Sunday Morning Greek Blog

May 15, 2022

Jesus, the Good Shepherd (John 10:22–30)

Author’s Note: I preached this sermon on Mother’s Day (05/08/22) at Mt. View Presbyterian Church. The text is lightly edited for publication. For a related post, see “I Am the Door of the Sheep”; “I Am the Good Shepherd” (John 10:7, 11). Additional Note: I preached this sermon again on March 11, 2025, which is when I recorded the audio. Prior to that, from March through Mother’s Day, this message was viewed over 700 times, outpacing my otherwise most popular article. Thank you for reading! I hope you enjoy the addition of an audio file. I retained the original text of the sermon.

I mentioned last week how the challenge of preaching from the lectionary texts has served to sharpen my preaching and academic skills. But this week’s texts presented an additional challenge for me, because none of them lined up with today’s special designation on our social and cultural calendars: Mother’s Day. What’s a preacher to do!?!

Well, fortunately, God gave me a unique 7-pound mass of gray matter that never ceases to amaze my wife with the connections I can make between seemingly unconnected concepts. At least, I think I amaze her. She would probably tell you I befuddle and bewilder her and then roll her eyes for emphasis. But anyway, I digress. Although I can’t make my whole message about motherhood based on the text today, I can highlight some principles of motherhood that undergird Jesus’s ministry and apply them to our situations.

Jesus in His Father’s House

To set the stage for our text today, we need to go back to Jesus’s preteen years, when he was only 12 years old, probably his “coming of age” year as a young Jewish male. Jesus’s family had gone to Jerusalem every year for the Passover, and that year was no exception. Only this time, according to Luke 2, Jesus decided to give his parents the scare of their lives by staying behind in Jerusalem while his parents headed back to Nazareth. His parents didn’t realize this until about a day later, because they thought he was hanging out with the other kids in the caravan they were travelling with.

It took them three days to find him, and when they did find him, he was in the temple courts hanging out with the teachers of the law. They were “amazed [ἐξίστημι (existēmi)] at Jesus’s understanding and answers.” In other words, they couldn’t believe their ears that such wisdom was coming from a 12-year-old boy. On the other hand, his parents were “astonished” or “overwhelmed” [ἐκπλήσσομαι (ekplēssomai)] that he was apparently commanding so much respect from the teachers of the law, let alone that he had managed to survive half a week in Jerusalem without his parents.

Jesus’s response to his earthly parents I think has been largely underappreciated or at least underemphasized in most circles: “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?” (Luke 2:49). Now every Jewish mother expected her boy might someday be the Messiah, but Mary knew it for a fact that Jesus was the Messiah. So Jesus’s response here may be the first time the implications of his conception and birth really hit her: Jesus IS the Son of God.

Luke says that Mary “treasured these things in her heart,” which probably meant that she had a choice to make about being the mother of the Son of God. Any other Jewish mother would have encouraged her son to follow in his father’s footsteps. But Jesus had a “stepfather,” if you will, in Joseph the carpenter as well as his true father, the God of the universe. So we can make an educated guess at this point that, not only did Mary and Joseph encourage Jesus to be a carpenter, but they also had to respect that his true home was the temple, where God was said to live. It’s fairly easy to assume then, that they continued the annual trips to the temple (perhaps at least three times per year) to help him develop and maintain that connection, at least until Jesus struck out on his own.

Jesus’s love for the temple, which he had such a special, passionate connection to, seems to be a main focus of John’s gospel, wherein lies our text for this morning. Now think about this for a minute: John’s first story about Jesus in the temple is Jesus chasing out the money changers. And what does he say? “Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” If the temple is his father’s house, then isn’t it technically his house too as the son of God? As God’s earthly representative, Jesus has sort of a default power of attorney over the temple and must protect the honor of his father and the integrity of his father’s house. For Jesus, then, clearing the temple wasn’t just an act of righteous indignation, but a deeply personal act of protecting his family honor. I must admit that this thought didn’t occur to me until just this week as I was preparing my message. This is the kind of passion you can expect when a good mother—and a good father—instill in their children a profound respect for family and home.

Seven of the 21 chapters in John place Jesus at the temple in all or part of the chapters. This is one feature that sets the gospel of John apart from the other three gospels. Sure, John does have Jesus ministering in locations outside of Jerusalem, like the wedding at Cana and the feeding of the multitudes. But he always comes back to the temple or a festival at the temple.

Jesus: The Gate and the Good Shepherd

That’s where we find ourselves in today’s passage, John 10:22–30. Jesus has come to the Festival of Dedication, what we know today as Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights, to participate in the celebration and do a little more teaching as well. He uses the metaphor of sheep in his discussion, which fits right in with two “I am” statements John records in the first part of chapter 10: “I am the good shepherd [ποιμήν (poimēn)],” and “I am the gate [θύρα (thyra)] for the sheep.” In fact, John 10–14 would seem to be the core of John’s gospel, because we also have two more “I am” statements in that section: “I am the resurrection and the life,” and “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”

So how does this all tie together? And why is Jesus using the imagery of sheep here? His first “I am” statement in John 10 is perhaps the biggest clue. When he says, “I am the gate for the sheep,” he’s most likely standing very near the Sheep Gate, one of the ancient entrances into Jerusalem, which is within 100 feet of the outer court of the Temple, the Court of the Gentiles. The Sheep Gate was so important given its proximity to the temple that Nehemiah (3:1) lists it as the first gate the Israelites repaired when they returned to Jerusalem. John’s first account of Jesus healing someone is in chapter 5, where Jesus healed a man who had been lame for 38 years at the pool of Bethesda near the Sheep Gate.

The other thing Jesus says about being the gate for the sheep is significant: “Through me, whoever enters will be saved.” That sounds very much like “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” in John 14:6. Another way to look at this is that John arranges this core section of his gospel with the two “I am” statements where Jesus says he’s the only way at the beginning and end.

Now Jesus saying that he’s the gate for the sheep leads naturally into Jesus’s next “I am” statement: “I am the good shepherd.” The shepherd fulfills multiple roles while he’s tending his flock. He serves as protector of the flock, fighting off wolves, predators, and thieves in the wilderness. Of course, these are roles we’d typically assign to a father, especially in Jesus’s day. But the shepherd also helps the ewes give birth and tends to any injured sheep, roles we would typically assign to, wait for it, mothers! See what I did there? I snuck that reference into my Mother’s Day message, wink and a nod.

And why can Jesus say he’s a good shepherd? Well in part, it’s because he healed that man at the Sheep Gate a few chapters earlier. But that’s not all. Jesus gives a pretty full explanation of what it means to be a shepherd. Here are the highlights:

  • The shepherd knows his sheep by name.
  • The sheep know the shepherd’s voice and to follow the shepherd’s voice; they won’t follow a stranger’s voice.
  • The shepherd will lead them to fertile pastures.
  • The shepherd ensures the sheep will have a full and abundant life (sounds kind of like “I am the resurrection and the life,” right?)
  • The shepherd will not abandon the sheep when danger is present; in fact, he will lay down his life for the sheep.

So with this background in mind, let’s read again today’s passage.

22 Then came the Festival of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23 and Jesus was in the temple courts walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. 24 The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”

25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.” [1]

John 10:22–30

The Jews want to know if Jesus is the Messiah, but many of the Jews are probably still thinking of a political Messiah who will overthrow the rule of Rome from their lives and restore a theocracy again, or at least something akin to what they had in the days of David and Solomon. Jesus’s response is a bit cryptic, as it usually is. He doesn’t want people to believe because he’s told them so. He wants people to look at what he’s done in the way of his miracles and teaching and figure it out for themselves. Figuring it out for yourself is always more convincing than just being told outright, right? Jesus’s followers know him and recognize him for who he is. They made the sacrifice to follow him, learn from him, and grow closer to God in him. They were the “sheep” following the shepherd. I don’t use that term in a disparaging way, of course. His followers put their trust in him, and Jesus proved faithful with that trust. But those who haven’t been following him or are just casual observers, they can’t believe because they don’t have the experience with him just yet.

Recognizing the Shepherd’s Voice

I think vs. 27 is the most important concept to grasp here. “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.” How is it we can get to a place where we can distinguish the Savior’s voice from all the other noise around us? I’m going to include another motherly fact here: audiologists say that between 6 and 7 months in the womb, a baby begins to recognize their mother’s voice and respond consistently. That’s two to three months BEFORE they’re born! How about you? When did you first realize God was speaking to you, calling you into his fold? Are you able to look back on your life and recognize, “Hey, maybe God was talking to me in this or that situation and I didn’t even realize it!” I’m sure he was talking to you even before you made your faith your own.

Another way we recognize God’s voice is by staying engaged with his word. I will never forget the time when I was a campus minister at Northern Illinois University, and our ministry operated some student housing. We had one resident who wasn’t working; he claimed God didn’t want him to work. Unfortunately, that meant he never had money to pay his rent. I guess he thought it would somehow magically fall from the sky and into his pockets. However, somehow, he always had money for food. When we finally confronted him about this, including Scriptures about working to provide for yourself (Eph 4:28; 1 Thess 5:14; 2 Thess 3:6–13, esp. v. 10), his response floored me: “I can’t help it if I’m more spiritual and you’re more scriptural.” In other words, he thought the Holy Spirit was telling him to do something that contradicted the word of God! I’m pretty sure it doesn’t work like that. The more we get into God’s word, the more we understand what he wants for our lives.

Assurance of Eternal Life

In the final part of this passage, we see that the good shepherd has given us eternal life; “life” without end. On the one hand, that means life to the fullest, as he promised earlier in the chapter. On the other hand, that means we have the promise of his resurrection, which he affirms in chapter 11 not only by saying he is the resurrection and the life, but by raising Lazarus from the dead as well. Not only do we have this eternal life, but we have the promise that, as long as we abide in him, nothing will ever overcome or nullify that promise of eternal life.

Paul reaffirms this in Romans 8:38–39:

38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Romans 8:38–39

Conclusion

To bring this to a close, I want to look briefly at chapters 12 & 13, the rest of this core section of John’s gospel, to grasp how Jesus further demonstrates himself as the good shepherd. In chapter 12, we see Jesus anointed with perfume in preparation for his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, which we looked at a few weeks ago. In chapter 13, we see the true servant nature of Jesus as he washes the disciples’ feet. He’s also preparing his disciples for when he departs from them after his crucifixion and resurrection, although they don’t seem to fully comprehend that. He’s truly ready and preparing for the time when he’d have to lay down his life for his sheep.

Are you a member of God’s flock? Are you part of the fold? Now is the time if you’re not. Reach out to the Father and ask him for forgiveness and acceptance, while pledging your life to be part of his kingdom.


[1] Scripture quotations taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version® NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00

Or enter a custom amount

$

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

April 24, 2022

The Coming King: An Exegesis of Revelation 1:1–8

Listen to “An Exegesis of Revelation”

In the past four months, I’ve explored much about the life of Jesus with you in the Gospels, especially as it relates to the fulfillment of prophecies about Jesus. At Christmas time, of course, we looked at his birth. A couple weeks ago, we looked at some of the prophecies surrounding his triumphal entry and final week up to the crucifixion and resurrection. The Old Testament prophets also told us he would teach in parables (Psalm 78:2||Matthew 13:35).

Variety of Interpretations

Now if you’ve spent much time reading and studying the book of Revelation or the end times in general, you probably know that there are many different views about how to interpret the book, especially as how it relates to the calendar. Views range from the preterists, who believe the end-time prophecies have already been fulfilled, perhaps when the Romans conquered Jerusalem in AD 70, to the postmillennialists, who think Christ will return after a literal 1,000-year reign of the church on earth. Then there are those who think there will be a 7-year period of tribulation prior to Christ’s return and millennial reign, with varying views on when the “rapture,” the transformation of God’s living saints into heaven, happens. And the last major view I’ll mention is that of the amillennialists, who see the church’s current presence on earth as a figurative expression of the 1,000-year reign of Christ, with Christ coming at the consummation of history and establishing his new heaven and new earth.

These differing views have all been put forth by their respective proponents based on well-intentioned study of and meditation on God’s word and historical theology. As someone who spent a great deal of time studying the end times when I was a renewed believer, I’ve seen some of these proponents use the same Scriptures to support their differing views! Add to that that much of the literature on end times is written from an American or Western perspective, but Christians throughout the world at various times and places have at one time or another experienced intense persecution and interpreted the signs of their own respective times such that they thought their generation would be the one to see the return of Christ. So let’s be honest and face the facts—we really don’t have enough solid information to make any absolute statements about when and how Christ will return. And as such, I’m not here this morning to defend any one of these viewpoints.

Setting the Stage

Instead, I believe that the message of the Revelation to John, when taken at the face value of the printed word, is one that can be easily understood. For example, we don’t have to know who or what the four horsemen of the apocalypse represent (or represented) in the historical context (past, present, or future; although we are called to discern those signs); the important thing to grasp is how the events surrounding these players would impact the church, and how the church should respond to those events. So this article, we’ll take a look at the first few verses of Revelation chapter 1 to see how John is setting the stage for us regarding the revelation he received while imprisoned on Patmos, which he recorded for all posterity.

Prologue

1 The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. 3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

Greetings and Doxology

4 John,

To the seven churches in the province of Asia:

Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits l before his throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6 and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.

7 “Look, he is coming with the clouds,” 

and “every eye will see him,

even those who pierced him”;

and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.”

So shall it be! Amen.

8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.” [1]

——Revelation 1:1–8

Defining “Revelation”

First, it helps to know what exactly is a “revelation.” In the biblical sense, a revelation (Gk ἀποκάλυψις apokalypsis) involves making something known that was previously hidden and that could NOT have been known by man prior to its being revealed. In Romans 16:25 and Ephesians 3:3, ἀποκάλυψις refers to a mystery. In Galatians 1:11–12, Paul claims to have received the Gospel not from any human source, but directly from Christ. This lines up with the testimony from Acts 9 when Paul is confronted by the risen Christ on the road to Damascus and his own testimony that he waited at least three years before going fully public with his conversion to Peter and James.

