"Matthew the Tax Collector/Simon the Zealot" has been ringing in my head for few weeks now. Basically these two disciples of Jesus represented both ends of the political spectrum of the day. Matthew had chosen to cooperate with the Romans, figuring it was the best way to ensure survival and his own financial status. Simon aligned himself with a group actively fighting for the violent overthrow of the Roman government. Both positions were not just theoretical exercises, but had real world consequences. Matthew helped further a crushing tax burden leading to devastation in many Jewish families. Simon's compatriots eventually brought down the wrath of Rome in such a way that thousands of Jews were killed when the temple was destroyed and Jerusalem was overrun.
Yet despite their wide political differences and the devastating results of their philosophies, Jesus wanted them both as followers. I haven't found a record of Jesus discussing politics with either of them. Neither did He appear to rebuke them for their positions. He didn't argue with them or take sides. He didn't show them where their logic was flawed or force them into some kind of compromise. Rather, He just said, "Follow Me."
So why is the refrain of "Matthew the Tax Collector/Simon the Zealot" bouncing around in my head?
Well, I tend to be very politically minded. The unfortunate downside is the demonization of anyone who differs. After all, their ideas have real world consequences which I believe hurt people. And there is the obvious conclusion that if I think I am right, those who disagree are, by definition, wrong. There is no escaping thinking I am right, however. I mean, if I didn't think I was right, I would change my mind. Then I would be right again!
Yet Matthew and Simon appear to have put aside their differences. How? Obviously it was Jesus, but how did this play out? How were they able to think that the other was so wrong and yet unite anyway? I have to believe that their personal beliefs faded in importance when confronted with the Messiah. Did their ideas change? or were they simply irrelevant when in the presence of Christ?
Because I am a collector of ideas, I read voraciously. One genre I have a love/hate relationship with is anything by very liberal Christians. I love to read their arguments and tear them apart, but on the other hand I get very angry at their judgementalism of the more conservative sects. (I guess I am judgemental of their judgementalism?!?) I find myself doubting their self-proclaimed Christianity. Or at least I think it's possible that they are Christians, but they are going to have another thing coming when they get to Heaven. Jesus will surely tell them what's up then! Right?!? At the very least they will be confined to the trailer park section of Heaven on the wrong side of the tracks.
My thinking kind of came to a head this morning in church as Mike Goldsworthy talked about the early church and the destruction of barriers they faced. Peter was told to welcome and even eat with Gentiles. There could not have been a more "other" group that God told him to love and accept. Although Peter led the charge of acceptance, even he stumbled later when Paul tells us in Galatians that he challenged Peter "to his face" for failing to welcome and eat with Gentiles in the presence of more conservative Jews.
Oh I relate to Peter. He was headstrong, offensive, opinionated, had to be told things by God repeatedly, argued with Jesus - a lot, and had a hard time always doing what he knew was right. I definitely find myself in his camp when he rebelled against God telling him to eat unclean things. Like always, God had to say it three times. You see, I like things a certain way - the right way. I like being around people who think like me, who talk like me, who come from a similar background. It's not a racial thing, it's a belief thing. I want to be around those who believe what I believe.
But that's not what Jesus did. Somehow His presence united Matthew and Simon, Peter (the hothead) and John (the lover of all), Paul and John Mark, and countless others who disagreed. How did He do this? I don' t know, but I want to know.
I want to focus on Jesus to the extent that my own personal beliefs fade in importance and it is Him that takes priority in my life. I want to see those I disagree with as fellow disciples spreading the message of Christ even if we have different methods. I don't WANT to be in contention. I don't WANT to have to always be right. I WANT to be in unity with my fellow believers.
I don't know if I'd have been on the side Matthew or Simon. I'm sure with my personality that I'd have definitely had an opinion and argued to the death with anyone on the opposite side. But, two thousand years later, it seems so irrelevant. Hmm...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Michelle, I am loving this new blog that you started. I look forward to digging deeper with you and I will do my best to comment here. I have noticed that when I write about spiritual matters, people don't often comment, even when I pose a question. Yet, that is the conversation I WANT to have. I guess it is easier to keep it light - about family and such. Anyways, know that I am reading even if I don't always comment.
Michelle, Great post. I think about this stuff often, also. I also wonder how it is that Christians who are like, pro-abortion can ever enter the Kingdom of Heaven when all is said and done. For some reason I feel like I have to be Gods little helper and help him judge people. I know the Bible says, how I judge people,
so I will be judged also. It is hard for me to just go with the flow and treat everyone the same....Uncle Kent
Couldn't have said it better myself. Beautifully written Michelle!
I used the same thing Simon/Matthew example tonight in our home church meeting after we had an intense conflict between two people which divided the group.
For myself I have come to the conclusion that it is only right for me to judge a matter or person if I have been given the authority to do so. I can judge my dependent children but not yours; I can judge an equal (like my wife or friend) if they have me the authority. As an opposite example; I can judge a defendant in court as deserving to be punished,but it is meaningless unless I have received the authority as a Judge. In fact if I make my judgement strong enough I may be punished by the rightful judge. All authority on Earth is always granted by a higher authority - we cannot simply assume it as we wish. If I have not been given authority to judge I best keep my mouth closed and leave it to another
I used the same Simon/Matthew example tonight in our home church meeting after we had an intense conflict between two people which divided the group.
For myself I have come to the conclusion that it is only right for me to judge a matter or person if I have been given the authority to do so. I can judge my dependent children but not yours; I can judge an equal (like my wife or friend) if they have me the authority. As an opposite example; I can judge a defendant in court as deserving to be punished,but it is meaningless unless I have received the authority as a Judge. In fact if I make my judgement strong enough I may be punished by the rightful judge.
All authority on Earth is always granted by a higher authority - we cannot simply assume it as we wish. If I have not been given authority to judge I best keep my mouth closed and leave it to another. I may rightfully and even necessarily judge for myself whether a political or social issue is right for me, knowing that I in turn will be judged by a higher authority, but I have no right to judge another.
I used the same Simon/Matthew example tonight in our home church meeting after we had an intense conflict between two people which divided the group.
For myself I have come to the conclusion that it is only right for me to judge a matter or person if I have been given the authority to do so. I can judge my dependent children but not yours; I can judge an equal (like my wife or friend) if they have me the authority. As an opposite example; I can judge a defendant in court as deserving to be punished,but it is meaningless unless I have received the authority as a Judge. In fact if I make my judgement strong enough I may be punished by the rightful judge.
All authority on Earth is always granted by a higher authority - we cannot simply assume it as we wish. If I have not been given authority to judge I best keep my mouth closed and leave it to another. I may rightfully and even necessarily judge for myself whether a political or social issue is right for me, knowing that I in turn will be judged by a higher authority, but I have no right to judge another.
Very timely ...both in 30...2008 or 2018 AD.
Nothing on the throne but Christ. All others are idols.
Its very profound that 2 of his followers were from such different backgrounds...
Matthew hopefully did not go on doing the common practice of extortion....and Simon hopefully didn't go around killing Romans to overthrow...since Christ show how Our king reigns.
Well done!
Pastor Mark Goldsworthy
Post a Comment