1 Maccabees 2:29-43, 49-50

29 At that time many who were seeking righteousness and justice went down to the wilderness to live there, 30 they, their sons, their wives, and their livestock, because troubles pressed heavily upon them. 31 And it was reported to the king’s officers, and to the troops in Jerusalem the city of David, that those who had rejected the king’s command had gone down to the hiding places in the wilderness. 32 Many pursued them, and overtook them; they encamped opposite them and prepared for battle against them on the Sabbath day. 33 They said to them, “Enough of this! Come out and do what the king commands, and you will live.” 34 But they said, “We will not come out, nor will we do what the king commands and so profane the Sabbath day.” 35 Then the enemy quickly attacked them. 36 But they did not answer them or hurl a stone at them or block up their hiding places, 37 for they said, “Let us all die in our innocence; heaven and earth testify for us that you are killing us unjustly.” 38 So they attacked them on the Sabbath, and they died, with their wives and children and livestock, to the number of a thousand persons.

39 When Mattathias and his friends learned of it, they mourned for them deeply. 40 And all said to their neighbors: “If we all do as our kindred have done and refuse to fight with the Gentiles for our lives and for our ordinances, they will quickly destroy us from the earth.” 41 So they made this decision that day: “Let us fight against anyone who comes to attack us on the Sabbath day; let us not all die as our kindred died in their hiding places.”

42 Then there united with them a company of Hasideans, mighty warriors of Israel, all who offered themselves willingly for the law. 43 And all who became fugitives to escape their troubles joined them and reinforced them. (1 Maccabees 2:29-43, NRSV)

49 Now the days drew near for Mattathias to die, and he said to his sons: “Arrogance and scorn have now become strong; it is a time of ruin and furious anger. 50 Now, my children, show zeal for the law, and give your lives for the covenant of our ancestors. (1 Maccabees 2:49-50, NRSV)

On November 18, 2007 (the Twenty-fifth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the Sunday closest to November 16, Year One), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from November 13, 2005 (the Sunday closest to November 16, Year One); the comments are repeated again here:

Yesterday’s reading ends with Mattathias’ call to arms, “Let every one who is zealous for the law and supports the covenants come out with me!” (1 Maccabees 2:27). Then he and his sons flee “to the hills,” and leave all their belongings “in the town,” that is, in Modein (v. 28). As today’s reading begins, we are told of the response. “At that time many who were seeking righteousness and justice went down to the wilderness to live there, they, their sons, their wives, and their livestock, because troubles pressed heavily upon them” (vv. 29-30). Mary Chilton Callaway points out that “In the wilderness of Judea they found hiding places (Isa. 32:16)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 1 Macc. 2:29-31). “The group,” says Daniel J. Harrington, “is described in terms (seeking righteousness and justice) used also of the Qumran community” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 1 Macc. 2:29). At the outset, Mattathias and company need to withdraw and prepare for coming battles. But it does not take long for their enemy to learn of their whereabouts, for “ it was reported to the king’s officers, and to the troops in Jerusalem the city of David, that those who had rejected the king’s command had gone down to the hiding places in the wilderness” (v. 31). The first encounter does not go well for Mattathias’ group. “Many [of the king’s forces] pursued them [Mattathias’ group], and overtook them; they encamped opposite them and prepared for battle against them on the Sabbath day” (v. 32). They challenge the rebels. “Enough of this!” they call out. “Come out and do what the king commands, and you will live” (v. 33). But the rebels are defiant. “We will not come out,” is their reply, “nor will we do what the king commands and so profane the Sabbath day” (v. 34). So “the enemy quickly attacked them” (v. 35), with disastrous results from a human perspective. But they refuse to fight on the sabbath as a matter of conscience; “they did not answer them or hurl a stone at them or block up their hiding places, for they said, “Let us all die in our innocence; heaven and earth testify for us that you are killing us unjustly’ ” (vv. 36-37). “So they [i.e., the king’s forces], attacked them on the sabbath, and they died, with their wives and children and livestock, to the number of a thousand persons” (v. 38). “The group died,” says Harrington, “because they refused to obey the king’s decree to profane the sabbath day. They refused to fight even defensive wars as part of their strict code of piety, thus inviting martyrdom. See 2 Macc. 6:11” (ibid., on v. 34). The response by “many who were seeking righteousness and justice” (v. 29) is impressive. Their refusal to defend themselves on the Sabbath, and their consequent deaths, put a religious emphasis on what was already seen as a religious conflict.

