1 Maccabees 1:1-28

Alexander the Great

1:1 After Alexander son of Philip, the Macedonian, who came from the land of Kittim, had defeated King Darius of the Persians and the Medes, he succeeded him as king. (He had previously become king of Greece.) 2 He fought many battles, conquered strongholds, and put to death the kings of the earth. 3 He advanced to the ends of the earth, and plundered many nations. When the earth became quiet before him, he was exalted, and his heart was lifted up. 4 He gathered a very strong army and ruled over countries, nations, and princes, and they became tributary to him.

5 After this he fell sick and perceived that he was dying. 6 So he summoned his most honored officers, who had been brought up with him from youth, and divided his kingdom among them while he was still alive. 7 And after Alexander had reigned twelve years, he died.

8 Then his officers began to rule, each in his own place. 9 They all put on crowns after his death, and so did their descendants after them for many years; and they caused many evils on the earth

Antiochus Epiphanes and Renegade Jews (2 Macc 4.7-17)

10 From them came forth a sinful root, Antiochus Epiphanes, son of King Antiochus; he had been a hostage in Rome. He began to reign in the one hundred thirty-seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks.

11 In those days certain renegades came out from Israel and misled many, saying, "Let us go and make a covenant with the Gentiles around us, for since we separated from them many disasters have come upon us." 12 This proposal pleased them, 13 and some of the people eagerly went to the king, who authorized them to observe the ordinances of the Gentiles. 14 So they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem, according to Gentile custom, 15 and removed the marks of circumcision, and abandoned the holy covenant. They joined with the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil.

Antiochus in Egypt (2 Macc 5.1, 11-26)

16 When Antiochus saw that his kingdom was established, he determined to become king of the land of Egypt, in order that he might reign over both kingdoms. 17 So he invaded Egypt with a strong force, with chariots and elephants and cavalry and with a large fleet. 18 He engaged King Ptolemy of Egypt in battle, and Ptolemy turned and fled before him, and many were wounded and fell. 19 They captured the fortified cities in the land of Egypt, and he plundered the land of Egypt.

Persecution of the Jews

20 After subduing Egypt, Antiochus returned in the one hundred forty-third year. He went up against Israel and came to Jerusalem with a strong force. 21 He arrogantly entered the sanctuary and took the golden altar, the lampstand for the light, and all its utensils. 22 He took also the table for the bread of the Presence, the cups for drink offerings, the bowls, the golden censers, the curtain, the crowns, and the gold decoration on the front of the temple; he stripped it all off. 23 He took the silver and the gold, and the costly vessels; he took also the hidden treasures that he found. 24 Taking them all, he went into his own land.

He shed much blood,

and spoke with great arrogance.

25 Israel mourned deeply in every community,

26 rulers and elders groaned,

young women and young men became faint,

the beauty of the women faded.

27 Every bridegroom took up the lament;

she who sat in the bridal chamber was mourning.

28 Even the land trembled for its inhabitants,

and all the house of Jacob was clothed with shame. (1 Maccabees 1:1-28, NRSV)

On November 15, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Twenty-fourth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), comments were based, with extensive revision, on comments from November 10, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One); the comments are repeated here with some editing and supplement:

