The Lord gives Jeremiah a vision of two baskets of figs, one
very good bunch of figs and another very bad bunch. He also gives the interpretation. The good figs are those who have gone into
exile and they will be brought back to the land when the time comes. They will be like the Israelites in Egypt,
they will be built up and their time of exile will be for good, they will
prosper in the land of Babylon prior to returning. The other bunch of figs, the spoiled ones,
will be “a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth, a reproach, a byword, a
taunt, and a curse.” On these He will
bring, “sword, famine, and pestilence.”
Why is that? The king, Zedekiah,
was a vassal of Nebuchadnezzar, a puppet regime. He had made a deal with the devil, the king
of Babylon, rather than aligning himself with the Lord and the Lord’s
people. He had taken what Jesus would
not, the kingdom on the terms of the world rather than on God’s terms. He had failed and in so doing, brought
dishonor on the Lord. Those who remained
had made the same bargain and so had aligned themselves against the Lord.
The idea that suffering is inextricably connected with sin
is an old one. We know that it goes back
as far as Job because Job pleaded his case based on his righteousness. He was righteous therefore he should not
suffer. His friends case rested on the
idea that his suffering revealed that he was not as righteous as he pretended
to be. The disciples here ask the
question concerning the blind man, who sinned, him or his parents that he was
born blind. In truth, we should all be
born blind because of both our own sins and that of our parents if there is
such a correlation. What we see sometimes
depends on our presuppositions. The
disciples had theirs, the Pharisees had theirs and missed an incredible miracle
because Jesus didn’t keep Sabbath when he healed the man born blind. Their blindness made them miss the work of
God and they thought they were on His side in the matter.
Jesus is the stone of stumbling, the Greek word is
scandalon. There is something
intentional about the stone of stumbling, more like a trap door than simply a
stone in the path. Paul’s argument here
concerns just how the Lord has “rejected” Israel in order that the Gentiles can
come into the covenant. It is
incomprehensible that Israel could be rejected, the covenant is irrevocable, so
Paul says that for a time this door is opened for the Gentiles to come in and who
are we to question the Lord. In the
first lesson there is sin, the failure to align with His agenda for the people
in exile. In the second, there is
misunderstanding over sin by the disciples first and then the leaders. Ultimately they tripped up on the stone of
stumbling, missing the forest for the trees, the law of Sabbath trumped this
incredible healing and they missed the Messiah.
Where is our legalism or our compromise with the world causing us to
stumble?
No comments:
Post a Comment