Jesus the Deceiver?

When I have the time, I attend my friend Tony's midweek noon Eucharist service. His church is about 30 miles from my house, so it gives me a chance to switch gears and enter into a mid-week theological/worship mode. This Eucharist is special because it has fewer people, and we actually have a discussion about the Scripture passages for the day as part of the liturgy.

For some reason, I became highly engaged in the texts for today, taken from the Daily Office Lectionary of the Episcopal Church, but I only let some of my engagement "out" in the discussion time--the part that was fully "orthodox." But, upon thinking about the two passages read this noon, it seems that the Lectionary arrangers are (unwittingly?) allowing for a probe into the issue of whether the deception that is so roundly exposed in Genesis is, in fact, at the root of Jesus' words in John 8. The thesis is, at first glace, somewhat outlandish, so it needs to be developed with some precision.

First, The Old Testament Lesson--Gen. 27:1-29

This text describes the deception of blind Isaac by his son Jacob. What is normally unmentioned, and what is really at issue in the text, however, is that Jacob is encouraged in this deception by his mother, Rebekah. As you may know, Isaac, being old, feels that he needs to give a blessing to his older son Esau. Isaac sends Esau out into the field to hunt game, return with it and prepare a special meal for Isaac so that Isaac could bless Esau. The reader knows, however, that Rebekah has intercepted this communication, and she gets Jacob, the younger son, to short-circuit this arrangement by getting a goat from their flock to offer it to Isaac. Along with this deception is another--Jacob will impersonate his older brother Esau, and thus the blind Isaac, confused, will actually give the blessing to the wrong son.

A close study of the text would reveal that multiple layers of deception are at work. Rebekah, really, is the genesis of it all. She commands (strong word) Jacob to perform the afore-described deception and then she devises a scheme whereby Jacob (smooth-skinned) can successfully stand in for Esau (hairy-skinned). Then, after her first two acts of deception, Jacob seems to "catch on," and he happily comes up with his own improvised deceptions, when Isaac wonders about the identity of the son standing before him. Rebekah's dual deceptions are then matched by two of Isaac's, and the blessing intended for Esau actually falls to Isaac.

Then, John 8:12-20

Then we read the Gospel text from John 8. Since the major point I make comes from this text, I will quote it here:

"Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, 'I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.' 13 So the Pharisees said to him, 'You are bearing witness about yourself; your testimony is not true.' 14 Jesus answered, 'Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I come from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going. 15 You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one. 16 Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is not true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me. 17 In your Law it is written that the testimony of two people is true. 18 I am the one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.' 19 They said to him therefore, 'Where is your Father?' Jesus answered, 'You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.' 20 These words he spoke in the treasury, as he taught in the temple; but no one arrested him, because his hour had not yet come."

This is a glorious passage, made more so because it is one of the six or so "I am" statements in the Gospel of John where Jesus boldly proclaims aspects of his Lordship. The images he draws upon in the other passages are from secular life ("I am the door") or from religious life ("I am the resurrection and the life"); here we are in the midst of the familiar image of a light shining in the darkness. The light is a good thing in John's Gospel and the NT generally, and so our first thought, in interpreting this passage, is to rush straight to the opening words. If we are bold enough to try to connect it to the Old Testament text previously read, we might say something to the effect; "Yeah, deception is bad, but Jesus sheds his light on deception and dissipates it, like light chases away the darkness."

Not So Fast

But I couldn't rush to that conclusion, attractive as it is. The reason is that the idea of deception is so strong in Genesis that the theme was on my mind when the Gospel was read. And, for some reason, I seemed to hear the theme of deception also echoed in John 8. But here it is Jesus who, in two instances, plays fast and loose with language or the legal traditions of the people.

First, after proclaiming himself the "light of the world," he is upbraided by the Pharisees on two legal grounds. First, there was the belief popular in ancient societies, and present even in our common law system until about 300 years ago, codified in legal systems, that a person could not bear witness in his own case. The supposition wasn't that self-testimony was prima facie false; it was that it had such a strong self-interest involved that it would be impossible to coax the truth from what was being said. Thus, evidence given by a party in a case with regard to his own innocence in a matter was inadmissable. Second, when testimony was needed to convict someone or to give one an alibi, it had to be corroborated by two independent witnesses.

With this as background, if Jesus had been interested in answering the Pharisees' legitimate concern in v. 13 ("You are bearing witness to yourself"...ergo..."your testimony is not true"), he should have said something to the effect--well, I withdraw my personal testimony but I will give two others as 'proof' of my claim. But instead of answering in a way that was the recognized mode of discourse in the time, Jesus just ignored the tradition: "Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true." It is pretty much saying to the people: "Screw you. I know your system, but I don't respect it, and so I will just repeat what I say." Is there something deceptive here? Not explicitly, I suppose, but it is an attempt to try to slip something by them--"oh, you believe that XX is inadmissable. Good...So, let me repeat my case...it is XX."

Jesus' statement is made even worse by his admission in v. 18 that he will, in trying to comply with their request, give them two witnesses--himself and the Father. But he knows that neither of these two will work. I have already explained why appeal to self would be inadmissible. But, then, referring to the Father is also excluded because such a witness could not be "produced" for cross-examination. That is why the Pharisees say, "Where is your Father?" In other words, they were willing to give Jesus the benefit of the doubt if he actually could produce a witness but, alas, of course, he couldn't.

Jesus isn't playing by the rules and he is trying to twist them as he goes along. You may say, 'Well, he is Jesus, he doesn't have to.' So, does that mean that we, who are imitators of Christ, should likewise so behave? I have done so, and it really doesn't work very well to get you to the goals you have set for yourself.

But then, in addition, we have a curious statement about judging. Jesus says that he judges no one (v. 15). Then, in v. 16, he basically contradicts what he has just said by saying that "even if" he judges someone, his judgment is right. It is like saying, 'No, I didn't rob the store. But even if I did, I did it for a really really good reason.' It seems to me that Jesus is here deliberately, or maybe unwittingly, trying to confuse his opponents by contradicting himself and by putting in lines calculated to deceive and to mislead.

Conclusion

So, these were the thoughts swimming in my brain as we went to communion. I will be supping with/supping on, in fact, the one whom I just read about and concluded was really a bit of a deceiver. Had John 8 simply been read by itself, I might have focused on the "light of the world" part, but once it is connected with Genesis 27, my "deception" antennae were up, and I couldn't help but read John 8 through that lens. It wasn't a fully disturbing thought; it just meant that I went to communion believing that Jesus was more human than I had ever imagined..

4422