gregoryjenks

Author: Gregory C. Jenks

  • Lent 1A (9 March 2014)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Genesis 2:15-17; 3:1-7 & Psalm 32
    • Romans 5:12-19
    • Matthew 4:1-11

    Introduction

    The Gospel passage for this week is widely recognised as a classic mythic tale of the hero overcoming a set of ordeals to establish his credentials in the eyes of the audience. The notes will provide just the text (in a horizontal line synopsis) and the major parallels from various ancient sources.

    With the context of the lectionary readings set for this first Sunday of Lent, this Gospel representation of Jesus as the spiritual hero—the “second Adam”, to use the terminology of Paul in 1 Cor 15:45–49—who successfully resists the Tempter, is set against the failure of the “first Adam” who succumbs to temptation and grasps for power, knowledge, and immortality. This mythic background is reinforced by this week’s NT reading (Rom 5:12–19) in which the legacy of Adam’s sin is contrasted with the legacy of Jesus’ faithfulness.

    Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned— sin was indeed in the world before the law, but sin is not reckoned when there is no law. Yet death exercised dominion from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who is a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died through the one man’s trespass, much more surely have the grace of God and the free gift in the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abounded for the many. And the free gift is not like the effect of the one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brings justification. If, because of the one man’s trespass, death exercised dominion through that one, much more surely will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness exercise dominion in life through the one man, Jesus Christ. Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all. For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. (Romans 5:12–19 NRSV)

    The lectionary wants us to read the story of Jesus being tempted (tested) through the lens of the “fall” (sic) of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. However, it will be more valid to resist that “framing” of the story, and to read it through the biblical, post-biblical, and interfaith lens of the testing of the hero.

    Jesus Tempted

    The Sayings Gospel Q—dated well before Mark by most NT scholars and thus a compilation more or less contemporary with the letters of Paul—develops the tradition into a narrative with three episodes. Despite the change in order of the Temple temptation, the close verbal similarity between the versions in Matthew and Luke is clear:

    Matt: He fasted forty days and forty nights,
    Luke: where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing at all during those days,

    Matt: and afterwards he was famished.
    Luke:and when they were over, he was famished.

    Matt: The tempter came and said to him,
    Luke: The devil said to him,

    Matt: “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.”
    Luke: “If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become a loaf of bread.”

    Matt: But he answered, “It is written, ‘One does not live by bread alone,
    Luke: Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘One does not live by bread alone.’”

    Matt: but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”
    Luke:

    Matt: Then the devil took him to the holy city and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple,
    Luke: Then the devil took him to Jerusalem, and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple, saying to him,

    Matt: saying to him, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down;
    Luke: “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down from here,

    Matt: for it is written, ‘He will command his angels concerning you,’
    Luke: for it is written, ‘He will command his angels concerning you, to protect you,’

    Matt: and ‘On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.’”
    Luke: and ‘On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.’”

    Matt: Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”
    Luke: Jesus answered him, “It is said, ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

    Matt: Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain
    Luke: Then the devil led him up

    Matt: and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor;
    Luke: and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world.

    Matt: and he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.”
    Luke: And the devil said to him, “To you I will give their glory and all this authority;
    for it has been given over to me, and I give it to anyone I please.
    If you, then, will worship me, it will all be yours.    ”

    Matt: Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan!
    Luke:

    Matt: for it is written, ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.’”
    Luke: Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.’

    Matt: Then the devil left him,
    Luke: When the devil had finished every test, he departed from him until an opportune time.

    Matt: and suddenly angels came and waited on him.
    Luke:

     

     

    The Testing of Abraham

    Jubilees 17

    And it came to pass in the seventh week, in its first year, in the first month, in that jubilee, on the twelfth of that month, that words came in heaven concerning Abraham that he was faithful in everything which was told him and he loved the LORD and was faithful in all affliction. And Prince Mastema came and he said before God, “Behold, Abraham loves Isaac, his son. And he is more pleased with him than everything. Tell him to offer him (as) a burnt offering upon the altar. And you will see whether he will do this thing. And you will know whether he is faithful in everything in which you test him.” And the LORD was aware that Abraham was faithful in all of his afflictions because he tested him with his land, and with famine. And he tested him with the wealth of kings. And he tested him again with his wife, when she was taken (from him), and with circumcision. And he tested him with Ishmael and with Hagar, his maidservant, when he sent them away. And in everything in which he tested him, he was found faithful. And his soul was not impatient. And he was not slow to act because he was faithful and a lover of the LORD. [translated by O.S. Wintermute, OTP 2,90]

    Sirach 44

    19Abraham was the great father of a multitude of nations,
    and no one has been found like him in glory.
    20He kept the law of the Most High,
    and entered into a covenant with him;
    he certified the covenant in his flesh,
    and when he was tested he proved faithful.
    21Therefore the Lord assured him with an oath
    that the nations would be blessed through his offspring;
    that he would make him as numerous as the dust of the earth,
    and exalt his offspring like the stars,
    and give them an inheritance from sea to sea
    and from the Euphrates to the ends of the earth.

    Apocalypse of Abraham

    And we went, the two of us alone together, forty days and nights. And I ate no bread and drank no water, because (my) food was to see the angel who was with me, and his discourse with me was my drink. We came to God’s mountain, glorious Horeb. And I said to the angel, “Singer of the Eternal One, behold I have no sacrifice with me, nor do I know a place for an altar on the mountain, so how shall I make the sacrifice?” And he said, “Look behind you.” And I looked behind me. And behold all the prescribed sacrifices were following us: the calf, the she-goat, the ram, the turtledove, and the pigeon. And the angel said to me, “Abraham.” And I said, “Here I am.” And he said to me, “Slaughter all these and divide the animals exactly into halves. But do not cut the birds apart. And give them to the men whom I will show you standing beside you, for they are the altar on the mountain, to offer sacrifice to the Eternal One. The turtledove and the pigeon you will give to me, for I will ascend on the wings of the birds to show you (what) is in the heavens, on the earth and in the sea, in the abyss, and in the lower depths, in the garden of Eden and in its rivers, in the fullness of the universe. And you will see its circles in all. ”
    13 And I did everything according to the angel’s command. And I gave the angels who had come to us the divided parts of the animals. And the angel Iaoela took the two birds. And I waited for the evening gift.” And an unclean bird flew down on the carcasses, and I drove it away. And the unclean bird spoke to me and said, “What are you doing, Abraham, on the holy heights, where no one eats or drinks, nor is there upon them food for men. But these all will be consumed by fire and they will burn you up. Leave the man who is with you and flee! For if you ascend to the height, they will destroy you.” And it came to pass when I saw the bird speaking I said this to the angel: “What is this, my lord?” And he said, “This is disgrace, this is Azazel!” And he said to him, “Shame on you, Azazel! For Abraham’s portion is in heaven, and yours is on earth, for you have selected here, (and) become enamored of the dwelling place of your blemish. Therefore the Eternal Ruler, the Mighty One, has given you a dwelling on earth. Through you the all-evil spirit (is) a liar, and through you (are) wrath and trials on the generations of men who live impiously. For the Eternal, Mighty One did not allow the bodies of the righteous to be in your hand, so through them the righteous life is affirmed and the destruction of ungodliness. Hear, counselor, be shamed by me! You have no permission to tempt all the righteous. Depart from this man! You cannot deceive him, because he is the enemy of you and of those who follow you and who love what you wish. For behold, the garment which in heaven was formerly yours has been set aside for him, and the corruption which was on him has gone over to you.”
    14 And the angel said to me, “Abraham!” And I said, “Here I am, your servant.” And he said, “Know from this that the Eternal One whom you have loved has chosen you. Be bold and do through your authority whatever I order you against him who reviles justice. Will I not be able to revile him who has scattered about the earth the secrets of heaven and who has taken counsel against the Mighty One? Say to him, ‘May you be the firebrand of the furnace of the earth! Go, Azazel, into the untrodden parts of the earth. For your heritage is over those who are with you, with the stars and with the men born by the clouds, whose portion you are, indeed they exist through your being. Enmity is for you a pious act. Therefore through your own destruction be gone from me! ” And I said the words as the angel had taught me. And he said, “Abraham.” And I said, “Here I am, your servant!” And the angel said to me, “Answer him not!” And he spoke to me a second time. And the angel said, “Now, whatever he says to you, answer him not, lest his will run up to you. For the Eternal, Mighty One gave him the gravity and the will. Answer him not.” And I did what the angel had commanded me. And whatever he said to me about the descent, I answered him not.
    15 And it came to pass when the sun was setting, and behold a smoke like that of a furnace, and the angels who had the divided portions of the sacrifice ascended from the top of the furnace of smoke. And the angel took me with his right hand and set me on the right wing of the pigeon and he himself sat on the left wing of the turtledove, (both of) which were as if neither slaughtered nor divided. And he carried me up to the edge of the fiery flames. And we ascended as if (carried) by many winds to the heaven that is fixed on the expanses. And I saw on the air to whose height we had ascended a strong light which cane not be described. And behold, in this light a fiery Gehenna was enkindled, and a great crowd in the likeness of men. They all were changing in aspect and shape, running and changing form and prostrating themselves and crying aloud words I did not know.
    [translated by R. Rubinkiewicz, OTP 1,694–6]

