4. Jesus Enters the Scene

Ananda: I understand the greatness of John. He preached a universal God who loves good and hates evil. Now, where does Jesus come into the picture?      

John: John and Jesus belonged to the same age-group.  It is possible that they knew each other from childhood because according to Luke’s story, they were relatives.  But I am not sure exactly how they were related, or how often John and Jesus met when they were young. As their ideas were similar and as they preached about the Kingdom of God, I guess that they might have influenced each other since their childhood. I have seen that they had great admiration toward each other. Jesus once said that no one else born of woman was greater than John. When Jesus came to John to accept baptism, John said that it was he who should be baptized by Jesus. Later, John told others that he saw the spirit of God descending upon Jesus when he took baptism.

Ananda: As Jesus accepted baptism from John, it is clear that he accepted John’s ideas. Later, when Jesus started preaching, what was his message?  Was it the same as John’s?

John: Whenever I think of John, what comes to my mind is a passage from the book of Prophet Isaiah: I will send a messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way. That is what John did. He prepared the way for Jesus. I must say that Jesus accepted John’s message and ideas. Jesus was very happy to reject a racist image of God, and to accept a God who loves good and hates evil. He preached the same good news as John did-- the Kingdom of God is at hand. However, Jesus was not satisfied with that. He developed John’s ideas further by making certain finer distinctions, and at that level, Jesus had to contradict John.

Ananda: I will be excited to hear about the distinctions Jesus made.

John: John asked people to start doing good deeds because it is good deeds that would qualify them to be the citizens of the kingdom of God. They wanted to know what John exactly meant by good deeds. John gave examples of good deeds as follows: Those with two clothes should give one to those without any; tax collectors should not collect more than what they are required to; and soldiers should not extort money from people, or accuse them falsely. In fact, John's idea of what is good differed radically from that of the Jewish religious leaders, for whom it meant nothing but blindly following religious rules and observing rituals.  

Jesus adopted John’s idea of good, and built upon it, making it clearer and more elaborate. To begin with, Jesus discovered that really there is no contradiction between following moral rules and doing good as John understood it. All the Jewish moral rules could be summarized in the ten commandments of Moses, which could be further summarized in the two rules: Love your God wholeheartedly, and love your fellow beings as you love yourself. Jesus used love as a criterion to distinguish good from what is not good. Any activity that results from love is good. When someone loves his/her fellow beings unconditionally, s/he will certainly do the good deeds as exemplified by John.  

But, why can't people love God? And why can’t people love one another? These questions led Jesus to a marvelous discovery. Hidden deep down in human hearts, there lies a misunderstanding, which makes human beings incapable of loving. So, even if they don’t want it, they do evil. If it is possible to clear this misunderstanding from human hearts, love will spring forth naturally.

Ananda: What is that misunderstanding?

John: That God loves us only if we love God. How would I love God and my fellow beings if deep down in my heart I believe that God loves me only if I love God? This idea was not clear even to John the baptizer.

If you don't do good deeds, God will not accept you as his people--that is what John said. God is like a farmer who doesn't allow a fruitless tree to grow in his garden. Just as a farmer gathers wheat into the barn, and burns the chaff, God accepts good people and rejects the wicked ones. Like a merciless judge, God refuses to overlook even the slightest misdeed. A contradiction occurs here. If God is good, God’s behavior also must be good, and it must be the perfect model for humans to follow. Therefore, if God is a judge, we can be judges too, and we can also accept good people and reject evil doers. Thus, though we are supposed to love our fellow beings unconditionally, we can't do it, for we don’t see such behavior in God.  

Moreover, if God is a judge who needs to be pleased by our good deeds, we will not feel like loving such a God wholeheartedly. If God loves us conditionally, how can we return unconditional love, and how can we love one another unconditionally?   

Jesus found a solution. He replaced the judge-image of God by a father-image. God is like a father who loves all people unconditionally, and that is the perfect model of good behavior for all to follow. Based on John’s model, hating and cursing the evil doer is the right behavior, but according to Jesus’ model, loving and blessing the evil doer is the right behavior. Evil can be fought only with good; darkness can be overcome only with light.

We usually assume that God behaves like us. We love only those who love us. But we forget that unlike us, God is all-knowing and all-powerful. We do evil deeds because of our ignorance, not because we are inherently evil. How can God, who is all-knowing and all-powerful, hate us for our mistakes? God’s love toward us doesn’t depend upon our behavior at all, but on God’s knowledge, power, and purpose. God loves us even if we hate God in return.         

What comes to my mind now is a story said by Jesus and recorded by Luke. That is the story of a father and his two sons. The father had unconditional love toward them, though they were unaware of it. They thought that his love depended on their love toward him, that is, he would love them only if they were good, and did good. Therefore, they couldn’t feel any love for him. They had to grow to maturity to recognize the love of their father and respond to it.

The younger one was honest enough to admit how he felt toward his father. He confessed that he didn’t feel any attachment toward his father, and expressed his wish to live away from him.  He just wanted to put an end to the double life he had been leading. He couldn’t be one kind of person inside and another kind outside. With his share of his father’s property, he left his home. As he didn’t know how to manage his money, soon he became penniless. He began to work hard to earn his daily bread. He was treated mercilessly by his master, and that helped him to clear his misunderstanding of his father. He compared the kindness and generosity of his father with the brutality of his master. "How kindly my father treats his servants," he thought, "and how on earth could I feel badly about him." He was overwhelmed with remorse, and he wanted to say sorry. "I will be the happiest man if I get a chance to work as a servant in my father's house," he said to himself.  He went back to his father, and he was accepted-- not as a servant, but as son.  His father arranged a grand party to celebrate the event because that was the happiest day in his life. All these years, neither of his sons could understand his love for them, and now, finally, one of them was responding to his love.

The elder son approached the situation in a different way.  According to our custom, the oldest son inherits a lion's share of his father's property, provided that he remains with his parents and takes care of them in their old age. He couldn't think of losing it, so he was willing to sacrifice anything else for it. He also knew that he didn’t feel any love toward his father, but it didn’t worry him at all. Though he didn’t feel any attachment toward his father, he was determined to pretend great affection by means of words and deeds. However, he couldn’t keep his true feelings hidden for long; they broke out when his brother returned.  He was not willing to accept him as his brother again, and also he blamed his father for accepting him.  He was not even willing to enter the house.          

At the end of the story, we see the two sons at different positions-- one inside, and the other outside. They had the same father, but they had different images of their father in their minds, which were reflected in their behavior. The younger one’s image was that of a wise father with unconditional love, and it enabled him to return that love. There was humility and willingness to serve in him. The elder one’s image was that of a judge-like, foolish father who loves conditionally, and it made him a judge. He judged both his father and his brother as unrighteous, and himself as righteous.

Ananda: That is an interesting story. It explains how our deeds are firmly based on our understanding. 

Back to Contents    Next