Mark, A Meal, A Leper & The Kingdom Of God (part 4)

This account of Jesus dining at the house of Simon the leper provides a bit more detail.  Here, the reader is informed that “six days before Passover,” (thus answering the question as to whether or not Jesus had adequate time to complete purification rituals before celebrating Passover---so Jesus (the Messiah) went to the cross in a state of ritual impurity, and the early church was unconcerned with this aspect of the story, though it would have certainly attributed to the scandalous, stumbling-block nature of the message of Jesus) “Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom He has raised from the dead.  So they prepared a dinner for Jesus there.  Martha was serving, and Lazarus was among those present at the table with Him” (John 12:1-2). 

If one did not have the stories of Matthew and Mark, when reading this story in John it would be possible to get the sense that Jesus is dining in the house of Lazarus, Martha, and Mary.  If He was doing so, that would be quite understandable.  Lazarus had, quite naturally, become famous.  Many people, as John reports few verses later, came to this house to see both Jesus and Lazarus (12:9).  Not only that, there are indications that the family may have had some wealth, and therefore may have been an honored family within the community, with that indication being the fact that Mary had the costly perfume with which to anoint Jesus, and the fact that the gathered guests make mention of “the poor,” with the words themselves ringing out and serving as an indication of the dichotomy that existed between the poor and those that were joining Jesus at this meal.  However, this meal is not taking place at the house of the now-famous-and-potentially-wealthy Lazarus, but rather, at the house of Simon the leper.       

In the ancient world, it was customary for a community to receive a famous and honored individual into their midst with great pomp and ceremony.  Often, a delegation from the community would go outside their town, meet the arriving person of prominence, and accompany them back to their locale.  This is referred to as a “parousia”.  There are several examples of parousia in the life of Jesus, and even one when He goes to Bethany to raise Lazarus from the dead.  There is no record of Jesus being received in this way upon this visit to Bethany, but one can imagine that such an event took place, as His fame could only have grown as Lazarus continued to live amongst the people. 

As a part of the reception, there would be a determination made as to which member or family of the community was the most worthy and important individual, in the best position to accept the dignitary into their house, most capable of reflecting favorably on the larger community so as to give the best possible impression to the honored guest, and able to bring honor to the whole of the community in the process.  As was said, it would have been a natural choice, owing to previous events, for Lazarus to host Jesus in Bethany.  The fact that Jesus loved Lazarus and His sisters would have contributed to this more than natural arrangement.  However, it is Simon the leper that receives the honor of hosting a meal for Jesus. 

Whether this is the choice of the community or Jesus’ choice one is left to wonder, but what is clear is that one who would normally be marginalized and even ostracized in the community for a variety of reasons is the one that has this honor.  If the story of Zaccheus (as a prime example of Jesus choosing His own host) is any indication, it is likely that it is Jesus that has made the choice of meal location, but it is not something about which one can be dogmatic. 

Mark, A Meal, A Leper & The Kingdom Of God (part 1)

Now while Jesus was in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper, reclining at the table, a woman came with an alabaster jar of costly aromatic oil from pure nard.  After breaking open the jar, she poured it on his head. – Mark 14:3  (NET)

Jesus is at a meal table.  Though there is not an explicit mention of a meal taking place, based on what is presented in the text it is appropriate to infer that a meal is taking place.  Mark writes that Jesus was “reclining at the table” (14:3b).  This is a clear indication that Jesus is participating in yet another meal, as it informs the reader that Jesus is utilizing a dining couch rather than an upright chair, and that He has most likely assumed the traditional posture of laying on the couch, propped up on one elbow, with His head near the table and His feet at the end of the couch away from the table.  Because this presents a much better picture of Jesus’ posture, it is then possible to form a more complete picture of what took place at this table. 

It is said that there was a woman “with an alabaster jar of costly aromatic oil from pure nard.  After breaking open the jar, she poured it on His head” (14:3c).  The text indicates that the woman did not stop with Jesus’ head, but might very well have poured out the perfume over the whole of His body, because Jesus, when some present scoffed at what was perceived to be a waste of a costly item that could have been sold, with the money given to the poor, responded by saying, “She has done a good service for Me… She did what she could.  She anointed My body before burial” (14:6b,8). 

There is an interesting dynamic that is at play here, having to do with the context in which Mark sets this event.  Though there is an intervening chapter of prophetic apocalyptic speech (pulling back the veil) by Jesus (Mark 13), the previous event that is recorded by Mark is that of Jesus observing the crowds making their offerings at the Temple.  While observing this activity, Jesus sees a poor widow who “came and put in two small copper coins” (12:42b), saying “I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the offering box than all the others… she, out of her poverty, put in what she had to live on, everything she had” (12:43b,44b). 

