John Shearman's Lectionary

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Third Sunday of Lent – March 7, 2010

ISAIAH 55:1-9. Gracious, merciful acceptance by God for all who seek such a relationship stands out as the theme of these magnificently poetic lines. But God does not ignore human sin. God seeks human repentance, a meaningful change in one’s behaviour for this relationship to be effective. This is necessary, the prophet emphasizes, because of the distinction between our human ways and God’s ways.

PSALM 63:1-8. The longing of the human heart for a relationship with God gives this psalm an intense feeling personal devotion. It expresses an abiding trust and confidence in God fully dependent on God’s constant love and  protection.

1 CORINTHIANS 10:1-13. Paul draws on the story of the Israelites in the wilderness breaking their covenant with God to challenge the Corinthians to live differently than their morally and  spiritually corrupt society. The great benefit of the Christian life, he states in vs. 13, is not that they will be tested by their circumstances, but that God will not let them be tested beyond their strength to endure.

LUKE 13:1-9. The Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, who later condemned Jesus to death, had murdered a group of worshipers as they offered sacrifices in the temple. Another group had been killed by a falling tower. As Messiah, Jesus used these incidents to call his fellow Jews to repent and believe in him. The parable of the fig tree confronted them with the prospect that there could be a limit to God’s forbearance.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

ISAIAH 55:1-9. If one wishes to know where Paul obtained his basic theological conception of the grace of God brought to its fullest expression in Jesus of Nazareth, one need look no further than this poem. Scholars generally agree that the superb poetry of Deutero-Isaiah’s (chs. 40-55) come to a natural close. All the themes identified in the opening poem in 40:1-11 as well as the major emphases of all subsequent oracles echo through this composition. The remainder the book (chs. 56-66) is believed to have been composed by others who followed his general themes and style.

Here is the consolation of Israel: forgiveness for individuals and community, Israel’s mission of reconciliation through suffering, a vision of universal salvation, a new exodus in the return of the exiles, the redemption of creation – all accomplished because Israel’s God, Yahweh, wills it so and will make it possible. Yahweh’s covenant promise is the vehicle through which this will be done.

Gracious, merciful acceptance by Yahweh for all who seek such a covenant relationship stands out in these magnificent lines. But Yahweh does not ignore human sin.  Yahweh seeks sincere human repentance, a meaningful change in human behavior, for this relationship to be effective. This is necessary, the prophet emphasizes, because of the distinction between our human ways and Yahweh’s ways.

Of special note is the emphasis placed upon listening intently for the word of Yahweh.  Throughout the OT and particularly in the prophets, “the word of the Lord” is the medium of revelation. In vss. 2-3 Yahweh bids Israel listen so that they may live. By this means Yahweh made known Yahweh’s will and purpose, especially for Israel as the chosen people. The content of the revelation Yahweh desires Israel to hear is the everlasting covenant. Beyond the mere hearing of the word, however, is the reason for the revelation and the covenant. Israel is to be a witness to the peoples of all nations. Despite many transgressions and failures to be what they had been called to be, Yahweh had not given up on them. Yahweh’s purpose would be accomplished even as the rain and snow make the soil fertile for a productive harvest (vs. 10-11) and the renewal of all creation (vs. 12-13).

For the authors of the NT and for Christians ever since, Jesus is the word come from God.  (John 1:1-18; Hebrews 1:1-4) As one Roman Catholic commentator on this passage said in traditional theological terms that Jesus did not return to God void but achieved the end for which he was sent:  to give expression to God’s infinite love and compassion, to enter into our humanity,  to show us how to live, to bring hope and salvation to all who walk in darkness.

What God intended for Israel, to be a witness to all peoples, God is now accomplishing through us still. “Each of us is a word of God, spoken only once at our creation, to give continuing expression to God’s love and compassion. What a blessing!   What a challenge!   We must achieve the end for which we were sent.  We will not return to God void. Yet with his word, Jesus, God has given us all that we need to achieve the end for which we were sent — if we but ask.” (From Maxine Shock, OP, Lenten Seeds. Heartland Center For Spirituality. (http://www.shalomplace.com)

For those seeking an emphasis on social justice so prevalent in the prophets of Israel, vss. 10-13 provide an excellent text for our own time. What is our personal, corporate and national environmental footprint in this day of global crisis? How shall we repent enough to make a difference for future generations to live as well as we have? What must we do to be saved? Repentance always means change.

PSALM 63:1-8. The longing of the human heart for a relationship with Yahweh gives this psalm an intense feeling  personal devotion. It expresses an abiding trust and confidence in Yahweh fully dependent on Yahweh’s constant love and protection. Even as it now stands in our English versions, it has been highly valued by countless generations.

