Hot, Cold & Lukewarm (part 5)

Having established the close connection between Colossae and Laodicea, this does not account for the use of “cold” in conjunction with the city.  It is the presence of Colossae’s cold, fresh water streams that would have supplied this descriptive title to the city.  Laodicea was located to the southeast of Colossae, and to the northeast of Hierapolis, near the Lycus River.  This meant that the waters of Colossae (colder because Colossae was situated at the foothills of a mountain), flowed down towards Laodicea. 

The water, quite naturally, would lose some of its coolness as it flowed, rising a few degrees in temperature by the time it reached Laodicea.  On the other hand, the water from Hierapolis had to be brought uphill, which explains the aqueduct.  That water from the hot springs of Hierapolis would, of course, cool down as it traveled the aqueduct to reach Laodicea, though it would still be prized for its healing qualities even if it had fallen in temperature. 

In the case of both the water from Colossae and the water from Hierapolis, by the time it reached Laodicea, the water would be lukewarm.  Thus, the rhetorical effect is preserved, with hot, cold, and lukewarm all making reference to water.  Furthermore, in conceptual terms, the city that would be located roughly halfway between the hot city and the cold city could easily be thought of as the lukewarm city (halfway between hot and cold).  Thus Laodicea would come to be referred to as the lukewarm city, with this being common knowledge for all of the residents of the region, with nary a thought related to the spiritual tenor of the city. 

Because of the interesting geographical positioning, and the unique feature of the water supplies to Laodicea, the cities came to be linked together in common usage as the “triangle cities.”  So if it was common for the cities to be linked and identified together, and if Paul links the cities in his letter, why should one be surprised if Jesus, communicating through the author of Revelation, also links the cities, doing so by taking advantage of common nicknames that were applied to them? 

Is it warranted to think that these highly spiritualized (today and in popular ways of thinking) terms are little more than nicknames that are meant to aid in identifying the real problem within the church in Laodicea, rather than an indicator of those problems?  Why not?  Once it is established that it is not possible to revert back to thinking that hot, cold, and lukewarm are to be applied in spiritual terms or to spiritual state, then it is possible to move towards a far more proper understanding of what Jesus is attempting to communicate to this, one of His churches. 

Is it warranted to think that these were simply nicknames or shorthand references for those cities?  Again, why not?  This is not without precedence today.  Much like what was true of the utilization of terminology in context and according to then-current understanding in order to rightly understand what is being communicated (as in the case of Nimrod), most people ready make these types of applications such that they become second nature, which should cause an observer to realize that thinking about the letter to Laodicea in this way is not wholly unique.  Individuals freely and casually operate within their own historical and cultural contexts, so imagining that men and women of the first century also operated in such ways is not exactly far-fetched. 

Acts, Jealousy & Honor (part 2)

Returning to the second chapter, one sees that this type of activity occurred in association with the fact that “Every day they continued to gather together by common consent in the Temple courts, breaking bread from house to house, sharing their food with glad and humble hearts” (Acts 2:46).  The conclusion of this report speaks to the effects of this regular gathering, which allowed the body of Christ to learn about and meet needs as they were “praising God and having the good will of all the people” (2:47a).  This fueled the growth of the church, as “the Lord was adding to their number every day those who were being saved” (2:47b).  Hearing these words, it would only be with some difficulty that one could separate the saving of people with the distribution that sought to meet the needs of all, without discrimination. 

Echoing the ministry of Jesus, chapter three sees the healing of a lame man at the gates of the Temple, with the accompanying “astonishment and amazement” (3:10) of those who witnessed the result of the healing.  This provides yet another opportunity for the public proclamation of Jesus as the Messiah, crucified and resurrected as the harbinger of the general resurrection, the assertion that Jesus was and is the long-awaited prophet like Moses, and a reminder of the all-important Abrahamic covenant by which the people largely defined themselves, along with its fulfillment in Jesus and in the movement that bore His name. 

This leads to the record of the opening of chapter four, by which Luke informs the reader that “While Peter and John were speaking to the people, the priests and the commander of the Temple guard and the Sadducees came up to them, angry because they were teaching the people and announcing in Jesus the resurrection of the dead.  So they seized them and put them in jail until the next day” (4:1-3).  This leads into the first examination of the disciples before the leaders of the people, and the order to discontinue their revolutionary proclamation of Jesus as Lord and His kingdom as present.  Clearly, the issue at hand was power, and those in power were threatened by the upstart from Galilee, though He had been crucified at their instigation, viewed as being accursed because He had been hung on a tree, and had been subject to the scorning and the horror of the greatest shame. 