Following that, Jesus goes on to tell His disciples that the very Temple to which this widow gave the last of what she had “will be torn down” (13:2b).  It would be difficult for the disciples not to draw the conclusion that the offering made by this poor widow, sacrificing all that she had for that which was going to be destroyed, was itself quite a waste.  From there, in terms of the presentation of events, Mark moves directly to the meal at which Jesus is present, and to the breaking open of the alabaster jar for the purpose of anointing His body, with the indignant insistence that this was nothing but a waste.  However, Mark is making a point related to the fact that Jesus saw Himself as the true Temple of God that would stand eternally, so that nothing offered to it could possibly be considered a waste (unlike the widow’s tragic offering). 

No One Knows The Hour (part 5)

Here it must also be said that in Mark’s account in contrast to Matthew’s, rather than the withering of the fig tree being bracketed by Jesus’ actions in the Temple and a return to the Temple the following day in which He is challenged by the Temple authorities, it is Jesus’ dramatic actions in the Temple and pronouncement of judgment against it that is bracketed by the words spoken to the fig tree and the words spoken about and prompted by the withered fig tree.  It is then that Mark writes “They came again to Jerusalem” (11:27a), with Jesus being confronted with “By what authority are you doing these things?  Or who gave you the authority to do these things?” (11:28)      

So in Mark, the order of events is the triumphal entry that is accompanied by a trip to the Temple where Jesus merely looks around at everything (11:11), a departure to Bethany for the night, words to the fig tree the following day, another trip to Jerusalem and the Temple where He dramatically acts and speaks, another departure from Jerusalem (presumably to Bethany again), the disciples noticing the withered fig tree to which Jesus had spoken and doing so on the following morning on their way back to Jerusalem (thus prompting the previously mentioned commentary by Jesus), where Jesus makes another trip to the Temple. 

By way of review and contrast, Matthew has Jesus triumphally entering Jerusalem, acting and speaking in the Temple, departing for Bethany, speaking to the fig tree which produces an immediate withering and subsequent commentary on the fig tree, and an entrance into Jerusalem and the Temple where He is challenged.  Luke, by way of further contrast, has Jesus entering Jerusalem (for which He weeps while on His approach) and then speaking and acting in the Temple.  He is a bit more ambiguous in His timeline, as following Jesus’ recitation from Jeremiah he writes that “Jesus was teaching daily in the Temple courts.  The chief priests and the experts in the law and the prominent leaders among the people were seeking to assassinate Him, but they could not find a way to do it, for all the people hung on His words.  Now one day, as Jesus was teaching in the Temple courts and proclaiming the gospel, the chief priests and experts in the law with the elders came up and said to Him, ‘Tell us: By what authority are you doing these things?  Or who is it who gave you this authority?’” (19:47-20:2)     

All that follows from the twenty-third verse of the twenty-first chapter of Matthew when Jesus re-enters the Temple courts, until the first verse of the twenty-fourth chapter when Jesus goes out of the Temple courts and walks away, occurs without a change of scenery.  The same is true of Mark, as the setting does not change from the twenty-seventh verse of the eleventh chapter until the first verse of chapter thirteen. 

In Luke, the Temple is the scene of the narrative from the first verse of chapter twenty to verse thirty-seven of chapter twenty-one, which does not neatly change the setting, but simply breaks-up the narrative by informing the listener that “every day Jesus was teaching in the Temple courts, but at night He went and stayed on the Mount of Olives” (21:37).  For Luke, though Jesus embarks on His triumphal entry from Bethany, He does not return there each evening.  This helps to explain his omission of the story of the fig tree and its withering, which takes place in Matthew and Mark on the road from Bethany.  Throughout this entire section of the narrative, one must see and hear Jesus in the Temple courts, which provides a dramatic backdrop for all of the words that He speaks, along with the obviously Temple-related context for understanding His insistence that no one knows the hour . 

No One Knows The Hour (part 3)

Returning to Matthew and to the day after Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, which took Him to the Temple to pronounce a symbolic judgment against it in the mode of Jeremiah (and for the same reasons), along with which He referred to the Temple authorities as robbers (for engaging in insurrection against the God of the Temple---an insurrection that will cause Israel’s God to bring upon Jerusalem and its Temple the same type of judgment that their God brought upon it by way of Babylon, which are the thoughts that Jesus’ words and actions would have stirred, therefore setting him at odds with the Temple authorities and the people, as also happened to Jeremiah), Jesus returns to Jerusalem and to the Temple, having spent the night in the nearby village of Bethany (the home of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus). 

