John Shearman's Lectionary

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

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

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

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

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

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

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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
NINTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST
PROPER 13 ORDINARY 18
AUGUST 2, 2009.

2 SAMUEL 11:26-12:13a. The confrontation between David and Nathan, the prophet, brings to the fore the magnitude of David’s adultery with Bathsheba, another man’s wife. The story is one of the most powerful in the whole sequence of hero-legends about Israel’s greatest king. The story makes the point, however, that even the greatest cannot misuse God-given authority and power for selfish ends.

PSALM 51:1-12. Because of the superscription many assume that this psalm refers directly to David’s sin, but that is highly unlikely. Psalm titles were added much later by scribes seeking to relate as many of them to David’s life on the mistaken assumption that he was author of the psalms. Nonetheless this one is a very beautiful prayer of repentance.

EXODUS 16:2-4, 9-15. (Alternate) After their miraculous deliverance from slavery in Egypt by crossing of the Red Sea, the Israelites pressed on into the wilderness. When they complained to Moses that they would starve, further evidence of God’s guidance and providence was given in flocks of quails and a flaky substance they called manna (Hebrew for “what is it?”) in plentiful supply for their daily needs.

PSALM 78:23-29. (Alternate) The whole psalm celebrates God’s mighty acts on behalf of the Israelites during their migration toward the promised land. In this segment the psalmist recalls the instance of them being fed with manna and quail at a time of threatened famine.

EPHESIANS 4:1-16. This exhortation to live the Christian life in all its fullness emphasizes the gift of the Spirit to bring unity to the church and the power to equip all members for their common ministry. It presents a clear mandate for the mission of every congregation.

JOHN 6:24-35. This reading shows a special way in which John handled the miracle of feeding of the five thousand. For John, miracles had much more to them than seeing them happen and benefitting from them. This one led to a discourse by Jesus about being the bread of life. Many scholars believe that John used this discourse in place of the narrative of the Last Supper in the other three Gospels. The story also recalls the feeding of the Israelites during their wandering in the wilderness.

The passage makes three significant points: The miracle was another of the signs identifying Jesus as the Messiah/Christ, the Son of God. Somewhat ambiguously, however, it pointed beyond Jesus to God who is the source of all life. Finally, by placing particular emphasis on his statement, “I am the bread of life,” it identifies Jesus completely with God. This is a more spiritual and theological reflection than one finds in the other Gospels.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

2 SAMUEL 11:26-12:13a. The confrontation between David and Nathan, the prophet, brings to the fore the magnitude of David’s sin with Bathsheba, then arranging for her husband’s death in battle to cover up what he had done. The story is one of the most powerful in the whole sequence of hero-legends about Israel’s greatest king. On the surface it makes the point, however, that even the greatest cannot misuse God-given authority and power for selfish ends.

There is some artificiality about the story, however, probably for dramatic effect. David should have seen through Nathan’s device without difficulty. As king he was also the chief judge of the nations, so the incident that Nathan related was a case that might have come before him. Whether it actually happened in David’s reign (circa 1000 BCE) or is a parable with a deeper purpose is moot. The situation was not uncommon when viewed in light of the social justice messages of Amos and Isaiah in the 8th century BCE . As a parable, it ranks with those of Jesus in the NT gospels for its power “to disturb the conscience and produce repentance.” (The Interpreter’s Bible, 2, 1102). That is its primary purpose in the David cycle as redacted by the Deuteronomists of the late 7th century BCE.

The intent of the redactor was not to denigrate or diminish David in the eyes of a later generation. Rather he intended it to show how David’s transgression fitted the overall tendency of Israel to depart from the covenant of Yahweh in much the same way as had Saul and all succeeding monarchs from the founding of the institution to its end in the Babylonian exile (596 BCE). In every instance, as in this case, a continuing moral and spiritual crisis beset the nation and led to its ultimate destruction. Although this is a serious crisis for David and the beginning of his decline, he is to be seen not so much as an individual, but as the representative of the nation. Thus the story has to be read from the perspective of the prophetic mandate to call Israel to repentance so that it may survive the crisis into which the sins of its whole populace were leading, as had the sins of their greatest king.

PSALM 51:1-12. Because of the superscription many assume that this psalm refers directly to David’s sin, but that is highly unlikely. Psalm titles were added much later by scribes seeking to relate as many of them to David’s life on the mistaken assumption that he was author of the psalms. Seventy-three psalms bear titles referring David in one way or another. Some of them related top specific incidents in his life, as does this one. The existence of these titles in the Greek version indicate that they date from pre-Christian times as Jewish traditions derived from the late compilation of the Psalter.

Nonetheless this one is a very beautiful prayer of repentance by an individual who is both deathly ill and very conscious of his personal transgressions. More significant, perhaps, is the fact that there are no attempts to blame anyone but himself for the fate that has befallen him. The whole psalm presents a personal confession as poignant as any in all of scripture.

