Daily Writing

Thursday, 1 January 2026

But He answered her not a word.
And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, “Send her away, for she cries out after us.” Matthew 15:23

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And He answered not a word. And having approached, His disciples, they entreated Him, saying, ‘You dismiss her! For she cries after us’” (CG).

In the previous verse, the woman of Canaan came to Jesus while He was in the region of Tyre and Sidon, begging Him to have mercy on her, seeking help for her demon-possessed daughter. Matthew continues the narrative, saying, “And He answered not a word.”

There are various thoughts on the cold shoulder, which is presented here. Some think that Jesus knew all along what would occur, and He was testing her, allowing the situation to unfold before doing what He knew He would do all along. Ellicott thinks that “the prevailing power of prayer working on the sympathy of Christ” is what eventually will motivate Him.

But at this point, He is candid about why He does not respond to her. That will be seen in the next verse. Jesus was on a mission. It was purposeful, targeted, and required His full attention. Hence, at this time, He did not answer her as she croaked out for her daughter. Matthew continues, saying, “And having approached, His disciples, they entreated Him.”

A new word is seen here, erótaó, to interrogate. HELPS Word Studies says, “make an earnest request, especially by someone on ‘special footing,’ i.e. in ‘preferred position.’” A good word to define this is entreat. The disciples are in such a preferred position, and they want to know why He is allowing this to continue.

One can see them, saying to Him (the verb is imperfect), “Why are you allowing her to annoy us. Why don’t you just tell her to leave!” It was an interrogation of sorts as to His motives for doing nothing, one way or another. In their ongoing words, Matthew notes they were “saying, ‘You dismiss her! For she croaks after us.’”

Stating the obvious doesn’t help anything here. Jesus knows she is there, and yet He is neither dismissing her nor assisting her. Therefore, their petition must be more for their own benefit than to convince Him. They are trying to figure out why He is not acting.

Life application: Put yourself in such a position. If you have been given instructions to do something, and yet an issue arises that does not fit within the parameters of your instructions, but you also don’t want to ignore the issue, what would you do?

It is probable that most people would not act. Not acting is not a violation of the mission unless it was made explicit from the outset. To cover every such condition would mean an infinitely long list. Hence, such things are normally not even addressed.

Think of any movie or play where such an event arises. A person has to do something. A secondary issue enters the scene that is not a part of the mission, but which has taken hold of the main actor. It introduces a tension into the narrative as both issues are dealt with. The main directive is followed while the secondary issue is allowed to play out, even though nothing is actively done about it by the main character.

This type of thing happens in real life all the time. An example might be a missionary who goes to a foreign land. His mission is to evangelize the people, making converts. He is not being paid for other things. While there, he meets a lady whom he is big time interested in. However, she is not a Christian, having not accepted the gospel.

What will he do? He cannot act toward her to develop a relationship because that would be contrary to the faith. However, he doesn’t want her to go away either. And so he does nothing. Regardless of the outcome (but for the sake of the love story, we’ll say she eventually accepts Jesus and they get married), the tension has developed.

This is as common as bullets in an ammo factory, and it is just why so many stories, plays, and movies are developed with this theme. It is a part of the human condition. In the end, when the rules are adhered to and yet the outcome is positive, we always get the best feeling when the story is over. Why? Because to do wrong, despite often being our default setting, is never the preferred option.

Therefore, to allow events to play out to a resolution (hopefully a happy one like our missionary example) is what stirs our human emotions the most. Think about this and consider it as this short story, relayed by Matthew, unfolds before us.

“Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. ¹⁵ For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. ¹⁶ Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.” Hebrews 4:14-16

Lord God, thank You for the humanity of our Messiah, Jesus. In seeing how He responded to the world around us, we have the perfect example of how to conduct our own affairs. May we learn to hold fast to Your word at all times while allowing surrounding events to play out in a way that will be favorable to our hopes and desires. Amen.

Wednesday, 31 December 2025

And behold, a woman of Canaan came from that region and cried out to Him, saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! My daughter is severely demon-possessed.” Matthew 15:22

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And you behold! A Canaanite woman from those same borders, having come, she croaked to Him, saying, ‘You compassionate me, Lord, Son of David! My daughter, she is demon-possessed badly’” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus left the land of the Gennesaret and departed to the allotments of Tyre and Sidon. With Him there, Matthew next records, “And you behold! A Canaanite woman.”

