Category: Gibbs 2006 - Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry

Receiving sight

4/1/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
4/1/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “9:27-31: Jesus Heals Two Blind Men." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 486-489.

In very brief terms Matthew 9:27-31 describes Jesus' healing of two blind men. Gibbs sees some similarities between this passage and the healing of the leper in 8:1-4. Both healings are performed after the person in need confesses belief that Jesus can heal. In both cases, Jesus touches the needy person. In both instances Jesus warns against telling what happened (Gibbs 2006, 487). Here, however, for the first time since 1:1, Jesus is addressed as the "Son of David." Gibbs observes the irony that it is two blind men who recognize Jesus as the Son of David (Gibbs 2006, 487).

The blind men confess that Jesus is their Lord (9:28). They are then healed, in what Gibbs sees as an anticipation of Jesus' work of restoration in the last day (Gibbs 2006, 488).

Gibbs explores several possible reasons for Jesus' request that the men should not reveal his identity. The most likely reason Gibbs finds is that the people would expect the Messianc title to go with someone who would come in power as a revolutionary, rather than as a suffering servant (Gibbs 2006, 489). The men who had been healed proclaimed Jesus as the Son of David, their healer.

Could it kill you?

3/25/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
3/25/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “9:18-26: Jesus' Authority over Death: Jesus Heals the Bleeding Woman and the Ruler's Daughter." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 483-485.

Matthew 9:18-26 shows Jesus' authority over death. Gibbs sees this as the main thrust of both the miracles in this passage. The request of the ruler, as compared to its expression in Mark, indicates an expectation that Jesus' act of laying his hand on her would be effective (Gibbs 2006, 482).

Gibbs observes that both the woman with the flow of blood and the dead girl would be considered unclean. The woman, due to her lengthy illness, would be dying slowly (Gibbs 2006, 484). Jesus' work gives life to both. Both the girl and the woman were healed because of faith. Likewise, Gibbs notes all who believe on Jesus are promised life (Gibbs 2006, 485).

Really New

3/18/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
3/18/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “9:14-17: Fasting and Wineskins: Something New Is Here!" Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 4475-481.

In Matthew 9:14-17, some disciples of John ask Jesus about the habits of his discioples. Gibbs considers Jesus' answer to show the question had more to do with Jesus' identity and mission (Gibbs 2006, 476).

Jesus' answer uses three illustrations. The first invites people to believe in Jesus. The second and third are more in the nature of warnings (Gibbs 2006, 477). The question itself, in verse 14, assumes that the disciples of Jesus would follow the same pattern as the Pharisees and other pious Jews, by fasting regularly. In verses 15-17, Jesus makes it clear that his disciples are following someone new, so they have new responses (Gibbs 2006, 477). Following Jesus is like celebrating a wedding. It would not be the appropriate occasion for a fast (Gibbs 2006, 478). In this situation, Gibbs further finds Jesus describing himself as the Bridegroom. This was a role previously reserved for God the Father. All are invited to come and believe (Gibbs 2006, 479). In the second illustration, Jesus cannot be seen as the patch on a garment. Gibbs considers him to be the solid one of Israel ho needs no actual patches (Gibbs 2006, 479). Finally, Jesus pictures himself as new wine which must be in a new wineskin, which is the only thing which will not be ruined by this use (Gibbs 2006, 480).

Matt and the Tax Band

3/11/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
3/11/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “9:9-13: Jesus calls Matthew and Others to Believe." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 463-474.

Gibbs' textual notes on Matthew 9:9-13 are brief and tend to focus on the textbook constructions in the passage. There is an excellent illustration of a definite article as a pronoun, an objective genitive, and a contrast which negates one element of the comparison (Gibbs 2006, 463-464). He then moves on to commentary on the content.

Gibbs sees Matthew 9:9-13 not only as the call of Matthew but also as an important reflection on the many others called by Jesus who elect not to follow him (Gibbs 2006, 465). Jesus' call to Matthew was brief and powerful. Matthew's response was to get up and follow Jesus. Gibbs is moved by the event to consider the identity of the tax gatherers and of the other sinners mentioned, as well as the function of table fellowship.

The nature of tax farming in Palestine is not well documented and probably involves considerable variation between different regions. Gibbs suggests that Herod may have been relatively open to allowing Jewish customs to be respected, when compared with other leaders (Gibbs 2006, 466). Matthew may not have been a high official. He was actually in the tax office, rather than being less visible, as would be likely of an important official (Gibbs 2006, 467).

The "sinners" mentioned in Matthew 9:10-11 draw complaints from the Pharisees (Gibbs 2006, 467). They may have simply been classed this way because they were not Pharisees. However, Gibbs thinks these are more likely people who were "more flagrant in their disregard for God's Law" than average (Gibbs 2006, 468).

