This passage occurs as the Transfiguration Sunday Gospel in the Revised Common Lectionary (Year A) and Narrative Lectionary (Year 1), most recently February 2020.
Summary:
Obviously a familiar and beautiful passage. Matthew lets us know that this event occurs "six" (hex) days after the first messianic prediction. This is the only time in the Gospels that anything happens six days later. Why? The last time we found something happening on the six day was the creation of humans, which the Bible calls good; in fact, very good. Peter likewise calls it "good" to be on the mountaintop. The sixth day of creation was good, but it was not the ultimate day; the 7th was and is. In the same way, the transfiguration is a good day. Moses and Elijah, the law and the prophets, are great and to be celebrated. By they are not the ultimate; Jesus is. Likewise, turning bright as light is good and to be celebrated. But it is not the crucifixion and resurrection Jesus for which has come.
Key words:
εξ ("six" -- there is a rough breathing mark over the e, so this word is read "hex" like "hexagon"; 17:1): This is the only event that occurs "six" days after something in any of the Gospels or in the whole Bible. The last event is a series of teachings in which Jesus foretells his death and resurrection and Peter rebukes him. So why six? In the Bible six often refers to incomplete (yet not entirely bad!) things, chiefly creation. Transfiguration is good. But not ultimate.
αναφερω ("took up" or "sacrificed"; 17:1): This word literally means "take up," but is often used to describe the action of the priest in sacrifice. It is also used for Abraham taking up Isaac to Mount Moriah. Is Jesus taking up his disciples for a sacrifice? Is he sacrificing them? I think in this case, the verb probably just means "took up" but an interesting connection. It is interesting to note that when Jesus "takes" us "up" we come back changed!
μεταμορφομαι ("transfigured" or "metamophisized"; 17:2): The Latin "transfigured" is not as "cool", imho, as the Greek "metamorphisized." This word is fairly rare in the NT. It also occurs in Romans 12:2 (Do not let your minds be confirmed to this world, but transformed by the renewing of your minds...) and 2 Corinthians 3:18, which reads something like "Shine, Jesus, Shine." Transfigured sounds so churchy. Try "transformation" or "metamorphosed" as see what reaction you get. "Transformer Sunday"
φος ("light"; 17:2 see also 5:14). Jesus called his disciples to be the light of the world; a city on a hill cannot be hidden. In this passage we again have light on the hill, but this time it is Jesus himself. The NRSV covers up the literal phrase, "white as light," which is too bad because it is one of the few times, outside of John, that Jesus is referred to as light. Even the angel at the resurrection (28:3) will not be bright as light!
αγαπητος ("beloved"; 17:5; 12:18; 3:17): This phrase harkens back to Jesus baptism. It also reaches back to the prophet Isaiah and the love song for the beloved. (A few times God calls Israel his beloved). Most significantly, it leads us back to Abraham and his near sacrifice of Isaac, his beloved son. Baptism, sacrifice, a mountaintop, God's promises to Abraham. Something Lutheran stirs in these waters...
αψαμενος ("touch"; aorist participle of απτω; 17:7): I find it interesting that Jesus touches them. I had missed that before. I think it greatly softens Jesus words. He touches them. Tells them to arise and not be afraid. We often remember his words at the end of the story, not to tell anyone, but this is a powerful gesture by Jesus: to uplift with his touch and his words.
οραμα ("vision," 17:9): The NIV probably gets this right by translating it "what you have seen" instead of vision, because vision for most of us sounds like something made up. Freiburg Lexicon says, (1) literally what is seen, appearance, spectacle; (2) in the NT a supernatural vision, given as a means of divine communication, to be distinguished from a dream (οναρ)
εγερθη ("stand up" or "resurrect"; aorist passive of εγειρω; 17:7 &9) Jesus uses the same verb for talking about his resurrection as he does to tell the disciples to "stand up." Jesus tells them to stand up. And then he tells them he will "stand up." Jesus resurrection leads to our own resurrection too.
Grammar: The quick and easy circumstantial participle
A number of verses in this section have easy circumstantial participles. 17:7 for example, puts one right in the middle of the sentence (after the και)
και αψαμενος αυτων ειπεν
first step: plug in English words in "untranslated format." I will put an * by the part that we need to clarify in order to translate.
and touch* of them he said
It turns out that the "he said" is the main part of the sentence. The αψαμενος αυτων is the participle
The participle is in the aorist, which means it happened before the other verb. So
"touched of them, he said."
We need to clean up the word "touched" but two things are tricky. First, the verb is in the middle voice. Don't worry about that. He did not touch himself; what languages consider "middle voice" varies. In this case, we can translate this as an active voice, "touch." Second, αυτων is in the genitive simply because this verb takes a genitive object. So
"and touched them, he said."
Now we figure out who is doing the action
Here it should be obvious that Jesus touched them. You could also check that the participle is in the nominative, which means the subject of the rest of the sentence is doing the action...who is Jesus.
Then we add in the circumstance
"and after he touched them, he said"
Consider also 17:9
επαραντες δε τους οφθαλμους αυτων ειδον...ει μη...
Here again we have a circumstantial participle. Step one, fill in English that you know
look up* and the eyes of them they saw...
Once you figure out that ειδον = they saw = the main verb of the sentence, you should be able to move quickly through this participle. Indeed, your brain can probably figure out the actual reading:
"After lifting their eyes they saw..."
You could work through this in sequential steps:
Fix tense: "lifted their eyes they saw"
Fix voice...already done
Figure out who -- the disciples! (Again, you can check the case and number, but disciples makes sense!)
Then add circumstance. Since it is aorist, it happened first...
"After lifting their eyes they saw..."
Wednesday, February 19, 2020
Wednesday, January 15, 2020
John 1:29-42
This passage occurs in the Epiphany season of the Revised Common Lectionary (Year A), most recently January 15, 2023.
