068. Chapter 9 - Hard Sayings

Chapter 9 - Hard Sayings Matthew 8:18-22;Luke 9:57-62 Accounts of Matthew and Luke

Matthew and Luke give different locations in their narratives to these replies to persons proposing to follow Jesus. Both arrangements give impressive background settings. It is very difficult to determine which is offering the chronological arrangement. It hardly seems probable that such striking requests and replies should have been given twice. In the arrangement of Matthew these exchanges with would-be followers are described just as Jesus was about to enter into a boat and cross to the eastern side of the lake. Following the order of Mark and Luke as to the location of the miracle of stilling the tempest, the conversations with these questioners would be placed just after the sermon in parables and before the stilling of the tempest. Luke places his record of conversations that are very similar at a considerably later time in the ministry of Jesus after the transfiguration scene and in the midst of a private journey through Samaria to the Feast of Tabernacles. It rather seems that Luke introduces this account of these strange replies of Jesus incidentally as further material he is presenting, but not in chronological order. The Scribe

“Teacher, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest….The foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.” The sermon in parables had ended with a declaration about scribes who were bent on becoming disciples “to the kingdom of heaven.” This implies there were such scholars who were willing to break with their close associates of the very inner circle of the sect of the Pharisees and become followers of Jesus. Such a bold move would require courage and initiative. The experiences of Nicodemus show what they might expect from their former colleagues. But it is also possible that such scholars as made this move might have selfish motives of future grandeur for themselves which they would acquire by being the first of the scholars to join in the messianic movement of Jesus.

Luke does not specify, as does Matthew, that this first questioner was a scribe. This is such a striking detail it makes one wonder again whether it can be possible that these extraordinary replies were repeated to different questioners on different occasions. One would expect Luke to mention the fact if this were actually one of the national leaders who was making this request. To the weight on this side of tile argument must be added the fact that at the close of Luke’s account he relates the question and answer in regard to a third man, a conversation which is not mentioned in Matthew’s Gospel. Those who hold that these are two similar but different groups of conversations, each recorded in its proper setting by Matthew and Luke, would emphasize strongly the fact that this third exchange is recorded by Luke alone. The Crisis

Matthew introduces this account of the coming of the scribe to Jesus with his enthusiastic proposal to follow Him wherever He goes, with the following statement, “Now when Jesus saw great multitudes about Him, He gave commandment to depart unto the other side” (Matthew 8:18). This is precisely the opposite of the conduct we should expect from Christ. The introduction to the account of the sermon on the mount represents that when He saw the multitudes He went up into a mountain, selected a proper amphitheater where all might hear, and delivered this tremendous sermon. But now when He sees great multitudes, He deliberately departs from their midst by boat. They cannot follow Him, at least not en masse. Why was this? This confirms our conclusion that this was the occasion of the sermon in parables when He sifted the crowd by this difficult sermon. Thus He prevented the worldly and violent elements in the crowd from taking control of His movement. This should throw some light on the ideas and motives of this scribe who, in the midst of the enthusiasm for turning the campaign of Jesus over into a worldly objective of politics and war, decided he would here and now cast in his lot with Jesus. His proposal is so sweeping it seems to leave nothing more that could be asked. To follow Jesus no matter where He went seems to imply also no matter what happens, what must be surrendered, or what sufferings and sacrifices are entailed. It is self-evident from the reply of Jesus that this scribe had not counted the cost. He had not thought through the proposition he submitted. He had little or no idea of what it would mean in the way of hardships, ostracism and persecution. He had only the bright vision of how Jesus could use His miraculous power any time He would to bring in the glorious worldly kingdom which the scribe pictured. This is not specifically stated.

Jesus liked to give cryptic answers which the hearers could solve after deliberate study. The inspired writers of the New Testament do not mar the impact of Jesus’ ministry on their readers by inserting unnecessary explanations. The readers of the gospel accounts are also left to solve the riddles. It is clear that Jesus read the heart of this scribe and knew that his motives were selfish and worldly, his outlook and determination shallow and insufficient. At least he needed to be challenged sharply. Not the least of the intriguing features of the account is that we are not told what the result was in each case as various men proposed to follow Jesus and were given blunt rebuffs. We are told later that the rich young ruler went away sorrowing. But we still should like to know whether he came at Pentecost, as the church was established, to confess Christ in fulness of faith and sacrificial devotion.

