(Text and Audio)
Title: All Powerful, All Personal
Ben/Brad reunion at the 2009 SBC convention
Dinners for the last two years in Frankfort.
Story of Nathan saying, “See you later you piece of trash.”
The point is, it’s good to be back.
I. Three Observations
- Peter had a house.
Compare this to Matthew 8:20 “The Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” Peter, the servant, had better quarters that Jesus, the master.
Point: How often have you considered this: Your life, and all its comforts and luxuries, is, by many accounts, “better” than the life of the Lord Jesus whom you are trying to emulate. Just as we wrestle with this thought, perhaps Peter did as well.
2. Peter was married.
This seems to be at odds with the Catholic idea of Priestly Celibacy. Catholics believe that Peter was the first Pope. They also claim that anyone in the priesthood takes a vow of celibacy and does not marry. Now, we believe that while celibacy can be a gift from God, as was the case with Paul.
POINT: There is no scriptural evidence that ministers can not, or should not marry, verse 14 proves that undeniably.
3. Peter cared for his in-laws.
Now, I don’t mean this to be a funny point, though certainly some of us are chuckling right now. Al and Sherrill are saying, “Told you!”
POINT: By taking this woman into his home and caring for her under his roof, Peter showed a love to his wife and those who his wife loved. I tell people all the time in marriage that their love for each other is not the only love they need to consider, but also the love their future spouses have for others. If your fiancé loves someone you despise, you need to talk about that, or I guarantee you it’s going to have consequences once you are yoked to that person in marriage.
One final note here: That Peter’s Mother-in-Law lay ill of a fever was not unusual. Fevers were as common in the first century as they are now. They were perhaps taken a little more seriously because of the lack of medicine like aspirin and other fever reducers, but a fever was a common affliction. So the question becomes, why then did Matthew, in a two verse arc, feel the need to include this footnote about Jesus healing Peter’s Mother-in-Law in his Gospel account? He could have just as easily omitted verses 14 and 15 and moved right on to verse 16. So why did Matthew include it? I’d like for us to consider three reasons:
- In the very next verse Jesus is healing a “powerful” affliction of demon possession. By placing these miracles back to back Matthew illustrates Jesus authority and power over both the amazing and the common.
- The point of this healing was not to illustrate the power of Jesus (for it is likely that this fever would have passed without the healing) but rather the compassion that Jesus showed to those who were loved by those he loved. In other words: Peter’s Mother-in-Law was important to Peter, therefore, she was important to Jesus. We need to remember this when we pray for our loved ones. Jesus is a deeply personal God. He is God, make no mistake. But just like a friend who weeps over the death of a best friend’s father, even if he didn’t know the father all that well himself, Jesus feels for those his loved ones care about.
- There was a point to this healing. She was healed, and then she served her master. We are healed and delivered from sin, not so that we can just sit around and be delivered. But rather so that we, just like Peter’s Mother-in-Law, can then get up, and serve our Lord.
- Yet Another Piece of O.T. Evidence
As we close and look at verses 15 and 16 we see another piece of O.T. evidence that Matthew ads to the pile of testimony that Jesus Christ was indeed the Jewish Messiah that was hoped for.
Here, Matthew points out Isaiah 53:4 “He himself took our infirmities and bore our sicknesses.”
Matthew does this to illustrate that in delivering us from both the common fever and the uncommon and much more serious demon possession, Jesus is able to deliver and bear both our everyday burdens and the worst burdens of our lifetime.
To put that into a modern context, Jesus is with me when I run out the door, late for a meeting, jump in my car and get ½ way there before realizing I’ve left my presentation on the kitchen counter. He is with me as I fight back tears of embarrassment and frustration as I now know I will have to turn around and suffer the humiliation of being late for this meeting.
Jesus is no less able to bear my burden in that instance than he is when I get the 4AM phone call that one of you has been in a serious car accident and is being life lighted to the hospital.
Jesus is just as powerful against inconveniences as he is against cancer. He is not a fair weather friend, and he is not limited by the smallness or hugeness of our situations. He is all God, all powerful, all the time.
There are literally 100 places in the Matthew’s gospel where he could have chosen to interject Isaiah 53:4, but he does so here, right after two very different examples of Jesus power to heal and deliver.
The first example is a common fever, with one whom Jesus loves. He heals her that she may serve them. The second is strangers coming to Jesus in mass, and he turns back their sickness, he casts out their demons, the takes away their burdens, he heals them.
Why does Matthew chose to make this O.T. argument here? I believe because this is the perfect example of Jesus the all powerful and Jesus the all personal. We, you and I, we are both groups. We are Peter’s mother-in-law, we are also the masses. You are a stranger, you are coming to him in mass, you are demon possessed, you are sick. But Jesus loves his own, he heals them, he bears their burdens, we receive this gift, and then, in joy, we turn to serve him.
Pray.