Posts Tagged ‘John’


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.

  • Share/Bookmark

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.)

  • Share/Bookmark

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?

  • Share/Bookmark

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Third Sunday After Epiphany
Third Sunday in Ordinary Time
January 24, 2010

NEHEMIAH 8:1-10.
The passage tells how Ezra the scribe read the law to the assembled populace after the walls of Jerusalem had been rebuilt. This reconstruction had taken place under the leadership of Nehemiah, the Jewish cupbearer of King Artaxerxes I of Persia, who had been appointed governor of Jerusalem and Judea in the mid-5th century BC. The point of the story is that, as in the creation story in Genesis 1:1-2:4, great and good work is to be followed by sincere, committed worship.

PSALM 19.
This originally existed as two separate psalms, but at some point were combined as one in an exquisite poem. The composite celebrates the wonder of God’s creation and the spiritual value of true devotion to God and obedience to God’s law.

1 CORINTHIANS 12:12-31a. Paul’s image of the disciple community as the body of the risen Christ has stood the test of time. It still speaks with power to our generation. Of less significance for us is the list of offices and functions which he enumerates. His purpose in doing so is to illustrate how the various gifts he had found among the Corinthian disciples could work together harmoniously when each person fulfilled his or her function for the good of the whole community. He moved from this powerful metaphor to show how this could be done through the best gift of all – love.

LUKE 4:14-21.
It was the custom in the Jewish synagogues of the 1st century to ask a visiting rabbi to teach from the scriptures. After making an initial tour of Galilee, Jesus went to worship on the sabbath. He was asked to read and interpret a passage of scripture. He chose or was assigned a passage from Isaiah 61 which was to become the model for his ministry. Then he declared to the congregation that this prophecy was being fulfilled in their hearing.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS. (The RCL recommends omitting vss. 4 & 7 with their lists of names from the lesson.) Until the time of Origen in the 3rd century, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah were regarded as a unity. They are now again considered as a composite whole edited from earlier sources and memoirs of the two men under whose diligent guidance the walls of Jerusalem and the temple were rebuilt and Israelite law re-established as the guiding principles of late post-exilic life. Most scholars accept that the Chronicler was responsible for the final form of the two books in the 4th century BC. This occurred about a century later than the main events of the reconstruction period in the 5th century BC.

NEHEMIAH 8:1-10. In Ezra 7-10 there is a memoir written in the first person. Similarly in Nehemiah 1-7:5 there is another memoir in the first person. These undoubtedly existed at the time when the editor did his work. The present passage (and the following three chapters, may also be part of the memoir by Ezra which some scholars believe to have been displaced from its original location between Ezra 8 and 9.

This passage tells how Ezra the scribe read the law to the assembled populace after the walls of Jerusalem had been rebuilt. This reconstruction had taken place under the leadership of Nehemiah, the Jewish cupbearer of King Artaxerxes I of Persia, who had been appointed governor of Jerusalem and Judea in the mid-5th century BC. One of the scholarly puzzles is why nowhere in the two complete narratives do the two community leaders, Ezra, the scribe, and Nehemiah, the governor, ever meet.

This event recalls a similar event two centuries earlier when King Josiah commanded that the rediscovered book of the covenant law to be read before the assembled elders of Judah and Jerusalem. (See 2 Chronicles 34:29-32) The reading of the Torah had great influence on succeeding generations, and still has to this day in the Jewish tradition, just as the reading of scripture in the Christian tradition. Like Christianity, however, how one hears the law and interprets its relevance for the present is always a matter of strong debate and frequently open conflict. Of special note in this passage is the statement about interpreting what had been read.

The actual reading during worship may omit two verses which name members of the community present for the occasion. The best explanation for this omission is that the names are virtually unpronounceable for the ordinary reader unfamiliar with Hebrew. The names are not significant, but the role these people played is. They were interpreters who helped the audience understand what they had heard. It is possible that the scrolls of the law were written in a language – Hebrew – that was unknown to most of the audience, who spoke only Babylonian Aramaic.

The role of the rabbi in the Jewish tradition and of the preacher in our own Christian tradition is to do likewise. Naturally, diverse interpretations could be given, leading to a heterogeneous understanding and application of the same law. Jesus himself also appears to have played a similar role in his disputes with the scribes and Pharisees. The same is true today in Judaism as it is in Christianity. For instance, do the laws relating to liturgy, property, sexuality or murder have the same authority today as they had in the time of Nehemiah or Josiah? And whose interpretation has primacy? Out of such differences denominationalism arose in every religious tradition.

PSALM 19. This originally existed as two separate psalms, vss. 1-6 and vss. 7-14. Differences in style, poetic grace and points of view indicate dual authorship. At some
point they were combined, perhaps by the author of the second part, in an exquisite poem extolling the virtue of devotion to God and obedience to God’s law as of equal spiritual value as wonder at the majesty of God’s creation. This could be a great text for an sermon on the holiness of the global environmental.

In the earlier part of the psalm, there are references to ancient myths about the sun long popular in Egypt and Babylon. But, though making use of such ideas, the psalmist stops short of describing the sun as divine, preferring instead a metaphorical allusion. The thinking of Pythogoras about the music of the spheres may also lie behind the poem. In his attempt to discern the basic principle of the universe, that 6th century Greek Philosopher proposed that numbers determined the harmonies of music, the proportions of architecture, the movements of the sun, moon and stars, and the harmony of the spheres. It is entirely possible that some such cross-cultural influence gave this deeply religious psalmist concepts which he transposed into theological language.

In the second part of the psalm, the author carefully observes the rules of Hebrew poetry. The law is represented by six different synonyms paired with one another through parallelism: law – testimony; precepts – commandments; fear – ordinances. However, these have more meaning to the psalmist than mere synonyms. They are means of grace instructing and warning the devoted Israelite of what God requires of the pious believer.

The psalm, probably from the same period as Ezra, the scribe (ca. 450 BCE), ends with a prayer that the worshiper may be preserved from sin and live worthily of his calling as a covenanted soul. For him, the law is no burdensome yoke, but a source of moral strength. Many Jewish people today hold a similar point of view. So do many Christians finding strength and inspiration in Jesus’ invitation in Matt. 11:28-30.


1 CORINTHIANS 12:12-31A.
Paul’s image of the disciple community as the body of the risen Christ has stood the test of time. It still speaks with power to many in speaking across the centuries to every generation. Of less significance for us is the list of offices and functions which he enumerates in vss. 27-30. It is impossible to discern whether these were actual offices in the Corinthian community or merely the functions performed at different times by the same leading members like himself. Compare this list also with the shorter one in Ephesians 4:11 which may represent a later development in the leadership structure of the Christian community.

Read the passage with a touch of levity and see if Paul isn’t tweaking his Corinthian converts for their childish behaviour as they squabble about who has the more important gift. One could even create a skit around the parts of the body using paper costumes to represent each organ. A youth group might be enlisted to provide an amusing but thought provoking “sermon” for this Sunday. It might be especially useful for a service that included or was followed by an annual vestry or congregational meeting.

The apostle wanted to illustrate how the various gifts he had discerned among the Corinthian disciples could work together harmoniously if each person fulfilled his or her function for the good of the whole community. He moved on from this powerful metaphor to show how this could be done through the best gift of all – love.

The passage can be interpreted in a wider context than a local congregation or even a denomination. It would make sense to use it for a service celebrating the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity. In a year when democratic elections will probably take place in several countries, it could help to focus what is meant by the phrase “the public good.” James Madison, the Virginia-born champion of religious freedom and fourth president of the United States, may have been the first to popularize the idea of public good as distinct from private rights. He emphasized the importance of protecting both in his Federalist Paper, no. 10 written in 1787. That concept has not been popular in the corridors of power in recent decades. Instead private initiative and enterprise in every aspect of life have been given most attention. Yet the concept of public good is as old as the oracles of the Old Testament prophet Amos. That prophet was speaking of what God wills for all of humanity in the 8th century BCE.

In this passage about the gifts of each person, the apostle Paul made a similar call for each member of the Christian fellowship to be concerned for every other member. What is more, there can be no other approach to living in the real world of globalization and universal communication. The whole Body of Christ can now be interpreted universally as the whole of humanity as is implied in the later letters of Ephesians and Colossians attributed to Paul. As retired Bishop John Shelby Spong wrote in his recent book, Eternal Life: A New Vision Beyond Religion, Beyond Theism, Beyond Heaven and Hell:
“The goal of all religion is not to prepare us to enter the next life; it is a call to live now, to love now, to be now and in that way to taste what it means to be part of a life that is eternal, a love that is barrier-free and the being of a fully self-conscious humanity.”

LUKE 4:14-21. It was the custom in the Jewish synagogues of the 1st century to ask a visiting rabbi to teach from the scriptures. After making an initial tour of Galilee, Jesus went to worship on the sabbath. He was asked or was assigned a passage of scripture to read and interpret. As we shall see in next week’s gospel lesson, his interpretation was not what his audience wanted to hear!

Michael Steinhauser made a significant point in an Internet seminar on The Man In The Scarlet Robe by pointing out that although there were at least two major Roman-Hellenist cities in Galilee, Tiberias and Sepphoris, there is no mention in any of the gospels that Jesus entered either of these, but remained in “the surrounding country” (vs.14). Recent archeological discoveries have revealed that there was a significant Jewish population in Sephhoris, scarcely five miles from Nazareth. One can assume that the same was true for Tiberius when Herod Antipas moved his seat of government to that city which he built on the shores of the Sea of Galilee. Jesus was more of a village preacher than a Hellenistic cynic or an eminent rabbi from Jerusalem. Yet he was certainly being heard by the common people if not by the religious authorities.

