Two meditations for Holy Week.

Reading the Gospel accounts of the last week in the earthly life of Jesus, there are two points that I want to offer for meditation. The first concerns what is known euphemistically as Jesus’ ‘triumphal entry’ into Jerusalem and the second focuses upon his last meal with his disciples.

Riding on a Colt

Matthew records the instruction Jesus gave to his disciples to go to the village ahead where they would find a donkey with her colt. They were to bring them to him for his entry into Jerusalem. Matthew quotes a verse from Zechariah, “See your king comes to you, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey” (Zech 9:9 and Matt 21:15).

I often wondered why Jesus chose to ride into Jerusalem on a colt, the foal of a donkey. I could understand his choice of a donkey as a sign of his humility; but why choose the foal of a donkey. It was one of my colleagues in the Issachar Ministries team who pointed to a verse in Exodus that I had not previously noticed. It says, “Redeem the firstborn donkey with a lamb, but if you do not redeem it, break its neck” (Ex 34:20).

A little research reveals that the donkey was the only animal in God’s creation whose firstborn foal had to be redeemed by offering the sacrifice of a lamb. Donkeys were very important for transport. They carried heavy loads and were usually willing workers. They were certainly very important in an agricultural community: in fact, so important that the owner had to give thanks to God for the firstborn foal before it could be used. The strength of this command was enforced by the instruction in Exodus 34:20.

Of course, Jesus knew this command! But this was the very reason why he chose to ride on the foal rather than the donkey. Here we see Jesus, having deliberately set his face to go up to Jerusalem, with the full knowledge of the murderous intent of the religious authorities to end his life, he now chooses to ride on the foal of a donkey. The foal had not yet been redeemed, hence it was still with its mother. But in this action, Jesus himself was redeeming the foal.

Here was Jesus, the Lamb of God, offering himself as a sacrifice for the sin of the world, symbolically redeeming the foal on his way to the cross.

For the One I Love

The incredible humility and determination to go through with the terrible events that he foresaw show something of the amazing character of Jesus. But, added to this, his incredible love is shown a little later in the week when he met with his disciples to share a last meal with them. This is the second point in this meditation.

One of my lasting memories of the late Lance Lambert whom I was proud to call my friend, was on one occasion when my wife and I shared a meal in his Jerusalem home with him and his sister. It was a Friday evening, a Shabbat meal. At one point in the meal Lance took a piece of bread, dipped it in the cup and gave it to me, and similarly to Monica, saying to each of us a little expression of love. He explained that in many Jewish families it was the custom for either the father of the family or the mother of the family to do this, particularly if they had guests as an expression of love.

Lance said it was a particularly poignant practice for the mother to do this for one of her children who had been away and was now back at the family table, or one who had been sick and now was recovered. She would say “This is for the one I love”. Her love was being expressed particularly for the one who had a special need, or to show joy at the reuniting of the family around their table.

At the Last Supper Jesus took bread and broke it and gave a piece to each of his disciples – a symbolic act through which he was giving himself to them and showing his indescribable love. Judas, the man who would betray him was also there and it is surely one of the most poignant acts of Jesus to give bread to the man who was going to be responsible for his betrayal into the hands of his enemies (John 13:26).
The act of giving the bread dipped in the cup symbolising his blood, was highly significant for each of his disciples.

But the most amazing act of Jesus at the Last Supper was surely to dip the bread in the cup and give it to Judas, who was to betray him, conveying the message (whether spoken or unspoken): “This is for the one I love”.

Love so amazing, so divine,

Demands my soul, my life, my all.

