Zechariah 4:1-14

Fifth Vision: The Lampstand and Olive Trees

4:1 The angel who talked with me came again, and wakened me, as one is wakened from sleep. 2 He said to me, "What do you see?" And I said, "I see a lampstand all of gold, with a bowl on the top of it; there are seven lamps on it, with seven lips on each of the lamps that are on the top of it. 3 And by it there are two olive trees, one on the right of the bowl and the other on its left." 4 I said to the angel who talked with me, "What are these, my lord?" 5 Then the angel who talked with me answered me, "Do you not know what these are?" I said, "No, my lord." 6 He said to me, "This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, says the LORD of hosts. 7 What are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain; and he shall bring out the top stone amid shouts of 'Grace, grace to it!' "

8 Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 9 "The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also complete it. Then you will know that the LORD of hosts has sent me to you. 10 For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel.

"These seven are the eyes of the LORD, which range through the whole earth." 11 Then I said to him, "What are these two olive trees on the right and the left of the lampstand?" 12 And a second time I said to him, "What are these two branches of the olive trees, which pour out the oil through the two golden pipes?" 13 He said to me, "Do you not know what these are?" I said, "No, my lord." 14 Then he said, "These are the two anointed ones who stand by the Lord of the whole earth." (Zechariah 4:1-14, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of May 8, 2008 (Thursday in the week of the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Year One), when comments were repeated with some editing and supplement from December 20, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Third Sunday of Advent, Year Two), when comments were repeated from December 15, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Third Sunday of Advent, Year Two), and from June 1, 2006 (Thursday in the week of the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Year Two).

As we have noted, the book of Zechariah begins, after a brief introduction (Zech. 1:1-5), with a series of visions (1:7-6:15) with what Gregory Mobley calls a common “pattern: (a) vision, (b) question about its meaning, (c) angelic interpretation” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Zech. 1:6-6:15). Today’s reading is the account of the fifth vision (4:1-14). “The angel who talked with me came again,” says Zechariah, “and wakened me, as one is wakened from sleep. Je said to me, ‘What do you see?’ ” (Zech. 4:1-2a). In his answer, Zechariah describes an unusual menorah. He says, “I see a lampstand all of gold (bhAz! traOnm4, m ^enôrath zāhāv), with a bowl on the top of it; there are seven lamps on it, with seven lips on each of the lamps that are on the top of it” (v. 2b). The menorah in the temple had seven lamps on seven branches according to the instructions in Exodus 25:31-40. In reference to the lampstand (menorah), Mobley refers to this passage from Exodus and says, “A normal lampstand (Heb. ‘menorah’), a sign of God’s presence, has seven lights; this lamp boasts forty-nine (seven times seven); symbolically, a surfeit of blessing” (ibid., on v. 2). But W. Sibley Towner challenges this description. “Lampstand,” he says, is “not the familiar seven-branched candelabrum of Ex. 25:31-40; 37:127-24. Archaeological evidence now confirms that the object envisioned here could be a bowl-shaped oil reservoir surmounting a golden base and fitted around the rim with seven (not forty-nine!) protruding spouts to serve as lamps” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Zech. 4:2). On the Internet web site, Jewish Virtual Library, A Division of The American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise, it says:

The lamp stand in today's synagogues, called the ner tamid (lit. the continual lamp; usually translated as the eternal flame), symbolizes the menorah.

The nine-branched menorah used on Chanukah is commonly patterned after this menorah, because Chanukah commemorates the miracle that a day's worth of oil for this menorah lasted eight days.

The menorah in the First and Second Temples had seven branches. After the Temples were destroyed, a tradition developed not to duplicate anything from the Temple and therefore menorah's no longer had seven branches. The use of six-branched menoras became popular, but, in modern times, some rabbis have gone back to the seven-branched menoras, arguing that they are not the same as those used in the Temple because today's are electrified. (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/menorah.html, accessed again Dec. 16, 2009).

On this web site it is said that “One of the oldest symbols of the Jewish faith is the menorah, a seven-branched candelabrum used in the Temple.” The author adds:

It has been said that the menorah is a symbol of the nation of Israel and our mission to be ‘a light unto the nations’ (Isaiah 42:6). The sages emphasize that light is not a violent force; Israel is to accomplish its mission by setting an example, not by using force. This idea is highlighted in the vision in Zechariah 4:1-6. Zechariah sees a menorah, and G-d explains: ‘Not by might, nor by power, but by My spirit.’ (ibid.)