     

    Testament of Job, chs 2-8

    2 Now I used to be Jobab before the Lord named me Job. When I was called Jobab, I lived quite near a venerated idol’s temple. As I constantly saw whole-burnt offerings being offered up there, I began reasoning within myself saying, “Is this really the God who made heaven and earth, the sea too, and our very selves? How shall I know?”
    3 One night as I was in bed a loud voice came to me in a very bright light saying, “Jobab, Jobab!” And I said, “Yes? Here I am.” And he said, “Arise, and I will show you who this is whom you wish to know. This one whose whole-burnt offerings they bring and whose drink offerings they pour is not God. Rather, his is the power of the devil, by whom human nature” is deceived.”
    When I heard these things, I fell on my bed worshiping and saying, “My Lord, who came for the salvation of my soul, I beg you—if this is indeed the place of Satan by whom men are deceived—grant me authority to go and purge his place so that I may put an end to the drink offerings being poured for him. Who is there to forbid me, since I rule this region?”
    4 The light answered me and said, “You shall be able to purge this place. But I am going to show you all the things which the Lord charged me to tell you.”
    And I said, “Whatever he has charged me, his servant, I will hear and do.”
    Again he said, “Thus says the Lord: If you attempt to purge the place of Satan, he will rise up against you with wrath for battle. But he will be unable to bring death upon you. He will bring on you many plagues, he will take away for himself your goods, he will carry off your children. But if you are patient, I will make your name renowned in all generations of the earth till the consummation of the age.” And I will return you again to your goods. It will be repaid to you doubly, so you may know that the Lord is impartial—rendering good things to each one who obeys. And you shall be raised up in the resurrection. For you will be like a sparring athlete,” both enduring pains and winning the crown. Then will you know that the Lord is just, true, and strong, giving strength to his elect ones.”
    5 And I, my little children, replied to him, “Till death I will endure: I will not step back at all.” After I had been sealed by the angel when he left me, my little children, then—having arisen the next night—I took fifty youths with me, struck off for the temple of the idol, and leveled it to the ground. And so I withdrew into my house, having ordered the doors to be secured.
    6 Listen, little children, and marvel. For as soon as I entered into my house and secured my doors, I charged my doormen thus, “If anyone should seek me today, give no report; but say, ‘He has no time, for he is inside concerned with an urgent matter.’
    So while I was inside Satan knocked at the door, having disguised himself as a beggar. And he said to the doormaid, “Tell Job I wish to meet with him.” When the doormaid came and told me these things, she heard me say to report that I had no time just now.
    7 When he heard that, Satan departed and put a yoke on his shoulders. And when he arrived, he spoke to the doormaid saying, “Say to Job, ‘Give me a loaf of bread from your hands, so I may eat.’ “So I gave a burnt loaf of bread to the girl to give to him and said to him, “Expect to eat my loaves no longer, for you are estranged from me.”
    Then the doormaid, ashamed to give him the burnt and ashen loaf of bread (for she did not know he was Satan), took the good loaf of her own and gave it to him. And when he received it and knew what had occurred he said to the girl, “Off with you, evil servant. Bring the loaf of bread given you to be given to me.” The girl wept with deep grief, saying, “Truly, you well say I am an evil servant. For if I were not, I would have done just as it was assigned to me by my master.” And when she returned, she brought him the burnt loaf of bread, saying to him, “Thus says my lord, ‘You shall no longer eat from my loaves at all, for I have been estranged from you. Yet I have given you this loaf of bread in order that I may not be accused of providing nothing to a begging enemy.’”
    When he heard these things, Satan sent the girl back tome saying, “As this loaf of bread is wholly burnt, so shall I do to your body also. For within the hour, I will depart and devastate you.” And I replied to him, “Do what you will. For if you intend to bring anything on me, I am prepared to undergo whatever you inflict.”
    8 After he withdrew from me, when he had gone out under the firmament, he implored the Lord that he might receive authority over my goods. And then, when he had received the authority, he came and took away all my wealth.
    [translated by R.P. Spittler, OTP 1,840–42]

     

    Interfaith Parallels

    Buddhism

    Marcus Borg [Jesus and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings] notes the following traditions about the Buddha that provide something of a parallel to this cluster:

    Then Mara the evil one drew near to him, and said: “Let the Exalted One exercise governance, let the Blessed One rule.”
    “Now what, O evil one, do you have in view, that you speak this way to me?”
    “If the Exalted One were to wish the Himalayas, king of the mountains, to be gold, he might determine it to be so, and the mountains would become a mass of gold?’
    The Exalted One responded: “Were the mountains all of shimmering gold, it would still not be enough for one man’s wants. He that has seen suffering — how should that man succumb to desires?”
    Then Mara the evil one thought: “The Exalted One knows me! The Blessed One knows me!” And sad and sorrowful he vanished then and there.
    (Samyutta Nikaya 4.2.10)

    During the six years that the Bodhisattva practiced austerities, the demon followed behind him step by step, seeking an opportunity to harm him. But he found no opportunity whatsoever and went away discouraged and discontent.
    (Lalitavistara Sutra 18)

    I thought: “Suppose I practice entirely cutting off food?’ Then the deities came to me and said: “Good sir, do not practice entirely cutting off food. If you do so, we shall infuse heavenly food into the pores of your skin and you will live on that.”
    (Majjhima Nikaya 36.27)

    Islamic Texts

    34 Satan said to Jesus when he placed him in Jerusalem, You claim to raise the dead. If you can truly do so, ask God to turn this mountain to bread.” Jesus said, “Do all people live from bread?” Satan said, “If you are what you claim to be, jump from this place, for the angels will receive you.” Jesus said, “God ordered me not to put myself to the test, for I do not know whether He will save me or not.”

