Morsels of food are delicious because of the little things, the subtle seasonings, the dash of salt, the sprinkle of garlic, the garnish of parsley, the touch of glaze, or the hint of lemon. Ahhhh - so delicious!
Events in Mark chapter 9 happened rather privately for Jesus and his 12 closest followers. Mark is rather episodic in nature, so for Jesus' followers who later told the story, the events probably were not as coordinated as they appear when Mark assembled the information later. A definite theme, however, does emerge from the events as Mark has written them.
The events started with a vision on a hilltop with Simon, James, and John. After the vision, they all heard the voice of God himself. That's astounding and inspiring - God's audible voice heard by everyone there at one time. That would have been special. What did the voice say?
Verse 7
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἀκούετε αὐτοῦ
(This is the son I love. Listen to him.)
That set the stage for the rest of the events in the chapter. At the foot of the hill after walking away from where God affirmed his son, Jesus, Simon, James, and John walked up on a squabble. The other nine and some more followers of Jesus who had gathered with them were arguing with the scholars of the Talmud.
Mark doesn't comment on what the argument was about. But, the situation that sparked the argument was explained to Jesus. A boy's father had brought his son to be healed probably by Jesus. But in Jesus' absence, his followers had tried to get rid of the spirit that had plagued the boy. The nine followers left behind had tried to do what they had seen their teacher do, but unsuccessfully. Mark records Jesus' response to this whole situation.
(What an incredulous generation! How long must I be with you? How long must I endure you?)
Perhaps Jesus was nonplussed by the fact that an argument had ensued by scholars of the Law over the followers' inability to dismiss the spirit. Perhaps, Jesus was frustrated at how his followers were trying to throw out the spirit. Perhaps Jesus was agitated about someone asking his followers to get rid of a "mute" spirit when that was not the reason for the boy's inability to speak. Mark only records Jesus' response to the situation. But as disgusted as Jesus was, he still called the boy to him and ordered the spirit to leave and never return.
Simon, James, and John had just heard the voice of God themselves, and then, they saw a spirit leave a boy at the command of Jesus. What a powerful tandem of circumstances to impress on one's mind that Jesus was God's very own son.
Another event highlighted the prevailing attitude that Jesus might have been referring to when he said What an incredulous generation! Verses 33-37 record the short trip to Capernaum on which Jesus continued to instruct his Twelve. Jesus had had been explaining just before the trip that he would be killed and woken back to life, so they were discussing who would be the best one to lead after Jesus' departure. So he brought in a child and set him in the middle of them for his lesson to them. He hugged the child and spoke:
(Anyone who waits on children like this in my name doesn't just wait on me but the one who sent me.)
Every parent would know exactly what Jesus said. You "wait on" children to nurture them, to protect them, to love them, to show them what is right, to teach them how to live life. And it is "waiting on them" in his name that gives the power to lead them in the ways of his father who sent him. What a powerful image - waiting on a child as Jesus, who was servant of all, would do in order to lead him into decent living. That is the model for waiting on someone in his name.
Verses 38-41 record even another event of an incredulous generation. The Twelve had come up on someone casting out powers that controlled people. John was the one to tell Jesus:
(If someone were to give you a cup of water because you have the name of the Chosen One, I assure you he would not lose his reward.)
While Jesus was alive, spirits recognized him, his authority, and his power. God endorsed him personally. Vicariously, through Mark's writing here, Christians today, as did the Twelve at the time, also can be recognized as his followers if we lead others in his name. And followers today can bless others through acceptance of them because we have his name.
The tasty morsel in all of this is the acceptance of others who might not follow Jesus according to our own understanding of how to follow Jesus. The Twelve encountered this exact situation. They opposed him, but Jesus told them differently.
Verse 40
ὃς γὰρ οὐκ ἔστιν καθ’ ἡμῶν, ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐστιν
(The person who is not against us is for us.)
I am certainly guilty of viewing others' beliefs as flawed in some way when I don't think my own belief is flawed. So, acceptance is hard for me to act on. But if God personally endorsed Jesus, a spirit who controlled someone else's life endorsed Jesus by obeying his command, and someone not in the Twelve's group of followers endorsed Jesus, my response should be easy. Don't oppose those who come in the name of Jesus.
If others who recognize his name and wait on us with water won't lose their reward, if waiting on children in his name to lead them to him will gain us a reward, then, why am I so haughty? Why so judgmental? I know - incredulous isn't it. I can hear Jesus saying that. I am working to replace that thought with the most important words in this chapter:
Morsels of food are delicious because of the little things, the subtle seasonings, the dash of salt, the sprinkle of garlic, the garnish of parsley, the touch of glaze, or the hint of lemon. Ahhhh - so delicious!