For Mattathias and his group, the loss of these people was tragic; when they “learned of it, they mourned for them deeply.” (v. 39). But in consequence, they rethink their strategy. “And all said to their neighbors: ‘If we all do as our kindred have done and refuse to fight with the Gentiles for our lives and for our ordinances, they will quickly destroy us from the earth’ ” (v. 40). And their decision is not to repeat the first tragic defeat, but rather, to defend themselves, even on the sabbath: “Let us fight against anyone who comes to attack us on the Sabbath day; let us not all die as our kindred died in their hiding places” (v. 41). Callaway calls this “the earliest statement of the principle that one may profane one sabbath in order to keep all the others” (op. cit., on v. 41). According to Harrington (in surmise?), “The Maccabees’ decision to engage in defensive warfare on the sabbath was not necessarily a complete innovation in Israel; the problem surely had arise previously” (ibid., on v. 41).

In this context, we first meet the “Hasideans,” the “pious,” a group concerned about religious law, from whom groups such as the Essenes and the Pharisees (first mentioned by name decades later) would later emerge. “Then there united with them a company of Hasideans, mighty warriors of Israel, all who offered themselves willingly for the law. And all who became fugitives to escape their troubles joined them and reinforced them” (vv. 42-43). Callaway relates the Hasideans to those who “chose to die rather than to be defiled by food or to profane the holy covenant; and they did die” (1:63). She says the “hasideans, ‘the pious,’ [were] a group not concerned for Jewish nationalism but only for the religious law. At first they resisted passively (1:62-63; 2:37), but now turned to violent action (but see 1 Macc. 7:12-13)” (ibid., on v. 42). Harrington puts it a little differently. “Unlike the group described in vv. 29-38, the Hasideans (Hebrew, ‘pious, loyal ones’) join the military action with the Maccabees. See 7:12-13, which suggests a scribal aspect to their movement and a rift with the Maccabees. In 2 Macc. 14:6, however, Judas appears as the leader of the Hasideans” (op. cit., on 1 Macc. 2:42). As the movement gathers momentum, “all who became fugitives to escape their troubles joined them and reinforced them” (v. 43).

The interval in the reading (vv. 44-48, included in parentheses in the Presbyterian and Lutheran references) reports that the newcomers (v. 43) “formed an army” and struck back in many ways at the enemy, including the renegade Jews, of whom “the survivors fled to the Gentiles for safety” (v. 44). We are told that “Mattathias and his friends” enforced the laws that had been rescinded by the Syrians; they tore down the [pagan] altars; they forcibly circumcised all the uncircumcised boys that they found within the borders of Israel” (vv. 45-46), and “they hunted down the arrogant” (v. 47) and “rescued the law out of the hands of the Gentiles and kings, and they never let the sinner gain the upper hand” (v. 48).

As today’s reading comes to a close, we are presented with only the beginning of Mattathias’ farewell speech to his sons (vv. 49-68). “Now the days drew near for Mattathias to die,” we are told, and he addresses his sons. “Arrogance and scorn have now become strong; it is a time of ruin and furious anger. Now, my children, show zeal for the law, and give your lives for the covenant of our ancestors’ ” (v v. 49-50). The speech that follows “appeals to biblical figures who underwent testing and so were rewarded by God,” says Harrington, as he lists several, Jacob, Moses, Samuel and others, and concludes: “their rewards–priesthood, rulership, deliverance from danger, land–foreshadow the gains to be made by Judas, Jonathan, and Simon” (ibid., on vv. 49-70). Tomorrow’s reading moves on to chapter 3.

Ezra 7:(1-10) 11-26 (alternative reading, Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions)

For the text and comments on this reading see the text and comments of Thursday, November 5, 2009, ten days ago.

Acts 28:14b-23

And so we came to Rome. 15 The believers from there, when they heard of us, came as far as the Forum of Appius and Three Taverns to meet us. On seeing them, Paul thanked God and took courage.

16 When we came into Rome, Paul was allowed to live by himself, with the soldier who was guarding him.

17 Three days later he called together the local leaders of the Jews. When they had assembled, he said to them, “Brothers, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our ancestors, yet I was arrested in Jerusalem and handed over to the Romans. 18 When they had examined me, the Romans wanted to release me, because there was no reason for the death penalty in my case. 19 But when the Jews objected, I was compelled to appeal to the emperor—even though I had no charge to bring against my nation. 20 For this reason therefore I have asked to see you and speak with you, since it is for the sake of the hope of Israel that I am bound with this chain.” 21 They replied, “We have received no letters from Judea about you, and none of the brothers coming here has reported or spoken anything evil about you. 22 But we would like to hear from you what you think, for with regard to this sect we know that everywhere it is spoken against.”

