Zacchaeus—Luke 19:1-10

Sycamore tree in the heart of Jericho
(Image courtesy of http://upload.wikimedia.org/)

Today's text can be read here: Luke 19:1-10

The man named Zacchaeus (Hebrew-Aramaic form: Zakkai) forms a foil to the unnamed "rich young ruler" we read about recently in Luke. The latter was given no name, because he never changed his mind and joined the Christian community, whereas Zacchaeus, whose life the Lord changed so dramatically for the better, did and became a primary source for this incident.

As to the name Zakkai, Richard Bauckham has the following to say, based upon Tal Ilan's studies:

"Many names had different forms and these could sometimes be used to distinguish one bearer of the name from another. For example, Jesus' brother Joseph (Matt 13:55) was evidently known by the abbreviated form Yoses (Mark 6:3) in order to distinguish him within the family from his father Joseph. This is exactly like a modern family within which the father is known as James and the son as Jim. It is possible that other persons known by abbreviated forms of a name were first so called to distinguish them from close relatives of the same name. Perhaps Zacchaeus (Luke 19:2, i.e., Zakkai, the short form of Zachariah) was first so called to distinguish him from his father or an uncle or grandfather called Zachariah" (Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, p. 78).

There is an intriguing possibility that the Zacchaeus whose name the early church historian Eusebius found in a list of 15 leaders of the first generation of Jerusalem church leaders was indeed the man of this story. Although Eusebius names him the fourth bishop of Jerusalem in a sequence of 15, Skarsaune (In the Shadow of the Temple, pp. 195-96) is probably right to interpret the list so as to make him and the eleven others that complete the list an "apostolate" of twelve assistants to one of the first three bishops who head the list: who were James (Jesus' brother), Symeon and Justus.

"If Jesus traveled from Jericho to Bethany on Sunday, he must have spent the last Sabbath before his death in Jericho. This throws light on the story of Zacchaeus. What Jesus says to this tax collector is, 'I must stay at your house today.' The verb 'stay' (Luke 19:5) and the phrase 'He has gone to be the guest of a sinner' (Luke 19:7) imply that Jesus stayed overnight with Zacchaeus. Jesus spent the last Sabbath in humiliation in order to bring salvation and joy to the home of a tax collector. This reinforces the program for ascending to Jerusalem: 'For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost' (Luke 19:10)" (Van Bruggen, Christ on Earth [1998], p. 202).

Zacchaeus' promise to repay fourfold was based on Exodus 22:1 (compare Jesus' comment
with Mark 2:13-17).

"According to the Mishnah (M. Arak. viii 4) a man may devote only part of his means to the Temple, and to go further than this was not valid. This passage demonstrates that men were obliged to set a limit to their generosity. It had already been recognized as a precept in the first century AD that it was not permissible to spend more than a fifth of one's means on acts of charity (j. Peah i.I, 15b.23). Zacchaeus the publican was ready to give half his goods to charity, and so to make recompense for fraud (Luke 19.8), and this intention Jesus commended. [Elsewhere in the gospels] The phrase, 'to sell all that he had' (makar kol ma she yesh lo, b. Pes. 49a Bar.) cannot always be taken literally, and the evidence shows how far the demands for charity on a man's means were taken in practice. On the other hand, it was performed to the letter by such a man as R[abbi] Johanan: for the sake of studying the Torah he sold all his material possessions without even retaining enough for the needs of his old age. We must, therefore, consider the possibility that 'to sell all' is not to be taken literally, but is rather a powerful expression for the demands of charity. There is no doubt in this case that such demands played a large part in the teaching of Jesus" (J. Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus, pp. 127-28).

Several lessons emerge from this account. Although Zacchaeus had all that anyone in his location and era could want—wealth, influence in society, probably a reputation for orthodoxy and religiosity among the more well-to-do class—he was clearly an unhappy man and was seeking to fill the emptiness in his soul. The measure of his desperation is shown by his willingness to appear ridiculous in order to attract Jesus' attention. His surprise and delight that Jesus "invited himself" to stay the night in Zacchaeus' home. And his eagerness to let Jesus change him from a self-serving, greedy person into a repentant man happy to rid himself of undeserved money and thirsty for the forgiveness of those he had wronged.

Some of us may still find ourselves in Zacchaeus' position. He had a thirst that perhaps others in his neighborhood, city or nation had. But unlike many of them he was willing to risk ridicule in order to slake that thirst in Jesus. Do you?

Others of us may have taken the step to "drink" the forgiveness of God through personal trust in Jesus, but need to examine our lives in this season preceding Passion and Easter. Are we only "respectable" on the outside, but inwardly driven by personal ambitions and acquisitiveness that shoves the needs of others aside? Are we "defrauding" others by ignoring them and failing to take their needs into consideration? Our spouses? Our children? Our parents? Our brothers or sisters? Our fellow church members? Our colleagues at work? How much do we even allow ourselves to see need around us?

If we are in either of these two positions, the story of Zacchaeus shows us the remedy. We need to go to Jesus, seeking his forgiveness and promising with his enablement to change. This kind of change is not an attempt to earn forgiveness and salvation: it is the grateful response of one who has found forgiveness and has drunk deeply of Jesus.

