|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Kerygmania: The death of Lazarus John 11
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Today's RCL reading is the raising of Lazarus. A couple of things struck me anew when re-reading it this morning and ties in to a number of current Kerg threads.
First, it is quite similar to last week's lectionary reading in John 9 about the healing of the blind man in that it is for God's glory:
But when Jesus heard it, he said, ‘This illness does not lead to death; rather it is for God’s glory, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.’
The difference being in this story that Jesus seems to purposely stay away so that Lazarus does die. Does this shed any further light on the man born blind's story?
Second: In terms of verse 3: "Lord, he who you love is ill". Does this have anything to do with the "disciple whom Jesus loved"? Why is Jesus' love for Lazarus pointed out here?
I guess the other striking thing about this passage is why Jesus gets so upset.
33When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who came with her also weeping, he was greatly disturbed in spirit and deeply moved
38 Then Jesus, again greatly disturbed, came to the tomb.
We have an unusual (for John?) display of emotion here. Why? What is Jesus so upset about when he knew already Lazarus was going to die?
[ 25. May 2016, 18:35: Message edited by: Belisarius ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
It seems to me that Jesus is disturbed by the grief of Martha and Mary. (He knew Lazarus was dead before, and he wasn't especially stricken with grief.)
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
General compassion you think?
Or was it tinged with a bit of guilt that he let Lazarus die first? Was he perhaps struggling with the agenda set before him like his struggle in the Garden of Gethsemane? That's the only other place that comes to mind where he was "greatly disturbed in spirit". (Though not - interestingly - in the Gospel of John)
[ 06. April 2014, 02:05: Message edited by: Evensong ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
It is hard to believe that Jesus did not know that it is grievous to die. (You and I know it, so how did He miss the memo?) But to be in the presence of weeping female friends is a different kind of sad. "The sympathizing tear," as it says in the hymnn.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Roselyn
Shipmate
# 17859
|
Posted
could it be that he was disturbed by what this confirmed about the immediate future,,,it was all part of a slow progress
Posts: 98 | From: gold coast gld australia | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
General compassion you think?
Or was it tinged with a bit of guilt that he let Lazarus die first? Was he perhaps struggling with the agenda set before him like his struggle in the Garden of Gethsemane? That's the only other place that comes to mind where he was "greatly disturbed in spirit". (Though not - interestingly - in the Gospel of John)
I actually think something along these lines. Even if the delay was necessary, it couldn't have been fun to anticipate the reaction of the sisters when he showed up- or even to imagine Lazarus as he lay waiting for him.
I had to put my cat down for good reasons, but it wasn't like I faced the task with a peaceful, serene heart. It was the absolute right thing to do, but it felt horrible.
[ 06. April 2014, 06:46: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Didn't Jesus also weep as He approached Jerusalem for the final showdown ?
Not sure He was given to weeping so easily earlier in His ministry, despite operating among mourners, weeping females and various other desperate situations.
Given the the Gethsemane account, with the sweating of blood and so on , I would say things had reached such a crescendo that Jesus was undergoing what some would now regard as a form of nervous collapse.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
We had this whole sentence today in St John's church, the John 11, 1-45 was read to us. It did seem nice that Jesus liked Mary and Martha and also he waited till Lazarus died, not fixing him while he was very ill. Maybe Jesus thought that was the proper thing to do just a little later after Lazarus died.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Today's RCL reading is the raising of Lazarus. A couple of things struck me anew when re-reading it this morning and ties in to a number of current Kerg threads.
First, it is quite similar to last week's lectionary reading in John 9 about the healing of the blind man in that it is for God's glory:
These gospel readings in Year A are sometimes called 'The scrutinies' and originate from the early church's Lenten preparation of those being prepared for Baptism at Easter.
I am not sure that 'John' wrote specifically with this in mind but all these passages have encounter, sometimes things are taken literally etc.
[ 06. April 2014, 14:33: Message edited by: leo ]
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nigel M
Shipmate
# 11256
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
I guess the other striking thing about this passage is why Jesus gets so upset.
