Matthew – Jesus, The Promised Messiah

March 26, 2023

The Gospels

   A biography of someone from birth to death was unusual in ancient literature; Alexander of Macedon being about the only exception. The gospels are not just a biography though, with the teaching and arrangement of material these four books are actually a brand-new genre of literature: a gospel.

   But why four gospels, and not three, five, or some other number? We can look beyond the quaint view of Irenaeus of Lyons (182-188 A.D.) “It is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. … the ‘pillar and ground’ of the Church is the Gospel and the spirit of life; it is fitting that she should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side.” Irenaeus Against Heresies book 3 ch.11.8 p.428. Like a "quadraphonic stereo", the gospels emphasize different sides of Jesus. Matthew emphasizes that Jesus is the promised king and messiah. Mark emphasizes that Jesus is a servant. Luke emphasizes that Jesus is a man. John emphasizes that Jesus is God. Some see similarities between the communication of the gospels and the four faces of the cherubim in Revelation: lion, ox, man, and eagle. Also, there are four "beholds" in the Old Testament: king Zech 9:9; servant Isa 42:1; the man Zech 6:12, your God Isa 40:9. There were colors in the tabernacle: purple (royalty), scarlet (crushing the cochineal worm), white (righteous deeds of the saints), and blue (heavens). See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1197-1198 for more info.

"The Four": Tatian was a Christian, later turned Encratite heretic, who died in 172 A.D. He made a "harmony" combining the gospels together into one continuous book. The name of this was The Diatessaron, which means "the four". This book, by a heretic who had no pressure to conform to what the orthodox church taught, is basically just 79% of the sentences of the gospels we have today. Specifically, it has 76% of Matthew, 59% of Mark, 78% of Luke, and 97% of John. Tatian has no references to any gospels besides these four.

   But while God works, Satan eventually gets busy too. About the time of Irenaeus of Lyons (182-188 A.D.) and his disciple Hippolytus (222-234/235 A.D.) they documented many spurious, fake gospels; there are a total of about 70 or so fake scriptures. Most of these were written by Gnostics who taught the creator god of the Old Testament was either malicious or bumbling, unlike the non-material god of the New Testament, who sent one of his many created semi-gods, Jesus, to earth.

Gospel of Mary (2nd or 6th century)

Gospel of Peter (180-190 A.D.)

Gospel of Thomas. The false book by Gnostic heretics was probably written between 188 and 235 A.D. Irenaeus of Lyons (182-188 A.D.) in exhaustively describing every known book and false religion from the Druids of Britain to the Brachmans of India, knows nothing about it, but his disciple, Hippolytus writing 222-235/236 A.D. does mention it.

Gospel of Nicodemus (405-439 A.D.)

Gospel of the Nativity of Mary (after 625 A.D.)

Distinctive Elements of Matthew

   Hopefully, you will be able to see how much poorer our spiritual instruction would be if we only had three gospels: Mark, Luke, and John. Matthew emphasizes Christ the Promised and long-expected King and Messiah, who ushers in the kingdom of God and is the fulfillment of the law. Christ is the fulfilled hope. Of all the gospel writers, Matthew is the one who shows the most how Old Testament prophecies are fulfilled in Christ. About 1/3 of Matthew is preaching, and the gospel appears organized around five great discourses.

   As far as language goes, Papias, a disciple of the apostle John, said that Matthew was first written in Hebrew/Aramaic. Jesus is the “type” of Israel, and some see Matthew using Midrashic techniques familiar to Jews of this time. In particular In Matthew 10:32, “to acknowledge me” is strange in Greek but natural only in Aramaic according to The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.256.

   As for false religions, Matthew 20:1-16 is a good passage to explain to Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses about grace. Matthew 18:21-35 is also good to show Mormons that there is no way we can even begin to pay Jesus back for His grace with our good works.

   This disciple was a tax collector before Jesus called him. Matthew is a Hebrew name meaning "gift of God". In Mark 2:14 and Luke 5:27 the disciple is called Levi. However, in Matthew 9:9-13 he is called Matthew. Luke speaks of Levi giving a great banquet in his own house. But Matthew 9:10 and Mark 2:15 simply say a dinner "in the house". See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.862 and the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.720 for more info.

   Matthew has more references to coins that any other gospel. Matthew names uses three specific terms for coins, in Matthew 17:24; 17:27; and 18:24, used nowhere else in the New Testament. Why would Matthew know so much about coins? Also, the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector in Luke18:9-14, is not present in Matthew. He has 50 direct Old Testament quotations and about 754 allusions. See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.15-17 for more info.

   Apart from that, Matthew is also fond of the statement "from that time" in Mt 4:17; 16:21; 26:16, according to the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.722.

   There are many similarities between Matthew and Mark. Many scholars thing that Matthew consciously used Mark's gospel in writing; 93% of Mark is found in Matthew and Luke. See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.13 for more info. 200 verses in Matthew and Luke but not Mark. Ibid. p.14. Many have conjectured a hypothetical document, called Q, for these 200 verses. However, there is no evidence that Q every existed, at least in written form. What some see as Q could be common verbal teaching of the church, and discussions with Matthew and Paul's companion Luke. There are also some similarities in emphasis between Matthew and the writings of the important Jewish Pharisee Johanan ben Zakkai, who lived from 30 B.C. to 90 A.D. Johanan emphasized mercy and helping others more than sacrifices and purity. Both saw that Gentiles had a place in God's kingdom and wrote on the future judgment. See Ulrich Luz' Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.89 for more info.

Date of writing: 50-60 A.D. is our best guess for when Matthew was written. Matthew contains more warnings against the Sadducees than all the other gospels combined. The Sadducees, considered by many as Roman puppets, disappeared from history soon after 70 A.D when the Romans captured Jerusalem, according to The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.20-21,34.

Midrashic Fulfillment

   Matthew is the most Jewish of the gospels. But to a knowledgeable Jewish person, how were some of the prophecies mentioned in this book about Christ? Before answering the question, let’s first list a few of the prophecies in question.

1. God calling Israel’s children out of Egypt (Hosea 11:1; Matthew 2:15)

2. Rachel weeping for her children at Rama (Jeremiah 31:15; Matthew 2:18)

3. Prophecy about Zebulun and Naphtali (Isaiah 9:1,2; Matthew 4:15-16)

4. Paying Zechariah 30 silver pieces and giving them to the potter (Zechariah 11:12-13; Jeremiah 32:6-9, Matthew 27:9-10)

The answer: Matthew, more than the other Gospels, was written to a Jewish audience that was familiar with the Old Testament, and with Midrashic methods. The early church writer Papias wrote that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek. Matthew, in referring to children coming out of Egypt, Rachel weeping for her children, etc. is doing something deliberate here. He is showing how the life of Israel’s Messiah parallels the life of the children of Israel. We may think of prophecy just as solitary predicted details that come true, but that is too limited a view. Matthew shows that the life of the children of Israel, in general was a prophecy of Jesus. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.344-345 and Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.168 for more info.

41 Pre-Nicene writers refer to Matthew's Gospel. Underlined ones say Matthew wrote it.

1,813 quotes in writings up through 325 A.D. quote 87.3% of the 1071 verses of the Gospel of Matthew. Based on the writings and manuscripts below, we are sure of 97.0% of each word in the Gospel of Matthew.

17 Early manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew

p45 Chester Beatty I (all four gospels and Acts) (100-150 A.D.) (formerly thought to be late 2nd or early 3rd century A.D.) [233 verses] Matthew 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41-26:39

p1 (c.200 A.D.) Mt 1;1-9,12,14-20; 2:14?

p35 (3rd century) Mt 25:12-15,20-23

p37 (mid-3rd century) Mt 26:19-52

p53 (c.260) Mt 26:29-40

p64/p67 (ca.200 A.D.) Mt 3:9,15; 5:20-22,25-28; 26:7-8,10,14-15,22-23,31-33

p70 (3rd century) Mt 2:13-16,22-23; 3:1; 11:26-27; 12:4-5; 24:3-6,12-15

p77/p103 (mid to late 2nd century) Mt 13:55-57; 14:3-5; 23:30-39

p80 (3rd century) Mt 3:34

p101 (3rd century) Mt 3:10-12, 16-17; 4:1-3

p102 (ca.300 A.D.) Mt 4:11-12,22-23

p104 (100-150 A.D.) Mt 21:34-37, 43, 45?

p110 (late 3rd century or 4th century) Mt 10:13-15, 25-27

0171 (ca.300) Mt 10:17-23, 25-32

0212 (part of Tatian’s Diatessaron) (written c.170 A.D. manuscript before 256 A.D.) small parts of the four gospels, including Matthew 27:56-57.

P Antinoopolis 2.54 (3rd century) Mt 6:10-12 (part of the Lord's prayer)

Sinaitic Old Syriac (3rd/4th century per Aland et al. 4th rev. ed. Nestle-Aland 128) Parts of the four gospels. For Matthew it has Mt 1:1-6:10, 7:3-12:4, 12:6-25, 12:29-16:15, 18:11-20:24, 21:20-25:15, 25:17-20, 25:25-26, 25:32-28:7.

Vaticanus [B] (325-350 A.D.) and Sinaiticus [Si] (340-350 A.D.) each contain all of Matthew.

Alexandrinus [A] (c.450 A.D.) Mt 25:7 to the end

Prior to 325 A.D., we have preserved 66.1% of the Gospel of Matthew in Bible manuscripts, or 708 out of 1071 verses.

A Geographical Outline of Matthew

1:1-4:16 Birth and Preparation

4:17-16:20 From that time preached repent in public in Galilee.

16:21-18:35 In Galilee, from that time Jesus must go to Jerusalem and suffer.

19:1-25:46 And it came to pass that Jesus ministered in Judea

26:1-28:20 And it came to pass: Jesus' passion and resurrection

A Discourse Outline of Matthew

1:1-2:23 Prologue

3:1-7:29 The Gospel of the Kingdom

     5:1-7:29 First discourse, the Sermon on the mount

8:1-11:1 The Kingdom under Jesus' Authority

     10:5-11:1 Second discourse: Mission and Martyrdom

11:2-13:53 Rising Opposition

     13:1-53 The Third Discourse: Parables of the Kingdom

13:54-19:2 The Glory and the Shadow

     18:1-19:2 The Fourth Discourse: Life under the Kingdom

19:3-26:5 Opposition and End Times

24:1-25:46 The Olivet (Fifth ) Discourse

26:6-28:20 The Passion and Resurrection

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.51-57 and Ulrich Luz's Matthew 1-7: A Commentary p.34-37 for more info.

There are chiastic outlines and Markan outlines too of Matthew, but there is a lack of consistency on what they entail.

Question on the Ancestry of Jesus by a Jewish person

Q: How could Jesus be of the tribe of Judah, since tribal affiliation is only through the father (Numbers 34:14, Numbers 1:18-44, Leviticus 24:10)? The mother's tribal affiliation was considered irrelevant to what her children's tribal affiliation was and tribal affiliation/genealogy could not be inherited though a stepfather; only property could be inherited. Because Christians believe that Jesus had no human father, he would have had no tribal affiliation and thus cannot be counted as a descendant of Judah or David and would therefore be eliminated from messianic consideration. The web site http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/faq-primary-211/birth-of-jesus-primary-360/59-whos-genealogy-is-given-by-luke makes the following claims regarding Christ’s genealogy: “To presume that Mary was of Davidic descent presents the problem that Mary could not pass on what she did not possess: (1) Maternal connection does not enter into consideration for succession to the throne of David which is passed on only through a continuous male line: ‘There shall not be cut off from David a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel’ (Jeremiah 33:17); (2) Biblically, the right of lineal privilege, that is, kingship and priesthood, are exclusively passed on through the male line. The incident regarding the inheritance of the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers, chapters 27 and 36) does not apply here since it concerns the transference of physical property and not privileges of lineage.”

Matthew 1:1-17 – The legal claim to be the promised king

1. In Mt 1:1-17, what was the point of the genealogy of Joseph’s ancestry back to David since Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born?

2. In Mt 1:2-17 why are there 27 generations from David to Jesus, while Lk 1:3:23-31 gives 42 generations?

3. In Mt 1:3,5,6, why the mention of four women: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Uriah's wife (Bathsheba)?

4. In Mt 1:5, since David’s grandmother was Ruth the Moabite, how could David be with the congregation, since Dt 23:3 says a Moabite cannot enter the congregation down to the tenth generation?

5. In Mt 1:8, was Joram the father of Uzziah, or was he the great-great-grandfather in 1 Chr 3:11-12?

6. In Mt 1:9 why was Uzziah the father of Jotham when 2 K 15:1-7 and 1 Chr 3:12 says Azariah was the father of Jotham?

7. In Mt 1:11,16, why does the genealogy show that Jesus descended through a cursed line of Jeconiah/Jehoiachin, as Jer 22:28-30 Jer 36:30 say? (See also 1 Chr 3:16). Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) and his father Jehoiakim were both cursed by God himself, who said that neither of these men would have any descendent on the throne of David. How could Jesus possibly be the Messiah, destined to rule forever on the throne of David, if he descended through either of these men?

8. In Mt 1:17, how come 3 x 14 = 42 generations, but there are only 41 generations?

9. In Mt 1:17, how come so many names were left out?

10. In Mt 1:17 and Lk 1, why do the two genealogies diverge after Solomon, but come together again in Shealtiel?

Matthew 1:18-25 – The birth of the Messiah

1. In Mt 1:18-19, why would Joseph consider divorcing Mary if they were not already married?

2. In Mt 1:18, was Mary impregnated by the Holy Ghost, or was Jesus the fruit of David’s loins in Acts 2:30?

3. In Mt 1:20; 2:12; 2:13; 2:19; 2:22; 27:19, why does Matthew mention dreams and other gospel writers do not?

4. Does Mt 1:23 mistranslate Isa 7:14 by using the word “virgin” as the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.781 says?

5. The name "Emmanuel" in Matthew 1:23, where did it occur in the prophets books or Old Testament books? How is it related to Jesus? And why we don't find it in the rest of the gospels?

6. In Mt 1:23 and Lk 1:26-35, how could Jesus, born of a virgin, be descended from David?

7. In Mt 1:23, what is so key about Jesus being "Emmanuel", or God with us?

8. In Mt 1:25, since Isaiah said He would be called Emmanuel, why did they name Him Jesus?

9. In Mt 1:25, did Mary have any other children?

Matthew 2:1-12 – The Star and the Magi

1. In Mt 2:1-4,9-12, exactly how many magi were there?

2. In Mt 2:1, when did the Magi come?

3. In Mt 2:1-4,9-12, who were the magi?

4. In Mt 2:2, were any other rulers claimed to have heavenly signs?

5. In Mt 2:2, what were some heavenly "signs" around this time?

6. In Mt 2:6 why does it say, “not small”, since Mic 5:2 says “small” in the Masoretic text and “very small” in the Septuagint?

7. In Mt 2:6 why does it say, “governors/rulers”, since Mic 5:2 says “thousands” in the Masoretic text and the Septuagint?

8. In Mt 2:8,12, did God command the wise men to fail to keep their word to Herod, since they were told not to return to Herod?

9. In Mt 2:11, since astrology is wrong, why did the Magi follow the star?

10. In Mt 2:11, is there any significance in the gifts?

Matthew 2:13-23 – The Flight to Egypt

1. In Mt 2:15 and Hos 11:1, how is “out of Egypt I called my son” a prophecy of Christ?

2. In Mt 2:16, is there any other account of King Herod the Great slaughtering children in Bethlehem?

3. In Mt 2:16, apart from killing the babies in Bethlehem, was Herod the Great ever cruel to anyone else?

4. In Mt 2:16, were other kings as bad as Herod?

5. In Mt 2:18, how is Jeremiah’s prophecy about Rachel fulfilled in Jesus?

6. In Mt 2:22, since sons of Herod the Great reigned in both Judea and Galilee, why would Joseph decide to go to Galilee over Judea?

7. In Mt 2:23, archaeologically, is it true there is no evidence of a town of Nazareth, as an atheist claimed?

8. In Mt 2:23, according to archaeologists, just how large was Nazareth?

9. In Mt 2:23 where is it prophesied that Jesus would be called a Nazarene?

10. Was Mt 2:23 false to claim Jesus being from Nazareth fulfilled the Old Testament (Isa 11:1, Zech 6:12 and other passages), as the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.801-802 says?

Matthew 3 – John the Baptist and Jesus' Baptism

1. In Mt 3:1-4, how would they think of the wilderness?

2. In Mt 3:4 and Mk 1:6, were the locusts John the Baptist ate clean or unclean food?

3. In Mt 3:6, why did John baptize others?

4. In Mt 3:7-9, why did John speak so harshly to the Pharisees and Sadducees?

5. In Mt 3:9, why did John use the phrase "do not say to yourselves", and how do some lie to themselves today?

6. In Mt 3:9, how could God raise up children of Abraham out of stones if He wanted?

7. In Mt 3:10, what was the point of John the Baptist mentioning the axe is laid at the root of the tree?

8. In Mt 3:11, how does John's admission that he is not giving the complete picture apply to our witnessing?

9. In Mt 3:11, how does Jesus baptize Christians with the Holy Ghost and with fire?

10. In Mt 3:12, how does winnowing work?

11. In Mt 3:14, why would Jesus want to get baptized and why would John want to stop Jesus?

12. In Mt 3:16 and Mk 1:10 who saw the dove?

13. Does Mt 3:16-17 support that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three separate personages, as Mormons have claimed (Talmadge, 1977 p.39-40)?

Matthew 4 – Satan's Temptations of Jesus

1. In Mt 4:1-11; Mk 1:13; and Lk 4:1-13 whose initiative was it for Jesus do go be tempted in the wilderness and why?

2. In Mt 4:1-11, Mk 1:13; and Lk 4:1-13, since Jesus is God, was He unable to be tempted and sin, or as a man was He able to be tempted and fall?

3. In Mt 4:1-11 and Lk 4:1-13, how do Satan’s temptations of Jesus echo Satan’s temptations of Eve in Gen 3:6?

4. In Mt 4:2, what is so ironic about Jesus' ministry in Matthew?

5. In Mt 4:3 and Lk 4:3-4, Jesus was hungry, and the Father had not fed Him, so what would be wrong with  Jesus make bread Himself?

6. In Mt 4:5-6 and Lk 4:9-12, what was this temptation about?

7. In Mt 4:8 and Lk 4:6-8, how could Satan offer Jesus the world, since Jesus was God and already owned the world, as an atheist (Cappello) asserts?

8. In Mt 4:14-16, do Isa 9:1 and Isa 9:2 belong together, or was Matthew incorrect to put these together?

9. In Mt 4:15-16, how does the prophecy about Zebulun and Naphtali in Isa 9:1-2 relate to Jesus?

10. In Mt 4:18-22 and Mk 1:16-20, what can we learn from these fishermen?

Matthew 5:1-20 – The Sermon on the Mount Part 1

The Sermon on the Mount is the first and longest of the five major discourses in Matthew.

1. In Mt 5:4, what are people to mourn about here?

2. In Mt 5:5, Mt 11:29; Mt 21:5; 1 Pete 3:4, what exactly is meekness?

3. In Mt 5:6, what are hunger and thirst here?

4. In Mt 5:7, what is mercy in this verse?

5. In Mt 5:8, 1 Jn 3:2, and Rev 22:4, how will pure people see God, since Ex 33:23 and other

6. In Mt 5:9, what are some good ways we can be peacemakers today?

7. In Mt 5:13, how can Christians be salt?

8. In Mt 5:14a are we the light of the world, or is Jesus the light of the world as John 9:5 says?

9. In Mt 5:15, what is the light on the lampstand?

10. In Mt 5:17 and Acts 10:10-16, since Jesus said he would not abolish anything in the law, why don’t Christians follow the Old Testament dietary laws like Muslims allegedly do?

11. In Mt 5:17, since Jesus said he would not abolish anything in the law, why are the Jewish festival days no longer followed?

12. In Mt 5:18, what is a jot and a tittle?

13. In Mt 5:20, who are the scribes and Pharisees and what level of righteousness do they have?

Matthew 5:21-48 – The Sermon on the Mount Part 2

1. In Mt 5:21, why do people kill, animals, criminals, etc., since Jesus said not to kill?

2. In Mt 5:22, why did Jesus say for us not to call anyone a fool, since He and others did in Mt 23:17; Lk 24:25; 1 Cor 15:36; Gal 3:1?

3. In Mt 5:22 Jesus said, “WHOSOEVER shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire”, Yet he himself did so repeatedly, as Mt 23:17, Lk 11:40, and Lk 12:20 show. Shouldn’t he be in danger of Hell too? After all, he broke His own law!

4. In Mt 5:25-26, why is it often so difficult to settle with your adversary?

5. Does Mt 5:26 support the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory as the Catholic teacher Ludwig Ott taught?

6. In Mt 5:27-29, how extensive is the prohibition against adultery?

7. In Mt 5:29, is Hell conscious torment or just the grave?

8. In Mt 5:34, why did Jesus emphasize swearing oaths here?

9. In Mt 5:34 are we not to swear, or are we to swear by God’s name in Dt 10:20? 

10. In Mt 5:39-40, how are Christians supposed to turn the other cheek?

11. In Mt 5:39, why do Christians resist evil?

12. In Mt 5:42 and Lk 6:29-30, should Christians give to everyone who asks of them?

13. In Mt 5:43, where does it say, “love your neighbor and hate your enemy”?

14. In Mt 5:48 can we be perfect?

Matthew 6:1-13 – The Sermon on the Mount Part 3

1. In Mt 6:1-4, are we to do good works in secret, or let our light shine before men as Mt 5:16 says?

2. In Mt 6:1-4, in giving to God, how are Christians not to let their right hand know what their left hand is doing?

3. In Mt 6:1-4, since we are not to give alms before men, who do Christians report charity for tax purposes, and why do some have buildings or other monuments in their name?

4. In Mt 6:5-6, since we are to pray in secret, why do many Christians want public prayer in schools?

5. In Mt 6:5-7, Jesus is condemning all public prayer?

6. In Mt 6:7, should we ever repeat prayers?

7. In Mt 6:7-8, are we not to use vain repetition, or should we pray continually as the widow was an example of in Lk 18:5,7?

8. In Mt 6:7-8, why do many Christians, especially those in more liturgical traditions (Catholics, Episcopal, Anglican, Lutheran, etc.) pray many of the same things over and over every Sunday?

9. In Mt 6:9-13 and Lk 11:1-4, what was Jesus teaching in the Lord’s prayer?

10. In Mt 6:9-13 and Lk 11:2-4, why should we pray?

11. In Mt 6:13, why should we pray that God lead us not into temptation, when Jms 1:13 says that God does not tempt anyone?

Matthew 6:14-34 – The Sermon on the Mount Part 4

1. In Mt 6:14-15, are we supposed to forgive others’ trespasses, or all their sins?

2. In Mt 6:16-18, should Christians fast?

3. In Mt 6:19-21, why do Christians have money and other treasures on earth?

4. Can Mt 6:22 refer to some kind of spiritual “third eye” as some New Age people claim?

5. In Mt 6:24, what is Matthew saying about God and money?

6. In Mt 6:25-26, why do you think God tells us not to worry about our life?

7. In Mt 6:26, since God watching the birds is an example of God’s caring, what can we expect in the way of help from God?

8. In Mt 6:33 what is Jesus saying here?

9. Does Mt 6:33 teach that we should make our alleged inner divinity a top priority as some New Age people say?

Matthew 7 – Applications from the Sermon on the Mount

1. In Mt 7:1-2, Lk 6:37, Jn 7:24 how are we not to judge others, since we are told to judge in Jn 7:24, 1 Cor 5:12, and 1 Cor 6:25?

2. In Mt 7:1-5, should Christians not judge, or should we judge as 1 Cor 6:2-5 says?

3. In Mt 7:6, what did Jesus mean by not casting your pearls before swine (pigs)?

4. In Mt 7:7-11, why don’t people get all they want?

5. Since Mt 7:7-8 says he who asks receives and he who seeks finds, why in Am 8:12 do they seek the word of the LORD and not find it?

6. In Mt 7:7-11, why don’t Christians always get what they pray to God for in the name of Jesus?

7. In Mt 7:12a, what are examples of the golden rule?

8. In Mt 7:13-14, why do you think the gate is broad that leads to destruction, and narrow that leads to eternal life?

9. Does Mt 7:20 tell us how to show which religious group is the true religion?

10. In Mt 7:21-23, how can some think themselves saved and yet still go to hell?

11. In Mt 7:24-29, how does this apply to our lives?

12. Does Mt 7:24-29 show that only those who recognize their alleged “inner divinity” can withstand the storms of life as Spangler and some other New Agers say?

Matthew 8:1-18 – Jesus’ Authority over Disease

1. In Mt 8:2, why did the leper phrase his question this way?

2. In Mt 8:4, why was the leper to make the sacrifice as a testimony to the priests?

3. In Mt 8:5-13 did the centurion come to Jesus himself, or did he send others as Lk 7:1-10 says?

4. In Mt 8:10 and Lk 7:9, why did Jesus marvel at the centurion?

5. In Mt 8:12, does this refer to temporary punishment or eternal punishment?

6. In Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30 is Hell a place of darkness, or a place of fire in Rev 20:14; Mk 9:48?

7. In Mt 8:13, what is the significance of Jesus’ phrasing here?

8. In Mt 8:14 and 1 Cor 9:5, does Peter being married prove wrong the Catholic practice that priests cannot marry?

9. In Mt 8:15, what is interesting about the healing of the fever here?

10. In Mt 8:17, does Isa 53:4 refer to suffering for us, or healing us?

Matthew 8:19-34 – Jesus’ Authority over People and Demons

1. In Mt 8:20 and elsewhere, could Jesus be referring to someone besides Himself when He says, “Son of Man”?

2. In Mt 8:20 and elsewhere, why does Jesus often call Himself the Son of Man?

3. In Mt 8:21-22, why did Jesus tell the man to let the dead bury their own dead?

4. In Mt 8:24-25, how could Jesus sleep through this great storm?

5. In Mt 8:24-27, what can we apply from this to our lives?

6. In Mt 8:28, were there two demon-possessed men in the country of the Gergesenes, or just one according to Mk 5:1-4; Lk 8:26-33?

7. In Mt 8:28, exactly what town was near the demon-possessed man?

8. In Mt 8:28-29, what can we see from this in our lives?

9. In Mt 8:29, what did the demons mean by “torment us before the time”?

10. In Mt 8:32, why did Jesus grant the demons’ request to go into the pigs?

Matthew 9 – Jesus’ Authority over Traditions, Death, and the Incurable

1. In Mt 9:1, Mk 6:45, and Jn 6:17,  why did Jesus spend time here in Capernaum, which Luke calls “his own city”?

2. In Mt 9:2-6, what would be considered wrong with Jesus forgiving sins?

3. In Mt 9:9-10 what is the background on Matthew and his friends?

4. In Mt 9:12, what did Jesus mean that only the sick need a physician?

5. In Mt 9:13, why did Jesus mention God desiring mercy and not sacrifice?

6. In Mt 9:14, why did the disciples not fast?

7. In Mt 9:16-17 and Mk 2:21-22, what is the point of the analogies of the clothes and the wineskins?

8. In Mt 9:20, what is special about the hem of a garment?

9. In Mt 9:20-22, Mk 5:27-34, and Lk 8:43-49, why did Jesus publicly call out the woman with the flow of blood?

10. In Mt 9:20-22 and Mk 5:27-34 does the amount of faith we have determine whether our prayers are answered?

11. In Mt 9:23-26, why have professional mourners?

12. In Mt 9:28-31, why did these two blind men, who had the faith to believe in Jesus, not have the obedience to refrain from broadcasting this to others?

13. In Mt 9:38, should we pray for more workers for the harvest today?

Matthew 10:1-16 – Jesus sends the Twelve

1. In Mt 10:1, could the disciples heal before this?

2. In Mt 10:4 and Mk 3:18, how could Simon the Cananaean be one of Jesus’ disciples, since Simon [allegedly] was not a Jew?