Lest one believe that power was not the issue, the disciples, via the author providing a sober reminder by relaying the response of the disciples and their understanding of the threat that their growing movement had become, say “Why do the nations rage, and the peoples plot foolish things?  The kings of the earth stood together, and the rulers assembled together, against the Lord and against His Christ” (4:25b-26).

With considerations of power come considerations of the all-important issue of honor in the ancient world---a world in which one’s status was delineated by conceptions of honor and shame.  Though honor would not necessarily have power as a compatriot (as the honorable would not necessarily be the powerful), power practically demanded honor.  Power, be it religious or political (remembering that the world of the disciples’ era did not neatly divide into the religious and the political, but operated in a holistic fashion in which all areas of life overlapped and intertwined), was nothing without honor.  Power was not power without honor.  Without public honor to accompany it, power would be empty and pointless. 

Timothy & Countering The Culture (part 2)

In the fifth chapter of Mark, Jesus heals a demoniac by casting a “Legion” of demons out of him and into a herd of pigs.  At the conclusion of this story, it is reported that “As He was getting into the boat the man who had been demon-possessed asked if he could go with Him.  But Jesus did not permit him to do so.  Instead, He said to him, ‘Go to your home and to your people and tell them what the Lord has done for you, that He had mercy on you.’” (Mark 5:18-19) 

At first glance, it appears that Jesus is in fact telling this man to engage in activity that would be standard for a client, that of telling others about the benefaction of a patron.  However, on second glance, Jesus, as was customary, is pointing away from Himself and to the Creator God of Israel as the source of healing.  At the same time, the Gospel author wants the reader to see the way in which Jesus act of mercy is received against the known background of the patron-client dynamic, as he goes on to write “So he went away and began to proclaim in the Decapolis what Jesus had done for him, and all were amazed” (5:20).  This would have been standard practice for a client.  Though it has not been requested nor demanded of him, he has made Jesus his patron.  Though the earthly Jesus clearly did not desire this, especially when considering His constant insistence on keeping His activities or identity secret, in a cosmic sense this is entirely appropriate.

The story of “Blind Bartimaeus,” as recorded in the tenth chapter of Mark, also fits well into the patron-client dynamic.  Commencing with verse forty-six: “They came to Jericho.  As Jesus and His disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho, Bartimaeus the son of Timaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the road.  When he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to shout, ‘Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!’” (10:46-47)  By this, Bartimaeus is attempting to gain Jesus’ attention and ultimately His patronage, offering Jesus praise, requesting mercy, and so attempting to take the position of client. 

Reading further then, it is said that “Many scolded him to get him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, ‘Son of David, have mercy on me!’  Jesus stopped and said, ‘Call him.’  So they called the blind man and said to him, ‘Have courage!  Get up!  He is calling you.’  He threw off his cloak, jumped up, and came to Jesus.  Then Jesus said to him, ‘What do you want me to do for you?’  The blind man replied, “Rabbi, let me see again.’  Jesus said to him, ‘Go, your faith has healed you.’  Immediately he regained his sight and followed him on the road” (10:48-52). 

In this story, Bartimaeus is undeterred by the scolding.  He desires Jesus’ patronage.  He is willing to become Jesus’ client.  He throws off his cloak (likely his only cloak), thus signifying a complete reliance on this patron (further debasing himself as a nod to the honor of the potential patron).  He also uses the honorific title of “Rabbi.”  Jesus’ response is not what one would expect from a patron, in that He does not take credit for the healing, but rather, Jesus tells the man that he has been healed by his own faith (fides, pistis - loyalty).  The now healed man, desirous of showing forth his loyalty and of having a role in increasing Jesus’ public honor, takes up the position of a client, by following Jesus on the road. 

Speaking In Tongues (part 2)

The very first recorded cases of that which can be termed as glossolalia, or ecstatic speech attributed to the activity of the gods upon a believer, goes as far back as 1100 B.C.  On that occasion, it was a worshiper of the Egyptian God Amun that was said to have attracted attention to himself through making sounds in a strange, ecstatic tongue.  He reported himself to have been possessed by the god.  Seven hundred years later, the famous Greek philosopher Plato demonstrated that he was quite well acquainted with the phenomenon of speaking in tongues, as he made reference to several families who habitually practiced ecstatic speech, with prayers and utterings offered as they were supposedly possessed by the spirit of their gods. 