    119 Satan passed by while Jesus was reclining his head upon a stone. “So, then, Jesus, you have been satisfied with a stone in this world! ” Jesus removed the stone from beneath his head, threw it at him, and said, “Take this stone, and the world with it! I have no need of either.”

    206 It is related that Satan once appeared before Jesus and said to him, “Say: ‘There is no god but God.” Jesus replied, “Righteous words which I will not repeat after you.” This is because Satan’s deceptions can lurk even beneath good.

    209 It is told that Jesus spent sixty days inmate conversation with his Lord without eating. Then the thought of bread occurred to him and his intimacy was interrupted. At once a loaf of bread appeared in his hands, so he sat down and wept for the loss of intimacy. At that moment, an old man cast his shadow upon him and Jesus said to him, “God bless you, friend of God. Pray to God for me, for I was in a trance and the thought of bread occurred to me, and so my trance was interrupted.” The old man prayed, “O God! If you know that the thought of bread has occurred to me since I have known You, do not forgive me. On the contrary, if anything was brought before me, I would eat it without any thought of it.”

    278 Satan appeared to Jesus in the visible form of an old man. “Spirit of God, say: ‘There is no god but God,” he bade him, hoping that he [would repeat this after him and thus] would have obeyed him to that extent. Jesus answered, “I say it – but not because you said it: there is no god but God.” Satan departed in disgrace.

    292 Satan asked Jesus, “Can your God cause the world to be contained by an egg, in such a way that the world is not shrunk and the egg is not enlarged?” Jesus replied, “Woe to you! Incapacity cannot be attributed to God. Who is more powerful than Him who can cause the world to become fine and delicate and the egg to grow great?”

    300 It is related that Satan appeared to Jesus decked out in pendants of diverse colors and kinds. Jesus asked, “What are these pendants?” “These are the lusts of mankind,” Satan replied. “Have I anything to do with any of them?” Jesus asked. “Perhaps you ate your fill and we made you too sluggish to pray or mention God,” Satan replied. “Is there anything else?” asked Jesus. “No,” said Satan. “I vow before God never to fill my belly with food,” said Jesus. “And I vow before God never again to advise a Muslim,” Satan replied.
    [Tarif Khalidi, The Muslim Jesus, 2001]

    Jesus Database

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Jewish Biblical Scholarship

    Contemporary biblical scholarship is mostly non-confessional. In other words, critical scholars are open to insights from all qualified contributors, irrespective of their personal religious affiliation (or lack thereof). The major critical tools will include material written by Anglicans, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and Protestants—as well as atheists and agnostics.

    Finding scholarship that is distinctively Jewish (or with any other religious character) is not as easy as one might expect. In most cases the personal religious identity of the author is not identified, but it may sometimes be inferred from their name and/or their academic affiliation. These are not entirely reliable indicators, as a Jewish scholar (for example) may be employed to teach at a Protestant seminary, while many biblical scholars work in secular universities.

    As an aside—and as something we will discuss at another time—let’s note the unresolved issue of how people with a particular religious identity (say, Anglican) might engage with scholarship that is from another religious perspective. This ecumenical and interfaith diversity is actually one of the great gifts of biblical scholarship since WW2, but it becomes more problematic when we are looking for a confessional or theological reading of the Old Testament. For example, is there a distinctive Anglican way of reading the Bible, and should our final interpretation of the Bible be controlled by our confessional location?

    Another factor that complicates this matter is that Jewish scholars writing as and for Jews, tend to work directly with the Hebrew text and to publish their work in Modern Hebrew. That makes it inaccessible for most of us.

    With all that in mind, here are some suggestions for finding contemporary Jewish scholarship that offers critical engagement with the biblical texts and addresses a wider audience than their own Jewish religious community.

    For a Jewish perspective on the Old Testament (excluding the OT Apocrypha or Deuterocanonicals), as well as helpful essays on Jewish approaches to biblical studies see:

    • Berlin, A., Brettler, M.Z., & Fishbane, M. (Eds). (2005). The Jewish Study Bible. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Note those three names – Adele Berlin, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Michael Fishbane – and look for other works by them.

    Another significant one-volume Jewish commentary to keep in mind is the revised edition of W. Gunther Plaut, The Torah: A Modern Commentary (1981):

    This  volume by women scholars from the Reformed Judaism tradition is also a valuable resource:

    A Google search for “Jewish biblical scholars” includes the following wikipedia page among its results (more names to look for when seeking Jewish scholarship):

    The major explicitly Jewish Bible commentary series is the JPS Commentary:

     

    The Feminst Companion to the Bible, co-edited by Athalya Brenner, has a number of contributions by Jewish scholars. There is now a second series for this project, but both the first and second series are with consulting.

    A glance down the list of volumes in the Anchor Bible and the Hermeneia commentary series reveals numerous Jewish scholars:

    • Adele Berlin
    • Mordechai Cogan
    • Michael V. Fox
    • Jonathan A. Goldstein
    • Moshe Greenberg
    • Baruch A. Levine
    • Carol L. Meyers
    • Eric M. Meyers
    • Jacob Milgrom
    • George W. E. Nickelsburg
    • Shalom M. Paul
    • William H. C. Propp
    • Jack M. Sasson
    • E. A. Speiser
    • Michael E. Stone
    • Marvin A. Sweeney
    • Hayim Tadmor
    • Moshe Weinfeld

    This article has tended to focus on Jewish scholarship that examines the biblical and post-biblical Jewish texts, but there are also Jewish scholars who focus on NT studies, including:

    • Rami Arav
    • David Flusser
    • Paula Fredriksen
    • Richard Freund
    • Samuel T. Lachs
    • Amy-Jill Levine
    • S. Safrai
    • Alan F. Segal
    • M. Stern
    • Emmanuel Tov
    • Geza Vermes

    The following resource is a good place to begin when seeking to access Jewish scholarship on the New Testament:

    Finally, it is worth mentioning that there are online biblical studies resources that offer a Jewish perspective, although these tend to offer traditional rabbinic materials, including the work of Medieval scholars such as Rashi (1040 – 1105 CE):

    [This information was initially created for students in my class, “Introduction to OT Studies”, at St Francis Theological College, but may be of wider interest. It will be updated from time to time as I become aware of further works by Jewish biblical scholars. Your suggestions of additional names to add to this page are very welcome!]

