Gleanings From the Text
The prophet Jeremiah speaks to dejected people of Israel and Judah. By force they have become semi-free subjects of a Persian King, and they have lost their land. God speaks to these people through a vision that Jeremiah relays to them.
• Covenant - People are reminded of the Old Mosaic Covenant God engineered between them. Due to their ancestors’ inequities of disobeying God, a new covenant will be employed. God realizes the shortcomings of passing a covenant from generation to generation. God says he will establish a covenant that cannot be misinterpreted or forgotten, because it shall be written on everyone’s heart and mind. Jeremiah enacts a future covenant that speaks of God’s mercy. The
catastrophic punishment for disobeying God will no longer exist. God
promises to for iniquity and remember their sins no more.
• Husband - God wishes to remain in an intimate relationship with the people. In Biblical times, the husband was appropriated with overseeing the good welfare and health of the family. Old covenants were broken, and a disappointed God only says “I was their husband”.
• Teach – Torah is the Hebrew word for teachings. The style of teaching God’s covenant to children by their parents has past. God intends to write this covenant so that all will know him.
Food for Thought
Powerful visions enable Jeremiah to become a restoration oracle. Why?
He had broached a new beginning. God’s people are not to think that they have been left abandoned. God sends a message through Jeremiah that was filled with hope when wounded people need it the most. It was a Hebrew belief that suffering was caused by some past transgression.
Jeremiah’s words caused people to lift themselves back up and again. Instilled with a new hope, people began rebuilding, and looking for prosperity.
This is a reminder to all people that everything is from God. God often leads people through disaster, only to bring them out of it. God is going to enable people to remember how to live as God’s people. God is going to empower people to recognize their Lord and Master, the one who secures their lives and provides for them.
It is very easy when reading this pericope, to interpret the hint of Messianic promise as disemboweling the people of Israel and Judah as God’s chosen people. Jeremiah’s prophecy of a New Covenant does not represent a radical disjunction with the Jewish people. Rather, it is a representation of a renewed relationship between God and the people of Israel. It is to be a relationship that will be stronger than those of the past. The New Covenant will embrace everyone in the community of faith. God, not the community will create love and fidelity so that everyone “from the least to the greatest” will know God.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This passage reminds me of expectations I held, and actual events that transpired. I was offered a position at a church that seemed full of opportunity for a Christian Educator.
Prior to accepting the position I dreamed three times of the Pastor teaching me as a mentor. With my vision for Christian Education firmly in place, I deducted that I was truly called to this position. I was sure that this person undoubtedly had a great deal to teach me!
Nothing is ever as it seems. Teach me, he did! It was not a lesson I wished to learn. There was great mental anguish associated with the lesson. I was not in control, God was. God was using the situation as a means to an end. My “vision” was something other than I expected. Perhaps those people of Judah and Israel were never able to look back upon the New Covenant and have an “ah ha” moment. Yet, with complete faith in God, did they ever wonder who God intended to become chosen?
Works Referenced
Mays, Jarvis L. (et al). (2001) The New Interpreter's Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes (vol. VI). (Nashville: Abingdon Press). P.812
Meeks, Wayne A. (ed) (1993). The Harper Collins Study Bible: New Revised Standard Version with Apocryphal/ Deutercanononical Books. (New Your: Harper Collins Publishers). p.p 1173-1174
Biographical Information
Cathy L. Smith graduated Union-PSCE in May of 2008 with a Masters in Christian Education. She was honored to do a directed study with Professor Henry Simmons in the area of Spirituality and Gerontology. Her FBL topic dealt with Christian Education among Older Adults. Currently, she is gaining her Certification as a Presbyterian Educator.
Read more!
Friday, February 6, 2009
March 22, 2009 - John 3:14-21 - Jenny McDevitt
Gleanings From the Text
These oft-quoted verses are part of Jesus’ monologue that flows directly from a dialogue with Nicodemus, a Jewish leader who comes to Jesus by night. The Fourth Gospel sends a mixed message about Nicodemus, a figure many readers identify with through his struggle to understand Jesus’ words. Though the lectionary includes only a section of this narrative, those preaching, teaching or reading this text may find greater insight by considering it as a whole.
“Lifted up” (v. 14) In Greek, the verb encompasses two meanings – “to lift up” and “to exalt” – and John uses both meanings simultaneously. The evangelist refers to Moses “lifting up” the bronze serpent in the wilderness, an act that had healing, life-giving power (see Numbers 21.8-9), then uses the same verb in relation to Jesus. In the Fourth Gospel, glory and exaltation come not only with Jesus’ resurrection, but also with the crucifixion itself – another act filled with healing, life-giving power.
