Jeremiah 36:11-26

Baruch Reads the Scroll in the Palace

11 When Micaiah son of Gemariah son of Shaphan heard all the words of the LORD from the scroll, 12 he went down to the king's house, into the secretary's chamber; and all the officials were sitting there: Elishama the secretary, Delaiah son of Shemaiah, Elnathan son of Achbor, Gemariah son of Shaphan, Zedekiah son of Hananiah, and all the officials. 13 And Micaiah told them all the words that he had heard, when Baruch read the scroll in the hearing of the people. 14 Then all the officials sent Jehudi son of Nethaniah son of Shelemiah son of Cushi to say to Baruch, "Bring the scroll that you read in the hearing of the people, and come." So Baruch son of Neriah took the scroll in his hand and came to them. 15 And they said to him, "Sit down and read it to us." So Baruch read it to them. 16 When they heard all the words, they turned to one another in alarm, and said to Baruch, "We certainly must report all these words to the king." 17 Then they questioned Baruch, 'Tell us now, how did you write all these words? Was it at his dictation?" 18 Baruch answered them, "He dictated all these words to me, and I wrote them with ink on the scroll." 19 Then the officials said to Baruch, "Go and hide, you and Jeremiah, and let no one know where you are.". (Jeremiah 36:11-19, NRSV)

Jehoiakim Burns the Scroll

20 Leaving the scroll in the chamber of Elishama the secretary, they went to the court of the king; and they reported all the words to the king. 21 Then the king sent Jehudi to get the scroll, and he took it from the chamber of Elishama the secretary; and Jehudi read it to the king and all the officials who stood beside the king. 22 Now the king was sitting in his winter apartment (it was the ninth month), and there was a fire burning in the brazier before him. 23 As Jehudi read three or four columns, the king would cut them off with a penknife and throw them into the fire in the brazier, until the entire scroll was consumed in the fire that was in the brazier. 24 Yet neither the king, nor any of his servants who heard all these words, was alarmed, nor did they tear their garments. 25 Even when Elnathan and Delaiah and Gemariah urged the king not to burn the scroll, he would not listen to them. 26 And the king commanded Jerahmeel the king's son and Seraiah son of Azriel and Shelemiah son of Abdeel to arrest the secretary Baruch and the prophet Jeremiah. But the LORD hid them. (Jeremiah 36:20-26, NRSV)

On October 15, 2007 (Monday in the week of the Twentieth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to October 12, Year One), comments were repeated from October 10, 2005 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 12, Year One). They are repeated again here with editing and supplement:

On Baruch’s Reading the Scroll to the Royal Officials

As we learned yesterday, on the occasion of a public fast, Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe read Jeremiah’s words of judgment to the people assembled at the temple in Jerusalem (Jer. 36:9-10). Jeremiah did not read the words himself because he was not permitted to enter the temple (v. 5). Today’s reading begins by saying that “when Micaiah son of Gemariah son of Shaphan heard all the words of the LORD from the scroll” (v. 11) he reported this to the royal officials. As noted yesterday, Marvin A. Sweeney says, “Gemariah son of Shaphan is a son of Josiah’s secretary (2 Kings 24:3) and brother of Ahikam son of Shaphan who interceded on the prophet’s behalf at his sedition trial (26:24). The scroll would have been read to him first as a potential ally among the scribes” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on v. 10). And Mark E. Biddle agrees that Gemariah was “a friend of Jeremiah” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Jer. 36:5-10). Micaiah, we are told, went down to the king’s house, into the secretary's chamber; and all the officials were sitting there: Elishama the secretary, Delaiah son of Shemaiah, Elnathan son of Achbor, Gemariah son of Shaphan, Zedekiah son of Hananiah, and all the officials” (v. 12). Sweeney summarizes what is known about these individuals.

Elishama is otherwise unknown in the Bible, although his name appears in bullae [seals] from the scribe’s house (see 32:12n.). [In the note on 32:12, Sweeney says, ‘The name Baruch son of Neriah appears on a clay bulla found inside a house in the city of Jerusalem that was destroyed during the Babylonian siege, and many believe that this bulla, which was originally used in ancient Israel to seal a document, belonged to the same individual.’] Delaiah son of Shemaiah is otherwise unknown. Elnathan son of Achor would presumably be hostile to Jeremiah since he was sent to Egypt to fetch the prophet Uriah who was executed for sedition (26:25). He may also have been Jehoiachin’s maternal grandfather (2 Kings 24:8). The name Achbor also appears on a bullae. Zedekiah son of Hananiah is otherwise unknown, although he could be the son of the prophet Hananiah (ch. 28). (op. cit., on vv. 11-12)