3. In Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19; Lk 6:16; Jn 6:71, what does “Iscariot” mean?

4. In Mt 10:5-6, why did Jesus explicitly command His disciples not to go into the Samaritan villages?

5. In Mt 10:5-6; 15:24-26, was Jesus a racist who came only for the Jews? (The Muslim Ahmad Deedat claimed this.)

6. In Mt 10:13, what does this mean of the disciples’ blessing setting on a house or else returning to them?

7. In Mt 10:14 and Mk 6:11, why were the disciples to shake the dust off their feet at those that would not welcome them?

8. Do Mt 10:14 and Mk 6:11 mean that we should never debate with anyone but just leave?

9. In Mt 10:14 and Mk 6:11 when should we stop debating with a non-Christian and just leave?

10. In Mt 10:14-15, 40-42, why did Jesus teach that receiving a righteous person was so important?

11. In Mt 10:15, why will it be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah on Judgment Day than for those who did not welcome the disciples into their homes?

12. In Mt 10:16, how are they (and we) to be wise as serpents yet innocent as doves?

Matthew 10:17-42 – Persecution will come

1. In Mt 10:19, how does the Holy Spirit give Christians the words to say when they are under persecution?

2. In Mt 10:19-20, when the Holy Spirit is giving Christians the words to say, does that mean that at that time, the words are inerrant (with no error), or infallible (without significant theological error)?

3. In Mt 10:21-22, 35-36, why would members of a Christian household rise up against a Christian?

4. In Mt 10:23, why did Jesus tell Christians to flee persecution, since God is protecting them?

5. In Mt 10:23, did Jesus’ coming never materialize since He would come before they went over all the cities of Israel? (The Muslim Ahmad Deedat brought this up.)

6. In Mt 10:23, what does this mean that Jesus will come before they finish going through all the towns of Israel?

7. In Mt 10:23 will the gospel be preached in every town, or will it not be preached in Mt 24:14?

8. In Mt 10:26, what does it mean that nothing is hidden that will not be revealed?

9. In Mt 10:28, how are physical bodies destroyed in Hell?

10. In Mt 10:33, if a Christian in a moment of weakness denied Christ before men, would that Christian be denied by Jesus and go to Hell?

11. In Mt 10:34, how did Jesus, the prince of peace, come not to bring peace but a sword?

12. In Mt 10:37, why do we have to love God more than our own family?

13. In Mt 10:41, how do we receive a prophet or righteous person’s reward by welcoming a prophet or righteous person?

Matthew 11:1-15 – John the Baptist’s Confusion

1. In Mt 11:3, why did John ask Jesus if He was the promised Messiah, since he saw the Spirit descending on Jesus like a dove in Jn 1:32?

2. In Mt 11:3-6, why did Jesus just not say yes or no?

3. In Mt 11:3, have there been times in your life where you were witnessing and living for God, and you have been confused or disappointed?

4. Do Mt 11:11 and Lk 7:28 teach that John the Baptist went to Hell, as Rev. Moon’s Divine Principle p.161 teaches?

5. In Mt 11:11 and Lk 7:28, what does it mean that he who is least in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than John the Baptist?

6. In Mt 11:12-13, how did the kingdom of Heaven suffer violence?

7. In Mt 11:12-13, since New Testament times, how have forceful men advanced, or tried to advance the kingdom of God?

8. In Mt 11:14; 17:12; Mk 9:11-13; and Lk 1:15, how was John the Baptist in the Spirit and power of Elijah?

Matthew 11:16-30 – The Beginning of Opposition to Jesus

1. In Mt 11:16-17 and Lk 7:32, how was that generation like fussy children in the marketplace?

2. In Mt 11:20, why did Jesus denounce these cities by name?

3. In Mt 11:23-24, why would Sodom be willing to repent here?

4. In Mt 11:25-26, why did Jesus thank God for hiding truth from the so-called wise?

5. In Mt 11:25-26, what are some ways God keeps people from figuring out His wisdom?

6. In Mt 11:25-26, should we ever thank God for hiding the truth?

7. In Mt 11:27, how are all things delivered to Jesus?

8. In Mt 11:27, how does no one know the Father, except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals the Father?

9. In Mt 11:27, why does Jesus say that no one knows the Father except the son, and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him, since Ps 145:18 says God is near to all who call unto Him?

10. In Mt 11:28, how does Jesus give us rest?

11. In Mt 11:29-30, what is the difference between a yoke and a burden?

12. Does Mt 11:29 somehow support yoga, as taught by Mark and Elizabeth Prophet in The Lost Teachings of Jesus 3 (1988) p.273-274?

13. In Mt 11:29-30, how do we take up the yoke of Jesus today?

Matthew 12:1-21 – Which is Greater?

1. In Mt 12:1, Mk 2:23, and Acts 7:12 (KJV), why does it refer to ears of corn”?

2. In Mt 12:1-5 did Jesus’ disciples break the Jewish Sabbath or not?

3. In Mt 12:1-8 and Mk 2:27, is what Jesus said here about the Sabbath a change in God’s Law, or was Jesus saying how they should have practiced it in the Old Testament times, too?

4. In Mt 12:3-5 and Mk 2:25-27, why was it OK to take the showbread, and how does this relate to keeping the Sabbath?

5. In Mt 12:5, how did the priests blamelessly profane every Sabbath?

6. In Mt 12:5, when Jesus said, “Or haven’t you read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple desecrate the day and yet are innocent?” (NIV), why wasn’t this a quote from the Law?

7. In Mt 12:3-8 and Mk 2:25-28, what was the point of these illustrations?

8. In Mt 12:8 and Mk 2:28, what does it mean that the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath?

9. In Mt 12:8,12, when, if ever, should we break the letter of the law today?

10. In Mt 12:10-14 and Mk 3:3-6, what would the Pharisees consider wrong with healing on the Sabbath?

11. In Mt 12:10-14, why did Jesus answer the Pharisees this way?

12. Is Mt 12:18 a reference to the Trinity?

Matthew 12:22-50 – Mounting Rejection of Jesus

1. In Mt 12:31,32, Mk 3:28-30, and Lk 12:10-11, what is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?

2. In Mt 12:31,32, Mk 3:28-30, and Lk 12:11, why is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit much more serious than blasphemy against Jesus?

3. In Mt 12:31-32, does blasphemy against the Holy Spirit mean detesting the light by denying God’s manifestations (such as Baha’u’llah) as Bahai’s teach in Some Answered Questions p.127-128?

4. In Mt 12:32, does this not being forgiven in this life for blasphemy against the Holy Spirit somehow support the belief in purgatory, as the Catholic writer Ludwig Ott has said?

5. In Mt 12:34, what is Jesus saying about some people?

6. In Mt 12:38-39 and Mt 16:1-4, when the Pharisees asked for a sign, did Jesus say they would only have the sign of Jonah, or was there no sign as Mk 8:11-13 says?

7. In Mt 12:38-39; Lk 11:30, were the verses about the sign of Jonah inauthentic, and probably added in the seventh century A.D. as Stendahl, Peake; G. Schmitt, “Das Zeichen Jona ZNW [1978] [p.123-120] claim?

8. In Mt 12:39-40, how can a generation be wicked and adulterous?

9. In Mt 12:45 what is Jesus teaching about people and demons?

Matthew 13:1-15 – The Parable of the Soil

1. In Mt 13:1, why did Jesus sit on a ship and speak to the people?

2. In Mt 13:1-23, what is different, the seed or the soil, and how does this relate to us today?

3. In Mt 13:1-58, what is unusual about these parables?

4. In Mt 13:6-7, what is the difference between the path, the second, rocky soil, and the third, thorny soil?

5. In Mt 13:10-13, why did Jesus explain this parable to His disciples and not to the crowd?

6. In Mt 13:10-11, to what extent should our gospel presentation have a mysteriousness about it?

7. What does Mt 13:10-16 mean?

8. In Mt 13:12, was God unfair to take from those who had not and give to those who had?

9. In Mt 13:15, is this rather hard-hearted of God, to not soften their hearts and open their eyes?

Matthew 13:24-43 – Other parables of the kingdom

1. In Mt 13:24, how is the kingdom of heaven like this situation, since Heaven is perfect?

2. Does Mt 13:28-30 mean we should allow heretics to remain in the church?

3. In Mt 13:30, what exactly are the tares Jesus is referring to?

4. In Mt 13:30, what is the significance of the tares gathered before the wheat?

5. In Mt 13:32 and Mk 4:30-34, how is the mustard seed the least of all seeds?

6. In Mt 13:32 and Mk 4:30-34, how can a mustard plant hold a bird’s nest?

7. In Mt 13:33, what is the significance of yeast here?

8. In Mt 13:33, in this parable, why did the woman in this parable hide the leaven in three measures of meal?

9. In Mt 13:34 how did Jesus speak only in parables since in other places such as the Sermon on the Mount Jesus did not use any parables?

10. In Mt 13:38, is everyone a child of the Kingdom?

Matthew 13:44-58 – Still other parables of the kingdom

1. In Mt 13:44, in the parable why wouldn’t the man in the field just secretly dig up and take away the treasure?

2. In Mt 13:44, who is the man and what is the treasure?

3. In Mt 13:45-46, what is the meaning of the parable of the pearl?

4. In Mt 13:47, what is the meaning of the parable of the dragnet?

5. In Mt 13:51, were the disciples right to say “yes” the understood these parables?

6. In Mt 13:51, are there times where you are confident and correct that you have a basic understanding of something God is teaching you, but subsequently found out that you had no idea what that would entail?

7. In Mt 13:52, why did Jesus mention a scribe having new treasures as well as old?

8. In Mt 13:52, how is our heart like a storeroom of treasure?

9. In Mt 13:53-58, was Jesus not a prophet, because Prophecy can only exist in Israel when the land is inhabited by a majority of world Jewry. During the time of Ezra (circa 300 BCE), when the majority of Jews refused to move from Babylon to Israel, prophecy ended upon the death of the last prophets -- Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.” (A Jewish person brought up this objection)

10. In Mt 13:54-58, Jesus’ teaching was polarizing; so, when should our teaching be polarizing?

11. In Mt 13:55 how could Jesus have brothers and sisters, since (according to the Catholic Church) Mary was always a virgin?

12. In Mt 13:55, what exactly did a carpenter do?

13. In Mt 13:55-56, why was a prophet not honored in his hometown?

14. In Mt 13:58, how did the people’s lack of faith restrict Jesus’ mighty works?

Matthew 14 – John the Baptist’s death and feeding 5,000

1. In Mt 14, why is the death of John the Baptist placed where it is in Matthew?

2. In Mt 14:3-4, why exactly did John the Baptist denounce Herod Antipas?

3. In Mt 14:6-12, why is this gruesome account in the Bible?

4. In Mt 14:6-12, wouldn’t it spoil the festive mood to bring in a severed head?

5. In Mt 14:15-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:12-17; Jn 6:1-14, did Jesus feed 5,000, or 4,000 as Mt 15:32-38 and Mk 8:2-9 say? Is it allegorical story, that's why he repeated it? Or the incident took place twice in reality and with variant details?

6. In Mt 14:15, since this was a desert, why was there grass in verse 19?

7. In Mt 14:24-32, how should Christians brave storms?

8. In Mt 14:25, when was the fourth watch in the night?

9. In Mt 14:29-31 why was Peter’s faith so strong, and then so weak?

Matthew 15:1-20 – Hand washing and lip service

1. In Mt 15:1-3, was Jesus against washing hands?

2. In Mt 15:3-6, where did the idea of qorban/corban (Greek korban) originate?

3. In Mt 15:7, what exactly is a hypocrite?

4. In Mt 15:8, why do people choose to draw near to God with their lips, when their hearts are far from Him?

5. In Mt 15:9, when are traditions of men good, and when are they bad?

6. In Mt 15:10-20 and Mk 7:15-23, why did Jesus invalidate the Old Testament dietary commands here?

7. In Mt 15:11,17-18, how is it only what comes out that defiles?

8. In Mt 15:12, wouldn’t it be strange for some of the Pharisees to go out from Jerusalem to find Jesus just to ask his opinions on personal hygiene?

9. In Mt 15:12, why was Jesus not concerned about making the Pharisees feel bad?

10. In Mt 15:14, why does God sometimes allow the blind to be led by the blind?

Matthew 15:21-39 – Ministry among Gentiles

1. In Mt 15:21-29 and Mk 7:24, why did Jesus go to Tyre and Sidon?

2. In Mt 15:24, was Jesus only for the Jews and not for everyone?

3. In Mt 15:21-28, when the “woman of Canaan” asked Jesus to have mercy on her, Jesus said: “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel”. Why do we find it only in Matthew? Also the command of Jesus to His disciples: “Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mt 10:5-7)? Are these two sayings by Jesus really, although they contradict with His universal salvation message? Or they are a fabrication or creation by the early church communities?

4. In Mt 15:21-22 and in the gospels in general, we find Jesus promises all people with salvation without any differentiation or discrimination between them, whether they were Jews or nations or pagans, but in Matthew we find the focus is on the Jews for salvation. What do you think?

5. In Mt 15:21-22, with the Canaanite woman, was Jesus apparently saying that they were only to love Jews and those who worshipped God in the approved manner, as the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.944 claims? (The Muslim Ahmad Deedat also brings this up.)

6. In Mt 15:24-26 was Jesus a racist for comparing the Canaanite (Syro-Phoenician) woman to dogs? (The Muslim Ahmad Deedat brought this up)

7. In Mt 15:21-29 and Mk 7:27-29, what exactly were Jesus and the Syro-Phoenician woman saying?

8. In Mt 15:24 are these “lost sheep of Israel” refer to people who allegedly migrated from Israel to America around the time of the Exile as taught by the Mormon Joseph Fielding Smith in Doctrines of Salvation 1975 vol.3 p.214?

Matthew 16:1-17 – Understanding what is significant

1. In Mt 16:1,4, why was it wrong to ask Jesus for a sign from Heaven?

2. In Mt 16:2-4, what does the cycle of evening and morning have to do with the signs of the times?

3. In Mt 16:3-4, what are some other times where someone can see all the fats and details, but yet be blind to the significance and conclusions?

4. In Mt 16:4, what exactly was the sign of the prophet Jonah?

5. In Mt 16:7-11 and Mk 6:52, what was the significance of the five loaves and 5,000, and the 7 loaves and the 4,000?

6. In Mt 16:7-11 and Mk 8:19-20, what is Jesus saying is the significance of these numbers?

7. In Mt 16:8, why did Jesus say they had little faith here?

8. In Mt 16:11-12, how is the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees like yeast in bread?

9. Does Mt 16:11-12 indicate a late authorship, as the writer could not distinguish between the Pharisees and Sadducees?

10. In Mt 16:13-14 and Mk 8:27-29, why did Jesus want to know who others said He was?

11. In Mt 16:16-17, how did Peter only know this by the Holy Spirit?

Matthew 16:18-21 – Who do you say that I am?

1. In Mt 16:18, what can Roman Catholics and Protestants agree upon in this verse?

2. In Mt 16:18, what or who is the rock here?

3. What does Mt 16:18 not say?

4. In Mt 16:18, was Jesus essentially saying that Peter was the first Pope, as the Catholic church claims?

5. In Mt 16:18, how was “the rock” the most significant pun in all of history?

6. In Mt 16:18, has the name Peter been found at Qumran among the Dead Sea Scrolls?

7. In Mt 16:18, what three complementary things could this verse mean about the gates of Hades?

8. In Mt 16:19, what is this binding and loosing?

9. In Mt 16:19, what exactly were the keys of the kingdom of Heaven?

10. In Mt 16:19, could these keys of the kingdom of Heaven be passed on?

11. In Mt 16:21 and Mk 29, why was Peter’s confession a major turning point in Jesus’ ministry?

Matthew 16:21-28 – Who do you say that I am?

1. In Mt 16:21, why would Jesus wait until now to tell his disciples He would suffer, die, and be raised from the dead?

2. In Mt 16:21; 17:22; 20:19; Mk 8:31, since Jesus would rise after three days or on the third day, does that mean He was dead at least 24 X 3 = 72 hours?

3. In Mt 16:22-23 and Mk 8:32-33, why did Jesus rebuke Peter here, saying “get thee behind me Satan”?

4. In Mt 16:22-23 and Mk 8:33, how could Peter have the boldness to correct and rebuke Jesus?

5. In Mt 16:22, why was Peter foolishly rebuking Jesus here?

6. In Mt 16:23 and Mk 8:33, what are ways people today can be having in mind the things of man instead of the things of God?

7. In Mt 16:24, why did Jesus mention a cross here, prior to telling His disciples He would be crucified?

8. In Mt 16:27, will Jesus come in the Father’s glory, or in His own glory as Jn 1:14 says?

9. In Mt 16:27, does this refer not to the end of the earth, but the supreme manifestation of Baha’u’llah, as Baha’is teach in Baha’u’llah and the New Era p.268-269?

10. In Mt 16:28 and Mk 9:1, what did Jesus mean that some would not taste death until they saw the kingdom of God come with power?

Matthew 17:1-13 – The Transfiguration

1. In Mt 17:1-8, why was Jesus transfigured, and why now?

2. In Mt 17:1, which mountain did Jesus take them up to?

3. In Mt 17:1-8, was the transfiguration a resurrection or a vision?

4. In Mt 17:2 and Mk 9:3, why did Jesus’ clothes become so white?

5. In Mt 17:3-4 and Mk 9:4, how did Matthew and Mark know this was Moses and Elijah?

6. In Mt 17:9 and Mk 9:9, why did Jesus specifically not want the disciples to tell anyone about the transfiguration until Jesus rose from the dead?

7. In Mt 17:11-13, how was John the Baptist the Elijah who was to come?

8. In Mt 17:12 and Mk 9:11-13, how did John the Baptist fulfill the prophecy of Elijah? Was he Elijah reincarnated?

Matthew 17:14-27 – Being Gracious when Exacerbated

1. In Mt 17:14-16 and Lk 9:37-39, why do demons often hurt the people they possess?

2. In Mt 17:15 the term for epilepsy is literally “moonstruck”. Is there any correlation between epileptic seizures and phases of the moon?

3. In Mt 17:15-21, Mk 9:17-18,28-29, and Lk 9:40, why could the disciples not cast out this demon?

4. In Mt 17:15-21, Mk 9:17-18,28-29, and Lk 9:40, should we lay hands when casting out of demon, or is this just a form of action?

5. In Mt 17:15-21, will the evil spirit that cast out turn back and attack the weaker person in the team that is trying to cast out the demon?

6. In Mt 17:15-21, some churches practice that the family must bring the demon processed person to the church, and not to go to the home. Is this because it is safer for casting demon in church that in someone’s house?

7. In Mt 17:15-21, if a non-Christian woman is possessed by the evil spirit, and the husband is not against if initially. But after 2-3 visits, the husband changes his mind and does not welcome the team, or stop the team to come, and the wife is still open, what is our position? Must she obey her husband?

8. In Mt 17:15-21, what if the possessed victim hurt herself or jumped out of a window during ministering time, and the family member decides to launch a complaint or file a court case to the team leader or the team, what is the church’s position?

9. In Mt 17:15-21, must we inform and seek approval from pastors before visiting a demon-possessed person?

10. In Mt 17:17, why and with whom was Jesus exacerbated?

11. In Mt 17:17, what are ways today that you think God might be exacerbated by believers’ lack of faith?

12. In Mt 17:25-27, why did Jesus say the sons are exempt from taxes, yet Jesus still paid taxes?

13. In Mt 17:25-27, did the other disciples pay the temple tax too?

14. In Mt 17:27, why are we sometimes exacerbated with others, and how should we respond when we are?

Matthew 18 – Greatness and Forgiveness

1. In Mt 18:1-6, when someone, especially a Christian, is focusing on asking the wrong question, how do you redirect it?

2. In Mt 18:1-6, what should you do when you detect rivalry among believers?

3. In Mt 18:5 and Mk 9:35-37, how is welcoming a child in Jesus’ name like welcoming Jesus?

4. In Mt 18:8 and Mk 9:43,47, should we cut off our hand or gouge out or eye if it makes us sin?

5. In Mt 18:9 and Mk 9:43-44,48, do the references to unquenchable fire here prove eternal punishment?

6. In Mt 18:14, since God is not willing that any of the little ones perish, why do people perish?

7. Does Mt 18:15-18 mean we should never criticize a Christian leader’s doctrine?

8. In Mt 18:17, what does you treating as a pagan or tax collector mean?

9. In Mt 18:18 what does binding and loosing mean?

10. In Mt 18:21-22, how does Jesus’ generosity in telling people to forgive others seventy times seven times compare with other teaching?

11. In Mt 18:28-31, how much were the amounts of money here?

12. In Mt 18:32-35, does God ever uncancel or unforgive sins?

13. In Mt 18:32-35, could this parable mean the master sent the wicked servant to jail for subsequent debts, instead of reapplying the old debt?

14. In Mt 18:35, are some works, such as forgiving our brothers, required for salvation?

Matthew 19:1-15 – The battle for our hearts and Divorce

1. In Mt 19:3-9, Mk 10:11-12, under what circumstances is divorce permitted?

2. In Mt 19:8,9 does Jesus changing the laws on divorce imply that God inspired scripture He did not agree with?

3. In Mt 19:9, why does a man who divorces his wife and marries another commit adultery, since polygamy was allowed?

4. In Mt 19:12, briefly does this teach that a man could make himself a eunuch for the kingdom of God as an atheist (Capello) says?

5. In Mt 19:12, Jesus states “.....and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” Here we [allegedly] have Christ’s endorsement of self-castration. I wonder how many Christian men would prove their allegiance to God by doing this. Curiously, this endorsement of castration contradicts Dt 23:1.

6. In Mt 19:14, how does the kingdom of Heaven belong to little children?

7. In Mt 19:14, does Calvinism, to be consistent, teach all who die as babies go to Hell?

Matthew 19:16-30 – The battle for our hearts and riches

1. Do Mt 19:16-17; Mk 10:18; and Lk 18:19 prove that Jesus is not God? (Muslims have mentioned this)

2. In Mt 19:17, what is good?

3. In Mt 19:23, is it true that rich people cannot go to heaven?

4. In Mt 19:23, Mk 10:25, and Lk 18;25, what did Jesus mean by a camel going through the eye of a needle?

5. In Mt 19:27,30 what is single key issue in this verse and in this chapter?

6. In Mt 19:27,30, what are ways you can tell if something has more of your heart’s devotion than God?

7. In Mt 19:28 and Lk 22:28-30, since the disciples will sit on twelve thrones, will Judas Iscariot sit too?

8. In Mt 19:29, how will people have 100 times more fathers, mothers, etc. in this life?

9. In Mt 19:30, Mk 10:31, and Lk 13:30, in what ways are those who are first going to be last and vice versa?

Matthew 20 – Grace and the Workers in the Vineyard

1. In Mt 20:1-16 is the Master fair in this parable?

2. In Mt 20:1-16, does everyone get the same rewards in Heaven?

3. In Mt 20:1-16, why is this a great parable to study with Mormons (LDS)?

4. In Mt 20:17-19, how can Almighty God permit His prophet Jesus to be turned over to the Gentiles to be mocked and killed?

5. In Mt 20:20-28, since great Christians are the servants, not rulers over others, why do some Christian leaders seem to forget this?

6. In Mt 20:22, what is Jesus pointing out is ignorant about their request?

7. In Mt 20:28, what can we learn from Jesus’ example here?

8. In Mt 20:30, was it two blind men, or one blind man named Bartimaeus as Mark 10:46-52 says?

9. In Mt 20:32, why did Jesus ask the obviously blind man what he wanted Jesus to do?

Matthew 21 – Who is prepared for a triumphal entry?

1. In Mt 21:1-3, Mk 11:2-3, Lk 19:30-31, why did Jesus tell his disciples to take a donkey?

2. In Mt 21:12-13, Mk 11:12-19, and Luke 19:43-48, why was Jesus angry at the moneychangers?

3. In Mt 21:14-15, what is significant about the blind and lame coming to Jesus to heal them?

4. In Mt 21:16-17, since we are only supposed to worship God, why did Jesus accept praise?

5. In Mt 21:18-19, Mk 11:14,20-21, why did Jesus seem to be so severe as to cause a non-thinking fig tree to wither?

6. In Mt 21:21-22 and Mk 11:24, since we can ask for anything in prayer, why don’t Christians ask for, and get everyone becoming a Christian? Also, I have a long wish list....

7. In Mt 21:21-22 and Mk 11:24, when you pray and believe, are you guaranteed to always get what you pray for?

8. In Mt 21:23, how large was the temple courtyard?

9. In Mt 21:23-24, why didn’t Jesus just answer their question about Him being the Messiah?

10. In Mt 21:24-27, Mk 11:33, and Lk 20:7-8, why did Jesus refuse to tell them by what authority He did these things?

11. In Mt 21:43, how have some grossly misinterpreted this concerning the British?

12. In Mt 21:46, was Jesus really a prophet or did the people just consider Him a prophet?

13. In Mt 21:1-46, how do various people today react when Jesus and His teaching come across their lives?

Matthew 22 – Don’t Get Skipped for the Wedding

1. In Mt 22:13-14, how is God all-loving, to turn someone out and throw them into darkness?

2. In Mt 22:14 does the phrase “many are called, few are chosen” refer to variations and degrees of faith and assurance, as Baha’is teach in Some Questions Answered p.129-131?

3. In Mt 22:21, what is Jesus saying about taxes and the government?

4. In Mt 22:29, why did Jesus tell the Sadducees, who had obviously studied scripture, they were in error because they knew not the Scriptures nor the power of God?

5. Does Mt 22:30 mean we will not have physical bodies in heaven, since we will be like the angels and angels are spirits (Heb 1:14)?

6. In Mt 22:30, Mk 12:25, and Lk 20:34-35, Hello. my dad just passed away. My mother is taking it very hard and wants to know if she will still be married to him in Heaven. I don't know how to answer her question. I know that Matthew 16:19 says that what is bound on Earth will be bound in Heaven and what is loosed on Earth will be loosed in Heaven. However, I have heard it said that “there is no marriage in Heaven.” I don't have a verse to back this up, but I have heard it said. Can you help me understand?

7. In Mt 22:31-32 and Mk 12:26, is Jesus justified in making this point based on the tense of the verb “am”?

8. In Mt 22:35-36 and Mk 12:28-29, why did Jesus not rebuke this question like He did the previous question on marriage?

9. In Mt 22:37-40 and Mk 12:30, did Jesus actually add to Deuteronomy 6:4, or did He paraphrase it without adding to it?

10. In Mt 22:37, for the greatest commandment, is it just “heart, soul, and mind”, or is it strength also as Mk 12:29-30 says?

11. In Mt 22:37, why did a Sovereign God allow the “greatest commandment” to be preserved imprecisely, in two different ways, as “heart, soul, and mind” in Mt 22:37, and as “heart, soul, mind, and strength” in Mk 12:29-30?

12. In Mt 22:40, how do all the Law and Prophets hang on these two commandments?

Matthew 23 – Woe and warning on entrusting spiritual leadership to another

1. In Mt 23, was Jesus right to be so argumentative?

2. In Mt 23:5-7, how are some today like the Pharisees, both expressing their pride and masking it as the same time?

3. In Mt 23:9, briefly, since we should call no man father, can we call our earthly father that?

4. In Mt 23:13-39, why did Jesus pronounce these woes?

5. In Mt 23:13-39, what is the pattern of these woes and are there 7 or 8 woes?

6. In Mt 23:14 and Mk 12:40, how did the scribes devour widows’ houses?

7. In Mt 23:16-22, when today, if ever, should you say something that makes it appear like you are entering into a binding agreement, when in fact you are not?

