I’ve been thinking a lot about what Jesus means in Matthew 5:17-20. He calls his disciples to a righteousness that surpasses that of the Pharisees.
How is this possible?
I think it’s possible by following Jesus and his interpretation of Scripture as articulated through is words and embodied by his deeds.
What is the difference between a disciple of Christ and a Pharisee? A disciple follows Jesus as He embodies the ultimate intent of scripture. A Pharisee follows scripture without following Jesus. The difference between the two is massive.
We can take scripture so seriously that we miss Jesus. That’s what the Pharisees did. But if we take Jesus seriously, we will also take scripture seriously in the way that God intends for it to be taken seriously.
I was talking to a church leader recently about what kind of church he leads, how they operate, their philosophy of ministry, etc. He said, “We keep it simple, we follow the Bible.”
I understand what he means by that, but I wonder if it ultimately points us in the wrong direction?
Are we called to follow the Bible or are we called to follow Jesus? If we follow Jesus, he will teach us how to read the Bible the way God wants the Bible to be read. If we take the bible more seriously than Jesus, our desire to follow the Bible will land us in the same pit with the Pharisees.
Telling Stories, Asking Questions, Learning Lessons
I like the thoughts! Makes me think of Jesus getting on to the Pharisees when he tells them they search the scriptures because they think the scriptures will give them life, but they miss the fact that the scriptures point to the giver of life.
Nobody wants to address this, but clearly it is the problem that is plaguing churches all over the country. We’re becoming the “Church of Christ without Christ” (to quote Flannery O’Connor).
I kissed my wife this morning; I did not kiss my wedding ring or marriage license. I respect the law but laws about abuse are not the reason I do not hit my wife. I love my wife as opposed to loving “Pharisaical Legal Marriage Scriptures.” The key for life and ministry is to fall in love with Jesus–when we do that, our “kisses” and “behavior” toward Him will happen.
We need more than ever to be a people of the text. Like no other time do we need to hear the word. What we know about Jesus is found in the the scriptures. Want to know what it means to follow in His steps, then behold His glory in the pages of holy scripture and then go and imitate Him.
Ray B,
Is scripture the ONLY place we find Jesus?
Can’t answer for Ray B, but Romans 1:18-20 would seem to indicate there’s more to God than meets the eye that is only on scripture.
In Philippians 1:21, Paul wrote that for him to live was Christ, and to die was gain.
To Corinth (2 Cor. 3:3) he said that the Corinthians show that they are a letter from Christ.
We must follow Jesus and find him where he is at. The wide-sweeping exclusion of sacraments, and the treating of the notion of sacraments as something akin to voodoo, has created a church environment where the Bible appears to have become the 4th member of the Trinity. If a sacrament is simply something where God is revealed, then we find the Lord in many places: Marriage, birth, death, meals, the Eucharist, nature, friendships, the catholic Church, the Bible, the writings of the Saints, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, housing the homeless, sex, confession and baptism just to name a few. In all these places/activities/things, I’d argue, we have the unique opportunity to meet, follow, and/or learn from the Lord himself. Then there’s also that Holy Spirit person Jesus told us about…
Interesting entry, Wade. I’ve often thought that our Churches of Christ sometimes become “Churches of Church” in that we have put the Bible and the model of the first century church in the place of Christ.
Here’s an interesting blog piece by Stephen Freeman entitled “Christian Atheism,” which might shed some light on the subject–
http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2007/08/20/christian-atheism/
Thanks again.
I think it’s possible to follow the Bible and not Jesus.
I think it’s impossible to follow Jesus and not the Bible.
Where do we get our clearest picture of Jesus? The Bible. Certainly, there are other ways of seeing and finding Jesus, but ultimately, we hold them all up to the light of Scripture to see if their form takes on that of Jesus or not.
We cannot separate the two things, for without one, we wouldn’t understand (or possibly even know) the other.
I’ll say it again, though…
It’s possible to follow the Bible and not be following Jesus.
It’s impossible, though, to follow Jesus and not the Bible.
Karl Barth was slightly interested in this question when he wrote Dogmatics.
Do we worship The Text or the God of The Text. Jesus told the Pharisees that they “search the Scriptures for eternal life” . . . “but if you knew the Scriptures you would know they point to me.”
Jesus is found in Scripture, the Church, creation and in the margins.
Basically, he’s everywhere and he’s right next to us.
Sam,
I respectfully disagree with you. Sacraments like the Eucharist and baptism, while documented in the Scriptures, were practiced well before any of the Epistles or Gospels were penned. In these two sacraments, the Church celebrates the life, death, and resurrection of Christ and therefore we would know about Jesus through them without the aid of the Scriptures.
That being said, I do think it is dangerous to follow Christ without the Bible. But, it’s probably equally dangerous to follow the Lord without experiencing him in some of the ways I mentioned earlier.
What about the Spirit? I know that he’s a different Person in the Trinity, but the revelation of the Spirit has to count for something? And, isn’t that Spirit the same Spirit who inspired many of the saints and their writings throughout the history of the Church? I think we Protestants (if you’ll still let me be a part of that movement) are too quick to discount (dismiss?) the extra-biblical witness. Surely we can meet the Lord in the writings of Thomas a Kempis, St. John of the Cross, and many others?
