Listening to Jesus

Posted on December 12, 2025 by jackpelham
Mary listening to Jesus, while Martha was worried and upset about many things. Luke 10:38-42

Listening to Jesus is a thing that’s supposed to be a way of life for the Christian, and not just a thing you do at or before conversion. But when I think about it, and when I look around, it doesn’t seem that this sort of long-term, attuned-and-submissive listening to Jesus goes on like it should among the churches.

Now let me say right away that there are surely a great many churchers who are listening to Jesus for what they want to hear ― which is mostly palliative language to soothe them. But when they do that ― when they look for things like “come to me…and I will give you rest“, they’re often intending not to listen to what may be even the very next words out of his mouth ― that is, the part about having to take up his “yoke” and his “burden”. They’re all for the rest, and are willing to shirk the work, the tutelage and the obedience. So in this case, sure, they’re listening to a micro-bit of what Jesus said, even while actively ignoring the rest of his will for them. And that’s just not the kind of listening I’m talking about in this brief post. Indeed, what parent among us would be pleased with that kind of listening from their kids? We know better.

I could write you a book about good listening, but you could do just as much good for yourself just to stop and ponder the matter for a few minutes:

  • How well do I listen to Jesus?
  • What would he like me to hear that I haven’t wanted to hear?
  • What if my heart were softer?
  • How have I been holding back?
  • Aren’t I in control of whether I listen well or not?
  • What would he do for me if I were to listen?
  • How would my relationship with him, and even my life be better?

A few minutes pondering this would be more fruitful than reading a book on the topic with one’s Sunday School class.

I’m convinced that listening ― real listening ― is the fundamental thing in a proper relationship with Jesus. And he has a way of “looking you in the eye” that will cut right through you and get to the depths of your heart faster than anything else I know.

The one who really knows how to listen, and yields himself to that practice, has some real spiritual superpowers, it seems to me. And I can’t think of any better skill set than that to have in this world!

Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

Four Types of Savior, and One with a Big S

Posted on December 11, 2025 by jackpelham

I’ll be brief, and save the book for later.

When I read the Bible, I see not just one type of savior, but four. So hang onto your hats while I spell it out briefly, because this may well offend some traditional sensibilities.

The Big-S Savior

Obviously, there is Jesus ― the Savior that practically no one professing Christ would fail to recognize. For the record, here are some quick passages that make this obvious:

Acts 4:11 This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

Acts 13:23 Of this man’s offspring God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus, as he promised.

2 Peter 1:11 For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Saving Others

As popular as the concept of the “Great Commission” is, this one really shouldn’t be all that hard to grasp, even if some are reluctant to admit it along the lines of the traditional idea that Jesus is the only “savior”. In God’s plan, Christians were a big part of saving other people.

Romans 11:14 in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.

1 Timothy 4:16 Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.

Acts 11:14 he [Peter] will declare to you a message by which you will be saved, you and all your household.’

John 5:34 Not that the testimony that I receive is from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved.

1 Corinthians 1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.

1 Corinthians 7:16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?

1 Corinthians 9:22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.

James 5:20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

Jude 1:22 And have mercy on those who doubt; 23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh.

Save Yourselves

This one’s really going to rub a lot of people the wrong way, but this is not a matter of opinion; it’s a matter of scripture. Here’s what the word of God says, and it’s hard to deny that people have some necessary role in their own salvation, even though Jesus is indeed the Big-S Savior, as shown above. So we have to decide whether we’re going to listen to these scriptures, or just handwave them away with the stubborn view that the scriptures about the Big-S Savior are the only ones we need to hear, and that we can righteously ignore these:

Acts 2:40 And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” 41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

1 Timothy 4:16 Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.

Philippians 2:12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,

1 Peter 1:8 Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory, 9 obtaining the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

Luke 7:50 And he said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”

Many will struggle to admit that in God’s plan, each plays a necessary role in his own salvation, even though Jesus remains the obvious Big-S Savior forever. We might like to simply the gospel message into having just one savior, but here it is in print, folks: In God’s way of thinking about things, believers do indeed “save” themselves in these God-designed ways!

False Saviors, Gods, Christs, Prophets, Counsels, Brothers, Teachers, and Idols

Finally, let’s consider this broader category, which is opposed to the one true Savior, Jesus. Where he is true, they are false. Even so, they promise to enlighten and lead and bless and such, and even to save.

Jeremiah 14:22 Are there any among the false gods of the nations that can bring rain? Or can the heavens give showers? Are you not he, O Lord our God? We set our hope on you, for you do all these things.

2 Kings 17:15 They despised his statutes and his covenant that he made with their fathers and the warnings that he gave them. They went after false idols and became false, and they followed the nations that were around them, concerning whom the Lord had commanded them that they should not do like them.

Judges 10:14 Go and cry out to the gods whom you have chosen; let them save you in the time of your distress.”

Matthew 24:24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.

