35. Caiaphas

People who met Jesus : 35 :  Caiaphas

Jn 18:24 Then Annas sent him, still bound, to Caiaphas the high priest.

Luke merely mentions Caiaphas as an historical marker for John the Baptist, as we saw in the previous meditation. Mark doesn’t mention him. Matthew gives him a couple of references, but it is left to John to give most detail.

Matthew shows us that Caiaphas was involved right from the start in plotting Jesus’ death: “Then the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, and they plotted to arrest Jesus in some sly way and kill him. “But not during the Feast,” they said, “or there may be a riot among the people.” (Mt 26:3-5) The plotting starts in a meeting called by the Jewish leaders, which is held in the palace of Caiaphas; it obviously has his blessing.

John adds detail to that particular meeting: “Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin. “What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many miraculous signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.” (Jn 11:47-50) There John shows us that Caiaphas was there in the midst of this meeting and came right out with it – it is better for one man to die than the nation rebels and is destroyed by Rome (implied). Older versions say, instead of ‘it is better’, ‘it is more expedient’. Expediency is what politics often works with, and that has little to do with the truth!

When it comes to the arrest and trial Matthew records, “Those who had arrested Jesus took him to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the teachers of the law and the elders had assembled…… The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for false evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death. But they did not find any, though many false witnesses came forward.” (Mt 26:57,59,60) which is exactly true but he misses out on the fact that they first took Jesus to Annas. Thus John records, “They bound him and brought him first to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year. Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it would be good if one man died for the people,” (Jn 18:12-14) to set the record straight.

Matthew gave a good coverage of Jesus’ interrogation by the high priest (see Mt 26:57-66) and so John doesn’t bother to cover it. He simply provides the link, “Then the Jews led Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor.” (Jn 18:28) We might consider why these two reporters cover what they cover. Matthew seems to cover the basics of the situation but John wrote a lot later and was also known by the high priest (see Jn 18:15,16) and had access to the palace, possibly with family connections, and would have picked up some of the detail from insiders there.

So, we are left with a picture of the high priest in office, equivalent of the Archbishop of Canterbury in England, the senior post leader of Judaism, living in a palace and being part of the plot to destroy this itinerant preacher who looks like he could upset the political balance between Israel and Rome. Thus he must go!

We saw in the previous meditation how Annas was involved as ‘the power behind the throne’, the older man ousted from his position but now exercising influence even though not officially the high priest in place. But now we see Caiaphas, who is high priest in place, planning to act against Jesus even before he has arrived in Jerusalem for the Passover. This is not a casual, off-the-cuff, attack on Jesus, but a premeditated carefully thought out scheme. This is a politician at a most senior level acting “for the good of the country” as he sees it. The only problem is that he is also the most senior religious figure and, we would expect, should be the best example of God’s representative on earth. So there you have it: the man who should be the best example of God’s representative on earth, acting against God and plotting to destroy God’s Son. How wrong can you get!

We mentioned the dangers of institutionalism in the previous meditation, so we don’t need to touch it again here, even though it applies. The bigger message or warning here is, how easy it is to get it wrong. This man in power, the most powerful man in Judaism was almost certainly most sincere and utterly convinced he was acting for the good of Israel. Well he was, and for the whole world, but in a way quite different to the way he thought. He was acting as the priest who had to sacrifice the Lamb of God (Jn 1:29), the Passover lamb to avert the judgment of God and take the sins of the world – but he didn’t know that that was what he was doing. He was doing it for a completely different reason. He was doing what he thought was right to protect Israel, but only God can protect Israel, only God can protect the church and the moment we start working in the same way that the world works, we will have gone wrong.

The weapons we use are spiritual, not material or political. We may engage in politics and have some influence in the world, but it will only be true influence if we are doing it at the leading of God. Indeed, in whatever we do, we will only have true influence if we are doing it at the leading of God. There was one thing about this supposed man of God at the top of Judaism – he couldn’t hear God. If he had he wouldn’t have had the Son of God killed. He would have had to leave that to someone else, someone else who was listening to the enemy.

Now isn’t that terrible – this man obviously listened to the enemy who wanted Jesus stopped. Fortunately the enemy didn’t realise what God was planning by allowing His Son to die on the Cross, but it was an enemy action. When Peter, on the day of Pentecost, described what happened he declared, “This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.” (Acts 2:23) This was an act of “wicked men” who with wrong motivation sought the death of the Son of God – and Caiaphas headed them up. What a warning to those of us in positions of power!

34. Annas

People who met Jesus : 34 :  Annas

Jn 18:12-13 Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him and brought him first to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year.

We now move to consider dark times and those involved in them. Yes, these are people who met Jesus but not in good circumstances. The first mention of Annas in the Gospels is in Luke as an historical marker for John the Baptist: “during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas.” (Lk 3:2) Caiaphas was the official high priest and he was son-in-law of Annas who had been deposed by the Romans in AD15, yet it was supposed by the Jews that the high priesthood was supposed to be held for life. Thus it is that we find both of these men being referred to as the High Priest. The position was that of the highest religious leader and was very powerful.

