Understanding the Golden Rule
Based on Matthew 7:12
Khen Lim | August 25 2019
Introduction
The very verse that is central to the title of this article is
none other than the Gospel According to Matthew 7:12 in the New Testament. As
many will know, it is an integral part of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and is a
very well-known verse that goes by the name, the ‘Golden Rule.’
As for the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 7:12 is the fitting
summation. Let’s take a look at the verse here:
“Do to others whatever you would like them to
do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the
prophets.” (Mt 7:12, NLT)
Not unpredictably, there are a few ways to look at this verse.
In some translations, it seems to be independent of others, standing on its own
and a self-sustaining way. In some others, it appears to be an extension to the
preceding five verses that centre on how to pray effectively (vv.7-11).
Yet
some of the words in the verse hold key to some more far-reaching implications.
Let’s read it again:
“Do to others whatever you would like them to
do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets.” (Mt 7:12, NLT, m.e.)
As the words “in the law and the prophets” suggest, there is a
way to link it back to two chapters earlier where the teaching of ethics
begins:
“Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did
not come to abolish the law of Moses or
the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose.”
(Mt 5:17, NLT)
As some of us know, the clarification that Jesus offers above
is connected to elsewhere in the same chapter, all of which offers us even
better definition. Here are just some of them:
Verse 20: Jesus talks
about righteousness that must not be equated to those of “the teachers of
religious law and the Pharisees.”
Verses 21 to 22: Jesus
sharpens the definition of the word ‘murder’ by extending on what “our
ancestors were told.”
Verses 27 to 29: Jesus
goes beyond “the commandment” by saying that adultery is committed even when a
person “looks at a woman with lust.”
Verses 31 to 32: Beyond
the definition of “the law,” Jesus says that whoever divorces his otherwise
faithful wife, will ultimately cause “her to commit adultery” in the same way
as when a man “marries a divorced woman.”
Verses 33 to 37: Again,
Jesus takes what “our ancestors were told” and sharpens the implication of what
it means to “break your vows.”
Verses 38 to 42: Despite
having “heard the law,” Jesus tells us we must “not resist an evil person!” And
with that, He proceeded to offer examples of what we must otherwise do.
Verses 43 to 44: Once
again, it’s “the law” that Jesus asks us to reinterpret not by hating our
enemies but to “pray for those who persecute you!”
These many preceding verses lend force to how “the law and the
prophets” link to them. In fact, in the Luke’s Gospel, the Golden Rule is also
present right after similar teachings about how to cope with enemies, making
the same link just as if not even more explicit:
“Do to others as you would like them to do to
you.” (Lk 6:31, NLT)
While gouging out the lustful eye seems a little hard to
perform in actual reality (Mt 5:29), perhaps the verse that defines the Golden
Rule is more reasonable and achievable.
The
irony of Gandhi
Image source: Times of India
The Internet offers plenty of exposure to the late Mohandas
Karamchand Gandhi’s – better known as “Mahatma” Gandhi (1869-1948) – statements
about Christianity. This is because he said one thing but meant another in the
sense.
In other words, he admired Jesus Christ but he rejected Christianity.
There was much he said about this of which the most infamous was, “I like your
Christ; I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your
Christ.”
Admittedly, that does sound a little dichotomous. Maybe we can
read a short excerpt from Jyotsna Kamat’s reflection of Millie Graham Polak’s
very incisive portrait of Gandhi and find out more:
“Is Mr Gandhi a
Christian?” a visitor asked Millie. Ms Millie asked for further clarification
whether she meant one converted to Christianity or one who believed in the teachings
of Christ. The visitor emphatically told she meant [the] former. She was
talking about him with some friends and they were wondering that Gandhi knew
Christian Scriptures so well and fond of quoting words of Christ frequently and
hence her friends thought he must be a Christian.
Ms Millie brooded over.
What the visitor said was true. Mr Gandhi frequently quoted the sayings and
teachings of Jesus. The lesson of the “Sermon on the Mount” seemed constantly
in his mind and was a source of guidance and inspiration to him. There was [a]
beautiful picture of Jesus Christ that adorned the wall over his desk.
(There was no picture of
the Buddha or of Krishna in the office and only three other pictures were to be
seen on the walls. One was of Justice Ranade, the great Indian social reformer.
Another was of Annie Besant, ever eager to defend the downtrodden and to
denounce injustice.
The third picture was of Sir William Wilson Hunter, editor
of “Imperial Gazetteer of India” who had very strongly written against the
system of Indian indentured labour, which he called as “semi-slavery” and at
home, there was [a] photograph of Dadhbhai Naoroji, grand men and women who
were fighting for liberation of the oppressed and so were dear to Mr Gandhi’s
heart. But in the centre of his office room was the face of Christ.)
When asked why he did not
embrace Christianity, Gandhi has said that he had studied the Scriptures and
was tremendously attracted. But eventually, he came to the conclusion that
there was nothing really special in the Scriptures, which he had not got in his
own, and “to be a good Hindu also meant that I would be a good Christian. There
was no need for me to join your creed to be a believer in the beauty of the
teachings of Jesus or try to follow His example,” he said.
“What do you think is the
essential lesson for man in the teaching of Christianity?” Gandhi asked Millie.
“I could think of two or three. But one that stands out strongest is, “One is
your Master Christ and all ye were brethren,” said Millie. “Yes,” replied
Gandhi, “and Hinduism teaches the same great truth and Mohammedanism and
Zoroastrianism too.”
At least a few modern Christian scholars have shared the same
irony – and a little suspicion – about those who reject Christianity amidst its
exclusiveness and uniqueness on the one hand and then acknowledge their deep
admiration for Jesus on the other.
Just as it is with Mr Gandhi. The problem is
that people who say they deny the faith but find much to admire about the Son
of God are either very confused, misinformed or simply erratic with the way
they see things.
But then, Gandhi wasn’t so. For a man as learned, intelligent
and perceptive as he was, none of those can be levelled at him. This apparent
inconsistency might be because of the way he understood the Gospel especially
the Sermon on the Mount, which we understand he often read and allegedly was
impacted by.