2 Corinthians 11:13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ.

Isaiah 47:13 You are wearied with your many counsels; let them stand forth and save you, those who divide the heavens, who gaze at the stars, who at the new moons make known what shall come upon you.

Jeremiah 2:28 But where are your gods that you made for yourself? Let them arise, if they can save you, in your time of trouble; for as many as your cities are your gods, O Judah.

Matthew 7:15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves….20 … you will recognize them by their fruits.

Galatians 2:4 Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—

2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.

Matthew 23:15 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are. [Notice that they do not make converts of God, but of hell (Gehenna), so their work is false.]

Conclusion

The popular idea that saving is one-dimensional, and that Jesus is all there is to it, is simply too narrow to fit with what all the scriptures say on the topic. I think it’s about time we broaden our view and accept into our own descriptions of salvation everything the scriptures say about it, admitting that God, Jesus, the Gospel Message, those who speak it, and those who believe and practice it all play a crucial role in the salvation of souls, by the very design of none other than God himself!

Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

Yes, It’s a COMMAND! (1 Peter 5:6-7)

Posted on December 9, 2025 by jackpelham

1 Peter 5:6 Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, 7 casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you.

I’m not so interested in the “Humble yourselves…” part, because many get that. But this second half of the sentence starts with “casting all your anxieties on him” ― which, we can be sure from the Greek grammar here, is a continuation of the “Humble yourselves” part. In other words, whatever “humble yourselves” might mean to us, to God, it means something that includes the casting of all one’s anxieties on God!

So, what if we consider ourselves humble before God, but we’re not casting all our anxieties on him? After all, how many of us are even self-aware enough to know what all our anxieties are? I mean, this command would actually take some brain power applied to it to be sure we were pleasing him as he wants. Sure, most of us believers do cast some anxiety on him, however infrequently. But all of it???

That’s quite a tall order!

So, whatever we’re doing, if we’re not doing this, we’re not quite in the kind of relationship he wants us to be in with him! It reminds me of this verse:

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!

Of course, to some, this last verse might sound really scary and condemning. But if you know just how ready God is to forgive us when we repent of our shortcomings, you see that all that’s really required here is simply to acknowledge the sin, ask his forgiveness, and start casting it all on him from that moment forward!

It’s a life-changer!

Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

The Biggest Sin

Posted on December 9, 2025 by jackpelham

Most have never looked into the translation closely, but the verse that says “Love keeps no record of wrongs” has variant translations, and can actually be meaning something like this instead: “Love … does not impute evil” or “Love does not falsely charge others with wrongdoing.”

DARBY [Love] does not behave in an unseemly manner, does not seek what is its own, is not quickly provoked, does not impute evil,

YLT [Love] doth not act unseemly, doth not seek its own things, is not provoked, doth not impute evil,

The reason the traditional “keeps no record of wrongs” is problematic is that we know about the Book of Life, where records are kept of what all we have done while in the body, whether good OR bad. So if keeping a record of wrongs is a sin, then whoever is keeping the Book of Life is a sinner. So maybe this one’s worth rethinking!

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

So, the way I see it right now, this greatest sin, the perfect example of which was the execution of the perfect Jesus, even got mentioned in the “Love Chapter” as the antithesis of it! Love does not charge the innocent with wrongdoing!

Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

The Edge of Me

Posted on November 28, 2025 by jackpelham
Ai Generated Stock photos by Vecteezy

Funny how most don’t think it’s safe
To be out on the edge ―
Where you can see over
Into the abyss below.

But what’s where the growth happens ―
Where your edges expand
And the plateau of self grows bigger and better ―
As if it were rather the point of life
To apply Truth to self and watch it grow.

And I can attest:
The more it grows,
The less likely I am to fall over,
And the more friends I can support ―
However weak or strong they may be.

And they can stand in the middle
If they want ―
Whether at my place or theirs ―
But if they come over here,
They’re going to have to get used
To me ranging all over, and spending
More time at the edge of me
Than they may think is wise and safe.

But I don’t mind;
I’ve had to get used to the idea myself.

Posted in Character, Philosophy, Poetry, Religion | Leave a comment

Common Error Types in Interpreting the Revelation

Posted on October 20, 2025 by jackpelham

This is a quick article I’ve written to assist a friend who is researching eschatology (“end times” teachings). The goal is not so much to target specific conclusions about such things, but common methodological errors that I’ve observed many make over the years. You’ll find that much of my concern here is about the state of mind and the character of the reader.

I hope these considerations are helpful to you in your own puzzling over end-times matters.

