Wednesdays Are for the New Testament.
11/13/24
Gibbs, Jeffrey A. (2010). "Matthew 18." In Matthew 11:2-20:34. (pages 887-941). St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House. (Personal Library)
Gibbs observes that Matthew 18:1-35 is the fourth of Jesus' major discourses presented in the First Gospel. The context of the immediately preceding pericopes sets up the argument of chapter 18 by demonstrating that Jesus is the one who makes atonement for sin and makes the disciples sons of God who no longer need the sacrificial system (Gibbs 2010, p. 887). Because of the context and a pattern Matthew has set up, Gibbs considers that this passage is used as Jesus' teaching to correct the disciples' misunderstanding of his earlier prediction of his death and resurrection (Gibbs 2010, p. 888).
Though there are numerous ways of analyzing the structure of Matthew 18:1-35, Gibbs considers that the image of a child serves as a unifying theme which can guide our understanding of the structure (Gibbs 2010, p. 889). Greatness in the kingdom of heaven is not related to power or intelligence. "Jesus redefines greatness in terms of dependence and neediness" (Gibbs 2010, p. 890, emphasis Gibbs'). A key to understanding the discourse then becomes what it means when Jesus says his followers should become like children.
While Gibbs affirms the value adults in antiquity would place on children, he also acknowledges that in Greco-Roman paganism and in Judaism the character qualities of children were not held to be examples which adults would emulate (Gibbs 2010, p. 891). Children were considered to be lowly and dependent. While this could encourage care, it would not encourage adults to act like children. Matthew's portrayal of children for the most part is consistent with this picture (Gibbs 2010, p. 893). Jesus' statements about children, then, describing them as the greatest, would be radical and unsettling. Gibbs concludes that in the Christian life those who have the greatest need to depend on God, such as children do, become the greatest in God's kingdom (Gibbs 2010, p. 894). While other passages teach that the Christian acts as a servant to all, Gibbs takes this passage to focus on a recognition of one's dependence on God (Gibbs 2010, p. 895). In this way, the message of Matthew 18:1-35 can be seen as coherent.
Matthew 18:1-5 shows a question posed to Jesus. "Who is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" Jesus finds a child to serve as an example, saying it is necessary to humble oneself as a child (Gibbs 2010, p. 897). In the process of his grammatical dissection of the text, Gibbs brings up an important question. Jesus says, "Whoever humbles himself as this child, this one is the greater in the kingdom of the heavens" (18:4, my very literal translation) (Gibbs 2010, p. 898). Gibbs asks whether Jesus is saying people should humble themselves the way the child humbles himself, or if Jesus may be saying people should humble themselves to be lowly as a child is lowly (Gibbs 2010, p. 898-899). Because of Matthew 18:3, in which the disciples are to "turn" and become "as children," Gibbs takes the latter meaning to be correct. The disciples are to be like children collectively, rather than like one particular child who exemplifies humility (Gibbs 2010, p. 899).
Gibbs does note that in the previous section of his commentary, setting up the context for chapter 18, he discussed the image of a child in some detail (Gibbs 2010, p. 900). The essential issue, in his opinion, is the nature of a child as dependent on others.
The question of the disciples in 18:1 strikes Gibbs as arrogant in nature, as if they wish to know which one of them is the greatest (Gibbs 2010, p. 900). This allows Matthew to follow his typical pattern of presenting a misunderstanding and then showing Jesus' teaching which corrects the misunderstanding. As noted in my previous paragraph, it is specifically the lowly and dependent nature inherent in childhood which qualifies one for the kingdom of heaven. It is reliance on Jesus which matters (Gibbs 2010, p. 901). Gibbs makes it clear that the disciples are not to be vying ostentatiously to see who can be the most humble. Rather, they are to cease their competition and receive the weakest, which in effect also receives Jesus (Gibbs 2010, p. 902).