It certainly appears that someone like him was actually being
selective with what he liked and not liked. With the subtlety of an expert
mental censor, it is obvious that he simply discarded whatever he read of
Jesus’ teachings that he did not agree with, which of course included anything
he’d also found offensive.
According to literature from the Gandhi Research Foundation,
it was said that he regularly conducted prayer meetings every evening at around
7:00pm when he’d recite the Sermon on the Mount standing up. In other words,
Gandhi wasn’t ignorant about Jesus’ most famous sermon covered in Matthew 5-7.
Specifically, he would have been very familiar with 7:12-14, which is of course
very interesting, considering how paradoxical he was about Christ and
Christianity.
Like every other Universalist, Gandhi would have been quite
beside himself reading about the Golden Rule (7:12). No doubt there would be
unbridled admiration for it in very much the same way as anyone raised in other
faiths because by this one verse alone, Jesus’ reputation as a man of peace and
lovingkindness is arguably unprecedented. That being said, what about the next
two verses that follow:
“You can enter God’s Kingdom only through the
narrow gate. The highway to hell* is broad, and its gate is wide for the many
who choose that way. But the gateway to life is very narrow and the road is
difficult, and only a few ever find it.” (Mt 7:13-14, NLT)
(*
Greek description: The road that leads to destruction)
After Jesus says that we should treat others the same way as
we’d like others to treat us, He goes on to use the analogy of gates and roads
(highways) to underscore the way to eternal life. What He is saying is that by
rejecting Him, there is neither life nor hope. The route to eternal life will
then be replaced by a sure path to eternal destruction and damnation.
For
Gandhi to read this during every prayer meeting and not understand it is
perplexing. A trained lawyer with a gift of words and understanding in no less
the English language, it is not possible that he would not know what verses 13
and 14 mean and how they link to the previous verse.
How can anyone accept and admire Jesus and then turns around
and reject the truth He offers? In other words, if anyone fails to accept and
admire Jesus who is the One and only way to eternal life, then he too cannot,
with any consistency, accept and admire Him for teaching how we are to do to
others what we’d like others do unto us. It just doesn’t make any sense at all.
And in the end, we really need to ask if Gandhi, as revered as he is the world
over, really truly did learn anything from Christ. After all, as we all know, you
can attend a thousand prayer meetings and still not scratch the surface of
Jesus’ teachings.
We cannot simply be selective with what we read and learn from
Scripture. The Bible is a manual to life and obedience under the One True God.
It is not a guide by which we pick and choose what is conveniently agreeable to
us. We cannot be choosy over only the things we can gladly call the One “Lord.”
The same Jesus who said, “Do to others whatever you would like them to do to
you” (7:12) happens to be the same Jesus who also said, “I am the way, the
truth and the life; no one can come to the Father except through Me” (Jn 14:6,
NLT).
The
significance of the word ‘therefore’
Before we proceed to disassembling the verse, out of
curiosity, there is the use of the adverb ‘therefore’ at least in some of the
translations such as NKJV/KJV, GNV (1599 Geneva Bible) and HCSB (Holman
Christian Standard Bible). In other cases, we have something similar:
KJV (King James Version): “Therefore all things whatsoever ye
would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and
the prophets.”
NIV (New International
Version): “So in everything, do to
others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the
Prophets.”
NASB (New American
Standard Bible): “In everything,
therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this
is the Law and the Prophets.”
ESV (English Standard
Version): “So whatever you wish that
others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.”
ASV (American Standard
Version): “All things, therefore, whatsoever
ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is
the law and the prophets.”
AMP (Amplified Bible): “So then, in everything treat others
the same way you want them to treat you, for this is [the essence of] the Law
and the [writings of the] Prophets.”
And with the use of such an adverb, the real question then is
how verse 12 links to the preceding parts of the Sermon on the Mount. The word
“therefore” offers us a clear connection that is undeniable.
Could it be linked to verses 7 to 11 in connection to
effective praying? Could it be linked to verses 1 to 6 that talks about how we critically
judge others? Or perhaps it is meant to function like a capping just like 5:17
where one opens while the other closes the main portion of the Sermon on the
Mount and in both cases, Jesus teaches us that the kingdom of God fulfils
rather than abolishes the law and the prophets.
In other words, the adverb “therefore” is there to help us to
relate verse 12 all the way back to the whole of the Sermon on the Mount up
until the point of 5:17. You can then see that both the start and end verses
underscore the expression that compliance to the Golden Rule “is the Law and
the Prophets.”
Verse 7:12 is, hence, the second (or the end) capping of Jesus’
entire Sermon. Between the two cappings (some call it ‘bookends’), He offers
clear explanation as to what the actions and attitudes are in order to fulfil
and summarise the Law and the Prophets.
The
significance of verses 13-14
Source image: maxprofetadedeus.blogspot.com
Although a bulk of our focus is on the Golden Rule (Mt 7:12),
we’ve seen how the significance of verses 13 and 14 certainly cannot be
overlooked but there is also the question of whether they are linked to what
precedes or follows from them for the remainder of the chapter. After all, if
we look at the way Jesus describes the “narrow way” where He tells us what the
outcome is with the two options:
Good way: “But the
gateway to life is very narrow and the road is difficult and only a few
ever find it.” (7:14, m.e.)
|
Bad way: “The highway
to hell is broad and its gate is wide for the many who choose that way.”
(7:13, m.e.)
|
Outcomes: “to life” or “to hell”
|
Analysis: By
saying that “only a few ever find it,” Jesus reiterates the reward to those
who make the effort no matter how difficult the way is. Verse 14 talks about
the way that ends in eternal life. Between it and the preceding verse, He
contrasts the narrow and the broad gate as well as the difficult road that
few will be determined enough to find and the one in which far more people
will end up choosing, leading to destruction.
|
||
Good way: “A good tree
produces good fruit and a bad tree produces
bad fruit. A good tree can’t produce
bad fruit and a bad tree can’t produce good fruit.” (7:17-18, m.e.)
|
Bad way: “So every tree that does not produce good fruit
is chopped down and thrown into fire.”
