Napoleon Bonaparte and Zacheous...

I went over to a campus crusade for Christ at university of southern California last night and I thought about something when the speaker Greg was talking about Zacheous.

Why is it that Jesus wanted to be with Zacheous. His name and this story comes up a lot when referring to the poor, since after his encounter with Jesus he gives half his possessions to the poor and repays several times more than what he took from them. But I questioned for the first time Jesus' reasoning for having a meal with Zacheous.

This past Monday for class we were given 20 bucks and headed down to skid row in groups of two to take a homeless person out to lunch and have a conversation with them. Not evangelize just hang out and learn about them. Later many of us came back to the group not discouraged because we all felt touched by the end of it, but surprised. Most of them would not accept the meal, some wouldn’t come with us to go eat and we got the feeling they distrusted us. And most were friendly one said "no I’m trying to lose weight" and then demonstrated by standing up and showing us her pants were kind of tight and one even said sure she'd tag along but when given a menu simply ordered a drink and said she wasn’t all that hungry. And one lady who didnt want to eat sat around talking to us about the cats she was helping out for a while, then when we had to leave she told us "make sure you head over to the shelter and help out those poor cats, you know it costs 12 dollars a day to feed em dont cha?"

Here’s where my questions began. Why do we expect them to trust us just because they are homeless? If a stranger came up to me on the street and asked me to go to lunch I'm not sure I'd go either. Is it because we think they are desperate? Do we have a mentality that they are like an animal and will come around if we have food? Now for curbing comments sake, of course many people accepted and I think we still should try to help feed the homeless, they are indeed in need of it. But I was struck by the things I just mentioned.

Back to Jesus. Why do we complain out "big oppressive evil corporation powers" and then turn to the poor for results. Its like if your car is leaking oil, you can keep putting it in day after day or you can go get the leak fixed. Now of course if you don’t keep putting it in on the way to the garage that’s not good either. So I see a need for and encourage people to take care of the poor, but while we are doing so we must be working to get the leak fixed. Now we see time and again the bible old and new testament and Jesus helping the poor but notice when Jesus comes across this system he goes straight to the source. He seeks out Zacheous and has a meal with him, not with the poor.

What if instead of taking a homeless man out to lunch, we took a politician or a company executive to lunch? Crazy I know, most will turn you down, but I’m sure some would do it and if you pester someone long enough or sound professional enough they will eventually give in. Wouldn’t that be humbling to be so rich and powerful and think you have everything and then have some college kid, or high school kid or however old you are pay for your lunch? Would it be humbling enough? Could you be compelling enough for them to give half of their possessions to the poor? Jesus did it. And Paul tells us that "through Christ all things are possible."



On another note, Greg read a quote that I though was awesome and thot inspiring:

"I know men; and I tell you that Jesus Christ is not a man. Superficial minds see a resemblance between Christ and the founders of empires, and the gods of other religions. That resemblance does not exist. There is between Christianity and whatever other religions the distance of infinity..." So says Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821), emperor of France.

Napoleon expressed the following thoughts while he was exiled on the rock of St. Helena. There, the conqueror of civilized Europe had time to reflect on the measure of his accomplishments. He called Count Montholon to his side and asked him, "Can you tell me who Jesus Christ was?" The count declined to respond. Napoleon countered: "Well then, I will tell you. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne and I myself have founded great empires; but upon what did these creations of our genius depend? Upon force. Jesus alone founded His empire upon love, and to this very day millions will die for Him. . . . I think I understand something of human nature; and I tell you, all these were men, and I am a man; none else is like Him: Jesus Christ was more than a man. . . . I have inspired multitudes with such an enthusiastic devotion that they would have died for me . . . but to do this is was necessary that I should be visibly present with the electric influence of my looks, my words, of my voice. When I saw men and spoke to them, I lightened up the flame of self-devotion in their hearts. . . . Christ alone has succeeded in so raising the mind of man toward the unseen, that it becomes insensible to the barriers of time and space. Across a chasm of eighteen hundred years, Jesus Christ makes a demand which is beyond all others difficult to satisfy; He asks for that which a philosopher may often seek in vain at the hands of his friends, or a father of his children, or a bride of her spouse, or a man of his brother. He asks for the human heart; He will have it entirely to Himself. He demands it unconditionally; and forthwith His demand is granted. Wonderful! In defiance of time and space, the soul of man, with all its powers and faculties, becomes an annexation to the empire of Christ. All who sincerely believe in Him, experience that remarkable, supernatural love toward Him. This phenomenon is unaccountable; it is altogether beyond the scope of man's creative powers. Time, the great destroyer, is powerless to extinguish this sacred flame; time can neither exhaust its strength nor put a limit to its range. This is it, which strikes me most; I have often thought of it. This it is which proves to me quite convincingly the Divinity of Jesus Christ."