Favorite Parable?

Recently, I was asked which of Jesus' parables was my favorite. I've got a strong top five to choose from, but my favorite is the Pharisee and the Tax Collector. I've included an excerpt from Revolution II: The Parables about this story below:

#17 Parable of the Pharisee & the tax collector (Luke 18:9-14)

Main Message: Justification is not found in law

Jesus told parables to teach a subversive wisdom versus conventional thinking. He told parables to reveal the true nature of the Kingdom of God, which he was introducing to the world. He also told parables to help carve a path of destination toward connection with God, making the realization of the Kingdom a closer reality. We see each of these in the Parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector. In this teaching, Jesus sends a message to those whose focus on fulfilling law had left them feeling erroneously justified with their Maker and simultaneously cold-hearted toward their brother. Jesus’ point is simple: Justification is not found in law.

As the Christian tradition has evolved, this story is perceived as one that teaches humility over religious arrogance. Primarily because of Jesus’ statement in verse 14b, “…for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” While this phrase is certainly believed to be genuinely from Jesus, many scholars do not think that he actually uttered those words in association with this parable. Many believe it was later added by the author as a commentary on the story to teach humility over pride, a conclusion that would greatly discount the first century context. When considering context and Jesus’ own example, we find a different direction for interpretation.

To Jesus’ listeners, the Pharisee’s words would not have been considered pompous, but rather a sincere thanks to God for providing such guidance. Such prayers were not considered pretentious and were quite common. In fact, one of the prayers uttered daily by Jewish males was:

“Praised, that he did not make me a heathen; for all the heathen are as nothing before him; praised be he, that he did not make me a woman, for woman is not under obligation to fulfill the law; praised be he that he did not make me…an uneducated man; for the uneducated man is not cautious to avoid sins.”¹⁹

Within our cultural context these words would be quite haughty, even scandalous, just as the Pharisee’s prayer would be equally pompous today. However, within first century Jewish context, such a prayer would be uttered with sincere thanks and been perceived in a similar frame. Therefore, when listening to the Pharisee’s words in Jesus’ parable, his audience would not have thought, “What an arrogant, self-righteous jerk!” More likely, they would have thought, “What a tremendous servant of God!”

The Pharisee prayed, “God, I thank you that I am not like other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.”

The Pharisee in Jesus’ story had not only adhered to the Law, but, indeed, went beyond those expectations. While the Law called for all Jews to fast one day each year for repentance, this Pharisee fasted twice weekly—atoning for the sins of others. By tithing all that he possessed, the Pharisee also extended beyond the limits of the law.²⁰ With the Purity System being such a pervasive component of Jewish culture, first century listeners would have been impressed with this display. Just as a 21^st century Baptist audience would admire the following words from their preacher: “I don’t drink. I don’t do drugs. I go to church three times a week. I am a faithful husband and father; and, I am fair in my business practices. Thank you that I am not like gays, adulterers, and criminals, Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists.” Such words, even though considered by many to be pompous and even wrong, would most likely sincerely connect with a Baptist audience, just as, by standards of Mosaic Law, the Pharisee in Jesus’ parable would have been considered, indeed, a man after God’s heart.

Meanwhile, the tax collector is on the opposite end of the spectrum. Tax collectors were commissioned by Rome to gather tax money (often extorting a larger sum than was actually due) from their Jewish brothers. Put simply, they were “sell-outs” whose very existence was abhorrent to the Jews.

“And the tax collector standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, “God, be merciful to me a sinner!” (verse 13)

This completes the foundation of Jesus’ illustration: on one side is the Pharisee, the keeper of the law to and beyond its fullest extent, while on the other end is a man whose very existence is synonymous with contempt. Notice that the tax collector does not mention any specific sin. To Jesus’ listeners, he did not need to; rather, his very being was held with great hatred in their eyes.

