Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Chapters 1-3: Getting Scriptures Wrong...What If...Jesus Afoot
8/14/2008 2:52 PM
chapter one
Ways to Get the Scriptures Wrong
The Bible is the world’s best selling book—and the least read. Well, having it nearby at least makes for one less excuse. But there are plenty more: too long, too old, too familiar, too complicated, too foreign (all those strange names)….Plus on my own?
Reading the Good Book strikes many as dangerous—almost as dangerous perhaps as leaving it unread.
Yet in a matter promising deliverance and happiness, maybe even hereafter, can one afford not to peek at least? We all know the Bible consists of two testaments. Aren’t we the least bit curious to see what, if anything, has been willed to us? Over so many centuries, any inheritance must certainly have accrued lots of compound interest by now.
Shying away from the Bible, even just the Gospels as in our case, usually stems from exaggerated anxiety that its contents may overturn our lives and loves. On the other hand, encouragement to find hidden rewards there can pander to other leanings, such as wishful thinking (as perhaps in the preceding paragraph). Skeptical or credulous…what will it be? But is there no approach that skirts both extremes, plus any other inadequate slants?
For all their brevity, simplicity and duplication, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have met with an out-and-out zoo of responses, leaving in their wake no little confusion, when not worse. Divinely inspired? Hoax? Just beautiful poetry or sublime moral utopias? When authored? By whom? A clever re-invention by Paul? Error-free, down to the last detail? Etc. High-sounding and occasionally scholarly theories cover the whole spectrum. Seemingly everybody has an interpretation. Things have so gotten out of hand that many doubt the authenticity of any passages that don’t agree with their pet bias.
How did this impasse come about?
On the basis of bits and drabs from Sundays past, many people think they know what the Bible is about and so leave the tome to gather dust. Others, after a sulfurous whiff or two, try to put as much distance between themselves and its threatening pages.
Bible scholars, usually with Germanic last names, also come in various flavors. Some like to indulge in mystical flights of fancy. Others drain the story of suspense when they minimize any human role in the text and assume that Christ is God himself. Still others try to remake Jesus into their own image and likeness—about the highest compliment those Herr Professors can bestow on a mere man.
Sprouting denominations at almost every turn, the past 2000 years of Christianity have likewise offered their own interpretations, usually discordant. Result? A Babel that puts the original one to shame.
It’s hard to make Christ out through the clouds and clutter. I’m not alone in asking, “What, after all, did Jesus say and do?” To find out, why not start all over again? Let’s read the Gospels, at least one of them, from stem to stern. And then, how about some investigative reporting, trying to reconstruct his sayings and doings? That’s where this book comes in. So, then let’s hold off on the interpretations till we’ve factually determined what all the text can tell us, warts and all. A whole lot of homework awaits us, before we can intelligently take or leave the Gospels’ messenger and his message. With some belated diligence, however, we should be able to answer the question: is it more reasonable to believe than to doubt and even deny?
Once the record has been pieced together as best it can, prospectors can then decide whether to trust Jesus and his word. Believers may also benefit by finding, or making more explicit, the grounds for their faith. Whatever they can do to reinforce their beliefs—and weaken the contrary case—will decrease both mood swings and temptations to unbelief.
The New Testament’s Christ is to be our main focus. We’ll concentrate on the four sketches of him that are the Gospels. If we don’t get Jesus right, at least in the main, the rest of the New Testament (not to mention the Old) will likely make little sense. The 23 latter documents need to be interpreted in view of the former four—and not vice versa. Many prematurely conclude that the Gospels are too “naïve,” “disjointed” and “concrete,” certainly not spiritual enough. They then pounce on speculative St. Paul and so give up mining the Gospel text. But that’s a trap heading apparently in the opposite direction to that of Jesus. Instead let’s keep at the painstaking detective work till it’s done. Let’s also keep an open mind, ignoring meanwhile any preconceptions or presuppositions. No little task.
Here are some things that need looking into:
· Mesh the four sketches into one chronological narrative;
· Peer into Christ’s so-called hidden life (10 times longer than his barely 3 years of public life);
· Explore Jesus’ relatives and parents, especially his mother;
· Tally and classify the “miracles” wrought by the Messiah and his followers (there are many more than the three dozen specifically named);
· Plumb the 38 parables: 21 offer novel and often fetching insights to the new kingdom and its king; the rest contrast the new with the existing legalistic establishment or simply expose the latter;
· Assemble and rank his moral teachings, both explicit and implicit;
· Study the prompts either to think or to believe;
· Profile the degrees of discipleship and its costs;
· Determine Jesus’ enemies and how much he provoked them;
· Lay out the kingdom’s rules on keeping quiet or proclaiming from housetops;
· Identify forerunners and predictions, mostly persecutions;
· Explain the roles of prayer;
· Detail Christ’s character, personality and “levels”;
· Interpret Jesus’ passion, death and resurrection: both failure and triumph?
· Make the acquaintance of God, the angels and other spirits;
· Examine the prospects and contours of heaven and hell. [#16]
Trying to map out Christ will occupy the lion’s share of this volume. But beforehand, let’s take up a preliminary consideration. There may be far deeper reasons affecting the search for the real Jesus. If the Messiah is the answer, what then is the question? And who wants to know? Hmm….
Over the past 2,000 years attempts to ask the right question have spawned hundreds of answers, some better than others. Had there, however, been among them an exact fit, the search would be over, crowned with a perfect ending. That doesn’t seem to be the case. What good is any savior unless it’s clear what or whom he’s to save us from? A recent example that may shed some light is found in Latin America’s recent flirtation with liberation theology. There have-nots exploited by a heartless upper class are told by frustrated, radicalized clerics they must topple their oppressors in a Marxist revolution and forcible re-distribution of wealth. And Christ, obviously no friend of the establishment, is to be their Generalissimo. A more common instance of trimming God to suit demand involves those obsessed with their seemingly irremediable sinning. Many of these are in the market for a doddering, grandfatherly, see-no-evil God who looks the other way or otherwise imputes no blame. At all events, let me first guess at what for most people today, myself included, is the most burning question or need.
Does anyone out there really care? In fact, is there even anyone out there? So ask, however unconsciously, all those milling, malling Little Orphan Annies. Some even come up with their own formula: “I don‘t know whether God exists or not, but if he does, he’s surely written me off by now.” These questions are of relatively recent origin. But “recent” doesn’t necessarily mean superficial. They had simply not been raised before, not at least on such a broad scale as today. Through the ages, pampered, privileged rich kids may have suffered varieties of identity crisis. But the rest have been too busy staving off hunger and purchasing with no little blood, sweat and brawn a plot of security. They were left with too little oomph or hope to indulge in the luxury of such queries or cravings.
Not so the past two or three generations: the spoiled-rich-kid malaise seems to have metastasized. That dubious honor we owe to near-universal education, freedom and wealthy trappings and conveniences, if not wealth. Few if any green plots or gratifications remain to be sampled. Theirs, if not ours, is the jadedness of “been there, done that.” Waning fast besides is the psychic stuff of envy, materialism, hope, passion, idealism and romance. Many today can lay claim to the complaints found in Memoirs of a Superfluous Man. Who or what would suffer if, say, suburban Sally were to return to the pages of Cosmo and to disappear for good? Does anything likewise stand or fall by perpetual adolescent Paul’s presence or absence—a mere blip at most in the Gross National Product?
Not too far into the 20th century things used to be different. Couples today are told each child comes with a half-million dollar price tag—and that’s before college. Yet even a century ago children were prized as assets: relatively free hands to work the family farm or cottage industry. Before the advent of social security and other welfare programs, a large family was also seen as an insurance policy against old age, premature deaths and catastrophic sicknesses. Back then no one felt unneeded or unwanted. There was plenty of work to be done, and a division of labor willy-nilly assigned to each a calling. When life and even survival were no distant threats, love between the couple themselves and between the parents and kids barely entered into the calculus.
When I was growing up on the Great Plains, of an evening we’d pile into the truck to cool off by driving about. On one such excursion mom pointed out which homesteads had begun thanks to mail-order brides. By most indications such couples seemed to have fared as well as those born of more traditional courtships. Usually under a sepia photograph of the available belles, the publication would list her skills and other qualities. If the farming pioneer liked what he saw and read, he’d drop her (or them) a line expressing his interest and background. If in response the prospective bride concurred, he would send her money for a one-way train fare. The usual custom was for the couple to make up their minds within 24 hours of her arrival. Time was of a premium; backbreaking harvest was bearing down on them; summer would soon be over.
We can imagine a prospective husband thinking along these lines: “OK, OK, she may be a good looker and even skilled in social ways, but can she cook, sew, nurse, teach the 3 Rs, keep a big garden, feed the flocks and herds, milk the cows, cut the logs…besides bringing a baby into the world every year and a half?” Such as they saw marriage not unlike a business partnership wherein each supplied what the other lacked. Mutual understanding and affection were more in the nature of extras to this mutual-help pact. Amid such straitened circumstances, children were rarely presented as optional such duties as doing chores and homework or contributing with their meager earnings to the single family “pot.” So long as the family was barely scraping by, rare is the child that could get tied up in psychological knots over the question of being loved conditionally. Whoever told them things could be different?
Yet beware of nostalgically mooning over the values of some past golden ages. Let’s keep in mind that our forebears, more than choosing a no-frills, resourceful life, were actually quite adept at making of necessity however many virtues they apparently sported. There just weren’t all that many chances to go wrong—not with another mortgage payment coming due and a drought peeping around the corner. This rather sweeping claim is borne out by how soon and thoroughly those good habits began to fray, when after WWII the Yankee cornucopia really started to churn out goods and goodies galore.
And what a scene it has been—and will be. The technological updraft has continued to soar, with all kinds of unsettling consequences. Consider advances of these: transportation, communication, medicine and health, contraception, computerization and automation, social and geographical mobility, proliferation of education and specialization. As entertainment and sports coverage has expanded to 24/7, tribal, family and church ties have frayed, along with morals and mores. Plus what hasn’t been psychologized these days?
Interestingly enough in roughly the same period, organized religion underwent similar changes. The sheep-tending vocabulary nearly says it all. The congregation was called “flock”; the minister, “pastor”; his job, “to shepherd”; lay religionists were known as “sheep” and even “lambs.” Scarcely versed in matters doctrinal and liturgical, the lay folk knew their job to be docility and submission: “Just tell us what to believe and do.” They didn’t aspire to more—which neatly dovetailed with their reverends’ expectations. So long as America was in the main rural and small-town, the formula worked. Roles were largely clear and accepted; the net cooperative effect was one of harmony and familiarity. But with the rising tide of education, wealth and freedom, the flock became a restless body hankering for independence. “Why can’t we think for ourselves?” Men of the cloth also began to doubt many of the traditional mores, beliefs and pieties.* “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” often has seemed the mantra of their ministerial shrinkage. One’s relationship with God, moreover, was often exposed as a contractual thing, resting largely on enlightened self-interest, if that.
With an anemic character and hazier goals, moderns have consequently found themselves misbehaving and sinning more often. What to do? Catholics used to stand in line on Saturday evenings headed to the confessional where their transgressions would be voided. But that periodic brush with personal wretchedness has largely disappeared. Rote, mechanical confession was unmasked and dubbed useless; meanwhile serious sin had been explained away. The same conversion of wine into water had earlier infested the Protestant camp, thanks to wave after wave of soothing but lying secular humanism: “I’m OK, you’re OK.” Prayer had also fallen into disuse, as emancipated people have found themselves with all kinds of other resources. Moreover, their half-hearted petitions never seemed to get answered anyway (surprise!). The result compounds the pervasive sense of a massive identity crisis.
But that’s not all. Most of us seem to be sinking, some for the third and final time, in a vast ocean of conditional love. So long as we behave, others’ allegiance is a good, necessary thing. We all need affirmation and understanding. There’s nothing wrong with this love, which boils down to the golden rule. But what happens, as so often is the case, when we’re neither loving nor lovable? When we misbehave, the welcome mat sooner or later is whisked away. Then to probe the fickleness of others’ shallow commitment, we rebel in no uncertain terms. Found wanting, this conditional affection is soon enough revoked entirely. Whereupon the rebellion is confirmed, to the detriment of however many parties. For instance, unreflective parental fondness pretty much gives out when the solitary first child (an experiment in fulfillment at least on the mother’s part?) begins to sass them back. Others, more cynical, foreswear the whole parenting business in the light of how others’ kids turn out. “Who the hell wants to be cooped up with a monster or two for some 20-30 years?”
What a huge, huge difference the past century has wrought! Can Humpty-Dumpty be epoxied back together? Is it even worth a try? Probably not, given the unlikelihood of turning the clock back. But all of the above zeroes may have largely stemmed from half-hearted stabs at the game of life anyway. Isn’t it a bit ridiculous to cry over spilt milk that was already turning bad on its own? Rather, see all those dead-ends as belated wisdom. We’re not to go there again. The decks are being cleared. People are beginning to see themselves as their worst enemy—instead of their supposed best friend. Sooner or later we all need to come clean. What we’re to be saved from is our own lying, cheating selves. And in this uncertain project, we may stand in need of some outside help. That may sum up the chastened mindset of those who may just be able to recognize and even resonate to some Good News and even the Best News: the prospect of an absolutely Unconditional Lover.
There you have the question for which the Messiah may be the answer. But only those who are sick and tired of the “bad olds” can appreciate the contrary. Otherwise the proverbial pearls will find themselves being tossed to and trampled by unwitting swine (see Mt 7:6). Didn’t Christ say that only those who are sick need a physician (see Mt 9:12 Mk 2:17, Lk 5:31)? So, by acknowledging ourselves to be moral pygmies, we may finally be able to get Christ right, however many times we’ve failed in the past.
Are we justified in raising the question of subjective dispositions and readiness? Yes, where do you think all those misinterpretations and misunderstandings come from? A story is told about the comic W. C. Fields, not particularly known to be fond of religion. Sick and bedridden, Fields is visited by a friend surprised to see him leafing through the Bible. “What’s this, W. C., have you found religion in your old age?” “No,” ran the reply, “just looking for loopholes.” We usually find what we look for. None of us is a stranger to misjudgments, both coming and going. Sometimes we rashly, impatiently, kid ourselves. At others we just don’t feel like digging for what makes others tick. In our regard others answer in kind. When, moreover, life-or-death issues come up, then we’re more likely to be especially defensive and truth-bending.
Just ask Christ, a communications failure through the ages. Had he unfurled a program as limited, say, as Dale Carnegie’s, most people would have ignored and dismissed him. That he was rejected so fiercely and nearly unanimously may testify to the depth of his message, mission and character. So many mistakes by others accumulated in fact that they spelt his death. We can’t therefore be surprised that most attempts to read scripture, sooner or later, also peter or short out. The Gospels cannot be taken up lightly or, at the other extreme, too ponderously. Both may be defense mechanisms. Success and peace, however, are promised to those of “good will” (see Lk 2:14).
So, what kind of a book is this? I have few credentials. But the absence of letters after my name may end up being a plus. Most of the “higher biblical critics” like to speak in code to the like-minded: at most 200 of them the world over. For starters then, I’m nobody’s mouthpiece but my own. And I largely agree with whoever once said, approximately: “Any religious formulation at which my cleaning lady turns up her nose I view with deep suspicion.”
One last word. In drawing close to Christ in the Gospel pages, beware also of shallow dreams and stunted expectations—or their opposites. We’re more likely to shipwreck by harboring too few hopes than too many. To paraphrase G. K. Chesterton, most people claim they’ve tried Christ and found him wanting, whereas in truth they’ve barely got their big toe wet. C. S. Lewis points up the same danger in our calling upon God as Mr. Fixit to make our little cottage snug and cozy. Thank you. He may help us to curb our lust, shrink our gossiping, overcome our inveterate laziness. Yes, he may do so at times and in part, plus grant some of our prayers—but only to get our attention for the main act.
How we may gyp God (and ourselves) in seeing him as a mere but prissy schoolmarm—or thundering tyrant! That something much, much greater and better and deeper and rapturously ecstatic may just be the reward for heeding Jesus’ absolutely outlandish and uncompromising demands to fling away our lives and all worlds to possess it.…Him?
Chapter 2
10/24/2008 12:08 PM; 4955ww
What If…?
Albert Einstein credited the imagination for the deepest and most permanent insights into reality, in physics to be sure, but elsewhere as well. In conversation one day with Saint-John Perse, he asked the poet what sparked his work. Perse: intuition and imagination. “It’s the same for a man of science” was Einstein’s delighted response.* Maybe it’s similar for Scripture gleaners also.
We’re also embarked on a research project: the more facts, the better. But that’s not an end in itself. Eventually we hope to draw some conclusions supported by the data. Meanwhile the imaginative mind is trying out all kinds of hunches—something over which we seem to have little control. (Similarly, we never stop dreaming about a happiness better than our current lot; otherwise we simply wouldn’t budge.) We’re on the lookout for patterns (hypotheses) to fit the most possible observations into something approximating a whole: “If that’s so, does this follow or that—or what?” As the composite image grows richer, we discard interpretations that do violence to the mounting data. Otherwise, we’re not likely to get to the batter’s box, let alone first base.
So, let’s first try to imagine implausible scenarios for Jesus’ presence in Palestine some 2,000 years ago. Then perhaps the settings he did appear in may not seem so arbitrary.
Let’s suppose Christ were born into an upper-class, moderate Pharisee family. We’re told there may have been 1,000 such in all Judea and Galilee, largely in Jerusalem. His hidden life would take place amid leisure and things of the mind. Unacquainted with toil, at most he might have been a source of pithy axioms, however insightful and elevated. As an adult, would he have contrasted all that much from, say, Socrates or Confucius? Any followers might then be something akin to Boy Scouts or to guru groupies. His self-manifestation would likewise have been limited and muted. To establish his mission, from an early age his departures from the Pharisee ethos would have had to be quite frequent, inviting rising criticism. Had, further, his Pharisee family been of the stricter stripe, he would have been entangled even earlier by both rigid legalism and vociferous disquisitions of the Law. In any case he would still clash with the establishment, leading the teacher to his persecution, passion and death—a collision the “odd ball” provoked, in part.
However, with no toe-hold amid the populace, wouldn’t such a Jesus have remained largely an intramural alien, somewhat elitist to boot? In those days some nine out of ten Jews are estimated to have been poor. Such lack of solidarity would hardly be a good platform for launching a new world religion to address the spiritual needs of most everybody. Moreover, without there being anything more at stake, his death too would have been sheared of any liberating purpose. Nobody has ever claimed some sort of deliverance as a consequence of Socrates’ poisoning via hemlock at the hands of Athens’ authorities.
A good moral teacher and leader, especially one acting in God’s name like the Jewish prophets, would bolster his case with the further sanction of cures and miracles. Such an envoy might help his peers to have a fuller grasp of human nature and its goals, plus offering them clearer notions of God. But would that have been enough stimulus for the Jews to fight free of their moral and religious morass? Probably not. As John Henry Newman once pointed out in so many words: no one will ever die a martyr for an argument, however airtight. Nor would such a super-prophet himself likely escape a super-execution, given the Jews’ custom of dispatching those sent to them.
What if the Teacher had come on the scene as a total adult stranger? Imagine some sort of itinerant preacher and do-gooder, à la the protagonist of Joshua Tree. But wouldn’t an enshrouded origin greatly add to the troubles of deciphering an already mysterious Christ? If a new revelation is to be trumpeted once for all, an uncertain sound may be worse than nothing. Whatever else he may be, a clear genealogical descent would help to establish the human reality of any envoy.
What if Jesus had militated with the zealots, steeped in animus towards the Romans? Such a politically-obsessed mien is so distant from a mere sketch derived from the Gospels that it hardly deserves consideration.
Consequently, it seems unlikely that Jesus would stem from any of Jewry’s religious or political parties. It might help, however, if he, paradoxically, came laden with wisdom but hailing from a lowly socio-economic rank. If indeed he claims to be some sort of ambassador from God, this could be best backed by many miracles in his wake. The Messiah would likely fulfill the requirements of a prophet—and then some. Yet somehow his influence would have to be greater and go deeper than that attending earlier prophets, while not departing from the sum of their traditions.
Now our imaginings of a possible deliverer can’t take place in a vacuum. If there are strong hints that in the past God may have shown himself in part, such unveilings merit our attention. You don’t have to believe that the Bible is God’s very word to accord it some authority. Is there any other religious foundational document that has been so prized and exalted, even at the cost of some of its defenders’ lives?
The Old Testament, viewed here as a trustworthy historical document, is a repetitious story of Hebrew waywardness, partially arrested time and again by some conspicuous divine intervention. Such godly displays include, among others, the delivery of the Ten Commandments, Joshua’s miraculous military battles, the daily advent of Manna, the universal Flood, and a succession of prophetic utterances. Then, regardless, the once repentant Jews would grow weary of heeding God’s directions or envious of their neighboring tribes’ manifold deities, soon falling away in any case. Thereupon God would generate a wake-up call in the form of some punishment or prophet—or both—and try to renew his covenant. This up-and-down pattern had been going on for some 2,000 years, dating from Abraham’s vocation, when not from the primal days of Eden. In the main the chosen people entrusted with monotheism reacted in monotonously similar ways.
Can the same be said of the Lord of the Old Alliance? As the centuries went by, God seems to have grown less warring and tribal. He also seems to have prompted Jewry ever so slowly to evolve from a collective and external religion to one that is more personal and internal. Just compare the flavor and thrust of, say, the Old Testament’s Chronicles with the book of Isaiah, penned some thousand years later in and around the Babylonian exile. Each refinement, however, made the proposal less attractive to the vast majority. God seemed to be choosing successively a smaller and smaller remnant of faithful souls who will apparently pave the way for the Gentiles, as Jewish apostates fell by the wayside. Even God seemingly abides by the adage: “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.” He doesn’t seem deterred by the Jews’ disloyalty. Precedents abound, therefore, for God’s sending more prophets and maybe even a definitive one. Did he? Let’s turn to the immediate historical context.
