Click on the links below for more sermons.

Baptism Of the Lord
Isaiah 42:1-4
Matthew 3:13-17

EPIPHANY
Micah 5:1-5a
Matthew 2:1-12

 

THE FIRST CALLING
January 20, 2008
Isaiah 53:1-7
John 1:29-42

          Last week we heard about the baptism of Jesus from the Apostle Matthew.  Today we get the pericope from the Apostle John’s perspective, along with what happened next.  We are going to accept the church tradition that the Apostle John is the author of the Gospel of John.  There are many excellent reasons to embrace this belief, unfortunately we don’t have time to go into them right now.   The Apostle John doesn’t begin his version on the day of the baptism.  His story begins approximately two weeks later.  

     On the day of the baptism the heavens opened up, the Holy Spirit visibly descended, and the voice of God spoke out loud (Matthew 3:13-17).  News of this has found its way back to Jerusalem, and for the next two weeks the religious authorities have been beating a path to the River Jordan to question John the Baptist (John 1:19-28).  They keep asking him the same questions, over and over, like police interrogating a suspect, “Are you saying that you are the Messiah?  Are you saying you are the reincarnation of the prophet Elijah?  Are you claiming to be The Prophet that Moses said would come?  (Deuteronomy 18:15)”  To all of this John the Baptist keeps answering, “No.  It’s not me.  It’s not me.  It’s not me.” 

     One day, while the Baptist is being interrogated, Jesus walks by.  This gives John the perfect opportunity to answer their questions once and for all.  “There he is, right there!  The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.”  Let’s take a second to look at that.  It was not a well known or easily understood phrase.  A first response is to say, “It’s a way to identify the Messiah.”  Not in Jesus’ day.   There were very well known titles for the coming Messiah, but Lamb of God was definitely not one of them.  The Messiah is a mighty warrior, not a lamb.  A second response is to call it a reference to the Passover lamb, Jesus will be crucified at the same time as the Passover lambs are being slaughtered.  The problem here is that the Passover lambs had nothing to do with sin.   The Passover ceremony was to help Israel remember how God had saved them during the plague of the death of the firstborn in Egypt (Exodus 12:24-27).  The Israelite firstborn were not saved because the blood of the lambs on their doorposts made them sinless.  The Passover Lamb was not a sin offering. 

     A third response is to call this a reference to the sin offering made each year by the High priest, for the salvation of Israel.  That doesn’t work either.  The rules for the sin offering were quite clear.  If the people or their priests had sinned, the required offering was a slaughtered bull (Exodus 29:14-16, Leviticus 4:3,8).  If the rulers of the people had sinned, the required offering was a slaughtered goat (Leviticus 4:22-24).  A lamb was not an appropriate sin offering. 

     So, the most reasonable explanation of John the Baptist’s title for Jesus is to tie him to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53.   The Suffering Servant was well known.  He would be a warrior for Israel.  He would do battle with their most hated enemy.  And, although it was going to cost him everything personally, he would set the stage for victory and independence.  He would make it possible for the Messiah to sit on the throne and rule as King and Commander.  Israel had always interpreted this as military victory.  It was variously applied over the centuries to Assyria, then Babylon, then Egypt, and finally Rome, whoever the enemy du jour was.  John the Baptist makes it clear, from the very beginning of Jesus’ ministry – it’s not about independence from, and victory over, Rome.  It’s about independence from, and victory over, sin.  Don’t you get it?  That’s your greatest enemy.  If you are separated from God by sin, your problems with Rome are irrelevant. 

     John the Baptist tells the religious authorities, “You need to stop looking at me.  I am so far behind Jesus it’s not even funny.  There’s the Lamb of God.  There’s the one who takes away your sin.  There’s the one you want.”  It is interesting to see how God has dealt with sinful man over the ages.  Originally he required one sacrifice for each person.  Then, it was one sacrifice for each family.  Next, it was one sacrifice for the entire nation.  Finally, it was one sacrifice for the entire world (John 3:16).  

     At this point we come up against a problem.  I am firm in my belief that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, Word of God.  But, that doesn’t mean that it comes without controversy or challenge.  We are never going to shy away from conflict, or gloss over it and pretend it’s not there.  Twice John the Baptist says, “I didn’t know who Jesus was, until after I baptized him.  It wasn’t until the Holy Spirit appeared that I knew this was the one I had been told about.”  Last week, when we read about the baptism in Matthew (3:13-17), we took special note that John the Baptist didn’t want to baptize Jesus.  He was afraid to baptize the Lord.  He wanted Jesus to baptize him.  How can he be reluctant to baptize the Lord, if he doesn’t know he’s the Lord until after he baptizes him?

     There are several attempts at explanation.  One goes like this; When John says, “I didn’t know him,” what he means is that he didn’t recognize Jesus’ face.  He knew that Jesus was the One, he just didn’t know that it was Jesus in the river with him.   This could be possible.  Jesus and John grew up a distance apart, and even though they were cousins they may not have seen each other for many, many years.  John the Baptist, in both his customs and his practices, has a lot in common with the Essene community from Qumran.  He may have spent many years isolated in the monastery there.  If so, it’s possible to know who Jesus is without recognizing his face.  Here’s the problem.  Before John was born, and before Jesus was born, when their mothers got close enough John recognized Jesus – even while they were both still in the womb (Luke 1:39-45).  With that kind of connection it’s difficult to believe that John didn’t know it was Jesus when they met at the river in person.  

