New Thoughts (12/02/12-12/04/12)
I remember, now, why it was I had kept John’s comment on this progress to Golgatha separate, as well as why I chose to set his message prior to that of the others. In reality, John would have written later than these three accounts. A quick look back at the last study will bring out the salient difference in what he says. “He went out, bearing His own cross” (Jn 19:17). John alone makes no mention of Simon’s role, but then, there was no need to mention his role. It was well known. What God had accomplished in arranging his part in the drama of the Passion was well known, at least the first several fruitful harvests. There was yet more to come, but they could not know that.
But, John emphasizes the start of that progress, with Jesus bearing His own cross. This is an important part of the event, one that got lost in the description these others were giving. It was important to John that we understand Jesus had begun that march in a fashion fitted to His teaching. It is one of the more shocking things that Jesus had spoken to those who sought to follow Him. “If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me” (Mt 16:24, Mk 8:34, Lk 9:23). Now, notice that! All three of the Synoptic authors see this message as critical to record. John, though, notes a small gap in their coverage of this final day. They neglect to show that Jesus led by example. Here He was, utterly denying Himself. Here He was, carrying His own cross. Here was the example. Follow Him!
Let’s understand, though, that John is not contradicting or even correcting the accounts given by these others. He is merely filling in the picture. At the outset, Jesus bore His own cross. Had the soldiers not intervened, it can be assumed that He would have done so to the end. Whether that end would have consisted in His fatal collapse on the way, or whether it would have ended as had been decreed, struck the commander of these soldiers as questionable, and he intended to see the decree carried out as ordered. It was not Jesus who sought relief from the burden of His cross. It was the guard, thinking He would never make it to His execution under these circumstances, who forcibly enlisted Simon to help. And note that detail that Luke provides. Simon didn’t just lend a shoulder to share the burden with Jesus. He was required to go behind Jesus.
Think about that for just a moment. I don’t really want to spend too much time on Simon right now, as I fully expect to consider him more fully as a sidebar topic shortly. But, think of the impression, walking whatever the distance may have been between the place where he was met by this procession, and the place of execution, and all that long way, the bloodied back of Jesus was before his eyes, even as the beam he carried was stained and sticky with that same blood. It’s very hard not to fall into a bit of a reverie, considering what must have been going through this man’s mind on that trek. We know the result, I think, but the process that led to the result is an intriguing matter.
That being said, it remains the point of fact that he was pressed into service by these soldiers, and who could argue? This term is intriguing in its own right, the eengareusan which is here translated as ‘pressed into service’. It has its roots in Persia, where there were couriers posted at strategic points, that royal missives might be dispatched with all speed. Each would ride the message to the next, where that one would take fresh mount and make the next leg of the journey. It’s not all that different from the Pony Express from our countries earlier years. In pursuit of this mission, these men had full authority to commandeer any man, horse, ship or whatever means lay at hand to hasten their journey. It is in this sense, then, that we have the Romans acting upon Simon. It’s not sympathy for Jesus, certainly. It is more in the interest of getting this job done. Maybe, if they stopped often enough, Jesus could have completed the trip in His own power. They seem determined that one way or the other, He’s going to complete the trip. I’m guessing their own well-being rather depended on seeing justice, such as it was, carried out as ordered. But, that march wasn’t any much more pleasant for them than for Him, and so the commander presses Simon into service to speed the process of crucifying this man.
There is an interesting note in Thayer’s coverage of this term which suggests that Jesus may have had this idea of pressed service in mind when He taught, “Whoever shall force you to go one mile, go with him two” (Mt 5:41). Given that it’s the same term used there, it’s certainly a reasonable suggestion. It also makes clear that this business of the soldiers pressing Simon into service was not some exceptional event in itself, but rather a relatively common experience. I suspect that knowing such impressed service could result from any encounter with these soldiers tended to make the populace a tad leery of being around to take the chance.
