John Shearman's Lectionary

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.”

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Third Sunday of Advent – December 13, 2009

ZEPHANIAH 3:14-20. After a long series of judgmental prophecies against Israel and its neighbours, Zephaniah promised a day of great rejoicing when God would be present among God’s people. This would bring not only forgiveness and security from oppression, but prosperity and renown among all people.

ISAIAH 12:2-6. Psalms like this one were often included in the writings of Israel’s prophets. This one provides a fitting conclusion to the prophet’s description of the Messiah and his role in the preceding chapter. This joyous thanksgiving psalm has also been set to music as a responsive chant in #880 in Voices United, the hymn book of The United Church of Canada.

PHILIPPIANS 4:4-7. A wonderfully confident faith shines through these few sentences. Paul’s expectation of the imminent return of Christ moved him to urge the Philippians to rejoice with him and to conduct themselves in an exemplary manner. The spiritual gifts of gentleness, thanksgiving and peace would keep them free from anxiety as they waited for that glorious day.

LUKE 3:7-18. John the Baptist’s preaching seems harsh and vituperative to our public relations sensitive ears. To his own generation, he must have appeared to be much like the early prophets of Israel – Amos, Micah, Isaiah and Jeremiah. Several traditional prophetic themes stand out in his message: the absolute sovereignty of God in spite of ritual correctness (vs. 8-9), far- reaching social justice (vss. 10-14), and the promise of a messiah who would come in judgment, not to win a glorious victory over Israel’s oppressors (vss. 15-17).
Luke interpreted John’s preaching as “good news.” That may surprise us because outspoken prophets are not welcome today when they attack established power structures as John did. Ultimately John was executed by the brutal puppet-king, Herod Antipas, for accusing him of an immoral marriage.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

ZEPHANIAH 3:14-20. Dating from the reign of Josiah (640-609 BCE), the prophesies of Zephaniah have both a nationalistic and a universal emphasis. This was a time of international intrigue and upheaval in which Israel played a relatively small part. On the other hand, it was a time of religious reform within Israel led by the school of Deuteronomists who re-emphasized the moral aspects of the Covenant with Yahweh and centralized worship in the temple at Jerusalem. The great threat to Yahwism during this period came from foreign influences which had provided various forms of idolatrous worship attractive to the common people.

Ninth of the twelve minor prophets in the OT, Zephaniah emphasized the anticipated Day of the Lord with its judgment on Israel and all nations. The prophet’s name is in itself a prophecy meaning, “Yah(weh) protects.” There may be some doubt as to who he really was. The name may have been a pseudonym for an unknown opponent of the establishment of the many local sanctuaries formerly used for Baal-worship by the Canaanites. The opening verse is really a superscription which goes to great pains to trace his Jewish ancestry four generations back to Hezekiah, one of Judah’s great kings. Zaphon, the city from which the name may derive, was a sacred shrine of one of the chief Canaanite gods, Baal-Zephon. It lay on the east side of the Jordan about halfway between the Dead Sea and the Sea of Galilee. According to Joshua 13:27, the Israelites captured it and gave it to the tribe of Gad.

The book consists of seven oracles, each designed as a dialogue between Yahweh and the prophet. Baal worship, idolatry and the profane leadership of the priests have a large place in these brief oracles. The forces of Assyrian oppression also lurk in the background as the means of Yahweh’s judgment. Could Zephaniah, who some believe to have been a cousin of Josiah, be the code-name of a prophet who supported the Deuteronomic centralizing of worship which Josiah pursued with such fervour for political as well as religious reasons?

After a long series of judgmental prophecies against Israel and its neighbours for their worship of gods other than Yahweh, Zephaniah promises a day of great rejoicing when Yahweh is present in Israel to judge and to save. The nation’s only hope lay beyond this day of judgment. These prophecies are given in the first person singular, as if Yahweh is speaking throughout.

The lectionary passage, ending the book, offers Israel the promise that the coming Day of the Lord will not only bring forgiveness and security from oppression, but prosperity and renown among all people. Like their Jewish antecedents, the early church regarded this as a messianic prophecy heralding the coming of Jesus.