Plato would also go on to point out that these practices had even been said to have brought physical healing to those who engaged in them.  Accordingly, and because they had no reason to presume otherwise, Plato and those contemporary with him casually and confidently asserted that these occurrences were in fact caused by some type of divine inspiration.  It was his suggestion that the god simply took possession of the mind during this state, inspiring the individual so possessed with utterances that he could neither understand nor interpret. 

In the century prior to the coming of the Christ, the poet Virgil, speaking of the Sybilline priestess that lived on the island of Delos, described her activity of speaking in ecstatic tongues.  This was explained by her being in some type of mysterious union with the god Apollo.  This union was reported to have happened while she meditated in a haunted cave, amidst what was described as the eerie sounds of the wind as it played strange music through the narrow crevices of the rocks. 

Several of the mystery religions that inhabited the Greco-Roman world in which the church first developed also recorded the phenomenon of speaking in tongues.  These include the Persian cult of Mithra, the Egypt-based cult of Osiris, and the Dionysian, Eulusinian, and Orphic cults of Macedonia, Thrace, and Greece.  Lucian of Samosata, a reliable historian of the ancient world that lived in the second century, to whom the church owes a debt because of his records concerning the meal practices of the Greco-Roman world, described an example of glossolalia in one of his written works.  In it, the ecstatic utterance was performed by somebody described as a roaming believer in the Syrian goddess that went by the name of “June” (the month is named after her). 

Focusing on Corinth, the prevalence of cults that spoke in tongues, especially in what is the wider geographic area by which the city of Corinth was bounded, informs an observer that there would be a high degree of familiarity with the practice within the city.  This becomes especially poignant if one was to consider the geographical and cultural position in which Corinth was situated at the time of Christ, and a short time later, of Paul. 

Experts In The Law (part 2)

Shortly thereafter, the experts in the law are again encountered, as Luke reports that “the Pharisees and their experts in the law complained to His disciples, saying ‘Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?’” (5:30)  On the heels of Jesus presenting Himself as a viable alternative, and indeed even a replacement for the Temple as He also presents Himself as a messiah-figure with all of the expectations that come with such a presentation, this criticism of actions in relation to Jesus’ table fellowship is offered. 

The statement that follows Jesus’ response, which was “John’s disciples frequently fast and pray, and so do the disciples of the Pharisees, but yours continue to eat and drink” (5:33), is also critical of Jesus’ meal practice and His influence, and is a part of the preliminary efforts to discredit this man who seems to be gaining a problematic standing amongst the people (in the eyes of their leaders).  This, at least, is what Luke appears to be making an effort to portray. 

Moving on to the sixth chapter, the seventh verse states that “The experts in the law and the Pharisees watched Jesus closely to see if He would heal on the Sabbath, so that they could find a reason to accuse Him.”  In the twenty-first verse of the fifth chapter, Luke reports what the experts in the law, along with the Pharisees, were thinking.  In the thirtieth and thirty-third verses, voice is given to their thoughts, and Luke records what are essentially rabbinic challenges through which the experts in the law and the Pharisees seek to gain the upper hand on Jesus in what is going to be an ongoing activity of thrust and parry throughout the course of Luke’s Gospel, between Jesus and those who challenged Him. 

Now, with these words from early in the sixth chapter, Luke has moved his hearers from an implied understanding of a desire to discredit Jesus through the common and well-understood means of rabbinic challenge (part of the ongoing honor competition), to an open effort to find a basis for accusation against Him.  This is amplified by Luke’s report that, following Jesus’ response challenge to them and His subsequent healing on the Sabbath, and what appears to be Jesus’ victory in the eyes of the people in this particular challenge (based on the response that Luke records), that “they were filled with mindless rage and began debating with one another what they would do to Jesus” (6:11).  

The ninth chapter sees the next use of the phrase.  This time, it is on the lips of Jesus, as He is heard saying “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests, and experts in the law, and be killed, and on the third day be raised” (9:22).  This comes on the heels of Jesus proffering two questions to His disciples, which were “Who do the crowds say that I am?” (9:18b) and “who do you say that I am?” (9:20a), along with Peter’s response of “The Christ of God” (9:20b). 

