Friday, January 31, 2014

The Cowardly Lion




This is a heart-wrenching story. Yet, just because there's an end, does it mean that's "the end"?

How often in our own lives do we judge someone over disappointment or because there's been a disagreement? "You don't agree with me, so we're done!" "You didn't stick up for me, so we're done!" "What you did was shameful beyond belief, so we're done!" The End.

Where is there room for grace? For mercy? For healing? For growth? Isn't this what Jesus is about?

To throw stones at Peter is easy. In the face of adversity, Peter failed. He denied Jesus not once; not twice; he denied knowing Jesus three times. Instead of being courageous, Peter used this moment for self-preservation.

Let's take a step back though and piece the story together. Let's see what "the end" truly is.

Earlier that evening, Jesus told the disciples, "You will become deserters."  Peter immediately responded, "Even though all become deserters, I will not." What happened then in the Garden of Gethsemane? Upon Jesus' arrest, the disciples fled. All of them.

End of the story? No. In all of the ensuing chaos, Peter drummed up the courage to stealthily follow Jesus to the house of the High Priest. While he wasn't inside, Peter stood on the outside in the courtyard. This disciple meant to keep his word.

On a cold night, Peter warmed himself by the fire. In the light produced by the flames, he was recognized by one of the High Priest's servant-girls who "stared at him."

"You were also with Jesus, the man from Nazareth."

How did a servant-girl have this knowledge? Jesus preached the message of Good News to all, but especially to the poor, to those in need. Would not this servant-girl have been drawn to such a message? Being a servant, even to the High Priest, wouldn't exclude one from being poor. It may have been an honor to serve Caiaphas, but a retirement plan wasn't in the works for that privilege of servitude.

By her statement, the servant-girl had actually been in the presence of Jesus -- at some point that week. How so? She had seen Peter "with Jesus, the man from Nazareth."

Peter knows he's standing on rocky pavement and in unfriendly confines. He utters a quick denial and makes his way to the gateway of the courtyard, but... he doesn't leave. "The cock crowed."

The servant-girl doesn't want a potentially money-making opportunity to escape. She says to others in the crowd, "This man is one of them."

While her heart may have been lifted by Jesus' message for a better future to come, the servant-girl had an opportunity to be instantly rewarded in her "present." To turn in a wanted man -- and the disciples were wanted -- would've lined someone's purse. Hers.

Again, Peter verbally denies it. In so doing, an observation is made by someone nearby.

"Certainly you are one of them; for you are a Galilean."

How did they know? Peter's accent gave him away. It was known fact that 11 of the 12 disciples were from Galilee. Standing in the courtyard of the High Priest at this absurd hour and with this emotionally wrought throng, no one would want to be associated with Jesus. Guilt by association would equal death.

What is Peter's response? For the third time, he denies Jesus. Vehemently. "I do not know this man you are talking about."

The rooster crows (or the priestly Temple Crier calls out) for the second time. At that moment, in saving his own neck, Peter realizes what he has done. "And he broke down and wept."

Why wasn't Peter arrested? By weeping, he admitted his guilt, yes? Not under that type of stress and pressure. His breakdown could've easily been looked upon as nothing more than weakness. Who among them could provide the necessary proof that Peter was a disciple?

Is this a story of cowardice? Of shame? It has those elements but there's more to the story.

The writer of the Gospel of Mark was very sharp. He brought irony to the page. On the inside of the High Priest's palace, false witness was being provided against Jesus. Simultaneously, on the outside, false witness was also provided.

Who among the disciples was the first to be called by Jesus? Peter. Mark 1:16-17. Who was the first to state Jesus as the Christ, the Messiah? Peter. Mark 8:29. Who was the first to openly deny knowing Jesus? Peter.

Swept up under the horrible circumstances surrounding Peter, one can understand why he collapsed from the weight of his words. He wept. Not just a few tears. He wept.

And even then, does the story end here? No.

Through his tears, Peter turned to God for forgiveness and mercy. Peter mourned his weakness. He wanted to be strong; to become the man who Jesus knew he could be.

In 2 Kings 20:4-5, the great prophet Isaiah heard these words coming from God, 'Turn back and say to Hezekiah prince of my people, "Thus says the Lord, the God of your ancestor David: I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; indeed, I will heal you;...."'

Because "I have heard your prayer," because "I have seen your tears," you will be healed.

That is a beautiful message of forgiveness, of grace, of mercy, of healing, of hope.

In this moment of utter despair, Peter's life changed forever. He would never be the same. If this story of Peter's denial ended with him in a heap of cowardice and shame, what would've happened to Jesus' message of Good News? Most likely this Gospel account would've never been written. Mark, the author, eventually followed Peter who gained fortitude and shared his witness to the masses. Mark, who was in the Garden of Gethsemane and fled as well, became inspired by Peter's courage and his wherewithal to grow from this experience.

