New Thoughts (9/16/07-9/24/07)
While it might seem natural to focus in the healing that happens in this brief passage, the things Jesus says here turn my attention more towards faith, which is as it should be. It begins right there in His question to these two men: “Do you believe that I am able?” Now, it might seem pretty obvious that they do believe. After all, they’ve been following Him since about the time He left Jairus. If they have been in that crowd that surrounded Jesus on the way to Jairus’ house, then they have heard more than enough to give them cause to believe in His ability. They have heard that woman’s testimony, and they have heard the shouts of surprise from those who had seen Jairus’ daughter dead when they saw that child up and eating. There should be no doubt at all as to His ability by this point, and their answer reflects that.
Next we see Jesus in action. He touches their eyes. Then He says something that we must really attend to, really hear in all its significance: “Be it done to you according to your faith.” If you would begin to feel the real power of that statement, it wouldn’t hurt to hear it is as the Message has put it: “Become what you believe.” There’s good cause for that understanding of what Jesus has said. It is predicated on the word we have translated as ‘be it done’. That word truly is indicative of that creation out of nothing that God alone is capable of. It is a word of genesis, generation. It is a matter of coming to pass, causing to be. Now, think about that: “Let the thing you have believed come into being.”
First, I would say we ought to consider that in light of God’s creating out of nothing. Our faith, that part of faith which is truly ours and not of God’s grace, is nothing. It is weak and powerless if it exists at all. Yet, out of that nothing, God creates something. He takes the nothing of our faith and adds to it the power of His faith and now, there is something there. There is a reality that is in its fashion founded upon faith. Well now, this is an idea that has been twisted and abused to no end. This treads so close to the new age conception of imagining your own reality, the so-called power of positive thinking, that many have allowed these mistaken conceptions to color their understanding of true faith. That’s a terrible thing, but hardly shocking. We are forever tempted to seek some way to adjust the message of the Gospel so that it fits more neatly with the so-called wisdom of the world. Yet, that is never the right way to go. That is not to say that there is not so much as a grain of truth in the wisdom of the world. There is. There are often nuggets of godly revelation that can be drawn from those sources. The problem enters in when we begin to deem those worldly sources as more important than the Truth of God.
If we hear something from an unlikely source that gives us a good illustration of a particular facet of God’s Truth, why should we not avail ourselves of that aid to understanding? But, if we must bend and twist the Truth to fit the illustration, something is wrong. Of course, the same could be said of illustrations that we seek to pull from Scripture. If we find ourselves having to bend and twist the obvious sense of the passage we quote to fit the doctrine we aim to support, then we are no longer serving up Truth. Even if the doctrine we seek to support be Truth, to bolster it by such false means is shameful.
Returning to the point at hand, though, there is a very real sense in which, as Thayer’s Lexicon pointed out, faith is a power. I feel we must also recognize at this juncture that there is faith and then there is faith. Faith, at its root, is a matter of being convinced. I should have to say that to be truly convinced, there must be some evidence to do the convincing. Faith without underlying evidence is not faith, it is vain imagination. Real faith has power because it has a reason to believe what it believes.
In that lies one of the distinguishing features of faith: the matter of what it believes. So, notice that first question Jesus poses: “Do you believe that I am able?” That really asks little more than whether they have had sufficient evidence shown them that they are convinced of what He can do. It probes no further than the physical plane. It bears no spiritual weight. There is nothing here that pushes into matters of sin forgiven or redemption set before them. It simply asks whether they are convinced as to His ability. Again, I would have thought their tenacity in following Him through town already attested to that, but perhaps some would go so far for the mere novelty of Him. So, He takes them to that first step of faith and belief.
“Do you believe that I am able?” There is so much that is not asked in that question! For instance, there is nothing in that which asks if they think He would be willing. There is nothing in this that probes where they think His ability comes from, or what it might mean. It is simply a question of capability.
Do you know, in spite of the evidence that they have heard in support of His ability, apart from His own implanting of faith, they still would not believe it? Think about it. The scribes and Pharisees, those in charge of the state religion, had heard far more evidence in support of this Man. They had not only heard it, they had witnessed it themselves, and yet, they did not really believe He was able. When the blind man stood before them testifying to his restored sight what was their first response? They called in the man’s parents to confirm that he had actually been blind. When the Apostles began to see healings happening in their presence by the power of this same Jesus, that news, too, came before the Sanhedrin, and still they could not accept that Jesus was able. I suppose, since they didn’t believe Him able in life it would be impossible that they would believe Him able in after-life. The point I am making, though, is that even this low-level faith to believe in His ability does not come except that He give it to us.
