Obadiah 15-21

¹⁵ For the day of the Lord is near against all the nations.

As you have done, it shall be done to you;

your deeds shall return on your own head.

¹⁶ For as you have drunk on my holy mountain,

all the nations around you shall drink;

they shall drink and gulp down,

and shall be as though they had never been.

Israel’s Final Triumph

¹⁷ But on Mount Zion there shall be those that escape,

and it shall be holy;

and the house of Jacob shall take possession of those who dispossessed them.

¹⁸ The house of Jacob shall be a fire,

the house of Joseph a flame,

and the house of Esau stubble;

they shall burn them and consume them,

and there shall be no survivor of the house of Esau;

for the Lord has spoken.

¹⁹ Those of the Negeb shall possess Mount Esau,

and those of the Shephelah the land of the Philistines;

they shall possess the land of Ephraim and the land of Samaria,

and Benjamin shall possess Gilead.

²⁰ The exiles of the Israelites who are in Halah

shall possess Phoenicia as far as Zarephath;

and the exiles of Jerusalem who are in Sepharad

shall possess the towns of the Negeb.

²¹ Those who have been saved shall go up to Mount Zion

to rule Mount Esau;

and the kingdom shall be the Lord’s. (Obadiah 15-21, NRSV)

On November 28, 2007 (Wednesday in the week of the Twenty-sixth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to November 23, Year One), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from November 23, 2005 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 23, Year One); the comments are repeated here with editing and supplement:

“Obadiah,” says Ehud Ben Zvi, “is the shortest book in the [Hebrew] Bible, containing only 291 Heb. words” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, in the Introduction to Obadiah). (In the New Testament, 3 John is shorter with 220 Greek words.) According to Richard A. Henshaw, revised by Ben Zvi, the name Obadiah (hyAd4bafo, ‘ōbadyāh) means “slave/servant [db,f,, ‘eved ) of Yah (i.e., Yahweh, the LORD)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, in the Introduction to Obadiah). The book’s title says, “The vision (NOzH3, ch ^a zôn) of Obadiah” (Ob. 1:1a). According to Henshaw and Ben Zvi, “Only the name of the prophet is given; nothing is said about his time, town, profession, ore even the name of his father. Some consider this laconic presentation an invitation to readers to fill the gaps” (ibid.). According to Gregory Mobley, “Though Obadiah contains no date formula, on the basis of its allusion to the fall of Jerusalem (586 BCE), it probably stems from the first half of the sixth century” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, in the Introduction to Obadiah).

As the focus of Nahum is on Assyria, so the focus of Obadiah is on Edom. According to Ben Zvi,

The Edomites, the central characters of the book, were regarded as kin to the Israelites, since they were supposedly descended from Esau, Jacob’s brother (see Gen. 25:30; 36:8; Num. 20:14; Deut. 2:4, 8, passim). In Obadiah, Edom serves both as a reference to the nation of that name that was considered to be Israel’s brother–a motif explicitly mentioned in Obadiah 10–and also to the nations in general. Subsequently, Jews identified Edom with Rome and later with Christendom. For them, the book of Obadiah referred at least in part to the events associated with the destruction of the Second Temple (cf. Radak), or to future events associated with the coming of the messianic era (e.g., Abravanel). Of course, ancient and medieval Christian readers were convinced that they were (the true) Israel, not Edom (cf. Rom. 9:6-13). (loc. cit., 2004)

In the case of Edom, as in the case of Assyria (in Nahum), the LORD’s judgment upon the enemy nation is relief for Israel. Obadiah rebukes Edom: “On the day that you stood aside, / on the day that strangers carried off his wealth, / and foreigners entered his gates / and cast lots for Jerusalem / you too were like one of them” (Obadiah 11). From Israel’s perspective, Edom stood by and watched the Babylonian destruction and captivity of Israel. “But you should not have gloated over your brother / on the day of his misfortune; / you should not have rejoiced over the people of Judah / on the day of their ruin; / you should not have boasted / on the day of distress” (v. 12). Edom added insult to injury by “gloating over Judah’s disaster” (v. 13, cf. v. 12), even hindering the flight of fugitives and “handing over his, that is, Judah’s, survivors (v. 14). Apparently, they even moved in to take over Jewish territory when the Jews were deported. (Compare the location of Edom on maps of the Old Testament period in your Bible, southeast of the Dead Sea, with the location of Idumea, a later name for Edomite territory, in Persian-Hellenistic times.)

