Gleanings from the Text
Mark 9:30-37
Acknowledging the worthiness and depth of studying the content of Jesus’ teachings in Mark 9:30-37, let us consider instead the manner of communication as our object of study, so that we can glean meaning from the interaction as well as the instruction of Jesus. For the sake of seeing the story from this altered angle, film critic Roger Ebert's aptly named "Ebert's Law of Movies" will serve as a rough interpretative guide: “A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it" (270). Of course the "what" is important, but a focus on the "how" can prove helpful in shedding new light.
At issue here is the responsiveness and dialogue between Jesus and his disciples. From the perspective of the followers, Mark 9:30-37 is especially unflattering, but it is Jesus' own behavior and presence that typify the approach he seeks from his students. Communication breakdown colors much of the disciples’ interaction with Jesus throughout Mark’s Gospel, but, significantly, the Gospel author does not allow their failure to understand Jesus here to disappear into the ether of destined events. Rather, we readers are provided an internal motivation for the muttering and the silence.
Verse 32 is an explicit two-step move within the thoughts of the disciples’ reaction to Jesus’ passion prediction of the previous verses: first, they didn’t understand and then they were afraid to ask Jesus about it. Is the author implying that they, the disciples, should have been straightforward in communicating their question about Jesus' second foretelling of his own death? Were they right to be afraid of the question? It is probably sound for us to empathize with the disciples’ actions and their difficulty in understanding, even if we are not happy with our inadvertent imitations of apostolic failures. The disciples at their lowest points tend to be the disciples at their most relatable.
In verses 33-37, the unasked question of 30-32 gives way to Jesus’ own didactic interrogation. Jesus senses a hushed conversation, and he initiates with a question. He asks simply what his students were discussing. In the context of a passage about children, it is easy to imagine their silence not unlike that of children who fail to respond having been asked the question that begs a self-incriminating response, What are you doing? They hold their tongues out of a clearly implied shame. Again, communication has been severed by the disciples either by holding on to their silence or by their lack of understanding.
Jesus takes initiative here at this point of apostolic thick-headedness. His startling and affectionate object lesson about humility reopens and broadens the communication that has been stifled by the disciples' unwillingness to ask Jesus' his meaning or to admit to their personal aspirations to greatness. Jesus returns to some fundamental sense of communication, be it human or divine, in this instance through the concept of welcoming. The content of the teaching is humility, but the vehicle for its expression is receiving children, being in communicative relationship with the small or marginalized.
Expanding on this idea of the various forms of powerful communication employed by Jesus, immediately preceding in verse 29, Jesus has established the interaction with God through prayer as a powerful means to effect change. The disciples have failed in healing the epileptic boy through a blockage in communication: "This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer." Prayer and hospitality thus present two forms of right communication in the reign of God (Mk. 1:15), and we see the "how" in inseparable tension with the "what," the means of expression undivided from the content of doctrine.
Food for Thought
It is an axiom of 21st century American thought that more conversation is better. We understand implicitly that rational people hash out their problems at length, and the airing of grievances becomes the critical move toward reconciliation. Consequently, there is also a minor backlash against "feelings" language in church when such talk becomes sentimental and conveys weakness, and so a stiff upper lip Christian stoicism can rush in to fill the vacuum. It is at the impasse between these two tactics that Jesus' approach to communication and his disciples' notable failures can provide insight as much as the content of the instruction. If we set aside proof texts and vitriol (if only temporarily), how does Jesus actually converse with others, and how does he treat the disciples in terms of encouragement and correction? The end of Mark 9 provides at least two jumping off points, rooted in the conveyance of unanticipated hospitality and a direct reliance on prayer, on God.
Sink Your Teeth into This
A few years ago, I heard a pastor speak briefly about the “What Would Jesus Do” phenomenon. Crass over-commercializing aside, he thought the idea had real merit as an approach to Christian life. This phrase has the added benefit of redirecting focus back on the Christ, subjugating the potential selfishness of “what do I believe” to the active example of Jesus. His means and the disciples’ responses provide insight into every facet of Christian existence. “How would Jesus do it” can be debated and constructed upon the varied human and divine interactions of the Gospels, and Christ-like methods can find fuller expression alongside such a flawed cloud of witnesses.
Works Referenced
Roger Ebert, Questions for the Movie Answer Man. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing,
1997.
Biographical Information
Grant Holbrook, a longtime Richmond resident (but a Midwesterner at heart), lives on the North Side with his wife Erin and is in his final year of the MATS program at Union Presbyterian Seminary.
Read more!
Friday, August 7, 2009
September 13, 2009 – Mark 8:27-38 – Marvin Lindsay
Gleanings from the Text
Mark 8:27-38
This gospel lesson is composed of three distinct scenes that, combined, present a unified vision of Jesus’ identity, mission, and call to discipleship. Scene one, verses 27-30, revolves around Jesus’ penetrating question, “But who do you say that I am?” and Peter’s confessional answer “Thou art the Christ.” In scene two, verses 31-33, Jesus warns his disciples that his ministry will culminate in death and resurrection, not in royal coronation, a teaching that provokes mutual rebukes between him and Peter. In the last scene, verses 34-38, Jesus heightens the tension considerably when he announces that self-denial and cross-bearing are vocations “for any who want to be [his] disciples.” The preacher must choose between focusing on one scene in particular, or on the gospel lesson as a whole.
There are many answers to the question, Who is Jesus? Some are better than others. The crowds understand Jesus primarily in terms of the past, a prophet returned from the dead. Peter, on the other hand, sees Jesus as an instrument of the future, the one God has anointed (Hebrew-Messiah; Greek-Christos) to vindicate Israel. But no sooner does Peter pipe up than Jesus shuts him up. Mark’s Jesus is loathe to draw attention to himself as an instrument of raw, divine power; thus he silences the demons when he casts them out, swears to secrecy those whom he cures, and cuts off coronation talk. But when it comes to the necessity for suffering, Jesus holds nothing back.
It is not only necessary for Jesus to suffer; it is necessary for him to rise again. The word “must” (Greek-dei) governs all the subsequent verbs in verse 31. There is no hard-core doctrine of penal substitution here. Instead, as The Son of Man, literally “The Human One,” Jesus knows that living humanely in an inhumane world will inevitably provoke massive resistance. Yet because the glory of God is a human being fully alive (Irenaeus), it is unthinkable that sin and death would have the last word on a life like Jesus’. Jesus “must” be resurrected. Peter would spare Jesus suffering, but at the cost of Jesus trimming the sails of his true humanity.
If dying and rising is good enough for the master, it is more than good enough for the pupil. Self-denial and cross-bearing were politically charged words, the cross being the Roman state’s favorite means of executing threats to the social order. Persecuted Christians had to choose between affirming loyalty to Jesus, and thus denying their own lives and freedom, or not. It is no less that case today. The word “any” presumably covers the modern reader as well as the crowds in the villages around Caesarea Philippi. Following Jesus will in some way or another bring the disciple into conflict with the powers-that-be, and to a kind of grief that only resurrection power can heal.
Food for Thought
Mark 8:27-38 presents an embarrassment of riches for the preacher. Given that Jesus poses the question “Who do you say that I am?” within earshot of the pagan city of Caesarea Philippi, home to a shrine to the Greek god Pan, a sermon on the identity of Jesus in a pluralistic society would certainly be in order.
Most commentators rush to assure us that self-denial does not mean denying oneself certain pleasures. No doubt they’re right, but in a world brought to the edge of economic collapse by highly leveraged over-consumption, crazed self-indulgence, not morbid self-denial, seems to be the greater danger. That this text turns up in Ordinary Time as well as Lent is entirely appropriate. Perhaps self-denial is an idea whose time has come again, a lifestyle for all disciples in all seasons.
Sink Your Teeth into This!
Sermon illustrations can illumine a scriptural truth, but can also overshadow the scripture itself. Here, the preacher should take special care with stories of suffering or martyrdom, lest they distance the hearer from Jesus’ call to bear the cross. Suffering is not just for those Christians “back then” or “over there.” It is for all Christians. So is the resurrection power that vindicates our suffering.
Works Consulted
M. Eugene Boring, Mark: A Commentary. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.
Marvin Meyer, “Taking up the cross and following Jesus: Discipleship in the gospel of Mark.” Calvin Theological Journal 37:2. November 2002. p. 230-8.
Ched Myers, Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus. Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 1988.
Biographical Information
Marvin Lindsay is a Presbyterian minister and a Ph.D. student in Church History at Union-PSCE. He served congregations in Missouri and North Carolina for 14 years before enrolling in Union-PSCE in the fall of 2008. Marvin is married and is the father of two red-headed boys. He blogs at http://marvinlindsay.typepad.com/avdat
Read more!
Mark 8:27-38
This gospel lesson is composed of three distinct scenes that, combined, present a unified vision of Jesus’ identity, mission, and call to discipleship. Scene one, verses 27-30, revolves around Jesus’ penetrating question, “But who do you say that I am?” and Peter’s confessional answer “Thou art the Christ.” In scene two, verses 31-33, Jesus warns his disciples that his ministry will culminate in death and resurrection, not in royal coronation, a teaching that provokes mutual rebukes between him and Peter. In the last scene, verses 34-38, Jesus heightens the tension considerably when he announces that self-denial and cross-bearing are vocations “for any who want to be [his] disciples.” The preacher must choose between focusing on one scene in particular, or on the gospel lesson as a whole.
There are many answers to the question, Who is Jesus? Some are better than others. The crowds understand Jesus primarily in terms of the past, a prophet returned from the dead. Peter, on the other hand, sees Jesus as an instrument of the future, the one God has anointed (Hebrew-Messiah; Greek-Christos) to vindicate Israel. But no sooner does Peter pipe up than Jesus shuts him up. Mark’s Jesus is loathe to draw attention to himself as an instrument of raw, divine power; thus he silences the demons when he casts them out, swears to secrecy those whom he cures, and cuts off coronation talk. But when it comes to the necessity for suffering, Jesus holds nothing back.
It is not only necessary for Jesus to suffer; it is necessary for him to rise again. The word “must” (Greek-dei) governs all the subsequent verbs in verse 31. There is no hard-core doctrine of penal substitution here. Instead, as The Son of Man, literally “The Human One,” Jesus knows that living humanely in an inhumane world will inevitably provoke massive resistance. Yet because the glory of God is a human being fully alive (Irenaeus), it is unthinkable that sin and death would have the last word on a life like Jesus’. Jesus “must” be resurrected. Peter would spare Jesus suffering, but at the cost of Jesus trimming the sails of his true humanity.
If dying and rising is good enough for the master, it is more than good enough for the pupil. Self-denial and cross-bearing were politically charged words, the cross being the Roman state’s favorite means of executing threats to the social order. Persecuted Christians had to choose between affirming loyalty to Jesus, and thus denying their own lives and freedom, or not. It is no less that case today. The word “any” presumably covers the modern reader as well as the crowds in the villages around Caesarea Philippi. Following Jesus will in some way or another bring the disciple into conflict with the powers-that-be, and to a kind of grief that only resurrection power can heal.
