A Pharisee and an Outcast

Because all scripture should be read within context, no one verse or passage to be lifted from the place where its author set it,  today we’re going to look at John 4:1-42 as it relates to John 3, where Jesus encounters a Pharisee named Nicodemus.  So, crack John 3 [and if you’re feeling particularly ambitious, reread John 4 for good measure] and read it.  Don’t worry, I’ll wait…     

Nicodeums Visiting Jesus by Henry Ossawa Tanner - found at oceansbridge.com

Now, as we’ve mentioned [repeatedly] before, in chapter 4 we find that Jesus has gone out of his way, literally, to meet this particular woman at this particular well.  But this point becomes crystalline when considering it in such close proximity to that of Nicodemus the Pharisee visiting Jesus.  In the Nicodemus discourse, it is the Pharisee who seeks out Jesus; yet for the Samaritan woman it is the other way around.  Another striking difference between these two accounts is the time at which they happen.  John notes that Nicodemus came to Jesus at night, while Jesus’ meeting with the Samaritan woman occurs at noon. 

Again, we’ve established that some scholars deem this an unlikely time for drawing water, and make further claims about the woman’s character based on this fact [including that she has no friends or is not welcome by the other women, which is why she draws her water at noon, alone].[1]  However, as much as this anthropologic information supports the typography of this woman as an outcast, literarily, John is employing one of his preferred tactics, the expression of duality, to further highlight the differences between these two encounters: Nicodemus seeks out Jesus in the dark, while Jesus approaches this woman in the light of day.  Thus the insertion of time and location, which are characteristic of John’s gospel, serve to draw the readers’ attention to the polarization of these narratives.  And because the woman’s exchange with Jesus occurs in the light, John paints her as the better example of faith, understanding, and evangelism.

Within the Nicodemus conversation it is the Pharisee who begins the dialogue, as the honor of speaking first is generally afforded to the most socially superior individual.[2]  Even though Nicodemus identifies Jesus as “a teacher who has come from God,” Jesus immediately commandeers the exchange by ignoring Nicodemus’ question; Jesus offers instead a statement that is completely off the subject that Nicodemus has introduced.  In the remainder of their conversation, Nicodemus is left only with questions and Jesus guides the discussion in an increasingly harsh manner through to its cessation.  In the Samaritan discourse, Jesus is the initiator of contact, which does indicate his superior position; however this contact is highly unusual and counter-cultural.  In fact, when the disciples return from procuring food, they are surprised to find him engaged in a conversation with this woman, yet, as Keener suggests, they know Jesus well enough not to question him out loud.[3]      

While Nicodemus initially appeared to have a superior position in his conversation with Christ, “Jesus approached the relationship with the Samaritan woman with all the cards on his side: he was male, he was Jewish, he was a Rabbi.  He came with knowledge, a certain amount of affluence, friends, and the privilege afforded to him as a result of being part of the dominant culture.”[4]  And yet, he brooked interaction with this woman, who by Jewish pietists’ definition would have been considered perpetually unclean from birth due to her Samaritan roots.[5]  And he humbled himself before her, empowering her in their exchange, asking for her help in quenching his thirst.[6]  This humility was so out of the ordinary, the woman comments on it in verse nine, asking how a Jewish man could be requesting a drink from her, a Samaritan woman.[7] It is worth noting that Jesus furthers his expression of humility in showing his willingness to be made unclean by this woman, for as she notes, he has “nothing to draw with,” meaning he would have to use her utensils (4:11). In response to her seeming refusal, Jesus offers a further supplication: the gift of living water.  

During their conversation, each of Jesus’ answers to her questions show that unlike his exchange with Nicodemus, a Pharisee who was considered to be one who should understand the things about which Jesus spoke, Christ will treat the Samaritan woman as one who does not yet understand.  She is a perennial outsider, even without a corrupt morality.  At no point does Jesus verbally distance himself from her with increasingly cryptic responses, as he had with Nicodemus; instead, he offers greater amounts of information, without ignoring her questions or impugning her intelligence, though he does allow her to duck to issue of her marital state.  Thus when she states her faith that he is a prophet and later that from the Jews the Messiah is coming and will show the Samaritans all things, Jesus offers her the clearest, most efficient personal Christology yet: “egw eimi,” I am he (4:26).

