I’m starting part two with the title, “Hard Act to Follow” for two reasons, first, as Homefire pointed out (it always takes me a full minute to submit to using your pen name sister, but that’s another story)… part one was pretty muddled.

More significantly though, Yeshua is a hard act to follow.  Yesterday as I presented this topic to my Dad, I was compelled to ask, “What was the hardest teaching Yeshua ever taught?”

Dad was like, “Well, it’s really hard to forsake everything and follow only him.”

“Why specifically?”

I hope you’ll take a moment and ponder the hard teachings of Yeshua and come up with your own private “hard act to follow.”  If it turns out that your answer is different than mine I’d like to know what it is.

As a kid it was the hard black shoes I had to wear on Sundays.  Some of the other kids didn’t have to wear those shoes to church and I wanted to be like them.  Jesus seemed to be telling our parents that we were to take the high road, and that consisted in hard black shoes.  Did I mention the suspenders?  Mennonites wore suspenders, Mom picked them up at Mary Weber’s store with the shoes, but none of the other kids in our church wore them.  God bless Mom and Dad, we were going to be the holiest kids in the country, keeping the best traditions of both our church and those of our Mennonite neighbors.

Jesus was a hard act to follow.

As a young adult it was the hard black hat and the ill fitting pants.  Jesus seemed to be asking to much of us.  But there was always hell to think about, and that was heralded to be many times worse than the wardrobes we had to endure during our brief sojourn among the contemporary heathen.

Jesus was merciful though, he gave us the option of Sugar Grove, Washington, or California.  Then came the committees.  After that the earnest pleas.

Jesus was putting the smack down.

“You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”  (Matthew 5:38-48)

When Yeshua states that our Father Yahweh in heaven “makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good,” and that “he sends rain on the just and on the unjust” I’m going to put to rest all my Old Estimates concerning annihilated Amalekites, and try to imagine the Yahweh that Yeshua is teaching us of.

I guess the sun had risen on them all that day, I guess the rain had fallen on Israel and on Amalek.  Although I wonder if it’s not a mistake to assume that Israel is without sin and Amalek devoid of virtue. 

And Joshua overwhelmed Amalek and his people with the sword. Then Yahweh said to Moses, "Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven." And Moses built an altar and called the name of it, Yahweh is my banner, saying, "A hand upon the throne of Yahweh! Yahweh will have war with Amalek from generation to generation."  

(Exodus 17:13-16)

Yahweh has done to you as he spoke by me, for Yahweh has torn the kingdom out of your hand and given it to your neighbor, David. Because you did not obey the voice of Yahweh and did not carry out his fierce wrath against Amalek, therefore Yahweh has done this thing to you this day. Moreover, Yahweh will give Israel also with you into the hand of the Philistines, and tomorrow you and your sons shall be with me. Yahweh will give the army of Israel also into the hand of the Philistines."

(1 Samuel 28:17-19)

It seems there’s always a bitter row between people groups.  War and killing, hate and bleeding, haughty prejudice, stubborn rebellion against insurmountable odds… You’d think there would be loyalty within each group respectively, but there’s very little.  No matter how thin you slice it there’s always a row.  Between blood brothers, between identical twins…

You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.”  That’s just first nature, common sense, basic knowledge, we can’t tolerate evil and THEY ARE EVIL.

Then Yeshua says the strangest thing in light of all that, “Love your enemies.”

“Like Yahweh does.”

Really?  What about hell?  What about the wars of Israel?  What about the Holocaust?  And I know this is beyond trivial in light of all that, but what about the hard black hats and shoes?

I have no idea how you reconcile all that, and while I’d love to know, my perception of the issue doesn’t rely on yours.  Your perception of the issues don’t depend on mine.  It’s obvious that the scriptures were written from an Israeli bias.  Maybe that’s why Yeshua said: You’ve heard it taught this way, I’m teaching it completely different.  Love your enemies.

I’ve become fairly confident that the wardrobe my dear parents thought was “Yahweh’s Holiness” was “wholly fabricated.”  Perhaps Moses’ bias was a little skewed.  Perhaps Yahweh allowed that.  Perhaps Yeshua’s teaching was more accurate than Moses’.

Perhaps.

I don’t know.  If you want to know beyond a shadow of doubt ask a reformed evangelical.  They insist on absolute knowledge.  Myself, I’m a liar.  Everything I say is in some sense a lie.  At the same time I hope that some things I say happen to be “true.”  “Let God be found true, but every man a liar.”        

Presently the hardest act of Yeshua that I try to follow is in loving my enemies.

I also believe it is the crux, crucial, essential, or deciding point of his teaching.

The cross. 

Then Yeshua told his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his life? Or what shall a man give in return for his life?

(Matthew 16:24-26)

Each of us who have ever said or written anything about Christ wants to say or write something of our opinion about what the “cross” means in Yeshua’s call to follow his act.  Some say it’s the plain lifestyle, others say it’s various forms of abstinence, maybe a crusade or a prohibition, I suppose that every pet peeve at one point or another has been compared to Yeshua’s “cross.”