The eschatological emphasis has given rise to many modern misinterpretations as preachers struggled to explain why the imminent return of the Messiah/Christ has not occurred as prophesied. Speculation has frequently misled many into believing that the peace and prosperity they so longed for and found in such beliefs are close at hand. A simplistic literalist reading of prophecies like those of Zephaniah can be very seductive in this regard. One has to understand them in their own context within the religious, social and political history of their times to discover what meaning they may have for our time and place. Their main message for today is that history lies within the providence of God whose purpose is to bring all things in a reconciling fellowship motivated by the everlasting love envisioned in Yahweh’s covenant with Israel, fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ and still being brought to completion by the work of the Spirit in all who believe.

ISAIAH 12:2-6. Not all Psalms are in the Psalter, but may be found throughout the writings of Israel’s prophets and elsewhere in the OT. This one provides a fitting conclusion to the prophet’s description of the Messiah and his role, and the return of the remnant of Israel from exile in Babylon.

The two parts of the current reading cannot be specifically located within Israel’s history. They appear to have been drawn from unknown sources and inserted here as was common in other prophetic literature (Jonah 2; Habakkuk 3; Jeremiah 20:13; 31:7). The second part of vs. 2, however, is identical with two other OT passages, Exodus 15:2 and Psalm 118:14. It is impossible to tell which may be the original.

It was the late Professor R.B.Y. Scott who pointed out that the passage actually contains two brief psalms, vss. 1-2 and 3-6 (The Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 5, 253). The first is an individual thanksgiving for deliverance. The second brings out the metaphor of life-giving water as the symbol of God’s saving power. Compare that with Exodus 15:22-25; Numbers 21:16-17; Judges 5:11; and John 4:13-14. It was well within the ancient tradition that Jesus described himself metaphorically as one who provides life-giving water to all who desire it.

Superficially observed, water appears to be so plentiful in our country that we have no concept whatsoever of how it could be regarded as a means of grace given by God. Much of Israel is extremely arid and water is precious. One of the crucial issues in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has to do with access to adequate water supplies. The incredibly crowded Palestinian city of Gaza, for instance, has a fraction of the water available for its more than a million citizens than Israeli citizens enjoy in the less thickly inhabited cities of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or Haifa.

PHILIPPIANS 4:4-7. No one seriously doubts that the Letter to the Philippians came from the hand of Paul or was dictated by him to an amanuensis. But is it a composite of two or possibly three letters as Gerald Hawthorne, of Wheaton College, Illinois, suggests? (The Oxford Companion to the Bible, 590.) Is there not an abrupt break between 3:1 and 3:2? And 4:10-20 also appears to be a separate segment. Or are we merely exposed to the vagaries of a man dictating his wide-ranging thoughts at different times? Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, (obit. AD 155) knew of several letters Paul had written to the Philippians, though he appears also to have used this one.

William Barclay provided an interesting solution to the problem which affects our understanding of this particular reading. He separated the whole into three parts written at different times, as follows: In 3:2-4:3 Paul expressed thanks and gave a warning about Judaizers challenging the gospel Paul had preached. Then, much later while imprisoned, probably in Ephesus, he sent a warm letter of thanks and encouragement, (1:1-3:1 and 4:4-23) asking them to welcome the bearer of the letter, Epaphroditus, who had been very ill.

Other scholars have proposed even more radical solutions as to the number of letters in this composite document and how they may be separated. The consensus appears now to be that such partitions make for the sounder hypothesis, although ultimately inconclusive. Because we now have a brief if composite letter, we must try to understand its legacy to the church in it present shape.

However we may wish to debate these unanswerable questions, a wonderfully confident faith shines through the few sentences of this excerpt. Foremost in Paul’s mind is his expectation of the imminent return of Christ. This moves him to urge the Philippians to rejoice with him and to conduct themselves in an exemplary manner. The spiritual gifts of gentleness, thanksgiving and peace – gifts of the Spirit so frequently referred to in other Pauline correspondence – will keep them free of anxiety as they wait.

Is that how we feel as Advent moves inexorably toward the celebration of Christ’s coming in Bethlehem? Are we similarly free of anxiety as we ponder just what the Second Coming of Christ may be like and when it may happen? Is it possible that in having received through faith in him and the gift of the Spirit, Christ has already come to us who are “in Christ?” Are not these gifts sufficient cause for us now to rejoice with Paul and his Philippian correspondents as well as the millions o Christians now preparing to celebrate Christ’s coming in Bethelhem?

LUKE 3:7-18. John the Baptist’s preaching seems harsh and vituperative to our modern ears, so sensitive as we are to good public relations. Just think of the furor in this country if the Moderator of The United Church of Canada or the Archbishop of Canterbury had spoken like this?

