Men in the life of jesus

MEN IN THE LIFE OF JESUS
By Pastor Glenn Pease
1. PETER-A DARING DISCIPLE Based on Matt. 14:22-36
2. JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA Based on Matt. 27:55-66
3. JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA THE CORAGEOUS COWARD Based on Mark 15:37-47
4. JOHN THE GREATEST Based on MARK 1:1-8
5. MATTHEW THE TAX COLLECTOR Based on Mark 2:13-16
6. SIMON OF CYRENE Based on Mark 15:15-26
7. SIMON THE ZEALOT Based on Luke 6:12-16
8. JOHN-SON OF THUNDER Based on Luke 9:46-56
9. DEFECTIVE DISCIPLES Based on Luke 9:46-50
10. APOSTOLIC INTOLERANCE Based on Luke 9:49-50
11. ANDREW THE ORDINARY Based on John 1:35-42
12. PHILIP Based on John 1:43-46
13. THE SON OF LIGHTNING Based on John 13:1-10
14. PILATE'S PERPLEXING PROBLEM Based on John 18:28-40
15. THOMAS THE DOUBTER Based on John 20:19-31
1. PETER-A DARING DISCIPLE Based on Matt. 14:22-36
Back in 1959 Ford Motor Company admitted they made a big
mistake in making the Edsel. It cost 250 million to bring it to market,
and they lost 200 million during the 2 and 1/2 years they produced it.
It was the number one lemon in the history of the U. S. auto industry.
But smart owners turned their lemons into lemonade. They formed
an Edsel owners club in all 50 states; they published a quality
magazine and had annual conventions, and they made their Edsels
collectors cars worth much more than they were new.
The point is, mistakes can be costly, but they can also be
profitable. The whole idea involved in Rom. 8:28 that God works in
all things for the good of those who love him is this very point. God

will even work with us in our mistakes to make them profitable and
learning experiences. This means we do not need to fear failure so
much that we refuse to take a chance and do what is of some risk.
Our very failure could be the stepping stone to success. This is not
some kind of mystical religious principle, but it is the wisdom of very
practical minded men. Years ago a writer interviewed IBM
president Thomas J. Wadson, and this is what he said:
"It's not exactly my line," Watson said, "But would you like me
to give you a formula for writing success? It's quite simple, really.
Double your rate of failure." "You're making a common mistake.
You're thinking of failure as the enemy of success. But it isn't at all.
Failure is a teacher-a harsh one perhaps, but the best. You say you
have a desk full of rejected manuscripts? That's great! Everyone of
those manuscripts was rejected for a reason. Have you pulled them
to pieces looking for that reason? "You can be discouraged by
failure-or you can learn from it. So go ahead and make mistakes.
Make all you can. Because, remember that's where you'll find
success. On the far side of failure."
There are numerous illustrations of this in the secular world, and
there are volumes that deal with the subject. But the best illustration
of this in the New Testament is the life of Peter. We have more
recorded mistakes and blunders of Peter than all the rest of the 12
put together. He was the master of mistakes, and yet Jesus chose him
to be the leader of the 12. There is no list of the Apostles where Peter
is not first. Is there any connection between all of his mistakes and
his being the number one man in leadership? Yes there is, and the
mistake we want to examine is a prime example.
Peter was the only man Jesus ever rebuked for lacking the faith
needed to stay on top of water. Why would Jesus make this man he
had to rebuke more than all the others the leader of the others? He

did so because Peter was the only one of the 12 willing to take the
chance. Yes, he sank while all the rest were safely in the boat. But
that is because he was the only one willing to take the chance of
leaping out of the boat. The risk taker fails more because they do
more. You can criticize Peter and be justified in doing so, for Jesus
rebuked him for his little faith that led him to doubt and then sink.
Peter did fail here, and needed to be rescued, but look at the whole
picture.
The only reason Peter failed is because he took a chance, and he
was the only one who did. We focus on his failure and neglect the fact
that Peter was the only man besides Jesus whoever succeeded in
walking on water. His faith weakened in the storm, but the text tells
us clearly in verse 29, "Then Peter got down out of the boat and
walked on the water to Jesus." Peter was the greatest success in the
world at walking on water. That took tremendous faith. But what we
see here is that faith can be very flimsy, and confidence can collapse
very rapidly in a fearful situation.
Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon, said at a press
conference in July of 1970, "I particularly remember the elation of
finding out that we indeed weren't going to sink into the surface, and
we could continue with all the other planned activities." These were
among the coolest men on the planet, and yet they had their fears as
they set foot on the moon. How much more so for Peter who set foot
on the lake where there was no mystery about it? He knew that
sinking in water was inevitable. Had the water been as still and calm
as glass it still would have been a fearful step out of that boat. But in
a raging storm it would seem to be an act of folly to even attempt it.
But Peter risked doing the impossible with Jesus, and he did it.
Peter was rebuked, for Jesus wanted him to go all the way and
experience total victory by his faith, but he failed and began to sink.

Jesus was not disgusted with Peter. Yes, he got a F in completion, but
he got an A for effort. He was the only one who took the test. The
rest sat like bumps on a log, and they did not fail, but they also never
had a chance to succeed. Peter did what none of the others ever did,
he walked on water. Jesus chose him to be the leader because he was
willing to take a chance. His very failure was a mark in his favor, for
only those who try can fail.
We don't want to give a false impression that the rest of the 12
were of no value because they did not rise up and leap over the side of
the boat. They are no less chosen of Christ, but they are less exalted.
Peter is made number one because he had a courage that the others
lacked. Not all Christians are risk takers, and it is not sinful that they
are not. Jesus did not need 12 men leaping into the lake. He only
needed one risk taker of that degree, for he only needed one head
man. We are not trying to put anybody down, but only striving to see
what it was about Peter that made him the one Jesus chose to be the
leader of the 12. What we see is that Peter was more willing to fail
and take chances for Christ. His failures were not good, but they
represent a quality of character that Jesus was looking for in a
leader. He was ready to risk losing for the sake of winning.
We can't all be Peter, just as none of the other disciples could be.
They were often chicken compared to him. But all Christians can
learn from Peter's example to move in the direction of boldness and
risk taking. In one sense this whole incident was much ado about
nothing. Who cares about walking on water? It is one of the most
useless miracles in all the Bible. Jesus never did it again, and nobody
else was ever challenged to do it again. It healed nobody and helped
nobody. In terms of benefit, you can place this miracles on the
bottom of the pile. Who could feel the loss if it never would have
happened? Obviously a miracle of so little worth must have great
value in terms of education.

This whole scene was deliberately set up by Jesus to teach a
lesson. He sent them out into the lake in a boat alone. This time he
was not going to be sleeping in the boat when the storm hit. This was
a whole new lesson for them to see how they would cope alone, and
how their faith would respond with him absent. He was not going to
be at their side in the flesh forever, and they needed to develop a faith
that went beyond sight. They had just seen Jesus feed 5000 with 5
loaves and 2 fish. You would think their faith would never fail again
after that, but Jesus sends them off to face contrary winds and put
their faith to the test.
Peter is being tested here especially, and we see him come through
with both and A and a F, but with an overall stamp of approval that
made him the key leader. He got a A for daring and a F for doubting,
but as we shall see, even his failure was an asset that Jesus
appreciated. If we could learn to fail like Peter, we will please our
Lord and be used to build his kingdom. Let's look at his success and
failure, or his daring and doubting.
I. HIS DARING.
Peter dared to do what the others never dreamed of doing. Safety
first was their motto. But Peter was an impulsive risk taker, and his
impulse in this very unusual setting was to step out onto the water.
"Lord if its you tell me to come to you on the water." Peter is saying,
"dare me to come Lord", and Jesus responds, "I dare you to come."
Jesus knew Peter was the kind of man who could not refuse a dare. If
you challenged him to do the unusual and impossible, you better be
prepared to deal with the consequences, for he will be going for it.
Such a personality trait can quickly turn you into a fool, but it can
also make you a hero. It has to be kept under control, and Peter had
his problems doing that. Peter dared to do foolish things also, and

was like a teenager being dared to play chicken in a car, or being
dared to go over 100 miles per hour. People who can't say no to a
dare are often at the mercy of the most foolish and dangerous whims.
It is one of those virtue-vice type traits. If you can be daring,
however, and respond to a dare to do what is good, noble, and heroic,
then you have a very positive virtue.
Studies show that people can be dared into doing what is best for
them. George Warren Kroll was a weakling who was dared to
become the healthiest boy in his class, and the blood flowed through
his body responding to the challenge, and he began to build his body
until it was the strongest in his class. Harry Wonda was about to quit
his job as a salesman when his sales manager challenged him. "I dare
you to go out and sell more today than you ever have."
It was like a call to battle, and he went out with a determination to do
just that, and he did. He needed the dare to bring out the daring
spirit that was in him.
Jesus knew Peter had a daring spirit, and that is why he challenged
him to do the daring act of walking on water. Jesus was doing to
Peter what Ulysses did to Achilles. He provided an opportunity to
reveal his true nature. When the Greeks were besieging Troy the
oracle came saying they would never take the city until Achilles came
to the front. But the mother of Achilles fearing his death had him
hidden away disguised as a girl in the court of Diomedes. Crafty old
Ulysses disguised himself as a peddler and entered the home of
Diomedes where he spread out a glittering array of trinkets before
the eager eyes of the girls. As if by chance there was also a sword laid
among them. Suddenly, a trumpet blast sounded at the gate, which
Ulysses had prearranged to give the impression of an attack. One of
the girls with flushing cheeks and kindly eyes sprang forward and
gripped the sword and flashed it in the air, and stood forth every inch
a warrior. Ulysses presented a challenge and a dare, and he found his

man. Achilles went with him and Troy fell.
Jesus needed a brave leader to defeat the kingdom of darkness,
and by this dare to come to him on the water Jesus also found his man
in Peter the daring disciple. But we have to face the reality that Peter
did not stay on top of the water very long, and so we have to look at-
II. HIS DOUBTING.
We love Peter better because he sank. Paul probably would have
walked all the way to Jesus and made us all feel hopelessly
inadequate. But Peter, the Rock, sank because his daring faith
turned to doubting fear, and we see ourselves in Peter, for he is more
like us. Paul was more of a intellectual, and he probably would not
have tried it after he gave it some thought. He was smart enough to
know it wouldn't work, but Peter was not that smart.
We get our courage up at times and feel determined to take a new
path. We say with Peter, "Lord bid me come to you on the water."
We pray for Jesus to guide us to new heights and bold adventures for
him. "Lord help me take the leap of faith; to get out of the boat of
complacency and non-productive habits. Help me be bold for you."
Then, like Peter, we soon recognize we are not very good at walking
on water. We are out of our element, and are like a fish trying to
walk on the beach. We see the reality of our inadequacy, and the
waves begin to pound our sand castle of faith, and it dissolves before
our eyes. All we see is the impossibility of maintaining our
commitment, and we cry out as Peter did, "Lord save me!" Our
determination leads us into deep water, and we are worse off now
than if we would have just stayed in the boat.
We are just like Peter. Even his best intentions often ended in a
failure because fear and doubt overwhelmed his faith and daring.

