John Shearman's Lectionary

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Twenty-Third Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 27 Ordinary 32
November 8, 2009

RUTH 3:1-5; 4:13-17. The climax to the story comes through a clever plan by Ruth’s mother-in-law, Naomi, to provide Ruth with security by marrying her kinsman, Boaz. Behind this plan lay the ancient Israelite custom of the nearest relative having responsibility for a widow’s care. The child of Ruth and Boaz became the crowning glory of the whole story: he was the grandfather of King David.

PSALM 127. This is another of the Songs of Ascent which may have been sung by pilgrims approaching the temple for one of the great festivals. It celebrates the virtues of strong family life as the basis for national security.

I KINGS 17:8-16. (Alternate) The miracle of the widow’s cruse that did not fail is one of the great stories of the OT. It points to a cardinal doctrine of Israel’s faith tradition: the providence of God under the most extreme circumstances. This doctrine finds expression in concern for one’s family and neighbours implicit in the latter six of the Ten Commandments and the Deuteronomic Law of love for neighbours which Jesus quoted.

PSALM 146. (Alternate) This is the first of the five Hallel Psalms which form the final praises of the Psalter. All are obviously for congregational liturgical use, but this one at least finds it inspiration in individual experience. A faithful Israelite has learned how he had benefited from the eternal goodness of God rather than from occasional favors of powerful princes.

HEBREWS 9:24-28. Reiterating the supremacy of Christ as the only true mediator between God and humanity, this passage points out how the self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ differs from the Hebrew sacrificial tradition. Instead of repeated offerings, the all-sufficient sacrifice of Jesus on the cross has eternal efficacy. The reading also cites the early Christian belief in the return of Christ when the salvation of all creation will be complete.

MARK 12:38-44. Approaching the temple, Jesus condemned the hypocrisy of the scribes who were experts in Jewish religious law. He emphasized the point by drawing attention to the sacrificial offering of a poor widow in contrast to the large donations of the wealthy and powerful. The incident declares a whole new principle for charitable giving which can be used as effectively today as ever. Christian stewardship is best measured not by how much we give, but how much we have left for personal use and discretionary spending.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.The central focus of the story is clearly stated in vs. 1. Ruth’s mother-in-law, Naomi, had devised a clever plan to provide Ruth with security by marrying her kinsman, Boaz. The barley harvest had arrived and Boaz was busy winnowing the grain. That ancient agricultural process involved throwing the reaped and threshed grain into the air on a windy day so that the wind would separate the grain from the chaff. In the Jewish tradition, this story is read on Shavu’ot (also called the Festival of Weeks or Pentecost) which celebrates the end of the barley harvest.

RUTH 3:1-5; 4:13-17.

Naomi’s scheme was for Ruth to wait until he had retired after his evening meal; then she was to seduce him in his bed. When he discovered Ruth during the night, Boaz dealt gently with her, advised her of a complication in taking care of her as both of them desired, and provided her with food as her cover for spending the night with him. Behind this plan lay the ancient Israelite custom of levirate marriage. This required the nearest relative of a widow to redeem her by marriage. If the next of kin did not choose to do so, he still had the responsibility for a widow’s care. Boaz was not the closest relative of Ruth’s late husband, so he had to negotiate with her next of kin before he could marry her. That process is described in 4:1-16.

The climax to the story comes through the child of Ruth and Boaz: he was the grandfather of King David. But there is a curious twist in 4:16-17. When Naomi became the child’s nurse, the women of the neighbourhood thought the child was hers. Could this have been a subtle way of making the Moabite ancestry of David more acceptable to an Israelite audience?

PSALM 127. While there is no conclusive evidence that the Songs of Ascent (Pss. 120-134) were sung by pilgrims approaching the temple for one of the great festivals, this remains the most likely hypothesis for their collection as a set of liturgical hymns. Several of them are oriented toward the temple (Pss. 122; 125; 129; 134), while others do not have any particular reference to pilgrims. A late Mishnah tract speculates that they were sung by the Levites on the fifteen steps leading from the court of women to the court of Israel (for men only), but this has been regarded as unlikely by most scholars. More probably, they came from several sources and were redacted as a book of devotions for pilgrims.

Ps. 127 celebrates the virtues of strong family life as the basis for national security. It has several characteristics of other psalms in the Wisdom tradition. (Pss. 1; 49; 73 128). These show a concern for moral principles and practices of a secular nature which provide for the greatest possible happiness. This one expresses a strong interest in ordinary family life expressed in very humane terms, yet rooted in a humble piety. The opening couplet makes this very clear as does the very descriptive reference to marriage, sexuality and a large family in vss. 3-5. The mention of male progeny only reveals the typical male-dominant attitudes of the Jewish tradition where only men could be b’nai b’rith – sons of the covenant.

A very colourful set of images lies behind these same verses. A man’s sons came from the marriage of his youth (vs. 4). The greater the number, the better for him, as indicated by the vivid image of a warrior’s quiver full of arrows (vs. 5). In his old age, he took his place as an elder seated at the town gate debating and giving judgments with his contemporaries. He had his opponents, of course. Jewish men loved to argue minute details of the law. The fact that he had many sons gave greater strength to his arguments. His enemies knew that family loyalties had persuasive force. The threat of vengeance prevented them from shaming him.

1 KINGS 17:8-16. (Alternate) There are subtle aspects to this story which ignite the imagination. Elijah, the prophet of Yahweh, was ordered to leave Israel and go to Zarephath, a coastal town between Tyre and Sidon now identified as Sarafannd. Archeologists have discovered that this was an important centre for manufacturing clay pottery and glass. This was foreign territory where other gods were worshiped, more specifically local manifestations of Baal, a Semetic storm god.

Was this pilgrimage made to escape a famine? It would not have been unusual and a very creative inspiration to come to Elijah. His home at Tishbe was some distance to the southeast in Gilead, on the east side of the Jordan. Because of the mountains of Samaria, rainfall was sparse at best in that part of Israelite territory while on the seacoast there would have been greater likelihood of rainfall and better crops.

Was the prophet at the end of his own resources when he asked for succor from the widow whom he met at the gate? She was certainly at the end of her resources. There was no welfare for a widow in any ancient social system unless she could remarry or was redeemed by a relative of her late husband as in the story of Ruth. Was her young son disabled in some way so that she had been rejected for remarriage? She certainly was extremely depressed, even hopeless about her chances for survival (vs.12).

The miracle of the widow’s cruse that did not fail is one of the great stories of the OT. It points to a cardinal doctrine of Israel’s faith tradition: the providence of God under the most extreme circumstances. This doctrine finds expression in concern for one’s family and neighbors implicit in the latter six of the Ten Commandments and the Deuteronomic Law of love for neighbors which Jesus quoted. This social system was proclaimed most clearly in the many of the Psalms and the Prophets, as well as evident in the Torah and here in the histories.

There is a modern parallel for us who live in the rich First World. Our extremities are moral and spiritual in the midst of grave overindulgence in consumer goods while many in our own society and millions elsewhere perish in poverty. What we desperately need in the present global economy when the distance between the haves and the have-nots widens daily, is a penetrating sense of God’s providence for all. Such a conviction would enable us maintain a much more balanced economic system and freely to share our excessive abundance with those who have nothing. The widow’s last handful of meal and a little oil is a common situation in a number of places in the world today. Despite our present difficult economic circumstances we still have much to share and could do so without fear of depriving ourselves and with faith’s assurance of God’s providence.

PSALM 146. (Alternate) This is the first of the five Hallel Psalms which form the final praises of the Psalter. All are obviously for congregational liturgical use, but this one at least finds its inspiration in individual experience. A faithful Israelite has learned how he had benefited from the eternal goodness of God rather than from the ephemeral favors of powerful princes. Perhaps he has even suffered personal imprisonment and some visual impairment (vss.7b-8a). Or, as is more likely, he stands in the tradition of the great prophets who discovered the social justice inherent in the Mosaic covenant (vv.7-9).

The late Professor W.R. Taylor, the exegete of the Psalms in The Interpreter’s Bible, had this to say: “We need not ask whether his trust in some time of personal need, or whether he is warning some of his fellows against obsequiousness to temporal powers been shattered. Rather, the psalmist is dealing more generally with the fundamental contrast between God and men when it comes to dependence on them for resolving the basic problems of human society. So viewed, the psalm sets forth its own way of truth which needs fresh emphasis in an era characterized by secular trends in culture and taste.” (IV, 745)

There is music in all of these Hallel Pslams, but the music is that of poetry cast in the characteristic Hebraic style of parallelism and in the sound of the very earliest musical instrument, the human voice. This musical element could be greatly enhanced by antiphonal reading or chanting by clergy and choir, or in the more traditional metrical version by Isaac Watts adapted by John Wesley to the tune “Old 113th” included in the hymnal of The United Church of Canada, Voices United, No. 867.

