Making a Way For Children

Notes for the Ekklesia Meeting
Sundays @ 10:00 a.m. Info: (651) 283-0568 www.dtminc.org Today’s Date: November 27, 2005

Making A Way For Children
by Dan Trygg

"And they were bringing children to Him so that He might touch them; but the disciples rebuked them. 14 But when Jesus saw this, He was indignant and said to them, ‘Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15 Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.’ 16 And He took them in His arms and began blessing them, laying His hands on them." Mark 10:13-16

Jesus and His disciples had just crossed over from the eastern side of the Jordan into Judea, and, being at the fords of the Jordan at a festival time, there were many people there. Many crowds were following Jesus, and He was healing them there (Matt. 19:1). This was the setting for the attempt by the Pharisees to entrap Him in a controversy over divorce. Instead, He both affirmed God’s original plan for marriage, and exposed the hypocrisy of His opponent’s attempts to justify their hard-hearted, hypocritical behavior. Immediately following this discussion, parents began to bring near their children, so that He might touch them, and bless them. The disciples, however, rebuked them, wishing to not bother their Master with what they probably considered an inane, troublesome waste of time.

Mark records that when Jesus saw the disciples’ treatment of these parents and children, He was "indignant". The Greek word indicates that Jesus first felt pain at their actions. His emotional response was displeasure, irritation or anger at the insensitive and uncaring manner in which they were treating these "little ones". This is a great word picture to help us understand how anger can be a healthy, appropriate emotion. Anger is a human emotion which God enables us to experience. God is an emotional Being, and we are like Him. The Lord wishes for us to be able to understand, appreciate and utilize our emotions in healthy ways. Jesus is our preeminent example, as we shall see.

Paul wrote in Eph. 4:26, "Be angry, and do not sin." This is a direct quote from Psalm 4:4 in the Greek Septuagint translation of the OT. The words for "do not sin" mean "don’t make a mistake" or "don’t miss the target" with your anger. David, in Psalm 4, had to deal with people who were mocking him for his faith, while they were carousing and partying (cf. vss. 6,7). His hurt and anger may have been appropriate, but there was no healthy outlet for his anger, so we see how he dealt with this situation. First, he cried out to God in his hurt and anger. Then, he recognized that these other people were focused on things that were deceptive and empty. God had called him to separate himself to serve Him, so David reminded himself of that in order to strengthen his resolve to not cave in to social pressure. He got away from those people who were attacking him. He went to his own room, and laid upon his bed. He had to quiet himself emotionally (vs. 4). Then, he offered himself afresh to God by renewing his commitment to do the right thing, and resolved to entrust himself to the Lord. He recognized that what these other people were looking for was simply to experience something good in life. They were focused on something much less than what was available in the Lord, however, so he asked God to show His beauty and glory through the joy and peace of his life. God had given him much more joy and gladness than his detractors would ever experience at even the best of their parties. (And no hangovers!) Furthermore, when he went home to bed, he was able to sleep in peace and safety. From David’s example, we can observe helpful pointers on how to deal with hurt and anger where it would be dangerous or unprofitable to speak up or to take action.

What we learn from Jesus’ example here is different. He felt the pain (either by empathizing with the parents and children being rebuffed, or by observing the inappropriate behavior of the disciples in light of what He knew would be God’s heart), which led to the emotional response of anger. The indignation motivated Him to action, and the time was appropriate to deal with the issue. He spoke up and corrected His disciples. (Paul wrote about how we ought not to allow the sun to go down on what provoked our anger [Eph. 4:26,27]. We are to deal with anger in some way, not just let ourselves stew about things, and give the devil an opportunity to aggravate the situation further in our emotions.) Jesus’ response in this situation was both immediate and appropriate. He dealt with the issue. He did not speak disrespectfully to His disciples, or chew them out, nor did He hold back and allow the mistreatment to continue. He simply spoke up and directed His disciples to allow the little children to come to Him. While doing this, He alluded to a principle which He had taught them previously, "Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a child shall not enter it at all" (Mk. 10:15). Matthew’s account adds, "…for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these" (Matt. 19:14).

