Soldier On! w/Leroy Garrett   — Occasional Essays


Essay 56 (1-15-05)

JESUS WAS REALLY IMPRESSED!

If you notice in Scripture our Lord is not easily impressed, whether positively or negatively. He wasn't one to be surprised or taken off guard. He was enough wary of human kind - "knowing what was in man" -that he could warn his disciples, "Beware of men." But there was balance in his judgment in that he could say "If you being evil," and yet speak of the "honest and good heart."

We may, therefore, rightly take special notice of those rare occasions when he met the unexpected. When he returned to his home town of Nazareth he seemed surprised at his reception - "He marveled at their unbelief." In Mark 4:13 he appears nonplussed that his disciples did not get it. If they couldn't understand the parable of the sewer, would they be able to understand any of the parables! The disciples' incomprehension of what Jesus was up to is a continuing theme in Mark, which Matthew and Luke graciously omit, apparently to put the disciples in better light.

While Jesus was usually prepared for the obscurant tactics of the Pharisees, it was with "a profound sigh" (NJB) that he said to them, "Why does this generation demand a sign (Mark 8:12)?

On the more positive side, there is at least one occasion when Jesus indulges in a superlative - when he commended not just faith, but great faith, it was the faith of an outsider, a faith that he had not found among his own Jewish people. Luke says he marveled.

It is a touching story, the kind Luke likes to tell, and he includes delicate details that Matthew and John omit. Mark doesn't tell the story. A centurion in Capernaum had a slave boy "who was dear to him," but was "sick and ready to die." The soldier had heard of Jesus, and he believed he could heal the boy. He sent Jewish elders of his city to Jesus imploring him to come and heal the boy. The elders pleaded with Jesus, explaining that the centurion was a worthy man, one who was generous to the Jewish people - "He loves our nation and built us a synagogue," they tell Jesus.

Jesus went with them. Now comes an interesting turn in the story. Apparently because he had thought about it and decided - when he heard that Jesus was actually on the way to his house - that he was not worthy of such an encounter. Too, he was aware that according to Jewish law Jesus would be rendered ritually unclean by entering the home of a gentile. He now sends friends to Jesus to intercept him, and to tell him, "Lord, do not trouble yourself, for I am not worthy that you should come under my roof." He went on to explain - through his friends - that is why he had not come in person. He was not worthy to be in Jesus' presence.

Then came the impressive statement, "Just say the word, and my boy will be healed." No anointing oil needed, not even laying on of hands. Simply a word. Jesus was impressed, superlatively impressed. Great faith!

I am impressed that Jesus was impressed, and I am curious as to what precisely was so impressive. Perhaps because the centurion was a gentile, one separated from the covenant and the promises given to Israel. And he was a man of means and authority who loved a slave boy. And a man of uncommon humility - an army officer who saw himself as unworthy to be in the presence of personified goodness.

But mainly, I suppose, Jesus was impressed because of his simple trusting assurance in the power of Jesus to make whole - which serves as a good definition of faith. And Jesus must have been impressed by the centurion's utter self-abandonment in his trust in Jesus. No fanfare needed, no gimmicks. Just a word! That is what faith is, great faith.

The truth is that Jesus didn't even have to say a word. There is no evidence that he did. He simply willed it and it was so. The record says that when the envoys reached the centurion's house the boy was well.

In this story Luke prepares the reader - as he does again and again in his gospel - for what he makes explicit in Luke II or Acts, the inclusion of the gentiles as equals before God, especially in Acts 10. The centurion is a pre-Cornelius, a gentile, an outsider, who has faith equal to or even greater than that found among God's covenant people. Luke prepares the reader to accept Peter's astounding announcement, "In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him" (Acts 10:34-35).

The story also anticipates all those of us down the centuries who believe in Jesus having never seen him. According to Luke's account the centurion never sees Jesus. He heard about him - probably abundant testimony as to Jesus' works of mercy - and he must have been curious to see him. But his deep faith eclipsed his curiosity. As 1 Peter 1:8 has it, "whom having not seen, you love. Though now you do not see him, yet believing you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory." It is the faith we all have - a not-seen faith.

There is a marginal benefit to this story in Luke - an example of how biblical accounts can differ, even contradict each other, and still convey the story God wants told, which may be the point of inspiration. When one reads the same story in Matthew 8:5-12 he can't help but notice some glaring differences. The main difference is that Matthew has the centurion himself going to Jesus. He sees Jesus and talks with him personally - not through the elders and then through friends, as in Luke.