I hear people refer to God's inactivity sometimes when they talk about the strength of the Muslim world, the killing of Christians in Islamic countries, or in their opinions of the current administration's lack of expression of faith in God. Talk like that sticks in my throat because the situations like the ones these people are complaining of have recurred in history time and time again. I want to share the message of John's seven seals with them so badly because it addresses the same situation in John's time. If I ever do share, the person responds with something like, "The seven seals? That's about the end of the world. I'm not talking about that." So, I go into explaining how the seals might just be about God's seeming inactivity rather than the end of the world, something like what is explained below.
Before a person writes something, thoughts and ideas have to be rumbling around in his or her mind. Then the thoughts get sorted. As they flesh out in one's mind, they begin to connect to examples, definitions, statistical data, previous places that they have seen or read about, comparisons of one idea to like ideas, and whether their thoughts arise from a cause or effect from some other occurrence. Nowhere is this more apparent than in Revelation.
What was rumbling around in John's mind for him to write his information for the seven seals. How did he sort those thoughts, flesh them out, and connect to like ideas? We have only his final product, so one has to reverse engineer to see what was on his mind. The first four seals have been commented on in an earlier blog (click here). They help to show what was on John's mind. Reverse engineering the sixth seal also shows clearly what John was thinking as he wrote. The sixth seal is found in Revelation 6.12-17.
(As he opened the sixth seal, I could feel the rumbling of a tremendous earthquake, and I could see the sun become dark, making people feel that they should wear their course mourning garments made of hide with hair on it, and the whole moon looked like blood.)
(The sky appeared as if it were being rolled up as scroll. Every mountain and island was moved to a different place.)
The imagery of these verses stands out to any reader. What has happened to cause the catastrophe depicted here? John wrote before the days of science fiction arrived, so he wasn't portraying some alien invasion or end of life on earth scenario from a meteor strike. So, what caused the disasters he mentioned?
Since John grew up in a Jewish environment, he surely had to have been influenced by the teachings from the Old Testament. One of the teachings coming out of the prophets was that the nations surrounding Israel would face a judgment from God for all of their mistreatments of God's people, Israel. And, Judea and Samaria themselves eventually faced the wrath of God for all of their own wrongdoings. Rumbling around in John's head were passages like the following.
In Joel 2, the writer depicts God's anger against his people in order to get them to return to more godly ways. And, in chapter 3, Joel begins with wrath for Tyre and Sidon for their treatment of Israel, then generalizes the fury of God to all of the nations surrounding Israel.
Joel 2.10 - The ground rumbles and shakes in front of them. In the sky, the sun and moon are dark, and the stars' brilliance cannot be seen.
Joel 2.31 - The sun will become dark and the moon will become blood before the great and dreaded day of the Lord.
Joel 3.15 - The sun and moon will become dark and the stars' brilliance cannot be seen.
Isaiah chapter 13 is about God venting his anger on the nations surrounding Israel and on Babylon in particular starting in verse 14. Similarly, chapter 34 is a general condemnation of the nations around Israel and of Edom in particular starting in verse 5.
Isaiah 13.10 - The stars and constellations of the universe don't give off any light. The sun is dark as it crosses the sky, and the moon doesn't give off any light.
Isaiah 13.13 - I will shake the entire sky and the earth will quake because of the fury of Yahweh and his mighty people on the day of his burning anger
Isaiah 34.4 - All the celestial bodies will disintegrate and be rolled up like a scroll. They will wither and drop like a leaf or a fig from a tree.
Joel and Isaiah speak of a day of reckoning for Israel's neighbors and enemies, and Joel speaks of a furious reaction from God toward his people Israel. The idea was formalized into the phrase the day of the Lord. This day of furious wrath to be poured out on the nations was not an end of the world depiction. It was a time when God dealt with Israel's enemies. It came against different nations at different times. Other prophets wrote about this day of the Lord, but the imagery for this day that John used in Revelation was from these two prophets' portrayal of this day of reckoning.
The use of Joel's and Isaiah's ideas were front and center in John's thinking as he considered what the culmination should be for the events in the previous 5 seals. The report to God from his angels in the first 4 seals revealed the conditions of the Earth's inhabitants. It wasn't a pretty picture. People were fighting, killing, starving, submitting to brutal conquerors, and dying in barbarous ways. The scene in seal 5 showed martyrs for faith in Christ. What should the natural conclusion of that be? In John's world, it was time for a day of the Lord. God would act in a decisive manner to show the enemies of his people the Christians that he was in control and would vindicate himself and the people who worship him. One can hear John thinking, "Yes, I will use the scenes from the well known day of the Lord imagery that no Jew or Jewish Christian would miss, as comfort for the terror so rampant during his own days of Roman rule.
