Smoodock's Blog

In my previous study, we considered the qualifications of the Messiah from the vantage point of Jewish tradition, vis-à-vis what the Messiah should look like, according to human understanding, once he had come. Jesus was criticized by the authorities over the fact that he wasn’t getting anywhere by preaching to the common people, performing miracles among them and claiming to be the Messiah. Where was the evidence of support from the common people to whom he had been ministering?

Apparently, Jesus lacked the support of the common people, which might have legitimatized his claim to the office of Messiah in the eyes of others. Why did he lack their support?[1] According to the skeptics of that day, it was because Jesus didn’t fulfill the then current expectations that would have qualified his claim. In other words, the people’s minds were full of false expectations of what the Messiah would be like. Nevertheless, Jesus claimed the traditions of men, vis-à-vis what they assumed the Messiah should be like, didn’t agree with the word of God. The man who serves the Lord must trust God for the fulfillment or results of his service. Therefore, the lack of immediate results was not evidence of failure or the lack of Messianic credentials. If the Lord sent the Messiah, the Messiah had come, whether or not he was received by the people.

Matthew tells his readers that, after Jesus rejected the traditions of men in favor of waiting upon God to act, he says the devil, the slanderer, “took” Jesus to the holy city (Jerusalem) and placed him on a wing, somewhere in the Temple complex. At least this is what the English translation tells us, but I have to ask, whether we are to understand that the devil literally took Jesus to Jerusalem. What if Jesus didn’t want to go? The literal version has Jesus at the disposal of someone else. Did the devil really have the authority to **take** Jesus anywhere he pleased and whenever he pleased? What’s my point?

Once Jesus rejected the idea that the Christ must act according to Jewish tradition, if he hoped to be taken seriously, the skeptic sought to place Jesus under the thumb of the high priest and other Jewish authorities in Jerusalem. He didn’t **take** Jesus anywhere, but, instead, he spoke hypothetically. Bringing Jesus to Jerusalem for argument’s sake and place him on a wing of the Temple, perhaps, the Messiah’s Wing. It doesn’t matter, if such a place didn’t exist at the time. They would build it for him IF… that is, IF… Jesus truly is the Messiah. Nevertheless, if he didn’t like the idea of having to fulfill his office by living it out according to Jewish traditions, then he needed to set himself up in his own place, vis-à-vis the wing of the Temple and “cast himself down…” (Matthew 4:5)!

The word is often used to cast lots! According to the skeptics, Jesus needed to ‘cast his lot’ with the Jewish authorities at Jerusalem. Why? Such a thing is not simply according to tradition, as their first argument was perceived, but according to scripture, for it is written: “He will give his angels charge concerning you: and in their hands they shall bear you up, lest at any time you dash your foot against a stone” (Matthew 4:6; cp. Psalm 91:11-12).

Most translators make angels into spirit beings, but the same word can also refer to men, the Lord’s messengers. The skeptic’s argument at this point is that Jesus needed to place himself under the authority of human messengers: the high priest and other Jewish authorities at Jerusalem, because, as the word of God says: God has given his messengers, vis-à-vis the high priest and other Jewish authorities, the responsibility of guiding the Messiah so that the manner in which he executes his office doesn’t transgress any law (stone).

The problem, as I understand it, is twofold. First, the devil/skeptic has misquoted scripture. The false accuser has left out the clause: “in all your ways” in citing Psalm 91:11, and he added the phrase “at any time” in citing Psalm 91:12. According to the Psalm, the servant of God has authority over his own way, and the Lord’s angels/messengers protect him, while he exercises his office in whatever he does. However, the devil/skeptic wants to place the Messiah under the authority of human messengers in everything: “lest at any time….” Secondly, and this is the point to which Jesus replies: it is a gamble to place oneself in the hands of another human being. Man is flawed and is prone to err. It is wrong for any servant of God to surrender the responsibility of his own life’s work over to another servant of God. Each one has authority over his own service to the Lord, and he can expect direct guidance from God and protection in his way.

Jesus didn’t dispute the devil’s/skeptic’s understanding of scripture. Instead, he quoted another scripture that would temper one’s understanding of Psalm 91:11-12, saying: “It is written again, ‘You must not tempt the Lord your God,” meaning expecting God to give definition to the Messiah’s service by speaking through someone else instead of the Messiah for the thing the Lord wants the Messiah to do is to make undue trial of God. Ancient Israel thought they could control God’s power by tempting him or causing him to do as they pleased (Numbers 14:22; Psalm 78:18), and the Jewish authorities sought to do the same thing with Jesus as he executed his office as the Messiah (Matthew 16:1). In other words, he had to continually prove he was the Messiah by performing the miracles they demanded of him!

______________________________________________________

[1] Jesus criticized the scribes and Pharisees of his day for intimidating the common people to comply with their traditions and reject the Gospel that Jesus preached (Matthew 23:13; Luke 11:52; cp. John 7:46-52). Nevertheless, even using the popular criteria to establish legitimacy fell before the end of Jesus’ ministry, for they feared the world had gone after him (John 12:19).