Mark, A Meal, A Leper & The Kingdom Of God (part 3)

As Mark is written within the confines of the early church that found itself immersed within much knowledge of the historical Jesus, along with resounding and powerful traditions about Him that would clearly have weighed heavily upon them in the area of practice, it is right to call attention to the marked contrast between what can be observed here in Mark and what one finds presented in a situation in the Gospel of John (which is also written during a time and within a community steeped in first-hand knowledge of Jesus). 

In John, after Jesus’ arrest and initial questioning by Annas and Caiaphas, “they brought Jesus from Caiaphas to the Roman governor’s residence” (John 18:28a).  The author then reports that “They did not go into the governor’s residence” (18:28c).  Why did they not go in?  It was “so they would not be ceremonially defiled, but could eat the Passover meal” (18:28d).  A stark contrast indeed.  In Mark, Jesus dines with a leper, sitting on his furniture and sharing a table with him in complete disregard of established custom, clearly communicating truths about the kingdom of the Creator God and about the nature of His own rule of that kingdom through what He was knowingly and consciously doing. 

When these two accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry include such stories, both are making points that are not easily dismissed.  One account represents separation and exclusion, whereas the other highlights inclusion --- pointing to a highly necessary aspect of ecclesiology.  John’s account of a concern to not become ritually impure before the commencement of Passover is useful because it points up the high level of seriousness with which such things were taken at the time.  For the sake of rabbinic credibility, and especially that of a rabbi that carried and stoked messianic expectations, issues of impurity would have been a concern. 

With no real record of time, and no textual sense of time between His certain contracting of ceremonial impurity while at this house and the celebration of Passover with His disciples, it would appear to His fellow members of the house of Israel that Jesus has, in fact, presided over a Passover (His last supper) celebration while he found Himself in a state of impurity.  With what one must presume is a well-founded grasp of this information, Mark demonstrates a complete lack of concern in this area, and instead presents this picture of Jesus that is stocked with a great deal of implications for those, both inside and outside of ethnic and national Israel, who call or will come to call Him Lord. 

There are other quite significant points to be made.  One of those points has to do with the fact that Jesus has chosen to dine in this particular house.  Calling upon the Gospel of John for assistance, one is reminded that Bethany is the place of Lazarus’ residence.  In chapter twelve of John, it appears that the reader is presented with a story (unless there was another story about Jesus being anointed with costly oil, the action being criticized as wasteful, and Jesus criticizing the criticizers and commending the “waste”) that is based upon the same meal as that which is reported in the fourteenth chapter of Mark. 

Invitations (part 1)

…The the master of the household was furious and said to his slave, “Go out quickly to the streets and alleys of the city, and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind, and the lame.”  Then the slave said, “Sir, what you instructed has been done, and there is still room.”  So the master said to his slave, “Go out to the highways and the country roads and urge people to come in, so that my house will be filled.” – Luke 14:21b-23  (NET)

In Luke fourteen, Jesus tells a parable of a great banquet.  A man had planned the event, invitations had been sent, requisite preparations had been carried out, and food and wine had been prepared in accordance with the number of people that had accepted the invitation.  Though it is not necessary to take up space setting up the context for this banquet, what can be seen, contextually, is that this parable of the great banquet is set within Jesus’ own attendance at a meal to which He had been invited.  Jesus’ presence at a meal closely follows His speaking about, in chapter thirteen, the great messianic banquet that will be hosted by Israel’s God. 

Luke, as an excellent story-teller within what is a culture that communicates its stories primarily in oral/aural fashion, builds on that which comes before, and never leaves Jesus’ words unexplained.  This, of course, is why one can never look at portions of the Gospel in isolation, and why, in order to have any authentic and plausible meaning, the stories in each of the Gospel narratives must be understood in relation to the multiple layers of narrative on offer as part of the whole.    

Rather than get into interpreting the details of the banquet or even explaining the nuances of the story, this study will attempt to place the banquet within Luke’s narrative of Jesus, which stretches past the Gospel that bears the same name, and on into the book of Acts.  When considering the nature of story and always realizing that details offered up early in a story will have bearing upon or come to fruition later on in the telling, one must be mindful that Luke sometimes brings resolution to a statement from Jesus within Acts, rather than neatly tying things off within the first half of his two-part series. 

As this is done, this study will also consider the mission of Jesus as presented by Luke, bearing in mind that the mission of Jesus is defined by the situation within the covenant God’s creation, and within the Creator God’s plan of redemption for His world as it is being enacted and carried forward by the people of His covenant.  To this end, as one hear the parable of the banquet, the hearer/reader  should be able to find points of contact with Luke’s ongoing presentation as well as the whole of the Biblical narrative, which of course gives shape to Jesus’ own mission.     

As Jesus opens the story, all indications are that the banquet is ready to commence.  However, something strange and quite unexpected happens.  Those who had been invited and who had accepted the invitation, fail to follow through on that acceptance.  Instead of coming when summoned, all begin offering up excuses as to why they cannot now attend.  One says “I have bought a field, and I must go out and see it” (14:18b).  A second says, “I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going out to examine them” (14:19a).  A third says, “I just got married, and I cannot come” (14:20). 