Understanding ritual purity baffled the sages of Israel. One of the most influential Jewish scholars, Maimonides, describes the whole subject as "bristling with difficulties, far from human understanding and one which even the Great Sages [of the Mishnah] found hard to comprehend."¹

Maimonides concluded that the purpose of these regulations was to impose limitations and conditions upon Israel's approach to God, to deepen their sense of awe and reverence for the majesty of their divine Father and King, which is why the laws apply only to relations with the sanctuary and the objects connected with it.²

However, Christians tend to perceive ritual purity as relating to sin, but this is not the case. The Lord mentions four categories of state in Leviticus: "distinguish between the holy and the common, between the unclean and the clean" (Lev 10:10). This instruction is given after unauthorised fire is offered by Aaron's sons, "So fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord" (Lev 10:2). To distinguish between the holy and common, the clean and unclean was therefore of life or death importance for the Israelites. No one could approach the Lord casually or unprepared because he dwelled physically in the Tabernacle and the Temple:

'Tell your brother Aaron that he is not to come whenever he chooses into the Most Holy Place behind the curtain in front of the atonement cover on the ark, or else he will die. For I appear in the cloud over the atonement cover.' (Lev 16:1-2)

It is important to understand that the distinction between the four categories of holy, common, pure and impure (or clean and unclean) is not between good and evil. Ritual purity is also not about hygiene or disease control – it had beneficial effects in these areas but that is not the central purpose. Rather, it is to do with the separation of the holy from the everyday.³

Holy vs Common, Clean vs Unclean

For example, in many churches when communion is served a special silver goblet is used, but after the service coffee is served in ordinary cups. It shows that in communion we are doing something different from every day eating and drinking. It doesn't mean that the cup itself is special, just that we are making a distinction. The biblical idea of holiness is not simply avoiding illicit things but hallowing the licit.

Ritual purity is not about hygiene or about distinguishing good from evil - it's about separating the holy from the everyday.

Holiness is not the same as purity or cleanness. An object which is not holy is not necessarily clean. An object which is clean is not necessarily holy. Joshua Tilton explains, "Holiness describes an object's use, whereas purity describes that object's readiness for its intended use" [emphasis added]. Suppose you lived in 1^st Century Jerusalem and you had a sack of grain set aside for a tithe. If a mouse crawled into the sack of grain and died, the grain is still holy because it is your tithe, which you have set aside for the Lord, but it is now unclean because it has a dead creature in it. So the difference between holy and common and clean and unclean is not about good versus evil, rather it is about the appropriateness of an object for its intended use.⁴

In the Nature of Creation, Not the Creator

Holiness originates from God and he created his creation to be clean – nothing he made is intrinsically unclean. However, the eternal and immortal and the finite and mortal have to find a way to approach each other. Joseph Frankovic illuminates this point, "...in designing a house, one does not put the bathroom inside the dining room. The activities of the bathroom do not complement those of the dining room. Neither bathroom nor dining room activities are, however, sinful - just incompatible."⁵

God's holy Temple would be profaned or contaminated by distinctly mortal sources of ritual impurity – sex, disease and death (for example, genital discharges, menstruation, childbirth, skin disease, contact with dead bodies). This is not for moral, ethical or simply hygiene reasons, but because God is not subject to disease, decay and death and he does not reproduce. Decay, death and reproduction are characteristics of the creation not the Creator, who is eternally alive, immutable and self-sufficient, radically different from us. We are mortal with the potential for immortality, changeable and dependent. Therefore, we need to set aside aspects of our mortal nature to approach his immortal presence. We must be in a state of holiness in order to move from our sphere into God's sphere.⁶

We might say that holiness requires purity because holiness is divine, of a different order, not because impurity is bad. Impurity from sin is, of course, bad, but that is different from ritual purity. For example, giving birth is not sinful, but it gives rise to ritual impurity.

Holiness requires purity, but it is not the same as purity.

Now the biblical writers (especially Ezekiel) did sometimes employed the terms 'clean' and 'unclean' as metaphors for good and evil, e.g. Ezekiel says God will "...cast clean water on you and you will be clean" (Ezek. 36:25).⁷

For believers in Jesus, this is the sense in which we usually apply these terms because we are not required to regard certain physical states or foods as clean or unclean. However, we are to have a keen sense of what is sinful and morally corrupt, what will pollute and defile our minds, bodies and spirits.

