John Shearman's Lectionary

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

PSALM 91:1-2, 9-16. This psalm proclaims the traditional faith that total dependence on God brings providential protection from evil. God does this graciously and mercifully because it is God’s nature to do so, not as a reward for good behaviour.

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

PSALM 91:1-2, 9-16. This psalm proclaims Israel’s traditional faith that total dependence on Yahweh brought providential protection from all evil. It may be claimed that the psalmist has little or no awareness of the complexity of the problem of evil. The perils of living in an imperfect world do not seem to worry him or detract from his absolute trust. This recalls Ps. 46 as a similar confession of trust.

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

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

It would appear that the psalm was chosen for the first Sunday of Lent because vss. 11-12 are quoted by Satan in tempting Jesus in Matthew 4:6 and Luke 4:10-11. On the other hand, we should interpret the devoutly expressed trust metaphorically rather than literally as Satan did. Jesus replied in such a way as to deflect such a literal interpretation by quoting another scripture text from Deuteronomy 6:16. Scripture texts so quoted may easily contradict one another.

The concluding vss. 14-16 give a different bent to the psalmist’s trust. The basis for it lies in the covenant love between Yahweh and Israel which extends to each individual Israelite. The RSV and NEB convey this better than the NRSV: “Because his love is set on me, I will deliver him; I will lift him beyond danger, for he knows me by my name.” (NEB) El Shaddai does this graciously and mercifully because it is his nature to do so, and it is in fulfillment of the covenant, not a reward for good behaviour.
This passage belongs to one of the major segments of Paul’s letter – chs. 9-11 – in which he struggled to explain how both Jews and Gentiles can have a right relationship with God through faith alone. His audience would appear to have been a predominantly Jewish community in Rome, so he was at pains to clarify the reasons for his Gentile mission and his attitude to the rejection of the gospel by many of his fellow Jews. In his classic Moffat New Testament Commentary (1932),  C.H. Dodd suggested that this section may even have stood alone, perhaps as a sermon, which Paul incorporated into his letter. If so, what a sermon!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1 SAMUEL 2:18-20, 26. How does a family bring up children “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” as one traditional baptismal liturgy reads? This scripture tells us that it can best be done by exposing them to the worship and teaching of our faith. Yet, as the passage just prior to this one relates, that isn’t all there is to it. The sons of Eli the priest did not follow in their father’s footsteps to become Israel’s spiritual leaders. That role fell to Samuel, who became one of Israel’s greatest prophets.

PSALM 148. We tend to forget that God loves all the created universe as well as the human race. This psalm summons all of creation to praise God just for being, as are God’s people Israel.

COLOSSIANS 3:12-17. The heart of Christian worship and ethics, wrote Paul, is to create loving relationships – with God, with other people, and with God’s creation. To make his point more vividly, Paul introduces a metaphor about putting on new clothes. It is often said that in the early church newly baptized Christians were dressed in new, white robes as a symbol of the new life Christ had given them. Another metaphor of the indwelling Christ brings out the spiritual growth that comes from worshiping and witnessing within the Christian fellowship.

LUKE 2:41-52. In much the same way that he drew from Hannah’s Song in 1 Samuel 2:1-10 for a model of Mary’s Song in Luke 1:46-55, Luke elaborated on the story of Samuel’s growth under Eli’s tutelage in the Old Testament lesson above. Thus he clarified for his readers that Jesus was a very human person, but with unusual spiritual insight and understanding. An early Christian heresy, called Docetism, claimed that Jesus was divine, but only seemed to be a real human being. In the traditional view based on scripture, he is both fully human and divine.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

1 SAMUEL 2:18-20, 26. The story of Eli and his sons is a tragic one. It appears to have been told to emphasize the contrast between Samuel’s childhood and that of the two wayward sons of Eli. Their sins appear to have been against religious customs or else demanding privileges which were not their due. (2:12-17). One commentator noted that this is an example of clericalism even in early Israel. It should surprise no one that there is still ample evidence of this human fault in clergy today as church leaders seek to protect themselves, their clergy and their institution from widespread public scandals .