Summary: John's narrative is very basic to read...because he only uses about 30 words in 14 verses! He invites us into the world of the Old Testament, he invites us to follow Jesus, and he also invites us into witnessing ourselves to the lamb of God. Speaking of the lamb of God, what is John getting at here? There is no lamb in the OT who takes away the sins on the day of atonement. The main lamb in the Old Testament is the Passover lamb, which has nothing to do with sins! John's creativity, hopefully, inspires our preaching and teaching.
ερχομαι & οραω (1:39; 1:46; 4:29; 11:34, 19:33; 20:8 "Come and see") These two verbs come together s number of times in John's Gospel. A quite impressive list actually:
A) When Jesus begins his ministry
B) When the woman at the well returns to her hometown to invite others (different cognate for "come");
C) When they bring Jesus to Lazarus' tomb
D) When they find Jesus on the cross
E) When they come to the empty tomb.
John's Gospel invites us to come and see again and again, ultimately even the resurrection (20:8).
αμνος (1:29; 36, "lamb"). The imagery of "lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world" often makes us think of animal sacrifices in the Old Testament. However, the main sacrifices on Yom Kippur (day of atonement) were not lambs, but a bull and two goats! In fact, other sin offerings (Lev 4&5) are not lamb offerings but again bulls and goats. I am sure that many other summaries would be better than this one, but the lamb was used in OT times for sacrifices in the following manner:
Daily offerings (Exodus 29): To please the Lord and welcome his presence
Lepers (Leviticus 14): To cleanse the lepers by its blood
Passover Meal (Exodus 12): To protect the Israelites from the angel of death by its blood marking the door panes.
A lamb could be used a burnt offering, a type of sin offering, but we are getting further afield here. The point of this discourse is to say that in the Jewish sacrifice model of the Old Testament, you do not find a theology where a lamb is constantly being used to take away the sins of the individuals. Isaiah 53 develops the idea of the suffering servant as a lamb led to slaughter, but again the point here is that one cannot simply draw a nice line from OT sacrifice to Messiah predictions to Gospel of John. Okay, you can, but it is not so simple.
More deeply, I do not think the Gospel of John is advocating an angry God who slaughters Jesus to be happy. I think John is riffing on Old Testament themes here, but the connection between Lamb of God, Jesus and "taking away" the sins of the world, moves far beyond what the Old Testament was prepared to acknowledge. Is this a problem? Not for this Christian. I just want to point out that John 1:29 is probably not a good time to bring out angry God needs a Jesus animal sermon.
Additional note: I did some research on the word "αιρω", meaning "take away." I could not find anything particularly connected with sin or sacrifice. That said, the word is used within the passion narrative a number of times.
μαρτυρεω (1:32, "witness") This verb appears 33 times in the Gospel of John!! It means to testify. It came to take on the connotation of "martyr" as people began to die for testifying to the truth. Stephen is often considered the first martyr (Acts 7 and 8), but it is worth remembering that John the Baptist also died.
Cheap sermon insight: 3+3=6. Bad number. Needs one more witness to be complete. That witness is you.
επαρυριον (1:29, 1:35, 1:43, "tomorrow") This little word appears three times in this section. It is kind of a nice progression. The first day Jesus is pointed out to the people. On the second day, the people begin following Jesus. On the third day they begin to invite others.
Grammar note:
The present tense often connotes continuous action. This can create some great insights but also make the narrative illogical. For example, in verse 1:43, Jesus goes to find (ευρισκω; present tense) Philipp. In the narrative this makes no sense that he "continually is finding" Philipp. On the other hand, it does make sense in theological terms that Jesus always is finding Philipp! Then Jesus is saying (λεγω in the present), or really "continually saying" to Philipp, follow me. This could make sense in both the narrative and in theology. In fact, even the verb for follow (ακολουθεω), is in the present, meaning Jesus intends for Philipp to keep following him. This all works out great on a theological level, but it pushes the narrative to the limits. This is especially true when these verbs are used in the present tense in verse 41, when Andrew finds his brother to tell him about Jesus. Is Andrew also continually finding Jesus and continually telling Peter about Jesus? It was ingrained into me the "continuous" nature of the present tense. This can create some great theological insight, but we cannot completely rest on it because authors often stretch the tenses more than we might expect.
John 1:41
ευρισκει ουτος προτον τον αδελφον τον ιδιον Σιμονα και λεγει αυτω ευρηκαμεν τον Μεσσιαν ο εστιν μεθερμηνευομενον χριστος
John 1:41: He first found his brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which is translated Anointed).
We divide by punctuation and conquer:
1) ευρισκει ουτος προτον τον αδελφον τον ιδιον Σιμονα και λεγει αυτω
We find the subject and verb:
ευρισκει: he/she/it finds - main verb
ουτος: he -- subject!
προτον: adjective in accusative case as an adverb: "first" or really "firstly"
τον αδελφον τον ιδιον Σιμονα: His own brother Simon
και λεγει αυτω: Another sentence: "He is saying to him."
Tricky to recognize this as another subject and verb combo, but the familiarity of the verb should make it possible.
2) ευρηκαμεν τον Μεσσιαν
We have found the Messiah. We is implicit in the verb.
3) ο εστιν μεθερμηνευομενον χριστος
who/what/which is translated Christos. Notice the o has a an accent and rough breathing accent, which means it is a relative pronoun.
So this sentence can almost be read word for word, once you divide it up. The complicated part, as a we discussed in the grammar review, is translating the present tenses of the verb.
Summary: John's narrative is very basic to read...because he only uses about 30 words in 14 verses! He invites us into the world of the Old Testament, he invites us to follow Jesus, and he also invites us into witnessing ourselves to the lamb of God. Speaking of the lamb of God, what is John getting at here? There is no lamb in the OT who takes away the sins on the day of atonement. The main lamb in the Old Testament is the Passover lamb, which has nothing to do with sins! John's creativity, hopefully, inspires our preaching and teaching.
ερχομαι & οραω (1:39; 1:46; 4:29; 11:34, 19:33; 20:8 "Come and see") These two verbs come together s number of times in John's Gospel. A quite impressive list actually:
A) When Jesus begins his ministry
B) When the woman at the well returns to her hometown to invite others (different cognate for "come");
C) When they bring Jesus to Lazarus' tomb
D) When they find Jesus on the cross
E) When they come to the empty tomb.