At this meeting, “Micaiah told them all the words that he had heard, when Baruch read the scroll in the hearing of the people” (v. 13). For this group of officials, merely being told about what the scroll said was not enough. “Then,” we are told, “all the officials sent Jehudi son of Nethaniah son of Shelemiah son of Cushi to say to Baruch, ‘Bring the scroll that you read in the hearing of the people, and come.’ So Baruch son of Neriah took the scroll in his hand and came to them” (v. 14). Sweeney says, “Jehudi son of Nethaniah son of Shelemiah son of Cushi is otherwise unknown” (ibid., on v. 14). Upon Baruch’s arrival, “they [i.e., the officials] said to him, ‘Sit down and read it to us.’ So Baruch read it to them” (v. 15). The first response of this group to the reading of the scroll was alarm. “When they heard all the words, they turned to one another in alarm, and said to Baruch, ‘We certainly must report all these words to the king’ ” (v. 16). But they want more information. “Then,” we are told, “they questioned Baruch, ‘Tell us now, how did you write all these words? Was it at his dictation?’ ” (v. 17). On the one hand, as royal officials, they apparently felt it was their duty to inform the king. But on the other hand, they seek to protect Baruch and Jeremiah from the consequences of the king’s inevitable wrath. Baruch answers their question: “He [i.e., Jeremiah] dictated all these words to me, and I wrote them with ink on the scroll” (v. 18). And the officials’ response is, “Go and hide, you and Jeremiah, and let no one know where you are” (v. 19). “Because the prophet’s message is considered seditious,” says Sweeney, “the scribes advise Baruch to go into hiding with Jeremiah” (ibid., on v. 19). We are reminded that it was the officials who earlier spoke in Jeremiah’s behalf when he was put on trial, so to speak, for predicting the destruction of the Jerusalem temple (chap. 16, esp. vv. 16-20). Here again, within certain limits, they seek to protect Jeremiah and his scribe.

On Jehoiakim’s Burning of the Scroll

Doing their duty, so to speak, as they had determined earlier (v. 16), the royal officials inform King Jehoiakim. “Leaving the scroll in the chamber of Elishama the secretary, they went to the court of the king; and they reported all the words to the king” (v. 20). The king wants to hear the scroll first-hand, not just the second-hand report of the officials, so to speak. Jehudi seems to be an errand boy in these royal circles, for “the king sent Jehudi to get the scroll, and he took it from the chamber of Elishama the secretary; and Jehudi read it to the king and all the officials who stood beside the king” (v. 21). While we are not shown an enraged outburst from the king, Sweeney tells us that “the king’s reaction is then described. The scene shows the bit-by-bit destruction of the scroll, vividly dramatizing how offensive its message was to the king and how intent he was on getting rid of it” (ibid., on vv. 19-26). The presence of a fire is explained. “Now the king was sitting in his winter apartment (it was the ninth month [i.e., Chislev = November-December] ), and there was a fire burning in the brazier (Hxa, ’ach) before him” (v. 22). “As Jehudi read three or four columns,” says the narrator, “the king would cut them off with a penknife and throw them into the fire in the brazier (Hxa, ’ach), until the entire scroll was consumed in the fire that was in the brazier (Hxa, ’ach)” (v. 23). “Yet,” says the narrator, “neither the king, nor any of his servants who heard all these words, was alarmed, nor did they tear their garments” (v. 24). This, as Sweeney implies (above) was the surface reaction. “Even when Elnathan and Delaiah and Gemariah urged (UfG9p4h9, hifg ^e‘û) the king not to burn the scroll, he would not listen to them” (v. 25). The recent Jewish translation says “begged” for “urged” (UfG9p4h9, hifg ^e‘û) (NJPS 1985, 1999). Sweeney says, “Although Elnathan, Delaiah, and Gemariah intercede for Jeremiah and Baruch, Jehoiakim orders their arrest” (ibid., on v. 25). But rather, concludes the narrator, “the king commanded Jerahmeel the king’s son and Seraiah son of Azriel and Shelemiah son of Abdeel to arrest the secretary Baruch and the prophet Jeremiah. But the LORD hid them” (v. 26). According to Sweeney, “Jerahmeel, Seraiah son of Azriel, and Shelemiah son of Abdeel are otherwise unknown. Versions of the names Jerahmeel, Seraiah, Azriel, and Abdeel appear among the bullae from Jerusalem” (ibid., on v. 26).

