(Text and Audio)
Title: The Prerequisites of Knowing Jesus
It is good that so many of our A.U. students are back and that is actually my lead in this morning. Someone explain to me what a prerequisite class is. Can anyone give me an example. Why are they necessary? What’s the philosophy behind a prerequisite?
Keep that in mind as we continue, we’ll come back to it shortly. (read/pray)
- Is Matthew the tax collector also the author of this Gospel?
This question always seems to come up when studying Matthew in two places. First, it is usually a point of discussion when one begins reading the Gospel of Matthew because you want to know a bit about the author. The question is usually asked like this, “Is the author the same Matthew, also called Levi, that was one of the 12 apostles?”
Certainly, a fair question. The other time the matter comes up is in today’s passage, where we see Jesus call a man named Matthew, also called Levi, a tax collector, to come join him and his ministry.
Well, the truth is, a valid argument can be made for both possibilities. Let me break it down for you a bit.
Points to Matthew the tax collector also being the author of this Gospel:
- While Mark and Luke give the fourth pair of Apostles as “Matthew and Thomas,” the Gospel of Matthew gives them as “Thomas and Matthew”. Why is that a big deal? Its shows modesty by the author.
- While Luke 5:29 explicitly states, and Mark 2:15 suggests, that Matthew gave a banquet for Jesus, Matthew 9:10 in describing the same banquet does not indicate who the host was. Again, both of these variations would be routine touches of modesty if Matthew was the author.
Points to Matthew the tax collector NOT being the author of this Gospel:
- The Gospel of Matthew does not read like an eyewitness account. (There is no inclusive language like what we find in Luke. “We then went here” etc.)
- Most scholars believe Mark was the earliest Gospel, yet Matthew borrows a lot of material word for word from Matthew. This seems strange: If Matthew was also an eye witness, why did he just copy what Mark wrote instead of writing it as he saw it?
For what it’s worth, my personal position is the latter, I think we are talking about two different men here, and that the gospel of Matthew was written by a different Matthew than the tax collector we are going to talk about today. Also, believing that the author of this book was not the apostle Matthew helps support a later date of authorship, after A.D. 70. It’s not impossible that Matthew the tax collector wrote this gospel after A.D. 70, but if the book was written after the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, it’s more likely that it was written by another Matthew, younger than the apostle we read about here.
- A Note on Tax Collection
I know many of you are aware of this, so I’ll be brief. Tax collecting was not a favorable vocation. If you were a Jewish tax collector, as this Matthew was, that means that for a living what you decided to do was work for the Roman government. And, using the power of the Roman courts and peacekeepers (soldiers) you made other Jews pay taxes to Cesar. You worked for the oppressive enemy of the Jews. This did not make you popular in Jewish circles.
Furthermore, the way you actually put food on your own table is by taking a little extra for yourself. So you, a Jew, show up at someone’s house, with a couple Roman Soldiers in the front lawn, and you declare that this household owes taxes of $15 that month. Only they don’t owe $15, they owe $12, and you pocket the $3. The Jews knew this was a racket, and they generally despised anyone who would do this sort of work.
Right now in our country, abortion is legal. But it is not funded by tax dollars. Imagine if a Christian got a bill passed so that our tax dollars now went to fund abortion clinics. How would that Christian be received amongst other Christians.
Not well, right? Same idea here.
POINT: Jesus has a history (both in the Bible and otherwise) of calling people who are social outcasts to follow him. He never says that Matthew’s line of work is okay. In fact, he lumps Matthew in with the other sinners he’s eating with, but Jesus is willing to call Matthew, willing to train Matthew, willing to save Matthew.
Here’s my question: By that standard, do we have any right to turn our backs on anyone. We do not qualify people for the kingdom. We bear the message of the Kingdom to anyone who will hear us.
- The Question and Answer
So the author sets up the scene. Jesus is walking (presumably with the disciples he’s already called) and sees Matthew sitting at the tax office. He calls to him “follow me.” And the next scene is Jesus eating at Matthew’s house. (Again, the Gospel of Matthew doesn’t tell us that it’s Matthew’s house, but Luke and Mark do.)
I think it’s safe to infer at this point that Matthew was interested in whatever it was that Jesus had to say. So he invites Jesus and his disciples over. And Matthew brings his friends. And in this day of open air dining, where passers by could gather and listen to the meal’s conversation, the Pharisees just happen to show up and what to they see? Jesus, this supposed Rabbi, this possible profit, who’s stories of baffling teachings and miracles have all of Galilee in an uproar, is sitting in the home of a tax collector, with his disciples and bunch of other tax collectors and sinners.
The immediate presumption of the Pharisees is simple: A man of God should not be in this situation, in this type of company!
So the Pharisees ask Jesus’ disciples the question: “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”
But Jesus, presumably overhearing their conversation, answers for himself. He says two things:
- “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.”
What is the subtle suggestion here? The tax collectors, the sinners, even Jesus’ disciples are sick, and they know it, and they are not offended by Jesus’ words, they are with him to be healed.
I can’t help but thinking again of Jesus telling the Pharisees “You who is without sin, cast the first stone.” When they want him to give his approval to stoning the woman caught in adultery. It’s the same subtle suggestion.
They are sick, I am the physician.
What isn’t said, is the most powerful part of Jesus’ teaching.
(Pharisee, are you well?)
If you are hear today, and are not sure if you know who Jesus Christ is, let me ask that question: Honestly now, are you well?
- “But go and learn what this means: “I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.
Jesus here is quoting Hosea 6:6, where the O.T. prophet cries out saying to his wayward people: Faithfulness, not ritual, is what is required of God’s people.
This is huge. Jesus looks at the Pharisees, the most highly decorated and regarded spiritual people amongst the Jews and says, “Go back to the O.T. and realize what Hosea was telling you. (In other words, “I know you’ve read it, but you don’t yet understand it.”) You are all about ritual, but that’s not what I want. I want your faithfulness, not your sacrifice.”
- “For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”
In other words Jesus tells them: “If you are righteous you have no need for a savior. What can I possibly save you from if you are already so right with God?”
This is the foundation of the Gospel.
If you think you are righteous you can’t see God. Even if he’s sitting right in front of you, eating a meal with sinners.
The prerequisite for being saved is knowing that you need to be saved. The perquisite for a visit to the doctor is knowing that you are not well.
The prerequisite for Jesus being able to forgive your sins is knowing you are a sinner in the first place.
One cannot share the truth of who Jesus is without sharing the reality of sin, both personal and universal. But when we refuse to talk about sin, and still try to talk about Jesus, we create Pharisees. We create seemingly holy people who look at the Jesus of the Bible, and can’t understand what he’s doing, so they change it.
The reason they can’t understand what he’s doing is the same reason the Pharisees couldn’t. They didn’t realize how sick they were, they didn’t truly then, have a need for Jesus.