The book of 1 Maccabees begins with a brief historical summary, covering the period from Alexander the Great’s replacement of his assassinated father, Philip II of Macedonia (336 B.C.), through Alexander’s conquests, the rule of his officers as successors upon his death, down to the accession of Antiochus IV Epiphanes as ruler over Seleucid (i.e., Hellenistic) Syria (175 B.C.; for the dates, see Daniel J. Harrington, HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 1 Macc. 1:1-9). Alexander “had defeated King Darius of the Persians and the Medes” (1 Macc. 1:1), that is, according to Harrington, Darius III Codomannus, defeated “between 334 and 331 B.C.E.” (ibid., on v. 1). Alexander “fought many battles,” says the narrator, “conquered strongholds, and put to death the kings of the earth” (v. 2). “He advanced to the ends of the earth,” we are told, “and plundered many nations. When the earth became quiet before him, he was exalted, and his heart was lifted up. He gathered a very strong army and ruled over countries, nations, and princes, and they became tributary to him” (vv. 3-4. Details of these further conquests are passed over by 1 Maccabees, where the primary interest is in getting to the atrocities of Antiochus IV Epiphanes. But we might note that, according to Jona Lendering, Alexander and his armies visited “Egypt, Babylonia, Persis, Media, Bactria, the Punjab, and the valley of the Indus [River]” (“Alexander the Great,” on the Internet web site Articles on Ancient History, at http://www.livius.org/aj-al/alexander/alexander00.html, accessed again Nov. 11, 2009; copy and paste the URL in your browser). In particular, Alexander apparently was in the borders of Pakistan and Afghanistan. “Bactria (the northwestern portion of ancient Afghanistan and Tajikistan), also known as Balkh, was a province of the Persian Empire bounded by Parthia, Aria, Drangiana and Arachosia, which was partly conquered by Alexander the Great. (http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/bactria/Bactria_Afghanistan.htm, ©2007 About, Inc., A part of The New York Times Company. accessed November 14, 2007)

1 Maccabees does briefly describe the scene of Alexander’s death. “After this,” the narrative continues, “he fell sick and perceived that he was dying. So he summoned his most honored officers, who had been brought up with him from youth, and divided his kingdom among them while he was still alive” (vv. 5-6). So it is reported that “after Alexander had reigned twelve years, he died” (v. 7). Mary Chilton Callaway, referring to the statement that Alexander divided his kingdom among his most honored officers, says, “A complex history of power struggles lies behind this statement” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 1 Macc. 1:6). These struggles are reflected in the note in 1 Maccabees that “Then his officers began to rule, each in his own place. They all put on crowns after his death, and so did their descendants after them for many years; and they caused many evils on the earth” (vv. 8-9). One result of these struggles was the rule of a series of kings named “Ptolemy” in Hellenistic Egypt, which had control of Judea throughout most of the third century B.C. (i.e., 200s), but lost Judea to the control of Seleucid (i.e., Hellenistic) Syria at the turn of the century (c.a. 200 B.C.). According to Jona Lendering,

After the death of Alexander the Great in the afternoon of 11 June 323 BCE, his empire was divided by his generals, the Diadochi. One of them was his friend Seleucus, who became king of the eastern provinces - more or less modern Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, together with parts of Turkey, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. His kingdom had two capitals, which he founded in c.300: Antioch in Syria (pictures) and Seleucia in Mesopotamia. Babylon was another important city. The empire was, like the empire of Alexander, actually the continuation of the empires before: the Assyrian, Babylonian, and the Achaemenid [i.e., Persian] Empire. (“The Seleucid Empire [Syria],” on the Internet at http://www.livius.org/se-sg/seleucids/seleucids.html, accessed again November 11, 2009; copy and paste the URL in your browser).

Prior to the accession of Antiochus Epiphanes IV (175-164 B.C.), Seleucus I Nicantor (305-281 B.C.) was succeeded by three rulers named Antiochus and two named Seleucus (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, Chronological Table of Rulers, Essays, p. 532). One might say that this was a period of relative calm for Judea, as reflected in the moderate tone of Ecclesiasticus (or the Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach), which Harold C. Washington has dated “sometime before 180 BCE” (Harold C. Washington, NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, in the Introduction to Sirach). But during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes IV unrest and struggles broke out in Judea. According to Callaway, by this time,

Jews were divided over the problem of accommodating to Gentile culture. The upper classes in Jerusalem, the Hellenizers, had long adopted Greek ways, while the poorer people of the rural areas tended to cling to the customs of their ancestors. The conflict among Judeans is evident at the beginning of 1 Maccabees (1:11-15) and is present throughout the book. (op. cit., in the Introduction to 1 Macc.)

