Day 1041 - Ten Angry Men

For the Men's bible Study at Second Presbyterian Church, Chattanooga, Oct. 15, 2015

Scripture Reading: Mark 10: 35-45

This passage has two parts. It actually should be read in the context of last week’s study, (vv17-31) where Jesus talks about wealth being a barrier to the kingdom of God and who has the power to save. We also recall that Jesus has twice foretold his Passion, the first time at the hands of the religious leaders, the second time at the hands of man. After hearing this, the disciples and entourage follow Jesus on the road to Jerusalem in amazement, awe and alarm and fear of the message and exactly what lies ahead. Finally two of the more forward disciples come forward with a question:

³⁵   James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came forward to him and said to him, “Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.”  ³⁶ And he said to them, “What is it you want me to do for you?”

Jesus has named these two Boanerges, the “sons of thunder.” Some early writers imply James and John are cousins of Jesus and are about to try to curry a family favor, or to resolve the earlier argument they had about who is the greatest. (See comment after v41 below.) Jesus (does he know the impending question?) plays the straight man.

³⁷ And they said to him, “Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.” 

Again Mark is painting a picture of bumbling ignorance of the disciples. They still do not get the reality of the message. Luke completely “rehabilitates” the two disciples and omits this exchange. Matthew retells the story but he promotes the disciples to a more respectable position. According to Matt 20:20–21, the mother of James and John makes the request.

In effect, the sons of thunder are requesting the top positions in the new kingdom that they anticipate will be established soon. They likely do not have some heavenly realm in mind as would be expected by a Parousia. The Greek keywords used to describe their amazement, astonishment and fear all imply a profound amazement and reverential fear. They sense that they are in divine presence listening to Jesus has been talking about the presence of the Kingdom of God on earth. But the Hebrew scripture speaks of the Messiah who will set things right and bring a great restoration. James and John probably have the real throne they expect to see Jesus occupy in Jerusalem after he restores Israel to its rightful place according to the great prophecies of Isaiah.

³⁸ But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?” ³⁹ They replied, “We are able.” Then Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized;  

Matthew betrays his knowledge of Mark’s version when he has Jesus reply: “You (all) [plural] do not know what you (all) [plural.] are asking” (Matt 20:22 = Mark 10:38). The plural clearly indicates that Jesus was addressing James and John, not their mother.

You can imagine the dismay of Jesus that they still have not heard his prediction of his Passion properly when he hears this request. He resorts to a longstanding metaphor of the “cup.”

Isaiah, about to be sawn in two, says to his disciples, “for me alone the Lord has mixed this cup.” Jesus will refer to this cup with dread in the Gethsemane prayer (Mark 14:36).

James and John say they are able to drink this cup and to undergo the baptism that awaits Jesus as they are inviting themselves to share the inevitable violent fate of Jesus. Jesus assures (warns?) them that they will indeed share his fate.

⁴⁰ but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”

Jesus does not deny their request as outrageous or brash, in fact he seems to acknowledge they do face a fate similar to his.  A powerful image lies behind this verse. The NRSV translation does not fully recognize the nature of the passive construction. This is called the Divine Passive. It is a strategy used in Hebrew to quote the Lord but to avoid naming him. (See Mat. 20:23: “…it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”) Notice Jesus acknowledges their future holds drinking from the same cup he will drink.

⁴¹When the ten heard this, they began to be angry with James and John. 

As we see, none of the twelve understand. The remaining ten are quite angry men that these two seek special favor as “the greatest.” In our minds we should recall what lies in the future. Who is at the right and left hand of Jesus at Golgotha?

In his commentary on Mark, Williamson says, “It has been suggested that James and John were cousins of Jesus (J. W. Wenham, Easter Enigma [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984] 34–35). If they were cousins, then it is understandable why these two disciples felt they could make such a request... (A)s family, were they not entitled to a measure of privilege? The ten are indignant because of the patent favoritism (if not nepotism) that such a request presupposed.”

The bottom line is that the ten are angry over worldly status and focus while Jesus is focused on the ultimate act of his discipleship.