God's Holy Presence

Holiness radiates from the divine presence. Therefore, those things which are closest to God's presence are holier than things which are further off. The sages of Israel⁸ said that there were ten degrees of holiness, starting with the Land of Israel which is holier than any other land, then the cities in it - Jerusalem is the holiest city, the Temple the holiest place in the City, and going through the courts of the Temple from the outer to the inner the holiness increases, until you reach the Sanctuary which is more holy than the outer courts, for none may enter there with unwashed hands and feet. Finally, the Holy of Holies where the ark was kept is more holy, "for none may enter therein save only the High Priest on the Day of Atonement."

Holiness can be transferred to common objects, which unlike unclean objects do not contaminate what is holy, but can instead be made holy by contact with holy objects, as Exodus 29:37 states, "The altar shall be most holy. Everything that touches the altar will become holy." However, the approach must be made from the holy towards the common: if a 'common' person, not a priest who was consecrated holy, intruded unauthorised into the holy places of the Temple they risked being struck down. It is also worth noting that sacred or holy objects were in two categories, sacred and most sacred. For example, some parts of an offering were considered most sacred: "The rest of the grain offering belongs to Aaron and his sons; it is a most holy part of the food offerings presented to the Lord" (Lev 2:3). There were also degrees of uncleanness, the most basic level dissipated by the evening. Contact with a corpse required a period of seven days' separation.

Jacob Milgrom describes both the most sacred and impurity as having airborne properties in rabbinic thought and those closest to the sacred, the priests, had to be more vigilant than ordinary people. Priests could attend the burial of only their close relatives, and the High Priest could not even attend the burial of his parents: "He must not enter a place where there is a dead body. He must not make himself unclean, even for his father or mother" (Lev 21:11).⁹

Holiness radiates from the divine presence. Those things which are closest to God's presence are holier than things which are further off.

Sin impurity was a potent source of contamination and would drive away the divine presence if it were not atoned for. Under the Mosaic Covenant, there was no purification for deliberate, unrepented sin. Even the Day of Atonement could not purify the Temple from wilful, unrepented rebellion. The shekinah (dwelling) presence of the Lord would no longer inhabit the Temple.¹⁰ The people of Israel's conduct had the capacity to defile not only the Temple but also the land of Israel. The land itself was not intrinsically holy: to call it the 'Holy Land' is a misnomer. It was simply God's land where Israel could live in either holiness or profanity. If it was the latter, the end result would be exile.

Restoration and Cleansing in Messiah Jesus

Only the Messiah could restore Israel to holiness. People became clean through touching him; he did not become unclean. Jesus was like the altar in the Temple: his presence was the place where heaven touched earth. The altar was where sin was atoned for and Jesus forgave sins, so he was an atonement carrier – he had the power to forgive and cleanse – when lepers touched him they became clean, ritually clean.

Jesus was 'most holy', like the altar in the Temple and like the Holy of Holies where the ark was kept. Uniquely, unlike any other person, he could not be contaminated but he decontaminated others.

The woman who touched the 'hem' of Jesus' garment (Matt 9) knew she was touching the most holy part of his physical presence, since it was the edge of his prayer shawl, whose knots and windings represented the very word of God, so she was trembling in fear when discovered, because when common objects were unintentionally brought into contact with the holy, or brought into the divine presence without proper sanction, it could be dangerous. Unauthorised approaches could lead to disaster. At Mount Sinai, Moses was warned not to let the people come near in case the Lord broke out against them. Even on the Day of Atonement the High Priest had a rope tied round his ankle as he entered the Holy of Holies in case he was unclean in some way and was struck down and had to be pulled out.

Jesus was 'most holy', like the altar in the Temple and like the Holy of Holies where the ark was kept. He could not be contaminated - instead he decontaminated others.

