Nehemiah 2:1-20

Nehemiah Sent to Judah

2:1 In the month of Nisan, in the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes, when wine was served him, I carried the wine and gave it to the king. Now, I had never been sad in his presence before. 2 So the king said to me, "Why is your face sad, since you are not sick? This can only be sadness of the heart." Then I was very much afraid. 3 I said to the king, "May the king live forever! Why should my face not be sad, when the city, the place of my ancestors' graves, lies waste, and its gates have been destroyed by fire?" 4 Then the king said to me, "What do you request?" So I prayed to the God of heaven. 5 Then I said to the king, "If it pleases the king, and if your servant has found favor with you, I ask that you send me to Judah, to the city of my ancestors' graves, so that I may rebuild it." 6 The king said to me (the queen also was sitting beside him), "How long will you be gone, and when will you return?" So it pleased the king to send me, and I set him a date. 7 Then I said to the king, "If it pleases the king, let letters be given me to the governors of the province Beyond the River, that they may grant me passage until I arrive in Judah; 8 and a letter to Asaph, the keeper of the king's forest, directing him to give me timber to make beams for the gates of the temple fortress, and for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall occupy." And the king granted me what I asked, for the gracious hand of my God was upon me.

9 Then I came to the governors of the province Beyond the River, and gave them the king's letters. Now the king had sent officers of the army and cavalry with me. 10 When Sanballat the Horonite and Tobiah the Ammonite official heard this, it displeased them greatly that someone had come to seek the welfare of the people of Israel.

Nehemiah's Inspection of the Walls

11 So I came to Jerusalem and was there for three days. 12 Then I got up during the night, I and a few men with me; I told no one what my God had put into my heart to do for Jerusalem. The only animal I took was the animal I rode. 13 I went out by night by the Valley Gate past the Dragon's Spring and to the Dung Gate, and I inspected the walls of Jerusalem that had been broken down and its gates that had been destroyed by fire. 14 Then I went on to the Fountain Gate and to the King's Pool; but there was no place for the animal I was riding to continue. 15 So I went up by way of the valley by night and inspected the wall. Then I turned back and entered by the Valley Gate, and so returned. 16 The officials did not know where I had gone or what I was doing; I had not yet told the Jews, the priests, the nobles, the officials, and the rest that were to do the work.

Decision to Restore the Walls

17 Then I said to them, "You see the trouble we are in, how Jerusalem lies in ruins with its gates burned. Come, let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, so that we may no longer suffer disgrace." 18 I told them that the hand of my God had been gracious upon me, and also the words that the king had spoken to me. Then they said, "Let us start building!" So they committed themselves to the common good. 19 But when Sanballat the Horonite and Tobiah the Ammonite official, and Geshem the Arab heard of it, they mocked and ridiculed us, saying, "What is this that you are doing? Are you rebelling against the king?" 20 Then I replied to them, "The God of heaven is the one who will give us success, and we his servants are going to start building; but you have no share or claim or historic right in Jerusalem." (Nehemiah 2:1-20, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of November 2, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Twenty-second Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One), when comments were based on those of October 28, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One):

While we are in the world, we would do well to emulate Nehemiah’s courage and determination, not to mention his faith, “God . . . will give us success” (Neh. 2:20). But as this reading begins, he tells us, “In the month of Nisan [March-April], in the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes, when wine was served him, I carried the wine and gave it to the king” (Neh. 2:1a). As noted yesterday, Tamara Cohn Eskenazi points out that the date given here, 445/444 B.C., correlates with the date given in 1:1, “in the month of Chislev [November-December], in the twentieth year,” “if Nehemiah’s reckoning begins the year in the fall, as in subsequent Judaism” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Neh. 2:1). “Now, I had never been sad in his [i.e., the king’s] presence before,” says Nehemiah. So the king said to me, “Why is your face sad, since you are not sick? This can only be sadness of the heart” (vv. 1b, 2a). We may be impressed with the king’s empathy or concern for a trusted servant, but that was not Nehemiah’s concern, though it may have given him courage to present his request. Even so, he says, “Then I was very much afraid” (v. 2b). But he proceeds with his request. “May the king live forever! Why should my face not be sad, when the city, the place of my ancestors’ graves, lies waste, and its gates have been destroyed by fire?” (v. 3). Eskenazi says, “depicting Jerusalem as graveyard dramatizes the importance of honoring ancestors and minimizes the threat that rebuilding Jerusalem might otherwise suggest. Ezra 4:21 suggest that this king had prohibited rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls until further notice” (ibid., on v. 3). According to David J. A. Clines, “Nehemiah wisely never mentions the name of Jerusalem, since it was notorious as a rebellious city (cf. Ezra 4:12, 15)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Neh. 2:3).

