Monday, July 11, 2022

Chapter 4 – The Third Rejection of the King (Part 3 of 6)

The Kingdom of Heaven vs. The Kingdom of Men

God gave the world two choices when Jesus entered Jerusalem on Palm Sunday.   This choice harkens back to His message in the beginning. Adam and Eve had the same choice to make. Obey God and not eat of the tree, or do so, thus disobey and reap the consequences of that decision. Throughout history, the choice has always been the same. You can live in the Kingdom God rules, or you can live in the kingdom men rule. 

Throughout his gospel account, Matthew has painstakingly noted the re-establishment of God as King as the basis and focal point of his entire story. It started with Jesus’s genealogy (Matthew 1:1-17), denoting Him as having the right to rule as a Son of Abraham and in the royal line of David. He was thus the Son of Man referenced by the prophet Daniel. He then was shown to be the Son of God with His miraculous birth in Matthew 1:18-25. In Matthew 2, He was anointed as the One born King of the Jews when the Magi came to honor Him, and more importantly, worship Him. Only deity was worshipped, even in pagan cultures. 

In Matthew 3 and 4, His ministry is authenticated by John the Baptist and proven to be superior by His overcoming Satan’s temptations in the desert. 

In Matthew 5-7, Jesus gave His “Manifesto of the Kingdom.” If you want to know how this new Kingdom of Heaven operates, versus how the kingdom of men operates, this is the hub of all its teachings. 

In Matthew 8-9, Jesus validates His ministry with many miracles and healings while calling His disciples. 

In Matthew 10-11, His disciples are trained and His ministry’s message becomes focused on the differences between the two kingdoms: The Kingdom of Heaven and the kingdom of men. It is at the end of chapter 11 where Jesus defines the difference. The kingdom of men is filled with rules and regulations that cannot be kept, even by those who created them, namely, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the scribes, and the high priests. The Oral Law became the litmus test on Jewish spirituality, even over and above the Old Testament, as we noted last week. It became a heavy burden on the backs of the nation Israel. The poor, although devout in many cases, suffered trying to keep all the commands of the religious elite. Jesus’s kingdom, on the other hand, is far different: “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (LSB). That is a stark contrast to the way Jews had to come before God, according to the Jewish religious leaders. Their laws were anything but light. The leaders were anything but gentle and humble in heart. There was no rest to be had in their system. One always worried about breaking the Oral Law and being labeled a sinner. And if that occurred, the cost of doing religious business in the Temple—buying Temple-approved sacrifices and paying exorbitant exchange rates from Roman money to Hebrew shekels—made sacrificial worship overbearing.   

From this point on in Matthew’s Gospel account, starting in chapter 12, one incident after another, pitting the Kingdom of Heaven against the kingdom of men, is demonstrated either in parables, with miracles, in confrontations with unbelievers (e.g., Matthew 13:53-58), or in direct confrontations with the religious leaders themselves. Sometimes, Jesus even has to rebuke His disciples, because they struggled with the concepts being taught by Jesus about this new Kingdom (e.g., Matthew 16:13-28; 17:19-20; 19:13-15; 20:20-28).

The Feast of the Passover 

To culminate this entire Gospel account, depicting Jesus as King of the Kingdom of Heaven vs. those who follow the “king” of the kingdom of men, Matthew 21 tells the story of the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem. It’s Palm Sunday, the beginning of the most sacred week of the Jewish year, ending in the Passover Feast. This would be the last week Jesus would walk the earth in pre-resurrection form. 

Jesus’s procession into Jerusalem, starting in verse 8, is a lowly one. The King comes riding on a donkey, not royal horses. He’s not being carried by slaves or servants in some royal caravan, covered by tapestries to shade Him from the sun and heat. He’s not surrounded by an army. Instead, His message, both in words and actions, was one of humility. He came down the Mount of Olives, from the east side of the city, hailing from a peasant village called Nazareth, from where nothing good allegedly comes (John 1:46). And yet, the crowd, which must have been sizable, shouted, “Hosanna to the Son of David; Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest!” (LSB). Although they were a large crowd, they were still peasants and considered rabble by the religious elite. Therefore, the entire group would have been viewed by the Pharisees and teachers of the law as a bunch of “hayseeds from Hickville,” acting like hayseeds always do: without discretion, without order, and without any concern for religious rules or proper righteousness. 

While this procession was happening on the east side of Jerusalem, another procession was occurring, entering the city from the west.1 The Roman governor, who at that time would have been none other than Pontius Pilate, entered Jerusalem, riding one of Rome’s finest horses, followed by a Roman centurion and the company he commanded. It was a show of authority. A demonstration of might. The extra forces accompanied the governor and were expected to aide those already stationed in the Fortress Antonia. 

