Hosea 11:1-9

God’s Compassion Despite Israel’s Ingratitude

11:1 When Israel was a child, I loved him,

and out of Egypt I called my son.

2 The more I called them,

the more they went from me;

they kept sacrificing to the Baals,

and offering incense to idols.

3 Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk,

I took them up in my arms;

but they did not know that I healed them.

4 I led them with cords of human kindness,

with bands of love.

I was to them like those

who lift infants to their cheeks.

I bent down to them and fed them.

5 They shall return to the land of Egypt,

and Assyria shall be their king,

because they have refused to return to me.

6 The sword rages in their cities,

it consumes their oracle-priests,

and devours because of their schemes.

7 My people are bent on turning away from me.

To the Most High they call,

but he does not raise them up at all.

8 How can I give you up, Ephraim?

How can I hand you over, O Israel?

How can I make you like Admah?

How can I treat you like Zeboiim?

My heart recoils within me;

my compassion grows warm and tender.

9 I will not execute my fierce anger;

I will not again destroy Ephraim;

for I am God and no mortal,

the Holy One in your midst,

and I will not come in wrath. (Hosea 11:1-9, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated with editing and supplement from October 7, 2006 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two):

Speaking for God, the prophet says, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, / and out of Egypt I called my son” (Hos. 11:1). But without dwelling on the details of the exodus, he moves on to Israel's rebellion. “The more I called them, / the more they went from me; / they kept sacrificing to the Baals, / and offering incense to idols” (v. 2). The parent-child relationship is elaborated. “Yet it was I [the LORD] who taught Ephraim to walk, / I took them up in my arms; / but they did not know that I healed them” (v. 3). The LORD “led them with cords of human kindness, / with bands of love” (v. 4a, b). He “was to them like those / who lift infants to their cheeks.” He “bent down to them and fed them” (v. 4c, d, 3). Ehud Ben Zvi observes that “The father-child relationship is used often in Prophetic books as a metaphor for the relation between God and Israel. The child is often stubborn and rebellious and is chastised by the father, but the father nonetheless loves the child” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Hos. 11:1-11).

Hosea continues by describing the consequences of their rebellion. “They shall return to the land of Egypt,” he says (v. 5a), reminding us of the parallel sometimes pointed out between the earlier bondage in Egypt and the later captivities imposed first by the Assyrians on north Israel, and then by the Babylonians on Judah. Note the reference to deliverance from Babylon and the comparison with the earlier exodus (e.g. Isa. 51:9-11 and frequently in that part of Isaiah). For Hosea, returning to “Egypt” becomes submission to the king of Assyria (Hos. 11:5b) “because they have refused to return to me” (v. 5c). War comes to Israel as “the sword rages in their cities,” consuming “their oracle-priests” as it “devours because of their schemes” (v. 6). Ben Zvi says,

As in the case of the husband-wife metaphor, many of today's readers may find the image of a father severely punishing his son troublesome, even if the father is presented as loving. The paternal metaphor, however, was commonly used in the ancient Near East to express the relation between ruler and ruled, sovereign and subject. It is not incongruous for prophets to mix metaphors, such as Israel as God's wife and as God's child. (ibid.).

“My people,” says the LORD–or is it the prophet?–“are bent on turning away from me” (v. 7a). “To the Most High they call, / but he [3rd person verb form!] does not raise them up at all” (v. 7b, c NRSV). The Jewish translation is, “For my people persists / In its defection from Me; / When it is summoned upward, / It does not rise at all” (Hos. 11:7 NJPS 1985, 1999). The meaning of this verse is called “difficult” in text notes b (NRSV) and d (NJPS). The Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia [BHS], is probably closest to the original reading in its suggestion that one should probably read (xUh) xr!q4y9 lf1B1-lx@v4 (w^e’el ba‘al yiqrā’ [hû’]), “and unto Baal they call,” for Uh xur!q4y9 lf1-lx@v4 (w^e’el-‘al yiqrā’u hû). Compare Hosea’s references to Baal (2:8, 123, 16, 17; 9:10; 11:2; 13:1). The difficulty of the Hebrew text here is illustrated by the different Septuagint reading:

kai; oJ lao;V aujtou: ejpikremavmenoV ejk th:V katoikivaV aujtou:, kai; oJ qeo;V ejpi; ta ;tivmia aujtou: qumwqhvsetai, kai; ouj mh; uJywvsh;/ aujtovn (kai ho laos autou epikremamenos ek tēs katoikias autou, kai ho theos epi ta timia autou thymōthēsetai, kai ou my hypsōsē auton), “And his people are threatened in (from) their dwelling, and God is angered at their valued things and will by no means exalt them.” (Hos. 11:7 LXX)

