Wednesday, July 18, 2007

The Inclusive Jesus

In the process of reading through the gospels once again, this morning I came across what I believe to be one of the most intriguing scenes in the entire Bible:

"On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. And as he taught them, he said, 'Is it not written: 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made it 'a den of robbers.'' The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching." -Mark 11:15-18

Now this is a man's memory verse, and I've mentioned it several times before in that capacity. Although John is less descriptive of this controversial act than Matthew, Mark and Luke, he does mention that Jesus drove them out with a whip that he made himself. That tells us two very important things:

1) Jesus was not guilty of rage, or of losing his temper. He had thought things through far enough in advance to make a whip just for this occasion. And,

2) Jesus had some mad skills.

Those two ideas were not new to me as I read the passage this morning. But in an effort to draw more out of Jesus' teachings, I have taken the advice of Ray VanderLaan, and started paying close attention to the source of Jesus' quotes. VanderLaan teaches that, when Jesus quotes the Old Testament, his true message is often not so much in the actual words he says, as in the passage he is referring to. This is not to say that Jesus is being misleading or disingenuous--every word he says is true--but that there is deeper meaning available for those who familiarize themselves with the Bible of Jesus' day. And I believe this is the case with the temple-clearing scene.

When he rebukes the temple officials, Jesus quotes two Old Testament prophets in one sentence. "My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations" comes from Isaiah chapter 56. The second part, about the den of robbers, comes from Jeremiah chapter 7.

OK, that was easy enough. All you have to do is check the footnotes to find that out. But now how about reading those two chapters? What are they really about?

One very intriguing thing about the temple-clearing passage is the emphasis on Jesus' teaching. You'd think, at a moment like this, everybody would either be cheering or jeering because of Jesus' behavior, not his words. But even in the midst of such outlandish deeds, the focus is on what Jesus is saying. Mark does not suggest that he is shouting his memory verses at the top of his lungs as he throws tables over the wall, and busts open the pigeon cages. Rather it says he is teaching the people. Likewise, when the chief priests heard this, they wanted to kill him, not for causing a ruckus, but because the people were amazed at his teaching.

Now I don't think we can conclude that the priests and teachers wanted to kill Jesus out of jealousy. As if one instructor at a school wins the educator of the year award and the others set right out to build a gallows in the teachers' lounge. It is indeed possible that Jesus' popularity and competency as a rabbi aroused the green-eyed monster among his colleagues, but it is far more likely that they wanted to kill him for what he taught than how he taught.

So what was Jesus really teaching? That the temple officials were getting a little carried away with the merchandising? That things were being run too much like a business and not enough like the house of God? Perhaps that people were getting ripped off and short-changed?

These things could all be fairly drawn from the text, and I don't think they would be wrong. But look again before you set fire to your church bookstore or tip over the soda machine. Because I believe that Jesus' heart on the matter lies in the message of Isaiah 56 and Jeremiah 7.

The Isaiah passage makes a beautiful promise to Israel's outsiders; to those who fear that their lineage will exclude them from the kingdom of God. A special comfort goes out to the eunuchs, who have been so mutilated as to never be considered among the circumcised. God essentially is telling the world, "No matter who you are, where you're from, or what your past is like, if you bind yourself to me, and keep my commands, I will hear your prayers and accept your sacrifices." What an incredible message (especially in the Old Testament!)

Now it's important to recognize that the Temple in Jerusalem had four courts: The Court of the Gentiles, and going inward from there, the Court of Women, the Court of Men, and the Holy of Holies. It is obvious that God intended people from all nations to be welcome at the Temple (even if only in the outer court,) to worship there and offer their sacrifices. But by Jesus' day, the rulers of the Temple had allowed (caused?) the Court of the Gentiles to overflow with merchants and money changers. This made it impossible for non-Jews to worship there, and sent a very strong message that they were not welcome.

So Jesus barges in and declares that the Temple was meant to be a house of prayer for all nations, not for one nation only! Israel had a sacred duty to welcome people of every stripe to God's house, and they had failed.