(7:19, m.e.)
|
Outcome: “chopped down and thrown into fire”
|
Analysis: Jesus
uses verses 17 and 18 to juxtapose the good and the bad tree that produces
two contrasting outcomes. The significance of the good fruit is that only a
good but not ever the bad tree can produce. In the next verse, He tells us
that God has no use whatsoever for trees that don’t bear good fruit and
therefore is consigned to fire (meaning ‘hell’).
|
||
Good way: “Only those who actually do the will of My
Father in heaven will enter. Anyone who listens to My
teaching and follows it is wise,
like a person who builds a house on solid rock. Though the rain comes in
torrents and the floodwaters rise and the winds beat against that house, it
won’t collapse because it is built on
bedrock.” (7:21, 24-25, m.e.)
|
Bad way: “But anyone who hears My teaching and doesn’t
obey it is foolish, like a person
who builds a house on sand. When the rains and floods come and the winds beat
against that house, it will collapse
with a mighty crash.” (7:26-27, m.e.)
|
Outcomes: “the Kingdom of Heaven” or “will collapse with a
mighty crash” (destruction)
|
Analysis: Jesus uses verses 22 and 23 to describe those
who are untrue in discipleship to Him. In the next two verses, He talks about
those whose foundations are and aren’t solidly made in Him where one leads
into and the other is excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven. One yields
stability while the other is steeped in complete ruin.
|
||
From
verse 13 to 27, Jesus adds the gloss in His description of the life that He
calls us to live and in doing so, He also provides a window into the life that
He asks us to avoid. The lifestyle He exhorts us to take up is as clear as the
one He warns us to avoid. So, on the one hand, the way is narrow, difficult and
few will find while the other is broad, easy and plenty will follow.
It’s easy for people to adhere to a life that has no
restrictions on behaviour or even opinions. Any of us will have no problems in
saying that they admire what Jesus says but can’t find it in them to follow Him
in obedience and discipleship. Gandhi’s excuse is the Hinduism offers him as
much as Christianity and yet on the walls of his home, there was neither a
picture of Buddha or Krishna. Talk is cheap when action is conveniently
missing.
Remember the rich man who came to Jesus. He asked, “Rabbi,
what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” (Mt 19:16) However Jesus’
response simply left him despondent (vv.21-22). As He said, “…the gateway to
life is very narrow and the road is difficult and only a few ever find it”
(7:14).
Describing
Jesus’ Golden Rule
Image source: elainemariecooper.com
In the non-Christian circle, the command is also called the
Ethic of Reciprocity. The world knows it as a ‘sensible notion’ that is
integral in the developing of an ordered society. Lesser known as the Golden
Rule, secular society accepts that it allows people to rationally shape their
behaviour – and laws – in order to ascertain the best possible chance for
order, justice and peaceful existence.
Typically, the origin of this Ethic of Reciprocity does not
find a home in Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount but as it turns out, many ‘believe’
that its home is in ancient Egypt around 2000 BC or in some other hypotheses,
it was allegedly found in the philosophies of ancient Babylon, India, Greece,
Judea and even China.
It was a Catholic catechism dated either 1567 or 1583 in
which it appeared for the first time in modern English form, having been translated
from ancient Greek manuscripts that are linked directly to Matthew 7:12 as well
as 22:39 as well as Luke 6:31.
In fact, regardless of whether one calls it by one or the
other name, many will say that all the world’s religions and leading
philosophies carry a version of it, meaning that none has any valid hold to it.
For example, Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama once said, “Every religion
emphasises human improvement, love, respect for others, sharing other people’s
suffering.
On these lines, every religion had more or less the same viewpoint
and the same goal.” Although he didn’t explicitly mention the Golden Rule, he
made it apparent that all organised religions agree on this point and that it
applies to the entire human race.
The Golden Rule is quite possibly the most pivotal part of the
modern human rights concept because it calls for one’s individual right to
equitability and also a sharing of responsibility in the assurance that justice
is for all. With the Golden Rule, people are to live with consideration for one
another beyond just those who are family members and friends.
It means that the
same rules that govern fairness with people we know also apply to strangers in
our midst. As such, it is not unusual to find that the Golden Rule is the cradle
of modern society where irrespective of the culture, it is a standard to
determine what is and isn’t civilised.
However, there is one distinctly Christ-centric flavour in the
Golden Rule that does not appear in the secular or ancient versions. In fact there
are four clear forms of interpretation based on how this ethical code (or
morality) is expressly worded:
Interpretation
|
Nature
|
Direction
|
Voice
|
One
should treat others according to how one would like others to treat him
|
Christian
|
Positive
|
Passive
|
Treat
others as you would like to be treated
|
Christian
|
Positive
|
Active
|
One
should not treat others in ways one
would not like to be treated
|
Secular
|
Negative
|
Passive
|
Do not treat others in ways you would not like to be treated
|
Secular (a.k.a. the Silver Rule)
|
Negative
|
Active
|
In many
ancient cultures, Jesus’ command is often expressed negatively as shown above. Here
are some of the ones I know of:
“Do not impose on others what you do not desire others to impose on you.” – Confucius (551-479BC),
ancient Chinese philosopher (Confucian Analects)
“What things make you angry when you suffer them at the hands
of others, do not you do to other
people.” – Isocrates (436-338BC), ancient Greek Attic rhetorician
“Let no man do to another that which would be repugnant to himself.” – Mahabharata, Bk 5 Ch 49 v.57
“Human nature is good only
when it does not do unto another
whatever is not good for its own
self.” – Dadistan-I-Dinik, 94:5; in Muller, Ch 49 Vol 18 p.69 (ancient
Zoroastrian sacred texts)
“Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.” – Udanavargu 5:18 (Buddhist
sacred texts)
“If I choose I may rule
over you. But what I condemn in
another I will, if I may, avoid
myself.” – Herodotus (c.484-c.425BC), ancient Greek historian (The Histories,
Bk. III Ch.142)
It isn’t just ancient texts that reveal this negative form.