  • Last Sunday after Epiphany (2 March 2014)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Exodus 24:12-18 & Psalm 2
    • 2 Peter 1:16-21
    • Matthew 17:1-9

    Introduction

    This Sunday sees the end of an unusually long Epiphany season. The lectionary texts for Epiphany in Year A—derived mostly from the first part of the Sermon on the Mount—are as follows:

    • First Sunday after Epiphany (Baptism of Jesus): Matt 3:13-17
    • Second Sunday after Epiphany (John’s disciples find Jesus): John 1:29-42
    • Third Sunday after Epiphany (Jesus in Galilee): Matt 4:12-23
    • Fourth Sunday after Epiphany (The Beatitudes): Matt 5:1-12
    • Fifth Sunday after Epiphany (Light, Salt and Torah): Matt 5:13-20
    • Sixth Sunday after Epiphany (The New Torah): Matt 5:21-37
    • Seventh Sunday after Epiphany (Love of Enemies): Matt 5:38-48
    • Eighth Sunday after Epiphany (On Anxiety): Matt 6:24-34
    • Last Sunday after Epiphany (Transfiguration): Matt 17:1-9

    First Reading: Exodus 24:12-18

    The story of the Transfiguration is a classic instance of a NT story imitating—and elaborating upon—a story from the Tanakh. In this case one of the key OT texts that serves as an intertextual stimulus and model for the NT is the story of Modes being called up the mountain to commune with God:

    The LORD said to Moses, “Come up to me on the mountain, and wait there; and I will give you the tablets of stone, with the law and the commandment, which I have written for their instruction.” So Moses set out with his assistant Joshua, and Moses went up into the mountain of God. To the elders he had said, “Wait here for us, until we come to you again; for Aaron and Hur are with you; whoever has a dispute may go to them.”
    Then Moses went up on the mountain, and the cloud covered the mountain. The glory of the LORD settled on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it for six days; on the seventh day he called to Moses out of the cloud. Now the appearance of the glory of the LORD was like a devouring fire on the top of the mountain in the sight of the people of Israel. Moses entered the cloud, and went up on the mountain. Moses was on the mountain for forty days and forty nights.” (Exodus 24:12–18 NRSV)

    We can note numerous points where the latter story imitates the earlier tradition in a process known as mimesis:

    • an epiphany atop a sacred mountain
    • the hero is summoned to the top for an encounter with God
    • Moses accompanied by his assistant/disciple
    • this assistant happens to be named Joshua (the Hebrew form of Jesus)
    • they were initially accompanied by a larger group but the others are left at the base of the mountain
    • the epiphany occurs “after six days”
    • a cloud covers the mountain
    • God speaks to Moses from the cloud
    • the divine glory settles on the mountain

    In the case of the NT story, this primary account of Moses being called UP the mountain may have been influenced by the matching tradition of how Moses’ DESCENT from the mountain was characterised by a mysterious transfiguration experience as his face shone with the glory of God:

    Moses came down from Mount Sinai. As he came down from the mountain with the two tablets of the covenant in his hand, Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God. When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, the skin of his face was shining, and they were afraid to come near him. But Moses called to them; and Aaron and all the leaders of the congregation returned to him, and Moses spoke with them. Afterward all the Israelites came near, and he gave them in commandment all that the LORD had spoken with him on Mount Sinai. When Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil on his face; but whenever Moses went in before the LORD to speak with him, he would take the veil off, until he came out; and when he came out, and told the Israelites what he had been commanded, the Israelites would see the face of Moses, that the skin of his face was shining; and Moses would put the veil on his face again, until he went in to speak with him. (Exodus 34:29–35 NRSV)

    While we were with him on the holy mountain: 2 Peter 1:16-21

    The Second letter of Peter is certainly is not a letter by Peter the Fisherman, as I have outlined elsewhere:

    Second Peter tries even harder to represent itself as coming from Peter. The opening sentences identify the author as “Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ.” This is really more like a testament of Peter than a letter from Peter, as the description of the aged apostle in 1:12–15 demonstrates. Perhaps operating on the assumption that offense is the best form of defense, the author claims to have been on the mountain with Jesus at the time of the transfiguration.

    For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, my Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.” We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven, while we were with him on the holy mountain.” (2 Pet 1:16–18)

    However, it is soon clear that the author has recycled material from the letter of Jude, and shares Jude’s anxiety over the prevalence of false teachers in these last days, when “the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and everything that is done on it will be disclosed” (2 Pet 3:10). … 2 Pet 3:15–16 reveals an awareness of Paul’s letters and a concern over the way false teachers abuse them “as they do the other Scriptures.” It is perhaps the last of the NT books to have been written—unless we accept the recent proposals for Acts to be dated around 150 CE. (The Once and Future Bible, 2011: 182f)

    What we seem to have in 2 Peter is a snapshot from the middle of the second century. Almost 100 years after the death of Peter we find some anonymous Christian leader invoking the authority of Peter to address the pressing pastoral challenges of his own time. By this stage the Transfiguration has ceased to be an epiphany of Jesus and has become a device to assert the authority of an unbroken line of tradition back to the apostolic period. The subversive spiritual power of direct spiritual experience is being supplanted by appeals to traditional authority.

    That struggle continues in the contemporary church, but in our time the momentum seems to lie with those who are transformed by the experience of the divine, while the traditional shepherds find fewer people wishing to be told what to believe and how to behave. As traditional theological controls crumble, chaos becomes more typical of contemporary Christianity. A new Christianity is coming to birth as the future of what Jesus began comes into sight. An epiphany. A transfiguration. A new creation.

    Gospel: Matthew 17:1-9

    Crossan suggests that the underlying tradition can be discerned in the resurrection scene from GPeter as part of a very early document that he calls the Cross Gospel, and which he argues was the original passion narrative:

    34Early, at first light on the sabbath, a crowd came from Jerusalem and the surrounding countryside to see the sealed tomb. 35But during the night before the Lord’s day dawned, while the soldiers were on guard, two by two during each watch, a loud noise came from the sky, 36and they saw the skies open up and two men come down from there in a burst of light and approach the tomb. 37The stone that had been pushed against the entrance began to roll by itself and moved away to one side; then the tomb opened up and both young men went inside.

    38Now when these soldiers saw this, they roused the centurion from his sleep, along with the elders. (Remember, they were also there keeping watch.) 39While they were explaining what they had seen, again they see three men leaving the tomb, two supporting the third, and a cross was following them. 40The heads of the two reached up to the sky, while the head of the third, whom they led by the hand, reached beyond the skies. 41And they heard a voice from the skies that said, “Have you preached to those who sleep?” 42And an answer was heard from the cross: “Yes!” (GPet 35-40 [= ch2 9-10] Complete Gospels)

    In the Synoptic Gospels, the story appears as an event during Jesus’ lifetime:

    • Mark 9:2-10
    • Matt 17:1-9
    • Luke 9:28-36

    The earliest version of this tradition seems to be the account in Mark 9, with the core verses being:

    Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain apart, by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his clothes became dazzling white, such as no one on earth could bleach them. And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, who were talking with Jesus. Then Peter said to Jesus, “Rabbi, it is good for us to be here; let us make three dwellings, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.” He did not know what to say, for they were terrified. Then a cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud there came a voice, “This is my Son, the Beloved; listen to him!” Suddenly when they looked around, they saw no one with them any more, but only Jesus. (Mark 9:2–8 NRSV)

    Interestingly, we get a kind of literary afterlife for this tradition in 2 Peter:

    For he received honor and glory from God the Father when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, my Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.” We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven, while we were with him on the holy mountain. (2Peter 1:17–18 NRSV)

    In Mark’s original narrative — from which Matthew and Luke have each developed their versions of this story — the event which stands before the “six days later” is a comment by Jesus concerning the coming of the Son of Man in the glory of his Father with the holy angels, after which Jesus is represented as saying, “Truly I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God has come with power.” Since there is no reason to assume that the location of the transfiguration is due to anything other than Mark’s editorial decisions, the proximity between the promise and its possible fulfillment in the transfiguration is worth noting. While we tend to think of winged creatures in white gowns when we read “holy angels” the original meaning is closer to “holy messengers” and could easily encompass Moses and Elijah.
    Matthew’s changes to Mark’s story are minimal, and can be listed as follows:

    • adds “his brother” to clarify the relationship of John to James
    • unique wording of transfiguration: “and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became dazzling white”
    • reverses the order of Elijah and Moses to reflect OT sequence for these characters
    • (oddly) prefers “Lord” to the more Jewish “Rabbi” in v. 4
    • omits implicit criticism of Peter for his bumbling response to this epiphany
    • adds “with him I am well pleased” (v. 5)
    • adds vss 6-7 (not found in either Mark or Luke): “When the disciples heard this, they fell to the ground and were overcome by fear. But Jesus came and touched them, saying, ‘Get up and do not be afraid.’”
    • omits reference (found in both Mark and Luke) to the disciples keeping this experience secret at the time

    The transfiguration itself is difficult to categorise. It seems to have some echoes of the baptism traditions with the heavenly voice affirming the beloved Son. Yet many scholars have wondered if this is not a displaced (and possibly garbled) Easter appearance story. The other alternative, that it may be an authentic religious experience that Jesus underwent and which was witnessed by a handful of his most intimate followers also needs to be kept in mind.