When the king asks, “What do you request?” (v. 4a). Clines says, “The king realizes that Nehemiah’s response is no resigned sigh, but demands a reply” (ibid., on v. 4). Nehemiah prays silently before answering. “So I prayed to the God of heaven,” he says (v. 4). And he addresses the king: “If it pleases the king, and if your servant has found favor with you, I ask that you send me to Judah, to the city of my ancestors' graves, so that I may rebuild it” (v. 5). According to Clines, “Nehemiah’s rebuilding of Jerusalem would not simply be a pious act in memory of his fathers; it would , by ancient custom, imply rulership of the rebuilt city and, since it was a capital, governorship of the province as well” (ibid., on v. 5). The king asks for further information. “The king said to me (the queen [lgaw0eha, haššēgal] also was sitting beside him), ‘How long will you be gone, and when will you return?’ ” (v. 6a). According to Eskenazi, “The presence of the queen indicates the intimate setting of the conversation” (op. cit., on v. 6). Clines says that “the queen [was] known as Damaspia from Greek sources” (op. cit., on v. 6). But the recent Jewish translation has “the consort” for “the queen” (Neh. 2:6 NJPS 1985, 1999); compare William L. Holladay, “traditionally queen Ps. 45:10; Neh. 2:6, but suggestions [include] ‘favorite of harem’ ” (A concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 4^th impression, 1978, s.v. lgawe, šēgal ). With the dagger symbol (†), Holladay indicates that “all undisputed instances [of the word] have been cited,” meaning here Ps. 45:10 [Heb. = v. 9 NRSV] and Neh. 2:6. We note that both refer to foreign “queens,” Phoenician (Ps. 45:9 NRSV, cf. “the people of Tyre”; the psalm celebrates the wedding of the Hebrew king [v. 1 NRSV = Heb. v. 2] to this Phoenician princess or queen), and Persian (Neh. 2:6). “So it pleased the king to send me,” says Nehemiah, “and I set him a date” (v. 6b).

Hindy Najman says, “Nehemiah either demonstrates quick thinking or he has planned this response in advance” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Neh. 2:6). Perhaps she refers to the response in verse 3, or in verse 5. “Josephus,” she adds, seems to prefer the first option, reporting this event as occurring on the same day on which Nehemiah is informed of Jerusalem’s present situation” (ibid.). Josephus combines the replies of verses 3 and 5:

How can I, O king, appear otherwise than thus, and not be in trouble, while I hear that the walls of Jerusalem , the city where are the sepulchres of my fathers, are thrown down to the ground, and that its gates are consumed by fire? ‘Bt do thou grant me the favour to go and build its wall, and to finish the building of the temple. (Antiquities, 11.5.6 [William Whiston, trans., reprinted 1984, p. 236]; this is on the Internet at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/josephus/works/files/ant-11.htm, accessed Oct. 29, 2009).

In addition to setting a date (Neh. 2:6), Nehemiah tells us he “said to the king, ‘If it pleases the king, let letters be given me to the governors of the province Beyond the River, that they may grant me passage until I arrive in Judah: and a letter to Asaph, the keeper of the king’s forest, directing him to give me timber to make beams for the gates of the temple fortress, and for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall occupy’ ” (vv. 7, 8a). “Perhaps it is etiquette,” says Clines, “that prevents Nehemiah from asking explicitly for the governorship, but 5:14 implies that he was appointed governor of Judea at this time. Nehemiah asks only for a passport for safe conduct through the other Persian provinces and a requisition order for timber from the royal forest” (op. cit., on vv. 7-8). Referring to “temple fortress,” Eskenazi says, “explicit plans for the Temple’s gates and fortifications, including the city’s walls, appear only now” (op. cit., on v. 8). “This v[erse],” says Najman, “is adduced as proof that it is permissible to accept a gift for the Temple from an idol worshipper only if the gift is from the government (b. ‘Arak. 6a)” (op. cit., on v. 8). “This,” says Clines, “is the first we hear of the temple fortress; cf. also 7:2. It may be the Tower of Hananel (3:1), and it may have been the predecessor of the Antonia tower built by Herod” (op. cit., on Neh. 2:8). These requests were granted, “for,” as Nehemiah says, “the gracious hand of my God was upon me” (v. 8b).