It is in this sense that I find the things done according to faith are things that are created out of nothing, for our faith is nothing. He must add His own gift to our nothing faith before ever our faith can begin to believe anything of Truth. Yet, we see here that faith is a power. It is a power, first and foremost, because it comes from Him and not from ourselves. That faith which is real and true is a gift of His own power imparted into our soul. There is this, that Thayer writes, that really strikes me: That power of faith, that seed of heavenly power that comes into our own being seizes the soul. Wow! So much for the meek and mild, never hurt a fly conception we have of the working of the Holy Spirit! No, He doesn’t just whisper from the sidelines hoping we might respond. He seizes the soul! Oh, there is still a yielding. Absolutely, there is a yielding to that power. Yet, it is more like the yielding of capitulation, of surrender.
This is, Thayer suggests, what it means to render obedience to faith. I would say it is more like what it means to surrender to faith. Faith is a power, and it is powerful to overwhelm our resistance. I stand as witness to that fact. It is my own story that faith overwhelmed, overpowered me in spite of myself. But, that is faith of a different level if not a different nature. We move into the realm of faith, salvific faith, faith that believes unto salvation. Yet, this is but a stronger power of belief. It still begins at that same question, “Do you believe that I am able?” What ability we are now discussing has changed, but the underlying question has not. Until we can answer ‘yes’ to that first question, though, we cannot move on to the follow-up: “Do you believe that I am willing?”
With all this in mind, I then turn to that second message of Christ, “Be it done to you according to your faith.” It is a phrase that I hear Jesus use quite often, and generally the circumstances show it to be something of a commendation of the one He is speaking to. Even here it seems to come as a sort of approval of the persistence and belief of these two. However, as I read it, and as I see the failure of these men to obey His command after receiving their healing, it occurs to me that the words Jesus speaks cut both ways.
What do I mean by that? Well, as a starting point, recall what I have been saying: There is faith and then there is faith. What is done to these two is in accord with the faith they possess. If their faith proceeded beyond merely the abilities Jesus had in the realm of physical healing, so too would His response have proceeded further. If, as seems apparent, their faith was limited to this physical matter, then the physical healing is all they would receive of Him.
Now, we must recognize and understand as well that whatever faith a man has, when it comes to the Truth of God, it comes only because God has been so gracious as to bless that man with belief. Left to ourselves, we are all unbelievers until the Holy Spirit comes at the direction of the Father through the ministry of the Son and instills belief in us. He so wills in us that we are made willing to believe. Thus, the seed of faith is planted, and the Spirit sees to it that the seed of faith is well tended so as to grow. Ah, but we’ve seen that parable! We know well enough that the seed of the word of God does not always grow, for it is sown with abandon. Not all soil is fit for growing righteousness.
So, we must balance our understanding of faith in some way. I have said elsewhere that faith must necessarily be connected to knowledge. Now, that may not necessarily be the case when that seed of faith is planted in us. Yet, if that seed had not been planted where its roots could grow down and draw sustenance from knowledge, then there would be no growth of that faith. But, Who has arranged for us to know? Who has maneuvered circumstances around us so as to prove His presence to us when yet we refused to believe? Indeed, He has worked in such fashion in my life as to leave me little choice but to believe, and He has done so in such a way that nothing can displace that belief.
So, faith is ours and yet it is His. How, then, is it that faith sets bounds upon what Jesus will do for us? (Let me say this: faith does not limit what Jesus can do, only what He will do.) While my answer may not be wholly satisfactory, this is what I see as the issue: We often speak a greater degree of belief than we truly hold. Sometimes, I suspect, we are as much trying to talk ourselves into believing as we are seeking to convince anybody else. Sometimes, I think we simply put more weight on the vocalization of belief than we ought to. We have read that faith must be spoken, and so we speak it. We speak it even when we’re not fully convinced of it. We speak it in hopes that maybe our beliefs will catch up with our tongue at some point. There may well be a place for that, for faith comes by hearing, yes? We have seen elsewhere in the Gospels, and in our own lives as well, how powerful a testimony can be. Faith, as I wrote a few weeks ago, is aroused by what arises from faith.
Here, though is the limit of the spoken word: When the word of the mouth does not reflect the true, deep-held convictions of the heart, the words count for nothing. Had these men only been claiming a belief that Jesus could heal but not really been convinced that this was true, I have no doubt but that no healing would have happened at all. Those men would have walked away as blind as they arrived. Had they believed beyond the mere matter of healing, to the point of truly believing Jesus was the Son of David, as they addressed Him, I suspect more than their eyes would have been healed in that moment. Again, though it pains me at times to have to repeat it: physical healing has never been and never shall be the primary focus of Jesus. It grabs our attention, to be sure, but His attention is on the soul, for the soul is eternal.