HEBREWS 9:24-28. Like so much else in the Letter to the Hebrews, this passage exhibits an extensive knowledge of Jewish sacrificial practice. The liturgy of the Day of Atonement is the central focus here. This was the one occasion in the whole year that the chief priest could enter the holy of holies, the most sacred shrine of Israel symbolic of the invisible presence of Yahweh. There he would perform three distinct sacrificial acts to atone for sin.

The first rite used incense and smoking coals to purify the shrine so that the high priest himself might be safe from the divine mystery. After prayer in the large main room of the temple, the high priest returned to the holy of holies to sprinkle the blood of a slain bull as atonement for all the priests. Finally, after slaughtering a scapegoat chosen by lot from one of two victims, the high priest entered the inner shrine a third time to offer its blood on behalf of the people. The second scapegoat was then driven out of the temple and city into the wilderness with a red ribbon tied around its neck. There it was pushed over a cliff to its death and a similar ribbon soaked red in the blood of the sacrificial victim was hung on the door of the sanctuary. The ribbon would be bleached white in the sun as a sign that the sins of the people were forgiven.

Reiterating the supremacy of Christ as the only true mediator between God and humanity, this passage points out how Christian faith and practice differs from the Hebrew sacrificial tradition. Instead of repeated offerings, the one, all-sufficient self-sacrifice of Jesus on the cross had eternal effectiveness. The writer enumerates the differences: (1) The sanctuary Christ entered after his resurrection was heaven itself (i.e. the real presence of God), not a temple built with human hands which supposedly was a copy of the heavenly dwelling of God (vs. 24). (2) Jesus did not offer himself again and again, as in the annual ritual as did the high priest (vs. 25). (3) He offered a single sacrifice, once for all (vs. 26). (4) Having died once bearing the sins of all people, as all mortals die who then face judgment, he will return, not to judge sin, but to save those who in faith eagerly await him (vss. 27-28).

By citing the belief in the return of Christ when salvation of all creation will be complete, this passage draws the indelible boundary of discontinuity between the Christian and Jewish messianic traditions. For Christians, Jesus is the Messiah/Christ. He came, lived and died, as do all humans. But his death was different. Not only did he lay down his life voluntarily to atone for the sins of all people, he will come again to bring them to eternal life in the presence of the eternal God. As Messiah/Christ, he is both high priest and victim, and as such his death on the cross is the divinely appointed means of atonement between God and humanity.

There is only one thing more for the author to add. It is by faith in what Jesus has done by his all-sufficient sacrifice that Christians must live and die. This final thought occupies the author for the remainder of the letter.

Some significance may also be given to the possible historical setting for this letter as an alternative to the traditional scholarly view that it was written for Jewish Christians struggling with the destruction of the temple and their expulsion from Jerusalem. A relatively new hypothesis holds that it was written for a Jewish community struggling with their difficult situation prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. The priesthood was already in serious decline and there was competition within Judaism from many sects, especially the Essene movement which may have been centered at Qumran close to the Dead Sea. That sect looked for an eschatological, end of history era when there would be a royal and a priestly messiah, both subordinate to the archangel Michael. Qumran literature also associated Michael with Melchizedek.

A Jewish scholar, Yigael Yadin, argued that this is the background of the Letter to the Hebrews. Some Jewish Christians may well have been attracted to the Essene movement or were former Essenes tempted to turn back to this sectarian belief. The letter could have been written to counter this compromise to the perfection of their salvation in Jesus Christ.

MARK 12:38-44. Jesus’ pilgrimage to Jerusalem was over. While teaching in the temple precincts, he condemned the hypocrisy of the scribes who were expert interpreters of religious law. This was a very controversial thing for him to do. Undoubtedly rabbis abounded in Jerusalem as did scribes. In Jesus’ time both were important members of the religious and political establishment of Israel. Although highly literate, scribes were much more than mere copyists who transmitted the law on written scrolls. They did not create new law, they merely interpreted both ancient and contemporary understandings of what was written in the Torah. They were also well trained for their task. Frequently, they acted as legal counselors to the priests and to the Pharisees. The gospel narratives usually link the three distinctive groups – high priests, scribes and the lesser priests known as Levites – in uncomplimentary ways. This may have been due more to the bias of the Christian community after the destruction of the temple by the Romans in 70 CE.

Many establishment people other than the priests would have consulted them so as to remain within the religious and moral boundaries set by the law. Transcribing the Torah, for which they may also have been responsible, allowed the scribes considerable room for fudging literal interpretations of the ancient texts. Apparently this had made some of the scribes very rich. Jesus forthrightly condemned their hypocrisy. Note what he criticized most severely: their fine robes; their proud appearance in public, possibly to encourage business; their way of seeking the best seats on the synagogues because being seen was also good for business; their cunning deceit of the most vulnerable to gain control of widows’ property; and their ostentatiously long prayers to display their piety. One is reminded of the public appearances, photo-opportunities and television interviews modern politicians seek as the time for elections comes around.

Mark tells us that Jesus re-emphasized the point he had made about hypocrisy by drawing attention to the sacrificial offering of a poor widow in contrast to the large donations of the wealthy. Every one who entered the temple had to pay temple tithes and taxes. This passage indicates how people made voluntary gifts to the temple treasury, possibly something like a poor box. The collection of Jewish oral law and interpretations known as the Mishnah compiled in the 2nd century CE described a trumpet-shaped vessel atop a chest in the Court of Women into which these monies were cast. Some gave substantial amounts; the poor widow had little to give, but gave what she had nonetheless. Mark did not explain how Jesus knew about her financial status. Perhaps it was no more than her ragged appearance in contrast to the fine clothes of the rich that gave him the clue.

This incident declares a whole new principle for charitable giving which can be as effective today as ever. Good stewardship is best measured not by how much we give, but how much we have left for personal use and discretionary spending. A recent newspaper report told of a Jewish businessman, presumed by many to be very wealthy, but who died leaving a relatively small estate. It soon became public that for years he had engaged his rabbi in helping him direct his fortune to those most needing help in one way or another. He had given his wealth away. This was the kind of private stewardship Jesus authenticated in this pericope. It could well be the guiding principle for all of us as well as for governments to raise and invest public taxation only for the common good and not just in the pursuit of political power.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Twenty Second Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 26 Ordinary 31
November 1, 2009

RUTH 1:1-18. The delightful short story of Ruth has an unusual place in the Old Testament. It is a beautiful folk tale which became a moral tract about welcoming foreigners as one of the people of God and ancestor of Israel’s greatest king. The hidden theology of the story assures us of the working out of God’s purpose in human affairs, desperate as the times may seem.

(Please Note: The Revised Common Lectionary assigns these readings for Proper 26, Ordinary 31, The Twenty Second Sunday After Pentecost. Many congregations will use the readings for All Saints Day, November 1, 2009.)

PSALM 146. This is the first of the final five psalms often referred to as the Hallel Psalms because they all begin with the Hebrew words for “Praise the Lord.” It recites a number of reasons for trust in God.
DEUTERONOMY 6:1-9. (Alternate) This passage states the unequivocal standard of orthodoxy of the Jewish religious tradition as defined in the years after the return from the Babylonian exile. It has remained so for the past two thousand five hundred years. The Shema (vss. 4-5) states in as few words as possible the essence of that faith. It was so for Jesus too and formed the first of his two great commandments.

PSALM 119:1-8. (Alternate) The whole psalm was written in the form of an acrostic, each verse of each section beginning with the same letter of the Hebrew alphabet. In this section, for instance, each verse begins with Aleph, corresponding to our A. The whole psalm is a celebration of the glories of the Law of Moses.

HEBREWS 9:11-14. This brief reading presents another in a long series of arguments for regarding Jesus Christ as the one mediator between humanity and God. It declares the supreme efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross in contrast to the repeated sprinkling of the blood of animal sacrifices on the temple altar customary in the Hebrew tradition.

MARK 12:38-34. Having arrived in Jerusalem, Jesus confronts strong opposition to his teaching. Unlike Luke who added the parable of the Good Samaritan to this incident, Mark merely used it to summarize the whole of the Jewish law in two brief commandments. In one sentence Jesus offered his challenger the key to entering God’s kingdom: to love God and neighbour as oneself. No one has ever devised a better way to live in the real world. As someone had rightly said, it isn’t that we don’t know how, it is rather a matter of doing it faithfully all the time in all our relationships.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.The delightful short story of Ruth has an unusual place in the Old Testament. Several different hypotheses have been proposed as to its origin and purpose, none of them entirely satisfactory. It may have been a simple folk tale from a specific community frequently repeated by a professional storyteller. It may have had such a humble beginning, but was intentionally rewritten at the royal court to emphasizes its royal significance. Its origin may have been during the 5th or 4th centuries BCE to offset the dissolution of mixed marriages mandated by the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Or it may have been a tract designed to promote the Moabite ancestry of David.

RUTH 1:1-18.