Yet, Luke tells us there was a great crowd following them out of town, many in that crowd mourning and lamenting (Lk 23:27). Professionals? I would guess not. Who had had time to arrange such a thing, and who would be paying for it? So, in spite of all the hubbub back at the Praetorium, and the strident shouting for Barabbas, it would seem there had been a fairly large contingent of supporters. They were not absent, then, just out-shouted. This may also have been feeding Pilate’s concerns about a riot, and it suggests he was in a tighter bind than ever, for whatever ruling he passed down, there would be a goodly number of locals upset.
But, back to Simon. In human terms, there would not seem to be any particular reason for his having been pulled from out of the crowds for this service. He just happened to be in the right place at the right time. And, the fact that he was ought give us some hint as to just Who was actually arranging this event. Before I begin to consider the reasons God so chose, there are one or two other points I shall consider.
First, there is the nature of Simon’s service. He was required to bear Jesus’ cross. This cannot help but echo that earlier lesson from Jesus, instructing His disciples to bear their own crosses daily. As I noted, this is the likely reason for John stressing how Jesus bore it Himself as they began the march out to Golgatha. This connection of theme is so strong that the BBE actually renders Matthew’s coverage of this encounter as saying, “so that he might take up his cross.” The BBE apparently doesn’t go in for capitalizing pronouns referring to Jesus, which makes this clause a bit more difficult to parse. But, we do know Whose cross it was, so we know ‘his’ refers to Jesus, and the remainder of the sentence makes it sufficiently clear that ‘he’ refers to Simon. But, it’s that ‘take up his cross’ part that forces us back to the earlier instruction. I wonder just what Simon would make of that teaching when he came upon it.
The second item I would consider very briefly is the importance of that little aside that Mark adds regarding Simon’s sons. Now, it is interesting to note how this meshes with Paul’s greetings to the church in Rome, but that is only sufficient to support the view that Mark was writing to that same church. The far greater message to be gleaned from this one verse in each of three Gospel accounts is that what they are relating to us is real history. In particular, as Mark makes note of those two sons, it is critical to recognize the implications. Those two are in your church, even as you are reading this. If it sounds incredible, ask them! Two witnesses provided, even as the disciples were first sent out in twos (Mk 6:7).
This is a critical point for us to comprehend, here at this far remove from events. The Gospels were no clever works of fiction, nor were they carefully orchestrated one with another. To be sure, Matthew or Mark, whichever came later, had the other’s work to refer back to. I tend to hold with the idea that Mark’s was the earliest of the official accounts. Why wouldn’t Matthew start from that point in putting together his own coverage? But, he was targeting a different crowd, with a different perspective, so he tends to include much more of what Jesus taught – surely an important task in its own right! He also stresses the fulfillments of prophecy that abounded in the life of Christ, for he is keen to establish that this new Christian sect is not foreign to Judaism, but its proper conclusion. It is not departure from the ancient faith, but the entire point of that ancient faith.
I digress. We are far removed from events, but those who first read these accounts were not. They still had among them others who had been witness to parts of what transpired. Just consider the vast number of lives that encountered Jesus during those years. You have the multiple thousands who were present when He fed the masses – two separate occasions. You have the countless numbers who had come to be healed, who had sat to listen on one occasion or another. It seems that for just about every event the Gospels present to us, there are several witnesses who are not to be counted amongst the Apostles. Think about what this means. If they had been making things up out of whole cloth, there would have been myriad voices denouncing their lies. They could not have got this new religion off the ground.
Now, admittedly, there were myriad voices being lifted against them. We see the opposition clearly as we read the subsequent history of the early church in the book of Acts. Here’s the thing, though: There were other voices, voices that book does not find it necessary to tell us about. There were those like Alexander and Rufus, seeded throughout the nascent church. They were there, and they could confirm some of the most unbelievable aspects of what was being taught as historical fact. This was a very necessary ingredient for the success of the new sect, every bit as necessary as those proofs Matthew laid out, as the careful investigatory efforts of Luke, as the phenomenal brilliance of Paul’s theological dissertations. Christ the cornerstone, and the Apostles the foundation, yes! But, there were these others set about as pillars and beams, that the whole of the construct of the Church of God could stand. Indeed our God is a masterful architect! He has seen to every last detail and requirement for this temple of His to stand through the ages. We ought to take this to heart as we consider the state of what passes for the church in our own day. We ought to take warning as well, lest we fall into the same errors of supposing that to be the true church which is not.