On his way back to Jerusalem, Jesus is reported to have caused a fig tree to wither for not producing fruit.  This echoes Jeremiah’s repeated use of fig tree symbolism, and therefore becomes a clear allusion to the nation of Israel, which was failing in its task to be a light to the nations.  This withering of the fig tree also functions as an allusion to the well-understood curses of the twenty-sixth chapter of Leviticus and the twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy, which the Creator God (as Matthew writes from the post-Resurrection perspective of Jesus as the physical embodiment of Israel’s Creator God) promised to bring upon His unfaithful people). 

This causing of the fig tree to wither, for Matthew, appears to stem from the reaction of “the chief priests and the experts in the law” (Temple authorities) when they “saw the wonderful things he did” (21:15a).  Matthew alone, to the exclusion of Mark and Luke, reports that following Jesus’ talk of the Temple as den of robbers, “The blind and the lame came to Him in the Temple courts, and He healed them” (21:14).  In addition, there were “children crying out in the Temple courts, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David’” (21:15b).  This is said to have caused the chief priests and the experts in the law to become “indignant” (21:15c). 

Those that represented Israel before their God were unable to celebrate Jesus’ entry in the way of Solomon as pronounced by Zechariah, they refused to repent when one who had been attempting to be a Jeremiah (and more than a Jeremiah) to the people for three years called them to account, and they refused to rejoice in what was a rather obvious coming of their Messiah (in the mold of Isaiah 61) and His healing of the blind and the lame in the Temple courts.  Little wonder then that Jesus spoke to and about the fig tree in such a way.  Matthew writes that “When the disciples saw it they were amazed” (21:20a), and wondered at what they had seen.  To their amazed inquiry, Jesus replied “I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only will you do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,’ it will happen.  And whatever you ask in prayer, if you believe, you will receive” (21:21-22). 

As these words are heard, one must not lose sight of the fact that Jesus is on His way into Jerusalem.  Matthew will move immediately to add “Now after Jesus entered the Temple courts, the chief priests and elders of the people came up to Him as He was teaching and said, ‘By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?’” (21:23).  So the story of the fig tree and the words about the mountain are bracketed by Jesus being in the Temple (Israel’s God returning to Zion and to the Temple), where the legitimacy of His presence there is challenged by the Temple authorities.  This fact shall not be allowed to casually pass.  This makes the point that it is the Temple mount that Jesus has in view when He speaks about the mountain being cast into the sea.  It must be understood that it is the Temple that is central to Matthew’s narrative (along with Mark and Luke), and one must not lose sight of that fact while working towards an appropriate understanding of Jesus’ statement about the day and the hour that no one knows.   

Raising Lazarus For Glory (part 5)

With this question from Jesus, and His reference to belief and the glory of God, an observers thoughts are returned to the beginning of the story of Lazarus.  As Lazarus and his plight is introduced into the Gospel narrative, Jesus says that “This sickness will not lead to death, but to God’s glory” (11:4b).  Once again, one must look past the immediate circumstance of the Lazarus issue, hearing the story as a component of a wider narrative (within a wider narrative) with a certain theological, sociological, and religious objective, in order to truly understand that to which Jesus is referring when He speaks about the Creator God’s glory.  Without making that effort, it would be tempting to think that the glory of the Creator God will be demonstrated through the raising of Lazarus, but in reality, the raising is only relational, and it serves only as a catalyst to that which will truly reveal the glory of the covenant God of Israel. 

The author reports that Jesus casts His eyes heavenward (11:41), and, one would have to imagine, thinking through what it was that is going to be accomplished through the events that this Gospel portrays as being set in motion through this raising, Jesus offers thankfulness for the power that will be put on display that will have the result that the people “may believe that You sent Me” (11:42b).  Having done this, Jesus, with a loud voice, said, “Lazarus, come out!” (11:43b)  As should be expected from all that has been reported to this point in the story of John, that is precisely what happened.  Lazarus came out of the tomb.  What was the result?  The author says that “Many of the people who had come with Mary and had seen the things Jesus did, believed in Him” (11:45), thus setting the stage for the previously mentioned glory of the Creator God that was soon to be manifested. 

John indicates that this growth in the number of those that believed in Jesus caused a widespread furor.  Honestly, one can only imagine the response to reports about a dead man being raised back to life.  In what is said to be a direct response to this occurrence and the furor that it created, “The chief priests and the Pharisees called the council together and said… If we allow Him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in Him” (11:47a, 48a).  This statement thus continues the march towards uncovering that to which Jesus was referring when He spoke of the glory of His God in connection with Lazarus’ death and raising. 

