Matthew 1:18-25

This passage occurs in the RCL, Year 1, Advent IV, most recently December 18, 2022.

Summary:  This passage teems with Old Testament allusions.  These allusions make it clear that Christ is to be exalted.  Furthermore, they make it clear that Joseph is a special person.  I appreciate why the church has so adored Mary; I think Joseph is often overlooked.  As Rev. Daniel Clark said to me while he was serving at my parish as a Vicar: Joseph is the blue collar bible character; a quiet, humble and hard-working person that Scripture overlooks!

γενεσις (lit. 'genesis', meaning "beginning" or "birth", 1:18)  Matthew uses this word twice in his first chapter (also 1:1).  He could have picked simpler words for giving birth, as he does in vs. 25.  I believe he used this word intentionally to connect back the Old Testament opening creation passages.  The first book but also the first word of the Hebrew Bible is "beginnings" (in Greek -- Genesis). Furthermore, like in the Old Testament, Matthew seems to offer two creation accounts, first the grand and then second, the detailed version.

To have more fun with this connection:  I believe Matthew in vs 1:1 here riffs on Genesis 2:4, much like John's Gospel opens with a riff on Genesis 1:1.  Matthew employs the the phrase "βιβλος γενεσωες" found only in Genesis 2:4.  Both creation accounts from Genesis are picked up by the New Testament; John picks up Genesis chapter 1; Matthew picks up Genesis chapter 2! 

ενθυμθεντος (from ενθυμεομαι, meaning "decide", 1:20)  This word does not simply refer to analytic processing, but the working through of one's feelings and literally passions (θυμος).  I love the fact that Luke acknowledges this was a matter of the heart for our introverted, blue-collar, step-dad to be.  There were so many layers of communal relationships - his parents, her parents, her and him.  How could he navigate all of this?

υιος Δαυιδ (meaning "son of David", 1:20)  When this phrase is used elsewhere in the Old Testament (Jeremiah 13:13 ; 2 Chronicles 32:33), it does not refer to the Jews or all of the Hebrews.  It refers to the ancient kings of Israel.  Matthew here is calling Joseph a king.

οναρ (meaning "dream", 1:20)  I am embarrassed to admit that I never saw this connection until some pastors showed this to me last week -- both the Old Testament Joseph and the New Testament Joseph have dreams...and go to Egypt!  I wonder if I didn't discover this earlier because the Greek version of the Old Testament uses a different word for dream.   Regardless, a cool connection.

Iησους (lit. 'Jesus', 1:21)  This is the name to be given to the baby born to Mary.  It is the Old Testament name Joshua.  Names often change when they move across cultures (Robert=Roberto in Spanish), so believe it or not, Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew.  Joshua's name means "The LORD saves" and his job is to lead the people across the river Jordan into the promised land.  Jesus will save the people, get baptized in the river Jordan and lead the people into the promised land.  We miss that connection in English that would have been clear to Joseph and Mary:  They are to name their child "the Lord saves" for he will save the people from their sins.

Εμμανουηλ  (lit. 'Emmanuel', meaning "God is with us", 1:23)  Although he is declared here to be "God is with us" Jesus will not assume this title during his ministry of teaching and healing.  Why is this?  I would argue because he must first die and rise in order to be Emmanuel.  At the end of Matthew's Gospel, Jesus declares "I am with you."  However, the literal Greek here is "I with you am"; "I am" is the ancient name of God.  So here Jesus expands the title of God to include -- at its heart -- with you.  He then takes on the name Immanuel, but only after the cross and empty tomb.

μη φοβηθης (meaning "do not be afraid", 1:20)  Little side note on the Greek.  Although the English translators translate this the same way they translate the words of Gabriel to Mary (do not be afraid), it is slightly different in the Greek.  It is the same verb (φοβοω), but it is in the passive voice for Joseph and the active voice for Mary.  Technically then the translation for Mary should be "Do not fear" and for Joseph "Do not be afraid."  This is not very different, really.  But what is interesting is that when the passive construction is used in the LXX translation of the Old Testament, it often has an element (further suggested by the words' meaning in Homeric Greek, I would argue) of "Do not flee."  Perhaps the angel is telling Joseph, "Don't go anywhere!"

Matthew 11:2-11

This passage occurs in the Advent season of the Revised Common Lectionary (Year A), most recently updated for 2022.
 
Summary:
For some comments on blessing, scandal and Luther, see below!  I would like to focus though on the words Jesus attributes today to John the Baptist, claiming that "See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you."  This passage is often said to refer to Malachi 3:1.  However, a careful reading, in English or in Greek, reveals that it is quite different from Malachi 3:1.  In Malachi, the Lord sends a messenger to prepare a way for himself (the Lord) to return to the temple and bring about the day of the Lord.  In the case of John, Jesus says that he prepares a way for YOU.  I think Jesus may be referring to another passage in Scripture, namely Exodus 23:20 (fixed previous post mistake here) or 33:2.  Here the messenger is supposed to show the people the way into the promised land and out of the wilderness. This sounds a lot more like the job of John than the messenger Malachi describes!  Regardless, Jesus is claiming to be the Lord!

Note:  Such passages like this are why I've begun to use Luke 1 as my Advent preaching texts.  This text does not have immediate cultural relevance.  However, I think one could tie into expectations and Christmas -- what are you expecting this year?  Do we have any real expectations for the impact that Jesus would make in our lives and in our world?

Key words

ἀγγελος (11:8; "messenger")  The word is literally "angel," but it also means messenger (double -gg in Greek is pronounced -ng).  In the Bible, especially in the OT, the line between the messenger and God is often blurred.  Often a story begins with an angel speaking and then suddenly God is speaking.  Why is this?  One answer may be historical.  As the NET commentary writes, "Cassuto says that the words of the first clause do not imply a being distinct from God, for in the ancient world the line of demarcation between the sender and the sent is liable easily to be blurred."  I provide a Lutheran, and therefore cooler, answer:  Where the Word is, so is God.  

σκανδαλίζω (11:6; "take offense")  This word appears often in the New Testament.  It is most often translated as offensive.  If you want to shake people up though, translate it more literally, "become scandlized."  I recall here Luther's 95 theses:
62. The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.
63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last (Mt. 20:16).

What might it mean to not be scandalized in Christ?  That we do not find his teachings offensive?  That we find our righteousness wholly in him?

μαλακοις (11:8; "fancy")  Hardly a key word for this passage, but alas, it is word of intense scrutiny these days.  Paul uses this word in 1 Cor 6:9 to refer to, well, we really don't know.  Ask the NRSV and they will tell you male prostitutes.  Ask the NET and they will tell you "passive homosexual partners."  It seems that at least, in this case, it refers to soft as in luxury soft.  I think.

προφητης (11:9, "prophet")  Sometimes in English we think of prophecy as predicting the future.  This was not the job of the prophet.  The prophet's job was something more like Jacob Marley in A Christmas Carol.  The task of the prophet is presenting reality in such vivid terms, including future possibilities, that repentance follows.  The future described by the prophet contains both beautiful visions of God's action but also the scary reality if the humans involved do not change their ways.  In short, a good prophet does not predict the future because the humans change their actions upon hearing his vision.  Jacob Marley's prophetic warning for Scrooge about a life in chains do not come true.  However, his biting words for Scrooge -- "Mankind is our business" do come true, but only because of the visions of hope and horror revealed to Scrooge.

σου (11:10 "you" in the genitive)  Interestingly, Jesus words in Matthew 11:10

"See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you."

do resemble Malachi 3:1

"See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me." 

However, Jesus changes the word "me" to "you"; the messenger is no longer for the Lord, but for you.  For those who come out of the Lutheran preaching tradition, this is crucial -- a sermon must be for you, in other words, it must hand over the work of God from Scripture, from the cross, from the empty tomb for you, so that you might believe and be renewed!

One could argue that Jesus is also referencing the work of God in sending messengers in Exodus as the people prepare to enter the promised land.

"I will send a messenger before you" (33:2)

"See, I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared. (23:20)"

While I like the idea of John heralding entrance into the promised land, both Malachi and Exodus are hard metaphors.  In Malachi, the messenger heralds the day of the Lord, complete with a refiner's fire.  In Exodus, the messenger heralds a season of battle against opposing tribes to gain access to the promised land.  Both arguably could fit within the New Testament context! 

