John Shearman's Lectionary

THE REIGN OF CHRIST
Proper 29 Ordinary 34
NOVEMBER 22, 2009

The Christian year ends with the celebration of Christ reigning in glory with dominion over all creation.

2 SAMUEL 23:1-7. The author of this hymn of praise, regarded as King David’s last words, saw them as a fitting conclusion to the long narrative of David’s reign. Jews and Christians alike saw it as a prediction of the coming of God’s anointed Messiah in fulfilment of an everlasting covenant with God’s faithful people. The last two verses of this reading also describe the destruction of those who do not believe.

PSALM 132:1-12, (13-18). Yet another of the songs pilgrims may have sung as they approached the temple. this one recalls the vow of David to build a permanent dwelling place for the ark of the covenant symbolizing the presence of God among God’s people. The psalm also contains a promise that David’s descendants would sit on the throne of Israel forever if they keep the covenant.

DANIEL 7:9-10, 13-14. (Alternate) ) The scene in this vision of Daniel is the classic setting for judgment day in several ancient Middle Eastern religious traditions including those of Egypt, Babylon and Persia. The description also had great influence in the early Christian visions of divine judgment at the end of time. The same scene is still used frequently in both popular and homiletic presentations of what will occur on judgment day.

PSALM 93. (Alternate) As in several other psalms (24; 47; 68; 96-99) this one has the characteristics sung at the New Year celebrating the enthronement of Yahweh as sovereign over the whole earth and its people. Kingship was the common political system of the times, so it was natural that divinity should be described in this image.

REVELATION 1:4b-8. The Book of Revelation fits the description of eschatology, a form of literature containing of predictions about the fulfilment of God’s purpose at the end of history. This introductory passage cites the expectation of the early church that the return of Christ would bring this about.

JOHN 18:33-37. Jesus had been accused by his opponents of claiming to be king of the Jews, a treasonable offense in the Roman empire. This exchange between Jesus and Pilate tells us what the early church believed about the true nature of Jesus’ sovereignty. It was spiritual, not political; but it certainly had and still has political implications.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

2 SAMUEL 23:1-7. The author of this hymn of praise, regarded as King David’s last words, saw them as a fitting conclusion to the long narrative of David’s reign. Vs. 1 clarifies the tradition of David as the man whom God had specially chosen and exalted to be Israel’s greatest king. The tone is more than hero-worship or hagiography. It has a prophetic and messianic flair to it. Jews and Christians alike saw it as a prediction of the coming of God’s anointed Messiah, in fulfilment of an everlasting covenant with God’s faithful people.

The prophetic element finds expression in vs. 2 where the spirit speaks through David in the same way that prophets spoke for Yahweh. The subsequent message reiterates the prophetic theme of justice (vs. 3) and elicits a striking simile of the world seen in the freshness of sunrise in spring (vs. 4).

The reference in vs. 5 to David’s house, i.e. his descendants who ruled Israel after him, suggests that this hymn was written at a later date than the end of his own life (c. 950 BCE). It conveys the conviction that the Davidic dynasty was given the divine mandate to carry forward the covenant relationship with Yahweh. The question in vs. 5c might be interpreted as questioning whether or not David’s heirs were succeeding in their duties. Not to do so would be tantamount to the apostasy and polytheism for which later monarchs were infamous, resulting in the end of Israel as an independent nation in 586 BCE. The last two verses of the reading describe the destruction of those who do not believe. This judgment became the religious explanation for the nation’s disastrous history by the great pre-exilic prophets and the post-exilic chroniclers.

One of the major difficulties in exegeting this passage is the corruption of the Hebrew text. Some scholars believe this is due to the antiquity of the poem. It bears some similarity to a poem in Numbers 24, thought to be from the J-document source in the 10th century BCE. If so, an early date not long after David’s death for this composition is not an improbability. Other scholars contrast it with the so-called “Testament of Jacob” in Gen. 49 and the “Blessing of Moses” in Deut. 33. The former is from the post-exilic P-document, but the latter is thought to have originated in the 10th century BCE.

PSALM 132:1-12, (13-18). Here is yet another of the songs pilgrims may have sung as they approached the temple. This one recalls the vow of David to build a permanent dwelling place for the ark of the covenant symbolizing the presence of God among God’s people. Unlike several of the other psalms of ascent, this one was created intentionally as a processional hymn commemorating David’s bringing the ark to Jerusalem. There are antiphonal parts for a soloist and a chorus. It has been speculated, with good reason, that its origin lay in the anniversary of the reigning king’s accession together with the celebration of Yahweh’s enthronement. This celebration is believed to have been held annually at the New Year in pre-exilic times. The psalm most likely came from the latter part of that period, but not from David’s own reign.

“The hardships” in vs. 1 refer to the loss of the ark and the difficulties David had in recovering it and bringing it to Zion as told in 1 Samuel 4-6. There is, however, no record of his vow (vss. 2-5). That may be an imaginative addition to the tradition for theological purposes, a common practice of both OT and NT authors.

Vss. 6-7 re-enact David’s search for the ark sung by the choir and summon the people to participate with them in bringing the ark to its appropriate place in the temple. A sense of awe in the holy presence symbolized by the ark comes to the fore in vss. 8-9 as the priests advance to carry the ark into the temple and lead the people in worship before it. As the ark entered the temple, the monarch
offered a sacrifice with prayer for Yahweh’s favor (vs. 10). The remaining verses of the shorter reading consist of an oracle which responds to the prayer giving Yahweh’s promise of the continuance of David’s dynasty (vss. 11-12). A second oracle (vss. 13-18) promises Yahweh’s continued presence in the temple and his providential care for both the priesthood and the monarchs who will continue David’s dynasty. The repeated mention of “the anointed one” lent this psalm to a messianic interpretation, although the term originally was a pious euphemism for the monarch.

DANIEL 7:9-10, 13-14. (Alternate) The scene in this vision of Daniel is the classic setting for judgment day in several ancient Middle Eastern religious traditions including those of Egypt, Babylon and Persia. The description also had great influence in the early Christian visions of divine judgment at the end of time. The same scene is still used frequently in both popular and homiletic presentations of what will occur on judgment day.

“The Ancient One” (i.e Yahweh) takes the seat of judgment in the heavenly court with a supporting cast of assessors. The books containing the lists of deeds, good and evil, is opened for the assessors to examine. There are several other OT and many intertestamental references to this scrutiny of human actions. (See Ps. 56:8; Isa. 65:6; Mal. 3:16; Jubilees 30:22; Enoch 81:4; 89:61-64; 98:7-8; 104:7.)

Suddenly the vision of Daniel changes. A new figure appears representing the beginning of a new era inhuman form. He comes from heaven, the place of orderliness, peace and purity replacing the old order of turmoil, chaos and evil.
This new person is given divine authority, power and eternal sovereignty which will never pass away.

It is not difficult to see why Jewish and Christian messanism and apocalypticism adopted this understanding of divine judgment that would completely displace the evil order of human affairs as it was experienced in actual history.

PSALM 93. (Alternate) As in several other psalms ( 24; 47; 68; 96-99) this one has the characteristics sung at the New Year celebrating the enthronement of Yahweh as sovereign over the whole earth and its people. Kingship was the common political system of the times, so it was natural that divinity should be described in this image.

This concept originated long before the development of monotheism in the myths of creation common throughout the ancient Middle East. Subsequently Israel’s god Yahweh was seen to be supreme among the gods of all other of the nations (i.e. henotheism) and the only one to whom the Israelites owed obedience.

This psalm describes how water in the form of floods from heavy rainstorms, recalling the primeval deep as in Gen. 1:1-2, assured that the providence of Yahweh would continue throughout the coming year. This assurance derived from Yahweh’s holiness even as his holiness would remain forever.

REVELATION 1:4b-8. The Book of Revelation can only be classified as eschatology, a form of literature containing predictions about the fulfilment of God’s purpose at the end of history. Some people make the mistake of reading this book literally or allegorically, then trying to guess how it fits into the current affairs they hear about on the daily news. One wonders where and how one could find reference to the current confusion about how democracy works or doesn’t work in different countries. Perhaps this is the time to prepare a sermon on how to interpret apocalyptic and eschatological literature with its strange symbolism and imaginative visions that so fill the pages of Revelation.

One of the best resources I have found for understanding what John was trying so say is Professor George B. Caird’s commentary in the Black’s New Testament Commentaries (The Revelation of St. John the Divine. Adam & Charles Black, 1966). William Barclay’s Daily Bible Study on Revelation is also excellent, as is exegesis and exposition by Martin Rist and Lynn Harold Hough in The Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 12.