1 Maccabees first blames the troubles on Antiochus. “From them [i.e., the rulers who succeeded Alexander},” we are told, “came forth a sinful root, Antiochus Epiphanes, son of King Antiochus; he had been a hostage in Rome. He began to reign in the one hundred thirty-seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks” (v. 10). This year would be 175 B.C. (NRSV text note b on 1 Macc. 1:10). Harrington says, “The Seleucid king Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 BCE), taken to Rome under the treaty of Apamea (188) as a penalty on his father, Antiochus III, replaced his brother Seleucus IV (187-175. The name Epiphanes (‘illustrious, [god] manifest’) was parodied by some as Epimanes (‘madman’). The kingdom of the Greeks is counted from the establishment of the Seleucid monarchy in Babylon (312/311 BCE)” (op. cit., on 1 Macc. 1:10).

But we are quickly informed of the Judean sympathizers with Gentile, that is, Hellenistic, ways. “In those days,” says the narrator, “certain renegades (uiJoi; paravnomoi, huioi paranomoi) came out from Israel and misled many, saying, ‘Let us go and make a covenant with the Gentiles around us, for since we separated from them many disasters have come upon us’ ” (v. 11). “Certain renegades,” says Callaway, were “led by Jason, whom Antiochus appointed high priest in place of his brother Onias III (2 Macc. 4:7). Renegades, lit. ‘lawless ones’ [were] those who compromised the law of Moses” (op. cit., on v. 11). “The term,” she adds, “is used throughout 1 Maccabees to describe Jews who did not support the Hasmoneans. Making a covenant with the Gentiles was expressly forbidden (Ex. 34:11-16; Deut. 7:1-6) because of the danger of being led into idolatry” (ibid.). “This proposal pleased them,” we are told, and some of the people eagerly went to the the king, who authorized them to observe the ordinances of the Gentiles” (vv. 12-13). The “proposal” would be that of the renegades (v. 11), and the people who went to the king would be their sympathizers. In order to be modern and urbane, so to speak, in tune with the cosmopolitan society and culture created–or better, considerably expanded–by Alexander’s conquests, some Jews were open to this life style, and even religion. “Greek culture,” says Callaway, “had become a part of life in Judea., but now enthusiasts introduced customs that compromised Jewish religious observance (2 Macc. 4:11-17)” (ibid., on vv. 11-15). For the pious among the Jews, there were further marks of degradation on the part of the Hellenistic sympathizers. “So they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem, according to Gentile custom, and removed the marks of circumcision and abandoned the holy covenant. They joined with the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil” (vv. 14-15). According to Harrington, the “gymnasium [was] an institution of Greek culture, a place not only for physical exercise but also for literary and philosophical education” (op. cit., on v. 14). He adds that, “The surgical correction of the marks of circumcision (epispasm) may reflect the Greek practice of nudity in physical exercise and sports. Instead of the holy covenant (Torah) Jewish renegades sought a constitution and lifestyle appropriate to a Greek city-state” (ibid., on v. 15).

Although pious Jews were horrified by these developments, Antiochus was encouraged. “When Antiochus saw that his kingdom was established, he determined to become king of the land of Egypt, in order that he might reign over both kingdoms” (v. 16). For a while, his plan worked. “So he invaded Egypt with a strong force, with chariots and elephants and cavalry and with a large fleet” (v. 17). The narrator in 1 Maccabees reports a decisive victory in Egypt for Antiochus. He “engaged King Ptolemy of Egypt in battle, and Ptolemy turned and fled before him, and many were wounded and fell” (v. 18). However, Harrington points out that the Ptolemy in question, “Ptolemy VI Philometer” was “a nephew of Antiochus [who] remained ruler in Egypt from 180 to 145BCE” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 1 Macc. 1:18). Nevertheless, we are told that Antiochus’s army “captured the fortified cities in the land of Egypt, and he plundered the land of Egypt” (v. 19).