Peter’s response is better translated as “the Messiah of God,” which, based upon the myriad of beliefs concerning what it is that the messiah would do, included (based on the way that previous messianic claimants had gone about their business) the throwing off of Rome’s yoke.  Peter’s confession is a highly charged political statement.  Owing to that, widespread and public voicing of the claim could lead to an open and premature conflict with the governing Roman authorities.

John's Inquiry (part 1 of 3)

Now when John heard in prison about the deeds Christ had done, he sent his disciples to ask a question: “Are you the one who is to come, or should we look for another?” – Matthew 11:3-4  (NET)

In light of the flurry of first-century messianic figures in Israel, the question that John asks his disciples to put to Jesus is one that is both legitimate and understandable.  Just like a great number member of the nation of Israel in that day, as Israel stood under Roman occupation, John seems to have carried, based on his message, some expectation that Israel’s God was going to break in to history through His Messiah, to go about establishing His kingdom.  To John, the deeds of Jesus, in the areas of healing sickness and disease, casting out demons and giving of sight to the blind, looked very much like the Scriptural portents that indicated what types of events would accompany the time (and the person or persons---messiah figure) through which Israel’s God would become King.  A the same time, the words that Jesus was speaking, and the way in which He was going about building a following, differed from much of the expectations of the messiah that had been created by Scriptural interpretation, Israel’s sense of itself, and the actions of the previous would-be messiahs. 

In consideration of these things, and though some do, we should find that there is absolutely no justifiable reason to chastise John for asking the question of Jesus.  Frankly, it would have been the question on the minds and on the lips of nearly everybody with whom Jesus came into contact.  Surely, John was not the only one to ask this question of Jesus’ messianic status; but Matthew, so as to be able to provide a context for further statements about John that were to come from Jesus, puts the question into the mouth of John ahead of all other questioners. 

How does Jesus respond to the question?  Does he send John’s disciples back to him with a stern rebuke?  Does Jesus say, “How dare you ask such a thing?”  No, of course He doesn’t.  Considering the subversive nature of His ministry---as He appears to be cutting across all of the religious and political movements within Israel in that day (that would seem to be at least one of the ideas to be garnered from the Gospel presentations of Jesus), and also considering the fate of every single person that had claimed the status of messiah for themselves (death on a cross at the hands of the Romans)---Jesus answers in the only way possible.  He offers a gentle answer, albeit indirect but in the affirmative, saying “Yes, I am He.”  How does He do this?  He says, “Go tell John what you hear and see: The blind see, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news proclaimed to them” (11:4b-6). 

Though we do not utilize Luke to interpret Matthew, as the authors had different intentions for their biographical offerings, looking to other portraits of Jesus does allow us to get a better sense of the way in which Jesus was understood in His own time and relatively shortly thereafter.  Of course, we also consider that Matthew and Luke had a common source (often thought to be the Gospel of Mark) that provided the underlying structure of their own works.  So if we look to the Gospel of Luke in consideration of the response of Jesus in Matthew, how do we hear and see Jesus announcing Himself?  While in the synagogue in Nazareth, he read from a scroll, saying “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to proclaim good news to the poor.  He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and the regaining of sight to the blind, to set free those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (4:18-19).  He then added, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled even as you heard it being read” (4:21).  Naturally, that sounds somewhat similar to the answer given by Jesus in answer to John’s quite reasonable question.  Of course, in those words, Jesus was reading from the sixty-first chapter of Isaiah---reading the words that were possibly expected to be found in the mouth of God of Israel’s Messiah---and applying those words to Himself. 

We can presume that John, with a messiah-expectant mindset (especially in light of the new exodus movement that he was leading---an exodus is accompanied by a deliverer/redeemer), would have understood the implications of this statement reported by Matthew just as well as did the people that heard Jesus that day in Nazareth (as reported by Luke).  On that day in Nazareth, after Jesus added a few more words of explanation, and when those words that indicated the direction of His messianic program did not necessarily appeal to His group of hearers, “the people in the synagogue were filled with rage” (4:28b).  It is with that in mind that we can return to what Jesus said to John, and perhaps better understand why it is that Jesus, after providing His subtle answer in confirmation of the substance of John’s inquiry, adds “Blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me” (11:6). 