Jesus has expressed his foreknowledge of his purpose and future. Mark, as usually the case, reveals Jesus taking a new tact to explain what he has just said in more direct terms.

42 So Jesus called them and said to them, “You know that among the Gentiles those whom they recognize as their rulers lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. 

Recall the greatest virtue of Rome is great, coercive power. Jesus is conducting a direct assault on Roman values. (Gentile always refers to Romans in the Gospels.) Jesus reminds them of Roman (Gentile) tyranny. More power means more greatness.

The disciples, and all Palestine, lived this reality day-in and day-out.

43 But it is not so among you; but whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant, 

Jesus takes a radical turn. Now he is not just talking about Rome and Gentiles he is rejecting the manner and sense of leadership in the world. He is, in fact, beginning to repeat his comments about the world opposing the Kingdom of God. Last week he talked about wealth that may have been symbolic of all the lures of the world.

Now he goes completely to the heart of the matter and calls out humility as the greatest virtue. He is challenging the fundamental value system of conventional wisdom. (Paul repeatedly draws on this theme.)

To be great you must be a servant. Here Jesus does not use the Greek word for slave (doulos) but the word for servant (diakonos). Diakonos means something like a table waiter or someone who does menial jobs. A Doulos is the absolute lowest position of service. Service, dikonia, in the Greek world is the opposite of happiness. (Plato says: “How can one be happy when he has to serve someone?”)

Again Jesus is taking a broadside swipe at Roman values, perhaps even those of the Jewish collaborators of Herod’s court.

44 and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all. 

In the style of great preaching, Jesus does not give the listener time to let the distinction of servant and slave sink in. He immediately magnifies the message to make the point of conflict with the values of the world unavoidable. To be first you must be a doulos, a slave.

And then he completes the message:

45 For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.”

Perhaps this is one of the most powerful sentences in the Gospels. It is the only time Jesus makes such a direct statement of his purpose of atonement, “to give his life a ransom for many.”

Reflection

There are four points in this passage. None of them are easy to live with.

1. We hear the third passion prediction, v45 and while the first says the Jewish leaders will accomplish it, the second all humanity, the third brings in Rome as an actor, clearly literally, and almost certainly symbolic of the values of the world. 

2. While Rome is literally going to have a hand in the death, Jesus makes it clear in using Rome as the symbol for cultural value, that it is the values of the world that oppose and seek to kill Jesus. It is the complacency and apathy, if not boredom of contemporary culture that opposes Jesus.

3. We may ask, is Jesus saying there is the world and there is the Kingdom of God? Is it the duty of the citizen of the Kingdom of God to challenge, or change, the basic value system of contemporary culture that instills complacency and apathy (and our measure of greatness), or is it to live a life of discipleship to all people knowing the world is going to oppose your action inevitably, sometimes with very harsh consequences?

Williamson says, “No culture in 2000 years has emerged on this planet where this text is inappropriate for followers of Jesus...” (p 195). Mark seems to tell us the message from Jesus is "you cannot beat culture by playing its game, you cannot ever find respite in it, you have to live in the Kingdom of God."

4. Discipleship is imitation of Jesus. It is living a life of service that embraces a reversal of greatness.

This passage stands somewhat in dissonance with other positions in the Gospels (Luke). It challenges the idea that discipleship should, or is even able to change culture since it implies we are always a permanent minority status whose behavior stands against culture with sometime costly consequences. It makes we wonder if the clerk in Kentucky, Kim Davis, actually understands this passage. I do not choose to enter the argument about the Supreme Court decision, but the Supreme Court is the voice of the forces of the world. She seems to thirst for the comfort of her faith in disobeying the demand of the world but expect the powers of the world to give her a free pass. It is not clear she is willing to pay the price for her believe if it really came down to it. It clearly is a conundrum for what the face of social activism should look like.

Bob Dylan says you have to serve someone, sometime. Perhaps we cannot get in the service mode until we are fully motivated to a life of discipleship.

This passage is a painfully accurate mirror that shows us who we are. I am aware of all the lures of the world that pulls me from perfect discipleship, be it frustration over completing construction of a garage, worrying about how much money I have in my bank account, of whether I should speak out against a perceived injustice, or just let it slide to avoid controversy.

