The Weekend Word
Matthew 17:14-27
Jesus Heals a Boy with a Demon
14 And when they came to the crowd, a man came up to him and, kneeling before him,
- They came down the mount to the reality of life.
- A grumbling crowd and the disciples fighting with the religious leaders.
- * Note the posture of the man. Respect!
15 said, “Lord, have mercy on my son, for he is an epileptic and he suffers terribly. For often he falls into the fire, and often into the water.
- Other translations – seizures – lunacy
16 And I brought him to your disciples, and they could not heal him.”
- Was this just the remaining 9 disciples who did not go up the mountain?
- They did not have that ‘mountain top’ experience and failed?
17 And Jesus answered, “O faithless and twisted generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you? Bring him here to me.”
- Who is Jesus addressing?
- The crowd? This man? The disciples? All of them?
- Are these ‘little faith’ disciples?
18 And Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of him, and the boy was healed instantly.
- Jesus rebukes his people, then turns and rebukes the demon who left ‘instantly’
- Sounds much like the gospel of Mark who wrote in terms of things happening ‘immediately’.
19 Then the disciples came to Jesus privately and said, “Why could we not cast it out?”
- Now they come privately
- What did we do wrong?
20 He said to them, “Because of your little faith. For truly, I say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you.”
- Jesus can move mountains – nothing is impossible for God.
- He seems to be giving that power / authority to those who do have faith.
No verse 21 – explain
*** NKJV = However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.”
Jesus Again Foretells Death, Resurrection
22 As they were gathering in Galilee, Jesus said to them, “The Son of Man is about to be delivered into the hands of men,
- Jesus gathers them together again to deliver another sermon.
- Son of Man is that Daniel 7 talk
- The divine son of man – this is the divine, the messiah who will rule and has a kingdom that will last forever.
- If you were a Jew in Jesus’ day and you know this Daniel prophecy – you are making this association – they are thinking great things
- ) overthrowing the Romans
- ) They think of Jesus as some great community organizer – messiah, where he will transform not only society but the whole world and make it into a Utopia.
23 and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day.” And they were greatly distressed.
- What??? They will do what?
- Note that this time they were distressed, but they did not speak out as Peter had in Ch 16
- They were distressed because that is not supposed to be the end of one who has a kingdom that will last forever.
The Temple Tax
24 When they came to Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma tax went up to Peter and said, “Does your teacher not pay the tax?”
- Temple Tax collection = all Israel males 20 yrs older had an obligation to pay the tax.
- This is not a Roman tax.
- The Jewish leaders say “if you are going to be Israel, you must pay this tax” – but…
- Jesus says “if you are going to be Israel, you must believe in me.”
25 He said, “Yes.” And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tax? From their sons or from others?”
26 And when he said, “From others,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free.
- This again is Jesus set aside for himself a new Israel.
- The sons of the king are free
- Jesus, not the Jewish leaders, is king and Christians are the sons.
- The New Israel.
- You are sons, you are the New Israel – you are free from the old system, free from them because I am here.
- I am the temple, I am the sacrifice, I am the high priest …. For salvation!
27 However, not to give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for me and for yourself.”
- This reality is the Mt Transfiguration thing – but not on the mount but down by the sea.
- Not to give offense – because Good Friday has not yet happened.
Thank you MLD for a good word this week.
In verse 26 I again make the point that Jesus has terminated his relationship with Israel and that in these middle chapters of Matthew, he has done so at least a half dozen times.
Yet over the weekend, I listened to 3 guys on the radio while traveling still making the claims of all the good things still to come to the ethnic, geographical nation of Israel. I don’t get it.
The same crowd speaks of people like me as replacement theologians, yet it is Christ who was the original replacement theologian.
There are many places in the New Testament,. though, that do refer to the Nation of Israel, and God’s plan for them. Don’t have time right now, but I can post more on that later.
Josh,
I hope you do, because it’s time to lay the cards on the table. This 150 year old discovery either puts to shame the first 1,850 years of the Church, or it is a deviant error which should be put down for the good of the Church.