Or was this just Luke’s way of lifting up Jesus’ appeal to the common people in contrast to the later opposition of the authorities? Did he have in mind the community for whom he was writing rather than the curious and disbelieving Nazarenes?

Jesus chose a passage from Isaiah 61 – or it was the assigned reading for the day – which was to become the model for his ministry. Then he declared to the congregation that this prophecy was being fulfilled in their hearing. From this dominical mission, the present disciple community has discerned God’s “preferential option for the poor” and the cause of social justice for the most vulnerable in our society.

In recent years we have seen this mission exemplified in the enthusiastic response by countless ordinary people and scientists of high repute to environmental crises around the world. Despite the lack of cooperation from some of the largest and wealthiest countries several governments adopted the Kyoto Treaty as national policy. Others, like that of my own country, adopted the Kyoto Treaty but subsequently ignored what it had agreed to do. For lack of political will the environment still deteriorates and the climate changes more rapidly year after year.

Again, at the recent UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen some governments, like the Canadian, for instance, appear to have withdrawn more and more from their role of developing realistic programs for bringing about a more tolerable protection of the environment and a more equitable sharing of the world’s limited resources. It becomes more important to drive the industrial and commercial systems that increase wealth to the wealthiest than to bring equity and justice those who most needed. The chief motivation of the most powerful is to compete for control of these resources so that as little change as possible in the lifestyle of the wealthier parts of the world will be necessary. One has to wonder what Jesus would say to us if he were to be asked to preach in our community.

-30-

  • Share/Bookmark

INTRODUCTION OF THE SCRIPTURE
SECOND SUNDAY AFTER EPIPHANY
JANUARY 17, 2010

ISAIAH 62:1-5. The return of the exiles and the rebuilding of Jerusalem is the constant theme of Second-Isaiah, as scholars have named the unknown poet-prophet of Israel’s exile in Babylon. He either composed or inspired his disciples to write the poetry now contained in Isaiah 40-66.

This is part of the last of a trilogy of poems in Isaiah 60-62 emphasizing the promised return and reconstruction resulting from Israel’s special relationship with God. Vss. 4-5 of this passage likens this relationship to a renewed marriage covenant. This special, intimate relationship with God motivates much of the tenacity of many Jews have for the modern state of Israel today.

PSALM 36:5-10. The steadfast love of God for Israel and for the whole of creation brings praise to the lips of the faithful and a prayer that this love with continue for “the upright of heart.”

1 CORINTHIANS 12:1-11. Paul had many difficulties teaching the new converts in Corinth just what it meant to believe in Jesus as Lord and follow his way of life. A major disagreement had arisen as to which of the gifts of the Spirit were the more important. Here Paul points out that all gifts come from the same Spirit of God, serve different purposes in the Christian community, and yet contribute to the common good. The issue still has relevance for our modern congregations. Each member may have a different role to play depending on his or her particular talents.

JOHN 2:1-11. John’s Gospel took its shape from a series of signs revealing Jesus as the Messiah, Son of God, and Saviour of the world. This miracle story described the first of these signs. Some regard it as the moment of Jesus’ revelation of himself to his own family and to those who knew him.

The marriage feast at Cana symbolized that the messianic age had begun. The changing of water for ritual purification to wine for the marriage feast indicated that Jesus would reinterpret Jewish religious tradition for the new age he inaugurated.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

ISAIAH 62:1-5. The themes of return of the exiles from Babylon and the rebuilding of Jerusalem resound through all the writings of Second-Isaiah, as scholars have named the unknown poet-prophet of Israel’s exile in Babylon. Much of the latter part of the Book of Isaiah (chs. 40-66) are believed to have come either from him or from a coterie of his disciples, sometimes called Third-Isaiah in scholarly circles. This brief passage joyfully reiterates this promise of return and reconstruction.

 The trilogy of poems in Isaiah 60-62, of which this excerpt formed the last part, emphasized the promised return and reconstruction resulting from Israel’s special relationship with God. This stands out in vs. 1 where the prophet, speaking for Yahweh, declares Yahweh’s passion as the initiator of this historic event. This further divine action in Israel’s faith-history occurred so that Israel might fulfill its divinely appointed mission. Vs. 2 clarifies this special role among the nations as ordained by Yahweh. The returning exiles will receive a new name indicative of a renewed relationship with Yahweh in accord with Yahweh’s eternal purpose. Since names in the prophetic tradition had special significance and tended to define the nominee’s character and purpose, the giving of a new name was, in effect, a confirmation of this purpose. (Cf. Gen. 32:28; Is. 7:3; 9:6, etc.)

The mission was to be messianic in the monarchical rather than a salvatory sense, as “the crown of beauty … a royal diadem” in vs. 3 states. The image is that of Israel as the crown in the hand of Yahweh, sovereign of the nation, in much the same way that the image of a protective patron deity of ancient cities crowned the city walls.

Vss. 4-5 introduce a different image, likening the relationship of Yahweh and Israel to a renewed marriage covenant. (cf. Hosea 2 and similar metaphors in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.) Though all the names in Hebrew in this passage ended in ‘AH,’ (or YAH) representing Yahweh, the new relationship was represented by the new names Hephzibah, “My delight is in her,” and Beulah, “Married.” These names revealed Yahweh’s love for Israel above all other nations. There may even have been undertones of the pagan sexual relationship with deity found in other traditions of this period.

The passage has relevance for the current crisis in the Middle East. The special, intimate relationship with God motivates much of the tenacity many Jews have for the modern state of Israel today. Yet it has to be admitted that most people, even in Israel itself where a majority are non-religious Jews, do not share a similar view. History is rarely kind to religious ideologies. Is democratic idealism always the will of God for every nation?

The issue in the Holy Land today has become one of a geopolitical conflict between a strong religious nationalism and the rights of Palestinian Arabs. The Arabs moved aggressively into a vacuum left by the decline of Roman and Byzantine empires. But most Jews had been driven out of the land to become a global diaspora long before that. Twentieth century geopolitics recreated and has sustained Israel as a viable state. Both Arabs and Jews now claim the right to live where their ancestors settled long ago. After more than six decades this conflict still festers as both parties often function as pawns in much larger geopolitical struggles.

Christian churches have not helped by taking one side or the other in this conflict. Most have been motivated by differing theological stances. Even when one believes fervently in God as Lord of history, events in the world are always the result of human interaction, rarely motivated by profound discernment of God’s will and purpose. On the other hand, it is never easy to discern where justice lies or how one position or the other relates to the divine will. The debate regarding the involvement of Christians in political issues between Karl Barth and Reinhold Niebuhr has never been satisfactorily settled. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was one who struggled with this issue in a very personal and sacrificial way.

PSALM 36: 5-10. The steadfast love of Yahweh for Israel and for the whole of creation brings praise for the goodness of Yahweh to the lips of the faithful. The psalm concludes with a prayer that this love with continue for “the upright of heart.”

This abbreviated reading provides a fascinating counterpoint to the first four verses of the psalm which have been excluded from the lectionary. Most commentators agree that the two parts probably represent two originally separate compositions which a later editor brought together. Yet they complement each other in such a way that two conflicting ways of life are cast in bold relief. The first (vss. 1-4) is said to belong to the category of Israel’s Wisdom literature, with special affinity with Proverbs. It emphasizes the way in which people of lesser moral character flatter and deceive themselves, and secretly plot mischievous misbehavior. This theme appears to have been picked up in the concluding verses (vss. 11-12). The part included in this reading (vss. 5-10), reflects the sovereignty and universalism of divine providence characteristic of the later prophet-poets like Second Isaiah and Job.

Vss. 10-12 raise a question that still troubles many modern Christians. Does God love only the faithful and morally upright? Is divine love exclusive? The covenant motif of the OT did have a strong ethical component which finds wide expression in the psalms. The opening verses of this psalm exhibit this aspect of the Hebrew tradition. The second part of the psalm reveals a more tolerant view found in the prophecy of Second Isaiah. Vs. 6, for instance, extends Yahweh’s steadfast love to animals as well as humans. Vs. 7 includes all people, not just Israel, within the purview of divine protection and providence.

The New Testament goes much farther. The Gospels in particular show unequivocally that God’s love extends even to those most alienated from God and immoral in their behavior. Is it not possible that the Islamic prayer Sadam Hussein offered on the gallows which seconds later ended his life were sincerely offered? However, God loves sinners like us so that we may respond to that love by changing our ways and seeking to follow Jesus in all we say and do. Jesus came to reconcile us all to God by revealing just how much God does love us and wants us to learn from Jesus how to live in a loving relationship with God, with all other people, and with the planet Earth on which we pass our years.

1 CORINTHIANS 12:1-11. The New Testament has a great many references to the body of Christ and many different meanings to that phrase. In general the phrase connotes the many-faceted relationships between Christ and those who believe in and belong to him, their relations with him as members, and with one another in the wide fellowship that bears his name. It is, perhaps, the most prevalent metaphor in the NT, in the Pauline corpus especially, for what was to become within a few decades of his death and resurrection the institution which has endured for the past two millennia. An examination of the many texts, however, would show how the understanding of the various authors changed from decade to decade. The unique aspect of its usage, however, is that the NT Greek word soma which normally translated the Hebrew basar had no counterpart in classical Hellenistic Greek. Furthermore, contrary to Hellenistic and most modern thinking, in OT and NT usage, there was no distinction between the true self or soul and the flesh or body.