Next, Jesus presents the subversive twist: “I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other.” (Verse 14a)  It was an outrageous thought: the despised and evil tax collector is more justified in God’s eyes than the Pharisee who administers to the law beyond its necessity. In other words, Jesus is saying, “…if you think adhering to the numerous aspects of the law is what it’s all about, you’re wrong.”

Note that the word “justified” to Jesus’ audience would not have meant “forgiven” as commonly denoted. Forgiveness was obtained through temple sacrifice rather than public prayer. The word “justified” later emerged in connection to forgiveness with Paul’s teaching. The word’s association was different prior to that timeframe. With this in mind, Jesus is not teaching that humility bests self-righteousness. Rather, “justified” to Jesus’ listeners would have meant the same as a great king looking at one subject with ultimate approval while another was looked on with dissatisfaction; a final verdict confirming a person’s righteousness.²¹

Therefore, in one subversive stroke, in this final verdict, Jesus has leveled the playing field and the repentant tax collector is justified. After all, is a sinful man incapable of being made right with God? Are we not all sinful beings? And, does God not forgive sins? If not, then the very existence of each of us should be held with great disapproval. But, God does forgive sins. It is mankind who does not forgive sins. It is mankind that continually holds the sinner with contempt even after he or she achieves rightness with God. Is the position of a sinner, even the worst example of a sinner, not the very position in which we all stand? Thus, the playing field has been leveled. Because to Jesus, righteousness was not obtained through adherence to the Purity System, but rather through relationship with God and the compassion that it spawns. After all, Jesus is not saying that we conveniently rely on God’s grace for our own shortcomings, while our brother is left to fend for himself and subjected to some other due process. Not at all, Jesus relies on God’s grace for all, living in connection with those around him versus the alternative. The alternative was found two thousand years ago as well as today. Today, we still construct divisive walls between people deemed unworthy because of this “righteousness by law” mentality. Such a philosophy does not uphold a brother, now or then, but rather merely leaves our brothers as estranged outcasts for God to deal with.

Within Jesus’ ideology, all of mankind relies on the grace of God. All of mankind fights alongside their brother to support, love and care for him and her. Gone is the idea that the disdainful sinner should be scorned and ignored because he doesn’t measure up. Alive is Jesus’ idea that we are each that sinner. In Jesus’ reality, all were equal and life could be lived in loving connection with our brothers and sisters rather than in separation from them. Quite simply, justification, or divine approval, was not obtained through law. This philosophy was one reason that Jesus was criticized for eating with “tax collectors and sinners” in Mark 2. He applied this teaching to his own life and embraced all—even those deemed unhealthy in the comparative world of the Purity System. In this parable, Jesus invites his listeners to do the same as ultimate righteousness was not found in adherence to the minutest aspects of the law, but rather in humble relationship and the compassion that it generates.

This is what I believe the Parable of the Pharisee and tax collector would have meant to Jesus’ first century spectators. The “righteousness through law” mentality was simply not effectively serving the realization of the Kingdom of God. Rather, it was separating people from a connection to God, while building thick walls between brothers themselves. This is why Jesus used a tax collector in the parable, because this character’s very existence was despised while he was ostracized by others. In other words, if the worst of the worse in the world of conventional wisdom, the loathsome tax collector, was justified, then we all are—not by merits of the Purity System, or religious law, but rather by reaching out in relationship with God.

Fast forwarding two thousand years, the Purity System is all but gone, but we see legalism generating the same results. We see the self-righteous lording over others, attempting to play the role of gatekeeper while denying others the love of God unless they strictly adhere to the same “righteousness through law” mentality. We see those on the outside of the various interpretations of the law moving away from God because they have erroneously believed in their fellow man’s approach to religion. And we see the divisive walls thickening between those engaging “righteousness through law” and those deemed on the outside of the law looking in.

It saddens me that, regardless of the fluff talk about grace found through organized religion, man has still taken Jesus’ wisdom and contorted it into a revamped version of the Purity System. Righteousness through law was not Jesus’ approach. True righteousness emerged through an intimate relationship with God which produces love and compassion while engaging our fellow man, even the tax collectors of the world, in love.