Sentence Translation:  NRSV Matthew 11:11.  I picked this sentence because it has no participles.  Instead, it has a lot of nouns in different cases!
αμην λεγω υμιν -ουκ εγηγερται γεννητοις γυναικων μειζων Ιωαννου του Βαπτιστου, ο δὲ μικροτερος ἐν τη βασιλεια των ουρανων μειζων αυτου εστιν

As usual, divide into little pieces, using the Greek punctuation provided by most Greek bibles to help
αμην λεγω υμιν
ουκ εγηγερται εν γεννητοις γυναικων μειζων Ιωαννου του Βαπτιστου
ο δὲ μικροτερος ἐν τη βασιλεια των ουρανων μειζων αυτου εστιν

1)  αμην λεγω υμιν:  This should be straight forward:  Amen, I am saying to you.  Or Truly I say to you all.  Just fill in the words!  The only mildly hard thing is the pronoun, "2nd person plural dative."  Or "To you all"

Proposed translation:  "Truly I am telling all of you:"

2)  ουκ εγηγερται εν γεννητοις γυναικων μειζων Ιωαννου του Βαπτιστου

Find the verb...εγηγερται   "perfect passive singular"  He/she/it has been born.  In Greek, the perfect makes sense here, because the perfect indicates a previous action that still has a linger impact, in this case, birth.  To translate the verb, you need to also translate the "not" or  ουκ.  So, before we get to the rest of the sentence, we know what has happened.  "He/she/it has not been born."  It turns out there is no obvious subject so far, so we will just leave it as "he/she/it."

Now divide up the rest of the sentence into "cars on the train."  Group them by case (hint:  cluster them by what looks the same in terms of endings):
A)  εν γεννητοις B)  γυναικων μειζων C)  Ιωαννου του Βαπτιστου

C) is the easiest:  John the Baptist.  But why is John in the genitive?
A) Bible works helps us here:  Among humankind.  To translate the word humankind, you don't have to worry it being in the dative because the preposition εν governs its translation:  in, with, among, etc.
B) "women" in also the genitive; μειζων means greater (at least here).

So what we know so far is:  "among mankind [genitive link] women greater [genitive link] John the Baptist."

To translate the genitive, just try "of"

"among mankind of women greater [of] John the Baptist."  This works in the first case, but not the second.  It turns out that μειζων grammatically requires a genitive.  This isn't how this works in English, so we will use "than" to establish the comparison.
... and at the same time, clean up the first part of the sentence:

"among people born to a woman greater than John the Baptist."

We combine this with earlier

"Truly I am telling all of you:"+"He/she/it has not been born."+ "among people born to a woman greater than John the Baptist."

Truly, I am telling you:  "No one has been born unto a woman who is greater than John the Baptist."

ο δὲ μικροτερος ἐν τη βασιλεια των ουρανων μειζων αυτου εστιν

Find the verb -- its at the end:  εστιν.  This means "is"  So now lets find the subject, which is something after the ο δὲ.  Hint -- when you have ο δὲ, the δὲ tells you that you are switching subjects.  But where to go from here?  Again, make you train cars:
A)  ο δὲ
B)  μικροτερος
C)  ἐν τη βασιλεια
D)  των ουρανων
E) μειζων αυτου
F)  εστιν

F and A you know.  Now E I put two words that seem different, but we've already learned that μειζων means greater and requires a genitive. So this means:  "greater than him."

C+D simply means:  "in the kingdom of heaven."  (Now what that means would take me the whole New Testament to explain."

B)  Means least.  And it is in the nominative.  So we combine with A) for our subject.  You get:  "the one who is least."  Or simply, "the least."

So we get:  "Even the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater then he."

Matthew 3:1-12

This passage occurs in the Advent season of the Revised Common Lectionary (Year A).
 
Summary: The great fun of this passage is that everything is happening all at once and then over and over again.  First, John commands the people to repent, but tells them to do this repeatedly.  Then, people are continually getting baptized while at the same time continually confessing.  The order of baptism-confession-repentance is not entirely clear.  Well, actually, it is clear:  They all happen at once.  Over and over again.  Does this mean baptism happens again and again?  I think the baptism of fire does happen again and again, even if the ritual only happens once in our lives.  What is not in question is that baptism, at least for John, is connected with repentance.

Key Words:

μετανοιετε ("repent"; 3:2).  This verb is in the present tense.  This is significant because it implies that the action ought to be on-going.  In other words, the action of repentance is not a one time event, but a life-time one.  Interestingly, this is the verse that begins the 95 thesis.  When Luther read a similar passage in Greek, he saw that the Latin had removed this continuous aspect of the Greek and said, "Hey!"  "When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said "Repent" he willed that the whole life is one of repentance."  

Advent used to focus on repentance.  The candle and vestments were purple with one pink; now they are blue.  The current focus is hope and "blue" is the color.  Yet we've kept the same lessons, which seem to focus a great deal on repentance.  I sense that repentance and hope are always related.  You cannot repent if you do not believe a situation can get better.

βαπτισμα ("baptism"; 3:7).  Originally, this word did not have religious meaning.  It simply meant to dip.  For your enjoyment, here are the Liddell-Scott hellenestic meanings of the word.  Wow!

I. trans. to dip in water
2. to dip in poison
3. to dip in dye, to dye
4. to draw water
II. intransitive the ship dipped, sank

Try preaching that:  Baptism as a dip in poison; as a dip in dye; as a drawing of water from God; as finally, a sinking ship!  Didn't some monk once write about Baptism as daily dying and rising?

πνευμα ("spirit"; 3:11).  The word can mean "breath" as well.  What is worth noting, especially as we begin the year of readings from Matthew's Gospel, that the Holy Spirit plays an integral role in Matthew's Gospel.  It is not fair to simply say Luke is about the Spirit...In Matthew the Spirit is there too, connected with the birth of Jesus (1:18) and the command to make disciples (20:18). 

This word also shows up in this week's Isaiah text (11:2).  The "Spirit of the Lord" is upon me.  The NRSV, always trying to avoid the Trinity in the OT, makes it "spirit of the Lord." (Note the lower case "spirit.)"  Everyone else, of course, gets it right and makes it "Spirit of the Lord" if not "Lord's Spirit."

Grammar point: 
Greek and Hebrew punctuation.  Well, they're ain't much!  Especially in the earlier manuscripts when things were all capitals (in Greek).  Anyway, there is some and Mark does a little slight of hand here:
"A voice cries in the wilderness:  "Prepare the way of the Lord."  The Hebrew more accurately reads:
"A voice cries, "In the wilderness, prepare the way of the Lord."  Ie, get ready to go back from exile on the road through the wilderness.  Mark and Matthew take the verse and give it new meaning!  A reminder of the freedom that the Spirit gives us to interpret the Word for our context.  Or maybe a warning too!

Verse Translation:
Matthew 3:6 και εβαπτιζοντο εν τω Ιορδανη ποταμω υπ αυτου εξομολογομενοι τας ἀμαρτιας αυτων

Sometimes, before you divide and conquer, just try reading the sentence by sticking in vocab you know and see where you get. When it comes to this verse, if you know a bit of Greek, you should be able to get: 

And baptize in the Jordan under/by/of him ?? the sins of them

Let's save that nasty participle and look at the first half of the sentence (ie, now divide)

και εβαπτιζοντο εν τω Ιορδανη ποταμω υπ αυτου

The key to translation here is to recognize that baptize is a passive voice verb.  This allows you to make sense of "υπ αυτου" which is how Greek tells you who did the action in passive voice:

"And baptized in the river Jordan by him." 

Now we nail down our verb a bit more:  imperfect, 3rd person:

"And they were continuously being baptized in the river Jordan by him."

So, now onto:  εξομολογομενοι τας ἀμαρτιας αυτων

 τας ἀμαρτιας αυτων should be clear:  Their sins or the sins of them.

However, the participle is a mess here.  It turns out it means "confess"  It is a middle present participle.  Hmm...middle means you can translate it as active.
So:  "confessing their sins."

