IN THE WORDS OF JESUS–Part 172

YES, HE is Talking to YOU! (continued)

Love is the Fulfilling of the Law

Starting with John and his doubt, we went to the ideas of illusion and glamour as they relate to Faith and ended with some thoughts on evolution; a very varied mix but all related in many ways. Many believe that all that is necessary is Faith and in our discourse yesterday we can see that most all of the leaders and the followers of the varied denominations and sects of Christianity, as well as the many other religions, all have Faith; they all believe that they are on the right Path and that their message is the right one and sometimes the only right one. So then how can this be? How can ALL of these differing ideas or philosophies or theologies or doctrines be THE right one. The answer to this is as we discussed yesterday, the illusion and glamour of the world. Now this is not what affected John the Baptist as he had that added virtue that we considered as necessary yesterday, John was a doer of His word. However, even in the clarity of vision that we spoke about, in his stamina, his righteousness, his commitment and his loyalty, in his unswerving dedication to his mission and his recognition of the Master, John the Baptist still found a moment of doubt. One could say that if the Baptist did not have that moment that he could have been counted among the very few to whom the Master refers in saying: “if ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed , and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done” (Matthew 21:21). Would he have taken some measure to escape his captivity? we cannot say. We can say however that he would not have been in any doubt whatsoever.

So how then does this correspond to our thoughts on evolution? First, evolution is the steadiness of man’s march through time in ever improving vehicles of manifestation. Man has gone from the base physical appetites governing his actions to being motivated by a combination of these physical desires and the added emotional desires of all kinds including the mystical desire for God. From this man evolves to a lesser dependence on the physical to the emotional and then to a combination of this with the mental which is where the races are now. A look across the broad spectrum of different ‘civilizations’ even to today will show men at most every stage noted here with some of the tribal men in the ‘darkest’ parts of our world still in or close to what we would consider as  being motivated by the base physical appetites. We have here the ever evolving vehicles of manifestation covering our psyche and this in its turn creates corresponding changes in the physical vehicle itself. Second, it is through the evolution noted above that man comes into and ever closer relationship with his own Soul for as the vehicles improve so does the Soul’s ability to contact form and we can say here that it is in the ‘mental’ realm of being that the closeness of the Soul and its appearance in form are most apparent. The complexity of human traits follow along these same lines and this all is occurring over thousands of years, in many, many small steps and in every phase there is found some thing to worship. The degree of superstition is only countered by the ability to rationally think. The degree of brutality is only countered by the ability to Love and will be eliminated by the ability to rationally think. The degree of cooperation between men is steadily enhanced by these same things.

The essay by Alexander Maclaren in yesterday’s post showed us that there can be an openness and a compatibility between the Christian ideas regarding evolution and the Book of Genesis. There does not have to be the hard and fast Christian thought, prevalent in much of the church….that this is how it is because this is what the Bible says. These type of thoughts only prolong and spread the illusion and the glamour that tend to keep one apart from the reality of the teachings and the reality of True Faith which takes us beyond these things which really do not matter anyway.

Getting back to John, we should see from the text those things that we put forth in the first part of this discussion (In the Words of Jesus part 170). First that he knew his role and his mission; second that he knew the Master and testified that he was the Christ both at the Baptism of the Lord and afterward in comment. And third, John knew of the works that Jesus had done from the reports of his own disciples, that the Master had raised the dead specifically and likely all else as could be covered by the saying “Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ” (Matthew 11:2). With this all the seeds of doubt still blossomed in John’s heart, his consciousness, whether because he is alone and in prison we cannot tell but we should be able to see that they are there. Not as John Gill claims in saying that John sent his disciples to Jesus for their own edification as these are among those that had brought him the news of “the works of Christ“.