Continuing this same story that began with the report of Lazarus’ sickness, some short period of time later, when there was “six days before the Passover” (12:1a), the reader learns that “Jesus came to Bethany” (12:1b).  This place, of course, was inhabited by those that had seen the great miracle of Lazarus being raised from the dead.  This would, undoubtedly, be a defining moment for Bethany for all of its existence, so it is wholly unsurprising that the author reports about “a large crowd of Judeans” that “learned that Jesus was there, and so they came not only because of Him but also to see Lazarus whom He had raised from the dead” (12:9).  Here one can note that Lazarus’ raising, as it was drawing people to Jesus, and ultimately to His mission and way of ushering in the kingdom of heaven on earth, was still being used as an instrument in the Creator God’s hands for the purpose of His own glory. 

Apparently the “Lazarus event” was quite well known, so much so that “the chief priests planned to kill Lazarus too, for on account of him many of the Jewish people were going away and believing in Jesus” (12:10-11).  This was a problem on many levels.  One of the reasons that it was a significant problem in the eyes of the chief priests and Pharisees that the people were going away and believing in Jesus, was that Jesus was seen as somebody that was not rigorously keeping to the covenant markers (works of the law) that were so vitally important to Israel’s national interests in that day.  

Raising Lazarus For Glory (part 3)

Before one can return to the issue of Lazarus’ sickness and death and God’s glory, it is necessary to traverse the territory that is laid out before the reader with the exchanges that take place between Martha and Jesus, and Mary and Jesus.  Jesus goes to Bethany, where He encounters the grieving sisters of Lazarus, whom He loved (along with his sisters).  Upon His arrival, Martha greets Him, saying, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.  But even now I know that whatever You ask from God, God will grant You” (John 11:21-22). 

There is, it needs to be said, a faith-rooted belief to be found in those statements.  Martha, apparently believing Jesus to be the Messiah, and combining that belief with some type of knowledge that part of the work of Messiah will be to restore all things, along with the general belief in the resurrection of the dead, appeals to her awareness of His powerful, healing and restoring works, in hopes that a restoration to life will be granted to her deceased brother.  Jesus responds to Martha’s faith and messianic understanding by saying, “Your brother will come back to life again” (11:23). 

Martha, who is merely reflecting the general hope of Israel in that day, which was the resurrection of the righteous dead (the Creator God’s covenant people) into their God’s good and restored creation, replies by saying, “I know that he will come back to life again in the resurrection at the last day” (11:24).  Jesus’ response to this is to flatly inform Martha that “I am the resurrection and the life.  The one who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and the one who lives and believes in Me will never die” (11:25-26a).  An interesting statement to be sure. 

Jesus punctuates this statement of response with an inquiry, saying, “Do you believe this?” (11:26b)  With this, Jesus confirms both Martha’s belief in Him as Messiah, as well as the Jewish hope in the resurrection of the Creator God’s covenant people into a renewed created order in which the God of Israel has put down death and corruption (as they were most definitely not looking towards a spiritual, dis-embodied, heavenly existence for all eternity), defeating the evil that had been launched into the world at Adam’s fall, all of which was connected with the coming of messiah at the last day.  Martha’s enthusiastic reply is “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ (the Messiah), the Son of God (King of Israel) Who comes into the world” (11:27-parentheses supplied).   

This worldview that Martha presents is that upon which the Apostle Peter will seize in what is generally referred to as his Pentecost “sermon” in the second chapter of Acts.  As a member of the nation of Israel, Peter himself had been looking towards their God’s action in history, which would eventually culminate in the resurrection of the righteous dead into the renewed creation.  The righteous dead were the saints---those who were the Creator God’s covenant people, Israel.  In that tremendous piece of oratory, Peter said, with an ultimate reference to what had been wrought in the world via the Resurrection of Jesus, that “this is what was spoken about through the prophet Joel” (Acts 2:16).  Following that, Peter recounts Joel’s prophecy, which, prior to the Christ-event, was generally understood as a presentation of that which would accompany the resurrection of the righteous dead, Israel, in the last days. 

After quoting Joel, Peter would go on to speak of Jesus, saying “God raised Him up, having released Him from the pains of death, because it was not possible for Him to be held in its power” (2:24).  This was what the people of Israel, Peter’s fellow Jews, were expecting to be said of all of their God’s covenant people in the last days.  Peter makes it clear that the expectation of Israel has been fulfilled in Jesus, and that He had gone down into death and had been raised up, experiencing these things as Israel’s representative.  