This is the only time that the word Chananaios, Canaanite, is seen in the New Testament. That is derived from Chanaan, Canaan, found twice in Acts. This was the early name of the land of Israel, having been named after Canaan, the grandson of Noah through Ham.

The meaning of the name Canaan (Hebrew kna’an) is debated. It is variously translated as Land of Purple, Low, Merchant, etc. The likely meaning is Low, Abased, Humble, Humiliated, something along these lines. This is based on the account of Genesis 9, where Canaan is first mentioned.

In Mark, it says of this same woman that she “was a Greek, a Syro-Phoenician by birth.” There is no contradiction in this. Syro-Phonecia is the area, and the term “Greek” is being applied as we might when we say of a person from Germany, “He is a European.” One is a wider explanation of a more precise designation. Albert Barnes provides the historical understanding –

“In ancient times, the whole land, including Tyre and Sidon, was in the possession of the Canaanites, and called Canaan. The Phoenicians were descended from the Canaanites. The country, including Tyre and Sidon, was called Phoenicia, or Syro-Phoenicia. That country was taken by the Greeks under Alexander the Great, and those cities, in the time of Christ, were Greek cities. This woman was therefore a Gentile, living under the Greek government, and probably speaking the Greek language. She was by birth a Syro-Phoenician, born in that country, and descended, therefore, from the ancient Canaanites. All these names might, with propriety, be given to her.”

Of this woman of Canaan, it next says, “from those same borders.” The meaning is based on the previous verse, that it is the “allotments – Tyre and Sidon.” Understanding this, Matthew continues, saying, “having come, she croaked to Him, saying, ‘You compassionate me, Lord, Son of David!’”

Nothing is said about how she knew of Jesus, but it is apparent that His fame had extended far and wide. In both Mark and Luke, by this time in the narrative, it was already acknowledged that people from Tyre and Sidon had come to see Jesus (Mark 3:8 and Luke 6:17). Thus, Jewish residents of that area had already gone to see Jesus, returned, and spoken of the things they saw.

Now, knowing He was in the area and understanding that He was the promised Messiah, indicated by the words “Son of David,” this Canaanite woman begs for compassion to be extended even to her, a Gentile.

But more, she is of the cursed line of Canaan. This is based on Noah’s cursing of Canaan for what Ham did to him in Genesis 9. The last thing a person of such lineage might expect from the Jewish Messiah would be compassion. And yet, she faithfully came forward in hopeful expectation that He might listen to her plea, which was, “My daughter, she is demon-possessed badly.”

This woman, having heard of Jesus’ capabilities, has placed the situation concerning her demon-possessed daughter in the hands of Jesus, hoping He will respond and cure her. Her faith is on prominent display, even if the level of it is not yet revealed.

Life application: In commentaries on this verse, both Cambridge and Vincent’s Word Studies say something similar –

“…out of the same coasts] Literally, those coasts. Jesus did not himself pass beyond the borders of Galilee, but this instance of mercy extended to a Gentile points to the wide diffusion of the Gospel beyond the Jewish race.” Cambridge

“Lit., as Rev., from those borders; i.e., she crossed from Phoenicia into Galilee.”

They cannot accept that Jesus traveled outside of Galilee. This, despite two different words having been used to describe His going there. The first was in verse 21, where Jesus is said to have traveled to the “allotments – Tyre and Sidon.” The second, in verse 22, says “from those same borders,” meaning she was born, raised, and lived in the same area where Jesus had traveled to.

These scholars got it stuck in their heads that Jesus never left the area of Galilee based on what it says when He charged His disciples not to go in the way of the Gentiles and by His words that will say that He was sent to minister only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Because of this, their faulty deduction is that “Jesus never left the Galilee.”

Both of those statements were addressed in the comments of verse 15:21. It explicitly says Jesus traveled to this area. But once we have a presupposition stuck in our head, cognitive dissonance takes over, and we will do anything to justify falling in line with what we want the text to say.

