What was the basis
for the ridicule that Jesus is said to have experienced at the hands of the
Pharisees and the experts in the law? As suggested by the construction of the
narrative, it was most likely Jesus’ statement about money, for though it is
said that they loved money, the Pharisees and experts in the law would not
necessarily have possessed a great deal of it. Though there would
certainly be exceptions, they were not necessarily a part of the aristocratic
ruling class of Israel. In the majority of cases, when it came to wealth,
they would have been little better off than the rest of the people.
However, one’s honor status
was not necessarily tied to wealth, and the honor competition is always at the
forefront of these interactions. Because
of what was likely relative poverty of Jesus’ primary interlocutors, as they
could demonstrate themselves to be suffering right along with the people in the
shared experienced of subjugation to the Caesars and the Herods and the oppressive
burden of taxation, they could be in a position to seize upon Jesus’ words
about the service of money, point to their own empty pockets (in a manner of
speaking), and thereby demonstrate that they did not serve money, being therefore
devoted to the service of the Creator God of Israel.
It is also possible,
however, that this particular slice of interpretation when it comes to talk of
money, limits the intended reach of the parable and of the words of Jesus, as
the context that has been created thus far has attempted to connect wealth and the
true riches with the correct use of the law and the kingdom of the Creator God.
Therefore, the dichotomy of serving two masters might be better understood as
their service of the law itself, in a selfish and non-inclusive pursuit of the
blessings to be had in the fulfillment of the covenant and the coming of the
kingdom of heaven, with this service taking place rather than the service of
the God of the law and the covenant, and the all-nations inclusiveness of that
covenant that was clearly presented in its original iteration to Abraham, and
buttressed by its detailed expansion especially to be found in the prophecy of
Isaiah (which was highly influential among those with messianic expectations
and sensibilities in their considerations of things related to the kingdom of
heaven).
In response to their
ridicule, in which they attempted to justify themselves against Jesus’ pointed accusations
(quite possibly in a way such as what was just described), Jesus says, “You are
the ones who justify yourselves in men’s eyes, but God knows your hearts.
For what is highly prized among men is utterly detestable in God’s sight”
(16:15). These words from Jesus about that which is “utterly detestable”
forces the observer to make an additional consideration of what it was that
these men had been saying in their attempts to defend and justify
themselves.
One can continue with
musings concerning the boundaries that were being placed around the Creator God’s
covenant promises, and of those boundaries and the associated blessings being
limited to those that acceded to the works of the law as then commonly
understood (the three primary indicators that revealed one’s allegiance to the
Creator God), and find oneself in a position to hear the Pharisees and law
experts who, along with their pointing out of their insignificant financial
status, are able to speak about their extraordinary efforts to protect and
defend the law (the guide to being properly human) and therefore the honor standing
of the God of Israel, by keeping Gentile sinners outside the bounds of the
covenant.
No comments:
Post a Comment