Matthew's Centurion (part 2 of 2)

In all of the uses of “Lord” that have been encountered up to this point in Matthew’s Gospel, the Greek term that is used is “Kurie.”  We see this in Matthew 7:21, Matthew 7:22, and in Matthew 8:2, as it used four times by Jesus, and then once by the leper that Jesus heals.  Then we come to the Roman centurion in Capernaum.  He is aware of this man Jesus.  He sees the crowds following Him.  He has most likely heard of Jesus’ usage of the term “Kurie, Kurie” in reference to Himself, along with His associating that usage with entering “the kingdom of heaven” and His “Father in heaven” (7:21).  As a good, Roman soldier, loyal to Caesar, he should be casting a suspicious eye towards this fellow called Jesus, and be ready to arrest Him for His claims.

So what does the centurion do?  When Jesus enters Capernaum, the centurion “came forward to Him, appealing to Him” (8:5b).  What did he say to Jesus?  How did he greet Jesus?  He said, “Lord” (8:6a).  This is more than just a sign of respect.  What reason would this centurion have to show Jesus such respect?  This usage of “Lord” is incredibly worthy of our attention.  Why?  Because in the Roman empire, in the first century, it was Caesar who was Lord.  Caesar was “Kurie.”  Not only would this be true for the vast majority of the people under his dominion, but it would be especially true of a solider of the empire.  This solider, however, having heard about Jesus, having likely heard of the cleansing of the leper, having heard of the way that the leper approached Him by calling Jesus Lord, and recognizing the power to heal and the connection of that power to the telling of words of the kingdom that he has heard, comes to Jesus and says, “Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering terribly” (8:6). 

How does Jesus respond to this Roman centurion, this Gentile?  Well, He responds the way that we have been trained to think He would respond.  He says, “I will come and heal him” (8:7).  Does He respond in that way simply because it is in Jesus’ nature to heal, or is it something deeper?  Does Jesus respond in that manner because the centurion calls Him “Lord”?  Should we equate Jesus being called “Lord” with Jesus’ own preaching of the kingdom, which is invariably connected with His performance of healing?  In essence, by calling Jesus “Lord,” this centurion preaches the Gospel, and does so in a revolutionary way, especially as we consider the context in which his statement is made, in which it is probably quite likely that the only person that this centurion had ever referred to as “Lord” up to that point, and in that way, was Caesar himself. 

Making his reply to Jesus, the centurion said, “Lord, I am not worthy to have You come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed” (8:8).  From there, he goes on to speak about authority and commands and servants.  Clearly, this centurion understood the nature of power.  In addition to that, it is becoming increasingly obvious that he knew of the cleansing of the leper, because in that instance, Jesus had spoken and the leper had been cleansed.  With this understanding of power and authority, and by his calling Jesus “Lord,” he knew that Jesus need merely speak the word for healing to take place. 

Here, it must be said that “Jesus is Lord” is the message of the Gospel.  The Gospel announcement, as Paul would say, is the power of God to salvation.  Salvation entails a rescue and a deliverance from all those things that are the effects of the failure of the divine image bearers to rightly bear that image, and sickness and disease are numbered among those effects.  Recognition of Jesus as Lord is salvation (joining with the covenant people of God so as to share in the prescribed responsibility to be a blessing).  In that moment, we can say that, rightly understood, the centurion and his servant experienced God’s salvation through Christ.  They experienced His eternal life---the renewal and restoration that Jesus brings as the in-breaking of the age of new creation to come---and they did so because the centurion called Jesus “Lord.”  It is no different for us.    

We read that “When Jesus heard this, He marveled and said to those who followed Him, ‘Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith’.” (8:10)  What a remarkable statement!  Jesus makes the point that the first overt recognition of Him as Lord, and of the power of His kingdom, came from a Gentile, and not from a member of the people of Israel.  By extension, this would indicate that the leper that was cleansed was a Gentile as well, which we can well understand, as Jesus was in “Galilee of the Gentiles”.  After making this crucial point, Jesus goes on to say “I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven” (8:11).  Almost immediately, Jesus embarks upon the usage of covenant language, referencing the covenant first given to Abraham, and then passed along to Isaac, and to Jacob, and then to Israel, that through that covenant all of the families of the earth would be blessed.  Jesus was fulfilling the covenant, according to God’s covenant faithfulness, in extending the blessings of that covenant to the Gentiles, by being the light of the world that had been God’s intention for His people Israel. 