One might think that was no way to treat a nephew, but we should consider conflicting interests regarding royal succession. According to Jonathan A. Goldstein, though we are told that “the kingdom was firmly in Antiochus’ hands” (v. 16), “Antiochus IV could still have been viewed as an insecure usurper. Two direct heirs of Seleucus IV were still alive: the child Antiochus, whom Antiochus IV had adopted and recognized as coregent, and an elder son, the future Demetrius I, now a hostage in Rome.” Goldstein adds, “Young King Ptolemy VI might even challenge Antiochus IV’s right to be the Seleucid king, for Ptolemy VI was himself the son of the sister of both Antiochus IV and Seleucus IV” (I Maccabees, Anchor Bible, 41, on 1 Macc. 1:16-19). Although we are told that Antiochus’ army “captured the fortified cities in the land of Egypt , and he plundered the land of Egypt” (v. 19), he was prevented from carrying out his plan to become king of Egypt as well as of Syria. The narrator of 1 Maccabees seems to report a satisfactory conclusion of the war against Ptolemaic Egypt. “After subduing Egypt, Antiochus returned in the one hundred forty-third year. He went up against Israel and came to Jerusalem with a strong force” (v. 20). But in fact, frustrated in Egypt, he returned through Judea in some anger. He returned from Egypt, says Callaway, “because the Roman envoy, Popilius Laenas, threatened him with war if he annexed Egypt; also, news of internal strife in Jerusalem had reached him, and he feared a revolt (2 Macc. 5)” (op. cit., on v. 20).

We are told that “He [i.e., Antiochus] arrogantly entered the sanctuary and took the golden altar, the lampstand for the light, and all its utensils” (v. 21). More than that, “He took also the table for the bread of the Presence, the cups for drink offerings, the bowls, the golden censers, the curtain, the crowns, and the gold decoration on the front of the temple; he stripped it all off. He took the silver and the gold, and the costly vessels; he took also the hidden treasures that he found” (vv. 22-23). According to Harrington, “Like other ancient temples, the Jerusalem temple had sacred vessels and served as a bank (see 2 Macc. 3:10-11). To pay his mercenaries and probably to exact what had been promised him by the high priest Menelaus (2 Macc. 5:15), Antiochus follows the example of Antiochus III (who died robbing a temple) and Seleucus IV (2 Macc. 3)” (op. cit., on vv. 20-28). We are told that Antiochus took all these treasures and “went into his own land” (v. 24a). Harrington also points out that, “Whereas 2 Macc. 5:11-21 places the robbery after Antiochus’ second Egyptian campaign, 1 Maccabees agrees with Dan. 11:28 in placing it after his first Egyptian campaign” (on v. 21). While Paul certainly does not refer to this kind of robbery of temples by kings, we are reminded of his challenge to a hypothetical Jewish opponent. “You that abhor idols, do you rob temples?” (Rom. 2:22b). From the perspective of the Jews under Antiochus’s oppressive rule, especially those who already resented the encroachments of Hellenistic culture, this violation of the temple was a sacriledge.

Today’s reading closes with poetic lines expressing their horror. Of Antiochus, they say, “He shed much blood, / and spoke with great arrogance” (v. 24b). “Israel mourned deeply in every community,” says the poet, “rulers and elders groaned, / young women and young men became faint, / the beauty of the women faded” (vv. 25-26). The national sorrow is illustrated by the situation of bridegrooms and brides. “Every bridegroom took up the lament; / she who sat in the bridal chamber was mourning” (v. 27). And the poet pictures “even the land” as trembling “for its inhabitants,” for “all the house of Jacob was clothed with shame” (v. 28). According to Goldstein, whether this poem “is a dirge contemporary with the events or the author’s composition, the poem represents the reaction of pious Jews to Antiochus’s sack of Jerusalem. They would indeed take adversity as punishment for sin and hence would feel more shame than indignation. The poet may have believed that the events were a fulfillment of Joel 2:6, 10-17, and perhaps also of Amos 8:13, both of which may have served him as models” (op. cit., on vv. 25-28).

Nehemiah 6:1-19 (alternative reading, Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions)

For the text and comments of this reading see the text and comments of Monday, November 2, 2009, ten days ago.

Revelation 19:1-10

Rejoicing in Heaven

19:1 After this I heard what seemed to be the loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, saying,

"Hallelujah!

Salvation and glory and power to our God,

2 for his judgments are true and just;

he has judged the great whore

who corrupted the earth with her fornication,

and he has avenged on her the blood of his servants."

3 Once more they said,

"Hallelujah!

The smoke goes up from her forever and ever."