The psalm begins with a plea for mercy and an expression of faith in Yahweh’s forgiveness. The double parallel of vs.1 emphasizes the way in which the psalmist has cast himself wholly on divine mercy. The phrase “blot out my transgressions” conveys an image of a record from which the sin be completely obliterated. The image of washing in vs. 2 recalls the liturgical ablutions of Leviticus 14:11-20 as an act of atonement. The Seer of Revelation (7:14) adapted the image to refer to the baptismal garments of lst century Christians. Similarly evangelical Christians envisage being “washed in the blood of the Lamb” as a metaphor of their salvation and atonement through the death of Jesus Christ.

The confessor makes no effort to conceal his sin and deny his guilt. Vs. 4 readily acknowledges the justice of whatever penalty is laid to his charge. Various translations of vs. 5, however, have led many to assume that this is a statement of original sin. Rather than placing blame on his parents, it affirms of what Ecclesiasticus 15:11-15 described as an evil inclination resulting from the freedom of our human wills. We are not born sinful, but do sin because of self-motivated willfulness resulting in sinful choices. (Ecclesiasticus is also known as the apocryophal book of Sirach and dates from the 2nd century BCE.)

Vs. 6 posits Yahweh’s choice for humanity: freedom from sin expressed as “truth in the inward being.” (NSRV) The Hebrew text is difficult to translate. The New English Bible has a better translation: “Though thou hast hidden the truth in darkness, through this mystery thou dost teach me wisdom.” This brings forth a further petition for cleansing and a desire to rejoice in the resulting freedom of spirit (vss.7-9).

The final verses of this reading have a depth of spirituality and moral responsibility reminiscent of the great prophets of the exilic period, Jeremiah (31:33-34) and Ezekiel (37:26-27). It is not improbable that the psalmist either knew these scriptures or belonged to the same prophetic company from which those texts came. The psalmist draws upon a concept of spiritual regeneration through the activity of the Spirit close to that expressed by Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:16-21 and Romans 8.

EXODUS 16:2-15. (Alternate) After their miraculous deliverance from slavery in Egypt by crossing of the Red Sea, the Israelites pressed on into the wilderness. When they complained to Moses that they would starve, further evidence of God’s guidance and providence was given in flocks of quails and a flaky substance they called manna (Hebrew for “what is it?”) in plentiful supply for their daily needs.

In this ancient story we have an important part of the Passover and Exodus saga told from the point of view of the highly developed faith of later generations. Modern scholars know, as the priests or scribes who committed this story to writing may also have known, that the manna and quails on which the Israelites fed were natural phenomena to be found in the wilderness of Sinai. Recent investigations suggest that manna is produced not by secretion of sap from the tamarisk bush as previously thought, but by insects which ingest the sap and excrete a honeydew rich in sugars and pectin thus creating a scale on the branches of the shrub. Quail are still found migrating along their natural flight path through the Sinai wilderness to and from their nesting grounds in Europe and wintering grounds in Africa.

Natural explanations do not deny what the Israelites saw as miraculous. Not what fed them, but that they were fed by the providence of Yahweh remained the great blessing which generations praised as in the following psalm.

This faith remained strong even in Jesus’ time, as it still may be for our time. Jesus identified himself as “the true bread from heaven” come down to give life to the world. (John 6:30-35) So also now, faith in Jesus means faith in the providence of God, a tradition as old as Abraham and Moses. (Cf. Genesis 22:8) If Israel’s faith extended nearly two millennia into the past through an oral tradition recounting the saga of their ancestors trek though the wilderness, does it not also extend two millennia forward to our time and a place in history when the global economy is suffering such vast imbalances of riches and poverty? It has been estimated that there are at least one billion poverty-stricken people living in urban slums around the world. Each year their number is swelling by many millions more.

But what does that faith mean in an age when the technologically developed nations have the means of producing far more food than needed but have problems marketing their surplus at prices which pay the producers a fair return for the costs of production? What does it mean for the current controversies about government subsidies to agriculture, transportation and genetically altered foods? How do issues such as the migration of unemployed refugees from Asia, Africa, South and Central America fit into this paradigm of divine providence for the needs of God’s people? Are these not the struggles of our generation which must we must think through and share openly with the politically powerful who have responsibility for making decisions that will determine the fate of millions?

PSALM 78:23-29. (Alternate) This whole psalm celebrates God’s mighty acts on behalf of the Israelites despite their obstinate disbelief during their migration toward the Promised Land. In this segment the psalmist recalls the instance of them being fed with manna and quail at a time of threatened famine.

The recitation of such mighty acts as this psalm celebrates always described Yahweh’s goodness and loving kindness toward Israel. Throughout the psalmist defines a stark contrast in the Deuteronomic mould between Yahweh’s faithfulness and Israel’s unfaithfulness. In all likelihood this psalm had a significant place in the liturgy of the Second Temple after the return from the Babylonian exile. The celebration of Passover would have been a suitable festival for this liturgical recitation of the nation’s religious history. However, due to several references to the Davidic dynasty still reigning, it may well date from before the exile when the tradition of the Exodus was taking shape.

This passage omits the concluding two verses (vss. 30-31) which state the basic issue repeated throughout the psalm: Yahweh’s anger at their unfaithfulness.

