Search Results

What matters the most? What do your words reveal? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 12:1-37 What matters the most? What do your words reveal? Image by Jamie Sreet, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Cropped. Tom Faletti September 9, 2024 Matthew now presents a sharpening of the opposition to Jesus, which will eventually lead to his death. Jesus is criticized for two matters that relate to the Jewish rules for honoring the Sabbath. Matthew 12:1-8 Plucking grain on the Sabbath In this first incident, how does Jesus end up at cross-purposes with the Pharisees? What do his disciples do, and what is the Pharisees’ complaint? Although Jesus does not mention this, the Old Testament prohibition of work on the Sabbath prohibited harvesting on the Sabbath (Exodus 34:21); it did not explicitly prohibit plucking grain and Deuteronomy 23:24-25 even allowed plucking your neighbors grapes or grain to fill our hunger, so it would be difficult to argue that plucking was prohibited on the Sabbath. The Pharisees extended the rule, as they did so many other rules, to the extreme. Jesus offers 4 different answers to their complaint: In verses 3-4, what does Jesus say, and what does it mean? David and his followers ate bread from the altar in 1 Sam. 21:1-6 [under the high priest Ahimelech – Mark wrongly says Abiathar; Matthew leaves out the name]. They and the disciples were both responding to the same legitimate concern: hunger. In verses 5-6, what does Jesus say, and what does it mean? The priests in the Temple do work on the Sabbath, but that is not a sin. The Sabbath rule is not the only or highest rule. In verse 7, what does Jesus say, and what does it mean? Hosea 6:6 says God wants mercy, not sacrifice. The Pharisees are focusing on the wrong concerns and failing to value what is more important: mercy. In verse 8, what does Jesus say, and what does it mean? Jesus, the Son of Man, is lord of the Sabbath. He has ultimate authority over the Sabbath. At the time Matthew is writing, Matthew’s community probably used these arguments as defenses when criticized by the Jews for being lax in following the Old Testament Law. In Mark, Jesus also says that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27). Jesus is saying that the Sabbath regulation had a limited purpose and the Pharisees were trying to give it a paramount, overpowering purpose. What is the limited but valuable purpose of the Sabbath? If one has a proper sense of the valuable but limited purpose of the Sabbath, why is the disciples’ plucking food to eat not a violation of the point of the Sabbath? Jesus is declaring himself the lord of the Sabbath. What does that make him out to be? As lord of the Sabbath, Jesus is declaring that human needs take precedence over Sabbath rules. How might we balance the freedom to do good on the Sabbath with the call to honor the Sabbath? How can we decide what is appropriate to do on the Sabbath? How might we sometimes fall into the trap of placing a higher priority on following rules than on achieving God’s loving, merciful purposes? Matthew 12:9-14 Healing on the Sabbath What is the second thing Jesus is criticized for? The Pharisees were so committed to not working on the Sabbath that when they were at war with the Greeks in the times of the Maccabees and when Roman attacked Jerusalem in 63 BC, they did not resist attack on Sabbath days, which led to some serious defeats (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , pp. 31-32). What is Jesus’s response to their criticism of his healing on the Sabbath? It seems so obvious when Jesus says it: You would pull your sheep out of a ditch on the Sabbath. How much more precious is a human being than a sheep. But how might we be slide into placing a higher value on things than on people? How is our society prone to place a higher value on things than on people? When or where in our society is there a tendency to place a higher value on rules and regulations, on procedure and protocol, than on helping people? How would you sum up in a phrase the “rule” Jesus is modeling that supersedes our human rules? Verse 14 is an ominous turn in Jesus’s ministry. What have the Pharisees now decided to do? Matthew 12:15-21 Jesus as the fulfillment of the Old Testament “Servant” of the Lord When Jesus learns that the Pharisees want to kill him, what does he do in verse 15? Jesus is being careful not to precipitate an attempt to kill him before the proper time when he has completed his work on Earth. And yet it does not deter him from his work. Although he changes location, he doesn’t change what he is doing. Jesus continues to do his thing. What can we learn from Jesus as he increases his carefulness but continues his ministry? Does this offer any insight for how to deal with opposition when we are doing God’s work? Does Jesus’s situation help us understand why he orders people (unsuccessfully) not to publicize what he has done for them (verse 16)? Matthew says what is going on here fulfills an Old Testament prophecy. Re-read verses 18-20 , which are a quote from Isaiah 42:1-4. What did Isaiah say about God’s chosen servant? Which elements of the prophecy correspond to what Jesus is doing with the people and how he is dealing with the Pharisees? In what ways does Jesus bring justice? In what ways does Jesus nurture, not break, the bruised reed, and strengthen, not quench, the smoldering wick? How has Jesus been like that in your life? Matthew 12:22-37 The blasphemy of the Pharisees What miracle does Jesus perform in verse 22? How do the Pharisees react, and why is this so serious? They blaspheme by saying that Jesus is working for Satan – i.e., that God is evil. What are Jesus’s 3 arguments in response to their claim (vv. 25-26, 27-28, and 29)? vv. 25-26: If Jesus is healing by the power of Satan, then Satan is destroying his own kingdom. vv. 27-28: If exorcisms performed by Jewish exorcists are judged as being done by the Spirit of God, then it is hypocritical to judge Jesus differently. vv. 29: If Jesus casts out demons, and thereby steals people back from Satan, he must have greater power than Satan – a power to bind Satan. But if that is happening then God’s Kingdom is breaking into our world. Do you see a battle going on in our day between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Satan, where the good that comes from God faces the bad that comes from evil forces? In verses 31-32, Jesus says there is only one unforgivable sin, which he says is blasphemy against the Spirit. How is the Pharisees’ attack a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Why would that particular sin be unforgivable? Is it that God refuses to forgive them, or is it that by refusing to recognize the Holy Spirit as good they are rejecting the source from which they would need the grace to repent of their sin and receive forgiveness? In verse 32 Jesus says that blaspheming against the Son of Man may be forgiven. Why? Perhaps because rejecting God in human form still leaves room for the movement of the Holy Spirit to lead a person to repentance. Or perhaps because it is one thing to misjudge Jesus; although he is God, he is somewhat hidden in human form. But to deny the manifest power of the Holy Spirit when it is plainly seen is to reject clear evidence. In verse 33, Jesus uses the analogy of a tree and its fruit and accuses the Pharisees of lying, because they are calling the tree (Jesus) evil even though its fruit (people being cured) is good. We sometimes evaluate people based on their actions and the effects they have (their fruit). Is this a wise strategy that we should use more regularly? Explain. In vv. 34-37, Jesus issues a more general caution about our words. It applies to the Pharisees, but it also applies to all of us, all the time. What is he saying and why? What does Jesus mean by your “heart”? What is the good treasure of storehouse of good (or evil) in our hearts? What does that mean? Is it fair to say that what comes out of a person’s mouth reveals the state of their heart? Explain. When are we most at risk of an unguarded or careless word? Some of the answers my Bible Study group offered include: when we are angry, hurt, tired, hungry, or disappointed; when we are not thinking about who the word is directed at, and when we don’t have a valid purpose for saying the word, even though it might be true. What can you do to avoid careless words? How can you bring only good out of your storehouse, so that you are not condemned by your words? Are there ways you need to deal with what is going on in your heart, so that you won’t have to work so hard to manage what comes out of your mouth? What adjustments might be needed in the state of your heart right now? We live in a world where talk is cheap and plentiful, and many people think truth is relative. How important is it to speak accurately and truthfully, to speak words that are consistent with reality as God knows it? Take a step back and consider this: In this passage, the Pharisees do what too many people in our modern world do: First, they decide what they believe. Second, they refuse to listen to the arguments and evidence offered by those who disagree with them. Third, they say whatever fits with what they believe, even if there is evidence to the contrary. Finally, they attack the people who disagree with them, sometimes viciously. We see this pattern all the time in our day. Even we ourselves may fall prey to this approach sometimes, especially on social media, where the culture encourages us to take sides and to speak without listening and with little respect. But Jesus’s rules for what comes out of our mouths apply as much when we are on social media as anywhere else. On social media, our “mouth” is our keyboard plus the “Post” or “Share” button. We may not literally speak words, but we communicate them just the same when we post. Jesus’s warning applies equally to social media: The words you communicate come out of the treasure or storehouse of your heart, for good or evil. “[B]y your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (Matthew 12:37, NRSV). What are the ideas and attitudes in your heart that you are revealing by what you say on social media and how you say it? As Christians it is our calling and privilege to reveal Jesus to others at all times. What changes might be good for you to consider, so that everything you post and share on social media comes from the good things in your heart so that it can properly represent Christ? If you would like some suggestions for how to decide what things are appropriate to share on social media, from Christ’s perspective, see Before You Hit the Share Button . The relevant questions are: Is it true? Have you checked it? Will it build others up? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Each of us will be judged by our treatment of the hungry, the stranger, the sick, those in prison, etc. What are you doing to find Jesus in those places? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 25:31-46 Each of us will be judged by our treatment of the hungry, the stranger, the sick, those in prison, etc. What are you doing to find Jesus in those places? Separation of Sheep and Goats . Early 20th century reproduction of a Byzantine mosaic originally dated early 6th century. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY. CC0, via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Separation_of_Sheep_and_Goats_MET_cdi24-144-4s1.jpg . Tom Faletti September 14, 2025 Matthew 25:31-46 in the final judgment, Jesus asks if you responded to those in need What is this passage about? Note that this story is not a parable. He is not saying the kingdom of heaven is “like” this. He is saying that this is what is going to happen. The only part of it that is like a parable is the use of the terms sheep and goats to picture Jesus separating people the way a shepherd would separate different creatures. The rest is a direct description of what Jesus says about how the final judgment will go. In verse 31, where is the Son of Man? Jesus has described himself as the “Son of Man” throughout Matthew’s Gospel. Here, for the first time, he takes to himself the title “king” (v. 34). The first title has messianic overtones but emphasizes his humanity. The second title offers a different perspective. What does his use of these two titles – Son of Man and king – tell us about Jesus and his relationship with the human race? Who is gathered before him (v. 32)? All the nations. Who do the sheep and the goats represent? Who is it that gets separated? He is not simply separating the nations for judgment; the language used makes it clear that this is a judgment of individual people – see the footnote below: Are individuals or nations judged? Note that the “sheep” and “goats” are used mainly as an illustration. Jesus isn’t asking us to draw conclusions here based on what we know about sheep and goats. In our day, he might have said: As a veterinarian separates the dogs from the cats. He used the image of separating sheep from goats because that was an image his audience was familiar with, an then he applied it to separating different types of people. In verse 34, what is the blessing given to those on his right hand – the sheep? What do you think it means to “inherit the kingdom”? In verses 35-36, what is it that they did, that led to this blessing? Do they understand what they did, or are they surprised by what he says? Explain. What is the king’s explanation of how they did these things to him? He says that when you did it to/for them, you did it to/for him. Different translations use “to” or “for” because in the Greek, the dative case used here indicates who receives the benefit of an action but does not specify a preposition. The point is that when we do these things, Jesus is the recipient of our actions: You did it to me. How do you think this passage applies to us today? How literally do you think we should take it? Do you think there are people who might be surprised to learn that when they were helping people in need, they were also doing those good things to/for Jesus? Explain. What does their surprise tell you about people who do good things, about God, and/or about our final judgment? It is probably unrealistic for any one person to do all these things with any frequency, so how do you think Jesus would want us to respond to this story? Those among us who like to-do lists (myself included) need to hear this caution: Jesus has not presented himself as the kind of person who would want us to turn this into a checklist and think that if you do each one of these things at least once we have earned salvation. That’s not what this is about. It is probably better to think about it as a way of life: responding to needs habitually and generously whenever needs present themselves. Now let’s look at the “goats.” In verses 41 and 45, what is the ultimate destination of the “goats”? What does the king say they failed to do, that has led to this outcome? Do they understand why they are receiving these consequences, or are they surprised? Explain. How does the king explain what he means by their failing to do these things to him? Note