Matthew 8:14

Monday, 10 March 2025   Now when Jesus had come into Peter’s house, He saw his wife’s mother lying sick with a fever. Matthew 8:14   “And Jesus, having come, into the house of Peter, He saw the mother-in-law of him, having been cast and fevering” (CG).   In the previous verse, Jesus healed the centurion’s servant by simply speaking the word. Now, with that event recorded, Matthew turns to another need for healing, beginning with, “And Jesus, having come, into the house of Peter.”   Peter’s house is located in Capernaum. Archaeologists believe they uncovered it in 1968. Since then, it has been made into a national landmark. Of the house, a Google search says the following:   Discovery: In 1968, archaeologists found the ruins of a large house in Capernaum  The house was part of a cluster of about a dozen houses from the 1st century AD  The house was simple, with coarse walls and an earth and straw roof  The house had a few small rooms around two open courtyards  Evidence:  The house's walls were plastered and painted with stylized flowers, pomegranates, figs, geometric figures, and hundreds of crosses The house's limestone floor had many fragments of votive lamps The house's walls had graffiti in many languages, including "Lord Jesus Christ, Help" and "Christ Have Mercy"   Once Jesus had entered the house, it next says, “He saw the mother-in-law of him.” Here the word penthera, mother-in-law, is introduced. It is a feminine Greek noun derived from pentheros, father-in-law. Of her, the next words say, “having been cast.”   As seen before, the idea of being cast means onto a bed of sickness. Hence, most translations just go with that. As for her state when she had been cast, it says, “and fevering.”   This is another new word, puressó. It is derived from pur or pura, both nouns indicating fire. As such, it is a burning fever. The word will only be used one more time, in Mark 1:30 when it details this same account.   Life application: Catholic tradition, without any substantiation from the Bible, says that Peter was the first “pope.” Not only can this not be gleaned from Scripture, but it also rather argues against it in various ways.   Popes are not supposed to be married. It is a tenet of Roman Catholicism. Priests are to remain celibate and unmarried. To cover up the point about Peter being married, Catholics claim, without any justification at all, that Peter was likely a widower when he became an apostle.   In this passage, it mentions Peter’s mother-in-law but not his wife. Because of this, they claim that she was already dead... Well, obviously! Because the Bible doesn’t say anything about her tending to her mother! This is known as an argument from silence. The Bible is not focusing on Peter’s wife, it is focusing on her sick mother.   In all three synoptic gospels, a boy is healed after the transfiguration. There is no mother mentioned in any of the accounts. Using Roman Catholic logic, it is obvious that this boy had no mother and his father had no wife.   Other Catholics claim that Peter and his wife separated by mutual consent so that he could minister with Jesus. That is called eisegesis, inserting a presupposition into the text. There is nothing to even hint at this.   Catholic doctrine holds that Jesus and Paul both encouraged celibacy in the service of the kingdom of God. It is true that Jesus was never married, however the exact opposite is true with Peter. He refers to marriage and makes no limitations on ministers of the gospel.   Some Catholics claim that Peter was never married. A man would be a blithering idiot to have a mother-in-law and never have a wife. In fact, he would be laughed out of the Galilee. People would still be talking to this day about the numbskull who decided to have a mother-in-law without a wife.   The point of this life application is that Roman Catholicism is a cult. Stay away from this ridiculous expression of Christianity. In doing so, you will do well.   *A man with a mother-in-law who never got married... ha!   Lord God, may we carefully handle Your word, never inserting what isn’t in it and never making idle speculations or even doctrines about what it doesn’t say. An argument from silence is damaging when it is intended to support something already nonsensical. Help us, O God, not to treat Your word the way that Roman Catholicism does. Amen.