Speaking on Behalf of God?
a sermon based on Deuteronomy 18:15-20 & Mark 1:21-28
by Rev. Richard Gehring

            It seems as though a lot of people these days claim to be speaking on behalf of God.  As we find ourselves in the midst of an election year, there are plenty of folks on both sides of the political aisle who want to claim God's blessing on their policies.  Whether it's increasing spending on social services and raising taxes on the wealthy or seeking bans on gay marriage and abortions, people across the political spectrum point to God for their motivation.  

            The question that we need to consider, then, is how we discern who really is speaking for God.  Who really carries this authority?  Our texts for this morning offer some important insights into answering that question. In these passages, we find probably the two most authoritative spokesmen of all time–Moses and Jesus.  And their words and actions tell us a lot about what we can–and cannot–expect from those who truly do represent God.

            In our Old Testament scripture for the morning, we find some of Moses’ final words to the people of Israel.  Moses has, of course, been God’s representative to the Israelites for some time.  And although some may have doubted his credentials to begin with, there has been no doubt that God has been speaking through Moses for quite some time.  It was, after all, Moses who pronounced the rash of plagues upon the Egyptians that led to Pharaoh’s decree freeing the Israelites from slavery.  It was Moses who then led them through the miraculous crossing of the sea.  It was Moses who struck the rock in the desert, bringing forth a stream of water.  And it was Moses who went up on Mt.  Sinai and came back down with the tablets of God’s command­ments–his shining face providing ample evidence that he was indeed speaking on God’s behalf.

            Now, however, the Children of Israel are facing a crisis.  Moses is getting old.  He knows that he will die before the people enter the Promised Land.  The Israelites are worried.  They want to know, “Who will tell us what God wants of us once Moses is gone?”  It is that very question which Moses himself addresses in today’s text.

            Moses tells the people not to worry.  He assures them, “God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you shall heed such a prophet.”(v. 15)  Actually, while Moses talks about “a prophet,” from the context it seems that he really means a series of prophets–a new one for each generation.  In fact, if you read this passage from the New Revised Standard Version, you may notice  a footnote each time the word “prophet” appears indicating that it could be plural.  “Raising up prophets” is thus something God proposes to do periodically, for as long as the people need to hear the word of the Lord.  These prophets will continue to speak to God’s people on God’s behalf.  They will  be Israel’s ongoing connection to God’s will for them as a people. 

            Moses also goes on to clarify how the people will be able to distinguish these genuine prophets of God from the false ones.  The real spokespersons, he says, will make proclamations which will prove to be accurate.  But, he says, if what is spoken by the prophet does not come to pass, “it is a word that the LORD has not spoken.”(v. 22)  Now, it is comforting to know that God will continue to be with the people, and will continue to speak to them long after Moses is gone.  Still, this answer is not entirely satisfactory.  Plenty of pundits have pointed to natural disasters with claims that they are God's vengeance for any number of supposed wrongdoings.  But it's pretty much impossible to prove any cause and effect.

            For that matter, many of the prophets who did come after Moses spoke about things that wouldn’t take place for centuries.  Yet many of them are recognized as true prophets sent by God.  Having to wait and see what happens is not particularly helpful when there are competing voices which all claim to be speaking for God, and you have to decide which of them to follow.  You can’t afford to just sit there and do nothing for a few hundred years until events make it all clear.

            Fortunately for us, we have a lot of other tools to evaluate the claims of those who say that they speak for God.  In those days immediately following Moses’ death, the people had, of course, the law which had been given to them by Moses.  They could compare the pronounce­

ments made by any so-called prophets to this law and see if it was really consistent.  I’m sure that this was helpful in determining whether or not a prophetic pronouncement was genuine.

Today, we have a far larger set of documents to which we can compare similar claims that are made.  We still have the Law of Moses.  In addition to that we have the writings of many of the prophets who followed in his tradition–prophets such as Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Hosea and so on.  And, most importantly of all, we also have Jesus who is the ultimate revelation of God.  So anything said by anyone who claims to be speaking for God today must be compared with the ministry and the teachings of Jesus.  Our first and most important question when someone claims to speak for God must be, “Is what they say consistent with Jesus or not?”

            Our New Testament text for this morning gives us some important things to look for in making such a comparison.  As we come to this passage, we find Jesus at the very beginning of his public ministry.  Jesus has just called his very first disciples.  And at the opening of today’s passage, they are already geared up for the first big public event of Jesus’ ministry: teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum on the Sabbath.

            We are told that the crowd at the synagogue that day is “astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority and not as the scribes.”(v. 22) Mark repeats this idea again at the end of the passage, saying that the people “were all amazed, and they kept on asking one another, ‘What is this? A new teaching–with authority!’”(v. 27) This upstart rabbi clearly seems to have something different about him–something that sets him apart from the others who claim to be the successors of Moses, and claim to have real authority when it comes to making pronouncements about God.

            Interestingly, the passage is not at all concerned with what Jesus says.  We have no idea what Jesus preached about that day in Capernaum, or even what scripture text he used.  We are simply told that he did teach, and that he taught with great authority.

            Then the passage describes what else happened that day.  Jesus goes on to cast out an unclean spirit from one of the men present in the synagogue.  Now, in our scientific era, we don’t talk much about “unclean spirits.”  Indeed, we could come up with all sorts of scientific explanations for what might have really been wrong with the man.  Perhaps it was a psycho­logical disorder that he suffered from.  Perhaps the man struggled was under the influence of some mind-altering chemical.  Or perhaps he had something like Tourette Syndrome or ADHD–some neurological or behavioral disorder that caused his inappropriate outburst in the midst of worship.

