New Thoughts (03/26/06-4/5/06)
We are entered upon a passage that seeks to accentuate the great difference between Jesus and all others who laid claim to authority in matters of righteousness. To realize what was happening here more fully, it is necessary that we also recognize how this connects with what transpired previously. Recall that Jesus had just recently walked away from what might be construed as the first test the Pharisees and their supporters had given Him. These religious authorities had come to hear Him and see Him that they might decide whether He was acceptable as a teacher or not. Recalling Mark’s conclusion of the matter, that all were glorifying God because of the answer that Jesus gave in authoritative power, I am led to conclude that Jesus had passed that first test. Those who had come to see if He was legitimate were forced to conclude that indeed He was.
Almost immediately, however, these same men were to witness something that would call their previous conclusion into question. In this, I see my own behavior reflected. It is, perhaps, human nature to respond with such fluctuations in our opinions of things. We see an undeniable act of God and we conclude that he through whom God would do such a thing is godly. Yet, we later see the same one doing something that, to our thinking at least, no godly man would ever do, and we conclude that he must be a fraud. Frankly, neither conclusion has much foundation. That God acts is not necessarily a proof that the one through whom He acts is godly. Those who came as His agents to punish Israel’s apostasy were hardly godly men, yet they were serving His purpose. The devil is hardly to be deemed godly, yet his activities in regard to God’s children must have God’s approval and inevitably turn out to be serving His good purpose. By the same token, we are poorly equipped to decide whether that which happened was the display of God’s power or the display of some charlatan spirit. After all, we are generally too busy expressing our excitement over the event to ask questions.
Likewise, when it comes to matters of sinful behavior we are not that far removed from the Pharisees. In the Church today we have a most definite set of things we deem sinful that we cannot hope to find a clear Biblical decree against. We are equally prone to ignoring the great point of God’s Law in favor of the achievable righteousness of our own standards. That this is the case should be evident in the simple fact that what is deemed a terrible sin in one corner of the Church is a matter of no concern in another corner. Now, this argument cannot be taken to the level of condoning matters of homosexuality and sexual deviancy within the Church, for here the mandate of Scripture is clear, and I think we can safely say that those who would condone such things as acceptable Christian behavior are themselves no Christians, whatever they may choose to call themselves.
All of this is said by way of introduction to the scene we are about to witness. This Jesus, who had just received the grudging approval of those Pharisees and Scribes who had come to witness His teaching is about to alienate them completely by His lifestyle. It is not that His lifestyle is somehow sinful, it is that His lifestyle does not fit their standards of achievable righteousness. To their way of thinking, the choices Jesus makes as regards to who shall follow Him and with whom He shall associate is an absolute affront to everything they hold to be true. To really recognize just how much of a slap in the face this dinner party was to those judges, though, we will need to consider the four classes of people that are presented to us in this story.
In considering the order in which to look at these classes, I have noticed something today that I had not realized before. Matthew does not identify himself as a tax-gatherer. He allows as how he was in the tax-collectors office, but he does not lay claim to the position itself. This makes me wonder all the more if perhaps Matthew had either changed his own name, or had it changed by his Teacher. At any rate, the order in which I will look at these folks is the order by which we meet them in Mark’s account. We will begin, therefore, with that class of people that Levi was part of, but which Matthew no longer identifies with: the tax-collectors.
Even were we to think of the Roman tax collectors as little different from our own T men, we would not think the Jews far wrong for despising them so. We oft times feel that the burden of taxation remains an evil abuse of government power and right. Particularly here in America, which finds revolt against unreasonable taxation at the root of its existence, the taxman is not a favorable character. There are no mothers out their praying that their children would join the IRS. There are no bumper stickers celebrating the relative working in that task. What we know today, even with its abusive, above-the-law methods, is nothing, however, compared to what the office entailed in times past.
The office of tax collector was a for-profit business venture. It was a sufficiently lucrative business venture that men of means and position in Rome would pay handsomely for the rights to that business. They would pay to take on a contract requiring them to provide the state with a fixed revenue from those provinces under their control, and whatever else they could garner was theirs to keep. Seeing the nature of the trade, it is hardly any wonder that those who plied the trade did so in greedy and violent fashion. It was like being part of a Mafia, but with state sponsorship. There was no law to which one’s victims might appeal, because the one extorting from them was an arm of the state, with license to pillage.
Now, as offensive as this office was in any nation, add to it the particulars of Jewish understanding. Here was a nation who prided itself on being God’s chosen nation. Here was a people freed by God Himself from their slavery many times and determined never again to suffer such servitude. So proud were they of their heritage in God that they did not even consider that the periods of servitude they had gone through counted. “We have never been slaves!” they shouted at Jesus (Jn 8:33). So ingrained was this, even under the domination of the Roman Empire, that they simply could not think of themselves in this fashion. That they were currently under another’s dominion, then was simply intolerable. This is, in large part, what charged the atmosphere into which Messiah came. This people, who could not even think of themselves as being enslaved, knew that so long as this Empire ruled over them, they were just that: enslaved. It was their present physical condition, but their spirit could not possibly accept it.
So, consider how they felt about this business of tax collection. In that tax was the most tangible evidence that their physical condition was at odds with their spirit. Here was a constant reminder that the state of Israel was in bondage to Rome. This in itself was bad enough. Had the Romans sent their own people to deal with the collection of the tax it would have been more than enough insult to the nation. But, to face the idea that one’s own people, one’s fellow Jews were doing the dirty work, this was simply unacceptable, untenable. It was so impossible to believe that a Jew might take up this work against his own kind that the nation as a whole rejected that laborer as being a Jew! He was anathema, kicked out of the Temple. Indeed, in the official rabbinical view, these guys were lower even than the Gentiles. Much like we hear about the Moslem view of the infidel today, so they taught of the tax collector: One need not keep his vows with such a man, for he was worse than a sinner, worse than a pagan. Indeed, they would keep close eye on this most vile of men, to make certain that should he dare come onto holy ground, the treasuries of God, even the alms box, would not be defiled by their contributions.