One more image was necessary before he closed out the message for the sixth seal (verses 15,16).
(Saying to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the presence of the one sitting on the throne and from anger of the Lamb.)
John writes especially about the Romans, but also the Greeks, Egyptians, and other influential nations in all their power, conceit, and dependence on their wealth. The five seals building up to this sixth seal spelled out all their arrogance and bias against God's people the Christians. John could hear the voices of the martyrs facing death by these countries asking God, "How long?" So he outlined the response found in the prophets of the Old Testament as shown above. He said there would be a day of reckoning and continued with the Old Testament idea of what would happen to the arrogant and evil people who had mistreated Christians. He quoted Isaiah.
Isaiah 2.19 - They will go into caves in the sides of rock cliffs and caves in the ground as they face the terror of Yahweh in glorious power when he decides to act suddenly to shake the earth.
Isaiah 2.21 - And they will go into crevices in the rocks and behind rocky crags as they face the terror of Yahweh in glorious power when he decides to act suddenly to shake the earth.
I am sure John could have meant Isaiah's remarks for the gentiles in the world at large. But, it doesn't escape notice that the two passages from from Isaiah 2 are prophecies particularly against the Jews. Luke's account of Paul's encounters with the Jews in Asia Minor in Acts was not a nice log of Paul's treatment at their hands. If Paul's treatment was representative of what the Christians at large experienced, then quoting Isaiah 2 was not a mistake on John's part and was meant for Jews, too, because of their treatment of Christians. The Jews would be included on the day when God came to shake the earth on behalf of his people the Christians.
And there is a tasty morsel in all of this talk of catastrophe. Jesus' title for himself was Son of Man. An influential work of the time, but not in the Old Testament, was the Book of Enoch. It can be found in the pseudopigrapha of the Old Testament, and it speaks about the Son of Man about 200 years before Jesus arrived on Earth. In one particular passage, 1 Enoch 46.4-5, the Son of Man specifically is said to be the one to remove and depose kings and powerful people from their seats, thrones, and kingdoms. 1 Enoch 62.3-4 also speaks of what the Son of Man's presence would be like for the rich and powerful. The author said kings, governors, high officials, and wealthy landowners would feel sudden pain like a woman is hit with when pains of childbirth seize her. On their day of judgment, day of terror, these people would be terrified and rejected when they see the Son of Man in all of his glory. This is one of the reasons why the Jews of Jesus' time thought Jesus would usher in an earthly realm since he took the name Son of Man. Since that expectation was not met, some felt that Jesus was not the Chosen One, which in Enoch was identified as the Son of Man.
So, when John was writing about the kings, rulers, military officials, rich and powerful in verses 15 and 16, he was applying the passages from 1 Enoch to the time when the rulers of the world around the Christians - the Roman military, Jewish landowners, governors of provinces, and influential others - would kill and antagonize Christians, thereby rejecting the Son of Man. The Jews had already rejected him and killed him and continued to harass Christians everywhere, so they were no different from the surrounding nations. All had to face this day of the Lord, day of terror. And what gives credence to all of this "referencing" of this outpouring of God's and the Son of Man's fury is that Jesus referred to it himself when on the way to the cross (Luke 23.30).
Given the Old Testament's use of the day of the Lord as a part of an ongoing cycle of purging and restoration for his people, there is every reason to think that the same thing would be true in the era of the Son of Man. Two thousand years have come and gone since Jesus was killed. It is easy to see in history that God has continuously purged and restored his people around the world. John's words in the sixth seal didn't have to portray a one-time judgment of those opposing his people. They could have followed the Old Testament model of different days of the Lord for different generations. But, if the New Testament model is different, then it would appear that John was writing comforting words to those in his generation - God would purge and restore them. He didn't want them to depart from their faith under such heavy duress. He wanted them to endure beyond the hard times and be assured that God would act on their behalf - against the Roman governors, Roman officials, Roman military, and wealthy, influential people from all countries. God would prove through Jesus that his people had not been duped. They would be vindicated. John ends the sixth seal on that exact note.
Joel 2.11 - Yahweh issues a command to his tremendously large army camped in front of him, an innumerable host, who executes his command. It is the the dreaded day of Yahweh. Who can endure?
(For the day of his great anger has come. Who can endure?)