So Nehemiah comes “to the governors of the province Beyond the River,” accompanied by “officers of the army and cavalry,” and gives them “the king’s letters” (v. 9). This turn of events was not pleasing to “Sanballat the Horonite and Tobiah the Ammonite official,” for “it displeased them greatly that someone had come to seek the welfare of the people of Israel” (v. 10). “Sanballat,” says Eskenazi, “is mentioned in the fifth-century BCE Elephantine papyri from Egypt as a governor of Samaria, Judah’s northern neighbor; see Ezra 4:10). Tobiah, a high official, probably Jewish (his name means, ‘the LORD is good’; see also 6:18), is in the service of the Ammonites, Judah’s eastern neighbor” (op. cit., on v. 10). “This verse is anticipatory,” says Najman; “a major theme of Nehemiah is the opposition of these people to his restoration of Jerusalem” (op. cit., on v. 10). Clines elaborates on the enmity here:

The Horonite seems to be a contemptuous reference to Sanballat’s humble origins (Horon may be an obscure village); Nehemiah never accords him his official title. . . . It displeased them greatly. Nehemiah’s appointment directly by the king perhaps was felt by Sanballat and Tobiah to be a threat to their own political and economic status. They were probably more hostile to Nehemiah personally than to the Jews. (op. cit., on v. 10).

Nehemiah arrives in Jerusalem and after three days (v. 11), with a few men, privately surveys the city at night. “Then I got up during the night, I and a few men with me; I told no one what my God had put into my heart to do for Jerusalem. The only animal I took was the animal I rode” (v. 12). According to Eskenazi, “I told no one (see v. 16) [means] he seeks to camouflage his activities from local opponents” (op. cit., on v. 12). “I went out by night,” Nehemiah explains, “by the Valley Gate past the Dragon’s Spring and to the Dung Gate, and I inspected the walls of Jerusalem that had been destroyed by fire” (v. 13). “Valley Gate,” says Clines, is “in the western wall, 500 yards north of the Dung Gate (3:13). Dragon’s Spring [is] no longer known. Dung Gate, or Potsherd Gate (Jer. 19:2) [is] at the southern tip of the city” (op. cit., on v. 13). The Dung Gate, says Eskenazi, “is at the southern end of the wall (in a different location from the present Dung Gate in Jerusalem)” (op. cit. on v. 13). “Then I went to the Fountain Gate,” says Nehemiah, “and to the King’s pool; but there was no place for the animal I was riding to continue” (v. 14). The “Fountain Gate,” says Clines, is “in the Kidron Valley on the east of the city. King’s Pool,” he adds, is “the Pool of Shelah (Shiloah), fed from the spring Gihon farther up the valley (cf. 3:15; Isa. 8:6)” (op. cit., on v. 14). As for the words, “No place for the animal . . . to continue,” Clines says, “The elaborate system of terraces on the eastern slope had collapsed after the Babylonian destruction, and the valley floor was now a vast tumble of stones. The archaeological evidence is that Nehemiah abandoned the old line of wall on the eastern slope and built a new wall on the crest” (ibid.). So, apparently, Nehemiah dismounted and scrambled through these stones. “So I went up by way of the valley by night and inspected the wall. Then I turned back and entered by the Valley Gate, and so returned” (v. 15). So he has come again to his starting place, the Valley Gate. Up to this point, Nehemiah has not told any interested parties about his inspection. “The officials did not know where I had gone or what I was doing; I had not yet told the Jews, the priests, the nobles, the officials, and the rest that were to do the work” (v. 16). “Perhaps,” says Clines, “Nehemiah is stressing that the rebuilding of the city walls was entirely his initiative” (ibid., on v. 16).