Whatever its original purpose, it is almost unique in the whole of the Old Testament as a complete narrative, paralleled only by the Joseph narratives in Genesis 37-50 and perhaps The Book of Jonah. It also shares with the latter a sense of universalism reminiscent of the late prophetic period most fully evident in Isaiah 40-66.

The hidden theology of the story assures us of the working out of God’s redemptive purpose in human affairs, desperate as the times may seem. Yet providence is not without human intervention in the person of Naomi who directs most of the action in keeping with the traditional custom of levirate marriage. This custom required the closest male relative to provide support for widows in his extended family, usually through marrying the widow himself (Deut. 25:5-10). Ruth’s sexual assertiveness may or may not have been common in Israel, but even that aspect of the story asserts the intent of the story to point to the very human ways of furthering the divine purpose (3:7-13).

Another, more obvious theme of the story is the preference of genuine human kindness over conventional duty. This finds expression through Naomi’s careful scheme for Ruth to marry Boaz and his acceptance of it despite the difficulties he faced in not being her closest kin.

That the story was carefully composed or revised as a literary document can be seen in the poesy of the responses of Ruth (1:16-17) and Naomi (1:20-21) to specific situations. In the first instance, Ruth rejects Naomi’s urging that she return to her people and her gods with her sister-in-law, Orpah. While it cannot be scanned in the traditional Hebrew form, it does feature the parallelism of ideas typical of Hebrew poetry and quite evident in the English versions. These words are often quoted as the supreme example of human devotion. It has been used occasionally in marriage ceremonies, but if spoken only by the bride the words express both sentimentality and sexist attitudes no longer acceptable in contemporary Christian liturgy.

Another hidden theological facet of the story can be recognized in the transition from traditional henotheism in vs. 15 where god, land and people are inseparable, to the monotheism of vs. 16. In the Hebrew text, Ruth does not used the word for God (el or elohim as would be expected of foreigners, but Yahweh. In so doing the author indicates that this foreigner worships the one true God.

While commonly placed between Judges and Samuel in the Christian canon, the book has a place of special liturgical significance in the Hebrew canon. It is first among five small festival scrolls immediately after Proverbs. Ruth is read in its entirety at Pentecost (Shavu’ot or Feast of Weeks) marking the time of the barley harvest (Ruth 1:22), Ruth’s acceptance of Judaism (1:16), the tradition of David’s birth and death at this time, and Israel’s acceptance of the Torah at Sinai seven weeks after the Passover and Exodus. The others include in this collection of megillot are, in canonical order, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations and Esther. Like Ruth, each is read at a particular festival in the liturgical calendar of Judaism.

PSALM 146. This is the first of the final five psalms often referred to as the Hallel Psalms because they all begin with the Hebrew words for “Praise the Lord” (Hallelujah). While the other four Hallels were clearly composed as congregational psalms, this one has a more personal sense of devotion. It contrasts the different capabilities of Yahweh and humans to provide help in desperate circumstances. As such, it appears as a reaction of the religiously oriented to an increasingly secular attitude to life. Thus, in a modern context, it has considerable relevance.

The psalmist recites a number of reasons for trust in Yahweh. Unlike political leaders who die and disappear, Yahweh is eternal (vss. 3-4). As creator of all that is, Yahweh provides justice for the poor and oppressed (vss. 5-7). Yahweh frees the prisoners, gives the blind their sight, lifts up the fallen, loves the righteous, watches over strangers and supports widows and orphans (vss. 8-9). All these divine initiatives represent Yahweh’s eternal and universal sovereignty (vs. 10).

The Greek OT (LXX) ascribed this psalm to Haggai and Zechariah, two minor prophets who lived in the late 6th century BCE. Proposals for a much later date has greater internal force because of the number of Aramaic words, its debt to other psalms known to be late, and the influence of the didactic style of the wisdom school. Furthermore, it is not God’s majesty or interventions in history, but a sense of social justice similar to that of the great prophets which moves the poet to praise Yahweh. This motif found expression in relatively few psalms, (e.g. Pss. 10, 15, 24, 37, 94, 103).

DEUTERONOMY 6:1-9. (Alternate) This passage states the unequivocal standard of orthodoxy of the Jewish religious tradition as defined in the years after the return from the Babylonian exile. It has remained so for the past two thousand five hundred years. The Shema (vss. 4-5) states in as few words as possible the essence of that tradition. It was so for Jesus too and formed the first of his two great commandments.

Nowhere in the OT does the rhetoric of the Deuteronomists reach greater ethical heights. The purpose of the passage is to set before Israel in the post-exilic period exactly what Yahweh requires of them. Could this have been in deliberate contrast to Micah 6:6-8? Scholars have pointed out that the word English translators consistently define as “commandment” (not plural as per the KJV) actually means “charge.” The purpose for this charge follows immediately (vs. 2-3): to possess the promised land; for every succeeding generation to fear the Lord; to have a long life; to increase the Israelite population.

It would appear that this charge reflects the post-exilic period (late 6th century BCE) as much as, if not more than, the time of the Exodus and invasion of Canaan (12th century BCE). The purely Israelite ethnic population had been depleted by the exile and by intermarriage with the other tribes who had replaced the exiles. The destruction of the temple in 586 BCE had drastically reduced the religious purity of the people who had barely become accustomed to centralizing process of Josiah’s reformation (circa 621 BCE). With the temple priesthood in exile and the Temple in Jerusalem in ruins, the rural sanctuaries of Bethel, Shechem, Anathoth, etc., which had been centres of popular tribal traditions, may well have become centres of folk religion again. In the more rigid ritualism of the post-exilic period, it was more important to purify these trends so that the people of Israel truly believed in and worshiped the one true God in the national sanctuary in Jerusalem.

PSALM 119:1-8. (Alternate) The whole psalm was written in the form of an acrostic, each verse of each section beginning with the same letter of the Hebrew alphabet. In this section, for instance, each verse begins with Aleph, corresponding to our A. As a whole psalm, the psalm celebrates the glories of the Law as given to Moses.

The acrostic system of poetic composition had a double purpose: educational and magical. Behind this form lay the belief in the magical power of letters and numbers. To the illiterate, written language gave the literate person a significant power advantage, as is still evident in the many treaties imposed upon indigenous people in North America and elsewhere during the days of early settlement by Europeans.

Several psalms and other Hebrew scriptures adopted the form as a means to aid memory in recitation and to fully express the central idea of the poem. (Pss. 9-10; 25; 34; 37; 111; 112; 145. See also Prov. 31:10-31; Lamentations 1-4.) One might also add a liturgical purpose to this highly structured poetic form. The supreme example is unquestionably Psalm 119 where each of the 176 verses of the 22 sections or strophes all address or refer to God. The effect is that of a litany, as in the instance of Ps. 119, in praise of the law.

In vss. 1-8, each begins with the letter Aleph. Also noteworthy are the several synonyms for the law: testimonies (vs. 2); ways (vs. 3); precepts (vs. 4); statutes (vs. 5) commandments (vs. 6); word (vs. 8). These are repeated again and again throughout the whole psalm. Nowhere is there any reference to the temple, its liturgies or other Jewish ritual. The author thought only of the law as the truth from God and his rule of life and ground for hope.

HEBREWS 9:11-14. This brief reading presents another in a long series of arguments for regarding Jesus Christ as the one mediator between humanity and God. It declares the supreme efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross in contrast to the repeated sprinkling of the blood of animal sacrifices on the temple altar customary in the Hebrew tradition.

From the internal evidence of this letter, some scholars have concluded that the audience for this whole argument were Jewish Christians who may have been in danger of reverting to Judaism from their recently acquired Christian faith. Others have proposed that these new Christians were not necessarily Jews, but were also in danger of falling away from their earlier confession under the threat of persecution. The historical-critical data suggests that while no one key to its interpretation has been found, the background of the document may have been some form of Hellenistic religious speculation.

Brevard Childs describes it as “a word of encouragement” based on 13:22. (The New Testament as Canon, Fortress Press, 1984, 404) On the other hand, for Childs, the reception of the document by the Christian community was the chief factor in its inclusion the canon. According to Childs, the letter presents a “programmatic statement of the theological relation of the two covenants which receives its content from scripture and not from its historical setting.”

In an excellent commentary by Frances Taylor Gench expresses the view that the recipients of the letter were Christians of the Jewish Diaspora familiar with the scripture and traditions of Hellenistic Judaism in urban centres of the Greek-speaking world. The only clue to the whereabouts of the unknown author is in 13:24 “Those from Italy send you greetings.” (Hebrews and James. Westminster Bible Companion, Westminster JohnKnox Press, 1996) Gench follows William Johnson in describing the book as a series of sermons that alternate between exhortations and applications designed to apply theological insights to practical pastoral situations.

This lectionary reading gives ample support to this conclusion. In these few verses, the author is saying that atonement for sin, the abolishing of guilt, reconciliation with God and sanctification for a new and holy life came through the sacrifice of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer. This is a standard approach to exhortation found in many of the Pauline letters, notably Corinthians and Galatians. We may never be able to penetrate behind this rhetorical situation to determine the historical situation out of which the letter arose.