The critics who seek to hunt out all manner of discrepancies and conspiracies in the text of the Gospel seem to me to have completely missed the historical situation into which these Gospels were delivered. Were they so full of discrepancies, there could have been no body of witnesses confirming the record. Were it all a conspiracy by which the twelve hoped to make a comfy life for themselves, then the lack of any confirmation, in spite of all those thousands they mention as being present, would have presented an insurmountable problem, particularly for the church that was set in the very heart of Jerusalem. They already had the officialdom of the temple against them, conniving to discredit their story. If there had not been those who were present, who could vouch for the veracity of what the Apostles were saying, who can suppose they could have even got started?
Either we think ourselves so far superior to the people of that period as to deem them not so far removed from chimpanzees, or we must accept that they were capable of discerning so great a deception. Hmm. But, then, how to explain Islam? Perhaps it’s not so unthinkable that a mass of humanity could be persuaded to even face death for a religion completely false. It does seem to happen rather regularly. But, there remains this distinction: That the facts related in the Gospels were verifiable facts. Witnesses were extent, and named. You could go ask them. Go seek out Jairus and his daughter. They’re still up there in Capernaum. Go ask Anna and Simon about their encounters with the baby Jesus at His dedication. Go ask Alexander and Rufus about what really happened this fateful, most critical day back there in Jerusalem.
We do not have this benefit. But, we have the great benefit of a vetted record from those who did. God has gone to great lengths, down through the ages, to ensure that this record survived, that not only the Apostles, but those who sat at their feet and learned of Jesus, can still speak to us today through their writings. We have the great benefit of seeing how Luke’s account, written as he says after careful research to ensure that he was getting the facts straight, and so, it would seem, as to weed out whatever bits of mythologizing had crept in, still meshes and agrees with what Matthew and Mark had earlier recorded. What Peter was preaching is what those at the scene remembered as well! Hey, come on! Peter was in Rome at this point, and these were people back in Israel. Is it really to be imagined that Peter was somehow pulling the strings and orchestrating their testimony? The technology for such a thing simply did not exist! What the Gospels record for us is real history. The events of the ministry of Jesus, from His conception by such miraculous means right through to His ascension to the throne of heaven are real events. They are not fanciful tales. They are not morality plays with valid points but fictitious vehicles for delivering those points. It’s history! It’s not chronology, but it’s assuredly history.
With that out of the way, I do believe I can think about focusing on the powerful results of this chance encounter. I confess that these results must, in large part, be matters of conjecture. So be it. But, I see this at the very center of it all: God, the God of Providence, the God Who, because He is Who He is demands that we realize that there are no coincidences, has arranged for Simon to be here, and for Simon to be chosen by the soldiers to bear His Son’s cross. He has seen to every last detail of this day. It has been needful, for so much has already been spoken of this day, and spoken by His command. His Word must be valid. It cannot be otherwise. Yet, His Word cannot be inviolably True except He stands behind that Word, except He enforces that Word, and is fully involved in the details. The absent clockmaker theory of the Godhood simply does not hold up. Winding it up and watching it go does not guarantee results. It does not supply the necessary ingredients for perfect accuracy in all that has been written so very long before the event. In Jesus, there is the focus, effectively, of every last scrap of prophecy to be found in the Old Testament, and a fair number made in the years between His birth and His death. So much fulfillment cannot be the product of chance, even if chance were capable of producing anything.
No, God is here, and He is firmly in control of events. He has arranged the timing of the trial, down to the second, and He has arranged for the journey Simon was making to come to town. He was in the right place at the right time because, whether aware of it or not, all of these men were being moved by God’s Spirit. Oh, they were choosing and acting freely of their own free will, yet their free wills were absolutely being orchestrated by Him Who alone has the power to enforce His Will absolutely. I will save for tomorrow the exploration of what all God was setting in motion by Simon’s presence at this place at this hour.