Josh, why would you think that it is the old Israel that I say has been cut off – and which ever verses you think you have, why are they not referring to this new Israel that I point out Jesus is calling to himself in these middle chapters …. which today we call the church?
I’ll say this once and leave it at that. In teaching through Matthew I have arrived at chapter 24. In reading some excellent exegetical commentaries from authors who reject any future for a national Israel in the endtimes scenario, I see the admission (which is what makes them excellent) that there is nothing in the history of 70 AD that really matches the prophetic reference to Daniel’s abomination of desolation that Jesus speaks of as future. Nor in Daniel’s chapter 9 and 12 references to which Jesus refers.
In point of fact, they criticize those who insist on pigeonholing some historical event to match the exact words of Jesus. Again, that is at least academic integrity and honesty befitting of Christ.
I then read this “…it is not necessary and probably not possible to identify specific aspects of the final events…..this is, after all, presented to us as prediction, not as historical narration.”
Fine and good. Except I would argue it is certainly possible for God to identify specific details in prophecy, and would argue that He most definitely did so when it comes to the First Coming of our Lord and the crucifixion. In fact, Isaiah chapter 53 practically does read like a historical narration of events, and the details throughout Scripture of specific references and details to the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus are the norm, not the exception.
I’ll leave it to others to argue what is “necessary” when it comes to God giving His prophetic word. I just note what He actually did – and suggest there is no reason to think He is not just as specific when it comes to details of the 2nd Coming.
Why, in the year in which we live, it is so impossible to imagine a political leader working a treaty that brings a temporary peace in the Middle East between Israel and the Islamic nations surrounding her, that might involve a rebuilt temple, is beyond me. The nation exists again. Jerusalem is again a major city of international discussion. She is surrounded by nations bent on her destruction. Even the temple mount has a nice empty space in line with the east gate that would accommodate the size of a rebuilt temple.
I understand why it would be unheard of in Luther or Calvin’s day – or for that matter the centuries of church history after the fall of Jerusalem.
Steve,
Your next to last paragraph which begins “Why, in the year in which we live, it is so impossible to imagine…”
It is not hard to imagine. But that is all it is, your imagination – because the text, especially in Daniel does not say that.
But my question is that Jesus has established his new Israel – do you deny that?
One other thing, what if in Daniel 9 it is Jesus being spoken there and through his acts he has ended the sacrifices (which I do believe he fulfilled on the cross?
Jean @ #4 – Again, it will be tonight before I can make a full answer, but wanted to point out your error.
Amiilennialism was not a thing until Augustine. All of the early church fathers were millennialists, in one form or the other. Millenialism, whether pre or post, has existed since the Apostles. It is you who are following the new doctrine.
Josh,
Two things, the innovation that I was referring to is the one in your comment #3 about God’s plan for the nation of Israel. Please show me in the Fathers where they held to that.
Secondly, when it comes to the early church beliefs concerning eschatology, we have the Apostles and Nicene Creeds, which represent the early Church view:
“He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. From thence He will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Christian Church, the communion of saints, the
forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.” – Apostles Creed
“And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures and ascended into
heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father. And He will come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead, whose kingdom will have no end.”
….
And I believe in one holy Christian and apostolic Church I acknowledge one
Baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.” – Nicene Creed
It’s all quite simple and straightforward.
Jean, you know that Creeds are not all that was written by the early church.
I think the issue would be settled if someone came up with a New Testament passage that says Jesus will set up his earthly kingdom that will last 1,000 years.
I know of no NT passage that states this – not even one NT passage that even implies this will happen.
Now Matthew 25:31-46 does clearly state the amil position – and the creeds pretty much attest to the same.
The Creeds are completely agnostic on millennial position. Revelation 20 is the millennial proof passage.
Josh – you can answer tonight when you are home and better armed – but according to Rev 20, when does the millennium begin? There is the whole answer.
