We need to take care when looking at the proof that is shown for any intervention. We have seen things promoted for our health — on very shonky grounds — that have made us sicker. Not because of ill-will, but because the ideology of the time means those of good will make errors, and that is the consensus.
So I am not sure what the Pharisees meant by a sign. For when Jesus talks about the leaven, he referrs to two miracles: they wanted something more than healing, and people fed. They wanted something more than demons being silenced lest they say who Christ was.
I am more sure about the motivations of the Pharisees: there had been many preachers who made something of themselves and were proclaimed the messiah, falsely. And I’m quite aware that the Pharisees had a model of what the Messiah was like, and as prophesied, Jesus did not fit into it.
The Pharisees came and began to argue with him, seeking from him a sign from heaven to test him. And he sighed deeply in his spirit and said, “Why does this generation seek a sign? Truly, I say to you, no sign will be given to this generation.” And he left them, got into the boat again, and went to the other side. Now they had forgotten to bring bread, and they had only one loaf with them in the boat. And he cautioned them, saying, “Watch out; beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.” And they began discussing with one another the fact that they had no bread. And Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why are you discussing the fact that you have no bread? Do you not yet perceive or understand? Are your hearts hardened? Having eyes do you not see, and having ears do you not hear? And do you not remember? When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?” They said to him, “Twelve.” “And the seven for the four thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?” And they said to him, “Seven.” And he said to them, “Do you not yet understand?” (Mark 8:11-21 ESV)
So what was this leaven? Calvin considers it was contempt. The Pharisees were convinced of their own righteousness and would not receive instruction, even from the hand of God.
God bless! pic.twitter.com/YIwiPKWxy3
— LutherTours (@LutherTours) July 10, 2015
Though the nature of the dispute is not expressed, yet I think it probable that they debated about the calling of Christ, why he ventured to make any innovation, and why he made such lofty pretensions, as if by his coming he had fully restored the kingdom of God. Having nothing farther to object against his doctrine, they demand that he shall give them a sign from heaven. But it is certain that a hundred signs would have no greater effect than the testimonies of Scripture. Besides, many miracles already performed had placed before their eyes the power of Christ, and had almost enabled them to touch it with their hands. Signs, by which Christ made himself familiarly known, are despised by them; and how much less will they derive advantage from a distant and obscure sign? Thus the Papists of our own day, as if the doctrine of the Gospel had not yet been proved, demand that it be ascertained by means of new miracles. The Pharisees, together with the Sadducees. It deserves our attention that, though the Sadducees and the Pharisees looked upon each other as enemies, and not only cherished bitter hatred, but were continually engaged in hostilities, yet they enter into a mutual league against Christ. In like manner, though ungodly men quarrel among themselves, their internal broils never prevent them from conspiring against God, and entering into a compact for joining their hands in persecuting the truth. Tempting. By this word the Evangelists mean that it was not with honest intentions, nor from a desire of instruction, but by cunning and deceit, that they demanded what they thought that Christ would refuse, or at least what they imagined was not in his power. Regarding him as utterly mean and despicable, they had no other design than to expose his weakness, and to destroy all the applause which he had hitherto obtained among the people. In this manner unbelievers are said to tempt God, when they murmur at being denied what their fancy prompted them to ask, and charge God with want of power.
??? Patriots Who Dare… Join our fight to save America! ? Click Here http://t.co/t5NLUd5Tgx #BB4SP pic.twitter.com/JNty8l52Wy
— Conservative Chick (@NaughtyBeyotch) August 2, 2015
I think the Papists of Calvin’s time are not the Catholics of this one. For the Papist authorities of that time worked primarily as renaissance princes: it was not the gospels nor the prophets they read but how to retain and keep power. The tactics of Xavier and Jesuits, concentrating on teaching the aristocracy and being the confessors to kings fit within the compromise of cuis regio, cuis religio that inadvertently led to a hundred years of war.
The Papists and Pharisees and Sadducees of this day are those who oppose the gospel. I will let my Roman and Orthodox friends talk about their branches: I’m a Prot, and we have enough of our own leaven to get rid of. Those who see the church as a place of power, who see truth as fungible, and consider advocacy a higher calling are at one with the enemies of the gospel.
#ChangeTheWorldIn5Words #whygbcs pic.twitter.com/YecTaCNS7w
— Church & Society UMC (@GBCSUMC) July 29, 2015
These people do not want signs. They do not want the gospel. They want their agenda fulfilled. They worship not the LORD Almighty, but progression: Chulthu and Topet more than Christ. And we have such within us. We need to reform our churches, and repent.
Preserve Human Dignity #BigTent15 #PCUSA #fairtaxation & #MakeTaxFair. Fri @ 4:30 #taxjustice #johncalvin #calvin pic.twitter.com/WJfw63LGsU
— Rutgers Presbyterian (@rutgerschurchny) July 24, 2015
Now, I can hear people say, but he is a notorious failure. He’s divorced. He’s (gasp) an academic: he does not walk as he talks: he belongs to a (gasp) standard Presbyterian church which has liberals in it! How dare he say this!
To that I say this: we all have to worry about the purity of the gospel being sullied. This is not about my lack of righteousness, for I can not ever earn my way into the good graces of God: that required the work of Christ. It is about seeing the gospel, not as the work of Christ completed, but as a social action, or preserving tradition and society, or any other social programme.
It is about seeing a dialectic of power where there should be charity and mercy. Which is where we now are. Lord have mercy on us, for we have fallen deeply.
Let our charity be practical, and not advocacy. Let our gospel be preached, and not muffled to appease those in power. And let us support each other. For the enemy is prowling like a lion.