While the word soma does not appear in this passage, that is certainly the metaphor toward which this passage points. It also speaks to our time as forcefully as to the middle of the 1st century AD when it was written. Today, secular paganism challenges us as it did the apostle Paul and his Corinthian converts. Here the apostle almost seems to wring his hands at their obstinacy and obtuseness. He had a great many difficulties teaching them just what it meant to believe in Jesus as Lord and follow his way of life. The chief problem cited in this passage was a disagreement as to which of the gifts of the Spirit were the more important. Paul points out as plainly as possible that all gifts come from the same source, the Spirit of God. They may serve different functions in the Christian fellowship, yet all contribute to the common good.

The issue still has relevance to our modern congregations. Each member may have a different role to play depending on his or her particular talents. It needs to be noted, however, that the use of these gifts in not to be exercised exclusively within the institution. The mission of the church is to the world, not to itself. Perhaps that was the main reason why the Corinthians had so much trouble with the great variety of gifts they brought to the apostolic church. Like so much of our contemporary gifting, it concentrated on themselves and their own fellowship rather than equipping them for the ministry of love for the world. They were in it for themselves and for their own little community, not for what Christ could do for the world through them as part of the wider Christian fellowship.

Another important feature of this lesson is the role the Spirit plays within the community. The word Spirit occurs no less than ten times in these few sentences. This tells us most poignantly that nothing beneficial can happen within the community or in carrying out its mission to the world except by the activation of the Spirit (vs. 11). That was the fundamental issue with which Paul had to deal so forcefully.

What really did control the witness of Christians in Corinth, or, for that matter, in any of our cities, towns and villages today? At the heart of the matter was the lordship of Jesus without whose Spirit none of the gifts of individual believers were of any value. As Paul states so clearly in vs. 3, even confessing that Jesus is Lord is the work of the Spirit. The contemporary leader of the World Community for Christian Meditation, Laurence Freeman OSB, reaffirmed this simple truth in saying that the Holy Spirit runs though every instant of time and every cell of life.

At the same time, it is wise to remember this prayer posted on the Internet on January 1,2010 by Quinn G. Caldwell, Associate Minister of Old South Church, Boston, MA: “Lord, I thank you that you are God and I am not. Help me to trust that you are saving the world even as we speak, and give me the grace and the resolve to play my small part in it. Amen.” (Stillspeaking Daily Devotional.)

JOHN 2:1-11. John’s Gospel takes its shape from a series of signs revealing Jesus as the Messiah, Son of God, and Saviour of the world. This miracle story is the first of these signs. Some regard it as the moment of Jesus’ revelation of himself to his own family and to those who knew him.

In the NT, a sign designated an outward manifestation of a hidden and usually divine purpose. Jesus himself was a sign that, as in the past, Yahweh had again taken redemptive initiative in the Israel’s history. In his prologue in chapter 1, John had made this revelatory statement that would infuse the whole of his narrative.

We meet this concept first in the birth narratives of Luke 2:12, 34. So also the miracles of Jesus were themselves signs that the dynamic reign of divine love was in process of being fulfilled in human affairs. Not only the person of Jesus and all his works, but also his death and resurrection were signs that the prophesied Day of the Lord when all history would be consummated was at hand.

The marriage feast at Cana symbolized that the messianic age had begun. Behind it lay the whole panoply of purification rites so prominently described in the Torah. Wine too had liturgical significance included in the daily sacrifices offered as victuals for the deity, although never offered alone. This custom had undoubtedly been adopted from earlier Canaanite and other non-Israelite traditions. In the Hebrew tradition, it may have substituted for blood sacrifice. Wine had a major place in religious feasts celebrated in every home as well as in the temple cult as a libation. However, it was not used in the Passover feast until Hellenistic times.

The changing of water for ritual purification to wine indicated that Jesus would reinterpret Jewish religious tradition for this new age he had inaugurated. For John, the miracle was nothing less than an open declaration that Jesus is the Messiah. Hence his curious reluctance to follow his mother’s anxiously informing him that the ordinary wine for the wedding feast had run out. She believed in him, so she told the servants standing-by to do whatever he told them. Was she also concerned that she about to lose her control of her son?

This seemingly insignificant aside can be seen as the way for Jesus to differentiate himself from his closest human relationships, even his mother. He appeared to reject his mother’s counsel and yet also as indicated that she did believe in him. The steward supervising the serving of the feast and the bridegroom were quite ignorant of what had happened. This served to establish the pattern so obvious throughout of John’s narrative that there would always be some who believed and would follow Jesus and some who would not.

Our post-Enlightenment Age minds have yet to grasp that biblical miracles cannot be explained in terms that exclude the supernatural. As Tom Harpur pointed out in a column in The Sunday Star (Toronto, January 4, 2004) symbols and metaphors have power. It is what they stand for and the power they represent that is important. John and his contemporaries had no difficulty combining such spiritual and material realities as metaphors of divine initiatives in ordinary human affairs.

This was especially true of the Hebrew minds who authored the Old and New Testaments. Spiritual realities were as obvious to them as the water with which they washed and the wine they drank at their festivals or ordinary meals. The transformation Jesus effected appeared as a perfectly natural, though surprising and pleasing event.

Behind the miracle, however, was the messianic message John sought to convey to a later generation of Jews and Gentiles at the end of the 1st century. This was the spiritual truth that lay beyond the materialism of the event. The Messiah/Christ had come to change everything, to reinterpret for them in their particular time and place, the great traditions which God had initially revealed through the chosen people Israel. For Jewish Christians recently thrust out of their synagogues and for Gentiles eager to find a new, fulfilling life of faith, this was indeed Good News.

  • Share/Bookmark

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
First Sunday After Epiphany
The Baptism of Jesus

January 10, 2010

 ISAIAH 43:1-7. The passage is the concluding part of a longer poem beginning in 42:5. The unknown prophet of Israel’s Babylonian exile authored this poetic promise of the return of the exiles to their homeland. Like all prophets, he speaks for God, assuring those dwelling in foreign lands that, in spite of their great difficulties, they would be brought home. The basis for this beautifully expressed faith is God’s ancient covenant with Israel as God’s chosen people.

PSALM 29. This psalm begins with evidence of God’s omnipotence in a thunderstorm, which it describes very vividly. It goes on to point out that the God who can work such wonders can guarantee the people of God strength and peace, for the God of the nature is also the God of history.

ACTS 8:14-17. The Philip of the passage immediately preceding this story (8:4-12) is not one of the apostles, but a deacon and evangelist. He was one of several Greek-speaking Christians appointed to help the apostles. (Acts 6:1-6) He had been forced to flee from Jerusalem after the death of his fellow evangelist, Stephen. This brief note points to a subtle development in the early church’s understanding of baptism and the special role of the apostles. For some reason, baptism by Philip “in the name of Jesus” had not been sufficient to bring upon some new converts the blessing of the Spirit.

LUKE 3:15-17, 21-22. Luke gives a much briefer account of Jesus’ baptism than the other gospels. It seems little more than an ending to his narrative about the ministry of John the Baptist. The essential details are the same, however. Luke records the actual baptism, the descent of the Spirit as a dove, and the divine blessing.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

(NOTE: Understood from the Christian point of view, the theme of all these lessons for the First Sunday after Epiphany can be interpreted as the activities of God who is Spirit as the Creator and Redeemer of Israel, God’s people, and who has come again to recreate the world in Jesus Christ through the action of the Holy Spirit in ordinary men and women.)

ISAIAH 43:1-7. This passage forms the concluding part of a longer poem beginning in 42:5. The unknown prophet of Israel’s Babylonian exile, called Deutero – or Second Isaiah, authored this poetic promise of the return of the exiles to their homeland in Judea. Like all prophets, he spoke for Yahweh, assuring those dwelling in foreign lands that, despite of their great difficulties, they would be brought home. The basis for this beautifully expressed faith was Yahweh’s ancient covenant with Israel as Yahweh’s chosen people. No other theme so dominated the Hebrew understanding of the countless events of their long experience as a much oppressed people.

This part of the poem emphasized the intervention of Yahweh so that Israel could fulfill its divinely ordained redemptive purpose. Revelation, creation and redemption formed the triple intent of Yahweh’s activity in Israel’s history, the one closely following on the other. Redemption was costly, however. Vs. 4 expressed the true measure of Israel’s value. Other nations and peoples would be given in return for Israel, i.e. Yahweh’s people would be ransomed.

The element of ransom had always been present in the Hebrew concept of redemption. In vss. 3-4, Egypt, Ethiopia and Sheba were the price paid for Israel’s freedom. This may well reflect the volatile period during which many Jews did return from exile in Babylon. The dominant Babylonian empire had fallen to Cyrus, king of Persia, in 539 BCE. After the death of Cyrus (c. 530 BCE) his son and successor, Cambyses, invaded Egypt, never to return home. It is now believed that skeleton’s of his army, 30,000 strong, have been re-discovered recently in a sand-swept wasteland in western Egypt where they perished in a sandstorm.

Rival usurpers vied for control of the empire until Darius emerged triumphant is 522 BCE. During this period, the returning Jews lived a very perilous existence as they struggled to reclaim independence and rebuild their temple under the governor, Zerubbabel, a sion of the house of David. The prophet may well have expected such turbulent times as inevitable or the passage may have been adapted after the fact to include these references.

