Gleanings from the Text
Mark 11:1-11
There are interesting juxtapositions that we find in this section of Mark. Immediately before our text is an account of the healing of Bartimaeus, a blind man in Jericho. When he hears that Jesus is passing through, more than once this man shouts, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” He throws off his cloak in coming to Jesus to regain his sight. As Jesus comes down the Mount of Olives, there is more shouting. This time a crowd shouts, “Hosanna,” which in addition to being an expression of praise, is also a call for mercy – ‘Save, now, we pray.’ There is mention once again of their ancestor, David, along with quotes from the Psalm 118. Cloaks are once again mentioned, this time as being placed on the colt Jesus is riding or on the road before him. The pilgrims coming to Jerusalem were gathering for Passover, a celebration of deliverance. Bartimaeus is delivered from his blindness and he follows Jesus on the way; would that we could clearly see what is happening as Jesus enters Jerusalem, so we can follow him faithfully.
Prior to Jesus’ entrance, there are details about obtaining what he would ride into town. Zechariah 9:9 calls upon Zion to rejoice upon the entrance of her king, who triumphantly but humbly rides on a colt, the foal of a donkey. Surprisingly, the account is more descriptive about details of the donkey and the donkey detail sent to obtain it than it is about the entrance into the city. Jesus is very purposeful in how he will enter. “The one who comes in the name of the Lord” stays in Jerusalem just long enough to go into the temple to look around before heading back to Bethany, where he had started earlier in the day. More focus on the temple is yet to come.
Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan suggest there was not only a procession from the Mount of Olives on the east that day, but also a Roman procession entering from the west, which would have had as a focal point the Roman governor named Pontius Pilate. The juxtaposition of these two processions would have set up quite a contrast. One came as an expression of empire and military occupation whose goal was to make sure oppressed people did not find deliverance. It approached the city using horses, brandishing weapons, proclaiming the power of empire. The other procession was quite a contrast, using a donkey and laying down cloaks and branches along the road. The one who was coming in the name of the Lord quietly, but profoundly, proclaimed the peaceful reign of God.
Food for Thought
There are not only challenging juxtapositions in the text, but also in our church observances of Holy Week. If we move directly from a Palm Sunday procession to an Easter parade, we will have missed the story and experience of the passion that is more than a part of the deliverance offered by the One who comes in the name of the Lord. How then can we proclaim our praises with palms and psalms, yet move beyond a focus solely on the procession? Mark emphasizes the mode and the manner of the entrance over the procession itself. How Jesus enters Jerusalem is the focus. Will the way we celebrate that entrance be a further proclamation of the peaceful reign of God?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
My wife went into labor with our first-born right after the worship service on a Palm Sunday thirteen years ago. She was in the bell choir that played that day and we wonder about the vibrations that might have led to the time of a significant entrance into our world. It was a painful, joyous time – an entrance with ramifications we did not fully understand, but that offered great hope. Another interesting juxtaposition – Palm Sunday and new life! What was the baby’s name? Grace!
Works Referenced
Borg, Marcus and Crossan, John Dominic, The Last Week: What the Gospels Really Teach About Jesus’ Final Days in Jerusalem, HarperOne, 2007.
Biographical Information
Kirby Lawrence Hill is Pastor of Warner Memorial Presbyterian Church in Kensington, Maryland. He graduated from Union Theological Seminary in 1984 and has previously served churches in Memphis and Atlanta.
Read more!
Friday, March 6, 2009
Friday, February 6, 2009
March 29, 2009 - Jeremiah 31:31-34 - Cathy L. Smith
Gleanings From the Text
The prophet Jeremiah speaks to dejected people of Israel and Judah. By force they have become semi-free subjects of a Persian King, and they have lost their land. God speaks to these people through a vision that Jeremiah relays to them.
• Covenant - People are reminded of the Old Mosaic Covenant God engineered between them. Due to their ancestors’ inequities of disobeying God, a new covenant will be employed. God realizes the shortcomings of passing a covenant from generation to generation. God says he will establish a covenant that cannot be misinterpreted or forgotten, because it shall be written on everyone’s heart and mind. Jeremiah enacts a future covenant that speaks of God’s mercy. The
catastrophic punishment for disobeying God will no longer exist. God
promises to for iniquity and remember their sins no more.
• Husband - God wishes to remain in an intimate relationship with the people. In Biblical times, the husband was appropriated with overseeing the good welfare and health of the family. Old covenants were broken, and a disappointed God only says “I was their husband”.
• Teach – Torah is the Hebrew word for teachings. The style of teaching God’s covenant to children by their parents has past. God intends to write this covenant so that all will know him.
Food for Thought
Powerful visions enable Jeremiah to become a restoration oracle. Why?
He had broached a new beginning. God’s people are not to think that they have been left abandoned. God sends a message through Jeremiah that was filled with hope when wounded people need it the most. It was a Hebrew belief that suffering was caused by some past transgression.
Jeremiah’s words caused people to lift themselves back up and again. Instilled with a new hope, people began rebuilding, and looking for prosperity.
This is a reminder to all people that everything is from God. God often leads people through disaster, only to bring them out of it. God is going to enable people to remember how to live as God’s people. God is going to empower people to recognize their Lord and Master, the one who secures their lives and provides for them.
It is very easy when reading this pericope, to interpret the hint of Messianic promise as disemboweling the people of Israel and Judah as God’s chosen people. Jeremiah’s prophecy of a New Covenant does not represent a radical disjunction with the Jewish people. Rather, it is a representation of a renewed relationship between God and the people of Israel. It is to be a relationship that will be stronger than those of the past. The New Covenant will embrace everyone in the community of faith. God, not the community will create love and fidelity so that everyone “from the least to the greatest” will know God.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This passage reminds me of expectations I held, and actual events that transpired. I was offered a position at a church that seemed full of opportunity for a Christian Educator.
Prior to accepting the position I dreamed three times of the Pastor teaching me as a mentor. With my vision for Christian Education firmly in place, I deducted that I was truly called to this position. I was sure that this person undoubtedly had a great deal to teach me!
Nothing is ever as it seems. Teach me, he did! It was not a lesson I wished to learn. There was great mental anguish associated with the lesson. I was not in control, God was. God was using the situation as a means to an end. My “vision” was something other than I expected. Perhaps those people of Judah and Israel were never able to look back upon the New Covenant and have an “ah ha” moment. Yet, with complete faith in God, did they ever wonder who God intended to become chosen?
Works Referenced
Mays, Jarvis L. (et al). (2001) The New Interpreter's Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes (vol. VI). (Nashville: Abingdon Press). P.812
Meeks, Wayne A. (ed) (1993). The Harper Collins Study Bible: New Revised Standard Version with Apocryphal/ Deutercanononical Books. (New Your: Harper Collins Publishers). p.p 1173-1174
Biographical Information
Cathy L. Smith graduated Union-PSCE in May of 2008 with a Masters in Christian Education. She was honored to do a directed study with Professor Henry Simmons in the area of Spirituality and Gerontology. Her FBL topic dealt with Christian Education among Older Adults. Currently, she is gaining her Certification as a Presbyterian Educator.
Read more!
The prophet Jeremiah speaks to dejected people of Israel and Judah. By force they have become semi-free subjects of a Persian King, and they have lost their land. God speaks to these people through a vision that Jeremiah relays to them.
• Covenant - People are reminded of the Old Mosaic Covenant God engineered between them. Due to their ancestors’ inequities of disobeying God, a new covenant will be employed. God realizes the shortcomings of passing a covenant from generation to generation. God says he will establish a covenant that cannot be misinterpreted or forgotten, because it shall be written on everyone’s heart and mind. Jeremiah enacts a future covenant that speaks of God’s mercy. The
catastrophic punishment for disobeying God will no longer exist. God
promises to for iniquity and remember their sins no more.
• Husband - God wishes to remain in an intimate relationship with the people. In Biblical times, the husband was appropriated with overseeing the good welfare and health of the family. Old covenants were broken, and a disappointed God only says “I was their husband”.
• Teach – Torah is the Hebrew word for teachings. The style of teaching God’s covenant to children by their parents has past. God intends to write this covenant so that all will know him.
Food for Thought
Powerful visions enable Jeremiah to become a restoration oracle. Why?
He had broached a new beginning. God’s people are not to think that they have been left abandoned. God sends a message through Jeremiah that was filled with hope when wounded people need it the most. It was a Hebrew belief that suffering was caused by some past transgression.
Jeremiah’s words caused people to lift themselves back up and again. Instilled with a new hope, people began rebuilding, and looking for prosperity.
This is a reminder to all people that everything is from God. God often leads people through disaster, only to bring them out of it. God is going to enable people to remember how to live as God’s people. God is going to empower people to recognize their Lord and Master, the one who secures their lives and provides for them.
It is very easy when reading this pericope, to interpret the hint of Messianic promise as disemboweling the people of Israel and Judah as God’s chosen people. Jeremiah’s prophecy of a New Covenant does not represent a radical disjunction with the Jewish people. Rather, it is a representation of a renewed relationship between God and the people of Israel. It is to be a relationship that will be stronger than those of the past. The New Covenant will embrace everyone in the community of faith. God, not the community will create love and fidelity so that everyone “from the least to the greatest” will know God.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This passage reminds me of expectations I held, and actual events that transpired. I was offered a position at a church that seemed full of opportunity for a Christian Educator.
Prior to accepting the position I dreamed three times of the Pastor teaching me as a mentor. With my vision for Christian Education firmly in place, I deducted that I was truly called to this position. I was sure that this person undoubtedly had a great deal to teach me!