8. In Mt 23:17, why did Jesus call people fools, since He told us not to in Mt 5:22?

9. In Mt 23:23-28, how do these woes differ from the others?

10. In Mt 23:24, how do people strain a gnat and swallow a camel today?

11. In Mt 23:25, what is the point of the clean cup?

12. In Mt 23:27-29, what is Jesus’ point about whitewashed tombs?

13. In Mt 23:35 and Lk 11:51, briefly who was Zechariah (or Zacharias)?

14. In Mt 23:37-40, since Jesus wanted to gather Jerusalem, why did this not happen, since God  is Almighty, All-knowing, and [allegedly] All-loving?

Matthew 24:1-31 – Signs of the Last Days

1. Does Mt 24:3-44 show that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914, as Jehovah’s Witnesses have taught?

2. In Mt 24:19-20, why will this be especially dreadful for pregnant women and nursing mothers?

3. In Mt 24:20, what difference does it make if this flight is on the Sabbath?

4. In Mt 24:20, are we therefore supposed to keep the Sabbath (Friday sundown to Saturday sundown) today?

5. In Mt 24:22, how can God “cut short” future days?

6. In Mt 24:23-27, why would God allow people seeking Christ to be deceived by a false Christ?

7. In Mt 24:23-27, if someone followed a false Christ or other spiritual counterfeit, and through innocent ignorance did not know how to tell if it were false, why would God allow this?

8. Does Mt 24:23-24 teach that we each have a “cosmic Christ” within us, as some New Agers say?

9. In Mt 24:24 how could the elect (people destined for Heaven) be deceived?

10. In Mt 24:27, does lightning flashing from east to west have to do with the Baha’i Messiah, called Ba’haullah, and the telegraph appearing the same year (1863)?

11. In Mt 24:28 and Lk 17:37, what does it mean about where there is a carcass the vultures will gather?

12. In Mt 24:29, how can the sun be darkened and the stars fall from the sky?

13. In Mt 24:30 are clouds things that are contrary to the ways and desires of men as Baha’is teach in Baha’u’llah and the New Era p.280-281?

Matthew 24:31-51 – The Timing of the Coming

1. In Mt 24:31, what are the different Christian views of the rapture?

2. In Mt 24:31, 1 Thess 4:16, and 1 Cor 15:52, which trumpet call is the last trumpet?

3. In Mt 24:32, what does the fig tree represent?

4. In Mt 24:34 and Mk 13:30, since “this generation” will not pass away until Jesus comes, how can this be?

5. Do Mt 24:34 and Mk 13:30 mean that all these things will happen within one generation of 1914, as the Jehovah’s Witness Watchtower vol.15 February 1986 p.5 taught?

6. In Mt 24:36 and Mk 13:32, since God is All-knowing, why did Jesus have no knowledge of the hereafter, as Ahmad Deedat asserts?

7. In Mt 24:36 and Mk 13:32, since God is All-knowing, and Jesus is God, how come Jesus did not know the day of His return?

8. In Mt 24:36, very briefly, did the Holy Spirit know when Jesus would return?

9. In Mt 24:36, did the Holy Spirit at that time know the time of Jesus’ return or not? (A Christian asked this.)

10. In Mt 24:42, why did Jesus say, “on what day your Lord is coming” instead of “on what day I am coming”?

11. In Mt 24:42, since we do not know when Jesus will come back, why do we look for the signs of His coming?

Matthew 25 – Three crises of separation

1. In Mt 25:1, since Christians are supposed to share, were the five wise virgins right not to share with the five foolish ones?

2. In Mt 25:1-13, are the five foolish virgins Christians who were not obedient and thus missed the rapture?

3. In Mt 25:24-26, how is God a “hard man” who harvests where He has not sown?

4. In Mt 25:24-30, have you ever seen today how because someone feared that something bad might happened, they made foolish decisions that ensured that it would happen?

5. In Mt 25:26-27 and Lk 19:23, why was the man with one talent told to put it in the bank and collect interest, since the Israelites were commanded not to collect interest from each other (Ex 22:25; Lev 25:35-37; Dt 23:19; Ps 15:5)?

6. In Mt 25:26-27, with enough missed opportunities the opportunities, talents, and gifts can go away. How do you think “spiritual atrophy” can manifest itself today?

7. In Mt 25:28-29, is God just to take the talent from the one with few and give it to the one with the most?

8. In Mt 25:31-46, It appears that the only distinction between the sheep and the goats is what they did and did not do. Is this true?

9. In Mt 25:31-46, since the key [allegedly] was helping others, won’t everyone who helps others go to Heaven?

10. Does Mt 25:46 show there is no conscious punishment for the wicked, as Jehovah’s Witnesses have taught?

11. In Mt 25:46, what do all three parts of Mt 25 have in common?

Matthew 26:1-35 – The woman with oil and the Last supper

There are five turning points in Matthew: 7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1 and 26.1.

1. In Mt 26:3-4, what are other examples of leaders doing the opposite of what they were set up to do, and why?

2. In Mt 26:7; Mk 14:3 and Lk 7:37, what do we know about alabaster?

3. In Mt 26:7, Mk 14:3 and Lk 7:37, how unusual was this?

4. In Mt 26:7-11, when the woman poured the expensive perfume on Jesus’ head, was Jesus too self-considerate? (The Muslim Ahmad Deedat brought this up)

5. In Mt 26:11 was Jesus not always going to be with them, or will Jesus be with the always, even to the end of the age as Mt 28:20 says?

6. In Mt 26:21-22, what do you think that Judas felt, when Jesus said He knew that one of them would betray Him?

7. In Mt 26:27; Mk 14:23; Lk 22:17,22; and 1 Cor 11:25, must all use the same communion cup?

8. In Mt 26:30, what hymn might they have sung?

9. In Mt 26:31-35,69-72, how do you counsel a Christian who made great commitments to serve God, and then fall flat on their face?

Matthew 26:36-75 – How do you judge the universe’s judge?

1. In Mt 26:39,42, since Jesus is God and has the mind of God, how could He pray “My Father if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me?”

2. In Mt 26:52 is Jesus against all war and capital punishment (execution)?

3. In Mt 26:52, when (if ever) should we use physical means in the service of Christ’s kingdom?

4. In Mt 26:53, how many are twelve legions of angels?

5. In Mt 26:64, how could Jesus speak before the Sanhedrin, since Isa 53:7 says the Messiah would not open his mouth?

6. In Mt 26:64, how would Caiaphas see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven?

7. In Mt 26:65, why did the high priest tear his clothes here?

8. In Mt 26:69-75, how could Peter, Jesus’ apostle, lie out of fear?

9. In Mt 26:73 and Mk 14:70, what were the characteristics of a Galilean accent?

10. In Mt 26:74 and Mk 14:71, why did Peter curse here?

Matthew 27:1-26 – The Impending Crucifixion

1. In Mt 27:1, why did they meet again during the day?

2. In Mt 27:2, what do we know about Pontius Pilate?

3. In Mt 27:3-5, what can we learn about people from Judas?

4. In Mt 27:5, did Judas hang himself, or did his body burst open as Acts 1:18-19 says?

5. In Mt 27:7 and Acts 1:18, did the priests or Judas Iscariot buy the field?

6. In Mt 27:9-10, how is this a fulfillment of Jeremiah, since Jeremiah said only part of this, and Zechariah said part of this?

7. In Mt 27:11 and Mk 15:2, when Jesus said, “you say so”, was Jesus affirming that He was the King of the Jews?

8. In Mt 27:15 and Mk 15:6, why did Pilate release one prisoner at the festival?

9. In Mt 27:24, how do people today sometimes try to “wash their hands” to convince others they had no part in something, when in fact they did?

10. In Mt 27:22; Mk 15:14; Lk 23:23; and Jn 19:14, did Jesus have to die a slow painful death on the cross, or could He have died less painfully by the sword or disease?

11. In Mt 27:25, why would they want Jesus’ blood on them and their children?

Matthew 27:27-66 – Crucified for Us

1. In Mt 27:29, why did they put a crown of thorns on Jesus and give Him a reed?

2. In Mt 27:32 and Mk 15:21, why did Simon of Cyrene have to carry Jesus’ cross?

3. In Mt 27:34,48 and Mk 15:36, why did someone put vinegar mixed with gall/myrrh on a sponge to give to Jesus?

4. In Mt 27:40-42, why were they encouraging Jesus to come down from the cross?

5. In Mt 27:46-47 and Mk 15:36, why did someone say Jesus was calling Elijah?

6. In Mt 27:46 and Mk 15:34, what did Jesus mean by saying, “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me”?

7. In Mt 27:51 and Mk 15:38, what was the significance of the Temple curtain ripping in two?

8. In Mt 27:51, is there any extra-Biblical evidence of the temple veil being torn?

9. In Mt 27:51 is it true that there is no evidence for this earthquake outside of Matthew?

10. In Mt 27:52-53, how could the dead people come out of their tombs?

11. In Mt 27:52-53, when people came out of their graves at Jesus’ resurrection, does this show the probability of Mary being bodily raised to Heaven, as one Catholic writer teaches?

12. In Mt 27:57-59, was Joseph of Arimathea brave to ask for the body of Jesus?

13. In Mt 27:65, how do we know that “take a guard” means 4-16 Roman soldiers, instead of Temple soldiers?

Matthew 28 – The Resurrection and Great Commission

1. In Mt 28:9, did Jesus appear first to Mary Magdalene, or first to Peter (Cephas) as Paul implies in 1 Cor 15:5?

2. In Mt 28:11-15, did the chief priests need to bribe the guards and where did the money come from?

3. In Mt 28:12-15, what are other examples of people being paid a lot of money to spread a lie, and why do people do that?

4. In Mt 28:19, how do we make “disciples” of all nations, as opposed to just hearers or converts?

5. In Mt 28:19, since there is only One God, how can Jesus be God, and how can the Trinity be true?

6. In Mt 28:19, Mt 24:36, and Mt 3:16-17, what is modalism, and why is it wrong?

7. In Mt 28:19, what exactly does “in the name of” mean?

8. In Mt 28:19, since the word Trinity is not in the Bible, so how can the Trinity be Biblical and thus true?

9. In Mt 28:19, why can I not picture the Trinity in my head?

10. In Mt 28:19, the Trinity just does not fit my image of God.

11. In Mt 28:19, if the Trinity is True, is Jesus 1/3 God?

12. In Mt 28:19, did the concept of the Trinity comes from Babylonian and Assyrian religions, which had triads of gods?

13. In Mt 28:19, why shouldn’t we refuse to worship any father that sent his own boy to be tortured and die instead of himself, as a Oneness Pentecostal preacher said?

Question on the Ancestry of Jesus by a Jewish person

Q: How could Jesus be of the tribe of Judah, since tribal affiliation is only through the father (Numbers 34:14, Numbers 1:18-44, Leviticus 24:10)? The mother's tribal affiliation was considered irrelevant to what her children's tribal affiliation was and tribal affiliation/genealogy could not be inherited though a stepfather; only property could be inherited. Because Christians believe that Jesus had no human father, he would have had no tribal affiliation and thus cannot be counted as a descendant of Judah or David and would therefore be eliminated from messianic consideration. The web site http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/faq-primary-211/birth-of-jesus-primary-360/59-whos-genealogy-is-given-by-luke makes the following claims regarding Christ’s genealogy: “To presume that Mary was of Davidic descent presents the problem that Mary could not pass on what she did not possess: (1) Maternal connection does not enter into consideration for succession to the throne of David which is passed on only through a continuous male line: ‘There shall not be cut off from David a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel’ (Jeremiah 33:17); (2) Biblically, the right of lineal privilege, that is, kingship and priesthood, are exclusively passed on through the male line. The incident regarding the inheritance of the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers, chapters 27 and 36) does not apply here since it concerns the transference of physical property and not privileges of lineage.”
A: First the 5-second answer, then a detailed answer. Most Jews consider being Jewish as through the mother, but let’s go ahead and answer this ignoring that. Basically, while tribal affiliation was normally through the father, Jewish tribal affiliation was through the mother, NOT the father, for Jarha’s family (1 Chronicles 2:34-41), and the sons of a priest (Ezra 2:61; Nehemiah 7:63). How much more would tribal affiliation be through the mother for the virgin-born case!

   As for a detailed answer, who said tribal or clan affiliation was only through the father? - nobody in the Bible. Numbers 34:14 does not show anything. Numbers 1:18-24 shows that the son of an Egyptian father and Israelite mother was not called an Israelite. People would have thought him Egyptian or half-Israelite. Leviticus 24:10 (and many other passages) only indicate that for regular Israelites that tribal affiliation was in fact through the father. But this is NO RESTRICTION ON GOD. The two biological parent cases have no bearing on the single biological parent case. Yet, even for two biological parents, there are in fact Old Testament examples of tribal lineage in fact being though the mother.

Three examples of tribal affiliation through the mother.

   In the tribe of Judah, Sheshan had no sons, only daughters. So, he gave his daughter in marriage to his Egyptian servant Jarha, and they had a son named Attai. Attai’s genealogy is given with the other Israelites in 1 Chronicles 2:34-41. Not only were the sons considered Israelites, but they were also listed under Judah.

   A second example is Jair, whose grandfather was Hezron of the tribe of Judah and the daughter of Makir, a Manassite. In 1 Chronicles 2:21-23 Jair controlled 23 towns in Gilead (in the territory of Manasseh). Yet even though Jair’s grandfather was from Judah, Jair is still called a Manassite as was his mother in Numbers 32:41 and Deuteronomy 3:14.

   A third example is Ezra 2:61 and Nehemiah 7:63, where sons of a priest who married a daughter of Barzillai were called the sons of Barzillai. See the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.1 p.213 for more info.

   Another example showing that ancestral affiliation was not only through the biological father is levirate marriage. When a husband dies before having children, the husband’s brother would marry the widow, and the first child born would be considered that of the dead first husband, even though biologically this was not the case.

   Regardless though, question seems like splitting hairs. What ethnic background was the human DNA of Jesus? 100% Jewish. There were only 12 Jewish tribes (actually 11 tribes plus 2 half-tribes). Was Jesus’ human DNA from any one tribe? Yes, from Judah. If not having a Jewish father would make him not one of the 12 tribes, then what would be Jesus’ ethnic background?

   This question seems like an avoidance of a bigger question. If Jesus were born of a virgin, sent from God to teach us, would you follow Him or not? If the choice were staying with the questioner’s Jewish culture vs. following the One True God, which would you choose? If the person would not say they would follow the One True God no matter what, then the issue is not Jesus’ DNA, but most of the Jews not being willing to follow the One True God.

   A second issue is succession to the throne. The questioner was wrong to say that Mary was not of Davidic descent; her genealogy in Luke, as well as Luke 2, Romans 1:3; and 2 Timothy 2:8 shows that Jesus (and her) were biologically from David. However, the questioner is correct in indicating that Mary’s genealogy would have no bearing on succession to the throne. For this, it was important that Jesus also be the adopted son of Joseph, who as a male from the Davidic line, would have a claim to the throne.

Matthew 1:1-17 – The legal claim to be the promised king - some brief answers

1. In Mt 1:1-17, what was the point of the genealogy of Joseph’s ancestry back to David since Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born?

A: Going back to David was important for establishing Jesus' right to be king over Israel. While Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus, Joseph was in every way the legal father of Jesus. Thus, the promises to David were fulfilled in both a legal father/son sense, as well as a biological sense through Mary’s ancestry in Luke. Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.780 raises this issue. See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.18 and the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1203-1204 for more info.

2. In Mt 1:2-17 why are there 27 generations from David to Jesus, while Lk 1:3:23-31 gives 42 generations?

A: While there are not necessarily the exact same number of generations on Joseph’s and Mary’s family tree, Matthew undoubtedly has some gaps. Since “son” can mean male descendants, there is no problem here. Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) reigned about 604 B.C., so there were 14 generations from David to Jeconiah in about 400 years, or 29 years per generation. From 604 B.C. to 4 B.C. one would expect 20 1/2 generations, and Matthew only gives 13, or 46 years per generation.

   Perhaps Matthew did not name more than 14 generations after the exile because Matthew did not know the other names, and he only wrote of what he knew. Alternately he was using three sets of fourteen names as a memory device.

   The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.69 tells us of the “coincidence” that David’s name in the Hebrew Masoretic text (dwd) adds up to 4 + 6 + 4 = 14.

3. In Mt 1:3,5,6, why the mention of four women: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Uriah's wife (Bathsheba)?

A: First of all, in the ancient world including women in genealogy down through the male line was highly unusual. While we do not know Matthew's, and God's exact reason, we can observe a number of things.

Famous: These four women were "famous" in that they were known to all Jews.

Foreigners: Rahab and Ruth were both aliens (i.e., foreigners) who joined God's people, so this highlights that Jesus was of mixed ancestry. Bathsheba was Jewish, she was married to Uriah, a Hittite.

Embarrassing: Tamar played the part of a prostitute to seduce Jacob. Rahab was a former prostitute. Bathsheba and David committed adultery, and David murder. If God can use these people in the legal ancestry (of Joseph), and all but Bathsheba in the biological ancestry (of Mary), then God can use anyone, no matter how bad they have messed up. On the other hand, Jacob was a deceiver, and Manasseh was a thoroughly wicked king, who later repented.

Curious silence: Now Matthew could have brought up three distinguished women: Sarah, Rebecca, and Rachel, but he passes over them and focuses on these instead.

   See the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.724, The Expositor's Greek New Testament vol.1 p.63, The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.66, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.18 for more info.

4. In Mt 1:5, since David’s grandmother was Ruth the Moabite, how could David be with the congregation, since Dt 23:3 says a Moabite cannot enter the congregation down to the tenth generation?

A: First what is probably not the answer, and then the answer.

Probably not the answer: Even if David being with the congregation was against Deuteronomy 23:3, the Bible still records that David was with the people and worshipped with them. People could do wrong things out of ignorance. For example, Joshua made a treaty with the Gibeonites, and that was against God’s Law. Once that was done, God wanted them to honor the treaty though. Indeed, God in his providence allowed them to make this error and used the Gibeonites later.

The answer: One can argue that David did not disobey Deuteronomy 23:3 here.

1. People traced their descent from their father’s side, not their mothers. Thus, is it possible (but not certain) that Deuteronomy 23:3 would be intended to apply to male ancestors.

2. Ruth “changed peoples”. She told Naomi that your people will be my people and your God my God. While people today can change citizenship if both they and the people of the new country agree, this was even more dramatic; God permitted her, like Rahab, to become one of the chosen of Israel.

5. In Mt 1:8, was Joram the father of Uzziah, or was he the great-great-grandfather in 1 Chr 3:11-12?

A: Actually both, given a proper understanding of how the words were used. The Jews understood Father to also mean ancestor (as in Acts 7:19; 1 Kings 15:24; 22:50; 2 Kings 15:38), just as son also meant descendent.

   King Joram was the great-great-grandfather of King Uzzah. See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.58 and When Critics Ask p.325 for more info.

6. In Mt 1:9 why was Uzziah the father of Jotham when 2 K 15:1-7 and 1 Chr 3:12 says Azariah was the father of Jotham?

A: Uzziah was another name for Azariah as 2 Kings 15:32,34 and 2 Chronicles 26:1-23; 27:2; Isaiah 1:1; 6:1; 7:1. Many kings had both a personal name and a royal name they acquired later. But for both kings and non-kings, this would not be thought abnormal by: Abram/Abraham, Sarai/Sara, Jacob/Israel, Ben-Oni/Benjamin, Zaphenath-Paneah/Joseph, Hoshea/Joshua, Gideon/Jerubbaal, Ammiel/Eliam, Bathsheba/Bath-shua, Azariah/Uzziah, Abijam/Abijah, Jehoahaz son of Josiah/Shallum, Eliakim/Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin/Jeconiah/Coniah, Zedekiah/Mattaniah, Hananiah/Shadrach, Mishael/Meshach, Azariah/Abednego, Daniel/Belteshazzar, Simon/Peter, Joseph/Barnabas, and Saul/Paul.

See When Critics Ask p.325-326 and Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.316-317 for more info.

7. In Mt 1:11,16, why does the genealogy show that Jesus descended through a cursed line of Jeconiah/Jehoiachin, as Jer 22:28-30 Jer 36:30 say? (See also 1 Chr 3:16). Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) and his father Jehoiakim were both cursed by God himself, who said that neither of these men would have any descendent on the throne of David. How could Jesus possibly be the Messiah, destined to rule forever on the throne of David, if he descended through either of these men?

A: The genealogy of Joseph in Matthew does in fact show that Joseph was descended from an accursed line. This would be a real problem if Joseph were the biological father, because Jeremiah prophesied that Jehoichin would have no descendants on the throne. However, the genealogy of Mary in Luke shows that Jesus was NOT biologically descended from Jeconiah and Jehoiakim, because Mary’s ancestors diverged from the kingly line. Looking back, we can see that David and Solomon were given slightly different promises. Only Joseph was descended from Solomon, and both Joseph and Mary were descended from David.

   By the way, in Matthew 1:16 "of whom" at least in English, sounds like it could mean of Mary, or Joseph, or both. But in Greek "of whom is specifically feminine singular, so it means that Jesus was only of Mary.

   Historically Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons in Gaul, answered this objection to Joseph’s genealogy in Matthew in Irenaeus Against Heresies book 3 ch.21.9 p.453-454, written 182-188 A.D..

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.18 and the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1204 for more info.

8. In Mt 1:17, how come 3 x 14 = 42 generations, but there are only 41 generations?

A: There are three sets of 14 names, but they are not additive, as the first list is Abraham up through and including David, and the second list is David to the exile. Now we might have a problem if Matthew had claimed there were 42 generations, but Matthew never said the sum was 42. Matthew presumably mentioned in passing three sets of 14 names as a memory device. People have also notice that the letters in the name David add up to 14.

   The first Christian writer we know of to see these three “mystic intervals” was Clement of Alexandria (193-202 A.D.) in Stromata book 1 ch.21 p.334

   See When Critics Ask p.326 and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.69 for more info.

9. In Mt 1:17, how come so many names were left out?

A: Scripture does not say, but a lot of names were omitted. For example, between Nahshon and Hezron were only two names, and the time interval was 400 years. Part of the reason could simply be that Matthew did not know the names. But he could have gotten some more names from 1 Chronicles if he had desired. Perhaps his intent was not to got lost in the details of every name, but to include enough names to show that Jesus' adopted father was indeed descended from David, and hence Jesus had a natural claim to be king of Israel. See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.1 p.64-65 for more info.

10. In Mt 1:17 and Lk 1, why do the two genealogies diverge after Solomon, but come together again in Shealtiel?

A: The skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.939 mentions this. Matthew 1:12 says Jeconiah (Jehoiachin), Shealtiel, and Zerubbabel, while Luke says Neri, Shealtiel, and Zerubbabel. The direct reason for the difference is given in 1 Chronicles 3:17-19. The royal line, which almost always passed from father to son, passed instead from Shealtiel to Zerubbabel, the son of Pedaiah, Shealtiel’s brother.

   The reason is not given, but is presumably Shealtiel did not have any sons, or at least living sons, when he died. Thus, Shealtiel likely adopted his brother’s son. Scholars think either that Pedaiah died and Shealtiel adopted Zerubbabel as an orphan, or else Shealtiel passed the royal line to Zerubbabel simply because he had no sons.

Matthew 1:18-25 – The birth of the Messiah - some brief answers

1. In Mt 1:18-19, why would Joseph consider divorcing Mary if they were not already married?

A: Joseph probably reasoned that either there would be shame on him if others thought they had sexual relations before marriage, or shame on both of them if Joseph would allow Mary to see other men. Thus, one can understand why Joseph would want to terminate the engagement.

   But why would they divorce if they were not married yet? Their customs were different from ours. A man and a woman were bonded at their engagement, though they did not have sexual relations until after the wedding. In their culture an engagement could only be officially broken by divorce.

   The one year waiting period could prove that the woman was faithful and was not pregnant with a child that was not her husband's. But when the angel appeared to Joseph, Joseph then took Mary into his home right away.

   See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1205, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.20, and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.1 p.68-69 for more info.

2. In Mt 1:18, was Mary impregnated by the Holy Ghost, or was Jesus the fruit of David’s loins in Acts 2:30?

A: The Virgin Mary was a virgin; the Bible says the Holy Spirit “overshadowed” Mary, not in a sexual way. Joseph was only the legal, adoptive father of Jesus, not the biological father. But Jesus was biologically descended from David though Mary, as Luke 3:23-37 is the genealogy of Mary. Other verses that say Jesus is a son (descendant) of David are Mt 12:23; 15:22; 20:30; 21:9,15; Mark 10:47-48; 12:35; Luke 10:41; 18:38-39; John 78:42; 2 Timothy 2:8; Revelation 5:5; 22:16.

3. In Mt 1:20; 2:12; 2:13; 2:19; 2:22; 27:19, why does Matthew mention dreams and other gospel writers do not?

A: Matthew mentions only four or five dreams:

Three or four in Jesus’ infancy: Matthew 1:20 (take Mary as your wife); 2:12 (do not go back to Herod); 2:13 (go to Egypt); 2:19 (return to Nazareth); 2:22 (do not go to Judea). Matthew 2:22 could be a separate dream, or the same dream as Matthew 2:19.

At Jesus’ trial, Pilate’s wife in Matthew 27:19.

   Mark and John do not speak of Christ’s infancy, so they would not be expected to record these dreams. Since Luke speaks nothing about the Magi and (almost) nothing about Joseph, he could not be expected to record those dreams.

   That leaves one instance in Matthew (Pilate’s wife) that is a detail not recorded in the other gospels.

   Based on this, you cannot conclude that the other writers were against recording dreams, however. In Acts 16:9, at night Paul had a vision of a man from Macedonia begging him to come and help them.

4. Does Mt 1:23 mistranslate Isa 7:14 by using the word “virgin” as the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.781 says?

A: No. Not only can the Hebrew word mean either “virgin” or “young maiden”, but Asimov on p.780 himself recognized that the Septuagint translated this word as parthenos meaning virgin. Of course, Asimov does not believe in any miracles of the Bible, so he would not choose to believe that the Isaiah would refer to a virgin.

5. The name "Emmanuel" in Matthew 1:23, where did it occur in the prophets books or Old Testament books? How is it related to Jesus? And why we don't find it in the rest of the gospels?

A: The title Emmanuel is in the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 7:14. Of all the gospel writers, Matthew is the one who emphasizes most the fulfillment of prophecy, so it is not surprising that he would mention this.

   The following eight early Christians also wrote about Isaiah 7:14 as Messianic. Justin Martyr (c.138-165 A.D.), Irenaeus of Lyons (182-188 A.D.), Tertullian (207-220 A.D.), Origen (225-253/254 A.D.), Novatian (250-257/258 A.D.), Cyprian of Carthage (c.246-258 A.D.), Athanasius of Alexandria (c.318 A.D.) and Lactantius (c.303-325 A.D.). See www.biblequery.org/history/churchhistory/WhatEarlyChristianTaught.html (or .doc) for the quotes.

6. In Mt 1:23 and Lk 1:26-35, how could Jesus, born of a virgin, be descended from David?

A: Three points to consider in the answer.

1. Jesus was not the biological son of Joseph. If he had been, Jeremiah 29:32 would be a false prophecy.

2. Jesus was the son of Joseph in the eyes of the law. Today, a man who marries a woman with a child becomes the father of the child in the eyes of the law, though he is not the biological father.

3. Jesus was the biological son of Mary, a descendant of David.

Jesus was of the house of David in the eyes of the law through Joseph, and Jesus was biologically from David through Mary.

7. In Mt 1:23, what is so key about Jesus being "Emmanuel", or God with us?

A: This is an important point of this chapter, which is not brought out as prominently in the rest of Matthew. There are two factors here.