Not only had they failed to provide hospitality to the nations, they had traded hospitality for iniquity. A place designed to radiate the grace of God was serving instead to highlight the greed of men. Thus the Jeremiah quote about the 'den of robbers'.

And this is where we really come to understand that Jesus is not merely venting about the misuse of a worship facility, but pronouncing doom on a nation who ignores God's commands. Because in Jeremiah chapter 7 we can see very clearly God's displeasure with those who would "oppress the alien," among others (verse 7.) God commands Jeremiah to stand at the gate of the temple, and announce that God is giving his people one last chance to reject false gods and serve him only, to treat people with love and grace and hospitality, and he will continue to accept their offerings and allow them to live in the Promised Land.

But if they do not--and Jesus was making it very clear that they had not--then God would no longer accept their sacrifices. In fact, God told them they might as well keep their sacrifices to themselves, because he was about to destroy the temple and scatter them from their homeland.

When Jesus referenced Jeremiah 7 (and when he said other things about the Temple, like "not one stone will be left on another") , he was making it very plain that Israel had had her chance, and she blew it. No wonder the chief priests and teachers of the law were fuming.

But right there, in the midst of a proclamation of doom, Jesus was making a promise of redemption. All the people were amazed at his teaching, because they were sick of being excluded. What a thought, that God would welcome everyone into his presence! What a thought, for you and I, that God is calling us to stop holding the "undesirables" at arm's length, and start truly showing them the love of Christ! Over and over we see it: Jesus talking with the Samaritan woman or the Roman general, Philip baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch, Peter seeing the vision of unclean foods, James inspiring us to honor the poor, or Paul dedicating his life's ministry to the Gentiles. What a grand theme of Jesus' life... to subvert the natural order, to exalt the humble and humiliate the self-exalted!

Despite the grand message, you might have concluded that Jesus didn't go far enough in his purging. Yes, he fought to give back the Court of the Gentiles, but what about all the separation? Why should the Gentiles be considered less than the Jews, and the women be denied privileges reserved for men?

During his life, you'd be right. Jesus did stop short. But when he was crucified, all that he'd been saying came to an explosive climax. Because at that moment, the curtain in the temple, designed by God to keep virtually all people separated from his presence, was ripped in two from top to bottom. Now, not only are Gentiles welcome among the Jews, but each and every person who trusts in Jesus is granted access to the heart of God!

Paul said it best in Galatians 3:28. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Amen.


Labels: , ,

7 Comments:

At 7:58 PM , Blogger Beloved said...

Powerful.

"Take that, dispensationalism!"

My pastor preached on a similar topic a few months ago-- "The Gospel is for Everyone". I was going to give you a link to the audio, but looks like it's been removed from the site. The small group bible study is still available, though, which is super good. You can view/download it here if you'd like.

Blessings!

 
At 9:25 AM , Blogger The Coreman said...

Looks like a good Bible study.

I did notice something I disagreed with, though... where it said that the "Old House Rule" is that only people who follow strict rules can approach God, and the "New House Rule" says that legal restrictions are satisfied in Christ.

That makes it sound as if there are no more rules, as if God relaxed a little after the crucifixion, and is a "cool God" now. On the contrary, faith has always been the trait that pleases God, and works have been the evidence of that faith, not the catalyst for it.

On a slightly different note (and this is something I should write an entire post about soon,) I think the message in this post is one example of a huge concept that most Christians are missing.

We tend to see the Old Testament as hard-nosed, legalistic and a bit mean. But when you read chapters like Isaiah 56, you realize that Jesus did not come to give God the Father an image makeover... to abolish the mean and establish the nice. He came for two reasons:

1) To set things right, and
2) To give himself as the final, (and the only truly efficacious) sacrifice.

As for number 1, you can see Jesus constantly trying to get people to understand what the law is really about. Even when he talks about lust or hating someone in your heart, he's not making up new stuff, he is trying to show people that sin has always been a matter of the heart.

And for number 2, we have to realize that the cross was not simply the beginning of a new covenant, it is the event that made all of God's grace, from Eve onward, possible. It is the ONLY source of redemption throughout all of history, stretching both forward and backward.