Revelation is a broad category. A revelation may simply be a statement from God about the truth; some sort of physical sign that appears in the natural world; or a “vision,” which in modern technological terms is similar to a 3-D interactive hologram, except some of the people and things in the vision may have some physical substance to them that the person actually experiences. Usually a vision is limited to one person, and is almost always accompanied by a messenger or angel, as in the current text. This helps give credence to John’s testimony, as he would have otherwise been alone when he received the revelation.

Location and Occasion

The book of Revelation is a very long epistle written to seven churches on or near the western coast of Asia Minor, what we know today as western Turkey. Because it was so long and John needed to get the word out quickly “because the time is near,” verse 3 has the instruction that the entire book be read out loud to the seven churches rather than have separate copies made and delivered to each of the churches. The order of the churches in vs. 10 (and their corresponding letters in chapters 2–3) would have been a typical circuit for anyone who traveled regularly through that region. What probably happened is once the book was read at Ephesus, someone would have travelled to Smyrna to pass it off to the next church, and so on.

What we don’t seem to know, at least, no one in the several commentaries I reviewed knew, is why these seven churches. There were other churches nearby who had already had letters from Paul: Colossae was just a few miles to the east of Laodicea, and the region of Galatia was just east of there. A simple answer, and the one I’ll assume here, is that John functioned as some sort of overseer for these churches, and so he “stays in his lane” and focuses on those churches. With these cities being on an established circuit, we can make an educated guess that there may have been some strategic considerations as well for eventually distributing the message to the rest of the Mediterranean region and beyond. At least one commentator suggested this area could have had the highest concentration of Christians at the time.

Many commentators focus on the number of churches, seven, because that symbolizes completeness, and as such, each in their own way may represent established churches elsewhere in the world. But there are local details that only the believers in the respective churches could have related to, so that might lessen a broader appeal to other churches. At the very least, if other churches besides those mentioned received this letter, they surely would have been able to discern broader principles that applied to their situation, and the grand visions of Revelation in chapter 4 and beyond would have had universal significance to the church as it existed at the time. For now, though, we can set the question of “Why these seven churches” aside and still discern some meaningful truths from the passage.

The OT Connection

Many early– to mid–20th-century versions of our English Bibles do not indicate that the book of Revelation has many, if any, direct quotations or allusions to the Old Testament. But as scholars and translators have studied the book in more detail, and the use of computers facilitated better text comparisons between the Old and New Testaments, they’ve come to discover the book’s extensive connections to the OT.

Verses 4 and 5 are at the heart of what I hope to communicate to you this morning. Not only do they speak to who Christ is, but to our relationship with Christ as well and how he views us in his eternal plan. After greeting the seven churches, Paul opens with a pretty standard greeting formula: “Grace and peace to you.” The word “grace” was rarely used in the OT, and when it was, it usually referred to adornment, graceful speech, or a graceful appearance. Only a couple uses of the word in the NIV could be considered to come close to the NT understanding of grace as a free gift from God, especially for salvation. “Peace” was the more common OT greeting, so John and the other epistle writers use this formula to tie together the new and old covenants when addressing a mixed audience. “Peace” is not just the absence of conflict in the OT context, but a sense of security and acceptance as well.

The next phrase, which is also repeated in vs. 8, tells us who the sources of grace and peace are: “The one who is, and who was, and who is to come” is, of course, God himself, the father. The phrase is a direct reference to the Greek translation of God’s divine name in Exodus 3:14, when he reveals it to Moses at the burning bush: “I am who I am,” or perhaps better “I will be who I will be” (Hebrew: אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה; [ehyeh asher ehyeh] Greek LXX: Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν [egō eimi ho ōn]). In Hebrew, we know that name to be Yahweh, which as a word, is nothing more than a glorified form of the “to be” verb in Hebrew. This refers to the timeless, eternal, self-sustaining nature of God. One other interesting fact about this description: The phrase “who is to come” sounds like it might be a future tense, right? But in Greek, it’s actually a present tense verb. Why is this little bit of grammar important? Because in Greek, the present tense usually implies an action is in process and is not a one-and-done event. God is saying that, even now, he is actively working on coming to us to redeem us once and for all and finally put an end to Satan’s power. We can always count on God’s presence and involvement in the affairs of our lives and in the world around us.

The next source for grace and peace is the “seven spirits before his throne.” This is a little trickier to discern, because John describes the seven spirits differently in each context he mentions them. In 3:1, when addressing the church of Sardis, Jesus says, “These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God….” In 4:5, John says the seven lamps blazing in front of the throne of God are the seven spirits of God. In 5:6, John says the “seven eyes” of the Lamb “are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth.” At the very least, then, it would seem like these spirits represent a special group of divine beings, perhaps archangels, who have some authority to carry out God’s will on the earth, especially with respect to the judgment events later in the book. However, this may in fact be an expanded way of referring to the Holy Spirit, because then we would have an expression of the Trinity in vss. 4–5: Father, Spirit, Jesus.

If you’re following along in your Bibles, some of you may have a footnote with an alternate translation: “the seven-fold Spirit.” This may refer to a seven-fold description of the Holy Spirit in Isaiah 11:2 about the shoot that comes up from the stump of Jesse, and thus support the idea this is in fact a statement about the Trinity:

The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him—

the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding,

the Spirit of counsel and of might,

the Spirit of the knowledge and fear of the Lord

If this is the case, it would seem these seven spirits (or the seven-fold Spirit) may have a role to play in preparing and protecting believers in the tribulation that John will describe. However we interpret the phrase “seven spirits,” we at least can be assured that God is working in our best interests to bring us grace and peace.

Moving on, we see the final source of our grace and peace is Jesus himself. We’re reminded of who he is and what he’s done for us. He’s first called a “faithful witness” here, which brings us back to Isaiah again, 55:4:

See, I have made him a witness to the peoples,

a ruler and commander of the peoples.

He is the faithful witness because he did all that his father commanded him to, even accepting death on a cross for our sins. This is also why he’s called here “the firstborn from the dead,” because God raised him from the dead and proved once for all that death could in fact be defeated (Psalm 89:27; Colossians 1:18). It’s important here that John reminds his readers of this hope of the resurrection because of the intense suffering some of them may face based on the revelation John is proclaiming.

The final piece in the first part of vs. 5 here is that Jesus is “the ruler of the kings of the earth.” This again hearkens back to the last part of Isaiah 55:4 I read a moment ago. Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

In response to the grace and peace of the blessing from the Father, Holy Spirit, and Jesus, John returns thanks to Jesus and acknowledges what the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit have done not just for him, but for all believers everywhere. First off, he loves us. I think we all know the passage from John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” He’s also “freed us from our sins by his blood.” The death of the perfect Lamb of God was powerful enough to cleanse us and make us holy in his sight. Finally, John mentions a promise that goes all the way back to their release from captivity in Egypt and before God gives Moses the Ten Commandments. Exodus 19:5–6 says:

Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.

What a blessing to know that we have power, authority, and hope in our Savior to face whatever may come our way! And because of that, John can conclude that God deserves all glory and power for who he is and what he’s done for us.

Verse 7 isn’t so much a vision but a mash-up of several OT verses that confirm that God is indeed all powerful and worthy of all glory. Let’s hear it again before breaking it down:

“Look, he is coming with the clouds,” 

and “every eye will see him,

even those who pierced him”;

and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.”

So shall it be! Amen.

“He’s coming with the clouds” is a direct quote from Daniel’s vision in 7:13. The gospels use this description of Christ’s return as well. The next few lines about being pierced and the people mourning come straight from Zechariah 12:10. The Jews always recognized these two passages as Messianic from the time they were published after the exile. John is confirming that here.

Verse 8 closes out this passage with God himself saying he is the Alpha and Omega. This also hearkens back to a passage in Isaiah 41:4:

4 Who has done this and carried it through,

calling forth the generations from the beginning?

I, the Lord—with the first of them

and with the last—I am he.”

Long before this, Jewish writers were referring to God as the ‘’Aleph and Tau,’ the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Some Jewish writers went even further and added the middle letter of the Hebrew alphabet between the first and last, which made the Hebrew word ’emeth, which means “truth.” So God calling himself “Alpha and Omega” is nothing new to Jewish Christians who spoke Greek. A few verses later, in Revelation 1:17, Jesus calls himself “the First and the Last.” In Revelation 21:6, God again calls himself Alpha and Omega, only this time he also adds “the Beginning and the End.” In the final chapter, 22:13, we see Jesus taking on both those titles as well, only this time he adds in “the First and the Last” from 1:17. In other words, Jesus affirms that he is part of the Trinity with God the Father and the Holy Spirit. Jesus is God, not “a” god little g, but the one and only “God” big G.

Conclusion

Revelation can be a difficult book to navigate. It’s full of strange and sometimes bizarre images of multihorned beasts, horses of different colors, and terrible cosmic events. But even if you don’t understand all that, the important thing to understand is what we’ve talked about here this morning. Here’s what I hope you’ll take away from today’s message:

  1. God is in control even in the most difficult times, and his presence is always with you.
  2. God loves you and has freed you from your sins. With that kind of freedom, you can and will do great things for God’s kingdom.
  3. No matter how bad things get around us, we have the absolute assurance that God and his church will win in the end. We don’t know how much of the bad stuff we’re going to have to go through, but we can be sure God will rescue us in the end and bring us safely home to his eternal kingdom.

Go in peace today with the assurance that your sins are forgiven, and that God is preparing a place for you.


[1] Scripture quotations taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version® NIV®
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™
Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My opinions are my own.

April 10, 2022

The Day of the Donkey: Holy Week Events From the Perspective of the Prophesied Donkey

Press play to hear the message. I had forgotten to record this the day of the message, so I recorded it at home. My apologies for the cat chiming in.

Scripture quotations taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version® NIV®
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™
Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

Author’s Note: Dr. Wayne Shaw, my preaching professor at Lincoln Christian Seminary in late 1980s, had assigned as one of our textbooks Lake Wobegon Days by Garrison Keillor. He did this so that we as preachers would not just preach exegetical, point-by-point sermons all the time, but to learn how tell stories as well. Every once in a while, I will break from my normal preaching (and writing) style and do just that, tell a story. My message this morning (April 10, 2022) at Mt. View Presbyterian Church in Omaha, Nebraska, was a retelling of the triumphal entry and the events of Holy Week from the perspective of the donkey who carried Jesus into Jerusalem on what we now know as Palm Sunday. I hope you enjoy.

My name is Ḥamor (חֲמוֹר). A silly, almost embarrassing name, really. I mean, why couldn’t my parents just name me Hammer, like the great Judas “the Hammer” Maccabeus. That sounds so much cooler than “Ḥamor.” That guy knew how to take it to the enemy and gain Jewish independence 200 years ago. But I digress.

I said my name is almost embarrassing. In fact, it really is quite embarrassing unless you know the history of my ancestors and how they’ve played an important role in the spiritual history of my people. Wait, what? You say you don’t know what the name Ḥamor means? Ohhh, that’s right, most of you probably don’t speak Hebrew, do you. Well, this is embarrassing then, because in your language, my name really doesn’t have a good reputation at all. In the language of the Romans, Latin, I’m known as Equus asinus (AH see noose). The Greeks would call me ὄνος (onos). That came over into the King James Version of the Bible as, well, uh—this is so embarrassing—(whisper) “ass.” Whew, there, I said it. Let me say it again (with confidence): “I am an ass.” Feels good to get that out. Yes, I say it proudly: I am a donkey! Go ahead, get it out of your system. Laugh if you want, “heehaw” and all that. I’m used to it. But be careful: I’m not just any donkey. I am THE donkey. Yep, I’m the one the prophets talked about as far back as the time of Jacob and his sons in Egypt. I’m the one the Messiah rode into Jerusalem last week.

Now you may think I’m just a dumb…donkey, a beast of burden to carry your stuff around and pull your plows. But what you don’t know is that, just like every Hebrew mother thought her son would be the Messiah, every donkey mom thought her little colt would be the one who’d fulfill the donkey prophecies in what you call the Old Testament. What? You’re not familiar with those prophecies? Well, we donkeys are taught them from the time we’re born. I guess if you’re not a donkey, it might be hard to appreciate the stories about donkeys. But it really is a fascinating story, and I hope by the end, you’ll have a new appreciation of donkeys, and maybe you’ll stop using that other word as a bad word, because I’m proud of our history and heritage.

Before we get too far into those stories, let me give you a little history of donkeys, especially as they relate to this part of the world. We donkeys have a bit of a mixed reputation throughout history. Let me start with the bad news first: some Christian traditions later on will associate us with absurdity, obstinacy, and slothfulness, and at some point, a red donkey becomes the symbol of Satan. I really don’t know how we got connected with that evil accuser, but I do admit that we can sometimes be a bit stubborn and slow starters. Plato called us “perverse” for whatever reason, and another Roman writer said we were the meanest of all animals. Not sure where he got that one from. Maybe he was thinking of our half-breed cousins, the mules.

But the good news is, there were plenty of cultures that had very high opinions of donkeys, so much so that they were always included in royal ceremonies. The Ugarits have artwork showing their gods riding donkeys, while the Muslims would call some of their heroes “donkey-riders.” One ancient Christian tale (Vita Sanctae Pelagiae Meretricis) even suggests that a woman riding on a donkey represents the height of beauty. Generally speaking, if someone with a lot of power and clout was riding a donkey, it usually meant that they were coming in peace.[1]

As far as the Bible itself goes, however, we seem to get a pretty fair shake. It all started with Jacob when, on his deathbed, he was blessing all his children, and pronounced this regarding Judah (Genesis 49:8‒12):

      8 “Judah, your brothers will praise you;

         your hand will be on the neck of your enemies;

         your father’s sons will bow down to you.

      9 You are a lion’s cub, Judah;

         you return from the prey, my son.

         Like a lion he crouches and lies down,

         like a lioness—who dares to rouse him?

      10 The scepter will not depart from Judah,

         nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet,

         until he to whom it belongs shall come

         and the obedience of the nations shall be his.

      11 He will tether his donkey to a vine,

         his colt to the choicest branch;

         he will wash his garments in wine,

         his robes in the blood of grapes.

