So here comes Jesus, up out of the Jordan River, still wet behind the ears, and the Spirit – the same one that came lightly on him, as a dove at his baptism – that same Spirit leads him into the wilderness. I can’t imagine what he was thinking, can you? A voice from heaven had just got finished telling him “You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased,” and here he was, in the wilderness, not eating anything,stomach shrunk to the size of a pea,and was he thinking “fine way, God, to treat your only Son?” I know I would be, but then, I’m not Jesus . . .
It’s not hisidea that to be out there, it’s not hischoice to be forty days without food or drink or must-see-TV, he’s been led out there by the Spirit of God—and where the Spirit of God leads, the Son of God had better go. Mark, in his Gospel, puts it even more starkly: he says the Spirit droveJesus into the wilderness, like a hunter drives his prey into a trap . . . but in our version the spirit leads him, and for me it brings up one of the enduring questions of our faith, namely how much did Jesus know of his fate? How much of a master of his own story, his own life was he? For those of us on the other side of the Council of Chalcedon, where our Western conception of the Trinity was forged, this can be a real poser. The Spirit led him into the wilderness? Isn’t Jesus both the Son and the Spirit, not to mention God to boot? You mean he led himself into the trackless desert?
It’s the old question of how much human Jesus was and how much God . . . of the balance between his humanity and his God-hood. It’s a question that was wrangled over and negotiated over for about four-hundred years, until that aforementioned Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD. There were extremists on either side . . . the Ebionites believed he was completely human, with no divinity, just an ordinary man, son of Joseph and Mary. The Docetists believed he was fully God, with no humanity whatsoever, and that his human appearance was just a disguise, and his suffering just an illusion. Both of these extremes were early-on declared to be heresy, that is, against the true teaching of the church. But there were intermediates between the two that weren’t so easily disposed of. On the more-God side, Apollinarius preached that Jesus’ bodywas human, but that his mind and soul had been replaced by a divine mind and soul. On the more-humanside, Arius taught that the Son was created by God, just like you and me, but that he was firstof all created beings.
Our story would perhaps be ammunition for the more-human side of Arius . . . Jesus was led into the wilderness, and he suffered there and hungered there just like any other human being, and that’s the way that wily ol’ devil findshim, out there in the wilderness, and didn’t they make a fine picture? Ol’ scratch all dapperin his three-piece Armani, with snakeskin boots and a big old white Stetson hat, set rakishly upon his head . . . like he’d been watching too many Dallas reruns . . . and then there was Jesus, all bedraggled and sweat-stained, gaunt from hunger and bone-tired. After all he had been out there for forty days and forty nights, and here the devil stands before him all manicured and well-coiffed, and he was looking amused with his one-raised eyebrow, and his gaze traveled slowly up and down the forlorn figure before him, from ragged sandals to tattered robe to matted hair, and he says “Well, well, well . . . what do we have here? If you are indeed the son of God(and personally, I doubt it), command this stone right here to change into a loaf of bread.”
And of course, old Beelzebub knewhe was the son of God, he was just messing with him, he was just testinghim, and it’s important for us to notice that the whole thing reeks of the Israelites in the wilderness . . . remember? They were there for forty years,and God provided bread, provided mannafor them, and the scripture that Jesus uses by way of reply – it’s from Deuteronomy – actually uses the word “manna,” and Jesus says it is written that human beings do not live by manna alone,” and it’s clear that Jesus is challenged to repeat that sign of God’s providing bread in the wilderness, that he is challenged to somehow provehe’s God’s Son, almost a second Moses, but if he makes bread for himself, he abuses his relationship with God, his sonship if you will, by doing it himself rather than relying on his heavenly parent.
And this is the temptation of the ages, isn’t it? It’s certainly a temptation that the Israelites, throughout their history, failed time and again, starting back at that time in the wilderness, when God gave them the bread, saying don’t try to gather more than a day’s worth, don’t try to save some back for the next day, ‘cause it won’t work, trust in God, live in the moment, but they didn’t listen, some gathered more, and some gathered less, they tried to hold some back for the next day, but it became foul and bred worms . . . but Jesus resists that temptation, he passes the test that the Israelites failed, he refuses to provide for himself, relying instead on God.