What is the connection of this clause to the rest of the clause?  Well, the participle is a circumstantial participle...but what circumstances?  Well, the key here is the tense.  It is present tense.  That means the action is on-going.  However, the main verb is in the imperfect.  So does this mean the baptizing happened before the confessing?  No!  The present tense of the participle means that this action happens at the SAME time as the main verb.  In other words, the people did not baptize and then confess; or vice verse.  What is means is that while they were being baptized, they simultaneously were confessing.  So we get:

"And they were continuously being baptized in the river Jordan by him, while they were confessing their sins."

In the wilderness of life, our baptism and confession...and repentance are all related.

Matthew 24:36-44

 This passage occurs for Advent 1, year A.  Because A) I don't always preach on the lectionary in Advent; B) I love the Isaiah passage paired with this Gospel and C) it falls so closely after Thanksgiving, I have not done a post on this passage.

So, some less organized thoughts about this passage.

παρουσια ("coming"; Matthew 24:37, 39): This word can mean simply "presence."  It can also meant "coming" -- literally translated as "Advent" by Jerome when he translated the Greek into Latin.

BDAG has some helpful insight (as usual)

"On one hand the word served as a sacred expression for the coming of a hidden divinity, who makes his presence felt by a revelation of his power, or whose presence is celebrated in the cult)."

"On the other hand, it became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, especially of kings and emperors visiting a province."

Is Christ speaking about his spiritual presence among us?  It sounds more like the final victory procession.  If one wants to know what this looks like, one can turn to apocalyptic parts of the New Testament.  Or just read the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Palm Sunday).  This Sunday might be interesting to build off of Christ the King.  What kind of triumphal procession does Jesus normally take?  Fascinatingly, in the Middle Ages, the preaching text for Advent 1 was the Palm Sunday passage!

κατακλυσμος (literally, cataclysm; 24:38, 39)  Jesus references a time of great destruction in which the righteous are saved through the ark.  This is hard; but is it meant to point out the destruction or ultimate salvation?  To what extent is destruction a part of creation?

Lastly, παραλαμβανω and αφιημι (24:40, 41)  These words are an interesting pairing.  They could mean "taken and left behind."  But they can just as easily mean "received and forgiven." 

Possible solutions:  

- Accept the fact that half of the people on earth will be left behind when Jesus comes, awaiting their opportunity to repent.

- Move to a sinner/saint understanding -- in each person resides two people. The saint is received; the sinner is forgiven, but this means, truly, left behind.

- That some are taken and others forgiven.  Both good outcomes and the result of Jesus coming among us.

Luke 23:33-43

This passage occurs on Christ the King Sunday in the Revised Common Lectionary (Year C).
 
Summary
There is an ambiguity in the Greek this week.  Do those mocking Jesus disbelieve he is king or, knowing this, misunderstand what this means?  The world has often suffered, not simply because we deny Jesus' his title, but because we misunderstand what it means for him to be king.  This passage offers great contrasts between Jesus' rule (or even economy) and that of Rome (and the world):  Jesus willingness to die, forgive and share.

2024 insight:  While doing a series on the 7 last words, I played around with the word paradise, realizing that this is the Greek word the Septuagint uses for the Garden of Eden. This definitely opened up some preaching possibilities in terms of Jesus restoring all things.

Key Words
σταυρόω (23:33; 'crucify')  As scholar Martin Hengel writes, “Death on the cross was the penalty for slaves, as everyone knew; as such it symbolized extreme humiliation, shame and torture.”  People wear crosses around the necks and jewelry today.  Not so in Jesus' day.

διαμερίζω  (23:34; see also 22:17, "divide")  The soldiers divide Jesus garments by lot.  Interesting, a scene early in the passion Jesus has the disciples divides the bread.  Quite a contrast between the kingdom of Rome and the Kingdom of Jesus!

χριστος (23:35,39, "Christ" or "Anointed.")  This word is from the Hebrew: "Messiah," which means anointed.  Worth pointing out is that Jesus has been called the Christ before.  First, by angels (2:11), then by Peter (4:41) and perhaps one could argue, by the penitent thief.

σωσάτω εαυτόν (23:25, 37 and 39, "Save yourself")  This is clear in the English, but worth pointing out.  Three times Jesus is commanded to save himself (or "save yourself).  Jesus was tempted three times in the wilderness.  At the end he is tempted three times as well.  This reveals the real purpose of the original temptations -- to avoid Jesus dying on the cross.  The kings of this world save themselves.  Jesus saves others.  (It also brings up an interesting question:  Could Jesus have saved himself at that point?  I believe the questions suggest he could of, but until the end, suffered willingly).

βασιλεύς (23:38; "King")  As BDAG puts it, "one who rules as possessor of the highest office in a political realm."  This doesn't mean mayor.  King.  In Athens, he had charge of the public worship and the conduct of criminal processes.  While "kingdom of God" or "Christ the king" does not reference medieval European kings, the New Testament writers would have known this word meant "authoritative power that is often abused"; in fact, the two examples of king in the New Testament are the Herods.  The OT isn't any better, as two folks listed as βασιλεύς the Old Testament include:  Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar

παραδείσῳ (23:43, paradise).  In Genesis 2 (and then in Revelation 2), the word for the Garden of Eden in Greek is paradise!  This might provide some fertile ground (get it, ground, ADAMAH!) for sermons, reflecting on the full mission of God to restore paradise.

Grammar Review:  εἰ
Once again we come to the lovely word "εἰ."  This can mean "if" or "since."  The correct translation depends on context but especially on the mood of the verb.  If the verb is in the subjunctive, "εἰ" should most likely be translated "if."  If the verb is in the indicative mode, then "εἰ" should be translated as "since."  In this particular passage, the verbs are indicative, so perhaps we should go with "Since you are the son of God."  Perhaps it makes little difference, but the translation begs a question:  Are the passers-by, the soldiers and even the thief wrong about him being the son of God; or are they wrong about what it means to be the son of God.  If you translate εἰ as "if" then you are arguing they don't know that he is the son of God.  If you translate εἰ as "since" then you are arguing that they know he is the son of God, they just don't have a clue what this means for the world.  I think the later translation probably makes us more uncomfortable and hence why we go with the grammatically incorrect (or at least less correct) "If you are the son of God..."

Sentence Translation. 23:33
καὶ ὀτι ἠλθον ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον τὸν καλούμενον Κρανίον, ἐκει ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτὸν καὶ τοὺς κακούργους, ὀν μὲν εκ δεξιων, ὀν δὲ εξ ἀριστερων

(NRSV) When they came to the place that is called The Skull, they crucified Jesus there with the criminals, one on his right and one on his left.

I picked this sentence because its not that hard in the Greek, but you need to know a trick or two to get through it.

First task, as always is to divide the sentence in to smaller pieces.  Use the commas:
1) καὶ ὀτε ἠλθον ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον τὸν καλούμενον  Κρανίον
2)  ἐκει ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτὸν καὶ τοὺς κακούργους
3)  ὀν μὲν εκ δεξιων
4)  ὀν δὲ εξ ἀριστερων

Looking at section 1: First, look for a verb.  Ah!  Notice the nice verb: ἠλθον.  This normal, nice looking aorist verb tells you two things -- one, you have a relatively straight-forward part of the sentence here and two, the subject of your sentence is I or they.  Remember, Greek can bury the subject in the verb.

Fill in what you know:  "And when they upon the place the "something-ugly" Kranion."

The "something ugly" is an adjective participle.  Easy to translate; easy to recognize.  Notice the pattern:  the +noun+ the + participle:  τὸν τόπον τὸν καλούμενον

The formula is "the noun who/which does the verb of the participle."
Or in this case, "The place which calls Kranion."
You also need to recognize (perhaps again through software) that it is a passive participle.  You should be able to figure this out on your own...know how?  Hint:  μεν
So you fix for the passive voice:
"The place which is called Kranion."  Kranion, or Cranion, means skull.  So we fix this up:
The place which is called "Skull"

"And then they came to the place which is called "Skull"

2)  ἐκει ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτὸν καὶ τοὺς κακούργους

Again, find the verb.  Notice again, its a nice verb:  ἐσταύρωσαν   Long, but not too bad...classic aorist.  Adds an "ε" in the beginning and "σ" toward the end.  Also tells you the subject:  "They"

So another basic sentence with a little twist:  "Here they crucified him and the-something or other"

Here we have the "substantive" participle.  Easiest in the book to translate.  Formula is:  "the+participle" and translates, "The one/ones who/which verb"  In this case:  "The ones who do bad things."