Now, without dwelling on the implausibility of the excuses (these excuses would have been laughable in the ears of Jesus’ audience), which is what enrages the spurned host, it is necessary to add that it seems as if the point being made is that all that were invited made excuses, and therefore were not going to be attending.  Rather than retaliate, as Jesus’ hearers would have expected the enraged host to do, especially in a culture defined by honor and shame, the insulted party-thrower re-directs his wrath and re-extends his invitations in another direction. 

...Like A Gentile Or Tax Collector (part 8)

So even though Jesus has agreed to meet the need, the centurion offers a bit of resistance.  Likewise, the Canaanite woman, though not receiving the desired response upon her initial request, puts up her own resistance, which is seen in the disciples’ report about her continuing to cry out after them.  In this instance, they ask Jesus to “send her away,” which is a bit evocative of the centurion’s statement about the way that he commands those under him to “go,” to “come,” or to “do this.”  Additionally, the centurion’s statement that he was not worthy to have Jesus come under his roof, and presumably not worthy to have Jesus do that which he is asking, falls in line with the Canaanite woman’s statement about dogs eating the crumbs that fall from the table.  Effectively, she too acknowledges that she was not worthy to have Jesus come under her roof or to do what she is requesting.

In the eighth chapter, it is the combined statement of the centurion that produces Jesus’ statement that He had not found such faith in Israel.  Similarly, in the fifteenth chapter, it is the woman’s statement that causes Jesus to exclaim upon her great faith.  To the centurion, Jesus makes reference to the great messianic banquet in which people from all nations will feast together.  It is possible that the Canaanite woman makes an oblique reference to that same messianic banquet, potentially doing so in her mention of the table from which crumbs will fall.  Jesus spoke to the centurion and said “just as you believed, it will be done for you.”  He spoke to the Canaanite woman and said “Let what you want be done for  you.”  The stories conclude with “the servant was healed at that hour” and “her daughter was healed from that hour.” 

It must be said that it is with his inclusion of such stories, together with his ingenious construction, that this Gospel’s author continues to present his audience with an understanding of the nature of that which is His primary concern, which is the kingdom of heaven and its dramatic and surprising introduction into the world through the person of Jesus of Nazareth the Messiah.  As part of that construction, the flow of the narrative, including the subject of this study, continually points towards Jesus’ parting words to His disciples. 

This trek through Matthew, spurred on by Jesus’ statement that concluded with “treat him like a Gentile or a tax collector,” now returns to Matthew’s eighteenth chapter.  By this point, owing to Matthew’s clear presentation of Jesus’ treatment of Gentiles and tax collectors, it can be rightly and comfortably concluded that treating an at-fault brother as a Gentile or a tax collector, if he refuses to listen to the correction of an individual, to a small gathering of brothers, or to the church, does not constitute a rejection of that brother.  Quite the contrary, in fact. 

If the example presented by Jesus is of any value to those that call themselves by His name, then there should be a re-doubling of efforts towards reconciliation and fellowship, as these are the people to whom Jesus is constantly addressing Himself.  The hand of fellowship and forgiveness should be extended indefinitely.  Yes, in this there is a potential risk of taking suffering, shame, loss, and humiliation upon oneself in an attempt to reconcile and restore a broken relationship, but in the end, is that not what the Creator God did for His people and His world through His Christ and the cross? 

Compassionate Brother (part 11)

It is as soon as Laban departs from him that Jacob’s thoughts turn to his brother.  He knows that he has a serious problem on his hands.  He knows that he has wronged his brother, and that he has dishonored his brother and his entire family.  He devises a plan.  Indeed, “Jacob sent messengers on ahead to his brother Esau in the land of Seir, the region of Edom.  He commanded them, ‘This is what you must say to my lord Esau: “This is what your servant Jacob says: I have been staying with Laban until now.  I have oxen, donkeys, sheep, and male and female servants.  I have sent this message to inform my lord, so that I may find favor in your sight.”’” (Genesis 32:3-5)

Jacob is quite right to be concerned.  This concern, and the reasons for the concern (which are culturally dependent) will be well understood and top of mind by those that would hear this story independently as part of the oral tradition being shared amongst the Israelites, or as those that would hear/read this story as a post-exodus people, doing so after the stories have been codified and taken the shape in which they have been passed through history.  Though all will already know the outcome (much like the initial church communities that were the hearers of the Gospels hear those stories with knowledge of their outcome), they can still share in the building tension by which the story is shaped. 

Having made this initial effort at what Jacob believes to be necessary for the assuaging of Esau, “The messengers returned to Jacob and said, ‘We went to your brother Esau.  He is coming to meet you and has four hundred men with him.’” (32:6)  Understandably, and with full cognizance of what he had done to his brother, “Jacob was very afraid and upset” (32:7a).  Owing to this, he took some precautions.  Knowing that the dishonor to which he has subjected his brother could be satisfied with a certain level of vengeance, and undoubtedly expecting the worst from Esau, Jacob “divided the people who were with him into two camps, as well as the flocks, herds, and camels” (32:7b). 