After they had set a day to meet with him, they came to him at his lodgings in great numbers. From morning until evening he explained the matter to them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the law of Moses and from the prophets. (Acts 28:14b-23, NRSV)

On August 28 and 29, 2009 (Friday and Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 24, Year One), when the readings were Acts 28:1-16 and 17-31, comments were repeated from October 17 and 18, 2008, when the readings were similar. These readings were based on earlier readings, as noted there. Today’s reading, Acts 28:14b-23 overlaps the two readings, and the following comments are based on relevant parts of the earlier comments for two days:

In today’s reading from Acts, Luke reports the completion of Paul’s journey in chains from Caesarea to Rome. The journey from Malta (Acts 28:11) to Rome was uneventful except for their time with “believers” at Puteoli. According to Charles H. Miller, Puteoli is “the seaport (modern Pozzuoli) just west of Naples . . . During the first century A.D., Puteoli was the major port of Italy, where Alexandrian grain ships (like Paul’s) docked to unload cargo for Rome” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Puteoli). It was about 120 miles south of Rome (cf. the scale of Map 14, NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007). After reporting their arrival at Puteoli (Acts 28:13), Luke says, “There we found believers and were invited to stay with them for seven days. And so we came to Rome” (v. 14). And Luke adds, “The believers from there, when they heard of us, came as far as the Forum of Appius and Three Taverns to meet us” (v. 15a). According to Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “The presence of believers in Puteoli and Rome indicates that Paul was not the first to preach the gospel there (see Rom. 1:13)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Acts 28:14-15). Christopher R. Matthews says, “The Forum of Appius was 65 km (40 mi) from Rome, and the Three Taverns 50 km (30 mi), both on the Via Appia” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Acts 28:15).

The “believers” from Puteoli were probably in fellowship with those of Rome itself. “On seeing them,” says Luke, “Paul thanked God and took courage” (v. 15b). These believers, most likely encouraged by the letter (Romans) recently received from Paul, went out some distance to meet him. Paul’s letter announcing plans to visit Rome (Rom. 1:9:15; 16:22-33) had probably arrived in Rome some three years earlier (spring of A.D. 57), but Paul’s own arrival had been delayed by his arrest and imprisonment, and in particular by the delays of Governor Felix, who was hoping for a bribe. “Felix became frightened [by his conversation with Paul] and said, ‘Go away for the present; when I have an opportunity, I will send for you.’ At the same time he hoped that money would be given him by Paul, and for that reason he used to send for him very often and converse with him” (Acts 24:25b-26).

The living/confinement arrangements in Rome will allow Paul the freedom to minister–when people come to him. “Paul was allowed to live by himself, with the soldier who was guarding him” (v. 16). So we find Paul settled–in a kind of “house arrest,” as it were–and ready to minister in Rome as people came to him (vv. 17-28). With his arrival in Rome and ministry there, Paul accomplishes one of his major goals, as expressed in his letter to the Christians there (Rom. 1:11-15; 15:22-33), though probably not in the manner he had envisioned. To that thought, he might well respond as he said to the Philippians, “What does it matter? Just this, that Christ is proclaimed . . .” (Phil. 1:18), though that was in reference to others who “proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition” (Phil. 1:17). We note that Acts 28 concludes with Paul’s ministry in the city of Rome, under house arrest, in what some call his “first” Roman imprisonment. In Rome, as often before in the narrative of Acts, Paul first reaches out to his own people. This time, of course, he does not start in a Synagogue, but leaders of the Jews come to him. Three days after his arrival, he calls “together the local leaders of the Jews,” and says, “Brothers, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our ancestors, yet I was arrested in Jerusalem and handed over to the Romans” (Acts 28:17). He claims that the Romans have found no fault in him, and wanted to release him (v. 18), but “when the Jews objected, I was compelled to appeal to the emperor–even though I had no charge to bring against my nation” (v. 19). Paul’s aim at this point is to clear his name in the eyes of fellow Jews, despite his imprisoned condition. “For this reason,” he says, “therefore I have asked to see you and speak with you, since it is for the sake of the hope of Israel that I am bound with this chain” (v. 20). But it seems that the Jews of Rome have not heard of the accusations made against Paul (Rom. 28:21). So they are willing to give him a hearing. “But we would like to hear from you what you think,” they say, “for with regard to this sect [i.e., the Christians] we know that everywhere it is spoken against” (v. 22).

