Wandering Rabbi

The Marching Bride Part One

Starting at the beginning of the church, we must look at its root, which is none other than Jesus Christ. Did he foresee the organization that his ministry would birth? Was it his intention to do so?

What is undeniably clear from the gospels is that he planned for his disciples to continue his work. From the very start of his preaching, he selects individuals and sets them apart from the rest of society, teaching them how to relate to the world and each other. It must be noted, however, that there is no record of him instituting any formal ceremonies or rules for the disciples as an organization. There was no list of things to do if you were a member. He however seemed to carry out in his personal life the normal Jewish rituals (we see him visiting the temple, also coming for the Passover and teaching in synagogues) which was a practice kept from his early childhood (Jesus left behind at the temple).

However, he seemed to have taken a less rigid approach than the Pharisees to these rituals, saying that they had twisted the law of Moses and reminded them (and others) of the true meaning behind the law. He talks about this true meaning as if he had inside information not just something he deduced from available evidence ('He taught as one with authority'). Adding to this, the incident with the Samaritan woman, when he speaks of the complete disposal of the temple and all the rituals, it is difficult to lay down specific religious rituals as having been instituted by Christ. What he seems to have taught is a way of life.

So although his followers cannot have been said to be 'organized' completely in the sense of having formal rules and rituals we observe today in the church, there was still a separation of the disciples from the rest of society. A separation so deep that it was necessary to have a treasurer for the whole group. It's not a stretch to say there were other assigned responsibilities.

So Jesus did, at least in a sense, found the Church as an organization.

If Jesus was not preaching the law as the Pharisees did, what then was he saying that made him so unique?

Let’s start with a man called John.

John was a prophet who was in a word, eccentric. Wearing camel skin for clothes and eating locusts in the wilderness, he wasn't the ideal candidate to draw crowds. But draw crowds he did. And not just any crowd. They came from all levels of society and all cultures in Palestine. He preached to the Pharisees, to the Sadducees, to the Roman, and the Jew. And what was his message?

'Repent! For the Kingdom of God is at hand!'(Matthew 3:2)

People who listened to him and wished for this repentance were subsequently immersed in water as a sign of this. However, John did give a caveat;

'And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. 8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.' (Mark 1:7-8)

We know now that the one he was speaking of was Jesus, as he himself said when he baptized him. (John 1:36, Matt 3:14)

After the baptism of Jesus, he begins to preach what seems to be the same thing as John;

Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. Mark 1:14-15

So in short, the preaching of Jesus centered around the Kingdom of God. It might not be too much to say, that it was not only centered, but it was all about the Kingdom of God.

As he went from place to place, preaching his fame grew, not in small part to the miracles he performed. He was aware of this, and fearing that they would be misinterpreted often cautioned those he healed to be silent. Nevertheless word spread. He came into close conflict time and time again with the Pharisees and Sadducees for his teaching and his message of repentance. As has been stated previously he did not hesitate to label the religious leaders of his time as hypocrites.

It is to be said that the Sanhedrin did not condemn Jesus to death simply because he embarrassed them. There was a real fear of a revolt from the people. A week before his trial, he had been welcomed into Jerusalem as nothing less than a King. With his constant talk of the kingdom of God, it wasn't too much of a task for the Sanhedrin to imagine who the king of this kingdom would be. And with the atmosphere being as it was, all he had to do was ask for it.

It would be far better to nip things in the bud now. A public recantation or if not that, declaring him to be a false prophet would be in order. And the law of Moses was unambiguous on what to do with false prophets. (Deut 13:1-5)

Before now, Jesus had always hinted at who he was, saying things like 'I am the way', 'You must eat of my flesh to have life', and most damning of all, at least to the Jews calling God his father.

But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. 18 Therefore the Jews sought more to kill him because he not only had broken the sabbath but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. (John 5:17-18)

Here was a dangerous man indeed. Miracles were not strange. Countless prophets had arisen and performed signs and wonders. There had been criticisms of religious leaders before, many had already recognized their hypocrisy. But this claim of his was just too much. And the major problem, of course, was his following. How many swords would be raised when he called for it?

So Jesus, one man, for the sake of the nation, was tried and put to death on the cross.