Let me state once again that this chain of events I am about to set forth is a matter of conjecture, not concerning the veracity of the events, but only in regard to their forming a chain. That being said, I find the relationship of these events compelling, and quite in keeping with the ways of God’s Providence. It must start here, with the seeming coincidence of Simon happening to be coming into the city just as Jesus and the soldiers are coming out. It starts with the decision of those soldiers to demand that Simon bear the cross for Jesus. It could have stopped there. Simon could have left Golgatha just as quickly as his feet would permit when once he had delivered that cross. But, had that been the case, I sincerely doubt that we would find him mentioned by name in three of the Gospels. He would have been a man coming in from the country, just as that woman back in Mark 5 was some unnamed woman with an issue of blood.
But, his name was known to Peter, who mentioned him by name when he preached. His name was known to Matthew who, though writing to a completely different audience, considered it important enough to mention. Even Luke, collecting his information several years later, knows this man by name. This is really rather amazing, given how little is known of him apart from these three verses which are effectively one. Something about him brought him to the attention not only of the apostles, but of the church.
That leads me to wonder what became of him as he was relieved of that beam he had borne to the site. It seems clear enough that he didn’t simply leave. I become curious as to how much he knew of this Jesus before he came to the city. Certainly, He had a high degree of fame, but would He have been recognizable to somebody who had never seen Him before? I’m going to run with the theory that Simon did not know Who he was walking behind, and if that’s the case, it seems unlikely that he was given opportunity to ask along the way. But, Luke does note the crowds, and that Jesus spoke to them, His speech being firmly in the prophetic voice. Yes, that would register. Something was different about this Man. And yet, what held Simon there at the execution site?
It is hard for us to imagine that there would be any interest in observing such a cruel punishment. But, it must be recognized that this is more to do with our own sensibilities. We must recall that even in much later years, the public showed a great interest in observing executions. I suspect that, were there such executions in our own day and were they held in public, the eagerness of the masses to observe the event would not seem so surprising. So, it need not surprise us that Simon would remain to watch, and as he watched, he could hardly help but listen. He would have heard those final words of Jesus, particularly His cry for God to forgiven those who had done this to Him. Amazing! He would certainly have begun to recognize just Who this was, perhaps not seeing in Him the King of the Jews or the Son of God, but certainly aware of His fame. Most interesting. He would also, one supposes, have caught the reaction of the soldiers later, “Surely, this was the Son of God.” And, he would have been there to witness the sudden darkness across the land, the earthquake. He would have seen that curtain torn in the temple. Whatever his understanding had been when he stood outside the gates of Jerusalem, God had his attention now.
Well, there’s the question of whether he was still residing in Cyrene at this point, or whether he had property local to Jerusalem. The term by which Mark speaks of the country from which he was coming could indicate nothing more than the surrounding area – i.e. he was outside the city in one of the local villages and was now coming in. It was the day of preparation, after all. On the other hand, that term could refer to his own personal plot of farmland. It’s not certain. I will, however, suggest that he was still based in Cyrene, that he was in town primarily for observance of the high holy days of Passover. His taking housing outside the city for this event would hardly surprise. The city was filled to overflowing on these feast days. Yet, he must still come and deal with the sacrifice. He being from afar, it’s unlikely he would bring his own lamb, but would procure one from the temple.
If he was here for Passover, it’s not unreasonable, I should think, to suppose he would have stayed around to observe Pentecost as well. Travel in those days was not what it is today. If he is here as an observant Jew, would he not remain for the next mandatory feast on the calendar? After all, the journey from Cyrene was no little jaunt. If one was going to take the days necessary to sail along the African coast from Libya over here to Jerusalem, and face the inherent risks of such travel, would you not decide to stick around awhile? Particularly with two such important days so near on the calendar.
So, we might well suppose that Simon of Cyrene could be found amongst those who stood outside the upper room on that day when the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles, and so many were hearing their words in their own language. Certainly, Luke’s listing of nationalities in Acts 2:7-11 includes men of Cyrene. Let me suppose Simon is in that number. And, what was he hearing? According to the record, they were “speaking of the mighty deeds of God.” And then Peter took to the balcony to speak of what was happening. He pointed out the fulfillment of Joel’s prophesies in what they had just witnessed, and then he moved on to the subject of Jesus of Nazareth who, though attested to by miracles too numerous to account, proving God’s hand upon Him, “you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put to death” (Ac 2:15-23). And, we know that Peter went on from there, and that his continuation included explanations that this Jesus, “whom you crucified,” has not stayed dead. He arose from the grave. He ascended to heaven. God has made Him both Lord and Christ!