that these are what are called “sins of omission,” not “sins of commission.” It isn’t that they did something bad; it is that they failed to do something good that they could have done and should have done. Do you think there are people who might be surprised to learn that they are failing the test of the final judgment? If so, do you think it would be a situation where they should have known because they knew what Jesus taught in the Bible, and they willfully ignored what they should have known? Or do you think it would be a situation where, once it was pointed out to them, they would be able to say, “Yeah, you’re right; I should have known that and I failed”? Or do you think it would be a situation where they would be legitimately baffled to learn that this was Jesus’s criteria for judgment? Explain. What does their surprise tell you about people who fail to help others in need, about God, and/or about our final judgment? In verse 40, the king tells the first group that they did it to one of the “least” of these brothers of mine, and in verse 45 he tells the second group that they did not do it to one of the “least” of these. Who are these “least” ones? What do you think this passage says to us? As you read this, is there someone or some group of people that you think the Lord might be nudging you to do more for, or some action you feel he is calling you to take? What is this passage saying to you personally? Throughout Matthew’s Gospel, we have seen Jesus’s constant “ downside-up ” approach. Why do you think this is the perspective he has chosen to take: to place such an emphasis on our action to help the “least” among us? Do you count yourself among these “least”? If so, how does this passage make you feel? If you don’t, how do you feel about the fact that Jesus identifies himself with the “least”? Verse 34 is the first time in the Gospels that Jesus is explicitly referred to as a “king.” Why does our King care so much about what happens to the “least” among us? For the most part, people aren’t naked and in need of clothing in our day. But there might be some other needs that would not have made sense to mention in Jesus’s day but that he might have mentioned if he were speaking now. What are some other basic needs that Jesus might add to his list if he were making this point to our society today? There are many possibilities; for example: I was homeless and you helped me find shelter; I was pregnant and you gave me baby clothes and diapers; I was a victim of human trafficking and you rescued me; I was an immigrant and you welcomed me – oh, that one already is on his list when he says: I was a stranger, and you welcomed me. In our more complicated world, some social and economic problems can be addressed by the people collectively in far better ways than we can do individually – for example, helping the homeless, pregnant women, victims of trafficking, people with mental illnesses, etc. Sometimes, Christians and other people of good will take action collectively through nonprofit organizations or governments. Is working to help people through social organizations and governments a reasonable way of trying to respond to what Jesus is calling us to do in this passage? Explain. For people who live in democracies, is it reasonable to try to hold governments accountable to address the needs of the hungry, the sick, etc.? None of us can do it all. But we can work to live our lives with a mindset that the least among us need to be central to our focus. How can you do that better? Take a step back and consider this: Jesus clearly wants us to place a high priority on meeting the needs of the poor, the hungry, the stranger, the sick, and others who are the “least” among us. This concern meant so much to him that he equated himself with them when he said: “What you did it to them, you did to me.” How easy is it for you to see Jesus in those who are suffering on the fringes of our society? What can a Christian do to internalize this perspective? How do we grow in our ability to see Jesus in the least among us? If we take this passage seriously, it could lead us to worry about our salvation. Are we doing “enough” to join Jesus in heaven? He clearly wants us to feel challenged. But he does not want us to be afraid of him or to think that we can only make him care for us if we do the right things. He is not creating a new works-based legalism after having spent so much time trying to overcome the legalism of the Pharisees. He also is not offering “works” as an alternative to “faith.” We are saved by him, not by our fulfillment of a specific list of requirements, but our faith should be manifested in actions to help the least among us. See Is Jesus suggesting that we can earn our way to salvation by our works? for more on this how this passage relates to faith. Since we are sinners saved by grace and called to be conformed to Christ, it might be worth thinking about it this way: Can we be comfortable living with Jesus’s priorities and serving him whenever we encounter a person in need around us? That is our challenge. How comfortable are you with Jesus’s “downside-up” view of the world – his close identification with those who have the least? What can you do to become more comfortable with Jesus’s worldview? Mother Teresa of Calcutta said that “the poorest of the poor are . . . Christ under the guise of human suffering” ( Mother Teresa: In My Own Words , p. 24), and that she sought to “comfort Jesus in the distressing disguise of the poor” ( Mother Teresa: Where There is Love, There is God , p. 15). If we can find joy in looking to serve Jesus in the least among us, we are on the right path of adopting the priorities and worldview of Jesus. The question is not whether we have fulfilled Matthew 25 perfectly. The question is whether we have embraced Jesus’s worldview. He wants our hearts. If we embrace his priorities, he is both willing and able to mold us into the people he wants us to be, through the power of the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. If we allow the Holy Spirit to work his worldview ever more deeply into the fabric of our lives, we will become ever more like Jesus – our character following the mold of his character, our concerns reflecting his concerns, our actions manifesting his love to the world and responding to needs wherever he can be found. Am I willing to let the Holy Spirit mold me so that I take on the heart of Jesus and allow him to work his priorities into my actions? Am I willing to show forth his love to the poorest of the poor? If I’m willing, he is able. May it be so! Notes regarding 2 issues people find in this passage: Are individuals or nations judged? Some theologians claim that the final judgment story is talking about God’s judgment of nations, not individual people. They argue that in Matthew, “the nations” usually refers to nations other than Israel, and “brothers” usually means Christians, so they claim that Jesus is saying that the Gentile nations will be judged by how they treat Christians (see, for example, Father Daniel Harrington, p. 101). Both Catholic and Protestant theologians have rejected this argument. Father Benedict Viviano, O. P., points out ( The New Jerome Biblical Commentary , par. 145, p. 669) that in Matthew 24:9 and 14, and in Matthew 28:19, Jesus uses the term “all nations” in a way that includes Israel, not just the Gentile nations. Furthermore, Matthew often uses the word “brothers” to include all humans, not just Christians – for example, in the Sermon on the Mount. As a result, the idea that this is only a judgment about nations is not well supported. H. L. Ellison uses the grammar of the passage to show that argues that Jesus is talking about individual people, not just nations (Ellison, p. 1148). When Jesus says that the king separates “them” (Matt. 25:32), the Greek word for “them” is masculine, which indicates people. If he was referring to the nations, the neuter form of the word “them” would have been required. So this is an individual judgment, applying to each person. Myron Augsburger adds that, although Jesus uses the word “brothers” in verse 40, he does not use that word in verse 45. There, Jesus says the goats did not help the “least” ones – i.e., the needy in general, not specifically Christians (pp. 283-284). Jesus is warning us about how all individuals should treat all individuals who are in need. Is Jesus suggesting that we can earn our way to salvation by our works? Some people struggle with how to fit this passage into a “faith versus works” framework. Jesus never separated faith from helping others. We can’t save ourselves, but he made it very clear that he expects us to help the hungry, the stranger, the sick, those in prison, etc. If there is a “faith vs. works” contradiction between what Jesus says here and what modern-day preachers preach, we would have to choose Jesus’s own words over modern re-interpretations of the gospel, since Jesus is our Lord and God. However, there is no contradiction. Faith and service to those in need are both central teachings of Christ. See Faith Versus Works: What Does the Gospel of Matthew Say for a discussion of how faith and works come together rather than being in opposition to each other. Regarding this specific passage and the concern that it undermines a commitment to faith, evangelical scholar H. L. Ellison says that this passage “is intended to be a warning to us. Since from His brothers, He [Jesus] will expect more, not less, this can serve as a check on the reality of our profession” (Ellison, p. 1148). In other words, we can test the genuineness of our profession of faith by how we respond to the plain words of Jesus in this passage. On the other end of the spectrum, some people use this passage to argue that faith in Christ is not necessary – that how we treat the poor is all that matters. Catholic scholar Benedict T. Viviano, O.P., responds that the passage “is addressed to Christian disciples, and discipleship is understood, in a very bold way, as identical with care of the needy. This is not a denial of faith; it is of the essence of faith” ( The New Jerome Biblical Commentary , par. 145, p. 669). Jesus is not here rejecting his consistent call to faith; he is showing us one element of what faith looks like in action. If our understanding of the Christian faith does not include an understanding both of the centrality of service to those in need and of the centrality of faith in Christ, we do not understand Jesus as presented to us in the Scriptures upon which our faith is based. This passage presents the Word of God to us. What do you think Jesus would say to those who think the passage contradicts the gospel message about how we are “saved”? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Jesus was not abandoned by God, but it might have felt that way when he started praying Psalm 22. The psalm affirms him, and the centurion declared: “Truly this was the Son of God!” Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 27:45-56 Jesus was not abandoned by God, but it might have felt that way when he started praying Psalm 22. The psalm affirms him, and the centurion declared: “Truly this was the Son of God!” The quote coming from the centurion reads (in German), “Truly, this man was the son of God.” Lucas Cranach the Elder (1472-1553). The Crucifixion with the Converted Centurion . 1536. Cropped. Courtesy of the National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC. Public domain, https://www.nga.gov/artworks/46168-crucifixion-converted-centurion . Tom Faletti September 22, 2025 Matthew 27:45-56 Jesus dies and some Gentiles recognize him as the son of God Mark tells us that Jesus was crucified at 9:00 a.m. (the third hour) and died at 3:00 p.m. (the ninth hour). Matthew picks up the story at noon. What is the symbolic significance of it growing dark in the middle of the day (verse 45)? What does Jesus cry out in verse 46? What does “forsaken” mean? Forsaken means abandoned; deserted and left entirely on your own. Some bystanders hear “Eli” – which means “my God” and misunderstand him, thinking he is invoking Elijah. Interestingly, the name Elijah means “The Lord is my God” ( The New Oxford Annotated Bible , footnote to Matthew 27:46, p. 1789.) In Jesus’s time, people saw Elijah as a helper who might come to you in a time of need ( The New Oxford Annotated Bible , footnote to Matthew 27:47, p. 1789), so it is easy to see why they might have jumped to the wrong conclusion. How do the bystanders react when they think Jesus is calling for Elijah? There are two different reactions, one in verse 48 and another in verse 49. What are their reactions? Jesus cries out one more time and dies. John tells us that Jesus’s final words were, “It is finished” (John 19:30), while Luke records, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23:46). Matthew describes Jesus’s death by saying that he “gave up” or “yielded up’ his spirit (Matt. 27:50. Some translations just say, “breathed his last,” which does not capture as well the sense of the Greek word that he was voluntarily letting go of his life. What does Jesus’s death mean to you? Before we go on to discuss what happened when Jesus died, let’s go back to Jesus’s final prayer, which begins with “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (verse 46). In verse 46, Jesus is quoting the first words of Psalm 22, which are denoted as 22:1 in the NRSV and most other Bibles and as Psalm 22:2 in the NABRE. (Explanation: Many of the psalms have a “superscription” – a comment before the psalm begins. These superscriptions were part of the original Hebrew. They were not added by the people who translated the Bible into English the way passage headings. We do not know when these superscriptions were first attached to each psalm, but they were there before the psalms as we know them were finalized. A superscription may indicate who the psalm was written for or by, or what type of psalm it is, or how it should be played, or what it is about. Sometimes, it uses Hebrew words the translators are not familiar with, and some translations leave those unfamiliar words untranslated. In most Bibles, including the NRSV, the superscription is not given a verse number, and the text of the actual psalm begins at verse 1. The NABRE in many cases assigns the superscription to verse 1 and begins the text of the psalm at verse 2. As a result, the verse numbers sometimes don’t agree between Bibles. I will give both sets of verse numbers: the number used by the NRSV and most other Bibles, followed by the number used by the NABRE.) Read Psalm 22 . Notice, as you read, the shifts in the psalmist’s mood. In Psalm 22, the psalmist begins with feelings of abandonment, and then moves to remembrance, to urgent plea, to trust, to anguish, to hope, and finally to confidence in what he and God will do in the future. Considering the psalm as a whole, how would you describe the overall tone of Psalm 22? Would you say the psalmist is primarily feeling forsaken, or something else? How would you describe his overall mood? Although the psalmist starts out feeling abandoned, by the end of the psalm he is declaring that God is with him, that