So, yes, there is this sense that our faith may well limit our reception of His benefits, but let me immediately counter that with the reminder that it is He who has given us the faith we have. So, if we are truly counted amongst the chosen, if we have truly received the mark of the redeemed, we need not fear that our faith is not sufficient for Him to honor. Again, I have written elsewhere of the false condemnation that some bring upon the suffering by claiming their weak faith has kept them from being healed. A faith that already believes unto salvation is not likely to be too weak to believe unto healing of physical ailments. Yet, God remains sovereign in how He chooses to work with each of His children.
I would see this more as a matter of warning to those who would rely on well-worded prayers and confessions. That is in keeping with the message of the Christ, that worship which is worship in form alone is no worship at all. The time is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship in Spirit and in Truth (Jn 4:23). There is much to say about such worship, but for the moment, let me limit it to this: True worship will not try to ‘work up’ a belief it doesn’t believe. Such a belief is not True, so how can the worship that it drives be true? True worship, as I see in David, confesses when faith is feeling weak. True worship admits to failure. But, it doesn’t wallow in it. Because, the core of faith, the real belief in the heart of the worshiper draws the eyes of God to him. Yes, and God looks with compassion upon this frail child and immediately sets to work. He points to that poor, downcast yet earnest worshiper, and sends the Spirit to his aid, and the Spirit of the Living God comes in to will in that man that he might will and work in accord with a greater faith. It is like God points to a plant in need of water and sends the Spirit to tend to His plant. Water that faith lest it wither and fail! And so we see David constantly moving from beginnings that seem so far from the God we know and love to conclusions that shout the glory of the Living God. We see him moved from the vengeful warring that he feels as he begins seeking God out to the praise of God’s mercy and redemption as the Spirit comes and cleanses him of his weakened understanding.
What has happened? Circumstance has turned our attention aside from its proper focus. Has faith grown weak? In a sense, but only in a sense. That faith still remains the gift of God and His gift is not really likely to fail, is it? No, but as we allow our attention to be drawn away from faith and towards our circumstance, our awareness of faith is weakened and so, the benefit we draw from faith is restricted.
Come, then, Holy Spirit, and restore our attention to its rightful Object, as You did so often with David! Help us to once again turn our eyes upon the prize of heaven, to keep our attention on our destination. Bring us to that place where we can hear the full blessing of our Jesus’ words, “It shall be as you have believed.”
Let me note, while I am at it, that sometimes the disconnect between our tongue and our faith is in our favor. There are times when our tongues confess a degree of disbelief when our soul knows better than to ‘go there’. In those moments of weakness, let this be a comfort to us: It shall be done as we have believed. Though our tongue has fallen, yet the faith that is ours remains strong. Though we will find it necessary to repent of what our tongues have confessed, yet the confession of faith remains unchanged, for the seed of Truth is not so weak as to be destroyed by the word of a man. Yes, and our Savior and Redeemer even now looks at the heart. So, understand that whichever way it may be that word and faith have diverged, it will ever be faith that matters more. Oh, we long for and desire that our words might be as true to Him as is the faith He has given us. How we ache to find ourselves in a place where our tongues no longer betray us! Yes, and that is well. But, as we labor towards that perfection, let us not be shaken with fear and doubts. Our faith, the faith that He has given us of Himself, has saved us. We have been given into His hands, and He has not yet lost a one that was thus entrusted to Him. He’s not going to start losing us now.
Be it done to you according to your faith. When words fail, though the body may be frail, be it done to you according to your faith. This is the positive application. We all know how easy it is to counsel the hurting to hold to their faith. There are more than enough people telling them to speak out the faith that is in them. But, we also know full well that when we are in that place, we don’t feel the faith we ought to speak. It is a place where emotions cloud the mind and the faith that is truly within us isn’t penetrating to our thoughts. To be told to hold out our faith, in those moments, is more likely to aggravate than to help. To be asked where our faith is will only weaken what remains as it stirs up doubt and self-condemnation, for somewhere deep inside we know our faith shouldn’t waiver like this.
The reality is that faith hasn’t wavered. As I said, it has just been obscured in the fog of pain and emotion. Faith remains strong because it is not our faith in the first place. It is the faith of Christ Himself, the faith that exudes from the presence of the Holy Spirit within us. He Who promised never to leave or forsake us is also the font of faith within us. Faith – real faith – doesn’t fail, and our weakness in times of suffering doesn’t change that fact. Faith remains. We may not feel it, but our feeling it isn’t the point. We may not be able to speak it out as we ought, but that isn’t the point.