But then Nehemiah informs the people of his plans. “You see the trouble we are in,” he says, “how Jerusalem lies in ruins with its gates burned. Come, let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, so that we may no longer suffer disgrace” (v. 17). “I told them,” he says, “that the hand of my God had been gracious upon me, and also the words that the king had spoken to me” (v. 18a). According to Eskenazi, “Nehemiah now galvanizes the Jews of Yehud [Judah] to rebuild by appealing to communal pride and disclosing divine and royal support” (on v. 18). “So,” we are told, “they committed themselves to the common good” (v. 18b). However, news of this development did not sit well in Samaria. “But when Sanballat the Horonite and Tobiah the Ammonite official, and Geshem the Arab heard of it, they mocked and ridiculed us, saying, ‘What is this that you are doing? Are you rebelling against the king?’ ” (v. 19). “Geshem the Arab,” says Clines, was “king of Qedar, the ruler, under nominal Persian control, of a large territory in northern Arabia, Edom, and the Negev of Judah” (ibid., on v. 19). There is apparently no basis for the charge here of “rebelling,” though, according to Clines, “the fortification of the city could be seen as a preparation for revolt” (ibid.). Nehemiah replies, “The God of heaven is the one who will give us success, and we his servants are going to start building; but you have no share or claim or historic right in Jerusalem” (v. 20). According to Eskenazi, “independence from neighbors’ control explains Nehemiah’s achievement and the opposition it meets. Like Zerubbabel, earlier (Ezra 4), Nehemiah limits participation in rebuilding, insisting on the superiority of God to any human power” (on v. 20).

or Lamentations 4:1-22 (alternative reading, Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions)

On November 2, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Twenty-second Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from October 28, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One); they are repeated here with editing and supplement:

The acrostic pattern continues in this chapter as the first sixteen verses describe the suffering of Jerusalem and her people. “How (Hk!yxe, ’êkāh) the gold has grown dim, / how the pure gold is changed! / The sacred stones lie scattered / at the head of every street” (Lam. 4:1). According to F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp, gold and sacred stones have no value, “emphasizing the severity of the suffering” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Lam. 4:1).

The precious children of Zion (NOy0c9 yn2B4, b ^enê tsiyyôn), / worth their weight in fine gold–how they are reckoned as earthen pots, / the work of a potter’s hands!” (v. 2). “Gold and gems,” says Daniel Grossberg, are “metaphors for people who, though precious, are now treated as worthless, throwaway objects (potsherds)” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Lam. 4:1-2).

“Even (-mg1, gam-) the jackals offer the breast / and nurse their young, / but my people has become cruel, / like the ostriches in the wilderness” (v. 3). “The personified city’s actions are less humane,” says Dobbs-Allsopp, “even than that of the cruelest of animals, jackals (commonly associated with deserted ruins; see Isa. 13:22; Mic. 1:8) and ostriches (cf. Job 39:13-18)” (op. cit., on Lam. 4:3). According to Grossberg, “Israel compares unfavorably even with the vilest animals (Isa. 1:3; Jer. ch. 8). Ostriches,” he adds, were “known proverbially for neglect of their young (Job 39:13-18)” (op. cit., on v. 3).

Because verse 3 implies the cruelty of withholding food from children, verse 4 continues: “The tongue of the infant sticks (qb1d!, dāvaq) / to the roof of its mouth for thirst; / the children beg for food, / but no one gives them anything” (v. 4). The children remain hungry. The contrast between “then” and “now” is graphic. “Those who feasted (myl9k4xoh!, hā’ōk^elîm) on delicacies / perish in the streets; / those who were brought up in purple / cling to ash heaps” (v. 5).

“For the chastisement of my people has been greater (lDag4y09v1, wayyigdal ) / than the punishment of Sodom, / which was overthrown in a moment, / though no hand was laid on it” (v. 6). “Sodom’s utter destruction,” says Dobbs-Allsopp, “was legendary” (op. cit., on v. 6). Grossberg says, “Jerusalem’s slow agony is worse than Sodom’s quick punishment” (op. cit., on v. 6).

“Her princes were purer (UKza, zakkû ) than snow,” continues the lament, “whiter than milk; / their bodies were more ruddy than coral, / their hair like sapphire” (v. 7). According to Dobbs-Allsopp, “light skin (purer . . . whiter, cf 5:10; Ps. 104:15; contrast Song 1:5) and a ruddy complexion (5:10; cf. 1 Sam. 16:12; 17:42) were identified with health and vigor” (op. cit., on v. 7).