Why then did Jesus choose Peter to be the leader of the 12, when he
had the same weaknesses that they had, and that we all have? The
reason is obvious, for Jesus is teaching us all through Peter that it is
better to try and fail then never to try at all. It is better to fail in a
cause that will one day succeed than to succeed in a cause that will
one day fail. That statement comes from another Peter who was
Peter Marshall.
Jesus chose Peter because Peter was willing to take a chance and
do something rather than nothing. You can set in the boat and
succeed at being a setter, or you can leap out of the boat and fail to be
a walker on water, but Jesus says that he chooses the one who fails in
trying, rather than the one who succeeds in not trying. Jesus is saying
to go ahead and fail in trying to do what he calls you to do. Take a
chance, for I prefer a rock that tries to walk on water and sinks, over
a bump in a boat that will take no risks.
Jesus never asked Peter to do this again, or anyone else. He never
again walked on water. It is not anyone's goal in life to walk on
water. It is not in God's plan at all, and so it is obvious this one time
event was to teach us this lesson. Failure in trying is superior to
success in not trying. Don't let your doubts and fears stop you from
trying to do something exciting for Christ. Even the world's greatest
daredevils have to fight with fear and doubt. Steve Brodie at age 23
leaped off the Brooklyn Bridge in 1886. He plunged a 120 feet into
the East River. He was on the front page of the New York Times the
next morning. He was arrested, but the judge didn't know what to do
with him, for nobody had ever done this and lived to tell about it. It
was against the law to kill yourself this way, but there was no law
dealing with someone who jumped and lived. He was released and
became quite famous as a daredevil.
He decided to go over Niagara Falls in a rubber suit. This also

was against the law, so he got up at 5:30 in the morning and paddled
out to the middle of the river above Horseshoe Falls on the Canadian
side. He went over, and again he lived to tell about it. But like Peter,
the power of the water all about him raised his doubt level to near
panic. He reported afterward that he would have given anything to
back out, but once he was in the current there was no return. He
tried hard to get to shore, but when he saw it was impossible he felt he
was going to die, and so cried out in prayer just as Peter did to be
spared. By the time he came to the brink of the falls the fear was so
great he went unconscious. That was his answer to prayer, for he was
spared the experience of the fall, and the next thing he knew he was
on the water's edge.
The point is, the most brave and bold and courageous can be filled
with fear, and his faith can fail. Fear of failure is no excuse, for all
men fear failure at some point. Fear of not trying should be the fear
that motivates us. We are not called to walk on water or go over
Niagara, or a thousand other stunts that have no value for the
kingdom of God. But we are called to get out of the boat which
represents the church, and join Jesus on the stormy sea which
represents the lost world. That is the kind of person Jesus is looking
for, and that is why he used Peter to be the first man to lead a Gentile
into the church. Peter ld Cornelius to Christ before Paul the Apostle
and the Gentiles were involved in ministry. The whole first part of
the book of Acts revolves around Peter. Why? Because he was a
man willing to change.
Stepping out of the boat onto a stormy sea is what we all do if we
take seriously the call to evangelism. It can lead to so much failure.
We risk offending people all the time. We risk losing friendships. We
risk getting a reputation as a fanatic. It is a high risk area to step
into, but it is better to fail in trying than to succeed in staying safe.
Studies show that only about 10 per cent of Christians ever respond

to the challenge of evangelism, the question is, are you one of that 10
per cent? We can't all be like Peter, but we can all move in the
direction of being a more daring disciple. The unknown poet gives the
challenge to us all.
"In this vast universe
There is but one supreme truth-
That God is our friend!
By that truth meaning is given
To the remote stars, the numberless centuries,
The long and heroic struggle of mankind....
O my Soul, dare to trust this truth!
Dare to rest in God's kindly arms,
Dare to look confidently into His face,
Then launch thyself into life unafraid!
Knowing thou art within thy Father's house,
That thou art surrounded by His love,
Thou wilt become master of fear,
Lord of life, conqueror even of death!"
2. JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA Based on Matt. 27:55-66
The danger of making a hero out of a man who does a great thing
after a long time of doing nothing is that you give the impression that
there was nothing lost by doing it that way. A man lives a life of sin,
or of indifference to God's will, and suddenly he sees the light and is
wondrously converted. If he has been a well known sinner, or a
famous unbeliever, there is a tendency to make a great deal of it, and
make such a person an example. But there is often a failure to point
out what a great lost was suffered by his delayed decision. Some have

pointed out that it is of no credit to Paul that God had to beat him
down and blind him before he submitted to Christ.
Joseph of Arimathea became a hero by his last minute change
from cowardice to courage. But we want to point out something of
the loss he suffered by not making his decision earlier. We want to
look at 2 aspects of his experience and see the loss which he suffered,
and the love which he showed.
I. THE LOST WHICH HE SUFFERED.
What is said here will not be taken as statements out of the text,
but as inferences from other passages of the Bible. First he suffered
loss because his discontent came to late for the greatest good. When
he stood before the cross he became thoroughly discontent with his
superficial secret discipleship. But this discontent should have
characterized his life from the start as a believer. Discontent is an
essential factor for effective Christian growth.
But didn't Paul say I have learned to be content in whatever state
I am. Yes, but Paul was speaking of being content with much or little,
with hard bed, in danger, or soft one in the home of a friend. He was
talking about being content with whatever life brought in his service
for Christ, whether it be good or bad. But when it came to the
spiritual, Paul was not content. Paul was as near perfect as we can
imagine, yet called himself chief of sinners, and cried out, "Oh
wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of
death." Paul was constantly pushing onward and upward trying to
apprehend that for which God had apprehended him. He was never
content to stop and be satisfied with where he was in his spiritual
growth.
If there is no discontent, there will be no drive to move ahead.

Contentment with one's spiritual life is a curse. It has been one of the
greatest curses in the history of the church, and was such also in
Judaism. Dead orthodoxy is the fruit of contentment. The Pharisees
were content with their system of salvation by works. That is why
they despise Jesus and wanted to kill Him. That is why the
established church has killed so many who were excited about doing
the will of God. Men like to get everything all wrapped up in a creed
and call that Christianity. This was the case with the state churches
of Europe. They were perfectly content to let the people live for the
devil just as long as they memorize the creed. But God raised up men
who would not be content with that kind of Christianity.
We need to be careful in our use of words like liberal. Remember
that the men who were the fathers of what we now call orthodoxy
were once the liberals. They were the discontented liberals who could
not stand dead orthodoxy, and so they rebelled. There needs to be
constant reformation, for the orthodox has a tendency to settle back
into contentment. It is only as we are constantly discontent that we
can keep orthodoxy alive. Whenever a Christian is content he is in
danger of backsliding, but a discontented Christian grows. We need
to distinguish, however, between discontent and discouragement.
Discouragement drags down, but discontent pushes us on.
I have said all this as background to explain what Joseph missed
by experiencing his discontent so late. If he had felt this all along,
there is no telling what he may have accomplished among the leaders
of Israel, and especially among those other secret disciples. If only
they had a leader who was discontent enough to speak out and
organize them. This is what Joseph lost-the honor of organizing a
band of disciples among the elite, and thereby winning many more to
Christ.
St. Augustine was one who lived long in sin before he came to

Christ. Once he said, "All too late have I loved thee." This was
Joseph's experience as well. What he did was great, but it was too
late for the greatest glory. Mary of Bethany demonstrates for us that
when we love it ought to be shown. While Jesus sat at the table she
came an anointed Him with expensive perfumes. Judas rebuked her,
but Jesus praised her and said that what she had done would be
spoken as a memorial for her wherever the Gospel is preached. She
gave her gift and showed her love while Jesus was alive. Joseph
waited until He was dead, and when it was too late for Jesus to
appreciate it.
The contrast is between those who send flowers to the living, and
those who only send them to the dead. Edgar Dewitt Jones told of a
man who had to leave his invalid mother to work in the city. Every
week he sent flowers home. Some felt this was a waste, for she had
flowers all over the house. But the mother eagerly awaited them each
week. They were concrete expressions of his love, and they made her
happy all her days until she died. The Judas mind says it is such a
waste, and the Joseph mind says why not wait until she dies. But the
Mary mind says express your love now and never put it off, and she
was the only one whom Jesus praised, for her philosophy is the only
one that acts when the greatest glory can be gained. An unknown
poet maybe too hard on Joseph, but here are some lines he has
written:
Strange quite man, what impulse in your breast
Involved your kindness to the Master whom
You had not dared to join? He wanted rest
Within your heart, but found it in your tomb.
Did you not dare to love Him, He who sought
To give you life, nor asked for recompense?
What pity that in finding Him you brought
Your laggard love in death's cold cerements!