Jesus' gathering for dinner with tax collectors and sinners raises the question of the purpose of gatherings for meals (Gibbs 2006, 469). While the meal could certainly have deep significance of shared purpose and a close relationship, Gibbs observes that it might not have that connotation. Gibbs suggests four reasons that this meal could have offended the Pharisees. They may have objected to the free acceptance he showed for people they considered flagrant sinners (Gibbs 2006, 470). Jesus also could have been seen as violating the customs of polite society by breaking down social barriers even when he was a guest at someone else's table. A thid reason could be the exclusive nature of Jesus' calling people to himself. He may have been expected to be shutting out others who would be worthy guests (Gibbs 2006, 471). Finally, the fact that Jesus offered transformation to those around him may have been offensive. Table fellowship was normally seen as a way of reinforcing the status quo, but Jesus used it to break down the status quo (Gibbs 2006, 472).

Gibbs notes that Jesus uses fellowship at a table as a foreshadowing of an eschatological feast. In Church practice, the Sacrament of the Altar serves this same function (Gibbs 2006, 473). There, sinners of all types are called to eat in the presence of the forgiving God.

Which Is Easier to Say?

3/4/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
3/4/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “9:1-8: Jesus Forgives and Heals a Paralytic." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 454-462.

Matthew 9:1-8 centers around Jesus' healing of a paralyzed man. Gibbs takes the verb of the men bringing the paralytic to indicate an ongoing activity. They persisted with difficulty because of the crowd. This also suggests to Gibbs that the participle "seeing" has causative rather than temporal force. The emphasis is on Jesus' ability to know the motivation of the friends, rather than simply to see their movement (Gibbs 2006, 454).

Jesus' assertion of verse two, that the paralyzed man's sins are being forgiven, draws an accusation in verse three of blasphemy. The scribes apparently understand that Jesus is asserting his ability to forgive, i.e., to do God's work (Gibbs 2006, 455). Gibbs observes that this was an internal thought of the scribes, but that in verse four Jesus "saw" it, just as he saw the people bringing the paralyzed man. This further emphasizes Jesus' ability to do what only God can do (Gibbs 2006, 456). By verse eight, Matthew's assessment of the crowd's attitude also affirms this special authority. God had given authority to heal and forgive to the man Jesus (Gibbs 2006, 457).

Gibbs reminds his readers that Matthew 8-9 contain three triads of miracles. This passage (9:1-8) is the third miracle of the second triad, a group which show Jesus' authority (Gibbs 2006, 458). In this instance, Matthew doesn't even mention the man's sin, only his illness. Jesus, however, moves directly to sin as the ultimate cause of suffering (Gibbs 2006, 459). Jesus' salvation not only takes away sin, but here is able to heal sickness.

In response to Jesus' healing, the scribes consider Jesus to be blaspheming. Gibbs observes that Jesus asks the scribes about their evil attitude, which fails to recognize Jesus as Lord (Gibbs 2006, 460). Jesus' healing of the paralysis shows that he is able to heal.

The response of the crowds is very different from that of the scribes. Gibbs observes that Matthew's reference to God as giving this authority to men is cryptic. Gibbs does not take it as a reference to healing authority of the Church in later time. Rather, he sees it as an assertion that Jesus, as the true "man," has great authority (Gibbs 2006, 461). The authority of the work of ministry is also passed on to Christians in Matthew 28, thus keeping the authority among men.

Can't Hurt This One

2/25/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
2/25/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 8:28-34: The Gadarene Exorcisms." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 447-453.

Gibbs observes that the location Matthew refers to in 8:28 is unclear. There are numerous variants in spelling in the manuscript tradition, which leaves us uncertain of the identity of the location of these exorcisms (Gibbs 2006, 447). The herd of pigs present strongly suggests a predominantly Gentile territory. The deportation of the demons into the pigs and the pigs' death both released the demons and drew the attention of the herders (Gibbs 2006, 448).

In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus showed his authority b teaching. Here, in Matthew 8-9, he is showing authority by performing miracles. Gibbs sees this passage as a particularly vivid account which points to both the terror of the demonic and the authority of God (Gibbs 2006, 449).

The setting, according to Gibbs, would even speak of despair and defilement when considered by Gentiles, as the men were outcasts and living among the tombs (Gibbs 2006, 450). The demons are able to identify Jesus, but are surprised to see him before the time of thier final destruction. Gibbs notes that though they beg Jesus for answers, he doesn't answer their questions until he sends them into the herd of pigs (Gibbs 2006, 451). Jesus is the one who shows authority throughout this passage.

Gibbs observes that the demons remained subject to Jesus' authority once they were in the pigs. They had to destroy something so as to be set free. The drowning of the pigs accomplished this and also set the stage for a conversation between Jesus and the townspeople (Gibbs 2006, 452). Though the people recognize Jesus' authority they do not act in faith, but rather in fear.

Gibbs observes that demon possession accounts are rare in the Bible outside of the Gospels. He considers it likely that there are still cases of possession, but that they are increasingly rare because Satan is a defeated enemy (Gibbs 2006, 453). Christians, as people indwelt by the Holy Spirit, may be attacked by demons, but should take hope and confidence from the fact that Jesus in us is greater than any opposition.

Jesus' Authority over All, Forever

2/18/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
2/18/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 8:18-27: Jesus' Authority: Questions of Discipleship and Jesus Stills the Storm." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 429-446.

In Matthew 8:19, a scribe offers to follow Jesus. Gibbs notes the scribe calls him "teacher." In Matthew, disciples of Jesus never address him in this way (Gibbs 2006, 430). Gibbs takes this man to want to be a disciple but only on his own terms, which could explain Jesus' unwelcoming manner toward the scribe.