So we put it all back together:  "Here they crucified him and the others who did bad things."

3) ὀν μὲν εκ δεξιων

4) ὀν δὲ εξ ἀριστερων

A little hint:  μὲν and  δὲ is a parallel structure hint:  "on the one hand...and on the other." 

To translate ὀν you should put in "who."  "who on the one hand of his left, who on the other hand of his left."
In fact, since ὀν is accusative, this should be"  "whom on one hand..."  But this is all too confusing and we let the words we've heard most of our life suffice:  "one on his left and the other on his right."

Two questions for you:  why is ὀν in the accusative?   (Because the sentence is describing the two bad guys.  The bad guys were in the accusative and so the writer is letting you know he is still talking about them by keeping things in the same case.)

And why is it εξ instead of εκ before ἀριστερων?  Because the Greeks like a harder sound before words that begin with vowels.

Luke 21:5-19

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary in Year C, most recently November 2019.
 
Summary:  The translators do a good job in this passage of not "covering up" the intensity of Jesus words.  As I played around in the Greek, I found a number of odd parallels between this passage and the resurrection account in Luke 24.  First, both this story and the resurrection story are haunting.  Here Jesus warns the people not to be terrified (πτοέω).  When his disciples encounter Jesus after the resurrection, they will be terrified.  Next, Jesus warns of the listeners they will be betrayed (παραδίδωμι); after the resurrection, the disciples will hear the angels announce that it was necessary for Jesus to be betrayed.  Finally, Jesus tells them about their future witness (μαρτύριον); after the resurrection, Jesus will send them out to be his witnesses to the world. 

These are loose parallels, I admit.  The basic point of the passage is that witnessing to Christ is connected with our suffering and finally, our own resurrection.  I would argue, both from the text and theologically, however, that witnessing to Christ finally is grounded in the suffering and resurrection of Jesus.

Theological curve ball, completely unrelated to the Greek:  This week Jesus promises to give words; in Mark's account, the Holy Spirit will give the words!

Key Words:

λιθοις καλοις ("beautiful stones", 21:5)  A sermon idea -- what do you consider the beautiful stones of your life?  The things that "adorn" life and upon which you build your confidence, your hope and your life?  The destruction of the temple rocked the foundation of Jewish world; what stones have your realized were only "beautiful stones", not "living stones."

μαρτύριον ('witness'; 21:13; see also 24:48)  Originally this word simply meant "testimony."  Because so many Christians gave their life as a martyr, however, the word eventually came to mean one who would die for a cause; ie, their willingness to die became their witness.  Jesus, after the resurrection will say, "You will be my witnesses." (Again in Acts 1:8)

πτοέω ('terrified'; 21.9; 24.37)  This word means terrified; the only other appearance of this word in the New Testament is used in Luke 24 to describe the reaction of the disciples to the risen Christ, who they believe is a ghost.

παραδίδωμι ('hand over'; 21.12; 16)  A very common word in the NT (roughly 100 times!)  Jesus ministry in the Gospel of Mark, for example, begins with the handing over (or betrayal) of John the Baptist.  Interesting to point out here is that this word will also appear in the resurrection accounts -- from the angels and then from Cleopas.

- Oddly enough, sometimes handing things over can be good -- Paul, for example, says he is simply handing over the words of institution (11:23) and the core kyrgma (15:3).

συναγωγη (literally "synagogue", from "lead together", 21:12)  It is worth noting that people will be handed over to synagogues.  Even if you want to believe this is Luke adding words into Jesus' mouth, it is clear that Jesus did not anticipate that his death and resurrection would end the conflict within Judaism about him.  The 1st century included a great deal of inter-religious tension.

ὐπομονή ('endurance'; 21.19)  Although rare in the Gospels, the epistles in the NT are filled with calls for endurance!  6x in Romans; 7x in Revelation.  The word means to endure and is often connected with suffering.  See Romans 5:3:  "Suffering produces endurance (NRSV)"

κτάομαι ('acquire'; 21.19)  This word appears rather infrequently in the NT.  One example is from Acts, where an official mentions he acquired his citizenship for a large amount of money (22.28).  This word does not mean hold but means acquire.

Grammar Review:  Non-necessity of an implied subject (its easier than it sounds)
In Greek, because you conjugate the verb based on who is the subject, you don't always need to list the subject.  For instance:  "λεγω" tells you both the action (speaking) and the subject (I).  Normally, in fact, Greek doesn't explicitly say the subject, but the reader/listener figures it out from the conjugated verb. 
Sometimes though Greek will leave in the non-necessary subject for emphasis.  This is true in a particular expression:  "I am" or "εγω ειμι."  This particular expression is often used as a name of God -- the one who is!  A handful of times Jesus will use this in the Gospels, most pointedly in John.  In this particular passage, Jesus says that many will come and that "I am," using two words, the subject and verb.  Again, the subject is unnecessary.  So why the emphasis?  First, because anyone declaring they are the messiah would probably want to emphasize the fact that they were indeed the Messiah.  Secondly, someone could employ this construction to indicate, in short hand, that they are God.

Only once will Jesus use these words - "I am he" - for himself in the Gospel of Luke.  After the resurrection he stands in the midst of his disciples and say, "εγω ειμι."  (24.39)  A reminder that its not only in John that Jesus uses such expressions!

Sentence Translation: 21:9
οταν δε ακουσητε πολεμους και ακαταστατιας, μη πτοηθητε; δει γαρ ταυτα γενεσθαι προτον, αλλ ουκ ευθεως το τελος

First step, as always, is to break down the sentence into smaller parts.  Let the punctuation help you here.
1) οταν δε ακουσητε πολεμους και ακαταστατιας
2) , μη πτοηθητε;
3)  δει γαρ ταυτα γενεσθαι προτον
4) , αλλ ουκ ευθεως το τελος

Now you've got four fragments, each of which is really translatable
1) οταν δε ακουσητε πολεμους και ακαταστατιας

First step to translating a clause is to figure out its subject-verb.  Here this is ακουσητε , which is conjugated (thanks Bible Works) for a 2nd person plural.  But you knew that anyway, right ;-) 

The basic of the sentence is then:  You hear

- Do you know yet why the verb is in the subjunctive mood?

πολεμους και ακαταστατιας is the object:  wars and destruction.  Its in the accusative case telling you its the object of the action.  So in proto-english:
You hear wars and destruction
You gotta add in the "of" because in English the verb "hear" needs this
You hear of wars and destruction


Now lets go back (skip the de) and figure out this conjunction οταν.  Actually, pretty straight-forward again.  It means "when" or "whenever."  It also demands the subjunctive mood of the verb. 

Clause 1:  "Whenever you hear of wars and destruction."
2) , μη πτοηθητε;

Translation:  Do not be terrified.  Worth noting here.  Simple aorist subjunctive regarding a future event/action we are not to engage in ;-)  Normally in the Bible, the words "do not fear" are in the present (and not aorist) tense, suggesting that the person who hears them is currently fearing.  The aorist subjunctive doesn't assume the person currently engages in such actions!

Clause 2:  Do not be (or perhaps even become) terrified.

3) δει γαρ ταυτα γενεσθαι προτον

When you see a dei clause, look for a verb in the infinitive.  In this case - γενεσθαι.  So we know that the basic translation of this passage will be :  "It is necessary to happen/be/occur."  Once you know you are in an infinitive clause, then find your subject, which will be in the accusative case. 

Agh!  There are two things in the accustative:  ταυτα and προτον.  Well, it turns out that Greek likes to stick neuter accustative adjectives in there as adverbs -- προτον (first) in this case.  So you get "It is necessary for these (things) to happen first."  But even if you didn't know about first functioning as an adverb, "It is necessary for first to happen this" doesn't work.  Add back in the "gar" and you get:

Clause 3 "For it is necessary for these things to happen first."