Contemporary leadership also applies the same negativity: “Don’t do what you
don’t want others to do unto you.” “Don’t abuse your authority if you don’t
want others to do the same.” “If you don’t do your part, don’t be surprised
that others won’t do theirs too.” “If you’re always going to be late for work,
don’t get upset if others follow your example.”
Modern leaders exhort others using identical negative
expressions that make it obvious when we compare with Jesus’ positive
expression but how is this significant? The late Robert Mounce puts it best
when he said, “In its negative form, the Golden Rule could be satisfied by
doing nothing. The positive form moves us to action on behalf of others.”
On the other hand, Jesus’ command is not only positive but is
in an active voice, meaning that He requires us to be of active service to
others. And unlike the negative versions, Jesus has set a far higher standard
by asking us to pursue the highest good and excel in a positive standard so
that others may be the same to us. Using the above negative leadership
expressions, we can put a positive spin on them:
Negative: “Don’t do what you don’t want others to do unto
you.”
POSITIVE: “Do to others
what you want others to do to you.”
Negative: “Don’t abuse your authority if you don’t want others
to do the same.”
POSITIVE: “Respect the
authority vested unto you and others will do the same.”
Negative: “If you don’t do your part, don’t be surprised that
others won’t do theirs too.”
POSITIVE: “If you do your
part, don’t be surprised that others will do theirs too.”
Negative: “If you’re always going to be late for work, don’t
get upset if others follow your example.”
POSITIVE: “If you’re
always on time to work, you’d be happy to see that others will follow your
example.”
Adding a positive spin to the expression makes it
significantly more active and demanding, more searching and substantive. D.A.
Carson in his 1982 publication, “The Sermon on the Mount: An Evangelical
Exposition of Matthew 5-7” wrote, “Here, there is no permission to withdraw
into a world where I offend no one, but accomplish no positive good either.” In
other words, a negated expression of the Golden Rule achieves nothing worth
noting because it makes no demands on us to accomplish anything substantial.
In its Christian form, the Golden Rule, in a nutshell, defines
the spirit of the whole Sermon on the Mount because the principle of the matter
is regardless of what the situation is, you can do whatever you want so long as
you know that the same will be done back to you. This tit-for-tat approach is
the underlying concept behind what Jesus is saying.
Because He knows that we
would never intentionally or maliciously harm ourselves, He calls us to treat
others in the same way. In that sense, if everyone were to just obey this verse
alone, what a different world it would’ve been because the transformation would
have prevented wars and all forms of conflict, hatred, murder etc. from taking
place.
In more ways than one, the apostle Paul is talking about the
Golden Rule here also:
“Owe nothing to anyone – except for your
obligation to love one another. If you love your neighbour, you will fulfil the
requirements of God’s law. For the commandments say, ‘You must not commit
adultery. You must not murder. You must not steal. You must not covet.’ These –
and other such commandments – are summed up in this one commandment: ‘Love your
neighbour as yourself.’ Love does no wrong to others, so love
fulfils the requirements of God’s law.” (Rom 13:8-10, NLT, m.e.)
We can also find it equally mirrored in the Old Testament
through Moses’ writings:
“Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against
a fellow Israelite but love your neighbour as
yourself. I am the Lord.” (Lev 19:18, NLT)
Just as it is in the New, it is also in the Old Testament.
God’s inerrant words through thousands of years reflect a sense of timelessness
where the Golden Rule exists with the same level of importance then as it is
today. Spoken by Moses, Jesus basically reinforces it and Paul reconfirms it.
It is so central to everything that God wants us to live by that we simply
ignore it at our peril.
Synoptically, we find the parallel in Luke’s Gospel although
it is somewhat a little different to Matthew 7. Here, Jesus words His
expectations in no uncertain terms:
“Do not judge others and you will not be
judged. Do not condemn others or it will all come back against you. Forgive
others and you will be forgiven. Give and you will receive. Your gift will return
to you in full – pressed down, shaken together to make room for more, running
over and poured into your lap. The amount you give will determine the amount
you get back.” (Lk 6:37-38, NLT)
Jesus’ standards define the kind of expectation on how we are to
act towards one another that is, if we wish to be blessed by Him. The phrases
used here – “you will receive,” “your gift will return to you in full,” “the
amount you get back” – bear a strong resemblance to such unmistakable rewards
awaiting us.
But at the same time, notice also the way the four ‘do-or-else’
exchanges conceal a serious threat. In other words, we stand to be judged,
condemned, unforgiven and deprived if we do not relent from judging, condemning
and not forgiving others.
The primacy of the Golden Rule places in stark contrast
society’s mantra that we must look out for ourselves first before we consider
the welfare of others. The idea is to be selfish – take first, talk later. But
in looking back at the Golden Rule and taking in the wider all-encapsulating
view of the Sermon on the Mount, we can see how it connects us all the way to
the promises of asking, seeking and knocking in verses 7 to 11. In other words,
what we ask, seek or knock for, or in general term, conduct ourselves, the same
will be done back to us.
Therefore, how we conduct ourselves before others in the way
we treat them will set the tone for how God, in return, will treat us. If we
all love our neighbours as ourselves, there will be positive repercussions
throughout society at large and the whole world as a matter of fact. If such
love abounds, there will be no laws required to put us in moral check because
we won’t lie, steal, covet, murder, lust after, be adulterous, slander or be
jealous about.
The problem with the Golden Rule is that, like God’s other
laws, sin makes it impossible for us to fulfil it on our own. Under our own
tainted mortal power, it will be beyond our reach. It may be the world’s
greatest solution to all its ills but without God, we don’t have any hope of
ever being able to overcome our shortcomings. Only Jesus can draw us to the
Golden Rule as nobody else can.
And this draws us to the two gate options that Jesus raises
and what they mean for us.
The
gates and the roads
Image source: lambskinny.wordpress.com
Let’s revisit the two verses once more:
“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is
the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction and many enter through
it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few
find it.” (Mt 7:13-14, NLT)
These verses are filled with different contrasting opposites.
You have a wide and a narrow gate. And then you have a broad and a narrow road
also. And then there are two distinct destinations; one that leads to
destruction and the other that leads to life.
Furthermore, it seems there are
two different groups of people too; one that comprises many and the other, a
far smaller group with fewer people.