Our words will be as poor a reflection of the faith within us in those moments as are the hypocritical words of the one whose pride deludes him into thinking himself more holy than he is. To both, God says, “It shall be done according to your faith.” To the hypocrite, that response ought to be sufficient to drive him to his knees in what may be the first real repentance he has known. To the suffering child of God, firm in faith, though he feels it not, these are words of greatest comfort. These are the words that turned David’s psalms around. What he spoke at the start was so poor a reflection of the God he believed, and the belief he held about God, but he poured out what he was feeling. God, far from being put off by this weakness, responded to the faith that was hid from sight in that weakness. “I shall not punish your honest words, David, but I shall cause the faith that is in you to arise and correct your words.” Thus, does the psalm resolve to the glory of God, as David’s faith is strengthened to break through the clouds of trouble that have taken hold of him.
The fundamental point is that there is an absolutely real correlation between what we really believe of God and how God responds. We mustn’t allow our prayers to become false to where we are at. If we are presently plagued by fear and doubt, God already knows about it. It accomplishes nothing to pretend all is well when next we talk to Him. It simply says we are not ready to deal with the problem yet. When we allow our prayers, our conversations with Father God, to be honest, He can minister to those weak spots we are showing, can strengthen the faith that lies beneath, so that we can end better than we began.
Part of the issue we have is that we tend to color the Truth of God by our own wants and desires. Rather than hearing the Truth as truth, we hear those parts that support our current position and ignore that which contradicts us. Like willful children, we hear what we want to hear. This is nothing new. Israel had the same problem. It is evident throughout the record of this ministry as we see it in the Gospels. They had, over the years, managed to misconstrue the purpose of the Law, the purpose of the nation, and the purpose of Messiah. They had, by and large, labored to bury the treasure of true religion that had been entrusted to them. Rather than shine the light of God upon the nations, they had made of it an exclusive club, only available in full to those of Jewish descent. Meanwhile, they had also tinkered with the Law they claimed to protect, trying to make it more manageable, more palatable. Perhaps they thought to keep it relevant to the culture.
Most evident in this passage, though, is the misunderstanding of Messiah. This is a matter we find Jesus dealing with repeatedly. We should understand that Israel’s desire for Messiah was heavily colored by their circumstance. They had been put under the feet of so many oppressors at this point that it had become almost normal to them. Oh, they would still bristle at the thought of being enslaved. No, they had never been enslaved! Yet, they could not deny that they no longer controlled their own land or their own politics. They could claim some pretty special treatment at the hands of Rome, but they were just as subjugated by Rome nonetheless. And they didn’t like it one bit.
So, they comforted themselves, such as still held some thread of the old faith, with thoughts of Messiah. This one would come, the hero of Israel, just like in the age of judges. Yes, one would arise with the anointing of God on him to lead the nation to military victory over their oppressors, and the glorious kingdom of David and Solomon would be restored. This is the Messiah the nation wanted. It was not – at least in the near term – the one God had promised. They had picked from amongst the prophecies of this One to build the image they wanted, and set aside every word of the prophets that displayed something else. There was no hint of the suffering servant in their picture. Neither was their anything of deity to be seen in the Messiah they sought. Why, that would be sacrilege! How could they assign deity to a mere mortal? Had Messiah been a mere mortal, their concern would have been valid. But, their coloring of Messiah’s description had left them unable to comprehend the whole of His story and His purpose.
This issue of popular misconception is a large part of the reason Jesus is constantly seeking to limit the response to what He is doing. Tell no one what was done. Tell no one what has happened. Tell no one Who I Am. The greatest underlying reason I see for all these commands, the common thread, is that the reports that would go out would only increase the mistaken understandings. Reports of marvelous healings might enhance His reputation with the people, but they would be even more inclined to come for the healing and the food, rather than for the message of the Kingdom. The more people began to think of Him as a candidate for Messiah, the more they were inclined to push Him into the throne of Israel, to force Him to take up arms against Rome and free the land. Tell no one, because they still won’t understand the point. They must be taught more before they can accept this news as they ought.
I see this underlying the way Jesus questions the understanding of His people when it comes to Messiah. Whose son is this Messiah? Who do they say I am? These are connected issues, connected by what the answers reveal. So, we find Jesus asking the experts that came to test Him, “Whose son is the Christ?” They answer that the Christ is the son of David (Mt 22:42). Well, what is their understanding of the Christ, then? They recognize that the Christ will be a king, like David, for the king must surely come of the Davidic line. They are expecting royalty, a ruler, and – given the historic role of king – a military commander of some little prowess.
According to Josephus, the son of David was also held to possess great powers of healing. Think about that for a moment. The places we hear people addressing Jesus by this title are almost exclusively places where people were seeking healing. We see it here. We see it in that other account of the blind men calling out for the mercy of the Son of David (Mt 20:30-31, Mk 10:47-48, Lk 18:38-39). We see it when the Canaanite woman was seeking His aid for her daughter (Mt 15:22). I notice, in this case, that she also refers to Him as Lord. That would seem to indicate an understanding of both roles for the son of David, king and healer.