We have an unusual (for John?) display of emotion here. Why? What is Jesus so upset about when he knew already Lazarus was going to die?
John uses the rather intense verb twice in this episode (11:33, 38): embrimaomai (= ἐμβριμάομαι) to describe Jesus' reaction. Jesus is “deeply moved” or “intensely indignant.” The verb is used by John only here, but he does link it with another emotional verb in 11:33 – tarasso (= ταράσσω), which John uses half a dozen times in his Gospel:
5:7 – to describe the churning of the water in the Pool of Bethesda
11:33 – the current verse
12:27 – Jesus being distressed about the approaching end game
13:21 – Jesus again distressed in connection with Judas' betrayal
14:1 – Jesus urging his disciples not to be stressed themselves
14:27 – as with 14:1
It's an interesting question whether John was using the terminology consciously or not. Was the churning of the water that brought healing akin to the 'churn' that Jesus felt in the context of death (both Lazarus' and his own)? If so, is there a connection with the fact that this emotional stress was something pre-Easter, as it were, whereas Jesus' disciples (and John's audience?) were being told they had no need to face the same stress?
Posts: 2826 | From: London, UK | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
A good thing to note is that in the Gospel of John, it is the raising of Lazarus not the Cleansing of the Temple that precipitates the events of the Passion which is IMHO why it was placed on the Sunday before Palm Sunday.
Jesus gives up his life to save the life of Lazarus, thus fulfilling 1 john 3:16.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
... which is IMHO why it was placed on the Sunday before Palm Sunday.
I think it was associated with the third scrutiny before the third scrutiny was associated with the 5th Sunday of Lent.
The identification of Lazarus with the Beloved Disciple is actually held by some. There's nothing in the text to contradict it. I'd prefer, though, to see "Lord, the one whom you love is ill" as a statement deliberately phrased in a way that many disciples could say. Feeling the Lord's absence during a loved one's illness and death is common now, and must have been for John's community, especially if, like the Thessalonians, they were concerned about the prospects for eternal life of those who died before Jesus' return. I think anglican_brat is definitely on to something with another reason for mentioning love: the connection with John 3. God so loved the world that he gave his only son that all who believe in him should not perish; Jesus so loved Lazarus that he risked his life for him.
The hotly debated point around these stories seems to revolve around how to assess the sisters' faith. Personally, I take a high view of it. For those who take a low view of it, Jesus' weeping is sometimes taken to be distress at their lack of faith. I'd prefer to take is as a mix of genuine grief and fear and trembling at being about to raise someone from the dead for the first time, possibly also with trepidation about his own imminent death.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
My son asked a very good question this morning which led to an interesting discussion: "Did Jesus let Lazarus die on purpose so God could be glorified? Wasn't that sort of mean of him?"
I thought about it and we wound up doing the Socratic question thing, and finally came to the conclusion that there's a difference between asking a stranger to suffer vs. asking your own family member or beloved friend to do so (the minor example we used was stacking and unstacking the dishwasher). To ask that of a stranger would be just mean, because you have no relationship with the stranger and he hasn't "signed on" for any joint purpose with you. But yes, I would ask a dear friend, much more my son, to do something unpleasant for my sake--in fact, the closer the relationship, the more I would feel I could ask, if I thought it necessary.
And so we get the repeated emphasis on how much Jesus loved these three people--mentioned with regard to all three once, and with regard to Lazarus a second time. They were very dear to him, certainly believers, clearly loved him in return, and had certainly "signed on" for supporting his mission, even if they didn't have a full understanding of what that entailed. And so, humanly speaking, Jesus could ask far more of them than he would of someone previously unknown like Jairus or the widow at Nain, both of whom got their loved ones back from death ASAP.