It is significant that the arresting party took Jesus first to Annas for the old man was obviously the ‘power behind the throne’. Annas is going to present the first line of questioning in this dubious series of events. Throughout the preceding week Jesus had been in Jerusalem teaching and healing and had clearly received opposition from each of the religious groupings including the priests, those who attended the Temple in Jerusalem as officials of Judaism. He had clearly upset the religious establishment. It had been after the raising of Lazarus that it had come to a head: “Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.  “What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many miraculous signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” (Jn 11:47,48) ‘Our place’ that they referred to was, of course, the Temple. They feared that Jesus’ activity would stir up the people to revolt and, in the brutal suppression that would follow, the Temple would be destroyed. Of course that is exactly what happened in AD70.

Annas sees his role as protecting Judaism – by whatever means. He therefore heads up the first inquisition: “Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. “I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said.” When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby struck him in the face. “Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded. “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?” Then Annas sent him, still bound, to Caiaphas the high priest.” (Jn 18:19-24)

He demands that Jesus tell him what he has been teaching the people, for he is looking for an excuse to condemn Jesus for false teaching, but Jesus will have none of it: I have been teaching openly and you know it and you know what I have been saying and you know there is nothing to criticise (implied). One of the other officials resorts to violence and then Jesus is sent to Caiaphas. Later on it is clear that Annas is included in the all-embracing language of condemnation: “Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people came to the decision to put Jesus to death. They bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor.” (Mt 27:1,2)

What is so terrible about this is that this is THE classic example of institutional religion standing against God! Whenever we institutionalize religion we create man-centred and man-focused religion that at times actually opposes God. False religion had often reared its head in Israel and it still did. This lifeless orthodoxy was a poor representation of the life of God and yet, I am sure, if you had questioned these leaders they would have been totally sincere – and yet sincerely wrong! The apostle Paul was a similar example of a sincere man but who was sincerely wrong until he met the risen Christ. When it comes to institutional religion the word ‘expediency’ enters the vocabulary as we’ll see in the next meditation. Religious leaders who are also political have to consider what is expedient for the protection of the institution, not what is the will of God. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why religion should never be institutionalized!

In this man’s hands was terrible power. He could have ended this fiasco then and there and released Jesus, but he is driven by fear that his precious institution will be harmed and he cannot let that happen. As we just suggested, the will of God doesn’t come into it – because he believes protecting the institution is the will of God and so Jesus (the Son of God) must die. How terrible! This must surely have been THE worst misjudgment of history, yet God knew that this is how it would work out so that His Son could be sacrificed for the sins of the world.

What happened to Annas?  Well he was still there in Acts: “Annas the high priest was there, and so were Caiaphas, John, Alexander and the other men of the high priest’s family.” (Acts 4:6). There were a number of men abusing their positions of power at this time. This was one of them. God’s word has a number of warnings against those who misused their authority. Annas should have heeded those warnings. May any of us in such positions, similarly be warned.

33. The Blind Man

People who met Jesus : 33 :  The Blind Man

Jn 9:1-3 As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life.

I have commented before that I felt the woman caught in adultery was one of my favourite stories, but now I have to add that this one comes joint first, and certainly first of all the healing accounts. There are so many aspects of this story that are worth noting.

It starts with a bunch of totally insensitive disciples. We’re like this sometimes! As they are walking along they come across this man who is blind who, they are told, has been like this from birth. Now they are just like Job’s comforters who worked on the basis that if you had anything wrong with you, you had obviously sinned. So the disciples, wanting to look like learners, ask of Jesus why this man would be like this. Was it because of his own sin or because of the sin of his parents? The former option is pretty stupid really, because he had been born like it, so how could his sin have caused it? Anyway, Jesus won’t have this.

It’s nothing to do with sin; it’s all about glorifying the Father.  What? Yes, stop your insensitive questions (what must the man have been feeling while they voiced their questions infront of him?); let’s just take the opportunity to heal him! There’s the challenge! Let’s stop criticising and blaming people; let’s just bring God’s love to them, bless them and save them!

Now the way of healing here is unique to the Gospel healing accounts: “he spit on the ground, made some mud with the saliva, and put it on the man’s eyes. “Go,” he told him, “wash in the Pool of Siloam” (this word means Sent). So the man went and washed, and came home seeing.” (v.6,7) So why did Jesus do this? Did he want to give the man some privacy in his healing and so did something that made him go elsewhere to receive the healing? Did he do it because he knew the man needed that extra faith-motivation? We don’t know – but the man was healed!

The incredible nature of what happened is revealed in what follows: “His neighbors and those who had formerly seen him begging asked, “Isn’t this the same man who used to sit and beg?” Some claimed that he was. Others said, “No, he only looks like him.” But he himself insisted, “I am the man.” “How then were your eyes opened?” they demanded. He replied, “The man they call Jesus made some mud and put it on my eyes. He told me to go to Siloam and wash. So I went and washed, and then I could see.” “Where is this man?” they asked him. “I don’t know,” he said.” (v.8-12). They couldn’t believe what had happened. Obviously Jesus wasn’t performing great miracles at this stage of his ministry in Jerusalem, because the enquirers haven’t got a clue about him yet.

