Mark 3:20-27

“Notice what you notice.” I never really understood verse 28: But no one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. Then indeed he may plunder his house. That is, I have understood the content of the verse but not the context, as to why Jesus said it. But today a note in my Study Bible helped me. Jesus is speaking of Himself as that person who enters that strong man’s house, where the house is a metaphor for the demon-possessed man and binding the strong man is Jesus overwhelming the demon. Plundering the house, then, is clearing out all the evil the demon left behind and freeing the man from his mute and blind condition. Now it makes sense!

Three other items…

First, we now have Jesus’ family showing up for the first time (v. 21), likely having come from Nazareth some 30 miles away. We will have this confirmed later in verse 31. I’ve always wondered about their perspective, He is out of His mind. Verse 31 refers to his family as “his mother and his brothers”. What troubles me about that verse is that His mother, Mary, is there with the rest of the family, coming “to seize Him”. But Mary knows more about who Jesus is, so it’s hard for me to imagine that she thought that He was “out of His mind”. Rather, I presume that she wanted to talk with Him and to learn more about where He was headed. So, reading between the lines, I imagine it’s Jesus’ brothers who have come to take Him away and Mary is there to intervene.

Second, Mark again offers us some details in today’s introductory verse 20 that the other writers do not, with some very different understandings depending on the translation. The ESV translation says, Then he went home, and the crowd gathered again, so that they could not even eat. I have always read that verse as Jesus simply returning to Capernaum, His “home” and that it was a shoulder-to-shoulder crowd, such that even eating bread would have been difficult for the crowd. However, the NASB translation says, And He came home, and the crowd gathered again, to such an extent that they could not even eat a meal. Reading this translation I can see Jesus inside Peter’s home in Capernaum and sitting down to eat, but with people so crowded in that they could not even eat. A very different comprehension from what I get from the ESV…!! And certainly more vivid!

Finally, a small item. Verse 22 has scribes who have come from Jerusalem. This wording contrasts with “the people” in Luke and “the Pharisees” in Matthew. Again, more detail from Mark!!

Blessings!

Luke 11:14-23

“Notice what you notice.” All too often in past readings, when two or three Gospel writers repeated the same story I would look for differences between these accounts. That was interesting to a point, but does not really get very deep into the heart of the matter before us. So I won’t be doing that much more, unless the differences are particularly striking.

For example, in today’s reading Luke has “the people” saying He casts out demons by Beelzebul… (v. 15), while in Matthew it’s the Pharisees who bring this charge. However, who said it is not a major point here. What is interesting is that the charge is brought against Jesus at all. In Jesus’ reply He asks …by whom do your sons cast them out? (v. 19), suggesting that casting out demons was not uncommon among the Jewish people – and possibly even commonplace. So why would the Pharisees (or the people) bring a Beelzebul charge against Jesus when He can respond with the same charge against them? It’s like me charging you with not wearing green on St. Patrick’s Day when I don’t have green on myself. The counter-charge is obvious.

Then in Luke we also see the people asking for a sign from heaven (v. 16) when Jesus had just performed a healing miracle – a mute (and blind?) person speaking (and seeing?). What other kind of sign could they have been seeking??!!

In Jesus’ closing statement for today’s and yesterday’s readings, both Luke and Matthew draw a clear dividing line between Jesus’ followers and everyone else: Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters (Lk. 11:23, Mt. 12:30). Jesus is not allowing for middle-roaders, for agnostics. Effectively He is labeling everyone else as His enemies, since they are undoing (scattering) what He has put together (gathered). It makes me want to be careful in sowing any kind of dissension in the Body. Pray about it, find support in Scripture, and close off any discussion with “Your will be done, O Lord”.

Matthew 12:22-30

“Notice what you notice.” Have I not noticed before that Beelzebub (Beelzebul) is basically a “Baal” derivative, in this case from Baal-Zebub/Zebul – the God of the Philistine city of Ekron (II Kings 1:1–4)? Thanking my Study Bible notes for that insight…

Abraham Lincoln quoted Jesus’ “house divided” item. I offer his entire quote, spoken a full two-and-a-half years before he became President: “A house divided against itself, cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become lawful in all the States, old as well as new — North as well as South.” (June 16, 1858, at the Illinois State Capitol in Springfield)

I see divisions in our country in both political parties today, the hard-rights and the hard-lefts against the more moderates in each party. And each party seems to be caving to its’ extreme instead of working toward bipartisanship legislation following the moderates’ leadings. I mention only the divisions within the political parties. There are so many other divisions that we could also name. Sad.

Blessings!

Luke 7:36-50

“Notice what you notice.” The first thing that strikes me is the beginning of verse 40, And Jesus answering said to him… Here’s what’s strange about that: the Pharisee, Simon, had said nothing – but Jesus answered him. Jesus knew what Simon was thinking without Simon having said a word (Luke reports of Simon that “he said to himself”). Jesus also knew something about the woman although there is nothing reported about her saying anything or anyone saying anything about her. And the ironic thing in all this is what’s on Simon’s mind in the first place. Simon is thinking, “If this man were a prophet…”! Jesus’ next words then validate His prophetic ministry, in that He knew both Simon’s thoughts and the woman’s past.

