The Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7; Luke 6)

The Sermon on the Mount is heavy in its complexity and theology.  I cannot possibly hope to unravel it all in this sitting.  

There is some overlap in the sermons between the accounts in Matthew 5-7 and Luke 6, but they might also be two completely different sermons.  In Matthew, Jesus goes up a mountain, sits down, and preaches.  In Luke, Jesus goes down to a "level place" and preaches.  

I will refer to the Sermon on the Mount as written in Matthew to cover both because it is substantially longer than Luke's account.

The Sermon on the Mount contains a wide variety of teachings spanning different subject matters.  It is further complicated because it seems to enter symbolic parables and then transition to literal teaching and back to parables without textual guideposts.  The language can almost seem like the teachings are riddles.  Further, it mentions things if taken on a literal level, might seem impossible.  

For instance, Jesus challenges everyone to "be you therefore perfect as your heavenly father is perfect".  (Matt. 5:43-48).  What does this mean?  Perfectly redeemed through Christ?  Perfectly redeemed through animal sacrifice?  A goal of righteousness, but an obviously unattainable one based on human effort alone?  

The statement comes after a discussion of loving one's enemies, so I think it should at the least mean that being "perfect" is affiliated with loving one's enemies.

Jesus also teaches that he is the fulfillment of the law and the prophets. Further, he says that until heaven and earth disappear, the least part of the law will not disappear.  Further, he admonishes people not to break the commands or teach to others to do the same.  (Matt. 5:17-20).

This discussion was probably prompted by Jesus actions on the Sabbath, but we do not know.  Again, this is a strange statement because Jesus seems to be doing just that, at least with regard to the Sabbath.  Later, when talking about divorce with the Pharisees, Jesus will mention that the letters of divorce practice from the law of Moses was imperfect and that they should not divorce at all.  So, at some level, Jesus is changing the law.

Likewise, I know of no Christian group today that does animal sacrifice, which was required in the law.  So, at some level, the law of Moses will ceased to be practiced.  Further, if we jump ahead to the Count of Jerusalem (Acts 15), much of the law is omitted with regard to instructing the churches they should practice.

So, does that mean heaven and earth did pass away?  Was Jesus speaking euphemistically about heaven and earth passing away?  The answer is not clear.

I would say the Sermon on the Mount is full such parables and mysteries.

Regardless, the audience is amazed when Jesus is done.  Whatever the interpretation, the Sermon on the Mount was fresh wine.

Crowds and Apostles (Mark 3:7-19; Luke 6:12-16)

Crowds still followed Jesus after he challenged the Pharisees about the Sabbath.  People still came to him for healing and deliverance from evil spirits.  Jesus still tells the evil spirits to not say who he is.  At this point, Jesus is publicly declaring divinity to people he encounters, including the Pharisees.  So, hushing the evil spirits seems to have a different purpose other than telling people about Jesus before Jesus knew they were ready.  It probably has to do with the manner the evil spirits would talk.

Jesus goes up a mountain where he spends a night in prayer.  In the morning, selects twelve disciples to be apostles.  They include the four fishermen from Galilee, Matthew (Levi) the tax collector, and seven others not previously mentioned. The more famous include Thomas (probably "doubting Thomas"), Phillip (probably of Acts 8), and of course, Judas Iscariot.

After selecting Apostles, he sees the crowd and climbs partway up a mountain.  This may be the same mountain where he went pray about selecting Apostles.  

This time, he goes up to speak to a crowd of disciples.  What he says will become known as the Sermon on the Mount.

Lord of the Sabbath (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John)

All four Gospels cover similar stories in which Jesus is challenged by the Pharisees regarding their rules about the Sabbath.  The accounts involve similar anecdotes, challenges, responses by Jesus, and eventually, similar responses by the Pharisees.  I will analyze them together to draw the most from them.

The account from John 5

The Book of John provides an encounter between the Pharisees and Jesus over the Sabbath that is separate and apart from those discussed in the other Gospels.

Jesus heads to Jerusalem for another feast.  He goes to a natural pool where blind and crippled people wait by the pool.  They believe that an angel of God stirs the water and if they get into the water, they will be healed.

Jesus heals a crippled person and tells the man to pick up his mat and walk.  It is the Sabbath day and Pharisees challenge him that he should not be carrying a mat on the Sabbath.  He tells them that the man who healed him told him to do so.  But Jesus had disappeared into the crowd. Later, the man encounters Jesus again and then he tells the Pharisees that Jesus had told him to pick up the mat and walk.

From the other accounts of Jesus, I do not think this was the only person who was healed at the pool.  Rather, it sounds like this was a place that Jesus wanted to go to heal many.  However, this man stands out because Jesus told him to carry is mat on the Sabbath day.

Likewise, there is no rule in the Law of Moses to refrain from carrying mats and walking while on the Sabbath.  To the Pharisees' credit, there was the incident of the man killed for collecting firewood in Numbers 15:32-36.  So, in some ways, this rule about not carrying objects around on the Sabbath is understandable.

The Pharisees challenge Jesus and Jesus launches into a long theological discussion about the Son of God.  This part is packed pretty dense, but a few things stand out:

• The dead will hear and have heard the voice of the Son of God
• The Father has entrusted all judgment of men to the Son
• Jesus refers to the Pharisees' belief in John the Baptist to help convince them
• Jesus will not accuse the Pharisees before the Father, but rather their accuser Moses.

Their certainly is a lot of heavy theology in response to being accused about breaking the Sabbath rules.  In the other Gospels, Jesus makes the statement that the Son of God is Lord of the Sabbath and that is part of the intended message here.  