To his own generation, John must have appeared to be much like the early prophets of Israel. It is obvious that Luke so regarded him too. Evidence of this is seen in the quotations from Isaiah as found in the Greek OT. Several recent studies have hypothesized that John was one of the Essenes, but was not resident in their community of Qumran. That is unprovable; but he may well have been influenced by their bitter opposition to the temple priesthood of the time which they regarded as totally illegitimate and unholy.

Several themes stand out in John’s message: the absolute sovereignty of God in spite of ritual correctness (vs. 8-9), far-reaching social justice (vss. 10-14), and the promise of a messiah who would come in judgment, not to win a glorious victory over Israel’s enemies (vss.15-17).

When people in his audience asked what they were to do, John proclaimed a far-reaching social justice (vss. 10-11). He challenged everyone who heard him to share their resources. The naming of specific clothing symbolized the essential necessities of life. His challenge received a significant response from the most unlikely persons – tax-collectors. They were among the most despised people in Israel because they were hirelings of the hated Roman imperial government. When they asked for specific directions for their reform, he attacked the crucial issue in the Roman taxation system. It depended on greed. Hired revenue officers had freedom to exact whatever amount they could, regardless of how much they had contracted to collect. John directed them to limit their revenues to what had been officially prescribed and nothing more. No sane tax collector would consider such a revolutionary approach to his miserable job.

John’s challenge extended even to the heart of imperial security forces. When soldiers asked for their directions, he had an equally harsh answer for them. Presumably it was fairly common for soldiers to supplement their wages by extorting bribes from anyone they caught and imprisoned. To be satisfied with their meagre wages as John required was unthinkable.

These two sets of questioners should be regarded as examples rather than a total list of those who responded to John’s harsh message. Even if he did limit his challenges to these two groups, the authorities would draw the immediate conclusion that John was preaching revolution. Every Jew would immediately think of the expected Messiah. Hence their questioning whether or not he himself was the Messiah. John’s answer to that speculation described a messiah who would come in judgment, not to win a glorious victory over Israel’s oppressors as the popular messianic tradition held (vss.15-17).

Luke interprets John’s preaching as “good news.” That may surprise us because outspoken prophets are no more welcome today when they attack established power structures as John did. Even in the smallest, intimate congregations, prophetic preaching is not often heard as the Word of God. Church officials are often called in to discipline the preacher who is too outspoken, especially if that differs from the dearly held, accepted tradition of the local power brokers. Isn’t that what has been happening in those denominations where the right of homosexuals to marry is being debated? A few decades ago, it was unmarried parents and divorced persons who were frowned upon or rejected by many congregations? Is it possible that those church leaders who take a rigid moralistic stance on such issues may see themselves as prophets much like John the Baptist?

Luke may have had in mind the moral depravity of Graeco-Roman society of his own time, exemplified by Herod Antipas, the puppet king whose moral degradation John denounced most vociferously. Without question, a significant part of the catechesis of the early church included teaching new Christians to lead a life very different morally than that to which they had been accustomed before their conversion. In those days as in ours, love for God and neighbour generated totally different quality of life and depth of sacrifice than the way most people lived. The challenge today for every Christian personally in every walk of life and for every Christian congregation is to demonstrate to an unbelieving world that there is a difference in the Christian way. This was Luke’s message as he described John the Baptist as the prophetic forerunner for the Messiah/Christ.

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Second Sunday of Advent – December 6, 2009

MALACHI 3:1-4. This short selection from the last book in our Old Testament answered a question immediately preceding it in 2:17, “Where is the God of justice?” Speaking for God, the prophet’s response was, “I am sending a messenger….” The messenger’s task of cleansing the temple came at a time of spiritual decline in the 5th century BC when slovenly priests and careless worshipers made unworthy offerings. Five hundred years later, the authors of the New Testament gospels interpreted this as a reference to John the Baptist and his role as the forerunner of Jesus.

BARUCH 5:1-9. (Alternate) The Revised Common Lectionary lists this alternate selection from one of the books excluded from both the official Hebrew canon and the Protestant canon but included in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox canons. It purports to be the work of Baruch, son of Neriah, Jeremiah’s friend and secretary, dealing with events of the Babylonian exile in the 5th century BCE. More than likely, it dates from the Hellenist period of Israel’s history, 4th to 2nd centuries BCE.