I was also struck by a Pharisee, Simon offering Jesus an invitation to dine with him. Was this a genuine invitation for Simon to get to know Jesus better (not unlike Nicodemus) or was it an attempt by Simon and his friends to invite Jesus in to trip Him up on something He might say? I’d like to think it was a genuine invitation that got ugly when the woman came in uninvited and that Simon repented of his own thoughts when he got “found out”. But that’s reading a lot more into the text than is actually reported!

Finally another small item. My NKJV says that Jesus “sat at table”, while the NASB and ESV both have Him “reclining at table”. And there’s not a footnote explanation on either item. There are a number of other occasions in the Gospels that have Jesus “reclining at table”. See Mt. 9:10, Mt. 26:20, Mark 14:18, Luke 11:37, John 12:2 and more. So I guess reclining at table was customary. Frankly, it makes it much easier to see the woman ministering to Jesus’ feet if He were reclining at table. I realize this is a small item, but my questioning it tells me how much more involved I am in this entire Gospel journey. I have active pictures in my mind that I never had before. And that’s good!

Slava Bohu!

Luke 7:18-35

“Notice what you notice.” Luke’s account of John the Baptist, in prison, asking about Jesus… I wasn’t going to do a comparison of Luke’s account of this incident with Matthew’s, but two items jumped out at me. First, however, I had something wrong yesterday. As I had noted, Jesus answered John’s question with His “what you have seen and heard” comment (v. 22). But then John’s disciples departed before they heard Jesus lauding John with His “no one greater than John” comment (v. 28). So John was affirmed in his doubt, but was not made aware of Jesus’ further comment lauding John. Just that…

As to those two items that struck me today… The first is verse 21, In that hour he healed many people of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on many who were blind he bestowed sight. This sentence does not appear in Matthew’s Gospel. John had asked for confirmation from Jesus as to Who He was. Matthew simply has Jesus replying about “the blind…”, etc.), while Luke has Jesus demonstrating His healing powers before replying. I always had in mind Matthew’s text, so Luke’s additional sentence surprised me. I had to go back and double-check Matthew’s account.

The second item is that verses 29 and 30 also do not appear in Matthew’s Gospel: (When all the people heard this, and the tax collectors too, they declared God just, having been baptized with the baptism of John, but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.). So Luke writes that tax collectors have already received John’s baptism, but that the Pharisees and lawyers had rejected it (not surprising). So when we see tax collectors coming to Jesus and “receiving” Him, it’s less surprising in that they were already prepared for Jesus’ message of the Kingdom since they had surrendered to John’s message of repentance. Reminds me of Paul’s comment, I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth (I Corinthians 3:6). John had no idea that he was planting a seed that would see full growth in Jesus’ ministry. Likewise, we never know how our words, simply spoken, can have greater meaning well down the road.

Finally, one other small item on these verses – it’s further surprising that the ESV has these verses as a parenthetical expression. Not so in the NASB or NKJV. Why, I wonder…?

Slava Bohu!

Matthew 11:2-19

“Notice what you notice.” John the Baptist, in prison, is wondering about (if not second-guessing) his earlier expectation that Jesus is the Messiah, the Lamb of God. John had formed his Messianic expectation at Jesus’ baptism and Jesus’ early Judean ministry. Now Jesus is in Galilee and John is miles away, in prison, presumably in Jerusalem. John is wondering what’s going on! Why is there no Messianic triumph? Or is Jesus still early in what will be His eventual triumph? Who are You, Jesus??!!

Jesus’ answer is both affirmative and comforting – affirmative in His recounting of His interactions with the blind, the lame, the lepers, the deaf, the dead, and the poor and comforting in pointing out to John that yes, in spite of John’s earlier denial (not being Elijah, John 1:19-21) that he is in fact Elijah. Jesus speaks firmly of John’s role: This is he of whom it is written, ‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you’ (v. 10). From his seat in prison, John must have been grateful to have had Jesus’ solid endorsement. But Jesus followed up His “Elijah” endorsement with even stronger praise, Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist (v. 11).

With it all, I can’t help but wonder if I have Jesus’ endorsement. Am I preparing a way for others to know Him? Do my actions, my words bespeak someone who is actively leading others to Jesus? As Archbishop Foley Beach so often says, “If not, why not?”

Slava Bohu!

John 4:46-54

“Notice what you notice.” John’s account of a long-distance, words-only healing… Commentators differ as to whether John’s account of this healing is a different healing from Matthew’s and Luke’s or that it is the same. No matter – we just look at what it says.

First, the differences…

1. John has an “official” (or nobleman or royal official), while Matthew and Luke have a centurion.
2. John has the man’s son dying while Matthew and Luke have a servant as the sick person.
3. Matthew and Luke have the “Lord, I am not worthy…” wording which is absent in John; instead, John has the official specifically asking Jesus to …come down before my child dies (John 4:49).
4. After the official’s son was healed John has the official believing in Jesus, along with his entire household. This is absent in Matthew and Luke.