Now their response shows how unpleasant and short-sighted people can be: “They brought to the Pharisees the man who had been blind. Now the day on which Jesus had made the mud and opened the man’s eyes was a Sabbath. Therefore the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. “He put mud on my eyes,” the man replied, “and I washed, and now I see.” Some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath.” But others asked, “How can a sinner do such miraculous signs?” So they were divided.” (v.13-16) The neighbours take him to the guardians of the Law, the Pharisees. Why? Were they trying to stir things up? Instead of rejoicing over the wonder of what had happened they look to cause trouble. The Pharisees pick on the fact that it was the Sabbath and in their eyes healing was work. How petty! This story reveals the worst of people and the wonder of Jesus. But the best is yet to come”

Let’s jump a little bit: “A second time they summoned the man who had been blind. “Give glory to God,” they said. “We know this man is a sinner.” He replied, “Whether he is a sinner or not, I don’t know. One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!” (v.24,25) That’s the bit that always makes me laugh. The Pharisees want to denounce Jesus and try to get the man to do it for them, but all he can do is declare his testimony which is as simple as you can get: “One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!”

You may think you don’t know what to say to people about the Christian life, but you have a testimony and no one can take that from you. For me it was, “Once I was lost, purposeless, lonely, and drifting into alcoholism, but then I met Jesus and he gave me purpose, security, healing, friends, a wonderful wife and a wonderful family.

You can criticise it but I know the truth of it – and so do millions and millions of other people who have met Jesus. Rather than be mean minded and criticise people who say they have found a new purpose in life that is filled with love, joy and peace, why not look for it yourself if you’ve never yet found it? God is in the business of transforming lives, not condemning them, and it’s there for whoever will come to Him, surrender to Him and put their life in His hands. Once I was blind, but now I can see! And you?

32. Long-term Invalid

People who met Jesus : 32 :  The Long-Term Invalid

Jn 5:5-9 One who was there had been an invalid for thirty-eight years. When Jesus saw him lying there and learned that he had been in this condition for a long time, he asked him, “Do you want to get well?” “Sir,” the invalid replied, “I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred. While I am trying to get in, someone else goes down ahead of me.” Then Jesus said to him, “Get up! Pick up your mat and walk.” At once the man was cured; he picked up his mat and walked.

The story of the invalid at the pool raises a number of important questions. He is, we note somewhat obviously, described as “an invalid” but we are not told what it is that makes him in this condition. It is obvious that he is unable to move himself and so whether it is a form of paralysis or some form of wasting disease where the muscles have been deprived of their strength is unclear. Whatever it is, he has been like it for a very long time. How he survives we don’t know. Whether his family come back once a day and feed him or whether he begs, we don’t know. He has a mat on which he lies and his life is just lying by the pool waiting for something to happen.

Now, apparently, every now and then the water in this pool became stirred and it was believed that if you got into the water when it was being stirred you would be healed. One assumes that this had happened otherwise the belief wouldn’t have come about.  Again whether such healings had been psychosomatic or had been physiologically genuine we don’t know, but people in need will grasp at whatever straws they can.

Now there is a horrible hopelessness about this man’s plight. He can’t move quickly on his own and if there is anyone else there when the water stirs, they are likely to be those who are sick and so will ignore him and get in ahead of him, for it seemed it was only the first person in who could get the healing. There was no way, in a land where there appeared a lot of sickness and even demon possession, this man was going to get in first. It was an utterly hopeless situation. Then Jesus comes along.

The question he asks is devastating for such people: “Do you want to get well?” If you’ve never come across anyone in this sort of situation you might wonder about such a question, but it is a very real question. The truth is that we learn to live with our illnesses and infirmities and after a while we can’t imagine life without it. In fact very soon we become so used to it that we fear the alternative – being healed. Today in Western society it is even worse for we provide financial benefits for such people and the fear becomes, what will I do if I am healed and they take away my benefit? This is very real and I have heard it expressed at least twice.

So, in this sort of situation there is not only the illness itself but there is also the fear of the alternative that locks us in. Although, most of the time, such people would deny this, it is nevertheless true for many, and it is a very real and genuine fear. The fear of how to cope with a totally different life is very real, even though it may be one that most of us cannot comprehend. So when Jesus asks this question he is probing for the truth. The man does not answer with a “Yes, of course!” answer but seeks to justify why he’s there, and that too is a very natural reaction. In a more humorous vein, when there is discussions about differences between the sexes, men so often are chided for their fears of going to a doctor when there is something wrong. The wife eventually finds out that there is something wrong with her husband and then chides him to go to the doctor. Watch the resistance! What it is that creates this resistance in us I don’t know (because I’m, a man!). Perhaps it is that we don’t like facing up to the fact of it, and hope it will just go away if we ignore it. It’s a form of denial whatever it is and it’s a form of denial that we find in this man. He puts the blame for his ongoing infirmity on the lack of people to help him. Maybe that is a genuine cry; maybe it is an excuse.

