Nearly thirty years ago I sat in a graduate
school class in Washington, D.C. where the professor was telling of a murder
investigation in London. Scotland Yard
was all over the case checking leads and interviewing eyewitnesses. "You say it was a Caucasian man in his
mid-forties. Is this the portrait of the
man?" the investigator asked one elderly eyewitness. "Yes, I believe he was the man I saw
pulling the trigger." "Are you
sure it was this man?" asked the investigator. “Yes,” she said. "Would you say that he was
responsible?" The old woman
squinted, raised her hand to her face, and said in her cockney brogue,
"Responsible? No, I would say he
was patently irresponsible, wouldn't you?"
Throughout
the history of language certain words and phrases used in a particular culture
are assigned multiple meanings. The word
“responsible” is a perfect example. But there is also a collection of other
words that demonstrate a shift in meaning over time. Words like "gay" and
"cool" have undergone a radical shift within the American culture
over the past 40 or 50 years. The same is true for certain words found in
Scripture.
By the time of Christ, a wide variety of words
are available to describe those who follow Him.
Like any first century Rabbi seeking to mold his students, Jesus might
have chosen to lock in on a single word like "disciple" or
"servant" and stick with it throughout His ministry. When outsiders refer to the followers of
Jesus as disciples, mathetes, Jesus
does little to dissuade them from using the term. In fact, He frequently uses it Himself. By referring to His followers as disciples, Jesus stands squarely in the
tradition of the philosophical teachers of His day. What the master imparts, the disciples
receive with eagerness, ready to display their affinity for Him and His
message.
But there are two crucial differences between
the disciples of Jesus and those of other masters. First, and foremost, the disciples of Jesus
follow Him as a result of His call.
Jesus’ disciples do not wander up to Him one day and ask to be His
disciples. They do not choose Him; He
chooses them. Second, the discipleship
to which Jesus calls them is one where the teacher is pre-eminent. Unlike other rabbinical masters who charge
their pupils with the task of disseminating their teaching, Jesus charges His
disciples with the primary task of proclaiming His identity. We see this in His sending of the twelve in
Matthew 10:32. “Therefore, whoever
confesses Me before men, him I will confess before My Father who is in
heaven.” It is not the teaching as much
as the Teacher who is essential. Six
chapters later Jesus turns to His disciples and asks, “Who do men say that I,
the Son of Man, am?” When Jesus hears
Peter’s reply, He proclaims that the veracity of Peter’s response will be the
very cornerstone upon which He will build His church. In other words, all He will ever do in and
through His church will be centered squarely on His identity as Lord. He is pre-eminent.
Christ’s pre-eminence in no way eliminates the
critical role His disciples will play in His church. On the contrary, Jesus goes to great lengths
to define their role in His kingdom. Unlike
other masters who may attempt to focus their attention on the qualifications
and duties of their disciples, Jesus
focuses their attention on His relationship with them. That focus is most clearly seen in John’s
Gospel where Jesus says, “No longer do I call you servants, doulous, for a servant does not know
what his master is doing; but I have called you philous, friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have
made known to you.” For Jesus, the
qualifications and duties of His disciples are inexorably linked to His
relationship with them as friends.
In fact, it is His relationship with them that will define their entire
course of life and ministry.
The term philos, friend, occurs twenty-eight times in the New Testament, almost exclusively
in the Gospels of Luke and John. In Luke
12:4 Jesus refers to His disciples as friends, but in a casual manner of
address, much as a rabbi might refer to his students. But John notes a deeper and more specific use
of the word friend. In John 3:29 Jesus first uses the word to
describe his cousin, John the Baptist.
He refers to John as the friend of the bridegroom who rejoices greatly
when he hears the bridegroom’s voice.
Just as the friend is in close relationship with the bridegroom and
subordinates his personal interests to the interests of the bridegroom, so John
the Baptist subordinates his interests to the interests of Jesus of
Nazareth. This is our first glimpse into
what Jesus will mean twelve chapters later when He uses the same term to
describe the disciples.
In John 11 when Jesus receives word that
Lazarus is dead, He replies with the words, “Our friend Lazarus sleeps.” His use of the plural pronoun “our” indicates
that Jesus considers the twelve to be in such a close relationship with Him
that His loss is their loss. But lest we
think that His use of philos places
them on equal footing, notice that He never refers to Himself as their
friend. He never says, “I am your
friend.” The friendship Jesus espouses
is a bond between two vastly unequal parties.
He remains their Lord, their commander and king. But, unlike all other commanders, He
perfectly fulfills all of His commands and chief among them is His command to
love unconditionally.
By calling His disciples friends Jesus uses a
concept that is fundamentally alien to the Old Testament world. Notwithstanding the filial relationship of
David and Jonathan who are said to have loved one another as their own life (I
Samuel 18:3), Old Testament Judaism knew nothing of friendship as brotherly
love. Friedrich writes:
In Palestinian Judaism we find certain forms
of friendship but these are all different from Greek friendship. In Rabbinic Judaism the concept is applied to
the relationship between students and teachers of the law. Since Jewish wisdom could agree with popular
wisdom that a man’s best friend is himself, it is the more significant that
like the Greeks who could regard only the good as capable of true friendship,
it advanced the principle that only those who fear God are capable of true
friendship and they alone find true friends.
Should Jesus have used the term “friend” in a Hebrew sense in John 15, He might
only have been elaborating the normal parameters of the teacher/student
relationship. But, it is obvious from
the context that this is not the case.
Jesus eschews the Hebrew concept of friendship and seizes on the
Greek.
By selecting this new title for His disciples
and setting it in the context of His relationship to His Father, Jesus is
making a quantum leap from the normal parameters of the master/disciple
relationship. Rather than sticking with
the term disciple or servant, Jesus opts for a new name for His beloved, a name
that has its etymological roots in the human kiss. Unlike any Hebrew rabbi of His day, by naming
them friends, Jesus defines His chosen ones as divinely ordained and appointed
intimates whose call and commission rests not on their own merits or
qualifications but on His divine endowment of unconditional love. At the climax of His own ministry Jesus
selects a new title, a title from which He will never deviate. He does not call them ruler or great ones or
first ones; instead He selects the term philous
as the ultimate expression of His intention for them. For the rest of their lives these whom He has
called and equipped to lead His flock are called friends.
Now I
say all of this to point out the fact that Jesus’ encounter with Zacchaeus is a
foreshadowing of what He will do that night, less than a week later, in the
Upper Room. When Jesus reaches Jericho and sees Zacchaeus in the tree, He sees
not a chief tax collector, a rich man, He sees a friend. And it’s Jesus’
demonstration of friendship that moves Zacchaeus from inward to outward, from
selfish to righteous. We are going to talk about all of this on Sunday as we
study Luke 19:1-10 in a message entitled, “Expanding Your Love”. In preparation
for Sunday you may wish to consider the following:
1. What is the significance of this encounter
happening in Jericho?
2. What is the biblical history of this city?
3. Where is Jesus heading when He walks into
town?
4. What is the correlation between the rich ruler
in Luke 18 and Zacchaeus?
5. How many "chief tax collectors" can you find
in the Gospels?
6. How many rich, named men can you find?
7. What is the significance of Jesus using
Zacchaeus’ name?
8. What does Jesus mean when He says, “Today
salvation to this house”?
9. How is Jesus’ behavior toward Zacchaeus a sign
of true and costly friendship?
10. How does this encounter display the essence of
the Gospels “in, up, and out”?
See you Sunday!