The question of infant baptism frequently arises in a context such as Matthew 18:1-5. While Gibbs takes the passage here and the blessing of children in 19:13-15 as showing a need to esteem and welcome children, these passages to not actually speak of baptism directly. Further, the children are seen as paradigmatic for people of all ages (Gibbs 2010, p. 903). There is an element of becoming needy like a child which suggests the need for receptive spirituality such as that which receives baptism. However, this passage really doesn't point clearly to infant baptism.
In Matthew 18:6-14, Jesus speaks of the importance of caring for "little ones." Gibbs emphasizes that the little ones in verse six believe in Jesus. This indicates they are specifically Jesus' disciples (Gibbs 2010, p. 905). Compared to causing others to stumble, in verse eight, it would be better to be injured and continue with a disability. Causing someone to stumble can bring eternal condemnation (Gibbs 2010, p. 906).
Gibbs observes that Matthew 18:11 is missing in many manuscripts and appears unknown to both Origen and Jerome (Gibbs 2010, p. 907). It may have been brought into later manuscripts in light of the structure of Luke 19:10.
The language of 18:6-14 is forceful in nature. Gibbs observes Matthew's characteristic threefold grouping, with three units of three, starting here in verses 6, 10, and 14. Each states a negative situation, contains a warning, then a statement of God's will (Gibbs 2010, p. 908). In verses 6-9, the problem of causing someone to "stumble" would deprive that person of his ability to follow Jesus. it throws someone into destruction (Gibbs 2010, p. 909). Your own harm is preferable to harm for others. God reserves the right of judgment against those who cause others to stumble. In verse 10 the statement is more compact. The disciples are not to despise others, because God cares for them and has his servants watching them (Gibbs 2010, pp. 910-911). There is no warrant for arrogance, since God has treated people with dignity. In a longer statement, verses 12-14 speak of the response to those who stray from the truth. Here the shepherd takes care not to neglect those who wander. The shepherd will leave others in safety and go to rescue the one who strayed. Gibbs sees this as a clear indicator of God's attitude about those who go astray (Gibbs 2010, p. 913).
Matthew 18:15-20 is often considered to relate specifically to "church discipline." However, Gibbs recasts its priorities based on the concept of considering the neediest person as the most important (Gibbs 2010, p. 916). When confronted with a brother who sins against you, the process begins, and it is a process which will seek reconciliation even if our attempts face rejection (Gibbs 2010, p. 917). The person who is in need is the one who has fallen into sin. Seeking restoration is desperately important Without it, the other is in grave danger (Gibbs 2010, p. 918). Further, Gibbs reminds the reader that any Christian who sees someone entering into sin will rightly try to reprove the other, hopefully with a gentle and humble spirit (Gibbs 2010, p. 919). The move to repentance and forgiveness needs to be pursued. Gibbs makes it clear that the material in Matthew 18:15-20 is not a checklist which implies making each step once. Rather, many points of contact may be needed to call someone to repentance (Gibbs 2010, p. 920). In the end, when it is quite certain that a person is not repentant, it becomes appropriate to speak "a loving word of exclusion" (Gibbs 2010, p. 920), acknowledging that the person can no longer be considered a follower of Jesus. This person is neither shunned entirely nor the special target of outreach. As with all those who are not Christian disciples, the unrepentant sinner is someone who is exposed to the public ministry of the church and invited to repent and believe.
Matthew 18:18-20 reflects God's promise to hear his people and come to them. Gibbs ties these three verses closely to the four immediately preceding them (Gibbs 2010, p. 921). There is also a strong connection to Jesus' words to Peter in 16:19. However, while the address in 16:19 was made to Peter as a singular person, here it is to a plural "you," indicating the Church, in Gibbs' judgment (Gibbs 2010, p. 922). In any case, the binding or loosing of sins must be in accord with the truth of God. The confession is to be true, and the forgiveness is real (Gibbs 2010, p. 923). Gibbs makes it plain that Jesus' promised presence with two of his disciples is not a matter of achieving a quorum which can persuade God to act (Gibbs 2010, p. 924). The emphasis is rather on Jesus' desire to be present with a seemingly insignificant group of people.
