BIBLE IN TEN

Matthew 18:22

Sunday, 5 April 2026
 
Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. Matthew 18:22
 
“‘He says to him, Jesus, ‘Not, I say to you until sevenfold, but until seventy-fold, sevenfold!’” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Peter came to Jesus and asked how many times he should forgive his brother sinning against him. Should it be up to seven times? In response, “He says to him, Jesus, ‘Not, I say to you until sevenfold.’”
 
Peter’s suggestion seemed magnanimous. He would demonstrate a careful, patient, and seemingly longsuffering attitude towards the person who was offending him.
 
However, despite this proposition, Jesus finds the number deficient. Peter’s assumption was that there was a termination of such forgiveness based upon human wear and tear on patience. It is a common mistake people make concerning theological and doctrinal matters, where we align our thoughts about God based on our emotions, mental constraints, etc.
 
God, however, is Spirit. His patience, for example, is unlimited. Having said that, this is only so when certain conditions are met. Again, as noted in the analysis of the previous verse, Peter’s question was incomplete in its scope. However, Jesus is answering it as it stands and will clarify the scope in His continued response. For now, He continues, saying, “but until seventy-fold, sevenfold!”
 
It is a new word, hebdomékontakis, seventy-fold. This is the only time it is seen in the New Testament. The meaning of the words is debated. Grammatically, the number could be interpreted in two ways. Some translations say seventy times seven (meaning 70 x 7). Some say seventy-seven times (77).
 
The latter is contextually what is intended. The word “times” is normally used. In this case, our minds think of multiplication of the next number. Thus, we think seventy... times... seven. But the Greek reads seventy times (70), seven times (7). Placing a comma between the two helps get the point. However, if one changes the word “times” to the ending “fold,” it clears things up: seventy-fold, sevenfold.
 
The number is used in the Greek translation of Genesis 4 –
 
And he said, Lamech, to his wives, Adah and Zillah, “You must hear my voice, wives Lamech. You must cause to enear my saying. For man, I killed to my wound, and child, to my stripe. 24For sevenfold [hebdomékontakis] he will be ‘caused to avenge Cain’, and Lamech, seventy and seven.” Genesis 4:23, 24 (CG)
 
There, the context is clear. The meaning is seventy-seven. The biblical precedent was set, and Jesus was certainly using that verse as a reference for his words to Peter. It was understood from the earliest writings that seventy-seven was the intent. However, later scholars expanded the meaning to 70x7 = 490. This was done to emphasize the magnanimity of the forgiveness. Later preachers picked this up and included it in their sermons.
 
The number seventy-seven is simply a way of saying the same thing Lamech was conveying, meaning an unlimited number. Repeating and/or doubling things in such a manner is intended to give such an idea to the mind of the hearers, and this is just what Peter would have understood.
 
Life application: As noted above, God’s patience is unlimited. And yet, God judged and destroyed His people at times. So how do those thoughts reconcile? Examples permeate Scripture. For example –
 
“And the children of Israel said to the Lord, ‘We have sinned! Do to us whatever seems best to You; only deliver us this day, we pray.’ 16 So they put away the foreign gods from among them and served the Lord. And His soul could no longer endure the misery of Israel.” Judges 10:15, 16
 
Reading all of Judges 10:6-16 will give a better sense, but this portion is sufficient to see what is necessary for God’s “unlimited patience” to come about. The people turned, humbled themselves, and petitioned for deliverance. God did not automatically forgive them. Such a thing is not found in Scripture.
 
Sin causes a wall between God and man. It cannot simply be overlooked. It is something that must be dealt with. When the appropriate means of dealing with it have been effected, the forgiveness is granted. God does not expect more of us than He metes out upon us.
 
Again, Peter’s question is incomplete in and of itself, even if the intent behind it was implied. Any reasonable Jew would have known that God does not arbitrarily forgive. There are conditions to His forgiveness, and the same is true with us. Believers are not punching bags.
 
When an offense is brought to bear against another, there can be no true forgiveness without the offender acknowledging his wrongdoing. We can “let it go,” but that is all we can do until the matter is resolved by both parties. The utterly inane concept of forgiving everyone of every offense all the time, which is taught in Christian circles, is unbiblical and damaging to proper doctrine and theology.
 
Lord God, thank You for the cross of Jesus. Its potential for forgiveness is unlimited. But it actually only forgives those who come to You by faith in what it signifies. Help us, O God, to always remember the cost of our sin. To Your glory. Amen.

Matthew 18:21

Saturday, 4 April 2026
 
Then Peter came to Him and said, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” Matthew 18:21
 
“Then Peter, having approached Him, he said, ‘Lord, how often, he will sin unto me, my brother, and I will forgive him? Until sevenfold?’” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus noted to the disciples that where two or three are gathered together in His name, He is there in their midst. Matthew next records, “Then Peter, having approached Him, he said, ‘Lord, how often, he will sin unto me, my brother?’”
 
A new word is used here, posakis. It is a multiplicative from posos, how much, how great, etc. Thus, the meaning here is “how many times.” In this chapter, Peter has heard about who the greatest in the kingdom of heaven is. Jesus also explained about causing one of the little ones (meaning those of simple faith) to sin, and what to do about it.
 