    Bruce Chilton (in Rabbi Jesus) has argued that Jesus was initiated into the Jewish mystical traditions while a disciple of John the Baptist. While that cannot be established beyond question, we should not exclude the possibility that Jesus’ own sense of identity and mission was formed and nourished by profound religious experiences. Certainly others in the early Christian movement had such experiences, in which Jesus himself played a critical role.

    The words of the Jewish Jesus scholar, David Flusser, concerning Jesus’ baptism are worth noting here:

    We can well imagine the holy excitement of that crowd who had listened to the words of the Baptist. Having confessed their sins and awaiting the gift of the Holy Spirit to cleanse their souls from all the filth of sin, they plunged their bodies into the cleansing water of the river. Can it be that none of them would have had a special pneumatic-ecstatic experience in that hour when the Spirit of God touched them? (Jesus, p. 40)

    … many scholars are right in thinking that in the original account, the heavenly voice announced to Jesus, “Behold, My servant, whom I uphold, My chosen, in whom My soul delights; I have put My Spirit upon him, he will bring forth justice to the nations” (Isaiah 42:1). This form is probably the original, for the reason that the prophetic word fits the situation. (Jesus, p. 41)

    The gift of the Holy Spirit assumed a significance for Jesus that was different than for others who were baptized by John. Heavenly voices were not an uncommon phenomenon among the Jews of those days, and frequently those voices were heard to utter verses from scripture. Endowment with the Holy Spirit, accompanied by an ecstatic experience, was apparently something that happened to others who were baptized in John’s presence in the Jordan. (Jesus, p. 42)

    If, however, the heavenly voice intoned the words of Isaiah, Jesus must have understood that he was being set apart as the servant of God, the Chosen One. For him, the gift of the Holy Spirit, which was part of John’s baptism, held another special significance that was to become decisive for his future. None of the designations Son, Servant or Chosen One were exclusively messianic titles–the last two could also denote the special status of the prophetic office. By these titles, Jesus learned that he was now called, chosen, set apart. Nothing we have learned casts any doubt upon the historicity of Jesus’ experience at his baptism in the Jordan. (Jesus, p. 42)

    The presence of just the inner circle may be an authentic memory, or a bit of promotion to bolster their standing within the community. Given Mark’s generally critical attitude to the apostolic circle, it is unlikely that he added their names to the tradition. That detail was most likely already in the story as he received it. Matthew has modified it slightly, while Luke has simply preserved the information intact.
    The location of the transfiguration up a high mountain is what the tradition would lead us to expect. High mountains were sacred places and thus ideal sites for theophanies. According to Jewish tradition, Moses spent 6 weeks (40 days) up the “mountain of God” in Sinai when getting a replacement copy of the Ten Commandments. Elijah retired to a mountain cave for his theophany. While no specific location is named in the gospels, later tradition chose to identify the “mount of the transfiguration” as Mt Hermon, the highest peak in the Galilee.

    The appearance of Moses and Elijah alongside Jesus is a powerful claim to spiritual continuity with the most sacred traditions of ancient Israel. Interestingly, like Luke Matthew does not follow Mark when he lists Elijah first. Mark reverses their chronological sequence in the biblical narrative, and flies in the face of later views of the relative significance of Moses and Elijah. However, that may reflect the significance of Elijah as the expected prophet of the End times. In general terms, their presence alongside Jesus speaks to the claim that Jesus was fulfilling the Law and the Prophets.

    Jesus Database

    See also: 184 Horizontal Line Synopsis – for a line by line comparison of the three Synoptic versions of this story

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Epiphany 7A (23 February 2014)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Leviticus 19:1-2, 9-18 & Psalm 119:33-40
    • 1 Corinthians 3:10-11, 16-23
    • Matthew 5:38-48

    Introduction: Holy perfection, perfect holiness

    The lectionary readings this weekend invite us to imagine reaching levels of spiritual perfection that reflect the character of God. That sets the bar pretty high as we draw towards the close of this unusually lengthy Epiphany season:

    • Leviticus 19 – a holiness that derives from (or reaches towards) the holiness of God
    • 1 Corinthians 3 – living temples for God’s own presence in the world
    • Matthew 5 – a perfection that derives from (or reaches towards) the perfection of God

    First Reading: Leviticus and the love of neighbour

    The excerpt from Leviticus 19 has been carefully edited to focus on those elements that compliment the Gospel passage this week, but perhaps also to avoid the embarrassment of reading a text that is so far removed from the values and practices of most contemporary congregations.

    This chapter of Leviticus does indeed include both a direct command for love of neighbour as well as a number of practical prescriptions to protect and assist those in need. Interestingly, these obligations are framed by a theological assertion that the character and actions of the covenant people should reflect the character (the holiness) of God.

    However, this chapter covers a much broader set of rules for holy living.

    Some of these rules are not ones that we would find especially cogent today, although some remain as important now as they were almost 3,000 years ago. The issues covered in this catalogue of practical holiness include:

    • reverence for parents
    • Sabbath observance
    • no idols and no cast images
    • rules for sacrificial food, including exclusion (possibly death) for breaches
    • leaving edges of the harvest for the poor to glean
    • no stealing, false dealing, lying or profaning
    • no defrauding neighbours, stealing, withholding wages, reviling the deaf, or placing obstacles for the blind
    • no unjust sentences, no special treatment for the rich and powerful, no slandering, and no profiting from other’s death (literally, “blood”)
    • no hatred of anyone in the heart, no failure to warn others of dangerous behaviour, no vengeance, no grudges, love your neighbour as yourself
    • keep God’s statutes, no cross-breeding of animals or plants, no mixing of cloth in the one garment
    • rules for expiating guilt after a man has sex with someone else’s female slave (!)
    • no fruit to be eaten from trees in Palestine for the first four years after the conquest
    • no blood to be consumed with the meat, no augury or witchcraft, no trimming of facial hair, no tattoos and no gashing of the flesh in mourning rituals
    • no profaning of daughters by selling them as prostitutes, but keep Sabbath and respect the holy places
    • no consulting mediums and wizards
    • stand up in front of old people and show respect for the aged
    • look after resident aliens
    • no cheating with weights and measures

    We might wonder what kind of people needed to be told not to engage in some of these actions, but the deeper insight perhaps comes from reflecting on the everyday implications of a radical appreciation of God’s character. Our understanding of the Sacred is to have real and observable implications for the ways we act in everyday relationships. Love for God will generate love of neighbour, even if the historical and cultural dimensions vary from one context to another.

