John Shearman's Lectionary

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Proper 7  Ordinary 12
Fourth Sunday After Pentecost – June 20, 2010.

1 KINGS 19:1-15a. Elijah the prophet was on the run from Queen Jezebel whose foreign priests he had defeated in a contest of spiritual power.  He was still in God’s care, however, and after being provided with food and drink in the desert, he came at last to the mountain where God had given the covenant law to Moses. But he could never escape responsibility as God’s prophet. After a windstorm, an earthquake and a raging fire, God spoke to him with a still, small voice within to give him a new commission.

ISAIAH 65:1-9. (Alternate)   In this eschatological song God offers both judgment and hope for Israel after the return of the exiles from Babylon, ca. 539 BCE. Judgment came because of a series of unholy religious practices (vss. 3-5) possibly related to a  nature cult. Yet God promised not to destroy the whole people and to restore them to their traditional land.

PSALM 42 AND 43. These two psalms were originally one. The first part laments a deep sense of absence from God. Yet the psalmist hopes that he will eventually have reason to praise God. The second part prays that his faith will be vindicated as he goes to the temple to worship.

PSALM 22:19-28. (Alternate)  Like all laments, this excerpt pleads with God for rescue, acknowledges God’s sovereignty and promises to be faithful. It envisions a hopeful future in which posterity will serve the Lord.

GALATIANS 3:23-29. One of Paul’s most decisive statements declares that faith in Jesus Christ has removed all barriers to a relationship with God for all who believe. He claims that the law given to Moses was like a schoolteacher disciplining us until Jesus came to make us all God’s children and heirs with Christ. Now, we are all children of Abraham and heirs of all God’s promises to Israel.

LUKE 8:26-39. This story appears to set Jesus’ compassion for the man chained among the tombs against compassion for the Gentile people of this community east of the Sea of Galilee. Is it a garbled story of a person with severe mental illness being healed after his frantic outcries had panicked the pigs? Or did Jesus fail to convince the unbelieving Gadarenes who had lost their pigs of God’s compassionate love?  Even for the most sane among us, the struggle to believe can be tormenting.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

1 KINGS 19:1-18. Most Westerners read a story from beginning to end. The various pericopes that present Elijah as one of Israel’s greatest prophets do not follow this orderly pattern. Scholarly opinion views some of the stories in which Elijah appears as coming from two different sets, the Elijah and the Ahab cycles. The editors of the Deuteronomic history of Israel, created after the return from exile in Babylon, wove these two sets of stories obtained from different sources into their overall narrative of the Davidic monarchy.

Only 1 Kings 17-19; 2 Kings 1:1-18; 1 Kings 21 and 2 Kings 9:1-10:31 appear to come from the Elijah cycle. The Ahab cycle includes 1 Kings 20:1-43; 22:1-38; 2 Kings 3:4-27; 6:8-23 and 6:24-7:20. The main theme of the Elijah cycle from which this week’s reading is taken is the preservation of the monotheist tradition against the Baal-worship imported by Ahab’s queen, Jezebel, daughter of the priest-king of Tyre. It has been suggested by some scholars that Psalm 45 bears evidence of being a love song in which Ahab and Jezebel appear as the two participants.

In this part of the narrative Elijah was on the run from Queen Jezebel whose foreign priests he had defeated in a contest of spiritual power on Mount Carmel.  He was still in God’s care, however. After being provided with food and drink in the desert, he came at last to the mountain where God had given the covenant law to Moses.

Elijah’s forty day journey to Horeb, the mount of God (aka Mount Sinai), appears to have been more symbolic than real. It compares with Moses sojourn at Mount Sinai without food or drink as recorded in Exodus 34:28. There may be other reflections of the Sinai narrative in the Elijah story: the cleft of the rock and the mouth of the cave (Ex. 32:22 cf. 1 Kgs. 19:9, 13), the covering of the face (Ex. 32:22 cf.1 Kgs. 19:13; thousands remaining faithful (Ex. 34:7 cf. 1 Kgs. 19:18). The symbolism points to a recalling of the faithful to the ancient tradition established by Yahweh in the covenant at Mount Sinai. The particular aspect of the covenant relationship emphasized here is the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods.”

Whatever Elijah’s actual experience may have been, he could never escape responsibility as God’s prophet. After a windstorm, an earthquake and a raging fire, God spoke to him with a still, small voice within and gave him a new commission. Such theophanies and their accompanying natural phenomena were common in Israel’s tradition, especially in the patriarchal narratives in Genesis. They were not peculiar to the Israelites, however, and can be found in traditions of other ancient peoples. In the Psalms and some of the prophets, the warrior image of Yahweh is often accompanied by similar violent natural phenomena (Pss. 18:7-15 & 46:1-7; Nahum 1:2-6; Habakkuk 3:8-15; Jeremiah 10:13.) These are instances where Yahweh is identified as having a special relationship with Israel alone.

Numerous homilies on the still, small voice have concentrated on the inner voice of conscience. That often tends to be guilt-laden. So it may have been for Elijah and called forth some self-justification (vss. 13-14). True as that may be, emphasis needs to be placed more heavily on continuing reflection on the divine mission to which Israel was originally called and is now summoned to return (vss. 15-18).

ISAIAH 65:1-9. (Alternate)    Scholars have had considerable difficulty dating this passage.  It appears to be the work of the school of prophet-poets sometimes referred to as Third Isaiah (Isa. 56-66). Like the poem that follows it in ch. 66, it expresses the eschatological vision of “a new heaven and a new earth” (vs. 17) as well as uttering judgment against Israel’s past aberrant religious practices.  It would appear that God offers both judgment and hope for Israel after the return of some of the exiles from Babylon, ca. 539 BCE. By no means did all those who had been transported return to their homeland.

The poem consists of ten strophes, although only the first four make up this extract, and not all of the fourth is included (vs. 10). The first strophe (vss. 1-2) presents the accessible nature of Yahweh and voices the complaint against Israel for not heeding the divine call. The second strophe (vss. 3-5) describes the corruption of Israel’s covenant tradition. Exactly what the heretical worship practices were cannot be determined. They seem to have had something to do with a nature cult (vss. 3-5). But that had been a continual temptation for Israel since the time of the earliest settlement in Canaan where some of them had adopted the traditional fertility religious practices of Baal worship of the Canaanites.

While in exile, had some Israelites been seduced by the religious rituals of Babylonian tradition too? It would have been surprising if that was not so. The naming of several aspects of such rituals – sacrificing in gardens, burning incense “on the bricks,” (or “on the roof tops,”) sitting in tombs, and eating swine’s flesh, all point to a bizarre cultus. In Babylon, there was a cult of the god Ninurta for which the pig was either sacred to the god or a totem. Swine’s flesh, anathema to all Semitic cultures, could be eaten under special ritualistic occasions.

Whatever the unholy religious practices may have been and however much these were abhorrent to Yahweh (third strophe, vss. 6-7), Yahweh was not yet willing to cast them on to the scrap heap of history. Yahweh promised not only to preserve a remnant of the people but to bless and restore them to their traditional homeland (fourth strophe, vss. 8–10).

The naming of Sharon and the Valley of Achor (vs. 10) intentionally redirected the Israelites’ imagination homeward. The Plain of Sharon is still the rich agricultural plain along the Mediterranean coast north from Jaffa to the foothills of Mount Carmel. The Valley of Achor was a small wadi which once formed the boundary between the tribal lands Judah and Benjamin, south of Jericho along the northwestern edge of the Dead Sea. It is very dry but also very fruitful when well irrigated. That practice had been extensively used in the Judean and Negev deserts by the Idumeans. Not far from the Valley of Achor, the Essenes created their eschatological community of Qumran. The providential image inspired by these names conveyed just such a vision for the faithful remnant.

PSALM 42 AND 43. These two psalms were originally one, but possibly for some unknown liturgical reason became separated. Some Hebrew manuscripts still have them as one, so the separation could have occurred during transmission from one manuscript to another. There is also some indication of dependence of the second on the first in 42:9 and 43:2. Then there is the refrain repeated in 42:5, 11 and 43:5. These elements sustain the argument for unity. The lectionary editors agree.

In the first part of the psalm, the poet laments a deep spiritual depression caused by his sense of absence from Yahweh’s presence (vs. 2). It could have been an actual absence from Jerusalem and the homeland of Israel where participation in temple festivals was once possible. Vs. 6 appears to suggest that the exact location was near the sources of the Jordan on Mount Hermon, possibly in enemy hands at the time. Wherever the psalmist was, he expresses distress at conflict in his community (vss. 42:3, 10). Scoffers took the present circumstances as evidence that Yahweh had deserted Israel or that there really was no god at all.

The psalmist’s memories of joining the throng of worshipers processing to the temple elicited great pain (vs. 4). Yet the psalmist hoped that he will eventually have reason to praise Yahweh once again within the temple. The idea that he could worship anywhere else had occurred to him (42:8; 43:2), but like many modern folk, it just didn’t seem to the same. We all like to worship in familiar sanctuaries. The second part of the psalm picks up this hopeful theme as the poet prays that his faith will be vindicated and that he will once again go to the temple to worship and to offer sacrifices as before (43:3-4).

PSALM 22:19-28. (Alternate)   Like all laments, this excerpt pleads with God for rescue, acknowledges God’s sovereignty, expresses the worshipper’s thanksgiving and vows to be faithful. It envisions a hopeful future in which posterity will serve the Lord.

With the exception of vss. 19-21, the remainder of this passage does not fit well with the preceding segment (vss. 1-18). Indeed, the repetition of vs. 11 in vs. 19 suggests a deliberate transition. This has caused scholars to suspect that the first segment was an individual lament to which the song of hopeful thanksgiving was added so that the whole might serve in the liturgical setting of the temple when anyone might come to offer thanks for deliverance from some affliction.

In vs. 21 two images of grave danger indicate how critical the situation had been for the psalmist. Lions of the Mesopotamian type still roamed the Jordan Valley and into the rich pasture lands and agricultural villages of Palestine well into the Christian era. The wild ox was the bos primigenius, called the aurochs in Europe, had been domesticated to some extent, although many still existed in the wild. Domesticated, the ox served in many capacities from ancient times. Sometimes it was used as a sacrificial beast of great value. The original wild ox still roamed the foothills of the Syrian mountains in biblical times frightening the populace with its long horns and fierce nature.

The psalmist, however, expressed the conviction that Yahweh was to be feared more than any wild beast. Therefore, he urged that Yahweh be praised (vs. 22-23). He had an even more significant reason for praise and thanksgiving: Yahweh had not despised or rejected the afflicted, but had heard his cry (vss. 24-26). This brought forth the prophetic assurance that once their realized Yahweh’s sovereignty, all nations would join Israel in the worship of Yahweh (vss. 27-31).  Even the unborn would know and worship the Lord when they heard of Yahweh’s deliverance of the oppressed.

GALATIANS 3:23-29. Coming from the gentile city of Tarsus, Paul knew well what a struggle it was to survive as a Jew in such a foreign cultural milieu. When Paul lived there, the site of Tarsus had been occupied for some 3000 years. Its founding by noted heroes of Greek mythology was the subject of many legends. A Hellenistic Greek city, in Roman times it became the capital of the province of Cilicia, prosperous as a seaport and for industries such linen weaving and sail and tent-making. It also achieved fame as a centre of learning from which had come several noted Stoic philosophers. It well deserved its Pauline designation as “no mean city.” (Acts 21:39) The exact size of the Jewish element of the population is unknown, but it is unlikely to have been more than a small minority.

Minority groups seek many means to survive. Jews adopted their religious traditions as their way of confirming their identity. We do not know whether Paul became an ardent Pharisee in Tarsus or later in Jerusalem. In either case, however, he would have been considered an outsider, first in Tarsus as an ardent Jew meticulous about keeping the law of Moses and then as a Hellenist in Jerusalem with an accent and an attitude. When he met the Christian community wherever he went after his conversion, he found at a safe haven. This reality shines through this high point in his letter to the Greek-speaking Christians of Galatia.

This passage contains Paul’s most decisive statement that faith in Jesus Christ has removed all barriers to a relationship with God and with one another for all who believe. He claims that the law given to Moses was like a schoolteacher disciplining us until Jesus came to make us all God’s children and heirs with Christ of all God’s gifts.

Paul himself had been a life-long learner. He did not come easily or quickly to the conclusion he so briefly summarizes in these few sentences. According to his own words in 1:18 and 2:1, it had taken him at least 17 years before he was well known to the apostolic community in Jerusalem. Even then, he was considered an outsider rather than a leading apostle (2:6-10). So when he wrote in 3:23-24 about being imprisoned and disciplined until Christ came, he was speaking out of his own learning experience and recognizing it as something everyone could experience. As a Pharisee, the law had been his schoolteacher, then it became a prison and Christ had been his liberator.

Paul gives us several other experiential images in this passage. By their new faith relationship to God, he and the Galatians too had become children of God and joint heirs with Christ. They had been dressed in new Christ-garments through baptism. New converts in the early church were baptized naked and re-clothed in a new, white garment. One can presume that Paul had also been baptized in this manner. He certainly knew what it meant to be delivered from slavery to the law and free to proclaim his faith with the considerable gifts of communication he possessed. His facility with languages – Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, in all probability – gave him additional freedom to roam far and wide among the Hellenistic Jewish Diaspora and Gentile cities he had visited throughout Galatia. and other Roman provinces of Asia Minor (modern Turkey).

However Paul may be perceived in our day as being prejudiced toward women in general and their role in society, he also appears to have had remarkably good relationships with a considerable number of individual women. His letters and the records of his travels in Acts identify numerous women with whom he worked and in whose homes he stayed. He considered them as co-workers. He expressed friendship for both men and women equally, seeing them as united with him in the body of Christ.

All this was exceptional for a 1st century Jew from such a strong Pharisaic tradition. Today, Moslems, Jews and Christians rightfully claim their spiritual descent from the patriarch Abraham to a large extent because of Paul’s creative genius in making the gospel known throughout the ancient Middle East. This passage from his letter to the Galatians expresses that unique vision exceptionally well.

LUKE 8:26-39. This unusual story appears to set Jesus’ compassion for the man chained among the tombs against compassion for the Gentile people of this community southeast of the Sea of Galilee. Gerasa (apparently mistaken by Matt. 8:28 as Gadara and by other ancient authorities as Gergesa) was foreign territory in what was then the Roman tetrarchy of Philip, another son of Herod the Great and half-brother of Herod Antipas who executed John the Baptist. Today it is recognized as an archeological site at Um Qeis in northwestern Jordan near its border with Syria, but has never been excavated. We know that it was a Gentile city because the people who lived there herded pigs. Archaeologists distinguish between Jewish and Gentile sites by the presence of pig bones.

Jesus’ exorcism of the demons afflicting this man who lived among the tombs seems at once both puzzling and bizarre. We can only speculate how to identify the man’s specific illness. As was the case with many serious medical conditions in those times, his family and neighbors would have interpreted it as common demon possession. Their solution was to run him out town. That forced him to survive in the local cemetery. There he could do no harm except to himself and be gossiped about in the marketplace of Gerasa as “Crazy Jack.” But as reported in this pericope, the incident reveals obvious marks of grave impurity for any Jew: a demon-possessed maniac living in a cemetery near a place where a herd of pigs wandered freely.

In any case, when Jesus confronted whatever the demons were, the reaction created a panic in the pigs. Jesus’ conversation with the demons about their name, “Legion” and their desire not to be sent back “to the abyss” reads like a fictional embellishment in the oral tradition which lay behind the gospel source. The abyss was the prison where Satan and his demons were believed to dwell for eternity (cf. Rev. 20:3). Popular belief also held that while waiting for their ultimate banishment demons wandered the earth in search of a dwelling place. They especially favored tombs and deserted places as well as those people we would call seriously ill.

It is difficult to understand how Jesus could send the man home to tell his neighbors that their pigs had been drowned. One explanation may that this is a garbled story of the demoniac being healed after his frantic outcries had panicked the pigs. Another view frankly admits that the story suggests that although Jesus healed the man, he failed to convince the unbelieving Gerasenes of God’s compassionate love for all victims of dreaded illness. After all, they had lost their pigs.

How loving could that be? Wasn’t this a failure on Jesus’ part despite having exorcized the demon? After this, Jesus did not extend his ministry further east of the Jordan, but returned to Galilee. There was one happy Gerasene, however. The man who had been healed could not keep this miracle to himself and went about telling everyone he met what Jesus had done for him. Perhaps that – and only that – is the whole point of the story.

SOME ADDITIONAL PREACHING NOTES.