All the more miraculous that a way has been opened for us to enjoy unfettered access to God the Father through the Lord Jesus Christ and his indwelling Spirit. We "have not come to a mountain that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom and storm; to a trumpet blast or to such a voice speaking words that those who heard it begged that no further word be spoken to them, because they could not bear what was commanded: "If even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned to death." The sight was so terrifying that Moses said, "I am trembling with fear." But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem...to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel" (Heb 12:18-24).

Let us not take this privilege for granted. We may be, thankfully, confident of full acceptance by the Lord through the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, but let us not forget that he is radically, awesomely holy. So "let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, for our 'God is a consuming fire'" (Heb 12:28-29).

References

1 Maimonides, Introduction to Seder Todoroth. Quoted in Slotki, IW. The Soncino Babylonian Talmud, Book I, Folios 2a-23a. Moore, Soncino, p491.

2 Maimonides, Mishneh Torah Book 10, The Book of Cleanness.

3 Tilton, J. A Goy's Guide to Ritual Purity, Jerusalem Perspective. 30 April 2014. I am indebted to Joshua Tilton for a number of insights into ritual purity.

4 Ibid. The example here is extracted from Tilton's expanded example: "a sack of grain could be common, if it was harvested by an Israelite, and clean, if the harvester was in a state of ritual purity. But if a mouse climbed into the sack of grain and died, the grain would be common and unclean. On the other hand, if the harvester happened to set aside this particular sack of grain as tithe, then the grain would be holy and clean. And finally, if a mouse crawled into the sack of grain set aside for tithe and died, the grain would be holy and unclean."

5 Frankovic, J, in Wilson, MR. Jewish Laws of Purity in Jesus' Day. Torah Class.

6 Tilton, ibid (note 3).

7 "Cleanse me from my iniquity and purify me from my sin" (Ps 51:4)

8 Mishnah (m. Kelim 1:6-9).

9 Milgrom, J, 2004. Leviticus, A Book of Ritual and Ethics, A Continental Commentary. Fortress Press, Minneapolis, p143, 154.

10 Tilton, ibid (note 3).

Edmund Heddle looks at the deep symbolism behind the Spirit's descent on Jesus 'like a dove'...

We cannot answer the question 'What is a prophet?' adequately until we turn our attention to Jesus, the Prophet, and discover the secret of his prophetic ministry. Moses foretold the coming of a prophet like himself and yet greater (Deut 18: 15-19). The early church believed that Jesus was that prophet (Acts 3:22-23, 7:37). Jesus referred to himself as a prophet (Matt 13:57, Luke 3:33) and his contemporaries certainly regarded him such (Matt 21:11, Luke 7:16 and John 4:19).

Jesus and the Spirit

It is highly significant that Jesus' prophetic ministry did not commence until after the Spirit had descended on him, immediately following his baptism by John in the Jordan River. Jesus was the Son of God and the Word from all eternity, yet as man he had to receive and rely upon the Spirit of God to carry out his ministry as a prophet. If this was true of Jesus, how much more must it be true for us!

Jesus' prophetic ministry did not start until after the Spirit had descended on him. If this was true of Jesus, how much more must it be for us!"

Who saw the Dove?

What is the special significance in our being told that the Spirit descended on Jesus 'like a dove'? Some have been content to see this as a reference to the innocence and harmlessness of the Spirit, along the lines of Jesus' words in Matthew 10:16, "Be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves". But there is a much deeper meaning in this phrase 'like a dove', if we let the biblical references fill out its meaning.

Who saw the dove? According to Matthew and Mark the dove was seen by Jesus (Matt 3:16-17, Mark 1:10-11). Luke mentions the descent of the dove but does not say who actually saw it. John's gospel however indicates that the dove was also seen by John the Baptist, and that this was the pre-arranged sign by which he would recognise the Messiah (John 1:31-34). It is to be noted that none of the gospels indicate that the dove was seen by the crowds standing by.