4) , αλλ ουκ ευθεως το τελος

"But not immediately the end."  If we recall from last week, sometimes Greek drops the "to be" verb.  So we can get:  "But the end is not immediately."  Or perhaps better: "But the end will not happen immediately."  It is not so hard to conceptually figure out what the Greek means, but its kind of awkward English.

Clause 4:  "But the end will not happen immediately."

Luke 19:1-10 (Zacchaeus)

 This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year C.  Most recently on October 30, 2021.

Summary:  As I write this post in 2022, this passage occurs on Reformation Sunday.  Some may therefore preach on John 8.  However, I think it is a great narrative to explain the propositions of John 8.  What does freedom look like?  It looks like giving up one's prestige and rank to serve the Lord!  What does it mean to be a child of Abraham -- to belong to the household of God, in which...we serve the Lord!  How does this happen?  When Jesus comes into our house.  It might take too much effort to have this story neatly fit into the proper grace-faith-salvation ordo salutis, but it definitely addresses some classical Reformation themes of vocation, salvation, faith and freedom.

Key Words:

αρχιτελωνης ("arch-tax-collector", 19.2)  I saw this poetic quote about tax-collectors:

"The Tax Collectors in Israel at the time of Christ were the leaches that sucked the financial blood out of the hard working laborers of Israeli society and transferred it in to the coffer of the occupying Roman Empire, taking as much as they could for themselves."  Ancient Tax Collector, Bible History, accessed 10/26/2022.

NT Wright offers a more complex, and perhaps more helpful take, arguing that they were socially isolated, not loved by the Romans and hated by the Jews.  The point of this is to say that the tax collector looked free, but was very bound.

I also think it is interesting that one tax collector, Matthew, follows Jesus.  Zacchaeus chooses to maintain his profession and continue to follow Jesus.  This harkens back to Luke 3:13 and the words of John the Baptist to tax collectors.  It turns out that what we do is less important that how we do it.  Even "dirty" professions can be done with integrity and in service to the Lord.  (That is a sermon for Reformation Sunday about vocation!!)

μικρος (small, 19.3)  I found a really interesting article that focused on Zacchaeus' short stature as a reminder that God can love all physical types of people.  It linked Zacchaeus' short stature to treatment of people who have disabilities.  I discovered this article while trying to find evidence for something a professor told me once, that the Cappadocian fathers claimed that Luke meant that Jesus was short, not Zacchaeus!

καταβηθι (command form of καταβαινω, meaning "descend", 19.5)  It turns out, we are not called to ascend to Jesus, but to come down, and live real life.  Zacchaeus will meet Jesus on the road, in the home and in works of charity (and justice!)

μειναι (infinitive of "abide", 19.5)  This is a key concept in John's Gospel, namely, Jesus dwelling with us.  Jesus wants to abide with him; but what is worth pondering...when Zacchaeus serves his new Lord, Jesus, is Jesus still abiding with him?  I would want to say yes.

ιδοντες/ιδου:  I don't know what to make of it, but the word "to see" is found five times in these passages in various forms.

καταλυσαι (infinitive of καταλυω, meaning is complex, 19.7)  This word means one thing in a transitive sense and a very different thing when used as an intransitive verb.  Freiburg Dictionary puts it:

As a transitive verb it means to  (1) transitively; 

• (a) literally, of buildings with their stones destroy, demolish, dismantle 
• (b) metaphorically, of the death of the body as a house or temple tear down, destroy (2C 5.1); 
• (c) figuratively, of completely ruining someone's efforts destroy (RO 14.20); 
• (d) figuratively, as invalidating an institution, such as law or sacrifice do away with, annul, abolish (MT 5.17); 

Yet intransitively, it means:  "strictly unharness beasts of burden; hence put up for the night, find lodging, rest (LU 9.12)"

Okay, so here is the deal.  The word might mean simply to lodge somewhere.  But it is a really cool notion that somehow Zacchaeus having Jesus over "unburdens" Jesus; Jesus will actually do the unburdening.  This is akin to the use of ζητησαι in 19.1 and 19.10.  It seems like Zacchaeus is seeking Jesus, but Jesus is the one seeking Zacchaeus.

σωτερια (salvation, 19.9)  Brings up the granddaddy of them all question -- what is salvation?  There is little that connects the works of Zacchaeus today with the afterlife.  Rather, it is the true life, the free life of serving Jesus (that ultimately transcends death).  

This is a crucial part of the interpretation of the story:  What changes has Jesus made in his life?  In what ways does Zacchaeus demonstrate faith?  What does the grace look like?  What does grace accomplish?

Luke 18:9-14

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year C, most recently October 23, 2022.

Note:  In some years this passage occurs on the same Sunday as Reformation Sunday (traditionally commemorated the last Sunday in October).  Many choose to preach that Sunday on the 'classic' Reformation texts, including John 8. However, I offer the Reformation themes of justification, forgiveness, atonement, sinner-saint, law and Gospel are all present here!

Summary:

This is a small passage, but loaded with meaning! A little thing worth pointing out: The worshipers go up to worship and come back down. A reminder that worship isn't just like every other experience. We come into the presence of the living God. Like the tax-collector in this passage and Isaiah before him, this demands our confession!

Key words:
αναβαινω (go up; 18:10) and καταβαινω (go down; 18:14); It is a small note, but it is interesting that the worshipers go up to worship and come down into their homes. Luke does not seem to use the language often (Jesus does go up into the mountain to pray in Luke 9:28) but this seems like something worth mentioning in our casual culture -- even the sinners must go up to worship.

τελονως (tax-collector; 18:10,11,13): The word tax-collector is used almost exclusively in the same breath as sinners. Tax-collectors (publicanus in Latin) were notorious for taking more than their fair share.  I've read more recently that tax-collectors though lived a terrible life in that they were always under fire from above to collect more; the people hated and despised them.  In short, they were lonely folks.

εξουθενεω (despise; 18:9): This word is not just reserved for tax-collectors, but Christians run into this problem...(See Rom. 14:3, 10; 1 Cor. 1:28; 6:4; 16:11; 2 Cor. 10:10)

δικαιοω (justify; 18:14): Lovely word for us Lutherans (and all Christians). A reminder, God justifies. Never used in the active sense correctly; by this I mean that in the Bible and in real life, we can try to justify ourselves, but finally, only God makes right. Even in James, when works do the making right, the person is still only passively justified! (See James 2:21-25). (There are times when the verb appears in the active voice; but this normally occurs when God speaking or the people asking for God to bring justice).

κτωμαι (κταομαι; 18:12):  The word here means to earn.  The person is attributing their success to themselves!

ιλασκομαι (have mercy on; Luke 18:13). A rare word in the NT; only mentioned as verb in Hebrews 2:17. This word and its cousins are always a matter of intense debate: How do we translate the concept of appease/expiate for sins? What does Paul means by this in Romans 3:25??

What is interesting here is that the person does not offer a sacrifice of bulls (see Deut 21.8) or any animal following Old Testament codes, but simply a broken and contrite heart, recalling Psalm 51.  This person is appealing to the mercy of God without any other mediator than his own confession.  Which Jesus declares acceptable.

This would then bring up the preacher's dilemma.  How can we help people arrive at a point of having a broken and contrite heart, a point of recognizing their deep and utter need for God?  This requires preaching the Law!  However, this must be done with skill so that it does not simply remain an objective criteria for a good sermon (did you preach the law?) but becomes the internal monologue of the hearer (I have fallen short).  However, this must move finally toward the Gospel and the person must still have space and be in a place to hear the good news.  In short, preaching a sermon in which the sinner is put to death and the new creation arises is not as easy as it sounds...the more one tries it, in fact, the more one realizes that it is a work of the Spirit and not our own!

τω αμαρτωλω (sinner, 18:13)  The word here for sinner includes the article:  THE sinner.  He is not just a sinner, but THE sinner!

υψοω (exalt; 18:14) The word here, interestingly, is used in Luke 1:52; God promises to exalt the humble! (And again in Luke 14:11, an almost copy of 18:14). Luke uses this word in an adjective form (exalted) quite frequently to refer to God.

Grammar review: Substantive participles

These are the easiest participles to translate. You get definite article+participle.

Easy formula:

The one/ones who do X.

The only thing that can trip you up is that occasionally you will get other words around them and in between them like: "de" or "pas" (all).