In fact, we usually deem it an honor to be allowed to "suffer" for those we love--whether by caring for them during an illness, or administering their estate, or doing some other onerous chore. We take the request to be a sign of trust. In fact, we often take the NON-request to be a sign of far greater trust--when my dear trusted friend D. commits me to an unpleasant task even though she hasn't been able to ask me in advance, I know she has only done so because she trusts absolutely that I will come through for her--which is a great compliment, coming from D. (this dynamic only works when the person doing the asking/committing is both close and trustworthy--which Jesus was and is).
Along these general lines, Christians have always regarded it as an honor to suffer for Jesus' sake. I truly think that, if you could ask Lazarus after the fact what his opinion was of the whole thing, he would say it was worth it.
(Which is why, in spite of all my whining, I still consider myself fortunate to have been allowed to live the life God set before me. Suffering is hell, and I dont' think I would ever voluntarily choose it, even if I knew it would turn out for God's glory and the salvation of people. So it's a damn good thing Jesus chose for me.)
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
Our preacher took a slightly different tact than I had expected dealing with this passage. He pointed out we are all experiencing death when we get so bound up in our rules and expectations, when we separate ourselves from "the other." Just as Jesus orders Lazarus to come out from that tomb, Jesus calls on us to come out from the deathlike cocoons we find ourselves in.
I think he did not go far enough in this analogy. Jesus also tells the people to unbind Lazarus from the death clothes. Likewise, Jesus tells the church to unbind others from the clothes that bind them too.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trudy Scrumptious
BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647
|
Posted
I've always seen Jesus' weeping at Lazarus's grave as a commentary on theodicy, in a way. The whole story, as presented, is a microcosm of the question we ask all the time: Why didn't God intervene? Jesus knew of Lazarus's suffering, could have come sooner to prevent his death, but chose to wait and allow Lazarus to experience death and his sisters to experience loss, all in the service of some greater purpose. Which is pretty much what (many) Christians claim is happening on this earth as a whole. God sees our suffering, COULD act to intervene but withholds His intervention to serve greater purposes that are not always clear to us at the time.
Jesus' tears when He sees Mary's and Martha's grief remind us that this process is painful for Him too -- though He has made the decision to allow them to suffer for a time and not to intervene, and though He knows He will ultimately bring joy and triumph out of this sorrow, still He feels their pain and weeps with them.
--------------------
Books and things.
I lied. There are no things. Just books.
Posts: 7428 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
In the Lazarus story, Jesus appears to be confidant that Lazarus will not die. Then he appears to dither. Then he appears to be distressed - twice - regardless of hus former confidence. And finally he heaves a great sigh of relief when someone mentions that if Lazarus were dead, he'd stink. Then comes the thanks to his father and the command to Lazarus to come out.
What's not to understand?
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pimple:
In the Lazarus story, Jesus appears to be confidant that Lazarus will not die.
I don't think Jesus was confident that Lazarus wouldn't die; I think he was confident that everything would work out all right.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I think the disciples translate that confidence that everything will work out as "Lazarus won't die". It's almost as though they've got used to Jesus healing that they have come to expect it as the way Jesus makes things work out for the best. They'd moved from amazement at any healing to almost seeing it as normal, and in the process had sort of put Jesus into a box of "healer and exorcist". Jesus bursts the box, saying in effect "you're God is too small, I'm going to demonstrate that by doing something bigger". I'm not sure they got the message until after his own resurrection, or maybe not until after Pentecost.
The conversation with Martha follows a similar pattern. Martha has an understanding of a resurrection on the last day, followed by life then. Jesus says, and demonstrates by raising Lazarus, "resurrection is NOW, new life is NOW, because I am here and I am resurrection and life".
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pimple:
In the Lazarus story, Jesus appears to be confidant that Lazarus will not die. Then he appears to dither. Then he appears to be distressed - twice - regardless of hus former confidence. And finally he heaves a great sigh of relief when someone mentions that if Lazarus were dead, he'd stink. Then comes the thanks to his father and the command to Lazarus to come out.
What's not to understand?