This selection is a poetic summons to the people of Jerusalem to look eastward for the return of the exiles. It vividly reflects the prophecies of Second Isaiah, especially the words of Isaiah 40. This magnificent expectation rests on the integrity of God to fulfill ancient covenantal promises to guide Israel according to the divine purpose. There is, nonetheless, a strong element of righteousness required of Israel if it is to receive this blessing.

LUKE 1:68-79. Also known by its Latin name, Benedictus, the Song of Zechariah was an early Christian hymn. It wove together a series of phrases from several Psalms. Specific Christian content comes only at the end in vss. 76-79 where Zechariah celebrates the birth of his son, John the Baptist.

PHILIPPIANS 1:3-11. This is possibly the last letter Paul wrote. Tried and imprisoned for his work as an apostle, Paul thanked God for the support of the Philippians. He wrote of them “sharing” the gospel and God’s grace, and prayed that this would bring forth an overflowing of love and righteous living as they waited for the anticipated return of Christ.

LUKE 3:1-6. The introductory stories of the birth of both John the Baptist and Jesus completed, Luke skipped over nearly three decades to place John the Baptist’s ministry in a specific historical context. He recognized John as another of Israel’s great prophets by quoting from Isaiah 40.

In so doing, Luke defined John’s role in the life and ministry of Jesus as that of the one of whom that earlier prophet spoke: “Prepare the way of the Lord.” More significantly, this also placed Jesus expressly within the sacred tradition of Israel.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

MALACHI 3:1-4. We do not know whether Malachi, translated from Hebrew as “my messenger,” was the prophet’s name or the description of his office. In the history of Israel The book message stands between the return from exile as recorded in Haggai and Zechariah, and the coming of Ezra and Nehemiah in the middle of the 5th century BCE. The covenant of God with Israel and the corruption of the temple priesthood which prevented the true liturgical expression of that covenant appear to have been Malachi’s predominant concerns. He employed an unusual, rhetorical style of questions and answers which may have been a literary device reflecting the teaching and preaching in the temple at that time.

This short selection from the last book in our Old Testament answered a question immediately preceding it in 2:17, “Where is the God of justice?” Speaking for God, the prophet’s response was, “I am sending a messenger to prepare the way before me ….” This recalls Deutero-Isaiah’s message in Isaiah 40:3. But it was the Levitical priesthood who must be purified before the offerings of the people could be pleasing to God.

This task of cleansing the temple and its priesthood came at a time of spiritual decline in the 5th century BCE when slovenly priests and careless worshipers made unworthy offerings. It revealed a concern for the temple and its worship as well as for ethical living. This stood in contrast to some pre-exilic prophesy like that found in Micah 6:6-8 by placing emphasis on both aspects of religious life.

Five hundred years later, the authors of the New Testament gospels interpreted this passage as a reference to John the Baptist and his role as the forerunner of Jesus.

BARUCH 5:1-9. (Alternate) The Revised Common Lectionary lists this alternate selection from one of the books excluded from both the official Hebrew canon and the Protestant canon. Baruch does appear, however, immediately after Lamentations in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox canons. It purports to be the work of Baruch, son of Neriah, Jeremiah’s friend and secretary, although this claim appears only in the opening verses (1:1-10). The content of the book deals with events of the Babylonian exile (586-539 BCE), but it was obviously intended as a message of reconciliation and hope for a much later period, most likely the Hellenistic age of the 4th to 2nd centuries BCE. All existing texts are in Greek like that of the Septuagint, but scholars have argued that it may have been written in either Hebrew or even Aramaic. Composed of three distinct sections, it is the product of traditional Israelite wisdom with similarities to both Job and Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), but not to the more Hellenistic wisdom literature such as the Wisdom of Solomon. Very few early Christian writers made reference to it. One oblique reference (3:37) was understood as a prophecy of the Incarnation.

This selection is a poetic summons to the people of Jerusalem to look eastward for the return of the exiles. It vividly reflects the prophecies of Second Isaiah, especially the words of Isaiah 40. This magnificent expectation rests on the integrity of God to fulfill ancient covenantal promises to guide Israel according to the divine purpose. There is, nonetheless, a strong element of righteousness required of Israel if it is to receive this blessing. The words of vs. 4 in the Jerusalem Bible puts this aspect succinctly: “The name God gives you for ever will be, ‘Peace through integrity, and honor through devotedness.’” That text may surely light up a sermon of reconciliation and hope suitable for our own time and place.