As noted above the phenomenon interpreted as an act of Yahweh had a very natural origin. Manna is the digestive by-product of an insect which appears as a whitish scale on the branches of the tamarisk tree. Quail still migrate through the Egyptian and Jordanian wilderness from their nesting grounds in Europe to their winter feeding grounds in Africa. But who does not interpret the most ordinary things around us, even a brilliant sunrise or sunset, as gifts of God’s infinite grace?

EPHESIANS 4:1-16. At this point in the letter, the mood changes from one of exultation in the blessings of salvation to exhortation about living the Christian life in all its fullness. The author places emphasis on the gift of the Spirit to bring unity to the church and the power to equip all members for their common ministry.

Memories of Paul’s troubles in Ephesus and in Corinth may well lie behind this passage. The early church did not have an easy transition from being a Jewish sectarian movement to a Gentile community of faith distinct from and yet continuous with its predecessor. Factionalism was its greatest problem. Dependence on the Spirit with the particular gifts of humility, patience and love had to be its primary resource for creating a sense of unity and motivating its evangelical mission. The symbol of this spiritual competence which all could share came from their common baptism, “the outward sign of inward, spiritual grace.”

Particular functions, divisions of labour and specific responsibilities in the evangelical mission may have been under development but had not yet become fixed when this letter was composed. Apostles and prophets are named together with evangelists, pastors and teachers without any recognizable difference in their functions within the community. The offices identified in vs. 11 cannot be regarded as literally applicable to any later period. Rather these are functions of service common to all members of the community. Every member had a responsibility “for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.” However, this should still be interpreted as a clear mandate for the mission of every member in every congregation today.

In his Church Order in the New Testament (SCM Press, 1961) Eduard Schweizer makes a strong point that in the Pauline epistles, notably Colossians and Ephesians, the church has the attributes of the kingdom of God. The image of the body serves to describe “not so much the Church’s state as its growth; this is true both for 4:12-16, where the head is both the source and the object of growth, and also for the image of the temple or God’s dwelling, where everything grows from Christ the cornerstone, and from the foundation laid by the apostles and prophets (2:20-22).”

Schweizer also notes that in ancient times, buildings such as temples were regarded as living organisms much like a living body in contrast to our modern view of buildings as manufactured infrastructure. This view finds expression clearly in the metaphor of maturity measured by the “full stature of Christ” (vs. 13) contrasted with the vacillations of immaturity (vs. 14) and the emphasis on love as the crucial element of nurture which “promotes the body’s growth” (vs. 16).

In Schweizer’s analysis, under the influence of the Spirit the church has become both a world wide unity and a cosmic reality. “Its mission is indeed of cosmic range.” As a result, the members of the church as well as the apostle function in a common ministry on a global and even cosmic scale, not merely as part of a particular local congregation. This passage thus forms the scriptural basis for the outreach ministry of every local congregation where, as individual members and as a gathered community, we must think globally and act locally.

JOHN 6:24-35. This reading shows a special way in which John handled the miracle of feeding of the five thousand. For John, miracles had much more to them than seeing unnatural events occur and benefiting personally from them. This one led to a discourse by Jesus about being the bread of life. Many scholars believe that John used this discourse in place of the narrative of the Last Supper in the other three Gospels. John completely omitted that pericope from his version of the Passion. This discourse is a homily on the meaning of the sacrament.

The passage makes three significant points: The miracle was another of the signs identifying Jesus as the Messiah/Christ, the Son of God. In vs. 27, Jesus claims to be the Son of Man, which by this time had acquired a christological connotation which it did not have in the Hebrew scriptures of Ezekiel and Daniel. He also bears the “seal” which the Father has set on him. The Greek verb spragizein used in this instance occurs also in 3:33. In both cases the verb refers to the well-known custom of stamping one’s personal signet on wax sealing a document, product or vessel to validate its ownership and authenticity in much the same way that modern silver is hallmarked. Ephesus, a noted commercial centre and the probable place from which the Fourth Gospel came, the custom would have been well known. Here it symbolized trustworthiness, i.e. Jesus is the one person who can give eternal, spiritual life because God has set his seal upon him.

Somewhat ambiguously, however, the passage points beyond Jesus to God who is the source of all life. The miracles Jesus performs are “the works of God” recalling the “mighty acts” of the Old Testament. Believing in Jesus, the Christ, is the only essential divine work because God alone is the source of all life and power including Jesus’ power to perform the miracle of feeding the multitude. The manna the Israelites ate in the desert came not from Moses but from God. Then John has Jesus’ interlocutors ask reverently for this “bread from heaven” which opens the way for Jesus to launch into his discourse, “I am the bread of life.”

Finally, by placing particular emphasis on this statement, John identifies Jesus completely with God. This is a more spiritual and theological reflection on the both the miracle and the person of Christ than one finds in the other Gospels. It comes close to defining the Trinitarian view of the person and work Christ. Writing from the viewpoint of a Jew in a thoroughly Hellenistic cultural milieu, John had not yet gone as far as his successors the Greek Fathers would go in defining the abstract Trinitarian hypostasis of Christ. He still maintains the Hebrew sense of spiritual life in the context of daily existence in the world where bread is eaten for physical sustenance.