At the time of Christ, the Jews had been missing prophets for some 500 years. The reason surely was not that they had finally digested the prophetic messages and were acting on them. Yet there were a few people back then on the lookout for a new revelation to enlighten and console them, even non-Jews such as the Roman poets Virgil and Horace, the Wise Men out of Persia, the Ethiopian eunuch baptized by Philip….Especially among the Jews, Messianic expectancy was running high 2,000 years ago. Bible students had found in the Old Testament at least 150 Messianic prophecies, most of them literal, whetting the long-thwarted Jewish appetite for some sort of redemption.
Coincidentally, even external circumstances for spreading a fuller disclosure of the divine image were favorable. First Greek, then Roman armies had conquered the known world, from Great Britain to the gates of India. There had never been more facility for travel and the exchange of thought—nor less facility for an armed insurrection by the Jews, given the grim, implacable Roman legions. And through this world of Greek speech and culture, of Roman roads and institutions, the Jewish people, till then so clannish and conservative, had been dispersed as little colonies in Rome, Alexandria, Ephesus, Antioch, Corinth and many other cities. These Jews of the Diaspora could serve as centers for the propagation of any new Jewish message. There were, we might say, conscious need and practical opportunity. But could anything new and universal stem from this most backward, poor and forlorn corner of the world?
Yet is there anything provincial in a God disclosing himself at one time instead of another, in one place rather than another? Palestine was admittedly a tiny country and hidebound besides. However, its religious dogmas and history were, even apart from any future Christian considerations or elaborations, something unique among religious histories. Even were the Christian religion to be proved fraudulent, aren’t we tugged to admit that, of all the great world religions, Judaism was the purest in its method of worship and the truest in its theological principles? Further, from what little we might know of God, somehow mightn’t we expect him to use inadequate instruments and settings? Otherwise the essence and strength of any revelation might be lost amid the use of an astounding, piercing megaphone.
What if behind the scenes God had been orchestrating events and people to pave the way for a special envoy? Short of bending and curtailing human freedom, any God worth his salt, so to speak, could presumably stack the deck somewhat. Had you been in God’s almighty shoes, might you not have acted similarly? Wouldn’t you thus have arranged the social-political circumstances and interiorly readied enough individuals at any rate to make viable the reception and spread of any new divine message? Try to come up with any more initiatives God could have possibly authored. Indeed the attempt to improve upon the actual scenario is a healthy exercise: a cobweb-cleansing process of discovering and discarding dead-end streets. What better way to appreciate what may indeed have happened?
That humans were dangerously marooned without some sort of divine invasion doesn’t prove anything of God, not even whether he exists. It may have been “bad luck” for the human race to be left to construct its own religion, considering how faltering are our mind, will and stabs at fulfillment. The human plight might seem almost to demand a revelation. But that establishes no claim that God was bound to reveal himself. Only if he’s good, should we have expected him to do so. But are we justified in assuming he is? This wouldn’t be the first time the human race has engaged perhaps in some wishful thinking.
Would it have ever occurred to humanity to love God or vice versa, had something not happened in the first century A.D.? Most unlikely, claims Aristotle (384-322 B.C.). The gods of Greek and Roman mythology were heartless, making men and women their mere playthings. Earlier and even later formulations of theology at most called for honoring and respecting the reigning gods. Aristotle perhaps scaled higher than anybody when he postulated an Unmoved Mover. But this “God” was eternally caught up in admiring his utmost excellence and beauty. At most he let himself be known and desired by whoever might get his moral-intellectual house in order. Thus would he spur distant inferiors to their limited perfection without bestirring himself.
The ancients, including Athens’ philosophers, had no notion of creation. They viewed the cosmos as something eternal, without beginning or end. Human history at most was something circular, cyclical. For them, any golden age was in the past. It was the Jews alone who bet on the future, a deliverance promised from on high. Whatever relationship the Gentiles saw as obtaining between the deity and humanity was one of power, analogous to that found between kings and their subjects. None of them dared to liken it to that arising between parents and their children.
Even the Old Testament, evidently the body of God’s self-revelation, is shy about proposing an exchange of love between God and the individual human soul. One of its oldest books, Deuteronomy, talks of loving God a dozen times; Sirach (never officially part of the Jewish Bible canon), eight times; only 13 times in the rest of the Old Testament. The prophets tell you to fear God, to seek God, to come back to God, little about loving him. Mankind was then apparently still learning the spiritual alphabet. Only with a fuller revelation could humans come to abound in a sense of divine intimacy. Since then, however, such love has been taken for granted. Even your “half-Christianities,” so called by Ronald Knox, which dislike the ideas of revelation, historical facts and miracles, insist loudly that God’s love is the only thing that matters. Yet without acknowledging God’s factual interference in human affairs, how can one certainly know that God is supremely loving and lovable?
Etymologically, revelation means drawing aside a veil, letting us see something that was there all the time, possibly even at work unbeknown to us. And the most staggering demand such disclosing could make on our powers of belief would be to assure us that God loves us, wretched and unrequiting though we be. It’s noteworthy that every time humans devise a religion, they write the human role as servants of God. Incredible though it be, when God authors a religion, he starts off, and ends up, serving his rebellious creatures. No wonder there are so few takers of the God-given version. Yet somehow the Remnant, through prayer, integrity, reflection and imagination, was gaining on this conclusion, no matter how haltingly. Those who dwelled on God’s disinterested decision to create and his fondly holding creatures in existence, despite their waywardness, seemingly had less distance to go. For such the Creator-creature relationship stemmed, not from power, but from fatherhood.
Whatever or whoever brought it about, a blindness had apparently descended on nearly all the human race. It obscured ultimate questions. The upshot was that humans had lost sight of their true face and no less of God’s. Accordingly, most men and women saw themselves reflexively as their best friends. And God, when seen at all, was viewed as someone close to their worst enemy. So long as this inverted proposition held sway, would there be any need to right themselves or to rectify their relationship with God? Consequently they’d need some outside corrective action to galvanize their engaging in some serious truth therapy on the inside. Humans had brought on their own blindness; they must strive to undo it. But clenched fists and gritted teeth might not be enough, not at least for the vast majority. On the other side of the equation, almighty God didn’t have exactly a free hand either, unless he was uncharacteristically to bulldoze human freedom.
Another related point to clarify: what’s the origin and purpose of any God-given moral proscriptions and prescriptions, say, the Ten Commandments? The vast majority of people, both then and now, tend to see them as a rather arbitrary obstacle course athwart human strivings and aspirations. The Creator lays them down to keep us in submission and to enshrine his sovereignty. Accordingly, to transgress them is wrong largely because such sinning offends God’s imperial anger. We see as much in the second Psalm, where the kings of the earth rebelled “against the Lord and his anointed,” for having saddled humanity with oppressive chains and gratuitous yokes. When men were learning their moral ABCs, perhaps it was necessary to make behavioral rules an authoritative matter, when not an authoritarian imposition. So in any case do we deal with children. But with the reflection and experience that make up maturity, one might be able to see that the main victim is neither God nor any wronged peer but the miscreant himself. Why? Each misdeed frustrates both the human mind and the aim of human nature. Because erring backfires on its author, God thus brands it wrong. Much as does a good parent.
Note that we did not say a doting grandfather, who may choose to look the other way. Some self-serving people tend to think that they can attain to an afterlife’s final reward without undeceiving their mind and “disinfatuating” their will. But how can a misdirected nature find fulfillment by landing on a conveyor belt headed in the opposite direction? The ensuing dislocation and distortion strike the author as coming close to spelling hell, unless one’s fundamental intention has at least shifted out of reverse.
Earlier in this chapter we imagined some unlikely settings for any divine envoy. Then we aimed for a bird’s-eye view of God’s apparent disclosures to the Jews. We also asked whether circumstances were ripe for a definitive prophet and the likelihood of God’s taking such a step. We’ll conclude this chapter spelling out the plausible needs and ways for such a divine invasion and rescue. What, in other words, should we be looking for in surveying the New Testament? What are the probable tasks and truths any savior and deliverer would have to undertake and proclaim, if his mission is to be viable and even successful?
First is the unfinished business of the old covenant.
As promised, the prophetic call to repentance and salvation has to reach most of the Jews (an estimated million in some 2,000 towns and hamlets in Judea and Galilee). Since the unassisted human voice is lucky if it can reach the fringes of a crowd of 200, the consequent crisscrossing of Palestine adds up to lots of time, sweat and sandal-leather.
Won’t cures and miracles—the more, the better and the wider-spread, the better—be the best certification that Jesus is at least a special divine envoy?
Moreover, nearly 700 religious, moral and ritual precepts binding the Jews had accumulated over the prior 1500 years. Most were man-made and proscribed ahead of time by the Lord. Will the envoy have enough authority to simplify and rank the oppressive, when not impossible, burden of duties galore?
How satisfactorily will the Messiah match up with a hundred or so prophecies foretelling his deeds and sufferings? These bloody passages are found in Isaiah (all of chapter 53).
Then there was the need to show up the Scribes and Pharisees. In effect they had a seeming monopoly on the Jewish religion. Not only was theirs stifling external legalism, but a full-time occupation. On both counts did they scare away the weak and work-laden.
Most Jews perhaps saw their liberation in terms of the yoke imposed on them by their pagan overlords. Gradually, the Messiah must rather convince them their worst enemy is closer to home.
But, much more important, how will the new revelation address the nagging question of how to generate enough steam just to fulfill the Ten Commandments? Ever since these precepts were entrusted to Moses circa 1500 B.C., Jews had been struggling, some manfully, to measure up…and largely failing in the attempt. In this regard the times haven’t changed all that much. Ultimately, the question boils down to one of strength and motivation. Seemingly the Jews simply weren’t sold enough on the Lawgiver to heed his Decalogue more than fitfully. Making Yahweh* more attractive and loveable would thus seem to be a paramount challenge of the envoy.
What features might the fuller revelation display?
To compensate for earlier collective shortcomings, we’re likely to see greater emphasis on the personal and spiritual. To that end we would expect any definitive message to make fuller allowance for both thinking and praying as pathways to greater knowledge of God, plus more intimate communion with him. Those same exercises would also likely lead to enhanced self-knowledge and personal responsibility.
Conversely, God’s not likely to make up for human sloth by mystically revealing himself to each and every human being—theoretically, one of his strategic options. Therein would lie dangerous subjectivism, confusion and wishful thinking, especially when private revelation is not joined to moral reform.
However superior the new theology might be, we can’t expect it to do away magically with the hindrances and indispositions thrown in God’s way by unreceptive, unrepentant human beings. Even God can’t override human freedom, abusive or not. If throughout the Old Covenant, let’s say, one or two percent were open to God’s overtures and revelations, in the best of cases we can’t expect more than 10-20 percent to be newly and effectively responsive. The new envoy will likewise be a probable failure, though perhaps eventually to a lesser extent than his predecessors.
Now this “failure” may not befall the new superior prophet unexpectedly. He might foresee and foretell such a bloody end. Further, might he not make such a fate, especially if willingly undergone and desired, somehow an integral part of some sort of saving tableau?
These spiritual and emotional needs might point to a new theology wherein God’s fatherhood is emphasized. Even imperfect parents have been known not to give up on their errant children. This would be somewhat of a Copernican revolution with respect to the chosen people’s rather stern image of God. In all of the Old Testament God is called “father” only seven times, not so much to point to his bowels of mercy as to use another word equivalent to “lord.”#
The problem with the scribes and Pharisees was that they equated holiness with external observances and sacred things: a matter of nouns and verbs. But what if the new message were all about eliciting a new disposition, a change of heart to underlie and stimulate all things and deeds? What if the new convocation were all about how and why—adverbs both? And wouldn’t such a shift fling open the doors equally to everyone, regardless of circumstances, talents, age, learning, health and so on? If so, the switch would go from chosen people to everyone chosen.
Most Jews knew themselves to be sinners for disobeying divine decrees. And if past be prologue, they were pessimistic about any future improvements. (Neither here have things changed much.) Was there any escape from divine disfavor? God’s justice and his mercy did not co-exist all that well in the Old Covenant, at least in the eyes of the human partner. Dare Jews hope for any reconciliation in the new revelation? To keep them (and any Gentiles) from going haywire both morally and psychologically, nothing short of God’s unconditional love would seem to be required. How could this be best expressed?
Except for the not totally convincing case of Job, the Old Testament does little to assuage the doubts and despairs of those undergoing or witnessing undeserved suffering and even death. How could an almighty and all-loving Creator allow such calamities to ravage the good and innocent? Somehow or other the new revelation must address this mystery more satisfactorily. Otherwise foxholes might well prove to be breeding grounds for agnostics and atheists.
Here’s a question we often overlook, much to our impoverishment: All our knowledge, philosophers tell us, begins in the senses. If something does not engage one or more of these portals to the physical world, it simply cannot be known (inferred) or desired. This limitation, when ignored, points to big troubles for the human race.* For example: if you were born into a den of thieves and had never moved beyond their reach, you would likely think that one of the essential traits of human nature was thievery. Or maybe the question had never arisen, since you neither had seen nor heard of someone bereft of sticky fingers. You’d likely follow suit yourself without much scruple or forethought.
But then one day you stumble across an obvious non-filcher who was apparently more fulfilled than you or your buddies. After rejecting denials and other bogus explanations, you come around and conceive a hankering and longing for whatever it is that makes Petunia enviably contented. One thing leads to another, and before too long, your grasp on stealing (and much else of a questionable nature) begins to weaken. Perhaps you even start making up for your earlier sleights of hand. But then Petunia moves away to take care of a dying relative. With a swiftness that nearly takes your breath away, you soon find yourself back to old pinching ways. Lessons: first, we need to see goodness incarnated to know that it really exists and beckons. We also need to keep rubbing elbows with our betters. We all in fact hail from Missouri. If anyone, God the Creator should surely be aware of this dependency and act accordingly.
Could God send himself? It would probably solve a lot of problems and would pose no insurmountable new problems. Obviously, he couldn’t walk among us as someone manifestly divine. That smells of too much too soon and would likely backfire. Would there be anything inherently dishonest in God’s fully assuming a human nature? No, not if he didn’t deny his divinity. In fact, if God really wanted to help his stranded, stunted children, wouldn’t his embodiment be practically the best way to do so?
Wouldn’t humans be offered thereby a burnished image of an ever encouraging God to see them through tons of repeated backslidings? Mightn’t then our bad news (miseria), paradoxically, be the best medium to magnify his Good News (misericordia)?
What if, also thereby, the human race were presented with a compelling example of a fully enriched human nature? This might persuade them that their labors to hone intellectual and moral virtues were worth while and ultimately rewarding, especially to others.
What if, in answer to those two needs, the Envoy were both God and man projecting the two faces at once, though ever so gradually? Otherwise God’s children might be scared off from drawing the due conclusions. Thus might we imagine a musing of one of the apostles: “What if the leader-friend on the other side of the campfire, now drinking from the wineskin, now squirting Jake alongside, now contributing his rich baritone to a rousing chorus of ‘Hava Nagila,’ were also God?”
And what would be the greatest proof that God remains in the human corner always, regardless? What if, to bolster the reasonable hope that the Creator cannot stop loving his children, the Envoy were factually to die and resurrect for his executioners? Wouldn’t that unilateral, unconditional pledge be the supreme proof that, while we, more or less consciously, can kill his love, we can’t keep it killed?
An unknown, incarnate God operating on the basis of “baby steps” seems to be a winning scenario because it so accommodates how we’re built. First, doesn’t it facilitate God’s weaving an ever escalating friendship with his children? Second, if God wants to show that his children needn’t engage in extraordinary or sacred activities to make him the center of their loves, what better example could there be than of Jesus’ humdrum hidden life? The first reason perhaps calls for some clarification.
Growing (or shrinking) by “leaps and bounds” is not the usual way humans conduct their moral lives. That’s why we often take a huge conversion (or collapse) as largely emotional exaggeration. Moreover, for us to confront utter, unalloyed goodness would likely resemble the blindness an owl experiences when exposed all at once to bright sunlight. Our tempo is poco a poco. We’re won over progressively to loving goodness by ever greater manifestations thereof and no less by our better understanding thereof, especially of tough love. First, like little children, we seek the giver’s gifts, then the gifts’ giver. All of which presupposes intimacy over a goodly length of time. The first lessons in love are best learned in a family setting. Later, deeper lessons are likely learned most readily in something like a spiritual family. We should consequently be on the lookout for the Envoy’s choosing some companions and lavishing on them his endearing favors. On the other hand, the challenges and requisites of love’s growing all but shut the door on those who try to go it alone.
Thus, the permanent human condition seems to call for God stealthily to incarnate himself and to knit a sufficiently strong friendship with closer followers able to weather any future persecutions and other trials. Should the enfleshed God decide to return to his native invisibility, we’d expect him then to leave behind men and women saintly enough to resemble him and somehow to echo his unconditional self-giving. Even better would be for these aspirant saints to be spread throughout the nooks and crannies of everyday secular life. That would diminish the chances of people justifiably claiming they were denied such potentially saving encounters.
To instill and leave behind such loving dedication (and all it presupposes) in his apostolic successors would seem to be the prime reason for God’s incarnation. While this was necessary, it might not be sufficient. Even at the risk of allowing the defects of the Jewish establishment to crop up, God would probably also set up an organized church body to defend and declaim the new revelation and to offer certain sacraments as guaranteed channels of illuminating and invigorating divine help. But note that this clerical superstructure should rather act more like an infrastructure: to midwife at least friendship between God and each of his children. It must resemble and echo its founder. In fact, would it be too much to ask that he choose so to act through others?
3/10/2009 1:35 PM; 9347ww
Chapter 3: Jesus Afoot
Too often readers and hearers of Christ’s life are left with disjointed fragments. They run the same risk of misunderstanding Jesus as did many Jews 20 centuries ago. Even if they try to assemble the puzzle, there are still many pieces missing. Plus some people may have discarded certain uncomfortable teachings. But even with an open mind it’s still difficult to follow chronologically and knowingly in Christ’s footsteps. One consequently may lose out on the drama and progressive suspense of the Savior’s mission.
Offered here are both a framework to help in connecting and structuring Gospel facts and the background to understanding the drama that was Christ. Before doing so, however, some guideposts may help readers to make more of the 4 Gospel accounts, starting with this digest (about one-tenth of the Gospels’ combined length).
1. None of the Gospels is complete, nor strictly chronological. While various attempts have been made to merge the accounts to form one narrative, I favor the Knox-Cox arrangement.[1] I have followed their sequence in attempting to highlight background information and digest key events for the periods making up Jesus’ public life.
2. Geographical references are helpful. Judea is that part of Palestine surrounding Jerusalem, religious capital and home of the Temple. It also houses most of the sticklers for the law—scribes, lawyers and Pharisees, plus the compromising Sadducees. They all feel most threatened by Christ’s person and message.
Galilee is northern Palestine, the hill country bordering on Syria and surrounding the fish-rich lake of the same name (also referred to as “sea,” “Tiberias,” “Gennesaret”). It contains such towns as Nazareth, Capernaum, Cana, homes to the holy family and the apostles (with the possible exception of Judas, who may have been Judean, if not a former Pharisee). Galileans are largely unsophisticated (country bumpkins in the eyes of many Judeans) and, perhaps consequently, more receptive to the master’s teachings and miracles. Here Christ launches his ministry.
Samaria, central-west Palestine, is home to a Gentile people sent into Palestine by the Assyrians to replace Jewish tribes carried into captivity in the 8th century B.C. While converts to the Jewish religion, they were not recognized by either Judeans or Galileans. The hostility was reciprocated. In his various treks to Jerusalem Jesus and his disciples sometimes pass through Samaria. Jews were generally indignant whenever Christ favorably compared Samaritans to his fellow Jews. Perea, also known as Transjordan, is the arid country east of Jerusalem and, more generally, east of the Jordan. Here intersect many Mideastern trade routes, leaving behind no little wealth. Here also Jesus sometimes retired when Jerusalem and, more generally, Judea prove inhospitable.
3. Basing themselves on messianic predictions, all Jews, even the Samaritans, await a king, a deliverer under one of several usual titles: Messiah (Hebrew, meaning Christ or the anointed one) or Son of David, for example. Presumably the savior is to be a man, but one very close to and favored by God. Throughout his public life Jesus seems to emphasize his human nature and fraternity with mankind by almost always referring to himself as the Son of Man (82 times), skirting the above 2 more common terms. Jesus, the personal Hebrew name given by the angel at the annunciation, is so called “for he will save his people from their sins.” Moses had much earlier changed the name of Osee (“salvation”) to Josue (very probably a contraction with Yahweh, which therefore means “Yahweh is salvation”). Jesus is the Greek form of Josue. It was a relatively common name among the Hebrews. Other variants: Josiah, Jesua or Jeshua, Jesse....
4. 30 A.D. is the most probable year for Jesus’ death; thus he begins his public period in 27 A.D., when “about thirty years of age,” according to Luke. In keeping with this estimate, our Gregorian calendar therefore understates by 3 years the year of his birth. Thus 2010 A.D. is in effect 2013 A.D.
5. Jesus’ public life runs for 26 months from March of what we’ll call year one to April of year 3. In keeping with the Torah, Jesus observes 3 paschs in Jerusalem, the last one ending in his death (what Christians call Holy Week). The Gospels mention at least one other ritual visit to the Holy City; there may have been more. During the last 6 months of his ministry, Jesus is found largely in Judea and Perea, again visiting towns and villages as earlier in Galilee. Both chronological and geographical references are scarce for this period; doubtless he at least passed through Jerusalem on more than one occasion.
6. Overall Peter is named 122 times; John the Baptist follows with 82 mentions; next comes John the evangelist, who’s named 23 times.
