Who Were the Wolves Jesus Warned the Disciples About?

When Jesus said, “Be wise as serpents and innocent as doves”, who was he speaking about?


I am reading in Mathew right now in my year long reading plan, focusing this year on the New Testament. I have read the whole sweep of the Bible, from the Old Testament through the New Testament, each year for a number of years. I am not sure how many, because I have not kept track.

The words, “be wise as serpents and innocent as doves”, came up in conversation with my son a few days ago, so these words caught my attention in my daily reading this morning. I had not paid much attention to the context in which Jesus spoke these words before:

“I am sending you out like sheep surrounded by wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of people, because they will hand you over to councils and flog you in their synagogues.” ‬

Matthew‬ ‭10:16‭-‬17‬ ‭NET

These are the instructions Jesus gave the disciples when he sent them to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel”. Jesus was very specific in his instructions, telling them what to do and what not to do, what to wear, how to conduct themselves, and Jesus pointedly included the following instructions:

“Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.”

Matthew 10:5-6

I realized this morning for the first time the significance of the warning that Jesus was giving to his disciples when he sent them “out like sheep surrounded by wolves”. (Matt. 10:16) That instruction takes on a different color for me, now, considering that the “wolves” surrounding the disciples would be the religious people in their world – their fellow Jews.

Jesus was not sending the disciples among the Romans, or the Greeks, or even the Samaritans. Jesus was sending his disciples to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Jesus told the disciples to go only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and Jesus warned them they would be surrounded by wolves. This means Jesus was sending the disciples to the sheep in the house of Israel, and the disciples would be surrounded by wolves in the house of Israel.

The conclusion seems clear that the sheep in the house of Israel to whom Jesus was sending his disciples were going to be among wolves, who were also in the house of Israel.

These words of Jesus provide us the time worn adages about wolves among the sheep and wolves in sheep’s clothing. Jesus repeats this theme of the lostness of religious people and the wolfishness of religious leaders over and over again throughout the Gospels. So much, that this theme has stuck out like a sore thumb to me in recent years. (I have written about it in articles like, Why Did Jesus Pick on the Pharisees so Much?)

I have been recently pondering about the many criticisms Jesus leveled against the religious leaders of his day. Do these criticisms have any warrant today? How should we view what Jesus said to the religious leaders of his day? Is the significance historical, only? Or does it have application today in our Christian world?

Continue reading “Who Were the Wolves Jesus Warned the Disciples About?”

The Minimalest, Non-Factual, Argument for the Resurrection

Perhaps, the minimalest, non-factual argument in favor of the resurrection isn’t a factual argument at all, but a philosophical one.

Thought to be the place of the resurrection of Jesus Christ in Jerusalem Israel

The title of this piece is tongue-in-cheek, a play on the “minimal facts” evidence for the resurrection made famous by Gary Habermas. I don’t really have a killer piece of evidence that uses fewer facts (or no facts) that trumps all other arguments. But, maybe I got your attention!

As often is the case, my inspiration comes from what someone said or wrote. In the podcast interview linked below, Mason Jones describes how he he decided to read through the Gospel accounts as an atheist who knew next to nothing about Christianity. He quickly caught on that the resurrection is the centerpiece of Christianity, so he focused his attention on that.

He researched the evidence for the resurrection. He googled arguments for the resurrection and arguments against the resurrection. Though he was an atheist at that time, he was willing to give the evidence that exists a chance. (Whether there was any, he didn’t know.)

As he considered the arguments and counterarguments, he found that the arguments against the resurrection didn’t address very well the arguments for the resurrection. They didn’t take them seriously.

Then he realized that the arguments against the resurrection only work if you start with the presupposition that the resurrection didn’t happen. Because it is impossible. Because people don’t come back to life. Ever.

If you take that presupposition out of the equation, thought Jones, the evidence favors the conclusion that the resurrection occurred, and the arguments against the resurrection loose their luster. If you want to hear the rest of Mason Jones’s thought journey from atheism to theism to Christianity in his own words, you can listen here.

Meanwhile, I want to spend a little time considering the presuppositions people make about the resurrection.