The repeated imperative, “Do not fear,” (vss. 1 & 5) provided encouragement for Israel. In both instances, a reassuring proclamation followed the command. In vss. 1-2, Yahweh claimed Israel as a sacred possession and promised to accompany them through deep waters and consuming fires. These images may be reminiscent of dangers encountered in the Exodus although the long journey from Babylon to Judea did involved crossing great rivers, passing through burning-hot desert, and possibly also settled areas where they would have to fight their way onward. In vss. 5-7, Yahweh promised to be present with them as the exiles made their way home to Judea.

The 18th century hymn, “How firm a foundation,” drew extensively on these same images. The unknown author of that hymn, however, made reference to the grace of God in Jesus Christ as the source of reassurance rather the covenant of Yahweh with Israel as this prophecy had done.

PSALM 29. This psalm begins with evidence of God’s omnipotence in a thunderstorm, which it describes very vividly. Before that, however, there is a description of angelic beings in a heavenly temple robed as ministering priests in a sacred procession summoned to praise Yahweh (vss 1-2). Then the psalmist hears the voice of Yahweh as the roll of approaching thunder.

Such thunderstorms are not common in Palestine. During the autumn and spring, cold fronts do sweep in from the northwest to break over the mountains of Lebanon and bring much needed rain to the whole of Israel, especially Galilee and the coastal plain. With no knowledge of modern meteorology, the psalmist could only see the storm’s effects as lightning flashed and thunder crashed overhead. His vivid description in vss. 5-9 conveys an unsurpassed realism for anyone who has ever been out in a violent storm such as this.

Vs. 10 refers to the traditional cosmology of the Bible where rain came from the heavenly ocean or flood above the clouds (cf. Gen. 7:11; Ps. 104:3). Yahweh’s throne was situated above the ocean from which Yahweh could command the loosing or restraining of its waters.

This vision of Yahweh in command of a mighty storm reminds the psalmist that the One who can work such natural wonders can guarantee Israel strength and peace, for the Yahweh who controls nature is also the One who controls history.

ACTS 8:14-17. The Philip of the passage immediately preceding this story is not one of the apostles, but a deacon and evangelist with particular gifts. He was one of several Greek-speaking Christians appointed to help the apostles. (Acts 6:1-6) He had been forced to flee from Jerusalem after the death of his fellow deacon, Stephen. Like Stephen, he appears to have preached and baptized first in Samaria with some startling results. Despite having received the apostolic laying on of hands, the apostolic community in Jerusalem do not seem to have been so sure of his effectiveness. So they sent Peter and John to investigate and improve upon the baptism Philip had offered those who believed.

There is much that is troubling about this pericope. Why was Philip’s ministry insufficient? Was Philip regarded as little more than a magician, by both the Samaritans and the apostles? Did his miracles (vss. 6-7) attract so much attention that the gospel message did not get through to the Samaritans? Did the conversion of Simon the magician detract too much from Philip’s preaching? If Philip, Stephen and the other deacons had been chosen because they were “full of faith and the Holy Spirit,” how could the Spirit be under the control of the apostles alone? Were these questions about what we call “apostolic succession?”

Does this not reflect an ecclesiology of a later period when apostolic confirmation had become the prerogative of the episcopacy? Some scholars argue that Acts – or portions of it – date from the early 2nd century and that this passage may be one of those excerpts. This reading, along with 9:32-11:18 and 12:1-23, presents Peter as having the same kind of mission to the Gentiles as did Paul. Does this point to a certain rivalry within the community for which Acts was written or redacted from earlier documents?

This brief note points to a subtle development in the early church’s understanding of baptism and the special role of the apostles. In many respects the lectionary misleads the reader from the intent of the whole narrative of Philip’s ministry and the apostle’s confrontation with Simon (8:4-25). “Simony” was known to have been a problem within the church at certain times. Isn’t it still?

The action by the apostles extends the practice of baptism to include the laying on of hands. It may be that this was a unique development by the apostolic church. After all, John the Baptist had practiced baptism for the repentant as had Judaism for proselytes converted from other traditions. But these were acts of moral purification. The unique aspect of Christian baptism was that by this sacramental act the gift of the Holy Spirit came upon the believers; they were en-Christ-ed, i.e. christened. On the other hand, Paul makes no mention at all of the laying on of hands as part of baptism. The practice may well be a later development, although laying on of hands was common in OT blessings and certain sacrificial rites. It was also used for healing in many gospel pericopes.

However, several OT references do relate purification by water to the gift of a new spirit (e.g. Ezek. 36:25-26; Ps. 51). It was not any power inherent in the water, but the action of God’s Spirit which initiated new life. Baptism not only symbolized a new way of life, but admission to a new community, as it did in the Essenes who probably composed the Dead Sea Scrolls. In Acts, the apostolic church acknowledged that by baptism God added new members to its fellowship. But on some occasions the gift of the Spirit preceded the act of baptism (e.g. Acts 2:4, 41; 10:44-48). The only satisfactory conclusion is that the apostolic church learned through practice what baptism is and what it meant. 1 Peter 3:18-22 appears to present a summary of what baptism ultimately came to mean to the early church and how this related to history, worship and mission of Israel.

LUKE 3:15-17, 21-22. Luke gives a much briefer account of Jesus’ baptism than the other gospels. It seems little more than an ending to his narrative about the ministry of John the Baptist. The essential details are the same, however, if perfunctory. Luke records the actual baptism, the descent of the Spirit as a dove, and the divine blessing. There are, however, some significant aspects to this brief narrative.

As noted previously, baptism was common in the Jewish tradition; but not for all people. Ritual bathing had great symbolic meaning for priests, Levites and Pharisees. Considering the shortage of water in Palestine, ritual bathing by the common people must have been regarded as a significantly holy act. However, this was not regarded in the same light as proselytes receiving baptism marking the cleansing of their pagan ways and acceptance into the covenant community. John did preach repentance of sins and baptized those who responded, thereby acknowledging their sinfulness and being immersed in water as a sign of their cleansing. Did Jesus also feel the need to be cleansed, he whom the whole NT testifies as having no sin or ever being alienated from God?

Another possibility exists: Jesus had reached the point in his own spiritual growth where he was acutely aware of his filial relationship to God and of his divinely appointed mission. Consequently, he felt the need to identify himself with all the people whom he intended to bring into a similar intimate fellowship with God. His messianic role had become that of a mediator. Luke captured these filial and mediatorial elements of Jesus’ baptism in the tightly worded sentences of vss. 21-22. Behind this profound experience lay long years of personal development, of growing insight into the scriptures of his Jewish tradition and their application to his own life (cf. Luke 2:41-52).

The moment had come for him commit himself, to move out into a wider community than his carpenter shop in the small village of Nazareth. Henceforth he would make known to whomsoever would listen what was involved in a life lived totally within the reign of God’s love. He would live in such a way that people would see that Israel’s messianic promise could only be fulfilled in such a totally committed life. Jesus’ baptizing kinsman provided the opportunity for taking action to fulfill this commitment. The vision of the dove symbolized the gift of the Holy Spirit, something he alone experienced in Luke’s account.

Did Luke describe it this way to identify Jesus’ absolute divinity in a manner corresponding to the narrative of his conception? The words from heaven gave final, divine approval to the course he had chosen as a human. Was he also aware at this time what the cost would be? Had he yet come to grips with the implications of being the Servant of Yahweh in the mold of Isaiah 53?

  • Share/Bookmark

[AUTHOR’S NOTE:  We have the unusual opportunity of choosing between several lessons celebrating distinctive aspects of the liturgical and secular calendars: The Second Sunday after Christmas; The Holy Name of Jesus; and The New Year. All three sets of lessons are set out below.]

JEREMIAH 31:7-14.
Scholars tell us that this passage contains ideas not found in Jeremiah’s prophecies, but which are very prominent in Isaiah 40-66, the work of an unknown prophet or his followers during the exile in Babylon. It promises Israel’s return from exile in many foreign lands and the re-establishment of the nation to everyone’s joy and prosperity. This redemptive action will result from nothing other than God’s gracious goodness.

PSALM 147:12-20.
The second of five Hallelujah psalms which close the Psalter celebrates the special relationship Israel had with God. Its message is summed up in the words of vs. 20: “He has not dealt thus with any other nation; they do not know his ordinances.”

SIRACH 24:1-12. (Alternate)   The book known as “the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach” (aka Ecclesiasticus from the Latin name given to it by St. Jerome) was not included in the Hebrew Scriptures nor in Protestant Bibles. It was among the several books known as Wisdom literature included in the Scriptures of Roman Catholicism. Dating from the 2nd century BCE, it consists of maxims and aphorism of worldly wisdom and social prudence.

This passage presents Wisdom personified as a woman speaking before the assembly of heaven. She describes herself as participating in creation even though she herself was created by God. She also claims a God-given special role in Israel’s destiny as the chosen people.

WISDOM OF SOLOMON 10:15-21. (Alternate) Like Sirach, Proverbs, Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes, the Wisdom of Solomon, was included in the Wisdom literature of Roman Catholicism, but not in the Hebrew Scriptures or Protestant Bibles. Although attributed to King Solomon, it was composed in Greek in the last century BCE by a Greek speaking Jew. This passage describes how Wisdom, again personified as a woman played a role in Israel’s Exodus from Egypt.

EPHESIANS 1:3-14. In writing to the Colossian congregation threatened by a destructive heresy, Paul opened his letter with some very kind and generous words. He praised them for remaining faithful to the gospel and the Christian way of love that Epaphras had taught them. He prayed that they would continue to grow in their knowledge of God’s will and strong in their witness to the faith as they had first received it. This is still an appropriate message for us who are so easily persuaded by the attitudes and practices of our own culture to adopt some other alternative than the Christian way.