LUKE 1:68-79. Also known by the Latin translation in Jerome’s Vulgate of its first word, Benedictus, the Song of Zechariah was an early Christian hymn. It wove together a series of phrases from several Psalms: vs. 68 = Ps. 41:13, 111:9; vs. 69 = Ps. 132:17; vs. 71 = Ps. 106:10; vss.71-72 = Ps. 105:8-9. Specific Christian content comes only at the end in vss. 76-79 where Zechariah celebrates the birth of his son, John the Baptist.

The psalm is primarily a celebration of the fulfillment of Jewish messianic hopes. John is to be the Messiah’s forerunner. This prediction combines Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3. Though from the hand of Luke, it reflects the teaching of the Apostolic Church in linking the Incarnation with the divinely ordered religious history of Israel. Searching the Jewish scriptures for references applicable to the gospel story was a practice evident throughout the whole New Testament. Numerous other examples can be found in Paul’s letters, the Pastoral and General Epistles, and Revelation.

PHILIPPIANS 1:3-11. We do not need to go into the exegetical problems of whether this is a single letter from Paul to the first congregation he founded in Europe or a composite of several letters. Nor is the question of its provenance – Rome, Ephesus or Caesarea – of great concern except to scholars. Tried and imprisoned for his work as an apostle, Paul thanked God for the support of the Philippians. It would appear that they had been in touch with him during his trial and imprisonment (vs.7). He wrote of them “sharing” the gospel and God’s grace reflecting his close association with them and their response to his ministry during at least three visits. (See Acts 16:12; 2 Cor. 2:3; Acts 20:6). As William Barclay points out in his Daily Bible Readings on this passage, partnership in the gospel involves not only a gift, but a task.

Paul then prayed that this will bring forth an overflowing of love and holy living as they waited for the anticipated return of Christ. This, Paul believed, would produce “knowledge and full insight to help you determine what is best.” (vs. 9) In other words, love, the supreme gift of the Spirit, would lead to spiritual growth and moral discernment, all to the glory and praise of God. This is an appropriate mandate for any congregation in our own time as it was for the Philippians in the 1st century CE.

LUKE 3:1-6. The introductory stories of the births of both John the Baptist and Jesus completed, Luke skips over nearly three decades to place John the Baptist’s ministry, and hence Jesus, in a specific historical context.

The 15th year of the reign of Tiberius corresponds to 28-29 CE. The Roman imperial government during this period included Pontius Pilate as governor of Judea and the named tetrarchs, Herod Antipas, Philip, Lysanias, of other nearby Roman provinces. The term tetrarch was used inconsistently in the NT, but usually referred to a ruler whom Rome appointed over a limited territory who might or might not be a petty monarch. They had little power or purpose other than to maintain a watch for any threats against Roman sovereignty. By also naming the high-priesthoods of Annas and Caiaphas, Luke gave a religious context to this historical note. The gospel tradition he was about to relate was no minor event. It had both political and religious significance.

By quoting from Isaiah 40, Luke recognized John as someone even more important than another of Israel’s great prophets. He defined John’s role in the life and ministry of Jesus as that of the one of whom that earlier prophet spoke: “Prepare the way of the Lord.” More significantly, he placed Jesus expressly within the sacred tradition of Israel.

While repeating the same excerpt from Isaiah 40:3 quoted by Mark, Luke expanded it to include vss. 4-5, thus adopting Deutero-Isaiah’s universalism as his own. Luke was a citizen of the Roman world. As we shall see in our study of Luke throughout the coming year, he had a wider Gentile audience in mind than the predominantly Jewish community which had first heard and responded to the gospel. By introducing John the Baptist in this manner, Luke was trying to bridge the gap between the Jewish and Gentile environments to which the gospel had been proclaimed by the apostles, most of whom may well have disappeared behind the shadows of history.

Luke wrote as long as two decades after the Jewish war with the Romans (66-70 CE) resulting in the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and the end of its traditional sacrificial worship. The synagogues of the Diaspora had become the centres of Jewish religious observance. Early Christian congregations had been a part of that post-war milieu, but had become centres of considerable tension that Paul had sought to dispel. The tradition of James, the brother of Jesus, emphasizing the ultimate importance of the Torah and the rite of circumcision, struggled against the influence of Paul who had turned to the Gentile world as the church’s mission field. Luke stood with Paul in seeking to foster a wider unity of the church than the narrow tradition of James. Like Paul, he envisioned a unity in the church based on faith in Jesus, the Messiah of God, long promised to Israel and now come to fulfill God’s promise and Israel’s mission to bring the whole world into a perfect relationship with God. For Luke, John the Baptist was the link between the two traditions.

