Responding with Apathy: Matthew 27:1-10

Focus Passage: Matthew 27:1-10 (GW)

Early in the morning all the chief priests and the leaders of the people decided to execute Jesus. They tied him up, led him away, and handed him over to Pilate, the governor.

Then Judas, who had betrayed Jesus, regretted what had happened when he saw that Jesus was condemned. He brought the 30 silver coins back to the chief priests and leaders. He said, “I’ve sinned by betraying an innocent man.”

They replied, “What do we care? That’s your problem.”

So he threw the money into the temple, went away, and hanged himself.

The chief priests took the money and said, “It’s not right to put it into the temple treasury, because it’s blood money.” So they decided to use it to buy a potter’s field for the burial of strangers. That’s why that field has been called the Field of Blood ever since. Then what the prophet Jeremiah had said came true, “They took the 30 silver coins, the price the people of Israel had placed on him, 10 and used the coins to buy a potter’s field, as the Lord had directed me.”

Read Matthew 27:1-10 in context and/or in other translations on BibleGateway.com!

When reading in Matthew’s gospel about the fate of Judas Iscariot, I am startled by what actually happens. Only Matthew includes the fate of Jesus’ betrayer and in what Matthew tells us is a brief, but also amazing, conversation between Judas Iscariot and the chief priests and religious leaders.

Matthew transitions onto Judas’ story by telling us: “Then Judas, who had betrayed Jesus, regretted what had happened when he saw that Jesus was condemned. He brought the 30 silver coins back to the chief priests and leaders. He said, ‘I’ve sinned by betraying an innocent man.’” (v. 3-4a)

On realizing that he had sinned, Judas tries to undo what had been done. However, the response he receives is amazing. The chief priests and leaders replied, “What do we care? That’s your problem.” (v. 4b)

In the end, Judas Iscariot realized what he did was wrong and he regretted what happened. In contrast, the chief priests and leaders – who were at least just as guilty as Judas was – are completely indifferent to the fact that they have sent an innocent man to die.

These people were supposed to be God’s representatives on earth, but while God’s character is one of love, nothing in the chief priests’ and leaders’ actions demonstrate a God that loves humanity. The chief priests and leaders statement of apathy towards Jesus’ condemnation reveals how far they had fallen away from knowing God.

In contrast, every action Jesus did throughout His ministry demonstrated God’s love. Even through the events surrounding the crucifixion, Jesus demonstrated God’s character more accurately than any of the religious leaders did.

Jesus chose to enter the world during a time when God’s character was the most misrepresented in all of history. He chose to enter the world at a time when He would ultimately be rejected and condemned without committing a crime. He chose to enter the world when the world needed to really see a clear picture of God in a time of apathy and indifference.

Jesus entered the world when He did for you and for me! His sacrifice opens the way for our salvation – even if the leaders that weekend were apathetic towards the life they had condemned to die.

This thought was inspired by studying the Walking With Jesus “Reflective Bible Study” package. To discover insights like this in your own study time, click here and give Reflective Bible Study a try today!

Subscribe to this blog and never miss an insight.

Two Opposite Brothers: Luke 15:11-32


Read the Transcript

In our last episode, we began looking at Jesus’ illustration that is normally referred to as the Parable of the Prodigal Son. However, with how Jesus begins the parable, we thought it would be better to emphasize the father in Jesus’ story because this is how Jesus opened up the parable, and because the Father likely represents God.

But our last episode didn’t have enough time to cover the last portion of this parable, so this episode will pick back up where we left off. However, in case you missed the last episode, let’s read the parable through from the start to catch you up, or at the very least, to refresh all of our memories with how this parable begins.

Our parable and passage are found in the gospel of Luke, chapter 15, and we will be reading out of the New International Version of the Bible. Starting in verse 11, Luke tells us that:

11 Jesus continued: “There was a man who had two sons. 12 The younger one said to his father, ‘Father, give me my share of the estate.’ So he divided his property between them.

13 “Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had, set off for a distant country and there squandered his wealth in wild living. 14 After he had spent everything, there was a severe famine in that whole country, and he began to be in need. 15 So he went and hired himself out to a citizen of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed pigs. 16 He longed to fill his stomach with the pods that the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything.

17 “When he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! 18 I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. 19 I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired servants.’ 20 So he got up and went to his father.

“But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him.

21 “The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’

22 “But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. 23 Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. 24 For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate.