7. According to an ancient writer, Galilee at the time of Jesus’ ministry contained 204 cities and towns. Presumably Judea had more; Perea, fewer. Therefore it seems improbable that each and every population cluster in the 2 main provinces was the object of Christ’s preaching. His disciples, however, in 2 preparatory swings, probably announced the kingdom’s advent in more villages and towns than those actually visited by the master. In any case it’s safe to assume that all Jews of the time, whether in Palestine or in the Diaspora, heard tell of Jesus, thus fulfilling the “Father’s will”—apparently Jesus’ motivation for his public life.
8. Dating from the time of the Jews’ Babylonian captivity, Malachi was the last prophet until John the Baptist came along: a barren span lasting over 5 centuries. A prophet was understood by the Jews to have received a special inspired teaching to be conveyed to Israel, whether or not its contents foretold future events. Thus they were, and knew themselves to be, channels of revelation. Later prophets, including the Baptist, wore distinctive penitential garb.
9. Originally God gave the old law to Moses on Mount Sinai, most notably the 10 Commandments. Torah is the Hebrew word for law. It regulated every detail of Jewish life, containing 365 prohibitions and 248 positive commands. As if those were not enough, countless man-made, derivative burdens had been added to the Torah, resulting in the most deadening of casuistries.
10. The word Gospel derives from the Anglo-Saxon coupling of “good” (god can mean either good or God) and “spell” (tidings, news).
11. The following digests of periods of Jesus’ public life are not intended to summarize his teachings or highlight his miracles. We will note all 37 of his specified miracles with [M#] and slightly more parables (42) with [P#]. In fact those 2 elements are here shrunk to emphasize the story line. Otherwise it would be easy to equate Jesus with a moralizer or mere teacher or even a miracle-worker. What Jesus teaches may be merely the foreground to what he is really teaching. And let’s keep in mind Christ is more likely to teach by showing and manifesting. The following therefore should be used to imagine how and what Christ seeks to present of himself, principally by deeds, to his various listeners. Special emphasis will be given to Jesus’ reactions to single persons or groups and their reactions to him.
YEAR 1, JANUARY TO APRIL, LARGELY IN JUDEA
The preceding fall the prophet John, Jesus’ second cousin, begins to call publicly for conversion, reinforced by symbolic baptism in the Jordan’s waters. Many flock to him, including Pharisees, whom he calls a “brood of vipers.” Some hail him as Messiah; he denies it but claims the anointed one is in their midst. He also delivers himself of unspecified prophecies to identify the Christ. In January Jesus overcomes John’s reluctance to baptize him. At its conclusion at least John hears the Father’s voice. At mid-month Jesus leaves for the desert to pray and fast.
At Jesus’ return 2 months later John identifies him to his closest disciples as the “Son of God.” Andrew and John follow Christ and stay “with him that day.” Both Andrew and John introduce their brothers: Simon, renamed Peter (meaning “Rock”), and James. Philip, a townsman of Andrew and Peter, is also introduced to the Galilean master. On their way to Galilee Philip recruits Nathaniel whose skepticism is overcome when Jesus claims to have seen him under a “fig tree.” Nathaniel: “You are the Son of God, you are King of Israel.” Jesus: “Greater than these shall you see.” How would these 6 former Baptist recruits interpret “Son of God” or “King of Israel”? They don‘t necessarily mean or imply divinity.
In Cana of Galilee at Mary’s request Jesus worked “the first of his signs” by converting water into wine [M1], thus anticipating the onset of his miracle-working by 2 months. “...[H]is disciples believed in him.” They walk from Cana to Capernaum and then to Jerusalem for the paschal feast. Jesus expels money-changers and merchants from the Temple, for making “the house of my Father” into a den of thieves. His warrant? “Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” Many believe in him, “seeing the [unspecified] signs that he was working.”
Jesus usually stays at Bethany, on the eastern slope of Mt. Olivet, during his visits to Jerusalem. There Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, visits him at night to inquire about the kingdom: “We know that you have come a teacher from God, for no one can work the signs you work unless God be with him.” Among other things, Jesus tellingly says there is “one who has descended from heaven: the Son of Man who is in heaven.”
There are few such good-willed observers in Judea. Some 50 or 60 years later in his Gospel John writes: “Now this is the judgment: The light has come into the world, yet men have loved darkness rather than light, for their works were evil.” Jesus and his disciples baptize on the other side of the Jordan from where the Precursor is still baptizing. The latter’s followers complain: “All are coming to [Jesus].” When the Baptist is imprisoned, Jesus leaves for Galilee, accompanied by no more than a few of his still unofficial followers.
GALILEAN MINISTRY: YEAR 1 MAY TO YEAR 2 OCTOBER
This period occupies 18 of the 26 months of his public life: a year and a half of miracles, parables, crowds and apostles. Here at least initially the Messenger meets with enthusiastic acceptance; this phase climaxes in Peter’s stated belief in Jesus’ special status. Some 80 miles north of Jerusalem, Capernaum will be Jesus’ base for this stage.
Passing through Samaria, Jesus sits next to Jacob’s well, “wearied as he was from the journey.” Again clairvoyant: he tells Samaritan woman facts of her past life, and more: “I who speak with you am he” [Messiah]. In Cana of Galilee one of Herod’s royal officials beseeches Jesus to cure his son. “Unless you see signs and wonders, you do not believe....Go your way, your son lives” [M2: first miracle from a distance]. “And he taught in their synagogues [first indoors and probably only on Sabbaths], and was honored by all.” Repent and believe.
In Nazareth where he grew up, Jesus in the synagogue applies Messianic passage from Isaiah to himself. “And the eyes of all were gazing on him....” He settles in Capernaum, on shores of Lake Galilee. “And they were astonished at his teaching; for he was teaching them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” During one such session he drives out from a man an unclean spirit [M3]. Later he cures Peter’s mother-in-law [M4]. But he commands silence. Simon and others track down Jesus praying early in morning: “They are all seeking you.” Jesus sets out to visit the whole of Galilee, “preaching in their synagogues...and casting out devils.”
One day Jesus preaches from Peter’s boat to the crowd “pressing upon him to hear the word of God.” There follows a miraculous catch of fish [M5]. To Simon and Andrew: “Come follow me; henceforth you will catch men.” He extends the same invitation to James and John, who also leave everything behind: the first permanent disciples. Moved with “compassion,” Jesus heals a leper [M6]. “See you tell no one.”
Back in Capernaum, because of the crowds, a paralytic is lowered through a hole made in the roof by his bearers. Pharisees from Jerusalem are present: the first time they’re seen in Galilee. First Jesus forgives paralytic’s sins; critics: only God can forgive sins. To show them “Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins” [the most explicit claim during the Galilean ministry], Jesus restores paralytic [M7]. “They were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, ‘Never did we see the like.’” The above deeds probably all fall in May; in early June Jesus teaches alongside the lake. Spying Matthew collecting taxes [thus a black sheep], Christ says, “Follow me.” With Matthew’s call Jesus completes the number of his closest followers. All may be Galileans; most were probably the Baptist’s disciples. New wine is not for old wineskins [P1].
Capernaum June: Again on the Sabbath Jesus teaches in the synagogue before scribes and Pharisees. “‘Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good...to save a life?’....And looking round upon them with anger [only such mention], and being grieved at the blindness of their hearts, he said to the man, ‘Stretch forth your hand.’ And he stretched it forth, and his hand was restored [M8]. But the Pharisees went out and immediately took counsel...how they might do away with him.”
Jesus withdraws from towns, but huge crowds follow him from every Jewish province, even from the Diaspora. “And he told his disciples to have a small boat in readiness” for fear the crowd would press too much on him; “he healed many.” Jesus prays all night; then he appoints the 12 apostles. At lakeside the people were eager to touch him, because power went out from him and healed them.
On this occasion Jesus goes up the mountain and, seated, speaks to the crowd below; it is the kingdom’s inaugural address: the sermon on the Mount with its 8 paradoxical beatitudes. Again he claims equality with, if not superiority to, original lawgiver; 6 times he uses the formula: “it was said...but I tell you....” Interior holiness, but also salt to savor and preserve; golden rule, pure intent and secret virtue; enemies to be loved; narrow path, beware of false guides (“ravenous wolves within”); build house on rock. “I have not come to destroy [the law], but to fulfill” it by due emphasis on love for God and neighbor. Thrice Jesus assails the hypocrites (=Pharisees), whom he also calls “false prophets.” Blind themselves, they try to lead the blind [P2]. Moreover, a kingdom divided against itself cannot last [P3].
Jesus cures a Jewish servant of humble centurion (Gentile) from afar [M9]. “…[N]ot even in Israel have I found such great faith.’” Outside Naim Jesus “had compassion on” a widow whose only son is being taken for burial. Unasked, he resuscitates the young man—the mightiest miracle [M10] yet worked.
Nothing is said regarding the months of July and August; very possibly Jesus concentrated on instructing his apostles away from the crowds. Again at the lakeside in September Jesus speaks of the Baptist….Jesus takes dinner with Simon the Pharisee, where a sinful woman [Mary Magdalene] washes, kisses and perfumes his feet. “‘He to whom little is forgiven, loves little.’ Then he said to her, ‘Your sins are forgiven’....‘Who is this man, who even forgives sins?’”
With the coming of fall Jesus begins journeying from one town to another “preaching and spreading the good news of God’s kingdom.” Accompanying him are the 12 and certain women “who ministered to them with the means they had.” At one point some of Jesus’ relatives seek to restrain him because “he has gone mad.”
One-third through his Galilean ministry Jesus turns to instructing with parables. The truth is there, but hidden. While seeking to right mistaken notions of the kingdom, Jesus in this more oblique way avoids falling into traps laid by pharisaical enemies from Jerusalem. Parable of candle [P4]. Parable of the sower [P5]: most seed unproductive, but good soil yields. Why does Jesus speak only in parables? “To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those outside, all things are treated in parables....”
The kingdom of heaven is like sown seed that sprouts and grows on its own [P6]. It is also like the wheat and weeds or like the dragnet [P7-8]: good and evil to coexist in kingdom; final damnation of the Satan-led wicked. Then parables of mustard seed and leaven [P9-10]: only start inconspicuous; of hidden treasure and pearl [P11-12]: the kingdom handsomely repays sacrifices. “Privately he explained all things to his disciples.”
To escape from the crowds he sets out to cross the lake with the apostles. The boat seems about to founder in a great storm. By stilling the wind [M11], Jesus’ power extends itself to forces of nature. Next the apostles see how completely he also controls the world of spirits by driving a legion of devils out of the crazed Gerasene man and into a herd of 2000 swine [M12].
Jesus returns by boat to Capernaum; it is now December. Awaiting him is a large crowd, including Jairus, who pleads for his dying daughter. On his way Jesus asks, “Who touched my cloak?” Many had, for the crowd was closely packed. It is the woman instantly cured of a hemorrhage of 12 years’ standing [M13]. Then he proceeds to Jairus’ house….Only the girl’s parents and the closest apostles (Peter, James and John) witness this second resuscitation [M14]. Still in Capernaum Jesus rewards the faith of 2 blind men by curing them [M15]; then a possessed dumb man [M16].
Nazareth: Jesus again preaches in his home synagogue, but now to a hostile audience, jealous perhaps of Capernaum where so many wonders have been performed. They seek to kill him. “But he, passing through their midst, went his way.”
“And Jesus was going about all the towns and villages…seeing the crowds, he was moved with compassion for them….” In March he sends out the 12 in pairs to teach and heal in Galilean towns and villages. John the Baptist is beheaded. Upon returning after a month, the apostles tell Jesus “all that they had done and taught. And he said to them, ‘Come apart into a desert place and rest a while.’ For there were many coming and going, and they had no leisure, even to eat.”
Their rest thwarted by a very great crowd, he spoke to them “of the kingdom of God, and those in need of cure he healed.” After some 6 hours, the apostles tell the Lord: dismiss them. Jesus: you give them food to eat. The master multiplies the bread and fish [M17]; the apostles distribute to the 5000 men (not reckoning women and children).
After a year’s instruction the crowd’s outlook has not changed; they still seek a liberator from the Roman yoke. The apostles cross over the lake, while he dismisses the crowd. Once again a storm buffets the boat; Jesus comes to them on the water [M18]. The wind dies; the boat at once reaches the shore [M19].
The crowds embark on boats to Capernaum “seeking Jesus.” For the first time Christ claims he is life-giving food, bread from heaven, the life of the soul. Jesus is bread to be eaten; his flesh, in fact. The Jews are dumbstruck it all smacks of cannibalism. A crisis is upon them. “From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer went about with him. Jesus therefore said to the Twelve, ‘Do you also wish to go away?’ Simon Peter therefore answered, ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of everlasting life….’”
Jesus thereupon goes to Jerusalem for the pasch. On a Sabbath he cures a cripple at a pool [M20]. Brouhaha with Jewish leaders: “This, then, is why the Jews were the more anxious to put him to death; because he not only broke the Sabbath, but also called God his own Father, making himself equal to God.” Jesus wants Jews to think and carefully weigh the evidence for his claims. He appeals to 4 witnesses: 1) the Baptist; 2) miracles of healing and exorcism; 3) the old testament’s messianic references; 4) Moses.
After this, Jesus returned to Galilee to avoid those out to kill him. But the spying Pharisees track him to Capernaum to trap him. What about eating with unwashed hands [P13]? Jesus upbraids them for their onerous casuistry, added to and falsifying God’s law. “When he had entered the house away from the crowd, his disciples began to ask him about the parable. ‘Are you also, then, without understanding? Do you not realize....’”
It is June; Jesus goes north, beyond Israel’s borders for the first time since his flight into Egypt. In part Jesus desires to complete his instruction of the apostles. Jesus heals the daughter of the persistent Syrophoenician woman [M21]. Still great crowds come to him; many cures take place, including that of a deaf and dumb man [M22]. On the northeastern shore of the lake Jesus again multiplies loaves and fishes [M23] to feed more than 4000 men (again not counting women and children), but there’s no messianic enthusiasm this time.
Pharisees and Sadducees dispute with Jesus and ask for a sign from heaven. Jesus: if only they could reason from miracles and teaching as well as they can foretell rain. In the boat he again scolds the apostles: “You of little faith, why do you argue among yourselves....Do you not yet understand...?” In 2 stages Jesus cures a blind man [M24].
Then Jesus went with his disciples into the villages round Caesarea Philippi. He asked, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” [Did thereby Peter confess Jesus to be God incarnate? Not necessarily, since these 2 names are ambiguous. This did, however, represent some sort of breakthrough as we see from Jesus’ reply:] “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. And I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church....” [This is the first of 2 mentions of a “church.”]
A change now comes over the Gospel story; a change in direction. Jesus now turns his eyes towards Jerusalem; there he is to die. Jesus speaks for the first time of the cross and of his death thereon. Whereupon the newly dubbed prince of the apostles chides Jesus: “Far be it from you, O Lord; this will never happen to you.” Then Jesus rebukes the Rock: “Get behind me, Satan, you are a scandal to me; for you do not mind the things of God, but those of men.”
Six days later Jesus takes Peter, James and John up Mt. Hermon, where the master is transfigured [M25]. Down from the mountain, Jesus encounters a “great crowd,” with scribes disputing with the apostles, who had failed to cure an epileptic boy. “O unbelieving generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you?” Jesus exorcises the boy [M26]. Alone with Jesus, the apostles ask why they had failed. “This kind can be cast out in no way except by prayer and fasting.”
August, north Galilee: “He did not wish anyone to know it, for he was teaching his disciples.” Second prophecy of passion and death. “But they did not understand this saying….” Absent 3 months, Jesus and the apostles return to Capernaum. On the way the 12 had disputed over who should be the greatest in the kingdom. Greatest, counters Jesus, is he who abases himself like the little child he gathers to his breast. Alone with the apostles the Teacher overflows in informal instruction that ranges from tolerance to scandal, from guardian angels to dignity of discipleship, from mortification to unity....Peter asks about forgiveness. Jesus answers with parable of the forgiven servant unforgiving in turn [P14]. Peter catches fish with coin in its mouth to pay the Temple tax [M27].
September of Year 2: Jesus says farewell to Galilee, reproaching “the towns in which most of his miracles were worked, because they had not repented. ‘And you, Capernaum, shall you be exalted to heaven? You shall be thrust down to hell! For if the miracles had been worked in Sodom that have been worked in you, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.’”
THE JUDEAN (& PEREAN) MINISTRY: OCTOBER OF YEAR 2 TO MARCH OF YEAR 3
The final 6 months are focused on Jerusalem, where Jesus is to consummate his mission. In Judea and neighboring Perea Jesus echoes his Galilean ministry; the home of Lazarus, Martha and Mary in Bethany becomes his headquarters. Here there is less incident, more instruction; many parables (most of these look to interior world and commitment as opposed to earlier ones that largely dealt with the kingdom), few miracles. The tone is somber; time is running out for Israel. Jesus repeatedly warns the apostles of impending persecutions, his and theirs—similar to those Jesus is now trying to head off.
Jesus goes with his disciples to the feast of Tabernacles, “not publicly, but as it were privately.” He sends messengers ahead to a Samaritan village to make things ready; they refuse to receive him. Everyone in Jerusalem is whispering about him; out of fear of the authorities “no one spoke openly of him.” Midway through the festival Jesus goes to the Temple to teach. “Why do you seek to put me to death?” Pharisees dispute publicly with him; Jesus insists: weigh the evidence. Attempts are made to arrest him. Why do officers come back empty-handed? “Never has man spoken as this man.” A woman apprehended in adultery, Jesus admonishes her: “Go and sin no more.” More teaching and disputing with Pharisees: “I am the light of the world....If you knew me, you would then know my Father also.” “...[T]hey did not understand how he could call God his Father.” “When he was speaking these things, many believed in him.”
Still at the Temple Jesus makes his most explicit claim so far: “Before Abraham came to be, I am.” [This may be the turning point in his Jerusalem ministry as Jesus tries to get audience beyond both monotheism and exclusive nationalism.] “They therefore took up stones to cast at him; but Jesus hid himself….” Jesus heals a man born blind [M28], resulting in Pharisees’ grilling man and his parents. “Why would you hear again?” asks the cured man. “Would you also become his disciples?...Jesus heard that [Jewish leaders] had turned him out, and when he found him said, ‘Do you believe in the Son of Man?’ ‘Who is he, Lord,’ he answered, ‘that I may believe in him?’ ‘You have seen him,’ Jesus told him; ‘he it is who speaks with you.’”
November, Bethany: The good shepherd [P15] freely lays down his life for his sheep. After this the Lord appointed 70 others, “and sent them forth two by two into every [southern] town and place where he himself was to come.” To reject these envoys is to reject God himself. They return: “Even the devils were subject to us in your name.” Parable of good Samaritan [P16]. Busy Martha is reproved, contemplative Mary praised. Jesus betakes himself to garden on Mt. Olivet to pray. Disciples: Teach us to pray. The master lays out the Our Father. Two more parables illustrate the need for persevering prayer [P17-18].
Jesus cures a possessed man who is both blind and dumb [M29]. All the crowds were amazed: nothing similar was ever seen in Israel. Could this be no other than the Son of David? Pharisees allege Jesus’ power comes from prince of devils. Among other things, the Nazarene accuses them of sinning against Holy Spirit. Crowd: we want a sign. Jesus: there’s to be no sign but that of Jonah, thus pointing to his resurrection. A Pharisee hosts Jesus at dinner. Why does he not wash before eating? “You Pharisees....Fools....Woe to you....” Jesus directs 3 woes against Pharisees, 3 against lawyers. Soon after, the scribes and Pharisees resolve to browbeat and hunt him down. They lay in wait, hoping to catch some word from his lips.
“Now when immense crowds had gathered together...they were treading on one another.” The time and place are probably December in Perea (a relatively wealthy area, prompting much teaching on virtuous detachment). But Jesus first must warn disciples about the Pharisees and their enmity, plus advising and encouraging them in their future work. They also will be hounded: “Fear not.” Parable of rich, foolish, unwary farm owner [P19]. To disciples: trust God’s providence, “you of little faith.” Where your treasure is, there your heart. How servants are to await their master’s return: vigilant and prayerful [P20]. [A glimpse into Christ’s inner life]: “I have come to cast fire upon the earth, and what will I but that it be kindled....I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how distressed I am until it is accomplished!” Jesus brings a sword.
To the crowds: interpret the signs of the times; repent before night comes. Parable of fruitless fig tree [P21]. Jesus will do his utmost to make Israel bear fruit in the short time left. He cures a crippled woman [M30] in his last synagogue appearance. Pharisees object. “...[A]ll his adversaries were put to shame; and the entire crowd rejoiced at all the glorious things that were done by him.”
Jerusalem, December, Dedication feast: Jesus is walking and teaching in the Temple. Jewish leaders: “If you are the Christ, tell us openly.” Only alone with his disciples does Jesus ever speak of himself as “the Christ.” [He does his utmost to keep it a secret because of the false political meaning given to the Messianic kingdom by the Jews.] Jesus points to previous evidence and then makes the plainest of self-descriptions, even to his enemies: “I and the Father are one.” Some listeners pick up stones. Why? “Not for a good work do we stone you, but for blasphemy...because you, being a man, make yourself God.” Again Jesus reasons with them, but to no avail. He escapes and goes to where the Baptist had first preached. There he stays; many come to see him; he heals; once more he teaches them. “‘...All things, however, that John said of this man were true.’ Many believed in him.”
The Lord, now clearly in Perea and in January, echoes warnings to repent, lest divine chastisement overtake them. Parable of the house master [P22] to those knocking at door: “I know you not, nor whence you come.” References to hell: weeping, darkness, gnashing of teeth. Last will be first, and first last. On a Sabbath Jesus again dines with a Pharisee [the last of 4 such meals]; he cures a man with dropsy [M31]. Parable of invitees who excuse themselves from great supper [P23]: Jews to be replaced by Gentiles.