We have the advantage of seeing the relationship of this incident in close proximity to Matthew 18:1-14. For the disciples, however, days or even weeks may have transpired between these separate incidents. You remember the incident? The disciples had been arguing about which of them was the greatest, competing with each other for a higher position in the leadership pecking order. Jesus stood a little boy in their midst, saying, "Unless you turn around and become as the children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven, and whoever might welcome one such child in My name welcomes Me. But whoever might stumble (offend, dishearten, reject, lead into sin) one of these little ones who believe in Me, it would be better for him to have a millstone put around his neck and be cast into the sea." Whoops! They forgot! Here, just a short time later, they are shooing away "little ones who believe" in Him. Instead of welcoming them, they were actually blocking them from coming to Jesus, and sending them away!
How could they be so thick-headed? Why didn’t they see what they were doing? They still did not grasp the nature of God’s kingdom. They were thinking in terms of an earthly kingdom, where pomp, propriety and formalism were ingredients of the king’s court. In this environment, the more important a person was, the more removed and protected he was from "commoners" and the noise and disruption of everyday life. Appointments were necessary to see the king, and only those considered important were permitted to have an audience with him. The royal guard would prevent any unwelcome guests from coming into the king’s presence. Important business was conducted by important people in special meetings. This was no place for children to be playing or interrupting. Besides, kings and important people were far too busy to be bothered with chucking children under the chin, or patting them on the head.

We have the same kind of thinking in many churches of our day. The entire environment often reeks of formalism, spit-and-polish, institutional thinking. Kids are supposed to be little adults. They are not supposed to run in church, nor raise their voices. Dressing up in special "Sunday-go-to-meeting" clothes, and being on their "best behavior" reinforces this mindset. Some pastors even are separated from the people, and use ushers as bodyguards (sometimes called "armor-bearers") to keep the "unimportant people" away, so as not to disturb "the anointing". (Apparently that was not a problem in the early church. At least, you never read about Jesus or the apostles requiring a buffer zone in the midst of their times of ministry. The anointing was there, crowd or not.) Pleeeze! Can’t you see that is the same kind of "put-him-on-a-pedestal" type of thinking that the disciples had in their minds? Can’t you see that people that need to be loved and affirmed get pushed aside in this kind of environment?

Jesus came to turn this kind of thinking on its head. Jesus came to display the heart of the Father, the King of the universe. In God’s economy, even the lowliest creature has its important place. He is fully aware of even the smallest of them. He knows when a sparrow falls to the ground, and even the number of the hairs upon our heads (Matt. 10:29,30). The whole point of the Father sending His Word to become human and live among us is to forever proclaim and clearly demonstrate that He considers us all important to Him, …even the lowliest, the poor, the powerless, and the weak (Rom. 5:6-8; I Cor. 1:25-28). We don’t have to jump through hoops to earn access to God’s presence (Rom. 5:1,2; Eph. 2:8-19). He has traversed the distance that was between us, so that we could simply open our hearts to Him. He cares nothing about the valuation of the world regarding our status, position or importance. He has come in search of us (Lk. 19:10), because He wants us to be part of His forever family. He is a Father. He made children to be children. Noisy, rambunctious, curious, squirmy, and wiggly, as well as teachable, humble, clingy, vulnerable, dependent, and in need of care. He loves the sound of children. They are not an irritation to Him. He wants to win their hearts.

You see, that is the difference in paradigm that we must get in our heads. We are not outsiders or foreign dignitaries coming to a King’s court to have an audience with the Almighty. He is awesome and holy, surrounded by angels and majesty, but that is not the primary relationship He has with us. That is not what we are to recreate when we meet together. God has called us to be members of His household. We need to envision a large table, with a huge family gathering. The older ones are to help serve the younger ones. They need extra attention. We are to cut up their meat for them. Dish up their food. Furthermore, it is our Father’s delight to come to each one, to offer them more of the abundance of the table, to speak to each one personally. There is not chaos, but neither is there formalism. This is family time. He has time for each one. Each one is precious to Him. He is especially blessed when we help each other, …when we don’t hog the food, or disregard others so we can eat first. There is plenty to go around. The more mature ones help in the kitchen and bring out the food to serve the younger ones. They are not secluding themselves because they think they are more important. They come earlier to help with the preparation, but they are not more special than the others. They understand that their task is to get food out for every last child, and they utilize their strength and understanding to serve. They don’t sit at some higher table. They join the rest, and everyone shares in the Father’s table together. And so we see, here in Matt. 19, our Elder Brother modeling the Father’s heart, as He takes each child in His arms, speaks to them personally, lays His hand on their head and blesses each one.

