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.
Although we may know the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) well, there is an aspect of that story that is easy to miss – one that lies at the very heart of the parable’s message.
Luke tells us that when an expert in the law of Moses asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Jesus confirmed that he should follow the biblical injunction to love God and to “Love your neighbor as yourself.” This prompted the lawyer to ask Jesus “And who is my neighbor?” – setting the stage for the parable of the Good Samaritan that Jesus then gave.
In this parable, of course, Jesus related that when a traveler was attacked by robbers and left naked and almost dead at the side of a deserted road, a priest and later a Levite traveling the same road both ignored the injured man and continued on their ways. Only a Samaritan – one of the neighboring group of people hated and despised by many Jews – who had pity on the injured man and helped him.
At the conclusion of the parable Jesus asked the lawyer “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” (vs. 36), to which the lawyer correctly replied “The one who had mercy on him.” We read that Jesus then told him, “Go and do likewise.”
But as we finish our own reading of this parable and move on to the following story in Luke’s Gospel, it is likely that we will miss a profound aspect of this final exchange between Jesus and the lawyer. Remember that at the beginning of the story we are told the lawyer asked “who is my neighbor,” but if we look carefully we see that what Jesus asked at the end of the story changes the wording of this question.
It is hard to see this subtle change because it is obscured in most English translations of the Bible. For example, the NIV – which we have quoted here – has ““Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” By translating this question with “was” – the verb to be – the translators made it match the lawyer’s original question “who is my neighbor?”
However, that is not what the Greek of the New Testament actually says. The word (gegonenai) used by Luke to record Jesus’ reply to the lawyer literally means “to have become,” and the question should be translated “who became a neighbor to the man?” This literal translation is found in some carefully done recent Bible versions such as the New English Translation which has “Which of these three do you think became a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?” (10:36 NET, emphasis added).
While this may seem like a small difference in meaning, it is actually a very important one. Jesus changes the lawyer’s question of “who is my neighbor” – meaning “ who must I regard as my neighbor”– to “who became a neighbor” – meaning “who did something that made him a neighbor?” Consider this difference. “Who is my neighbor” implies only theoretical acceptance of the person. “Who became his neighbor” implies an action that resulted in a relationship being established. The difference is that of what we believe as opposed to what we do.
To really understand this difference, we must go back to the parable itself. It is easy to presume that any priest who passed by the injured man must be callous and uncaring, but that is a judgment that may not be true. In the circumstances described in the parable it may be that a priest could accept the injured man as a neighbor but be afraid to do anything to help him. Even apart from the possibility of being attacked himself, a priest might well have considered the fact that if he touched a dead or dying man he would have been rendered ceremonially unclean for a whole week (Numbers 19:11). That would have resulted in him having to return to Jerusalem to undergo lengthy purification rituals – leaving his wife and family not knowing why he had not returned home when expected. According to the priestly system in place at that time, it would also mean that he and his family would lose expected income. So, under such circumstances, it is perfectly possible that a priest could have viewed the injured man as a “neighbor,” and still not have done anything about the situation through selfishness or fear. Seen this way, we realize that the change of wording Jesus insisted upon in the lawyer’s question was one that taught him – and all of us who will listen – that in our relations with others we must be willing to move beyond acceptance to action. The changed wording teaches us that acceptance alone is not enough – our neighbor is anyone in need to whom we extend help, anyone to whom we actually become a neighbor.
The word empathy doesn’t appear in most translations of the Bible (although the concept is certainly there), so we don’t tend to think of it as a powerful biblical idea like faith, hope, or love. But empathy may be a vital virtue you are neglecting – a biblical super-weapon that every Christian needs.
Our new article looks at empathy in a way that may be new to you – as a tactical spiritual weapon that can help us both to do what is right and not to do what is wrong. You can read this new article – and find out why empathy is so important to you personally, here.
An old joke says that the only exercise some people get is jumping to conclusions, but assuming the worst of situations and people is a problem we are all guilty of at times – sometimes all too frequently.
Not surprisingly, the Bible has a good deal to teach us about this tendency and why we need to overcome it. Proverbs 25:8 is a good example. The Message Bible translates this verse as: “Don’t jump to conclusions – there may be a perfectly good explanation for what you just saw.” That may not be a literal translation of the Hebrew proverb, but it does show a principle we must all keep in mind.
Just as important as this kind of direct instruction are the many biblical stories that show the folly of jumping to conclusions. One of the clearest is that of the Syrian general Naaman who was afflicted with leprosy and who travelled from ancient Aram (Syria) to Israel to ask the prophet Elisha to pray for his healing. Second Kings 5 tells this story and shows repeated examples of people in responsible positions jumping to unwarranted conclusions.
First we see that the king of Aram sent a letter to Israel’s king on behalf of his general, asking help in Naaman’s healing. As many of us might have done, the Israelite king immediately began to jump to conclusions – going into to a “jump to hyperspace” within a few seconds: “As soon as the king of Israel read the letter, he tore his robes and said, ‘Am I God? Can I kill and bring back to life? Why does this fellow send someone to me to be cured of his leprosy? See how he is trying to pick a quarrel with me!” (2 Kings 5:7).
