Terry C. Hulbert, Th.D.Distinguished Professor Emeritus at
Columbia Biblical Seminary in Columbia, South Carolina
Shall we pray together, Our Father, as we approach Your word again, we’re very conscious of our own deficiency, our own perception, as we think of those disciples of whom Jesus said, do You not yet understand, do You not yet see, do You not yet hear. We pray that you will enlighten us so that we will not disappoint You in our perception, in our understanding, in our remembering, in our application, of this word today. Again, we pray that You will guide us into all truth, that we might spend a profitable time together, we might learn much and that we might worship You better through our experience, for we pray in Jesus name. Amen.
Continuing in Section 122, we find Jesus and the three disciples coming down from the Mount of Transfiguration, and as they do they are having some very strong reactions, as you can well imagine. This was an unusual, unexpected event. Jesus knew what was going to happen when they went up to the mountain, but I wonder as they went up if they were asking among themselves, “Why are we going up here?” Certainly the nine at the bottom were saying, “Why can’t we come? And Peter and James and John probably discussed it among themselves, “Where are we going, why are we going up here, what are we going to see, what are we going to do?” But in their wildest dreams and expectations they could never have guessed that they were going to meet Moses and Elijah, and that they were going to see Jesus in a form in which they had never seen Him before.
His appearance up there perhaps reflected the Shekinah Glory concept of the presence of God in the Old Testament, over the holy of holies, over the mercy seat. Certainly it was a shining through of what Jesus Christ really was in essence: “The light of the world” (John 8:12).
But as they come down, Jesus says to them, in Matthew’s account, 17:9, “Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man has risen from the dead.” Why tell it to no one? Wasn’t this a news
story? (Can you imagine when they got down there, Peter saying, “Guess what we saw up there, guess who was up there? Moses and Elijah.” You can imagine Thomas saying, “I’d have to see that myself).
Tell the vision to no one, why? Well first of all, I think to avoid drawing attention to themselves. Certainly three people that had a news story like this would divert attention to themselves, even if they didn’t intend to, and it may be interpreted as giving a further sign to the leaders. It would be a very confusing thing if this word were to get out in terms of a sign as to who Christ was and a sign to the leaders which Jesus said He would not give to them.
But the main problem is - I think the main reason why Jesus told them that is - that they did not understand the cross. They did not understand the resurrection, and as we see in Mark’s account, chapter 9, they said they were discussing with one another what rising from the dead might mean. So Jesus had a specific purpose in taking them up there and giving them this preview of what He would be like in the glory. He did not want to go further with it in discussing it with them or their discussing it with others or making it a subject of conversation or teaching, because the whole group had really no understanding of what was going to happen, no appreciation of the resurrection. And how can you appreciate His coming in glory if you couldn’t understand the resurrection, if you couldn’t accept the fact of the cross? So I think the point in history at which they were militated against the appropriateness of their telling other people.
There is something else that we should notice here. We might ask the question, “Why did Jesus take them up there?” Well we’ve already seen a basic reason, but we will notice as we go along that Jesus, on several occasions, told His disciples things that were going to happen ahead of time so that when they came to pass, they would appreciate them and not be shaken by them. This does not mean that He’s telling them ahead of time with the expectation that they will understand, but rather that when the event takes place, they will appreciate it and see it where it fits in.
A classic illustration of that is in John 13:18-20, Jesus tells them about the traitor. And that’s the first time that He has openly told them that somebody is going to betray Him, and
He says, “I’m telling you this now so that you will be able to accept it. You’ll be able to realize that I knew it all the time. This was not a surprise to Me. It’s not something that should shake your confidence in me.” So I think all of these things will help us to understand why He did not want them to tell. I am intrigued by Mark’s account, verse 9:9, where He says, “Don’t tell anybody what you’ve seen until the Son of Man should rise from the dead.” And they seized upon that statement—another translation there is, “They kept it to themselves or talked among themselves about it, discussing with one another what rising from the dead might mean.” Didn’t they know what resurrection from the dead was? Hadn’t they read Daniel 12 about the resurrection and the last day and so on? Hadn’t Jesus Himself just talked about raising people up on the last day in that discourse on the Bread of Life? Yes, but they still didn’t understand Jesus’ resurrection and they still didn’t quite understand resurrection itself.