Nothing is ever as it seems. Teach me, he did! It was not a lesson I wished to learn. There was great mental anguish associated with the lesson. I was not in control, God was. God was using the situation as a means to an end. My “vision” was something other than I expected. Perhaps those people of Judah and Israel were never able to look back upon the New Covenant and have an “ah ha” moment. Yet, with complete faith in God, did they ever wonder who God intended to become chosen?
Works Referenced
Mays, Jarvis L. (et al). (2001) The New Interpreter's Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes (vol. VI). (Nashville: Abingdon Press). P.812
Meeks, Wayne A. (ed) (1993). The Harper Collins Study Bible: New Revised Standard Version with Apocryphal/ Deutercanononical Books. (New Your: Harper Collins Publishers). p.p 1173-1174
Biographical Information
Cathy L. Smith graduated Union-PSCE in May of 2008 with a Masters in Christian Education. She was honored to do a directed study with Professor Henry Simmons in the area of Spirituality and Gerontology. Her FBL topic dealt with Christian Education among Older Adults. Currently, she is gaining her Certification as a Presbyterian Educator.
Read more!
March 22, 2009 - John 3:14-21 - Jenny McDevitt
Gleanings From the Text
These oft-quoted verses are part of Jesus’ monologue that flows directly from a dialogue with Nicodemus, a Jewish leader who comes to Jesus by night. The Fourth Gospel sends a mixed message about Nicodemus, a figure many readers identify with through his struggle to understand Jesus’ words. Though the lectionary includes only a section of this narrative, those preaching, teaching or reading this text may find greater insight by considering it as a whole.
“Lifted up” (v. 14) In Greek, the verb encompasses two meanings – “to lift up” and “to exalt” – and John uses both meanings simultaneously. The evangelist refers to Moses “lifting up” the bronze serpent in the wilderness, an act that had healing, life-giving power (see Numbers 21.8-9), then uses the same verb in relation to Jesus. In the Fourth Gospel, glory and exaltation come not only with Jesus’ resurrection, but also with the crucifixion itself – another act filled with healing, life-giving power.
“Eternal life” (v. 15-16) For John, eternal life is a present-tense reality. It is not something we wait for or hope for our future, but something we experience now as a result of faith in Jesus. As Gail O’Day writes, “To have eternal life is to live life no longer defined by blood or by the will of the flesh or by human will, but by God. Eternal does not mean mere endless duration of human existence, but is a way of describing life as lived in the unending presence of God. To have eternal life is to be given life as a child of God.” (See also John 10.10.)
Food For Thought
We run the risk of not hearing what this text has to say to us precisely because we’ve heard it (at least in part) so many times. As Frances Taylor Gench points out, John 3.16 permeates everything from Vacation Bible School to billboards and bumper stickers to Monday Night Football.
The tendency of some Christians to use this verse as evidence only of the urgent need to ‘accept Jesus’ can have an unfortunate consequence of overlooking a central claim. Before we are given any rhetoric about belief or unbelief, we are again reminded of God’s immense love for the entire created order (see also 1.1-18). We are given the choice between light and darkness, between belief and unbelief – but that choice of whether to love God, or not, is ours only because first, “God so loved the world.”
Other potential stumbling blocks exist. Verses 18-20 contain language of condemnation, judgment, darkness, and evil, intimidating concepts at best. But verse 17 assures us: “God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.” Gench helpfully points out, “God and Jesus do not judge; self-judgment is in view. To John’s way of thinking, we judge ourselves by our response to God’s love in Jesus Christ. Those who receive it receive new life; but those who reject it cut themselves off from ‘eternal life.’”
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Before seminary, I served as the program director of a summer camp. Campers learned a memory verse each morning that they would recite, in cabin groups, prior to entering the dining hall for lunch. One morning, I approached a particularly bouncy child and asked if he knew the verse. “Yes!” he exclaimed. “ForGodsolovedtheworldhesenthisonly . . .” He continued at top speed, each word running into the next. I asked him if he knew what it meant. “Of course,” he said. “It means I get to have lunch!”
We are all invited by God – it is an open invitation, meant “to enlighten every human being” (1.9). Among other claims, this text reassures us that through our faith, we, too, “get to have lunch.” We are given a seat at the heavenly banquet – which begins here and now, in the unending presence of our God.
Works Referenced
Frances Taylor Gench, Encounters with Jesus (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007).
Gail O’Day, “John” in The New Interpreters Bible Commentary Volume IX (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995).
Sandra Schneiders, Written That You May Believe (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 2003).
Biographical Information
Jenny McDevitt is a final-level Masters of Divinity student at Union-PSCE. Originally from Michigan, she graduated from Kenyon College with a degree in English (creative writing). Prior to attending seminary, McDevitt worked within camp and conference ministries of the PCUSA. She assures any concerned readers that all campers received three meals per day, whether they remembered bible verses or not.
Read more!
These oft-quoted verses are part of Jesus’ monologue that flows directly from a dialogue with Nicodemus, a Jewish leader who comes to Jesus by night. The Fourth Gospel sends a mixed message about Nicodemus, a figure many readers identify with through his struggle to understand Jesus’ words. Though the lectionary includes only a section of this narrative, those preaching, teaching or reading this text may find greater insight by considering it as a whole.
“Lifted up” (v. 14) In Greek, the verb encompasses two meanings – “to lift up” and “to exalt” – and John uses both meanings simultaneously. The evangelist refers to Moses “lifting up” the bronze serpent in the wilderness, an act that had healing, life-giving power (see Numbers 21.8-9), then uses the same verb in relation to Jesus. In the Fourth Gospel, glory and exaltation come not only with Jesus’ resurrection, but also with the crucifixion itself – another act filled with healing, life-giving power.
“Eternal life” (v. 15-16) For John, eternal life is a present-tense reality. It is not something we wait for or hope for our future, but something we experience now as a result of faith in Jesus. As Gail O’Day writes, “To have eternal life is to live life no longer defined by blood or by the will of the flesh or by human will, but by God. Eternal does not mean mere endless duration of human existence, but is a way of describing life as lived in the unending presence of God. To have eternal life is to be given life as a child of God.” (See also John 10.10.)
Food For Thought
We run the risk of not hearing what this text has to say to us precisely because we’ve heard it (at least in part) so many times. As Frances Taylor Gench points out, John 3.16 permeates everything from Vacation Bible School to billboards and bumper stickers to Monday Night Football.
The tendency of some Christians to use this verse as evidence only of the urgent need to ‘accept Jesus’ can have an unfortunate consequence of overlooking a central claim. Before we are given any rhetoric about belief or unbelief, we are again reminded of God’s immense love for the entire created order (see also 1.1-18). We are given the choice between light and darkness, between belief and unbelief – but that choice of whether to love God, or not, is ours only because first, “God so loved the world.”
Other potential stumbling blocks exist. Verses 18-20 contain language of condemnation, judgment, darkness, and evil, intimidating concepts at best. But verse 17 assures us: “God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.” Gench helpfully points out, “God and Jesus do not judge; self-judgment is in view. To John’s way of thinking, we judge ourselves by our response to God’s love in Jesus Christ. Those who receive it receive new life; but those who reject it cut themselves off from ‘eternal life.’”
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Before seminary, I served as the program director of a summer camp. Campers learned a memory verse each morning that they would recite, in cabin groups, prior to entering the dining hall for lunch. One morning, I approached a particularly bouncy child and asked if he knew the verse. “Yes!” he exclaimed. “ForGodsolovedtheworldhesenthisonly . . .” He continued at top speed, each word running into the next. I asked him if he knew what it meant. “Of course,” he said. “It means I get to have lunch!”
We are all invited by God – it is an open invitation, meant “to enlighten every human being” (1.9). Among other claims, this text reassures us that through our faith, we, too, “get to have lunch.” We are given a seat at the heavenly banquet – which begins here and now, in the unending presence of our God.
Works Referenced
Frances Taylor Gench, Encounters with Jesus (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007).
Gail O’Day, “John” in The New Interpreters Bible Commentary Volume IX (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995).
Sandra Schneiders, Written That You May Believe (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 2003).
Biographical Information
Jenny McDevitt is a final-level Masters of Divinity student at Union-PSCE. Originally from Michigan, she graduated from Kenyon College with a degree in English (creative writing). Prior to attending seminary, McDevitt worked within camp and conference ministries of the PCUSA. She assures any concerned readers that all campers received three meals per day, whether they remembered bible verses or not.
Read more!
March 15, 2009 - John 2:13-22 - Esta Jarrett
Gleanings from Text
Part 1 (vv. 18-22): Unlike much of the monologue-heavy Fourth Gospel, the narrator packs many verbs and objects into a few tight, complex verses (v. 15 especially). We are given the impression of a dramatically chaotic and confused scene, with many people and animals tumbling over each other.
This pericope directly follows the wedding at Cana and sharply contrasts Jesus’ dangerous public activities with his private life. Narrative arrangement is very important; the Fourth Gospel is the only one that places this story at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry.
Part 2 (vv. 18-22 or -25, depending on where you choose to end the pericope): Jesus’ words in the second part play on several interpretative levels. The literal understanding, with the Temple seen as a physical building, is put in the mouths of “the Jews.” The narrator, however, reminds the readers of the truth of the resurrection. As per usual in the Gospel of John, misunderstanding accompanies Jesus’ words.