Revelation 20 does not say, so that will have to referenced with other Scriptures. Most of which point to a time in the future,
The Scripture, especially Old Testament prophets, are pretty clear what life is going to look lIke on earth during the Millennium though….
The millennium begins when Satan is bound. Jesus said in Matt 12 that he has bound Satan. So the Millennium has begun.
“He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended.”
No rational person would honestly say that describes the time we live in.
Well if we are going to quote verses, Matthew 12
“28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house.”
Are you denying that Jesus, now in this church age, is plundering Satan’s kingdom? All the people saved from then until the present day were a part of Satan’s household and Jesus has plundered.
Or as Revelation 20 says about Satan – “to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended.”
Nations are still being deceived.
Not in the way this means – look, Jesus even today plunders Satan’s house by saving Muslim even in Iran and other Muslim countries.
How is that happening with out the binding of Satan … unles you think Satan is casting out Satan.
“Not in the way this means”
The way you interpret it makes it not mean what the words say.
#9 Jean,
“…. whose kingdom will have no end.”
I don’t believe this was included in the Nicene Creed against Chiliasm (Millennialism.)
It was included against something else, can’t remember what it was.
But it is useful nowadays against Millennialism, even if that wasn’t its original purpose.
All those early Millennialists did believe in a literal 1000 reign by Christ on earth because it does explain lambs and lions but they were not the rapturists of modern times. And eventually, Millennialism was condemned as heresy. (I prefer the term “heterodox.”)
Well Josh, you still have not shown that the events of Rev 20 are an earthy event. Every time we see thrones in the book of revelation, they are in heaven – representing heavenly (as in not earthly) events..
Are there nations in heaven?
Josh,
When the word “nations” is typically used in the NT it is speaking broadly about all people groups.
“And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place”
“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”
Are those nations deceived in heaven?
Xenia,
Thank you for those clarifications in #22. The creeds are of immense value to the Church, for keeping us within the lanes of orthodoxy. We are so fortunate that the Church councils prepared them for us. I doubt in the splintered nature of the Church today a broad swath of the Church could ever agree on a Christian creed.
A perusal through church history shows that a rise in millennialism coincides with a rise in persecution.
When the church is comfy, amill rises.
Josh,
“Are those nations deceived in heaven?”
Jesus reigns in heaven and the nations are not deceived here on earth because Satan is bound.
What do you think Jesus said he did in Matt 12 if not bind Satan?
HAHAH..
So Revelation 20 IS about earth?
You can only have your circular argument one way or the other MLD.
Xenia, when was Millennianism considered heresy?
Josh – Yes.
Jesus reigns in heaven – in his heavenly kingdom – described as the millennium
While we live on earth. – this is exactly what is happening today. Is Jesus not reigning in his heavenly kingdom today?
Show me from the NT anywhere where it says that heavenly, glorified people will be living together with mortal humans here on the earth?
Well, you keep changing the question.
in #23 you said “Well Josh, you still have not shown that the events of Rev 20 are an earthy event.”
Now you agree that they are, at least partially.
Show me from the NT anywhere where it says that heavenly, glorified people will be living together with mortal humans here on the earth?
————————————————————
That is not necessary under premillennialism. In fact, it most likely will not be the case.
Once more, MLD makes a claim to represent the theology he has personally rejected, inserting his own straw into the argument, and calling it unbiblical.
He shall judge between many peoples, and shall decide disputes for strong nations far away; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore;
If that verse is a reference to something that happens in heaven, I will eat my keyboard.
If someone wants to argue that verse is presently underway on earth today, maybe HE should eat his keyboard.
Steve,
So are you saying that the Church has no role in the Millennial Kingdom. Totally absent?
This is absolutely more Plan A / Plan B than I was ever led to believe.
Steve,
Our basic difference is that you use the OT to interpret the NT. In fact you try to insert the OT into the NT just as you are doing here.