The selection for today’s reading continues Obadiah’s rebuke and judgment of Edom (vv. 15-16). “For the day of the LORD is near against all the nations. / As you have done, it shall be done to you; / your deeds shall return on your own head” (v. 15 NRSV). Although the NRSV translation is according to the Hebrew, the recent Jewish translation says, “As you did, so shall it be done to you; / Your conduct shall be requited” (Ob 15a, b NJPS 1985, 1999), and “Yea, against all nations / The day of the LORD is at hand” (v. 15c, d NJPS). Of v. 15b, “Your conduct shall be requited,” Ben Zvi says, “This line is shared by the previous unit [i.e., vv. 8-15] and this one [i.e. vv. 15b-18]. Sharing of expressions or lines between two neighboring units within a literary text is not uncommon. This feature brings the two units together, makes the book more cohesive, and contributes to the flow of the reading” (op. cit., 2004, on v. 15b).

“For as you have drunk on my holy mountain,” says the prophet, speaking for the LORD, “all the nations around you shall drink; / they shall drink and gulp down, / and shall be as though they had never been” (v. 16). Mobley compares this to such texts as Jeremiah 25:15-29; 49:12; and Lamentations 4:21 (op. cit., on Obadiah 16), where drinking the cup of the LORD’s wrath and the resulting drunkenness is a vivid picture of the LORD’s judgment and punishment. Jeremiah says, “For thus says the LORD: If those who do not deserve to drink the cup still have to drink it, shall you be the one to go unpunished? You shall not go unpunished; you must drink it” (Jer. 49:12).

But Obadiah has words of blessing for Israel. “But on Mount Zion there shall be those that escape (hFAylep4 hy,h4T9, tihyeh [feminine verb] p ^elêtāh), / and it shall be (hyAhA6v4, w ^ehāyāh [masculine verb]) holy; / and the house of Jacob shall take possession of those who dispossessed them” (v. 17). Ben Zvi says, “The text creates both a temporal differentiation between Israel that already drank the cup (see Jer. 25:15-29), and the nations that shall drink it, and a spatial one between holy Mt. Zion and the rest of the world” (op. cit., 2004, on vv. 16-17). He adds, commenting on the NJPS text, “The Heb. clearly states that it is Zion’s mount that shall be holy, not the remnant (hFAylep4, p ^elêtāh). According to Henshaw and Ben Zvi, “The motif of reversal is emphasized and culminates with the house of Jacob taking possession of those who dispossessed them” (op. cit., 2006, on vv. 16-17).

The restoration of Israel will be a blessing for Israel, but at Edom’s expense.

The house of Jacob shall be a fire,

the house of Joseph a flame,

and the house of Esau stubble;

they shall burn them and consume them,

and there shall be no survivor of the house of Esau;

for the Lord has spoken. (Ob 18, NRSV)

Israel is “a fire,” “a flame” and “the house of Esau stubble,” and Edom will be burned with “no survivor” (v. 18). Ben Zvi (commenting on the NJPS), says “And no survivor shall be left of the House of Esau: This claim has later been understood as pointing to the world to come and to the place of ‘those whose evil deeds are like to those of Esau’ rather than specifically to Romans (or non-Jews in general. See b. A. Z. 10b)” (op. cit., 2004, on v. 18).