      12 His eyes will be darker than wine,

         his teeth whiter than milk.

All the Hebrews knew that the Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah based on this prophecy. And all the donkeys knew that this ruler, the Lion of Judah, would eventually choose one of us for the most important mission in history. It seems like God is saying that he’s already got a plan to put all the players in place for when this ruler comes, even though the Hebrews had never had a king to this point. But one thing we’ve never been able to figure out about that prophecy is the bit about washing his garments in wine and his robes in the blood of grapes. Seems like they’d come out sticky and disgusting if we did that. One day we’ll know, though, I guess, right?

It’s not really a prophecy, but there is that story about Balaam in Numbers when he got a little too eager to help Moab out against the Hebrews. Keep in mind that Balaam probably wasn’t a Hebrew, but just a pagan prophet for hire. When the mama donkey (אָתוֹן, ʾāṯôn) he was riding (yes, she was female!) saw the angel of the Lord trying to stop him three times, she stopped and got a beating each time from Balaam. When mama donkey had finally had enough of that, she became a mama bear and chewed Balaam’s…, I mean scolded Balaam for his misplaced eagerness. Wouldn’t you have loved to see Balaam’s face when that mama bear voice started reading the riot act to him? He must have been white as a ghost. Mama donkey saved our reputation that day. She’s definitely one of our heroes.

Then there was that time that David had his son Solomon ride David’s own mule (פִּרְדָּה, pirdā(h); in case you don’t know, a mule is a cross between a horse and a donkey) to name him as successor to his throne. That must have been quite a day of celebration, pomp, and circumstance. I wish I could have been there.

But the ultimate prophecy that impacts us donkeys is the one in Zechariah 9. All of us have to learn this one.

      9 Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion!

         Shout, Daughter Jerusalem!

         See, your king comes to you,

         righteous and victorious,

         lowly and riding on a donkey,

         on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

      10 I will take away the chariots from Ephraim

         and the warhorses from Jerusalem,

         and the battle bow will be broken.

         He will proclaim peace to the nations.

         His rule will extend from sea to sea

         and from the River to the ends of the earth.

      11 As for you, because of the blood of my covenant with you,

         I will free your prisoners from the waterless pit.

      12 Return to your fortress, you prisoners of hope;

         even now I announce that I will restore twice as much to you.

      13 I will bend Judah as I bend my bow

         and fill it with Ephraim.

         I will rouse your sons, Zion,

         against your sons, Greece,

         and make you like a warrior’s sword.

Oh, how I love this prophecy, especially now, because I’m realizing I’m living in the midst of it. Verse 13 refers to Judas Maccabeus, you know, the Hammer guy I mentioned at the beginning of my story. He and his followers were able to overcome the Greek Seleucids and bring independence to Judah for a long time. It was from them that the Herod dynasty arose in Judah. They were okay at first, as most new rulers are, but they’re just sniveling little Roman puppets now. Nobody likes them. In fact, one of them tried to have the Messiah killed after he was born, and another one had John the Baptist beheaded. They’re just puppet kings; they’re not real kings, and they’re certainly not on the Messiah’s side. But, that was exactly the situation God needed to send the Messiah.

I’m pretty sure the current Herodian wouldn’t have ridden into town on a donkey. He’s too full of himself to go near us donkeys. But about a week ago, we started to hear the buzz around Jerusalem: Jesus and his disciples were on their way. He’d already earned quite a reputation with his miracles and his teaching, and it was obvious he was doing something right because the religious rulers were having a really hard time accepting him. Our donkey spy network, if you want to call it that, had been hearing troubling conversations, even to the point of the religious rulers wanting to crucify the Messiah. We were scared and excited at the same time.

We had been noticing that the crowds coming to Jerusalem for Passover were a lot bigger than in recent years, so my person thought we ought to get a jump on the day last Sunday, even though my hometown of Bethphage was only a few miles away. My mom and I were tied up outside, waiting to get loaded up and leave, when these two guys who looked like they’d been traveling forever came up, scratched my nose, and started to untie me. Now you’d think my mom would have started braying and kicking up a storm when that happened, but instead, she gave them both a gentle nuzzle. My person came out and asked, “Why are you untying the colt?” The older of the two just smiled and said, “The Lord needs it.” That was good enough for my person. Mom gave me a knowing look and kind of nudged me, as if to say, “It’s okay. Go with them. It’s time.”

So they led me a little way toward Jerusalem, and who do think was at their camp waiting for me? It was Jesus!!! There were so many people around, I was a little scared, but I realized this must be the time that Zechariah and Jacob had talked about in their prophecies. People put their cloaks on me and on the road ahead of me, waved palm branches, and Jesus himself sat on me! What an honor! A whole crowd of people were so happy to see him and were shouting all kinds of praises to him. But I saw a couple grumpy Pharisees trying to get Jesus to quiet the crowd. Yeah, right. Good luck with that, Pharisees. I imagine Rome was getting pretty nervous as well.

Even though the crowd was cheering, as we got closer to Jerusalem, Jesus started crying and pronounced a sad, scary prophecy about the city. That kind of took me by surprise. Why was he so sad and so gloomy about Jerusalem when most everyone else seemed so excited and joyful?

Well, it didn’t take too long to find out. Our huge parade went into the city, and the first place we went, as you might imagine, was the Temple. I couldn’t go in, but Jesus was really upset at those who were taking advantage of the poor who were coming in for the Passover and overturned their tables and chased them out of the Temple courts. Something about making his father’s house a den of robbers. That just seemed like quite a turn of events at that point, and it seems to have set the stage for what happened the rest of the week.

Now I did stay in Jerusalem after that Temple incident, but I didn’t go everywhere Jesus went. However, I had begun to hear stories of Jesus confronting the Pharisees, prophesying against the Temple, and other stuff like that. When I did see Jesus, he was resolute, like a man on a mission who could not be deterred. On Thursday night, a few of the disciples loaded me up with some Passover food and we headed to a house in town. The meal was upstairs, so I had to stay outside. It was a quiet night because it was the Passover meal, so I was able to hear bits and pieces of the conversation coming through the windows. Something about washing their feet, body and blood, and even a betrayer. It wasn’t long after that conversation that I saw Judas running out of the house and headed toward the Temple.

After that is when things get a little confusing. Jesus and the rest of the disciples sang a hymn and came down from the meal. We all went to the Garden of Gethsemane, but by that time we were all getting pretty tired and the sun had set. I lay down there to try to sleep, and I heard Jesus say something to Peter and John about staying awake. All of the sudden, everyone started shouting, because Judas had come to the garden with soldiers. They were arresting Jesus!!! Things got really confusing then. I heard a couple swords drawn, someone got hurt but Jesus healed him, and then all the disciples scattered, forgetting about me.

I managed to follow Jesus back to Jerusalem without being too obvious and was just able to slip through the city gate before they closed it again. I heard someone say they were going to the high priest’s house. We got there, and there was quite a crowd for that late at night. I heard a lot of shouting and arguing coming from the house, and eventually Jesus came out, still tied up. It was weird. Right when he came out, a rooster crowed, and I could see Jesus was looking straight at Peter, who was in the crowd. Peter looked sad, but the crowd surged at that point, and I lost sight of him.

It’s hard for me to describe what happened the next day, because it was so gruesome and ugly and I’m still pretty shaken by it. The pharisees turned Jesus over to the Romans, who whipped him, then he was brought to Pilate, who wanted to release him. But the Pharisees were stirring up the crowd, shouting “Crucify him!” I couldn’t bear it anymore. I just wanted to go home. Here, I thought I was the donkey of the prophecies, yet the “king” was going to be crucified instead. As I was exiting the city, I saw three poles on a hill nearby. It looked like there were already several Roman soldiers there and a crowd gathering. Then I heard behind me a mob approaching. I went down the road a little bit where I could get off to the side and still watch the hill. In the midst of the mob, I saw Jesus, whipped, bleeding, struggling to carry the horizontal beam of the cross. Oh, wait, maybe that’s what the prophecy meant about his garments washed in wine. Eww (shudder). It couldn’t be. I watched the rest of that scene unfold in utter disbelief. I watched as they hung Jesus from the cross between two other criminals. I could see that Jesus was shouting something as best he could, but I couldn’t make it out. I saw a soldier poke him in the side. Then the sky went dark. Yeah, that seems to fit the way this day is going.

As I was watching all this, I remembered that along with the donkey prophecies, my parents had taught me an Isaiah passage as well: “He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities. The punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds, we are healed.” How could all that pain and suffering bring healing? Then I made the connection: I realized I have a cross on my back; most donkeys do. Could it be that God made us beasts of burden with a cross on our backs because one of us would one day bear the one who would be burdened with the sin of mankind on a cross? As much as I wanted to go home, my eyes and my soul were captivated by the horror of what I was seeing. I had to get closer. I watched as they took his limp body down from the cross. I could see the general direction they were headed, so I tried to get to where they seemed to be headed. I’m glad I did. When I got to the place where they would bury him, I watched as they took his body, wrapped in linen cloths, into the tomb, rolled the stone in front of it, and put the Roman seal on it. And then I saw two people I recognized: Mary and John. I went up and nudged them gently, and they recognized me. But it was getting close to sundown, and they had to get home before the Sabbath started. They tried to get me to come, but I put on my stubbornness and wouldn’t budge. I wanted to stay near the tomb.

As much as I wanted to go home, my eyes and my soul were captivated by the horror of what I was seeing. I had to get closer. I watched as they took his limp body down from the cross.

That Sabbath yesterday was the worst day of my young life. I was still in shock. I couldn’t even move, let alone eat. I just hid out in some nearby trees and kept guard as best I could. I dozed off and on all day (just like the Roman guards!), until I finally realized I had slept through most of the night. Just before daybreak on the morning after the Sabbath, I felt the ground shake and heard the Roman guards yelling as they ran away. Then I saw them at the tomb, two angels rolling the stone away! I saw Jesus come to the opening of the tomb. He looked straight at me, winked, and disappeared. Could I be dreaming?

Just then Jesus’s mother, Mary, and Mary Magdalene came running up to the tomb, only to find the stone rolled away. I hadn’t been dreaming! I wanted to approach them, but before they noticed me, the angels appeared to them and told them what had happened. It was true then, Jesus was alive! The women never saw me, but turned and ran back toward Jerusalem, presumably to tell the rest of the disciples.

After the women ran off, one of the angels looked at me and said, “Well done, faithful Ḥamor. You may return home.” I had done my part that the prophets had predicted so long ago. I was indeed THE donkey that gave the king a ride into Jerusalem, and now I knew just what kind of king he would be. I headed home to tell my mom, and I can’t wait to see what happens next.


[1] Ryken, Leland, Jim Wilhoit, Tremper Longman, Colin Duriez, Douglas Penney, and Daniel G. Reid. 2000. In Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, electronic ed., 215. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

March 27, 2022

Lost and Found: The Parable of the Prodigal (Luke 15:11-32)

I preached this message at Mt. View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, Nebraska, March 27, 2022. I modified the introduction and preached it again on March 30, 2025, recording it this time. The text from the original message has been lightly edited for publication and to add in references to the key Greek words. The only major change made to the text in 2025 was a change in the opening illustration; this edit is not indicated here.

We can’t do anything else to earn [God’s forgiveness] because it’s already been granted to us in full by his grace.

When was the last time you “lost,” or rather, “misplaced” something you really needed? Since I had my third surgery on my leg a month ago, I’ve gotten out of my usual dressing habits and have been wearing sweatpants. The pockets in sweatpants tend to not be as deep as pants pockets, and this has gotten me out of the habit of where I put all my stuff during the day. With my pants, I could have my keys and change in one pocket, billfold in the back pocket, handkerchief in the other back pocket, and cell phone in my other front pocket. Pockets were made for carrying stuff, and I take full advantage of that.

But in the last couple weeks, I’ve “lost” or misplaced my house keys three times! They weren’t in their usual spot. One of those times, I looked all over the house during the day and couldn’t find them. When my wife got home from work, I looked in her car, and discovered they had fallen out of my sweatpants pocket between the driver’s seat and the center console. The other two times, I had taken them out of my sweatpants pocket and put them on my desk in my office instead of on the shelf in my bedroom where they usually go. The other day, I even lost my phone in the couch cushion, because I was keeping my leg elevated, and the phone fell out of my sweatpants pocket.

We hate it when we lose stuff, right? I went looking for some information on what are the most commonly “lost” items by Americans. What do you think is the number one item Americans say they lose?

Top Items Lost in US & UK
US: TV remotes, phones, car & house keys, glasses, wallets and bags 
UK: Keys, phone, pens (or other items of stationery), glasses or sunglasses, remote controls

CHipolo.com

The Parables of the Lost

According to the article this all comes from, written as a marketing piece for a company that sells electronic products you can attach to your lost items to help you find them with your smartphone, we spend on average 5 minutes and 20 seconds looking for lost items. That’s not to say we find the item after we search. This is quite the contrast to the time it takes to recover what the people in the parables in Luke 15 lost. The shepherd goes out into the open field to look for his lost sheep; probably not a quick walk. Or the woman who sweeps and cleans her entire household to find one coin, perhaps the most valuable thing she owned. And after the hard work to try to find what was lost, both the shepherd and the woman rejoice in finding what they’d lost.

The Lost Son Begins the Downward Slide

So as we come to the parable of the “lost” or “prodigal” son, we’re faced with a story of a different kind of “lostness.” Instead of an item, we’re dealing with a person, who by his own choice, loses himself by virtue of a series of poor decisions. Let’s look at the first part of that story.[1]

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

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

Let’s break this down a bit. The most important thing to note here is that, in that time, it was a grievous dishonor to your parents to ask for your share of the inheritance before they died. It was akin to saying to your father, “I wish you were dead.” It would have brought shame not only on the son, but on the father as well. The father could have easily said no, or he could have disowned his son altogether for such an act. It’s likely the father knew how the son would handle himself as well. Yet in spite of all this, the father consented and let the son go his own way.

