Luke 12:49-56 contain sayings related to mission of Jesus as that of bringing division and discerning the spirit of the times.
Verses 49-53 contains sayings concerning the enigma of the mission of Jesus. With unqualified audacity, he claims an unparalleled role for himself. Jesus views his ministry as fire he enkindles in the world. Then, his ministry is a baptism of fire that he must undergo. His ministry will bring discord. Everything about his language indicates Jesus' real sense of urgency for his mission and ministry. Jesus is making it clear that if you have not chosen the rule of God first, it will not make any difference what you have chosen instead (William Law).
These sayings are among the “I-sayings” of Jesus, “I came to…” or “I have come …” almost reminding one of the Gospel of John. Jesus could have spoken in the first person about himself and his coming. It would be consistent with his prophetic self-consciousness to do so. Some scholars discount such sayings as coming from Jesus, since he did not usually speak of himself. However, it would hardly be unusual for someone like Jesus to have a firm grasp of his sense of mission and to share with his followers what that mission was. Jesus now claims his role as the designated agent of the divine will.
In verse 49 (unique to Luke) is a saying in which Jesus describes his mission as bringing fire on earth, where he is taking up the view of apocalyptic literature of the flood of fire.[1] It refers to the aim of the ministry of Jesus.[2] I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! The mission of Jesus is the prelude to the coming of the eschatological time of distress, which will bring fire on the earth. Jesus places his fate in the context of other events of the end time.[3] Jesus describes his mission of the fulfillment of the promise of John the Baptist, Jesus bringing the eschatological judgment of fire.[4] It offers a rare glimpse into Jesus’ mind and heart as he approached Jerusalem. The fire of judgment Jesus will bring will occur in the future, giving it an apocalyptic perspective. Confining ourselves to Luke, John the Baptist used fire to warn the crowds of approaching judgment. He reminded them that "every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire ... [and] the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire" (3:9, 17). James and John wanted to "command fire to come down from heaven and consume" the Samaritan village that refused to welcome Jesus "because his face was set to Jerusalem" (9:53-54). Later, Jesus will refer to the "fire and sulfur from heaven" that destroyed Sodom and all who lived there except Lot and his family (17:29). Jesus stands with a match ready, but he is waiting for the divine word before striking. Also confining ourselves to Luke in describing the mission of Jesus, God anointed Jesus to bring good news and proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor (4:16-19), and at his birth the heavenly host proclaim peace on earth among those whom God favors (2:14). At this point, it might be well to let the tension remain such in our thinking and preaching. Yet, in the context of Luke, the fire could refer to Acts 2, with the tongues of fire, and therefore the fire envisioned would be the community devoted to Jesus.
Verse 50 (Mark 10:38) reflects on the mission of Jesus as involving a baptism. It offers a rare glimpse into Jesus’ mind and heart as he approached Jerusalem. I have a baptism with which to be baptized, referring severe affliction, and what stress I am under (or, ‘how I am hemmed in,’ ‘surrounded’ or ‘encircled,’ or ‘governed by this’[5]) until it is completed! This statement refers to a passing personal experience, obviously a powerful one.[6] His mission is the prelude to the coming of the eschatological time of distress, including the cosmic baptism of suffering. Jesus places his fate in the context of other events of the end time.[7] This could refer to the baptism that this death will bring. It uses the imagery of the practice familiar to the disciples through John the Baptist and his baptism of repentance. Jesus’ reply invites them to consider whether they can face the cost of sharing in Jesus’ messianic suffering. The saying means more than martyrdom. The baptism refers to the great tribulation. It refers to the suffering that Jesus will endure. Jesus himself must die to rise to the new, eschatological life that the Father will give him. Theologically, though, we cannot merely see here an obscure allusion to the approaching path of suffering for Jesus. We must relate the images to his understanding of the baptism he received from John. Jesus linked his baptism by John to the expectation of approaching martyrdom. Only after passing through this baptism could he kindle fire on the earth. This will eventually lead to the teaching of Paul that baptism means participation in the death and resurrection of Jesus. The idea of a baptism of blood rests on transferring the baptism of John for repentance to martyrdom. Jesus was already seeing the approaching martyrdom of himself and his disciples in the context of the water baptism he had received form John. If so, then we can understand that along with the idea of a baptism of blood for martyrs, water baptism as adopted by early Christianity had a new meaning that it appropriated from Jesus. Yet, only from the standpoint of the Easter event did the death of Jesus represent a saving event. Only then could fellowship with the death of Jesus as a martyr that grounds itself in the act of baptism count as a pledge of future salvation for the baptized and the hope of participation in the life of the risen Lord.[8] In the context of the theology of Luke, Acts 2 will reveal that the baptism of fire in the flames of Pentecost as baptism in the Holy Spirit for all believers. Thus, the fire for which longs to be kindled and the baptism Jesus longs to be completed refers to the coming of the Holy Spirit for believers, and thus, is not a destructive force.
