“The heart of the righteous weighs its answers, but the mouth of the wicked gushes evil” (Proverbs 15:28).
We don’t always think about words as having “weight,” but they do – whether they represent “weighty” thoughts or not. Putting this fact another way, although we may sometimes use the expression “all words and no action,” the truth is that all words are actions that create reactions. That is why, in the expression used in Proverbs, the heart (mind) of the righteous weighs its answers before speaking them.
We all understand that just because something comes into our mind doesn’t mean it should come out of our mouths, yet most of us fall down in this area to some degree. Perhaps because there is more of a time-lag involved, we tend to do better in what we write. How many times have you typed an email or text message and then thought better of it, or at least made changes before clicking “send”? Yet the spoken word seems to occur at closer to the speed of light – no sooner do we think something than all too often we hear ourselves saying it. But it doesn’t have to be that way. We can learn to stop and weigh our words before speaking them if we choose.
We weigh physical things such as recipe ingredients on a scale to make sure they are enough for what is needed, but not too much. Weighing our words is the same because we can err by saying too much or too little.
On the one hand, we can err in not saying enough – in not verbalizing appreciation in our lives (Psalm 107:8-9, etc.), in not speaking up to help others when we should (Proverbs 31:9, etc.), and in many other ways. Matthew 18:15 alerts us to one of those situations: “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.” If we fail to do this, we fail in our relationship. Weighing our words involves thinking about this kind of thing – asking ourselves if we have said what we should say in a given situation.
On the other hand, saying more than we should is an even more common problem – and often the most serious. Once again, there are numerous ways this can occur.
Sometimes saying too much is just a matter of too many words. As the book of Proverbs puts it, “When words are many, transgression is not lacking but whoever restrains his lips is prudent” (Proverbs 10:19). Depending on the circumstances, not saying too much may even mean not saying anything at all – as Proverbs also tells us: “Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue” (Proverbs 17:28) – a thought that is sometimes humorously worded “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.” But although not speaking at all may only apply in occasional and extreme situations, the Bible does stress that we should “Avoid godless chatter” (2 Timothy 2:16), and this may be an area in which we should all weigh our words.
Sometimes saying too much is not just about the number of words spoken, of course, but about the harmful nature of even a few words spoken in anger or frustration. We have all heard the advice to “count to ten” before saying something when we are angry or upset, but counting may just be delaying our reaction. What we really need is to weigh the words before they are spoken – to assess the probable results before we speak – and that’s what Proverbs 15:28 is specifically talking about.
We may understand that relationships are often broken or damaged when things are said that are better left unsaid, but such “unweighed” words do not just include hurtful things such as unjust criticisms or angry retaliations; they can also include gossip, lies and exaggerations that hurt others (Psalm 34:13). Although we may not think of it this way, the use of irreverent, vulgar, or profane speech can also hurt both ourselves and others. That is why the apostle Paul urged, “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen” (Ephesians 4:29).
There are even other circumstances where not weighing our words can lead to problems, not through saying something wrong, but perhaps through committing to do things we can’t or don’t do, for example. The book of Ecclesiastes tells us in this regard that: “It is better not to make a vow than to make one and not fulfill it. Do not let your mouth lead you into sin” (Ecclesiastes 5:5-6). In these and many other ways we can fall down spiritually if we do not think about what we say before we say it. That may be difficult for most of us, but it’s why we should strive to weigh our words continually. As the apostle James wrote: “my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak …” (James 1:19 ESV), and we should never forget the warning that Jesus himself gave: “I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak” (Matthew 12:36). If we need one, that’s a very good reason to weigh our words before, rather than after, they are spoken.
Luke’s Gospel indicates that the evangelist may have particularly appreciated good food – at least it shows clearly that he noticed and commented on food more than any other Gospel writer! But Luke does not simply mention food and meals – he draws lessons from them, as we will see.
First, as a frame of reference, we should notice that Luke’s account of the life of Jesus really does have a noticeable focus on food. For example, while Matthew uses the word “eat” 18 times, and John only 15 times, Luke uses the word 33 times. Mark also uses this word quite frequently (25 times), but overall Luke uses a number of eating and food-related words twice as many times as Mark and the other Gospels, so his emphasis on this is clear. Within his Gospel, Luke also – uniquely – describes ten meals in which Jesus participated, and we will look at them all briefly.