This statement secures her faith and she immediately acts upon it; she leaves her bucket where it is and departs to call her fellow Samaritans to this man whom she believes is the Messiah.  Yet, Nicodemus, a man who was supposed to be constantly villagent for the consummation of God’s promise, is even rebuked by Jesus for his lack of belief (3:12).  Thus a foreign woman, the last person any Israelite would have expected, heralded the Messiah’s coming.  She called her people to Christ, believing with all that she was that Jesus was the Promised One.  While the Pharisee, a man whom Jesus identifies as “Israel’s teacher” (3:10), had only questions and unbelief.  Thus, when we look at these two passages together, we see Jesus lifting a woman to a place of greater use in his kingdom; for she was ministered to and used by Jesus to announce the reality of his kingdom on earth, in a way that the Pharisee Nicodemus could not, because he could not believe.

And these two scenarios pivot on belief.  One, who should have known better, did not believe.  The other, who was fairly clueless, believed.  And tucked so neatly between these two accounts, not just once, but twice, is the theme of both:

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.  For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.   Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. (John 3:16-18)

-- And --

The one who comes from heaven is above all.  He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony.  Whoever has accepted it has certified that God is truthful.   For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands.   Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them. (John 3:31b-36)

Thus, the Pharisee isn’t bad because he’s a Pharisee, nor because he’s male.  And the Samaritan woman isn’t good because she’s a woman, or a Gentile, or a sinner.  It is merely because he did not believe.  And she did.

Belief in Jesus Christ is the pivotal catalyst for eternal life. 

Without it, we are dead. 

  Enjoying this study?  Here's a link to other articles in this series: The Women Who Knew Jesus

---

[1]Craig S. Keener, “One New Temple in Christ (Ephesians 2:11-22; Acts 21:27-29; Mark 11:17; John 4:20-24),” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies 12 (2009): 82.

[2] Craig Blomberg, “Literary Criticism, Introduction to Mark and Matthew,” Lecture, Gospels and Acts class, Denver Seminary, Denver, CO, September 27, 2011.

[3] Keener, “One New Temple,” 82.

[4]Brenda Salter McNeil, “A More Excellent Way: Race and Gender Reconciliation Through Christ,” Priscilla Papers, 14, (2000):  1-5.

[5] Keener, “One New Temple,” 82.

[6] McNeil, “A More Excellent Way.”

[7] Leonard Swidler, “Jesus in His Encounter with Women,” AFER, 13, (1971):  297-298.

Who She Was...and Who She Wasn't

The Samaritan Woman at Jacob’s Well, Day 2

A Video Blog

Enjoying this study?  Here's a link to articles in this series: The Women Who Knew Jesus

 

Bibliography:

John 4:1-42

Walt Disney World’s “Hall of Presidents”: http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/parks/magic-kingdom/attractions/hall-of-presidents/

John Piper, “God Seeks People to Worship Him in Spirit and Truth (John 4:16-26),” Bethlehem Baptist Church, April 8, 1984.  http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper84/040884m.htm.

Cohick, Lynn H.  Women in the World of the Earliest Christians: Illuminating Ancient Ways of Life.  Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009.

Swidler, Leonard.  “Jesus in His Encounter with Women,” AFER.  13 (1971): 290-300. 

An Outsider's Outsider

The water went out at my house a few years ago.  Construction to a neighboring area necessitated it.  But somehow, I didn’t get the memo.  You don’t realize how absolutely necessary water is, for everything, until you don’t have immediate access to it.  My sister was home alone with my small children at the time, and not only could no one get a drink, but they couldn’t flush or wash hands or make mac and cheese.  All of which are requirements of daily life with little kids.  Fortunately, I have an extremely resourceful sister who emptied out our ice maker and boiled the ice on the stove for cooking; she kept hand sanitizer in her purse, and the little boy (to his great delight) was encouraged to use the outdoors for relief.  After this incident, I keep 3 gallons of store-bought water in the pantry, just in case. 

Even with all of our modern conveniences, water is a necessary part of daily life.  This is no different from life in first century Palestine.  In the absence of indoor plumbing the only place water one might procure water was from a stream or a well.  Today, we’re going to start our series with a familiar, though unnamed woman.  A Samaritan who needed water.   

The Samaritan Woman at Jacob’s Well:

John 4:4-30

As with all of scripture, there is so much truth and beauty bound in this passage, we are going to have to be selective to what we attend.  We could spend the entire four weeks on this one exchange, but to stay on track, we can only stay for three days.  For today, we must start by reading the account of Jesus and this woman.  I know it’s very likely that you know the story, and could recite the gist of it by heart.  But, we are going to need to set aside what we have already heard about this encounter and engage the text anew.  If you’re not near a Bible, I’ve included a link [John 4:4-30].  Don’t worry, I’ll wait. 
 