The author had an intimate knowledge of the Hebrew scriptures and of the continuity of the Christian faith with those scriptures. He or she was particularly responsive to the prophetic element in the OT which emphasized the spiritual reality that the living God speaks both judgment and mercy to people with whom God had made an eternal covenant. God’s purpose was to create a faithful people within a renewed creation. This God had accomplished through Jesus Christ, God’s Son, who offered himself as the all-sufficient sacrifice on the cross instead of the repeated sacrifices of the old covenantal system. The task of the Christian believer in this new covenant, therefore, was to accept in faith this new relationship with the living God and to live out this relationship with purified conscience and grateful worship and service in the ordinary round of daily life.

MARK 12:28-34. His traveling days done, Jesus has arrived in Jerusalem and confronts strong opposition to his teaching. Unlike Luke who added the parable of the Good Samaritan to this incident, Mark merely used it to summarize the whole of the Jewish law in two brief commandments. The first commandment is the traditional Shema from Deuteronomy 6:4. This has been described as “the central confession and self-definition of Israelite belief.” (The Complete Gospels, Robert J. Miller, ed., 43n) The scribe’s response shows how much this expert in the Jewish Law felt at ease with Jesus’ teaching at this point.

The second commandment is from a more obscure passage in Leviticus 19:18. There it appears at the end of a long sequence of ritual and moral dictates of the Holiness Code coupled with the prophetic refrain given as its divine warrant, “I am the Lord.” In its Levitical context the commandment has the effect of countering vengeance within one’s own extended family or tribe. It is probable that this did not extend to those of another tribe, as many of the OT narratives show. Was that how Jesus understood it too? Or Mark? Or Paul (cf. Gal. 5:14? Or James (cf. Jas. 2:8)? If Mark, Paul and James are representatives of the earliest apostolic tradition as they had received and created it from remembered sayings of Jesus himself, it is obvious that they recognized a much wider scope for this commandment that did the framers of the Holiness Code of Leviticus. With these commandments, Jesus offered this expert in casuistry so common in the interpretation of the Law the key to entering God’s kingdom he had come to establish.

One might well ask what “Lordship” and “kingdom” meant to Jesus as he approached the cross. We can only speculate on such topics because we read his sayings through the prism of the early Christian community as they sought to clarify the continuity and discontinuity of the Old and New Covenants. We can believe, however, that if he was fully human he made no claims for himself as Lord and perhaps did not fully realize until Gethsemane that the sovereignty of God in his and all human life would involve his own death at the hands of his enemies.

Many scholars do not believe that Jesus was omniscient and could predict the future course of events. He did, however, have great moral perception into the events of his time were trending. His perception of his own mandate may not have extended beyond that ascribed to him by the scribe in this instance, “Teacher.” Possibly this went no further than the traditional wisdom teacher of the previous few centuries. Is there some inkling of that in the way Mark tells how Jesus reacted (vs. 34) to the scribe’s approbation and praise in vss. 32-33? Does this come to the fore in the fact that whereas Mark had several times previously quoted Jesus teaching about his death, he made no mention whatsoever about the cross at this place in his narrative?

So clear and memorable in their brevity, no one has ever devised a better way to live in the real world than by following these two commandments. As someone had rightly said, it isn’t that we don’t know how, it is rather a matter of doing what we do know faithfully all the time in all our relationships. Without entering into Christological debate so divisive within our own tradition, we can speak of these commandments in terms similar to the late Wilfrid Cantwell Smith, renowned Canadian scholar of world religions. When these commandments are faithfully implemented in human affairs, and especially between the members of different religious traditions, the love of God revealed in Jesus would also be disclosed in the historical traditions of others.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
All Saints Day
November 1, 2009


WISDOM OF SOLOMON 3:1-9. Many congregations will find this passage from the Apocryphal Book of Wisdom as a canticle in their hymn books. It is often read at memorial services because of the comforting message it conveys. In some respects it speculates about trials after death, but also presents a view of the righteous ultimately being found worthy to be in God’s eternal presence.

(Please Note: The Revised Common LectiOnary assigns these reading for All Saints Day which falls this year on the Twenty Second Sunday after Pentecost. Some congregations may wish to use those posted separately for this Sunday.)

ISAIAH 25:6-9. (Alternate) The banquet theme described here has antecedents in the literature of several other religious traditions and echoes through several New Testament passages. The uniqueness of this poetic excerpt from Hebrew prophecy rests in its expectation that all peoples will be included at the Lord’s table and all suffering will cease. Jesus practiced eating with outsiders as a symbol of the way things will be in God’s realm.

PSALM 24. This psalm celebrates two crucial elements of Israel’s religious tradition: the whole creation as the possession of God alone and the temple as the visible symbol of God’s presence within creation.

REVELATION 21:1-6. John has a vision of the whole of creation redeemed and renewed. This is what awaits the faithful and thus makes those bitter experiences of persecution endurable.

Many Old Testament references colour this vision – the creation, the city, the bride. Perhaps the most important insight of the passage is that “now God’s dwelling is among mortals.” (vs. 3) This reaffirms Jesus as God’s human representative coming into the world for the single purpose of redeeming the world and reconciling humanity and all creation to God’s original purpose.

JOHN 11:32-44. The passage contains the heart of the story of the raising of Lazarus. It is the sixth of seven signs John gives to prove that Jesus is the Messiah/Christ, Son of God, and that through faith in him believers receive eternal life. Even as the event reveals Jesus’ divine power over death itself, it also shows him as a wonderfully sensitive human being.
The story, which may be a midrash or interpretative story, is also John’s reflection on the significance of the resurrection. Because in John’s view Jesus is fully human and fully divine, life and death are his gifts to give.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS. Written in Greek about 100 BCE, The Wisdom of Solomon (or simply, The Book of Wisdom) was not included in the Bibles commonly used by the Protestant Bibles because it was not included in the Jewish canon. On the other hand, in making up the canon for his Latin Vulgate translation, Jerome did include it after the Song of Songs. Hence it came into use in both the Roman Catholic and most Orthodox Churches. Its content has more affinity with Greek philosophy, literature and science of its time than the Hebrew scriptures. There are no quotations from it in the New Testament, although it does allude to the Hebrew scriptures, especially the Psalms and Isaiah, but in their Greek text from the Septuagint.

WISDOM OF SOLOMON 3:1-9.

Many congregations will find this passage from the Apocryphal Book of Wisdom as a canticle in their hymn books. For example, Voices United, published by The United Church of Canada, has it as #890. This passage is often read in memorial services because of the comforting message it conveys. In some respects, it speculates about trials after death, but presents a view of the righteous ultimately being found worthy to be in God’s eternal presence.

Contrary to Christian faith and modern science, the first few sentences seem to deny the reality of death for the souls of righteous humans. This is closer to the Greek concept of the immortality of the soul, an entity distinct from the human body, which found religious expression the Gnostic heresies of 2nd and 3rd centuries CE. Christian faith in life beyond death is rooted in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, not immortality. No one has yet clarified how that element of our human nature we know as spiritual consciousness experiences resurrection. Some progressive research in the field of psycho-neurology is beginning to throw some light on the experience.

The second set of sentences in this canticle presents an element not recognized by Protestant traditions. In Roman Catholic teaching, Purgatory is “a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God’s grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions.” (Catholic Encyclopedia) This doctrine appears to be very similar to the text from Wisdom. However, the text does leave the final outcome to God as to who shall be ultimately redeemed.

There are several images drawn from the liturgies of the temple. Souls are tested in a golden crucible. The element of sacrifice finds expression in the text as well, likening the souls of the righteous to a burnt offering on the altar which will burst into flame again in God’s presence. Prophetic images of judgment and ruling over the nations also enlighten the text. But the basic religious emphasis is on trust that in God’s grace and mercy the faithful are the chosen ones, or in popular parlance, “the saints.” This is not the NT view. The saints are all God’s people who remain faithful throughout the most difficult times, even persecution and undeserved death.

ISAIAH 25:6-9. Those who do not wish to wrestle with the alternative views of the canticle from Wisdom, have this passage from a special section of Isaiah as the Old Testament reading. Isaiah 24-27 is generally regarded as an eschatalogical collection of prophecy, psalms and prayers dating from the post-exilic period. Similar eschatsalogical appendices were added to the prophecies of Amos, Micah, Zephaniah, Zechariah, Joel and Obadiah.

The banquet theme of this passage has both antecedents in the literature of other religious traditions and echoes in several New Testament passages. The uniqueness of this poetic excerpt from Hebrew prophecy rests in its expectation that all peoples will be included at the Lord’s banquet table and all suffering will cease. Jesus practiced eating with outsiders as a symbol of the way things will be in God’s realm.