John's Gospel invites us to come and see again and again, ultimately even the resurrection (20:8).
αμνος (1:29; 36, "lamb"). The imagery of "lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world" often makes us think of animal sacrifices in the Old Testament. However, the main sacrifices on Yom Kippur (day of atonement) were not lambs, but a bull and two goats! In fact, other sin offerings (Lev 4&5) are not lamb offerings but again bulls and goats. I am sure that many other summaries would be better than this one, but the lamb was used in OT times for sacrifices in the following manner:
Daily offerings (Exodus 29): To please the Lord and welcome his presence
Lepers (Leviticus 14): To cleanse the lepers by its blood
Passover Meal (Exodus 12): To protect the Israelites from the angel of death by its blood marking the door panes.
A lamb could be used a burnt offering, a type of sin offering, but we are getting further afield here. The point of this discourse is to say that in the Jewish sacrifice model of the Old Testament, you do not find a theology where a lamb is constantly being used to take away the sins of the individuals. Isaiah 53 develops the idea of the suffering servant as a lamb led to slaughter, but again the point here is that one cannot simply draw a nice line from OT sacrifice to Messiah predictions to Gospel of John. Okay, you can, but it is not so simple.
More deeply, I do not think the Gospel of John is advocating an angry God who slaughters Jesus to be happy. I think John is riffing on Old Testament themes here, but the connection between Lamb of God, Jesus and "taking away" the sins of the world, moves far beyond what the Old Testament was prepared to acknowledge. Is this a problem? Not for this Christian. I just want to point out that John 1:29 is probably not a good time to bring out angry God needs a Jesus animal sermon.
Additional note: I did some research on the word "αιρω", meaning "take away." I could not find anything particularly connected with sin or sacrifice. That said, the word is used within the passion narrative a number of times.
- The chant of the crowd to crucify Jesus -- "away with him, away with him, crucify him" (19:15)
- The stone is rolled away
- Mary thinks they have taken Jesus away
However, I couldn't see any obvious pattern for what John might mean by the one who "takes away" the sins of the world.
Cheap sermon insight: 3+3=6. Bad number. Needs one more witness to be complete. That witness is you.
επαρυριον (1:29, 1:35, 1:43, "tomorrow") This little word appears three times in this section. It is kind of a nice progression. The first day Jesus is pointed out to the people. On the second day, the people begin following Jesus. On the third day they begin to invite others.
Grammar note:
The present tense often connotes continuous action. This can create some great insights but also make the narrative illogical. For example, in verse 1:43, Jesus goes to find (ευρισκω; present tense) Philipp. In the narrative this makes no sense that he "continually is finding" Philipp. On the other hand, it does make sense in theological terms that Jesus always is finding Philipp! Then Jesus is saying (λεγω in the present), or really "continually saying" to Philipp, follow me. This could make sense in both the narrative and in theology. In fact, even the verb for follow (ακολουθεω), is in the present, meaning Jesus intends for Philipp to keep following him. This all works out great on a theological level, but it pushes the narrative to the limits. This is especially true when these verbs are used in the present tense in verse 41, when Andrew finds his brother to tell him about Jesus. Is Andrew also continually finding Jesus and continually telling Peter about Jesus? It was ingrained into me the "continuous" nature of the present tense. This can create some great theological insight, but we cannot completely rest on it because authors often stretch the tenses more than we might expect.
John 1:41
ευρισκει ουτος προτον τον αδελφον τον ιδιον Σιμονα και λεγει αυτω ευρηκαμεν τον Μεσσιαν ο εστιν μεθερμηνευομενον χριστος
John 1:41: He first found his brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which is translated Anointed).
We divide by punctuation and conquer:
1) ευρισκει ουτος προτον τον αδελφον τον ιδιον Σιμονα και λεγει αυτω
We find the subject and verb:
ευρισκει: he/she/it finds - main verb
ουτος: he -- subject!
προτον: adjective in accusative case as an adverb: "first" or really "firstly"
τον αδελφον τον ιδιον Σιμονα: His own brother Simon
και λεγει αυτω: Another sentence: "He is saying to him."
Tricky to recognize this as another subject and verb combo, but the familiarity of the verb should make it possible.
2) ευρηκαμεν τον Μεσσιαν
We have found the Messiah. We is implicit in the verb.
3) ο εστιν μεθερμηνευομενον χριστος
who/what/which is translated Christos. Notice the o has a an accent and rough breathing accent, which means it is a relative pronoun.
So this sentence can almost be read word for word, once you divide it up. The complicated part, as a we discussed in the grammar review, is translating the present tenses of the verb.
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Luke 12:13-21
This passage occurs in the RCL Year C, most recently in August 4, 2019.
Summary: I am intrigued by the fact that Jesus does not make a distinction between "needs" and "wants." So much of my Christian and cultural upbringing taught me to distinguish between "need" and "want." God gives us what we need; not necessarily what we want; we can keep what we need and given to charity the things we "only" want. I wonder if it is time for us to explode this distinction and say God gives us all we have; all we have is a gift to be shared! All possessions, at some deep level, are simply wants. All we truly need is God, a God who provides us with daily bread and who gives us his eternal Kingdom.
If you are preaching this after Luke 11:1-13 (the Lord's prayer and praying; the RCL's previous week's Gospel passage), this passage becomes a great way to build on what we mean by daily bread and "yours is the Kingdom"!
Key words:
οχλου (genitive of οχλος, "ochlos", meaning "crowd", 12:13) It is someone in the crowd who calls to him; The word here for crowd is οχλος, a fairly common word in the NT. It refers to the uneducated mass of citizens; Jesus is among "the people."
