When reading the Bible, especially the words of Jesus, have you ever wondered why Jesus did not speak more plainly? He was a man of few words, and I often find myself wishing for more words from him—more detail, more explanation. Only a part of the problem is the brevity of Jesus’ remarks. Part of it is an assumption of knowledge on the part of his listeners. Jesus is building on a foundation, and he expects the people standing around him to be acquainted with the scriptures.

Part of our modern problem, too, is that we have a lot of preconceived opinions about what Jesus said, and when we encounter something in his words that doesn’t match that opinion, we get confused. More often than not, we dismiss what we just read or reinterpret it to fit the model we have always believed. The result is sure to be imperfect understanding of Jesus and his words.

Another part of our problem is that Jesus spoke in the idiom of the time, and some of that idiom is lost on the translators. An idiom is an expression whose meaning is not predictable from the usual grammatical rules of a language or from the usual meanings of its constituent elements. For example, try translating someone kicking the bucket into another language. There are a number of idioms in the New Testament, and translators do their best with them, but they drive the literalists crazy. Another reason why Jesus often seems obscure is that he was positively curt with the religious establishment of the time. Let’s examine an interesting example of this, found in Matthew 12.

Abide with me; fast falls the eventide;
The darkness deepens; Lord with me abide.
When other helpers fail and comforts flee,
Help of the helpless, O abide with me.

It is an old, familiar friend, this hymn. There’s a good chance you know the tune and could sing it. Too often, when we sing these songs in church or hear them on the radio, we sing them without much reflection on the song—how and why it was written, and what the composer was trying to say. I’m not saying we need to read a biography on the songwriter; I mean listening to the words and asking, What was he thinking when he wrote this?

The man who wrote this particular hymn, Abide With Me, in 1847, was a man named Henry F. Lyte. He was inspired to write this hymn as he was dying of tuberculosis. He finished it the day he gave his farewell sermon in the parish he served for so many years. The next day, he left for Italy to regain his health. He didn’t make it, though—he died in Nice, France, three weeks after writing these words. In his farewell sermon he said:

O brethren, I stand here among you today, as alive from the dead, if I may hope to impress it upon you, and induce you to prepare for that solemn hour which must come to all, by a timely acquaintance with the death of Christ.

The pain of living and dying has a way of binding men together, even when they are separated by time and distance. The idea behind Abide With Me arose from another time and place, and from another man who was facing a painful death within hours. It was Jesus, at the last supper, who was engaged in a very long discourse with his disciples. It is unlikely that any of them really understood it at the time. In truth, much of what he said is lost on us even though the citations are familiar. Here is how he developed his theme in John, chapter 14.

There is such a thing as an unpardonable sin. I hesitate to bring it up, because some poor soul out there who is guilty of serious sin is likely to have a few bad nights worrying about whether he or she has done it. But you needn’t worry. The unpardonable sin is not a matter of degree. It isn’t adultery or theft. What is it? Well, Jesus popped the idea on a rather annoying group of people who suggested that Jesus had a demon. Why? Well, because he cast out demons. Having shown the irrationality of that idea to the crowd, he went on to say this:

Therefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come.

Jesus had, with the power of God, cast demons out of several people. He didn’t do a lengthy exorcism, he just told the demon to leave and it left. Some, who had actually seen what he had done, alleged that Jesus himself was using demonic powers. They knew that what Jesus had done was supernatural. They could not explain it away. But if they attributed it to the power of God, then they acknowledged that Jesus was of God and they ought to listen to him.The problem was, that Jesus was calling on men to change their lives—to repent. These men were not willing to repent, so they attributed the power of God to the devil.

In the end, the refusal to repent leads one to reject the call of God in his life, and the attribution of the works of God to some other power. Thus it is the hardened, unrepentant spirit that leads to the unpardonable sin—not human weakness, fecklessness, or stupidity.