The point at issue in our reading, however, deals with Samuel and the way his family was rewarded for dedicating their son to service of Yahweh. For our time this issue might be stated in the words of one traditional baptismal liturgy: How does a family bring up children “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord?” By exposing them to the worship and teaching of the faith, this scripture tells us. Would that it was so simple! Many communities have tales to tell of faithful church members whose children betrayed everything the parents had stood for.

The sons of Eli the priest did not follow in their father’s footsteps to become Israel’s spiritual leaders. That role fell to Samuel, who subsequently became one of Israel’s great prophets. We know that dedicated parenting isn’t all there is to it. Even the most piously trained young people sometimes rebel against their parents’ devotion. How many adults absent themselves from the church because they claim to have had too much of it in their youth?

In practice, it is impossible to tell when and how parental efforts to educate their children religiously will be effective. We are dealing with moral and spiritual matters in which results are notoriously difficult to determine. Some would use authoritarian means to achieve the end they desire. That would be self-defeating, however, since it is an exercise of power rather than advancing the processes of education and spiritual development. Practiced by governments on a regional or national level, it becomes theocracy – a religious state where law is determined by religious mandate rather than by justice for all. This has become an important issue in some fundamentalist Islamic countries where Islamic shariah law has been enforced.

A few years ago, a great deal of publicity was given to a situation in the southern American state of Alabama where the chief justice of his state was removed from office because he defied a judgment by the federal court to remove a monument bearing the Ten Commandments he had erected at the entrance to the state court building. The federal court had ruled that the monument constituted a government endorsement of Christianity, so violating the separation of church and state. The judge argued that being constantly made aware of the laws of God would beneficially effect obedience to the laws of the nation.

PSALM 148. This is the third of five hallelujah psalms at the end of the Psalter. It summons all of creation to praise God just for being. So are God’s people Israel. The well-known hymn, “This is my Father’s world,” found its motif here. We do tend to forget that God loves all the created universe as well as the human race. The psalm has a liturgical structure with vss. 5-6, 13 -14 forming antiphons which could have been sung by a Levitical chorus.

The theological concepts of the psalm developed late in Israel’s history. Yahweh is transcendent, far removed from creation. There are several intervening heavens arranged concentrically like the walls of a city or superimposed one on the other. These concepts reappear in 2 Corinthians 12:2, 4; and again in Hebrews 4:14 and 7:26, so it must have been well-known in rabbinical Judaism. On the other hand, the celestial beings and stars worshiped as gods in other eastern traditions are here seen as
subordinate to Yahweh.

The “horn for his people” (vs. 14) which Yahweh raises up is a symbol of strength and dignity drawn from the horns of animals in the Israelites’ flocks, their ancient source of wealth and power, but not possessed by other animals, particularly those that preyed on the flocks. But is there another possible interpretation of the phrase?

In Exodus 27:2, the instructions for the building of the altar included horns at each corner. They were made of wood covered with bronze. Probably of Canaanite origin and possibly similar to the horns of a ram or a bull, tradition held that this was the most important part of the altar, with special powers to protect those seeking asylum. Adonijah and Joab grasped the horns of the altar to save themselves from Solomon during the struggle for succession to David (1 Kings 1:50; 2:28).

Instructions for sin offering (Leviticus 4:7, 18, 25) also states that the priest should wipe some of the blood of the sacrificial animal on the horns of the altar. Lev. 8:14 refers to this being done by Moses when he ordained the Aaronic priesthood. Aaron did so also when he performed the sin offering ( Lev. 9:9). This gives a symbolic significance of divine power resting in this appurtenance of the sacred altar. By the time the psalm came into liturgical use in the late post-exilic period, it is possible that the historic symbolism remained regardless of the ancient sacrificial practice or sacred accountrements of the temple still remained.