This reading contains a lot more than the greeting and address of the seven letters to follow in chs. 2-3. Seven is the traditional symbol for wholeness or completeness. So, in this instance, it does not only designate the specific churches addressed, but the church as a whole for whom John wrote. In other words, the book has a universal audience, all who believe that Jesus Christ is Lord. According to Caird, “the seven spirits who are before the throne” represents the Spirit of God actively engaged with the churches in all its fullness and power. He also sees this as a reference to Zechariah 4 where the prophet has a vision of Israel represented by a candelabra with seven lamps. Rist also felt that the phrase referred to several OT passages which spoke of the seven archangels of Jewish speculation and to Persian astral theology where the sun, moon and five visible planets were thought to have control over human affairs.

There may also have been a hidden challenge to the imperial religion of Rome in this phrase. Coins from the early reign of Domitian showed the emperor’s heir who died in childhood as an infant Zeus playing with the stars to compensate for the dominion he would never inherit. For John, there could be no other sovereign than the crucified, risen and ascended Christ. So immediately he calls forth the scene before the throne of God (vs. 5). The titles he gives to Christ proclaim his sovereignty to encourage those who are even now struggling with the challenge to be faithful witnesses as they faced persecution for not paying obeisance to the emperor.

The first witness to the saving, redeeming love of God was Jesus Christ himself. Faithful unto death, he was raised from the dead and now is seated at the right hand of God as the reigning sovereign of heaven and earth. To him even the emperor owes allegiance for he is “ruler of the kings of the earth.” The term “firstborn of the dead” refers not only to the resurrection, but to the spiritual experience of every believer who enters into Christ’s death and resurrection through the act of baptism. Compare also the words of Jesus to Nicodemus about being born again of the Spirit in John 3: 5-6.

A double reference to the sacrifice of Christ and the sacrament of holy communion leads into the next sentence of John’s address to the churches. This same sentence resonates with the Fourth Gospel in speaking of the both the sacrament and the glorification of Christ by his death and resurrection. John also knew the OT (probably in the LXX version) and voiced the tradition of the apostolic church that the church was the continuation of Israel as “a kingdom (and/of) priests serving God” (vs. 6 cf. Exod. 19:6) What is more, John believed and returned to the thought several times that those whom Christ had released from their sins would reign with him. It remains a question whether they would exercise this dominion in this life or in life beyond death (cf. 2:26; 3:21; 5:10; 7:13-15; 20:6).

In vs. 7, John combined two apocalyptic references from Daniel 7:13 and Zechariah 12:10 to create a vivid picture of the Second Coming of Christ when even those who crucified him will submit to him. But is their wailing when they see his wounds a true repentance and acclamation of him as Lord and God as was the case with Thomas (cf. John 20:28)? John, the author of Revelation, has no doubt . He proclaims Jesus “the beginning and the end” i.e the great “I am,” the One in whom we are perpetually confronted by the living, ever-present and all powerful God. In the OT, those terms are caught up in the Hebrew name Yahweh Sebaoth, translated in English versions as “the Lord of hosts.”

One of the Greek translations for that name in the LXX was Pantokrator, “the Almighty.” For John the word meant something else than the Hebrew interpretation that Yahweh’s Messiah would lead a great army into victorious battle over Israel’s enemies. Christ’s omnipotence does not exist in unlimited coercive military power, but in the authority of self-giving love that cannot be defeated. This surely has something to say about all the current manipulations in the pursuit of political power a s well as the seemingly endless wars for dominance in geopolitical spheres of influence.

JOHN 18:33-37. Through the centuries Jesus’ trial before Pilate has engendered incredible flights of imaginative fancy. Despite all the research and preaching based on this event as John narrated it, we have no clear, definitive indication of what actually happened. We have no more than this pericope tells us. Jesus had been accused by his opponents of claiming to be king of the Jews, a treasonable offense in the Roman empire. The automatic penalty was death. Pilate had very little personal reason to examine the prisoner before him. After all the others he had ordered executed, one more dead Jew would mean little or nothing to his career. His governorship lasted for another six years. Why then did John tell of this incident told in this way?

This exchange between Jesus and Pilate helps us understand what the early church believed about the true nature of Jesus’ sovereignty. John designed this part of the passion story to reiterate something he had Jesus say earlier. He wanted to reaffirm Jesus as “the way, the truth and the life.” (Cf. John 14:6) He also wanted to clarify the true nature of the kingdom of God as Jesus had revealed it, although the phrase actually occurs in only one other passage in John. (3:3 & 5)

This interchange revolved around the meaning of the word “kingdom.” (Greek = basileia). The word occurs no less than six times, twice as many as “truth” (Greek = aletheia) on which so much expository and homiletic attention has been focused. As John narrated it, Jesus and Pilate talked right past each other, but that appears to have been quite intentional on John’s part. The meaning of the word “kingdom” was the key to what each of the two men said. Each had a totally different interpretation of it.

For Pilate, “kingdom” had a purely political reference. As Roman governor, he recognized Herod Antipas as one of two puppet kings, also known as tetrarchs, of the Jews. Philip, half brother of Antipas, was the other. Antipas had limited authority in Galilee; Philip in Transjordan. Luke added a complication to the trial of Jesus before Pilate passed sentence on him by having Pilate send Jesus to Herod (Luke 23:6-12). At most, Pilate must have been curious about this Galilean usurper of Herod’s jurisdiction, little though it was under Roman imperial sovereignty. For Jesus, the meaning of “kingdom” was quite another matter.

As Jesus exercised it, true sovereignty was spiritual, not political. Had it been political, he told Pilate, his followers would be fighting in the streets to keep him from being handed over to the Jews. (We may note as an aside that this is yet another hook on which to hang the accusation that John’s Gospel is anti-Semitic. Actually, the nature of Jesus’ sovereignty prevents that from being credible except in its literal sense. The central drama of John’s Gospel includes this conflict between Jesus and the Jews.) Jesus had been brought before Pilate on a purely political charge. Jesus did not deny his kingship; he interpreted it on a level on which people of all nations and races could respond to it.

Pilate was as puzzled as we are about what that meant. The sovereignty of Jesus rests on the love of God he came to reveal. The anticipated response to that revelation of divine sovereignty is to make love dominant in all human relationships in obedience to the commandment to love as God loves us. (Cf. John 15:12; 1 John 4:7-12) This humble truth was as far beyond Pilate’s understanding as it still is for a great many of the six billion and more of us inhabiting this planet today. That may be an entirely spiritual sovereignty; but it certainly had and still has political implications. It is our calling as believers to implement this God’s sovereign love in the myriad affairs of personal, national and international life.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Twenty-Fourth Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 28 Ordinary 33
November 15, 2009

 1 SAMUEL 1:4-20 AND 1 SAMUEL 2:1-10. These readings tell the story of Hannah and the song she sang when she dedicated her son, Samuel, to serve God. The early church saw it as a prefiguring of the birth of the Messiah. Almost certainly Luke used it as the model for his narrative of the announcement of the birth of Jesus to Mary and her song in Luke 1, known best by it liturgical name, The Magnificat. The canticle can be read as the psalm for the day.

DANIEL 12:1-3. (Alternate) This somewhat obscure passage prophesies a future time when by God’s action through the archangel Michael justice will come to the nations. The righteous, both living and dead, will be rewarded with everlasting life and the unrighteous put to shame and everlasting contempt. It was a prophesy for a time of great tribulation in the 2nd century BC when in Israel was greatly oppressed by a powerful Greek emperor, Antiochus Epiphanes.

PSALM 16. (Alternate) This psalm of trust meditates on the spiritual values enjoyed by the psalmist in serving God alone. It yields pleasures and security which those who worship other gods cannot enjoy.

HEBREWS 10:11-14, (15-18), 19-25. The author of this theological essay or series of sermons clinches his argument regarding the supremacy of Christ by appealing to his audience to hold on to their faith. He urges them to encourage one another to love and do good deeds as they wait for Christ’s return because Christ has made the perfect sacrifice for their salvation and has been exalted to the right hand of God.

MARK 13:1-8. In spite of the long quotation attributed to Jesus, this chapter may well consist of the teaching of the early church in which are imbedded actual words of Jesus about his return. The incident reported in this passage became the obvious setting for these instructions about what would happen and how believers should act when the time comes. Mark may actually be referring to the temple’s destruction which had occurred about the time he wrote.

While the return of Christ is still a part of our tradition, scholars debate how much of the detail was actually drawn from the Jewish expectation of the Messiah to bring his reign to Israel, defeat all its enemies and oppressors, and end human history.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

1 SAMUEL 1:4-20 AND 1 SAMUEL 2:1-10. The second part of this reading< Hannah’s song, is actually a psalm and may be read as the psalm for the day.

Very few lectionary readings feature a woman as the main character. Hannah ranks among the OT heroines of faith along with Miriam, Esther and Ruth. These readings tell her brief but simple story and recite the song she sang when she dedicated her son, Samuel, to serve Yahweh under the tutelage of Eli, the priest at the shrine of Shiloh.