This story is read in the context of Judaic worship history and the Temple cult, in which animals are brought for sacrifice during Passover. In Jesus’ day, since many people traveled long distances to the Temple, they had to buy their animals in Jerusalem, and were required to exchange their money for the Temple tax into currency of Tyre (since all Roman currency bore the image of Caesar) (Lev. 1, 3).
As opposed to the synoptic versions, Jesus doesn’t call the activities in the Temple a “den of robbers” (Isa. 56.7, Jer. 7.11), instead alluding to Zech. 14.21 with a play on “house” (oikos): his Father’s house has become “a house of trade” or “market-place.” This charge is much more radical an accusation and condemnation than calling it a “den of robbers,” hitting at the very foundation of the cultic tradition, and not just its abuses.
Food for Thought
In this story (read together with 1:51), we learn that God’s locus on earth has moved from the Temple to Jesus’ body. As the entire Fourth Gospel is written from a post-resurrection perspective, this understanding of Jesus’ body and personhood as the Word is a key interpretative lens.
The disciples later remembered Jesus’ words about the Temple being rebuilt. In the Fourth Gospel, “remembering” is an active aspect of discipleship, aided by the Spirit, which leads to faith and deepened understanding (see 12.16). In the confrontation between Jesus and the authoritative figures of the Temple cult, we see that the early church already equated Jesus’ words with the authority of Scripture.
As always in the Fourth Gospel, we must tread cautiously around the text’s history of anti-Semitic interpretation. Most scholars believe that this text was written by Jews, exiled from the synagogue, who believed that Jesus was the Messiah. This is insider language, borne of grief, distance and change.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This story has been illustrated many times. I’ve seen some paintings that show Jesus poised like a boxer with clenched fists; some that show Jesus enraged, seemingly berserk, swinging a whip above his head; and some that focus instead on the confusion of the money lenders and terrified beasts. All of these scenes are set in the beauty and glory of the Temple architecture, so reminiscent of some of today’s finest churches.
Just as varied are the scholarly interpretations. Is this a demonstration against corruption? A cleansing? A purging? A personal affront? Would we be relieved, confused, or embarrassed by Jesus’ display today, if it happened in our places of worship?
There is a lot of pain in this text, as there is in the PC(USA) and our state and national governments as we undergo times of discernment.
Works Referenced
Dodd, C.H., The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, Cambridge at the University Press, Cambridge, 1965.
“Jesus Drives out the Money-Changers.” Jacopo Bassano, 16th Century.
“Jesus Purges the Temple at Jerusalem.” Alexandre Bida, 19th Century.
The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol IX: Luke, John; Leander E. Keck (Senior New Testament Editor), Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1995. Pp. 541-545.
The New Oxford Annotated Bible, NRSV with the Apocrypha, Michael D. Coogan (editor), Oxford University Press, 2001.
O’Day, Gail, “John: Introduction,” The Women’s Bible Commentary, Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe (editors), Westminster/John Knox Press, Louisville, KY, 1992.
Biographical Information
Esta Jarrett (M.Div., M.A.C.E., and Th.M.), originally from Newport News, VA, is a 2007 and 2008 graduate of Union PSCE. She is currently enrolled in CPE at St. Francis hospital.
Read more!
Part 1 (vv. 18-22): Unlike much of the monologue-heavy Fourth Gospel, the narrator packs many verbs and objects into a few tight, complex verses (v. 15 especially). We are given the impression of a dramatically chaotic and confused scene, with many people and animals tumbling over each other.
This pericope directly follows the wedding at Cana and sharply contrasts Jesus’ dangerous public activities with his private life. Narrative arrangement is very important; the Fourth Gospel is the only one that places this story at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry.
Part 2 (vv. 18-22 or -25, depending on where you choose to end the pericope): Jesus’ words in the second part play on several interpretative levels. The literal understanding, with the Temple seen as a physical building, is put in the mouths of “the Jews.” The narrator, however, reminds the readers of the truth of the resurrection. As per usual in the Gospel of John, misunderstanding accompanies Jesus’ words.
This story is read in the context of Judaic worship history and the Temple cult, in which animals are brought for sacrifice during Passover. In Jesus’ day, since many people traveled long distances to the Temple, they had to buy their animals in Jerusalem, and were required to exchange their money for the Temple tax into currency of Tyre (since all Roman currency bore the image of Caesar) (Lev. 1, 3).
As opposed to the synoptic versions, Jesus doesn’t call the activities in the Temple a “den of robbers” (Isa. 56.7, Jer. 7.11), instead alluding to Zech. 14.21 with a play on “house” (oikos): his Father’s house has become “a house of trade” or “market-place.” This charge is much more radical an accusation and condemnation than calling it a “den of robbers,” hitting at the very foundation of the cultic tradition, and not just its abuses.
Food for Thought
In this story (read together with 1:51), we learn that God’s locus on earth has moved from the Temple to Jesus’ body. As the entire Fourth Gospel is written from a post-resurrection perspective, this understanding of Jesus’ body and personhood as the Word is a key interpretative lens.
The disciples later remembered Jesus’ words about the Temple being rebuilt. In the Fourth Gospel, “remembering” is an active aspect of discipleship, aided by the Spirit, which leads to faith and deepened understanding (see 12.16). In the confrontation between Jesus and the authoritative figures of the Temple cult, we see that the early church already equated Jesus’ words with the authority of Scripture.
As always in the Fourth Gospel, we must tread cautiously around the text’s history of anti-Semitic interpretation. Most scholars believe that this text was written by Jews, exiled from the synagogue, who believed that Jesus was the Messiah. This is insider language, borne of grief, distance and change.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This story has been illustrated many times. I’ve seen some paintings that show Jesus poised like a boxer with clenched fists; some that show Jesus enraged, seemingly berserk, swinging a whip above his head; and some that focus instead on the confusion of the money lenders and terrified beasts. All of these scenes are set in the beauty and glory of the Temple architecture, so reminiscent of some of today’s finest churches.
Just as varied are the scholarly interpretations. Is this a demonstration against corruption? A cleansing? A purging? A personal affront? Would we be relieved, confused, or embarrassed by Jesus’ display today, if it happened in our places of worship?
There is a lot of pain in this text, as there is in the PC(USA) and our state and national governments as we undergo times of discernment.
Works Referenced
Dodd, C.H., The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, Cambridge at the University Press, Cambridge, 1965.
“Jesus Drives out the Money-Changers.” Jacopo Bassano, 16th Century.
“Jesus Purges the Temple at Jerusalem.” Alexandre Bida, 19th Century.
The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol IX: Luke, John; Leander E. Keck (Senior New Testament Editor), Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1995. Pp. 541-545.
The New Oxford Annotated Bible, NRSV with the Apocrypha, Michael D. Coogan (editor), Oxford University Press, 2001.
O’Day, Gail, “John: Introduction,” The Women’s Bible Commentary, Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe (editors), Westminster/John Knox Press, Louisville, KY, 1992.
Biographical Information
Esta Jarrett (M.Div., M.A.C.E., and Th.M.), originally from Newport News, VA, is a 2007 and 2008 graduate of Union PSCE. She is currently enrolled in CPE at St. Francis hospital.
Read more!
March 8, 2009 - Genesis 17:1-7, 15-16 - Becky Purcell
Gleanings From the Text
Ernest Hemingway once bet he could write a complete short story in six words. He reportedly thought this his best work: “For Sale: Baby Shoes. Never Worn.” The author of Genesis 17 distilled the essence of the entire chapter into the preamble of vv. 1-3a which may be reduced even further into: “God: ‘You LIVE; I GIVE.’ Abraham did.” Not six words, but a biblically complete seven!
When Abram was 99 and could have been thought to have already lived a life, God appeared to him using a special name--El Shaddai. He gives Abram and Sarai new names--Abraham and Sarah. God summons Abraham, and through Abraham his entire family throughout the generations, to live completely. God promises to give to this elderly couple greatly, without measure. El Shaddai means God (El) of the, perhaps, “mountain,” “field,” “guardian spirit,” or even “mother’s breast,” depending upon which biblical scholar you choose to follow. It is a name that in Genesis is always associated with the promise of future generations. The names Abraham and Sarah mean “father of many people” and “princess of many.” God is making a covenant; this covenant is balanced--and reciprocal.
Food for Thought
In verse 1, God commands Abraham to do much more than the NRSV translation conveys with the word “walk.” The Hebrew verb in question in its simplest form does mean “walk” but in Gen. 17:1 the verb is found in its iterative form--it is a hitpael verb. The hitpael describes a repeating action, a back and forth, back and forth, or an ebb and flow, ebb and flow or a continuous, steady repetition. Walk--hallek--here is hithallek, and it means the living of a “life before God in such a way that every single step is made with reference to God and every day experiences [God] close at hand” (Westermann, 259).
Abraham is also to be what the NRSV translates “blameless”--the Hebrew word tamim carries the broader meaning “complete, whole, entire.” God expects Abraham, Sarah and their generations to capital letter LIVE which means live everyday to their full potential in a wholesome relationship with God.
This relationship will allow God to give. The baby shoes Sarah stitched in anticipation of God’s earlier promise (chapter 15) will be worn and maybe even handed down. God will bless this couple with continuing life in a covenantal relationship, and verses 3b-7 detail God’s gifts of abundance (“you shall be the ancestor of a multitude”), honor (“kings shall come from you”), partnership (“my covenant between me and you”) and security (“I will give to you...land”).