The Pharisees hear this and their mood darkens.  They want to kill Jesus for breaking the Sabbath rules, but also stating that he is equivalent to God.  So, it was not breaking the fasting tradition or cleansing the temple of money changers that drove the Pharisees to want to kill Jesus, but their Sabbath rules and stating that he was like God.

The accounts from Matthew 12:1-21; Mark 2:23-3:6; and Luke 6:1-11

Jesus' disciples are in a grain field on the Sabbath.  They pick grain and eat them.  The Pharisees see this and ask Jesus why his disciples are breaking the Sabbath rules.

Harvesting grain is not explicitly forbidden in the law of Moses.  However, it is a reasonable extraction of principles if one simply looked at the time the Israelites were in the desert.  The time in the desert was important because it is the first mention of a requirement of anyone doing a Sabbath.  So, it appears to be the beginning of the institution of the Sabbath as a human requirement and it was so important, it made it in the list of Ten Commandments.  

Harvesting grain seems to be contrary to two anecdotes of the Israelites.  First, there was the time the person was stoned for collecting firewood.  Another reasonable extraction of that is Sabbath-breaking is punishable by death.  Second, God had required that two days of manna would be collected on the sixth day so they would not need to collect manna on the seventh day.

Back to the story, Jesus responds by pointing out other areas of the Old Testament that make the issue more complicated.  First, David and his friends ate bread that was consecrated to God.  This seems to be a non-sequitur in Mark and Luke, but in Matthew, Jesus explains that God prefers mercy, not sacrifice.  Second, Jesus points out that the priests were in fact commanded to work on the Sabbath and they were innocent.

At this point, Jesus makes two bold statements.  First, the Sabbath was created for man, not man for the Sabbath.  Second, the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.  I will return to these statements after covering the final anecdote of the Sabbath in this group.

Later, Jesus is in the synagogue and a man with a paralytic hand is present.  The Pharisees want to see if Jesus will heal this man on the Sabbath.  In Matthew, they even ask him if it is lawful to heal on the Sabbath, but in Mark and Luke, this detail is omitted.  But Jesus knows what is in their hearts and knows that this is a pseudo-trap.

Again, there is no explicit rule in the law of Moses against healing on the Sabbath.  On one level, this question seems bizarre, because healing requires supernatural power that would either come from God or another source.  So, perhaps the question carried the implication that God was resting on the Sabbath and would not heal anyone.  Therefore, if Jesus healed someone on the Sabbath, it showed that he did not come from God.  Likewise, they may have actually created a law specifically to target Jesus - no healing on the Sabbath.  Regardless, it is a strange question.

In Mark and Luke, he asks the people in the synagogue if it is acceptable to do evil or good on the Sabbath.  In Matthew, Jesus asks whether if a sheep fell into a pit on the Sabbath, would they lift it up?  He further asks - How more important to God are humans than sheep?  Jesus concludes it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.

The people remain silent.  He asks the man to extend his hand and the hand is now healed.

This angers the Pharisees a lot.  They are angered so much that they begin to plot with the Herodians to conspire to kill Jesus.  The Herodians are people loyal to Herod and ultimately, the Roman government over Palestine.  Normally, the Pharisees probably hated the Herodians and viewed them as traitors.

Afterwards, Jesus continues healing the sick, but tries to maintain a lower profile.  He tells the people whom he heals not to say who he is.

Reading all of this together, what can we extract?

1.  God prefers mercy over sacrifice.  

In this context, the sacrifice being the sacrifice of refrain on the Sabbath.

2   It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.  

Stated examples include healing and taking a sheep out of a pit.  However, the statement to "do good" is actually very broad and encompasses far more than healing or taking care of emergencies.

3.  Harvesting grain for immediate consumption on the Sabbath is ok.
This is a literal extrapolation.  Stepping further back, preparation of food for immediate consumption is OK, even if it involves "harvesting".  However, in light of the context in which it appears, one wonders if any work on the Sabbath is OK.

4.   Sabbath was made for man, not vice versa

I suppose that means that at a minimum people should not be put to death for breaking the Sabbath.  In fact, i think it goes even further that people should not be punished at all for breaking the Sabbath.  The Apostle Paul will take this logic much further in Colossians 2:16-17 and state that the Sabbath observance is personal and flexible.

So, why was the man stoned for breaking the Sabbath by collecting firewood?  In the context of that particular story, think it also involves the fact that he consciously avoided taking place in the community worship that was happening at the same time.  He was off collecting firewood instead.  It also showed his selfishness because he was getting a head start on collecting firewood in detriment to the group.

On a more literal level, the statement by Jesus also means that the Pharisees had the exact opposite view of the Sabbath than Jesus.  It implies that the Pharisees believed that people were made to serve the Sabbath, so they created rules on what could and could not be done.

5.  Lord of the Sabbath

This statement is not entirely explained by Jesus.  On one level, Jesus is stating that he is God and is above their rules of the Pharisees on the Sabbath.  On another level, given the context that Jesus is going against the restrictions on the Sabbath, it could also imply that Jesus is releasing everyone on the rules of the Sabbath.

The Response of the Pharisees

All four accounts end with the Pharisees plotting to kill Jesus.  From a Christian bias, this is unfair and wrong.  That said, Sabbath-breaking to them is punishable by death.  Likewise, being a false prophet was punishable by death.  Jesus is doing things that go against what they perceived was taught in the Law of Moses.

On the other, Jesus has legitimacy even within their beliefs.  First, John the Baptist, who they respected, said that Jesus was greater.  Second, Jesus has a lot of supernatural power and constantly amazes the crowds.  Third, they expected a Messiah has probably arrived.  Thirty years prior, the wise men spread the word around Jerusalem that the king of the Jews had been born.  Jesus might not fit their expectations for a Messiah, but that would mean they wanted a Messiah on their own terms and not on what the Messiah wanted to accomplish.  So, they in turn wanted to control what the Messiah did.  