he will fulfill his vows and praise God in the assembly, that the poor will eat and be satisfied, and that God will provide deliverance. These questions about the overall mood of the psalm are important because Jesus would have been able to recite this entire psalm from memory. The psalms were the hymns and prayers of his Jewish faith community throughout his life. Since he would have known the psalm by heart, do you think he would have stopped at verse 1, or would he have kept going, praying through the whole psalm as best he could? What verses in the psalm would have seemed to Jesus to be accurate descriptions of what he was going through? Here are some of the things he would have noticed: Verses 7-8 (8-9 in the NABRE) would have reminded him of the mocking he was enduring. Verses 14-17 (15-18 in the NABRE) describe some of the torture he was experiencing in being crucified, including having his hands and feet pierced. Verse 18 (19 in the NABRE) describes what he would have seen from the cross: the soldiers dividing up his clothing. There is a difference between feeling abandoned and losing hope. Has Jesus lost hope in his Father? Jesus is still praying to his Father, so he has not lost all hope. He has not turned away from God in despair. And as he prayed Psalm 22, his words from that prayer would have been words of hope, not words of despair. You can feel abandoned and still not lose hope in God. Is it OK to feel abandoned at times in our lives? Can you feel abandoned and still not lose hope in God? Explain. There is a difference between feeling abandoned and actually being abandoned. In the psalm, is the psalmist actually forsaken, or does it become clear by the end of the psalm that the psalmist recognizes that God is with him ? Explain. This is an important issue, because some Christians have used Matthew 27:46 to help build a theology that God abandoned Jesus on the cross. That idea is deeply flawed for many reasons, some of which are explored in God Did Not Abandon Jesus on the Cross . Go back to Matthew 27:45-56 and read Matthew 27:43 . Are the chief priests suggesting that Jesus’s God has abandoned Jesus? Are the chief priests right that God has abandoned Jesus? As Jesus quotes Psalm 22, one way to view it is that he is directly refuting the chief priests’ claim that God has abandoned him. He is starting at verse 1, in which the psalmist thinks he is abandoned, and then reciting the rest of the psalm, which walks through some of the evidence that what was happening to Jesus was prophesied in advance and fit into God’s grand scheme for the salvation of the human race, and then reaching the end of the psalm where the psalmist expresses confidence that God has not abandoned him and God has provided the salvation the people needed. That fits perfectly with the fact that Luke and John tell us Jesus went on to say, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23:46) and “It is finished” (John 19:30). In verse 51, what two things happened when Jesus died? What is the symbolic significance of the curtain in the Temple being torn in two? And what is the significance of it being torn from top to bottom? The curtain or veil was a large, thick curtain that covered the entrance to the Holy of Holies in the Temple – the place where the presence of God was believed to reside. No person was allowed to go there except, once a year, the High Priest on the Day of Atonement. There are many ways to think about the symbolism here: Temple sacrifices were no longer needed; access to God was no longer restricted; God would no longer reside in the Temple but in human hearts; the Old Covenant, with its reliance on the blood of animal sacrifices, has been replaced by the New Covenant in Jesus’s blood because of his once-for-all sacrifice. The curtain was very tall. No human could tear it from the top down. That the curtain was torn from top to bottom signifies that this is God’s doing – that through Jesus’s death God has removed the barrier between himself and us. What is the symbolic significance of the earthquake? In Joel 2:10, earthquakes happen in the day of the Lord. It shows God is at work. In verses 52-53, what does Matthew tell us happened after Jesus rose from the dead? Do you know any Old Testament prophecies that relate to the idea of people coming back to life? In Ezekiel 37, God shows Ezekiel a valley of dry bones that, at God command, come back to life (37:10) as God opens up graves and bringing people back to the land of Israel (37:12). What is the significance of dead people coming back to life, insofar as it relates to Jesus’s death? How did the centurion and the soldiers under him react (verse 54)? We don’t know if “son” should be capitalized in their statement about Jesus – i.e., whether they declared him to be the Son of God or a son of God – because the Greek only had one case at that time. But either way, what is the significance of Gentiles calling Jesus the son of God after the chief priests mocked his claim to be the son of God? How is the centurion a model for us? It turns out that Jesus wasn’t totally alone all this time. Who was there (verses 55-56)? What does this tell you about the women who followed Jesus? How can we be more like those women – perhaps often unseen, but faithful? What does Jesus’s death tell you about him? How does Jesus’s death affect how you want to live your life? How does Jesus’s death affect how you want to approach your own death? Take a step back and consider this: Although God the Father did not abandon Jesus on the cross because of our sins (see God Did Not Abandon Jesus on the Cross ), humans sometimes experience the feeling of abandonment. Because Jesus expressed that feeling at one point while he was hanging on the cross, we know that we are not alone if we sometimes feel like God has abandoned us. He understands. Have you ever felt abandoned by God? How did you deal with it? (Or how do wish you had dealt with it?) What do you think Jesus says to you in those times? How does Jesus’s victory despite feelings of abandonment affect how you can approach difficult times in your own life? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Welcome a child, be as humble as a child, and don’t lead any “little ones” astray: the starting point for our relationships in the church. Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 18:1-9 Welcome a child, be as humble as a child, and don’t lead any “little ones” astray: the starting point for our relationships in the church. Carl Bloch (1834–1890). Jesus Christ with the children / Let the little Children come unto Me / Suffer the Children . Date unknown. Oil on copper. Cropped. Museum of National History at Frederiksborg Castle, Denmark. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Let_the_Little_Children_Come_unto_Jesus.jpg . Tom Faletti June 29, 2025 In chapter 18, Matthew again gathers together various sayings and teachings of Jesus. This time, the focus of the teachings is on how to deal with issues that might cause dissension and strife within the Christian community. Jesus tells us how to treat each other and what to do when someone doesn’t treat us right. Matthew 18:1-5 Seeking status versus becoming like a child and welcoming the child What is the disciples’ question to Jesus? What do you think they are thinking about, and how does it show that they don’t understand Jesus’s ways yet? Notice that he doesn’t answer their question. Instead, he calls a child into their midst. What do you think it is about a child that shows what it takes to enter the kingdom of heaven? What does it mean, when Jesus tells us to humble ourselves like a child (verse 4)? In what ways is a child “humble”? Why does Jesus say that those who do this are “the greatest”? Greatest in what way? Why would Jesus say (in verse 5) that when we welcome (NRSV) or receive (NABRE) a child in his name, we welcome or receive him? Fr. Daniel Harrington tells us: “in ancient society the child had no legal rights or standing and was entirely dependent on the parents. . . . Likewise, no one through rank or status has a real claim on God’s kingdom” (Harrington, p. 74). Harrington explains that the Qumran community from whom we have the Dead Sea scrolls seated people at meals according to their rank within the community because “[t]he meals were supposed to mirror what would happen when God’s kingdom comes” (p. 73). This focus on status was apparently not uncommon in the time of Jesus. How does our society give attention to status and elevate some people over others? In what ways do people seek status in our society? How are people asking today a modern-day equivalent of “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” How are we infected by that kind of thinking? What does Jesus say in response? How is a child’s dependence and lack of worldly status a model for us? In the context of the rest of the passage, Jesus is not just talking literally about children. They represent all the people at the bottom of the social ladder. The disciples want to know who is greatest – who has highest rank. Jesus says, those who appear to have the lowest rank, the least claim, the lowest status are the ones who, in the kingdom of God, have the highest status or who are the greatest. If this is the criterion for greatness, what does it say to us about ourselves? What does this tell you about God and about God’s thinking? Jesus identifies himself with the children, the people with the lowest status. This is not the only time Jesus identifies himself with someone else. In Matthew 25, in the story of the sheep and the goats, he identifies himself with the hungry, sick, etc. What does this tell you about Jesus? What does this tell us about the importance of looking out for the vulnerable: children, the poor, people with mental or physical disabilities, and others who have no claim to greatness? Jesus appears to be saying, I will measure you not by whatever status you think you have, but by how you treat the people who don’t have status, the people who are not considered the greatest. Who are the people who lack status in our community and nation, and what must we do differently to respond to this challenge from Jesus? Harrington sums up this verse by saying that Jesus is saying that “He dwells in them in a special way” (p. 74). What is this special relationship between God and the least among us? What does that relationship challenge us to do? How can we welcome those with the lowest social status? This passage starts out talking about status in the kingdom of heaven. But by the end of the chapter, we will realize that Matthew is thinking in part about the church on Earth and the struggles between people within the church. In that context, who are those with low status that your local church should be showing greater concern for? Matthew 18:6-9 Don’t lead the little ones astray In this passage, Jesus refers to “these little ones,” and most people interpret it as not just talking about children. Who are “these little ones”? Harrington suggests that this term describes “a simple and good-hearted member of the community who can be lead astray” (p. 74). The one other place where Jesus uses the term is in Matthew 10:42, where it means a disciple as Jesus praises anyone who gives one of “these little ones” a cup of cold water. The word Jesus uses to describe the offense committed by someone who leads others astray is a word we have seen before: the Greek word is skandalon . When Jesus calls Peter a “stumbling block” or “obstacle” in Matthew 16:23, it is this word. When Jesus says in Matthew 17:27 that they should pay the Temple tax so that they will not give offense (Matt. 17:27), the word for “offense” is the verb form of the same word. Here again it is the verb form of that word. To be a stumbling block, to give offense, to scandalize – these are all situations where one person might trip up another person so that their faith is shaken or they are led into sin. How can one person lead another person to sin? Jesus says that the perpetrator would be better off if some pretty bad things happened to him or her. What are those things he warns us about in verses 6, 8, and 9? What is his point in making these comparisons? In verse 7, Jesus addresses the common rationalization: it’s going to happen anyway. What is his warning? How might we be a stumbling block for others if we are not careful? Take a step back and consider this: Matthew is selecting various teachings of Jesus and arranging them in the order he thinks might have maximum benefit for the Christian community. He could have chosen any story to tell first. It is worth considering why he chose to start with these teachings about how to treat children and the “little ones,” before dealing with what to do when a member of the community sins against you and how often you should forgive people (which are coming next). By starting here, Matthew provides a bigger-picture perspective with which to consider the rest of the teachings in this chapter. If you think of yourself as a big deal, you may be more tempted to get angry when someone does something you don’t like. You may be more tempted to try to exclude them or cut them off. If you think of yourself as a humble child, you might choose a different way to deal with disagreements. In every age, there are people in prominent positions who identify themselves as Christians but aren’t living up to the “high calling” or “upward call” we have in Christ (Phil. 3:14). They may be too focused on power, or on what they can gain from their prominence. They may have a tendency to lord it over other people or act as though they think they are more important than others. We too sometimes get off track. Maybe we get too focused on ourselves and our own desires. Maybe we start treating others as underlings whom we expect to help us accomplish our desires. Maybe we start treating people as means to our ends, rather than as important in themselves. Matthew 18:1-5, can be an antidote to that. How can viewing ourselves as simply a child in the kingdom of God help us maintain the right perspective and not act like we and our agenda are more important than everyone else and their agenda? How can viewing the world through the eyes of a child help prepare you to forgive others when they hurt you? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Blessed are the poor, the grieving, the meek. Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 5:1-5 Blessed are the poor, the grieving, the meek. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti April 20, 2024 Matthew 5:1-2 The setting for the “Sermon on the Mount” Matthew introduces his first compilation of Jesus’s teachings. He ultimately has 5 of these “discourses.” Why does Matthew set this scene on a mountain? We can compare this to Moses presenting the Law on Mount Sinai. Jesus was seated because that is how Jewish teachers taught. Although this says it is addressed to the disciples, Matt. 7:28 tells us that it is being heard by crowds of people. Matthew has compiled teachings that Jesus would not have presented all at once. Therefore, there is not a specific, single crowd envisioned by Matthew. We will see that Matthew frequently gathers together different things that Jesus said or did that might not all have happened in one time or place. He carefully organizes his material to help us understand what Jesus said and did. Matthew 5:3-12 The Sermon on the Mount – who is blessed in the kingdom of heaven? These statements of Jesus are known as the “Beatitudes,” from the Latin word for “blessed.” There are generally considered to be eight beatitudes in Matthew, whereas Luke only has four. Verse 3 What does “blessed” mean? What does “poor in spirit” mean? “Poor in spirit” does not mean spiritually poor. A person who is “poor in spirit” is actually spiritually rich. So what is the opposite of poor in spirit? What does a life look like that is not “poor in spirit”? How can a person become, or try to be, poor in spirit? Is “poor in spirit” different from “poor,” which is how Jesus says it in Luke’s account in Luke 6:20? It is possible that Jesus said it in different ways at different times, since he probably preached the same message many times in different places. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary argues that “the addition of ‘in spirit’ changes the emphasis from social-economic to personal-moral: humility, detachment from wealth, voluntary poverty” (Benedict T. Viviano, O.P., “The Gospel According to Matthew,” The New Jerome Biblical Commentary , par. 24, p. 640), but some commentators find no significant difference. Barclay tells us that the Greek word here is the word for “absolute and abject poverty” (William Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 85). He then walks through the development of the phrase “the poor” in the Old Testament, where it shifted from being simply a word for economic poverty to a word for lack of power and influence, to a word for being oppressed and downtrodden, to a word for putting one’s whole trust in God because one has no other resources. The Psalms repeatedly talk about “the poor” as people who trust in and rely on God (William Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 86). The Bible does not give any sign that God finds value in the life-destroying effects of abject poverty, so perhaps Matthew included the words “in spirit” to make it clear that Jesus was not praising abject poverty in itself but rather the attitude of trust in God that some poor people have because of their lack of anything else to put their trust in. Can a person be wealthy yet poor in spirit? If so, what would it look like? Can a person be educated yet poor in spirit? If so, what would it look like? Can a person be popular or famous and still be poor in spirit? What would it look like? Considering all that we have talked about, what is the attitude or approach to life of a person who is poor in spirit? One might say: People who are poor in spirit exhibit a fundamental dependency on God rather than on anything else, and treat people as all having an equal claim on the resources of the earth rather than focusing on their own right to own their own resources. In Luke, Jesus says, “ yours is the kingdom of God,” but in Matthew the poor in spirit are referred to in the third person (“ theirs is the kingdom of heaven”) (Matthew 5:3, NRSV). What might be the significance of the fact that in Luke the audience is included in the category of the poor? According to this verse, what do people get or have, if they are poor in spirit? What does it mean to have the kingdom of heaven? If you have the kingdom, that means you are where God is and have all that God wishes to give to you. Jesus said that, with his arrival, the kingdom of heaven is now at hand – i.e., right near you. The poor dwell (or will dwell, to the extent that this is a promise going forward rather than an immediate reality) in that place. And we understand from the Lord’s Prayer that where God’s kingdom has come, God’s will is done. So if the poor have that kingdom, they have citizenship in that place where God’s will is done – and is done for them as much as for everyone else, unlike in earthly kingdoms. Verse 4 What do you think this beatitude is envisioning that people are mourning about? People have seen many forms of mourning in this passage: They might be grieving due to their own losses or difficult lives: the death of a loved one, the effects of illness, mistreatment by others, the suffering that accompanies doing what is right. They might be deeply sorrowful for their sins, mourning their own failure to live up to what God has called them to be. They might be mourning the sufferings of others: grieving the injustices and evils that the world tolerates and the poor treatment of the lowly and needy. Is this beatitude only offering comfort when bad things inevitably happen or when we recognize our sinfulness? Or is it also calling us to take proactive action to choose to mourn situations that go beyond our own little world; and, if so, what should we be mourning? Why would the fact that you will be comforted (in the future) make you blessed that you are mourning now? Wouldn’t it be better to not have to be mourning in the first place? What do you think the nature of the “comfort” is? Verse 5 What does it mean, to be “meek”? What does it look like? Barclay says that the Greek word for meek, praus , had several meanings. Aristotle used one of its meanings to talk about the virtue of meekness. According to Barclay, Aristotle defined meekness as the happy medium between excessive anger and excessive angerlessness (William Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 91). When, if ever, might a meek person be angry and still be meek? Barclay highlights a second meaning in the Greek for the word “meek”: it is used to describe an animal that is domesticated and trained to obey the commands of its master (William Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 91-92). How is meekness related to being responsive to the leading of God? Barclay also notes a third meaning: the humility that is the opposite of pride and lofty-heartedness (William Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 92). Humility is sometimes described as living in recognition of one’s true place, with neither too high a view of oneself (puffed up) nor too low a view of oneself (groveling). This does not mean self-abasement, despite the extremes to which some people may take it. As people sometimes say, “God doesn’t make junk”; so we don’t need to debase or dishonor ourselves in order to be meek. Humility means having a right view of ourselves and our place, as God sees us, and acting accordingly. What is true humility? Can I do something to become meek? The Greek word for “earth” is used in the Bible in a variety of ways: for ground, earth, soil, etc.; and also for territory, as in “the land of Israel”; and also for the Earth or the physical realm of our existence, as in “heaven and earth” and “a new heaven and a new earth.” The promise that comes for the meek is that they will inherit the earth. What does it mean, that the meek shall inherit “the earth”? Psalm 37:11 says the meek shall inherit the land. That would have been understood as meaning the land of Israel. As Christians, perhaps we understand this as meaning that, for us, the meek shall inherit the kingdom of heaven. That is our true land. Take a step back and consider this: The poor, the meek, and those who are mourning are not the people at the top of the social ladder, and poverty, mourning, and meekness are not likely to move people to the top of the heap in society. But Jesus is beginning to develop a thread of teaching here that will continue throughout Matthew’s Gospel, telling us that God views things very differently than the typical society does. In Jesus’s downside-up view of the world, those who are seen as at the bottom from the world’s perspective are prominent in God’s perspective. Matthew will show us that a lot of Jesus’s teachings build on Old Testament themes. But here, Jesus has broken totally new ground. Nowhere in the Old Testament are we told that the poor are blessed. The people who help the poor are blessed, and God hears the cries of the poor, but never does the Old Testament suggest that there is any blessedness associated with being poor. Jesus is asking us to think differently. When you see a poor person, does your mind say, “The kingdom of heaven is theirs”? Do you think of those who are humble rather than grasping as being the ones who will inherit the earth? How might you treat the poor and the meek differently if you keep firmly in mind that Jesus declares them blessed and says that the earth and the kingdom of heaven belong to them? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Jesus wanted the Temple to be a house of prayer and a place of healing. Can our churches and our lives be that, too? [Matthew 21:12-13; 21:14-17] Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 21:12-17 Jesus wanted the Temple to be a house of prayer and a place of healing. Can our churches and our lives be that, too? August Jernberg (1826–1896). Kristus utdriver växlarna ur templet [Christ Driving the Moneychangers out of the Temple]. 1857. Cropped. Göteborgs konstmuseum (Gothenburg Museum of Art), Gothenburg, Sweden. Public domain. Photo by Hossein Sehatlou, CC BY 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Christ_Driving_the_Moneychangers_out_of_the_Temple_(August_Jernberg)_-_Gothenburg_Museum_of_Art_-_GKM_0008.tif . Tom Faletti August 4, 2025 Introduction to Matthew 21:12-17, Jesus’s first day in Jerusalem What do you think is the first thing Jesus does after he arrives in Jerusalem and gets off the donkey? Make a courtesy call to the political leaders? Visit the religious leaders and ask for their blessing? Get a permit for a rally where he can preach to the people in the city? Set up a healing tent? As we will see, the first thing he wants to do is heal people, but he needs a quiet place to do it. So the first thing he does is one of the most disruptive and confrontational things he could have done: clear the Temple of the people providing currency exchange services and selling sheep and doves for sacrifice. Matthew 21:12-13 The cleansing of the Temple: Jesus clears the Temple area of commercial business We saw in our study of the previous passage that, in the time of the Maccabees, palm branches were waved as part of the ritual in which the Temple was restored and purified after its defilement by the Greeks. Here, Jesus is addressing what he sees as a new defilement of the Temple. Some scholars see in this passage a reference to Mal. 3:1-3, where the prophet says that the Lord will come suddenly to his temple and “he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the descendants of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, until they present offerings to the LORD” (Mal. 3:3, NRSV). What does Jesus do in the Temple? Who is the target of his disruption? Why does he do this? Jesus quotes from two places in the Old Testament. Let’s take them in reverse order. A den of robbers When Jesus refers to a “den of robbers,” he is drawing from Jeremiah 7:4-11. In that passage, God tells the people not to boast about the Temple because they are oppressing others and acting unjustly and have turned the Temple into a den of robbers (v. 11) In what ways might the Temple have become a “den of robbers”? The selling and buying took place in the outermost court of the Temple complex – not in the Temple building itself but in the Court of Gentiles. This was the first of several courts Jews had to walk through to reach the Temple itself, which could only be entered by the priests. The Temple tax, which every male Israelite was required to pay yearly, was a half-shekel, which was equivalent to about two days’ wages. However, the Temple authorities would not accept Roman or Greek coins because the emperor’s image was stamped on the coins. They would accept only Tyrian coins (because of their higher silver content) and Jewish coins. The currency exchange fee was about 10% (one gera or ma’a, which was around one-twentieth of a shekel, according to my research). In addition to paying that fee, if you brought a larger coin and needed to have change given back to you, the charge was doubled. So the fee was 10%-20% of two-days’ wages, which was a significant charge for poor people, who didn’t always find enough work to earn a days’ wages every day and who were sacrificing several days of wages to come to the Temple. There was a thriving trade in cattle, sheep, and doves (see John 2:14) for the sacrifices people needed to make at the Temple. For pilgrims, it was hard to bring an animal from far away, so people in Jerusalem sold sheep to them. This could have been seen as a helpful service, unless the prices were set high to take advantage of the pilgrims. Furthermore, you could only sacrifice an animal that was without blemish, and the power to decide if an animal was without blemish was in the hands of the Temple priests. It was easy for the Temple authorities to reject a supposedly “imperfect” animal, so the potential for abuse was high. Doves With regard to doves: Poor people who could not afford a sheep were allowed under the Law to bring turtledoves and pigeons (Lev. 5:7). Also, whereas Israelite men were commanded to offer a lamb, women were directed to offer a dove. Barclay says that price for a dove inside the Temple precincts could be as much as 20 times as high as the price outside the Temple (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , p. 270). Matthew and Mark both specifically mention that Jesus overturned the seats of the people selling doves. In John, he specifically chastises the people selling doves, telling them to stop making his Father’s house a marketplace (John 2:16). Why might Jesus be especially concerned about the selling practices regarding doves? Since doves were the offerings made by poor people, Jesus might have been particularly concerned about how the sellers were taking advantage of poor people. Poor people are easier targets for financial abuse since they have little power to respond, so perhaps the markup was especially large for doves, or perhaps he was concerned more generally about the impact of these practices on the poor. There is one other significant point of background: The high priest Annas had major control over this business and therefore probably took it personally when Jesus drove out the sellers. Are there ways that we can be at risk of turning God’s holy places into places of commercial exploitation? There is a lot of money-making associated with the Christian faith (consider Christian music, Christian books, Bible sales, Christian movies, Christian art, statues, candles, devotional materials, Sunday school materials, etc.). How can we evaluate when it is appropriate, or not, to make money from religious activities? A house of prayer In verse 13, Jesus says that his house should be a “house of prayer.” This phrase comes from Isaiah 56:6-7, where God says that foreigners will come to the Temple and worship there, and it will be a house of prayer for all people. Even if there was no exploitation going on, how might the money-changing and selling and buying have made it hard for this to be