COLOSSIANS 3:12-17. Much scholarly energy has been expended in debating whether or not Colossians was written by Paul or by someone else. Perhaps the most satisfying conclusion to this observer, though admittedly unprovable, is that of Eduard Schweizer: The letter was composed by Timothy on behalf of Paul and himself while the apostle was imprisoned in Ephesus. (1:1)

The heart of Christian worship and ethics, this passage says, is to create relationships – with God and with other people. This is the special work of Christ whom believers encounter in their life together as the church in the real world. Thus the list of five virtues which the Christian must “put on.” These are summarized by “love” in vs. 14 and supplemented by the “peace of Christ to which you were called in the one body.” This all refers to the life of the Christian community, most likely a contentious mix of Jews and Gentiles, rich and poor, employers and employees, perhaps even slaves and free.

To make his point more vividly, Paul reiterates a metaphor about “putting on” as one puts on new clothes contrasting with the “putting off” the five evils of v. 8. In the early church when catechumens came to be baptized, they took off their old clothes and were dressed in new, white robes as a symbol of the new life Christ had given them.

Another metaphor of the indwelling Christ brings out the spiritual growth that comes from the worshiping and witnessing of the Christian fellowship. The dynamic for creating the new relationships the church brings to the world is what Schweizer calls “the stream of love flowing from God to humankind via Christ.” In these times when the church’s influence has been so greatly diminished and we exercise our faith on the margins of society, this important ministry of the whole people of God is often neglected.

LUKE 2:41-52. In much the same way that he drew from Hannah’s Song in 1 Samuel 2:1-10 for a model of Mary’s Song in Luke 1:46-55, Luke elaborated on the story of Samuel’s growth under Eli’s tutelage in the Old Testament lesson above. However, this story should not be interpreted as Jesus’ bar mitzvah, a practice developed in rabbinical Judaism no earlier than the 15th century CE.

Luke clarifies for his readers that Jesus was an very human person as well as having unusual spiritual insight and at least an elementary awareness of his divine mission. The portrait we have here is of a headstrong adolescent who disappeared from the company of Galilean travelers as they left Jerusalem after the Passover festival. He went missing for three days, a terrifyingly long time for his anxious parents. They finally found him in the temple questioning the learned scholars about spiritual matters.

Naturally, Mary rebuked him, as all mothers would. Instead of submitting to her rebuke, he answered her back. The distance between the boy and his parents was already widening, in spite of Mary’s treasuring of this memorable experience. Who was this child-man who so mystified them?

In his biographical study of the biblical record, Rabbi Jesus: An Intimate Biography (Doubleday, 2000), Bruce Chilton reasoned that Jesus was actually an outsider, a mamzer, even in his own family because of his unusual birth. (The term mamzer meant one born outside of his parents’ marriage.) Chilton believes that Jesus fled from Nazareth to join John the Baptist’s movement calling for repentance as young as sixteen or seventeen. Both those who hold to the virgin birth and those who do not can take some rationale for their respective points of view from this story. It would seem that Luke’s intention in telling it was the provide a narrative which later generations would codify in traditional creeds that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine.

An early Christian heresy, still evident in some parts of the church today, claimed that Jesus was divine, but wasn’t a real human being. Today this may be no more than an overemphasis on Christ’s divinity in contradiction to the easy humanizing of Jesus and his ethical message so prevalent in our post-Christendom culture and the renewed search for “the historical Jesus” many traditionalists find so disturbing. On the other hand, to minimize the humanity of Jesus is as heretical as overemphasis on his divinity. Luke does not attempt to do anything more than tell his story and leave the reader to answer the crucial question which confronts us all: Who is this?