Going back to the parable of the wine skins, I think it explains much of the reaction Jesus receives from the Pharisees.  Jesus was offering new wine, but the Pharisees could only receive it in old wine skins.  As a result, Jesus was breaking their beliefs and now they wanted to kill him.

Jesus and fasting (Matthew 9:14-17; Mark 2:18-22; Luke 5:33-39)

The following story might actually occur at this same banquet.  In all three accounts, the tax collector story continues into this next one.

Jesus is approached by Pharisees and disciples of John the Baptist.  They ask him why Jesus and his disciples are not fasting while the Pharisees and disciples of John the Baptist do not fast.

Again, there is no need to infer malicious intent on behalf of the question in the since of Pharisees trying to trap Jesus.  There is no evidence of a setup or trying to get Jesus in trouble.  Since the disciples of John the Baptist are part of this group, this neutralizes the question in that regard because Jesus and John the Baptist were friends.

However, I think the disciples of John the Baptist might be somewhat angry at Jesus.  John the Baptist is imprisoned and I suspect that his disciples are fasting for John's release and safety.  They also would know that several of John's disciples are now following Jesus, Simon and Andrew.  They would also know that Jesus was baptized by John.  So, they might view the fact that Jesus' group is feasting (with tax collectors) as being disloyal to John the Baptist when the others are fasting.  

Jesus responds with a few parables.  The first is that the guests of the bridegroom cannot fast while the bridegroom cannot fast while the bridegroom is present.  When the bridegroom leaves, the guests will fast.

This is a strange answer, but it does speak to the disciples of John.  They should know that John the Baptist anointed Jesus as one greater than John the Baptist.  So, in a way, the parable is a turnaround to the disciples of John and implies that if they were followers of John the Baptist, they should now be following Jesus too.

Jesus follows this with two parables.  That no one uses new, unshrunk clothing to repair old clothing.  Likewise, no one puts new wine into old wine skins because the new wine will burst the old, unstretched, wine skins as it ferments.

As written, this statement seems to come out of nowhere and probably left the original crowd confused.  However, I think Jesus may have looked around the group or feast of wherever he was.  He saw a wine skin and someone with a patch of repaired clothing and they became the bases of the parables.

As for the substance, I think Jesus means that both the Pharisees and disciples of John have a rigid, inflexible viewpoint while Jesus is offering something new and fresh.  Unless they have a container that can accommodate Jesus' fresh ideas, his message will rip and tear at them.

Finally, it is interesting that Jesus uses the parable of wine skins at a time when he is questioned about fasting.  He is making no apologies for the feasting.

Jesus calls Matthew/Levi (Matthew 9:9-12; Mark 2:13-17; Luke 5:27-32)

Jesus left where he had healed the paralytic and sees a tax collector sitting at the official booth.  He says to the man to follow him.  The man does.  According to Gospel of Matthew, this man is named Matthew.  According to Mark and Luke, this man is named Levi.

It is possible such an event happened on two separate occasions involving two different people.  It is also possible that Matthew and Levi are two names that refer to the same person.  Since the Gospel of Matthew - which he may have authored - says that this man is named Matthew, I will refer to him as Matthew.

Later that day, Matthew invites Jesus to his home for a banquet with other tax collectors.  The Pharisees see this and ask the disciples why does Jesus eat with tax collectors?  Jesus overhears this and uses the analogy that it is not the healthy that need a doctor, but the sick.  Similarly, Jesus did not come to call the righteous, but the sinners.

I think it is is tempting to read malicious intent into the Pharisees question.  I am more hesitant to do so.  The question is actually quite valid and Jesus is surprising the social norms.  Jesus heals the sick and casts out demons, but also cleansed the temple of money changers and is eating with tax collectors.  

Tax collectors were bad because they collected taxes for Rome and were viewed as traitors to the Jews.  I think a good modern day analogy of the social pariah for Christians would be an abortion doctor or even someone collecting signature petitions for Planned Parenthood. Regardless, when Jesus encounters them, he invites Matthew to be his friend and eats with them.

This does not necessarily mean that Jesus approves of tax collecting for Rome, which is probably the focus of the social stigma.  If anything, Jesus endorses detaching negative social stigma from people to engage with people as friends.  

It also interesting that the Pharisees question the disciples and not Jesus himself.  Again, it is possible to infer malicious intent in that the Pharisees were trying to bully the disciples.  However, the disciples may have just been on the outer edge of the group and the Pharisees did not want to get any closer to the tax collectors.

The man with leprosy and the paralytic (Matthew 8:1-4; 9:1-8; Mark 1:40-2:12; Luke 5:12-26)

Jesus is in one of the towns when he is approached by a man with leprosy.  He begs for Jesus to heal him, which happens.  Jesus then instructs the man not to tell anyone, but rather to present himself to the priest, who were in charge of determining skin diseases.  Jesus mentions that this would be a testimony to the priests.

However, the man talked freely about Jesus.  The crowds swarmed Jesus so much that he must retreat to remote places.

This story stands in contrast to the other public miracles, that Jesus was doing at this time.  In fact, the very next anecdote is another high profile healing.  

So, why would Jesus do this?  On one hand, maybe Jesus needed some quiet and private time.  The account of this story in Luke 5 mentions that Jesus had to withdraw to lonely places to pray because the crowds became so large.  