I leave you to decide the meaning of discipleship with the words of another: (1 John 2:6,16-17): “whoever says, “I abide in him,” ought to walk just as he walked…for all that is in the world…comes not from the Father but from the world…And the world and its desire are passing away, but those who do the will of God live forever.” (1 John 4:10-12, “In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins…Beloved, since God loved us so much, we also ought to love one another… if we love one another, God lives in us, and his love is perfected in us.”

Amen.

Day 1026 – A Field of Circumstance

A study of Jesus Teaching on Divorce and Children for the Men's bible Study at Second Presbyterian Church, Oct. 1, 2015

Scripture reading: Mark 10:2-16

The last few weeks we have followed Jesus as he teaches his disciples the nature of discipleship. His final trip to Jerusalem hangs heavy in the air. Critics and opponents confront him, as well as those seeking grace. He usually calls his disciples aside and explains his teaching to them in private.

He does this perhaps because the disciples repeatedly show that have failed to understand the teachings and the predictions of Jesus death in Jerusalem. These are the ones who will carry the message on afterwards. Jesus has a stake in them “getting it.”

The passage today touches all these themes. (The lectionary omitted the verse (Mark 10:1) that clarifies Jesus is headed for Jerusalem: “He left that place [Capernaum, where he began his ministry three years earlier] and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan. And crowds again gathered around him; and, as was his custom, he again taught them.” This verse is a reminds us that Jesus has embarked upon his final journey from the place where it all began.

Pharisees engage Jesus on the controversial issue of divorce and after replying to them, Jesus uses it as a teaching moment. The confrontation runs over 10:2-9, when the Pharisees pose argumentative question, “Are there spousal acts that allow divorce?”

Divorce at that time was a controversial religious matter in Jewish law and in the Roman society that surrounded Palestine. Some Jewish religious leaders said adultery was the only basis for a man to divorce his wife. Others said a wife who displeases a husband for any reason is legitimate ground for divorce. All agreed the woman had no right to divorce.

Yet, the Pharisees also include a question about a woman seeking a divorce, seeking to draw him into conflict with the authorities, both the religious authorities and Rome. This question is particularly relevant for Jesus. The killing of John the Baptist resulted from his decrying the divorce of Herodia (A Jewish woman) from her husband so she could marry Herod Antipas.

You recall the way Jesus dismissed the tradition of the elders as the proper interpretation of adhering to the law. The reply about divorce dramatically turns from his earlier criticism of the religious leaders who rely upon the “tradition of the elders” as the interpretation of the Law.

Here, Jesus cuts off the Pharisees’ argument and supports John's indictment of Herodia. He forces them to justify divorce based on Deuteronomy 24:1-4. Then Jesus turns upon them defining the formal nature of marriage by Genesis 1:27 and 5:2. Marriage is an express gift of the pleasure and grace of the Lord of two becoming one. Jesus says that the permission to divorce in Deuteronomy is a consequence of their hardened hearts and resistance to honor the Lord.

Jesus interprets the Genesis passages to say that marriage is grounded in the creative act of life established by the Lord. There is no basis for divorce. Not hardened hearts. Not stubbornness. Not being unteachable and obstinate. All these human weaknesses are acknowledged implicitly as excuses to divorce in  Deuteronomy 24:1-4.   Jesus leaves the message that though Moses permits divorce, the Lord isn’t happy about it because it is an affront to his creative act.

As is Mark’s usual case, Jesus moves from public confrontation to private teaching of the disciples at the end of verse 9. He uses this confrontation with the Pharisees as a teaching moment on divorce and children (verses 10-16).

The disciples ask him to explain the teaching and Jesus says simply, when you marry, you become heirs of the grace of life (Williamson, p177). If you divorce and remarry, you have committed adultery – the act of unfaithfulness to spouse and the Lord.

Jesus is not “taking any prisoners” here. He broadens his teaching to challenge not only the understanding of the Pharisees but also Herod and Rome by addressing both a man or a woman divorcing their spouse.