Living in relationship with God…

Embrace relationship with God and the world around us.

Historian Will Durant noted that Jesus is a constant force in our theology, yet virtually non-existent in our behavior. Case in point: the Parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector. Even though Jesus denounced legalism and its ill effects, we see a constant gravitation toward such thinking as religion evolves. More and more, we see organized religion instilling the type of legalism valued by the Pharisee and Jesus’ first century audience. Perhaps this is why the story has emerged through the Christian tradition as one that teaches humility over self-righteousness. In the church’s infancy, maybe “humility over pride” was an easier lesson to accept than the denouncement of “righteousness based on law.” The tradition has seemingly shaped the teaching into a mold it could withstand. After all, in the mind of men, it is reasonable to set out to live a good Christian life with some type of road map—a helpful resource that gives us the do’s and don’ts of the day. However, such a mindset is not really what Jesus taught; and thus, we see Jesus present in our theology, as an iconic figurehead of sorts, but not truly at work in our hearts or lives. Jesus taught love and compassion. At the heart of his wisdom is relationship: with God and the world around us; relationships that otherwise do not develop within a legalistic mindset.

I have numerous issues with organized religion and church in general. Regardless of denomination, each sect seems intent on providing its members with their own religious checklist, more so than promoting an earnest relationship with God. Just as the stringent Purity System emerged with Moses’ inspirations, this approach has led organized faith to a religion by law—of being acceptable to God through adherence to its own select and distinct set of guidelines pushed on its members with the air of divine authority. This framed the attitude of the Pharisee in the parable and shapes the mindset of many today. 

One interpretation of this parable I studied made the following analysis: “Jesus is laying the groundwork for the kind of people whom God accepts.”²² I wholeheartedly disagree. In fact, such an analysis is the kind of attitude being denounced by Jesus, merely proving the prominence of the “righteousness through law” mentality so prevalent today.

I do not believe that Jesus is laying the groundwork for more legalism. He is not adding the “humble” column to a person’s daily checklist. In proper context, the reality of Jesus’ message seems to be: “You can follow religious law to the utmost extent, and even beyond the utmost, but in the ultimate analysis, that’s really not what it’s about—righteousness is not achieved through law.” Otherwise, the Pharisee would have been blazing the trail to God’s good graces rather than going home without justification.

At the heart of the parable were two characters perceived to be as far apart from each other as possible: the Pharisee and the tax collector.  Their disparities in social esteem meant easy casting for the roles in Jesus’ parable. Examining the two men’s social roles more closely helps us realize why they were cast in the story. The Pharisees were one of the three religious parties of Jesus’ day. The Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes were the most prominent of the three Judaic societies. As critical as Jesus was at times toward the Pharisees, they were actually the most liberal of the three parties. They began around the third century B.C. From their beginning, the Pharisees encouraged the Jews to stay true to the more stringent Mosaic Law in the wake of the Greek’s efforts to Hellenize them into pagan practices. The word “Pharisee” means “separatist,” which follows form to their original purpose.²³ They sought to set the Jewish people apart from the Greeks. At the height of the Pharisees’ popularity, it has been estimated that there were around 6,000 in number.²⁴ While Pharisees were strict and steadfast observers of Mosaic Law, they often extended law beyond the limits of the Torah. They called such additions, ‘the traditions of the elders.’²⁵ Even though they had no true governing or leadership roles, the Pharisees were living examples to the Jews of how Mosaic Law should be lived.