A Real Dove?

We need also to note that the gospels do not say that it was a dove, but that it was 'like a dove'. As on the day of Pentecost, the Spirit revealed himself like rushing mighty wind and like tongues of fire, so here it does not say that an actual dove flew down and alighted on the newly baptised Jesus. It was real to Jesus and his forerunner John, and deeply significant to these two, both of whom had minds that were soaked in the stories and teaching of the Old Testament.

The Spirit's descent 'like a dove' would have been deeply significant to both Jesus and John the Baptist."

The Brooding Dove

We have only to turn to the second verse of the Bible to read: "The Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." Some translators prefer 'brooding' to 'hovering', but both words describe the activity of a bird. The Talmudic comment on this verse reads: "The Spirit of God who moved on the face of the waters like a dove." Those who are familiar with Milton's Paradise Lost will recall the lines "...and with mighty wings outspread, dovelike sat'st brooding on the dark abyss".²

The descent of the dove on our Lord marks him out and qualifies him to be the one to bring mankind out of the chaos of a fallen world and into the "new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells" (2 Pet 3:13). The dove is symbolic of the mighty creative power of God, which rested in fulness on Jesus. Yet at the same time it reveals the quietness of such power; expressed beautifully by Dr Alexander McLaren in the words: "The Spirit of God was brooding over chaos and quickening life, as a bird in its nest by the warmth of its own soft breast."¹

Dove with Olive Branch

The second Bible reference to the dove occurs in the story of Noah's flood (Gen 8:6-12). Because of the spread of man's violence and the unheeded preaching of Noah, God's judgement fell on all except those who took the God-provided way of escape (Gen 6:11-13; 2 Pet 2:5). After the floodwaters had receded and the Ark had come to rest on Mt. Ararat, Moses sent out two birds. The raven, a bird of prey, flew off and stayed away, doubtless feeding on what had died. The dove returned to the Ark as the earth was still covered with water.

Seven days later the dove was again sent out and this time returned with a freshly plucked olive leaf. The dove bearing the olive branch was messenger of hope to the prisoners in the ark, telling them that judgement was past. The raven, in contrast, was too intent on gorging itself that it brought no message.

The dove's descent marks Jesus out as the One to bring order out of the world's chaos, hope out of despair, life out of death."

Augustine put it like this: "As the dove did at that time bring tidings of the abating of the water so doth it now of the abating of the wrath of God upon the preaching of the Gospel." The dove that comes to us with a leaf plucked from the tree of life is symbolic of the redemptive power of our Saviour and of the good news that through him we have escaped judgement and have been reborn into his new creation.

Poor Man's Sacrifice

In the Old Testament system of sacrifices, the only bird that was allowed to be offered was the dove. The rich were required to bring a bull or a lamb, but the poor man (as in the case of Jesus' parents) could bring a pair of doves (Lev 1:14-17, Luke 2:24). We know that doves were acceptable offerings from the stories of Jesus cleansing the temple and his overturning the benches of those selling doves (John 2:14-16, Matt 21:12-13).

St. Cyprian sums up his understanding of the doves' acceptability as a sacrifice in the following words: "A dove, a gentle joyous creature, with no bitterness of gall, no fierceness of bite and no violence of rending claws".³ The Spirit who came on Jesus was the Spirit of sacrifice, the Spirit that led him eventually to offer himself without blemish to God (Heb 9:14). The voice from heaven that accompanied the descent of the dove declared that Jesus after living thirty years in Galilee was totally acceptable to God.

Jesus' submission to baptism by John in the Jordan and the descent of the dove upon him are the negative and positive aspects of his Spirit of entire self offering; of his oneness and identification with the sinful race he came to save and of his complete consecration to achieve their eternal salvation cost what it might.

In the Old Testament, the dove was the only bird acceptable as a sacrifice. The Spirit who came on Jesus was the Spirit of self-sacrifice, leading him to offer himself on our behalf- an offering with which God was 'well pleased'."