Our goal today is to see what the text actually says, and set aside what we have been taught or have always assumed about this woman, but is not found in the text (or other reliable, historical documents). 

The following are key points we learn from the text: 

1.         The text tells us that Jesus “had to go through Samaria.” 

2.        It was noon.

3.        Jesus was alone.

4.        The woman he encountered was alone.

5.        The woman he encountered was a Samaritan.

6.       She desires the living water of which Jesus speaks.

7.        She is not married to the man with whom she’s currently living.

8.       She knows about the prophesied Messiah.

9.       Jesus offers her the clearest, most efficient personal Christology in scripture yet: “egw eimi,” I am he.

10.     The woman leaves her present task to go and tell her fellow townspeople that the Messiah is among them. 

I had always pictured Jesus strolling through the countryside, en route to somewhere important, making a pit stop in Samaria.  My family makes frequent trips south to visit extended family, and our tried and true rest stop is Raton, New Mexico: the halfway point.  We end up there at noon more often than not.  So in my mind, Jesus and the disciples were on their way elsewhere when they got hungry and thirsty and pulled off the freeway to refuel before heading back onto the road. 

Yet, scholars agree that this was not a geographical necessity; according to Peter Phan, there is an alternate route from the Jordan valley up to Galilee through the Bethshan gap, without a traveler ever having to pass through Samaria.*  And because the Jewish people viewed the Samarians as perpetually unclean due to their non-Jewishness, it is very likely that a group of Jewish men would take a route that kept them out of Samaria.  Thus, as the disciples are away procuring food, Jesus has gone out of his way, literally, to meet this particular woman at this particular well.      

Much has been made of John’s inclusion of the time.  John tells his readers that it is noon; some scholars deem this an unlikely time for drawing water, and make assumptions about the woman’s character based on this fact, including that she has no friends or is not welcome by the other women, which is why she draws her water at noon, alone.**  Were this the only reason for John’s inclusion of the information, it would further this woman’s typography as an outcast, one whom even the Samaritans would not accept.  However, John’s gospel is characterized by his inclusion of time and locations; and this particular example thereof is likely employed for the purpose of expressing a duality between this encounter and another very recent one, between Jesus and Nicodemus the Pharisee.  But, we’ll have to explore this in more depth on day three.

Many teachers, preachers, and scholars have made sweeping judgments about the Samaritan woman’s character, based on her assertion that she is not married to the man with whom she lives.  And while the people who have come after John have branded this woman a harlot, a prostitute, or a whore, Jesus does not utter such a label; nor does John provide one.  Thus, Tuesday next we will examine who this woman was…and who she wasn’t.      

Today, consider what the text says. 

Jesus “had” to go to Samaria; yet we know it was not a geographic necessity.  Under what compulsion did he go?  To meet a woman in need of a Savior.

Prior to this encounter, Jesus has spoken with learned men and leaders of his community, as well as fringe dwellers, like the disciples.  Yet it is to this outsider that he gives the most clear and concise Christology; when she talks of a promised messiah, Jesus says, “I AM HE.”

As soon as she hears this, the Samaritan woman abandons her daily task of fetching water necessary for her survival.  She runs into her village and calls her community to this stranger.  She heralds the Promised Messiah to a people deemed unworthy by the religious elite of their day.  And she brings her community to him; draws these outsiders to the One who can give Living Water. 

Would that we all could be more like her.



Enjoying this study?  Here's a link to other articles in this series: The Women Who Knew Jesus

---

[1]*Peter C. Phan.  “An Interfaith Encounter at Jacob’s Well, A Missiological Interpretation of John 4:4-42.”  Journal of the International Association for Mission Studies.  27 (2010): 160-175.

[2]**Craig S. Keener, “One New Temple in Christ (Ephesians 2:11-22; Acts 21:27-29; Mark 11:17; John 4:20-24),” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies 12 (2009): 82.

My Editor's Job

If I had an editor, her job would be to take these articles and arrange them into a palatable and organized sequence.  Sadly, that position has not yet been filled.  Likely because it’s more un-paid internship than actual job; but I digress… 

If I had an editor, she would have put this article first.  As a preface to the introduction of a five week study of who Jesus was with the women he encountered; and who they were because of it.  Then would come the clear assertion of who Jesus was and is; then a quick jaunt through history to recall the context in which we find these women.  And then we could meet each one individually and examine what scripture teaches us about her relationship with Jesus.  And discover what that means for us today. 