Then we come to the entry to Jerusalem, and there are the crowds crying out, “Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!” (Mt 21:9). This was the final straw for those authorities in the Temple! The people were proclaiming Him king, right here in Jerusalem. If Rome’s representatives caught wind of this, there would be trouble, and that trouble would not spare the leaders of the Temple. Something must be done. This is exactly what leads to their coming to Jesus to trip Him up with their clever religious riddles. But, Jesus turns the challenge on its head when He asks them that simple question, “Whose son is the Christ?” When they respond that the Christ is David’s son, they are had. “If that is so,” Jesus asks, “how can it be that David calls his own son, ‘Lord’?” He then proceeds to quote David’s own Psalm 110. This stops His interrogators cold. They cannot answer, nor dared they ask Him anything more (Mt 22:43-46).
Well, what was the point of that exchange? Was it simply to spar, to show off? No, it was as much a matter of teaching as anything else. He was getting the people to recognize that there was more to this Christ than just the human dimension. It was something greater than God’s anointing on Israel’s ruler. It was about far more than dynasty and self-rule. Much of Jesus’ effort went into correcting the misconceptions of His people.
Isn’t it interesting that He never refers to Himself as the Son of David? His preferred title is Son of Man. This is also a clear reference to the Christ, established by the prophets, particularly Daniel. I know I have studied that particular title of His recently. Here, I simply wish to consider it in light of His other titles of descent, Son of David and Son of God. These three titles, being as they all refer to the Christ, need to be understood together.
In light of the fact that this portion of study has now been on my horizon for some days, I find it wonderful that God ordained a set of coincidences in other areas for me. First, there is the timing of R. C. Sproul’s message of the month for this month arriving earlier in the week. His topic for this month? Peter’s confession, “Thou art the Son of the Living God”. Perfect timing, God! Then, as I have been reading Calvin’s coverage of the Gospels off and on over the course of this study, I picked it up last night, and what passage had I arrived at? Peter’s confession. So, it seems, I am intended to pursue this connection, and must give thanks to my God and King for providing the extra insight in such a timely fashion.
Thank You, my Lord, for bringing these resources before me just as I enter into exploring Your presentation and handling of these titles. May I grasp what You have placed before me and also pursue this connection with wisdom and without vain imaginings.
So, the nation awaited their Christ, their anointed king and redeemer. They had ideas of who he was to be, but they were only ideas. They had this sense of the redeemer coming with power to heal. They certainly had the sense of the king who would restore the fortunes of his people, chasing out the oppressing enemies before his armies. Whose son is the Christ? He is the Son of David. This was the understanding. It was understood in that light because it was taught in that light. “The scribes say the Christ is David’s son” (Lk 20:41).
When Jesus confronts this limited understanding of the office, two things happen. First, we find Him seeking to distance Himself from the office as they envision it. Here we have a case in point. The two men who have pursued Him for healing recognize this Son of David role that is a portion of the office He holds. They are recognizing His lineage well enough. But, what they are attributing to Him as regards the basis for His power to heal is off base. Yes, there is a matter of prophetic fulfillment here. Yes, because God has decreed it to be so, it is necessary that the Christ must be descended from the line of David, that the promise to David may be maintained. But, it is neither the lineage nor the prophecy that give the Christ power to heal. There is no mystical connection to Solomon that imbues Him with this power. It is not the power of man or of magic, but the power of God. Because they understand the matter wrongly, Jesus seeks to quiet their testimony, for it is a testimony of misunderstanding, and will serve to promote the myth rather than the Truth.
The second thing I notice is that Jesus doesn’t simply feed them the Truth when He asks about their understanding of things. He gives them reason to think and leaves it at that. If it is as you say, that the Christ is David’s son, then how can it be that David calls him ‘Lord’? If it were merely a reference to Solomon, one could write it off as maybe indicating that period near David’s death when Solomon already had the throne. For that brief period, Solomon is king and David is not. But, then it cannot be indication that the Christ is David’s son, only that Solomon is, which is hardly revelation. Jesus is essentially telling the scribes that they should have clued in that the Christ was more than just the heir to the throne. That David declared the Christ greater than himself should have pointed them to the real answer to the riddle of Messiah.
Think about that passage. Yahweh says to my Adonai. That alone should clarify that we’re not speaking of any earthly king here. The Psalm is relating a conversation of God with Himself, as it were. Though it would be an offense in the ear of His people, it really is Father speaking to Son. Behold, the Lord your God, He is One! Yes, He is, and yet there is a plurality in that One. There are promises made Person to Person. There are assignments given. There are so many places where the Spirit of the Living God is evident in the pages of Torah, somewhat less where we can discern the Son and He is always seemingly shown in shadows; hinted at but never clearly on display. Yet, Abraham saw His day and even Adam heard news of His coming.