By contrast, “Now their visage is blacker (j`waHA, chāšak) than soot; / they are not recognized in the streets. / Their skin has shriveled on their bones; / it has become as dry as wood” (v. 8). “For associations of blackness with famine,” says Dobbs-Allsopp, “see Job 30:30; Lam. 5:10” (ibid., on v. 8).

“Happier (Myb9OF, tôvîm) were those pierced by the sword / than those pierced by hunger, / whose life drains away, deprived / of the produce of the field” (v. 9). Grossberg explains: “A quick death in battle would be preferable to slow starvation” (op. cit., on v. 9).

“The hands of (ydey4, y ^edê ) compassionate women / have boiled their own children; they became their food / in the destruction of my people” (v. 10). According to Werner E. Lemke, revised by Kathleen O’Connor, “The horrors of cannibalism during severe famine are mentioned in traditional treaty curses and prophetic threats (see Lev. 26:29; Deut. 28:53-57; Jer. 19:9; Ezek. 5:10) and reported on at least some occasions (Lam 4:10; 2 Kings 6:28-29)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Lam. 2:20). “Cannibalism,” says Grossberg, “is most often associated with literary descriptions of sieges” (op. cit., on Lam. 2:20). Both refer to 2:20 in comment on 4:10.

“The LORD gave full vent (hl0AK9, killāh) to his wrath; / he poured out his hot anger, / and kindled a fire in Zion / that consumed its foundations” (v. 11). “Misery,” says Grossberg, “is divine chastisement” (ibid., on vv. 11-16). And he adds that “fire” is a “symbol of divine wrath (e.g. 2:3; Deut. 32:22; Isa. 10:17; Jer. 17:27); also actual fire that burned down the city” (ibid., on v. 11).

“The kings of the earth did not (xlo, lō’ ) believe, / nor did any of the inhabitants of the world, / that foe or enemy could enter / the gates of Jerusalem” (v. 12). Jeremiah’s “Temple sermon” countered the false impression that Jerusalem was impregnable because it was spared in the earlier Assyrian invasion (Jer. 7:1-15; 26:1-24).

“It was for (-me, mē-, lit. ‘from’) the sins of her prophets / and the iniquities of her priests, / who shed the blood of the righteous / in the midst of her” (v. 13). According to Dobbs-Allsopp, “Because of the sins of prophets and priests (v. 13), the larger community wanders blindly and bloodied through the streets” (op. cit., on vv. 13-15).

“Blindly they wandered (Ufn!, nā‘û) through the streets, / so defiled with blood / that no one was able / to touch their garments” (v. 14).

“ ‘Away (UrUs, sûrû)! Unclean!’ people shouted at them; / ‘Away! Away (UrUs, UrUs, sûrû, sûrû)! Do not touch!’ / So they became fugitives and wanderers; / it was said among the nations, / ‘They shall stay here no longer’ ” (v. 15). According to Grossberg, “The formerly respected are now scorned and shunned as lepers (cf. Lev. 13:45-46)” (op. cit., on v. 15).

“The LORD himself has scattered them, / he will regard them no more; / no honor was shown to the priests, / no favor to the elders” (v. 16 NRSV). “The LORD’s countenance (HVHY yn2P4, p ^enê YHWH) has turned away from them . . .” (v. 16a NJPS). Grossberg, commenting on “countenance” in the NJPS version, says the “LORD’s countenance, the sign of divine favor (Lev. 6:26-27), is averted from Israel” (ibid., on v. 16).

Note the change to first person in the following. Dobbs-Allsopp refers to the “communal voice,” and sees here “a transition into the ‘we’ of the community whose horrible plight has just been graphically depicted” (op. cit., on vv. 17-22).

hn!ydaOf, ‘ôdaynāh (Qere). “Our eyes failed, ever watching / vainly for help; / we were watching eagerly / for a nation that could not save” (v. 17). I need to work on the textual issue here. The word for “our eyes” (Unyneyfe, ‘ênênû), if first in the sentence, would have served the acrostic pattern. Lemke and O’Connor suggest that this verse is “perhaps an allusion to expected relief from Egypt during the siege (see Jer. 34:21-22; 37:3-10)” (op. cit., on v. 17).