1 KINGS 19:1-15a. Is this another “Elijah time” for the Christian church? Experiencing significantly decline in membership, ordained clergy and social influence, the church today appears to be suffering  much as Elijah did. Following World War II in North America, there was a great growth spurt for about the next quarter of the 20th century. The beginning of decline in my own denomination can be traced to 1967. That was about the end of what population sociologists ad economists call “the Baby Boom.”

The children and grandchildren of that generation no longer flock to the church and build new religious and educational facilities as their parents and grandparents did. Secularism driven by wealth greater than that enjoyed by any previous generation seems to have captured former church people en mass. In the past decade or two in what could be called a turn of the century debacle many studies and consultants’ programs have  offered more and better ideas to restore congregational growth in every denomination, all to no avail.

The decline continues, even among those massive congregations on the verge of metropolitan areas that number in the tens of thousands. They seem to offer little more than a fearful security in traditional fundamentalism in return for allegiance and financial support.

Perhaps this is the time to reflect on what God’s mission really is at this time. That could be the theme of each member’s individual reflection during the summer down-time. What is the true meaning of this regression? What spiritual insights can come out of the truth that may be waiting for us to discover? It is not as if this has not happened before in the history of the church, as Kenneth Scott Latourette’s well-known history of Christian missions since the beginning of the church,  so clearly shown in The Unquenchable Light (1940).

GALATIANS 3:23-29. Paul’s family trade would appear to have been that of leather working (Acts. 18:3). It has also been speculated that his family was fairly wealthy. Due to extensive use of leather products in those times, that  would have quite likely. But tanners were not highly regarded among Jews. It was customary for them to live outside the towns and cities due to the smell and refuse accumulated by their work. In a Gentile centre like Tarsus, pig leather would have been widely used and valuable, but anathema to Jews.

Did Paul’s ardent Pharisaism result from his rejection of his family’ trade? Was that why he made his way to Jerusalem to learn at the feet of the great Gamaliel I, a leader among the Pharisees in the Sanhedrin? Was another aspect of his conversion his willingness to return to his trade to maintain  opportunities for preaching the gospel in Gentile centres like Tarsus, Corinth and elsewhere? (1 Cor. 9:6-7) Not only all types of people, but all types of work do yield such opportunities for any Christian. Is there a sermon there?

LUKE 8:26-39. Is there a possible link between this pericope of Jesus’ extending his ministry into hostile Gentile territory east of the Jordan and Isaiah 65:3-6? The theory has been proposed that prior to the writing of the earliest NT gospels many of the stories about Jesus’ ministry were reinterpretations of lectionary passages read sabbath by sabbath in the synagogues of the 1st century. In Luke’s case, these would have been synagogues of the Jewish Diaspora in Gentile cities in the last decades of the century. This occurred during the period of oral transmission of the apostolic experience of Jesus. (Gulder, Spong et al.) It is quite feasible to read this pericope in that light.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE

Proper 6  Ordinary 11

Third Sunday After Pentecost

June 13, 2010 .

1 KINGS 21:1- 21a. This simply told tale echoes across the centuries as brilliant example of how the Israelites put their message about God’s justice so even a child could understand. The depressed bumbling of Ahab make for great irony and the deceit of Jezebel clearly describes how the powerful victimize the powerless. The dramatic words of Elijah reveal how God feels about such selfish injustice.

2 SAMUEL 11:26-12:10, 13-15. (Alternate)   This conclusion to the story about David’s lustful adultery with Bathsheba forcefully conveys the moral lessons that God’s justice is meted out equally to kings and commoners alike. The prophet Nathan confronted David about his deceitful arranging for Uriah’s death so that he might marry Bathsheba. Despite David’s confession of sin, Nathan declared God’s judgment against the king: Bathsheba’s child will die.

PSALM 5:1- 8. This lyrical lament may well have been recited by temple singers to the music of flutes. It tells worshipers making their way into the temple that God hears their cries for help because God has only steadfast love for all who follow God’s righteous ways.

PSALM 32. (Alternate) This prayer of confession has nothing to do with King David’s confession. It contains a hopeful expression of God’s forgiveness for any penitent relying on the steadfast love of God. This is something in which we too can truly rejoice.

GALATIANS 2:15- 21. Paul cites the basic difference between Jews and Gentiles as resting on the law given to Moses when he led the Jews out of slavery in Egypt. Then Paul strikes down that distinction because Jesus Christ has established an entirely new relationship with God for Jews and Gentiles alike. It depends on faith in Jesus Christ who was crucified and raised from the dead to live in anyone who believes.

LUKE 7:36- 8:3. In this passage Luke told several things about Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. He had friends among the Pharisees and one invited him to dine. He rebuked his host for neglecting a customary welcome. He also had great compassion for this disreputable women always thought of as a prostitute.

The parable Jesus told to drive home his message must have cut the Pharisee to the quick. The point of the whole incident is that forgiveness depends on our faith in God’s compassionate love, not on how righteous we may strive to be.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

1 KINGS 21:1- 21a. This simply told tale echoes across the centuries as brilliant example of how the Israelites put their message about God’s justice so even a child could understand. Yet its fine points speak to our age as crisply as it formed one of what is known as “the Elijah cycle” of stories about one of Israel’s greatest prophets and his conflict with King Ahab and his Tyrian queen, Jezebel. Two other cycles of stories closely related to this one featured the prophet Elisha and the reign of the weak King Ahab. Scholarly debates have not completely settled how the three have been melded into the whole of the Book of Kings. Several incidental narratives are scattered in different places in I and II Kings.

It is thought that these three sets of stories originated in the Northern Kingdom in late 9^th century BCE. They existed separately and circulated centuries before being included in the Book of Kings by an editor of the Deuteronomic school. Written after Israel’s return from the exile in Babylon in the late 6^th or early 5^th century BCE, the main concern of the Deuteronomic editors of the Book of Kings was the struggle to maintain the worship of Israel centralized in the temple Jerusalem against the incursions of alien gods. They believed that it was Israel’s infidelity to the worship of Yahweh and the Torah which brought the great disaster of the Babylonian exile upon them.

In this particularly dramatic incident, the depressed bumbling of Ahab make for great irony and the deceit of Jezebel clearly describes how the powerful can victimize the powerless. The dramatic words of Elijah reveal how God feels about such selfish unfairness.

Just reading the story to its conclusion at vs. 29 would make a great sermon in itself. If one chose to elaborate and draw parallels to present times, one would find ample illustration in the economic and political injustices rampant in the world as we see these described in our news media.

2 SAMUEL 11:26-12:10, 13-15. (Alternate)  This conclusion of the story about David’s lustful adultery with Bathsheba forcefully conveys the moral lesson that God’s justice is meeted out equally to kings and commoners, to rich and poor alike.

Whether or not this was indeed an historical event from the later years of David’s reign can never be proven. However, the narrative bears the marks of a much later time in the 8^th and 7^th centuries BCE when justice had become an important element of the preaching of Israel’s great prophets Amos, Micah and Isaiah.

The prophet Nathan confronted David about his deceitful arranging for Uriah’s death so that he might marry Bathsheba. But the wily prophet doesn’t do it with a blunt charge of misbehaviour. He skillfully tells a parable about a rich man who coveted his poor neighbour’s lamb. The rich man stole the poor man’s lamb to provide a feast for a visitor. When David challenged the prophet to identify the culprit of this injustice, Nathan pointed his finger directly at the king and in Yahweh’s name condemned the king for what he had done to Uriah and Bathsheba.

Despite David’s confession of sin, Nathan declares God’s judgment against the king: Bathsheba’s child will die. More than that, David’s household would experience nothing but strife, a prophecy that subsequent events proved. Indeed, by the time the story was redacted in the post-exilic period, the Davidic dynasty had disappeared.

PSALM 5:1-8. This lyrical lament may well have been recited by the temple singers to the music of flutes. It may have been used as a prayer during the morning sacrifice (vs. 2). While it is written as if sung as a solo, it tells worshipers making their way into the temple that God hears their cries for help because God has only steadfast love for those who follow God’s righteous ways.

We can only imagine the specific circumstances in which the psalmist had composed this prayer. It would appear that he was beset by a menacing group of fellows Israelites. He had suffered from their boastful arrogance and slanderous lies vividly described in vss. 6 & 9. The psalmist found relief from this unbearable annoyance in the assurance of Yahweh’s steadfast love communicated through worship (vs. 7). This results in his commitment to Yahweh’s righteousness, i.e. the Torah.

Vs. 7 contains what may be an oblique reference to the Babylonian exile. The psalmist may not have  been in the temple precincts at all, but far away in Babylon and turning toward the temple as he uttered his morning prayers (cf. Daniel 6:10). It is logical to assume, therefore, that the psalm comes from the post-exilic period.

The varying readings of vs. 3b suggest that this is so. The KJV has added the words “my prayer” to the Hebrew text, “I direct my prayer to thee, and will look up,” to convey a clearer sense of its assumed meaning. The RSV gives an alternate reading: “I prepare a sacrifice for thee, and watch.”  The NEB tends to agree: “I set out my morning sacrifice and watch for thee, O Lord.” The NRSV, however, stays closer to the Hebrew text conveyed by the KJV: “in the morning I plead my case to you, and watch.” The rather obscure Hebrew verb *‘awrak* (= prepare) does have several meanings, but chiefly “to arrange or put in order.” One may choose which one to prefer.

PSALM 32. (Alternate) This prayer of confession has nothing to do with King David’s confession. It is one of series of penitential psalms frequently used in the Lenten season. The others like it are Pss. 6, 38, 51, 102, 130 and 143. It belongs to a class of wisdom psalms designed to instruct the faithful in times of sickness and distress. Like all theology in the ancient Middle East, it closely links sickness ands sin.

Although attributed to David in the superscription, it actually comes from the late Persian or early Greek periods (4^th century BCE) when wisdom literature strove to maintain the true faith of Israelites in the moral law of the ancient covenantal tradition.

Whatever its origins, the psalm contains a hopeful expression of God’s forgiveness for any penitent relying on the steadfast love of God. It describes quite effectively the process of being forgiven: sincere penitence, the acceptance of forgiveness, the resolution to guilt. It also includes a didactic moral with a touch of irony about our human resistance to true penitence. The psalm ends with a shout of praise for God’s compassionate grace in which we can truly rejoice.

GALATIANS 2:15-21. Paul’s primary concern in his Letter to the Galatians was to prevent recently converted Jews and Gentiles from falling away from the simple freedom of their new faith under attack from other Jewish Christians. These “Judaizers” had persuaded them that to be Christians they must also follow the strict Jewish laws. This conflict came a consequence of the division between the Jerusalem and Antioch Christian communities within two decades after the resurrection. In this passage Paul cited the basic difference between Jews and Gentiles. It rested on the law of the covenant given to Moses when he led them out of slavery in Egypt.

In Paul’s estimation, his fellow Jews were wrong in assuming that they put themselves in good standing with God (“justified” – vs. 16) by keeping the laws designed to create ritual purity worthy of admission to God’s covenant. Dietary restrictions and circumcision were the particular aspects of the covenant law against which Paul was arguing. Gentiles could not easily accept such rigorous purification as practical expressions of their relationship with God. Realizing this, and pleading freedom from the ritual restraints of the Jewish tradition, Paul worried that his Galatian friends would desert the Christian community altogether. As anyone who has been in conflict situations, in times of crisis it does not take much to create doubt and disaffection in the minds and hearts of Christian believers.

Then, in a series of rhetorical questions, (vss. 16b-17) Paul strikes down the distinction he had drawn between Jews and Gentiles. Jesus Christ has established an entirely new relationship with God for Jews and Gentiles alike. It rested on faith in Jesus Christ who had been crucified and raised from the dead to live in anyone who believes. The English translation of what Paul was saying is by no means easy to grasp.

He used his own experience as the main illustration of his argument. Does he not claim to have invalidated not just certain parts of the Judaic law, but the legalist tradition as a whole? Trying to understand Paul’s impact on both Judaism and Christianity, many scholars have followed this train of thought in the past century and a half. It was not so much Jesus, but Paul who is regarded as the architect of the Christian tradition distinct from its earlier roots in Judaism. We may firmly counter such a view by showing that, according to this passage, Paul himself believed that his faith depended entirely on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. Great though it had been, he did not depend on his personal impact on the communities to which he had proclaimed the Gospel.

But what did he mean in vs. 19 that “through the law I died to the law? There may well be some specific act of transgression the memory of which still bothered Paul’s conscience.  We get much the same impression if we compare this passage to Romans 7:7-12 where he identifies a sin but does not specifically state what that sin might have been. It could have been something he coveted, but had to relinquish because it was unattainable or because his changed relationship with Christ prevented its achievement.

Paul had found a new hope, nonetheless. It was in Christ. Whatever his sacrifice had been, he saw it as being personally crucified, yet he was alive as never before. He knew this not because of anything he had done, but because Christ had forgiven him and had given him a much greater commission. He now could live for Christ assured that the risen Christ was with him always. Indeed the Spirit of Christ was alive in him transforming him day by day into a new creation. That was the faith which sustained him. His entirely new relationship with God rested on faith alone. If this were not so, he claimed in his final point to clinch his argument, then Christ had died for nothing.

LUKE 7:36-8:3. In this passage Luke told us several important things about Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. One can easily assume that Jesus’ most ardent opposition came from those who belonged to the party of the Pharisees. On the other hand, he also had many good friends among this ultra-religious party and this one had invited him to dine. Some Jewish rabbis today believe that Jesus himself was a member of the Pharisees.

In his Rabbi Jesus: An Intimate Biography, Bruce Chilton based much of his analysis of Jesus’ ministry on the frequency of his dining out with just about anyone who would invite him. Certainly, some of those who opposed him accused him of being a glutton and an alcoholic. Luke had reported that charge immediately before this passage. Chilton regarded Jesus’ penchant for being a guest at other people’s homes as being particularly significant in marking out his differences with the priestly authorities as well as the Pharisees.

When a sacrifice was offered in the temple, part of the offering was burned on the altar, but most of it was divided between the priests and the worshiper for their own consumption. Jesus may have regarded the temple sacrifices as dining in the presence of God. It culminated, in Chilton’s view, in the intimate fellowship meals of which the Last Supper was only one instance.

According to this pericope, Luke presented Jesus as not being afraid to rebuke his host for neglecting the customary welcome he ought to have received. The normal customs of the time required that on the arrival of his guests, the host would provide water for them to freshen up after walking through dirty and dusty streets. Ritual washing was also required of everyone who ate at home or as invited guests at a feast. In all probability, this stringent practice was frequently ignored, especially far from Jerusalem in Galilee.

The story set up an interesting contrast between Jesus rebuke of his host and his compassion for this interloping woman. Apparently she just came in off the street uninvited, knowing that Jesus was there. Perhaps she had followed him. She has always been thought of as a prostitute or an adulterer, but she could well have had other well-known sins which characterized her demeanor. Her presence quite naturally upset the host. He remonstrated with Jesus for allowing such a person to touch him thus making him impure according to the strict interpretation of the laws governing such behavior.

The parable Jesus told to drive home his message must have cut the Pharisee to the quick. Comparison with Paul’s words to the Galatians reveals that both are very clearly the good news Jesus came to reveal and make effective in reconciling us with God and with one another. The point of both passages is that forgiveness depends on our faith in God’s compassionate love, not on how righteous we may strive to be.

It is important not to ignore 8:1-3, Luke’s brief statement naming certain women who followed Jesus. In subsequent centuries, the unnamed woman who interrupted the feast at the home of the Pharisee has been conflated with Mary Magdalene and/or Mary of Bethany (vs. 2). More recent scholarship has shown this to be completely wrong. Miriam (Mary) was the most common Jewish name for women in those days. Throughout his gospel Luke showed that women held a special place in Jesus’ life and ministry. With regard to Mary Magdalene legend and fiction have made much of this.

So has feminist scholarship of the late 20^th century. In her study of Luke, however, Sharon H. Ringe has shown that the roles women filled in the ministry of Jesus did not differ from the customary roles for women in those times. In this instance, we have relatively little information about these particular women. Some of them had been healed by Jesus of evil spirits and demons, but that does not imply that they were sinful or of disreputable moral character. We are told that some of them were women of means. Apparently they chose to make use of their wealth in supporting Jesus’ ministry and joining him on the road to Jerusalem. Several of them reappeared in Luke’s Passion narrative. It would only amount to fruitless speculation to reconstruct anything more from what Ringe described as “a mere opening and closing of the curtain to indicate a new scene.”

SOME ADDITIONAL PREACHING POINTS.