Yet, it also looks beyond the materialistic element of a few loaves and fish to the divine, spiritual source of life itself. The purpose of eating the bread of life (i.e. believing in Jesus Christ) is to live spiritually in the world here and now while waiting for the eschaton yet to come. But that carries us beyond the immediate passage to the remainder of the discourse (vss.35-58).
-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Fifth Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 9 Ordinary 14
July 5, 2009

2 SAMUEL 5:1-5, 9-10. The first part of this passage is one version of the tradition of how David became king of Israel. As a successful military leader, he was the people’s choice as well the as divinely anointed sovereign. He first established Hebron as his capital; then he captured the fortress of Jerusalem and made it his capital city. The intervening verses between the two segments of the passage are confusing due to a corrupt Hebrew text.

EZEKIEL 2:1-5. (Alternate) The call of Ezekiel to be prophet among the exiles in Babylon included a strong warning that he would encounter much resistance. In spite of their rebellion against God and their impudent and stubborn nature, he was to deliver an outspoken message directly from God, “Thus says the Lord God.”

PSALM 48. This highly nationalistic psalm praises Jerusalem as the holy city of God. It still retains this designation for three great religious traditions – Judaism, Christianity and Islam – all for different reasons.

PSALM 123. (Alternate) Assumed to be for pilgrims approaching the temple this “psalm of ascent” saw it as representing the very presence of the invisible God among God’s people. That brought considerable relief from the contempt and scorn of unbelievers who felt no need for God in their lives.

2 CORINTHIANS 12:2-10. In the midst of a conflict with the Corinthian Christian community, Paul tells about two of his deepest spiritual experiences. In one he had an ecstatic theophany when he received an exceptional revelation. He does not say exactly what the revelation was. In the other, he fervently prayed to have the unidentified cause of great suffering removed, but was given instead the reassurance that God’s grace would be sufficient for his every need.

MARK 6:1-13. Jesus’ hometown folk felt uneasy with him in their midst, especially when he taught in their synagogue on a sabbath. We are not told why they were so offended. Certainly they thought he had far gone beyond what one of his status as a humble carpenter should go. They did not expect him, a mere tradesman, to be skilled in the interpretation of the scriptures.
So Jesus adopted another strategy. He gathered his disciples together and sent them out “with authority over the unclean spirits.” This may have meant that they merely had power to change people’s minds about what they might expect from Jesus. The end of the story tells how successful they were in calling people to repent, casting out demons and curing the sick.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

2 SAMUEL 5:1-5, 9-10. The first part of this passage is one version of the tradition of how David became king of Israel. It comes from the Deuteronomic editors who viewed David as the supreme commander of all Israel’s army. This agrees with 1 Samuel 18:5, but not 1 Samuel 18:13. Traces of an earlier source is found is vs. 3 where it is only representative elders of the tribes rather than “all the tribes” (vs. 1) who gather at Hebron to covenant with David and anoint him king. This narrative makes the point that as a successful military leader, he was the people’s choice as well the as divinely anointed sovereign.

Vss.4-5 also give the standard Deuteronomic formula for successive monarchs of Israel. It tells us the duration of his reign which is now calculated as spanning the year 1000 BCE. David first established Hebron as his capital; then he captured the fortress of Jerusalem and made it his capital city. The intervening verses between the two segments of the reading are confusing due to a corrupt Hebrew text. The narrator obviously knew much more about the lay of the land than we are now able to determine from the most advanced archeological data. Scholars still debate how much we can depend on the geographical and historical validity of much of the biblical narrative.

The intent of the Deuteronomic editors of this passage was to tell their generation of Israelites of the utmost significance of David’s reign and especially his relocation of the capital city to Jerusalem. They wrote during the Babylonian exile about 550 BCE when the holy city had very special significance for the nation’s religious tradition. They sought to justify to the exiles in Babylon why their captivity was the judgment of Yahweh, but also that their hope lay in the greatness of David’s reign as the sign of Yahweh’s eternal covenant with Israel.

The stronghold of Zion (vs. 7) was indeed a fortress situated on the southern ridge between the valleys of Tyropoen and the Kidron brook. It later included the whole of the fortifications of Jerusalem. The name Zion subsequently became associated with the sacred site of the temple built by David’s son, Solomon. In religious parlance, it became known as the dwelling place of Yahweh, as evidenced by the numerous reference in the Psalms. Today, it is occupied by two great mosques of Islam, Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock.

The reference to “the Millo” in vs. 9 is obscure, but may indicate a particular element of the fortifications which David built. I Kings 9:15, 24; 11:27 attribute its construction to Solomon. The word suggests a place of stamped earth. It may have been a very secure house or perhaps a military barracks and parade ground for gathering the city’s defensive forces.

EZEKIEL 2:1-5. (Alternate) Being a prophet is never easy. The name of this prophet means “Yahweh strengthens.” And that about says it all about this man of whom very little is known except what is found in 1:3 that he was of priestly heritage and may have deported with the rest of the exiles to Babylon in 598/597 BCE after the surrender of King Jehoiachin. Scholars debate whether he was actually among the exiles in Babylon or remained in Jerusalem. According to 29:17 he was still receiving divine revelations as late as 571 BCE.

