Series: Twenty-Four Hours that Changed the World                                                       March 12, 2006

Sermon: Jesus, Defenders and Betrayers                                               Matthew 26: 6-30, 31-45, 69-75

I’m beginning a new series of Sermons for the season leading up to Easter called 24 Hours that Changed the World.  We will think through the passion, death and resurrection from the vantage point of those who were with him in his last days and try to understand the story through their vantage point.  Let’s try to creep into their skins and encounter Jesus again as he is anointed, and institutes the Last Supper. 

We have three witnesses to Jesus we’ll consider today: Mary, Judas and Peter.  I think we see three different paradigms for ways to understand and respond to Jesus’ message.

MARY AND HER PERFUME

It is a fact that in the gospel narratives, the women come off much better than the men.  They are far superior disciples, much more self-sacrificial, and understand Jesus’ mission with greater insight and perception.  Here is a perfect example.  According to John, this even happened in the home of Lazarus, and the women who anointed Jesus was Mary the sister of Martha.

Jesus saw this event as in some way connected to him coming death and burial: “She did it to prepare me for burial.”  Jesus saw it as a beautiful act – an appropriate act of extravagance of Christian love and giving.  Somehow, this woman’s act was fully appropriate (even in a world full of poverty) because by this act this woman not only expressed her devotion and love, she pointed the way to what was to come.  What was coming was a critical world-changing event and she was playing an important role.

Jesus’ statement that what she had done would be told wherever the gospel was preached has come true this morning.  We’ve told her story again.  But the story has an important function in this way.  Mary is used by the gospel writer to put Judas into perspective; one gets it, the other doesn’t.  Peter is somewhere in between; he doesn’t get it but is getting it. 

Mary gets it.  What does that mean?  I think two things.  First, she realizes – has some inkling – that when she encounters Jesus she is in God’s presence.  That is huge.  She hasn’t worked out the doctrine of the Trinity.  But she knows that when she’s with Jesus, God-things happen in her.  Jesus brings her to God.  Jesus is God-in-a-body to her.  That is huge. 

Second, I think Mary is beginning to figure out what the male disciples cannot seem to fathom.  Namely, Jesus is about to die a horrible death.  She sees things playing out that way.  Jesus knows it.  He sees the understanding in her eye.  She anointed him to say, “This holy/beautiful/precious/amazing human being is worth everything.  This precious nard is worth nothing compared to him.  And he’s about to die and be buried.”  Her act was a lavish act of self-giving, but also prophetic in Jesus’ understanding.  This woman gets it.  She’s giving her all.  Do you get it?

JUDAS ISCARIOT THE BETRAYER

Judas is a fascinating person as well.  Several very interesting things about him could be said.  One thing that happens when you read carefully – perhaps a little between-the-lines – is that you realize what a shock it must have been to the twelve that Judas was the betrayer.  They didn’t seem to suspect it and were shocked by it.  Firstly, he was the group’s treasurer (John 12:4-6 and 13:29).  That only happens if he was considered above reproach and respected.  He was considered responsible and trustworthy.  Second, when Jesus starts talking about being betrayed, the disciples don’t immediately look to Judas and say, “He’s the one!  We knew it all along!”  No, it came as a complete surprise.  They all wonder if they are the one who is ready to crack under the pressure. 

When Jesus gave Judas the morsel, that threw all the disciples off because the person who received the first morsel was placed in a position of honor and esteem.  He was the honored treasurer – look, he just got the position of honor.  You would have liked Judas, I think.

What about Judas’ motivation.  Let’s try to interpret him with the principle of charity.  I think it all centers on his expectations for what the Messianic deliverer is to do.  When Jesus started talking about his crucifixion, Judas (along with all the disciples) simply could not wrap his mind around this.  Many Messiah-pretenders had already come along to deliver Israel, and Rome had crucified them all.  The litany of crucifixions of false Messiahs is documented in Josephus – a Jewish historian of the time.  The disciples had seen Jesus’ potential, his charisma, he miraculous power, his ‘Son of Man’ and ‘Son of God’ language which harkened back to King David and the restoration of David’s kingdom. 

That was very exciting!  All the disciples were thrilled to think they were getting in on the Messianic Kingdom on the ground floor.  And to think Jesus had chosen 12 disciples – clearly a reference to the 12 tribes of Israel.  So they were to establish a New Israel with a tribe for each.  The Gospels each make clear that the disciples expected that kind of kingdom.  Peter rebuked Jesus when he suggested that he would go to Jerusalem to be killed (Matt 16:21-23).  The disciples had even quarreled about their ranks and positions in the New Kingdom just before the Last Supper (Lk. 22:24-26).  The disciples had simply ignored everything Jesus said about his Kingdom not being of this world.  They expected Jesus was going to go to Jerusalem for this Passover and challenge the power of Rome and lead a military revolution.  That is probably what Peter has in mind when he says, “I’m willing to die for you, Jesus.”  He probably is thinking of a military battlefield.

Jesus had been slowly bringing them around to understand that his Kingdom had nothing to do with the power of Rome but the power of Sin.  It was a very very difficult paradigm shift and they resisted every step of the way.  They were all enthralled with the thought of being leaders in the new Messianic kingdom.  Judas was perhaps the most perceptive of the twelve, and realized that Jesus was not planning on establishing an earthly kingdom.  He simply couldn’t make the paradigm shift.  He wanted a Messiah who would challenge the power of Rome, not the power of sin – the Rome within.