On the other hand, Jesus instructs the man to talk to the priests so it would be a testimony to the priests.  Jesus wanted this man to serve as an outreach of the Gospel directly to the priests, which the man did not do.  The next anecdote gives us some indication of what may have been going on.

Jesus returns to Capernaum.  A large crowd swarms the place where Jesus is staying.  Following the new custom of bringing sick people to Jesus, paralytic is taken to Jesus.  Since the man is paralyzed, the man is carried on a mat by his friends.  The man cannot get to Jesus, so they remove the roof of the home and lower the man to Jesus.

Jesus says the man's sins are forgiven.  No one says anything, but Jesus does a little mind reading and knows that the Pharisees and teachers of the law listening to him are thinking that this is blasphemy.  Jesus then asks whether it is easier to forgive sins or heal.  He then states that so in order for them to know that the Son of Man has the authority to heal and forgive, he then tells the paralytic to get up and walk.  The man does and the entire crowd is astonished.

Here we have another high profile healing.  These events will encourage the crowds following Jesus.  Likewise, Jesus is now publicly stating the he is the Son of Man.  This is a bold move, prior to this only the demons were stating Jesus' identity.  Likewise, this will only further the attention that Jesus is getting.

Looking back to the prior anecdote of the leper, this may provide a clue as to why Jesus instructed the man to testify to the priests.  Jesus may have been getting some resistance from priests as he got resistance from the Pharisees and teachers of the law in this anecdote. 

Fishermen to fish for men (Luke 5:1-11)

Luke provides a slightly different account on how Jesus called Simon Peter and the sons of Zebedee, John and James.  Matthew 4 and Mark 1 both record that Jesus saw them fishing, called to them, and they followed.  This in further contrast to how they initially meet Jesus through John the Baptist, as recorded in John 1.  It could very well be that they had resumed fishing after the initial call.  This would not be out of character for them since it seems that they resumed fishing after the arrest of John the Baptist.

Jesus is preaching to a large crowd by the shores of the sea of Galilee.  He gets into the boat owned by Simon (Peter) and teaches the crowd from the boat.  After he is done speaking, he tells Peter to go further out and cast a net.  Simon Peter does this, but after saying that they were out all night trying to catch fish, but caught nothing.

Simon casts his net and the net becomes full of fish.  His partners, James and John bring their boat to help Simon.  Their boats become so full of fish that they begin to sink.  

Simon is astonished and Jesus says to follow him and they will become fishers of men.  At that point, they leave everything to follow Jesus.  So, it seems that prior to that, they were still working  very hard in their trade while also following Jesus.  They seemed to be leading two lives.  It is not that fishing was wrong, but Jesus wanted them to fully devote their time to him.

This miracle also shows to them that they can still fish with Jesus around, but that Jesus would make fishing a lot easier for them.  Likewise, I suspect that all the fish they caught may have been used to feed the crowd, but it is unstated.  We know that Jesus would feed the crowds later on, but giving away their fish would enable Simon and the disciples to literally fish for men at that very moment.

The exorcist, episode 1 (Mark 1:21-39; Luke 4:31-44; Matthew 8:14-25)

Jesus is still in Capernaum, which was where the feverish child was the Jesus healed remotely from Cana.  

Jesus goes to the local synagogue on the Sabbath.  Jesus began to teach and amazed the crowd.

A man within the synagogue is possessed by an evil spirit.  The spirit causes the man to cry out "what do you want from us?  Have you come to destroy us?  I know who you are - the Holy One of God!"

Jesus tells the spirit to be silent and then commands it to leave.  It does.  Up to now, the Mark 1 and Luke 4 are nearly verbatim identical.  There are a few differences in how it exits.  Mark tells us the spirit shook the man violently and came out with a shriek.  Meanwhile, Luke tells that the spirit threw the man violently and came out without injuring him.

The crowd is even further amazed.  Not surprisingly, the news about Jesus spreads around synagogue.

This is the first demonic exorcism in the Bible.  Jesus will do a lot more and there are a handful in Acts.  

A pattern is established:

1.  The demon asks why Jesus is there.  Other demons that encounter Jesus will ask this same question.  One possible explanation for this is that the demon just does not know why God has appeared in the flesh.  In short, the whole ministry of Jesus took them off guard, including the crucifixion.  This theory is heavily expounded on in the book God At War, by Greg Boyd.

2.  The demons want to reveal Jesus identity when Jesus is not yet ready to publicly do so.

3.  If you have ever seen actual exorcisms, this pattern is very typical.  Demons shriek, complain, shake and throw.  But following Jesus example, just tell them to be silent and come out.

Back to the story, Jesus leaves the synagogue and goes to the home of Simon and Andrew.  There, he heals Simon's mother-in-law of a fever.  She gets out of bed and begins to wait on them.  

So, if Simon (Peter) has a mother-in-law, he might be married.

Meanwhile, the whole town is talking about Jesus.  That same evening, they bring to Jesus all the sick and demon-possessed.  We don't get any specifics, but Jesus heals many and drives out many evil spirits.  Luke 4 notes that as they came out, they shouted "you are the Son of God".  But again, Jesus did not let them speak because they knew his identity.

Matthew 8 notes that the healing of the sick is in fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah.

Jesus leaves the house in the next morning while it is still dark and prays alone.  One wonders if Jesus stayed up all night healing the sick and driving out demons.

Simon and the others look for Jesus, find him, and tell him that everyone is looking for him.  There probably still is another line of people who need healing and exorcism.  

So, Jesus tells them that they will have to go to another town and do the same.  They travel around the area and Jesus preaches, heals every disease, and drives out demons.

People from the region come to Jesus for healing and large crowds begin to follow Jesus.