Pilate and his accompanying military procession rode up from Caesarea Maritima, a relatively new city near the coast of the Mediterranean, some sixty miles away. From the time it was built, Caesarea Maritima became the place Roman governors over the regions of Idumea, Judea, and Syria resided. They considered it more relaxing and more hospitable than Jerusalem. And besides, it was a Roman city, not a Jewish one, so that made it better all by itself. 

It must also be understood that Pilate, like his predecessors, did not perform this parade of sorts in some kind of “tip of the hat” to the Jews, as if they approved or even appreciated the Jewish commitment to their heritage. The Roman governors made this trek three times a year; every time an annual feast was required of the Jews. And no other feast was more important than Passover, the feast that commemorated Israel’s liberation from Egypt, no less. Thus, in “ceremonial” language of their own, Rome wanted to make sure Israel understood that Rome was not Egypt, and Moses was no longer alive. 

As a Jew living in that time, whether you worked there every day or were in town because of the feast week pilgrimage, it must have been quite the scene. As has been stated:

Imagine the imperial procession’s arrival in the city. A visual panoply of imperial power: cavalry on horses, foot soldiers, leather armor, helmets, weapons, banners, golden eagles mounted on poles, sun glinting on metal and gold. Sounds: the marching of feet, the creaking of leather, the clinking of bridles, the beating of drums. The swirling of dust. The eyes of the silent onlookers, some curious, some awed, some resentful.2 

Interestingly, as Jesus’s procession establishes a theology concerning who He is, so too, did the Roman imperial procession. In Roman religion, the emperor was viewed as deity, namely, the Son of God.

Although Julius Caesar believed himself to be deity, it was Augustus Caesar who believed his father was the god Apollo. He believed he, too, was born of a miraculous conception as Apollo impregnated his mother, Atia. Inscriptions found in Roman artifacts called Augustus “son of god,” “lord,” and even “savior.” He was even said to be one who would bring “peace on earth.” However, he only ruled until 14 A.D., but the belief of the emperor being all those things was carried on through his successors, including Tiberius, who was in power at the time of Jesus’s earthly ministry. Therefore, you can see the two “theologies” clashing as the two kingdoms prepare for war.
 

However, the quote from Zechariah 9—the first portion referenced in Matthew 21:4-5—depicts not war, but a King who will humbly come to put an end to war:

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Make a loud shout, O daughter of Jerusalem!

Behold, your king is coming to you; He is righteous and endowed with salvation,

Lowly and mounted on a donkey, Even on a colt, the foal of a pack animal.

I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim

And the horse from Jerusalem;

And the bow of war will be cut off.

And He will speak peace to the nations;

And His reign will be from sea to sea

And from the River to the ends of the earth (Zechariah 9:9-10; LSB). 

You would expect nothing less from the One we call The Prince of Peace. 

Spiritual Scheduling

Jesus’s procession countered Rome’s procession and was obviously set up by God to occur at the very same moment. As with most of Jesus’s life, the mission had a timetable, and each step along the way had to keep the divine appointments. Thousands of years of Israeli history and multiple prophetic utterances by the Old Testament prophets were coming to fruition. As Jesus’s time on Earth drew to a close and reached the climax, specific occurrences accelerated. Scheduling such things, to happen in the correct sequence, was crucial, and only God could manage such a monumental feat. 

This is why I reject what some commentators refer to as “Jesus’s Protest.” They liken His planning of the disciples going to retrieve the donkeys in Matthew 21:1-3 as the first major step in some kind of planned demonstration for the implementation of an “activist event.” To do so twists and cheapens the entire message being conveyed by His Triumphal Entry into something it was never intended to convey. Jesus never righted any social injustices at the hands of the Romans. He even taught the disciples to pay their taxes and live the kind of lives others—including the Romans—could praise God for (Matthew 5:16). He never called for revolution, enlisting the help of groups like the zealots. On the contrary, He ordered Peter to put his sword down when he tried to lop off the head of the slave of the high priest, Malchus, but only got his ear (John 18:10). Then, hours later, when He is before Pilate, Jesus informs Pilate in John 18:36 that His Kingdom is not of this world, for if it was, He would start a revolution, asking His servants to fight for Him. And no doubt, a few angels as well.

It must be clear that Jesus never lobbied for political reform, to try and turn Rome into something more palatable for the common, working folks. The Triumphal Entry was all about establishing Jesus’s right to rule as King over the Kingdom of Heaven, which was not of this world. This is so important to remember.   