Now they have an even larger question than that. Section 123, His disciples, on the way down—and they had lots of time to talk on the way down from this hill; probably take them an hour or so at least to get down. Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first? Notice they’re very gentle about that. They didn’t just say, “Why do you say it,” or “Why is it said in the Scripture?” “Why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” Their problem was one of sequence, because in Malachi 4:5-6, we read that before the great and terrible day of the Lord, Elijah will come. And that was the prophecy that was predicted to Zechariah concerning the birth of John the Baptist.
He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things” (Matthew 17:11). That’s referring, I think, to the hearts of the fathers to the sons and the sons to the fathers.
Incidentally, Elijah doesn’t do this personally, but Elijah has a function in history which will introduce Messiah who will actually do this. It’s the first in a sequence.
Verse 17:12, “I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished.” Now that would give them something to think about. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands. Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist”(Matthew 17:12-13).
So John the Baptist was in the power and office; and as we read in Luke 1:17, [he had] the spirit and power of Elijah. He had the Elijah function. But there’s a connection between what happened to John the Baptist and what happened to Jesus. Because Jesus was going to be crucified, He was going to be rejected, so John “the forerunner” also was rejected. So that the prophecy concerning Elijah was fulfilled in John the Baptist, but not in the way that they had anticipated because of the treatment that was to be given to Jesus himself. This is actually what is said.
Notice in Mark’s account, in verse 9:12, “Elijah does first come and restore all things. And yet how is it written that the Son of Man, that He should suffer many things and be treated with contempt?” I think what Jesus is saying here is that “Yes, it says that Elijah will come first and then will come Messiah. But wait a minute! You had not taken into account the fact that when Messiah comes He will suffer crucifixion. You’d forgotten about that.” So, if He suffers crucifixion, then that is going to have an impact on the ministry and person of “this Elijah” who is to come. So, as the religious leaders had not recognized Jesus’ role and ministry as king, so they had not recognized the role and ministry of John as His herald.
Section 124, as they come down from the mountain they find the nine other disciples in great distress. There was a large crowd gathered. “The entire crowd saw Him” (Mark verse 9:15), “They were amazed and began running up to greet Him” (Mark 9:15). And Jesus says, “What are you discussing with them?” (Mark 9:16). Now Jesus would, of course, know what they were discussing, but He asked it to bring out a statement from them.
One of the crowd says, verse 9:17, “Teacher, I’ve brought you my son, possessed with a spirit which makes him mute; and whenever it seizes him, it dashes him to the ground and he foams at the mouth, grinds his teeth, stiffens out. I told your disciples to cast it out, and they could not do it.”
There might be a clue in the problem here. The problem lies not just with the disciples but the man. He said, “I told them to cast it out.” It may be that there’s some arrogance on the part of this man. As a matter of fact, Jesus seems to pick up on this and He says, verse 9:19, “O unbelieving and perverted generation.” It’s not likely at all that Jesus is talking to the nine disciples. He’s never called them a perverted generation.
But this man apparently represents the unbelieving element of Jews. He did not come in faith, humbly as others have come and said, “Please, heal my son.” But rather he came apparently in arrogance. So again, we find this phrase that I’ve mentioned several times before, this almost technical expression of an unbelieving and twisted or perverted generation. The leaders [were], especially of that generation of that time when Christ was on earth, and the issue was before them as to whether or not they received Him as Messiah.
In Mark’s account, He goes on to heal the boy. Verse 9:21: “How long has it been happening?” He says, “From childhood.” And in verse 9:22, He becomes a little bit more subdued (that is, the man does). He says, “If you can do anything, take pity on us and help us!” That’s a little bit different than saying, “I told Your disciples to heal him.”
