Luke 12:49-56; The Problem of Preaching Division

"‘I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 I have a baptism with which to be baptized, and what stress I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division! 52 From now on, five in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three; 53they will be divided: father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.’
54 He also said to the crowds, ‘When you see a cloud rising in the west, you immediately say, “It is going to rain”; and so it happens. 55 And when you see the south wind blowing, you say, “There will be scorching heat”; and it happens. 56 You hypocrites! You know how to interpret the appearance of earth and sky, but why do you not know how to interpret the present time?"

Introduction--The Problem

Just when we think we have understood Jesus, just when we think we have interpreted him to conform (and only lightly judge) our early 3rd millenium progressivism, just when we have seen him as a proclaimer of justice and peace in the world, we get this passage. When he asks, "Do you think that I have come to bring peace on earth" (v. 51), and then answers "No:" well, excuse me if I answer the question, "Yes. After all, I actually thought that was why you came into the world, Jesus." Why do I say that? Well, I let's begin with Luke 1: 79--"to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.’" Or, if this doesn't convince, how about Luke 2:13-14, the staple of our Advent preaching:

"13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host, praising God and saying, 14 ‘Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on
earth peace among those whom he favours!'"

After Jesus had forgiven the woman who bathed his feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair, he said to her, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace" (7:50). When he healed the woman with a hemorrhage of blood his last words to her were, "Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace" (8:48).

No doubt you get my point. How do we handle a Jesus whom we both thought was teaching peace and whom we want to teach peace, when he then seemingly redefines his ministry purpose right before our eyes and tells us that he brings division in families and society? And, it isn't as if only mentions the idea in passing. Three times in vv. 51-53 Jesus uses the word for division (merizo) to speak about the nature of his ministry. He just isn't, therefore, making a verbal "slip" in v. 51.

Dealing with the Problem

In my judgment there are two ways that we can handle this problem, both of which aren't very satisfactory, though I will opt for the second interpretation below. On the one hand we could argue that Jesus' words are really eschatological words, words spoken in view of a belief that the end was imminent and that the sudden irruption of the end would cause incredible strife and division on the earth. This approach is supported by the preceding narratives, where Jesus exhorts his followers to be girded and ready for the return of the master, for the master will come at a time when no one knows. Thus, we could argue that this passage only refers to that period of intense calamity preceding the end of time. Just as Albert Schweitzer argued that the Sermon on the Mount was a sort of "interim ethic" (valid between the time Jesus spoke and the imminent coming of the Kingdom), so we might argue that this is an "interim reality," where the pressure of Jesus' demands on the disciples in the face of the coming Kingdom simply forces people apart from each other.

I like this approach for a lot of reasons, but I don't like it for one basic reason--because then it would take away any significance of the passage for today. We could then "write it off" as simply an expression of millennial fervor. Since most of us don't live with an expectation of an imminent return of Christ (whatever that really means), the passage then can just be relegated to the ash heap. I don't think this is a very straightforward way of dealing with the passage.

But if we take it as having a meaning for today, regardless of an eschatological urgency, how are we to interpret it, expecially in light of the passages I quoted earlier from Luke? Well, I think that Jesus makes two points in this passage (a passage linked together by the appearance of fire in vv. 49, 55 and water in vv. 50, 54): (1) his urgent presence in our lives causes division in the most intimate relationships; and (2) we really don't understand the spiritual forces at work in the world. Let's talk about each--in the next essay.

2824