1) Dining with the Despised. Luke 5:27-32 tells the story of how Jesus accepted an invitation to “a great banquet” at the home of Levi (Matthew) – one of the hated tax collectors employed by the Romans. We are told that “a large crowd of tax collectors and others were eating with them” and that the Pharisees and religious teachers who saw this complained “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” The first meal Luke describes immediately teaches us that eating with others is an important form of showing true acceptance. It’s a lesson we can all learn from. Is there someone we could eat with as a way to show our acceptance and love for them?
2) The Horrible Host. Luke 7:36-50 records how Jesus went to eat at the home of a certain Simon, one of the Pharisees who invited him but did not provide him with any of the normal forms of welcome and comfort. Dinners such as this were often eaten partially outdoors in the cool of the day, which meant that the woman who came to anoint Jesus with costly perfume would have been able to see and go to him. But the woman crossed an invisible social barrier in doing this and in her subsequent actions, and when the self-righteous Pharisee became indignant Jesus gently corrected him while showing support for the woman. Sadly, in many families, more arguments occur during meals than at any other time, and Jesus’ actions teach a valuable lesson in the effective de-escalation of interpersonal tensions in such circumstances. We can learn a lesson from this regarding keeping our meals and interactions positive.
3) Catering to a Crowd. Luke 9:10-17 tells how a large crowd of people followed Jesus to hear his teaching, and the disciples then urged him to send them away so that they could find food and lodging. Jesus felt empathy for the tired and hungry crowds, however, and performed the miracle of feeding the crowd of five thousand with only two fish and five loaves of bread. The story contains a symbolic lesson in that the twelve baskets of “crumbs” the disciples gathered up after the meal (vs. 17) doubtless represented the twelve tribes of Israel for which Jesus was providing spiritual food. But at the practical level, the story teaches us the need for an observant and thoughtful attitude that looks for and sees the needs of others, and that we should never hesitate to help those in real need because we do not have much ourselves.
4) The Hassled Hostess. Luke 10:38-42 describes a dinner Jesus attended at the home of his friends Mary and Martha. When Mary sat and listened to Jesus, Martha complained that she could not complete all the preparations by herself. Jesus, of course, gently rebuked Martha by telling her that sometimes listening is more important than eating, and pointed out that she was “worried and upset about many things, but few things are needed” (vss. 41-42). Meals can be an important part of our relationships with others, but they shouldn’t become an end in themselves. A less elaborate meal may be better if it means more time together.
5) Consider Cleanliness. Luke 11:37-53 is a somewhat different meal story. When a Pharisee invited Jesus to eat with him, we are told “the Pharisee was surprised when he noticed that Jesus did not first wash before the meal” (vs. 38). We do not know exactly what the Pharisee said, but Jesus’ response was withering: “you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness” (vs. 39). Jesus then continued by detailing some of the Pharisees’ problems and showing them their hypocrisy. The dinner seems to have ended at this point, but Jesus doubtless knew this meal was doomed from the start (vs. 53). Of course, the lesson from this meal can be applied in our own lives if we are more concerned with details of physical cleanliness than with cleanliness of thought, speech, and attitude.
6) Principles with our Provisions. Luke 14:1-24 tells how “One Sabbath …Jesus went to eat in the house of a prominent Pharisee.” Jesus used this dinner as a teaching opportunity and told three parables, each with its own lesson – the lawfulness of healing on the Sabbath day, the principle of humility in not taking the place of honor at banquets, and the principle of inviting “the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind” to our feasts (vs. 13). The second two principles are certainly ones that we can apply in our own lives when we are invited to a meal or offer one to others.
7) A Salvation Stopover. Luke 19:1-10 gives the story of Zacchaeus, a tax collector at Jericho who wanted to see Jesus and hear his words. While Jesus had doubtless been offered dinner at a number of “respectable” homes, he had evidently declined as he was only planning to pass through Jericho (vs. 1). But seeing Zacchaeus’s receptiveness, Jesus invited himself to the man’s home (vs. 5), ate there, and brought the word of salvation to him (vs. 9). Sometimes we need to be willing to stop doing even the most important work or be willing to change our plans in order to fit in a meal or other activity that can make a difference in someone’s life – as Jesus certainly did with Zacchaeus (vs. 8).