Like the Cowardly Lion at the end of "The Wizard of Oz," Peter is no longer filled with fear. His story of shame ultimately becomes one known for his courage.

We aren't called to be perfect, and we won't be perfect even when answering that call. At times, we will be weak when we want to be strong. However with a humbled heart, we will eventually grow into who God wants us to be.

NEXT
It's all about Pilate

Thursday, January 23, 2014

Judge, Jury and Executioner




"This territory isn't big enough for the two of us."

In an old Western movie, menacing words such as these would be spit out by a gruff gunslinger. What about at a biased court martial with Jesus as the accused, the Sanhedrin as the biased jury, and Caiaphas as the hanging judge?

Recognized as the supreme court of the Jews, the Sanhedrin was composed of 71 members. Among the numbered were Sadducees (priests), Pharisees and Scribes (experts in the law), and respected men who were elders. Presiding over the court was the High Priest.[i]

In the dead of night, the assembly had gathered at the house of Caiaphas. Witnesses were brought forward to testify against Jesus, but their testimony didn't coalesce. Not knowing what to do, the religious authorities' frustration escalated.

Did You Know...?
Not all on the council were against Jesus. Two dissenting members, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, played a significant role later in the gospel account.

Sights set on Jesus, the High Priest stood up to take matters into his own hands.

"Have you no answer? What is it that they testify against you?"

Silence. Like the suffering servant in Isaiah 53:7, Jesus gave no response. Caiaphas' blood boiled.

"Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?"

Although Jesus avoided similar questioning in earlier situations (Mark 7:5-6, 11:29), not answering this question could have serious repercussions. If he remained silent, it might be seen as a denial of his mission.

"I am."

Those two words, while politically charged, were not blasphemous. A Jewish king could have the titles of Messiah and Son of the Blessed One. However, it was what followed "I am" -- Jesus' quotes of Psalm 110:1 and Daniel 7:13 -- that provided the Sanhedrin something in which to grab a hold.

'''You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power,' and 'coming with the clouds of heaven.'''

Jesus tells the Jewish supreme court, "You've come to judge me? The role will soon be reversed." In melodramatic fashion, Caiaphas rips open his clothes. Jesus had identified himself as the judging Son of Man.  

"Why do we still need witnesses? You have heard his blasphemy!"

The Sanhedrin reached a verdict of death; yet, with no power to inflict capital punishment, Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, would have to consent. In the frenzy of heightened emotion after the rush-to-judgment, the spitting, beating and mocking of Jesus began.

Straight-forward story, right? Everything on the up-and-up, yes? Not so much. Rules and laws were broken right and left.

1) A meeting violation. "The official meeting place of the Sanhedrin was the Hall of Hewn Stone which was within the Temple precincts, and the decisions of the Sanhedrin were not valid unless reached at a meeting held in that place."[ii] Where did they meet? At Caiaphas' house.

2) A timing violation. "The court could not meet at night, nor could it meet at any of the great feasts."[iii] "m. Pesah 4:1, 5-6 makes clear that one may work at most up until noon on the day on which Passover begins at sundown."[iv] When did they meet? After midnight. On the feast of the Passover.

3) A testimony violation. Exodus 20:16, Deuteronomy 17:6 and 19:15 clearly state evidence must be truthful, must come from more than one witness, and details must align. Also witnesses were supposed to be examined separately. Did any of that happen? "Their testimony did not agree."

4) A trial violation. "No one could be asked to incriminate himself, but that was the very question the High Priest asked."[v] Caiaphas couldn't get what he wanted so he took matters into his own hands. He asked a leading question.

5) A jury violation. "Each individual member of the Sanhedrin must give his verdict separately, beginning from the youngest and going on to the eldest."[vi] With the rush for a verdict, that rule seemed to have been skipped.

6) A judgment violation. "If the verdict was a verdict of death, a night must elapse before it was carried out, so that the court might have a chance to change its mind and its decision towards mercy."[vii] In a no-mercy decision, only a few hours pass before Jesus will be brought before Pilate. So much for a required time-lapse.

Violation after violation after violation after violation,... Jesus should've been released from the get-go. But who was going to put a screeching halt to these blatant injustices? The deck was stacked. Who would speak on Jesus' behalf? The disciples had fled. No followers were there to advocate for Jesus.

"Someone has to go, Jesus,... and that's someone is you!"

NEXT
Courage in cowardice


[i] The Gospel of Mark, Barclay -- p. 349
[ii] The Gospel of Mark, Barclay -- pp. 349-350
[iii] The Gospel of Mark, Barclay -- p. 350
[iv] Jewish Annotated New Testament -- p. 91
[v] The Gospel of Mark, Barclay -- p. 350
[vi] The Gospel of Mark, Barclay -- p. 350
[vii] The Gospel of Mark, Barclay -- p. 350

Friday, January 17, 2014

Exposed




In the dark of night, near midnight, the moment of truth has arrived. But whose truth?