So here we go again… I think it’s the act of loving one’s enemies.  I think that’s the toughest act to follow.  I think that’s the cross of Messiah Yeshua.

The stories that touch me the deepest are those stories where someone overcame the overwhelming impulse to destroy their enemies; from the story of Yeshua to Victor Hugo’s Jean Valjean in Les Misarables, or Quasimodo in the Hunchback of Notre Dame.  Or the story of Hassan in Khaled Hasseini’s “the Kite Runner.”

The way a teacher responds to his enemies directly affects the amount of weight I apply to his teachings.  And that goes for John Calvin and Martin Luther as well.

Bodac asks: “What person’s authority do you place yourself under?”  …In immediate response to a few brief paragraphs which I had concluded with “exalting none other than Yeshua” & “grow in God's kingdom favor and understanding.”

...but I can expand on that a bit...

“For it stands in Scripture: "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame." So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe, "The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone," and "A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense." They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do. But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” – Peter, sent of Yeshua the Anointed

One time as Peter entered the temple with Yeshua and his fellows, the chief priests and the elders of the people came up to Yeshua as he was teaching, and asked, "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?"

Yeshua answered with several parables then he concluded with: “Have you never read in the Scriptures: “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes'? Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.”

Peter, of course, was quoting Yeshua; and the Scriptures when he said: “it stands in scripture.”

Anyone following will recall, or may go back and recap, that I had said: “let us fall on the rock and be broken, exalting none other than Yeshua.”  I was not consciously aware at the time I wrote those words how intricately connected they were in scripture, but then for several years I almost literally imbibed scripture to the point where one of my friends started calling me “the walking concordance.”  I don’t pour over the scriptures like I used to, but some of it has certainly been ingrained in my subconscious, for which I am grateful.  It has in fact “set me free” – just as Yeshua promised that it would for those who learn and live by his words. 

So when asked, “Under what person's authority do you place yourself?”  I can answer without the embarrassment of hypocrisy that I have placed myself under the authority of the person of Yeshua the Messiah.  Who said:  “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” 

Earlier, when asked indirectly how that was going to shake down, (the disciples were arguing about who was going to have the most control), Yeshua replied, “it shall not be like that among you, the least shall be as the greatest, the older shall be as the younger, the charismatic shall be as the quiet disenfranchised.”

“Blessed are the poor in spirit.”    

I find this to be of the most critical points.  Who do I follow?  Who do you follow?

I don’t particularly enjoy calling the unconscious bluff of well meaning Christians who instinctively gravitate to the wheel ruts of men’s traditions of authority and control by officials and so called “elders” who may or may not be “older.”  In spite of that lack of gratification, I call that bluff.

It stands in Scripture that it was “the chief priests and the elders of the people” gave Yeshua the most trouble.  Based on Yeshua’s “it will not be so among you” I do not believe that system of control works, which we humans naturally gravitate toward.

The German Baptist Church and the Dunkard Brethren Church have operated under governmental control, patterned almost precisely as the governments of the “nations” who’s leaders exercise dominion and are called officers and benefactors, of which Yeshua said: “it will not be so.”  You might say that those who promote those systems are acting in blatant contempt for Yeshua’s teaching.  Actually, I don’t believe so strongly, that there is much open contempt among them for that teaching, I think it’s more like a duh? with a blank stare.  Duh?  What do you mean?   We’ve always done it that way.  And if Greenville Fellowship doesn’t yank the wheel hard for the side ditch it will soon be deeply entrenched in the same old ruts.

By steering clear of the ruts I mean rejecting the whole Old German paradigm.  Completely.  No turning back.  The Volkswagen will do better in the field.  Actually, it’s going to get hung up either way.  The Way has always been a foot path anyway.

Lieutenant General Paul Van Riper is a retired officer of the United States Marine Corp.  From what I’ve heard he thought and acted brilliantly in Vietnam and throughout his career.

I read of Paul in a book by Malcolm Gladwell, ‘Blink,’ about rapid cognition and decision making.         

In 2002 the US government developed a quarter billion dollar war game to test some strategies.  Van Riper was #1 over the Red Team as a rogue warrior in opposition to Blue Team who outnumbered them and out-geeked them. 

Blue team had lots of information collecting and sorting devices, and had lots of meetings where they, in Paul’s view, “had terrible conversations” about the CROP (Common Relevant Operational Picture),the Blue DIME (Diplomatic, Informational, Military, and Economical), and the ONA (Operational Net Assessment) versus the Red PMESI (whatever that was).

He wanted to GAG (gag).

Anyway, his strategy in Vietnam, throughout his career, and of course in Millennial Challenge was to give his people space to perform in their own right.

With that brief background I quote:  “Once the fighting started, Van Riper didn’t want introspection.  He didn’t want long meetings.  He didn’t explanations.  “I told our staff that we use none of the terminology that Blue Team was using.  I never wanted to hear the word “effects,’ except in a normal conversation.  I didn’t want to hear about Operation Net Assessment.  We would not get caught up in any of these mechanistic processes. [and here’s the kicker]  We would use the wisdom, the experience, and the good judgment of the people we had.”” 