II. THE LOVE WHICH HE SUFFERED.
Hate has had its hour, and now love steps in to close the day.
Maybe Joseph was late with his love, but it was of great significance
when it came. It is of interest to note the similarities of the burial of
Christ with His birth.
1. When He was born the rich came to worship. When He was
buried it was in the tomb of a rich man.
2. When He was born the main characters were Mary and Joseph.
When He was buried the main characters were Mary Magdalene and
Joseph of Arimathea.
3. Joseph would be the first to touch the baby at birth, and Joseph
was the last to touch the body in burial.
4. In birth He had a borrowed cradle, and in dead a borrowed grave.
Jesus did own things, for He was a carpenter and had to have
tools. But He was greatly dependant upon others in His ministry. He
preached from a borrowed boat; He rode on a borrowed colt; He ate
the Last Supper in a borrowed room, and was buried in a borrowed
tomb. He had nothing lasting on earth, for He laid up all His treasure
in heaven. The only thing He had of permanent value was His life and
He gave that for us.
In comparing His birth and burial Wordworth said, "One Joseph
was appointed by God to be the guardian of His body in the virgin
womb, and another Joseph was the guardian of His body in the virgin
tomb, and each man is called a just man in Holy Scripture." A poet
has put it,
How life and death in Thee agree;
Thou hadst a virgin womb and tomb,
And Joseph did betroth them both.

Some critics go too far in their criticism of Joseph and say that he
only took Jesus down from the cross because he was concerned about
obedience to the Jewish law, which said in Deut. 21:22-23, "When a
man who has committed a crime deserving of death, is executed and
you hang him on a tree, his body must not be permitted to remain on
the tree over night; you must bury him on the same day." (Berkley).
This is going too far, for if that was his only concern, why did not take
care of the two thieves as well? Not only that, if he was worried
about the law he would not be there defiling himself by touching a
dead body on the night of the Passover Feast. He was a rich man and
could have hired someone to do it. The fact that he and Nicodemus
were there, and cut themselves off from the feast by defilement, is
proof enough of their real love.
John tells us that while Joseph was getting permission to take the
body of Christ Nicodemus went to buy a 100 pound weight of spices.
It is of interest again the myrr should be used, which was one of the
gifts the wise men brought at His birth. When they came to take
down the body of Jesus and prepare it for burial the women who had
been there watching followed them, and Mary Magdalene was among
them. They, no doubt, wondered what was happening, for they did
not know these two men were disciples of Jesus. They had been secret
disciples. It must have been a pleasant surprise for them to see these
two take the body to a beautiful garden tomb and prepare it for
decent burial. They would have done it themselves, but they could
never have gotten permission to take the body. Here was the amazing
providence of God in having a man of wealth and position ready just
when he was needed.
In taking Jesus to His new tomb Joseph was fulfilling the prophecy
of Isa. 53:9, which said, "Men made His grave with the criminals, and
He was with the rich in His death." The tomb of Joseph must have
been in a beautiful garden with many plants and flowers. Man began

in the Garden of Eden with perfect life, but soon he turned it into
death. Jesus now lays in the garden of Joseph dead, but will soon turn
it into life. The beauty of the location was symbolic of the joy and
glory of the Easter message.
It is more than guess work that makes us visualize the beauty of
Joseph's garden. If you recall, Mary Magdalene on the first Easter
morning saw a figure nearby when she was weeping because her Lord
was gone. It says that she supposed him to be the gardener. It is
highly unlikely she would think any such thing unless this garden was
a beautiful estate calling for a great deal of care. Joseph was a rich
man, and no doubt did have a gardener to keep this place neat and
beautiful, and so it was perfectly natural for Mary to think that is
who she saw.
Thanks to the love of Joseph, Jesus received the burial of a king
and fulfilled several prophecies. One of them was that the body of
Jesus was not to see corruption. Thanks to the new tomb where none
had been laid, and to the spices that Nicodemus bought, his body did
not see corruption. The Christian is to regard the body with respect
and car, but not to worship it. Some say just throw it away as
worthless, and others say honor it as an idol. These extremes are both
wrong. The body is to be loved and respected, but whatever happens
to the body does not make a difference in terms of the resurrection.
Jesus had a decent burial, but the thief on the cross was likely thrown
into a ditch somewhere, but his spirit went to paradise with Jesus just
the same. Whatever be the grave of a saint it is a resurrection field.
Joseph was late in his expression of love, and because of that he
suffered loss, but he illustrates the truth of the saying that it is better
late than never. Joseph will always be remembered for the love
which he finally showed that did play an important role in the respect
given to the body of Christ.

3. JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA THE CORAGEOUS
COWARD Based on Mark 15:37-47
A fireman who was half dead from exhaustion and smoke
inhalation, with face dirty and uniform covered with grime, staggers
past the crowd and is almost deafened by their shouts and cheers for
him. He has just come from a burning building where, at the risk of
his life, he climbed to the third story and rescued a trapped child.
The crowd watched breathlessly as he walked along the ledge of the
building with his precious burden, and finally managed to get back to
the ladder and down to safety. The crowd cheered this man more
now than they ever thought of doing on the day of the firemen's
parade. He marched by then in his freshly cleaned uniform with all
the buttons shined. It is obvious why. Even though he was more
presentable marching in a parade, that was only a superficial duty of
a fireman, but now they had just witnessed his sacrificial duty. He
had risked his life, and the awful appearance which he now exhibited
was the result of his willingness to perform the hardest, highest, and
most sacrificial duty of a fireman. This called for cheers and praise.
We would think people mad if they thought more of him all spic
and span marching in the parade than they thought of him now. Yet,
it is just this very thing that happened in the last week of the life of
Christ. On Palm Sunday when Jesus rode into Jerusalem the crowds
cheered him and honored Him like a king. A few days later when He
hung on the cross they mocked Him. This was as foolish as mocking
the fireman for saving the child. Couldn't they see that the triumphal
entry was only the parade, but the cross was the real victory? Here
was the king on His throne doing the real and sacrificial duty He
came into the world to do. It was on the cross that He was at His
best. He came to give His life a ransom for many, and now as he

fulfills this greatest and most sacrificial duty of all time, the cheering
crowds have become the cruel crowds. They were blind, and they
missed the meaning of it all.
What was obvious in the case of the fireman is just the opposite
here, but we want to consider the happy fact that not everyone missed
it. The Bible tells us of several who were deeply moved by the death
of Christ. We have the Roman Centurion, Joseph of Arimathea, and
Nicodemus. We want to focus on Joseph, for he was the first
Christian man we know of who was so moved by the cross that he
made an all out commitment of his life. We want to consider his
experience in two stages.
I. HIS COWARDICE BEFORE THE CROSS. v. 43
Simon of Cyrene, the penitent thief, and the Roman Centurion, all
found Christ at the cross, and they could sing as a trio, "At the cross,
at the cross, where I first saw the light." This was not the case with
Joseph of Arimathea. Matthew and John both tell us that he was
already a disciple of Christ, but John adds, "But secretly for fear of
the Jews." It was not at the cross where Joseph first saw the light,
but it was there that the light penetrated deep into his heart, and
compelled him to come out into the light of open commitment.
Where was Joseph before the cross? Why don't we hear of him
until now? It was because Joseph was one of those men who wanted
to eat his cake and have it too. He and Nicodemus were both
members of the Sanhedrin, the highest ruling body among the Jews.
Most of the followers of Jesus were from the common people. His
chosen disciples were mostly uneducated fishermen. You certainly
would not expect a man of his standing to come out in an open
declaration of his belief in Christ. Just about everyone in his circle of
high society was opposed to this Galilean upstart who taught with

more authority than they did.
It was too risky to operate in the open, and so Joseph decided he
would be a secret disciple. He, no doubt, had all kinds of good
reasons why this would be best, such as, I'll be more influence in this
position of power; I'll be able to be a silent witness among the elite,
the up and outers. John tells us the real reason: He was just plain
scared. Nothing is so hard as going against the group.
Joseph was not alone. There were others who were afraid to risk
their position and reputation by making an open stand. In John
12:42-43 we read, "Nevertheless, many even of the leaders believed in
Him but, due to the Pharisees, failed to confess it so they might not be
put out of the synagogue, for they preferred men's esteem to divine
approval." Jesus had good cause for saying, "He who denies Me
before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in
heaven."
The fear of what others think is a powerful force in controlling our
conduct. A group of boys from good American families broke over
300 windows in a new school building. A famous psychologist was
called in to interview each boy separately, and he found that not one
approved of the conduct of the group. Each thought that they were
the only one who didn't want to do it, but no one was willing to voice
his opinion. They were all afraid of what the others would think. All
it would have taken is for one with enough sense to call the whole plan
a stupid idea. He would have been a welcome leader, and could have
prevented the whole thing, but they were all secret disciples of what
they knew to be right. A secret disciple is about as useless as a
rubber crutch.
Nicodemus and Joseph both made weak attempts to do something
for Jesus. Nicodemus on one occasion said to the Sanhedrin, "Does

our law condemn a man without a trial?" Luke tells us Joseph did
not consent to the decision to condemn Jesus. He didn't consent, but
he didn't fight it either. He was neutral, but to be neutral and silent
in the presence of sin is to condone the sin. Someone said, "All it
takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." If he would
have risen to the defense of Jesus along with Nicodemus, and other
leaders who believed, they could have prevented all the injustice and
cruelty Jesus had to suffer, but he remained a secret disciple and a
cowardly Christian.
Secret discipleship is a sad development in the life of many a
believer. The idea of being a silent witness with your life, without
speaking up for Christ, is being shattered these days. It is a fine idea,
but it just doesn't work as a major method. Luke tells us that Joseph
was a good and righteous man, but that did not do a thing for Christ
as long as he was a silent and secret disciple. To be a silent witness is
the hard way, and it leads to all sorts of complications. The man who
comes right out and lets others know where he stands finds it much
easier to live an effective Christian life. Once you make your stand
the world expects you to be Christian in your conduct, but until they
know they assume you are like them.
The secret disciple has to constantly make excuses for why he does
not live like the world. When asked to go to a night club, he has to
say he is tired, or has other plans. When asked to play golf on Sunday
morning, he has to explain that his wife wants him to go to church, or
that he would rather play on Saturday. He has to laugh at their dirty
jokes or they will get suspicious. When are we going to learn that the
best defense is our offense? The world shrinks in weakness before the
man or woman who takes a solid stand for Christ, and for what is
right. Even the conscience of the unbeliever is on our side. No one
ever took a fort by hiding in the woods. You have to attack to take it.
Like a mighty army moves the church of God; the gates of hell cannot

