Showing posts with label John 20. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John 20. Show all posts

Sunday, August 30, 2026

Binding of Sins (Matthew 18:15-20)

Note:  This post comes out of my 2023 sermon on Matthew 18:15-20.  I will focus on the word "bind."  However, you can access my post on Matthew 18:15-20 or John 20:19-31.

I want to reflect a bit more on what Jesus means when he says "Truly I tell you, whatever you BIND on earth will be BOUND in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."  I offer that this word "bind" (δεω) might have three meanings.

  • Classic medieval: The binding, along with the loosing, refers to the keys of heaven which are given to the church (see Matthew 16:19).  These keys of loosing and binding will open and close the door.  As the church chooses to absolve or not absolve sins, people are moved in or blocked from heaven.
  • Rabbinic:  A movement has picked up in recent scholarship to view the "binding" and "loosing" referring to the Rabbinic practice of determining, within a community, what was "bound", that is "sinful" and what was "loose", that is ''permitted." 
  • Pastoral:  The binding refers here to the act of restoring a lost sheep by binding sins to Christ.

I want to unpack each of these, describe the Scriptural argument for each, its implications and its shortcomings.

Classic Medieval

In a nutshell:  The classic understanding of the office of the keys is nicely summarized by Martin Luther in his small catechism:

What is the Office of the Keys?  The Office of the Keys is the special authority which Christ has given to His Church on earth: to forgive the sins of the penitent sinners, but to retain the sins of the impenitent as long as they do not repent.

(See footnote for a longer passage of Luther) 

It is worth noting that the medieval Roman Catholic church and Luther were in agreement about what the keys did (see Aquinas on the office of the keys belonging to the church).  Luther disagreed about whether the keys belonged to the "holy Roman Catholic church" or the "holy catholic church, the communion of saints" and how the keys were dealt with through the sacramental system.

Biblical support:  All of this understanding arises from Matthew 16, Matthew 18 and John 20, in which Jesus gives the apostles authority to forgive sins and retain them.  It is worth noting that the wording is different in Matthew and John, with Matthew using the words "bind" and "loosen" and John using the words "forgive" and "hold/retain/grasp."

Implications and Shortcomings:  The mission of the church becomes clear:  act as a gate keeper for who is in and who is out of the Kingdom of God.  This clarifies and perhaps simplifies the task of the church in an age when the objectives often seem political and social.  

However, the church doors, physically and spiritually, become hard boundaries of God's mercy on earth.  As discipleship in Jesus moves from a Jewish renewal movement to an inter-continental institution, this boundary becomes a wall and the institution abuses its power, time and time again.

It also makes the point of life "getting into heaven" rather than experiencing eternal life, which begins here and now, as Jesus comes to us.

Rabbinic

In a nutshell:  This way of thinking might be new to some.  The binding and loosing, in this view, refer to the process by which community leaders, Rabbis, would determine what was morally permissible (or not) for a community.  A good article I found online by the author Kindalee Pfremmer De Long outlines it.  As she writes

In this practice of [rabbinic] binding and loosing, rabbis uphold the law as eternal and universal but recognize that new contexts require new decisions about how to bind or loose particular behaviors. 

Biblical support:  In the article by De Long, she delves more deeply into historical and linguistic support of this interpretation, which she acknowledges is solid but not exhaustively conclusive.  It is not a strictly biblical argument, per se, but one in which extra-Biblical sources allow us to better understand what the original authors (or in this case, the original speaker, Jesus) likely meant.

De Long also does not dismiss the classic way of understanding this passage.  She offers that both people may be bound or loosed (classic) and that laws or ethical standards may be bound or loosed (rabbinic).  I resonated with De Long's article, not simply in substance, but also tone.  She wrote in a generous spirit - rather than a "everyone got it wrong because we/I've discovered this social science data from the 1st century that upends everything you knew", she approached it with a "there is likely another layer to this that has impact for ministry" attitude.

Implications and Shortcomings:  In this way of thinking, Christian communities become loci of ethical and moral discernment.  For a community to exist, there must be agreed upon standards of behavior, processes for determining these standards and then means by which people are restored to the community. 

The Rabbinic perspective returns to the Achilles' heal for Protestants - once you've left the institution AND acknowledged that differences are inevitable, on what basis can you find unity and on what basis will your ethical teachings stand?  And furthermore, why attend a church that doesn't suit your moral proclivities, which increasingly means your political stances?  Like, if you disagree with your church's moral conclusion about some issue, why not leave?  In short, if your church is going to stake its hat on getting it right morally and you don't agree, why stay?