κληρονομια(ν) ("kleronomia", meaning "inheritance", 12:13) Breaking down this word explains the trouble people had and continue to have with it. The word is literally "portion-law." κλερος means portion (or lot, as in cast lots); νομος means law (the ending has an "a" because it is a feminine word, but this doesn't change the fact that its root it still νομος). An inheritance is meant to be a gift, a blessing to future generations. Due to sin, we cannot leave a gift a gift, but we have to "protect" it with laws until the point where it no longer becomes gift. It is interesting too that the people want to make Jesus, the savior, into a law-giver. Again, due to sin, we cannot embrace a gift, but must install law!
πλεονεξια ("pleonexia", meaning "greed" or "coveting", 12:15) Jesus warns them, "Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed." The word here for "greed" is πλεονεξια. This word, whenever it appears in the NT, has a negative connotation, most often used in laundry lists of obvious sins. Most interesting, however, is the connection that Colossians 3:5 (the RCL's NT reading for this week) provides. Paul writes that coveting, πλεονεξια is, in essence, idolatry. Wow! Greed as idolatry is in itself a great sermon (Walter Bruggeman gave a fantastic sermon on this at Luther Seminary in 2008). One tidbit he shared is that as Paul connects coveting/greed and idolatry, he connects the last commandment (do not covet) to the first (one God; no idols).
υπαρχοντων (genitive participle of υπαρχω, meaning "possessions", 12:15) Jesus warns of an excess of possessions. It is worth reminding ourselves that the word for possessions, υπαρχοντων, does not simply mean toys or things. It includes: means, resources, the things which one can claim for existence. In fact, the word is a substantive participle, literally meaning "the things that exist to him."
Two examples of where this word shows up:
Luke 8:3 These women were helping to support them out of their own means.
Luke 19:8 Zacchaeus says to Jesus: Look, half of my possessions, Lord, I will give to the poor.
In other words, Jesus here is not distinguishing between needs and wants. Perhaps this is really helpful for as American Christians who are told we can have what we need, but not what we want. Our tendency is to greatly exaggerate what we need! Jesus here points out that our only need is God and God alone.
αναπαυου (command form of αναπαυω, meaning "rest"; 12:19) We are a world hungry for relaxation -- stress relief from our anxieties. The word for relax here is αναπαυω. This word is used in Matthew 11:28, when Jesus promises us rest (Come to me all you who are weary and heaven laden for I will give you rest." The parable asks us a haunting question: Where do we seek our solace? Where do we seek out rest? Possessions inevitably require maintenance, rules and effort...and do not bring us the profound solace we had hoped for.
*** A little addendum on Luke 12:22-34)
τρεφει (feed; 12:24), αμφιεζει (clothe; 12:28) I put these two verbs together. They appear in these verses:
Luke 12:24 Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds (τρεφει) them.
Luke 12:28 But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe (αμφιεζει) you
In both of these cases, the verb is in the present tense, indicating an on-going action. God will continually feed and clothe us. This is not a one-time action to start the human story in motion, but a continuous creator!
προστεθησεται (future passive form of προστιθημι, meaning "add", 12:31) What is significant here is that this verb is in the passive voice, meaning that the subject (us) is not the agent (the one doing the work.) If these things are to be added, it is not because of us, but because of God. If you did not catch that God has agency, not us, in the next verse Jesus says that the Father gives us the Kingdom.
Two little grammar notes:
12:16 "A certain rich man..." The literal translation of the clause is: "of a man certain rich produced good crops the field." The fact that the first three words - man, certain, rich - are all in same case shows they are related.
12:17/12:18 The verb ποιησω appears in both 12:17 and 12:18. Even though both spellings are the same, it is conjugated (and therefore translated) differently. The first time it is translated as an aorist subjunctive: "What shall I do?" In the other it is future indicative: "This I will do." Context determines the correct translation
Summary: I am intrigued by the fact that Jesus does not make a distinction between "needs" and "wants." So much of my Christian and cultural upbringing taught me to distinguish between "need" and "want." God gives us what we need; not necessarily what we want; we can keep what we need and given to charity the things we "only" want. I wonder if it is time for us to explode this distinction and say God gives us all we have; all we have is a gift to be shared! All possessions, at some deep level, are simply wants. All we truly need is God, a God who provides us with daily bread and who gives us his eternal Kingdom.
If you are preaching this after Luke 11:1-13 (the Lord's prayer and praying; the RCL's previous week's Gospel passage), this passage becomes a great way to build on what we mean by daily bread and "yours is the Kingdom"!
Key words:
οχλου (genitive of οχλος, "ochlos", meaning "crowd", 12:13) It is someone in the crowd who calls to him; The word here for crowd is οχλος, a fairly common word in the NT. It refers to the uneducated mass of citizens; Jesus is among "the people."
κληρονομια(ν) ("kleronomia", meaning "inheritance", 12:13) Breaking down this word explains the trouble people had and continue to have with it. The word is literally "portion-law." κλερος means portion (or lot, as in cast lots); νομος means law (the ending has an "a" because it is a feminine word, but this doesn't change the fact that its root it still νομος). An inheritance is meant to be a gift, a blessing to future generations. Due to sin, we cannot leave a gift a gift, but we have to "protect" it with laws until the point where it no longer becomes gift. It is interesting too that the people want to make Jesus, the savior, into a law-giver. Again, due to sin, we cannot embrace a gift, but must install law!
πλεονεξια ("pleonexia", meaning "greed" or "coveting", 12:15) Jesus warns them, "Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed." The word here for "greed" is πλεονεξια. This word, whenever it appears in the NT, has a negative connotation, most often used in laundry lists of obvious sins. Most interesting, however, is the connection that Colossians 3:5 (the RCL's NT reading for this week) provides. Paul writes that coveting, πλεονεξια is, in essence, idolatry. Wow! Greed as idolatry is in itself a great sermon (Walter Bruggeman gave a fantastic sermon on this at Luther Seminary in 2008). One tidbit he shared is that as Paul connects coveting/greed and idolatry, he connects the last commandment (do not covet) to the first (one God; no idols).
υπαρχοντων (genitive participle of υπαρχω, meaning "possessions", 12:15) Jesus warns of an excess of possessions. It is worth reminding ourselves that the word for possessions, υπαρχοντων, does not simply mean toys or things. It includes: means, resources, the things which one can claim for existence. In fact, the word is a substantive participle, literally meaning "the things that exist to him."