The LORD is the loving parent, but he must punish his wayward children. “How can I give you up, Ephraim?” the LORD asks (v. 8a), a question certainly from the LORD, whether verse 7 is from the LORD or from the prophet. “How can I hand you over, O Israel?” (v. 7b). The LORD almost says, “This hurts me more than you.” “My heart recoils within me,” he says; “my compassion grows warm and tender” (v. 8e, f). It seems that the LORD changes his mind. “I will not execute my fierce anger,” he says; “I will not again destroy Ephraim” (v. 9a, b). He is “God and no mortal, / the Holy One in your midst” (v. 9c, d). I will not come in wrath,” he says (v. 9e). Gregory Mobley says, “At the pivotal point of this soliloquy, divine compassion overcomes divine anger” (NOAB, 3rd ed., 2001, on Hos. 11:8-9).

Hosea 5:1-7 (Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions; this passages is not included in the current Book of Common Prayer Daily Office Lectionary series):

5:1 Hear this, O priests!

Give heed, O house of Israel!

Listen, O house of the king!

For the judgment pertains to you;

for you have been a snare at Mizpah,

and a net spread upon Tabor,

2 and a pit dug deep in Shittim;

but I will punish all of them.

3 I know Ephraim,

and Israel is not hidden from me;

for now, O Ephraim, you have played the whore;

Israel is defiled.

4 Their deeds do not permit them

to return to their God.

For the spirit of whoredom is within them,

and they do not know the LORD.

5 Israel’s pride testifies against him;

Ephraim stumbles in his guilt;

Judah also stumbles with them.

6 With their flocks and herds they shall go

to seek the LORD,

but they will not find him;

he has withdrawn from them.

7 They have dealt faithlessly with the LORD;

for they have borne illegitimate children.

Now the new moon shall devour them along with their fields. (Hosea 5:1-7, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from October 7, 2006 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two):

At the outset of this reading, the LORD, speaking through the prophet addresses Israel's leaders. “Hear this, O priests!” (Hos. 5:1a). But he includes the “house of Israel” (v. 1b), before addressing the king (v. 1c). The pronoun “you” (v. 1d, e) is plural: Mk@l! (lāchem), cf. the plural verb ending in Mt@yy9h$ (h^eyîtem, “you [plural] have been”). And so it includes all of the above, so to speak. The LORD knows Ephraim and Israel (v. 3a, b); Ephraim has “played the whore,” and “Israel is defiled” (v. 3c, d). They are not fit to return to God because of “the spirit of whoredom” that “is within them,” and because “they do not know the LORD” (v. 4).

The prophet claims that “Israel's pride testifies against him,” and that “Ephraim stumbles in his guilt” (v. 5a, b). The added reference to Judah also stumbling (v. 5c) is not incidental, according to Ehud Ben Zvi, but rather, “References to Judah are not minor parenthetical remarks, but major markers of where the interest of the present book lies (see, among others, 1:7; 3:5; 4:15; 5:5, 10, 12, 14; 6:11; 12:3)” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Hos. 5:5). They [Israel and Judah?] will go “with their flocks and herds . . . to seek the LORD, / but they will not find him; / [for] he has withdrawn from them” (v. 6). “Because of their disloyalty, the LORD will not be available to the people at festivals” (Gregory Mobley, NOAB, 3rd ed., 2001, on Hos. 5:5-7). Because “they have dealt faithlessly with the LORD” (v. 7a), “Now the new moon [one of the festivals] shall devour them along with their fields” (v. 7c). Hosea continues to paint a very dark picture of Israel's condition, which, as Ben Zvi reminds us (above), is later applied to Judah.