            The point, however, is not what label to put on the man.  Rather, the point of this passage is this: the authority of Jesus is demonstrated by his actions–by what he does in response to this man.  Jesus doesn’t just come to the synagogue and talk about the Kingdom of God.  That’s the sort of thing that the scribes would have done.  These professionals followed established scholarly procedures in interpreting the Law of Moses.  They debated points of law along particular schools of thought.  Their interpretation was intellectually demanding, but not expected to be spiritually surprising and certainly not life-changing.

            But Jesus is different.  Jesus doesn’t just talk in theoretical terms, he does something about it.  He works to institute the Kingdom of God in the present situation.  So when a man comes in clearly suffering from some sort of disability, Jesus heals him.  Jesus acts to free the man from the bondage that has kept him from being who he could be, and who he was meant to be.

            The authority with which Jesus impresses the crowd does not come from his being born into the right family.  His authority does not come from attending the right schools or studying with the right people and earning the right degrees.  No, his authority is granted to him directly by God, and is demonstrated through the many ways in which he works to make the Kingdom of God a reality throughout his ministry.  I would put it this way:  Jesus was authoritative, but he was not authoritarian.  And that, I believe, is a crucial distinction.

            The priests and scribes and elders gained their authority by being part of a traditional social and political structure of power.  They exercised their authority by making literally hundreds of rules and regulations, then enforcing those mandates on the rest of society.  Those who failed to live up to the decrees and ordinances were required to do penance before they could again engage in all the ritual activities of their faith community.  It was an authoritarian approach.

            Jesus, on the other hand did none of these things.  He wasn't a priest or scribe–he was a carpenter with no formal religious training that we know of.  He didn't make laws–he told stories.  And he didn’t punish people or pronounce God’s judgment on those who sinned–he forgave them and ultimately sacrificed himself for them.  He rejected the notion that someone’s illness is a result of their sin.(John 9:1-3) He dismissed the idea that people suffer tragedies because of their guilt.  (Luke 13:2-5)  He was not authoritarian. 

            But this does not mean that he was totally laissez-faire, that he was wishy-washy or that he waffled on issues.  He may not have been authoritarian the way that the Jewish religious leaders were, but as we can see in our passage today he certainly was authoritative.  He commands the unclean spirit that speaks through the man in the synagogue to “shut up and get out!”  And he impressed his listeners with the authority by which he spoke.

            This is just the beginning of his ministry.  Throughout the next three years, Jesus took some very strong stands on issues, many of which were quite unpopular.  He challenged the political and religious leaders of his time.  He placed very high expectations on those who followed him, demanding that they give up everything else in order to be fully committed to his cause.  These are certainly not the marks of a weak leader or of one who is unwilling to take leadership.  Jesus was a very strong, authoritative leader.

            What's more, he gave that same authority to his disciples.  A few chapters after today’s story, Jesus sent his twelve disciples out two by two with the authority to drive out demons and heal illnesses (Mark 6:7).  Later on, the book of Acts portrays the early church as a body with authority.  Peter preaches with great authority at Pentecost.(Acts 2:14-36)  James exercises his authority as the leader of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 15:13-21).  And Paul was commissioned by the church and given the authority to preach the good news among the Gentiles (Acts 13:1-3).

Jesus expected his disciples to carry on his ministry.  Like Moses, Jesus expected that each generation which followed him to have their own authoritative spokespersons for God.  And in order to do that they needed to have the same sort of authority that he had–authority which came from being faithful to God’s call.

            Over the years, as the church became more established and institutionalized, this authoritative leadership began to shift to a more authoritarian model.  Eventually, there was little distinction between the political authority of the kings and princes and the spiritual authority of the popes and priests.  Shameful episodes in the history of Christendom from the Crusades to recent sexual abuse scandals are among the all-too-many examples of the abuse of authority by church leaders.  Obviously, not everyone who works in Jesus’ name is really doing his will.   Indeed, it’s interesting to note that the only character in our story today who recognized Jesus is the unclean spirit.

            Today, many have reacted against authoritarian models of church leadership which seem to only pay lip service to Jesus, and with good reason.  But the unfortunate result is that many of us are suspicious of any kind of authority.  The trust we once placed in both religious and political leaders has been betrayed, so we are now very hesitant to recognize the authority of almost anyone.  We have not only rejected the authoritarian models, we have also closed our ears and our minds to some authoritative persons who may indeed have a word from God for us.

Obviously, we cannot blindly accept every claim that is made in God’s name.  Jesus clearly rejects such an authoritarian model.  But he does not reject all notion of authority.  Instead, he claims the authority that he genuinely has and passes that authority on to his disciples.  He does not do away with leadership entirely.  He merely replaces bad leadership models with good ones.  And it seems to me that one of the great challenges facing the church in this new millennium is to do that very same thing today.

            What we need is to create new models of leadership–models that establish clear lines of authority within an overall structure of mutual accountability; models that balance the concept of the priesthood of all believers with the notion of a special calling to certain offices of ministry; models that reflect the paradox that whoever wishes to be great must be a servant, and whoever wishes to be first must be a slave to all (Mark 10:43-44).

            In the final analysis, I don't think we should exactly be looking to either the Republicans or the Democrats for answers on what God is saying to the church today.  What we need are fewer leaders like the politicians and the priests, and more leaders like Jesus.  What we need are fewer people who are convinced that they know what God wants other people to do, and more people willing to do the actual work that God is calling all of us to do.  What we need are fewer people who either bark out orders like God’s generals or who follow their own leading regardless of what anyone else says, and more people who are dynamically involved in ministry like the disciples.  For until we begin to seek to live according to the life and teachings of Jesus, we can not hope to discern who really speaks on his behalf.