JOHN 1:10-18.
Looking at Jesus from the perspective of perhaps sixty years after his death on the cross, John assessed what the coming of Jesus into the world really meant. For those who believed in him and accepted the grace and truth now available through him, it meant a new life of spiritual power as the children of God. So also it may be for us as we complete one year and are about to begin a new year of living in God’s grace.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.


JEREMIAH 31:7-14.
One of the most obvious revelations of the current Christological debate is the strength of the literalist approach to scripture, even in the mainline churches. Here is a passage which offers an excellent opportunity to discuss in a sensible way, the composite nature of the scriptures as we presently have them and the still valuable spirituality of the message conveyed in the words. God as the gracious providential Protector and Redeemer of Israel IS the story of the Old Testament to which all the priestly, prophetic and poetic voices contributed, no matter when or where they appeared throughout Israel’s history. Thus the editors who put together the Book of Jeremiah could include a poem from the later, but unknown, prophet of the Exile among the oracles of the prophet whose ministry may have ended soon after  Jerusalem was devastated by the Babylonians in 586 BC and most of the leading citizenry, the prophet among them, were led away into exile.

PSALM 147:12-20.
From the temple liturgy for the New Year or the Feast of Tabernacles comes this Hallelujah Chorus celebrating God as the Creator of the universe and Sustainer of Israel. It is believed to have been composed as a liturgical psalm in the early 4th century BC. The influence of the prophetic oracles of the unknown prophet of the Exile (Isaiah 40-66) can be detected in several places.

EPHESIANS 1:3-14.
John C. Kirby, formerly of McGill University, Montreal, made a strong case that this prayer at the beginning of Ephesians, “both in language and in form, is patterned after the Jewish berakah, a prayer of praise and blessing of which there are numerous examples in the Old Testament. He points out that some scholars divide these poetic verses into stanzas having separate themes.

OTOH, Kirby suggests that the ideas so tumble over one another as to defy such analysis. He accepts the view of another scholar, Masson, that “the tone of wonder and awe which runs through the whole passage, the slow mediatative style, the solmenity of the language, the repetition of the phrase ‘to the praise of his glory,’ which is the main purpose of all berakoth, show us the origin of this way of approaching God. Thoroughly Christian in content – though many of the ideas have been taken over from Judaism they have been baptized into Christ – it is yet thoroughly Jewish in attitude.”

JOHN 1:10-18.
What the gospel meant to John’s audience certainly would not be what it may mean to us 1900 years later. He was writing for a Hellenistic culture from a Hebraic perspective. He chose the word Logos to describe Jesus which he may well have drawn from Philo, the Alexandrian Jew steeped in Greek thought who was a contemporary of both Jesus and Paul. His emphasis in this passage is to focus attention on both the continuity and the discontinuity between Israel’s tradition and that which the Christian gospel was bringing to the Greek-speaking world.

In his New Testament Words, (Westminster Press, 1974) William Barclay has a helpful comment on the way John used this word as a bridge between the two cultures:
“In Jewish thought we have two great conceptions at the back of the idea of Jesus as the Word, the Logos of God. First, God’s word is not only speech; it is power. Second, it is impossible to separate the ideas of Word and Wisdom; and it was God’s Wisdom which created and permeated the world which God made….
“The idea of a mind, a Logos ruling the world fascinated the Greeks…It was the  Logos which put sense into the world. Further, the mind of man himself was a little portion of this Logos….This conception was brought to its highest peak by Philo, who was an Alexandrian Jew, and who had the aim of joining together in one synthesis the highest thought of Jew and Greek….
“Now we can see what John was doing when he uttered his tremendous statement, ‘The Word was made flesh.’  (i) He was clothing Christianity in a dress that a Greek could understand…. (ii) He was giving us a new Christology…. (a) Jesus is the creating power of God come to men. He does not only speak the word of knowledge; he is the word of power. He did not come so much to say things to us, as to do things for us. (b) John is the incarnate mind of God. We might well translate John’s words, ‘The mind of God became a man.’”

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
The Holy Name Of Jesus – January 1, 2010

NUMBERS 6:22-27. This passage may be more familiar to congregations as a benediction at the close of worship or in a traditional baptismal liturgy. In the thought of its own time God’s blessing consisted of material things as well as spiritual benefits.

PSALM 8. The psalmist first contemplates the glory of God manifested in the wonders of the heavens. And yet, the psalmist also reflects on the minute place of humanity in such a vast universe.

GALATIANS 4:4-7.
Unfamiliar with the later tradition of the virgin conception of Jesus, Paul gave a theological and scriptural interpretation to the birth of Jesus. He focused on the redemption of all humanity effected through Jesus, the fulfillment of Israel’s hope. Stating that God’s Son was “born of a woman, born under the law,” he places Jesus in continuity with Jewish tradition.

PHILIPPIANS 2:5-11.
(Alternate)  This early Christian hymn may well have been composed by Paul himself. Nowhere else in all his letters does he rise to such eloquence of speech or give such a clear definition of how the apostolic church understood the Jesus story.

LUKE 2:15-21.
This passage with its more homely happiness and wonder is frequently hidden behind the angelic announcement and glorious rejoicing in the previous verses. It is best read slowly and with emphasis on each scene: the shepherds’ surprise at the angels’ message; their hasty decision to go to Bethlehem to find the child; the discovery of the manger where the baby lay as they had been told. (If vs. 16 is read in haste we can even get all three of the Holy Family into the manger at same time!) The mention of Mary’s meditation as the shepherds departed to spread the good news left a quieter mood in the stable. Finally, the naming of Jesus at the time of his circumcision according to the Jewish custom is the one link Luke’s nativity story has with Matthew’s.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

NUMBERS 6:22-27. This passage may be more familiar to congregations as a benediction at the close of worship or in a traditional baptismal liturgy.  It may have existed from earlier times and have been incorporated into the priestly document (P) now forming part of the Pentateuch.  Its words are similar to those found in Pss. 67:1 and 4:6b. The basic concept is that of divine grace. The Mishnah, a rabbinical interpretation of the Torah dating about 200 CE, held that it was used daily in the temple.

As it stood in the thought of its time Yahweh’s blessing consisted in material things as well as spiritual benefits. Plentiful crops, productive herds, seasonable weather, even military victory would be sincerely hoped for. These were seen as acts of divine providence for Yahweh’s people. A shining face would have been interpreted as a sign of pleasure. When shown to other people, it indicated a strong personal relationship (cf. Pss. 31:16; 80:3, 7, 19) or a bond of friendship (2 Sam. 2:22; Job 22:26). That, of course, was the permanent relationship of Yahweh to Israel.

Peace – Shalom – is still the standard blessing of the Middle East. Shalom is more than an absence of discord. It represents a state of well-being and security, something sadly lacking in the interpersonal and communal relationships of the modern Middle East. While visiting there, I approached and made eye-contact with a man of Arabic descent.  I spoke the traditional greeting in Hebrew- Shalom. Then I repeated it in Arabic version – Salaam. He responded in exactly the same way. I wondered if both of us felt safer because of that momentary eye-contact and greeting.


PSALM 8.
The psalmist first contemplates the glory of God manifested in the wonders of the heavens. One can imagine a devout courtier like Isaiah standing on the flat rooftop of his Jerusalem home or a herdsman like Amos watching over his resting flock on a Judean hillside. As either of them gazed into the heavens he would have sen the panoply of stars spread out above him or possibly a full moon rising over Jordan. We who have spent summer nights at Canadian camps and cottages or watched the northern lights illuminate a winter sky know well how such a scene gives one an overwhelming sense of how infinitely small and insignificant we are.

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

The environmental issues for us are vastly different than they were when this psalm was composed. Sadly, by taking the text literally, we have excessively exploited our role as God’s vice-regents with “dominion” over nature. That calls for repentance and radical change in our attitudes and our actions, individually, communally, globally. We must think of ourselves as stewards rather than masters of creation. We can only continue to praise our Sovereign Lord’s majestic name if we accept total responsibility for restoring our right relationship with God’s creation.

GALATIANS 4:4-7. Unfamiliar with the later tradition of the virgin conception, Paul gave a theological and scriptural interpretation to the birth of Jesus.  Stating that God’s Son was “born of a woman, born under the law,” he places Jesus in continuity with Jewish tradition. In some respects, this could be interpreted as a rebuttal of the doctrine of the virgin conception, although Paul probably did not intend it to be so. He may not even have known about the somewhat later tradition cited only in Matthew and Luke.

If Jesus was born “under the law,” then his birth must have been regarded as the natural result of human sexual activity rather than the asexual descriptions of later Gospels. For Mary to have given birth before marriage would have been a serious transgression of the law as defined by Deut. 22:13-28 and as alluded to in Matthew’s narrative. As a child bride prior to pubescence, common in those days, she could have conceived before her menstrual cycles began. Geza Vermes argues this position in his The Nativity: History and Legend (Penguin 2006). Paul, however, wrote to the Galatians circa 50 CE, possibly 25-30 years before the birth narratives were written. If there was an earlier tradition of the virgin conception, Paul did not share it.

Instead he focused on the redemption of all humanity effected through Jesus, the fulfillment of Israel’s hope. The phrase “the fullness of time” expresses the prophetic view that God is sovereign over all history.  So God’s plan will be fulfilled according to God’s timing when the Messiah, Jesus Christ, reigns as the divinely appointed sovereign of the world. The redemption of which Paul spoke (vs. 5) began with coming of Jesus, the Messiah. This “already but not yet” eschatological process will be completed only at the Parousia.