Jesus' ministry begins in Galilee

Jesus' ministry begins with explosive force in Galilee.

John the Baptist is arrested by Herod.  Jesus now preaches that the "time has come".  The Gospels are full anecdotes of preaching and miraculous healings by Jesus in Galilee.

Jesus heals the official's son (John 4:43-53)

Jesus is welcomed in Galilee.  A lot of the Galileens were in Jerusalem and saw what he had done in Passover.  Plus, prophets are welcomed in places other than their hometowns.

Jesus is in Cana, where he had turned water to wine.

A royal official with a dying son comes to Jesus and begs Jesus to go to his home to heal the child, who is in Capernaum.  Jesus states, "unless you see miraculous signs, you won't believe".  The man begs Jesus to come a second time and this time, Jesus replies that the child is fine.  The man leaves Jesus and heads back to his home.  He is met by others from his home and tell him that his child is fine and the fever lifted at around the same time the man interacted with Jesus.  The text reports that this man and his household and believed in Jesus.

One theme in the story is about belief based on (1) seeing miracles and (2) hearing about miracles.  I don't think there is a problem with belief predicated on miracles at some level.  In fact, this gives the prophet supernatural credibility.  Plus, for Jesus, the Christian faith is predicated on the Resurrection, which would be classified as a miracle.  Likewise, it is the pattern presented at Jerusalem at Passover that signs and wonders brought people to faith.  So, I don't think Jesus' statement is chastising the father in the story, but rather a statement of fact.  Miracles are a necessary part of any ministry that claims supernatural authority.  

Jesus has a lot of miracles.

For this man in the story, I think he already believed in Jesus without seeing a miracle.  He took Jesus' statements on faith and left Jesus.  He did not beg Jesus to come yet a third time.  Rather, it seems to be the healing of the son plus the testimony of the father that convinced the household.

Jesus in Nazareth (Luke 4:16-30)

Jesus goes to the synagogue in Nazareth and reads from the scroll in Isaiah 61.  The quoted portion describes a man who is anointed by God to preach the good news, heal the blind, and free people.  Jesus sits back down and says that this is fulfilled.  

The people are eager for miracles and ask Jesus to do what he had done in Capernaum.  So, word about the healing of the child remotely had spread in the area.  

Jesus declines because prophets are not welcome in their hometown.  Jesus tells the story about how Elijah healed the Syrian leper although there were other lepers in Israel.  

This angers the crowd who take him to a cliff to throw him off.  At the top, Jesus walks through the crowd and leaves.  This last portion is stated as if it were a miracle, so we can probably imagine that either the mob was supernaturally quelled or perhaps even an invisible force field protected Jesus at the last minute.  If I had to speculate, I would say it was the former, but the text is silent about further details on how the mob let Jesus go.

It is interesting that they took Jesus to the top of the mountain to kill him.  They seem to believe in Jesus might be a powerful prophet.  Although they echo surprise that this man came from their hometown, they had heard about the Capernaum healing.  So, they are taking their lives into their own hands by trying to kill him.  Jesus had just talked about Elijah who had called down fire from God on the groups of soldiers coming to arrest him.  So, if Jesus is the real deal, they might be killed themselves by trying to kill Jesus.

Overall, I read the story as both a farewell from Jesus to his hometown of Nazareth as well as an invitation for them to follow him.  Jesus is saying that he will not concentrate his ministry on Nazareth, but that does not preclude them from following him.

Jesus calls Simon, Andrew, John, and James (Mark 1:16-20; Matthew 4:18-22)

Jesus is by the sea of Galilee when he sees Simon and Andrew.  Jesus encountered them before when Andrew was a disciple of John the Baptist and Andrew had gone to bring Simon to Jesus (see John 1:35-41).  Simon and Andrew have returned to fishing now that their leader is in jail.  Jumping ahead, they will return to fishing after Jesus is executed, but before they know he is risen.  Jesus also sees the sons of Zebedee, James and John, fishing nearby.  He invites them and they leave Zebedee to follow Jesus.

Jesus calls to them and officially invites them to become disciples of himself.  Specifically, Jesus makes the analogy that Jesus will teach them to become fishers of men.  They drop their nets and follow Jesus.

John the Baptist is arrested (Luke 3:19-20; Mark 1:14-15; Matthew 4:12-17)

John's arrest

John the Baptist rebuked Herod for the evil things he committed with Herodias, the wife of Herod's brother.  Herod did not like this and he locked John in prison.

One wonders if John knew this would happen.  John knows his role as leader of the Jews is largely complete and he must step aside for Jesus.  Also, what circumstances did John rebuke Herod?  Was it a public or a private audience before Herod?  Or, was he just shouting these "treasonous" things in the desert?  We don't know and can only speculate.

John's arrest does settle the dispute among the Jews about who should be baptizing John or Jesus.

The time has come 

After John is arrested, Jesus preaches in Galilee and perhaps includes a new message.  As part of preaching about the Gospel, he says "the time has come".  Perhaps this is what he referred to when he told his mother that his hour had not arrived before turning the water into wine.  If so, it would seem to imply that his hour would come when John the Baptist fully steps down.  

On one hand, there is some logic to this idea because John's role was specifically to be forerunner of Jesus.  Similarly, when the two were both preaching and baptizing, it fostered a dispute among the Jews of who was the leader - John or Jesus.  This dispute was in spite of John saying that Jesus was greater.

On the other, Jesus certainly took initiative to perform some miracles and talk about himself while John was still around.

This might be resolved in Matthew 4:17, which states that from time onwards, Jesus began to preach, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.". So, something in Jesus' ministry appears to have shifted on account of the arrest of John the Baptist.