Jesus then spoke about the shepherd leaving the ninety-nine sheep to seek the one, and the reconciliation that is hoped for from that. If it is found, He spoke of the joy of it. After that, Jesus referred to the matter of a brother who sins against another and the efforts that should be taken to bring about restoration.
 
As a result of that, He spoke of the matter of binding and loosening, a topic that was developed based on the lack of reconciliation of the wayward brother. These things have led Peter to want to know the extent of forgiveness that should be extended to another. He has asked how often the brother would sin against him, and as he continues, “and I will forgive him?”
 
Peter’s question must be taken in connection with other thoughts that have been presented, that will be presented in Matthew, and that are presented in the other gospels. So far, Peter has only asked about forgiving for an offense against him. The question is actually incomplete. Because of this, and by taking it as a complete thought, too many err in their evaluation of the subject of forgiveness. For now, he answers his own question with another question, saying, “Until sevenfold?”
 
A new word is seen, heptakis, sevenfold. It means repeating something seven times. Peter’s suggestion is one that seems appropriate. We only have so much time in a day, so much patience with nonsense, and an inability to read the hearts and intents of others.
 
Seven is a number well known in Scripture and one already seen in Jesus’ ministry several times. It is the number of spiritual perfection. As such, it is a logical number for Peter to put forth. Some people argue that the rabbinic interpretation of forgiveness was up to three or four times based on Amos 1:3 and other Amos references.
 
This is not an acceptable place to go for understanding such a matter, but it is common for the rabbinic society to try to define every moral thing in a set manner. The attitude, however, is one that has only caused them eons of grief for misapplying God’s intent in this fashion.
 
As for Peter’s question, it will be answered by Jesus with a direct answer, but then He will provide a couple of paragraphs of explanation to fill in the details of Peter’s incomplete question. He will then sum up the matter in verse 35. Unfortunately, when Jesus’ response is evaluated by people, they read the beginning of His answer, skip to the last part, and fail to consider the middle content.
 
They also fail to consider all other examples of the matter of forgiveness. Thus, they conclude that forgiveness is mandatory in all circumstances. This is not only inappropriate, but it has also caused great damage to people throughout the ages.
 
Life application: Without even getting into Jesus’ answer, the matter of Peter’s question being incomplete should be addressed. What is it that prompts forgiveness? The answer is that there is an understanding that a wrong has been committed.
 
In the previous example, a brother was offended. He went to the offender and addressed the matter. The offender refused to listen. The matter was elevated to two or three witnesses. The offender still refused to acknowledge his wrongdoing. Therefore, the matter was brought to the out-calling. The offender still refused to yield.
 
So what was the result after that? He was to be like the ethnicity and the taxman to them. What was lacking in the man’s demeanor that caused his expulsion? The answer is that he did not acknowledge his offense, and he did not ask for forgiveness for it. And that leads to the next obvious question: Was he forgiven? The answer is a giant, NO.
 
Peter’s question is incomplete because it only addresses the matter of forgiveness without the matter of his brother coming to him and asking for forgiveness, or at a minimum, Peter going to him and addressing the matter as in the example cited by Jesus.
 
The thought may have been implied in Peter’s mind, but it is not clearly stated. Jesus’ example, however, will bring up the matter of repentance, demonstrating the incomplete nature of Peter’s question for us to understand more fully what is expected in the process of offense and forgiveness.
 
Pay attention as the verses continue to unfold, and this will be seen. Jesus has already given an example of when not to forgive others. Peter’s question is based on that, not separate from it.
 
Lord God, help us to consider the context of what we read. It is very easy to be duped into bad doctrine taught by others who sound convincing, but who really have no idea what they are talking about. Give us the desire to both read and contemplate Your word so that we are not led astray by false ideas about important doctrinal issues. Amen.
 

Matthew 18:20

Friday, 3 April 2026
 
For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.” Matthew 18:20
 
“For where they are, two or three having been gathered into the name of My Father, there I am in the midst of them.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus told the disciples that if two of them harmonized about any deed, that if they should ask, it would come to pass for them from His Father. He next continues, saying, “For where they are, two or three having been gathered into the name of My Father.”
 
The words here refer to any assembly of people. It does not appear that there is anything exclusively pointing to the disciples. However, it does not logically follow that the previous verse gives a grant as stated there to all such gatherings.
 
In other words, Jesus’ words of the previous verse clearly refer to the disciples. The reasons for that were stated. As such, the idea that a claim by two or three gathering at any time in church would necessitate that the Father to agree to whatever they ask cannot be supported. What Jesus is saying in this verse is a general statement about anytime such a group meets. It is an obvious truth.
 
The reason it is obvious is what is said in Hebrews 13:5 –
 
“Let your conduct be without covetousness; be content with such things as you have. For He Himself has said, ‘I will never leave you nor forsake you.’”
 
The words are directed in the singular, “...no not you [sg.] I should leave, neither no you [sg.] I should forsake.” (CG)
 
The weight of that is seen in Jesus’ next words, “there I am in the midst of them.” If Jesus states there is no point at which He should leave or forsake an individual, then He is always with him. If two or three are gathered, then it is certain He is among them, acknowledging that they have gathered in His Father’s name.
 
Again, however, it does not logically follow that everything Jesus says to His disciples applies to all people in the church at all times. The follow-up general statement is given to the disciples to ensure they know that the first statement is true.
 