A Blind Man at Jericho—Luke 18:35-43

(Image courtesy of http://www.bible-history.com/)

Today's text can be found here: Luke 18:35-43

Beggars were normally found at places where many people had to pass: at entrances to temples, at gateways to walled cities. Jericho was a walled city. There were two routes for travelers between Galilee and Jerusalem. One followed the spine of the central north-south mountain range and passed through Samaria. Jesus had taken this route before, and had had both positive and negative reception by the Samaritans. On this trip, however, he took the easterly route down the Jordan valley to Jericho and then up the slopes westward to Jerusalem. Today's passage and tomorrow's deal with incidents at Jericho.

The blind beggar's name, given to us by Mark, was Bar-Timaeus, which in Aramaic means "son of Timaeus". Although the RSV omits the name, considering it to be merely the Aramaic words, then translated by Mark as "son of Timaeus" in the following gloss, research into naming practices among Palestinian Jews in Jesus' day has shown that it was fairly common for a man to have his patronym ("son of X") as his usual name. Mark was therefore really giving us the name by which the beggar was called, and then (in Greek translation) identifying him as Timaeus ' son. In Arabic-speaking Middle Eastern societies today the common practice is the opposite: a father often is called by the name of his eldest son: Abu Tariq "father of Tariq".

Richard Bauckham, in his book Jesus and the Eye-witnesses (2006), has made a good case that named individuals in the gospel accounts occurring in only one recorded incident were most likely identified by name, because they had survived in the Christian community as living sources (eye-witnesses) of the event being described. It is therefore very probable that Bar-timaeus became a member of the earliest Christian community after the Resurrection, and that he was a primary source for this account.

Bar-timaeus was sitting by the roadside near the entrance to Jericho when he heard the hubbub of the crowd accompanying Jesus approach. Inquiring who this popular person was that was passing by, he was told it was Jesus of Nazareth. By this time, which was relatively late in his three-year public ministry, Jesus was well-known and had a largely popular and favorable reputation, foremost of which was his ability to heal any affliction.

Luke and Matthew agree on the wording of what Bar-timaeus called out to Jesus: "Jesus, son of David! Have mercy on me!" Mark only omits "son of David". Now, it is true that "son of David" might have royal, and messianic overtones, implying that Bar-timaeus believed Jesus was the promised Davidic King and Messiah. But on analogy with the rules governing the use of the "father of Tariq" type name in Middle Eastern society today, only those who are relatives or on intimate terms with the person (or who wish to be) use this form of address. It is possible that Bar-timaeus called Jesus bar David because he wanted Jesus to view him as an intimate friend or relative, and thus "have mercy" on him. Of course, this parallel may not go very far, since David was Jesus' remote ancestor, not his real parent. But in support of the theory, it is interesting that, after bystanders sought to silence Bar-timaeus, he cried out more insistently and desperately "Son of David! Have mercy on me!" omitting the name Jesus entirely. His appeal was based on what "Son of David" meant to him. By addressing Jesus this way, he hoped desperately to receive his mercy.

In any event, the actual gospel text does not say that Bar-timaeus directly requested healing, only "mercy". Since in the Greek of Jesus' day gifts to beggars were called "mercy" (ἐλεημοσύνη), his request could have been answered with a small gift of money. But in Jesus' vocabulary "mercy" meant much more. It meant healing—both of body and of soul.

Jesus stopped and commanded his disciples to bring Bar-timaeus to him. When the beggar arrived, Jesus asked him "What do you want me to do for you?" and open-ended offer of "mercy". Ask little, receive little. Ask much, receive much! Understanding this, Bar-timaeus asked much of Jesus: "Let me receive my sight." Jesus' answered, "Receive your sight. Your faith has made you well."

The miracle was instantaneous: immediately the man could see. And immediately also he began to "follow" Jesus, that is, he became a disciple. This fits the understanding mentioned above that Bar-timaeus is named in this story (only in Mark, however), because he had become a believer and continued in the early Church as a living source for this story.

In fact, although the blind were among the classes exempt according to Jewish law (M. Hag. i 1) from the obligation to travel to Jerusalem for the major festivals (Passover, Pentecost, Tabernacles), now that this man's sight was restored he was obligated to go. And since Jesus and his entourage were at this point on their way to Jerusalem for Passover, it is likely that the previously blind beggar actually joined their party and thus quite literally "followed" (or "accompanied"; Greek ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ) Jesus!

There is a sense in which you and I, once we believe and become disciples of Jesus, become living sources for what the Resurrected, Living Jesus has done to make us spiritually whole. Others who see how our lives have changed for the better can also testify to this. But it is we ourselves who are the primary sources. Sometimes it is not only the Scripture that God uses to lead a seeking person to take the step of becoming a disciple. Sometimes God also uses the testimony of one of us, telling how we were, and how we came to believe, and how Jesus changed us. I'm sure Bar-timaeus never grew tired of telling his story. I know I never lose the deep sense of gratitude to Jesus for how he reached out to me as a confused freshman at Princeton University in 1956. I pray only that my life and yours will match well with the stories we can tell. Bar-timaeus never went blind again; he continued to see. The change was permanent and plain for all to see. The drastic changes in our lives should also be permanent and plain for all to see.