    Gospel: Perfection, no less

    The week’s excerpt from Matthew continues the selections from the Sermon on Mount, and completes the series of antitheses:

    • (in the past) no murder, (now) no hatred (5:21-26)
    • (in the past) no adultery, (now) no lust (5:27-30)
    • (in the past) no divorce without a certificate, (now) no marriage after divorce (5:31-32)
    • (in the past) no false swearing, (now) no oaths at all (5:32-37)
    • (in the past) an eye for eye, (now) turn the cheek, go the second mile (5:38-42)
    • (in the past) love your neighbour, hate your enemy, (now) love your enemy (5:43-47)

    The underlying dynamic of these sayings is to portray Jesus as a rigorous teacher of the Torah, but a rabbi whose focus was on internal coherence rather than external compliance.

    While sometimes understood as a displacement of Torah, Matthew actually represents Jesus as calling for a level of Torah observance that exceeds the “righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.” Far from being a rejection of Jewish Torah, Matthew represents a reaffirmation of Torah as central to Christian identity and practice.

    The spiritual instincts of the Matthean community were very different from those seen in the letters of Paul. They represent very different expressions of early Christianity, but Matthew’s perspective was not the way of the future as Christianity became increasingly isolated from its Jewish roots. In the aftermath of successive Jewish uprisings against the Roman Empire, some second century Christians even contemplated abandoning the Old Testament as they sought to distinguish themselves from Judaism. In the end, the Jewish Scriptures found a permanent place within the Christian Bible, but relations between Christians and Jews sank to a low ebb in many parts of the empire. Matthew’s preference for describing Jesus in traditional Jewish categories did not hold sway over the Christian imagination, and Pauline categories with their emphasis on Jesus as the divine kyrios came to dominate the christological debates of the third and fourth centuries.

    The two antitheses that comprise this week’s Gospel are among the most distinctive of the teachings attributed to Jesus.

    • The injunction to turn the other cheek, to give one’s cloak (for night time protection) when our daytime clothing is demanded, and to carry the enemy soldier’s baggage for an additional mile beyond what he could legally impose is radical indeed. Choosing not to retaliate, but to serve even more generously than (unjustly) demanded by an oppressor is a supreme act of the human spirit. These examples, however, are not as innocent as they may seem to anachronistic Western eyes. To turn the cheek would require the enemy to dishonour himself by using his left hand, while to relinquish one’s legal right to the overnight protection of the cloak would be to disclose the shameful conduct of the oppressor. And to insist on carrying the soldier’s equipment for an additional mile would undermine his sense of supremacy, as well as deftly challenging his capacity to control and coerce by his military powers. This is subversive wisdom at its best.
    • The command to love even one’s enemy moves the contest of wills to a new level entirely. There is, of course, no Old Testament command to hate one’s enemies; although there far too many biblical examples of tribal violence and ethnic cleansing directed towards the enemies of ancient Israel. As represented by Matthew, Jesus calls for a higher level of holiness, a more complete perfection. To be truly authentic the person of faith must do far better than caring about neighbour and friend. To be “perfect just as your Father in heaven is perfect” requires love even for one’s enemies.

    These instructions do not belong to the doctrinal essence of historic Christianity, but they are at the centre of its sacred wisdom for everyday life. Can we imagine—or, better still, create—a church that practised these injunctions, and gave more weigh to the authenticity of its members’ treatment of others than to their theological correctness?

    Jesus Database

    • 140 The Other Cheek: (1a) 1Q: Luke 6:29 = Matt 5:38-41, (1b) Did. 1:4a.
    • 103 Give Without Return: (1) Gos. Thom. 95; (2a) 1Q: Luke 6:30,34,35b = Matt 5:42; (2b) Did. 1:4b,5a.
    • 114 Love Your Enemies: (1) P. Oxy. 1224, 2 r i, lines 1-2a; (2a) 1Q: Luke 6:27-28,35a = Matt 5:43-44; (2b) Pol. Phil. 12:3a; (2c) Did. 1:3b.
    • 117 Better Than Sinners: (1a) 1Q: Luke 6:32-35 = Matt 5:45-47; (1b) 2 Clem. 13:4a [from Luke 6:32]; (1c) Did. 1:3b; (2) Ign. Pol. 2:1.
    • 141 As Your Father: (1a) 1Q: Luke 6:36 = Matt 5:48, (1b) Pol. Phil. 12:3b.

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Epiphany 6A (16 February 2014)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Deuteronomy 30:15-20 & Psalm 119:1-8
    • 1 Corinthians 3:1-9
    • Matthew 5:21-37

    Introduction

    The readings set for this Sunday mostly follow the continuing series established over the past few weeks, but the first reading is drawn from Deuteronomy. Depending on the date of Easter, these readings are sometimes used in the series after Pentecost, but in other years they are simply omitted.

    First Reading: Deuteronomy 30:15-20

    In its present canonical location, Deuteronomy reiterates the account of the tribes of YHWH in the wilderness. It is both the conclusion to the great national epic narrated from Genesis through Deuteronomy (the Torah), and also the theological prelude to the subsequent prophetic recital of Israel’s political history that extends from Joshua and Judges through 1 & 2 Samuel to 1 & 2 Kings.

    Deuteronomy is broadly cast in the literary form of a covenant document, but it is also something of a last testament for Moses whose death is one of the final scenes in the book.

    The section read this week comes from the concluding section of Moses’ third and final discourse:

    • Deut 5–11 – First Address
    • Deut 12–28 – Second Address
    • Deut 29–30 – Third Address

    At the culmination this series of exhortations the Deuteronomist presents Moses as laying down a challenge for the people of Israel. They were to choose between two pathways, one leading to life and blessing in the land of promise, and the other guaranteed to result in suffering, death and exile. This is not a historical memory, but a projection back into the imaginary past of a theological value held dearly by the Yahwists of ancient Israel and Judah.

    The following description of the radical Yahwists responsible for this book, and perhaps for much of what we have come to know as the Old Testament, comes from The Once and Future Bible (p. 84f):

    What we find in Deuteronomy—and also in the books that follow it and reflect the same deuteronomistic mindset—is a radical redefinition of Yahwism as an exclusive loyalty to the national deity, matched with a determination to eliminate anything that may compromise their primary devotion to God. The late dating of this book is shown by its demand to kill all of the indigenous peoples of Canaan, matched with the call for all the traditional religious sites (the “high places”) to be destroyed.
    Had this been the view taken by the earliest tribes of YHWH, the history of ancient Israel and Judah would have been rather different. Even the Bible acknowledges that the earlier generations of “settlers” did not drive out the people of land, and failed to eradicate the worship of Baal and Asherah. Had they done so, according to the Bible, Israel would not have been led astray by these pagans and their despicable practices. (See especially 2 Kgs 17:7–18 and 23:26–27.) The violence visited on Israel by God in punishment for their sins would not have been such a feature of their historical experience as a nation and, in particular, they would not have been sent into exile in distant Babylon.
    This, of course, is the perspective of the “Deuteronomist” and his school—an informal tradition of prophetic leadership that was deeply skeptical of the establishment with its coalition of king and priest, palace and temple. It is not a view supported by history. Both the brief flourishing of the small kingdoms of israel and Judah, and their total collapse, can be fully explained by the larger political context of Palestine in the Iron Age II period. Other—non-Yahwistic—kingdoms thrived and collapsed in the same area and at the same times. But, as the Deuteronomistic prophets tell the story, history could have turned out differently—if only the people had allowed them to call the shots.
    Had the anti-establishment religious fringe gained the public power it craved, we would have seen a total annihilation of the non-Jewish population of Canaan. There would have been more religious bloodbaths of the kind unleashed by Jehu following his religious coup against the northern dynasty of Omri (see 2 Kings 10). Local villages and towns would have been deprived of access to local sacred places much sooner than happened when the high places were suppressed during the reign of Josiah, and sacrifice restricted to the temple in Jerusalem.
    Central to the theology of the Deuteronomist was a theology of punishment and reward, an ancient form of the prosperity gospel. Good behavior by pious people would always lead to blessings (possession of the land, good health, fertility of field and bed, and so on). On the other hand, failure to serve YHWH with total loyalty would inevitably result in loss of the land, famine and plague, invasion and exile. The good are blessed, while the bad are punished. The simplistic theology of the Deuteronomist was to be challenged in other parts of the Bible, but especially in the OT book of Job.