Matthew 8:18-27 serves as a triad of miracles, the second triad in Matthew 8-9 (Gibbs 2006, 432). In the earlier triad the people recognized Jesus' authority. Gibbs notes that in this passage there are three people who fail to recognize Jesus' authority (Gibbs 2006, 433).

Gibbs notes that the scribe in Matthew 8:18-20 neither recognizes the authority of Jesus nor does he know how one becomes a disciple (Gibbs 2006, 433). The scribe had no concept of following Jesus to the point of death, laying down his life.

The title "Son of Man" is important. Gibbs observes that much scholarship has concentrated on the authenticity of the statements of Jesus at this point. Gibbs considers this to be an unimportant question, but that we need to seek to understand how Jesus and his hearers thought the phrase was being used (Gibbs 2006, 435). The hearers never seem to recgonize "Son of Man" asa Messianic title. Nobody reacts to it or applies it to Jesus. This is in contrast to other titles Jesus or others use, such as "the Christ." Gibbs suggests that Jesus may have used the term of himself so as to allow his hearers to ask about the rather ambiguous title (Gibbs 2006, 436). Gibbs' opinion ins that the passage of Daniel 7:13-14 was not sufficiently tied to messianic hopes to arouse a response.

In Matthew 8:21-22 another man approaches Jesus, this mann called a "disciple." His request would seem reasonable, but Jesus turns it down quickly (Gibbs 2006, 437). Gibbs concludes that it would be unusual for someone to leave a dying father so as to follow Jesus. Therefore, the father's death was probably not imminent. Jesus was telling the man that his priority should be to follow Jesus that day, not at some indistinct time in the future(Gibbs 2006, 438).

In Matthew 8:23-27, Jesus and his disciples cross the Sea of Galilee. Gibbs notes this is a challenging passage (Gibbs 2006, 440). For this reason, he first discusses what the passage does not mean, then what it does mean.

The passage is often treated as an allegory, with the storm becoming the trials in people's lives (Gibbs 2006, 440). The interpretation is also present in an article by Bornkamm from 1948, in which he makes a case for redaction criticism. Both means of interpretation miss the point of the passage, which is to show Jesus' authority over all things (Gibbs 2006, 441).

Gibbs goes into some detail of the weakness of Bornkamm's specific hermeneutic arguments. The allegorical arguments making the boat into the church and the storm as a social or emotive trial also have no solid basis in the New Testament texts (Gibbs 2006, 443). Specifically, in application, Jesus does not guarantee protection through storms. In Matthew, Jesus "makes the danger go away" but we cannot find a promise that suffering will go away.

Gibbs' conclusion is that Jesus is using the situation to show his authority. The first two encounters in verses 18-27 show "the purpose and the priority of Jesus' authority" and this narrative shows "the extent of Jesus' authority" (Gibbs 2006, 444). Jesus' significant act here is to rebuke the wind. The creation obeys Jesus, who is shown as God over all (Gibbs 2006, 445). This show of Jesus' authority promises a time when all creation will be brought into obedience to God. Gibbs sees this as an eschatological hope.

Touching and Healing

2/11/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
2/11/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 8:14-17: Jesus Heals Peter's Mother-in-Law and Fulfills Isaiah 53:4." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 421-428.

When Jesus heals the sick in Matthew 8:16-17, Gibbs observes that Matthew provides a very literal translation of Isaiah 53:4. Matthew seems to be making a clear statement of Jesus' ability to take away not only sickness, but also guilt and sin (Gibbs 2006, 422). Gibbs finds that this is done not only in Matthew's Gospel, but also in 1 Peter 2:24, when it is made clear that Jesus takes away our guilt (Gibbs 2006, 423).

Jesus' authority in Matthew 8:14-17 is seen as coming from his words. Gibbs sees the touch of Jesus as a typical accompaniment to his word, but that the word has the pre-eminent rule.

Gibbs finds the reference to demon possession in Matthew 8:16 as an important concept. It has indicated to some that Isaiah 53 shows the Messiah as cleansing from sin, but that Matthew fails to see that. Others have decided that the Messiah is specifically a healer of leprosy, but that he might not be literally taking the illness onto himself. Jesus' touch seems to cure, rather than to spread, the illness (Gibbs 2006, 425). The teaching and healing works of Jesus are inextricably bound to one another (Gibbs 2006, 426).

Gibbs finds the good news of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection to be "the end and goal of Matthew's narrative" (Gibbs 2006, 427). Matthew sees healing and forgiveness as an essential part of the eschatological mission of Christ, showing what his goal is.

Authority to Command

2/4/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
2/4/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 8:5-13: Jesus Heals a Centurion's Servant." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 414-420.

Gibbs notes that the centurion, possibly not a Roman, as Syrians and Idumaeans were active in the Roman forces, shows Jesus honor and begs his assistance (Gibbs 2006, 414). Jesus' response suggest sstrongly that the centurion is not an Israelite, as he is compared to what Jesus had seen "in Israel." Gibbs sees this as parallel to Luke 7, and not contradictory, though in Luke Jesus is approached by Jewish representatives. The request still comes from the centurion (Gibbs 2006, 415). In additional defense of the event being the same, while Luke mentions a servant, Matthew uses the word παῖς, which only rarely refers to a son in the New Testament. Gibbs takes the sick person to be a servant.

