The Greatest Commandment

In Matthew 19:16-21 there is an exchange which is mirrored in Mark 12:28-31 and Luke 10:25-28. The exchange, while not a parable, is worthy of inclusion solely for reasons of definition. We want to know, we want to understand, we want a clearer picture of the truth in the words of our Lord. Now, in all three instances, the exchange of words deals exclusively with the first, or greatest commandment, and also the second, which Jesus says is like the first.

As one stumbles into this exchange, one immediately begins to associate the word 'commandment', and the Jews, with the big ten delivered by Moses. I was surprised to find, in a quick check, that the two great commandments actually come from different sources, and represent a collective amalgamation of general opinion. It stands that these two concepts summarize the Yin and Yang of the Ten Commandments and represent two interconnected spirits of the law working hand in hand.

The first concept is found in Deuteronomy 6:4-5, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.” This concept  epitomizes the first actual commandment: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me,” as well as all subsequent commandments that deal with the individual's relationship with God.

The second concept is found in Leviticus 19:18, “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the Lord.” This concept epitomizes all the commandments that deal with an individual's relationship to other people. These two concepts, combined, are viewed as the spirit of the law. What does Jesus say about these two core concepts? Matthew 22:40, “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

The great commandment is a 'two-part' commandment. 'Love your God/love your neighbor' is the whole of it. For mankind, it stands as the prime constant that binds us, that binds us. It is our moral compass upon which must be based all of our judgments and higher prejudices. We must give all to our god, but by the same token we cannot give any less to those around us than we would give to ourselves. For man, there can be no 'Holy War' against our neighbors, no 'Jihad'. There may only be a Holy compassion. There can be no 'business as usual', for that must dissolve to allow brotherly love to address the needs of the people.

Love is the definition here, more than love, a connected love. I would like to conclude with this from Wikipedia: Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, wrote,
This is the first and great commandment - It is so,
1. In its antiquity, being as old as the world, and engraven originally on our very nature.
2. In dignity; as directly and immediately proceeding from and referring to God.
3. In excellence; being the commandment of the new covenant, and the very spirit of the Divine adoption.
4. In justice; because it alone renders to God his due, prefers him before all things, and secures to him his proper rank in relation to them.
5. In sufficiency; being in itself capable of making men holy in this life, and happy in the other.
6. In fruitfulness; because it is the root of all commandments and the fulfilling of the law.
7. In virtue and efficacy; because by this alone God reigns in the heart of man, and man is united to God.
8. In extent; leaving nothing to the creature, which it does not refer to the Creator.
9. In necessity; being absolutely indispensable.
10. In duration; being ever to be continued on earth, and never to be discontinued in heaven.

Don't look at the eunuch

There is an exchange in Matthew 19:1-12, which is not a parable, yet deserves our attention. I say this because I am engaged in a quest of sorts. It is a quest for definition and meaning. The search is on for a better understanding. Now, the exchange concerns divorce, adultery, and the sexual abstinence of men. It runs like this: the Pharisees grill Jesus on the issue of divorce. They seek to trap him in legal nit-picking. He tells them, “What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.”

But, the Pharisees are unwilling to hear the truth, so they continue to argue the point. Why then, they ask, did Moses allow it? Jesus answered that it was because of the hardness of the hearts of men, but it was not so from the beginning. The only just cause they had for putting away a wife was the discovery of adultery. Note that Christ did not suggest she be stoned. In fact, what he told them was that the danger of adultery existed in their inclinations toward divorce.

Divorce posed two dilemmas. The first was that another man was caused to commit adultery for marrying the divorced adulteress. Such a past could remain covered as the woman sought the security of a stable life. Second was that if the woman was not guilty of adultery but was divorced anyway, and the man remarried, the man committed adultery because, in the eyes of God, he was still one with the wife he put away.

Enter the disciples. They figure that if a man runs such a high risk of falling out of God's favor, then he should just not marry. He should make God his choice and leave the women alone altogether. I don't doubt that they were amazed by the whole exchange. The truth seemed to make the institution of marriage a bit more dark and gloomy. So then we come to the point of this study.

Jesus talks about the eunuch. However, the eunuch is not the point I wish to bring up. Don't look at the eunuch. Someone like the apostle Paul will pick up on that. Rather I wish to draw attention to two statements the Christ makes in relation to the non-relation. Suffice it to say that there are reasons why a man might abstain from congress with a woman. We'll leave the issue of being a eunuch as the odd bit of trivia mostly unrelated to modern practice. Again I say, do not look at the eunuch.