Jesus certainly had his share of disagreements with some Pharisees. However, I do not believe he is targeting them in this parable as an example of “self-righteous arrogance.” After all, when examining the other prayers uttered by Jewish men of the time, the Pharisee’s prayer is very much in line to what a sincere prayer of thanks would represent. Yes, some Pharisees had become so consumed with adherence to Mosaic Law that they had developed an arrogant and pretentious self-righteousness, which drew criticism from Jesus. His disparagement came in an entire chapter of Matthew, which quotes Jesus’ displeasure toward the superior attitudes showcased by some Pharisees. For example in Matthew 23, Jesus equates some Pharisees to white-washed tombs. Examining cultural context, we learn that corpse impurity could be contracted by overshadowing a corpse or being overshadowed by a corpse. Therefore, merely walking over a grave would result in corpse impurity, which required a seven day purification process. To prevent accidental contact, and thus impurity, tombs were painted white. In this comparison, Jesus is claiming that the Pharisees were glossed over outwardly but inwardly impure.²⁶ So yes, Jesus did take issue with many of the Pharisees; however, this parable is not such an example. Many Pharisees were undoubtedly devout and honorable men. Jesus used that reputation for honor as a resource in this parable.  Their example showcased the “righteousness by law” mentality that Jesus disagreed with…enter the tax collector.

While adhering to the numerous purity guidelines created a devout image for the Pharisees, the tax collectors’ reputation put them on the opposite spectrum of the good-guy meter. As a group, they were despised by the people. The process of collecting taxes was done through a bidding procedure. The Roman government accepted the highest tax bid and in turn, the winner of the bid would then set the tax for their territory. That meant that the bid-winner would have to pay Rome and make a profit. It was a process that was evidently taken advantage of by the tax collectors to extort additional monies from their charges under the threat of abuse or imprisonment. As author Herschel Hobbs explains, “Quite naturally, the publicans were a hated group among the Jews, not only for their evil practices but also because they were regarded as traitors to their people.”²⁷ Their very existence was despised by the Jews.

In the parable, the Pharisee stood in the place in which many feel they stand today: adhering obediently to a certain interpretation of God’s law and drawing God’s favor in the process. But to Jesus, even those with an impressive reality of abiding by religious law were not made righteous by such adherence. The tax collector stood in a place that all of mankind actually stands, the place of sin where equality achieves the mark of balance. Living in relationship with God, as revealed through Jesus, meant abandoning the philosophy of “righteousness through law.” It meant recognizing that spirituality is not necessarily about creating an impressive resume of “Do’s” and “Do not’s” but rather living passionately with compassion in relationship with God. The distinction between the two philosophies is vast. Convincing Jesus’ audience of this meant that he had to persuade them to recognize the need for grace for themselves and others as a prerequisite for relationship with God and the world around them. This meant putting aside ideas of treating the tax collector as one whose very existence is wrong, and instead embracing all brothers with love and support.

If Jesus’ listeners accepted the reality of this parable, two truths would emerge. One, they would realize that “righteousness through law” does not represent the final appeal of God’s verdict of justification toward man. And two, all mankind would embrace Jesus’ own approach in genuinely connecting with our fellow man, serving truly as our brother’s keeper and not our brother’s probation officer.

Revolution: The next installment... The Early Judean Ministry (Part 4)

The Outreach Begins: Following the Christian Tradition

After leaving Jerusalem, Jesus then began teaching in Judea as well as in the area near his baptism, the Lower Jordan River. The time had come for Jesus to make his ministry more public. Jesus’ teachings and signs already had many believing him to be the Messiah. Meanwhile, John the Baptist’s mission was nearing its completion, having effectively paved the way for the Messiah.

John was baptizing in Aenon near Salim when some of the Jews questioned him about Jesus. “He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified—look, he is baptizing and people are coming to him.”

John responded by saying, “A man can receive nothing unless it has been given to him from heaven. You yourselves bear witness that I said, ‘I am not the Christ,’ but, ‘I have been sent before him.’ He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice. Therefore this joy of mine is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease. He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all. And what he has seen and heard, that he testifies; and no one receives his testimony. He who has received his testimony has certified that God is true. For he whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not give the Spirit by measure. The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his hand. He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe in the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides in him.”

John had been denouncing Herod Antipas’ marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. Therefore, Herod imprisoned John the Baptist.