  1. Bad Assumptions. One big class of mistake is this: To assume in advance that we know what the Revelation is about, rather than letting the book tell us itself. We can impose our own ideas onto the text, rather than really listening to it. Some of the items that follow are specific instances of this general class of error.
  2. Timing. It’s a mistake not to listen to the now-ancient text when it tells is that it was about “things that must soon take place” (Revelation 1:1, and several other such statements). Many assume instead that it was written nearly 2,000 years ago, mostly to tell about events that wouldn’t happen until our time or afterwards. They are not listening to what it says ― which is a terrible mistake to make when handling the Word of God. An excellent study exercise is this: Read the entire Revelation, highlighting every time statement made in it. I.e.: “soon”, “quickly”, etc. Judge for yourself whether the imminence of it seemed to be a pressing theme of the author.
  3. Separating from the Greater Context. It’s a mistake to assume that the Revelation is a stand-alone work, and that it’s not deeply rooted in the rest of the scriptures. This fact can ruin the fun of the casual sleuth, making it obvious that we need to become good students of the wider body of Bible literature instead of just entertaining ourselves by taking a casual stab here and there at what the Revelation means. The one who draws on the rest of scripture in interpreting the Revelation can reach vastly-different conclusions that the one who has nothing else to go on but the Revelation itself. The original audience of the Revelation was not one that was ignorant of the larger body of scripture, but that was expected to be familiar with it.
  4. Separating from Major First-Century Events. Example: There’s a mass resurrection described in Matthew 27:51-53, but many interpreters of the Revelation make no attempt to let this event instruct their understanding of the Revelation. Was this one of the resurrections mentioned in Revelation 20:4-6? If so, which one? And if not, why would it bear no mention in the Revelation, which was written later in the same century as that mass resurrection?
    Similarly, many will read the Revelation with little idea that the Temple in Jerusalem was utterly destroyed in 70AD, in a judgment long foretold by God and his prophets, and that had been recently foretold by Jesus in the First Century. Should this historical fact be in view as we interpret the Revelation? Would the author really have skipped these mega-events in order to tell us a story wholly about something else?
  5. Conflating Metaphor and Non-Metaphor. Example: Some take 6:3 literally (“…the stars of the sky fell to the earth…”), not realizing that the author has already explicitly demonstrated that at least sometimes, he uses “stars” as a metaphor for angels (Revelation 1:20 “…the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches…”). Another such thing to examine is all the “thousand years” talk in Revelation 20. Scripture famously addresses “a thousand years” in not just one other place, but two: Psalm 90:4, and 2 Peter 3:8, both passages rather cryptically, and without explaining themselves, equating the “thousand years” figure with “a day”. Is the well-informed member of the Revelation’s original audience supposed to know this when he gets to Chapter 20? Is he supposed to have the whole body of scripture in mind, or is he supposed to doggedly refuse to consider anything else he has learned from the Word of God as he’s interpreting the meaning of the Revelation?
    NOTE: There may also be instances where errors are made by assuming that passages intended literally by the author of the Revelation were intended instead as metaphors.
  6. Reading Linearly, As If from a Timeline. Many will assume that the way the author presents the material in the Revelation is a simple timeline of events, from start to finish. The miss the possibility that the author, from time to time, presents information in “tableau” fashion, as if to bring the various pieces of a larger puzzle into view before telling the audience how those pieces fit together. For example, I would suggest that Revelation 12:1-6 is just such a “tableau”, bringing to mind this “woman” and this “dragon” (who can be identified from elsewhere in scripture) before launching into an account of the “war in heaven” that involved this dragon. (Read the whole chapter here.) I think it’s highly likely that there are several other such tableau passages in the Revelation, and it may not make good sense to try to read them into the timeline in strict chronological order.
  7. Separating from the Original Audience. Many will read the text as if it had been written for us in 2025, and without a thought as to the fact that it was written nearly 2,000 years ago to an audience contemporary with the author. In other words, we read with only ourselves in mind, where it would make much more sense to read with that original audience in mind. That is to ask, what would they have understood? What would this have meant to them? Knowing what they knew already, how would they have taken this?
  8. Not Accounting for Modern Manipulation. Many today will adopt modern interpretations of the Revelation without having accounted for the biases and motives of those who are promoting those interpretations. They may have no idea what underlying motivations could be at play, such as financial or political motivations, for example. They do not realize they may be being manipulated.
  9. Assuming the End of the World. It is very popular to assume that the Revelation is generally about the end of all life on Earth as we know it. And with this assumption in mind, the reader can easily interpret more and more of the Revelation to be painting such a picture. A very fruitful study, however, is this: List every judgment in the Revelation, noting whether any is said to destroy Planet Earth, or to destroy all life thereon. If it is not expressly stated, are we safe to assume it? And have we done our due diligence in surveying alternative possibilities?
  10. Doing the Math on Revelation 21:1.
    Revelation 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.
    It’s easy for us to assume an old Planet Earth being literally destroyed, and a new one being put literally in its place. It’s harder for us, however, to understand why such a thing would be necessary when it comes to Heaven. Just why would that be? What was wrong with the First Heaven that it would need to be replaced? Do we really understand this?
    And what’s up with “the sea was no more”? Isn’t that part of Planet Earth? And if you’re going to get a New Earth, wouldn’t it naturally be expected to come with a New Sea? So why is this part left out in the new picture?
    I submit that these questions (and our great difficulty in answering them well) demonstrates that we are not very well qualified to understand the Revelation. Most of us, it seems, simply take this interpretation (of Planet Earth being replaced with a new one) as what we are being told, and give it little thought thereafter. But I don’t think we should presume this to be true if we can’t explain what could possibly be going on here. Indeed! Have we given any thought to other possibilities? Imagine, for example, that what we’re being told about here were not a literal replacement of Heaven and Earth (without any Sea this time), but simply a new order of things, where Satan is no longer in charge, but God and Jesus are. And would it help you to know that the “sea” is an ancient metaphor for the chaotic reign of evil? What if we’re being told about a new order of things in which there was simply no need for a place for Satan and his rebel angels, since they had already been put permanently in the Lake of Fire? Do we really know enough to rule this out? Are we really in a good position simply to ignore this possibility, and plow headlong into the common assumptions about what the Revelation means?