This is the deal, the covenant, and Abraham in faith accepts it as we learn in verse 3a--the circumcision detailed in later verses is only a “seal,” as Paul tells us, “of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised” (Romans 4:11). Circumcision is a “religious act,” to use a phrase of Bonhoeffer’s, and, as he writes in one of his letters from prison, “the ‘religious act’ is always something partial; faith is something whole, involving the whole of one’s life. Jesus calls men [and women], not to a new religion, but to life.” God capital letter GIVES a covenant of not rules and rituals that circumscribe but an everlasting relationship continuously, steadily--with a lot of back and forth and many ebbs and flows--calling into existence new life.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
As my youngest babies reached speaking age they each, in turn, gave our eldest a name change that in some way or another spread to others in the family. Jacob was first nicknamed “Jay-bob”; my husband and I became “Dad-bob” and “Mom-bob.” Later, he and his brother were “Bubba” to their baby sister, but the name stuck to the eldest and is still used by our family today. Each of these name changes was a delight to me: they symbolized the promise and potential of a new relationship; they were the birth of a covenant. Each time our oldest son graciously--or uncomprehendingly--accepted the claim.
The Lord our God, in the words of Isaiah 43, redeems us, calls us by name, is with us through the waters, through the fire, honors us, loves us and promises to “do a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?” God claims us whether or not we comprehend the claim. But, God intends for us the fullness of the covenant. God summons us to live with God in a way that is, as one of our seminary professors daily reminded us, “joy and nothing less.”
Works Referenced
Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, Hendrickson Publishers, 2005, pp 236 & 1071.
Lambdin, Thomas O., Introduction to Biblical Hebrew, Prentice Hall, 1971, p. 250.
Ellison, Jesse, Newsweek, February 2, 2009, Vol. CLIII, No. 5, p. 10.
Towner, W. Sibley, Genesis, Westminster John Knox, 2001, p. 164.
Westermann, Claus, Genesis 12-36, Augsburg, 1985, p. 259.
Biographical Information
Becky Purcell is a MACE student in the Extended Campus Program. She lives in Fayetteville, Arkansas where she is an elder in her church, a university professor’s wife, a mother of three and a member of the local school board.
Read more!
Ernest Hemingway once bet he could write a complete short story in six words. He reportedly thought this his best work: “For Sale: Baby Shoes. Never Worn.” The author of Genesis 17 distilled the essence of the entire chapter into the preamble of vv. 1-3a which may be reduced even further into: “God: ‘You LIVE; I GIVE.’ Abraham did.” Not six words, but a biblically complete seven!
When Abram was 99 and could have been thought to have already lived a life, God appeared to him using a special name--El Shaddai. He gives Abram and Sarai new names--Abraham and Sarah. God summons Abraham, and through Abraham his entire family throughout the generations, to live completely. God promises to give to this elderly couple greatly, without measure. El Shaddai means God (El) of the, perhaps, “mountain,” “field,” “guardian spirit,” or even “mother’s breast,” depending upon which biblical scholar you choose to follow. It is a name that in Genesis is always associated with the promise of future generations. The names Abraham and Sarah mean “father of many people” and “princess of many.” God is making a covenant; this covenant is balanced--and reciprocal.
Food for Thought
In verse 1, God commands Abraham to do much more than the NRSV translation conveys with the word “walk.” The Hebrew verb in question in its simplest form does mean “walk” but in Gen. 17:1 the verb is found in its iterative form--it is a hitpael verb. The hitpael describes a repeating action, a back and forth, back and forth, or an ebb and flow, ebb and flow or a continuous, steady repetition. Walk--hallek--here is hithallek, and it means the living of a “life before God in such a way that every single step is made with reference to God and every day experiences [God] close at hand” (Westermann, 259).
Abraham is also to be what the NRSV translates “blameless”--the Hebrew word tamim carries the broader meaning “complete, whole, entire.” God expects Abraham, Sarah and their generations to capital letter LIVE which means live everyday to their full potential in a wholesome relationship with God.
This relationship will allow God to give. The baby shoes Sarah stitched in anticipation of God’s earlier promise (chapter 15) will be worn and maybe even handed down. God will bless this couple with continuing life in a covenantal relationship, and verses 3b-7 detail God’s gifts of abundance (“you shall be the ancestor of a multitude”), honor (“kings shall come from you”), partnership (“my covenant between me and you”) and security (“I will give to you...land”).
This is the deal, the covenant, and Abraham in faith accepts it as we learn in verse 3a--the circumcision detailed in later verses is only a “seal,” as Paul tells us, “of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised” (Romans 4:11). Circumcision is a “religious act,” to use a phrase of Bonhoeffer’s, and, as he writes in one of his letters from prison, “the ‘religious act’ is always something partial; faith is something whole, involving the whole of one’s life. Jesus calls men [and women], not to a new religion, but to life.” God capital letter GIVES a covenant of not rules and rituals that circumscribe but an everlasting relationship continuously, steadily--with a lot of back and forth and many ebbs and flows--calling into existence new life.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
As my youngest babies reached speaking age they each, in turn, gave our eldest a name change that in some way or another spread to others in the family. Jacob was first nicknamed “Jay-bob”; my husband and I became “Dad-bob” and “Mom-bob.” Later, he and his brother were “Bubba” to their baby sister, but the name stuck to the eldest and is still used by our family today. Each of these name changes was a delight to me: they symbolized the promise and potential of a new relationship; they were the birth of a covenant. Each time our oldest son graciously--or uncomprehendingly--accepted the claim.
The Lord our God, in the words of Isaiah 43, redeems us, calls us by name, is with us through the waters, through the fire, honors us, loves us and promises to “do a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?” God claims us whether or not we comprehend the claim. But, God intends for us the fullness of the covenant. God summons us to live with God in a way that is, as one of our seminary professors daily reminded us, “joy and nothing less.”
Works Referenced
Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, Hendrickson Publishers, 2005, pp 236 & 1071.
Lambdin, Thomas O., Introduction to Biblical Hebrew, Prentice Hall, 1971, p. 250.
Ellison, Jesse, Newsweek, February 2, 2009, Vol. CLIII, No. 5, p. 10.
Towner, W. Sibley, Genesis, Westminster John Knox, 2001, p. 164.
Westermann, Claus, Genesis 12-36, Augsburg, 1985, p. 259.
Biographical Information
Becky Purcell is a MACE student in the Extended Campus Program. She lives in Fayetteville, Arkansas where she is an elder in her church, a university professor’s wife, a mother of three and a member of the local school board.
Read more!
March 1, 2009 - Mark 1:9-15 - Jessica Tate
Gleanings from the Text
Mark’s first picture of Jesus is baptism, when Jesus joins the ranks of the people the baptized. During this baptism, the heavens are schizo “torn apart.” (Worth doing a word study on!) According to Brian Blount, “In [Mark’s] rendering, this isn’t a comforting metaphorical moment that initiates diplomatic relations between God and humankind; it is a foreboding image of the eschatological schizophrenia human history has now become. … In what on the surface appears to be an historical delusion, in which future hope and present reality can exist together at the same moment, Mark’s baptism story narrates his gospel truth: in Jesus’ life and ministry God’s future is on the move in the human present” (Blount, 20).
Right on the heels of being baptized and named as God’s Son, Jesus is cast out into the wilderness. Immediately, the text says. “Do not pass go, do not collect $200.” Blount writes, “You want to know what happens when you get … touched by the power of God’s Spirit? You don’t sit still and enjoy the view, you don’t lay down and take a nap, you don’t bask in the glory of what great thing just happened to you. You go immediately to wild work. To work for God is to be thrown directly into the path of those who would oppose God” (Blount, 31). So it is for Jesus, for while in the wilderness, he is tempted by Satan.
The final verses of this pericope suggest that the good news that Jesus preaches is the Kingdom of God. The way we live into that kingdom? Repent and believe the good news.
“Repent” (metanoiete) means “to turn around,” to turn away from sin and toward God (McReynolds, 123; Hare, 22). The form of “repent” suggests recurring urgency, something always in the right time and in the pregnant moment (Charles, 37).
“Believe” (pistueo) implies trust and commitment. It is a relational term, not intellectual assent (McReynolds, 123; Hare, 22). In Jesus, the kingdom has come near; in his preaching we are confronted by the kingdom of God itself. The appropriate response is to repent and believe (Williamson, 43).
Each verse in this pericope could be a sermon in itself:
- v. 9: importance of Jesus joining the people in baptism,
- vv. 10-11: significance of baptism as the place where identity is known and claimed,
- v. 11: Jesus as God’s Son…and all the many implications of that statement
- vv. 12-13: being claimed by God results in a time of struggle and test in the seeming absence of God,
- vv. 14-15: proclamation of the good news that the kingdom of God is only a hair’s breadth away,
- vv. 14-15: the calling of us, as the hearers of this proclamation, to repent and believe.
Food for Thought
In the first week of Lent, I think you take a larger view than any of these individual themes. Our 40 days in the wilderness will be the 40 days we spend on the journey to Holy Week. They begin with the announcement that this man who has been baptized (just like the rest of us) is the Son of God. In him, God has literally torn down the barriers between God and us. In him, God comes near to us in the waters of baptism and in that act comes to know us completely. At the same time that we experience this closeness, we know what is to come before these 40 days are up.
We know that we will turn away from God and crucify Jesus, only then to recognize with the Roman centurion that this was God’s Son, in him the kingdom was so close we could touch it.
Despite our turning away, despite our refusal to accept God’s invitation to closeness, God still pursues us. On the day of the crucifixion the curtain in the Temple will schizo; God is again ripping down the barrier between us. Our 40 days in the wilderness is our “test” to accept God’s offer of closeness. It is our chance to say we want the barrier down too.