And Jesus said, “If you can (He throws that right back into his face), if you can?” (Mark 9:23). “What do you mean, if you can?” “All things are possible to him who believes” (Mark 9:23). And you’ll notice that He doesn’t say, “If you can?” That is a wrong thing to say because, “I can do anything.” He doesn’t speak of His own power. He said, “All things are possible to him who believes.” In other words, “The fault lies not with any weakness on My part, but the fault lies with your faith, your believing.”
And immediately the boy’s father cried out and began saying, “I do believe” (Mark 9:24). He just shouts it out, “I do believe, help my unbelief” (Mark 9:24). This is a phrase which has often been repeated in our own lives perhaps. More crowd is gathered, and then Jesus said, “I command you, come out of him and do not enter him again” (Mark 9:25). Then verse 9:27, “Jesus took him by the hand and raised him up; and he got up.”
Of course, Christ had control of every situation. We must always notice that He was never taken off guard. He was always in control. We’re going to see this particularly at the trial of Christ. But I think having said that, we could say that “This was almost one of those healings, one of those scenes, that Jesus would not have wanted to do.” I know it’s odd to say that, but He was not going to give any more signs to the people. Certainly this was not a sign to the people of His deity; that wasn’t the purpose of it. But again, since this is the time in His life, the period in His ministry, in which He is training the Twelve, it seems that the emphasis of this whole incident is on His teaching the disciples
something about their faith, about how things got done, about their attitudes and the attitudes of people and so on.
As a matter of fact, that comes out when the disciples say, “How is it that we could not do this?” They ask Him privately, in Mark’s account, verse 28, “Why could we not cast it out?” And here’s the training. He says, “This kind cannot come about by anything but prayer” (Mark 9:29). So He is apparently teaching His disciples in this situation that healing is not automatic. Here were nine of them down there at the foot of the mountain by themselves and this urgent need is thrust upon them and they couldn’t do anything. But apparently they tried to do it in their own strength and they failed. So He’s reminding them that it’s God that does the healing, not they themselves.
Section 125, He again predicts His death and resurrection, this is the second time. And as they’re going through Galilee, in verse 9:30 of Mark’s account, “He was unwilling for anyone to know about it.” This reinforces our understanding that this was a period of withdrawal, a period of just traveling through Galilee but not stopping there to teach. He was “teaching His disciples” during this period (Mark 9:32). And one of the key things He’s teaching them and telling them at this moment is that He’s “going to be delivered up to the hands of men. He would be killed, and He would rise three days later” (Mark 9:31).
Interesting in verse 9:32, “they did not understand this statement and they were afraid to ask Him.” Perhaps they were afraid to ask Him because of what happened the last time when they asked Him about this.
In Section 126, we come to a scene which is almost amusing if it weren’t so pointed and tragic. They have now come back to Capernaum. They haven’t been there for quite some time and as they come back to Capernaum. [It was] sort of their home base. Those who collected the two drachma tax came to Peter and said, “Does your teacher not pay the two-drachma tax?” (Matthew 17:24).
Now the two-drachma tax was a tax paid by all Jewish men of 20 years and older, paid to the temple. This was not a tax paid to the Roman government. It was not a customs tax. It was a tax which was paid to take care of the sacrifices and to just pay for the upkeep of the operation of the temple in Jerusalem.
And they had not been there when this tax should have been paid. At the time of year, it should have been paid. And apparently those who had the responsibility of collecting the tax were waiting for them to come back. And they immediately pounce on Peter when he comes into the scene and they say, “Does your teacher not pay it? How come He hasn’t paid it?” I don’t think Peter really knew, for that matter. At least he didn’t know for sure. He says, “Yes, of course, He pays it” (Matthew 17:25). And when he comes into the house, Jesus, who knows what’s happened, speaks to him about the very thing.