Two examples of where this word shows up:
Luke 8:3 These women were helping to support them out of their own means.
Luke 19:8 Zacchaeus says to Jesus: Look, half of my possessions, Lord, I will give to the poor.
In other words, Jesus here is not distinguishing between needs and wants. Perhaps this is really helpful for as American Christians who are told we can have what we need, but not what we want. Our tendency is to greatly exaggerate what we need! Jesus here points out that our only need is God and God alone.
αναπαυου (command form of αναπαυω, meaning "rest"; 12:19) We are a world hungry for relaxation -- stress relief from our anxieties. The word for relax here is αναπαυω. This word is used in Matthew 11:28, when Jesus promises us rest (Come to me all you who are weary and heaven laden for I will give you rest." The parable asks us a haunting question: Where do we seek our solace? Where do we seek out rest? Possessions inevitably require maintenance, rules and effort...and do not bring us the profound solace we had hoped for.
*** A little addendum on Luke 12:22-34)
τρεφει (feed; 12:24), αμφιεζει (clothe; 12:28) I put these two verbs together. They appear in these verses:
Luke 12:24 Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds (τρεφει) them.
Luke 12:28 But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe (αμφιεζει) you
In both of these cases, the verb is in the present tense, indicating an on-going action. God will continually feed and clothe us. This is not a one-time action to start the human story in motion, but a continuous creator!
προστεθησεται (future passive form of προστιθημι, meaning "add", 12:31) What is significant here is that this verb is in the passive voice, meaning that the subject (us) is not the agent (the one doing the work.) If these things are to be added, it is not because of us, but because of God. If you did not catch that God has agency, not us, in the next verse Jesus says that the Father gives us the Kingdom.
Two little grammar notes:
12:16 "A certain rich man..." The literal translation of the clause is: "of a man certain rich produced good crops the field." The fact that the first three words - man, certain, rich - are all in same case shows they are related.
12:17/12:18 The verb ποιησω appears in both 12:17 and 12:18. Even though both spellings are the same, it is conjugated (and therefore translated) differently. The first time it is translated as an aorist subjunctive: "What shall I do?" In the other it is future indicative: "This I will do." Context determines the correct translation
Thursday, July 25, 2019
Genesis 18:20-32
This passage appears in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year C (recently on July 28, 2019)
Summary: There is a lot of great material in this passage to consider regarding prayer, especially as it is paired with Jesus teaching the Lord's Prayer to the disciples in Luke's Gospel. But I want to look at the question: What is the sin of Sodom?
חטאת (meaning "sin", 18:19) The sins of Sodom are "grave" (כבך meaning "to be heavy") in Hebrew). There are a lot of potential sins in the Bible. So what are the sins of Sodom?
It is often assumed that Sodom was punished for its sexual sins, specifically homosexual lust. The book of Jude in the New Testament supports this:
- "Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." Jude 1:7
This possibility runs into some difficulty, namely, that the story involving sex comes after God has heard the outcry against Sodom; furthermore, the story involving sex involves gang rape of two men (actually angels) visiting Lot's home and then Lot offering his virgin daughters in their place. In addition, one must consider the culture's overwhelming value of hospitality, as displayed by Abraham earlier in chapter 18. Sodom represents total moral depravity; there are multiple moral failures in the gang-rape scene, well beyond sex.
In fact, in 2 Peter, Sodom (and Gomorrah) get mentioned as THE example of ungodly behavior:
"by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction and made them an example of what is coming to the ungodly." (2 Peter 2:6) The writer associates this ungodliness with sexual misconduct in that God: "rescued Lot, a righteous man greatly distressed by the licentiousness of the lawless" (2 Peter 2:7). However, the writer/Peter concludes this section by concluding that they "They have hearts trained in greed." (2 Peter 2:14)* It seems that for Peter, sex is a problem, but not THE problem. Again, sexual sin goes hand in hand with other sins.
Furthermore, God declares in Genesis 18.19 that he has known/chosen/singled out Abraham so that Abraham may do "righteousness" and "justice" (צדקה and משפת). These two concepts will be paired again and again in the Old Testament (Psalm 33.5; Proverbs 21:3; Isaiah 56:1, Amos 6:12). It is fair to wonder if the problem in Sodom is about basic righteousness.
We do not have much evidence in Genesis prior to chapter 18 of what is happening in Sodom. However, the prophet Ezekiel gives voice to the Lord's judgment against them: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me." (Ezekiel 16:49-50)
To put it another way, the sexual sins of Sodom are not the problem in themselves, rather they are manifestation of a culture in which people put themselves first, objectify others, and justify their greed. Sound familiar? I've read a number of commentators who want to ignore the sexual sins, totally focusing on hospitality, likely as a reaction of those who use this passage in sexuality debates. I think as a whole, the American church struggles with sexual sins, either obsessing over them or ignoring them. Perhaps this story reminds us that yes, sexual immorality is a concern to God, but it likely arises alongside of other problems.
Most haunting may not be what happens to Sodom, but the words of judgment that God has in Ezekiel. Especially when heard with the words of Peter, as he concludes his argument: "They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption; for people are slaves to whatever masters them." (2 Peter 2:19)
* Admittedly, Peter is referencing the story of Sodom and other passages within a section in which he is critiquing the behavior of members of his church who have gone astray. It might be difficult to ascertain when Peter is offering commentary on the Biblical characters versus his piers. That all said, the overall impression Peter gives is that there is sexual sin, but this is more a manifestation of others sins, rather than the problem in itself.
Summary: There is a lot of great material in this passage to consider regarding prayer, especially as it is paired with Jesus teaching the Lord's Prayer to the disciples in Luke's Gospel. But I want to look at the question: What is the sin of Sodom?
חטאת (meaning "sin", 18:19) The sins of Sodom are "grave" (כבך meaning "to be heavy") in Hebrew). There are a lot of potential sins in the Bible. So what are the sins of Sodom?