The idea that Yahweh will triumph over his enemies is a common OT theme, but the victory over death and pain does take on a deeper meaning. When the passage in again quoted in Revelation 21:4, it was in the light of a new certainty of faith in the resurrection of Christ. The same passage is also referenced in Paul triumphant shout, “O death where is thy sting; O grave where in thy victory.” (1 Cor. 15:54).

PSALM 24. This psalm celebrates two crucial elements of Israel’s religious tradition: the whole creation as the possession of Yahweh alone and the temple as the visible symbol of God’s presence within creation. Although attributed to David in the superscription, it comes from a much later date as evidenced by the references to the temple (vs. 3). Similarly the cosmology of creation is typical of the ancient world-view which saw our plant Earth set in a three tiered universe with heaven above, the place of the dead (Sheol or Hell) below. Modern science following the discoveries of Copernicus, Galileo and Newton have shown that this is not the universe as we know it today.

It would appear that the psalm had liturgical origin and was sung in a procession on some festival occasion. Late Jewish sources regard it as a hymn for the New Year festival when Yahweh’s work of creation was commemorated and the sovereignty of Yahweh over all creation celebrated. There is also a strong element of holiness in vss. 3-6. Ritual purity had special meaning for entrance into the temple because the sacred precincts were regarded as the place where Yahweh dwelt.

The antiphonal song of vss. 7-9 again emphasizes the entrance of Yahweh into the holy place. The gates of the temple are personified and responsive to the approaching worshipers represented by the holy people of Yahweh. Yet the identification of Yahweh and the people of Israel is not altogether complete. Hence the question, “Who is the King of glory?” The poetic image used in answering this question (vs. 8) is that of a victorious monarch leading his triumphant army home. One commentator has suggested that this may have been the point in the procession where the ark or some other symbol of divine presence moved into the temple.

In Jewish history, the temple was the last stronghold to fall to an invading enemy. Its few remaining stones in the Western Wall still form the centre of Jewish religious devotion. In the Scottish Protestant tradition, the antiphonal verses were sung to the tune of St. George’s, Edinburgh, at the evening service in many churches on Communion Sunday.

REVELATION 21:1-6. John has a vision of the whole of creation redeemed and renewed at the end of history. This is what awaits the faithful and thus makes those bitter experiences of persecution endurable.

Many Old Testament references colour this vision – the creation, the city, the bride. Perhaps the most important insight of the passage is that “now God’s dwelling is among mortals.” (vs. 3) This reaffirms Jesus as God’s human representative coming into the world for the single purpose of redeeming the world and reconciling humanity and all creation to God’s original purpose.

The late Principal George B. Caird, of Mansfield College, Oxford, wrote in his magisterial commentary on this passage, “In some ways this is the most important part of the book, as it is certainly the most familiar and beloved.” It is the promised answer to the plea of every martyr, “If only we knew where it is all going to end! Much of John’s vision, and much of the human history it depicts and interprets, becomes intelligible, credible, tolerable, when we know the answer. Here is the real source of John’s prophetic certainty.” (The Revelation of St. John the Divine. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1966.)

The image of the vanishing sea has great significance. It represents the ending of history in the same way that creation out of chaos began history when “the earth was a formless void and darkness was over the face of the deep.” (Gen. 1:1-2) The descent of the holy city, New Jerusalem, and the voice from heaven announcing its meaning, also represents a whole new order that is taking place. The distinction between heaven and earth disappears. No longer is heaven the dwelling of God and earth the dwelling of humans. Now God’s dwelling is with us. The Incarnation has reached its true end: Immanuel, God with us. (Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:23) As we have seen above, the bride from heaven are also a quotation from Isaiah 25:6-8.

The voice from the throne is, of course, the voice of God which was first heard at the very opening of John’s visions (Rev.1:8). All things are being made new; a complete transformation is taking place, not just in the seven churches to which John was commanded to write, but in all places of God’s dominion, God is forever making all things new. Paul had the same vision as voiced in 2 Cor. 3:18; 4:16-18; 5:16-17; Col.3:1-4. But John sees it on a cosmic scale whereas Paul saw it in the individual believer. As Caird put it: “Blind unbelief may see only the outer world, growing old in its depravity and doomed to vanish before the presence of holiness; but faith can see the hand of God in the shadows, refashioning the whole. The agonies of earth are but the birth-pangs of a new creation.”

God’s naming of the Alpha and the Omega do not mean that God is just at the beginning and the end, as the deist philosophy would have it, creating then allowing creation to run without intervention. God is the living God who confronts humanity at every step of the way. All that we have and are as humans within God’s creation, and above all our salvation, is the work of God from start to finish. God requires nothing of us but the openness of faith, a thirst for God to be satisfied with nothing less that the water of life.

JOHN 11:1-45. The story of the raising of Lazarus is the sixth of seven signs John gives to prove that Jesus is the Messiah Christ, Son of God, and that through faith in him believers receive eternal life. Hence, the telling of this miracle leads directly to the climax of the gospel story and the greatest sign of all – the resurrection. Throughout the gospel, John’s purpose had been to show that in all that Jesus of Nazareth said and did God was fully present, actively revealing and “glorifying” the redemptive power of God’s love. Of this not even Jesus’ closest friends were fully aware until after the resurrection.

As this story proceeds, Martha gradually becomes aware and believes. That is the significance of the interchange between Martha and Jesus resulting in another of the characteristic “I am …” proclamations found only in John’s Gospel (vs. 25), and Martha’s confession of faith (vs. 27). Yet even she, like countless others since, experiences a moment of real doubt when Jesus orders the tomb to be opened (vss. 39-40).

While the miracle of raising Lazarus from the grave shows Jesus’ divine power over death itself, it also shows him as a wonderfully sensitive human being. His love for Lazarus and his sisters is palpable. Martha’s and Mary’s accusation that Jesus’ presence would have averted Lazarus’ death tells how real their friendship was. So also did Jesus’ tears. All cultural aspects of ostentatious grief aside, the story represents the best of that special human quality of openly expressing their real feelings. This same quality also comes through in Martha’s revulsion at the stench of her brother’s decaying corpse.

Not to be overlooked, however, is the dramatic intensity building throughout John’s narrative. Martha’ s accusation (vss. 21) sets the stage for Jesus to declare, “I am the resurrection and the life,” and for Martha to confess her faith in him. When Mary repeats the accusation, Jesus uses it to reveal his very human feelings (vss. 33-38) and then perform the miracle.

By means of this miracle story, John is telling his own 1st century community and us that because Jesus is fully human and fully divine, life and death are his gifts to give. This too is the meaning of his resurrection and the basis of hope for ours. Yet nowhere in this passage is any attempt made to define what the resurrection life will be like.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Twenty First Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 25 Ordinary 30
October 25, 2009.
Job’s story ends with the old man acknowledging his humble status before God and repenting his hostility toward God for not giving him all the answers he sought to the problem of suffering. His fortunes are restored twofold when he prays for his friends.

PSALM 34:1-8. With an assurance that counters the angry doubt of Job, this psalm declares an almost absolute trust in God to provide all the answers to life’s great questions. The caveat remains, however, that only the righteous can have such a relationship with God. This was the message of all of Job’s friends too; and it brought him no comfort in his suffering.

JEREMIAH 31:7-9. (Alternate) This passage predicts the return of the exiles from Babylon, but that very promise raises the question as to its authenticity as a prophecy of Jeremiah. He lived during the beginning of the exile (586 BCE) but nowhere else promised a safe and joyful return.

JOB 42:1-6, 10-17.

PSALM 126. (Alternate) This psalm also celebrates the return of the exiles from Babylon as one of the great acts of God to Israel.

HEBREWS 7:23-28. Behind this passage stands the custom of the high priest of the Jews entering the holy of holies once a year on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) to offer an unblemished lamb to atone for the nation’s sins. The sacrifice offered by Jesus on the cross, once for all, removes the necessity of repeated sacrifices required under the older system. Jesus thus becomes both the eternal high priest and the perfect sacrifice.

MARK 10:46-52. The healing of the blind man in Jericho emphasizes the point that Mark has made throughout his gospel. Faith in Jesus not only gives the man back his sight, but a spiritual healing enabling him to follow him “on the way.” This could mean the way to Jerusalem and the cross; or it could also be interpreted as in later years and today as “the way of discipleship.” In Acts, the early church was described as “the followers of the way.” Since this was the last episode in Mark’s narrative before he began telling of the death of Jesus, we can presume that both meanings were fully intended. The discipleship of true faith is costly. That remains as much so today as it ever was.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS. This reading includes both the poetic and the narrative conclusions to the composite book. The omitted verses 7-9 provide a transition from one form to the other and show how different the two styles were.

JOB 42:1-6, 10-17.

In the poetic segment (vss. 1-6) Job acknowledges his humble status before Yahweh, but first confesses that Yahweh’s purpose cannot be thwarted. By repeating a slight variation of the opening words of Yahweh’s address (cf. 38:1-2), he repents his hostility toward Yahweh for not giving him all the answers he sought.