8) Making the Meal Matter. Luke 22:14-38 is the account of the most memorable meal in the Gospels – that of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples. Although the meal symbolized and was spiritually all about Jesus and his coming sacrifice, Jesus explained this, but focused nonetheless on guiding and serving his friends (compare John13:3; etc.). Today, most of our big celebrations – birthday, anniversary, graduation, and other dinners – are about us and, it is natural to tend to focus on ourselves at such times. The Last Supper teaches the opposite of this and has many lessons we can learn in this regard.
9) A Supper Surprise. Luke 24:28-35 describes a post-resurrection event when the risen Jesus – unknown to them – joined two of his followers as they walked to the village of Emmaus outside of Jerusalem. Jesus talked with the followers and explained the Scriptures to them, but they still did not realize who he was until they stopped to eat supper together. As soon as Jesus gave thanks for the food and broke the bread, as he had done at the Last Supper, the two disciples’ eyes were opened, and they recognized him (vs. 31). The lesson here is simple but important – the story prompts us to ask ourselves if people would recognize us as Christians if we were to eat with them, and if so, how?
10) Proof in the Presence. Luke 24:36-43 is the final meal Luke records in his Gospel, occurring when Jesus appeared to the main group of his disciples after his resurrection. It was at this meeting that he allowed them to see and touch his wounds to prove that it was indeed him. But, in a fascinating turn of the story, as though it was unplanned, we read “And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, ‘Do you have anything here to eat?’ They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence” (vss. 41-42). In taking a physical meal with his disciples, Jesus showed it was he – the one who had eaten so many meals with them in friendship and mutual acceptance. When we do meals right, we follow his example.
“When Jesus … saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick” (Matthew 14:14).
It’s easy to read right over simple verses like this in the New Testament and not notice things. First, it’s easy to miss what is actually said – that Jesus didn’t just have compassion on the sick in the multitude, he had compassion on the whole crowd which led to his intervening wherever there was a need.
That means that Jesus didn’t just see and have compassion on the noticeable members of the crowd – the blind, the lame and those clearly afflicted with diseases and problems. It means he had compassion on the ones who were helping carry the lame, lead the blind and support the weak. It means he had compassion on the ones we might not notice as readily in a crowd – the shy, the grieving, the lonely and the discouraged.
Second, it’s easy – of course – not to see what’s not said. When we read the accounts of Jesus’ works we tend to read them in a vacuum, but we have to remember how much the Gospel writers are summarizing each incident. When Jesus had compassion on the crowds we get only the highlights of the healings – a kind of Gospel triage in which the most important healings and significant signs were recorded. But in having compassion on the crowds – not just the sick in the crowds – would Jesus not have noticed people with less obvious problems and had compassion on them also?
Surely Jesus saw the loneliness in the eyes of some and, having compassion, offered them a warm and accepting smile. Surely he saw the discouragement in the faces of others (Luke 18:24) and offered a few words of encouragement. In every case in the New Testament where we are told Jesus had compassion on people, he followed it with action; and having compassion on the crowds doubtless meant he interacted with and helped many more than the few people on whom he performed miracles of healing.
Perhaps we may feel we do not interact with crowds in the same way, but the totality of people we see and pass by as well as those we actually meet and with whom we interact in a day is often a small crowd, and for some of us a large one. If we are followers of Jesus, do we have compassion on that daily “crowd”? Do we seek to encourage and to smile, to check that people are all right? These may seem like small things and may seem hard to do in our over-crowded and impersonal world. But following in Christ’s footsteps means doing the things he did to the extent we can.
We know that God pays attention and knows the hairs on our heads, though we don’t tend to think of that in perspective of the teeming world of billions in which we live. But God does see every face in the crowd, and in his physical life the Son of God doubtless did his best to do so also. We are not just a face in the crowd to God, and no one in the crowd should be just a face to us.
Whether it is in international politics or in interpersonal relations, de-escalation of difficult and potentially dangerous situations is vital to the preservation of peace. Not surprisingly, the Bible has a lot to say about the principle of de-escalation and can teach us valuable lessons in this area.
De-escalation or “standing down” from potential emotional or political flash-points is a principle found throughout the Old and New Testaments alike. We see it everywhere from proverbs such as “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but harsh words stir up anger” (Proverbs 15:1 NLT) to the words of Jesus himself: “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9).