The book closes with a section that Mobley calls “Israel’s vindication,” stating that “Israel will regain its lost territories” (op. cit., on vv. 19-21).

Those of the Negeb shall possess Mount Esau,

and those of the Shephelah the land of the Philistines;

they shall possess the land of Ephraim and the land of Samaria,

and Benjamin shall possess Gilead. (Ob. 19, NRSV)

Various Israelite tribes and groups will repossess land. “Negeb,” says Mobley, “is in the arid south; Shephelah, the western foothills. Gilead is in Transjordan” (op. cit., on v. 19). Ben Zvi says that verse 19 “is probably better understood” to say “will and should inherit/possess the whole of . . .” in each case” (op. cit., 2004, on vv. 19-21, and refers to the Targum).

The prophet continues to announce the regaining of lost territory.

The exiles of the Israelites who are in Halah

shall possess Phoenicia as far as Zarephath;

and the exiles of Jerusalem who are in Sepharad

shall possess the towns of the Negeb. (Ob. 20, NRSV)

According to Mobley, “Exiles from the eighth-century Assyrian campaigns will return from Halah, a city in northern Mesopotamia (2 Kings 17:6). Zarepath a city on the Phoenician coast, between Tyre and Sidon, represents the northwest border of an expanded Israel. Sepharad, location unknown [is] perhaps in Asia Minor” (op. cit., on v. 20). According to Ben Zvi,

A number of alternative readings and understandings of v. 20 have been advanced. . . . Although all agree that the text communicates that Israel will repossess the land, the question at stake is which social and geographical structure is envisioned for that Israel. . . . Sepharad was identified in the Targum as Spain. (It is more likely to be Sardis, a main city in Asia Minor.) The equation Sepharad = Spain, however, became a cornerstone in Jewish self-identification for centuries. The Jews of Spain and their descendants are called, and call themselves Sepharadim (or Sefaradim). (loc. cit.)

The prophet concludes his book with the words, “Those who have been saved shall go up to Mount Zion” (v. 21). The words, “those who have been saved” (NRSV), are based on a correction (cf. text note a “Or Saviors”), MyfwAOn, nôšā‘îm, or MyfwAUm, mûšā‘îm, for Myf9w9Om, môš ^e‘ îm, that is, ‘those saved/delivered’ for ‘saviors/deliverers’ (cf. K. Elliger, Liber XII Prophetarum, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 2^nd ed., emended, 1983, on Ob. 21). Following the Massoretic Text (i.e., the traditional Hebrew text), the Authorized (KJ) Version says, “And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the LORD’s” (Ob. 21 AV/KJV); compare “Delivers will go up on Mount Zion to govern the mountains of Esau. And the kingdom will be the LORD’s” (Ob. 21 TNIV). The recent Jewish translation says, “For liberators shall march up on Mount Zion to wreak judgment on Mount Esau; and dominion shall be the LORD’s” (Ob. 21 NJPS). Ben Zvi says,

Some scholars would prefer to translate ‘saviors’ instead of liaberators and ‘to judge’ rather than to wreak judgment on Mount Esau. The conclusion of the book originally evoked the language associated with the time of the Judges, who are sometimes called deliverers or liberators (see, e.g., Judg. 3:9). Such an understanding raises questions about the identity of the mentioned saviors (see Radak on Mic. 5:4; Ibn Ezra; Abravanel). (op. cit., 2004, on vv. 19-21).

1 Peter 2:1-10

2:1 Rid yourselves, therefore, of all malice, and all guile, insincerity, envy, and all slander. 2 Like newborn infants, long for the pure, spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow into salvation— 3 if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.

4 Come to him, a living stone, though rejected by mortals yet chosen and precious in God’s sight, and 5 like living stones, let yourselves be built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For it stands in scripture:

“See, I am laying in Zion a stone,

a cornerstone chosen and precious;

and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

7 To you then who believe, he is precious; but for those who do not believe,

“The stone that the builders rejected

has become the very head of the corner,”

8 and

“A stone that makes them stumble,

and a rock that makes them fall.”

