Triumph Of Jesus (part 3)

The ceremony would commence outside the walls of Rome, on the western bank of the Tiber River.  The “triumphal entry” would enter the city of Rome by means of a gate that was only opened for these specific occasions.  The procession would not only include the army and the spoils of war, but it could also be replete with floats that depicted battles won and groups of captives consisting of enemy soldiers and famous leaders of the now vanquished foe.  Naturally, this can be recognized as the forerunner to what is generally thought of as a modern parade.  At the head, or sometimes at the center of all of this would be the celebrant, as cheering crowds often showered him with flowers.  A winding path would be followed through the city, with this path known as the “sacred way.” 

The climax of the procession would occur at Capitoline Hill.  There, in devotion to Jupiter, white bulls would be sacrificed to Jupiter.  On some occasions, the vanquished leader of Rome’s enemy would be slain before the eyes of the cheering masses.  Then, if the celebrant was a general (rather than the emperor), he would enter into the temple of Jupiter so as to offer his laurel wreath (his celebratory crown) to the god, doing so in order to signal that he had no intentions of becoming the king of Rome.  With this portion of the ceremony brought to a close, the temples were kept open, incense was burned at the altars, soldiers would disperse throughout the city in order to properly celebrate, and a great banquet would be provided for the citizens of Rome. 

If one was to take the position of a spectator of the Roman “triumph,” and found himself in a position to view the entirety of the procession and offer a description of what was being seen, with this sight fused with knowledge of what all would take place in association with the procession and the symbolism at work by what was being seen, and then offered a report on what we witnessed, it might go something like this: “I was so excited for the events that were about to unfold before my eyes.  Truly this was a banner day for Rome and its glory.  From what I understood, the war had been fierce.  Some thought it would never end, but eventually the general triumphed.  There were some rumors that Caesar intervened and took command of the army, directing it to its victory, and I can believe it; but if he did, he’s allowing the general to receive all the credit and be the subject of today’s ‘triumph.’ 

So even though this general was being honored today, and even though we eventually looked to him as a ‘god for a day,’ or ‘king for a day,’ there was a bit of an undercurrent amongst the populace that it should have been the Caesar himself riding at the head of this procession.  Along those lines, it’s interesting that, with all he has done for the empire, it’s the Caesar that is truly responsible for the victory that was celebrated here today, but he has never once insisted upon his own ‘triumph.’   What humility.  It tends to make one think that he truly is a son of the gods.’ 

I had a great seat.  I could not believe it when Caesar himself sent a royal messenger to bring me to the place from which I could watch the whole thing.  Then, when I was asked to write an account of it, from the people’s point of view, well, wow!  How could I refuse?  Me, of all people.  It was all a bit overwhelming.  I was so stunned by the news that I think I fainted.  I could have kissed the messenger’s feet, but he wouldn’t let me.  I was day-dreaming, thinking about my good fortune, and I almost missed the beginning of the parade.  It’s a good thing I came to myself when I did.  That would not have been a good thing. 

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.

Describing David, Seeing Jesus (part 3 of 3)

The Psalmist insists, however, that “a violent oppressor will not be able to humiliate him.”  It may have appeared that Jesus had been successfully oppressed and humiliated by death, but this was not the case.  There was a Resurrection.  Those that commented on it saw it as a vindication.  They saw it as a glorification.  They perceived it as an exaltation.  By His Resurrection, it came to be understood that Jesus was made to defeat death.  Now, with that defeat, the oppressor has become the oppressed, with Jesus having gained victory for Himself and for the kingdom of God that was now to extend itself forth upon the earth.  Jesus has been shown forth to the appointed Son-of-God-in-power by the Resurrection.  With this, He comes to be recognized as the unquestioned King and Lord of all. 

Though it will still be unfortunately at work in the world, because there is a hope for a general resurrection because of Jesus’ Resurrection, the once powerful oppressor that had ruled the thoughts and minds and emotions of mankind, has been stripped of its power and holds sway over the lives of the Creator God’s people no more.  Indeed, because of the Resurrection, the New Testament authors insist that the Holy Spirit, through the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus (He is Lord) that is and tells of the Creator God’s power and faithfulness, somehow gifts a faith that shows forth as a public and trusting allegiance to Jesus as Lord of all.  The attendant renewal and transformation of the mind, so that the place once occupied by death and all that death brings in its train, is now occupied by Jesus.  Accordingly, it is thoughts of Him and being in His service, along with a contemplation of the Creator God’s mission for the world, that now rules the thoughts, the minds, and the emotions of men and women that are now understood to stand free. 