It is often assumed that Sodom was punished for its sexual sins, specifically homosexual lust. The book of Jude in the New Testament supports this:
- "Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." Jude 1:7
This possibility runs into some difficulty, namely, that the story involving sex comes after God has heard the outcry against Sodom; furthermore, the story involving sex involves gang rape of two men (actually angels) visiting Lot's home and then Lot offering his virgin daughters in their place. In addition, one must consider the culture's overwhelming value of hospitality, as displayed by Abraham earlier in chapter 18. Sodom represents total moral depravity; there are multiple moral failures in the gang-rape scene, well beyond sex.
In fact, in 2 Peter, Sodom (and Gomorrah) get mentioned as THE example of ungodly behavior:
"by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction and made them an example of what is coming to the ungodly." (2 Peter 2:6) The writer associates this ungodliness with sexual misconduct in that God: "rescued Lot, a righteous man greatly distressed by the licentiousness of the lawless" (2 Peter 2:7). However, the writer/Peter concludes this section by concluding that they "They have hearts trained in greed." (2 Peter 2:14)* It seems that for Peter, sex is a problem, but not THE problem. Again, sexual sin goes hand in hand with other sins.
Furthermore, God declares in Genesis 18.19 that he has known/chosen/singled out Abraham so that Abraham may do "righteousness" and "justice" (צדקה and משפת). These two concepts will be paired again and again in the Old Testament (Psalm 33.5; Proverbs 21:3; Isaiah 56:1, Amos 6:12). It is fair to wonder if the problem in Sodom is about basic righteousness.
We do not have much evidence in Genesis prior to chapter 18 of what is happening in Sodom. However, the prophet Ezekiel gives voice to the Lord's judgment against them: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me." (Ezekiel 16:49-50)
To put it another way, the sexual sins of Sodom are not the problem in themselves, rather they are manifestation of a culture in which people put themselves first, objectify others, and justify their greed. Sound familiar? I've read a number of commentators who want to ignore the sexual sins, totally focusing on hospitality, likely as a reaction of those who use this passage in sexuality debates. I think as a whole, the American church struggles with sexual sins, either obsessing over them or ignoring them. Perhaps this story reminds us that yes, sexual immorality is a concern to God, but it likely arises alongside of other problems.
Most haunting may not be what happens to Sodom, but the words of judgment that God has in Ezekiel. Especially when heard with the words of Peter, as he concludes his argument: "They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption; for people are slaves to whatever masters them." (2 Peter 2:19)
* Admittedly, Peter is referencing the story of Sodom and other passages within a section in which he is critiquing the behavior of members of his church who have gone astray. It might be difficult to ascertain when Peter is offering commentary on the Biblical characters versus his piers. That all said, the overall impression Peter gives is that there is sexual sin, but this is more a manifestation of others sins, rather than the problem in itself.
Tuesday, August 7, 2018
Ephesians 4:25-5:2
This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year B, most recently August 12, 2018.
Summary: It is summer, so I only offer a brief commentary here. I mainly want to look at the words related to grace!
χαρις (grace; 4:29) The word grace appears a number of times in Ephesians. I want to consider what this particular writer (okay, I get it, there is a lot of debate about whether Paul wrote this letter. If it turns out not to be Paul, the person who wrote it was a spiritual genius and student of Paul). I am going to break down grace a bit, which is theologically impossible, but I think it is a necessary intermediate step
Grace isn't conferred in one moment, but becomes the vehicle, it seems through which the Spirit works; to put it another way, grace is the heavenly currency that can never be earned.
χαριζομαι (give freely or even forgive; 4:32) This word typically does not mean "forgive" but means "be gracious" or "be generous", which includes forgiving one another. I like this word here first because it reminds us that our forgiveness toward our neighbor is not an abstraction but must bear fruit in real life. Second it connects to the broader theme of grace!
εχαριτωσεν (from χαριτοω, meaning "bestow freely"; 1.6) The writer declares we have been freely bestowed with God's blessing through Christ. The only other New Testament appearance of this word is in Luke's Gospel, to describe Mary as the "highly favored." Turns out that in Christ we are all highly favored, bears of God's word to the world.
Summary: It is summer, so I only offer a brief commentary here. I mainly want to look at the words related to grace!
χαρις (grace; 4:29) The word grace appears a number of times in Ephesians. I want to consider what this particular writer (okay, I get it, there is a lot of debate about whether Paul wrote this letter. If it turns out not to be Paul, the person who wrote it was a spiritual genius and student of Paul). I am going to break down grace a bit, which is theologically impossible, but I think it is a necessary intermediate step
- Out of the richest of grace, we have redemption through the blood on the cross (1:7)
- Grace is revealed in the resurrection of Christ and us (2:6)
- Grace is the revelation of the mystery of Christ (3:2)
- Grace is imparted through faith (2:8) and leads to a life of good works
- Grace becomes a way of life, building others up (4:29) and giving grace to others through forgiveness (4:32)
- Grace, one might argue, is that which predestines us (1:6)
Grace isn't conferred in one moment, but becomes the vehicle, it seems through which the Spirit works; to put it another way, grace is the heavenly currency that can never be earned.
χαριζομαι (give freely or even forgive; 4:32) This word typically does not mean "forgive" but means "be gracious" or "be generous", which includes forgiving one another. I like this word here first because it reminds us that our forgiveness toward our neighbor is not an abstraction but must bear fruit in real life. Second it connects to the broader theme of grace!
εχαριτωσεν (from χαριτοω, meaning "bestow freely"; 1.6) The writer declares we have been freely bestowed with God's blessing through Christ. The only other New Testament appearance of this word is in Luke's Gospel, to describe Mary as the "highly favored." Turns out that in Christ we are all highly favored, bears of God's word to the world.
Tuesday, March 13, 2018
2 Samuel 12 and Psalm 51
This passage occurs in the Narrative Lectionary, Year 1; it also occurs many years in the Revised Common Lectionary during Lent.
