Genesis 3:8-15, Episcopal and Lutheran Traditions

8 They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?" 10 He said, "I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself." 11 He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?" 12 The man said, "The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree, and I ate." 13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this that you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent tricked me, and I ate." 14 The LORD God said to the serpent,

"Because you have done this,

cursed are you among all animals

and among all wild creatures;

upon your belly you shall go,

and dust you shall eat

all the days of your life.

15 I will put enmity between you and the woman,

and between your offspring and hers;

he will strike your head,

and you will strike his heel." (Genesis 3:8-15, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from December 18, 2005 (the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two):

On the first Sunday after Epiphany (January 8, 2006), Daily Office Old Testament readings will begin in Genesis, chapter 1, and over the following six weeks, continue through Genesis, chapter 35. But today’s reading, neither in a daily sequence based on Genesis, nor in a Sunday-to-Sunday Daily Office sequence, perhaps anticipates the later sequence. The story–the LORD God confronting Adam and Eve about their disobedience, and the curse upon the serpent–raises one of the central issues of the entire biblical narrative, the problem of sin and its consequences. When Adam is confronted, “Where are you?” (Gen. 3:8), he cannot hide his new-found knowledge of sin, since he has eaten “of the tree of knowledge of good and evil” (2:17). He was afraid to face God “because I was naked” (3:10). The true part of the serpent’s “half-truth,” “you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (3:5), had come true. (The false part of the serpent’s “half-truth” was, of course, “You will not die” (3:4). But God’s interrogation reveals the truth. “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” (3:11). Adam, of course, “passed the buck.” He blamed Eve. “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree, and I ate” (v. 12). He was apparently “with her” at the time (v. 6), and could have protested. But “later interpreters of the story have shown a similar tendency to blame the woman” (David M. Carr, NOAB, 3^rd ed., on Gen. 3:8-13). She in turn blamed the serpent. “The serpent tricked me, and I ate” (v. 13).

The serpent is not interrogated, but simply “cursed” (v. 14, cf. vv. 14-15), a term not used of the woman (v. 16), nor of the man (vv. 17-19), though it is used of the ground, “cursed is the ground because of you” (v. 17). Neither the pain of childbirth nor the man’s ruling over the woman should be understood as punishments for the woman, nor as God’s prescription for the “order” of human society. They are nothing more than simple predictions as God foresees the tragic breakdown of harmony within human society. David M. Carr agrees, at least with respect to the “order” issue. The man’s “ruling,” far from representing the divine order of human society, is “a tragic reflection” of it’s “disintegration”:

Though this [i.e. v. 16] is often understood as a “curse” of the woman to pain in childbirth, the word “curse” is not used in these verses. Others have suggested that this text sentences the woman to endless “toil” (not pain) of reproduction, much as the man is condemned in vv. 17-19 to endless toil in food production. The man’s rule over the woman here is a tragic reflection of the disintegration of original connectedness between them. (Carr, on vv. 16-19)

None of the verbs in these words to the woman or the man in verses 16 to 19 is a “weak verb” that would clearly distinguish the jussive, or “command” form from the ordinary imperfect (i.e. future) tense form which ordinarily states a fact about the future. God simply foresees tragic consequences within the human family, which is no more pleasing to him than to the human subjects.

Jeremiah 31:10-14, Presbyterian Tradition

10 Hear the word of the LORD, O nations,

and declare it in the coastlands far away;

say, "He who scattered Israel will gather him,

and will keep him as a shepherd a flock."

11 For the LORD has ransomed Jacob,

and has redeemed him from hands too strong for him.

12 They shall come and sing aloud on the height of Zion,

and they shall be radiant over the goodness of the LORD,

over the grain, the wine, and the oil,

and over the young of the flock and the herd;

their life shall become like a watered garden,

and they shall never languish again.

13 Then shall the young women rejoice in the dance,

and the young men and the old shall be merry.

I will turn their mourning into joy,

I will comfort them, and give them gladness for sorrow.

14 I will give the priests their fill of fatness,

and my people shall be satisfied with my bounty,

says the LORD. (Jeremiah 31:10-14, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from December 23, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two; Presbyterian ref. for December 23).

