Matthew 21:33-46

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year A; Most recently October 8, 2023.

Summary
The meaning of the parable is clear:  Ancient Israel rejected prophets of old; they will reject and kill Jesus.  Somehow God will rebuild on the rejected Jesus.  How do we find a Gospel message relevant for people's lives?  While there is some interesting stuff in verse 34 about sending and bearing fruit, I sense myself drawn to verse 42 and the proclamation that God will rebuild on the rejected stone.  This verse points toward the faithfulness of God, who rebuilds on Christ.  I think we can apply this to people's lives: even through we again and again reject God's commands and even love in our lives, God rebuilds us on Christ.

For 2023, I have added a tangent on institutional vs servant church leadership.

Key Words in verse 34 -- which sets up the whole thing
ηγγισεν (from εγγιζω, meaning "approach", 21:34)  This word, meaning "approach" or "come near", appears at turning points in the Gospel:
3:2  John Baptizes Jesus (John the Baptist say the Kingdom of Heaven is approaching/near)
4:17 Jesus begins ministry (Jesus says the KoH is approaching/near)
10:7 Jesus sends disciples (He instructs them to proclaim KoH is approaching/near)
21:1 Jesus is approaching/near Jerusalem
26:45/46  Jesus is betrayed (The hour is near/approaching)

Broad point:  Each time the Kingdom of Heaven is approaching, there is movement of Jesus and arguably a movement of the Spirit.  

Specific point:  The Lord of the Vineyard is doing something new when he sent his prophets and now when he is sending Jesus.

καιρος (kairos, meaning "season", 21:34; 41)  This word means 'season' or 'ideal time.'  In this case, it describes the harvest season.  A reminder that in Jesus there is the fullness of time!

απεστειλεν (from αποστελλω, meaning "send", 21:34)  I am amazed at how many times in Jesus' parables in Matthew we have (the character representing) God sending out people.  I think we often think of this as a concept in John's Gospels, but it is really crucial to Jesus' ministry.  We are sent out, certainly if and when the Kingdom of Heaven is approaching!  This word is important because it reminds us that the Kingdom of Heaven, while principally about the movement of Jesus into this world and toward the cross (see discussion on ηγγισεν), involves our movement too.

καρπος ("fruit", 21:34)  Again, we find a word that appears throughout scripture to describe the impact of the Spirit and the Kingdom of Heaven in our life:  We bear fruit.  In this case, workers are sent to gather the fruit.  What a beautiful image of ministry -- gathering the fruit that God has already created.  As the word αυτου ("of him") remind us, the fruit belongs to God.

Other interesting words

οικοδεσποτης  (literally, oikos - despot, meaning "owner of the land", 21:33)  This is a fun word in Greek.  It is built on two smaller words that we can recognize: oikos and despot!  It is interesting that Jesus would refer to God as an οικοδεσποτης, which was unlikely a favorable comparison for working-class listeners.  It is a reminder that first, these are parables and not allegories; second, it all belongs to God.

αμπελωνα ("vineyard", 21:33)  Jesus tells three vineyard parables, almost right in a row.  This seems clearly the one built the most on Isaiah 5, in which the vineyard owner builds a tower, as this vineyard owner does here as well.  It is a sermon series by Jesus :-)  It shows us how good stories and metaphors work, they continue to unfold in new ways.  It reminds us of Jesus' creative genius to somehow use old wine skins!

υστερον (meaning "last," 21:37)  The word here for "last" is used 4 times in Matthew 21 and 22; and also in Matt 25 and 26, but rarely ever appears elsewhere in the NT...Matthew is starting to emphasize the final nature of things and of his Gospel.

εντραπησονται  (future passive of εντρεπω, "respect", 21:37)  The word for "respect" means more like embarrass...in short, they will be embarrassed enough to show respect.  In the rest of the New Testament, it is always used within a context of shame rather than respect.  Perhaps this is a reminder that respect within an honor/shame culture has a different meaning; perhaps it is a reminder that Jesus ends up shaming the pharisees and religious leaders.  Ironically their attempts at shaming Jesus (killing him outside of Jerusalem) only lead to his glory!