a house of prayer? How might this have been particularly problematic for the Gentiles, and why would Jesus care? Jews could go beyond the Court of the Gentiles, to the courts where things were quieter. But Gentiles could not go further and were stuck in the court where the marketing was going on. Do you think that all of the people involved in changing money and buying and selling were evil? Or is it possible that many were devoutly trying to honor God in their lives? Is it possible for Christians today to be faithful believers but not realize that they are caught up in accepted practices that undermine God’s work? What might be some examples? How might we take this message into the business world? What should the Temple have looked like and sounded like and felt like, as a house of prayer? If our churches are to be effective houses of prayer, what do we need to help them look like and sound like and feel like? Matthew 21:14-17 Jesus heals people and responds to the criticisms of the leaders After Jesus has cleared the Temple courts of the sellers, it is presumably a quieter, more prayerful place. What is the first thing Jesus does (verse 14)? Notice that he does this in the Temple – i.e., in the courtyards of the Temple – a place that is crowded with thousands upon thousands of pilgrims. What does this tell you about Jesus? Given that the Jewish leaders have not been friendly to Jesus, what does it tell you about Jesus that he is doing this right in the Temple courtyards? Why do you think the chief priests and scribes are unhappy that children are crying out, “Hosanna to the Son of David”? How does Jesus respond (verse 16)? Jesus quotes from Psalm 8:2. This is the psalm that begins, “O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth.” The verse Jesus quotes is the very next verse, which says, roughly: out of the mouths of babes and infants, you have [done something – scholars aren’t sure what the words mean here] to silence your enemies. Jesus chooses not to quote the words calling them “enemies” – he is an eternal optimist, hoping people will respond to his teaching. What is Jesus implying, by using this quote? What kind of link is he implying between himself and God? Notice that Jesus defends himself by quoting God’s Word to the religious leaders. How important is it to know the Bible? It is telling that the chief priests had no problem with the hubbub of the animals and the buying and selling and money changing in the Temple precincts, but now they are indignant about the noise of the children’s praise of Jesus. They see (verse 15) the miracles of healing that Jesus is performing. Yet they are indignant about the children, rather than moved by the healings. The chief priests may be unhappy that Jesus is healing people in the Temple precincts. Leviticus 21:16-23 said that people with a “blemish” – i.e., a physical deformity or deficiency – were not supposed to approach the altar. But Jesus is welcoming them right there in the Temple precincts, not far from the altar. The chief priests and scribes are more focused on their ideas about what the Temple should look like than on the good that Jesus is doing. Are we sometimes like that too, focused on our rules and preconceptions and missing the good that God is doing? Do any examples come to mind? If so, how might you do things differently? Jesus spends the night in Bethany, presumably with his friends Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. Martha and Mary are mentioned in the Gospel of Luke, and all three of them are mentioned in the Gospel of John. Take a step back and consider this: Jesus had had a special fondness for the Temple at least since he was 12 years old, when he first called it “my Father’s house” (Luke 2:49). He clearly believed that this was a special place – a place where heaven and earth meet and people have a special opportunity to commune with God. He is now making it not only a place where prayer can happen, but also a place where healings happen. Are there places that you think of as specially graced for prayer, healing, and communion with God? If so, how do you nurture the prayerfulness of those spaces? We are not bound to a Temple as the unique place where God resides, but rather have come to understand that every Christian is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who resides in us. What are some things we might consider doing to make our hearts, our souls, our very selves more fitting places of prayer, and healing, and communion with God? What can you do to nurture a spirit of prayer and healing in your own life? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

What is a healthy view of wealth? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 6:19-24 What is a healthy view of wealth? Image by Mathieu Stern, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti May 19, 2024 Matthew 6:19-24 Money and wealth Verses 19-21 What does Jesus tell us not to do in verse 19? What does Jesus tell us to do in verse 20? Jesus offers a practical reason for these two arguments. Why does Jesus say the one kind of treasure is better than the other? The problems Jesus identifies with trying to preserve the world’s treasures relate to the kinds of ways people might store up treasures in Jesus’s time: Moths eat fine clothing, which is something that wealthy people might put their wealth into – recall the parable of Lazarus and Dives (Luke 16:19-31) where the rich man dressed in purple and fine linen. The word for rust literally means “eating,” which could refer to rust corrupting metal but could also refer to vermin eating away at storehouses of grain. Thieves could break into houses and steal gold, silver, or other treasures. The contrast Jesus draws between the two kinds of treasures revolves in part around treasures that can be corrupted or taken away from us, and the secure and incorruptible treasures that will remain with us in heaven. What “treasures” do we have now that would still have value in heaven? Jesus describes these as treasures we “store up” now, so they are things that we at least partially experience now, before we go to heaven. So be not talking just about “heavenly” treasures, but also things that we experience at least partially on earth but that have lasting value in heaven. Here are some possible examples: The character we develop and demonstrate by showing patience, fortitude, or other virtues, which we will still have in heaven; the ways we experience Jesus as we respond to him by feeding the hungry, helping the poor, comforting those who are mourning or sick, educating others, etc.; the ways we live the teachings of Jesus by working to make peace or promote justice or to encourage others to live for God; etc. “Who we are” goes to heaven, so our virtues, character, and godly ways of living that made us who we are will still be there in heaven. What are some examples of earthly treasure that are corruptible or lacking in eternal value and will not be treasure in heaven? What does “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be” mean to you? How can we train ourselves to focus on the “treasures” that have heavenly value and not just earthly value? Verses 22-23 This passage is not based on the modern science of the eye but on a more simple idea that light enters our body through your eyes. A “healthy” or “sound” eye (Matthew 6:22, NRSV and NABRE, respectively), allows the light to come in fully and easily. We might think about the effect of cataracts on human eyes. A cataract clouds your eye so that not as much light gets in and what gets in is more blurry. To use that as a metaphor for our approach to wealth, In the context of the surrounding teachings, Jesus may be using the idea of the eye and light as a metaphor for the need for his disciples to have a clear view about wealth or riches. What are some spiritual or metaphorical cataracts that might keep the light of Jesus’s teachings from shining clearly into your eyes? Some of the things that might block the light are: Anxiety, fear, prejudice, pride, the desire to be thought well of by others, confirmation bias or other cognitive biases, self-centeredness, excusing our own actions in ways we would not excuse others. What are the effects or results when those things keep the light from getting in? What kind of eye do we need? What would make for a “sound” or “healthy” eye? How does the attitude expressed in the Lord’s Prayer – “Give us this day our daily bread” – which Jesus taught in the previous passage, offer guidance about how to let the light of God’s teaching about possessions shine clearly through healthy eyes in our lives? In what ways do you need a new way of “seeing” wealth if you are going to take a Christ-like approach to money, wealth, and possessions? Verse 24 What does Jesus say in this verse? The last word of the verse is the Greek word mammon , which can mean money or wealth or possessions. “Wealth” better captures the point, since there are various forms in which we might be focused on riches or possessions or assets rather than God. What are some forms of “wealth” we might be tempted to become devoted to? Regarding verses 19-20, St. Jerome said: “This must be understood not of money only, but of all our possessions. The god of a glutton is his belly; of a lover his lust; and so every man serves that to which he is in bondage; and has his heart there where his treasure is” (quoted in Thomas Aquinas, Catena aurea , p. 244). What does Jesus say about the possibility of serving two masters at once? Why do we sometimes think we can serve more than one master? Why doesn’t it work to try to serve two masters at once? Jesus does not reject all forms of wealth-holding. It is worth noting that his ministry was funded in part from the resources of wealthy women – see Luke 8:2-3. St. Jerome suggested that there is a difference between being a slave or a master of one’s money: “Let the covetous man who is called by the Christian name, hear this, that he cannot serve both Christ and riches. Yet He said not, he who has riches, but, he who is the servant of riches. For he who is the slave of money, guards his money as a slave; but he who has thrown off the yoke of his slavery, dispenses them as a master” (quoted in Thomas Aquinas, Catena aurea , p. 248). Jerome’s insight is that a person may have wealth yet be the master rather than the slave of it by how they regard it and what they do with it. In our time, it is considered irresponsible as well as imprudent to go through one’s whole work life and approach retirement without having saved up some wealth, because our social system does not provide a way for us to live in dignity in our old age if we do not have assets saved up to spend down in retirement. How can a person have riches and yet not become a servant of riches? How do we find balance in our handling of wealth? What are the practical attitudes and actions that would help us not become slaves or servants of the wealth or assets we have? In 1 Cor. 7:29-31, Paul talks about having possessions and dealings with the world but living as though you do not have them. It might be possible to apply that idea here. There are several dimensions that could be considered. First is our focus : How much attention do we give to our wealth? What is one practical thing you could do to reduce your focus on money, wealth, or possessions? Second is our spending : How much do we spend on ourselves? Just because we have wealth (if we do) does not mean we have to spend it on ourselves. Instead, we could be on the lookout for ways to use it for the kingdom of God. If you don’t currently tithe (give 10% of your income to the work of God – i.e., church, service agencies, groups working for justice, etc.), could you increase your giving to the level of a full tithe? If you already tithe and you don’t need to spend all the money you earn, could you increase your charitable giving? Regardless of your level of tithing, how could you become more open to opportunities to help others who need help? What is one thing you could do differently that would shift your amount of spending somewhat from yourself to others? Take a step back and consider this: Many Christian denominations have found value in the concept of “stewardship” – the idea that what we have is not ours, to be used for our own benefit, but a gift or loan from God to be used for his service. This might lead to a shift in our attitude toward our paycheck: Instead if thinking of it as “what I have earned,” we could think of it as “what God has given to me.” If we can get there, we can consider a further mind-shift, from “what God has given to me” (which is still me-centered), to “what God allowed me to receive in trust for his purposes.” What we hold in trust, we hold for another’s benefit. If we can view all we have as being entrusted to us by God for his benefit and the benefit of his children (i.e., for the common good), it can help us avoid becoming a slave to our money, wealth, or possessions. Then we can see the things we do with our wealth as acts of service to God, as we acknowledge him as our master, rather than ourselves or our wealth. John Wesley, founder of the Methodist movement in the Church of England, understood this view of stewardship. In a sermon on money in 1760, he said: First: “Gain all you can” through your labor and effort without hurting yourself or anyone else. Second, “save all you can” and don’t waste any of what you have gained on unnecessary expenses. Third, “give all you can.” In deciding how to give, Wesley said you should think about it this way: God “placed you here not as a proprietor [owner], but a steward: As such he entrusted you, for a season, with goods of various kinds.” As a faithful steward of what the Lord has “for the present lodged in your hands,” you should first meet your own genuine needs and the needs of those dependent on you, and then “give all you can; nay, in a sound sense, all you have,” giving for the purpose of doing good to all people, and particularly to help the poor. Every expenditure we consider, he suggested, could be evaluated by whether the spending would be the action of a steward or the action of someone who thought he or she was the owner of what they possess. When we act like a steward rather than like an owner, then we are recognizing that all we have has been entrusted to us by God (Wesley, “The Use of Money” ). How would you approach wealth, money, or possessions differently if you routinely thought of them as things entrusted to you by God rather than as things you have earned or received on your own account? What is one step you might take in response to today’s insights? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Is your faith built on rock? Is the Sermon on the Mount a central part of your faith? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 7:24-29 Is your faith built on rock? Is the Sermon on the Mount a central part of your faith? Image by Nenad Radojčić, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti June 7, 2024 Matthew 7:24-27 The house built on rock What are the two things Jesus says a person must do to be like the wise man? What does it mean to truly “hear” God’s word? What does it mean to “act on” these words? Jesus uses the metaphor of building a house. What does the “house” stand for in our lives? There are many possible answers, including: your faith, your principles, your worldview, your habits, your character, your life choices, etc. How does a “wise” person built this kind of house? What is the “rock” on which your life stands? And how does it operate as a “rock” for you? What might be some examples of “sand” that are not solid things on which to build your life? What are the rain, floods, and winds that will test the “house” you have built? Why does Jesus contrast “hearing and doing” vs. “hearing and not doing”? What does this tell us about the role of obedience and action in our lives? What is something you might consider doing that might help ground your life more fully on the rock rather than on shifting sands? Matthew 7:28-29 The effect of Jesus’s teaching Matthew ends the Sermon on the Mount by saying of Jesus, “he taught them as one having authority and not as their scribes” (Matthew 7:29, NRSV and NABRE). What does this mean? Among other things, the scribes only explained and interpreted what the Law said; they did not add to it. Jesus is speaking as one who has the authority to create new teachings for people to follow. In what ways do you see the teachings in the Sermon on the Mount as manifesting Jesus’s authority? The fact that Jesus is acting like he has the authority not just to interpret but to re-think and expand upon the law, and to do other things that mere scribes cannot do, will soon get him in trouble with the religious leaders. Stay tuned by continuing the study of Matthew. Conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount Skim back over the Sermon on the Mount (chapters 5-7). Which of Jesus’s teachings strikes you as being most uniquely Christian – that is, which of the teachings of Jesus seems to be most distinct from the teachings of other religions or ethical systems? What does this uniquely Christian message tell you about God or people or God’s desires for us? How important is the Sermon on the Mount in your understanding of your faith? What passage or teaching from the Sermon on the Mount do you think God is calling you to give special attention to right now in your life? What is one concrete step you can take to live out that teaching more faithfully? Take a step back and consider this: We know that Christians are not perfect. We don’t live up to the fullness of the gospel as presented by Jesus. As Peter said to Jesus, “Who then can be saved?” (Matt. 19:25, NABRE). Jesus’s answer – “For human beings this is impossible, but for God all things are possible” (Matt. 19:26, NABRE) – is a comfort to modern Christians, who believe that God will indeed save them. It is sad, however, that many Christians, when they study the Sermon on the Mount as we have, are surprised to learn these details of the kind of life Jesus calls us to live. Perhaps too many people have not been effectively taught the full gospel, or even the full Sermon on the Mount. (And, of course, too often, we hear but don’t act on what we hear.) A detailed study of the Sermon on the Mount prompts many Christians to embrace new habits. That’s a good thing. But there is a danger. It would be easy to turn every teaching in the Sermon on the Mount into a new law. We could add to the Ten Commandments another 10 or 20 laws to follow, just from these three chapters. The risk is that we might turn into modern-day Pharisees, focused on the laws as ends in themselves rather than living in a vital relationship with the God behind the teachings. Without that relationship, the Sermon on the Mount will seem like an impossibly difficult, ever-expanding work list. But with a relationship with God, the Sermon on the Mount is a continual invitation to keep become more like Jesus, to keep being empowered by the Holy Spirit to respond to ever-new opportunities to bring God’s love and grace to the world. How can we encourage ourselves and our fellow believers to embrace the full Sermon on the Mount, but do so in ways that avoid turning it into another soul-deadening Law? How can we find joy in our relationship with God in responding to the dos and don’ts of Jesus’s teachings? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

What is the evidence that Jesus is the Messiah? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 11:1-19 What is the evidence that Jesus is the Messiah? Image by Hasan Almasi, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Cropped. Tom Faletti August 27, 2024 Matthew 11:1-19 Jesus responds to John the Baptist and explains John’s role in God’s plan Notice in verse 1 that Matthew does not tell us what happened when Jesus sent out the apostles. This reinforces the idea that Matthew isn’t focused on writing an event-by-event history; he is focused on explaining how Jesus’s life and teachings are relevant to the Christian community he is writing for. What matters most to Matthew here is not what the apostles did but what his readers might do. Verses 2-6 What is the meaning of John’s question? What does Jesus offer as signs, or what we would call “evidence,” in response to John’s question? All of the signs Jesus offers involve physical healing except the last one. Why does the fact that the good news is being proclaimed to the poor fit in a list of signs, and how is it evidence of who Jesus is? How is this concern for the poor a sign that Jesus is the one sent by God? How is being concerned for the poor evidence that a person may be aligned with or sent by God? What does Jesus’s inclusion of the poor here suggest to us about our own relationship with the poor? Notice that Jesus does not directly answer John’s question. Instead, he provides evidence by naming deeds mostly deeds mentioned in the Old Testament) as things the Messiah would do. John would have been familiar with those Old Testament passages and would have understood the conclusion Jesus is suggesting he reach. Let’s take a look at two of those prophecies: Read Isaiah 35:3-6 . According to Isaiah 35:3-6, what things will happen when the Lord comes to save his people? Read Isaiah 61:1 . According to Isaiah 61:1, what things will happen when the Lord comes to save his people? Jesus also names signs that are not listed in the Old Testament prophecies – signs that perhaps make his presence even more wonderous that what had been predicted. What has he done that goes beyond those Old Testament prophecies? Jesus raised a small number of people from the dead. But for some people, the greatest evidence that Jesus is the Messiah is the fact that he himself rose from the dead. Why is that powerful evidence of who Jesus is? Verse 6 is not meant as a criticism of John the Baptist, but rather as a set-up for what Jesus says in verses 16-19, where he challenges those in his own time who have taken offense at him. What are some of the things Jesus said or did that people took offense at? In our time we also have people who take offense at Jesus. What about Jesus causes people to take offense at him today, in our time? Have the words or deeds of Jesus ever been a stumbling block or problem for your faith? If so, how did you deal with it? Verses 7-15 Jesus shows a bit of wit as he speaks about John’s identity. He is saying that the people knew that John was special, or they wouldn’t have gone out to see him and be baptized by him. Jesus follows this by revealing John’s identity in biblical terms. He quotes Malachi, the last officially recognized prophet, whose book is the last book of the Old Testament (last when the Deuterocanonical books are placed in their proper places). Read Malachi 3:1-3 . What does Malachi 3:1 say that relates to John the Baptist? Look at Malachi 3:2-3. In this description of the messenger preparing the way before the Lord, what reminds you of John, and how? Read Malachi 4:5-6 . In Mathew 11:14, Jesus explicitly connects John to Elijah by invoking Malachi 4:5. What does Malachi 4:5 say? In what sense is John the Baptist like Elijah? In Luke’s Gospel (1:8-20), an angel appeared to John the Baptist’s father Zechariah and told Zechariah that he would have a child. The angel uses language from Malachi 4:6 in describing John. What does this verse say about John the Baptist? Why does John the Baptist get so much attention in the Gospels? Why is John important in the story of God’s plan to save his people? John serves not only as a forerunner to Jesus but also as a link or bridge between the Old Testament and the New Testament. Go back to Matthew and look at Matthew 11:11 . Jesus has now established that John is really important. Why, then, does he say in Matthew 11:11 that the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John? Greater in what sense? Is he talking about moral/spiritual greatness? About what they could experience that John did not have an opportunity to experience? Or what? This question may be answered in a variety of ways, but most answers revolve around the fact that Christians who lived after John had the opportunity to know the crucified and risen Christ and experience the new life he brings in the kingdom of God, and John did not. Barclay offers this: “But what was it that John lacked? What is it that the Christian has that John could never have? The answer to that is very simple and very fundamental. John had never seen the Cross. And therefore one thing John could never know – the full revelation of the love of God” (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , p. 7, emphasis in the original). It is our opportunity, blessing, and privilege to have experienced what John did not. We did not merit it. Do not agonize over verse 12. The scholars consider it to be puzzling at best and offer a wide variety of interpretations of it. The “violence” could be the violence suffered by John at the hands of the Roman government, or the sufferings of Christians in Matthew’s day (perhaps as a parenthetical insert by Matthew), or the apocalyptic sufferings to come; but some commentators consider it to be allegorical, referring to the self-discipline that Christians must embrace as followers of Christ. Verses 16-19 Jesus contrasts what was said about John and what was said about Jesus, to show the hypocrisy of those who rejected both John and Jesus. What was the impression of John among those who did not respond to his preaching? What was the impression of Jesus among those who did not respond to his preaching? Are there ways that we can become naysayers, rejecting preachers or teachers who seem too severe but also rejecting those who seem too soft? Scholars disagree about the meaning of verse 19. Luke records the saying differently (Luke 7:35), saying that wisdom is vindicated by her children. That form of the statement might suggest that John and Jesus are the children of wisdom. But Matthew’s version offers a different interpretation that draws on the Old Testament practice of personifying wisdom as a person (see, for example, Proverbs 8-9 and Wisdom 7:22-8:21). In that view, Jesus is the embodiment of wisdom, and his works vindicate his claims. If we follow that interpretation, verse 19 reaffirms the point of verse 2: that Jesus’s works demonstrate that he is “the one,” the very wisdom of God. Would it be fair to say that when someone is claiming to be offering words of wisdom, the deeds or actions that come from following that word of wisdom might be a helpful guide to whether the claim is actually wisdom or nonsense? Explain. How do Jesus’s actions give us reasons to believe his teachings, so that we can be confident that he is providing wisdom from God? If Jesus is the wisdom of God, what might you consider doing, or doing more of, to grow in that wisdom? Take a step back and consider this: In Matthew, 11:4-5, Jesus tells John the Baptist to judge him by his actions. The Christian community today mostly does not do the things that Jesus did: we mostly don’t give sight to the blind, make the lame walk, heal lepers, open the ears of the deaf, or raise the dead. To deal with this problem, people often spiritualize the statement, as though Jesus was talking about spiritual blindness, for example, rather than physical blindness. However, the Christian community, down through the ages, has shown the same concern for people’s physical needs, even though they have mostly not addressed those needs through miraculous signs. For example, Christians, and especially Catholic Christians, have created countless hospitals and other health care institutions to connect people with medical professionals who use the medical truths God has allowed scientists to discover, to bring healing to many people. I can support those good works, and I can support efforts to ensure universal access to health care. Second, Christians have found countless ways to carry out the last sign that Jesus offered to John: to proclaim good news to the poor. Healing can involve meeting both people’s spiritual needs and their physical needs. Similarly, good news can come to the poor both in the spiritual form of the spoken gospel and in the physical form of actions that meet their physical needs. The apostle James tells us: “If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well,’ but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it?” (James 2:15-16, NABRE) Why should someone believe our gospel if we do not show an active, effective concern for their pressing physical needs as well as their spiritual needs? World Concern, a Christian nonprofit organization that provides disaster response and community development in many countries around the world, puts it this way: “Food is a basic human need and an essential part of bringing the whole gospel to a village. A mother cannot hear the gospel over the cries of her hungry child” (“Food & Nutrition,” World Concern , https://worldconcern.org/food-nutrition , accessed 25 Aug. 2024). The whole gospel addresses the physical and spiritual needs of God’s children. This is not the first time we have seen Jesus express concern for the poor. Repeatedly throughout Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus emphasizes his particular concern for the poor and suffering of the world. Part of sharing the good news of Christ is showing his concern for the basic needs of others. We are called to present his love to others by being his hands and feet as the Body of Christ in this world. How can you show concern for the whole person as you consider the poor around you? How can you bring the good news of Jesus both in words and in actions that address their basic human needs? What is your church doing to meet the basic needs of the poor? What more might it be able to do, perhaps with a little help from you? What international Christian organizations, like World Concern, might you support to extend, in the name of Christ, God’s helping hand to those struggling to meet their basic needs? Many Christians support the work of Catholic Relief Services and/or World Vision, both of which are large, highly respected relief and development organizations that effectively address the basic needs of millions of people around the world every year. Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

