Matthew 7:6

F. THE DANGERS FACING THE WISE AND GODLY MAN

(Matthew 7:1-27; Luke 6:37-49)

2. THE DANGER IN FAILING TO DISCERN IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES.
TEXT: 7:6

6. Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast you pearls before the swine, lest haply they trample them under their feet, and turn and rend you.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS

a. Would Jesus call a man a dog, or a -hog? Are not these terms usually used as despisingly derogatory terms? Then, how is it that God's Son can mean these words?
b. What is the connection of this little allegory with the general subject of judging others and being judged?

PARAPHRASE

Do not give what is holy to dogs nor feed your pearls to swine, lest they only trample them underfoot and turn on you to tear you to pieces.

SUMMARY

Some men have no appreciation for what belongs to God; others have no sense of values. Therefore, do not intrust them to them, lest they not only despise them but also ungratefully attack you for having been so optimistic about their real character and reaction.

NOTES

Even though Jesus specifically stated that after personal self-criticism one might help his brother (Matthew 7:5), yet with the warning against self-righteous judgments ringing in their ears, the audience might yet think that ALL judgment is wrong and they must never condemn anyone. Thus, from one extreme attitude of criticizing everyone, they might fly to the opposite pole of refusing to discriminate in any case, Here, then, the Lord is balancing the scales: You must judge, yes, but with a well-tempered sense of discernment.

Matthew 7:6 This is another example of Hebrew poetic thought, expressed in an inverted parallelism:

A: Give not that which is holy unto the dogs,

B: Neither cast your pearls before the swine,

B: Lest haply they trample them under their feet,

A: And turn and rend you,

The thoughts of the first and last members are connected, while those of the two middle members are harmonious. This proverb, because of the thought parallels, is saying just one thing that is expressed by (1) dogs and swine; (2) the holy and your pearls;, and (3) trampling underfoot and turning to rend, The literal meaning of this allegory is simple: Do not persist in offering what is sacred or of value to those who least appreciate it, because your gift would be not only contaminated or despised, but also your generosity would be rebuffed if not openly attacked.

But, it will be asked, why did Jesus choose this proverbial form in order to convey such a simple messagecould He not have stated exactly what He meant in literal language? One answer would be, yes, but by stating His message in this proverbial version He rendered it more vivid and memorable, Yes, but why should He choose this particular proverb and talk about dogs and swine?

Does Jesus mean this proverb to be a simple illustration in which only the main point is to be gathered without identifying each point? If so, He is saying, Just as any sensible person would not feed sacrificial meat to dogs nor offer pearls to swine by virtue of their unappreciative nature, even so a sensible person would be able to make proper distinctions between those who would not understand important differences and those who would.

But if Jesus means the problematic proverb as an allegory with more than one point to be interpreted, then one must seek to identify each point of the proverb with some reality in the context which it is supposed to illuminate, clarify or illustrate. If so, the dogs and s d e are men, just as the wolves are men. (Matthew 7:15) But what is there about dogs and swine that is like men, that renders them completely unaware of the value of holiness of that which might be offered them? Dogs were the garbage-disposal units of Palestine, the scavengers of the day. (Exodus 11:7; Exodus 22:31; 2 Kings 14:11; 1 Kings 16:4; 1 Kings 21:19; 1 Kings 21:23-24; 1 Kings 22:38; 2 Kings 9:10; 2 Kings 9:36; Psalms 68:23) However some were, of course, tamed (Matthew 15:26; Mark 7:28) and worked (Job 30:1; Isaiah 56:10-11). In their character as fierce, half-famished animals that ran in packs, they have been used to symbolize the treachery of the wicked (Psalms 22:16; Psalms 59:6; Psalms 59:14-15). Not only being unclean animals (see Leviticus 11), their habits provided a pictorial euphemism for a homosexual person (Deuteronomy 23:17-18; cf. Revelation 22:15). To Jews, this figure is strikingly significant as referring to the dog's indiscriminate eating of meat, whether the filth and refuse of the street or the consecrated sacrifices of the temple (that which is holy; cf. Leviticus 6:24-30; Leviticus 7:15-21).