stop it. Secret disciples like Joseph are of no help in the battle.
Maybe they are not helping the enemy hold up the gate, but neither
are they doing anything to beat it down. That is why it is a delight to
see what happened to Joseph at the cross.
II. HIS COMMITTMENT BENEATH THE CROSS. v. 43
What a sudden change came over Joseph. When Jesus was popular
and the crowds cheered him, he was cowardly, but now when it
appears that there is nothing but defeat and utter ruin of all the
Lord's plans, he becomes courageous. When Jesus was performing
miracles, healing the blind, and raising the dead, he was afraid to
come out into the open. But now when all his disciples have fled, and
he is a picture of complete helplessness and weakness, he boldly goes
to Pilate and asks for the body of Christ, and thereby proclaims to
the world that he is a follower of this man.
This took more courage then we realize. The Roman practice was
to dishonor the bodies of criminals who were crucified. They would
let the dogs and birds consume them, or burn them, or throw them in
a ditch. For Joseph to go and request the body of Jesus for decent
burial was as much as saying, "I think you crucified an innocent man.
You did wrong to kill him." It was fortunate for him that Pilate felt
guilty, and was glad to grant his wish as another act to ease his
conscience. Eusebius, the ancient church historian, tells us that when
the Presbyter Pamphylius of Cesarea was sentenced to martyrdom in
309 A. D., his young slave Porphyrius requested that he might be
allowed to bury the body. The judge was infuriated and condemned
him to be tortured at the stake.
Joseph not only risked his life because of Pilate, but because of the
Sanhedrin. What would they do when they heard what he had done to
the one they had so despised? At best he would be cursed and

ostracized from office. What was it that caused Joseph to do now
what he could never do before? I cannot doubt that it was what he
saw and heard beneath the cross. If the cross does not bring a man
out of his cowardly concealment, nothing will. We see in Joseph the
first evidence of the power of the cross. There was a power there
that did what even his perfect life could not do. The cross is not only
the power that brings sinners to conversion, it is the power that
brings saints to commitment.
As Joseph stood beneath the cross of Jesus, and saw the love that
He exhibited there, in spite of the hate and mockery against Him, his
conscience must have burned within him. His shame must have been
almost unbearable when Jesus said, "Father forgive them for they
know not what they do." He must have examined Himself and said,
"That is right! I don't know what I am doing. I have been playing it
safe, and look what He suffers. I've been worried about my position,
power, and possessions. My pride has been my master." He saw
what folly he was practicing in the light of the cross. Even the Roman
Centurion, who did not have the knowledge he did, could see the love
of God at the cross.
Joseph could not longer hide his love for this one whose love never
failed or faltered, even on the cross.
"For me, I yield, I yield-I can hold out no more.
I come by dying love compelled, and own Him conqueror."
Joseph could have sung from actual experience,
"When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory
died,
My richest gain I count but loss and poor contempt on all my pride."

Our text tells us that Joseph was looking for the kingdom of God.
Could it be that even the penitent thief played a part in Joseph's
sudden commitment? This thief said to Jesus, "Remember me when
you come into your kingdom," and Jesus said, "This day thou shalt be
with Me in paradise." This was certainly a challenge to Joseph. Here
was a thief who saw in Jesus a king. He believed that Jesus had a
kingdom, and that he could be a part of it, and Jesus assured him he
would be. Joseph must have wondered at his own folly. He was
looking for the kingdom, and here was the king before his very eyes.
He had been counting the cost of coming out in the open for Christ,
and he thought it was too high a price to pay, but now he begins to
consider the cost of remaining silent, and he came to the conclusion
that he would count all else as loss that he might win Christ. He
threw all fear to the wind, and made an open stand. Jesus said, "It is
finished," and Joseph said in his heart, "Amen, and so is my secret
discipleship finished."
The death of Jesus did something in Joseph just the opposite of
what it did to the disciples of Jesus. They took it as the final blow,
and they slunk away in defeat to weep in despair. Joseph, in contrast,
came out of hiding, threw off his mask, and boldly said, "I love this
man enough to give him my tomb for burial." He took a stand as
shocking to all who knew him as it would be to us if a member of the
Supreme Court gave his burial plot to one that the court had just
condemned to death. If you think that would make headlines, what
about the story of Joseph? It would spread like wildfire through the
land of Israel. He would be branded for life. Tradition says he was
removed from the Sanhedrin for his action. How would we feel if the
Supreme Court judge who gave his plot, gave it to one who was
condemned as a traitor of our country? That is how the leaders of
Israel looked at Jesus, and at Joseph who gave him a place of burial."
It took the crisis of the cross to change his cowardice into courage.

Sometimes it takes a crisis to bring out a man's true faith. Foxe, in
his book of martyrs, tells of Christians who trembled in fear as they
sat in prison thinking of being burned at the stake, but when the time
came they faced it bravely. Some Christians are like Peter who was
courageous when all was calm, but who turned weak in the hour of
crisis. Others are like Joseph who was cowardly, but who became
courageous in the hour of crisis.
Joseph was the first in a long line of men of God who were
compelled to risk all in complete commitment due to a crisis
situation. Savonarola was preaching the Word of God with such
boldness to the Italians that the corrupt church tried to stop him by
advancing him to the position of Cardinal. When the messenger of
Rome arrived with the offer of the Cardinal's purple, Savonarola
asked him to come to his next sermon and receive his reply. In that
lenten sermon of 1496 he said, "I desire neither hats nor mitres, be
they great or small. I desire naught save that which thou hast given
to thy saints; it is death; a crimson hat, a hat of blood I desire." That
is what he got, for he chose the cross rather than compromise, and to
be a coward.
Before the great anti-Christian outbreak in China, an official who
was a secret believer was ordered to send a message to an inland
governor telling him to kill all Christian missionaries. This was his
hour of crisis, and, as it was with Joseph, it led him to open
commitment. He sent instructions to the governor to protect the
Christians, and in so doing he risked all that his life offered him, and
that is what it cost, for he was soon put to death. It is costly to be
committed to Christ. But Jesus did not call us to raise roses, pick
posies, cultivate carnations, but to carry the cross. The Christian life
is not a cinch, but a challenge that calls for courage. As the hymn
says,

Ye that are men now serve Him,
Against unnumbered foes:
Your courage rise with danger,
And strength to strength oppose.
Leaders of any cause know that there must be a challenge in their
cause if it is going to succeed. Napoleon once built a battery in such
an exposed position that his artillery officers said he would never find
men to man it. Napoleon was wise. He set a placard by it which read,
"The Battery Of Men Without Fear." He never lacked men to man
that battery.
If we read between the lines on the placard over the cross, we see
written there, "Jesus Christ the King of the Jews-those who would
follow Him must be willing to risk everything. Joseph of Arimethea
accepted that challenge, and made the most important decision of his
life-the decisions to end his secret discipleship of cowardice, and
become an open witness whatever the cost.
As we consider the cross before our communion service, we too
must face its challenge. We cannot remain neutral before the cross of
Christ, and we ought not to want to, for every man's heart cries out
with George Eliot who said, "I don't want to be a bit of driftwood on
the current of things." We want our lives to count, and if they count
for Christ, they count for eternity. A decision for him gives direction
to life; gives determination to make life useful, and gives a destination
for our life worth striving for. Everyone of us stand at the cross of
crisis, and it is the hour of decision: Will we be cowards, or will be
courageous?
4. JOHN THE GREATEST Based on MARK 1:1-8

It takes all kinds to make a world is an old cliché, and like many
old clichés there is a lot of truth to it. God so made our physical
world that it just won't work without differences. Issac Asimov
points out that energy can only be turned into work when you find it
in greater concentration in one place, and in lesser concentration in
another. If the world was flat and the sun shone on all of it at the
same time, all parts of the earth would be at the same temperature,
and you could get no work out of it. But if it is round, and so one side
is dark when the other is light, and it is the reality of these opposites
that makes the sun so powerful a source of energy for work.
God follows the same laws in the building of His kingdom on earth.
He does not want everybody to be the same. In fact, He wants people
who are opposites: Not just in sex, but in personality, life-style, and
in there gifts and goals. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the
contrast we see between Jesus and His forerunner John The Baptist.
They were as unlike each other as a wedding and a funeral, or joy and
solemnity. Do not reject or look down on Christians who are
different. The world is full of Christians who are strange to us, but
they are just what God wants. We are all strange to someone else,
but God loves the variety.
The paradox is Jesus and John were so much alike in their
preaching of the kingdom that they were mistaken for each other.
People thought John may be the Messiah, and he had to deny it.
Jesus was taken to be John the Baptist because He was so powerful.
People thought he was John come back to life. In Matt. 14:1-2 we
read, "At that time Herod the Tetrarch heard about the fame of
Jesus; and he said to his servants, this is John the Baptist, he has been
raised from the dead, that is why these powers are at work in him."
Later on Jesus asked His disciples, "Who do men say that the Son Of
Man is?" And in Matt. 16:14 we read this response, "And they said,
some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or

one of the prophets."
This gives us an insight into the powerful impact John the Baptist
had on Israel in the few short years of his ministry. All the other
prophets people thought of were Old Testament prophets. John was
the only contemporary that was put in that class of people whom
Jesus might have been, for He was the only man of God like him who
had been seen in Israel for centuries. They could easily imagine that
he was the Messiah. So John was taken for Jesus, and Jesus for John,
because they were both such powerful personalities for God. But they
were still very much opposites in their personal lives.
John was a hermit who spent a good share of his life in the desert
living the life of an ascetic. This is the point of Mark 1:6 where his
dress and his diet are described. There is not much point in details
like this being preserved unless they have some significance. What do
we care what John wore and ate? Unless there is something valuable
to learn by the contrast with the life-style of the Master, whose way
he was preparing, there would be no point in it. His camel hair
clothing was the clothing of a wilderness nomad, and his diet of locust
and wild honey were the products of the wilderness. If we saw John
today, we would no doubt point him to a mission, for he would give us
the impression that he was not exactly living high off the hog. He was
an uncut diamond, rough and unpolished.
Jesus said, "Why did you go out into the wilderness, to see a man
clothed in soft raiment?" Jesus went on the say you would go to
king's houses if all you were interested in was soft and expensive
clothing. No, he said, you went out to see a prophet, and more than
prophet. He is the one who was to prepare the way for Messiah. And
then Jesus makes this amazing statement: The greatest compliment
he ever paid to anyone in Matt. 11:11, "Truly, I say to you, among
those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the