In the thick of anti-Christian sentiments that have happened toward me from time to time by groups that would steal my faith, it is easy to say that God has not shown up to defend me or himself. It is easy to trade faith in the Son of Man and his representation of God for money, prestige, position, comfort, privilege, or expertise. It is easy to say that God didn't show up for me to prove me right in my faith, so no, no faith for me. It's so easy. It is necessary for me to remind myself once in a while that God does shake the earth for me, that the Son of Man does show himself in his splendor for me, that no matter who or how high-up someone is when mocking my faith, the Son of Man deposes them for me. Then it makes my path of faith so much more bearable. I know I have millions of people, some of whom I read about in seal 5, that have gone before me and stand with me. And, passing faith to my children is not a burden or task, but a passing of a torch of light piercing a darkness that can never, never extinguish its light!
[Translations from the Old Testament above are mine using Biblia Hebraica. The purpose of the blog is to highlight Jesus, so verses in the New Testament are given in Greek using the Nestle Aland text (28th edition) {used in every article of this blog}.
For additional information on the seven seals, see the book Discerning the Seven Sealed Scenes by David Singleton published by iUniverse.]
Morsels of food are delicious because of the little things, the subtle seasonings, the dash of salt, the sprinkle of garlic, the garnish of parsley, the touch of glaze, or the hint of lemon. Ahhhh - so delicious!
David wrote a psalm about doing the right thing (Psalm 37). He recognized the world around him was full of people who didn't treat people right. So, he wrote lyrically contrasting the two types of people. His words inspired Jewish readers to do the right thing for many years afterward. One of the most inspiring verses comes in verse 25.
"In my journey from youth to old man, I have never seen those who live decently left destitute or their children begging for food."
Matthew 6.24-34 doesn't record Jesus' thoughts in order to know if these psalm lines were on his mind, but the words he used echoed in his sentiments. Early in his public teaching, Jesus seemed to have been struck by people always thinking about making enough money - whether just to live on or to impress others. Apparently it seemed to Jesus that accumulation of money and the things that accumulation would bring permeated people's thinking. He felt the need to say a few words about that permeation of thought (verse 24).
Οὐδεὶς δύναται δυσὶ κυρίοις δουλεύειν· ἢ γὰρ τὸν ἕνα μισήσει καὶ τὸν ἕτερον ἀγαπήσει, ἢ ἑνὸς ἀνθέξεται καὶ τοῦ ἑτέρου καταφρονήσει. οὐ δύνασθε θεῷ δουλεύειν καὶ μαμωνᾷ (Nobody can serve two masters. Either he will despise one and show a lot of care for the other or he will be loyal to one and have little regard for the other. You cannot serve God and the accumulation of money.)
Jesus had just made a bold statement. He had elevated the status of wealth. Everyone knew that money was important. People have to have it to live on. So, yes, money was important. Why would Jesus make it a big deal? I think the answer is in the breakdown of how money comes to people. To Jesus it evidently was in showing care and loyalty. People spend a lot of time caring about whatever accumulates money for them. And, when they spend that much time accumulating something, they inevitably are loyal to taking the time to bring in more. To Jesus the two ingredients of serving a master were showing care and being loyal. That was a problem for him when he looked at people and saw them showing those two characteristics for accumulation of money instead of for God, his father. Jesus elevated the status of pursuing wealth from something people do for a living to a consuming pursuit being master of people's lives, a God pursuit. The secret to understanding this elevation of status is found in the word κυρίος (lord). The word poses a fairly significant problem for Americans. When the constitution was passed in 1787, it contained provisions against elected officials accepting titles related to a monarchy, such as Lord. Lord, of course, has been one of the main translations for κυρίος since the King James Version was published during the days of the British monarchy, and its influence on subsequent translations has been enormous. The constitution had no diminishing effect on the use of lord as a translation for κυρίος even though an elected official couldn't accept the title. But it did diminish the use of lord in Americans' everyday speech, so much so that Americans only use the word now when referring to the royal line of succession or the upper class of people living in a monarchyin a historical era. Master, used above, is not really a suitable substitution, but given the American proclivity against all words monarchical, it was almost the only word left that still contains most of the semantic domains of κυρίος.
One of the great problems with the word master is that it implies the idea of slavery, an idea that is more repugnant to Americans than lord. Both lord and master leave bad tastes in Americans' mouths because of such a raw, mistrusting experience with the rulers and owners who embodied the ideas meant with these words. People don't usually consider the implication of benevolent with either word. κυρίος, on the other hand, did imply that a person in charge of others' lives in some way was worthy of the title because he could be trusted to take care of the people he was over. Usually it was for protection, but in many areas of the Mediterranean Sea, it was also for organizing society in a way that allowed people not to worry about how they should go about daily living and fulfilling their basic needs.