Paul conceived the idea of believers being adopted as children of God and heirs with Christ (vs. 5b-7) as the fulfillment of both his Jewish heritage and his Christian faith. This was also the new status of the Galatians. God’s promise to Abraham, including freedom and election as God’s chosen people, had been made good through Jesus. But the Christian communities in Galatia included Gentiles as well as Jews. The main theme of the letter declared that Gentiles and Jews alike were now freed from slavery to “the elemental spirits of the world” (vs. 3) and to the law of Moses. In Greek mythical thought, present also in late Jewish apocalypticism, the elemental spirits were believed to rule human lives as well as the natural world. Paul was contemptuous of this polytheistic idolatry.

The new relationship with God through Christ made everything different in their relationships with each other and with the particular cultural milieu in which they lived. Paul would spell out just what that meant in the latter segment of the letter (especially 5:13-6:10). So as well as fulfilling their heritage, the relationships born of their new-found faith in Jesus Christ, rather than any previously held convictions, would also give rise to a definite discontinuity with that same heritage. Their new spiritual inheritance as a result of receiving the gift of the Spirit made all this possible.


PHILIPPIANS 2:5-11.
(Alternate)  This early Christian hymn may well have been composed by Paul himself. Nowhere else in all his letters does he rise to such eloquence of speech or give such a clear definition of how the apostolic church understood the Jesus story.

As a rabbinical student in Jerusalem before his conversion Paul would have heard of three significant elements of this song: Its lyrical form was similar to the great Levitical hymns of the temple. The apostolic story of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus was a personal concern of his teacher, Rabbi Gamaliel.  The humble poverty of the Christian community was well known too, made up as it was predominately of Galileans and the lower classes with few men and women of prominence among them.

In carefully constructed Greek words and phrases, Christ is seen as the key figure in a divine drama in which he yields up his co-existence with God, assumes human form and suffers the humiliation of death by crucifixion. Those who have difficulty understanding whether or not Jesus was divine has only to consider Paul’s statement about his true nature. The word huparchein (translated as “being”) described the very inner nature or essence of a person. As William Barclay said: “It describes the innate, unchangeable, unalterable characteristics and abilities of a man which, in spite of all the chances and the changes, and in any circumstances, remains the same.” (The Letter to the Corinthians: Daily Bible Readings. 1957, 43.) Coupled with that was the Greek word for “form.” In this case, morph‚ was used rather than schema. Morph  referred to the essential form as opposed to the outward form, schema, that continually changed. So Jesus’ unchangeable nature was divine.

At the same time, Paul said, Jesus did not think that his divinity “was something to be exploited” as the NSRV puts it. Again the Greek word is beautifully descriptive. Harpagmos comes from the verb which means “to snatch” or “to clutch.” Either English word would fit the situation. As Barclay points out, either he had no need to snatch at equality with God; or he did not need to clutch it, “as if to hug it jealously to himself. And to refuse to let it go.” On the contrary, Paul says in amazement, Jesus gave it all up, humiliating himself as a slave obedient to the point of suffering the utmost shame of crucifixion in total contrast to the glory and honour of divinity. Barclay again: “There is no passage in the whole New Testament which so movingly sets out the utter reality of the godhead and the manhood of Jesus Christ, and which makes so vivid the inconceivable sacrifice that Christ made when he laid aside his godhead and took manhood upon him. How it happened we cannot tell. The end is mystery, but it is the mystery of a love so great that we can never fully understand it, although we can blessedly experience it and adore it.”

The hymn does not end there however. It goes on to sing of the exaltation of Jesus to the place of glorious sovereignty with God where heavenly and earthly worship is offered to him as to God.

The confession ‘Jesus is Lord” is at once the earliest Christian creed and an acknowledgment of Jesus’ divinity. Paul used that designation only three times in his letters and each time with worshipful sincerity and awe. The other two are found in Romans 10:9 and 1 Corinthians 12:3. This was said to be the essential confession each convert repeated at baptism. All the Philippians had made this same confession. All later creeds of the Christian church derived from it. There was – and is – nothing more that needs to be said as a statement of faith. For all time, this confession commits the one who says it sincerely to a life in which Jesus reigns supreme and so fulfills the will and purpose of God.


LUKE 2:15-21.
This passage with its more homely happiness and wonder is frequently hidden behind the angelic announcement and glorious rejoicing in the previous verses. It is best read slowly and with emphasis on each scene: the shepherds’ surprise at the angels’ message; their hasty decision to go to Bethlehem to find the child; the discovery of the manger where the baby lay as they had been told. (If vs. 16 is read in haste we can even get all three of the Holy Family into the manger at same time!) The mention of Mary’s meditation as the shepherds departed to spread the good news left a quieter mood in the stable. Finally, the naming of Jesus at the time of his circumcision according to the Jewish custom is the one link Luke’s nativity story has with Matthew’s.

The name Jesus, however significant to us, was not unique in any way. It was common enough in earlier Hebrew literature. Its original form was Joshua, or more fully Yehoshuah, and meant as Matthew pointed out, “Yahweh is salvation” or “Yahweh saves.” In his various histories of the Jews, Josephus named nineteen persons with that same name all from the 1st century CE. It has been hinted that the name increased in popularity reflecting a growing nationalism after the Maccabean War (165 BCE) and even more so during Roman times after 65 BCE. Some manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew named Barabbas, Jesus Barabbas to distinguish him from Jesus of Nazareth who died in his stead (Matt. 27:16-17). A novel, Barabbas, by the late Swedish Nobel laureate for 1941, Pär Lagerkvist (1891-1974), gave considerable emphasis to the way the coincidence of names affected the robber in the years after the crucifixion.

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
New Year’s Day – January 1, 2010

ECCLESIASTES 3:1-13. The reading of this passage is customary at the beginning of a New Year. It emphasizes the significance of passing time and change. But it also reflects the deep sense of changelessness that Ecclesiastes, the Preacher, (Heb. Qoheleth) expressed with a remarkable frankness.

PSALM 8. [See above re The Holy Name of Jesus.)

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

MATTHEW 25:31-46. This parable tells us that the reign of Christ will begin with a final judgment. But it is a parable, a metaphorical story told to persuade people on how to live as they prepare for that inevitable experience, not a description of what the event will be like whenever it occurs. The story also has an eschatological and a messianic emphasis set in place by its very first clause, “When the Son of Man comes in his glory and all his angels with him ….” That is a typical description from the apocalyptic tradition derived from Jewish literature of the late centuries BCE greatly influenced by forerunners in both the prophetic and possibly the wisdom traditions. (See Ezekiel 38-39; Isaiah 24-27; Zechariah 12-14.) Its stock-in-trade was revelation through visionary experience. This parable contains some very vivid images of that kind.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

ECCLESIASTES 3:1-13. The reading of this passage is customary at the beginning of a New Year. It emphasizes the significance of passing time and change. But it also reflects the deep sense of changelessness that Ecclesiastes, the Preacher, (Heb. Qoheleth) expressed with a remarkable frankness.

He is not an atheist, but neither did he share the traditional Jewish theology of Yahweh’s choice of Israel as a special people. He even counseled against unquestioniedparticipation in the traditional religious rites of Israel. In the end, he is both an agnostic – one cannot know God, but only acknowledge God’s existence and power – and a fatalist – nothing can be done to change the way things are.

How then did it become a part of the Hebrew Scriptures? We simply do not know for sure, but it must have won approval of the religious authorities and the worshiping community as the canon was being finalized during the 1st century CE. So it must have been in common use during that time and finally was authorized on the grounds that it was genuine religious teaching.

The book is thought to have originated during the time of Alexander the Great and his immediate successors. That was time of great upheaval, uncertainty and insecurity for Israel and its religious institutions. The sentiments of this passage that everything must happen in its own time according to God’s timing and not our own were probably very helpful to some who struggled to believe in a divine purpose for human life and history.

PSALM 8. [See above re The Holy Name of Jesus.)

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

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

The late Principal George B. Caird, of Mansfield College, Oxford, wrote in his magisterial commentary on this passage, “In some ways this is the most important part of the book, as it is certainly the most familiar and beloved.” It is the promised answer to the plea of every martyr, “If only we knew where it is all going to end! Much of John’s vision, and much of the human history it depicts and interprets, becomes intelligible, credible, tolerable, when we know the answer. Here is the real source of John’s prophetic certainty.” (The Revelation of St. John the Divine. Black’s New Testament Commentary, 1968.)

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

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

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


MATTHEW 25:31-46.
This parable tells us that the reign of Christ will begin with a final judgment. But it is a parable, a metaphorical story told to persuade people on how to live as they prepare for that inevitable experience, not a description of what the event will be like whenever it occurs. The story also has an eschatological and a messianic emphasis set in place by its very first clause, “When the Son of Man comes in his glory and all his angels with him ….” That is a typical description from the apocalyptic tradition derived from Jewish literature of the late centuries BCE greatly influenced by forerunners in both the prophetic and possibly the wisdom traditions. (See Ezekiel 38-39; Isaiah 24-27; Zechariah 12-14.) Its stock-in-trade was revelation through visionary experience; and this parable contains some very vivid images of that kind.