For example, in Ezekiel, it says that Gog will be destroyed along with all of his armies. It then says that God will give them to the birds and beasts to be devoured. This doesn’t mean that every person slain in the armies will be eaten by birds and beasts. It is a general statement given to confirm the fact that the armies will be destroyed.
 
We can be certain that the Lord is always with us. We can also be certain that when we gather in the Father’s name, Jesus will be with us. But we should not claim that because we have met in this manner, the Father is going to agree to everything we determine. It assumes too much.
 
Life application: It is important to consider the context of what is being said in Scripture. Once the context is understood, we should go further and question if what is said in the surrounding verses is a specific or general statement. Does what is said logically follow if a general statement is made? The answer will normally be no. The general is given to confirm the specific, but not necessarily in all circumstances or in all ways.
 
The example of Gog above is just one of many such examples that show one does not logically follow after another. As this is so, let us lean toward the more conservative idea concerning such things. To go further may, and usually will, assume too much.
 
And as an additional confirmation of such things, just look realistically at the world around you. Has your experience shown that every time two or three are gathered in Jesus’ name, God has done for them what they determined? Of course not! If not, then why not? Are the words of Jesus in error? Of course not! Then the disconnect is in our thinking and understanding of the passage, not in what Jesus is telling a certain group of people.
 
Lord God, give us the wisdom to consider Your word in its intended context. May we not run ahead with various thoughts from Your word without thinking them through and properly considering what is said and why it is said. Give us this wisdom, O God. Amen.

Matthew 18:19

Thursday, 2 April 2026
 
Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven.  Matthew 18:19
 
“Again, I say to you, that if two of you, they may harmonize upon the earth about any deed, that if they should ask, it will become to them from My Father, the ‘in heavens’.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus instructed the disciples about binding on earth what is bound in heaven and loosing on earth what is loosed in heaven. Following along with that same authority, of which the context demands it is referring to these disciples, it says, “Again, I say to you, that if two of you, they may harmonize upon the earth.”
 
Here is a new word, sumphóneó, to be harmonious. One can see the obvious etymological ancestor of our modern word symphony. The word is derived from sýn, together with, and phōnḗ, sound or voice (think of the telephōnḗ). HELPS Word Studies says, “to be in harmony, agreeing, because in one concord.”
 
When a symphony plays, each voice of the instruments is playing in accord with the whole to form a tapestry of music. Jesus continues, saying that if these disciples harmonize upon the earth “about any deed.”
 
A second new word is seen, pragma, a deed. By extension, it refers to a material object, a business, a matter, a thing, or work in general. This word is the great-grandfather of our modern word pragmatic. From there, it became the Greek word pragmatikos (relating to a fact). That was then adopted into English.
 
Jesus is looking for harmony among these disciples to form a united consensus. Once that is obtained, He says, “that if they should ask, it will become to them.”
 
This is the main key to obtaining what is needed for the furtherance of the church in its infancy. There cannot be individual voices pulling from one side and other voices pulling from another in an attempt to obtain personal victory. That type of dealing is left up to business leaders, politicians, etc. But the early church would only properly function when they were united.
 
And that could only happen when the will of the Lord, a will whose general principles and main goal were already known to them, would be pursued. Should they have been united in this manner, they would receive their request, as Jesus says, “from My Father, the ‘in heavens’.”
 
Jesus is restating and reconfirming the thought of the previous verse. There is an ability to obtain what is asked because it has already been ordained to be so in heaven.
 
Life application: The words of Jesus in this verse are quite often taken to inappropriate and unintended extremes. The words are used to claim things that will not come about because the intended recipients of what Jesus says were these disciples, not the church at large, after the word was completed.
 
As seen in the previous commentary, an example was given concerning binding and loosening from Acts 15. In the same chapter, the decision that led to the letter sent to the believers at Antioch says –
 
“Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren.” Acts 15:22
 
This is the type of agreement Jesus was referring to. It was a necessary grant to the early church because there was no New Testament to guide the church in its decision-making process. Therefore, they came together, united in an agreement, and then disseminated that decision to where it was needed to go.
 
A similar type of agreement came about in Acts 6 over a matter. Today, the church’s instruction manual is Scripture. If a church body agrees on something that is contrary to the word, how could God grant that? For this to come about, every single church would have to be in perfect agreement over every point of doctrine given in Scripture.
 
And yet, there isn’t a single point of doctrine that every church agrees on! The words of Jesus in Matthew 18:19 are not, and indeed they cannot be speaking of people today. Using this verse as a way of supposedly settling a matter is inappropriate. The word is given to do that. It is our job to learn the word, apply the word in its proper context, and be obedient to its precepts.
 
Lord God, help us to remember that You have bound what we are to do and You have loosed what we are not to do. As such, our agreement in spiritual matters must be based upon the word of God, not upon a misunderstanding of what Jesus has taught. Help us to remember the context of what He instructs us. Amen.

Matthew 18:18

Wednesday, 1 April 2026
 
“Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Matthew 18:18
 
“Amen! I say to you, as much if you should bind upon the earth, it will be ‘having been bindings’ in the heaven. And as much, if you should loosen upon the earth, it will be having been loosenings in the heaven.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus gave instructions on someone who would not listen to the out-called gathering. If he continued to stubbornly listen, he was to be treated like the ethnicity and the taxmen. Now, he provides an authority similar to that stated to Peter in Acts 16:19, beginning with, “Amen! I say to you.”
 