Baptist."
Who was the greatest man in history? It all depends on who you
ask. But if you had asked Jesus that question in His day on earth, He
would say it was this strange forerunner of his, John the Baptist. Any
survey among Christians with this question would bring in votes for
Abraham, Moses, David, and other great personalities of the Old
Testament. Few would choose this wild looking man, darken from
years in the desert sun, and unshaven, for he was a Nazarite. He was
too radically different to appeal to us. It is true he had low overhead
for his ministry, the locust and wild honey were free. Bees were
everywhere making honey in the crevices of the rocks.
Some might even consider it a delicacy to eat honey coated locust. He
was getting his protein and carbohydrates with no preservatives
added.
But, all kidding aside, John the Baptist was performing a ministry
to thousands of people, and he started one of the biggest revivals in all
the history of Israel, and he never took an offering of which we have
any record. John was not called to be a fund raiser, or to build a
church, or a school for prophets. He was called to prepare the way
for the Messiah, and he did it without money. He had the lowest
overhead of any ministry on record. Can you imagine what it would
cost to get John's results today? The point is, there was no credibility
gap when he preached to others to live the simple life style, and to
give to the poor. Many who preach this live like kings and drive the
most expensive cars, but John lived what he preached.
John is one of the few people in history, in or out of the Bible, who
demonstrated you can live a life sold out to God, and give up all that
the world treasures, and still be successful. When John's birth was
announced to his father the angel said in Luke 1:15, "He will be great
before the Lord." He was destined to be great. His birth is the only

one described in detail in the New Testament, except that of Jesus.
Most of the world, in most cultures, at most times, would not consider
John as being very successful, let alone great. He had nothing of the
status symbols of materialism. Yet he was powerful in his poverty,
and we learn from John that the only resource one really needs to be
great, as far as God is concerned, is the Holy Spirit. John is the only
person in the Bible who was surrounded by the Holy Spirit from his
conception. We know this was true of Jesus also, but it is only
recorded of John. In Luke 1:15 we read of John, "..he will be filled
with the Holy Spirit even from his mothers womb." This is never said
of any other person. In Luke 1:41 we read of his mother, "And
Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit." Here is the most unique
family in all of history. No wonder John was in the eyes of Jesus the
greatest man in history.
It is of interest to note that John was the first person to recognize
that Jesus came into the world to give His life as a sacrifice. He saw
Jesus coming toward him and he said, "Behold the Lamb of God who
takes away the sin of the world." Some of his disciples followed Jesus
because of this, but it was a long time before they saw in Jesus what
John did. John was so special and unique, but there are few sermons
about him, and this may be legitimate because he said, "I must
decrease and He must increase." His job was to point the way to
Jesus, and not focus on himself, but we can't escape the facts. There
are more words in the New Testament about John the Baptist than
there are in 33 of the 66 books of the Bible. He is the first preacher of
the New Testament. He did not preach the law, but the New
Testament kingdom coming with the Messiah.
He was the first man in history called the Baptist. For decades it
was thought that John picked up the idea of baptism from the Jewish
practice of baptizing Gentiles. It was supposed that the Jews
baptized them when the came into the Jewish faith. Modern studies,

however, reveal that this came after John and not before. There is no
reference to this practice in the Old Testament, the Apocrypha,
Philo, or Josephus, or any record that would indicate that it came
before John. Even the liberal scholar Rudolf Bultmann writes, "No
certain testimony to the practice of proselyte baptism is found before
the end of the first century." What this means is that all the evidence
points to John as the first Baptist in history, and the founder of the
very idea of Baptism. He also baptized more people than anyone we
know of in history. Note verse 5 of our text: "And there went out to
him all the country of Judea, and all the people of Jerusalem, and
they were baptized by him in the river Jordan."
The use of "all" is hyperbole. It is deliberate exaggeration to
convey the point that it was a major movement touching everybody
from both the city and the country. People of all walks of life were
caught up in the revival, and were being baptized. A quarter of a
century later Paul, in Acts 19, found a group of John's disciples way
off in Ephesus. Jesus even tells us the Jewish leaders were positively
excited about the John's ministry for awhile. He says in John 5:35,
"He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice
for awhile in his light." Even some of the Scribes and Pharisees were
baptized by John. There was no revival like this before in history. It
was the preparation for the Messiah, and John was doing the job well.
John had the privilege of baptizing not only the most people in
history, but he got to baptize the Messiah Himself. He resisted
because he felt unworthy, but Jesus did not resist, but gladly let his
body be immersed by John, who in his eyes was the greatest. John
was a man that Jesus looked up to and admired. The other two
persons of the trinity concurred, for it was at that point where John
baptized Jesus that the trinity, for the first time in history, was
manifested in all three persons at the same time: Jesus in the flesh,

the Holy Spirit coming down as a dove, and the Father speaking,
"This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." John was the
only man in history permitted to witness such a marvel and mystery
revealed. Many of the Old Testament saints had visions, but none
were ever let in on the full reality of the trinity.
John was very special in God's plan for sending His Son into the
world. We think of him as sort of a minor character. So what if he
opened the door for Christ. Anyone could have done that, we think.
But we are wrong to so think. It took a very special and unusual man
to fill this role. If we go back to the last two verses of the Old
Testament, we read these words, which were the last official words
God spoke to Israel: "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet
before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes. And He will
turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children
to their fathers, lest I come and smite the land with a curse." The
Old Testament ends with this promise of the coming of the prophet
Elijah. Elijah was caught up into heaven without dying. His history
was not completed on earth, for God intended to send him back into
history. Can you come back into history after you have gone to
heaven? It is highly improbable, but not impossible if God chooses to
use you in this way. Elijah was one God so chose to use.
Now, how serious did the Jews take their hope of seeing the
prophet Elijah? Very serious, for the Rabbis taught that Elijah
would appear if Israel would repent for one day. This expectation of
the coming of Elijah was an important part of the Jewish hope. We
already read of how some people thought Jesus was the prophet
Elijah. Now we come to the beginning of the New Testament, and
what do we discover? A prophet called John the Baptist who is so
much like Elijah. In fact, the angel that announced the birth of John
said to his father in Luke 1:17, "He will go before him in the spirit
and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the

children....." This sounds like John was the fulfillment of the Old
Testament hope of the coming of Elijah.
They wore the same hairy wilderness clothing. They both spoke
out against wickedness in high places. They both drew great crowds
and spoke the word of God. One begins to wonder if John was the
fulfillment of the last promise of the Old Testament. Well, we do not
need to depend upon circumstantial evidence for we have a clear
word from Jesus. In the very context where Jesus calls him the
greatest man born of woman Jesus says in Matt. 11:13-14, "And all
the prophets and the law prophesied until John and if you are willing
to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come." The one who is to come to
prepare the way for Messiah has come, and he is none other than
John the Baptist.
No wonder there was a great revival. He was the great hope of
Israel, and next to the Messiah the most important man in Jewish
hopes. He was second only to Jesus himself, and that is what Jesus
said, and this makes John all the more amazing. He was a man of
great power and influence, and he could have resented being pushed
into the background when Jesus came onto the scene. But John did
not have any personal ambitions. He lived only to do the will of God,
and said he must increase and I must decrease. It takes a great man
to do this and nobody did it better than John.
It is of no small interest for singles to take note that the Messiah
and his great forerunner were both single. This eliminates forever
the idea that the single life can never be as great as the married life.
Here was a single at the top, greater than all the famous married men
of the Old Testament. John never married, never had children, never
lived what most of us would call a normal life. Without having all the
facts about this man we have a tendency to feel sorry for him. He
died young leaving no heirs, and he missed out on most of the

pleasures we take for granted as part of the good life. Yet Jesus says
he was the greatest. If we are going to evaluate life as Jesus did we
will have to resist all of our cultural conditioning as to what success is,
and see that it does not consist in the abundance of possessions, but in
the commitment we have to be obedient to God's call.
Most of us would have no interest in living the life of John the
Baptist. It has little that is appealing, and much that is appalling.
Fortunately, God does not call many to live such a life. Even his own
Son the Lord Jesus was not called to live like John. Jesus was not
anti-social like John. He was seen at weddings and banquets, and He
enjoyed the life and laughter of social life. He wore better clothes,
and ate better food, and grew up in a society where He interacted
with people. He was not a loner like John.
God does not call all of us to be alike. Some have a radical
different role to play in God's plan. But the beauty is we do not hear
John even once trying to get a single follower to join him in his
wilderness nomad life-style. He never condemned another for not
giving up lamb and bread, and joining him in his locust and honey
lunch. John was different, and he knew it, and he accepted it without
trying to impose it on others as if God called all people to be like him.
John took up the moral issue of Herod's immoral marriage to
Herodius, and paid the price of his life for this courageous stand. You
will observe, however, that neither Jesus nor any of His followers
took up the same cause. When John was beheaded the issue was
dropped, and Jesus never spoke a word about it. Why? Because this
was not his calling. Nor was it the calling of other Christian leaders.
Not once do we hear John from his prison cell, where he spent
possibly up to a year, crying out and cursing the people of God for
not joining and standing with him against Herod's evil. This was his

