Seeing God (part 1)

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. – Matthew 5:8  (NET)

The fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of Matthew, commonly referred to as “The Sermon On the Mount,” begin with a programmatic declaration.  Jesus, in Moses-like fashion, has taken up a position on a mountain in order to deliver news of the Creator God’s will to the people and begins with a set of statements prefaced by “Blessed are”.  By using the term “blessed” while standing on the mountain to speak to the people, Jesus has not only conjured up thoughts of Moses, but He successfully pulls Abraham into His context as well, as the Creator God was specifically going to bless Abraham and his descendants---and through them all the world would also be blessed (Genesis 12:2-3). 

Beginning with “Blessed are,” and with what follows during the course of this particular “sermon,” Jesus offers up a new set of “laws,” if you will, to govern the way in which His covenant people will interact in and for the world that His God is redeeming through Him.  If one thinks of Jesus as offering up a new set of governing principles, such will be a helpful lens through which to view His statement of “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.  I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them” (5:17).  Of course, Jesus also immediately goes on to say “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth pass away not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law until everything takes place” (5:18). 

By speaking of “these things” (5:17) along with saying “heaven and earth pass away” (5:18), Matthew lays the groundwork for the other important and extended discourse from Jesus to be found in his Gospel, which is Jesus’ speech concerning the Temple.  There, in chapters twenty-four through twenty-six of Matthew, Jesus makes repeated use of “these things” (24:2,3,8,33,34,26:1) as well as “Heaven and earth will pass away” (24:35), with the two statements linked and quite clearly connected with the fall of the Temple (“heaven and earth” was a common way of referring to the Temple---the place where heaven and earth meet).  One cannot disconnect Jesus words from chapter five with His words from chapter twenty-four.  Doing so would probably be a mistake. 

Jesus goes on to say “So anyone who breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do so will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever obeys them and teaches others to do so will be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (5:19).  One must be cognizant of the fact that He is talking about that which He has said here with His initial delivery of the “laws” upon which He is about to elaborate.  In that sense then, one could even be justified in looking at the “beatitudes” as something of a new set of “Ten Commandments,” though there are not ten, and though they aren’t really commandments in the traditional sense.  The reader is also put in the position of seeing the beatitudes as the outline of the sermon, with all that follows serving as the explanation of those beatitudes. 

As is known, Jesus begins by saying “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them” (5:3).  Beginning in this manner fits perfectly with what is heard from Matthew prior to this.  First, Matthew introduces John the Baptist and his message, which is “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near” (3:2).  Then, the first report that is received about that message that comes from Jesus, as He insists on the need to “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near” (4:17b).  Matthew follows this up by informing his audience that “Jesus went throughout all of Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the Gospel of the kingdom” (4:23a).  So Jesus beginning the message in which He outlines His vision of the kingdom of heaven with a mention of the kingdom of heaven makes perfect sense.  He is quite consistent in this regard. 

Absalom (part 15)

In the Deuteronomic curses, Moses informs the Creator God’s people that one of the curses that will come upon them for their failure to obey their God’s commands (of which David was certainly guilty) would be that “You will be engaged to a woman and another man will rape her” (Deuteronomy 28:30a).  This is not strictly analogous to what Nathan has told David, or to what it has been suggested that Absalom do, as neither this God’s threat through Nathan nor Ahithophel’s suggestion to Absalom carries with it (at least on the surface) the connotation of violence or force, but it can probably be thought of as being connected closely enough to drive home the point to David that he has violated his God’s commands. 

Additionally, Ahithophel apparently sees a close enough connection in that it will play well into Absalom’s ongoing effort to show himself as a true deliverer in the mold of Moses, thereby allowing Absalom to continue co-opting the most powerful story of Israel’s history for his own purposes.  Furthermore, it adds to Absalom’s claim to be a just man and the one that is used by the covenant God to deliver justice to Israel.  This is especially and strikingly so if Absalom is the means by which the prophecy (judgment) related to cursing that had been delivered to David by Nathan is fulfilled. 

This merely cements the notion that David is no longer fit to be king, while also pointing to the fact that the story of Bathsheba and David, and the oppression and injustice that the story entails, has been made known in Israel.  If it has not, then there is no real point in Absalom engaging in sexual relations with his father’s concubines, unless it is also being used to indicate that just as David has forsaken these wives of his, that he has also forsaken his care of the people of Israel as well. 