In the kingdom of men—which was embodied more in the imperialistic empire of Rome than any other empire—power and violence, politics and human glory were viewed as honorable, so much so, that they despised the concept of humility as a people. Therefore, to advance in the kingdom of men, one can lie, cheat, and steal, if it means climbing the ladder of success. One can invoke violence, if it means getting his or her own way. One can use politics to manipulate and deceive, if it means that person and his cohorts will benefit. And all of this is done for personal glory and honor as more power is garnered along the way. Oh, they may say it is for “Rome,” but we all know who it really is for.3 

In the Kingdom of Heaven, which was embodied by Jesus and His followers, power came in a different form. Violence would be reserved for the righteous judgments of God Almighty. Politics would vanish because there would only be one King, one set of rules, one dominion. And human glory would become poverty of spirit as it started the sojourner down the path to a righteousness that surpasses that of the Pharisees (Matthew 5:3; 20).  

Throughout the rest of the Passover Week, each and every confrontational event became a picture of the two kingdoms at war. And it’s sad that it came to this point. But this is what the elders of Israel asked for way back in 1 Samuel 8. They wanted to be “like all the other nations around them.” And like the other nations, they instituted their own version of a “domination system” (see Footnote #3). They had their political oppression, just like God said they would through the prophet Samuel. The oppression of the kings of Judah and Israel would become brutal at times. Even more so when they had to submit to the likes of the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Greeks, and the Romans. They also developed their religious intimidation through the Oral Law. It made the average Jew poorer while the religious elite became wealthy. And sadly, for the poor, the political elite and religious elite made the economic exploitation doubly cruel. 

This was why Jesus came to bring good news to the oppressed (Isaiah 61:1). It’s why He bound up the brokenhearted. It’s why He proclaimed the release of captives from the prison of sin. It’s why He came to proclaim the favorable year of the Lord. For all of these people, God will bring His vengeance against the organizers of the domination systems of this kingdom of men. And now, listen to the rest of what God promised through His prophet, Isaiah, in 61:2-11 (LSB): 

To comfort all who mourn,

To grant those who mourn in Zion,

Giving them a headdress instead of ashes,

The oil of rejoicing instead of mourning,

The mantle of praise instead of a spirit of fainting.

So they will be called oaks of righteousness,

The planting of Yahweh, that He may show forth His beautiful glory.

Then they will rebuild the ancient waste places;

They will raise up the former desolations;

And they will make new the ruined cities,

The desolations from generation to generation.

Strangers will stand and pasture your flocks,

And foreigners will be your farmers and your vinedressers.

But you will be called the priests of Yahweh;

You will be spoken of as ministers of our God.

You will eat the wealth of nations,

And in their glories you will boast.

Instead of your shame you will have a double portion,

And instead of dishonor they will shout for joy over their portion.

Therefore they will possess a double portion in their land;

Everlasting gladness will be theirs.

For I, Yahweh, love justice,

I hate robbery in the burnt offering;

And in truth I will give them their recompense

And cut an everlasting covenant with them.

Then their seed will be known among the nations,

And their offspring in the midst of the peoples.

All who see them will recognize them

Because they are the seed whom Yahweh has blessed.

I will rejoice greatly in Yahweh;

My soul will rejoice in my God,

For He has clothed me with garments of salvation,

He has wrapped me with a robe of righteousness,

As a bridegroom decks himself with a headdress,

And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.

For as the earth brings forth its branches,

And as a garden causes the things sown in it to branch out,

So Lord Yahweh will cause righteousness and praise

To branch out before all the nations. 


And all God’s people said, “Amen.”     


Thought for the Week: 

Have we, the church of the twenty-first century, developed our own domination system? Do our churches (and the individual worshippers) resemble the kingdom of men or the Kingdom of Heaven?   

Do we vow to elect people to public office, who, in turn, politically oppress others? Do we work with and protect those who use kinds of political oppression within the church, say on a church staff or a denominational headquarters? Political oppression can come in many forms, so it’s hard to list all the different types here. However, some examples could be: Are we more concerned with building the kingdom of America so we can protect our precious freedom? Are we more concerned with building “a better tomorrow, whatever that means?” Are we more concerned about having a world filled with peace and not war? Are we more concerned with having lavish places of worship? Are we more concerned about keeping people in positions of power in a church because of the negative press we may receive if they get exposed? Or are we concerned with living faithfully in and building the Kingdom of Heaven?

Do we take part in a system that economically exploits others without giving it a second thought? Do we wittingly exploit others in the business world? Telling ourselves, “It’s not personal. It’s just business.” Do we support those who exploit others within the church, asking them to give and give while padding a certain luxurious lifestyle? Are we more concerned with filling pews and offering plates than helping others find the Bread of Life and be filled with the Holy Spirit?