In his commentary in The Interpreter’s Bible, the late Professor George Caird cited this as part of the later of two main sources of 1 & 2 Samuel. Its purpose was to introduce the prophet Samuel as a man of significant heritage which the genealogy omitted from this reading (vss. 1-3). Hannah’s barrenness gave her great sorrow and became the cause of additional anguish when she suffered great provocation from her rival, her husband’s other, more fertile wife. Caird held that this was also the reason why Elkanah had taken a second wife. No Israelite man could bear the shame of childlessness. The story also appears to recapitulate the story of Abraham and Sarah.

Eli, the priest of Shiloh, found her in the doorway of the temple and suspected her of being in a drunken stupor. In reality she was praying and making a vow – perhaps a bargain would be a better word for it – that she would dedicate to lifelong service of Yahweh if the son for whom she pleaded be granted her. Eli promised that her petition would be granted, a prophetic oracle that relieved her sorrow.

The story is quite legitimate as the introductory tale about a great hero of the Jewish tradition. More problematic, however, is the second reading. Hannah’s song was reputedly sung when she dedicated the boy as per her bargain before his conception. This is a typical psalm praising the providence of Yahweh similar to many others in the Psalter. In the Hebrew text, it breaks into the narrative in the middle of sentence, which gives strength to the argument that it was imported from some other source.

The early Christian church saw the story and especially Hannah’s song as a prefiguring of the birth of the Messiah. Almost certainly Luke used it as the model for his narrative of the announcement of the birth of Jesus to Mary and her song in Luke 1: 47-55.

The song sounds a strong note of triumphalism. Adversaries and enemies play a large part in the drama it describes, emphasizing these almost to the point of paranoia. This has little to do with Hannah’s circumstances, but a great deal to say about the hostility Israel felt toward its neighbours. It is the song of an oppressed people longing for deliverance. Unable to throw off the yoke of their oppression, they had transferred their hope to divine intervention. In the final verse of the passage (vs. 10) a note of messianic eschatology creeps in.

Professor Caird’s fellow expositor in The Interpreter’s Bible, John C. Schroeder, felt that Hannah’s song of thanksgiving came very close to moral immaturity. That was prevented by Yahweh’s providential intervention on her behalf as an instance of the ethical dilemma always presented to those who ask for divine favors. Yahweh is morally accountable, even if we humans are not. Because Yahweh is righteous and just, history – if not all human experience – is essential providential. The British historian, Herbert Butterworth, adopted a similar theory of history in his Christianity and History (1954). Perhaps this is why there is hope for a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians in that holy corner of the globe where the biblical story unfolded. This ethical attitude toward divine providence also gives impetus to the global struggle for justice from which all persons may someday benefit.

DANIEL 12:1-3. (Alternate) This somewhat obscure passage prophesies a future time when by God’s action through the archangel Michael justice will come to the nations. The righteous, both living and dead, will be rewarded with everlasting life and the unrighteous put to shame and everlasting contempt. It ends an extensive apocalyptic vision beginning at 11:1. It was a prophesy envisioning the end of a time of great tribulation in the 2nd century BC when in Israel had been greatly oppressed by a powerful Greek emperor, Antiochus Epiphanes.

This was by no mean an imaginary event or irresponsible hope. Although the prophecies of Daniel were set as if the Jews were still in exile in Babylon. the dire effects of the reign of Antiochus IV and his ardent Hellenization of Jerusalem and Judea had ended or was about to end with the rebellion of the Jewish people under the Maccabees (168-167 BCE). The subsequent turmoil brought about the century long reign of the Hasmonaean dynasty, the last period of Jewish independence in their homeland until the mid-20th century C.E.

This brief excerpt was thought to be the original ending the apocalypse of Daniel. With the death of Antiochus Epiphanes the final consummation of Israel’s divinely mandated history would begin. This would come about as Michael, the patron archangel of the Jews, undertook to execute Yahweh’s will for the Covenant People. The prophecy described what would happen as if the end of history was about to arrive and a general resurrection take place. Those whose deeds were irreconcilably evil would be condemned while the righteous would reign with justice and peace.

As we shall see in the reading from Mark 13 and similar New Testament references, Christian apocalyptcism as well as the hope for God’s reign on earth even in modern times of great tribulation has drawn extensively from this passage.

PSALM 16. (Alternate) This psalm of trust meditates on the spiritual values enjoyed by the psalmist in serving God alone. Such a life yields pleasures and security which those who worship other gods cannot enjoy. Identified as psalms of trust, this class includes several others such as Pss. 4, 23, 27A, 62 and 131.

While the words of vs. 2 “I have no good apart from you,” seem clear enough, a note in the RSV and NRSV point out that this is a translation from the Vulgate of Jerome. Again in vs. 4, the Hebrew text is confused, but the meaning does not appear to have been lost. In the Jewish tradition, only libations of wine were offered to Yahweh. According to Isa. 66:4 libations of blood, possibly that of pigs, were associated with practices considered detestable. The Law permitted only blood sacrifices with the blood of freshly slaughtered sheep, goats and bulls, but never pigs.

Vss. 5-11 expresses the psalmist deep sense of security because Yahweh provides for his material and spiritual needs. Several striking metaphors reiterate the way divine providence has blessed this person. In vs. 5, the phrase “my chosen portion” expresses the inherited share of land or goods, while “my cup,” drawn from the practice of passing a cup of wine to a guest, may refer to this person’s destiny ( cf. Mark 10: 38; Matt. 26:27, 39). In vs. 6, “the boundary lines … in pleasant places” probably means the way the division of property by lot yielded good land.

Vss. 7-8 deal with spiritual matters. Divine wisdom comes during the night when quiet meditation on the way of the Lord keeps the psalmist steadfast in faith. In the final verses (9-11) the psalmist expresses the joy and security he feels because Yahweh has not abandoned him to Sheol, the place of the dead eternally isolated from Yahweh’s presence. Imagination pictured it as a shadowy pit beneath the earth into which the unfaithful were cast for all eternity. Peter’s sermon in Acts 2:25-28 quoted the Septuagint version of vss. 9-11 based on an interpretive story or midrash which gave them an unusual messianic interpretation.

HEBREWS 10:11-14, (15-18), 19-25. The author of this theological essay or series of sermons clinches his argument regarding the supremacy of Christ by appealing to his audience to hold on to their faith. He urges them to encourage one another to love and do good as they wait for Christ’s return because Christ has made the perfect sacrifice for their salvation and has been exalted to the right hand of God.

However much the downgrading of Jewish sacrificial practices may appeal to the Christian mind, Jews did not necessarily feel that the sacrifices of their priests were ineffective. In fact, the Pharisees adopted such meticulous attitude toward ritual because they believed that the worship of the temple did have the intended effect of bringing them closer to God. Jesus enraged them not only because he included notorious sinners in God’s kingdom, but because he, for the most part, disregarded the appropriate sacrifices which would show their true repentance. E. P. Sanders points out that Jesus did not necessarily object to sacrifices, but regarded them as aspects of temporal piety in contrast to the more adequate, eternal relationship with God which he offered. The author of Hebrews regarded them as inadequate too.

Commenting on this passage, William Barclay stated that the writer reiterated how perfect the sacrifice of Christ really is by showing that as an act of total obedience it fully revealed the love of God. All that God requires, even in the Hebrew Torah, is absolute obedience. This Jesus accomplished by his death on the cross. Having done so, God accepted this perfect offering and exalted Jesus in the resurrection and ascension to the right hand of God. Vs. 14 points out the universal effect of his sacrifice: it makes humans holy, i.e sanctify them. Paul would have used the legal term justification, making sinners right with God, for this effect. This writer did not separate justification and sanctification.

Vss. 19-25 carries the argument still further. Appropriation of the benefit of Christ’s sacrifice, i.e bring about a perfect relationship with God, rests on a steadfast response of faith. Recalling the rituals on the Day of Atonement, the author likens the effect of Christ’s sacrifice and the Christians’ response to the renewal of the divine-human relationship the temple liturgy was intended to effect. The results of this atonement will show in the way Christians continue to love and do good deeds which reflect the divine love which has sanctified them. They were also meet together for worship and mutual encouragement, all the more so because they expected Christ’s return very soon.

There may be recollections of Paul’s thinking in these final exhortations to faith, hope and love. Paul might not have added “good works” as this writer did. Modern biblical scholar John Knox has said that this author was “a sacramentalist on a grand scale” in that he was steeped in liturgics of Israel and regarded the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ as “the supreme sacrament.” (The Interpreter’s Bible, XI, 712) Yet, as Knox adds, this author had very little to say about either the Christian sacraments or Christian liturgy. Nor was he a strong ethicist despite knowing that the essence of the Christian ethic is love. He used the word agapé‚ here, but this is one of the only two times he did. (See also 6:10.) His sole interest was in the extended analogy he drew between the high priestly role and sacrifice of Christ and rituals of Judaism.