Sink Your Teeth Into This!
One of the first baptisms I performed was for an infant who wailed the entire time…as I recited the words of grace, as we made promises to her, as we prayed over the water, as the water touched her head… Finally, unable to let the crying continue any further without doing something, and out of my own sense of helplessness for her distress, I said to the child, “this is supposed to be good news!”
God’s action to become close to us, to claim us, to bring God’s kingdom into the present, to call us to participate in that kingdom—good news, to be sure, and yet we’re going to turn away, to be tested. We will hide, ignore, go the other way to the point of crucifixion. With all that in view, wailing may be a very appropriate response. And yet that day around the font, the child’s parents made promises, the congregation made promises, together we remembered God’s promises. Maybe that is our first step in again saying that despite all our failing and all our wailing, we want that barrier down too.
Works Referenced
Brian K. Blount and Gary W. Charles. Preaching Mark in Two Voices. Louisville: WKJP, 2002.
Paul R. McReynolds (ed.) Word Study: Greek-English New Testament. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1999.
Douglas R. Hare. Mark. Louisville: WJK, 1996.
Lamar Williamson. Mark. Interpretation Bible Commentary. Louisville: WJK, 1983
Biographical Information
Jessica Tate is the Associate Pastor for Christian Formation at Fairfax Presbyterian Church in Northern Virginia.
Read more!
Mark’s first picture of Jesus is baptism, when Jesus joins the ranks of the people the baptized. During this baptism, the heavens are schizo “torn apart.” (Worth doing a word study on!) According to Brian Blount, “In [Mark’s] rendering, this isn’t a comforting metaphorical moment that initiates diplomatic relations between God and humankind; it is a foreboding image of the eschatological schizophrenia human history has now become. … In what on the surface appears to be an historical delusion, in which future hope and present reality can exist together at the same moment, Mark’s baptism story narrates his gospel truth: in Jesus’ life and ministry God’s future is on the move in the human present” (Blount, 20).
Right on the heels of being baptized and named as God’s Son, Jesus is cast out into the wilderness. Immediately, the text says. “Do not pass go, do not collect $200.” Blount writes, “You want to know what happens when you get … touched by the power of God’s Spirit? You don’t sit still and enjoy the view, you don’t lay down and take a nap, you don’t bask in the glory of what great thing just happened to you. You go immediately to wild work. To work for God is to be thrown directly into the path of those who would oppose God” (Blount, 31). So it is for Jesus, for while in the wilderness, he is tempted by Satan.
The final verses of this pericope suggest that the good news that Jesus preaches is the Kingdom of God. The way we live into that kingdom? Repent and believe the good news.
“Repent” (metanoiete) means “to turn around,” to turn away from sin and toward God (McReynolds, 123; Hare, 22). The form of “repent” suggests recurring urgency, something always in the right time and in the pregnant moment (Charles, 37).
“Believe” (pistueo) implies trust and commitment. It is a relational term, not intellectual assent (McReynolds, 123; Hare, 22). In Jesus, the kingdom has come near; in his preaching we are confronted by the kingdom of God itself. The appropriate response is to repent and believe (Williamson, 43).
Each verse in this pericope could be a sermon in itself:
- v. 9: importance of Jesus joining the people in baptism,
- vv. 10-11: significance of baptism as the place where identity is known and claimed,
- v. 11: Jesus as God’s Son…and all the many implications of that statement
- vv. 12-13: being claimed by God results in a time of struggle and test in the seeming absence of God,
- vv. 14-15: proclamation of the good news that the kingdom of God is only a hair’s breadth away,
- vv. 14-15: the calling of us, as the hearers of this proclamation, to repent and believe.
Food for Thought
In the first week of Lent, I think you take a larger view than any of these individual themes. Our 40 days in the wilderness will be the 40 days we spend on the journey to Holy Week. They begin with the announcement that this man who has been baptized (just like the rest of us) is the Son of God. In him, God has literally torn down the barriers between God and us. In him, God comes near to us in the waters of baptism and in that act comes to know us completely. At the same time that we experience this closeness, we know what is to come before these 40 days are up.
We know that we will turn away from God and crucify Jesus, only then to recognize with the Roman centurion that this was God’s Son, in him the kingdom was so close we could touch it.
Despite our turning away, despite our refusal to accept God’s invitation to closeness, God still pursues us. On the day of the crucifixion the curtain in the Temple will schizo; God is again ripping down the barrier between us. Our 40 days in the wilderness is our “test” to accept God’s offer of closeness. It is our chance to say we want the barrier down too.
Sink Your Teeth Into This!
One of the first baptisms I performed was for an infant who wailed the entire time…as I recited the words of grace, as we made promises to her, as we prayed over the water, as the water touched her head… Finally, unable to let the crying continue any further without doing something, and out of my own sense of helplessness for her distress, I said to the child, “this is supposed to be good news!”
God’s action to become close to us, to claim us, to bring God’s kingdom into the present, to call us to participate in that kingdom—good news, to be sure, and yet we’re going to turn away, to be tested. We will hide, ignore, go the other way to the point of crucifixion. With all that in view, wailing may be a very appropriate response. And yet that day around the font, the child’s parents made promises, the congregation made promises, together we remembered God’s promises. Maybe that is our first step in again saying that despite all our failing and all our wailing, we want that barrier down too.
Works Referenced
Brian K. Blount and Gary W. Charles. Preaching Mark in Two Voices. Louisville: WKJP, 2002.
Paul R. McReynolds (ed.) Word Study: Greek-English New Testament. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1999.
Douglas R. Hare. Mark. Louisville: WJK, 1996.
Lamar Williamson. Mark. Interpretation Bible Commentary. Louisville: WJK, 1983
Biographical Information
Jessica Tate is the Associate Pastor for Christian Formation at Fairfax Presbyterian Church in Northern Virginia.
Read more!
Friday, January 2, 2009
Feb. 22, 2009 - Psalm 50:1-6 - Brenda Barrows
Gleanings From the Text
Psalm 50:1-6
The Larger Picture:
This six-verse pericope introduces a prophetic psalm of judgment (see Mays), whose later verses lay out specific charges against God’s chosen people. Psalm 50 goes beyond rebuke and the threat of punishment, directing the faithful to reject mechanical worship and corrupt behavior and to offer sincere thanksgiving and praise for their creator. In this context, it has been pointed out that Psalm 51’s prayer for cleansing and pardon serves as an appropriate confession of sin and commitment to reform along the lines mapped out in Psalm 50 (see Schaefer).
Some Details:
Ecological setting: God calls the entire natural world to witness in the case. The scope of creation’s witness extends from sunrise to sunset (v.1) and from the height of the heavens down to the earth (v.4). Later in the psalm (vv. 10-12), it is pointed out that God owns all of creation, and does not need human sacrifice.
God is not an outsider: It is from within this natural context that God’s glory shines forth in Zion (v. 2) (see “God’s Grandeur,” Gerard Manley Hopkins, http://www.bartleby.com/122/7.html). God uses the forces of nature (devouring fire, whirling tempest) not only to demonstrate power but also to communicate (does not keep silent) (v.3). It even appears that God requires this natural context “that he may judge” God’s people (v.4). It is the heavens that “declare [God’s] righteousness” – witnessing to God’s appropriate role as judge (v.6)
God’s judgment is intimate: The verb translated as “summons” in v.1 of the NRSV accurately reflects the psalm’s legal setting, but that same verb is more commonly translated simply as “calls to,” as in v.4. The God-that-summons calls out personally, “Gather to me my faithful ones, who made a covenant with me…” (v. 5) Further, the verb translated “judge” in v. 4 may carry the connotation of “pleading a case” in behalf of someone (see BDB). If a courtroom scene is depicted by Psalm 50, it is a family council where the judge knows everyone and prefers reformed behavior to vengeful punishment.
Food for Thought
Lectionary readings consistently snip out the hard words of the psalms, leaving only words of praise. There is nothing wrong with praise! However, Psalm 50 demonstrates that God requires worshipers to struggle with the significance of their worship and to move away from mechanically tossed-off prayer, praise, and thanksgiving. By expurgating the hard facts laid out in later verses of Psalm 50, could the lectionary actually contribute to the very type of behavior against which we are being warned?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Years ago, a new second-career student came to my office to discuss plans for life at seminary. The student remarked that he had already completed a successful career, and was now able to “give something back to God.” At the time, I thought of the parable of the rich young ruler, and wondered if the student knew exactly how much he might need to give up. Today’s work with Psalm 50 brings that past conversation to mind yet again. We have many high achievers at Union-PSCE, and it is a delight to see their varied gifts being polished to serve the church. At the same time, Psalm 50 offers a strong and helpful reminder that each of us owes everything – property, family, personal attributes, the very ground we stand on – to God. We have nothing of our own to give to God – except our gratitude. The astonishing good news is that gratitude is exactly what God has always wanted.
Works Referenced
Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius, The New Hebrew and English Lexicon, 1979. p. 192a.
Mays, James L., Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: Psalms, John Knox Press, 1994. p. 194
Schaefer, Konrad, Berit Olam Studies in Hebrew Narrative & Poetry: Psalms, The Liturgical Press, 2001. p. 128.
Biographical Information
The registrar of Union-PSCE, Barrows earned her Masters of Divinity degree from the Richmond campus. She works closely with the student body, helping individual students to select their classes and also participating in a wide range of activities including leading chapel worship. Barrows is originally from Salem, Oregon. Read more!