Jesus actually flat out says, "Lazarus is dead" shortly before they arrive on scene.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
... and that "shortly" might well have been a couple of days, since he says it before they begin their journey.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
That's OK Alan but it's worth noting that Lazarus was not resurrected in the fullest sense of the word. I'm sure he lived a good few years more after Jesus "raised" him but he still went on to die a natural death just like the rest of us will barring Christ's return. Not so with those who inherit full eternal life at the resurrection of the dead; they will be clothed with immortality. In this sense, the raising of Lazarus, amazing and wonderful as it is pales in comparison to what is promised to happen at the general resurrection of the dead.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Well, I guess that depends on what you mean by "resurrected in the fullest sense of the word" or "inherit full eternal life". For me, they are present realities. I have been raised, I was dead in my sins but now I'm alive in Christ. I have received eternal life. Yes, I will still pass through physical death and receive an incorruptable body - but that transition will be less significant than the one already achieved by raising me from death in sin to life in Christ.
Jesus said "I am the Resurrection" and "I am the Life", not "I will be ..." - it's a present reality, not a future hope. Though, of course, that phrase "I am" has strong connotations with the name God gives himself in Exodus that is more of I-AM-IN-VARIOUS-TENSES-WITH-YOU (pinching the term Nigel M introduced on the non-stop threads) past and future as well as present.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
I mean resurrected never again to die as per Christ and the promise of 1 Corinthians 15, rather than raised from the dead to die again as per the raising of Lazarus.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
And, my point isn't that we (and Lazarus) will pass through the death of this physical body to be clothed with an eternal one. My point is that in Christ we have already been raised to life in the most important manner, getting our bodies changed for something incorruptable is just a minor detail in comparison.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
The Apostle Paul seems to express more eschatological tension than you're allowing for Alan. Romans 8:18-25 seems to capture an ongoing sense of incompletion which will only be resolved at the Apocalypse of Christ and the general resurrection.
quote:
18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.
[ 09. April 2014, 16:26: Message edited by: daronmedway ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
That just sounds odd for him. I mean, he never seems like the type to turn his focus away from what's happening suffering-wise right in front of his eyes to focus on his own problems. Everywhere else, if someone's suffering, he's right there with them--not distracted.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
I agree. this is a story about friendship-- what Jesus's friends expect from him, what they ask of him, what he experiences with them. As LC points out, why would he suddenly break character and not focus on the wounded people n front of him, especially since the author repeatedly emphasises that these people were particularly beloved? The author seems to be telling a story about a terrible moment in their corporate friendship.
Forgive me, but the above interpretation reminds me of Edina Monsoon weeping over her father's death because it reminds her she is going to die someday.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
I was preaching on this last week and among the commentaries I read, there did seem to be some who assumed that just because Jesus knew what he was going to do (assuming this from Jesus' words to his disciples and to Martha), he couldn't possibly have felt grief at the death of Lazarus. Which seems unlikely, to say the least, and also leads to unhelpful interpretations like "he was upset and angry because they didn't have faith in him".
That said, I'm not sure that "grieving with his close friends" and "grieving because Lazarus' death brought home his own death" are necessarily mutually exclusive - at least not for Jesus. I do think a huge part of why he weeps is because of the grief of Martha and (especially) Mary and their friends. But the cross is growing ever-closer and ever-larger in the narrative; indeed, it's the raising of Lazarus that finally tips the authorities over to making firm plans to have him killed. Also, throughout John, Jesus has shown such a keen sense of timing about his death and resurrection: he knows when the time is wrong, he knows when the time is right (see John 12:20-36). In John's narrative at least, the cross is not a surprise or a shock to Jesus. And the story of the raising of Lazarus seems to have so many echoes of the story of Jesus' own death and resurrection (not least the tomb with the stone rolled across it).
To me, at least, it wouldn't be at all surprising if Jesus saw in all of this reminders that his own time was drawing near. And I think Jesus of all people would be able to realise that without it distracting him from his sharing in the grief for his dead friend.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
May I be so bold as to share with you some of my sermon on this passage from last Sunday?
quote:
So here we are, 13 days before Good Friday considering not why, but how.