But there is one section of the Bible that provides an amazingly clear example of interpersonal de-escalation – the story of the patriarch Jacob’s meeting with his brother Esau a number of years after Jacob had effectively cheated his brother out of his inheritance with that famous post-hunting trip bowl of stew (Genesis 25:34). When that incident occurred, Jacob had to literally leave town in the hopes that his brother’s anger (which was at the homicidal level) might subside (Genesis 27:43-44).
When we fast-forward in this story to the next time Jacob and Esau met – some twenty years later – we read that Jacob sent a message to his brother to test the situation and the returning messengers said: “We went to your brother Esau, and now he is coming to meet you, and four hundred men are with him” (Genesis 32:6). If there was ever a situation needing de-escalation, this would appear to be it.
Understandably, Jacob felt “fear and distress’ (Genesis 32:7), but notice how he handled the situation: “Jacob divided the people who were with him into two groups, and the flocks and herds and camels as well. He thought, ‘If Esau comes and attacks one group, the group that is left may escape’” (Genesis 32:7-8). Jacob then – understandably – prayed and asked God for his protection in this situation (Genesis 32:9-12). This was good basic tactical preparation. Jacob did what he could and asked God to help with the rest. But Jacob then proceeded to employ a very astute plan of de-escalation.
Jacob selected a large group of animals from his herds and flocks and divided these animals into smaller groups, each under the control of some of his servants – telling them “Go ahead of me, and keep some space between the herds” (Genesis 32:13-16). “For he thought, ‘I will pacify him with these gifts I am sending on ahead; later, when I see him, perhaps he will receive me’” (Genesis 32:20). This approach of attempting to win his brother’s favor by means of generous gifts is obvious enough, but there is a great deal more tactical wisdom to it than might meet the eye.
By sending his gift in multiple installments, Jacob actually gained a number of tactical advantages. First, he slowed the advance of Esau and his four hundred men who had to repeatedly stop and deal with the incoming gifts of animals. This not only bought Jacob time to plan and prepare for their meeting, but also slowed Esau down and helped distract him from any murderous thoughts of vengeance that may have been in his mind.
Second, Jacob continually bled off small numbers of Esau’s men who would have to be assigned to take charge of and herd the numerous groups of animals. Just as important from a tactical perspective, Jacob also was able to repeatedly insert small groups of his own men into the heart of the advancing potential enemy – giving him a major tactical plus if fighting occurred.
Third, from a tactical perspective, Jacob might have guessed that Esau did not regularly keep four hundred men in his employ. It was very likely that many if not most of these men had been quickly brought together as a mercenary force with the promise of plunder if they helped Esau attack Jacob’s group. If this were the case, Jacob’s extensive gifts gave Esau an option not to have to fight – they provided him with ample goods to pay off any fighters Esau might have hired.
Finally, there was, of course, an undoubted and cumulative psychological effect of the gifts Jacob sent ahead. Just as the Book of Proverbs tells us that a gift “pacifies anger” (Proverbs 21:14), Jacob was clearly aware of the potential for this in the gifts he was sending, as we have seen (Genesis 32:20). In that day and age it was also common for minor kings and nations to pay “tribute” (read “protection money”) to greater kings and nations in order to gain a guarantee of their safety from attack by their more powerful neighbors. Jacob’s gifts could clearly be seen as “tribute” – reinforcing the psychological effect of gifts that also proclaimed submissiveness.
Perhaps not surprisingly, and perhaps with God’s help, of course, this multi-pronged approach of de-escalation was wildly effective. When the two groups finally came into combat range Jacob cemented the de-escalation by stepping forward and bowing before his brother (Genesis 33:3). How effective this all was can be seen in Esau’s response: “Esau ran to meet Jacob and embraced him; he threw his arms around his neck and kissed him” (Genesis 33:4). If we think this would have been Esau’s response all along, we should ask ourselves why he needed to bring four hundred men to do that.
Submission may not always be the appropriate approach in situations where de-escalation is needed, but it often is. There is no question that Jacob’s humble strategy and careful use of tactical principles was totally successful in protecting a small group from a much larger and potentially very hostile one. The principles Jacob utilized are also a lasting lesson for us in the value of asking God’s help, then doing everything we can to avert violence when that is possible. In more cases than not, de-escalation does not just happen. De-escalation – as Jacob teaches us – is usually a matter of strategy and of carefully applied tactics.
The Thanksgiving holiday we celebrate in the United States is one in which we hopefully give thanks for the abundance or “overflow” of good things we have been given. A biblical verse often quoted in this context is that of the words of Christ regarding blessings: “Give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you” (Luke 6:38).