Do we try to intimidate others religiously, either in an individual manner or in a larger, more corporate way, by piling one rule on top of another until the leaders of the church look like the Pharisees He condemned? Are you more concerned about someone keeping denominational regulations more than keeping God’s teachings and instructions? Does the church leadership live their lives like the Pharisees, asking congregants to do things they never do themselves (cf. Matthew 23:4)? Does the church leadership like to be noticed by men, love the places of honor at social functions, and seek admiration in public places (Matthew 23:5-7)? Or is the church leadership more concerned about turning the church body into members of the Kingdom of Heaven? 

When you truly study the Kingdom of Heaven, you begin to see life through the eyes of the Almighty. And when you do, there is a great deal of soul-searching that comes with it. Jesus’s teachings, the King’s Manifesto, relates more to His realm than ours. However, as He taught us, His principles of Kingdom living have application here on Earth. But just know this: when you begin to implement them in your personal life, you will run across obstacles you never saw before because you were blind to them. Some are obvious from the very beginning. Some are made known to you later as God opens your eyes more and more. But as He does so, you see yourself being drawn deeper into His Kingdom and away from the kingdom of men. The things of the kingdom of men become more and more foreign and increasingly undesirable. The things of His Kingdom become more desirable and more fulfilling. You see your peace and joy increase. Your despair and depression decrease. Why? Because you are becoming a slave to Christ. And He said His yoke was easy. His burden was light…as opposed to the domination system of the kingdom of men. 

 

NEXT WEEK:

We look at Jesus’s arrest and trial.

  

Endnotes

1. The majority of the information in this chapter has been derived from The Last Week: A Day-by-Day Account of Jesus’s Final Week in Jerusalem by Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan (Harper/SanFrancicso; New York, NY, 2006), pp. 1-30). Although Borg and Crossan give a very good, detailed, historical account of the Triumphal Entry (and that’s why I use it here), based on Mark’s account mainly, this author does not ascribe their overall theology (nor recommend the book), which comes out from time to time in their book. They tend to take the spiritual side of the equation out of the picture and lean too heavily on a philosophical, human explanation. An example of this is in the preface, where they note that Mark’s Gospel account was written around 70 A.D. Therefore, they say, because it was written almost forty years after the life of Jesus, “it is not ‘straightforward history,’ but like all the gospels, a combination of history remembered and history interpreted. It is the history of Jesus ‘updated’ for the time in which Mark’s community lived.” My question for these two professors is, where does the Holy Spirit’s role in aiding the writers of Scripture come into the picture, like what Paul writes to Timothy in 2 Timothy 3:16-17? One wonders. Also, to make such assertions opens the door for God’s Word to be “updated” for future communities, which is actually happening, even in our own time. To say, in such a matter-of-fact manner, that this practice was acceptable to Mark and the other writers of the New Testament is blasphemous in its own way. In this line of thinking, God’s Word is incomplete and will always need to be “updated.” That is heresy, if you believe God’s Word needs improvement and expansion because of how we see things today.

  

2. Ibid., p. 3.

 

3. Borg and Crossan note that such empires use what they call a “domination system,” which is comprised of three parts: political oppression, economic exploitation, and religious intimidation. It does not take a Phi Beta Kappa to see how this “system” has been used through history as a means by which the kingdom of men have ruled their respective regions. However, it needs to be said here that the kingdom of men follows the ways of Satan. Those three components of a “domination system” come from the pit of hell. All these things we described (power, violence, politics, human glory) are applauded in the kingdom of men because that is how Satan operates. He will continue to applaud and promote those who do his bidding, using them as he sees fit until they no longer serve any purpose. This ultimately comes to its proverbial, purposeful end in Revelation 17:16, where the beast with ten horns no longer tolerates the worship of the prostitute, Babylon the Great—which symbolizes the kingdom of men for all ages, by the way—and kills her, demanding that everyone worship him. This was Satan’s plan all along, but it could not be allowed to happen until God said it could (v. 17).

 

  Pictures courtesy of  Pixabay and the following photographers/artists:

Palm Sunday - by Jeff Jacobs

Statue of Caesar  - by 15299

Remember - by Andrew Martin

Amen/praise - by Barbara Jackson


 

 

 

Monday, July 4, 2022

Chapter 4 – The Third Rejection of the King (Part 2 of 6)


John 11:47-53 became the tipping point of Israel’s tolerance of Jesus.

