Today's Readings
(Audio)
I have shown you many good works from my Father.
For which of these are you trying to stone me?
To even engage with him about the many miraculous deeds he had done was already to concede more than they wanted. For instance, they could complain about what he had done on the Sabbath only by mentioning one or more of the healings had had performed. Jesus preferred to keep the emphasis on the way the power of God was obviously at work in the world through him. But they wanted to argue about words, and often about technicalities, to keep the focus away from this elephant in the room. Other of his opponents did not find success in impugning the conduct of his disciples, whether that of not performing ritual washings, or of picking grain on the Sabbath. These Judeans therefore ramped up their critique, making him out to be guilty of one of the chief crimes against the Law, that of blasphemy.
“We are not stoning you for a good work but for blasphemy.
You, a man, are making yourself God.”
To their credit they did correctly understand what Jesus had implied about his unique relationship with the Father. Yet they wished to ignore all of the works that seemed to indicate that his claim must be true, that the finger of God was really at work in their midst. They therefore thought a verbal assault would be irrefutable. Their logic: men are not gods, but you claim to be God, therefore you are a blasphemer.
Jesus answered them,
“Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, ‘You are gods”‘?
If it calls them gods to whom the word of God came,
and Scripture cannot be set aside,
can you say that the one
whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world
Jesus did not then go to great lengths to explain the reason why the incarnation was in fact possible, or how the Second Person of the eternal Triune God could, without contradiction, take unto himself a human nature. Rather it seemed that he didn't want them to get hung up at that point in words or merely verbal disputes and miss the reality that was unfolding all around them. Scripture had used the term gods for those who were merely creatures made in God's image, and whose leadership roles in some measure mediated his presence. The implication was not that the term was empty. It was rather that if even those individuals, who were wicked, and would be punished, could be described in that way, how much more could Jesus be rightly addressed as the Son of God. If there was any valid analogy at all between God and man then perhaps reality had always been designed to be open to the incarnation. In any case, the Scriptures had used the word in that way, and so the opponents of Jesus ought not to be so utterly flabbergasted when he appropriated the term himself.
If I do not perform my Father’s works, do not believe me;
but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me,
believe the works, so that you may realize and understand
that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.
He wanted to direct their attention back to the works he did. The reason seemed to be that they had an excessive ability to deceive themselves in merely intellectual and abstract discussion. But if they actually gave their attention to the things Jesus was doing in their midst they would be more likely to "realize and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father".
Most of us probably know what it is like to spend too much time in our heads, in our own subjectivity. We are aware of our tendency to become confused and even deceived when we spend too much time on abstractions. Instead, let us focus more on the great things Jesus has done, just as Mary teaches us.
for he who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.
And his mercy is for those who fear him
from generation to generation (see Luke 1:49-50)
No comments:
Post a Comment