Notice how four measures are used to describe the overflowing fullness of the blessings being spoken of: Good measure – this is not a short-filling, but a filling to the brim. Pressed down – this is the first way we can get more into a container, by forcing even more in. Shaken together – we can also shake a container to make the contents settle to make room for more. Running over – finally, we can overfill till the container has an overflowing excess.
It would be hard to better describe the concept of the cornucopia – the horn of plenty spilling out abundant blessings that is so often used as a symbol of Thanksgiving! But let’s go back to the words of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke. We should remind ourselves, of course, that Jesus spoke of being blessed to the extent we bless – gifted to the extent that we give.
But there is actually more to consider when we look at the preceding verse – which is less frequently quoted – and we grasp the whole context: “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. 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” (Luke 6:37-38).
Reading these verses together shows us that Christ’s words regarding overflowing blessings were set in the context of not judging, not condemning, and forgiving, as well as giving. In each of these cases the overflowing aspect of what we are given applies. Jesus’ words stress that we must be willing to “overflow” in our not judging or condemning others and in our forgiving them (Matthew 18:21-22).
So what does forgiveness have to do with Thanksgiving season? God’s word shows us that with blessings come responsibilities; God’s gifts are freely and abundantly given, but they come with expectations. Jesus’ words remind us that we will be blessed (there is nothing in his words indicating that he was not talking about both physical and spiritual blessings) as we bless, and we will be forgiven as we forgive. In a season in which we focus on thankfulness for the blessings we receive, we should perhaps also focus on the blessings we give – the gifts of not judging or condemning and actively forgiving. And the blessings we give should be “good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over.”
Our God is an abundantly generous God. In giving and in forgiving, we should strive to be the same.
How many times, if ever, have you heard someone say “white and black” for “black and white” or “potatoes and meat” instead of “meat and potatoes”? There are unwritten laws of how we speak, and even though we don’t consciously think about them – and no one ever really taught them to us – we say what we have heard others say and what sounds natural to us. We say “Ladies and gentlemen” and never “gentlemen and ladies,” even though we say “men and women,” not “women and men.” In the same way, it’s always “bread and butter,” “thunder and lightning,” or “highs and lows” – never the other way around.
In some expressions we can see a certain kind of logic in the way we place one word before another – as with time order (“cause and effect,” “crime and punishment,” etc.); most important first (“bread and butter,” “fish and chips,” etc.); better first (“good and bad,” “pros and cons,” etc.). But often there is no seeming reason for putting one word before another, yet it’s always “salt and pepper,” “cloak and dagger” – and countless other expressions where we naturally place one before the other.
The clearest example of this kind of unwritten law of what we say is probably found in pairs of words containing the letter “I” where we always put the “I” first. That’s why we always say “hip hop” and not “hop hip,” or “tittle-tattle” and not “tattle-tittle,” “flip-flop” and not “flop-flip,” “drip-drop” and not “drop-drip,” etc. It’s hard to think of an exception to this tendency – we put “I” before other letters in dozens of pairs of words probably for no other reason than it seems natural, easy, and comfortable to us.
The actions in our lives can be a lot like that, too. Although we may not consciously think about it and were never taught to do so, we tend to place “I” before other people in our interactions and relationships. We may not mean to do so, but we often just naturally stress our own needs before those of others whether it is in the grocery store, or driving on the roads, in office meetings, or in talking with friends. In countless ways we all tend to put “I” first. It’s just the natural thing to do.
But the Bible turns life around in this regard and shows us that it is actually a whole lot better to resist what comes naturally in our attitudes and actions towards others. For example, the apostle Paul reminds us that we should “count others more significant than yourselves” (Philippians 2:3), and that is definitely an attitude of putting others before ourselves.
It’s one of the most basic principles of Christianity, but especially in difficult times of social upheaval and difficulties – when we may be particularly tempted to put our own needs ahead of those of others – we have to make a conscious effort not to place the naturally preferred “I” first.
When supplies are short in stores, when people are tempted to hoard more provisions than they actually need at this time, Paul’s continuing advice applies more than ever: “Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others” (Philippians 2:4).
It may be natural to put ourselves first, but Christianity calls us to a much better way in which we do not do things because they are the “natural” thing to do – but the way that ultimately is the best for us and for everyone else.
Recent Comments