Biddle suggests that the account in Jeremiah 36:1-32 “mirrors 2 Kings 22, suggesting to some scholars that it functions as a literary device contrasting the reactions of Josiah (who tore his clothing upon hearing the reading of the scroll containing God’s word) with those of Jehoiakim (who tears the scroll, itself, in an act of defiance)” (op. cit., on Jer. 32). Biddle seas this as a reason to question “the value of ch. 36 as a source for historical reconstruction,” which “is in dispute.” But this response is credible, given the circumstances. We are not told what exactly was written in the scroll, but it had to do with “all the disasters that I [the LORD] intend to do to them” (v. 3a). The LORD intended that “all of them may turn from their evil ways, so that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin” (v. 3b). That, clearly, was not Jehoiakim’s response.

1 Corinthians 13:(1-3) 4-13

Love, the Greatest of These

13:1 If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

4 Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant 5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. 7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

8 Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. 9 For we know only in part, and we prophesy only in part; 10 but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. 13 And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love. (1 Corinthians 13:[1-3] 4-13, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of March 8, 2008 (Saturday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year Two), when comments were based on comments from earlier, from October 17, 2005 (Monday in the week of the Twenty-Second Sunday after Pentecost, Year one), from April 1, 2006 (Saturday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year Two), and from October 15, 2007 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 12, Year One):

Yesterday’s comments introduced the well-known “love chapter,” 1 Corinthians 13, as, among other things, Paul’s correction of over-enthusiasm for certain gifts on the part of some members of the Corinthian Christian community. In the first three verses (1 Cor. 13:1-3), according to Ben Witherington III, who cited C. A. Holladay, Paul uses hyperbole here to challenge this over-enthusiasm. The citation from Holladay is worth repeating:

The hyperbole recasts the self-portrait so that each item is stretched to the limit of incredibility because it is recast with the assumptions of the Corinthian enthusiasts. That is, even if he were to allow his apostolic work to be shaped by the assumptions of those Corinthians who are not content with speaking, but insist the apostle must speak with eloquence surpassing human capabilities . . . , yet . . . unmotivated by agapē it would be for nought. (“1 Corinthians 13: Paul as Apostolic Paradigm,” in Early Christian Literature and the Classical Intellectual Tradition, 1979, cited by Witherington (Conflict & Community in Corinth, 1994, p. 269, on 1 Cor. 12:31b-13:13)

Paul’s statement that “love is the fulfilling of the law” (Rom. 13:10) echoes the centrality of love within the Judeo-Christian tradition, from the Shema (Deut. 6:4-9) to Jesus’ response to the question about the “greatest commandment” (Mt. 22:34-40 and parallels) and beyond. We may compare a statement by Ben Zion Bokser and Baruch M. Bokser:

While the rabbis placed the love of man at the summit of human virtue, they also urged people to cultivate the love of God as the source from which all other virtues flow. This is taught by R. Reuben, who was asked to define the most reprehensible act a man may commit. His answer was: the denial of God’s existence, ‘For no man violates the commandments, “thou shalt not murder,” “Thou shalt not steal,” til he has renounced his faith in God.’ (Tosefta Shebuot 3:6, cited by Bokser and Bokser, edd., in the Introduction to The Talmud; Selected Writings, The Classics of Western Spirituality, p. 29).

Here, Paul waxes eloquent about love. “Love is patient,” he says; “love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things” (1 Cor. 13:4-7). According to Richard A. Horsley, “The positive qualities of love are the opposite of the Corinthians’ behavior presented elsewhere in the letter” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on 1 Cor. 13:4-7). “The second paragraph,” says Witherington, “has often been taken as a description of Christ’s character, which is true enough, but Paul intends it as a description of how a Christian ought to behave and of the way in which Paul has been attempting to behave. He contrasts blameworthy behavior, which seems to characterize the Corinthians, and the behavior that he is trying to model for his converts” (loc. cit.) . Witherington comments on the meaning of ajgavph (agapē ), the term translated here as “love” (NRSV; “charity” AV/KJV).

For the NT writers love is a matter of behavior, not feeling. In particular it is other-directed behavior, not self-directed action. This is the character of Christian agapē. The word agapē is not uniquely Christian. Christians likely derived it from the Septuagint, where it is often used of God’s love, not ordinary human love. It is a unique privilege to be a bearer, by means of the Spirit, of God’s love. This love differs from both natural human affection (philia, so-called brotherly love) and eros (desiring love, usually related to physical attraction). (ibid.)