calling to take such a stand, and not even Jesus felt that same call.
This same thing is true today. I get mail constantly urging to take
stands on all sorts of issues. Nobody can get involved in fighting all
the evils of the world. You have to select what is relevant to you, and
let others response to what is relevant to them. This is not only how it
has to be, it is how it is meant to be, and we see it in John and Jesus.
On some issues they were as one, but on others they had a different
perspective. Not only about Herod, but about fasting and other issues
of the law as well as life-style issues.
Jesus said John is the greatest, but He did not conform to who
John was and what he did. He did His own thing and what He was
called to do. John was John and Jesus was Jesus, and their
differences were not bad for the kingdom of God, but were a part of
the plan for the kingdom of God. We are not necessarily called to be
like this greatest man ever born of woman. We are not necessarily
called to do what he did nor live like him. We are called to be
obedient like him. Jesus did not think of John as the greatest because
of his life-style or his approach to people, but because he was a man
sold out to do God's will regardless of any loss or gain to himself.
There not many of us like that, and nobody was like that in the Old
Testament to the same degree as John.
We all have mixed motives and self-centeredness, and few if any
can match the commitment of John. He will always be next to Jesus
as the greatest of men. Paul and Peter were used to do great things
too, but John was never a persecutor or blasphemer like Paul, and
never denied his Lord like Peter. There is no escaping the facts:
John with all of his differences was the closest to being the perfect
man because of his ideal spirit. John was filled with the spirit from
his birth.

The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was this man and his
ministry. It is of interest to go to the book of Acts where they are
selecting a disciple to take the place of Judas. Listen to the
requirements this man had to fulfill. Acts 1:21-22 says, "So one of the
men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus
went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until
the day when He was taken up from us." Notice that the beginning
point for a Christian disciple was not the public ministry of Jesus, but
the baptism of John. This is where the New Testament begins.
Everything else before this was Old Testament. The Old Testament
ends with the promise of the prophet Elijah, and the New Testament
begins with Johns fulfillment of that promise. The disciples of Jesus
were first of all disciples of John.
Calvin in his Institutes writes, "It is very certain that the ministry
of John was precisely the same as that which afterwards was
committed to the apostles......the sameness of their doctrine shows
their baptism to have been the same....If any difference be sought for
in the Word of God, the only difference that will be found is, that
John baptized in the name of Him who was to come, the apostles in
the name of Him who had already manifested Himself."
John did not just baptize Jesus, and that was the end of their
relationship. On the contrary Jesus began His ministry and became
quite popular, and the source, not only of His select 12, but of many
others of His disciples was from John the Baptist. In John 10:40-42
we read of how Jesus had to flee from the wrath of Jews in Jerusalem,
and it says, "He went away again across the Jordan to the place
where John at first baptized, and there He remained. And many
came to Him and they said, John did no sign, but everything that
John said about this man was true. And many believed in Him
there." When the leaders and the masses were turning on Jesus he
was still gaining crowds of followers from the ministry of John the

Baptist.
They were partners in the work of the kingdom, and not in two
different camps, as some give the impression. Jesus made it clear
that though He and John had different approaches, they were on the
same team. He said to the rebellious Jews who would not repent in
Matt. 11:18-19, "For John came neither eating nor drinking and they
say, he has a demon; the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and
they say behold a wine bibber and a glutton." Jesus is saying they
could have been a part of the kingdom of God had they responded to
either approach, for both preached repentance for the kingdom of
God is at hand. They rejected both because they did not want to
repent, and when that is the case, people find fault with the messenger
regardless of his method. John and Jesus were baptizing people at
the same time, and they were not two different kinds of baptism.
Jesus did not baptize, but His disciples did, and they were doing just
what John was doing: Bringing Jews back to God in repentance.
They were not in competition with their old master, but were
following him who prepared the way.
Dr. Merrill C. Tenny wrote that John's preaching, "Laid the
foundation of all practical Christian theology." Augustus Strong, one
of the greatest theologians of this century wrote, "John's baptism was
essentially Christian baptism, although the full significance of it was
not understood until after Jesus' death and resurrection."
George E. Hicks writes, "It is to the Baptist we are indebted for
practically all the major articles of the Christian faith. Not only so,
but the actual terms used by him have constituted the seed bed of all
subsequent thought."
John was the first to teach the deity of Christ; the first to teach of
the baptism of the Spirit; the first to teach baptism by immersion.

John taught a host of doctrines that are vital to the Christian faith
such as, the sovereignty of God, the kingdom of heaven, the need for
repentance and confession, the inevitability of judgment and
individual responsibility. He taught by example, loyalty unto death,
and a humility that is unsurpassed. We can't begin to look at all that
he taught, but Jesus taught us to look at him as a hero, and a great
example to follow. We can learn a lot from a focus on this man that
Jesus called the greatest.
5. MATTHEW THE TAX COLLECTOR Based on Mark
2:13-16
Someone said, you never could take your money with you, but
some can remember when the government would let you keep
some while you were still here. It is hard for many to believe that
our country was founded partly to avoid taxation. As bad as taxes
are, however, only two classes of people ever complain-men and
women. Taxes are nothing new, however. The Romans had just
about every tax we do today, and they were heavy. Rome needed
taxes because she built the best road system the world had ever
seen. Some of the roads built in New Testament times are still in
use today. Trade was booming because of the road system.
Soldiers patrolled the roads to protect travellers from bandits.
To maintain this system and highway patrol protection, plus build
government buildings, town halls, baths and stadiums, there was a
need for many taxes.
They taxed one tenth of crops of grain, one fifth of produce of
wine, oil, and fruit, plus they had an income tax of one percent.
On top of this, they had a poll tax for men 14 to 65 and women 12

to 65. This was one denarius a year, which was the wages of an
average man for one day. Then, of course, there were the import-export
taxes, the road taxes, the harbor taxes, and the tax for the
use of the market place. Custom officers were stationed
everywhere to collect these taxes, and they had the power to be
very unjust. It is known that some levied taxes so high the trader
could not pay, and so the tax collector would loan him the money
for his tax at a high interest rate. It was literal highway robbery.
This tax burden and the abused power of the tax collector has
survived into the modern day. Charles Brown, the dean of Yale
Divinity School, went to Palestine years ago when it was under
Turkish control. He talked to a farmer in Jericho who told him he
was required to place his harvested crop of wheat in ten stacks.
He made them as even as possible because the tax collector had
the right to come and select one of the ten for the state. To get the
tax collector to come and make his selection he had to give the
collector another of the ten stacks for his personal fee. Then to
get a paper signed permitting him to thresh his crop he had to
give another stack in final payment.
This same kind of oppression was going on in New Testament
days, and the Jews despised it, and everyone connected with it.
The Jews were not opposed to taxes, but, as a theocracy, they felt
only a God appointed man had the right to collect taxes. They did
not mind supporting their government, but the objected to the
support of a foreign government. Those who cooperated with the
Romans were considered traitors to Israel. They were so hated
that their money was not accepted in the temple. Their word was
of no value in court, and they were listed by the Jews along with
harlots and murderers. Even the Romans themselves did not
respect the tax collector. Cicero said that it was a trade
unbecoming to a gentleman, and it was vulgar. Lucian listed them

with a adulterous, informers, and money-lenders. All in all it was
a class of people highly unlikely to contribute anyone to a
religious movement, and yet Jesus chose one of these tax collectors
to be one of His 12 select men.
Matthew the publican was chosen long before the only Pharisee
Jesus ever chose as an Apostle, which was Paul. Matthew, or Levi
as he is called, also had potential which no one else would have
ever tried to discover, but Jesus not only discovered it, He
developed an used it. When Matthew left his tax booth he took his
pen with him, and was used of God to record words of Jesus which
we would otherwise not have, and be much the poorer. The
Sermon on the Mount being just one of the major examples.
In 1844 a New Testament scholar visited the monestery of St.
Catherine on Mt. Sinai. While there he saw some papers in a
basket. His eye detected Greek characters which turned out to be
the famous manuscript of the Bible called Codex Sinaiticus. It
was a copy that dated back to the 4th century. To the monks
there it was just an old Bible of no value, but to the scholar it was
a priceless discovery. So it was with Matthew the publican. To his
own people he was a worthless Jew; a disgrace to his nation, and
of no value at all, but to Jesus he was so precious that he chose him
to be one of the foundation stones of the New Israel-the Church.
Jesus did not select His 12 according to any standard of social
acceptance of His day. He chose men of any class or position who
had depth of character and commitment. In His selection of
Matthew we noticed that He chose a man who was successful and
wealthy. We know this because he had a house and was able to
throw a big party in it for Jesus and His disciples, plus a large
number of old friends who were publicans and sinners. The
Scripture stresses how big this affair was. It was probably the

largest social event Jesus ever attended, and the news of it spread
so that the Scribes and Pharisees complained of his eating with tax
collectors and sinners. In Luke 5:29 we read, "Levi made him a
great feast in his house, and there was a large company of tax
collectors and others sitting at table with them."
Matthew was obviously a leader among his class of despised
people, and he was well liked if they would all come to his party.
The point we want to notice again is that Jesus did not call a dozen
loafers to be His key men. He called men who had already
demonstrated their ability in the secular world. Matthew had
achieved success in his profession, as did Peter, Andrew, James
and John in the fishing business. As far as we know everyone of
the 12 were in middle and upper middle class of the society of that
day. Often we like to emphasize that Jesus took a bunch of poor
nobodies and turned them into dynamic leaders. He can and has
done it, but when He chose men for the foundation of His church
He chose the best He could find. We are not being honest with the
facts of Scripture if we do not recognize that the men Jesus chose
were sharp men in their field.
Another factor that is common in the selections Jesus made is
the way He chose sets of brothers. Peter and Andrew were
brothers; James and John were brothers, and now we come to
Matthew who also had a brother who was one of 12. In Mark 2:14
we read, "As he passed on he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting
at the tax office, and he said to him, follow me, and he rose and
followed Him." Mark gives us the same quick picture of a call to
discipleship without any detail as to the background just as he did
in the call of the fisherman. We know, however, from John's
Gospel that a great deal of background took place beforehand.
We can be confident that this was true with Matthew as well. We
don't know the story of that background, but Jesus must have had