God's Plan For Marriage

Notes for the Ekklesia Meeting
Sundays @ 10:00 a.m. Info: (651) 283-0568 www.dtminc.org Today’s Date: November 20, 2005

God’s Plan For Marriage
by Dan Trygg

"And Pharisees came up to Him and tested Him by asking, ‘Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?’ 4 He answered, ‘Have you not read that the One creating them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, “‘Therefore a person shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will be unto one flesh’”, 6 with the result that no longer are they two, but one flesh? What therefore God has joined together, let not a person leave.’"
Matthew 19:3-6

Leaving Capernaum, Jesus crossed the Sea of Galilee and seems to have traveled down the eastern side of the Jordan and crossed over, having come “unto the region of Judea across the Jordan”. (Since Judea lay entirely on the west side of the Jordan, to refer to it as “the region across the Jordan” only makes sense if your point of reference were from the eastern side. This was a very popular route for pilgrims from Galilee to Jerusalem, since they could then avoid traversing the country of Samaria. The Samaritans were often very inhospitable to Jerusalem-bound travelers.) Matthew reports that many crowds followed after Him, and He healed them there.

While all of this activity was going on, the Pharisees came near to Him. Testing Him, they said, “Is it permitted to a person to divorce his wife according to every cause?” Matthew says they were “testing” or “tempting” Him, because they were trying to manipulate Him into saying something they could use against Him. At the time, there were two very distinct positions on this matter, which were proposed by different rabbis and promoted by their followers.

Hillel and Shammai had lived in Palestine during the reign of King Herod the Great (37-4BC). They were both respected rabbis of great influence. Both gathered students in schools that studied and carried on the insights and perspectives of their respective masters. The followers of Shammai took the strict position that divorce was not to be permitted at all, except in the case of immorality. The school of Hillel, by contrast, took the very liberal position that divorce could be had for any cause at all (Note the language used is contained in the Pharisee’s question, a clear reference to the teachings of this school.). Hillel had taught that a man could divorce his wife over any incident of displeasure, at all. If she burnt his breakfast, if she was too noisy, or if there was any disharmony, or even if the husband was simply tired of her, or if another, prettier woman came along, the followers of Hillel taught that he was within his rights to divorce her. This teaching of “easy divorce” was much more popular (as it is in our culture today), though it was abhorrent to the more conservative Jews. The Pharisees thought that no matter how Jesus would answer their question, they would be able to use His comment to impeach His credibility.

These rabbis thought they were teaching what was good in God’s eyes, and that a man doing what they advised would still be considered righteous before Him. These rabbinical schools were purporting to be “interpreting the Torah”. The debate centered around Deut. 24:1, "When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, and she departs out of his house…”. The debate centered around the word “indecency” (literally, “nakedness” or “shameful exposure”). The followers of Shammai emphasized the sexual connotation involved in the word, and reasoned that it referred to some kind of sexual immorality. The followers of Hillel emphasized the first reason given (i.e., that she “finds no favor in his eyes”), and interpreted the “indecency” to be whatever the husband felt was inappropriate, leaving it wide open to whatever whim might set him at odds with his wife. Among the Jews, certainly it was a man’s world. Women did not even have the right to divorce their husbands. The most an unhappy wife could do was make life so miserable for her husband that he would be irritated and fed up enough to give her the divorce she wanted.