Well. Fire shoots from the Devils fingertips, he’s so angry, it scorches his leather briefcase and burns a hole in his hundred-dollar pants. When he finally gets himself under control, he leads Jesus up to this high mountain—lots of things happen on mountains—and he can see all the nations spread out below, not just Israel, but allthe nations, past, present and future, nations that had come and gone—yes, there really wasan Atlantis—and nations yet to come, with their cell towers and space stations, and Jesus’ eyes widen and a look of wonder comes over him, and the Devil gives a little smirk and says “Now that I’ve got your attention, how ‘bout it? Wanna rule it all? Well you can . . . all you gotta do is fall down on your knees and worship me. You see, all the kingdoms of the world have been given to me to rule, and I can give it all over to anyone I want.” They didn’t call him the Father of Lies for nothing . . .
And this must have been quite a temptation, ‘cause Jesus could do a lot of good as ruler of the world . . . even as they speak, the Romans rule large swaths of it, including his beloved Palestine. Surely Jesus would be a more just and fair ruler, surely they could use a regime change . . . and for that matter, what about the first temptation, the first test? If Jesus could turn those stones by his feet into bread, he could surely do the same to all those otherslittering the rocky ground, and feed the hungry people in a land often wracked by famine.
But Jesus isn’t buying any of it. Once again he quotes Deuteronomy, this time from the Sh’ma, one of his Israelite sisters and brothers’ most beloved passages, one observant Jews to this daynail to their doorposts: “Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.” And to have authority over all the nations, he’d have to both worship someone other than God and serve him as the overseer of all his domain. And besides: it’s hardly ol’ Scratch’s world to give, is it?
And now the Devil’s mad . . . so mad that he can hardly hold it together, he can hardly keep his Texas oil man look in place. It keeps flickering in and out, like a TV-picture on the fritz, revealing something enormously dark, enormously direunderneath. And the whole world rumbles under his feet, and cracks appear in the sides of the buildings, and people on the Jerusalem streets cower in fear, but Ol’ Scratch gets his act together and smooths down his suit and reseats his hat, and suddenly they’re standing on the pinnacle of the Temple, the highest place in town, and he can see all the priests scurrying around down below, he can smell the greasy smoke from the sacrificial fires, and he says “If you’re the Son of God, throw yourself off! For it’s written: God will command his angels to save you; on their hands they will bear you up, and you’ll not be dashed against the rocks!” And the Devil chuckles to himself, he’s thinking “This’llget him, he won’t be able to resist declaring who he is to those Jewish yokels . . .” And maybe he’s right maybe it’s the toughest temptation of them all . . . the Israelite religion, centered around the Temple apparatus, around priests and law and sacrifice, had become increasingly corrupt, increasingly beholden to the Roman overlords, increasingly jealous of their power, and a little reform certainly couldn’t hurt any . . . and by taking over the religion, he could put a stop to all of that, he could redeem it from its collusion with the oppressors, he could help take the wealth of the establishment and re-distribute it to his countrymen in need.
And once again, the temptation, the testis not just for Jesus to help himself. In the first instance, true: he could feed himself, but also his country-people, all too often the victims of bad weather and avaricious tax-men. In the second instance, he could become the leader his people deserved, a beneficent ruler, a kindruler, who sat in the gates and led with justice and righteousness. And now, the temptation to take over the Temple, to declare himself to all that he isGod’s Son, and in him God iswell pleased.
And that’s really what this is all about . . . it’s about what it means to be God’s Son, God’s child. . . does it mean to use it to do things as youwant to do them, on your time schedule, and under your own steam, or does it mean to rely on God’s grace, God’s time-schedule, God’s way? It’s important to remember what comes afterthis episode as well as before. After he gets back from the wilderness he strides into his home-town synagogue, takes up the scroll and lays out his mission statement, which is to do much of what Ol’ Scratch has tempted him to do. And after he resists the final temptation—don’t be testing the Lord God—when the Devil departs ‘til a more opportune time, he does those things he was tempted to do—feed the people, declare the just reign of God, reform the religion—only in God’stime, using God’smethods, nestled in the arms of God’s will.
And so, on tis first Sunday of Lent, it’s traditional to read this passage, just as it’s traditional to wonder the same thing: what does it mean to be a child of God? And in a sense, our temptations today haven’t changed all that much. We’re always trying to do it all under our owns steam: feeding the hungry, bringing about a more Christ-like government, reforming our faith—we Presbyterians are good at that always doing that—but is God always in it? When that ol’ Devil urges us to do it all ourselves, do we resist the temptation? Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment