Son of God Redefined

Sermon on Mark 14:1-11

Last month, I gave a sermon about Jesus healing a blind man with his saliva. [1] I then mentioned another story about the Roman Emperor Vespasian who also healed a blind man with his saliva. Some may think I have saliva fetish, well I don’t. It is Mark. In case some of you missed the purpose of the second story, allow me to elaborate on my point now because it is relevant to the passage today. You see, I believe Mark, as the first gospel writer, was trying to give his listeners a new understanding of the title “son of God”. At the beginning of the gospel, Mark states his objective: Mark 1:1 “The beginning of the good news about Jesus the Messiah, the Son of God.” When Christians see the title, “Son of God”, and they assume it naturally means the second person of the Holy Trinity, but actually its original meaning is radically different for the original listeners. How would a person in the past listening to Mark 1:1 interpret the title “Son of God”?

For the world at large, and by this I am referring to the Roman Empire during that era, “Son of God” refers to the Roman Emperor. [2] It all started with Julius Caesar who was crazy with self-importance after his final victory in 44BC. It can happen to you when you fight and fight your entire life, and you always win. This is why I always lose my arguments to my wife. Anway, Julius Caesar became a “god”. Statues were set up to Caesar as the "unconquered god." He was given a house built like a temple; his portrait was put on the coins, something formerly reserved for the gods. Legal oaths were sworn by his name “I swear by Julius Caesar”; his birthday was made a public festival; the month Quinctilis was renamed July in his honor, just like how we got the name June from the god Juno. His title as a living divinity was Divus Julius, meaning Divine Julius. However, the madness did not stop there.

After Julius Caesar died, his adopted son Octavian honoured him as a divus (god) of the Roman state. This was how the imperial cult and emperor worship began. Since, Julius was god, Octavian then proclaimed himself as (divi filius) son of God. Since then, all Roman Emperors claimed to be the sons of God including Vespasian who reigned when Mark was being written. His last words were puto deus fio ("I think I'm turning into a god"). So when Mark said he was going to talk about Jesus, the Son of God, some may have wondered: was he talking about a person like the Roman Emperors? And when Mark’s account of the healing of the blind man with saliva was so much like Vespasian’s story, you know there is no mistaking the comparison. Mark was directly challenging the notion of “son of God”. Who should be the true “son of God”? Should it be someone like Vespasian? Or is it someone like Jesus?

Let’s stop here and think for a second. What words would you associate with the title “son of God”? Power? Honor? Strength? Authority? I’ve read the series Percy Jackson, the son of Poseidon. The demi-gods in the stories were equated with special powers. Is that what “son of God” means?

Mark not only challenged the common understanding of Roman Emperors as “sons of God”, he was also questioning the Jews who had their own understanding of “son of God”. For the Jews, [3] the “son of God” referred to the kings from the line of David. They had this understanding because of the promise God gave to David through his prophet.

2 Samuel 7:11 “‘The LORD declares to you that the LORD himself will establish a house for you: 12 When your days are over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you. 13 He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his father, and he will be my son. 16 Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever.’” [4]

This house that would be constructed refers to the Temple. For the Jews then, the Temple was the physical sign that all future kings from the line of David are the “son(s) of God”. It is understandable that the Jews expected the Messiah to be a Davidic king, who would re-establish the kingdom of God, who would destroy their enemies and oppressors, who would validate the priests of the Temple and the teachers of the Law for preserving this tradition all this while. But Jesus, who Mark has proclaimed as the “son of God”, seemed to be nothing like this.

Jesus challenged in Mark 12: 37 “(If) David himself calls (the Messiah) ‘Lord.’ How then can he be his son?” Jesus seemed to have refuted the importance of Davidic kingship. As for upholding Law and the Temple system, in Mark 3, he openly challenged Sabbath law. Then we were told: Mark 3: 6 Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus. When in Jerusalem, he disrupted the Temple system, “driving out those who were buying and selling there.” Again we were told: Mark 11: 18 The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him.

Jesus wasn’t exactly the poster child for the Jewish “son of God”. Mark shows us that the priests and the Pharisees wanted to kill Jesus, because Jesus was undermining that entire belief system, from the Davidic kingship to the Law to the Temple. But these things were not wrong in itself. Jesus did come from the line of David. Jesus fulfils the Law and embodies the Temple. But one key factor is missing, and that element radically transforms the entire meaning the “son of God”. And the key is this: the “son of God” must suffer, die and rise again. We can read how Jesus revealed this key to his closest disciples.

Mark 8: 29 (Jesus) asked. “Who do you say I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Messiah.” 31 He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again.