Thus, when Jesus used the word κυρίος, he was implying a benevolent protector/provider. This would explain Jesus' consternation with the Jews' idea of accumulating money. The effect of wealth allowed a person to depend on it to provide and protect, God's place. But for Jesus, his father, God, was κυρίος, not the accumulation of money. There was no substitute for his father's provisions.
Verses 28-30 have a morsel of flavor in them as Jesus continued to illustrate his point. He illustrated first that people could trust his father to give them food and drink. Then, he addressed provision for clothes by asking a rhetorical question.
(Why are you stressed about clothing? Learn from the lilies dotting the countryside. How do they become so beautiful? They don't work hard or make their own clothes.) Verse 29
(If God dresses up the meadows with wild lilies today and and people throw them in their little bread ovens tomorrow, don't you think he would do much, much more for you, smallfaiths?
This last illustration shows how much Jesus was dismayed with the way that people didn't trust in their father and his for the necessities of life. Instead, they depended on money accumulation. It wasn't enough for him to raise the status of people's dependence on their own ability to eat and dress, and do so nicely, to κυρίος (lord) status, he also coined a term for the people exhibiting this attitude. No secular records exist using the word Jesus called such people. He combined the words for small andfaith and used it as a term of address. He was probably just stating facts by using this word, but it would be easy to see how the people who heard him might take the term as sarcasm.
These three verses (28-30) also have a little sting to them. Where it might be slightly veiled whether or not Jesus had Psalm 37.25 on his mind when he started talking about people's trust in God for their basic provisions, it isn't veiled at all that Psalms 37.20 is used.
"But the wicked will die,
The Lord's enemies are like flowers in a field -
They will disappear like smoke." (New Living Translation)
The apparent innuendo of Jesus' words definitely show the connection of "the Lord's enemies" in Psalms 37 to those in his own crowd of listeners not trusting his father for the basics of life. Jesus' reference to the flowers of the field disappearing in smoke is a dead give away of the connection. And in case there was any misunderstanding of who κυρίος was in either Psalms or his own words, the Old Testament reference uses יהוה Yahweh), translated as Lord in verse 20 above, the most sacred of the names for God, Yes, that stung a bit. But the words sting a bit for me too, I who live in this great modern era. I see myself working hard and priding myself on the type of clothing I can buy and the type of restaurants I can eat in when not cooking at home. I fully understand the God replacement idea Jesus spoke about. While I am not wealthy by my own country's standards, my country's standards for "working class" are still head and shoulders above most of the rest of the world's standards for the same designation. I find myself in need of a picture of lilies dotting the countryside being better made and more attractive than the clothes on my own body. I need an understanding of how temporary those lilies-more-beautiful-than-my-clothes are since they are thrown in a fire and burned, yet my clothes remain because my father thinks that much more of me. I need a good reminder of Jesus' sentiments echoed in Psalms 37 of living decently, doing the right things, showing a lot of care for my creator, and being loyal to him for any accumulation of things that come my way.
Morsels of food are delicious because of the little things, the subtle seasonings, the dash of salt, the sprinkle of garlic, the garnish of parsley, the touch of glaze, or the hint of lemon. Ahhhh - so delicious!
The trip to Caesarea Philippi had been worth it. It's recorded in Matthew 16. Jesus had probed his 12 followers about his identity. Simon spoke the acknowledgment he had wanted to hear. Soon after, Jesus thought he should more specifically prepare his closest followers. So he did, but when he did, Simon had a rather telling outburst in reaction to Jesus' words (verse 22).
Was Simon just unaware of what was happening around him? Maybe he was blind to the social setting Jesus moved in. Simon was from Galilee, not Jerusalem, so he wasn't so plugged in to the Judean power structure or as sensitive to the Judean penchant for knowing the Talmud and practicing its rules to a T. I'm sure he had heard about the nature of those Jerusalem Jews, but to walk among them and catch all the innuendos swirling around about Jesus and his band of 12 might have been just out of the awareness IQ of Simon.
The conversation started because Jesus thought that he was close to the time the Jews would act on their distaste for him. His words are found in verse 21.
Ἀπὸ τότε ἤρξατο ὁ Ἰησοῦς δεικνύειν τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ ὅτι δεῖ αὐτὸν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἀπελθεῖν καὶ πολλὰ παθεῖν ἀπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ ἀρχιερέων καὶ γραμματέων καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἐγερθῆναι (From that point forward, Jesus began making his close followers aware that he had go to Jerusalem for his departure, that he must come into all kinds of ill treatment by the councilmen on the Sanhedrin, the important priests, and the scholars of the law, that he must be killed, and that he must be awakened on the third day.)
