Two Worlds, Two Types

Luke 20:34-36 presents Jesus' answer to a complicated question meant to trap him in religious technicalities. See below.

“The children of this world marry and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.”

This is how his answer breaks down:

Two opposing types:

This world and that world – one already obtained, the other to be obtained.

Those who are or are not given and those who do or don't receive the given in marriage.

Of the higher type (accounted worthy):

The children of the resurrection are equal to the children of God.

The children of God are equal to the angels – who are no longer bound to the wheel of life and death.

The fact that they do not die “any more” signifies that they used to regularly die 'again'. Whereas they were, upon a time, associated both with life and death, the worthy will have their association to death removed.

That the worthy neither marry nor are given in marriage in no way signifies a situation indicative of “that” other world. It may well be that the non-marrying type, who are accounted worthy of the other world, are simply the type who refrain from marriage in this present world. In regard to this consideration, I remind the reader of the 144,000 virgins found in Revelation 14:4.

“These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. ”

If there is a transition from opposing types, it is not necessarily to be found in aspects associated with this present world. The book of revelation seems only to indicate virgin men, but a transition that follows the pattern of 'worldly to spiritual' may mean a new spirit in women that is equal to the spirit in men.

Is 'that' world a wholly different physical world from “this' world? Consider this question with due diligence. If you took the time to research the word 'world', you would find this list of synonyms: everyone, everybody, people, mankind, humankind, society, humanity, sphere, arena, milieu, province, domain, and discipline. Obviously, a world is more than a physical location.

We have obtained a world that is a physical location, a solid rock speeding through a solid void. The cold vacuum of space is not so empty. The ethereal and invisible nature of spirituality, by the same token, may be more inhabited than previously established. Think about it. Man, as a living thinking soul, could not inhabit this rock called Earth without an appropriate vehicle. The physical body perfectly matches the need, but alas, the body is bound to the cycle of life and death.

Likewise, a soul may not inhabit a world associated with eternal life without an appropriate vehicle. To obtain the necessary vehicle is to obtain the domain. The discipline of immortal angels frequents this physical world, but not as men do. And yet, Biblical accounts of angels depict them as men – as man-like yet untethered to death. In short, an opportunity has been presented to the children of men, an opportunity for an upgrade that is neither physical nor worldly.

Balance Between the World and the Spirit

Seekers of truth always dig deeper than the rest. We look, now, at Luke 20:25 as if viewing two layers – a worldly, or common, layer and a spiritual, or refined layer. Like everyone else, we see what is on the surface of things, although we are rarely inclined to take things at face-value. We see both where we are and where we should be.

If I said to you, “I am off to a good start,” my comment is only a common, face-value, worldly, on-the-surface-of-things statement. However, what I have not said, also makes a statement. To be off to a good start is a place and a condition that is equal to not yet having reached the finish line. Knowledge of the goal is that higher, refined layer.

When we want someone to pay special attention and get a particular point, we say 'listen up'. Up is the key direction. Whenever you see the face-value of something, as in where you are or what you are, you should strive to look beyond that. You should seek the unspoken truth that is above the world.

When Jesus spoke, he wanted people to 'listen up'. His parables were the unspoken truth behind the face of things, above the surface of the world. His message, although it was couched in worldly illustrations, always pointed away from what a person was or where they were to what they were supposed to be and where they needed to go.

A case in point is Luke 20:25. For the reader, there are two levels to be seen in the statement Jesus made. On the surface of things, Jesus was outwitting the people who were trying to trap him in his words. At face-value, the statement was a clever reply, but the unspoken truth, above the worldly surface of things, was the issue of finding and keeping balance.

Jesus said, in Luke 20:25, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.”

How does one find a balance between the things of the world and the things of the spirit? Indeed, does one even seek said balance? You may notice that in his statement, Jesus used the word 'and' rather than the word 'or'. He did not say don't pay tribute to Rome, nor did he minimalize the importance of faithfulness to God. He said to find the proper balance.

The view on a balance between the world and God, in both Christian and non-Christian thought, is an 'either-or' arrangement. It is not a matter of balance but a restriction of one reality in preference for another reality. All realities are actually one and the same, yet certain people only see what is real through the lens of personal preference.

Some personal preferences restrict the use of musical instruments in worship services. Some personal preferences restrict modern technology in daily life. Some personal preferences restrict the vocalization of the name of God. For some, prayer only works if you kneel down, or if you lay on your face, or if you fold your hands just so, or if you finger some beads. Some men can't be spiritual without a beard; some women must wear uncomfortable clothing and head coverings to be what they think they should be – or worse, to be what others think they should be.