Food for Thought
Mark 8:27-38 presents an embarrassment of riches for the preacher. Given that Jesus poses the question “Who do you say that I am?” within earshot of the pagan city of Caesarea Philippi, home to a shrine to the Greek god Pan, a sermon on the identity of Jesus in a pluralistic society would certainly be in order.
Most commentators rush to assure us that self-denial does not mean denying oneself certain pleasures. No doubt they’re right, but in a world brought to the edge of economic collapse by highly leveraged over-consumption, crazed self-indulgence, not morbid self-denial, seems to be the greater danger. That this text turns up in Ordinary Time as well as Lent is entirely appropriate. Perhaps self-denial is an idea whose time has come again, a lifestyle for all disciples in all seasons.
Sink Your Teeth into This!
Sermon illustrations can illumine a scriptural truth, but can also overshadow the scripture itself. Here, the preacher should take special care with stories of suffering or martyrdom, lest they distance the hearer from Jesus’ call to bear the cross. Suffering is not just for those Christians “back then” or “over there.” It is for all Christians. So is the resurrection power that vindicates our suffering.
Works Consulted
M. Eugene Boring, Mark: A Commentary. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.
Marvin Meyer, “Taking up the cross and following Jesus: Discipleship in the gospel of Mark.” Calvin Theological Journal 37:2. November 2002. p. 230-8.
Ched Myers, Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus. Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 1988.
Biographical Information
Marvin Lindsay is a Presbyterian minister and a Ph.D. student in Church History at Union-PSCE. He served congregations in Missouri and North Carolina for 14 years before enrolling in Union-PSCE in the fall of 2008. Marvin is married and is the father of two red-headed boys. He blogs at http://marvinlindsay.typepad.com/avdat
Read more!
September 6, 2009 - James 2:1-13 - Frances Taylor Gench
Gleanings from the Text
James 2:1-13
Here, James tackles head-on the problem of discrimination in the Christian community, maintaining that faith in Jesus Christ bears directly upon our treatment of persons. Thus, signs of snobbery and partiality in the Christian community prompt an incredulous question: "My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?" The fact that James refers to "acts of favoritism" in the plural form suggests that discrimination can manifest itself in the Christian community in a variety of ways. But by using a flagrant example, the author leaves no doubt as to the kind of attitude and behavior deemed incompatible with Christian faith.
Two visitors are depicted as entering the Christian assembly -- one bejeweled and one bedraggled – and are given correspondingly contrasting receptions. The bejeweled visitor is treated with extreme courtesy, while the bedraggled guest is brusquely shuffled aside. When Christians "make distinctions" among themselves in any such manner, haven't they "become judges with evil thoughts"? (See Lev. 19:15.) Are they not manifesting that internal dividedness that belies integrity of faith? By kowtowing to the counterfeit glory of the splendidly attired, have not they betrayed the truly glorious one who alone is to be exalted in the Christian community and before whom all are equal: "our glorious Lord Jesus Christ" (2:1)?
To James' way of thinking, this kind of snobbery is far from a trivial matter. In fact, the author proceeds to establish three grounds on which acts of favoritism constitute a serious denial of faith. First, he reminds his readers of God's special care and concern for the poor (v.5) -- a concern that is writ large throughout the Scriptures (see Lk 6:20). It should be clear, then, that when members of the Christian community ignore the poor, they are not reflecting God's compassion. When they slight the poor, they dishonor those whom God has honored -- whom God has "chosen" to be "rich in faith" and "heirs of the kingdom." How is it that the prejudices of the world rather than the preferences of God come to be manifested in a community of God's people?
Second, the author appeals to his readers' own experience. He suggests that acts of favoritism make little sense in light of the way they themselves are treated at the hands of the rich. James' letter reflects a time when persons of wealth were not yet often found in the church -- at least not in the communities with which the author is most closely associated.
Members of the Christian community may very well have been taken to court by the rich over such issues as debts, rents and wages (see 5:4-6) -- disparaged as bad citizens or unreliable debtors. James regards any such treatment as blasphemy, for Christians bear the name of Jesus from the moment they are baptized in the name of Christ (see Acts 2:38). In James' view, abuse of those who bear the name of Christ is abuse of Christ himself. Thus it is bewildering that members of the Christian community should grovel before those who exploit the poor, harass Christians, and dishonor Christ.
Third, the author insists that partiality toward the rich is also a transgression of the biblical principle of love. Readers are reminded of the familiar commandment to love the neighbor as the self (Lev. 19:18). This commandment is referred to as the "royal law," because it is the law of the kingdom into which God has called them (see Mk 12:29-31).
Those whom James addresses may very well have argued, as do we, that in attending to the rich they are showing love to their neighbors. And if this is really the case, then they "do well." But this is no excuse for partiality. If in attending to the rich, readers discriminate against the poor, then they "commit sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors" (v.9). They have not understood that the poor person whom they dishonor is also a neighbor and that "acts of favoritism" place them in violation of the biblical commandment to love.
Moreover, "acts of favoritism" are not to be dismissed as minor infractions of God's command -- as misdemeanors rather than felonies. In order to underline the seriousness of the crime of partiality, James draws on the ancient Jewish doctrine of the complete unity of the law and contends that to violate the law at this one point is to break the law as a whole (v.10; compare Gal. 5:3). To illustrate this point, James links partiality with the heinous sins of adultery and murder -- sins readers would not fail to consider serious. Adulterers will not suppose that they should be excused of adultery because they have not committed murder (v.11).
James's point is that the adulterer stands guilty before the law, as does the murderer -- and as does the one who discriminates. God who forbids adultery and murder also forbids discrimination. God stands behind every commandment. Thus, all three -- the adulterer, the murderer, and the one who commits "acts of favoritism" -- are transgressors of the law and are subject to God's judgment.
In closing, James reminds us all that we are accountable to God for our words and deeds (v.12). At the last day, every individual will stand before the judgment seat of God. What will be determined at that point is not whether we are to be "saved"; we have already been saved by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ. What the judgment will reveal is whether or not we have misused the grace that is ours -- whether or not we have embodied in our lives the possibilities the gospel offers. Our practice of indiscriminate love toward all people will reveal whether we have allowed the grace and power of God to produce a transformation in our lives. Impartiality in all our doings is in no small part a sign of the integrity of faith.
Food for Thought
Clearly, James has much to contribute to our thinking about acts and experiences of discrimination. Indeed, Cain Hope Felder observes that James 2:1-13 provides what is perhaps the strongest castigation of class discrimination in the New Testament -- or for that matter, any discrimination based on outward appearance -- and that these words have particular pertinence for African-Americans who still experience such discrimination daily. The fact that James speaks of "acts of favoritism" (plural!) should prompt us to ponder all those experiences in which we have made snap judgments about others on the basis of outward appearance -- perhaps on the basis of disability, or dress, or race, or class, or gender, or age. From James's perspective, discrimination of any kind is simply inconsistent with Christian faith.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Here, as elsewhere in the letter, we find that James’ ethical exhortation is decidedly theocentric or God-centered. To be sure, James is short on Christology (explicit reflection on Jesus Christ), but it is rich in theology (reflection upon God). James points to God, for example, as the very ground of Christian existence (1:18, 21; 3:17; 4:5) and maintains that God is a gracious presence in our lives (1:5, 17; 4:8). Indeed, every aspect of Christian life of which James speaks is related to God (2:5-6; see also 3:9; 4:13-17).
James assists us in discerning how we might order and maintain every aspect of our lives in the context of God's sovereignty - how we as Christians are to live in light of the rule of God, or kingdom, which is now present among us in the earthly and risen Jesus. It is important to recognize the decidedly God-centered nature of James's ethical exhortation, because the Christian life that James describes is demanding and could not be pursued on our own strength. This is the good news: it is God's own gracious presence and power and wisdom that makes it possible for Christians to live as James describes.
Biographical Information
Frances Taylor Gench is Professor of New Testament at Union-PSCE.
Works Referenced
Cain Hope Felder. Troubling Biblical Waters: Race, Class and Family. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1989.
This piece excerpted from:
Frances Taylor Gench. Hebrews and James. Westminster Bible Companion. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996.
Read more!
James 2:1-13
Here, James tackles head-on the problem of discrimination in the Christian community, maintaining that faith in Jesus Christ bears directly upon our treatment of persons. Thus, signs of snobbery and partiality in the Christian community prompt an incredulous question: "My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?" The fact that James refers to "acts of favoritism" in the plural form suggests that discrimination can manifest itself in the Christian community in a variety of ways. But by using a flagrant example, the author leaves no doubt as to the kind of attitude and behavior deemed incompatible with Christian faith.
Two visitors are depicted as entering the Christian assembly -- one bejeweled and one bedraggled – and are given correspondingly contrasting receptions. The bejeweled visitor is treated with extreme courtesy, while the bedraggled guest is brusquely shuffled aside. When Christians "make distinctions" among themselves in any such manner, haven't they "become judges with evil thoughts"? (See Lev. 19:15.) Are they not manifesting that internal dividedness that belies integrity of faith? By kowtowing to the counterfeit glory of the splendidly attired, have not they betrayed the truly glorious one who alone is to be exalted in the Christian community and before whom all are equal: "our glorious Lord Jesus Christ" (2:1)?
To James' way of thinking, this kind of snobbery is far from a trivial matter. In fact, the author proceeds to establish three grounds on which acts of favoritism constitute a serious denial of faith. First, he reminds his readers of God's special care and concern for the poor (v.5) -- a concern that is writ large throughout the Scriptures (see Lk 6:20). It should be clear, then, that when members of the Christian community ignore the poor, they are not reflecting God's compassion. When they slight the poor, they dishonor those whom God has honored -- whom God has "chosen" to be "rich in faith" and "heirs of the kingdom." How is it that the prejudices of the world rather than the preferences of God come to be manifested in a community of God's people?
Second, the author appeals to his readers' own experience. He suggests that acts of favoritism make little sense in light of the way they themselves are treated at the hands of the rich. James' letter reflects a time when persons of wealth were not yet often found in the church -- at least not in the communities with which the author is most closely associated.
Members of the Christian community may very well have been taken to court by the rich over such issues as debts, rents and wages (see 5:4-6) -- disparaged as bad citizens or unreliable debtors. James regards any such treatment as blasphemy, for Christians bear the name of Jesus from the moment they are baptized in the name of Christ (see Acts 2:38). In James' view, abuse of those who bear the name of Christ is abuse of Christ himself. Thus it is bewildering that members of the Christian community should grovel before those who exploit the poor, harass Christians, and dishonor Christ.