Jesus’ response, however, was not as His enemies were expecting. Rather than taking one position or the other, the Lord went back to the original plan for marriage. In their squabbling over the details and legalities of divorce, they had forgotten what God’s intent for marriage was. They were so busy trying to decide when it was legitimate to leave the marriage pact, they had not understood the potential behind why God had ordained it in the first place. He or she who leaves the marriage misses out on what God had in His mind. “Have you not read that the One creating them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, “‘Therefore a person shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will be unto one flesh’” Jesus is not talking to people who were unschooled in the OT. He knew that they would remember that God had said it was not good for the man to be alone, so He made a helper (an ally) corresponding to him, someone who could bring strengths and abilities to compliment his so that together they could accomplish God’s will. This was the Creator’s idea. It was He, the One creating all things, who decided to make this helper from the man’s own side, so that she would be bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. It was His plan that they leave their families of origin and establish a new household of their own. He joined them together so that they might come to be one flesh. The thrust of that statement is not that they would become one at the point of marriage, or at the moment of their sexual union. “One flesh” is the goal of the marriage relationship. The language indicates that it takes time to develop that. Their commitment and union is to develop oneness. The end result should be that they are no longer two individuals, but a one-flesh team. Jesus’ next statement is very telling, “What God has yoked together, let no one separate/depart from”. Like two draft animals yoked together as a team, the husband and wife have work to do. They must learn to work together as a team. To do that effectively, they need to learn to accommodate each other, to pay attention to and respond to each other’s peculiar ways and style. Divorce runs counter to the plan. It is going the wrong direction. God has great blessings for those who will work hard toward oneness.

Trying to escape the conclusion to which Jesus was directing them, the Pharisees asked, “Why, then, did Moses command us to give a certificate of divorce and send her away?” Jesus replied, “Toward the hardness of your hearts Moses permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.” Moses actually was fighting against the rampant immorality which was commonly accepted by the nations around Israel. It was not uncommon for husbands to divorce wives at a whim, and often take them back in a day or two. Moses required that a man obtain a certificate of divorce, a legal document obtained in front of respected elders of the city in the public court, which was at the city gate. This gave the husband pause. Did he really wish to go through all that because he was momentarily angry at his wife? Many so-called divorce cases never went beyond a threat stage because of Moses’ law. Secondly, this certificate of divorce was a statement freeing the wife from the husband so that she would be able to marry another. This protected her rights and her security, since women rarely could earn a living as a wage earner in that society. Finally, if you read the first four verses of Deut. 24, you will see that another purpose for this commandment was to stop the practice of wife-swapping, which also was quite common. By making it impossible to remarry the woman after she marries another, this law once again eliminated frivolous divorce, and protected the woman from being passed around from man to man. It was the hardness of men’s hearts that had caused this misuse of women and necessitated some protection under the law for women. Again, this was not God’s original plan. Moses’ commandment was actually given to motivate people to stay in their marriages, not get out of them. It was designed to slow down rampant, whimsical divorce.

Finally, Jesus comes out and declares that anyone who would divorce his wife and marry another commits adultery. Jumping through accepted civil or even religious hoops does not change the motives of the heart, or the breaking of the covenant made between the original partners. Please, understand that Jesus is not talking about whether or not a divorced person can ever remarry. He is confronting the shallow religious sham that was being practiced by the people of His day, and by people of our time. He is championing marriage. He is attempting to get us to not disregard or devalue the covenant nor the purpose of marriage (cf. Mal. 2:13-16). God has given us a relationship which is to be unique from all others. It is the joining of two people, yoked together to become a team to accomplish God’s will in the world. The partners rub on each other, shape each other and teach each other, if they are of a mind to receive from each other. Marriage calls us to die to self, to learn to love. Marriage is also the place where God ordained children be raised and nurtured. It is the one place where God says sexual activity is good and healthy. We see around us the devastating effects of when the value and importance of marriage are ignored. Casual sex produces venereal diseases, emotional wounding, unwanted pregnancies. Divorce and single parents are the largest cause of poverty in our country. Children growing up without two parents often have great difficulties. Society suffers, as a whole, from a low view of marriage. God’s way would spares us from these dreadful consequences, and would provide a relationship of stability, support, partnership and encouragement for those who can accept each other and truly become a team in God’s will.

