No formula for success

A healthy Bible study always considers each text first in its own context. If one does not do this, the words are easily misinterpreted. This is also what happens with this verse. Two things are often assumed here that are not even mentioned in the text:

1. It takes two, to be sure that Jesus is with you (and with three it becomes really cozy)
2. This is a statement about the church (because we have rented Jesus)

Both assumptions are wrong. This is neither a formula according to which Jesus is present from two participants, nor a description of today’s church. This can be seen with a few questions.

On the first point: Is it implied here that Jesus is not with you when you are alone? Does it take at least two people for Jesus to say “Now it’s worth it for me to be there”? Probably you will deny this, after which the verse is immediately relativized. It will be intuitively clear to us that this is not some kind of success formula for community, nor a magic formula to get Jesus moving.

It will be intuitively clear to us that this is not some kind of success formula for community, nor a magic formula to get Jesus moving.

The second point is also easy to answer. It is generally assumed that the church does not begin until Acts. Before that, there was no church in which believers from the nations had a place. The current passage is written before the cross and Jesus has previously stated very specifically that He was sent exclusively to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matt 15:24). There was really no question of a present-day congregation of all nations. One cannot simply interpret this text as one pleases. Not everywhere that says “Jesus” on it is also “today’s church” in it. Read more in the article “Jesus and Paul – are they saying the same thing?”

The problem with such a popular statement is not only that people misinterpret the text, but also that they do not understand the text. The original meaning is lost and with it a piece of wealth.

Why is it really going on here?

It is about a rebuke

If we want to understand the statement in context, we must include the context. Then this story reads quite differently.

“If therefore thy brother sin, go and deliver him between thee and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take another one or two with you so that every legal case is established by two or three witnesses. But if he does not listen to them, tell the called-out church; if he also does not obey the called-out church, count him as much to you as one of the nations or a tax collector.
Verily, I say to you: Whatever you bind on earth will be what is bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be what is loosed in heaven.
Verily, again I say to you: If two of you here on earth agree in asking for any thing, it will be given to you by My Father in the heavens; for where two or three are gathered in My name, there am I in their midst.”
Mt 18,15-20

This section does not talk about arbitrary topics, but the statements belong together. The passage just quoted belongs to a conversation between Jesus and His disciples that seizes the whole of chapter 18. The disciples’ original question in this conversation concerns the “kingdom of heaven,” and Jesus’ answer fits this particular context (Matt. 18:1). With Jesus’ proclamation, the disciples experienced, so to speak, a beginning of the coming messianic kingdom. That is the context and these verses are also part of it.

Logically, it is not only about dreams of the future, but also about practical issues. “Now if your brother sins” is one such reference. It’s about community living. What to do when there are problems, when someone “sins” and engages in unhealthy behavior? Then Jesus gives some practical advice that is for the protection of all people. It is a matter of rebuke:

1. A “brother” (someone from the community) sins. You see the behavior that is not okay (Mt 18:15)
2. Go to him privately and talk to him. This is the first step (Mt 18:15)
3. If your brother does not respond, talk again, but bring one or two witnesses (“where two or three …”). Mt 18:16)
4. If your brother still does not respond, bring the case before the church (Matt. 18:17).
5. If your brother also does not respond to the judgment of the whole congregation, he is to be considered one of the nations (non-Israel peoples) or like a tax collector (Matt 18:17). They have distanced themselves from these. This also impressively shows that this is not about today’s community.
6. The judgment is now to be valid, in heaven as on earth. Jesus places responsibility with the individual, then with some of the congregation, then with the entire congregation. (Mt 18:18)
7. God will confirm these common decisions, not because people are infallible, but because pragmatic solutions are sought here, with God’s action in mind (Mt 18:19).
8. (now follows the reason) … For where two or three are gathered in My name, there am I in their midst.

The topic is rebuke in the community and how to proceed in it. If you see something that is not good, you should first go in person. If that doesn’t work, go back with one or two witnesses. If the brother evades even there, it goes to the next and last instance: the community. If the behavior is not corrected, this person should be considered “outside the people of Israel”. The Jewish community in Jerusalem, who were waiting for the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom, did not maintain contact with gentiles. Even with pious proselytes, contact was avoided. This is shown, among other things, by the story of Peter and Cornelius (Acts 10), where Peter fiercely resisted making contact with a proselyte.

This is a kind of community discipline. That now God and Jesus stand in solidarity with the decisions of the church is the statement here. This is extraordinary. The procedure is very thoughtful. Several steps are required. In the end, however, the decision should be as valid before man as it is before God.

So no one is carelessly maneuvered out of the picture here. One tries to win the person who was conspicuous by his behavior (not: other doctrine!). However, should you decide to distance yourself from someone who is behaving wrongly, that is fine. So you can’t stand up and say that this is just a “human” decision that can be directly doubted again, but it is a pragmatic decision that was made by agreement of several people. This will apply.

“If two of you here on earth agree in asking for any thing, it will be given to them by My Father in the heavens”. It should be clear by now that it does not concern any questions or requests, but that it is about the extremely difficult decision to rebuke someone, perhaps forcing oneself to take a painful step of distancing. Take courage! Jesus is there in such a case. He is then in the middle among us. You can count on God’s guidance even when everything is not easy. The focus in this section is the community. Such a decision is made with regard to the community.

Two or three

The expression “two or three” is found in both the Old and New Testaments. Paul writes, for example:

“Against an elder take no charge, except upon the testimony of two or three witnesses.”
1Tim 5:19

These “two or three” are to be used to ensure that “only with several witnesses” can a statement be made. This is necessary because otherwise individuals will go to war against some elders. I have experienced this myself several times, so I can agree that this statement from Paul to Timothy makes a lot of sense.

Paul repeats references that already existed in the Tenach (Old Testament):

“Upon the testimony of two witnesses or three witnesses, whoever is to die shall be put to death. He may not be killed on the testimony of a single witness.“
Deut 17:6

“A single witness should not appear against anyone for any unrighteousness or for any sin, for any transgression that he commits. Only on two witnesses’ testimony or on three witnesses’ testimony shall a matter be valid.“
Deut 19:15

This is exactly what was said in the Gospel of Matthew, as quoted earlier:

“But if he will not listen to you, take another or two with you, that every legal case may be established by the mouths of two or three witnesses.”
Mt 18,16

This has nothing to do with community in the social or spiritual sense. It’s about testimony and being prudent about handling a difficult case in the community.

After all, isn’t it about community?

But isn’t it also about community? No, not by context. You have to read that into it first.

However, there are questions about community from the Jewish tradition. In the book “The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah” Alfred Edersheim, a Jew from Budapest, describes the Jewish background to the Gospels. This is highly interesting. Concerning Matthew 18:20, he mentions (book ii, page 124) a passage from the Mishnah (Ab. iii.2) and the Talmud (Ber. 6a), and on the basis of Malachi 3:16, that-where two or three come together and contend with the Torah, the Shechinah (the glory of God) is among them. In this way, one tries to trace the word and to link a new meaning to it by interpreting it. Note, however, that this way of looking at the Bible is completely different from what is common in evangelical circles, for example.

In the same section, Edersheim mentions that in Jewish tradition it was by no means inferred that one had to get along on one’s own without God’s presence. Based on Lamentations 3:28 and Exodus 20:21, people recognized that God is present even when they are alone. He will be present and bless the individual even then.

Deepening

• Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (PDF/HTML)
• Alfred Edersheim (Wikipedia)