The call of Ezekiel to be prophet among the exiles in Babylon included a strong warning that he would encounter much resistance. People in deep mourning would likely react negatively to an encouraging message that intended to transform their ancient traditions as did Ezekiel. In spite of their rebellion against God and their impudent and stubborn nature, he was to deliver an outspoken message directly from God, “Thus says the Lord God.”

Note however that his mandate came directly from Yahweh’s Spirit (vs. 2). This form of revelation is repeated many times in the rest of the book (3:12, 14, 24; 11:1, 5, 24; 37:1; 43:5). In short, Ezekiel was commanded to challenge the faith of the exiles in the God who intended only to move them into an entirely new phase of their religious, social, economic and political history. Doesn’t that sound familiar for times such as these?

PSALM 48. In the century after their return from exile in Babylon in 539 BCE, the Jews sought to recover their national identity by rebuilding their temple and their capital city of Jerusalem. The monarchy had ceased to exist, but the temple priesthood replaced royalty as the most prominent leaders of the people. Out of this restored religious culture arose a fundamentally theocratic system which flowered in the elaboration of the cultus of temple sacrifices, the creation of psalmody and other religious literature which subsequently became the canon of scripture. This highly nationalistic psalm praising Jerusalem as the holy city of Yahweh is part of that renaissance.

Believed to be from a collection of “Songs of Zion,” it may well have been sung by pilgrims who came to Jerusalem for the sacred festivals. Many Jews, especially those of the Diaspora, could only afford to make this pilgrimage once in a lifetime. Every stone and handful of dust from the city would be sacred to them. Pilgrims today still return from Jerusalem with souvenirs of all kinds, the more valuable if they are part of the urban fabric rather than commercial trinkets.

The theme of this psalm is Yahweh’s protection for the city itself. It is “his holy mountain” (vs. 2). The second part of that parallelism likens Mount Zion to a mountain in the far north, possibly Mount Hermon, which reaches to heaven. There follows a rewriting of history in vss. 4-8. Israel had suffered from many foreign invasions. Her enemies had all perished but Jerusalem had remained. With poetic hyperbole, the fear and panic of those enemies is ridiculed “as a woman in travail.”

The psalmist was undoubtedly a male who had little regard for the subject of his simile. He drew another derogatory image from the violent storms that drove ships from the eastern Mediterranean bound for the Phoenician port of Tartessus in Spain (Tarshish), frequently wrecking them with its violent east wind (vs. 7). Amidst all this terror, Jerusalem remained safe, at least in the imagination of the poet.

Worshiping in the temple, strolling through the streets, or marveling at the city’s fortification brings to mind why this Jerusalem is so secure: Yahweh loves Israel. There can be only one response to this insight: praise for Israel’s protector.

Despite having been destroyed and rebuilt several times, Jerusalem still retains the designation of “the holy city” for three great religious traditions – Judaism, Christianity and Islam – all for different reasons.

PSALM 123. (Alternate) Assumed to be for pilgrims approaching the temple this “psalm of ascent” saw it as representing the very presence of the invisible God among God’s people. That brought considerable relief from the contempt and scorn of unbelievers who felt no need for God in their lives.

Without doubt, the temple when seen from the Mount of Olives would have been an awesome experience for the weary pilgrim. We should note, however, that the psalm makes no mention whatever of the temple. The prayer could have been uttered in any place where the supplicant looked toward the sky and imagined God seated on a throne as the master of a household with a company of servants gathered around him.

The strong emotions of the latter verses suggest the time of the exile when the Jews were treated contemptuously by their neighbours who felt superior to them. This gives us some insight into the personal feelings of Jews subjected to anti-Semitism. Powerless to fight back as in recent times when Israel withstood every assault from hostile neighbours, they could only turn to prayer to avert the pain such attacks inevitably imposed. One hears the same note of despondency in those survivors of the Holocaust remembering the time when six million Jews were left to suffer at the hands of the Nazis.

2 CORINTHIANS 12:2-10. In the midst of a conflict with the Corinthian Christian community, Paul tells about two of his deepest spiritual experiences. In one he had an ecstatic theophany when he received an exceptional revelation. He does not say exactly what the revelation was. Perhaps it was beyond words, as such experiences often are.

Such religious ecstasy brings forth negative attitudes and criticisms in our intellectually sophisticated age. We should neither spurn them nor invent opportunities to create moments such as Paul describes. They can be very real, however or to whom they occur. It may well be that certain people, like Paul and innumerable other saints in the history of the church, have a special gift for or are particularly susceptible to such experiences. There is some recent psycho-neurological research that certain neurological structures of the brain make intense religious experiences not only possible but likely. (See The Global Spiral, monthly online publication of the Metanexus Institute.)
Bruce Chilton adds to the scholarly uncertainty about these experiences in his Rabbi Paul: An Intellectual Biography. (Doubleday, 2000) He believes that Paul, like Jesus and Peter before him, shared in what later became known as the Merkabah tradition. Jey J.Kanagaraj (Mysticism’ in the Gospel of John: An Inquiry into its Background. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998) discussed the Merkabah tradition in positing the theory that “the Gospel John is a “mystical” document, written, at least as one of its purposes, to address with the Gospel those who were preoccupied with Merkabah mystical practice and with cosmological speculations.” It is known that from the 2nd to the 7th centuries CE, Jewish mystics were inspired and guided by the mystical visions of Ezekiel and the divine chariot (Ezekiel 1) to experience direct, personal communion with God.