These lines from Jeremiah come from what has been called the “Book of Consolation” (Jer. 30:1-31:40; cf. Victor R. Gold & William L. Holladay, NOAB, 2^nd ed., on Jer. 30:1-31:40; and Mark E. Biddle, NOAB, 3^rd ed., on the same passage). Today’s reading describes a “Homecoming. God will assemble the dispersed in their homeland (Isa. 35:5-10; Ps. 23:2-3)” (Gold & Holladay on Jer. 31:7-14; cf. Biddle on the same passage). “He who scattered Israel will gather him,/and will keep him as a shepherd a flock” (Jer. 31:10b). “For the LORD has ransomed Jacob . . . has redeemed him from hands too strong for him” (v. 11). They shall again rejoice in the bounty of their land (v. 12), dance and be merry (v. 13a), for the LORD “will turn their mourning into joy . . . comfort them, and give them gladness for sorrow” (v. 13b). The normal temple worship will resume for the priests will be given “their fill of fatness” and “my [that is, the LORD’s] people shall be satisfied with my bounty” (v. 14).

Revelation 12:1-10, Episcopal and Lutheran Traditions

The Woman and the Dragon

12:1 A great portent appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. 2 She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pangs, in the agony of giving birth. 3 Then another portent appeared in heaven: a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. 4 His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, so that he might devour her child as soon as it was born. 5 And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron. But her child was snatched away and taken to God and to his throne; 6 and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, so that there she can be nourished for one thousand two hundred sixty days.

Michael Defeats the Dragon

7 And war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels fought against the dragon. The dragon and his angels fought back, 8 but they were defeated, and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. 9 The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world-he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

10 Then I heard a loud voice in heaven, proclaiming,

"Now have come the salvation and the power

and the kingdom of our God

and the authority of his Messiah,

for the accuser of our comrades has been thrown down,

who accuses them day and night before our God. (Revelation 12:1-10, NRSV)

On June 10, 2007 (the Sunday closest to June 8, Year One) comments were combined with revision and adaptation from June 5, 2005, two years earlier (the Sunday closest to June 8, Year One), from comments of November 2, 2005 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One, from December 18, 2005 (the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two), and from November 1 and 2, 2006 (Wednesday and Thursday of the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year Two). The combined comments were repeated on November 7, 2007 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One), and are repeated again here.

John has a vision of “a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” (Rev. 12:1). She is pregnant and “crying out in birth pangs, in the agony of giving birth” (v. 2). According to Bruce M. Metzger, she “appears to be the heavenly representative of God’s people, first as Israel (from whom Jesus the Messiah was born, v. 5), then as the Christian Church (which is persecuted by the dragon, v. 13)” (NOAB, 2^nd ed. on Rev. 12:1). The “great red dragon” (v. 3), a serious threat to the woman and her child (v. 4), “is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world” (v. 9). The fact that the child “is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron,” alludes “to Ps. 29, originally concerning the king of Israel, and interpreted as referring to a future anointed ruler or messiah (Psalms of Solomon 17:23-24)” (Jean-Pierre Ruiz, NOAB, 3^rd ed. on Rev. 12:5). But the child is “snatched away and taken to God and to his throne” (v. 5), which prevents the dragon from devouring him, and the woman is also protected: she flees “into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God (v. 6a); thus “the church is sustained by God” (Metzger on v. 7).

According to Ruiz,

The vision of the woman, the child, and the dragon is rich in symbolism drawn from mythological traditions found in ancient Babylonia, Egypt, Greece, and Rome, as well as in the Hebrew Bible. One well-known version of the story tells of the goddess Leto, pregnant with Apollo, who is menaced by the dragon Python, who pursues her because he knows that Apollo is destined to kill him (Hyginus, Fabulae 140). Here this material is reinterpreted in terms of Jewish traditions and expectations as the story of the birth of the messiah. (op. cit., on Rev. 12:1-17)

One should say, however, that the “Jewish traditions” dominate the background, but vision contributes to John’s message of Christian victory in the face of diabolical opposition. The Battle continues between Christ and Satan. “War broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels fought against the dragon” (Rev. 12:7). But the dragon and his angels are defeated and thrown down to the earth (vv. 8-9), where they pose a deadly threat. Another poetic announcement in heaven celebrates the coming of salvation, God’s kingdom, and his Messiah’s authority (v. 10a. b, c), and the victory of the martyrs in heaven who “have conquered him [Satan] by the blood of the Lamb / and by the word of their testimony” (v. 11a, b), “paradoxically, like Jesus (3:21; 5:5), by dying” (David E. Aune, HarperCollins Study Bible, on Rev. 12:11; the same in the 2^nd ed.; cf. Phil. 1:21-23; 3:20-21). So the heavens and “those who dwell in them” are called upon to rejoice (v. 12a, b), but woe is pronounced on the earth and the sea “for the devil has come down to you / with great wrath, / because he knows that his time is short!” (v. 12c, d, e, f).