With the Resurrection and the hope for resurrection that it sparks, together with no real fear of death as exhibited by countless willing martyrs down through the centuries, it can be said that death has lost its sting and the violent oppressor is de-toothed and de-clawed.  The enemy that sought to humiliate, is now itself humiliated, as the covenant God speaks through the Psalmist and says “I will crush his enemies before him; I will strike down those who hate him” (89:23). 

Though the Psalmist presents the reader with these words in association with David, the ultimate view that is provided, as the Psalms are viewed through the apex of the Scriptural narrative that is the Christ-event, is most definitely that of Jesus, as one is able to find a portion of the Gospel message when the Psalmist goes on to report the Creator God, following the defeat of this once vicious and all-conquering enemy, as saying “I will appoint him to be My firstborn son, the most exalted of the earth’s kings” (89:27).  Is Jesus not referred to as the King of kings?  In regards to the statement concerning the firstborn son (a royal title), of that son the covenant God of Israel says, “I will always extend My loyal love to him, and My covenant with him is secure” (89:28). 

Jesus is to be understood as the culmination of the covenant that began with Abraham, and the restoration of the covenant that God made with Adam.  In Him, that covenant remains secure, and all those that call Him Lord, and who order their lives according to that approbation, can stand secure in the knowledge of their redemption and the hope of their joining Him in the restored creation at the final consummation of the kingdom of God, in which the Creator God’s people are allowed to humbly participate in this day.  God’s promise, to “give him an eternal dynasty, and make his throne as enduring as the skies above” (89:29) was sealed by the Resurrection, and made manifest by His people, in believing union with Him as He works through them to be the people of His kingdom, so that the will of the Creator might be done on earth as it is in heaven.    

Joshua's Battles (part 4)

In the end though, because Jesus is reigning and because He has a people in covenant with Him through their confession of Him as Lord of all, in spite of the evil that can be seen, each and every time a true divine image-bearer (Jesus believer) is successfully able to gain a victory over the powers that attempt to compel a joining in the evil---each time a covenant member engages in an act of sacrifice and love that benefits only the recipient---then and there is one able to overcome the self-idolatry that was the primary reason for mankind’s initial rebellion against the responsibility given by the Creator God.

It is in this way that the covenant people, with a nod to ancient Israel in purpose if not methods, consistently attempts to annihilate the obstinate enemy.  They do so, thankfully, in an exercise of mercy, knowing that before Jesus accepted them into His kingdom by an act of mercy, they stood in the same position as these kings and enemies of Israel, in need of that mercy but deserving of none.  In such engagements, as believers are able to overcome, they begin to rightly bear that long-lost divine image, and in doing so, are able to embody and manifest Jesus’ ultimate victory over evil. 

With each act of mercy and self-sacrificial love, believers point to the fact that Jesus does indeed reign, and that through the mysterious activity of the Holy Spirit and the proclamation of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord) in both word and deed, the power of transformation and renewal and restoration and reconciliation is at work in this world.  Not only is it proven to be at work, but all of these things are reminders that it has been at work ever since the tomb was split open and Resurrection power flooded into this world. 

The Creator God enables His people to harness that flood of power and to carry it into the world through the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus---again, in word and in deed.  The doing takes an equal place alongside the teaching (as indicated by the opening of the book of Acts), for why would there be any need to teach if it was not for the purpose of doing that which embodies and furthers the reach of the kingdom of heaven on earth (rather than teaching strictly for the purpose of training people to refrain from doing that which is labeled as “sin”). 

In all of the doing and teaching, as the Resurrection is proclaimed and embraced and brought to bear in the world, there is no denial that evil is pervasive.  Indeed, Israel could not deny that they had to go to battle to gain victories over that which their God pointed to as the embodiment of evil in the land of His promise, so even though it is in a world that has been and is being re-shaped by the message and power of the crucifixion and the Resurrection, why should it be any different for renewed Israel? 

One is also able to read that “Joshua conquered the whole land, just as the Lord had promised” (11:23a).  So too did Jesus, with his conquering also occurring according to what He (and those that believe in Him) believed to be His God’s promise to Him.  The words that follow in Joshua point to the final outcome of Jesus’ conquering, in that the tribes of Israel were assigned the portions of the land for which they were responsible, which they were to rule and steward along with Joshua, with it being said that “the land was free of war” (11:23c).  It seems that Israel was charged with a responsibility to react and respond to evil, in full knowledge of their God’s promise of a victory already won. 