Nearly a century ago, some of the Protestant churches in Canada developed two strong teenage youth programs as a counterpart to the Scouting movement. The boys’ groups were called TUXIS and the girls’, CGIT (Canadian Girls In Training). TUXIS was an acronym for the program’s motto: “You and I training for service with Christ and nothing but Christ between us.” TUXIS groups were formed as midweek activities of Sunday school classes in many local congregations. Both of these groups had as their biblical basis the text of Luke 2:52 (KJV): “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.”

This text provided the four basic elements of the program of these two groups: healthy growth of mind and body, and of one’s social and spiritual relationships. A few of the boys’ groups lasted until the early 1950s, but eventually succumbed to a lack of strong male leadership and competition from the Scouting movement. A significant number of male lay and ordained leaders of the church received their strongest religious education from participation in TUXIS groups. There are still CGIT groups in some congregations of The United Church of Canada. Many of the prominent lay women as well as diaconal and ordained ministers of the present generation in the United Church began their leadership training in CGIT.

Panentheism holds that the divine spirit dwells in each person and in all of creation. It is not too much to say that the panentheism which characterizes the theology of many contemporary clergy stems from passages like this. Luke’s narrative in chapters 1 & 2 points to Jesus as being a human person in whom the Spirit dwelt from the time of his conception and was evident to him as early as his visit to the temple in Jerusalem when he was twelve years old.

-30-

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
Fourth Sunday of Advent – December 20, 2009

MICAH 5:2-5a. This prophecy presents an overview of Israel’s long and tragic history from the time of King David onward. Following the return of a remnant of the nation from exile in Babylon, a new ruler was intended to bring peace and prosperity because he would be strengthened by God. The early church saw the promise of the Messiah in this passage.

LUKE 1:47-55. The psalm and the gospel lessons form a single reading from Luke 1. Mary’s Song, known for centuries by its Latin name The Magnificat, was almost certainly modeled on Hannah’s prayer in 1 Samuel 2:1-10. It promises the social justice of the messianic age for which the world is still waiting in hope.

HEBREWS 10:5-10. The message of this obscure passage indicates that Christ was born to die as the sacrifice for the sin of the world. It quotes Christ, but in reality it is a quotation from Psalm 40:6-8. That psalm is a song of praise and petition seeking God’s help. This interpretation emphasizes the sacrifice of Christ on the cross which God willed as vastly superior to the repeated sacrifices in Israel’s temple ritual.

LUKE 1:39-45. The story of Mary’s visit to Elizabeth, John the Baptist’s mother, has an air of immediacy and intimacy about it. Some have speculated that the story came from Mary herself. On the other hand, the birth narratives of Luke are in the form of oral legend and poetry which may have circulated as a separate collection long before the gospel was written about 80 AD. However they may have come into being, the stories were meant to convey the faith of the church, then and still, that in Jesus, the God who loves the world came to bring all who believe into a living relationship with God now and for all eternity. This is still as good news to our age as it was to the first Christians two thousand years ago.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

MICAH 5:2-5a. Micah (or Micaiah, meaning “Who is like Yahweh?) Came from a small village in the Judean foothills, Moresheth-Gath, about halfway between Jerusalem and Gaza. He was a contemporary of the better-known Isaiah. Yet the two prophets had a markedly different outlook, perhaps because of their different status in Judean society. Micah had the viewpoint of the common people of the countryside; Isaiah, that of an aristocrat and courtier. Micah could speak from harsh experience of the suffering of ordinary folk in a time of intolerable injustice and political turmoil, roughly 742-697 BCE. His village lay near the Judean stronghold of Lachish and close to the cities of the Philistines, in the pathway of every invading force. No “minor” prophet, he and Amos became the voices of the rural people who suffered under almost constant oppression.