The “you” is plural. In Matthew 16:19, it was singular, referring to Peter. Therefore, the authority is not limited to Peter. This authority is, “as much if you should bind upon the earth, it will be ‘having been bindings’ in the heaven.”
 
The plural “bindings” refers to the plural number of people. Each such decision is a part of those things having been bound in the heaven.
 
Access to heaven is through faith in Jesus. That is something ahead for the disciples at this time. Hence, the future tense, “it will be.” These disciples are being told that they will have authority to bind, meaning prohibit, that which is prohibited in the heavens. That is seen with the use of the perfect participle “having been.” Likewise, Jesus says, “And as much, if you should loosen upon the earth, it will be having been loosenings in the heaven.”
 
To loosen means to undo and thus to allow. These disciples were given the authority to make decisions concerning what was to be done or not done in the church, confirming that which was bound in heaven. This is how the church was established. Decisions were made, authority was set, and matters were discussed, such as in Acts 15 at the Council in Jerusalem.
 
These matters were granted to men, inspired by the Spirit, to establish the workings of the church and also to pen the words of Scripture that would then become the final authority for church conduct. These words are logically connected to the previous section that dealt with a sinning brother, because that was a matter that they would decide.
 
If they decided such a person was to be returned to fellowship, that is what was bound in heaven. If they determined he should be expelled, that was bound in heaven. With the word of God complete, we now have Scripture to determine what is bound in heaven. We simply need to follow what has been provided.
 
Life application: It is not uncommon in some churches to hear people claim they are “binding” this or that, or that they are “loosening” this or that, as if they personally have authority to direct heaven to do certain things.
Rather, God in heaven determines what is acceptable and what is not in spiritual matters. He has given us His wisdom for church-age guidance in the pages of Scripture. That is what is bound and what is loosed.
 
A problem with churches arises when they don’t use the Bible to make such determinations. How can you allow or prohibit something in accord with God’s will if you don’t know what His will is? The answer is that you cannot.
 
A process was set in motion for Christ’s church to be established. Moses received God’s will, penned it, and passed it on to the people. That is what was bound or loosened for the people. God took a bit of a different direction with the church. He gave the leaders authority to get things going, to make decisions in accord with the Spirit’s directions, and eventually, they penned the New Testament.
 
That is seen, for example, in these words from James –
 
“For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.” Acts 15:28, 29
 
The decision was bound in heaven (good to the Holy Spirit), and it was then passed on to the people as a binding precept. Now that the word is completed, we are to go to the epistles to further clarify what was initially set forth.
 
Lord God, how good it is to have Your word to direct us. We don’t need to worry if we are living in accord with Your will or not if we are aware of what Your will is! And so, we will continue in Your word, learning its precepts and living in accord with what it says. Amen.

Matthew 18:17

Tuesday, 31 March 2026
 
And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector. Matthew 18:17
 
“And if he should ignore them, you say to the out-calling. And if also the out-calling he ignores, he is to you as the ethnicity and the taxmen.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus cited the precept from Deuteronomy concerning establishing a matter by two or three witnesses. He next says, “And if he should ignore them.”
 
A new word is seen, parakouó, to mishear. By implication, it then means to disobey. In this case, he simply ignores what has been presented, failing to hear their reason. The matter was brought up privately between the offended and the offender. That didn’t work, so the one offended brought witnesses to assist in adjudicating the matter. That attempt has failed. Therefore, the next step is noted by Jesus, “you say to the out-calling.”
 
This is the second time the out-calling is mentioned. It is a called-out group of people in any given context. Today, we call it the church. But the church didn’t exist as an entity until after the Pentecost recorded in Acts 2. Thus, saying “church” at this point is a bit of a misnomer. As for it being brought to the out-calling, Jesus next says, “And if also the out-calling he ignores.”
 
The word parakouó is used again. It will only be seen one more time, in Mark 5:36. This stubborn guy has now thrice ignored reason. Because of this, there is no more remedy available. And so Jesus says, “he is to you as the ethnicity and the taxmen.”
 
In this case, the ethnicity means a non-covenant person. Jesus, at the time, was speaking to the people of Israel. At the time, they were the covenant people. Therefore, it was anyone outside of their realm. The taxmen, even if in Israel, were outcasts from the people. They worked for the Romans and thus harmed the state of their own people. As such, this guy is now like an ethnicity, being out of the covenant graces. He is also like the taxmen, being at enmity with the cause.
 
Life application: In the epistles, Paul handles matters concerning such people in various ways –
 
“But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person.” 1 Corinthians 5:11
 
“And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. 15 Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.” 2 Thessalonians 3:14, 15
 
“This charge I commit to you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, 19 having faith and a good conscience, which some having rejected, concerning the faith have suffered shipwreck, 20 of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.” 1 Timothy 1:18-20
 
One can see that Paul had a variety of disciplinary methods for various infractions against the church. The circumstances dictated what he would do. What he says in 1 Corinthians and 2 Thessalonians is prescriptive and is to be adhered to.
 