Wait, what?!? The Messiah, the “son of God”, must suffer, die and rise again? You can see why Peter reacted strongly to this. Yet, Jesus would repeat this same exact teaching 2 more times before entering Jerusalem (repeated in Mark 9:30ff, and Mark 10:32ff). But nobody rebutted him anymore. Somehow they didn’t like to be labeled as Satan. Mark knew about the proud proclamations of the Roman Emperors as the “son of God”. To them, it meant the divine blessing to rule over the empire. Mark knew the ambitions the Jews had for their own version of the “son of God”. But Mark says, hey, let me tell you about Jesus, he is the true Son of God. This Son of God comes to suffer and die. Really? A Son of God who comes to die? What does it mean? As you ponder about this, allow me to demonstrate how a passage like today’s passage comes alive.

When we look at today’s passage, it looks familiar enough. We know about the plot to kill Jesus. We know about the betrayal of Judas. Is there something we are missing? Brothers and sisters, “almost dying changes nothing (Life goes on.). Dying changes everything.” [5] When we are alerted to the impending death of Jesus, every detail linked to his death becomes important. The religious authorities wanted to kill Jesus. But it was the season of Passover, where Jews from all over gathered in Jerusalem to celebrate the festival. In such situations, especially when nationalistic emotions run high, a careless spark can lead into an overblown riot. If you want to start a bar fight, just tell a soccer fan his team sucks. Yes, they wanted to kill Jesus while he was still around in Jerusalem for the festival, but they would have to give it up because of the dangerous consequences due to Jesus’ popularity. They wanted to kill Jesus, but not at the expense of a Roman military clampdown.

But Judas Iscariot gave them a chance. It was a chance to kill during the Passover. The arresting and killing could now happen because Judas was a close follower of Jesus. He could identify Jesus out of a crowded city filled with outsiders during this season. He could also offer the best timing when Jesus was alone, so they could carry out operations covertly. Judas gave them a chance to kill during the Passover. This could happen within the Passover. Yet, what is a chance for them to kill is also a chance for Jesus to die. And when you are alerted to the death of the Messiah, the death of this “son of God”, you realize that by a strange “coincidence”, Jesus Christ, the son of God, was dying during the Passover. Is it a big deal? But of course! The Passover is a time when all Jews understand the meaning of how death can bring life. They have this understanding because Passover is the time they slaughter the Passover lamb. It was because of the death of the Passover Lamb that the Israelites lived. Through this ritual during this annual festival they remember this story:

Exodus 12: 1 The LORD said to Moses and Aaron in Egypt, 3 Tell the whole community of Israel that on the tenth day of this month each man is to take a lamb for his family, one for each household. 6 Take care of them until the fourteenth day of the month, when all the members of the community of Israel must slaughter them at twilight. 7 Then they are to take some of the blood and put it on the sides and tops of the doorframes of the houses where they eat the lambs. 12 “On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn of both people and animals, and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the LORD. 13 The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are, and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt.

The Passover lamb demonstrates the principle of death that brings life. Because of the blood, the judgment of God passes over. So there is great significance in Jesus dying during the Passover. He becomes the symbolic Passover Lamb. In John, Jesus is called the Lamb of God (John 1:29,36). In Revelation, worthy is the Lamb who was slain (Revelation 5:12; 13:8). Jesus is the Lamb whose death has brought life. It might have been a coincidence, that there was this opportunity to kill Jesus during the Passover. But for us, the careful followers of Mark, we know better. This death is no coincidence. Mark is revealing to us the true Son of God. This is the Son of God who suffered and died. But this is the Son of God who brings life. This Son of God is not like the Roman Emperor who goes to war to bring peace. That peace does not last. This Son of God is not like a Jewish King who uses the law and temple to bring faith. That faith does not last. This Son of God, with all his power and authority, chose to suffer and die like a Passover lamb. Do you want a “son of God” that dies? Yes. Because today’s passage tells us, Jesus dies at Passover. It is a death that brings life. Mark says at the beginning of his gospel: This is good news. I think you might agree, because this Son of God gives life. And this is Life that lasts.

[1] http://www.jubilee.org.sg/sermons/id/345/
[2] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_cult_%28ancient_Rome%29
[3] The other understanding of “son of God” is Israel, the people of God. So in Hosea 11:1 ““When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” This is what God told Moses in Exodus 4:22 “ Then say to Pharaoh, ‘This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son, 23 and I told you, “Let my son go, so he may worship me.” But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.’”
[4] See also Psalm 2
[5] House, season 5, episode 1