So: o δε ακουσας (Luke 18:23) is simply
The one who listens.

Verse analysis:
Luke 18:14 λεγω υμιν κατεβη ουτος δεδικαιωμενος εις τον οικον αυτου παρα εκεινον οτι πας ο υψων εαυτον ταπεινωθησεται, ο δε ταπεινων εαυτον υψωθησεται
NRS Luke 18:14 I tell you, this man went down to his home justified rather than the other; for all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted."

See also Luke 14:11 for the almost same sentence!
First step is to divide this sentence into three parts:

1) λεγω υμιν
2)  κατεβη ουτος δεδικαιωμενος εις τον οικον αυτου παρα εκεινον
3) οτι πας ο υψων εαυτον ταπεινωθησεται, ο δε ταπεινων εαυτον υψωθησεται

How did I decide on this breakdown? Well, the comma and dot (semicolon essentially) suggest this. οτι (hoti) is a conjunction that also tells you as a reader that a new clause is starting

1) λεγω υμιν: Simple interjection -- I am saying to you.

2) κατεβη ουτος δεδικαιωμενος εις τον οικον αυτου παρ' εκεινον -- this is a big one, so let's break this down. Take the low hanging fruit first:

εις τον οικον αυτου: Into his house. εις takes the accusative case; αυτου is genitive to describe the relationship of the house to the man. Simply translate with "of" as in "into the house of him." Or more elegantly, "into his house"

παρα εκεινον:
note:  I had translated this small phrase incorrectly.  Here are my revised comments:
The word "para" can mean "alongside of."  Some have then pushed this phrase (including NT scholar Amy Jill-Levine) to argue for the translation, "Justified, he went into his house along with the other one" arguing that the justification to which Jesus refers is given to both the pharisee and the publican.  I'd like to argue this is not the best translation.  I think the typical translation, in which para here is translated "as opposed to the other one", is the preferred translation.

First, in terms of textual criticisms, there are a few different traditions in the manuscripts regarding this passage.  The other variants add in (or replace para with) η meaning "rather."  If you have a variety of manuscripts, it seems more logical, at least to me, that people would replace words with synonyms, than words that would signify an entirely different ending to the parable.

Second, grammatically para used in the accusative suggests a parallel position --  an "adjacent comparison of reference" in the words of my-becoming-friend Matthew Frost.  Any time you have para+accusative in the New Testament, para refers to someone living along a water body or it refers to something in opposition to something else.  I.e., comparison is the function of the preposition in the New Testament when used with the accusative.

Third, prepositions are hard to nail down...so let's even say we agreed that the changes from παρα to η were cover-ups of the uncomfortable nature of the story...and that this should mean "along with."  At this point, παρ' εκεινον appears after the prepositional phrase "into his house" and not "justified" suggesting that this phrase would be modifying with "into the house" or functioning as an adverb for the main verb (went down.)  In short, at best, you could argue that the man walked along with each other.  But this seems really counter intuitive to the story.

Fourth, the whole context -- the whole story -- is one of contrast.  It seems entirely out of character to sandwich a moment of cooperation and grace in a story of over exaggerated contrast with a conclusion that says the outcomes are different for these different groups of people (the humble and the exalted).

Now...can you talk about how the pharisee is justified by grace and that in the Kingdom of God, both walk along side each other.  Yes.   But this is not a grammatical possibility for this story, although theologically always a a possibility!

Okay, so now you've got: κατεβη ουτος δεδικαιωμενος into his house as opposed to the other one.

The κατεβη is the east part: Simple means he/she/it went down, which makes sense because you have "into his house" and also, earlier the Greek says they went up to worship (vs 9).

The ουτος is a bit trickier because you don't see it that much. It simply means this/that. If Jesus had used "autos" it would have simply read: "He went down" By using ουτος Jesus can say, "This very one" adding a bit of emphasis.

Now you've got: "This very one went down into his house from there." You can officially tackle the participle! Which in this case means "being made righteous," or "being justified." A circumstantial participle to boot...So he did all of this going down under the circumstance of being justified.

So, let's put this all together: "This very one, having been made righteous, went down into this house unlike the other one.

Now we come to the last part of the sentence:
3) οτι πας ο υψων εαυτον ταπεινωθησεται, ο δε ταπεινων εαυτον υψωθησεται

Basically you have a little parallel going here:

substantive participle+infinitive; substantive participle + infinitive

So you get, "all who do X, then Y; all who do Y, then X."

(See above for substantive participle translation)

All who exalt themselves will be humbled; all who humble themselves will be exalted.

Luke 18:1-8

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary Year C, most recently in October 16, 2022
 
Summary
This parable does not simply commend us or even command us to pray; rather it humbles into prayer. The Greek used indicates Jesus told them this parable to make it necessary for them to pray. The particular construction and use of the word "necessity" do not suggest a teaching moment, but a transformation one, where people are humbled into prayer. What kind of God would compare himself to an unjust judge, who only gives in when brow-beaten? Furthermore, the particulars of the grammar -- the inclusion of the word "they" -- reveal this is not simply about the need for prayer in the abstract, but this parable is intended for us who hear it that we would pray.

The preaching task then is not simply to teach about prayer but fill the peoples hearts (and guts) with a hunger for prayer.  For those preaching with the Revised Common Lectionary, this passage is paired with Jacob wrestling with God, perhaps the example of God making it necessary for someone to pray.

Key Words
δει: (It is necessary; 18.1). The translations suggest Jesus used this parable to 'show' people they should pray. Actually, the word in Greek carries more force then should; It is used, for example, when Jesus says, "it is necessary for the son of man to die." Furthermore, the word "show" is never used. Luke (in the Greek) does not say this parable shows them why prayer is necessary but the parable makes prayer necessary! See below for more on the construction.

εκδικεω (revenge, 18.3;5) This word is hardly used in the NT; it does not simply mean justice, but really vengeance (as in Romans 12:10; Vengeance is mine.")

υπωτιαζω (wear out or beat; 18:5) This word does not simply mean annoy or wear down, but means to give a black eye. Paul talks in 1 Cor 9:27 about beating his body (and not punching the air).

μακροθυμια (delay, 18:7). This word does not really mean delay. It means be patient (as in love is patient, 1 Cor 13:4). It seems that the verse ought to be translated, "Will God not be patient?" This is really strange because patience is one of the key characteristics about God.  Jesus really seems to be pushing his point here.  In the abstract, God is patient, but in our prayer life God becomes something more immediate and involved.

Grammar point
See sentence review about articular infinitives. Read this and then try 18:5, the first five words. Hint: δια here means "because."
Also 18:4 is a great example of an "ει" clause where "ει" means "since" and not "if"

Sentence review
NRS Luke 18:1 Then Jesus told them a parable about their need to pray always and not to lose heart.
18:1 ελεγεν δε παραβολην αυτοις προς το δειν παντοτε προσευχεσθαι αυτους και μη εγκακειν

ελεγεν δε παραβολην αυτοις : "Then he was telling them a parable." The four words here are all learned in the first few weeks of Greek: λεγω, to speak; δε, and; παραβολη, parable; αυτος, he/she/it. However, you've got to work a bit to put then together. Let's start with "δε." You can ignore this, or add a "then/when/and" to connect this sentence to the previous one. The next word to look at is "παραβολην." Easy enough -- you just have to realize that in Greek, they rarely ever include an indefinite article (τις) and so you have to add "a" before the word.

"λεγω" is simply to speak, but because it is in the imperfect (parsing review: why not aorist or future?), you have to give a little bit of umph here: "Was continually telling...", something that reflects the on-going nature of the action. Finally you go to "αυτοις ." This is "he" in the plural dative. First, make it plural: "they" now dative: "to/with/for/through them." Put this all together and you get: Then he was telling them a parable.

προς το δειν παντοτε προσευχεσθαι αυτους: "so they would need to pray all the time." The παντοτε is the easy part; simply an adverb meaning always or at all times The tricky part is the "articular infinitive with preposition." In this case, "προς το δειν." Pros means toward; when used in an articular infinitive, it shows purpose or reason. The purpose of the parable then, is the necessity of prayer. The parable is not really "to show them it is necessary" but really, "so that they would need to pray."  More tricky here, the verb "dei" requires another verb (it is necessary to do something), which in this case is "pray" (προσευχεσθαι ). So you get: "for the reason of being necessary to pray." The αυτους is simply here an accusative form of autos, or "they." Because its part of an infinitive clause, it behaves not as an accusative, but as a nominative, namely, the subject. This might not seem like much, but by adding this word it moves it from "the necessity of prayer" to "the necessity of them praying."