Third, the author insists that partiality toward the rich is also a transgression of the biblical principle of love. Readers are reminded of the familiar commandment to love the neighbor as the self (Lev. 19:18). This commandment is referred to as the "royal law," because it is the law of the kingdom into which God has called them (see Mk 12:29-31).
Those whom James addresses may very well have argued, as do we, that in attending to the rich they are showing love to their neighbors. And if this is really the case, then they "do well." But this is no excuse for partiality. If in attending to the rich, readers discriminate against the poor, then they "commit sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors" (v.9). They have not understood that the poor person whom they dishonor is also a neighbor and that "acts of favoritism" place them in violation of the biblical commandment to love.
Moreover, "acts of favoritism" are not to be dismissed as minor infractions of God's command -- as misdemeanors rather than felonies. In order to underline the seriousness of the crime of partiality, James draws on the ancient Jewish doctrine of the complete unity of the law and contends that to violate the law at this one point is to break the law as a whole (v.10; compare Gal. 5:3). To illustrate this point, James links partiality with the heinous sins of adultery and murder -- sins readers would not fail to consider serious. Adulterers will not suppose that they should be excused of adultery because they have not committed murder (v.11).
James's point is that the adulterer stands guilty before the law, as does the murderer -- and as does the one who discriminates. God who forbids adultery and murder also forbids discrimination. God stands behind every commandment. Thus, all three -- the adulterer, the murderer, and the one who commits "acts of favoritism" -- are transgressors of the law and are subject to God's judgment.
In closing, James reminds us all that we are accountable to God for our words and deeds (v.12). At the last day, every individual will stand before the judgment seat of God. What will be determined at that point is not whether we are to be "saved"; we have already been saved by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ. What the judgment will reveal is whether or not we have misused the grace that is ours -- whether or not we have embodied in our lives the possibilities the gospel offers. Our practice of indiscriminate love toward all people will reveal whether we have allowed the grace and power of God to produce a transformation in our lives. Impartiality in all our doings is in no small part a sign of the integrity of faith.
Food for Thought
Clearly, James has much to contribute to our thinking about acts and experiences of discrimination. Indeed, Cain Hope Felder observes that James 2:1-13 provides what is perhaps the strongest castigation of class discrimination in the New Testament -- or for that matter, any discrimination based on outward appearance -- and that these words have particular pertinence for African-Americans who still experience such discrimination daily. The fact that James speaks of "acts of favoritism" (plural!) should prompt us to ponder all those experiences in which we have made snap judgments about others on the basis of outward appearance -- perhaps on the basis of disability, or dress, or race, or class, or gender, or age. From James's perspective, discrimination of any kind is simply inconsistent with Christian faith.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Here, as elsewhere in the letter, we find that James’ ethical exhortation is decidedly theocentric or God-centered. To be sure, James is short on Christology (explicit reflection on Jesus Christ), but it is rich in theology (reflection upon God). James points to God, for example, as the very ground of Christian existence (1:18, 21; 3:17; 4:5) and maintains that God is a gracious presence in our lives (1:5, 17; 4:8). Indeed, every aspect of Christian life of which James speaks is related to God (2:5-6; see also 3:9; 4:13-17).
James assists us in discerning how we might order and maintain every aspect of our lives in the context of God's sovereignty - how we as Christians are to live in light of the rule of God, or kingdom, which is now present among us in the earthly and risen Jesus. It is important to recognize the decidedly God-centered nature of James's ethical exhortation, because the Christian life that James describes is demanding and could not be pursued on our own strength. This is the good news: it is God's own gracious presence and power and wisdom that makes it possible for Christians to live as James describes.
Biographical Information
Frances Taylor Gench is Professor of New Testament at Union-PSCE.
Works Referenced
Cain Hope Felder. Troubling Biblical Waters: Race, Class and Family. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1989.
This piece excerpted from:
Frances Taylor Gench. Hebrews and James. Westminster Bible Companion. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996.
Read more!
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
August 30, 2009 - James 1:17-27 - Jenny McDevitt
Gleanings From the Text
James 1:17-27
Talk to two different people about the letter of James, and you’ll likely hear at least three different opinions. This brief book tucked towards the back of our bibles has a reputation for being rather neglected -- or for stirring up strong emotion and memorable rhetoric. Comparing it to several other New Testament books, Martin Luther famously referred to it as “an epistle of straw,” with “nothing of the nature of the gospel about it.”
Admittedly short on that which is Christological, this (probably) pseudonymous letter is long on that which is practical and tangible. It is important to realize, however, that James wrote to a community of believers, people entirely aware of Jesus and his story. The letter was written not to bring its readers to faith, then, but to advise its readers on how to live out the faith they already had.
These eleven verses contain a helpful progression. Verses 17-18 offer an important grounding of all that follows, stating unambiguously that all that is good comes from God, “the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.” Here, James poetically acknowledges God’s creative works and God’s consistent faithfulness, and then reminds us of our call to be the “first fruits.”
The verses that follow offer concrete advice on how we are to be those first fruits. Verses 19-21 provide instruction for receiving and internalizing the “implanted word that has the power to save your souls” as a first step, before the letter unleashes its forceful call to action in verses 22-27. This call to be “doers” of that word, rather than only “hearers” of it, leaves little room for compromise. Specific mention of “orphans and widows” is not to lift up these two populations above all others; this phrase is often used to represent all oppressed peoples as those about whom God is particularly concerned (see also Isaiah 1:16-17) -- and therefore as those for whom we are challenged to show particular concern, as well.
Food For Thought
James’ emphasis on being “doers” in this text, particularly regarding oppressed peoples, is part of what creates a big message within a short book. It’s a message that can make some of us a bit uncomfortable, precisely because it has the ability to reignite (or feed the continued flames of) a Christian commitment to social justice.
As Peter Rhea Jones has noted, this letter “could actually bring off a renewing of the Christian life. There will be a recurring temptation to tame the powerful social message of this flaming letter, to domesticate it and calm its biting, all too relevant message into palatable terms. If this message of James is allowed to go out unmuffled, it will rattle the stained glass windows.”
Rattling windows can have both positive and negative connotations. What about that idea makes you nervous? What about it do you find exciting or promising? A life of discipleship is not always comfortable. What can we learn here, about ourselves, the world, and God’s work in the world?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
One of the sermons I remember best is a sermon I didn’t actually hear. During the expected sermon time, the preacher offered only a few introductory comments - and then sent the congregation out of the sanctuary and into the community, to be “doers” of all that we proclaim in church each Sunday. One church member said afterwards, “Every week, we hear the sermon. This week, we lived it.”
Though many members of my church are involved in similar activities - preparing food at homeless shelters, building homes with Habitat for Humanity, and more - there was something poignant about those activities occurring during the time generally reserved for sitting in church, worshipping, listening, and discussing. One Sunday in Williamsburg, we were reminded that hearing the word and doing the word are one and the same.
Suggested Resources
Cain Hope Felder. Troubling Biblical Waters: Race, Class and Family. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1989.
Frances Taylor Gench. Hebrews and James. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996.
Patrick J. Hartin. A Spirituality of Perfection: Faith in Action in the Letter of James. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1999.
Peter Rhea Jones. “Approaches to the Study of James.” Review and Expositor 66 (1969).
Elsa Tamez. The Scandalous Message of James: Faith Without Works Is Dead. New York: Crossroad, 1990.
Biographical Information
Jenny McDevitt (MDiv, Union-PSCE, 2009) can't get enough of Richmond! She has deferred admission to a doctoral program in biblical studies and will spend the next year completing advanced coursework in Union-PSCE's Th.M. program and working as the seminary's Union Fellow in Institutional Advancement. She is excited to work with Join the Feast as co-editor and invites you to pull a chair up to the table as a contributing writer.
You can contact Jenny at jenny.mcdevitt@union-psce.edu.
Read more!
James 1:17-27
Talk to two different people about the letter of James, and you’ll likely hear at least three different opinions. This brief book tucked towards the back of our bibles has a reputation for being rather neglected -- or for stirring up strong emotion and memorable rhetoric. Comparing it to several other New Testament books, Martin Luther famously referred to it as “an epistle of straw,” with “nothing of the nature of the gospel about it.”
Admittedly short on that which is Christological, this (probably) pseudonymous letter is long on that which is practical and tangible. It is important to realize, however, that James wrote to a community of believers, people entirely aware of Jesus and his story. The letter was written not to bring its readers to faith, then, but to advise its readers on how to live out the faith they already had.
These eleven verses contain a helpful progression. Verses 17-18 offer an important grounding of all that follows, stating unambiguously that all that is good comes from God, “the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.” Here, James poetically acknowledges God’s creative works and God’s consistent faithfulness, and then reminds us of our call to be the “first fruits.”
The verses that follow offer concrete advice on how we are to be those first fruits. Verses 19-21 provide instruction for receiving and internalizing the “implanted word that has the power to save your souls” as a first step, before the letter unleashes its forceful call to action in verses 22-27. This call to be “doers” of that word, rather than only “hearers” of it, leaves little room for compromise. Specific mention of “orphans and widows” is not to lift up these two populations above all others; this phrase is often used to represent all oppressed peoples as those about whom God is particularly concerned (see also Isaiah 1:16-17) -- and therefore as those for whom we are challenged to show particular concern, as well.
Food For Thought
James’ emphasis on being “doers” in this text, particularly regarding oppressed peoples, is part of what creates a big message within a short book. It’s a message that can make some of us a bit uncomfortable, precisely because it has the ability to reignite (or feed the continued flames of) a Christian commitment to social justice.
As Peter Rhea Jones has noted, this letter “could actually bring off a renewing of the Christian life. There will be a recurring temptation to tame the powerful social message of this flaming letter, to domesticate it and calm its biting, all too relevant message into palatable terms. If this message of James is allowed to go out unmuffled, it will rattle the stained glass windows.”
Rattling windows can have both positive and negative connotations. What about that idea makes you nervous? What about it do you find exciting or promising? A life of discipleship is not always comfortable. What can we learn here, about ourselves, the world, and God’s work in the world?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
One of the sermons I remember best is a sermon I didn’t actually hear. During the expected sermon time, the preacher offered only a few introductory comments - and then sent the congregation out of the sanctuary and into the community, to be “doers” of all that we proclaim in church each Sunday. One church member said afterwards, “Every week, we hear the sermon. This week, we lived it.”
Though many members of my church are involved in similar activities - preparing food at homeless shelters, building homes with Habitat for Humanity, and more - there was something poignant about those activities occurring during the time generally reserved for sitting in church, worshipping, listening, and discussing. One Sunday in Williamsburg, we were reminded that hearing the word and doing the word are one and the same.
Suggested Resources
Cain Hope Felder. Troubling Biblical Waters: Race, Class and Family. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1989.
Frances Taylor Gench. Hebrews and James. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996.
Patrick J. Hartin. A Spirituality of Perfection: Faith in Action in the Letter of James. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1999.
