Seeing God (part 8)

If it has been adequately established, both historically from the Scriptures and the tradition that they inform and by which they are informed and with which Jesus would have been familiar, as well as within the context of the sermon on the mount, that purity of heart is related to money (treasure) and its use, it is possible to then go on to discern, based on that understanding, what it might mean to “see God.” 

To determine what this means, it is necessary to look outside the sermon on the mount, realizing that the sermon of chapters five, six, and seven serve as the foundation of what is going to be seen and hear from Jesus throughout the remainder of Matthew’s Gospel.  That is a completely understandable and plausible assertion, as when one read a story that is presented in narrative form, as Matthew’s presentation of Jesus most certainly is, the reader knows that the things that are seen and heard and read early in the story will inform an understanding of what comes later, just as what comes later generally allows a reader to interpret that which has already been encountered. 

With that said, it is possible to turn to the twenty-fifth chapter of Matthew.  In the thirty-first verse of this chapter, Jesus is heard speaking.  He says “When the Son of Man comes in His glory and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne.”  Now it is obvious that Jesus is here speaking of Himself.  Prior to this, Matthew presents Jesus speaking of Himself as the Son of Man on twenty-three occasions.  After this usage, there will be an additional four, all found in the twenty-sixth chapter, thus making for a total of twenty-eight self-references by Jesus as the Son of Man. 

When Jesus speaks of the Son of Man in conjunction with coming in glory, angels, and a throne, He is making explicit reference to the Son of Man of Daniel chapter seven.  Looking to Daniel, one finds “I was watching in the night visions, And with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man was approaching.  He went up to the Ancient of Days and was escorted before Him.  To Him was given ruling authority, honor, and sovereignty.  All peoples, nations, and language groups were serving Him.  His authority is eternal and will not pass away.  His kingdom will not be destroyed” (7:13-14). 

When one hears reference to the Son of Man, especially at this juncture in Matthew’s work (though really throughout the entirety of the work), the reference demands to be heard in the context of and in connection with the kingdom of heaven.  This Son of Man is given rule over all.  He rules over the kingdom of the Creator God, which is an interchangeable term with kingdom of heaven, with both meaning the same thing (the Creator God’s will being done on earth as in heaven, through the agency of covenant members).  Since it is the Creator God Himself that is understood to ultimately rule His kingdom, then it is quite safe to say (though this probably needs far more qualifications and explanations), that the Son of Man, though not the Ancient of Days, and though He is not necessarily supposed to be looked to as “God the Father” (to use a Trinitarian term), is of a piece with the Creator God. 

Naturally, as the Matthean narrative is compiled from a post-Resurrection perspective in which Jesus is worshiped as the Son of God and the Messiah (the manifestation of the Creator God in the flesh), the term “Son of Man” is quite naturally and overtly bestowed with divine attributes.  Put simply, if Jesus is understood to be the manifestation of the Creator God, and if He calls Himself the Son of Man, then the Son of Man can be understood to be the Creator God.

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.