Yet there are problems occasioned by a possible confusion in the order of the verses as they now stand. Scholarly examination of the original text suggests that vss. 6-8 should follow vss. 1-2. This transposition creates a typical lament. Distressed by hostile enemies, the devout soul seeks Yahweh’s presence in the sanctuary. There finding the spiritual resources for courage and confidence in Yahweh, the psalmist makes a vow to sing praises to God all his life. Initial despair leads to devotion which enriches faith and ends in praise.

While not included in this reading, vss. 9-11 seem to have little to do with the rest of the psalm and could have been added by another hand. Yet there is some reason to believe that the outburst of vindictiveness expressed in vs. 10 reflects the intensity of the psalmist’s spiritual struggle.

It may be helpful to read a modern paraphrase of the psalm like that by Jim Taylor in his Everyday Psalms. (Wood Lake Books, 1994). Jim entitles his paraphrase with the title “Holy Presence” and a question and answer: “Why do we need downtown churches? Because a few people still come there to seek sanctuary.” He then gives a moving testimony of someone seeking respite from the meaningless scurry of the contemporary rat race. In his Psalms/Now, (Concordia, 1973) Leslie F. Brandt depicts a thirsty child reaching for a drink as a metaphor of this psalmist reaching for and finding God.

1 CORINTHIANS 10:1-13. Paul was probably a much younger contemporary of Jesus, but did not meet him until his unique resurrection appearance to Paul on the Damascus Road. As a well-educated Pharisee of the Hellenistic Diaspora rather than a peasant Galilean, Paul may well have read the Hebrew scriptures in Greek and interpreted them within the context of his own generation and culture. Because Paul died before the destruction of the temple ending the first Jewish Revolt of 66-70 CE, it would be interesting to speculate how Paul might have dealt with that event and the subsequent triumph of the Pharisees in Judaism. We may well have one such reaction by a Christian leader in the unknown author of the Letter to the Hebrews.

One of the characteristics of early Christian preaching and teaching, including that of Paul, was to use OT passages not merely as illustrations, but as the very basis for their instruction in the new faith tradition and the Christian way of life. In this passage Paul drew on the story of the Israelites in the wilderness breaking their covenant with God to challenge the Corinthians to live differently than their morally and spiritually corrupt society. But Paul was both honoring and condemning his ancestral traditions as he wrote to what may have been a predominantly Gentile Christian audience. He also likened the events of the Exodus led by Moses to the Christians’ experience of baptism and the eucharist. In vss. 3-4 he even identified the manna and the rock which Moses struck to obtain water with the spiritual food and drink of the sacraments.

But what was Paul really saying to his Corinthian friends? That receiving the Christian sacraments will not save them as the Exodus and the wilderness experience in themselves did not save the Israelites? The words “a some of them did” sound like a drumbeat through this passage. Because of the Israelites’ idolatry,  he claimed, most of those who fled Egypt died in the wilderness long before the remnant straggled into the Promised Land. Their wandering away from the way mandated by Yahweh, so they met their doom.  Adherence to ritual is no guarantee of being in right relationship with God. Living must correlate with liturgy.

Or was Paul confronting some other issue in Corinth? As a devout and learned Jew, Paul knew full well the traditional link between idolatry and sexual immorality which so frequently enticed his ancestors in the wilderness. Witness the brutal treatment of those who married Moabites and adopted the fertility god Baal of Peor described in Numbers 25:1-9.  Paul sternly warned the Corinthians that their sexual behavior could well have the same result, if for no other reason than that it is a common human failing (vss. 7-8, 11-12). The seaport city of Corinth was notorious for sexual promiscuity and licentious living. The Corinthians had something to learn from the experience of the Israelites.

At the same time, Paul did not leave them without a word of encouragement. The great benefit of the Christian life, he stated in vs. 13, is not that they will be tested by their circumstances, but that God will not let them be tested beyond their strength to endure. Here, as always in Paul’s declaration of the Christian way, the grace of God was operative, not simply human moral effort. One has to wonder if Paul would preach or write in a similar vein to our North American culture.

LUKE 13:1-9. Luke gives us a glimpse of the violent and hostile world in which Jesus lived. Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor who later condemned Jesus to death, had murdered a group of worshipers as they offered their sacrifices for the temple. Strangely, there is no other ancient record of this atrocity. Another group had been killed by a falling tower, part of Jerusalem’s fortifications  near the important water source, the  pool of Siloam and its reservoir. Such tragedies would naturally produce great fear among common people. In the simplistic conventions of the times, these incidents would have been used by religious leaders to warn the general populace that such events resulted from sin on the part of the victims.