On top of the insult of submission to another state, or perhaps because of it, the idea of paying a tax to some Gentile power was deemed a sin. Now, Jesus would later make clear that there was no particular sin in obeying the laws of the land, where they did not contradict the Law of God, but that was hardly the popular view. I might note here that we are inclined to likewise declare anything we consider odious to be sinful as well, when in reality it may simply be a particular requirement we wish we did not have to keep, or a habit that we happen to disagree with. I could easily be tempted, for instance, into declaring matters like viewing television a sinful thing, and I might not even be that far off the mark in doing so. Yet, others would likewise find aspects of my own life just as disturbing and worthy of being marked out as sinful. The fact of the matter is that we all have a tendency to declare whatever offends us sinful, just to give our offense a more ‘reasonable’ foundation.
So it was with the tax collector in Israel. It mattered little whether they did only what their position absolutely required of them, or whether they were, as was so often the case, abusing their office to get rich. Character was not the question when the people of Israel looked upon this collector. He was helping the sinful Gentiles force the righteous people of Israel to sin. What greater evil could befall the nation than that its own citizens should become enticers unto sin? And this was not even a pleasurable sin! Prostitutes we could tolerate. Purveyors of intoxicating drink we could accept. These things were sinful, to be sure, but some fun could be had along the way and we could always repent later. But, this tax business; what fun was to be had in that. The evil must be purged! So, the man was essentially excommunicated from his own community and, not being satisfied with that, the family that would allow their boy to do such evil was likewise booted! One could not possibly sink lower than to become a tax collector, so far as the people of Israel were concerned.
I would have to say that in the light of this public opinion of his work, it would hardly be surprising that Matthew would not identify himself by his family name, particularly in writing of these events to a Jewish audience. After all, the witness of a tax collector at trial was worthless. They would not even think of accepting the testimony of such a man. How, then, could an acknowledged tax collector hope to get a hearing from a Jewish audience? It was going to be hard enough for them to accept that such men were not utterly beyond redemption without the message coming from the mouths of such a man. No, it would have to remain to others to explain who Matthew was, what he had been before he heard those fateful words, “Follow Me!”
The party with which he responded to this One who was willing to call him His disciple would seem to indicate that he was not the exception to the rule amongst tax collectors. That he had so many acquaintances in the same trade or in other sinful means of employ would hardly be shocking. After all, polite society would not have anything to do with him and a man needs fellowship in some form. However, that he could afford the sort of party that such as these would flock to suggests that he had been doing all right by his labors. It had been a profitable business in that regard. Perhaps, though, this party was his way of throwing it all away, leaving it behind him in such a fashion as to prevent any possible return. The funds that paid for that party could not be regained. There was no cover charge to defray the cost. It was profligate waste in economic terms, but the spiritual investment was great.
Moving on, we come to those identified as sinners. Of course, one could as easily labeled any man, woman or child in the area by that title and have been accurate. What, after all, is a sinner other than one who has missed the mark of righteousness! That one who has failed in any least way to abide by the Law of God in its entirety both as to the letter and as to the intent is a sinner, guilty before the court, and deserving of the full punishment of Justice. One could, however, draw the conclusion from the definition of the particular word used to describe these sinners that these were, as we might say, notorious sinners. They were known for their sinful ways. They were profligate, habitual and manifestly evident in their ways.
Given the rather strong sense of the word used here, I have to wonder why it is that the NIV chooses to put the term in quotes. In all three accounts, it chooses to describe those at the banquet as tax collectors and “sinners”. Generally, when one puts a word in quotes in this fashion it is meant to indicate that the term does not really apply. It might be taken, for instance, as conveying the opinion of those scribes and Pharisees who looked on the event, but not reflect the thinking of the author. It might be seen as a way of casting doubt on the judgment that would have declared those people sinners. I, in turn, doubt that there was any reason to doubt what sorts of people these were. There may be, probably ought to be, reason to question why they had come to live the life they did, but there was no doubt in anybody’s mind as to what sort of life they were living. A prostitute isn’t a “sinner”, in other words, is not only sinful in the minds of certain observers. A prostitute is a sinner plain and simple. It is not something that you or I have determined, it is not the verdict of any earthly authority. It is a simple statement of truth. I can just as simply and unequivocally state that you are a sinner, or that I am a sinner. It may or may not be manifest in our lifestyles. It may or may not be those things that people around us have considered sinful in us. Those factors are not important. The important matter is that we are, every one of us, sinners before a pure and holy God. We know it and He knows it. What the NIV seems to attempt to minimize ought really to be accented. Where they have as much as indicated that these were only so-called sinners, we ought to understand that these were notorious sinners.
This is the crowd we find Jesus surrounded by. This is the crowd that more than likely had heard John the Baptist with his message of repentance and had taken it to heart. They knew who they were. They knew what they had done. They knew, as well, that is was utterly wrong and worthy of death by the judgment of God. They knew they ought not to do such things. What they didn’t know was how to stop. These were people trapped in their lifestyle. One does not become a prostitute by choice, really. Oh, one may have had some voice in the matter, but it was limited and constricted by the circumstances of life. We could doubtless say the same thing about the tax collector. It wasn’t a position a self respecting Jew could even consider taking up. There must, I think, have been something in the life of Matthew Levi that had either destroyed his own self-respect along with any sense of being of the people, or else had so devastated his family that he felt he must do this job, however repugnant, in order to provide for his parents as he ought.
While I suspect this is the rare exception, I find it worth considering that the sinner may well have entered upon his sinful lifestyle for reasons more noble than many a ‘righteous’ man. As we look upon those notorious sinners that we come upon from day to day, we would do well to at least consider that there is a great possibility that they did not launch upon this course of life by any choice they felt they had. They are far more likely to have begun in the despair of feeling there was no choice, that this was the only way they would survive.