The disciples heard what Jesus said, and they were shocked. Their response was, “If this is the case between a man and a woman, it is better not to marry.” In other words, “If divorce is not an option, then it is not beneficial to marry.” This is not at all what Jesus was saying. This reveals that they were so used to using the threat of divorce as a club, or they saw it as an escape if things got too bad at home, that deprived of that as an option they were feeling, “Oh, no! What have I gotten myself into?” Interestingly, Jesus did not feed into that. Instead, He said not everyone can live as unmarried, single person. That is the alternative. Otherwise, embrace God’s plan. Work at being joined to your wife and becoming one.

Unlimited Forgiveness

Notes for the Ekklesia Meeting
Sundays @ 10:00 a.m. Info: (651) 283-0568 www.dtminc.org Today’s Date: November13, 2005

Unlimited Forgiveness
by Dan Trygg

"Then Peter came and said to Him, ‘Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?’ 22 Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.’” Matthew 18:21,22

We have been working through this context for the past several weeks. There had been a controversy among the disciples, probably caused by what appeared to be a special advancement of Peter from among the other disciples. We don’t know exactly what was going on, whether some of the other disciples were envious of Peter, and were taking some verbal pot shots at him, or whether Peter was letting recent events go to his head and stirred up controversy by being arrogant and acting as though he were superior toward the others. What we do know is that a controversy began along the roadway, while they were traveling, regarding which of them was the greatest.

When they finally came to Capernaum, they openly brought the question to Jesus, although He was already well aware of their foolish disputations. He took a child and stood him in the midst, and told them that they needed a reality check. They were arguing about who was the greatest in the kingdom, but unless they turned and changed their self-focus they would not even enter the kingdom. Instead of squabbling over position, and trying to climb over one another for first place, they needed to become as humble and unpretentious as a little child.

The world often disregards, abuses and is not mindful of the true needs of children, the weak and the powerless, but those who are aligned with God’s kingdom will value, welcome, and watch out for such “little ones”. In that spirit, we ought to watch out for one another, attempting to help and restore a brother or sister who has wandered away or has become entangled in sin. If such a person has injured me, and I attempt to rectify the problem, but he or she does not acknowledge my concerns, I am not to judge or reject them, but wisely put some emotional distance between us. That person is still my brother or sister, even though they are not considerate of my preferences at the present time.

Not quite wiling to let the issue die, Peter piped in, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” In saying this, Peter was being magnanimous, since the Jewish rabbis had interpreted Amos 1:3,6,9,11,13; 2:1,4,6 as indicating that the divine rule was that when someone sinned against you up to three times, you overlook their sin, but after that you no longer cut them any slack. Of course, that is not really what the passages in Amos say. The point of what God revealed there was that the judgment He was about to bring upon these offenders was not a knee jerk reaction after one offense, but was initiated after much transgression. The scribes had turned the meaning of a poetical statement into a literal formula to justify unforgiveness.

Peter was taking a position that was more than twice as permissive and gracious as was commonly accepted. Perhaps a little dusting of the magnanimous grace of God in Christ was rubbing off on him. He knew that the forgiveness he should show as a kingdom disciple should be much greater, even scandalously greater, than what other people expected. While he thought he was more than going the extra mile for people, the limits of his understanding of grace are clearly exposed by Jesus’ response.

“I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven,” shot back Jesus. Peter’s “magnanimous grace” was but a drop in the bucket compared to what God expects from us, and enables us to do, as servants in His kingdom. This response would have brought a significant OT passage to the minds of the disciples.