In the face of his impossible situation, Jesus simply declares healing for the man in the form of a command to get up and walk. Now there may be those who may suggest that this was just a psychosomatic illness and in fact there was nothing wrong with the man at all, but the fact is that he had been like it for thirty eight years. If it wasn’t physiological, it was therefore a psychological illness – yet it is an illness that makes a person lie on a mat for that length of time if there is nothing wrong physically! It doesn’t matter if it was psychological; it was just as real to the man. There may be those of us who are locked in by some psychological thing. It is just as real to us and we are just as much a prisoner to it as if it had been purely physical. Whatever it is, such a thing needs the command of Jesus being spoken to it to break the power of it. Gloriously the man is freed and he gets up and walks. If it was physical it was a miracle of healing. If it was psychological it is just as wonderful that the word of the Son of God can release the bondage of the mind. Mind or body; Jesus is still our Saviour! Hallelujah!

31. Nicodemus

People who met Jesus : 31 :  Nicodemus

Jn 3:1,2 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

Nicodemus only appears in John’s Gospel. Again this may be because the Synoptic Gospel writers’ might have wanted to have given him privacy but by the time John wrote he had passed away. We first see him as he comes to Jesus at night to question him. The fact of it being at night suggests that this is a private visit; he is not coming on behalf of the Sanhedrin, the ruling council, and he doesn’t want others to know that he has come. He comes and accepts that Jesus is a teacher for he starts out with the respectful address, “Rabbi.” Moreover he acknowledges that he is a teacher who has come from God for that is clear by the miracles that Jesus performs.

Now from the outset we can see that Nicodemus is a seeker of truth. He is a respected senior member of the Jewish community, being on the ruling council, he has heard about Jesus and so, while Jesus is in Jerusalem for the Passover, (Jn 2:23) he decides to go and question him. As a leader of the people he comes with a measure of authority and superiority. Many of us think we are someone.

Nicodemus acknowledges that Jesus moves with the power of God but Jesus says you can’t see or enter into the place where God moves in sovereign power (his kingdom) unless God gives you a new life: “In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.” (v.3) Nicodemus says he has been seeing the works of God but Jesus says you can only look in from the outside until you’ve been ‘born again’. This catches Nicodemus on the hop: “How can a man be born when he is old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born!” (v.4) He is thinking in literal terms and suddenly he is not as confident in himself and shows he doesn’t understand what Jesus is saying.

Jesus focuses it back on the kingdom of God as if to say, don’t worry about the material technicalities; it’s all about spiritual issues: “Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” (v.5,6) i.e. you’re not going to experience the kingdom of God for yourself until God’s Holy Spirit does a work in you so it is like your own spirit is reborn and brought alive to a new life in a new dimension.

Nicodemus obviously looks perplexed for Jesus continues, “You should not be surprised at my saying, `You must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.” (v.7,8) It’s a mystery, says Jesus, the way the Spirit works. Just like the wind you sense His movement but you won’t know when or where He’ll move next.

Nicodemus is still confused: “How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.” (v.9) Jesus isn’t going to give him neat, pat answers; he’s going to challenge him some more: “You are Israel’s teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? I tell you the truth, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven–the Son of Man.” (v.10-13) In this manner Jesus brings himself right back before Nicodemus.

There’s something very challenging about this conversation. In our preaching we try to be very clear but that’s not the way Jesus did it. Very often he spoke enigmatically so that the listeners had to really think about what he had said. It was only those with seeking hearts who pressed through to understanding. (See what Jesus said about his use of parable in Mt 13:10-17). People who say they don’t understand Jesus reveal hearts that are not seeking.

We next see mention of Nicodemus when there is discussion about Jesus among the religious leaders and we find, “Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus earlier and who was one of their own number, asked, “Does our law condemn anyone without first hearing him to find out what he is doing?” (Jn 7:50,51) He is subtly defending Jesus without being an out and out follower.

Our final reference to him comes after Jesus’ death: “Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus…. He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds. Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs.” (Jn 19:38-40)

Community leader he may be – and the community has just killed Jesus – but his conscience makes him, with Joseph of Arimathea, go to give the body a proper burial. He is a follower of sorts. It is not clear how much of a follower but more and more he is standing out for Jesus. He looks like he’s on the way to being a citizen of the kingdom.

Interestingly, in the story of Nicodemus, Jesus never said to him, “Follow me.” That was only for people who were ready for it. Nicodemus has got a lot of thinking to do so Jesus gives him plenty to think about. The story about Nicodemus is seriously challenging because it asks us what sort of seekers WE are. Are we those who look in from the outside and just criticise because we don’t understand – and can’t be bothered to really seek? Or are we those who half hear the truth and complain that the preacher isn’t making it clear enough?  Jesus is looking for genuine seekers who will spend time seeking God for the truth. Will we be such people?