“Eternal life” (v. 15-16) For John, eternal life is a present-tense reality. It is not something we wait for or hope for our future, but something we experience now as a result of faith in Jesus. As Gail O’Day writes, “To have eternal life is to live life no longer defined by blood or by the will of the flesh or by human will, but by God. Eternal does not mean mere endless duration of human existence, but is a way of describing life as lived in the unending presence of God. To have eternal life is to be given life as a child of God.” (See also John 10.10.)
Food For Thought
We run the risk of not hearing what this text has to say to us precisely because we’ve heard it (at least in part) so many times. As Frances Taylor Gench points out, John 3.16 permeates everything from Vacation Bible School to billboards and bumper stickers to Monday Night Football.
The tendency of some Christians to use this verse as evidence only of the urgent need to ‘accept Jesus’ can have an unfortunate consequence of overlooking a central claim. Before we are given any rhetoric about belief or unbelief, we are again reminded of God’s immense love for the entire created order (see also 1.1-18). We are given the choice between light and darkness, between belief and unbelief – but that choice of whether to love God, or not, is ours only because first, “God so loved the world.”
Other potential stumbling blocks exist. Verses 18-20 contain language of condemnation, judgment, darkness, and evil, intimidating concepts at best. But verse 17 assures us: “God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.” Gench helpfully points out, “God and Jesus do not judge; self-judgment is in view. To John’s way of thinking, we judge ourselves by our response to God’s love in Jesus Christ. Those who receive it receive new life; but those who reject it cut themselves off from ‘eternal life.’”
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Before seminary, I served as the program director of a summer camp. Campers learned a memory verse each morning that they would recite, in cabin groups, prior to entering the dining hall for lunch. One morning, I approached a particularly bouncy child and asked if he knew the verse. “Yes!” he exclaimed. “ForGodsolovedtheworldhesenthisonly . . .” He continued at top speed, each word running into the next. I asked him if he knew what it meant. “Of course,” he said. “It means I get to have lunch!”
We are all invited by God – it is an open invitation, meant “to enlighten every human being” (1.9). Among other claims, this text reassures us that through our faith, we, too, “get to have lunch.” We are given a seat at the heavenly banquet – which begins here and now, in the unending presence of our God.
Works Referenced
Frances Taylor Gench, Encounters with Jesus (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007).
Gail O’Day, “John” in The New Interpreters Bible Commentary Volume IX (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995).
Sandra Schneiders, Written That You May Believe (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 2003).
Biographical Information
Jenny McDevitt is a final-level Masters of Divinity student at Union-PSCE. Originally from Michigan, she graduated from Kenyon College with a degree in English (creative writing). Prior to attending seminary, McDevitt worked within camp and conference ministries of the PCUSA. She assures any concerned readers that all campers received three meals per day, whether they remembered bible verses or not.
Read more!
These oft-quoted verses are part of Jesus’ monologue that flows directly from a dialogue with Nicodemus, a Jewish leader who comes to Jesus by night. The Fourth Gospel sends a mixed message about Nicodemus, a figure many readers identify with through his struggle to understand Jesus’ words. Though the lectionary includes only a section of this narrative, those preaching, teaching or reading this text may find greater insight by considering it as a whole.
“Lifted up” (v. 14) In Greek, the verb encompasses two meanings – “to lift up” and “to exalt” – and John uses both meanings simultaneously. The evangelist refers to Moses “lifting up” the bronze serpent in the wilderness, an act that had healing, life-giving power (see Numbers 21.8-9), then uses the same verb in relation to Jesus. In the Fourth Gospel, glory and exaltation come not only with Jesus’ resurrection, but also with the crucifixion itself – another act filled with healing, life-giving power.
“Eternal life” (v. 15-16) For John, eternal life is a present-tense reality. It is not something we wait for or hope for our future, but something we experience now as a result of faith in Jesus. As Gail O’Day writes, “To have eternal life is to live life no longer defined by blood or by the will of the flesh or by human will, but by God. Eternal does not mean mere endless duration of human existence, but is a way of describing life as lived in the unending presence of God. To have eternal life is to be given life as a child of God.” (See also John 10.10.)
Food For Thought
We run the risk of not hearing what this text has to say to us precisely because we’ve heard it (at least in part) so many times. As Frances Taylor Gench points out, John 3.16 permeates everything from Vacation Bible School to billboards and bumper stickers to Monday Night Football.
The tendency of some Christians to use this verse as evidence only of the urgent need to ‘accept Jesus’ can have an unfortunate consequence of overlooking a central claim. Before we are given any rhetoric about belief or unbelief, we are again reminded of God’s immense love for the entire created order (see also 1.1-18). We are given the choice between light and darkness, between belief and unbelief – but that choice of whether to love God, or not, is ours only because first, “God so loved the world.”