The Christian can't seem to shake the inclination that in order to give God his due, he or she must restrict the normal realities of life. It is a restrictive state of mind that empties life of TVs and radios, and games, and computers – as if reality opposes itself -- as if God did not place or allow all these things in life.

As if it was not bad enough that the Christian can't find balance between his worldly reality and his spiritual reality, the Non-Christian comes along and bashes him with such accusations as 'you can't be a Christian if you smoke', or 'you can't be a Christian if you drink', or 'you can't be a Christian and have sex, too'. So, why can't a Catholic monk, or a nun marry and have children – how does that decrease their faith or devotion to God?

A balance between the world and God is a balance between the outer man and inner man. 'Either-or' is an impractical mindset. There is a balance to be found, and to the Christian, the Bible has this advice in regard to the 'either-or' approach to truth and spirituality, in the following NIV translation of Ecclesiastes 7:16-18.

“Do not be overrighteous, neither be overwise – why destroy yourself? Do not be overwicked, and do not be a fool – why die before your time? It is good to grasp the one and not let go of the other. Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes.”

Recognition and Title

In Luke 19:39, Jesus is addressed as 'Master'. Christians, these days, see absolutely nothing odd about this. What I wish to point out is who, exactly, called him Master. In the multitude that crowded around Jesus, as he made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, and positioned close enough to speak with Jesus, were Pharisees. It was they who called Jesus by the title of Master.

Pharisees were themselves, in their own station, addressed as Master. This instance was a case of Masters calling Jesus by the same title. It was a case of positive recognition of the station and title of a peer.

Jesus was more than a wannabe in their eyes; the Pharisees knew Jesus for who he was. He was much more than some country-bumpkin upstart with twelve disciples. According to verse 37 of this section of scripture, Jesus was attended by “the whole multitude of the disciples.” Everyone who followed Jesus was a disciple – and Jesus had quite a large following. The Pharisees were part of that multitude, part of that following.

One has to ask, why did the Pharisees always follow Jesus? You would think, if they were there only to harass and lay traps, the twelve, being closest, would set a perimeter, do some crowd control. That was the case for many among the press, but not so for the Pharisees. They were always close to Jesus.

Since I approach this as evidence of authoritative recognition of the station and title of Jesus in a social setting, I wish to address how many times, in the New Testament, the title of Master was applied. Master is the interpretation of both 'Rabbi' and 'Rabboni'.

In Matthew 8:19, a scribe addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 9:11, Pharisees addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 10:24-25, Jesus referred to himself as master. In Matthew 12:38, both scribes and Pharisees addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 17: 24, tribute collectors referred to him, in speaking to Peter, as “your master.” In Matthew 19:16, a young man with great possessions called Jesus “Good Master.” In Matthew 22:16, disciples of the Pharisees, and of the Herodians addressed Jesus as Master.

It is interesting that both Jesus and the Pharisees had disciples. It seems that having disciples was a standard practice of the Pharisees.

In Matthew 22:24, it was the Sadducees who addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 22:36, a Pharisee lawyer addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 23:8, Jesus said this about himself, “But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.” He said pretty much the same thing in verse 10, “for one is your Master, even Christ.” In Matthew 26:18, Jesus called himself by the title of Master. In Matthew 26:25, he was called Master by the disciple Judas. Again, Judas said, “Hail, master;” when he betrayed Christ.

Jesus is called by the recognized title of Master fifteen times in Mark, twenty-two times in Luke, and eight times in John. Altogether, in the New Testament, Jesus is addressed by the official title of Master some fifty-nine times.

Such a number places one far above the upstart level. Pharisees were also referred to by the title of Master. When Jesus spoke to Nicodemus, who was a Pharisee, he asked him this in John 3:10, “Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?”

I am convinced that Jesus had an official status among the religious leaders and that his peers recognized that fact every time they addressed him by the title of Master.

Interestingly, John the Baptist, Jesus' close cousin, was also addressed as 'Master' in Luke 3:12. Here is what I wish to note in closing, Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, and lawyers were all masters of Israel. The title of 'Master' and the title of 'Rabbi' are one and the same. 'Master' is a bonafide title. All of them, being addressed by the title of Master – whether Pharisee, John, or Jesus – all of them, I say again, had disciples. It was a standard practice for all titled religious leaders.

Accusation, Confession, and Judgment

We turn our attention to Luke 19:7-10. Zacchaeus, a tax collector for Rome, was called by name. Jesus called him down from the sycamore tree and told him he would eat with him. Zacchaeus hosted Jesus and at least some of his troop that day. Jesus had not been invited; Zacchaeus had been invited. That was the decision of the Son of God.

It was a savior's decision.

In verse ten, Jesus said plainly and publicly for all to hear, “The Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.”

