After Jesus cast a devil out of a man in Matthew 12, the people reacted in one of 2 ways. Some thought he was the Son of David (Ie: he was the messiah king they were looking for), and some thought that he was deceiving the masses by healing, working miracles, and casting out devils. They even went so far as to say that Jesus was casting out devils by the prince of devils.
Jesus argued with this second group by telling them that it would be absurd for Satan to fight his himself. He told them that he was taking territory from Satan because Satan had been already been bound.
Nobody doubted that Jesus was working amazing miracles, in fact, everybody assumed that Jesus was healing and working miracles; there was no doubt about that. There was doubt, however, about what those miracles meant and where they came from. This is unlike healers of today whose miracles are questioned and usually found wanting. Even Jesus' enemies believed he was working miracles.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Friday, June 24, 2011
Breaking the Sabbath
Several times in the Gospels, Jesus broke the Sabbath in order to eat with his disciples or to heal somebody. Upon being rebuked by religious leaders for breaking the Sabbath Jesus told them that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath and that there was one who was greater than the temple in the place where they were. These were indirect ways of pointing to himself as that person.
Jesus also directed them to other passages of scripture such as when out of need, David ate unlawful showbread set apart for the priests. He also used reason to explain that even the religious leaders know that there is a time to bend the rules in order to help an animal. Jesus did not break the Law of Moses, but rather, he reinterpreted it in favor of mercy for others over strict obedience. In the Law, Jesus read that people were more important than the icon called the Law or the icon called the temple.
The religious leaders were sure that Jesus was breaking the Law because they had inherited, and built on, a different way of reading and obeying the Law than Jesus taught. For years, the leaders had been debating and refining the interpretation of Scriptures, so that they would know how to interpret the Law in matters of the Sabbath and purity.
We do not know who influenced Jesus and how he came to the conclusions he did about the Law and its interpretation. The Gospels tell us that Jesus received his teachings from God; but does this mean that, like Paul, he received revelations directly from God through visions and revelations; or did God give him his teachings from others who mentored him when he was young; or was it both?
Jesus also directed them to other passages of scripture such as when out of need, David ate unlawful showbread set apart for the priests. He also used reason to explain that even the religious leaders know that there is a time to bend the rules in order to help an animal. Jesus did not break the Law of Moses, but rather, he reinterpreted it in favor of mercy for others over strict obedience. In the Law, Jesus read that people were more important than the icon called the Law or the icon called the temple.
The religious leaders were sure that Jesus was breaking the Law because they had inherited, and built on, a different way of reading and obeying the Law than Jesus taught. For years, the leaders had been debating and refining the interpretation of Scriptures, so that they would know how to interpret the Law in matters of the Sabbath and purity.
We do not know who influenced Jesus and how he came to the conclusions he did about the Law and its interpretation. The Gospels tell us that Jesus received his teachings from God; but does this mean that, like Paul, he received revelations directly from God through visions and revelations; or did God give him his teachings from others who mentored him when he was young; or was it both?
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Jesus Was a Threat...or Was He?
Jesus was described as a threat to the Roman government in Matthew more than any other Gospel.
THE BEGINNING CHAPTERS
In the beginning chapters, wise men came from the East to seek out the one who was born King of the Jews. This so bothered Herod that he sent to kill Jesus and because he didn't know where to find Jesus he had an entire city of young boys killed (probably a dozen or so kids). This story drew the reader back to the infancy of Moses thus comparing Jesus to Moses who was also a threat to the government of Egypt.
The threat Moses posed was not the typical overthrow of the government threat, but rather the threat was that he was simply born in a generation designated to be destroyed. Moses just happened to be a part of a large group that threatened the leaders of Egypt. Pharaoh was threatened by the sheer growth of the Jewish people and was afraid they would become too numerous for them to handle, so to protect his own government and his own people he demanded that the Jewish slaves would throw their baby boys into the Nile river to die. It was one of those babies who was discovered by the daughter of Pharaoh and was rescued, who was named Moses. Moses' feeble attempt to use force to rescue his people was a failure that sent him into the desert to live.