In that meeting on the set day, they came to him at his lodgings in great numbers. From morning until evening he explained the matter to them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the law of Moses and from the prophets” (v. 23). In the end, Paul’s efforts to evangelize the Jews of Rome met with limited success. “Some were convinced by what he had said, while others refused to believe” (v. 24). “So they disagreed with each other,” says Luke; “and as they were leaving, Paul made one further statement: The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your ancestors through the prophet Isaiah” (v. 25, introducing the quotation of Isaiah 6:9-10 that follows). But the present reading concludes at this point.

Luke 16:1-13

            The Parable of the Dishonest Manager

16:1 Then Jesus said to the disciples, "There was a rich man who had a manager, and charges were brought to him that this man was squandering his property. 2 So he summoned him and said to him, 'What is this that I hear about you? Give me an accounting of your management, because you cannot be my manager any longer.' 3 Then the manager said to himself, 'What will I do, now that my master is taking the position away from me? I am not strong enough to dig, and I am ashamed to beg. 4 I have decided what to do so that, when I am dismissed as manager, people may welcome me into their homes.' 5 So, summoning his master's debtors one by one, he asked the first, 'How much do you owe my master?' 6 He answered, 'A hundred jugs of olive oil.' He said to him, 'Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it fifty.' 7 Then he asked another, 'And how much do you owe?' He replied, 'A hundred containers of wheat.' He said to him, 'Take your bill and make it eighty.' 8 And his master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly; for the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light. 9 And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes.

10 "Whoever is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and whoever is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much. 11 If then you have not been faithful with the dishonest wealth, who will entrust to you the true riches? 12 And if you have not been faithful with what belongs to another, who will give you what is your own? 13 No slave can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth." (Luke 16:1-13, NRSV)

On November 14 and 15, 2008 (Friday and Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year Two), comments on Luke 16:1-9 and 10-17 (18) were repeated with some editing and supplement from earlier, as noted there. The following comments are based on the earlier comments.

The Parable of the “Dishonest Manager” (to;n oijkonovmon th:V ajdikivaV, ton oikonomon tēs adikias), so called in Luke 16:8, is not presented as an example of ethical behavior, in spite of the master’s commendation in the parable. Some of Jesus’ parables may be understood as exemplary stories. The actions of the Good Samaritan, for example, may be taken as a model for Christian behavior in similar circumstances (Lk. 10:29-37). In some cases, the example is a bad example. Don’t follow the example of the Rich Fool (Lk. 12:16-21), or the Rich Man who ignored the needs of Lazarus, who lay at his gate, hungry and “covered with sores” (Lk. 16:20, cf. vv. 19-31). But many interpreters seem faced with a dilemma when it comes to the Parable of the Dishonest Manager (Lk. 16:1-9). Should he have squandered his master’s property in the first place (v. 1)? Should he have reduced the debt of his master’s debtors (vv. 5-7)? Was his motive to help his master realize whatever gain he could in the circumstances, and so to deserve the commendation in fact given by the master (v. 8)? Or was his motive to provide for his own future, “so that, when I am dismissed as manager, people may welcome me into their homes” (v. 4)? Other explanations have been given. Perhaps it’s a call for decisive action in reference to the coming kingdom of God, but one then wonders, says G. W. H. Lampe, how verses 10-13 are related (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1962, reprinted 1972, sec. 730 j, p. 836, on Lk. 16:1-9). Perhaps the commendation (v. 8) is ironic, or perhaps it is genuine because the manager has lowered the debt by forgoing his commission (50%?) (cf. David L. Tiede, HarperCollins Study Bible, 1993, on Lk. 16:5-7). Perhaps there is a contrast between earthly and heavenly values (cf. v. 13). Lampe has a point: “it is more likely that the parable is directed against the leaders of Israel as stewards of God’s property. They should be making friends of those whom they have oppressed, so as to find security when their present position of worldly privilege collapses with the end of the old order” (loc. cit.). The manager is called dishonest for a reason, “a manager of unrighteousness.” We are not called to act as he did, but we are called to weigh our values carefully as good stewards (managers) of the grace of God given to us.