MARK 13:1-8. Known as “the Little Apocalypse,” this whole chapter remains the subject of much scholarly controversy. In spite of the long quotation attributed to Jesus, this chapter may well consist more of the teachings of the early church in which were imbedded actual words of Jesus about his return. That assumes, of course, that Jesus could foretell his resurrection and return as the NT tradition held. The incidents reported in this passage – one viewing the temple close up and one from a distance on the Mount of Olives – became the obvious settings for these instructions about what would happen and how believers should act when the time comes.

Mark may actually be referring to the temple’s destruction which had occurred about the time he wrote his gospel. On the other hand, Herod the Great had spent so much money and taxed the people so heavily to reconstruct the temple, that it must have had a startling effect on these Galileans if they had just seen it for the first time. Even today, the site is magnificent although much altered by the total destruction of the temple in the 1st and 2nd centuries and the extensive construction of the area by the Moslems in 7th and 16th centuries. The only remaining element of the temple is the massive stone wall on the western side of the site, the Western Wall, where Jews and tourists alike gather daily by the thousands to pray.

While the return of Christ, which is the theme of this whole chapter as well as this passage, is still a part of our tradition, scholars debate how much of the detail was actually drawn from the Jewish eschatological expectations of the Messiah found largely in Daniel. Many preachers make the grave error of treating the passage literally. One can hear or see such misinterpretations every weekend on religious radio stations and television channels. Their error consists in attempting to answer the same question that the four disciples asked in vs. 3: “When will this be …?” Of course, no answer can be given. What follows is a composite discourse drawn from several sources including some sayings which may well be part of the authentic tradition of what Jesus said, plus a considerable amount of general apocalyptic material. There is an intriguing possibility that some of the details were drawn from an “oracle” said to have warned the Christians of Jerusalem in 70 CE to flee the city before its fall to the Romans. This tradition was reported by Eusebius, the early church historian (circa 260-340 CE).

The current reading includes no more than the introduction to the discourse. Vss. 5-8 are no more than a warning against deceit – very appropriate in the light of the consistent misinterpretation of the signs here defined: false messiahs, international conflicts, and natural disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes and famines. These have occurred throughout history. We have been witnesses to similar events in our own lifetime on a scale Mark could not have dreamed. All of which has given rise to the contemporary plethora of eschatological predictions.

One of our dilemmas in dealing with this and other eschatological passages in the NT is to discover the spiritual message contained therein without falling into the literalist mode. Perhaps Halford E. Luccock put it best in his exposition of the passage The Interpreter’s Bible (VII, 856): “If all the attention and concern which in Christian history have been given to last things had only been given to first things, the power of Christianity in the world and its service to the world would have been enormously increased.” Luccock concluded by quoting a collect from the Anglican Book of Common Prayer which set the matter in a proper perspective:

“Eternal God, who committest to us the swift and solemn trust of life; since we do not know what a day may bring forth, but only that the hour for serving thee is always present, may we awake to the instant claims of thy holy will, not waiting for tomorrow, but yielding today.”

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-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Nineteenth Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 23 Ordinary 28
October 11, 2009.

PLEASE NOTE: Monday, October 12 is Thanksgiving Day in Canada. Most Canadian churches celebrate the festival on this Sunday. The RCL lessons for Thanksgiving are posted separately under the title of “Canadian Thanksgiving.”

JOB 23:1-9, 16-17. This is an excerpt from a powerful lament in which Job complains that God has ignored his truly righteous behaviour and thwarted his every attempt to obtain any kind of encounter with God. The whole poem extends to 24:25 and ends, not with a vow as in the traditional style of a lament, but in a challenge to Job’s accusers.

PSALM 22:1-15. This psalm expresses intensely the longing for deliverance from suffering. It also became a model for the crucifixion story in Christian tradition. Many of the details of that narrative were taken directly from this psalm – e.g. vss. 1, 7 and 18.

AMOS 5:6-7, 10-15. (Alternate) Behind this passage from one of the earliest of the great prophets stands the tradition that there will come a day when God will judge Israel, especially for its idolatry of false gods and injustice to the oppressed of the land.

PSALM 90:12-17. (Alternate) This psalm is still used to celebrate the transitory nature of nature of human life and the eternal security we have in God. It may originally have existed in two different parts, verses 1-12 and 13-17. This excerpt emphasizes our human need to maintain a faithful relationship with God throughout our lives.

HEBREWS 4:12-16. This brief excerpt places utmost importance on our confession as believers and followers of Jesus Christ. It notes in particular the supremacy of Christ as our high priest who experienced all the temptations that we face, but did not sin. Because of this we may approach life and life beyond death in God’s eternal presence with boldness knowing that the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ has made faithful living possible.

MARK 10:17-31. This passage may be difficult for us to hear in our consumer age where wealth and possessions matter so much. The questioner who accosted Jesus as he set out on a journey had led an exemplary moral life and had an earnest desire for a more meaningful spiritual life. But he lacked one thing: the inability to separate himself from his great wealth. Jesus used the opportunity to explain to his disciples why wealth was such a stumbling block and promised that those who were faithful would be rewarded for whatever sacrifice they made.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.This is an excerpt from a powerful lament in which Job complains that God has ignored his truly righteous behaviour and thwarted his every attempt to obtain any kind of encounter with God. The whole poem extends to 24:25 and ends, not with a vow as in the traditional style of a lament, but in a challenge to Job’s accusers.

JOB 23:1-9, 16-17.

Throughout the passage, Job appears to be speaking to his friends, but also with full awareness that God is also hearing his complaint. It is as if he were addressing God even as he argues with his friends. He reaches the point of despairing that his sufferings have any meaning at all and that God is totally unconcerned and apathetic.

Job is very sincere in his outburst, expressing a serious desire to learn from God the reason for his suffering. He believes that God would not only hear him out, but would acquit him for his righteous behaviour. But God has hidden from him and although he fears God, he earnestly wants his suffering to end, even if it ends in death.

Vss. 3-7 present one of the clearest statements of our human search for God in the whole of the Bible. It envisions God as an imperial potentate before whom a petitioner may come seeking redress for some harm or injustice done to him. Job claims to terrified before God, yet there is still an arrogance in his demeanor, so convinced is he of his own righteousness. How human he is! By vs. 16-17, he has given way to doubt. He is no longer sure that an encounter with the almighty judge will be enough to establish his rights and win his acquittal. The inscrutable mystery of the divine is almost more terrifying than his suffering.

The vision of God in this passage, as in most of the Hebrew and Christian scriptures, is that of traditional theism. God is perceived as a personal being external to the universe in which we and all generations before us have ever lived. We are all mortal and life itself ends in death. Our traditional Christian theistic faith declares that life eternal, life beyond death, is the gift of God through faith in Jesus Christ, Incarnate Son of God. In a newly published book, John Shelby Spong, Eternal Life: A New Vision – Beyond Religion, Beyond Theism, Beyond Heaven and Hell, challenges this traditional way of dealing with death through faith in an external, invasive God.
Such a concept of deity and eternal life has become obsolete since the time of Galileo, Newton and Darwin.

This volume is a significant contribution to progressive theological thought as well as a meaningful antidote to the anxiety with which we all approach our own mortality. Spong does not deny eternal life; he rejoices in its reality and hopes to experience it himself as he approaches his own death. He is in his eightieth year. He also finds a new, if unorthodox, way for those who struggle with the concept to comes to terms with our doubts. He bases his long searched for faith on theological concepts of the nature of God and of human nature rooted in self-consciousness and in a mystical approach to John’s Gospel and the Letter to the Ephesians.

PSALM 22:1-15. This psalm expresses an intense longing for deliverance from suffering. It also became a model for the crucifixion story in Christian tradition and in that context is most commonly used as the psalm for Good Friday. Many of the details of the crucifixion narrative were taken directly from this psalm – e.g. vss. 1, 7 and 18.

On the other hand, we must accept the fact that the original author had no fore-knowledge of that event. It is a supreme example of an individual lament, although some scholars believe that this reading is only part of two psalms which may have been separate at one time. For example, vss. 1-21 and 22-31 appear to have quite different motifs – agony and thanksgiving.

It should be noted that following the initial cry of dereliction in this reading (vss. 1-2) the psalmist expresses a sincere trust (vss. 3-5) based on the ancient tradition of Israel’s faith relationship with Yahweh. He then turns to declare the cause of his misery: calumny and mocking by people who know him.

Once again he returns to trustfully plead his faithfulness (vss. 9-11), but sees around him only the persistent verbal assaults of his enemies (12-13) described metaphorically as wild bulls and ravenous lions. In the end he appears to accept his fate, although vividly expressed in strong metaphors drawn from painful experiences of someone who seems to have suffered from dehydration and heat prostration in a desert environment (vss. 14-15).

AMOS 5:6-7, 10-15. (Alternate) Behind this passage from one of the earliest of the great prophets stands the tradition that there will come a day when God will judge Israel, especially for its idolatry of false gods and injustice to the oppressed of the land.