When Moses did return to Egypt he helped the Israelites escape slavery in Egypt and took them into the desert to become a nation.
When Jesus was born, the wise men called him the "King of the Jews." They thought he was a political king as did Herod who heard the wise men asking for the whereabouts of "the King of the Jews." For this he was considered a threat to the throne. But was Jesus really a threat? So far my studies suggest that Jesus was not a direct threat to Rome in any way; and if he was, the NT writers did not include that information in their Gospels. If he was a threat at all, it was indirect at best, in that Jesus promised people a better kingdom; one that came from God; one that turned the world upside down, giving power to the powerless and poor, and demoting the rich and powerful.
THE LAST CHAPTERS
The last chapters in Matthew record the passion narrative where the leaders of Israel and Rome send Jesus to a cross to die, even though there was no testimony found against him.
The fact that Matthew starts and finishes the story of Jesus in the halls of Roman and Jewish officials; the fact that these leaders were threatened by Jesus at the beginning and at the end of his life, tells us that he was viewed as a threat by the leaders of both Rome and Israel. And because Matthew begins and ends with this same threat, we the readers must see that everything Jesus said and did was threatening to the powers of this world.
So what is the big threat? The threat was another kingdom that does not come out of this world, a kingdom where the meek will inherit the earth, and the poor in spirit will be made rich.
THE BEGINNING CHAPTERS
In the beginning chapters, wise men came from the East to seek out the one who was born King of the Jews. This so bothered Herod that he sent to kill Jesus and because he didn't know where to find Jesus he had an entire city of young boys killed (probably a dozen or so kids). This story drew the reader back to the infancy of Moses thus comparing Jesus to Moses who was also a threat to the government of Egypt.
The threat Moses posed was not the typical overthrow of the government threat, but rather the threat was that he was simply born in a generation designated to be destroyed. Moses just happened to be a part of a large group that threatened the leaders of Egypt. Pharaoh was threatened by the sheer growth of the Jewish people and was afraid they would become too numerous for them to handle, so to protect his own government and his own people he demanded that the Jewish slaves would throw their baby boys into the Nile river to die. It was one of those babies who was discovered by the daughter of Pharaoh and was rescued, who was named Moses. Moses' feeble attempt to use force to rescue his people was a failure that sent him into the desert to live.
When Moses did return to Egypt he helped the Israelites escape slavery in Egypt and took them into the desert to become a nation.
When Jesus was born, the wise men called him the "King of the Jews." They thought he was a political king as did Herod who heard the wise men asking for the whereabouts of "the King of the Jews." For this he was considered a threat to the throne. But was Jesus really a threat? So far my studies suggest that Jesus was not a direct threat to Rome in any way; and if he was, the NT writers did not include that information in their Gospels. If he was a threat at all, it was indirect at best, in that Jesus promised people a better kingdom; one that came from God; one that turned the world upside down, giving power to the powerless and poor, and demoting the rich and powerful.
THE LAST CHAPTERS
The last chapters in Matthew record the passion narrative where the leaders of Israel and Rome send Jesus to a cross to die, even though there was no testimony found against him.
The fact that Matthew starts and finishes the story of Jesus in the halls of Roman and Jewish officials; the fact that these leaders were threatened by Jesus at the beginning and at the end of his life, tells us that he was viewed as a threat by the leaders of both Rome and Israel. And because Matthew begins and ends with this same threat, we the readers must see that everything Jesus said and did was threatening to the powers of this world.
So what is the big threat? The threat was another kingdom that does not come out of this world, a kingdom where the meek will inherit the earth, and the poor in spirit will be made rich.
Monday, June 6, 2011
John the Baptist's Expectations and Disappointments
After he was taken prisoner, John the Baptist was disappointed with the way everything was turning out. He had doubts. There is no way to tell how far John's doubts took him - all the Bible says is that he asked Jesus if he was really the one who was to come, or was there somebody else out there? Even after the baptizing Jesus and witnessing what he did, he had doubts.
I believe the reason John had doubts is because he expected something greater out of Jesus and for the office of the Messiah. He expected Jesus to establish a new political kingdom with Israel on top of the world.