The part about being lost – that was past tense. It had already happened. The part about seeking and saving was present tense. It was the ongoing mission of the Son of man. The fall of man, his sinful nature, his need for redemption – all were concepts widely known and believed. Nothing about those concepts was foreign to the people standing around at the time.

Jesus said what he said for a pointed reason. Zacchaeus was not the only one standing there who was lost. He was an example of being lost, an example of the need for salvation, an example of God's grace.

The people had complained, they stood there and accused Zacchaeus of being a sinner. Sinners accusing sinners obviously ticked Jesus off. We can be so dense sometimes. And it wasn't just a few ornery individuals pointing the finger. Verse seven goes like this: “And when they saw it, they all murmured . . .”

Who, exactly, were 'they'? The people who had come to town with Jesus? Had he not traveled the country healing their diseases and forgiving their sins? His disciples? Had he not taught them better? Townfolk? Could they really be so grudging?

It was Jewish nature that accused. The national concept of a savior was bent around the hope that someone would save them from Rome. Rome was despised. Romans were despised. Anyone who sold out to Rome was despised. Was Zacchaeus a sinner because he collected taxes for the Romans? The Jewish consensus was a resounding 'Yes!'

The bruised and burdened Jewish heart accused anyone who worked against the Jewish state. Jewish equaled good, Roman equaled bad. Law of God equaled good, law of Rome equaled bad. It was a natural reaction for that day and age.

While those around Jesus spoke ill of Zacchaeus, murmuring, accusing, Zacchaeus, on the other hand, made confession. In the spirit of making things right, he confessed to Jesus that either he would make things right, or was already in the process of making things right.

He said this in verse eight, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.”

The Hebrew law, found in Exodus 22, deals with the restoration of lost goods and requires a twofold, fourfold, or fivefold restoration.

To a son of Abraham, charity is a fundamental way of life. Jewish law requires an individual to give one tenth of his substance to the poor. “Tzedakah” is the Jewish word for charity. It is taken from the root “Tzadei-Dalet-Qof ” which translates as righteousness, justice or fairness.

A good article on this topic may be found here: http://www.jewfaq.org/tzedakah.htm

Zacchaeus worked for the Romans, but he was a fair and a just man who obeyed the laws of God. In everything we read about the man in these verses, we see a desire toward God and his laws. Zacchaeus had such a desire to see Jesus, who he unreservedly called Lord, that he climbed a tree, and when called down, “He made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully,” verse six.

Jesus judged the situation and the man in verse 9, “This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.” Inasmuch as Zacchaeus was a son of Abraham no less than those who accused him of sin, and since it was the Son of man's ongoing mission to seek and save such sons of Abraham, Jesus clearly displayed the type of spirit in a man that is right with God and God's law. 

There Was A Tree In Jericho

To those of you who actually read what I write, you know my posts are, at times, quite lengthy. This study of Luke 19: 1-4 may turn out to be short.

Think of the movies you've seen about Jesus. Jesus in the wilderness, Jesus walking with his disciples, Jesus teaching and walking through cities, feeding the thousands on a country hillside, his triumphal entry into Jerusalem.

Many depictions, such as this image from the movie J.C. Superstar, place Jesus in a treeless setting such as a barren desert.

Where are the trees?

This study of Luke 19: 1-4 shows Jesus inside the city limits of Jericho. Along the city street he walked, he and his disciples and the pressing throng, there was a sycamore tree, a tree that grows rather large. It was high enough for a man, who could not see Jesus for the press, to climb and see Jesus above the heads of the crowd.

It is my belief that there was an abundance of trees in Jesus' day. They were everywhere. Had they used them all up, which some Hollywood movies suggest, they would have gone down the same road as the people of Easter Island.

Wood was a commodity of everyday use. It was useful in the preparation of daily meals for tens of thousands of people. It was used in construction. It was a food source. It was used daily in temple sacrifices. In the yearly Festival of Booths, palm covered booths and tabernacles were erected in a week-long celebration of the tabernacle Moses carried through the wilderness.

I am reminded of the triumphal entry. Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the back of a donkey's colt. Thousands welcomed him, ripping branches from palm trees to lay on the road before him.

You might see the token palm in one of the movies, and you might see multiple trees in scenes of the garden prayer and betrayal – otherwise, depiction of trees in the Holy Land is pretty skimpy.

Finally, let's jump back in time and think of Moses leading his people through the wilderness for forty years. Think of the logistics. How many people walked through the wilderness for forty Years? How many people needed to cook their daily meals? How many animals needed to be stalled and fed? How many fires had to be built for the sacrifices? Have you ever seen a movie about Moses where the landscape was filled with trees?