Now I think when Peter got back to the house, what Peter was going to say is, “Lord, we pay that two-drachma tax, don’t we?” But before he could get to ask the question, Jesus speaks first and says, “What do you think, Peter? From whom do the kings of the earth collect customs or a tax, from their sons or from strangers?” (Matthew 17:25). In other words, “What’s the custom in our culture, in our day? The Romans, for instance, Peter what do you think about taxation? Who is it that pays the taxes?”
Now we’ve got to understand that the system in that day was considerably different than it is in the United States and many countries in the West today, because we tax our own citizens. The Roman Empire did not so much, at least at first, tax their own citizens as the people of the countries they conquered. As a matter of fact, that was one of the main motivations for conquering many nations, because then they could pay the money. They could give the money to let the Romans operate more or less tax free. So they brought in slaves. They made slaves of people to bring them in to do the work. So that was their custom. In other words, it was not the people of the kingdom, it was the aliens, it was the foreigners, it was the conquered people that paid. That was the principle.
So Peter knows the answer; he says, “From strangers” (verse 17:25). That is, from foreigners, not from the citizens of a given country. And he says, “Consequently the sons are exempt.” In other words, if you’re part of the country, if you’re a citizen, then you don’t have to pay. It’s the others that pay. Now what he’s implying here is that “We are true citizens of the kingdom. So theoretically, we shouldn’t have to pay. It’s those aliens, those unbelieving Jews. We are the true citizens of the kingdom, so we shouldn’t have to pay.”
But lest we give them [the people down in Jerusalem] offense, go to the sea and throw in a hook [he hadn’t done that for a long time probably], and take the first fish that comes up [great illustration of predestination); and when you open its mouth, you will find a stater [that’s four of these drachma], take that and give it to them for you and Me (Matthew 17:26-27).
This seems to be almost a trite little experience. So Peter, somewhat bewildered, goes off to do this. Remember the time that he didn’t think they were going to catch fish when they threw the net over, and he caught all the fish? (John 21). So Peter’s quite willing to fish when and how Jesus tells him to. So he [Peter] goes down there and he drops his hook into the sea, and sure enough a bite, [and he] pulls it up (Matthew 17:27). I wonder if he hesitated before he opened the fish’s mouth. [He would have] opened the fish’s mouth, and [said], “Can you believe it? There’s a coin in that fish’s mouth!” He pulls it out and it’s just enough to pay for Jesus and him.
So he marches off to the office, possibly in the synagogue, he lays it down, and they say, “Who’s this for?” He says, “This is for Simon Peter, for myself, and it’s for the Master. It’s for Jesus.” He puts it down, they check them off the tax list, and [he] goes back. That’s the end of it? No it isn’t. That is the trigger that causes the explosion that comes in the next verses.
Chapter 18—you can’t understand Chapter 18 unless you read back into 17, because in these previous chapters, several things have happened which have put Peter in a very prominent position. It was Peter, James, and John that went into the room of Jairus’ daughter right there at Capernaum, you remember, and the others were left outside. It was Peter, James, and John that had just been up on the Mount of Transfiguration and the other nine had had a pretty rough time. And they probably didn’t think too highly of the three men who hadn’t been with them at that time.
Now to cap it all off, Peter, by a miracle, gets his tax paid and there are eleven other fellows that have “to reach into their own pockets,” so to speak, to pull out the money to pay their taxes. And that’s about all they can take on the subject.
Chapter 18:1, Matthew’s accountant: “At that time the disciples came to Jesus saying, ‘Who then is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?’” Can you imagine why they asked the question? So my point is that all of these have built up to it. And I actually believe that Jesus arranged for Peter to catch the fish, to get the tax out, not just for a casual payment of the tax, but to precipitate this whole thing. This is a period of training, and He’s going to teach them something. “Who’s the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” (Matthew 18:1). This is a basic question of pride that we’re all subject to. We compare ourselves with other people. Greatest implies comparison. And when we start to compare, then we start a sequence that goes on to confrontation because if I look at somebody else and say, “Is he greater or am I greater?”, [it is almost natural], “I am greater.” None of us likes to point to somebody else as being greater in our own minds. Now in public we might not say that, but actually that’s what’s in our heart.