This briefest of excerpts from Amos presents the core of his prophetic message. There will come a day of judgment when Israel will have to answer for the evils and injustices that have become so commonplace in the land.

It is important to understand the historical background of Amos’ harsh condemnations. With Assyria suffering a period of internal weakness and political upheaval during the late 8th century BCE, the small states of the Palestinian coastal region, and especially Israel, the Northern Kingdom, had been able to extend its borders and prosper considerably by controlling the trade routes passing through its territory between the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia. A rich merchant class developed in Israel with all the economic benefits and consumer extravagances that entailed.

The common people like Amos, the shepherd and fruit grower, did not share in this new wealth. The shrines of Bethel and Gilgal were crowded with wealthy worshipers who interpreted their prosperity as a sign of God’s favour. Because the priests and prophets at the sanctuaries also benefited from the lavish offerings they had no inclination to dampen the confident hypocrisy of their benefactors.

Amos represented the lower classes, particularly the farmers and labourers who had no share in the prosperity of the times. Not far away, however, a new Assyrian emperor, Tiglath-Pileser, had gained power and was moving his armies resolutely westward to subjugate the Syrian and Palestinian kingdoms once again. We cannot be sure that Amos was aware of this new threat. He certainly recognized that the blatant corruption and faithlessness of the Israelites could not last. The day of judgment, “the fearful Day of the Lord,” was at hand. His pleas that the Israelites return to their traditional life based on faith and justice went unheard.

Has he yet been heard by any nation or empire blessed with great wealth and power?

PSALM 90:12-17. (Alternate) This psalm is still used to celebrate the transitory nature of nature of human life and the eternal security we have in God. It may originally have existed in two different parts, vss. 1-12 and 13-17. This excerpt emphasizes our human need to maintain a faithful relationship with God throughout our lives. The most natural break would seem to come at the end of vs. 12, thus making this reading an excerpt from both parts. There seems to be no apparent reason for the RCL to truncate the whole psalm in this manner.

Its title in the Hebrew scriptures, “A prayer of Moses, the man of God,” gave it a supreme distinction rather than definitive authorship. Hence it was placed at the beginning of the fourth collection of the Psalter. Of all the psalms this one may have greater familiarity for most church people because of its frequent use in the service of Christian burial.

The theme of the poem is the eternity of God in contrast to the transitory nature of human life. This presentation of the theme appears “to skirt the very edge of pessimism, and might well lead the poet down into the abyss where men say, ‘All is vanity’…. But the native Hebrew is saved from the final descent by a deep understanding and a fierce moral earnestness…. The Psalmist … may have had his doubts at times, but in the light of his initial certainty, which he never lets go, all doubts are resolved. The Everlasting Nay is finally overcome by the Everlasting Yes.” (John Paterson. The Praises of Israel. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1950. 126-7.)

One is reminded of similar beautiful passages of the unnamed prophet of the Babylonian exile (cf. Isa. 40; 55) which also expressed the same prophetic message. Can the similarity of Isa. 40:6-8 and Ps. 90:5-6 be accidental? Beginning with the affirmation of the permanence of God in vss. 1-2, the psalmist delved deeply into the fragile and ephemeral quality of human life. In vs. 12 he drew the natural conclusion that wisdom brings to every reflective person of faith. The shortness of life compels one to make wise use of our brief span of years. In the latter part of the poem, the psalmist returns to the original theme and acknowledges how dependent we are on the compassion and steadfast love of God (vss. 13-15).

Many senior women of The United Church of Canada may recall that the Women’s Association used vss. 16-17 as their motto in the years prior to 1960 when amalgamation with the Women’s Missionary Society took place to form the United Church Women. That part of the denomination has since evolved into a more amorphous Women of The United Church.

HEBREWS 4:12-16. This brief excerpt places utmost importance on our confession as believers and followers of Jesus Christ set forth in the common teaching of the New Testament. It does so in terms that would have been familiar to Jewish Christians of the latter part of the 1st century CE. In particular it describes the supremacy of Christ as our high priest who experienced all the temptations that we face, but did not sin. Because of this we may approach life and life beyond death in God’s eternal presence with boldness knowing that the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ has made faithful living possible.

The latter part of the reading compares the suffering and death of Jesus to the ritual performed by the Jewish high priest on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. It proclaims that Jesus’ death and resurrection accomplished once and for all as the final, necessary atonement for our sin. The emphasis is not placed on the ritual but on the sinless nature of the one performing it.

At first reading there may seem to be no direct connection between vss. 12-13 and 14-16, especially as printed separate paragraphs in the NSRV and discussed in numerous commentaries. On closer examination, however, the initial verses refer to the proclamation of the gospel of salvation through faith in the life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. The use of the phrase “the word of God” as “living and active” recalls John 1:1-18 which introduced the central theme of the Gospel as it was preached toward the latter years of the 1st century. The idea of the word of God as a sword also has parallels, not only in Ephesians 6:17, but in the works of Philo, the Alexandrian Jewish contemporary of Jesus, who used an almost identical metaphor. In the next section beginning at 4:14, the writer goes on to elaborate his main theme of the work of Jesus Christ as the one and only Saviour. We must thus see this as a transitional passage linking two quite distinct sections of the Letter to the Hebrews.

MARK 10:17-31. This passage may be difficult for us to hear in our consumer age where wealth and possessions matter so much. The questioner who accosted Jesus as he set out on a journey had led an exemplary moral life and had an earnest desire for a more meaningful spiritual life. But he lacked one thing: the inability to separate himself from his great wealth. Jesus used the opportunity to explain to his disciples why wealth was such a stumbling block and promised that those who were faithful would be rewarded for whatever sacrifice they made.

The reading falls naturally into several small, equally preachable segments, but probably not all at once. First is the way the man addressed Jesus and the response Jesus gave him. The term “Good Teacher” may have been no more than a polite exaggeration, a kind of solicitude that bespoke more of the man’s anxiety than his sincerity. To bring him back to reality, Jesus challenged this overreaching by making a self-effacing statement about himself. He did not claim moral perfection, only the humility of being human. Only God is perfect.

Then Jesus gave a thumbnail sketch of the latter half of the Decalogue, those commandments which deal with human relationships. After the man had protested his moral excellence in keeping all those commandments, Jesus struck home with his final challenge: the man’s covetousness. His wealth was so much a part of his self-esteem that he could not face the prospect of parting with it.

The final segment of the passage brought the disciples into the picture. An almost offhand remark that riches can be an impediment to spirituality, startled them to the point of disbelief. Which one among them did not have a longing for greater financial security? That surely must have been a cause for anxiety in their early discipleship which had taken them from their homes and businesses to follow Jesus. As usual Peter spoke for all of them, giving voice to their sacrificial choice. Jesus dealt with their fears by promising that their reward was assured – wide acceptance in the family of God and beyond death eternal life.

This passage must have been of great importance to the Roman community to which Mark’s Gospel was addressed. Those from the upper class who had heard and responded to the Gospel had much to lose – prestige, power, wealth. Those from the underclass had nothing to lose but their lives if their masters turned against them. If the former had been disturbed by the story of Jesus and the rich man, the latter had been reassured that they were now accepted as ordinary members of the new community of faith.

Christians still have difficulty dealing with their community as a truly classless fellowship. Various denominations, and even congregations, have been formed to isolate one group from another. In many urban settings, the churches of one group or another can be easily distinguished by their architecture and the size of their staff. There is really only one fellowship in the church – the koinonia of the Spirit in which there is only one Lord – Jesus Christ himself.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Nineteenth Sunday After Pentecost
Canadian Thanksgiving Sunday
October 11, 2009

PLEASE NOTE: Monday, October 12 is Thanksgiving Day in Canada. Most Canadian churches celebrate the festival on this Sunday. Americans will celebrate Thanksgiving Day on Thursday, November 26, during the week between The Reign of Christ and Advent 1. The RCL lessons for Thanksgiving that are presented here.

JOEL 2:21-27. In every culture the harvest season is a time of thanksgiving. Such celebrations occurred in ancient Israel as this excerpt from one of their minor prophets shows. The images of plenty pour out on the page, line after line, like the fruits of harvest pouring from a cornucopia. What is more, this abundant harvest came after years of privation. The significant element of this celebration comes to the fore in the phrase “rejoice in the Lord your God.” Providential grace, not human effort alone, yields the abundant harvest.

PSALM 126. This was another of the songs that might have been sung by pilgrims making their way up to the temple in Jerusalem. It celebrated Israel’s deliverance from the Babylonian captivity. The concluding prayer asked for God’s help in renewing the nation as the dry watercourses of the Negev desert and the reaping of an abundant harvest restored prosperity.