Vs.5 may well contain the supreme lesson of the whole book. Although its questions have never been answered by any of his friends nor by Yahweh, Job has nonetheless received spiritual insight. His friends, stand-ins for the Wisdom schools, had all touted the traditional wisdom and the ancient beliefs of their ancestors. Confronted by Yahweh in the magnificent theophany from the midst of the whirlwind (chs. 38-40), Job has perceived a new reality which he can only express in the metaphorical statement, “My eyes see you.” Faith is like that. It happens within each person as a whole new set of thoughts are shaped into an abiding conviction.

Recognizing that he has been in the presence of Yahweh, Job finally confesses his sinfulness. None of the polemic accusations of his friends could have brought him to this point. This says something significant to us about the way we preach. Is it ever right to accuse others of sinful behaviour in hopes of convicting them? Is it not the Holy Spirit alone who can convict us of sin? (cf. John 16:7-11) Without naming the Spirit, Job’s metaphor of seeing Yahweh makes this point.

Yahweh restores Job’s fortunes twofold when he prayed for his friends (vs. 10). Here again the concern for the other person rather than oneself clearly expressed in the prophetic literature comes to the fore. If Job’s friends represent the classical attitude of retributive justice, Job represents a radical revolt against such a harsh theological stance. So also concern for justice for the individual person plays a significant part in the theology of the book. As Professor R.B.Y. Scott so ably put it in his study of Wisdom literature, The Way of Wisdom (Macmillan, 1971. 164) , “The Book of Job tells us that the keystone of genuine morality and all true religion is personal integrity, not proud but humble, committed ultimately to truth and love and goodness in the faith that these are what sustain the universe.”

PSALM 34:1-8. With an assurance that counters the angry doubt of Job, this psalm declares an almost absolute trust in God to provide all the answers to life’s great questions. Emphasis placed on humility, however, (vs. 2) almost gets lost amid repeated summonses to praise (vss. 1, 3, 8) and reassurances that God does respond to prayer (vss. 4-6). Nonetheless, the caveat remains that only the righteous can have such a relationship with Yahweh. This was the message of all of Job’s friends too; and it brought him no comfort in his suffering.

Much could be made of the metaphors in vs. 6 and their representation of traditional OT views of how God intervenes within history. An angel encamped around those who fear Yahweh recalls the frequently used military name for Yahweh, “the Lord of hosts.” The epithet occurs no less than 267 times and was originally associated with the tribal confederacy at Shiloh (1 Sam. 3:1, 11). It variously referred to angelic bodies gathered in Yahweh’s name to defend Israel or to the army of Israel itself. “Fear of Yahweh” is often interpreted as reverence, but this is not credible in this instance. Coincidence with the militaristic terminology recalls the ancient narratives about Israel’s struggle to survive throughout the patriarchal period and the millennium before this psalm came into existence.

Although the superscript suggests that it was of Davidic origin, this is not so. The psalm belongs to a limited set using the acrostic format where each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet. This artificial form, described by one commentator as a fad, came into use late in the literary history of Israel. It was designed as a pedagogic tool to aid memorization or to give complete expression to an idea or emotion. No question can be raised about the religious fervor of the psalmist in using this poetic style. The superscript itself exemplifies an even later type of Hebrew interpretation. Christians have frequently made use of vs. 3 as a call to worship.

JEREMIAH 31:7-9. (Alternate) This passage predicts the return of the exiles from Babylon, and the wider Diaspora. That very promise raises the question as to its authenticity as a prophecy of Jeremiah. He lived during the beginning of the exile (586 BCE) but nowhere else promised a safe and joyful return of the Diaspora.

The similarity of this passage to the sayings of Deutero-Isaiah, the prophet of the exile, tends to confirm doubt that it is one of Jeremiah’s oracles. There are words and phrases found also in Isa. 40-66 which were not common to Jeremiah. (Cf. vss. 8-9 with Isa. 35:5-6; 40:11; 42:16; 43:6). One brief section of vs. 9c may be from Jeremiah, but not much else. (Cf. vs. 9c with 31:20; 3:19) One scholar has suggested that vs. 9c actually belongs with vs. 20, and probably part of a true Jeremiah poem (vss. 15-22).

In and of itself, however, the passage has a profound beauty to it that cannot be denied. It attributes the homecoming of the remnant of Israel to the mystery of divine salvation (vs. 8) and Yahweh’s unsurpassed kindness for the weak and marginalized.

PSALM 126. (Alternate) This psalm also celebrates the return of the exiles from Babylon as one of the great acts of God to Israel. It belongs to that special set known as “Songs of Ascent,” (Pss. 120-134) which may have been sung by pilgrims approaching the temple at various festivals.

It also shows some of the characteristics of a lament. Scholars suggest that it dates from a time late in the post-exilic period when the fortunes of Israel had been reversed from the golden expectations of return from Babylon (539 BCE). This fits the more difficult times when the Persian empire was breaking down and the Greek empire was on the rise, circa 5th 50 4th centuries BCE. The psalmist is consoled in such desperate times by memories of the joyful return and hopes that the tears of the present troubled times will water the seed of a future glad harvest. Indeed the psalm may have been adapted for liturgical use in a memorial pilgrimage that took place at one of the great festivals when members of Diaspora gathered to celebrate in the temple. John 7 tells of Jesus and his brothers observing such a festival in Jerusalem.

HEBREWS 7:23-28. This brief excerpt continues the author’s discourse about the supremacy of Christ as priestly mediator of a better covenant than that of the Levitical priesthood. Behind this passage stands the custom of the high priest of the Jews entering the holy of holies once a year on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) to offer the blood of an unblemished lamb to atone for the nation’s sins. The argument may seem distressingly complex for a modern audience, but presumably would have seemed quite cogent to those Jewish Christians familiar with their Jewish religious tradition and anxious about its relationship to their new faith.

Several points of reference to both the Jewish tradition and the passion of Christ begin in vss. 23 -24 by noting the temporary character of the Jewish priesthood in contrast to the permanence of the priesthood of Christ. The key to this discontinuity is the resurrection of Jesus Christ, although this is only indirectly stated in the final clause of vs. 24, “because he continues forever.” This immediately relates to Christ’s role as saviour and advocate with God as a result of his ascension (vs. 25).

The next phase of the argument develops around Christ’s suitability for the priestly office. He is unique in holiness, innocence and purity, all of which resulted in his having an exalted position in heaven due to his death, resurrection and ascension (vs. 26). Furthermore, the author’s exposition clarifies another crucial distinction between the Jewish tradition and the Christian faith. Whereas on the Day of Atonement the high priest of Judaism offered an annual sacrifice for his own and the sins of all Jews, Jesus offered himself on the cross, once for all, and thereby removed the necessity of repeated sacrifices required under the older system. Jesus thus became both the eternal high priest and the perfect sacrifice (vs. 27).

Finally in vs. 28, we have an even more obscure reference to “the word of oath (which) appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever.” Oaths had an important place in the life of the Jewish community. They invoked the deity to validate the reliability and permanence of particular relationships, be it a legal, economic or personal relationship. The most common form of oaths in the OT can be found in several passages in 1 Samuel, “As the Lord lives ….” In other words, Yahweh was called to witness that the relationship being sealed by the oath was valid. In NT times, the Qumran Community made prevalent use of oaths; but Jesus urged that they be completely omitted (Matt. 5:34; cf. Jas. 5:12). Paul, however, did use oaths in Gal. 1:20, 2 Cor. 1:23 and Phil. 1:8. It is probable that this statement in Heb. 7:28 refers to God’s validation of the Sonship of Jesus Christ. It was, after all, the story narrated in four gospels and the NT letters which reveal and attest who Jesus is and what God did through him. This is the central message of the Letter to the Hebrews too.

MARK 10:46-52. Mark’s Gospel consists not only of “the Jesus Story,” but also a narrative which described the essence of faithful discipleship for his audience, whoever they may have been. The healing of the blind man in Jericho emphasizes this point which Mark had been making throughout his gospel and will bring to its fulfilment in the Passion narrative he is about to begin.

Bartimaeus of Jericho stands as the last person to respond to Jesus before he began his final approach to Jerusalem and the cross. Since the declaration of his messiahship at Caesarea Philippi (8:29ff), Jesus had been making his way slowly south from Galilee toward the holy city. As he went, he consistently taught his disciples about his pending death and resurrection (8:31). They neither understood him nor recognized the cost of following him. Indeed, the final mistake they made was to fight among themselves who among them would have precedence in the messianic kingdom they believed he was about to establish (10:32-45). How could they have been so blind?

That, of course, was exactly what Mark had been saying. The disciples had been both blind and deaf. Yet many of the miracles of healing Mark reported had been to give sight to the blind and hearing to the deaf (7: 31-37; 8:22-26). Jesus had also reiterated several times the cost of being his disciple (8:34-38; 9:30-32; 10:17-22; 42-45). They just did not get it.

