. . . birds came along and devoured it . . . it withered away . . . it yielded no grain . . .”
-Mark 4:4, 6, 7.

Parables are usually connected to a scripture text or several of them. They often explain something puzzling about God and his relation to his people, or something unstated or mysterious in a text.

Yeshua understood a startling truth found in Isaiah 6, one that naturally leads any thoughtful reader to ask questions. Modern readers of the Sower parable (Mk 4; Mt 13; Lk 8) tend not to realize that the parable is commenting on a text. The text is Isaiah 6. It is not a randomly chosen or obscure passage. It is the chapter in which Isaiah saw God’s Throne above with his kingly robes coming down and filling the Temple (Isa 6:1). It is the “holy, holy, holy” passage with the Seraphim (the burning ones). It is the commission of the prophet Isaiah.

Yeshua, prophet and Messiah, has a mission which can be compared to Isaiah’s. Yet the puzzling thing about Isaiah’s commission is that he was sent to tell the people about God’s desire for them in that moment in history and yet his words would paradoxically cause greater judgment. God said to Isaiah:

Go, say to that people: ‘Hear, indeed, but do not understand; see, indeed, but do not grasp.’ Dull that people’s mind, stop its ears, and seal its eyes — lest, seeing with its eyes and hearing with its ears, it also grasp with its mind, and repent and save itself.
-Isaiah 6:9-10, JPS.

These words are so surprising, so ironic, many readers need to give them multiple readings to understand what they are saying.

Isaiah was a kingdom prophet. Yeshua was a kingdom prophet. The kingdom is God’s rule over his people and all the cosmos. Isn’t telling people about the kingdom good news? On the contrary, in many cases it is bad news. The simple in understanding think that true instruction will be easily recognized and that great promises will be believed and acted upon.

The easiest criticism of Yeshua is that his message was so little heeded. If he was Messiah, or even a true prophet, why didn’t he bring about the renewal of Israel? Why wasn’t the earth redeemed? Why didn’t the world to come start in his day? Where is the messianic redemption with all the promises of every person under their vine and fig tree?

Parables, according to the early rabbis in the land of Israel, were especially founded in Israel as a way of teaching by Solomon (see Song of Songs Rabbah, first chapter). They interpreted Mishlei (Proverbs) and Kohelet (Ecclesiastes) as illustrations of Torah truths. They saw Shir HaShirim (Song of Songs/Solomon) as figures of God’s dealings with Israel at the Exodus and Sinai. The figure or simile or parable (mashal) explains something about a scripture text.

The Sower parable is about good news that is bad news. It explains first and foremost how a true prophet (Isaiah, Yeshua) can speak what is good and yet he will not be heard. It explains how a generation can be so close to devastation (Isaiah’s in the Assyrian and Babylonian crises and Yeshua’s in the coming war with Rome) even though the kingdom is proclaimed. It explains how disciple circles can form and preserve the teaching for the future.

Isaiah’s words did not prevent Israel and Judah from collapsing, nor did Yeshua’s. But Isaiah’s words and Yeshua’s words did lead to the formation of disciple circles. They were passed down generation to generation.

The Sower parable is rich. To begin to understand it, realize it is a commentary on Isaiah 6. Realize first that it is about our human tendency not to receive the message. It is not our responsibility to bring the messianic era. The king will bring the kingdom. But he who has ears to hear will understand why it is delayed. We bear fruit while we wait.

If you would like to follow this series, here is Part 1.

To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables.
-Mark 4:11

“Kingdom” is not “afterlife” exactly and it is not “people of Israel” or “people of the Church.” The modern reader tends to inject meanings into Yeshua’s words that are not there. Looking in the words of Messiah for a message on how to qualify for a good afterlife, it is natural for many to see in the word “kingdom” a code word for “going to heaven.” This is a problem compounded by the fact that Matthew, the best-known gospel for many Bible readers, uses the phrase “kingdom of heaven” instead of “kingdom of God.” But, as many will rightly point out, “heaven” here stands for “God.” It is a euphemism, like saying “in the eyes of heaven.”

Another temptation is to see “kingdom” as either “the nation of people known as Israel” or “the visible institution of the church.” Christian pastors sometimes ask people to “work for the kingdom” with the understanding that “church is the kingdom.” In Judaism, “kingship of God” is a more common notion than “kingdom.” This is because Judaism, like Yeshua, is immersed in the Hebrew Bible.

