Matthew 15

Matthew 15:1-20

DIVINE VERSUS HUMAN Mat_15:1-20.THE Scribes and Pharisees followed Jesus as a detective follows the man suspected of crime. They listened ardently to His words; they watched critically His work; they took cognizance of His every movement; but they were interested as the detective is interested. They saw everything through suspicious eyes; they heard every word by prejudiced ears; they watched every movement with the hope of finding in it the ground of charges and even of conviction.Hence, their question, “Why do Thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread”? A weighty question! To eat at the table of the refined, with dirty hands, would be an occasion of criticism; but to eat as these were accustomed to eat, men only around a common pot, with hands that were clean enough, but only lacking the ceremonial touch, that was the offence! Alas, to what desperate lengths men went to find deficiencies in Christ.

So anxious were they that when they were compelled, with Pilate, to confess, “We find no fault in this Man”, they charged up to His account even the peccadillos of His disciples.But, we have reason to thank God for every question voiced by the enemies of Jesus. The whole world has been enriched, and the Church of God empowered by His answers. In these twenty verses, certain great truths are clearly set forth. First,DIVINE VS. HUMAN When the Scribes and Pharisees came to Jesus asking, “Why do Thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread”? He answered and said unto them, “Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God for your tradition”?The human test is too often man’s traditions. This is to be expected with the world, but unfortunately, we find the same fact largely obtains with the Church, and the controversy now raging in the churches is accentuated at this very point. The strangest inconsistency known to ecclesiastical history exists in the fact that modernism boasts, in one breath, its utter loyalty to denominationalism and its opposition to the biblical basis on which the great denominations were builded. The denominational traditions they hold in high, if not reverent, esteem, and they are ready to charge disloyalty against every man who does not back every movement inaugurated by his denomination; and yet, they will frankly affirm that they have practically no interest in the biblical teachings, great outstanding Scripture doctrines, out of which the denomination itself arose, and on the basis of which it was brought to its present size and success. For instance, fifty years ago, yea, even twenty-five years since, every man who appeared before an examining committee with a view to ordination, had to give satisfactory answers on the great doctrines of God’s Word, as they related to the inspiration of the Bible; the being and personality of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost; the existence and evil nature and work of Satan, the adversary; the Scripture teaching concerning Christ, the fall of man, the Virgin Birth, the atonement for sin, the grace in regeneration, the freeness of salvation, the doctrine of justification, repentance, faith, the Church, the ordinances, the perseverance of the saints, and the final state of the righteous and the wicked.

These fiats were supposed to provide the basis for one’s faith and the rule for one’s conduct. Now, high ecclesiastical dignitaries openly declare that they have no interest in doctrinal subjects, which is only another way of saying that they have no concern as to what the Scriptures say. But they are united in a demand that the denominational name be revered, the denominational traditions preserved and practiced, the denominational programs sacrificially advocated; and they even attempt the ecclesiastical decapitation of any and every man who asserts that, in faith and practice, the only sufficient guide is what the Scripture saith. There are men who have actually repudiated the authority of the Bible, and yet could not be brought, under any circumstances, to give up the practice of baptism by immersion—a clear illustration of the pathetic truth that the custom of the fathers is, with them, more compelling than the clear teaching of God’s Word. Hence, they continue this practice, not because the Book teaches it, but because their ecclesiastical ancestors performed it.The true test is the command of God. It was to that fact that Christ referred when He said, “Why do ye also transgress the command of God for your traditions”? He then recites, in Matthew 15:4-6, an illustration of His charge,“God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. “But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; “And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition”. This is only one of the multiplied instances of setting aside the plain Word of the Lord by an individual or personal interpretation that destroys its meaning. The present apostasy in the Church of God is well-nigh uniform in this practice. In defense of the same, we have now a new philosophy of religion, namely, that which proposes to keep the Bible, and even assign to it some degree of authority, but to so interpret its plain commandments as to make them meaningless, and then justify the deed by saying, “We are only spiritualizing Scripture; we are not literalists”—another way of declaring that the Bible does not mean what it seems to say, but something else, and, in fact, whatever the individual conscience reads from it, or even into it.When a man tells me that he is “no literalist”, I know full well what he means. He means that the plain commands of God are no longer authoritative to him; he means that he has maneuvered his own mind so as to make those commands say what he would like to have them say, and suggest what he would like to have them suggest. It is an intellectual sleight-of-hand, and there are many mentally dexterous brethren.The tradition, then, is made the enemy of the command. The great conflict today is not as formerly.

Individual interpretations of the Word of God accounted for denominations, and while it left them separated on some important matters, and on many ones of lesser moment, it left them agreed on the great fundamentals.When the World’s Christian Fundamental’s Association met for organization in Philadelphia in 1919, they picked out the major points upon which the representatives of various evangelical denominations were agreed, and they set forth the following Confession of Faith:“I. We believe in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as verbally inspired of God, and inerrant in the original writings, and that they are of supreme and final authority in faith and life.“II.

We believe in one God, eternally existing in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.“III. We believe that Jesus Christ was begotten by the Holy Spirit, and born of the Virgin Mary, and is true God and true man.“IV. We believe that man was created in the image of God, that he sinned and thereby incurred not only physical death, but also that spiritual death which is separation from God; and that all human beings are born with a sinful nature, and, in the case of those who reach moral responsibility, become sinners in thought, word and deed.“V. We believe that the Lord Jesus Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, as a representative and substitutionary sacrifice; and that all who believe in Him are justified on the ground of His shed Blood.“VI. We believe in the resurrection of the crucified body of our Lord, in His ascension into Heaven, and in His present life there for us, as High Priest and Advocate.“VII. We believe in ‘that Blessed Hope’, the personal, premillennial and imminent return of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.“VIII.