The centurion's response to Jesus' offer of a personal visit both emphasizes that the centurion is not worthy. Gibbs observes the very emphatic word order used. Further, though the centurion does not imply that Jesus is under authority, he says clearly that he himself is (Gibbs 2006, 416).

Gibbs notes that in the initial encounter, the centurion does not actually ask Jesus to do antyhing. He merely states the problem. It is Jesus who suggests the solution (Gibbs 2006, 417). The narrative then becomes not so much about the need of the servant but about the conversation pertaining to Jesus' authority to heal. Jesus rather surprisingly states his willingness to enter the home of a Gentile and heal a servant. The centurion shows his own humility by acknowledging Jesus' authority (Gibbs 2006, 418). Jesus' authority extends beyond that of any earthly ruler, since he can command an illness to go away.

Jesus' response of praise and wonder is surprising to Gibbs. He speaks not to the centuryon but to those following him, praising the centurion's faith (Gibbs 2006, 418). In his praise, he also predicts that those of all nations will be brought together into the heavenly gathering. God gathers all nations, like that of the centurion (Gibbs 2006, 419).

Gibbs finally notes the word of caution which Jesus brings to the crowds. They must also trust Jesus' authority so as to be gathered into the kingdom (Gibbs 2006, 419). It is Jesus' authority which makes all things possible, including the healing of the centurion's servant. Gibbs lists a number of other New Testament passages which speak of God's welcome of all who believe in Jesus.

Amazement vs. Belief

1/28/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
1/28/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 8:1-4: Jesus Cleanses a Leper." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 407-413.

Gibbs observes that in Matthew 8:2 the man with "leprosy" may have had any of a wide variety of illnesses resulting in scaly or scabby skin. The term is not limited to Hansen's disease (Gibbs 2006, 407). When the man has been healed, he is not to go and tell people, but is to see the priests and make an offering. These offerings are not to bring healing but are a response to recovery. They are spelled out in Leviticus chapter 14 (Gibbs 2006, 408).

Gibbs notes that while the crowds were amazed, only the man with leprosy acted in belief. Jesus shows his authority to do good, and works that good by healing the man who believes (Gibbs 2006, 409). The leper's address to Jesus acknowledges him as Lord and also affirms that Jesus is able to heal him if he wishes to do so (Gibbs 2006, 410).

Gibbs points out that Jesus' authority goes beyond that of anyone else. "Any other clean person who would touch a leper would thereby become unclean. However, rather than Jesus himself becoming ritually unclean through contact with the leper, Jesus' touch transmits purity and holiness to the unclean man and restores him" (Gibbs 2006, 411). Though not every person with an illness is healed, Gibbs observes that every person who believes Jesus receives forgiveness of sin, which leads to eternal healing.

Jesus' instructions to the man who has been healed include offering the normal sacrifice. This would permit him to return to life in society. The other instruction, to avoid speakign to anyone, is more cryptic. Gibbs suggests that telling others may have delayed and interfered with the man's re-entry into the community. Therefore, he should go with urgency to offer the sacrifice (Gibbs 2006, 412).

Jesus' Authority Seen in Grace

1/21/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
1/21/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “The Structure and Themes of Matthew 8-9." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 402-406.

Matthew's narrative of Jesus' ministry was interrupted in 4:25-8:1 by the Sermon on the Mount. The narrative resumes in chapters 8-9. Gibbs notes that this first half of the middle portion of the Gospel shows Jesus' Galilean ministry growing. The narrative was focused on word and deed. The Sermon was words. In chapters 8-9 Matthew focuses on Jesus' deeds. Gibbs takes these deeds to be emphasizing "Jesus' authority and how people react to it" (Gibbs 2006, 402).

Gibbs emphasizes that Jesus' authority as seen in chapters 8-9 is characterized by grace. He shows authority by healing and forgiving people (Gibbs 2006, 403). The reign of heaven, then, as Jesus shows it, is intended to do good for others.

Gibbs observes that Jesus only healed and rescued some, not all, people in Galilee (Gibbs 2006, 404). The consummation of Jesus' ministry, though, it not until the last day. Though Jesus has bound Satan, his reign in full is yet to come (Gibbs 2006, 405).

Gibbs notes that sevearl structural schemes exist for the organization of chapters 8-9, and that none has clearly won out over the others. One influential model sees the actions "as three triads of miracle stories," with each followed by some narrative (Gibbs 2006, 405).

Teaching and Doing

1/14/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
1/14/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 7:28-8:1: Narrative Conclusion to the Sermon." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 398-401.

Gibbs notes that Matthew 7:28 marks the end of one "of Jesus' five large discourses in Matthew's Gospel" as it bears the same wording as 11:1, 13:53, 19:1, and 26:1 (Gibbs 2006, 398). The Sermon on the Mount has served as Jesus' call and instruction to his special disciples but also, through Matthew's presentation, to all disciples everywhere.