In a footnote, Witherington adds, “There is some obvious overlap between agapē and philia (cf John 21:15-19)” (ibid., n. 29). One might also compare John 15:14, “You are my friends fivloi (philoi) if you do what I command you.” A similar comparison of various terms for love is presented by C. S. Lewis. He discusses romantic love ( e[roV, eros, poetic form of e[rwV, erōs), “love: desire for a thing” (A LEXICON Abridged from Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, impression of 1958, s.v. e[rwV, erōs). C. S. Lewis also discusses affection (storghv, storgē ), “love, affection, the natural affection of parents and children” (ibid., s.v. storghv, storgē ), which occurs in compounds in the New Testament, for example filovstorgoi (philostorgoi, plural of filovstorgoV, philostorgos), “loving dearly, devoted (Rom. 12:10, the only NT occurrence); friendship (filiva, philia), “friendship, love” (Jas. 4:4, the only NT occurrence of this abstract noun form, but cf. the adjective fivloV, philos, “kindly disposed, devoted,” and filovstorgoi, philostorgoi, above); and ajgavph (agapē ), “love, the highest Christian virtue” (F. Wilbur Gingrich, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 1965, s.v. ajgavph, agapē ).

As Paul continues his eloquent praise of love, he says, “Love never ends” (1 Cor. 13:8a). He contrasts love with some of the gifts listed earlier. “But as for prophecies [cf. 12:10, 28, 29], they will come to an end; as for tongues [cf. 12:10, 28, 29], they will cease; as for knowledge [cf. 12:8, 13:2], it will come to an end” (13:8b). These gifts have their limits. “For we know only in part,” says Paul, “and we prophesy only in part; but when the complete [NRSV for to; tevleion, to teleion, ‘that which is perfect’ AV/KJV] comes, the partial will come to an end” (vv. 9-10). Paul offers an explanation with reference to himself: “When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways” (v. 11). But it is clear that his own experience is an example for the others. “For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known” (v. 12). “In these comparisons,” says Horsley, “Paul becomes more rhapsodic, no longer ironic, glorifying the qualities he most values–while still denigrating the Corinthians’ most valued spiritual gifts. Against their sense of present transcendence, Paul emphasizes future fulfillment” (on vv. 8-13). Witherington says, “Verses 11f. should probably not be understood as saying that it is childish to speak in tongues or to prophesy, since Paul himself still does such things. He is saying that there is an age appropriate to such things and that now is that age. When the completion of the age finally comes, then it will be time to set aside what was appropriate and needful in that age. Only later will one know as one is known by God” (op. cit., p. 271, on vv. 11-12). As for the reference to seeing in a mirror (v. 12), Witherington says the “literal meaning is ‘in a riddle.’ Paul’s point is not to castigate mirror-making, which was a trade practiced in Corinth. Nor were ancient bronze mirrors necessarily all that bad. His point is, rather, that as a mirror image of the truth a mirror only partially tells the tale of what we look like. “What we know of Christ, self, others, or salvation through the Spirit is not necessarily inaccurate, just incomplete” (ibid.).

As we reflect on Paul’s description of this kind of love, which is patient, kind, not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude; unselfish, not irritable or resentful, one wonders if we can live up to this standard. But within this description of love, it is clear that Paul is making a comparison with the spiritual gifts. In fact, the placement of this description between the discussion of gifts and church unity in chapter 12 and the comparison of tongues and prophecy in chapter 14 makes it clear that love is the supreme value. Prophecy and understanding, even with faith, are nothing without love (1 Cor. 13:2). What could be better than faith, hope and love? But “the greatest of these is love” (v. 13).

Matthew 10:5-15

The Mission of the Twelve (Mk 6.7-13; Lk 9.1-6)

5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, 6 but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 As you go, proclaim the good news, 'The kingdom of heaven has come near.' 8 Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. You received without payment; give without payment. 9 Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, 10 no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff; for laborers deserve their food. 11 Whatever town or village you enter, find out who in it is worthy, and stay there until you leave. 12 As you enter the house, greet it. 13 If the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it; but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town. 15 Truly I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. (Matthew 10:5-15, NRSV)

On May 14, 2008 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 11, Year Two), comments were based on earlier comments, from October 15, 2007 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 12, Year One), when comments were repeated from October 10, 2005 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 12, Year One). For comments on Mark’s version of the Mission of the Twelve, see February 26, 2008 (Tuesday in the week of the Third Sunday of Lent, Year Two).

With the final paragraph of Saturday’s reading from Matthew (Mt. 10:1-4) and the readings for today through Thursday of this week, we will cover the Second Major Discourse of Jesus as presented by Matthew. It is introduced with the words, “These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions” (Mt. 10:5a), and it is concluded with the words, “Now when Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples . . .” (11:1a; for the formula, cf. 7:28-29; 13:53; 19:1a; 26:1a). A table with references for this Discourse and parallel passages in the other Gospels is in the separate file, Jesus’ Second Major Discourse References. A table that includes the parallel passages for today’s reading is in the separate file, Commissioning the Twelve according to Matthew.