What do you believe about the timing of the rapture? Have you got that in your head because of what you were taught? If so, the chances are that you will argue that point regardless of what the Bible actually says. That is unwise. We must be willing to acknowledge that we could be wrong.

Be sure to keep all things in their proper context. This is of paramount importance. From there, be willing to accept that what you think is true might be wrong. After that, do your study and don’t violate the “context” issue if you find you might have been wrong. This is what most people do when faced with the reality that things aren’t matching up with what they thought.

Context is king. So keep everything in its proper context. From there, stick to it at all times. Your doctrine will improve as long as you stick to what is said, regardless of what you think you know.

Lord God, none of us wants to be proven wrong. And none of us wants to betray the teachings that we received from a beloved pastor or teacher by contradicting what they taught us. And so, we put up a defense against change. Help us not to do this. May we be willing to go where Your word teaches, regardless of whether we find we were wrong. Help us to have this attitude at all times. Amen.

Tuesday, 30 December 2025

Then Jesus went out from there and departed to the region of Tyre and Sidon. Matthew 15:21

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And having departed thence, Jesus, He withdrew to the allotments – Tyre and Sidon” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus finished His explanation of the things that defile a man. Eating with unwashed hands was not among those things. Next, Matthew records, “And having departed thence.”

The last record of where they were was in the land of Gennesaret. That was noted in Matthew 14:34. The account doesn’t say why they left, but some scholars assume it was to avoid the anger of the Pharisees whom He had shamed. Regardless of the reason, it next says, “Jesus, He withdrew to the allotments – Tyre and Sidon.”

This is not the first time that these two cities are mentioned, but it is the first time that it notes Jesus having gone to them. The first time, it was in reference to His works, which evidenced His being the Messiah –

“Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. ²² But I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you.” Matthew 11:21, 22

As for the terminology, it says that He went to the allotments of Tyre and Sidon. Thus, He may not have gone to these cities, but to the surrounding area. However, it would be inappropriate to assume that He didn’t go there based on His words to the disciples about not going in the way of the Gentiles (Matthew 10:5) or His words concerning being sent only to the House of Israel, which will be stated in verse 24 of this chapter.

The reason for this is that, despite being Gentile cities, there was probably a sizeable Jewish presence there. Going to a Jewish home in a Gentile area would not violate either statement. He would remain in the “way of the Jews,” and He would be ministering to the House of Israel.

Of this visit, the Pulpit Commentary says –

“If, as Chrysostom suggests, Jesus, by going to these partly Gentile districts, wished to give a practical commentary on the abrogation of the distinction between clean and unclean (breaking down the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile), this lesson was given equally well by the acceptance and commendation of the Gentile woman’s faith, even though Christ himself was outside of pagan territory.”

This is, as noted in a previous commentary, not an appropriate sentiment. It is true that Jesus fulfilled the law and set aside all dietary laws in its fulfillment. It is also true that the wall of partition is brought down in Christ. However, it is an unacceptable leap to assume that Jesus was there to “give a practical commentary on the abrogation of the distinction between clean and unclean.”

That is putting the cart before the horse. Only in the completed work of Christ is that realized. The introduction of the Gentile woman will be the same lesson to Israel as that stated by Him in Luke 4:23-27. God does not favor Jews over Gentiles, and His mercy towards Gentiles was evidenced concerning this in the past.

His point is the same there as it was with the centurion already noted in Matthew 8. God is looking for faith in people. He would rather have a faith-filled Gentile than an entire nation of Jews lacking faith. True as this is, it has nothing to do with Jesus hinting that the ceremonial parts of the law had been abrogated by Him.

If that was what He intended, and the people of Israel would have known this very well, they would have taken Him out and stoned Him. Even after the resurrection, the Jews still didn’t get this. They insisted on maintaining the dietary laws scrupulously. Peter had to be explicitly told that this was not appropriate in Acts 10 before he was told to go to the house of Cornelius.

Life application: It must be trumpeted loudly that the dispensational model is a necessary part of what God is doing in order for us to rightly divide Scripture. Until it was fully laid out and explained, commentaries throughout the centuries were wholly incorrect in explaining what Jesus did and what the effects of His work meant for the people of the world.