So, here are the four sets of contrasting opposites:
Gates
|
“…narrow gate”
|
“…wide is the gate”
|
Roads
|
“…narrow [the] road”
|
“…broad is the road”
|
Destinations
|
“Life”
|
“Destruction”
|
People
groups
|
“A few”
|
“Many”
|
To get
into the thick of it, we’ll begin by looking at the road (way) and the gate. The
question is which one comes first. Does one get past the gate and then embark
on the road or does he take the road to get to the gate?
The likelihood is that he will unlatch the gate and embark on
the road. This is because Jesus mentions the gate first, saying, “Enter through
the narrow gate” (Mt 7:13, NLT). In the subsequent two sentences, the gate is
consistently mentioned before the road.
In all probabilities, the gate refers
to conversion while the road could be a reference to the Christian life itself;
in other words, the walk. In other words, one cannot begin his Christian life
unless he is converted first.
In explaining the Golden Rule, Jesus begins by positioning us
to first notice two gates in front of us. The choice is which gate to head to
and open. Open one and not the other gate takes us down a particular road. Open
the other and a different road is available.
In other words, we are faced with
a decision that begins with the gate and once we make our choice, the road is
set. There will be no backtracking. Neither will there be any layovers. It’s
just one long road that leads either to eternal life or hell. The only recourse
is to realise our mistake and diligently change roads through contrition and
confession.
So, one gate is wide, which then leads to a broad road. This
is the superhighway with a mind-boggling number of lanes to travel on, making
travelling easy and effortless. This is the road with plentiful attractions
(distractions) and people are all rushing through the wide gate, clamouring for
all the ‘promising’ bright lights. Filled with excitement, people come through the
wide gate, packed to the gills with everything they’ve got, not leaving
anything behind (including their sins).
As John Stott commented about this road:
This is the road that leads to the normalisation of sin in our
society. This is where people can be in wild abandon, doing whatever they feel
like without being ‘shackled’ by all that talk about right and wrong, good and
bad. Morality doesn’t exist for one just goes with how he ‘feels’ is right by
him. This is the road that is paved with glitter except it’s fool’s gold.
The other gate is, as Jesus puts it, “small” and because of
the size of its opening, the road henceforth is narrow. It’s not an easy road
to travel on. By the sounds of it, it might not even be that straightforward to
find, let alone stay on it. And because it is narrow, it is also fairly easy to
miss or overlook. As narrow as the eye of a needle, this is a road that is less
travelled also because so many aren’t likely to choose it.
For one, people will realise that to enter such a “small”
gate, they have to leave everything behind; otherwise, you cannot get past it
let alone get on the road, which, again, is narrow. What you leave behind is
your emotional baggage, sinfulness, selfishness (self-centredness),
ambitiousness (ruthlessness), covetousness (lust) and so on.
In fact, for some
people, it might also mean leaving behind friends and family just as Jesus has
said (Lk 9:23, 14:26-27, 33, Mt 16:24, 10:38, Mk 8:34).
Here’s the continuation to Stott’s description:
“The hard way, on the other hand, is narrow. Its boundaries
are clearly marked. Its narrowness is due to something called ‘divine
revelation,’ which restricts to the confines of what God has revealed in
Scripture to be true and good. It is a fact that revealed truth imposes a
limitation on what Christians may believe, and revealed goodness on how we
behave. The gate leading to the easy way (broad way) is wide for it is a simple
matter to get on the easy road. We need leave nothing behind, not even our
sins, self-righteousness or pride. The gate leading to the hard way (narrow
way) is narrow. One has to look to find it. The entry into it has to be entered
one by one.”
Being a “small” gate likely means entry to the road is very
restricted in a single-file manner, which means one cannot enter as a
collective group of multiple people. Hence, there will be no barging in and no
one can force himself past it. The decision to get through this gate will be
personal. There is no peer group pressure to force anyone to rush for it.
Because it is an individual choice, there are three things to
be mindful of. Firstly, your decision has nothing to do with your parents or
spouse or child and what they believe or not believe in.
Secondly, no matter
what threats you receive, your single-minded choice to believe in Christ means
no one can change your mind one way or the other. It is purely you and yours
alone.
Thirdly, it will have nothing to do with where you come from, which
denomination church you attend, how successful (or otherwise) you are,
academically or career-wise, in your worldly existence or whether or not you
are married. And that also includes if you have a run-in with the law.
Having to go through such a “small gate” also means that you
cannot bring everything with you. Other than yourself, no baggage would be
allowed. In the analogy, the word ‘baggage’ will mean non-physical items as
Stott puts it.
The part that says, “Only a few find it” is mystifying because
it suggests that the gate might be hidden from view and only certain people so
equipped can track it down. Armed with faith, loyalty and obedience in Christ and
with eyes that can ‘see’ God (as in ‘seeing is believing’) is what characterise
this sparse group of people than the ones clamouring for the wide gate.
No thanks to Adam and Eve, we all are, by default, born with
sin and that means that we are put on the road to destruction. We don’t even
have to do anything to get on this road. We don’t need special passes to access
the broad gate let alone grease any palms. Our destiny is always to head down
this road to perdition unless our sins are forgiven. The only way this is ever
possible is to enter that “small” and narrow gate of faith in Jesus Christ.
In case you get confused, some translations refer to roads as
“ways.” In other words, both “road” and “way” are interchangeable and mean the
same thing.
The road we find ourselves on will ultimately depend on which
gate we choose to get through. Even though we are, by default, born into sin
and therefore find ourselves on the broad and easy road, we do have a choice to
abandon and switch. The road that the “wide” gate leads into has a bewildering
abundance of worldly attractions. It glitters with conveniences, riveting entertainment,
colourful lures and so on.
In the days of Joseph and Mary, the trek from Nazareth to
Bethlehem was arduous. They had to travel through very rocky terrain and along
the journey, they faced the risk of getting harassed or worse, getting robbed
of whatever they owned that they had with them. On the other hand, one can
imagine how much ‘better’ it would’ve been had the road been easier, more
convenient and safer to travel on.