God incarnated as a human. Jesus was Emmanuel, "God with us". In a way that nobody on earth can fully define, God choose to lower Himself down to earth and live as fully human (Hebrews 2:6,14,17), with a real human body, which had real human needs (John 19:28), and real human feelings (Luke 22:42). Jesus did not just appear to be human; rather, he was 100% human, just as human as you or me, except that Jesus was without sin (Hebrews 4:15). Yet, on earth, at the same time, Jesus was still 100% God. Jesus could be tempted, yet would never sin (Hebrews 4:15, Matthew 4:3-12; Mark 1:13; Luke 4:2-13). As The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.865 says, Jesus was "deity in a diaper".

Jesus lives within us. Jesus is even now Emmanuel, "God with us". Through the agency of the Holy Spirit, Christ lives in us. God not only tells us what to do and say, but Philippians 2:13 says it is God who works in us. When we came to Christ, God did not pat us on the back and us "good job so far, you are on your own now." Rather it is the start of a relationship closer than even a marriage relationship, forever with the church's bridegroom, Christ.

8. In Mt 1:25, since Isaiah said He would be called Emmanuel, why did they name Him Jesus?

A: "Jesus" in Hebrew is the same as Joshua, which means, "the LORD saves". Jesus is an appropriate name, but they (and we) call Jesus God with us. A Chinese Christian friend of mine was concerned about this. He had both a Chinese name and an English name. So, I told him his mother named him the Chinese name, but he is called the English name in America. It is not rare for a person to have two names, or a name and a title.

9. In Mt 1:25, did Mary have any other children?

A: The last phrase of this verse would be both meaningless and misleading if Joseph and Mary never had intimate relations.

   In addition to this verse, Matthew 12:46; 13:55-56; Mark 6:3; John 7:3-5; Acts 1:14; 1 Corinthians 9:5; Galatians 1:19; and (implied) Jude 1 also record that Jesus had brothers. Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (318 A.D.) 2:23 and 3:20 also says that Jesus’ four brothers were James (called the Just), Joses (or Joseph), Judas, and Simon.

   One Catholic answer is that Joseph had children by a prior marriage, but not Mary. However, there is no evidence from church history that Joseph was married before, or that any of Jesus’ brothers were not by Mary and Joseph. If Jesus had an older half-brother through Joseph, then the older half-brother would have the right to the throne, not Jesus. See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.299 for more info.

   Another Catholic answer is that “brothers” in Mediterranean cultures could mean cousins and close relatives of similar age, and not just immediate brothers. However, applying what might be true for later Italians and other peoples to the Israelites is problematic.

   After the Bible, the earliest known Christian writers to say Mary had children were Hegesippus (170-180 A.D.) Origen (a strange teacher) (225-253/254 A.D.), and Eusebius of Caesarea (318-325 A.D.). Hegesippus gives us an interesting detail: he says that mentions a brother of Jesus named Judas, who “bore for the faith in Christ in the time of Domitian” Five Books of Commentaries on the Acts of the Church section 1 p.764. Eusebius  of Caesarea (318-325 A.D.) says that Jesus’ four brothers were James (called the Just), Joses (or Joseph), Judas, and Simon. Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History 2:23; 3:20. After Nicea Helvidius/Helvetius (before 383 A.D.) also taught that.

   After the Bible, the earliest known Christian writers to say Mary was ever a virgin, or similar, were Hippolytus (225-235/236 A.D.), Peter of Alexandria (306,285-311 A.D.), and implied in Origen (a strange teacher (225-253/254 A.D.) Here is what Origen in 246-248 A.D. says: “Some say, basing it on a tradition in the Gospel according to Peter as it is entitled or “The Book of James” that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honour of Mary in virginity to the end,… And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the first-fruit among men of the purity which consists in chastity, and Mary among women; for it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the first-fruit of virginity.” Origen’s Commentary on Matthew book 10 ch.17 p.424

After Nicea, Athanasius (331 A.D.), Ambrose of Milan (340-397 A.D.) and Jerome (383 A.D.) taught that Mary was always a virgin. However, Ambrose was clear that Jesus needed no assistance to mediate between man and God, and Mary was not to be adored (On the Holy Spirit book 3 ch.11 no.80 381 A.D.). He said, “And let no one divert this to the Virgin Mary; Mary was the temple of God, not the God of the temple. And therefore He alone is to be worshipped Who was working in His temple.”

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.81 and the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1206 for more info.

Matthew 2:1-12 – The Star and the Magi - some brief answers

1. In Mt 2:1-4,9-12, exactly how many magi were there?

A: Scripture never says. People often think three simply because of the song “We Three Kings of Orient Are”, and there were three gifts, but it could have been any number of magi. See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.865, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.726, The New Unger's Bible Dictionary p.799, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.21 for essentially the same answer.

   The idea that there were three kings goes back to Origen (225-253/254 A.D., but most of the other traditions made up about the Magi came in the sixth century and later. Ideas that their names were Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, or that they were from Ethiopia, or one was from each race of people, were all later inventions. If they were "Magi", a tribe of Zoroastrian priests, then they would likely be from Persia (modern-day Iran) or Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq). However, if Magi simply meant a religious official, then they could be from other places too.

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.85, The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.73, and Ulrich Luz's Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.140 for more info.

2. In Mt 2:1, when did the Magi come?

A: Scripture only indicates it was sometimes after the birth. Jesus was born in a stable (which could have been a cave). But by the time the Magi came in Matthew 2:11, they were in a house. Matthew uses the term "young child" paidion, instead of the word "infant" brephos. Since Herod killed all the baby boys in Bethlehem two years or younger, this was before Herod figured out that the Magi were not going to come back to him. So, it could have been months or even a year or so after the birth. See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.20 for more info.

   As a side note, this practice of bringing gifts for a king was not unheard of. When Nero was emperor of Rome, King Tiridates of Armenia came to Rome in 66 A.D. bearing gifts for Nero. See Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.131 for more info.

3. In Mt 2:1-4,9-12, who were the magi?

A: The Magi were Mideastern religious men who practiced astrology. While the Bible does not specify that there were three Magi, there are three views of who the “Christmas magi” were.

Originally, as the Levites were a tribe of priests among the Israelites, the later Magi were the tribe of priests among the Medes according to Herodotus. This is analogous to the Levites being a tribe of priests among the Israelites. The Magi offered sacrifices before fires, interpreted dreams, and practiced astrology. While we get the English word “magician” from “Magi”, except for a passage in Herodotus there is no evidence that they practiced magic. The Medes were polytheistic (not Zoroastrian). When Daniel 5:11 speaks of Magi, it is these Magi.

Later, after a Magi who was called “false Bardiya” took control of the Persian throne for seven months in 522 B.C., King Cambyses replaced many of the Median Magi with Persian Magi. The Persian Magi were Zoroastrians. Zoroastrians believed in equal and opposite divine beings, one good and represented by light and one evil and represented by darkness. During and after the fourth century B.C., Zoroastrians believed in resurrection The Greeks generally said the Magi were Zoroastrians. Clement of Alexandria believed the Magi who came to Bethlehem were Zoroastrians. The skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.788 mentions only these as the Magi.

By the time of Christ, the Greeks also called Chaldeans who practiced astrology as Magi too. Many astrologers traveled west to teach, including the Babylonian Berossus, who taught on the Greek island of Cos after 281 B.C. Tacitus says the magi practiced sorcery, and Pliny claims magic started with Zoroaster. The early church writer Origen, among his many criticisms of the heretic Celsus, said Celsus failed to distinguish between the Magi and the Chaldeans in Origen Against Celsus book 1 ch.58 p.422. The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.612 mentions these as the Magi.

Regardless of the precise Mideastern origin of the “Christmas Magi”, the Magi practiced astrology. See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1067-1068, and especially the chapter on the Magi in Persia and the Bible p.467-491.

4. In Mt 2:2, were any other rulers claimed to have heavenly signs?

A: A comet was said to have appeared at the time of the birth of Nero (Dec. 15, 37 A.D.) according to Suetonius (de Divinatione 1.47)  and king Mithridates of Pontus (135 B.C.). Comets visible to the naked eye occur about 2 to 5 times per century. Haley's comet appears every 75 years, including 87 B.C and 12/11 B.C.. See Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.131 and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.83 for more info.

5. In Mt 2:2, what were some heavenly "signs" around this time?

A: Here are some naturally occurring phenomena.

Haley's comet came 12/11 B.C. (Lagrange mentioned this, but this is too early to be relevant.)

A conjunction of the plants Jupiter (representing royalty) and Saturn (representing the Jews) was in 7/6 B.C. Kepler (before 1630 A.D.) was the first to mention this, though he preferred the supernova theory.

A comet or nova mentioned by Chinese astronomers in 5/4 B.C.

   However, what appeared to be a star went ahead of them and stopped over the house in Matthew 2:9-10. While the Greek could just mean the town, not the house, according to The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.88, a planetary conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, and a comet, cannot do that. Regardless of whether or not they initially noticed a conjunction or comet, by the time they came to Palestine an angel was supernaturally using some light to guide them.

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.85 and Ulrich Luz Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.132 for more info.

6. In Mt 2:6 why does it say, “not small”, since Mic 5:2 says “small” in the Masoretic text and “very small” in the Septuagint?

A: The scribes said this, and although they could have just been mistaken, particularly if they were translating verbally, their meaning was correct here. Micah 5:2 says, “You, Bethlehem Ephratha, being least among the thousands of Judah you, He shall come forth to Me, to become ruler in Israel…” (Green’s Literal Translation) The point of Micah 5:2 is that though Bethlehem was small in size, it will become great in importance. So, the teachers of the law were not mistaken, in that Bethlehem will have a great importance, despite its small size.

   See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.318-319 and When Critics Ask p.327 for complementary answers.

7. In Mt 2:6 why does it say, “governors/rulers”, since Mic 5:2 says “thousands” in the Masoretic text and the Septuagint?

A: Four points to consider in the answer.

1) Micah 5:2 says, “You, Bethlehem Ephratha, being least among the thousands of Judah you, He shall come forth to Me, to become ruler in Israel…” (Green’s Literal Translation) The point is that though Bethlehem was small in size, it will become great in importance.

2) The Hebrew word for “thousands” (plural) in Micah 5:2 is ‘alapim. The Greek equivalent is chiliasin. The Hebrew word for governors/rulers (plural) is ‘allupe. The Greek equivalent is hegemosin. While the Greek words are totally different, the Hebrew words are almost the same except for the vowels. The Old Testament was originally written with no vowels; they were only added about 700 A.D. This indicates they were not reading from the Greek Septuagint, but either the Hebrew, Aramaic, or possibly another Greek translation.

3) This was spoken by the priests and teachers of the law. They could have made a mistake, or they could have been quoting to Herod a Greek translation besides the Septuagint. More likely though, they could have been translating from Hebrew to Aramaic or Greek verbally as they were going along.

4) Actually though, the priests and teachers of the law did not make a mistake in conveying the meaning: small Bethlehem is NOT least in importance for the ruler who will come from there.

   See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.318-319, The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.88, and The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.72 for complementary answers.

8. In Mt 2:8,12, did God command the wise men to fail to keep their word to Herod, since they were told not to return to Herod?

A: Herod was concerned, as he was never in line to be the king in the first place. His father was an Edomite, his mother was an Arabian, and he was only a convert to Judaism. When he became king in 40 B.C., it took three years and Roman help to crush the revolts against him. When Herod asked the magi to return to him, Herod had apparently already had a plan to destroy this king, and he tried to get the Magi involved in his evil plan. It probably did not occur to Herod that while he was mad at the Magi for tricking him, he had first tried to trick the magi by saying he wanted to worship Jesus too. By the way, Bethlehem was only 5 miles (9 km) south-southeast of Jerusalem. As for the Magi, as the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1207 says, "No one who meets Christ with a sincere heart ever returns the same way."

   The tense of the question does not mean "where is he who eventually will become the king of the Jews", but rather "where is he who is now the rightful king of the Jews" according to The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.86.

   Three points to consider in the answer.

1. Matthew 2 never says the Magi promised Herod they would return.

2. Matthew 2 never says the Magi told Herod they intended to return. Even if they did, after the dream, their intention changed.

3. Even if they would have promised Herod, a promise should not necessarily be kept if:

3a) It was promised under deceitful conditions,

3b) You promise something that is directly contrary to God’s will,

3c) Keeping your promise means an innocent person will die.

For example, let’s if a man asks you to call him when a woman leaves her house because he says he wants to leave flowers on her doorstep, and you promise to do so. Later you find out that the man has robbed a number of houses and intends to rob her house. When you see the woman leave the house, should you call the robber, because that is what you promised? No!

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.21-22, the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1207, Ulrich Luz's Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.136, The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.84, and The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.69 for more info.

9. In Mt 2:11, since astrology is wrong, why did the Magi follow the star?

A: First let’s learn a bit about the Magi, and then see what this teaches us about God.

The Magi were a tribe of Median priests, somewhat like the Israelite priests came from Levi. You can read more about the Magi throughout the excellent book, Persia and the Bible. The Magi were known to practice astrology.

Prophecy of a star coming out of Judah goes all the way back to Balaam in Numbers 24:17.

Astrology is against the Bible: The Magi most likely did not know that the Old Testament says astrology was wrong (Lev 19:26; 22:27; Dt 18:11-14; 2 Ki 17:16; 21:3,5; 2 Chr 33:3-6). On the other hand, the star did not predict Christ’s coming, it announced it.

   Here is what the early church writer Tertullian (198-220 A.D.) wrote about astrologers in On Idolatry ch.9 (vol.3) p.66. “You know nothing, astrologer, if you know not that you should be a Christian. If you did know it, you ought to have known this also, that you should have nothing more to do with that profession of yours which, of itself, fore-chants the climacteries of others, and might instruct you of its own danger. There is no part nor lot for you in that system of yours. He cannot hope the kingdom of the heavens, whose finger or wand abuses the heaven.”

God never said He was restricted to using only good means to draw people to Himself. Sometimes God uses truly wicked means, such as the Babylonian army (Habakkuk 1:6,13). God can use disease, evil people, and even unintentional sin (as with the Magi) to draw people to Himself.

Most strange of all, is that God has used deliberate, willful sin by believers to rescue those same believers. You can read all about this in the narrative of Joseph and his brothers, in Genesis 37 and 50, and especially Genesis 50:20. As a matter of fact, God can work all things together for good (Romans 8:28) and for His purposes (Ephesians 1:11)

In conclusion, as God using kidnapping of Joseph for his purposes does not justify kidnapping, God using astrology for his purposes does not justify astrology.

   See the Complete Book of Bible Answers p.55 Hard Sayings of the Bible p.353-354, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.317-318, When Critics Ask p.326-327, and When Cultists Ask p.93 for complementary answers.

10. In Mt 2:11, is there any significance in the gifts?

A: The gifts were worth a lot of money, and that would be important to support them in Egypt for two years. But beyond that, the Bible does not give any significance. Some have speculated that the gold is appropriate because it represents royalty. Frankincense was a part of the formula for incense that the priests used. Myrrh is a bitter substance, valuable in preparing bodies for burial. There are other views too. See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.89 and Ulrich Luz's Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.138 for more info.

Matthew 2:13-23 – The Flight to Egypt - some brief answers

1. In Mt 2:15 and Hos 11:1, how is “out of Egypt I called my son” a prophecy of Christ?

A: Hosea 11:1 was first used of the Israelite people. Matthew is using not only Hosea 11:1, but many other Old Testament verses to show that the life of Christ paralleled that of the Israelite people (except without the sin.) Matthew is writing to Jews well-versed in the Old Testament, and Matthew apparently is using what Jewish scholars of that time would recognize as Midrashic techniques. Jewish Midrashic interpretation to ferret out the meaning and application behind each word.

   As an aside, Philo says there were about a million Jews living in Egypt in his time, around 40 A.D.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.22, the New International Bible Commentary p.1122, and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.90,91-92 for more info.

2. In Mt 2:16, is there any other account of King Herod the Great slaughtering children in Bethlehem?

A: Bethlehem was a small town; this could have been only a few dozen babies killed, and that was small compared to other executions Herod was more famous for.

   There are many things that we would not know happened, or how they happened, except with a single historical record. For example, we have no record of the Romans conquering Gaul, or how they conquered Gaul – except for a single source, the writings of Julius Caesar. Likewise, there are no non-Christian accounts that Jesus was crucified either; only mentioning in passing that Christ was executed (i.e., suffered the extreme penalty).

   In this case, apart from the Bible, other writers who mention Herod the Great slaughtering the little children prior to Nicea are:

Justin Martyr in Dialogue with Trypho ch.78 p.238 (c.c.138-165 A.D.) mentions that Magi visiting Herod, and Herod massacring all the children in Bethlehem.

Irenaeus Against Heresies book 3 ch.16.4 p.442 (182-188 A.D.) says that [God] “removed those children belonging to the house of David, whose happy lot it was to have been born at that time, that He might send them on before into His kingdom”

Origen (225-254 A.D.) says that Herod slew all the infants in Bethlehem and surrounding areas hoping to kill the King of the Jews. Against Celsus book 1 ch.61 p.423

Cyprian of Carthage (c.246-258 A.D.) (implied, no mention of Herod) mentions that at Christ’s birth infants two years old and under were killed for Christ. Letter 55 ch.6 p.349

Peter of Alexandria (306,285-311 A.D.) mentions the infants Herod slaughtered because of Christ. Canonical Epistle Canon 13 p.277

After 325 A.D.

Hegemonius (4th century) says that at the time of Jesus Herod killed “every [infant] male among the Jews.” The Disputation with Manes ch.44 p.220

In summary, “It is true that Josephus, our informant about Jewish history, says nothing about the massacre of the innocents; and it is also true that the passages in the works of historians that actually mention this event are so late and so likely to have been derived from the Gospel of Matthew as to possess little value. But the argument from silence is in this case altogether devoid of weight. No doubt, from our point of view, the massacre of young children would be a particularly atrocious form of murder, which would have to be mentioned in any detailed account of current events — even, perhaps, in Chicago! But in ancient times, when the exposure of infants was a common practice, which is alluded to, for example, in one of the non-literary papyri, in the most casual possible manner as an ordinary feature of the life of that day,[1] and the murder of children would probably not be regarded with any special horror. Moreover, we ought not to exaggerate the number of the infants who would be killed. If Bethlehem was a small village, as it probably was, then the number of male children in it under two years of age would not exceed perhaps twenty or thirty. In the orgies of blood and cruelty that marked the closing years of Herod's reign, the removal of a score of children in an obscure village might well escape the notice of our one historian. But even if Josephus knew of the incident, and even if he thought it in itself worthy of remark, there was in this case a special reason for his silence. The incident involved Jewish Messianic hopes; and without doubt Josephus purposely avoided the mention of such things in the history that he wrote for Roman readers. There is no reason, therefore, for supposing that if the massacre of the innocents had really happened Josephus would necessarily have included it in his historical work.

   But something more positive needs also to be said. Although the massacre of the innocents is not directly attested by secular history, it is exactly in accord with what we know of the character of Herod in his declining years. Herod the Great was an able monarch, but in the last years of his reign he entered upon a career of cruelty that reached the verge of madness. His actions in putting to death his own children and his beloved wife, and his plan (interrupted only by his death) of butchering all the leading citizens of Jerusalem in the theatre, possess just exactly that quality of wild and useless bloodthirstiness which appears in the massacre of the innocents at Bethlehem. Never was a story more completely in character than this. In general, we may say that the difficulty which has been found in the silence of secular history about the bloody deed at Bethlehem amounts to nothing at all.” J. Greshem Machen, The Virgin Birth of Christ ch.10 p.239

   See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1208 and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.94 for more info.

3. In Mt 2:16, apart from killing the babies in Bethlehem, was Herod the Great ever cruel to anyone else?

A: Yes. Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.799 says it is hard to believe Herod’s killing ever happened. However, as the allegedly more civilized 20th century has seen Pol Pot of Cambodia, Idi Amin of Uganda, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Tse-Tung, it is not hard to believe Herod would do this.

   See the previous question for six pre-Nicene writers who wrote of Herod slaughtering the infants. By the way, do not confuse Herod (the Great) who ruled when Jesus was born with Herod (Antipas) whom Jesus say right before He was crucified.

   Herod the Great’s character was such that he killed many in the 36 years of his reign. Herod executed or had assassinated his wife Mariamne, and two husbands of his sister Salome. Herod had his brother-in-law drowned in the Jordan, and his mother-in-law Alexandra killed. He killed Hyrcanus, the last of the Hasmonean Dynasty. He killed many Pharisees and many noble families. The Jewish rabbis Jehuda ben Saripha and Mattathias ben Margoloth were burned alive. Herod had his own sons Alexander and Aristobulus killed. He arranged to have hundreds of Jewish leaders killed on the day of his death. Since Herod, like most Jews, did not eat pork, this prompted the Roman Emperor to quip that he would rather be Herod’s sow (female pig) than his son. In Greek, the word "sow" is huos and the word "son" is huios. Five days before Herod died, he had his son Antipater killed. (Three younger sons, Archelaus, Herod Antipas, and Philip, survived him). There is no question that Herod had the lack of moral fiber to kill the infants. Given all the other “news” Herod produced, killing infants in a small town might seem less newsworthy.

   After Herod died in 4 B.C., there was a revolt, and Archelaus sent troops to Jerusalem and killed 3,000 in one day. When Archelaus and Herod Antipas went to Rome, Sabinus, an agent of the Imperial Treasury came to audit the taxes. He took 400 talents out of the Temple Treasury. There was a revolt in 9 A.D., and Syrian troops under Quintilius Varus put that down.

   Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews book 17 ch.213 [ix.3] and The Bible as History p.358 says there was an eclipse of the moon when Herod the Great died, which would place the death on March 12/13, 4 B.C.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.23 and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.84 for more info.

4. In Mt 2:16, were other kings as bad as Herod?

A: Some could say that Herod was no different than many people today; he had no room for any king but him, and he would use all means at his disposal to ensure that, regardless of who else got hurt.

   Some kings were better than others, but some were very evil. For example, the Parthian king Phraates IV murdered his father Orodes II in 37 B.C. The Romans sent him an Italian slave girl named Musa. Phraates had a son by her, Phraataces (= Phraates V). Musa poisoned her husband Phraates IV in 2 B.C. She then married her own son in 2 A.D.. Phraates V was exiled in 4 A.D. This is according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1972.

5. In Mt 2:18, how is Jeremiah’s prophecy about Rachel fulfilled in Jesus?

A: In Genesis 35:16-19, Rachel died giving birth to Benjamin. At the time Jeremiah wrote these words about Rachel the wife of Jacob, she had already been dead for over 1,000 years. Jeremiah’s words do not have two meanings but rather only one meaning with two fulfillments plus a third fulfillment back in Genesis. Jeremiah’s meaning is that just as Rachel would be sorrowful over the death and enslavement of her offspring, be it by Egyptians or Babylonians, Rachel would be sorrowful over the death of her offspring by Herod’s hand. In Jeremiah’s time, the prophet repeated the word to prophesy the same feelings of grief over the loss of the Jews being exiled to Babylonia, near Rachel’s tomb.

   Matthew likewise uses the same words to show the loss over the death of the baby boys of Bethlehem, which was near Rachel’s tomb.

   If a skeptic has a problem with Matthew using Jeremiah’s words, he might have an equal problem with Jeremiah using words from Genesis. The crux of the problem is this: just as Jews in Jeremiah’s time understood the interpretation by saying the captivity would relate to Rachel’s sorrow in Genesis, Jews in Jesus’ day would understand this type of Midrashic interpretation Matthew used.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.866-867, The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.91-92, and The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.75-76 for more info.

6. In Mt 2:22, since sons of Herod the Great reigned in both Judea and Galilee, why would Joseph decide to go to Galilee over Judea?

A: The skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.800 provides two helpful observations here.

1. Archelaus, who ruled as a king in Judea starting in 4 B.C., might have heard about Jesus, an infant king and been anxious to kill Him too. Herod Antipas, who was a tetrarch of Galilee, might have had a different attitude.

2. Asimov points out that Archelaus was so antagonistic that Jews and Samaritans, enemies of each other, united in their appeal to Rome to remove Archelaus. When Herod died, Archelaus only ruled 10 years. On the other hand, Herod Antipas ruled peacefully in Galilee for over 40 years.

However, there is a far more obvious reason in Luke 2:39. Joseph was from Nazareth, not Bethlehem. Not only was Joseph going to the land of the milder ruler, but Joseph was also simply returning to where he was from.

7. In Mt 2:23, archaeologically, is it true there is no evidence of a town of Nazareth, as an atheist claimed?

A: No. Atheist Frank Zindler claimed this in an article “Where Jesus Never Walked”, according to The Case for Christ p.102 (p.137-138 in paperback). The Talmud mentioned 63 other Galilean towns (but not Nazareth), and Josephus mentioned 45 other towns in Galilee (but not Nazareth). Nazareth is mentioned at the beginning of the 4th century A.D., and in Jewish literature starting about the 7the century A.D.

   However, archaeologists have found remains at Nazareth going back to 900 A.D. (after Solomon started reigning) and going up through Greek Roman and Byzantine periods. In 1962 an inscription was found at Caesarea about the rotation of priests. The inscription has preserved: ". . . Mamliah . . . Nazareth . . . Akhlah . . . Migdal [Magdala]" The Case of Christ p.103 mentions that after Jerusalem in 70 A.D., archaeologist found an Aramaic list of priests who were relocated, and one of them was recorded as having moved to Nazareth. First century Tombs have been discovered just outside of Nazareth. Finally, pre-Christian remains have been found in 1955 under the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth today.

   Nazareth was also looked down upon because, according to The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.23, Nazareth housed the Roman garrison for the northern parts of Galilee.

   See https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1975/12/nazareth-attested-in-caesarea-fragments and the New International Bible Commentary p.1123 for more info.

8. In Mt 2:23, according to archaeologists, just how large was Nazareth?

A: According to The Case for Christ p.103-104, Nazareth was a very insignificant town. It was about 60 acres, with a maximum population of about 480 at the time Jesus was born.

9. In Mt 2:23 where is it prophesied that Jesus would be called a Nazarene?

A: First we will give the answer of the early church writer Tertullian (which is probably incorrect) and then the most likely answer.

Lamentations 4:7 (Septuagint) Tertullian in 207 A.D. answered this in his work, Against Marcion book 4 chapter 7. While the Masoretic text of Lamentations 4:7 says, “her princes were whiter than snow”, the Septuagint says, “her Nazirites were whiter than snow”. Tertullian mentions this as meaning both “Nazirites” (those who take a vow for God to abstain from alcohol, dead bodies, and other uncleanness), and “Nazarenes”, those who come from Nazareth.

   Tertullian said, “The Christ of the Creator had to be called a Nazarene according to prophecy; whence the Jews also designate us, on that very account, Nazarenes after Him. For we are they of whom it is written, ‘Her Nazirites were whiter than snow;’”

The Branch: The Messiah is referred to as “the branch” in Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5, 33:15; and probably Zechariah 3:8; 6:12. The consonants in the word “branch” are identical to those in “Nazarene”, and the Hebrew Old Testament was originally written without vowels. In addition, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.23 mentions that “branch” carried the idea of an insignificant beginning, and the Pharisees reaction showed that Nazareth had the same connotation.

   See When Critics Ask p.328 and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.97 for more info.

10. Was Mt 2:23 false to claim Jesus being from Nazareth fulfilled the Old Testament (Isa 11:1, Zech 6:12 and other passages), as the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.801-802 says?

A: Not at all. First here is what Asimov says, and then the answer.

   The skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.801-802 mentions that “Matthew may see a similarity here to ‘Nazarene’. (Actually, the two words are identical in Hebrew since the vowels were not written.) Asimov p.802 says “that Matthew “is indulging in, at best, a play on words, and is not referring to any actual prophecy of the Messiah being an inhabitant of Nazareth.”

The answer is that the Old Testament says the Messiah would be called the “branch” without specifying one or more reasons why. Matthew 2:22 does not restrict Jesus from also being God’s “branch” from which His church would grow.