30. The Pharisee

People who met Jesus : 30 :  Simon, the Pharisee

Lk 7:36-39 Now one of the Pharisees invited Jesus to have dinner with him, so he went to the Pharisee’s house and reclined at the table. When a woman who had lived a sinful life in that town learned that Jesus was eating at the Pharisee’s house, she brought an alabaster jar of perfume, and as she stood behind him at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them. When the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she is–that she is a sinner.”

We move on to a new group of people now, people who struggled with Jesus, people who showed resistance to him. Now two meditations ago we considered weeping Mary who appears in this story and we also noted that in Matthew’s Gospel this appears in the home of ‘Simon the Leper’ (Mt 26:6). Because of the similarities of the stories we concluded that this must be one and the same person. Now if he had been a leper at that moment they would not have been dining in his home for he would have been an outcast, which leads us to suppose that he had been a leper but had been healed – by Jesus? That may have been so but we can’t know for sure. What we do know is that he is a Pharisee, a member of that conservative group who saw themselves as guardians of the Law. They were also (or because of this) legalists and were more concerned with people’s sin that with their restoration. We thus find that Simon is a classic Pharisee!

He has invited Jesus into his home to have dinner with him. Mary enters the house with her perfume to anoint Jesus with it. Luke tells us in his account that Lazarus and Martha are at this meal and that adds credibility to the woman being their sister, Mary. Because they were there, she would feel easy about coming as well. As we considered previously she weeps with a mixture of gratefulness over having been forgiven and restored from her old life, and also, perhaps, from a sense of foreboding about the weeks ahead of Jesus.

Simon, the host, looks at this woman – who he knows – and wonders what sort of prophet Jesus is, if he can’t discern the sort of woman Mary is. The problem Simon has, though, is that he is locked into the past. Yes, that’s what she had been like but that’s not what she’s like now!  Simon, catch up! She is clearly a repentant sinner and God loves repentant sinners!!!!  I know we have covered this previously but it is so important for us in the Church today that it bears repeating. Previously our focus had been on Mary; now it is on Simon.

Jesus has a story to tell him: “Jesus answered him, “Simon, I have something to tell you.” “Tell me, teacher,” he said. “Two men owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he cancelled the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?” Simon replied, “I suppose the one who had the bigger debt cancelled.” “You have judged correctly,” Jesus said.” (v.40-44)  Now what is interesting is that above we read of Simon, “he said to himself.” In other words he didn’t speak out loud what he was thinking but Jesus reads minds and Jesus knew exactly what he was thinking, which is why we now read, “Jesus answered him.” He is directly addressing what Simon is thinking. If you think it is virtuous not to speak out what you are thinking, beware, Jesus reads minds. It’s better not to think it in the first place!

The lesson is very obvious. The more you are forgiven, the more grateful you will be. But it doesn’t end there. Jesus now applies it to Simon: “Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet.” (v.44-46) Look Simon, he says, when I came into your home, as an apparent honoured guest, you did not have my feet washed or give me anything to put on my head to freshen up, as is customary, yet this women that you write off has done both things.

And then, to push home the point even further: “Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven–for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little.” (v.47) i.e. her love for me is a clear sign of her repentance and so anything she may have done in the past is now forgiven.

Being judgmental is a dangerous hobby. We mostly don’t know the state of heart of the people we condemn. Simon went on what he knew of her past and didn’t realise that her heart had changed. How terrible it might have been if he, the moment he saw her entering his home, had sent her out again. And yet that is what we do sometimes with people whose hearts are changing as God draws them. Those of us who have been religiously righteous all our lives, because that is how we were brought up, have an even bigger difficulty in accepting that all-out sinners can repent and are loved by God. This is especially so when they are still struggling to bring changes to their lives – which often takes time. We want instant perfection, and yet don’t have it ourselves. If we do that, get ready for a rebuke from Jesus!

29. The Widow

People who met Jesus : 29 :  The Widow

Lk 7:11-15 Soon afterward, Jesus went to a town called Nain, and his disciples and a large crowd went along with him. As he approached the town gate, a dead person was being carried out–the only son of his mother, and she was a widow. And a large crowd from the town was with her. When the Lord saw her, his heart went out to her and he said, “Don’t cry.” Then he went up and touched the coffin, and those carrying it stood still. He said, “Young man, I say to you, get up!” The dead man sat up and began to talk, and Jesus gave him back to his mother.

This story appears nowhere else in the Gospels. Perhaps it appears in Luke’s Gospel because, as he was sifting the stories he had heard, trying to decide which ones to include, this one struck him, as a physician, for its shear beauty. Luke is clearly a people-person who feels for people and the story of the widow of Nain is a moving story. It is thought that Nain is probably in the south east of Galilee, and Jesus is obviously on his tour of the towns of Galilee bringing the love of God to them. Why he went to Nain we don’t know. Whether he knew what was about to happen, again we don’t know, but otherwise it is a coincidence that he arrives at the moment that a funeral procession is coming out of the town gate on the way to the local cemetery.

Look at the terrible description of the dead person: “the only son of his mother, and she was a widow.” This isn’t just a funeral; this is a portrayal of the devastating nature of life. We don’t know how old the son was but there is no mention of a wife in attendance which may suggest both he and his mother are of younger years, yet he is described as a man at the end of our verses.  But she is a widow. She has already lost her husband. Life has already dealt her one cruel blow and now it is dealing her another, for her only son has just died. She is now all alone. This is a most pitiful picture.