1 TIMOTHY 2:1-7. The two Letters to Timothy probably date from about 120-140 AD. A church leader, perhaps a bishop using Paul’s name, wrote to guide a younger pastor (or several pastors) in his (their) ministry. Among other counsel, he warned about a serious heresy. Here he gave instructions about how and for whom to pray. Most surprising is the inclusion of the king (i.e. the Roman emperor) and government officials. The philosophy behind the Canadian Constitution reflects this very contemporary prayer in the words, “peace, order and good government.”

MATTHEW 6:25-33. This well-known passage from the Sermon on the Mount declared that the secret to God’s ample provision for human need are trust and obedience to God’s righteous rule. Our response to God’s plentiful grace, not anxious manipulation of economic and financial systems, will bring about the universal prosperity God wants all of us to enjoy.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

JOEL 2:21-27. In every culture the harvest season is a time of thanksgiving. Such celebrations occurred in ancient Israel as this excerpt from one of their minor prophets shows. The images of plenty pour out on the page, line after line, like the fruits of harvest pouring from a cornucopia. What is more, this abundant harvest came after years of privation.

The passage does not stand alone, however, but is part of a carefully constructed prophecy balancing an oracle of doom with this celebratory promise of restoration and providence. Nor does the chapter stand in isolation from what goes before it in chapter 1. Together these three parts form a dramatic whole which can be quickly summarized in narrative form as follows.

A plague of locusts and a drought has devastated the land. Despite performing all the appropriate rituals of fasting and repentance, nothing could stop the total destruction of the nation. To the prophet this could only mean that the Day of the Lord was near (1:15). Dire warnings (2:1-11) and pleas on behalf of Yahweh for a return to faithfulness end in the declaration of a fast and further rituals of repentance. Finally, the prophet is able to speak for Yahweh promising an end to the plague of locusts, the resurgence of growing things and the return of prosperity. All of this has but one intent: to show that Yahweh is in the midst of Israel and Yahweh’s people will never again be put to shame.

We are almost totally ignorant about who Joel was and when he prophesied. The emphasis on temple rituals and frequent reference to the priesthood suggest that he can best be placed in the post-exilic period circa 400 BCE. The events which inspired his prophesies, however, are quite clearly defined in the text. Christian use of Joel’s oracles, however, are almost exclusively limited to 2:28 which formed the text for Peter’s sermon on Pentecost in Acts 2. That isolated quotation gives a clue to the real significance of Joel. Here Jewish apocalypticism of the intertestamental period began to take shape.

The natural catastrophe of locusts and drought prefigured a theological interpretation that cast these events on a cosmic scale. Yahweh’s purpose in covenanting with Israel held promise of both privation and privilege depending on how Yahweh’s people responded. Yet this would not necessarily take place within a historical context. Yahweh’s vision of a renewed creation could only reach fulfillment in the spiritual realm and be implemented in the natural world through the inspiration of the Spirit.

It was this element of redemptive apocalypticism which the Apostolic Church embraced as its mandate. The resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead marked the beginning of this new age of universal peace and plenty.

The significant aspect of this passage comes in vs. 23 “rejoice in the Lord your God.” Providential grace, not human effort alone, yields the abundant harvest which we celebrate at Thanksgiving. But widespread hunger and homelessness – in this country and to a greater degree in other parts of the world – surely point to the stark reality that the God’s vision of a time of peace and plenty for all people, not for one nation alone, is still far from fulfilled.

PSALM 126. This was another of the songs that might have been sung by pilgrims making their way up to the temple in Jerusalem. It celebrated Israel’s deliverance from the Babylonian captivity. The concluding prayer asked for God’s help in renewing the nation as the dry watercourses of the Negev desert and the reaping of an abundant harvest restored prosperity.

The very first words of the psalm reveal the setting. An alternate reading actual clarifies this historical reference: “When the Lord brought back those who returned to Zion ….” This confidence in what Yahweh has done carries through vv. 1-3 with increasing expectation. In all probability the psalmist was recalling the hope and promise of the period immediately following the return of the Babylonians captives and the rebuilding of the temple in 538-520 BCE. But those hopes were now a fading memory as barren as the dry wadis of the Negeb before the autumnal rains.

Like every farmer at seeding time, hope for harvest rests in the often variable elements of rain and sunshine. With these in sufficient supply, a joyful harvest comes forth. Without these disaster occurs. Remembering what has happened in the past and what could happen now, the psalmist’s hopes are not without uncertainty. So as the prayer of vv. 4-6 points out, this is really a lament seeking consolation containing a new golden age as promised the post-exilic prophecies of Deutero-Isaiah 55:12-13, Zechariah 8:1-23 and Haggai 2:1-25. Psalm 85 also voices similar hopes that have been in vain.

Perhaps with too much subtlety, some scholars have suggested that this psalm had a liturgical purpose as part as preparation for the New Year festival with promise of the reviving of life and hope.

1 TIMOTHY 2:1-7. Although still subject to scholarly debate, the Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus) probably date from about 120-140 CE. An anonymous church leader, using Paul’s name, wrote these episcopal letters to guide less experienced pastors in their ministry. It must be said, however, that other scholarly opinions propose different theories as to their date and origin. For example, William Barclay believed that the author had before him some clippings from personal communications from Paul around which he composed an amplified series of letters more suited to the church of his times. His special concern was to protect the church from a dangerous heresy, probably Gnosticism.

In this passage, we read the senior pastor’s instructions about how and for whom to pray. Most surprising is the inclusion of the king (i.e. the Roman emperor) and government officials “so that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and dignity.” The philosophy behind the Canadian Constitution reflects this very contemporary prayer in its intent: to create a state where “peace, order and good government” exist.

The significant aspect of this call to prayer is that it exists at all. It represents an attitude toward the Roman imperial government which may have existed during a relatively peaceful time in early church history. Indeed, it conveys such a degree of respect as to include the government in God’s will and extends the promise of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ to those who rule. Could this have been Paul himself speaking? After all, according to Acts 25:11, he claimed his right of Roman citizenship to appeal to the emperor; and in Romans 13:1-7 counseled the Christians in Rome to be subject to governing authorities, to obey the laws of the state and to pay their taxes.

On the other hand, the theme of the passage in not civil governance, but the universality of the Christian faith. Having come into serious conflict with the imperial cult, Christians would not pray to the emperor, but by praying for the emperor. By doing so they removed any danger of being charged with disloyalty while at the same time placing all imperial authority under the sovereignty of God. This type of prayer made the civil government the subject of salvation and continued until the emperor became Christian.

This summons to prayer also reflects a view very distinct from that of the true Pauline letters. For Paul, there was a permanent tension between the political and spiritual realms. This tension would cease only when Christ returned to establish his reign. Paul expected that to occur in the very near future. Expectation of the Second Coming having faded, the author of the Pastorals was concerned with how Christians were to live in the world in practical ways that helped them to be good Roman citizens. Thus even the Roman government was of concern to God. Nonetheless, salvation did not depend on the political system or the favour of human authorities. It depended on the gospel of Jesus Christ to which the author of the letter and the Christian church as a whole gave witness as the truth given by God.

That this letter is not from Paul but from a much later apostolic representative is clearly shown in vs. 7. Having worked intimately with Paul for several years, Timothy would not have needed to be reassured of Paul’s apostleship or his mandate to preach to and teach Gentiles. Furthermore, the triad of preacher, apostle, teacher appears only in this passage and in 2 Timothy 1:11. Paul never designated his office in this manner. Rather, we see here the developing church order of the 2nd century as one of its key leaders sought to establish a pastoral institution which would both carry out the apostolic mission and protect its representatives from the threats of civic authorities.

It is frequently said that the Constaninian Age of the church has now ended. Church and state no longer engage one another for mutual benefit. The church today lives in a similar space to that reflected in this letter. As William Hazlitt (1778-1830) said in a very different context, we have to live “in the world, as in it, not of it.” The celebration of the Thanksgiving, no longer a religious festival, but a holiday mandated by the civil authorities, is a case in point. Our worship will make it more than the last long weekend of the season.

MATTHEW 6:25-33. This well-known passage from the Sermon on the Mount declared the secret to God’s ample provision for human need: trust and obedience to God’s righteous rule. Our grateful response to God’s plentiful grace, not anxious manipulation of economic and financial systems, will bring about the universal prosperity God wants all of us to enjoy.

Would that these values could be translated into action by the economic and political decision makers of the global institutions we are in the process of creating. We tend to forget how much change has occurred in the past few decades. One recent estimate held that just a century ago the vast majority of the world’s population had no more annual income than the poorest people of the world today. Was it Gandhi who said, “If everyone cares enough and everyone shares enough, there will always be enough”?

In 1971, just prior to the first oil crisis and as the computer revolution was just beginning , the noted economist, Robert Heilbronner (1919-2005), predicted that no one would ever again be as rich as North Americans had become and the global economy would never be as fully developed as it was at that time. How wrong he was! Yet the boom and bust of the first decade of the 21st century causes even the most optimistic to question what lies ahead.