A new year begins on the liturgical calendar of Christian worship. This will be the third year, Year C, in the cycle of the Revised Common Lectionary.

Advent is the time when we make our spiritual preparations for the coming of Christ by thinking first about his return in glory as promised throughout the New Testament.

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
1st Sunday of Advent – November 29, 2009

JEREMIAH 33:14-16. Jeremiah lived seven centuries before Christ was born. Yet he spoke with intense hope of a time when an anointed king of David’s line would come to bring righteousness and justice to Israel and so give the nation the security it so desperately needed and earnestly desired.

PSALM 25:1-10. The personal faith of the individual Israelite expressed in a prayer forms the central theme of this instructional psalm. In Hebrew, each verse begins with a different letter of the Hebrew language. This was done for easier memorization. The special covenant relationship between God and Israel also lies behind the prayer as a secondary theme.

1 THESSALONIANS 3:9-13. The two letters of Paul to the Thessalonians were probably the first part of the whole New Testament to have been written, possibly no more that twenty years after the death and resurrection of Christ. Prominent throughout these two short letters is the expectation that Christ would soon return to establish his eternal reign of justice, peace and love. Here Paul urges that continued spiritual growth and warm personal relationships be maintained by these early Christians until that glorious day.

LUKE 21:25-36. The expectation of Christ’s return dominated early Christian thought. Bible scholars debate whether these teachings came from Jesus himself or the early apostolic church. Many of the concepts and images are drawn from typical Jewish apocalyptic writing found in the Hebrew scriptures and similar writings of the period between the two parts of our Bible.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

JEREMIAH 33:14-16. Jeremiah lived seven centuries before Christ was born. His ministry spanned four decades from about 627 to 586 BCE. Two great crises occurred during this time. The break-up of the Assyrian empire and the rise of the Babylonian empire changed the economic and political environment for the kingdom of Judah. The resurgence of religious nationalism during the reign of King Josiah (ca. 640-609 BCE) created a new social, moral and spiritual environment. Jeremiah may well have been greatly involved in that revival as the narrative parts of the book describe.

As the Book of Jeremiah comes to us now, it is a composite work of several different types of literature drawn from several sources and dealing with several themes. But like most pre-exilic prophets, Jeremiah was primarily a preacher, not an author. So the book that bears his name must be regarded as only partially his. The lectionary passage comes from a so-called “Book of Consolation” (chs. 30, 31 and 33) into which is inserted an incident from Jeremiah’s life illustrating this hopeful theme (32). These oracles are probably of varied origin that offer hope beyond national disaster. They also show the influence of the earlier prophet Hosea and close links with Deutero-Isaiah (Isaiah 40-55). Some of the material is undoubtedly that of Jeremiah himself as well as from Baruch, the scribe. (See Robert Davidson’s article “The Book of Jeremiah,” in The Oxford Companion to the Bible, 343ff) Baruch may have been responsible for writing down some of the prophecies attributed to Jeremiah.

This passage speaks with intense hope of a time when an anointed king (Hebrew = masiah) of David’s line would come to bring righteousness and justice to Israel and so give the nation the security it so desperately needed and earnestly desired. It emphasizes the prophetic faith that the nation’s fate will not be not decided by the Babylonians, but by Yahweh. This faith in Yahweh as Lord of history is found throughout the Old Testament, but especially in the oracles of the great prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. It presents a hopeful faith for difficult times such as our own.

Our problem today is to recognize and accept this biblical faith that God does indeed have a providential purpose to be fulfilled through the actual events of human history. This faith implies an interventionist God who cares what happens to creation, but this is also open to wide misinterpretation found so often in some narrow theological views that claims God is really on our side and against our enemies. Such views have frequently led to civil, international and interfaith warfare. The mediaeval Crusades and the Irish Troubles of the past several decades occurred because of such disastrous religious prejudices. The great danger of the present moment is to see the extremist Islamists’ jihad, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories in a similar light.

It also has to be recognized that such a narrow view is evident in the scriptures themselves. After the global wars of the 20th century, one is tempted to reject all theological interpretations of history. How could we ever conceive of a God in control of such tragic events when millions of innocent civilians died because they belonged to an “enemy” nation or a particular race or ethnic group? It is at this point that the vision of Jeremiah of the Messiah “executing righteousness and justice” becomes relevant to our own time. Without these qualities dominant in human character and practiced in personal, national and international relations, history will continue to be a record of human failure to do as God wills.