It states that Caiaphas, “who was the high priest that year,”1 listened to the other members of the Sanhedrin argue back and forth in an impromptu meeting that should not have occurred in the manner in which it did. The Sanhedrin in Jerusalem was the “Supreme Court” of Israel. They consisted of seventy members, plus the high priest, giving the body an odd number for voting purposes. They heard cases from other areas of Israel that could not be settled by the local Sanhedrins in those towns which had twenty-three members (if the town was big enough to convene a Sanhedrin).2 

Since the latest incident preceding this passage of scripture occurred in Bethany (John 11:1-46), which was the raising of Lazarus from the dead, the Sanhedrin in Bethany should have been convened and held hearings. However, in verse 46, these people ran to the Pharisees—the ones in Jerusalem, who in turn, went to Caiaphas. As a result, the Jerusalem Sanhedrin undertook the proceedings.

The Jewish system detailed in the Torah in Deuteronomy 16:18-20, Deuteronomy 17:7, and 

 Deuteronomy 19:16-19 had built-in safeguards against exactly the kind of judicial proceedings the Jerusalem Sanhedrin conducted in John 11 and would conduct later. In this regard, they were acting more like their Roman and pagan counterparts than being faithful to the Torah and the God of their fathers Abraham and David. 

In these illegal proceedings, these members of the Jerusalem Sanhedrin argued about “this man” who was “doing many signs.” No doubt, the conversation went on for several minutes, with members weighing the pros and cons of allowing Jesus to continue with His ministry. They were concerned about Roman retaliation, if all of Israel believed in Jesus. They would first lose their “place” (John 11:48). They were more concerned about their status and positions of power. If the Temple were made physically inoperative or religiously illegal by the Romans, then how would they exert their influence over the rabble who were walking away from traditional Judaism to follow this Jesus character? Second, they would lose their “nation.” They were concerned Israel would be wiped off the map and absorbed by the Roman Empire, no longer allowed to exist in any way, shape, or form, which was a very real possibility. 

This is where Caiaphas steps in and tells the other seventy members of the Sanhedrin that they “know nothing at all.” This speaks to the ignorance and audacity of Caiaphas. As we pointed out last week, his conclusion actually produced the very effect he was trying to avoid. Had they all “believed in Jesus,” Jesus would have “taken on the Romans” by using the nation Israel as His messengers of the gospel. He would have brought the nation back to Himself (Matthew 23:37). The rest of the gospel record would have looked much different, I do believe, as would have the remainder of the New Testament. 

However, Caiaphas thought he was smarter than the crowd, which in this particular case was the seventy members of the Sanhedrin. What was his conclusion? It would be better for one man, Jesus, to die for the nation Israel, than to hold Him up as the Messiah and deal with the aftermath of a bloody beat down at the hands of the Roman army, which they had already concluded would result in the loss of their “place” (the Temple), not to mention their precious “nation” (Promised Land). 

In this scene, we get a glimpse of just how corrupt the religious leaders had become and why Jesus called them out every chance He got. What was their issue? They believed that what made them Jewish was their tradition. They used certain parts of the Torah to justify their existence and often gave it a lofty status, even when they were an occupied nation. 

An example of this is found in Matthew 15. The Pharisees and teachers of the law question Jesus about his disciples, claiming they were breaking tradition by not washing their hands before they ate. What was Jesus’s response? “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” (v. 3; LSB). He proceeds to give them an example of what he is talking about: 

For God said, “Honor your father and mother” and “He who speaks evil of father or mother is to be put to death.” But you say. “Whoever says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever you might benefit from me is given to God,” he need not honor his father.’ And by this you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you: 

 ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far away from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching as doctrines the commands of men.’” (vv. 3-9; LSB). 

Jesus quotes God’s Word. The first commandment He references comes from Exodus 20:12 and Deuteronomy 5:16. The second commandment comes from Exodus 21:17 and Leviticus 20:9. Jesus is pitting God’s instructions and teachings (God’s torah) against the traditions of the religious leaders of Israel, known as the Oral Law, which in their minds, were simply explanations of the Torah, to help clarify and better understand its meaning so that it could be implemented in daily life. In other words, like we have commentaries on the Bible today, the Oral Law, which consisted of the Mishnah and the Talmud, was (and still is) the “Jewish Commentary” of the nation Israel.

The Pharisees and teachers of the law were upset because Jesus’s disciples broke one of their rules explained in the Oral Law, i.e., traditions. Tradition was what saved the Jews, according to their teachings. The Oral Law is referenced in passages like Matthew 23:23, where Jesus again pits God’s Torah against their misinterpretation and adherence to the Torah via their Oral Law traditions: 

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the Law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others (LSB). 

For someone to break a rule of the Oral Law was equal to—in the minds and theology of the teachers of the law and Pharisees—sinning against God. These traditions became so lofty, in fact, they have been viewed from the decades and centuries prior to Jesus’s time until now as necessary explanations of how to interpret the Torah “because the Torah alone,” as one modern Jewish website states, “even with its 613 commandments, is an insufficient guide to Jewish life” (emphasis added).3 

God’s Word? An insufficient guide for life? Was that how the Pharisees and teachers of the law in Jesus’s day felt about God’s instructions and teachings (torah)? They didn’t come right out and say it, but their actions point in that direction, judging by Jesus’s condemning remarks in Matthew 5-7 and Matthew 23. 