Jesus answered John with a description of his ministry: “Go and tell John the things which you hear and see: The blind see and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up and the poor have the gospel preached to them. And blessed is he who is not offended because of Me (Luke 7:4-6).”
This is not the description of a political uprising or political power. From a 1st Century point of view, Jesus' ministry looked more like the Elijah figure that was suppose to come before the Messiah. And John the Baptist looked like neither. This fact did not escape the people of Jesus' day.
In John 10:41 the people wondered about Jesus talking to each other, "John performed no sign, but all the things that John spoke about this Man were true." They expected the Elijah figure who prepared the way for the messiah to be the one who did all the miracles, signs and wonders. The messiah was to be more the King David figure who was warrior.
I believe the reason John had doubts is because he expected something greater out of Jesus and for the office of the Messiah. He expected Jesus to establish a new political kingdom with Israel on top of the world.
Jesus answered John with a description of his ministry: “Go and tell John the things which you hear and see: The blind see and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up and the poor have the gospel preached to them. And blessed is he who is not offended because of Me (Luke 7:4-6).”
This is not the description of a political uprising or political power. From a 1st Century point of view, Jesus' ministry looked more like the Elijah figure that was suppose to come before the Messiah. And John the Baptist looked like neither. This fact did not escape the people of Jesus' day.
In John 10:41 the people wondered about Jesus talking to each other, "John performed no sign, but all the things that John spoke about this Man were true." They expected the Elijah figure who prepared the way for the messiah to be the one who did all the miracles, signs and wonders. The messiah was to be more the King David figure who was warrior.
Friday, June 3, 2011
The Politics of Fear
Great politicians use fear to direct and to unify their followers. I don't think it is a legitimate or ethical ploy, but it works wonders in the political realm. People and groups who would ordinarily fight each other will unite to fight a common fear. In fact, fear is a better unifier than love. Morally or ethically, with few exceptions and for many reasons, I do not believe that fear is a good unifier. But from a pragmatic point of view it works well for the short run.
I find it interesting that when Jesus sent out his disciples, he told them not to fear those who had power to kill them. Today politicians create fantom fears about the economy, fellow politicians and about the direction of the country in order to unite their followers in fear and anger. They promise to be the ones who can solve the problems and calm the fears of the followers, but once in office life goes on as usual and little if any real change happens.
Now the point I am making is simple: Fear guides our actions. Hitler knew this and told the Germans that Poland had begun a war and the Germans stepped up to invade Poland. The U.S. was told that North Viet Nam had already begun shooting at American ships when they had not, so Americans quickly backed the decision to invade North Viet Nam. In these cases the politicians used fear and anger to get what they wanted. Although fear may help create certain actions, it may do the opposite. Fear can hold us back from doing what we should.
The disciples faced real life threatening situations and Jesus told them not to be afraid but to preach boldly. Their fear was based in reality, many of them did face extreme persecution and even death for talking about and following Jesus. Jesus told them not to be afraid but to speak boldly. Why? Because God loved them and cared for them.
Jesus told them not to be afraid because fear would hold them back from doing the right thing.
I find it interesting that when Jesus sent out his disciples, he told them not to fear those who had power to kill them. Today politicians create fantom fears about the economy, fellow politicians and about the direction of the country in order to unite their followers in fear and anger. They promise to be the ones who can solve the problems and calm the fears of the followers, but once in office life goes on as usual and little if any real change happens.
Now the point I am making is simple: Fear guides our actions. Hitler knew this and told the Germans that Poland had begun a war and the Germans stepped up to invade Poland. The U.S. was told that North Viet Nam had already begun shooting at American ships when they had not, so Americans quickly backed the decision to invade North Viet Nam. In these cases the politicians used fear and anger to get what they wanted. Although fear may help create certain actions, it may do the opposite. Fear can hold us back from doing what we should.
The disciples faced real life threatening situations and Jesus told them not to be afraid but to preach boldly. Their fear was based in reality, many of them did face extreme persecution and even death for talking about and following Jesus. Jesus told them not to be afraid but to speak boldly. Why? Because God loved them and cared for them.
Jesus told them not to be afraid because fear would hold them back from doing the right thing.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)