Galatians 3:15-22, Presbyterian Tradition

The Promise to Abraham (Cp Gen 12.1-3)

15 Brothers and sisters, I give an example from daily life: once a person’s will has been ratified, no one adds to it or annuls it. 16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring; it does not say, “And to offsprings,”as of many; but it says, “And to your offspring,” that is, to one person, who is Christ. 17 My point is this: the law, which came four hundred thirty years later, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. 18 For if the inheritance comes from the law, it no longer comes from the promise; but God granted it to Abraham through the promise.

The Purpose of the Law

19 Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring would come to whom the promise had been made; and it was ordained through angels by a mediator. 20 Now a mediator involves more than one party; but God is one.

21 Is the law then opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would indeed come through the law. 22 But the scripture has imprisoned all things under the power of sin, so that what was promised through faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. (Galatians 3:15-22, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from January 26, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One):

The following comments are repeated here with some revision and supplement from June 9, 2006 (Friday in the week of Pentecost Sunday, Year Two), when some use was made of earlier comments. (Cf comments of June 4, 2004 (Friday of the week of Pentecost, Year Two) in an email sent June 2, 2004 for June 3-6), and from January 28, 2005 (Friday of the week of the Third Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), From December 23, 2005 (Friday in the week of the fourth Sunday in Advent, Year Two).

Paul continues to support his thesis (Gal. 2:15-21). The fourth argument, the “example from daily life” (Gal. 3:15) turns on the double meaning of the Greek word diathēkē, translated as “will” (i.e. “last will and testament”) in Gal. 3:15, but as “covenant” in verse 17. This understanding is combined with the reference to “offspring” (sperma, literally “seed”) to show that the promise, is to (and through) Christ. The promises “were made to Abraham and to his offspring [seed]; it does not say, ‘and to offsprings,’ as of many, but it says, ‘And to your offspring,’ that is, to one person, who is Christ” (v. 16). Sheila Briggs points out that

Paul uses the same Greek word as the Septuagint text of God’s promises to Abraham in Genesis (Gen. 12:7; 15:5; 17:8; 22:17). Paul contrasts the singular seed in the text with the common (and in his view mistaken) interpretation of it as plural seeds. (Sheila Briggs, NOAB, 3^rd ed., on Gal. 3:16).

Paul is then prepared to conclude that the Law of Moses, “which came four hundred thirty years later, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise” (Gal 3:17). He anticipates certain questions, the first, “Why then the law? (v. 19a) The first answer is that the law “was added because of transgressions, until the offspring [Christ] would come to whom the promise had been made” (v. 19b). It further counts against the law that it was “ordained through angels by a mediator” (v. 19c), “according to later Jewish belief” (Bruce M. Metzger & John Reumann, NOAB, 2^nd ed., on Gal. 3:19-25). Verse 20 is called “obscure” by Briggs, who says that it “links monotheism with there being no need for a mediator of God’s promise” (on v. 20). After referring to many interpretations of this verse, Ronald Y. K. Fung favors the view which

regards the plurality implied in “not . . . of one” as a duality of parties and understands the verse as emphasizing the one-sided nature of the promise. Her the thought is that while the very idea of mediation involved in the giving of the law indicates that it is of the nature of a contract between two parties, both of whom have to fulfill its terms for it to be valid, the promise is a unilateral disposition dependent solely on God’s sovereign grace. . . .

Thus far, then, in his answer to the question regarding the purpose of the law Paul has pointed to its negative function, its limited validity, its mediated communication, and its conditional nature–all of which show, by implication if not by explicit statement, that the later dispensation of law is inferior to the original covenant of promise. (The Epistle to the Galatians, NICNT, pp. 161-162, on Gal. 3:20)

The second question, “Is the law then opposed to the promises of God?” (v. 21a), is answered in the negative. “Certainly not!” For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would indeed come through the law” (v. 21b). The true remedy for the power of sin is “faith in Jesus Christ.” “But the scripture has imprisoned all things under the power of sin, so that what was promised through faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.” (v. 22).