How did he walk down that 3-year road to a very real death.
Maybe we should go back to Bethany; we’re told that Jesus loved Martha and Mary and their brother Lazarus.
And the reason I look at this story today is because it reveals something of the humanity of Jesus, the ordinariness of Jesus.
And you might ask, how is Jesus anything like ordinary when he raises a man from the dead 4 days after the funeral? How is that ordinary?
And some might say, does that not prove that death is nothing to Jesus? Nothing more than inconvenience? That death or pain or even everyday hardship is like a fly that can be whisked away?
I’ve heard that about the cross itself – O Jesus was the Son of God, it was nothing to him.
But consider him… Consider him who endured the cross.
He was not untouched by it; he didn’t ride it out as if it were just an inconvenience. It was dreadful, some would say it was hell.
And the story of Lazarus shows clearly that when faced with death, the death of someone he knew, Jesus in his humanity almost didn’t know how to cope with it.
Death is not, as the dreadful funeral poem puts it, 'nothing at all…'
In Gethsemane Jesus was so frightened of death he sweat great drops of blood caused by the stress of it all. On the cross he was going to cry out 'why have you forsaken me?' and here at the graveside of his friend, beside himself with grief and hardly knowing what to say, Jesus was deeply moved in spirit and troubled. Jesus wept.
And here is another of those phrases that was better in the original language because the phrases we have mean a deep groaning, the kind of sound a man would make who doesn’t normally show his feelings.
I was at the bedside of a woman once when her life support was turned off and the husband let out a wail I have never heard before or since. And Jesus was faced with death, the most powerful and devastating experience, didn’t just have tears in his eyes, he experienced the pain of heartbreak and he expressed just how he felt.
And in that moment of rage and grief he cried out in a head-to-head battle with death itself, Lazarus come out!
And do you know, in that moment I believe Jesus saw something. He saw a foreshadowing of his own predicted rising again. In the moment that Lazarus rose Jesus saw not just a prediction but the promise of his own rising on the third day; and he saw in that moment a joy that would lead him through those final days – the joy of life overcoming death – he saw joy in the faces of Mary and Matha, he saw joy in the face of his dear friend as the graveclothes were removed and he felt it. – and for the joy that was set before him he would be able to ride into Jerusalem.
For the joy that was set before him he would pray on his knees in Gethsemane, 'not my will but thine be done'.
For the joy set before him Jesus was able to endure the cross for us.
Consider that.
Consider that Jesus did not move easily from miracle to miracle feeling no sympathy for the long-endured pain and the frustration of the people he touched.
He didn’t forgive freely without some idea of the power of the temptations we all face.
He didn’t teach and preach without some idea of the doubts we face or the struggles or challenges we face in order to believe what our Bibles tell us as we live in a society that no longer trusts or accepts the Christian faith.
Consider him who, because he has endured all these things – pain, loneliness, temptation, misunderstanding, doubt, fear and yes even death itself – because he has faced and endured these things can say to us, there is joy.
[ 10. April 2014, 14:49: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
Very powerful, Mudfrog.
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Very much so. Very moving.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pine Marten
Shipmate
# 11068
|
Posted
Seconded. Thank you, Mudfrog.
--------------------
Keep love in your heart. A life without it is like a sunless garden when the flowers are dead. - Oscar Wilde
Posts: 1731 | From: Isle of Albion | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
And it was on the radio this morning reading about him being rescued and alive again! (I always try to listen to the Christian bit of the radio every morning) They do sing all sorts of different Christian bits!
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
Good sermon, Mudfrog. But I don't think we live in a society that rejects wholesale the truths of the bible. Rather I would say that we live in a society that is no longer frightened to challenge some traditional Christian interpretations of the biblical texts. And that's very healthy. Because some of them are quite wrong.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pimple:
Good sermon, Mudfrog. But I don't think we live in a society that rejects wholesale the truths of the bible. Rather I would say that we live in a society that is no longer frightened to challenge some traditional Christian interpretations of the biblical texts. And that's very healthy. Because some of them are quite wrong.