Pastoral

As a western and American, living in the 21st century, I live in just about the most autonomous and individualized culture in the earth's history.  Never before have people been less grounded in their past, including both family of origin and even biological gender.   In short, we tend to trust our feelings and are motivated to create a life, a story, an identity for ourselves, often over and against the entities that brought us to bear.  Our participation in society often amounts to signaling our virtue more than bearing one another's burdens and we move to "cancel" rather than listen.  

This all makes me acutely hungry for Matthew 18 and Jesus words about community.  More and more, in fact, I sense that God's Kingdom is a place where this individualism dissolves in Christ's grace.  I can stop having to create myself and simply let Christ define me.  While I retain a sense of distinction from others -- we do not become a blob -- I am finally able to get over myself in a way that I can be for others.  God's Kingdom allows for real community, truly communion, with God of course, but also with others.  In that light, I very much appreciated Rolf Jacobson's article about the community dynamics within Matthew 18.  Jacobson helps these words of the binding and loosing be heard in their context, namely, that of a good shepherd finding lost sheep.

If Jesus is indeed speaking about bringing people into "Life Together" as Bonhoeffer called it, what might binding look like?  Fascinatingly, Bonhoeffer ends his book with a chapter on Confession and Communion.  He extols the virtues of confession and bases participation in Holy Communion on confession.  Yet he does not mention binding of sins, but rather the proclamation of forgiveness. 

In short, a community needs to bind and loosen laws in terms of structuring life together, but given the reality of sin (see again Jacobson's article), inevitably we fill mess up before God and each other.  The only way forward is forgiveness and reconciliation.  Does this mean, then, that we have left the binding of sins behind or simply see binding as the way to remove people from the community?

μη γενιοτο (heck no!)  The community needs something bound in order for the key of loosing to work.  Sin must be dealt with.  The only binding that can actually hold a community together, then is confession and absolution, which is a binding of the sin to the cross and the freeing of the new creation for life together.

In reality, this binding will likely take weeks and be on-going given the capacity for humans to hurt ourselves and each other.  We will again and again need to bind the old sinner to the cross - our shame, our guilt, our pride, our fears, everything.  While I cannot prove it, I sense that a congregation that truly experiences this kind of forgiveness, not simply from the pulpit, but from each other (as Bonhoeffer envisions) is the kind of church that will cohere even when people disagree.  

***

PS  Longer Luther passage on the keys:

"We possess these two keys through Christ's command.  The key which binds it the power or office to punish the sinner who refuses to repent by means of a public condemnation to eternal death and separation from the rest of Christendom... The key which binds carries forward the work of the law.  It is profitable to the sinner in as much as it reveals to him his sins, admonishes him to fear God, causes him to tremble and moves him to repentance and not to destruction." ("The Keys", pg 372, LW 40)

Sunday, April 5, 2026

John 20:19-31

In the RCL, this passage appears on Easter II

Summary:  This is a rich enough story to preach on every year.  There are so many directions!  Obviously, there is a lot in this passage about the dynamics of doubt.  But I don't think one needs to take that angle!

Key Words:
λεγει ("speak", 20.19)  The verb here for "speak" is the present tense, which suggests repeated action: He continually was saying to them, "Peace be with you."

υμιν ("you all" in the dative, 20:19).  The Greek leaves out the word "is" in the sentence, simply declaring "Peace to you."  Hence, the Greek is a bit more ambiguous here as to whether Jesus is offering a blessing or making a statement: "Peace is with you" could work. All that the Greek has is "Peace to/for/with/by/in you."

Always worth addressing to an American audience:  This you is a plural you.  The peace is among, with and for the whole group, not just an individual.

It is also worth noting the power of the community in this passage:  They continue to believe for Thomas, even when he cannot believe himself.

θυρα ("gate", 20.19)  The word for "door" or "gate" here is θυρα; this word is used in other Gospels to talk about the entrance to Jesus tomb.  It can be hard to make cross-Gospel connections, so a bit simpler:  Jesus calls himself the θυρα, or the Gate in John's Gospel (10:1-9).  See also:

κεκλεισμενων ("locked", 20.26) The text literally reads: "The Jesus of locked doors/gates came stood into the middle of them." This is a very odd placement/case of the expression "locked doors/gates."  It may modify the circumstances under which Jesus came (ie, Jesus came in after the gates were locked), but it might also modify Jesus.  This is the more exciting possibility.  Again, option A, the standard translation:  "Jesus came while the doors were locked."  Option B, more exciting:  "Jesus of locked doors came." The former is the more likely translation, but John seems to suggest the latter through his narrative.  My point with the "locked gates" Jesus is that Jesus is very good at breaking down barriers that we establish.   