How do you look at religion? Is religion a burden you have to bear, or is it more of a release from burdens? I don’t mean theoretically, I mean by your own observation of the religious people you know. As a person becomes more religious, is she more or less happy? Jesus made a short statement on this; it is found in Matthew’s 11th chapter:

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knows the Son, but the Father; neither knows any man the Father, except the Son, and he to whomever the Son will reveal him. Come unto me, all you that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and you shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

I am not so sure that modern man really appreciates this in these days of five-day work weeks and eight hours a day of work—and work that is not at all physical in many cases. Jesus spoke into a world of hard labor. He spoke to people who worked a twelve-hour day, six days a week—if they were lucky. But then there are other kinds of burdens, as well—like fear and anxiety. I suppose these words of Jesus still resonate with us in the 21st century. The words rest, and easy, and light sound awfully good to me when things aren’t working out as I wish they would. Is religion hard or easy? Well, at times, Jesus suggests it is hard, and here he says his yoke is easy. Which is it, really?

Man is a territorial creature. I don’t mean that purely in a geographical sense, either. Man is socially territorial—we expect people to stay in their class or in their race. Man is even territorial in an ideological sense. We put together belief systems—think of churches with all of their doctrines and creeds—that are exclusionary. They accept all people who believe exactly what we believe and exclude everyone else.

Part of this, I think, comes from a very natural desire to feel special. No one wants to be ordinary—just a part of the herd. We want to know that there is something special about us and we want to be together with people who share this same special quality. I realize this sounds like psychobabble, in a way, but let me explore the idea with you from a religious point of view.

If you were to ask a hundred people, what is the name of the religion of the Old testament, most of them would answer: Judaism. They would be wrong. In the New Testament, we encounter two of the major sects of Judaism—the Pharisees and the Sadducees—and Jesus is at some pains to make it clear to us that what these people believed was sharply different from the revealed religion of the Old Testament.

Judaism was not the revelation of God, but the response of the Jewish people to the revelation of God. This is manifest in the sectarian nature of Judaism. I don’t know if Judaism can boast as many sects as Christianity, but if not, it will only be because there are not as many adherents in the world. Consider, in this light, a fascinating encounter Jesus had with a Roman Centurion. We’ll find it in Luke, chapter 7.

And, you, Lord, in the beginning have laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of your hands: They shall perish; but you remain; and they all shall grow old as does a garment; And as a mantle shall you fold them up, and they shall be changed: but you are the same, and your years shall not fail.

Follow along with the Life & Teachings of Paul bonus study questions ^[3].

Poor Joseph. It is hard to imagine what a shock it was to him when he learned that his betrothed wife was with child. Understand that, in that society, at that time, this was a much bigger thing that it is today. The role of women in society was different, and her marriage-ability was all that stood between a young woman and starvation—or perhaps prostitution. In some societies, it led to what is called an honor killing—that is, the girl had shamed her family, and the father killed her for it. Israelite law allowed for stoning the girl for playing the harlot, but it was not required. And thus, Joseph decided he would just quietly put the girl away instead.

God had chosen well in this man and this girl. They were good people. Joseph was a just man, and his betrothed, Mary, was a remarkably poised young woman. Thus, a messenger from God appeared to Joseph in a dream and told him not to hesitate to take Mary as his wife because the child she was carrying would be a son who would save his people from their sins. Joseph had to understand that this meant the boy Mary was carrying would be the Messiah. He was to be named Jesus. Matthew then adds one relevant fact:

Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Now, the prophet being cited here was Isaiah, and the prophecy came in a definite time and place in history. Taken in isolation, I would never have connected this prophecy with the Messiah. Because what Isaiah will offer is a type of something yet to come. (I explained the term type and its corollary, anti-type in the last program. So keeping this in mind, and realizing that Isaiah has no idea that this prophecy would be applied to Christ by Matthew, let’s consider the context of what Isaiah said. We’ll find it in Isaiah, chapter 7.

Would you consider yourself a fair-minded person? I mean a person who believes in equity—who holds yourself to the same standards to which you hold others; a person who really believes we shouldn’t have double standards; a person who is offended when someone judges you for doing something and then does the same thing himself? Jesus said:

Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you measure, it shall be measured to you again.