This is a part of a greater truth that Jesus brought forth on numerous occasions. The sinners, particularly those notorious sinners that society will never allow to forget their sinfulness, are far more likely to recognize their need for a Savior. It is the desperate that seek out any last chance for help. It is the one trapped in his sins that knows most desperately the need for repentance, and the hopelessness of being unable to truly repent. How sin entraps us! How we cry out for freedom, and yet find ourselves incapable of doing anything to procure that freedom for ourselves! Truly, the bonds of sin are stronger than any prison devised by man. If we are to be freed of those bonds, it must be by the hand of One more powerful than ourselves, and more powerful than our sins. Thanks be to God that such a One has come!
We have thus far been introduced to those who were following Jesus and His ministry. These are the ones He was choosing as companions and these are the ones from whom He was selecting His disciples. One might argue that He had no choice in regard to who came to Him, but that would be to misunderstand Him. Truly and wholly man, He was and is simultaneously truly and wholly God. As His Word speaks, so His Word is. He has declared that none come except they are called, and so it is. The seeker after God is doing nothing more than answering His call. If that seeker is seeking in every spiritual corner, then I must say he is no seeker at all, just a sinner pursuing another delusion. Those that come to the Christ come not because they have been looking for Him, but because He has been looking upon them. That is as true of these crowds that gathered about Him as He went throughout Galilee and Judea as it is of each and every believer today. Well, we see that He has chosen these as His own, but to recognize how utterly shocking this must have been to those official observers of religion we must understand the ways and beliefs of those officials.
Continuing the order of introductions seen in Mark’s presentation, I turn to the scribes next. The office of scribe had once, it would seem, been a truly important office. Judging by the scant references to that office in the record of Scripture, it appears that in the earliest era of the kingdom of Israel, they had stood highly indeed, on a par with the chief commander of the military and the high priest. The chief scribe was seen, then, as the head of another force of great importance to Israel. Why was this so? Well, to begin with, while the priests were charged with maintaining the worship at the Temple, the scribes were the ones who taught the people of Israel about God and His Torah. Is it really any wonder, then, that particularly under the reign of David, these men were thought to be critically important to Israel’s well-being?
As the kingdom declined, so too did the respect for the office of the scribe. While they continued in their profession as teachers of Mosaic Law, they were also called upon for drawing up contracts for the people. This was particularly the case where such contracts involved matters of Law, such as with marriage or divorce. The course of time reduced their importance in the eyes of the nation. This situation only worsened as outside influences made their inroads into the land. To the people of Rome and Greece, there was no sense of a connection with God in the office of scribe. He was merely one who was literate, and perhaps familiar with legal matters. Teaching could be left to teachers and philosophers for those who had the leisure to pursue such things.
As the nation declined, the office declined, but at least in some quarters there was still a concern for God’s Law. Thus, it is actually out of the scribes that Pharisaism arose. It was their earnest desire to reestablish a passionate pursuit of God that led to the movement whose adherents called themselves the separated ones. It was also the scribes who began to examine the minutia of applying Law to every least facet of daily life, which in itself is not a bad thing, but in that the books of such observations began to matter more to them and those they taught than did the Torah from which these observations were supposedly taken, it was a horrible thing.
Tradition overtook Law. Ceremony mattered more than morality. So it was in Israel when the True King came to His kingdom. So it was in the ‘holy’ Empire of the Church when some arose amongst the scribes of that day and the Protestant movement was born. So it is today in many corners. We can be sure that God will again rise up and cast off from His people the yoke of dead ritual and allow a true and earnest pursuit of His ways to be reestablished as the norm for His children.
In that regard, I would make note that one thing Jesus did not do was condemn the office of the scribe. Indeed, He promises that He will be sending His own scribes out, along with His prophets (Mt 23:34). The scribal office, after all, is that same office which we know more familiarly as that of rabbi. They were and are the teachers of the Church, those who know not only what the Scriptures say but also what they mean. They are the ones fit by God for the purpose of teaching His children. How can we think He would despise such a people. I would also point out that while the scribes served the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin as advisors on matters of Law, they were not the officials making the calls. It is the scribes that one will hear Jesus telling that they are not far from the kingdom of God. It is the scribes whom Jesus will gently correct on many occasions, praising them where their knowledge is right and pointing out the things they have misunderstood. Yes, there would be those occasions when He would speak woes over the class, but we mustn’t lose sight that He also speaks the blessings of His own influence upon that same class.
Consider the statement He makes concerning the disciples in Matthew 13:52. “Every scribe who becomes a disciple of the kingdom of heaven […] brings forth out of his treasure things new and old.” Such scribes of the Law are truly blessed to hold the keys of knowledge! Of old, the path to becoming a scribe had been a difficult path indeed. First, one must find another scribe who would accept you as a disciple. This would require examination, and not only by that teacher from whom you would learn, but by his current students. If you were accepted, you would remain an apprentice until your thirtieth birthday, and only then would you be given the title of scribe. This would occur by laying on of hands, and along with that laying on, the master would present you with the ‘key of knowledge.’ It was this very rite of passage that Jesus had in sight when He pronounced His woe upon the class of the rabbis (Lk 11:52). They had, after all these keys of knowledge, but refused to use them . In fact, Jesus says, “you have taken away the key of knowledge.” Consider that! They had been presented with the keys and rather than use them, they had treated them as some relic to be protected and hidden away. Further, He says they hindered those others who sought entry where the keys ought to have opened a way. Here was an issue of pride in their office. If they had the keys, after all, they must have the exclusive access to knowledge. It could come from no other quarter.
Now think again upon that which Jesus had said of His scribes. They had become disciples of the kingdom of heaven. They were apprenticed to no man, but to the King Himself. When they attained to office, it was He who had laid hands upon them. It was He who had presented them with the key of knowledge, and because it was His key from His hand, His scribes were not too proud to use them. They would not use the keys to lock up and protect their treasure of knowledge. They would use the keys to bring out those treasures of understanding and give forth from them to all who came seeking God.