In Saturday’s reading, we discussed Jesus’ selection and commissioning of the twelve disciples (Mt. 10:2-4; Mk. 3:13-19; Lk. 6:13-16), which in Matthew provides a transition from the preceding series of episode reports (chaps. 8-9) to the speech in which Jesus instructs the disciples as he sends them out to “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (vv. 5b, 6). This restriction is not included in the other Gospels; for Matthew it does not mean the Gentiles are permanently excluded from God’s salvation (cf. the “Great Commission,” Mt. 28:19-20; not to mention the positive role of Gentiles, e.g. Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, “the wife of Uriah” [i.e. Bathsheba], the “wise men” [Magi], in the genealogy and infancy narratives).

The purpose of the disciples’ mission according to Mark appears at first to be to exorcize unclean spirits. The twelve are sent “out two by two [with] authority over the unclean spirits” (Mk. 6:7). This aspect is expanded to include curing diseases in the reports of Luke (9:1) and Matthew (10:1), who describes the authority as “over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to cure every disease and every sickness.” But Matthew also makes explicit the message they are to proclaim. “As you go, proclaim the good news, ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near’ ” (Mt. 10:7); compare Luke’s statement that “he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal” (Lk. 9:2). In the similar instructions for the seventy who are sent out (Lk. 10:1-12), they are told to say, “The kingdom of God has come near to you” (Lk. 10:9; cf. v. 11). And Mark does indicate the disciples’ message by reference to those who “refuse to hear you” (Mk. 6:11), and the report that “they went out and proclaimed that all should repent” (v. 12). With that, and the report that “they [the disciples] cast out many demons, and anointed with oil many who were sick and cured them” (v. 13; cf. Lk. 9:6), Mark clearly reports that the disciples carried out Jesus’ instructions, a point not mentioned, but apparently left to be inferred in Matthew, chapter 10. Luke’s brief report that the disciples carried out these instructions (Lk. 9:6) is followed later by their return and report to Jesus (v. 10); compare the return and report of the seventy and Jesus’ response (Lk. 10:17-20; see below).

In Matthew, the instructions include, in addition to the basic Gospel message, “Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons” (Mt. 10:8a; cf. Mk. 6:7, 15; Lk. 9:1-2). To the disciples Jesus says, “You received without payment; give without payment” (Mt.10:8b). As for provisions for the journey–or should we say, lack of provisions--Jesus says, “Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff; for laborers deserve their food” (vv. 9-10; cf. Mk 6:8-9; Lk. 9:3; 10:4). According to Dennis C. Duling, who comments on “no bag” here, says, “Wandering Cynic philosopher-preachers carried a begging bag to symbolize their self-sufficiency.” And of “or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff,” he adds, “Josephus (War 2.125-26), says traveling Essenes did not replace clothing or sandals until they were worn out, but carried something (perhaps a staff) to ward off robbers” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 10:10). If well received, the disciples are to stay as guest in homes. “Whatever town or village you enter, find out who in it is worthy, and stay there until you leave” (Mt. 10:11; cf. Mk. 6:10; Lk. 9:4; 10:5). “As you enter the house,” says Jesus in Matthew, “greet (ajspavsasqe, aspasasthe) it (Mt. 10:12). And Jesus instructs about possible responses to their greeting. “If the house is worthy, let your peace (eijrhvnh, eirēnē , cf. MOlwA, šālôm, ‘Shalom!’) come upon it; but if it is not worthy, let your peace (eijrhvnh, eirēnē , cf. MOlwA, šālôm, ‘Shalom!’) return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town” (Mt. 10:13-14; cf. Mk. 6:11; Lk. 9:5; 10:10-11a). Note that only Matthew uses the Greek equivalent of the typical Hebrew greeting here (but cf. Lk. 10:6). Only in Matthew, does Jesus continue with the warning, “Truly I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town” (Mt. 10:15); but compare the explanation of shaking “off the dust of your feet as a testimony against them” (Mk. 6:11; Lk. 9:5).

The separate mission of the “seventy” (Lk. 10:1-12) has no parallel as such in Matthew or Mark, though, as noted above, Luke includes instructions that are comparable to the instructions in Matthew 10. Luke’s report of the return of the seventy (Lk. 10:17-20) emphasizes joy and rejoicing, which Jesus focuses on rejoicing “that your names are written in heaven” (Lk. 10:20).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net