Continue reading “The Minimalest, Non-Factual, Argument for the Resurrection”

The Curious, Mysterious Nature of the Kingdom of God, Its Effects in the World, and Our Place In It

The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed


“Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, ‘The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.” 

Luke‬ ‭17:20‭-‬21‬ ‭NIV‬

I have been continually impressed by the countercultural and otherworldly nature of the kingdom of God. In response to the question by the Pharisees, Jesus plainly said that the coming of the kingdom of God is nothing we can observe, but it is in our midst.

As I think about his response, I am reminded that the Holy Spirit is like that as well. The Spirit is like the wind: we can’t see it, but we can see the effects of the wind.

The wind, of course, is a bit less of a mystery than the Holy Spirit or the kingdom of God. We can measure the wind, and we can (somewhat) predict the direction and velocity of the wind. (However, imprecise our predictions may be!)

The wind is a natural phenomenon driven by natural forces (no matter how difficult it may be to predict those forces). Natural forces are different than the forces of personal agency. The Holy Spirit (and the kingdom of God) are forces driven by agency – God’s agency. The Holy Spirit is a Person, and the kingdom of God is, presumably, advanced by God in the “form” of the Holy Spirit (and by the agency of believers as well).

We don’t confuse the wind with other effects in nature, though we might be apt to confuse the effects of the kingdom of God with other effects, such as political, cultural, and other worldview effects.

I suspect that volumes could be written on this!

What are the effects of the kingdom of God? We can’t see the kingdom coming, but I assume we can the see effects of the kingdom of God coming just like we can see the effects of the wind (or the Holy Spirit). It seems that we have some confusion about these things, just as the Pharisees were confused in the 1st Century. However, we do have some guidance from Jesus to help us.

Continue reading “The Curious, Mysterious Nature of the Kingdom of God, Its Effects in the World, and Our Place In It”

Comments on Why God Became Incarnate and Died for Our Sins

Daniel Mann does a good job of explaining Why Christ, as God Incarnate, Had to Die for Our Sins. In reading his explanation, my mind goes to statements like God’s “transcendent love” and “total abhorrence for sin”, God’s “righteousness” and “divine forbearance” for sin, and the price that had to be paid “to satisfy God’s righteous character”.

Daniel describes his own reaction to these concepts formerly, as a non-Christian. He felt God was a “deceiving sadist” until one day he realized that Jesus was God incarnate, that God did not merely sacrifice a created being – God sacrificed Himself in human form!


Indeed, that is the central point of Christian belief, which is described beautifully and poignantly in Paul’s letter to the Philippians (2:5-8):

In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

Who, being in very nature [form of] God,
    did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
    by taking the very nature [form] of a servant,
    being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
    he humbled himself
    by becoming obedient to death—
        even death on a cross!

These things would be small consolation, also, if not for the victory on the other side of the cross (Phil. 2:9-11)

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
    and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
    in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
    to the glory of God the Father.

That Jesus was fully man and fully God incarnated into a man is key to the understanding of Christianity. That God is three “persons” in one is also key, as it provides some explanation how God can incarnate Himself into the form of a man and die (in human flesh), though God remains self-existent and eternal, the Creator (and not a created being).

Not that there is no mystery in this. I concede this is hard for creatures who are limited dimensionally to wrap our heads around these ideas.

Finally, it explains how (and why) death to Jesus in the flesh had no power over him. As God incarnate, death “could not hold him”. (Acts 2:24)

But, I am not writing to clarify these aspects of Christian doctrine. I want to focus on Daniel Mann’s personal revelation that Jesus was God incarnate, and his death was voluntary – God sacrificing Himself, and not God sacrificing some created being.

This realization made all the difference for him. When he really understood this distinction, he began to see the love of God that was demonstrated in that act of self-sacrifice – something God did not have to to, but He did it for us because He loves us.

Other people, I know, are not convinced. Indeed, if a person understands Jesus to be human only, and not God incarnate, the story makes no sense.

Another stumbling block is God’s “abhorrence for sin” and the need to satiate a “righteous” God. These Christian concepts are foreign territory for many people. Why, if God is so loving, does He demand sacrifices for sin?

Continue reading “Comments on Why God Became Incarnate and Died for Our Sins”

What Does It mean that the Kingdom of Heaven Is Subjected to Violence, and Violent People Take It By Force?