The story of Bartimaeus appears in Matthew and Luke with slightly different details. Matthew has two blind men in his version of the incident. Luke has the same essential information as Mark with some elaboration, but omits the man’s name. He also includes an added note about the praise by both the blind man and the crowd inspired by his regaining his sight. Like Mark, Luke also laid emphasis on the man’s faith as the key to being healed.

Faith in Jesus not only gave Bartimaeus back his sight, but a spiritual healing enabling him to follow him “on the way.” This contrasts dramatically with the spiritual blindness and disbelief of the disciples even though they had been with him all the way from Galilee. In this instance following Jesus “on the way” could mean going with him up to Jerusalem and to the cross. Or it could also be interpreted by Mark’s audience in later years as “the way of discipleship.” In Acts, the early church is described as “the followers of the way.” Since this was the last episode in Mark’s narrative before he began telling of the death of Jesus, we can presume that he fully intended both meanings.

The discipleship of true faith is costly. That remains as much so today as it ever was. During the first decade of the 21st century many hypotheses have been proposed to account for the decline in church membership and participation. This decline has occurred especially in the mainline denominations in North America since the heyday of the post-war boom in church building in the 1950s and 60s. Each person may have his or her own favourite reason. Could the underlying factor be the one which Mark highlights in this final segment of his narrative before beginning the climax to the story (8:22-10:52)? The cost of discipleship is still as great as ever, but fewer people are willing to undertake the self-sacrifice involved. Could it be that they have heard that message, but realize full well how much it will cost to follow Jesus in the way?

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Twentieth Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 24 Ordinary 29
October 18, 2009. In this long poem dealing with the problem of suffering, Job’s friends and a fourth participant, Elihu, have all said their pieces. None have satisfactorily answering the eternal question: Why do the innocent suffer? Now God enters the dialogue in response to Job’s hostility. The divine rhetoric majestically declares the works of divine creativity and providence, yet never answers the fundamental question. It merely humiliates Job and illustrates the vast gulf between human and divine knowledge. The problem remains a mystery.

JOB 38:1-7, (34-41).

PSALM 104:1-9, 24. This magnificent hymn of praise blesses God as the Creator and Upholder of all. Creation and control of nature by a supernatural power found expression in many cultures of the ancient world. The Jewish faith affirmed that the God of Israel brought all things into being and saw that they were good.

ISAIAH 53:4-12. (Alternate) This reading from the unknown prophet of Israel’s Babylonian exile quickly became the model for early Christian interpretation of Jesus’ Passion. As the fourth and last of the Servant Songs in the Hebrew Scriptures, it describes vicarious suffering on behalf of others which receives divine vindication. This was seen as Israel’s role in bringing God’s plan and purpose to the world.

From the spiritual point of view, the passage may also contain the solution to the problem of suffering: It can be redemptive, despite often having destructive powers that ultimately triumph over its victim. In its numerous forms, it enables us to recognize our own humanity and acknowledge our true selves in a universe that is subject to God’s dominion.

PSALM 91:9-16. (Alternate) This psalm proclaims the traditional faith that total dependence on God brings providential protection from evil. God does this graciously and mercifully because it is God’s nature to do so, not as a reward for good behaviour.

HEBREWS 5:1-10. The passage defines the role of the ideal priest expressed as the representative of others. Accordingly, he offers the appropriate sacrifice on the Jewish feast of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. Jesus, the Man of Galilee who is the Son of God, fulfills all the conditions as the ideal priest. By his obedience, suffering and death on the cross, the representative of God and humanity, wrought the atonement “designated by God,” i.e. as God intends the story of human salvation to unfold.

MARK 10:35-45. Their conviction that he is the Messiah firmly established, James and John boldly put their request for precedence in the messianic kingdom to Jesus. As he so often did, Jesus responded with another question. His reply symbolized his death and the two sacraments the church still uses to tell of its meaning.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS. The structure of the Book of Job consists of three or four main parts. The prologue and the epilogue are purely narrative and thought to have existed as a separate story before the poetry and dialogue in three cycles was written. The long speech by Elihu, the fourth participant, may also have been composed separately. In whatever manner the final form of the book occurred, we now have one of the great works of literature dealing with a universal human concern. Its essential value lies in the way it questions and challenges the earlier traditions of Hebrew moral theology that suffering is the inevitable retribution for sin. More than that, it emphasizes the moral quality of each person’s life and denies the circumstances of life as the common criterion for piety.

JOB 38:1-7.

At this point in the poem, Job’s friends and a fourth participant, Elihu, have all said their set pieces. None have satisfactorily answering the eternal question: Why do the innocent suffer? Now in response to Job’s hostility, Yahweh enters the dialogue. In a long series of rhetorical questions, Yahweh majestically declares the works of divine creativity and providence. Yet the divine rhetoric never answers the fundamental question. It merely humiliates Job and illustrates the vast gulf between human and divine knowledge. The solution to the problem remains a mystery.

Yahweh’s relentless questioning never accuses Job of ethical transgressions, but does deny Job’s right to question divine wisdom and power. This brief excerpt focuses attention on creation with Yahweh speaking from a whirlwind is a typical prophetic medium for a theophany. The creation motif continues through most of remaining segments of Yahweh’s address.

An appeal to creation is frequently used to justify the existence of God. A century ago, the eminent British theologian, P. T. Forsyth, declared that we had not yet got over our delight with having discovered evolution as the key to creation. Our fascination today with the unraveling of the genetic code tends to give science an even greater sense of its own power. At the same time, does not the destructive brutality of our fratricidal conflicts and the exploitive ruination of our environment reveal how much our ethical judgment has diminished even as our power over creation has increased? Would this not be the challenge that God would throw at us if any of us could take Job’s place in a similar rhetorical theophany? There is one question to which we all must respond:Is there any hope?

In a perceptive column in the New York Times, journalist Tom Friedman stated the issue succinctly. Whether we realize it or not, we are putting our children and grandchildren in the grip of two merciless forces: the Free Market and Mother Nature. Then quoting environmentalist Rob Watson he said, “Mother Nature is just chemistry, biology and physics …. The market is just a second-by-second snapshot of the balance between greed and fear.”

In her very hopeful Thanksgiving 2009 message, Mardi Tindal, newly elected Moderator of the United Church of Canada wrote: “The degree to which there will be enough food, shelter, and ecological resilience is the degree to which we trust that these are shared desires and that the rest of our extended community—those in other political parties, cultural groups, faith communities, and families—will work with us to bring them about. Why would we assume otherwise? Why assume that others don’t want good things for their children, or that they aren’t prepared to work as hard toward these goals as we are?”

PSALM 104:1-9, 24. Echoing the rhetoric of Job 38-41, this magnificent hymn praises Yahweh as the Creator and Upholder of all. Originating in a primitive form of animism, creation and control of nature by a supernatural power found expression in many cultures of the ancient world. An Egyptian “Hymn to the Aton” dating from the time of the 14th century BCE most closely resembles this psalm. The Jewish faith affirmed that Yahweh, the God of Israel, brought all things into being and saw that they were good.

The phrase that Yahweh is “wrapped in light as with a garment” (vs. 2) conveys the idea that while humans may see the effects of divine creativity, the true nature of the deity is concealed. The metaphor may well refer express that while no one can look at the sun without harm, yet the sun casts its light that all else is fully revealed.

A tiered universe is portrayed in vs. 3 where the “beams of your chambers on the waters” suggest successive layers of the heavens where Yahweh is presumed to dwell. In vs. 4, “winds” as ministering messengers appears to refer to angels. Jewish tradition likened angels doing Yahweh’s errands to wind and those in the heavenly choir as fire. However, these metaphors do seem to remove the deity from direct contact with creation. This rather deistic concept of divine creativity receives further reinforcement in the limits set on the boundaries of the waters of chaos described in vss. 5-9.

The reading skips to vs. 24 which summarizes the whole content of the psalm. The created universe came about through the wisdom of Yahweh. Even the most penetrating modern science cannot contradict the psalmists faith.

ISAIAH 53:4-12. (Alternate) This reading from the unknown prophet of Israel’s Babylonian exile quickly became the model for early Christian interpretation of Jesus’ Passion. As the fourth and last of the Servant Songs in the Hebrew Scriptures, it describes vicarious suffering on behalf of others which receives divine vindication. (See also 42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-9.) This was seen as Israel’s role in bringing God’s plan and purpose to the world.

From the spiritual point of view, the passage may also contain the solution to the problem of suffering: It can be redemptive, despite often having destructive powers that ultimately triumph over its victim. In its numerous forms, suffering enables us to recognize our own humanity and acknowledge our true selves in a universe that is utterly dependent on divine providence.

The passage was crucial to the authors of the whole NT. The story of the Gospel as they heard and subsequently narrated it rested on their understanding of this passage from the writings of the unknown prophet of the Babylonian exile scholars have designated as Second Isaiah. The Passion of Christ was not only based on this passage, but was seen as the fulfilment of it.

