Parable of parables

In Matthew 13:10, the disciples ask Jesus, "Why do you speak to them in parables?" It's a natural question to ask, and it seems especially appropriate in Matthew, because this gospel could easily be called the "gospel of parables". The book is FULL of them. Even in passages where Jesus is not giving a parable, the narrative often reads like one. So why did he speak in parables? We should expect that the answer helps us to understand the words and works and overall ministry of Jesus, and in a related way also shed light on the gospel of Matthew as a whole. 

Jesus first responds with, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given." This seems pretty straightforward, Jesus is calling his parables "secrets" that need interpretation and explanation. But he continues on to say, "To the one who has, more will be given, and he will have more than enough, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away." Wait... is he referring to the parable that immediately precedes this passage, the parable of the sower (v. 3)? This parable describes seed scattered on the road, on rocky soil, in thorns, and on good soil, and describes how some seed is "taken away". Jesus does go on, in fact, to give a full explanation of this parable in verse 18, but before we get there, we have this "interrupting" question of the disciples.

So it seems clear that the words of Jesus here are doing double duty. For one, they are answering the disciples' question about parables, and defining them as "secrets of the kingdom". But also, this is already the beginning of the interpretation of the "parable of the sower" itself. But if that's true, it makes the "parable of the sower" itself a sort of parable about parables. The interpretation of this parable, and the question "why do you speak in parables?" have the same answer. 

So this is the rest of Jesus' reply (verse 13): "This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand." This is presented as the heart of the matter. Jesus speaks in parables in order to show who has been given understanding. As he says to his disciples, "Blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear." But they don't understand the parable... yet! They are blessed not because they have inherent wisdom or understanding, but because Jesus gives them the understanding of it. 

So who is given understanding? Those in the kingdom of God! If Jesus calls the "seed" in the parable the "word of the kingdom", and if he calls parables the "secrets of the kingdom", and if many parables are introduced with the words, "to what can I compare the kingdom of heaven?", it's clear that the understanding of the parables are integrally linked with those who are members of the kingdom of God. In fact, we can say that one disciple of Jesus can recognize another, when they recognize that they share a common understanding of the parables, when they share understanding about how the kingdom of God works in the world and before God.

We need this understanding of the parables and the kingdom of God today. And indeed, when Jesus left this earth, he did not leave us without a guide, but sent the Holy Spirit in his place, to grant this same understanding into his parables, and more broadly into all of scripture. Just as the disciples sought out the meaning of this parable, so now our Father rewards those who "diligently seek him". As Paul says (in 1 Cor 2:12), "Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God." We should earnestly seek out the understanding of the parables (and the other teachings) of Jesus, and of scripture in general, and confidently expect the Holy Spirit to abundantly bless us with a deep understanding of our Father in heaven, and the kingdom of God here on earth.

Early morning nonsense

Even and tide, the endless apportion,

Made from the gasps of tearing and torsion.

Pushing aside the endless ague,

Grasping the pall of alternate hue,

Upward and downward the dew feathers fall,

Pointing their daggers at spectre and thrall,

Poised to accrue to a host more resplendent,

Swollen with notes and the glory ascendant.

King Sacrifice

As the kids and I wrap up our long-running OT reading (and minimal discussion) of the history of Israel's kings (finishing up 2 Chronicles), one notable takeaway is this: 

So prophets are intermediaries between God and men, often bringing God's word to his people, right? And then priests are another kind of intermediary, offering sacrifices to God? 

So also the "good" kings of Israel are another kind of intermediary, specifically in how they are often asked to bear punishment from the Lord for the people. David, Hezekiah, and Josiah (and Moses too, in fact!) are all "tested" on this point, when faced with God's imminent judgement upon the people of Israel.

For example, David sees the angel of the Lord raising his sword over Jerusalem, and he exclaims, "Behold, I have sinned, and I have done wickedly. But these sheep, what have they done? Please let your hand be against me and against my father’s house."