frequent contact with Matthew and his family, for Matthew is
called the son of Alphaeus, and the other Apostle named James is
in Matthew , Mark, Luke, and Acts, always listed as James the son
of Alphaeus.
This is no doubt to distinguish him from James the son of
Zebedee and brother of John. It also links Matthew and this
James together as another set of brothers. It is not impossible it is
only a coincidence that they both had fathers of the same name,
but the pattern of Jesus makes it probable that Jesus got into that
family and won both boys to Himself, just as He did with other
families. Jesus seemed to specialize in brothers. The result was
that He had a close knit group from the start. He had a natural
loyalty to build on from the beginning. What a joy this must have
been to Alphaeus the father of Matthew. Remember, Matthew
was a despised outcast by the establishment, and the majority of
respected citizens. Matthew had sold his patriotism down the
drain because he wanted to make money at any cost.
Matthew represents the millions who long to make a fortune,
and are willing to forsake all other values to do it. Matthew was
money hungry, and the path he took cut him off from his people,
and alienated him from the institutions of Israel's faith. Matthew
said the religion of Israel irrelevant, but making money and
friends in the world, and getting somewhere is all that counts.
Yet, though he made his decision, and was doing quite well, he was
not satisfied. You can just imagine Matthew at that big feast
giving his testimony. There can be no doubt that he did so, for he
was leaving his old life to follow Jesus, and he wanted to tell his old
gang why. He had gained all he could ask for in terms of wealth,
success, and fame among his class of people. Yet, he was empty.
The story of Matthew is repeated in lives everyday.

Boswell said to Johnson as they went through the mansion of
Lord Scarsdale, "One would think the proprietor of all this must
be happy." "No sir," replied Johnson, "All this excludes but one
evil-poverty." That is the only evil Matthew escaped, and it cost
him more than it was worth, and he knew it, and Jesus knew that
he knew it. Jesus knew that sometimes your best potential is in
people outside the institution of the church. Sometimes a rebel is
so valuable just because he has broken away, and found the world
so empty, and is hungry to find his way back into the real
experience of commitment. Matthew was not in the pig pen like
the Prodigal, but he was just as empty and hungry.
Matthew was a rebel who had fulfilled his dream in the world,
and who realized it was not satisfying. He calls himself the
publican, however, in his Gospel, because he rejoices that he is a
trophy of grace. He had quite a testimony in his giving up success
in the world to follow Jesus. Matthew's Gospel reveals clearly the
authors personal experience. Matthew is the only one who
records the parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl of great
price. These so fit him that he could never forget them. The story
of a man hunting for something, and then finally finding it in
Christ, describes Matthew perfectly.
It is also in Matthew that we find such text as, "You cannot
serve God and mammon." That was the decision he had to make.
"Seek ye first the kingdom of God and all these things shall be
added unto you," is only in Matthew. How it fits him. Or, "What
is a man profited, if he gain the whole world and lose his own
soul." That is the very thing Matthew almost did. How it must
have poured out of him as he wrote for others to read the words of
Christ which had been so relevant to his own life. There are
many more that reveal the author was very conscious of the
dangers of the love of money.

Matthew became a zealous Bible reader, for his Gospel has 65
quotes from the Old Testament. It is the first Gospel, and it
bridges the gap between the Old Testament and the New
Testament. Tradition says that for 15 years Matthew preached to
the Jews. He is the most Jewish of the Gospel writers, and aims at
Jewish conversions. Matthew forsook Israel to get rich, but Jesus
called him to forsake his riches to be a missionary to Israel. He
had already learned to be hated by the Jews for being a money
hungry collaborator with Rome, so he had no problem in
adjusting to be hated for being an Apostle of Christ. All the hate
and ridicule he faced in his old life prepared him to be a bold
witness for Jesus.
It is interesting how little things can reveal a factor in a man's
character. Matthew was a humble man, and one who, no doubt,
felt inferior to the other Apostles who had never deserted Israel as
he had. In Mark and Luke the Apostles are listed with Matthew
and Thomas, in that order. But in Matthew's Gospel it is Thomas
and then Matthew. This is an incidental witness to the author's
humility. You need to know the author of the part of the Bible you
are studying, for this gives you the perspective from which you are
seeing his revelation.
Traditions vary as to where and how Matthew died. Some say
in a Arabia, and others in Ethiopia. Some say he died by the
sword, but the Greek church uses fire as a symbol of Matthew,
because they believe he died a martyr by burning. All we know
for sure is that this ex-tax-collector became a profitable servant of
Christ; teaching us to never underestimate the potential of any
worldly person for the kingdom of God. When ever you see an
ambitious, materialistic, money hungry man, remember Matthew,
and do not despise him, but pray and labor for his conversion.
Like Matthew, he can become as zealous for the Master as he

formerly was for money.
6. SIMON OF CYRENE Based on Mark 15:15-26
This text focuses on a man who was forced to become famous.
Millions of people through the ages have labored and fought to get
their names in the record of history, but Simon of Cyrene was
pushed into the pages of history. Except for one incident in his life
he would never have been known, but because of that one
experience, he is known the world over wherever the Gospel of
Jesus is known. There is very little said about Simon in the Bible.
In fact, just about everything we know about him is found in Mark
15:21, and in one verse in each of the Gospels of Matthew and
Luke which are parallels of this one.
One might suspect that there is hardly enough information to
preach on for ten minutes, but this is not the case, for the Bible
has a unique way of saying a great deal in just a few words. A
high school student was assigned to write a five hundred word
theme, and he chose to write on the universe, its origin, nature,
and destiny. Even the Bible does not attempt to condense to that
degree, but it does not waste words. The story of creation is told
in two chapters. The great 23rd Psalm is just a little over a
hundred words. The famous Sermon on the Mount is in three
chapters, and the last words of Christ on the cross, though few in
quantity, have been of such quality as to give birth to literally tons
of literature. The Bible is the key example of the truth that one
does not need to be wordy to be wise, nor voluminous to be
valuable. I trust we see this as we consider what we can know
about Simon from this one verse. First of all-

I. WE KNOW WHERE HE WAS FROM AND WHAT HE WAS
DOING.
He was from Cyrene, one of the two largest towns of Libya in
North Africa, of over 100,000 people. It was a city in which a
great many Jews lived, and many of them would travel all the way
to Jerusalem for Passover and Pentecost. In the list of places in
Acts 2 of which the people were from, you will find Cyrene listed.
Simon was either a Jew or a proselyte, that is a pagan who was
converted to Judaism, and who was a very pious believer, for he
was willing to travel over a thousand miles to Jerusalem to
worship in the temple.
But what he was doing when he was suddenly, in a moment,
made to change the whole direction of his life, was simply passing
by. He knew nothing of all that had gone on in the city that night.
Jesus had been going through the agonies of Gethsemane, and the
trial, and had endured the cruel mockings and beatings of the mob
and soldiers. Simon had no doubt been sleeping. He had a long
day planned, and was up early in the morning, as were all
Orthodox Jews, saying their prayers. He was dressed, cleaned,
and almost into the city before 9 in the morning. If he had been
three minutes earlier or later, or had gone a different way, we
never would have heard of him, but in the providence of God
Simon was to have an experience that morning that changed his
whole life. This brings us to the second thing we know about
Simon.
II. WE KNOW HE WAS COMPELLED TO BEAR THE
CROSS OF CHRIST.
As Simon came near the city gate he saw a crowd coming out of
the city. They were shouting and mocking at three men who were

bearing crosses. One of them was having a difficult time, and it
was obvious he was holding up the procession. The soldiers who
were anxious to get this business over ordered Simon to bear his
cross. The Roman soldiers had a right to compel a civilian to help
them. When Jesus said, "If anyone compel you to go a mile, go
with him two miles," He was referring to this practice.
Why the soldiers picked Simon is not known. We know that
Jesus had been up all night, and had taken a beating that was
known to have killed other men. Therefore, it is quite likely that
the traditional viewpoint is true-that Jesus stumbled and fell
beneath the load. Many feel that Simon must have shown
sympathy for this one who had been so cruelly treated, and
possibly even stepped forward to help Him up. The soldier in
charge, seeing a chance to speed things up, says, "Alright helpful,
you carry the cross," and forced him to do so. Simon was likely
the only one in the crowd not mocking Jesus, and so he was a
likely one to choose.
I find it easy to believe another idea held by many, that Jesus
looked on Simon with a look of love that drew out his compassion.
Jesus had a power in His eyes to move men. Just hours before He
moved another Simon, called Peter, to tears of repentance by a
mere glance. It is likely then that Simon was moved by a force
within before he was compel from without. The poet put it-
Thou must have looked on Simon,
Turn Lord, and look on me,
Till I shall see and follow,
And bear Thy cross for Thee.
Because of an act of sympathy and compassion he found
himself going in the opposite direction and bearing a cursed cross.