Surprisingly I would agree with you on that - especially on the bits that are interpreted through years of Church tradition. If we were to take the Bible as it was written and at its plain meaning taking into account the historical background to it all, I think we might come out with a few different things to some of the dogma and practice we have today.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by pimple:
In the Lazarus story, Jesus appears to be confidant that Lazarus will not die.
I don't think Jesus was confident that Lazarus wouldn't die; I think he was confident that everything would work out all right.
Moo
But that's not what he said. The commonsense (i.e. naïve, un-theological) modern equivalent of "This illness does not lead to death" must surely be "this is not a fatal illness". Applying this commonsense interpretation makes the whole ensuing story much less problematic. What he's upset about is the fact that Lazarus' sisters have not trusted him. He has told them their brother will not die (compare this with "she is not dead, only sleeping" on another occasion). But they see no sign of life and bury him anyway. They can hardly be faulted for that. Even today, perfectly well-qualified physicians sometimes make mistakes.
But he's got to have the tomb opened. Maybe it's not too late? But what if it is? Then one of the sister's tells him "but he'll stink - it's been four days..."
Going back to the original message of Jesus, what tense is used in the Greek for "this...does not..." if it's imperfect, that would be a strong indication that he means "people don't die from this". If he was making a prediction about this specific instance, would not a future perfect tense be less ambiguous - "death will not be the end of this"?
[ 03. December 2014, 19:45: Message edited by: pimple ]
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pimple:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by pimple:
In the Lazarus story, Jesus appears to be confidant that Lazarus will not die.
I don't think Jesus was confident that Lazarus wouldn't die; I think he was confident that everything would work out all right.
Moo
But that's not what he said. The commonsense (i.e. naïve, un-theological) modern equivalent of "This illness does not lead to death" must surely be "this is not a fatal illness". Applying this commonsense interpretation makes the whole ensuing story much less problematic. What he's upset about is the fact that Lazarus' sisters have not trusted him. He has told them their brother will not die (compare this with "she is not dead, only sleeping" on another occasion). But they see no sign of life and bury him anyway. They can hardly be faulted for that. Even today, perfectly well-qualified physicians sometimes make mistakes.
But he's got to have the tomb opened. Maybe it's not too late? But what if it is? Then one of the sister's tells him "but he'll stink - it's been four days..."
Going back to the original message of Jesus, what tense is used in the Greek for "this...does not..." if it's imperfect, that would be a strong indication that he means "people don't die from this". If he was making a prediction about this specific instance, would not a future perfect tense be less ambiguous - "death will not be the end of this"?
If he was confident that everything would work out all right, there would be no point in hanging around in a dangerous place - a point which I think was put to him by one of the disciples.
John's take is that Jesus knew very well what he was going to do and deliberately let Lazarus die so that God would be glorified by his resurrection from the dead.
Which some Christians accept as a perfectly reasonable explanation on John's part and a perfectly acceptable action on the part of Jesus - because he was God and God's the only guy who can use "the end justifies the means" excuse.
All of which I challenge as mistaken on John's part and disingenuous on the part of traditional Christians down the ages - not so much on hte part of John's audience or those who have historically been cowed by the church, but those who are now free to think and act and speak for themselves, but who seem too darned lazy to bother!.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
If, and only if, the cap fits.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Well, I'm neither part of John's original audience nor am I cowed by the church. That doesn't leave much.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
Indeed, and if your posts here are anything to go by, neither are you lazy - anything but - so there is no need to include yourself in my far too simplistic generalization.
It's what I do. Grandstanding is my way of dealing with stuff. And some of the mud is meant to stick so I'm not making a general apology. However, this did all start with a a sort of blanket personal remark so I guess I'm lucky not to be in Hell. Back to the matter in hand?