Even to this day, churches that do not understand or properly teach dispensationalism have all kinds of aberrant doctrines they must contend with. Actual contradictions in their doctrine and theology arise because of mishandling this important precept.

It affects the doctrines of salvation, end times matters, law observance, and so much more. Be sure to study and remember the principal tenets of the dispensational model. In doing so, you will avoid many pitfalls that some of even the greatest teachers of Scripture have failed to get right.

Lord God, help us to rightly divide Your word, the word of truth. It is without error or contradiction. But when we misunderstand the context, we will have both creep up in our doctrine. Help us to get things right. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.

Monday, 29 December 2025

These are the things which defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man.” Matthew 15:20

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“These, they are, the ‘defiling the man,’ but to eat with unwashed hands, not it defiles the man” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus gave a list of things that stem from the heart and which defile a person. He confirms this now with the words, “These, they are, the ‘defiling the man.’”

The list from Jesus, as recorded in Matthew, is not all-inclusive. In Mark, rather than seven items, Jesus gives a list of thirteen. It is certain that the list could go on all day as the human heart thinks up new ways of sinning. That is a thought stated by Paul in Romans 1:30, where he notes those who are “inventors of evil things.” In fact, the Lord, through Jeremiah, says –

“The heart is deceitful above all things,
And desperately wicked;
Who can know it?
¹⁰ I, the Lord, search the heart,
I test the mind,
Even to give every man according to his ways,
According to the fruit of his doings.” Jeremiah 17:9, 10

It is the heart where the source of true defilement of a man comes. Jesus continues, saying, “but to eat with unwashed hands, not it defiles the man.”

Here is a new word, aniptos. It is derived from the negative particle a, and the word niptó, to wash or cleanse. Therefore, it signifies unwashed. Jesus explicitly says what He was referring to concerning foods entering the mouth. He was not speaking of the foods themselves, but of the fact that they are unwashed.

Without considering these words, scholars have run ahead of the dispensation’s completion and said that Jesus was claiming that all foods are acceptable to be eaten. However, that would be a violation of the Law of Moses, something not yet fulfilled by Him. Having said that, the parallel account in Mark says concerning food –

“…because not it enters him into the heart, but into the stomach and into the john it ejects, cleansing all the foods.” Mark 7:19

Taking this to a wholly unintended extreme, the NIV et al, which is based on the offset of the NU text, thus implying it is the wording of Mark, says, “(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean)”. This is not at all what Jesus is saying. He is saying that the food is purified through the process of going through the body. As in Matthew, the context is that of ceremonial washing of foods, not the types of foods.

It is true that during this dispensation, all foods are acceptable –

“For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving.” 1 Timothy 4:4

This sentiment is taught by Paul in several ways in Romans 14, 1 Corinthians 8, Colossians 2, etc. But this is not what Jesus is referring to while under the Law of Moses. The distinction must be made and kept separate. Until the law was fulfilled, it had to be obeyed.

Life application: Those who have come to Christ “are not under law but under grace” Romans 6:14. If there is no law, then there can be no imputation of sin (Romans 5:13, 2 Corinthians 5:19, etc.). As this is so, believers cannot lose their salvation.

However, Jesus states moral truths in the verses we have been looking at. The things that we do, which stem from a wicked heart, are wicked. No, we will not be imputed sin and lose our salvation for doing those things. However, we are not blameless either.

In doing such things, we harm our relationship with the Lord, we set a very poor example for the world to see, and we will lose rewards at the Bema seat of Christ. We may also lose our lives, health, savings, etc., in the process of doing such things. These are truths that the Bible proclaims.

We are not given license to do wrong, something those who say the doctrine of eternal salvation necessarily must teach. That is a false dichotomy that is unsupportable from Scripture. Scripture teaches eternal salvation, while it also teaches holiness and consequences for wrongdoing.

Be sure not to get bullied by those who claim you can lose your salvation. They have poor doctrine and nothing biblical to stand on. At the same time, never take your eternal salvation as a license to sin. That is the surest way of making your life miserable. Actions have consequences. Be holy to the Lord and honor Him with your lives.

