Untitled Sermon (4)

Fear not that your life shall come to an end, but rather fear that it shall never have a beginning.

John Henry Newman

Therefore do not fear but uncover

Mt 10:24–26 24 “A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. 25 It is enough for a disciple that he be like his teacher, and a servant like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more will they call those of his household! 26 Therefore do not fear them. For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.

24–25 Neatly balanced parallel clauses spell out the relative status of disciple and teacher and of slave and master. It is true that Jesus has been frequently addressed in this gospel as kyrie, “Lord,” But for Jesus during his ministry to speak of his own disciples as his douloi, “slaves,” is an extension of the metaphor which is unique in this gospel, though the apostolic writers were of course happy to describe themselves as douloi of the risen Christ (Rom 1:1; Gal 1:10; Phil 1:1, etc; Jas 1:1; 2 Pet 1:1; Jude 1:1). Jesus has previously used the language of slavery to describe discipleship in Matt 6:24, but there they are slaves of God. He will also speak of being slaves of one another in 20:27. This speaks strongly of Matthew’s sense of the unique authority of Jesus in relation to those who have been called to follow him.[1]

What you “hear” can overcome fear so profess

Mt 10:26–27 26 Therefore do not fear them. For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known. 27 “Whatever I tell you in the dark, speak in the light; and what you hear in the ear, preach on the housetops.

26–27 “Don’t be afraid” prepares for the sayings about whom the disciples should fear in vv. 28–31, and the remainder of vv. 26–27 may seem something of an intrusion within that sequence. But v. 27 is about the disciples’ duty to proclaim their message openly, and that proclamation would be the first casualty of a fear inspired by their opponents. The disciples’ duty is not merely the negative one of avoiding fear, but the positive one of bold proclamation in the face of opposition.[2]

Fear HIM but HE cares, therefore confess

Mt 10:28–33 28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin? And not one of them falls to the ground apart from your Father’s will. 30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 Do not fear therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.

32 “Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. 33 But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven.

The possibility of martyrdom in the cause of Jesus, already raised in v. 21, is now squarely faced. The body/soul contrast , when used in relation to execution, presupposes that there is a true life which goes beyond mere physical existence, so that the real “self” is untouched by the death of the body alone. Under that judgment it is not only the body but the true life of the person which is liable to destruction in hell. see on 5:22 for geënna, “hell,” in Jewish thought. In this passage it is spoken of as a place of destruction, not of continuing punishment, a sense which fits the origin of the term in the rubbish dumps of the Hinnom valley, where Jerusalem’s garbage was destroyed by incineration. ;18[3]

29 Fear of God is balanced by trust in God as the disciple’s heavenly Father; the God who can destroy in hell is also the God who cares for the smallest bird.Within his fatherly care, there is nothing to fear from human hostility. The point is made, as in 6:26, by another comment on God’s care for his animal creation, this time concerning not their daily provision but, as the context of potential martyrdom here requires, the time of their death. That too falls within the Creator’s care. The pregnant phrase “without your Father”has been variously translated as “without your Father’s knowledge” or “consent” or “will” or “care,” The implication is apparently that nothing happens to the children of a loving Father which falls outside his providential care; it neither takes him by surprise nor frustrates his purpose. 21[4]

Find the right love, by compare nothing is fairer

Mt 10:34–39 34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’ 37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

37 The disciple’s prior loyalty is now explicitly spelled out.10Matthew does not go so far as Luke, who uses the startling Semitic idiom (cf. Gen 29:30–33; Deut 21:15–17; Mal 1:2–3) of “hating” the members of one’s own family in comparison with love for Jesus (Luke 14:26). To “love more” is a less easily misunderstood idiom to express the same demand for a prior loyalty, but its practical effects are no less rigorous. The (perhaps well-meant, but still essentially selfish) attempts of either parents or children to dissuade the disciple from “seeking first God’s kingship” (6:33) must be resolutely resisted, just as in 12:46–50 Jesus will distance himself from his natural family who, according to the most probable understanding of Mark 3:21, wanted to take control of him because they had concluded that he was out of his mind.

38 Verses 21 and 28 have raised the prospect of martyrdom resulting from loyalty to Jesus, and that prospect is now given more concrete form in the image of carrying the cross after Jesus. Christian readers have become so used to the cross as a word and a symbol (and indeed a cause for “boasting,” Gal 6:14) that it is hard now to recapture the shudder that the word must have brought to a hearer in Galilee at the time. Crucifixion was a punishment favored by the Romans but regarded with horror by most Jews,11 and was by now familiar in Roman Palestine as a form of execution for slaves and political rebels. It was thus not only the most cruel form of execution then in use,12but it also carried the stigma of social disgrace when applied to a free person. To have a member of the family crucified was the ultimate shame. Crucifixion was an inescapably public fate, and drew universal scorn and mockery, as we shall see in 27:27–44. And that public disgrace, as well as physical suffering, began not when the condemned man was fixed to the cross, but with the equally public procession through the streets in which the victim had to carry the heavy cross-piece, among the jeers and insults of the crowd.13 [5]

[1] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007), 400–401. [2] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007), 402. 18 see p. 399, n. 5 for the meaning of the verb in this context. [3] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007), 403. 21 Schweizer, 249, comments: “This section derives its force from the fact that it does not try to sketch an illusory picture of a kindly God. Sparrows fall to earth and disciples of Jesus are slain, and Jesus never says that it hardly matters. What these sayings assert is that God is indeed God, that he is above success and failure, help and isolation, weal and woe, holding them in hands that Jesus says are the hands of the Father.” [4] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007), 403–404. 10 For the rabbinic principle that the teacher takes priority over the father see m.B. Meṣiʿa2:11. In 4Q175.14–17, based on Deut 33:9, Levi is held up as an example of piety because he abandoned his father, mother, brothers and sons for the sake of his priestly calling. 11 There are historical instances of Jews adopting this Roman practice (see M. Hengel, Crucifixion84–85), though the extent of this as a form of execution is sometimes exaggerated by failing to distinguish it from the traditional Jewish practice of exposing an already executed body on a pole (Deut 21:22–23). In 11Q19 (the Temple Scroll) 64:7–12, however, it seems clear that even in that conservative Jewish community “hanging on the wood” is the cause of death, not its sequel. See also the wider study of crucifixion in the Jewish world by J. Zias & J. H. Charlesworth, in J. H. Charlesworth (ed.), Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 273–289 (directed particularly toward denying that the Teacher of Righteousness was crucified). 12 Crucifixion was “the most cruel and revolting punishment” (Cicero, In Verrem5.64.165), “the most pitiable of deaths” (Josephus, War 7.203). For full details of the use and nature of crucifixion in the Roman world see M. Hengel, Crucifixion;more briefly J. Schneider, TDNT7.572–574; R. E. Brown, Death945–947. 13 The shame involved in crucifixion is well brought out by J. H. Neyrey, Honor 139–140. [5] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007), 409–411.

The remarkable thing about fearing God is that when you fear God, you fear nothing else, whereas if you do not fear God, you fear everything else.

Oswald Chambers