We should note here next that the Master does not question why John doubts nor why he sent disciples to inquire of the Him but simply answers their questions in a straightforward and reassuring manner. For reference, the dialogue, from Luke’s Gospel, goes thus: “When the men were come unto him, they said, John Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another? And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits; and unto many that were blind he gave sight. Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached. And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me” (Luke 7:20-23). We cannot tell whether the Master’s answers assuaged John’s doubts but let us assume that they did and this based upon the spiritual nature of John’s entire existence at that time and, again, his heretofore unswerving dedication to his mission and his recognition of the Master.

We come now to the final saying here by the Master which is misunderstood in its context in the King James Version (KJV) and perhaps elsewhere as well. Jesus says: “And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me“. It is in our understanding of the English word offended which is elsewhere translated as “take offense” and also as ‘scandalized’ that causes us confusion. The New International Version (NIV) changes this wording to overcome the problems with the word offended and says “Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me” while the later version of the NIV called the Today’s NIV says: “Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me“. The literal translation from Young’s tells us that this phrase is “and happy is he whoever may not be stumbled in me“. None of these, in our opinion,  properly frames the Master’s message to John. Let us look at where these translation ideas come from remembering that in most all of the interpretive documents that we use there is always a bias toward what the writer believes and this is true of our posts as well. The Greek word that we are studying here is skandalizo which in its own way tells an English story. We should remember also and again that words are the conveyors of ideas and the meaning of our words changes over time as likely did the meaning of the Greek word as well.

• Strong’s says of skandalizo that it ; means to cause to sin, cause to fall (into sin), offend; to fall away (from the faith), go astray; to take offense; we have here a wide variety of meanings of which it is difficult to see how the Master could cause any of these specifically.
• The lexicon tells us that skandalizo means: to put a stumbling block or impediment in the way, upon which another may trip and fall, metaph. to offend, to entice to sin; to cause a person to begin to distrust and desert one whom he ought to trust and obey; to cause to fall away; to be offended in one, i.e. to see in another what I disapprove of and what hinders me from acknowledging his authority; to cause one to judge unfavourably or unjustly of another, since one who stumbles or whose foot gets entangled feels annoyed; to cause one displeasure at a thing; to make indignant; to be displeased, indignant. We should see here that much of this is written around the supposed usage of the word and not as a direct meaning.
• Vine’s tells us that skandalizo is from skandalon (offence, No. 1), signifies “to put a snare or stumblingblock in the way,” always metaphorically in the NT in the same way as the noun….. Of the noun Vine’s says that it originally was “the name of the part of a trap to which the bait is attached, hence, the trap or snare itself, as in Rom. 11:9, rv, ‘stumblingblock,”…….In the NT skandalon is always used metaphorically, and ordinarily of anything that aroused prejudice, or becomes a hindrance to other or causes them to fall by the way…… Still there is difficulty in seeing how or why the Master would say this of himself in relation to John. Why would one stumble or fall away or be offended because of the works of the Master?
• Vincent gives us much also on this a here we may find some help in the three references that he gives to us. First, of our saying in Luke he says: Shall not be offended (Greek words printed (xxx)). Rev., shall find none occasion of stumbling. See Matt. v. 29. notice the conditional not: “shall not find, whatever may occur.”  Regarding the same saying from Matthew’s Gospel he says: Be offended (xxx). See on ch. v. 29. Rev., shall find none occasion of stumbling. Compare Wyc., shall not be slandered.**  Moving on to the reference text that Vincent cites, Matthew 5:29, we find this: Offend (xxx), The word offend carries to the English reader the sense of giving offence, provoking. Hence the Rev., by restoring the picture in the word, restores its true meaning, causeth to stumble. The kindred noun is (xxx) (skandalon added text) a later form of (xxx), to stick in a trap on which the bait is placed, and which springs up and shuts the trap at the touch of an animal. Hence, generally, a snare, a stumbling block. The reference verses here are those referring the the hand and the eye that offend and, as Vincent continues this is his reference: Christ’s meaning here is: ” if your eye or your hand serve as an obstacle or trap to ensnare or make you fall in your moral walk.” ……

**NOTE here that Wyc. refers to Wycliffe’s version of the New Testament and we should know here also that some versions do not appear today as to agree with Vincent’s quotations as is the case here with Wyc. and the R.V. and we can only assume that these too have changed over time. Vincent wrote in the 1880’s at about the same time that the R.V. was originally published.