You remember the statement [from Disney’s Snow White]: “Mirror, Mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of them all?” And looking into the mirror, what answer do you expect? Your friend? Somebody else? You ask, “Who is the fairest of them all,” expecting the answer, “[You]. Of course you are.” You wouldn’t ask the question if you didn’t want that answer at least.
“Who is the greatest in the kingdom?” And 12 men wanted to hear their own names come back as the answer. And He called a child to himself and set Him before Him and He said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you are converted (now this isn’t in the sense of conversion, to become saved, to become a Christian; this is converted in your thinking. Turn around 180 degrees from where you’re thinking now) and become (not children, but become) like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3). In other words, “Kingdom people are people who are not asking the question, ‘Who is the greatest?’” “You’ve said, ‘Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?’ I’m saying that one of the essential aspects of the ethos of the kingdom of heaven is that people will not be proud. They will not be asking ‘Who is the greatest?’” There will not be that competition. “That’s of the earthly earth. That’s carnal! That’s Corinthian!” if we may say.
As a matter of fact, the disciples never did quite learn this lesson, at least not until Pentecost, because six months later at the time of the Last Supper, when they came into the room (in Luke’s account, Chapter 22) we find that they came into the
room still asking who was the greatest, jostling for the best seats. “Who was the greatest in the kingdom?” (Luke 22:24).
As a matter of fact, it was that scene in all likelihood that precipitated the foot washing that Jesus did (John 13). They did not wash each other’s feet, they did not even wash Jesus’ feet because they were asking, “Who was the greatest in the kingdom?” And the greatest certainly would not wash somebody else’s feet. That is why Jesus, I believe, did that very act.
Now He uses a child as an example. And He used a child as an example because in that day it was well understood that a child did not have any rights. This is contrary to much of our culture in which children are looked to for answers, for decisions, you go into a restaurant and you hear a mother saying, “Would you like this,” “Would you like that,” “What would you like,” and so on. That’s not typical of the scene at Christ’s time. As a matter of fact, the men were fed first, then the women, and then the children. And this is as culture is in many parts of our world today.
So the essence of this child is that the child is humble. He knows that he has no rights. He has no claims whatsoever. So when Jesus says that “You must become like children,” (Matthew 18:3) it means not in simplicity, not in faith, but rather in status (perceived understood status), humility.
Matthew verse 18:4 begins the first of three “whoevers.” “Whoever then humbles himself as this child…” By the way, it seems to me that you can only humble yourself. Now other people might humble you. But the command in I Peter 5:6 is: “Humble yourself onto the hand of God.” There are many things that God must do for us and that others must do for us, but there’s one thing that only we can do. That is to say no to self. Humbling yourself is really saying no to self and only you can say no to self. “Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:4).
“You want to know who the greatest is? I’ll tell you who the greatest is. The greatest is the one who says, ‘I have no rights and I am humble.’”
Now He moves on a step from that—the second “whoever”—in verse 18:5 and says, “Whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me.” This is important, because how I receive or
act toward other people will be determined by what I think about myself. If I think I’m the greatest and I’m going to look down on other people and I’m not going to receive them (receiving here meaning to accept them, to have fellowship with them, to be open to them, to be friends with them, to feel comfortable with them), my attitude toward myself will determine my attitude toward other people. If I realize that I have no rights, if I humble myself, then I will receive other people humbly. If I think I am somebody special, if I am proud, if I think I’m “the greatest in the kingdom,” then I’m going to look down on others and I’m not going to receive them. I’m going to manipulate them. I’m going to use them. I’m going to expect praise and appreciation from them. I think you can see how the picture develops here.
So there’s an attitude toward oneself in verse 18:4, an attitude toward others. And notice that Jesus makes a very special point of our attitude toward other people, how we receive them. So realizing my own non-status brings me to a place of respect and reception of other such people.