May I take this a step farther? Is this how we, as Christians today, view God’s Word? The words on the page are not sufficient enough? Not clear enough? Therefore, we need to write volumes and volumes, arguing over every jot and tittle, to explain what God really meant? What Jesus really meant? What the New Testament writers really meant? To the point where our denominational traditions and interpretations of God’s Word, both Old Testament and New Testament, hold more sway over us than His actual commandments (and let us not even mention our political leanings, psychological beliefs, or personal feelings at this time)? It’s one thing to create quick references, like a Strong’s Concordance, for example, or a Greek or Hebrew dictionary. These kinds of works do not interpret the Bible or change what it says or means. You can even write a commentary, but you had better make sure it jives with the mind of God and doesn’t contradict anything. That’s why James said not many of us should wish to be teachers because of the stricter judgment that teachers must endure (James 3:1). 

But you see, these religious leaders had taken the Torah and made it say things it was never intended to say with their explanations and commentary on it. They argued about what constituted work in relationship to the Sabbath to the point where if something weighed more than a fig, you couldn’t lift it. Parents couldn’t pick up a frightened child. You couldn’t help a fellow Israelite get his child or ox out of a well. They argued about what could be done for someone who was injured or ill on the Sabbath. Jesus confronted them about this lunacy as well (Luke 14:1-6). 

These religious leaders had become so intense about keeping the Oral Law, they were driving people away from the Lord instead of drawing them near (Matthew 23:13). For example, they had water jars or jugs ready for use before every meal. They established the minimum amount of water to be used for hand cleansing at the amount needed to fill one-and-a-half eggshells. The water was first poured on the hands with the fingers pointing upward, kind of like a doctor, so the water ran down the hand and off at the wrist, but it could not run down the arm. Of course, once this step was conducted, the water was now unclean and could not touch anything else, since it had been made that way by washing the unclean hands. Therefore, one had to be careful not to allow the water to backtrack and cover areas of the hand already “washed clean,” otherwise, it would make that area unclean again. 

The process was administered again, but this second time, the hands were held down, with the fingers pointing toward the ground. Once the second application was completed, the Jew would then rub the fist of one hand into the palm of the other to complete the cleansing process. Strict Judaism did this not only before each meal, but between courses as well. This was looked upon as so honorable, that Rabbi Ta’anith said doing this would cause a Jew to obtain eternal life.4 

But again, before we pick up stones for casting, I’m afraid we, the Church, are doing the same thing today and have done the same thing over the centuries. What God calls sin, we call mistakes. What God says is forbidden, we claim was an Old Testament standard and commandment that no longer applies in our grace-filled New Testament era. Yet, I would argue Jesus claimed the Old Testament was just as in force in His day as it ever was (Matthew 5:17-20), and since the writer of Hebrews says God never changes (Hebrews 13:8), it would behoove us not to commit the same sins the Pharisees, the teachers of the law, and the chief priests committed. 

We are seeing the fruit of our Pharisaical ways today, bad fruit, mind you. As so many things are happening “in the name of God” or with God’s supposed blessing that is based on some person’s or group’s personal, political, or religious commentary on God’s Word. 

A simple law, like “honor your father and mother,” is wrapped up in the verb, as are most of God’s commands, because it is in the verb where the action occurs. The Hebrew word “honor” in Exodus 20:12 is the word “kabad” (pronounced kaw-bad), and it means “to be heavy, weighty, burdensome, honored.”5 This seems an odd word to use on the surface, when speaking of how to properly deal with one’s father and mother so that “your days may be prolonged in the land Yahweh your God gives you. (LSB)” How can one be “heavy,” “weighty,” “burdensome,” and “honored,” all at the same time? At first glance, this definition seem incongruous. However, when you look at them the way Jesus was—through the eyes of the Almighty—you see the spirit of the Torah plainly.6 

As followers of God, trying to live according to His instructions and teachings, we know that we are owed nothing, deserve nothing, and are only worthy of death, because of sin, according to scripture (Romans 3:9-20; 6:23). With that as our attitude, then “honoring” our father and mother doesn’t become a burden to us, in the sense of drudgery, caring for their needs, taking care of them in their old age, etc. Instead, it should become a weighty burden, a heavy honor, like that of a servant towards a king, when he feels the utter importance of his position. “Weighty” can be seen in this regard not only as something to do with how heavy an object is, but more importantly, as in “to be important because of its enormous gravity on a subject.” We used to hear this concept bantered about a lot back in the 1970s and 1980s when someone would refer to an important event as “heavy.” I always think of Marty McFly in the Back to the Future film series, having his discussions with Doc Brown, and how Marty meant “weighty, as in very important and even awesome,” while Doc Brown interpreted it as something being wrong with the gravitational pull of the earth. 