Gone After Him

Look, the world has gone after Him. – John 12:19b

This was spoken of Jesus, by the Pharisees.  What was it that precipitated these words?  The Gospel of John ultimately traces this back to the raising of Lazarus from the dead, which is recorded in the eleventh chapter of John.  It was due to this miraculous occurrence that took place at the word of Jesus, that “Many of the Jews…believed in Him” (11:45).  It was in response to that belief that “the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the Council and said, ‘What are we to do?  For this Man performs many signs.  If we let Him go on like this, everyone will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation’.” (11:47-48)  They were concerned that the people would rally around Jesus as the promised Messiah and redeemer and king of Israel, sparking a revolt; and therefore, Rome and its Caesar would have no choice but to come out against Israel and put down the revolution.

This whole Lazarus business was a problem.  It could bring nothing but trouble as far as the chief priests and Pharisees were concerned.  We read that “When the large crowd of the Jews learned that Jesus was there,” that being the town of Bethany, just a short distance from Jerusalem, “they came, not only on account of Him but also to see Lazarus, whom He had raised from the dead” (12:9).  You see, as long as people could see Lazarus, back from the dead, with potentially hundreds and hundreds of eyewitnesses to confirm both that he had been dead and was now alive, there was a risk.  The chief priests and Pharisees did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah, so as far as they could tell, nothing good could come from His being elevated to such a position in the eyes, hearts, and minds of the people.  They decided that an effective way to deal with the problem was to eliminate Lazarus.  “So the chief priests made plans to put Lazarus to death as well, because on account of Him many of the Jews were going away and believing in Jesus” (12:10-11). 

This was evidenced by the fact that “The next day the large crowd that had come to the feast heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem” (12:12).  They went out to Him, shouting “Hosanna!  Blessed is He Who comes in the Name of the Lord, even the King of Israel!” (12:13b)  Thus, the leaders’ fear were confirmed.  The people were being led to follow somebody that was clearly not the promised Messiah that would liberate Israel.  We go on to find out that “The reason why the crowd went to meet Him was that they heard He had done this sign” (12:18), which was that “He called Lazarus out of the tomb and raised him from the dead” (12:17b).  It was all that people could talk about, which is quite understandable.  This is what prompted the Pharisees to say, “Look, the world has gone after Him” (12:19b).

Had the world gone after Him?  Was it not just the people of Israel?  What comes next?  What do we read?  We find that “among those who went up to worship at the feast were some Greeks” (12:20).  These Greeks, Gentiles of course, went to one of Jesus’ disciples and said, “Sir, we wish to see Jesus” (12:21b).  Is this not interesting?  Not only was Jesus to be the Messiah for Israel, but Israel’s Messiah was also to be the ruler of all the nations.  Here, we find that it was more than the Jews going after Him.  It was more than the people of Israel that were going away and believing in Jesus.  There were Gentiles going after Him as well.  These Greeks could very well represent the whole world going after Him.  So what is Jesus’ response to the inquiry of these Gentiles?  Does He say that He does not have time for them?  Does He put them off?  Does He say, “that’s nice to hear”?  No, upon learning that Gentiles were desirous of seeing Him, He says, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified” (12:23b).  It seems that Jesus saw this wish to see Him as a grand part of His mission.    

Sparked by the Grecian inquiry, Jesus launches into a dissertation on dying, bearing fruit, losing and hating one’s life, eternal life, service, following Him, being where He is, and being honored by the Father (12:24-26).  He almost immediately begins speaking of coming to this hour as it related to the purpose of His life and ministry (12:27).  Again, in a series of statements sparked by the Greeks desiring to see Him, Jesus exclaims, “Father, glorify Your Name” (12:28a).  Shortly thereafter, we hear Jesus saying, “Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out” (12:31).  Extending that, not only was the ruler of the world being cast out, but He would shortly be replaced by Jesus, as King and Ruler of the world, by the coming of the Kingdom of God, through His Resurrection.  Jesus says, “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to Myself” (12:32).  He would draw people to Himself though He would undergo the shaming and dishonoring spectacle of crucifixion (which was partially designed to repel people from the crucified one).  He would draw people to Himself through the giving of new life, just as He had done for Lazarus.  He would draw people to Himself, just as He had drawn these Greeks.  From that point on, there would never come a time in which it could not be said of Jesus, because of the power of the Gospel’s proclamation drawing people to Him, “Look, the world has gone after Him.”