I’m still a student.  As such, I’ve had the spectacular opportunity to really dig into God’s word regarding topics I’m passionate about.  A topic that is particularly close to my heart is Jesus’s interactions with women, as found in the gospels.  How the living, breathing Lord acted and spoke around living, breathing women in first century Palestine, with all the cultural parameters of that time.  And what that means for us, as a body of believers, today.  After completing this project, I was surprised, not at what I’d found, but that people outside of school wanted to read my paper.  Why? 

Though, during my research as my spirit was stretching out into this new, wide open space I was discovering, I recall driving home, asking God, “why haven’t I heard this before?”  I could feel Him smile.  And though I can’t give a precise reason, I have a hunch that this topic drove me deeper into His word than I’d been before; and it had me climbing up onto his lap with my books, pointing out passages and talking excited about them to Him.   And I am guessing that He, as I do with my own beloved children, delighted in the time we spent together; relished watching me make discoveries that were not new to Him, nor to many other more mature believers; and thoroughly enjoying my deepening love for Him and His Son.  After I was done, I tucked my newfound discoveries away, sure that I had simply uncovered what everyone else already knew.

And yet…

As I listen to dear friends and trusted teachers, I find my head cocking to the side.  I flip to the passages they are talking about and wonder, “Does scripture really say that; or is that just what we’ve been taught for so long that it’s tradition?”  And I felt the certainty I held so close a few semesters ago slipping into the background.  I felt a pull to share what I’d learned.  To not be stingy and hoard the insights I’d been allowed to discover, but to set these treasures out in front of my friends and family, so each may adorn themselves with the beauty that is the Truth of Scripture.*              

Thus, every Tuesday and Thursday for the next four weeks, I’ll provide an article in this series which will examine the interaction of Jesus and a woman found in scripture.  We’ll put aside what we’ve heard about her before.  We’ll turn off that pastor-in-my-head, and look at the passage with fresh eyes.  We’ll listen to what scripture is telling us, through these encounters, about whom Jesus is; and who we are because of it.  I welcome, or more accurately, I ask for your comments and questions.  Leave them in the comment section below, Facebook them to me, e-mail me, tweet them at me.  Drive by my house and leave them taped to my door.  But join me in taking a fresh look at stories we’ve heard taught time and again; open your hearts and minds to a new work by the Holy Spirit.  Let the accounts of these women draw you closer to Jesus and His Father.  And experience the wide-open space in your spirit that is evidence of the Holy Spirit’s work in you.     

I know the title for this series is hardly a catchy one:

The Women Who Knew Jesus,

but, I’ve heard editors help with that, too. 

* And on the off chance that any of this idea gives you pause, let me assure you: I have had more than one set of eyes on this project (one set belonged to a Distinguished Professor of New Testament, and he hasn’t branded me a heretic yet.  Though, this coming semester of Greek may provide that opportunity).  Thus, let me assure you that what I present is very safely within the bounds of scripture.    

Enjoying this study?  Here's a link to other articles in this series: The Women Who Knew Jesus

 

Women, historically

Last week, I attempted to be very clear about who Jesus the man was.  He was a real, live human male.  He lived in first century Palestine.  And he was a practicing, orthodox Jew.  As a final preface for examining Jesus’s interactions with women, as recorded in the gospels, I find it necessary to try to understand the culture in which these women existed.  Particularly as it pertains to them as women.  Because we cannot come to these passages with our Western, one-quarter world ideas and think that we can fully grasp what’s going on.  It would border on negligence to take our understanding of the world, as it is today, in our frame of reference, and apply this knowledge to Jesus’ interactions with these women. 

Yes, scripture is God-breathed.  Yes, it is alive and applicable today.  Yes, we can and should mold our lives to mirror its tenets.  Yet, we cannot mimic a culture from which we are 2,000 years removed.  So must do our best to take off our twenty-first century goggles, and peer back through eons to the time when Jesus walked among humans.