PSALM 25:1-10. The special relationship between Yahweh and Israel as well as the personal faith of the individual Israelite form the central theme of this psalm which is both liturgical and instructional. It is a prayer of supplication for Yahweh’s intervention in some unstated personal problem and as such was useful to anyone seeking divine help in distress.

The psalm has the form of an acrostic, however. In Hebrew, each verse begins with a different letter of the Hebrew language. This was done for easier memorization. It also contains similarities to Wisdom literature, e.g. vss. 4-5; 12-14. As such, its superscription “Of David” is an anachronism attached to the psalm to give it liturgical authority. This type of psalm appeared only in the late post-exilic period when the worship of temple was highly structured by the Levitical priesthood. It may have come from a collection of psalms of varying age and authorship attributed to but certainly not composed by David.

While the implications of vss. 1-2 indicate an external human enemy whose treachery the psalmist feared, there is no reason why this could not also refer to an inner, spiritual enemy. The habit of personifying the impersonal can be found quite commonly in Hebrew literature. Mediaeval art and some modern literary images depicting various forms of temptation as evil angels (e.g. C. S. Lewis’ Screwtape Letters) followed the same pattern.

The psalmist had found that obedience to the way of Yahweh led to moral uprightness and spiritual strength when confronted by life’s vicissitudes. Dependence on the mercy and steadfast love of Yahweh yielded the power to overcome (vss. 6-10). A note of sincere humility crept into the prayer as the psalmist openly confessed his youthful transgressions and personal guilt (vss. 7 & 11). He also had concern for others, that they would reverently seek to be taught by Yahweh and reap the reward of prosperity through keeping the covenant (vss. 12-15).

Vss. 16-21 return to the original petition. The psalm ends with a brief reference to the need for Israel’s redemption from troubles which are never disclosed. The personal and national distress to which the psalm gave expression can best be understood in the light of the covenant relationship between Yahweh and Israel. Each Israelite, as a “son of the covenant,” (b’nai b’rith) felt a deep sense of personal identification with what happened to the whole community. Today, we can see this in the way our Jewish neighbors feel about and defend Israel whenever they perceive some incident as threatening to that modern state.

1 THESSALONIANS 3:9-13. The two letters of Paul to the Thessalonians were probably the first part of the whole New Testament to have been written, possibly no more that twenty years after the resurrection of Christ and relatively early in Paul’s ministry. Prominent throughout these two short letters is the expectation that Christ would soon return to establish his eternal reign of justice, love and peace. Paul shared this viewpoint with the whole church of the Apostolic Age. It greatly influenced the oral transmission of Jesus’ teachings and the writing of the earlier Gospels.

Paul’s intimate relationship with some of his early European converts comes to the fore in this passage. The immediately preceding verses (3:1-5) describe his considerable anxiety for them as they struggled to live their recently acquired faith in very difficult circumstances. They were probably mainly Gentiles experiencing strong persecution from non-believers of their own community not unlike the opposition confronting Jewish Christians in Judea (2:14). Accordingly, Paul had sent his colleague Timothy to encourage them (3:2). Timothy had returned with good news (3: 6). So Paul was writing this first letter in response to what Timothy had told him.

Thanksgiving and intercessory prayer for the Thessalonians highlight Paul’s very personal concern. He earnestly wanted to return to see them and strengthen their faith. In the meantime, he urged that they continue to grow and maintain warm personal relationships within their fellowship until that glorious day when Christ returns. He did not elaborate on the details of the apostolic expectation of Christ’s second coming.

In general, all NT writers concentrated on the purpose rather than the manner of this anticipated event. It was as if they felt that Jesus’ work of establishing God’s kingdom had been left unfinished by the crucifixion and resurrection. In all honesty, the world still seemed – then and now – as if the reign of God had not yet come. The promise of Christ’s coming again offered hope that what had gone before had not been in vain. The love of God in Christ would triumph in the end and those who refused to believe and follow his way would be rejected
in the final judgment.

The phrase “strengthen your hearts in holiness” in 3:13 offers a very appropriate Advent text. Instead of rushing around in consumer panic, we need these four weeks before Christmas to prepare spiritually for Christ’s coming. Holiness in daily life is best expressed in love for God and neighbour. It is not just happenstance that charities make their strongest appeal for public support during the last few weeks before Christmas. The problem most of us face is how to share our resources, material and well as spiritual, in this particular season when so many demands are placed upon us. Childhood Christmases during the Great Depression of the 1930s showed me personally how it is that while material resources may be limited, spiritual resources for this season can be truly unlimited.