αποστελλω vs πιμπω ("send", 20.21) Jesus here will use different verbs for the father's sending and his sending of the disciples, αποστελλω vs πιμπω .  Don't read into this.  John just likes to use variety. See 8.29 and 17.18 for examples of Jesus using these verbs interchangeably.  The big deal is that Jesus sends the disciples.  Don't buy the idea that this is a core Johannine theme; this is a core New Testament and whole Bible theme!

ενεφυσησεν (aorist form of "breath-in", 20.22)  The verb "breath-in" is a rather rare verb in biblical Greek, appearing once in the NT and nine times in the OT Greek.  Significantly, in the OT it shows up in Genesis 2:7, when God breathes into the humans; in 1 Kings when Elijah revives a boy and also in Ezekiel 37, when God's Spirit breathes into the bones.  The disciples are coming alive! 

COVID-19 reflection.  It wasn't enough for Jesus to be raised from the dead.  It was also not enough for them to hear the news.  Jesus had to physically interact with them.  We are incarnate creatures.  Which means that the spiritual is also the physical.  The spirit itself is associated with breath, not internal mystical feelings.  We are inspirited creatures, something not opposed to incarnate creatures. 

αφεωνται & κεκρατηνται (perfect forms of αφηιμι & κρατω, meaning "forgive" and "hold", 20.23) The verb tenses of "forgiven" (αφεωνται) and "bound" (κεκρατηνται) are in the present for the disciple's actions, but in the perfect tense for the result -- the effect is lasting. Actually, the tense for forgive is in the aorist and the tense for bound is present.  This suggests that binding/retaining a sin takes energy -- we have to keep it up...I think this is true on an individual level, where retaining a sin takes energy as we hold a grudge. I think this also is true on a societal and church level, where calling something a sin and continuing to claim it as such takes energy too. 

τυπος ("mark", 20.25)  This word can mean "wound" or "mark" but clearly comes into English as another word:  "Type."  A τυπος originally meant a mark created by a blow or impression.  Eventually it came to mean a mold or form into which something could be made (you make such a form by impressing or blowing something!); then it came to mean 'example', often related to a set of teachings.  For example, Paul writes in Romans 6:17 (NIV)
"...you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted."
Paul is offering in Romans that Christ's teachings made an impression and formed a mold.

So what is the mold and form τυπος of the Christian teachings?  Jesus offers us a brutal and powerful image of the form of Christian teaching:  Resurrected wounds from the cross!!  Death that leads into life through the Spirit!  This is the substance of the Christian proclamation.  To put it another way, sanctification comes about through healed wounds that allow us to point to God's faithfulness

ου μη ("no-no", 20.25) The ου μη that Thomas uses is a strong future denial meaning "ou meh," as in "will never."

οκτω ("eight", 20.26) The number eight here is a reminder that Christians gather on the 8th day, the day after the (Jewish) Sabbath, the day of resurrection.  Baptismal fonts have eight sides...

απιστος ("unfaithful", 20.27)  Thomas never "doubts" as a verb. The word doubt is not used, but rather, unfaithful! Jesus says literally, "Do not be unfaithful but faithful."  Side note:  I've often wondered if Thomas struggled to believe the resurrection more emotionally than intellectually because he knew exactly what it meant if Jesus had been raised -- they would all have their lives totally changed...exactly what happened to Thomas, even traveling to India to proclaim Jesus is Risen!

To be more clear:  In English "believe" is often about intellectual assent; I believe in aliens means I think it is highly probably they exist.  I believe in God, in the Hebrew, Greek and Latin languages means I TRUST in God.  (Creed comes into English in credit, credibility, etc).  The question is ultimately whether Thomas believes that the resurrection happened, but whether he trusts Jesus fully as his Lord.

Sunday, March 29, 2026

John 20:1-18 (Easter)

Here are links for Greek commentary on all four Gospel
Matthew 28:1-10
Mark 16:1-8
Luke 24:1-12
John 20:1-18

Summary:  The big story in John is that Mary needs to hear Jesus call her by name.  At that point, she recognizes Jesus.  In our grief and sorrow, we can over look Jesus and his resurrection until we hear Jesus call us by name, which he does in our Baptisms.  But if you already preached THE John sermon, here are some other ideas.