Gibbs briefly comments on the tension between earlier passages rejecting making judgment on sins and this passage which endorses judgment. He observes that in both cases the goal of restoration is at the center (Gibbs 2010, p. 927). Every Christian is a precious gift deserving of the care needed at any given time.
As a response to Jesus' teaching of forgiveness, Matthew records Peter's question of how many times he should forgive (Matthew 18:21-35). Jesus' brief response is followed by a parable which emphasizes the importance of forgiveness (Gibbs 2010, p. 933). The question Peter poses is framed in terms which ask for a general principle. Jesus' answer, in the plural, can be applied to all people. Forgiving seven times is not adequate. Many more times are appropriate, as long as there is sin, repentance, and requested forgiveness (Gibbs 2010, p. 934).
The parable of the unforgiving servant in Matthew 18:23-35 is a striking lesson of the compassion of God (Gibbs 2010, p. 934). The first two scenes tell parallel stories of a person in debt, an attempt to collect the debt, and a plea for forgiveness (Gibbs 2010, p. 935). The contrast is found in not only the social role of the creditors and debtors, but in the striking difference in the amount of the debt. The greatest contrast is found in the response to the plea for patience. The master of the slave with an enormous debt forgives it, while the fellow slave who is owed a debt that can be repaid is unmerciful (Gibbs 2010, p. 936). The third scene, which Gibbs considers "scarcely necessary" (Gibbs 2010, p. 936) depicts the master reinstating the debt and imprisoning the unforgiving servant until it can be repaid. In effect, this is a sentence that could last many lifetimes (Gibbs 2010, p. 937). The divine demand that his followers must be forgiving cannot be missed. Refusal to forgive results ultimately in God's refusal to forgive us. It is central to the Christian life that we be forgiving people (Gibbs 2010, p. 939).
11/13/24
Gibbs, Jeffrey A. (2010). "Matthew 18." In Matthew 11:2-20:34. (pages 887-941). St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House. (Personal Library)
Gibbs observes that Matthew 18:1-35 is the fourth of Jesus' major discourses presented in the First Gospel. The context of the immediately preceding pericopes sets up the argument of chapter 18 by demonstrating that Jesus is the one who makes atonement for sin and makes the disciples sons of God who no longer need the sacrificial system (Gibbs 2010, p. 887). Because of the context and a pattern Matthew has set up, Gibbs considers that this passage is used as Jesus' teaching to correct the disciples' misunderstanding of his earlier prediction of his death and resurrection (Gibbs 2010, p. 888).
Though there are numerous ways of analyzing the structure of Matthew 18:1-35, Gibbs considers that the image of a child serves as a unifying theme which can guide our understanding of the structure (Gibbs 2010, p. 889). Greatness in the kingdom of heaven is not related to power or intelligence. "Jesus redefines greatness in terms of dependence and neediness" (Gibbs 2010, p. 890, emphasis Gibbs'). A key to understanding the discourse then becomes what it means when Jesus says his followers should become like children.
While Gibbs affirms the value adults in antiquity would place on children, he also acknowledges that in Greco-Roman paganism and in Judaism the character qualities of children were not held to be examples which adults would emulate (Gibbs 2010, p. 891). Children were considered to be lowly and dependent. While this could encourage care, it would not encourage adults to act like children. Matthew's portrayal of children for the most part is consistent with this picture (Gibbs 2010, p. 893). Jesus' statements about children, then, describing them as the greatest, would be radical and unsettling. Gibbs concludes that in the Christian life those who have the greatest need to depend on God, such as children do, become the greatest in God's kingdom (Gibbs 2010, p. 894). While other passages teach that the Christian acts as a servant to all, Gibbs takes this passage to focus on a recognition of one's dependence on God (Gibbs 2010, p. 895). In this way, the message of Matthew 18:1-35 can be seen as coherent.