οικοδομεω (meaning "build" "erect" or even "rebuild", 21:33 and 21:42)  The word here for builder is the same as in vs. 33. God built something.  People messed it up.  God will rebuild.  God is always at work revising the mistakes of our bad construction, relaying the foundation of our lives on Christ that we may bear fruit!

εθνει (ethnos, meaning "gentiles", 21:43)  The word for "people" here is "Gentiles."  Interestingly, Paul will talk about how he has a harvest of Gentiles in Romans 1:13, a case where Scripture is fulfilling itself!

Institution vs Servant Church

In verse 45, the religious leaders recognize this parable is directed at them.  As tenants of the vineyard, they have killed the servants sent by God.  I see this parable as a reminder of the way in which the institution of the church has again and again chewed up prophets and the servants of God.  In this way the parable serves as a judgment on institutional Christianity as well and the ways in which we devour prophets among us.  Those who come with a servants heart, beware!  However, in the end of the parable, Jesus says that there will be new tenants.  There will always be an institutional church...that always abused the pure in heart and always needs reformation. 

Church history reveals this too -- where the small and forgotten folks on the margins get forgotten, if not excluded.  They form a movement.  Which becomes a church.  Which gets too institutional.  Which then needs reform...or more likely kicks out the people that will grow the next generation of the church.

Matthew 21:23-32

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year A, most recently October 1, 2023

Summary:  (2008) I wrote that the Greek here is not that illuminating.  I actually stand by this, in that the basic message remains clear in English:  The 'leaders' and 'righteous' aren't saying they love God, but their actions suggest otherwise.  Yet God still loves them and yes, they still have a place in the Kingdom, but they certainly aren't first in line.  

Here are some wrinkles that perhaps can spark a thought or two in you preaching meditations:

εξουσια (meaning "authority" 21:23, 24, 27)  The word authority - εξουσια - is rare in the LXX but incredibly common in the New Testament, including the Gospels.  Jesus speaks with authority (Matthew 7:29), has authority to forgive sins (Matthew 9:6) and even can confer authority to the disciples against evil spirits (Matthew 10:1).   At the end of the Gospel, Jesus declares that ALL authority has been given to him (28:1).  A few questions on authority:

1)  What makes someone have legitimate authority?  Is there a difference in official and unofficial power?  

2)  Do we give Jesus authority in our lives?  Can we give Jesus authority in our lives?  What would this look like?

3) Do we believe that Jesus has given authority in this world?  In what ways do we see or not see this authority working itself out?

4)  How has the church lost authority in the last two generations in our country?  Is this good or bad?

ιερον (meaning temple, 21:23)  This story taking place in the temple is significant -- Jesus had just ridden on a donkey into Jerusalem and then "cleansed" the temple by driving out the money changers.   Those actions reveal that Jesus believes himself to be the Messiah and the rightful Lord of the temple.  (Which he alluded to in Matthew 12:5).  What is at stake isn't simply some moot point of theology, but the question of Jesus being the Messiah.  

διδασκοντι (participle form of διδασκω, meaning "teach" 21:23)  Just a friendly reminder that Jesus' role as teacher was not in opposition to his role as savior. 

τεκνα (plural of τεκνον, 21:28)  Jesus knows that it is less than week until his death.  He is speaking to people who will either a) be directly involved in his death or b) chant for him to be crucified.  Yet he is still calling them children of God!

αμπελων(ι) (meaning "vineyard", 21:28)  This whole section of Matthew's Gospel should be called the vineyard discourses.

επιστευσατε (form of πιστευω, meaning "believe", 21:25, 32)  Just a reminder that believe isn't simply about stating something is true or not, it is about trusting, if not following.  

μετεμεληθητε (form of μεταμελομαι, meaning "repent" or "regret", 21:29, 32)  The typical word for repent isn't used here.  This word means to over-care.  Like to care-over, for a second or third time.  Again, this word is less common in the New Testament. 

βασιεαιν του θεου (kingdom of God, 21:31)  There are only two times Jesus uses the phrase Kingdom of God instead of Kingdom of Heaven in Matthew's Gospel; the others are  6:33 and 19:24.  I don't know why!