4 And the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God who is seated on the throne, saying,

"Amen. Hallelujah!"

5 And from the throne came a voice saying,

"Praise our God,

all you his servants,

and all who fear him,

small and great."

6 Then I heard what seemed to be the voice of a great multitude, like the sound of many waters and like the sound of mighty thunder peals, crying out,

"Hallelujah!

For the Lord our God

the Almighty reigns.

7 Let us rejoice and exult

and give him the glory,

for the marriage of the Lamb has come,

and his bride has made herself ready;

8 to her it has been granted to be clothed

with fine linen, bright and pure"--

for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints.

9 And the angel said to me, "Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb." And he said to me, "These are true words of God." 10 Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, "You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your comrades who hold the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." (Revelation 19:1-10, NRSV)

On November11, 2008 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year Two), comments were repeated from earlier comments, those of November 15, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), when comments were repeated with revision and comparison of earlier comments from November 14, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year Two), when comments were combined with revision and supplement from November 9, 2004, (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year Two), and from November 10, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One); there was also comparison with comments on Revelation 19:4-16 from June 11, 2006 (Trinity Sunday, Year Two), and with further comparison with the comments of May 18, 2008 (Trinity Sunday, Year Two). The following comments are based on the above:

Previous readings have focused on the anticipation of the destruction of “Babylon,” that is, of Rome (Rev., chap. 18). Today’s reading first celebrates this divine victory, and then moves into worship and rejoicing of those on God’s side. David E. Aune says, “A heavenly throne-room scene . . . reflects on Rome’s fall (vv. 1-5) and anticipates the marriage of the Lamb (vv. 6-10)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Rev. 19:1-10). John reports hearing “what seemed to be the loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, saying,

‘Hallelujah ( +Allhloui&av, Hallēlouïa)!

Salvation and glory and power to our God,

for his judgments are true and just;

            he has judged the great whore

who corrupted the earth with her fornication,

and he has avenged on her the blood of his servants.’ (Rev. 19:1-2, NRSV)

“Hallelujah,” says Aune, is “a Hebrew term meaning ‘praise Yah(weh)’ (Ps. 135:3), occurs in the NT only in these verses, though it has become a familiar term in Jewish and Christian liturgy” (ibid., on vv. 1-6). Compare, “The gates of Jerusalem will sing hymns of joy, / and all her houses will cry, ‘Hallelujah (Allhlouia, [H]allēlouia)’ ” (Tobit 13:18a, b LXX ms. Sinaiticus = NRSV 13:17a, b). The shorter texts of the Septuagint Manuscripts Alexandrinus (A) and Vaticanus (B) include the word Allhlouia, ([H]allēlouia, “Hallelujah” (cf. Alfred Rahlfs, ed., Septuaginta, 7^th ed., 1935, reprint 1962, vol. I, p. 1036). The Hebrew word h0yAUll4ha (hall ^elûyāh) occurs, of course in many Psalms: 104:35d; 105:45c; 106:1a, 48d; 111:1a; 112:1a; 113:1a, 9c; 115:18c; 116:19c; 117:2c (cf. v. 1); 135:1a, 21c; 146:1a, 10c; 147:1a, 20c; 148:1a, 14d; 149:1a, 9c; 150:1a, 6b. There are also many variations; in Psalm 148, for example, h0yAUll4ha (hall ^elûyāh), is followed by the nearly synonymous, hvhy-tx, Ull4ha (hall^elû ’eth YHWH), “Praise the LORD (from the heavens).” William L. Holladay has apparently overstated the case when he says this word is found “at the beginning or end of Pss. 104-150” (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 10^th corrected impression 1988, s.v. h0yAUll4ha, hall ^elûyāh).

John tells us that, “Once more they [i.e., the ‘great multitude,’ v. 1] said,

‘Hallelujah ( +Allhloui&av, Hallēlouïa)!