The crowds followed Jesus after this teaching. Gibbs points out that Jesus had acted as one who bore authority. The crowds saw that authority as well (Gibbs 2006, 399). Gibbs is clear, though, that Matthew does not affirm the crowds believe Jesus' message. Rather, they seem to believe that he speaks with authority (Gibbs 2006, 400). This set Jesus apart from the scribes. Gibbs sees the perceived authority of Jesus as the unifying feature for much of the material in Matthew 8-9. As Jesus acts upon the authority he claims as a dispenser of grace, people from the crowds believe his claims and become his restored and saved disciples.

Gibbs finally summarizes the Sermon on the Mount as a place where Jesus graciously speaks of salvation and blessing according to his promises (Gibbs 2006, 401). Gibbs sees that Jesus' ongoing work in the Church is very consistent with this beginning.

Hearing and Doing

1/7/2021

Thursdays are for the New Testament
1/7/21

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 7:24-27: Two Builders." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 394-397.

When Jesus speaks of the two builders in Matthew 7:24-27, he observes that the future passive of "will be like" is used intransitively and is uniformly used in the New Testament with eschatological importance (Gibbs 2006, 394). A present or aorist passive would be used for present reality. This statement, then, looks to a future fulfillment.

The essential element is hearing and doing as contrasted with hearing and not doing Jesus' words. Gibbs concludes that what we do, how we live, in light of God's Word, has eternal consequences (Gibbs 2006, 395). The high Christology is striking. Here Jesus exalts himself above all else. He claims to make statements which bear definitive divine authority. Gibbs, following Kingsbury, concludes that hearing should result in believing, which in turn results in actions (Gibbs 2006, 396). This is a pattern which can be traced throughout Matthew's Gospel.

False Prophets

12/31/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
12/31/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 7:13-23: False Prophets along the Narrow Road." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 383-393.

Gibbs notes the force of the present participles in Matthew 7:13-14. The process of the trip to destruction or to life is important, with the action of a response to Jesus as the determinative factor. The vivid language of Jesus invites his hearers to continue on the road to life (Gibbs 2006, 383).

Verses 21-22 speak of those who would address God as "Lord" and who have claimed to do miracles. Gibbs is clear that even the enemies of God recognize him as "Lord" and that the false prophets and miracle workers have always been condemned b God (Gibbs 2006, 385). Even those who use God's name may be guilty of misusing his name and authority.

When Jesus concludes the Sermon on the Mount, Gibbs says he is releasing some sobering points of view. The triumph of God will be complete, but there will be features of trouble and judgment (Gibbs 2006, 387). Among the trouble is the need to guard one's steps carefully (vv. 13-14). It is necessary to remain on course, even without a comprehensive knowledge of the entire journey (Gibbs 2006, 388). Another troulbe is the deceit of the false prophets along the way (vv. 15-23). Their actions seem to be those of faithful disciples but their fruit is not faithful. Gibbs sees the fruit of a prophet not as deeds but as teachings (Gibbs 2006, 389). The false prophets "will describe a different Jesus" (Gibbs 2006, 390) who is not the one who truly comes from the Father to save people. Gibbs describes the trouble caused by those who claim to act as Christians yet teach a different Christ than the one described in Scripture (Gibbs 2006, 391). Their own doom is sure and they also bring condemnation on those who accept their teaching.

Gibbs finally asks what Jesus means in his call for people to do the Father's will (Gibbs 2006, 391). It seems on the surface to be equivalent to hearing and doing Christ's words (7:24). The clause about doing the will of the Father occurs in Matthew 12:50 and 21:31. Gibbs finds the statement refers to repentant belief that Jesus is the coming judge who fulfills righteousness (Gibbs 2006, 392). This belief results in actions that show the fruit of righteousness.

God's Blessing - Not Like Ours

12/24/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
12/24/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 7:7-12: Summary; Blessing and Calling." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 376-382.

Gibbs considers Matthew 7:7-11 to represent a generous attitude of God. Here God shows a willingness to cre for His people, regardless of their failings (Gibbs 2006, 376). Though Jesus does teach persistence in prayer, that is not his purpose in this passage.

The structure of the Sermon on the Mount is normally a challenge. Gibbs considers Matthew 7:12 as "a summary for the whole large middle portion of the Sermon" (Gibbs 2006, 378). The main body of teaching is introduced in the Beatitudes. Here at the end, the blessing of God's mercy returns.

Verses 7-11, in Gibbs' estimation, does not focus on the disciples but points boldly to God's grace. Even if an earthly father is good, God is better (Gibbs 2006, 380).

The crux of the issue, in verse 12, is that the disciples are to treat all people, not just the disciples, as God would treat them (Gibbs 2006, 381). Gibbs quotes Luther at length, saying that all the things around us point to our ability and obligation to love and serve our neighbors (Gibbs 2006, 381-382).

Judging?

12/17/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
12/17/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 7:1-6: On People." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 367-375.

Jesus' prohibition on judgment, from Matthew 7:1, should not be read as a command to accept anything and everything uncritically. Gibbs observes that God judges, but that he does it rightly. If we judge in a hypocritical manner, we might expect God to repay us in kind (Gibbs 2006, 367). Rather, we judge others in the way God has judged us, with mercy and grace.