On the east side of Jordan: “Now great crowds were going along with him.” Disciples must count the cost and renounce all. Parables [P24-25] of tower builder and warring king. In his kingdom poverty alone is currency. To Pharisees indignant at the publicans and sinners surrounding Jesus: parables [P26-27] of lost sheep and lost coin. Christ here offers glimpse of God’s merciful heart: he searches, finds and rejoices. Story of the prodigal son [P28]: in the finest of all parables God’s love is shown to be affectionate, human, warm, personal, paternal. Parable of the unjust steward [P29]. “Now the Pharisees, who were fond of money, heard all these things, and they began to sneer at him.” Jesus adds fuel to the fire: parable of Dives [rich man] and Lazarus [P30]. “If they do not hearken to Moses and the prophets, they will not believe even if someone rises from the dead.”
Privately to the apostles: “If you have faith...you will say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and be planted in the sea,’ and it will obey you.” Besides greater faith, Christ asks them for a deeper humility (worthless servants). At this point (February) Jesus crosses over the Jordan and begins to go south to Jerusalem. The 10 lepers cleansed [M32]: how little do the Jewish lepers profit from it; only 1 Samaritan outcast returns to thank him. Asked by Pharisees about the kingdom’s advent, which was said, first by John and then by Jesus, to be “near at hand,” Christ speaks about its suddenness, but also its hiddenness: “God’s kingdom is here, among you.” God’s children must act as though it’s always at the door: be prepared.
Pray continually without discouragement: parable of unjust judge brought around by pestering woman [P31]. “Yet when the Son of Man comes, will he find, do you think, faith on the earth?” Parable of Pharisee and publican [P32]: he who humbles himself will be exalted. Pharisees ask about indissolubility of marriage: no divorce; celibacy is even better, but only through special grace. Disciples try to prevent mothers from presenting their babes to Jesus, which makes him “indignant.” To the childlike does the kingdom belong. The rich young man, apparently so eager to be perfect, balks at selling everything and goes away “sad.” That, despite the fact that earlier Jesus, “looking upon him, loved him.” [The disciples are dismayed at the need to renounce riches; isn’t that what the kingdom is all about?] Then Jesus promises them a hundredfold in this life (but with persecutions) and life everlasting.
March: early spring is a time for frenzied work in the vineyards. Jesus so tailors his next parable [P33]: laborers hired at different times: God dispenses his mercy as he wills. Martha and Mary send a courier to tell Jesus: “Lord...he whom you love is sick.” “Jesus loved Martha, and her sister Mary, and Lazarus.” The disciples object to returning to Judea. Jesus claims no harm can befall him until the time set by the Father. Lazarus is dead. Thomas: “Let us also go, that we may die with him.” To Bethany, then.
Jesus comforts Martha and Mary. But who will comfort Christ? “Jesus...groaned in spirit and was troubled....And Jesus wept....The Jews therefore said, ‘See how he loved him’....Jesus, therefore, again groaning in himself, came to the tomb.” Resurrection of Lazarus [M33], the third such resuscitation, the most dramatic and conspicuous. “Many therefore of the Jews who had come to Mary, and had seen what he did, believed in him. But some of them went away to the Pharisees, and told them the things that Jesus had done.” In council Caiaphas recommends the death penalty. “...[F]rom that day forth their plan was to put him to death. Jesus therefore no longer went about openly among the Jews, but withdrew to...Ephraim; and there he stayed with his disciples” [1-2 weeks].
THE LAST WEEK: END OF MARCH & EARLY APRIL OF YEAR 3 IN JERUSALEM
Jesus shows himself resolute and eager to reach Jerusalem, unlike his followers, submerged as they are in dark forebodings. Despite 2 earlier predictions, apostles still can’t realize that the Messiah must suffer and die; on the road they lag behind....
Just outside Jericho Jesus again, even more explicitly, foretells his passion, death and resurrection. Salome, mother of James and John and perhaps one of Jesus’ regular women followers, asks that her sons be seated next to the King, once the kingdom is established. The other apostles wax indignant. Jesus restores harmony by insisting again on humility: “[T]he Son of Man also has not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Many pilgrims from Galilee are also on their way to Jerusalem for the pasch; they have not seen Jesus for 6 months. They add themselves to the master’s group, while also forming something like a screen. Their addition immediately raises the spirits of the mercurial apostles. Outside Jericho’s north gate sits the blind man Bartimeus, whose decibel level, insistence and faith win from Jesus one of his last miracles [M34]. Christ, “moved with compassion,” restores the man’s sight.
Now within Jericho proper, Zacchaeus the publican, short and stocky, climbs a sycamore to be able to catch sight of Jesus. He wins not only a conversion but a golden opportunity: “Zacchaeus [how does Jesus know his name?], make haste and come down; for I must stay in your house today.” Parable of 10 servants [P34], each entrusted with a pound and told to trade with it in the king’s absence: one earns 10, another 5, while the slothful, foolish servant, none at all. Jesus and the 12 skirt Jerusalem and go to Bethany, where 2 weeks earlier Lazarus had been notoriously returned to life. It is 6 days before the paschal feast. Simon the leper offers another feast at his home, where Lazarus is a guest, Martha serves table and Mary anoints. So precious was the spikenard she “wasted” on Christ that, so the purse-keeping Judas claims, it could have fetched 300 silver pieces. Parable of 2 sons [P35].
SUNDAY: triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Many Galilean pilgrims and some locals escort Jesus into the holy city. [Jesus has a surprise for those who had witnessed his earlier escapes from crowds seeking to hail him as king. Publicly and unmistakably now he will claim to be their Messiah, though mounted on a young donkey. No matter that the “kingdom” envisioned by the noisy acclaimers and what Jesus is about to inaugurate definitively are worlds apart. His thinking seems to be: to believer and unbeliever alike, then and now, Jesus finally owes the truth that he is indeed their king, although the opposite to that sought by the wild crowd: a very meek king of hearts.]
To the Pharisees protesting the acclaim, Jesus says: “[I]f these keep silence, the stones will cry out.” The Pharisees sound defeated: “Do you see that we avail nothing? Behold, the entire world has gone after him!” On catching sight of Jerusalem, “...he wept over it, saying, ‘If you had known, in this your day, even you, the things that are for your peace!...[B]ecause you have not known the time of your visitation.’”
Jesus goes to the Temple. “The whole city was in a stir.” Blind and lame people he healed. The chief priests and scribes, despite witnessing the miracles, protest. To no immediate avail. To Greeks seeking an audience, Christ predicts his imminent death. “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself.” A voice from heaven? “[A]s it was already late, he went out to Bethany [2 miles distant] with the twelve,” where he spent the night.
Members of the plotting Sanhedrin have no more than 4 days before the Passover to do Jesus in. Since the paschal holiday lasts for a full week, during which repose is mandated, Jesus must be killed beforehand. Another reason for urgency was his growing approval by the “people”: “The chief priests and Scribes...found nothing that they could do to him, for all the people hung upon his words.”
MONDAY: On their way back to Jerusalem “at daybreak” Jesus is hungry and goes to a fig-tree “to see if he might find anything on it.” While not the season for fruit, still Jesus curses the tree for having only leaves. “He taught in the Temple daily.”
TUESDAY: The fig-tree is withered from its roots [M35]. Jesus tells an apostle he’ll do much greater things, if “he does not waver in his heart, but believes....” At the Temple awaiting Jesus is an imposing delegation of enemies; their only aim is to discredit him with the crowd. Jesus turns the tables. “Believe me, the publicans and the harlots are further on the road to God’s kingdom than you.” Parable of the unfaithful vinedressers [P36]: They maltreat servants sent by the rich owner to collect his share, who don’t even scruple to kill the owner’s well-beloved son. The chief priests and Pharisees “knew that he was speaking about them. And though they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the people, because they regarded him as a prophet.”
Jesus retells an earlier banquet parable with a new twist [P37]: one of the guests is without a proper wedding garment and is ejected: not all the saved will be Jews, nor will all the Jews be saved. Seeking to make him betray himself in his talk, the Pharisees raise a question of tribute to Caesar. “Jesus saw their malice….Give to Caesar....And they said no more; they were full of admiration at his answer, finding no means of discrediting his words in the eyes of the people.” Disbelievers in immortality, the Sadducees ask about a woman married successively to 7 brothers. Whose will she be in heaven? “You understand neither the scriptures nor the power of God.” In that other world none will marry, for all will be like angels. “This the crowds heard, and were amazed by his teaching.”
A Pharisee asks which is the greatest commandment. Love of God with all one’s heart, soul, mind and strength, and love of neighbor as much as oneself. No one dared “after that day, to try him with further questions.” Again Jesus warns crowd to be wary of scribes and Pharisees, pitiful caricatures of holiness. Above all shun the Pharisees‘ vain, ostentatious display of piety. Jesus then turns to those who will replace the rabbis and insists on humility: the greatest of all is to be the servant of all. Jesus ends his last discourse in the Temple by pronouncing 7 woes upon the hypocritical Jewish leaders. He concludes:
“‘Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets, and stone those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings, but you would not. Behold, your house is left to you desolate.’ So much Jesus told them and then went away.” Read signs of future times [P38].
After the crowd dispersed, Jesus continues to instruct his followers, probably as they return to Bethany. The widow’s mite; questions related to the end of Jerusalem and end of world. “Watch then, praying at all times....” He recasts earlier parables: “The kingdom of heaven will be like 10 virgins” [P39]. Imitate the provident wise—not the 5 foolish ones. Another: 10 talents distributed to 3 (instead of one to each); thrust is more spiritual: reward is for faithfulness in little things [P40]. A sentence of condemnation is passed on the unprofitable servant. That leads to a description of the last judgment: corporal works of mercy done to “least of my brethren” are done “to me”—just as, when omitted, they are denied to Jesus. The former will pass on to “eternal life”; the latter “to eternal punishment” [P41].
WEDNESDAY: Jesus spends most of the next 2 days at Bethany resting and gathering strength for the upcoming trials. “You know that after 2 days the Passover will be here; and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified.” [To Judas these words smack of defeat; there is no hope now for the kingdom; he must save his own skin as best he can. Jesus’ repeated warnings about the danger of riches have left him bitter, resentful. The final break had occurred when he was rebuked for complaining about the wasted spikenard.] The Jewish leaders have only today and tomorrow to rid themselves of Jesus—for good. Both urgency and secrecy weigh on them. Judas guarantees both in promising to betray Jesus. “And they, when they heard it, were glad.” He seeks opportunity to hand him over “without any commotion.”
THURSDAY: Early, Jesus sends trusted Peter and John to town to make ready for eating the paschal meal. The mysterious instructions as to where serve to respect the possibly secret discipleship of the house’ owner and to keep Judas in the dark. Because of complicated calendar considerations, Galileans were accustomed to eat the paschal meal on Thursday, a day before the Judeans. So do Jesus and his immediate followers.
The Cenacle 6 to 9:30 p.m.: Their most solemn meal ever does not stop the apostles from arguing, yet again, about who is to be the greatest. In response Jesus washes their feet, even Judas’, as “an example.” The Lord tells them the traitor is there. Jesus is at the bottom of the U-shaped table. Prompted by Peter, John, “leaning back upon the bosom of Jesus,” asks who the traitor is; Jesus identifies Judas, who thereupon leaves. The supper’s second course is the paschal lamb; the third consists of unleavened bread, followed by a 4th cup of wine. At this point Jesus institutes the Eucharist, portraying himself as the sacrificial victim of the new covenant; he gives his body and blood to the 11. “Do this for a commemoration of me” perhaps makes them priests, to perpetuate the sacrifice. New commandment of love: telltale sign of discipleship. Boastful Peter’s denials are foretold. Fury is just around the corner.
Jesus’ hour-long farewell discourse: he must go, they will join him later; trust him, love him; obey him. He reveals the deepest mystery of the Godhead: the mutual love of Father and Son is the Holy Spirit, soon to be sent them. Peace...vine and branches [P42]...no longer servants: “friends”...persecutions...courage: victory certain. Jesus’ priestly prayer: for himself, for them, pillars of kingdom; avoid disunity.
Garden of Gethsemane 10 p.m. to midnight: The olive grove outside Jerusalem: a customary halting-place for the group. With both pilgrims and Jerusalemites safely asleep, what better place for Judas to find Jesus, after not finding him in the Cenacle? For Jesus too, nighttime makes it easier for the apostles to escape, if they so desire; he won’t force them to be co-victims. Christ’s internal agony (“dread...troubled...sad”) may surpass any impending physical torments. How human he appears as contrasted with the transfiguration; the same apostles witness both. Instructed to “watch and pray,” the 3some soon snore away, while Jesus sweats blood. Judas seals treason with a kiss; Jesus knowingly and freely embraces his fate. “I have told you that I am he. If, therefore, you seek me, let these go their way.” Arrest. Jesus restores Malchus’ severed ear [M36]. The Galileans? Paralyzed by fear and indecision. When Jesus does not resist, their courage vanishes, as do they.
FRIDAY: Interrogation 2-4 a.m.: First to Annas, then to his son-in-law Caiaphas, currently the head priest. Jesus is unofficially examined in the hope of extracting damning self-incrimination. Jesus claims to have taught openly; no secrets. He’s struck by an officer. Peter thrice denies knowing the Master.
Jewish trial 5-6 a.m.: While Caiaphas rehearses witnesses, for an hour the blindfolded Jesus is buffeted, slapped, derided. Jesus is brought before 70-member Sanhedrin; 2 concordant witnesses are required for each accusation; all fail this procedural test and so are rejected. Exasperated, chief priest adjures Jesus “to tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God.” “I am.”...“Your own lips have said it....He is liable to death.” Meanwhile Judas, despairing, returns silver and hangs himself.
Roman trial 7-8 a.m.: Pilate goes out to receive Jewish leaders, who thus avoid defilement by not treading on Roman property. Jesus meets the heathen ruler on whom the apparent malefactor leaves a deep impression. Pilate to leaders: Judge him yourself. Since Jews had lost right to inflict capital punishment (stoning), the execution Jesus “deserves” can only be carried out by Romans. When Pilate disallows charge of blasphemy, Jews change it to treason: he claims to be king. “I can find no fault in him.” The prisoner, because of Galilean roots, is then sent to Herod. Jesus says nothing; after mocking, he is sent back to Pilate. Jesus or Barabbas? “I will scourge him and then he shall go free.” He’s whipped (Jewish law restricted lashes to 39; Romans had no such ceiling). Soldiers make fun of this native rival of their illustrious emperor: thorns driven in; taunted, beaten, spit upon....
Twice before in his tenure Pilate had provoked the Jews into the makings of a revolt; both cases had been appealed to Rome and were decided against him. Another mistake could end the career of this very rational, detached, dispassionate Roman. Sensing Pilate’s weak character, the crowd turns on him, threatening another appeal to Rome. What can Pilate do but wash his hands and pronounce the death sentence? Anything for a bit of peace.
Way of cross 11 a.m. to noon: Golgotha lies 600 yards beyond Jerusalem’s west gate; the first 200 down into a deep valley; the last 400 up a steep incline. Crucifixion is the standard Roman form of execution. Simon of Cyrene forcibly helps Jesus. Ordinarily only the crossbeam (some 100 lbs.) was carried, on the shoulders with hands tied to the ends; the upright was already in place. Jesus sips a drugged drink; he wants to feel the full w8 of his pains.
Crucifixion and death, noon to 3 p.m.: Stripped, Jesus is affixed with nails through each wrist; the crossbeam is then raised by ropes and bolted to the upright; the feet are then nailed with a single blow (no foot support or seat). “They know not what they do.” Crucifixion is one slow torture of nauseating pains, cramps and suffocation. To speak, Jesus must straighten his sagging body by resting all his w8 on the foot nail.
Witnesses and passers-by jeer at the bogus prophet; where now are his vaunted miraculous powers? To the Good Thief: “Today you shall be with me in paradise.” Darkness for 3 hours. Conscious to the very last, Jesus cries out: “It is consummated” [nothing more to do or suffer, to show or say]. “‘Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.’ Then he bowed his head, and yielded up his spirit.”
RESURRECTION TO ASCENSION FROM APRIL 8 TO MAY 18 OF YEAR 3
In life Jesus had said 5 times that he would rise from the dead “on the third day.” While his body was in the tomb little more than 36 hours, Jews would call the span 3 days. Jesus rises from the dead with apparently no physical needs, but able to move at will and to pass through solid objects. His current state seems intermediate between his pre-resurrection materiality and his later disappearance into invisibility, at the ascension. Is he thus training the apostles to get used to an all-spiritual world? Jesus does not now resume his former way of life. He helps the apostles to understand what he had previously taught, concentrating largely on the kingdom. Most of his teaching and appearances during these 40 days are not recorded in the Gospels; only 7 appearances are mentioned.
Much has been made of the scrambled, and even contradictory, accounts of the first Easter. Because of their minor discrepancies, first the credibility of the Gospel texts and then the central event have been put in question. Some commentators seem almost obsessed with establishing that Jesus resurrected only in the apostles’ desires and imagination. As for why the risen Jesus appears only to his loyal followers, Jesus apparently anticipated the question in the parable of Lazarus and Dives. If they didn’t heed the initial evidence in Moses and the prophets, neither will they accept any latter-day resurrection of whomever. Two things come through most clearly from the relevant texts. Everywhere there’s so much reference to touching that these chapters almost seem a riot of fingers. The second is the apostles’ skepticism and hardness of belief.
According to Mark, whose Gospel is largely based on Peter’s teaching, the apostles “would not believe it,” when Mary Magdalene passes on to them a message from the resurrected Jesus. Neither are they persuaded by the 2 disciples recently returned from Emmaus after having been instructed by the unrecognized Jesus: “they did not believe them.” Moreover, the confused details may have a very simple explanation: Both the women who go first to the tomb and the foot-dragging, mournful apostles are doubtless so filled with excitement, fear and befuddlement that it was impossible for them to come up with a single reconstruction of events. There is, besides, such helter-skelter movement on the part of both sides to an eventual rendezvous that actual events take place in a veritable whirl of dust. While the apostles initially keep seeing what they take to be a ghost, Christ seems bent on proving his corporeality. At least he makes the point on one occasion by eating half of their breakfast. Then, he guides Thomas’ hand (the first apostle to call him “my God”) to the gash in his side and into the wounds through his hands. It is apparently the same body as of yore, but more.
On their way to Emmaus, a veiled Jesus appears to 2 dejected disciples whose dreams have vanished. “O foolish ones and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the Christ have to suffer these things before entering into his glory?” During the 7-mile trek Jesus interprets for them those scriptures referring to his redemption through suffering.[2] When the 2 men recognize Jesus, he disappears. As with the other early appearances, he only shows himself to restore their faith, not to resume his usual ways.
Sea of Galilee: Events of the past 2 weeks have altered the shape of the apostles’ lives completely; yet they have not adjusted themselves to an existence without Jesus to counsel and strengthen them. So we find Peter, Nathaniel, James and John back fishing. After a second miraculous catch of fish [M37], youthful, clear-eyed John recognizes Jesus in the man who had just told them where to find fish. Now on the shore, Jesus cooks their breakfast. Alone with Peter, Jesus invites the fisher of men to make amends for his 3fold denial by a triple declaration of affection. To this new, humble, contrite Peter, Jesus entrusts his sheep and lambs. He promises the head apostle that he will not only live Jesus’ life, but he will also die his death.
Mount of Beatitudes in May: The very mountain in Galilee, where 2 years earlier Jesus had selected his apostles and promulgated the full Good News, now witnesses Jesus’ giving them his authoritative commission to establish the kingdom the world over (till now it had been restricted to Jews, except for allusions in some parables). “Go...preach...make disciples of all nations...baptizing them...teach the commandments...Behold I am with you all through the days that are coming, until the consummation of the world.”
Mount Olivet Thursday May 18—the Ascension: At Jesus’ command the apostles have returned to Jerusalem to prepare for the Jewish feast of Pentecost. “[W]ait here in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high....You shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days hence.” As he led them out towards Bethany beyond Gethsemane, the apostles again show how much they need the Holy Spirit when they ask: “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
“He lifted up his hands and blessed them. And it came to pass as he blessed them, that he parted from them...and a cloud took him out of their sight. And while they were gazing up to heaven as he went, behold, 2 men stood by them in white garments, and said to them, ‘Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking up to heaven?’” As if to say: Get back to Jerusalem and pray. “All these with one mind continued steadfastly in prayer with the women and Mary, the Mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.”
“And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord aiding them, and attesting his word by the miracles that went with them.”
* Throughout the Catholic and Protestant world, for example, the first grudging permission of contraception, “but only in the most severe cases,” dates just from a conclave of the Anglican Church in the 1930s.
* Walter Isaacson, Einstein: his life and universe (New York 2007). This is no solitary assertion; hundreds more can be found throughout this biography.
* This is the name God gives himself on Mount Sinai, to be hallowed and revered such that it was never to be said or written, except in the abbreviated form of what is called the tetragrammaton: YHWH.
# Here are the references: Tob 13:4; Ps 68:6; Ps 89:27; Wis 14:3; Sir 23:1, 4; Mal 2:10.
* There are also certain advantages: a piecemeal mind and a tentative heart also lessen somewhat both freedom and responsibility. Our choices and commitments are necessarily partial and therefore revocable.
[1] Ronald Knox and Ronald Cox, The Gospel Story (New York, 1958).