We believe that all who receive by faith the Lord Jesus Christ are born again of the Holy Spirit and thereby become children of God.“IX. We believe in the bodily resurrection of the just and unjust, the everlasting felicity of the saved, and the everlasting conscious punishment of the lost.”It must be admitted that these nine points of agreement touch the very heart of Scripture itself.

They have to do with the dogmatic utterances of the Divine Word; and yet, upon them, true Methodists, honest Baptists, sincere Presbyterians, leading Episcopalians, and the noblest representatives of other denominations are absolutely united. They ignored the traditions of men as those related themselves to methods of procedure, forms of government, mere ceremony, and stood together on the great basal truths of Scripture teaching. Traditions tend to separate men; commands of the Lord unite them. That’s why it so happens now that the “fundamentalists” of the world are more united in solid body than any denomination in existence. They have naught to do with traditions; they are asking one question, “What saith the Scripture”? and being “agreed”, they “can walk together”.But Jesus passed from the consideration of Divine Commandments vs. Human Traditions, to the subject ofDIVINE VS. HUMAN Move with the text,“Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, “This people draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and honoureth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me. “But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. “And He called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man” (Matthew 15:7-11). Christ here carried His contention to the common people. Denouncing the Pharisees and Scribes as hypocrites, affirming that Esaias had prophesied their character as a people that drew nigh with mouth, but were far off in heart, He turned to the multitude and made His appeal to them. His method in this matter was also another revelation of His wisdom.The world has yet to produce one great and mighty man who trusted his cause to either financial, intellectual or ecclesiastical autocrats. When history records such cases, and it does, it also records failures in each instance. The world’s truly noble and great men have always carried their preferred causes to the people. The wisdom involved in that method was voiced millenniums ago in the old Latin phrase, “Vox populi, vox Dei” (“the voice of the people is the voice of God”).

Even the great religious denominations that have enjoyed the most evident Divine favor have been those that carried their cause to the common people, and it will ever so remain. From time immemorial, the aristocratic church has been the ideal of some men and the objective of some movements, and in all outward appearances, it has more than once succeeded.