Modern psychology, psychiatry and neurology have attempted to describe how these mystical experience do happen. One of the best analyses was written nearly fifty years ago by a British psychiatrist, William Sargent, in his book Battle For The Mind. Sargent showed that physiological similarities exist between religious ecstasy and conversion, healing for shell-shocked and battle-fatigued war veterans, forced criminal confessions, and politically motivated brain-washing. He might also add the behavioral compulsions of teenagers in response to their favorite rock stars.

In the other spiritual experience described in this passage, Paul tells how he fervently prayed to have the unidentified cause of great suffering removed. Instead he was given the reassurance that God’s grace would be sufficient for his every need. Much speculation has been expended as to the exact nature of Paul’s problem. These vary from a painful and incurable disease, a physical disability due to paralysis, a facial disfigurement or poor eyesight, all the way to a tendency to homosexuality. Chilton adds to the speculation by proposing that because he was under such constant stress from the time of his conversion onward, he was subject to frequent attacks of shingles (herpes zoster) that left him disfigured. The fact is that we can never know for sure. More important, however, is the way he deals with his “thorn in the flesh.” It became a source of power in that it made possible a deeper spiritual experience enabling him to withstand ever greater hardship in pursuing his mission as an evangelist.

Many ministers can attest to the reality that when they feel most incapable of making an effective witness to faith, others have greatly benefited from their perceived failures. One minister invited to preach in a prominent New York church felt he had utterly ruined the opportunity. Retiring to the vestry after the service, his eye fell on a wall plague bearing the words, “Hallelujah anyway! God is with us.”

MARK 6:1-13. To say the least, Jesus’ hometown folk felt uneasy with him in their midst, especially when he taught in their synagogue on a sabbath. We are not told why they were so offended. Perhaps it was just their jealousy that one whom they knew so well had become so famous. Certainly they thought he had far gone beyond what one of his status as a humble carpenter should go. They would have had respect for him as one skilled in such trades as carpentry that contributed to the general welfare of the community. But they would not have expected him to be skilled in the interpretation of the scriptures or a radical social reformer. One of the contemporary group of Jesus scholars has speculated that although verbally gifted in a predominately oral culture, Jesus may have been illiterate.

Rejected at home, Jesus adopted another strategy. He gathered his disciples together and sent them out “with authority over the unclean spirits.” This may have meant that they merely had power to change people’s minds about what they might expect from Jesus. The gospel authors like Mark who wrote down the tradition for subsequent generations also believed that the disciples possessed the same authority over unclean spirits that Jesus himself had demonstrated. Apparently that is what Mark intended. But was this “authority” (Greek = exousia) a moral and spiritual authority of a pastoral nature or was it something more of a power to effect physical cures? Without question then as now, anyone suffering from an illness, however caused, would seriously affect everyone in the extended family or the immediate community of the sick person. In such circumstances, even death has a healing effect over time.

There is an interesting analysis by John Dominic Crossan of the differentiation between the actual events in Galilee when Jesus lived there during the late third decade of the lst century and the way the story was told by Mark in the seventh decade. Crossan believes that the Markan account described a difference of approach between those who were itinerant apostles and those who were resident followers of the Way. This occurred in the later period when the apostolic church was spreading out into the Gentile world. He elaborates this thesis in his essay “Jesus And The Kingdom” in the volume edited by Marcus Borg, Jesus At 2000. (Westview Press, 1998). He concludes that this passage is Mark’s own description of the kingdom as “companionship of empowerment” rather than the actual historical events of Jesus’ ministry. This is in keeping, Crossan claims, with Jesus’ inauguration of the kingdom as an “interactive social radicalism” consisting of two distinct elements: those who were itinerant preachers of a radical gospel and those who were resident householders who witnessed to it less radically in their normal community living.

The end of the story as we now have it in this passage revealed how successful they were in calling people to repent, casting out demons and curing the sick. This appears to have been a trial run for the post-Pentecost period when Mark was an active itinerant with Paul and Barnabas, at least for while before accompanying Peter to Rome.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Second Sunday After Pentecost
Proper 6 Ordinary 11
June 14, 2009

1 SAMUEL 15:34-16:13. The story of how Samuel was led by God to anoint David as king of Israel instead of Saul may sound strange to our modern ears. Yet it fits well with the theological viewpoint found throughout the Old Testament that God is very much involved in the working out of human history.

EZEKIEL 17:22-24. (Alternate) In a metaphor of God planting a tree on a high mountain this poetic prophecy again expresses the view of God as Lord of Israel’s history. The metaphor refers to Israel’s return from exile in Babylon to rebuild their capital city, Jerusalem.

PSALM 20. Like a number of psalms, this one offers prayers for an anointed king. It pleads for God’s help at a time when the monarch is menaced by foes from within and without his country.

PSALM 92:1-4, 12-15. (Alternate) The psalmist has occasion to offer thanks to God. His gratitude arises out of long experience of God’s goodness during a long life.