Jesus does not say “If you divorce, do not remarry. He presumes that divorce will occur, but he says, remarriage violates the relationship created by the first marriage. Few of us want to brook this teaching. It is as severe as the command to sell all your belongings and follow him.

What are we to make of this in 2015? Some dilute the teaching, saying this was not a public teaching but a private teaching to the disciples. It suggests a higher standard for his disciples, not a comforting though for all the ministers of the church today (its membership). Keep this question in mind, we will return to it shortly.

It is appropriate that on the heels of this teaching about divorce the issue of children arises. Children are a primary focus for Jesus (See Day 1011 – Masters and Servants, for an example.). In spite of his earlier teachings not to be stumbling blocks for the little ones, to welcome everyone as a child into your midst, the disciples are preventing children from coming into the presence of Jesus.

There is a figurative and literal element to this teaching about children. Truly children are entirely at the mercy of the world around them and in the best of all worlds, depend on parents and the family who brought them into the world to sustain them. Likewise, people who are disaffected, weak, imprisoned, sick, who are the underlings of society, are welcome as the actual children to survive in the world. These are also children of God and a fundamental part of this new Kingdom of God in the world.

Let’s come back to our question about the teaching on divorce in 2015.

If you are part of a group that pushed for a broader definition of marriage, you may chafe at the reference by Jesus to the Genesis passage and creation. If you are part of a group that opposed the broader definition of marriage, you may be clapping your hands and thinking, “I told you so.” If you are divorced and especially if remarried or parents of children of the broken marriage, you may well grieve over the entire passage or chafe, saying it is outmoded, irrelevant to today’s concerns.

Almost every household in the USA in 2015 has been touched by divorce. It may be the spouses and parents who divorce, it may be a sibling, it may be one of your children or another relative.

If you have taken marriage and the responsibility of parenting seriously, you know the pain and damage that comes in divorce. Studies (sorry I don’t have the citation at hand) show that even in the most amicable divorce children are harmed by it. They may feel guilty that they are responsible. They may feel abandoned. It impacts their own view of marriage.

So, what are we to make of this hard teaching by Jesus on divorce? If we take seriously any on these teachings of Jesus on discipleship read in Mark over the last few weeks on discipleship, we must acknowledge that living a Christian life is a hard and difficult road. The world wants us to turn away. Our own inner nature is painfully susceptible to that lure.

An increasing number of folks of the same sex are entering the institution of marriage. Do they understand the gravity of the act? Perhaps the big issue behind this teaching is not so much how to define marriage but how to address the commitment and consequences of marriage embodied in the Genesis texts (in Genesis 1:27 and 5:2).

If we think divorce, or violating our particular sense of who can be married bars someone from grace, we really are indulging in god-like behavior – judging people rather than bringing them grace.

The message on divorce and children is about behavior and accommodating God’s children. When we engage in non Christ-like behavior, such as divorce, we harm not only our self but those around us. Jesus says we become stumbling blocks to his children. When considerations of wealth, dissatisfaction with a spouse, physical attraction and the excitement of a new relationship, neglect of our children, preoccupation with the world’s definition of self fulfillment guide our action, we find they all lead to grief.

When we indulge in objecting to other's violating our sense of marriage, or overlook this teaching on divorce we are actually overlooking the purpose Jesus had coming into the world - to welcome the Kingdom of God.

The Lord has reconciled with humanity through Jesus. The Lord has acknowledged our predilection to err, our stubbornness and obstinacy, and has offered grace to erase, if we are truly penitent over our disregard for living the true way. Then we remain on the right side of grace. We are reckoned righteous by our faith. Abraham was reckoned righteous for his faith before he took Isaac to the mountain top.

Reckoned righteous is a judicial term that means to be declared righteous before there is even a trial. Indictment and judgment are short-circuited.

That we have the grace of forgiveness does not mean we will not suffer the human grief and feeling of guilt that comes knowledge of our sinful act. It does not erase the negative, and often irreversible consequences our acts bring upon those we love, and upon us when we wander into the field of circumstance of divorce.