Chris,
I don’t think we disagree. I think it’ve very dangerous to follow Christ without the Bible. Following Christ without the following the Bible can twist His words, making his teachings something they were never intended to be.
Following Christ means doing what He did – seeking the will of the Father, something we discover in the Bible.
Following Jesus means that we follow the Bible, but we always have Jesus first.
There is a lot being said about what would Jesus do but how can we ever do what He did , how can we walk in His footsteps , without knowing Him via the scriptures . As we behold His glory we are being transformed into His likeness. Study and the apply. It is more that just read , it is read the narratives about what He did and listen to what He said and then live in obedience and walk as He walked.
Excellent thoughts.
If you’re interested, I wrote a reaction to this article on my own blog
Jonathon–thanks for sharing your take. If you want to dig a bit deeper into my take, you can listen to this message on line, from which the above post was taken. I’ve dug into this a bit deeper than your response assumes.
http://tinyurl.com/6gczfk
For me, the big issue here is not whether we should read the Bible, but rather how we should read it. Jesus teaches us how. Yes, his method for reading it is revealed in Scripture, so it is a bit circular, but still, if we don’t pay attention to the way Jesus read the Scriptures and imitate his method, then we’re gonna get it wrong.
Excellent – I’ll try to give it a listen today.
Sam,
It doesn’t sound like we disagree. With your first comment, you used the word impossible, which is very different from dangerous. Sorry for being so picky.
Wade –
I listened to your sermon, and it sounds quite different in character from this post. In the sermon, you were criticizing the pharisees for what-can-I-get-away-with-ism. I guess I don’t view such behavior as equivalent to “following scripture”. For instance, if my children were to obey my commands, but try to get around what I was trying to get at with my commands, I’m still mad at them. They aren’t guilty of obeying me, their guilty of disobeying me. Also, your post seems to indicate that Jesus’ interpretation of the law was different from what has been understood throughout the history beforehand. But indeed the history of the prophets shows that Jesus’ interpretation is pretty much inline with what had been revealed all along.
The problem is that many people want to limit the scope of scripture. Scripture’s scope is to be the foundation of our lives, not just a set of rules and everything else is up to us. So, if we are in agreement (I can’t really be sure), I would caution your use of language because, while your sermon indicates the following of the whole of scripture, your blog post indicates a second-class status of scripture.
Again, I would strongly disagree that the problem with the pharisees was that they took scripture too seriously. Jesus certainly never criticized them for that.
Jonathan–thanks for taking the time to listen and engage.
In John 5:39-40 Jesus says,
“39 You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you possess eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, 40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life.”
This is probably as close as Jesus comes to telling the Jewish leaders that they’re taking the scriptures too seriously. Of course, the real issue is that they’re taking their particular interpretation of scripture so seriously that they’re not able to see Jesus for who he is: the ultimate, authoritative embodiment of the Scriptures. Their interpretation includes the traditions and customs they use to justify why they obey some laws and not others.
I think that your statement about Jesus’ interpretation of the law being in line with what the prophets had always revealed is a bit naive and only possible after 2000 years of Christian interpretation of the prophets. If you were on the street listening to Jesus teach in the first century, would it be that obvious to you? If so, you would have been one of the few to get on the first hearing.
Jesus wasn’t crucified because he reinforced what everyone already knew and believed, but because he challenged the various interpretations of scripture held by his contemporaries. In some sense, Jesus presented a “new” way of reading the Scriptures.
By following Jesus instead of following the Bible, we are giving Jesus, through the power of the Spirit, the authority to challenge our contemporary interpretations of scripture.
Well, I’ll just conclude by saying that I think the “new”-ness of Jesus is that humans continually forget the scriptures and insert our own cultural values and rules, not that scripture needed radical re-interpretation. Note that the prophets were not terribly popular, either – again, because scripture is fairly clear, but humans continually put in their own rules in place of God’s.
With reference to the verse you pointed out, I’ll agree that this does accord with your thesis somewhat, but also note that the immediately preceding verse says “you do not have his word abiding in you”.
The Pharisees did not grasp the simple truth that the letter of the law kills, but the spirit gives life. Jesus is to be found in the spirit of the law. That does not mean that we should not follow the letter of the law: we are called to do both. Hence, “you should have practiced the latter without neglecting the former.”
I recall hearing McClaren say this once, “Many of us act as though Jesus is our savior and Paul is our Lord.” This hints at one flaw in our approach to scripture… we disconnect passages from the actual good news itself, the coming of Jesus our savior and His Kingdom. I am convinced more and more that scripture must be “entered” and “interpreted” through Jesus’ life, death and new life. To enter any other way is to worship the text instead of the author of life, Himself.
Good post Wade.
Not to be argumentative , but it confuses me. How do we know about Jesus unless we go the text of scripture and even if it is Paul or whoever the human writer may be , do they not also reveal Jesus to us. As we behold His glory will we not be transformed into His likeness ? And where do we behold His glory except in scrpture ?
And yes it is more than just read or hear. It is also apply . But how will any of us become more like Christ if we do not first go the text.