So what is it that can possibly be in the works of the Master that could offend John or cause him to stumble and lose faith? What did the Master perceive was going on in John’s mind to cause him to send his disciples and inquire of Him? We cannot know but we can say that based upon all we know of John and of the works of the Master that there is nothing. The commentaries on this are typical of what we saw regarding the earlier parts of these verses, the one, The Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible⁸ alludes to the idea that John should not be offended at the lowly exterior of the King of Israel and the other, John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible⁸, tells us that: The Jews were offended at Christ’s parentage and birth, at the poverty of his parents, and at the manner of his birth, by a virgin; and at the place of his birth, which they thought to be Galilee; at his education, because he had not learnt letters, and was brought up to a mechanical employment; at his mean appearance in his public ministry, in his own person, and in his attendants: his company and audience being the poorer sort, the more ignorant, and who had been loose and scandalous persons, publicans and sinners; at the doctrines he preached, particularly, which respected his own deity and eternity, the distinguished grace of God, and living by faith upon his flesh and blood. The disciples of John also were offended in him, because he and his disciples did not fast, and lead such an austere life as they and their master did; because of the meanness and obscurity of Christ’s kingdom; the imprisonment of John, and the many reproaches, afflictions, and persecutions, which did, and were likely to attend a profession of Christ: this our Lord knew, and had a peculiar respect to them in these words; but happy are those persons, who, notwithstanding all these difficulties and discouragements, are so far from stumbling at Christ, and falling from him……

For us here we should see that John already knows most all that there was to know about the Christ and His coming; there was nothing that should have been able to surprise him so that for the most part the ideas of Gill and the Critical Commentary should have no effect. Similarly from the defining terms we get little help in understanding the whole of the issue. Some of what we have read may have made others offended or ashamed (a word not used in this context) but none of this would affect the John that we read about and know. What is it then that causes John to send his disciples and what is the meaning of the words of the Master in response? Taking some ideas from Vincent and others from John Gill we can say, in rather simple terms, this:

John develops doubt in the reality of the Master being the Christ; he is sitting in prison alone and abandoned and wondering what will be and why. His sense of certainty falls away much like happens to each of us from time to time. For me personally I do find myself wondering if what I am doing is the right thing; am I truly hearing the voice of my own Soul or is all this the work of a personality working for some selfish reason? is what I am saying really true? is this really revelation? or am I making things up to fit my own agenda? This is all in the lower force of the human mind and emotions and is largely an effect of fear which is only overcome by the continued Light from the Soul which is only found in persistent pursuit of His Presence.

And what of the Master’s words? Taking from Vincent the idea of  causeth to stumble and tying this to John Gill’s thought that: this our Lord knew, and had a peculiar respect to them in these words; but happy are those persons, who, notwithstanding all these difficulties and discouragements, are so far from stumbling at Christ, and falling from him, we can attempt to answer. Gill’s words however should not be seen in his context regarding the things about the Christ which are known and already accepted by the Baptist but should be seen as words in relation to the things that the Baptist is hearing from any and all who do not see the Master as the Christ but as a man. And what are some of the thoughts about Him?

• “And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said , He is beside himself” (Mark 3:21).
• “There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings. And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him? Others said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a evil open the eyes of the blind?” (John 10:19-21).

Can we see the Master simply telling John, His faithful servant, that he should not let what he may hear about Him cause him to stumble and lose faith as it apparently did but that he should remember that he is blessed in his unswerving Faith and that based on these things that are now reported to him, he should be steady and doubt not. Is this not the same message to us all? Our final understanding: Blessed it he who maintains his faith no matter what they may see or hear about the Christ or the spiritual way of life.

We will continue with the Master’s testimony regrading the Baptist in the next post.

Note on the Quote of the Day