How do I put this difficult teaching in a positive perspective? Perhaps the circumstances about the execution of Kelly Gissendaner by the State of Georgia Tuesday evening helps us understand.

The idea of a field of circumstance is a good way to think about her situation as an insight into our own actions. The human damages wrapped up in and around her acts and her death are real and painful. Her husband’s family grieves. Many of us shed tears over her execution Many shed tears over her several stays of execution as she certainly did. Many of her friends grieve. Her children grieve. Many who do not know her except by her execution grieve. I think this event accurately portrays a field of circumstance that follow from the consequences of not heeding the teachings of this passage.

The first thing to be said is that her execution is an opprobrious act for any Christian to advocate. There is zero justification in the Gospel teachings for capital punishment, or revenge of any kind. In fact, the essence of the Gospel is the saving grace of forgiveness that defeated state-sanctioned capital punishment. See John 18:1-11, particularly v 11, and Luke 22:49-52. We might ask why Jesus did not seek vengeance against Rome who crucified him and the Jewish Religious leaders who arrested him. Perhaps he knew the field of circumstance his opponents entered…

Capital punishment at its core is an act of judgment and revenge. Both are expressly forbidden to us by many teachings of the scriptures. One cannot escape the dying words attributed to Jesus in Luke, “forgive them for they do not know what they do.” (There is some debate in scholarly circles as to whether this is a late insertion because the passage is missing in several early sources.)

The field of circumstance of execution put guilt on the executioner. It does not allay the anguish of those who have lost a loved one. Do any penitent Christians truly sleep easier knowing the killer was executed on their behalf?

What origin foray into a field of circumstance by Kelly Gisendaner brought all this misery into play?

According to news reports, Kelly Gissendaner was married, but began an affair with another man. Prosecutors said that by late1996 she had decided she did not want to divorce her husband but rather chose to entice her lover to kill her husband (stabbed to death) after the two of them ambushed him at her home. Both Ms. Gissendaner and her lover were convicted of the murder but only she was sentenced to death.

Her husband’s family harbors hate and revenge. The same news report quoted them as saying, “She's been given more rights and opportunity over the last 18 years than she ever afforded to Doug who, again, is the victim here." They continued to say, "She had no mercy, gave him no rights, no choices, nor the opportunity to live his life."

So who among the living won here? Who came out on the sunny side of life as a result of the murder or execution? Even though the state prevailed in its act of state-sanctioned killing, it did not win. Mr. Gissendaner did not return from death. I dare say no one won.

We may ask in the light of Jesus’s teaching on divorce that we have just read (and by inference on adultery), “What if Ms. Gissendaner had honored her marriage vows as Jesus taught? What if she had even taken up the Deuteronomic or State permission to divorce to satisfy her stubborn heart (as she had previously done)?”

Perhaps she would not have ventured into that particular field of circumstance that led to murder. The field of circumstance of ignoring one’s marriage drew many people into grief and more sin. The family of the slain husband harbors hate in their hearts. Her children have lost both father and mother. Family and friends of Ms. Gissendaner, some acquaintances of mine, are sorrowful and probably quite angry. Many people express hatred towards the authorities and those who opposed her execution.

There are no winners in this foray into the field of circumstance, we all lost. Perhaps through this we, disciples all, ought to take a dose of humility as medicine to our hardened hearts, stubbornness, obstinacy, being unteachable and harboring a desire for vengeance that persistently lead us into our own fields of circumstance.

However, Ms. Gissendaner said she found a path to divine forgiveness in prison becoming a strong Christian who acknowledges her guilt and God’s mercy. Her children found a path to forgive her. Many people who advocated for clemency and were moved by her humility, repentance and acceptance of execution and are more strongly empowered to work against the death penalty.

In the end, Kelly Gissendaner, who carried her own personal collection of sins circumstances, found divine forgiveness, defeated death, and lives again.

I hope the lesson on divorce gives everyone pause to think long and hard about marriage as a commitment to life, and to the spouse as two becoming one. You cannot unmake leavened, baked bread into its original grain, salt, water, yeast and oil. You can only ruin the bread trying to do it.

Amen