Peter Rhea Jones. “Approaches to the Study of James.” Review and Expositor 66 (1969).
Elsa Tamez. The Scandalous Message of James: Faith Without Works Is Dead. New York: Crossroad, 1990.
Biographical Information
Jenny McDevitt (MDiv, Union-PSCE, 2009) can't get enough of Richmond! She has deferred admission to a doctoral program in biblical studies and will spend the next year completing advanced coursework in Union-PSCE's Th.M. program and working as the seminary's Union Fellow in Institutional Advancement. She is excited to work with Join the Feast as co-editor and invites you to pull a chair up to the table as a contributing writer.
You can contact Jenny at jenny.mcdevitt@union-psce.edu.
Read more!
August 23, 2009 - Ephesians 6:10-20 - David Cameron
Gleanings from the Text
Ephesians 6:10-20
There were many threats against the fledgling church in Asia Minor. Gnostics, Judaizers, Libertines, Roman bullies - each got in their licks. Because this epistle was likely an encyclical letter meant to be read in a number of communities in the region, not just Ephesus, we can’t say with confidence what precisely the author had in mind when he warned his audience to stand against the “wiles of the devil” and the “present darkness.” Some say it wasn't anything in particular, but more an apocalyptic consortium of cosmic powers that had the author spooked.
The epistle begins with a gentle swell of praise for God, whose covenant of grace has been revealed in Christ to be not just for the Jews but for the Gentiles as well. God will unite them into one body – very comforting.
Halfway through chapter four, however, the author changes gears and takes on a more practical tone, advising that this new unity in Christ must be reflected in a transformed life, and that transformed life will run counter to the prevailing culture. The author anticipates excuses from his readers, protests of helplessness in the face of all the forces arrayed against them. The author will brook no excuse. The strength of God’s power is theirs to claim. What more do they need?
In Ephesians 6:10, the author begins a summation of the letter designed to punch home his main themes. He resorts to a common militaristic image of body armor that his audience would see on Roman soldiers daily, but in a nose-tweaking twist, he reinvents the image in a most non-militaristic way. He appropriates the common parts of armor – belt, breastplate, shield – but he assigns them uncommon values: truth, righteousness, faith. Consequently, the armor, usually a symbol of self-reliance, is transformed into a symbol of utter dependence on God.
Food for Thought
One could make this passage last an entire season, preaching each Sunday on another piece of armor. Or, one could pick apart the skeleton of armor, bone by bone, in a single sermon. A meatier course might be to skip the tedious piece-by-piece analysis and explore in general what it means for a congregation to imagine radical dependence on God and to consider living a transformed life in Christ. The implication of Ephesians 6:10 is clear: God's grace has enemies; God's justice has a bounty on its head; God's peace is marked for attempted demolition. We are known by our associations, and when we hobnob with known forgivers and peace-mongers we must expect a strong reaction from those who traffic in accusations and innuendo.
It is, in the end, all about power. Human distortions of power thrive in secrecy, in dissembling, in violence, and in the capacity to drive a wedge between groups by promoting fear and suspicion. But the strength of the Lord, the non-armor armor that ensures our victory, is transparency, mercy, peace and an absolute trust in the dynamic interplay of Spirit and Word.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
The shoes of the gospel of peace interest me. My son has autism and doesn't speak, so much of the communication in our house is non-verbal. When my wife and I come down each morning the first thing my son does is check our shoes. He's learned that the shoes we have on speak volumes about the kind of day we have planned. Dress shoes mean work. Scuffed slip-ons mean a casual, more relaxed day around the house.
In Wishful Thinking, Frederick Buechner writes, "If you want to know who you really are as distinct from who you like to think you are, keep an eye on where your feet take you." Peace is the goal. Our feet, not our words, will get us there. The author of Ephesians doesn't commit to any one style of shoe as THE most appropriate for spreading the gospel of peace. I suppose wing-tips or high heeled pumps will do, even Crocs or flip-flops. But my experience is that spreading peace is hard work. My money would be on work boots as the best, probably a pair with steel toes.
Works Consulted
Frederick Buechner, Wishful Thinking: A Theological ABC, New York: Harper & Row, 1973, p. 27.
Perkins, Pheme, Ephesians, Abingdon New Testament Commentaries, Victor Paul Furnish, General Editor. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1967.
Witherington, Ben III, The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on the Captivity Epistle. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Erdmans Publishing Co., 2007.
Biographical Information
David Cameron is the pastor of Rockfish Presbyterian Church in Nellysford, VA. He was birthed into ordained ministry by Columbia Seminary but adopted into the Union-PSCE fold first through a semester of study at PSCE and more recently as a supervisor of three summer interns from Union from whom he has learned much. He is married to Kathryn Johnson Cameron, also an ordained PC(USA) minister and graduate of PSCE. They have two children.
Read more!
Ephesians 6:10-20
There were many threats against the fledgling church in Asia Minor. Gnostics, Judaizers, Libertines, Roman bullies - each got in their licks. Because this epistle was likely an encyclical letter meant to be read in a number of communities in the region, not just Ephesus, we can’t say with confidence what precisely the author had in mind when he warned his audience to stand against the “wiles of the devil” and the “present darkness.” Some say it wasn't anything in particular, but more an apocalyptic consortium of cosmic powers that had the author spooked.
The epistle begins with a gentle swell of praise for God, whose covenant of grace has been revealed in Christ to be not just for the Jews but for the Gentiles as well. God will unite them into one body – very comforting.
Halfway through chapter four, however, the author changes gears and takes on a more practical tone, advising that this new unity in Christ must be reflected in a transformed life, and that transformed life will run counter to the prevailing culture. The author anticipates excuses from his readers, protests of helplessness in the face of all the forces arrayed against them. The author will brook no excuse. The strength of God’s power is theirs to claim. What more do they need?
In Ephesians 6:10, the author begins a summation of the letter designed to punch home his main themes. He resorts to a common militaristic image of body armor that his audience would see on Roman soldiers daily, but in a nose-tweaking twist, he reinvents the image in a most non-militaristic way. He appropriates the common parts of armor – belt, breastplate, shield – but he assigns them uncommon values: truth, righteousness, faith. Consequently, the armor, usually a symbol of self-reliance, is transformed into a symbol of utter dependence on God.
Food for Thought
One could make this passage last an entire season, preaching each Sunday on another piece of armor. Or, one could pick apart the skeleton of armor, bone by bone, in a single sermon. A meatier course might be to skip the tedious piece-by-piece analysis and explore in general what it means for a congregation to imagine radical dependence on God and to consider living a transformed life in Christ. The implication of Ephesians 6:10 is clear: God's grace has enemies; God's justice has a bounty on its head; God's peace is marked for attempted demolition. We are known by our associations, and when we hobnob with known forgivers and peace-mongers we must expect a strong reaction from those who traffic in accusations and innuendo.
It is, in the end, all about power. Human distortions of power thrive in secrecy, in dissembling, in violence, and in the capacity to drive a wedge between groups by promoting fear and suspicion. But the strength of the Lord, the non-armor armor that ensures our victory, is transparency, mercy, peace and an absolute trust in the dynamic interplay of Spirit and Word.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
The shoes of the gospel of peace interest me. My son has autism and doesn't speak, so much of the communication in our house is non-verbal. When my wife and I come down each morning the first thing my son does is check our shoes. He's learned that the shoes we have on speak volumes about the kind of day we have planned. Dress shoes mean work. Scuffed slip-ons mean a casual, more relaxed day around the house.
In Wishful Thinking, Frederick Buechner writes, "If you want to know who you really are as distinct from who you like to think you are, keep an eye on where your feet take you." Peace is the goal. Our feet, not our words, will get us there. The author of Ephesians doesn't commit to any one style of shoe as THE most appropriate for spreading the gospel of peace. I suppose wing-tips or high heeled pumps will do, even Crocs or flip-flops. But my experience is that spreading peace is hard work. My money would be on work boots as the best, probably a pair with steel toes.
Works Consulted
Frederick Buechner, Wishful Thinking: A Theological ABC, New York: Harper & Row, 1973, p. 27.
Perkins, Pheme, Ephesians, Abingdon New Testament Commentaries, Victor Paul Furnish, General Editor. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1967.
Witherington, Ben III, The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on the Captivity Epistle. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Erdmans Publishing Co., 2007.
Biographical Information
David Cameron is the pastor of Rockfish Presbyterian Church in Nellysford, VA. He was birthed into ordained ministry by Columbia Seminary but adopted into the Union-PSCE fold first through a semester of study at PSCE and more recently as a supervisor of three summer interns from Union from whom he has learned much. He is married to Kathryn Johnson Cameron, also an ordained PC(USA) minister and graduate of PSCE. They have two children.
Read more!
August 16, 2009 - John 6:51-58 - Martha Rollins
Gleanings from the Text
John 6:51-58
Sandwiched in a pivotal way between the two foods of paradise—the forbidden food of Genesis and the food awarded to “overcomers” in Revelation 2:7, Jesus’ invitation to eat his flesh/blood as bread gives a key to our movement from fallen Adam to overcomer in Christ. To eat or not to eat was the question before Adam and is before us in this “do-over” offered by Jesus. This time God not only provides the food, God is the food and God gives power to choose it. This new food nourishes us in a way that (Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him) invites us to a new level of intimacy with Jesus giving power to "do the works that I do."
The text calls us beyond being casual receivers of God’s bounty John 6:1-16) and connected recognizers of God’s presence (John 6:17-26) to a new committed relationship with Christ, the bread of heaven. Eating the real flesh and real blood requires entering a new upside down reality. “Feed on me.” In feeding we are taking into our selves the very nature of Christ.
Eating is right up there with breathing—both are necessary for life. However, we choose what kinds of foods we pick up, put in our mouths, chew, swallow. Our choices allow us to participate or not in creation. From birth we develop an intimate relationship with food. Jesus is asking us to enter into this radical plane of intimacy by eating his flesh. It’s one thing to develop an intimate relationship with chocolate, but eating/loving/being addicted to Jesus—that’s risky. Furthermore, eating his flesh is not a one-time act that “saves us.” By comparing his flesh with manna Jesus reminds us of the daily necessity of feeding on him.
Food for Thought
So what of those who “ate the body and blood”? We know the story—those who answer the call, eat the bread, join the feast are alive with the word. For the church and for us today it is an ever-present calling to partake of the bread of life not just for ourselves but to be empowered “for the life of the world.” So what? It means that I can’t go home and watch my brother hungry, lonely, afraid—the bread of heaven given for the life of the world calls us to the life of the world—to feed, cloth, visit, preach. Why be committed? Why eat this fleshly new reality bread? Jesus answers this twice (John 6:33, 51): “for the life of the world.”
