Sen

JESUS THE TEACHER MARCH 5, 1972
MATTHEW 5:{-!2 JOHN M, BUCHANAN

Onty rarely do .you and { have the privilege of sttting at the feet of an
unforgetable teacher. In the years + spent in formal education, and in the
seminar and study experiences | have had since that time, 1 would guess that | have
been taught by about 170 different fachers. And of those {70 just a very few
remain in my mind and have a consciously contining effect on me. Now |
learned something from atl of them, even if it was negative. But a handful
somehow managed to combine themselves, their own personality and style, with
what they were trying to teach me so that today, years jater, 1 stil} think,
"Dr. Glick used to say that": or “that sounds like Mr.Hoffman".

Let me tell you about one of them. G. Wayne Glick had the unenviable
task of teaching retigion at a coilege where one year of religion was a
required subject: and where weekly chapel attendance was a necessity. That
made him a kind of natural opponent for most students who were Interested in
neither @ course in religion nor attending Chapel. But, somehow, In spite
of those handicaps Wayne Glick managed to be a very effective teacher. His
freshman course In religion was discussed more in the dormitories !ate at
night than any other. And his elective courses in Ethies, World Religions,
and New Testament were quickly filled with Sociology, Political Sclence,
Chemistry and Biology majors. Students used to read the newspaper, or their
mail in Chapel: sometimes a little qame of penney ante would develop over the
pews in the back. But whea Wayne Glick was pre2zching, students came to listen
and to learn. He would come to the dorms in the evenings, find a bull session
in progress: sit down on the floor, take off his shoes, light a cigar and wade
right In. And It was that, more than anything else, that hooked me on the rian
and what he had to say.

}'m stitl learning from the man. For today, he has an [8 year old son on
tria} in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania for alleged participation in the plot to
kidnap Henry Kissinger. And he ts going through that visible and particular

agony of observing hls son, who has taken absolutely serfousiy the Gospet

~2e
Wayne Glick taught and preached, pay a very dear price. And so he's still

teaching me about things |ike courage and commitment and integrity.

Wetl, there are only a few of these in our fife time. The superb,
unforgetable teacher combines an enthustastic knowledge of his subject, a
thorough skill of teaching techniques, a true concern for his students as
persons, and something else: something hard to define: somethina call-
Charisma ~ or electricity - or authority ~- or authenticity.

To read the New Testament objectively, honestly, and critically, is to
discover a remarkable Teacher, [t's not, however, an easy discovery to make.
For so much mythology, so many theological convictions, so many preconceived
notions surround thenan that it is, in fact, quite difficult to meet him as
his contemporarics did = as a particularty and uniquely compelling *-> “er.

That is how he was known mostly. Not as Jesus the Christ - Jesus the Lord -
Jesus the Savior: those are theciogical assertions that were added tater: but
as Jesus the teacher, the rabbi, the master - which is a translation of a
Greek title meaning schoolmaster. No less than fifty times in the Gospel
accounts Jesus is called teacher: even his opponents and adversaries conceded
that to him. He was a teacher par excellence.

William Barday, in his work, The Mind of Christ, describes Jesus the

teacher in terms of four categories, five teaching methods and three types of
argument.

Because we are overly famijiar with the man, and because we too have
preconceived notions of wnat he said and what he was about, | think if is
heipful to plow this ground again, in order to get the "feel" of this
remarkable teacher.

His greatness may be seen in light of these four facts. First, he was
obviously Immediately anesting. There were plenty of rabbis, plenty of
itinerant teachers: but where this man taught he gathered a crowd and they
listened. He was a flexible teacher. He taught formally in the Synagog and

Tempte, but also in heavy scholarly debates on the street corner. He taught

-3=
as he walked with his friends: he used a fishing boat as a fectern on one

occassion: he taught amidst great crowds, but in the Initmate Give and take
of a fellowship of twelve disciples.

He was immediately itnteltegible. No one, apparently, watked away
wondering what it was the man was trying tosay. And he was permanently
memorable. Thre were no books or newspapers or magazines to record f-r pos-
terity. But he got the job done in such a way thet men could remember what he
said, a way so effective that many of his sayings are part of our vocabulary
20 centuries later. For instance - "any man worth his salt’ ~ “turn the other
cheek" ~ “the spirit is willing but the flesh fs weak".