Jesus and John had been preaching the same message, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Jesus, because of his numerous miracles, knew that the Pharisees touted him as more popular and dangerous to them than John. The time had not yet come for Jesus to confront the Pharisees or the high priests, so he decided to move north and begin the ministry in Galilee. However, rather than going through the route typically taken by Jews through Perea to Galilee, Jesus went through Samaria. This was done for two reasons. First, it would delay a direct confrontation with the Pharisees and second, it would help chip away at a wall of prejudice that was centuries old.

Following the Christian Tradition:  In Samaria…the Woman at the Well

(John 4:5 – 30; 39-42)

The Samaritan region was not a favorite of the Jewish people. Actually, that’s an understatement. In reality, Jews and Samaritans had quite an adversarial relationship in the time of Jesus. The rivalry began when Assyria captured the area more than 750 years earlier. Many Assyrians settled the land and intermarried with Jews, which created a new race. Between issues of intermarriage and disputes over the construction of a new temple that ensued after the Jews reclaimed Jerusalem, the two groups despised each other. In fact, it was common practice for Jews to thank God in their prayer rituals that they were not Samaritans. Incidentally, they said the same prayer regarding women, which made Jesus’ next encounter all the more meaningful.

In Sychar, a small village in Samaria, Jesus rested at Jacob’s Well. It was around noon, which was the hottest time on most likely a very hot day. While his disciples went into the city to buy food, a Samaritan woman approached the well. The woman was alone. This was strange only because women usually performed this task in groups. In addition to that oddity, the woman was also drawing her water during the hottest time of the day. Because of the physical difficulties of lugging around a heavy water pot, this task was not only done with groups of women, but it was done during a cooler part of the day. From those two elements we can surmise that this woman most likely was not carrying a sterling reputation along with her water pot. She was, quite possibly, an outcast. 

Jesus said to her, “Give me a drink.”

The Samaritan woman was startled that a Jew, especially a Jewish man, would speak to her. She responded by saying, “How is it that you, being a Jew, ask a drink from me, a Samaritan woman?”

“If you knew the gift of God and who it is who says to you, ‘Give me a drink’, you would have asked me and I would have given you living water.” Jesus stated.

This also startled the woman, as she answered, “Sir you have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep. Where then do you get this living water? Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as well as his sons and the livestock?”

Jesus said, “Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life.”

This excited the lady, as she answered, “Give me this water that I may not thirst nor come here to draw.” While she was thinking in terms of eliminating a lonely and cumbersome task, Jesus was thinking about something much greater.

Then, according to John, it became time for Jesus to reveal his identity to her. He told her to go and call her husband. When she responded by saying that she had no husband Jesus said, “You have well said, ‘I have no husband’, for you have had five husbands, and the one you are with now is not your husband; in that you spoke truly.”

This amazed the woman who began exclaiming that Jesus must be a prophet. She went on to tell Jesus that, “Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship.”

“Woman, believe me,” Jesus stated, “the hour is coming when you will neither worship the Father on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem. You will worship what you do not know; we know that we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”

The woman responded, “I know that the Messiah is coming. When he comes, he will tell us all things.”

“I, who speak to you, am he.” Jesus said.

At that point the disciples returned. They were undoubtedly amazed that Jesus was speaking to a Samaritan woman. She left in order to share her experience with others. Soon, she returned with many men to meet the Messiah. Jesus stayed in the city for two days, preaching and ministering to the people and they believed and accepted him. 

Genuinely Jesus: Jesus and the Samaritan Woman at the Well

This story from John undoubtedly contains many instances of the author ascribing words to Jesus. Nevertheless, it is a story, whether completely fictional or grounded in the basis of reality, that bears great relevance to us today. Yes, there probably are additions to the text.  For instance, some consider Jesus’ references to living water an addition because such references are exclusively found in John’s writing (with similar verbiage expressed to Nicodemus in the preceding chapter).  I believe that Jesus might have made such a reference, most likely in regards to his message about the Kingdom of God. However, Jesus most likely did not disclose the notion that he was the Messiah, certainly not at this point in his ministry. With those thoughts in mind, I do not consider the dialogue between Jesus and the Samaritan woman to be grounded in historical accuracy. I do, however, believe that some type of conversation took place between Jesus and a Samaritan woman, which, in and of itself is grounds for greater study. In fact, with all due respect to the early Christian writer’s agenda and the scribes that followed, I would very much like to be privy to that actual conversation.