They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, in order that you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.

10 Once you were not a people,

but now you are God’s people;

once you had not received mercy,

but now you have received mercy.

On April 19, 2009 (the Second Sunday of Easter, Year One), comments were based on those of April 15, 2007 (the Second Sunday of Easter, Year One), of November 28, 2007 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 23, Year One), of April 2, 2008 (Wednesday in the week of the Second Sunday of Easter, Year Two), and from earlier dates as noted there. The present comments are repeated with editing and supplement from the comments of April 19, 2009:

Chapter 2 of 1 Peter introduces a series of exhortations–advice about Christian living–that continue in much of the remainder of the Epistle. Peter urges Christians to “Rid yourselves, therefore, of all malice, and all guile, insincerity, envy, and all slander” (1 Pet. 2:1), but rather, “Like newborn infants [to] long for the pure spiritual milk, so that, by it you may grow into salvation–if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good” (vv. 2-3). Peter H. Davids finds a “surprise” in verse 2,

for instead of a catalogue of virtues to replace the vices (as in Gal. 5), we discover a call to dependence on God. Since they have been reborn (cf. 1:2 for this image, which is a baptismal image), they are babies. Both the terms “newborn” and “babies,” which indicate a nursing infant, show this. Thus they should desire appropriate food, namely milk. (The First Epistle of Peter, NICNT, 1990, p. 81 on 1 Pet. 2:2)

Then the imagery shifts to stones, or, as Davids puts it, “from that of nourishment to that of security and honor” (ibid., on v. 4). “Come to him, a living stone, though rejected by mortals yet chosen and precious in God’s sight” (v. 4). The readers, “like living stones,” are to “let yourselves be built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (v. 5). Davids comments:

The Christians are not naturally ‘living stones,’ but become such as they are joined to Christ in conversion and baptism (cf. 2 Cor. 3:18, for it is only as they come to him that this building is possible. Nor are they pictured as individually stones, lying apart in a field or building site, but collectively as part of God’s great temple. It is God, of course, who is building them together into this edifice of the end times, thus the verb (‘are being built’) is descriptive, not imperative (‘be built’ or ‘let yourselves be built,’ neither of which fits smoothly into the context). (op. cit., pp. 86-87 on v. 5).

Peter is encouraging new Christians, “newborn infants” (1 Pet. 2:2), to “long for the pure, spiritual milk” and become mature Christians, “living stones” for “a spiritual house” (v. 5a), that is, a “temple.”

Quotations from the Old Testament about stones follow, illustrating the statement that Christian believers are “built into a spiritual house.” “For it stands in scripture,” says Peter,

‘See, I am laying in Zion a stone,

and a cornerstone chosen and precious;

and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame’.” (1 Pet. 2:6, NRSV, citing Isaiah 28:16)

According to David L. Balch, revised by Paul J. Achtemeier, the “stone [is] Christ, as in vv. 7-8” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 1 Pet. 2:6).

“For you then, who believe,” adds Peter, “he is precious; but for those who do not believe,

‘The stone that the builders rejected

has become the very head of the corner’.” (1 Peter 2:7, NRSV, citing Ps. 118:22)

And Peter quotes again:

“ ‘A stone that makes them stumble,

and a rock that makes them fall.’