Acts 22:17-29

Paul Sent to the Gentiles

17 “After I had returned to Jerusalem and while I was praying in the temple, I fell into a trance 18 and saw Jesus saying to me, ‘Hurry and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about me.’ 19 And I said, ‘Lord, they themselves know that in every synagogue I imprisoned and beat those who believed in you. 20 And while the blood of your witness Stephen was shed, I myself was standing by, approving and keeping the coats of those who killed him.’ 21 Then he said to me, ‘Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’ “

Paul and the Roman Tribune

22 Up to this point they listened to him, but then they shouted, “Away with such a fellow from the earth! For he should not be allowed to live.” 23 And while they were shouting, throwing off their cloaks, and tossing dust into the air, 24 the tribune directed that he was to be brought into the barracks, and ordered him to be examined by flogging, to find out the reason for this outcry against him. 25 But when they had tied him up with thongs, Paul said to the centurion who was standing by, “Is it legal for you to flog a Roman citizen who is uncondemned?” 26 When the centurion heard that, he went to the tribune and said to him, “What are you about to do? This man is a Roman citizen.” 27 The tribune came and asked Paul, “Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?” And he said, “Yes.” 28 The tribune answered, “It cost me a large sum of money to get my citizenship.” Paul said, “But I was born a citizen.” 29 Immediately those who were about to examine him drew back from him; and the tribune also was afraid, for he realized that Paul was a Roman citizen and that he had bound him. (Acts 22:17-29, NRSV)

On August 18, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 10, Year One), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from October 7, 2006 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two), when comments were repeated from August 13, 2005 (Saturday of the week of the Twelfth Sunday after Pentecost, Year One). The revised comments are repeated here:

Paul’s speech of defense at the temple has completed the account of his former life in Judaism (Acts 22:3-5), and his conversion and call to mission (vv. 6-16, in yesterday’s reading). The speech continues with his report of a vision, after his return to Jerusalem, and while “praying in the temple” (v.17a). “I fell into a trance,” he says (v. 17b), “and saw Jesus saying to me, ‘Hurry and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about me’ “ (v. 18). In the vision, according to Luke, Paul says he responded to the Lord by recounting his pre-Christian opposition and persecution of the followers of Jesus. “And I said, ‘Lord, they themselves know that in every synagogue I imprisoned and beat those who believed in you. And while the blood of your witness Stephen was shed, I myself was standing by, approving and keeping the coats of those who killed him’ “ (vv. 19-20), both points that Luke has emphasized earlier (8:1, 3; 9:1-2). But in the vision, the Lord said to Paul, “Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles” (22:21). As Christopher R. Matthews observes, “The report of the vision is not given in the other conversion accounts [but] Paul’s commission to the Gentiles is [here] significantly located in the temple” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Acts 22:17-21).

Loveday Alexander comments on the significance of this vision being located in the temple, and adds that the vision:

gives him a direct commission to go ‘far away to the Gentiles’ (v. 21). This is more explicit (and closer to Gal. 1:16) than 9:15-16, where Ananias is told only that Saul has been chosen to bring the name of Christ ‘before Gentiles and kings and the people of Israel’ (a promise that seems in context to have more to do with martyrdom than with preaching. (Loveday Alexander, The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, pp. 1055-1056, Acts 22:1-21)

Paul holds the attention of the crowd up to the point where he speaks of his commission to go “far away to the Gentiles” (v. 21). But the crowd’s renewed hostility, “Away with such a fellow from the earth! For he should not be allowed to live” (v. 22), and their riotous “shouting, throwing off their cloaks, and tossing dust into the air” (v. 23), compel the tribune to intervene again. The tribune “directed that he [Paul] was to be brought into the barracks, and ordered him to be examined by flogging, to find out the reason for this outcry against him” (v. 24). Apparently, Paul could expect no leniency from the Romans, but his claim of Roman citizenship (v. 25) spares him the flogging and causes some fear for the tribune who had bound him (v. 29). “ But when they had tied him up with thongs, Paul said to the centurion who was standing by, ‘Is it legal for you to flog a Roman citizen who is uncondemned?’ “ (v. 25). “Paul’s question is rhetorical,” says Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “for both Paul and the soldiers would have known the answer” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Acts 22:25). So “the centurion went to the tribune and said to him, ‘What are you about to do? This man is a Roman citizen’ “ (v. 26). When the tribune confirms that by asking Paul (v. 27), he says with some amazement, “It cost me a large sum of money to get my citizenship” (v. 28a), to which Paul replies, “But I was born a citizen” (v. 28b). So the examination of Paul is halted, as “those who were about to examine him drew back from him; and the tribune also was afraid, for he realized that Paul was a Roman citizen and that he had bound him” (v. 29). Matthews notes the following: “That Paul is a Roman citizen is disclosed at the last moment . . . In the early part of Claudius’s reign [A.D. 41-54], citizenship was often purchased for a large sum” (op. cit., on vv. 25-29). Matthews adds, however, that “The scene increases Paul’s status for readers of Acts and reinforces the theme of the compatibility of Christianity and Roman life; there is nothing in Paul’s letters to indicate that he was a Roman citizen” (ibid.). On the other hand, Alexander, who is willing to see Luke as supplying some detail, for example, “attribution of direct speech” in his account of events, defends his “hotly disputed” claim to Roman citizenship:

Paul’s claim to be free-born (v. 28) means that his status goes back at least to his father’s generation, possibly earlier, to the period of the civil wars, when Roman generals granted citizenship to a number of individuals and associations in the Greek East who had supported their cause. The contrast with the tribune (whose name we discover in 23:26 to be Claudius Lysias) may be a sly dig at the growing laxity of citizenship grants, which were widely reported to be freely available for money in the time of Claudius (Dio Cassius, 60. 17.5-6). But the essential point is that Luke’s whole plot falls apart at this point without Paul’s Roman citizenship, which is the motive force to get him to Rome; it is hard to imagine that Luke’s readers, even as late as the 80s or 90s would not have been familiar with the broad outlines of the story. . . . [so] it is not plausible to suppose that the whole episode of Paul’s appeal to Caesar is free invention: and the appeal is only possible if Paul had citizen status. (op. cit., p. 1056, on Acts 22:22-29)

Luke 6:27-38

Love for Enemies (Mt 5.33-48)

27 “But I say to you that listen, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you; and if anyone takes away your goods, do not ask for them again. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

32 “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. 35 But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return. Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

Judging Others (Mt 7.1-5)

37 “Do not judge, and you will not be judged; do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap; for the measure you give will be the measure you get back.” (Luke 6:27-38, NRSV)

On May 2, 2007 (Wednesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Easter, Year One), comments were repeated from October 7, 2006 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two), when they were repeated from April 20, 2005 (Wednesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Easter, Year One). The comments are repeated again here with editing and supplement, and with comments on not judging others and the Golden Rule from April 25, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Fifth Sunday of Easter, Year Two), when the Gospel reading was Matthew 7:1-12.

The following table compares teachings in today’s portion of Luke’s Sermon on the Plain with parallel passages in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. The framework of the “Six Antitheses” in Matthew, chapter five, “You have heard that . . . but I say . . .” (Mt. 5:21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43), is absent from Luke’s version, but much of the content is present. It is clear that Jesus taught that we should love our enemies, and do good for people who cannot, or will not, respond in kind.

On Loving One’s Enemy

In their respective versions of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount/Plain, both Matthew and Luke present the principle of loving one’s enemy. Luke’s conjunction “but” (ajlla, alla) sets it in contrast to the last of the “woes”: “Woe to you when all speak well of you, for that is what their ancestors did to the false prophets” (Lk. 6:26). “But (ajlla, alla) I say to you that listen,” says Jesus, “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you” (vv. 27-28; cf. Rom. 12:14). Matthew puts this principle in the framework of the sixth antitheses (see above). Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’ ” (Mt. 5:43). J. Andrew Overman notes observes that “love your neighbor quotes Lev. 19:18 (see Ex. 23:4-5), but hate your enemy is not command there” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Mt. 5:43). Later, in response to the question about the greatest commandment, Jesus cites Deuteronomy 6:5 about loving God “with all your heart . . .” (Mk. 12:30; Mt. 22:37; Lk. 10:27a) and in addition cites Leviticus 19:18 about loving one’s neighbor as oneself (Mk. 12:31; Mt. 22:39; Lk. 10:27b). While Luke’s statement of the principle itself is a little more elaborate, Matthew’s version is more succinct. “But ( dev, de, a weaker adversative particle than Luke’s ajlla, alla) I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (v. 44). Matthew adds a motive, “so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous” (Mt. 5:45; cf. Eph. 5:1). Dennis C. Duling says, “the author [Matthew] usually contrasts the fate of the good and the evil; see 3:12; 7:11, 16-20; 12:33-35; 20:15; 22:10; 25:21-26)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 5:45). Some of Duling’s references clearly refer to the difference between the ultimate fate–at God’s final judgment–the good and the evil (esp. 25:21-26), whereas in the present context, Jesus points to the fact that, in this present life, the evil often fare as well or better than the good.. In a later parable, both are even invited to the king’s wedding banquet for his son (22:1-14, cf. v. 10, cited by Duling), though there a distinction was made between having or not having “a wedding robe” (vv. 11-14).