The second part of Ahithophel’s response to the request to provide advice to Absalom is to say that “All Israel will hear that you have made yourself repulsive to your father.  Then your followers will be motivated to support you” (2 Samuel 16:21b).  Yes, Ahithophel suggests that this will be viewed by the people as Absalom being willing to be cursed by his very own father, if it indeed means justice for Israel.  This is powerful symbolism.  Absalom will be seen to be willing to bear that pain and shame on behalf of the people, with this becoming a messianic role.  In a society based upon honor and shame, this is a calculated move (though also prophetically fulfilling) to win further sympathy from the people. 

Does this aid Absalom in his desire to be seen as Moses?  Absolutely!  Moses was willing to forsake his father’s (Pharoah’s) house so as to identify himself with the people suffering under the oppression of the king.  Thinking beyond that however, this might also be an attempt to entice David to retaliate against Absalom, who up to this point has not lifted up his hand (nor asked anybody else to lift up their hand) against his father. 

David has left willfully.   He has abandoned his throne and fled from Jerusalem and Absalom has peacefully entered to take that throne.  There has been no bloodshed, violence, or loss of life (except Amnon many years prior, but that has only tangential bearing on the events at hand at that time).  If David now turns and raises sword and spear against Absalom and his supporters, then David is most certainly to be likened to Pharaoh, who allowed Israel to depart from Egypt and from his oppression peacefully, but then had a change of heart and set out to recover the Israelites (and his power) by violent means.    

Only Son (part 20)

It is written that “When Solomon became old, his wives shifted his allegiance to other gods; he was not wholeheartedly devoted to the Lord his God, as his father David had been.  Solomon worshiped the Sidonian goddess Astarte and the detestable Ammonite god Milcom.  Solomon did evil in the Lord’s sight; he did not remain loyal to the Lord…  The Lord was angry with Solomon because he had shifted his allegiance away from the Lord, the God of Israel…  So the Lord said to Solomon, ‘Because you insist on doing these things and have not kept the covenantal rules I gave you, I will surely tear the kingdom away from you’.” (1 Kings 11:4b-5a,9a,11a)  This idolatry would reportedly lead to the division of the kingdom of Israel into north and south, and the dual monarchies that would persist until their respective subjugations and exiles. 

When the Temple of Jerusalem had been dedicated, Israel’s God promised to make it the place of His presence, as it was recognized in the ancient near east that temples were the resting places of the gods (the whole of the creation was the temple of the Creator God, for that is where He was said to have rested).  At the same time, the covenant God issued a warning for Solomon, saying “if you or your sons ever turn away from Me, fail to obey the regulations and rules I instructed you to keep, and decide to serve and worship other gods, then I will remove Israel from the land I have given them, I will abandon this Temple I have consecrated with My presence, and Israel will be mocked and ridiculed among the nations” (9:6-7).  To this was added: “This Temple will become a heap of ruins” (9:8a).  Is not this same warning, given to Solomon, also that which was given to both Adam and Israel? 

These respective sons of God were all given responsibilities, and all three, as the historical narrative would indicate, fall short of those responsibilities through which they were to reflect the glory of the Creator God, and through which their God would gain worship and praise.  Indeed, Adam’s temple (creation) would fall into ruin, subjected to death and decay.  Israel’s temple (it’s promised land) would fall into ruin, subjected to foreign power and exile.  Solomon’s temple (the Temple) would fall into ruin, destroyed by subjugating powers. 

For all of the good that was said to have been done during his reign, it was Solomon’s idolatry that set the nation on course for the eventual destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple at the hands of the Babylonians.  For all of the good that Adam presumably did, in service of his Creator, it was his self-idolatry that brought destruction into the world.  For all of the good that Israel had done, as they carried out at least a portion of their God’s commands in taking and subduing their promised land, it was their idolatry that routinely and repeatedly and finally brought about destruction. 

Before coming to that however, Solomon is shown to have served his Lord well.  As was said, kingdoms paid tribute to Israel, as the Creator God blessed Israel for its faithfulness.  “People from all nations came to hear Solomon’s display of wisdom; they came from all the kings of the earth who heard about his wisdom” (4:34).  The queen of Sheba was one of those that reportedly came to Solomon, having heard of his reputation.  It is said that when she heard him and saw all of his wealth, that “she was amazed” (10:5b).  She would go on to say, “Because of the Lord’s eternal love for Israel, He made you king so you could make just and right decisions” (10:9b).  This hearkens to the words of Jesus.  Is it not possible to hear echoes of these amazed words from the queen when Jesus says, “For this is the way God loved the world: He gave His one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16)?