“They dogged (UdcA, tsādû) our steps / so that we could not walk in our streets; / our end drew near; our days were numbered; / for our end had come” (v. 18).

“Our pursuers were swifter (Myl09qa, qallîm) / than the eagles in the heavens; / they chased us on the mountains, / they lay in wait for us in the wilderness” (v. 19).

“The LORD’s anointed, the breath (HaUr, rû ^ach) of our life, / was taken in their pits–the one of whom we said, ‘Under his shadow / we shall live among the nations’ ” (v. 20). “The LORD’s anointed,” says Grossberg, “the breath of our life, [refers to divinely ordained kings (1 Sam. 24:7, 11; 2 Sam. 1:14, 16). The reference may be to King Zedekiah. The Kings were also of no avail, and now the kingdom has lost its independence” (op. cit., on v. 20).

“Rejoice (yW9yW9, ś î ś î) and be glad, O daughter Edom (MOdx$-tBa, bat-’ ^edôm), / you that live in the land of Uz; / but to you also the cup shall pass; / you shall become drunk and strip yourself bare” (v. 21). “Rejoice and exult,” says Grossberg, is an “ironic charge to the enemy to exult as long as she can, for soon she, too, will suffer divine punishment. Edom [is] singled out for a curse (cf. Ezek. ch. 35; Obad. 11; Ps. 137:8)” (op. cit., on v. 21).

“The punishment of your iniquity, O daughter Zion (NOy0c9-tBa, bat-tsiyyôn), is accomplished (MTa, tam), / he will keep you in exile no longer; / but your iniquity, O daughter Edom (MOdx$-tBa, bat-’ ^edôm), he will punish, / he will uncover your sins” (v. 22). In the recent Jewish translation, “O daughter Zion” (NOy0c9-tBa, bat-tsiyyôn), is translated “Fair Zion” (v. 22 NJPS), and “O daughter Edom” (NOy0c9-tBa, bat-tsiyyôn) is translated “Fair Edom” (vv. 21, 22). According to Grossberg, “ ‘Fair’ Edom parallels ‘Fair’ Zion; the two will exchange places in terms of misery” (ibid.).

As noted earlier, the first four chapters of Lamentations are in the form of alphabetic acrostics. With the line, “The punishment of your iniquity, O daughter Zion, is accomplished” (Lam. 4:22), beginning with a taw word (mt1, tam, ‘accomplished’), according to Dobbs-Allsopp, the verse “signals the conclusion or completion of the alphabetic acrostic portion of the sequence. Moreover 4:22a forms the mirror image of 1:3a, underscoring the strong sense of closure” (ibid., on v. 22). On the acrostic form as used in Lamentations, Dobbs-Allsopp says,

The alphabetic acrostic functions as the material, physical container of this poetry, literally holding each poem’s component verses together and conveying a strong sense of closure through its clear structure and fixed length. Yet the acrostic conveys meaning symbolically as well. The poet’s whole attempt to render the chaos of his world into language, to contain his fragmented lyrics within the frame of the alphabetic acrostic, thus becomes an attempt to control and contain, and ultimately transform, the suffering and hurt that engulfed Jerusalem and its inhabitants. (from the Introduction to Lamentations, ibid.)

Revelation 6:12-7:4

12 When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and there came a great earthquake; the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, 13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree drops its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. 14 The sky vanished like a scroll rolling itself up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. 15 Then the kings of the earth and the magnates and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, 16 calling to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one seated on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb; 17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?"

The 144,000 Sealed

7:1 After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth so that no wind could blow on earth or sea or against any tree. 2 I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, having the seal of the living God, and he called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to damage earth and sea, 3 saying, "Do not damage the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have marked the servants of our God with a seal on their foreheads."

4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed, one hundred forty-four thousand, sealed out of every tribe of the people of Israel: (Revelation 6:12-7:4, NRSV)

Today’s reading was the reading for November 2, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Twenty-second Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One), and for October 28, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One). The reading for December 22, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Third Sunday of Advent, Year Two), included a portion of today’s reading. The following comments are based on these earlier comments.