PSALM 5:1-8. What happens during our liturgies? In 2009 a Conference on Performing Self and Community: Ritual and Ritual Practice was held at McGill University, in Montreal, Canada. Papers from this conference were published in Volume 37:2009 issue of ARC: The Journal of the Faculty of Religious Studies. These papers attempt to respond to the question, “What does scholarship on ritual have to say in the 21^st century?”

The papers range through many religious and secular fields. Some titles seem far away from religious studies, but on closer examination contain to be very appropriate hypotheses and incisive if tentative insights for our time. For instance, among the titles of papers are:  “Etiology, Neurology, and Emergence: Reductionism in Biological Perspective on Religious Rituals;” “ An Examination of Virtual Rituals Found in Online Gaming;” and “Rituals and the Everyday: Performing Food and Sex in Contemporary Visual Arts.” The major world religious traditions and specific pastoral concerns are not neglected: “Ritual is Not Religion: Exploring Balagangadhars’ Proposal for Understanding the ‘East;’” and “Journeys in Grief: Theorizing Mourning Rituals.”

Though not always easy reading, the introduction and thirteen papers may prove quite challenging for a summer of study. ARC is indexed in the Religion Index One: Periodicals published by the American Theological Library Association (http://www.atla.com/) and other well known social science indexes. Individual copies of the journal may be obtained for $15 Cdn within Canada and $15 US outside of Canada from ARC, Faculty of Religious Studies, McGill University, 3520 University Street,  Montreal, QC H3A 2A7 Canada. Cheques should be payable to “ARC, FRS, McGill University.” Annual subscriptions are $30 Cdn and $30 US per annum. The Faculty’s webpage is

www.relgstud@mcgill.ca.

GALATIANS 2:15-21. There is an ancient legend that part of the price Paul paid when he met Jesus on the Damascus Road was to give up any hope of marriage to the daughter of Caiaphas, the high priest. Was this an indirect reference to such an experience? It was unusual for a young rabbi not to marry and such a marriage would have been immensely advantageous to any ambitious young rabbi. How he would have coveted that! Dare we speculate that this could have been the reason why the “Judaizers” followed him wherever he went and tried to undo all he had done in the predominately Gentile cities of Galatia? As a servant of the high priest he had deserted his commission and had gone over to the enemy. How could that ever be forgiven by the priestly authorities whom he had betrayed?

Who were the Galatians? Primarily, they were the descendants of a tribe of Celts who had broken away from the main Celtic migration in the 7^th and 6^th centuries BCE. Originally from western Asia, they migrated up the basin of the Danube River in Europe to eventually settle first in Switzerland (known as Helvetians), and France (known as Gauls). Later they had crossed to southern England and Ireland. This break-away migration through Bulgaria and Greece to Asia Minor had taken place in the 3^rd century BCE. A relatively small but rather warlike tribe, they had settled in the central Anatolian plain at the invitation of the king of Bythinia. There they subsequently became known as Galatians.

See these websites: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galatians; and

http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/history/migration/chapter113.html#1 .

LUKE 7:36-8:3. Do justice and political reconciliation ever meet? During one of Nelson Mandela’s visits to Canada, a member of the Parliament of Canada publicly condemned the South African leader as a communist who had advocated violent revolution in South Africa before and during his imprisonment. However true or false that accusation may have been, the gift Mandela has given to the world in his long struggle against apartheid cannot be denied. His long life has showed how the worst of enemies can be reconciled through the forgiving love of God working through ordinary people of every race and creed. This too is gospel.

Reconciliation can be seen too in current if tragic events. Quite recently a remarkable reconciliation between Poland and Russia has resulted from the death of many Polish political and military leaders in a plane crash near Smolensk. The Polish delegates were on their way to meet with their Russian counterparts and mark the anniversary of the massacre of more than 20,000 Polish military, political and intellectual leaders at Katyn Forest near Smolensk in April and May 1940 on the orders of Joseph Stalin.

On May 24, 2010 Ontario’s educational television station TVO held an hour long debate on the extent and character of this reconciliation featuring a Canadian, two Polish and two Russian political scientists now teaching at different Canadian and American universities. Among the five was Nina  Khrushcheva, the granddaughter of former Soviet president, Nikita Krushchev. At the end of the debate the question arose whether or not the Russians had apologized to the Poles for Stalin’s criminal behaviour. No, they conceded, it was not an apology, but it was an admission that a terrible crime had been committed.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURES
Sixth Sunday of Lent – March 28, 2010
Liturgy of the Palms and Liturgy of the Passion.

Author’s Note: The Revised Common Lectionary includes the first two lessons of the celebration focusing on the Triumphal Entry of Jesus into Jerusalem. If preferred, the celebration may be centred on the Passion of Christ using the second set of lessons. After each set of lessons, some “Preaching Points” have been added to assist in getting some thoughts for sermons started.  My son,  Rev. David Shearman, of Central-Westside United Church, in Owen Sound, Ontario, has joined me in contributing to these suggestions.

PSALM 118:1-2, 19-29. This psalm attributed some unidentified victory to Yahweh rather than to Israel’s military prowess. The use of the first person singular probably indicates that the person concerned may have been a king or high priest as representative of the whole nation. At some later date,   along with Pss. 113-117, it was adapted for liturgical use as one of  “The Hallel Psalms” sung at one of the great festivals.

LUKE 19:28-40. According to Luke, following Mark’s earlier Gospel, Jesus had planned his entry into Jerusalem by warning the owner of the colt that he would need the beast for this occasion. That the colt had never been ridden emphasized the aura of the incident Jesus’ intended to create. The donkey was regarded as a peaceful beast willingly serving its master, thus creating an image of a servant rather than a conquering king. Matthew elaborated the story to include two animals as in a messianic prophecy from Zechariah 9:9-10. Jesus himself took no part in the celebration. Instead, he rebuked  the Pharisees who complained about the crowd of disciples displaying their joyous expectations.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

LITURGY OF THE PALMS.

PSALM 118:1-2, 19-29. This psalm may have been sung originally as an individual  hymn of thanksgiving, but quickly became a congregational hymn used to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. One of the six psalms of the Hallel (Pss. 113-118), pilgrims sang it as they approached the temple on this and other high holidays. It is yet another of the Psalms given a messianic interpretation by the Apostolic Church. Several NT passages alluded to it.

The person who originally sang this hymn (the “I” of the text) may have been the king or high priest, but it soon was reinterpreted as the personification of the nation and sung antiphonally with several parties singing allotted parts.

The “gates of righteousness” (vs. 19) referred to the massive gates at the entrance of the temple precincts representing the holy presence of Yahweh at the centre of the nation. The words would have been sung by the priest at the head of the procession of pilgrims.

Although its use in Christian scriptures invariably refers to Jesus, “the stone which the builders rejected …” (vs. 22) may have come from an old Hebrew proverb. It may have referred to a stone that was too large to be used anywhere but as a cornerstone anchoring a whole wall of a building. Today, most public buildings like churches have a ceremonial “cornerstone” marking the date it dedication and naming the architect who designed it. The psalmist used it to point out that Israel, though despised by the Gentile world, had become an honourable and beloved people in Yahweh’s sight.

The day of rejoicing in vs. 24 is the day of the festival, but is not specifically identified. This may well be the Feast of Tabernacles, for in vs. 27 the festal procession to decorate “the horns of the altar” probably best fits with that festival. The horns were protrusions at each corner of the altar possibly created for just such a decorative purpose or on which the blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled (cf. Lev. 4:7).

Vss. 28 and 29 given what appears to be a double ending to the psalm. More likely, vs. 28 is the original ending for the individual hymn of thanksgiving, while vs. 29 is the  ending to the congregation hymn. Alternatively, the first is sung by the celebrant priest while the second is the antiphony sung by the congregation.

LUKE 19:28-40. Those who have visited Jerusalem may have walked the same path that Jesus took from Bethany and Bethphage on the eastern side of the Mount of Olives over the ridge and down the western slope toward the city gates. It is no more than two miles (three kilometres), if that. Presumably the village Jesus indicated was Bethany where he later seems to have made his headquarters during  his Passion  Week.

According to Luke, following Mark’s earlier Gospel, Jesus had planned his entry into Jerusalem by warning the owner of the colt that he would need the beast for this occasion. Was it at the home of Lazarus, Martha and Mary in Bethany, that he had arranged for the colt? That the colt had never been ridden emphasized the aura of the incident Jesus’ intended to create by acting out the Old Testament prophecy from Zechariah 9:9-10. The donkey was regarded as a peaceful beast willingly serving its master, thus creating an image of a servant rather than a conquering king. Matthew elaborated the story to include two animals as in the prophecy. By choosing the lowly beast of burden Jesus sought to allay the nationalistic feelings the prophecy engendered.

The disciples began the celebratory procession by throwing their cloaks on the colt and setting Jesus upon it. Quickly joining the celebration, people began strewing their cloaks on the path as he rode along. Note that Luke makes no mention of branches being strewn in the way, neither from palm or any other trees as in Mark and Matthew. Palm branches were used in traditional Jewish celebrations of the Feast of Tabernacles (Lev. 23:40; Neh. 8:15.) but not Passover.  The palm was an almost universally sacred symbol throughout the ancient Near East. In pre-Christian times it was a symbol of victory and was used in that sense in John 12: 13 and Revelation 7:12.

As the procession moved down the Mount of Olives, a whole multitude of disciples began to praise God. Presumably these were Galileans who had come for the Passover festival and now recognized Jesus whose miraculous deeds they had been witnessing for some time. Luke’s version of their song differs from the one recorded in Mark because he chose words from Ps. 118:26. Originally they were sung by the high priest welcoming pilgrims to the temple. Luke included the word “king” to signal that the crowds believed they were participating in the coronation procession of the Messiah.

Jesus himself took no part in the celebration. Instead, he rebuked  the Pharisees who complained about the crowd of disciples displaying their joyous expectations. His words appear to show that he shared the disciples’ messianic convictions, at least in Luke’s mind.

Preaching Points:

This is a Day of Rejoicing. How do we celebrate in the face of what we know will happen? Does our foreknowledge add or detract from our understanding of the reading? If not, how can the celebration of Palm Sunday be made truly celebratory?
The Gospel lesson is so well known that is may seem impossible to make it “hearable.” Why not use the Psalm as the basis for the sermon? Try emphasizing the cornerstone text (Ps. 118:22). What is the cornerstone of our faith? Does having our faith rejected, sometimes even by our spouse or children, diminish or strengthen it? How can we celebrate that?

LITURGY OF THE PASSION.

ISAIAH 50:4-9A. The unnamed prophet of Israel’s Babylonian exile whose poetry is included in Isaiah 40-55 describes the response of persecuted people to their suffering. The longer poem (vss.1-11), from which      this reading is an excerpt, portrays the exile as the result of the nation’s sin against God (vs.1). The prophet-poet uses this reflection as a teaching    moment. Though written in the 6th century BC, the poem was seen by the    early Christian church as a prophecy of Jesus’ wholly unjust trial and    execution.

PSALM 31:9-16. Again the Christian church has interpreted this psalm with reference to the Passion of Christ. Orignally it was a lament and plea for God’s protection from persecution by false accusers. Though not in this  reading, according to Luke’s Gospel vs. 5 of this psalm was uttered by Jesus on the cross: “Into your  hand I commit my spirit.” (Luke 23:46)

PHILIPPIANS 2:5-11. Paul may have found this hymn in use in one of the congregations he visited, or he may have created it himself. Note that while it does equate Jesus with God (vs. 6,) Jesus did not exploit that honour. Rather, it emphasizes his humanity, his death obedient to God’s will, and his exaltation so that he may be worshiped as Lord of all.

LUKE 22:14-23:56. It is not intended that the whole story of the Passion should be read during public worship, though this is often done in a special, extended service accompanied by  musical  selections and hymns. It could be used for personal devotions, however, throughout Holy Week.

Note how as the story progresses many people come and go, each having contact with Jesus in one way or another. In the end, Jesus is alone in death, commits himself into God’s keeping, and is buried in a unused tomb. Despite its apparent gloom, the story nonetheless has a deep sense of worship about it.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

ISAIAH 50:4-9A. We tend to select only excerpts of OT passages with reference to our Christian liturgical themes and seasons. This passage is yet another example of that kind of adaptation. We need to understand both the setting and significance of the original which was never  intended to prophesy the life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

The unnamed prophet of Israel’s Babylonian exile whose poetry is included in Isaiah 40-55 describes the response of persecuted people to their suffering. Chapter 50:1-11 is a poem of four strophes (or stanzas: vss. 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, 10-11). It portrays the exile as the result of the nation’s sin against Yahweh’s covenant  (vs.1) and contrasts this with Yahweh’s faithfulness and that of the servant of Yahweh who suffers for his loyalty. Though written in the 6th century BC, the poem was seen by the early Christian church as a prophecy of Jesus’ faithfulness throughout his trial and unjust conviction and death on the cross.

The early church had only the Jewish scriptures from which to discover the relationship between the life, death and resurrection of Jesus to which they were witnesses and the purposes of God as revealed in the historical and religious traditions of Israel. It is not surprising, therefore, that the apostolic community made some unusual connections between various passages and their experience of the crucified and risen Christ. The obedient, faithful and persecuted servant of this passage gave them exceptional insight into the sufferings of Christ and their own sufferings under persecution in subsequent years.

It is hypothesized by redaction critics of the NT that instead of being actual accounts of what happened, the various versions of the Passion story were created, each from a different theological perspective, for very different audiences, and as expositions of relevant OT passages such as this one. Mel Gibson’s controversial movie, The Passion of Jesus the Christ, while drawing on all four gospels, has given a mediaeval interpretation to those sufferings more in keeping with Isaiah 52:13-53:12. While the NT does contain some reference to the great suffering and shame caused by  crucifixion, as in Hebrews 12:3, that is not its main emphasis. As Otto Piper, formerly of Princeton Seminary, put it, “While in the OT the believer becomes so occupied with his own suffering that he seems to lose sight of the rest of the world, the follower of Christ feels as a result of his suffering a deep compassion for the sufferings of others.” (Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. IV, 453.)

This prophecy puts greater emphasis on the trust of the persecuted one in Yahweh in order to encourage fellow sufferers. Physical violence plays a limited role in the action (vs. 6). Rather, this is a teaching moment (vs. 4) when the suffering servant is certain of his innocence and of Yahweh’s vindication. He also envisions an end to the persecution (vss. 8-9). It is this victory over suffering through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ which becomes a central theme of the NT.

PSALM 31:9-16. Again the Christian church has interpreted this lament and plea for God’s protection from persecution by false accusers with reference to the Passion of Christ. According to W. Stewart McCullough in The Interpreter’s Bible,IV, 158ff, the psalm in its entirety consists of three laments woven together (vss. 1-8; 9-12; 13-18) and concluding with a hymn of thanksgiving (vss.19-24). This selection includes only the middle segments. Its two parts consist of the cry of someone who is suffering from some undefined illness (vss. 9-12) and of someone menaced by false accusations. The parallel with the Passion story is obvious, especially in vss.11-13. One could easily imagine Jesus reciting the prayer in vss. 14-16 as he stood silently before his accuser and bore the cross along the Via Dolorosa.

Or was it only in the imagination of later generations of Christians to magnify events along Via Dolorosa so that these became precious to the faithful in “the Stations of the Cross?” All four gospels have very little to say about the journey from Pilate’s seat of judgment to the place where the crucifixion actually occurred. Only the incidents about Simon of Cyrene being compelled to carry the cross and the wailing of the women of Jerusalem appear in the gospel narratives. The actual route of the journey to the place of crucifixion is lost among the ruins of the many destructive assaults on Jerusalem over the millennia. Archeologists and historians believe that following the Via Dolorosa is a sincere devotional journey with little relationship to the historical events at that time.

Though not in this reading, vs. 5 of this psalm was uttered by Jesus on the cross according to Luke’s narrative: “Into your hand I commit my spirit.” (Luke 23:46) This gives further evidence of how the early church searched their Hebrew scriptures to better understand and communicate the Gospel.

PHILIPPIANS 2:5-11. This is an early Christian hymn outlining the essential creed of the early church. In a few well chosen words it recites the whole sequence of the Incarnation, ministry, crucifixion, resurrection and exaltation of Jesus as described in the gospel records. But Paul had not read any of the gospel narratives which were all written after his own death. He knew only what the first apostles had proclaimed or had taught him after his conversion. It may be that he found this hymn in use in one of the congregations he visited, or he may have created it himself.

In NSRV the passage appears as poetry with some aspects of parallelism, one of the characteristics of Hebrew poetry. William Barclay noted that it may well be an elaboration of 2 Corinthians 8:9 “For you know the generous act of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich.”