Paying attention to what is going on in the word is important. Issues arise that must be addressed from time to time. Churches do not need books of order, books of discipline, etc., to make judgments within the congregation or for laying charges against elders and deacons.These things are laid out in Scripture. Such books begin to take the place of Scripture in the minds of people. When this happens, and it inevitably does, the word loses its importance in the church. Later, when the morals of the church degrade, as is common, such books are amended to accommodate whatever perversion is now considered acceptable.
 
But the word of God cannot be amended. It stands as the rule and guide of the faith. Be sure to go to it, not some other source, to determine matters of church policy.
 
Lord God, help us to remember Your word for all occasions where we need spiritual guidance and direction. May we never forsake this precious gift You have blessed us with for conducting our life’s walk. Amen.

Matthew 18:16

Monday, 30 March 2026
 
But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’ Matthew 18:16
 
“And if not he should hear, you take with you yet one or two, that ‘upon mouth – two witnesses, or three, it should stand, every word.’” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus said, “And if he should sin against you, your brother, you withdraw, and you confute him – between you and him alone. If he should hear you, you gained your brother.” Next, He will cite words from Deuteronomy 19:15, beginning with, “And if not he should hear.”
 
Jesus has been speaking of the “little ones,” meaning those who accepted the message by simple faith, like a little child. If a matter arises between two of them, there should first be a private attempt to reconcile. If that does not resolve the issue, because the person will not hear, “you take with you yet one or two.”
 
This means that the matter is worth elevating. Someone might do something to another that was upsetting, but does that mean every matter needs to be handled this way? Rather, some disputes are better left unaddressed. But this is a matter where someone has been really wronged by another. Bringing one or two more to stand as witnesses thus fulfills a necessary requirement of validation. The reason for this is explicitly stated by Jesus, saying, “that ‘upon mouth – two witnesses, or three, it should stand, every word.’”
 
As noted, this was a precept of the Law of Moses, and Jesus is currently speaking to people under the law. However, it is a precept of wisdom that extends beyond the law. This is certain because Paul repeats the sentiment in his epistles –
 
“This will be the third time I am coming to you. ‘By the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established.’” 2 Corinthians 13:1
 
Paul was careful to ensure that a precept which is logical and appropriate not be overlooked simply because the law was fulfilled in Christ.
 
Life application: With a precept from the law being addressed by Paul, it would be easy for someone to conclude that we are somehow bound to the other precepts of the law as well. Without understanding what God has done in Christ, this is what many have concluded over the years.
 
But such a position ignores the entire weight and significance of what Christ came to do. Just because there are precepts in the law that make sense and should be applied to our continued walk, it in no way logically follows that we are somehow bound to the Law of Moses, in part or in whole.
 
The same is true with verses in Acts where Paul apparently observed Jewish rites, customs, and practices. Law-observing heretics will point at those examples and say, “See, Paul never stopped observing the law, and neither should we.”
 
Again, such a thought ignores what is clearly stated elsewhere, such as –
 
“For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; 20 and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; 21 to those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law; 22 to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. 23 Now this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I may be partaker of it with you.” 1 Corinthians 9:19-23
 
Paul was an apostle. It was his job to get converts. Paul was also a Jew. If it meant observing a now-fulfilled law in order to open the eyes of his fellow Jews to their need for Christ, that is what he did. Elsewhere, such as in Galatians 2, he argues against Peter for this same thing when in the presence of the Gentiles.
 
The Gentiles were never under the law. In Peter’s failure to uphold the integrity and truth of the gospel, he turned from grace back to the law. And he did it not for saving Jews, but to save face with the Jews. It was an unacceptable action because it harmed the Gentile believers, confusing them and bringing them into a bondage they never faced before.
 
Be careful to think things through. Don’t get swayed by the failed arguments of law observers. Stand fast on the grace of God in Christ.
 
Lord God, may we be faithful people who faithfully follow You. There is no need to find our righteousness in the law. Rather, we find it in You. You are the Lord, our righteousness. May we remember this and cling to it all our days. Amen.

Matthew 18:15

Sunday, 29 March 2026
 
“Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. Matthew 18:15
 
“And if he should sin against you, your brother, you withdraw, and you confute him – between you and him alone. If he should hear you, you gained your brother.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus finished the parable of the lost sheep. He now enters into a new type of possible loss. Unlike a brother in the faith who has wandered from the fold, this one is in the fold, but has caused turmoil, as Jesus says, “And if he should sin against you, your brother.”
 
The statement is as broad as it gets. No particular sin is mentioned, only that it is something a brother (meaning a fellow believer) has done to offend another. Should this be the case, Jesus continues with, “you withdraw, and you confute him.”
 
It is a new word, elegchó, to confute or admonish. HELPS Word Studies says, “to convince with solid, compelling evidence, especially to expose (prove wrong, connect).” The reason for this is at least two-fold. The first is to maintain harmony with others. The second follows naturally from the first point. In Leviticus 19, it says –
 
“‘You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.” Leviticus 19:17
 
Under the law, there was to be fellowship with others of Israel. They were commanded to love their neighbors as themselves (Leviticus 19:18). As this is a point of law, to not do so by hating one’s brother resulted in bearing sin.
 
In the epistles, Paul says –
 
“Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith.” Galatians 6:10
 
Doing good to others includes maintaining fellowship and not hating one another. As for how to approach the matter Jesus refers to, He continues with, “between you and him alone.”
 