On Wednesday of this week, John was told, “do not week. See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals” (Rev. 5:5). And yesterday, we read about the opening of the first five seals and their effects (6:1-11). Now today, we come to the opening of the sixth seal. “When he [i.e., the Lamb] opened the sixth seal, I looked, and there came a great earthquake; the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree drops its winter fruit when shaken by a gale” (vv. 12-13). Furthermore, “the sky vanished like a scroll rolling itself up, and every mountain and Island was removed from its place” (v. 14). According to Bruce M. Metzger, “The great earthquake and cosmic catastrophes are not to be understood literally, but represent social upheavals and divine judgment on the Day of the Lord (Isa. 34:4; Joel 2:30-31; Am. 8:9” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Rev. 6:12-14). According to Jean-Pierre Ruiz, “The opening of the sixth seal unleashes a great earthquake, and its catastrophic effects on the cosmos and on human society are described” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Rev. 6:12-17). “The sky vanished like a scroll rolling itself up,” says David E. Aune, is “a simile used in Isa. 34:4 (see also Sibylline Oracles 3:82-83; 8:233; cf. Heb. 1:12), here a preview of the eventual destruction of the heavens (20:11; 21:1)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Rev. 6. 14). In response to these upheavals, John tells us, “Then the kings of the earth and the magnates and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains” (v. 15). All of these were “calling to the mountains and rocks, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one seated on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb; for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?’ ” (vv. 16-17). Ruiz says, “All classes of society seek to escape from the wrath of God (Isa. 2:10, 19)” (op. cit., on vv. 15-17; cf. Metzger, op. cit., on vv. 15-17).

The visions of judgment unleashed by the opening of the seals (sfragi:deV,, sphragides) pause temporarily; the seventh seal is opened in chapter 8. In the meantime, we have what Aune calls “a digression (based on the catchword seal) underscoring the fact that the faithful will experience divine protection during the coming catastrophes” (op. cit., on 7:1-17). John sees “four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth so that no wind could blow on earth or sea or against any tree” (7:1). “The four winds,” says Ruiz, “are destructive forces to be unleashed by God (Jer. 49:36). They correspond to the four horsemen in 6:1-8 (see Zech. 6:5)” (op. cit., on 7:1). “I saw another angel,” says John, “ascending from the rising of the sun, having the seal (sfragivV, sphragis) of the living God, and he called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to damage earth and sea” (v. 2). This angel was saying, “Do not damage the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have marked the servants of our God with a seal (sfragivswmen, sphragisōmen, aorist subjunctive form of sfragivzw, sphragizō, ‘to seal’) on their foreheads” (v. 3). According to Aune, “Those with a seal on their foreheads (see Ezek. 9:4-6; Psalms of Solomon 15:6-9) are divinely protected from the plagues, as the Israelites were in Egypt (Ex. 8:22; 9:4-7, 26; 10:23)” (op. cit., on 7:3). “Seals,” says Ruiz, “were used to signify ownership or authorship” (op. cit., on v. 3). John hears “the number of those who were sealed, one hundred forty-four thousand, sealed out of every tribe of the people of Israel” (v. 4). According to Metzger, the number given here does not limit the number of the redeemed, but “symbolizes completeness; not one of the redeemed is missing” (op. cit., on 7:4). “The symbolic number 144,000, which is the square of 12 multiplied by 1000, has been interpreted variously,” says Ruiz, “as a reference to the faithful remnant of Israel; the church; the martyrs; the remnant of Christians who survive the eschatological turmoil; all the redeemed (14:1, 3)” (op. cit., on v. 4).

Matthew 13:24-30

The Weeds among the Wheat

24 He put before them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to someone who sowed good seed in his field; 25 but while everybody was asleep, an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and then went away. 26 So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared as well. 27 And the slaves of the householder came and said to him, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where, then, did these weeds come from?' 28 He answered, 'An enemy has done this.' The slaves said to him, 'Then do you want us to go and gather them?' 29 But he replied, 'No; for in gathering the weeds you would uproot the wheat along with them. 30 Let both of them grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Collect the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.' " (Matthew 13:24-30, NRSV)

On May 17, 2009 (the Sixth Sunday of Easter, Year One), comments on Matthew 13:24-34a were repeated from May 29 and 30, 2008 (Thursday and Friday, 2008 (Thursday and Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 25, Year Two), when comments were based on earlier comments, of November 2 and 3, 2007 (Friday and Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One), and earlier. Relevant comments for Matthew 13:24-30 are repeated here with some editing and supplement; tomorrow’s reading will continue from verse 31.