Other potential stumbling blocks exist. Verses 18-20 contain language of condemnation, judgment, darkness, and evil, intimidating concepts at best. But verse 17 assures us: “God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.” Gench helpfully points out, “God and Jesus do not judge; self-judgment is in view. To John’s way of thinking, we judge ourselves by our response to God’s love in Jesus Christ. Those who receive it receive new life; but those who reject it cut themselves off from ‘eternal life.’”
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Before seminary, I served as the program director of a summer camp. Campers learned a memory verse each morning that they would recite, in cabin groups, prior to entering the dining hall for lunch. One morning, I approached a particularly bouncy child and asked if he knew the verse. “Yes!” he exclaimed. “ForGodsolovedtheworldhesenthisonly . . .” He continued at top speed, each word running into the next. I asked him if he knew what it meant. “Of course,” he said. “It means I get to have lunch!”
We are all invited by God – it is an open invitation, meant “to enlighten every human being” (1.9). Among other claims, this text reassures us that through our faith, we, too, “get to have lunch.” We are given a seat at the heavenly banquet – which begins here and now, in the unending presence of our God.
Works Referenced
Frances Taylor Gench, Encounters with Jesus (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007).
Gail O’Day, “John” in The New Interpreters Bible Commentary Volume IX (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995).
Sandra Schneiders, Written That You May Believe (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 2003).
Biographical Information
Jenny McDevitt is a final-level Masters of Divinity student at Union-PSCE. Originally from Michigan, she graduated from Kenyon College with a degree in English (creative writing). Prior to attending seminary, McDevitt worked within camp and conference ministries of the PCUSA. She assures any concerned readers that all campers received three meals per day, whether they remembered bible verses or not.
Read more!
March 15, 2009 - John 2:13-22 - Esta Jarrett
Gleanings from Text
Part 1 (vv. 18-22): Unlike much of the monologue-heavy Fourth Gospel, the narrator packs many verbs and objects into a few tight, complex verses (v. 15 especially). We are given the impression of a dramatically chaotic and confused scene, with many people and animals tumbling over each other.
This pericope directly follows the wedding at Cana and sharply contrasts Jesus’ dangerous public activities with his private life. Narrative arrangement is very important; the Fourth Gospel is the only one that places this story at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry.
Part 2 (vv. 18-22 or -25, depending on where you choose to end the pericope): Jesus’ words in the second part play on several interpretative levels. The literal understanding, with the Temple seen as a physical building, is put in the mouths of “the Jews.” The narrator, however, reminds the readers of the truth of the resurrection. As per usual in the Gospel of John, misunderstanding accompanies Jesus’ words.
This story is read in the context of Judaic worship history and the Temple cult, in which animals are brought for sacrifice during Passover. In Jesus’ day, since many people traveled long distances to the Temple, they had to buy their animals in Jerusalem, and were required to exchange their money for the Temple tax into currency of Tyre (since all Roman currency bore the image of Caesar) (Lev. 1, 3).
As opposed to the synoptic versions, Jesus doesn’t call the activities in the Temple a “den of robbers” (Isa. 56.7, Jer. 7.11), instead alluding to Zech. 14.21 with a play on “house” (oikos): his Father’s house has become “a house of trade” or “market-place.” This charge is much more radical an accusation and condemnation than calling it a “den of robbers,” hitting at the very foundation of the cultic tradition, and not just its abuses.
Food for Thought
In this story (read together with 1:51), we learn that God’s locus on earth has moved from the Temple to Jesus’ body. As the entire Fourth Gospel is written from a post-resurrection perspective, this understanding of Jesus’ body and personhood as the Word is a key interpretative lens.
The disciples later remembered Jesus’ words about the Temple being rebuilt. In the Fourth Gospel, “remembering” is an active aspect of discipleship, aided by the Spirit, which leads to faith and deepened understanding (see 12.16). In the confrontation between Jesus and the authoritative figures of the Temple cult, we see that the early church already equated Jesus’ words with the authority of Scripture.
As always in the Fourth Gospel, we must tread cautiously around the text’s history of anti-Semitic interpretation. Most scholars believe that this text was written by Jews, exiled from the synagogue, who believed that Jesus was the Messiah. This is insider language, borne of grief, distance and change.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This story has been illustrated many times. I’ve seen some paintings that show Jesus poised like a boxer with clenched fists; some that show Jesus enraged, seemingly berserk, swinging a whip above his head; and some that focus instead on the confusion of the money lenders and terrified beasts. All of these scenes are set in the beauty and glory of the Temple architecture, so reminiscent of some of today’s finest churches.