In Genesis 4, we have a genealogical record of the line of Cain, who murdered his brother. As part of his punishment, Cain was to be a vagrant and wanderer upon the earth, which meant that he could no longer be a farmer. He would have to make his living by herding animals, or by making and selling products, or by being a hired servant to his relatives. When Cain feared that someone would kill him for murdering Abel, God had put a mark upon him, warning that anyone who would kill him in revenge for Abel’s death would be judged by God with a sevenfold vengeance. It was clear that God was attempting to nip the sinful tendency to take revenge in the bud. Instead of accepting the wise judgment of God, however, Cain chose to build the first city, a stubborn, rebellious resistance to the divine will. The heritage of the continued rebellion and the unrepentant violence of Cain became evident four generations later, when Lamech became the first man to marry more than one wife, another significant departure from God’s original plan. He also arrogantly boasted in his violent character, telling his wives that he had killed a young man for merely striking him. Instead of justice, “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, …and wound for wound” (Ex. 21:23-25; Lev. 24:20; Dt. 19:21), Lamech advocated unrestrained vengeance and retaliation, rage and unforgiveness expressed without limits. Here, Jesus totally turns that around to advocate unrestrained grace and limitless forgiveness.

To drive His point home, Jesus tells a parable. In this story, a king wished to settle accounts with his slaves. As he began to do this, one slave was brought to him who owed him 10,000 talents of silver. Obviously, this man had been a trusted servant of the king, one who was given a stewardship or great responsibility which he had squandered or very poorly invested. The amount he owed was incredible, well over the ten million dollars which would be represented by the weight of the silver involved, although the buying power was much more. Think of that! This man owed his king over ten million dollars! To get some handle on the amount of money involved for the time, the entire taxation of the territories of Judea, Idumea and Samaria for one year was only 600 talents of silver, or six percent of what was owed. That means it would take almost 17 years of taxes from these three territories, without anything subtracted for maintenance or expenses, to pay up what was owed! The size of the debt was truly impossible for this slave to even imagine that he could repay. Yet, when the king ordered him, his family and all he owned to be sold to partially repay the debt, he cried out, “Please, be patient with me, and I will repay you everything.” Yeah, as if that was going to happen! Not only was the sum virtually impossible to raise, the man’s track record surely indicated that he did not have the skill to profitably manage and increase the estate. His claim was totally baseless. Amazingly enough, however, the king felt compassion for his slave, and forgave him the entire amount!

The slave should have been overwhelmed with joy, and with a grateful heart, went on his way. Instead of coming to grips with what just happened, however, he was still determined to prove that he was able to repay the amount owed. He was still fixated on paying the unpayable debt which had been so graciously forgiven. Going out, he sought out and found a fellow slave who owed him about the equivalent of three months wages for a common laborer. Seizing him by the throat, he throttled him, saying, “Pay if you owe me anything.” In other words, he didn’t even know for sure if the man still owed him, or how much it was, that was how little concerned he had been about money before this day. Since his encounter with the king, however, he was determined to collect on every debt. The poor fellow slave did as his friend had done before the king. Falling to the ground, he plead for patience, and promised to pay back the relatively manageable amount that he owed. The original slave was not willing to give him any extra time, nor was he compassionate as his master had been to him. Instead, he had his fellow slave put in prison until he should pay back his debt.

Other fellow slaves had witnessed this man’s hard-heartedness, and were exceedingly grieved at what he had done. They reported these events to their master, the king, who summoned the original slave. He said, “You wicked slave! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. Was it not necessary for you to show mercy to your fellow slave as I showed mercy to you?” And being angry, his master delivered him over to the torturers until he would repay his entire debt.

Jesus summarized the point by saying, “In the same way your heavenly Father will do to you, if ever each one does not forgive his brother from his heart.” What does this mean? Jesus does not spell it out. Some have suggested that the torturers are demons who find access into our lives through unforgiveness. That is not spelled out in this passage, and would therefore be inadvisable to teach as the meaning of this text. Nevertheless that could be one scenario that would seem to fulfill the parameters of Jesus’ parable. Others could as well. The torturers could also refer to psychological or even psychosomatic afflictions. God did not make us to carry bitterness and unforgiveness for extended lengths of time. Bitter and unforgiving people are not happy or joyful people. These attitudes are like cancers which tend to grow and wear away at the person’s psyche and world view. Studies have also shown that these emotional attitudes are toxic to one’s physical health. People who are angry, bitter and resentful tend to develop physical afflictions at a much higher rate than the general population. Spiritually, Jesus tells us that those who do not forgive those who sin against them will not experience forgiveness from the Father for their sins (Matt. 6:14,15; 18:35). The point of the parable is that we ought to treat others with a graciousness that corresponds to the grace God has offered to us. Just as the fellow slaves recognized the evil choice of the forgiven slave, in the same way our unforgiveness does not demonstrate the love of Jesus, but the sinful retaliatory nature of man. If we are going to claim to follow Jesus, we must choose to forgive our brothers and sisters as often as God would show us His grace. If we understand His grace toward us, and really let it sink in, we cannot help but be gracious to others out of a grateful heart (Col. 3:12-15).