Frankly, this is a little bloodcurdling, but it is only fair. If I hold you up against a standard, it is only fair that I be held up against the same standard. How are we supposed to take what Jesus said here? It is problematic, because we all have to judge at times. Jesus recognized that. Take what he said to one of the churches in the Book of Revelation. He told them:

I know your works, and your labor, and your patience, and how you can not bear them who are evil: and you have tried them who say they are apostles, and are not, and have found them liars[.]

You can’t do that without judging. You have to look at the facts and judge whether what the man says is true or not. You are allowed to conclude that a liar is a liar. In fact, I think God would be pleased if more of us would exercise our critical faculties in matters religious and political. When a preacher tells you one thing and you can see the Bible plainly says something else, you can safely conclude that something is wrong somewhere.

All of us grow up familiar with rules. Our parents had rules for us. Schools had rules. The community had rules. If you are the parent of a teenager, I’ll bet you have heard at least once, Aw, you never want me to have any fun. And if you are teenager, you have heard, in answer to your question, Why? the words, Because I said so.

When you grow up and move away from home, you no longer have to obey the rules of your parents, but does that mean the rules have been abolished? Hardly. We hope that they have been internalized by the time we move away from home. Mom and Dad will no longer be there to see that we brush our teeth and shine our shoes, but they hope we will continue to take care of ourselves. Similarly, God intends for us to internalize his rules, to make them a part of our character. To be out from under parental administration in no way invalidates the things they have taught us. So perhaps we can understand why Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, said:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The Pharisees observed many rules, yet our righteousness must exceed theirs. What was wrong with the righteousness of the Pharisees?

Was Jesus a pacifist? It hasn’t been much of a question in this country since the end of the draft, but it still resonates with a number of people. Did Jesus say we could not defend ourselves if attacked? When he said turn the other cheek, just how far does that go? In this program series, we are talking about the words of Jesus—what he actually said—and on this subject, Jesus had something definitive to say. It is in his longest discourse—the Sermon on the Mount.

You have heard that it has been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That you resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.

This is a troubling saying of Jesus. Does this mean if a mugger knocks you down in the street that you can’t defend yourself? Does it mean that if someone attacks your wife or children that you cannot defend them? Would it have meant to the British in WWII that when the German bombers were overhead, they could not shoot back? That as a nation, they should have turned the other cheek and let the Nazis roll over them? To understand these words, we first have to understand an important thing about the role Jesus is assuming in his Sermon on the Mount.

When the history of our generation is finally written, I think historians will see the single greatest tragedy of our generation is the disintegration of the family. Some experts are now saying that half of all new marriages will end in divorce. We tried an experiment in making divorce easier in this country, without thinking through the consequences. I don’t think we understood why society ever felt constrained to keep marriages together. I think people thought that it was purely a religious impulse and, since religion isn’t very important, we don’t have to do that anymore. I don’t think they realized that the reason why society has an interest has an interest in keeping marriage together is for the children.

A study by the National Center for Health Statistics found that children in single parent families (including those whose parents never married) are more likely to drop out of high school, become pregnant as teenagers, abuse drugs, and get into trouble with the law than those living with both parents. Society and God have seen the need to keep families together for the children’s sake. So Jesus, in his most fundamental teaching—the Sermon on the Mount—takes what appears to be a very strict view of divorce. It is a pretty tough statement, though not as tough as some theologians try to make it. He says this:

It has been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced commits adultery.

Finally we come to Second Timothy. Paul is now an old man—one who had been over a lot of roads, been to a lot of places. He had been imprisoned, beaten, shipwrecked. Paul may not have lived as many years as some in the Bible, but he put an awful lot of miles on in that period of time. He also changed a lot.

The Paul we know in Luke’s early writings—the man who went up to persecute the Christians in Damascus, who was a fanatic in the plainest sense of the word—is the same man who was later so vehement in his defense of Christianity that he made enemies almost as fast as friends, and many people wanted him dead. A lot of people in the Church would not have been that disappointed if something happened to Paul, because he had caused them a lot of trouble.