Lastly, a little tid bit:  In Greek, the phrase "in the way of righteousness" (as preached by John) literally reads "εν οδω δικαιοσυνης" which is literally "a way of righteousness."  This may be a reference to Proverb 8:20 or 12:28.  It also connects with 2 Peter 2:21, but in this case, the Greek actually is "THE way of righteousness").  I sense that Jesus is offering there is another path of righteousness that John did not teach, namely, that of God's grace in Jesus Christ.

Matthew 20:1-16

This passage occurs in both the Revised Common Lectionary and the Narrative Lectionary (most recently September 2023).

Summary:   Tough parable for us.  Most churches preach grace, but when exposed like this, grace just seems, well, unfair!  But grace it is.  And grace abounds.  I find grace in that God goes after the lazy (αργος); furthermore, even the envious (πονηρος, evil in fact) get into heaven.  We do not enter God's Kingdom based on our heart being perfect, but simply by God's grace.  I also find grace to be the hiring, not the pay-day; It is all by God's grace that we are hired in the first place and get to belong to God, to work in his vineyard.  I love that grace is so irresistible that even the grumpy don't get kicked out of God's vineyard!

Key words
απεστειλεν (aorist form of αποστελλω, apostello, meaning "send"; 20.2).  John's Gospel get a lot of publicity for the idea of sending (even within the Trinity), but Matthew uses the word αποστελλω 22 times! (Mark 20; Luke 25; John 27).  Here they are even sent into the...

αμπελων(α) (ampelon, meaning "vineyard"; 20:1,2,4 and 7).  First, it is interesting that Matthew and John have such a strong connection here, with vineyard and sending.  Another comparison worth exploring is between the parables in chapter 20 and 21, both about vineyards.

αργος (argos, meaning idle; 20.6)  I have no unique insights to add to this word.  I just want to point out:  God goes after the lazy, those not fit for work elsewhere, those who simply stand around.

αποδος (from αποδιδημι. meaning "pay/give back"; 20:8)  Matthew uses this word quite frequently in his Gospel:
Matthew 6:4  Give in secret, your father will reward/pay/give back in secret (see also 6:6, 6:18)
Matthew 12:36  On judgement day, we will have to "give back" an account of our life (see also 16.27)
Matthew 18 and the parable of the unforgiving servant -- lots of pay back in this story!
Matthew 22:21  Give/render to Caesar what is Caesar.
Matthew 27:58  Pilate gives the dead body back.
In the case of Matthew 20, the workers are paid/rendered/given back their wages.  The question is:  What is salvation?  Working in the vineyard or getting paid?  I would argue that the moment of salvation is becoming one of God's workers in the vineyard.  Ultimately, as long as we view salvation as pay, there is likely little joy along the way and much frustration about the salvation state of our piers.

καυσων(α) (causon, like caustic in English; 20:12)  It is worth reminding ourselves that doing Christ's work is not always easy.  I wonder if the Gospel for this passage is found way back in Matthew 11:  Come to me, all your who are heavy laden..."

τοις εμοις (dative with "the of me"; 20:15)  The Greek here is not good English, but the English reader can make sense of it.  When you have the word "the" without a noun it means more like "things", in this case, "the 'the' of me" or "the 'things' of me."  The question is here, is the master talking about money or people?  It seems that in the case of God, the things of God are the people. 

πονηρος ("wicked" or "envious"; 20:15)  Even the wicked still get into the vineyard!!  God is really gracious.

ισους (isous, from isos, meaning the same, as in "iso-metric"; 20:15)  The problem is that the master is making people equal to each other.  This should call to mind Philippians, in that Jesus did not regard equality (same word) as something to be exploited, but humbled himself.  In this case, becoming like Christ is being willing to work in the vineyard and to rejoice over a repentant sinner instead of being frustrated they get the same "reward" as us!