There's a kind of completeness to the work of Jesus, a completing of these OT roles of prophet, priest, and king. But there's a deep connection between his death on the cross and his role as king. After all, he establishes a "Kingdom of God" based on sacrifice and suffering in his earthly ministry. It's as the kingly descendant, the "lion of Judah, the root of David", that he appears in Revelations as the slain lamb. And just a couple of verses later we have the ultimate summation: 

"Worthy are you to take the scroll

and to open its seals,

for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God

from every tribe and language and people and nation,

and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God,

and they shall reign on the earth." (Rev 5:9,10)

Jesus is the king that sacrifices himself, to create his kingdom. He's the one that conquers and triumphs over the world through his death. We become a nation, and he claims us as his subjects, when he takes our sins upon his own head. "Worthy is the Lamb" indeed!

Musings on blame

The great lie of the modern age is that we need to have an "opinion" on everything, along with the need to assign blame.

On Ukraine, on Trump or Biden, on famous people in the news, on this or that social issue, on powerful people throughout history.

On your nation, on your city, on your church, on your family, on yourself. 

Reality is complicated. It's hard to uncover the truth of things. And moreover, even when things are uncovered, we aren't very good at weighing the merit or moral quality of this action compared to that. 

We cannot set wrongs to right, here on earth, we can only mitigate the damage, and deal with things as they are. As a righteous man said once,

"Do not judge anything before the appointed time. Wait until the Lord returns. He will bring to light what is hidden in the dark. He will show the intents of the heart. And, at that time, each person will finally receive their reward from God."

"Impeccability" and flesh and blood

In Sunday School this past week, we talked about Jesus' "impeccability"; that is, his *inability* to sin. I think I had heard it before, but never really contemplated it. But the more I thought about it, the more I found it edifying and rich with meaning; for example, considering that Jesus did not need to demonstrate "overcoming temptation" in order to be the Christ.

So when we read the accounts of Jesus' life, is it about a man who was commended at the end of a righteous and upright life? Perhaps it's similar to Job, who was a good man who faced great trial late in his life? 

Or perhaps we can look at Moses as a parallel story, who led his people out of bondage, but only after learning humility for decades in the desert? 

In short, was Jesus "special" at the beginning of his life, or only at the end? Did he BECOME the Messiah, or was he BORN the Messiah? Or perhaps he was merely PROMISED to be Messiah early in life, and needed to be prepared for it?

No, of course Jesus was Messiah -- fully Messiah -- from birth... and even before birth, in the announcement to Mary. Is this confirmed in his childhood? Yes, of course, even as a youth he called the temple "my Father's house". 

Now, there is the passage in Hebrews which speaks of Jesus "being tempted in every way yet without sin", which some have taken to mean that Jesus was subject to the *internal* temptation of sinful desires. But rather, the context of Hebrews is about Jesus becoming man, to be a "fitting High Priest" whose sacrifice saves us. What kind of "temptation" is this, then? Jesus is described as "suffering when tempted", experiencing the weaknesses of having flesh and blood, reminding us of the temptation in the wilderness, when Jesus experienced bodily pain and hunger. Jesus experienced all these things just like us, and so can sympathize with us and "help those who are being tempted."

It also reminds us that this kind of "temptation through physical suffering" comes up over and over in the scripture. Consider Job, whose PEAK suffering and temptation came AFTER his family members died, when his body was racked with disease. Consider Paul and his "thorn in the flesh". Consider Israel in the wilderness, provoked to sin through hunger and thirst. 

Sure, the immediate doctrine tells us important things about Jesus and his character and his person. But it's also an invitation to consider the nature of "temptation", to consider those who are experiencing physical pain and suffering, doing what we can to ease those burdens, consider the moral temptations that such sufferings bring, reminding us to exhort and encourage those suffering in this way, to hold fast to the Lord and to Jesus, to hope for that resurrected body that will no longer experience pain and hunger. Even so, Lord Jesus, come quickly! 