Great ecclesiastical organizations, characterized by social upper tens have come into being, and almost without exception they have become apostate in both faith and practice, and from a spiritual standpoint were cumberers of the ground. The majority of the spiritual, evangelical movements of the day are secessions from such institutions. They have come out only upon finding that the denomination has repeated on a large scale what was charged against the Church in Laodicea, namely, “rich”, “increased with goods”, consciously “in need of nothing”, and yet, from a spiritual standpoint, “wretched, miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked”.One often wonders, looking back over half a century, if the time will yet come when the Salvation Army and the American Volunteers shall be aristocratic movements. Their origin was not more humble than that of Episcopalianism, Methodism, or the Westminster movement—not more humble than the Baptists of a few centuries since. But, when the humble movement becomes proud, Christ turns again, as He did in this instance, to the common people. They are the perennial, yea, even the eternal source of spiritual response and supply, and the Church of God can no more live and flourish in true faith and conduct, after it has forgotten and refused them, than the coral can live detached from the great lime-stone base, out of which he is born, and connected with which he flourishes.Mark the alarm of Jesus’ disciples lest He lose the religious intellectuals.“Then came His disciples, and said unto Him, Knowest Thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying”? That is the mortal terror that grips the heart of many church people. They have been told that the cultured among men are going to leave the church; in fact that already “The church numbers among its members few of the professional, that is to say, of the scientifically trained classes; the college crowd are leaving it, and even the big-brained business men are losing interest, because they can’t accept Christ’s Word, and there is great perturbance. Whenever it falls out that the leading man of the church intellectually or financially, is cold, indifferent or offended, disciples will congregate and discuss that fact with bated breath: “Have you heard that we are likely to lose Mr. A., our most important member, and do you know I fear that in case he goes, he will have a great following, and the very best people we have will be lost, and without their support, the church will perish?” Then, when that news travels, a council is liable to be called, ex parte, of course, and sitting in solemn conclave, suggest that something be done to get the Pharisees back, and in all probability “the pastor’s resignation would be the one essential step to bring about a more settled and desirable state of affairs”.I give my candid word, as a man forty-three years now in the ministry, and as a man who has never been under the necessity of yielding to any such council, that that very alarm has unsettled and either set adrift or sent into other parishes, where God has not appointed them, more preachers than almost all other circumstances combined.Such councils never seem to remember the conduct of Christ in these matters, and if they ever did know what Paul wrote to the Corinthians, they have certainly forgotten, for when did any present-day observer hear a man answer that argument by an appeal to the Apostles’ words,“For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: “But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; “And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: “That no flesh should glory in His presence” (1 Corinthians 1:26-29). Recently, there appeared in “The Methodist” what was entitled “A Delayed Letter”. It was addressed to the Reverend Dr. Paul of Corinth, Greece, and in it the writer said,“My dear Dr. Paul: “I have been reading a letter written by you some years ago to a company of disciples of Jesus Christ who were living in Galatia. I have been instructed and inspired by your message, and greatly impressed by your exaltation of Grace over Law, and am fully convinced that you are right in every particular. “I have also read with interest and sympathy of your fight of faith, and of your entire consecration which is expressed in the words, I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the “flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me’. “I have heard from others of the purity of your character, the wisdom of your utterances, and of your untiring zeal, in spite of persecutions, dangers and sufferings, such as no ordinary man could endure; and I have been told that of persons born of two human parents, no greater has ever lived. “Will you pardon one who has the highest regard for your Christian character, and believes that your every utterance was inspired by the indwelling Spirit of the ever-living God, if I make a kindly criticism of something found in the letter named above? I refer to the controversy in which you engaged with some of the dignitaries of the early Church who ‘seemed to be somewhat’, to whom you refused to ‘give place by subjection, no, not for an hour’. And then again, when Peter came down to see you, you ‘withstood him to his face, for he was to be blamed for his dissimulation’. “Did you not know that there should be no controversy in religious matters? Have you never heard the slogan of the ‘seemed to be somewhat’s’—‘stop your controversy and unite to secure an increase of membership in the Church?’ But I am forgetting that that modern slogan was not adopted until the apostasy had begun, and was man-made, while your utterances were Spirit-inspired. Perhaps the ‘seemed to be somewhat’ leaders had some similar slogan that led you into controversy with the religious high-brows of your time. A Believer” Following Christ further in this study, it looks strangely as if He affirms it a fact that The loss of such people would be gain.“But He answered and said, Every plant, which My Heavenly Father hath not planted, shall he rooted up. “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch”. That was a very unbrotherly answer to make. It seems almost like indignity of expression, and certainly it appeared to be wanting in consideration for the high standing of the repudiated Pharisees. But the wisdom of the ages seems to have approved Christ at this point, also, for, as the writer of the above “Delayed Letter”, to Paul continued:“Permit me to call your attention to some of the results of your example. Martin Luther entered into controversy with the Roman Church; he suffered great persecution, and that fallen Church has become more and more intolerant, and her path down the ages has been marked by the blood of the slaughtered saints of God. John Wesley entered into controversy with the teachers of English Deism, and like you, would not ‘give place by subjection, no, not for an hour’, but it made him unpopular with those who ‘seemed to be somewhat’, and aroused opposition and persecution. “And because of the encouragement received from you, there are many sincere Christians today who are engaging in controversy with those who ‘seemed to be somewhat’, who are despoiling the Church, wrecking the faith, and destroying the souls of the people. It looks as if it would result in a divided Church, unless the Christians should heed the call to ‘stop the controversy and unite to secure an increase of membership in the Church’. And if they do not respond to it, those who ‘seemed to be somewhat’, may be driven into Unitarianism. Yours in the Faith, A Believer.” We have already made additional history to the effect that Unitarianism has always been a leech upon the ecclesiastical body, and, when shaken off, its loss was gain. Apart from the evangelical church, such people have always been as the Pharisees of old, without power.“Let history teach us! Cerinthus found place in the first century church, and his followers multiplied. John, instead of calling a prayer meeting to see if his views of doctrine would not fellowship those of this early Unitarian, quit the bath house when this skeptic entered it, lest God in judgment strike the place, and wrote an epistle begging true brethren not to receive him or his into their houses.“And yet the faith of Cerinthus was far nearer Christian teaching than is the infidelity of Modernists. The effect of the Gnostics upon the early church was sore enough. They followed the method of Modernists and captured the schools, but in the course of time the churches repudiated them and enjoyed a consequent revival.“Let Presbyterians recall the Socinian result in England in the eighteenth century and save themselves its repetition in the twentieth.

As the ‘Westminster Confession’ then cleared the air, and called the denomination back to the Book, so they rose again in 1910 and 1916 and 1923 to reaffirm their faith and largely turn Unitarian infidelity from their fellowship.“Let not the Baptists forget the consequences of the Arian teaching in England, nor the wilting effect that reduced them from a prosperous people to a nonentity, never to be recovered until the ‘New Connection’ purged itself of this leaven and came again into the favor of the Lord.“Let the Congregationalists be not unmindful of the time when the Unitarian parasite so ate into that New England Christian body as to carry away at one time and by the most infamous ‘legalized plunder’ one hundred and twenty-five of their churches, and leave them but a single evangelical body in the city of old Boston. Dr.

Jefferson, of the Broadway Tabernacle, New York, himself a Liberal, referring to these defections from the trinitarian faith, and the bitter fruits of them, says, ‘I can understand how a delusion can maintain its ground one generation, or a half dozen generations, but I cannot believe that a delusion would be mighty over the truth through sixty generations. The two conceptions (Trinitarian and Unitarian) have met again and again, and every time they have met, the lower (Unitarian) conception has been routed and driven from the field. Nineteen of God’s centuries have come out of eternity since Jesus died upon the Cross, and all of them have put the crown on the head of the higher conception of Jesus and broken the scepter of the lower conception.’ That, perhaps, is the very reason why Edward Everett Hale, in his old age, was compelled to say, ‘I do not see why so simple and democratic a religion as Unitarianism has not swept the country long ago.’ The success of falsehood is fitful; its final failure is as certain as the existence of God. Truly, as one said of Unitarianism, it is like the farm which John Randolph of Roanoke described as ‘sterile by nature and exhausted by cultivation.” (See Riley Inspiration or Evolution, P. 155-157.)But our point of further consideration isDIVINE WISDOM VS. HUMAN . “Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable. “And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? “Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? “But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: “These are the things which defile a man; but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man” (Matthew 15:15-20). Even saved men are slow to perceive spiritual truth. Peter was a saved man, and yet he had not understood what Jesus meant. Ceremonialism has more than once clouded spiritual vision. Only those who are caught and held in its meshes fail to understand the great truth that inner cleansing is more needful than outer, and that defilement comes not from eating meats, but from the exercise of evil thoughts. It is rather a pathetic fact that, when we have come to the last chapter of Luke’s Gospel, and the scenes of Christ’s earth-ministry are certainly closing, His own disciples do not yet understand Him. To the two who walked with Him on the way to Emmaus and who revealed to Him ignorance of the meaning of His Word, He was compelled to say, “O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken”.