Forgetting about the differences, the main similarity between the three accounts is the long-distance, words-only healing. There is no laying on of hands, no touching, no “power going out from Jesus” (see Luke 8:46, Mark 5:30). Is this the power of intercessory prayer in our own lives? Healing from afar…? The Holy Spirit working “behind the scenes”…? My siblings and I have been praying for our unbelieving brother, Dickie, who has prostate cancer and kidney problems. During our prayer time his kidney condition has gone from borderline stage-5 “kidney failure” to stage-3/4 “kidney injury”. And this while he has been at home recuperating. Will my brother continue to get better? Will his kidneys continue to get better? Will his prostate cancer vanish (for which we have been praying)? And will he, as did the official, come to belief in Jesus? That is our most sincere, most urgent prayer. Lord, we are asking for a long-distance, words-only healing in Dickie’s life – and for him to come to Your saving grace. Please pray with us.

Slava Bohu!

Luke 7:1-17

“Notice what you notice.” I first wanted to see all the items that were different between Matthew and Luke in this healing of the centurion’s servant. I found at least five.

1. In Luke the centurion sent elders of the Jews, while in Matthew he came himself.
2. In Luke the Jews told Jesus that the centurion had built their synagogue (no mention of this in Matthew).
3. In Luke the servant was near death, while in Matthew he was paralyzed and dreadfully tormented.
4. In Luke there are two “visitations”, the first from the Jewish elders, the second from the centurion’s “friends”, while in Matthew there is only the one visitation, the centurion himself.
5. Finally, in Luke, through his friends speaking, the centurion said not only that he was not worthy for Jesus to come to his house, but that he was not worthy even to speak with Jesus!

For all these differences, #5 is the most striking to me. The centurion was truly humbling himself! Contrast the centurion with the Jewish leaders, the scribes and Pharisees (not the “Jewish elders” who came on behalf of the centurion). The Jewish leaders were not at all troubled about approaching Jesus or speaking with Him – they were more than willing to engage Him, typically challenging Him as to His words or His actions. But this Gentile centurion saw a different Jesus, the One that I hope we see. Yesterday in my comments I imbedded the Prayer of Humble Access. Although we can come to Jesus because of His “manifold and great mercies”, I hope that we also come humbly – clearly as unworthy as the centurion, but no less welcomed by Jesus’ grace and love.

As to the second half of today’s reading, the raising of the widow’s son, when we think of Jesus raising people from the dead, I daresay our first thought is of Lazarus. Nearly an entire chapter (John 11) is devoted to this activity. Second, personally, my thoughts would go to the raising of Jairus’ daughter, probably (in my mind) because this raising is associated with a direct name, Jairus, but also because the story is interrupted with the healing of the woman touching Jesus’ robe (Luke 8:40-56). I might have been hard pressed to name the raising of the widow’s son – even though he was her only son, her life support, if you will. Yet Jesus was clearly moved by her situation – …He had compassion on her… (v. 13). Although Jesus grieved over Lazarus (“Jesus wept.”, John 11:35), there is no mention of compassion with Jairus’ daughter, just Jesus’ healing activity. So the raising of the widow’s son will now be more prominent in my eyes.

Slava Bohu!

Matthew 8:5-13

Sorry for a very interrupted day today: P.T.; church bank business; Avanza, chickens, Men’s Group. Now back at it at 9:41 pm…!

“Notice what you notice.” We have spent the last 3+ weeks reading and digesting the Sermon on the Mount. Now we move back to “action” and what mighty action we have today!

Today’s story is remarkable, in and of itself – the healing of the centurion’s servant, remarkable in that it is a words-only, long distance healing. Jesus speaks and the deed is done. We will see this again in a couple of days in John’s Gospel, a similar incident, then later Matthew and Mark record the healing of a demon-possessed girl from afar. So today’s words-only, long distance healing is truly remarkable.

However, what strikes me as even more remarkable in this story is that this Gentile centurion’s words have stayed with us through two millennia in our Eucharistic prayer. The centurion says, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed…” (v. 8). We find these words universally in Catholic, Anglican, and Lutheran services, spoken either as “Lord, I am not worthy that you should come under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed” or “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed”.

At St. Andrew’s similar words are used as part of our 9:00 am (traditional) service, just before communion, commonly known as the “Prayer of Humble Access”: We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies. We are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under thy Table. But thou art the same Lord, whose property is always to have mercy: Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen. This version is a combination of Matthew 8:8 (the centurion’s words above) and Mark 7:28 (a woman replying to Jesus as to her unworthiness).

I also wanted to offer a quick comment on verses 11 and 12, …many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. That sounds to me like another chastisement of the Jewish leaders (“sons of the kingdom”), together with an elevation of Gentile peoples (“coming from east and west”). That section deserves more commentary, but not tonight.

Slava Bohu!