Lynn Cohick, in Women in the World of the Earliest Christians: Illuminating Ancient Ways of Life, asserts that “for most women in the ancient world, and in the majority of cultures today, the home is the primary workplace; [as] tending to children, preparing meals, making clothing, soap, and so many other necessities of life bound women’s lives tightly to the home.”* We cannot read scripture and assume that these women had the opportunity to choose between being a professional or staying home, or even a finely balance mixture of both.  Nor can we assume that they, after weighing all the options, made the best [and therefore generalizable] choice.  They had no choice, home was the only place for them; as soon as a woman married, her father transferred her proprietarily into the household of her husband.  Unless she was unwed and abandoned by her family of origin; in which case she may have been sold into slavery as young as the age of six.  Modern women may not be able to relate to these circumstances, however we must note that neither today nor in the first century did any of this preclude women from participating in religious ceremonies or festivals, nor from daily public life in the marketplace.   

origin

These women were not American citizens with rights afforded us today.  The historian Josephus establishes a Jewish perspective on women in the first century, saying, “the woman, says [Mosaic] law, is in all things inferior to the man.  Let her accordingly be submissive, not for her humiliation, but that she may be directed, for the authority has been given by God to the man."**  Ms. Cohick later notes that scholars are unclear about the exact law to which Josephus refers; postulating instead that this mindset was established much earlier by Plato and Aristotle, and was so ingrained into Greco-Roman society that it assimilated into Jewish culture to the extent that Josephus mistakenly attributes its conception to Moses.  Yet, to this view of women, a lack of formal educated could be attributed.  But, in reality, the primary reason for this discrepancy, Ms. Cohick points out, is the majority’s economic class within this timeframe.  Most people were simply too busy with the daily business of survival.  The few women who had any wealth were legally allowed to manage it independently; though even in the first century both Jewish and Roman documents encourage wealthy women to transfer monetary control to their husbands.***

Thus we can conclude that the women with whom Jesus interacted, the ones whom we’ll look at over the next four weeks, were likely not well-educated.  Some may have been financially secure, though most were probably impoverished outside of daily survival.  Each one was considered inferior to the males of her time.  Yet, Jesus interacts with these women with a great deal of intimacy, respect, and a focus towards inclusion, so that the culturally-held ideas and norms might give way to unity within the coming Kingdom of God.       

Enjoying this study?  Here's a link to other articles in this series: The Women Who Knew Jesus

---

*Lynn H. Cohick, Women in the World of the Earliest Christians: Illuminating Ancient Ways of Life  (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 160.

**Cohick, Women in the World, 83.

***Cohick, Women in the World, 83.

IN-siders and OUT-siders

       Or how, after 2,000 years I have finally got it right.*

Recently, I’ve read quite a few articles bagging on “mega” churches.  In the past few months, I’ve sat in round-table discussions focusing on how denominational representation was absolutely necessary to keep believers from stumbling off into the cult-ish wilderness of quasi-doctrinal belief.  I’ve heard stances on submission, authority, worship, “religion” (yes, I’ll interject here to say how I despise the misuse of that word.  We’re all religious, we only differ in what and how we serve.  And yes, that includes the pagans and atheists and naturalists and Christians and every-blooming-person on the earth.), theology, soteriology, historicity, interpretation, and all manner of topics.

And where I’ve landed, after looking at the Jesus revealed in the gospels, hoped for in the Pentateuch, promised through the prophets, ached for in the wisdom literature, proclaimed in the epistles, and again in the Revelation, is that not a single one of us has gotten it right.  Granted, there were a literal handful of folks in Jesus’ time who saw who he really was.  But even that was through a direct revelation on the Holy Spirit. 

So, 2,000 years later, how can any one of us claim to have cornered the market on Jesus?

Yes, we study the scriptures to discover as much as we can about what he did, who he was, and how to emulate him.  Yes, we beg the Holy Spirit to mold our decrepit and rotten hearts to be more like his.  And yes, we must rely on God’s revealed character as a litmus test against which we measure our findings.  And yes, all of this is best done within the protective boundaries of doctrinally-sound communities.          

Yet, I hurt when I come across Christian-bashing.  By other believers.  Those in the mega-churches saying the liturgical are faithless robots.  The seeker-oriented gatherings bash mega-church attendees as godless zombies.  Those in the liturgical traditions treat their liberal fellows as if infected with anti-Christian-plague.  We, brethren, are the body of the one, true Christ.  We are all outsiders, seeking entrance, through grace, into the glorious kingdom of the Father. 

And not a single, solitary person among us is worthy to be let in.

                But for Christ… 

Jesus loved the outsiders.  Yet, he still found time to minister to the insiders.  He touched Roman and Jew alike.  He healed without care for class or ethnicity.  He rebuked Pharisees and a Syrophoenician with the same authority.  He taught men and women just the same.