 
At 1:37 AM , Anonymous Caleb said...

I guess I don't know that much about dispensationalism. How does this post have anything to do with dispssiosdnfsdionism?

 
At 11:28 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great post. Seriously, it's the best thing I've read on this blog.

 
At 2:40 PM , Blogger The Coreman said...

Thank you.

 
At 12:55 PM , Blogger Mark Pettigrew said...

Ryan, I've been a Christian for many years. I rarely hear a sermon which opens my eyes to a new facet of the gospels I'd never considered before. This blog post of yours did that. For that, I thank you.

I tend to cringe when I hear the word "inclusiveness", because I tend to associate it with liberal attempts to introduce moral compromise into the Church by persuading Christians to abstain from speaking out against sins such as homosexuality.

In reality, welcoming people into the Church and loving them as Christ loved them is not equivalent to coddling them and telling them what they want to hear instead of telling them the truth. That's where I think that many liberals misconstrue our obligations as Christians. In the name of inclusiveness, liberals often softpedal or deny the truth about sin.

However, I do agree that Jesus offers everyone the opportunity to come to God. Therefore, there is a biblically acceptable sense in which the word "inclusiveness" can and should be used.

I think (just as you suggest in this blog post) that many Jewish leaders resented the fact that Jesus reached out to Gentiles and other outsiders as never before. They were especially offended when He taught that being Jewish was, in and of itself, nothing special.

Earlier in His ministry, Jesus said that God could even make "chosen people" out of the rocks if God chose to do so. That must have really ticked some people off! No one would have been particularly surprised if a Roman soldier had made such a statement. The fact that Jesus was Jewish was what gave the statement its potency.

There were only two possible explanations. One was that Jesus was a self-loathing anti-Semite. But that clearly wasn't the case, or he wouldn't have chosen a team consisting of 12 men who all happened to be Jewish! So they had to seriously consider the other explanation: Jesus loved his own people (the Jews), but he had a better understanding than most Jews regarding what it really meant to be chosen by God.

Jesus taught that it was faith, and not a person's genetic heritage, which entitled a person to be chosen by God. If the Jewish people were God's "chosen people", it wasn't because they were innately better than anyone else. Rather, it was because they were the heirs of Abraham, who was blessed by God because of his great faith in God.

Since faith was a matter of the heart, it therefore logically followed that anyone who exhibited such faith could be welcomed into the Kingdom of God.

Regarding the comments about dispensationalism, I think it depends on how one looks at things.

On the one hand, a strictly dispensationalist view of things might try to divide everything neatly into two distinct periods: "Old Testament (Law)" and "New Testament (Grace)".

I think that you've demonstrated that it isn't quite that simple. But you haven't invalidated the general truth of the observation to the effect that Christ's incarnation, death and resurrection ushered in a new era in which grace and mercy, rather than law, were predominant.

In the book of Romans, St. Paul seems to suggest that the main purpose of the Law (aside from its utilitarian function in terms of helping to maintain order and keep people from murdering each other) was to teach people just how much they needed God's mercy.

After all, Jesus could have just come to earth immediately after Adam and Eve sinned, and offered himself up as a sacrifice. But if it hadn't been for millenia of trying (and repeatedly failing) to follow God's laws, it's doubtful that people would have fully appreciated that sacrifice.

It wasn't as if God changed His mind and decided that law wasn't working after all, so He'd offer grace and mercy instead. The purpose of the law had always been to point to mercy and grace, it was just that people living prior to the coming of Christ sometimes had difficulty grasping that concept.

And some of us still do!

God still expects us to try to obey His laws. Thankfully, God also understands that we will sometimes fail to do so. Consequently, his grace and mercy can indeed cover a multitude of sins, if we will fall on our faces and cry out for his mercy and forgiveness.

 
At 11:56 AM , Blogger The Coreman said...

Mark-

I wish I had time to give your comment the response it deserves. But suffice it to say that it seems you and I are on much the same path in regards to biblical understanding... and I want to thank you for such a thoughtful contribution to this post.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home