These are the two statements of interest:
One, “All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.” (See verse 11)
Two, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (See verse 12)

For all the reasons why a man might not be with a woman, there are still plenty of reasons for a man to be one with his wife – as God intended. Now, society might place the having of children as the top reason, but I dare say that God would place love in the number one slot. Children, while important in their own right, are a natural extension of the institution of marriage. Love must be first.

So obviously, all men cannot receive the saying. But – those who can receive it, they are the ones to whom it is given. It is meant for them. They are open to that particular avenue. And – it is not like they are doomed to some sad life that saps their very will to persevere. They can receive it because they are prepared for it. They are strong enough for it. We see in this that the Almighty never intended for everyone to be exactly the same.

Some people are just different. That should be respected. There are many places in life that are different, and that require different sorts of people to fill them. Diversity is a personal choice of God. He doesn't want everyone to marry, or have children. He doesn't give everyone a tongue to pray with, or eyes to see why he is so worthy of our praise. He does not want everyone to be a Christian, or a Jew, or a Muslim, or a Hindu, etc. He doesn't want everyone to believe, and as unbelievable as that may sound for the believers, God has made a place for those who will not, or can not.

I can see the whole of us as a clock. We are the gears that click and turn. Some of us are small, some large. Some of us spin faster than some others of us. Some of us turn a different way – but the whole contraption works, and that is what God wants. There is a force, a tension, between the differences that keeps it all ticking.

If all of us were eunuchs, life would grind to a halt. So, don't look at the eunuch. If all of us were Muslims, life would grind to a halt. So, don't look at the Muslim. For that matter, don't look at the Christian or the Jew. Don't pay any special attention to the complaints you perceive in yourself, and don't exalt yourself unduly. You fill the spot that God gave you. You understand the message he has crafted for you. Don't try to manipulate the world around you, to remove or to change the things that trouble you.

Seek a personal relationship with your God, and while that remains unresolved, live the life you have, love the one you are with. Make yourself useful, and allow the light of virtue and truth that is in you to inspire others. Resist fear and terror; exalt love.

Spirit on Tap

We turn our attention now to Matthew 18:18. We look at a single statement that is found between two parables. It is a statement that is often overlooked, although it is found within a body of words often cited in religious services. To be fair, I have seen it addressed, but not thoroughly. In fact, it is touched upon so lightly that I wonder why they bring it up at all. I believe it to be an important statement, and I believe that important statements, that is to say, the understanding of important statements, should always begin with an attempt at definition.

Before I approach that definition, we should take note of the context in which the statement is found. First, it is found between two parables. The former parable addresses the lost sheep, the shepherd who rejoices at finding it, and the ninety-nine sheep that stayed put. The latter parable addresses the servant whose debt was forgiven, but who in turn would not forgive a fellow servant. Between these two, Christ spoke to his disciples about those the disciples would need to forgive. More precisely, he relays the order in which a personal trespass should be approached. It is in the body of this particular discourse that Matthew 18:18 comes up.

Here, what we want is a firm grasp on the concept of 'trespass'. We turn to Wikipedia. The concept has calcified into actionable law, where in a civil court one person may lay claims of wrongdoing against another. Trespass breaks down into three variants: assault, battery, and false imprisonment. Pretty basic stuff, really. To view the full article go to this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trespass_in_English_law.

There is also trespass of goods, and trespass of land. In most of the actionable cases, intent must be proved, although the law recognizes trespass due to negligence. So then, we are speaking of real, not imagined, slights. Peter referred to trespasses as sins in the question he posed Jesus in Matthew 18:21. However, I must reassert that the sins be real, and not imagined. For example, in the exercise of our freedom of speech, we daily run the risk of hurting someone's feeling, of offending their sensibilities, but for the most part these are not actionable under the law. Therefore, there is no real cause for distress, and no real offense that must either be addressed or forgiven.

This is the context in which we find Christ making this statement in Matthew 18:18 – “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” It is, to begin with, a concluding statement to the argument he just presented. That argument was an organized treatment of the forgiveness of trespass. Binding on earth is representative of the servant who threw his fellow servant into prison over a small debt. That act of imprisonment is equally reflected in heaven – that is to say, the personal connection of the spirit to the individual. Loosing on earth, or the act of forgiveness, is also equally reflected in heaven. By that I mean that the individual who forgave, finds within his personal connection to the spirit an equal degree of forgiving.