These connected pieces of information should not have been news to Simon. But his reaction to them makes us think it was. Either it was news to Simon because he was naive and unaware of the Judean power brokers' whispers, or he was not ready for Jesus to "give in" to the power brokers because his teachings against their way of interpreting and practicing the Talmud were having a great effect on everyday, normal Jews. No matter, his reaction showed total unpreparedness for Jesus' information.
Part of the reason Simon was taken by surprise was the wording Jesus used in speaking of leaving them. Very curiously, and deliberately, Jesus had used the phrasing for departure from one place to go to another place, Examples from secular Greek texts are abundant in their use of the phrase δεῖ αὐτὸν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἀπελθεῖν (he had to go to Jerusalem to depart [for somewhere]. The Greeks often said they would have to go to a town to depart for a specific destination. Jesus plainly used the departure phrase to tell the Twelve he would be going to Jerusalem to depart, but he implied or didn't speak the second part, the destination. For certain, Thomas didn't catch the implication since later he tells Jesus he didn't know where Jesus was going (John 14.5). But Jesus had spoken of being from God and returning to God during his whole time of public teaching. The Twelve were not always swift in catching on to implied information.
Another part of the reason Simon took Jesus to task about leaving them was the way Jesus said that he would meet his end. Jesus was very specific about the three groups of people by name who disliked his message enough to kill him. Perhaps Matthew named them on reflection if Jesus had only said that the Judean establishment would kill him, but likely Jesus knew of the collaboration shaping up. Evidently Simon couldn't handle the part of Jesus falling into ill treatment at the hands of the Judean establishment.
Of all people, though, Simon should have heard what Jesus was really saying. Luke records a significant event (8.40-56). Jairus' daughter was stone cold dead when Simon walked into her room that day with Jesus. Yet Jesus said she was only asleep. Only six people were in the room with the girl that day, and Simon was one of them. Jesus had taken the girl's hand and used the same word that he was using on this occasion now to discuss his "death." Jesus had taken the girl's hand and said, "wake up."
Of all people, Simon should have deciphered what Jesus was really saying. Luke records a previous event of Jesus to that of Jairus' daughter in Luke 7.11-16. Jesus had stopped a large crowd of people outside the town of Nain who were mourning a young man's death, the son of a widow. Jesus asked for the coffin lid to be removed and he spoke to the young man lying lifeless in the coffin. All he had said was, "Wake up." Simon had seen it for himself.
But Simon's mind got stuck on the wrong phrases. He heard Jesus say, "I'm leaving you," and "I'll be treated badly and killed." I think he missed the phrase, "I'll be awakened on the third day." If Jesus would awaken, then Simon should have been comforted. But no, Simon's mind ignored the scene he witnessed at Jairus' house and failed to remember Jesus telling the girl, "Wake up." He ignored the overwhelming tears of the widow at Nain after Jesus had stopped a funeral procession, looked into the coffin of this widow's son's and said, "Wake up."
Simon had reacted so vociferously and had missed the point of Jesus' warning so badly that Jesus felt the need to tell Simon that he was in all reality speaking about life not death. He ends his speech to Simon in verses 25 and 26 with a really tasty morsel to ponder. The word play is with ψυχὴν, usually translated soul.