Let’s face it: Most of us are not Bible scholars, and are simply unequipped in our present state for handling such far-reaching considerations very well. We are amateurs at best. And further, we tend not to understand just how susceptible we are to the way that information is first framed for us by those who present it to us. We have no idea that had it been presented in a different way, or a different order, we might have drawn very different conclusions about it.

I believe that the Revelation was meant to be understood by the well-informed Christians of the day in which it was written. But we are not them. And to complicate our difficulties considerably, it was written to be cryptic, so as not to reveal its treasures to outsiders. We can become insiders if we study enough, but we don’t do ourselves any favors when we simply assume that we are insiders, and that we should naturally understand it without having to work at it pretty hard. Sadly, I’ve seen far too many moderns arrogantly assume that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit will make the Revelation’s meaning plain to them, just by their reading it, and without having to lift a scholarly finger to see what all of this kind of writing had been done in the many centuries of Bible history that preceded the First Century. Well, it’s not working. And even so, though there are a great many such people arrogantly assuming that they’ll understand it, they are not reaching the same conclusions, and are considerably at odds with one another in their interpretations.

Whatever the Revelation is describing, it was to happen in short order, and was imminent at the time the book was published. (There’s considerable disagreement on the timing of this, ranging from the late 60s to the late 90s AD.) It’s a fundamental mistake, then, to go looking for the bulk of its fulfillment in our own day, or even future to us. If you assume it’s about “the end of the world”, then you can easily prove to yourself that it hasn’t happened yet, because you can see that “the world” is still here. But I question the assumption that this is what it was about. I think instead that it was about the end of a temporary order of things that had been running a long time, and that had been prophesied as coming to an end, to be replaced with a new order of things. I believe you’ll find much discussion of this in a Bible study about the “age” and the “ages” and the transition between the two, and the then-imminence of it all. (I asked Grok 3 to compile a list of passages.)

In short, Jesus had finally arrived and had “fulfilled” the Law of Moses, which fulfillment was ushering in a new “age” from what had existed before. I believe that much of the language about these things was metaphorical in nature, such what we might seem to us like “end of the world” talk was only “end of the age”. Similarly, we do well to ask the question about “the end times”: “the end of what?” It’s too easy to assume that it simply meant “the end of existence”, or something like that. But this is much too simplistic a view, and does not serve us well. A brief survey of the body of language about “end times” and “last days” and such can instruct us considerably.

This topic is one for the long-game student, and the casual 1-day seminar student is going to be quite prone to making mistakes in judgment. I do believe the the Revelation can be understood by us moderns fairly well, though not fully. And I certainly see how, if I were wickedly inclined, I could use the Revelation to spin quite a story for modern-day political purposes, making an audience more agreeable to the machinations of some particular political regime. I could tell them that this or that current event is nothing more than the rumblings of such-and-such prophecy about to be fulfilled in our own lives. And I could get them to overlook the logical fallacy that what was written 2,000 years ago as “must soon take place” is to be read by us today as if it were written to us today and about us today. Sadly, people tend to believe what they want to believe, and I could help them imagine all manner of reasons to believe any of a number of false scenarios about our near future.

Interestingly, one of the things that a great many people really want to believe is this: Nobody would be so twisted as to want to deceive me about the right interpretation of the Revelation. But when faced with differing interpretations, they quickly shift to thinking that some definitely want to deceive them, and if not that, that those people are simply mistaken. Well, then, why couldn’t they be mistaken themselves? Is this an impossibility?

Which of these could be wrong?:

  • God would not let me be wrong about this.
  • God would not let my preacher be wrong about this.
  • If I were wrong about this, I would know it.

If the church down the road can get this wrong (as many will certainly believe), then why can’t one’s own church be wrong about these things?


    Posted in Prophecy, Religion | Leave a comment

    If Matthew 18:15-17 Really Is About “Conflict Resolution”, Why Don’t They Obey It As Such?

    Posted on October 13, 2025 by jackpelham

    Bible versions disagree about whether Matthew 18:15 is about “If a brother sins….” or “If a brother sins against you…”. The implications are quite huge and important. But while I’ll explore all that elsewhere, the purpose of this president article is to examine whether the camps that say it’s about “conflict resolution” are doing what it says, or whether they are disobeying it.