What does Messiah mean when he says “to you” (the inner circle, those who come to me after my teaching and ask questions) is given the “secret of the kingdom” but to everyone else (outsiders who sit on the hills and listen from afar, hoping to catch a glimpse of a miracle) there are only “parables”?

Does he mean that the parables are not about the kingdom? Is the idea that the parables are teasers, mere hints, but that somewhere else we should look for Messiah’s real teaching? If so, where do we find this teaching?

No, it is not that there are two sets of teaching exactly, although the inner circle does get more explanation and teaching than the hill-sitters get. But rather, it is the whole package. Those who become part of Messiah’s disciple circle (not just the Twelve, but at least one hundred and twenty by the time of Acts 1) receive the secret. And the secret is not just one thing. It is many things.

Those who were in Messiah’s disciple circle, the ones who were fortunate enough to be there in Galilee and Judea so long ago, saw the actions of Messiah, got private explanations, and went through the experience of disappointment, terror, disbelief, startling realization, overwhelming joy, and sense of empowerment through the trial, death, burial, resurrection, commission, and ascension of Yeshua. The secret was being in the disciple circle. It was asking questions. It was watching Messiah do messianic things. It was seeing the kingdom in action. It was living through the greatest misunderstanding about kingdom (that death and suffering lead to the reign of God).

It is possible to be in Messiah’s disciple circle now. The requirement is a willingness to consider his words and actions. The requirement is to do this with others. The requirement is to believe.

In this series, I will explore a little at a time the details of Messiah’s parables and what they mean about the kingdom, future and present. What is the kingdom exactly? What does a first century Jewish teacher mean when he says “kingdom of God”? How do we apply this?

These are symbolic actions, a kind of prophetic message in and of themselves. Yeshua also engaged in symbolic actions and what I call kingdom enactments.

Symbolic Actions Declaring High Authority

• The Triumphal Entry (Mk 11:1-11; Mt 21:1-11; Lk 19:29-44; Jn 12:12-19) – Riding deliberately into the city as per Zechariah 9 with crowds hailing him, Yeshua is making a claim of messianic identity.
• The Temple Cleansing (Mk 11:15-17; Mt 21:12-13; Lk 19:45-46; Jn 2:13-17) – Perhaps Malachi 3:1 is in the background (after the messenger — Elijah, John the Baptist) the Lord comes suddenly to his Temple. Yeshua quotes Isaiah 56 and Jeremiah 7. This action largely contributed to his arrest and execution.
• Forgiving Sins (Mk 2:5; Mt 9:2; Lk 5:20 and another incident in Lk 7:48) – In even the most skeptical interpretation, Yeshua is claiming to know when God forgives a sinner. Since he says in Mk 2:10; Mt 9:6; Lk 5:24 that the Son of Man has authority to forgive, evidence is strong Yeshua is claiming more. He is claiming to be the divine Son of Man with authority in such matters as per Daniel 7 and the dominion given him by the Ancient of Days.
• Sending the Twelve (Mk 6:7-13; Mt 10:5-42; Lk 9:1-6) and Sending the Seventy (Lk 10:1-16) – Even more so that Yeshua’s own mission of proclaiming the kingdom (Mk 1:15; Mt 4:17), sending disciples to proclaim it suggests starting a renewal movement (a prophetic or even messianic role).

Symbolic Actions as Identity Stories

• The Baptism of Yeshua (Mk 1:9-11; Mt 3:13-17; Lk 3:21-22) – Yeshua’s participation in John’s movement already connects him to the role of prophet. The heavenly voice affirms Yeshua’s identity.
• The Temptation of Yeshua (Mk 1:12-13; Mt 4:1-11; Lk 4:1-13) – Yeshua is tested for worthiness for a role of high authority (prophet, messiah). Satan affirms Yeshua’s identity in an ironic manner.
• The Transfiguration (Mk 9:2-10; Mt 17:1-9; Lk 9:28-36) – Yeshua ascends a mountain with three as witnesses and experiences a prefiguring of coming glory and a visit from Moses and Elijah. A heavenly voice affirms his identity.

Kingdom Enactments
In these Yeshua demonstrates that he has partially brought the kingdom with him (the rest to come later).

• Healings, for in the world to come there will be no illness, disability, or death.
• Exorcisms, for the forces of spiritual evil are due to be defeated by God.
• Banquets, which foreshadow the banquet to come, a messianic promise.