The smoke goes up from her forever and ever’.” (Rev. 19:3, NRSV)

Compare the “fire” (18:8) and “the smoke of her burning” (18:18). John refers to “the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures,” whom he saw in the first vision of the heavenly throne room (4:4-11); they “fell down and worshiped God who is seated on the throne, saying,

‘Amen ( =Amhvn, Amēn). Hallelujah ( +Allhloui&av, Hallēlouïa)!” (‘Rev. 19:4, NRSV)

The “Amen,” and the “Hallelujah” of “the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures” (cf. 4:4-11) acknowledge God’s judgment on “Babylon” (19:4). “And,” says John, “from the throne came a voice saying,

‘Praise our God,

all you his servants,

and all who fear him,

small and great’.” (Rev. 19:5, NRSV)

For this verse, Metzger refers to Psalm 115:13, “He [i.e., the LORD, v. 12] will bless those who fear the LORD, / both small and great” (op. cit., on Rev. 19:5).

Then the focus shifts to “the marriage supper of the Lamb” (vv. 8, 10). “Then,” says John, “I heard what seemed to be the voice of a great multitude, like the sound of many waters and like the sound of mighty thunderpeals, crying out,

‘Hallelujah ( +Allhloui&av, Hallēlouïa)!

For the Lord our God

the Almighty reigns. (Rev. 19:6, NRSV)

At this point Aune refers (op. cit., on v. 6) to his earlier note on 7:9: “A great multitude [is] a heavenly assembly that may include but is not identical to the 144,000 Israelites mentioned in [7:] 4-8; it represents the spiritualized fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (Gen. 22:17; 32:23; cf. Rom. 9:27). It’s members are identified in [7:] 14 as the martyrs who have gone through the great tribulation” (ibid., on 7:9). The “great multitude” of chapter 19, however, is more inclusive that Aune suggests, in anticipation of “the marriage supper of the Lamb” (vv. 8, 10). “ ‘Let us rejoice and exult,’ they say, ‘and give him the glory, / for the marriage of the Lamb has come, / and his bride has made herself ready; to her it has been granted to be clothed with fine linen, bright and pure’–for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints” (vv. 7-8). The Lamb is Christ and the bride is the church, to be united henceforth and forever. As Metzger says, “His bride [is] the church (Eph. 5:23-32)” (op. cit., on v. 7). And Metzger adds, “‘the church is holy as her members are holy (7:14; compare Mt. 22:11)” (ibid., on v. 8). Aune calls the “marriage of the Lamb [a] metaphor for the union of Christ as bridegroom and the church as bride (see 21:2, 9; 22:17; 2 Cor 11:2; Eph. 5:25-33); for Israel as the bride of God, see Isa. 54:5; Hos. 2:19-20” (op. cit., on v. 7). Ruiz points out that “fine linen,” in which the bride is clothed, stands “in contrast to the attire of Babylon (17:4)” (op. cit., on v. 8).

The woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication” (Rev. 17:4, NRSV)

What are they celebrating? “The marriage supper of the Lamb” (v. 9, cf. v. 7b)! Then the angel tells John, “Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb” (v. 9). John is apparently overcome, and falls down “at his feet to worship him [the angel],” but he is reminded to “worship God!” (v. 10).

One of my seminary professors, Dr. Dennis Kinlaw, began a sermon on Christian marriage something like this: “The Bible begins with a wedding [Adam and Eve], and ends with a wedding [the marriage supper of the Lamb]. Throughout the Bible there is frequent use of human marriage as a picture of God’s relationship with his people.” “On that day, says the LORD, you will call me, ‘My husband,’ and no longer will you call me, ‘My Baal.’. . . And I will take you for my wife forever; I will take you for my wife in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love, and in mercy. I will take you for my wife in faithfulness; and you shall know the LORD” (Hosea 2:16, 19-20).

Matthew 16:1-12

Jesus is Asked for a Sign (Mk 8.11-13; Lk 12.54-56)

16:1 The Pharisees and Sadducees came, and to test Jesus they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. 2 He answered them, "When it is evening, you say, 'It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.' 3 And in the morning, 'It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. 4 An evil and adulterous generation asks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah." Then he left them and went away.

The Yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mk 8.14-21)

5 When the disciples reached the other side, they had forgotten to bring any bread. 6 Jesus said to them, "Watch out, and beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees." 7 They said to one another, "It is because we have brought no bread." 8 And becoming aware of it, Jesus said, "You of little faith, why are you talking about having no bread? 9 Do you still not perceive? Do you not remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 10 Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 11 How could you fail to perceive that I was not speaking about bread? Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees!" 12 Then they understood that he had not told them to beware of the yeast of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. (Matthew 6:1-12, NRSV)

On June 11, 2008 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 8, Year Two), comments were repeated from November 15, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), when comments were based on comments from November 10, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), and from June 14, 2006 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 8, Year Two). For recent comments on the parallel passages in Mark (Mk. 8:11-21), see the Archive for August 3, 2009 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year One).

Matthew’s reporting of the demand for a sign from Jesus appears twice, in chapters 12 and 16. The first occurs in a context shared with Luke about The Sign of Jonah (Mt. 12:38-42; Lk. 11:16, 29-32), and the second occurs in a context shared with Mark (Mt. 16:1-4; Mk. 8:11-13). Other traditions share this motif (e.g. Lk. 12:54-56; Jn. 6:30). These relationships are presented in the following table:

Although there is minor variation in the identity of the questioners, “Pharisees and Sadducees” (Mt. 16:1); “some of the scribes and Pharisees” (Mt. 12:38), “Pharisees” (Mk. 8:11), “others” (Lk. 11:16), and “they” (Jn. 6:30, apparently some from “the crowd” (Jn. 6:24) who are sincere seekers (cf. v. 34), they may be seen as two groups, the leaders who opposed or resisted Jesus’ teaching (Mt. Mk) and the “crowds” who remain undecided but show signs of earnest inquiry (Lk., Jn.). The “sign of Jonah” (Mt. 16:4; 12:39; Lk. 11:29) and the contrast between their ability to read the signs of the weather and the lack of ability to “interpret the signs of the times” (Mt. 16:3; cf. Lk. 12:56) appear to come from traditions or sources shared by Matthew and Luke; for the others there is just a request for a sign. But in all these passages, ironically, the request for a sign follows on the heels of (i.e. immediately or soon after) one of Jesus’ miracles.

The disciples ask for an explanation of the warning about the “yeast” of the Pharisees or of the Pharisees and the Sadducees or of Herod (Mt. 16:6; Mk. 8:15; Lk. 12:1), as indicated in the following table:

Jesus’ warning about “the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Mt. 16:6) leads to a reminder that Jesus has supplied the disciples’ needs (i.e. bread), in the Feedings of Five Thousand (v. 9) and Four Thousand (v. 10). But the warning really applies to “the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (v. 12). If it is ironic that the Pharisees and the crowds ask Jesus for a sign when he has just performed a miracle (see above), it is at least puzzling that the disciples appear to misunderstand as well. They ask for an explanation of the warning about the “yeast” of the Pharisees or of the Pharisees and the Sadducees or of Herod (Mt. 16:6; Mk. 8:15; Lk. 12:1). Jesus responds to their “literal” understanding of “yeast” as a reference to “bread.” “It is because we have brought no bread” (Mt. 16:7) or “. . . we have no bread” (Mk. 8:16) as a failure to understand the feeding miracles (the 5000 and the 4000). Jesus’ rhetorical question in Matthew, “How could you fail to perceive that I was not speaking about bread?” (Mt. 16:11) is reduced to a simple label of “hypocrisy” in Luke. “Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees, that is, their hypocrisy” (Lk. 12:1). Compare the “Woes” Jesus pronounced on the scribes and Pharisees (Mt. 23:1-36; Mk. 12:37b-40; Lk. 20:45-47).

We have the witness of faithful Christian believers over twenty centuries. Some Christians (or those who claim that label) have also done terrible things in the name of Christianity (the Inquisition, the Holocaust, etc., come to mind), but that should not detract from the examples of faithful Christian living such as the early martyrs, Francis of Assisi, Sister Mary Theresa, and many others, probably including the leaders in the church you regularly attend. We, like the Galilean crowds, may turn to Christ for nourishment, which he called “the bread of life” (Jn. 6:35).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net