This was not easy for the family. The oldest son was always entitled to twice the inheritance of the other sons, so the father probably would have had to sell off assets (βίος bios) he’d accumulated through his life’s work to give the younger son 1/3 of what the total inheritance for his sons would have been. The older son got his 2/3 inheritance as well, as vs. 12 says he divided his property between them. That will be important to remember as we come to the end of the story.

The younger son was impatient to get started on his newfound “freedom,” if we want to call it that, and dispensed with the cultural norms of saying goodbye. Keep in mind that most family units remained in close proximity to their ancestral home, so this was no small thing for the son to go away to a distant land. It was a sad time indeed, almost akin to mourning the loss of a loved one. But the younger son was seemingly insensitive to all of that, and went his own way.

So he “squandered his wealth in wild living.” That word “squandered” (διασκορπίζω diaskorpizō) is one of the most egregious terms for wastefulness in the New Testament. It implies an indiscriminate scattering of people, sheep, or even seed for planting. It tends to be a descriptive word about what’s going on, but it doesn’t seem to carry too much moral weight in that it’s not necessarily a strong condemnation. However, the results of his wastefulness come home to roost with him. Instead of planning for a rainy day or investing his wealth in something that might have earned him more money, he scattered it abroad indiscriminately. When the money dried up, so did his friends.

The beginning of his need was the beginning of his feeing of lostness. He had no friends, no nearby family, and there was no food bank or other charity nearby. He hired himself out to feed pigs, an animal considered unclean to the Jews. It was the ultimate shame, and he began to feel it. The pods the pigs were eating were carob pods (κεράτιον keration). Have you ever had carob? I remember several years ago carob had gained some popularity as a substitute for chocolate. But when I tried it, there was no comparison. If you like carob, more power to you. You won’t get any judgment from me. I’ll take the real chocolate any day.

Rock Bottom

But I digress. The son has hit the bottom of the barrel at this point, and he knows he needs to make a complete 180 degree turn with his life. We see his desperation in the next part of the story.

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

He thinks because he has brought such shame and disgrace upon himself that he can’t go back to his family with all the rights of a son. But he knew his father treated the servants well, so he at least thought he’d stand a better chance of survival and success there than all alone in a distant land.

Repentance and Ascendance

This 180-degree turn is what the Bible calls repentance. Repentance not only means to change your mind about the way you’ve been living, but also to change the way you’ve been living. He decides his best course of action is to humble himself and return home, where at least someone might love him.

20 So he got up and went to his father.

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

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

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

This part of the parable is one of the most beautiful pictures of God’s acceptance of a sinner returning to him. The younger son had probably spent most of his journey home rehearsing what he’d say to his father. Can you relate to that? You don’t have to raise your hand if you do. How many times have we found ourselves in a similar situation, where we knew we messed up and we have to humble, or even humiliate ourselves to croak out a huge apology. No excuses, no rationalizations, no passing the buck to someone else. It’s all on you, right? Those of us who’ve had those moments will most likely never forget how we felt in those moments.

But the younger son didn’t count on his father still loving him and missing him. Their parting was probably not pleasant as I hinted at above. The younger son had every right to assume his return would be met with skepticism, sorrow, and anger from the father. But the father shocks his son with his response, as Jesus shocks his listeners by telling this part of the story. The father runs to greet his son not with punishment or anger, but with love and compassion. This would have been somewhat embarrassing for the father, having to tuck his outer garment under his belt so his legs were free to run. It would seem all this time, the father never took his eyes of the horizon, waiting for his son to return, and the father didn’t care one bit what others may have thought of him for running to welcome his prodigal son home.

The prodigal, perhaps experiencing shock, embarrassment, and relief all at once, tries to get his prepared speech out, but the father cuts him off before he can get to the part about being one of his father’s hired servants. Instead, his father cuts him off and orders the servants to bring the best robe, a signet ring, and sandals. In that culture, those were signs of authority. The sandals were probably the most important part to the son, as slaves went barefoot. Right away, the son knew he was not going to be welcomed back as a slave, but as a son. When pharaoh made Joseph second in command in Egypt (Genesis 41:41ff), he received pharaoh’s own signet ring, which was a sign of authority and allowed Joseph to make financial decisions and royal decrees in Pharaoh’s stead. He got robes of fine linen from pharaoh, which must have brought back memories of getting the coat of many colors from his own father as a young man. Joseph received a gold chain as well, although there’s no mention of that for the prodigal. Joshua, the high priest in the time of the prophet Zechariah, had his filthy clothes exchanged for fine garments at the order of the angel as a sign that his sins had been removed (Zechariah 3:3–4).

To bring it back to our story, then, the younger son was experiencing complete forgiveness and restoration from his own father. Not only that, but the father orders the fattened calf to be killed for a great celebration feast. Notice the contrast between the response here and the responses in the first two parables in this chapter. The one seeking what was lost gathers friends and neighbors together to “Rejoice with me; I’ve found what I lost.” And then Jesus says that there would be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over the 99 who don’t need to repent. Those first two parables use a form of the word for “rejoice” (συγχαίρω/χαρά sunchairō/chara) four times, but never use the word “celebration.” In the prodigal story, Jesus skips the “Rejoice with me” part and goes straight to a heaven-worthy celebration. The word for “celebration” (εὐφραίνω euphrainō) is used four times in the prodigal story. As such, we see how much more valuable God considers our own souls over and above what we possess or are called to care for.

How much is that like our God? Before we can even get the words of apology and repentance out of our mouths, God comes running to meet us where we are, ready to embrace us and welcome us into his kingdom. He’s ready to forgive the moment we change our minds; we can’t do anything else to earn it because it’s already been granted to us in full by his grace.

The younger son’s response here is similar to what we see in Psalm 51, which David wrote after his sin with Bathsheba was exposed:

1 Have mercy on me, O God,
   according to your unfailing love;
   according to your great compassion
   blot out my transgressions.

2 Wash away all my iniquity
   and cleanse me from my sin.

3 For I know my transgressions,
   and my sin is always before me.

4 Against you, you only, have I sinned
   and done what is evil in your sight;
   so you are right in your verdict
   and justified when you judge.

Or again, like the ending of the longest chapter in the Bible, Psalm 119, the younger son seeks out restoration:

169 May my cry come before you, LORD;
   give me understanding according to your word.

170 May my supplication come before you;
   deliver me according to your promise.

171 May my lips overflow with praise,
   for you teach me your decrees.

172 May my tongue sing of your word,
   for all your commands are righteous.

173 May your hand be ready to help me,
   for I have chosen your precepts.

174 I long for your salvation, LORD,
   and your law gives me delight.

175 Let me live that I may praise you,
   and may your laws sustain me.

176 I have strayed like a lost sheep.
   Seek your servant, for I have not forgotten your commands.

The Other Lost Son

It would be great if the story of the prodigal son ended here, with everyone rejoicing, but it would seem that the role of the problem child is transferred to the older son.

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

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

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

Evidently the servants had been so busy preparing things for the prodigal-come-home that no one thought to go get his older brother to join the celebration. Or, to be fair, maybe the servant assigned that task hadn’t got to him yet, and was meeting him half way. We don’t know how far out in the field the son was. Of course, the older brother’s attitude is what we might expect. His attitude is much harsher than the description of his squandering at the beginning of the story. Jesus here puts a different word for “squandering” (κατεσθίω katesthiō) in the older brother’s mouth, and adds the bit about prostitutes as well. The word for “squandering” here seems to carry a much more judgmental tone through the Scriptures, sometimes translated as “devour” or “exploit.” The father tries reassuring the older son that everything he has is available to him, but still emphasizes the need to celebrate his brother’s return. Jesus ends the parable abruptly there, presumably on purpose. He leaves us to think about what our own response might be in that situation. Would we continue to be indignant and jealous about the attention his younger brother is getting, or would we follow in the footsteps of his father and rejoice that a lost one has returned?

I get it. Sometimes it’s hard to trust that someone who has turned their back on God might genuinely want to come back to Jesus and get their lives back in order. Sometimes, they really have made the change in their lives. I’ve known people who’ve done that. But I’ve also known those who made a play at repenting, but then continued on with the bad decisions in their life. There was no real motivation for positive change or repentance. Do you have a lost loved one who may be showing signs of wanting to be restored? Run to them and let them know they’re welcome. Or have you lost your way and need to come home? Turn around. The father is waiting to welcome you into his kingdom with open arms.

Epilog: The Connection to the Parable of the Shrewd Manager (Luke 16:1ff)

I want to offer a brief epilog here, because even though it looks like the three “lost” parables in chapter 15 stand as a unit of teaching, there’s a connection to the very next parable, the parable of the shrewd manager. The word for “squandered” (διασκορπίζω diaskorpizō) from the first part of the prodigal story is used to describe the manager in 16:1. But the parable of the shrewd manager ends quite differently. All we know is that the manager was accused of “squandering” the owner’s possession, but nothing seems to have been proven. The manager takes a couple bills and discounts them for the debtors so he can collect something for his master, and at the same time, earn a little favor with those to whom he gave the discounts. The owner commended the manager for his shrewdness, and Jesus closes the parable by saying “Use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.” The prodigal wasted his money on things that wouldn’t bring him any eternal benefit. The shrewd manager, however, used the money under his control to win friends and influence people. I’ll leave you with this question: How can we as individuals and as the body of Christ, grow the kingdom with our worldly wealth?


[1] Scripture quotations taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version® NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My views are my own.

March 13, 2022

Temptations Lose Their Power (Luke 4:1‒13)

Author’s Note: This message was preached at Mt. View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, Nebraska, March 6, 2022. The text has been lightly edited with the addition of section headings. I was not recording audio files of my messages at that time.

I preached the message again on March 9, 2025. The new audio file is from that date.

It’s the oldest persistent and scariest challenge in the world, and one that very few have ever navigated with 100 percent success. Men and women who have done great things in their lives have lost it all because one time out of the hundreds or thousands of times they’ve dealt with this challenge, they failed horribly, miserably, and humiliatingly. Whether it was a moment of pride, lust, greed, or desperation, that one moment of failure was enough to erase and “cancel” all the good and great things someone ever accomplished.

The Roots of Temptation

By now, you’ve probably guessed what that oldest challenge is: temptation. We see it from the earliest chapters in the Bible, while Adam and Eve are still in a pristine paradise in the garden, clear through the Old Testament, and even into the New Testament story line. In Genesis 3, we see the primary elements of temptation in Eve’s encounter with the serpent: “the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom.”[1] John confirms this definition in his first letter (1 John 2:16) in slightly different words: “For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world.[2]

Examples of Temptation

Old Testament

We could, unfortunately of course, provide several other examples of temptation in both testaments, but I want to highlight a couple other ones to clarify what temptation is and is not. For example, later in Genesis, not once, not twice, but three times the patriarchs mislead the king of a foreign country about the nature of their respective relationships with their wives. Abraham does it twice, and Isaac once. These failures ostensibly came about because the men had some measure of fear of what these foreign kings might do, but that was no excuse in God’s eyes. And let’s not forget about Joseph when Pharaoh’s wife pursues him. He put his own life at risk by fleeing the scene of temptation.

Fast forwarding to the kingdom era, we of course have the story of David and Bathsheba, where David goes out on the rooftop of his palace and sees a beautiful woman bathing. Not only does he have her brought to the palace to take advantage of her, but when he realizes he got her pregnant, he tries to “frame” her husband for the pregnancy. Of course, this utterly fails, as Uriah has more integrity than David, and David has him put on the front lines of battle to a certain death. One moral failing leads to another, which is ultimately exposed by Nathan the prophet.

New Testament

One final example of temptation is that of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts, the couple who misrepresented the money they earned from a property sale and both wound up dead for lying to the church about it. They could have given whatever they wanted to and kept whatever they wanted to, but they tried to fool church and paid the ultimate price.

I believe each of these stories represent each of the three elements of temptation individually that we saw in Eve’s thinking and John’s epistle. But before we get too much further into this, it’s important that we look at the words the Bible uses for “temptation” so we can get a better understanding of its meaning and application.

Temptation and Testing: The Word Study

[Professor's Tip: Normally, I would do a word study in the original language, but since there are only two related Greek words (noun and verb) and one Hebrew word dedicated to the concept, a study of translation principles is more in order.]

Now even though I gave several examples of temptation from the Old Testament, the verb “tempt” (πειράζω peirazō) and its noun “temptation” (πειρασμός peirasmos) are rarely if ever found in English translations of the OT. Neither the New International Version nor the English Standard Version nor the New Revised Standard Version have those English words at all in the OT. The New King James Version translates the Hebrew word (נסה nāsāh) as “tempt” or “tempted” in four verses, three of which are related to Jesus’s responses to the devil in the temptation narrative we’ll look at in a moment. The reason I bring this up is because by comparing the NKJV with the other three translations I mentioned, we see that the other way the Hebrew (and in the NT, the Greek) words are translated: “test.”

The Difference Between “Test” and “Tempt”

So why do three of the versions I mentioned use “test” instead of “temptation” for the same Greek or Hebrew word? Well, as I tell my students when they ask me questions like that, the answer is “context, context, context.” If you follow the use of the words in their respective story settings, you find that “testing” has to do with the relationship between God and humans. The general thrust of the verses in question goes one of three ways: either God is testing his people to see how they respond, or the people are testing God by NOT doing what he’s commanded them to do, or one person is testing another’s character. And consistent with the concept of testing, sometimes there’s a judgment or “grade” on how we responded to the test.

“Temptation” is a subset of testing. That is, all temptations are tests, but not all tests are temptations. The word “temptation” is used by these English translation committees to indicate a situation in which some personified evil power or influence is at work. James 1:13–15 clarifies this for us:

13 When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.[3]

Our own modern English dictionaries seem to confirm this distinction as well. Merriam-Webster says “tempt” means “to entice to do wrong by promise of pleasure or gain,” “to induce to do something,” or its synonym “provoke.”[4] However, the word gurus at Merriam-Webster tell us that the use of the word “tempt” to mean “to make trial of” or to “test” (i.e., how the word is used in the King James Version) is now obsolete.

