Tag: denial

The Bible in a Year – 11 November

If this is your first viewing, please see my Introduction before reading this

11 November. Mark chapter 14

Only a single chapter of the Gospel today, but one worth pondering closely.  It covers the “anointing at Bethany”, Last Supper, the arrest of Jesus and his appearance before the High Priest, and Peter’s three-fold denial.  There could hardly be a greater contrast  than in the attitudes towards Jesus of the people here.

The High Priest (Annas or Caiaphas depending which Gospel you read – they shared the role), when he asked Jesus “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” (14:61), presumably had already decided in his mind that the correct answer was “no”.  So when Jesus replied “I am” (not only an answer to a closed question, but also an implied identity with God himself), the High Priest took the straight answer to be a lie, and the “I am” (and subsequent declaration that he would sit at God’s right hand and return in power) to be a blasphemy.  He must have known the reports of Jesus’ miracles and teaching, and could have drawn the obvious conclusion for himself.  So either he didn’t believe in the concept of the Messiah that he professed, or (more likely)  he was, like so many other people in power, prepared to set aside his own integrity and conscience in order to keep the status-quo.

Peter was motivated by fear and the instinct for self-preservation, rather than power and riches, when he denied Jesus not only among other men but even to a servant girl. But at least he acknowledged his failure, and we see him a few weeks later as once again Jesus’ chief disciple. As Jesus said in chapter 3 (see my commentary ), all sins are forgiveable except the sin against the Holy Spirit.  To deny that you know Jesus the Messiah is a sin but a forgiveable one.  To deny the possibility of him being the Messiah is to resist the Holy Spirit, and is (spiritually) unforgiveable, for the Spirit cannot work in such a person.

At the start of the reading we meet not a High Priest, not an apostle, but an unnamed woman (though often assumed to be Mary Magdalen).  Not only does she believe in Jesus, but is prepared to acknowledge him in an unusual way, a way that costs her dearly and attracts criticism, as she pours perfumed ointment over his head.     “She has anointed me for burial” says Jesus, but the act of anointing also acknowledges him as the true High Priest and King.  But for Jesus at that moment what probably mattered most was giving him her full attention and devotion when he was highly troubled and stressed. A woman’s touch, the scent of the nard, and her tears would have touched this most sensitive of men.   Mark, in recording this little cameo scene, obeyed what Jesus also said, “Truly I tell you, wherever the good news is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in remembrance of her.”

So what is your reaction to the Jesus who says “I am” – by implication “I am the Messiah”, and as John records, also “I am the way, the truth and the life”.  Will you deny the possibility of the truth of those statements, or deny that you intend to follow him, or offer him your most precious belongings and your undivided attention?

 

The Bible in a Year – 9 November

If this is your first viewing, please see my Introduction before reading this

9 November. Mark chapters 10-11

From the point yesterday where Jesus talks about ‘taking up the cross’ and ‘giving up one’s life’ to follow him, events move swiftly.  Within a couple of pages of Mark’s Gospel he teaches his disciples more about the servant nature of ministry, faith and forgiveness, during which time he also arrives in Jerusalem with them, then confronts the money-changers and traders in the Temple that was supposed to be a place of prayer.  Finally, he is challenged by the “priests, scribes and elders” about the source or authority of his teaching.  Authority was a big matter for them – Jewish rabbinical tradition is based on tradition, precedent and the moral authority of one rabbi over another.

Jesus once again answers their question with another: “Did the baptism of John come from heaven, or was it of human origin?” It was a trick question, and Mark explains their reason for being reluctant to answer it by saying it was of human origin, for “they were afraid of the crowd, for all regarded John as truly a prophet” (11:31-32). I think they did really know it was from heaven, but were too embarrassed to say so.

There is an English saying that dates from the 16th century if not earlier, and particularly popular in Yorkshire: “There’s none so blind as those who won’t see”.  In other words, if we have a reason for finding a certain truth “inconvenient” (as Al Gore might say) then we will deny it, at least outwardly to other people; and if we deny it often enough to others we will convince ourselves that it is not true as well.  The priests and scribes would have found it very inconvenient at this point to acknowledge to others or even themselves that John’s baptism was from God, because in that case they would have had to accept that Jesus who did more miracles than John ever did, and whom John called the “[sacrificial] lamb of God” was also sent from God.  But they had spent the last couple of years publicly criticising Jesus’ teaching, doubting his miracles and denouncing his authority.

When someone is in this “denying something they know in their heart to be true” mode, there is no point trying to argue further, as the more you convince them of the rightness of the argument the more they will argue against it – just look at the climate change deniers today.  All you can do is leave them alone until they convince themselves inwardly and “eat humble pie”. If they eventually stop opposing the obvious truth, then they know they have lost the argument and there’s no point humiliating them further by saying “I told you so”.    Unfortunately Jesus didn’t have time on his side to wait for this to happen.