Spring and Lovers

The Song of Songs tells us that the dove is the herald of spring and is associated with lovers:

Arise, my darling, my beautiful one, and come with me. See! the winter is past; the rains are over and gone. Flowers appear on the earth; the season of singing has come, the cooing of doves is heard in our land...My dove in the clefts of the rock, in the hiding places on the mountainside, show me your face, let me hear your voice; for your voice is sweet and your face is lovely (Song of Solomon 2:10-12, 14).

The Hebrew word for dove comes from the word yayin, which contains the ideas of effervescence and intoxication and refers to the warmth of doves' love-making. There is a 'twoness' about doves. The poor man's offering was a pair of doves. Doves live in pairs and lay a clutch of two eggs, "nurturing their young together; when they fly abroad hanging in their flight side by side; leading their life in mutual intercourse; giving in concord the kiss of peace with their bills; in every way fulfilling their unanimity" (to quote from St. Cyprian again⁴).

The coming down of the dove on Jesus symbolises our Lord as the lover of our souls, desiring to become one with his bride- the Church."

Their twoness becomes oneness, or as St Paul says to the Ephesians (5:31-32), "the two shall become one". Paul says he is referring to Christ and his bride, the church. The coming down of the dove on our Lord reveals him to be the lover of our souls who cannot be content until we respond to his eternal love-making.

The Dove Prophet

As well as the direct references to the dove in Scripture we have examined, there is a very instructive one, which is not immediately apparent. The Hebrew word for dove is 'Yonah' or 'Jonah': the name of a prophet who tried to escape from the responsibility of declaring God's message to the city of Nineveh. When Jonah was sent he disobeyed but the One on whom the dove came acted in absolute obedience, when his Father told him to leave heaven and travel to our earth with the message of God's pardoning love.

Jesus is the true and perfect Jonah, the final dove-prophet."

Sinful Jonah, when sent by God, disobeyed and found himself jettisoned into a storm of judgement. Yet in the incredible mercy of God he was saved by being swallowed up and vomited out! Sinless Jesus was completely obedient to God's instructions and yet found himself overwhelmed by the storms of judgement and death. But he rose again! Furthermore, the only sign he would give his generation was the sign of Jonah (Matt 16:4). Jesus is the true Jonah, the final dove-prophet, the missioner of God. It was when John saw the dove descend on him that he recognised his cousin to be nothing less than the Son of God, the Lamb of God and the Baptiser in the Holy Spirit (John 1:29-34).

Dove-Prophets Today

Those who are prophets today must be careful to make sure that the Spirit that is inspiring their speaking is truly the Dove.

A possible reaction to man's rebellion and violence and to its inevitable consequence of divine judgement and punishment, is that we become harsh in our attitudes, judgmental in our speech and separatist in our relationships. But we are not to manifest the spirit of the raven, but the Spirit of the Dove.

Those prophesying today must not manifest the harsh spirit of the raven, but the endlessly loving Spirit of the Dove."

Dove-prophets are to be endlessly loving, always seeking unity and togetherness. They must sacrifice their own plans and preferences for the greater joy of announcing forgiveness to those who would otherwise perish. They are to be ever hopeful; convinced that the last word is with the God who will yet have heaven and earth as he intends.

Commenting on the descent of the dove, Dr. Alexander McLaren said of Jesus: "Since he was a man, he needed the Divine Spirit. Since he was sinless, he was capable of receiving it in perfect and unbroken continuity."⁵ If he needed the Dove, so much more do we- and the thrilling truth is that our need has been met. Every Christian prophet today may by faith receive the Spirit in fullness; the Spirit that is 'like a dove'.

References

1 Commentary on Mark 1:9-10

2 Vol. 1.

3 Treatise 1, section 9.

4 See previous note.

5 See note 1.

First published in Prophecy Today, Vol 1, No 4, 1985.