2 CORINTHIANS 5:6-17. Paul confidently celebrates faith in the love of Christ that has motivated and sustained him through years of difficult ministry to the Gentiles. He fervently proclaimed that anyone who believed and followed Christ had become a new creation and could see the whole of life in this world from a spiritual point of view.

MARK 4:26-34. Because we do not think in spiritual terms, Jesus’ parables of the kingdom of heaven often seem to defy interpretation for modern readers. In these two brief vignettes drawn from the rural life of Galilee, Jesus spoke about the way faith can provide those who believed in and followed him with a full and abundant life.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

1 SAMUEL 15:34-16:13. In these times when governments are change by democratic vote or by violent revolution, this passage may seem to have no message for us. The story of how Samuel was led by God to anoint David as king of Israel instead of Saul may sound particularly strange to our modern ears. Yet it fits well with the view found throughout the Old Testament that God is very much involved in the working out of human history, especially that of God’s chosen people, Israel.

The concept of God as Lord of history is not easy to understand in today’s global political situation. We tend to think either in terms of God being on our side or favouring the most militarily powerful empire, especially in times of war. The story of Samuel anointing David reveals that God is not interested in either prestige or power. As 16:7 declares, “the Lord does not see as mortals see.” It was the youngest of Jesse’s son, the shepherd boy, David, whom God chose to succeed Israel’s first king Saul after he had departed from God’s purpose.

Another aspect of this story is the reality of Samuel’s fear. At first he was loath to do as God had directed him. The aging prophet knew that Saul would kill him if he found out that God had rejected him as Israel’s leader. God saw things differently and gave Samuel an alternative way to do God’s bidding. When Samuel arrived in Bethlehem, the elders of that city were similarly fearful of Saul until the prophet advised them of the ruse to conceal his real intention.

More often than not fear is a significant factor in human relations, be it among individuals or nations. Fear of hostile neighbours led Israel to aggressive wars on many occasions. Fear of losing the competition for imperial power led to the two costly global wars of the 20th century. As the 21st century began, a pre-emptive war against terror became a further reason for more futile bloodshed to the Middle East.

Surely God has another purpose and plan for the nations and the religious traditions that motivate them to take up arms against one another. The working out of God’s purpose to create a universal reign of love in this world is the task to which all peoples of faith must now turn. But will we ever find the courage to do so?

EZEKIEL 17:22-24. (Alternate) In a metaphor of God planting a tree on a high mountain this poetic prophecy again expressed the view of God as Lord of Israel’s history. The metaphor referred to Israel’s return from exile in Babylon to rebuild their capital city, Jerusalem, in the latter part of the 6th century BCE.

The poet Ogden Nash once wrote, “How odd of God to choose the Jews.” Yet the biblical narrative assures us that God chose Israel to be a light among the nations that the whole world might learn God’s way to live in neighbourly peace. This divine purpose lies behind Ezekiel’s metaphor of a small sprig of a lofty cedar tree planted on a high mountain to grow and give shade for the birds to nest in.

In vs. 24, speaking for God, the prophet depicted as trees that either flourish or fail to declare how God uses the rise and fall of nations and empires to bring about the end to which history moves.

PSALM 20. Like a number of psalms, this one offers prayers for an anointed king. It pleads for God’s help at a time when the monarch is menaced by foes from within and without his country.

It is never wrong to pray for our government and our country. On the other hand, we should beware the blatant nationalism of the false patriot who declares, “My country right or wrong; but right our wrong, my country.” In fact, that bit of bravado is a misquotation of statements with quite different meaning made by several British and American authors including Charles Churchill (1731-1764); Stephen Decatur (1779-1820); John Quincy Adams (1767-1848); Carl Schurz (1829-1906); and G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936).

This prayer for a king probably dates from the period prior to the Babylonian exile (586-539 BCE) when Judea, the southern part of the original kingdom, still had a ruling monarch. The performance of religious rites seeking God’s favour comes through the early verses. A sense of trepidation lies behind the latter verses. As God’s anointed, the monarch’s safety and victory were of paramount importance to the nation and its security. Whoever the enemy was, they were presumed to have more powerful armaments (vss. 7-8). Therefore the appeal for God’s help in gaining victory was far from assured.

Offering prayers for victory in battle may be as old as human religious traditions. How God is to deal with the fervent prayers for victory offered by both combatants is a theological puzzle that no one can satisfactorily solve.

PSALM 92:1-4, 12-15. (Alternate) The psalmist has occasion to offer thanks to God. His gratitude arises out of long experience of God’s goodness during a long life. His joy in praising God comes through vividly in the opening verses.

The mood changes in vss. 5-8 to a traditional contrast of those who are faithful and those who are not. The right to make such judgments still belongs to God. Victory over enemies is also seen as the victory of God (vss. 9-11). Finally, vss. 12-15 lift up the benefits of living righteously. Such benefits rest on God’s righteousness and justice, not on human behaviour.

2 CORINTHIANS 5:6-17. In this excerpt Paul confidently celebrated faith in the love of Christ that had motivated and sustained him through years of difficult ministry to the Gentiles. He fervently proclaimed that anyone who believed and followed Christ had become a new creation. This gave him a whole new perspective on life in this world and life eternal from a spiritual point of view.