Swine, also unclean (Leviticus 11:7-8; Leviticus 14:8; Isaiah 65:4; Isaiah 66:3; Isaiah 66:17) have also been used as a symbol of a person without proper discretion (Proverbs 11:22). Your pearls might symbolize anything of value to man, but which swine would be, by nature, totally incapable of appreciating, hence would trample them under their feet as if they were common gravel.

Jesus did not define the terms, that which is holy or your pearls, to mean gospel privileges, as many commentators do. What Jesus said may have been much more general than this one application, although it would certainly include it.

Dogs and swine, then, are obdurate, perverse men who have abandoned all moral restraints and who, because of that attitude, are incapable of appreciating the blessings of the holy or its value, or those who, after they have once arrived at an appreciation of spiritual values, retain their vicious, filthy nature. (Cf. Hebrews 6:4-6; Hebrews 10:29; 2 Peter 2:20-22)

In short, the teaching of the proverb is clear: One MUST make proper distinctions: practical estimates are absolutely necessary. For even if dogs and hogs are without discernment of the holy and valuable, he who must deal with them must not be!

But in the dealing with people, it is not always possible to tell at first what manner of character it is with which one must deal. This however becomes quite evident when they begin to show disregard for the pricelessness of what is offered them, or when they turn to attack the one who would bless them. The NT is replete with examples of applications of this basic idea of Jesus:

1. Jesus-' dealing with the crowds who clamored for more loaves and fishes (John 6:26) and were failing to discern the really important Bread of Life who would feed them, Rather than continue to feed them, He preached them that sermon which scattered the ones unwilling to accept Him,

2. Jesus-' refusal to give additional signs to those who would not accept previous miracles and their relative revelations (Matthew 16:1-4). Similarly, Jesus-' refusal to perform for Herod (Luke 23:8-9).

3. Jesus-' command to move on to other cities when some would not receive the apostle's message (Matthew 10:11-14). Paul's practice (Acts 13:44-52; Acts 18:5-7),

4. Paul's treatment of Elymas Bar-Jesus (Acts 13:4-12),

5. Peter's dealing with Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-24).

6. Paul's declaration concerning those who slanderously charged him (Romans 3:8) or brought another gospel (Galatians 1:8-9). But look at Paul's attitude as he tried to enter the theater of Ephesus (Acts 19:30-31) and tried to win the mob at Jerusalem (Acts 22:1-21) and the court of Agrippa (Acts 26).

7. Paul's instructions concerning the choice of elders and deacons (1 Timothy 3:1-13) and his warning not to give these holy offices to unworthy candidates (1 Timothy 5:19-24).

As is seen elsewhere in the character of the persons who made these judgments, careful discernment was required before they concluded that the persons with whom they were dealing were hogs or dogs. Therefore, before we arrive at this judgment, let us be as full of hope, love and mercy as was God when He was dealing with us. This careful judgment is imperative to keep us from treating men as if they were altogether beyond hope or too sinful to be saved. We must remember that God has transformed men who were often more brutal and more stubborn than we. On the other hand, we must remain on the alert because of the forces of wickedness that are working in human hearts. But just because a man has once rejected the gospel does not necessarily mean that he is therefore to be branded a dog. There is often a hair-splitting distinction between the point at which we are to compel men to come in (cf. Luke 14:23) and the point at which we must cease expending our energies to extend the gospel privileges and our fellowship to those who are so perverse and profane as not to have any appreciation or concern for what God is offering them. (See Ephesians 4:17-18) But the obvious key to the solution is repentance and fruit (Cf. Matthew 18:15-18: if he refuses to be converted after much loving, persistent effort, he is a dog.

FACT QUESTIONS

1. What is that which is holy?
2. What are your pearls?
3. Are they to be distinguished as two separate ideas in Jesus-' meaning?
4. What are dogs? List other Biblical references to dogs that may help to understand that to which Jesus makes reference.
5. What are swine? List other Biblical references to swine that may help to clarify Jesus-' choice of their mention.
6. What is it to give what is holy w dogs?
7. Is this to be distinguished from casting pearls before swine? If so, how so? If not, why not?
8. What is meant by the trampling under their feet?
9. What is meant by the act of turn and rend you?
10. Which animal is likely to do each of the above-mentioned deeds?
11. What Hebrew poetic figure is this allegory?