Note that it does seem to equate Jesus with God (vs. 6). Yet Barclay examined the original Greek more closely, as did E.F. Scott in The Interpreter’s Bible, XI, 48ff. Barclay came to the conclusion that this verse does express the “innate,  unchangeable, unalterable characteristics and ability of the man…. So Paul begins by saying that Jesus was essentially, unalterably, and unchangeable God.”

If it is easily accessible, Barclay’s exegesis of this passage in his Daily Bible Readings Series, The Letter to the Philippians, Colossians and Philemon, is well worth examining in detail. In particular, his definition of the two Greek words for “form” – morph‚ and schema – is helpful in understanding what he believes Paul claimed as the essential divine nature of the human Jesus: “The morph‚ (the word Paul uses) never changes …. However Jesus’ outward schema might alter, he remained in essence and in being divine.”

The humiliation of Jesus as a servant (again the word is morph‚) emphasizes his humanity and his death obedient to God’s will. This humiliation leads to his exaltation so that he may be worshiped as Lord of all. The seven week Season of Easter, from the Resurrection to Pentecost, celebrates this exaltation.

LUKE 22:14-23:56. It is not intended that  the whole story of the Passion should be read during public worship, though this has been done in a special, extended service accompanied by musical selections and hymns. Which segment should be used as the Gospel lesson for worship on Passion Sunday is a matter of considerable choice. The whole passage could be used for personal devotions, however, throughout Holy Week. A liturgy of the palms would have to look to Luke 19:28-40 as an alternative reading.

Note how as the story progresses that many people come and go, each having contact with Jesus in one way or another, and some role to play in the drama. The first to leave are those closest to him, Peter being that last. They were followed by his most hostile opponents, the chief priests and scribes when they delivered him to Pilate. Then Pilate himself gave up trying to administer justice and gave in to political expedience.

Quickly thereafter came Simon the Cyrene who carried the cross, the weeping women of Jerusalem, the two other criminals, the Roman centurion, and finally the crowds. In the end, Jesus commits himself into God’s keeping, and dies alone to be buried in an unused tomb.

In Jerusalem today, two sites are shown to tourists as probable locations of the place of crucifixion and burial. Without question, the site where the Church of the Holy Sepulchre stands is the more elaborate and traditional in Christian lore. Only since the late 19th century has the site of the Garden Tomb been favourably regarded as an alternate location.  The truth is that the actual place of Jesus’ death and resurrection are forever lost. The four Gospels each give a different version of the Passion story based on their differing theological standpoint and intentions as authors writing for very disparate communities.

A television documentary broadcast during the week of March 4, 2007 on the Discovery Channel in the USA and Visions in Canada presented a controversial discovery of ten stone burial ossuaries containing bones and three skulls had been located some years ago in a tomb in Jerusalem. The boxes were inscribed with the names of Jesus, Miriam (Mary), Miriamne (Mary Magdalene), and several others, presumed to be members of Jesus’ family. The documentary also claims that DNA has been found on two of the ossuaries which are not related – those of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. This suggests that Jesus and Mary Magdalene may have been married. Church authorities, theologians and archeologists all discounted the validity of this discovery. As with Gibson’s portrayal of the crucifixion, it is clear that the interpreter’s own theology determines which site or what objects are acceptable as a places or relics to inspire devotion and to be appropriately venerated. It was so also for the authors of the four Gospel narratives.

Luke’s version is not so much the climax to his Gospel as it is “a major turning point in salvation history, inaugurating the new period of the church and its universal mission. This period would be covered by the book of Acts.” (Reginald H. Fuller in The Oxford Companion to the Bible, 365. In other words, for Luke, the Passion story is only the middle, not the ending of what Jesus came to do. And so it is for us, despite the sometimes brutal concentration of attention on the crucifixion as in Gibson’s movie of Jesus’ twelve last hours.

Preaching Points.

Most people in the congregation this Sunday will not likely be at any midweek, Maundy Thursday or Good Friday services. For them the crucial homiletic opportunity is on Palm or Passion Sunday. How to make best use of this opportunity presents some difficulty in choosing the best text and theme for this liturgy and sermon. It cannot all be done at once. It might best to review the themes used throughout Lent and bring them toward a natural conclusion. This will not come this Sunday, of course, but on Easter when we celebration the Resurrection of our Lord.

Any one of the personalities appearing the Passion narrative may be used as the focal point of a sermon. Leslie D. Weatherhead’s Personalities of the Passion, first published in 1941 and republished several times would be a helpful resource.

In a recently published work Craig Evans and N.T. Wright have suggested that the gospel accounts describe with reasonable accuracy the execution practice of the Romans and the burial practices of the Jews. [Jesus, the Final Days: What Really Happened (Westminster John Knox, 2009)] While the crucifixion emphasized the terror of the experience for victims and witnesses alike, the burial was designed to comfort the mourners that the end of life had come without any hope of life beyond death.  The Pharisees did believe in resurrection, but they were a  minority party at this time. Most Jews did not share their conviction.

Arguing the pro’s and con’s of the Passion narrative itself is not advisable. This  a time for belief, not lifting up questions of doubt. The true meaning of the word “believe” is not credulously accepting the literal details of the narrative, or any specific sacrificial or salvationist theology, as the final word on why Jesus died. To believe means to discover what we mean by the love that compelled Jesus of Nazareth, Messiah/Christ and Son of God, to accept his own death by cruel execution as a political  criminal who had committed treason. Does he love me that much? How then should I love him and show his compassion for those whom he calls my neighbours?

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURES
Fifth Sunday of Lent   March 21, 2010

ISAIAH 43:16-21. To the Israelites in exile in Babylon, this unnamed prophet whose words are recorded in Isaiah 40-55 delivered a message of great hope and promise: the exiles were going home. The capture of Babylon about 539 BC by Cyrus, king of the Medes and Persians, had made this possible. The way home led through the wilderness, recalling the first exodus and the journey through the wilderness to the promised land under Moses many centuries earlier. This would happen because God willed it for God’s own people.

PSALM 126. This Song of Ascent celebrates the return of the exiles to Jerusalem. It echoes God’s intervention in Israel’s history as proclaimed in the prophecies of Isaiah 40-55. It may have been sung by pilgrims approaching the temple as part of a liturgy preparing for a new   year.

PHILIPPIANS 3:4b-14. Despite his background as a zealous Pharisee, Paul tells of giving up a promising career as a rabbi to follow Jesus. The one source of power for his new life came from his faith in the resurrection of Jesus, in which he longed to share. That had become his one goal which he now sought as zealously as he had sought to obey the Mosaic law in his youth.

JOHN 12:1-8. Mary of Bethany expressed her love and dedication to Jesus by perfuming his feet with a costly ointment. When Judas Iscariot protested the waste, Jesus acknowledged the gift as a symbol of preparing his body for burial; but he did not forget the poor as well.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

ISAIAH 43:16-21. It is always difficult to know where to begin and to end a particular selection from Deutero-Isaiah. Different commentaries are likely to make different choices as to the extent of specific poems and oracles. Generally speaking, however, the phrase “Thus says the Lord …” is a clue to the beginning of a new oracle. How several oracles may be included in a longer poem is a more complex issue.

In The Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 5, p. 491ff. James Muilenburg places this selection in a longer poem extending from 43:14-44:5 of which this selection is but the second, third and fourth of nine strophes or stanzas. Muilenburg entitles the poem “Redemption By Grace.” He also states that the key to the whole poem lies in the first strophe (43:14-15) just prior to the beginning of this reading.

To the Israelites in exile in Babylon, this unnamed prophet delivered a message of great hope and promise: the exiles were to be set free and sent home. The capture of Babylon in 539 BC by Cyrus, king of the Medes and Persians, had made this possible.   There was to be a new exodus. It actually occurred in 536, so this poem may well date from the intervening three years.

Vs. 16 recalls the first exodus and the journey through the wilderness to the Promised Land under Moses many centuries earlier. The passage of Israel through the sea and the subsequent destruction of their Egyptian pursuers. (vs.17) demonstrated that nature and history are both under the sovereign control of Yahweh. The prophet then calls for the exiles in Babylon to turn from memory to hope (vs.18) for a great new deliverance is about to occur.

The road home is open to them as was the road through the wilderness and across many rivers to the Promised Land. This would happen because Yahweh willed it for Yahweh’s own people.  Yahweh would provide life-giving water for them in the thousand-mile trek through the desert. That had been a crucial issue for the Israelites in their exodus from Egypt. Unlike their ancestors, the promise of water and safety from lurking wild animals would reassure those of weak faith.

The return from exile in Babylon was not only an act of divine grace but also as a testimony to Yahweh’s mighty purpose for Israel. Vs. 21 states unequivocally that Yahweh’s intent was that the exiles would declare Yahweh’s praise. Imagine the amazement of every tribe through whose territory the returning exiles passed. Two generations earlier, their Babylonian overlords had led the Israelites eastward in chains. Now they were marching homeward in a rejoicing throng spreading the good news of Yahweh’s blessed deliverance as they went.

PSALM 126. This Song of Ascent, one of fifteen contained in Pss. 120-134, celebrates the return of the exiles to Jerusalem, yet reflects life of a later, more difficult period in Israel’s history. Writing long after the event, the psalm echoes God’s intervention in Israel’s history as proclaimed in the prophecies of Isaiah 40-55 and other prophets of the post-exilic period, Zechariah, Haggai and Ezra.  These psalms may have been sung by pilgrims approaching the restored temple as part of a liturgy preparing for one of the great festivals.

Yet this particular psalm may actually be more of a lament for hard times. It begins and ends with a plea for restored fortunes. Do the references to water and the harvest suggest a time of drought? Could this be a hint that the psalm was used in the new year’s liturgy or at the harvest festival of Succoth when hope for better days was much on the minds of worshipers?

PHILIPPIANS 3:4b-14. Do you suppose that Paul either had a very low self-image or was constantly attacked for having inadequate credentials as an apostle? He seems to have felt called on to defend his qualifications on several occasions. Here he cites his background as a faithful Jew of the strictest kind. Despite this background as a zealous Pharisee, he had given up a promising career as a rabbi to follow Jesus. But note the antecedent to this self-defense. It throws his subsequent assertions into high relief.

In vss.2-3, he had castigated the Judaizers who promoted circumcision as a prior commitment for Gentile Christians. There may have been few Jews in Philippi, but obviously they were very orthodox. Archeologists have not yet discovered a synagogue among the considerable ruins of this substantial Roman administrative centre. What is more, it would seem to have been women like Lydia who first responded to Paul’s preaching at a place of prayer by the river (Acts 16:13-15). Such a situation would almost certainly give rise to jealousy and controversy from those who wished to preserve orthodox, male domination in the new community Paul was helping to create in Lydia’s house church.

In the light of these circumstances, it is not surprising that Paul should use his own experience as a zealous Pharisee to clarify for the Philippians both the sacrifices and the promises of being a Christian in a hostile world. It has even been speculated that Paul had sacrificed his own marriage to a high-born Jewish women of Jerusalem, perhaps the daughter of Caiaphas or some other dominant family.

Three words stand out in what Paul had to say about the gains he had received in knowing Christ: righteousness, faith and resurrection. William Barclay defines what those words meant to Paul: Righteousness meant “a right relationship with God.” Faith meant “taking Jesus Christ at his word;” and “accepting what God offers you through Christ.” Resurrection meant “the guarantee of the importance of life in this body in which we live; … the guarantee of the life to come; …the guarantee that in life and in death the presence of the risen Lord is always with us.” (The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians and Philemon. Edinburgh: Church of Scotland, Daily Bible Readings.  77-79.)

Paul now knew that the one source of power for his new life came from his faith in the resurrection of Jesus, in which he longed to share. That had become his one goal which he now sought as zealously as he had sought to obey the Mosaic law in his youth.

It is not unusual for converts to be forceful enthusiasts for their new faith. Conviction tends to transform even normal life experiences into opportunities for witness. Church history has many such ardent evangelists. Some, like John Henry Newman, a prominent Anglican churchman of Oxford, converted to Roman Catholicism, and became a cardinal of his new tradition.  John Newton, a degraded slave trader, was known as “the perpetual deacon of Olney” and left numerous saintly hymns celebrating his new faith.

JOHN 12:1-8. Women play an unusually large part in John’s Gospel. In this incident, Mary of Bethany, expressed her love and devotion to Jesus by perfuming his feet with a costly ointment and wiping them with her hair. We know who Mary was from John’s explicit identification (vs.1) which follows Luke 10:38-42. But she was not the same woman who performed a similar act according to Luke 7:36-50. That error is still being offered by some interpreters. Nor was she Mary Magdalene with whom the Western church identified her from the 6th century CE, a fictional assessment followed by modern movies. The Eastern church rejected this mistaken identification. John’s story, however, does show some dependence on the Synoptic tradition of Mark 14:1-9 and Matthew 26:1-13.

Jesus appears to have made the home of Mary, Martha and Lazarus his headquarters during his last visit to Jerusalem for the celebration of the Passover. It is not difficult to see why. Bethany was a hamlet just over the eastern ridge of the Mount of Olives. Today, when one looks eastward toward the Mount of Olives from any vantage point in the city overlooking the Kedron Valley, one can see the spire of the ancient church erected on the traditional site of the home where this incident occurred. The minaret of a nearby mosque is even more visible. The distance to Bethany from the Beautiful Gate to the Temple would have been no more than three kilometres; and less than that from the traditional site of the Garden of Gethsemane at the foot of the Mount of Olives.

There the Bethany family gave a dinner party for Jesus. Martha and Mary played their customary roles. Mary’s anointing of Jesus’ feet and wiping them with her hair was a most astonishing display of affection and devotion. Is it too much to give a 20th century Freudian interpretation of this demonstrative display? Many devoted Christians has found their piety and their sexuality strangely and simultaneously enhanced.  Perhaps this was what motivated the confusion of Mary of Bethany with Mary of Magdala, although there is no scriptural evidence that the latter was in any way promiscuous.

Judas was quick to put an economic value to what happened. John had his own agenda in casting Judas in the role of a thief (vs. 6). John may have used this as a warning to some of the members of his own diaspora community in the latter decade of the 1st century. Here Judas corresponds to the Ephesian “evildoers … who claim to be apostles but are not” in Revelation 2:2; or to the Laodicean “rich (who say) I have prospered, and I need nothing,” in Revelation 3:17.

When Judas Iscariot protested the waste, Jesus acknowledged the gift as a symbol of preparing his body for burial; but he did not forget the poor as well. They would be with us always and needing our concern and help. As the parable of Matthew 25:31-46 so beautifully describes, our gifts to anyone in need, large or small, are tokens of our loyalty and commitment, as well as expressions of our love for Christ.

 NU5WMBUKGFK7

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURES
Fourth Sunday of Lent – March 14, 2010

JOSHUA 5:9-12. Throughout their forty year journey through the wilderness from Egypt to the promised land of Canaan, the Israelites had been provided for by God’s gift of manna. Now that they had entered the land, they recalled their escape from Egypt as usual by celebrating the festival of the  Passover. This time they used the produce of Canaan to make their unleavened bread. On that same day, the gift of manna ended.

PSALM 32. The relation of sickness to sin was common to all people in ancient times. This psalm reflects that attitude. While we no longer accept such limited view of sickness, we may still reflect the penitence with which every sinner approaches God and trusts in God’s forgiveness.

2 CORINTHIANS 5:16-21. This most significant of all of Paul’s interpretations of the meaning of Christ’s life, death and resurrection contains three key words: reconciliation, the world, and ambassadors. In this instance, reconciliation meant a renewed relationship with God established through Christ. The world referred to the whole of creation, not just our planet Earth. An ambassador represented and interpreted his/her country in a foreign land.

Paul believed that because we have been given a new relationship with God through Christ, we are now God’s representatives in the world, and perhaps also the universe, which God has destined for re-creation through love.

LUKE 15:11-32. The parable of the lost son welcomed home by his forgiving father tells the whole gospel of God’s reconciling love in Jesus Christ in short story form. But what of the elder brother? Did he ever become reconciled?

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

JOSHUA 5:9-12. Whether a natural product or not, manna was deemed to be a gift from Yahweh to the Israelites in the wilderness of Sin (Exodus 16). It is now believed to have been the carbohydrate excretions of an insect which fed on the sap of the tamarisk bush. Rich in sugars and pectin, even a large amount would have been insufficient to supply the need for food. Thus, it must be assumed that it is symbolic rather than materialistic, in somewhat the same way as we now regard the bread of the Eucharist. (Cf. John 6:31-35) In this story it symbolized that throughout their forty year journey through the wilderness from Egypt to the promised land of Canaan, the Israelites had been provided for by Yahweh.