The point Jesus makes to the teachers of Israel at that time is that there really is no excuse for them having so limited not only their own understanding of Messiah, but also that of those they taught. The people no longer had the power of God’s own Truth to uphold them in these trying times, but only the myths and misunderstandings of their supposed shepherds.
Now, come to Peter’s confession. It opens with a question not unlike what Jesus asked the scribes. “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” (Mt 16:13-16). Again, the answers He hears are indicative of myths and superstitions more than of Truth. Well, some think He’s John the Baptist. As R.C. pointed out, that may simply have been because they hadn’t heard about John’s passing yet, for their ministry styles were quite similar. On the other hand – and particularly given the second alternative they offer up – it may be a superstitious belief in the possibility of shades returning. It’s not quite reincarnation, but it does evidence a certain belief in the permanence of the soul. It’s just been twisted out of shape. You know, there is that promise of a new body more befitting the soul of man when we are welcomed home, but that is nothing even close to allowing for some form of second physical life here.
The third opinion they offer up from the people is that they think He might be Jeremiah or one of the other prophets. Today, that gets prettied up a bit in the opinions of man. They don’t speak of Him as the return of a previous prophet, but simply as a prophet. To acknowledge Him a prophet is hardly to promote error, for He is Prophet and Priest as well as King. The error lies in restricting Him to that office alone. What is interesting, as Peter relays the opinions they have been hearing, is this idea that He is a specific prophet, a returning prophet. Clearly, any prophet they might have in mind would have to be a prophet long dead. After all, no fully sanctioned prophet had been heard in Israel for several hundred years.
What does it say of the state of Israel at that time that they could not even envision a man of God arising from their midst? The only way they seem to be able to accept a man as God’s messenger is to view him as the embodiment of somebody from former times! It’s not even a matter of looking back to the glory days of Israel, either! Neither Elijah nor Jeremiah were speaking at the height of Israel’s devotion to God. Quite the opposite. These men, in their ministries, were dealing with times when Israel’s spiritual condition was at its nadir. Indeed, it seems the prophetic role was always tuned for dealing with such times. The prophet was the voice of correction. If there were nothing to correct, what need for the voice? So, perhaps it was a form of confession on the part of the people that they would expect a prophet in their own day. It is as much as an admission that their neglect of God and righteousness had made it necessary for a prophet to come.
This also leads me to wonder if the proper role of the prophet has changed all that much. Certainly, our view of the prophetic has changed, but is that God’s plan or our penchant? It seems, from the examples we have in the New Testament, that there was indeed some degree of change in the prophetic role. Yet, it never seems to have lost that mission of warning. I think the degree of excitement that arises around things prophetic in our day may well be evidence of our failure to understand the prophetic purpose, much as we have misunderstood the purpose of healing.
God does not send forth a prophetic word for our amusement. Neither does He do so just to tell us how good we’re doing. God is not frivolous. When He sends such direct word to His people it is because they are going so far off course that nothing less will do. The prophets of the Old Testament ministered to a nation that had walked away from God. Yes, there were those few who remained faithful, who may have rejoiced to hear these spokesmen, but somehow I think any rejoicing was pretty muted. No matter how much we might agree with God’s assessment of things, it would be hard to rejoice over our own destruction should our neighbors fail to repent. Generally, that is what could be expected, given the messages that came. I must also note that the message God sends, even though it is such a stern message of judgment, never fails to offer hope. There is always that ‘never the less’ included. There is always the remnant remaining. This was the hope given to those faithful few who heard with agreement.
What of the New Testament prophets? Were they really any different? We don’t have a great deal to go on in this regard, but we do know there were prophets. Were they still serving as watchmen on the walls, still warning of the consequences of rejecting and ignoring God? It doesn’t seem so, from what we can see of them. It seems they were far more involved with informing the remnant of what was coming. There is that one who found himself warning Paul of what must happen if he insisted on going to Jerusalem, for instance. This is no warning to the world, it is a informing of God’s own agents.
Even the great prophetic book of the New Testament, the Revelation to John, is not really written in a fashion that would address the unbeliever. Indeed, it is one of the strongest arguments for supposing the unbeliever’s case is already settled in heaven. No, this is far more a warning to the believer. Look at the way the message begins. Is the King of kings addressing those rulers of the earth whose reign He will soon be ending? No. His warnings are addressed to the churches. These are messages to the faithful, designed to stir them back to strength and fervor. As dark a picture as is painted of the end times in that book, it is painted so that the believer will not be shaken by what must come. The whole is a warning of what must come about so that those whose faith is kept by Christ will not waver. Forewarned is forearmed, as the saying goes. These things are coming, but don’t suppose it means that God has lost. Far from it! They are the death throws of a defeated enemy.