In1995, Heilbronner summarized 188 reports of economic development he had received from international observers on three continents in these prophetic words: “Their common insight is that the global free-market paradigm is neither viable ecologically in the long term, nor adequate, in the short term, to meet the basic needs of all peoples for human development. Those interviewed were not ideologues and had no ready-made alternative to offer, but they are searching for broader alternative approaches to development, ones that include a critical handling of cultural and spiritual values. I say a critical handling because most of those interviewed have no illusions about how easily cultural and religious values can be frozen into external forms and institutions that betray their original meaning. They would agree with Mohamad Sahnoun: manifestations of cultural and religious values, like values found in the dominant economic paradigm, secularism, individualism, materialism, paternalism, and marketism can become modern ‘golden calves.’”
(The Crisis of Vision in Modern Economic Thought. (with William S. Milberg), 1995.)

We do need a new vision of how to work out on a global scale what this gospel reading anticipated. Theologian Gabriel Fackre called it “God’s Vision” for the world. The Commission on Global Governance, in its 1995 report, Our Global Neighbourhood, affirmed the need for “neighbourhood ethics” and “neighbourhood values” as the cornerstone of future global governance. The report quoted Barbara Ward as suggesting that “people have to see with new eyes and understand with new minds before they can truly turn to new ways of living.” The quotation continued:

“The most important change that people can make is to change their way of looking at the world. We can change studies, jobs, neighbourhoods, even countries and continents and still remain much as we always were. But change our fundamental angle of vision and everything changes our priorities, our values, our judgments, our pursuits. Again and again, in the history of religion, this total upheaval in the imagination has marked the beginning of a new life… a turning of the heart, a “metanoia,” by which men [sic] see with new eyes and understand with new minds and turn their energies to new ways of living.”

In 2000, Paul Martin, then Canada’s minister of finance, made an earnest plea to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to extend a moratorium on burdensome debt repayments that cause developing nations to restrict their spending on health and education, and so worsens the cycle of ever increasing poverty and disease. Commitments of this kind can only help those in greatest need in those parts of the world that made the developed countries wealthy in the colonial period of past centuries. This is carrying into the global economy the justice and righteousness of God which Jesus set before us in the gospel for today.

Six years later, at the 16th World Conference on HIV/AIDS, held in Toronto, Canada, similar appeals were made. In many African nations, one of the main inhibitors to fighting this global epidemic is the almost total absence of health systems to provide the help needed by millions of impoverished victims of all ages. This has been due in large part to the drastic reduction in the systems to support health services mandated by those very same funding agencies.

With a new influenza pandemic at hand caused by the H1N1 virus, we can be thankful that so many individuals, governmental and non-governmental agencies are making valiant efforts to stem the destructive tide of destructive illness and disease. But we need to do so much more in restructuring the political and economic means of making health services and global economic health available to everyone, especially the poor of the world who are most in need.

As this commentary is being written, the United States, the wealthiest country in the world, is in the throes of a double crisis: an unstable economy and a failing health care system based on the profit motive. Other rich, developed nations are struggling with the problem of finding adequate ways to pay for ever-increasing health care costs, let alone all other services, even when paid for through general taxation. The needs of less wealthy and poverty stricken nations is a great burden and cause for deep anxiety to our Christian consciousness. How are we to love our neighbours is such critical situations? Thanks be to God that Jesus has shown us the way: Abundant life is the promise to those who sacrifice in love for others. (John 10:10; 15:12-13)

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Eighteenth Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 22 Ordinary 27
October 4, 2009


JOB 1:1; 2:1-10. The Book of Job is a long poetic work from a large body of “wisdom literature.” Only some of that collection was included in the Hebrew scriptures. Job is unusual in that it deals with a single theological issue: the problem of suffering.

In this excerpt in story form, the stage is set for the testing of Job’s faith. Satan (a Hebrew word meaning “the Accuser”) acts like a prosecutor at a trial in God’s heavenly court to see whether or not Job will deny his trust in God as a result of continual suffering.

PSALM 26. This psalm is a fitting accompaniment to the lesson from Job. It protests the innocence of faithfulness of an individual worshiper. Integrity is the operative word throughout as a devoted Jew pleads for God’s vindication.

GENESIS 2:18-24. (Alternate) No end of confusion comes from attempting to correlate the two descriptions of creation in Genesis 1 and 2. This is the earlier of the two, dating from the 8th century BCE whereas the first comes from the 6th century BCE.

The interpretation of the creation of woman from a rib of man, distinct from all other creatures, signals what became a rigid tradition for many: the subjugation of women. Another possible translation if the Hebrew word for “rib” is “side.” This gives much wider meaning to the rest of the passage of the woman as an equal helper, partner and “one flesh.”

PSALM 8. (Alternate) The psalmist first contemplates the glory of God manifested in the wonders of the heavens. And yet the psalmist reflects on the minute place of humanity in such a vast universe. The environmental issues for us are vastly different than they were when this psalm was composed. Sadly, by taking the text literally, we have excessively exploited our role as God’s vice-regents with “dominion” over nature.

HEBREWS 1:1-4; 2:5-12. Few passages in the New Testament contains a higher expression of Christology defining the true role of Jesus Christ in the Christian tradition. Ch. 1:1-4 summarizes the basic message of the gospels. Ch. 2:5-12 gives us a clear definition of God’s plan in coming among us in Jesus: to bring us into the glorious presence of God.

MARK 10:2-16. Jesus voiced his profound concern for stable family life and for children. In Roman society, marriage had one purpose – to provide a legal heir who would inherit a man’s property. In Jewish society, men could divorce their wives for any reason, or even at a whim. Wives had no such right without their husband’s consent. In vv.10-12, Jesus put women on an equal footing.

The setting of the two subjects in sequence is surely not by chance. It is fully evident in our day as in Jesus’ time that women and children suffer most when love dies and marriages are dissolved by divorce. Modern society is moving inexorably to separate what is meant by civil and religious marriage. A clear distinction can be drawn between a civil contract and a sacred covenant made as an act of worship in which God participates.

A MORE COMPLETE ANLAYSIS.

JOB 1:1; 2:1-10. The Book of Job is one of the treasures of the Hebrew Scriptures. This long poetic work comes from a large body of “wisdom literature” only some of which was included in our Bible. It is probable that the present literary work is dependent a much older story. This present version has been interpreted by some scholars as analogous to the suffering of Israel during the Babylonian exile. Others have seen the prologue and epilogue as an independent story for which the poetic dialogue (3:1- 42:16) was separately composed.

Job is unusual from most Hebrew scriptures in that it deals with a single theological issue: the problem of suffering. It was designed as a drama in which the prelude is contained in chs. 1 & 2 and epilogue in ch. 42:7-17. Between these we have a series of dialogues in which Job argues with three friends with great intensity, and a fourth who seems somewhat out of place. He contends that he is suffering unjustly while they insist that his suffering is caused by sin, known or unknown. Then, in chs. 32-37, a younger accuser enters the debate berating Job for his intransigence. Finally, God answers Job’s complaint with a series of rhetorical questions to which there can be no response. Job admits his ignorance, but the issue remains an unresolved mystery.

The discussion deals with three aspects of the problem of suffering: Why do people suffer and what are its origins? Is there such a thing as innocent suffering? What am I to do when I am suffering? The first two questions do not have a satisfactory answer. The last may involve an encounter with God, which only provides an indirect, existential answer, but also tests one’s faith to the limit.

This excerpt in story form, sets the stage for the testing of Job’s faith. Satan (a Hebrew word meaning “the Accuser”) acts like a prosecutor at a trial in God’s heavenly court to see whether or not Job will deny his trust in God as a result of continual suffering.

However we may wish to deal with the problem of suffering, perhaps the more poignant issue is the theology of the anthropocentric universe that lies behind the problem as the Book of Job portrays it. This theology follows the Priestly Document of the late 6th century BCE separating creation from deity. One finds it first in Genesis 1, followed by many psalms and much of the Wisdom literature. Koheleth or Ecclesiastes may be the exception in our scriptures. A comment by a radical thinker on this issue, Bishop John Selby Spong, challenges this theology as recently expressed in his weekly e-mail newsletter available through Agora Media or Beliefnet.com .

Spong’s view is that theism is only one theology – and a late one at that – to be found in scriptures. By buying into theism, that we are “a little lower than the angels,” we have turned the universe into our playground, free as God’s surrogates to be the most aggressive bullies and always available to exercise our domination. So we can do as we will with the natural resources, all non-human species and God’s gifts of air, climate and every ecosystem from the most minute to the greatest. We are now beginning to see the consequences of such misconceptions as environmental disaster awaits all who pursue such practices.

To restore the balance in creation, we must redefine our theology, its definition of God and our relationship to God. We have misread our scriptures, Spong claims, and should now begin to search the Bible anew for a different, more appropriate and yet valid definition of God.