Now that they had entered the promised land, they recalled their escape from Egypt as usual by celebrating the annual festival of the Passover. This time they used the produce of Canaan to make their unleavened bread. On that same day, the gift of manna ended.

Of course, this may have been due to the changing flora and fauna of the Israelites new homeland. According to Christian monks who lived in the Sinai in early Christian times, manna was available for about three to six weeks in June and July. The quantity depended on the rainfall of the previous winter.  It appeared on the tamarisk in small deposits about the size of pea. A good worker could collect about a half a kilogram a day, not much to survive on. Faith interprets actuality according to its own spiritual insights.

From a religious point of view, the point of the story is that when we reach the end of one set of resources, God makes others available. Devoted Christians have been able to survive under extreme circumstances with such faith. Victor Frankl, the Austrian psychotherapist who survived three years in a Nazi concentration camp, discovered that the one essential to survival was a sense of meaning. Faith that God is with us in life, in death and in life beyond death is an existentialist creed to which countless believers can witness. It gives sustaining meaning to the most disastrous events.

This may be especially true for parents whose children are born with unexpected disabilities or incurable genetic diseases. The same may be true for those in middle age whose parents suffer from various forms of late life dementia. If there is such a thing as surd evil – something so evil as to have no explanation or meaning whatsoever – only faith that God is with us and loves us regardless of all possible circumstances can help us to survive. That is the only way we can make sense of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

PSALM 32. The relation of sickness to sin was common to all people in ancient times. This penitential psalm reflects that attitude. While we no longer accept such limited view of sickness, we may still reflect the penitence with which every sinner may approach God and trust in God’s forgiveness.

In its original form, the psalm had the didactic character of Wisdom literature which points to a late date. Yet there is a refreshingly frank honesty about it that speaks to any age. There is no hiding one’s sin from God and no self-deceit about one’s wrongdoing. In this day and age, a good deal of human illness can still be traced to deliberate sin. Sexually transmitted diseases, illnesses caused by excessive alcohol consumption, compulsions for certain foods, hyperactivity or deliberate inactivity that results in mental or physical breakdown could be included in that category.

The psalmist’s illness is not clearly described, although there does appear to have been both a wasting of the body, weakness and considerable pain (vss. 3-4). Nonetheless, as vss. 1-2 suggest, he still has memories of healthier times which he interpreted as a genuine blessing. How many times have we heard people say that they are grateful to be blessed with good health? Does anyone ever express gratitude for ill health? Or persistent, incurable pain?

Whatever his illness, the psalmist recognizes his affliction as an opportunity to draw nearer to Yahweh through prayers of confession and expressions of trust (vss. 5-7). There is even a touch of ironic humor in vs. 9 where the stubbornness of a sick man is likened to an unruly horse or mule which must be controlled with a bit and bridle. This may have been ancient proverb, but the psalmist may also have been speaking from experience. The letter of James the Apostle makes use of the same metaphor in James 3:2-3.

Like all Wisdom literature, the contrast between the wicked and the righteous is clearly stated in the closing couplet. While we may question the cause and effect relationship between righteousness and health, the psalmist never doubts that his trust in Yahweh’s steadfast love will be rewarded with rejoicing. That is an ageless emphasis we too should not forget. It could be the only way to live through devastating illness that can never be cured. This is the trust that God will be with us come what may.

2 CORINTHIANS 5:16-21. This is perhaps the most significant of all of Paul’s interpretations of the meaning of Christ’s life, death and resurrection. The passage contains three key words: reconciliation, the world (literally in Greek cosmos), and ambassadors.

Reconciliation was undoubtedly one of Paul’s favorite words.  In one form or another, it occurs five times over in this single paragraph. Obviously it expressed so completely his own spiritual experience.  In this instance, it meant a renewed relationship with God established through Christ’s life, death and resurrection. As one who had tried so zealously as a Pharisee and failed to achieve a fully satisfying relationship with God, he was overwhelmed by the realization that he now had “friendship with God” through Christ Jesus. This was like being “a new creature” or, in the terms of John’s Gospel, “born again.” By the gracious gift of God in Christ, he – and we – now possess the right relationship God desires to have with us.

In the New English Bible (1970) vs. 15 immediately preceding this passage, we find the key to how reconciliation can be experienced day by day: “His purpose in dying for all was that men, while still in this life, should cease to live for themselves, and should live for him who for their sake died and was raised to life.”

The Greek word kosmos occurs 46 times in the Pauline corpus. For Paul it may well have meant  no more than the inhabited world around him, but it could also have represented the universe or the whole of creation. Even more likely is the possibility that Paul saw the cosmos as that which was in total enmity with God, the locus of  human  rebellion and alienation from God, and the place where humanity is under the domination of evil. It was to remove this alienation and hostility and to break the power of sin and evil enslaving humanity that Christ had died.

An ambassador represented and interpreted his/her country in a foreign land. It was an ancient a honorable profession even in Paul’s time, as it still is. Every country has its ambassadors in other nations’ capital cities. Paul believed that because we have been given a new relationship with God through Christ, we are now God’s representatives in the world which God has destined for re-creation.

The representative view of the atonement has been given strong theological support in the work of such theologians as Douglas John Hall in the third volume of his trilogy, Confessing The Faith: A Christian Theology In The North American Context. (Fortress Press, 1996).  Hall’s view of social justice and Christian stewardship follows directly from this position. As God’s representatives in the world endowed with the Spirit that was in Christ who overcame the dominance of human selfishness, we are to manage the world’s resources and environment for the benefit of all humanity.

In the divine economy, everyone is a shareholder with the Creator. Never was there a time in recent years when this insight was more valuable. With natural disasters, millions starving and the gap between rich and poor ever widening, sharing in love for one’s neighbour has never been more necessary in obedience to God.

LUKE 15:11-32. The parable of the long lost son welcomed home by his forgiving father tells the whole gospel of God’s reconciling love in Jesus Christ in short story form. We tend to give the story the popular title of “The Prodigal Son.” But the story is really about the father, not one or other of his two sons.

An unusual interpretation to this story has been given in a book by Professor Bruce Chilton, Rabbi Jesus: An Intimate Biography. (Doubleday, 2000) Chilton posits the thesis that this is an autobiographical parable. He infers from scant evidence that Jesus was never accepted in Nazareth because of his uncertain parentage. He had a falling out with his family after Joseph’s death and left home to become one of the disciples of John the Baptizer. Only after John had been imprisoned and executed several years later did he return home to Nazareth where he was warmly received by Mary, but not by James. Being Joseph’s eldest son by a previous marriage, as Chilton claims, James was both older than Jesus by several years and head of the family. Chilton recognizes that there is little actual evidence for such a story. Even if highly speculative, it does add an additional dimension of realism to the parable.

It may be tempting to interpret the parable allegorically, as if each element represented a different aspect of our human experience of sin, reconciliation and resistant pride. As such, it could represent the dual mission of the apostolic church to Jews and Gentiles. In that light, the young brother may represent the Gentiles accepted by the early church, but not by traditional Jews. The elder brother could be regarded as representative of Israel’s resistance to Jesus, the Messiah. However, this advances our understanding no further than Chilton’s speculations.

Jesus’ parables were intended to convey only one core message. In this case, the lost son is reconciled and restored by the father’s gracious, forgiving love. It is the story of God’s covenant love that desires to reconcile the world to our relationship with God. But the story is unfinished. The elder brother is left to make up his own mind whether or not to join in the celebrations. A unique Bible study question might be for the participants to consider what they might do if they had been the elder brother.

The late Al Forrest, one time editor of The United Church Observer, visited with a Lebanese Christian scholar who interpreted the story as his people read it. What the father did in dividing the family’s resources, then later celebrating the younger son’s return, was an outrageously wasteful and careless deed. The elder brother who would normally inherit the estate had every right to be angered and to take steps to protect the family’s livelihood by regarding the old man as senile. The real profligate was the father, not the younger son. It would be absolutely unprecedented and unconscionable to forgive and renew the broken relationship in this way.

Yet this is how grace functions in God’s realm. Would that Arabs and Israelis might recognize that this is the way their common deity views the geopolitical dilemma in which history has imprisoned them!

There is an old Scottish tale of a son who fought with his father about church-going and left home in stubborn, self-willed anger. For many months he wandered hither and yon living like the typical prodigal. At last in a city he happened on an outdoor preacher telling the story of this parable. The lad listened intently and when the preacher narrated how the father had received his runaway son, he cried out, “Yon’s a fine auld man. I’d tak’ a lang die’s tramp to see the lum reek in my father’s cotte.” (Translate: That’s a fine old man. I’d take a long day’s walk to see the chimney smoke in my father’s cottage.”) And he set off for home.

But the parable does not have an altogether happy ending, does it? Despite the father’s reiteration of his forgiveness for his younger son, the elder brother is not so generous. Is there not also a deep truth there? Not everyone is pleased to see the sinner repent or accept God’s gracious and forgiving love. Those who claim “to hate the sin, but love the sinner,” or insist that sinners repent before being forgiven, may have more work to do on their understanding of God’s grace. God’s reconciling love is what theologians used to call “prevenient grace.” It precedes our need for it. As Paul discovered and told the Romans in his letter to them, (Romans 32:23) God loves and has forgiven us even while we are still sinners.

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Second Sunday of Lent – February 28, 2010.

GENESIS 15:1-12, 17-18. The story of God making a covenant with Abraham formed an important link in the religious tradition of Israel. When later generations realized that they had an special relationship with God, they read this back into their ancient sagas of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

PSALM 27. This psalm originally existed as two separate psalms. Vss. 1-6 are a superb song of trust. Vss. 7-14 are a typical lament seeking God’s help in trouble. However it came about, the psalm still has great value as an expression of personal trust in God.

PHILIPPIANS 3:17-4:1. The Philippians struggled with a problem we also face every day: how to live as disciples of Jesus Christ in a hostile environment in which the majority of our neighbours do not share our convictions. Paul’s advice was to follow his example as he followed Christ in living in this world, but with totally different values to guide them: “In the world, but not of it.”  In 3:21 Paul refers to the hope of resurrection so that we shall not only be with Christ, but like him when he returns.

LUKE 13:31-35. Jesus rejected the advice of friendly Pharisees that he escape the imminent danger of Herod’s persecution. Knowing full well the risks it entailed, he had determined to end his challenge to Israel’s establishment only in Jerusalem. The pathos of his words about the holy city showed how much he cared about the ancient traditions of his people.

LUKE 9:28-36. (Alternate)   Some traditions celebrate the Transfiguration on this occasion. Please refer to the lessons listed for February 18 for an analysis of this lesson.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

GENESIS 15:1-12, 17-18. This story of how God made a covenant with Abraham may sound strange to our modern ears, but it formed a primary link in the religious tradition of Israel. It is important to remind our modern congregations that these patriarchal stories in Genesis are not history in the sense of being a factual record of actual events. Yet the truth they convey is valid nonetheless. It may help to briefly outline how oral tradition lay behind the biblical record.

The stories of the patriarch’s were tribal sagas passed down from generation to generation by word of mouth.  When later generations committed these stories to writing they particular theological points of view about Israel’s special relationship with Yahweh. They also read these attitudes back into their ancient sagas of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The sagas took on new meaning and became an integral part of Israel’s religious heritage, eventually becoming part of their scriptures.

The problems Abram (not yet given his longer name Abraham – see ch. 17) faced and took up with Yahweh were those of an appropriate heir and a territory in which to live permanently. These were tribal issues.  In subsequent centuries when the story became part of a written document, it also became a national issue. In some respects they remain so to this day, religiously and politically.

Scholars debate which of the several documentary sources of the Pentateuch, J, E or D, lie behind this narrative. It is probably a composite redacted into final form after the Babylonian exile. There is little question, however, that the story has two parts: vss.1-6 deal with the promise of an heir; vss. 8-21 deal the promise of land. Vs. 7 links the two with the standard formula still used to justify Israel’s claim to the territory occupied since the 7th century CE by Palestinians of Arab descent and other ethnic backgrounds. It has been suggested that this connective was a post-Babylonian exile addition to offset the claim of foreigners who had migrated to or forcably settled in the land. The argument persists that temporary absence from the land did not abrogate the divine promise.

Vs. 6 contains a remarkable statement which the early Christian church, beginning with Paul adopted as the basis for the doctrine of justification by faith. (Rom. 4:3, 9. 22; Gal. 3:6) For the Deuteronomist redactors, this special relationship with God was obtained through obedience to the law (Deut. 6:25; 24:13). That the two parties would keep the covenant gave Israel the right to the land. On the other hand, it has been argued that the land created the special relationship rather than vice versa. Settlement in Canaan by the invading Israelites required the theological myth of the covenant promise to sustain their claim.

The performing of a sacrifice sealed the covenant (vss. 9-11) as a religious transaction. This shaped all subsequent OT narratives in which the Israelites claim to the land was in dispute. The myth provided the mandate for the conquest of Canaan after the Exodus as well as the return from exile in Babylon. In a sense, like Britain’s Magna Carta and the American Declaration of Independence for their nations, it formed the constitutional foundation on which ancient and modern Israel were established.

The mysterious fire pot and flaming torch moving among the pieces of sacrificed flesh symbolized the sacred character of the promise of eternal possession of the land (vs. 17). The extent of the territory named (vs. 18) far exceeded anything Israel actually controlled at any time. It included the whole of the Fertile Crescent from the Nile to the Euphrates Rivers and on both sides of the Jordan River. This description was nothing short of an imaginative claim by an enthusiast for the the Davidic monarchy extinguished by the Babylonian exile.

PSALM 27. Because of the differences in style and focus, it is thought that this psalm originally existed as two separate psalms. Vss. 1-6 are a superb song of trust. Vss. 7-14 are a typical lament seeking Yahweh’s help in trouble. Both are believed to have been composed at a relatively late date after Israel’s return from exile in Babylon. However it came about, the psalm still has great
value as an expression of personal trust in God.

Vss. 4-5 lead to the conclusion that the first part came from the hand of someone whose duties required spending a considerable amount of time in the temple precincts. A Levite who served as a choir singer might well have been the poet. He certainly rejoiced in his art as well as his faith. Music has always played a significant role in public and private worship.

The latter part of the psalm has all the basic elements of a lament pleading for divine help in a desperate situation. Vss. 7-12 describe extremely dark circumstances when the psalmist could not look even to his parents for help (vs. 10). This may be no more than a proverbial way of expressing the depths of despair into which he had fallen. Although everyone had deserted him, he was still sure that Yahweh would come to his aid. He was determined to follow the path of holiness despite the attacks of his adversaries who spread false witness against him (vss. 11-12).

In the end, his faith was his only bulwark against disaster. So in a final exhortation he reassured himself that, come what may, Yahweh would be good to him. The conclusion (vs. 14) may be a liturgical formula similar to a benediction at the end of a worship service. Who knows how many saints of past generations have used it as their own source of comfort in lamentable straits?

PHILIPPIANS 3:17-4:1. As this passage shows, Paul had a very close relationship with the Philippian congregation.  None of his other letters express his love and concern for them in such intimate terms. This could well have been due to the story told in Acts 16 that it was in Philippi that Paul first made contact with a European community and founded the first European congregation there.

The Philippians struggled with a problem we also face every day: how to live as disciples of Jesus Christ in a hostile environment in which the majority of our neighbours do not share our convictions. He faced death on a daily basis, particularly so if, as many scholars have concluded, he wrote this letter from prison either in Rome or in Caesarea Maritima, on the east coast of the Mediterranean, while on his way to Rome (Acts 25-26).

Paul’s advice was that the Philippians follow his example as he had followed Christ in living in this world, but with totally different values to guide them: “In the world, but not of it.” In 3:21 Paul refers to the hope of resurrection so that we shall not only be with Christ, but like him when he returns. But what exactly did Paul mean by “being like Christ?”

Certainly, he did not mean it in a physical sense. Paul was su re that we would ultimately be transformed into something similar to the “body of Christ’s glory” (vs. 21). Nor did he know anything about the modern science of genetics and the recent description of the human genome. But even this latest scientific discovery raises many more questions than it answers. Geneticists are now saying that all humans are 99.9% alike in our genetic makeup and, as far as the number of genes we have, remarkably like the fruit fly which has been of such use to geneticists in their research. We also share a great number of genetic traits with the chimpanzees and other members of the anthropoid apes. Are we to conclude, therefore, that genetically speaking, Jesus’ humanity was almost identical with ours? That’s a theological conundrum, isn’t it?

As always, Paul was speaking in a metaphorical and spiritual sense. It is the essence of the gospel Paul and all NT authors proclaimed that the life we have in Christ is spiritual, created by the gift of the Holy Spirit. This gift comes alive in us – and it is already there waiting to be enlivened – through our exercise of faith. It is most   effectively expressed in the love for God and others with which we learn to live day by day.