Fortunately, the prophet Elisha was aware of the situation and arranged for Naaman to come to him. “So Naaman went with his horses and chariots and stopped at the door of Elisha’s house. Elisha sent a messenger to say to him, ‘Go, wash yourself seven times in the Jordan, and your flesh will be restored and you will be cleansed’” (vss. 9-10).
While that may sound like a positive ending to the story, the human tendency to jump to conclusions came into play again – almost wrecking the outcome of the situation:
But Naaman went away angry and said, “I thought that he would surely come out to me and stand and call on the name of the Lord his God, wave his hand over the spot and cure me of my leprosy. Are not … the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Couldn’t I wash in them and be cleansed?” So he turned and went off in a rage (vss. 11-12). We can almost hear Naaman saying this – and perhaps hear our own thoughts if we had been in the same situation: “What a waste of time! I came all this way to ask for help and this guy just brushes me off. Who does he think he is anyway? It looks like I’m not good enough for him – probably he’s biased against Syrians!”
Naaman almost returned to Syria, but fortunately one of his servants persuaded him to just do what he was told to do and the general was indeed healed when he washed himself in the Jordan as instructed (vs. 14). But this story shows that assuming the worst almost led to Naaman not being healed when he was given the opportunity, and at an even broader level to war between Israel and Syria.
In another biblical example ancient Israel came precipitously close to civil war because many of the Israelites assumed that an altar built by some of their tribes was in rebellion against God (Joshua 22:9-34).
So rushing to judgment and jumping to conclusions is dangerous. And the problem of jumping to conclusions is often broader than we may think. Other biblical stories show the many ways we can make unfounded assumptions – such as assuming the worst because of people’s appearances, or because of what they say or do. We may end up wrongfully judging people because we assume their motives, or assume something they say is critical of us. Spiritually, we may assume a principle we have not heard before is not true, or we may assume that specific Bible verses or teachings about them don’t apply to us – but perhaps to someone we know. Perhaps the most damaging way we can assume the worst is by jumping to conclusions about God.
The New Testament shows that many of those who saw Jesus teach and perform miracles jumped to erroneous conclusions. Some thought he was unrighteous in what he did (John 10:33-36), others thought he was mad or demon possessed (John 10:20). Some just presumed that “no good thing” could come out of Nazareth – Jesus’ home town (John 1:46). Although we may not think such reactions apply to us, we can assume the worst of God when things do not go well. We think that perhaps God is angry with us, punishing us, does not care about us – these are all human reactions we may experience at times if we allow ourselves to assume the worst.
Some of us may be more prone to this fault than others, but ultimately we must all work on not jumping to conclusions. The legal principle of “innocent until proven guilty” has saved many innocent lives, and the principle of assuming the best until we have reason to think otherwise has saved many friendships, marriages and other relationships. It’s a sound biblical principle we can apply any and every day of our lives. By all means jump to exercise, but don’t jump to conclusions.
So began Roy Orbison’s 1960 rock ballad which propelled the previously unknown singer to sudden fame. Orbison’s song struck a psychological note with many people, although it referred only to a limited kind of loneliness – that experienced by someone cut off from a romantic relationship. Ultimate loneliness, of course, is experienced by those who have lost most or even all of their friendships and relationships. For many people, that kind of loneliness can be psychologically devastating.
Interestingly, the Bible has something to say about the lonely of this world – but far less than you probably expect. The word “lonely” only appears a few times in the Old Testament and does not appear in the New Testament at all relative to people – only “lonely” places! This is probably because in the society of biblical times people lived in more tightly knit extended families, and loneliness was far less common. We can see this in one of the few scriptures in the Bible that does mention loneliness. When King David wrote “God sets the lonely in families …” (Psalm 68:6), he does not say that God gives the lonely new friends, but sets them back in a family setting where loneliness is not an issue.
Today, especially in the Western world, where children commonly move away from their homes as they get older, individuals of both the younger and older generations are much more likely to experience loneliness. Psychological and medical studies have shown that under these circumstances loneliness can become a severe psychological discomfort affecting not only happiness, but also health and even life expectancy.
The problem is compounded because loneliness is often difficult to diagnose or for others to recognize. We soon become aware if our neighbors are injured or ill, but even extreme loneliness may not be noticed by others, especially because lonely people often keep to themselves and may even hide their loneliness because of pride or other factors.
As Christians, we have a responsibility to reach out to the lonely just as we have a responsibility toward those who are hurting in any other way. The psalmist’s comment that “God sets the lonely in families…” needs individuals and families who are willing to make that possible. We can be the family that God wishes to use by inviting a lonely neighbor to dinner occasionally, stopping by to see if an aged neighbor needs help with anything, including widowed neighbors in home Bible study invitations, or in many other ways.
But we should also remember that any lonely neighbors we may have are only the tip of the iceberg of loneliness. Many of our Christian brothers and sisters around the world suffer loneliness because they are rejected and cut off from their own families because of their faith. Others suffer extreme loneliness in situations where they are imprisoned for their beliefs and cut off from all meaningful fellowship or friendship.
It is probably true that only the lonely can fully understand the extent of the problem of loneliness, but through any action we can accomplish and through prayer we can set the lonely in families they otherwise would not have.
Recent Comments