Does Jesus authorize violent or forceful behavior in defending Christianity?


I engage in many conversations with people of faith on just about any topic. I remember one conversation (on the topic of guns, I believe) in which a fellow believer cited Mathew 11:12 in support of a Christian defense of gun ownership.


From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it.” Matthew 11:12 NIV


My friend also mentioned Jesus turning over tables and instructing his followers to buy swords (Luke 22:36, though he tells them in the same chapter to but them down (Luke 22:49-51); “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52)). My friend believes that Jesus was saying that force, and even violence, is ok as long as it is used for a good purpose.

I am reminded of his comments as I read through Matthew 12 in my yearly reading plan. I didn’t follow up on his comment then, but reading this passage in context brings it to mind, and it brings clarity to me at the same time.

Does this passage justify violent or forceful behavior in defending Christianity? That is the question

Let’s start with the context. Jesus is preaching in Galilee where John the Baptist has recently been imprisoned for calling out Herod for adultery. John was no shrinking violet. He was bold and forthright, and it landed him behind bars when Herod didn’t take kindly to the criticism.

While in prison, John heard reports of the miraculous things that Jesus was doing. These reports prompted John to send his own followers to ask Jesus, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?” (Matt. 11:3).

I imagine John the Baptist was wrestling with doubt as he languished in prison. In his mind, and in the minds of most Jews at that time, the Messiah was expected to come and take over the world, but it didn’t seem to be happening. The Roman Empire was still very much in charge.

John’s imprisonment must have given him second thoughts about the Messiah stuff. The miraculous signs seemed to mark Jesus as the Messiah, but why was he not wielding the power and the glory of God against the Roman occupation and Roman Empire? John the Baptist may have been hoping that Jesus was just biding his time when he sent for a report.

Jesus sent this message back:


Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor. Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me.” (Matt. 11:4-6) (quoting Isaiah 35:5-6)


Was that the report John was expecting? Jesus didn’t say anything about driving out Rome and restoring King David’s throne. He didn’t pull from the prophetic messages about a conquering messiah. He pulled a different thread from the Prophets.

When John’s followers left, Jesus praised John the Baptist to the disciples. He affirmed that John the Baptist is the one spoken of in Malachi 3:1 – the messenger sent ahead of the Messiah to prepare the way. He affirmed that he is the Messiah, but the response he sent back to John was about healing, cleansing, and proclaiming good news to the poor.

In this context, Jesus said, “the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it.”

Jesus seems to be confirming only what John was already hearing about the miraculous signs, but John already knew about those things. Therefore, I think Jesus was doing more than confirming what John already knew. Jesus was tying what he was doing to prophetic passages like the language he quoted from Isaiah when he announced his public ministry (Luke 4:18-19):


The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
    because he has anointed me
    to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
    and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
     to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”


These words from Isaiah 61:1-2 with overtones from Isaiah 58:6 were read aloud by Jesus in his hometown synagogue in Nazareth before he sat down with all eyes on him and said, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” (Luke 4:21) These are the words Jesus used to to characterize the purpose for which he came.

We know, of course, that Jesus came to die on a cross, but John and his followers didn’t know that and probably could not have imagined it. Jesus’s followers also didn’t get it even when he tried to tell them.

Jesus pulled passages from Isaiah that alluded to the suffering servant motif to affirm his identity. John the Baptist would have immediately recognized the thread Jesus was pulling, but it wasn’t likely what he was expecting or what he was hoping.

First Century Jews were expecting the Messiah to reestablish the Davidic kingdom “here and now”. The Romans were well aware of that Jewish sentiment and had been putting down factions of zealots who took up the sword to attempt to bring it about.

Imagine Pontius Pilate’s confusion that prompted him to ask Jesus, “Are you the king of the Jews? …. Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me. What have you done?” This is how Jesus responded to Pontius Pilate:


My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” (John 18:36)


With this as the backdrop, let’s turn back to Matthew 12. If we understand the context, and the bigger picture, we see that Jesus is not advocating violence or force: he is doing just the opposite.

Continue reading “What Does It mean that the Kingdom of Heaven Is Subjected to Violence, and Violent People Take It By Force?”