Psalm 50:1-6
The Larger Picture:
This six-verse pericope introduces a prophetic psalm of judgment (see Mays), whose later verses lay out specific charges against God’s chosen people. Psalm 50 goes beyond rebuke and the threat of punishment, directing the faithful to reject mechanical worship and corrupt behavior and to offer sincere thanksgiving and praise for their creator. In this context, it has been pointed out that Psalm 51’s prayer for cleansing and pardon serves as an appropriate confession of sin and commitment to reform along the lines mapped out in Psalm 50 (see Schaefer).
Some Details:
Ecological setting: God calls the entire natural world to witness in the case. The scope of creation’s witness extends from sunrise to sunset (v.1) and from the height of the heavens down to the earth (v.4). Later in the psalm (vv. 10-12), it is pointed out that God owns all of creation, and does not need human sacrifice.
God is not an outsider: It is from within this natural context that God’s glory shines forth in Zion (v. 2) (see “God’s Grandeur,” Gerard Manley Hopkins, http://www.bartleby.com/122/7.html). God uses the forces of nature (devouring fire, whirling tempest) not only to demonstrate power but also to communicate (does not keep silent) (v.3). It even appears that God requires this natural context “that he may judge” God’s people (v.4). It is the heavens that “declare [God’s] righteousness” – witnessing to God’s appropriate role as judge (v.6)
God’s judgment is intimate: The verb translated as “summons” in v.1 of the NRSV accurately reflects the psalm’s legal setting, but that same verb is more commonly translated simply as “calls to,” as in v.4. The God-that-summons calls out personally, “Gather to me my faithful ones, who made a covenant with me…” (v. 5) Further, the verb translated “judge” in v. 4 may carry the connotation of “pleading a case” in behalf of someone (see BDB). If a courtroom scene is depicted by Psalm 50, it is a family council where the judge knows everyone and prefers reformed behavior to vengeful punishment.
Food for Thought
Lectionary readings consistently snip out the hard words of the psalms, leaving only words of praise. There is nothing wrong with praise! However, Psalm 50 demonstrates that God requires worshipers to struggle with the significance of their worship and to move away from mechanically tossed-off prayer, praise, and thanksgiving. By expurgating the hard facts laid out in later verses of Psalm 50, could the lectionary actually contribute to the very type of behavior against which we are being warned?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Years ago, a new second-career student came to my office to discuss plans for life at seminary. The student remarked that he had already completed a successful career, and was now able to “give something back to God.” At the time, I thought of the parable of the rich young ruler, and wondered if the student knew exactly how much he might need to give up. Today’s work with Psalm 50 brings that past conversation to mind yet again. We have many high achievers at Union-PSCE, and it is a delight to see their varied gifts being polished to serve the church. At the same time, Psalm 50 offers a strong and helpful reminder that each of us owes everything – property, family, personal attributes, the very ground we stand on – to God. We have nothing of our own to give to God – except our gratitude. The astonishing good news is that gratitude is exactly what God has always wanted.
Works Referenced
Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius, The New Hebrew and English Lexicon, 1979. p. 192a.
Mays, James L., Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: Psalms, John Knox Press, 1994. p. 194
Schaefer, Konrad, Berit Olam Studies in Hebrew Narrative & Poetry: Psalms, The Liturgical Press, 2001. p. 128.
Biographical Information
The registrar of Union-PSCE, Barrows earned her Masters of Divinity degree from the Richmond campus. She works closely with the student body, helping individual students to select their classes and also participating in a wide range of activities including leading chapel worship. Barrows is originally from Salem, Oregon. Read more!
Feb. 15, 2009 - 2 Kings 5:1-14 - Catherine Devins
Gleanings from the Text
2 Kings 5:1-14
2 Kings 2-8 offers a series of folktales that describe miracles of nurture and restoration that provide evidence of Elisha’s reputation and authority as prophet of God, successor to Elijah. Chapter 5 reports two miracle stories that work together as a unit. The first story (2 Kings 5:1-14) describes the healing of a foreigner from leprosy. The sequel or second miracle story (vv.15-27) has a twist on the first story with a greedy Israelite who is given leprosy.
1. Introduction (vv.1-5)
• Naaman is a foreigner, chief military commander of the Aramean army and conqueror of the Israelite army. Tradition suggests that Naaman is the “certain man” who shot the arrow that killed Israel’s King Ahab (2 Chronicles 18:33-34) (see Seow).
• Leprosy described a broad range of skin diseases. Naaman did not likely have the leprosy we refer to as Hansen’s disease, but undoubtedly it was painful, disfiguring or had negative social stigma.
• Hope for salvation comes from a captured, Israelite servant girl who suggests that Naaman could be cured of disease by the prophet from her homeland.
• Naaman prepares an enormously ostentatious gift of persuasion for the healer prophet.
2. First Obstacle (vv.6-8)
• The hapless King of Israel misunderstands the diplomatic letter thinking that he, the King, must perform the miracle of healing: only God has power over life and death.
• Elisha responds: Send Naaman to me that he might know there is a prophet in Israel (vv.7-8).
3. Second Obstacle (vv.9-12)
• Namaan takes his entourage to Elisha. Expecting personalized attention, Naaman is indignant when Elisha dispatches a messenger to tell Naaman to wash seven times in the Jordan.
• Elisha’s instructions are for ritual cleansing (Lev. 13-14)—not healing. Naaman expects more ceremony or challenge. Naaman’s ego is wounded (see Seow).
• National pride is also at stake. He could just as easily have jumped into a clean river in Damascus.
4. Resolution (vv.13-14)
• Naaman’s servants have a different interpretation of Elisha’s command to “wash and be clean.” To Namman’s credit he again listens to the advice of servants.
• Without really understanding, Namaan submits to a simple routine task and washes seven times in the Jordan. Miraculously his flesh is restored to that of a young boy!
Food for Thought
• This miracle story demonstrates the healing power and universality of the Sovereign God of all. Naaman was victorious in battle against Israel (1 Kings 22:29-36) which the Israelites explain as the will of the Lord (see Seow). God’s offer of salvation extends outside the chosen people. Jesus uses this story to highlight the inclusiveness of his ministry to Gentiles (Luke 4:27).
• Elisha’s command and promise require Naaman’s obedience for his salvation to occur. In complying, Naaman learns that God’s salvation comes through the unexpected when we submit to God’s plan, not ours. It was not the Jordan’s miracle properties, but Naaman’s obedience to the prophet’s command and promise that leads to cure (see Fretheim).
• God mediates salvation in unexpected ways—through lowly servants and simple acts, and is symbolized in a baptism.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This story contains all the elements of good movie entertainment: vivid characters, complex plot, comedy, tension, resolution and message. As I envisioned how the script might be written for the big screen, a colorful cast of characters for the various roles came to mind:
First, cast in the role of Naaman the mighty warrior, is Kelsey Grammar from TV’s “Fraser.” His Dr. Crane character has the right blend of arrogance, pomp and yet humility when his vast ego is inevitably deflated. The goofy, hapless king of Israel, running around ranting and tearing his clothes must be played by the spastic over the top characterization of Jim Carey. Keeping the emphasis on the Word and not the messenger, Elisha the prophet is an authoritative voice-over telling the King to send Naaman to him. In his best, booming, “This is CNN” voice, my pick is James Earl Jones. Finally, we need Radar O’Reilly of "M*A*S*H" fame in the role of Naaman’s servant who points out the simple, obvious truth and anticipates what his master cannot.
Works Referenced
The HarperCollins Bible Commentary. James L. Mays, et al. editors, (HarperCollins Publishers, 1988) p. 296.
Terrance Fretheim, First and Second Kings, (Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 1999) p. 153.
Choon-Leong Seow, “1 and 2 Kings.” The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. III. Leander Keck, et al. editors. (Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1998) p. 193. Read more!
2 Kings 5:1-14
2 Kings 2-8 offers a series of folktales that describe miracles of nurture and restoration that provide evidence of Elisha’s reputation and authority as prophet of God, successor to Elijah. Chapter 5 reports two miracle stories that work together as a unit. The first story (2 Kings 5:1-14) describes the healing of a foreigner from leprosy. The sequel or second miracle story (vv.15-27) has a twist on the first story with a greedy Israelite who is given leprosy.
1. Introduction (vv.1-5)
• Naaman is a foreigner, chief military commander of the Aramean army and conqueror of the Israelite army. Tradition suggests that Naaman is the “certain man” who shot the arrow that killed Israel’s King Ahab (2 Chronicles 18:33-34) (see Seow).
• Leprosy described a broad range of skin diseases. Naaman did not likely have the leprosy we refer to as Hansen’s disease, but undoubtedly it was painful, disfiguring or had negative social stigma.
• Hope for salvation comes from a captured, Israelite servant girl who suggests that Naaman could be cured of disease by the prophet from her homeland.
• Naaman prepares an enormously ostentatious gift of persuasion for the healer prophet.
2. First Obstacle (vv.6-8)
• The hapless King of Israel misunderstands the diplomatic letter thinking that he, the King, must perform the miracle of healing: only God has power over life and death.
• Elisha responds: Send Naaman to me that he might know there is a prophet in Israel (vv.7-8).
3. Second Obstacle (vv.9-12)
• Namaan takes his entourage to Elisha. Expecting personalized attention, Naaman is indignant when Elisha dispatches a messenger to tell Naaman to wash seven times in the Jordan.
• Elisha’s instructions are for ritual cleansing (Lev. 13-14)—not healing. Naaman expects more ceremony or challenge. Naaman’s ego is wounded (see Seow).