[2] Among the Messianic passages in the Old Testament, those allusive to his suffering are: Gen 3:15; Ex 12; Lev 16; Num 21; Ps 15, 21, 30, 39, 40, 54, 68, 108; especially Is 42:1-7, 49:1-7l, 50:4-9, 52:13-53:12; Zac 12:10, 13:7-9.
chapter one
Ways to Get the Scriptures Wrong
The Bible is the world’s best selling book—and the least read. Well, having it nearby at least makes for one less excuse. But there are plenty more: too long, too old, too familiar, too complicated, too foreign (all those strange names)….Plus on my own?
Reading the Good Book strikes many as dangerous—almost as dangerous perhaps as leaving it unread.
Yet in a matter promising deliverance and happiness, maybe even hereafter, can one afford not to peek at least? We all know the Bible consists of two testaments. Aren’t we the least bit curious to see what, if anything, has been willed to us? Over so many centuries, any inheritance must certainly have accrued lots of compound interest by now.
Shying away from the Bible, even just the Gospels as in our case, usually stems from exaggerated anxiety that its contents may overturn our lives and loves. On the other hand, encouragement to find hidden rewards there can pander to other leanings, such as wishful thinking (as perhaps in the preceding paragraph). Skeptical or credulous…what will it be? But is there no approach that skirts both extremes, plus any other inadequate slants?
For all their brevity, simplicity and duplication, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have met with an out-and-out zoo of responses, leaving in their wake no little confusion, when not worse. Divinely inspired? Hoax? Just beautiful poetry or sublime moral utopias? When authored? By whom? A clever re-invention by Paul? Error-free, down to the last detail? Etc. High-sounding and occasionally scholarly theories cover the whole spectrum. Seemingly everybody has an interpretation. Things have so gotten out of hand that many doubt the authenticity of any passages that don’t agree with their pet bias.
How did this impasse come about?
On the basis of bits and drabs from Sundays past, many people think they know what the Bible is about and so leave the tome to gather dust. Others, after a sulfurous whiff or two, try to put as much distance between themselves and its threatening pages.
Bible scholars, usually with Germanic last names, also come in various flavors. Some like to indulge in mystical flights of fancy. Others drain the story of suspense when they minimize any human role in the text and assume that Christ is God himself. Still others try to remake Jesus into their own image and likeness—about the highest compliment those Herr Professors can bestow on a mere man.
Sprouting denominations at almost every turn, the past 2000 years of Christianity have likewise offered their own interpretations, usually discordant. Result? A Babel that puts the original one to shame.
It’s hard to make Christ out through the clouds and clutter. I’m not alone in asking, “What, after all, did Jesus say and do?” To find out, why not start all over again? Let’s read the Gospels, at least one of them, from stem to stern. And then, how about some investigative reporting, trying to reconstruct his sayings and doings? That’s where this book comes in. So, then let’s hold off on the interpretations till we’ve factually determined what all the text can tell us, warts and all. A whole lot of homework awaits us, before we can intelligently take or leave the Gospels’ messenger and his message. With some belated diligence, however, we should be able to answer the question: is it more reasonable to believe than to doubt and even deny?
Once the record has been pieced together as best it can, prospectors can then decide whether to trust Jesus and his word. Believers may also benefit by finding, or making more explicit, the grounds for their faith. Whatever they can do to reinforce their beliefs—and weaken the contrary case—will decrease both mood swings and temptations to unbelief.
The New Testament’s Christ is to be our main focus. We’ll concentrate on the four sketches of him that are the Gospels. If we don’t get Jesus right, at least in the main, the rest of the New Testament (not to mention the Old) will likely make little sense. The 23 latter documents need to be interpreted in view of the former four—and not vice versa. Many prematurely conclude that the Gospels are too “naïve,” “disjointed” and “concrete,” certainly not spiritual enough. They then pounce on speculative St. Paul and so give up mining the Gospel text. But that’s a trap heading apparently in the opposite direction to that of Jesus. Instead let’s keep at the painstaking detective work till it’s done. Let’s also keep an open mind, ignoring meanwhile any preconceptions or presuppositions. No little task.
Here are some things that need looking into:
· Mesh the four sketches into one chronological narrative;
· Peer into Christ’s so-called hidden life (10 times longer than his barely 3 years of public life);
· Explore Jesus’ relatives and parents, especially his mother;
· Tally and classify the “miracles” wrought by the Messiah and his followers (there are many more than the three dozen specifically named);
· Plumb the 38 parables: 21 offer novel and often fetching insights to the new kingdom and its king; the rest contrast the new with the existing legalistic establishment or simply expose the latter;
· Assemble and rank his moral teachings, both explicit and implicit;
· Study the prompts either to think or to believe;
· Profile the degrees of discipleship and its costs;
· Determine Jesus’ enemies and how much he provoked them;
· Lay out the kingdom’s rules on keeping quiet or proclaiming from housetops;
· Identify forerunners and predictions, mostly persecutions;
· Explain the roles of prayer;
· Detail Christ’s character, personality and “levels”;
· Interpret Jesus’ passion, death and resurrection: both failure and triumph?
· Make the acquaintance of God, the angels and other spirits;
· Examine the prospects and contours of heaven and hell. [#16]
Trying to map out Christ will occupy the lion’s share of this volume. But beforehand, let’s take up a preliminary consideration. There may be far deeper reasons affecting the search for the real Jesus. If the Messiah is the answer, what then is the question? And who wants to know? Hmm….
Over the past 2,000 years attempts to ask the right question have spawned hundreds of answers, some better than others. Had there, however, been among them an exact fit, the search would be over, crowned with a perfect ending. That doesn’t seem to be the case. What good is any savior unless it’s clear what or whom he’s to save us from? A recent example that may shed some light is found in Latin America’s recent flirtation with liberation theology. There have-nots exploited by a heartless upper class are told by frustrated, radicalized clerics they must topple their oppressors in a Marxist revolution and forcible re-distribution of wealth. And Christ, obviously no friend of the establishment, is to be their Generalissimo. A more common instance of trimming God to suit demand involves those obsessed with their seemingly irremediable sinning. Many of these are in the market for a doddering, grandfatherly, see-no-evil God who looks the other way or otherwise imputes no blame. At all events, let me first guess at what for most people today, myself included, is the most burning question or need.
Does anyone out there really care? In fact, is there even anyone out there? So ask, however unconsciously, all those milling, malling Little Orphan Annies. Some even come up with their own formula: “I don‘t know whether God exists or not, but if he does, he’s surely written me off by now.” These questions are of relatively recent origin. But “recent” doesn’t necessarily mean superficial. They had simply not been raised before, not at least on such a broad scale as today. Through the ages, pampered, privileged rich kids may have suffered varieties of identity crisis. But the rest have been too busy staving off hunger and purchasing with no little blood, sweat and brawn a plot of security. They were left with too little oomph or hope to indulge in the luxury of such queries or cravings.
Not so the past two or three generations: the spoiled-rich-kid malaise seems to have metastasized. That dubious honor we owe to near-universal education, freedom and wealthy trappings and conveniences, if not wealth. Few if any green plots or gratifications remain to be sampled. Theirs, if not ours, is the jadedness of “been there, done that.” Waning fast besides is the psychic stuff of envy, materialism, hope, passion, idealism and romance. Many today can lay claim to the complaints found in Memoirs of a Superfluous Man. Who or what would suffer if, say, suburban Sally were to return to the pages of Cosmo and to disappear for good? Does anything likewise stand or fall by perpetual adolescent Paul’s presence or absence—a mere blip at most in the Gross National Product?
Not too far into the 20th century things used to be different. Couples today are told each child comes with a half-million dollar price tag—and that’s before college. Yet even a century ago children were prized as assets: relatively free hands to work the family farm or cottage industry. Before the advent of social security and other welfare programs, a large family was also seen as an insurance policy against old age, premature deaths and catastrophic sicknesses. Back then no one felt unneeded or unwanted. There was plenty of work to be done, and a division of labor willy-nilly assigned to each a calling. When life and even survival were no distant threats, love between the couple themselves and between the parents and kids barely entered into the calculus.
When I was growing up on the Great Plains, of an evening we’d pile into the truck to cool off by driving about. On one such excursion mom pointed out which homesteads had begun thanks to mail-order brides. By most indications such couples seemed to have fared as well as those born of more traditional courtships. Usually under a sepia photograph of the available belles, the publication would list her skills and other qualities. If the farming pioneer liked what he saw and read, he’d drop her (or them) a line expressing his interest and background. If in response the prospective bride concurred, he would send her money for a one-way train fare. The usual custom was for the couple to make up their minds within 24 hours of her arrival. Time was of a premium; backbreaking harvest was bearing down on them; summer would soon be over.
We can imagine a prospective husband thinking along these lines: “OK, OK, she may be a good looker and even skilled in social ways, but can she cook, sew, nurse, teach the 3 Rs, keep a big garden, feed the flocks and herds, milk the cows, cut the logs…besides bringing a baby into the world every year and a half?” Such as they saw marriage not unlike a business partnership wherein each supplied what the other lacked. Mutual understanding and affection were more in the nature of extras to this mutual-help pact. Amid such straitened circumstances, children were rarely presented as optional such duties as doing chores and homework or contributing with their meager earnings to the single family “pot.” So long as the family was barely scraping by, rare is the child that could get tied up in psychological knots over the question of being loved conditionally. Whoever told them things could be different?
Yet beware of nostalgically mooning over the values of some past golden ages. Let’s keep in mind that our forebears, more than choosing a no-frills, resourceful life, were actually quite adept at making of necessity however many virtues they apparently sported. There just weren’t all that many chances to go wrong—not with another mortgage payment coming due and a drought peeping around the corner. This rather sweeping claim is borne out by how soon and thoroughly those good habits began to fray, when after WWII the Yankee cornucopia really started to churn out goods and goodies galore.
And what a scene it has been—and will be. The technological updraft has continued to soar, with all kinds of unsettling consequences. Consider advances of these: transportation, communication, medicine and health, contraception, computerization and automation, social and geographical mobility, proliferation of education and specialization. As entertainment and sports coverage has expanded to 24/7, tribal, family and church ties have frayed, along with morals and mores. Plus what hasn’t been psychologized these days?
Interestingly enough in roughly the same period, organized religion underwent similar changes. The sheep-tending vocabulary nearly says it all. The congregation was called “flock”; the minister, “pastor”; his job, “to shepherd”; lay religionists were known as “sheep” and even “lambs.” Scarcely versed in matters doctrinal and liturgical, the lay folk knew their job to be docility and submission: “Just tell us what to believe and do.” They didn’t aspire to more—which neatly dovetailed with their reverends’ expectations. So long as America was in the main rural and small-town, the formula worked. Roles were largely clear and accepted; the net cooperative effect was one of harmony and familiarity. But with the rising tide of education, wealth and freedom, the flock became a restless body hankering for independence. “Why can’t we think for ourselves?” Men of the cloth also began to doubt many of the traditional mores, beliefs and pieties.* “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” often has seemed the mantra of their ministerial shrinkage. One’s relationship with God, moreover, was often exposed as a contractual thing, resting largely on enlightened self-interest, if that.
With an anemic character and hazier goals, moderns have consequently found themselves misbehaving and sinning more often. What to do? Catholics used to stand in line on Saturday evenings headed to the confessional where their transgressions would be voided. But that periodic brush with personal wretchedness has largely disappeared. Rote, mechanical confession was unmasked and dubbed useless; meanwhile serious sin had been explained away. The same conversion of wine into water had earlier infested the Protestant camp, thanks to wave after wave of soothing but lying secular humanism: “I’m OK, you’re OK.” Prayer had also fallen into disuse, as emancipated people have found themselves with all kinds of other resources. Moreover, their half-hearted petitions never seemed to get answered anyway (surprise!). The result compounds the pervasive sense of a massive identity crisis.
But that’s not all. Most of us seem to be sinking, some for the third and final time, in a vast ocean of conditional love. So long as we behave, others’ allegiance is a good, necessary thing. We all need affirmation and understanding. There’s nothing wrong with this love, which boils down to the golden rule. But what happens, as so often is the case, when we’re neither loving nor lovable? When we misbehave, the welcome mat sooner or later is whisked away. Then to probe the fickleness of others’ shallow commitment, we rebel in no uncertain terms. Found wanting, this conditional affection is soon enough revoked entirely. Whereupon the rebellion is confirmed, to the detriment of however many parties. For instance, unreflective parental fondness pretty much gives out when the solitary first child (an experiment in fulfillment at least on the mother’s part?) begins to sass them back. Others, more cynical, foreswear the whole parenting business in the light of how others’ kids turn out. “Who the hell wants to be cooped up with a monster or two for some 20-30 years?”
What a huge, huge difference the past century has wrought! Can Humpty-Dumpty be epoxied back together? Is it even worth a try? Probably not, given the unlikelihood of turning the clock back. But all of the above zeroes may have largely stemmed from half-hearted stabs at the game of life anyway. Isn’t it a bit ridiculous to cry over spilt milk that was already turning bad on its own? Rather, see all those dead-ends as belated wisdom. We’re not to go there again. The decks are being cleared. People are beginning to see themselves as their worst enemy—instead of their supposed best friend. Sooner or later we all need to come clean. What we’re to be saved from is our own lying, cheating selves. And in this uncertain project, we may stand in need of some outside help. That may sum up the chastened mindset of those who may just be able to recognize and even resonate to some Good News and even the Best News: the prospect of an absolutely Unconditional Lover.
There you have the question for which the Messiah may be the answer. But only those who are sick and tired of the “bad olds” can appreciate the contrary. Otherwise the proverbial pearls will find themselves being tossed to and trampled by unwitting swine (see Mt 7:6). Didn’t Christ say that only those who are sick need a physician (see Mt 9:12 Mk 2:17, Lk 5:31)? So, by acknowledging ourselves to be moral pygmies, we may finally be able to get Christ right, however many times we’ve failed in the past.
Are we justified in raising the question of subjective dispositions and readiness? Yes, where do you think all those misinterpretations and misunderstandings come from? A story is told about the comic W. C. Fields, not particularly known to be fond of religion. Sick and bedridden, Fields is visited by a friend surprised to see him leafing through the Bible. “What’s this, W. C., have you found religion in your old age?” “No,” ran the reply, “just looking for loopholes.” We usually find what we look for. None of us is a stranger to misjudgments, both coming and going. Sometimes we rashly, impatiently, kid ourselves. At others we just don’t feel like digging for what makes others tick. In our regard others answer in kind. When, moreover, life-or-death issues come up, then we’re more likely to be especially defensive and truth-bending.
Just ask Christ, a communications failure through the ages. Had he unfurled a program as limited, say, as Dale Carnegie’s, most people would have ignored and dismissed him. That he was rejected so fiercely and nearly unanimously may testify to the depth of his message, mission and character. So many mistakes by others accumulated in fact that they spelt his death. We can’t therefore be surprised that most attempts to read scripture, sooner or later, also peter or short out. The Gospels cannot be taken up lightly or, at the other extreme, too ponderously. Both may be defense mechanisms. Success and peace, however, are promised to those of “good will” (see Lk 2:14).
So, what kind of a book is this? I have few credentials. But the absence of letters after my name may end up being a plus. Most of the “higher biblical critics” like to speak in code to the like-minded: at most 200 of them the world over. For starters then, I’m nobody’s mouthpiece but my own. And I largely agree with whoever once said, approximately: “Any religious formulation at which my cleaning lady turns up her nose I view with deep suspicion.”
One last word. In drawing close to Christ in the Gospel pages, beware also of shallow dreams and stunted expectations—or their opposites. We’re more likely to shipwreck by harboring too few hopes than too many. To paraphrase G. K. Chesterton, most people claim they’ve tried Christ and found him wanting, whereas in truth they’ve barely got their big toe wet. C. S. Lewis points up the same danger in our calling upon God as Mr. Fixit to make our little cottage snug and cozy. Thank you. He may help us to curb our lust, shrink our gossiping, overcome our inveterate laziness. Yes, he may do so at times and in part, plus grant some of our prayers—but only to get our attention for the main act.
How we may gyp God (and ourselves) in seeing him as a mere but prissy schoolmarm—or thundering tyrant! That something much, much greater and better and deeper and rapturously ecstatic may just be the reward for heeding Jesus’ absolutely outlandish and uncompromising demands to fling away our lives and all worlds to possess it.…Him?
Chapter 2
10/24/2008 12:08 PM; 4955ww
What If…?
Albert Einstein credited the imagination for the deepest and most permanent insights into reality, in physics to be sure, but elsewhere as well. In conversation one day with Saint-John Perse, he asked the poet what sparked his work. Perse: intuition and imagination. “It’s the same for a man of science” was Einstein’s delighted response.* Maybe it’s similar for Scripture gleaners also.
We’re also embarked on a research project: the more facts, the better. But that’s not an end in itself. Eventually we hope to draw some conclusions supported by the data. Meanwhile the imaginative mind is trying out all kinds of hunches—something over which we seem to have little control. (Similarly, we never stop dreaming about a happiness better than our current lot; otherwise we simply wouldn’t budge.) We’re on the lookout for patterns (hypotheses) to fit the most possible observations into something approximating a whole: “If that’s so, does this follow or that—or what?” As the composite image grows richer, we discard interpretations that do violence to the mounting data. Otherwise, we’re not likely to get to the batter’s box, let alone first base.
So, let’s first try to imagine implausible scenarios for Jesus’ presence in Palestine some 2,000 years ago. Then perhaps the settings he did appear in may not seem so arbitrary.
Let’s suppose Christ were born into an upper-class, moderate Pharisee family. We’re told there may have been 1,000 such in all Judea and Galilee, largely in Jerusalem. His hidden life would take place amid leisure and things of the mind. Unacquainted with toil, at most he might have been a source of pithy axioms, however insightful and elevated. As an adult, would he have contrasted all that much from, say, Socrates or Confucius? Any followers might then be something akin to Boy Scouts or to guru groupies. His self-manifestation would likewise have been limited and muted. To establish his mission, from an early age his departures from the Pharisee ethos would have had to be quite frequent, inviting rising criticism. Had, further, his Pharisee family been of the stricter stripe, he would have been entangled even earlier by both rigid legalism and vociferous disquisitions of the Law. In any case he would still clash with the establishment, leading the teacher to his persecution, passion and death—a collision the “odd ball” provoked, in part.
However, with no toe-hold amid the populace, wouldn’t such a Jesus have remained largely an intramural alien, somewhat elitist to boot? In those days some nine out of ten Jews are estimated to have been poor. Such lack of solidarity would hardly be a good platform for launching a new world religion to address the spiritual needs of most everybody. Moreover, without there being anything more at stake, his death too would have been sheared of any liberating purpose. Nobody has ever claimed some sort of deliverance as a consequence of Socrates’ poisoning via hemlock at the hands of Athens’ authorities.
A good moral teacher and leader, especially one acting in God’s name like the Jewish prophets, would bolster his case with the further sanction of cures and miracles. Such an envoy might help his peers to have a fuller grasp of human nature and its goals, plus offering them clearer notions of God. But would that have been enough stimulus for the Jews to fight free of their moral and religious morass? Probably not. As John Henry Newman once pointed out in so many words: no one will ever die a martyr for an argument, however airtight. Nor would such a super-prophet himself likely escape a super-execution, given the Jews’ custom of dispatching those sent to them.
What if the Teacher had come on the scene as a total adult stranger? Imagine some sort of itinerant preacher and do-gooder, à la the protagonist of Joshua Tree. But wouldn’t an enshrouded origin greatly add to the troubles of deciphering an already mysterious Christ? If a new revelation is to be trumpeted once for all, an uncertain sound may be worse than nothing. Whatever else he may be, a clear genealogical descent would help to establish the human reality of any envoy.
What if Jesus had militated with the zealots, steeped in animus towards the Romans? Such a politically-obsessed mien is so distant from a mere sketch derived from the Gospels that it hardly deserves consideration.
Consequently, it seems unlikely that Jesus would stem from any of Jewry’s religious or political parties. It might help, however, if he, paradoxically, came laden with wisdom but hailing from a lowly socio-economic rank. If indeed he claims to be some sort of ambassador from God, this could be best backed by many miracles in his wake. The Messiah would likely fulfill the requirements of a prophet—and then some. Yet somehow his influence would have to be greater and go deeper than that attending earlier prophets, while not departing from the sum of their traditions.
Now our imaginings of a possible deliverer can’t take place in a vacuum. If there are strong hints that in the past God may have shown himself in part, such unveilings merit our attention. You don’t have to believe that the Bible is God’s very word to accord it some authority. Is there any other religious foundational document that has been so prized and exalted, even at the cost of some of its defenders’ lives?
The Old Testament, viewed here as a trustworthy historical document, is a repetitious story of Hebrew waywardness, partially arrested time and again by some conspicuous divine intervention. Such godly displays include, among others, the delivery of the Ten Commandments, Joshua’s miraculous military battles, the daily advent of Manna, the universal Flood, and a succession of prophetic utterances. Then, regardless, the once repentant Jews would grow weary of heeding God’s directions or envious of their neighboring tribes’ manifold deities, soon falling away in any case. Thereupon God would generate a wake-up call in the form of some punishment or prophet—or both—and try to renew his covenant. This up-and-down pattern had been going on for some 2,000 years, dating from Abraham’s vocation, when not from the primal days of Eden. In the main the chosen people entrusted with monotheism reacted in monotonously similar ways.
Can the same be said of the Lord of the Old Alliance? As the centuries went by, God seems to have grown less warring and tribal. He also seems to have prompted Jewry ever so slowly to evolve from a collective and external religion to one that is more personal and internal. Just compare the flavor and thrust of, say, the Old Testament’s Chronicles with the book of Isaiah, penned some thousand years later in and around the Babylonian exile. Each refinement, however, made the proposal less attractive to the vast majority. God seemed to be choosing successively a smaller and smaller remnant of faithful souls who will apparently pave the way for the Gentiles, as Jewish apostates fell by the wayside. Even God seemingly abides by the adage: “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.” He doesn’t seem deterred by the Jews’ disloyalty. Precedents abound, therefore, for God’s sending more prophets and maybe even a definitive one. Did he? Let’s turn to the immediate historical context.
