|
21–22 A second potential recruit is met by an even more off-putting demand
from Jesus. The phrase “another of his disciples” suggests that both the
potential follower of these verses and the enthusiastic “scribe” of v. 19 are in
some sense to be understood as “disciples;”¹ this one even uses the more
committed form of address, “Lord,” rather than “Teacher.” Yet neither is
identified as one of the Twelve, and we should probably assume that neither
in fact became one of Jesus’ traveling companions. Whereas in Mark the
term mathētēs is probably restricted to the Twelve,² Matthew, like Luke,
also uses it sometimes more widely of anyone who is committed to following
Jesus. Note, in addition to this passage, its use in 10:24–25, 42. In 5:1, while
it denotes people who are separated from the crowd, there is no reason to
restrict it to those who would later be identified as the Twelve; the discourse
is addressed to anyone who has become part of the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew’s use of the verb mathēteuō (not used in the other gospels)
confirms this broader usage, being applied to a “scribe who has become a
disciple to the kingdom of heaven” (13:52), to Joseph of Arimathea (27:57),
and to the people from all nations who will become followers of Jesus as a
result of the mission of the “eleven disciples” (28:19).²¹ It seems then that
here (and by implication also in vv. 19–20) Matthew is using the term for a
potential committed follower, a volunteer who is thinking of leaving the
“crowd” in order to travel with Jesus. Jesus’ response is then designed to
draw out the radical implications of such a commitment.
The potential disciple’s words are usually understood of the immediate and
pressing responsibility of arranging the funeral for his father who had just died.
Burial took place within 24 hours of the death, so he would not be asking for a
long postponement, though subsequent ceremonies could last up to a week. The
arrangements were the responsibility of the eldest son (Gen 50:5–7; Tob 4:3;
6:15; 14:11–12; Sir 38:16), and Jewish custom and piety demanded that they
take priority over all other commitments, even the most essential prayers (Lev
21:1–3; m. Ber. 3:1). The request would thus be entirely reasonable, indeed
essential. If his filial duties prevented him from joining the group in the boat just
now, he could catch up with Jesus as soon as his responsibilities had been
discharged; the word “first” implies that was his intention. No Jew, especially
one who took religious obligations seriously, could have expected him to do
otherwise. Jesus’ refusal to allow so essential a filial duty would then be
profoundly shocking.
But K. E. Bailey,²² drawing on the insight of Arabic commentators and on his
own experience of cultures and idioms of the Middle East, insists that such a
scenario results from a “western” reading of the text and is culturally impossible.
If the father had just died, the son could hardly be out at the roadside with Jesus;
his place was to be keeping vigil and preparing for the funeral. Rather, to “bury
one’s father” is standard idiom for fulfilling one’s filial responsibilities for the
remainder of the father’s lifetime, with no prospect of his imminent death. This
would then be a request for indefinite postponement of discipleship, likely to be
for years rather than days. In that case Jesus’ reply would be less immediately
shocking—the man’s proposed “discipleship” was apparently not very serious.²³
But even so Jesus’ demand would still cut across deep-rooted cultural
expectations, and the reference to those who can be left to fulfill the filial
responsibility as being themselves “the dead” is harsh.²⁴ Like v. 20, it is an
epigrammatic formulation designed to pull the man up short. The cultural
“insensitivity” of Jesus’ demand underlines the radical newness and overriding
importance of the message of the kingdom of heaven; even the most basic of
family ties must not be allowed to stand in its way (cf. 4:22; 10:37; 12:46–50;
19:29). Compared with those who have found true life in the kingdom of heaven,
those who remain outside it are “the dead.” This metaphorical use of nekros
(literally “a dead person,” “corpse”) for those without spiritual life does not
occur elsewhere in the gospels,²⁵ but it is a metaphor readily understood in the
light of sayings like 10:39; 16:25–26, and occurs elsewhere in the NT (Eph 2:1,
5; Col 2:13; Rev 3:1).² A disciple’s business is with life, not with death.
Whether the metaphor is immediately grasped or not, Jesus’ reply is a stark
refusal to allow filial duty to take priority over discipleship. No rabbi would
have been so cavalier, and normal Jewish piety would find such an attitude
incomprehensible,²⁷ a prima facie breach of the fifth commandment, even though
Jesus himself elsewhere endorses it (15:3–6; 19:19).²⁸ If this is what “authority
not like their scribes” (7:29) involves, most people would not want to have
anything to do with it. The kingdom of heaven apparently involves a degree of
fanaticism which is willing to disrupt the normal rhythms of social life.² Jesus
can hardly have been surprised that true discipleship remained a minority
movement, and that popular enthusiasm for his teaching and healing generally
stopped short of full discipleship. Many are invited but few are chosen (20:16;
22:14; cf. 7:14).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