Well, now! Simon had been there on the scene. He had witnessed that very crucifixion, had his own part in the proceedings, though not of his own choosing. And this is what he had been party to? This requires some meditation, doesn’t it? When that call came to be saved from this perverse generation (Ac 2:40), it’s not hard to imagine Simon being eager to avail himself of that opportunity. Three thousand or so felt the pull of salvation that day. I’ll maintain that Simon was in that number.
Now, in previous considerations, back when I was finishing up my study of Romans, I was inclined to think his sons were there with him that fateful day in the gates of Jerusalem, but I’m not so sure. What I am reasonably certain of is this: When he got home, he could not cease from speaking about the events he had witnessed, the events he had been a part of. I suspect that he now had some personal friends amongst the Apostles, Peter very likely among them. But, for Simon’s part, he went home as full of the Holy Spirit as those who had been in the upper room. He found it as impossible not to speak of what God had done as did the Apostles back in Jerusalem. The first to hear this news from him would have been his family – his wife, his sons. Apparently, the change in him was sufficiently noteworthy that they recognized something major had happened. This was not the same Simon they had said goodbye to before he embarked on that journey. And, taking the testimony of Paul to heart, it would seem that they not only noticed the difference, but were themselves brought to faith in this very same Jesus, the Christ of God’s own choosing.
So, when Paul says goodbye to those in Rome, he includes in the list not only Rufus (with the acclamation of his being a good man in the Lord), but also Simon’s wife, mother of Rufus, who had also acted in such a fashion that Paul would say she had been a mother to him as well (Ro 16:13). Things had changed in this family. Now, we might also surmise from this greeting that by the time Paul wrote, Simon was no longer amongst the living. If it had been only his sons mentioned, I would suppose they had gone off seeking their own fortunes in the world and had become part of the church there in Rome. But, their mother is there, as well. That suggests to me that Simon had passed on, and the family had gone to Rome after the fact. But, that is getting ahead of the story somewhat.
See, other things were happening back in Jerusalem, as the church found its feet. We discover, for instance, that there were those from Cyrene (as well as Alexandria) who were attempting to debate Stephen as he preached (Ac 6:9-10), but they were insufficient to the task of countering the wisdom of the Spirit which filled Stephen’s words. Now, these men are listed as hostiles. They would also have been counted amongst the intelligentsia of the time. Both Cyrene and Alexandria were centers of learning, regions where Jews and Greeks were exchanging ideas a bit more freely than here in Jerusalem. But, let’s consider Simon in particular. He’s been closer to the action, as it were. He may well have been witness to this debate, as well, but not so much as a participant. He’s not yet so solid in his faith that he would stand with Stephen, yet he’s also not so far removed as to stand with those who are presenting their arguments. He is, let us say, a neutral observer. And, he sees the wisdom of Cyrene, the wisdom with which he himself was raised and trained, effectively destroyed by this representative of the risen Christ, clearly a simple man. And yet, like the Pharisees experienced at the hands of Peter and John, the simple man was outclassing their arguments in irrefutable fashion. Impressive.
Well, fast forward just a bit. The men of Cyrene may, at this stage, have tended to oppose this new sect of Christianity, but it didn’t stay that way. Perhaps it was even this argument with Stephen, and standing as witnesses of his death as he was stoned that began to shift their views. But, by the time we arrive in Acts 11, we find out that ‘men from Cyprus and Cyrene’ came to Antioch bearing the Gospel message with them, and they began speaking not only with the Jews, but also with the Greeks (Ac 11:20). How has this come about? Well, it would seem to me that some time has passed. Those men of Cyrene who had been in Jerusalem, or at least some of their number, had returned home to Cyrene, and they bore the great news of glad tidings towards men, of Joel’s day of the Lord fulfilled in such spectacular fashion, of Messiah come and seated on His throne (however much it was at variance with popular conceptions of what was to happen). They weren’t quiet about it. How could they be?