In vss. 31 and 32 there are two images of the judgment which may seem to be unusually juxtaposed. The first envisages a typical a royal court where the monarch is surrounded by courtiers and the whole populace is gathered before the throne waiting for a critical decision. The second describes the much humbler scene of a shepherd at the end if a day separating sheep from goats as they enter the fold for the night. The task was an easy one, for in the Middle East sheep are generally white and goats black. The monarch’s task might not be so easy, for the character of human beings is much more complex.

The story does simplify the basis on which the judgment is made. It has to do with how each person responds to everyday opportunities to help others in need. The length and detail with which this poignant emphasis is described assures even the hasty reader that this is what the story means.  The reign of Christ and God’s eternal judgment are going on right now with each decision and action we take. How we live today has eternal consequences. We are to witness to the reign of Christ in the way we serve him in faithfulness, kindness and love to our neighbors in need.

Yet this parable is not a simple story offering polite moral counsel for those seeking for ethical behavior to create a kinder, gentler, self-satisfied society. Coming as it does immediately before the Passion story, this parable connects our time in history and the time of Jesus as an historical person with the reality of eschatological judgment at the  end of time. The way this parable describes how the faithful are to live is the way Jesus lived “as one that served.” His actions constantly affirmed his messianic character.

Matthew constantly reminded his audience of this in his choice of names by which he referred to Jesus of Nazareth, in this instance the OT messianic figure of the Son of Man. As he turned to the all important concluding section of his gospel, Matthew was saying that in Jesus the Messiah the divine judgment which Israel has anticipated for so long had arrived. The gospel speaks across the millennia with the same clarion call of judgment: the crucified and risen Jesus, the ever present ‘God with us,’ is now deciding who will have a part in the eternal reign of love fulfilled in God’s creation. One could not find a better lesson for the beginning of a New Year.

-30-

  • Share/Bookmark

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Christmas Eve & Day
December 24 & 25, 2009
Propers 1, 2 & 3

PLEASE NOTE: The Revised Common Lectionary follows the tradition of listing Propers 1-3 in the liturgy for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. This Introduction combines the Lessons for this festive occasion into one format as the simplest way of analyzing them for preaching purposes.

ISAIAH 9:2-7. (Proper 1) The early Christians saw this passage as a prediction of the coming of Christ. Matthew quoted the opening and preceding verses as a prophecy of Jesus’ ministry (Matthew 4:15-16). For Jews it was not so intended, but regarded it as a promise of a future Messiah who would reign on David’s throne amid great rejoicing. The coming of this new king with lofty titles would bring in an age of justice and peace.

The term Messiah actually meant “the anointed.” The custom of so designating a future ideal king arose from the liturgical act of anointing each Israelite king on his coronation (2 Sam. 2:4; 2 Kings 11:12). He was thus regarded as “the Lord’s Messiah” having a unique relationship with Israel’s God, Yahweh. It would appear that vss. 1-6 originally existed as a dynastic oracle uttered on the occasion of a new king’s anointing or on the anniversary of that event.

The passage contains motifs found extensively in Psalms with reference to the Davidic dynasty, viz: the dawn of great light (Pss. 110:3, 118:24, 27); exaltant rejoicing (Pss. 118:15, 24; 132:9,16); the overthrow of Israel’s enemies (Pss.2:2, 8, 9); burning fire (Pss. 21:9; 118:12); gift of a divine son (Pss.2:7; 89:26-27); proclamation of divine qualities (Pss.2:6,7; 21:5; 72:17; 89:27; 110:4); establishing a permanent throne of peace and justice (Pss. 2:8-9: 21:4; 61:6-7; 72:1-8; 89:3-4;, 28-29, 36-37; 132:11-12).

This lends credence to the possibility that the oracle had been associated with the crowning of an unnamed Judean king and may well have come from the time of Isaiah himself in the late 8th century BCE. A Jewish tradition linked it with the coronation of Hezekiah (715-686 BCE) who worked closely with the temple priesthood. It may also have been associated with his predecssor Ahaz (735-715 BCE). The prophet Isaiah is known to have been closely associated with both the royal court and the temple during that period.

ISAIAH 62:6-12. (Proper 2) This passage consists of the final strophes of the last of three poems from the disciples of the unknown prophet of Israel’s exile in Babylon, sometimes referred to as Third Isaiah. The whole chapter (62:1-12) defines Israel as a messianic people and recalls many of the themes found in the work of Deutero-Isaiah (Isa. 40-55). This poem promises that Jerusalem will express a new relationship with Yahweh in which the nation’s fortunes will be reversed will never again be left helpless before its enemies and will be restored by divine providence.

The image in vss. 6-7 is of the prophet as a watchman on the walls of the city whose function is to pray unceasingly for the fulfillment of divine promises. Vss. 8-9 recalls Yahweh’s promise that never again will invaders reap the crops sown by Israelites. Vs. 9 may contain a reference to the Feast of Tabernacles when the first fruits of the harvest were offered to Yahweh as the festival was celebrated in the temple with much feasting (Deut. 12:17ff; 14:23ff; 16:13ff).

The final strophe in vss. 10-12 identifies Israel as the messianic community, the eschatological theme of Isa. 40:1-1 and 52:1-12. These lines contain many of the same images of those earlier passages from Deutero-Isaiah. They speak of the joyful enthusiasm of pilgrims (or possibly the exiles from Babylon) thronging the gates of Jerusalem as the redeemed people of Yahweh return to their holy city.

Would it be too much for Christians too, gathered in their multitudes for Christmas worship, to see themselves in a new light and rejoice as the inheritors of their status as the redeemed people of God prospering as result of God’s forgiving grace? Would not the conversation at many festive table be enriched by discussions of the true mission of the faithful community to share the redemptive tradition with the world, beginning within the gathered family circle?

ISAIAH 52:7-10. (Proper 3) In words that have inspired countless generations to hope for deliverance from disastrous experiences, these verses bring us too the simple message, “Your God reigns.” Would the survivors of the Holocaust have thought of these lines when they saw their deliverers drive into their prison camps with food and medicine to preserve what little life was left in their broken bodies? If only the people of Iraq and Afghanistan could have seen the military forces that invaded their countries in such a redemptive light.

The prophet’s vision is of a messenger running through the hills that surround Jerusalem bearing the totally unexpected news. From the sentinels keeping watch on the walls the cry goes out that the exiles are indeed on their way home. From the streets of the city songs of rejoicing break forth. The ruins in which they have lived in such desperation for two generations echo their joy. At long last, the comforting words of Yahweh’s redemptive love for Israel have not only been confirmed, but Israel’s mission to the world renewed. “Before the eyes of all the nations, all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of God.” (vs. 10)

Is Christmas in this war weary world not the time to reiterate again and again the message from God sung in Jerusalem and heard again over Bethlehem, “Glory to God in the highest and peace to all people of good will?”

In a moving article in The Living Pulpit, a quarterly magazine “dedicated to the art of the sermon,” Rabbi Michael Lerner pleads with his own people, the Jews of America and Israel, the Arab people of Palestine and the Middle East, and people of all nations, to find new ways to reconcile their differences. He offers a strategy, which if accepted by all parties, would begin the process of bringing security and peace by planting the seeds of Shalom not only with adults but with children. “In the final analysis,” he wrote, “no political settlement will work without a huge amount of compassion, open-heartedness, generosity of spirit, and ability to recognize the Other as equally precious in God’s eyes.”

PSALM 96. (Proper 1) This psalm, along with the two following it, Pss. 97 & 98, were meant to be sung as part of the enthronement liturgy at the beginning of each New Year. In many respects, the vocabulary of all these psalms is similar. This celebration acknowledged Yahweh’s awesome power, justice and absolute supremacy over all creation. The Incarnation, God’s coming into the world in the infant Jesus, is the Christian celebration of this sovereignty.

Ps. 96 may actually have consisted as three separate hymns sung during a long processional into the temple (vss. 1-6; 7-9; and 10-13). While much of the psalm is borrowed from other psalms, the first part rejoices in Yahweh, the one God and Creator who exercises dominion over the natural world. The second part proclaims the power and glory of Yahweh and summons the worshipers to present their offerings before the altar. At the high point of the enthronement ceremony, the cry goes up, “The Lord reigns!” as Yahweh has assumed his kingship. The heavens, the earth, the fields, tress of the wood and the sea are called to echo the praise of the people.

The performance of this ritual at the beginning of each new year reminded Israel that Yahweh’s sovereignty was neither a relic of the past or some future hope, but a present reality renewed once again for the coming year and for all time.

PSALM 97. (Proper 2) Jewish theology did not depend on abstractions. Anthropomorphism – defining the nature of God in terms of human characteristics – featured much of the Jewish concept of divinity. Perhaps it could not have been otherwise. The human mind abstracts from what it observes in the immediate environment such symbols and metaphors it can use to describe in words what is essentially indescribable. Does God really reign from a throne enveloped in “clouds and thick darkness?” Of course not, but these images enable this poet to convey the ideas of divine sovereignty, righteousness and justice. In fact, vss. 2-5 actually describes a violent thunderstorm raging over the mountains. In vs. 6, the storm has passed and glorious sunlight reflects the divine glory for all to see.

In vss. 7-9, the poet’s vision shifts from nature to religious objects of worship. Unlike the Greeks and Romans who espoused many religions and absorbed them in a syncretist fashion, Israel’s prophets fought a continuing battle against idolatry and false religion. The psalmist shared this prophetic faith. He did not deny the existence of idols, but unequivocally declared their worthlessness (vs.7) and Yahweh’s sovereignty over all (vs.9). Hence there could be both hope for deliverance and security for the faithful, righteous believer. (vss.10-12)

PSALM 98. (Proper 3) This psalm uses different sounds in nature as well as the human voice and musical instruments as the means of praise. The reason for such an outburst of rejoicing lay in the mighty saving acts of Yahweh extending in mercy to Israel. Their purpose was to draw the attention of the whole world and thus inform all peoples of what Yahweh was doing through this specially favoured people.