Israel had failed in that, though all they truly had to do in order to be that light was refrain from idolatry, keep God’s Sabbaths, and reverence His sanctuary (which, in the end and according to the Scriptures, would look a great deal like caring for orphans and widows).  That had proven to be too much, so they experienced cursing and exile and dominion by foreign nations.  This was designed to get them to return to the covenant and be that light to all nations for the glory of their God.  Instead, they had ostracized the Gentiles.  They had separated and isolated themselves from the Gentiles.  They had risen up violently against their Gentile rulers, and would eventually demand that Jesus do the same if He was to have their support.  It is for this reason that Jesus follows up His invoking of the covenant and its inclusion of Gentiles, by saying “while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness.  In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (8:12).  Indeed, this is the lot and end of all that fail to live up to the terms of the covenant that Christ delivered, which is to believe the Gospel and to preach the Gospel, so that God might be glorified.

Jesus goes on to say to the centurion, “Go; let it be done for you as you have believed” (8:13a).  It is written that “the servant was healed at that very moment” (8:13b).  What was it that was believed?  Why was the servant healed?  Did healing take place because the centurion believed that Jesus could heal?  Absolutely.  More importantly, it was the belief in Who Jesus was, and the proclamation of Jesus as Lord, and its associated proclamation of the kingdom of heaven, that was the more crucial aspect of belief.  That was what showed forth faith and its associated allegiance.  That was what brought the healing.    

Matthew's Centurion (part 1 of 2)

When He entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to Him, appealing to Him, “Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering terribly.”  And He said to him, “I will come and heal him.”  But the centurion replied, “Lord, I am not worthy to have You come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed.” – Matthew 8:7-8  (ESV)

At first glance, this passage does not strike us as one of the most significant passages in the Gospel of Matthew, but it should.  There is much to be learned here, especially as it relates to Jesus’ mission, the message of the Gospel, the proclamation of the Kingdom of heaven, God’s covenant faithfulness, and healing. 

Just before we reach this story of the centurion, we read in the seventh chapter of Matthew, Jesus saying, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of My Father in heaven’.” (7:21).  Jesus follows that with another “Lord, Lord” reference, saying, “On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your Name, and cast out demons in Your Name, and do many mighty works in Your Name?’  And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness’.” (7:22-23)  Those words come near the close of what is generally referred to as “the sermon on the mount.” 

Shortly thereafter, right after Jesus has made these “Lord, Lord” statements, we read “When He came down from the mountain…a leper came to Him and knelt before Him, saying, ‘Lord, if You will, You can make me clean’.  And Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, saying, ‘I will; be clean’.  And immediately his leprosy was cleansed” (8:1-3).  One thing we can notice here, is that contrary to Jesus becoming unclean by touching the leper, Jesus actually makes the leper clean through His touch.  This is contrary to the declarations of Leviticus concerning leprosy.  This would not be looked upon as insignificant by those that viewed this encounter, nor by those that would hear or read about this encounter.  Apart from that, the thing of which we should take greater notice is that, for the first time in the Gospel of Matthew, a person has come to Jesus and called Him “Lord”; and this has followed closely on the heels of the ominous “Lord, Lord” statements that were spoken on the mountain.  Additionally, not only did the leper call Jesus “Lord,” but he also knelt before Jesus while using the title.

When Jesus gave His “Lord, Lord” warnings, what was missing from the words of prophesying, casting out demons, and doing many mighty works, was a kneeling before Jesus, in recognition that He was truly Lord.  This might cause us to reflect on what Paul would write in Philippians, perhaps reflecting on the Jesus tradition of which he was aware and that was circulating in his day prior to the composition of the Gospel records, “that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (2:10-11).  The other thing missing was the confession of Jesus Christ as Lord “to the glory of the God the Father,” as the prophesying, the casting out, and the doing of works was proceeded by the words “did we not.” 

In the fourth chapter of Matthew, we read that Jesus “went all throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the Gospel of the Kingdom and healing every disease and affliction among the people” (4:23).  The Gospel, of course, is intimately connected with the Kingdom, because the Gospel message is the proclamation of Jesus as King of kings and Lord of lords.  It is only shortly before this that we read of Jesus first saying “the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand” (3:17b).  We must note that He first made this proclamation, not in Jerusalem, but in “Galilee of the Gentiles” (3:15b).  We also take note of the fact that this is also the first mention of healing in the Gospels, and it is bound up with Jesus’ preaching of the Kingdom of Heaven.  As it relates to the leper of whom we have already learned, we can make the connection that his recognition of Jesus as “Lord,” and his kneeling before Him as Lord, as though he recognized Jesus as the Sovereign of a Kingdom, is what brought the healing, as the life of the age to come (the new creation, in which there is to be no sickness and no disease), breaks into the world where Jesus is recognized as Lord.  In the leper’s words and actions, the Gospel of the Kingdom was preached. 