Matthew 3 – John the Baptist and Jesus' Baptism - some brief answers

1. In Mt 3:1-4, how would they think of the wilderness?

A: This was a dry, arid place, but not like the Sahara Desert. You could not grow crops without extensive irrigation, but you could raise sheep and goats if there were places you could water them. This was not a place of comfort and excitement, but empty, lonely places of quiet away from civilization. The Israelites were in the Wilderness as they prepared the next generation to enter the Promised Land. Paul was in the wilderness in Arabia prior to starting his ministry.

   Today sometimes God takes believers to the wilderness. It is not a place of excitement but quietness. It might not be a place of active ministry, though in John's case it was a place of ministry, and for the people a place of repentance and dedication. It can be a place of preparation.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.867 for more info.

2. In Mt 3:4 and Mk 1:6, were the locusts John the Baptist ate clean or unclean food?

A: Some have claimed it was a locust tree and not insects, but there are no Biblical manuscripts or pre-Nicene Christian writings that say this. There were both clean and unclean locusts, and the Gospels do not specifically say. However, we can assume the John, being an obedient Jew, ate the clean variety. Clean animals included “hoppers” with wings with joint legs, including locust and grasshoppers, according to Leviticus 11:21-22 and Deuteronomy 14:21. Unclean animals included “flyers” according to Numbers 11:20,23 and Deuteronomy 14:19. Even today, poorer people would remove kill clean locusts, removed the wings and legs, and boil and eat them.

   See The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.80 for more info.

3. In Mt 3:6, why did John baptize others?

A: It was common that a person would baptize themselves, in a special basin for that purpose, when they converted to Judaism. But this is the earliest that we hear of somebody baptizing someone else. In the Old Testament sprinkling water for purification is mentioned in Ezekiel 36:25-27 and pouring out God's Spirit is mentioned in Ezekiel 39:29 and Joel 2:28.

   John said he baptized for repentance, to turn people back to God and make a way for the Messiah. When an earthly king was going to visit a far-off city in his realm, road-workers would go out months before and fix up the road. In a similar way, John was there to fix the path in people's hearts for when the Messiah would come.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.24 and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.9 p.286 for more info.

4. In Mt 3:7-9, why did John speak so harshly to the Pharisees and Sadducees?

A: John was calling people to repentance, to confess and leave their old way of doing things. Though the Pharisees and Sadducees came, he knew most of them were not coming for that purpose. At worst, they were coming to investigate an eccentric teacher and perhaps to find reason to get rid of him. Even at best, they were looking at picking up a few pointers to add to their existing way. John is not saying they just need to add to their knowledge; they need to repent and turn away from their reliance on a place, traditions, their organizations, or their places within their organizations. Before a wildfire snakes will try to flee; it is hard for them to get far though. It is like fleeing from God's wrath without repentance. But John did not say they could not stay and listen. If Pharisees and Sadducees were sincere in wanting to repent, they could choose to be baptized too.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.867-868, The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.82-83, and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.103 for more info.

5. In Mt 3:9, why did John use the phrase "do not say to yourselves", and how do some lie to themselves today?

A: John is addressing a lie, but who is doing the lying? Demons can lie to us, and other people can lie to us, but in addition to that, we often have lies that we tell ourselves. It is still a lie, even if we are the only one hearing the lie. We can lie by saying "that sin is not so bad", or "God understands my staying here" when God is calling us to repent and move. Others are "there is always plenty of time" or "I'm basically a good person, so I don't need to change."

6. In Mt 3:9, how could God raise up children of Abraham out of stones if He wanted?

A: God Almighty can do anything, even turn inanimate stones into children with copies of Abraham’s genes. Also, there is a play on words here. In both Hebrew and Aramaic, the word for "stones" is very similar to the word for "children".

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.103 for more info.

7. In Mt 3:10, what was the point of John the Baptist mentioning the axe is laid at the root of the tree?

A: Some things in life are irreversible, such as cutting down a tree. After you start, you cannot undo what has been started. Likewise, this was their last chance before being cut off. Their time was up.

8. In Mt 3:11, how does John's admission that he is not giving the complete picture apply to our witnessing?

A: John was a necessary forerunner, to turn the people back to God before Jesus came. John did not want the people to believe his words and think that is all they have to do. No, John was just the "appetizer" and Jesus was the "main course". Even then there are a few people in history who ignored John's words here. These people are in the Mandaean religion, believed by marsh Arabs in southern Iraq. They believe John the Baptist was from God, but that Jesus was not.

   Today we need to share the gospel with someone where they are at. If they do not believe God exists, or that there is only One God, we need to focus on that. Perhaps sharing other points, that we are all sinners, that Jesus died on the cross for our sins, and that we need to accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior come later. But when we have to postpone sharing part of the gospel, either due to time or the place spiritually the person is in, we should tell them that what we said is not the whole story; there is more to come.

9. In Mt 3:11, how does Jesus baptize Christians with the Holy Ghost and with fire?

A: John's message reminds us of Joel  2:28-29 promising the Holy Spirit, and the purification mentioned in Malachi 3:2-5. Believers are baptized with the Holy Spirit when they first believe in Christ. While the modern phrase “baptism by fire” means a difficult ordeal, that is not the meaning here, because it is Jesus, not persecutors doing the baptizing, and it is with fire, not by fire.

There are three views as to what “fire” means.

(unlikely) A second baptism by the Holy Spirit: There is only one preposition, i.e., it says “by the Holy Spirit and fire” not “by the Holy Spirit and by fire. So, this probably does not refer to a second event.

(unlikely) Pentecost: The apostles had a flame appear on their heads when they preached during Pentecost, and this interpretation would mean John the Baptist was prophesying Pentecost. The Treatise on Rebaptism (c.250-258 A.D.) ch.2 p.668 teaches this view. The NIV Study Bible p.1446 says, “Demonstrated in a dramatic way at Pentecost (Ac 1:5,8; 2:1-13; 11:16), though here ‘fire’ may refer to judgment to come (see v.12).” But it likely does not refer to Pentecost for the same reason it did not refer to the first. The Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1211 adds this is unlikely because fire is equated with judgment in the next verse.

(unlikely) Cleansing work of the Holy Spirit: The New Geneva Study Bible p.1508 and the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.727 hold to this view. Origen (225-254 A.D.) also held this view in Commentary on John book 6 ch.16-17 p.366-367. However, this is unlikely as the chaff is burned with unquenchable fire in Matthew 3:12. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.104-105 says it is this view, because the single preposition in Greek would indicate not two baptisms (Spirit for believers and fire of judgment for unbelievers) but just one baptism (Spirit and cleansing fire)

(unlikely) Fire of judgment for a Christian’s work was the interpretation of Basil of Cappadocia (357-378/379 A.D.) in On the Spirit ch.15.36 p.22.

Hellfire for individuals who reject Jesus: See Today’s Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.150-152 for the view that this means Jesus will baptize believers with the Holy Spirit, and those who reject Jesus with the fire of judgment. John Chrysostom (died 407 A.D.) taught this view in Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew Homily 11 ch.6-7 p.71-72, emphasizing the continuity with John’s other warnings on fire. The Expositor’s Greek New Testament vol.1 p.84 says that John focused on three things: water, wind/spirit, and fire. John baptized with water, the Messiah would baptize believers with the Spirit, and a baptism of fire would destroy in judgment those not involved with the water and Spirit. Irenaeus of Lyons (182-188 A.D.) uses this verse to speak of God’s judgment of unbelievers in Irenaeus Against Heresies book 4 ch.4.3 p.466. Tertullian (198-220 A.D.) says that baptism with water is unto salvation, and pretended and weak faith is baptized with fire, unto judgment (On Baptism ch.10 p.674).

Endtimes fire of judgment when Jesus returns. The Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1211 holds to this view.

Multiple meanings: The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.25 says this refers to both judging and cleansing of believers. Theodotus the probable Montanist p.124 (c.240 A.D.) says that fire is simply the destroying element, cleansing away evil in believers, and (he implies) destroying others.

Not specified: The following quoted this verse but did not mention a particular view.

Justin Martyr (c.138-165 A.D.) in Dialogue with Trypho the Jew ch.49 p.219

Hippolytus (222-234/5 A.D.) in The Discourse on the Holy Theophany ch.3 p.235

Cyprian of Carthage (c.246-258 A.D.) in The Treatises of Cyprian Treatise 12 ch.1.12 p.511

Augustine of Hippo (388-430 A.D.) discusses this verse but does not mention a particular view (Harmony of the Gospels book 2 ch.12.26 p.117).

   See NET Bible footnote on Matthew 3:11 for more on the different views.

10. In Mt 3:12, how does winnowing work?

A: When you harvest wheat, most of what you harvest is inedible. You have the good seed surrounded by the husk, which is attached to the stalk. First you have threshing, where oxen step on the wheat to separate the seeds, which are denser, from everything else. Then you might have a pitchfork, or a winnowing shovel, also called a winnowing fan, to throw the mixture in the air so that the wind would blow the inedible chaff away from the edible seeds.

   The picture here is that harvesting the wheat give you a great amount of material, but only a small fraction of it is actually useful. Yes, cutting the wheat stocks is both important and time-consuming, but separating the wheat from the chaff is just as important and time-consuming. Getting people to have a positive response to the gospel message is important, but that is at most only half the job of making disciples of all nations.

   See The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.84, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.868, and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.105 for more info.

11. In Mt 3:14, why would Jesus want to get baptized and why would John want to stop Jesus?

A: Of course, Jesus had no sin to repent of, but Jesus identified with us in all ways. As we follow Jesus' example, Jesus was baptized. Jesus also validated John's ministry here.

   But let's look again at these verses from John's perspective. John's guiding purpose in life was to preach repentance, and for people to make a public commitment to repent and follow God by water baptism. John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth, and John knew that his understanding was correct. He knew that Jesus was the sinless Messiah. So, John was perplexed with Jesus wanting to be baptized.

   John's viewpoint was correct, except that it was over-simplified. John saw that Jesus did not need to repent and found it absurd that the mere forerunner should baptized the Messiah Himself. Of themselves, John had valid points. But what John did not see was that in order to fulfill all righteousness, Jesus identified with us in every way. Jesus was greater than John the Baptist; Jesus did not deny that. But Jesus humbled himself, and came to serve, so in verse 15 the Lord essentially commanded John the Baptist to permit Jesus to have the humbler position her.

   Something precious about John's heart is revealed here. John, though not 100% correct, saw his only life's mission as to preach to and baptize those who needed to repent. Baptizing Jesus fell outside of John's perception of his life's work. So was serving God by fulfilling what he saw as his God-given purpose the most important, or was following and obeying the Lord wherever He led more important to John. Even though John did not have a clear understanding of everything, at least until later, John chose the latter. We too should not just follow God, but follow God without preconditions.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.868, The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.85-86, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.727, the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1212, and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.107-108 for more info.

12. In Mt 3:16 and Mk 1:10 who saw the dove?

A: Both Matthew 3:16 and Mark 3:16 say that Jesus saw the dove, and John 1:32 says that John the Baptist also saw the dove. These verses do not specify who else saw the dove, so the crowds might have seen it too.

13. Does Mt 3:16-17 support that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three separate personages, as Mormons have claimed (Talmadge, 1977 p.39-40)?

A: No. This shows they are distinct, but it does not show they are separate. Rather than being against the Trinity, this passage is important the support part of the Trinity, that the three are distinct. This passage does speak against modalism and “Oneness Pentecostalism” though. See When Cultists Ask p.93-95 for more info.

Matthew 4 – Satan's Temptations of Jesus - some brief answers

1. In Mt 4:1-11; Mk 1:13; and Lk 4:1-13 whose initiative was it for Jesus do go be tempted in the wilderness and why?

​​A: The Greek word here for tempt, peirazo, and temptation, peirasmos, can mean lure to evil, but in secular Greek literature means to test. Jesus was not kidnapped by the devil, as a Muslim claimed, because when Jesus commanded Satan to leave in Matthew 4:10, Satan had to leave. Rather, God had the initiative; the Holy Spirit led Jesus went into the wilderness to confront the devil. The devil took Jesus to a high mountain, and to the wing of the temple, but both Satan and Jesus knew that Satan was not allowed to do anything to Him. So, before Jesus' ministry even started, it was demonstrated that Satan would not have any hold on Jesus or cause Jesus to fall. Jesus could withstand physical craving to meet spiritual need.

​   See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1212-1213, the New International Bible Commentary p.1123, The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.112, and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.868 for more info.

2. In Mt 4:1-11, Mk 1:13; and Lk 4:1-13, since Jesus is God, was He unable to be tempted and sin, or as a man was He able to be tempted and fall?

A: This is a paradox commonly called the impeccability of Christ. The temptations were real, not fake. But the outcome was certain that He would not sin. As the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1212 says, "Despite Jesus' inability to sin, the temptation was very real. It was possible for him to be faced with the enticements to sin, but it was morally impossible for Him to yield." Rather than being unable to sin, Jesus was able not to sin. One rough analogy is whether a small Somali pirate skiff could attack a U.S. battleship cruiser. The pirates mistakenly thought that this was a merchant vessel that could be hijacked. The video is very short. Their main boat was rapidly sunk by what the U.S. Navy calls "small arms fire" before they got near the battleship.

3. In Mt 4:1-11 and Lk 4:1-13, how do Satan’s temptations of Jesus echo Satan’s temptations of Eve in Gen 3:6?

A: While they are not identical, Satan often uses similar tactics over and over, and that is probably because they continue to work well for Satan. But while Adam and Eve, in the lush garden fell, Jesus, in the desert was victorious. While Israel was not faithful in the wilderness for 40 years, of even 40 days that Moses was on the mountain in Exodus 34:28; Deuteronomy 9:9,18), Jesus was faithful in the wilderness for 40 days (as was Elijah in 1 Kings 19:1-8). When we are tempted, that is an opportunity for us to show that he who is in us is greater than he who is in the world as 1 John 4:4 says.

Eve saw that the forbidden fruit was:

1. Good for food [physical appetite],

2. Pleasing to the eye [beauty, lust of the eyes],

3. Desirable for gaining wisdom, [eyes will be opened, and like God, knowing good and evil. [godlike power after following Satan’s command].

Jesus, who was fasting, was tempted with:

1. Stones becoming bread [physical appetite],

2. Throwing himself from the wing of the temple [showing off],

3. Authority over all the kingdoms of the earth [godlike power under Satan’s command.]

   1 John 2:16 mentions three kinds of sins in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.

   While the order of temptations was different in Matthew and Luke,  it is likely that Satan did not just tempt Jesus three times and then give up. Rather, Satan probably tempted Jesus over and over.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.27, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.868, and the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.727 for more info.

4. In Mt 4:2, what is so ironic about Jesus' ministry in Matthew?

A: Jesus is hungry here (Matthew 4:2), yet he fed others (Matthew 14:13-21; 15:29-39).

Jesus grew weary (Matthew 8:24) yet Jesus offers rest to others (Matthew 11:28).

Jesus is the Son of King (Matthew 17:24-26), yet He pays taxes (Matthew 17:27).

Jesus is accused of being using power from the devil (Matthew 12:24), yet Jesus casts out demons (Matthew 12:22-23).

Jesus dies the death of a criminal and sinner (Matthew 27:37-38), yet He saves us from our sins (Matthew 1:12).

Jesus is sold for thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:15) but gives His life as a ransom for many (Matthew 20:28).

Jesus refuses to turn stones to bread (Matthew 4:3-4), but symbolically gives His own body as bread for His people (Matthew 26:26).

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.112 for more info.

5. In Mt 4:3 and Lk 4:3-4, Jesus was hungry, and the Father had not fed Him, so what would be wrong with  Jesus make bread Himself?

A: Jesus had committed to fast, and the Father could sustain Him, as a person must eat within 40 days to live. But Jesus was awfully hungry, and He was able to use His supernatural power to eat if He chose to. But Jesus was not going to use His supernatural power or do anything apart from the will of His Father. And the Father did send angels to minister to Jesus eventually in Matthew 4:11.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.869 and The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.88-89 for more info.

6. In Mt 4:5-6 and Lk 4:9-12, what was this temptation about?

A: First of all, this demonstrates that Satan knows scripture, and can even try to use it to his advantage in getting people to fall. Since Jesus as the son of God, Jesus knew He would be protected if He jumped off. Geographically, the Temple ordered the Kidron Valley, and the highest point of the temple to the bottom of the Kidron Valley would be about 450 ft.

   This temptation is interesting in that it would not break any Old Testament Laws, and would actually advance the cause of convincing people that He was the Messiah. So rather than leading to a bad thing, this is a "God-disapproved shortcut" to a good thing. Of course, it would also appeal to Jesus' pride in showing off and increase his popularity. Furthermore, it would be like backing God into a corner, to force his hand to protect you. We know, of course, that God does not want us to do bad things, "the ends do not justify the means" in using shortcuts to do good things. So, if you are late to church, should you speed? If you wish to give more money to ministry, should you cheat on your taxes and use that money? As The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.869 says, "God doesn't need Satan's help to get you where He wants you to go."

   See the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.729 and The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.89-90 for more info.

7. In Mt 4:8 and Lk 4:6-8, how could Satan offer Jesus the world, since Jesus was God and already owned the world, as an atheist (Cappello) asserts?

A: This is an interesting question. There are four points to consider in the answer.

1. Jesus was still God, but Jesus voluntarily emptied himself when He came to earth, as Philippians 2:7 and John 17:5 show.

2. God does indeed “own” the world as Psalm 24:1 shows. Nevertheless, when Jesus emptied himself of his glory and came to earth, his “own” did not receive him, as John 1:10-11 shows.

3. While God retained ultimate power, God granted mankind rule over this world, according to Genesis 1:28.

4. While God is the rightful owner, since the Fall Satan has temporarily been given a great deal of control over this world, as 1 John 5:19 shows. According to 2 Corinthians 4:4, the god of this age is Satan. Satan is the prince of this world in John 12:31; 14:30,16:11; Ephesians 6:12; and Colossians 1:13.

5. Finally, Satan is the great deceiver, so you cannot base any doctrine on what Satan claimed, and thus this verse does not answer the question. While Satan is the ruler of the world, and on that basis one might think that Satna could have delivered this, Satan can do nothing except what God allows, so Satan might not have that freedom. But as demons and temptation have made so many broken promises to people, there is no hint that Satan would "turn honest" here and that the father of lies would even try to deliver what he was promising.

Summary: God has the right of ownership because of both past Creation and eternal Sovereignty. Jesus temporarily gave up the second when He came to earth. But since the Fall, Satan has the rule, though not ultimate control of this world.

   See The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.90-91 for more info.

8. In Mt 4:14-16, do Isa 9:1 and Isa 9:2 belong together, or was Matthew incorrect to put these together?

A: They belong together because Isaiah 9:1 is a transition with both sections.

   The skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.816 says Isaiah 9:1 belongs with the earlier section and is actually called Isaiah 8:23 in modern Jewish Bibles and the New Jerusalem Bible. Isaiah 8:22 and 9:1 do relate, because Isaiah 8:22 speaks of people in darkness and Isaiah 9:1 speaks of no more darkness.

   However, Isaiah 8:22 speaks of people who will be driven away into darkness, Isaiah 9:1 says there will be no more darkness for Zebulun and Naphtali, and Isaiah 9:2-7 says how the people who were in darkness will see a great light.

   It is interesting that Asimov is trying to say that those who were in gloom but will have it lifted in Isaiah 9:1 do not relate to those who were in darkness and have seen a great light in the very next verse.

   See When Critics Ask p.329 for more info.

9. In Mt 4:15-16, how does the prophecy about Zebulun and Naphtali in Isa 9:1-2 relate to Jesus?

A: It relates in two ways.

Childhood: Jesus’ spent most of his childhood was in Galilee, west of the Sea of Galilee.

Early ministry: Jesus’ early ministry was in Galilee, primarily west of the Sea of Galilee. This region was the ancestral land of Zebulun and Naphtali.

   The Greek word for dawned here, aneteilen, does not mean the light shown somewhere else and then moved to Galilee. Rather, the light first shone brilliantly there. This is according to The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.117.

10. In Mt 4:18-22 and Mk 1:16-20, what can we learn from these fishermen?

A: Jesus had been in Galilee awhile, and they were called to salvation earlier, in John 1:35-42. Here they were called to service. These fishermen never stopped fishing. It is just that what Jesus told them to fish for was different. As The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.870 says, if you are not fishing, then you are not following. You might say that you are not called to be an evangelist, can pastor (care for others) because you were not called to full-time ministry. Consider this: every Christian is called to full-time ministry, though not necessarily full-time paid ministry. You might be called, full-time, to care for your mother or your family, to minster to the poor and others around you, to be a godly example, and to lead others in serving.

   See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1214 for more info.

Matthew 5:1-20 – The Sermon on the Mount Part 1 - some brief answers

The Sermon on the Mount is the first and longest of the five major discourses in Matthew.

1. In Mt 5:4, what are people to mourn about here?

A: This does not specify mourning over the fate of the lost, mourning over a personal loss, or other mourning. Regardless though, it can refer to being sad about things that sadden the heart of God. The Christian writer A.W. Tozer said, "A fairly accurate description of the human race might be furnished one unacquainted with it by taking the Beatitudes, turning them wrong side out, and saying, 'Here is your human race.'" (The Believer's Bible Commentary p.1216)

   Many people have no concept of mourning today; a common phrase, which is not Biblical is "no regrets". Secondly, this and the following commands of Jesus really did not have any place in Pharisaic righteousness.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.29 and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.870 for more info.

2. In Mt 5:5, Mt 11:29; Mt 21:5; 1 Pete 3:4, what exactly is meekness?

A: Meekness is related to gentleness, and not insisting on your own way. It is being willing to serve, not just be served. Jesus was meek.

   But meekness is not weakness. Think if a wild horse that is "broken-in". The horse is still strong and fast, but instead of just doing whatever it wills, it will obey the rider and consent to be ridden. Usually if a wolf or large cat can get on top of a horse, unless the horse rapidly shakes it off, that is the end of the horse. But the horse as both the trust and obedience to let a person ride it.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.871 and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.29 for more info.

3. In Mt 5:6, what are hunger and thirst here?

A: Do you have an appetite, a passion, for spiritual growth? Or do you fail to grow, not because you do not eat, but because you will your stomach with the wrong things.

    There are a few ways of looking at this. First, it metaphorically refers to those who have a strong desire for righteousness, for themselves, others, their church, their nation, and the world. Second, it can refer physically to those have to go without food and water to do God's work. Third, it can refer to those who fast for those things. Fasting does not generally refer to not drinking water, so the first is the primary meaning.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.871, the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1216, The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.134 and The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.98-99 for more info.

4. In Mt 5:7, what is mercy in this verse?

A: Mercy can mean letting someone escaping from punishment, but here it means helping others who need help and cannot help themselves. See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1217 for more info.

5. In Mt 5:8, 1 Jn 3:2, and Rev 22:4, how will pure people see God, since Ex 33:23 and other verses say that no man can see God and live?

A: Since the Fall, no mortal, sinful man can see God and live. However, we will see God face to face in Heaven. In the meantime, we are to strive hard to live good, and authentic lives on earth. As The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.135 says, "The pure in heart will see God – now with the eyes of faith and finally in the dazzling brilliance of the beatific vision in whose light no deceit can exist." See When Critics Ask p.403-404 and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.871 for more info.

6. In Mt 5:9, what are some good ways we can be peacemakers today?

A: Peace is needed between individuals, at work, within a group, between groups, politics, and countries. One of the first things is to learn from godly people who are peacemakers. Notice not just what they say, but what they could have said and chose not to. Remind the parties of what they have in common and challenge them whether their differences are so great to separate. Jesus said that the world will know we are His by our love in John 17:21).

   Within the body of Christ, we have a command (actively) "to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:3), while separating from those in persistent sin (1 Corinthians 5:13), and rejecting any teachers who are teaching heresy (1 Timothy 6:5 and 2 Timothy 3:5).

7. In Mt 5:13, how can Christians be salt?

A: Salt is added to food in small amounts to do one of four things. It is interesting that we are not the salt container, which dispenses the salt of Christ. Rather, we are the salt ourselves. Christians likewise are salt of this world in four areas.

Life - Salt is essential for us to live. In the West African city of Timbuktu, where gold was plentiful, one pound of salt sold for one pound of gold. As Christians have the life of Christ inside of them, they are to display that life to this world. God uses our preaching, love, and service to bring others to Him to give them life.

Flavor - Salt adds flavor to food and makes it taste good. Likewise, we are the aroma of Christ (2 Corinthians 2:15-16) to those who are saved. God also looks down and is pleased to see Christians in this world who are following Him.

Preservative - When there is no refrigeration, salt is also important to preserve food by keeping down the bacteria. Christians likewise are to be salt and light in this world by having a preserving effect by standing against sin.

Sacrifice - In Leviticus 2:13 the sacrifices were to be seasoned with salt. We too are to live our lives as a sacrifice for God.

Thirst – salt makes people thirsty, and that is why many bars serve salty food. By our lives we should also make people "thirsty" to hear about the hope that is within us: Christ.

   As the secular Roman writer Pliny the Elder (died at Mt. Vesuvius in 79 A.D.) said in Natural History 31.102 "Nothing is more useful than salt and sunshine." Many times, Roman soldiers were paid monthly in salt. They could use what they wanted and easily sell the rest. Sal is the word for salt in Latin, and their pay was called the salarium, from which we get the English word "salary".

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.872, Now That’s a Good Question p.248-249, Hard Sayings of the Bible p.430-431, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.29, The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.138, The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.101, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.729, and the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1217-1218 for more info.

8. Does Mt 5:13 speak of people who recognize their divinity in themselves and help others to recognize their divinity too, as some New Agers say? (Spangler, 1981, 80).

A: Not at all; salt is not divinity. Saying that we could become as God was only of the oldest lies told to mankind, in the Garden of Eden. We are created to love and serve God forever, not become either separate gods, to be worshipped, or a part of God, and to be worshipped.

   This strange view seems to forget that Jesus was Jewish, and Judaism was a monotheistic religion. See the previous question for what salt represents and When Cultists Ask p.95-96 for a more extensive answer.

9. In Mt 5:14a are we the light of the world, or is Jesus the light of the world as John 9:5 says?

A: Both: Jesus brought the light to the world, and we have the responsibility to be reflectors of the light of Jesus. Paul talks of this in 2 Corinthians 4:6-7. Jesus said He was the light of the world “as long as I am in the world” in John 9:5. Jesus’ body is now in heaven, not in this world, but Jesus’ presence is still in the world through the Holy Spirit in us. What exactly does light do? It does not do anything except shine. But as it shines it illuminates others and gives direction to the path. So be yourself, and shine. See When Critics Ask p.329, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.872, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.29, and the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1218 for more info.

10. In Mt 5:15, what is the light on the lampstand?

A: It is us and our testimony of Jesus, the light of the world. Unless there is persecution, we are not to hide the fact that we are Christians, and we should always be prepared to share the hope within us (1 Peter 3:15). We are not to hoard the truth for ourselves, but we are to share it with others. Matthew 5:15 does not just say let your light shine, but to let is shine before men. Unfortunately, it is all too easy for believers to find excuses not to share the gospel. We have to be careful not to look for excuses.

   See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1218 and The Expositor's Greek Testament vol.1 p.103 for more info.

11. In Mt 5:17 and Acts 10:10-16, since Jesus said he would not abolish anything in the law, why don’t Christians follow the Old Testament dietary laws like Muslims allegedly do?

A: While neither Christians nor Muslims keep the Old Testament dietary laws, Christians do not because they listen to Jesus. Five points to consider in the answer.

At this time, Jesus’ followers obeyed the Old Testament dietary laws. Jesus actually said that not one jot or tittle would pass away until all is accomplished.

The fact of Jesus’ resurrection fundamentally changed the way God dealt with His children. An angel informed Peter, Jesus’ apostle, that God had made all food clean in Acts 10:9-16. Note it does not say these animals were always clean, but rather that God had made them clean.