Yet, before we would jump to Paul’s explanation of Abraham (Rom 4:3; Gal 3:7), it is good to consider a step earlier than the realization that Abraham represents faith. It is eye-opening to re-read some of the Abraham texts in the gospels with an eye for first century Jewish ideas about election, covenant, and afterlife. Let’s begin with three texts:

Bear fruit that befits repentance, and do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. (Matt 3:8-10; cf. Luke 3:8-10).

When Yeshua heard him, he marveled, and said to those who followed him, “Truly, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such faith. I tell you, many will come from east and west and sit at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth.” And to the centurion Yeshua said, “Go; be it done for you as you have believed.” (Matt 8:10-13).

The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried; and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes, and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus in his bosom. And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ (Luke 16:22-26).

In all three of these texts, Abraham represents Israel’s election as the Chosen People and the idea, current in Yeshua’s time, that being born a child of Abraham put a person in a privileged position with God.

Modern scholars, following E.P. Sanders, have called this belief covenantal nomism. Nomism refers to the Greek word for Law (nomos) and it is the idea that every Israelite, already being in covenant with God and privileged with inclusion in the afterlife already, would keep at least enough Torah (nomos) to remain Jewish. Sanders rightly dismissed the idea that first century Jews were like the Pelagians that Augustine fought or the medieval churchmen that Luther fought. They were not by the merit of their deeds thinking they gained position with God.

Yeshua’s problem (and John the Baptist’s problem) with the idea of Abrahamic privilege is much the same as Yeshua’s problem with what Temple and Torah had become. Yeshua did not reject Temple, Torah, or the Abrahamic promise. In every case, he rejected the false sense of privilege and entitlement that people felt as “the Chosen.”

John said to his audience at the Jordan that their rightness with God depended on repentance and living according to justice as in the Torah and prophets. Yeshua said that “sons of the kingdom” would be excluded from Abraham’s table in the messianic age while many gentiles from “east and west” would be included, because of faith. In the Lazarus and the Rich Man parable, both are Israelites and standard thinking would be that both would be at Abraham’s bosom (a reference to reclining at a table next to Abraham). Yet Yeshua says the rich man will be excluded because he ignored day after day the beggar at his gates, proving his hard heart was not for God.

Nearly every use of “Abraham” in the gospels, including John, is a reference to this notion of carnal election, privilege by birth, and is a vehicle for Yeshua to say, “Election in Abraham is not an invitation to the banquet to come, but a calling to be like Abraham in making this world like the one to come.”

See also a treatment of more Abraham texts in “Abraham in the Gospels.”

What I mean is this: in Mark’s gospel, we see the theme of the identity of the veiled Son of Man. He is much more than he appears to be. Those who remain close to him see this gradually more and more. The coming Son of Man (Yeshua in his Second Coming) will bring all of that future hope to reality. So Mark is apocalyptic (interested in showing how the Eternal breaks through into the Present).

In Luke’s gospel, the reality of a disciple-community spread throughout the empire dealing with the problems of an absent Lord and an unbelieving Roman populace, is more obviously in the background. So Luke emphasizes the present need for faith and the Spirit. While we wait, we are in distress and our gospel seems impossible to believe.

This difference (not contradiction) in emphasis was clarified for me this morning as I considered how Luke follows up the Sower parable with a series of illuminating stories.

In presenting this outline, I am saying that Luke has taken the same stories from Mark’s gospel, and ordered them in a way that emphasizes the present situation of disciples: in need of faith and the Spirit while the current crisis of Yeshua’s absence is going on. If you are not used to the idea that a storyteller shapes a message in the order and details of the story, please let me be clear: I am not saying that Luke has distorted the stories or that his version contradicts Mark’s or Matthew’s.

SOWER PARABLE – Luke 8:4-15
As I have said in Yeshua in Context chapter 11 and in other commentary on the Sower parable, the issue of the whole parable is the word Yeshua is spreading about the kingdom’s arrival and the way the delay of the kingdom causes people to fall away, except for disciples who bear fruit like Yeshua.

THE LAMP ON A STAND – Luke 8:16-18
Yeshua is the lamp who will be put up on a stand (you know, the cross). Much will be revealed when the kingdom does not come as expected but when the hoped for king dies instead. Blessed is the disciple who grasps the truth. God will give much to those who have faith.

YESHUA’S TRUE FAMILY – Luke 8:19-21
Those who are scandalized by Yeshua are not his true family. But those who believe even in crisis will hear and do what the word teaches. The word means the specific word Yeshua is teaching about the kingdom (that he will bring it and while waiting, his disciples are to bear the fruit of the kingdom–healing, serving, redeeming).