This interaction with the leper occurs just before Jesus enters Capernaum and encounters the centurion.  Great crowds had followed Him down from the mountain (8:1), and undoubtedly, many had witnessed the interaction with the leper.  Though Jesus had told the leper “See that you say nothing to anyone” (8:4a), it is quite likely that, due to the crowds, the news had spread rather quickly.  This information would have come to the ears of a Roman centurion, who would be charged with keeping peace and order.  A man with large crowds following Him, about Whom such things was being reported, would put the centurion on alert.  This makes his interaction with Jesus all the more interesting.      

Immediately (part 3 of 4)

Creating an undoubtedly great stir, Jesus will go on to feed what is referred to as “the five thousand.”  Rather than staying to bask in the glory that this would bring, “Immediately He made His disciples get into the boat and go before Him to the other side” (6:45a) of the lake, as He went up on the mountain to pray.  From that vantage point, Jesus was able to see His disciples struggling against the wind.  He was going to pass by them, walking on the water, but changed His mind when they saw that His presence terrified them greatly.  Sensing this, “immediately He spoke to them and said, ‘Take heart; it is I.  Do not be afraid’.” (6:50b)  Surely, this is more of the immediate message of the Gospel. 

Over and over, as the Gospel stories proceed apace, through Jesus, with His words and actions, the author tells us “Your King is here.  All has been put under my feet.  I have conquered death and disease.  I have promised and delivered to you complete salvation (a joining with the Creator God by joining with the covenant people through belief in Jesus as King), redeeming you from the cursed corruption of this world through your faithful proclamation of me as Lord and subsequent allegiance to Me.  By the power of the long-hoped for resurrection of the dead that in-breaks the world here and now, I share with you the life of the age to come.  What need you fear?”  Just as Jesus got into the boat with His disciples, we join with Him (union) through the believing proclamation of the Gospel in both word and deed.  Jesus was now with them when they reached the other side of the lake, and “the people immediately recognized Him and ran about the whole region and began to bring the sick people on their beds to wherever they heard He was” (6:54b-55).  Yes, the very presence of Jesus, which now is manifested through the preaching of His Gospel and action according to it, communicates the same power.

Jesus went to the region of Tyre and Sidon, to the house of a Syrophoenician woman.  He did not want anyone to know that He was there, but this was an untenable desire.  “Immediately a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit heard of Him and came and fell down at His feet” (7:25).  Because this Gentile woman showed no delay, neither did Jesus.  Her daughter was relieved of demon oppression.  Jesus returned from the region of Tyre, making His way back to the Decapolis.  Here, he conducts His famous feeding of the four thousand.  Upon its completion, as before, He did not remain with the people, to bask in the adulation of the masses, but “immediately He got into the boat with His disciples and went to the district of Dalmanutha (or Magadan/Magdala)” (8:10).  There was always more to be done.  Yes, in the power of the eternal life in which we share by the faithful allegiance to the Gospel (Jesus is Lord), there is always more to be done in His service, as the Christ works through us to extend redemption and covenant participation to His people and His creation. 

Jesus would be transfigured, and seen on the mountain with Moses and Elijah.  He came down from the mountain to find a crowd with some of His disciples.  “Immediately, all the crowd, when they saw Him, were greatly amazed and ran up to Him and greeted Him” (9:15).  A boy with an unclean spirit was brought before Him, “and immediately it convulsed the boy” (9:20b).  Upon this, Jesus makes mention of the requirement of belief upon Him for healing to take place.  “Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, ‘I believe; help my unbelief!’” (9:24)  With confession of unbelief that included a revelation of the belief of the father, Jesus responded with deliverance, immediately. 

In time, Jesus would encounter a blind man, who asked for the recovery of his sight.  With his request, the blind man revealed his understanding of Who Jesus was, having called him the “Son of David” (10:48), recognizing Him as King of Israel.  This was the very manifestation of saving faith (faith that binds a man to the covenant God, people, and purpose) and Jesus responds to this gifting, saying “Go your way; your faith has made you well” (10:52a).  “And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way” (10:52b).  This formerly blind man, demonstrating the faith to believe the Gospel, desired nothing more than to follow his Lord and Master, his King.  Such is the inherent power of the message of the Gospel.  It is the power of God unto salvation.