Jesus explicitly refuted this simplistic traditional belief. Calamity can happen to anyone, sinner and righteous alike. As Messiah, Jesus used these incidents to call his fellow Jews to repent and believe in him. He foresaw disaster ahead for his people. Their only hope was to accept him for who he was and fulfill their historic mission of making God known to the world. In saying this, he clearly challenged the traditional view that the Jews held of their election as God’s covenant people. All Jews regarded this divine favor with great pride. They looked for a Messiah who would rout their oppressors and establish Israel’s worldly dominance. As the true Messiah come from God, Jesus had a quite different mission.  The parable of the fig tree confronted them with a last chance to recognize him and to respond to God’s mercy, or find that there is a limit to God’s forbearance.

What seems puzzling is why Luke inserted these teachings at this point in his narrative written for a Gentile audience.  There is every likelihood that Luke was reporting an oral tradition of words Jesus’ actually spoke. The parable of the fig tree has the sense of Jesus’ Galilean origins and his preference for rural vignettes like this. Or could Luke be interpreting for his audience 50 years later certain historical events of which they already knew well?

Pilate was recalled from his post in 36 CE after a similarly murderous act against Samaritans.  The fall of Jerusalem to Titus in 70 CE would still have been fresh in everyone’s mind when Luke wrote about 85 CE. As Paul did in his letter to the Corinthians, could Luke have been calling his audience to repentance and pleading with them to change their ways lest a similar fate befall them? To reject Jesus’ way was to put themselves in the same danger as the many victims of Roman oppression so extremely exemplified in the sacking of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple. It was unnecessary for Luke to remind his audience that Jesus himself was a victim of Roman injustice.

In a fascinating little book drawn from a series of BBC radio broadcasts in 1946, historian Herbert Butterfield, of Cambridge University, made a case for his conviction that God allows humanity the freedom to commit enormous sins such as the two world wars and holocausts of the early 20th century. (Christianity and History, 1949.) Yet there is a sense, he claimed,  that these great atrocities are also the very acts by means of which Providence resets the course of history.  One can certainly read the OT stories of the Exodus and the Exile in Babylon in this light. The life, death and resurrection of Jesus can also be accounted for in this manner.

Indeed, it was Butterfield’s faith as a liberal Christian which motivated his study of the modern era as “providential.” From this approach, he drew the conclusion that the purpose of history is, from the personal point of view at least, to engage in doing what is right and good following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ.  He ended his broadcasts with these words:

“The hardest strokes of heaven fall in history upon those who imagine that they can control things in a sovereign manner, as though they were kings of the earth, playing Providence not only for themselves but for the far future …. And it is a defect in such enthusiasts that they seem unwilling to leave everything to Providence, unwilling even to leave the future flexible, as one must do….

“It is agreeable to all the processes of history, therefore, that each of us should rather do the good that is straight under our noses. Those people work most wisely who seek to achieve good in their own small corner of the world and then leave the leaven to leaven the lump, than those who are forever thinking that life is vain unless one can act through the central government, carry legislation, achieve political power and do big things….

“We can do worse than remember a principle which both gives us a firm Rock and leaves us the maximum elasticity for our minds: the principle: Hold to Christ, and for the rest be totally uncommitted.”

Although Butterfield spoke more than 60 years ago, his words still have potent meaning for us. We live in a similarly violent time when our providential God may once again be intervening to reset the course of world history. Is that the meaning we may take from the end of the Cold War, the break up of the USSR, and the present struggles of the world’s wealthiest nations to overcome the current global recession? Does Haiti’s natural disaster resulting from the earthquake on January 12, 2010 give us the opportunity to respond to God and change our ways? Will we heed the warning or ignore it to our sorrow? Is the basic issue of our time not also a matter of how far we may test God’s forbearance?

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
Third Sunday After Epiphany
Third Sunday in Ordinary Time
January 24, 2010

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Twenty Second Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 26 Ordinary 31
November 1, 2009

RUTH 1:1-18. The delightful short story of Ruth has an unusual place in the Old Testament. It is a beautiful folk tale which became a moral tract about welcoming foreigners as one of the people of God and ancestor of Israel’s greatest king. The hidden theology of the story assures us of the working out of God’s purpose in human affairs, desperate as the times may seem.

(Please Note: The Revised Common Lectionary assigns these readings for Proper 26, Ordinary 31, The Twenty Second Sunday After Pentecost. Many congregations will use the readings for All Saints Day, November 1, 2009.)

PSALM 146. This is the first of the final five psalms often referred to as the Hallel Psalms because they all begin with the Hebrew words for “Praise the Lord.” It recites a number of reasons for trust in God.
DEUTERONOMY 6:1-9. (Alternate) This passage states the unequivocal standard of orthodoxy of the Jewish religious tradition as defined in the years after the return from the Babylonian exile. It has remained so for the past two thousand five hundred years. The Shema (vss. 4-5) states in as few words as possible the essence of that faith. It was so for Jesus too and formed the first of his two great commandments.