    Second Reading: 1 Corinthians 3:1-9

    This week’s excerpt from 1 Corinthians provides a glimpse into the contests and tensions that were hallmarks of earliest Christianity.

    Far from being a golden age of theological purity and spontaneous unity, as the orthodox writers of the second and third century would have us imagine it, the hidden history of early Christianity seems to have been characterised by doctrinal confusion, factional disputes, and leadership rivalries. Some of this is easily surmised by the content and tone of Paul’s letters, many of which may never have been composed were it not for the problems he was seeking to address. We can discern the outline of Paul’s opponents in letters such as Galatians and Corinthians, and his passionate defence of his apostolic status is surely a barometer of the challenges to his authority from other parts of the early church.

    In today’s passage, Paul is appealing for tolerance and shared loyalty to a larger objective. He suggests that spiritual maturity is demonstrated by a capacity to move beyond loyalty to particular persons, our favourite religious practices, and our pet doctrines. Yet acrimonious arguments over precisely those questions were to bedevil Christianity for much of its first three centuries, coming to a temporary settlement only when the emperor Constantine directed the resources of the empire to impose uniformity and suppress dissenters. With the lifting of civil constraints on religious diversity in the last few centuries we have seen a renewed passion for doctrinal debate, exclusive claims to truth, and the fragmenting of Christianity into hundreds of competing sects.

    For further resources on diversity and conflict in earliest Christianity see studies such as the following:

    For a conservative critique of the consensus represented in the previous studies, all of which derive to some extent from the influential work of Walter Bauer (1877-1960), see:

    Gospel: Matthew 5:21-37

    This section from Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount traditions is commonly known as The Antitheses, where Jesus is represented as setting his own teaching in opposition to the traditional sacred law of Judaism:

    • Anger
    • Prayer and forgiveness
    • On the way to the judge
    • Lust
    • Radical holiness
    • Divorce
    • Oaths

    Space will not allow a discussion of these separate points, but the Jesus Database pages listed below will offer the texts and some commentary.

    Jesus Database

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Preaching the Old Testament

    A sermon by Dr Anthony Rees for the ‘Debate the Preacher’ series at St John’s Anglican Cathedral, Brisbane on Sunday, 9 February 2014. Published here at Anthony’s request.

    Last week we commenced on a four week series—Why Bother with the Old Testament?  My colleague, Rev Dr Greg Jenks gave a fascinating reflection on this, inviting us to imagine a bible without the law, a bible without the prophets, a bible without the poems.  What sort of bible would that leave us with?  A narrow one, a lighter one—and not only in size.  Greg’s position was that we should bother with the Old Testament.  For the sake of the series, I considered proposing an alternative view.  But I need you to understand something.  I am writing my second book on the book of Numbers.  To be clear, if there is a book we have not bothered with, it is Numbers.  So if word got out that I had claimed that we need not bother with the OT, that would have been very bad for me.

    Greg began by playing a little with this title—Why Bother with the Old Testament?  Is this a question, or a statement?  If it is a question, how should we inflect it?  I want to suggest that the question itself assumes that we should bother with the Old Testament.  Even if we ultimately come to a point of rejection, we can only get there through a process of bothering.  But ‘bother’ itself is ambiguous.  To bother can mean to pay attention to, to attempt to understand.  In this sense it has a positive meaning.  But I say to my son, stop bothering your sister, by which I mean agitate, disturb, and it is generally not said positively.  Can we agitate the Old Testament—can we mess with it, can we play with it, can we bother it.  If we do, is it positive or negative?  Plenty of things I read, and write, suggest that we can—but that is for another time.

    What I want to do tonight is to pick up on something that came out of the discussion which followed Greg’s sermon.  If we affirm that we should bother with the OT, how should that manifest itself in our worshipping community?  The simple answer was that we should devote preaching to it—a recognition that much, if not all of our preaching tends to focus in on the NT readings.  For a long time, that meant Paul, and the reinforcement of doctrine.  But in more recent decades, as we have understood that our lives are a narrative, not a series of propositional statements, the gospel narrative has become a more potent source for preaching.  I have to make clear that this focus on NT preaching is not universal.  Indeed, I suspect it is a western phenomenon.  In the rural areas of Fiji, you might be lucky to hear one NT sermon a month.  The same is true of Africa.  I preached a sermon from John in Kenya a few years ago, and I think the local minister was very surprised.

    So I am going to preach from an OT text—but I want to do so as a way of demonstrating what I think is another compelling reason for us to hold onto the OT.  That is, that the OT gives us an emotional vocabulary to express our human experience, that is far richer than what we find in the NT.  Much of this is lost, due to the tragically sterilising work of the lectionary compilers.  But if we were in a sense, to reclaim our scriptures, we might be surprised at what we find.  Actually, my experience is that people are always surprised at what they find.

    PSALM 22

    For centuries, one figure dominated our interpretation of the psalms; David, the charismatic, god fearing, heroic King of biblical Israel, whose story we read in the books of Solomon, Kings and Chronicles.  This king, warrior, singer and song writer was thought to be the writer of many of the psalms we have collected in this book.  The superscriptions made it clear.  A psalm of David.  It was thought that at least some of these psalms could be traced to particular events in the story of David’s life as we read it in the historical books.  For example, psalm 51 has been thought to be written as a response to David’s actions with Bathsheba; in some sense, a display of contrition in light of his moral failing.  The psalms inspired readers, being, as Ellen Davis puts it, the spontaneous outpourings of a pious King’s heart.

    The twentieth century fractured that romantic view.  No longer are these psalms valued for their insight into David’s life, which is now considered to be essentially unknowable, but instead for the way in which their more generalized language and forms have made them accessible to generations of worshippers.  These songs belong not to David, but to all those who worship the God of Israel.  As Davis says again, they are intensely personal, and yet, not private.  Their response of faith to human experience ensures that they serve as the single most important resource for both Jewish and Christian prayer.

    So it is with psalm 22, a lament, perhaps the supreme example of lament in the psalms.  The psalm divides into two major sections. Vss 1-21 are what we might generally refer to as the lament, vss 22-31 being a prayer of thanksgiving for deliverance.  The distinction between the two sections is so sharp that some scholars have suggested that these two fragments may have come from separate authors, or at least represent two independent compositions.  If we were interested in looking for an author, this may well be a clue to us.  However, if we approach the psalm with a view to reading it as a liturgical work, what we see instead is not discontinuity, but rather, a liturgical process; the lamenting prayer makes way for the praise and thanksgiving which follows the assurance of God’s gracious response.