It saddened Paul greatly that many chose “to live as enemies of the cross of Christ” (vs. 18).  The essence of sin as he saw it was to continue to live in the spiritual   dysfunctional way of selfishness, greed, hate and pride that brought about the death of Jesus on the cross. A so much better way lay in the way Jesus himself had lived. That too was the way Paul himself had tried to live, however imperfectly, since his conversion on the Damascus Road. He had said as much in the paragraph  immediately preceding this passage.

Lent is a time when we may examine our lives, confess our sins and renew our commitment to live differently. While Paul knew nothing about Lent, which did not become common in the church for another millennium, this is the pattern Paul set before the Philippians and ourselves two millennia later.

LUKE 13:31-35. Jesus rejected the advice of friendly Pharisees that he escape the imminent danger of persecution by Herod Antipas. Knowing full well the risks it entailed, Jesus determined to end his challenge to Israel’s religious establishment only in Jerusalem, the city of God for which his heart ached.

In his book, Rabbi Jesus: An Intimate Biography (Doubleday, 2000), Bruce Chilton gave a striking description of the ambivalence of many Pharisees toward Jesus. Chilton saw Jesus as an illiterate Galilean peasant rabbi who gathered about him a following of relatively humble folk who lived in the villages of Galilee rather than in fishing port of Capernaum or the larger centres of Roman culture like Sepphoris or Tiberias. The former city had been Herod Antipas’ capital, but in 21-25 CE he built and moved his center of government to Tiberias, on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Jesus may have been conscripted as indentured labor in Antipas’ enterprise.

Some of the Pharisees were quite sympathetic to Jesus because they felt he was defending the traditions of Moses against the onslaught of the hated Graeco-Roman cultural influences of the larger centers. Furthermore, according to Chilton, Jesus had been a close follower of John the Baptist whom Antipas had executed unjustly. Antipas would have done Jesus in too, if he could have done so without causing a rebellion in his Galilean domain. Jesus spurned him as a sly fox (vs. 32) knowing full well that Antipas feared Jesus’ power to command significant support among his fellow peasantry as well as the more sophisticated party of Pharisees. This tour of Galilean communities (vs. 27) was, in Chilton’s analysis, an effort to raise a large following of disciples to take with him to Jerusalem. Some of those to whom he appealed were Pharisees (vs. 31; 14:1), despite his frequent clash with them because of their sharp differences about dietary and sabbatical observances.

Acknowledging himself as a prophet (vs. 33), Jesus recognized that Jerusalem was the centre of all Jewish culture and religious tradition. He must go there; but he also realized what danger lay in wait for him (vs. 34). The Jewish establishment dominated all the political and economic power structures remaining in Jewish hands. The sacrificial rituals of the temple determined not only the keeping of the ancient covenant of Israel and Yahweh, but every aspect of the city’s life. Jesus’ desire to reform and simplify the whole system mandated that he take whatever risk going there might involve. Yet, like many of the great prophets before him, he knew that his mandate came from a higher authority, from Yahweh, Lord and God of all (vs. 35), who desired not great sacrifices, but profound obedience expressed in love.

If the confession of Peter at Caesarea Philippi and the Transfiguration confirmed Jesus as Messiah/Christ, this steady procession toward Jerusalem built the dramatic tension leading to the final confrontation between the old traditions and Jesus’ new way of living within the covenant between Israel and Yahweh. However we may read the story of the Passion of Christ, we cannot escape the strong element of Jesus’ conflict with the priestly establishment. To say so is not to be anti-Semitic, but to read the gospels as they were written several decades after the events they describe. The gospels were written to interpret with faith what the authors had learned from the traditions and teaching of those seen and heard what Jesus had done and said.

Christians and church congregations still face the threat of persecution today if faith is found  at odds with dominant authorities – religious or secular. The issue of gay rights divides many congregations and denominations. The woman to be elected presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church in the USA faced strong disapproval by some of her episcopal colleagues in Africa although elected to her post by a strong majority of her denomination.  In Canada, several Anglican congregations have declared their independence from the Anglican Church in Canada over the issue of ordaining homosexuals. A  progressive minister of a congregation of The United Church of Canada In Toronto has been widely condemned for declaring her personal doubts about the divinity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity. Religious authorities frequently challenge secular officials and governments who seek to change a nation’s laws on abortion. Portugal is the latest country to experience such internal conflict during and after a plebiscite sought popular support to modernize the law.

Such examples show how vulnerable faithful Christians can be when their convictions conflict with those of civil and religious authority. Is this not the way of the cross that Jesus pioneered for us?

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
First Sunday of Lent – February 21, 2010

DEUTERONOMY 26:1-11. The offering of the first fruits of the harvest was one of the great festivals in Israel’s temple ritual. Though the story and the liturgy probably developed much later, in this passage Moses is said to have initiated the ritual as a commandment from God. The story lifts up the fundamental concept of stewardship: offering to God the first returns of our labour as an act of worship and thanksgiving, and as a symbol of the  dedication of ourselves and all our possessions to God.

PSALM 91:1-2, 9-16. 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.

ROMANS 10:8b-13. Paul struggles to explain how both Jews and Gentiles can have a right relationship with God. For Jews it was by keeping of the commandments of God given through Moses. But that can only be done by faith in the lordship of Jesus Christ, Paul says to the Romans. Nothing else will suffice for either Jews or Gentiles.

LUKE 4:1-13. Immediately after his baptism, the Spirit led him into the wilderness for a time of prayer and fasting. The so-called temptations came to Jesus as inner reflections about how to do what he now perceived his divine mission to be. He could have chosen any of the three tempting ways: to satisfy his own needs by feeding himself and the crowds immediately; to gain supreme power by subjecting himself to evil; or to draw attention to himself by some spectacular performance. He rejected all three. His struggles with temptation had not ended. More were yet to come as he chose the way that led to the cross.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

DEUTERONOMY 26:1-11. The offering of the first fruits of the harvest was one of the great festivals in Israel’s temple ritual. As with most ancient festivals, the practice of dedicating the first sheaf of grain to be harvested to Yahweh had much earlier origins in the agricultural practices adopted by the Israelites when they left their pastoral life in the wilderness and settled down among the Canaanites.

An ancient taboo lay behind the offering, rooted in the concept of divine property rights. All created beings of any kind belonged to the deity and were therefore regarded as holy. Ps. 24:1 gives this concept explicit expression. Before being consumed by humans, all produce had to be “redeemed” for profane use. If this was not done, divine justice entailed retribution. The only way to resolve this problem was to give back to the deity the first part of the tabooed object, thus nullifying the deity’s prior property rights. Thus ancient Israelites dedicated the first fruits of the harvest to Yahweh. They similarly dedicated their first-born animals and gave special place of honour to their first-born sons.

Though the liturgical celebration of this festival probably developed much later, in this passage Moses is said to have initiated the ritual as a commandment from Yahweh. This passage is part of a major section of Deuteronomy (chs. 12-26) written as if Moses delivered the law on almost all aspects of the covenanted nation’s life as revealed by Yahweh on Sinai. It is an imaginative reconstruction dating from the late 7th century at the earliest, possibly six or seven hundred years after the assumed time of Moses.

For us, the passage lifts up the fundamental concept of stewardship: offering to God the first returns of our labour, now usually measured in monetary terms, as an act of worship and thanksgiving, and as a symbol of the dedication of ourselves and all our possessions to God. However we may make the dedication – by an offering presented during worship or by a pre-authorized remittance from our bank accounts – the meaning is the same. By this sacramental act, we are committing ourselves to live in God’s way. The temptation we all face is to short-change God by neglecting to make an offering commensurate with our means.

Another aspect of this sacred stewardship is gaining more and more popularity in the developed nations. Environmental stewardship means that we must make use of the gifts of God in the natural world for the benefit of all, but not abuse them only for personal consumption and so destroy the quality of life for all on this planet. Our greatest challenge is to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels to satisfy our profligate habits. This is particularly difficult for us who have lived so long as if we are the dominant creatures to whom all nature is to be subjugated for our benefit (Gen. 1:29-30). With global warming causing great changes to the planet’s natural, interdependent systems, this is the time for us to reconsider our role and adopt a stringent stewardship of the planet’s resources as the only means to bring about a more balanced future for all humanity and our planet. Lent is a good time to begin practicing these personal disciplines as our part in environmental stewardshp. It  may mean giving up some of our profligate consumption and accepting higher standards for our lifestyle so that others who have little may have basic their needs met.

PSALM 91:1-2, 9-16. 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 first two verses create some interesting images. Was the psalmist, possibly a Levite whose duty kept him close to the temple precincts, taking shelter from the blazing midsummer sun in the shadow of the temple? The massive structure communicated something of the mysterious omnipotence that so dominated the Israelite concept of the deity.

The word translated Almighty in vs. 2 also conjures up some ancient concepts of the divine being. The Hebrew word is shaddai, a name for Israel’s deity supposedly dating from the patriarchal period more than a thousand years before the 6th century BCE priestly document of the Pentateuch used it almost exclusively. The name referred to a mountain deity whose typical theophany was in a storm. The power of this god was not manifested in nature, but by protecting the family or tribe, upholding its social life and guiding its historical pilgrimage tot he Promised Land. This is the intent of its use in the context of this psalm. The name El Shaddai also appeared extensively in the Book of Job where it expressed the omnipotent majesty of deity, not surprising because that book probably also dates from the 6th century BCE or a little later.

It would appear that the psalm was chosen for the first Sunday of Lent because vss. 11-12 are quoted by Satan in tempting Jesus in Matthew 4:6 and Luke 4:10-11. On the other hand, we should interpret the devoutly expressed trust 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) El Shaddai does this graciously and mercifully because it is his nature to do so, and it is in fulfillment of the covenant, not a reward for good behaviour.
This passage belongs to one of the major segments of Paul’s letter – chs. 9-11 – in which he struggled to explain how both Jews and Gentiles can have a right relationship with God through faith alone. His audience would appear to have been a predominantly Jewish community in Rome, so he was at pains to clarify the reasons for his Gentile mission and his attitude to the rejection of the gospel by many of his fellow Jews. In his classic Moffat New Testament Commentary (1932),  C.H. Dodd suggested that this section may even have stood alone, perhaps as a sermon, which Paul incorporated into his letter. If so, what a sermon!

ROMANS 10:8b-13. For Jews, Paul claimed, their relationship with God depended on keeping of the commandments of God given through Moses. He condemned his fellow Jews for their unenlightened ways. They had chosen a good end – relationship with God – but pursued it by the wrong means. He went on to claim that a true relationship with God could only be attained through faith in the lordship of Jesus Christ.  Nothing else would suffice for either Jews or Gentiles.

All through his Letter to the Romans, Paul quoted rather freely and literally (perhaps from memory) from the Greek Septuagint version of the Jewish scriptures. He was not much concerned, however, with the context of the passages he quotes. Vss. 6-8 refers to Deuteronomy 30:11-14. He simply tried to say that salvation in Christ is available to all and cannot be achieved by human effort. In vs. 11, he quoted from Isaiah 28:16; and in vs. 13 from Joel 2:32. His purpose was establish that Jesus is Lord and to reassure his predominantly Jewish audience that the sovereignty of Christ is not only effective for Jews and Gentiles alike, but was prefigured in the Jewish scriptures.

Thus Paul, a scholarly young rabbi before his conversion, pled his case before fellow Jews by drawing extensively on the sacred literature of his people. A glance at chs. 9-11 in the NSRV shows many of the quotations in poetic style and stand out on the pages. The quotation from Joel in vs. 13 refers to the Jewish conviction that when the end of the world came, those who called on the name of the Lord (i.e. Yahweh) would find safety in the kingdom of the Messiah. Paul merely transposed this verse to convince his now Judaeo-Christian audience as to how safe they were in accepting the fundamental creed that Jesus is Lord.

LUKE 4:1-13. This passage takes us back to the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry. Yet it was not the report of a single incident. S. MacLean Gilmour said that this is “a commentary on the entire course of Jesus’ ministry.”  Jesus must often have been tempted to prove the authenticity of his mission by displaying  miraculous powers and undertaking the role of a political Messiah.  (The Interpreter’s Bible, viii, 83).

The issue of power and how Jesus was to use it runs through the whole of the gospel story. His healing miracles were social dynamite to the astonished multitudes. They were an immediate threat to the religious authorities in Galilee, but especially in Judea and Jerusalem. Jesus constantly had to face the question of when and how to use the power of God in him. He became conscious of that power through the infusion of the Spirit at his baptism.

Immediately after his baptism, he retreated into the wilderness for a time of prayer and fasting. The so-called “temptations” came as a time of deep inner reflection about his baptismal experience and how to do what he now perceived his divine mission to be. All three gospels assert that it was the Spirit and not Satan which motivated him to withdraw for this time of contemplation.

But what exactly was this experience? Did it result from the intensely emotional spiritual insight of his baptism in which he totally and compassionately identified himself with the common folk despite being aware of his divine nature and mission? Was he hallucinating because of his lack of food and water? Had he discovered in a flash of insight that the root of the world’s suffering lies in the misuse of power?

Who but Jesus could have told the disciples and their successors in the Apostolic Church about his experience and its meaning for his ministry? Could this have been one of the things he told them after the resurrection? Or, could this be the gospel authors’ reflection on who this strange person in their midst really was and what his arrival in their Galilean villages meant for them and for future generations of believers?

Jesus – and by implication, the church which still represents him in the world – could have chosen any of the three tempting ways to tell what the story of his life, death and resurrection is really all about. First, he could satisfy his own needs by feeding  himself, thus immediately negating the very essence of his message to love God and others in every possible way. After all, human institutions exist because in some way or another they meet the needs of those who create them. The church is no exception as its attention to property and worldly possessions so obviously demonstrates.

Secondly, he had a choice of gaining immediate and supreme power by subjecting himself to the forces of evil. All through history, this has been the choice of the politically and economically powerful, as the devastating wars of the last century manifested so clearly. All too frequently the church has aided and abetted this power-seeking urge in dominant en and not a few women.

Jesus’ third option would draw attention to himself by a spectacular theatrical performance. How could anyone fail to recognize who he was if he did this? He rejected all three options. Or did he? It never ceases to amaze me that time and again, Jesus’ miraculous healings and other acts of mercy did exactly what the third temptation indicated he should not do. Perhaps it was just the way the gospels tell the story and the way the later kerygma of the apostolic church focused attention on this strange person. Nonetheless, the biblical narrative places him at its very centre and asks the eternal question, “Who do you say that I am?”

Nor were Jesus’ internal struggles ended with this incident so briefly reported by Luke. Many more were yet to come as he chose the way that led to his death by crucifixion in a relatively short time. His message that the kingdom of God was at hand, indeed had already arrived with him, continually created the problem of distinguishing between personal opportunism and the radically new ways he proposed to bring God’s sovereign love into all human relationships.

Christian history through the centuries demonstrates how much his followers failed to live up to his real intent. Sadly, we have not rejected the various options of continuing Jesus’ ministry in and to the world. This point needs to be made again and again in every community of faith. Meeting our own needs, the desire for and rewards of power have continually prevented us from doing as he did in laying down his life for those whom he loves.

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
The Transfiguration – February 14, 2010
Last Sunday After Epiphany

EXODUS 34:29-35. This is an imaginative description of what might have happened after Moses came face to face with God. Moses had been in the very presence of God to receive the commandments. His brother Aaron and all the Israelites knew this because his face shone. This strange phenomenon symbolized that these commandments had come from God, not from Moses himself. The shining presence in God’s messenger represented the divine authority behind the commandments.

PSALM 99. This is the last of a series of psalms used in the temple ritual, which some scholars believe celebrated the enthronement of God as Israel’s ruler at the new year festival. It focuses on God’s justice and praises God for providential and merciful guidance throughout Israel’s history from the time of Moses onward.

2 CORINTHIANS 3:12-4:2. Because Paul had quite another purpose in mind, he reinterpreted the story of Moses covering his shining face with a veil. He declared that God’s authority comes not from the commandments Moses brought to the Israelites, but from the risen Christ who is now present with the church through the gift of the Spirit. So the church is able to speak truthfully and authoritatively for God as we proclaim the gospel.

LUKE 9:29-43. Luke tells of the transfiguration of Jesus with the same Old Testament lesson in mind to make the same point Paul made: Jesus represents God and God’s authority along with Moses and Elijah. The healing of the epileptic child proves that this is no pious hope, but a spiritual reality breaking in upon the natural scheme of things in a distressed world. Our troubled time needs to hear this hopeful message.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

EXODUS 34:29-35. The tendency of biblical scholarship since the beginning of historical-critical inquiry has been to dissect the whole of the Pentateuch, including the Book of Exodus, into source documents authored by unknown hands at different periods of Israel’s history and finally edited into a composite whole. This fragmentation detracted from what many scholars now see in the Book of Exodus: one of the foundational books of holy scripture, for Jews and Christians alike.