So, to sum up where we’re at: testing happens between God and man or from man to man. Temptation happens when an evil one or evil desire holds our attention. I haven’t forgotten about my sermon title, “Temptations Lose Their Power”; we’ll get to that soon. And no, there will NOT be a quiz afterwards!

OT Background for Jesus’s Temptation Narrative

Let’s get back to Scripture, then, and look at the passages that set us up for passage about Jesus’s temptation in the wilderness.

In Exodus 17, not long after the Jews had crossed the Red Sea on dry land, one of many grumbling episodes broke out against Moses. This is the first time we see the Hebrew word for “test” in the OT, so it’s worth taking a quick look at the text:

The whole Israelite community set out from the Desert of Sin, traveling from place to place as the Lord commanded. They camped at Rephidim, but there was no water for the people to drink. 2 So they quarreled with Moses and said, “Give us water to drink.”

Moses replied, “Why do you quarrel with me? Why do you put the Lord to the test?”

3 But the people were thirsty for water there, and they grumbled against Moses. They said, “Why did you bring us up out of Egypt to make us and our children and livestock die of thirst?”

4 Then Moses cried out to the Lord, “What am I to do with these people? They are almost ready to stone me.”

5 The Lord answered Moses, “Go out in front of the people. Take with you some of the elders of Israel and take in your hand the staff with which you struck the Nile, and go. 6 I will stand there before you by the rock at Horeb. Strike the rock, and water will come out of it for the people to drink.” So Moses did this in the sight of the elders of Israel. 7 And he called the place Massah  and Meribah  because the Israelites quarreled and because they tested the Lord saying, “Is the Lord among us or not?”[5]

Notice here that Moses, at least, passes the test. He’s commanded to strike the rock, and indeed he does. The people, however, not so much. Now if you’re scratching your head and saying, “Wait a minute, I thought Moses got in trouble for that one,” you might be thinking of the similar account toward the end of the wilderness wanderings in the book of Numbers, where Moses was commanded to SPEAK to the rock, but STRUCK it twice instead, and consequently lost his free pass to the Promised Land. Moses failed that one. So, let’s ask an obvious question at this point: If you’re stuck in the wilderness for 40 days and 40 nights, which of these two stories of a Bible hero would you want on your mind to survive your time of testing?

Well, Deuteronomy 6 answers that question for us, and these verses are the sources for two of Jesus’s three responses in the wilderness to the Devil”

13 Fear the Lord your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name. 14 Do not follow other gods, the gods of the peoples around you; 15 for the Lord your God, who is among you, is a jealous God and his anger will burn against you, and he will destroy you from the face of the land. 16 Do not put the Lord your God to the test as you did at Massah.[6]

The Temptation Narrative

And so finally, we come to the story today of Jesus’s temptation in the wilderness.

Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where for forty days he was tempted (πειράζω peirazō) by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry.

The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread.”

Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’”

The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. If you worship me, it will all be yours.”

Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’”

The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down from here. 10 For it is written: “ ‘He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; 11 they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’”

12 Jesus answered, “It is said: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

13 When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.[7]

Luke 4:1‒13

Now we can make an educated guess as to why the devil tried to pull this little stunt here of tempting God’s son. The devil knew Jesus was the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world and he couldn’t get to him on the spiritual side. The devil targeted Jesus’s human side with the three elements of temptation we talked about in the beginning: the lust of the flesh (turning stones into bread to assuage his hunger, a clear abuse of power to serve himself only); the lust of the eyes (the devil showing Jesus all the kingdoms and offering him to rule it all if he worshiped the devil, Jesus knew who the true ruler was and who deserved his worship); and the boastful pride of life (demonstrating superhuman strength and feats, again an abuse of power to serve himself and draw attention away from his teaching and example). If the devil could get Jesus to bite on just one of these, it would be all over for the rest of us.

How Temptations Lose Their Power

Prayer

One of the main reasons we have this story is to demonstrate what Hebrews 4:15 says: “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.”[8] And why did he care enough to do that? The very next verse gives us the answer, and one of the biblical steps we can take to cause temptations to lose their power. “Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.”[9]

For any test, trial, or temptation we face, we can always turn to God in prayer. Joseph, even though he was imprisoned after fleeing Potiphar’s wife, stayed connected with God. He would eventually rise to power in Egypt because he maintained his integrity and continued to do the will of God. And we’re not alone in these times either. Hebrews 12 says we’re surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses. Not only can we seek mercy and grace from Christ at the throne of God, but we can also seek it from the body of Christ here in our own communities. Some churches have a Celebrate Recovery program that helps people deal with addictions. Other churches sponsor Grief Care and Divorce Care groups to help people in those situations.

Living in the Will of God

This brings us to another strategy for cutting off the impact of temptation in our lives. Right after John gives his description of temptation I mentioned earlier, he says this: “The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.”[10] David, when he had a chance to kill King Saul in a cave, refused to lay a hand on God’s anointed. It must have been a huge temptation for him to have killed Saul then and there and complete his divinely appointed takeover of the kingdom, but David waited on God’s timing. Another episode where David succeeded was when he was bringing the Ark of the Covenant back to Jerusalem. When he realized he wasn’t transporting it according to God’s instructions, and Uzzah died when touched the Ark to steady it on the cart, David left it at the home of Obed-Edom to keep it safe there until he could move it properly. He didn’t try to make excuses for doing it the wrong way, he just stopped doing it the wrong way.[11]

(Memorizing and) Quoting God’s Word

In addition to prayer and doing God’s will, Jesus shows us yet another way to address temptation and weaken its power in our lives: citing the word of God. The fact that Jesus cites two of his three verses from Deuteronomy 6 gives us some insight as to what Jesus had been thinking about and meditating on while he was in the wilderness. He was obviously thinking about how Moses had led a stiff-necked people through the wilderness for 40 years when he only had to survive it 40 days. He remembered Moses’s success at Massah as we read above from Exodus 17. We can always look to the Scriptures for help facing temptation. It’s good to memorize Scripture as well, so you can have it at the ready, especially when temptation may come at you out of nowhere. Study God’s word. Learn from the mistakes and successes of the heroes of faith. Make a plan.

A Personal Testimony

When I was a young Christian in high school, I was all too aware of what my hormones were doing to me. When I read the story of Joseph and Potiphar’s wife, I embraced that as my power and plan to avoid that kind of temptation. Without going into any detail, twice I found myself in very similar situations to Joseph where I was outright given an opportunity I was not seeking to make the wrong decision with people I knew would be bad influences on me, and I followed Joseph’s plan as a young man. Run away! I am certain that those two events are watershed moments in my faith journey. I’d hate to think where I’d be today had I not made the right decisions in those early days of my faith.

The Promise of God

This brings me to my final Scripture, 1 Corinthians 10:13. I’m sure many of you are familiar with it: “No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.”[12] Trust in God, his word, and the power of the Holy Spirit working in your lives to watch over you. The devil tried to convince Jesus he could jump off the top of the temple without being harmed by quoting Psalm 91:12. But that verse was never intended for us to do things to provoke God’s protection. That promise is there for us when we find ourselves in a place we were powerless to avoid. God will make a way to cause temptations to lose their power, and that’s one way he shows his great love for us.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My opinions are my own.


[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] Merriam-Webster, Inc. 1996. In Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 10th ed. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[8] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[9] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[10] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[11] 2 Samuel 6

[12] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

February 20, 2022

Getting Naked for Jesus: A Lesson on Loving Your Enemy (Luke 6:27–38; par. Matthew 5:39–42)

Sermon preached February 20, 2022, at Mount View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, NE. The sermon text has been mildly edited and reformatted for publication.

Scripture quotations taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version® NIV®
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™
Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

I want to acknowledge the contribution of Walter Wink’s Engaging the Powers, Chapter 9, “Jesus’ Third Way: Nonviolent Engagement” for his exegesis of the cheek slapping, garment forfeiting, and extra mile passages. Over the years, I have found his “Powers” series extremely helpful in understanding the concept of spiritual warfare.

Flipping the Script on the Good Samaritan Parable

I think most of us here know what the two greatest commandments are: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” And most of us know that when someone asked Jesus who his neighbor was, Jesus, in typical fashion, answered with a parable instead of a direct answer. That parable, of course, is the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

Just to set the stage, here, I’ll recap the parable: A man was robbed, beaten, and left for dead on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. A priest and temple servant, that is, a Levite, two people who we’d think are most in tune with worshiping God, walk right by the man and offer him no help. Then a Samaritan, someone despised to no end by the Jews and outside of most Jewish “in-groups,” comes along and renders care to the man and gets him to a place of safety. When Jesus asked the Jewish law expert who was a neighbor to the man, the expert couldn’t even bring himself to say “Samaritan.” He answered, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Now as we come to today’s passage in Luke 6:27 and following, let’s take a different track on the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Instead of asking “Who was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” at the end of the story, how would we answer if Jesus had asked, “Who is the enemy of this man?”

Before we answer that question specifically about the Parable, or even about our own lives, we can make a broader statement about who the enemies of the Jews were generally, as that is important to set the context for Luke 6:27.

Who Is My Enemy?

In the first place, we can identify the obvious political enemy for the Jews: The Roman Empire. They were efficient and brutal in executing judgment against those who wouldn’t toe the line. They collected taxes and even recruited some Jews to betray their people and collect the taxes for them. This would certainly be at the forefront of every Jew’s thinking, which is why they had the expectation at the time that the Messiah would be a military leader who would free them from Roman bondage. But Jesus wasn’t just concerned about Rome.

We can look at the Beatitudes as well. Have you ever noticed that the first chapter of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5), which includes the Beatitudes, has as much to do with our relationships with each other as it does with our relationship to God? Just listen to a few passages from that chapter:

Matthew 5:11 Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. [1]

Matthew 5:22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment.[2]

Matthew 5:25 Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court.[3]

Matthew 5:43‒44 You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.[4]

Matthew 5:11, 22, 25, 43‒44

They could have enemies within their own in-group, never mind the Romans. And those kinds of enemies can be the most painful to deal with at times. So with these concepts of who the Jews’ enemies were at the time, let’s turn to our central passage this morning, Luke 6:27‒36.

27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

32 “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. 35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.[5]

Luke 6:27‒36

What Does “Loving Your Enemy” Look Like?

One big question we need to ask ourselves right off the bat is, if loving your neighbor looks like what the Samaritan did for the victim on the side of the road, what does loving your enemy look like if they’re the ones that put you on the side of the road? What is that kind of love in action? What does Jesus think will happen to the enemy, or to us, if we “love” them back?

Luke here takes the other side of the beatitude we looked at earlier. If you’re blessed when you’re persecuted, turn around and bless the persecutor. Again, what does that look like? Is just a matter of saying a few kind words or praying a quick prayer over the persecutor? Or does Jesus have something a little more transformative in mind here?

In Matthew’s parallel account of this in the Sermon on the Mount, he uses this teaching as a contrast to the Lex Talionis, the “eye-for-an-eye” principle of legal punishment in the Old Testament. So it would seem here that Jesus has in mind with this teaching the cultural and legal ramifications of our actions. There are much bigger principles at work here than just the day-to-day challenges we face, like getting cut off in traffic, someone putting a ding in your car door, or a neighbor not picking up after their dog has graced your yard.

Resistance Is Unfruitful

In Matthew’s version, he records Jesus saying: “Do not resist an evil person.” That word “resist” (ἀνθίστημι anthistēmi) is the same word used in Ephesians 6:13 about “standing your ground” or “standing firm.” The word is used quite often in passages about military battles, so it has the implication of not just staying put, but actively and at times violently resisting the enemy so they cannot push you back or overcome you. When Jesus says “do not resist,” then, he’s talking about not resisting violently, about not responding in kind.

What he’s NOT saying, however, and this is important to understand the passage, is let yourself get trampled over, and the examples that follow help us understand just how to apply this type of “love.” It also shows how this type of “love” he wants us to demonstrate can be the seed to transform a situation and possibly bring some redemption.

Slapping for Shame

The first example about loving your enemy, getting slapped on the cheek, has been sorely misunderstood through most of Church history, primarily because we have failed to recognize the historical context in which it is set. Matthew’s version is a little more specific than Luke’s version in that Matthew specifies the right cheek. He has a couple reasons for doing that. The first is that, when a superior wanted to shame or reprimand a subordinate, a soldier wanted to shame a subject, husband wanted to shame his wife, or a parent their child, the custom in that day was to use a backhand slap to the cheek. The other background piece here is that, for the Jews, using the left hand was taboo because it was used for “unclean” tasks. So the backhand slap always had to be done with the right hand, and the right cheek was the easiest target for that.

So what happens when you “turn the other cheek”? It exposes the left cheek for a backhand slap. But the taboo against using the left hand was so strong, no one would do that, and trying to do a backhand slap with your right on someone’s left cheek is pretty awkward. [Author’s note: technically, a backhand stroke starts on the opposite side of the body from the hand used; trying slap the left cheek with the back of the right hand would essentially require you to come straight on the person’s face, like a punch. It wouldn’t cross the body, and it would look ridiculous to an observer.] In other words, turning the other cheek is a sort of passive challenge to the abuser to subsequently either shame themselves by using a left-hand slap or losing the power dynamic by punching the person outright. In a culture that valued honor and scorned shame so highly, most people would think twice about bringing shame upon themselves or degrading their position of power or authority.

“But,” you may ask, “why not just punch someone with your fist?” Well, this is the final piece of the cultural puzzle: if you punched someone with your fist, as in a regular fist fight, that meant you considered the person you hit your equal in that culture. There would be no one-way expression of shame or insult. You would shame yourself by resorting to violating cultural norms with what would be considered violence.

So the popular and long-standing Christian misreading of this as letting yourself get beat up when someone slaps you has no basis in historical reality when it comes to what Jesus intended to teach here. The point of turning the other cheek, then, is not to passively get pummeled, but to deny or make it more difficult for the oppressor to continue to shame you. I mean, how is it “loving your enemy” to submit to a beating? This is one way, then, to “love your enemy.” The temptation for us is to respond to such shaming, which is a form of violence, with violence of our own, but this is not what Jesus wants for us, as he said in Matthew. Turning the other cheek is a way to fight back against the culture of shaming without resorting to violence. It is love for your enemy because it also forces them to make the choice to continue to shame by putting their own honor and shame on the line.