Matthew 18:1-5 shows a question posed to Jesus. "Who is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" Jesus finds a child to serve as an example, saying it is necessary to humble oneself as a child (Gibbs 2010, p. 897). In the process of his grammatical dissection of the text, Gibbs brings up an important question. Jesus says, "Whoever humbles himself as this child, this one is the greater in the kingdom of the heavens" (18:4, my very literal translation) (Gibbs 2010, p. 898). Gibbs asks whether Jesus is saying people should humble themselves the way the child humbles himself, or if Jesus may be saying people should humble themselves to be lowly as a child is lowly (Gibbs 2010, p. 898-899). Because of Matthew 18:3, in which the disciples are to "turn" and become "as children," Gibbs takes the latter meaning to be correct. The disciples are to be like children collectively, rather than like one particular child who exemplifies humility (Gibbs 2010, p. 899).
Gibbs does note that in the previous section of his commentary, setting up the context for chapter 18, he discussed the image of a child in some detail (Gibbs 2010, p. 900). The essential issue, in his opinion, is the nature of a child as dependent on others.
The question of the disciples in 18:1 strikes Gibbs as arrogant in nature, as if they wish to know which one of them is the greatest (Gibbs 2010, p. 900). This allows Matthew to follow his typical pattern of presenting a misunderstanding and then showing Jesus' teaching which corrects the misunderstanding. As noted in my previous paragraph, it is specifically the lowly and dependent nature inherent in childhood which qualifies one for the kingdom of heaven. It is reliance on Jesus which matters (Gibbs 2010, p. 901). Gibbs makes it clear that the disciples are not to be vying ostentatiously to see who can be the most humble. Rather, they are to cease their competition and receive the weakest, which in effect also receives Jesus (Gibbs 2010, p. 902).
The question of infant baptism frequently arises in a context such as Matthew 18:1-5. While Gibbs takes the passage here and the blessing of children in 19:13-15 as showing a need to esteem and welcome children, these passages to not actually speak of baptism directly. Further, the children are seen as paradigmatic for people of all ages (Gibbs 2010, p. 903). There is an element of becoming needy like a child which suggests the need for receptive spirituality such as that which receives baptism. However, this passage really doesn't point clearly to infant baptism.
In Matthew 18:6-14, Jesus speaks of the importance of caring for "little ones." Gibbs emphasizes that the little ones in verse six believe in Jesus. This indicates they are specifically Jesus' disciples (Gibbs 2010, p. 905). Compared to causing others to stumble, in verse eight, it would be better to be injured and continue with a disability. Causing someone to stumble can bring eternal condemnation (Gibbs 2010, p. 906).
Gibbs observes that Matthew 18:11 is missing in many manuscripts and appears unknown to both Origen and Jerome (Gibbs 2010, p. 907). It may have been brought into later manuscripts in light of the structure of Luke 19:10.
The language of 18:6-14 is forceful in nature. Gibbs observes Matthew's characteristic threefold grouping, with three units of three, starting here in verses 6, 10, and 14. Each states a negative situation, contains a warning, then a statement of God's will (Gibbs 2010, p. 908). In verses 6-9, the problem of causing someone to "stumble" would deprive that person of his ability to follow Jesus. it throws someone into destruction (Gibbs 2010, p. 909). Your own harm is preferable to harm for others. God reserves the right of judgment against those who cause others to stumble. In verse 10 the statement is more compact. The disciples are not to despise others, because God cares for them and has his servants watching them (Gibbs 2010, pp. 910-911). There is no warrant for arrogance, since God has treated people with dignity. In a longer statement, verses 12-14 speak of the response to those who stray from the truth. Here the shepherd takes care not to neglect those who wander. The shepherd will leave others in safety and go to rescue the one who strayed. Gibbs sees this as a clear indicator of God's attitude about those who go astray (Gibbs 2010, p. 913).