Now, myself and at least Jean use the NT as the interpretive lens for the OT. The fact that the NT says nothing about this earthly kingdom, but instead describes the 2nd coming in total at Mastt 25:31-46 (in Jesus’ own words) – says much in my book.
Josh, I think I talked myself into a corner.
I was listening to an EO podcast last night where the speaker said Chiliasm was condemned as a heresy but when I went to that speaker’s web page, he is referencing “…. whose kingdom will have no end” which I just declared to be irrelevant. This seems to be what people are using to say Millennialism was declared to be heretical. So, unless I find something more substantial, I will take back “heretical” and replace it with “heterodox.”
We already shown that REvelation 20 speaks of said earthly kingdom. You sort of agreed.
All good Xenia, I think you just got that one wrong. I may have even done that before 🙂
I still don’t see how you would call the early church fathers heterodox, but to each his own.
Heterodox just means “different belief.” It doesn’t mean “damnable heresy.”
I have always seen it as a negative, not reaching all the way to condemnation, but all good. Thanks for the clarification.
Josh – Revelation 20 is happening now – we are in that Millennium – everyone since the 1st advent
Oh brother. Well, we clearly disagree on the definition of “deceived” then. But even then you just said ” THe NT says nothing about an earthly Kingdom”
But REv 20 is about happenings on earth. So even in your different definitions, we are now in an earthly kingdom.
Our basic difference is that you use the OT to interpret the NT
———————————————
Not at all.
Our difference is I believe ALL of God’s prophetic word will be fulfilled….and given that I teach the entire word of God – since all Scripture is profitable, I do not have the luxury you have of avoiding verses that clearly have never been fulfilled, and that can’t ever be filled in an amillennial manner.
And I am not a good enough actor to stand before God’s people and talk about all the literal, specific, detailed prophecies concerning the First Coming of Christ, and then say that God wants us to symbolize, generalize, and allegorize all the prophecies that speak of His Second Coming.
“But REv 20 is about happenings on earth. So even in your different definitions, we are now in an earthly kingdom.”
Earth is not Jesus’ kingdom. Look, show me something in Rev 20 that ties what it is talking about to a Jesus ruled earthly kingdom. It just is not there – it is totally heavenly.
Read the book of revelation and you will see continually that the scenes keep going back and forth. You see all the mayhem happening on earth, people wanting the rocks to fall on their head things are so bad – but then the scene shifts and we see the heavenly scene and how Jesus is ruling in his kingdom.
You have been sold something that is not there – there is no earthly kingdom lead by Jesus spoken of in the NT – at all.
In fact you try to insert the OT into the NT just as you are doing here.
————————————————
This is a second point.
I did no such thing. To speak of the end of war on earth among the nations is not to make comment on New Testament verses. I referenced ZERO NT verses.
It is to note that this promise of God has not yet happened.
I like this promise of God. Isn’t it wonderful to think a moment about a world with no wars, no military budgets or training camps. What a beautiful promise given to us by our Creator as we trudge through this fallen, sin cursed world. Maybe MLD is too busy reading Luther to think upon such things….I think on them regularly.
I believe this will happen. I believe this will happen because God promised it will happen in His word….and I believe God….and His word.
For one to make it an error of hermeneutics….well, maybe it is time to put down the doctrine and look at a sunset.
Steve,
Except that the prophecies are fulfilled in Jesus.
Daniel is about Jesus, the OT is about Jesus and it all points to Jesus coming to earth, born of a virgin, living a perfect life, dying on the cross, buried and on the 3rd day rising from the dead.
The OT prophecy is not about Israel – it becomes about Israel when the dispensationalists of old, especially Scofield and Chafer worked backwards from Israel being God’s people of eternity on the earth while the Church is God’s people in heaven. They worked this back into the OT.- with no mention in the new.
Am I the only one who wonders, when Paul was speaking about Israel in Romans 9-11, wasn’t that a great opportunity for him to speak directly to the grand time when God makes up with his people the Jews and when he will lovingly rule over them from David’s throne here on earth for 1,000 years?
How did he miss that opportunity?