STILLING THE STORM – Luke 8:22-25
In a crisis, Yeshua asks, “Where is your faith?” Luke is asking the disciples in his generation the same question: the Second Coming is delayed and our message seems to be in crisis, but in this situation, do we have faith to keep going?

THE GERASENE DEMONIAC – Luke 8:26-39
The story is a parallel to the Yeshua story. The demoniac is virtually a dead man who returns to life. His story is spreading in a gentile region. The people of the region are distrustful of the message and want nothing to do with Yeshua. The man tells his death-to-life story all over the gentile region. Isn’t Luke mirroring what is happening in his time? The basis of the faith the Yeshua-community is spreading is a story about a man who passed from death to life. And the eyewitness accounts that informed the gospel are the only reason the disciples can give a resistant people to believe.

TWO HEALINGS: THE BLEEDING WOMAN AND JAIRUS’ DAUGHTER – Luke 8:40-56
Yeshua says to the woman, “Your faith has saved you.” He says to those who doubt he can raise Jairus’ daughter, “Do not fear; only believe.”

This whole section is stories reflecting on the meaning of the Sower parable. The word has been planted, Yeshua’s word that the exile is over and the kingdom is arriving, but is also delayed. The kingdom is present and future. Its present aspect is faith and fruit. Its future aspect is the Second Coming and the time of God’s direct reign. Luke’s way of presenting it all emphasizes what we, in this present distress, are to do: believe and teach. Our strength is in the witness of the past (Yeshua rose) and reminding ourselves of this belief is what will get us through this long crisis.

Cliches like splitting hairs, chopping logic, quibbling over details, or making fine distinctions come to mind as the probable result of insisting on a good interpretation of a few words from an ancient saying. After all, do the differences really amount to much?

Well, I think they do. Take the phrase “poor in spirit” for example.

I was explaining the Beatitudes at a “Yeshua in Context” seminar this past weekend. It was the third lecture in a few hours and the whole experience for me was like an intensive meditation on the meaning of being a disciple, of being a follower, of thinking about what it meant to be near to Messiah and learn from him. I was learning at least as much as those I was speaking to. Sometimes inspired texts do that.

Of course, following the example of Yeshua, I started the talk with something unexpected. Predictability is often not the best tactic in teaching. So we started by thinking about the Beatitudes in Luke 6 instead of the more familiar ones in Matthew 5.

Matthew’s version is easier to take, especially Matthew’s version of the very first Beatitude about the “poor in spirit.” As you probably know, in Luke’s version, Yeshua makes a very similar point, but not about the “poor in spirit,” but rather “the poor.” Blessed are the poor.

Why is “poor in spirit” easier to take?

It’s because there is no alternate way to understand “blessed are the poor.” “Blessed are the poor” is an antithesis, pure and simple. It’s truth standing on its head, logic upside down. It’s crazy to say “blessed are the poor.”

But “poor in spirit” is capable of a few comfortable interpretations. The common one goes like this: “Blessed are people who exhibit humility, who think more of others than themselves. They are poor in spirit but rich in rewards from God.”

It’s a nice interpretation and the main point of it is certainly true. So if we just read Matthew’s version of the saying that way, we can’t go wrong. Right?

Why not just read all of Matthew’s Beatitudes in a parallel manner? Meek people are humble. Those who hunger and thirst in Matthew do so for righteousness (of course, in Luke, they just hunger and thirst). Being merciful is good. Peacemakers and people will to be persecuted are good.

Maybe all the Beatitudes are about something we do to earn a blessing. God gives the kingdom to humble people, the poor in spirit, and the meek and merciful. Maybe that’s what Yeshua meant.

But I don’t think so.

I think there is plenty of evidence that the “poor in spirit” are the broken and devastated. And the meek are not the “saints of humility” but rather the stepped on and oppressed, the ones always overlooked and never assumed to be important.

I think there is a long tradition of this in the Psalms and Prophets (and also the Wisdom) before Yeshua ever comes to teach God’s way to a band of disciples.

Job exhibits repeatedly a Wisdom tradition concerning care for the poor as a sign of righteousness, such as in 30:25, “Did not I weep for him whose day was hard? Was not my soul grieved for the poor?”

In Psalms the poor or needy one is the special subject of God’s care, as in 34:7(6), “This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him, and saved him out of all his troubles.”