Summary: There are rich theological themes in this Psalm 51. For my blog this week, I try to get into some the words, which are rich in imagery in the Hebrew. Hopefully these descriptive words can be a means to get into the Psalm (and accompanying story of David, Bathsheba and Nathan). As a side note, I've always seen the fullest expression of Gospel in this passage in the existence of the Psalm 51. God turned David's sin into something that was enduring and lasting. His child died, but his words of lament have comforted people for centuries.
Key Words:
נביא ("Nivea" meaning "prophet", 51:1 (intro to Psalm): The word prophecy often means prediction in modern popular imagination and film (Harry Potter/Star Wars). The prophets in the Bible did not predict the future. Rather, they spoke the word of God, which often included future possibilities for judgment or promises of blessing. But the main job of the prophet was to speak the Word of the Lord to the present situation, in this case, a king who had sinned badly. Very badly.
נתן ("Nathan", name of the prophet, 51:1 (intro to Psalm): The prophet's name "Nathan" means gift. Even the harsh words of God are a gift to David here in that he calls David to repent, to have a restored relationship with God. When we deny calling 'sin' 'sin' we deprive people of the gift of forgiveness and repentance.
רחמים ("rakamim" meaning "compassion", 51:2) The origin of this word רחם meaning is womb. In the plural it means compassion; this is clearly feminine way of thinking about God's love; it is like a woman's care born in her womb.
מחא ("makha" meaning "wipe", 51:2;9): As the TWOT points out, almost every time this verb shows up in the Hebrew Bible, it is significant. For example, God will wipe out the earth with a flood; God will wipe away every tear in the eschaton (Isaiah 25:8). The literal action means: "Erasures in ancient leather scrolls were made by washing or sponging off the ink rather than blotting. " Literally erase away, expunge! So that when God reads the book of life, he reads them no more.
כבס ("kabas" meaning "launder", 51:3;7) TWOT: "to make stuffs clean and soft by treading, kneading and beating them in cold water...it is used always for clothing, 'to launder'"
טהר ("tahar" meaning "cleanse, purify", 51:3;7) In Hebrew, this word is associated with pure metals (especially gold); it is often associated with ritual and ceremonial cleansing and furthermore, cleansed items used in worship. You could go a couple of ways here: First, that God's cleansing is like removal of dross from metal -- getting rid of the crap in our lives that we might be pure. Second, you could argue that the cleansing has a purpose (to be used in worship and service to God). Third, you could argue that ultimately forgiveness entails a ritual cleansing, including through washing with water or blood.
חול ("khul" meaning "twirl" translated here as "born", 51:5) from the moment the person begins writhing, twirling, dancing, moving, even in pain, they are born with sin.
אמת ("amat" meaning "faithfulness" or "truth", 51:6) What is it that God desires? It is not simply truth as in a true statement, but faithfulness. Something beyond propositional truth is desired here. We could do a lot more here, but the NET translates this nicely with integrity.
ברה ("barah" meaning "create" 51:10) Just a reminder that this verb is only associated with God as the subject. Humans can fairly be described as co-creators in the sense of we can imagine, build, make, name...but we cannot create life; nor can we create a new heart.
קדש ("kadesh" meaning "Holy" 51:11) This is the only time in the Old Testament we have an unambiguous reference to the Holy Spirit. The NRSV does not do Christians justice when they translate the words with lower case holy spirit.
Summary: There are rich theological themes in this Psalm 51. For my blog this week, I try to get into some the words, which are rich in imagery in the Hebrew. Hopefully these descriptive words can be a means to get into the Psalm (and accompanying story of David, Bathsheba and Nathan). As a side note, I've always seen the fullest expression of Gospel in this passage in the existence of the Psalm 51. God turned David's sin into something that was enduring and lasting. His child died, but his words of lament have comforted people for centuries.
Key Words:
נביא ("Nivea" meaning "prophet", 51:1 (intro to Psalm): The word prophecy often means prediction in modern popular imagination and film (Harry Potter/Star Wars). The prophets in the Bible did not predict the future. Rather, they spoke the word of God, which often included future possibilities for judgment or promises of blessing. But the main job of the prophet was to speak the Word of the Lord to the present situation, in this case, a king who had sinned badly. Very badly.
נתן ("Nathan", name of the prophet, 51:1 (intro to Psalm): The prophet's name "Nathan" means gift. Even the harsh words of God are a gift to David here in that he calls David to repent, to have a restored relationship with God. When we deny calling 'sin' 'sin' we deprive people of the gift of forgiveness and repentance.
רחמים ("rakamim" meaning "compassion", 51:2) The origin of this word רחם meaning is womb. In the plural it means compassion; this is clearly feminine way of thinking about God's love; it is like a woman's care born in her womb.
מחא ("makha" meaning "wipe", 51:2;9): As the TWOT points out, almost every time this verb shows up in the Hebrew Bible, it is significant. For example, God will wipe out the earth with a flood; God will wipe away every tear in the eschaton (Isaiah 25:8). The literal action means: "Erasures in ancient leather scrolls were made by washing or sponging off the ink rather than blotting. " Literally erase away, expunge! So that when God reads the book of life, he reads them no more.
כבס ("kabas" meaning "launder", 51:3;7) TWOT: "to make stuffs clean and soft by treading, kneading and beating them in cold water...it is used always for clothing, 'to launder'"
טהר ("tahar" meaning "cleanse, purify", 51:3;7) In Hebrew, this word is associated with pure metals (especially gold); it is often associated with ritual and ceremonial cleansing and furthermore, cleansed items used in worship. You could go a couple of ways here: First, that God's cleansing is like removal of dross from metal -- getting rid of the crap in our lives that we might be pure. Second, you could argue that the cleansing has a purpose (to be used in worship and service to God). Third, you could argue that ultimately forgiveness entails a ritual cleansing, including through washing with water or blood.
חול ("khul" meaning "twirl" translated here as "born", 51:5) from the moment the person begins writhing, twirling, dancing, moving, even in pain, they are born with sin.