Interestingly, Jesus says they will bring out things both old and new. Here, I think we can understand several things. We can understand that Jesus is stressing the continuity of faith. He is at the same time pointing up one issue that the scribes were suffering from: so tied to tradition were they that they could not think freshly any more. There is, to be sure, a strength in tradition. There is a solidity to be found in solidarity with the past. We must never, however, allow the past to overrule what God is doing in the present. Tradition can serve as a guide to us, helping us to discern truth from imagination as we face new teachings, but it should never bring us to the point of rejecting the new out of hand.
Jesus says His scribes will bring forth new knowledge. In many corners of the Church there is the assumption that the time in which this new knowledge was poured out is done and over. With the closing of the Canon of Scripture came the end to all those gifts God was pouring out. With the closing of the Canon of Scripture things such as this declaration of Jesus were complete. No more would He speak new things to or through His scribes. But, on what grounds is this declared? We think of the silent period between the Old and the New Covenant, those years when no prophet was heard in Israel. Yet, was God silent in that period? Clearly, He was not, else there would have been no blessings greeting the Christ child at His dedication. There would have been no readiness to accept God’s voice as other than delusion had He been so silent for so long. If God had been so detached from His people for so long, we would not read of Mary’s willingness to do His will.
In light of this, I have to assume that the God Who never changes has not changed in my day. He still holds to His course, declaring things both old and new through His chosen teachers. Two thousand years on, and we can still learn something new about Him! Is that really a shocking concept? Now, I will admit that many who claim to teach new things in His name are teaching nothing more than their own ideas, given them the stamp of Holy Spirit inspiration to gain acceptance. Jesus was clear enough that this would come about. Scripture gives many warnings that ought to keep us vigilant. The new teaching is no more to be taken as Scripture than is tradition. Each must be examined in light of the closed Canon, the patently revealed will of God to make certain that it is in accord with what is certain. The new is not wrong for being new. It is wrong when it is wrong. Tradition is not rejected for being tradition. Tradition is rejected for running counter to the Law of heaven. In neither case is the rejection wholesale. In both we do well to heed Paul’s wonderful admonition: “whatever is true, good, lovely…”.
Recognize this, as well, of the scribes that came before, particularly those who laid out the Mishna. They were determined to speak nothing but the words of God, most especially as they considered how to apply the Law to daily life. They were determined not to voice merely their own opinions, but only the opinion of God. We who would be the scribes of Christ in this day and age ought to be doubly determined to abide by that same guidance. Recall James’ warning words in this regard. “Don’t too many of you become teachers, because teachers are held to a stricter standard” (Jas 3:1). They are held to the standard of the scribes: that their words shall be God’s words and never their own.
Turning to the Pharisees, I would first note that this movement had its roots amongst the scribes. It had been founded by men with a deep concern for living in the righteousness required by God. Further, it might be noted that in many ways their understanding was indeed closer too the truth than that of other sects within Judaism. They recognized and anticipated a resurrection. They had not rejected the idea that angels and spirits were still active in the world of man. It would seem that their main competition in the world of religious teaching, the Sadducees, had fallen into many of the same traps that the modern rationalist has. Resurrection doesn’t fit into a rational, ‘scientific’ understanding of how the world works. It is not the normal course one sees in nature. At least, if it is, it does not present to us any physical evidence by which we might prove the case. Spiritual beings are utterly preposterous to that same mindset. They cannot be proven to exist by scientific methods, therefore they cannot exist.
So, what had happened to the Pharisees that, being so close to the Truth, they wandered so far into error? The fundamental issue, it seems, was that they sought holiness in works and exclusiveness. As to the first of these issues, it seems they had failed to see the point of the Law of Moses. They could not abide the idea of its impossibility for man, and therefore they set out reams of lesser ways by which one might ‘obey.’ To their credit, at least in earlier years, the concern that they had for each least action of their day was commendable. We would do well to even approach such concern for our daily routine! Yet we seem to come to a place where we do not even have near that concern for how we serve our God in worship, let alone how we behave the rest of the time.
One tends to associate Pharisaism and legalism as being tightly related. It is true enough that their works oriented approach to righteousness made for a tendency towards legalism, yet legalism itself is rather a different issue. In legalism, one finds such a blind and rigid insistence on following the rules that define righteousness that no understanding of circumstance, no allowance for mercy is to be made. It may take a number of forms. In one instance, it is that taking the letter of the Law as binding, and failing utterly to understand the intent of the Law. This was a large part of what Jesus reprimanded in the Pharisees. It was not so much that they had dissected and itemized the Law, it was that they had failed of its intent in their application. Rather than a means of teaching us our need for a Savior, they had made of it a prop for pride, even as they violated its intent in their pursuit of applying Law to life.
As the weight of Tradition began to take on greater life in the movement of the Pharisees, the second aspect of legalism began to emerge. More and more it seems the things laid out in Tradition began to matter to them more than the Torah from which Tradition had sprung. They no longer sought out the real commandments of God, because they had more than enough to do in maintaining the legalities of tradition. As such, they failed to notice when Tradition had wandered so far astray that it fell into contradicting the very Law it sought to espouse. Here, it seems, the scribes had failed of their standard. There came a point that they became so confident in their ability to speak God’s words rather than their own that they became less careful to check their sources. They began to speak as God’s officials, and slowly slipped into a place where they simply assumed their own opinions and decisions must be God’s. As these crept into the Tradition, the Tradition crept farther from the righteousness it had hoped to maintain. And to this day the problem of tradition continues to plague both the descendants of Pharisaism and the Church. Even in churches that would claim they have no tradition, one will find it lurking in the corners if not displayed prominently front and center, and the very fact that nobody sees it as such makes it all the more dangerous.