Then in verse 18:6, moving on in Matthew’s account, “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it’s better for him that a heavy millstone be hung around his neck, and that he be drowned in the depths of the sea.” This is the third of the “whoevers.”
Two or three things we need to notice here. When He says, “one of these little ones,” I don’t think He is talking about a four-year-old child. I think He’s talking about the “little ones” who are now defined as believers. Because in the passage, He has used the child as an illustration, but He’s gone beyond the child, and He is now speaking of people who have the attitude of a child, who are humble. So here’s a person who has humbled himself, “How are you going to treat this humble other believer?” You’d better be careful how you treat him, because if you cause one of these humble Christians to stumble, then you’re in big trouble yourself and will be judged for it. So there’s a progression here of how you view yourself (in verse 18:4), how you view others (in verse 18:5), and in the light of those two, how you treat other people in terms of refraining from causing them to stumble in any way (in verse 18:6).
Now across in the next column, in Section 128, there’s a passage there from Mark (verse 9:39) in which John—incidentally, John is the older gentleman who writes later on, 60 years later, I, II, and III John and Revelation and the Gospel of John. And he [John] was apparently a very benign soft-hearted person who wrote there about love. But at this time remember, he was one of the two that were called, “Sons of Thunder,” (Mark 3:17) and I don’t think that was an ironic title—and he says, “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we tried to hinder him because he was not following us” (Mark 9:38). Jesus says, “Don’t hinder him, for there’s no one who shall perform a miracle in My name and be able soon afterwards to speak evil of Me for he who is not against us is for us” (Mark 9:39-40).
So what John is apparently trying to do (and it doesn’t seem to hardly fit the context) is be the greatest in the kingdom. “These other little children, these other people, they’re cutting in on our territory. They’re imitating us. Lord, let’s do something about him, let’s stop him.” And later on he’s going to actually ask that fire be called down on the Samaritans (Luke 9:54). And Jesus gives this very soft answer in this situation.
Further on in the passage, in Matthew verse 18:7, an elucidation on this last point about causing one to stumble: “Don’t you become the cause of their problems.” In verse 18:7: “Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks!” The believer is going to have all kinds of discouragements in the Christian life. We can expect it. It’s inevitable that this should take place. He says, “But woe to the man for whom it comes” (Matthew 18:7).
Then in verse 18:8, concerning “yourself.” This is the cause of the problem (others in verse 7) to “yourself” in verse 8. “If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away” (Matthew 18:8). This is a hyperbole. I don’t think He expected people to mutilate their bodies. But in Eastern thought and Eastern ways of expression, this was very common, this hyperbole, this extreme statement. But He is here showing the importance of not stumbling. In other words, if there’s anything in your life that might cause you to stumble, it’s more important for you to get rid of that. That is a lower value. Verse 18:10: “See that you do not despise one of these little ones.” Again, not speaking of children, but an attitude toward other believers.
In verse 18:12, we find an interesting illustration. Its is a story of 100 sheep and one has gone astray. Immediately we think of the story of the lost sheep which will occur in Luke 15. But this is the same illustration, but it’s used for a different purpose. I don’t know of many others of these, but in this case the sheep is not a person who is lost. The sheep in this case is one of these “little ones” and what it’s illustrating now is not the persistence of the shepherd (in that case, God, going out to find a lost sheep, which we’ll see later on as God loves sinners in Luke 15), but rather the emphasis here seems to be on how precious one, even one of these little ones, is to the Father. So the emphasis here is on the great value of every believer to God. Even though he has 99 others, he is still very concerned about that one.
Now up to this point, the issue has been “causing somebody else to stumble.” And that has grown out of the question of “Who is the greatest in the kingdom?” (Matthew 18:1). And we’ve traced the thought in that.