This seems to epitomize the role of the prophet, and displays the greatest continuity between the old and the new. While much of the old message was a direct warning regarding the behavior of the covenant community, the warning was given to explain the discipline that must come. The discipline was shown to be discipline so that none would see it as God abandoning His people. No. There would be a remnant. The faithful, or at least a portion of the faithful, would remain to see His blessing on the other side of that discipline. For those whose punishment would be in full, this was but an announcement of the court’s decision. But, to those who still heard with ears of faith, there was that kernel of hope – the remnant will survive, and they will again know God’s countenance upon them when this has been done.
So, yes, the prophetic role has changed somewhat, as far as we can see in the Biblical example, but not by much. When the Church strays from God’s course, we can certainly accept and expect that He will speak a word of correction. Will it include threats of destruction as of old? Well, I would have to say that God does not change. If the Church has become so deaf to the word of gentle correction that only destruction can save it, then yes, I would expect to hear such threats. But, I will never expect to hear the threat without the promise. I will never expect to hear all doom and no hope. The remnant will still remain because His promise is still yea and amen.
Well, let me get back to Peter and his confession (Mt 16:15-16). Once again, Jesus has been hearing that the understanding of His people is misdirected. They know there is a Christ, but they have allowed their conception of Him to be distorted by myths and corrupted by the beliefs of other cultures. Where has this idea of dead men coming back in new bodies come from? It certainly hasn’t come from God’s revealed religion! Why can they not see that the Messiah is more than just a man anointed to rule Israel? As He showed them from the Psalms, it ought to be clear that this is not merely a man that is pointed to. So, between bad teaching and cultural corruption, God’s people fail to see what is revealed to them.
Let’s not get too down on them, though, until we have seen to ourselves! If ever there was an age when the Church was being overwhelmed by the culture, this is it! Some would say that the very presence of modern music in our worship services is a sign of that corrupting culture. Some would point to the projectors, technology in the house of God, and decry it as foreign fire at the altar. While I think these complaints should be taken seriously and brought before God in prayer that we might discern any real problems, I also think they are a bit over zealous. This does not, however, clear us of the charges of bringing false fire before God. I would only say that these particular complaints are more likely distracting us from the real issues. What shall we say to a church more interested in being relevant than being accurate to the Word of God? What shall we say to a church more concerned with its bottom line than with the purity of the Gospel that it preaches? What shall we say to a church that is more concerned with being sensitive to society than with impacting society? Strange fire indeed!
Back to the text: Jesus has heard the report. Israel’s teachers have clearly done His people a disservice, if this is how they understand the message. Well, is it the teachers’ fault or are the students just a bit dense? One more question answers that quite nicely. “Well, then, who do you say I am?” Before we hear Peter answer for the group, let’s recognize something important here. The “I am” of this question is most assuredly to be heard as equating Himself with the “Son of Man” of that first question. So, whatever answer is given, the one answering must now recognize that the question contains in itself a declaration. “Who do you say that I, the Son of Man, am?” Whatever it is you may speak of this Son of Man, know now that you are speaking about Me. This was not lost on those disciples sitting with Him at that point. They understood fully that He was the Son of Man, for He had referred to Himself by that title often enough.
They must have recognized that with the first question, that He was really asking, “What do the people understand about Me?” Now it’s their turn, “what do you understand about Me?” “Have you been grasping what I have been teaching?” Well, Peter speaks for the group and proclaims, “Thou art the Christ.” Had he stopped there, it would have said nothing new. It would not provide any evidence that these twelve were not suffering from the same misconceptions as the rest. But, he doesn’t stop there. He also declares, “You are the Son of the living God.” Now, we have a confession that proclaims truth beyond the general understanding. Now, all three titles are tied together and their real significance laid bare!
The Son of David is the Son of Man is the Son of God. Perhaps we should view this as three titles to indicate three offices. The Son of David points particularly to the King, both as legislator and as military hero of the people. The Son of Man reflects the office of the Prophet, bearing God’s word to the people for their correction and edification. The Son of God, though, does He not minister to God? Is He not uniquely qualified to bear the prayers and the worship of God’s people to Him? Yes, and therein lays the role of the Priest. And, as the Son of the living God, He is set apart as something completely unique from those titans of Greek mythology. He is not the accident of some dalliance of a capricious deity. No, He is the legitimate and legal son of the God Who Is!
