Jesus consistently engaged in debate with Israel’s two main religious-political parties: the Pharisees and the Sadducees. These two groups, both important to first century Judaism, were similar in many aspects, but they did differ on several issues. One crucial theological point on which they certainly disagreed was the idea of resurrection. While the Pharisees did hold to a belief in the resurrection of the dead, the Sadducees did not believe that such a resurrection would occur.
In Mark 12:18-27 we are specifically told that the Sadducees
did not believe in the resurrection of the dead, and in being told this, we
know exactly why this group of religious leaders come to debate theology with
Jesus. They come to argue with Jesus not in an attempt to discover theological
truth. They come to Jesus for the sole
purpose of entrapping Jesus by forcing him to answer a conundrum about
brothers, marriage, death, and resurrection.
When I read about these encounters Jesus has with religious
leaders, encounters he surely knows are motivated by aims of trickery, I often
wonder why he would even give them the time of day. After all, was his mission
as the one sent from God to waste time debating with theologians who remained
embedded in their traditions and who refused to believe that God could speak
and work outside of those traditions? Was not his mission toward the poor, the
outcast, the sick, and the oppressed, and if so, why does he spend any time
debating and arguing with either the Sadducees or Pharisees?
There is a fundamental question that underlies every debate
Jesus had with any group of religious leaders. Every discussion, every debate,
every argument, whether instigated by Jesus or the religious leaders, centers
on this one question: Who speaks with the authority of Israel’s God? And over and
over, every one of the debates raises the next logical question concerning the
nature of God. Whether the debate is over the Sabbath, purity laws, or paying
taxes to Caesar, the underlying argument is over who speaks for God and who
defines the nature and purposes of God.
I think this helps us see why Jesus engages in debates and
arguments with these religious leaders when he certainly had better and more
important things to do with his time. He argues with them about the nature of
God, because for him, God is the ultimate reality that gives meaning to human
existence, and he understood this not simply because of his place among the
people of Israel, but perhaps more fully through his own experience of God.
Let’s suppose Jesus did not believe God to be the ultimate
reality that defines human existence. Suppose he was just another good person
with certain powers to heal people, which he chose to do frequently. Yet, in
healing these people, what life would he be offering to them if he was not also
offering them the essence of what it means to be human?
In other words, while his healings would have been physically
beneficial to those who were sick, if such physical healings did not also
encompass the reality of God as the one who gives, sustains, and blesses life, such
healings would fall short of the restoration to full humanity. Healing is not
simply the absence of physical amelioration. Healing is the holistic union of a
person’s body, mind, and soul that returns them to the unity and peace of the
original creation. Healing involves the whole of a person restored to
wholeness.
And this is why this particular debate between Jesus and the
Sadducees is so important. They have not come to discover theological truth
from Jesus. Nor have they come with open hearts and open minds. Indeed, they
have come only to trap Jesus into admitting there is no resurrection. Yet, in a
turn of events even Jesus’ interrogators could not foresee, Jesus offers a
rebuttal to which they have no answer, and which defines the true meaning of
life.
The problem in this debate is a disagreement over
definition. While the Sadducees defined life as living as flesh and blood
humans in this world until death ends this life, Jesus defined life in terms of
relationship to God. For the Sadducees, life ends at death. But in their
preoccupation with the dead, they have missed the theological truth that God is
not the God of the dead; God is the God of the living.
When Jesus says that God is not the God of the dead, he is
not saying that God has stopped being God to those who have experienced
physical death. He is saying that God cannot be God of that which is dead, for
God is not dead; God is living. Likewise, God is not the God of the living
because the living are alive. God is the God of the living because God is the
living God.
Jesus once stated that he had come to give life more
abundantly. In other words, he defined his mission not only as imparting life
to all who believed, but also as imparting a life of fullness and wholeness. And
for Jesus, who believed and followed the God of the living, this meant not only
the absence of death, but the presence of the living God in the life of the
believer.
No comments:
Post a Comment