If the world’s wisdom is folly (and it is), the wisdom of disciples, when left without the illumining Word of Christ, is stupidity. What an occasion of gratitude to remember that it is written, “If any man lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him”.

Peter, then, went to the right source for information, for Christ is God.The state of the heart determines one’s spiritual standing. This is brought out in many Scripture passages, found in both the Old and New Testaments. The heathen notion was that the bowels were the seat of life. The Bible teaching is, “Out of the heart are the issues of life”. In far ancient Hebrew history, it was written, “Man looketh on the outward appearance, but God looketh on the heart”. Paul, writing to the Colossians, pled with them to “fear God in singleness of heart”; writing to the Ephesians, he besought servants to be “obedient to their masters in singleness of heart”.

We know that “with the heart, man believeth unto righteousness”; and that’s the great truth that Jesus here seeks to impart. From that, He passes to its corollary.Cleanliness is of the Spirit, not by mere ceremony.

The washing of hands improves character in nothing. It is not the dust of the ground that stains the soul, or even seriously blotches the body. In all probability, the fallen women of the world are more uniformly cleanly in person and bathed in perfume than any other single class. This in no whit helps a corrupt heart. There is a “washing of regeneration by the water of the Word”—the work of the Spirit, that cleanses body and soul.A. J. Gordon, in one of his books, tells the story of a Chinaman—a laundryman—and a scholar in a Chinese Sunday School in Boston. One Sunday they had in their Sunday School lesson verse 1 John 1:9, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness”.

Wang’s eyes were glued on the word “cleanse”. As a laundryman, he knew exactly what that meant—“wash, make clean”. He went home to ponder the Word, and apparently to fully comprehend its meaning; for, when, on the next Lord’s Day, he appeared, the old clothes he had formerly worn were cast aside and he was in the cleanest new suit. His cue was cut, his face was shaven, his linen was immaculate, and his teacher thought he had a new scholar—and on discovering that it was the same man made over, he remarked, “My, Wang, how clean you look today!” to which Wang replied, “Christ, He make-a me clean inside, outside!” Such are the undefiled!

Matthew 15:21-39

CHRIST IS THE ANSWER TO ALL CRIES Matthew 15:21-39. OUR Saviour’s ministry was, in a most realistic way, a missionary one. To look after the lost sheep of the House of Israel and gather them into the fold whence they had strayed may have been the most immediate intention of His mission, but surely the whole tone and character of His teaching and doing pointed clearly to the more remote end of seeking to save all the lost, whether Jew or sinner and publican. His forerunner, John the Baptist, was a Jew. His first disciples, James and Andrew, Simon and John, were Jews. His first teaching was in the synagogue of the Jews, from their Scriptures and for their enlightenment; but that Israel’s bounds were not to determine the limits of His Kingdom, nor her traditions the measure and character of His truth, grew more and more evident as the days of His ministry flew apace.When He mingled freely with the common crowd, the lines of Jewish caste were overstepped. When He called into His fellowship and to His discipleship Matthew, the publican, He seemed violating both social and moral law.

When He declared the faith of a heathen centurion superior to that found in the hearts of Israel, He appeared to despise and almost to defame the devotion which had gathered strength through centuries of exercise. When at last He despatched His chosen workers with the commission, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to the whole creation”, ringing in their ears, He seemed to have given the last stroke needed to destroy the middle wall of partition.

His philosophy of life and salvation placed all men on the same level—the level of sinfulness, called upon all men to repent, and offered to all men redemption through faith in Himself. In the text of this evening (the circumstances considered), there is a hint of this broader religion—this missionary element in the ministry of Christ. The Master is now outside of Galilee. The text is the speech of a Phoenician woman, a heathen. And yet there is something in the plea that wrests a blessing from Him who “was sent not, but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel”.A practical question for us is, “How can we make our cry to this same Master most effective?” In attempting to answer this question, it is not my thought to bring any special secret from this Scripture, but, rather, to emphasize its more obvious lessons.I want, therefore, in the first place to call your attention toTHE PHŒNICIAN’S PRAYER“Lord help me”!It was evidently born of conscious need. The character of that need is described in the context, “My daughter is grievously vexed with a devil”.

She knew also for what she had come. She experienced no difficulty in expressing her heart’s desire.Dr.

Joseph Parker sagely said, “The sense of need abbreviates our prayers and teaches us true eloquence. When the heart is in the grip of a deadly agony, it knows how to pray.” One secret of success in the pulpit is long and earnest thought upon what one proposes to say. The same principle applies to the closet prayer, and to the prayer made in public. When you have meditated upon a thing until the conviction has come to you, “I must have this;” until you say, as Rachel did to Jacob, “Give me, * * or else I die”, then your spiritual intensity is likely to insure the success of your petition. So many of our prayers, both in public and in private, are mere phrases, not petitions. They are like our children’s requests, just asking for anything and everything that comes into the mind, and like them also, must be denied by a wise Father.

I have come to believe that the public prayer in the sanctuary is powerless when it does not bespeak previous meditation upon the needs of the people; and effective in proportion as one has thought out the shortcomings, burdens, sins and sorrows, of those for whose sake he asks.Dr. James Hamilton, a true Scotch preacher, tells the story of a Scotch wife who besought her husband to pray that the life of their sick baby might be spared.

The good man knelt devoutly and went over the accustomed petition. On and on he prayed, until at last he reached the honored quotation which he never omitted, “Oh, Lord, remember Thine ancient people, and turn again the captivity of Zion,” when his wife, unable longer to restrain herself, cried, “Eh, mon; you are aye drawn out for the Jews, but it is our bairn that is de’en.” Then, lifting her own hands to heaven, she cried, “O Lord, help us and give our bairn back to us, if it be Thy holy will. But if he is to be ta’en awa’ from us, make us to know Thou wilt have him for Thyself.”This Phoenician woman has illustrated for us the fact that true prayer is both brief and of conscious need.Again, Her prayer was the prayer of intercession. While she said, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David”, her petition was made for another’s sake, since her daughter was “grievously vexed with a devil”. And yet, the very language employed is the language of intercession. The true intercessor identifies himself with the subject of his petition. “Lord, help me”! means that in blessing another, Thou art granting favor to my own soul.

How often in our letters of commendation, or request, we say to business men, “If you can give this man a position, or grant this man a favor, you will oblige me.” That is the meaning of intercession.Go back to the Old Testament and hear Moses pray for Israel. If you took the language out of its context, you would think that he had no one in mind but himself; but he is asking nothing for his own sake; it is all for Israel’s sake.

It is no marvelous thing that Paul prayed effectively for the Jewish people, since he so far identified his interests with them as to be able to say, “I could wish myself accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh”.Go hear fathers and mothers pray for their children, and you would think they were praying for their own souls. Such is the natural expression of the true intercessor. And when the time comes that men are upon our hearts to such an extent as to weigh them; to such an extent that we feel the agony of their unsaved condition, then we can turn effective intercessors. Is not that the reason why Jesus Christ Himself, standing in the presence of the Father, pleads not in vain? He has so far identified Himself with the sinner that all that He asks is for His own sake, and God cannot turn Him away.Charles Spurgeon tells that his brother James was at Croydon hospital one night. All the porters had gone home; it was time to shut up the hospital for the night, when a boy came and told of an accident at the Railway Station and the need of stretchers.

The doctor said, “James Spurgeon, you take one end of this stretcher and HI take the other.” And so they went—the doctor and the pastor—and brought back the sick man with them. And James Spurgeon testified to his brother, “I went often to the hospital, because I felt so much interest in the man I helped to carry.” And Charles Spurgeon said, “I believe he will always feel an interest in that man because he once felt the weight of him.”But yet again, this Phoenician’s prayer voiced a resistless faith.

She would not be turned away. There is every evidence that she realized that she was in the presence of infinite power—at the fountain-head of Divine benediction—and need not go away empty. His silence did not discourage her; His apparent refusal was to her no signal for departure. The discourtesy of His disciples would not dampen her ardor. After meeting all, she came and worshiped Him, saying, “Lord, help me”! And when He talked of the Jews as “children” and the Gentiles as “dogs” she only answered, “Truth, Lord; yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master’s table”. Luther says, “Was not that a masterful stroke? She snares Christ in His own words.

And then He sends her forth as one who teaches men how to wring Yea from God’s Nay. If one would do this, he must, like her, give God right in all He says against thee; and yet, must not stand off from praying till thou overcomest as she overcame; till thou hast turned the very charges made against thee into arguments and proofs of thy need.” And Luther’s words are justified by Jesus Himself. What else is the meaning of the parable of the unjust judge?“There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: “And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary. “And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man: “Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me. “And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith. “And shall not God avenge His own elect, which cry day and night unto Him, though He bear long with them? “I tell you that He will avenge them speedily” (Luke 18:2-8). Then the application which Jesus made before He uttered the parable, “Men ought always to pray and not to faint”. Think of Jacob at Peniel, when the angel urged him to let him go, saying, “I will not let thee go, except thou bless me”.I often think of the sixth article adopted by George Mueller, when declaring on what conditions he proposed to undertake the great work of caring for orphans. It read like this: “We do not mean to reckon the success of the institution by the amount of money given, etc., but by the Lord’s blessing upon the work (Zechariah 4:6), and we expect this in proportion in which He shall help us to wait upon Him in prayer.” Oh, beloved, let this Phoenician woman teach us the power of the prayer of faith. But we pass from the Phoenician’s prayer to theD OPINION. “And His disciples came and besought Him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us”. They had misinterpreted their Master’s silence. They supposed it to be either unconcern, or else an air of indifference, assumed for the sake of getting rid of one with whom He preferred not to be troubled. Many months they had spent with Him, but how little they understood His spirit!When the prophets of Baal cried to their god from “sunrise to sunset”, Elijah laughed them to scorn, and mockingly urged them to cry louder, inasmuch as he might be on a journey. The silence of the false god is properly so interpreted, who is never anything else but silent; whose lips never part in speech; whose hand is never outstretched to help; whose heart never beats in sympathy; whose ear is always deaf to the petitions of his worshipers, and his silence is properly identified with his indifference. But we cannot say that of Him who “sitteth upon the circle of the earth: whose ear is not closed that it cannot hear; whose heart is not hard that He cannot feel; whose arm is not shortened that He cannot save”.You will remember that when, after the long draught, Elijah said unto Ahab,“There is a sound of abundance of rain. So A hah went up to eat and to drink. And Elijah went up to the top of Carmel; and he cast himself down upon the earth, and put his face between his knees, “And said to his servant, Go up now, look toward the sea. And he went up, and looked, and said, There is nothing. And he said, Go, again seven times. “And it came to pass at the seventh time, that he said, Behold, there ariseth a little cloud out of the sea, like a man’s hand. And he said, Go up, say unto Ahab, Prepare thy chariot, and get thee down, that the rain stop thee not. “And it came to pass in the mean while, that the heaven was black with clouds and wind, and there was a great rain” (1 Kings 18:41-45). Beloved, when the saints of God had marched around Jericho six times, with trumpets in hand, blowing their horns, and there was not a tremor in the walls, God’s silence was not to be interpreted as an evidence of God’s indifference, nor of God’s inability. You have been praying to God for something for a long time; something which you believe would advance His cause, and your petition has seemed to you to be indicted by Himself, but no answer. If, therefore, disciples come and say to you, “God’s silence is positive proof that He does not propose to answer,” be slow to accept the suggestion; it is proof of nothing of the sort. God has His own reasons for delay, and those reasons are not an open secret to every disciple who takes it upon himself to censure the prayers of others. It is only when He has shown us that what we ask is not according to His will, that we are under obligation to desist from our petition, and then He has broken His silence by saying, “No.”This opinion of the disciples also presents another subject worthy of discussion.They pitted their prayers against the Syro-Phoenician woman’s petition. In our petitions to God we must be careful not to be asking that which may be for our own comfort to the distress of another; for our own profit to the injury of another.

When you pray for your own gain, be sure you are not asking to get it through the losses of others; for your own victory, consider if that means the defeat of your opponent. Beloved, is not this the secret of failure in some of our petitions?

When we have asked for personal victory, we failed to take into account the effect upon others who are as precious in His sight as we ourselves are, and whose interests might be injured by our prayer’s answer? Think of Jonah at Nineveh pleading with God to overthrow that great city, that his prophecy concerning its fall might not fail, that the people might be saved the scourge of the Syrian, and all the while forgetting the hundred and twenty thousand little children who were not sinners, “who could not discern between their right hand and their left hand, and also much cattle”, that must suffer if his prayer was answered. There are people who have no hesitancy in the hour of conflict to ask God to be on their side and give them victory. When conflicting interests are before us, and we are involved in the conflict, there is but one prayer sure of Divine approval and that is the petition of the Lord in the hour of His own need, “Thy will be done”.Then we notice also that this opinion of the disciples voices a personal privilege. “For she crieth after us”. Like all selfish men they were mistaken! She was not saying a word to them, or about them; she was crying for her Lord instead.

Like all selfish men, also, they were exclusive. They felt that the Son of God preferred to give His time to the favored Children of Israel, and had little or no use for this “dog of a Gentile”.

Beloved, can we not learn from their mistake? All the children who come to our Christ will not be personally attractive to Him; all the people who come to our Christ will not add dignity or honor to the circle of His disciples; all the people who come to our Christ will not be able to bring Him gifts of gold and frankincense and myrrh. The disfigured will seek Him. The lepers, diseased and decaying, will cast themselves before Him for mercy. The social outcasts will come to His feet and entreat His favor. The poor who can bring no contribution—but must ask assistance—will also dog His steps.

But if you imagine any one of these unwelcome, you will only evince a selfishness which misinterprets the Lord our Saviour, and invites His reproof. Campbell Morgan has uttered a saying which ought never to be forgotten in the Church of God.

Referring to the expression, “the common people heard Him gladly”, Morgan objects to the expression and says, “Mark’s language is, ‘Much people heard Him gladly’.” He does not mean to refer to the latter class; the Bible never thinks of calling this sort of people “common”, and it was not this class of people who came to Christ. There was the Pharisee, the Sadducee, the ruler, the publican, the poor man—all classes were attracted to Him. When He came into Simon’s house, the poor harlot, who had never crossed the threshold before, went right in and came to His side. For this reason, Christ can no more consent to a church for the laboring man, than a religious club for the capitalist; He has nothing to do with men in sections; He deals with man as man. And when He looked out upon the world, He saw a man—the Son of God by creation—He saw what God saw. And the disciple, who is a respecter of persons, has earned the reproof reserved for him. This Jesus, who was the Saviour of Joseph of Arimathaea, has His heart open to the Syro-Phoenician, and a hand open to her need.To illustrate this, I call your attention to the last suggestion.THE SAVIOUR’S . At first He met her petition with an unbroken silence. How unlike the Son of God! When men reviled Him, “He reviled not again”, and when “like a Lamb they led Him to the slaughter, He opened not His mouth”; but commonly when men came to Him desiring a blessing, His response was ready. Why silent now when a woman, in the grip of a great agony, having journeyed a long distance (for “she came out of the coasts”), was crying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil”?There are various explanations of this silence by students of the Word, but I am inclined to the idea that this first cry was that of an alien, not a child. Jesus reminded her that He came to the “lost sheep of the House of Israel”, and not to the unregenerate Gentiles. In that speech is suggested the great fact that seems everywhere to run through the Word, that God is under no obligation to unregenerate men.