Getting Naked for Jesus

Let’s take a look at the next example of “loving your enemy,” giving up your underwear. Yes, you heard that correctly, folks. Jesus says to give up your underwear if someone takes your outer garment. The average Jewish person had a simple wardrobe: an undergarment, which in Greek was called a χιτών (chitōn), and an outer garment called a ἱμάτιον (himation). In the Old Testament, if you needed to borrow money from someone, you might be asked to give the lender your outer garment as a pledge to repay your loan. However, since many Jews only had one outer garment (there were no Duluth Trading Company or JC Penney stores), Jewish law said the lender must return the outer garment to the borrower each night so they could use it to keep warm while sleeping.

In some cases, a lender may get a little too aggressive in trying to secure a pledge for a loan. They would take a poor borrower to court in an attempt to secure the borrower’s outer garment indefinitely, without returning it to the borrower each night. This was not only a violation of basic human rights for the Jews, but an insult to Jewish law and tradition. Unlike the slap in the face, this wasn’t so much about shaming the individual as it was taking a cruel action to force the borrower’s hand to pay back the loan.

But shame does play a part in Jesus’s teaching about how to respond to such a tactic. Jesus teaches that the person who is taken to court for their outer garment should just go the whole nine yards and hand over their undergarment as well, leaving them essentially naked. But as we see in the story of Noah and his sons after the flood, the primary shame of nakedness is not for the one who walks around naked, but on those who view or even mock the naked person. So once again, instead of taking a more violent response toward the aggressor, Jesus tells his listeners to essentially put the plaintiffs and the judge in a position of shame by walking out of the court room naked!

Jesus’s point here, then, is that the loving thing to do is shame the oppressors and make them think twice about using the courts to compel violations of Jewish law and tradition. Maybe, just maybe, the oppressors would think twice next time about permanently withholding someone’s outer garment.

Going the Extra Mile, Literally

Matthew adds one more example of how to love your enemies: going the extra mile. Roman law allowed a soldier to compel (ἀγγαρεύω angareuō) a subject to carry his pack one mile. Jesus’s answer to this is for the person to go another mile with the pack. Here’s why: Romans seem to have strictly enforced this compelled service rule so they wouldn’t incur the wrath of the ruled, so going the extra mile would actually put the Roman soldier in danger of being punished for violating Roman law. The soldier may also take it as an insult, that the Jew perhaps thought the soldier hadn’t regained enough strength to resume carrying the pack. Again, this is a nonviolent way of making the oppressor, the power holder, think twice about pressing someone into service.

So to summarize these three examples that Jesus gives, loving your enemy would seem to be a little like tough love. Again, Jesus was not in favor of a violent retaliation against Romans or of a violent response to those who do us harm. He wants a response from us that will bring positive transformation to both parties.

Our Response

Verses 32–34 confirm that loving and being kind and compassionate to those in our in-group is no big deal. God expects that, and even sinners do the same for each other. In vs. 35, Jesus takes loving your enemy beyond the tough love of the first three examples. “Love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back.[6]” Take the lead; take the initiative; and take the moral high ground when it comes to your enemies. Verse 35 goes on to say that even God is kind to the ungrateful and wicked, so we should mirror that kindness.

Now earlier, I asked the alternate question about the Parable of the Good Samaritan: “Who was the enemy of the man beaten and left on the roadside?” The Samaritan was a cultural enemy of the Jews, but he didn’t act like an enemy to the man in need. Certainly we can say the robbers were his enemies. But what about the priest and the Levite? With all their supposed piety, is it possible they could be categorized as enemies as well?

Are YOU Someone’s Enemy?

Now I know some of you have probably never heard these Scriptures explained in this way before. It might be a lot to process about what it means to love your enemy. But let’s flip the script one more time. Who in your life or your circle of influence might consider you an enemy? Hmm? I don’t know about you, but when it occurred to me during my sermon prep this week that I needed to ask that question of myself, it made me squirm a little bit. Now it’s possible no one considers us an enemy, I’ll grant that. But many of us have experienced the heartache of a broken relationship, failed expectations from those we love, or maybe even not living up to our own expectations. Jesus takes us to the highest level of love in vv. 37-38:

37 “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. 38 Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”[7]

Luke 6:37‒38

In Matthew 5 in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus gives us the solution for this:

23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift. [8]

Matthew 5:23‒24

If you’re struggling with loving your enemy, I would encourage you to find a good support group at a local church who can help you through any struggles you might have with that. Jesus calls us to love our neighbors AND our enemies as ourselves. There is no higher calling than this.

I own my opinions and my agreement with Walter Wink’s exegesis of these passages.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.


[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[8] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

February 19, 2022

From Wine to the Vine

Historical Note: This sermon is based on one of my earlier articles on the Seven “I Am” Statements of Jesus. I preached the sermon (in its current form) at Wheeler Grove Church on January 16, 2022, and at Mount View Presbyterian Church two weeks later.

In my message on Halloween Day, I walked us through Jesus’s miracle of raising Lazarus from the dead and his corresponding “I am” statement, “I am the resurrection and the life.” Of the seven “I am” statements Jesus makes in John, and the seven miracles, or “signs,” of Jesus that John records in his gospel, those two are the closest in the text, and of course most closely related.

This morning, I want to look at another related combination of an “I am” statement and a miracle of Jesus. Only this time, the two are about as far apart as they could be in John’s gospel. Jesus’s first miracle, turning water into wine at the wedding in Cana in chapter 2, and Jesus’s final “I am” statement in John 15: “I am the true vine.” His final “I am” statement comes in the middle of his final instructions to the disciples after the Last Supper and before his final prayer and arrest.

These two stories form “bookends” for the core of John’s gospel because they represent one of the key messages of Scripture: the power of and in the blood of Jesus. Now you may wonder why my sermon title is “From Wine to Vine,” especially since the process of making wine works the other way, but that’s the way they’re ordered in the gospel, so I’m going to respect that order. Let’s take a look at the miracle first: turning water into wine.

Read John 2:1–10

John opens his gospel with a profound statement of the incarnation: God’s only son has come to us as a human being, experiencing the fullness of life, from birth in a stable through the “terrible twos” (if that even applied to Jesus), the challenges of puberty, and into adolescence and adulthood. John also emphasizes in the opening chapter that Jesus is the light, something Jesus will affirm some time later with another “I am” statement. It shouldn’t surprise us that Jesus’s first miracle has to do with a basic, joyful human celebration: that of a wedding.

Wine is an interesting choice for a first miracle, because the OT has a mixed bag of opinion about wine, depending on the word the Hebrews used for it. The most common word for wine is connected to violence, poverty, and anguish in Proverbs; drunkenness in several other places; and is forbidden for those who take the Nazarite vow as Samson did.

But since Jesus is the one making about 180 gallons of premium vino, I think we’re okay looking at some of the positive uses of wine in the OT.

Melchizedek, who is seen as a Christ figure in Genesis, brings out bread and wine to Abraham after a military victory. It was often used as a drink offering in sacrificial or other sacramental rites. Psalm 104:14–15 says this about God’s provision:

14 He makes grass grow for the cattle,

and plants for people to cultivate—

bringing forth food from the earth:

15 wine that gladdens human hearts,

oil to make their faces shine,

and bread that sustains their hearts.[1]

Psalm 104:14–15

Solomon, as you might imagine, had a positive view of wine and understood the joy it could bring to life:

Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, for God has already approved what you do.[2]

Ecclesiastes 9:7 

And again,

A feast is made for laughter,

wine makes life merry,

and money is the answer for everything. [3]

Ecclesiastes 10:19 

Even the Greeks were concerned about the proper use of wine, and this may in fact reflect some of Solomon’s own philosophy. I came across this quote from Plato’s Laws while doing some other research recently. The discussion involves rules about wine for various age groups: They prohibited wine to those under 18 years old, saying it would have poured “fire upon fire” of unchecked youthful desire. They allowed young men under 30 to drink wine in moderation. But my favorite part of this description is what they allow for us old folks:

But when a man has reached the age of forty, he may join in the convivial gatherings and invoke Dionysus, above all other gods, inviting his presence at the rite (which is also the recreation) of the elders, which he bestowed on mankind as a medicine potent against the crabbedness of old age, that thereby we men may renew our youth, and that, through forgetfulness of care, the temper of our souls [666c] may lose its hardness and become softer and more ductile, even as iron when it has been forged in the fire.

Plato, Laws, 665–666, emphasis mine

Now don’t get me wrong: I’m not endorsing the drunken parties of Dionysus, Greco-Roman god of wine. That text goes on to say that the purpose of the wine was to loosen tongues of those who were afraid to sing the praises of Dionysus amongst their friends. I most certainly do not endorse that practice as a way pep up a church’s worship service! All kidding aside, though, the point is, they did consider wine from their own worldview as something that made life merrier, a little more bearable, but seemingly only in its proper context.

The Old Testament also had a separate word for “new wine” (תִּיר֖וֹשׁ tirōwsh) that is, wine from the current year’s harvest. It was not fermented as much as older wine, so it was not as sweet, but the literature of the day still suggests you could get drunk on it. This new wine is usually spoken of positively in the OT. The NT didn’t really have a special word for “new wine,” so the author would have to use the word “new” if they wanted to specify “new wine.” Jesus’s wine is obviously “new,” but the fact that it was far superior to the wine served initially suggests it wasn’t the typical “new wine,” nor was it even comparable to the old wine.

Jesus’s first miracle saved the wedding. It saved the host from the terrible embarrassment of running out of wine. Jesus thought that much of celebrating the joys of life here on earth that he was willing to create 180 gallons of premium wine to keep the party going. But that’s only a small part of the picture here with this miracle. There’s a seemingly innocuous fact in vs. 6 that we should pay attention to. John says the stone water jars were “the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing”[4] (καθαρισμός katharismos) or “purification” as some translations have it. We see the concept of purification or washing in the next passage we’ll look at, Jesus’s last “I am” statement, “I am the true vine.” It’s also should not go unnoticed that there’s a connection here between wine and the concept of ceremonial cleansing. Sound familiar?

[Note on katharismos: The -ismos ending added to the Greek root typically indicates an intensification of the base meaning of the root word. It’s not just “clean,” but “clean through and through, inside and out,” which is what one should expect from a ceremonial cleansing.]

Read John 15:1–10

This passage comes in the midst of Jesus’s final instructions to his disciples. The last half of John’s gospel, from chapter 12 on, covers the last week of Jesus’s life on earth and his resurrection. John gives us a great deal more detail what happened between the Last Supper and his arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane than the other gospels do. In chapter 14, he describes the ministry and role of the Holy Spirit. In 15, he reassures them that they can still be connected to him when he’s gone. In 16, he prepares them for the struggles ahead. And in 17, he prays for his disciples and all of us who come after them that we would be secure in our faith.

The vine metaphor is pretty straightforward to understand. A vine has one root structure with a bunch of branches that spread out, attaching to whatever it can find around it, even to the ground itself. Jesus is that singular root from which we all derive. In order to remain fruitful, we need to stay connected to the main vine and its root structure. And this is the goal of our lives: not just to be Christ followers but fruit bearers. Jesus extends this further: not only should we remain in Jesus, we should also remain in his love by showing love to those around us.

Now the word “vine” isn’t found in the wine miracle, and the word “wine” isn’t found in the “vine” story. But vs. 3, which seems to come out of nowhere, makes the connection with wine miracle: “You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you.” The word for “clean” is from the same root (καθαρός katharos) as the word for “washing” or “purification” in the miracle story.

Perhaps by now, you know where I’m headed with this connection between the two passages, and how they form the thematic bookends of the gospel of John. In chapter 13, John’s version of the Last Supper with details not found in the other three gospel accounts, Jesus washes his disciples’ feet, and addresses Peter’s objection by saying, “Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.” In vs. 10, Jesus says, “Those who have had a bath need only to wash their feet; their whole body is clean.” There’s that word “clean” again.

So these two very different stories we’ve looked at have a common thread, even if that thread isn’t the main message of the stories: the concept of being cleansed in a spiritual sense. I think this cuts to the heart of how the people in Jesus’s day felt about themselves spiritually: beat down by the culture around them while trying to abide by a rigorous legalistic application of God’s laws. They felt like they had no hope of freedom, no hope of ever feeling like they were truly right with their God. Jesus comes to bring joy and to assure the people that they are and can continue to be connected to their God.

If we look at the Last Supper stories in the other gospels, we get a better idea of just what Jesus means by “clean.” In Matthew, when Jesus takes the cup and blesses it, he says, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”[5] This, of course, is a far cry from Plato’s “potent medicine against the crabbedness of old age”! Jesus forgives us, cleanses us, and makes us complete in him.

So we see how John has woven the theme of the cleansing blood of Jesus throughout his gospel, with miracle of the wine in the ceremonial washing jars, the “I am the true vine” statement, John’s unique account of the Last Supper, the “True Vine” statement, and the theme of cleansing therein.

So the next time you have Communion, or even the next time you read the gospel of John, consider how Jesus, from the very beginning of his ministry, was concerned not just with enjoying life on earth, but about assuring us that we can be forgiven of our sins and made pure and righteous in him. Peace and safety to you all in the new year, and thank you for asking me back again. I am truly enjoying these opportunities to share with you.


[1] The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Ps 104:14–15.

[2] The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Ec 9:7.

[3] The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Ec 10:19.

[4] The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Jn 2:6.

[5] The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Mt 26:28.

January 2, 2022

2021 Reflection and Summary

I wanted to take a moment and thank the readers of Sunday Morning Greek Blog (SMGB) for tripling the number of views from 2019 to 2021! I went from 2,856 views in 2019 to 9,130 views (across 130 countries) in 2021. The theme of my blog has always been “Dig deeper, read smarter, draw closer.” I hope that whichever one of those goals brought you to my site will continue to be something I am able to meet for you. And, if you ever have a request or a question about a biblical topic, I would be happy to research it for you. I’m always excited to dig deeper into God’s Word to help others understand it better.