     A second possibility concerns the Jewish tradition of Haggadah.   Haggadah says, “I don’t have to tell you the strict truth, as long as what you conclude in the end is the truth.”  The ends justifies the means.  Film maker Michael Moore embraces Haggadah.  He has consistently said that it’s ok to lie about facts, as long as you embrace a truthful conclusion in the end.  Some Jewish writers during the 400 years of silence seem to have used Haggadah to tell stories, but never considered it lying – it was just a method of conveying a point.  Some believe that Matthew was using Haggadah when he made John the Baptist reluctant to baptize the Lord. 

     The third option is the most skeptical.  It says that Matthew lied, just to make life easier.  Matthew recognized it was awkward for the Son of God to be baptized, but he still needed to tell the story of the arrival of the Holy Spirit and the voice of God speaking out loud.  So, he lied about John the Baptist recognizing Jesus’ divinity and being reluctant to baptize him – just to make the problem go away.  Here is the truth.  There is no good, satisfying answer to this dilemma.  I cannot tell you with absolute certainty why the Apostle Matthew says that the Baptist knew he was the Lord before he baptized him, and the Apostle John says he didn’t know he was the Lord until after he baptized him. 

     John the Baptist has another significant piece of information for the religious authorities.  The Holy Spirit descended from heaven, anointed Jesus, and then stayed with him.  This is a big deal.  Prior to this, anytime we talk about someone receiving the Spirit, like Job (Job 34:14), Samson (Judges 14:6,19), King Saul (1 Samuel 11:6, 16:14), or King David (Psalm 51:11) it was a temporary anointing.

     Jesus is the first one to permanently receive the Holy Spirit.  Jesus is also the firstborn of the sons and daughters of God (Colossians 1:18).  Once we are baptized by the Holy Spirit it remains permanently with us as well (John 14:26, 20:22).  This should be a source of delight for us, that we have this absolutely unique and special relationship with the Father.  Unfortunately, towards the end of the Apostle John’s life, this had become a source of division within the Church (1 John 4:1-3).  Advocates of Gnosticism began teaching church members, “Yes, we all have the Holy Spirit.  But, some of us have a lot more than the rest of you.  We know special secrets that we can’t share with those of you who don’t have ‘as much’ spirit.”   Even today the Church seems to suffer from ‘holier than thou’ syndrome. 

     The very next day after John the Baptist presents Jesus to the religious authorities he is again at the river baptizing with two of his disciples.  The Apostle John tells us that one of them was Andrew, little brother of Simon – who Jesus would rename Peter.  The other disciple isn’t named.  However, the Apostle John gives us great detail about what time they met, where they went, and what they talked about.  He describes several days in a row.  The only way to know that much detail, is if the Apostle John was the other disciple.   This would also be consistent with the rest of his Gospel, where John routinely downplays his role or even refuses to name himself (John 13:23, 20:2).  Centuries ago the Church embraced John and Andrew as the first two disciples. 

     Jesus calls these two men to leave the Baptist, and follow him.  Jesus takes two of John the Baptist’s disciples.  This was really unusual.  Typically, a Rabbi put out notice that he would be interviewing candidates for discipleship.  Then, from those who responded to the notice he picked the very best and the very brightest.  Jesus totally breaks the mold when he goes in search of candidates, and calls them away.  What is just as significant is the kind of person he chooses.  With the exception of Judas Iscariot, each of the men Jesus calls is employed in a despised trade.   They were on the official list of jobs you should not teach your son.  With the exception of Judas, none of the Apostles could serve as a witness in a trial, because they worked in jobs occupied by liars and cheats.  And yet, these are the men Jesus chooses to serve as witnesses to his ministry. 

     I am not a strict Calvinist.  I absolutely believe that we have Free Will, we make our own choices.  And yet, there is no denying that somehow Jesus chooses us, and calls us to him (Romans 8:29).  Even today, he reaches out and takes the ones he wants.  I have skeletons in my closet.  And, Lord knows, there are a lot of people who believe the modern era preacher belongs on the list of despised trades.  If I were picking disciples, I probably wouldn’t pick me.  I am so fortunate that 2000 years later, Jesus still defies convention, looks past the best and brightest, and chooses sinners to be his own. 

     Thomas Aquinas tried to explain why some of us get it.  Why some of us respond to the calling.  He decided that the most ‘real’ part of a person is not their body, it is their ‘essence’.   Essence is that part of us that can’t be measured, but makes us who we are.  If only our bodies were real, then identical twins would have identical personalities and tastes.  They should respond to all questions with identical answers.  The fact that they don’t is proof that each of us has a unique ‘essence’.  Somehow, the Holy Spirit connects with that essence.  Once it does, only a relationship with Jesus Christ will satisfy us. 

     The Apostles John and Andrew spend two days with Jesus.  There are two important consequences of this.  First, their opinion of who he is changes.  When they first met him he was Rabbi, ‘teacher’.  After more time he becomes Messiah.  At that time Messiah still wasn’t Savior.  Jesus wouldn’t become Savior until Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi (Matthew 16:16).  But, it shows that who Jesus is to you depends on how much time you spend with him.  Whether he is ‘a good man with an interesting philosophy’, or ‘the one who saved me from hell’, or ‘My Lord’ – doesn’t depend on how much he loves you.  It depends on how much time you spend with him. 

     Secondly, after two days in his presence both men are driven to bring others to Jesus.  Twenty first century evangelical Protestantism focuses almost exclusively on the relationship of the individual to Christ.  One of the aspects of Methodism that I really value is our commitment to community.  We do not live in isolation.  We are part of a society.  And, when the Holy Spirit touches our ‘essence’, we are commanded to bring others to Jesus.  You and I did not find Jesus in a vacuum.  Every one of us had help from someone else to get where we are today.  We can pass that on.  We must pass that on.