This is the man who, when he and Barnabas had a disagreement on whether to take John Mark with them on a journey, refused to have him. Barnabas wanted him, and the dissension between them was so sharp that they split up entirely. I speculated earlier that I wouldn’t be surprised if Paul was really at fault. Now, later in his life, he’s mellowed; and he tells Timothy to take Mark with him, as profitable for the ministry.

I believe that suffering pain and loss, and getting older, brought life into perspective for Paul. You can see the change. It’s a slow change, but it takes place in Paul’s letters; and it’s finally capped in this last, mellow letter of Paul’s life.

Follow along with the Life & Teachings of Paul bonus study questions ^[3].

There are so many mysteries in the Bible. Yes, it was written in another language and in another culture, and there is much we simply don’t know. But I am not talking about that. I am talking about things we aren’t programmed to understand. We are programmed, you know. Just like a computer has to have an operating system to, well, operate, so do we. And just as a small example, our system of thought addresses everything in terms of a beginning, a middle, and an end.

So grasping the idea of a being is eternal, that is, who has always existed, is just beyond our reach. It is hard enough to imagine living forever into the future. But when we turn around and look back, we can’t help ourselves. We have to ask: Where did God come from? That he has simply always been doesn’t compute. I don’t mean to say that we aren’t willing to believe it. Only that we can’t really understand it. And, I don’t mean to say that we can’t understand God. We can, but only in terms in which he chooses to reveal himself. When we step beyond that, we are lost.

Thus saith the Lord, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the Lord which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the Lord.

I known I’ve been complaining about Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John not giving us more of what Jesus actually said. They’ll tell us that Jesus went into a synagogue and taught, that people were astonished at his doctrine, that he delivered it with authority—but wouldn’t tell us what his doctrine was.

Well, we’ve discovered that the reason for that supposed lapse is that the doctrine is conveyed to us elsewhere in the gospel accounts. Jesus was an itinerant preacher, and many of his messages were the same in one location as they were in another. So we can presume that when we do find a comprehensive lesson from Jesus, we are getting what he taught in most of those places where the evangelists neglected to include the message.

In our study on the words of Jesus, we have come to Sermon on the Mount—which is the longest, and perhaps the most comprehensive statement of Jesus’ doctrine in the New Testament. And we have come to the point where Jesus is about to tell his audience something very important. I don’t know how his audience took it, but I know it poses major problems for modern Christian students. First, let me explain a little background that those listening would already have known…

Jesus was a man of few words, so we want to pay close attention to the words he did say. When he spoke, he was often enigmatic in what he said–sometimes it was hard to figure out exactly what he meant. As often as not, he would make his point with a question, or perhaps with a question followed by an action. For example, Jesus was a Sabbath-keeper, but he was very much at odds with the scribes and Pharisees on their interpretation of Sabbath observance. In its origins, the Sabbath was a liberating law–it set men free. One version of the original commandment is found in Deuteronomy, chapter 5:

Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord your God has commanded you. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord your God: in it you shall not do any work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your ox, nor your donkey, nor any of your cattle, nor your stranger that is within your gates; that your manservant and your maidservant may rest as well as you. And remember that you were a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm: therefore the Lord your God commanded you to keep the sabbath day.

What’s the idea here? Well, you were toiling as slaves for hundreds of years. Now, with an escape from bondage, you, your servants, and your animals would be given a day off. You’re liberated, you’re free. The Pharisees had managed to turn this liberty–something to be rejoiced over–into a burden. They had a list of do’s and don’ts as long as your arm. According to Jesus, they had lost touch with what the Sabbath was all about. So how did Jesus, a man of very few words, make his point?

How was it possible that otherwise sane men would want to kill Jesus? Think about it. He was a quiet man. He was plainly a kind man. He was an engaging teacher and faithful to the scriptures. More important, he was doing miracles—he was healing people left and right, and such healings as no one had ever seen. And yet, immediately after some of these healings, they wanted him dead. I submit to you that this is strange behavior.