    For the record, here’s a pretty straight-forward translation of the passage in question, with the late insertion in red:

    Matthew 18:15 “Now if your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be confirmed. 17 And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, he is to be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

    You can see a list of the English translations here.

    And here are my questions about obedience to these directions, assuming they are indeed the directions Jesus gave:

    1. How often do Christians in this camp go to the having-sinned-against-them believer to “show him his fault”?
    2. How often do they do it in private?
    3. How often are they really listened to in that meeting ― which is to ask, how often do they truly win their brother over?
    4. When they do not win their brother over in that first meeting, how quickly do they obey and go find one or two others to witness a second attempt at hashing the matter out? How often does it get put off? And how often is it put off indefinitely? How often do they disobey this step, say, by reason of “Oh, I actually forgave the offense.”?
    5. Does it really say, “…but don’t confront him if you forgive it.”? Or is that just a popular assumption by which we let ourselves off the hook?
    6. Hypothetically speaking, what would happen in a church culture that habitually “forgave” these things, and did not press the matter so that the offending brother was pressured to repent of them, as in the instructions?
    7. When the one or two others do go along, how often does it happen that they actually confront him themselves, such that he should “listen to them” as it says ― and how often are they just silent observers?
    8. Do those chosen as witnesses consider themselves under a Jesus-appointed obligation in this matter? Is this a regular occurrence in their Christian lives, or a rare one? Should it be regular?
    9. In the event that the offender does not repent in the second meeting, how often do the two or three confronters actually take it to the assembly?
    10. When it is taken to the assembly, is the matter actually heard by the congregants? And do they actually speak to the offender? Or is this part typically co-opted by church leadership, who step in to “represent” the assembly as proxies? If the latter happens, how is it that the offender ever gets to a chance to hear what the assembly says?
    11. I notice that there is no mention of voting in this text. How many camps assume that it calls for voting the offender in or out?
    12. What did it mean to “treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector”? Does anyone even know? Do modern Christians look this up and find out, or do they never get this far?
    13. Does this shunning equate to what the Didache says here?:
      Didache 15:3 Rebuke one another, not in wrath but peaceably, as ye have commandment in the Gospel; and, but let no one speak to any one who walketh disorderly with regard to his neighbour, neither let him be heard by you until he repent.
    14. Is this command in Matthew 18:15-17 the same thing Paul is writing about here?:
      1 Corinthians 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church[b] whom you are to judge? 13 God judges[c] those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
    15. Is it the same thing Paul is writing about here?:
      2 Thessalonians 3:13 As for you, brothers, do not grow weary in doing good. 14 If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. 15 Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.
    16. Is it the same thing Paul is talking about here?:
      Titus 3:10 As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

    I have never once in my life seen any church anywhere make a regular and authentic practice of this passage ― whether they think it should contain the insertion or not. I think that the insertion is popularly used to keep the passage from being about sin in general, but even then, then some brother does sin “against them”, they still won’t obey the instructions even in that situation! It’s just a shallow attempt at dodging their Jesus-commissioned responsibility in the matter.

    The result of this neglect is an assembly filled with members who are conditioned to think that as long as somebody “forgives” their offenses, they don’t have to repent of anything or improve themselves in any way whatsoever.

    In short, I see a world of churches who simply do not want to live this responsibly, and who opt instead for some sort of spin on this passage, so as to pretend that it’s OK not to do what the Master commanded.

    And I ask you: even if the insertion is excluded, what’s the harm in that? What’s the harm in teaching the Christian to abandon every sin and error? Would that be so bad? Indeed, the word here for sin (hamartia) simply means “to miss the mark”. It’s an archery term, about that commonplace occurrence of failing to hit the bullseye when shooting. And what would be the harm of training all Christians to hit the mark in living the Christian life?

    Do we really think we know better than do obey Jesus in this?

    If you want to insist on the “against you” insertion, then fine; you have absolved yourself from having to get involved in anybody’s sin if it is not lodged directly “against you”. But I’m not sure how much this helps you, since in this world, believers will sin against nearly every day ― and if not that, certainly every week. Why, then, do you not handle it as directed when it does happen?

    Why cheat the Lord’s instructions and pretend that “forgiving” the sin is a reason not to confront it as directed? Why neglect the edification and correction of that brother, and leave him out in the cold to improve himself without your Jesus-commanded assistance?

    Doesn’t that kind of behavior smack of this?

    Luke 10:29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34 He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”

    I don’t think this parable was really about literal wounds from robbers; I think it was about helping one’s neighbor in need, whatever the trouble. And I don’t think that Jesus was applauding the behavior of those who would “pass by on the other side”. Rather, I think he condemned it.

    So I don’t see how you’re helping yourself, friend, when you claim that this passage is not about sin in general, but only about “conflict resolution”, when you won’t even obey it faithfully in that instance. I think it shows a problem with your heart if you are not driven to obey the Master.