Impact on Disciples

We are also caused to wonder what the impact of this blunt reply to this scholar was upon the rough and ready men who had been chosen as the apostles of Christ. How did they feel to hear Jesus say in such lonely words, “The Son of man hath not where to lay His head”? Did it shock their exalted ideas of a messianic kingdom of worldly glory? How far were they enmeshed in the popular conceptions? How much was this warning needed in their thinking as in that of the scribe? They knew how true it was that Jesus had no earthly home of His own. Many times they must have camped by the roadside and slept on the hard ground like tough veterans in military campaigns. They could picture readily the grandeur and affluence with which Jesus could have surrounded Himself by means of the miraculous power at His command. When the disciples had left all and followed Jesus, Peter had not sold his house and his boat and turned the money into the evangelistic campaign. His wife and mother-in-law, and whatever other members of the household there may have been, would have needed shelter and protection. The house and the boat were ever at the command of Jesus. Did Peter think, as he heard Jesus make this remark, that he was thankful he could offer his home to Jesus on any and every occasion when Jesus chose to work in Capernaum? And what of their own future? Was this grand messianic kingdom to be of the variety that would leave them also without a place to lay their head? Row many nights did they ponder this saying of Jesus as they lay down on the ground to sleep with no place to stay. When the Samaritan village refused to allow them even to spend the night in their midst, James and John had been moved to hot indignation.

Luke presents a strong line of contact between the rejection of Jesus by this Samaritan village, even for an overnight stay, and this saying about Jesus having no place to lay His head. He records this saying immediately after his account of the churlish inhospitality of the Samaritan village. Either as the saying was originally delivered or in the mind of Luke as he records another item of interest, there is this definite illustration at hand. Were the apostles now beset by inner protests that it was most shocking that the Messiah should find Himself without a place to lay His head? Verily they had much yet to learn about the spiritual nature and objectives of the kingdom Jesus was about to establish. What humiliation must now have been the part of this scholar. Evidently he had felt he was conferring a very great favor on Jesus to offer in such reckless fashion to follow Him wherever He would go. Having had such a struggle to decide on making such a sweeping proposal to Christ, it must have been shattering to have his offer rejected. Obviously his ideas and motives did not actually match his words. It was not really unconditional surrender he was offering, but a shrewd, selfish move to secure a high place for himself in the kingdom. Here was further miraculous evidence of the power of Jesus to read the human heart as if it were an open book. From the Gospel of Mark we learn that as Jesus left in the boat for the other side of the lake, there were other boats which accompanied Him. The speculation is often suggested that Mark, a young lad, was in one of the other boats. A similar speculation might be added to our thinking as to whether this scholar turned away in disappointment or whether he actually attempted to follow in one of the other boats that were caught in the terrible storm which Jesus stilled by a miracle.

“And another of the disciples said unto Him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus saith unto him, Follow me and leave the dead to bury their own dead.”

Identity of the Man At first sight this appears to be in individual who has already a different relationship with Christ than the rejected scholar. This man is a “disciple” who is proposing to continue his following Jesus. But this thought is checked by the fact that he is called “another disciple.” The scribe must be counted as a disciple in the sense of his general inclination to cast in his lot with Jesus. Luke gives further light on this or a similar incident, “And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father” (Luke 9:59). Here the record makes clear that Jesus gives the command to this man to follow Him. This is in sharp contrast with the refusal implied in His blunt warning to the scribe that he did not realize what it was he was proposing to attempt.

Some hold that this second man must have been one of the apostles who is now seeking permission to return home on this urgent errand. They suggest it was James or John since Zebedee disappears from the narrative at an early time. They surmise his death at this time and hence this request to return home for the funeral. They point out that Jesus selected but twelve apostles and therefore would not be inviting someone outside this circle to follow Him. But the record does not show that Jesus was making this man one of the inner circle. There was a much wider group of followers who were with Jesus when He permitted, and were always at His command when He desired. There was a distinct group of seventy disciples who were trained and sent out on a missionary tour as the twelve had been sent. The twelve apostles were with Jesus in the boat when He left on this occasion, but again we come back to the interesting detail that other disciples at tempted to follow Jesus on this occasion in other boats. Certainly Jesus invited the rich young ruler to come and follow Him. He was not offering to make him an apostle by this invitation, but only a disciple. The Situation

Some offer the interpretation that the father of this man was not actually dead but only desperately ill. His sickness might last a long time. Hence the refusal because it would entail a considerable break in the man’s service to Christ. The record does not say that the father is dead, but this is the implication. The effort to say that the father is only sick and the proposal might mean months of delay in taking up the service of Christ again is plainly an attempt to dilute this hard saying of Jesus and make it seem less heartless. Moreover this explanation contradicts the fundamental teaching of the text. Jesus makes the sharp contrast: burying a dead body vs. ministering to a living soul. To change over the burial of a dead body into the ministry to a living soul destroys the contrast and contradicts the principle.