    My, God, My God, why have you forsaken me?  The opening question leads to another—why are you so far from helping, from the words of my roaring?  And a further complaint—I cry, day and night, but find no rest, by which he means not peace, but rather, no reason to stop crying, God’s abandonment is still real to our psalmist.  This is an interesting problem.  The psalter is full of assertions that God does not abandon his people (see Psalms 9, 27, 37, 38, 71), and yet what we have in this psalm is a writer in despair, complaining bitterly at God’s abandonment.  Despite his bitterness, the writer is still some way from turning away from God.  His cry reveals his desperation, twice calling ‘my God’, what Calvin notes as a distinct profession of faith, the cry of a believer.

    The shift in vs 3 highlights the gravity of the psalmist’s theological problem.  The essence of Israelite covenant faith is that trust in God leads to deliverance.    This is the story of ‘our’ ancestors, those who cried out, trusted and found deliverance.  This story is the praise upon which Yhwh is enthroned!  The use of ‘our’ is instructive also.  There is an understanding that personal distress can be held together with a common history.  The prayer for personal deliverance is spoken in the midst of others.  This idea reiterates Davis’ comment; it is personal, but not private.

    At vs 6 the tone changes again.  The psalmist reveals something of his circumstances.  He is a worm—an object of derision, of insignificance.  People around him taunt him—all who see me, he says.  The taunts reveal to us the nature of the psalmist’s mental turmoil; God’s apparent inaction justifies the taunts of the mockers.  Their taunts have a tinge of truth to them; ‘let Yhwh deliver —let him deliver the one in whom he delights’—their taunt echoes the historical recollection of the ancestors who were ‘delivered’ in vs 4.  The irony is cutting.  God’s abandonment seems evident to the onlookers, their jibes are internalised by the psalmist.

    Again the focus shifts at verse 9.  A pattern has emerged: vs 3 commences with the words, ‘But you’, verse six, ‘But I’, and at verse nine, ‘But you’, though this time a little more emphatically.  The psalmist again looks at God’s action in the past, though this time not with Israel, but with himself.  God is imaged as a midwife, taking him from the womb and placing him on the mother’s breast.  God, the gentle, caring, compassionate midwife is tenderly concerned for the well being of this new life.  God has been intimately involved in the development of our psalmist, so much so that he proclaims, ‘since my mother bore me, you have been my god’, forming an inclusio with the opening cry of the psalm—my god, my god—god who has always been my god, why have you forsaken me?  The opening section concludes with a plea which affords us a glimpse of what lies ahead—do not be far, trouble is all around, there is no one to help.

    Vss 12-18 reveal an ever deepening despair and unravelling of the psalmist.  The language is metaphorical, the imagery powerful.  His enemies are described as wild animals; bulls, lions and dogs.  The animals are symbols of non human strength.  They are animals that represent a threat to human existence.  In the ancient world they could also represent demonic forces, an image which dramatically heightens the picture of fear that is being painted.  They surround him, stalk him and appear ready to pounce on their prey.  They seem to be ever closing—vivid contrast to God’s supposed distance.  The psalmist’s physical state is disastrous—his energy is consumed, his body battered, his heart melts, his mouth is dried out—he is fatigued and thirsty beyond the ability to speak, death is assured.  So certain are the enemies of his demise that they cast lots for his clothing—this man is beyond hope.  In fact, in the midst of this litany of disaster, God does appear, but only to lay the victim in the dust, symbolising the apparent certainty of death.

    Vs 19—But you, and here the psalmist names God Yhwh for the first time, and prays not for closeness, but for deliverance, for help.  Vss 20-21 are remarkable; ‘deliver my soul from the sword, my life (my only one) from the power of the dog; save me from the mouth of the lion’, and then, remarkably, ‘from the horn of the wild ox you have rescued me!’—the perfect tense immediately changes the tenor of the text.  No longer is this a psalm of petition, of imploring god to be close, of crying out for divine help.  This is now a prayer of assurance, you have rescued me!

    The praise that follows unfolds in sharp distinction to the lament from which it proceeds.  The lament is marked by a sense of entrapment, of an ever tightening circle of danger.  The praise and thanksgiving section however, moves ever outward in its expression, moving from brothers and sisters, to the congregation, to the offspring of Jacob, to the ends of the earth—all the families of nations, those who are dead and those who are yet to be born.  All of humanity is caught up in the psalmists vision of praise to the almighty god of his deliverance.  It hints at Isaiah’s vision—that the whole of the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God, though its scope is even wider.

    While the universal vision that this portion of the psalm presents is breathtaking, these verses contain other significant statements that we mustn’t ignore.  Vs 22 places the psalmist in the presence of friends, in opposition to the enemies that have surrounded him to this point.  That he is in the midst of the congregation also tells us that what is being described is a liturgical, religious event.  This is extended in vss 25-26, where having offered his vows in recognition of God’s action, the psalmist joins in a thanksgiving meal.  This is a symbol both of a reconciled community and fellowship with God.  The psalmist, who had previously approached death exclaims to those with whom he shares ‘may your hearts live forever’.

    The language of verse 26 is particularly significant.  The poor (the afflicted, the lowly) shall eat and be satisfied, those who ‘seek’ will praise the Lord.  James Luther Mays sees here a clear redefining of who Israel is.  It is not the trouble he has faced which has made the psalmist lowly or afflicted.  This suffering has happened to him  ‘as’ one of the lowly, and God’s response shows that he is the God of the lowly, of the afflicted, not in circumstance, but in being.  This too reaches back to vs 24 and is a realisation that God’s apparent absence was an illusion.  So the psalmist answers his own complaint—he did not hide his face from me, but heard when I cried.  The meal then is not just a meal of physical nourishment, but also represents a spiritual fill for those who continue to be ‘lowly’.

    In response to God’s actions on behalf of the psalmist, the nations are called to praise god.  This is an unusual move, as the nations are often pictured as god’s enemies (Ps 2).  Even more peculiar is that they are said to ‘remember’, and ‘turn’, verbs which are commonly implored of Israel.  And then they will worship, or ‘bow low’.  Interestingly, Israel is frequently warned against becoming like the nations.  Here, the nations are to become ‘like Israel’, the clear implication being that Yhwh rules the nations.

    The ever widening circle even encompasses those who have died or have not yet lived.  This lends the psalm an eschatological character, particularly with the future tense verbs of vss 27 onwards.  Death comes to all, but the delivering acts of God will be told from generation to generation; he has done it.

    The sufferer of the psalm experiences the terror of human mortality, acutely aware of god’s absence and the presence of enemies.  The prayer of the psalmist offers us a paradigm for expressing our own suffering—to use it is to set one’s self within the paradigm.  For Christians, this psalm has taken on special significance, since Jesus’ appropriation of the psalm joins him with the countless others—the company of the afflicted, and he becomes one with them in the midst of suffering.  Jesus’ use of the psalm invites us to pray with him in the midst of our own turmoil.

    But this psalm, in the end, is not about suffering.  It is, finishing with the words of Ellen Davis, about the possibility, efficacy and necessity of giving praise to god’.  He has done it.