The Christian freedom to not have an opinion

So I think this is a pretty interesting article, though perhaps not for the reasons that the author intends. I think it displays clearly some of the exaggerated moral terms, and irrational ideological fervor, for the dramatically pro-Ukraine secular perspective of American journalistic and political responses to the situation. For example, here's some quotes from this article:

"Ukraine is the most important story of our time, that everything we should care about is on the line there."

"[A] few things are morally clear: slavery, and genocide, and Russia’s attempt to destroy Ukraine."

"For the first time in my life, I felt hopeless about America. And because I have no transcendent beliefs, the loss of this earthly one left a void of meaning that made me sick.

Here was another motive—the strongest and most dubious of all. I wanted a gulp of Ukrainian air. I wanted to breathe its hope. What a thing to ask of people fighting for their lives."

"I asked what she was fighting for.

“Democracy, a new nation, survival—all together,” Olesya said. “This is a sacred war. It’s everything good against pure evil.” "

In the absence of any transcendental beliefs, in the absence of a trust in God's hand directing the nations, the secular voices of media NEED to believe that the democratic systems of the United States have moral and/or ethical superiority over the other nations. And when they doubt or lose that trust in America's systems, there is the frantic need to find moral absolutes, to bind one's cause to a place like Ukraine, a place that needs to be squeeeeeezed into representing our ideals for democracy, and then the war is squeezed into our ideal of "fighting to protect democracy". The war becomes a proxy for the fight that (supposedly) is not happening, or even losing here in the US. Isn't it strange that the Ukraine flag is displayed by people who have never been there, who know nobody there?

As Christians, it's certainly appropriate to pray for those affected by war -- especially our affected Christian brothers and sisters -- and pray for wars to cease, but thanks be to God that we are NOT obligated to have any opinions these political and military situations, whether domestic or international. That is, American Christians are not obligated to support US policies, and are certainly not obligated to worry about the political or military policies or outcomes of the war in Ukraine. 

One of the greatest "freedoms" that Christians enjoy is the freedom to "let God be God" and free our hearts from worry about situations hopelessly out of our control. We are "free" to put our primary care on holiness and righteousness and repentance, both that of ourselves and that of our Christian brothers and sisters in our local congregations. 

I think it's a uniquely Christian blessing, that we have the freedom to say, "No, I don't know much about that, I don't really follow the news," through our trust in God's providence in all things.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/10/ukraine-invasion-civilian-volunteers-survival/671241/

In Memoriam, Gary Martin, 1947 - 2022

I remember doing a lot of watching of my dad.

I have early memories of his Twin Lakes Club in Wrightwood, CA, watching him and my grandfather fixing things, and watching my dad playing and teaching racquetball, tennis, and handball.

I remember watching him building a house in our backyard for my grandparents, and planting fruitless mulberry trees.

I remember him showing me his architecture offices, his blueprint machines, his plotter printer, his landscape drawings.

I also remember seeing him sick in the hospital, sick but bright-eyed and warm to be near.

I remember a lot of *places* with my dad. Like offices, backyards, building sites, tool sheds, train sets, places with equipment, where stuff happened, where stuff was built or fixed.

And he was always showing me things.

And when I was older, I remember watching him in matters of faith as well. We talked about Jesus, about scripture, about theology. I saw him firm in faith and hope and grace, I can attest to that.

But now, even if I can't watch him anymore, my dad was watched, and continues to be watched, by the Lord, by his savior and God. The Lord of all sees him, and knows him as one of his own. The Lord knows his life, his deeds, and his heart completely, and sees him and loves him today.

As I get even older, the Lord willing, I have hope that I will know my dad even better, as I walk down paths that he walked before me. Even if I can't see him, I hope I still can learn things from him, as my life experiences bring memories of him to mind. Or even as I unconsciously imitate him, because of how much time I've spent with him throughout my life. 

And as I continue to follow my God and his God, keeping my eyes "fixed on Him", and be changed by the same Holy Spirit, I hope to be close to my dad in that way as well, as I pursue the same Lord and Savior, and walk down the same path of faith.

My father is with the Lord. And I look forward to the day when I will see him and walk with him once more.