Sheryl Bozeman, an alumna of HGST (M.Div., 1994), wrote her Master’s degree thesis as a study of this parable, in the context of recent research on parables. She noted that Adolf Jülicher, called “the father of modern parabolic research,” rejected allegorization and contended that “the essence of the parable was similitude” (Bozeman thesis, 14). She cites another (Kissinger), who said “a similitude grows from a simile that depicts familiar scenes and relationships that are presented in some detail.” So the point of the Parable of the Dishonest Manager is not in the correctness or the wickedness of what he does, but the comparison which can be made with his “shrewdness” in using the things of his present life to prepare for the future. And the disciples should “shrewdly” use the present time to prepare for the future kingdom of God. “And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth [text note a: ‘Gk. mammon] so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes [text note b: ‘Gk. tents]” (v. 9). Marion Lloyd Soards says, “Wealth, lit. ‘mammon,’ is the Greek translation of a Semitic word probably meaning ‘that in which one fully trusts’ ” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Lk. 16:9).

Eric Franklin notes a difference in the sense of “dishonest” in verses 8 and 9, where the same Greek word (ajdikiva, adikia) is translated as “dishonest.” (The word ajdikiva, adikia, “injustice, unrighteousness,” is a noun but functions as an adjective in the Semitic idioms manager of injustice = “dishonest manager” and wealth (mammon) of injustice = “dishonest wealth.”)

The servant is ‘dishonest’ in our understanding of the term. All mammon (NRSV ‘wealth’), however, is called ‘dishonest’ in the sense that it is material possessions understood as the things in which one puts one’s trust and that therefore encourage an acquisitive attitude and a self-reliance; it separates one from God (hence ‘unrighteous’ is probably a better term). (The Oxford Bible Commentary, 1962, reprinted 1972, p. 948, on Lk. 16:1-13)

In this way, Franklin suggests that verse 9 is not a part of the parable. “If v. 9 were part of the parable, it would be encouraging us to use our wealth gained dishonestly in a way that brought us some benefits: it would be virtually condoning dishonesty!” Franklin further struggles with the idea that the master commended the dishonest manager. “The real challenge is the master’s commendation of the steward. What does this say, not only about the steward but also about the master?” As he says, the parable certainly is enigmatic. But perhaps some former Exxon employees and other creditors have something of an answer. When the crunch time comes, you take what you can get! Or better, as Sheryl Bozeman suggested, we should regard the story as an extended simile which is really about something else, namely our own preparation for the future with God.

In a series of Jesus’ sayings that follows the Parable of the Dishonest Manager, some themes recur. Some of the sayings are found only in Luke; others have parallels elsewhere in Matthew and/or Mark. Earlier comments made reference to a table showing these parallel passages. The full table is in a separate file, Faithfulness and the Law. The relevant portion for today’s reading is presented here:

Jesus begins with what amounts to commentary on the Parable of the Dishonest Manager. “Whoever is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and whoever is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much” (Lk. 16:10). The dishonest wealth of this world is not “true riches” (v. 11), nor does it relate to God’s kind of wealth (v. 13). The “dishonest manager” is commended (Lk. 16:8) but “dishonest wealth” is used by him and by Jesus’ disciples (v. 9), who are to be “faithful with the dishonest wealth” if they are to be entrusted “with the true riches” (v. 11). Compare the distinction cited from Eric Franklin above. He noted the use of the same word for “dishonest” (ajdikiva, adikia) in verses 8 and 9. The expression varies in verse 11, but the thought is the same: Verse 11 uses the adjective a[dikoV (adikos), “If then you have not been faithful with the dishonest wealth ( ejn tw:/ ajdivkw/ mamwna:/, en tō adikō mamōna). We are faced with a choice: “No slave can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth” (v. 13; cf. Mt. 6:24, which in the Greek does not include “a slave,” oijkevthV, oiketēs [except in ms. L and a few others], but is otherwise the same as Luke’s version), where “wealth” (mamwna:V, mamōnas) carries the sense given by Franklin, “material possessions understood as the things in which one puts one’s trust and that therefore encourage an acquisitive attitude and a self-reliance [which] separates one from God.” Franklin notes that Luke “has the parable [of the Dishonest Manager] addressed to the disciples” which “would include those whom Jesus’ table-sharing was receiving into the Kingdom, the tax-collectors and sinners” (ibid.). He adds:

Faithfulness with ‘unrighteous mammon’ means using it in the service of the poor (v. 11). They must free themselves from its shackles. They cannot be slaves to God and to mammon. (ibid.)

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net