Even Muslims who bring up this objection, themselves have to agree that some the Old Testament dietary laws are not to be followed. Muslims feel they can eat camel meat (and Mohammed did so), yet Leviticus 11:3-8; Deuteronomy 14:6-8 prohibit eating them.

Listen to Jesus in Matthew 15:10,17-20 and Mark 7:14-15. Jesus said it is what comes out of a man that makes him unclean, not what goes in. Mark 7:19 shows that by this Jesus declared all foods clean. If we call Jesus a prophet, we should listen to His words.

A voice from heaven commanded Peter to eat in Acts 10:10-16, showing him that the dietary laws were only in effect until Jesus’ sacrifice, not after. We should obey the voice of God’s angel and Jesus’ apostle.

In conclusion, we should not ignore what God’s prophets said, but listen to them.

12. In Mt 5:17, since Jesus said he would not abolish anything in the law, why are the Jewish festival days no longer followed?

A: Four points to consider in the answer.

1. The moral requirements of the Old Testament Law are for all people and are unchanged.

2. The sacrifices can be said to be for all people today in one sense, because Jesus is our high priest, and He performed all the sacrifice that is needed.

3. The festival days, which were for the Jewish people, and involved sacrifices, are not followed since Christ’s death by non-Jews.

4. If a Muslim brings up this objection, one might ask why Muslims do not follow God’s holidays in the Old Testament either, if they think Christians are to follow Old Testament Jewish holidays.

   See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.234-235, When Cultists Ask p.96-98, and When Critics Ask p.329-330 for more info.

13. In Mt 5:18, what is a jot and a tittle?

A: In Hebrew writing, a jot, or yod, is the tenth and smallest letter of the Hebrew alphabet. It is basically a dot with a small, curved line coming out the top and a small, curved line coming out the bottom. A tittle is a small in. In English a "tittle" is all that distinguishes a capital F from a capital E, and a P from an R. See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1218 for more info.

14. In Mt 5:20, who are the scribes and Pharisees and what level of righteousness do they have?

A: In Mt 5:20, the scribes were usually with the Sadducee party, while the Pharisees were against them. Politically, Sadducees were among those Jews who favored accommodation with Rome, while the Pharisees were against that. The Pharisees were a small group 5,000 to 6,000, but they were very influential because the people looked up to them. The Sadducees generally denied physical resurrection and said only the first five books were Scripture. Acts 23:8 also says the Sadducees denied the angels and spirits. It is significant that Jesus rebuked the Sadducees for not knowing the scripture nor the power of God. He never rebuked the Pharisees for not knowing scripture.

   While the scribes and Pharisees tried to have the appearance of being righteous, Jesus was not validating them or saying they were righteous. Jesus did not say there was no good in them, but rather that they were not good enough. Rather, he said people needed more righteousness than they had to enter the kingdom of Heaven. This implies three things:

a) The scribes and Pharisees did not have the righteousness necessary to enter the kingdom of heaven

b) Jesus' followers were to be more righteous than them

c) Actually, nobody has enough righteousness, on their own, to enter the kingdom of Heaven. Jesus alludes to this more in chapters 6 and 7. The disciples eventually got this point in Mark 10:26-27.

d) If no one is righteous enough, don't look down on people who are sinners because you are a sinner too. To the consternation of the Pharisees, Jesus ate with many tax collectors and sinners in Matthew 9:9-12.

   Irenaeus in his work Against Heresies (182-188 A.D.) book 4 ch.13 p.477 gives a complementary answer. Here is a paraphrase of his four points:

1) While the scribes and Pharisees believed in the Father, we are to believe in the Son too.

2) We must not only say, but we must do; for the scribes and Pharisees said but did not.

3) We must not only abstain from evil deeds, but also even from the desires of them.

4) Jesus did not teach us things that opposed the law, but things that fulfilled them. Jesus did not destroy the law, but he fulfilled, extended, and afforded greater scope to it.

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.146-147 for more info.

 Matthew 5:21-48 – The Sermon on the Mount Part 2 - some brief answers

1. In Mt 5:21, why do people kill, animals, criminals, etc., since Jesus said not to kill?

A: The King James Version translated this “kill” when the Greek word phoneuo can mean murder. One who does this, a phoneus is a murderer or assassin, not an executioner or animal butcher. If someone really thought the Old Testament “thou shalt not kill” referred to animals and execution of criminals, their misunderstanding of this word would make the entire Old Testament sacrificial system an unfathomable mystery to them.

2. In Mt 5:22, why did Jesus say for us not to call anyone a fool, since He and others did in Mt 23:17; Lk 24:25; 1 Cor 15:36; Gal 3:1?

A: Jesus did not say “foolish” or “fool”, but actually he used an Aramaic slang term, which means “empty-head”, similar to an American slang word “airhead”. Jesus also calls people “foolish”, “blind guides’ (Matthew 23:16), and even “thieves and robbers” and “vipers”. Jesus chose His words carefully and did not denigrate people.

   See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.358-359 for more info.

3. In Mt 5:22 Jesus said, “WHOSOEVER shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire”, Yet he himself did so repeatedly, as Mt 23:17, Lk 11:40, and Lk 12:20 show. Shouldn’t he be in danger of Hell too? After all, he broke His own law!

A: No for two reasons.

a) We should not let others call us Lord, or allow other people to worship us, and that is proper for Jesus. Thus, what Jesus taught for us is not always applicable to Him. On a more mundane level, when I make a rule for my pet bird, like it can only eat out of a bird feeder, do I have to follow that rule too?

b) Jesus actually did not say “fool” (that is a paraphrase), the actual term was raca which is best translated “empty-head”. Jesus called people foolish, in the sense of foolish people in Proverbs, but he did not communicate that their heads (or lives) were not worth anything.

4. In Mt 5:25-26, why is it often so difficult to settle with your adversary?

A: Oftentimes it means that one or both parties should admit their guilt, or that they were wrong, the pride of people is reluctant to do that.

   See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1220 for more info.

5. Does Mt 5:26 support the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory as the Catholic teacher Ludwig Ott taught?

A: No for seven reasons.

No mention after death: This does not mention purgatory or even anything after death.

Even some Catholics such as former Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) would disagree. Here is what he said, “Purgatory is not some kind of supra-worldly concentration camp where one is forced to undergo punishments in a more or less arbitrary fashion. Rather it is the inwardly necessary process of transformation in which a person becomes capable of Christ, capable of God [i.e., capable of full unity with Christ and God] and thus capable of unity with the whole communion of saints” (Ratzinger’s book Eschatology (1990) p.230. Part of this is also quoted in When Cultists Ask p.98-99)

Hebrews 10:10-15 teaches two things: 1) Christ has already completed His offering in Hebrews 10-12, and 2) Christ has perfected us forever through His offering in Hebrews 10:13-15. Let’s not tell Christ His offering was not good enough, complete enough, or did not finish the job that the Book of Hebrews tells us He finished.

Romans 8:1 says, “There is therefore Now there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus….” (NKJV)

2 Peter 1:11 says that after we die we will receive a rich or abundant welcome into Heaven. (Not a warm welcome, or fiery with flames hot welcome). Purgatory would not be a very welcome-looking “porch” to heaven.

2 Corinthians 5:8 says, “We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.” (NKJV) Likewise Philippians 1:23 says Paul will either stay alive in the flesh, or “depart and be with Christ.” We will be with God as soon as we die, not in purgatory with the promise of heaven delayed.

The early Christians, prior to Nicea never heard of purgatory, and certainly did not see anything like purgatory in this verse. In more than 5,235 writings that we have prior to Nicea, this interpretation of Matthew 5:26, and the idea of any kind of fiery purging of believers after death, is totally absent.

   See When Cultists Ask p.98-99 for more info.

6. In Mt 5:27-29, how extensive is the prohibition against adultery?

A: It is not just something only a married person can do. Rather, Jesus says "anyone". It is not just committing the act; rather it is even looking with lust at someone, or a picture or video of someone, including but not limited to pornography and strip clubs. See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.873 for more info.

7. In Mt 5:29, is Hell conscious torment or just the grave?

A: It is both. The Greek word Hades is analogous to the Hebrew word Sheol. In Matthew 5:29 is obviously a place where you do not want to go to, so the context is “Hell” where those who die apart from God go.

Luke 16:22-23 shows there will be torment (basanois in Greek) (Luke 16:23,28), consciousness (Luke 16:23), and suffering in flame (Luke 16:24,25). Unbelievers are not just there; they are eternally punished there too. Matthew 25:41,46; Revelation 14:9-11; ~19:3; ~22:15

Matthew 13:40-42,50 says there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth IN the fiery furnace. (ekei “there” in Greek means there, “at that place”, not there “it will occur”.

2 Thessalonians 1 teaches this is eternal destruction; shut out from the presence of the Lord and his majestic power.

Revelation 14:9-11 those who worship the beast will be tortured with fire and brimstone (burning sulfur) in the presence of the lamb and his angels.

Non-believers have painful consciousness after death (Revelation 20:10; Luke 12:5; 13:28; 16; Ezekiel 32:31-32; Matthew 3:12; 5:21; 13:42,50; 22:13; 25:41; Isaiah 50:11).

Non-believers will perish (Luke 13:3,5; John 3:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:9) and be destroyed (2 Thessalonians 1:9; 2 Peter 3:16; Matthew 10:28; 1 Corinthians 3:17; Philippians 1:28; James 4:12; Revelation 11:18).

   See When Cultists Ask p.99-100 and When Critics Ask p.331-332 for more info.

8. In Mt 5:34, why did Jesus emphasize swearing oaths here?

A: The Jews in Jesus' time and later had strange views on oaths. The Mishnah Shebuoth discusses this. The Mishnah Sanhedrin 3.2 and Mishnah Tosephta Nedarim 1 (originally from SBK 1:321-336). Oaths were not binding if swearing "by heaven and earth" "by the gold of the temple" or "by Jerusalem". But there were binding to swear "by the temple" or "toward Jerusalem". Deuteronomy 6:13 says that when taking oaths, take them in God's name. But Jesus is changing that here. Jesus is saying to stop taking oaths at all; let your "yes" should be "yes" and your "no" should be "no". The Essenes also avoided taking oaths.

  As an aside, many Greeks also frowned upon taking oaths. Sophocles, Choerilus Epicus, Plutarch, Epictetus (avoid as far as possible), Quintilianus were against taking oaths. Pythagoras said to take oaths only rarely, and later Pythagoreans refused to take oaths. During the Middle Ages and Reformation, Waldensians and many Anabaptists refused oaths. See Ulrich Luz Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.314,316,320 for more info on this.

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.153-154 and the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1222 for more info.

9. In Mt 5:34 are we not to swear, or are we to swear by God’s name in Dt 10:20? 

A: When studying the Bible, it is important to know the general context; in this case what is Old Testament and what is New Testament. Jesus explicitly superseded or changed five Old Testament commands and one saying in Matthew 5:21-48. Here is a summary of what Jesus said.

Verses

Old Testament

But Jesus said

Matthew 5:21-26

Do not murder 

In addition, do not be angry with your brother or say “you fool”

Matthew 5:27-30

Do not commit adultery

In addition, do not look at a woman with lust in your heart

Matthew 5:31-32

When divorcing give a certificate

In contrast, do not divorce except for unfaithfulness

Matthew 5:33-37

Do not break oaths

In contrast, do not make oaths at all, but simply yes and no

Matthew 5:38-42

Eye for an eye

In contrast, turn the other cheek, walk the extra mile, etc.

Matthew 5:43-48

Love your neighbor and hate your enemy

In contrast, love even your enemies

By the way, James 5:13 also echoes Matthew 5:34 that we are not to make oaths today.

Jesus also showed that all foods are now clean in Mark 7:19, which is echoed in Acts 10:9-16.

10. In Mt 5:39-40, how are Christians supposed to turn the other cheek?

A: Being struck on the cheek is not only painful, but it is also an insult. The Jewish tract Mishnah Baba Kamma 8:6 discusses this. Yet Christians are not to live naturally but supernaturally. We are to allow ourselves to be vulnerable (but not foolishly trusting evildoers), recognizing that we can trust God to watch over us and our family. Sometimes Muslims and others ridicule this teaching of Jesus. But regardless, we, like this teaching, are supposed to stand out in a vengeful, sinful world.

   See Now That’s a Good Question p.522-524 and The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.136 for more info.

11. In Mt 5:39, why do Christians resist evil?

A: No verse in the Bible says Christians are not to resist any evil. Rather Matthew 5:39 specifically says not to resist an evil person, who is doing evil to you. We are not to seek revenge or get people back. We are to resist the devil in James 4:7 and 1 Peter 5:9. Like Jeremiah in 7:6 and 22:16, we should speak up for the oppressed. In the Old Testament, Proverbs 28:4 says the righteous “contend” with the wicked who forsake the law. Leviticus 5:1 says it is a sin to refuse to testify in court about an evil we have seen. We are to guard against false teachers (1 John 2:26; 3:7; 4:1; 2 John 7-8; Revelation 2:16; 2 Peter 2:2; Acts 20:28-29. We are to refute false teachers (1 Timothy 1:3; Titus 1:9-11; Jude 3). We are to contend for the faith (Philippians 1:27; 4:3).

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.1127 for more info.

12. In Mt 5:42 and Lk 6:29-30, should Christians give to everyone who asks of them?

A: Yes: this teaching is not hard to understand, but it is challenging to follow. Christians are to consider others as even more important as themselves (Philippians 2:3). We are to love our neighbor as ourselves, so of course we are not to give a person something that would harm them (like drugs), even if they ask for it. But if we see someone in genuine need, we should try to see that their needs are met. This is true regardless of whether the person in need is a fellow Christian or not.

   Loving our neighbor as ourselves implies that it is fine to love ourselves too. However, many people are guilty of loving themselves more than others, giving less than they should, not loving themselves too little and giving more than they should.

   See When Critics Ask p.332-333 for a complementary answer.

13. In Mt 5:43, where does it say, “love your neighbor and hate your enemy”?

A: This is not in the Old Testament, and Jesus never said that it was. Love your neighbor is in Leviticus 19:18, but there is nothing about hate your enemy. But Jewish people had often heard it because it was a scribal tradition according to the New Geneva Study Bible p.1513, as well as When Critics Ask p.333, which adds that Jesus did not say it was in the Old Testament for a very good reason: it was not there.

   In the Qumran sect, their Manual of Disciple said members had to swear to love the Sons of Light (i.e., the Qumran sect) and to hate for all eternity the Sons of Darkness. See Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls p.165 for more info.

   The atheistic philosopher Frederich Nietzsche thought love of enemies was weakness and dishonesty. Sigmund Freud thought love of enemies "is an attempt of the culture superego to change the need of aggression into guilt feelings and so to fight against it, an attempt which was indeed successful but is hostile to happiness." Sigmund Freud "Civilization and its Discontents in Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud vol.21 p.57-145. Mao Tse-tung said "We cannot love our enemies, we cannot love social evils, and our aim is to exterminate them." Mao Tse-tung: An Anthology His Writings p.260. These are taken from Ulrich Luz Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.350,351. Some authors did not take too kindly to Jesus' teaching to love your enemies.

14. In Mt 5:48 can we be perfect?

A: As a diamond shines differently from different sides, the Bible shows four facets to this issue. The simple answers to this broad question are: Yes, Yes, no, and yes.

Yes after death: we should meditate on the truth that we will be sinlessly, perfectly holy in Heaven, we should be looking forward to that, and if you think with regret of leaving behind some of your sins, then there is something wrong with your spiritual walk. After death, and only after death we will fully achieve Matthew 5:48.

Yes judicially: God that Father has pronounced us forgiven and the guilt of sin has been pronounced pardoned by Jesus’ death on the cross. Hebrews 10:17 specifically tells us that at the cross Jesus “has perfected” those who are being made holy. Romans 4:17 reminds us that our God calls things that are not, as though they are. Though we have sinned against God and are worthy of Hell, if God promises our forgiveness and sinless life in Heaven, God’s promises are 100% certain. In one sense, all who have trusted in Christ, and His death and body resurrection have been pronounced as achieving Matthew 5:48.

No on earth now, but we still try: we will not be sinlessly perfect on earth, and anyone who thinks he has achieved that is deceiving themselves as 1 John 1:18 says. Not even Paul was perfect in Philippians 3:12. While we will not achieve sinless perfection on earth, we are still to strive to attempt to achieve sinless perfection and Christlikeness, though not to be discouraged when we fall short, as all believers still do. So, Jesus’ command in Matthew 5:48 was not simply a future promise, and a pronouncement, but a command we are seriously to try to fulfill today.

Yes we can be perfectly in God’s will: We can be a “perfect” believer, as in being complete and being exactly where God wants us to be. But just as a “perfect” baby is not supposed to remain a baby forever, perfection here is simply "are we hitting the milestone on our path to be more Christlike in this life?" Perfect is used in this sense in 1 John 2:5 and Philippians 3:15. So while we are to try to fully obey Matthew 5:48 in our lives today, and though we will inevitably fall short, we can still have joy and perfect peace abiding in God now.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.33 for more info and When Cultists Ask p.100-101 for a complementary answer.

Matthew 6:1-13 – The Sermon on the Mount Part 3 - some brief answers

1. In Mt 6:1-4, are we to do good works in secret, or let our light shine before men as Mt 5:16 says?

A: Both. We should be diligent in doing good works. However, it should not be our own works, but rather Jesus, the one who lives in us, that others see when they see us. We are to be reflectors of Christ. Our light should shine, not us.

   It is a privilege that God chose us to give glory by working through us. See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.233-234 for more info.

2. In Mt 6:1-4, in giving to God, how are Christians not to let their right hand know what their left hand is doing?

A: Just as we are not to make a big deal about our good works toward others, we are not to make a big deal about it before God. Do not break your arm by patting yourself on the back too hard either. ;-) Do not think of how you are doing God a favor. Do not mistakenly thing that you are enriching God, who owns everything anyway, or how fortunate God is to have saved you. We are saved not because of any merit of ours, but because God saw how helpless we were, and in His grace loved us anyway. See Now That’s a Good Question p.581-582 for a different but complementary answer.

3. In Mt 6:1-4, since we are not to give alms before men, who do Christians report charity for tax purposes, and why do some have buildings or other monuments in their name?

A: Before men (plural) means before the public, so reporting charity for tax purposes, is OK. However, if someone donates money in order for a building or monument to be built in their name, then they have their reward, on earth. However, if someone builds a monument in someone else’s name, and the first person is either unaware of that, or did nothing to encourage it being built in their name, then this verse does not apply to them.

4. In Mt 6:5-6, since we are to pray in secret, why do many Christians want public prayer in schools?

A: The Bible gives many examples of private and personal prayer. However, it also gives examples of group prayers, such as Joshua 7:6-9. One can have corporate prayer where only one person is speaking, such as 1 Kings 8:22-53. In these examples of public prayer, everyone is involved in the praying, whether they are speaking or not.

   In Acts 16:25-26, Paul and Silas were praying together and singing in a place where others could see. However, being in prison, they had no choice in their location.

   Christians could see each other, praying corporately, in Acts 2:42; 12:12; 13:3; 14:23; 20:36, so that is fine.

   What we do not see approved is publicly praying for show, or publicly praying where some of the crowd were not participating, perhaps because they do not believe in God.

   See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1224 for more info.

5. In Mt 6:5-7, Jesus is condemning all public prayer?

A: No, this verse does not say that. Rather He is condemning prayers that are just for show. In fact, Jesus prayed publicly in John 11:41-42.

   In the Old Testament Solomon prayed a very public prayer in 1 Kings 8:22. Jesus is not against public prayer, but against “ostentatious” prayer, i.e., prayer in order to be seen in public. See When Critics Ask p.333-334 for more info.

6. In Mt 6:7, should we ever repeat prayers?

A: It is OK to repeat prayers, as long as they have meaning for you when you pray them. If you are not praying them with meaning, then do not bother to pray them. Within a prayer or during worship, repetition of a phrase is OK, as was done in some Psalms. See Now That’s a Good Question p.207-210, and Today’s Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.411-412 for more info.

7. In Mt 6:7-8, are we not to use vain repetition, or should we pray continually as the widow was an example of in Lk 18:5,7?

A: Praying continually does not necessarily mean you have to use repetition. You can say different things in your prayers when you pray.

   Jesus did not say repetition was wrong, only if it is vain or meaningless repetition. Some repetition is OK if it is meaningful. As an example, see Psalm 118:1-4. Thus, if a church service uses some of the same things every week, that is OK as long as it is meaningful. See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.236-237 for more info.

8. In Mt 6:7-8, why do many Christians, especially those in more liturgical traditions (Catholics, Episcopal, Anglican, Lutheran, etc.) pray many of the same things over and over every Sunday?

A: Saying the same thing multiple times is OK if it has meaning to them every time. Jesus did not criticize repetition here, but vain (meaningless) repetition. In some Psalms, such as Psalm 136, repetition is used. Jesus warned us that repetition can be meaningless, but that does not mean all repetition is meaningless.

 "Hail Mary's are not good prayers, as they are addressed to Mary, not Jesus. But even if we had analogous "Hail Jesus prayers" that would not be good either, and it would presuppose we would get blessing based on the frequency of reciting memorized phrases.

   See Ulrich Luz Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.366 for more info.

9. In Mt 6:9-13 and Lk 11:1-4, what was Jesus teaching in the Lord’s prayer?

A: Here is a very brief synopsis.

Our Father: we pray to God the Father. Jesus is God (Hebrews 1:8-9), so prayers to Jesus are OK too, as Stephen did in Acts 7:59.

Who is in Heaven: While God is everywhere at once, never forget that God is transcendent. His throne is farther removed from us than the stars.

Holy be your name: Do not think God is just a buddy or “pal”. Remember who God is.

Your kingdom come: This type of prayer is often neglected today. In addition to Praise/Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving, and Supplication for yourself and others, there is praying for God’s Kingdom to come soon. 1 Thessalonians 4:18 is just one verse that shows we are to long for His kingdom. Verses that show we are to be watching and waiting for His Kingdom include 1 Thessalonians 4:18, 2 Peter 3:13 and 1 Peter 4:7.

   This phrase does not indicate an uncaring attitude. Rather, with it we express a fervent desire to see God’s kingdom come soon.

Your will be done: We are to pray for God’s will, not just to spend on our selfish desires (James 4:3). When we want what is best for God's Kingdom, who do we think is the best at determining that; us or God?

On earth as it is in Heaven: We do not have to pray that God’s will be done in Heaven, where there is no temptation, but there is a need for us to pray that the desired will of God Almighty be done on earth. Heaven is our standard for how much we want God’s will to be obeyed.

Give us this day: We are to pray to receive our needs, not just our desires. While ungodly rich people may get financially all they need and more without praying, we are to ignore that and pray to God for our needs. (See Proverbs 30:7-9.) Apparently, there is no plan for praying for what we need for the entire week on one day, so that we can neglect to pray at all on the next six days.

Our daily bread: Pray daily for our needs, not our greeds. Do not just pray one time for all the needs for your life but pray daily. Absent from this prayer is a request for our wishes and selfish desires, as James 4:3 shows. This is a prayer for what we legitimately need.

Forgive us our sins: We need forgiveness for the words, actions, and inaction on the outside. In addition, we need forgiveness for our thoughts and cleansing for our sinful desires on the inside. Some falsely say that we should not pray for God to forgive us once we have become Christians and have already been forgiven. This prayer shows otherwise. James 5:16 also shows praying for a believer so that his sins will be forgiven (future tense). Forgiveness of sins is on the basis of Christ’s death on the cross, not any of our words, but forgiveness has a past, present, and future aspect which all go back to the cross. According to the New International Bible Commentary p.1127 the best translation here is "sins"; just calling them "trespasses" is not very accurate.

As we forgive those who sin against us: God’s forgiveness for those who repent and turn to Him is complete. That is how our forgiveness to others should be.

   As an aside, the Lord's prayer is also quoted in Tatian's Diatessaron section 9:32-41 p.58 and the early Christian writings Origen's On Prayer ch.18.1 p.65 and The Didache ch.8 ANF vol.7 p.379. The Didache adds that it should be prayed three times a day.

   See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1224-1225 and Ulrich Luz Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.369 for more info.

10. In Mt 6:9-13 and Lk 11:2-4, why should we pray?

A: Prayer is not informing an all-knowing God, empowering the Almighty, or changing the heart for a very loving God. Rather it is a commandment, a privilege to talk to God, and a promise that God will hear our prayers. Prayer is amazing, in that an All-Sovereign God has not only consented, but that He even originated the idea that He allows our prayers to “be effective” (James 5:16) in God changing things.

   See Today’s Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.299-302 and the Complete Book of Bible Answers p.160 for complementary answers.

11. In Mt 6:13, why should we pray that God lead us not into temptation, when Jms 1:13 says that God does not tempt anyone?

A: The meaning is better conveyed by the way many British people say this prayer: “save us in our hour of need.” God does not tempt us, but God allows us to be tempted, as Jesus was, and as Paul was tempted to despair in 2 Corinthians 1. God tests us, but God does not allow us to be tempted beyond what we can bear (1 Corinthians 10:13a). When we are tempted, and we think we are close to being beyond what we can bear, we can pray to God, and He will find a way for us to escape or a way to strengthen us. See When Critics Ask p.334 for a complementary answer.

Matthew 6:14-34 – The Sermon on the Mount Part 4 - some brief answers

1. In Mt 6:14-15, are we supposed to forgive others’ trespasses, or all their sins?

A: Trespasses here means sins, so there is no difference.

2. In Mt 6:16-18, should Christians fast?

A: Yes, fasting is a way for believers to communicate the intensity or our feelings toward God.

We should fast for worship (Acts 13:2-3); to pray for help (Isaiah 58:3-9; Acts 14:23; Psalm 35:13; Nehemiah 1:4; Esther 4:3,16; 1 Kings 21:27, Ezra 8:23), and for individual and corporate repentance (Nehemiah 9:1; Daniel 9:3; Joel 1:14; 2:12-15; Jonah 3:5).

We should not fast for tradition (Zechariah 7:5) or show (Matthew 6:16-18).

Dieting to lose weight is fine to do, but that is not fasting since the primary purpose is different. Binge eating, alternating with fasting is not particularly healthy or scriptural.

   See Now That’s a Good Question p.229-230, New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology p.377-378, and 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.463-464 for more info.

3. In Mt 6:19-21, why do Christians have money and other treasures on earth?

A: Giving to God is not optional for believers (Malachi 3:10-12). We should give to the Lord’s work (2 Corinthians 8:1-8; 9:6-11; Proverbs 3:9,10; 11:24; 1 Corinthians 16:2; Titus 2:13). It is important for us to help the poor and others to help others (Proverbs 11:24-25; 14:21; 24:11-12; 28:22; 29:7; 31:9,20; 2 Corinthians 9:6-7).

   A large number of verses in the Bible tell us to give to the poor and others: Proverbs 11:24-25; 14:21; 19:9-10,17; 21:13; 22:9; 24:11-12; 29:7; 31:9,20; Psalm 41:1; Isaiah 58:7-8,10; Jeremiah 5:28; 22:16; Matthew 6:2-4; 19:21; Galatians 2:10; Ephesians 4:28; 1 Timothy 6:18-19; James 1:27; Deuteronomy 15:11; Psalm 68:5; Job 29:12-13; 1 John 3:17-19; Acts 4:32-35

   However, also recognize that riches can be a blessing from God, according to Proverbs 28:20. For Christians, it is proper to do the following

a) Have personal property (2 Timothy 4:13).

b) We are to provide for our family (1 Timothy 5:4,8; Proverbs 31:13-15; Mark 7:10-13; ~Luke 15:18-30).

c) Provide for our ministers (1 Corinthians 9:4-12; 1 Timothy 5:18; Galatians 6:6)

d) Provide for ourselves (Titus 3:14).

e) Pay your taxes (Matthew 22:17; Romans 13:7).

f) Store for the future (Proverbs 6:6-8; 10:5; 31:16; Luke 15:18-30; Titus 3:14).

g) Leave an inheritance for our children (Proverbs 13:22; 17:2; 19:14; Psalm 17:14).

h) We should take care of our possessions, (which sometimes takes additional money) (Proverbs 12:10,11,27). We should know the condition of our wealth, for it can be lost through neglect (Proverbs 27:23-24).