The Prophets rail against the injustice done to the poor, as in Isaiah 3:14, “What do you mean by crushing my people, by grinding the face of the poor?”

So, a good interpretation of the Beatitudes does matter and it gives a different message. It is not, “Blessed are the righteous for they will earn a reward.” It is, rather:

Blessed are the crushed people, devastated, for theirs is the kingdom.
Blessed are those suffering grief, for they will be comforted by God.
Blessed are the overlooked and oppressed, for these will own the world to come.
Blessed are those who cannot find justice and true goodness in this broken world, for they will see goodness in the kingdom.
Blessed are those who have mercy now, for all will see how mercy is needed then.
Blessed are those who work for the One Thing, for they will see the One.
Blessed are those who heal fights and bitterness, for this is what God does.
Blessed are those who suffer for the mission of healing and serving, for their reward will redeem the persecution.

And the underlying message is also clear: My disciples will work to make this world as much like the world to come as they can.

After the commentary, I will suggest a few points of application for discipleship in our time.

MARK 11:12-14, 20-25
Yeshua curses a fig tree (vss. 12-14).
In between is Yeshua’s Temple protest action (vss. 15-19).
The next morning’s lesson from the fig tree (vss. 20-25).

This whole section in vss. 14-25 is a classic example of what some have called the Markan sandwich technique. He begins to tell a story, follows with another scene which may not seem to be related, and then returns to the story. So, here, Yeshua curses a fig tree and then the story of his Temple protest action is related. But the next morning, the story comes back to the fig tree.

The episode raises a number of questions. Is Yeshua’s cursing a fig tree rational or irrational? Does the fig tree symbolize something specific and should we try to find the exact reference? Which mountain does Yeshua have in mind for being moved by prayer? How does the fig tree lesson relate to the Temple protest action?

To begin, we need to understand the seasons for figs in Israel. By Passover (April) there would usually be leaves, but no figs. By Shavuot (June), the same time as the wheat harvest, would be the early crop of figs (there are two fig crops a year in Israel’s climate). Therefore, and as Mark is careful to point out, it is irrational for Yeshua to expect figs at Passover. This means his action with the fig tree is purely symbolic. His curious action, a prophetic enactment, is meant to make the disciples curious.

The next morning, after the Temple protest action, Peter remembers the fig tree as they pass it, now brown and withered. Does Yeshua now launch into a lesson about Israel being fruitless and unworthy, as we might expect? Not at all. He launches into a lesson about the power of prayer. What could it all mean?

First, it is helpful to know that the fig comes up as a symbol in the prophets several times for Israel’s faith and fruitfulness. Micah speaks of God’s disappointment at finding no fig to eat in Israel (7:1). Hosea describes Israel as a withered fig tree without fruit (9:10). Yet the promise of a great age of peace is that every man will sit under his vine and fig tree (Isa 36:16; Mic 4:4).

Second, we should forget about some specific symbolic meaning, since Yeshua gives no such clues. Neither should we read the mountain of vs. 23 with some specific reference (as if this is about the Mount of Olives and the Zechariah 14 imagery, as some interpreters do). Yeshua does not take the lesson in this direction. Note that Yeshua’s words about faith moving a mountain come up again in Paul in 1 Cor 13:2 (“faith so as to move mountains”).

What we have here is a potent contrast between the powerful Temple state and the humble disciple group. The Temple, though holy, has become corrupt through its leadership. It is a religious institution of vast wealth and power. But it is not effective at making Israel holy and fruitful. So, Yeshua, powerless and alone, makes an ineffective protest action, an irrational act which cannot succeed (like his irrational expectation of a fig tree to have early fruit). But while Yeshua’s protest does not bring the Temple to its knees, his curse does wither a fig tree.

This leads to a lesson about prayer. The humble disciple group has more power than all the Temple state. If they do God’s will and pray, nothing is beyond their ability. God will move mountains, shake empires, and change the world through them. Their power is not in wealth or position, but in prayer, forgiveness, and faith.