The late Bruce Vawter, of DePaul University, IL, described Micah’s time in these words: “His prophetic career may have begun about 725 BCE when it had become evident that the northern kingdom of Israel – where prophecy had begun and which had always been the ‘elder sister’ of the kingdom of Judah – was now doomed to disappear into the voracious Assyrian empire. Judah, by a combination of statecraft, collaborationism and religiously unacceptable compromise, would still be able to hold off the inevitable for a time; indeed, it outlasted the Assyrians only to become the prey to their Neo-Babylonian successors. But this was done by the sacrifice of national and religious integrity, and in the end the result was the same.” (Oxford Companion to the Bible, 517)

In the book as it now stands, Micah’s own prophecies have been considerably adapted to changed conditions, added to and amplified by later editors. Vawter thought that this excerpt came from the prophet himself. Rolland E. Wolfe, formerly professor of Biblical Literature at Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, thought that it was part of an appendix added in postexilic times dealing with “the restoration of Israel by resorting to militaristic means …. (which) breathes vengeance upon other nations.” (The Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 6, 922)

This prophecy presents an overview of Israel’s long and tragic history from the time of King David onward. It marvels that a Davidic lineage that lasted nearly half a millennium could come from such a small place as Bethlehem. Following the return of a remnant of the nation from exile, a new monarch of David’s line would bring peace and prosperity because he would be strengthened by God. This is distinctively different from the post-exilic vision of Deutero-Isaiah in that here the deity will delegate authority to the Davidic monarch in what will amount to a theocracy. Deutero-Isaiah envisioned Yahweh being the shepherd of reconstructed Israel. (Isa. 40:10-11)

As Matthew 2:6 states, the early church saw in this passage the promise of the Messiah and applied it to Jesus. The Matthean text is not taken from either the Hebrew or the Greek LXX of this passage and may be an original translation. Some scholars believe that the quotation is the sole source of the tradition that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

HEBREWS 10:5-10. The message of this obscure passage indicates that Christ was born to die as the sacrifice for the sin of the world. In our modern celebration of Christmas, we tend to neglect this important aspect of our faith: the Easter story begins at Christmas.

The passage quotes Christ, but in reality it is a quotation from Psalm 40:6-8. That psalm is a song of praise for God’s help and has no messianic connotations at all. However, this excerpt does echo the prophetic messages of Micah 6:6-8 and Jeremiah 31: 31-34. This interpretation lifts up the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, which God willed, as vastly superior to the repeated sacrifices of Israel’s temple ritual. The Christian doctrine of sanctifying grace which enables us to be obedient to God’s law of love finds its simplest definition here. It also opens us to the dangers of supersessionism and dispensationalism, theological positions that are no longer tenable in contemporary global religious and multicultural dialogue.

The interweaving of the Old Testament and the Gospel also stands out in this passage. Both testaments are essential elements of a mature Christian faith. From time of Marcion in the middle of the second century CE attempts have been made to exclude the Old Testament from Christian scriptures. This cannot be done because both parts tell the same story of God’s redemptive activity for the restoration of God’s creation – and all of humanity as part of creation – to its proper relationship to God.

This is what the author of Hebrews means by his use of the word “sanctified.” The Greek word is hagiazo (trans. “to make holy”). The only way for us to be made holy is in relationship to God who alone is holy. The claim of the author of Hebrews is that, according to divine will, only through faith in the sacrifice of Christ is this possible.

There has been a widespread misunderstanding that evangelical Christians emphasize only personal holiness. Such a limited view ignores the significant leadership of many 19th and 20th century evangelicals as William Wilberforce, Anthony Shaftesbury, Walter Rauschenbusch, Reinhard Niebuhr and numerous others that to be fully expressed holiness must include the whole social order and all cultural systems. Even John Wesley himself in the 18th century regarded sanctification as incomplete as long as society remained unchanged by converted Christian men and women. Accordingly, the celebration of Advent and Christmas must include not only a genuine concern for the poor and disadvantaged, as in the original legend of St. Nicholas, but also a witness to God’s will that the reign of God be established in all human relationships and social institutions.