A conflict between two people should start with a one-on-one presentation of what one did to the other to harm the relationship. Again, no example of what the sin is has been mentioned. These are guidelines to cover all such instances. The offense has been made, the offended has identified it, and he has done so in private between the two. Jesus next says, “If he should hear you, you gained your brother.”
 
The matter was handled properly, and nobody else needed to be bothered with the offense. It is a simple, straightforward, and expected way of handling such things. In the end, reconciliation was made, and life will go on without further sin being the result.
 
Life application: In Romans, Paul gives continued advice concerning such things –
 
“Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. 18 If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. 19 Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” Romans 12:17-19
 
Notice how Paul says, “as much as depends on you.” It is similar in thought to what lies ahead in Jesus’ continued words to the disciples. Some things are beyond our ability to mend, and this can be for a limitless number of reasons. We can only do what we can do.
 
These matters are addressed in the word because they are matters that have arisen in human hearts since the very beginning. Cain’s jealousy turned into murder. That was just the start of unhappy interactions between people, even among Christians. So don’t beat yourself up too much when disputes, even irreconcilable disputes, arise.
 
Hand your cares and disappointments over to the Lord after you have done what you can to resolve a matter. He has been handling humanity’s problems for millennia.
 
Glorious Lord God, help us to be people who are willing to resolve conflicts with others when it is possible. Give us the wisdom to take the proper steps to do so, reminding us of what Your word says concerning such matters. Help us in this, O God. Amen.

Matthew 18:14

Saturday, 28 March 2026
 
Even so it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish. Matthew 18:14
 
“Therefore, not, it is, determination – before your Father, the ‘in heavens’ – that he should perish among the least of these.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus noted that the sheepherder rejoiced more over the one sheep that strayed than over the ninety-nine that didn’t. He now finishes this parable, beginning with the words, “Therefore, not.”
The form of the wording bears its own emphasis by beginning the statement with the negative in this manner. Imagine someone facing possible death, and he says to his girl, “What is it you want?” She says, “...Not... for you to die! I don’t want you to die!” Beginning with the negative gives a special type of emphasis that would otherwise be lacking. That is what Jesus is doing. This then leads into what is not. Not, “it is, determination.”
 
In other words, there is something determined or willed. Instead of saying what is willed, Jesus says what is not willed. Next, to state what the determination is based on, He next says, “before your Father, the ‘in heavens’.”
 
God has a predetermined will, a determination that is set forth. It is this that is preeminent in His redemptive plans. For example, using the same word, Paul says –
 
“In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will [theléma], 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.” Ephesians 1:11, 12
 
God’s will, His determination, is set forth. It is what He has committed to. Understanding this, Jesus next says what the negative of that will is, “that he should perish.”
 
In other words, because of the negative, it is the determination that the person should not perish. Removing the intermediate words shows this: “not ... that he should perish.” God has a determination that of a particular group, none of them should perish. That group is next defined, completing the parable, “among the least of these.”
 
Who are the least of these? Remember, as an object lesson, He called a little child to come among them. His words have pointed not to little children, but to those who have become like little children. That is through their child-like innocent faith, accepting God at His word. Consider Abram –
 
“And He brought out – him, the outside. And He said, ‘You must cause to gaze, I pray, the heavens-ward, and you must recount the stars (If you will be able to recount them!).’ And he said to him, ‘Thus, it will be, your seed.’ 6And he caused to establish in Yehovah. And he interpenetrated it to him – righteousness.” Genesis 15:5, 6 (CG)
 
God declared Abram righteous through simple, childlike faith. He accepted the word of the Lord as true, and the Lord proclaimed him righteous. Think of Jesus’ words again –
 
“Therefore, not, it is, determination – before your Father, the ‘in heavens’ – that he should perish among the least of these.”
 
In other words, the words of Jesus now are contained in the thought of John 3:16 –
 
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
 
These are “the least of these” whom God has a determination set forth that they should not perish. Jesus’ words show that whether the sheep strays or not, and regardless of what happens to the sheep, be it taken by a lion or by a thief, God has set forth a determination that they will not perish. It is a note of eternal salvation found in a parable that is often misunderstood because of imprecise translations that miss the nuances of Jesus’ intent.
 
Life application: Remember that the subject of the parable is the man and his sheep. This isn’t referring to Israel as a nation. Many in Israel rejected the Lord outright. But within Israel were His sheep. That was also true before Israel existed, in people such as Job and Abraham. It is true with those now brought into the commonwealth of Israel in the church.
 
God’s sheep are not Muslims, even though some Muslims may eventually come to God through Christ. As such, it is evident that the “sheep” do not represent all little children. Rather, they represent those who belong to the Lord.
 
When one of them strays, the Lord’s determination is that he will be brought back to Him. Such sheep may not be found in this life, but they remain the Lord’s. In the end, those who are His are given the surety that they will not perish. However, how sad it will be at the Bema Seat of Christ when those sheep are brought forward who strayed and never came back.
 
There will be little reward for a life squandered when it started out so well in simple faith. Let us endeavor to persevere in our walk with the Lord, to the glory of God who saved us through the giving of Jesus.
 
Lord God, we are prone to stray from the fold. Some will never return. However, we still belong to You if such is the case. Thank You that You are faithful to us, even when we can be faithfully unfaithful. Thank You for Your infinite goodness. Amen.