DISCIPLESHIP LESSONS:
… The power of the Yeshua community is never going to be in money, position, and power over people to govern or coerce.
… The power of the Yeshua community comes from God and is based on faith and prayer.
… We should not read that we have the power to move mountains, but that God does. Thus we have no “blank check” from God here, but rather the promise that as we serve him he will move mountains and use us along the way.
… The Temple state and its leaders made the error of setting goals based on personal power and trying to make them come to pass.
… Yeshua, who has real power, does not use it to coerce. He could have smitten the Temple completely, but instead made a protest action which changed nothing. He stands for right even if his actions do not overthrow evil. So the Yeshua community stands for right even though we cannot change evil.
… Unlike the Temple state Yeshua protested, our calling as a disciple community is to understand and discern God’s purposes in healing people and the world and to stand praying for mountains to move as God wills. Our power is in togetherness, faith, and prayer centered on our wise understanding of God’s purposes, not agendas created to manipulate the process or establish power structures.
… The Jewish tradition of prayer with additional prayers and teachings by Yeshua is a good tradition which accomplishes these purposes for the disciple community as Yeshua taught us (note that Mark 11:25 is the closest Mark comes to echoing Yeshua’s prayer recorded in Matthew and Luke).

But it is impossible to exaggerate the importance of the idea that Yeshua was a prophet of the kingdom from within the story, from within the experience the disciples and crowds had of Yeshua. For them Yeshua was a potential prophet, a healer, an exorcist. How does Yeshua come across as a prophet in Mark? What sorts of things do we learn from this?

Rather than go through a boring list of passages in which Yeshua plays a prophet role, I thought I’d look more deeply into one story and reflect on the others from within it.

The classical story is, of course, Mark 8:27-38. The disciples’ answer to Yeshua’s question is, “John the Baptist; and others say, Elijah; and others one of the prophets.” Only one disciple goes further, Peter, and we wonder if all of the Twelve would have gotten this or if Peter had better insight than the others. (Yes, I know that in another gospel, John, we have Andrew telling Peter, “We have found the Messiah” (1:41)).

The popular notions of Yeshua’s identity all had to do with the role of prophet. John the Baptist and Elijah, of course, were prophets. If Yeshua wasn’t one of them returned to life, then who was he? He must be one of the other prophets (Malachi? Isaiah? It’s hard to know who else people might have imagined).

It’s curious that in Mark’s wording, it did not occur to anyone that he was simply “Yeshua the prophet,” but that he was “Yeshua with the spirit of one of the prophets upon him.” That is, we might wonder if people resisted the idea of a new prophet and thought that God might bring back one of the hallowed prophets in a kind of spiritual endowment on a contemporary person.

And what sort of prophet was Yeshua. What “prophetic” topics did he address? Leaving aside for the moment his healings and feedings, which put him in an Elijah-Elisha category, we would have to say that Yeshua was a prophet of the kingdom.

The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel (Mark 1:15).

I will make you fishers of men (1:17) said Yeshua, meaning either “catching people in kingdom faith” or “catching and judging those who prevent the kingdom” (Jeremiah 16 uses the image of fishing for people as judgment).

I came not to call the righteous, but sinners (2:17), said Yeshua. He was calling them to a realization of the kingdom.

The days will come, when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day (2:20), which is a futuristic pronouncement of coming sorrow (a very prophet-like thing to say).

In 3:13; 6:46; and 9:2 he goes up on “the mountain” or “a high mountain” and gives revelation. It is a very Moses-like thing to do. In one of these instances, he said he would show those standing with him the kingdom (9:1).

To you has been given the secret of the kingdom, but to those outside everything is in parables (4:11), says Yeshua and then cites Isaiah as a precedent of a prophet, like himself, called to preach in a way that will bring judgment to the many but reward to disciples who hear and follow.

The kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed upon the ground (4:26). Yeshua’s parables, even when not put into a form of “the kingdom is like” were generally understood to be about the kingdom.

The Pharisees and scribes sought a sign (8:11-13) from the prophet, perhaps not satisfied for some reason with the signs they already saw.

Yeshua made many other prophet-like pronouncements, including enactments with a fig tree and a long discourse on signs and coming events in Mark 13.

No wonder Schweitzer long ago depicted Yeshua historically in the category of a apocalyptic prophet. Likewise, Maurice Casey in his new and monumental historical Jesus book, Jesus of Nazareth, sees apocalyptic prophet as the main category for Yeshua.

In an upcoming series (“Messianism and Yeshua in Mark”) we will consider the further claim that Yeshua is Messiah. But from within the story, few could see that. Such a realization came mainly after the resurrection.

Even stories in which it seems people either hoped or actively pushed for Yeshua to take on some revolutionary role (deliverer from Rome), they may still have had prophet in mind more so that “king” or “one like David” or “Messiah.”