Such a movement models urban ministry goal from handout to empowerment, as I have personally witnessed. Casual folks come to Boaz & Ruth wanting a job or wanting to be fed with a paycheck. Connected folks stay at B&R because they discover comfort of family relationships. Our job at B&R is to call folks beyond being receivers to becoming doers: folks who are committed (those who chose to eat radical new real food) to their personal transformation enough to give back “for the life of others.”
Sink Your Teeth Into This
In 2002, on an early visit to Highland Park before Boaz & Ruth was open, Rosa Jiggetts, then a casual acquaintance and now my committed friend, jumped out of her car, stood in my space and said, “We need you in Highland Park.” Don’t just come do a service—be committed enough to stay in the hard times. Don’t leave like the others. She reminds me often of that commitment especially in the dark times. Rosa calls me beyond the casual and connected to glimpse, to taste, to experience him in me and me in him if only ever so fleetingly. When I am with Rosa, I taste the bread of heaven. I experience the body of Christ. I witness the power of God bringing life to the world.
Biographical Information
Martha Rollins is the founder and CEO of Boaz and Ruth (www.boazandruth.com), a non-profit assisting formerly incarcerated men and women through a transitional jobs and training program. She writes:
"Renewing my faith in 1973, the call I heard was not the call to seminary (as I had thought) but to stay an antiques dealer. It was as though God assured me that opportunities for ministry would be provided outside the pulpit. And of course this assurance proved to be true: people call an antiques dealer at many of the same points of need that they call a minister - there is a death, a downsizing, a financial crisis, or a divorce. The difference is that many of my callers were unchurched; God provided ministry opportunities beyond what I could ask or think. And then God topped it off with another surprise by allowing me to participate in the birth of Boaz & Ruth."
"Working in Highland Park is like living in the middle of the Old Testament and the book of Acts. We repeatedly experience spiritual opposition to our presence and we experience Red Sea miracles. We daily find the need to 'eat the bread of heaven' so that we can become reconcilers in Christ, become providers, and become calming presence. Without the possibility and the occasional reality of a relationship of intimacy beyond casual and connected, we would all fall away. Nurtured by my husband, Randy Rollins, my parents Carolyn and Bill Franck in Martinsville, an awesome pastor, Charlie Summers, an empowering church, First Presbyterian, and a great staff at Boaz & Ruth, I rejoice even in darkness thanks to these - and other - participants in the feast."
Read more!
John 6:51-58
Sandwiched in a pivotal way between the two foods of paradise—the forbidden food of Genesis and the food awarded to “overcomers” in Revelation 2:7, Jesus’ invitation to eat his flesh/blood as bread gives a key to our movement from fallen Adam to overcomer in Christ. To eat or not to eat was the question before Adam and is before us in this “do-over” offered by Jesus. This time God not only provides the food, God is the food and God gives power to choose it. This new food nourishes us in a way that (Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him) invites us to a new level of intimacy with Jesus giving power to "do the works that I do."
The text calls us beyond being casual receivers of God’s bounty John 6:1-16) and connected recognizers of God’s presence (John 6:17-26) to a new committed relationship with Christ, the bread of heaven. Eating the real flesh and real blood requires entering a new upside down reality. “Feed on me.” In feeding we are taking into our selves the very nature of Christ.
Eating is right up there with breathing—both are necessary for life. However, we choose what kinds of foods we pick up, put in our mouths, chew, swallow. Our choices allow us to participate or not in creation. From birth we develop an intimate relationship with food. Jesus is asking us to enter into this radical plane of intimacy by eating his flesh. It’s one thing to develop an intimate relationship with chocolate, but eating/loving/being addicted to Jesus—that’s risky. Furthermore, eating his flesh is not a one-time act that “saves us.” By comparing his flesh with manna Jesus reminds us of the daily necessity of feeding on him.
Food for Thought
So what of those who “ate the body and blood”? We know the story—those who answer the call, eat the bread, join the feast are alive with the word. For the church and for us today it is an ever-present calling to partake of the bread of life not just for ourselves but to be empowered “for the life of the world.” So what? It means that I can’t go home and watch my brother hungry, lonely, afraid—the bread of heaven given for the life of the world calls us to the life of the world—to feed, cloth, visit, preach. Why be committed? Why eat this fleshly new reality bread? Jesus answers this twice (John 6:33, 51): “for the life of the world.”
Such a movement models urban ministry goal from handout to empowerment, as I have personally witnessed. Casual folks come to Boaz & Ruth wanting a job or wanting to be fed with a paycheck. Connected folks stay at B&R because they discover comfort of family relationships. Our job at B&R is to call folks beyond being receivers to becoming doers: folks who are committed (those who chose to eat radical new real food) to their personal transformation enough to give back “for the life of others.”
Sink Your Teeth Into This
In 2002, on an early visit to Highland Park before Boaz & Ruth was open, Rosa Jiggetts, then a casual acquaintance and now my committed friend, jumped out of her car, stood in my space and said, “We need you in Highland Park.” Don’t just come do a service—be committed enough to stay in the hard times. Don’t leave like the others. She reminds me often of that commitment especially in the dark times. Rosa calls me beyond the casual and connected to glimpse, to taste, to experience him in me and me in him if only ever so fleetingly. When I am with Rosa, I taste the bread of heaven. I experience the body of Christ. I witness the power of God bringing life to the world.
Biographical Information
Martha Rollins is the founder and CEO of Boaz and Ruth (www.boazandruth.com), a non-profit assisting formerly incarcerated men and women through a transitional jobs and training program. She writes:
"Renewing my faith in 1973, the call I heard was not the call to seminary (as I had thought) but to stay an antiques dealer. It was as though God assured me that opportunities for ministry would be provided outside the pulpit. And of course this assurance proved to be true: people call an antiques dealer at many of the same points of need that they call a minister - there is a death, a downsizing, a financial crisis, or a divorce. The difference is that many of my callers were unchurched; God provided ministry opportunities beyond what I could ask or think. And then God topped it off with another surprise by allowing me to participate in the birth of Boaz & Ruth."
"Working in Highland Park is like living in the middle of the Old Testament and the book of Acts. We repeatedly experience spiritual opposition to our presence and we experience Red Sea miracles. We daily find the need to 'eat the bread of heaven' so that we can become reconcilers in Christ, become providers, and become calming presence. Without the possibility and the occasional reality of a relationship of intimacy beyond casual and connected, we would all fall away. Nurtured by my husband, Randy Rollins, my parents Carolyn and Bill Franck in Martinsville, an awesome pastor, Charlie Summers, an empowering church, First Presbyterian, and a great staff at Boaz & Ruth, I rejoice even in darkness thanks to these - and other - participants in the feast."
Read more!
August 9, 2009 - 1 Kings 19:4-8 - E. Carson Brisson
Gleanings from the Text
1 Kings 19:4-8
Understanding the text from Kings for this week's Feast is served first by placing it in its wider contexts. Specifically, these five verses are lodged within the much larger story (as it now stands from the perspective of its last editor) of how Yahweh's chosen people managed to forfeit the benefits of their covenant with the God who had chosen them, and as a result land in bitter exile. Within that larger saga, fascinating and often colorful episodes that address the question of what roles Yahweh's prophets played in this divine-human drama abound. These verses present one of those episodes.
Elijah's calling and the providential interventions that have sustained him in it (See 1 Kings 17-18) have, by early chapter 19, run him thoroughly afoul of the Omride dynasty and its current infamous representatives, Ahab and Jezebel. In one of the most memorable scenes in scripture, Elijah (whose name means, "My God is God") has on Mount Carmel ("God's vineyard") demonstrated beyond any doubt, and to the acclamation of the witnesses gathered there, that Yahweh is the one God of Israel. Afterward, in the valley below that mountain, he dispatched 450 of Baal's (false) prophets to underscore this important point.
This upsets King Ahab, who, true to his nature, initiates vengeance that turns out to be as incompetent as his governance: Elijah outruns Ahab's chariots, and escapes. When Ahab reports the need for 450 funerals to Jezebel, she vows a more competent response. She has a messenger (mal'ACH) tell Elijah, in effect, "By this time tomorrow, at the very latest, I promise you a 451st funeral: yours."
Elijah takes her threat seriously, and in a superhuman feat inspired by his fear "for his life" runs the considerable distance from Jezreel ("God sows.") to Beer-sheba ("Seven wells") in the south! (Two chapters later, Naboth, owner of an attractive but small vineyard right around the corner from Ahab and Jezebel's palace, will choose to fight rather than take flight when he finds himself at odds with this royal couple, and will not live to tell his grandchildren about it.)
With this life and death conflict as their frame, these five verses then draw an exquisite portrait of Elijah – who has been faithful in his commission from Yahweh and triumphant in his encounter with the evil of nationalized Baalism – not relishing his faithfulness and Yahweh's victory, but utterly despairing. In successive verses Elijah is painted as increasingly forlorn: First, his servant falls away. Then the prophet alone moves beyond even the border town of Beer-sheba and takes a day's full journey into the wilderness, somewhat reminiscent of Hagar the Egyptian's lonely wandering in that same dramatic landscape.
In the wilderness he comes upon a sole broom tree. There, like Jonah, he asks that his life (nephesh) be taken from him. Unlike Jonah, he cites as his reason the searing conviction that he is a failure in a long line of failures. Exhausted, physically and in spirit, he finally collapses into sleep beneath the only tree (the only shade) he has managed to find. Many commentaries point out that his flight reverses in some respects Israel's journey to the Promised Land.
It is at this juncture, at the point of honestly confessed despair and exhausted sleep, that the narrative takes a turn. A messenger arrives. The term used to denote "messenger" here is identical (mal'ACH) to the one used in v. 4 to describe the messenger who delivered Jezebel's threat. But, the message in this case is quite the opposite. It is not an announcement of imminent death, but a call to life and renewed purpose. This heaven-sent messenger bears food, drink, and a refreshing of Elijah's commission quite beyond what the prophet could naturally do: "Get up and eat, otherwise the journey will too much for you." Elijah obeys, rests again, and even enjoys seconds. Rising from such rest and feast, he is then able "in the strength of that food" to go "forty days and forty nights" (Recall the forty-year wilderness wanderings of the Hebrew tribes) until he comes, as once had his ancestors so very long before him, "to Horeb, the mountain of God."
Food for Thought
The juxtaposition of Elijah's vindication on Mount Carmel and his subsequent flight for his life is stark. One might have expected at least an interlude, perhaps an episode or two, describing how it felt finally to come out on top when opposing a monarchy and a system that bore so much responsibility for the devastating path toward national ruin and eventual exile. If it is too much to ask for a moment to savor his theological triumph over the prophets of Baal, where at the very least now that Elijah is running for his very life are the crowds that only verses earlier "fell on their faces" and cried out "The Lord indeed is God; the Lord indeed is God" (1 Kings 18:39), and who participated fully and repeatedly in the prescribed penalty for false prophets (Deut. 13:1-5)?