PSALM 119:1-8. (Alternate) The whole psalm was written in the form of an acrostic, each verse of each section beginning with the same letter of the Hebrew alphabet. In this section, for instance, each verse begins with Aleph, corresponding to our A. The whole psalm is a celebration of the glories of the Law of Moses.

HEBREWS 9:11-14. This brief reading presents another in a long series of arguments for regarding Jesus Christ as the one mediator between humanity and God. It declares the supreme efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross in contrast to the repeated sprinkling of the blood of animal sacrifices on the temple altar customary in the Hebrew tradition.

MARK 12:38-34. Having arrived in Jerusalem, Jesus confronts strong opposition to his teaching. Unlike Luke who added the parable of the Good Samaritan to this incident, Mark merely used it to summarize the whole of the Jewish law in two brief commandments. In one sentence Jesus offered his challenger the key to entering God’s kingdom: to love God and neighbour as oneself. No one has ever devised a better way to live in the real world. As someone had rightly said, it isn’t that we don’t know how, it is rather a matter of doing it faithfully all the time in all our relationships.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.The delightful short story of Ruth has an unusual place in the Old Testament. Several different hypotheses have been proposed as to its origin and purpose, none of them entirely satisfactory. It may have been a simple folk tale from a specific community frequently repeated by a professional storyteller. It may have had such a humble beginning, but was intentionally rewritten at the royal court to emphasizes its royal significance. Its origin may have been during the 5th or 4th centuries BCE to offset the dissolution of mixed marriages mandated by the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Or it may have been a tract designed to promote the Moabite ancestry of David.

RUTH 1:1-18.

Whatever its original purpose, it is almost unique in the whole of the Old Testament as a complete narrative, paralleled only by the Joseph narratives in Genesis 37-50 and perhaps The Book of Jonah. It also shares with the latter a sense of universalism reminiscent of the late prophetic period most fully evident in Isaiah 40-66.

The hidden theology of the story assures us of the working out of God’s redemptive purpose in human affairs, desperate as the times may seem. Yet providence is not without human intervention in the person of Naomi who directs most of the action in keeping with the traditional custom of levirate marriage. This custom required the closest male relative to provide support for widows in his extended family, usually through marrying the widow himself (Deut. 25:5-10). Ruth’s sexual assertiveness may or may not have been common in Israel, but even that aspect of the story asserts the intent of the story to point to the very human ways of furthering the divine purpose (3:7-13).

Another, more obvious theme of the story is the preference of genuine human kindness over conventional duty. This finds expression through Naomi’s careful scheme for Ruth to marry Boaz and his acceptance of it despite the difficulties he faced in not being her closest kin.

That the story was carefully composed or revised as a literary document can be seen in the poesy of the responses of Ruth (1:16-17) and Naomi (1:20-21) to specific situations. In the first instance, Ruth rejects Naomi’s urging that she return to her people and her gods with her sister-in-law, Orpah. While it cannot be scanned in the traditional Hebrew form, it does feature the parallelism of ideas typical of Hebrew poetry and quite evident in the English versions. These words are often quoted as the supreme example of human devotion. It has been used occasionally in marriage ceremonies, but if spoken only by the bride the words express both sentimentality and sexist attitudes no longer acceptable in contemporary Christian liturgy.

Another hidden theological facet of the story can be recognized in the transition from traditional henotheism in vs. 15 where god, land and people are inseparable, to the monotheism of vs. 16. In the Hebrew text, Ruth does not used the word for God (el or elohim as would be expected of foreigners, but Yahweh. In so doing the author indicates that this foreigner worships the one true God.

While commonly placed between Judges and Samuel in the Christian canon, the book has a place of special liturgical significance in the Hebrew canon. It is first among five small festival scrolls immediately after Proverbs. Ruth is read in its entirety at Pentecost (Shavu’ot or Feast of Weeks) marking the time of the barley harvest (Ruth 1:22), Ruth’s acceptance of Judaism (1:16), the tradition of David’s birth and death at this time, and Israel’s acceptance of the Torah at Sinai seven weeks after the Passover and Exodus. The others include in this collection of megillot are, in canonical order, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations and Esther. Like Ruth, each is read at a particular festival in the liturgical calendar of Judaism.

PSALM 146. This is the first of the final five psalms often referred to as the Hallel Psalms because they all begin with the Hebrew words for “Praise the Lord” (Hallelujah). While the other four Hallels were clearly composed as congregational psalms, this one has a more personal sense of devotion. It contrasts the different capabilities of Yahweh and humans to provide help in desperate circumstances. As such, it appears as a reaction of the religiously oriented to an increasingly secular attitude to life. Thus, in a modern context, it has considerable relevance.

The psalmist recites a number of reasons for trust in Yahweh. Unlike political leaders who die and disappear, Yahweh is eternal (vss. 3-4). As creator of all that is, Yahweh provides justice for the poor and oppressed (vss. 5-7). Yahweh frees the prisoners, gives the blind their sight, lifts up the fallen, loves the righteous, watches over strangers and supports widows and orphans (vss. 8-9). All these divine initiatives represent Yahweh’s eternal and universal sovereignty (vs. 10).