Ched Myers in Binding the Strongman summarizes well the ideas of resistance to Rome with the involvement of a prophet as the leader. Theudas (see Acts 5:36) promised to lead a group to the Jordan and part the waters, like Moses, Joshua, and Elijah. An action like this had military overtones, with Rome being like Egypt. In Acts 21:38 we have a reference to the Egyptian, a prophet coming from Egypt (but Jewish) who called followers to gather in the desert and come with an unarmed attack on Jerusalem. He said they would stand on the Mount of Olives and the walls of Jerusalem would crumble. This calls to mind not only Joshua, but also Zechariah’s words (chapter 14) about the Mount of Olives and the last battle. John the Baptist repeatedly denied he would lead any resistance movement, but he drew many followers out into the desert. His movement was packed with revolutionary potential.

The idea that many people regarded Yeshua as a prophet who might lead a popular resistance movement against Rome is not far-fetched. But Yeshua kept putting down such expectations. And as a prophet he gave off mixed signals, saying things about suffering, a cross, and being raised after three days.

What are we, as Yeshua’s followers now, to make of Yeshua as the prophet and even apocalyptic prophet?

It is in forgetting Yeshua’s role as a prophet that much modern religion has missed the mark. Prophets brought change in the present as well as cryptic foretastes of the future. Yeshua’s kingdom talk mysteriously is about future and present. Is the kingdom here now or coming? Many of Yeshua’s sayings can be read either way.

But when we combine Yeshua’s sayings and his actions, we find a pattern. He based present actions on the future realities of the kingdom. So, the kingdom now of Yeshua the prophet looks like the things he did and taught (healing, defeating evil, teaching love and service). The kingdom future will look like a world where everyone is healed, evil defeated, and love and service will be the norm.

So, if we take Yeshua as Messiah-for-the-future-only, as does so much modern religion, we miss the prophetic movement of Yeshua. It is about literal things, not spiritual realities to be realized in the future. Yeshua the prophet has a lot to say about how you relate to people now, to possessions, and to life itself.

Zechariah’s prophecy of the king coming on a donkey is a critical view of kingship looking ahead to the messianic age when the ideas of dominion change into peace. In the early part of Zechariah 9, the warring peoples of the Mediterranean coast will become peaceful and submit to God’s authority in the messianic era. Then, in 9:9, Daughter Zion’s king (Jerusalem in the age when promises are fulfilled) comes not as a war-maker, but bringing peace, not on a warhorse, but a donkey like the Davidic kings of old.

Yeshua deliberately evokes this scene, so those who say this is about a prophecy fulfilled miss the point. Yeshua acts out the scene, proclaiming by his action that he is this different kind of king.

The scene creates excitement and tension in Jerusalem. Yeshua is not a Judean, so the people in Jerusalem thinking about the triumphal entry limit their understanding to the idea of a prophet from Galilee. They do not entertain the idea of a messiah from Galilee. But the crowds who are in the know, those who have followed Yeshua around, they proclaim him in clear messianic terms as Son of David. Yet the fact remains that not one in the crowd truly understood. Yeshua is not to be the vanquisher of Rome, but Rome’s redeemer. The theme of Zechariah 9 stands as a witness against revolutionary notions. Yeshua is the one who makes Philistines as if they are part of the people of Israel (Zech 9:7). Yeshua declares here exactly the sort of kingship he is bringing and until the resurrection, none comprehend it.

O the gladness of the poor in ruach, theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Yeshua makes desirable what is commonly regarded as unpleasant or pathetic. Our emotions are stirred by such talk. The imaginations and hopes of peasants sitting on the Galilean grass were stirred. It is something greatly to be desired, a reversal so needed by those of us who deeply feel our poverty of spirit.

What makes these Beatitudes pleasantly sweet is a combination of our trust in the one who speaks them and the attractiveness of their message. There is nothing in all Jewish literature after the Bible to compare with them.

The king, if we believe that about Yeshua, offers his kingdom to the unlikely. It is not because we are poor in spirit that the time of God’s rule on earth is extended to us. Rather, we can know our destiny is gladness and draw on that blissfulness now because the kingdom is ours.

In other words, poverty of spirit is not a condition of the kingdom, though some have read it that way. Rather, poverty of spirit is a condition in which many of us find ourselves without any say in the matter, just as mourning happens to us rather than being a virtue we cultivate.