They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do” (1 Pet. 2:8, citing Isa. 8:14). According to M. Eugene Boring, “the imagery” which “modulates from birth and growth to the construction of a spiritual house (temple) and then to a holy priesthood,” pictures the “communal rather than individualistic” aspect of the Christian life” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 1 Pet. 2:5-8). According to David L. Balch, elaboration of the thought uses “A chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people” (v. 9), “four honorific titles taken from Ex. 19:6; Isa. 43:20-21" (HarperCollins Study Bible, on 1 Pet. 2:9), and quotations from Hosea 1:9; 2:23. Davids says these titles, “which are used elsewhere in the NT as well, particularly in Revelation (Rev. 1:6; 5:10; 20:6; cf. 1 Pet. 2:5), are woven together with a phrase taken first from Exodus (‘But you’), then from Isaiah (‘chosen people’), then Exodus again (‘royal priesthood’ and ‘holy nation’), and finally Isaiah (‘God’s own people . . . deeds,’ the grammar changed to suit the new context in 1 Peter), indicating a long period of meditation on and use of these texts in the church. The emphasis throughout is collective: the church as a corporate unity is the people, priesthood, nation, etc., rather than each Christian being such” (op. cit., p. 91 on v. 9).

Davids comments on the “stone” (v. 8) which “divides believers from unbelievers (including the persecutors of these Christian readers)” (ibid.). Peter then

returns to the topic of their privileged position in God’s temple, using the emphatic “but you” to make the transition and contrast clear. This position is described by transferring to the church the titles of Israel in the OT (for the church is the true remnant of Israel, as the use of Israel’s titles from 1:1 on indicates), in particular the titles found in the Septuagint of Exod. 19:5-6 (cf. 23:22) and Isa. 43:20-21 (cf. Deut. 4:20; 7:6; 10:15; 14:2). (ibid.)

Today’s reading concludes with what Davids calls “a poem based on Hos. 1:6, 9-10; 2:23” (ibid., p. 93 on 1 Pet. 2:10). Hosea’s unfaithful wife had children with symbolic names. “She conceived again and bore a daughter. Then the LORD said to him, “Name her Lo-ruhamah, for I will no longer have pity on the house of Israel or forgive them” (Hos. 1:6). “When she had weaned Lo-ruhamah, she conceived and bore a son. Then the LORD said, “Name him Lo-ammi, for you are not my people and I am not your God” (Hos. 1:8-9). This judgment on Israel is reversed in Hosea 2:23: “And I will have pity on Lo-ruhamah,/and I will say to Lo-ammi, ‘You are my people’; / and he shall say, ‘You are my God’.”

Unlike Israel these Christians never experienced themselves as unfaithful to a covenant, but they did realize that they were once outside God’s favor, that is, rejected. Once they were “not a people,” for “the people of God” was a term reserved for Israel. . . . But now these Christians know they are elect–not just a people of God, but the people of God. They are the recipients of God’s mercy, that is, his care and concern. (Davids, p. 93 on 1 Pet. 2:10)

The closing quotation from Hosea emphasizes God’s mercy.

But now these Christians know they are elect–not just a people of God, but the people of God. They are the recipients of God’s mercy, that is, his care and concern. This poem sums up the election theme of this section and gives comfort to a suffering and rejected people who are to see that their earthly rejection is only earthly. In truth they are the accepted ones of God. (ibid., on v. 10)

Matthew 19:23-30

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” 25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astounded and said, “Then who can be saved?” 26 But Jesus looked at them and said, “For mortals it is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”

27 Then Peter said in reply, “Look, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?” 28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold, and will inherit eternal life. 30 But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first. (Matthew 19:23-30, NRSV)

On June 21, 2009 (the Sunday closest to June 22, Year One), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from June 24, 2008 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 22, Year Two), when comments were repeated from November 28,, 2007 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 23, Year One), when comments were repeated with some editing from June 24, 2007 (the Sunday closest to June 22, Year One), when comments were based on those of June 19, 2005, (the Sunday closest to June 22, Year One), those of November 23, 2005 (Wednesday of the week of the Sunday closest to November 23, Year One), and those of June 27, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 22, Year Two). The comments are repeated again here with editing and supplement:

In the three Synoptic Gospels this passage (Mt. 19:23-30; Mk. 10:23-31; Lk. 18:24-30), addressed to the disciples, follows the account of Jesus advice to the Rich Young Ruler (Mt. 19:16-22; Mk. 10:17-32; Lk. 18:18-23), who “went away grieving, for he had many possessions” (Mt. 19:22). For parallel accounts of the text of this discussion, see the separate file, On Riches and the Rewards of Discipleship. For recent comments on Mark’s version of these passages, see the Archive for August 12, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 10, 2009).For recent comments on Luke’s version, see the Archive for June 6, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 1, Year One).