The Greek OT (LXX) ascribed this psalm to Haggai and Zechariah, two minor prophets who lived in the late 6th century BCE. Proposals for a much later date has greater internal force because of the number of Aramaic words, its debt to other psalms known to be late, and the influence of the didactic style of the wisdom school. Furthermore, it is not God’s majesty or interventions in history, but a sense of social justice similar to that of the great prophets which moves the poet to praise Yahweh. This motif found expression in relatively few psalms, (e.g. Pss. 10, 15, 24, 37, 94, 103).

DEUTERONOMY 6:1-9. (Alternate) This passage states the unequivocal standard of orthodoxy of the Jewish religious tradition as defined in the years after the return from the Babylonian exile. It has remained so for the past two thousand five hundred years. The Shema (vss. 4-5) states in as few words as possible the essence of that tradition. It was so for Jesus too and formed the first of his two great commandments.

Nowhere in the OT does the rhetoric of the Deuteronomists reach greater ethical heights. The purpose of the passage is to set before Israel in the post-exilic period exactly what Yahweh requires of them. Could this have been in deliberate contrast to Micah 6:6-8? Scholars have pointed out that the word English translators consistently define as “commandment” (not plural as per the KJV) actually means “charge.” The purpose for this charge follows immediately (vs. 2-3): to possess the promised land; for every succeeding generation to fear the Lord; to have a long life; to increase the Israelite population.

It would appear that this charge reflects the post-exilic period (late 6th century BCE) as much as, if not more than, the time of the Exodus and invasion of Canaan (12th century BCE). The purely Israelite ethnic population had been depleted by the exile and by intermarriage with the other tribes who had replaced the exiles. The destruction of the temple in 586 BCE had drastically reduced the religious purity of the people who had barely become accustomed to centralizing process of Josiah’s reformation (circa 621 BCE). With the temple priesthood in exile and the Temple in Jerusalem in ruins, the rural sanctuaries of Bethel, Shechem, Anathoth, etc., which had been centres of popular tribal traditions, may well have become centres of folk religion again. In the more rigid ritualism of the post-exilic period, it was more important to purify these trends so that the people of Israel truly believed in and worshiped the one true God in the national sanctuary in Jerusalem.

PSALM 119:1-8. (Alternate) The whole psalm was written in the form of an acrostic, each verse of each section beginning with the same letter of the Hebrew alphabet. In this section, for instance, each verse begins with Aleph, corresponding to our A. As a whole psalm, the psalm celebrates the glories of the Law as given to Moses.

The acrostic system of poetic composition had a double purpose: educational and magical. Behind this form lay the belief in the magical power of letters and numbers. To the illiterate, written language gave the literate person a significant power advantage, as is still evident in the many treaties imposed upon indigenous people in North America and elsewhere during the days of early settlement by Europeans.

Several psalms and other Hebrew scriptures adopted the form as a means to aid memory in recitation and to fully express the central idea of the poem. (Pss. 9-10; 25; 34; 37; 111; 112; 145. See also Prov. 31:10-31; Lamentations 1-4.) One might also add a liturgical purpose to this highly structured poetic form. The supreme example is unquestionably Psalm 119 where each of the 176 verses of the 22 sections or strophes all address or refer to God. The effect is that of a litany, as in the instance of Ps. 119, in praise of the law.

In vss. 1-8, each begins with the letter Aleph. Also noteworthy are the several synonyms for the law: testimonies (vs. 2); ways (vs. 3); precepts (vs. 4); statutes (vs. 5) commandments (vs. 6); word (vs. 8). These are repeated again and again throughout the whole psalm. Nowhere is there any reference to the temple, its liturgies or other Jewish ritual. The author thought only of the law as the truth from God and his rule of life and ground for hope.

HEBREWS 9:11-14. This brief reading presents another in a long series of arguments for regarding Jesus Christ as the one mediator between humanity and God. It declares the supreme efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross in contrast to the repeated sprinkling of the blood of animal sacrifices on the temple altar customary in the Hebrew tradition.

From the internal evidence of this letter, some scholars have concluded that the audience for this whole argument were Jewish Christians who may have been in danger of reverting to Judaism from their recently acquired Christian faith. Others have proposed that these new Christians were not necessarily Jews, but were also in danger of falling away from their earlier confession under the threat of persecution. The historical-critical data suggests that while no one key to its interpretation has been found, the background of the document may have been some form of Hellenistic religious speculation.