The road “broad” used in this verse comes from the original
Greek word εὐρύχωρος (pr. euruchoros)
to mean spacious (chora) or wide (euru). According to BibleWorks (#3290),
the word can also be used to describe “a large room” where one can “live
comfortably and unmolested.”
Stott adds that people have plenty of latitude on
this road as they have freedom from moral obligations in as much as they also
have the liberty to normalise their behaviour along the lines of anything
sinful and wicked. Everyone is happy because no one can tell anyone what to do,
think or say. There are no limits as to what (or who) you like to feel,
criticise, condemn, threaten or mock.
Through the “small” and narrow gate, things are completely
different to the point of looking gloomier. This is because on immediate
impression, there are none of those worldly incentives that you see on the
broad road. Jesus describes such a road as “difficult,” which comes from the Greek
work θλίβω (pr. thleebo) to mean to
make narrow, persecute, afflict, suffer tribulation or trouble.
Little wonder
then there this is a gate that ultimately leads to loneliness, difficulties and
barrenness. It is also not surprising that very few will get to enter this road
although those who do choose it will see something amazing along the way that
they otherwise cannot on the broad road: a cross (Mt 10:37-39).
Stott says the road is narrow because those who travel along
it are restricted in accordance to God’s revelation that in Scripture is “true
and good.” On this road then, not only are the boundaries “clearly marked” but
the narrowness also means that in discipleship to Christ, we are bound by very
specific terms and conditions that govern the way we live and conduct
ourselves. The liberties that define life on the broad road are missing here
and so are the luring attractions of the flesh. With the narrow road, there is
no ‘steering of the wide berth.’
The problem is in contemporary society, both the broad and
narrow gates appear to be the way to God although in truth, only one will.
That’s because there are no labels or markings on the broad gate to indicate
otherwise. You won’t get to see any signage that tells us it will lead to
destruction. Only those who read and understand Christ’s Golden Rule will know
that.
The thing is people themselves will take to task in describing
the gates in however way they want and in all likelihood, such descriptions
will merely be convenient to the way they think. If they consider the broad
gate to be the way to heaven, that’s because to them, that’s what it looks and
feels like.
After all, what’s there not to like along the broad road? Filled
with entertainment of all kinds, carefree but destructive lifestyles, immoral
ideologies and rebelliousness against God, that’s what millions today enjoy and
embrace. The deceptiveness of the broad road is as dangerous as it seems and
unless you are equipped with the Word of God, you will be completely misled as
Solomon says:
“There is a path before each person that
seems right but it ends in death.” (Prov 16:25, NLT)
No doubt that this deception is well entrenched today.
Hedonism in society points a crooked finger at the righteous lifestyle and
accuse us of painting a life that is as dull as it is morose and in the end, we
seem to offer nothing but suffering, affliction and trials.
The fact that
exegetically, the word “narrow” as explained earlier simply refers to all of
that. People of the epicurean world will call us dullards who take the fun out
of life. We are killjoys who seem to take pleasure out of the trials of life,
replacing vivid colours with dull lifeless greys.
That’s why many don’t go to church. That’s one of the reasons
many backslide and enjoy a life of ‘fun’ when they should be worshipping in
church on a Sunday or get themselves involved in ministry activities. With
mainstream media hand in hand with Hollywood dismissing righteous living, the
danger is very apparent that many will not come to personally know God through
Christ. Or they will simply outright reject Him despite the joy of His promise
of salvation. Regardless of how only He can forgive us of our sins and only He
can offer triumph over temptation, many will just walk away.
Invariably there will be many who will think we are not only
dull but foolish, backward and incapable of joy. But how wrong they are. The
joy Christians experience isn’t of the worldly type. Ours is for eternity. We
may suffer today under persecution but we look forward to a great celebration
in the kingdom of God. People of the world who prefer the promise of worldly
pleasures may enjoy now but suffering will be eternal for them. So, no, the
gate may be “small” and the road narrow but it leads to life and not
destruction.
Comparative
crowd differences
Source image: The Atlantic
Jesus is distinct here:
“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is
the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction and many enter through it. But small is the
gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few find it.”
(Mt 7:13-14, NLT, m.e.)
There are clearly two very different crowds here. Not just in
size terms but also in who they are by nature. The crowd size difference is
characterised by the choices they each make. The ones who choose the wide gate
that leads to a broad road are many but the ones who manage to find the “small”
gate and narrow road are few.
God’s way is a narrow one because He is specific about what we
must do to qualify but the world continues to reject Him by and large, which is
why we have a huge crowd that loves the broad and easy way but a far smaller
one that prefers His.
The majority holds the opinion that they have strength in
numbers but they find the “small” gate and narrow road too frustrating for
their liking. To begin with, the gate can’t even take their crowd size! So,
though Christ’s way is grossly unpopular, it means it takes some very special
people to truly understand and want it.
As for how these numbers translate to how many will be saved,
that’s a little more challenging. Scripture offers us a few glimpses of what
the answer might be:
“For many are called but few are
chosen.” (Mt 22:14, NLT,
m.e.)
This verse comes from
Jesus’ Parable of the Great Feast (aka Parable of the Wedding Feast), which
tells of how the father is repudiated by his people’s decision not to accept
the invitation to attend his son’s wedding banquet. But it was more than that.
The king’s servants who went to share the joyous message were also mistreated
and some were even killed.
Angered by his people’s appalling reaction, the king
not only avenges the death of his servants but extends his invitation to
strangers good and bad. These were people who were never part of the king’s
plan but now it is them who fill out the wedding hall.
The parable draws parallel
with how many Israelites reject God’s kingdom, which then led him to take the
Gospel to the Gentiles. And it is on that basis that Jesus says, “For many are
called but few are chosen” (v.14). In fact, the parable foreshadowed how the
Jews rejected the Gospel as told in Acts 13.
The Apostle Paul’s words to them
echo the parable’s king who said that those who reject the invitation
ultimately “did not deserve to come.” Similarly, Paul said something similar: “We
had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not
consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles” (Acts
13:46).
With that in mind, the
above standout verse speak more about God’s own people, the Jews.