Jesus gives each one of us His Truth.  That He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that no one comes to the Father but through Him.  Jesus allows each of us to decide whether we accept or decline his sacrificial death on our behalf.  And if we do, He expects obedience from us.  Be we Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female.  Our allegiance to His Father requires our submission to His will.  We are to listen for His voice and be obedient to Him. 

And in our obedience, we are to love one another.  Whether the other happens to be our polar opposite or not.  We, as Christ’s followers, are to be known by our love for one another.  Jesus said so.     

Thus, I have to ask: can we look at one another, in love, and strive to live peacefully as far as it is up to us.  And admit that none of us have it exactly right

But for Jesus.



*I say this entirely tongue-in-cheek.  I'll be the absolute first to admit that I, in fact, do not have it all right.

Just so we're clear...

(a type of worship)

Basilica

It is historically documented.  It is intellectual folly to deny that a first century, Palestinian Jew by the name of

     Jesus

was crucified by the Roman government.  There is no scholarly debate: Jesus was a man.  Fully, completely, no-way-around-it, human, male.  This man, worshiped over 2,000 years later, could not then, nor ever have been a woman.

As a man, Jesus was a Jew.  He was raised in an orthodox Jewish home.  He practiced the Jewish religion (yep, I said that Jesus was religious.  Which, in the anthropologistic and historical sense implies that he practiced his religion…, well, religiously).  He followed the Mosaic Law to the letter.  Not one iota was ignored, not one minutia disobeyed.  His lineage was carefully documented to prove that he was the answer to eons of prophecy.  He was educated in the Hebraic traditions and scriptures; and he observed all the festivals and Sabbaths as one who understood their true purpose.  He taught with authority and corrected the misunderstandings of the mortals he came to save.  Of the Israelite leaders, he expected much.  To those on the fringe or outside the faith, he offered a way in.         

Jesus hung out with sinners and outcasts; ate with them, walked with them, talked and laughed and wept with them.  He saved them; he forgave them; he loved them.

                HE WAS NOT ONE OF THEM.

Jesus was Divine.  Before the universe was formed, before humans drew breath, before time began and after time ends he will continue to be always and forever Divine.  One with the Father and Holy Spirit in perfect and complete communion. 

Jesus came to earth, while sinners were sinning, to rescue humans who didn’t know they needed saving.  He died in the stead of every sinner who ever was or ever will be.  But only,
     Only
if the sinner chooses to trade his or her wickedness for Jesus’ all-encompassing righteousness.  To trade their own, impending and eternal torment, for his atoning death on the cross.  This choice is always in the heart of the sinner.  Like a marriage proposal, anyone can accept or reject this love.  Unlike a proposal, this love is offered every moment of every life.  Until the moment when life is over.  Or until that soul grows so hard from scratching out a life in the wilderness of death and constant pain, that Jesus [whom I picture weeping bitterly, as he did over Jerusalem just prior to his crucifixion] says to that sinner, “your will be done.” 

To be completely clear, Jesus was everything the Holy Scriptures say he was.  Jesus, the Promised Savior, the Only Son of the Almighty God, will never be a sinner.  He came to save sinners.  He died to redeem sinners.  He lives to give Love to sinners.  If we would but accept it.    

He was, in a specific and tangible and documented portion of linear time, God housed in flesh.  He was Eternity in temporal form.  He is the Healer of the broken, Redeemer of the damned.  He is the One who loves each sinner so much that He would trade his life, his oneness with the Eternal Almighty LOVE Itself, for the sake of that one sinner to be welcomed into His Father’s house. 

But He is not to be made in our image.  He is not a domesticated kitten, upon whom we may assert our ideals or morals or compunctions.  Our culture does not dictate, any more than the ancient Hebraic or Hellenistic cultures which comprised his earthly context, his will.  Jesus’ will was always that of the Father.  And the Father’s will does not deviate from scripture.  Regardless of what our favorite authors may tell us.  Or how we feel, as one-third-world dwellers.

Jesus the Christ is the Lion of Judah, who will return not as prophet or pacifist, but as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.  Robes dipped in blood; Warrior for His Father’s kingdom, who will reclaim all that evil has stolen.   And He will win.

For LOVE, true and honest and just LOVE, wins. 

     For His glory and Kingdom and Power are forever.

Amen.

 

 

Please leave a comment below if you have any questions regarding this theology. 

 I am happy to supply scripture references (as well as secular and scholarly). 

John Mark McMillan's "Death In His Grave"

 

 

Enjoying this study?  Here's a link to other articles in this series: The Women Who Knew Jesus