There are no reasons given in this short account for the death of the husband and the death of the son. Job’s comforters would have claimed that they must have been a bad family and they were only getting what they deserved, but it doesn’t work like that! If we got what we deserved all of us would be dead. Yes, some sins do bring about illness or even death, but people who are not sinful in any big way die for no apparent reason beyond the illness or bodily failure that took them. Life in a Fallen World is like that, it goes wrong and people die. Ultimately we die because of sin in the world but the reasons why specific people die are often a mystery. It isn’t judgment; it’s just that we live in a Fallen World where things go wrong.

Yet into this world comes the Son of God with all power. He doesn’t exercise that power indiscriminately but uses it as moved by the Father – or by people! In this story we read, “When the Lord saw her, his heart went out to her.” Jesus acted as he did because he was moved by compassion. Compassion is an expression of love and we are told, “God IS love,” (Jn 4:8,16) and Jesus is the perfect expression of that love, and Jesus constantly expresses love, and we see it in different forms in the Gospels. Here we see it in the form of compassion that moved him into action.

We are told something else about the woman: “a large crowd from the town was with her.” She was a popular woman and her plight caused anguish in the town. When Jesus sees her and sees the crowd, he is moved. He understands her plight and he feels for her, and what he feels moves him to act.

There are three phases to what he does. The first is to reassure the woman: “his heart went out to her and he said, “Don’t cry.” Initially she may not have realised what was happening. All she knows is that suddenly this preacher accompanied by his own large crowd steps up and interrupts the funeral procession, and he starts with her. Phase one is a subtle indication that he is going to do something. Next he goes over to the procession and puts his hand on what was probably an open-top coffin. Those carrying it stop. This man obviously wants something and he carries and air of authority about him, so the funeral procession is stopped and they come to a halt. Jesus is bringing this ‘death activity’ to a halt. It’s as if he is implying, that’s enough, this has gone on long enough. The third phase is a word of authority spoken to the dead body and that word has effect so that the body comes alive and the man sits up and starts speaking.

I suspect that those carrying the coffin didn’t know what to do with themselves at this point! No doubt they put the coffin down, if they hadn’t already done that when Jesus stopped them. From the wording it would appear that Jesus probably took the confused (?) man by the hand and led him back to his mother who must have now been standing there in tears. Luke just records, “and Jesus gave him back to his mother.” It is a purposeful act of reuniting them. Mother and son are back together again. Wonderful!

This is a story where nothing is asked of Jesus, and no one came to him. He simply came upon this funeral procession and stepped in, moved by compassion. There are times when we pray our hearts out to get God to move on our behalf, and there are times when He just comes on His own volition. Why does He come? He comes because He loves us and is moved by our plight. Hallelujah!

28. Weeping Mary

People who met Jesus : 28 :  Weeping Mary

Mt 26:6-13 While Jesus was in Bethany in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, which she poured on his head as he was reclining at the table. When the disciples saw this, they were indignant. “Why this waste?” they asked. “This perfume could have been sold at a high price and the money given to the poor.” Aware of this, Jesus said to them, “Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful thing to me. The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me. When she poured this perfume on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. I tell you the truth, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.”

I have often had to make comment about contradictions in the Bible – or rather the absence of true contradictions. If there is an account that might come in the line of fire of those who are looking for contradictions, this passage is one such.  There is a similar account in Luke 7:36-39 and another in John 12:1-8. The key point about contradictions is that they need to be specific opposites of information. Simply different information is different reporting styles. Let’s see what we have here.

In Matthew and Luke there is an unnamed woman who comes with a jar of perfume. In John she is named as Mary, presumably the sister of Martha and Lazarus, who were both there. Matthew and John both identify the location as Bethany. Matthew says it was the home of Simon the Leper, while Luke says it was the home of a Pharisee and John doesn’t say whose home it was. In Matthew she pours the perfume over Jesus’ head, in John she pours it on his feet and in Luke we aren’t told what she did with it.

In Matthew the disciples object to the waste, in John it is Judas who is identified as the objector (and Jesus does use some same words in both), and in Luke it is the Pharisee who questions Jesus’ ability to discern the state of this woman. In Matthew the woman isn’t described, in John she is simply described as Mary, but in Luke she is described as a woman who had lived a sinful life. My own view on these accounts is that there are such similarities that we must be talking about the same incident – in Bethany, at dinner, perfume, and a woman.

I may be wrong and I know some commentators think we have different incidents here, but I have no problem synthesising the information in the three accounts. So Simon, who had previously been a leper is now a Pharisee. Mary, sister of Martha, didn’t have a good history (often in the Lazarus; account in Jn 11 we just think of them as nice people, but that isn’t necessarily so). It is quite probable that the Synoptic writers don’t name to woman to protect her, whereas John was writing so much later it is probable that she (and Lazarus) were no longer alive when he wrote.  The rest of the points are simply different emphases being made by the different writers.