LUKE 21:25-36. The expectation of Christ’s return dominated early Christian thought. Bible scholars debate whether Jesus himself or the early apostolic church taught in such terms. Uniformly, the gospels and Acts attribute this teaching to Jesus, although in John’s Gospel there is some ambiguity whether certain sayings of Jesus referred to his resurrection rather than an eschatological Parousia at the end of historical time. Many of the concepts and images were drawn from standard Jewish apocalyptic writing found in the Hebrew scriptures and similar eschatalogical literature of the intertestamental period.

The prophets much earlier had declared their faith in a future historical event, the Day of the Lord, when God’s rule of righteousness, peace, justice and prosperity would become permanent for Israel. The earliest gospel statement in Mark 1:15 set the ministry of Jesus as the dawning of this new age. Matthew and Luke shared this belief. But the moment had not yet come by the eighth or ninth decade of lst century CE when Luke’s Gospel was composed. Later New Testament writers, notably the author of the Pastoral Epistles to Timothy and Titus, dealt with the delayed expectation of the church.

There may well be actual historical events behind this apocalyptic passage in all three Synoptic Gospels. As can be seen by comparing Matthew 24:4-36 Luke 21 5-38 to Mark 13:5-37, Matthew and Luke were dependent on Mark’s original statement of the early oral tradition. The differences in the three accounts may have been due to an earlier version of Mark which the two other authors had before them, but were altered in what is now a much debated “Secret Gospel of Mark.” (Biblical Archeological Review, , “Secret Mark: A Modern Forgery?” November-December 2009. Vol.35, No. 6. 43ff.)

All four Gospels were written after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in 70 CE and reflect that momentous event. Written about 70 CE, Mark’s Gospel was closest to the catastrophe . There is a strong tradition that shortly before that fateful event in Jewish history, the Christian community in Jerusalem fled from the city and settled in Pella, an established flourishing Roman and Greek town on the eastern side of the Jordan River about 16 km (10 mi) south of the Sea of Galilee. Hence the reference in Luke 21:21 “Then those is Judea must flee to the mountains ….” (Cf. Mark 13:14; Matt. 24:15-16). The tradition came from that fact that the Christian community there existed there until the Moslem period in the 7th century CE. Thus, in this passage we may well be reading the leaders of the Christian community cast their counsel and hope for Christ’s return to their endangered community in the eschatological words of Jewish apocalypse taken from the Hebrew scriptures they knew so well.

Nor has that hope in the future return of Christ yet been fulfilled twenty-one centuries later in the traditional manner in which it has been declared. In the meantime, the church’s faith in the Second Coming has been variously interpreted, depending on the approach to scripture taken by the interpreter. Is it specific prediction? Or more general prophecy of God’s intention? Or is the descriptive Second Coming more of a symbol of God’s ultimate triumph? Or are we merely discussing the personal identification of the individual with Christ? Or has it already taken place – at Pentecost? Stephen H. Travis, of St. John’s College, Nottingham, England, writes: “In any case, it is possible to affirm the basic structure of Christian hope, with its emphasis on the second coming as the goal and fulfillment of God’s past work in Christ, without committing oneself to any precise view about its nature or when it will be.” (The Oxford Companion to the Bible, p. 686.)

That may not be a satisfactory approach for some, but it does give us a continuing hope and a commission to carry on the ministry of God’s love for the world so fully expressed in Jesus Christ. How each person fulfills that commission is to be realized in the choices and priorities one makes in the myriad human relationships which engage one’s energies day by day. For some it may mean quiet prayer and contemplation. For others it may mean active participation in ministries that seek justice for all. For still others it may have extensive economic and/or political ramifications. One form or expression of hope does not fit all situations.

To some extent, there was truth in what former US President George H. W. Bush (1988-92) advocated when he said that we all have a responsibility to create “a thousands points of light”. It would be a grave mistake, however, to regard any specific political or military events occurring at this or any other moment in history, no matter who may perpetrate them, as signs that the end times have begun. The Day of the Lord envisioned by the prophets of Israel and the eschatological passages of the NT is always here and now.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

JOB 42:1-6, 10-17.

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

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

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

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

JOB 42:1-6, 10-17.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

JOB 38:1-7.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

JOB 23:1-9, 16-17.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-