Jesus in Samaria (John 4)

The Pharisees hear that Jesus is baptizing more people and gaining more converts than John the Baptist.  This news prompts Jesus to leave Judea and head back to Galilee.  Jesus passes through Samaria on the way to Galilee.

So, why is becoming more popular than John the Baptist a problem with the Pharisees?  It is not explained entirely in the text.  On one hand, Jesus has cleared the temple of money-changers, which the temple leaders did not like.  But Jesus used the occasion and performed miraculous signs.  Thus, the event may have been controversial, but Jesus turned it around.

On the other hand, in the prior chapter, we saw an argument break out between the disciples of John and "certain Jews".   Clearly, this issue is bringing up raw emotions.  Likewise, the "certain Jews" might be the people who reported to the Pharisees that Jesus is becoming more popular than John.  If so, that would help unpack the story of the argument in that it was the disciples of John who were defending Jesus against those who wanted John to retain prominence.

It could also be that the message of John the Baptist has changed.  John has gone from preaching repentance in the wilderness to preaching that this man Jesus, who cleared the temple, is the Messiah.  The people might need time to digest this.  Until that happens, emotions will be raw and there will be a lot of fights.

Regardless, Jesus heads back north, but must pass through Samaria.

Jesus arrives in Samaria.  He is tired and sits at a well.  He disciples go into town to buy food.

It is midday and a Samaritan woman comes up to the well.  Jesus asks her for a drink of water.  This prompts an interesting dialogue.  First, they discuss social and cultural boundaries because she is a Samaritan woman and Jews do not associate with Samaritans.  Jesus also discusses this mysterious life giving water that she will make h never thirst again.  Eventually, Jesus tells her that he knows she has had five prior husbands and the man she lives with now is not her husband.  This statement out of the blue convinces her that he is a prophet.

In the last part of the dialogue, they finally discuss religion.  They discuss the religious dispute between Samaritans and Jews, which is the proper mountain to worship.  Through this, Jesus reveals that he is the Messiah and soon the issue of where to worship will be irrelevant.

By then, the disciples return and stand silently above her because they are surprised by this interaction between Jesus and this woman.  The woman leaves her jar at the well and runs off.  This indicates that she may have felt intimidated by the disciples.  She runs back to the town and tell the town folk that she found a man who might be the Messiah.  As a result, the town folk swarm Jesus, many believe in him, and they ask him to stay an extra two days.

But before the arrival of the town folk, Jesus chastises the disciples for not harvesting when the harvest is ready and right before them.

This story is full and I will try to unpack.  I probably cannot "harvest" it for all that it is worth.

First, the story is a contrast in style with Nicodemus, a Pharisee who already believed in Jesus.  Jesus does not preach condemnation to the woman, whereas it was discussed with Nicodemus.  Jesus talked about the attributes of belief in him, in particular the living water.  The message carried its own weight and eventually he let the holy spirit take over.

The woman did precisely what the disciples did not do.  She goes into town and invites everyone to Jesus.  In that since, she "harvests" alone, whereas the disciples just go into buy food.  We can infer that while buying food, they maintained all the proper social etiquette of the Jewish-Samaritan interactions given their surprise of Jesus breaking the social norms when they return.

About the religious tension, I think a modern analogy would be the dispute between Jews and Muslims in Jerusalem today.  The Samaritans today exist, but are a marginal group.  According to Wikipedia, they currently number about 750 in total population today.  However, at the time, this was a major split.  The Samaritans believed that Mount Gerizim was the proper mountain to worship on while the Jews believed it was the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.  Nowadays, a similar dispute in the Middle East occurs, but it is not whether the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is more important, but rather which religion claims it.  In particular, Judaism or Islam.  Several centuries after the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, the Muslims built the Al Aqsa Mosque on top of the Temple Mount.

John the Baptist speaks about Jesus (John 3:22-35)

Jesus and his disciples leave Jerusalem and go to the countryside.  There, Jesus baptizes people.  As I mentioned before, this might be the fruit of the Passover week where Jesus cleared the temple of the marketplace and performed miracles.  People believed in Jesus and the might be getting baptized now.  This group might include Nicodemus.

John the baptist and his disciples are nearby.  An argument develops between John the Baptist's disciples and "certain Jews" about this.  They approach John and say that the person who John baptized is now baptizing others.  John uses the occasion to preach about Jesus.  John mentions that it was his role all all along to be sent ahead of the Messiah and now John must become take a smaller role while Jesus takes a larger role.  

 

Again, this fits the pattern of John.  John also makes statements he has not made before, including that those who believe in Jesus would have eternal life.  This discussion mirrors statements by Jesus earlier in the chapter when Jesus spoke to Nicodemus.  

But it is interesting that Jews knew that John had spoken about Jesus, but still were challenging his authority to begin baptizing.  It seems like there might be resistance or at least hesitancy among the people to let John be replaced by Jesus.  However, to say more than this would be speculation since we cannot tell from the text who has a problem with this - John's disciples or the "certain Jews".  By this point, a few of John's disciplines had already left John and joined Jesus, so that dynamic might be at play.

Regardless, John's reaction to all this is not rebuke those fighting, but rather to elevate Jesus.  John says just about everything but directly say " stop following me and follow Jesus instead."

Jesus and Nicodemus (John 3:1-21)

This is a very theologically rich passage and I could not possibly hope to unpack it all.  All I want to do now is focus on the interaction of Jesus and Nicodemus.

From the prior chapter, we learn that Jesus' miraculous signs are convincing many people to believe in his name.  But Jesus does not entrust himself to these people.  The text does not give a specific reason why other than the fact that Jesus knew their consciences.