The second issue with Pharisaism was their isolationism. They were not interested as much in spreading news of God to those in need, but were far more interested in keeping to themselves, making sure the wickedness of the great unwashed masses did not somehow adhere to themselves. Now, they did not take isolationism to the extremes of the Essenes, or the monastic movements of the Church. Perhaps exclusiveness is the better term. Those who failed to abide by the standards of Pharisaism were to be excluded from the company of the Pharisees. Such people were not to be associated with. If circumstance or business required it, one might converse with them or have such dealings as were utterly necessary, but no circumstance could cause a Pharisee to step into their house, and certainly not to have a meal with them! Why, such actions were just fraught with perils to one’s righteousness! What if they didn’t tithe? Mightn’t one’s own righteousness be tarnished should one partake of their goods? And, who knew what else they might have done in the course of a day, what idols they might have hidden in their homes. Would we not be made as much sinners as they if we entered a house like that?
I have to say it was a mighty weak righteousness that saw itself threatened by the sins of others. Of course it was weak, because it was not really righteousness! Whenever man falls into the trap of thinking that his salvation depends on his own efforts, and many think that way even as they profess that it’s all about Jesus, he is made weak. For, no matter how much effort we may put into living according to what we know to be righteous, no matter how good a face we may seek to put on our character, truth is we know deep down that we are failures. The more we come to understand righteousness the more we must face the terrifying fact that we fail utterly to even approach what righteousness demands. To one whose righteousness is thought to hinge solely on his own actions, this is a death knell! If it’s all about me, all about my efforts to stand in perfect righteousness, how I must fear anything and everything that would possibly tarnish that perfection. Because I think it’s all up to me, I am not only concerned about my own actions, but I become desperately concerned about the actions of those around me, lest I become guilty by association.
Yet, I dare not wander to the other extreme and decide that since it’s all up to Jesus I need have no concern at all for my righteousness. That way lies great peril. Jesus has not excused us from our obligation to the Law. He has come to empower us to obey the Law, and more importantly, to pay for our failures to obey. Every Law has its punishments. They are the means by which Law is maintained in a fallen land. A law whose breach bears no penalty is no law. It is reduced to a recommendation or a guideline. No, we are still a people under Law, even as we have become a people under Grace. God has not changed, and this is one area where we tend to prefer thinking He has. Many will tell you that because of Grace we are not under Law, but that is simply not the case. We are no longer under sentence of death because of the just penalty of that Law, but we are still responsible to heed every demand of that Law.
Indeed, we are perhaps more responsible now than we were before. After all, we are no longer just citizens in God’s demesnes. We are much more. We are ambassadors, representatives of the very court whose Law we are discussing! If it is important for the citizen to heed the law of the land, how much more the governors and representatives of that land? Jesus tells us that unless our righteousness is greater than that of the Pharisees, we shall in no way gain entrance to the kingdom (Mt 5:20). That is no license to sin in our dependence upon Him. That is a call to greater compliance to the Law of heaven than has yet been seen amongst the people of God. It is to enter into a true righteousness that understands the real point of the Law of God and lives in full accord with that intention.
In our pursuit of righteousness, we have tended towards the Pharisees’ approach. We, too, have tended to close ranks amongst ourselves, associate only with our fellow Christians. Indeed, today it spreads from our choice of associates to our choices of every day purchases and activities. We will seek out only Christian music for our delicate ears. We will procure only Christian texts for our endangered eyes. We will seek to make our purchases only from Christian establishments. Oh, how the wolves are profiting in this environment! Why, they need do little more than stick a fish in their logo and they’ve got a guaranteed clientele! Print five magic letters on your pencils and suddenly their worth three times the going rate in the eyes of these gullible shoppers you’ve attracted. Just so’s it says ‘Jesus’ on it somewhere, charge what you will for your swill.
Now, taking care what you watch, what you listen to, what you read; these are things you ought to do. Yet, we are not really taking care. We are setting aside our own responsibility to be discerning and putting that responsibility in the hands of some profit-motivated corporation. Do we really think our righteousness is safe in the hands of a capitalist? Are we really that far gone? By all means, let’s be discerning in our choices, but let it be our own discernment informed by God’s Word, not simply a label loyalty.
We also suffer in great part from the disease of exclusivity when it comes to who we will associate with. In many places the Church has become little more than a social club, and frankly, the unbelievers out there know that. A Church that is nothing but a place for believers to associate, that has little to no concern for the unbeliever is not a Church after the model Jesus and His apostles established. A Church that has become just another civil service organization is also not in pursuit of God’s model. Many churches are still pursuing the social gospel, seeking to do good works as an organization, but at a loss to know how to bring Christ to those they help, for they have lost sight of Him themselves.
It is time we begin to recognize the great gulf between what religion had become and what Jesus inaugurated. It is time to recognize that the same great gulf is once again widening in our own day, and if we would be a bride prepared we must find ways to close up the gulf and close ranks with our Lord. To that end, now that we have seen who Jesus called and who He left watching, let us consider how utterly radical that choice was.
Recall that this comes close on the heals of that healing which the scribes and Pharisees had been witness to. Recall that those sent to asses His ministry had been rather forced to acknowledge His authority. Although they found some of His ways offensive, they could not deny the powerful confirmation of His right to do as He did. I suspect that as we come to this current scene, they have decided He is acceptable and are thinking they might welcome Him into their homes without risk to their righteousness. As the officialdom of righteousness, they no doubt expect Him to seek them out as His peers. Amongst the scribes, there may have been question as to whose disciple He had been. Perhaps He was one of Gamaliel’s graduates, surely not Hillel’s. But, He was of age and He was operating in the office of scribe. Somebody must have authorized Him.
Jesus’ actions this day would come as a great offense to both of these groups. In one short period of time, He would manage to cast aside so many of their treasured privileges and traditions that they could only react in shock and horror, sure that God had saved them from giving Him the greeting they had been prepared to give. Surely, it was God protecting them from defilement, for look what He was doing!