So as an act of patriotism and devotion to Israel’s reestablishment of the Davidic kingdom, Judas decides to call the whole thing to a halt.  Jesus was not only not going to challenge Rome, he would complicate the intentions of those who would do so.  He would steer a huge group of those who sought this kingdom away to a kingdom that was not “of this world.”  Judas wanted a kingdom ‘of this world’ and not with Rome’s heavy boot on their neck.  Judas simply turned Jesus in to the proper authorities once he realized that Jesus was, in his opinion, a Messianic fake.  You cannot simply transform what the Messianic hopes are about like this – a kingdom not of this world.

PETER AND THE ROSTER

So far, we’ve considered the faith, perception and generosity of Mary, the betrayal of Judas, and now the weakness of Peter.  As I’ve thought about this story of Peter’s betrayal, and read over it carefully, I’ve come to realize something that I don’t think I’ve ever seen before.  I think Peter really meant this.  Peter at one moment believes he’ll follow Jesus to the death.  He’s probably thinking in terms of death which involved a struggle with the Romans for independence.  But perhaps the Judas impulse has gotten to him.  His denials seem very real; it wasn’t simply a moment of weakness.  He doesn’t seem to be simply trying to buy himself some time so he can continue to follow Jesus closely.

Peter seems to be actually denying Christ in a Judas fashion.  The language he uses says he denied that he knew Jesus with an oath and a curse.  “May God curse me if I’m lying!  I really don’t know the man!”  This is serious business.  I read up on oath-taking as I started thinking about this.  These were fairly common – divine authority would be appealed to to set up an automatic, irreversible mechanism that activates or triggers the curse as soon as stipulated circumstances arise.  Therefore, Peter is saying, “If I do indeed know this may, I’m giving God permission to curse me!”  I cannot help but wonder if Peter really had come to believe that he didn’t know Jesus after all.  When Peter affirmed, “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God!” Jesus answered, “Blessed are you Peter because flesh and blood has not revealed this to you.”

Now Peter claims he doesn’t know Jesus and I cannot help but take him seriously.  Of course, technically he did.  But did he have some thought process of rationalization going on in his mind that allowed him to take a divine curse in claiming that he didn’t.  I wonder if Peter was realizing that Jesus wasn’t who he thought.  Remember Peter rebuked Jesus when Jesus first started talking about going to Jerusalem to die.  “Jesus, you’re not going to die, you’re going to be victorious and the Romans are going to die!”  Jesus said, ‘Get behind me, Satan.’ 

Peter cannot get it into his head that Jesus is really going to die.  Peter is willing to die for Jesus, but he is not willing for Jesus to die.  He’s the Christ, the Son of God!  How could he die?  What could be the plan in that?  So Peter follows Jesus all the way hearing Jesus’ words at their Passover meal, “This is my body” “This is my blood poured out for the forgiveness of sins.”  Peter is taking a long time to catch on, but as he think over the Last Supper, those words are ringing in his ears while he’s following Jesus in the Garden and then under guard.  I think Peter is finally beginning to understand that Jesus is going to die.  There will not be thrones in a New Israel with Peter as Jesus’ right-hand-man in this glorious re-establishment of the kingship of David.

Peter is angry for thinking Jesus would take on Rome.  He’s angry with himself  “I don’t know this man.  I don’t know a dying-on-the-cross kind of Jesus.”  I think that is how he is rationalizing his oath, “I don’t know the man.  I thought I knew him but I realize now that I don’t.  God knows I don’t know this man who is walking right into their trap!  I would be willing to die for him if he would stand and fight!  But not this willing self-sacrifice!”  I wonder if Peter was hoping Jesus would stand and fight against Rome right up to the point that Jesus allowed himself to be taken by the guards in the garden.

This is Peter’s Judas moment.  I think he means his oath just as fervently as Judas meant his betrayal; only a few hours later and Peter’s mind wasn’t so firmly made up.  Luke (22:61) tells us that Jesus was being led from the courtyard to the soldier’s barracks and turned to catch Peter’s eye.  Something in that moment broke Peter’s heart.  He remembered what the Lord had said about his denial.  He went out and wept bitterly.  I think he realized that he simply couldn’t reject Jesus even if he didn’t understand what Jesus was doing.  It was a moment of a leap of faith: I don’t know what this man is doing.  I feel like I don’t even know him anymore.  But I’m not going through with this rejection.  He went right up to the Judas-jump and then pulled back.  “I don’t really know him, but I’m not rejecting him.”

THREE RESPONSES TO JESUS

I want you to place yourself in this story.  Most laudable is the response of Mary.  She understood Jesus better than the rest and responded more appropriately.  Her gift was reasonable and passionate: if Jesus is indeed the incarnation of God, about ready to choose a self-sacrificial death, the appropriate response is to give the very very best of ourselves.  We so often give to God sloppily, and with little care to the sacredness of the one whom we worship.  Let us learn from Mary.  May we in this church inspire many Mary’s to pour out their most costly gifts.  Why give to God what costs us nothing.

Second, the response of Judas.  Of course, there is a little Judas in us all.  Judas is easy to despise, but he was a fierce patriot whose devotion to country came first and foremost.  Perhaps his greatest sin was his unwillingness to learn from Jesus that Rome’s threat was not the greatest.  The tyranny of human sin and selfishness caused more destruction than Rome ever could, and if one replaces one tyrant with another, what gain has been made?  What can be learned from Judas?  The danger of patriotism run amuck, of fierce loyalties that blind us to the deeper realities of the situation. 

What of Peter?  He wept in the end.  He turned from the brink of self-destruction that took Judas.  His heart wouldn’t let him deny the Lord.  That made all the difference.  It will make all the difference for you.