With this right understanding of “honor your father and mother” in mind, immediately, you can see what’s wrong with so much of society today. Children do not honor their fathers and mothers with a servant’s heart that is rightly understanding the concept of sin. Instead, they blame their parents for all their ills, when in fact, it is their choices and their sin that causes their ills. But you see, to admit we are the problem in our own life would mean the blame would have to be shifted from dear old Mom and Dad to us. Therein lies the rub. 

Getting back to the discussion between Jesus, the Pharisees, and the teachers of the law, to lighten the “burden” of this law in Exodus 20:12 and Deuteronomy 5:16, the Pharisees and teachers of the Law came up with a great way to do just that. In essence, their tradition allowed them to say something like this in Matthew 15:5-6: 

“Hey, Mom, Dad, I was going to give this gift to you so that you could use it to live (usually referring to an amount of money), maybe even enjoy life a little. Or maybe you could have at least used it to pay the bills or put some food on the table. However, all my gifts are now devoted to God, so I can’t give them to you. That would be a sin. I would be stealing from God. Therefore, I have to give them to the Temple, to the priests, as a gift to God.” 

On the surface, it sounds extremely pious. It sounds religiously righteous. It sounds like that mother and father raised a godly son, of whom they should be proud. However, Jesus calls it something else. He called it a tradition of men. He called it out as the attempt of the religious leaders to manipulate God’s Law into their own favor. Jesus called them hypocrites. Jesus said Isaiah was right about them when he prophesied: 

This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the traditions of men (vv. 8-9; LSB).

You see, gifts to God went into the Temple treasury, and guess who benefitted from a plump Temple treasury? The Pharisees and the teachers of the law. The chief priests too. 

How convenient.7 

This explains Caiaphas’s words in John 11:48: “If we let him go on like this, all will believe on Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation (LSB).” Do you understand the glaring treachery of his words? He treats “everyone believing on Jesus” as a plague to avoid at all costs. Why? Because if they do, the Romans would swoop in and take away the livelihood of Caiaphas and his cronies. The Romans would take their money and their homes, and they lived in some nice digs. “According to tradition the palace of Annas was located in the Upper City near the palace of Caiaphas and Herod's Palace. The high priests of the Second Temple period had their luxurious residences on the southwest hill.”8 They were consummate politicians who padded their status with wealth, taken from the people, like the widow with her two little pieces of money that added up to mere cents (Luke 21:1-4). And heaven forbid if the Romans would take away their power. The Pharisees, chief priests, and teachers of the law would be turned into mere paupers. They would be forced to live like the rabble they serve. 

In this eye-opening episode, Caiaphas spoke and acted like a true human ruler. The fulfillment of the elders’ wish in 1 Samuel 8 came true again and again. However, this time, it became viler as God’s Word became perverted to aid and abet these leaders in their craftiness.

  

Thought for the Week:

Imagine if “everyone in Israel believed on Jesus,” during His first three years of ministry. All of Israel would have been saved because God would have “become their God and they would have been His people” once again. 

However, in a turn of irony—echoing the words of the elders in 1 Samuel 8—Caiaphas, the high priest, believed serving Rome was a better alternative.

The religious leaders in Jesus’s day had indeed become religious hypocrites. They were just like the earthly kings described for us by God in 1 Samuel 8. In fact, they were religious kings, in a way. They had the power to arrest Jesus and submit him to a religious judgment (John 18:31). They were even allowed to submit Him to punishment, so long as they did not enact the death penalty. Only Rome could execute prisoners. 

In a kind of reverse Robin Hood-ism, these religious rulers took from the people and gave it to themselves. They were just like politicians today, who write laws that favor themselves and their donors. Do not ever believe a politician when he or she says, “I can make your lives better.” How do some politicians, who never worked a real job a day in their lives but have always been a politician, become multi-millionaires on a salary of less than $200,000 a year? Because they give themselves gifts intended for the poor, intended for the honor of fathers and mothers, intended for the widows and the orphans, all in the name of serving their country, which is their solemn duty. 

You see, it doesn’t matter what nationality you are. It doesn’t matter what century you live in. It doesn’t matter what religion is being touted. People are all the same. And God told the Israelites exactly how those kings and rulers would act and react if they gave themselves over to them instead of being qadosh and following God’s instructions and teachings (torah). 