The scribes, so selective as to whom they would accept as disciples must have been utterly dismayed at the way Jesus gathered students. There was not testing, no quizzing of those who became His disciples. The scribes were used to supplicants begging for the privilege of learning from their august selves. This man simply threw out offers to whomever, and even welcomed those who were not His disciples to come and learn from Him. What would become of the prestige of the scribes if this caught on? And then, look at the sort of person He was attracting! Why, His students were by and large the worst of the worst. Tax collectors! I mean, come on! They weren’t even allowed in the sanctuary, their money was not to be accepted in the treasury (and that’s really saying something!) nor were their families to be welcomed. How could a true son of Israel allow his son to become such as this? Yes, and alongside of these, there were known prostitutes, and other such scum gathered from the back alleys of life.
Here, the Pharisees were utterly appalled. What sort of righteousness was He promoting that would associate with such people? Surely He was made unclean by the company He kept. Oh, how they misunderstood righteousness! How we misunderstand! The righteousness that is ours in Christ is powerful, powerful enough to stay righteous even as we walk through a sinful world. It is powerful to cleanse us daily from the dust of our travels through this darkened land. Because our righteousness is not of ourselves, but of Him Who has saved us, we can walk through these shadow lands and bear His light, rather than being darkened and snuffed out by what surrounds us. The Pharisees feared the unwashed because their righteousness was a fragile thing. Jesus had no fear, for He knew His righteousness was the very righteousness of God. The Christian today ought really to understand the same thing. The righteousness that is ours is ours as having been imparted to us by Christ Himself. It is ours as to authority and efficacy, but it is His as to origin and power. We, too, walk into the world with the righteousness of God as our light and our shield. It is time we, as a people, began to operate in the full understanding of that fact. No more the fear of the sinful! Not that we shall go forth and wallow in it, but that we might go forth and conquer it.
Those who came to dine with Matthew Levi came as sinners. Those who heard what Jesus was teaching, who responded to His willingness to be amongst them, who heard His real definition of real godliness and real hope, and who determined to pursue this One who loved them; they came in as sinners, but they left as something new. They may have been cheating and brutal tax collectors that morning, but no more. They may have been selling themselves to stay alive last night, but no more. The things they had pursued they had pursued in hopelessness, but hopelessness was gone. There was a Savior in Israel, and a hope that even with all they had done they could yet find forgiveness and acceptance in the God of their fathers.
In a world of hopelessness, hatred and fear, such as we live in today, how desperate is the need to know this hope once again! Until we are ready, willing and actively seeking opportunity to be with and serve the sinful and unbelieving people of our communities, hopelessness will remain. This does not require us to condone their sins. Jesus did not look with approval upon the sins of those He saved, He simply recognized in them no barrier to salvation. He was and is powerful to the overcoming of these sins. He was and is able to pay the penalty due God for those crimes against His law, to heal the emotional, spiritual and even the physical damage those sins have done to those who committed them. He was and is able to recreate the greatest of sinners in His own image, and set them upon the road to hope and home. What great good news to the desperate and the homeless! It is so much more than giving them a helping hand. Hot meals and blankets, while they are a welcome and manifest expression of loving concern, are not really the point – cannot be the point. If they are allowed to become the point, we have lost sight of real ministry. We have become an adjunct of the DSS, not of God’s courts. No, the Gospel is the point. Everything else must be but an expression of what the Gospel means. Everything else must be a manifestation of Who the God of the Gospel is. Apart from the Gospel, though, the manifest expression of God will forever be misunderstood.
How utterly foreign to the religious elite was this Jesus! The who insisted that only the best and brightest could become their students find Him not only welcoming the lowest and simplest of folk, but actively inviting them. Neither did He restrict His teaching to those who were His official disciples, as would the typical rabbi. No, He was just as glad to teach whomever might stop and listen for a time. As for the Pharisees, well the habits of these people that gathered around Him were surely enough to make His righteousness questionable. As one of their rank would later posit, if He’s such a prophet, surely He would know what sort of people these were, and would avoid them as the Pharisees did. Such a weak righteousness they had, needing protection from these sinners.
The Pharisees in their exclusiveness could not even begin to fathom what this Jesus was about. They had made themselves the official arbiters of everything righteous, and by their standards His associations made Him a sinner, too. So little they understood righteousness. Here was the pure, holy, begotten Son of God, and they were so convinced of their own lame Codex of the Achievable that they denounced Him as a sinner, rather than face themselves. Those whom the Pharisees habitually wrote off were being saved for the very simple reason that they knew they needed saving. The Pharisees themselves would by and large neglect this great Salvation for the equally simple reason that they refused to see themselves in the light of Truth.
So, imagine the reaction of these paragons of society in these events. Here they had just about reconciled themselves to the idea that this Jesus just might be legitimate, and He goes and does this! Why, as a proponent of righteousness and faith, surely He ought to be seeking audience with them, ought to be joining them for dinner. Surely, if He were such a great teacher He ought to be making Himself known to His fellow scribes. It was only reasonable to expect that He would honor them with His presence. But, instead He has chosen to be ‘honored’ by these awful folk, by the most despicable of people. This was not only unacceptable to them, it was utterly unfathomable. It should be noted that if they had thought Him a sinner and a fraud, it would hardly have surprised them so to find Him in that company. The shock registered by them is an indication that they had at least started to accept as a legitimate coworker.
That leads me to believe that along with simple surprise, their reaction to His dinner was a product of wounded pride. They were the paragons, what was He doing with these? They were the ones who should have been honored by His presence, not the ones they had chased from the temple. Their pride would suffer worse wounds when Jesus learned of their questions. They were, after all, the watchmen posted over Israel. They had watched, I suppose, but had never really cried out the warning. They had been satisfied to glory in their own security, even though that security was but an illusion.