No one denies that the structure of Exodus is composite; but it also may be seen as a deliberately structured whole designed for a particular theological purpose. In chapters 33 and 34 this purpose becomes clear. In the renewal of the covenant and the presentation of a second set of stone tablets bearing Yahweh’s commandments, the presence of Yahweh among Yahweh’s chosen people is revealed in all its glory. This above all else, despite Israel’s persistent apostasy and the continued opposition of Israel’s enemies, formed the central point around which all subsequent Jewish history, ritual and faith revolved. This passage presents an imaginative description of what might have happened after Moses came face to face with God.

A tent where Moses met face to face with Yahweh (33:7-11) represented the divine shekinah, (usually described as “the radiant glory,” but literally, “the dwelling” or “that which dwells”). In the ensuing dialogue, Yahweh renewed the covenant with Israel based on mercy and grace, not on Israel’s obedience (34:6-7). In this lesson we have a description of how the people of Israel recognized that this had happened: the shekinah was reflected in the shining face of Moses. This strange phenomenon of the shining presence in Yahweh’s messenger symbolized that the commandments and the covenant of promise had come from Yahweh, not from Moses himself.

Much the same phenomenon is used today in democracies where laws are promulgated in the name of the nation as a whole. In Canada or the United Kingdom, the monarch is the symbolic representation of the nation. In the USA, the president fills this role. In ancient Israel, this representation embodied by Moses provided the nation with its unique identity as the chosen people. The commandments thus became the divinely mandated response to this special relationship and the ultimate authority in the daily life of Israel.

The issue confronting us in this text has to do with our authority for representing Jesus Christ and the living God in our daily lives. A growing number of people have turned to meditation as a means of reconnecting their lives with the divine authority they seek to practice. We owe much of the revival of this facet of our Christian tradition to our Roman Catholic ecumenical partners. A number of devotional websites have been created to assist those unfamiliar with this practice. These include such sites as the World Center for Christian Meditation http://www.wccm.org; Dr. Phil St. Romain’s Shalom Place: The Heartland Center for Spirituality, http://shalomplace.com; and Sacred Space accessible at http://sacredspace.ie/. Another helpful source for guided meditations is the book and CD, The Healing Oasis by Sharon Moon with Gary Sprague, composer and musician, issued by The United Church Publishing House in 1998. While these practices may not recreate for us the experience of the divine shekinah, they may in and of themselves be useful spiritual practices in our anxious age when we seem to have little or no control over our lives.

PSALM 99. According to some scholars, this is the last of a series of psalms used in the temple ritual, probably sung in two or more parts, to celebrate the enthronement of Yahweh as mythical sovereign of the universe as well as of Israel. Scholars have included Psalms 47; 93; 96-99 in this series. This ritual was thought to have been based on non-Jewish traditions adapted for use in Israel at the new year festival. Such celebrations are known to have been common in Babylonian, Ugarit and Moabite traditions. Other scholars dispute this interpretation and regard these as psalms for the sabbath rather than for the new year. On the other hand, they may reflect some specific but indeterminate historical situation. The data is insufficient to prove any of these points of view.

Most likely the psalm dates from the time of Zerubbabel at the end of the 6th century BC, when the temple was being rebuilt following the return of the exiles from Babylon. As several prophetic references indicate, there was an awakening of messianism during this period. (Haggai 2:2-9, 20-23; Zechariah 3:8; 4:8-11; 6:11-12.) Messianism and monarchy were inextricably linked in the theology of the later books of the OT and intertestamental literature.

As we have it now, the psalm celebrates Yahweh’s holiness and justice, and praises Yahweh for providential and merciful guidance throughout Israel’s history from the time of Moses onward. In vss. 6-7 there is a reference to Moses, Aaron and Samuel as priests representing the people before Yahweh and receiving from Yahweh the terms of the covenantal relationship as we have seen described in Exodus 33-34. This is no easy transaction based on special favour. Vs. 8 stipulates that it is the forgiving nature of God which maintains the relationship, while at the same time avenging Israel’s wrongdoings.

The psalm ends with a summons to worship in the sacred temple on the holy mountain of Jerusalem. In the television clips one sees of the Western Wall in Jerusalem, one can quickly discern the persistent sense of holiness and total identification which modern Israelis exhibit toward the site of the temple. I have been there and shared in the practice of praying at what is believed to be all that is left of the temple created by Herod the Great (37-4BCE). One feels a certain empathy for this attitude. Sadly, this same attitude is not extended to the magnificent Islamic mosques which tower over the site and which are just as sacred and worshipful to Moslems as the Western Wall is to Jews. Yet these holy sites have been the source of much anguish and conflict between Jews and Moslems for more than the past half century.

2 CORINTHIANS 3:12-4:2. One of the significant facets of biblical interpretation comes to the fore in this passage. Whatever its original meaning, a specific passage may be used by a later author/interpreter to make a point quite different from that intended by the original author. This was a common practice of NT authors as may seen from their frequent quotations from the only scriptures they knew, the Hebrew scriptures. Most likely they had before them the Greek translation of the Hebrew text composed in the 3rd century BCE by Jews living in Alexandria, Egypt. They freely reinterpreted their selected quotations to convey a message relevant to their own context without regard to the intent of the original passage. Their purpose was to proclaim Jesus of Nazareth as the long promised Messiah/Christ. Don’t we still do that all the time, often in polemical voice as Paul seems to have used here?

Behind this passage stands the OT lesson from Exodus 34. Paul refers directly to the time Moses covered his shining face with a veil. Because he has quite another purpose in mind, Paul saw in this story another interpretation of how the divine presence and truth are authoritatively expressed. Throughout chs. 2 & 3 Paul has been expounding the validity of his apostleship. His confidence in doing so, he claims, is dependent on the superiority of the new covenant he and other apostles preach. He makes a rather negative reference to the shekinah reflected in Moses’ face (vs.7) which is now fading because the old covenant is being set aside. That old covenant simply condemned the Israelites, it did not save them, he claims. Now, however, the new covenant justifies believers; it establishes a right relationship with God which the old covenant failed to do. He goes so far as to liken the veil over Moses’ shining face to the veil he claims lies over the minds of the people of Israel because they refuse to believe in Christ.

This may sound to us supersessionalist, if not blatantly anti-Semitic; and so it has been interpreted. Let’s not deny it as many Christians still do so to the extent of excluding faithful Jews as “the people of God.” (See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism) One of the reasons Paul was so fiercely opposed by his fellow Jews was their belief that he had abandoned the sacred tradition that Israel alone was God’s chosen people. In fact, Paul was trying to say that the old covenant was not wrong, but that it was incomplete. It was but one step along the way to the full revelation of God’s nature and God’s saving love as Jesus Christ had made this known. How do we feel when radical Christian interpreters (e.g. Bishop John Spong) declare that our present understanding of the orthodox Christian tradition is just as incomplete?

The metaphor of the veil covering Moses face and so veiling the minds of believers from the truth in Christ plays an unusually large place in this passage. William Barclay had some interesting insights about this veil and how it still may affect us through prejudice, wishful thinking, fragmentary thinking, disobedience or an unteachable spirit.

Paul goes on to declare that the relationship of Christians in Corinth with God and God’s authority in their lives comes not from the commandments of Moses, but from the risen Christ who is now present with the church through the gift of the Spirit. So the church is able to speak truthfully and authoritatively for God as it proclaims the gospel. What is more, now that they (and by inference, we also) behold the presence of God fully revealed in Jesus Christ and the Spirit, we are being transformed into his likeness. This transformation is not effected by us, but by the Spirit of Jesus Christ himself.

LUKE 9:29-43. Who really knows exactly what Transfiguration means? The word itself translates the well-known Greek term, metamorphoo (English = metamorphose). One is compelled to ask not what it means, but if it really happened. Since the 2nd century CE it has been the subject of much speculative interpretation. Was it, as 2 Peter claims a verification of the Second Coming (2 Pet. 1:16-18)? Was it a misplaced tradition of a post-resurrection appearance to Peter, James and John? Was it, as Matthew 17:9 declared, a vision? Was it a kerygmatic story created by the apostolic church to teach that the messiahship of Jesus was supported by the law and the prophets?

Writing for a Gentile faith community living in a different context, Luke drew on the same Old Testament lesson from Exodus 34 as Paul had in writing to the Corinthians. He wanted to make the same point Paul made, but he said it in a very different way without the polemical attitude Paul voiced. He told this story to point out that Jesus is the one who represents the divine presence in the world and possesses divine authority and power to save. But Luke did not see Jesus as abrogating the old covenant in the same way many believe Paul had done. Along with Matthew (5:17), he saw Jesus as fulfilling the covenant witnessed to by both Moses, as representative of the original covenanted community of Israel, and Elijah, the representative of the whole prophetic witness throughout Israel’s faith history.

What is more, Luke tied this symbolic experience, so vividly recalled by the apostolic community represented by Peter, James and John, to the mission of the apostolic church in the real world where human sickness and distress abounded. The healing of the epileptic child proved that the divine presence and redeeming grace which the church proclaimed is no pious hope, but a spiritual reality breaking in upon the natural, chaotic state of a diseased and distressed world. This interpretation of the Transfiguration, recalling as it does the transfiguration of Moses and the prophetic witness to God as sovereign Lord of Israel’s faith and history, seems far more relevant to our times than Paul’s tortured polemic.

On the other hand, we must also recall that Paul and Luke had quite different purposes in mind. Paul wrote a personal communication to one of the congregations he had founded and which suffered from a serious crisis of disunity. The conflict raging in Corinth, perhaps between Jews and Gentiles as in Galatia, had not only divided the community, but threatened to destroy the very work Paul had so patiently carried out there. Paul would be of all people most surprised to find that his letter was now “holy scripture.” Luke wrote to convince a leader of the Gentile community, or a wider audience of both Jews and Gentiles, that the Christian faith was no threat to peace and welfare of the Graeco-Roman world in which they were living, but indeed its only hope for survival.

If one prefers to regard this as a credible, historical event in the life of Jesus, one must see it for what it meant to him as much as to the apostles. It confirmed Jesus in his mission and prepared him for the difficult trials that lay ahead. To quote D. M. Beck in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (iv.687): “Luke places more emphasis on Jesus, who, facing death, found in prayer the support with him of great spiritual leaders and especially God who chose him for the way of suffering, death and resurrection.” That may well have been all that Luke sought to do.

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Fifth Sunday after Epiphany
Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time
February 7, 2010

ISAIAH 6:1-13. Here we have another classic example of a prophet called to a special ministry. As the smoke of the morning sacrifice wafted through the temple, Isaiah had a vision and heard an angelic voice praising the holiness of God. He then realized his own and his fellow Israelites’ unworthiness before God. One of the angelic beings touched his lips with a live coal, thus cleansing him to speak. Isaiah heard the voice of God calling for a messenger and he responded. But the message God gave him to deliver was one of unmitigated judgment.

PSALM 138. Unlike most of the psalms, this hymn of thanksgiving by an individual is thought to be from a small “Davidic collection.” (Psalms 138-145.) This meant that it was ascribed to King David rather than being composed by him. It expresses gratitude for God’s blessing as well as trust in God’s love and purpose.

1 CORINTHIANS 15:1-11. In this passage beginning his great confession of the resurrection, Paul states as simply as possible what he had learned from the apostles. He had met some of them – notably Peter (Cephas) and James – in Jerusalem when he returned there some time after his conversion. First, he concentrated on the facts he had been told. Could this summary have been what the apostles in the earliest Christian community were teaching in the first years after the resurrection? Then he too makes his claim as “the least of the apostles” and reiterates his dependence on God’s grace for that.

LUKE 5:1-11. Behind the gospels as we now have them, there was a long tradition of stories about Jesus’ teaching and miracles repeated by word of mouth before being put into written form. Toward the end of the 1st century CE Luke gave a much more elaborate story than either Mark or Matthew. He connects this story of a miraculous catch of fish with the calling of the first disciples. John tells it as one of Jesus’ resurrection appearances (John 21). Taken together, the tradition represents a promise of the ultimate success of the apostolic mission.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

ISAIAH 6:1-13. Here we have another classic example of a prophet called to a special ministry. My OT professor, the late Rev. Dr. R.B.Y Scott, made this passage the starting point for his lectures on prophecy. He had written a highly regarded book, The Relevance of the Prophets, and at the time he was lecturing to us at McGill in 1948, he was writing the introduction and exegesis of Isaiah 1-39 for The Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 5. His analysis of this passage in this latter volume is a valuable contribution to the understanding of prophetic visions and oracles.

The ancient temple in Jerusalem faced east. The daily sacrifice was offered as the sun rose over the horizon formed by the Mount of Olives. Rays from the rising sun flooded into the temple through its great doors causing its burnished gold and copper accouterments to shine gloriously. As the smoke of the morning sacrifice wafted through the temple, Isaiah, saw a vision and heard angelic voices praising the holiness of God.

Isaiah was possibly a cousin and certainly a courtier of King Uzziah, who had just died. Uzziah’s reign was one of the longest of the kings of Judah, 783-742 BCE. In his last years he suffered from leprosy and was replaced by his son Jotham as regent. This was also the time when Assyrian power was on the rise throughout ancient Mesopotamia and the wider Middle East. Uzziah’s reign included an expansion into both Philistine territory to the west that controlled trade routes to Egypt and Edom, to the south where there were valuable trade routes to Arabia. As the prophecies of Amos and Micah also reveal, this was a very prosperous period in the nation’s history.

In this passage Isaiah was in mourning and went into the temple, as was his wont, to offer a lament. As he worshiped in the familiar surroundings, he sensed the divine presence in a dramatic new way. God, of course, is invisible; yet Isaiah did have such a vision. Or was it just the hem of God’s robe and the attending seraphim, which represented the divine presence to him? Quickly afterward, Isaiah recognized his own unworthiness before God and that of his fellow Judeans. The experience overwhelmed him. That he should become the prophet to proclaim God’s judgment on his nation’s moral and spiritual decay was furthest from his imagination. Great revelations come to faithful men and women in the midst of the mundane experiences of life.

In Isaiah’s vision, one of the angelic beings touched his lips with a live coal from the altar, thus cleansing him to speak for God. He heard the voice of God calling for a messenger and he responded, “Here am I, send me.” But the message God gave him to deliver was one of unmitigated judgment. It must have been a fear-filled experience. To be called to speak God’s judgment against his own people would have frightened the most courageous of men or women in that day of woeful events as is in ours. One only has to hear or see to the attack ads created for contemporary political campaigns to realize how much the prophet exposes him or herself to community ridicule.

Yet there are men and women willing to present the divine alternatives to our petty human machinations of history. The people are the ground-breakers for new advances in faith and witness to the purposes of God in the world. It was so for Isaiah, who with Amos and Micah in the late 8th century BCE set forth a vision of divine justice and righteousness which remains as convincing for us as it was for them. These elements of Israelite prophecy had close affinity to the actual events of that time when the great empires of Assyria and Egypt were in conflict. Israel, the northern kingdom, and Judea itself was constantly threatened with invasion and the imposition of foreign religious practices.

PSALM 138. Unlike most of the psalms, this hymn of thanksgiving by an individual is thought to be from a small “Davidic collection.” (Psalms 138-145.) This meant that it was ascribed to King David rather than being composed by him.

There are some twenty such hymns of thanksgiving by individuals preserved in the religious literature of Israel. Isaiah 38:10-20 and Jonah 2:2-9 are examples found in the OT. The apocryphal books of Ecclessiasticus (Sirach), the Psalms of Solomon and the Odes of Solomon contain others.

Like most others, this psalm is from a post-exilic date. The absence of any thanksgiving sacrifice points to an unusual level of spiritual development rarely found except in some of the prophetic literature which condemned the temple sacrifices. Or it may date from a time before the reconstruction of the temple when the normal sacrifices could not be celebrated. It also reflects a universalism echoing that of Second Isaiah (vss. 4-6) for earthly kings are said to worship God as do the humble; and God does not despise their praise. The psalm ends with an declaration of trust in God’s love and purpose. Vs. 8 certainly provides a very preachable text.

1 CORINTHIANS 15:1-11. Paul states as simply as possible what he had learned from the apostles whom he met in Jerusalem when he returned there some time after his conversion. This probably occurred less than a decade after the resurrection. Some scholars believe it may have been no more than a year or two. Could this have been an early Christian creed? It summarizes what the apostles were teaching in those first years after that momentous event when the apostolic church was feeling the full flush of its new faith.