This reading begins as Jesus says “to his disciples, ‘Truly I tell you, it will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven” (Mt. 19:23); compare the exclamation in Mark’s version, “How hard it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!” (Mk. 10:23; cf. Lk. 18:24). In Mark, because “the disciples were perplexed,” Jesus repeats the saying without reference to the rich: “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!” (Mk. 10:24). In each of the Gospels, Jesus explains with what J. Andrew Overman calls “a proverbial expression of impossibility” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Mt. 19:24). “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God” ( Mt. 19:24; cf. Mk. 10:25; Lk. 18:15). For a proverbial saying–perhaps inevitably–the vocabulary varies here. For the “eye,” or “hole,” in the needle, Matthew and Luke have trh:ma (trēma)*; a variant reading (i.e. in some mss.) in Matthew is truvphma (trypēma)*. For “eye,” or “hole,” Mark has trumaliav (trymalia)*, which is a variant reading in Matthew and Luke. For “needle,” Matthew and Mark have rJafivV (hraphis)*, which is a variant reading in Luke. Luke’s word for “needle” is belovnh (belonē )*. As indicated by the asterisks (*), each of these words for “eye” or “needle” occurs only in this saying in the New Testament (cf. F. Wilbur Gingrich, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 1965, s.v. each word)–due, apparently, to subject matter, and not because the words as such were rare in ancient or biblical Greek.

In reference to the saying about the camel and the needle’s eye, there’s no need to look for “doorways” in and around Jerusalem for which a camel would have to kneel and then barely make it through. Elton Trueblood takes the saying (Mt. 19:24; Mk. 10:25; Lk. 18:25) as an example of “the preposterous.” We fail, he says

to recognize that Christ used deliberately preposterous statements to get his point across. . . . ‘It is easier,’ said Jesus, ‘for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God’ (Mark 10:25). This categorical statement, given with no qualifications whatever, follows, in all three accounts, the story of a wealthy man who came to Jesus to ask seriously how he might have eternal life. He claimed to have kept the standard commandments, but he went away sorrowfully when told that, at least in his case, it would be necessary to divest himself of all of his possessions.

We are informed that Christ’s hearers were greatly astonished, and well they might have been, if they took the dictum literally, as they apparently did. Taken literally, of course, the necessary conclusion is that no one who is not in absolute poverty can enter the Kingdom, because most people have some riches, and it is impossible for a body as large as that of a camel, hump and all, to go through an aperture as small as the eye of a needle. . . . That the listeners failed to see the epigram about the needle’s eye as a violent metaphor is shown by their question, ‘Then who can be saved?’ (Mark 10:26).

By making the statement in such an exaggerated form . . . Christ made sure that it was memorable, whereas a prosy, qualified statement would certainly have been forgotten. . . . Christ made his point, so that millions remember it today, though the first hearers misunderstood and kept it accurately only because it was so bizarre. (Elton Trueblood, The Humor of Christ, 1964, pp. 46-48).

R. McL. Wilson, commenting on Mark 10:25, says “The saying about the eye of a needle should not be weakened by taking the ‘camel’ as a cable or the ‘needle’s eye’ as a postern gate; the saying is a vivid hyperbole to express what is humanly impossible.” He adds, “the whole passage [Mk. 10:17-31] contains in germ Paul’s doctrine concerning the law” (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1962, reprinted 1972, sec. 106c, p. 811 on Mk. 10:25).