Gibbs reminds his readers that when Jesus and his disciples proclaim Law and Gospel they do accuse, or at least God's Word accuses (Gibbs 2006, 369). The issue, pointed up by Jesus' words about the speck and the beam, is acting in a way that is blind to our own problems. The hypocrisy iw what condemns, not fair judgment. Gibbs points out that the teaching on judgment should make us slow to confront others, as well as gentle when doing so (Gibbs 2006, 370).

Verse six is normally considered a difficult statement. In general people assume the valuable things in the verse have to do with doctrine and that the dogs and swine are unbelievers or sme sort of outsiders (Gibbs 2006, 371). Gibbs finds the interpretation lacking. The context doesn't lead to the interpretation. Further, all people are predisposed to reject or misuse the Gospel. It also does not seem consistent to limit the proclamation of the Gospel as the traditional interpretatin could suggest (Gibbs 2006, 372).

Some have suggested that the holy things in the passage are godly character or opinions (Gibbs 2006, 373). Gibbs sees that the passage may serve as a summary of the judgment theme. If this is the case, we are warned against hypocritical judgment or an arrogant attitude which could get us trampled. Gibbs considers the biggest challenges to this view as seeing fellow Christians as the holy things. We confess our sin, but God does call us holy (Gibbs 2006, 374).

Worry?

12/10/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
12/10/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 6:25-34: Food and Clothing." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 359-366.

In Matthew 6:25, Jesus says not to worry about τῇ ψυχῇ. Gibbs finds this word in Matthew is not often used for the "soul" but much more often for the entirety of life (Gibbs 2006, 359). God is perfectly able to care for all the things we need, as evidenced by the οὐχί. The question expects a positive answer (Gibbs 2006, 360).

The amount of change we could expect as a result of worry, stated in 6:27, is slightly cryptic. Gibbs notes it could be taken as adding a small amount to the stature. However, a cubit is a large part of a human stature. The word can also be used for a duration of time, maybe a small amount of time required to move a short distance (Gibbs 2006, 360). Gibbs favors this view.

Gibbs observes that the teaching of 6:25-34 follows naturally from the teaching about treasure that preceded it. He also observes that Jesus is speaking about what is necessary to life, not what might be desired (Gibbs 2006, 362). The discipoles may find themselves in positions of dire need, such as the bird which starves or is captured by another animal, or the wild flowers in a time of drought. Yet Gibbs points out there is no need for eternal fear (Gibbs 2006, 363).

Rather than worry, Gibbs finds Jesus calling his disciples to seek God's reign and righteousness (6:33). The proposition is that in the end what we normally worry about is already cared for by God. Our concern is rightly focused on God's kingdom (Gibbs 2006, 365). Gibbs ties this command to the emphasis a Christian should have on receiving from Word and Sacrament, focusing on Jesus' work rather than our own troubles (Gibbs 2006, 366).

Fasting

12/3/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
12/3/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 6:16-18: Fasting." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 348-350.

Gibbs observes that Jesus' purpose in his teaching on fasting, as earlier in Matthew 6 about charity and prayer, is likely to urge the disciples not to seek honor from humans but from God (Gibbs 2006, 349). They engage in the works, many of which can be known. Howeer, they reject the motive of being seen to be doing them.

Gibbs recognizes a strong emphasis on fasting in Judaism of this period. There was an assumption that a faithful person would fast. In Luther's practice as well, fasting was assumed to be perfectly normal. For Christians in the early 21st century i nNorth America, it is much less common (Gibbs 2006, 349). However, Gibbs suggests the development of such a habit of discipline can be of benefit for us as we learn to take control of our desires. It then generalizes into a disciplined life of, for instance, charity and prayer (Gibbs 2006, 350).

Our Father

11/26/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
11/26/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 6:5-15: Prayer." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 314-347.

Gibbs observes a switching between second person singular and plural throughout Matthew 6:1-7:6. He theorizes that it may have been a purposeful way to make it clear that Jesus' teaching is for each disciple and for all disciples (Gibbs 2006, 314).

The word regularly translated as "daily" in Matthew 6:11 is not known in Greek literature prior to 6:11 and Luke 11:3. Gibbs traces the etymology briefly and concludes the word may have implications about a time drawing near, such as, "for the next day" (Gibbs 2006, 316).

Gibbs notes that Jesus' teaching on prayer in Matthew 6:5-6 points, first and foremost, to the need for prayer to be addressed to God, without intent to impress other people. It is simple and direct, well done in private, with God alone as the witness (Gibbs 2006, 319).

The prayer of Matthew 6:9-13, normally called "the Lord's prayer" or the "Our Father" is foundational in Christian piety. Gibbs observes that Jesus' words "pray indeed like this" in 6:9 show the prayer as a guide for our prayers (Gibbs 2006, 320-321). He makes rather extended comments on this prayer.

The introduction of the Lord's Prayer addresses God as "our Father." Gibbs sees this as an indicator that Christians understand themselves as part of a plurality, and that the relationship to God is that of a father and children (Gibbs 2006, 322).