On Nonretaliation

In Luke’s sermon, Jesus moves on to the principle of nonretaliation. “If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt” (Lk. 6:29). In Matthew, this principle is again set in the antithesis framework, the fifth–thus moving back in comparison with Luke’s sequence. In Matthew’s version, Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But ( dev, de) I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer’ ” (Mt. 5:38-39a). The example is presented with the stronger adversative particle, “But (ajll’, all’, short for ajllav, alla, before a vowel) if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also” (v. 39b). In the second example, Luke describes a kind of mugging, “and from anyone who takes away your coat ( iJmavtion, himation [the outer garment]) do not withhold even your shirt (citwvn, chitōn [‘tunic, shirt, a garment warn next to the skin, and by both sexes, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 1957, 1965, s.v. citwvn, chitōn’])” (Lk. 6:29b). Matthew’s comparable example envisions a lawsuit, “and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat (citwvn, chitōn [the ‘shirt’!]), give your cloak ( iJmavtion, himation [the outer garment]) as well” (Mt. 5:40). In a lawsuit, as opposed to a mugging, one could take the shirt first and then the coat. Matthew adds another example, “and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile” (v. 41). According to Overman, “soldiers could compel civilians to carry their baggage ([Mt.] 27:32); going the second mile would perhaps spare another from such compulsion” (op. cit., on v. 41). In a further example, the first part seems identical in English, “Give to everyone who begs from you” (Mt. 5:42a; Lk. 6:30a NRSV). But there are some subtle differences in the tree texts. The word “everyone” in Luke translates pantiv (panti, dative case of pa:V, pas), which means “to everyone.” Matthew lacks this word, and has been translated, “Give to the one who asks you” (Mt. 5:42a TNIV). The imperative verbs, “Give” (Mt. 5:42a; Lk. 6:30a) differ in Greek accordingly. Matthew’s verb is dovV (dos), the aorist imperative of divdwmi (didōmi), which simply means “give” and fits the simple reference to “the one who asks you.” Luke’s verb is divdou (didou), the present tense imperative of divdwmi (didōmi), which includes the idea of continued or repeated giving, “make a habit of giving,” we might say, which corresponds to Luke’s “to everyone who asks” (Lk. 6:30).

The injunction to give to the one who asks continues. According to Luke, Jesus says, “if anyone takes away your goods [a simple case of robbery?], do not ask for them again” (Lk. 6:30b). Matthew’s version instructs us to “not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you” (Mt. 5:42b). Does this reflect Matthew’s in legal matters (cf. v. 40 and comments above; also his reference to the value for Christian faith of a scribe = lawyer? 13:52)? The contrast in the tense of imperative verbs continues, with Matthew using the simple, or undefined, aorist tense, mh; ajpostrafh:/V (mē apostraphēs, “do not refuse,” whereas Luke uses the continued or repeated action present tense, mh; ajpaivtei (mē apaitei), “do not ask [for them] again.” Luke does not misrepresent what Jesus has said, but perhaps he inflects it some addressing the ongoing Christian lifestyle needs and interests of his Christian community.

On the Golden Rule

In Luke’s sermon, Jesus moves next to the Golden Rule (Lk. 6:31), which comes much later in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 7:12). Luke’s version is very brief. “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” In Matthew’s version, Jesus presents it as the epitome of “the law and the prophets” (Mt. 7:12). Parallels to this have been found in other cultures, including that of ancient China, for example, “Try your best to treat others as you would wish to be treated yourself, and you will find that this is the shortest way to benevolence” (Confucianism, Mencius, VII.A.4, cited by World Scripture, The Golden Rule http://www.unification.net/ws/theme015.htm, accessed again Oct. 3, 2008). Hillel is credited with a version of the Golden Rule. It is said that

A certain heathen came to Shammai and said to him, ‘Make me a proselyte, on condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot.’ Thereupon he repulsed him with the rod which was in his hand. When he went to Hillel, he said to him, ‘What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor: that is the whole Torah; all the rest of it is commentary; go and learn.’ (Talmud, Shabbat 31a, cited by ibid., accessed again Oct. 3, 2008)

There are many who would tell us how to live. I believe that Christianity provides a form of redemption that brings the power to live in that way.