Because the Creator God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and because He does not change, in this day, the renewed Israel that is the covenant people via believing union with the Christ must do the same as their forbears in covenant, reacting and responding to evil in full knowledge of their God’s promise of a victory already won.  In both instances, the fact that there was a foregone conclusion in place did not remove the responsibility to work according to the Creator God’s plan that His covenant-bearers be His lights in the world, reflect His glory to and upon His creation, doing so according to His intentions, plans, and purposes.  That, it could be said, is the essence of the life of faith. 

Joshua's Battle (part 2)

That corruption of human nature creates an internal conflict against being fully human (as the Creator God intended for the divine image-bearers), and thus causing a falling short of the glory of God.  Of course, that conflict is inward but expresses itself outward, and shows itself through human interaction with this world and with other divine image-bearers. 

It would appear that Scripture is insistent that victory in this conflict, in which the original intention for the human being wins out, is somehow made through the operation of the Spirit of God through the very power of the Gospel, as like that which was experienced by Joshua and Israel as they attempted to subdue the promised land, none of the corrupted parts of human nature want to make peace via submission to Jesus and His claim to Lordship. 

As it stands, just as Adam and Eve are reported to have been successfully tempted with the idea that they could be like “divine beings,” human, and understandably because they are made as the image of their Creator, seem to have a desire to rule and worship themselves.  However, all must be conquered.  The analogy that is here being drawn thus raises a question, especially in light of the Gospel declaration that Jesus is Lord. 

On the surface, it is then easy to understand the need for Israel to enter the land and conquer.  Or is it?  Israel had promises.  Joshua had promises.  After the death of Moses, the God of Israel is said to have spoken to Joshua and said, “No one will be able to resist you all the days of your life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you.  I will not abandon you or leave you alone” (1:5).  Joshua was promised that none would be able to resist, but as can be seen, that didn’t stop many from attempting. 

The Creator God continued His words to Joshua, saying “Be strong and brave!  You must lead these people in the conquest of the land that I solemnly promised their ancestors I would hand over to them” (1:6).  So  here Israel has the promise that their God would “hand over” the land to them, but as one traverses the book of Joshua, and if the obvious supernatural intervention is stripped from the tale, the story that is left does not seem like much of a handover. 

Quite to the contrary, the handover of the promised land is presented as a near-constant battle.  As has already been noted, nobody was making peace with Israel (except one by stealth means, and it was a very tentative “peace”), and the covenant people were required to carry out a lengthy campaign in the land.  This stand against Israel was the case even in the face of what seemed to be well-known (at least as far as is communicated within the narrative itself), as Rahab, the famous harlot from Jericho, who must have had “contact” with a diverse group of people from the whole of what was the promised land, is shown to speak with a knowledge of the covenant God of Israel as she says “I know the Lord is handing this land over to you.  We are absolutely terrified of you, and all who live in the land are cringing before you” (2:9). 

So in looking at this situation with Israel, with their promises and with the supposed existence of the terror of Israel of which Rahab speaks, one is then forced to consider a thought: “If Jesus’ kingdom has been established, and He is reigning at this very moment, then why does it continue to be necessary to fight?  Why must there be a battle?  Why does death continue?”      

David & Goliath: A Battle With Death (part 7 of 7)

Goliath, employing his training, methodically marched toward David.  The story of the encounter says that he “drew steadily closer to David to attack him” (17:48a).  On the other hand, “David,” with what was apparently complete trust in His God to deliver his enemy into His hand, “quickly ran toward the battle line to attack the Philistine” (17:48b).  This was bold, perhaps even foolhardy.  He embraced the confrontation.  Thinking forward to the great conflict of the Christ-event, Jesus could have put off His confrontation with death.  He could have delayed it.  At His “trial,” He could have asserted His rights, defended Himself, demanded witnesses, or engaged in any number of procedural technicalities in order to push back the time of confrontation.  However, He did not answer His accusers.  He did not attempt to defend Himself or explain Himself.  He merely said all that needed to be said in order to hasten the inevitable.  Yes, He “quickly ran toward the battle line to attack” the enemy force that had been arrayed against Him. 

When David dropped his enemy to the ground, he “did not even have a sword in his hand” (17:50b).  Having felled his opponent, “David ran and stood over the Philistine.  He grabbed Goliath’s sword, drew it from its sheath, killed him, and cut off his head with it” (17:51).  How does this fit with what it was that Jesus did?  Well, just as David utilized Goliath’s own weapon against him, by cutting off his head with his own sword---the very weapon that Goliath had planned to use to strike down David and thereby bring the Creator God’s people into subjection---Jesus defeated death by going down into death.   