On one side stand Jesus and 11 of his disciples. On the other side stand the 12th disciple -- Judas, representatives from the Sanhedrin police serving three distinct sections -- the chief priests, scribes and elders, and Malchus, the personal servant of the High-Priest -- Caiaphas. Others in the armed crowd included a cohort of Roman soldiers, "600 at full strength." [i] Although the entire cohort wouldn't have been deployed, a significant number was there.

How did it come to this? With Judas' notification, the Sanhedrin were provided "the opportunity" for which they had waited. But with Romans at Gethsemane, as well? To secure soldiers to help arrest Jesus, a prearrangement had to have been reached between Caiaphas and the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate.

In his desperate desire to be rid of Jesus, Caiaphas needed Pilate on his side. While the Sanhedrin had certain rights with its own police force, they were still under Roman jurisdiction. To carry out a death penalty which they wanted, permission must be granted from Rome.

"A crowd with swords and clubs" had come to Gethsemane -- ready for battle. Were the disciples armed as well? Walking in the dark from Jerusalem to Gethsemane wouldn't have necessarily been safe -- either from thieves or from creatures. It makes sense the disciples would have some type of protection with them.

Judas would've shared that information with the Sanhedrin representatives. Plus with an earlier statement made by the disciples to Jesus -- "Even though we must die with you, we will not deny you" -- armed resistance could well be a possibility.

Did You Know…?
The "swords" carried by the Roman soldiers were actually small hand weapons, and the "clubs" were ordinary wooden weapons carried by the Jewish temple police. [ii]

In this tense moment of truth, what was to happen? If the arresting party forced their way on to the grounds, chaos could erupt with their prey fleeing into the dark. It would be extremely difficult to see which person was Jesus with only the light from lanterns and torches.

To make it more than obvious for the purpose of absolute identification, Judas stated, "The one I will kiss is the man." As was the custom of the day, a sign of respect between a rabbi and his followers was a greeting with a kiss. It showed great affection and love. What kind of love was this though? This wasn't a kiss of love. It was an exaggerated kiss. It was the kiss of death.

What then ensues is a struggle. Mark however keeps the description clean and simple. In fact, when Caiaphas' servant is struck by a blade, the person committing the offense isn't named. Only later in the Gospel of Matthew was it revealed "one of those with Jesus put his hand on his sword"  [iii] and hurt Malchus. The Gospel of Luke cited the same. However, the Gospel of John was explicit. "Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it, struck the high priest's slave, and cut off his right ear." [iv]

As an eventual follower and interpreter of Peter, why didn't Mark name the apostle as Jesus' defender? It is believed at the time of this gospel writing that Peter was still alive. To be "named" would've placed Peter in grave danger. Some 40 years later when the Gospel of John was written, there was no concern in stating Peter's involvement since the apostle had already died.

Regardless of who drew the weapon, Jesus ordered, "Put your sword back into its place."  [v] In this garden scene of turmoil, Jesus brought peace. He exhibited calm in this garden of angst, preventing further bloodshed.

Just think, if Jesus had made a run for it, if he had walked away during his evening prayers, there would've been no church history. Instead, Jesus said, "Here I am. Take me."

"Then all the disciples deserted him and fled." To where did most of them flee? To their safe house in Bethany with Mary, Martha and Lazarus.

Yet another person fled from the garden on this night -- "a certain young man" -- which isn't in any other Gospel. Only Mark. And for good reason. Because the teenager was Mark himself.

Curiosity piqued, Mark could've slipped out of his father's house to follow Jesus and his disciples after the Last Supper. Or he may have been stationed at the family's private garden by his father to stay away from the secretive gathering of Jesus and the disciples in the upper room. How else did anyone know about Jesus' prayerful struggle -- given that the disciples had been asleep in the garden? Someone had to have witnessed that evening's happenings -- start to finish. That someone was Mark.

Considered by opposing forces to be an advocate for Jesus, there was a rush to grab the youngster in this dark night of mayhem. The linen cloth worn by the teenager was torn away and he "ran off naked."

Could it be Mark was also making a garden analogy between Eden and Gethsemane? In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were ashamed by their nakedness and hid from God. In the Garden of Gethsemane, like the young man who "ran off naked," the followers of Jesus hid.

Each had been exposed -- by their fear.

NEXT
So what if a few rules and laws are broken; role reversal
 

[i] MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1496
[ii] MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1496
[iii] Matthew 26:51
[iv] John 18:10
[v] Matthew 26:52