Yet it is not proper to do things for greed or fear. If you are insured so much, that you can provide better for your family dead than alive, your priorities are messed up. See the discussion on Proverbs 3:9 for a more extensive discussion on proper and improper attitudes and uses of money.

4. Can Mt 6:22 refer to some kind of spiritual “third eye” as some New Age people claim?

A: No early Christian, or modern one either, ever interpreted this passage this way. If this was what was truly meant, as a few claim, then God failed to communicate in a way that any Christian could understand. When interpreting a passage, we are not to ask, “can I make it mean such and such” but rather, “what did God intend to communicate to us.” Many people do the former because there are sins of the intellect as well as sins of the will and heart. See When Cultists Ask p.101 for a complementary answer.

5. In Mt 6:24, what is Matthew saying about God and money?

A: This is talking about masters. God as a master demands our complete service and obedience. Chasing the money demands complete service to it too.

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.178-179, the New International Bible Commentary p.1128, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.33 for more info.

6. In Mt 6:25-26, why do you think God tells us not to worry about our life?

A: These verses are not telling us never think about our life, or do not plan, but do not worry about it. Birds actually work very hard, making nests, caring for their young, etc., yet they do not worry about it.

7. In Mt 6:26, since God watching the birds is an example of God’s caring, what can we expect in the way of help from God?

A: This verse does not mean "don't every think about" but rather "don't worry about". God sustains the birds of the air with their active participation in getting food. Here are five points to consider in the answer.

1. Nothing happens except what God allows (Job 1:12; 2:6).

2. We will have troubles (2 Timothy 3:12; James 1:2; John 16:33f), but God will strengthen us and comfort us in our troubles (2 Corinthians 1:4-5).

3. God does not allow believers to be tempted beyond what they can bear. (1 Corinthians 10:11)

4. Some believers will suffer persecution, and some even death. (1 Peter 1:6)

5. Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints (Psalm 116:15). Even if we die an unjust painful death, God will still take care of us in Heaven, and our present sufferings are nothing compared to the joys of heaven (see 1 Corinthians 2:9)

   See The Expositor's Bible Commentary vol.8 p.179, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.876, and the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1226-1227 for more info.

8. In Mt 6:33 what is Jesus saying here?

A: Jesus is not saying they have not also been seeking other good things. But Jesus is saying to seek first the Kingdom of God. As The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.867 says, in baseball you can touch second base, third base, and home without being tagged, but if you miss first base, it does not matter; you are out.

9. Does Mt 6:33 teach that we should make our alleged inner divinity a top priority as some New Age people say?

A: No, we do not have inner divinity. We are made in the image of God, and believers (both male and female) are sons of God, but we have no divinity of our own. This verse says nothing about our divinity, or anything else that is ours. Instead, it teaches us to seek His kingdom and His righteousness. There is no God but the One, as any Jewish monotheist would tell you, and Jesus was Jewish and affirmed that there was only One True God, whose words we are to obey. We are to submit to scripture, rather than twist scripture to submit to our opinions. See When Cultists Ask p.101-102 for a more extensive answer.

Matthew 7 – Applications from the Sermon on the Mount  - some brief answers

1. In Mt 7:1-2, Lk 6:37, Jn 7:24 how are we not to judge others, since we are told to judge in Jn 7:24, 1 Cor 5:12, and 1 Cor 6:25?

A: The Bible approves judging actions, but not sitting in judgment on people. 1 Corinthians 6:5 uses a different Greek word, diakrinai, than the others for judge. It refers to a Christian arbitrator pronouncing judgment on a civil matter between Christians.

   The Greek word used in the other passages, krinete, has a range of meaning. Matthew 7:1-2, Luke 6:37 says we are not to judge others (no mention of not judging things or actions). In other words, we are not to judge the value of other people, judge how good a Christian they are, or how bad a sinner they are. Let God do that; we do not need to judge. But while we should remove the plank in our own eye before trying to remove the speck in our brother’s eye, we should still try to remove the speck in our brother’s eye. There are two aspects here. The first is the hypocrisy of worrying about your brother’s speck more than your own plank. The second is that you can’t see the speck well enough to take it out if you have a plank in your eye. While Jesus used hyperbole, it is still amazing in real life how people can see a fault in someone else and yet be totally blind to the same fault in themselves.

   John 7:24 also uses the word krinete saying, “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” (NASB).

   It is irresponsible to tell others Matthew 7:1 teaching abdicating all judgment, so as to disobey the rest of Matthew 7. We are to recognize dogs and swine (Matthew 7:6) and we are to be fruit inspectors in Matthew 7:16-20.

 Concerning the murdering of others, the Holocaust, people having sex with animals and children, etc., some people might say we should not impose morality, or in essence not judge what is right and wrong. This is not what the Bible teaches.

   See Now That’s a Good Question p.163-164, Today’s Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.369-371, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.33, the New International Bible Commentary p.1129, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1227-1228, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.730-731, and the New Geneva Study Bible p.1515 for complementary answers.

2. In Mt 7:1-5, should Christians not judge, or should we judge as 1 Cor 6:2-5 says?

A: We are not to judge other people, including their worth, but we are to discern good and bad actions as 1 Corinthians 6:2-5 teaches. While some of the words are the same in Greek (from krino), the context is different. We are not to judge in the sense of being judgmental, but we are to judge in the sense of being discerning See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.877 for more info.

3. In Mt 7:6, what did Jesus mean by not casting your pearls before swine (pigs)?

A: Do not take what is precious and give it to those who are not appreciative of it and might use it to turn and attack you. This concept of not casting pearls is behind Proverbs 9:7-9, where we are not to try to correct a scoffer or wicked man. Jesus did not do many miracles before unbelieving people. Also, it is better for a person not to know the way of truth, than to know it and turn their back on it, as 2 Peter 2:20-22 says.

   Let’s look at the side range of possible interpretation, and then narrow it down to determine the best choice or choices are the intended meaning.

Casting could mean:

C1. Do not cast could mean do not force.

C2. Do not nag.

C3. Do not make any effort to teach.

C4. Be very careful to never tell.

   Here the verb “cast” is active, so Jesus did not mean hide your pearls, hide that you are a Christian, or do not leave any pearls on the ground. Thus, it is not C4.

Pearls could mean:

P1. Godly teaching

P2. The message of the gospel

P3. Anything of value, special privileges, or participation in sacred things Hard Sayings of the Bible p.370-371 has this view.

P4. It could also mean that when the church is being persecuted, do not expose other Christians by giving their names to just anyone.

   Jesus taught moral teaching openly, so it probably does not mean P1.

Before swine could mean:

S1. Those who are not appreciative of these things (Hard Sayings of the Bible p.370-371).

S2. Those not ready to learn (The NIV Study Bible).

S3. Unbelievers who do not actively desire to learn.

S4. Unbelievers who refuse to learn.

S5. Gentiles (according to the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.833-835) However, Matthew mentions non-Jews who believed, so it does not refer to Gentiles in general.

   Swine was a derogatory term, so it is very likely the intended meanings include those who refuse to learn.

   So, the best choice may be C1 + C2 + C3, and P2 + P3, and S1 + S2 + S3 + S4.

   See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.370-371 and Now That’s a Good Question p.585-586 for complementary answers.

4. In Mt 7:7-11, why don’t people get all they want?

A: God is much more than merely a cosmic Santa Claus. People do not always get what they want least five reasons.

1. People do not ask for them (James 4:2)

2. Must pray to God, not another. (~Deuteronomy 5:6-7)

3. Must pray in the spirit and name of Jesus (Colossians 3:17; John 14:13-14; 15:16; 16:26).

4. God does not hear the wicked (Proverbs 15:29; 1 Peter 3:12; Isaiah 1:15; Jeremiah 11:14; 14:12; Micah 3:4).

5. They fight against God’s people (Psalm 18:41. 1 Samuel 22:16-17; 28:6).

See also the answer to the next question.

5. Since Mt 7:7-8 says he who asks receives and he who seeks finds, why in Am 8:12 do they seek the word of the LORD and not find it?

A: First what is not the answer and then the answer.

Not the answer: Jesus said these words centuries after Amos, and things are different in New Testament times than before. Also, there was a 400-year period of silence, where no scripture was given, right before Jesus came. Finally, the knowledge that Jesus gave us was not available even to godly people who lived before Jesus. But while these three statements are all true, they miss the timeless truth, and the warning, that are the main point of Amos 8:12-14.

The answer: There are two levels of the answer.

Specifically, Amos 8:12-14 referred to those (mainly Samaritans) in the land [of Israel] who went after the idols of the northern kingdom as well as God. As long as they tried to follow both, they would not find the word of God.

Generally, Amos 8:12-14 is a warning for all people. Matthew 7:7-8 does not mean to ask just anybody; it means you have to ask the One True God. If you want to combine the truth of God with the falsehood of idols and other religions, you will have a famine of truth, not a fulfilling of truth. You have to seek God with all your heart, not part of your heart seeking God and part of your heart seeking idols.

6. In Mt 7:7-11, why don’t Christians always get what they pray to God for in the name of Jesus?

A: God answers some prayers, as “yes”, some as “no”, and some as “wait”. When there is no answer, or not the answer we want, it is good to think why. We cannot know every specific case, but in general there are at least 21 reasons dealing with us, circumstances, and God.

Us:

1. Praying to the wrong God, an idol. 1 Kings 18:26-29

2. Requests should not be for spending on our passions. James 4:3

3. Requests must be for good things. Matthew 7:11

4. It is not God’s will to have them. Mark 14:36

5. We have to wait. Daniel 10:12-14

6. Our prayers are simply vain repetition. Matthew 6:7

7. Yet we have to [meaningfully] persist. Luke 11:5-10, 18:1-7

8. We cherish sin in our hearts (Psalms 66:18-19), turn a deaf ear to the poor (Proverbs 21:13), or are wicked (Proverbs 15:29, Isaiah 59:1-3). God does not hear us when we choose not to hear God (Zechariah 7:11-14 and implied in Proverbs 28:9).

9. We need self-control. 1 Peter 4:7

10. We have sinned, such as divorce. Malachi 2:13-14

11. We ignore God and His law. Zechariah 7:13; Proverbs 28:9

12. We ignore the cry of the poor. Proverbs 21:13

13. We are inconsiderate of our wives. 1 Peter 3:7

14. God will not hear if they are still worshipping idols too. Ezekiel 8:8-18

15. Their hands are filled with blood. Isaiah 1:15

16. God knows what trials are best. 2 Corinthians 12:7-9

17. God disciplines us. 2 Samuel 12:16-18;22-24

Circumstances:

1. In his time, God might grant the prayer, but now is not yet the right time. Habakkuk 2:3

2. It might be that we need to change in some way, or that someone else needs to change. 1 Samuel 1:10-12; Exodus 2:23-24

God:

1. God might be answering our prayer as “no”

2. God might be allowing us to be tested.

Sometimes, as the book of Job and Daniel 10:2-3,12-14 show, we have absolutely no idea of everything that is going on behind the scenes. But we do know that our patience and persistence glorify God.

7. In Mt 7:12a, what are examples of the golden rule?

A: Notice that this does not say “brothers” i.e., fellow believers, but neighbors, both believers and non-believers. In business treat vendors, customers, co-workers, supervisors, and reports the way you would want and expect to be treated if the situation was reversed. For competitors, you can be a tough competitor, but still a fair and honorable one too. When a situation, sale, or transaction is completed, would you be at ease telling the other party you are a Christian, or embarrassed and ashamed to tell them you are a Christian.

The golden rule was given, in a negative way by Hillel a hundred years before, Philo of Alexandria, Tobit 4:15 and by Confucius (Legge, Chinese Classics, 1 p.191f).

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.1129, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1229, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.731, and The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.131-132 for more info.

8. In Mt 7:13-14, why do you think the gate is broad that leads to destruction, and narrow that leads to eternal life?

A: The two gates lead to different destinations. Satan leads the world down one path, which is ultimately self-serving and destructive. But God has a different path, and we need to choose whether to follow the crowd or follow God.

See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.34, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1229, and Ulrich Luz Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.435 for more info.

9. Does Mt 7:20 tell us how to show which religious group is the true religion?

A: Yes and no. In every religion there are people who claim to be of that religion, but do not follow what it says. There are many cultural Christians, cultural Muslims, cultural Hindus, etc. This passage says it is addressing individuals, especially false teachers. So, this verse is applicable to the founders of a cult or religion. See When Cultists Ask p.103 for a different answer.

10. In Mt 7:21-23, how can some think themselves saved and yet still go to hell?

A: There is an important concept called “counterfeit conversion”. People can not only fool others, but they can also fool themselves. Nothing here indicates they had heretical teachings. But if the fruit of their faith and life don’t line up with what the New Testament teaches, then they should examine their own faith, as Paul says to do in 2 Corinthians 13:6 says. See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.878, the New International Bible Commentary p.1129, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1229-1230, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.34, and Ulrich Luz Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.442 for more info.

11. In Mt 7:24-29, how does this apply to our lives?

A: Tony Evans give the illustration that he had a crack in his wall that he fixed many times, but it always came back. The problem was not the wall; no, it was more serious. The problem was with the foundation. If there is a crack in our life, spiritually, that keeps coming back, perhaps don’t look to the crack as the root cause. The root cause might be something wrong with the foundation. Technically this parable is not about two foundations; rather, it is where to build your foundation. See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.878, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1230, The Expositor’s Greek New Testament p.135-136, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.34,36 for more info.

12. Does Mt 7:24-29 show that only those who recognize their alleged “inner divinity” can withstand the storms of life as Spangler and some other New Agers say?

A: No, see the answer on Matthew 6:33. In this passage there is no mention of our divinity; New Agers are reading that into the passage. Rather, the issue is whether our life (our house) is built upon God’s foundation or sand. See When Cultists Ask p.103 for more info.

Matthew 8:1-18 – Jesus’ Authority over Disease  - some brief answers

1. In Mt 8:2, why did the leper phrase his question this way?

A: The leper had doubts about Jesus’ ability to make him clean. The leper was unsure of Jesus’ willingness to make him clean.

   Leprosy is also a good metaphor for sin. It looks gross, spreads on the person, is infectious to others, and was humanly incurable.

   See the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1231 for more info.

2. In Mt 8:4, why was the leper to make the sacrifice as a testimony to the priests?

A: This would serve as a testimony to show the priests he was miraculously cleansed, and it also would be a testimony to the priests that Jesus was still upholding the law. Probably very few lepers went to the priest asking to be examined since they were healed now. The priest, if he were on the ball, might investigate who this healer was; however, there is no mention that the priest looked into this further. This might have been the reason why Jesus “tested the priest” by having him be the first to examine the man.

   Another reason was that Jesus wanted restoration in the society for the man as well as physical healing. If the priest had heard second-hand that this man was “clean” despite not having gone to the priest like the Mosaic Law said, then out of spite the priest might have refused to pronounce him clean.

   Later, some of the Pharisees became Christians, according to Acts 15:5. For all of their many faults, many of the Pharisees still had the virtues of taking God’s word seriously, and believing what God said about resurrection and afterlife.

   See the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1231, The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.138,  and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.36-37 for more info.

3. In Mt 8:5-13 did the centurion come to Jesus himself, or did he send others as Lk 7:1-10 says?

A: There are two possible answers.

1) The centurion sent others ahead, and then came himself.

2) When the centurion “came”, that does not necessarily mean he came in person. For example, when John 19:1 says that Pilate whipped Jesus, which does not mean Pilate did it with his own hands.

   See Bible Difficulties & Seeming Contradictions p.174-175 and When Critics Ask p.334 for more info.

4. In Mt 8:10 and Lk 7:9, why did Jesus marvel at the centurion?

A: Jesus marveled at the comparison He observed. The centurion was not Jewish, and he had not been brought up in the Law all of his life, yet the centurion had more faith than many Jews. The centurion thought that Jesus could order about disease similar to how he ordered about his soldiers. Having faith is not simply based on your environment and upbringing. The centurion might have said he was undeserving either because of Jewish customs or, more likely, because he recognized Jesus’ power and authority. The centurion might have been aware of the earlier healing in John 4:46-54 and that gave him hope and courage to approach Jesus.

   See the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.731-732, The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.139, the New International Commentary on the Bible p.1130, and the Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.878-879 for more info.

5. In Mt 8:12, does this refer to temporary punishment or eternal punishment?

A: The verse itself does not say. However, “weeping and gnashing of teeth” elsewhere refers to not only agony, but honor, privilege, and joy that is permanently lost, so this most likely refers to eternal punishment.

6. In Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30 is Hell a place of darkness, or a place of fire in Rev 20:14; Mk 9:48?

A: Both. First a short answer, then a longer answer.

Short answer: This fire is no mere earthly fire, and God could make this fire however He wishes. God is describing to us something we have not ever seen on earth, and while we do not know how similar or different earthly fire is from Hellfire, it is similar enough for God to use this as a descriptive metaphor.

Long answer: Scientifically fire is bright because it emits light photons in the visible spectrum (red through violet). It feels hot because it radiates us with light photons in other parts of the spectrum too, mainly infrared from fire, while the sunlight through the atmosphere has more ultraviolet rays. How would you describe the something that just gives off mainly x-rays or gamma rays? This could fry something a whole lot quicker, but it would look dark to the visible eye. Leaving photons, a neutron star would have most of its energy emitted as neutrons which an atomic bomb gives off, but it would be dark if there were few photons. Now we do not know whether Hell is hot because of photons, neutrons, or something entirely else, but these earthly observations simply show there are many possibilities of what darkness and fire of Hell could be like.

   See When Cultists Ask p.104-105 and When Critics Ask p.335 for other answers.

7. In Mt 8:13, what is the significance of Jesus’ phrasing here?

A: It is not recorded that Jesus said this to anyone else. The centurion had such great faith, that Jesus should say this and his daughter would be healed.

8. In Mt 8:14 and 1 Cor 9:5, does Peter being married prove wrong the Catholic practice that priests cannot marry?

A: Speaking as a Protestant, this particular verse neither proves nor disproves this point. Peter was married before he became a disciple. In like manner, there have been married Episcopalian priests in the twentieth century who converted to Catholicism, and the Catholic church let them continue to be married Catholic priests and continue as before in their marriage.

9. In Mt 8:15, what is interesting about the healing of the fever here?

A: Usually when someone gets over a fever, they are weak and need time to recover. Being sick from a fever was not uncommon, due to malaria. Peter’s mother-in-law needed no time at all to recover before she started serving them.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.37, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1232, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.204, The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.140-141, and the New International Bible Commentary p.1158-1159 for more info.

10. In Mt 8:17, does Isa 53:4 refer to suffering for us, or healing us?

A: Isaiah 53:4 could refer to both.

The Messiah will be hurt: As Isaiah 53:5 shows, this passage refers to the Messiah (the Suffering Servant) suffering for our sake. Similarly, Isaiah 53:6 says that the LORD laid upon the suffering servant our iniquity.

God’s people will be healed. Isaiah 53:5 as well as 53:4 show that a benefit of the Messiah will be our healing. Nothing in Isaiah 53 specifies this is only spiritual healing or physical healing. Certainly, God used the examples of physical healing to point beyond themselves to the greater importance of spiritual healing made possible through the cross.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.204-206 for a more extensive discussion.

Matthew 8:19-34 – Jesus’ Authority over People and Demons  - some brief answers

1. In Mt 8:20 and elsewhere, could Jesus be referring to someone besides Himself when He says, “Son of Man”?

A: No, Mark 14:41b shows that Jesus meant Himself. At the Garden of Gethsemane, right before His arrest, Jesus in Matthew 14:41b says, “Are you still sleeping and resting? Enough of that! The hour has come. Look, the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Get up, let us go. Look! My betrayer is approaching!” (NET Bible). See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.209-213 for an extensive discussion of the term “son of man”.

2. In Mt 8:20 and elsewhere, why does Jesus often call Himself the Son of Man?

A: Three points to consider in the answer.

1) Jesus thought this term was very significant. Jesus used this phrase 32 times in Matthew, 14 times in Mark, 26 times in Luke and 12 in John.

2) While the title Son of God is used to emphasize Jesus’ divinity, “Son of Man” emphasizes Jesus’ full humanity too. But just as Son of Man implies Jesus’ full humanity, Son of God emphasizes Jesus’ full divinity.

3) Daniel 7:13-14 prophetically speaks of the Son of Man. Jesus probably wanted them to go back and read this passage. It says, “I was watching I the night visions, ‘And with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man was approaching. He went up to the Ancient of Days and was escorted before him. To him was given ruling authority, honor, and sovereignty. All peoples, nations, and language groups were serving him. His authority is eternal and will not pass away. His kingdom will not be destroyed.” (NET Bible)

   See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.322-324, When Critics Ask p.335-336, When Cultists Ask p.105-106 and the New International Commentary on the Bible p.1130-1131 for more extensive answers.

3. In Mt 8:21-22, why did Jesus tell the man to let the dead bury their own dead?

A: Jesus was saying there were plenty of spiritually dead people around to bury the dead, and do not be tied up in things of no eternal significance. The problem was with the man’s request, “Lord … let me first”.

   There is no indication that the man’s father had already died. The man might have been saying, wait until my elderly father dies, and maybe until he gets the inheritance, and then I will follow you. So, the man wanted to follow Jesus, but he wanted to do it with his own timing. Jesus turned him down. In sharp contrast to this, when Matthew, the author of the gospel, was asked to follow Jesus, Matthew left immediately and followed Him in Matthew 9:9.

   See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.324, When Critics Ask p.336, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1232-1333, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.38, the New International Commentary on the Bible p.1130 and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.879 for more extensive answers.

4. In Mt 8:24-25, how could Jesus sleep through this great storm?

A: The Greek word here, seismos, can refer to an earthquake, but here it refers to a violent “shaking” of the sea. Jesus had conquered human sicknesses, and He had no fear of natural elements either. There are two possibilities.

Natural: Jesus was tired after His preaching and slept very soundly. Back then they had no microphones or sound systems, so a public speaker had to speak very loudly. Remember also that Jesus had no anxiety about reaching the other side. If Jesus could normally sleep in a small boat, then He is simply sleeping when there are higher waves and wind.

Supernatural: If the storm were so great that nobody could sleep through it, then perhaps the Father had Jesus be in a very deep sleep to test the disciple’s faith in God keeping Jesus safe.

   See the Evangelical Bible Commentary p.732 and The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.143 for more info.

5. In Mt 8:24-27, what can we apply from this to our lives?

A: Everyone has storms, some so serious they could swamp our boat. However, Jesus’ view of the storm, and our view of a storm might be radically different. The disciples were fishermen, and they knew that fishermen could die in storms like this. As Matthew henry says, Jesus did not chide them for waking Him to ask for help, but rather for their fears and lack of faith. The disciples did not realize that they should have no fear that their boat would sink, with Jesus in it. The disciples had faith, but they did not have a faith they could rely on. The storm was genuinely fierce, but the thing to do was to have Jesus quell the storm. We can have storms in our life that not only appear to be fierce, but really are fierce. We need to ask Jesus to quell the storm.

   Jesus had two rebukes here: one for the wind and waves, and one for the disciples for their little faith. It is as if they did not fully realize, or really remember, who was in the boat with them. Perhaps we need to repent when we forget who is in the boat of our life with us. One good thing about trials in our life, is that they introduce us anew to a better understanding of who Jesus is.

   Finally, when the wind stops, the water is still very choppy for a while. But the disciples were astonished because Matthew 8:26 says not only the wind but also the waves were calm. A boat would not be safe until the waves were calm, so God made the waves calm too.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.38-39, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.215, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1233, and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.880 for more info.

6. In Mt 8:28, were there two demon-possessed men in the country of the Gergesenes, or just one according to Mk 5:1-4; Lk 8:26-33?

A: While there possibly could be two different events, it is more likely it was the same event, and there was a scribal error in Matthew. Papias, a disciple of John the apostle, wrote that Matthew originally wrote his Gospel in Hebrew/Aramaic. When Critics Ask p.337 adds that if there two men, then both accounts are correct, because There is a very fundamental mathematical law … - wherever there are two, there is always one. There are no exceptions!” We would have a problem if Mark and Luke said there was only one man, but the word “only” is not there.

7. In Mt 8:28, exactly what town was near the demon-possessed man?

A: It would either be in Gadara or Gerasa. The difficulty is that there were three towns with rather similar names. On top of that, if this was transcribed from Hebrew, the Hebrew letters for “r” and “d” are very similar.

Gergesenes (of Gergesa), modern Khersa, is town named in the majority of manuscripts. It is on the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, and the hills slope suddenly to the sea.

Gadarenes (of Gadara), modern Um Qeis, was only 5 to 8 miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee, and the “land of the Gadarenes” did reach the Sea of Galilee as proved by Josephus mentioning this and a coin of Gadara showing a ship. Vaticanus, the text of Ephraem Rescriptus, and some copies of the Diatessaron have this town.

X Gerasenes (of Gerasa) (modern day Jerash) it is about 30 miles from the Sea of Galilee so it would not be that town. This name is only in Italic manuscripts, the Vulgate, the margin (not the text) of the Harclean Syriac, and Sahidic Coptic.

X Gersa in Gilead is 20 miles east of the Jordan River

X Gaxarenes is not a town that existed. This obvious misspelling is only in the original Siniaticus, and a later scribe corrected it in the Sinaiticus manuscript to Gergasenes.

 See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.324-326, Hard Sayings of the Bible p.373, When Critics Ask p.336-337, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.122, Aland et al.’s The Greek New Testament p.29, The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.144-145, and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.219-220 for more info.

8. In Mt 8:28-29, what can we see from this in our lives?

A: First of all, the tombs should be a quiet place, with nothing living around there. But in the realm of the dead is where demons operate. The demoniacs should not have been there; they should have lived with everyone else. We don’t know why they were there; because they chose to avoid people, because people drove them out, to do grave robbing, to rob or kill those who came, or some other reason. But it would be surprising for someone to pay respects to the grave of someone and then, all of a sudden, these two demon-possessed men show up.

   In our life and the lives of others around us, there might be dead things in our past that should not be revisited, brought up, or even voluntarily remembered. But suddenly, for whatever reason, something that should no longer be there shows up anyway. We should be firm that this cannot be; that has to be cast out, in the Name of Jesus. We are a new creation; part of that means what is old and sinful needs to die, - and stay dead.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.880 for more info.

9. In Mt 8:29, what did the demons mean by “torment us before the time”?

A: The demons knew they would be sent to the abyss (Jude 6; Revelation 20:1-2) and later to the Lake of Fire (Revelation 20:14-15).

10. In Mt 8:32, why did Jesus grant the demons’ request to go into the pigs?

A: Scripture does not say. But it seems that it did not do the demons any good to go into pigs that drowned right away. It is interesting that the townspeople were more concerned about the 2,000 pigs that drowned than the two demoniac people. They value financial loss more than spiritual gain. See the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1233, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.219, and the Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.880 for more info.

Matthew 9 – Jesus’ Authority over Traditions, Death, and the Incurable - some brief answers

1. In Mt 9:1, Mk 6:45, and Jn 6:17,  why did Jesus spend time here in Capernaum, which Luke calls “his own city”?

A: Remember, the people of Nazareth (about 20 miles away) had tried to kill Jesus in Luke 4:29-31, and the Gergesenes specifically asked Jesus to leave after 2,000 pigs were drowned, so Jesus made Capernaum is home. It is very likely the modern Tell Hum about 2.5 miles southwest of where the Jordan River enters the Sea of Galilee, on the northwest shore. Simon Peter, Andrew, and Philip were all originally from Bethsaida as was Philip (John 1:44, 12:21), which was very close by. As adults they worked in the lakeside town of Capernaum, along with James, John, and Matthew (Mark 1:29). See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.66,226,310 and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1234 for more info.