    Jesus wanted his followers to follow him in every principle. He wanted them to have help with everything, no matter how small, how large, or how often they had to address it before they finally got it right, and could obey it habitually. That was the way of life he handed down to his ekklesia. But this is so not the kind of life taught in the churches today.

    James 5:19 My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

    Who will do this work for Jesus in such faithless churches?

    Much could be said about this, of course, but it has already been said, and by Jesus and his own apostles. Why, then, should one such as I bother to say it again on his own watch? Are not the scriptures sufficient?

    Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

    Matthew 18:15 Translations with and without “Against You”

    Posted on October 13, 2025 by jackpelham

    Here are 64 English Bible translations of Matthew 18:15. Of these, 53 adopt the “against you” idea that didn’t appear until the 4th or 5th Century AD in the Codex Washingtonianus. Earlier manuscripts lacked the “against you” idea, and spoke only of “If your brother sins…”, and not of “If your brother sins against you…”. The way it seems to me, the implications of this difference are huge. I’ll write about all that elsewhere, but the purpose of this page is simply to display the different English translations conveniently for your study.

    The 11 renderings in blue font lack the insertion.

    —————————————————————————–

    KJ21 – “Moreover, if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    ASV – And if thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    AMP – “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens and pays attention to you, you have won back your brother.

    AMPC – If your brother wrongs you, go and show him his fault, between you and him privately. If he listens to you, you have won back your brother.

    BRG – Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    CSB – “If your brother sins against you, go tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    CSBA – ‘If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    CEB – “If your brother or sister sins against you, go and correct them when you are alone together. If they listen to you, then you’ve won over your brother or sister.

    CJB – “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin against you, go and show him his fault — but privately, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won back your brother.

    CEV – If one of my followers sins against you, go and point out what was wrong. But do it in private, just between the two of you. If that person listens, you have won back a follower.

    DARBY – But if thy brother sin against thee, go, reprove him between thee and him alone. If he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    DLNT – “But if your brother sins against you, go, expose him between you and him alone. If he listens-to you, you gained your brother.

    DRA – But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.

    ERV – “If your brother or sister in God’s family does something wrong, go and tell them what they did wrong. Do this when you are alone with them. If they listen to you, then you have helped them to be your brother or sister again.

    EASY – Jesus said, ‘If your Christian friend has done something wrong against you, you must go and speak to him. When you are alone with him, tell him what he has done that is wrong. He may agree with what you say. If he does, then you can call him your friend again.

    EHV – “If your brother sins against you, go and show him his sin just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have regained your brother.

    ESV – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    ESVUK – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    EXB – “If your ·fellow believer [L brother (or sister)] sins against you, go and ·tell him what he did wrong [L reprove/convict/correct him] ·in private [L between you and him alone]. If he listens to you, you have ·helped that person to be your brother or sister again [L gained/won back your brother (or sister)].

    GNV – ¶ Moreover, if thy brother trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast won thy brother.

    GW – “If a believer does something wrong, go, confront him when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have won back that believer.

    GNT – “If your brother sins against you, go to him and show him his fault. But do it privately, just between yourselves. If he listens to you, you have won your brother back.

    HCSB – “If your brother sins against you, go and rebuke him in private. If he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    ICB – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him what he did wrong. Do this in private. If he listens to you, then you have helped him to be your brother again.

    ISV – “If your brother sins against you, go and confront him while the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have won back your brother.

    PHILLIPS – “But if your brother wrongs you, go and have it out with him at once—just between the two of you. If he will listen to you, you have won him back as your brother. But if he will not listen to you, take one or two others with you so that everything that is said may have the support of two or three witnesses. And if he still won’t pay any attention, tell the matter to the church. And if he won’t even listen to the church then he must be to you just like a pagan—or a tax-collector!

    JUB – ¶ Therefore if thy brother shall sin against thee, go and reprove him between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    KJV – Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    AKJV – Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    LSB – “Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault, between you and him alone; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    LEB – “Now if your brother sins against you, go correct him between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    TLB – “If a brother sins against you, go to him privately and confront him with his fault. If he listens and confesses it, you have won back a brother.

    MSG – “If a fellow believer hurts you, go and tell him—work it out between the two of you. If he listens, you’ve made a friend. If he won’t listen, take one or two others along so that the presence of witnesses will keep things honest, and try again. If he still won’t listen, tell the church. If he won’t listen to the church, you’ll have to start over from scratch, confront him with the need for repentance, and offer again God’s forgiving love.

    MEV – “Now if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    MOUNCE – “If · your brother sins, · go and point out his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won back · your brother.

    NOG – “If a believer does something wrong, go, confront him when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have won back that believer.

    NABRE – “If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.

    NASB – “Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    NASB1995 – “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    NCB – “If your brother wrongs you, go and take up the matter with him when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.

    NCV – “If your fellow believer sins against you, go and tell him in private what he did wrong. If he listens to you, you have helped that person to be your brother or sister again.

    NET – “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have regained your brother.