Christ went on to fit one final piece into the puzzle of this discourse, a finishing touch, as it were, to present the full image. He dropped this clue about spirit and connection into Matthew 18:19-20, “Again I say unto you” (or, I must reassert),  “That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

What final meaning, or definition, may we draw from this section of scripture? The theme of this discourse seems clear. It is the theme of spiritual connection. It is the theme of spiritual reflection. It is the action and reaction that is equal between the individual of this plane, and his spirit that resides in heaven.

Finally, when I think about the words, 'bind' and 'loose', I am reminded of a water tap. If you twist the handle one way, you close off the flow – that is, you restrict or bind the passage between the source and destination. If you twist it the other way, you open the connection. You loose the flow of water from its source. In this manner, the water will reach the one in need, and the refreshing may proceed.

Divine Connections

Children, angels, and sheep are the topics of this investigation. We look to the parable found in Matthew 18:10-14, and again, by way of reference, in Luke 15:3-7. The main parable, as seen in Matthew, is told to the disciples in the context of a broader discussion. In that setting, Christ relays important facts.

The disciples had gathered around to ask, “who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” First of all, then, know it is a 'kingdom' that is being discussed. Positions of power and authority were of interest. A big question for all Jews of that day was why the people of God occupied such a low rung on the Roman ladder.

To this end, Christ placed a small child in the midst of his companions in order that he might illustrate the nature of greatness in the eyes of God. When I say greatness, I mean excellence, beauty, desirability. The nature of a child is then expounded upon. That nature, for the purpose of this present study, requires a better understanding on our part.

Christ told his disciples that for them to even have a shot at getting into the kingdom, they all must convert to become like the child. He was telling adults to become child-like. Further, he described the highest rank in the kingdom as the nature of lowliness. In this case, a brutally honest and self-defacing nature is not what Christ is pointing to. Rather, he is directing our attention toward the nature of acceptance, learning, belief, and looking up in the sense of a willing faith coupled with excitement.

It is vital to note Christ's addendum to this, that if any of us receive someone of this nature in his stead, it is equal in every respect to receiving Christ. To learn of Christ, is Christ. To seek, and to communicate the Word, is the Word. This higher nature is the expression of love, joy, yearning, and sharing all rolled into one.

A short list of offenses follow, and it is important that we see all of them as offenses against the child-like nature rather than against the child. Christ shows an acceptance of the inevitability of offenses; even the Son of God knows and accepts that bad things happen, but he places the blame squarely on the offender. Yet, not even the offender is cut off completely, for if they rectify the matter, they may still enter into life – albeit maimed or blind.

Christ views the 'little ones' who believe in him in a very personal way. The nature of belief is a part of him – who is the greatest in heaven. The connection is not hypothetical or metaphorical, but real in every sense. Speaking of connections, Christ uses specific language as he leads into his parable. For starters, the angel of the little one is not 'an' angel, neither is 'the' used, but rather, 'their angel'. These angels are always in direct connection with God.

On the point of God, Christ calls him 'Father' not once but twice. In both instances, Christ makes sure to point out that the 'Father' is in heaven -- or the kingdom. This I believe is in reference to the Jewish standard belief that their father was Abraham. Christ lifts fatherhood above the merely nationalistic and racially motivated – way up to the kingdom of heaven. Heaven is a totally different kind of kingdom – a kingdom of spirit and nature. Further, Christ connects himself and his followers under the same 'Father'. In one instance he says, “my Father”, but in another instance he says, “your Father”.

Then Christ tells of the one hundred sheep. A variation of this parable is found in Luke. I include it here, and add it to the former, to give the Matthew version added depth. Here, we will view the 'sheep' and 'little ones' as identical. We will view Christ as the shepherd, and we will view the angels of the little ones as the 'neighbors' of God. Christ plainly stated the he came to save the lost. In the seeking of the lost little one, who believes in him, there is joy.

There is more joy for the one that was found than for the ninety-nine that stayed put. Envision God as the one who found his lost sheep. He throws it over his shoulder, and when he gets home, he calls the angels to rejoice with him. Christ is the shepherd of the sheep who came to save the lost, but he told his disciples

this: “is not the will of your Father which is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.” The little ones, greatest in God's kingdom, are connected to God (who is one with Christ) through the angels, and Christ is one in nature with the little ones.