His promises of help and healing do not obtain for them—universalism to the contrary. The Scriptures do not warrant the thought that any man who will can ask of God and get an answer.During the stormy days of the civil war, there were many people in Washington who would have paid money for the sight of Lincoln’s face, but the doors of the White House were closed against them.

There were many politicians who would have given gold to have gotten his ear for a moment, but it was not always open to them. But even in that hour, engaged in affairs of state as he was, little Tad came and went untrammeled; told the President whatever he had to say; asked of him whatever request he had to make; always had his attention. Why? Because he was his son! And somehow or other, I don’t know that I can explain how, but somehow or other, those who believe, those who have faith in God, are His children; and to their cry His ear is always open.When the father brought his dumb son to Jesus and said, “If thou canst do anything, have compassion and help us”, Jesus immediately responded, “If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth”. There is a double truth in that.

On the one side, faith connects us with the fountain of blessing; on the other side, unbelief effectively separates us from the same. Jesus Himself conditions our blessing by saying, “Whatsoever ye ask believing, ye shall receive”, and illustrated by those marvelous words, “As the branch cannot bear fruit except it abide in the vine, no more can ye except ye abide in Me”.

Phillips Brooks has much Scripture for his assertion, “There is an utter, eternal relationship and opening between the life of man and the life of God, and to have that opening closed is unbelief; to have it opened wide is faith.” It is not an evidence that one is a child of God because He cries after Him. In the ninth chapter of John’s Gospel, Jesus is passing by where the man, blind from his birth, is sitting. This man is not a believer. Jesus anointed the eyes of the blind man with clay and sent him to the pool of Siloam to wash. Still he was not a believer; he did not even know who had done this thing. It was sometime afterwards when he made the discovery and said, “Lord, I believe”.

One of the most pitiful things is the unbeliever in a conscious agony, calling upon a God whom he does not know, and claiming promises that are the property of God’s children only. Only a few days since, such a man said to me, “I hope that God will hear my prayer.” I did not tell him—I could not—that God had made no promise to the unbeliever, for his heart was breaking already.Sometimes God’s silences may be accounted for on this ground, that men who have never acknowledged Him are now calling upon Him, and their cries ring out upon the air and there is no response.Later Jesus seemed to utter a flat refusal.“It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs”. “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel” (Matthew 15:24; Matthew 15:26). And yet that expressed refusal was better than His continued silence. He had at least recognized her; she had gotten into touch with Him. Ah, beloved, it is better to be in such relationship with God that He says, “No,” to you, than to sustain no relationship whatever with Him, so that when you speak He is only silent. Once in communion with Him, there is a chance for that very communion to so lift you up and enlighten you that a true knowledge of Him may be the consequence.It was so with the Samaritan woman who met Jesus at the well. As they talked together, the light broke upon her darkened mind, and she knew her Lord had come. That is the reason why Jesus invites even the sinner to a conference with Him, saying, “Come now, let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow”.

That is why the sinful ought to joyfully respond to the call, since it may result in their salvation and bring them an unspeakable blessing.And yet, it is not always sure that God will answer at once even His own. He does delay His own child, as every wise father does, and for good and sufficient reasons.

The child who has only to ask a rich father for a gift, to have his desire gratified, never appreciates his possessions; and seldom, if ever, does he appreciate the giver. A child who does not have to prove himself worthy before his petitions are granted, gets no good out of it, and God knows these things so perfectly that He does not always hand out everything for which we ask. He makes us wait that He may educate and fit us for it. He makes us wait until we have demonstrated some greater evidence of worthiness. He makes us wait until the heart grows so hungry that it will have some keen appreciation of the gift when it does come. He makes us wait until, when the benediction is bestowed, we will know so perfectly the source of blessing that we will not dare to misuse it.

Why is it that the law of the land makes children wait until they are of age before coming into possession of fortunes that already belong to them? Because all law makers perfectly understand the principle so commonly employed by God of appointing a waiting time of education.