What a way to start the Passover season. He was on his way to
church, and he winds up in a prossession to a crucifixion. Just to
touch the cross would defile him, so his day was ruined. What a
miserable way to meet the Master. He was on his way to worship
God, and was interrupted by having to help Christ get to the cross
to redeem the world. Not a bad days work! He, of course, did not
realize what was taking place. He came a thousand miles to do
something significant, and all he did was help save the world.
Simon did not rebel at this sudden turn of events. It had to be a
disappointment, but it was one of the greatest acts of love in
history. Like Cornelius, Lydia, and others who were honestly
seeking to know the will of God, he had, no doubt, prayed that
very morning, "Lord teach me thy will and draw me closer to you
this day." He had come a long way seeking a deeper knowledge of
God, but he believed compassion and not cruelty was the will of
God, so he submitted to the shame of bearing the cross.
He was compelled to bear it, but he chose to submit. The fact
that nothing more is said indicates that Simon gave no trouble, but
bore the cross without a struggle. If only we could, like Simon,
choose to bear what we are compelled to bear. If only we could
see the blessings and burdens that we bear for Jesus.
Circumstances compel us to bear burdens, but we can choose to
submit or rebel. This principle holds true for all of life. For
example: Young people are compelled to go to school. This is a
burden that many would not choose if it was left to them. But
since we are compelled to go, we have two choices. We can rebel
and fight the system, and quit as soon as possible, or we can take it
as a challenge, and choose to submit to the burden, and in so doing
the burden will become a blessing. We cannot determine what life
brings to us, but we can determine what we bring to life, and if we
choose to do what we are compelled to do, we can change burdens

into blessings. The third thing we know about Simon is-
III. WE KNOW THE CONSEQUENCES OF HIS BEARING
THE CROSS.
It is also certain, that though the cross kept Simon from church
that morning, it brought him to Christ. We believe he found it to
be true that the way of the cross leads home, and that his
frustration led to faith; his embarrassment led to enlistment; his
compassion led to commitment, and his sympathy led to salvation.
There are several reasons for believing this to be the case. In the
first place, it fits into a pattern which is amazing if true. If Simon
was a convert just before the cross, and the Roman Centurion was
a convert just after the death of Christ on the cross, then together
with the thief on the cross, we have three converts at the cross
representing the descendants of each of the three sons of Noah,
Sham, Ham, and Japeth. This would be a concrete illustration of
the universality of the cross, and that Jesus did indeed die for all
men.
There is more to go on, however, for our verse says that Simon
was the father of Alexander and Rufus. Why would Mark, who
wrote his Gospel for the Romans, say that he was the father of
these two men unless it was because the Romans knew these two
men? There would be no point in giving these names unless they
were well known among the Roman Christians. Nor would these
names be known if Simon just disappeared in the crowd after
reaching Golgotha. The others Gospels do not mention the names
of these two sons. This means that the sons of Simon were well
known Christians in Rome, and this is confirmed by Paul in his
letter to the Romans where he says in 16:13, "Greet Rufus,
eminent in the Lord, also his mother and mine." Where did this
outstanding Christian family come from? Paul had not been to

Rome when he wrote his letter, so he must have met them before
they moved to Rome.
If we put all these facts together and see that, not the Ethiopian
Eunuch, but Simon of Cyrene was the first convert from Africa,
and he went back to his home and won his family to Christ. From
there they likely moved to Antioch, for in Acts 13:1 we read of
prophets and teachers there, two of which were Simon and Lucius
of Cyrene. It was here in Antioch where the followers of Jesus
were first called Christians. Who knows how much he who bore
the cross of Christ had to do with that. He was the first convert at
the cross, and became a leader where believers were first called
Christians. It would be here that Paul would get to know the
family, and later be able to speak of them when they moved to
Rome.
There is much we do not know, but these things that we do
know teach us to see that though Simon was compelled to bear the
cross for a while by the soldiers, he chose to bear it the rest of his
life for the Savior. That brings us to the final thing we can know
about Simon.
IV. WE KNOW HIS EXPERIENCE WAS RECORDED FOR A
PURPOSE.
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable.
The story of Simon, though minor in length, teaches us a lesson of
major importance. It teaches us what cross-bearing really is.
Men have been more concerned about making up legends about
the cross than they have been in learning what it means to bear it.
Legend takes us way back to the garden of Eden. Adam was
dying, and so his eldest son Seth ran to the gate of the garden, and
begged the angel for fruit from the tree of life. The angel told him

that Adam would be dead when he returned, but that he should
bury him with seeds from the fruit of the tree of life in his mouth.
A great tree grew from these seeds, which Noah cut down for the
king post in his ark, which saved him and his family. Centuries
later Hiram, king of Tyre, brought it down from the mountains to
build the temple of Solomon. It was not used, however, but laid in
a trench by the wall. Nehemiah used it when he rebuilt the temple,
but when Herod rebuilt it again this tree was again laying beside
the wall.
In the haste of the day of the trial of Jesus no one made a cross,
and so this post by the temple wall was used. The early Christians
cared nothing about the actual cross on which Christ died, but
only the meaning of it, and so for several centuries there is a
break in the legend. But when the church became corrupted
because of paganism, it again revived the legend. The cross was
found it was claimed, and was being sold in small pieces as
charms. This is where we get the idea of knocking on wood. It has
been estimated that enough pieces of the cross have been sold to
build a fleet of ships. Today the cross has become, to many
people, nothing more than a piece of jewelry. We bear golden
crosses around our neck or on our lapel as decorations. There is
nothing wrong with the cross as a symbol like this, but there is
something wrong with our thinking about it. The experience of
Simon teaches us to think of the cross as an identification with
Christ, and not merely a decoration.
When Simon bore the cross of Christ he became identified with
Christ, and bore the same reproach that he did. Jesus said, "Take
up your cross daily and follow me." That means to be identified
openly with Jesus, and if people would mock Christ they will mock
you. That is why it is not as easy to talk about Jesus as it is about
the weather or politics. It is embarrassing and difficult to be

identified with Christ in some circles. I am sure Simon was
ashamed as he picked up the cross and heard the laughter and
mocking of the crowd.
Bearing the cross is not the same kind of suffering one goes
through because of some injury or weakness in the body. That is a
thorn and not a cross. The cross is only taken up when we are so
identified with Christ that people will feel and act toward us as
they do toward Him. If a person loves Jesus, he will also love you.
If a person despises Jesus he will also despise you. This means
that Christ expects us everyday to be so identified with Him that it
costs us to be a Christian. It is easy to be a Christian if we do not
bear the cross.
Ray Jordon tells of being in a group in Jerusalem that wanted
to follow the path that Jesus took on His way to the cross. It was
hot that day and he noticed that the leader had an umbrella over
his head to protect him from the discomfort of the blazing sun. It
struck him as to the amazing contrast between this and the real
incident. They wanted to follow the path of Christ, but did not
want any discomfort in doing so. It is understandable, for there
would be no profit in being miserable as they followed the path.
But when this philosophy passes over into the spiritual realm, it is
tragic. We want to follow Jesus, but we do not want it to cost
anything. It should be that we experience some discomfort
because of our identification with Christ.
Leslie Weatherhead had an Indian Christian tell of what it cost
to follow Christ, and it put him to shame when he considered how
little he had identified himself with the cross of Christ in such a
way that it cost. This Indian friend heard the call of Christ in a
Methodist church in Madras. He came from a Brahmin family
and his father was the head of the community. When his father

heard of his decision for Christ he blazed with anger. He tied him
to a pillar in the courtyard of his home. He stripped the turban
from his head, a mark of indignity in the East, lashed his back
with whips till blood ran, and let him stand in the hot sun for
hours.
They even poured the contents of the sewage bin over his head.
They put two large scars on his face with red hot irons. His own
mother died of shock before him, and finally his sister cut him
loose, and he escaped to the hills. He eventually became a
chaplain in the army. Many have suffered the same thing for
crimes, but when it is suffered because one is identified with
Christ, that is cross-bearing. The story of Simon is recorded for
the purpose of challenging each of us to take up the cross and be
identified with Jesus whatever the cost.
7. SIMON THE ZEALOT Based on Luke 6:12-16
We want to look at an Apostle of whom we would know
nothing if the New Testament did not tell us of his political
affiliation before he became a believer. If a man was called Simon
the Democrat or Simon the Republican, you would not be able to
draw many conclusions about him because these terms are too
general. But if he was called Simon the Communist you would be
able to say much more about him, for they have a more specific
philosophy. So it is with the name Simon the Zealot. The Zealots
were a political party in Israel with a very clear cut philosophy,
and a program to carry it out.
Since the New Testament tells us nothing of Simon but the fact
that he was a member of this party, everything we can learn about

him must come as inferences from what we know of the party.
Simon the Zealot is as obscure as Simon Peter is famous. We
know nothing about the Apostle Peter's political background, but
that is all we know of Simon the Zealot. The Zealots were radical
and fanatical nationalists who mixed their religion and politics
into one of the most potent mixtures history has ever seen.
The land of Palestine was a country under Roman rule. None
of the Jews liked it, but some hated it, and they wanted to fight
this master that had them in its grip. Herod the Great was able to
keep the volcano of their wrath from erupting by skilled
diplomacy and sheer power of personality. But when he died in 4
B. C. and the territory was divided between his three sons, things
began to get hot. In 7 A. D. a leader rose up in Galilee where the
blaze was hottest. Judas the Galilean led an insurrection. They
stormed the palace and broke into the arsenal, and embarked on a
revolution as armed rebels.
Judas and his men were no match for the power of Rome,
however, and he was crushed. In Acts 5:37 Gamaliel tells us of his
fate. "Judas the Galilean arose in the days of the census and drew
away some of the people after him; he also perished, and all who
followed him were scattered." Judas did not get far, but he
started something which gave rise to the party called the Zealots.
These fanatical nationalists loved their country more than life
itself, and they hated Rome with all the hatred the human heart
can possess. Such passion of love and hate when mixed lead to
zeal bordering on madness. Nothing was permitted to stand in
their way. Murder was not only permitted, it was promoted.
They became known as the assassins. The name Sicarii came from
the Sica, the little curved sword which they carried below their
robes, and which they plunged into their enemies at every possible
opportunity.

Men in the life of jesus

More Related Content

Men in the life of jesus