loose ends

it would seem in the old testament law, God had a thing for allowing people to tie up loose ends.

Deuteronomy 20:5 Then the officers shall speak to the people, saying, 'Is there any man who has built a new house and has not dedicated it? Let him go back to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man dedicate it. 6 And is there any man who has planted a vineyard and has not enjoyed it's fruit? Let him go back to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man enjoy its fruit. 7 And is there any man who has betrothed a wife and has not taken her? Let him go back to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man take her.'

there is something of a sense of seeing things through to fruition here... the fruit of building a house is it's dedication, of planting a vineyard enjoying it's fruit, and betrothal to a wife the taking of her to himself.  those were things God intended for the man to 'tie up the loose ends' himself, and not be left to another man.

and it's not just an immediate thing, either.  i don't know how long the dedication of a house was, but for a vineyard it could be 5 years: the cross reference for verse 6 in the esv is to Leviticus 19:23-25:

Lev 23 When you come into the land and plant any kind of tree for food, then you shall regard its fruit as forbidden.  Three years it shall be forbidden to you; it must not be eaten. 24 And in the fourth year all its fruit shall be holy, an offering of praise to the LORD.  25  But in the fifth year you may eat of its fruit, to increase its yield for you: I am the LORD your God.

whether that necessarily applies to grapes i don't know...

and from betrothal to the 'taking' of the wife is a year.

my point in pointing this out is to say that the jews would have been used to the idea of wrapping up loose ends before embarking into battle -- because God himself put those things into the law.

so when you move to the gospels, when Jesus says to people to 'follow me', and they say, 'i will, just as soon as i....' and they mention a loose end, they are doing what seems right according to what they have been taught, no?  so who are we to say that they are only halfhearted in their acceptance of following Jesus?  they would be attempting to do right by their God to see things through to fruition before they go on to the next thing He has for them.  finish what you started, right?

so what is really the 'moral of the story' for verses such as Luke 9:59 - 62?

Luke 9:59 To another he said, "Follow me."  But he said, "Lord, let me first go and bury my father." 60 And Jesus said to him, "Leave the dead to bury their own dead.  But as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.  61 Yet another said, "I will follow you, Lord, but let me first say farewell to those at my home." 62 Jesus said to him, "No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God."

in my meager understanding, it seems rather than about our willingness, it's more about the paradigm shift that Jesus brought to the understanding of God's kingdom.  He is doing a NEW thing.  there are no loose ends to tie:  they are dead things, but a vapor.  He was countering what they knew of how the kingdom worked.  it was as much a affront to the levitical law as His saying "drink my blood, eat my flesh".  it would be offensive.  only those with new ears would hear.  those whose understanding of God was tied to the law would naturally find it foolishness, and would turn away.  why do we tend to diss them for doing what is logical?  only if He has given them ears to hear will they be able to hear.... and have their world turned upside down.

talk about a PARADIGM SHIFT.  whoa.

i dunno, i just been mulling this over for about 3 days now.

~lynnie

parable of the beaten man v2

a re-write of an earlier post http://no-agenda-but-jesus.blogspot.com/2010/12/parable-of-beaten-man.html. as i was rereading it today, i saw a totally different emphasis.

*******

Jesus was asked, how can i be saved?

He told a story...

a certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, fell among robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and left him for dead.

a priest came down the road. to touch the man would make him ceremonially unclean and unable to do his priestly duties. so he passed him by on the other side. the law was unable to save.

a levite came and looked. to touch the man would make him ceremonially unclean. so he passed him by on the other side as well. the law was unable to save.

but an Outcast came along, rejected and despised, and so identified with the broken man, that He had mercy on him and took him unto Himself, and loved him as His own. He bound up his wounds, anointing them with oil and wine, and carrying him on His own animal, took him to an inn to tend to him.

the next day when He left, He gave the innkeeper two denarii, and said whatever else the man's wounds require, I will give all. for this left-for-dead man's life I take as Mine own.

who was a Neighbor to the man who fell among robbers?

Jesus said, "Go and do likewise".

(ref. Luke 10:30-37.)

***

please note: i'm  not stating this, or the earlier version, as in anyway an authoritative -- or even necessarily accurate --  interpretation of the scripture.  i'm just attempting to understand. :)
~lynnie