At the time of Christ, the Jews had been missing prophets for some 500 years. The reason surely was not that they had finally digested the prophetic messages and were acting on them. Yet there were a few people back then on the lookout for a new revelation to enlighten and console them, even non-Jews such as the Roman poets Virgil and Horace, the Wise Men out of Persia, the Ethiopian eunuch baptized by Philip….Especially among the Jews, Messianic expectancy was running high 2,000 years ago. Bible students had found in the Old Testament at least 150 Messianic prophecies, most of them literal, whetting the long-thwarted Jewish appetite for some sort of redemption.
Coincidentally, even external circumstances for spreading a fuller disclosure of the divine image were favorable. First Greek, then Roman armies had conquered the known world, from Great Britain to the gates of India. There had never been more facility for travel and the exchange of thought—nor less facility for an armed insurrection by the Jews, given the grim, implacable Roman legions. And through this world of Greek speech and culture, of Roman roads and institutions, the Jewish people, till then so clannish and conservative, had been dispersed as little colonies in Rome, Alexandria, Ephesus, Antioch, Corinth and many other cities. These Jews of the Diaspora could serve as centers for the propagation of any new Jewish message. There were, we might say, conscious need and practical opportunity. But could anything new and universal stem from this most backward, poor and forlorn corner of the world?
Yet is there anything provincial in a God disclosing himself at one time instead of another, in one place rather than another? Palestine was admittedly a tiny country and hidebound besides. However, its religious dogmas and history were, even apart from any future Christian considerations or elaborations, something unique among religious histories. Even were the Christian religion to be proved fraudulent, aren’t we tugged to admit that, of all the great world religions, Judaism was the purest in its method of worship and the truest in its theological principles? Further, from what little we might know of God, somehow mightn’t we expect him to use inadequate instruments and settings? Otherwise the essence and strength of any revelation might be lost amid the use of an astounding, piercing megaphone.
What if behind the scenes God had been orchestrating events and people to pave the way for a special envoy? Short of bending and curtailing human freedom, any God worth his salt, so to speak, could presumably stack the deck somewhat. Had you been in God’s almighty shoes, might you not have acted similarly? Wouldn’t you thus have arranged the social-political circumstances and interiorly readied enough individuals at any rate to make viable the reception and spread of any new divine message? Try to come up with any more initiatives God could have possibly authored. Indeed the attempt to improve upon the actual scenario is a healthy exercise: a cobweb-cleansing process of discovering and discarding dead-end streets. What better way to appreciate what may indeed have happened?
That humans were dangerously marooned without some sort of divine invasion doesn’t prove anything of God, not even whether he exists. It may have been “bad luck” for the human race to be left to construct its own religion, considering how faltering are our mind, will and stabs at fulfillment. The human plight might seem almost to demand a revelation. But that establishes no claim that God was bound to reveal himself. Only if he’s good, should we have expected him to do so. But are we justified in assuming he is? This wouldn’t be the first time the human race has engaged perhaps in some wishful thinking.
Would it have ever occurred to humanity to love God or vice versa, had something not happened in the first century A.D.? Most unlikely, claims Aristotle (384-322 B.C.). The gods of Greek and Roman mythology were heartless, making men and women their mere playthings. Earlier and even later formulations of theology at most called for honoring and respecting the reigning gods. Aristotle perhaps scaled higher than anybody when he postulated an Unmoved Mover. But this “God” was eternally caught up in admiring his utmost excellence and beauty. At most he let himself be known and desired by whoever might get his moral-intellectual house in order. Thus would he spur distant inferiors to their limited perfection without bestirring himself.
The ancients, including Athens’ philosophers, had no notion of creation. They viewed the cosmos as something eternal, without beginning or end. Human history at most was something circular, cyclical. For them, any golden age was in the past. It was the Jews alone who bet on the future, a deliverance promised from on high. Whatever relationship the Gentiles saw as obtaining between the deity and humanity was one of power, analogous to that found between kings and their subjects. None of them dared to liken it to that arising between parents and their children.
Even the Old Testament, evidently the body of God’s self-revelation, is shy about proposing an exchange of love between God and the individual human soul. One of its oldest books, Deuteronomy, talks of loving God a dozen times; Sirach (never officially part of the Jewish Bible canon), eight times; only 13 times in the rest of the Old Testament. The prophets tell you to fear God, to seek God, to come back to God, little about loving him. Mankind was then apparently still learning the spiritual alphabet. Only with a fuller revelation could humans come to abound in a sense of divine intimacy. Since then, however, such love has been taken for granted. Even your “half-Christianities,” so called by Ronald Knox, which dislike the ideas of revelation, historical facts and miracles, insist loudly that God’s love is the only thing that matters. Yet without acknowledging God’s factual interference in human affairs, how can one certainly know that God is supremely loving and lovable?
Etymologically, revelation means drawing aside a veil, letting us see something that was there all the time, possibly even at work unbeknown to us. And the most staggering demand such disclosing could make on our powers of belief would be to assure us that God loves us, wretched and unrequiting though we be. It’s noteworthy that every time humans devise a religion, they write the human role as servants of God. Incredible though it be, when God authors a religion, he starts off, and ends up, serving his rebellious creatures. No wonder there are so few takers of the God-given version. Yet somehow the Remnant, through prayer, integrity, reflection and imagination, was gaining on this conclusion, no matter how haltingly. Those who dwelled on God’s disinterested decision to create and his fondly holding creatures in existence, despite their waywardness, seemingly had less distance to go. For such the Creator-creature relationship stemmed, not from power, but from fatherhood.
Whatever or whoever brought it about, a blindness had apparently descended on nearly all the human race. It obscured ultimate questions. The upshot was that humans had lost sight of their true face and no less of God’s. Accordingly, most men and women saw themselves reflexively as their best friends. And God, when seen at all, was viewed as someone close to their worst enemy. So long as this inverted proposition held sway, would there be any need to right themselves or to rectify their relationship with God? Consequently they’d need some outside corrective action to galvanize their engaging in some serious truth therapy on the inside. Humans had brought on their own blindness; they must strive to undo it. But clenched fists and gritted teeth might not be enough, not at least for the vast majority. On the other side of the equation, almighty God didn’t have exactly a free hand either, unless he was uncharacteristically to bulldoze human freedom.
Another related point to clarify: what’s the origin and purpose of any God-given moral proscriptions and prescriptions, say, the Ten Commandments? The vast majority of people, both then and now, tend to see them as a rather arbitrary obstacle course athwart human strivings and aspirations. The Creator lays them down to keep us in submission and to enshrine his sovereignty. Accordingly, to transgress them is wrong largely because such sinning offends God’s imperial anger. We see as much in the second Psalm, where the kings of the earth rebelled “against the Lord and his anointed,” for having saddled humanity with oppressive chains and gratuitous yokes. When men were learning their moral ABCs, perhaps it was necessary to make behavioral rules an authoritative matter, when not an authoritarian imposition. So in any case do we deal with children. But with the reflection and experience that make up maturity, one might be able to see that the main victim is neither God nor any wronged peer but the miscreant himself. Why? Each misdeed frustrates both the human mind and the aim of human nature. Because erring backfires on its author, God thus brands it wrong. Much as does a good parent.
Note that we did not say a doting grandfather, who may choose to look the other way. Some self-serving people tend to think that they can attain to an afterlife’s final reward without undeceiving their mind and “disinfatuating” their will. But how can a misdirected nature find fulfillment by landing on a conveyor belt headed in the opposite direction? The ensuing dislocation and distortion strike the author as coming close to spelling hell, unless one’s fundamental intention has at least shifted out of reverse.
Earlier in this chapter we imagined some unlikely settings for any divine envoy. Then we aimed for a bird’s-eye view of God’s apparent disclosures to the Jews. We also asked whether circumstances were ripe for a definitive prophet and the likelihood of God’s taking such a step. We’ll conclude this chapter spelling out the plausible needs and ways for such a divine invasion and rescue. What, in other words, should we be looking for in surveying the New Testament? What are the probable tasks and truths any savior and deliverer would have to undertake and proclaim, if his mission is to be viable and even successful?
First is the unfinished business of the old covenant.
As promised, the prophetic call to repentance and salvation has to reach most of the Jews (an estimated million in some 2,000 towns and hamlets in Judea and Galilee). Since the unassisted human voice is lucky if it can reach the fringes of a crowd of 200, the consequent crisscrossing of Palestine adds up to lots of time, sweat and sandal-leather.
Won’t cures and miracles—the more, the better and the wider-spread, the better—be the best certification that Jesus is at least a special divine envoy?
Moreover, nearly 700 religious, moral and ritual precepts binding the Jews had accumulated over the prior 1500 years. Most were man-made and proscribed ahead of time by the Lord. Will the envoy have enough authority to simplify and rank the oppressive, when not impossible, burden of duties galore?
How satisfactorily will the Messiah match up with a hundred or so prophecies foretelling his deeds and sufferings? These bloody passages are found in Isaiah (all of chapter 53).
Then there was the need to show up the Scribes and Pharisees. In effect they had a seeming monopoly on the Jewish religion. Not only was theirs stifling external legalism, but a full-time occupation. On both counts did they scare away the weak and work-laden.
Most Jews perhaps saw their liberation in terms of the yoke imposed on them by their pagan overlords. Gradually, the Messiah must rather convince them their worst enemy is closer to home.
But, much more important, how will the new revelation address the nagging question of how to generate enough steam just to fulfill the Ten Commandments? Ever since these precepts were entrusted to Moses circa 1500 B.C., Jews had been struggling, some manfully, to measure up…and largely failing in the attempt. In this regard the times haven’t changed all that much. Ultimately, the question boils down to one of strength and motivation. Seemingly the Jews simply weren’t sold enough on the Lawgiver to heed his Decalogue more than fitfully. Making Yahweh* more attractive and loveable would thus seem to be a paramount challenge of the envoy.
What features might the fuller revelation display?
To compensate for earlier collective shortcomings, we’re likely to see greater emphasis on the personal and spiritual. To that end we would expect any definitive message to make fuller allowance for both thinking and praying as pathways to greater knowledge of God, plus more intimate communion with him. Those same exercises would also likely lead to enhanced self-knowledge and personal responsibility.
Conversely, God’s not likely to make up for human sloth by mystically revealing himself to each and every human being—theoretically, one of his strategic options. Therein would lie dangerous subjectivism, confusion and wishful thinking, especially when private revelation is not joined to moral reform.
However superior the new theology might be, we can’t expect it to do away magically with the hindrances and indispositions thrown in God’s way by unreceptive, unrepentant human beings. Even God can’t override human freedom, abusive or not. If throughout the Old Covenant, let’s say, one or two percent were open to God’s overtures and revelations, in the best of cases we can’t expect more than 10-20 percent to be newly and effectively responsive. The new envoy will likewise be a probable failure, though perhaps eventually to a lesser extent than his predecessors.
Now this “failure” may not befall the new superior prophet unexpectedly. He might foresee and foretell such a bloody end. Further, might he not make such a fate, especially if willingly undergone and desired, somehow an integral part of some sort of saving tableau?
These spiritual and emotional needs might point to a new theology wherein God’s fatherhood is emphasized. Even imperfect parents have been known not to give up on their errant children. This would be somewhat of a Copernican revolution with respect to the chosen people’s rather stern image of God. In all of the Old Testament God is called “father” only seven times, not so much to point to his bowels of mercy as to use another word equivalent to “lord.”#
The problem with the scribes and Pharisees was that they equated holiness with external observances and sacred things: a matter of nouns and verbs. But what if the new message were all about eliciting a new disposition, a change of heart to underlie and stimulate all things and deeds? What if the new convocation were all about how and why—adverbs both? And wouldn’t such a shift fling open the doors equally to everyone, regardless of circumstances, talents, age, learning, health and so on? If so, the switch would go from chosen people to everyone chosen.
Most Jews knew themselves to be sinners for disobeying divine decrees. And if past be prologue, they were pessimistic about any future improvements. (Neither here have things changed much.) Was there any escape from divine disfavor? God’s justice and his mercy did not co-exist all that well in the Old Covenant, at least in the eyes of the human partner. Dare Jews hope for any reconciliation in the new revelation? To keep them (and any Gentiles) from going haywire both morally and psychologically, nothing short of God’s unconditional love would seem to be required. How could this be best expressed?
Except for the not totally convincing case of Job, the Old Testament does little to assuage the doubts and despairs of those undergoing or witnessing undeserved suffering and even death. How could an almighty and all-loving Creator allow such calamities to ravage the good and innocent? Somehow or other the new revelation must address this mystery more satisfactorily. Otherwise foxholes might well prove to be breeding grounds for agnostics and atheists.
Here’s a question we often overlook, much to our impoverishment: All our knowledge, philosophers tell us, begins in the senses. If something does not engage one or more of these portals to the physical world, it simply cannot be known (inferred) or desired. This limitation, when ignored, points to big troubles for the human race.* For example: if you were born into a den of thieves and had never moved beyond their reach, you would likely think that one of the essential traits of human nature was thievery. Or maybe the question had never arisen, since you neither had seen nor heard of someone bereft of sticky fingers. You’d likely follow suit yourself without much scruple or forethought.
But then one day you stumble across an obvious non-filcher who was apparently more fulfilled than you or your buddies. After rejecting denials and other bogus explanations, you come around and conceive a hankering and longing for whatever it is that makes Petunia enviably contented. One thing leads to another, and before too long, your grasp on stealing (and much else of a questionable nature) begins to weaken. Perhaps you even start making up for your earlier sleights of hand. But then Petunia moves away to take care of a dying relative. With a swiftness that nearly takes your breath away, you soon find yourself back to old pinching ways. Lessons: first, we need to see goodness incarnated to know that it really exists and beckons. We also need to keep rubbing elbows with our betters. We all in fact hail from Missouri. If anyone, God the Creator should surely be aware of this dependency and act accordingly.
Could God send himself? It would probably solve a lot of problems and would pose no insurmountable new problems. Obviously, he couldn’t walk among us as someone manifestly divine. That smells of too much too soon and would likely backfire. Would there be anything inherently dishonest in God’s fully assuming a human nature? No, not if he didn’t deny his divinity. In fact, if God really wanted to help his stranded, stunted children, wouldn’t his embodiment be practically the best way to do so?
Wouldn’t humans be offered thereby a burnished image of an ever encouraging God to see them through tons of repeated backslidings? Mightn’t then our bad news (miseria), paradoxically, be the best medium to magnify his Good News (misericordia)?
What if, also thereby, the human race were presented with a compelling example of a fully enriched human nature? This might persuade them that their labors to hone intellectual and moral virtues were worth while and ultimately rewarding, especially to others.
What if, in answer to those two needs, the Envoy were both God and man projecting the two faces at once, though ever so gradually? Otherwise God’s children might be scared off from drawing the due conclusions. Thus might we imagine a musing of one of the apostles: “What if the leader-friend on the other side of the campfire, now drinking from the wineskin, now squirting Jake alongside, now contributing his rich baritone to a rousing chorus of ‘Hava Nagila,’ were also God?”
And what would be the greatest proof that God remains in the human corner always, regardless? What if, to bolster the reasonable hope that the Creator cannot stop loving his children, the Envoy were factually to die and resurrect for his executioners? Wouldn’t that unilateral, unconditional pledge be the supreme proof that, while we, more or less consciously, can kill his love, we can’t keep it killed?
An unknown, incarnate God operating on the basis of “baby steps” seems to be a winning scenario because it so accommodates how we’re built. First, doesn’t it facilitate God’s weaving an ever escalating friendship with his children? Second, if God wants to show that his children needn’t engage in extraordinary or sacred activities to make him the center of their loves, what better example could there be than of Jesus’ humdrum hidden life? The first reason perhaps calls for some clarification.
Growing (or shrinking) by “leaps and bounds” is not the usual way humans conduct their moral lives. That’s why we often take a huge conversion (or collapse) as largely emotional exaggeration. Moreover, for us to confront utter, unalloyed goodness would likely resemble the blindness an owl experiences when exposed all at once to bright sunlight. Our tempo is poco a poco. We’re won over progressively to loving goodness by ever greater manifestations thereof and no less by our better understanding thereof, especially of tough love. First, like little children, we seek the giver’s gifts, then the gifts’ giver. All of which presupposes intimacy over a goodly length of time. The first lessons in love are best learned in a family setting. Later, deeper lessons are likely learned most readily in something like a spiritual family. We should consequently be on the lookout for the Envoy’s choosing some companions and lavishing on them his endearing favors. On the other hand, the challenges and requisites of love’s growing all but shut the door on those who try to go it alone.
Thus, the permanent human condition seems to call for God stealthily to incarnate himself and to knit a sufficiently strong friendship with closer followers able to weather any future persecutions and other trials. Should the enfleshed God decide to return to his native invisibility, we’d expect him then to leave behind men and women saintly enough to resemble him and somehow to echo his unconditional self-giving. Even better would be for these aspirant saints to be spread throughout the nooks and crannies of everyday secular life. That would diminish the chances of people justifiably claiming they were denied such potentially saving encounters.
To instill and leave behind such loving dedication (and all it presupposes) in his apostolic successors would seem to be the prime reason for God’s incarnation. While this was necessary, it might not be sufficient. Even at the risk of allowing the defects of the Jewish establishment to crop up, God would probably also set up an organized church body to defend and declaim the new revelation and to offer certain sacraments as guaranteed channels of illuminating and invigorating divine help. But note that this clerical superstructure should rather act more like an infrastructure: to midwife at least friendship between God and each of his children. It must resemble and echo its founder. In fact, would it be too much to ask that he choose so to act through others?
3/10/2009 1:35 PM; 9347ww
Chapter 3: Jesus Afoot
Too often readers and hearers of Christ’s life are left with disjointed fragments. They run the same risk of misunderstanding Jesus as did many Jews 20 centuries ago. Even if they try to assemble the puzzle, there are still many pieces missing. Plus some people may have discarded certain uncomfortable teachings. But even with an open mind it’s still difficult to follow chronologically and knowingly in Christ’s footsteps. One consequently may lose out on the drama and progressive suspense of the Savior’s mission.
Offered here are both a framework to help in connecting and structuring Gospel facts and the background to understanding the drama that was Christ. Before doing so, however, some guideposts may help readers to make more of the 4 Gospel accounts, starting with this digest (about one-tenth of the Gospels’ combined length).
1. None of the Gospels is complete, nor strictly chronological. While various attempts have been made to merge the accounts to form one narrative, I favor the Knox-Cox arrangement.[1] I have followed their sequence in attempting to highlight background information and digest key events for the periods making up Jesus’ public life.
2. Geographical references are helpful. Judea is that part of Palestine surrounding Jerusalem, religious capital and home of the Temple. It also houses most of the sticklers for the law—scribes, lawyers and Pharisees, plus the compromising Sadducees. They all feel most threatened by Christ’s person and message.
Galilee is northern Palestine, the hill country bordering on Syria and surrounding the fish-rich lake of the same name (also referred to as “sea,” “Tiberias,” “Gennesaret”). It contains such towns as Nazareth, Capernaum, Cana, homes to the holy family and the apostles (with the possible exception of Judas, who may have been Judean, if not a former Pharisee). Galileans are largely unsophisticated (country bumpkins in the eyes of many Judeans) and, perhaps consequently, more receptive to the master’s teachings and miracles. Here Christ launches his ministry.
Samaria, central-west Palestine, is home to a Gentile people sent into Palestine by the Assyrians to replace Jewish tribes carried into captivity in the 8th century B.C. While converts to the Jewish religion, they were not recognized by either Judeans or Galileans. The hostility was reciprocated. In his various treks to Jerusalem Jesus and his disciples sometimes pass through Samaria. Jews were generally indignant whenever Christ favorably compared Samaritans to his fellow Jews. Perea, also known as Transjordan, is the arid country east of Jerusalem and, more generally, east of the Jordan. Here intersect many Mideastern trade routes, leaving behind no little wealth. Here also Jesus sometimes retired when Jerusalem and, more generally, Judea prove inhospitable.
3. Basing themselves on messianic predictions, all Jews, even the Samaritans, await a king, a deliverer under one of several usual titles: Messiah (Hebrew, meaning Christ or the anointed one) or Son of David, for example. Presumably the savior is to be a man, but one very close to and favored by God. Throughout his public life Jesus seems to emphasize his human nature and fraternity with mankind by almost always referring to himself as the Son of Man (82 times), skirting the above 2 more common terms. Jesus, the personal Hebrew name given by the angel at the annunciation, is so called “for he will save his people from their sins.” Moses had much earlier changed the name of Osee (“salvation”) to Josue (very probably a contraction with Yahweh, which therefore means “Yahweh is salvation”). Jesus is the Greek form of Josue. It was a relatively common name among the Hebrews. Other variants: Josiah, Jesua or Jeshua, Jesse....
4. 30 A.D. is the most probable year for Jesus’ death; thus he begins his public period in 27 A.D., when “about thirty years of age,” according to Luke. In keeping with this estimate, our Gregorian calendar therefore understates by 3 years the year of his birth. Thus 2010 A.D. is in effect 2013 A.D.
5. Jesus’ public life runs for 26 months from March of what we’ll call year one to April of year 3. In keeping with the Torah, Jesus observes 3 paschs in Jerusalem, the last one ending in his death (what Christians call Holy Week). The Gospels mention at least one other ritual visit to the Holy City; there may have been more. During the last 6 months of his ministry, Jesus is found largely in Judea and Perea, again visiting towns and villages as earlier in Galilee. Both chronological and geographical references are scarce for this period; doubtless he at least passed through Jerusalem on more than one occasion.
6. Overall Peter is named 122 times; John the Baptist follows with 82 mentions; next comes John the evangelist, who’s named 23 times.