Just as varied are the scholarly interpretations. Is this a demonstration against corruption? A cleansing? A purging? A personal affront? Would we be relieved, confused, or embarrassed by Jesus’ display today, if it happened in our places of worship?
There is a lot of pain in this text, as there is in the PC(USA) and our state and national governments as we undergo times of discernment.
Works Referenced
Dodd, C.H., The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, Cambridge at the University Press, Cambridge, 1965.
“Jesus Drives out the Money-Changers.” Jacopo Bassano, 16th Century.
“Jesus Purges the Temple at Jerusalem.” Alexandre Bida, 19th Century.
The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol IX: Luke, John; Leander E. Keck (Senior New Testament Editor), Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1995. Pp. 541-545.
The New Oxford Annotated Bible, NRSV with the Apocrypha, Michael D. Coogan (editor), Oxford University Press, 2001.
O’Day, Gail, “John: Introduction,” The Women’s Bible Commentary, Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe (editors), Westminster/John Knox Press, Louisville, KY, 1992.
Biographical Information
Esta Jarrett (M.Div., M.A.C.E., and Th.M.), originally from Newport News, VA, is a 2007 and 2008 graduate of Union PSCE. She is currently enrolled in CPE at St. Francis hospital.
Read more!
Part 1 (vv. 18-22): Unlike much of the monologue-heavy Fourth Gospel, the narrator packs many verbs and objects into a few tight, complex verses (v. 15 especially). We are given the impression of a dramatically chaotic and confused scene, with many people and animals tumbling over each other.
This pericope directly follows the wedding at Cana and sharply contrasts Jesus’ dangerous public activities with his private life. Narrative arrangement is very important; the Fourth Gospel is the only one that places this story at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry.
Part 2 (vv. 18-22 or -25, depending on where you choose to end the pericope): Jesus’ words in the second part play on several interpretative levels. The literal understanding, with the Temple seen as a physical building, is put in the mouths of “the Jews.” The narrator, however, reminds the readers of the truth of the resurrection. As per usual in the Gospel of John, misunderstanding accompanies Jesus’ words.
This story is read in the context of Judaic worship history and the Temple cult, in which animals are brought for sacrifice during Passover. In Jesus’ day, since many people traveled long distances to the Temple, they had to buy their animals in Jerusalem, and were required to exchange their money for the Temple tax into currency of Tyre (since all Roman currency bore the image of Caesar) (Lev. 1, 3).
As opposed to the synoptic versions, Jesus doesn’t call the activities in the Temple a “den of robbers” (Isa. 56.7, Jer. 7.11), instead alluding to Zech. 14.21 with a play on “house” (oikos): his Father’s house has become “a house of trade” or “market-place.” This charge is much more radical an accusation and condemnation than calling it a “den of robbers,” hitting at the very foundation of the cultic tradition, and not just its abuses.
Food for Thought
In this story (read together with 1:51), we learn that God’s locus on earth has moved from the Temple to Jesus’ body. As the entire Fourth Gospel is written from a post-resurrection perspective, this understanding of Jesus’ body and personhood as the Word is a key interpretative lens.
The disciples later remembered Jesus’ words about the Temple being rebuilt. In the Fourth Gospel, “remembering” is an active aspect of discipleship, aided by the Spirit, which leads to faith and deepened understanding (see 12.16). In the confrontation between Jesus and the authoritative figures of the Temple cult, we see that the early church already equated Jesus’ words with the authority of Scripture.
As always in the Fourth Gospel, we must tread cautiously around the text’s history of anti-Semitic interpretation. Most scholars believe that this text was written by Jews, exiled from the synagogue, who believed that Jesus was the Messiah. This is insider language, borne of grief, distance and change.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This story has been illustrated many times. I’ve seen some paintings that show Jesus poised like a boxer with clenched fists; some that show Jesus enraged, seemingly berserk, swinging a whip above his head; and some that focus instead on the confusion of the money lenders and terrified beasts. All of these scenes are set in the beauty and glory of the Temple architecture, so reminiscent of some of today’s finest churches.
Just as varied are the scholarly interpretations. Is this a demonstration against corruption? A cleansing? A purging? A personal affront? Would we be relieved, confused, or embarrassed by Jesus’ display today, if it happened in our places of worship?
There is a lot of pain in this text, as there is in the PC(USA) and our state and national governments as we undergo times of discernment.
Works Referenced
Dodd, C.H., The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, Cambridge at the University Press, Cambridge, 1965.
“Jesus Drives out the Money-Changers.” Jacopo Bassano, 16th Century.
“Jesus Purges the Temple at Jerusalem.” Alexandre Bida, 19th Century.