In answer to the second question–the law is not opposed to the promises of God. It is about righteousness even though it cannot “make alive” (v. 21). The true remedy for the power of sin is “faith in Jesus Christ” (v. 22).

John 3:16-21 (Episcopal and Lutheran Traditions)

16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.

17 "Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God. 19 And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. 20 For all who do evil hate the light and do not come to the light, so that their deeds may not be exposed. 21 But those who do what is true come to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that their deeds have been done in God." (John 3:16-21, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from December 18, 2005 (the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two):

The following is repeated here from Thursday, February 17, 2005:

John 3:16, the “Gospel in a nutshell,” has a paragraph of its own in the New Revised Standard Version. Raymond E. Brown, sees connections backward–“the theme of Jesus’ death” (vv. 14-15)--and forward: “If 16 assures us that the purpose of the Father’s giving the Son in Incarnation and death was eternal life for the believer, 17 paraphrases this in terms of salvation for the world” (John, Anchor Bible 29, 147). Brown also notes similarities in “the dualistic vocabulary of vss. 19-21 (light/darkness; practicing wickedness/doing truth)” to the dualism of Qumran texts (i.e. Dead Sea Scrolls): “According as man’s inheritance is in truth and righteousness, so he hates evil; but insofar as his heritage is in the portion of perversity, so he abominates truth” (1QS iv 24, cited by Brown, p. 148).

If there is a twofold reaction to Jesus in John, we must emphasize that the reaction is very much dependent on man’s own choice, a choice that is influenced by his way of life, by whether his deeds are wicked or are done in God (vss. 20-21). There is a consistency in the two sides of the dualism: evildoers are disbelievers, while good works and faith go together. Thus, there is no determinism in John as there seems to be in some passages of the Qumran scrolls. . . . the idea is that Jesus brings out what a man really is and the real nature of his life. Jesus is a penetrating light that provokes judgment by making it apparent what a man is. The one who turns away is not an occasional sinner but one who “practices wickedness”; it is not that he cannot see the light, but that he hates the light. (Brown, pp. 148-149)

We need not find ourselves in that last group. “But these [signs/this book] are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name” (Jn. 20:31).

On March 1, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the First Sunday of Lent, Year One), comments were repeated from February 17, 2005, two years earlier (Thursday in the week of the First Sunday of Lent, Year One), which were repeated on January 17, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Second Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), and on August 14, 2006 (Monday of the week of the Sunday closest to August 10, Year Two), and are repeated again here:

John 3:16, the “Gospel in a nutshell,” has a paragraph of its own in the New Revised Standard Version. Raymond E. Brown, sees connections backward–“the theme of Jesus’ death” (vv. 14-15)--and forward: “If 16 assures us that the purpose of the Father’s giving the Son in Incarnation and death was eternal life for the believer, 17 paraphrases this in terms of salvation for the world” (Brown, p.147). Brown also notes similarities in “the dualistic vocabulary of vss. 19-21 (light/darkness; practicing wickedness/doing truth)” to the dualism of Qumran texts (i.e. Dead Sea Scrolls): “According as man’s inheritance is in truth and righteousness, so he hates evil; but insofar as his heritage is in the portion of perversity, so he abominates truth” (1QS iv 24, cited by Brown, p. 148).

If there is a twofold reaction to Jesus in John, we must emphasize that the reaction is very much dependent on man’s own choice, a choice that is influenced by his way of life, by whether his deeds are wicked or are done in God (vss. 20-21). There is a consistency in the two sides of the dualism: evildoers are disbelievers, while good works and faith go together. Thus, there is no determinism in John as there seems to be in some passages of the Qumran scrolls. . . . the idea is that Jesus brings out what a man really is and the real nature of his life. Jesus is a penetrating light that provokes judgment by making it apparent what a man is. The one who turns away is not an occasional sinner but one who “practices wickedness”; it is not that he cannot see the light, but that he hates the light. (Brown, pp. 148-149)

We need not find ourselves in that last group. “But these [signs/this book] are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name” (Jn. 20:31).

Luke 1:67-80 (Presbyterian Tradition)

67 Then his father Zechariah was filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke this prophecy:

68 “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,

for he has looked favorably on his people and redeemed them.

69 He has raised up a mighty savior for us

in the house of his servant David,

70 as he spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets from of old,

71 that we would be saved from our enemies and from the hand of all who hate us.