At the saying of Jesus, the disciples were amazed. “They were greatly astounded (perissw:V ejxeplhvssonto, perissōs exeplēssonto) and said to one another, ‘Then who can be saved?’ ” (Mk. 10:26); compare “When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astounded ( ejxeplhvssonto sfovdra, exeplēsonto sphodra) and said, ‘Then who can be saved?’ ” (Mt. 19:25). In Mark, Jesus directs these sayings to the disciples (10:23; cf. Mt. 19;23), but in Luke, there is a larger audience. “Those who heard it said, ‘Then who can be saved?’ ” (Lk. 18:26). At the end of this exchange, “he took the twelve aside” (v. 31). Jesus explains: “Jesus looked at them and said, ‘For mortals it is impossible, but not for God; for God all things are possible’ ” (Mk. 10:27). Matthew simplifies, “For mortals it is impossible, but for God all things are possible” (Mt. 19:26); and Luke even more so, “What is impossible for mortals is possible for God” (Lk. 18:27). Dale C. Allison, Jr. summarizes:

The disciples’ subsequent question, which uncritically presupposes (against the rest of Matthew) that wealth is a sign of divine favour, implies that if not even the rich man, blessed as he is by God, can enter the kingdom, who can? The answer lies in God’s omnipotence, which is antithetical to human impotence: regarding salvation only God has strength–just as, with regard to goodness, God and human beings belong to different categories (cf. v. 17). But note that v. 26 speaks only of the possible, not the probable. God’s omnipotence does not guarantee anyone’s salvation. V. 26 is not comfort for the rich; it does not cancel vv. 23-4. (Dale C. Allison, Jr., The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 870, on Mt. 19:16-30)

It appears that Peter wanted to “change the subject,” so to speak. He wonders what this means for himself and others who, not like the rich man, have left all to follow Jesus. According to Mark, “Peter began to say (  [Hrxato levgein, Ērxato legein) to him, ‘Look, we have left everything and followed you’ ” (Mk. 10:28). Peter completed his statement, of course, without interruption. The verb a[rcomai (archomai, “begin”), according to Gingrich, “at times . . . is pleonastic and adds little to the meaning of the sentence, e.g. w|n h[rxato oJ =Ihsou:V; poiei:n (hōn ērxato ho Iēsous poiein) = simply what Jesus did rather than what Jesus began to do Acts 1:1” (op. cit., s.v. a[rcw, archō 2. mid.). According to the unabridged Lexicon, “Often a[rcomai [archomai] only means that the person in question has been doing something else and that the activity now takes a new turn” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. a[rcw, archō 2. mid. b). The other Gospels understand Mark in this way. According to Matthew, “Then Peter said in reply, ‘Look, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?” (Mt. 19:27), making explicit Peter’s implied question in Mark. Luke’s version also simplifies the “began to speak” phrase: “Then Peter said, ‘Look, we have left our homes and followed you” (Lk. 18:28).

In Mark, Jesus’ response is elaborate:

Truly I tell you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the good news, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this age–houses, brothers and sisters, mothers and children, and fields, with persecutions–and in the age to come eternal life. (Mk. 10:29-30)

And in Matthew, even more so, with explicit reference to “the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory”:

Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold, and will inherit eternal life. (Mt. 19:28-29)

Luke’s version simplifies, but includes the essentials from Mark:

And he said to them, "Truly I tell you, there is no one who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not get back very much more in this age, and in the age to come eternal life. (Lk. 18:29-30)

According to Overman, this means they will “assume the role of the twelve patriarchs (T. Jud. [i.e. Testament of Judah] 25:1-2)” (op. cit., on Mt. 19:28).

But in Mark and Matthew, Jesus add a caveat, so to speak: “But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first” (Mk. 10:31 = Mt. 19:30). These verses, the same in English, are also the same in Greek (except that some manuscripts add the definite article in the final phrase, “and the last first,” kai; (oiJ) e[scatoi prw:toi, kai [hoi] eschatoi prōtoi)

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net