LUKE 1:39-45 AND LUKE 1:47-55. Because the psalm and the gospel lessons form a single reading from Luke 1, we comment on them together. These two passages are part of a series of Marian narratives from which the doctrine of the Virgin Birth and other aspects of traditional Christology developed. Together they form a creative and poetic flowering of what the church believed from its beginning: that God had come into human life for our salvation through faith in and following Jesus Christ in everyday living. Like so much else in the gospel story, the influence of the prophets of Israel, and especially their sense of divine justice and messianic hopes, can be clearly seen. The birth narratives read like an unfolding drama gradually introducing the central character of the gospel, Jesus, the Jewish Messiah/Christ.

The story of Mary’s visit to Elizabeth, John the Baptist’s mother, has an air of immediacy and intimacy about it. Some have speculated that the story came from Mary herself. On the other hand, the birth narratives of Luke 1 and 2 are more likely oral legend and poetry which may have circulated as a separate collection long before the gospel was written about 80-90 CE. Later extreme examples of this kind of story show that the church needed to distinguish between what was valid revelation and what was merely imaginative speculation. This task fell to the Church Fathers of the late 2nd and 3rd centuries when the New Testament canon was given its final form.

On the other hand, the story as it stands gives some very natural insight into these two women’s experience. They rejoiced in each other’s pregnancy. They needed each other’s support. They realized how blessed they were to be bearing God’s miraculous gifts to humanity. What modern mother who willingly and intentionally bears a child does not sense the same joyful hope that they felt?

Mary’s Song, known for centuries by its Latin name The Magnificatt, was almost certainly modeled on Hannah’s prayer in 1 Samuel 2:1-10. But that the circumstances of that source are more closely parallel to Elizabeth’s, who like Hannah, conceived late in life. Most likely Luke or his Jewish source composed a typical hymn of praise based on Hannah’s prayer and other Old Testament references. (vss. 49-50 cf. Ps. 103:17; 111:9) These were adapted to fit this situation, a common practice of New Testament authors. As it stands, the psalm promised the social justice of the messianic age for which the world is still waiting in hope.

However they may have come into being, these passages conveyed the faith of the church, then and still, that in Jesus, God who loves the world came to bring all creation into a living relationship with God now and for all eternity. This relationship extends to every human activity and institution as well as to each individual. There can be no social justice where people are not free or deprived of a fair share of the world’s resources. Some may see this as a basis for pre-emptive assaults against powerful opponents of political democracy and a free market economy. This would be a mistaken interpretation. The evidence of Old Testament prophecy and New Testament Christology is that God makes use of events manipulated by human agents to redeem creation. The Incarnation and the Resurrection had but that one purpose: the redemption of the world through the spiritual resources made available through faith in Jesus Christ, born of Mary.

WHO IS HE?

A poem for Christmas.
Rev. John Shearman

It was a stone manger, that place where he lay;
not a fine oaken cradle, but a box filled with hay.
His mother sang to him suckling her breast,
while shepherds came kneeling at angels’ behest.

Is this the Messiah? Not a king, but a child,
Just like our children in a world just as wild.
Does God really want us to follow this boy?
Can he be the Saviour who has not one toy?

The hopes of the world, invested in pain,
will not bring another; there’s nothing to gain
in pining and searching, in warring and strife;
for God’s saving love came in that helpless life.

An Epilogue:

For those who seek some resolution to the endless controversy about the Virgin Birth, a relatively new book by Geza Vermes, The Nativity: History and Legend, (Penguin Books, 2006) offers a reasonable position. Vermes concludes that since the custom of the times regarded child marriage as normal and virginity was thought to continue until puberty, it is entirely possible that Mary did conceive after her first ovulation but before her menstrual cycles began. That would mean that she was technically “a virgin” at the time of her conception. He supports this view with quotations from the Mishnah and the Talmud that distinguishes between two different understandings of virginity: one that terminates with sexual intercourse and one that ends only with the onset of menstruation, i.e “a girl who has seen blood even though she is married.” (See Vermes, “The virginal conception in Luke.” 78-81.)

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.