Lord God, help us to be ready to defend sound doctrine at all times. But may we not be arrogant as we do. Also, Lord, help us to be holy in our thoughts, words, and deeds for the sake of Jesus’ name. We can so easily get distracted from these things. So help us in this, O God. Amen.

Sunday, 28 December 2025

For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. Matthew 15:19

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“For from the heart, they come: evil meanderings, murders, adulteries, harlotries, thefts, false-witnessings, blasphemies” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus told the disciples that it is what proceeds out of the mouth that defiles a man. Having said that, He now explains what that means, saying, “For from the heart, they come.”

Rather than something entering externally and passing through, this is something that begins internally, in the heart. Therefore, it reveals the nature and characteristics of the one from whom those things issue. In the case of defilement, Jesus begins His list of seven defiling items with “evil meanderings.”

It is two words in Greek, dialogismoi ponēroi. The first word is new, dialogismos, a discussion. Internally, it signifies a consideration (by implication, purpose). Thus, it would signify a meandering. The second word is an adjective signifying evil.

Taken together, this refers to the general evil thoughts that arise in a person’s head. The thought itself is wicked. To act on such meanderings only compounds the guilt of the person. Next, He says, “murders.”

It is another new word, phonos. It is from pheno, to slay. In this case, it is intentional, unjustified homicide. Jesus continues with “adulteries.”

Another new word is given, moicheia, the act of adultery. It will only be seen again in Mark 7:21 and John 8:3. Throughout the Bible, the act of adultery is condemned as wrongdoing, but the act begins inside the person. Jesus will later note that the thought alone brings guilt, even without committing the act. Continuing on, Jesus says, “harlotries.”

It is a word already seen, porneia. It signifies various harlotries, such as adultery, incest, and fornication in general. Next are “thefts.”

It is yet another new word, klopé, meaning stealing or theft. It is derived from the verb kleptó, to steal. One can think of a kleptomaniac. But it includes any stealing, not just the compulsive type. A person taking something that does not belong to him is a thief. The act is known as theft. Jesus continues with, “false-witnessings.”

It is another new word, pseudomarturia. One can easily see the breakdown. The first part is pseudo, being derived from pseudés, that which is false or untrue. It defines what a liar speaks. The second half of the word is from martus, a witness. Thus, it speaks of a false witness.

The word martus has come to signify a martyr because one’s witness will often lead to his martyrdom. This word, pseudomarturia, only refers to a false witness. Jesus finishes the list with “blasphemies.”

It is a word already used in Chapter 12. It refers to vilification, especially against God. As such, it is defined as blasphemy, evil speaking, and railing in general.

Life application: Jesus says these things stem from the heart and render a person unclean. The fact is that most of us have had many of these thoughts in our hearts many times. They exist as a part of fallen humanity. It isn’t that we would necessarily act on these thoughts, but we may even have done or still do them.

As people, we are responsible for quelling the inner urges that stem from within us, keeping them from overtaking us. When we fail, does the Lord understand? The answer is, Yes. He knows our weaknesses and frailties.

David was overtaken by adultery. That started in his heart, and he acted out his desire. This led to his next wicked act, murder. Again, that started in his heart. He acted against one of his own soldiers. The law called for death in such instances. However, the record of the account says –

“So David said to Nathan, ‘I have sinned against the Lord.’
And Nathan said to David, ‘The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. ¹⁴ However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who is born to you shall surely die.’” 2 Samuel 12:13, 14

David’s sin was taken away. He acknowledged his sin, the Lord looked on his heart and knew that he was repentant, and forgiveness was provided. David still had to live with the consequences of what he did, but he remained in the Lord’s favor. If the Lord did this for David, even before sending Jesus to atone for our sins, we can know that God will forgive us when we come to Him, acknowledging our wrongdoing.

No person is outside of God’s potential forgiveness, and no person’s sin is too great to be forgiven. Trust that this is so, come to Jesus, and receive forgiveness and eternal life because of what He has done for His people.

Lord God, how grateful we are to You for what You have done in sending Jesus. May we stay close to You at all times, but when we stray, we know we have an Advocate who stands with us, ready to defend us for His name’s sake. Hallelujah for Jesus our Lord! Amen.