The text is, apparently, completely uninterested in such questions. What we are given, rather, between Elijah's fiery (and bloody) triumph and his forlorn flight, is a weather report. To be specific, we are told it rains. It rains a lot. The heavens, which had so recently sent down fire (1 Kings 18:38) and which had before that for three terrifying years closed their bronze will against all moisture to send down only drought and its fierce twin famine, now grow black with rain.
Elijah's success, or his failure for that matter, it turns out, is not the point. The point rather is the restoration of Yahweh's covenant relationship with the people of Yahweh, and the renewed future that yearns to burst forth from that in the return of rain, therefore the return of sowing, therefore the return of growth, therefore the return of harvest, therefore the return of sharing the harvest between haves and have-nots (Lev. 19:9; Lev. 23:22; Deut. 24:19; Ruth 2), and therefore the return of God's gift of life.
Elijah, and I do not know who could blame him, will later famously but mistakenly express his belief that God's good purposes, which do include his life and his actions and decisions, have become no bigger than his life and his actions and decisions (1 Kings 19:10). The good news is that in this belief, prophetic gifts notwithstanding, he is 99.9857 percent wrong (1 Kings 19:18).
Sink Your Teeth into This
Authority is a lifetime member of the human condition; there are trains and all of us, at some level whether we like to admit it or not, need them to run. Therefore, there will be a Rome to see that they do. But, things "go south", as did Elijah, when Rome – as is too often the case – behaves badly by sending its trains not only to run but to run over anyone in their way.
The gift of faith, the Feast section this week from Ephesians rather audaciously claims (Eph. 4:25-5:2), produces its own social and personal structures of authority as it nurtures persons who and communities that are being made new in the image of Christ. Insofar as such individuals and communities are, in Ephesians' bold and rare (for the New Testament) image, "imitators of God" (Eph. 5:1), they will rise and stand, not to lift up sword as in our 1 Kings passage, but to "speak the truth in love" (Eph 4:15) wherever and whenever a system of power forgets or ignores the good news that the covenant-making God of Elijah's faith always intends life.
The issues may be complex, the particular steps to be taken subject to considerable debate lodged in high feelings and compelling arguments among persons of equally good intentions. The outcomes most certainly are not guaranteed, nor are the efforts at times without substantial risk, if not to life then perhaps to limb. The path is more often through the wilderness than up any ephemeral "crystal staircase" as the African-American writer Langston Hughes, who knew about exile, wrote.
But the direction of God's purposes, out of drought into harvest – for all – has been reliably declared, from a distance on Mount Horeb, with horrific and unacceptable violence in the valley below Carmel, as well as in a thousand other times and places, and finally with unspeakable vulnerability, preeminence, and grace on Calvary. Deeply amidst – not around – flame, flood, flight, fight, fear, and even forlorn hope, there is taking shape yet another and different and life-giving journey: "[Beloved] . . . live in love, as Christ loved us, and gave himself for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God" (Eph 5:2).
Biographical Information
E. Carson Brisson is Associate Professor of Biblical Languages and Associate Dean for Academic Programs at Union-PSCE in Richmond.
Works Consulted
Patrick Coats
S. Dean McBride, Introduction to I Kings
Langston Hughes, Mother to Son
New Jerome Biblical Commentary
I and II Kings: A Commentary (Old Testament Library)
I Kings (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries)
HarperCollins Bible Dictionary
Read more!
1 Kings 19:4-8
Understanding the text from Kings for this week's Feast is served first by placing it in its wider contexts. Specifically, these five verses are lodged within the much larger story (as it now stands from the perspective of its last editor) of how Yahweh's chosen people managed to forfeit the benefits of their covenant with the God who had chosen them, and as a result land in bitter exile. Within that larger saga, fascinating and often colorful episodes that address the question of what roles Yahweh's prophets played in this divine-human drama abound. These verses present one of those episodes.
Elijah's calling and the providential interventions that have sustained him in it (See 1 Kings 17-18) have, by early chapter 19, run him thoroughly afoul of the Omride dynasty and its current infamous representatives, Ahab and Jezebel. In one of the most memorable scenes in scripture, Elijah (whose name means, "My God is God") has on Mount Carmel ("God's vineyard") demonstrated beyond any doubt, and to the acclamation of the witnesses gathered there, that Yahweh is the one God of Israel. Afterward, in the valley below that mountain, he dispatched 450 of Baal's (false) prophets to underscore this important point.
This upsets King Ahab, who, true to his nature, initiates vengeance that turns out to be as incompetent as his governance: Elijah outruns Ahab's chariots, and escapes. When Ahab reports the need for 450 funerals to Jezebel, she vows a more competent response. She has a messenger (mal'ACH) tell Elijah, in effect, "By this time tomorrow, at the very latest, I promise you a 451st funeral: yours."
Elijah takes her threat seriously, and in a superhuman feat inspired by his fear "for his life" runs the considerable distance from Jezreel ("God sows.") to Beer-sheba ("Seven wells") in the south! (Two chapters later, Naboth, owner of an attractive but small vineyard right around the corner from Ahab and Jezebel's palace, will choose to fight rather than take flight when he finds himself at odds with this royal couple, and will not live to tell his grandchildren about it.)
With this life and death conflict as their frame, these five verses then draw an exquisite portrait of Elijah – who has been faithful in his commission from Yahweh and triumphant in his encounter with the evil of nationalized Baalism – not relishing his faithfulness and Yahweh's victory, but utterly despairing. In successive verses Elijah is painted as increasingly forlorn: First, his servant falls away. Then the prophet alone moves beyond even the border town of Beer-sheba and takes a day's full journey into the wilderness, somewhat reminiscent of Hagar the Egyptian's lonely wandering in that same dramatic landscape.
In the wilderness he comes upon a sole broom tree. There, like Jonah, he asks that his life (nephesh) be taken from him. Unlike Jonah, he cites as his reason the searing conviction that he is a failure in a long line of failures. Exhausted, physically and in spirit, he finally collapses into sleep beneath the only tree (the only shade) he has managed to find. Many commentaries point out that his flight reverses in some respects Israel's journey to the Promised Land.
It is at this juncture, at the point of honestly confessed despair and exhausted sleep, that the narrative takes a turn. A messenger arrives. The term used to denote "messenger" here is identical (mal'ACH) to the one used in v. 4 to describe the messenger who delivered Jezebel's threat. But, the message in this case is quite the opposite. It is not an announcement of imminent death, but a call to life and renewed purpose. This heaven-sent messenger bears food, drink, and a refreshing of Elijah's commission quite beyond what the prophet could naturally do: "Get up and eat, otherwise the journey will too much for you." Elijah obeys, rests again, and even enjoys seconds. Rising from such rest and feast, he is then able "in the strength of that food" to go "forty days and forty nights" (Recall the forty-year wilderness wanderings of the Hebrew tribes) until he comes, as once had his ancestors so very long before him, "to Horeb, the mountain of God."
Food for Thought
The juxtaposition of Elijah's vindication on Mount Carmel and his subsequent flight for his life is stark. One might have expected at least an interlude, perhaps an episode or two, describing how it felt finally to come out on top when opposing a monarchy and a system that bore so much responsibility for the devastating path toward national ruin and eventual exile. If it is too much to ask for a moment to savor his theological triumph over the prophets of Baal, where at the very least now that Elijah is running for his very life are the crowds that only verses earlier "fell on their faces" and cried out "The Lord indeed is God; the Lord indeed is God" (1 Kings 18:39), and who participated fully and repeatedly in the prescribed penalty for false prophets (Deut. 13:1-5)?
The text is, apparently, completely uninterested in such questions. What we are given, rather, between Elijah's fiery (and bloody) triumph and his forlorn flight, is a weather report. To be specific, we are told it rains. It rains a lot. The heavens, which had so recently sent down fire (1 Kings 18:38) and which had before that for three terrifying years closed their bronze will against all moisture to send down only drought and its fierce twin famine, now grow black with rain.
Elijah's success, or his failure for that matter, it turns out, is not the point. The point rather is the restoration of Yahweh's covenant relationship with the people of Yahweh, and the renewed future that yearns to burst forth from that in the return of rain, therefore the return of sowing, therefore the return of growth, therefore the return of harvest, therefore the return of sharing the harvest between haves and have-nots (Lev. 19:9; Lev. 23:22; Deut. 24:19; Ruth 2), and therefore the return of God's gift of life.
Elijah, and I do not know who could blame him, will later famously but mistakenly express his belief that God's good purposes, which do include his life and his actions and decisions, have become no bigger than his life and his actions and decisions (1 Kings 19:10). The good news is that in this belief, prophetic gifts notwithstanding, he is 99.9857 percent wrong (1 Kings 19:18).
Sink Your Teeth into This
Authority is a lifetime member of the human condition; there are trains and all of us, at some level whether we like to admit it or not, need them to run. Therefore, there will be a Rome to see that they do. But, things "go south", as did Elijah, when Rome – as is too often the case – behaves badly by sending its trains not only to run but to run over anyone in their way.
The gift of faith, the Feast section this week from Ephesians rather audaciously claims (Eph. 4:25-5:2), produces its own social and personal structures of authority as it nurtures persons who and communities that are being made new in the image of Christ. Insofar as such individuals and communities are, in Ephesians' bold and rare (for the New Testament) image, "imitators of God" (Eph. 5:1), they will rise and stand, not to lift up sword as in our 1 Kings passage, but to "speak the truth in love" (Eph 4:15) wherever and whenever a system of power forgets or ignores the good news that the covenant-making God of Elijah's faith always intends life.
The issues may be complex, the particular steps to be taken subject to considerable debate lodged in high feelings and compelling arguments among persons of equally good intentions. The outcomes most certainly are not guaranteed, nor are the efforts at times without substantial risk, if not to life then perhaps to limb. The path is more often through the wilderness than up any ephemeral "crystal staircase" as the African-American writer Langston Hughes, who knew about exile, wrote.
But the direction of God's purposes, out of drought into harvest – for all – has been reliably declared, from a distance on Mount Horeb, with horrific and unacceptable violence in the valley below Carmel, as well as in a thousand other times and places, and finally with unspeakable vulnerability, preeminence, and grace on Calvary. Deeply amidst – not around – flame, flood, flight, fight, fear, and even forlorn hope, there is taking shape yet another and different and life-giving journey: "[Beloved] . . . live in love, as Christ loved us, and gave himself for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God" (Eph 5:2).
Biographical Information
E. Carson Brisson is Associate Professor of Biblical Languages and Associate Dean for Academic Programs at Union-PSCE in Richmond.
Works Consulted
Patrick Coats
S. Dean McBride, Introduction to I Kings
Langston Hughes, Mother to Son
New Jerome Biblical Commentary
I and II Kings: A Commentary (Old Testament Library)
I Kings (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries)
HarperCollins Bible Dictionary
Read more!