אמת ("amat" meaning "faithfulness" or "truth", 51:6) What is it that God desires? It is not simply truth as in a true statement, but faithfulness. Something beyond propositional truth is desired here. We could do a lot more here, but the NET translates this nicely with integrity.
ברה ("barah" meaning "create" 51:10) Just a reminder that this verb is only associated with God as the subject. Humans can fairly be described as co-creators in the sense of we can imagine, build, make, name...but we cannot create life; nor can we create a new heart.
קדש ("kadesh" meaning "Holy" 51:11) This is the only time in the Old Testament we have an unambiguous reference to the Holy Spirit. The NRSV does not do Christians justice when they translate the words with lower case holy spirit.
Wednesday, February 28, 2018
1 Corinthians 1:18-31
This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary (Year A), most recently in January 2017; then a portion of it during Year B (Lent 2018).
...foolishness to those who are perishing
...power of God to those who are being saved
What does this mean for a sermon: Well, everything. But I think the notion of dynamic salvation is crucial (pun intended); I also think clarifying the power of God is really important for people. (This links up well with the connected Gospel passage on Matthew 5!)
Rather than review this whole passage, I just want to offer an in-depth commentary on this one crucial verse:
"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1 Corinthians 1:18
...foolishness to those who are perishing
Although
the NIV, NRSV, NAU and NET translate απολλυμι
as “perishing” it should not be understood as merely physical death. The
middle voice of this verb (it cannot be determined if the verb is middle or
passive) means “ruin." Looking at how Paul uses this verb throughout his letters to the Corinthians suggest Paul employs a metaphorical, or perhaps better said, theological layer when he uses the word "perish."
When Paul later uses the verb in the present tense in chapter 8:11, “So by your knowledge those weak believers for whom Christ died are destroyed (απολλυται),” Paul does not mean that weak believers are immediately undergoing physical death. Instead, Paul is trying to talk about the process of dying; or being captive to sin, the law and the flesh. Paul will use this verb to refer to physical death (10:9, 10:10, and 15:18) but in these cases, the verb tense is aorist. 15:18 even refers to the physical death of Christians. In short, all humans perish (aorist tense), but non-believers are perishing (present tense).
This pattern of Paul using απολλυμι in the present tense to signify not an ultimate death, but the process of perishing, matches with 2 Corinthians and Romans. These passages also continue the pattern of contrasting those being saved and those being ruined.
When Paul later uses the verb in the present tense in chapter 8:11, “So by your knowledge those weak believers for whom Christ died are destroyed (απολλυται),” Paul does not mean that weak believers are immediately undergoing physical death. Instead, Paul is trying to talk about the process of dying; or being captive to sin, the law and the flesh. Paul will use this verb to refer to physical death (10:9, 10:10, and 15:18) but in these cases, the verb tense is aorist. 15:18 even refers to the physical death of Christians. In short, all humans perish (aorist tense), but non-believers are perishing (present tense).
This pattern of Paul using απολλυμι in the present tense to signify not an ultimate death, but the process of perishing, matches with 2 Corinthians and Romans. These passages also continue the pattern of contrasting those being saved and those being ruined.
- For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; 2 Corinthians 2:15
- And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 2 Corinthians 4:3
- If your brother or sister is being injured by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. Do not let what you eat cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died. Romans 14:15
This point is most saliently brought home by
contrasting 1 Cor 15:18 which talks about the reality that Christians will die
(aorist tense) with 2 Cor 4:9, that even through Christians are “struck down”
they are not “απολλυμενοι.”
What does this mean for a sermon: Consider the ways in which life outside of Christ consists of perishing each and every day.
What does this mean for a sermon: Consider the ways in which life outside of Christ consists of perishing each and every day.
...power of God to those who are being saved
Paul uses the word
power in a variety of ways. One of the
most important, however, is that God’s power will bring about
resurrection: Both Jesus and ours. (And God raised the Lord and will also raise
us by his power, 1 Cor 6:14), It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It
is sown in weakness, it is raised in power (15:43).
The final word in the section "σωζω" is also a loaded theological term. Although BDAG indicates this word can mean
“heal”, Paul normally employs it to mean “save/preserve from eternal
death.” In America
The most saliently comes across in
verse 1:18. The cross does not simply
trigger a salvation event. The wording
is not: The words of the cross is the
power of God for salvation to those believing, as it is in Romans 1:16. Rather it is the power of God to those being
saved. What is amazing is that the power
of God is not simply the saving, but rather, to those being saved, the cross is
the power of God. At the very least the
power of God entails something more dynamic than ultimate salvation; it may
even include something more than being saved.
2nd
Corinthians gives an image of how the power of God becomes that which allows
Christians to endure hardship.
- But we have this treasure in clay jars, so that it may be made clear that this extraordinary power belongs to God and does not come from us. We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; (2 Corinthians 4:7-9)
- We do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, of the affliction we experienced in Asia; for we were so utterly, unbearably crushed (u`pe.r du,namin) ‘beyond our strength’ that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death so that we would rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. (2 Corinthians 1:8-9)
- but as servants of God we have commended ourselves in every way: through great endurance, in afflictions, hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments, riots, labors, sleepless nights, hunger; by purity, knowledge, patience, kindness, holiness of spirit, genuine love, 7 truthful speech, and the power of God; with the weapons of righteousness for the right hand and for the left; (2 Corinthians 6:4-7)
- but he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness." So, I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me. (2 Corinthians 12:9)
This is an amazing
revelation of the power of God. The
power of God does not glorify the Christians, but propels them through
suffering. Paul even takes it a step
further in Philippians: I want to know Christ and the power of his
resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings by becoming like him in his
death, Philippians 3:10
To conclude with another quote from Corinithians around power:
For he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God. For we are weak in him, but in dealing with you we will live with him by the power of God. 2 Corinthians 13:4
For he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God. For we are weak in him, but in dealing with you we will live with him by the power of God. 2 Corinthians 13:4
What does this mean for a sermon: Well, everything. But I think the notion of dynamic salvation is crucial (pun intended); I also think clarifying the power of God is really important for people. (This links up well with the connected Gospel passage on Matthew 5!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