The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol IX: Luke, John; Leander E. Keck (Senior New Testament Editor), Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1995. Pp. 541-545.
The New Oxford Annotated Bible, NRSV with the Apocrypha, Michael D. Coogan (editor), Oxford University Press, 2001.
O’Day, Gail, “John: Introduction,” The Women’s Bible Commentary, Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe (editors), Westminster/John Knox Press, Louisville, KY, 1992.
Biographical Information
Esta Jarrett (M.Div., M.A.C.E., and Th.M.), originally from Newport News, VA, is a 2007 and 2008 graduate of Union PSCE. She is currently enrolled in CPE at St. Francis hospital.
Read more!
March 8, 2009 - Genesis 17:1-7, 15-16 - Becky Purcell
Gleanings From the Text
Ernest Hemingway once bet he could write a complete short story in six words. He reportedly thought this his best work: “For Sale: Baby Shoes. Never Worn.” The author of Genesis 17 distilled the essence of the entire chapter into the preamble of vv. 1-3a which may be reduced even further into: “God: ‘You LIVE; I GIVE.’ Abraham did.” Not six words, but a biblically complete seven!
When Abram was 99 and could have been thought to have already lived a life, God appeared to him using a special name--El Shaddai. He gives Abram and Sarai new names--Abraham and Sarah. God summons Abraham, and through Abraham his entire family throughout the generations, to live completely. God promises to give to this elderly couple greatly, without measure. El Shaddai means God (El) of the, perhaps, “mountain,” “field,” “guardian spirit,” or even “mother’s breast,” depending upon which biblical scholar you choose to follow. It is a name that in Genesis is always associated with the promise of future generations. The names Abraham and Sarah mean “father of many people” and “princess of many.” God is making a covenant; this covenant is balanced--and reciprocal.
Food for Thought
In verse 1, God commands Abraham to do much more than the NRSV translation conveys with the word “walk.” The Hebrew verb in question in its simplest form does mean “walk” but in Gen. 17:1 the verb is found in its iterative form--it is a hitpael verb. The hitpael describes a repeating action, a back and forth, back and forth, or an ebb and flow, ebb and flow or a continuous, steady repetition. Walk--hallek--here is hithallek, and it means the living of a “life before God in such a way that every single step is made with reference to God and every day experiences [God] close at hand” (Westermann, 259).
Abraham is also to be what the NRSV translates “blameless”--the Hebrew word tamim carries the broader meaning “complete, whole, entire.” God expects Abraham, Sarah and their generations to capital letter LIVE which means live everyday to their full potential in a wholesome relationship with God.
This relationship will allow God to give. The baby shoes Sarah stitched in anticipation of God’s earlier promise (chapter 15) will be worn and maybe even handed down. God will bless this couple with continuing life in a covenantal relationship, and verses 3b-7 detail God’s gifts of abundance (“you shall be the ancestor of a multitude”), honor (“kings shall come from you”), partnership (“my covenant between me and you”) and security (“I will give to you...land”).
This is the deal, the covenant, and Abraham in faith accepts it as we learn in verse 3a--the circumcision detailed in later verses is only a “seal,” as Paul tells us, “of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised” (Romans 4:11). Circumcision is a “religious act,” to use a phrase of Bonhoeffer’s, and, as he writes in one of his letters from prison, “the ‘religious act’ is always something partial; faith is something whole, involving the whole of one’s life. Jesus calls men [and women], not to a new religion, but to life.” God capital letter GIVES a covenant of not rules and rituals that circumscribe but an everlasting relationship continuously, steadily--with a lot of back and forth and many ebbs and flows--calling into existence new life.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
As my youngest babies reached speaking age they each, in turn, gave our eldest a name change that in some way or another spread to others in the family. Jacob was first nicknamed “Jay-bob”; my husband and I became “Dad-bob” and “Mom-bob.” Later, he and his brother were “Bubba” to their baby sister, but the name stuck to the eldest and is still used by our family today. Each of these name changes was a delight to me: they symbolized the promise and potential of a new relationship; they were the birth of a covenant. Each time our oldest son graciously--or uncomprehendingly--accepted the claim.
The Lord our God, in the words of Isaiah 43, redeems us, calls us by name, is with us through the waters, through the fire, honors us, loves us and promises to “do a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?” God claims us whether or not we comprehend the claim. But, God intends for us the fullness of the covenant. God summons us to live with God in a way that is, as one of our seminary professors daily reminded us, “joy and nothing less.”
Works Referenced
Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, Hendrickson Publishers, 2005, pp 236 & 1071.
Lambdin, Thomas O., Introduction to Biblical Hebrew, Prentice Hall, 1971, p. 250.