August 2, 2009 - Psalm 51 - Andrew Taylor-Troutman
Gleanings from the Text
Psalm 51
A cursory reading of this Psalm would surely convince any reader of the paramount importance of penitential themes. Contained with the first few verses are enough words for sin as to constitute a Hebrew grammar lesson: “transgression” (vv. 1, 3), “iniquity” (vv. 2, 5, 9), “sin” (vv. 2, 3, 5, 9), and “doing evil” (v. 4). Correspondingly, notice the plethora of forgiveness verbs: “having mercy” (v. 1), “blotting out” (v. 1, 9), “washing” (v. 2, 7), “cleansing” (v. 2, 7), “purging” (v. 7), and “restoring” (v. 12). Compare and contrast how these words are used in other texts – Brown, Driver, and Briggs are our friends! Such word study will flesh out and deepen their meanings in this specific Psalm.
Personally, I am intrigued by three other words that directly describe God:
In verse 1, the word translated as “mercy” (NRSV, RSV), “compassion” (TNK), or the poetically rendered “tender mercies” (KJV – of course!) is actually a cognate of the word for “womb.” What do you think is the significance of this feminine imagery?
Secondly, the verb in verse 6 most often rendered as “desire” carries with it the connotation of “delighting in.” Is there a notable difference between desiring verses delighting in truth?
Finally, in perhaps the most famous verse of the Psalm, God is begged “to create” a clean heart. The same verb, which is also used in the Genesis Creation accounts (for example, 1: 1 and 1:27), only takes the Divine as its subject; grammatically (as well as theologically) speaking, only God can grant the psalmist’s request.
For me, the alternative nuances of these words invite rich contemplation of the Divine in new and powerful ways. I would love to hear a sermon or lesson exploring and unpacking a womb-y God, who delights in the truth of doing what only this God can do!
Food for Thought
The Psalm itself directly links with a specific account in the Hebrew narrative: the rape of Bathsheba by King David and the subsequent condemnation by the prophet Nathan (2 Samuel 11:2–17, 26–27; 12:1–7). In recent years, scholars have investigated this pericope from liberationist and feminist points of view in an effort to view the story from “the underside” or in solidarity with historically oppressed peoples. As Psalm 51 purports to give David’s perspective, these types of critical readings would present a balanced view, if not a helpful corrective. Jo Ann Hackett and Alice Ogden Bellis have each written an accessible critique, both of which are wonderfully illustrative of feminist hermeneutics. For a more extensive treatment of the entire pericope from a liberation perspective, see Robert McAfee Brown. Finally, Union-PSCE’s own James L. Mays has written a brilliant sermon on Psalm 51 – a must read for its interplay between ancient text and modern context with Mays’ trademark lucidity.
Sink Your Teeth Into This!
My mother-in-law, who runs her own business coaching company, recently informed me about a book by Reginald Johnson that applied the Myers-Briggs personality categories to important figures in the Bible. David is an extrovert, sensing, feeling, perceiver (ESFP); this happens to be the exact same type as my wife, Ginny! Due to David’s sordid history of rape, lying, betrayal, and murder referenced in Psalm 51, Ginny is admittedly not thrilled to be in the same company. However, I have witnessed her praying in a Psalm 51-like way: expressive, self-aware, passionate, and devoted. These are qualities that seem to fit what I know about an ESFP personality type.
My point, though, is that this type of prayer style is inspiring. While I have a different personality (INFJ for those keeping score at home), Ginny’s prayers and the way she lives her life cause me to think deeper about myself in relation to God and challenge me to share these insights with others. It seems to me that such inspiration for personal and communal piety is the essence of Psalm 51 – available to all personalities.
Resources:
Bellis, Alice Ogden. Helpmates, Harlots, and Heroes: Women’s Stories in the Hebrew Bible. See pages 149 – 151
Brown, Robert McAfee. Unexpected News: Reading the Bible with Third World Eyes. See pages 49 – 62
Hackett, Jo Ann. Women’s Bible Commentary: Expanded Edition with Apocrypha. See pages 91 – 95; 97 – 99
Johnson, Reginald. Your Personality and the Spiritual Life.
Mays, James L. Preaching and Teaching the Psalms. See “Getting a New Heart: Psalm 51” pages 171 – 174
A personal note from first-year editor
Andrew Taylor-Troutman (MDiv, Union-PSCE 2009)
I have thoroughly enjoyed the “Join the Feast” from its nascent beginning as a twinkle in Gayle Haglund’s eye to its fruition into a living entity on the web. To all our writers, I have a deep sense of gratitude for your profound contributions, communicated creatively and in a uniquely personal sense. In particular, I want to publicly thank Josh Andrzejewski for his invaluable work as co-editor and web manager. To all of our readers, I cannot thank you enough for your support.
Beginning in September, I am continuing graduate work in biblical studies at the University of Virginia Charlottesville and will no longer serve JTF as editor. In my stead, I welcome the extremely competent and committed Jenny McDevitt (MDiv, Union-PSCE 2009). Under Jenny’s leadership, the future is bright … or better yet, the table is set!
Read more!
Psalm 51
A cursory reading of this Psalm would surely convince any reader of the paramount importance of penitential themes. Contained with the first few verses are enough words for sin as to constitute a Hebrew grammar lesson: “transgression” (vv. 1, 3), “iniquity” (vv. 2, 5, 9), “sin” (vv. 2, 3, 5, 9), and “doing evil” (v. 4). Correspondingly, notice the plethora of forgiveness verbs: “having mercy” (v. 1), “blotting out” (v. 1, 9), “washing” (v. 2, 7), “cleansing” (v. 2, 7), “purging” (v. 7), and “restoring” (v. 12). Compare and contrast how these words are used in other texts – Brown, Driver, and Briggs are our friends! Such word study will flesh out and deepen their meanings in this specific Psalm.
Personally, I am intrigued by three other words that directly describe God:
In verse 1, the word translated as “mercy” (NRSV, RSV), “compassion” (TNK), or the poetically rendered “tender mercies” (KJV – of course!) is actually a cognate of the word for “womb.” What do you think is the significance of this feminine imagery?
Secondly, the verb in verse 6 most often rendered as “desire” carries with it the connotation of “delighting in.” Is there a notable difference between desiring verses delighting in truth?
Finally, in perhaps the most famous verse of the Psalm, God is begged “to create” a clean heart. The same verb, which is also used in the Genesis Creation accounts (for example, 1: 1 and 1:27), only takes the Divine as its subject; grammatically (as well as theologically) speaking, only God can grant the psalmist’s request.
For me, the alternative nuances of these words invite rich contemplation of the Divine in new and powerful ways. I would love to hear a sermon or lesson exploring and unpacking a womb-y God, who delights in the truth of doing what only this God can do!
Food for Thought
The Psalm itself directly links with a specific account in the Hebrew narrative: the rape of Bathsheba by King David and the subsequent condemnation by the prophet Nathan (2 Samuel 11:2–17, 26–27; 12:1–7). In recent years, scholars have investigated this pericope from liberationist and feminist points of view in an effort to view the story from “the underside” or in solidarity with historically oppressed peoples. As Psalm 51 purports to give David’s perspective, these types of critical readings would present a balanced view, if not a helpful corrective. Jo Ann Hackett and Alice Ogden Bellis have each written an accessible critique, both of which are wonderfully illustrative of feminist hermeneutics. For a more extensive treatment of the entire pericope from a liberation perspective, see Robert McAfee Brown. Finally, Union-PSCE’s own James L. Mays has written a brilliant sermon on Psalm 51 – a must read for its interplay between ancient text and modern context with Mays’ trademark lucidity.
Sink Your Teeth Into This!
My mother-in-law, who runs her own business coaching company, recently informed me about a book by Reginald Johnson that applied the Myers-Briggs personality categories to important figures in the Bible. David is an extrovert, sensing, feeling, perceiver (ESFP); this happens to be the exact same type as my wife, Ginny! Due to David’s sordid history of rape, lying, betrayal, and murder referenced in Psalm 51, Ginny is admittedly not thrilled to be in the same company. However, I have witnessed her praying in a Psalm 51-like way: expressive, self-aware, passionate, and devoted. These are qualities that seem to fit what I know about an ESFP personality type.
My point, though, is that this type of prayer style is inspiring. While I have a different personality (INFJ for those keeping score at home), Ginny’s prayers and the way she lives her life cause me to think deeper about myself in relation to God and challenge me to share these insights with others. It seems to me that such inspiration for personal and communal piety is the essence of Psalm 51 – available to all personalities.
Resources:
Bellis, Alice Ogden. Helpmates, Harlots, and Heroes: Women’s Stories in the Hebrew Bible. See pages 149 – 151
Brown, Robert McAfee. Unexpected News: Reading the Bible with Third World Eyes. See pages 49 – 62
Hackett, Jo Ann. Women’s Bible Commentary: Expanded Edition with Apocrypha. See pages 91 – 95; 97 – 99
Johnson, Reginald. Your Personality and the Spiritual Life.
Mays, James L. Preaching and Teaching the Psalms. See “Getting a New Heart: Psalm 51” pages 171 – 174
A personal note from first-year editor
Andrew Taylor-Troutman (MDiv, Union-PSCE 2009)
I have thoroughly enjoyed the “Join the Feast” from its nascent beginning as a twinkle in Gayle Haglund’s eye to its fruition into a living entity on the web. To all our writers, I have a deep sense of gratitude for your profound contributions, communicated creatively and in a uniquely personal sense. In particular, I want to publicly thank Josh Andrzejewski for his invaluable work as co-editor and web manager. To all of our readers, I cannot thank you enough for your support.
Beginning in September, I am continuing graduate work in biblical studies at the University of Virginia Charlottesville and will no longer serve JTF as editor. In my stead, I welcome the extremely competent and committed Jenny McDevitt (MDiv, Union-PSCE 2009). Under Jenny’s leadership, the future is bright … or better yet, the table is set!
Read more!
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
July 26, 2009 - John 6:1-21 - Luke Schlimme
Gleanings From Text
John 6:1–21
These stories in John of Jesus feeding the multitude and walking on water are also accounts that take place in all of the Synoptic Gospels. Each Gospel captures the events in the same order, with the feeding first and then the walking on water.
In the literary framework of John, we find the author splitting the book into two repeating sections. The first section starts in Chp. 2 with the Miracle at Cana (2:1-11). The second section begins at the start of Chp. 6 with the feeding and walking on water. In Chp. 2 Jesus transforms the ordinary into the extraordinary by turning water to wine, thus showing his glory, and at the same time reveals who he is to his disciples. We find similar happenings in Chp. 6. Jesus turns an ordinary meal into something extraordinary by feeding so many with only 5 loaves and 2 fish (1-15). When Jesus walks out on the water to comfort the disciples he shows his glory and reveals who he is to his disciples (16-21).