    NIRV – “If your brother or sister sins against you, go to them. Tell them what they did wrong. Keep it between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them back.

    NIV – “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over.

    NIVUK – ‘If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over.

    NKJV – “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother.

    NLV – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him what he did without other people hearing it. If he listens to you, you have won your brother back again.

    NLT – “If another believer sins against you, go privately and point out the offense. If the other person listens and confesses it, you have won that person back.

    NMB – Moreover, if your brother trespasses against you, go and tell him his fault between him and you alone. If he hears you, you have redeemed your brother.

    NRSVA – ‘If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

    NRSVACE – ‘If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

    NRSVCE – “If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

    NRSVUE – “If your brother or sister sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If you are listened to, you have regained that one.

    NTFE – “If another disciple sins against you,” Jesus continued, “go and have it out, just between the two of you alone. If they listen to you, you’ve won back a brother or sister.

    OJB – And if your Ach b’Moshiach sins against you, go and reprove him in private, just between the two of you; if he listens to you, you have gained your Ach b’Moshiach.

    RGT – “Moreover, if your brother trespasses against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have won your brother.

    RSV – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    RSVCE – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    TLV – “Now if your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault while you’re with him alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    VOICE – Jesus: This is what you do if one of your brothers or sisters sins against you: go to him, in private, and tell him just what you perceive the wrong to be. If he listens to you, you’ve won a brother.

    WEB – “If your brother sins against you, go, show him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained back your brother.

    WE – `If your brother does something wrong to you, go to him. Talk alone to him and tell him what he has done. If he listens to you, you have kept your brother as a friend.

    WYC – But if thy brother sinneth against thee, go thou, and reprove him, betwixt thee and him alone; if he heareth thee, thou hast won thy brother.

    YLT – `And if thy brother may sin against thee, go and show him his fault between thee and him alone, if he may hear thee, thou didst gain thy brother;

    Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

    Are the Hypocrites Between You and God?

    Posted on July 31, 2025 by jackpelham

    (Please pardon the ALLCAPS. I authored this on Facebook, where it’s the easiest form of emphasis.)

    Back when I was in the “one true church”, we’d invite a lot of people to church and I’d occasionally run across one who would shun church categorically on account of all the hypocrites in religion. Such a response quite obviously sidesteps the question of what THEY should be doing — which is not to say that it must necessarily be a dodge, or be dishonest, irrational, and irresponsible. But it requires a nuanced and wise response — better than I ever managed to figure out back then.

    At the time, I thought I was quite clever to respond along these lines: “Well, if you’re letting those people keep you away from God, you are farther from God than they are.”

    But this, too, was a dodge to some degree. Did I deal headlong with the problem of hypocrisy in the churches? No, just as the one invited was not (yet?) dealing headlong with the question of his OWN spirituality. Rather, it was just a semi-clever semantic argument. And in retrospect, I don’t remember that it ever convinced anybody. Indeed, it seems more one of those things more intended to speak to my fellow churchmates, rather than to the one objecting to the hypocrisy. That is, to reassure them that we were in fact doing the right thing.

    But WERE we doing the right thing? Well, yes and no. If you were to score us all-around, you’d probably find that we had adopted better doctrine than most churches, were more dedicated and active, took it more personally, were more accountable and more invested in it. I could have easily said to that naysayer, “Oh, you might be right about the churches in general, but you need to see THIS church; it’s different!”

    And I’d have been right; it WAS different. But it was also the same. It had its successes, its bright spots, its strengths, its accomplishments. But it also had its weaknesses, too. And we were largely blind to them. To me now, it’s plain as day that one of the huge and glaring problems was that we didn’t faithfully practice the commands in Matthew 18:15-17.

    Matthew 18:15 “Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault just between the two of you; if he listens to you, you have won him over. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two others along, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be confirmed. 17 And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, he is to be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

    Many of my churchmates will think I’m crazy about this. “WHAT???,” they would say, “We followed Matthew 18 all the time!!!”

    But did they really? Yes, they’d confront each other about sin, but not whenever it happened. There was frequent hesitation to do it, and there was the frequent dodge of saying, “Oh, well, I FORGAVE that sin, so I didn’t have to confront it.” Uh, did Jesus SAY you don’t have to confront it if you forgive it????

    (See, all they’re thinking about is their own part in it, and they’re not thinking about what’s best for the one who sinned— that he get help dealing with it properly.)

    Yes, we did Matthew 18 more than any OTHER church I’ve ever seen. But never once in 17 years of being there did I ever see an instance of the congregational meeting Jesus called for. Not once. In 17 years.

    And I’ve never seen that ANYWHERE. Any. Where.

    So, then, we were a partially-restored church at best. But when the subject of hypocrisy arose, we’d take a defensive stand against it, employing some rhetoric like I mentioned above, rather than to take the matter of hypocrisy straight-forwardly. And it makes sense to me now that we did not UNDERSTAND the matter of hypocrisy straight-forwardly back then, for we were caught up in it ourselves, and hadn’t worked our way out of it.