Christ First The word first stands out in this man’s request. instead of making Christ “first” and the doing of God’s will in seeking to save souls “first,” the man proposes to put something else “first.” In his reply Jesus points out that when a person is dead nothing more can be done for him to change his eternal destiny. “It is appointed unto every man once to die, and after this cometh judgment” (Hebrews 9:27). This disciple has not only made a mistake in putting his relationship to any human being before his service to Christ, but he has overlooked the urgent nature of the campaign in which he is engaged, seeking to save lost men while it is still possible to win them to faith, repentance and obedience. Those who are spiritually dead will not fail to take care of the detail of burying the dead body of a loved one. The very necessity of self-preservation would prevent even the most callous from leaving the corpse unburied. It is a beautiful and altogether proper thing for the loved ones to express their devotion, gratitude, and sorrow on the occasion of burying the dead. There is no idea of deprecating this final act of devotion. But the absolute supremacy of devotion to Christ and the exceeding urgency of the task of seeking to save the lost are the lessons which this man has yet to learn.

Funerals

There is a simplicity about the funerals recorded in both the Old and New Testaments which stands in sharp contrast with the pyramids of Egypt and the entire emphasis upon material provisions for the dead and endless ceremonies multiplied in pagan lands. The perversity of unbelief has attempted to make out an argument from this that the Old Testament leaders did not believe in a life after death. But see the simplicity of the record of Stephen’s funeral in the New Testament, “And devout men buried Stephen, and made great lamentation over him” (Acts 8:2). In a chapter of The Everlasting Gospel entitled “The Message of Two Ancient Tombs,” the contrast is drawn between the amazing treasures buried with Tut-Ankhamen in his tomb in Egypt and the simplicity of Jesus’ burial — the one tomb, full after three thousand years; the other, empty on the third day. This shows the contrast seen in both the Old and New Testaments between the attitude of the inspired leaders in both periods and the super-emphasis given in pagan lands to funerals. Our entire attitude toward world evangelization is at fault when we find this reply of Jesus heartless and shocking. If some loved one is still in the burning building and may be saved, is not this the urgent objective rather than sorrowful respect to be paid to one who is now beyond rescue? Our trouble is that we do not have a sufficiently vivid realization of the peril surrounding those without Christ and the critical need to go to their rescue while it is yet day. “Follow me [in search of the lost and perishing that still may be saved] and leave those who are dead [spiritually dead to the high mission of saving the living] bury their own dead [physically dead and hence no longer in a state where they may be helped spiritually].”

Outcome As in the case of the scribe we are left to surmise what the impact of this shocking reply was upon this disciple. If it was actually one of the twelve apostles who thus was proposing to interrupt his service to Christ, then we can be sure he accepted without question Jesus’ decision (Matthew 8:23). If it was one of the larger group of disciples, we can only conjecture as to what course he followed. Probably most readers of the texts of Matthew and Luke will conclude that the scribe turned back from any further attempt to follow Jesus at this time and that this disciple did exactly the opposite and continued his present discipleship rather than interrupt it by returning to his father’s funeral. But the texts do not actually give us any further information except the hard sayings which Jesus gave in reply.

Objective?

“And another also said, I will follow thee, Lord; but first suffer me to bid farewell to them that are at my house. But Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:61, Luke 9:62). This man introduced by Luke is also already a disciple of Jesus, for he has put his hand to the plow. As in the case of the preceding disciple, he is proposing to interrupt this service to Christ by a return to his home. His plan has to do with the living rather than the dead, but there is no indication that it is evangelistic in nature. Matthew had given a farewell banquet to his old comrades when he abandoned his occupation as tax collector to go with Jesus. But his objective had been evangelistic. He had sought to have all his friends see Jesus and hear Him challenge their corrupt way of life and appeal to them to repent and turn to God. This disciple who desires to return home and bid farewell to all that are in his home does not ask permission to return home and preach the gospel to them.

Concentration The answer to this third man is as blunt and severe as to the two preceding men. It also states a universal principle which is applicable to all the world and all the centuries. To decide to plow is one thing, and to be diligent and consistent and plow a straight furrow by giving all one’s attention to the task is another. This saying makes one think of the magnificent song The Blind Plowman. “Set my feet upon the sod, Turn my face toward the East, And thanks be to God.” The blind plowman can look neither ahead nor to the rear, but his heart is full of the joy of achieving useful work and he seeks careful directions from which to start his day’s plowing. With all concentration he will try to plow a straight furrow with the help of instincts and experience. When any plowman is breaking up land to be planted, his plowing will be uneven if he attempts to look back while the animals are tugging ahead without direction from him. If he is cultivating crops already planted, he will destroy much by the wavering course of his cultivator. This disciple seems recently to have joined the company of Jesus. Farewells to his relatives and friends are still high in his thinking and desires. He has not concentrated on the task of telling others about Jesus. Luke records the response to the second disciple as more definite than “Follow me”; he has, “Leave the dead to bury their own dead; but go thou and publish abroad the kingdom of God.” This also is the task of this man who would interrupt his work for Christ by farewells to relatives and old friends. To be fit for the kingdom of God, a man must proclaim the kingdom of God. He must plow a straight furrow.