In Section 129, we seem to come now to another aspect of that, the passive aspect - supposing that “I am the one who is caused to stumble?” I’ve been warned now not to cause others to. In verse Matthew 18:15 it says, “If your brother sins…” Now some of the texts add, “If your brother sins against you.” It’s not actually there, but later on Peter asks the question, in verse 18:21, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him?” So taking verse 18:21 as part of the conversation, I think we can realize that in verse 18:15, that the issue really is “a brother sinning against you.” In other words, you are the person who has been caused to stumble. Matthew 18:15 reads:
If your brother sins against you, go and reprove him in private: if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the assembly [which may refer to the church, and I think after Pentecost, does refer to the church. But perhaps not exclusively here referring to what we would call a church]; and if he refuses to listen to the assembly, let him be to you as a Gentile and as a tax collector.”
I wonder if Matthew winced on that parallel. In other words, someone that you don’t normally have fellowship with.
The essence of this passage, of course, is interpersonal relationships. The first phase of the discussion is, “Don’t cause somebody else to stumble.” Don’t despise somebody else. Esteem others better than yourself. Don’t ask, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom?” But supposing that you are with a person in an organization, in a relationship, where that person sins against you, what should be your reaction? Go and reprove him in private. Why in private? Well because you may not have the facts straight, and I think the first thing you’re going to do is try to establish the facts. Reproving is not the same as restitution. I think this is the big distinction we must make in making a practical application of this. It’s very easy for us to have a knee-jerk reaction when somebody hurts us in some way, does something against us to try to retaliate. But to retaliate is to say, “I love myself and I don’t love that other person.” Because if that other person has indeed done something against you, you don’t have a problem, the other person has a problem. And if the other person has a problem, then you have a responsibility to go and do something to help that person in that situation.
Now this comes out very clearly in the foot washing scene when He said, “wash one another’s feet” (John 13:14). I believe that there is more to this than the physical washing of feet, because what was the problem? The problem is not with their dirty feet but with their dirty hearts. And Jesus knew this, and Jesus was taking the initiative to correct the heart attitude. And I think what He’s saying, in effect, in that scene is that you have a responsibility. When you see a brother with dirty feet, so to speak, then you have a responsibility to wash his feet. Go and reprove him. Go and reprove him as the first step in restoring him, because he has a problem and you have a responsibility to him.
This, of course, is quite opposite to human thinking in which my first reaction would be to retaliate, to get even with him, to put him down, to in some way nullify what he has done. That’s why you do it in private. [This is a] very important principle. Go to that person first, “wash his feet,” as it were as an act of love. You may well find that in many cases that you have misunderstood, that the person has not intended any harm. But even if he has intended harm, he is a lot more likely to be restored to fellowship, to confess it just before you, than if the whole thing
is done before a group. “If he listens to you, you have won your brother” (Matthew 18:15). And how you have won your brother? That brother can say, “Thank you for coming to me personally Thank you for not spreading this all over. Thank you for loving me enough to wash my feet. Thank you for loving me enough to care for me to restore.”
“But if he doesn’t listen, then you take one or two with you” (Matthew 18:16). Again, [this is] not for retaliation, not to embarrass him, but rather to restore him so that they can evaluate the situation. Perhaps we need a third or fourth person in this, not to be prosecutors against him, but rather to evaluate and to witness what is going on. Not retribution, but restoration.
Then if that does not take care of the situation, we have a problem on our hands which is going to contaminate the church, and something like in the extreme case in I Corinthians 5:6 when he [Paul] says, “A little leaven leavens the whole lump.” You’ve got to purge out this leaven. You’ve got to take care of this situation. And the person then needs to have church discipline.
I firmly believe that as we speak today about the lack of church discipline, that we may not be hitting at the heart of the problem. I think the heart of the problem is in personal restoration and personal foot washing. If it starts there, you very seldom would have to get the church discipline. In other words, what I’m saying is: when there’s a problem of this nature, that it should not start with church discipline. Church discipline is the last place it should start. And always the goal is to restore the person.