Matthew 18:15-20 is often considered to relate specifically to "church discipline." However, Gibbs recasts its priorities based on the concept of considering the neediest person as the most important (Gibbs 2010, p. 916). When confronted with a brother who sins against you, the process begins, and it is a process which will seek reconciliation even if our attempts face rejection (Gibbs 2010, p. 917). The person who is in need is the one who has fallen into sin. Seeking restoration is desperately important Without it, the other is in grave danger (Gibbs 2010, p. 918). Further, Gibbs reminds the reader that any Christian who sees someone entering into sin will rightly try to reprove the other, hopefully with a gentle and humble spirit (Gibbs 2010, p. 919). The move to repentance and forgiveness needs to be pursued. Gibbs makes it clear that the material in Matthew 18:15-20 is not a checklist which implies making each step once. Rather, many points of contact may be needed to call someone to repentance (Gibbs 2010, p. 920). In the end, when it is quite certain that a person is not repentant, it becomes appropriate to speak "a loving word of exclusion" (Gibbs 2010, p. 920), acknowledging that the person can no longer be considered a follower of Jesus. This person is neither shunned entirely nor the special target of outreach. As with all those who are not Christian disciples, the unrepentant sinner is someone who is exposed to the public ministry of the church and invited to repent and believe.
Matthew 18:18-20 reflects God's promise to hear his people and come to them. Gibbs ties these three verses closely to the four immediately preceding them (Gibbs 2010, p. 921). There is also a strong connection to Jesus' words to Peter in 16:19. However, while the address in 16:19 was made to Peter as a singular person, here it is to a plural "you," indicating the Church, in Gibbs' judgment (Gibbs 2010, p. 922). In any case, the binding or loosing of sins must be in accord with the truth of God. The confession is to be true, and the forgiveness is real (Gibbs 2010, p. 923). Gibbs makes it plain that Jesus' promised presence with two of his disciples is not a matter of achieving a quorum which can persuade God to act (Gibbs 2010, p. 924). The emphasis is rather on Jesus' desire to be present with a seemingly insignificant group of people.
Gibbs briefly comments on the tension between earlier passages rejecting making judgment on sins and this passage which endorses judgment. He observes that in both cases the goal of restoration is at the center (Gibbs 2010, p. 927). Every Christian is a precious gift deserving of the care needed at any given time.
As a response to Jesus' teaching of forgiveness, Matthew records Peter's question of how many times he should forgive (Matthew 18:21-35). Jesus' brief response is followed by a parable which emphasizes the importance of forgiveness (Gibbs 2010, p. 933). The question Peter poses is framed in terms which ask for a general principle. Jesus' answer, in the plural, can be applied to all people. Forgiving seven times is not adequate. Many more times are appropriate, as long as there is sin, repentance, and requested forgiveness (Gibbs 2010, p. 934).
The parable of the unforgiving servant in Matthew 18:23-35 is a striking lesson of the compassion of God (Gibbs 2010, p. 934). The first two scenes tell parallel stories of a person in debt, an attempt to collect the debt, and a plea for forgiveness (Gibbs 2010, p. 935). The contrast is found in not only the social role of the creditors and debtors, but in the striking difference in the amount of the debt. The greatest contrast is found in the response to the plea for patience. The master of the slave with an enormous debt forgives it, while the fellow slave who is owed a debt that can be repaid is unmerciful (Gibbs 2010, p. 936). The third scene, which Gibbs considers "scarcely necessary" (Gibbs 2010, p. 936) depicts the master reinstating the debt and imprisoning the unforgiving servant until it can be repaid. In effect, this is a sentence that could last many lifetimes (Gibbs 2010, p. 937). The divine demand that his followers must be forgiving cannot be missed. Refusal to forgive results ultimately in God's refusal to forgive us. It is central to the Christian life that we be forgiving people (Gibbs 2010, p. 939).
RSS Feed