και μη εγκακειν: "Not be discouraged." The μη is the Greek "no" for non-indicative moods. What does that mean? Well, if the sentence is "I do not go to the store" the 'no' in Greek would be "ουκ." However, if you have a command or an infinitive or a participle, you get "μη " In this case, the word discouraged is connected with the verb, "δει" or it is necessary. You know this because it is an infinitive and not an imperative (a command). So the parable is also for the purpose of them not losing heart.

The two waves of secularization: A proposed response

Like all pastors, I have observed an increasing secularization of American culture over the past generation.  This process picked up pace during the past six years and then seemed to go into overdrive during COVID.  This has created challenges (and opportunities) for us as churches.

More than simply speed up over time, I offer that the contours of secularization have changed in the past six years.  Earlier we were going through (what we might call) secularization phase 1:  "People got busy."  Now people are going through (what we might call) secularization phase 2:  "People got disgusted."  I will describe them as a waves, because they kind of roll and crash into each other.  Furthermore, each presents churches with a different set of opportunities - ways to ride the wave - and challenges - crashing and undertow.  My sense is that both have been at work for some time, but I sense that for most churches, they will discover that the second wave is much harder to navigate than the first.

Secularization Wave #1:  People got Busy

In the first phase of secularization, people began to find meaning in other places besides church.  Andrew Root has masterfully examined this through the lens of youth ministry (and his series on the church in the secular age).  People filled their schedule and found ultimately their identity in all sorts of activities: travel soccer, marching band, social media, politics, etc.  While some of these had a more 'Christian' flavor to them, they generally meant that people spent far less time in religious activities than a generation ago.

The Aftermath of Wave #1

• What did this mean for churches?  Attendance declined.  The biggest victim was the pastoral size church.  A church that consistently had 125 in worship found itself struggling to worship 100 only a decade or two later.  While this was enough to pay the bills (barely), its attendance of young families was so lean that it could no longer offer a meaningful 'Youth group' and 'Sunday school'.  This meant that the remaining families wanting programming for their children, youth and family did two things:  one, they complained about the lack of programming (even as they chose to have their kids attend other events) and two, many of them migrated in the direction of larger churches.  This left many congregations with a fair amount of nostalgia  that impeded new ideas; in addition there was a lot of residual anger in the system that burned out their clergy.
• More positively, it often forced smaller (pastoral and family size) churches to be creative, explore inter-generational learning opportunities and consider partnerships with other congregations.  The happiest among these have accepted a smaller size and are finding their particular niche within their community. 
• Within larger churches (program to mega), this first wave of secularization put a huge premium on excellence and programming.  As young families with time on their hands for churchy activities became a scarcer commodity, larger churches had the opportunity and need to attract them (as well as the older folks (with money!) who wanted churches that still had kids).  While someone with more experience could point out how I am truly wrong about this, my sense is that the net effect of the first wave of secularization was to encourage big churches to work "faster, bigger and harder", doing what they had been doing in the 1980s and 1990s, albeit with far thinner results.  I also offer that this influx of people curbed the incentive of large churches to do real evangelism; they spent more of their resources on welcoming existing Christians into their midst (if not their sub-culture).  In short, their energy vector began pointing in and perhaps out, but was not going out in the same way. 
  

Secularization Wave #2:  People got Disgusted

The second wave of secularization, the one that I think is picking up speed, is different.  In this wave of secularization, people go further than saying that church is less important.  They move toward skepticism, if not fear and rejection of the church.  This is not entirely new; Gen-X is famous for rejecting institutions; also, the priesthood scandal in the Catholic church added a great deal of kindling to this fire!  

However, there is an acute wholesale rejection of the church by increasing numbers of people.  There is a sense that the church has wed itself, not simply to conservative policy aims, but to partisan political warfare and even flirts (if not cheats with) Christian nationalism.

An interesting article from Christianity Today offers that the rise of Christian nationalism is itself a manifestation of secularization.  The thesis is that as people become less engaged in actual church, they tend to gravitate toward pseudo-church.  I find the argument compelling.  Many of our churches have also been hit by this form of secularism, as we have seen people in our church ghost us over COVID-mask requirements, not to attend elsewhere, but simply to walk away from church.

But even if I cool down my rhetoric, the point is simple:  You have a significant number of people who are one or two generations removed from active participation in the life of a congregation.  (Consider this -- the last family on Television that went to church is the Simpsons!!)  When such people have religious or spiritual questions, the Christianity they observe, especially through the lens of typical media or social media presentations, is likely going to be a very socially conservative, if not even schismatic and heretical presentation of the Gospel. Such people are incredibly unlikely to show up at worship because they heard we have good music or good preaching.  There are far too many barriers. 

Trying to Ride Wave #2

My sense is that trying to ride Secularization Wave #2 is going to be really hard for most people.  It will require a different set of tools than Wave #1.  For many mainline pastor size churches, this officially ends their ability to continue business as usual.  The loss of an additional 10% of people post-COVID is going to mean they can no longer afford their staff, forcing cut backs.  It will be difficult for these congregations to find a way to celebrate who they are and discover where God is calling them without succumbing to bitterness.  Ironically, the family size churches may do better because they have accepted a smaller size; whereas the former pastoral size churches likely are reeling from loss.

For the bigger and healthier churches, I sense that they will need to rediscover evangelism.  By and large, 'evangelism' in such contexts meant attractional ministry, welcoming church people into our congregation.  The dynamics of wave #1 and the early phases of COVID-musical-church-chairs seduced many congregations into a comfortable sense that "bigger, faster, harder and ONLINE" will work.  But I sense moving forward, we will need to think beyond 'welcoming visitors' or even 'inviting people to worship.' 

My candid sense is that dealing with a society after two waves of secularization will force us to become missionary churches...Churches that meet people where they are.  Churches that find a variety of ways for people to form relationships, share stories and serve others.  As Bonhoeffer wrote:

The Church is the Church only when it exists for others . . . not dominating, but helping and serving. It must tell men of every calling what it means to live for Christ, to exist for others

Luke 12:49-56

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year C.  Typically this passage occurs late in the summer, when pastors are on vacation or in the midst of a summer preaching series.  In short, no one likes to preach on this passage.  Most recently it occurred: August 17, 2025

Summary:  This is my 5th time (?) seeing this passage as an upcoming passage.  Each time I cringe, especially in our current political environment.  I've included some thoughts about how we might understand Jesus difficult words about division.

2025 offering:  Jesus is the one who does the division - not us!

Key words:
πυρ ("fire", 12:49)  Throughout the Bible, fire is associated with God's judgment.  Here are few verses that put them together, but you can find this over and over.

• Isaiah 66:16 For by fire will the LORD execute judgment, and by his sword, on all flesh; and those slain by the LORD shall be many.
• Amos 7:4 This is what the Sovereign LORD showed me: The Sovereign LORD was calling for judgment by fire; it dried up the great deep and devoured the land.
• Revelation 18:8 therefore her plagues will come in a single day-- pestilence and mourning and famine-- and she will be burned with fire; for mighty is the Lord God who judges her.
• Hebrews 10:27 but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.

The dominant and most natural interpretation here is the reminder that Jesus has come to bring judgment.

While this may seem strange in our society, which seems on the verge of civil war, I wonder if we too quickly throw out the baby with the bathwater.  Judgement is necessary, even for the ultimate goal of unity.  For until all realize that they have fallen short of God's glory, that the only line in the sand is those who have sinned and those who have not, we will always find ways to create other divisions in our culture.  As a family and marriage therapist I recently met offered:  "I need to create disorder to disrupt the current stasis to help bring about a new and healthier one."

διεμεμερισμενοι  (from διαμεριζω, meaning "divide", 12:52, 53).  Divide can mean divide like Rome: Divide and conquer.  But maybe divide has a different Biblical sense.  Especially when connected with fire.