Having said that, the blog was also a blessing to me as well this year. As 2021 kicked off and more churches started to resume in-person services, I was called to preach at a couple smaller churches that lost pastors during the pandemic through attrition (thankfully not to COVID). One is the (now) inner-city church I grew up in and which some of my family still attend, and the other is a rural country church in Iowa. For me, the blog turned out to be (way-in-advance) sermon prep! This blog was helpful in that I still have been working my full-time day job, so it was nice not to have to a lot of new research for sermons. What sermons I did write this past year wound up as new blog posts.

Top 5 Posts

My top post for 2021 surprised me, because it was a little more academically technical than my typical posts, but it must have struck a chord with some. I had written “Indignant Jesus: The Variant Reading of Mark 1:41” in January 2019 in part because I wanted to know for myself why the NIV translators had changed the translation from “compassion” to “indignant” The other reason is that I wanted to provide an example of how translators use internal and external clues to determine the quality or genuineness of a textual variant. I figured with all the NIV readers out there, many of them would be curious about an “indignant Jesus,” so I wanted to provide what I hope was an explanation of the thought process in layman’s terms.

“Indignant Jesus” had 86 views that year. In 2020, it saw a 360% increase to 310 views. In 2021, it nearly had another 360% increase to 1,106 views! That was over 12% of total blog post views for 2021. Judging from the access peaks, I’d say it wound up on a few recommended reading lists for college syllabi. If you happen to know who used it on a syllabus, I’d love to thank them. I don’t want any royalties; I’d just like to know what they found redeeming about it, or even if they thought it needed some work.

The second most popular post was “Seer” in the Old Testament. This has been a perennial favorite, having been the number one article for at least 6 years through 2018, again, most likely because it appeared on someone’s college syllabus. Obviously, it’s not a Greek word study, but a Hebrew word study, and it was one I had sent out in an e-mail thread long before blogs were a thing. I never expected much from it on the blog, primarily because I had been looking for something different to post and pulled that one out of the archives. I’m both surprised and pleased that it continues to generate great interest.

My third most popular post (just 23 views behind #2) was 2020’s top post: “Take Heart!” That had slowly been growing in popularity, but it really caught hold in 2020, most likely due to the pandemic. I got one comment from a reader who said they had shared it with several health care workers at the time. They of all people had and continue to have a need for encouragement and endurance in the face of COVID and (if I may) the current lack of gratitude and sympathy from those at the highest levels of government for those hardworking heroes.

Number 4 is one that has steadily grown in popularity, but really began to take off in 2019, having three times the views in 2017. “Falling Away” tackles the difficult section of Hebrews 6 that at first glance seems to address the concept of losing your salvation. But a closer look at the text, grammar, and sentence structure (yes, there’s a classic sentence diagram attached; also an epilog post) shows the passage has quite a different meaning that isn’t so harsh theologically. Monthly views jumped dramatically in beginning in mid 2020, which makes me think the article also wound up on someone’s syllabus. I recently had a lively exchange with one reader who was asking for some clarification on a couple points, which also helped me sharpen my thinking and conclusions on the passage.

The fifth one was a total shocker to me. “Speaking in Tongues” averaged 49 views per year in the first 10 years it was online. In 2021, the post had 691 views, averaging over 57 views per month! Again, I’m not sure what sparked the sudden interest, but as with the other posts, the only thing I can think of is someone put it on their syllabus or perhaps cited it in a widely read paper.

Looking Forward

For 2022, I anticipate preaching about once every month, so I’ll continue to post sermon texts to the blog. I’d also like to break into the podcast sphere and start posting some videos or audios that can generate some ad revenue for me. I’m not really set up for that yet, and I’ll have to seek out some technical help most likely, but I’m pretty sure that won’t be a difficult learning curve.

I also have a blog called “Sustainable America,” which is my outlet for the intersection of politics, ethics, and faith in my life. That has never really taken off, although it has seen some modest growth. I’ve had just over 100 views the last two years, and 2020’s views (106) were a little more than double 2019’s views. Although it hasn’t really had many views, I do find it personally therapeutic as an outlet for what I’m thinking and feeling on such subjects. The founding fathers didn’t put “separation of Church and State” in the Constitution because they understood instinctively people’s politics derive from their religious and moral convictions (or lack thereof). The purpose of Sustainable America, however, is to analyze cultural and political issues and apply Scripture to them, while SMGB is all about analyzing the biblical text and discerning how it should affect and inform our lives all around, not just in the political or cultural spheres.

My most-viewed post on Sustainable America was “Why I’d Rather Not Work from Home Full Time.” After having spent much of my early career either working from home or working in a ministry setting where I was the only staff member, I found it quite enjoyable to transition to working in an office setting with lots of interesting people around. When the pandemic hit, all of that was defenestrated. I do miss working around other people. Somewhere along the way, I lost my introversion.

As such, one final goal for me for 2022 is to get back into the adjunct professor space, or full-time college instruction nearby, if someone wants to take a chance on my M.Div. degree with OT & NT concentrations. I found it ironic that, in 2020, the third-party supplier through whom I had been teaching Biblical Studies courses at St. Louis Christian College was bought out, and the acquiring company dropped the online adjunct service at a time when everything was moving online. Teaching Biblical Studies is really my first love, but it’s been tough landing positions without a Ph.D.

I wish you, my readers and blog followers, a happy and prosperous new year. Thank you for continuing to read, interact with, and spread the word about Sunday Morning Greek Blog!

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My opinions are my own.

November 9, 2021

I Will Build My Church (Matthew 16:13-20)

Note: Preached at Mt. View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, NE, on 11/7/21; also planned for Wheeler Grove Church, Carson, IA, 11/14/21. The passage came up in the lectionary for 8/27/23, so I preached it again, swapping out Mt. Rushmore & the Golden Gate Bridge for the St. Louis Arch & the Eiffel Tower. I forgot to turn the voice recorder on at the beginning, but did turn it on after the two monument stories and captured the meat of the message.

I’ve got a little trivia challenge for you this morning. I’m going to give you the names of a couple people who built or created famous things in the last 100 years that are still with us today, but whose names have been long forgotten by most.

The first may be familiar to some: Gutzon Borglum was born in Idaho and lived in Fremont, Nebraska, when he was 7 years old. He eventually became a famous artist, achieving early fame for painting a portrait of General John C. Fremont for the general’s wife. He later sculpted a colossal head of Abraham Lincoln, which is still on display today in the Capitol Rotunda. This inspired his most famous work, however, which perhaps now you’ve guessed: the four super colossal heads of American presidents carved into Mount Rushmore.

Joseph Baermann Strauss answered the call to build an impressive structure that, interestingly enough, also had a connection to General Fremont. Strauss’s task was to connect the two shores on either side of a strait in a region General Fremont had named “Chrysopylae.” Politicians of the day thought the structure would have a price tag of nearly $100,000,000 in his day, but Strauss was able to build it for the modest price of about $30,000,000. Oh for politicians who could create such infrastructure savings in our day! Chrysopylae is Greek for “Golden Gate,” and thus was origin of the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco.

So we come to our passage today where someone whose name we haven’t forgotten, and I hope we haven’t forgotten “who” he is, wants to build something greater and more enduring than either of these creations.

Read Matthew 16:13–20

This passage is at the heart of Matthew’s gospel and reveals that “Aha!” moment for the disciples when they finally realize who Jesus is and what his mission is on Earth. To put it in context, it comes after the stories where Jesus feeds both the 5,000 and 4,000, with his walking on water in between. Immediately after this Caesarean confession, we have the story of the Transfiguration, where he proves beyond a shadow of doubt who Peter says he is.

In light of the events leading up to the passage, Jesus gives his disciples a little quiz, as it were. “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” They of course give a variety of wild guesses, I mean, answers from the broad extent of Jewish history: Elijah? Jeremiah or one of the prophets? John the Baptist? For whatever reason, the disciples can’t seem to bring themselves to admit what they’ve begun suspecting all along. Notice, though, how Jesus makes a subtle shift in his second quiz question. He doesn’t ask the disciples who they say the Son of Man is: He asks them, “Who do you say I am?”

Simon Peter answers, perhaps hoping he won’t stick his foot in his mouth as he’s prone to do. Now there were actually two Simons among the disciples: Simon the Zealot and Simon Peter. Matthew doesn’t call him “Simon” much in his gospel, only a couple times early on to show there were two Simons among the disciples and one more time in chapter 17. Here in vs. 16, this is the first and only time Matthew uses both names side by side in introducing Jesus’s statement where he officially renames Simon to Peter.

Peter does NOT stick his foot in his mouth on this occasion (but does in the very next section!), and Jesus makes a word play out of his name. Peter’s name in Greek (Πέτρος, petros), if it were just a regular noun, would mean something akin to “boulder,” while the word for “rock” (πέτρα, petra) upon which Jesus says he’ll build his church most likely refers to the concept of “bedrock,” the hard granite that you see, for example, at the bottom of the Grand Canyon that the Colorado River has cut through.

At this point in the passage, we have at least two major questions to answer: What exactly is the “rock” that Jesus refers to here, and what does it mean that Jesus will “build” (οἰκοδομεω, oikodomeō) his “church” (ἐκκλησία, ekklēsia)?

What (or Who) Is the “Rock”?

Believers through the ages who may or may not have engaged in theological studies have debated just what the “rock” symbolizes here. Since they’re in Caesarea Philippi at this point, it’s generally agreed that it’s not referring to any kind of physical location nearby, although there was a cave in that region that had been dubbed “the Gate of Hades” by some.

Some have seen here a direct connection to Peter, citing Peter’s sermon in Acts 2, where we see the first mass conversion of people from all over to being Jesus followers. The Catholics take this a step farther and list Peter as the first Pope. And Jesus even tells Simon Peter that he’ll give him the keys to the kingdom. But since Jesus says, “I will build my church,” it seems unlikely that he would impart that responsibility to one man.

Ephesians 2:20 broadens this concept a bit and says that the church is built “on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.” This has merit on a couple levels for understanding what “rock” means. First, assigning responsibility for the church to a group of contemporary apostles creates a system of accountability so that no one person is initially responsible for establishing “the church.” Second, this passage is the only time in the gospels where we see the word “church” used, and in the context of the story, the NT church hadn’t even started yet! However, in the Greek version of the OT, the word translated “church” here was often used of the “congregation” of Israel. That would make the connection to the prophets. Third, since Paul describes Christ as the “chief cornerstone,” Christ is the one that sets the standard by which the rest of the “church” is measured and built.

Still others suggest that this “rock” is the truth of Peter’s confession, or more broadly, the teachings of Jesus which feature prominently in Matthew’s gospel. In the church I attend, we ask a new convert if they believe that “Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” This would also fit with Romans 10:9-10: “If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.”

Now just as God never wanted Israel to have an earthly king, so also do I think that Jesus never wanted one man (other than himself) to have authority over all believers. I think a combination of the last two views I mentioned is probably the best understanding of “rock” here: the church would have a solid foundation, and those who would become “bricks” in its construction have means of doing so by acknowledging the cornerstone.

What Does Jesus Mean by “Build”?

This brings us to the second question: what does Jesus mean when he says, “I will build my church.” Just as this larger passage is the crux of Matthew’s gospel, so is this statement a crux between the ministry of Jesus on earth and the ministry of his church after his death. Now I’ve already mentioned that this passage is the only place in the gospels where the word church is used. Of course, the gospels were written after the church was formed, so it’s not too surprising to find it here. After all, as I said earlier, it may be reasonable to assume Jesus was referring to the congregation of Israel.

But what you may not know is that the word “build” or “building” in the gospels always refers to a physical building. So it’s worth asking, at least for the moment, if perhaps Jesus himself was referring to some kind of building, like a temple or a synagogue, when he made this statement. As you might guess, though, it’s pretty clear that Jesus isn’t referring to a building at all, but to his followers, a “congregation,” if you will.

1 Corinthians 1:2

Overlapping structure of the verse

A         To the “called” (“church”) ekklēsia
      B         of God
            C         sanctified (i.e., “made holy”)
      B′     in Christ Jesus
A′     “called”
            C′     holy (=sanctified)
A″     those who “call upon”
      B″     the name of our Lord Jesus Christ

Above, you’ll see a small chart on 1 Corinthians 1:2. I believe Paul here is drawing on the root meaning of ekklēsia, which is the word we translate “church” in the NT. It literally means “those called out from.” Paul uses a rhetorical device of his day to define who the church is, a sort of reverse parallel structure that suggests he put some thought into this. You can see it in the chart with the parallel elements identified by the capital letters: “To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours.” The church is made up of those who are called to be holy, and who call upon the name of Jesus.

Now I do want to offer a bit of a caveat here: just because “church” refers to people doesn’t mean the concept of a church building should be tossed out the window. Even in Paul’s day, the believers met in their respective homes or early on, even in the synagogues, so those who gathered had a place they could identify as their spiritual home and could use as a central place to carry out ministry to their respective communities. I’ve heard a lot of people say they don’t need to belong to a church to be a Christian, but it sure makes it easier to live the Christian life if you have a place you can call home and where you know that you’ll be welcome good times or bad.

This idea of “church” being people or a congregation is borne out when we look at the words “build” and “building” in Paul’s letters. With just a few exceptions in some OT references, these words NEVER refer to a physical building, but to the people who make up the “church” or to the concepts that support the truth of the Christian message. And several times, the words are used with the word for “church.” Let’s look at some of these passages. In these contexts, often these words are translated as “edify,” “edification,” “strengthen,” or some other synonym.

Let’s look first at how this concept of “building” or “edifying” relates to the church.

In Acts 9:31, shortly after Paul’s Damascus Road conversion, Luke mentions that “the church…enjoyed a time of peace and was strengthened.”

In Paul’s farewell address to the Ephesian believers in Acts 20:32, he concludes, “Now I commit you to God and to the word of his grace, which can build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.”

In 1 Corinthians 3:9, Paul tells the Corinthian believers: “For we are coworkers in God’s service; you are God’s field, God’s building.