This is where we finished off in our last episode. However, Jesus isn’t finished sharing the parable. Continuing in verse 25, we discover that:

25 “Meanwhile, the older son was in the field. When he came near the house, he heard music and dancing. 26 So he called one of the servants and asked him what was going on. 27 ‘Your brother has come,’ he replied, ‘and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound.’

28 “The older brother became angry and refused to go in. So his father went out and pleaded with him. 29 But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. 30 But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’

31 “‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. 32 But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’”

What began as a celebration because of the younger son’s return home turns into a family dispute. It would seem that the father in this parable is only capable of pleasing one of his sons at a time. On the return of the younger son, the older son becomes resentful at the father’s joy.

Does this then mean that when God rejoices at the return and repentance of sinners, those who stayed beside Him without turning away will ultimately turn away and become resentful? From the way this parable describes this event, it certainly seems this way.

However, I believe this parable is a challenge and not a prediction. When we begin to see this parable as a challenge, then we stop letting it dictate our life and our future. Instead of seeing the two sons as two types of people we must choose between, we should think of these two sons as two extremes we probably should avoid.

The younger son represents the first extreme, and this extreme is rejecting God. It is never good to reject God, however this younger son does ultimately turn around and realize He needed to repent and return. The younger son’s return is the best decision that is made in this entire parable. The younger son falls, but he also models the best response when he comes to his senses and he chooses to repent and return to the Father, who as we mentioned in the previous episode represents God the Father.

The older son represents the other extreme, and this extreme is resenting God for His love and acceptance of sinners who repent. This extreme really is only a trap for people who have followed God their entire lives, and it is a trap because we begin to feel like we are missing out on something the world claimed to offer and that God is not happy that we stayed with Him. Neither portion of this trap is true. The younger son experienced temporary happiness that was shallow and self-serving, and then ultimately the younger son experienced rejection and ultimate humiliation. If these things are desirable to someone who has followed God their whole life, then perhaps rejecting God is a great choice.

However, before rejecting God, ask someone who has left God who then came to their senses and returned. Ask this person if their time away from God was valuable and/or worthwhile. Don’t ask someone living apart from God this question, because they won’t give you as honest of an answer simply because they either haven’t come to their senses, or because they truly don’t know both sides of this decision.

The truth of the older son’s extreme is that God is incredibly happy that we have stayed with Him and everything He has is ours. By staying with God, we have avoided many other traps we could face, and the only reason to be resentful is because we think we missed out on something important, or we don’t understand God’s love and His character of forgiveness. If we have been living our lives looking forward to seeing other people get judged for their actions, then we are living in the older son’s extreme and trap.

We don’t have to reject God and we don’t have to chose to be resentful when sinners repent and return to God. However, these two brothers represent the extremes we all face when deciding to come to God and when we discover just how loving, forgiving, and accepting God truly is!

As we come to the end of another podcast episode, here are the challenges I will leave you with:

Whether you identify more with the older son or the younger son, choose to avoid each son’s extremes. Choose instead to return to God humbly when you’ve fallen away, and choose to love those who return like God loves and celebrates for those who repent and return. Understand that these two extremes, and the traps that these extremes represent, are the extremes God wants us to avoid in our lives.

Also, continue to pray and study the Bible for yourself. Don’t take my word, or anyone else’s word for it. Choose to study the Bible for yourself and don’t let me or anyone else get between you and your relationship with God.

And as I end every set of challenges by saying in one way or another, never stop short of, back away from, or abandon where God wants to lead you to in your life with Him!

Year of Parables – Episode 32: In the Parable of the Prodigal Son, discover how each brother represents an extreme we can take, and how neither extreme leads anywhere positive. Discover the best path for moving forward when returning to God and when celebrating the return of others.

Join the discussion. Share your thoughts on this passage.

Limiting Miracles: Mark 8:22-26

Focus Passage: Mark 8:22-26 (GNT)

22 They came to Bethsaida, where some people brought a blind man to Jesus and begged him to touch him. 23 Jesus took the blind man by the hand and led him out of the village. After spitting on the man’s eyes, Jesus placed his hands on him and asked him,
         Can you see anything?

24 The man looked up and said,
         Yes, I can see people, but they look like trees walking around.

25 Jesus again placed his hands on the man’s eyes. This time the man looked intently, his eyesight returned, and he saw everything clearly. 26 Jesus then sent him home with the order,
         Don’t go back into the village.

Read Mark 8:22-26 in context and/or in other translations on BibleGateway.com!