ὃς γὰρ ἐὰν θέλῃ τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ σῶσαι ἀπολέσει αὐτήν· ὃς δ’ ἂν ἀπολέσῃ τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ εὑρήσει αὐτήν (Whoever wants to save his life will lose it. Whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.) τί γὰρ ὠφεληθήσεται ἄνθρωπος ἐὰν τὸν κόσμον ὅλον κερδήσῃ τὴν δὲ ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ζημιωθῇ; ἢ τί δώσει ἄνθρωπος ἀντάλλαγμα τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτοῦ (What is the advantage to a person if he or she gains the whole world but suffers the loss of his or her life? Would a person give that in exchange for his or her life?) Another word, ζωὴ, was the usual word for life. That prompts one to ask if ψυχὴ was used asan exact synonym of ζωὴ? As with virtually all synonyms, exactness is not the case. Synonyms share properties or features, but exactness would exclude the need for one of the two words in the language. In that way language uses natural selection to weed out words from a language over time. ζωὴ was used to indicate that something was alive as opposed to dead, that a person was breathing air and the heart was beating. ψυχὴ on the other hand, was the essence of what makes a person, that person, personality and all. It was the sentient features of a person. ψυχὴ would include how a person thought. In fact, mind has sometimes been used as a translation for the word, and the derivative of the word into English, psyche, means the capacity to think, understand, and shape ideas for oneself. Jesus on many occasions loved using double meanings for his words. This occasion was no different. One way Jesus meant the words was to say that if a person wanted to keep his own way of thinking and shaping ideas, he would lose that at his death. But if he wanted to change his thinking and shaping of ideas to Jesus' way of thinking, he would find a fulfilling life. Jesus also meant the more literal way of taking his words too. If a person lived his own lifestyle he would die, if he adopted Jesus' lifestyle, he would never die. Jesus' second statement contained two questions. The literal consideration of the first question was that a person didn't have any advantage if he or she had reached a zenith in some way, but died after reaching the top. There would be no enjoyment. The enjoyment is not in the struggle to the top, but at the top reaping the benefits of hard work. The second meaning was, What advantage is there to shaping a "good" way of thinking to take one to the loftiest heights if the journey there would change or contaminate the original way of thinking? If one's "good" way of thinking was important in the first place, all the way through, and at the end, was it worth risking a change to it? I love the way Jesus thought and spoke... such simplicity, yet such depth. As I reflect on such a passage, I find that I am on a journey too that will end. Preparedness has no substitute. Unlike Simon, I want to hear Jesus' words and face them head on and glean their meaning. Jesus clearly spoke of his departure for another place, the one he went to prepare for us. By all means, I want to go there. I don't want to miss it. To be there with him evidently means not shaping ideas to advance my agenda but shaping ideas that advance Jesus' way of thinking. By doing that I wake up while I live and again in a prepared place after I fall asleep here.
It's amazing what sleeping will do for a person. When we awake, there are benefits. Jesus was very consistent in referring to death as sleep. Yes, he wanted his closest followers to know about the restorative nature of sleep. He wanted them to enjoy waking up to life after lying down to sleep, finally, here on the planet.
Morsels of food are delicious because of the little things, the subtle seasonings, the dash of salt, the sprinkle of garlic, the garnish of parsley, the touch of glaze, or the hint of lemon. Ahhhh - so delicious!
Some of Jesus' most disturbing words for the Jews came on the occasion found in John 5.1-29. It was just a typical Saturday at the colonnade in Solomon's temple. The courtyard was buzzing with people. They were crossing the open area next to the refreshing pool to get where they were going, mingling with each other or meeting someone there. It was a typical Saturday at the beautiful, historic Sheep's Gate Courtyard and Pool.
Also at this place were a number of invalids. They were blind, crippled, and paralyzed. I'm sure they liked being around the daily buzz, but they also had a chance to be healed there. Some of the later manuscripts of John added that people helped the invalids to get into the pool when the pool water bubbled. It was thought that an angel was stirring the water, and whoever got into it first would be healed.
Jesus made it a point to be at the courtyard that day. The reason was not stated. Perhaps it was a hot day, and this was a good place to rest and cool down because of the 5 ornate colonnades around the pool for people to stand under. Maybe Jesus was meeting someone there. Or, he could have gone there just to observe people. It was a great place for that.
But, while he was there, he decided to go over and talk to the invalid everybody knew because he had been sitting around the pool for 38 years - most of his life. The man had been young and had grown old there. As they talked, Jesus wanted to show the man what faith could do, so he healed him and disappeared into the crowd. The Jews around the pool saw the newly healed man. Their thoughts revealed the incredulous attitude they had toward things out of the ordinary for them. Instead of sharing his ecstasy of being able to walk in the first time for at least 38 years, they found fault with him being healed because he was carrying his old invalid mat with him. Saturday rules said he couldn't. Well, at least some of the Jews' interpretation of the Saturday rules had been construed to mean he couldn't carry his mat. 38 years of bondage to being crippled and some of the Jews were worried about him carrying his mat because of Saturday rules! You can't be serious.