One point stands out in Paul’s repetition of this statement of faith. To him, the resurrection was something experienced by those few who had seen and spoken with the risen Christ. It was also Paul’s firm conviction that the same risen Lord had appeared to him on the Damascus Road. The ambiguity between faith and fact remains with the Christian community to this day. Faith does not attempt to be factual. Rather it expresses a spiritual interpretation of deep and often inexplicable psychic experiences. It uses the language of image, symbol and metaphor to describe what persons of faith have experienced amid the ebb and flow of ordinary events which a reporter or historian might well record differently as observed facts or strange myths.

The resurrection experience symbolized for Paul and the other apostles that Jesus Christ, who had been executed as a criminal, was very much alive. Death had not conquered him; he had conquered death and was now with them in spirit. There were still many living in Paul’s time who could testify to this experience. The reference to the risen Christ’s appearance to five hundred people may be an alternate reminiscence of Pentecost as that event had been told to Paul by the apostolic community.

Quite possibly Paul was the first to connect the death of Christ to the ancient Israelite tradition that sin could be forgiven by the shedding of blood. This belief had its roots in the ancient practices of offering sacrifices to the deity common to all ancient religious traditions. In some traditions human sacrifice had also been quite commonly practiced. Even in Israel as late as the 7th century BCE reign of Manasseh (ca. 687-642 BCE) there had been evidence of this. Among the Jews, animal sacrifice in lieu of human sacrifice was related closely to the celebration of the both Passover and Yom Kippur. In this context Paul interpreted the crucifixion of Jesus as a self-offering which had a similar effect of dealing with the human problem of sin and alienation from God.

Note too that Paul adds himself as “the least of the apostles.” One view of the narrative in Acts presents Paul and Peter as rivals for leadership of the Gentile mission. In Galatians and here, Paul gives some basis for this hypothesis. He numbers himself among the apostles, though with self-deprecating diminution. He goes on to reiterate his total dependence on God’s grace for his status and gives his fellow apostles credit where credit is due. They all share the resurrection faith which is the heart of the gospel for us as well.

LUKE 5:1-11. (Author’s note: This passage is also covered in a new blog posted here: http://studiesinluke.blogspot.com. Look on the list to the left for #7 – Calling The First Disciples. The content of this blog introduced a Bible study with a group of seniors at Glen Abbey United Church, Oakville,ON, Canada.)

Luke tells this story of a miraculous catch of fish in connection with the calling of the first disciples. His version is much more elaborate than the brief accounts of Mark and Matthew. John tells it as one of Jesus’ resurrection appearances (John 21). Behind the gospels as we now have them, there was a long tradition of stories about Jesus’ teaching and miracles repeated by word of mouth before being put into written form. Assuming that all versions referred to the same event, which some commentators doubt, they speak to the future mission of the apostolic church. It appears to be a promise of ultimate success though not without long and difficult toil on the part of the disciple community.

At first, the ekklesia (i.e. the apostolic church) meant simply a group of Jews of humble origins, many of them unlettered and poverty stricken, who had responded to the preaching of Jesus and believed in his resurrection. Then as now, fishing was not always a lucrative occupation, but one which required much skill and patience, hard work and long hours. These men were partners in a small business in which they had invested their whole lives. Catching and marketing of fresh fish, a major food in Galilee at the time, was not always a profitable trade. In that climate, the fish would have to be caught during the night and sold in the marketplace within a few hours. Often the results were disappointing. However, this story is told for its metaphorical significance rather than as a factual vignette of the harsh life of the Galilean fisherman.

Luke has a way of weaving the whole tradition into his story as he tells it. His audience was two generations removed from the events he narrates and unfamiliar with the places in which those events occurred. So he did not have to be concerned about chronological order. His intent was primarily evangelical. For instance, he has Peter call Jesus first “Master,” then “Lord.” Those are titles which Luke reserves for disciples. Non-disciples used the term, “Teacher.” The title “Lord” appears in Luke twenty-one times; twelve of them in pericopes peculiar to Luke. It can be argued that here Luke was thinking in post-resurrection terms when the apostles had fully realized that Jesus was the Messiah for whom such a title was appropriate. As has been pointed out many times, the original creed of the apostolic church was the simple statement, “Jesus is Lord.”

So also Peter’s confession of sinfulness in his plea that Jesus depart from him is appropriate to a post-resurrection attitude. It reiterates the gospel call to repentance as the antecedent to Christian discipleship. Luke had emphasized this as the message John the Baptist had preached (3:1-20) and which Peter had also proclaimed in his Pentecost sermon in Acts 2:38. It may also have some reference to Peter’s denial of Jesus in the court of the house of Caiaphas (22:54-60).

The late Professor G. B. Caird pointed to Jesus’ choice of these “hard-working but intensely loyal men, ever aware of their own shortcomings, as those whom he needed to carry the gospel into the world.” Does not the present evangelistic environment call for a disciple community of similarly dedicated, loyal and hard-working persons? Certainly not those who may lay claim to moral perfection or spiritual greatness would not fit the requirements. Caird’s analysis of this passage is a valuable contribution to the understanding of how prophetic visions and oracles affect us: “On Simon at least the impact he made was a profoundly moral one, resulting in a sense of sin. It was not the miracle that brought him to his knees but the grandeur of sheer goodness.” (Caird, G.B. Saint Luke. The Pelican New Testament Commentary, 1965.)

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Fourth Sunday after Epiphany, Year C
Fourth Sunday in Ordinary Time
January 31, 2010

JEREMIAH 1:4-10. This is a classic example of the call to a prophet for his special mission. The young Jeremiah is summoned by the direct intervention of God in his life. The divine message revealed that God had intended this role for Jeremiah from before his birth. God not only called, but also equipped the prophet for his vocation by reassuring him and by “touching his mouth” to give him effective powers of speech. The prophet would need all of these gifts because his task was to pronounce God’s judgment in a difficult religious and political situation in Israel at the end of the 7th century BC.

PSALM 71:1-6. The psalmist makes several urgent appeals to God for deliverance from unnamed enemies. Throughout his prayer, he prefaces his appeals by confessing his trust in God as his only refuge and hope.

1 CORINTHIANS 13: 1-13. Paul’s hymn to love remains one of the great pieces of poetry in any language. It has universal application – from marriage and family life to all forms of human relationships. Yet there is a firmness about it that denies all sentimentality. It goes straight to the heart of the problems of human communication and issues that drive us apart.

For those who doubt that this approach to life can be effective, Paul has a special word of counsel. This is how mature people relate to each other. There is no other way to settle disputes such as those he had encountered among the disciples in Corinth.

LUKE 4:21-30. By telling the audience in his home town that they are witnessing the inauguration of the new age of God’s rule in all of life, Jesus challenged his hearers to believe in him. They ran him out of town. Wouldn’t we still do so? Don’t we, though perhaps in more subtle ways?

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

JEREMIAH 1:4-10. How does God call someone to be God’s spokesperson? Is it always a direct vocal summons such that heard by as Moses, or Samuel, or Isaiah, or Jeremiah – a mystical experience which comes to very few? Or is there sometimes a less dramatic way: a still, small voice within; or a gentle suggestion from a friend; or an inner desire expressed in a wordless prayer of commitment and a deep, reassuring confirmation that this is what God also desires? God has as many ways of calling as there are those whom God has chosen to lead.

This passage tells of a classic example of the direct call to a prophet for his special mission. As the prophet himself reported the experience, Yahweh intervened in the life of the young Jeremiah with a summons. “The word of the Lord came to me saying, ….” (vs.4) The divine message revealed that Yahweh had intended this role for Jeremiah from before his birth. Although Jeremiah felt predestined, he also felt unsuited for the vocation to which Yahweh had called him. That too is a common reaction to what must have been a very intense experience.

For anyone who has had a similar experience, Jeremiah’s protests have a familiar ring to them. We all can think of every conceivable reason not to accept such a call. He didn’t know how to speak. He was too young. These days, we might say, “I am too old.” Or “I am too busy raising my family.” Or “I am too busy saving for my retirement. Actually, he was afraid. And so are we. That was what Yahweh reassured him about most (vs. 8).

Yahweh not only called, but also equipped Jeremiah for his vocation. He received promises that Yahweh would give him the words to utter and to be with him whenever he was commanded to speak (vss.7-8). He would become “the mouthpiece of the Almighty,” as William Sanday described the prophet’s vocation. Then Yahweh acted to ordain him by “touching his mouth,” thus giving him effective powers of speech. Isaiah had a similar experience (Isa. 6:5-6) Be warned, however, vocation and ordination today do not guarantee effectiveness in preaching.

The prophet would need all of these gifts because his task was to pronounce God’s judgment, not only on Israel but on other nations too. His mission had much wider implications, both negative and positive. It reached beyond Israel to the nations (vs.10). This happened in a time of great disruption when the power of the great Assyrian empire had declined to the point where it was in its death throes. The kingdom of Judah had been ruled by Manasseh (697 ? or 687-642), a vassal of Assyria. He had been the longest reigning and the most reviled monarch, according to the Deuteronomists, because of his love for syncretist religious practices. Idols and worship of foreign gods had been introduced into Judea and Jerusalem rivaling and corrupting the worship of Yahweh. Vassal states like Babylon and Media quickly filled the political vacuum left by the decline of the Assyrian empire.

It is thought that Jeremiah’s ministry began the very year in which Assurbanipal, the last of the Assyrian emperors (669-627 BCE) died. That could well have been the incident which occasioned his call. From this brief discussion of historical events, we may conclude that the details of vs.10 were written after the fact, reflecting what had already taken place.

Jeremiah’s active ministry is thought to have extended over the next 40 years to 586 BCE. In that year Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians and a great many of the leaders of Israel were marched away to exile. Jeremiah was not among them, but was carried away to Egypt by a group of refugees. However, some scholars doubt that his ministry began before 612 or 609 BCE because there is a gap of some 20 years in biographical information. This is so despite the fact that no other prophetic book includes so much biographical data. Some regard the date of 627 BCE as the time of his birth, which gives poignancy to his protest about his youth in vs.6.

PSALM 71:1-6. In some respects, this psalm does not conform to the traditional style of a lament with its sequence of appeal, complaint, petition and vow of thanksgiving, such as we find in Ps. 56. Here we have a sick, fearful and depressed old man (vss. 9, 18) who appears to have reached the end of his resources. He feels that God has all but deserted him. He makes several urgent appeals to God for deliverance from unnamed enemies. Yet, throughout his prayer, he prefaces his appeals by confessing his trust in God as his only refuge and hope (vs. 3).

We must conclude that the psalm was composed at relatively late date. It draws on material found in other parts of the Psalter: vss. 1-3 = 31:1-3a; vs. 6 = 22:10, etc. Be that as it may, the psalm still expresses the intensive search of the lonely and distressed soul for the assurance and hope of a living relationship with God in the utmost extremities of life.

Could this not also be the prayer of those who even now endure unexpected natural disasters such as earthquakes or tsunamis? And what of those many millions who flee for their lives in terror caused by war only to face starvation and death in refugee camps? Are there not also many single parent families or elderly people, ill, alone and threatened with being forced out of their homes because no one cares about them and governments have withdrawn support for the most vulnerable of this richest society ever in human history? The profound sense of justice implicit is so much of Hebrew prophetic literature comes to the fore in this psalmist’s lament.

1 CORINTHIANS 13: 1-13. Paul’s hymn to love remains one of the great pieces of poetry in any language. It has universal application – from marriage and family life to all forms of human relationships, individual and corporate. Yet there is a firmness about it that denies all sentimentality.

This love is more than words or even noble, sacrificial actions (vss.1-3). It goes straight to the heart of the problems of human communication and the fractious habits that drive us apart: impatience, unkindness, envy, boasting, arrogance, rudeness, selfishness, irritability, resentment, deliberate wrongdoing, deceit and dishonesty (vss. 4-7). Paul declares his unequivocal conviction that love can overcome all of these human failings common to us all. This should surely still form an important element of every marriage ceremony and the heart of every pre-marital interview for couples asking the church to bless their union. Conflict resolution programs never had a better means of achieving success than following these few verses.

For those who doubt that this approach to life can be effective, Paul has a special word of counsel: this is how mature people relate to each other. (vss. 8-12) There is no other way to settle disputes such as those he had encountered among the disciples in Corinth. Why not in our homes, our towns, our country and our world too?

Enthralling as this poem may be, Paul wrote explicitly to the Corinthian disciple community – and to us in our context right now. Some may feel that while this may be the ideal formula for life in the Shalom of God, it is not very practical for life in the real world. If we are disciples of Jesus Christ, if we are indeed “his body,” then this is the way we are to live here and now. This is the way he lived in the real world, costly though it was. This is what the cross means: Love that lays down its life for the world through every-day human relationships.

The Greek word translated “love” throughout this passage is agapé. Many treatises have been written comparing this word to other Greek words all translated into English as “love.” The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible has a nine page article on this word entitled “Love in the NT.” It was written by a man I knew well and who more than once tested my love for him as a teacher and colleague in ministry, the late Professor George Johnston, one-time professor of NT at Emmanuel College, Toronto, then later at United Theological College and McGill University, Montreal. He concluded his exhaustive study by saying that this love had taken a human face in Jesus of Nazareth and had spoken by a human voice to and for all the scattered children of God. “Love had reached down from God to man, that man might rise up to enjoy life in God forever.” Acerbic though he was in his criticism of less than adequate scholarship, Prof. Johnson has a genuine pastoral care for his students which exemplified the word love.

LUKE 4:21-30. So what does one say after one has told the audience in one’s home town that they are witnessing the inauguration of the new age of God’s rule in all of life through all the world? The message Deutero-Isaiah had delivered was simple, “Your God reigns.” Jesus had come to implement that reign of God in his home town, among his own people.

The initial reaction to Jesus in Nazareth was quite favourable. Patronizing too. “Fine fellow, that boy. Joseph the carpenter’s son, isn’t he? His widowed mother must be proud of him. He’ll go far.”

That wasn’t good enough for Jesus. He knew they hadn’t really heard him at all. He would have none of it. So he made them listen by challenging his hometown audience to believe in him and his mission to the world. He had not come home to do miracles like they had heard of him performing in Capernaum a few kilometres down the road by the Sea of Galilee. And he wasn’t there to make them think well of him; or to make them feel good as the preferred and privileged people, good Israelites all. Like Elijah and Elisha, he had come to minister to outsiders too.

Here Luke, ever mindful of his Gentile audience, lets his universalism stand out clearly. G.B. Caird wrote in his study of Luke’s Gospel: “The stories of Elijah and Elisha should, indeed, have taught them that with God charity begins wherever there is found human need to call it forth and faith to receive it, irrespective of class or race.” (Caird, G.B. Saint Luke. The Pelican New Testament Commentaries, 1963.) As Luke presents him, Jesus had a much wider vision than the Jewish community in the small mountain village in Galilee from which he had come.

George Santayana once said that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. After a century of the most destructive conflicts ever based on ideological rivalries between competing empires, we have entered a new century with the prospect of ethnic and religious conflicts within many smaller nations. Our 24-hour television news broadcasts feature violence and death occurring wherever the far-ranging eye of a television camera will reach. The problem is that when we see these tragic events, we fail to recognize that our own attitudes toward those who are “not like us” are being deeply challenged. For example, whenever we ask someone who has a skin colour different from ours, “Where do you come from?” we expose our own racial prejudices. Or when we tell a joke that pigeon-holes people because of their particular accent or country of origin, we express the narrowness of our own minds.

That is exactly what happened when Jesus recalled the stories about the widow of Sidon and Naaman the Syrian. Both of them weren’t even Israelites, but had been ministered to by two of Israel’s great prophets. “Open your eyes!” Jesus was saying to his neighbours in Nazareth. “The world is bigger than you imagine. The God you claim to believe in is far too small. God doesn’t just favour Israelites like you and me. God’s love extends to those who are most vulnerable, the most oppressed, the outsiders, the most in need.”

My friend, Jim Taylor, wrote in his Soft Edges column on the Internet: “Canadians have been more subtle about our prejudices. We’re only now coming to realize the second class status accorded to our aboriginal peoples. And our immigrants. Our women. Our elderly…. Racism’s roots lie in one group’s conviction of God-given superiority over another group, simply by belonging to that group. By extension, any member of the dominant group can feel superior to any member of the victim group.”

Whether it was the way he said it or the unspoken implications of what Jesus said, the good citizens of Nazareth were enraged. They ran him out of town. Wouldn’t we still do so? Don’t we, though perhaps in more subtle ways?