The Golden Rule is part of the fundamental choice Jesus is calling us to make. Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 7:12-23 The Golden Rule is part of the fundamental choice Jesus is calling us to make. Image by Rosalind Chang, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti June 7, 2024 Matthew 7:12 The Golden Rule What word or phrase comes to mind as you consider this passage? In my Bible Study group, here are some of the ideas that were considered: empathy, consideration, reciprocal treatment, kindness, walking in the other’s shoes. How does this go beyond the “eye for an eye thinking” of earlier civilizations? Almost all religions and ethical systems have some form of the Golden Rule, but most are expressed in the negative: Don’t do to others what you don’t want them to do to you. No one before Jesus expressed this idea in the affirmative, requiring that we “do.” How does Jesus’s way of saying it push us further? There are a variety of possible answers to this question. One think worth noting is that the negative formulation only requires you to hold back and not do something bad. Jesus’s rule requires us to affirmatively take action to be helpful in ways that we would want others to be helpful to us. To live the Golden Rule seriously, we have to take the time regularly to think about what we might wish others were doing – and then do that thing. Is that an easy or difficult challenge for you? Explain. How would the Christian witness to the world be different if we truly lived the affirmative version of the Golden Rule that Jesus taught? Matthew 7:13-23 The fundamental choice Verses 13-14: The wide way and the narrow way. In the poem “The Road Not Taken” , Robert Frost wrote: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. Jesus is similarly proposing a fundamental breakpoint where a choice must be made. Where does the narrow gate lead (verse 14)? What do you think he means by “life”? How have you experienced this “life” that is found on the narrow way? What choices did you have to make to set you on the path with the narrow gate? On the narrow way (verse 14), why do you think Jesus says the road is “hard” (NRSV) or “constricted” (NABRE)? How is the narrow way hard? Where does the road with the wide gate lead (verse 13)? What do you think he means by destruction”? Are there times when you have experienced the effects of spending time on the easy road with the wide gate? Explain. If you have spent time on the wide way, what choices did you have to make to get of that road and move to the narrow way? How would you characterize the difference between how a person lives their life on the narrow way versus the wide way? Are there differences in outlook, focus, character traits that are exhibited, priorities, etc.? Verses 15-20: False prophets Prophets are people who speak the word of the Lord to the people. While we think of prophecy mostly in terms of predictions about the future, most prophetic activity in the Old Testament and probably in the early church involved the delivering of commands from God about how the people should live, often in response to what was going on at the time. We know from other passages in the Bible that itinerant prophets would come through town and expect to be fed them and supported while they were there. The question was, were they moochers, or evilly inspired, or from God? According to Jesus, how can you judge whether some is a good prophet (verses 16 and 17)? What does good fruit look like? What fruits would you look for in trying to judge whether someone is of God? Among many criteria, we might look for: How are they living their lives? Do their lives exhibit righteousness and repentance, or are they caught up in sinful behaviors? Do their lives conform to the Golden Rule that Jesus has just laid down a few verses earlier? How well do they manifest the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23)? Do they live lives of discipline or excess? Do they care for the poor or focus on the wealthy? How do they handle adversity? Do their teachings promote unity or sow division? Do their teachings cohere with what God has already revealed or promote new, hidden knowledge known only to them? Why does Jesus say in verse 19 that bad trees are cut down and thrown into the fire? Who are the “prophets” of our time whom we need to judge by their fruits? Are there “prophets” you are tempted to listen to? How can you make sure you are judging them wisely and not being drawn in by clever words and enticing ideas? Verses 21-23: Saying “Lord, Lord” doesn’t mean you’re in the kingdom of heaven Jesus says that saying, “Lord, Lord,” is not enough. What needs to be done to enter the kingdom of heaven? Only those who do the will of the Father enter the kingdom of heaven. In this context, what do you think Jesus means by “doing the will of the Father”? What must we do? What deeds are not sufficient evidence that someone will be welcomed into the kingdom of heaven (verse 22)? Why are those powerful signs of God’s presence not sufficient? What do you think those people should have been doing instead? Note: Jesus will spell some of this out more explicitly later in Matthew’s Gospel, including where he says that the ultimate test will be how we treated the least of us who were in need around us (Matthew 25:31-46). It is popular to say that we need to “walk the walk and not just talk the talk.” How does that idea reflect what Jesus is saying? What is the “walk” that is needed, that goes beyond the “talk”? Notice that the people Jesus is describing here weren’t just “talking.” They were doing impressive, attention-grabbing things. They may have even been doing good things. But Jesus said that is not enough. What are they missing? What does this passage say to you about your own life? What do you need to be doing, in order to be what you are called to be? Take a step back and consider this: It is interesting that the Golden Rule sits between a set of passages that, on one side, tell us to stop judging others and to pray continually to God with confidence that our Father in heaven will give us what we need, and, on the other side, tell us that we need to make a fundamental choice to take the hard way that bears good fruit and look good. Perhaps the linkage is that the Golden Rule, if lived fully by a committed Christian, will lead us to the right dispositions: If we treat others the way we want them to treat us, we will cut others as much slack as we hope they will cut us and that God will cut us. If we treat others the way we want them to treat us, we will trust God for our needs and not look for ways to squeeze every last dollar out of the people around us. If we treat others the way we want them to treat us, we will live lives that the people around us will recognize as bearing good fruit. If we treat others the way we want them to treat us, the Lord will not say, “‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoers” (Matt. 7:23, NABRE). If we take the Golden Rule in its full, affirmative form – do what you want others to do – how might it change not only our actions, but our entire way of thinking? Pick an area of your life where you are dealing with other people and the situation is currently bothering you or not going as you would like. How can you apply the Golden Rule creatively, in its affirmative direction to do what you wish others would do for you? How can you do something differently in that situation, in the spirit of the Golden Rule? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Pre-tribulation theories contradict Jesus and Paul. What does the Bible actually say? Previous Christian Faith Next The Rapture? It’s Not a Pre-Millennial Escape from Tribulation Pre-tribulation theories contradict Jesus and Paul. What does the Bible actually say? Image by CHUTTERSNAP, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti December 13, 2024 In 1 Thessalonians 4:17-18, the apostle Paul refers to the “rapture” while he is discussing the end times when Christ will return. The word “rapture” comes from the Latin word that translates the Greek word in verse 17 where Paul says that we will be “caught up” (literally, “snatched”) to meet the Lord in the air. Authors Tim LaHaye of the Left Behind series and Hal Lindsey of The Late Great Planet Earth fame have popularized an approach to interpreting what the Scriptures say about the end times that leans heavily on a modern interpretation of Paul’s “rapture.” These authors (and others, who don’t always agree among themselves) combine their interpretation of the rapture with their interpretation of the “1000 years” mentioned in Revelation 20:2-3 and other Bible passages to produce an entire timeline of the end times that is not consistent with the historic understanding of the Scriptures. Their views are based on ideas that mostly did not spread until the 19th century. Most of Christendom from the time of Augustine in the 5th century until the 19th century has taken a very different approach to interpreting the Bible’s end-times passages. Currently, the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, and many Protestant denominations – including the Episcopal, Lutheran, and Methodist Churches and others – reject that interpretation of the end times. This summary of the problem is drawn from a variety of sources, in an attempt to identify the commonalities in Catholic and Protestant thinking about the subject. In addition to the sources used in my 1 Thessalonians study, it also considers Trent Horn (Catholic), Karlo Broussard (Catholic), Alan S. Bandy (Reformed), the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (Lutheran), and “Where does the Rapture fit into UM beliefs?” (United Methodist). The historic churches and denominations have much in common in their understanding of the end times. The main divide on this topic is not between Protestants and Catholics. The main divide is between a fundamentalist segment of modern Christianity and the rest of Christianity. Frameworks for thinking about the end times There are roughly 6 common frameworks for thinking about the rapture, the tribulation, and the 1000-year “millennial” reign mentioned in Revelation 20:2-3: The first three approaches all revolve around the idea that the rapture will precede a 1000-year millennium of peace and righteousness on earth. However, the pre-millennialists don’t agree on whether the rapture will happen before, during, or after the tribulation that precedes the end: Pre-tribulation, pre-millennial: Christ will come and take the Christians who are alive to heaven (the “rapture”) before the tribulation. Then the tribulation will come, in a world devoid of Christians. Then Christ will come again with the church (which sounds like a second Second Coming, since he already came to rapture people). Then Christ will reign for 1000 years, and then there will be the final judgment (which sounds like a third Second Coming). This is the view of the people like Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey who have fed the “rapture” industry. Mid-tribulation, pre-millennial: This approach is similar to the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial approach, except that the rapture will happen in the middle of the tribulation (i.e., halfway through the 7-year tribulation), not before it begins. Therefore, Christians will experience some of the tribulation and not be fully spared. Post-tribulation, pre-millennial: This approach says that Christians will not be spared the tribulation at all. Christians will not join Christ until he comes in his Second Coming at the end of the tribulation. Then Christ will reign for 1000 years, and then the final judgment will come. These approaches all separate the Second Coming of Christ from the final judgment. Jesus never suggests such a separation, nor does Paul. They both describe one decisive event when Jesus comes, takes believers to himself, and presides over the final judgment. Amillennial: This view rejects the separation of the “rapture” from the final judgment and the entire pre-millennial framework. In this view, we are in the 1000-year reign of Christ, which began when Christ broke the power of sin by his death and resurrection and ascended into heaven. The reference to “1000” years in the Book of Revelation is symbolic, not literal: “1000” means a large number and “1000 years” means “a very long time.” Revelation 20 says that in this millennial time, the devil is being restrained. God is giving us time so that the gospel can be spread around the world. After the period we are now in, which includes its own times of smaller tribulation, Satan will be allowed to try to turn people away from Christ and the great, final tribulation will come. The Christians and non-Christians suffer now, and both the church and non-believers will suffer during the final tribulation, as Jesus warned from the beginning (see, for example, Matthew 24:29-31, where the tribulation precedes the gathering of the elect to Christ). After that period of tribulation, the final judgment will begin with Christians being caught up with those who have risen from the dead to meet Christ when he returns (1 Thess. 4:17; also referred to by Paul in 2 Thess. 