Later in chapter 14, Paul exhorts the Corinthians on the matter of tongues and prophecy in their gatherings, capturing the concept of “edification” several times, including vs. 26: “When you come together….everything must be done so that the church may be built up.

I’ve already mentioned Ephesians 2, but later in chapter 4, Paul says this: “From him [Jesus] the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love as each part does its work.”

Acts 2:42 shows us how the church functioned in the early days after Peter’s Pentecost sermon. “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, to the fellowship of the breaking of the bread, and to the prayers.” These “prayers” were probably the daily prayers in the Temple. That was probably the only place big enough to accommodate 3,000 new converts! Acts 2 goes on to say how they met together in homes and had everything in common, taking turns sharing meals in their homes.

In other verses, we see the “how” of edification. In Romans 15:20, Paul speaks of his desire to preach where no one else has so he’s not building on someone else’s foundation. In 1 Corinthians 8:1, he says “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.” Twice in 2 Corinthians, Paul mentions his authority to “build up” believers through preaching and exhortation that may have been difficult for that church to accept, preaching that stepped on their toes, if you will. In Galatians 2:18, Paul is “building” an argument for justification by faith as opposed to the Law. And in Ephesians 4:29, Paul says our speech should be wholesome, “Helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.”

We see the many ways that we can be the church and that Christ builds his church through us, not just amongst ourselves, but out in the mission field of our immediate circle of influence. To borrow a phrase from my wife’s profession, these are the “activities of daily living” for the Christian: sharing the good news with those who’ve never heard it; showing love, care, and compassion; having the difficult conversations with those who need strong encouragement; defending the truth of God’s word; and taming our tongues.

Now there’s one more concept in this passage we need to address. After Jesus says he will build his church, he adds the promise that “the Gates of Hades will not overcome it.” It’s important that we understand just what this means. When Jesus says “will not overcome it,” he’s not talking about hell advancing on the church, trying to destroy it. He’s really talking about the church advancing on the gates of Hades, which do not have the strength to withstand the advance of God’s people, God’s army. Ephesians says God has given “incomparably great power for us who believe,” so we should never think that Satan will win. We look forward to the kingdom of heaven with its pearl gates that open to streets of gold (see what I did there?).

Joseph Strauss wrote a couple poems about the Golden Gate Bridge upon its completion. One stanza from The Mighty Task Is Done struck me as being particularly relevant for the Church because it can allude to the battles we face each day, and I’ll close with this:

An Honored cause and nobly fought

And that which they so bravely wrought,

Now glorifies their deed,

No selfish urge shall stain its life,

Nor envy, greed, intrigue, nor strife,

Nor false, ignoble creed.

Peace to all of you, and thank you for allowing me to share with you again.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My opinions are my own.

July 2, 2021

μαλακός (malakos) “soft”; “weak”; “effeminate”: A Look at Classical and Biblical Greek Usage

[If you like this post, you may also like “Rachel Weeping”: The Objectification of Gender and Children.]

One of the main goals of a word study in an ancient language is to understand how the writer used the word in the original context and, where possible, to discern contextual clues that provide the historical and cultural background of the recorded events, descriptions, and deliberations. We cannot change what the historico-cultural background of the time was, nor should we presume to impose modern concepts and ideas on an ancient text or its author, although further study may reveal a more thorough understanding of the historico-cultural background and cause us to look anew at certain texts.

With this in mind, I set out to understand more fully the implications and ideations surrounding the use of μαλακός (malakos) in the ancient Greek texts, and more specifically how that understanding would have carried over into biblical texts of the day in its few uses in Matthew 11:8 (par. Luke 7:25) and 1 Corinthians 6:9–10. The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT) does not have a separate entry for μαλακός, so the average student of the Bible whose Greek knowledge is limited to Koine is left wanting if they want more information about the broader historico-cultural use of the word.

My purpose here is not so much to comment on the 21st century state of affairs surrounding the concepts behind the word, although I freely admit that is the reason why I undertook this study in the first place. Rather, in the spirit of TDNT, I want to give a more dispassionate, unbiased look at the use of the word in the historical context so the student of the Bible has a fuller understanding of the word and can therewith draw their own conclusions. As with all of my writings on biblical texts, my goal is that we have a fuller understanding of the Word of God and God’s love for us so we can better and more fully love our neighbor as God loves us.

My methodology for this study is simple: I looked at standard Greek annotated Lexicons such as Liddell & Scott (LS) and the online Perseus resource (the Greek texts and any corresponding English translations of the text where available) in addition to standard biblical reference works (UBS 3rd & 4th editions) that indexed the use of the word to its various contexts, then examined the surrounding context to understand the writer’s tone and intention surrounding the use of the word. Where the word was used in contrast, comparison, or in parallel (synthetic or antithetic) with other words or ideas, I examined those as well to better understand the contrast or comparison.

I want to keep this brief so the busy pastor or researcher can get a broad overview of the word’s use in the ancient world. As such, I have chosen representative examples from the entries in LS and other resources to illustrate usage rather than an exhaustive treatment of lexical entries. Most of these resources are publicly available online or in your local college library, so nothing should stand in the way of those who want to dig even deeper. I have organized the article on the basis of the word’s semantic domains rather than by source so the reader can more readily access the section relevant to their interests.

Soft (in the sense of physical touch)

One of the more benign meanings of the word is “soft,” especially when referring to animals or nature. Xenophon (Hiero the Despot 1.5) speaks generally about experiencing the extremes of sensation: cold vs. hot; light vs. heavy; pleasure vs. pain. In the list, he contrasts “soft” with “hard” (σκληρὰ sklēra). In his writing about Horsemanship (1.9a), he makes the same word contrast regarding the condition of a horse’s jaw. Xenophon also uses the word to describe the soft coats of the hunting hounds and the hare, the need for a soft collar for the hunting hound to prevent chafing (Hunting 4.6, 5.10, 6.1), and the softer “double back” on dappled horses (Horsemanship 1.11c).

Xenophon also uses μαλακός to describe the turf on which a horse should be trained (Horsemanship 8.6) and soft turf that makes it easier to track the quarry (Hunting 10.5). Homer (Iliad 9:615–619) uses the word to describe a soft couch on which to lie and in the Odyssey to describe soft fleece (3:38). Herodotus (Histories 9.122.3) also uses the term twice in a zeugma with respect to land somewhat metaphorically in his phrase “Soft lands breed soft men”; the second use of the word in that zeugma is covered in the next domain of meaning below.

The word is used three times in the NT in parallel passages (Mt 11:8 [2x]; Lk 7:25) to describe the “fine clothes” worn by those in palaces. There is one use of the word in this domain in Proverbs 26:22, although used metaphorically: “The words of a whisperer are like delicious morsels, they go down to the inner parts of the body.” This seems akin to Xenophon’s usage (although perhaps a bit more abstract) in Hiero the Despot 1.23: “Don’t you look on these condiments, then, as mere fads of a jaded and pampered appetite?” Note that the phrase in the Greek here for “jaded and pampered” is μαλακῆς καὶ ἀσθενούσης, the latter word often translated “sick” or “weak.” This is an important pairing for two reasons. In Xenophon’s Horsemanship 1.3, the superlative of the adjective is contrasted with ἰσχυροτάτῳ (“strongest”) in describing two parts of the horse’s foot (hoof and flesh). Second, the substantive cognate of μαλακός, μαλακία, also means “sickness,” “weakness,” or “pain,” especially in several OT passages (e.g., Ex 23:25; Dt 7:15, 28:61; 2 Chr 16:12; Is 53:3) and three times in Matthew’s gospel (4:23; 9:35; 10:1), all of which have some overlap with the next domain discussed.

Soft (as a character attribute or abstraction), often translated “weak”

The most extreme example of “soft” as a character attribute in my mind is Homer’s description of defeated (and deceased) Hektor in Iliad 22.373 as the victors continue to defile his body with spear jabs: “It is easier to handle [lit. “softer to touch”] Hektor now than when he was flinging fire on to our ships.” In Laws 666b-c, Plato describes the “convivial gatherings [that] invoke Dionysus” where the men over 40 may drink wine without moderation such that “through forgetfulness of care, the temper of our souls may lose its hardness [σκληρὰ sklēra] and become softer and more ductile” (my literal translation). R.G. Bury’s English translation (much less literal and perhaps more poetic than my own) of the same passage describes the wine “as a medicine potent against the crabbedness of old age, that thereby we men may renew our youth.”

Archidamus “had gained credit for weakness” (or as Jowett’s translation has it, “was also thought not to have been energetic enough”) when attacking the Athenians at Oenoe, seemingly procrastinating the attack and perhaps thinking he could spare any damage to the surrounding land that full-on aggression might bring (Thucydides, Histories [The Peloponnesian War] 2.18).

In Herodotus Histories 3.51.2, Periander desires “to show no weakness,” and later in the same book (3.105.2) Herodotus says “the mares never tire, for they remember the young that have left.” (It is interesting to note that the latter reference could be an unintended word or semantic play, as the word for “mares” [θῆλυς] could also be translated “weak” in some contexts.) In 6.11.2, Herodotus recounts that Dionysius addressed his slave army, contrasting the potential for hardship in a battle that could win them their freedom or a “weak and disorderly” response which would lead to continued slavery and perhaps even humiliating death. Recall also the zeugma mentioned above found in 9.122.3: “Soft lands breed soft men.”

One final reference to Herodotus Histories (7.153.4) will tie us into the other NT usage of the word. Herodotus describes a man named Telines, who “is reported by the dwellers in Sicily to have had a soft and effeminate [θηλυδρίης τε καὶ μαλακώτερος] disposition.” This is Godley’s translation. The words are used in parallel with a double conjunction, so it’s not clear at first glance if the Greek word order is switched in the English translation. Regardless, the words are used in parallel, so (as shown in the previous paragraph), it makes little difference in the translation, and Telines’s character is certainly not portrayed in a positive light by Herodotus. [NOTE: See excursus below on Telines’ story in Herodotus.] The use of μαλακός in this domain is primarily a negative trait when ascribed to a human person. It is important to keep this in mind as we look at NT usage of the word (and its parallel) when applied to people in lists of, to put it softly, unflattering persons.

I believe it is, in part at least, this use here in classical Greek that informs Paul’s use of the word in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 (NIV), and the context in Paul’s letters bear this out: “Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men [οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται] nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” The King James Version (KJV) is a little more literal with the translation of the target phrase: “nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.” Lowe & Nida, in their Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domains, distinguish the two words by saying the former is “the passive male partner in homosexual intercourse,” and the latter is “the male partner in homosexual intercourse” or in this context, the “active” partner. (Could Herodotus have implied a similar distinction with his dual description of Telines?)

The latter word in the Corinthian text (ἀρσενοκοίτης) is a masculine compound meaning “lying with men” in Liddell & Scott’s abridged lexicon. This word is also used in 1 Timothy 1:10 in a similar list: “for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine.”

Conclusion

Short of an Orwellian feat of doublethink, then, it is nearly impossible to give any positive twist on the use of the words for persons practicing homosexuality in the NT. Some try to argue μαλακός means “morally soft” apart from any sexual connotations in the 1 Corinthians passage, but the context in Paul’s letters does not really allow for a generic description like that. I’m not trying to be cruel or bigoted here; I’m just stating the obvious facts as revealed in the historical usage of the words. However, I would remind my Christian siblings that Jesus’s attitude toward those on whom Jewish society generally looked down on (e.g., tax collectors) was not one of hatred, judgment, or spite, but of love and acceptance with a view toward repentance. My encouragement to my readers is to have the same attitude of Jesus toward those practicing homosexuality.

My opinions are my own.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

Excursus on Herodotus Histories 153: the Story of Telines

Added February 17, 2026.

Telines descended from a family from the Isle of Telos (thus the name?) and apparently worshipped the goddesses of the underworld, Demeter and Persphone (aka Kore). Telines had “won” the priesthood of these goddesses for himself and his descendants by rescuing some exiles from Mactorium and returned them to Gela “with no force of men but only the holy instruments of the goddesses worship to aid him.”* Herodotus does not relate how this happened; one might speculate he convinced the Mactorians to worship the goddesses, or perhaps he used the artifacts to indicate some terrible fate awaiting the Mactorians if they continued to hold the exiles. Regardless, the full context of Herodotus’s assessment of Telines not only confirms the meanings of the Greek words attributed to him that I cite (they are the translator’s words, actually) but also may lend some insight into the use of the words in 1 Corinthians 6:910.

“Now it makes me marvel that Telines should have achieved such a feat, for I have always supposed that such feats cannot be performed by any man but only by such as have a stout heart and manly strength. Telines, however, is reported by the dwellers in Sicily to have had a soft and effeminate disposition.”*

The contrast between Herodotus’s expectation of Telines’s character and the Sicilian report of such further emphasizes the negative attribution of the two words. But was the Sicilian “report” an accurate reflection of Telines’s character, or had they been perpetuating a false narrative about Telines because they just didn’t like him and wanted to ostracize him? Again, that’s all we have of the history in the four “verses” of the story. The connection with 1 Corinthians 6:910 might be obvious to the reader at this point. Herodotus seems to suggest that Telines has “redeemed” himself from the Sicilian reputation (whether he deserved it or not) by performing an act of religious heroism in rescuing the exiles. Paul says the μαλακοὶ and ἀρσενοκοῖται have also been redeemed by converting to Christianity and becoming Christ-followers. In the biblical context, those who were redeemed were also cleansed of their sin and recipients of new life and a new lifestyle.

This is consistent, then, with the transition that Paul makes from the last half of Romans 1, where he describes the sexual debauchery of the Gentiles, but then begins chapter 2 suggesting that even those Gentiles can be redeemed, because God’s kindness could lead them to repentance.

I was touched by the full story once I understood it, and I do have to give some credit to Copilot AI for helping me understand that I didn’t have to look too far to get the complete extant story. I hope this encourages you as well. I read some of the context before and after this story in Herodotus, and I found myself drawn into it, as he had some other moral lessons as well that I may write about at some point.

*Herodotus. 1920. Herodotus, with an English Translation by A. D. Godley. Edited by A. D. Godley. Medford, MA: Harvard University Press.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.