Then, Jesus makes clear how important it is that Peter and those others understood this. It is important not only in showing that they understood the Truth. It is important in that the only way they could have understood is because the Father revealed it to them. As important as it is for us to preach the Truth of God unvarnished and untarnished, we cannot, by doing so, guarantee results. That should be obvious to us. Were it not so, surely the whole world would be converted by now. No, we cannot do anything in our own strength that will work. There is no program we can devise, no blueprint for ministry that we can purchase from the successful church down the road, that will make us more effective for the kingdom. The best preaching, the best worship, the most fervent prayer; all of this will avail us nothing except the Father reveal to those we would reach Who His Son Is. We can and should do our utmost to provide Him means to reach those lost hearts by our words and actions, but it is His call and His alone in the end.
And on that rock, He will build His church (Mt 16:17). It’s not Peter that sits as the cornerstone. How could anybody think so? It would be a weak church indeed that took a man as its foundation! I’m not sure it’s even the recognition of the Christ in His full role that Jesus intends in this comment. I rather think it’s the nature of the revelation. It is the fact of revealed religion, the fact that what we stand upon, what we believe, we believe for no reason other than that the Father revealed it to us. That is the strength of faith at least as much as what faith believes. Oh, it were impossible that we could believe a Christ we do not see in His full office at this stage, but if we were convinced only by logic, only by the arguments of man, our faith would yet be a weak and fragile thing. It is because He has revealed Himself to us, often without or in spite of the efforts of man, that our faith in Him can be so resolute. The strength of the Church is that its foundation rests on no man. In the end, it doesn’t even rest on the Son of Man, but on the Father Who reveals the Son.
Well, if I return once more to these two blind men, what did they recognize about Jesus? Clearly, they believed Him to be Messiah, but what did they understand about Messiah? They understood the popular conception: he had power to heal. They certainly should understand that. There had been more than enough evidence of that ability given. Did they know anything beyond this about their Messiah? I suspect not. It strikes me that when the Canaanite woman came to speak to this same Son of David, for similar reasons, she at least called Him, ‘Lord,’ recognizing His right of rule. This is more than these two display. Further, had they truly recognized this One as King, would they really be so easy about ignoring His command to them? “Let no one know!” But they went out and told everybody.
Now, it should be pretty obvious, I suppose, that this was not intended to be either a permanent injunction, nor even a total injunction. Had it been given with such intention, He would have been asking of these two something they could never hope to comply with. Tell no one? Look, they couldn’t be complete unknowns. Somebody out there was familiar with their condition, and could hardly fail to notice that conditions had changed. What were they to say to such people? Should they lie? I cannot imagine that Jesus would advocate such a thing. No, I am confident that there would have been no issue with them answering those who directly asked them what had happened. Even then, though, had they respected this Messiah as Lord and King, I think they would have had to think hard about it before they did so.
However, the idea that they should go out and broadcast the news to anybody within earshot is so clearly counter to the command as to suggest perhaps they were deaf as well. But, then, they had heard His question well enough. “Do you believe that I am able?” Oh, yes. They believed that, and it was done for them according to their faith. No more and no less. Their eyes were opened as they believed would come. Their hearts, however, seem to have remained shut, for their faith did not extend that far. The gift they had been given was not as big as that.
Such is the display of excitement. Many today come to the house of God for no more than these two did. They will pursue healing ministries hither and yon. They will chase whatever evangelist has the latest miracle light show being reported. Flakes chasing gold flake. Yet, there is nothing in them that really recognizes God in God. There is no longing for a true Messiah, only for bread and circuses. Will they receive healing? Perhaps. It may be done according to their meager faith. Will they receive prosperity in this life? Perhaps. It may be done according to their misdirected faith. But, will there be salvation? You know, that’s the only answer that really matters, and sadly, the answer is often going to be no. It was nothing they were seeking – not that it was anything any of us were seeking. It was not there in the gift of faith they received, so they have satisfied themselves with things that glitter and missed the gold of kingdom citizenship.
In many ways, such as these deserve greater pity than those who are more actively opposed to the work of Christ. At least those who battle the Christ in earnest know they are lost. These chasers after trinkets, though, quite often think themselves properly in the church, properly in the number. They may well go to their grave convinced that they are right with God, only to find themselves like that rich man of parable. “You have had your blessings in life, but you have stored up no treasure in heaven.”
God! Let us not find ourselves in this predicament, learning too late that we have set our priorities all wrong. Oh, Father, if there be anything in me that thinks I am better off than I am, purge me of it. If, on the other hand, I present too harsh a picture, then let that, too, be corrected in me, lest I teach of You other than You are. Oh, but God, let me ever value the reward of life in the kingdom with You more highly than anything this life has to offer. I shall enjoy those gifts You choose to give me now, but let me not cling to them. I shall rejoice for the beauty You set before my eyes, but let me not pant for desire after them. Let my greatest hunger, Holy One, be reserved for Your presence, now and always. Amen.