2:1 as our “assembling” with the Lord). That event is not a pre-tribulation, pre-millennial escape from suffering; it is part of the Second Coming and final judgment exercised by Christ. This more traditional approach to interpreting the end-times Scriptures was the generally accepted view throughout the church from the time of Augustine in the 5th century, through the Protestant Reformation, and all the way until the 19th century. It is more faithful to the Scriptures, and it is followed by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches and a variety of current Protestant denominations, including the Episcopal, Lutheran, and Methodist Churches and others. Although scholars call this approach the “amillennial” approach, that term is not necessarily used by these churches. All of those churches reject the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial approach that was popularized in the decades before and after the year 2000. There are two other views worth mentioning, for the sake of completeness (and there are many other sub-categories and branches dividing all of the approaches). Postmillennial: In this view, first there will be a (literal or symbolic) 1000-year golden age of prosperity and minimal suffering on Earth, during which most people will be converted to Christ and live in righteousness. The devil will be bound during that time but will be loosed at the end of the 1000 years. After that 1000 years of relative peace, there will be a time of tribulation followed by the Second Coming (when believers will be called up to heaven) and the final judgment. This view was popular in the 19th century (the 1800s), until the World Wars of the 20th century made people rethink whether the world could reach such a golden age of righteousness. Metaphorical: In this view, most of the end-times references in the Bible are metaphorical and should not be interpreted literally. There will not be a literal trumpet, a literal 1000-year reign, a literal meeting of Christ in the sky, etc. God has used figurative language and metaphors to help us understand things that are beyond us. All of the key points of Scripture will be fulfilled: Christ will return and judge the world, the dead will be raised, there will be a final judgment, the devil and death will be defeated, and Christians will live with Christ forever. But the details of what it will look like are not for us to worry about. Problems with the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture idea The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture theory is inconsistent with Scripture in several ways: The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture violates the claim in Acts 1:11 that Jesus will return in the same visible way he left, since the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial story creates a scenario where Jesus remains hidden except to believers. The theory claims that Jesus doesn’t stay on Earth after the rapture and only returning visibly 1000 years later. The word Paul uses in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 for the “coming” of the Lord (the Greek word parousia ) in was used by the Greeks before Christ to refer to the ceremonial arrival of a king or ruler. Pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture proponents argue that in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, Christ only comes partly back, gathers the raptured people, and returns to heaven. However, Paul does not say Jesus immediately returns to heaven with them; he only says that those who are caught up to meet him in the air will be with him forever. The word for “meet” in verse 17 is a Greek word used to describe the situation where people go out from their town to meet a visiting official or king and escort that official into their city (in response to the “coming” in verse 15). Paul is saying that when Christ comes to Earth and the risen Christians and the still-alive Christians join him, they will stay with him as he comes to the Earth and does his work of final judgment. The idea that Christ aborts his “coming” and returns to heaven, only to return later, has been added by the pre-tribulation advocates without justification or good evidence. The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture theory that Jesus’s coming to gather the elect is separated from his final judgment by 1000 years contradicts Jesus. 1 Thessalonians 4:16 says that Christ’s Second Coming will be announced with an archangel’s voice and the sound of a trumpet, at which point the dead will be raised. 1 Corinthians 15:51-55 also links the trumpet to the raising of the dead. In Matthew 24:29-31, Jesus links his coming in power and glory (verse 30) with the angels (verse 31), the sound of the trumpet (verse 31), and the gathering of the elect (verse 31). In Matthew 25:31-33, Jesus links his coming in glory (verse 31) with the final judgment (verses 32-33ff). These events are all connected and happen together. The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial approach contradicts Jesus by separating the raising of the dead from the final judgment by 1000 years. In Matthew 24:29, Jesus says that these events happen right after the tribulation (verse 29). The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial advocates seek to escape the tribulation that Jesus clearly foretells. The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture violates Jesus’s statement in Matthew 16:27 that when he comes with his angels, he will repay people according to their deeds (i.e., the Second Coming with the final judgment). Again, Jesus does not teach any separation between these events. Note: Some rapture fans also interpret Luke 17:34-37 as referring to the rapture. In that passage, Jesus says that one person will be taken and another will be left. However, when you read that verse in context, starting at verse 26, you see that people are being “taken” in judgment. They are not being taken to heaven. They are not being raptured away to be saved from tribulation. Conclusion: The popular theory is wrong, but the Lord will be with us forever. In summary, the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture story created in the 19th century and popularized as Americans endured the Cold War and approached the millennial year 2000 does not have a sound basis in Scripture. The Book of Revelation is filled with symbolic language. There is no reason to distort the teachings of Jesus and Paul in order to interpret Revelation’s round number of 1000 years as a literal 1000 years. It is symbolic for the long period of time we are in before the Lord returns. And Jesus and Paul are very clear that Christians will endure the tribulation before they are united with Christ in his return. We must reject the distortions of their words that are central to every pre-tribulation rapture theory. This also means that no one escapes the tribulation except by dying. What else is true? The Scriptures tell us clearly: Christ will return. The dead will be raised. Christians (both those who have died and those who are still alive) will be united with Christ and live with him forever. Christ will judge the living and the dead and ask them how they treated “the least of these” among us. Fortunately, that’s all we really need to know about the end times. Copyright © 2024, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Christian Faith Next

In the days surrounding Jesus’s birth, uncertainty is a fact of life for his mother Mary. She responds by pondering and treasuring everything that happens. How can we embrace her trusting attitude? [Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 2:1-7; 2:8-20; 2:21; Luke 2:22-24] Previous Mary Index Next Session 2: Jesus’s birth causes uncertainty as well as joy In the days surrounding Jesus’s birth, uncertainty is a fact of life for his mother Mary. She responds by pondering and treasuring everything that happens. How can we embrace her trusting attitude? [Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 2:1-7; 2:8-20; 2:21; Luke 2:22-24] Nicolas Poussin (1594-1665). The Adoration of the Shepherds . Around 1633-4. Detail. The National Gallery, London, UK. Photo by Tom Faletti, 28 May 2025. Tom Faletti July 13, 2025 As we explore the birth and infancy of Jesus, we are going to look at what happens from Mary’s perspective. We begin with a story that is partly about Mary but not told from Mary’s perspective. It is Joseph’s side of the story as Mary and Joseph grapple with the virginal conception and birth of Jesus. Matthew 1:18-25 The birth of Jesus from Joseph’s perspective What dilemma does Joseph face? How do you think Mary felt as Joseph was considering what to do about the fact that she was pregnant? How do you think Mary felt when Joseph told her about her dream and took her into his house to live their married life together? Mary bears a lot of uncertainty throughout her life. The Bible doesn’t tell us much about what she is thinking or how she deals with the anxiety of not knowing what will happen. How do you think Mary dealt with anxiety? We have no words from Mary in this story. What can learn from this “silent Mary” who endures all things quietly and stays faithful? Luke 2:1-7 Mary and Joseph travel to Bethlehem, where Jesus is born Why do Joesph and Mary travel to Bethlehem? Traveling from Nazareth to Bethlehem would require walking around 90 miles, which would take 4-7 days, depending on how fast Joseph wanted to push his pregnant wife and perhaps a donkey. Donkeys walk at roughly the same speed as humans, so a donkey helps carry a burden and can carry a human, but it doesn’t speed up the journey. Note: In Luke 2:4, Jesus is referred to as Mary’s “firstborn son.” Some have tried to argue that this is a clear signal that Mary had more children later. That would be a misreading of the text. This passage does not provide any guidance regarding the debate between Protestants and Catholics over whether Mary had additional children or was a perpetual virgin. For Jews, the phrase “firstborn son” had a special meaning that applied regardless of whether the mother had more children later. They were commanded to redeem their firstborn son through a special offering. We will see this when we look at Luke 2:22-24. This offering was required regardless of whether they ever had additional children. So the only thing Luke is clearly stating here is that Jesus is subject to the requirements that applied to a “firstborn son.” How do you think Mary felt when she learned that she and Joseph needed to walk or travel by donkey to Bethlehem? How comfortable do you think Mary and Joseph are with each other at this point? If you have had a newborn child, think back to those early days. Now add to your mental image the extra challenges Mary faces: staying in a cave or barn, or more likely, staying in a stranger’s house on the first floor where the animals live, while the residents sleep upstairs. What do you think it would have been like for Mary in those first days in Bethlehem with a newborn baby? If you were Mary, how would you try to make sense of the contrast between the prophecies that this child would be great and the gritty reality of life with the animals? Luke 2:8-20 Shepherds suddenly pop in and tell Mary that her son is special We usually start looking at this story from the perspective of the shepherds, who see angels. Consider it from the perspective of Mary, who does not see these angels (though she has seen an angel before) but first encounters the shepherds when they barge into the cave or barn or house and tell her they have seen angels. Focus on verses 16-17 for a moment. How do you think Mary feels? According to verse 11, What did the angels tell the shepherds about Jesus? In verse 11, the angels tell the shepherds that this is good news for all people. What do you think this reference to “all people” means to them and to Mary? Verse 18 tells us that everyone who heard the shepherds’ story was amazed. Do you think this includes Mary? What do you think her initial reaction is? Verse 19 tells us that Mary hung onto these events long after they happened, keeping them and reflecting on them (NABRE) or treasuring them and pondering them (NRSV) in her heart. There are two parts to this. First, she keeps or treasures the memories. What do you think these memories mean to Mary as the years go by during Jesus’s childhood? Second, she ponders or reflects on what has happened. How does pondering and reflecting what has happened in the past help prepare us or strengthen us for what may lie ahead in our life? How does looking back on what God has done help us discern what God is trying to do in our lives now? Do you think these memories meant something different to Mary after Jesus began his public ministry? How might these memories have taken on a different or enhanced meaning after Jesus died and rose from the dead? What Mary was, we are called to be. How can the habit of treasuring and pondering what God has done in our lives help us be the kind of people God is calling us to be? What Mary did, we are called to do. How can we act on what God shows us as we treasure and ponder what he has done previously in our lives? Luke 2:21 Jesus is circumcised and named What is the significance of the fact that Jesus is circumcised? If you go back and look at the accounts of the appearance of the angel to Mary and the angel in Joseph’s dream, both angels tell them to name the child Jesus. This would be the Hebrew name Joshua, which means “God saves,” or “Yahweh saves.” What do you think the assignment of this name to Jesus meant to them? Luke 2:22-24 Mary offers sacrifice for purification and Jesus is consecrated to God Starting in verse 22, Luke describes rites that occurred 40 days after Jesus’s birth. There are two things going on here: According to the Law of Moses, a woman who gave birth was considered unclean – i.e., ritually impure – for 40 days after the birth of a son (80 days after the birth of a daughter). At the end of that period, she was supposed to make an offering to God of a year-old lamb and either a pigeon or a turtledove. If she could not afford a lamb, she could offer a second pigeon or turtledove. Read Leviticus 12:1-8 to see the purification rule in the Old Testament. What strikes you as significant in Leviticus 12:1-8? What does the fact that they offered two pigeons or turtledoves, and not a lamb, tell you about them? Also, according to the Law of Moses, every firstborn son belongs to God and must be consecrated to him. The firstborn son is ransomed by the offering of a sheep, in remembrance of the death of the firstborns in Egypt when the Israelites were rescued from bondage. Jews were not required to make this offering at the Temple, but that is where Mary and Joseph did it. Read Exodus 13: 1-2, 11-16 to see the rules regarding the firstborn in the Old Testament. What does the fact that Mary and Joseph brought these offerings to the Temple tell you about them in terms of their faith? How do you think Mary and Joseph’s dedication to following the Law affected Jesus as he was growing up? As Mary was, so we are called to be. What does this passage say to you about your approach to your faith? Sometimes, when we face unexpected developments in our lives, it is easy to fall away from the regular routines that we might otherwise stick with, including church attendance and religious observances. How is Mary’s approach toward these practices an example to us of how to live out our faith in uncertain times? Take a step back and consider this: Mary faces a great deal of uncertainty as she ponders what the angels are saying about her son. The angel she encountered directly, at the Annunciation, told her that her son would be given the throne of David and would rule over the house of Jacob forever (Luke 1:32-33), yet his birth did not look like a royal birth in an earthly sense: no palace, no royal attendants, no heralds proclaiming the birth to the people in the countryside. Angels declared to nearby shepherds that he was a savior and Messiah, but no one cared enough to provide them a proper room for the delivery. We face uncertainties too. We might ask in faith for something we know is a good thing, and not receive it. We might pray for someone for decades and not see the outcome we desire. We might seek to be freed from a habitual sin and find it still lurking years later. And yet God has assured us that he never forsakes us. We might summarize this experience of life by saying that life is not always easy, but God says things are not always as they seem. There is more going on than we can see. Mary lives with the uncertainty and keeps doing what people of faith do, while keeps pondering, and treasuring, and trusting. How can you, like Mary, keep trusting God for what lies ahead, even when what is happening now is not what you might have liked? What attitudes and practices can you embrace that Mary has shown? Bibliography See Mary - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/mary/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Mary Index Next