Brevard Childs describes it as “a word of encouragement” based on 13:22. (The New Testament as Canon, Fortress Press, 1984, 404) On the other hand, for Childs, the reception of the document by the Christian community was the chief factor in its inclusion the canon. According to Childs, the letter presents a “programmatic statement of the theological relation of the two covenants which receives its content from scripture and not from its historical setting.”

In an excellent commentary by Frances Taylor Gench expresses the view that the recipients of the letter were Christians of the Jewish Diaspora familiar with the scripture and traditions of Hellenistic Judaism in urban centres of the Greek-speaking world. The only clue to the whereabouts of the unknown author is in 13:24 “Those from Italy send you greetings.” (Hebrews and James. Westminster Bible Companion, Westminster JohnKnox Press, 1996) Gench follows William Johnson in describing the book as a series of sermons that alternate between exhortations and applications designed to apply theological insights to practical pastoral situations.

This lectionary reading gives ample support to this conclusion. In these few verses, the author is saying that atonement for sin, the abolishing of guilt, reconciliation with God and sanctification for a new and holy life came through the sacrifice of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer. This is a standard approach to exhortation found in many of the Pauline letters, notably Corinthians and Galatians. We may never be able to penetrate behind this rhetorical situation to determine the historical situation out of which the letter arose.

The author had an intimate knowledge of the Hebrew scriptures and of the continuity of the Christian faith with those scriptures. He or she was particularly responsive to the prophetic element in the OT which emphasized the spiritual reality that the living God speaks both judgment and mercy to people with whom God had made an eternal covenant. God’s purpose was to create a faithful people within a renewed creation. This God had accomplished through Jesus Christ, God’s Son, who offered himself as the all-sufficient sacrifice on the cross instead of the repeated sacrifices of the old covenantal system. The task of the Christian believer in this new covenant, therefore, was to accept in faith this new relationship with the living God and to live out this relationship with purified conscience and grateful worship and service in the ordinary round of daily life.

MARK 12:28-34. His traveling days done, Jesus has arrived in Jerusalem and confronts strong opposition to his teaching. Unlike Luke who added the parable of the Good Samaritan to this incident, Mark merely used it to summarize the whole of the Jewish law in two brief commandments. The first commandment is the traditional Shema from Deuteronomy 6:4. This has been described as “the central confession and self-definition of Israelite belief.” (The Complete Gospels, Robert J. Miller, ed., 43n) The scribe’s response shows how much this expert in the Jewish Law felt at ease with Jesus’ teaching at this point.

The second commandment is from a more obscure passage in Leviticus 19:18. There it appears at the end of a long sequence of ritual and moral dictates of the Holiness Code coupled with the prophetic refrain given as its divine warrant, “I am the Lord.” In its Levitical context the commandment has the effect of countering vengeance within one’s own extended family or tribe. It is probable that this did not extend to those of another tribe, as many of the OT narratives show. Was that how Jesus understood it too? Or Mark? Or Paul (cf. Gal. 5:14? Or James (cf. Jas. 2:8)? If Mark, Paul and James are representatives of the earliest apostolic tradition as they had received and created it from remembered sayings of Jesus himself, it is obvious that they recognized a much wider scope for this commandment that did the framers of the Holiness Code of Leviticus. With these commandments, Jesus offered this expert in casuistry so common in the interpretation of the Law the key to entering God’s kingdom he had come to establish.

One might well ask what “Lordship” and “kingdom” meant to Jesus as he approached the cross. We can only speculate on such topics because we read his sayings through the prism of the early Christian community as they sought to clarify the continuity and discontinuity of the Old and New Covenants. We can believe, however, that if he was fully human he made no claims for himself as Lord and perhaps did not fully realize until Gethsemane that the sovereignty of God in his and all human life would involve his own death at the hands of his enemies.

Many scholars do not believe that Jesus was omniscient and could predict the future course of events. He did, however, have great moral perception into the events of his time were trending. His perception of his own mandate may not have extended beyond that ascribed to him by the scribe in this instance, “Teacher.” Possibly this went no further than the traditional wisdom teacher of the previous few centuries. Is there some inkling of that in the way Mark tells how Jesus reacted (vs. 34) to the scribe’s approbation and praise in vss. 32-33? Does this come to the fore in the fact that whereas Mark had several times previously quoted Jesus teaching about his death, he made no mention whatsoever about the cross at this place in his narrative?

So clear and memorable in their brevity, no one has ever devised a better way to live in the real world than by following these two commandments. As someone had rightly said, it isn’t that we don’t know how, it is rather a matter of doing what we do know faithfully all the time in all our relationships. Without entering into Christological debate so divisive within our own tradition, we can speak of these commandments in terms similar to the late Wilfrid Cantwell Smith, renowned Canadian scholar of world religions. When these commandments are faithfully implemented in human affairs, and especially between the members of different religious traditions, the love of God revealed in Jesus would also be disclosed in the historical traditions of others.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
All Saints Day
November 1, 2009


WISDOM OF SOLOMON 3:1-9. Many congregations will find this passage from the Apocryphal Book of Wisdom as a canticle in their hymn books. It is often read at memorial services because of the comforting message it conveys. In some respects it speculates about trials after death, but also presents a view of the righteous ultimately being found worthy to be in God’s eternal presence.