“Someone asked Him, ‘Lord, will only a few be saved?’ He replied, ‘Work
hard to enter the narrow door to God’s Kingdom, for many will try to enter but will fail.” (Lk 13:23-24, NLT, m.e.)
In the MSG translation, we
have a more contemporaneous interpretation of Jesus’ reply. When asked that
question, He replied, “Whether few or many is none of your business” before
proceeding to say pretty much what we know from the NLT version. In other
words, Jesus didn’t exactly provide an answer.
Instead He points to the
challenge of salvation itself, which is when He said, “for many will try to
enter but will fail.” Perhaps then the impression is that indeed, few will be
saved.
“And I tell you this, that many
Gentiles will come from all over the world – from east and west – and sit
down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob at the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven. But many Israelites – those for whom the
Kingdom was prepared – will be thrown into outer darkness, where there will be
weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Mt 8:11, NLT, m.e.)
The backdrop behind these
verses were two people, a Roman centurion who met Jesus and his very ill
servant who neither had the means nor the opportunity. The centurion had gone
to Jesus begging Him to heal his servant who was paralysed and in pain. The
story has two important aspects that lead to the question of salvation here.
Firstly, the servant is
like all of us as he badly needs to be saved and in accordance to God’s promise
of salvation, he would be. And so despite being beyond his means to reach out
to Jesus, God will save him. In other words, getting saved isn’t something
within his capability to do. Without God’s grace, salvation would never be
available simply because we don’t deserve it.
Secondly, the centurion is
not a Jew but a Gentile and as such, he had cultural obstacles that would have
prevented most from having access to a rabbi’s assistance, much less someone
like Jesus whom he addressed as “Lord” (Gk. kurios).
As a Gentile, he knew Jews face the risk of defilement if they enter his home
and so it was out of the question that Jesus could go even if He did say, “I
will come and heal him” (v.7). But then such an obstacle presents itself as an
opportunity to show his faith and that he did when he said to Jesus, “Just say
the word from where You are, and my servant will be healed” (v.8).
And that was what spurred
Him to say, “I tell you the truth, I haven’t seen faith like this in all
Israel!” All (of) Israel. Not only was this a significant remark but Jesus
added the next verse that is the headliner in this section, something that the
Israelites couldn’t have been more ashamed of.
In the headlining verse, Jesus
made two bold predictions. On the one hand, many Gentiles (that’s us) from
everywhere will be saved and they will be in the Kingdom of Heaven. On the
other, many of God’s own people “for whom the Kingdom was prepared” will not.
Instead, they will face destruction and damnation.
So in this case, many will
not be saved but the focus here is on God’s people.
Rev 7:9, NLT, m.e. – “After this, I saw a vast crowd, too great to count, from every nation and tribe and
people and language, standing in front of the throne and before the Lamb. They
were clothed in white robes and held palm branches in their hands.”
The key phrase here is “a
vast crowd,” which in some other translations, is “a great multitude.” This is
by no means a small crowd of people but a hugely significant number. The next
part that says, “too great to count” confirms that this is as close to infinite
that we can get. It is, in other words, beyond all power of computation, as
Albert Barnes’ commentary describes. And so the apostle John didn’t bother to
count.
The interesting thing here
is that being such a “great multitude” puts it in stark contrast with the
commonly-held opinion that only a few would be saved. But if we take in the big
picture, we can put this number into better perspective. What Scripture is
saying is that although it seems that vast numbers will not be saved, there is
reason to accept that, at large, a vast majority of the whole will make it to
heaven.
The problem we currently
have is that as the Gospel is still making its way around the world and so long
as Christ is yet made known to everyone in all of the world’s four corners, it
might take a while before we truly see the extent of what an all-reaching faith
looks like.
And when it does, it seems quite possible that the numbers of those
saved may even exceed all those who have been lost in the past. It will be
beyond anything we have ever seen especially if we also consider those
multitudes who will sit on the thrones and have been given the authority to
judge in the afterlife (Rev 20:4-6).
Do the
gates refer to the many religions and philosophies?
Ms Pollak far right with Gandhi on the left (Image source: Alamy)
Although it is tempting to take the Universalist’s point and
believe that they well could, the answer is still no, they don’t. There remains
always that the two gates lead to only two ways that shape our eventual
destinies. We either choose eternal life or death will permanently choose us.
But it is understandable that some might view the gates as
such. After all, there are apparently anywhere between 4,200 and 4,300
different religions throughout the world today and most if not all of them
claim exclusive ideologies.
At the same time, ideologies parading as
philosophies also seek to become religions such as Nazism, Socialism (Communism
by any other name), Fascism, Universalism, Atheism and Agnosticism and many
others. You could even argue that Materialism has gained a widely embraced
worldwide cult face that has cut through all cultures and societies.
While violent ideologies bring about pain and suffering,
misery and mass deaths, materialistic philosophies are hedonistic in nature
with a strong centrism on self-indulgent love. Naturally both come in direct
contrast to a belief in Christ. When tempted by Satan in the wilderness to turn
stones to loaves of bread in order to address his hunger from fasting, Jesus
retorted:
“No! The Scriptures say, ‘People do not live
by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” (Mt
4:4, NLT)
Even Gandhi himself was thoroughly misguided. From one of
Polak’s many interviews (1931), he said:
“It was impossible for me to believe
that I could go to heaven or attain salvation only by becoming a Christian. …
It was more than I could believe that Jesus was the only incarnate Son of God
and that only he who believed in Him would have everlasting life. … My reason
was not ready to accept that Jesus by His death and by His blood redeemed the
sins of the world.
“I could accept Jesus as a martyr, an embodiment of sacrifice
and a divine teacher but not as the most perfect man ever born. Though I took a
path other than the one my Christian friends had intended for me, I have remained
forever indebted to them for the religious quest that they awakened in me. His
death on the cross was a great example to the world but that there was anything
like a mysterious or miraculous virtue in it, my heart could not accept.”