7. According to an ancient writer, Galilee at the time of Jesus’ ministry contained 204 cities and towns. Presumably Judea had more; Perea, fewer. Therefore it seems improbable that each and every population cluster in the 2 main provinces was the object of Christ’s preaching. His disciples, however, in 2 preparatory swings, probably announced the kingdom’s advent in more villages and towns than those actually visited by the master. In any case it’s safe to assume that all Jews of the time, whether in Palestine or in the Diaspora, heard tell of Jesus, thus fulfilling the “Father’s will”—apparently Jesus’ motivation for his public life.
8. Dating from the time of the Jews’ Babylonian captivity, Malachi was the last prophet until John the Baptist came along: a barren span lasting over 5 centuries. A prophet was understood by the Jews to have received a special inspired teaching to be conveyed to Israel, whether or not its contents foretold future events. Thus they were, and knew themselves to be, channels of revelation. Later prophets, including the Baptist, wore distinctive penitential garb.
9. Originally God gave the old law to Moses on Mount Sinai, most notably the 10 Commandments. Torah is the Hebrew word for law. It regulated every detail of Jewish life, containing 365 prohibitions and 248 positive commands. As if those were not enough, countless man-made, derivative burdens had been added to the Torah, resulting in the most deadening of casuistries.
10. The word Gospel derives from the Anglo-Saxon coupling of “good” (god can mean either good or God) and “spell” (tidings, news).
11. The following digests of periods of Jesus’ public life are not intended to summarize his teachings or highlight his miracles. We will note all 37 of his specified miracles with [M#] and slightly more parables (42) with [P#]. In fact those 2 elements are here shrunk to emphasize the story line. Otherwise it would be easy to equate Jesus with a moralizer or mere teacher or even a miracle-worker. What Jesus teaches may be merely the foreground to what he is really teaching. And let’s keep in mind Christ is more likely to teach by showing and manifesting. The following therefore should be used to imagine how and what Christ seeks to present of himself, principally by deeds, to his various listeners. Special emphasis will be given to Jesus’ reactions to single persons or groups and their reactions to him.
YEAR 1, JANUARY TO APRIL, LARGELY IN JUDEA
The preceding fall the prophet John, Jesus’ second cousin, begins to call publicly for conversion, reinforced by symbolic baptism in the Jordan’s waters. Many flock to him, including Pharisees, whom he calls a “brood of vipers.” Some hail him as Messiah; he denies it but claims the anointed one is in their midst. He also delivers himself of unspecified prophecies to identify the Christ. In January Jesus overcomes John’s reluctance to baptize him. At its conclusion at least John hears the Father’s voice. At mid-month Jesus leaves for the desert to pray and fast.
At Jesus’ return 2 months later John identifies him to his closest disciples as the “Son of God.” Andrew and John follow Christ and stay “with him that day.” Both Andrew and John introduce their brothers: Simon, renamed Peter (meaning “Rock”), and James. Philip, a townsman of Andrew and Peter, is also introduced to the Galilean master. On their way to Galilee Philip recruits Nathaniel whose skepticism is overcome when Jesus claims to have seen him under a “fig tree.” Nathaniel: “You are the Son of God, you are King of Israel.” Jesus: “Greater than these shall you see.” How would these 6 former Baptist recruits interpret “Son of God” or “King of Israel”? They don‘t necessarily mean or imply divinity.
In Cana of Galilee at Mary’s request Jesus worked “the first of his signs” by converting water into wine [M1], thus anticipating the onset of his miracle-working by 2 months. “...[H]is disciples believed in him.” They walk from Cana to Capernaum and then to Jerusalem for the paschal feast. Jesus expels money-changers and merchants from the Temple, for making “the house of my Father” into a den of thieves. His warrant? “Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” Many believe in him, “seeing the [unspecified] signs that he was working.”
Jesus usually stays at Bethany, on the eastern slope of Mt. Olivet, during his visits to Jerusalem. There Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, visits him at night to inquire about the kingdom: “We know that you have come a teacher from God, for no one can work the signs you work unless God be with him.” Among other things, Jesus tellingly says there is “one who has descended from heaven: the Son of Man who is in heaven.”
There are few such good-willed observers in Judea. Some 50 or 60 years later in his Gospel John writes: “Now this is the judgment: The light has come into the world, yet men have loved darkness rather than light, for their works were evil.” Jesus and his disciples baptize on the other side of the Jordan from where the Precursor is still baptizing. The latter’s followers complain: “All are coming to [Jesus].” When the Baptist is imprisoned, Jesus leaves for Galilee, accompanied by no more than a few of his still unofficial followers.
GALILEAN MINISTRY: YEAR 1 MAY TO YEAR 2 OCTOBER
This period occupies 18 of the 26 months of his public life: a year and a half of miracles, parables, crowds and apostles. Here at least initially the Messenger meets with enthusiastic acceptance; this phase climaxes in Peter’s stated belief in Jesus’ special status. Some 80 miles north of Jerusalem, Capernaum will be Jesus’ base for this stage.
Passing through Samaria, Jesus sits next to Jacob’s well, “wearied as he was from the journey.” Again clairvoyant: he tells Samaritan woman facts of her past life, and more: “I who speak with you am he” [Messiah]. In Cana of Galilee one of Herod’s royal officials beseeches Jesus to cure his son. “Unless you see signs and wonders, you do not believe....Go your way, your son lives” [M2: first miracle from a distance]. “And he taught in their synagogues [first indoors and probably only on Sabbaths], and was honored by all.” Repent and believe.
In Nazareth where he grew up, Jesus in the synagogue applies Messianic passage from Isaiah to himself. “And the eyes of all were gazing on him....” He settles in Capernaum, on shores of Lake Galilee. “And they were astonished at his teaching; for he was teaching them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” During one such session he drives out from a man an unclean spirit [M3]. Later he cures Peter’s mother-in-law [M4]. But he commands silence. Simon and others track down Jesus praying early in morning: “They are all seeking you.” Jesus sets out to visit the whole of Galilee, “preaching in their synagogues...and casting out devils.”
One day Jesus preaches from Peter’s boat to the crowd “pressing upon him to hear the word of God.” There follows a miraculous catch of fish [M5]. To Simon and Andrew: “Come follow me; henceforth you will catch men.” He extends the same invitation to James and John, who also leave everything behind: the first permanent disciples. Moved with “compassion,” Jesus heals a leper [M6]. “See you tell no one.”
Back in Capernaum, because of the crowds, a paralytic is lowered through a hole made in the roof by his bearers. Pharisees from Jerusalem are present: the first time they’re seen in Galilee. First Jesus forgives paralytic’s sins; critics: only God can forgive sins. To show them “Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins” [the most explicit claim during the Galilean ministry], Jesus restores paralytic [M7]. “They were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, ‘Never did we see the like.’” The above deeds probably all fall in May; in early June Jesus teaches alongside the lake. Spying Matthew collecting taxes [thus a black sheep], Christ says, “Follow me.” With Matthew’s call Jesus completes the number of his closest followers. All may be Galileans; most were probably the Baptist’s disciples. New wine is not for old wineskins [P1].
Capernaum June: Again on the Sabbath Jesus teaches in the synagogue before scribes and Pharisees. “‘Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good...to save a life?’....And looking round upon them with anger [only such mention], and being grieved at the blindness of their hearts, he said to the man, ‘Stretch forth your hand.’ And he stretched it forth, and his hand was restored [M8]. But the Pharisees went out and immediately took counsel...how they might do away with him.”
Jesus withdraws from towns, but huge crowds follow him from every Jewish province, even from the Diaspora. “And he told his disciples to have a small boat in readiness” for fear the crowd would press too much on him; “he healed many.” Jesus prays all night; then he appoints the 12 apostles. At lakeside the people were eager to touch him, because power went out from him and healed them.
On this occasion Jesus goes up the mountain and, seated, speaks to the crowd below; it is the kingdom’s inaugural address: the sermon on the Mount with its 8 paradoxical beatitudes. Again he claims equality with, if not superiority to, original lawgiver; 6 times he uses the formula: “it was said...but I tell you....” Interior holiness, but also salt to savor and preserve; golden rule, pure intent and secret virtue; enemies to be loved; narrow path, beware of false guides (“ravenous wolves within”); build house on rock. “I have not come to destroy [the law], but to fulfill” it by due emphasis on love for God and neighbor. Thrice Jesus assails the hypocrites (=Pharisees), whom he also calls “false prophets.” Blind themselves, they try to lead the blind [P2]. Moreover, a kingdom divided against itself cannot last [P3].
Jesus cures a Jewish servant of humble centurion (Gentile) from afar [M9]. “…[N]ot even in Israel have I found such great faith.’” Outside Naim Jesus “had compassion on” a widow whose only son is being taken for burial. Unasked, he resuscitates the young man—the mightiest miracle [M10] yet worked.
Nothing is said regarding the months of July and August; very possibly Jesus concentrated on instructing his apostles away from the crowds. Again at the lakeside in September Jesus speaks of the Baptist….Jesus takes dinner with Simon the Pharisee, where a sinful woman [Mary Magdalene] washes, kisses and perfumes his feet. “‘He to whom little is forgiven, loves little.’ Then he said to her, ‘Your sins are forgiven’....‘Who is this man, who even forgives sins?’”
With the coming of fall Jesus begins journeying from one town to another “preaching and spreading the good news of God’s kingdom.” Accompanying him are the 12 and certain women “who ministered to them with the means they had.” At one point some of Jesus’ relatives seek to restrain him because “he has gone mad.”
One-third through his Galilean ministry Jesus turns to instructing with parables. The truth is there, but hidden. While seeking to right mistaken notions of the kingdom, Jesus in this more oblique way avoids falling into traps laid by pharisaical enemies from Jerusalem. Parable of candle [P4]. Parable of the sower [P5]: most seed unproductive, but good soil yields. Why does Jesus speak only in parables? “To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those outside, all things are treated in parables....”
The kingdom of heaven is like sown seed that sprouts and grows on its own [P6]. It is also like the wheat and weeds or like the dragnet [P7-8]: good and evil to coexist in kingdom; final damnation of the Satan-led wicked. Then parables of mustard seed and leaven [P9-10]: only start inconspicuous; of hidden treasure and pearl [P11-12]: the kingdom handsomely repays sacrifices. “Privately he explained all things to his disciples.”
To escape from the crowds he sets out to cross the lake with the apostles. The boat seems about to founder in a great storm. By stilling the wind [M11], Jesus’ power extends itself to forces of nature. Next the apostles see how completely he also controls the world of spirits by driving a legion of devils out of the crazed Gerasene man and into a herd of 2000 swine [M12].
Jesus returns by boat to Capernaum; it is now December. Awaiting him is a large crowd, including Jairus, who pleads for his dying daughter. On his way Jesus asks, “Who touched my cloak?” Many had, for the crowd was closely packed. It is the woman instantly cured of a hemorrhage of 12 years’ standing [M13]. Then he proceeds to Jairus’ house….Only the girl’s parents and the closest apostles (Peter, James and John) witness this second resuscitation [M14]. Still in Capernaum Jesus rewards the faith of 2 blind men by curing them [M15]; then a possessed dumb man [M16].
Nazareth: Jesus again preaches in his home synagogue, but now to a hostile audience, jealous perhaps of Capernaum where so many wonders have been performed. They seek to kill him. “But he, passing through their midst, went his way.”
“And Jesus was going about all the towns and villages…seeing the crowds, he was moved with compassion for them….” In March he sends out the 12 in pairs to teach and heal in Galilean towns and villages. John the Baptist is beheaded. Upon returning after a month, the apostles tell Jesus “all that they had done and taught. And he said to them, ‘Come apart into a desert place and rest a while.’ For there were many coming and going, and they had no leisure, even to eat.”
Their rest thwarted by a very great crowd, he spoke to them “of the kingdom of God, and those in need of cure he healed.” After some 6 hours, the apostles tell the Lord: dismiss them. Jesus: you give them food to eat. The master multiplies the bread and fish [M17]; the apostles distribute to the 5000 men (not reckoning women and children).
After a year’s instruction the crowd’s outlook has not changed; they still seek a liberator from the Roman yoke. The apostles cross over the lake, while he dismisses the crowd. Once again a storm buffets the boat; Jesus comes to them on the water [M18]. The wind dies; the boat at once reaches the shore [M19].
The crowds embark on boats to Capernaum “seeking Jesus.” For the first time Christ claims he is life-giving food, bread from heaven, the life of the soul. Jesus is bread to be eaten; his flesh, in fact. The Jews are dumbstruck it all smacks of cannibalism. A crisis is upon them. “From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer went about with him. Jesus therefore said to the Twelve, ‘Do you also wish to go away?’ Simon Peter therefore answered, ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of everlasting life….’”
Jesus thereupon goes to Jerusalem for the pasch. On a Sabbath he cures a cripple at a pool [M20]. Brouhaha with Jewish leaders: “This, then, is why the Jews were the more anxious to put him to death; because he not only broke the Sabbath, but also called God his own Father, making himself equal to God.” Jesus wants Jews to think and carefully weigh the evidence for his claims. He appeals to 4 witnesses: 1) the Baptist; 2) miracles of healing and exorcism; 3) the old testament’s messianic references; 4) Moses.
After this, Jesus returned to Galilee to avoid those out to kill him. But the spying Pharisees track him to Capernaum to trap him. What about eating with unwashed hands [P13]? Jesus upbraids them for their onerous casuistry, added to and falsifying God’s law. “When he had entered the house away from the crowd, his disciples began to ask him about the parable. ‘Are you also, then, without understanding? Do you not realize....’”
It is June; Jesus goes north, beyond Israel’s borders for the first time since his flight into Egypt. In part Jesus desires to complete his instruction of the apostles. Jesus heals the daughter of the persistent Syrophoenician woman [M21]. Still great crowds come to him; many cures take place, including that of a deaf and dumb man [M22]. On the northeastern shore of the lake Jesus again multiplies loaves and fishes [M23] to feed more than 4000 men (again not counting women and children), but there’s no messianic enthusiasm this time.
Pharisees and Sadducees dispute with Jesus and ask for a sign from heaven. Jesus: if only they could reason from miracles and teaching as well as they can foretell rain. In the boat he again scolds the apostles: “You of little faith, why do you argue among yourselves....Do you not yet understand...?” In 2 stages Jesus cures a blind man [M24].
Then Jesus went with his disciples into the villages round Caesarea Philippi. He asked, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” [Did thereby Peter confess Jesus to be God incarnate? Not necessarily, since these 2 names are ambiguous. This did, however, represent some sort of breakthrough as we see from Jesus’ reply:] “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. And I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church....” [This is the first of 2 mentions of a “church.”]
A change now comes over the Gospel story; a change in direction. Jesus now turns his eyes towards Jerusalem; there he is to die. Jesus speaks for the first time of the cross and of his death thereon. Whereupon the newly dubbed prince of the apostles chides Jesus: “Far be it from you, O Lord; this will never happen to you.” Then Jesus rebukes the Rock: “Get behind me, Satan, you are a scandal to me; for you do not mind the things of God, but those of men.”
Six days later Jesus takes Peter, James and John up Mt. Hermon, where the master is transfigured [M25]. Down from the mountain, Jesus encounters a “great crowd,” with scribes disputing with the apostles, who had failed to cure an epileptic boy. “O unbelieving generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you?” Jesus exorcises the boy [M26]. Alone with Jesus, the apostles ask why they had failed. “This kind can be cast out in no way except by prayer and fasting.”
August, north Galilee: “He did not wish anyone to know it, for he was teaching his disciples.” Second prophecy of passion and death. “But they did not understand this saying….” Absent 3 months, Jesus and the apostles return to Capernaum. On the way the 12 had disputed over who should be the greatest in the kingdom. Greatest, counters Jesus, is he who abases himself like the little child he gathers to his breast. Alone with the apostles the Teacher overflows in informal instruction that ranges from tolerance to scandal, from guardian angels to dignity of discipleship, from mortification to unity....Peter asks about forgiveness. Jesus answers with parable of the forgiven servant unforgiving in turn [P14]. Peter catches fish with coin in its mouth to pay the Temple tax [M27].
September of Year 2: Jesus says farewell to Galilee, reproaching “the towns in which most of his miracles were worked, because they had not repented. ‘And you, Capernaum, shall you be exalted to heaven? You shall be thrust down to hell! For if the miracles had been worked in Sodom that have been worked in you, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.’”
THE JUDEAN (& PEREAN) MINISTRY: OCTOBER OF YEAR 2 TO MARCH OF YEAR 3
The final 6 months are focused on Jerusalem, where Jesus is to consummate his mission. In Judea and neighboring Perea Jesus echoes his Galilean ministry; the home of Lazarus, Martha and Mary in Bethany becomes his headquarters. Here there is less incident, more instruction; many parables (most of these look to interior world and commitment as opposed to earlier ones that largely dealt with the kingdom), few miracles. The tone is somber; time is running out for Israel. Jesus repeatedly warns the apostles of impending persecutions, his and theirs—similar to those Jesus is now trying to head off.
Jesus goes with his disciples to the feast of Tabernacles, “not publicly, but as it were privately.” He sends messengers ahead to a Samaritan village to make things ready; they refuse to receive him. Everyone in Jerusalem is whispering about him; out of fear of the authorities “no one spoke openly of him.” Midway through the festival Jesus goes to the Temple to teach. “Why do you seek to put me to death?” Pharisees dispute publicly with him; Jesus insists: weigh the evidence. Attempts are made to arrest him. Why do officers come back empty-handed? “Never has man spoken as this man.” A woman apprehended in adultery, Jesus admonishes her: “Go and sin no more.” More teaching and disputing with Pharisees: “I am the light of the world....If you knew me, you would then know my Father also.” “...[T]hey did not understand how he could call God his Father.” “When he was speaking these things, many believed in him.”
Still at the Temple Jesus makes his most explicit claim so far: “Before Abraham came to be, I am.” [This may be the turning point in his Jerusalem ministry as Jesus tries to get audience beyond both monotheism and exclusive nationalism.] “They therefore took up stones to cast at him; but Jesus hid himself….” Jesus heals a man born blind [M28], resulting in Pharisees’ grilling man and his parents. “Why would you hear again?” asks the cured man. “Would you also become his disciples?...Jesus heard that [Jewish leaders] had turned him out, and when he found him said, ‘Do you believe in the Son of Man?’ ‘Who is he, Lord,’ he answered, ‘that I may believe in him?’ ‘You have seen him,’ Jesus told him; ‘he it is who speaks with you.’”
November, Bethany: The good shepherd [P15] freely lays down his life for his sheep. After this the Lord appointed 70 others, “and sent them forth two by two into every [southern] town and place where he himself was to come.” To reject these envoys is to reject God himself. They return: “Even the devils were subject to us in your name.” Parable of good Samaritan [P16]. Busy Martha is reproved, contemplative Mary praised. Jesus betakes himself to garden on Mt. Olivet to pray. Disciples: Teach us to pray. The master lays out the Our Father. Two more parables illustrate the need for persevering prayer [P17-18].
Jesus cures a possessed man who is both blind and dumb [M29]. All the crowds were amazed: nothing similar was ever seen in Israel. Could this be no other than the Son of David? Pharisees allege Jesus’ power comes from prince of devils. Among other things, the Nazarene accuses them of sinning against Holy Spirit. Crowd: we want a sign. Jesus: there’s to be no sign but that of Jonah, thus pointing to his resurrection. A Pharisee hosts Jesus at dinner. Why does he not wash before eating? “You Pharisees....Fools....Woe to you....” Jesus directs 3 woes against Pharisees, 3 against lawyers. Soon after, the scribes and Pharisees resolve to browbeat and hunt him down. They lay in wait, hoping to catch some word from his lips.
“Now when immense crowds had gathered together...they were treading on one another.” The time and place are probably December in Perea (a relatively wealthy area, prompting much teaching on virtuous detachment). But Jesus first must warn disciples about the Pharisees and their enmity, plus advising and encouraging them in their future work. They also will be hounded: “Fear not.” Parable of rich, foolish, unwary farm owner [P19]. To disciples: trust God’s providence, “you of little faith.” Where your treasure is, there your heart. How servants are to await their master’s return: vigilant and prayerful [P20]. [A glimpse into Christ’s inner life]: “I have come to cast fire upon the earth, and what will I but that it be kindled....I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how distressed I am until it is accomplished!” Jesus brings a sword.
To the crowds: interpret the signs of the times; repent before night comes. Parable of fruitless fig tree [P21]. Jesus will do his utmost to make Israel bear fruit in the short time left. He cures a crippled woman [M30] in his last synagogue appearance. Pharisees object. “...[A]ll his adversaries were put to shame; and the entire crowd rejoiced at all the glorious things that were done by him.”
Jerusalem, December, Dedication feast: Jesus is walking and teaching in the Temple. Jewish leaders: “If you are the Christ, tell us openly.” Only alone with his disciples does Jesus ever speak of himself as “the Christ.” [He does his utmost to keep it a secret because of the false political meaning given to the Messianic kingdom by the Jews.] Jesus points to previous evidence and then makes the plainest of self-descriptions, even to his enemies: “I and the Father are one.” Some listeners pick up stones. Why? “Not for a good work do we stone you, but for blasphemy...because you, being a man, make yourself God.” Again Jesus reasons with them, but to no avail. He escapes and goes to where the Baptist had first preached. There he stays; many come to see him; he heals; once more he teaches them. “‘...All things, however, that John said of this man were true.’ Many believed in him.”
The Lord, now clearly in Perea and in January, echoes warnings to repent, lest divine chastisement overtake them. Parable of the house master [P22] to those knocking at door: “I know you not, nor whence you come.” References to hell: weeping, darkness, gnashing of teeth. Last will be first, and first last. On a Sabbath Jesus again dines with a Pharisee [the last of 4 such meals]; he cures a man with dropsy [M31]. Parable of invitees who excuse themselves from great supper [P23]: Jews to be replaced by Gentiles.