In John 3, Nicodemus came to Jesus at night.  Nicodemus is a Pharisee and a member of the Jewish ruling council.  

Nicodemus calls Jesus "Rabbi" and that he must have come from God due to the miraculous signs that he is doing.  This indicates that Nicodemus is likely one of the people spoken about because he is referring to Jesus' miraculous signs as showing the authority.  Jesus was skeptical of this group of people, but will he be skeptical of Nicodemus?

Nicodemus coming to Jesus at night could mean several things and is not dispositive of a single outcome.  First, it could men that Nicodemus was trying to publicly hide his support and belief in Jesus.  At this point, Jesus may be a controversial figure due to the cleansing of the temple, but he can do miraculous signs.  Jumping ahead, we know the Pharisees will seek to subvert and then execute Jesus, so we can probably infer that the initial encounter was not positive for all the Pharisees.

I think this is probably what is going on, but the reasoning rests on events that happen later on.  The text of John 3 is silent as to why Nicodemus comes at night.  There may have been an innocuous reason such as Nicodemus just wanted Jesus alone without the crowds that were beginning to form.

Jesus answers Nicodemus with what seems like a riddle - unless a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.

Nicodemus is bewildered and focuses on the literal meaning of what Jesus said - no one can enter the womb a second time.

 Jesus responds that no one can enter the Kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.  Jesus then discusses the actions of the Spirit as a mysterious and unique entity.  Jesus statements even imply the Spirit has its own free will.  Finally, Jesus states that so it is with everyone born of the Spirit.

Nicodemus asks how can this be?

At this point Jesus begins to talk to Nicodemus about the importance of the Son of the Man.  Unpacking the text, Jesus states:

1.  The Son of Man is the only one who has gone into heaven because he has come from heaven.  

2.  God loved the world so much that He gave his only begotten Son to save people.  

3.  Those who believe in the name of the Son is not condemned.

4.  Those who do not believe in the name of the Son is already condemned.

5.  People either love light and hate darkness or vice versa.

There is no record of what Nicodemus says in response to all of this.  Rather, the story seems to end abruptly.  

Now that we know Jesus' response, let's look back at the initial encounter.  Here is what I see:

1.  Nicodemus believes in Jesus' name because of the miraculous signs

2.  Nicodemus is already part of the Kingdom of God, as demonstrated by his approach of Jesus.  Thus, Nicodemus is already "born again", i.e., born of the Spirit, otherwise he would not have approached Jesus.  Jesus just needs to explain it to someone to get it on the record.  

Similarly, we have no indication of whether Jesus said anything similar to anyone else prior to this encounter with Nicodemus.

3.  Jesus seems to be entrusting himself to Nicodemus.  In fact, Jesus is implicitly revealing himself as the Son of God to Nicodemus.  Jesus never actually says "I am the Son of God".  In verse 2, Nicodemus stated that Jesus came from God.  After a bit of dialogue, Jesus then states that the Son of God has already come from God.  Although it is in a third person discussion, we can surmise from the context that Jesus is telling Nicodemus that he is the Son of God.

Jumping ahead to the story immediately following this, we find Jesus' disciples baptizing converts.  The focus of the story is on the interaction with John the Baptist, but we can make an inference that Nicodemus was one of the people being baptized because:

1.  it immediately follows the story with Nicodemus

 2   Jesus told Nicodemus that he had to be born of water and Spirit.  The discussion that followed seemed to indicate that Nicodemus was born of Spirit, now he needs to be born of water.

3.  The story with Nicodemus seems to end abruptly, but it could just mean it parlayed directly into his baptism. If Nicodemus is baptized immediately afterwards, this stands in sharp contrast to secretly approaching Jesus by night.  Rather, it is a public declaration of faith during daylight.

Jesus clears the temple (John 2:12-25)

Jesus went to Jerusalem shortly before the Passover.  In the temple courts, he finds people selling animals for sacrifice, cattle, sheep, and doves.  Other people are sitting at tables exchanging money.

Jesus makes a whip out of cords and drove all from the temple area.  He overturns the tables of the money changers and scatters their tables.  To those selling doves, he shouts "how dare you turn my Father's house into a market".

This is the only anecdote of physical violence by Jesus in the Gospels.  Even then, the violence might not even be directed against people, but rather the animals, tables, and coins.  Jesus overturned the tables of the money changers and scattered their coins in the process.  Jesus does make a whip, but the whip seems to be used to drive out the sheep and cattle.  There is no indication that Jesus used the whip against people.  He does not use any violence against the dove sellers, but rather shouts at them.

There probably was nothing wrong with the custom of selling animals near the sacrificial area.  It is actually a necessary service if people had to come from a long way off to sacrifice at Passover.  However, it seems the problem is that it was within the temple itself.  

The temple court was known at the Court of the Gentiles.  This was the only area of the temple that Gentiles were allowed to enter and worship God.  As demonstrated by the story, the Jews had a strong zeal for the worship of God, but to the exclusion of Gentiles.  Rather, the area for Gentiles had become a common marketplace, full of animals and money changers.  If one was a Gentile and wanted to worship God, one would have to compete against the noise and traffic within the court that has become a barn.  Preventing access to God for the Gentiles could be what triggered Jesus' anger at this time.

The Jews are mad at Jesus and ask him what sign can he do to show his authority he can do this.  His response is that this temple is destroyed, it will be raised up in three days.  The Jews scoff at this because it took 46 years to rebuild the second temple.  The text indicate that Jesus' disciples did not initially understand the statement either.   However, after the resurrection, they remembered the statement and understood the "temple" to be the physical body of Christ.