It is the same for us today. We can’t cancel our sin with our own sacrifices offered how we choose to offer them and then expect to stroll through the pearly gates like we own the place. It doesn’t work that way. God was very explicit in His Word. 

One enters the Kingdom of Heaven with a poor spirit, not a haughty one.   

And although we have touched upon this aspect several times already, we’ll get more into that later in this series.

 

NEXT WEEK:

We will see the stark contrast between the Kingdom of men and the Kingdom of God displayed in the Triumphal entry.

 

Endnotes

 

1. It should be noted here that a high priest was to be one for life, once elected or placed in that position, much like our Supreme Court justices today. However, because the position had become highly politicized, it was “bought and sold,” if you will, when the political winds of the times demanded it. Because of this, you could have as many as five to ten “high priests” alive at any given time, for they kept the title for life, even if they didn’t hold the position for life. An example of this was Annas, who you meet later in the Gospel record. He was pressured to resign his position as high priest in 15 A.D., because he was amassing too much power. As a result, three years later, the Romans came in and replaced him with someone they felt they could control. His name was Caiaphas, and he happened to be Annas’s son-in-law (nepotism has always been a bedfellow of politics, by the way). I would not be surprised if Annas had a hand in Caiaphas’s election to the position.

 

Yet, despite his fall from Roman grace, Annas was a cunning and intelligent man. He remained in Jerusalem and controlled much of what occurred in the Temple, including the operation of the Temple courts, which were known as “The Bizarre of Annas.” Annas held so much sway, despite no longer being a high priest, that Jesus was brought to his house during the series of “trials” after His arrest and before His flogging and crucifixion.

 

Therefore, you can understand the Sanhedrin’s concerns about all the disruption Jesus is causing at this moment in John 11. Unfortunately, they were concerned about the wrong things.

  

2. We here in the United States patterned our judicial system much after the Romans. However, the Romans used a variation of the judicial system of Israel, established in the time of Moses by God (See Deuteronomy 16:18-20; 17:7; 19:16-19).

  

3. Jewish Virtual Library. “Judaism: The Oral Law – Talmud & Mishna.” Jewish Virtual Library. No Date. Web. 1 August 2020. <https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-oral-law-talmud-and-mishna>  This website states the article was taken from Telushkin, Joseph. Jewish Literacy: The Most Important Things to Know About the Jewish Religion, Its People, and Its History. (New York, NY; William Morrow and Co., 1991).

  

4. Throughts taken from sermon titled, “Confusing Man’s Traditions with God’s Commandments, Part 1,” by John MacArthur. www.gty.org. 11 July 1982. Web. 30 June 2022. < https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/2311/confusing-mans-traditions-with-gods-commandments-part-1>

  

5. Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. “3513.” Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon. (Hendrickson Publishers; Peabody, Mass., 1979), p. 457.

 

6. There are other words Moses could have chosen for this word “honor,” like “hadar,” which means “to honor, adorn, perhaps to swell.” It is used in Leviticus 19:32 to show respect or honor toward the elderly (See Brown, Driver, Briggs, Ibid, p. 1089; #1922). It is also used Exodus 23:3 in a different way, as the Israelite is not to “show honor” as a means of partiality toward a poor man in a lawsuit. Instead, justice is to prevail, regardless of how one feels about the defendant or the plaintiff. The point is, Moses chose this word (kabad) for a reason, despite the fact that overall, there are at least seven other words Moses could have used:

·       kanah” - which means “to honor with a title” (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Ibid, p. 487; #3655)

·       chaphets” – which means “to delight in” (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Ibid, p. 342; #2654)

·       paar” – which means “to beautify, glorify” (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Ibid, p. 802; #6286)

·       tamak” – which means “to grasp, support, attain” (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Ibid, p. 1069; #8551)

·       shebach” – which means “to laud, praise” (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Ibid, p. 1114; #7624)

·       salal” – which means “to lift up, cast up” (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Ibid, p. 699; #5549)

  

7. We see this concept used today in the Health & Wealth Gospel. God’s instructions and teachings about giving, about devoting oneself to God, and about being a righteous Christian are twisted to benefit the “Temple treasury” of multiple so-called pastors (Matthew 7:15-23). For just a couple of references on this, see:

 

·       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGOEt1PCWio

·       https://www.velvetropes.com/backstage/joel-osteen-house

 

8. “Palace of Annas.” No Author. Bible-History.com. No date. <https://bible-history.com/jerusalem/palace-of-annas>

 




 Pictures courtesy of  Pixabay and Unsplash and the following photographers/artists:

Scroll - Pixabay by falco

Money bag - Pixabay by Jose Augusto Camargo

Humble in prayer - Unsplash by Ben White