On the east side of Jordan: “Now great crowds were going along with him.” Disciples must count the cost and renounce all. Parables [P24-25] of tower builder and warring king. In his kingdom poverty alone is currency. To Pharisees indignant at the publicans and sinners surrounding Jesus: parables [P26-27] of lost sheep and lost coin. Christ here offers glimpse of God’s merciful heart: he searches, finds and rejoices. Story of the prodigal son [P28]: in the finest of all parables God’s love is shown to be affectionate, human, warm, personal, paternal. Parable of the unjust steward [P29]. “Now the Pharisees, who were fond of money, heard all these things, and they began to sneer at him.” Jesus adds fuel to the fire: parable of Dives [rich man] and Lazarus [P30]. “If they do not hearken to Moses and the prophets, they will not believe even if someone rises from the dead.”
Privately to the apostles: “If you have faith...you will say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and be planted in the sea,’ and it will obey you.” Besides greater faith, Christ asks them for a deeper humility (worthless servants). At this point (February) Jesus crosses over the Jordan and begins to go south to Jerusalem. The 10 lepers cleansed [M32]: how little do the Jewish lepers profit from it; only 1 Samaritan outcast returns to thank him. Asked by Pharisees about the kingdom’s advent, which was said, first by John and then by Jesus, to be “near at hand,” Christ speaks about its suddenness, but also its hiddenness: “God’s kingdom is here, among you.” God’s children must act as though it’s always at the door: be prepared.
Pray continually without discouragement: parable of unjust judge brought around by pestering woman [P31]. “Yet when the Son of Man comes, will he find, do you think, faith on the earth?” Parable of Pharisee and publican [P32]: he who humbles himself will be exalted. Pharisees ask about indissolubility of marriage: no divorce; celibacy is even better, but only through special grace. Disciples try to prevent mothers from presenting their babes to Jesus, which makes him “indignant.” To the childlike does the kingdom belong. The rich young man, apparently so eager to be perfect, balks at selling everything and goes away “sad.” That, despite the fact that earlier Jesus, “looking upon him, loved him.” [The disciples are dismayed at the need to renounce riches; isn’t that what the kingdom is all about?] Then Jesus promises them a hundredfold in this life (but with persecutions) and life everlasting.
March: early spring is a time for frenzied work in the vineyards. Jesus so tailors his next parable [P33]: laborers hired at different times: God dispenses his mercy as he wills. Martha and Mary send a courier to tell Jesus: “Lord...he whom you love is sick.” “Jesus loved Martha, and her sister Mary, and Lazarus.” The disciples object to returning to Judea. Jesus claims no harm can befall him until the time set by the Father. Lazarus is dead. Thomas: “Let us also go, that we may die with him.” To Bethany, then.
Jesus comforts Martha and Mary. But who will comfort Christ? “Jesus...groaned in spirit and was troubled....And Jesus wept....The Jews therefore said, ‘See how he loved him’....Jesus, therefore, again groaning in himself, came to the tomb.” Resurrection of Lazarus [M33], the third such resuscitation, the most dramatic and conspicuous. “Many therefore of the Jews who had come to Mary, and had seen what he did, believed in him. But some of them went away to the Pharisees, and told them the things that Jesus had done.” In council Caiaphas recommends the death penalty. “...[F]rom that day forth their plan was to put him to death. Jesus therefore no longer went about openly among the Jews, but withdrew to...Ephraim; and there he stayed with his disciples” [1-2 weeks].
THE LAST WEEK: END OF MARCH & EARLY APRIL OF YEAR 3 IN JERUSALEM
Jesus shows himself resolute and eager to reach Jerusalem, unlike his followers, submerged as they are in dark forebodings. Despite 2 earlier predictions, apostles still can’t realize that the Messiah must suffer and die; on the road they lag behind....
Just outside Jericho Jesus again, even more explicitly, foretells his passion, death and resurrection. Salome, mother of James and John and perhaps one of Jesus’ regular women followers, asks that her sons be seated next to the King, once the kingdom is established. The other apostles wax indignant. Jesus restores harmony by insisting again on humility: “[T]he Son of Man also has not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Many pilgrims from Galilee are also on their way to Jerusalem for the pasch; they have not seen Jesus for 6 months. They add themselves to the master’s group, while also forming something like a screen. Their addition immediately raises the spirits of the mercurial apostles. Outside Jericho’s north gate sits the blind man Bartimeus, whose decibel level, insistence and faith win from Jesus one of his last miracles [M34]. Christ, “moved with compassion,” restores the man’s sight.
Now within Jericho proper, Zacchaeus the publican, short and stocky, climbs a sycamore to be able to catch sight of Jesus. He wins not only a conversion but a golden opportunity: “Zacchaeus [how does Jesus know his name?], make haste and come down; for I must stay in your house today.” Parable of 10 servants [P34], each entrusted with a pound and told to trade with it in the king’s absence: one earns 10, another 5, while the slothful, foolish servant, none at all. Jesus and the 12 skirt Jerusalem and go to Bethany, where 2 weeks earlier Lazarus had been notoriously returned to life. It is 6 days before the paschal feast. Simon the leper offers another feast at his home, where Lazarus is a guest, Martha serves table and Mary anoints. So precious was the spikenard she “wasted” on Christ that, so the purse-keeping Judas claims, it could have fetched 300 silver pieces. Parable of 2 sons [P35].
SUNDAY: triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Many Galilean pilgrims and some locals escort Jesus into the holy city. [Jesus has a surprise for those who had witnessed his earlier escapes from crowds seeking to hail him as king. Publicly and unmistakably now he will claim to be their Messiah, though mounted on a young donkey. No matter that the “kingdom” envisioned by the noisy acclaimers and what Jesus is about to inaugurate definitively are worlds apart. His thinking seems to be: to believer and unbeliever alike, then and now, Jesus finally owes the truth that he is indeed their king, although the opposite to that sought by the wild crowd: a very meek king of hearts.]
To the Pharisees protesting the acclaim, Jesus says: “[I]f these keep silence, the stones will cry out.” The Pharisees sound defeated: “Do you see that we avail nothing? Behold, the entire world has gone after him!” On catching sight of Jerusalem, “...he wept over it, saying, ‘If you had known, in this your day, even you, the things that are for your peace!...[B]ecause you have not known the time of your visitation.’”
Jesus goes to the Temple. “The whole city was in a stir.” Blind and lame people he healed. The chief priests and scribes, despite witnessing the miracles, protest. To no immediate avail. To Greeks seeking an audience, Christ predicts his imminent death. “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself.” A voice from heaven? “[A]s it was already late, he went out to Bethany [2 miles distant] with the twelve,” where he spent the night.
Members of the plotting Sanhedrin have no more than 4 days before the Passover to do Jesus in. Since the paschal holiday lasts for a full week, during which repose is mandated, Jesus must be killed beforehand. Another reason for urgency was his growing approval by the “people”: “The chief priests and Scribes...found nothing that they could do to him, for all the people hung upon his words.”
MONDAY: On their way back to Jerusalem “at daybreak” Jesus is hungry and goes to a fig-tree “to see if he might find anything on it.” While not the season for fruit, still Jesus curses the tree for having only leaves. “He taught in the Temple daily.”
TUESDAY: The fig-tree is withered from its roots [M35]. Jesus tells an apostle he’ll do much greater things, if “he does not waver in his heart, but believes....” At the Temple awaiting Jesus is an imposing delegation of enemies; their only aim is to discredit him with the crowd. Jesus turns the tables. “Believe me, the publicans and the harlots are further on the road to God’s kingdom than you.” Parable of the unfaithful vinedressers [P36]: They maltreat servants sent by the rich owner to collect his share, who don’t even scruple to kill the owner’s well-beloved son. The chief priests and Pharisees “knew that he was speaking about them. And though they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the people, because they regarded him as a prophet.”
Jesus retells an earlier banquet parable with a new twist [P37]: one of the guests is without a proper wedding garment and is ejected: not all the saved will be Jews, nor will all the Jews be saved. Seeking to make him betray himself in his talk, the Pharisees raise a question of tribute to Caesar. “Jesus saw their malice….Give to Caesar....And they said no more; they were full of admiration at his answer, finding no means of discrediting his words in the eyes of the people.” Disbelievers in immortality, the Sadducees ask about a woman married successively to 7 brothers. Whose will she be in heaven? “You understand neither the scriptures nor the power of God.” In that other world none will marry, for all will be like angels. “This the crowds heard, and were amazed by his teaching.”
A Pharisee asks which is the greatest commandment. Love of God with all one’s heart, soul, mind and strength, and love of neighbor as much as oneself. No one dared “after that day, to try him with further questions.” Again Jesus warns crowd to be wary of scribes and Pharisees, pitiful caricatures of holiness. Above all shun the Pharisees‘ vain, ostentatious display of piety. Jesus then turns to those who will replace the rabbis and insists on humility: the greatest of all is to be the servant of all. Jesus ends his last discourse in the Temple by pronouncing 7 woes upon the hypocritical Jewish leaders. He concludes:
“‘Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets, and stone those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings, but you would not. Behold, your house is left to you desolate.’ So much Jesus told them and then went away.” Read signs of future times [P38].
After the crowd dispersed, Jesus continues to instruct his followers, probably as they return to Bethany. The widow’s mite; questions related to the end of Jerusalem and end of world. “Watch then, praying at all times....” He recasts earlier parables: “The kingdom of heaven will be like 10 virgins” [P39]. Imitate the provident wise—not the 5 foolish ones. Another: 10 talents distributed to 3 (instead of one to each); thrust is more spiritual: reward is for faithfulness in little things [P40]. A sentence of condemnation is passed on the unprofitable servant. That leads to a description of the last judgment: corporal works of mercy done to “least of my brethren” are done “to me”—just as, when omitted, they are denied to Jesus. The former will pass on to “eternal life”; the latter “to eternal punishment” [P41].
WEDNESDAY: Jesus spends most of the next 2 days at Bethany resting and gathering strength for the upcoming trials. “You know that after 2 days the Passover will be here; and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified.” [To Judas these words smack of defeat; there is no hope now for the kingdom; he must save his own skin as best he can. Jesus’ repeated warnings about the danger of riches have left him bitter, resentful. The final break had occurred when he was rebuked for complaining about the wasted spikenard.] The Jewish leaders have only today and tomorrow to rid themselves of Jesus—for good. Both urgency and secrecy weigh on them. Judas guarantees both in promising to betray Jesus. “And they, when they heard it, were glad.” He seeks opportunity to hand him over “without any commotion.”
THURSDAY: Early, Jesus sends trusted Peter and John to town to make ready for eating the paschal meal. The mysterious instructions as to where serve to respect the possibly secret discipleship of the house’ owner and to keep Judas in the dark. Because of complicated calendar considerations, Galileans were accustomed to eat the paschal meal on Thursday, a day before the Judeans. So do Jesus and his immediate followers.
The Cenacle 6 to 9:30 p.m.: Their most solemn meal ever does not stop the apostles from arguing, yet again, about who is to be the greatest. In response Jesus washes their feet, even Judas’, as “an example.” The Lord tells them the traitor is there. Jesus is at the bottom of the U-shaped table. Prompted by Peter, John, “leaning back upon the bosom of Jesus,” asks who the traitor is; Jesus identifies Judas, who thereupon leaves. The supper’s second course is the paschal lamb; the third consists of unleavened bread, followed by a 4th cup of wine. At this point Jesus institutes the Eucharist, portraying himself as the sacrificial victim of the new covenant; he gives his body and blood to the 11. “Do this for a commemoration of me” perhaps makes them priests, to perpetuate the sacrifice. New commandment of love: telltale sign of discipleship. Boastful Peter’s denials are foretold. Fury is just around the corner.
Jesus’ hour-long farewell discourse: he must go, they will join him later; trust him, love him; obey him. He reveals the deepest mystery of the Godhead: the mutual love of Father and Son is the Holy Spirit, soon to be sent them. Peace...vine and branches [P42]...no longer servants: “friends”...persecutions...courage: victory certain. Jesus’ priestly prayer: for himself, for them, pillars of kingdom; avoid disunity.
Garden of Gethsemane 10 p.m. to midnight: The olive grove outside Jerusalem: a customary halting-place for the group. With both pilgrims and Jerusalemites safely asleep, what better place for Judas to find Jesus, after not finding him in the Cenacle? For Jesus too, nighttime makes it easier for the apostles to escape, if they so desire; he won’t force them to be co-victims. Christ’s internal agony (“dread...troubled...sad”) may surpass any impending physical torments. How human he appears as contrasted with the transfiguration; the same apostles witness both. Instructed to “watch and pray,” the 3some soon snore away, while Jesus sweats blood. Judas seals treason with a kiss; Jesus knowingly and freely embraces his fate. “I have told you that I am he. If, therefore, you seek me, let these go their way.” Arrest. Jesus restores Malchus’ severed ear [M36]. The Galileans? Paralyzed by fear and indecision. When Jesus does not resist, their courage vanishes, as do they.
FRIDAY: Interrogation 2-4 a.m.: First to Annas, then to his son-in-law Caiaphas, currently the head priest. Jesus is unofficially examined in the hope of extracting damning self-incrimination. Jesus claims to have taught openly; no secrets. He’s struck by an officer. Peter thrice denies knowing the Master.
Jewish trial 5-6 a.m.: While Caiaphas rehearses witnesses, for an hour the blindfolded Jesus is buffeted, slapped, derided. Jesus is brought before 70-member Sanhedrin; 2 concordant witnesses are required for each accusation; all fail this procedural test and so are rejected. Exasperated, chief priest adjures Jesus “to tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God.” “I am.”...“Your own lips have said it....He is liable to death.” Meanwhile Judas, despairing, returns silver and hangs himself.
Roman trial 7-8 a.m.: Pilate goes out to receive Jewish leaders, who thus avoid defilement by not treading on Roman property. Jesus meets the heathen ruler on whom the apparent malefactor leaves a deep impression. Pilate to leaders: Judge him yourself. Since Jews had lost right to inflict capital punishment (stoning), the execution Jesus “deserves” can only be carried out by Romans. When Pilate disallows charge of blasphemy, Jews change it to treason: he claims to be king. “I can find no fault in him.” The prisoner, because of Galilean roots, is then sent to Herod. Jesus says nothing; after mocking, he is sent back to Pilate. Jesus or Barabbas? “I will scourge him and then he shall go free.” He’s whipped (Jewish law restricted lashes to 39; Romans had no such ceiling). Soldiers make fun of this native rival of their illustrious emperor: thorns driven in; taunted, beaten, spit upon....
Twice before in his tenure Pilate had provoked the Jews into the makings of a revolt; both cases had been appealed to Rome and were decided against him. Another mistake could end the career of this very rational, detached, dispassionate Roman. Sensing Pilate’s weak character, the crowd turns on him, threatening another appeal to Rome. What can Pilate do but wash his hands and pronounce the death sentence? Anything for a bit of peace.
Way of cross 11 a.m. to noon: Golgotha lies 600 yards beyond Jerusalem’s west gate; the first 200 down into a deep valley; the last 400 up a steep incline. Crucifixion is the standard Roman form of execution. Simon of Cyrene forcibly helps Jesus. Ordinarily only the crossbeam (some 100 lbs.) was carried, on the shoulders with hands tied to the ends; the upright was already in place. Jesus sips a drugged drink; he wants to feel the full w8 of his pains.
Crucifixion and death, noon to 3 p.m.: Stripped, Jesus is affixed with nails through each wrist; the crossbeam is then raised by ropes and bolted to the upright; the feet are then nailed with a single blow (no foot support or seat). “They know not what they do.” Crucifixion is one slow torture of nauseating pains, cramps and suffocation. To speak, Jesus must straighten his sagging body by resting all his w8 on the foot nail.
Witnesses and passers-by jeer at the bogus prophet; where now are his vaunted miraculous powers? To the Good Thief: “Today you shall be with me in paradise.” Darkness for 3 hours. Conscious to the very last, Jesus cries out: “It is consummated” [nothing more to do or suffer, to show or say]. “‘Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.’ Then he bowed his head, and yielded up his spirit.”
RESURRECTION TO ASCENSION FROM APRIL 8 TO MAY 18 OF YEAR 3
In life Jesus had said 5 times that he would rise from the dead “on the third day.” While his body was in the tomb little more than 36 hours, Jews would call the span 3 days. Jesus rises from the dead with apparently no physical needs, but able to move at will and to pass through solid objects. His current state seems intermediate between his pre-resurrection materiality and his later disappearance into invisibility, at the ascension. Is he thus training the apostles to get used to an all-spiritual world? Jesus does not now resume his former way of life. He helps the apostles to understand what he had previously taught, concentrating largely on the kingdom. Most of his teaching and appearances during these 40 days are not recorded in the Gospels; only 7 appearances are mentioned.
Much has been made of the scrambled, and even contradictory, accounts of the first Easter. Because of their minor discrepancies, first the credibility of the Gospel texts and then the central event have been put in question. Some commentators seem almost obsessed with establishing that Jesus resurrected only in the apostles’ desires and imagination. As for why the risen Jesus appears only to his loyal followers, Jesus apparently anticipated the question in the parable of Lazarus and Dives. If they didn’t heed the initial evidence in Moses and the prophets, neither will they accept any latter-day resurrection of whomever. Two things come through most clearly from the relevant texts. Everywhere there’s so much reference to touching that these chapters almost seem a riot of fingers. The second is the apostles’ skepticism and hardness of belief.
According to Mark, whose Gospel is largely based on Peter’s teaching, the apostles “would not believe it,” when Mary Magdalene passes on to them a message from the resurrected Jesus. Neither are they persuaded by the 2 disciples recently returned from Emmaus after having been instructed by the unrecognized Jesus: “they did not believe them.” Moreover, the confused details may have a very simple explanation: Both the women who go first to the tomb and the foot-dragging, mournful apostles are doubtless so filled with excitement, fear and befuddlement that it was impossible for them to come up with a single reconstruction of events. There is, besides, such helter-skelter movement on the part of both sides to an eventual rendezvous that actual events take place in a veritable whirl of dust. While the apostles initially keep seeing what they take to be a ghost, Christ seems bent on proving his corporeality. At least he makes the point on one occasion by eating half of their breakfast. Then, he guides Thomas’ hand (the first apostle to call him “my God”) to the gash in his side and into the wounds through his hands. It is apparently the same body as of yore, but more.
On their way to Emmaus, a veiled Jesus appears to 2 dejected disciples whose dreams have vanished. “O foolish ones and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the Christ have to suffer these things before entering into his glory?” During the 7-mile trek Jesus interprets for them those scriptures referring to his redemption through suffering.[2] When the 2 men recognize Jesus, he disappears. As with the other early appearances, he only shows himself to restore their faith, not to resume his usual ways.
Sea of Galilee: Events of the past 2 weeks have altered the shape of the apostles’ lives completely; yet they have not adjusted themselves to an existence without Jesus to counsel and strengthen them. So we find Peter, Nathaniel, James and John back fishing. After a second miraculous catch of fish [M37], youthful, clear-eyed John recognizes Jesus in the man who had just told them where to find fish. Now on the shore, Jesus cooks their breakfast. Alone with Peter, Jesus invites the fisher of men to make amends for his 3fold denial by a triple declaration of affection. To this new, humble, contrite Peter, Jesus entrusts his sheep and lambs. He promises the head apostle that he will not only live Jesus’ life, but he will also die his death.
Mount of Beatitudes in May: The very mountain in Galilee, where 2 years earlier Jesus had selected his apostles and promulgated the full Good News, now witnesses Jesus’ giving them his authoritative commission to establish the kingdom the world over (till now it had been restricted to Jews, except for allusions in some parables). “Go...preach...make disciples of all nations...baptizing them...teach the commandments...Behold I am with you all through the days that are coming, until the consummation of the world.”
Mount Olivet Thursday May 18—the Ascension: At Jesus’ command the apostles have returned to Jerusalem to prepare for the Jewish feast of Pentecost. “[W]ait here in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high....You shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days hence.” As he led them out towards Bethany beyond Gethsemane, the apostles again show how much they need the Holy Spirit when they ask: “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
“He lifted up his hands and blessed them. And it came to pass as he blessed them, that he parted from them...and a cloud took him out of their sight. And while they were gazing up to heaven as he went, behold, 2 men stood by them in white garments, and said to them, ‘Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking up to heaven?’” As if to say: Get back to Jerusalem and pray. “All these with one mind continued steadfastly in prayer with the women and Mary, the Mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.”
“And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord aiding them, and attesting his word by the miracles that went with them.”
* Throughout the Catholic and Protestant world, for example, the first grudging permission of contraception, “but only in the most severe cases,” dates just from a conclave of the Anglican Church in the 1930s.
* Walter Isaacson, Einstein: his life and universe (New York 2007). This is no solitary assertion; hundreds more can be found throughout this biography.
* This is the name God gives himself on Mount Sinai, to be hallowed and revered such that it was never to be said or written, except in the abbreviated form of what is called the tetragrammaton: YHWH.
# Here are the references: Tob 13:4; Ps 68:6; Ps 89:27; Wis 14:3; Sir 23:1, 4; Mal 2:10.
* There are also certain advantages: a piecemeal mind and a tentative heart also lessen somewhat both freedom and responsibility. Our choices and commitments are necessarily partial and therefore revocable.
[1] Ronald Knox and Ronald Cox, The Gospel Story (New York, 1958).
[2] Among the Messianic passages in the Old Testament, those allusive to his suffering are: Gen 3:15; Ex 12; Lev 16; Num 21; Ps 15, 21, 30, 39, 40, 54, 68, 108; especially Is 42:1-7, 49:1-7l, 50:4-9, 52:13-53:12; Zac 12:10, 13:7-9.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]