Consider what Matthew has done in chapter 13. He has presented eight parables (or comparisons), three with parallels in canonical Gospels, and four explanatory paragraphs (Purpose of Parables, Mt. 10-17; the Sower explained, vv. 18-23; the Use of Parables, vv. 34-35; and an explanation of the parable of the weeds, vv. 36-43). An outline of these parables is found in a separate file, Parables, Matthew 13. All of these (brief paragraphs) have parallels or similar parable parallels in the canonical Gospels or in the Gospel of Thomas, sometimes both, except the statement about the Christian scribe (vv. 51-52). It is likely, of course, that Matthew, or traditions used by Matthew, is Thomas’ source rather than the reverse. Matthew certainly did not make use of the Gospel of Thomas as a source. But Matthew, not inventing sayings of Jesus, but gathering them from various sources, has shown us how Jesus drew upon the agriculture and local business activity to illustrate his conception of the kingdom of heaven. This he does to “proclaim what has been hidden from the foundation of the world” (v. 35).

In Matthew’s parable, Jesus says, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to someone who sowed good seed in his field, but while everybody was asleep, an enemy came and sowed weeds (zizavnia, zizania, plural of zizavnion zizanion) among the wheat, and then went away” (Mt. 13:24-25). The Gospel of Thomas version has the appearance of a simpler story; “Jesus said: The kingdom of the Father is like a man who had [good] seed. His enemy came by night (and) sowed a weed (zizavnion, zizanion) among the good seed.” The phrase, “the kingdom of the Father” instead of “the kingdom of heaven,” like Mark’s and Luke’s “the kingdom of God” in other contexts, does not seek, as does Matthew’s phrase, to respect Jewish scruples about the use of God’s name. Matthew’s version tells how “the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared as well” (Mt. 13:26). And he reports a conversation about the weeds (vv. 27-29) that was severely condensed in Thomas’ version, “The man did not allow them to pull up the weed (zizavnion, zizanion).” Both report the man’s instruction to let the weeds and wheat grow together (Mt. 13:30a), both warn against pulling up wheat along with the weeds (Mt. 13:29), and both also foresee separation of the weeds from the wheat and burning of the weeds at the time of the harvest (Mt. 13:30b). The eschatological interpretation of the parable (Mt. 13:36-43 is absent from the Gospel of Thomas version of the parable.

Neither Mark nor Luke have a parallel to this parable, but Mark has a parable of a Growing Seed:

He also said, "The kingdom of God is as if someone would scatter seed on the ground, and would sleep and rise night and day, and the seed would sprout and grow, he does not know how. The earth produces of itself, first the stalk, then the head, then the full grain in the head. But when the grain is ripe, at once he goes in with his sickle, because the harvest has come." (Mark 4:26-29, NRSV)

According to Richard A. Horsley, Mark’s parable of the Growing Seed focuses on surprising growth. “The kingdom of God will surely come to full fruition, just as the seed inevitably sprouts, grows, and produces a harvest (cf. Joel 3:13)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mk. 4:26-29).

I grew up in the wheat country of western Kansas, where farmers sometimes hired boys to walk through the wheat fields and pull up the rye–usually taller than the wheat–and throw the stalks out of the field. Perhaps something like that was done in the country that Jesus knew, but the timing is different in his parable. The modern wheat farmer’s harvesting machine (the combine) could not separate the rye from the wheat at the time of harvest, so the separation is done prior to the harvest. But Jesus says, “Let both of them grow together” (Mt. 13:30). Some have seen the parable as reflecting “concern over the character of some members of Matthew’s church” and as teaching tolerance,

but vv. 24-30 do not clearly address a situation in the Christian community. Augustine used this parable to argue against the Donatists, who wanted to exclude the lapsed from the church. 13:36-43, however, quite plainly identifies the field with the world, not the church. (Dale C. Allison, Jr., The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 862, on Mt. 13:24-43)

Given the larger context in the Book of Matthew, the parable clearly pictures judgment and separation. The good news is that God does not lightly cast away his people, but does all that he can to redeem them.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net