Jacob’s reasoning process, as it is steeped in an honor and shame culture (as the stories are being circulated within communities that also function in the dialectic of honor and shame), is on display as he thinks “If Esau attacks one camp… then the other camp will be able to escape” (32:8).  In hope, Jacob reasons that the dishonor which he has foisted upon his brother (really to his own shame) will be satisfied by Esau’s slaughter of half of Jacob’s people and possessions. 

After devising this plan, Jacob is said to have prayed to the Lord, saying “Rescue me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau, for I am afraid he will come and attack me, as well as the mothers with their children” (32:11).  He then repeats the promise that has been conveyed to him, reminding his Lord of His words in which He had said “I will certainly make you prosper and will make your descendants like the sand on the seashore, too numerous to count” (32:12). 

Having offered up this prayer, and perhaps gaining a bit of confidence in light of this recollection and of all that has happened to him to this point, Jacob makes a change to his plans.  “He sent as a gift to his brother Esau” (32:13b) a sizable number of animals, in the obvious hope that doing so would make up for what Jacob had stolen from him, and as something of a symbolic (and tangible) transfer of honor.  Is this a semblance of humility here on Jacob’s part?  Perhaps. 

It is recorded that “He entrusted them to his servants” (32:16a), telling them to “’Pass over before me, and keep some distance between one herd and the next.’  He instructed the servant leading the first herd, ‘When my brother Esau meets you and asks, “To whom do you belong?  Where are you going?  Whose herds are you driving?” then you must say, “They belong to your servant Jacob.  They have been sent as a gift to my lord Esau.  In fact Jacob himself is behind us.”’” (32:16b-18)  There is an element here, however faint it may seen, of Jacob attempting to shame himself (and so acknowledge his own shameful actions) as he approaches Esau.

Deeds Of Love & Faithfulness (part 2 of 2)

It was during Jacob’s flight from Esau that God appeared to Jacob in a dream and said, “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac.  The land on which you lie I will give to you and your offspring.  Your offspring shall be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south, and in you and your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.  Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land.  For I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you” (28:13b-15).  Now, Jacob is returning to the place where he began, so he is sure to remind his God of the words of His covenant promise that he is said to have received shortly after he departed from his home.  It appears that Jacob calls God to remembrance of His covenant, counting on divine faithfulness to the words and ends of that covenant.   

Why have we gone through all of that?  It has been in order to get to what comes next.  Jacob “took a present for his brother Esau, two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams, thirty milking camels and their calves, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (32:13b-15).  These evidences of the blessings of God, through His covenant faithfulness, were a present for Esau.  Jacob thought, “I may appease him with the present that goes ahead of me, and afterward I shall see his face.  Perhaps he will accept me” (32:20b).  Because all of this has been placed in the context of God’s covenant with Jacob (which would be instructive for Israel and the stories are told and retold, recognizing that Israel would very much define itself by these stories), and that covenant’s promise of blessing the families of the earth through the covenant bearers, it is possible to view the giving of gifts to Esau---the apparent showing forth of the riches of the God that is faithful to His covenant---as an example of one under God’s covenant extending the blessings of the covenant to those outside of it.  Even though Esau was Jacob’s brother, he was not a recipient of God’s covenant. 

In this, being unsure of Esau’s response, it would seem that Jacob becomes something of a prototype for what the nation of Israel to come was supposed to do and be, as a light to all the nations, revealing the covenant making and keeping God to those outside the covenant, as those nations could then see the blessings of the riches that their God has lavished upon those with whom He has entered into covenant, and to whom He has given conditions for obtaining the blessings of that covenant, which in Israel’s case would be the keeping of the Torah (generally outlined as circumcision, keeping the Sabbaths, and reverencing the sanctuary). 

Let it be said that the response of the nations to the shining of the light of God through the people of the covenant was not Israel’s concern.  Their concern was the showing forth of that God’s faithfulness, by being a blessing to all peoples, as their response of trust in their faithful God.  Likewise, for us, being part of God’s covenant family through Jesus Christ, we are not necessarily to overtly concern ourselves with the response to the shining of the light of the Gospel.  The response is God’s business.  It is our over-arching responsibility to live according to the Gospel (ordering our lives according to the recognition of the universal kingly dominion of the Christ), and to make possible the preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God with Jesus as its King, and its riches of the eternal life (the in-breaking of the life of the age to come) that is to be had in union with the Christ (allegiance to Him in His royal position) which shows itself forth as faith. 

As we experience God’s steadfast love and faithfulness, believing in Jesus by the demonstrable outworkings of the Spirit (good deeds performed because Jesus is King and such are the demands of His kingdom and its subjects), we know that it is through these preached and lived proclamations that we also experience God working through us to extend His love and show His faithfulness, like Jacob to Esau, to all those that are destined to receive His blessings.