The big idea I see in this passage, and in this unique healing miracle is this: My lack of faith may limit Jesus’ ability to work miracles in my life.

We can see this idea played out in a few details within Mark’s retelling of this event.

First, other people bring the blind man to Jesus. We can assume they are more interested in seeing a miracle than on seeing this disabled man be healed. We see this idea played out (and perhaps a collective groan/sigh) when Jesus takes the blind man out of the village and away from them.

Next, since other people brought the blind man to Jesus, we may conclude that the man wasn’t all that confident in Jesus’ ability to heal him. Other blind people made a much bigger deal when getting near Jesus than this man did. This man likely had lots of doubts about Jesus.

Thirdly, this is one of the only times where Jesus performs a healing that doesn’t “work” entirely the first time around. He has to try again. The big takeaway I have from this two-times approach is that the man needed a little evidence in Jesus’ ability to assure him that Jesus really could heal him. We might call him the “Thomas” (John 20:24-29) of those who Jesus healed.

The now formerly blind man has faith and evidence to believe in Jesus, and it was the partial evidence that he allowed to strengthen his faith that gave him the ability to experience the complete healing miracle.

This thought was inspired by studying the Walking With Jesus “Reflective Bible Study” package. To discover insights like this in your own study time, click here and give Reflective Bible Study a try today!

Subscribe to this blog and never miss an insight.

Nothing Left to Chance: Mark 15:21-24

Focus Passage: Mark 15:21-24 (NCV)

21 A man named Simon from Cyrene, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was coming from the fields to the city. The soldiers forced Simon to carry the cross for Jesus. 22 They led Jesus to the place called Golgotha, which means the Place of the Skull. 23 The soldiers tried to give Jesus wine mixed with myrrh to drink, but he refused. 24 The soldiers crucified Jesus and divided his clothes among themselves, throwing lots to decide what each soldier would get.

Read Mark 15:21-24 in context and/or in other translations on BibleGateway.com!

While Jesus was hanging on the cross, Matthew and Mark describe how Jesus refused a drink offered to Him by the soldiers. Part of me wonders if the wine and myrrh was to help deaden the pain of the cross, or if it was given to help prolong the life of the one being crucified. Perhaps it could have been given as a way of dulling the mind of the person being crucified, which may have resulted in them not having a filter on their last words while alive.

All of these ideas might be accurate, but it is interesting that both of these gospel writers include Jesus refusing to drink it. Mark describes in his gospel that “The soldiers tried to give Jesus wine mixed with myrrh to drink, but he refused.” (v. 23)

Matthew’s gospel says something similar, but he is a little more descriptive: “The soldiers gave Jesus wine mixed with gall to drink. He tasted the wine but refused to drink it.” (Matthew 27:34)

I am curious if Jesus refused this drink because He wanted His mind to be clear for the duration of His death. I wonder if Jesus knew that there was still more to do. Even in His last hours alive, Jesus may have known that there was one more person who would turn to Him – and it would be one of the least likely people possible: a thief being crucified next to Him.

I also wonder if Jesus refused to drink as a way of fulfilling His dedication to God – similar to the vow of a Nazarite in the Old Testament. While Jesus associated with people who drank, He had a reputation for socializing with those who did, and He turned water into wine early on in His ministry, we don’t see any direct record of Him drinking wine or vinegar-based drinks. The juice at the last supper that symbolized His blood is about the closest reference I can think of which would describe Jesus drinking. I wonder if Jesus had dedicated Himself to God in a similar way to how a Nazarite would have in the Old Testament – or if Jesus’ life was a fulfillment in some way of the Nazarite vows those in the Old Testament took.

The last thing I wonder is whether Jesus wanted us to know He was in as sane of a state of mind as one could be during an event like this. If Jesus had taken a drink, we might wonder if what He said to the thief or to anyone at any point during His time on the cross was really Him talking, or some type of alcoholic delusion. By refusing to drink what was offered, we can believe the words Jesus said while on the cross.

I may have to wait until heaven to get all these questions answered, but one thing I do realize in this decision not to drink is this: Even in death, Jesus was very intentional about the choices and decisions He made. Nothing was left to chance, and nothing happened that was not part of God’s great plan of salvation!

This thought was inspired by studying the Walking With Jesus “Reflective Bible Study” package. To discover insights like this in your own study time, click here and give Reflective Bible Study a try today!

Subscribe to this blog and never miss an insight.