2. In Mt 9:2-6, what would be considered wrong with Jesus forgiving sins?

A: People sinned against God, and they correctly reasoned Jesus would have to be God to forgive sins against God. Notice that Jesus did not say “God authorized or approved me to say that your sins forgiven”. Rather, Jesus simply pronounced, “your sins are forgiven”. While the Jews were supposed to be expecting a Messiah, they would not expect the Messiah himself to forgive sins. Both forgiving sins and healing diseases are pointed out in Psalm 103:3, but both are specifically the LORD’s job.

   Naturally speaking telling the man “your sins are forgiven” would be just as ridiculous as commanding a crippled man to walk.

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.1131, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.732, Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1234, and The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.148 for more info.

3. In Mt 9:9-10 what is the background on Matthew and his friends?

A: Matthew (meaning gift of God or possibly faithful) is the same person known as Levi in Mark. Both are Hebrew names. This was outside of Capernaum, where a Roman garrison was. A tax collector there would need to be fluent in both Aramaic and Greek, though Latin would also help. We don’t know the for sure main language spoken at the banquet, or even if Aramaic was spoken hardly at all. Regardless, no Pharisees or self-respecting Jews would be seen there, eating with “sinners”.

   The tax collectors were despised because they collected taxes for the Roman occupiers. Also, they were expected to charge more than the government required and keep the difference. There would be so much opportunity to charge even more and take advantage of others, it would be a hard temptation to resist.

   Since there were a lot of guests, perhaps Matthew’s house was large, or the dinner might have been in an outdoor courtyard of the house. Probably at the dinner the guests were invited to become disciples too. (Jesus had a lot of disciples besides the inner circle of the twelve.) As the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1234 says of Matthew “He lost a comfortable job, but he found a destiny. He lost a good income, but he found honor. He lost a comfortable security, but he found an adventure the like of which he had never dreamed.” Imagine if Matthew had said “no” when Jesus had asked him. Matthew would not have been an apostle, would not have written the gospel, and instead would just have lived out his days as a purposeless, fairly well-off but despised and later forgotten anonymous man.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.39, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.223-224, The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.150-151, and the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.733 for more info.

4. In Mt 9:12, what did Jesus mean that only the sick need a physician?

A: All are sick, but only those that realize they are sick seek out a doctor. So, in one sense the charge they accused Jesus of was absolutely true. But by eating with the Pharisees, or with anyone else for that matter, Jesus would eat with sinners too! Since Jesus had just proved that He could forgive the sins of the paralytic, Jesus could forgive sins of tax collectors too. If someone says they don’t want to go to church because it is filled with people who are imperfect and sin, tell that that should not stop them, because the church always has room for one more! See Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1234-1235 and The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.152 for more info.

5. In Mt 9:13, why did Jesus mention God desiring mercy and not sacrifice?

A: Jesus is referring to Hosea 6:6. While God commanded sacrifice as well as to be merciful, God was more interested in us having a heart of mercy than sacrifice. Just as in Hosea’s time, some religious people in Jesus’ time cared less for others and were more concerned with being with the “right kind” of people. Jesus was concerned for the lost tax collectors and sinners and rebuked them for not recognizing that all are sinners before God, and they had no reason to feel themselves better than other sinners. The scribes and Pharisees showed their heart because they never accused Jesus of being a tax collector or sinner, but of associating with them. See Bible Difficulties & Seeming Contradictions p.118-119 and The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.152 for more info.

6. In Mt 9:14, why did the disciples not fast?

A: Jesus did not say his disciples would never fast, but rather they did not need to fast while Jesus was still with them in the flesh. For the proper purposes of fasting, see the discussion on Matthew 6:16-18. See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.226-227 for more info.

7. In Mt 9:16-17 and Mk 2:21-22, what is the point of the analogies of the clothes and the wineskins?

A: Even in the natural world one cannot always gradually ease into something new. Sometimes you need to “break the mold”, shift paradigms, or have a new beginning. Jesus was saying here to accept His teaching, the break was so radical, you have to be born again (John 3:5-7) and become a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:16-17). See also the discussion on Mk 2:21-22.

   Unfortunately, in ancient times people Paul spoke against in Galatians, called Judaizers, were trying exactly that; to mix grace and Jesus’ teachings with the law and Old Testament commands. In a different way, some Seventh Day Adventists do that too.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.227, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.40, The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.153, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1235-1236  for more info.

8. In Mt 9:20, what is special about the hem of a garment?

A: It was probably tassels on the edge of the garment. These might have been thought a more holy part of a garment because tassels with a blue thread in the middle were commanded in Numbers 15:38f; Deuteronomy 22:12.

   The lady seemed very secretive about this. According to Leviticus 15:19-33, her continual flow of blood would have made her unclean, so she should not have mingled in the crowd in close quarters to get to Jesus in the first place.

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.1131, The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.154, and the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.733 for more info.

9. In Mt 9:20-22, Mk 5:27-34, and Lk 8:43-49, why did Jesus publicly call out the woman with the flow of blood?

A: Physical healing was not the reason Jesus came to earth. Jesus was more concerned about the woman’s faith than just the physical malady. As one pastor quipped about this public miracle, “At the end of our rope is the hem of Jesus’ robe.”

10. In Mt 9:20-22 and Mk 5:27-34 does the amount of faith we have determine whether our prayers are answered?

A: It is a factor. For prayers that are in God’s will, we need to have faith when we pray. James 1:6-7 says that we must ask without doubting because a double-minded person will not get what he or she is asking for. However, if we believe, but still have some doubts, we can ask, while still honestly acknowledging our unbelief as the man did in Mark 9:24, and God will honor our prayer. It is also nice to know that the Holy Spirit intercedes for us in prayer in Romans 8:26-27.

   Of course, even if we ask something with more faith than anyone has ever asked for anything before, and it is not God’s desire to give it to us, then God will not, as James 4:3 shows. This is a piece of a large question: when does God answer prayer, and when does scripture say He does not. See the discussion on Matthew 7:7-11 and Hard Sayings of the Bible p.419-421 for more info.

11. In Mt 9:23-26, why have professional mourners?

A: Paid mourners were common, so that you would have time to attend to all the guests for the funeral. According to M Ketuboth 4:4 even a poor family would have to pay for two flute players and one professional wailing woman. Some have called this “synthetic grief”. Dying is big business, then and now. See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.231 and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1236 for more info.

12. In Mt 9:28-31, why did these two blind men, who had the faith to believe in Jesus, not have the obedience to refrain from broadcasting this to others?

A: This is an interesting issue. These blind men “saw” that Jesus was the Son of David, i.e., the Messiah, better than most of those with sight. These men had the faith to turn to Jesus when there was no other alternative. Yet, though they turned to Jesus in faith for the big things, they did not obey Him on this small thing. Perhaps they thought that broadcasting this at this time would be helpful, and they presumptuously thought they knew more about what was helpful than Jesus did.

   Here is the interesting but sad situation of spiritually discerning people, who had great faith in Jesus, then choosing to directly disobey Jesus. Wisdom and faith are not good for much without obedience. Yes, they received their vision, but Jesus did not receive obedient servants here.

   See the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1236-1237 and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.232-233 for more info.

13. In Mt 9:38, should we pray for more workers for the harvest today?

A: Yes, this is an often-neglected prayer. We pray for the harvest, which is for people to come to Christ and become His disciples, but we should also pray for more harvesters that God would use to evangelize Christians, because Jesus says the laborers will be few, meaning too few. Sometimes when times are rough and economic conditions are hard, even those who pastor and work in the mission field can feel discouraged and want to leave. Workers are sent out by God, but they should stay sent out until God calls them to do something else. See the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1237 for more info.

Matthew 10:1-16 – Jesus sends the Twelve - some brief answers

1. In Mt 10:1, could the disciples heal before this?

A: Regardless of if they did heal some diseases before this, here Jesus was giving them the power over every disease. By the way, Matthew 10:2 is the first time they are called apostles.

2. In Mt 10:4 and Mk 3:18, how could Simon the Cananaean be one of Jesus’ disciples, since Simon [allegedly] was not a Jew?

A: The KJV and NKJV say “Canaanite”, with the NKJV having a footnote saying the majority text is “Cananaean”. The NASB and NRSV say “Canaanean”.

   Whether Simon was not at all a Jew or partly Jewish is not the point. Jesus could call disciples from any nationality. As a side note, many from the Gentile towns of Tyre and Sidon came to see Jesus in Mark 3:8. Tyre was about 35 miles from the Sea of Galilee, and Sidon was 25 miles from Tyre.

   However, the Greek word Kananaios could be a transliteration of the Aramaic qan’an which means zealot. Luke 6:15 and Acts 1:13 call him “Simon the Zealot”. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary volume 8 p.237,239 and Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.840, and The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.158 say the same. But this brings up an interesting point. If one of Jesus’ disciples used to be a zealot, and another, Matthew, a tax collector, they would have been diametrically opposite politically, at least before coming to Christ. See the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.734 for more on this.

3. In Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19; Lk 6:16; Jn 6:71, what does “Iscariot” mean?

A: Judas’ father is named Simon in John 6:71 and 13:26, so it is not his father’s name. There are two views of what Iscariot meant.

1. Iscariot could mean “man of the dagger”.

2. It could mean man (ish) from Kerioth, which was the name of two towns in Judah. See various sources, including the Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land p.212 and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.239 for more info.

4. In Mt 10:5-6, why did Jesus explicitly command His disciples not to go into the Samaritan villages?

A: This was a matter of timing, as Jesus explicitly did command them to go into Samaria in Acts 1:8.

   Jesus was sent first to Israel, and then to the rest of the world. The apostles first went to Judea, then Samaria, and then to the ends of the earth. When Paul went to a new town, he too followed the pattern of preaching first at the synagogue. In many things today there might be timing that God wants us to follow, too.

5. In Mt 10:5-6; 15:24-26, was Jesus a racist who came only for the Jews? (The Muslim Ahmad Deedat claimed this.)

A: Not at all, as we can see reading these 24 passages. Matthew 2:1; 3:9-10; 4:15-16; 5:13-16; 8:1-13; 8:18-28; 10:18; 21:43; 24:14; 25:31-46; 28:16-20; Mark 7:24-30; 7:31-37; 8:1-10 (east side of the Sea of Galilee); Luke 8:22-33; 24:45-47; John 1:9,29; 3:17; 10:16; 12:46; 14:6; 17:20; 18:27; Acts 1:7-8. However, Jesus had a sense of timing.

Prior to His Resurrection, Jesus announced the gospel to God’s people, the Jews, first. Even in Acts 1:8, Jesus gave the order of being His witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, and then to the ends of the earth. Nevertheless, prior to Jesus’ death and resurrection, not only did Jesus minister to the Syro-Phoenician woman in Matthew 15:24-26, but he ministered to the Samaritans in John 4:1-42, as well as those Gentiles east of the Sea of Galilee.

After His Resurrection in Matthew 28:19-20 Jesus said, “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” The message was re-emphasized by God in Acts 10.

   As a side note, Ahmadiyya Muslims also have claims that Jesus came only for Jewish people.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.244-245 for more info.

6. In Mt 10:13, what does this mean of the disciples’ blessing setting on a house or else returning to them?

A: The “house” here refers to those residing in the house. They were not to worry about “accidentally” blessing someone who do not really welcome them. The blessing comes from God, not any magic of their words.

7. In Mt 10:14 and Mk 6:11, why were the disciples to shake the dust off their feet at those that would not welcome them?

A: This was a testimony against them. That is, the inhospitable people might reconsider their ways after seeing this rebuke. Also, it would be a testimony to God against those who rejected His message.

8. Do Mt 10:14 and Mk 6:11 mean that we should never debate with anyone but just leave?

A: No for a number of reasons: you have look at all of the special commissioning at this time for the twelve, and it does not say to leave if someone opposes them. Rather, to shake the dust off their feet as a sign WHEN they leave if no one welcomes them. Finally, the apostles Peter and Paul debated others, and Apollos, a non-apostle debated too.

Special Commissioning at This Time:

Matthew 10:5-20 is probably the same event as Mark 6:11, and you have to look at the entire passages, not just part of one verse. The twelve disciples were not to take a staff, any money, and stay in someone else’s house. This is not the pattern for all evangelism after that. The fact that they were not to stay in one place and discuss and debate (unlike as Paul later did at the Hall of Tyrannus in Acts 19:9-10) is reasonable as they were initially spreading the message.

   Even then they were not to leave if someone opposes them. Rather, they were to stay in someone’s house who would welcome them. If no one in the town would welcome them, then they would leave, shaking the dust off of their feet.

Shake the Dust Off WHEN They Leave

The Greek here does not actually tell them to leave. Rather it says to shake the dust of their feet WHEN they leave. Both they, future Christians, and us, would have situations where in the same place some people opposed them, and others supported them. In 2 Corinthians 10:3-6 Paul says, “For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” (NIV)

Jesus disputing with others

Jesus disputed with the Pharisees using questions in Matthew 22:41-46 and other places.

Then Jesus changed and used heavy, heavy rebuke in Matthew 23:1-37.

Jesus told the Pharisees they could commit the unforgivable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit in Matthew 12:22-33.

Jesus used named calling! He called those Jews “a wicked an adulterous generation” in Matthew 12:39-41. He called the people opposing Him “sons of Hell” in Mathew 23:15.

Jesus explicitly told the Sadducees they were in error because they did not know the scriptures or the power of God in Matthew 22:29-32.

Peter, Paul, Stephen, and Apollos debated with others

Besides Jesus, Paul was proving that Jesus was the Christ in Antioch in Acts 9:19-25. He was having both success and opposition. He did not leave until the Jews tried to kill him.

When Elymas opposed Paul in Acts 13:8-12, Paul rebuked him, and Paul did not leave.

When there was a riot in Ephesus against Paul, Paul wanted to speak with them in Acts 19:30.

In Jerusalem, Paul spoke to the hostile crowd in Acts 22:2-22.

Peter debated with non-believers in Acts, and Paul even more frequently debated with non-believers. Lest someone say this was only what apostles should do, Apollos was not an apostle, and he debated. However, it is not correct to assume that every single believer is equipped to debate with others.

Early Pre-Nicene Christians

The early pre-Nicene Christians, whom God used to transform the Roman world, used persuasion and argument extensively in their witnessing. They ranged from a friendly and lengthy dialogue between Justin Martyr and Trypho the Jew, to others such as Aristides, Theophilus of Antioch, Epistle to Diognetus, and Tertullian, detailing the alleged shameful acts of Greco-Roman deities, to Irenaeus and Hippolytus extensively refuting all the many varied schools of Gnosticism. Arnobius used very humorous ridicule of Greco-Roman paganism. Lactantius showed why Greek philosophy was wrong. You can see a list at

www.BibleQuery.org/History/ChurchHistory/WhatEarlyChristiansTaught.html. Search starting at “r1” in lower case.

Finally, if you disagree with me and others who live in the same city, and you still think you should not persuade or discuss with people who disagree with you but instead leave the city, I can call a moving truck for you if you want. ;-)
   Seriously, this actually raises two good questions: how did Jesus and early Christians dispute with people who disagree with them, and at what point should we stop disputing and leave? The next two questions address those topics.

9. In Mt 10:14 and Mk 6:11 when should we stop debating with a non-Christian and just leave?

A: There are at least three considerations.

Immediate Danger

If your life, the lives of your family, or the lives of other Christians are in immediate danger because of your presence, you might want to consider if God wants you to leave. Paul fled Antioch when they tried to kill him, and Christians fled frequently when they were persecuted. On one hand, we should be willing to die for Christ, but on the other hand God might want us to live a while longer to share the gospel more, and our fleeing might be the chosen means God has for preserving us.

Diminishing Return vs. Other Opportunities

I have reached the point where I am not able to put all the time I possibly could into witnessing as much as possible to every person who emails me, and still have time to sleep, be with my family, and regular work. With some people, I may give them only quick answers, or decline some ministry opportunities, in order to have time to do things that I think are more important for me to do. Once Paul went to a town, and some people had accepted Christ. Paul could have chosen to do a good thing and spend the rest of his life in that one town trying to convert everybody else there. But instead, Paul moved on to other towns. Don't let doing good things keep you from doing great things.
   On the other hand, I have continued disputing with people in cults whom I had extremely little hope that they would repent. I did this because there were other non-Christians there and I wanted them to be warned not to join.

If your disputing or preaching would be harmful or close people's ears

 I hesitate to mention this because most people have the opposite problem, not being bold enough in preaching the Gospel. Jesus said to pray for more workers for the harvest, and Paul in Philippians 1:14 was glad his sufferings encouraged other believers to preach more courageously and fearlessly. Furthermore, 2 Corinthians 2:15 says that (if we are doing things right) we WILL smell of the aroma of death to those who are perishing. The Gospel is offensive, and if our words never offend, we are not doing our job. However, as offensive as the gospel is to some, we are not to add to the offense. We are to speak the truth in love in Ephesians 4:15. Especially in modern culture, we can speak the truth in an obnoxious or insensitive way and turn people off unnecessarily. We can share the gospel so frequently to the same people, that our nagging can be annoying. We don’t want to add to the offense of the gospel, but we don’t want to take away any of the offense of the gospel either.

10. In Mt 10:14-15, 40-42, why did Jesus teach that receiving a righteous person was so important?

A: Receiving a righteous person entailed many things. It not only meant welcoming him, but giving the righteous person help, aid, and in the coming decades, shelter from pursuing authorities. Receiving a righteous person also implied accepting his teaching and being willing to learn from him. It also would entail letting him have a platform to teach others.

11. In Mt 10:15, why will it be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah on Judgment Day than for those who did not welcome the disciples into their homes?

A: Scripture does not say, but God judges people based on what they were able to know (Romans 4:15; 5:13). While the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were very wicked, they knew very little of God. People who are not as wicked but know a great deal about God, but still reject God’s disciples, will have to face serious judgment.

12. In Mt 10:16, how are they (and we) to be wise as serpents yet innocent as doves?

A: Very simply, we are to be aware of the schemes and potential traps that others could do, but we are never to do evil schemes ourselves.

Matthew 10:17-42 – Persecution will come - some brief answers

1. In Mt 10:19, how does the Holy Spirit give Christians the words to say when they are under persecution?

A: Whether a Christian is under persecution at a particular time or not, sometimes the Holy Spirit just pops into a person’s mind the words to say. Secondarily, God can have you see or hear everyday things around you that relate to the message you are to give. For example, right before speaking to the Athenians, Paul saw many idols, plus an altar to an unknown god. Also, we are reminded of truth through our reading of the Bible. Even if a Christian knew every story and every teaching in the Bible perfectly, it would still be important to read the Bible to be reminded of truth.

2. In Mt 10:19-20, when the Holy Spirit is giving Christians the words to say, does that mean that at that time, the words are inerrant (with no error), or infallible (without significant theological error)?

A: Unless the Holy Spirit were giving exact words, and it could be certain that the person heard the words without error, then it is possible that an obedient Christian can still speak with error.

3. In Mt 10:21-22, 35-36, why would members of a Christian household rise up against a Christian?

A: It is evil that family members of a worshipper of God would rise up against him or her. I have been told of an Algerian boy who converted from Islam to Christianity. When he refused to recant, his own mother put rat poison in his food.

4. In Mt 10:23, why did Jesus tell Christians to flee persecution, since God is protecting them?

A: God can protect us any way He wishes, and one way to protect us is telling us when to flee.
On one hand, there is no shame in fleeing, as many Christians did after Stephen was stoned in Acts 8:1-8. On the other hand, there are times when God does not want us to flee but to stand and suffer for Him. At different times, both Jesus and Paul deliberately went to Jerusalem, knowing what awaited them there.

5. In Mt 10:23, did Jesus’ coming never materialize since He would come before they went over all the cities of Israel? (The Muslim Ahmad Deedat brought this up.)

A: No, because in their fleeing they would not flee through every city in Israel before Jesus came, and they never fled through every city of Israel. This future event will most likely happen during the tribulation.

6. In Mt 10:23, what does this mean that Jesus will come before they finish going through all the towns of Israel?

A: First what is not the answer, then some facts, and finally the answer.

Not the answer: It says that Jesus will “come” so it cannot refer to His ascension where Jesus went away. Some think it refers to Jesus’ coming judgment of the destruction of Jerusalem, but nothing about a temple is mentioned here.

Some facts: We have no evidence of the disciples suffering persecution before Jesus was crucified. While the destruction of the temple was in 70 A.D., if Jesus came secretly and invisibly then, nobody in the early church had a clue about that. In fact, after 70 A.D., around 14 early Christians wrote of Christ’s return as a future event.

Two points in the answer: First, Jesus is not talking about preaching the gospel in Matthew 10:21-22, but rather going from town to town to flee persecution. So, running from persecution “starts the clock” so to speak. At that time Christians will not run out of towns to flee to before Christ returns. This will be in the future, likely during the tribulation.

Second, regardless of when this occurs, there is no evidence that the apostles were able to go through every town in Israel, so this has not happened yet.

   See When Critics Ask p.339-340 for more info.

7. In Mt 10:23 will the gospel be preached in every town, or will it not be preached in Mt 24:14?

A: It is important to read verses carefully to not misunderstand what they are saying. Matthew 24:14 says the gospel will be preached to the whole world as a testimony to all nations. That does not mean every individual is forced to listen; but with TV, radio, and the internet, the gospel today has been preached to almost the whole world, except for perhaps some isolated tribal areas.

   Matthew 10:23 is silent on whether every town in Israel will be preached to or not. Rather, it is speaking of fleeing persecution, and a Christian will not run out of towns in Israel to flee to before Christ returns.

8. In Mt 10:26, what does it mean that nothing is hidden that will not be revealed?

A: In the end everything will be revealed. Specifically, in the Last judgment, God will judge every action (Revelation 20:13), every idle word (Matthew 12:36-37), and even know all our thoughts (Psalm 139:2,4).

9. In Mt 10:28, how are physical bodies destroyed in Hell?

A: The Greek word here is Gehenna, which refers to Hell, but that word also refers to a large trash heap just south of Jerusalem. Regardless of where a wicked person’s first body is destroyed, their resurrection body goes to the Lake of Fire and is destroyed because they refuse to accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

10. In Mt 10:33, if a Christian in a moment of weakness denied Christ before men, would that Christian be denied by Jesus and go to Hell?

A: Peter did that, but Peter was forgiven. Denying Christ and repenting is not an unforgivable sin, because no sin is unforgivable, except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matthew 12:31,32; Mark 3:28-30; Luke 12:10-11).

11. In Mt 10:34, how did Jesus, the prince of peace, come not to bring peace but a sword?

A: Jesus did not wield a sword at anyone (at least not until His second coming), yet families divided, and many Christians have been killed because of the name of Jesus. Jesus is saying here, that even though He is the Prince of Peace, don’t assume He is here to bring peace on earth yet, though Jesus does bring peace now to the hearts of believers, according to Ephesians 2:14-17 and Philippians 4:6-7. See When Critics Ask p.340, Hard Sayings of the Bible p.378-379, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.883, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1241 for more info.

12. In Mt 10:37, why do we have to love God more than our own family?

A: In Mark 12:29-30 Jesus said loving God was the first commandment. God created us and loves us, more than anyone, and it is to God we should have our highest allegiance.

13. In Mt 10:41, how do we receive a prophet or righteous person’s reward by welcoming a prophet or righteous person?

A: This is true in at least two ways.

1. When a person welcomes them and receive their message, a person can convert to Christianity and become a righteous person too.

2. When we receive a Christian in Jesus’ name, that is a righteous act, and it is as if we are receiving Jesus, as Matthew 25:33-40 says.

Matthew 11:1-15 – John the Baptist’s Confusion - some brief answers

1. In Mt 11:3, why did John ask Jesus if He was the promised Messiah, since he saw the Spirit descending on Jesus like a dove in Jn 1:32?

A: John the Baptist was in prison in the fortress of Machaerus by the Dead Sea according to Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews book 18 ch.119(v.2). Perhaps John had not heard of the miracles and ministry of Jesus. Or perhaps John was wondering if Jesus was going to supernaturally free him from prison. There are at least four complementary possibilities:

Doubt: Perhaps John was having a moment of doubt here. The early church writer Tertullian (198-220 A.D.) was the first to suggest this.

Confusion: Perhaps John saw the prophecies of the first coming being fulfilled and was wondering about the prophecies of the Second Coming.

Impatience: William Hendrickson says that “Perhaps John’s difficulty was not his faith, but his patience. John made a very wise decision when, instead of keeping his difficulty regarding Jesus to himself, or talking it over with others but not with the right person, he took it to Jesus.” (The Gospel of Matthew 1973 p.84)

Prodding Jesus: Similarly, perhaps John was prodding Jesus to show more power, or both.

See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.261, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1242-1243, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.43-44, and The Expositor’s Greek Testament vol.1 p.169-170 for more info.

2. In Mt 11:3-6, why did Jesus just not say yes or no?

A: It is an easy thing to claim to be the Messiah. It is another thing to back up the claim by providing miraculous evidence. Jesus was reminding both John and Jesus’ listeners of the evidence Jesus provided.

3. In Mt 11:3, have there been times in your life where you were witnessing and living for God, and you have been confused or disappointed?

A: John the Baptist preached the word boldly, followed God faithfully. For his persevering effort, John ended up going from the freedom of the wilderness to the confined prison, where he would later be executed. But he did this for the great Messiah, who would do spectacular things and very soon reveal Himself in power. – except that that did not seem to be happening, at least on John’s expected timeline. John the Baptist was confused, and he just wanted to double-check that everything he worked at and suffered was not for nothing.

   Rather than rebuking John, privately or publicly, for having some doubt, Jesus sent to John to tell John things were coming, and he could look at the miracles now, using the language of Isaiah 35:5-6. Then he publicly affirmed John, despite his doubt.

   John might have been confused, but there are times where we can be confused too. Sometimes change for the good does not happen on our timeline. Sometimes it can look like everything we did was all for naught. Sometimes, like Job, we have no clue why we are following God faithfully and yet so many bad things happen to us.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.261-263 for more info.

4. Do Mt 11:11 and Lk 7:28 teach that John the Baptist went to Hell, as Rev. Moon’s Divine Principle p.161 teaches?

A: No. John 10:41-42 shows that John’s testimony led many to believe in Jesus. We should be cautious in condemning a martyr who died for God as failing and offending God. Jesus saying the one who is least in the kingdom heaven is greater than [John the Baptist] refers to the fact that Jesus had not opened the way to heaven, and John the Baptist was actually the last prophet under the old covenant. Also, if John the Baptist failed in his teaching, then why in Matthew 21:32 did Jesus say the people were to believe John the Baptist? See also the next question for more info.

5. In Mt 11:11 and Lk 7:28, what does it mean that he who is least in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than John the Baptist?

A: This is not saying John was not saved or a bad guy, because he highly praised John in the first part of the verse, and as the chosen forerunner, John had a place that no one else in history had. But the kingdom of heaven had not yet come on the earth, so John the Baptist was killed before he could be a part. Moreover, the spiritual insight of believers would be greater than John the Baptist had.

There are also three additional viewpoints, and all of which might be true.

Hebrew Idiom: This expression is very similar to a rabbinic saying of Johanan ben Zakkai, one of the most respected scholars of the first century, being the “least of” Hillel’s eighty disciples; this saying was not meant to diminish John’s status but to increase that of his contemporaries.

None until Jesus: Even John the Baptist was not in the kingdom of Heaven yet. No one was, until Jesus opened the way through His death and resurrection.

Relative position in Heaven: Remember that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit from before birth. A speculation is that perhaps believers in Heaven, who had to be regenerated after they were born will have a higher position than one who did not have to go through this.

   See the Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.973, the IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament 1993 p.76 the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1394, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.815, Hard Sayings of the Bible p.459-460, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.8 p.264-265, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.223 for more info.