Paul had a very troubled relationship with the Corinthians, but he constantly strove to bring them to a new life of faith. The early part of this passage (vss. 6-10) deals with the subject of our unavoidable mortality which he had begun to discuss in the previous chapter, 4:7 – 5:5. Facing death was nothing new for him. Many times he had been threatened with imminent demise, yet he had never been afraid of it. Early in his life as a Pharisee and much more so after his conversion, he had devoutly believed in resurrection and life beyond death. This faith gave him the confidence to say what for any other person might be regarded as death wish (vs.8). His one desire was to serve Christ as long as he had breath, knowing full well that judgment awaited him as it did for every other human being. Beyond that too lay the glorious experience of the eternal presence of God and Jesus Christ.

The expression “the fear of the Lord” occurs many times in the Old Testament. In many respects it was the familiar way of describing the religious tradition of post-exilic Judaism. Its central meaning can be understood best as mysterium tremendum. Much more than reverent piety, it meant a sense of supreme awe in the presence of Yawheh. It was the essence of wisdom in approaching everyday life and the ethical motivation for an absolute moral monotheism determining the behaviour of every believer. Even the Messiah would sense the spirit of the fear of the Lord (Isa. 11:2).

Paul shared this classical theological and psychological point of view. At the same time, his approach to life and to his mission had been filtered through his conversion experience. He had come to see that above all else the life, death and resurrection of Jesus conveyed the love of God for sinful, selfish humanity. “He died for all, so that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who died and was raised for them.” Nothing else mattered. This became the fundamental motivation for his ministry to the Gentiles and his continual conflict with both Peter and James about that mission.

Verse 16 contains a profound retrospective of his conversion experience. He certainly had seen Jesus “from a human point of view.” The apostolic claim that Jesus was the Messiah/Christ had so threatened Paul’s rabbinical ambitions that he had become a violent persecutor of the Christian community in Jerusalem. He had obtained permission from the high priest to extend his campaign against those messianic heretics to Damascus. Whatever that experience may have been in modern psychological terms, his meeting with the risen Christ on the Damascus Road had totally transformed his life. He became, as vs. 17 avers, “a new creation.”

Perhaps the most significant element of this compact passage is the simple word “anyone” in vs. 17. Paul did not regard the conversion experience as exclusive to himself. It was for everyone who believed that Jesus had indeed risen from the dead. It was the power of the Spirit of God available to Jew and Gentile alike.

In his Rabbi Paul: An Intellectual Biography (Image Books, 2004), Bruce Chilton has described Paul in this passage as “thinking on so cosmic a scale, linking God’s Spirit to humanity’s and both to the transformation of the world.” Chilton elaborates: “The same Spirit that made the world, hovering over the face of the primeval waters and descending upon each believer at baptism, infused the meetings of every congregation, joining Paul’s spirit and Jesus’ power in the judgment that would free the world of its old shape and give it new form. That transformation was doubly powerful because at the same time it occurred at the intimate level of each believer’s own body. The transformation of body, self and world were all happening at once, ‘in Christ.’”

Is it too much to believe that even the least noticed transformation of any person that leads to deeper and more faithful discipleship is a step toward remaking this sin-sick old world?

MARK 4:26-34. Because we do not think in spiritual terms, Jesus’ parables of the kingdom of heaven often seem to defy interpretation for modern readers. In these two brief vignettes drawn from the rural life of Galilee, Jesus spoke about the way faith can provide those who believed in and followed him a full and abundant life.

As a young carpenter of Nazareth Jesus would have met and chatted with innumerable peasant farmers of Galilee. Seedtime and harvest would have been natural topics of conversation then as they are today among farm folk. In that region, especially in the Plain of Esdraelon nearby, there was abundant good soil for raising abundant grain crops. Because of the mountains of Lebanon to the north, rainfall was plentiful. He might well have turned his own hand to the sickle to aid his neighbours at harvest time. This set of parables reflects that rural scene with sharp realism.

The time between seedtime and harvest also come through almost as clearly in the words of vs. 27. It takes approximately ninety days for the farmer to sleep and rise before a field crop can ripen to maturity. Much can happen in the interim to prevent a fruitful harvest. That requires both faith and patience from the farmer.

The second parable is less illustrative of rural Galilee. Once cultivated for the oil of its very small seeds, the mustard plant (brassica nigra) is now a common weed. It does exceed most other weeds in height, projecting above the level of the grain it contaminates. With large leaves, bright yellow flowers and small seeds in pods, it can be easily distinguished from crop surrounding it. However, it is not as large as a small tree or shrub and certainly could not hold up even a small bird’s nest. At most, a tiny bird might settle on its branches for a few seconds rest. It is even possible that the parable drew on a well-known image found in Daniel 4:10-12 and 20-22.

So Jesus must have been exaggerating to make his point. But why the hyperbole? To emphasize the significance of faith. “The kingdom of heaven” is no earthly nation with exact geographic location on this planet or elsewhere in the vast universe. It is spiritual in nature and can only be accessed by those who are spiritual. It is located wherever God’s love reigns. In these parables Jesus was saying that only those with a deep, abiding and patient faith in him and his way will find themselves citizens of that sacred, spiritual realm.

-30-