One last thought before I turn to the reply that Jesus gave to these watchmen, and that is simply that the reply is likely not something that was given on the spot. Consider that the Pharisees would not associate with the likes of those with whom Jesus was at table, would certainly not have entered such a household to hear His response. It seems reasonable to think that time has passed in the course of these events. I would suppose that it was probably at least a day later that the disciples heard these complaints from the Pharisees, and perhaps into evening before they found a moment of relative quiet in which to pass comment to Jesus on the matter. It may have been a day or so after that before Jesus found occasion to respond to the concerns the Pharisees had raised.
I wonder, as I read this section again, what tone Jesus replied in. Reading the passage with its sense of immediacy I tend to think of Him responding with a degree of anger, controlled anger perhaps, but anger none the less. Matthew’s account in particular seems to suggest a bit of sarcasm as well. Yet, knowing my Jesus, I have to suspect that overlaid upon whatever He may have felt at their reaction was a love that wanted nothing more than that they might recognize the Truth and respond to it.
With that, let’s turn to what He had to say as He gave answer to them. For the most part, the three accounts are united in their reporting of what that reply was. It comes in a form quite typical of a rabbi, first comes an example illustrating the point to be made, and then comes the greater point. The example is so plain as to be undeniably true. The healthy are not inclined to call the physician, for they have no need of one. Likewise, we might note, the physician is not likely to call at the house of the healthy. There are so many others that do need him he has not the time to spare for those who need him not. This corollary is implied in the point Jesus draws from His example. “I have come not to call the righteous, but to call sinners to repentance.”
How apt is the parallel He has chosen here. The righteous are in spiritual health, and therefore are not in need of being called upon by the healer of spirit. But sinners, the sin-sick, are in desperate need of attention. Where there is awareness, where the sick know their sickness and have not slipped into delirium, they are crying out for a Doctor, and He has heard. He has come to call them, to call upon them and to tell them what they must do to be cured. The cure is repentance. He cannot heal the spirit that is bent on continuing as it was before. More accurately, He can, but He will not. It would be as much a waste of His time as it would to bring healing to the healthy.
Along with the clear conclusion that His example brings, there is a degree of irony in what He says here. “I have not come to call the righteous.” Remember He is addressing the local experts on matters of Scripture. They ought, therefore, to be well aware of the passages from the Psalms, in which God sought out the righteous man, but found not even one in all the earth (Ps 14:1-3, Ps 53:1-3). How could they who knew the Scriptures so well, and taught them to others be so foolish as to think they had attained a righteousness that God Himself said was to be found in no man? Of course Jesus had not come to call the righteous, for it must necessarily have left Him with nobody to call on. The righteous, indeed, have no need of a Savior, but there is not one righteous soul to be found. Therefore, all are in need. The inevitable conclusion is that only the most blind of men would fail to call upon the Savior Who comes with redemption in His hands.
We may as well hear what the Pharisees must have heard in that response. Those whom they despised as unwashed, untrained and ignorant had, in their response to Jesus shown themselves more wise, less ignorant, and more accurate in their understanding of God than these self-proclaimed experts of things religious.
Then there is this comment that only Matthew appears to have picked up on. This would hardly be surprising given that these events are so closely and personally connected to him. It was his dinner that the Pharisees took such exception to. It was his friends, his profession, that they singled out for all their scorn and rejection. He had been dealing with their attitudes for years, had felt the rejection of his own nation for years, largely because these experts on the kingdom of God had taught the people to reject his kind. One might reasonably expect that under those circumstances his memory of events might be a bit more detailed.
Hear, then, the detail that he brings for us. Jesus, between example and point, inserts a bit of a barb at the much vaunted learning of these men. “Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire compassion, not sacrifice’”. To begin with, as He addresses these illustrious teachers, consider that He tells them to go learn. To these self-proclaimed experts this was a bit of a slap in the face. But, there is more to that term than simply to study. It expresses both the motivation for learning and the intended value of learning. “Go and learn,” He says, “but learn not only to know the answer. Learn that you may experience the thing you have learned.” Learn what God means by desiring compassion over sacrifice, not so you can explain it to others, but so you can live as you have learned.
In another sense, He is saying to make a habit of doing what God desires. Here, I think I have at last stumbled onto the main point of this study. Make a habit of doing as God desires. If that is not the point of studying His word, if that is not the point behind every teaching, then the teaching is not only pointless, it is dangerous, the study is not only vain and empty, it is learned deception. Our pastor has been teaching much of late about the kingdom, about living by kingdom principles and pursuing a kingdom mentality. Much has been made of our position as kings within that kingdom. I would submit, however, that more must be made of the King of kings. If we are indeed kings in His kingdom, we must surely be submitted to His rule. If we are submitted to His rule, we must surely have foremost on our agenda the purposeful doing of what He wills, what He desires. I have heard Pastor Najem put it this way: “It is time we stop asking God to bless what we are doing, and start seeking to do what God is blessing.”
Make a habit of doing what God desires. Of course this will require that we be in His Scriptures, for they are His declaration of desire. In them we have His own explanation of what He expects from His children, His kings. It is all too easy, however, to lose sight of the reason for studying. That is what happened to the Pharisees and it is an ever present risk to every man who comes to them. We can easily lose sight of purpose, and study for the simple pleasure of knowing, never really putting knowledge into practice, but simply knowing and taking pride in displaying our vast knowledge to these lesser souls around us. For shame! That we should ever make our humble learning from the Master a prop for our pride! Yet we all do. So God reminds us that learning has a purpose. Learning has the purpose of establishing habit, but habit that is not addiction, is not deadly. The death seeking habits of the flesh are, by learning from our sweet Teacher, replaced with habits of life and light.