Could the source of human suffering be in ourselves? As the cartoon character Pogo once said, “We have seen the enemy and it is us.”

PSALM 26. This psalm is a fitting accompaniment to the lesson from Job. It protests the innocence of faithfulness of an individual worshiper. Integrity is the operative word throughout as he or she pleads for God’s vindication.

The word t’m pronounced “tome” and translated integrity is used relatively little and usually late in the Hebrew scriptures, most often in the Psalms and Proverbs. It speaks of innocence, completeness or perfection. The psalm itself is similar in tone to Pss. 3-5, 7 and 17. All are laments of individuals, but also closely associated with the post-exilic temple liturgy (vss. 6-8,12).

At first, the psalm appears to be a private appeal to Yahweh by a worshiper pleading innocence and faithfulness, not once but again and again. The specific situation is so general that it could be used by anyone seeking acquittal from guilt of a very personal nature or consorting with evildoers, especially those who make a business of crime. One thinks of the exorbitant funerals celebrated for senior members of the Mafia or Hell’s Angels. As such the psalm could be used by any individual or a group come to declare their innocence in a liturgical setting. It has been suggested that vss.6-7 should be relocated after vs.12 because they appear to refer to processions that circle an altar, as described in 1 Kings 18:26 and Ps. 118:27.

GENESIS 2:18-24. (Alternate) No end of confusion comes from attempting to correlate the two descriptions of creation in Genesis 1 and 2. This is the earlier of the two, dating from the 8th century BCE whereas the first comes from the 6th century BCE.

The interpretation of the creation of woman from a rib of man, distinct from all other creatures, has long been claimed as evidence for a rigid tradition: the subjugation of women as inferior to man. Another possible translation of the Hebrew word for “rib” (tsala) is “side.” This gives much wider meaning to the rest of the passage of the woman as an equal helper or partner and of the couple as having “one flesh.”

It would appear that Philo, the Alexandrian Jewish scholar of the 1st century CE adopted this interpretation: “The letter of this statement is plain enough; for it is expressed according to the symbol of the part, a half of the whole, each party, the man and the woman, being as sections of nature co-equal for the production of that genus which is called man.” (The Works Of Philo, 796. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts.)
This approach is featured in a copyright article by Wayne Simpson, distributed by the Biblical Research Foundation, of Sapulpa, OK. He concluded that a woman created from a rib was once a simple if dramatic metaphor. It can now be reinterpreted as a beautiful symbol for the most profound relationship between men and women. He felt that God gave woman an absolutely equal status with man. (http://www.jasher.com/Adamsrib.htm)

PSALM 8. (Alternate) Without any knowledge of modern astronomy or space research, the psalmist first contemplated the glory of God manifested in the wonders of the heavens. One can imagine a devout courtier like Isaiah standing on the flat rooftop of his Jerusalem home or a herdsman like Amos watching over his resting flock on a Judean hillside. As either of them gazed into the heavens they saw the panoply of stars spread out above them and a full moon rising over Jordan. We who have spent summer nights at Canadian camps and cottages or watched the northern lights illuminate a winter sky know well how such a scene gives one an overwhelming sense of how infinitely small and insignificant we are.

And yet, the psalmist reflects not only on the minute place of humanity in such a vast universe. He also brings his faith to bear on his sense of smallness. He knows that we have a special relationship with the Creator of this universe and hence a special relationship with the created world in which we presently live. (vv.5-8).

The environmental issues for us are vastly different than they were when this psalm was composed. Sadly, by taking the text literally, we have excessively exploited our role as God’s vice-regents with “dominion” over nature. That calls for repentance and radical change in our attitudes and our actions, individually, communally, globally. We must think of ourselves as stewards rather than masters of creation. We can only continue to praise our Sovereign Lord’s majestic name if we accept total responsibility for restoring our right relationship with God’s creation. As The New Creed of The United Church of Canada states, we must learn that we are “called to be the Church … to live with respect in creation.” The latter phrase was added under the leadership of our Moderator, Very Rev. Stan Mackay, who was a member of the Cree Nation.

HEBREWS 1:1-4; 2:5-12. Few passages in the New Testament contains a higher expression of Christology defining the role of Jesus Christ in the Christian tradition. Ch. 1:1-4 summarizes the basic message of the gospels: the incarnation, life on earth, death, resurrection and ascension of the Son of God. Ch. 2:5-12 gives us a clear definition of God’s plan in coming among us in Jesus: to bring us to the glorious presence of God.

There is an intentionality about the Letter to the Hebrews which sets it apart from other so-called epistles. The author and the exact date of its composition remain unknown although there are illusions to it in Clement of Rome’s letter to the Corinthians written before the end of the 1st century CE. Presumably Clement knew but did not say who the author was. Authorship did not become an important issue until Jerome assigned it to Paul and the Latin Vulgate in the 5th century CE and so identified it for next 1000 years.

Two significant factors cancel that possibility: the style is totally different from Paul’s and the writer refers to having received the gospel directly from those who heard Jesus (2:3). It is not really a letter at all, but much more like an essay designed to convince Jewish Christians, probably those in the Diaspora, of the supremacy of Christ over the Levitical priesthood associated with the temple and to encourage them to remain faithful during a time of crisis when many were tempted to withdraw from the Christian fellowship.

This could be a clue that the date of its composition was just before or just after the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 CE. In her helpful study of Hebrews, Frances Taylor Gench posits a much broader range of dates from the time of the expulsion of Jews from Rome by Emperor Claudius in the early 60s to the threat of persecution of Christians by Emperor Domitian ca. 95. Jewish Christians were also denied participation in synagogues after the Synod of Jamnia toward the end of the 1st century CE. (Hebrews and James. Westminster Companion to the Bible. Westminster JohnKnox Press 1996.)

The issue of the supremacy of Christ stated in these passages also forms the general theme of the whole essay. Neither angels, the law of Moses, or Aaron and the old order of the priesthood could match or surpass what God has done for those who believe in Jesus Christ. The elements of temple worship are very much in the author’s mind as are contemporary concepts of angels, those heavenly agents of God’s will and purpose on earth and courtiers in heaven. It is not necessary for modern humans to worship as did the Jews of that time or accept the traditional concepts of angels in order to understand the message: Nothing supercedes Jesus Christ in bringing God’s purpose to fulfillment. On the other hand, the figure of Christ suffering as a pioneer of faith or exemplar of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah comes to the fore (2:10-12). This same image reappears most vividly in chs. 11:1-12:11.

MARK 10:2-16. Jesus here voiced his profound concern for stable family life and for children. In Roman society, marriage had one purpose – to provide a legal heir who would inherit a man’s property. In Jewish society, men could divorce their wives for any reason, but wives had no such right without their husband’s consent. In vv.10-12, Jesus put women on an equal footing.

The setting of the vulnerability of women and children in sequence is surely not by chance. It is fully evident in our day as in Jesus’ time that women and children suffer most when love dies and marriage is dissolved by divorce. Modern society is moving inexorably to separate what the difference between civil and religious marriage. The distinction lies in the fact that a civil contract can be negotiated away but a sacred tripartite spiritual covenant is made as an act of worship in which God participates along with a man and a woman.

But how does one deal with this passage at a time when the ratio of divorce to marriage is 1:2? Many people in every congregation and many in the order of ministry have been through the painful experience of grieving for a broken marriage. Many of the more traditional church folk are irate that in many legal jurisdictions marriage is no longer considered an exclusively heterosexual relationship.

These anomalies appear to deny the very words of Jesus himself in vss.6-9. As one who has experienced a frequently stressed but deepening relationship with my spouse of more than 55 years, I personally would have difficulty preaching on this passage.

The Complete Gospels: Scholars Annotated Version (Robert J. Miller, ed., Polebridge Press, 1992) has a helpful comment. The Pharisees had malice in their hearts as they put their question to Jesus. He responded by jousting with them, using his own scriptural quotations to counter theirs. He gave precedence to the opening chapters of Genesis over the Mosaic tradition from Deuteronomy 24:1-4. In a subsequent and private conversation with the disciples, he did not forbid divorce so much as remarriage.

That may not be a very satisfactory solution for the modern age. Perhaps it would be best for us to acknowledge our sinfulness and failure in creating lasting relationships for whatever reason. There are many different reasons why divorce may be the best of bad options. Roman Catholicism adopts another attitude that tends toward casuistry. Absolute divorce is forbidden but a marriage may be annulled when it can be shown
that a true marriage did not exist according to the appropriate doctrine of the church. A marriage deemed to be non-Christian in the eyes of the church, however, may be granted an absolute divorce. For most mainline Protestant churches, divorce can still present tricky questions which does not have an easy or logical religious solution.

As the influence of churches in society declines, marriage and divorce may best be left to the civil authorities to deal with while the churches concentrate on the spiritual and covenantal aspects in both premarital and post-marital counseling.

-30-