They said he deserved special attention; he said they were wrong. As a soldier, he understood power and authority. He understand that if Jesus was a powerful prophet or God-man, then Jesus very much out-ranked him. Yet he knew someone that high up in God's power structure could change the life of his beloved servant.
In the next scene Jesus brought a funeral procession to a stop. He committed a seriously impure act, i.e., he came in contact with the dead. It was an action that would make him unclean for a week. Touching the dead meant being cast out of the community for seven days with ceremonial cleansing on the third and seventh days in order to come back in.
Yet, Jesus did not become an outcast by touching the dead. He did not become impure but rather the impure son became pure again. The child who had been the source of death for the community came into contact with the source of life for all communities.
These stories make me question my view of Jesus. Do I see him as the source of utmost authority? Do I believe that being touched by him gives life? Is my religion focused on naming outcasts or on restoring life? Would I have been a Jew appalled at Jesus violating the law by touching the dead or would I have realized that the law was meaningless when the giver of life was present? What defines me today . . . law-abiding or life-abiding?
No comments:
Post a Comment