Dealing With Offenses In The Body

Notes for the Ekklesia Meeting
Sundays @ 10:00 a.m. Info: (651) 283-0568 www.dtminc.org Today’s Date: November 6, 2005

Dealing With Offenses In The Body
by Dan Trygg

"If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.” Matt. 18:15

Last time, we talked about the rivalry which was going on among the disciples. Apparently, there may have been some jealousy over the way Peter seemed to be advancing beyond the rest of the group. Or, Peter himself may have been inflating his own importance, and the others were grumbling and feeling resentful about his boasting. When they asked Jesus who was the greatest among them, the Lord rebuked them for their selfish ambition. He then talked about how those who would be great in the kingdom will become least of all and would be concerned to help and assist the weak, not judge or abuse them. He especially warned about causing others to stumble or despising them (vss.6-10). They must value even the very least, enough to pursue them if they wander.

What if they should catch someone in sin, or if someone should sin against them? What are they to do? The correction and restoration of a brother or sister, and the hope of healthy relationships, is what the remainder of Jesus’ discourse in this chapter is about. Often this passage is taught as being about “church discipline”. Let me emphatically say that such an interpretation wholly misses the point. The reason for this will become apparent as we work through the passage.

Jesus sets up the scenario, “But if your brother sins…”. Note that the phrase “against you” is not in the best manuscripts. In other words, the sin may not be directed against you personally. You merely observe it, or become aware of it in some other way. What is your responsibility?

First, “Go and show him his fault in private.” You don’t talk about the person behind his or her back. You don’t go get a group to approach this person from the get-go. You certainly do not bring it up in a gathering at church. You respect the person enough to come to them individually and privately. “Love covers (or, bears with) all things” (I Cor. 13:7). “Love covers a multitude of sins” (I Pet. 4:8). “Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all transgressions” (Prov. 10:12). “He who conceals a transgression seeks love, but he who repeats a matter separates intimate friends” (Prov. 17:9). The scripture is clear. We should do our best to not expand the circle of those who know about the offense.

Too often we want to either vent our anger to someone, and fall into gossip and slander, or we want to get someone else to confront the person. We become spiritual “tattle-tales”, and try to enlist a pastor or other leader to do the difficult job of confrontation and exposure of the sin. Sorry, in the kingdom of God, our heavenly Father wants us to grow up and become able to work through conflict with others. We will never develop these skills if we continually avoid confrontation. He will go with us and help us, if we are humble and spiritually-minded. Galatians 6:1 tells us that if anyone is caught in a trespass we who are spiritual ought to restore such a person in a spirit of humility and gentleness, looking to ourselves, lest we, too, are tempted. That is not a cop out, allowing us to pass our responsibility on to others who are more mature. It is an admonition that we had better get spiritually tuned in before we go to talk with our brother or sister. If we are angry or resentful, or want to attack the other person, then our heart is not right, and our meeting will likely explode into an argument. We need to examine ourselves, also, to see what part we may have played in the conflict. Jesus told us to first “take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye” (Matt. 7:5).

Look at Hebrews 12:14-17. It is addressed to everyone in the Body. Note that we are to pursue two things: peace and holiness. It is not peace at all costs, but peace and holiness together, at the same time. The beginning of vs. 15 is translated as “see to it” in the NASB, but the Greek word is “overseeing”. What are we to be overseeing? That no one misses God’s grace, that no bitterness springs up, that there be no immorality or godlessness in the Body. In other words, it is everyone’s responsibility to keep watch over each other. This is not about control or repression, but love. Note vs. 16,17. When Esau finally came to value his birthright, it was too late. He missed his opportunity, and could not get it back. The same is true for all of us. Satan is doing all he can to keep us stuck in old behaviors and sin. Fleshly lusts and old thinking wage war against our spiritual growth (I Pet. 2:12), and keep us from coming into what God has for us. If we love each other, if we love God and want to see His purposes come into fruition in this world, we will watch over and admonish one another. We will do what we can to help one another get free of old patterns. Often, what we need to break with sin is the knowledge that another person will hold us accountable (Heb. 3:12,13; 10:24,25).