Jesus’ life showcased a true revelation of God’s love. It would have been easy for Jesus to mirror a Jewish heritage that intensely disliked the Samaritans. Such a reflection was expected. He was exposed to the same teachings used by his fellow Jews to justify a prejudice that had lasted for years. Further, Jesus’ culture had taught that women were inferior and not worthy of even speaking openly to a man. However, Jesus knew God’s revelation of love. He knew that love toward all is expected. God’s unconditional love, agape, is extended toward people of all races and genders despite any prejudices that man can concoct. Jesus took a hammer with him to Jacob’s Well and chipped away at prejudice. Upon returning to Jesus, the disciples were astonished. Their teacher was talking, openly and meaningfully, with a woman, a Samaritan woman. The hammer was lowered and the wall began to deteriorate.

Jesus was a revolutionist. He was a revolutionist who specialized in breaking down barriers of legalism and prejudice. There is a reason why Jesus took the less traveled path to Galilee through Samaria rather than the safer and more familiar route through Perea. The result was an encounter with a special child of God, a Samaritan woman. This meeting not only helped spread Jesus’ message in this country, it planted a strong idea in the minds of the disciples. God’s love is for all. It was a revolutionary idea then and now. Through compassion, kindness and love, Jesus was revealing God.

Jesus’ ministry began very successfully. Anticipation was building and many of the Jews were already beginning to believe in Jesus as the Savior. That belief would soon explode into incredible popularity as Jesus continued his journey to Galilee.

Question of the Week...kinda

Okay...this wasn't a "Question of the Week" per se--at least it didn't come from an e-mail sent to the Compassion Revolution. Rather, it came from a recent e-mail exchange with an atheist friend. First let me state, that I have great respect for those that follow that path. This particular individual claimed to be a militant atheist, but by definition of that sect, he really didn't seem to fit that description.

At any rate, our discussion led to one's image of God. He was dispelling the Biblical images of God being essentially a "grumpy old fart in some distant realm, who was ready to strike down man for shitting on the wrong brick". I think I surprised him by wholeheartedly agreeing with him. He then asked me, "What then, as a Christian, is your image of God?"

Answer..."First, let me say that, I think that your image of God greatly impacts the way you serve God. Those of the more legalistic versions of Christianity see God as a dictator who demands to be obeyed...to have his many rules followed in order to gain Divine acceptance. That is not my image. Actually, I don't think that image mirrors the revelation of God provided by Jesus. This is not surprising considering that much of what Jesus taught is ignored left legalistic religion in favor of re-working scripture (i.e. Paul's letters, etc.) into the law that is so craved by these segments of fundamentalism. No, my image of God is much more based on the revelation of God provided by Jesus.

First, God is a loving Father, whose love is not bound or dependent upon adherence to law, but truly operates withen the limitless boundaries of compassion and agape. After all, it is truly man that has created the confines of law by buying into conventional thinking and the lofty expectations created by such a mindset. Behavior that operates within the confines of love will always play out in such a manner that generates an embracing, loving, peaceful mindset for all parties. In other words, law is naturally taken care of when one's focus is on the love that Jesus taught.

Second, God is energy...generative, spiritual energy. God is not a man and should not be alluded to as such. Rather, the image that it can be accurately stated that humans are in likeness to God, is that of a spiritual nature; and not a human form. God is an omnipresent, spiritual entity that binds, loves, unites, connects. That entitity can be felt and experienced or equally ignored completely. Some choose the latter; some the former. That, in a nutshell is my image of God."