Last bonus:  The evil eye in 20:15
The literal translation of 20:15 is "Or is your eye evil because I am good."  God does not describe himself as generous but as good. Ultimately goodness is tied into generosity.  Furthermore, those disgruntled are described as having an evil eye.  A reminder that a reward is given to those with jealousy and evil in their hearts, not just those pure in heart.  God is good.  He gives to humans. Regardless of how long they worked; regardless of how lazy they are; regardless of how good they are.

Matthew 18:21-35

This passage occurs in the RCL "Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently September 2023. 
 
Summary:  A classic tale of forgiveness.  A man owes an absurd amount (Roughly 6 billion by my calculations).  After being forgiven he arrests his friend who owes him a couple thousand dollars.  I would like to put it in terms of relationship.  The man has misunderstood his relationship to God (as being a recipient of mercy) and his relationship to other humans (co-recipients and fellow-sharers of mercy).  This causes him to further sin.  Jesus warns us of dire consequences when we fail to understand the true nature of our relationship with God and with others.

I suggest this is Matthew's version of the prodigal God and prodigal son, except the younger son became the older son.

Show me the money

μυριων ταλεντων ("ten thousand talents", 18.24)  A talent is roughly 5,000 to 6,000 denarii.  This means that 10,000 talents is like 500,000 denarii.  A denarii is a roughly a day's wages.  @120/day this is about 6 billion!  (Or almost 2,000 years of labor).  In comparison the few hundred denarii would be about $30,000.  That is quite a difference.

Theologically significant words

σπλαγχνισθεις (form of σπλαγχνιζομαι, meaning "compassion", 18.27)  The master has compassion on the slave.  This is also the word that describes the father's heart toward the son in the prodigal son.  That a father would have this kind of compassion for his son is not the most shocking; however, in this case, the master has compassion on his servant.  This kind of compassion and forgiveness suggests to me that the master is grafting this slave into the family, although the slave doesn't realize it.

αφηκεν (from αφιημι) and απελυσεν (from απολυω)  Both of these verbs, which appear throughout the story, are related.  The first means "forgive" or "let go"; the second means "set free."  It is interesting that even though the slave's debt was freed, the relationship status did not change.  To what extent was he freed?   It is an interesting parable in that the masters work of forgiving and setting free does not change the heart of the person.  Tough to ponder.  When we view (and even experience) the relationship between us and God as a transaction and not an opportunity for transformation we always go awry.  

ελεησαι (from ελεεω, meaning show mercy, 18.33)  To the extent this is revealing about God, the point is that God does not simply possess mercy, but actively shows mercy.  Mercy is rarely an adjective (merciful), sometimes a noun (mercy) but most likely a verb with God as the subject: "show mercy."

Likely lost in translation:

ειπεν vs λεγει (18:21)  Both of these are different tenses of the same verb.  ειπεν is aorist; λεγει is present.  The aorist usually connotes a single action whereas the present suggests an on-going action.  Peter asks one time: "How often..." but Jesus repeatedly says, "7*70".  Jesus needed to repeat himself for this to be heard.

"will sin" vs "would sin" (Future vs. Subjunctive:  Sins aren't subjunctive in this case!)  

The Greek language is obsessed with the future.  There are multiple ways to show the future implications of a given action.  Worth noting is that there is no future subjunctive.  Either something will happen in the future or it might happen starting from this moment forward in an unknown time.  But you cannot do "might happen in the future"; that simply means might happen.  Today, when Peter is asking Jesus about forgiving others, he does not put the verb αφησω (forgive) in the subjunctive.  The whole sentence is in the future.  In short, Peter expects sin and forgiveness. The sentence literally reads: "How often will my brother sin against me and will I forgive him? Until seven times?"

ει τι ("whatever" 18.28)  The exact construction of the phrase "Pay what you owe me" is rather interesting. It actually includes an "ει τι" phrase. This phrase is normally translated "if anything," as if to say, the man was not even really sure what the debt was, if in fact, it was anything.

συνδουλος ("fellow-slave" 18:28, 29, 31, and 33)  The Greek can put "fellow" and "slave" together in one word.  Powerful word.  Fellow slave.  Do we view each other as fellow slaves to sin!