The first three petitions of the Lord's Prayer are parallel in meaning and form (Gibbs 2006, 324). They lead together to the end of Matthew 6:10. Here the prayer is that all these things - the name being hallowed, the kingdom coming, and the will being done - should be here on earth as well as in heaven (Gibbs 2006, 325). Gibbs finds this to speak agains the often overly introspective ideas that Christianity is "just for me." We pray God would work in the whole world (Gibbs 2006, 326). Gibbs goes on to make specific comments about each of the petitions. Each of the first three petitions are that God would accomplish what is already true about himself. The application to the world is not complete, but does go on all the time. In the end, God's name will be known as holy, his realm will be established, and his will accomplished beyond question.

Gibbs finds Matthew 6:11-13 to have a structural unity separate from verses 9-10. For this reason he considers this a separate division of the prayer (Gibbs 2006, 330). The first person plural pronouns are used. The petitions are addressed in the second person rather than the third person imperatives used for the first three petitions (Gibbs 2006, 331).

In Matthew 6:11, the petition that God would supply our bread contains a challenging word, normally translated as "daily." Gibbs notes that the word does not appear except in Matthew 6:11, Luke 11:3, and texts which are influenced by those verses (Gibbs 2006, 331). The word appears to be a relative of a verb meaning "to come near." Interpreters are divided about whether the word is to be taken eschatologically or not. In other words, while some consider the passage a plea for the provision at the end of the world to come, others simply see it as a call for daily needs (Gibbs 2006, 332). Gibbs considers it to be the latter, largely due to the shift of emphasis after the first three petitions (Gibbs 2006, 334).

The fifth petition, asking that God would forgive our sins, would be a potential source of fear. However, the use of a perfect tense verb, "we forgave," suggests that Christians, who would pray this prayer, are people who have already forgiven others. They can have a confidence that God forgives them as well (Gibbs 2006, 335). Gibbs is clear that humans may need to forgive many times as hard feelings about past wrongs arise. The difference between finding forgiveness difficult and being unwilling to forgive is significant. The Christian who is willing to forgive shows God's forgiveness (Gibbs 2006, 336).

Speaking of Matthew 6:13, the sixth petition of the Lord's Prayer, Gibbs suggests that most commentators avoid speaking about what "lead us not into temptation" might mean (Gibbs 2006, 337). The word "temptation" is always used negatively in Matthew, never simply implying a test of faithfulenss (Gibbs 2006, 338). The verb for leading does not seem to be used to say"do not allow us to be brought into temptation." Gibbs concludes that the petition asks God not to tempt us to evil (Gibbs 2006, 339).

A related question is whether the sixth and seventh petitions should be read as one, as Luther does (Gibbs 2006, 339). The structure of the passage could suggest this, as there is no "and" before the "deliver us from evil." If that is the case, we see a very common form of petition, found many times in Scripture. We ask that a negative should not happen but tha the positive should (Gibbs 2006, 340). Gibbs illustrates this as a very common structure.

The Christian life does have trials and temptations. Gibbs acknowledges this. Yet he says the Christian, praying as taught by the Lord, endures those temptations (Gibbs 2006, 344). Gibbs closes this section of his commentary with an exhortation to teach and pray this prayer carefully and faithfully.

Not Like the Hypocrites

11/19/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
11/19/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 6:1-4: Alms." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 309-313.

Gibbs notes that Matthew 6:1-7:6 "contains a remarkable alternation of eight present imperatives and twenty-four aorist stem imperatives" (Gibbs 2006, 309). The specific reason or interpretation indicated is not altogether clear, but Gibbs does observe the present imperatives here normally introduce new ideas, while the ideas are expanded upon by the aorist imperatives.

In Matthew 6:2, the identity of a hypocrite bears examination. Gibbs says, "The first-century denotation of the term 'hypocrite' does not necessarily include purposeful feigning of false motives. Someone can be a hypocrite without knowing it" (Gibbs 2006, 310-311).

This second part of the Sermon on the Mount shifts our attention from the application of Torah to the motivation of acts of piety (Gibbs 2006, 312). Gibbs observes that 6:1 introduces the entire unit, which is a triad, each following the same pattern. The pattern, broken when Jesus moves to the Lord's Prayer, makes that deviation all the more striking (Gibbs 2006, 313).

Love Your Enemies

11/12/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
11/12/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 5:43-48: On Love." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 304-308.

Commenting on Matthew 5:43, Gibbs points out that Jesus is specifically not quoting the Old Testament. The only use of the verb form here in the Old TEstament is Leviticus 19:17, which says not to hate your brother (Gibbs 2006, 304). Gibbs concludes that Jesus is citing some teaching found in 1st century Judaism. Jesus' contrasting command, to love your enemies, is clearly something which goes against virtually all of our sensibilities (Gibbs 2006, 305). Gibbs also observes the purpose of this love, that it shows the relationship to the loving Father in heaven. It further shows a sign of Jesus, who loves his enemies and gives himself for them.

The reality of hatred is clear in the Scripture. Gibbs notes that it is rightly directed toward evil, though we are never commanded to hate our enemies (Gibbs 2006, 306). There are, of course, many statements affirming that the wicked hate God and His people. Counter to this, Jesus commands his disciples to love and pray for others. Verse 48 "follows from Jesus' earlier commands to love the enemy, since the Father willingly does good to all" (Gibbs 2006, 307). In this, it shows love for others as the sign of maturity, being like God.