Key words:
μνημειον ("tomb", 20:1)  This word comes from the Greek for memory (like English "mneumonic" is something that helps you remember).  The complaint almost reads, "They have taken Jesus out of my memory!"  There is something to play with here, about memory and loved ones.  Jesus isn't just a memory; your loved ones aren't just a memory.  Jesus is alive!

οιδαμεν ("know" from ειδω, 20:2, 9 and 13).  This word comes from ειδω, which means to see.  In the perfect sense (I have seen), it means I know.  The point here is that John is subtly combining the ideas of knowing and seeing; and there is a lot more of seeing going on than first anticipated.  Also, this verb is in the plural, suggesting that Mary is not alone (hence synchronizing with the synoptics).

εθηκαν ("place", from τιθημι, 20:2) This verb is all over John's Gospel, most importantly in chapter 10, when Jesus discusses himself as the Good Shepherd who will lay down his life.  No one lays down Jesus; only Jesus himself does this.  Jesus also praises one who lays down his life (John 15:13) and asks if the disciples will lay down their life (13:37)

οθονια ("fine linen", 20:5, 6 and 7)  I never realized it was high quality linen they put around Jesus!  Interestingly, this can refer in ancient Greek to a sail.  Okay.  Back to reality.  The point is that Jesus had the finest stuff that he even took time to roll up!

αυτους ("themselves", 20:10)  This word here is translated as "home."  But the Greek doesn't say home.  It literally reads, "They went back to themselves."  I think one can picture them simply going off to ponder what had happened rather than simply going back to life as it were.  The resurrection was not expected -- it was the entirely surprising event.
 
ο κηπουρος ("gardener", 20:15)  The big deal here is that Jesus is THE gardener.  Where is Jesus after the resurrection.  GARDENING!  Also worth noting is that like in the OT, when angels speak the Word of the Lord, the Lord shows up.

Grammar note:
20:9  Infinitive phrases:  subject takes accusative
Just a quick reminder that in infinitive phrases, the subject is found in the accusative case.  Hence "it was necessary for Jesus to rise from the dead" and not "it was necessary for him to raise Jesus from the dead."

Sunday, April 2, 2023

Easter (RCL and NL)

Here are links for Greek commentary on the resurrection accounts in all four Gospel
Matthew 28:1-10
Mark 16:1-8
Luke 24:1-12
John 20:1-18

Note:  All four Gospels do not portray an entirely resolved emotional situation.  Our anthems on Easter project robust celebration and confidence.  The Easter Gospels show fear, confusion and the dawning of the entirely unexpected.

A teaser from the posts on Luke 24:1-12
προς εαυτον ("to himself"; 24.12)  Most translators take the phrase, "to himself" to mean "to his possessions," namely, Peter's house (including BDAG).  Hence they translate it "Peter went to his house."  Yet, Peter does not necessarily go to his home. It literally says, "He went away to himself." This could just as naturally read, "He went away by himself." As the KJV puts it "wondered in himself."  Most translators likely base their translation on John 20:10, where it is more clear that the disciples went home.  But Luke's imagery is of Peter walking away by himself, pondering these events, likely without any real direction in his wanderings.
Luke's presentation of the Resurrection story gives us permission to struggle with the Good News.  It is so good, so amazing, that even the first disciples struggled with it.

A teaser from the posts on Matthew 28:1-10 and Mark 16:1-8:
εσταυρομενον ("crucified"; 6).  This word is also in the perfect, meaning an action happened in the past that still describes the state of affairs.  The angel declares that even though he is risen, Jesus is still in the state of being crucified.  You are seeking the crucified one; he is risen.  Jesus is alive but he still has the wounds in his hands.

My pastoral thought, reflecting on the Greek, is that the women have the courage and compassion to go to the tomb.  It can be easy to make Easter into a day when we criticize those who focus on the grave; who focus on grief.  I think as Christians we have the power to grieve because we have hope.  In short, we can say good-bye and miss them because we will see them again.

A teaser from the post on John 20:1-18:
μνημειον ("tomb", 20:1)  This word comes from the Greek for memory (like English "mnemonic" is something that helps you remember).  The complaint almost reads, "They have taken Jesus out of my memory!"  There is something to play with here, about memory and loved ones.  Jesus isn't just a memory; your loved ones aren't just a memory.  Jesus is alive!