βασανισταις (-στης, meaning "jailer" or "torturer", 18.34)  This is a hard word.  I don't like the idea of one being tortured.  On the one hand, the word means "jailer" so perhaps Jesus is simply referring to the act of the imprisonment.  The other way to think about this is that the word torture in Greek comes from the word test.  Perhaps this slave is put up to another time of testing, this time hopefully to succeed.  The word comes from a rag that was used to test whether gold was real.  The person needs to go and discover what he really is - a sinner yet a child of God!

δανειον  ("debt"; 18.27) The use of this word for "debt" here is unique in the NT.  The word normally carries with it a suggestion of interest, even usury with this debt.  Most simply it means a loan.  God is calling the loan and then forgives it.  What has God loaned you!?  It is interesting that in this parable, like the other classic parable of talents, the talents are loaned. never earned.  

παρακαλεω ("encourage"/"plead"; 18.29, 32)  The word for Holy Spirit is derived from this word:  "paraclete".  I want to connect Holy Spirit, pleading and forgiveness, but I can't quite sew this thread together.  Anyway, putting it here for someone else to run with it!

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)

Matthew 18:15-20

This passage occurs as a New Testament Lesson in the RCL "Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently September 2023 . 
 
Summary:  Jesus seems to let us off the hook today, telling us we can treat sinning Christians like gentiles and tax collectors, as long as we've gone through the appeal court system.  However, this is the worst news of all, because Jesus spends most of his time eating with tax collectors and even getting harassed for his association with them.  In other words, Jesus doesn't give us permission to drop them, but rather instructs us to bear them, teach them and even get persecuted because we continue to care for them over and against their difficulties toward us.  Yes, he does let us remove our heart strings a bit from them, but not our moral obligation.  Hence why Jesus has to promise us his presence in the midst of conflict!

Key Words:
αδελφος (brother/sister; found throughout section)  Earlier in Matthew's Gospel, Jesus refers to his followers as his brothers and sisters (12:49).  He is telling his disciples that in the church they are also brothers and sisters to one another.  

εκερδησας (from κερδαινω, "to gain", 18:15)  Jesus puts it beautifully:  If he listens to you, you have gained back your brother.  It is not about winning people to your side, but restoring the relationship!  

Additional 2023 note:  That this passage occurs after the story of the (Good) shepherd finding the lost sheep might be lost on the normal preacher, because the lectionary leaves that story for the year of Luke.  Dr Rolf Jacobson offers a nice connection between the two stories.  He argues, correctly I believe, that the latter story reveals this story is about Jesus working to reconnect the lost to the flock.

ακουω & παρακουω ("listen" and "listen aside", 18:15, 16 and 17)  Jesus does not say "if he apologizes" or "if he agrees"; he simply says, "if he listens."  If we can listen to each other, we make room for reconciliation.  In fact, in order to get the point of agreement (vs 19), we must first reestablish the relationship (15).  

Jesus introduces a word that is rare in the New Testament: παρακουω.  That ακουω is part of it should be readily clear.  What is added is the preposition/prefix:  παρα.  This means alongside of.  So this verb means "to hear aside", ie not hear directly, not focus, not pay attention.  Definitely an indictment of our culture today!

εθνικος (pagan, gentile, literally "ethnic"; 18:17)  Jesus suggests we treat Christians who have greatly sinned against us as gentiles.  Interestingly, Jesus final words in the Gospel of Matthew instruct us to preach to the gentiles (all the nations of the world; same root word) and earlier Jesus reminds us to love our enemies.  Jesus is not giving us permission to be rude and dismissive to our brothers and sisters in Jesus, even those whom we are angry with.

τελωνης ("tax collector"; 18:17)  Jesus eats with tax collectors.  He repeatedly takes heat for being seen with them.  So considering someone a tax collector means something more like this:  "Treat them in such a way that no one knows how much they anger and embarrass you, bearing your cross and thanking God for this opportunity to become a more patient and compassionate person."

δησητε (form of δεω, meaning "bind"; 18:18)  Bind does not mean declare forgiven.  (In another post, I explore the historical meanings of this word within the context of "The Keys").  