Matthew verse 18:18: “Truly I say to you, whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Binding and loosing were technical terms of that day referring to holding a person culpable or responsible or releasing the person. Usually the rabbis did this, the officials down in Jerusalem. They would bring cases to them and they’d say, “All right, am I responsible in this situation or am I released from responsibility in this situation?” And what he’s saying here is that these apostles have this kind of responsibility. And the decisions made on earth by believers reflect and carry the authority, determination, of God in heaven.
Now this comes, I think, into full force in the body of Christ, in the church. And this is what is so important for us, to look to the church, especially the local assembly of believers, to make decisions in matters so that they evaluate the situation; so that it’s not just one person against another person, but that we have this whole group of witnesses, people whom God would use in our lives.
And then He goes on to the matter of prayer. “If two or three agree on earth about anything they may ask, it shall be done by My Father who is in heaven [notice “in heaven” at the end of verse 18, “in heaven” at the end of verse 19]” (Matthew 18:19). So it’s a matter of delegating authority to the church on earth here.
Well in verse 18:21, Peter says, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him?” Now Peter has been sort of boiling all this time, thinking to himself, “Yes, but I’ve done this and I have forgiven this person.” He may be referring to John. There are some commentators who think that John has been sort of a thorn in Peter’s side. It’s beautiful to see how Peter and John get along after Pentecost when they’re filled with the Holy Spirit. And I can understand why. If John is “the Son of Thunder” and Peter is the kind of person he is, they’ve been in the fishing business together. They’ve grown up together. They were kids together. They know each other real well. And it’s perhaps, to put it in extreme terms, almost a love/hate relationship between them. There’s a little bit of competition. What we do know is that somebody said, “Who’s the greatest in the kingdom?” (Matthew 18:1) and this is what’s going on in their minds. So I can’t imagine that Peter and John are exempt from this atmosphere of “Who is the greatest in the kingdom?” - this rivalry.
Anyway, Peter says, “How often am I supposed to forgive my brother? Up to seven times?” (Matthew 18:21). And Jesus says, “No not seven times, but 70 times seven” (Matthew 18:22). In other words, a jillion times. There is no limit to the situation.!
What Jesus is actually telling His disciples then is that we should never close the door on another person. We should never say that we would not forgive another person.
We must just take a moment to note the word “forgive” here. God forgives sins. I forgive sins are these the same? No. We
use the same word for both. God forgives sins, and when God forgives sins, He takes the sin from my account and puts it on Jesus’ account and puts Jesus’ righteousness on my account. And it’s just as if I had never sinned, as we say. My account is clean. That is done by a legal transaction, we might say. And that sin will never appear again. It’s in the sea of God’s forgetfulness. That’s God’s forgiveness. He removes sin.
When I forgive another person, I don’t remove the other person’s sin. I don’t have that authority or power. But in that case, when I forgive another person, what I’m saying is that I am restoring fellowship. I’m accepting this other person into fellowship. I am not, as it were, holding that sin, charging that sin, against him. I can’t remove it, but this brings up another question. I should not do this until God has removed that person’s sin. Because if I say, “That’s all right, I forgive you. Don’t worry about it,” and the person hasn’t made it right with God, then I am covering that person’s sin. So we should keep this in mind when we think of the matter of forgiving sin.
He gives an illustration of the man who had much to be forgiven, and he accepted the forgiveness of much, but he would not forgive the person who actually owed him very little (Matthew 18:23-18:33).
There are many practical lessons in this passage for us and I think we should take them to heart, because it’s so important that we recognize that interpersonal relationships are extremely important in the body of Christ. One of the major things that Jesus is doing with His disciples at this time is not only teaching them about the church, teaching them about their ministry, but teaching them about how they should relate to each other. And our ministry, no matter how great it could be potentially, will be greatly damaged and greatly hindered if we do not have right interpersonal relationships with each other. And those horizontal relationships are always determined by our vertical relationship with Christ Himself.
In our next session we will begin this long journey down to Jerusalem from Capernaum. These events have taken place in Capernaum, and now we will move from Capernaum down for the Feast of Tabernacles and we’ll start in our next session with Section 130.