Vs. 4 identifies the songs of praise as worshipers process into the temple. In vss. 5-6, musical instruments add to joyous cacophony. Finally, all nature and all creatures are summoned to support the noisy disharmony.

The idea of Yahweh as a monarch to be enthroned each new year conveyed the spiritual truth of a supreme being to whose will the people owed obedience. This concept went as far back as the times of Gideon (Judges 8:23) and presumably also reflected the double roles of an ancient Middle Eastern monarch as ruler and chief religious figurehead or priest. The Israelites had adopted this concept after their settlement in Canaan. Yahweh was their King-God similar to the monarchs of other cultures. In the post-exilic period when there were no reigning monarchs, the annual ritual of the enthronement of Yahweh took the place of royal coronations. Ps. 72 refers to a coronation when the monarch ascended Israel’s throne as the representative and “son” of Yahweh. From these customs and practices came the concept of the saving messiah so familiar to Christians in the gospel depictions of Jesus as the Messiah and King of the Jews.

TITUS 2:11-14. (Proper 1) This brief letter attributed to Paul, but probably form the hand of a disciple of a generation or two later, reiterates the apostolic message that God’s gracious salvation for all came through Jesus Christ. But what was salvation for? Grounded in the faith that God through Christ has redeemed us, the author calls us to live a holy life while we await Christ’s return in glory.

In vs. 13, the epithet, “our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ” refers to Jesus alone, not to God and Jesus. Scholars believe that this was a way of countering the emperor cult and mystery traditions of the Romans. There may have been a liturgical origin behind the unusual phrase.

Vs. 14 gives reiterates the purpose of redemption. Jesus gave himself for us in obedience to God’s will, so we also ought to be zealously obedient in going good. In other words, redemption means being freed from the binding powers of sin so that we may be purified and as new people no longer live under sin’s evil domination. We use the term ”sanctification” to describe the process. This reflects the experience of the Israelites who were led through the wilderness to be recreated as God’s people zealous for obedience to the covenant law. The same theme echoes through the whole of the New Testament because the early church saw themselves as God’s new people.

TITUS 3:4-7. (Proper 2) When read aloud this passage has an almost liturgical tone to it. In fact, as some scholars have noted, it could have been part of a baptismal liturgy used in maturing church of late 1st or early 2nd centuries. It also reiterates some well known Pauline concepts such as justification granted through grace alone entirely at God’s initiative, symbolized by baptism and effecting a moral and spiritual rebirth.

The emphasis of the passage is on a new beginning. That was how the apostolic age regarded what had happened in the Jesus story. God had created something entirely new. Whereas Jewish and Greek thought regarded change as decay and history as degeneration from a golden age, such words as regeneration and rebirth came to Christian thought full of new meaning, hope and faith. In Jesus God had begun a whole new creation despite the appearance to the very opposite.

This theme is found throughout the New Testament, not least of all in the Pauline epistles, John 3:6 and 1 Peter 1:3-4. This experience of regeneration was not ephemeral, like an ecstatic and momentary enthusiasm. It involved a moral redemption available to and characteristic of all Christians, making them a holy people, a colony of heaven even while still living in the real world. It should not surprise us in our time that this liturgical expression of the true meaning of the Good News has been made the epistle reading for Christmas Day.


HEBREWS 1:1-4, (5-12). (Proper 3)
This sonorous sentence in the Greek text runs through to the end of vs. 4. It states the theme of the whole book that in contrast to all previous incomplete and imperfect revelations, the coming of Jesus is the final and perfect revelation because he is God’s Son.

Several quotations from the Hebrew scriptures follows this single sentence to establish the supremacy of Jesus Christ. The quotations are taken mostly from a number of Psalms, although Deuteronomy 32:43 also appears to lie behind vs. 6. All were taken out of context, but that made no difference to the author because they served his purpose.

Noteworthy is the significance placed upon angels. Both Jews and Christians regarded angels as mediators and agents of the divine will. Scholars have suggested that the worship of angels may have threatened the unknown Christian fellowship to which the letter had been sent. The Colossians community faced a similar threat (Col. 2:8, 18). Angels, however, have no function not initiated by the divine will; they simply serve in assigned roles. The task of human redemption, however, is the act of the person who shares divine power in and of himself. Therein lies the authority and power of the Son. One because he is one with God could he undertake such a ministry.

With this precise argument, the author lets us peer behind the manger, the cross and the empty tomb to recognize who Jesus really is and why we still celebrate his birth.

LUKE 2:1-20 (Propers 1 & 2) Luke tells the story of the birth of Jesus as if it was history, but it is actually a folk idyll more akin to poetry than history. The details differ significantly from those in Matthew’s narrative and the two cannot be correlated in any way, as modern Christmas pageants tend to do. Here it is not wise men from afar, but angels in the heavenly host and humble shepherds from their pastures who come to marvel at this once in eternity event. Christian hymnody has made much of the story. We still sing those hymns and carols with sincere joy and faith. Exacting scholarship may question the factual truth of many romantic aspects of Luke narrative, but cannot detract from the reality of the Incarnation of God in human flesh.

Nonetheless, attempts have been made to find non-Christian sources for the birth stories in Matthew and Luke. Roman, Persian and Hellenistic Jewish mythologies have been suggested, but none have been proven. One recent speculative proposal by Bruce Chilton in his Rabbi Jesus: An Intimate Biography, supposedly based on archeological as well as biblical research, insisted that there was a second town of Bethlehem in Galilee. Such a town is named in Joshua 19:15 within the territory allotted to Zebulun and located just seven miles from Nazareth. Chilton argued that it was the hometown of Mary where Joseph met and married her at the tender age of thirteen. He also quoted the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 67a) of the 5th century CE as referring to Mary having slept with a Roman soldier. A more exacting study by Raymond E. Brown is non-committal as to the historicity of the birth narratives and the virginal conception. (The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Doubleday, 1993) Chilton clarifies the issue cogently as follows: “What about Jesus’ birth generated the divergent understanding of it in Christian and Jewish literature?” A more recent study by Geza Vermes, The Nativity: History and Legend. (Penguin Books, 2006) presents a very cogent discussion of the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke. Vermes drew on his vast knowledge of the Jewish textual and commentary background to the Christian scriptures to make a reasonable case for both traditionalists and progressives.

Traditional Christian art, liturgy and hymnody as well as modern commercial depictions of the first Christmas follow the scripture narrative ‘religiously.’ Perhaps this more than anything else is responsible for 65% of Americans believing in the Virgin Birth despite the vocal denial of most biblical scholars, The Jesus Seminar and Bishop John Spong. Not all presentations of Christmas are so literal.

The United Church of Canada recently carried a provocative advertising campaign intended to attract the attention of the generation of young adults 30-45 years old no longer significantly represented in its congregations. A full-page colour advertisement appeared in December issues of several popular consumer magazines. It pictured a bearded, traditionally robed Jesus sitting on Santa’s throne with a child on his knee and others standing by waiting their turn. They were set in a gaudy shopping mall surrounded by with all the customary consumer objects. The caption directed the reader to an Internet website. The media made the most of the opportunity to draw critical attention to the page. Yet in the first week after it appeared, 32,000 viewers logged on to the website and 306 topics were posted in a reasonably civilized discussion.

To avoid controversy, especially at Christmas Eve and Christmas Day services, the preacher would be advised to maintain a position that the Incarnation, the embodying of God in human form, remains as much a mystery as the nature of God. Christmas is an emotional and/or a devotional occasion for most congregations. This may be true even for the occasional worshipers or non-believers who may not attend at most other times. Woe to the preacher who denies any congregation the opportunity to experience the true mystery of faith.

JOHN 1:1-14 (Proper 3). The Fourth Gospel establishes the mystery of the Incarnation in a totally different manner. This prologue to the narrative refers to the ancient Hebrew metaphors of the creative word of God in Genesis 1, the glory of God seen as light eternally shining in darkness and the expectation of the Messiah to whom prophetic witness is made by John the Baptizer. This prologue to the gospel also introduces the new concept of the pre-existent Christ as spiritual co-creator with God who bursts into the world of flesh and blood in a new creation.

Gail O’Day and Susan Hylen liken the prologue to John’s Gospel to “the overture to an opera, ballet or musical. They present in miniature the key themes that will come later.” (John. Westminster Bible Companion, Westminster John Knox Press, 2006) The passage is not “straightforward introduction or recounting of events.” Rather, with these sonorous words John celebrates “the gifts and new life … given to the Christian community because of the presence of God in Jesus.” John’s purpose is to elicit a sense of “joy and anticipation for what is to come.”

This approach captures the essence of Christmas: joyful expectation. One of the best photographs I have ever taken was with a small, inexpensive camera on a black and white film. It shows a small boy of about three dressed in pyjamas and a bathrobe on Christmas morning peering around the banister of a stairway to see what wonders await in the living room beyond. The expectation on his face is beyond description.

So it is with John’s Gospel. When the passage is well-read in any version, one is left almost breathless at the words, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth.”

  • Share/Bookmark

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

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

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

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

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


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

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

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


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

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

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

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


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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-

  • Share/Bookmark

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-

  • Share/Bookmark