When we do talk with our brother or sister, we are to “reprove” them in private. “Reprove” tends to convey a strong, scolding flavor. That is not necessarily what the Greek word is saying. The force of the original language is primarily to “expose, bring out into the open, show or demonstrate”. There are two aspects to this. One is that we bring the issue out in the open. They may not even be aware of what they have done, or realize that they sinned. The word for sin, here, is the general word, to “miss the mark”, to “commit an error”. Then, we are to explain why what the person did was wrong, or hurtful. The word, “reprove” can carry the notion of “convincing someone”, of making a case for your point. This is important, especially if what the person did is not something clearly delineated in the Bible. We need to express why we believe they something wrong.

Secondly, if the person does not listen to you, when you attempt to share with them, then you are to bring one or two others, who are there to witness the interaction. They are not to gang up on the person. They are there to observe and help moderate the communication. The goal is reconciliation, not winning an argument. Sometimes when we try to confront someone, the emotional energy or defensiveness is so powerful that it is difficult to speak or hear. These other brothers or sisters are to serve as objective observers to witness, and, if necessary, to help with the communication both ways. They are also there to confirm the discernable facts. Sometimes things appear a certain way to us, but we really don’t know what the other person’s intent may have been. In such cases, we must accept them at their word. It is important for these people to keep an open mind. There are usually two sides to most stories. Two proverbs would be good advice in this scenario, “He who gives an answer before he hears, it is folly and shame to him”; and, “The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him” (Prov. 18:13,17).

If there is still no resolution, then we are instructed to bring this issue before the church. Now, we must remember that in NT times this was not a large congregation of people in a religious building, with pews and a podium and all those trappings. This was a small group of serious-minded disciples gathered in someone’s home. Whatever “sin” was the original issue must not have been a major moral issue, such as in I Cor. 5:1-13, because Jesus does not recommend the same action that Paul does there. Why do we bring it to the church? Because God has given us His Holy Spirit so that spiritual people judge together spiritual things (I Cor. 2:13). So, we listen and counsel together. If the offender still disregards the counsel of the group, then he is not put out of the group. That is not what Jesus says. Rather, Jesus tells us, “Let him be to you (singular) as a Gentile and a tax collector” (Matt. 18:17). In other words, put some distance between you and that other person who has hurt you and does not seem to really understand or care what he or she has done. Don’t continue to try to be close to them, or hang out with them, because they will likely hurt you again.

Then Jesus uses language that He had mentioned in chapter 16, when Peter had made the good confession that He was the Christ, the Messiah. Jesus had said that the revelation Peter had received came from the Father, and that he was a petros, a detached stone, and upon this petra, the bedrock (referring to the truth which he had grasped) Jesus would build His gathered people, His church or ekklesia. Hade’s gates would not be able to stand against the church. Then, He said to Peter, “…and I will give to you (singular) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be having been bound in heaven and what you loose on earth will be having been loosed in heaven.” Here, in Matthew 18, Jesus extends this authority to the remainder of the disciples. They, too, have authority to bind and loose. Peter is not the only one. Furthermore, wherever two might “sound together” in agreement from the Spirit concerning any matter which they ask, it will be done by the Father in heaven. For where two or more would be gathered in His name, Jesus is there in the midst of them. How does this fit in with the rest of the passage? Jesus seems to be undercutting any notion that Peter was more advanced than the rest, or was somehow “greater” than they. Together they make a powerful, awesome team. Together they will hear from God and be led by the Spirit. No one person can be expected to get it right all the time, but as a group they will learn to identify the “agreement” of the Spirit which will guide them to the Father’s will.