    Why couldn’t we see that Matthew 18 was so much about the GOOD of the one who sinned? Why couldn’t we see that it was also about US having the courage to help a brother? Why wouldn’t we see that this is what the Master commanded, and that he did not list the exceptions to the rule that we commonly assumed?

    When God told King Saul to completely destroy an enemy and all their flocks, and Saul saved some of the flocks, God confronted him about it, and Saul actually claimed he HAD obeyed. God’s incisive reply was, “What, then, is this bleating of sheep in my ears?”

    To God, it was obvious. Not so much to Saul.

    And why not? Well, Saul’s problem was that he was not “a man after God’s own heart” like imperfect David was. David would mess up terribly, but he kept coming back to God. Saul, on the other hand, was aloof and dishonest about his sins, even to the point of denying the obvious. That’s quite twisted and self-deceived, and yet here he was, doing it in the name of God himself, as the anointed king of Israel! And that’s pretty messed up.

    So, this person I had invited saw a problem with hypocrisy in the churches, and I had seen it, too — except not so much in my own church, and not so much in my own life. The dubious prayer, “I thank you, Lord, that I am not like those sinners over there,” comes to mind.

    Of course, what SHOULD have happened is this: I should have looked that person in the eye and said, “You know, hypocrisy is a HUGE problem, germane to us all, and we all stumble in it if we’re going to espouse some certain principle, for we will most likely fall short in it, and have need to keep correcting ourselves until we have mastered the thing. I’m glad you’re concerned about hypocrisy, and the challenge for all of us is to be more concerned about it when WE do it than when others do it.”

    But I wasn’t wise enough then to see it that way. Rather, I was contented with my snappy comeback about how “that makes the hypocrites closer to God than you are.”— as if the MAIN thing that is needed here is simply to be a member of a church — as if the church members have pretty much accomplished what REALLY needs accomplishing, merely by virtue of being members, and as if the rest of what is needed is sure to follow.

    But it was NOT sure to follow. 17 years, and never once did I see such a meeting as Jesus commanded. Not once. There was a sensibility at work in the church that somehow quietly assumed that we knew better than Jesus on this subject. If such a meeting were really necessary, surely the LEADERS would call it. And they DIDN’T call it, so it must not really be necessary. That’s about as far as the “reasoning” ever needed to go to satisfy us.

    But this is what the Lord, Master, Teacher, Creator, and Messiah commanded:

    Matthew 18:15 “Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault just between the two of you; if he listens to you, you have won him over. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two others along, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be confirmed. 17 And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, he is to be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

    There are no exceptions stated here. One (pretty bad) book I listened to recently pretended something like this: If the offense is too great to be overlooked in love, then you should….

    And NOW it occurs to me that this fine-sounding argument is really quite twisted. Overlooked in LOVE? If “love” would overlook an offense without confronting it, why in the world would the loving Master command the confrontation? Indeed, why did HE confront so much sin and error and ignorance? Was he sinning to do so?

    Perish the thought!

    He even asked them “are you still so dull?” — and I can’t count the times he confronted ignorance and challenged attitudes and repeated commands. This was not sin; it was his MISSION. He called them to REPENTANCE. He expect them to actually CHANGE their minds and change their actions.

    Best I can tell, we were about the best church running. Even so, we stopped half way there. It’s as if our goal had been to worship a Half Jesus, never REALLY listening to the whole of him and his teachings.

    And why couldn’t we see this?

    Well, there are probably several reasons for this. Pride comes to mind — that and a fair dose of persecution complex, where we assumed that if we were being persecuted we must be in the right — and where we assumed that if we were in the right, we were WHOLLY in the right, and not in need of improvement ourselves.

    Indeed, if were HAD realized just how much improvement of which we were in need, wouldn’t we have understand what was REALLY going on in Matthew 18? Wouldn’t we have seen that it was the very practice that could lead us all quickly to maturity in Christ?

    But we had found our groove — our comfort zone. We were comfortable being in between the worldlier churches and Jesus, counting ourselves better, yet not being willing to listen actively and meticulously to ALL he commanded. We were comfortable being less comfortable than they were, but not comfortable going all-out to obey Jesus no matter what — and not comfortable THINKING about it, so as to figure this out.

    But I see it now.

    Posted in Character, Dysrationalia, Philosophy, Religion | Leave a comment

    The Righteous, Order, and Matthew 18:15-17

    Posted on July 19, 2025 by jackpelham

    The righteous recognize that there’s a proper order of things, initiated by God himself. They understand that they, and everyone else, were created according to the image and likeness of God ― and they understand this metaphorically, not that they look like God, but were designed to be like him in some other ways. They understand that God has many qualities, and is honest, rational, responsible, kind, stern, resolute, proactive, just, and serving, to name a few. They understand that he wants them to be like this, too, even though they cannot possibly equal him in every way, since they lack both his powers and his role as God and Creator.

    Continue reading →
    Posted in Character, Religion | Leave a comment