So let’s focus now on the woman. Let’s suppose she was the Mary we’ve already considered in the Luke account of Mary and Martha in an earlier meditation. She had previously sat at Jesus’ feet and if Luke 7 is the same incident, she bathes in the love of the Master who has accepted and forgiven her past (had Martha previously invited Jesus to their home to talk some sense into Mary?)

THE crucial thing about these accounts and about her is that she had expensive perfume and she poured it out on Jesus as she wept over him. Was she weeping for her own sins or because she sensed that something awful is about to happen to Jesus. Here we have a woman moved by emotion into an extravagant action that received censure from both some of the disciples and the host. From Jesus she only receives acceptance. He is simply blessed by her action.

For those of us who have nice controlled unemotional lives, we may struggle with this woman. In fact we may struggle with anyone who expresses emotion in their spiritual life. I remember the testimony of one of our (now) elderly members who, when he first came to us many years ago, was embarrassed by the emotion he found being expressed by the congregation in worship. Worship should be a volitional and emotional expression if it is real worship. The psalms are full of emotion and emotions must have been fully operational when Jesus was performing so many miracles on a daily basis. Thankfulness, praise and wonder must have been the order of the day.

There is an even lovelier reason for raw emotion to be expressed which Jesus highlighted when he chided his guest in Luke’s ongoing account: “Two men owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he canceled the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?” Simon replied, “I suppose the one who had the bigger debt canceled.” (Lk 7:41-43) and then referring to her past Jesus declared, “I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven–for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little.” (Lk 7:47) Wow! There’s the truth. Those who are conscious of their past sins are really grateful when they are forgiven and saved. Those who think they are all right, love little for, as John was to write, “We love because he first loved us.” (Jn 4:19)

This is an account of a woman who had an unsavoury past but who was loved and accepted by Jesus and so was thankful, so thankful that she literally poured out her love over Jesus, using perfume. Extravagant love is what God looks for. May He find it in us!

27. Mary Magdalene

People who met Jesus : 27 :  Mary Magdalene

Lk 8:1-3 After this, Jesus travelled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God. The Twelve were with him, and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out; Joanna the wife of Cuza, the manager of Herod’s household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.

Although Mary Magdalene features strongly in modern myth about Jesus, we know relatively little about her from the Gospels, and documents outside the canon of Scripture are so suspect as to be ruled out as sources of truth. The speculation that arises, tends to be about Mary’s relationship with Jesus, yet if anything of modern speculation were verging on the truth, that would surely have been picked up by the Gospel writers. If she had a strong place in the apostolic band, it would certainly have been referred to – but it isn’t. In terms of descriptions of her, these verses in Luke are really all we have. She is just another figure who was with Jesus, and the Gospels give no hint of anything beyond that.

The first possibly surprising piece of information that Luke gives us is that when Jesus exercised his itinerant ministry, he didn’t only travel with the twelve men, but there were also a number of women who travelled with him as well. Their role is clearly that of a support team. The provision for this band would have come from people they met along the way, but it is also from the women who now travelled with Jesus. Whether Mary had much to contribute we don’t know. We don’t know her background at all, apart from the fact that the name ‘Magdalene’ supposes ‘from Magdala’, a town thought to be on the Western shore of the Sea of Galilee, south of Capernaum. We don’t know whether she had had a husband, whether she was rich or poor or what.

The only thing we do know about her, that Luke the doctor picks up, is that she had previously been severely demon possessed. In fact, he says, she had had seven demons cast out of her by Jesus. Now we have, in previous meditations, commented that it is our belief (though not mentioned in Scripture) that for a demon to take up residence in a person (possession), their life had to be of a nature that invited Satan in. It has to be a life given over to the occult, or to sin, in a serious way. For there to have been seven demons in Mary, suggests a very bad life previously. What is intriguing is why her deliverance does not feature in the Scriptural accounts. It suggests that the Gospel writers often drew a veil over circumstances involving individuals, perhaps to protect them from publicity. Surely this is the only reason Lazarus’s raising from the dead is not mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels. Many of the people who are picked out for a mention are not named. Thus Mary’s background is hardly mentioned.

Yet, here she now is, as a faithful follower of Jesus, serving the apostolic band. Again we don’t know for how long. The whole of the three years? Just part of it? We just know these sorts of things.

The next mention of her is by Matthew and it is at Jesus’ crucifixion: “Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.” (Mt 27:55,56) He also makes the point that they had travelled with Jesus and the team, to care for their needs. The rest of the disciples may be in hiding, but these women are drawn to watch the terrible last hours of Jesus.