Ellison, Jesse, Newsweek, February 2, 2009, Vol. CLIII, No. 5, p. 10.
Towner, W. Sibley, Genesis, Westminster John Knox, 2001, p. 164.
Westermann, Claus, Genesis 12-36, Augsburg, 1985, p. 259.
Biographical Information
Becky Purcell is a MACE student in the Extended Campus Program. She lives in Fayetteville, Arkansas where she is an elder in her church, a university professor’s wife, a mother of three and a member of the local school board.
Read more!
Ernest Hemingway once bet he could write a complete short story in six words. He reportedly thought this his best work: “For Sale: Baby Shoes. Never Worn.” The author of Genesis 17 distilled the essence of the entire chapter into the preamble of vv. 1-3a which may be reduced even further into: “God: ‘You LIVE; I GIVE.’ Abraham did.” Not six words, but a biblically complete seven!
When Abram was 99 and could have been thought to have already lived a life, God appeared to him using a special name--El Shaddai. He gives Abram and Sarai new names--Abraham and Sarah. God summons Abraham, and through Abraham his entire family throughout the generations, to live completely. God promises to give to this elderly couple greatly, without measure. El Shaddai means God (El) of the, perhaps, “mountain,” “field,” “guardian spirit,” or even “mother’s breast,” depending upon which biblical scholar you choose to follow. It is a name that in Genesis is always associated with the promise of future generations. The names Abraham and Sarah mean “father of many people” and “princess of many.” God is making a covenant; this covenant is balanced--and reciprocal.
Food for Thought
In verse 1, God commands Abraham to do much more than the NRSV translation conveys with the word “walk.” The Hebrew verb in question in its simplest form does mean “walk” but in Gen. 17:1 the verb is found in its iterative form--it is a hitpael verb. The hitpael describes a repeating action, a back and forth, back and forth, or an ebb and flow, ebb and flow or a continuous, steady repetition. Walk--hallek--here is hithallek, and it means the living of a “life before God in such a way that every single step is made with reference to God and every day experiences [God] close at hand” (Westermann, 259).
Abraham is also to be what the NRSV translates “blameless”--the Hebrew word tamim carries the broader meaning “complete, whole, entire.” God expects Abraham, Sarah and their generations to capital letter LIVE which means live everyday to their full potential in a wholesome relationship with God.
This relationship will allow God to give. The baby shoes Sarah stitched in anticipation of God’s earlier promise (chapter 15) will be worn and maybe even handed down. God will bless this couple with continuing life in a covenantal relationship, and verses 3b-7 detail God’s gifts of abundance (“you shall be the ancestor of a multitude”), honor (“kings shall come from you”), partnership (“my covenant between me and you”) and security (“I will give to you...land”).
This is the deal, the covenant, and Abraham in faith accepts it as we learn in verse 3a--the circumcision detailed in later verses is only a “seal,” as Paul tells us, “of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised” (Romans 4:11). Circumcision is a “religious act,” to use a phrase of Bonhoeffer’s, and, as he writes in one of his letters from prison, “the ‘religious act’ is always something partial; faith is something whole, involving the whole of one’s life. Jesus calls men [and women], not to a new religion, but to life.” God capital letter GIVES a covenant of not rules and rituals that circumscribe but an everlasting relationship continuously, steadily--with a lot of back and forth and many ebbs and flows--calling into existence new life.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
As my youngest babies reached speaking age they each, in turn, gave our eldest a name change that in some way or another spread to others in the family. Jacob was first nicknamed “Jay-bob”; my husband and I became “Dad-bob” and “Mom-bob.” Later, he and his brother were “Bubba” to their baby sister, but the name stuck to the eldest and is still used by our family today. Each of these name changes was a delight to me: they symbolized the promise and potential of a new relationship; they were the birth of a covenant. Each time our oldest son graciously--or uncomprehendingly--accepted the claim.
The Lord our God, in the words of Isaiah 43, redeems us, calls us by name, is with us through the waters, through the fire, honors us, loves us and promises to “do a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?” God claims us whether or not we comprehend the claim. But, God intends for us the fullness of the covenant. God summons us to live with God in a way that is, as one of our seminary professors daily reminded us, “joy and nothing less.”
Works Referenced
Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, Hendrickson Publishers, 2005, pp 236 & 1071.
Lambdin, Thomas O., Introduction to Biblical Hebrew, Prentice Hall, 1971, p. 250.
Ellison, Jesse, Newsweek, February 2, 2009, Vol. CLIII, No. 5, p. 10.
Towner, W. Sibley, Genesis, Westminster John Knox, 2001, p. 164.
Westermann, Claus, Genesis 12-36, Augsburg, 1985, p. 259.