1)  It means to forgive, understood in connection with Matthew 16 and John 20 as the priestly office of the keys

2)  It means to declare something taboo.  Marriage is a binding of two people together, which means that certain actions are permitted, but also that certain actions are no longer permitted.  This is interesting that in order for their to be life together, there has to be an established set of norms.

3)  I offer it means to bind sins to Christ.

συμφωνησωσιν ("agree" or "match", from συμφωνεω; 18:19)  The actually meaning of this word is not that interesting.  What is interesting is the derivation, "symphony" which means "together-sounds."  Jesus says that if we make a symphony, God listens.  Haha!  Also worth noting that this coming together takes place within a story about renewing of relationships and returning of lost sheep to the fold.  This is NOT then, simply two people coming together, but two people who were previously at odds.

επι της γης ("upon the earth", 18:19)  I want to point out something in the Greek overlooked in most translations -- Jesus says that if two or three on the earth agree, God in heaven will act.  This would suggest that people coming together is bridge between heaven and earth.  Reconciliation is a thin space, so speak.  The God in heaven responds to people on earth, when we find unity.  While this sounds like we are the agents of reconciliation, remember the context: the shepherd finding the lost sheep.

This passage also underscores a fundamental theme in the Bible:  Humans are estranged from each other.

συνηγμενοι ("gathered"; passive perfect participle from "συναγω"; 18:20)  This participle covers up a familiar word:  synago, from which we get synagogue.  The voice is significant here.  We do not gather ourselves in the church, but rather are gathered God.  Thus, we are moving  from human action to God's promise. Also worth noting that Jesus promises his presence in the midst of the office of the keys and congregational conflict.  The church is a gift, however human and sinful it can be!

εν μεσω ("in the midst", 18:20)  Matthew begins his Gospel by declaring Jesus to be Immanuel -- God with us.  Matthew ends his Gospel with Jesus declaring he is God with us.  In the middle of the Gospel Jesus affirms this as his mission (and identity) when he declares that, at the crossroads of worship and conflict, he is with us.

 
Translation Issue:  Hypothetical situations with εαν

Technically, this word is a combination of:  ει αν, both of which are "subjunctive" markers.  Put them together and you have a very hypothetical situation.  If you have the word εαν, the writer/speaker is not specifying if this will actually happen.  It means something like, "if" or perhaps "whenever."  If is used in Greek to set up a simple phrase (so necessary for science), if-then.  So in our text for this week, Jesus is not promising conflict; nor is he promising that people will not listen.  He is simply saying, "If you experience this, well, then do this..."

Also worth noting:  Every other verse in this section has an "if" clause, yet in 18:20 Jesus simply declares -- Where two or three are gathered, I am in the midst of you.

Matthew 16:21-28

This passage occurs in the RCL, year A (most recently Sept 3, 2023).
 
Summary:  Whatever one does, we shouldn't water down this passage.  It is harsh.  As I reflect on it this year, I am really struck by the tenses of the verbs, that "deny" and "pick up" are aorist or one-time events, yet follow is a present, or on-going event.  This suggests to me, with a Lutheran understanding of Baptism and vocation, of a life-long cross that we inherit in our Baptisms, the cross of service to our neighbor.  We are always following Jesus, discovering what this cross entails.  It looks different, but it is always the same -- care of our neighbor.   Lastly, I think the good news for me is actually found in the next story, the transfiguration.  We get overwhelmed by the cross but then Jesus opens our eyes to his glory -- and we can carry on.

Some words I'm chewing on:

διεκνυειν (-υμι, "show", 16:21)  Although it is translated as 'explain' it has a more visual sense.  See the following examples.

• "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us" (John 14:8, Phillip to Jesus)
• "...show yourself to the priest" (Luke 5:14, Jesus to a Leper)
• "He will show you a large upper room, furnished and ready..." (Mark 14:15, Jesus to disciples)
• "The devil ...showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor..." (Matthew 4:8)
  

This makes me wonder -- how was Jesus communicating the necessity of the cross?  Is the rebuke of Peter part of the lesson?