Her final role as seen in the Gospels is of one of the key people who first saw the risen Jesus. Matthew records, “After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.” (Mt 28:1) The add on section of Mark’s Gospel records, “When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.” (Mk 16:9) John also records this: “Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.” (Jn 20:1) and then Jesus appears to her (v.13-17) and she returns to tell the rest of the band: “Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news: “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them that he had said these things to her.” (Jn 20:18)

Mary Magdalene shows us a woman with a very difficult past, who fell into utter darkness, met Jesus and was utterly restored to normality – yet we are told virtually nothing about that. We are told that she became a faithful follower and stood by Jesus even in the darkest hour and perhaps for that, was granted the privilege of being the first to see Jesus when he rose from the dead. Modern mysticism wants to make more of her but this is all we are told in the Gospels accounts. She brings us hope – restored from the depths by Jesus. She is an example – a servant/provider for Jesus who stuck with him. She provides a testimony of the risen Lord. Beyond that – nothing!

I am amazed, when I read Abraham’s story in Genesis, how little we are told of him considering all the years he had encounters with God. It’s the same sort of thing as we see here with Mary Magdalene and so many others. They had a real, living, vibrant relationship with the Lord but we are told so little about them. They simply are players in the great story about Jesus. Yet they ARE significant! And isn’t that how it is with so many (if not all) of us? In terms of history, most of what we were and did will not be remembered, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that day by day we walked with the Lord and as far as He is concerned that is important. Every now and then we will do something really noteworthy but mostly, for most of us, life isn’t like that. We are simply faithful followers – and God is blessed. It doesn’t matter that we don’t get great acclaim for lots of ‘big’ things!  Be blessed in who you are as his follower!

26. Adulterous Woman

People who met Jesus : 26 :  The Adulterous Woman

Jn 8:3-6 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

I have to confess that this is one of my favourite stories about people who met Jesus. This is about a lady who neither came to see Jesus of her own volition nor was sought out by Jesus. No, this lady was dragged to Jesus by the ‘ethics police’, the Pharisees, and what is especially bad about it is that they brought her to Jesus and questioned him about her “as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.” Now we have to also note before we get under way that in our Bibles we have a note: “The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11.” i.e. this story may not have been in the original form of this Gospel. So why do we use it? Because it ‘fits’ with all we know of Jesus. Possibly it was added in later as one of the stories that had been passed down by others that maybe John spoke about but hadn’t originally included. But it fits!

So, the Pharisees come with this ‘lady’ who has been caught in an adulterous relationship. We observed in the previous meditation that the Law, when it was being upheld, demanded that those caught in adultery be stoned, yet the moral and spiritual state of the land as shown in the Gospels, doesn’t appear very good (when you have so much sickness and so much demon possession among a people who have been promised health by God, you know things aren’t right!). Thus I suspect that that law was very rarely applied. But now the Pharisees have heard of this woman who has been caught in adultery. The question naturally arises, where is the guilty man? They aren’t concerned with him, just with this woman. She is enough to put Jesus in an awkward position.

Now why would that be? Well if on one hand Jesus agreed with the Law then he would be seen to be siding with the Pharisees (who were unpopular) and may appear as hard hearted. On the other hand, if he let her off he would be seen to be rejecting God’s law. They are out to get him and they care nothing for the woman and her feelings or her future. They are quite happy to have her stoned to make a point! Heartless!

So how is Jesus going to deal with this situation? “But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger.” (v.6). We don’t know what he wrote or why he wrote. Perhaps it was something about the Pharisees; perhaps he was just doodling to give himself time to think. Then, “When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.” (v.7,8) They press him to give an answer to he stands up and looks at them and basically says, “OK, yes this is what the Law demands so let’s see if there is any one of you who doesn’t equally deserve punishment. If that is you, you can cast the first stone.” And then he crouches down and writes in the dust on the ground again.

The response is good: “At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there.” (v.9). In the silence that follows, minds are working furiously. The older (wiser) ones of his accusers get the point and sidle away, followed soon by the younger ones. They know that they dare not say, “I’m perfect, I’m sinless, I don’t deserve punishment, I’m fit to bring judgment on others!” Now their original accusations become an embarrassment and they quietly leave. Soon it’s just Jesus and the woman left.

“Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” “No one, sir,” she said. “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.” (v.10,11) This is grace and mercy. No, I’m not going to condemn you. I’m giving you a second chance, so don’t blow it. Break off this adulterous relationship and don’t get into this sort of mess again. Suddenly, I suspect, we have a very grateful woman and one with a new lease of life who will stay out of wrong relationships, a restored woman.

I especially like this story because it goes to the heart of our own judgmentalism. How often do we look down our ethical noses at those who have sinned and want judgment? Now we are not to condone sin; we are to recognise it, but having done that we are so seek for restoration of the sinner: “Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.” (Gal 6:1) This is God’s desire for us, to bring restoration not judgment. When the woman came to Jesus she was utterly helpless. Yes, she had been caught in her sin. Did Jesus just let her off it? No he gracefully gave her a second chance but it did come with the warning “leave your life of sin.” Because grace and mercy had been applied, that was now possible.

Every one of us are just like the Pharisees in this story and we cannot point a finger without first facing our own inadequacies, our own failures and thus our own lack of qualification to judge and condemn others. We are just the same as them. Our sins may be different, they may be less damaging in society, but they are still sin, whether they are pride, bad thinking, critical judgmentalism or whatever. I dare not stoop down and pick up a stone to throw – and neither can you!