Verses 51-53 (Matt 10:34-36, see Micah 7:5-6) reflect on the mission of Jesus by referring to peace or conflict.Jesus viewed his ministry as bringing the time of eschatological terror, and the early community of followers of Jesus experienced in its own life. In the experience of the church can be seen the fulfillment of the eschatological prophecy, and in it the church knows, to its comfort in suffering that Jesus has willed it.[9] The saying was meaningful as it reflected the bitter experiences of the Jewish-Christian communities.[10] The text reveals what a fearless witness may expect to encounter. Jesus is no peacemaker here. Most of us today are uncomfortable with this image of Jesus. Most of us enter unfamiliar intellectual territory when we start reflecting on the mission of Jesus that suggest he came to bring a division. Such images as used here suggest that human lives are beyond cleaning, but in need of new life. Such sayings resist trivializing Jesus and Christianity. If Jesus came to bring division, then maybe the point is that we have grown too comfortable. We need the stirring up that division brings to find out what Jesus wants of us in this setting. Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division! For Jesus, family ties faded into insignificance in relation to God's imperial rule, which he regarded as the fundamental claim on human loyalty. Jesus identifies his mission as bringing a sword rather than peace. The war will divide families. Jesus gives notification of the ultimate dissolution and disintegration of the world order, of the cleavage between yesterday and tomorrow, old and new, this world and the world to come. Certain people in certain situations must bear witness not to peace, but to the rule of God that that limits and qualifies it.[11] We have here the notification of the ultimate dissolution and disintegration of the world as we know it, as it points us to the cleavage between yesterday and tomorrow, old and new, this world and the world to come. Certain people in certain situations must bear witness not to peace, but to the kingdom that that limits and qualifies it.[12] Such a statement is a reminder of the broken nature of the reality that salvation can achieve in historical form. Christian confession itself causes opposition that Christians cannot avoid if the cost is their confession. Thus, the unity of humanity in the reign of God is always a broken one as we see it in its historical form.[13] From now on, indicating Jesus and the disciples now approach a climactic moment, five in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three; 53 they will be divided, as stated in Micah 7:5-6: father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.” Jesus introduced conflicts into family relationships. Those who reject Jesus have judgment brought to them rather than peace. Jesus does not create division. Rather, others create division through their choices. Binding of people to each other in the family of God that arises out of the presence of the rule of God in Jesus will not occur without all kinds of separations. One must disrupt and destroy all falsity that will corrupt human fellowship. In this sense, the sword of Jesus Christ will continuously prove to be necessary and powerful. Yet, one wields the sword with unity as the aim.[14]
Even the primary loyalty of the ancient world, the household, Jesus sought to relativize given the priority of the rule of God. Jesus challenged the basic social and religious practice to its core. Such a household, comprised of husband, wife, children, grandchildren, and slaves, was a group to which birth irrevocably assigned one. Jesus points us to the priority of a family open to all who wish to join it. This saying is suggesting that Jesus comes to tear apart the ancient notion of the household, with its hierarchal system of gender and generations, with a new notion of the family of God open to all. The household was not just a center of domestic tranquility. It invited the use of power, and Jesus attacks its power center in this saying. The coming rule of God, provisionally present in Jesus, invites us to consider a new family open to all.[15] Another way to think of this saying is that Jesus relativizes the most intimate relationships we have. In cases of conflict, the call of God may well cause us to renounce the most intimate of our relationships in favor of the rule of God. Institutional or blood relationships cannot ignore the demands of the call of Jesus, which is always a call for the sake of the mission of Jesus in this world.[16]
The point for us today is that Jesus does not play a secondary role to other commitments. Re-ordering commitments is a central moment in our discipleship. Here, Jesus is saying that discipleship means strengthening our faith ties to Jesus. A true disciple will value a relationship with Christ over other relationships.