Revenge

11/5/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
11/5/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 5:38-42: On Revenge." Matthew 1:1-11:1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 297-300.

In Matthew 5:38, Gibbs notes that the use of the preposition ἀντί with the genitive is shown to regularly mean "in exchange for." The quotation Jesus makes is from Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20, and Deuteronomy 19:21, word for word, except for the added "and." (Gibbs 2006, 301).

Verse 39 is somewhat more complex. Gibbs notes that some have attempted to make the dative "evil" a dative of means, thus allowing, "not to resist by evil means." However, Gibbs finds the use of the verb typically includes a direct object in the ddative case, no less than 47 times in the Septuagint and the New Testament. Therefore, Gibbs considers "evil" to be the direct object here (Gibbs 2006, 301).

Gibbs observes that Jesus' teaching in Matthew 5:38-42 is about "the true divine intent of the Torah" (Gibbs 2006, 302). Rather than keeping track of instances of evil so as to gain retribution, we do good. Gibbs cites Kleinig's commetary on Leviticus showing that the Israelite law of retribution was particularly intended to put limits on retribution. Jesus' teaching is that we self-limit the use of retaliation. Gibbs illustrates this by the life and sacrifice of Jesus (Gibbs 2006, 303).

Making Promises

10/29/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
10/29/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 5:33-37: On Oaths." St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 297-300.

In Matthew 5:33-37 Jesus speaks of making and breaking oaths. Gibbs observes that the idiom used here differs from that of Exodus 20:7 and Deuteronomy 5:11. His conclusion is that Jesus is not actually citing the Old Testament though he is referring to an Old Testament principle (Gibbs 2006, 297). Promises are not to be based on heaven or earth, or on Jerusalem, as they are the special property of God. Jesus refers to such a promise as coming from the evil one (Gibbs 2006, 298).

Gibbs finds in some Palestinian teachers a heirarchy of ways one could swear an oath (Gibbs 2006, 298). Counter to this idea, Jesus is teaching that all promises are binding. Gibbs observes that Jesus' implication is that all things belong to God. Making an oath based on something is a promise before God (Gibbs 2006, 299). Rather, our word is to be our word. Gibbs does not regard this as an injunction against making solemn promises. However, our words are never to be used lightly (Gibbs 2006, 300).

Divorce and Adultery

10/22/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
10/22/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 5:31-32: On Divorce." St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 290-296.

In Matthew 5:31-32, Jesus speaks of divorce. Gibbs quotes a first century example of a write of divorce (Gibbs 2006, 290). The assumption in the document is that the woman will remarry. The term Jesus uses to describe the outcome, porneia, probably refers to a sexual relation with someone who is married to someone else. Of interest to Gibbs is the implication that the husband who issues the divorce provokes his former wife to endure adultery (Gibbs 2006, 291). He is the one guilty of the adultery.

The issue arises again at greater length in Matthew 19:3-12. In this briefer passage, Gibbs considers Jesus to be speaking specifically of the husband's responsibility. The concept is predicated on Deuteronomy 24:1-4, where Gibbs observes that it is permited for a man to divorce his wife but not to take her as his wife again (Gibbs 2006, 292-293).

At the time of Jesus' teaching there was a debate between the schools of Hillel and Shammai. The followers of Shammai saw the reason for divorce as a woman's adultery, while Hillel took it to be "indecency," which could include any sort of indecorum. Gibbs concludes that the Hillel interpretation was the most accepted at the time of Jesus' statements (Gibbs 2006, 293).

Gibbs sees Jesus as affirming that marriage and divorce involve more than "a measure of protection and future security" (Gibbs 2006, 294). The divorce breaks the union created by God. For this reason, it could be seen as an act of adultery. Unlike adultery, Gibbs observes divorce causes more harm because reconciliation is no longer an option (Gibbs 2006, 295). Gibbs does not take the passage to mean that an innocent party to a divorce should be unable to marry. However, he does see the passage as a statement that divorce is seriously harmful by nature. For this reason, Jesus compares it to the grave sin of adultery.

One-Sided Adultery

10/15/2020

Thursdays are for the New Testament
10/15/20

Gibbs, Jeffrey A. “Matthew 5:27-30: On Adultery.” St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006, pp. 286-289.

Looking at a woman with desire is a serious issue, one which can condemn a man, according to Matthew 5:27-30. Gibbs questions the interpretation of “so as to desire her.” The construction could indicate purpose, meaning that the guilt is only based on a prior intent. It could also indicate result, meaning that the man who looks at a woman and then finds himself desiring her is engaged in sin. Gibbs takes this to be the more reasoned understanding. We can be guilty even without premeditation (Gibbs 2006, 286).

The consequences of inner or outer adultery are severe - condemnation. For this reason, the treatment to stop such condemnation may be very severe. Gibbs summs it up by asking, “Which is better for you? To be resurrected and then cast with your body intact into hell’s eternal torment, or the resurrection to eternal life without an eye or a hand?” (Gibbs 2006, 288). Gibbs does acknowledge the serious different consequences of physical adultery, particularly in terms of broken earthly relationships which have severe side effects. Regardless, the life of purity is very important, in earthly and heavenly terms.