Side tangent - from Nehemiah we learned that the reconstruction of the city walls took less than two months.  Here, we find out that the reconstruction of the temple took 46 years.

The question by the Jews is interesting because it shows their perspective.  They needed a miraculous sign to prove his authority, or at least the question indicates that they need one.  At this point, they probably would have heard that John the Baptist has baptized "someone greater", and they may have even heard that it was Jesus.  However, Jesus does not fit the mold of what a prophet greater than John would do.  Jesus does not have a remote wilderness ministry (unlike John) but rather goes directly to Jerusalem and challenges their customs.

Jesus then actually gives them what they wanted.  In verse 23, Jesus performs many miraculous signs during Passover and many people believe in his name.  However, Jesus does not entrust himself to any of these new converts because he knew their consciences even without verbally hearing about their reputation. The Bible does not give us any further details about them as a group.

We will encounter someone who was probably one of these new converts in John 3 - Nicodemus.

The temptation of Jesus (Matthew 4; Mark 1; Luke 4)

Jesus is led by the spirit to go into the wilderness and fast for 40 days.  The Bible says he fasted from food, but not water.  So, I think Jesus is hungry, not thirsty.  At the end of this time, the devil tempts Jesus.  

The first tempting is about food (not water) and targets the identity of Jesus.  The devils says, "if you are the Son of God, then turn these stones into bread".  

Jesus' response quotes Deuteronomy in that the man should not live by bread alone, but by every word from God.

The devil takes Jesus to a high place where he tempts Jesus with power.  He shows Jesus all the kingdoms of the world and says that these would all belong to Jesus if he would worship the devil.  Jesus' responds by affirming his identity, which the devil did not explicitly ask about this time - "do not put your God to the test."

The devil takes Jesus up to the top of the temple.  The devil quotes the Bible, specifically Psalm 91, and tells Jesus to step off because if he is the Son of God, the angels will come and protect him.  The quoted Psalm also discusses fears and this could also be an attempt to see if Jesus was afraid of heights.

Again, Jesus Jesus responds that only the Lord should be worshipped and to "get behind me Satan".

Then, the devil left.  Angels then came and ministered to Jesus.

The accounts of Matthew and Luke invert the order of the second and third temptations.  Matthew uses the word "then" in between the temptations which suggests that this chronological order of events was the correct one.  Luke by contrast does not seem to have a textual requirement of which happened second or third.  Regardless, one gets the impression that the devil abandoned Jesus on top of a mountain or on top of the temple, leaving one to wonder how Jesus got down.  That seems to be the role of the angels, which would be exactly what the temple temptation was about.

The devil's questions follow several patterns in themes.  They focus on Jesus' hunger and identity as the Son of God.  The devil also tempts Jesus with power, twists Scripture, and may even try to capitalize on a possible fear of heights by Jesus.

But Jesus resists and the devil went away.

Finally, I think the story also marks another transition in the fulfillment of John the Baptist as the prequel to Jesus.  John was famous for living and preaching in the desert.  There, John ate locusts and wild honey.  Here, Jesus takes on the same challenge, but ups it by completely fasting from food for 40 days.

Jesus turns water to wine (John 2)

Jesus is now in Galilee and goes to a wedding with his mother.  They run out of wine and Mary relays this news to Jesus.  Jesus is at first reluctant to do anything because "my hour has not yet come".  Mary's response seem to put Jesus on the spot and she says to the others to do whatever he suggests.

He requests several stone water jars to be filled with water.  They draw from it and the water has now been turned to wine.  The banquet master then makes a comment that the better wine is being served second and not first, unlike the usual custom.

There are various statements and passages in the Bible that suggest that all alcohol is un-Christian.  There are many examples in the Bible where alcohol was used improperly and led to problems.  I have even heard that people say that when the Bible refers to wine, it is actually "grape-juice".  I think neither view can be supported based on a reasonable reading of this passage.  If the wine being served second was better than the first, this strongly implies that the wine contained alcohol since alcohol dulls one's ability to taste.  Thus, Jesus made alcoholic wine.

Temperance aside, this story at the beginning of Jesus' ministry parallels another important story at the end where Jesus proclaims that the bread and wine at the Last Supper represent his body and blood.

We can also speculate about Mary's prompting of Jesus.  Perhaps Jesus needed a little pushing to begin the public phase of the ministry.  Or perhaps, Mary was in a jam and knew that Jesus would not disobey his mother.

Jesus gets some disciples (John 1)

The first disciples of Jesus were initially followers of John the Baptist.  John has denied that he is the Christ, but rather tells everyone he can that Jesus is the Christ.  Here, the transition of followers takes place.

John has already baptized Jesus and sees him again.  He then states, "behold the Lamb of God.". This prompts the two disciples of John with him to begin following Jesus.  They end up spending the day with Jesus.  One of the two disciples is Andrew who run off to find his brother, Simon.  He tells Simon that he found the Messiah.  Simon returns with Andrew and Jesus gives Simon the name Peter.

The next day, Jesus sees Philip and calls to him to follow him.  Philip does.  Philip also runs off to find Nathaniel and tells him that he found the one predicted in the law of Moses and the prophets.  Nathaniel comes to Jesus and Jesus tells him that he saw Nathaniel under a fig tree.  This alone convinces Nathaniel that Jesus is the King of the Jews.

There is no indication that Philip or Nathaniel were follow of John the Baptist.  However, we can presume that they knew words was spreading that there was a Messiah.  Likewise, the seeds of all this were planted 30 years prior when the three wise men publicly looked for a newborn Messiah and this upset Herod and all of Jerusalem.  The people are primed for a Messiah.  Nathaniel has a supernatural encounter with Jesus that fits this pattern and he is convinced.