He did it ty combining and using a rather amazing array of iiterary
techniques, all the more ammazing for a man who could not have had much by
way of formal education.

First the sharn epigram - the phrase that sticks in the mind, For
instance: “What will it profit aman, if he gains the whole world and forfeits
his life?’ Only [literary genius coins a phrase like that. Someone did a
study recently of how much a congregation. retains of a sunday sermon. The
findings were shattering. By Sunday night, almost no one could remember a
specific sentence. By mid week almost no one could remember a general idea.
And by the following week, almost no one could remember the subject. Jesus
was a master at turning a phrase with staying power.

Second, the thought provoking paradox; idea that sounds incredible -
almost farcical - but that turks in the mind because of the suspicion thet it
may, after al! be true. For instance: “Blessed are the poor in spirit"? -
"Happy are the peace makers"? 'Btessed are the pérsecuted'? Trouble is,
we've heard them so often, they don't stun us anymore: where, In reality, if we
could be absolutely objective our initial response to these rather outlandish
suggestions would be - “You've got to be kidding!

Third, the vivid hyperbole: the literary equivalent of shock treatment:

the didactic slap in the face. ~if your right eye causes you to sin, pluck

it out and throw it away”.

Fourth, humor: frony: cynicism: tongue in cheek and sometunes sion stick
comedy. He drew a picture, for instance, of a man with a board ih his: aye,
Trying to remove. a speck of dust from another man’s eye. the iiterary equivalent
of a neuro-surgeon with paisy.

Fifth, his use of parables. Life magazine was started on the basis of
The assumption that people would rather fook at pletures than read. Twenty
centuries before Jesus knew the trust of that, and created verbal pictures, -
the point of which was so very clear that he didn't have to say anything further.
The Prodigal Son. the Good Samaritan: the Lost Sheup.

Finally, in the intense envircament of discussion with his opponents he
was a master at making hispoin? in a way Thet would put Perry Mason to shame,
and of teachingat th: same time. When confronted with that clear moral judge-
ment invelving the adultress about fo be stoned: he was able to stop it and to
make a point about man's conditfon by inviting anyone, without s#n to throw
the first one.

He was a master: a remarkable teacher. And he had that something extra -
that authority or authenticity, or charisma if you wifl. To know him very well
was to find him indistinquishable trom what he taught. To know him very well
was to sense that he was what he said: that he was the most vivid parable of
all: that his own lifewas his best teaching illustratton. ft has been said,
and correctiy so, that there is nothing unique about Jesus’ ethical teaching:
that at best, he pravided a synopsis and anthology of the highest ethical
Teaching, of the scribes, pharises and prophets. The difference Is thet he
lived it: he became it. When he suggested that a man might find life by losing
it: it wasnit a pompous pontification: he went out and did it. And it is good,
for us today, to seem him in this light - as teacher.

We have Been thinking about the technician: the master teacher, Maa
Tse Tung is a master teacher: so was Adolf Hiticr. And so if is irfesponsible

fo falk about him as teacher without also thinking about the content of what

-5-
he taught. The obvéous probtom here is that mor have spont a fife tars

studying, thinktng and writing about the teaching of Jesus. What he said
infuscs every sermon preached: every ctass taught: and we aren't about to get
a very definitive job done in the time remaining this morning. What we can do,
| think, is to construct two categories and see if wa cannot establish an
overview — a sense of direction - In cach. Jesus! teaching canbe broken down
into ethical Instruction - wnat he said about manis moral behav .c: and ideas
about God ~ what hy said that was new content, new revelation on the subject
of the nature of the Aimighty.

First, ethics. Jesus spent a jot of time talking about how men ought to
behave in relation te each other. and in the process a whole new detiAition
of what is right and good began to emerge. In the process of ta! king about
Peophe and Their behavior Jesus questioned and turned around the very mora!
standards that regulated that hehavior in the first place,

Like ali men before them, and all men after them, the contemporarics
of Jesus thought they knew what was right and good:and conversely, what was
wrong and bad. We don't meud to be critical of them for moral arrogance,
because wo are much the same. In fact, without some commonly agreed~upon set
of ethical norms - corporate fife connot exist for fang. Jesus was, and
always will be, at this point, the revotutionary teacher: the one who
questions The very foundation stones of sociuty: the one who in absolute
and sometimes crucl honesty, holds up and examines the sacred morat cows of
culture.