Biographical Information
Becky Purcell is a MACE student in the Extended Campus Program. She lives in Fayetteville, Arkansas where she is an elder in her church, a university professor’s wife, a mother of three and a member of the local school board.
Read more!
March 1, 2009 - Mark 1:9-15 - Jessica Tate
Gleanings from the Text
Mark’s first picture of Jesus is baptism, when Jesus joins the ranks of the people the baptized. During this baptism, the heavens are schizo “torn apart.” (Worth doing a word study on!) According to Brian Blount, “In [Mark’s] rendering, this isn’t a comforting metaphorical moment that initiates diplomatic relations between God and humankind; it is a foreboding image of the eschatological schizophrenia human history has now become. … In what on the surface appears to be an historical delusion, in which future hope and present reality can exist together at the same moment, Mark’s baptism story narrates his gospel truth: in Jesus’ life and ministry God’s future is on the move in the human present” (Blount, 20).
Right on the heels of being baptized and named as God’s Son, Jesus is cast out into the wilderness. Immediately, the text says. “Do not pass go, do not collect $200.” Blount writes, “You want to know what happens when you get … touched by the power of God’s Spirit? You don’t sit still and enjoy the view, you don’t lay down and take a nap, you don’t bask in the glory of what great thing just happened to you. You go immediately to wild work. To work for God is to be thrown directly into the path of those who would oppose God” (Blount, 31). So it is for Jesus, for while in the wilderness, he is tempted by Satan.
The final verses of this pericope suggest that the good news that Jesus preaches is the Kingdom of God. The way we live into that kingdom? Repent and believe the good news.
“Repent” (metanoiete) means “to turn around,” to turn away from sin and toward God (McReynolds, 123; Hare, 22). The form of “repent” suggests recurring urgency, something always in the right time and in the pregnant moment (Charles, 37).
“Believe” (pistueo) implies trust and commitment. It is a relational term, not intellectual assent (McReynolds, 123; Hare, 22). In Jesus, the kingdom has come near; in his preaching we are confronted by the kingdom of God itself. The appropriate response is to repent and believe (Williamson, 43).
Each verse in this pericope could be a sermon in itself:
- v. 9: importance of Jesus joining the people in baptism,
- vv. 10-11: significance of baptism as the place where identity is known and claimed,
- v. 11: Jesus as God’s Son…and all the many implications of that statement
- vv. 12-13: being claimed by God results in a time of struggle and test in the seeming absence of God,
- vv. 14-15: proclamation of the good news that the kingdom of God is only a hair’s breadth away,
- vv. 14-15: the calling of us, as the hearers of this proclamation, to repent and believe.
Food for Thought
In the first week of Lent, I think you take a larger view than any of these individual themes. Our 40 days in the wilderness will be the 40 days we spend on the journey to Holy Week. They begin with the announcement that this man who has been baptized (just like the rest of us) is the Son of God. In him, God has literally torn down the barriers between God and us. In him, God comes near to us in the waters of baptism and in that act comes to know us completely. At the same time that we experience this closeness, we know what is to come before these 40 days are up.
We know that we will turn away from God and crucify Jesus, only then to recognize with the Roman centurion that this was God’s Son, in him the kingdom was so close we could touch it.
Despite our turning away, despite our refusal to accept God’s invitation to closeness, God still pursues us. On the day of the crucifixion the curtain in the Temple will schizo; God is again ripping down the barrier between us. Our 40 days in the wilderness is our “test” to accept God’s offer of closeness. It is our chance to say we want the barrier down too.
Sink Your Teeth Into This!
One of the first baptisms I performed was for an infant who wailed the entire time…as I recited the words of grace, as we made promises to her, as we prayed over the water, as the water touched her head… Finally, unable to let the crying continue any further without doing something, and out of my own sense of helplessness for her distress, I said to the child, “this is supposed to be good news!”
God’s action to become close to us, to claim us, to bring God’s kingdom into the present, to call us to participate in that kingdom—good news, to be sure, and yet we’re going to turn away, to be tested. We will hide, ignore, go the other way to the point of crucifixion. With all that in view, wailing may be a very appropriate response. And yet that day around the font, the child’s parents made promises, the congregation made promises, together we remembered God’s promises. Maybe that is our first step in again saying that despite all our failing and all our wailing, we want that barrier down too.
Works Referenced
Brian K. Blount and Gary W. Charles. Preaching Mark in Two Voices. Louisville: WKJP, 2002.
Paul R. McReynolds (ed.) Word Study: Greek-English New Testament. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1999.
Douglas R. Hare. Mark. Louisville: WJK, 1996.
Lamar Williamson. Mark. Interpretation Bible Commentary. Louisville: WJK, 1983
Biographical Information
Jessica Tate is the Associate Pastor for Christian Formation at Fairfax Presbyterian Church in Northern Virginia.
Read more!
Mark’s first picture of Jesus is baptism, when Jesus joins the ranks of the people the baptized. During this baptism, the heavens are schizo “torn apart.” (Worth doing a word study on!) According to Brian Blount, “In [Mark’s] rendering, this isn’t a comforting metaphorical moment that initiates diplomatic relations between God and humankind; it is a foreboding image of the eschatological schizophrenia human history has now become. … In what on the surface appears to be an historical delusion, in which future hope and present reality can exist together at the same moment, Mark’s baptism story narrates his gospel truth: in Jesus’ life and ministry God’s future is on the move in the human present” (Blount, 20).
Right on the heels of being baptized and named as God’s Son, Jesus is cast out into the wilderness. Immediately, the text says. “Do not pass go, do not collect $200.” Blount writes, “You want to know what happens when you get … touched by the power of God’s Spirit? You don’t sit still and enjoy the view, you don’t lay down and take a nap, you don’t bask in the glory of what great thing just happened to you. You go immediately to wild work. To work for God is to be thrown directly into the path of those who would oppose God” (Blount, 31). So it is for Jesus, for while in the wilderness, he is tempted by Satan.
The final verses of this pericope suggest that the good news that Jesus preaches is the Kingdom of God. The way we live into that kingdom? Repent and believe the good news.
“Repent” (metanoiete) means “to turn around,” to turn away from sin and toward God (McReynolds, 123; Hare, 22). The form of “repent” suggests recurring urgency, something always in the right time and in the pregnant moment (Charles, 37).
“Believe” (pistueo) implies trust and commitment. It is a relational term, not intellectual assent (McReynolds, 123; Hare, 22). In Jesus, the kingdom has come near; in his preaching we are confronted by the kingdom of God itself. The appropriate response is to repent and believe (Williamson, 43).
Each verse in this pericope could be a sermon in itself:
- v. 9: importance of Jesus joining the people in baptism,
- vv. 10-11: significance of baptism as the place where identity is known and claimed,
- v. 11: Jesus as God’s Son…and all the many implications of that statement
- vv. 12-13: being claimed by God results in a time of struggle and test in the seeming absence of God,
- vv. 14-15: proclamation of the good news that the kingdom of God is only a hair’s breadth away,
- vv. 14-15: the calling of us, as the hearers of this proclamation, to repent and believe.
Food for Thought
In the first week of Lent, I think you take a larger view than any of these individual themes. Our 40 days in the wilderness will be the 40 days we spend on the journey to Holy Week. They begin with the announcement that this man who has been baptized (just like the rest of us) is the Son of God. In him, God has literally torn down the barriers between God and us. In him, God comes near to us in the waters of baptism and in that act comes to know us completely. At the same time that we experience this closeness, we know what is to come before these 40 days are up.
We know that we will turn away from God and crucify Jesus, only then to recognize with the Roman centurion that this was God’s Son, in him the kingdom was so close we could touch it.
Despite our turning away, despite our refusal to accept God’s invitation to closeness, God still pursues us. On the day of the crucifixion the curtain in the Temple will schizo; God is again ripping down the barrier between us. Our 40 days in the wilderness is our “test” to accept God’s offer of closeness. It is our chance to say we want the barrier down too.
Sink Your Teeth Into This!
One of the first baptisms I performed was for an infant who wailed the entire time…as I recited the words of grace, as we made promises to her, as we prayed over the water, as the water touched her head… Finally, unable to let the crying continue any further without doing something, and out of my own sense of helplessness for her distress, I said to the child, “this is supposed to be good news!”
God’s action to become close to us, to claim us, to bring God’s kingdom into the present, to call us to participate in that kingdom—good news, to be sure, and yet we’re going to turn away, to be tested. We will hide, ignore, go the other way to the point of crucifixion. With all that in view, wailing may be a very appropriate response. And yet that day around the font, the child’s parents made promises, the congregation made promises, together we remembered God’s promises. Maybe that is our first step in again saying that despite all our failing and all our wailing, we want that barrier down too.
Works Referenced
Brian K. Blount and Gary W. Charles. Preaching Mark in Two Voices. Louisville: WKJP, 2002.
Paul R. McReynolds (ed.) Word Study: Greek-English New Testament. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1999.
Douglas R. Hare. Mark. Louisville: WJK, 1996.
Lamar Williamson. Mark. Interpretation Bible Commentary. Louisville: WJK, 1983
Biographical Information
Jessica Tate is the Associate Pastor for Christian Formation at Fairfax Presbyterian Church in Northern Virginia.
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