Remember that poor Gadarene man, from whom Jesus had cast out the legion of demons? He couldn’t keep quiet. And because he couldn’t keep quiet, there was a rich harvest of salvations out there in the Decapolis. Likewise, it would seem, for these men. They went home, and could not but speak of what they had witnessed back in Jerusalem. And that same Spirit of God who had filled the Apostles, who had given them words of salvation, who had quickened the hearts of those who listened, was now active amongst these returned sojourners. Hearts were changing, Simon’s family amongst them. And they, too, found it impossible to keep the news to themselves. They, too, felt the call to go out and tell the nations what great good news had come to them. So, then had apparently sent from their number out to Antioch.
Let me correct my thoughts just a bit. If I read more carefully, I find Acts 11:19 specifying that it was from amongst those fleeing Jerusalem that these men in Antioch were numbered. Fine. But, why, we might ask, was there such a powerful impact on these men from Cyrene and Cyprus? I am mindful that they were likely members of that same Synagogue of the Freedmen whence came those who had encountered Stephen. I am mindful that Simon would likely have been in attendance there as well. His story, particularly combined with their own observations of Stephen, and of Peter’s first sermon, would prove a powerful testimony. Can it be that because Simon was present to tell his part, these men who had at the first been so hostile to the message of Christ were brought to faith in that same Christ, and not just brought to faith, but filled with a missionary zeal that shaped their actions when they departed for Antioch? It seems an acceptable theory to me.
So, there they were, planting the Gospel up in Antioch, preaching not only to Jews but to Greeks. These men were particularly well suited to such a mission, for they came from a place where Greeks and Jews were not so separated. Cyrene was a place of Hellenized Jews. They retained their faith, their religion, but they also accepted the education, the wisdom, and some of the practices of the Greeks. They were, then, less inclined to suppose the Greeks excluded from belief in Israel’s God. They were not dogs. They were neighbors. They were as much in need of God’s salvation as ever Israel was. And, given their propensity for pursuing philosophy and understanding of Truth, they had, perhaps, recognized more clearly how Torah and the Prophets spoke of something involving not only Israel, but all the nations. They had come to recognize more of the greatness of God than had those holding sway in God’s temple in Jerusalem.
And it didn’t stop there, this Providential orchestration of events flowing out of Simon’s moment with the Son. Reading somewhat of Cyrene’s history, one learns how that city, now all but lost to the sands, had been central in the spread of the church into northern Africa. Yes, though it may seem impossible to believe given the current situation in that region, there was a time when places like Libya and Egypt and other nations along that shore had been a major center of Christian development. Some of the greats of Christian history arose out of Carthage and Alexandria and such places, and Cyrene was, it would seem, critical to that development. Consider that Augustine, perhaps the most significant of the early fathers of the Church, was a product of Hippo as concerns his religious development, and that city was not so very far from Carthage along Africa’s northern shore.
Isn’t that something? Had not God arranged for Simon to be there in the gates of Jerusalem this fateful day, it is just possible we would have no Augustine of Hippo to have fed so much knowledge of God into the church. We might have had no Reformation, no Pilgrims or Puritans. We might never have seen the Gentiles made so integral a part of the Church. Of course, it being in God’s plan, it was impossible that it should be otherwise, and yet, there is this which we ought to see in how events played out, even if my chain of suppositions is not entirely accurate: From the smallest of seed events, the seemingly trivial and insignificant, comes great harvest. Is this not exactly what Jesus taught when he compared the kingdom of heaven to a mustard seed (Mt 13:31)?
Let us, then, not suppose that the meager results we may see from our efforts are the full measure. Let us not be discouraged, nor despise the things we are given to do because the initial results seem to be non-existent. It is not by the measure of our years that God marks the extent of His work through us. He has all the time in the world to bring to fruition that which He has begun in and through us! That is the marvelous truth of this labor in which we have joined. It’s not about us. It’s not about our job satisfaction. It’s about what God is able to do with our limited abilities, and what He is able to do with those limited abilities is limitless! With God, impossible does not apply. With God, I can do all things whatsoever as are in His purpose.