ιλεως ("merciful", 16:22)  This is a fascinating word here.  Perhaps you recognize "eleison" as its sibling?  Anyway, Peter is saying, something akin to "Forgive you, Lord" or "God be merciful."  He is not saying, "Never!"  He is saying that Jesus' prediction is antithetical to God's purposes.

οπισω ("behind", 16:23,24)  This word appears twice:  'Get behind me Satan' and then 'if you want to come behind me'.  The second time its often translated as follow, yet its the same word.  Either we are left behind or we get behind him.

απαρνησασθω ("deny", 16:24) and αρατω ("pick up", 16:24)  What I have always struggled with here is that these verbs are in the aorist tense, which suggests a one-time event.  Does this mean we should move toward a decision/one-time event understanding of faith?  Keep reading...

ακουλουθειτω ("follow", 16:24) this is in the present tense.  We are to pick up the cross one time, but then continue to follow Jesus are whole lives?  Rather than understand this to mean that we make a one-time decision to follow Jesus, I argue we need to re-think what Jesus means by cross here.  When I think of picking up my cross, I think of my baptism.  The cross given to me in a my baptism confers on me the life orientation of living a disciple.  In my life, this same cross -- living as a disciple -- unfolds in different ways, always through service to the neighbor.   It is always the same cross-  dying to myself and to the world, but it looks different -- patiently bearing the criticism of others, apologizing to my colleagues when I am wrong, listening to my neighbor whine, potty training my daughter and so forth.  In life, we don't get one particular cross, one challenge to bear, but the whole weight of our neighbor's needs is ever upon us.

To put it another way, the cross of life should weigh upon us so heavy that we call out to Jesus for mercy and forgiveness.  And he then can carry the cross for us.

Later note:  I realize that in writing this blog post years ago I was trying to preserve this Lutheran teaching on the Holy Spirit and Baptism:  That we do not make the decision for Christ and that life is a daily process of dying and rising.  I still confess this.  I think you can get there from this Bible passage, especially when one looks at the whole "character arc" of Peter.  In preaching this passage now (2023), I would likely make less a big deal of the verb tenses and lean into the action itself - deny.  How are you, or I or anyone denying themselves in a culture that preaches, teaches and lives self-fulfillment.  How are you, I or anyone actually denying our quest to craft our own identity in all sorts of things rather than the cross?  I would avoid domesticating the law here with theology...

σταυρον ("cross" 16:24)  Just a quick reminder that before we get to sentimental about cross, this was an ancient capital punishment device.  We need to make the cross abstract to make sense of it (ie, we don't need to nail wood planks and walk around with them); but we if make it too abstract we lose the challenge of it.

ψυχη(ν) ("soul", 16:25)  This word is very tricky to translate.  The NET Bible offers a good reflection:

The Greek ψυχή (psuchē) has many different meanings depending on the context. The two primary meanings here are the earthly life (animate life, sometimes called “physical life”) and the inner life (the life that transcends the earthly life, sometimes called “the soul”). The fact that the Greek term can have both meanings creates in this verse both a paradox and a wordplay. The desire to preserve both aspects of ψυχή (psuchē) for oneself creates the tension here (cf. BDAG 1099 s.v. 1.a; 2.d,e). Translation of the Greek term ψυχή (psuchē) presents a particularly difficult problem in this verse. Most English versions since the KJV have translated the term “life.” This preserves the paradox of finding one’s “life” (in the sense of earthly life) while at the same time really losing it (in the sense of “soul” or transcendent inner life) and vice versa, but at the same time it obscures the wordplay that results from the same Greek word having multiple meanings. To translate as “soul,” however, gives the modern English reader the impression of the immortal soul at the expense of the earthly life. On the whole it is probably best to use the translation “life” and retain the paradox at the expense of the wordplay.  NET Bible: Matthew

πραξιν (-ς, "actions", 16:27)  While Jesus may call us to set out mind of things of God and not "of people" (vs. 23), we are evaluated on our "praxis."  Praxis means "business" or "actions", what we actually do.  The godly life then, does not consist of other worldly activities, but activities in this world that somehow involve God.  What might that mean for you?  For your congregation?