(Please Note: The Revised Common LectiOnary assigns these reading for All Saints Day which falls this year on the Twenty Second Sunday after Pentecost. Some congregations may wish to use those posted separately for this Sunday.)

ISAIAH 25:6-9. (Alternate) The banquet theme described here has antecedents in the literature of several other religious traditions and echoes through several New Testament passages. The uniqueness of this poetic excerpt from Hebrew prophecy rests in its expectation that all peoples will be included at the Lord’s table and all suffering will cease. Jesus practiced eating with outsiders as a symbol of the way things will be in God’s realm.

PSALM 24. This psalm celebrates two crucial elements of Israel’s religious tradition: the whole creation as the possession of God alone and the temple as the visible symbol of God’s presence within creation.

REVELATION 21:1-6. John has a vision of the whole of creation redeemed and renewed. This is what awaits the faithful and thus makes those bitter experiences of persecution endurable.

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

JOHN 11:32-44. The passage contains the heart of the story of the raising of Lazarus. It is the sixth of seven signs John gives to prove that Jesus is the Messiah/Christ, Son of God, and that through faith in him believers receive eternal life. Even as the event reveals Jesus’ divine power over death itself, it also shows him as a wonderfully sensitive human being.
The story, which may be a midrash or interpretative story, is also John’s reflection on the significance of the resurrection. Because in John’s view Jesus is fully human and fully divine, life and death are his gifts to give.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS. Written in Greek about 100 BCE, The Wisdom of Solomon (or simply, The Book of Wisdom) was not included in the Bibles commonly used by the Protestant Bibles because it was not included in the Jewish canon. On the other hand, in making up the canon for his Latin Vulgate translation, Jerome did include it after the Song of Songs. Hence it came into use in both the Roman Catholic and most Orthodox Churches. Its content has more affinity with Greek philosophy, literature and science of its time than the Hebrew scriptures. There are no quotations from it in the New Testament, although it does allude to the Hebrew scriptures, especially the Psalms and Isaiah, but in their Greek text from the Septuagint.

WISDOM OF SOLOMON 3:1-9.

Many congregations will find this passage from the Apocryphal Book of Wisdom as a canticle in their hymn books. For example, Voices United, published by The United Church of Canada, has it as #890. This passage is often read in memorial services because of the comforting message it conveys. In some respects, it speculates about trials after death, but presents a view of the righteous ultimately being found worthy to be in God’s eternal presence.

Contrary to Christian faith and modern science, the first few sentences seem to deny the reality of death for the souls of righteous humans. This is closer to the Greek concept of the immortality of the soul, an entity distinct from the human body, which found religious expression the Gnostic heresies of 2nd and 3rd centuries CE. Christian faith in life beyond death is rooted in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, not immortality. No one has yet clarified how that element of our human nature we know as spiritual consciousness experiences resurrection. Some progressive research in the field of psycho-neurology is beginning to throw some light on the experience.

The second set of sentences in this canticle presents an element not recognized by Protestant traditions. In Roman Catholic teaching, Purgatory is “a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God’s grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions.” (Catholic Encyclopedia) This doctrine appears to be very similar to the text from Wisdom. However, the text does leave the final outcome to God as to who shall be ultimately redeemed.

There are several images drawn from the liturgies of the temple. Souls are tested in a golden crucible. The element of sacrifice finds expression in the text as well, likening the souls of the righteous to a burnt offering on the altar which will burst into flame again in God’s presence. Prophetic images of judgment and ruling over the nations also enlighten the text. But the basic religious emphasis is on trust that in God’s grace and mercy the faithful are the chosen ones, or in popular parlance, “the saints.” This is not the NT view. The saints are all God’s people who remain faithful throughout the most difficult times, even persecution and undeserved death.

ISAIAH 25:6-9. Those who do not wish to wrestle with the alternative views of the canticle from Wisdom, have this passage from a special section of Isaiah as the Old Testament reading. Isaiah 24-27 is generally regarded as an eschatalogical collection of prophecy, psalms and prayers dating from the post-exilic period. Similar eschatsalogical appendices were added to the prophecies of Amos, Micah, Zephaniah, Zechariah, Joel and Obadiah.

The banquet theme of this passage has both antecedents in the literature of other religious traditions and echoes in several New Testament passages. The uniqueness of this poetic excerpt from Hebrew prophecy rests in its expectation that all peoples will be included at the Lord’s banquet table and all suffering will cease. Jesus practiced eating with outsiders as a symbol of the way things will be in God’s realm.