72 Thus he has shown the mercy promised to our ancestors,

and has remembered his holy covenant,

73 the oath that he swore to our ancestor Abraham,

to grant us74 that we, being rescued from the hands of our enemies,

might serve him without fear,75 in holiness and righteousness

before him all our days.

76 And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High;

for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways,

77 to give knowledge of salvation to his people

by the forgiveness of their sins.

78 By the tender mercy of our God,

the dawn from on high will break upon us,

79 to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death,

to guide our feet into the way of peace.”

80 The child grew and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness until the day he appeared publicly to Israel. (Luke 1:67-80, NRSV)

On December 24, 2006 (the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year One; Presbyterian ref. for Dec. 24), comments were repeated from December 24, 2004, two years ago (the references designated for Dec. 24, Year One), and they are repeated again here:

Perhaps more than he knew or fully comprehended, Zechariah, in his Benedictus (“Blessed be . . .”), anticipated the redemption, restoration and blessed future of God’s people, fulfilling the promise,

            the oath that he swore to our ancestor Abraham,

               to grant us that we, being rescued f rom the hands of our enemies,

            might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness

               before him all our days. (Lk. 1:73-75)

This will happen because

            He [the Lord God of Israel] has raised up a mighty savior for us

               in the house of his servant David,

            as he spike through the mouth of his holy prophets from of old,

               that we would be saved from our enemies

                  and from the hand of all who hate us. (vv. 69-71)

He will give us salvation, “the forgiveness of . . . sins” (v. 77), light for “those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death,” and peace (v. 79).

Matthew 1:1-17, Presbyterian Tradition

The Genealogy of Jesus the Messiah (Ruth 4.18-22; 1 Chr 2.1-15; Lk 3.23-38)

1:1 An account of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 3 and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Aram, 4 and Aram the father of Aminadab, and Aminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon, 5 and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of King David.

And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, 8 and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, 9 and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 10 and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amosthe father of Josiah, 11 and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.

12 And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Salathiel, and Salathiel the father of Zerubbabel, 13 and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, 14 and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, 15 and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, 16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called the Messiah.

17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations. (Matthew 1:1-17, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from December 23, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two; Presbyterian ref. for December 23).

Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus presents a balanced sequence of fourteen generations each “from Abraham to David,” from David to the deportation to Babylon,” and “from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah” (Mt. 1:17). Elwyn E. Tilden and Bruce M. Metzger note that, “The device of making three groups of names is an aid to memory. Fourteen is the sum of the numeric value of the three letters in the name David in Hebrew (DWD)” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., on Mt. 1:17). Earlier they note “the omission of Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah,” “for the sake of the pattern,” and “consistent with Jewish practice in forming genealogies” (Tilden & Metzger on v. 8; cf. J. Andrew Overman, NOAB, 3^rd ed., on Mt. 1:17).

It has been noted that prior to Mary, four women are mentioned in the genealogy, which otherwise names only the fathers. The four women mentioned, Tamar (Gen. 38), Rahab (Josh. 2), Ruth and “the wife of Uriah,” that is, Bathsheba, have been considered marginal by some, but Overman says, “Each acted independently, in some cases scandalously, at critical junctures in Israel’s history to ensure the continuation of the Davidic line” (Overman on Mt. 1:3-6). Rosemary M. Dowsett notes that this genealogy is not “sanitized,” but includes “saint and sinner, illustrious king and obscure nobody.” She adds, “Yet even more intriguing is the inclusion of five women, five mothers, each of whom, in a beautiful way, is a sign of the grace of the gospel. God’s good news for sinners” (The IVP Women’s Bible Commentary, 521, on Mt. 1:1-17). After briefly summarizing the biblical stories about each, she summarizes:

What is Matthew doing in including these women in the genealogy of Jesus? He is celebrating the thread of God’s grace in the Old Testament, a thread that is quite as much in evidence in the lives of women as in those of men. He is showing how God turns tragedy into triumph, even as he does with his Son. No one, man or woman, is condemned beyond hope, no one need feel so dirty, so worthless, so powerless, that there is no possibility of being drawn within the circle of the Lord’s compassion and merciful concern. Women as well as men are of such immeasurable value to him that he will go to any lengths to give us a hope and a future, to bring good from evil, to give the grace of a new beginning with the slate of the past wiped clean. (Dowsett, p. 522)

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net