Matthew 18:13

Friday, 27 March 2026
 
And if he should find it, assuredly, I say to you, he rejoices more over that sheep than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray. Matthew 18:13
 
“And if it should become – found it! Amen! I say to you that he rejoices upon it more than upon the ninety-nine, the ‘not having roamed’.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus asked the disciples what they thought a man would do if one of his flock of a hundred went astray. Wouldn’t he go after the one to find it? He now continues, saying, “And if it should become – found it!”
 
The man went into the mountains looking for his lost sheep, leaving the other ninety-nine that were not lost. As he searched, he eventually caught up with the wayward wanderer. It is an exciting time for him. Hooray! The Lord guided his steps to obtaining his objective and retrieving it. Therefore, Jesus says, “Amen! I say to you that he rejoices upon it.”
 
This is a natural reaction. When we lose something important to us, it becomes the object of our attention. Other things move to the background, and our pursuit of what is lost takes over as a greatly motivating desire. 
 
This is so much the case that when it is found, our inner emotions are relieved, the tension we felt fades away, and a sense of calm in our mind is restored. Because of this, the emotion of joy replaces these harsher emotions. This is natural anytime we go through such things.
 
This type of joy actually elevates what transpired so much that there is a sense of it above what wasn’t lost. That was never a consideration, and so we take possession of it as a normal event. Thus, for the man, the joy over what is found is “more than upon the ninety-nine, the ‘not having roamed’.”
 
This is to be taken as an axiom. If we have money in the bank, for example, we consider it safe. It doesn’t come to mind except when we need it. We assume it is there and may be happy about it in some manner, just as a shepherd is happy about his big flock, but we don’t get anxious about it and then rejoice when we go to the bank to take out some of it, as if we would if it were lost.
 
But if we have a little stash at the house, which is kept for emergencies, and if we were to lose that, we would be terribly distraught and seek high and low for it. If we should find it, we will have a thorough sense of elation that it has been recovered. Jesus, making an obvious metaphor for us to consider, says that the shepherd feels the same way about his lost sheep.
 
Life application: Jesus uses a subjunctive verb in this verse to describe the state of His metaphor, “if it should become.” As Jesus is the Lord, the words He uses are precise and carefully laid out in Scripture to convey the way things are. He says as much in Matthew 5:18 concerning the law.
 
Everything in the word has been meticulously set forth for us to understand what is going on in the world around us. There are facts to be understood in this parable. One is that there is a shepherd and that he has sheep. Jesus is basing this parable on people who came to Him with childlike faith.
 
After coming to Him in faith, he wanders off. It is Jesus’ intent for that person to come back into the fold. However, the subjunctive verb tells us that it may never be the case. Thus, the doctrine of irresistible will is proven false. There is complete freedom of will in man to pursue the path he is on, even if it is a reckless one.
 
However, this verse says nothing of salvation. The sheep, even if lost, still belongs to the man. If it returns or is found, that is great. If not, it doesn’t change true ownership. Likewise, man may remain separate from God after being saved to the point where he no longer remembers he was of the fold, but God does, as is evidenced in 2 Peter 1:9.
 
Such considerations must be on Jesus’ mind for Him to convey this parable the way He does. His examples are clear, precisely stated, and specific in what they convey.
 
Lord God, we are grateful to You for the salvation You have granted us. In our state of salvation, we are prone to wander, and some of us may not make it back to the fold, but even that can be a lesson for others. Like Hymenaeus and Alexander, we may be handed over to Satan to learn not to blaspheme, but others will have a chance to see and learn. No matter what, we remain Yours through such times. Thank You for this wonderful assurance. Amen.

Matthew 18:12

Thursday, 26 March 2026
 
“What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine and go to the mountains to seek the one that is straying? Matthew 18:12
 
“What, you, it seems? If it should become, to some man, a hundred sheep, and it should roam – one from them, not he left the ninety-nine upon the mountains, and having gone, he seeks the roaming?” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus noted that the Son of Man came to save that which was lost. He now provides a metaphorical example of this, beginning with, “What, you, it seems?”
 
Jesus will ponder a question based on His statement to elicit them to think through what it is like from God’s perspective. In essence, “Here is a situation. What would you do about this matter?” It should be noted that Luke’s gospel provides more surrounding detail. That is found in Luke 15:1-7. The audience is different in both, and so it is likely that this same basic parable was spoken at different times, something that would be expected in any ministry.
 
As for His question, He next says, “If it should become, to some man, a hundred sheep.” It is a nice round number, which reveals a man with some wealth, but understanding his abilities are best directed to this number. He is attentive to maintain the flock at this set size, maybe selling off anything that goes beyond it.
 
As for the number itself, it is a multiple of ten. Bullinger notes that the number signifies ordinal perfection. He says of it, “Completeness of order, marking the entire round of anything, is, therefore, the ever-present signification of the number ten. It implies that nothing is wanting; that the number and order are perfect; that the whole cycle is complete.”
 
As for this man with his one hundred sheep, Jesus next says, “and it should roam – one from them.”
 