For the first century Jew, morality was clearly defined by the Holy
Law: the 613 rules and the volumnes of Interpretation and commentary on
those rules. {+t was entirely possible, if one knew Them all, to obey them all
and the result was that a man could regard himself as morally perfect. tt
is at this point: this assumption that rightness can be accomplished by
staying within tne perimeters of a codificd legal system that Jesus focused his

attention. He had nothing against the law, per sco. He was a Jew ~ end we

-6-
ought never to forget that. But what he taught was that moral goodness can

never be accomplished as a result of not doing certain prohibited activities.
And that was the revoluntionary position that threatened the whok massive
structure of First Century Judias. That's why thu scribes and priests and phar-
isees were afraid of him. Because the whoic system had come to rest on this
vory dubious assumption about the definition of goodness.

Essentially, Jesus taught that morality was positive instead of negative.
The law - beginning with the Ten Commandments - was essentially negative:
all laws seem to be. Jesus taught that it wasn't enough: that it wasn't
adequate to refrain from killing your mighbor, or stualing his cattiv. True
morality dumands that you love him, evn if you don't tikes him: that you stop
by the road and minister to his wounds and pay his bills, even if he is one
of a hated, minority group, the very sight of whom is revolting.

Jesus even went soa far as to suqgest that lugaily defined goodness
could bucome badness: that is, when a man feit so good about himself that
he bucame proud and vain. That really hurt, and that stilt hurts because
institutional religion, in the name of this same Jesus has always played the
same kind of gamc. Don't de this: donit do that: follow our rules - and your
reward will bu the ability to jook down.your pious nose at atl those poor
sinners out there. Jesus called that a form of walking death. He called the
men who spouted if ‘write washed tombs’.

Jesus made goodness a positive activity: but even that wasn't enough.
Motivation was as important for him as exturnal bBohavier. Generosity where done
publically is suspect. Anger with another man. lust for another women - fs
as wrong as murder and adultry. It's afmost amusing the way some peopte have
been able to regard Josus as 4 great mora! teacher apart from the ctaims the
church makes bout him When a man told the great theologian Soren Kierkegaard
thet he could accept Jesus as teacher but not as Lord, Kiekegaard's answer was
to invite the man te try living those teachings. He knew, and we know too -
tf we fhink about it - that it cannot be done alone. Envil Brunner said it

WwW

-j-
wel}: "Jesus makes everyone of us a murderer and an adulterer'.

And we move now from our objective observation of Jesus the teacher - to
our convictions of faith about Jesus Christ our Lord. For if he is teacher
alone - and if |} take what he said very seriously, he very quickly becomes
my accuser, my judge, my prosecution.

Jesus was more than a tcacher of uthics. He taught about God: he
reveated God: he was, we belieys, God in the flesh. This is, and must be, as
Important as everything he taught. for the God Jesus Christ revealed to us
is forgiving and merciful and toving. He Is a God - more like a Fathor
than a righteous judge. a God who understands when his children stumbly
and fall: a Gad who's forgiveness can pick a man up and recreate him and give
him the kind of powor he needs to live honestly in the ethical dilemnas of
life,

That's why we can, with a straight face, call the content of his
teaching Gospe!. Good News. For Jesus - in the words of the fourth Gospel,
‘did not came fo condemn the world - but to save it’. He came, that is to
say, not To ptle guilt on your head and mine. not to make us feel so badly
about ourselves that we become. obsessed with our inadequacies. He came
rather to show us a better way: a way to five and love that is positive
and outgoing and heipful and essentially very happy. He came to show us a
Side of God men didn’t know and men stil! have trouble handling: a God who is
pleased with our humanity: a God whose love for us enabius us to feel goad
about ourselves: a God whose incredible acceptance of us - compe!tis us to
keep trying To gut up when we fall - to keep on imitating his remarkab!«
teacher son: not because we're afraid of what will happen to us if we don't:
but because his love for us is so great that we have no other option.

Jesus taught that. Jesus became that. Jesus the teacher died for that -

in the most vivid visual aid you and | shalt ever see. AMEN

Father, we would sit at the feet of the master. Give us the moral integrity

To hear what he says. AMEN.