The idea that Yahweh will triumph over his enemies is a common OT theme, but the victory over death and pain does take on a deeper meaning. When the passage in again quoted in Revelation 21:4, it was in the light of a new certainty of faith in the resurrection of Christ. The same passage is also referenced in Paul triumphant shout, “O death where is thy sting; O grave where in thy victory.” (1 Cor. 15:54).

PSALM 24. This psalm celebrates two crucial elements of Israel’s religious tradition: the whole creation as the possession of Yahweh alone and the temple as the visible symbol of God’s presence within creation. Although attributed to David in the superscription, it comes from a much later date as evidenced by the references to the temple (vs. 3). Similarly the cosmology of creation is typical of the ancient world-view which saw our plant Earth set in a three tiered universe with heaven above, the place of the dead (Sheol or Hell) below. Modern science following the discoveries of Copernicus, Galileo and Newton have shown that this is not the universe as we know it today.

It would appear that the psalm had liturgical origin and was sung in a procession on some festival occasion. Late Jewish sources regard it as a hymn for the New Year festival when Yahweh’s work of creation was commemorated and the sovereignty of Yahweh over all creation celebrated. There is also a strong element of holiness in vss. 3-6. Ritual purity had special meaning for entrance into the temple because the sacred precincts were regarded as the place where Yahweh dwelt.

The antiphonal song of vss. 7-9 again emphasizes the entrance of Yahweh into the holy place. The gates of the temple are personified and responsive to the approaching worshipers represented by the holy people of Yahweh. Yet the identification of Yahweh and the people of Israel is not altogether complete. Hence the question, “Who is the King of glory?” The poetic image used in answering this question (vs. 8) is that of a victorious monarch leading his triumphant army home. One commentator has suggested that this may have been the point in the procession where the ark or some other symbol of divine presence moved into the temple.

In Jewish history, the temple was the last stronghold to fall to an invading enemy. Its few remaining stones in the Western Wall still form the centre of Jewish religious devotion. In the Scottish Protestant tradition, the antiphonal verses were sung to the tune of St. George’s, Edinburgh, at the evening service in many churches on Communion Sunday.

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

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

The late Principal George B. Caird, of Mansfield College, Oxford, wrote in his magisterial commentary on this passage, “In some ways this is the most important part of the book, as it is certainly the most familiar and beloved.” It is the promised answer to the plea of every martyr, “If only we knew where it is all going to end! Much of John’s vision, and much of the human history it depicts and interprets, becomes intelligible, credible, tolerable, when we know the answer. Here is the real source of John’s prophetic certainty.” (The Revelation of St. John the Divine. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1966.)

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

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

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

JOHN 11:1-45. The story of the raising of Lazarus is the sixth of seven signs John gives to prove that Jesus is the Messiah Christ, Son of God, and that through faith in him believers receive eternal life. Hence, the telling of this miracle leads directly to the climax of the gospel story and the greatest sign of all – the resurrection. Throughout the gospel, John’s purpose had been to show that in all that Jesus of Nazareth said and did God was fully present, actively revealing and “glorifying” the redemptive power of God’s love. Of this not even Jesus’ closest friends were fully aware until after the resurrection.

As this story proceeds, Martha gradually becomes aware and believes. That is the significance of the interchange between Martha and Jesus resulting in another of the characteristic “I am …” proclamations found only in John’s Gospel (vs. 25), and Martha’s confession of faith (vs. 27). Yet even she, like countless others since, experiences a moment of real doubt when Jesus orders the tomb to be opened (vss. 39-40).

While the miracle of raising Lazarus from the grave shows Jesus’ divine power over death itself, it also shows him as a wonderfully sensitive human being. His love for Lazarus and his sisters is palpable. Martha’s and Mary’s accusation that Jesus’ presence would have averted Lazarus’ death tells how real their friendship was. So also did Jesus’ tears. All cultural aspects of ostentatious grief aside, the story represents the best of that special human quality of openly expressing their real feelings. This same quality also comes through in Martha’s revulsion at the stench of her brother’s decaying corpse.

Not to be overlooked, however, is the dramatic intensity building throughout John’s narrative. Martha’ s accusation (vss. 21) sets the stage for Jesus to declare, “I am the resurrection and the life,” and for Martha to confess her faith in him. When Mary repeats the accusation, Jesus uses it to reveal his very human feelings (vss. 33-38) and then perform the miracle.

By means of this miracle story, John is telling his own 1st century community and us that because Jesus is fully human and fully divine, life and death are his gifts to give. This too is the meaning of his resurrection and the basis of hope for ours. Yet nowhere in this passage is any attempt made to define what the resurrection life will be like.

-30-

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

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

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

JOB 42:1-6, 10-17.

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

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

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

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

JOB 42:1-6, 10-17.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-30-