It is this attitude that Jesus absolutely abhorred because it was the attitude that kept people from having life. People were so condescending and for no good reason. Eventually, the word spread that Jesus had healed the man on Saturday with all of its special rules and "the Jews," presumably the ones that read the Talmud with all of its oral traditions, who were in the colonnade that day, confronted Jesus with his faux pas. Jesus was not in the least bothered or embarrassed by what he did and shared his affrontive remarks with those Jews. His comments boiled down to this (verse 24):
Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ὁ τὸν λόγον μου ἀκούων καὶ πιστεύων τῷ πέμψαντί με ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον καὶ εἰς κρίσιν οὐκ ἔρχεται, ἀλλὰ μεταβέβηκεν ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου εἰς τὴν ζωήν (Most assuredly you should believe me when I tell you that the person hearing my message and believing him who sent me has life for the ages. That person does not come under judgment but has made a transition from death to life). The whole point of healing this man was to give him a second lease on life, a literal, physical second life. But after the Jewish rule-keepers approached Jesus with their offensive, condescending attitudes, Jesus decided to take his teaching of second lease on life to the level they couldn't see, the non-physical, spiritual plane. Already Jesus knew they couldn't handle him putting himself equal with God, even coming from God (his father) [verse 18]. So, he drew a clear line in the sand. "Believe my message and receive a life for the ages," which is a moral life, not a second lease on physical life. The moral life is not a rule-keeper's life. It is a life of accepting others, treating others decently, and watching out for each other. A rule-keeper's life is all about himself/herself. A moral life is all about not putting others under your judgment of them. There was a huge difference.
And, Jesus wanted to address straightforwardly the main concern of this Jewish audience of condescending, pious onlookers: he absolutely was equal to God. John says that the Jews were already talking about killing him for this (verse 18). So, Jesus had nothing at all to lose by continuing to talk about who he was with the group he knew he couldn't convince. In verse 27 he called himself the Son of Man, which was his term for the messiah, making it clear that he claimed to be God's chosen one in Jewish history. But in the same breath, he didn't want to leave any doubt that the messiah was also God's son. So, he says it plainly (verse 25). ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἔρχεται ὥρα καὶ νῦν ἐστιν ὅτε οἱ νεκροὶ ἀκούσουσιν τῆς φωνῆςτοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ οἱ ἀκούσαντες ζήσουσιν (Most assuredly you should believe me when I tell you that an hour is coming, actually here now when the dead will hear the voice of God's son and, having heard, will live.) Jesus is clear. If one believes his message that he is the promised chosen one and God's son, then he or she will live. But the life is not the physical life now, nor is it the life to come. It is a moral life that "is here now." It is not life according to the Jewish way of thinking that one should keep rules to please God or the more minor theme of keeping rules to enter the next life. It is deliverance from the death people give themselves by feeling pious enough to condescend and judge others by their own rules. It is the life of accepting and helping others on their journey in the same way people desire acceptance and help that they themselves. It is a spiritual rather than physical life. A tasty little morsel is found in verse 29. καὶ ἐκπορεύσονται οἱ τὰ ἀγαθὰ ποιήσαντες εἰς ἀνάστασιν ζωῆς, οἱ δὲ τὰ φαῦλα πράξαντες εἰς ἀνάστασιν κρίσεως (And they will come out. Those who have done good things will experience a resurrection of life. Those who have carried on with careless, thoughtless, and indifferent attitudes and actions will experience a resurrection of judgment.) The verse was a direct quotation from Daniel 12.2. Jesus decided to quote from a book of the Old Testament that would attest to the truth of what he was saying. If the Jews wouldn't believe him, maybe they would believe something they did trust. However, he chose a rather recent addition to the Old Testament, an enigmatic one at that, and one that didn't have a lot of oral tradition built around it. It's almost a choice to see if the Jews would repudiate something considered sacred ground. Daniel spoke of a time that would come when people would be dead and rise to life - the same transition Jesus used earlier (verse 24 above)in explaining to the Jews that they should not be so worried about him "working" on a Saturday but celebrating the man's second lease on life and showing that their own morality embraced life not the sterility of judgment (or death) which is the same as supporting death. Their ideas about what constituted work and not rest were a misguided application of the Old Testament principle of holding the Sabbath sacred. Thus, Jesus applied Daniel's words of death and life to moral death and moral life. Jesus used the scripture to illustrate that Daniel's coming time was "now here" and that the death spoken of was moral death leading to his judgment of them, one and the same with God's judgment of them. Jesus accomplished both objectives with one quotation. That was pretty strong medicine. Then again, what other kind of medicine is there when people can't believe you are God's son.
Whenever I read John, I can't help but notice the emphasis he gives to the idea of life. The idea fills his book. He also helps me with a standard that I have to work on for myself. All of us find ourselves in the human condition, imperfect and flawed. We need each other. We need to watch out for each other and treat each other decently. I want others to see me as a person who will accept them and their station in life. I want people to count on me for making it to the end of our journey here on Earth with them - one with the other, not one without the other. [I realize that not everyone agrees on the dating of the book of Daniel. I accept the late dating of Daniel in the time of the Macabbees, and thus make my comments accordingly.]