Henry Ward Beecher says, “Had our Saviour, when this woman made petition, at once granted her request, it would have been a great boon to her. Had He healed her child by a word and passed on, that child would have bloomed in the household, and the mother would have never forgotten the work of mercy which had been wrought for her; and yet, after all, she herself never would have been as large as she must have been after that interview. By mercies that are wrought out and brought in their entireness to us, and then passed over into our own hands, we having had no agency in the procuring of them—by such mercies we are less blessed than when our friends are kind to us through our own activity, in such a way as to raise up and educate and thoroughly strengthen that which is good within .us.”Is not that what the Apostle Paul is talking about when, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, he says,“No chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous; nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby” (Hebrews 12:11). It is told of Sir Walter Raleigh that on one occasion he went to the Queen for some favor. After hearing his request, she replied, “Sir Walter, you are the greatest beggar that I ever knew. Will you never leave off your petitions to the Queen?”“Yes, madam,” he replied, “when your majesty ceases to grant me favors.”But beloved, it is not ours to leave off pleading for favors from the King of Glory, even when His beneficences are locked away from us for a season, since a wise father will withhold gifts until we have grown up to them; until he has trained us for their use; until he has taught us their true value; until all those intervening lessons so needful to our success have been whispered to us while we are waiting. Do not say that God won’t answer, because for the present He withholds.“Unanswered yet! The prayer your lips have pleaded In agony of heart these many years? Does faith begin to falter? Is hope departing? And think you all in vain those falling tears? Say not the Father hath not heard your prayer. You shall have your desire, sometime, somewhere. “Unanswered yet! Nay do not say ungranted; Perhaps your part is not yet wholly done. The work began when first your prayer was uttered, And God will finish what He has begun: If you will keep the incense burning there, His glory you shall see, sometime, somewhere.” But our text takes us one step further; takes us into the Saviour’s response.Eventually, He grants more than was asked or thought. She came seeking the healing of her child’s body; she went to find her daughter made whole, to rejoice in her own salvation, and to have recorded to her everlasting glory the exercise of the greatest faith. Is it not like our God to give us more than we ask or think? It is not only according to the promise of Scripture; it is according to the experience of them that know Him. Years ago, a friend of mine, a noted evangelist, was in tent work in the city of New York. In one of those tent meetings, a lady arose, and with trembling voice told how, for twenty-five years, she had been praying for her unconverted husband.

For twenty-four years and eleven months of that time her petitions had seemed in vain. There was not even a suggestion that they would ever be answered. “However,” she said, “when these meetings began, I asked him to come with me to the service. First, he declined; but one night he yielded, and was deeply interested in the sermon. And that night, when we reached home, we prayed together and he yielded himself to Christ. I tell you this tonight because he finds it difficult to speak.” She had no more than sat down when he sprang to his feet and said that he could not keep silent and he bore a blessed testimony.Beloved, there are some of you here who have prayed for one thing for five years! Some of you have prayed for another ten years in vain!

Some who have asked for twenty, for twenty-five years! Be not dismayed! Jesus did keep this woman waiting, but when at last He answered, His grant was above her greatest expectation. It is the custom of Jesus.“Unto Him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, unto Him be glory” (Ephesians 3:20). We began with this woman in her weakness; we witnessed her distress; we listened to her agonizing cry; we were cognizant of all her agonizing circumstances. But we conclude the story, seeing that God has supplied her need, knowing that her sorrow has been removed, her agonizing cry has been answered, adverse circumstances have been overcome, and she walks the earth, a mother made happy by the recovery of her child, and a woman also rejoicing in recovery from sin; and one whose faith compels the record of “worthies” to receive her name.Beloved, our weakest hours are not our worst. When we are crying to God in agony, we are nearer Our coronation than we know; when we are smitten by some evil spirit of sickness, the Saviour is near; when we are spoken against by the selfish, His silence may only mean His deeper sympathy; when the very promises of God are not fulfilled unto us, it may be only that we may grow up to the point where His greater grace can be bestowed.Finally, He turns from the needy individual to the needy multitude.“And Jesus departed from thence, and came nigh unto the sea of Galilee; and went up into a mountain, and sat down there. “And great multitudes came unto Him, having with them those that were lame, blind, dumb, maimed, and many others, and cast them down at Jesus’ feet; and He healed them: “Insomuch that the multitude wondered, when they saw the dumb to speak, the maimed to be whole, the lame to walk, and the blind to see: and they glorified the God of Israel. “Then Jesus called His disciples unto Him, and said, I have compassion on the multitude, because they continue with me now three days, and have nothing to eat: and I will not send them away fasting, lest they faint in the way. “And His disciples say unto Him, Whence should we have so much bread in the wilderness, as to fill so great a multitude? “And Jesus saith unto them, How many loaves have yet And they said, Seven, and a few little fishes. “And He commanded the multitude to sit down oh the ground. “And He took the seven loaves and the fishes, and gave thanks, and brake them, and gave to His disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. “And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the broken meat that was left, seven baskets full. “And they that did eat were four thousand men, beside women and children. “And He sent away the multitude, and took ship, and came into the coasts of Magdala” (Matthew 15:29-39). The New Testament records of Christ’s ministry are motion-pictures indeed. We see in Christ no slumberer, but a prodigious worker and tireless teacher. Such men have always called the multitudes about them and have commonly been a blessing to them; but no other man ever wrought as the man Jesus. He alone healed the lame, opened the eyes of the blind, loosed the tongues of the dumb, strengthened the limbs of the maimed, and healed all that came, until the multitude, looking upon the marvels, glorified the God of Israel.The passage concludes with a second miracle of loaves and fishes. I say a second miracle because the number of loaves in this instance is seven, and a few little fishes, whereas in the 14th chapter there were five loaves and two fishes. In this chapter we have seven baskets full of fragments; in the fourteenth chapter we have twelve.

In this chapter those fed were 4,000 beside women and children; in the 14th chapter those fed were 5,000 beside women and children.In each instance, Christ finishes addressing the multitude, and taking a boat sets out to sea. The water-way was practically His only way of escape from the multitudes, such was their greed for loaves and fishes; and also let it be said, such their desire for healing and their interest in the truth.Let all men learn this lesson: Christ is our sufficiency. If a loved one has been demon-conquered, He can help; if, out of multitudes, there come the lame, the blind, the dumb, the maimed, He can heal; if men hunger, He can feed. Christ is our sufficiency.