• National pride is also at stake. He could just as easily have jumped into a clean river in Damascus.
4. Resolution (vv.13-14)
• Naaman’s servants have a different interpretation of Elisha’s command to “wash and be clean.” To Namman’s credit he again listens to the advice of servants.
• Without really understanding, Namaan submits to a simple routine task and washes seven times in the Jordan. Miraculously his flesh is restored to that of a young boy!
Food for Thought
• This miracle story demonstrates the healing power and universality of the Sovereign God of all. Naaman was victorious in battle against Israel (1 Kings 22:29-36) which the Israelites explain as the will of the Lord (see Seow). God’s offer of salvation extends outside the chosen people. Jesus uses this story to highlight the inclusiveness of his ministry to Gentiles (Luke 4:27).
• Elisha’s command and promise require Naaman’s obedience for his salvation to occur. In complying, Naaman learns that God’s salvation comes through the unexpected when we submit to God’s plan, not ours. It was not the Jordan’s miracle properties, but Naaman’s obedience to the prophet’s command and promise that leads to cure (see Fretheim).
• God mediates salvation in unexpected ways—through lowly servants and simple acts, and is symbolized in a baptism.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This story contains all the elements of good movie entertainment: vivid characters, complex plot, comedy, tension, resolution and message. As I envisioned how the script might be written for the big screen, a colorful cast of characters for the various roles came to mind:
First, cast in the role of Naaman the mighty warrior, is Kelsey Grammar from TV’s “Fraser.” His Dr. Crane character has the right blend of arrogance, pomp and yet humility when his vast ego is inevitably deflated. The goofy, hapless king of Israel, running around ranting and tearing his clothes must be played by the spastic over the top characterization of Jim Carey. Keeping the emphasis on the Word and not the messenger, Elisha the prophet is an authoritative voice-over telling the King to send Naaman to him. In his best, booming, “This is CNN” voice, my pick is James Earl Jones. Finally, we need Radar O’Reilly of "M*A*S*H" fame in the role of Naaman’s servant who points out the simple, obvious truth and anticipates what his master cannot.
Works Referenced
The HarperCollins Bible Commentary. James L. Mays, et al. editors, (HarperCollins Publishers, 1988) p. 296.
Terrance Fretheim, First and Second Kings, (Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 1999) p. 153.
Choon-Leong Seow, “1 and 2 Kings.” The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. III. Leander Keck, et al. editors. (Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1998) p. 193. Read more!
Feb. 8, 2009 - 1 Corinthians 9:16-23 - Chris Burton
Gleanings From The Text
1 Corinthians 9:16-23
In this passage, Paul emphasizes responsibility over prestige. He performs a tightrope act with his rhetoric; blending sacrifice with reward and freedom with constraint, in order to optimize his ability to share the gospel. Throughout the text, he is obliged to proclaim the gospel without giving in to boasting. In verse seventeen, Paul brings the notion of “calling” into direct conflict with his volition (see Conzelmann). He notes the ability to receive a reward through one’s volition, yet verse sixteen shows that it is a calling (obligation) that motivates him to proclaim the gospel rather than himself. Paul does not take this fork in the road as an opportunity to condemn rewards; rather he offers a working definition.
“What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my rights in the gospel.” (1 Cor. 9:18) Through this I invite you to consider Paul’s notion that the reward and the call are not mutually exclusive. A reward is found in proclaiming the gospel and this reward is the ability to…proclaim the gospel!
There is a freedom in Paul’s notion of becoming “all things to all people,” (1 Cor. 9:22) that is fostered through the compassion this stance connotes. It promotes versatility within the “called” individual and can generate the necessary amount of empathy that strengthens community.
Food For Thought
These qualities—which may get you labeled a populist in political circles—empower us to meet people where they are. Too often we do not help people with their own problems but offer advice that is too specific to our own plights. Perhaps you know someone who has great potential but is reluctant to follow opportunities because they feel unprepared or unworthy. Or people have developed an impervious image of you and consequently confessed that they “could never do what you do.” What if we were to operate under a duality that allows us to share our experiences in a manner that leads people into their strengths? My struggles with fear may lead you to overcome your anger but I cannot solely focus on fear when you are oppressed by anger. This empathy and understanding is possible when we are operating through obligation and not a personal search for reward. If I am concerned with showing you how good I am and the pursuit of my reward, how can I meet you in your circumstance? Won’t the gospel be impeded by my one-man show?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Confessedly, my argument is founded upon a belief that proclaiming the gospel manifests itself in the physical realm through empowering people. Simply put, I believe acts of kindness are a suitable conduit for gospel proclamation. It saddens me that our world consistently generates mistrust amongst people. When an act of kindness is performed, people feel obliged to “pay you back” rather than “pay it forward.” Or when asked to perform an act of kindness, people often ask, “What’s in it for me?” This climate has led agents of social gospels to meet individualism halfway and link pursuits of happiness to greater causes. An example of this is a campaign encouraging consumers to buy particular items in order to support the fight against HIV/AIDS. For a while I admired this effort and considered it an ingenious way of forming a symbiotic relationship between the consumer and the cause. (Feel good and do good!) On World Aids Day, I came across a website that blasted this effort and proclaimed, “Shopping is not a solution. Buy (less). Give More.” (see www.buylesscrap.org) Does goodwill lose its merit if one receives something in return? If we are led to feel convicted about feeling good while doing good; should the act of spreading the gospel be purely sacrificial?
I suppose this amalgamation of social gospel and consumerism can lead people to follow their will and give fodder for boasting. I can feel good about myself if my restaurant meal helps fight childhood cancer. My nose may turn up as other coffee drinkers fail to share my passion for “fair-trade” java. Still, I am persuaded that Paul’s message should challenge the saturation of individualistic striving (both the callous and the self-righteous blends). Our challenge to proclaim the gospel equips us with a cohesive force that says, “I am because we are.” (see Blount) I believe it is through a commitment to community that we receive our reward of further opportunities to give.
Works Referenced
Brian K. Blount, ed., True To Our Native Land An African American New Testament Commentary (Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 2007), 291.
Hans Conzelmann, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, ed. George W. MacRae, S.J. (Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1975), 158.
Judith L. Kovacs, ed., 1 Corinthians Interpreted by Early Christian Commentators (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 155.
Biographical Information
After graduating from Davidson College, Burton was offered a scholarship to attend Union-PSCE and is already active on campus as a first year student. Before coming to Richmond, he taught in Brooklyn, New York. Burton hails from East Orange, New Jersey. Read more!
1 Corinthians 9:16-23
In this passage, Paul emphasizes responsibility over prestige. He performs a tightrope act with his rhetoric; blending sacrifice with reward and freedom with constraint, in order to optimize his ability to share the gospel. Throughout the text, he is obliged to proclaim the gospel without giving in to boasting. In verse seventeen, Paul brings the notion of “calling” into direct conflict with his volition (see Conzelmann). He notes the ability to receive a reward through one’s volition, yet verse sixteen shows that it is a calling (obligation) that motivates him to proclaim the gospel rather than himself. Paul does not take this fork in the road as an opportunity to condemn rewards; rather he offers a working definition.
“What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my rights in the gospel.” (1 Cor. 9:18) Through this I invite you to consider Paul’s notion that the reward and the call are not mutually exclusive. A reward is found in proclaiming the gospel and this reward is the ability to…proclaim the gospel!
There is a freedom in Paul’s notion of becoming “all things to all people,” (1 Cor. 9:22) that is fostered through the compassion this stance connotes. It promotes versatility within the “called” individual and can generate the necessary amount of empathy that strengthens community.
Food For Thought
These qualities—which may get you labeled a populist in political circles—empower us to meet people where they are. Too often we do not help people with their own problems but offer advice that is too specific to our own plights. Perhaps you know someone who has great potential but is reluctant to follow opportunities because they feel unprepared or unworthy. Or people have developed an impervious image of you and consequently confessed that they “could never do what you do.” What if we were to operate under a duality that allows us to share our experiences in a manner that leads people into their strengths? My struggles with fear may lead you to overcome your anger but I cannot solely focus on fear when you are oppressed by anger. This empathy and understanding is possible when we are operating through obligation and not a personal search for reward. If I am concerned with showing you how good I am and the pursuit of my reward, how can I meet you in your circumstance? Won’t the gospel be impeded by my one-man show?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Confessedly, my argument is founded upon a belief that proclaiming the gospel manifests itself in the physical realm through empowering people. Simply put, I believe acts of kindness are a suitable conduit for gospel proclamation. It saddens me that our world consistently generates mistrust amongst people. When an act of kindness is performed, people feel obliged to “pay you back” rather than “pay it forward.” Or when asked to perform an act of kindness, people often ask, “What’s in it for me?” This climate has led agents of social gospels to meet individualism halfway and link pursuits of happiness to greater causes. An example of this is a campaign encouraging consumers to buy particular items in order to support the fight against HIV/AIDS. For a while I admired this effort and considered it an ingenious way of forming a symbiotic relationship between the consumer and the cause. (Feel good and do good!) On World Aids Day, I came across a website that blasted this effort and proclaimed, “Shopping is not a solution. Buy (less). Give More.” (see www.buylesscrap.org) Does goodwill lose its merit if one receives something in return? If we are led to feel convicted about feeling good while doing good; should the act of spreading the gospel be purely sacrificial?
