12.04.2014

You’ve Heard It Said…

After Jesus says that He is not here to abolish the law, but to fulfill it, He goes on to do that very thing. In true rabbinic style, Jesus goes about the art of interpreting Torah. One of the striking refrains that stands out in this section of the Sermon of the Mount is Jesus’s statement, “You’ve heard it said… but I say unto you…”

This is a common rabbinical statement made by a teacher who carries authority. The teacher is announcing to his listeners that they are about to hear a new interpretation of the same texts they are familiar with. This, however, is not a job for just any rabbi. Later in rabbinical history, we know that there were certain rules and stipulations about who could interpret the law and how they could do it. This wasn’t a job for any reader of the Text.


While this may come as a blasphemous idea to Protestant ears, not just anyone was allowed to do the work of interpretation. Interpretation was (and still is) tricky business. In order to reinterpret the Text, a teacher had to have s’micha, which is the Hebrew word for “authority.” If a rabbi did not have s’micha then he was not allowed to offer a new interpretation. A rabbi received s’micha by having two other rabbis with s’micha commission him with it. While this is a later rabbinic practice, it is easy to find this cultural understanding in the gospels.

Listen to the words of Matthew that immediately follow the Sermon on the Mount:
When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.

Jesus taught as one having s’micha and not just as a regular teacher. That’s gutsy; the people caught that this Jesus guy had some chutzpah.
But it does beg the question: Did Jesus have s’micha?

The reader could point to Jesus’s baptism. The words of John the Baptist (a person who has s’micha, at least in the eyes of the people) blesses Him and tells the crowd that Jesus is greater than he is, followed by the voice of the LORD coming from heaven announcing God’s pleasure on Jesus as His son. That’s a convincing s’micha commissioning if you ask me.

Nevertheless, Jesus certainly teaches with s’micha. A rabbi would offer a prologue to his new interpretation by offering these words: “You’ve heard it said ____________, but I say unto you ____________.” It was a rabbi’s way of saying, you are familiar with this teaching, but I’m here to give you a better understanding. Again, this is not something that any rabbi is allowed to do; rabbis are bound in their interpretation to the teachings that have come before them. But a rabbi with authority can chart new paths.

Like we’ve pointed out previously, Jesus is trying to make the case that he is not here teaching something outside of Torah. Instead, He claims to be here showing the world how they were always supposed to be reading it. According to the rabbinical claims of Jesus as a teacher, His teaching of Torah is what God was really after when the law was given at Sinai. This is important because it shows God is not here to change game plans — He is not here to do away with the Jews or take their “place” away — He is here to throw the blinds open on what has always been true. Jesus is here to clean up our understanding.
It’s actually a more profound wrestling match than we might realize. I find that most of us give the teachings of Jesus a treatment that relegates it as a great “thought to consider,” but hardly authoritative. I think most of my readers will claim that statement is far too harsh, but practically speaking, I think you will find it to be true. Jesus’s teachings are far too rabbinic and confusing — at times too “mystical” — for our western preferences. Take, for instance, the way we interact with the teachings/letters of the apostle Paul. We are far quicker to accept the teachings of Paul at face-value than we are the teachings of Jesus. This is a grave error and one that has led to massive misinterpretations of the Text (let alone horrific, destructive teachings throughout church history). As Brian McLaren says, “Christians have accepted Jesus as their savior, but Paul as their Lord.”

Those are merely some thoughts to chew on.

One must be confronted with the authority of Jesus in the gospel accounts. Everything that the follower of Jesus interprets in the Bible has to be seen through the lens of Jesus. When Jesus says that the right way to interpret the Text is through love God and love others, then you are now forced to read your Bible through that lens (as a follower of Rabbi Jesus). You do not get to disagree. For some readers who thought my treatment of the conquest and the Book of Joshua was too far-reaching, they must consider that whatever our interpretation of the book is, it must be aligned with Jesus’s yoke of love God and love others. Jesus said all the Law and the Prophets are interpreted through that lens — period. As a follower of Jesus, I have no other option.

I work under the s’micha of Jesus.

No comments:

Post a Comment