Reference reading sources
Author unknown (Sept 1993) Declaration
Toward a Global Ethic (Chicago, IL: Parliament of the World’s Religions)
accessible at https://web.archive.org/web/20130411195746/http://www.parliamentofreligions.org/_includes/FCKcontent/File/TowardsAGlobalEthic.pdf
Author unknown (nd) Morality
and Ethics – The Declaration of a Global Ethic (Religious Tolerance) accessible
at http://www.religioustolerance.org/parliame.htm
Barnes, Albert (1834) Barnes
on the Whole Bible: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Whole Bible () accessible
at http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/cmt/barnes/index.htm
or in Kindle form at https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27225486-barnes-on-the-whole-bible
Beversluis, Joel (editor) (Jun 2000) Sourcebook of the World’s Religions: An Interfaith Guide to Religion
and Spirituality (Novato, CA: New World Library) available at https://www.amazon.com/Sourcebook-Worlds-Religions-Interfaith-Spirituality/dp/1577311213
Blackburn, Simon (Sept 2009) Ethics: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press) available at https://www.amazon.com/Ethics-Very-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0192804421
Blomberg, Craig L. (May 1992) Matthew: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture (The
New American Commentary Book 22) (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press) available at https://www.amazon.com/Matthew-Exegetical-Theological-Exposition-Commentary/dp/0805401229/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
Carson, D.A. (Jun 1982) The
Sermon on the Mount: An Evangelical Exposition of Matthew 5-7 (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Book House) available at https://www.amazon.com/Sermon-Mount-Evangelical-Exposition-Matthew/dp/0801024803
Davies, W.D. and Allison Jr., Dale C. (Nov 2000) A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Gospel According to Saint Matthew (International
Critical Commentary Volume III) (London, UK: Bloomsbury T&T Clark)
available at https://www.amazon.com/Critical-Exegetical-Commentary-According-International/dp/056708518X
Epstein, Greg M. (Oct 2010) Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe
(New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers) available at https://www.amazon.com/Good-Without-God-Billion-Nonreligious/dp/006167012X
Fowler, Harold (1968) Bible
Study Textbook: The Gospel of Matthew Volume One (Joplin, MO: College Press
Publishing Company) available at https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Study-Textbook-Gospel-Matthew/dp/0899000290
Fuller, Reginald H. and Westberg, Daniel (1984) Preaching the New Lectionary: The Word of
God for the Church Today (Collegeville, MN: The Order of St Benedict, The
Liturgical Press) available at https://www.amazon.com/Preaching-Lectionary-Church-Today-Third/dp/0814627927
Gandhi, M.K. (Dec 1955) My
Religion (Ahemadabad, IN: Navajivan Mudranalaya) accessible at https://www.mkgandhi.org/my_religion/my_religion.htm
Kamat, Jyotsna (Jun 2019) Gandhi
and Christianity (Kamat’s Potpourri) accessible at http://www.kamat.com/mmgandhi/christian.htm
Kidder, Rushworth Moulton (Nov 2009) How Good People Make Tough Choices Rev. Ed.: Resolving the Dilemmas of
Ethical Living (New York, NY: Harper Perennial) available at https://www.amazon.com/Good-People-Make-Tough-Choices/dp/0061743992
Küng,
Hans (Feb 2004) Global Responsibility –
In Search of a New World Ethic (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Pub) available
at https://www.amazon.com/Global-Responsibility-Search-World-Ethic/dp/1592445608
Küng,
Hans (editor) (Dec 1993) A Global Ethic –
The Declaration of the Parliament of the World’s Religions (New York, NY:
The Continuum International Publishing Group, Inc.) available at https://www.amazon.com/Global-Ethic-Declaration-Parliament-Religions/dp/0826406408
Lama, Dalai (1988) Kindness,
Clarity and Insight: The Fourteenth Dalai Lama, His Holiness Tenzin Gyatso
(Boulder, CO: Shambhala Publications) available at https://www.amazon.com/Kindness-Clarity-Insight-Fourteenth-Holiness/dp/B001WBKVX2
Luz, Ulrich (author) and Linss, Wilhelm C. (translator) (Dec
1989) Matthew 1-7: A Commentary
(Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, Evangelical Lutheran Church in
America) available at https://www.amazon.com/Matthew-1-7-Commentary-Ulrich-Luz/dp/0806624027
Mounce, Robert H. (May 1990) Matthew (Understanding the
Bible Commentary Series) (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group)
available at https://www.amazon.com/Matthew-Understanding-Commentary-Robert-Mounce/dp/0801047218
Nazareth, Pascal Alan (n.d.) Gandhi, Christ and Christianity (Bombay Sarvodaya and Gandhi
Research Foundation) accessible at https://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/gandhi_christ.html
Polak, Millie Graham (1931) Gandhi, The Man (London, U.K.: George Allen & Unwin) available
at https://www.amazon.com/Mr-Gandhi-Millie-Graham-Polak/dp/B0008B1IIO
Raj, Frank (Dec 2014) Gandhi
Glimpsed Christ, Rejecting Christianity as a False Religion (Washington
Times) accessible at https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/31/gandhi-glimpsed-christ-rejecting-christianity-fals/
Spooner, W.A. Spooner (nd) The
Golden Rule in Hastings, James (editor) (1920) Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. XI, Sacrifice-Sudra (New
York: Charles Scribner’s Sons) available at https://www.amazon.com/ENCYCLOPEDIA-RELIGION-ETHICS-XI-SACRIFICE-SUDRA/dp/B0016D7JRW
Stott, John R.W. (Feb 1985) The Message of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7: Christian
Counter-Culture Book 100) (Leicester, U.K.: Inter-Varsity Press) available
at https://www.amazon.com/Message-Sermon-Mount-Matthew-Counter-Culture/dp/0877842965
Strobel, Lee (June 2016) God’s
Outrageous Claims: Thirteen Discoveries That Can Transform Your Life (Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan) available at https://www.amazon.com/Gods-Outrageous-Claims-Discoveries-Transform/dp/0310345766
Strobel, Lee (Aug 2016) Random
Acts of Kindness Aren’t Enough (Faith Gateway) accessible at https://www.faithgateway.com/random-acts-kindness-enough/
No comments:
Post a Comment