We know a lot of it had to do with jealousy. The religious establishment felt threatened by Jesus. The establishment always feels threatened by someone outside the establishment who is successful. Even Jesus’ own disciples felt threatened by a man successfully casting out demons in Jesus name. They wanted him stopped. It is just human nature, I suppose. But the establishment would not have admitted they were jealous. What was their reason?

And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. But Jesus answered them, My Father works still, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

So the establishment had two reasons for getting rid of Jesus: breaking the Sabbath, by their definition, and blasphemy—making himself equal with God. In response to their objections, Jesus gave a relatively long response. (I say relatively. It is only 108 words.) It is an important statement, because it addresses the relationship between Jesus and the Father. It is Jesus’ first major doctrinal statement as well. I touches on the nature of God, the resurrection and the fact that there are at least two resurrections, the judgement, and the connection between Jesus and Moses. All this in 108 words. Let’s read it.

Over the years, a common objection people raised to religion is that, well, it’s pie in the sky. Religion, they think, has some vague promises of benefits in the next life, but it doesn’t do much for a person in this life. That’s really a pity that those of us who call ourselves Christians have allowed people to think of us that way; for if a person comes to understand the words of Jesus, they’ll come away with a totally different perspective.

Take for example one day when Jesus came to a synagogue in Nazareth where he had been brought up. As his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day and he stood up to read. (As Jesus was a Sabbath keeper, he did not work at his job on the Sabbath and he was in regular attendance at the synagogue. Adult men were allowed to read aloud from the scriptures in the synagogue and it was very important in a time when hardly anyone had even a piece of the Bible of their own and a lot of them couldn’t have read it if they had it.) So, Jesus stood up to read, and there was delivered to him the book of the prophet Isaiah. When He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written:

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

He closed the book, he handed it back to the minister, and he sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. Something about the way he read it, something about the way he communicated this ancient prophecy, struck people, and he said to them, This day is the scripture fulfilled in your ears. Not tomorrow, not in the next life, right now.

Titus was a younger man than Paul, and is called his own son after the common faith. Titus had assisted him since at least the Jerusalem Conference, so by the time Paul gets around to writing this letter to Titus, he is writing to an experience minister—a man who has been used to deal with difficult situations on several occasions. Now, having Titus on Crete to solve some problems there, Paul writes to offer pastoral guidance as well as to establish Titus’ authority among the Cretans.

Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, showing all meekness unto all men.

For we ourselves also were once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.

Follow along with the Life & Teachings of Paul bonus study questions ^[3].

There seems to be a difference between a secret and a mystery. At the very least, the Bible seems to use the word mystery in more than once sense. For example, there might be something that can be known but has been deliberately kept secret. Then there can be something that, even though stated, is not understood.

This is the only way I can understand what Paul is saying when he declares that the conversion of the Gentiles was a mystery—that it was not made known to the sons of men. We find this discussion in Ephesians, chapter 3.

I doubt if there are any words of Jesus more widely quoted and better known than his little statement in John 3:16:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

It is hard to grasp how a first-century Jew would have taken that. Listen to the emphasis. God so loved the world—not just the Israelites, and not just the Jews. And it is everlasting life we are talking about here, and it is for whosoever believes him, not just for the Jews. It is difficult, looking back from our perspective in the 20^th century to the 1^st—we already have a concept of Jesus, we already have a very strong idea of what he taught and believed, and we have attached a very strong meaning to this one little verse. But it’s hard to understand what that verse meant to the man who first heard it.

Judaism was the religion of the Jews. Gentiles were shut out unless they made the complete transition—being circumcised and observing the whole package including the Oral Law and traditions of the Jews in order to have any access to God at all. Observant Jews would not so much as eat with a gentile.

What Jesus is saying here is not new. The prevailing doctrine of the Jews relative to Gentiles was not what the Old Testament taught. The prophets—especially Isaiah—spoke quite frankly of the conversion of the Gentiles; and the Torah made definite provision for Gentiles to worship God, to adore him, and observe most (if not all) of his festivals. So Jesus, in a manner that must have gone over his listeners heads, speaks of God loving the whole world and extending salvation to all people.