Jesus is not meek and mild here. A mild person lets sleeping dogs lie and avoids trouble wherever possible. A mild, placid temperament is a stranger to the passions of humanity. Such a person is a nonentity in a crowd, both uninspired and uninspiring. Yet, Jesus did not hesitate to challenge and expose the hypocrisies of the religious people of his day. He could walk through murderous crowds unscathed. Religious and political authorities regarded him a public danger. Shameless exploitation and complacent orthodoxy could rouse him to anger. He had the courage of one who could deliberately walk into a situation that would mean his death.[17]
Verses 54-56 (Matt 16:2-3) concern the signs of the times, announcing the critical character of the hour.[18] It is a prophetic saying remembered in the Jewish-Christian community on the menacing seriousness and announcing the critical character of the hour decision is distinctive of the preaching of Jesus and of the community he is forming. The longed-for age is breaking in now. It has no relation to the person of Jesus, and it contains traces of the characteristically individual spirit of Jesus.[19] It employs concrete and vivid images to challenge inconsistent judgment. Jesus also said to the crowds, When you see a cloud rising in the west, you immediately say, ‘It is going to rain’; and so it happens. And when you see the south wind blowing, you say, ‘There will be scorching heat’; and it happens. You hypocrites! Jesus points to the blatant contradiction between their sure knowledge of the weather and their tardy or absent knowledge of the nearness of the rule of God in the ministry of Jesus.[20] You know how to interpret the appearance of earth and sky, but why do you not know how to interpret the present time? Jesus uses an ironic barb. The tone is sharp, even sarcastic, suggesting that this crowd may not be a friendly one. You know how to read the weather, but you have no ability to discern the real state of things. “Red sky in morning, sailors take warning; Red sky at night, sailors delight.” The crowds live in a critical moment. If they can read the clouds, they should the signs of the cultural atmosphere as well. Jesus contrasts their sensitivity to nature with their sensitivity to the spirit of the times. If people can discern weather patterns from such obvious signs, Jesus points out, then why can they not discern the spirit of this age?
Nature is reliable in its signs, but human beings in their cultural, political, and economic arrangements are not so reliable. We often disagree over what we perceive to be the signs of our time. As I reflect upon the intellectual environment of our times, the danger in the signs today relate to forces arrayed against freedom, whether the source is Islamic militancy, Chinese communism, totalitarianism, or the alienating critique of Western style democracy and capitalism that is Marxism and much of critical theory. These are threats to the church because they represent political agendas that are totalitarian, leaving no room for opposing positions. Such an understanding of the signs leads me toward sympathizing with certain types of churches and those with certain political commitments, although I hope I do so with reasonableness, openness to those who differ, thinking of myself as speaking truth with love, and lacing any truth I might think I offer with grace. I understand others would read the signs of the times differently and will thus lead to a different understanding of the mission of the church in these times.
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4] Lang, TDNT, VI, 944.
[5] Koster, TDNT, VII, 884.
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15] Inspired by John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, 59-60
[16] Inspired by Wolfgange Schrage, The Ethics of the New Testament, 1988.
[17] J.B. Phillips, Your God Is Too Small (New York: Macmillan Paperbacks Edition, 1961), 27.
[18]
[19]
[20] Wilckens, TDNT, VIII, 567.
No comments:
Post a Comment