Food For Thought
In this text we see an interplay taking place between Jesus’ grace and his glory. Jesus shows grace to the crowd by providing for their physical need and personally handing out the blessed food. This gift of grace becomes the vehicle for the revelation of Jesus’ glory. At this moment, Jesus is not trying to display his glory, and so when the crowd tries to twist the situation to serve their own purposes and make him king, Jesus retreats into the hills alone. In the next section the reverse happens. This time the revelation of Jesus’ glory becomes the vehicle for his gift of grace. His glory is not revealed for power alone, but for grace-filled pastoral care. Although Jesus will not allow his grace to be controlled by those seeking his power, he also will not hold back his glory from those in need. It is very important that grace and glory be held in balance.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
During occasions when I have been fortunate enough to serve on a mission team, I have noticed a common occurrence. Most of the trips have taken place in third world countries or poorer parts of the United States. As our team arrives to bring aid to those in need, either through work teams, VBS, or other service projects, we begin to be looked at as the healers and saviors of the people we have come to minister to. Although we come in the name of Christ to serve others in love, I sometimes get the sense that we are seen as Christ, instead of Christ’s disciples.
As we are given glory and praise for the grace we bring, it is easy to begin to think that we have done something original and marvelous on our own, ignoring the fact that we are simply doing what Christ has called us to do. Throughout the trip I have to constantly remind myself that the purpose is not to make me feel better about myself. I do not think it is wrong for me to realize that I have done something good, but if the only reason I am on the trip is to lift myself up, then my heart is in the wrong place. I relate with Jesus in this text and feel the need to get away when grace turns into unwanted glory. The difference is I must step aside because I am not worthy to receive the glory. In fact, it is by Christ’s grace that we are given the privilege to serve.
Biographical Information
Luke Schlimme has completed his first year of the dual degree MACE/MSW program in Richmond, VA. Originally from Raleigh, NC, he has also enjoyed the transition to Richmond. He enjoyed his first year at Union-PSCE and is looking forward to starting the MSW program at VCU in the fall.
Read more!
John 6:1–21
These stories in John of Jesus feeding the multitude and walking on water are also accounts that take place in all of the Synoptic Gospels. Each Gospel captures the events in the same order, with the feeding first and then the walking on water.
In the literary framework of John, we find the author splitting the book into two repeating sections. The first section starts in Chp. 2 with the Miracle at Cana (2:1-11). The second section begins at the start of Chp. 6 with the feeding and walking on water. In Chp. 2 Jesus transforms the ordinary into the extraordinary by turning water to wine, thus showing his glory, and at the same time reveals who he is to his disciples. We find similar happenings in Chp. 6. Jesus turns an ordinary meal into something extraordinary by feeding so many with only 5 loaves and 2 fish (1-15). When Jesus walks out on the water to comfort the disciples he shows his glory and reveals who he is to his disciples (16-21).
Food For Thought
In this text we see an interplay taking place between Jesus’ grace and his glory. Jesus shows grace to the crowd by providing for their physical need and personally handing out the blessed food. This gift of grace becomes the vehicle for the revelation of Jesus’ glory. At this moment, Jesus is not trying to display his glory, and so when the crowd tries to twist the situation to serve their own purposes and make him king, Jesus retreats into the hills alone. In the next section the reverse happens. This time the revelation of Jesus’ glory becomes the vehicle for his gift of grace. His glory is not revealed for power alone, but for grace-filled pastoral care. Although Jesus will not allow his grace to be controlled by those seeking his power, he also will not hold back his glory from those in need. It is very important that grace and glory be held in balance.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
During occasions when I have been fortunate enough to serve on a mission team, I have noticed a common occurrence. Most of the trips have taken place in third world countries or poorer parts of the United States. As our team arrives to bring aid to those in need, either through work teams, VBS, or other service projects, we begin to be looked at as the healers and saviors of the people we have come to minister to. Although we come in the name of Christ to serve others in love, I sometimes get the sense that we are seen as Christ, instead of Christ’s disciples.
As we are given glory and praise for the grace we bring, it is easy to begin to think that we have done something original and marvelous on our own, ignoring the fact that we are simply doing what Christ has called us to do. Throughout the trip I have to constantly remind myself that the purpose is not to make me feel better about myself. I do not think it is wrong for me to realize that I have done something good, but if the only reason I am on the trip is to lift myself up, then my heart is in the wrong place. I relate with Jesus in this text and feel the need to get away when grace turns into unwanted glory. The difference is I must step aside because I am not worthy to receive the glory. In fact, it is by Christ’s grace that we are given the privilege to serve.
Biographical Information
Luke Schlimme has completed his first year of the dual degree MACE/MSW program in Richmond, VA. Originally from Raleigh, NC, he has also enjoyed the transition to Richmond. He enjoyed his first year at Union-PSCE and is looking forward to starting the MSW program at VCU in the fall.
Read more!
July 19, 2009 - Ephesians 2:11-22 - Rachel Butler
Gleanings from the Text
Ephesians 2:11-22
A preliminary reading of this familiar text leaves one thinking of words often seen in the New Testament: words like “circumcision”, “Gentiles”, and “peace”. In fact, “peace” is seen four times in this passage. As an overriding theme, “peace” applies not only to the Jews and Gentiles of the biblical world, but to the Christians and non-Christians of today.
The author of Ephesians (whom most scholars agree was not Paul) uses the past issues of circumcision to remind the audience of Gentiles how far they have come. “Remember” is used twice as the author urges the audience back to that time in their minds. With the words of Paul from Galatians (2:1-14) and Luke in Acts ((15:1-11) echoing in our own minds as we read the text, the idea of circumcision is not new to us. Circumcision has been a way to tell God’s elect from the un-clean.
Colossians 2 mentions circumcisions “not of human hands”, perhaps referring to a sort of spiritual circumcision. By noting this circumcision is a physical one, made in the flesh by human hands, scholar Pheme Perkins offers that the author of Ephesians has dissociated himself from those Jews who used the derogatory term “uncircumcised” for Gentiles (396). This in itself is a testament to the author’s desire to promote peace among the people.
Food for Thought
This text is often titled “One in Christ” or “Unity in Christ”, but I’d like to go a step further and say “One in Peace”. The author seems to be making a claim to it, urging the readers to remember what they went through in their own tumultuous past and how they simply longed for peace; for unity among their fellow believers. The imagery used in verse 14 regarding the “wall of hostility” is powerful. The notion of Christ uniting the two groups in peace tears down that wall.
Also, by using the common memory of the circumcision, the audience is hopefully reminded of how painful it was, being “aliens” and “strangers ... without hope.” Have they forgotten that the blood of Christ united them? Have they forgotten the walls of hostility were torn down? The peace that Christ proclaimed to them, near and far, is at hand and the author is reminding them to take hold of it.
Sink Your Teeth into This!
The “wall of hostility” reminds me of the wall I saw in the Middle East, dividing Israel and Palestine. An actual physical wall of hostility stands on this earth today. It also reminds me of the guarded concrete slab I saw in Korea, dividing the country, North and South. Armed guards are at the ready 24 hours a day to protect their side of the line.
How painful it must be for people on both sides of the dividing line. Maybe they aren’t arguing over being circumcised or uncircumcised but the result is the same: divisiveness. Each side thinks they are right, and maybe, by some stretch of the imagination, they both are in their own way. I don’t know. However, I am certain that God never intended us to be divided in this way. Whether politically, economically, or religiously motivated, walls of hostility are all around us, not just in the obviously places like the Middle East and Korea. I urge you to take the peace of Christ to your own walls and break them down. This peace is extended not only to us, but to all peoples of all places and times.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Biographical Information
Rachel Butler is a third year MDiv. student from Georgia who has no idea what she will do after seminary. Hopefully this last year will shed some insight! Currently she is immersed in the 10 week summer program of CPE with VCU at MCV and loving every second of it.
Works Referenced
Pheme Perkins. New Interpreter’s Bible: Ephesians Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000.
Read more!
Ephesians 2:11-22
A preliminary reading of this familiar text leaves one thinking of words often seen in the New Testament: words like “circumcision”, “Gentiles”, and “peace”. In fact, “peace” is seen four times in this passage. As an overriding theme, “peace” applies not only to the Jews and Gentiles of the biblical world, but to the Christians and non-Christians of today.
The author of Ephesians (whom most scholars agree was not Paul) uses the past issues of circumcision to remind the audience of Gentiles how far they have come. “Remember” is used twice as the author urges the audience back to that time in their minds. With the words of Paul from Galatians (2:1-14) and Luke in Acts ((15:1-11) echoing in our own minds as we read the text, the idea of circumcision is not new to us. Circumcision has been a way to tell God’s elect from the un-clean.
Colossians 2 mentions circumcisions “not of human hands”, perhaps referring to a sort of spiritual circumcision. By noting this circumcision is a physical one, made in the flesh by human hands, scholar Pheme Perkins offers that the author of Ephesians has dissociated himself from those Jews who used the derogatory term “uncircumcised” for Gentiles (396). This in itself is a testament to the author’s desire to promote peace among the people.
Food for Thought
This text is often titled “One in Christ” or “Unity in Christ”, but I’d like to go a step further and say “One in Peace”. The author seems to be making a claim to it, urging the readers to remember what they went through in their own tumultuous past and how they simply longed for peace; for unity among their fellow believers. The imagery used in verse 14 regarding the “wall of hostility” is powerful. The notion of Christ uniting the two groups in peace tears down that wall.
Also, by using the common memory of the circumcision, the audience is hopefully reminded of how painful it was, being “aliens” and “strangers ... without hope.” Have they forgotten that the blood of Christ united them? Have they forgotten the walls of hostility were torn down? The peace that Christ proclaimed to them, near and far, is at hand and the author is reminding them to take hold of it.
Sink Your Teeth into This!
The “wall of hostility” reminds me of the wall I saw in the Middle East, dividing Israel and Palestine. An actual physical wall of hostility stands on this earth today. It also reminds me of the guarded concrete slab I saw in Korea, dividing the country, North and South. Armed guards are at the ready 24 hours a day to protect their side of the line.
How painful it must be for people on both sides of the dividing line. Maybe they aren’t arguing over being circumcised or uncircumcised but the result is the same: divisiveness. Each side thinks they are right, and maybe, by some stretch of the imagination, they both are in their own way. I don’t know. However, I am certain that God never intended us to be divided in this way. Whether politically, economically, or religiously motivated, walls of hostility are all around us, not just in the obviously places like the Middle East and Korea. I urge you to take the peace of Christ to your own walls and break them down. This peace is extended not only to us, but to all peoples of all places and times.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Biographical Information
Rachel Butler is a third year MDiv. student from Georgia who has no idea what she will do after seminary. Hopefully this last year will shed some insight! Currently she is immersed in the 10 week summer program of CPE with VCU at MCV and loving every second of it.
Works Referenced
Pheme Perkins. New Interpreter’s Bible: Ephesians Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000.
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