Fire is not only used for judgement, but also commissioning, specifically the call of Moses (burning bush, Exodus 3:2), Isaiah (burning coals, chapter 6) and the call of Ezekiel (firey chariots, chapter 1).  In each of these cases, the fire produces a division, but this division is more of a setting aside.  The fire indicated a holiness that transforms the one who experiences it.  

This really comes full circle in the book of Acts, where the tongues of fire, divided (same word) rest on the apostles.  In this case, the early followers of Jesus have been divided from everyone else, but for a purpose, to share the good news.

Could we read this verse here as Jesus is saying he has come, not simply to judge, but to divide us from the rest, to call us into a new way of being?  This initial division will produce further division, but ultimately it serves a broader and unifying goal.

Lastly, I find it noteworthy that this whole section of Luke begins with a question about division, namely two brothers fighting over how to divide an inheritance (12:13).  Perhaps Jesus is reminding us that the real division isn't over money, but over loyalty to him.  Just like all other allegiances, this will cause division.

βαπτισμα ("baptism", 12:50)  It is interesting that the two times Jesus twice refers to his baptism, it refers to his suffering, both here and Mark 10

• "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?" (Mark 10:38)
• Or even in Paul's letter to the Romans:  We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. (6:1)

Any real talk of Baptism that doesn't deal with suffering and the cross doesn't seem New Testament, frankly!

Luke 10:1-11, 16-20

 This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, most recently for July 2022

Summary:  There is a very similar to passages in the year of Mark (Mark 6:1-13) and Matthew (starting at 9:35; I've not posted on that passage).

I've not looked this passage in depth too much, but I sense that the most crucial thing for preaching is what the accounts in Mark and Luke share:

Jesus sends people out

 A) in teams 

B) to proclaim, call to repent, and heal  

C) to move on from those who reject them (ie, not live in anger, but in hope for the next interaction!).  

D) (Added in 2022): To return and tell the story of what they've done with Jesus and the gathered congregation.  (Action and reflection!!)

However, it is worth pointing out a few things that are unique to Luke's account:

εβδομηκοντα (seventy; 10:1)  There are seventy (or seventy-two) people sent out.  Luke does have the sending of the twelve.  But shortly thereafter, Jesus sends out the 72.  In Luke's Gospel, Jesus is not only shaping a small group of people, but impacting a wider circle as well.  It is also worth nothing that Jesus tries a ministry with a small group before expanding it.

υιος ειρηνης (sons of peace; 10:6)  The word 'sons' here can mean both sons and daughters.  Children of peace.  What a beautiful expression.  How are we cultivating children of peace?

σατανος (satan; 10:18)  This expression here reminds us that evil is ancient.  But so is Jesus.  In this passage Jesus acknowledges his consciousness prior to his human incarnation!

ου μη αδικηση (never harm; 10:19)  This is worth pondering -- plenty of Christians have suffered harm.  What does Jesus mean here?

John 14:23-29

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, 6C, most recently May 22, 2022
 
Summary:  Like many passages in John, this passage at first seems like a sequence of fairly random phrases; the preachers job is to pick the best one and run with it.  (Likely my peace I give you!)  If we take a look at the whole of verse 14, we realize that Jesus here is trying to calm his disciples down, as they are growing agitated and disbelieving in light of the coming death.  It makes me wonder -- over and against what fears and anxieties should we preach the promise of peace and God's presence?

(I think I prefer the paired Acts passage (16:9-16) for preaching, but there are some fascinating elements to the Greek here!)

Key words
μονη(ν) (meaning "dwelling", 14:23; as a participle this root word appears in 14:25):  One of the most important ways of understand the work of God in John's Gospel is "dwelling."  In the beginning of the Gospel, we learn that the word dwelt among us (different root word).  In fact, Jesus begins this section by offering that in his Father's house there are many "dwellings" (14:2, same word, but in plural form).  If we interpret 14:2 in light of 14:23, we get a really interesting concept.  In the father's house there are many dwelling places because in each and every person God can make a dwelling!  A dwelling place is a place of peace -- truly home.  This is what Jesus has come to offer!

This passage also establishes the criteria for God making his dwelling:  keeping his word and love.  So let's look at what is happening with those two criteria in this passage --

τηρεω (various forms in 14:21,23 and 24):  This means to guard, protect.  Interestingly, Jesus calls his disciples to guard:  his commandments (22), his word (23), his words (24).  Each of these connotes a different aspect of Jesus' teaching ministry.  It is also worth considering, if we just had John's Gospel, what are the commandments?  Believe in God (14.1) and love one another (14.34) stand out.  I would be curious to see what other commandments we could distill from John's Gospel besides these two foundational words, for John's Gospel offers less moral advice than the other Gospels.  Jesus does tell the woman to sin no more; other than this, what commandments do you find in John's Gospel?

ει αν (markers of conditional phrases): 
Heavy Greek lifting you can skip: 
These two words can work together to set up an IF...THEN...clause in Greek.  Depending on the tenses and moods used, it defines what kind of IF...THEN statement you get.  In the case of verse  14:28, "If you love me, then you would rejoice that I am going to the Father..." you have an ει+indicative imperfect followed by an αν+indicative aorist.  This type of phrase means IF (but it is not true) THEN (therefore this is not true).  So for example, in John 11:21 and 11:32:  If you had been there, my brother would not have died.  (But you weren't there, so my brother did die.).  See also John 18:30 and Acts 18:14 for examples. 

Based on the verbs, Jesus is actually saying in verse 28:  "If you have been loving me (which you haven't), then you would rejoice that I am going to the Father (which you aren't)!  I think this drastically changes the understanding of Jesus words.  He knows his disciples are distressed.  He tells them in the beginning (14:1) and at the end of the passage (14:27) not to be worried (ταρασσεσθω, from ταρασσω). 
 

While it may seem harsh that Jesus is telling his disciples they don't love him, he is actually speaking loving truth here:  They don't get it why Jesus had to die.  The other Gospels make the struggle of the disciples clear; this is the part of the Gospel when the disciples are showing they are struggling to understand and believe.  So what does Jesus do?  He offers them the promise of his presence and his peace.  Sometimes this is all we can do for people!

αφιημι and διδωμι ("leave" and "give", 14:27)  The word αφιημι is fascinating here, but I want to focus more on the fact that we are in the present tense.  This means that Jesus will continually leave and give; this is not a one time transference, but a ministry commitment for Jesus.

I want to borrow from another blogpost I have about the paraclete

***
παρακλητος (paraclete, 15.26 and throughout John 15 and 16) The word parakletos for the Holy Spirit is a tough one to crack! The noun literally means "one called along side of." Originally it meant a "legal assistant." Hence the affinity for the term advocate.

Yet, the whole field of words related to parakletos pushes against a cold, judicial term, especially in terms of our relationship with God.

14.16 The parakletos is a gift from God
14.17 The parakletos will be with us, even abide in us forever
14.26 The parakletos will teach you and cause you to remember the words of Jesus
15.26 The parakletos will witness about Jesus
16.8 The parakletos will prove the world concerning sin, righteousness and judgment.
16.13 The parakletos will guide you on the way
16.13 The parakletos will listen to the Father and Son
16.14 The parakletos will glorify Jesus 
16.14 The parakletos will make Jesus known

Interestingly, the Vulgate does not even use the term advocate to translate parakletos, instead transliterating the word "paracletus." In fact, the Latin does translate the word "parakletos" from the Greek into the Latin "advocatum" once, and this is from 1 John 2.1, where the sense is different. Indeed, here the idea is Jesus interceding for us against the judge of the Father concerning our sins; in John's Gospel the idea of the parakletos has nothing to do with a legal metaphor before God the Father, but the enabler of Christian before the world of unbelievers.

Furthermore, a look at the verb παρακαλεω, the related verb for the noun παρακλητος, really brings home that this word (really word field) is not primarily about legal matters:
Isaiah 40.1 "Comfort, comfort my people, says your God."
Psalm 23 "Your rod and staff, they comfort me."
Proverbs 8:4 "To you, O people, I call and my cry is to all that live."
2 Corinthians 1:3-4  "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and the God of all consolation,  who consoles us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to console those who are in any affliction with the consolation with which we ourselves are consoled by God."