Debate still rages whether the “Servant” is an individual or the whole nation of Israel. Many scholars hold to the thesis that Jesus himself adopted the mission of the Servant as the model for his own ministry. (See Richardson, Alan. An Introduction to the New Testament, passim under the indexed subject ‘Servant of the Lord.’) The apostolic community also drew on the Hebrew scriptures frequently discovering there new references which they interpreted as directly foreshadowing all that they had seen and heard from the person whom they now believed was the Messiah/Christ, Son of God. Isaiah 52:13-53:12 aptly suited their instructional purposes.

As originally written, the passage did not explicitly refer to someone who was born, lived and died more than 500 years earlier. The prophetic image of one man suffering for others appeared in more than this particular passage. If anything, it was a typical prophetic motif and many of the prophets did suffer for their witness to the will and purpose of Yahweh in the history of Israel as recorded in the OT. This was, indeed, Ezekiel’s own title for himself who spoke of the Shepherd-Servant who would save the flock of God from evil shepherds (Ezek. 34:23). The prophetic servant is also named in Amos 3:7 as the one to whom Yahweh would reveal the divine will. If Jesus ever applied the term to himself, it is not recorded except perhaps in his shepherd and sheep parables and similar references attributed to him (e.g. John 10:1-18). It is impossible to discern whether these are actual words as spoken by Jesus or the apostolic teaching about him in subsequent years before they were recorded in the gospels.

Thus, the words of this passage from Second Isaiah actually convey the image of how this particular prophet saw his own role and experienced suffering in a period of great religious, social and political devastation. Israel had been overwhelmed by the Babylonians, its temple destroyed, it leading citizens led away as captive slaves, its common folk destitute after what must have been a frightful holocaust, and left to mourn their dead under the heel of an oppressive foreign regime. We cannot tell whether the prophet-poet who wrote these lines was himself an exile or one of those who remained behind and could only recall in painful memory what he had seen as he shared the fate of his compatriots. If 53:8-9 gives a clue, he may have been in Babylon when he died and this passage was written by one of his circle of followers.

Nonetheless, Christians do well to embrace this passage as a messianic prophecy. Whether Jesus himself taught this about himself or not, or whether we have instead his apostles’ teaching after the resurrection, this is how Jesus himself died. The church has always claimed this role for Jesus of Nazareth: he suffered for us.

PSALM 91: 9-16. (Alternate) This psalm proclaims Israel’s traditional faith that total dependence on Yahweh brought providential protection from all evil. It may be claimed that the psalmist has little or no awareness of the complexity of the problem of evil. The perils of living in an imperfect world do not seem to worry him or detract from his absolute trust. This recalls Ps. 46 as a similar confession of trust.

The psalm recalls Satan tempting Jesus in Matthew 4:6 and Luke 4:10-11. On the other hand, we should interpret the devoutly expressed trust in God metaphorically rather than literally as Satan did. Jesus replied in such a way as to deflect such a literal interpretation by quoting another scripture text from Deuteronomy 6:16. Scripture texts so quoted may easily contradict one another.

The concluding vss. 14-16 give a different bent to the psalmist’s trust. The basis for it lies in the covenant love between Yahweh and Israel which extends to each individual Israelite. The RSV and NEB convey this better than the NRSV: “Because his love is set on me, I will deliver him; I will lift him beyond danger, for he knows me by my name.” (NEB) Yahweh does this graciously and mercifully because it is Yahweh’s nature to do so, and it is in fulfilment of the covenant, not a reward for good behaviour.

HEBREWS 5:1-10. The passage defines the role of the ideal priest expressed as the representative of others. Accordingly, he offers the appropriate sacrifice on the Jewish feast of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. As with most apologetic statements of faith, the image of the ideal high priest and his role in the Hebrew tradition rarely agrees with the actual historical record. This reference may appear all the more surprising from a Christian apologist who must have known about the role the high priests Annas and Caiaphas played in the crucifixion of Jesus. Perhaps that explains why the author of this letter refers specifically to Aaron, the original high priest according to the priestly tradition of the Pentateuch (Exod. 28-29) and Chronicles (1 Chron. 24:1). Indeed, the latter part of the Book of Exodus and the whole of Leviticus and Numbers focus overwhelmingly on Aaron and his functions as high priest of Israel.

In order to draw the parallel between the high priest and Christ, however, the author goes further back into the Israelite tradition to the mysterious figure of Melchizedek, an ancient Canaanite priest-king of Salem to whom Abraham submitted and paid tribute (Gen. 14:17-24). Consequently, Melchizedek was regarded as superior to both Abraham, his descendent, Aaron, and the Aaronic priesthood. Fragments of text from one of the Dead Sea Scrolls revealed that the Melchizedek tradition was very much alive in late Judaism. It would appear that this tradition was well-known to the author of this letter and perhaps to his audience. Further, Melchizedek served an even more important purpose for this author. He became the core of his messianic argument. In his analysis of these fragments, Geza Vermes gave very helpful insight into the role of this enigmatic figure. (The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. Allen Lane/The Penguin Press, 1997, 500-502.)

The Qumran scroll designated 11Q Melchizedek identifies Melchizedek with the archangel Michael as the Prince of Heaven, the head of the “sons of Heaven” or “gods of Justice.” He is also referred to as elohim and el which in this context means a judge rather than God. Melchizedek is portrayed as presiding over the judgment of Belial/Satan, the Prince of Darkness. This is an eschatological midrash presaging an event which will occur on the Day of Atonement at the end of the tenth Jubilee cycle. Melchizedek liberates those whom Satan has held captive (Isaiah 61:10), restores property to rightful owners (Lev. 25:13) and remits rents (Deut. 15:2)

By introducing Melchizidek in relation to Jesus here and much more explicitly in chapter 7, the author of the letter is making a profound messianic confession. Jesus, the Man of Galilee who is the Son of God, fulfilled all the conditions as the ideal priest. By his obedience, suffering and death, the representative of God and humanity wrought the atonement God intends for human salvation. He was more than that, however, in that by his death he became the eschatological Liberator in the same way that Melchizedek had been portrayed in the Qumran scroll.

MARK 10:35-45. Prior to the destruction of the temple in 70 CE, a wide variety of sacrifices played a major part in the religious observance of the Jewish people. In two volumes of The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (vol. 4, R-Z, 147ff and the supplemental vol. 5, 763ff) two articles on the subject extend over 20 pages. This emphasis on sacrifice as a means of worship or propitiation should not be regarded as unusual. All religious traditions have included sacrifices of one kind or another. Throughout the past two millennia Christians have taken great pains to clarify the perceived difference between those traditions and the Christian forms of sacrifice, although not always successfully. The two parts of this pericope provide the basis for that distinction.

Their conviction that he is the Messiah firmly established, James and John boldly put to Jesus their request for precedence in the messianic kingdom. As he so often did, Jesus responded with another question. His question symbolized his suffering and death in the sacramental language of cup and baptism the church still uses to tell of its meaning.

It may be instructive to note how the other gospels dealt with the same issue. Matthew put the blame of “the mother of the sons of Zebedee” (Matt. 20:20) perhaps out of respect for James and John, two of the inner circle of apostles. According to Acts 12:1-2, James also became the first apostle to be martyred. Luke, on the other hand, does not identify who raised the issue of precedence, but does include Jesus’ response to the anger of the others at James and John, as does Matthew (20:24-28). From this one naturally concludes that the emphasis of this pericope must be placed on the latter part rather than on the question James and John asked.

Thus we are challenged to deal with the nature of sacrifice in the Christian tradition. Significantly, The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (IDB) discusses “Sacrifice in the NT” under the heading of “Atonement” although that word does not appear anywhere in the NT. This appears to say that only in the Christian tradition is an atoning sacrifice effective. Indeed, the summary of the IDB article reads: “The NT declares that in Christ and his death is all that man needs in order to find his sins forgiven and his life reconciled to God; in him is that which can cancel out the ill effects of sin, release man from the burden of its guilt, and grant him peace with God.” (IDB, I.311)

Also notable are the closing words of this pericope on which generations of Christians have built the substitution theory of atonement: “to give his life as a ransom for many” (vs. 45). Generally speaking, scholars agree that Isaiah 53 had considerable influence in the saying and its subsequent theological use. Others have argued that this is simply a vivid metaphor for what Paul wrote in Gal. 5:1, “For freedom Christ has set us free.” Two references in the Pastoral Letters (1 Tim. 2:6 and Titus 2:14) also reflect this same statement in Mark.

Finally, we must ask if the uniqueness of Christian sacrifice as defined in this passage depends on offering oneself instead of some valued possession, even one’s first born child as was common in cultures that practiced human sacrifice. If so, what does this say about the theological stance that in Christ God offered himself? As Paul said in 2 Cor. 5:19, “In Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us.” Are we not saying, therefore, that Christian sacrifice is the sacrifice of God-in-Christ internalized and realized by each person by the action of the Holy Spirit transforming every word and deed into an expression of God’s self-giving love?

-30-