In that, He gained all power by being subject to the weapon of death that had been used to strike fear and terror into the hearts of people throughout the world.  He conquered that which was designed to foster subjection and subservience to the claims of power.  Jesus used the very cross of Caesar---the great symbol of the world’s power and Caesar’s power of death over life---as the means by which He would enter into the conflict from which He would ultimately emerge victorious via the Resurrection. 

With their champion defeated and dead, the Philistines ran away.  How did Israel respond?  How did the Creator God’s covenant people respond to the defeat of their enemy?  Before David’s victory, Israel saw Goliath and the Philistines as a curse, very much in line with that promised by their God as recorded in the Deuteronomical narrative.  Had David been defeated, Israel would have been subject to the Philistines and therefore under their God’s curse, in exile from their God’s promises.  Trembling in fear before that enemy, the men of Israel had no hope.  Figuratively, they saw themselves as dead men.  Now, with Goliath’s defeat and the enemy’s retreat, they were able to walk into the realm of their God’s blessing.  They were not going to be in subjection.  Death was not going to come to overcome them.  They were resurrected! 

“Then the men of Israel and Judah charged forward, shouting a battle cry” (17:52a).  Likewise, when Jesus defeated His enemy, being raised from the dead, all those in union with Him through believing in Him (the new mark of the Creator God’s covenant people) were moved from the state of cursing and exile and death and hopelessness in the face of its relentless march, into being the place of the overlap of heaven and earth, as the life of the age to come is brought to bear through the power of the Resurrection, with no more fear.  As did Israel, those that now find themselves as the Creator God’s covenant people charge forward, with a battle cry.  What is that cry?  The cry is the proclamation of the Gospel.  The cry is Jesus is Lord, for He has won the battle!    

David & Goliath: A Battle With Death (part 4)

Seemingly un-intimidated by the imposing warrior that stood before him, young David boldly is said to have boldly declared, “This very day the Lord will deliver you into my hand!  I will strike you down and cut off your head” (1 Samuel 17:46a).  Answering Goliath’s assertion that he would feed David’s lifeless body to the birds and the beasts, David adds, “This day I will give the corpses of the Philistine army to the birds of the sky and the wild animals of the land” (17:46b). 

Jesus too, more than one thousand years later, would fling Himself headlong into battle.  With what appeared to have been a supreme trust in the faithfulness of His God, He too would confront His enemy, brushing off the multiplied attempts at intimidation from a variety of directions, and saying “The Lord will deliver you into My hand.”  Because He is shown to have trusted that He would be resurrected, with that resurrection according to that which He had most likely come to believe concerning what had come to be considered as the promises about Israel’s messiah, and that His Resurrection would signal the defeat of death and its decapitation, He could confidently insist, not unlike David, that He would strike death down and cut off its head.

David would go on to add that his defeat of Goliath would not only be a temporary victory for the covenant people of the Creator God, but that it would prove to one and all that “Israel has a God” (17:46c).  Why would that be the case?  Frankly, because it would be inconceivable to any observer that this young man, vastly inexperienced in battle and in the art of war, could actually topple this proven warrior.  Yet the report of the story is that that is exactly what happened.  Similarly, as nobody had ever been able to overcome death or gain victory over the grim reality that all life would eventually come to an end, Jesus’ defeat of death would be just as inconceivable.  Death’s track record, undoubtedly, was even better than that of Goliath.  However, that which was and is inconceivable by any reasonable standard, would be proven by a physical Resurrection. 

Then, as now, all people were more than well aware that people do not come back to life.  This was especially true of those subjected to crucifixion.  Not only was crucifixion fatal, the shaming experienced by the one crucified (as well as those close to the crucified individual) would be so great that, even if one was somehow able to survive the ordeal, the shame that would now be attached to that person would be so intense that they might as well be dead. 

So when Jesus returned to life, demonstrating death’s defeat, it was taken to be the manifestation of the Creator God’s victory over death.  It was taken to be a reversal of the honor and shame cultural paradigm, now informing one and all that the place of suffering, perhaps unjustly, on behalf of others in an act of self-sacrifice, was that which should be afforded honor.  Because Jesus’ Resurrection showed Him forth as the Son of God in power---borrowing a well-known title from the liturgy surround the Caesar and his cult of worship, with Jesus now looked upon as the Son of God and King of Israel who rules in the inaugurated kingdom of heaven on earth---all observers that were willing to be honest with themselves would know and understand, as David had said to Goliath so many centuries prior (with that statement definite for Israel’s defining narrative), that Israel has a God.