As the man is carefully attentive to his flock, having one leave would mean there is a void in what he considers the proper amount of sheep to tend to. Remembering that they are “his sheep,” he determines to protect that which is his. Therefore, Jesus asks the disciples what they would do, but doing so already knowing what their answer will be, saying, “not he left the ninety-nine upon the mountains?”
 
This is the obvious thing such a meticulous shepherd would do. It should be observed that in Luke, it says he left them in the wilderness. Here, it is the mountains. In the Bible, a mountain represents a large amount of something gathered together. In typology, it is synonymous with a large but centralized group of people.
 
Jesus doesn’t say he left the other sheep alone. To say he did would be an argument from silence. He could have had three sons or five servants with him. As for the number ninety-nine, nine signifies the conclusion of a matter. It is the number of finality or judgment. Eleven is the number that marks “disorder, disorganization, imperfection, and disintegration.”
 
So there is a finality resulting in disharmony if the one isn’t found. Because of this, Jesus continues the question, “and having gone, he seeks the roaming?”
 
A new word is seen here, planaó, to roam or wander. It is a word cognate to the etymological root of our word planet. The reason for this is that, unlike stars, the planets appear to wander through the night sky, sometimes even going into retrograde. To the people, they were curious anomalies that demanded a different word than star to describe them.
 
The answer to the question would be obvious to the disciples. Here is a man with his perfectly precise flock. With one wandering off, there is disharmony. Jesus will continue His words to explain what He is referring to.
 
Life application: As noted, the text says nothing concerning who, if anyone, the ninety-nine were left with. And yet, it is common in teachings and sermons to have some thought not in Scripture added into the account, as if the one was more important than the ninety-nine because the others were left alone.
 
But that assumes too much. When David was tasked by his father to take supplies to his brothers, he left his flocks with a guarder to tend to them (1 Samuel 17:20). Nabal had many sheep, and he had men tending to them in 1 Samuel 25.
 
Remember that when you hear sermons, you should not make a new brain squiggle over what you hear unless you check what the pastor is referring to or think the matter through carefully. Once you hear something and assimilate it into your mind, that will normally become a settled matter in your thinking.
 
But settled matters that are incorrect will inevitably lead to more incorrect thinking. Step by step, your thinking will stray from what is intended. So be sure to check things out!
 
Lord God, how wonderful it is to search out Your word and find how much Your people really mean to You. For those who are Yours, we can see that You are willing to go to great lengths to bring us back to You. How blessed we are that because of Jesus, we are safely cared for. Thank You for Jesus, who has made this bond possible. Amen.
 

Matthew 18:11

Wednesday, 25 March 2026
 
For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost. Matthew 18:11
 
“For He came, the Son of Man to save the ‘having been lost’.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus admonished the disciples not to disesteem one of the least of these, noting that their messengers in heaven see the appearance of His Father in heaven. Having noted that, He begins words which explain who “the least of these” refers to. It should be noted that most modern translations omit this verse or footnote it as being missing from many texts. He says, “For He came, the Son of Man to save the ‘having been lost’.”
 
Scholars argue over which texts are best and why this verse is or is not authentic. The words appear genuine enough, setting the stage for the next three verses. Without being dogmatic, they are worthy of evaluation because of this. In the Bible, there are several times that explain why Jesus came.
 
For example, in Mark 1:38, Jesus notes that He came to preach to the cities of Israel. In John 6:38, Jesus said He came to do the will of Him who sent Him. In John 10:10, He said He came that His people may have life, and have it more abundantly. Each reason given for Jesus’ coming helps us to see more clearly the greater plan of redemption that God has set forth for the people of the world.
 
In the case of Matthew 18:11, the reason is to save what has been lost. If Jesus were talking only of little children in the previous verse, it would mean that little children were lost and needed to be saved. If He is referring to those who are like little children, which the context demands, it still means that little children, of whom the one with Him is the example, are lost and need to be found, but they serve as an example of any person who demonstrates childlike faith toward His message.
 
The point then is based on what He just said. Jesus came to save humanity. How can the disciple disesteem “the least of these” when they are the very reason for His coming? Philippines 2:1-11 first refers to what it should be like to be in Christ, esteeming others better than themselves and looking out for others’ interests.
 
This is because Jesus left the glory of heaven and came in the likeness of men. Paul says, “taking the form of a bondservant.” If He was willing to do this, then how can we disesteem those He came to save who were lost in the wilderness of sin?
 
Life application: Myer’s New Testament Commentary says of this verse that it “is not genuine.” What if it is? Reliable texts include it. And the sentiment is in line with Luke 19:10, which says, “for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.”
 
If Matthew 18:11 was simply copied from Luke 19:10 as a means of reconciling the two gospels, why would the scribe leave off the words “to seek” found in Luke’s version? When there is doubt, the best option is to evaluate the verse anyway, note that there is a conflict between texts, and not adamantly assert something that may not be correct.
 
God’s word is too precious to fiddle with. Rather, it should be carefully handled and treated with the utmost respect. It is ok to not know everything and to admit it rather than be wrong about a matter.
 
Whatever side you lean towards in an issue like this, be willing to admit you were not there when Matthew penned the original. Defend your stand, but don’t adamantly assert without absolutely sure evidence to back up your claim.
 
Lord God, help us to always treat Your word with the utmost respect, cherishing it and carefully relaying its sacred content to others. Be glorified in our care for this precious word. Amen.