[ 25. December 2014, 16:03: Message edited by: pimple ]
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
Which, I've just remembered, is the death of Lazarus. Perhaps I should leave it alone on this forum. The traditional message (John's) means a great deal to a lot of people, and I'm very much a guest here.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
You're no more a guest here than I am, and to imply that our faith in the traditional reading of John is too fragile to handle your critique borders on insult. Seriously, just say what you want to say already.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trudy Scrumptious
BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647
|
Posted
Perhaps we could best steer this discussion away from personal attack (or "grandstanding") by asking pimple to explain WHY you challenge the traditional reading of this story, and associate that reading with people cowed by the church (while obviously acknowledging that some people can hold to the traditional reading without being so cowed?). Since you say that was John's intent in writing the scene, it's not a matter of the church traditionally misinterpreting the text, but text itself being wrong, in your view, is that correct? I agree wholeheartedly with Lamb Chopped that there is no reason for you not to challenge the traditional reading, especially not on the grounds that it "means a great deal to people" -- that's neither here nor there when it comes to a reading of the text. Can you, as one of my old profs used to say ad infinitum, unpack your views a little more?
--------------------
Books and things.
I lied. There are no things. Just books.
Posts: 7428 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
I just made a start. About a thousand words, then hit the delete button by mistake. I don't know how to cut and paste. So I'll start again.
With the premise that the gospels are self-advertised propaganda. That which is to be propagated. "The good news of Jesus, Messiah, Son of God".
I don't have a problem with that per se. But I do have a problem with "That which is to be propagated and accepted as divinely-inspired truth, on pain of death and/or damnation."
I am prepared to accept the foregoing as an emotional overreaction on my part to the historic abuses of the church.
I believe Jesus of Nazareth existed. More of what I believe about him follows.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
I believe that Jesus preached repentance (and forgiveness), healed the sick, was kind, intelligent and compassionate, but no wimp - he exposed cant and hypocrisy where he saw it and was prepared to counter it verbally and physically. He was prepared to put himself and his followers in mortal danger in the pursuit of truth and justice and the Kingdom of God - which he may have expected to be imminent.
I believe that he was unjustly killed.
I believe much more - but specifically to the argument here, I do not believe that he ever lied or resorted to any form of deliberate deception. Where others lied or were misled by their contemporaries, I do not believe that any failure on Jesus' part to correct them was a matter of lying by omission.
This begs the question, I think, of whether as God (if God he was) he could uniquely claim (or Christians could claim on his behalf) that the end justifies the means.
In the case of Lazarus, for instance, the traditional idea that Jesus allowed Lazarus to die and his sisters to suffer four days of grief in order to provide us with a divine example of how Jesus was about to suffer just
beggars belief. I can only assume that people who hold this belief would act the same way if they were God. It's a perverted way of dragging God down to their level, in much the same way as the Old Testament writers cheerfully countenanced multiple genocide.
But even without the argument "He can't have done that because he was God - because anyone who acted like that would not be in any way God-like" I would want to challenge John's account on the grounds of what I think I can see is the original story - one which instead of making a tawdry god out of him, describes Jesus as a courageous man, a faithful friend who is prepared to put his own life on the line for his belief God the Father. A belief which falters when Jesus breaks down at the news of the burial, but which in the end proves totally justified when the recovering Lazarus staggers out of the tomb.
But that is not all. This is underpinned by what I believe about some diseases, and by the way the Lazarus story continues while Jesus and his disciples wait.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
This passage has long served to me as an indication that healing miracles are first and foremost signs to all rather than for the personal benefit of the recipient.
When you think about it, the whole thing must have been traumatic for Lazarus. Firstly being sick and dying, then being resurrected swathed in his grave clothes, and being restored to this life - only to know he'd have to go through the whole dying thing again one day. I'm not sure it would be easier to bear a second time round.
In short, it works well to illustrate "I am the resurrection and the life", less so as an example of entitlement to personal healing.
[ 27. December 2014, 08:15: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