I suppose this amalgamation of social gospel and consumerism can lead people to follow their will and give fodder for boasting. I can feel good about myself if my restaurant meal helps fight childhood cancer. My nose may turn up as other coffee drinkers fail to share my passion for “fair-trade” java. Still, I am persuaded that Paul’s message should challenge the saturation of individualistic striving (both the callous and the self-righteous blends). Our challenge to proclaim the gospel equips us with a cohesive force that says, “I am because we are.” (see Blount) I believe it is through a commitment to community that we receive our reward of further opportunities to give.
Works Referenced
Brian K. Blount, ed., True To Our Native Land An African American New Testament Commentary (Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 2007), 291.
Hans Conzelmann, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, ed. George W. MacRae, S.J. (Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1975), 158.
Judith L. Kovacs, ed., 1 Corinthians Interpreted by Early Christian Commentators (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 155.
Biographical Information
After graduating from Davidson College, Burton was offered a scholarship to attend Union-PSCE and is already active on campus as a first year student. Before coming to Richmond, he taught in Brooklyn, New York. Burton hails from East Orange, New Jersey. Read more!
Feb. 1, 2009 - Mark 1:21-28 - Beverly Zink-Sawyer
Gleanings From the Text
Mark 1:21-28
Jesus had barely just begun. He had been baptized by John, tempted by Satan, and joined by the first disciples. He had hardly said or done anything at this point in Mark’s Gospel before he found himself in the midst of conflict. And what an unexpected place for that first conflict to occur: in the synagogue on the Sabbath Day.
Jesus had arrived in Capernaum and entered the synagogue to worship and teach—an agenda no different from that of any faithful Jewish scholar. But as becomes obvious very quickly in the Gospels, Jesus did not have to say or do much to find himself in the middle of a confrontation.
This opening confrontation in Mark’s Gospel was prompted by what the NRSV translates as an “unclean spirit.” The unclean spirit, sometimes referred to as a demon, inhabited a worshipper in the synagogue, making the juxtaposition of an unclean spirit with the holiest of places even more startling and offensive. The demon speaks through the man to confront Jesus, in the process not only questioning Jesus (“What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth?”) but also identifying him (“I know who you are, the Holy One of God”). When Jesus “rebukes” the demon, the demon is expelled from the man with convulsions and cries.
The final scene is one of amazement on the part of the bystanders, the man’s fellow worshippers in the synagogue. They, too, then recognize Jesus’ uniqueness: that he teaches something new imbued with authority. At that point, Jesus’ ministry becomes public and the object of speculation and testing that would persist to his death.
This text is sometimes regarded as a miracle story, but the real subject of the text, as Lamar Williamson notes, is not the miracle but “Jesus’ authority in word and deed” (Mark—Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, 49). The “new teaching” of Jesus is evident from the opening of the pericope (v. 22) to its close (v. 27). The exorcism is a demonstration of Jesus’ power, but that power issues from his word.
Food for Thought
Several dimensions of this text offer rich homiletical “food for thought.” The opening verse indicates the primacy of Sabbath practice for Jesus. The Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John all include a synagogue event early in Jesus’ life and ministry. According to this text, the synagogue on the Sabbath is the place where Jesus reveals his radical new teaching and his authority from God. This should remind us of the primacy and the efficacy of worship for us as those who seek to know and follow Jesus.
Another dimension of the text is the uniqueness of Jesus’ teaching. The preacher might explore more precisely what that unique teaching looked like for those who heard that teaching first-hand and what that teaching looks like for us today. How does Jesus’ unique teaching shape our faith and work in our present world?
Jesus’ unique teaching as portrayed in this text issues from the authority of his word, or, more precisely, the word of God proclaimed through him, authority that stands in contrast to the authority of the scribes, the biblical authorities of the day. There is a word of caution here even for the church today, lest we put too much faith in the human teachings of the church and its leaders. “God alone is Lord of the conscience,” as one of our Presbyterian principles declares. God’s message to us as individuals, while perhaps confirmed or interpreted by the church, is ultimately a word from God to our own minds and hearts.
Of course, there are a couple of challenges for the contemporary preacher of this text. One is the demon possession that prompts the incident. While such a literal understanding of the work of evil spirits may seem anachronistic to modern listeners, we all can attest to the presence and persistence of evil in our world in various guises. The good news in this text, however, is that Jesus demonstrated his power to overcome the forces of evil wherever we may encounter them.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
One does not have to look far to find examples of the power of Jesus’ word set loose in our fearful and powerless world. Naming places, people, and situations that have been healed by the power of Jesus’ word would clearly convey the message of this text. I think of the wonderful words of Martin Luther’s great hymn, “A Mighty Fortress,” in conjunction with this text: “one little word” shall “fell” all the evil that threatens “to undo us.” That “word” is the Word of God in Jesus Christ, the identified Holy One, who speaks with the power and authority of God. Who else, then do we need on our side?
Biographical Information
Zink-Sawyer, the Samuel W. Newell, Jr. Professor of Preaching and Worship at Union-PSCE Richmond, focuses on the interaction of homiletics and American religious history with particular attention to women’s preaching. An ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), she served churches in Pennsylvania and Tennessee for 15 years and has served on committees at the presbytery and synod levels. She is editor of the Abingdon Women’s Preaching Annual and author of From Preachers to Suffragists: Women’s Rights and Religious Conviction in the Lives of Three Nineteenth-Century American Clergywomen. She was a Lilly Faculty Fellow of the Association of Theological Schools for 2000–2001. Read more!
Mark 1:21-28
Jesus had barely just begun. He had been baptized by John, tempted by Satan, and joined by the first disciples. He had hardly said or done anything at this point in Mark’s Gospel before he found himself in the midst of conflict. And what an unexpected place for that first conflict to occur: in the synagogue on the Sabbath Day.
Jesus had arrived in Capernaum and entered the synagogue to worship and teach—an agenda no different from that of any faithful Jewish scholar. But as becomes obvious very quickly in the Gospels, Jesus did not have to say or do much to find himself in the middle of a confrontation.
This opening confrontation in Mark’s Gospel was prompted by what the NRSV translates as an “unclean spirit.” The unclean spirit, sometimes referred to as a demon, inhabited a worshipper in the synagogue, making the juxtaposition of an unclean spirit with the holiest of places even more startling and offensive. The demon speaks through the man to confront Jesus, in the process not only questioning Jesus (“What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth?”) but also identifying him (“I know who you are, the Holy One of God”). When Jesus “rebukes” the demon, the demon is expelled from the man with convulsions and cries.
The final scene is one of amazement on the part of the bystanders, the man’s fellow worshippers in the synagogue. They, too, then recognize Jesus’ uniqueness: that he teaches something new imbued with authority. At that point, Jesus’ ministry becomes public and the object of speculation and testing that would persist to his death.
This text is sometimes regarded as a miracle story, but the real subject of the text, as Lamar Williamson notes, is not the miracle but “Jesus’ authority in word and deed” (Mark—Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, 49). The “new teaching” of Jesus is evident from the opening of the pericope (v. 22) to its close (v. 27). The exorcism is a demonstration of Jesus’ power, but that power issues from his word.
Food for Thought
Several dimensions of this text offer rich homiletical “food for thought.” The opening verse indicates the primacy of Sabbath practice for Jesus. The Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John all include a synagogue event early in Jesus’ life and ministry. According to this text, the synagogue on the Sabbath is the place where Jesus reveals his radical new teaching and his authority from God. This should remind us of the primacy and the efficacy of worship for us as those who seek to know and follow Jesus.
Another dimension of the text is the uniqueness of Jesus’ teaching. The preacher might explore more precisely what that unique teaching looked like for those who heard that teaching first-hand and what that teaching looks like for us today. How does Jesus’ unique teaching shape our faith and work in our present world?
Jesus’ unique teaching as portrayed in this text issues from the authority of his word, or, more precisely, the word of God proclaimed through him, authority that stands in contrast to the authority of the scribes, the biblical authorities of the day. There is a word of caution here even for the church today, lest we put too much faith in the human teachings of the church and its leaders. “God alone is Lord of the conscience,” as one of our Presbyterian principles declares. God’s message to us as individuals, while perhaps confirmed or interpreted by the church, is ultimately a word from God to our own minds and hearts.
Of course, there are a couple of challenges for the contemporary preacher of this text. One is the demon possession that prompts the incident. While such a literal understanding of the work of evil spirits may seem anachronistic to modern listeners, we all can attest to the presence and persistence of evil in our world in various guises. The good news in this text, however, is that Jesus demonstrated his power to overcome the forces of evil wherever we may encounter them.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
One does not have to look far to find examples of the power of Jesus’ word set loose in our fearful and powerless world. Naming places, people, and situations that have been healed by the power of Jesus’ word would clearly convey the message of this text. I think of the wonderful words of Martin Luther’s great hymn, “A Mighty Fortress,” in conjunction with this text: “one little word” shall “fell” all the evil that threatens “to undo us.” That “word” is the Word of God in Jesus Christ, the identified Holy One, who speaks with the power and authority of God. Who else, then do we need on our side?
Biographical Information
Zink-Sawyer, the Samuel W. Newell, Jr. Professor of Preaching and Worship at Union-PSCE Richmond, focuses on the interaction of homiletics and American religious history with particular attention to women’s preaching. An ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), she served churches in Pennsylvania and Tennessee for 15 years and has served on committees at the presbytery and synod levels. She is editor of the Abingdon Women’s Preaching Annual and author of From Preachers to Suffragists: Women’s Rights and Religious Conviction in the Lives of Three Nineteenth-Century American Clergywomen. She was a Lilly Faculty Fellow of the Association of Theological Schools for 2000–2001. Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