Luke even has the elders explain why the centurion himself did not come - he was not worthy. But Matthew says the centurion himself came. Since the centurion could not both come and not come it is a contradiction. If Luke is right, Matthew is wrong. If Matthew is right, Luke is wrong.

I placed this conundrum before my dear Ouida, who is less than enthusiastic about biblical criticism. She admitted it was a contradiction. When I asked which account was likely right, she chose Matthew, concluding that the believing centurion would likely go to Jesus personally rather than send envoys. Some eminent scholars agree with her, concluding that Matthew's is the original form.

Since Luke has so much detail in the story - including the centurion's relationship to the Jewish community ("He built our synagogue") - it appears that he had sources not available to Matthew, This is common in Luke, who was an astute researcher. He reveals in Luke 1:1 that he had a library of documents about Jesus - none of which suited him to forward on to Theophilus - so he wrote his own account. Thank God for that, for it is only in Luke that we have the stories of the Prodigal Son, the Good Samaritan, the Rich Man and Lazarus, the Pharisee and the Publican, the Walk to Emmaus, etc.

And except for Luke we would never know that on the Cross Jesus prayed, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do," nor about his promise to the thief, "Today will you be with me in paradise." Even when Matthew and Mark tell the same story, Luke provides details found no where else, as in the Transfiguration.

So, when Luke takes pains in our story to tell how the centurion sent elders to Jesus with his request, and has them explain why he did not come himself, it is not improbable that his account is the right one. Matthew likely had an abbreviated account. After all, if one sends envoys to speak for him, it is tantamount to his going himself.

I explained to Ouida that conflicts/contradictions like this do not matter, for they are insignificant. For the sake of our story it doesn't matter whether the centurion personally encountered Jesus or did so by proxy. Both accounts give the essence of the story, and again, that may be the point of the inspiration of the Spirit.

I say it doesn't matter. It might matter if you are a fundamentalist and believe that there can be no errors/contradictions in the Bible -not even minor ones! They do a disservice when they claim that if the Bible is wrong on anything at all, then none of it can be trusted.

They could not possibly believe this in reference to everyday affairs. An email from a daughter at college says she had a phone call from her Uncle Henry. But from the context of the letter the parent can see that it must have been Uncle Earl. She said Henry when she meant Earl. An error. So, do you trash her email as untrustworthy? The Bible has conflicts of exactly that nature. To me that enhances the Bible, not denigrates it. It confirms what Scripture itself affirms, that such treasure is given to us through earthen vessels. There may be occasional static in the Master's voice, but the message comes through loud and clear. Jars and conflicts also bear witness to the integrity of Scripture, that there is no collusion and no fraud. Counterfeiters do not leave a trail of obvious conflicts.

It is best to understand the inspiration of the Bible the way the church universal has always explained it: There are no substantive errors in Scripture, none that affect the story it has to tell. The fundamentalist doctrine of inerrancy is a modern invention. If the Spirit verbally, word for word, revealed this story to Matthew and Luke, we have a problem far more serious than the one I laid before Ouida.

Personal

The publication date for The Stone-Campbell Encyclopedia is now February 6. You can still purchase it from us at the pre-publication price of $46, postpaid. This monumental work has 203 photos and illustrations, 860 pages, 600 original articles by 300 writers from all wings of the Movement. Send check or money order in advance to Leroy Garrett, 1300 Woodlake Dr., Denton, TX 76210.

A lady at our congregation said that her husband had talked about my autobiography - A Lover's Quarrel: My Pilgrimage of Freedom in Churches of Christ -- so much that she decided to read it for herself. You too can read it for yourself. When you send us a check, made out to Leroy Garrett, for $14.95 we pay the postage. My history book, The Stone-Campbell Movement is also available from us, and we save you a few dollars at $35 postpaid.

My eye specialist told me on my last visit that I might drive in areas where I am well-acquainted but not on a freeway and only in daylight. That was his way of saying I'm improving. I've driven short distances in town on two occasions, and I felt a little uneasy. I'm leaving the driving to Ouida for now, which is the way she sees it, whatever the doctor may say! Thank you for your prayerful concern.

[TOP].