On Being Perfect/Merciful

Leading up to the command to be perfect/merciful, which returns to the theme of loving one’s enemy, Jesus asks a series of rhetorical questions. “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you?” (Lk. 6:32a). Matthew asks “ . . . what reward do you have?” (Mt. 5:46a), still thinking in legal terms? According to Luke, Jesus puts down that attitude–loving [only] those who love you, “For even sinners love those who love them” (Lk. 6;32b). Instead of “sinners,” Matthew’s rhetorical question refers to “the tax collectors”: “Do not even the tax collectors (oiJ telw:nai, hoi telōnai) do the same?” (Mt. 5:46b). Since Matthew’s version is more specific in terms of Jesus’ setting and context, it is likely closer to what Jesus said, and generalized by Luke. A similar view applies to the next saying. “And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?” (Mt. 5:47). Luke again generalizes, substituting “sinners” for Matthew’s “Gentiles”: “If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same” (Lk. 6:33). Now Luke includes a reference to lending, not included by Matthew. “If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again” (v. 34). Now Luke recapitulates: “But love your enemies (cf. v. 27; Mt. 5:43-44; Lk. 6:32; Mt. 5:46), do good (Lk. 6:27, 33), and lend, expecting nothing in return (v. 34; Mt. 5:42). Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked (cf. Mt. 5:45)” (Lk. 6:35).

After that comprehensive recapitulation by Jesus in Luke’s version, the admonition to be merciful is simple and direct. “Be merciful (Givnesqe oijktivrmoneV, Ginesthe oiktirmones), just as (kaqwvV, kathōs) your Father is merciful (oijktivrmwn, oiktirmōn)” (Lk. 6:36). Matthew’s version is similar but with differences in wording. It comes as an inference, “therefore”(ou\n, oun), from the rhetorical questions about what even tax collectors and Gentiles would do. “Be perfect (  [Esesqe . . . uJmei:V tevleioi, Esesthe . . . hymeis teleioi), therefore, as your heavenly (oJ oujravnioV, ho ouranios, not in Luke’s version) Father is perfect (tevleioV, teleios)” (Mt. 5:48). In the saying itself, the significant difference is between “merciful” in Luke and “perfect” in Matthew. Of these differences T. W. Manson says that “perfect” is an Old Testament term used of human character and behavior (e.g. Noah, Gen. 6:9, “blameless [‘perfect’ KJV, Mym9T!, tāmîm, Heb.] in his generation” and Job, Job 1:1, “blameless [‘perfect,’ KJV, MT!, tām, Heb.] and upright [rw!y!, yāshār],” cf. 1:8; 2:3). On the other hand, the term “merciful” is almost exclusively applied to God in the Old Testament. Because God is the standard of comparison here, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt. 5:48), “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Lk. 6:36), Manson concludes that Jesus used the term “merciful,” and Matthew interpreted it with a term that his (mainly Jewish or Jewish Christian) audience would understand (The Teaching of Jesus, 1^st paperback ed.,1063). In a context where we are asked to love the unlovable and do good and lend with no expectation of return, “merciful” is an apt description. For modern persons who take “perfectionism” to be a neurosis, we may need to do some interpreting of our own.

            On Judging Others

To Matthew’s brief injunction, “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged” (Mt. 7:1, Luke’s parallel adds “do not condemn, and you will not be condemned.” and “Forgive, and you will be forgiven” (Lk. 6:37). Both Gospels have the passive voice in the motive for not judging, “so that you may not be judged” (Mt.), “and you will not be judged” (Lk.). It has been suggested that the passive voice is a Jewish circumlocution, one of various ways to avoid saying God’s name. The meaning would be, “Do not judge, so that God will not judge you!” The point is graphically illustrated by the reference to the log and the speck (Mt. 7:3-5; Lk. 6:39-42).

The principle of getting back what one gives is expressed in both Gospels, but with a difference. “For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get” (Mt. 7:2), says Jesus in Matthew’s Gospel, but after advising forgiveness and generous giving, Luke’s version expresses the principle in positive terms: “A good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap; for the measure you give will be the measure you get back” (Lk. 6:38). And before Luke’s version moves on to the speck in one’s eye, a short parable is presented: “He also told them a parable: "Can a blind person guide a blind person? Will not both fall into a pit? A disciple is not above the teacher, but everyone who is fully qualified will be like the teacher” (Lk. 6:39-40; cf. Mt. 15:14; 10:24-25). But both versions share the advice to remove the log from one’s own eye before attempting to remove the speck from the neighbor’s eye (Mt. 7:3-5; Lk. 6:41-42).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net