How’s that for a novel idea?  I wonder if Yeshua is that kind of a commander…    

“This kind of management system clearly has its risks.  It meant Van Riper didn’t always have a clear idea of what his troops were up to.  It meant he had to put a lot of trust in his subordinates.”  [Omigod!  I absolutely have to interrupt here, “trust in his subordinates?” thank God THAT never happens in the Church!]  It was, by his own admission, a “messy” way to make decisions.  But it had one advantage:  allowing people to operate without having to explain themselves constantly turns out to have won them the game.  It enabled Rapid Cognition.”

Think “you’re all siblings.”

“You are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.” – Yeshua

“The first thing I told our staff is that we would be in command and out of control," Van Riper says, echoing the words of the management guru Kevin Kelly. "By that I mean that the overall guidance and the intent were provided by me and the senior leadership, but the forces in the field wouldn't depend on intricate orders coming from the top. They were to use their own initiative and be innovative as they went forward. Almost every day, the commander of the Red air forces came up with different ideas of how he was going to pull this together, using these general techniques of trying to overwhelm Blue Team from different directions. But he never got specific guidance from me of how to do it; just the intent.” From Blink, Malcolm Gladwell, 2005, page 118

Of course Van Riper’s findings aren’t 100% parallel with Yeshua’s teachings.  For the sake of comparison though, imagine Church leadership that never gives “specific guidance” of how to apply Yeshua’s doctrines, “just the intent.”  You may wind up imagining Yeshua.  Yeshua taught the intent of Yahweh’s precepts. 

If he’d have laid down the minute details in absolute specifics, the voluminous works would have taken his scribes 300 years to put to papyrus.  It would take you and I 600 years to learn what was written.  Yet Yeshua only had 30 something, and we don’t know how long we have.

The Church has been writing and rewriting the “specific guidance” for approximately four thousand years (2000 BC & 2000 AD).  Guess what?  It’s not working.   

The controlling authority of the church doesn’t come from following Yeshua’s teachings, it comes from our traditions.  "The Great Ecclesiastical Conspiracy" by George Davis & Michael Clark (free online book) is an indispensable tool in debunking the proof texts for official control within the community of faith in Yeshua.  Or if you believe that the KJV is a book above criticism, again, you will find this documentation valuable.

I read The Great Ecclesiastical Conspiracy about four years ago at the advice of several friends, I think it was Bob Riffey who discovered and recommended it to us first.  The book basically brings to light several key mistranslations and paraphrases that dissuade common people, or uncommon people as well depending on how you look at it, from realizing their full potential in the kingdom of God.

The “elder,” “priest,” or “minister” who is exercising unwarranted control over the “ministered too” isn’t going to attain “the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.”  You’ll find that much of the control side of church is unwarranted, unveiled by the research of George and Michael, as well as by William Tyndale and others before them.   

By way of replacing the hierarchical ecclesia, Peter Rollins envisions something like this: “To develop a healthy community, the best approach can actually involve being clear that one is not starting a community at all and that there will be no pastoral support, that no one will be charged with the job of taking in money and distributing it on other peoples behalf, and that no one will be responsible for calling you up if you stop attending events.”

“Providing a space with no welcoming team or pastoral support group means that individuals need to take responsibility for welcoming and caring for others themselves.  Here the role of those setting up the group is not to create a new priest/laity divide but rather to refuse to act in the role of a priest precisely so as to encourage a priesthood of all believers,* offering relational, mutually dependent, pastoral support.  This does not mean that there is no leadership, for the leader is the one who attempts to prevent any one person, including the leader, from taking over the space and taking on the role of some high priest.  In such a space there is a radical refusal, by those who organize the gathering, to take on personal responsibility.  For by refusing the place of power, the “pastors” equip everyone to be a pastor, simultaneously discouraging an unhealthy dependency in those who attend.”  - (pg. 177) The Fidelity of Betrayal by Peter Rollins

“Discouraging an unhealthy dependency…”  That’s a good line.  I’m constantly on guard against placing myself in a position where anyone depends on me for their relationship with Yahweh.  I believe that is Yeshua’s position and his alone.

In Vietnam Paul Van Riper noted that when he called the troops in the field during a raid it diverted them, they waiting on him for their next move instead of applying their abilities toward the task at hand.  Creating a possessive top down hierarchical approach to life prevents people from resolving situation on their own, or relying on the Spirit of Yahweh for themselves. 

It keeps people children.

Adults make decisions for themselves.  From my perspective Yeshua didn’t teach us to remain helplessly immature babies; forever fawning over the whim of every pompous priest.  Yeshua taught toward becoming fully mature, fully alive adults in the kingdom of his Father.

So then Bodac, having gone into detail about what person it is I submit to, I ask you in turn: Under what person’s authority do you place yourself?

I’m sure you must be prepared with an answer.  It might also be helpful to include your real name for a change.  Even better would be to include a short list of independently verifiable contacts who know you in real life.

*Priesthood of all believers: 1Peter 2.9; 1Peter 2.4-5; Revelation 1.5-6, 5.6-10