The Beatitudes are further attractive to us because they are not spoken by just another religious teacher. Yeshua had two things that proved his words worthy of devoting one’s life. He lived what he professed and he gave evidence of having authority to back up his assurances. He comforted mourners and lifted up unimportant people. He showed that the kingdom of heaven can be partially here amongst those who will bring its qualities into life now. His kingdom aims were not simply to draw a following of desperate poor with a false assurance of future hope. Rather, he taught the movement that followed him how to become communities of healing while waiting for the full arrival of God’s reign.

And who could deliver such a counter-intuitive message with authority like Yeshua? He spoke of granting the right for his disciples to sit at his table in his kingdom (Luke 22:29-30) and demonstrated in life, death, and resurrection that he can keep his word.

Yeshua indicated that in some ways the kingdom of God arrived with him and in others that there would be a delay. Luke 10:9 is one of the “now” aspects of the kingdom of God in the “now and not yet” duality. How does Luke 10:9 inform us of one of the senses in which the kingdom had already reached Yeshua’s generation? What does it tell us about the kingdom in our day and in the future?

The story in Luke 10 is about Yeshua sending out seventy to proclaim and heal and exorcise demons. Luke Johnson comments, “The preaching of the kingdom of God is signaled by the power to heal.” In other words, an aspect of the kingdom of God was with Yeshua wherever he went (healing and liberating the possessed). And Yeshua sent that same kingdom power with the seventy.

The kingdom of God (God’s rule on earth) partially exists now, but will be fully realized in the future when human kingdoms are gone and God’s rule is unopposed. Many times “kingdom of God” simply stands for “the age to come.” And in the age to come, sickness and disability and demonic possession will all be done away with.

It was in the healing work of Yeshua and his followers that the kingdom reached his generation. The beatitudes clue us in to other aspects of the kingdom which can be brought into the here and now: comfort, peace, righteousness, lifting up the poor in spirit, etc.

Whether we can, in our modern context, go out with the same power as the seventy or not (some think we can, others do not), we can cause the kingdom to reach our generation much as they did, by bringing aspects of the age to come into the present wherever we are.

Acts 1:11 (NET): This same Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven will come back in the same way you saw him go into heaven.

Where will Yeshua return? The answer, it seems, is to the Mount of Olives next to the old city of Jerusalem.

And this is all the more interesting since we read in Zechariah 14:4 that during a time of many nations attacking Jerusalem (a battle known as Armageddon):

Zechariah 14:4 (NET): On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives which lies to the east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in half from east to west, leaving a great valley. Half the mountain will move northward and the other half southward.

Two of my favorite New Testament scholars, great thinkers about historical issues and the life of Yeshua, are N.T. Wright and Raymond Brown. Alas, both are prone to make anti-Temple statements at times:

He [Jesus] was simply declaring that it [the Temple] was on its way to being redundant. . . . I think that Jesus saw himself, and perhaps his followers with him, as the new Temple (Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, p. 426).

The first theme [in the Fourth Gospel, book of signs, chs. 2-12] is that of replacing Jewish institutions and religious views . . . the replacement of the water for Jewish purifications . . . the Temple . . . worship at Jerusalem (Brown and Moloney, An Introduction to the Gospel of John, p. 305).

Part of my aim in chapters 7 and 14 is to show that Yeshua was not opposed to the Temple itself, did not indicate that its purpose was coming to an end, and would not have disagreed with the promises in the prophets of Israel of a beautiful role for the Temple in the coming age (see Isaiah 2 as one example).

I offer here a few of several references to keep in mind when considering Yeshua’s reverence for the Temple. You can find more in the book:

(1) Yeshua called the Temple his Father’s house (Luke 2:49; John 2:16; 14:2).

(2) Yeshua acted out of zeal for God’s house (John 2:17).

(3) Yeshua upheld the ongoing sanctity of the Temple and altar (Matthew 23:19-22).

(4) There is a difference between being against the Temple and sacrifices (which he was not) and against the Temple state (the leadership with all its compromises and injustices). See my coming Audio-Commentary on Mark for more about Yeshua’s major emphasis on opposing the Temple state.

Isaiah 25:6-9, The Banquet of Fine Wine on Zion, Death Swallowed Up.
Isaiah 55:2, God Gives the Bread That Satisfies
Ezekiel 34:12-14, God Regathers and Feeds His Flock
1 Enoch 62:14, They Shall Eat and Rise and Rest with That Son of Man Forever
2 Baruch 29:4, Feasting on Behomoth and Leviathan
Dead Sea Scrolls, 1Q28a [1QSa] 2:11-22, Banquet with Messiah
Revelation 19:9, Marriage Supper of the Lamb