This which Jesus places before the Pharisees for their edification is of particular note in understanding what God wants from and in us. “I desire compassion.” What is this compassion that He is pleased to find in us? It is the grace to forgive. It is mercy working to alleviate the suffering which is the fallout of sin. It is the active desire to relieve misery in those who like us are being turned towards the kingdom. Is this not, after all, exactly what we have experienced of Him ourselves? Isn’t that a large part of why we are so caught up in loving Him? He has done so much not only to forgive us, as if that weren’t enough in itself! He has not only forgiven, He has also gone out of His way to counter the damage that sin and its guilt have done in our lives.
Forgiveness, God’s forgiveness, has reconciled us to Him. In His forgiveness, we have been brought back to fellowship. We are no longer the declared enemies of the One and only King, we are now friends of His court, children of His household, kings ourselves over His territories. That is the declaration of heaven on our behalf. He has declared Himself our peace, and as Pastor teaches us repeatedly, that peace is God’s declaration that all is restored back the way it was intended to be. Not only the forgiveness, but the repair work, completed by Him who alone can do it! That is our testimony, that is our heritage in Him.
Knowing this, how can we not express that same compassion that has been shown us? In later parables, Jesus will explain the great evil that consists in having known such great compassion as this and yet failed to express even the least bit of compassion towards those we have been wronged by. Who are we to be so haughty? Who are we to think our honor a greater issue than God’s? “I desire compassion,” says God. For compassion expresses God’s essence, and magnifies His glory.
Another thing I find fascinating in Jesus’ use of Scripture is that He does not seem to concern Himself much with quoting things verbatim. This is a case in point. That He is quoting Scripture is clear, that He is quoting Hosea in particular is equally clear. Yet, His quotation is not a literally accurate quotation. It is not faithful to the letter of the text. The passage quoted reads, “For I delight in loyalty rather than sacrifice,” and then continues, “And in the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings” (Hos 6:6). Wow! How have we moved from loyalty to compassion? Well, in part it is because One has finally come to the Scriptures to truly know from them, and to establish His habits after that which He learns. It is interesting that in that unquoted portion of the verse God’s cry is that they would know Him. Offerings are fine. They show at least some degree of respect, I suppose, although it may very well be the abject fear that the unknown inspires in us. Sacrifices could be a symbol of obedience, but more often they are just the acting out of our inner guilt. They are like the flowers the guilty husband brings to his wife to soften her reaction to his sins against their marriage, and both God and the one bringing the sacrifice know it.
Somehow or other, these great experts of Torah had come away thinking that the loyalty and knowledge of God that are called for here consist in an even greater devotion to the sacrifices and offerings demanded by Law. Rather than hear the call to know Him better, they assumed their knowledge was already sufficient and it was just their obedience that was at fault. Instead, God was calling them to correct their understanding of who He is. He was calling them to understand what it was about Him that had led Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to entrust their lives to Him, what it was about Him that had brought David to have such incredible love for Him. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, but not when that fear is nothing but the desperate effort to fend off our own destruction. That sort of fear does not inspire trust, does not inspire love. No, it is the deep and abiding compassion of God that inspires these things. It is knowing that He is not only Just, not only Powerful, but that He loves us and has compassion for our weakness. It is because all of these things are combined in Him that He has our trust as Lord, and our undying love and gratitude as Savior.
Loyalty to such a one requires that we know Him truly, that we understand that the devotion He seeks from us is not the devotion of the imperiled who grovel at His feet hoping to thereby survive, but the devotion of loving children, the devotion of family. Loyalty to such a one requires our every effort to act on His behalf as He would act on His own. If His own response is compassion, so too must compassion be the response of loyalty to Him. “Go and learn what this means.” Recognize, oh teacher, that loyalty to God is compassion to man. Understand the meaning, not just the words, and having understood, live it.
With that Jesus closes the conversation saying that He came to call sinners, the sick who needed to hear from Him, not the righteous who had no such need. For to be righteous is by definition to be wholly conformed to God’s will. Every thought, every feeling, every action is to be bent to His purpose and His desire, if we are to be truly righteous. Now, combining that with the previous thought was a powerful message. Go learn what God desires and then, if you see that you truly conform to His desire, you can call yourself righteous. To ears that could hear, this should have been instant conviction. They ought surely to have been brought to their knees by the realization that their wholesale lack of compassion for those sinners that surrounded Jesus was undeniable evidence that they were not conformed to God’s will. “I desire compassion.” In what way was their reaction reflective of His desire? How dare they walk away still convinced of their righteousness when they had been so clearly reminded of their failure?
Father, what shall I say of myself in this regard? Have I yet learned to make Your will my habit? I know I have not, not in every regard. There are those places where I feel as though I am where You want me, doing what You would have me to do. Yet, there are many others where I cannot say this is the case. Why is this, Lord? Why is it such a challenge for us to establish the habit of holiness? It seems as though no matter how much my heart desires to pursue Your will, still I fail. And in this I know I am hardly alone. You have been gracious to leave us record of those who have felt the same struggle, men that we can only look up to as those who have found favor in Your sight.
Yet, I am amazed by this thought: Even as these men have found favor in Your sight, so have I. That I struggle in myself is not the proof of failure. It is, in reality, the proof of Your continued presence and Your continued effort in me. For this proof I thank You. For Your faithful patience I thank You. Oh! How I would that this life of mine would require less of Your patience, though. This, as it occurs to me in this moment thanks to Your Spirit teaching me, is exactly in accord with what You were saying in these verses. That frustration I feel at my slowness in responding is but the admission that I am amongst those sick You came to heal, and I welcome my Healer once again.
Let me never fall into thinking I am done and complete, Holy God. Let me never become so satisfied with what I have done in, for and through You that I think I am something. I am nothing. You are all. Whatever there is in me that is worth thinking on is You anyway. Whatever accomplishments I may lay claim to, they are accomplished because You are with me, both willing and working that I might pursue all Your desire, that I might accomplish every work that You purposed my creation for. Great is Your faithfulness, oh my God, and in Your faithfulness alone I stand. Blessed be Your holy Name now and forevermore! Amen.