Zechariah continues to describe his vision. “And by it (i.e., by the lampstand), there are two olive trees, one on the right side of the bowl and the other on its left” (Zech. 4:3). In the first chapter of Revelation, John sees “seven golden lampstands” (Rev. 1:12) which represent “the seven churches” that will be addressed in chapters 2 and 3 (Rev. 1:20). If each lampstand had seven branches with a light on each branch, this would add up to forty-nine lights. Later John sees “the two olive trees” (Rev. 11:4; cf. Zech. 4:3, 12) “and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth” (Rev. 11:4; for the two olive trees, cf. Zech 4:3, 12). As a practical matter, olive trees would furnish oil for the lamps in the temple, but the focus of the pairing of the lampstand and the trees (one complex lampstand and two trees in Zechariah, two lampstands and two trees in Rev., chap. 11) is to symbolically represent “the two anointed ones who stand by the Lord of the whole earth” (Zech. 4:14), who are reflected in “my two witnesses” whom the LORD grants “authority to prophesy for one thousand two hundred sixty days, wearing sackcloth” (Rev. 11:3). On the “two witnesses,” see further below.

“I said to the angel who talked with me,” says Zechariah, “ ‘What are these, my lord?’ Then the angel who talked with me answered me,’Do you not know what these are?’ I said, ‘No, my lord’ ” (Zech. 4:4-5). As it stands, the text suggests that the answer to the angel’s question are the promises to Zerubbabel (vv. 6-10a), but Towner has a different suggestion. “If vv. 6-7, 8-10a are construed as a pair of embedded oracles, v. 10b flows perfectly as the angel’s response to this question [i.e., the question in v. 5]” (op. cit., on v. 5). Ehud Ben Zvi has a similar view. “Those seven are the eyes of the LORD [is] probably the answer to the question in v. 4 regarding the meaning of the seven lamps of the lampstand. Cf. 3:9” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Zech. 4:10). According to Zechariah, “He (i.e., the angel) said to me, ‘This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit says the LORD of hosts’ ” (v. 6). According to R. Lansing Hicks and Walter Brueggemann, “Through God’s spirit, Zerubbabel will complete the temple” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Zech. 4:6-10). “This v[erse],” says Ben Zvi, “has often played a significant role within Judaism, which has felt small and powerless, yet comforted by its reliance on God. It is inscribed on the front of the Synagogue of Cologne reconstructed after World War II” (op. cit., on Zech. 4:6).

In Zechariah’s word for Zerubbabel, the word of the LORD (through the angel) asks, “What are you, O great mountain?” and answers, “Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain; and he shall bring out the top stone amid shouts of ‘Grace, grace (Nhe Nhe, chēn chēn) to it!’ ” (v. 7). The word translated “grace” (Nhe, chēn) could be translated “favor” (cf. William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 4^th impression, 1978, s.v. Nhe, chēn). The recent Jewish translation of the shout is “Beautiful! Beautiful!” (NJPS 1985, 1999 Zech. 4:7); compare “God bless it! God bless it!” (TNIV Zech. 4:7). “O great mountain,” says Towner, is “possibly the Temple Mount, cluttered with ruins that would need to be removed. Perhaps the top stone should be understood as a stone from the former temple incorporated into the foundation deposit of the new structure. Mesopotamian sources attest to similar efforts to ensure sacral continuity” (op. cit., on v. 7).

Another word of the LORD is presented for Zerubbabel. “Moreover the word of the LORD (hvhy-rbaD4, d  ^evar-YHWH) came to me, saying, ‘The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also complete it. Then you will know that the LORD of hosts has sent me to you. For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet (lyd9B4ha Nb,,x,hA, hā’even habb ^edîl) in the hand of Zerubbabel’ ” (vv. 8-10a). For verse 9, Towner refers to the same statement in 2:9, where he calls it “a formula suitable for the recognition of God’s work in history . . . (See also v. 11; 4:9; 6:15; see also Ezek. 33:33, where the prophet is validated by historical events). This slogan and its variations are thematic in Ezekiel, where they are used more than seventy times” (ibid., on 2:9). For “plummet” (v. 10 NRSV), the Jewish translation has “stone of distinction” (NJPS v. 10, with a text note, ‘Meaning of Heb. uncertain; others ‘plummet.’ ) Holladay says lyd9B4 (b ^edîl) means “tin” in Num. 31:22, but the phrase lyd9B4ha Nb,,x,hA (hā’even habb ^edîl) is “uncertain, plumbline?” in Zech. 4:10, op. cit., s.v. lyd9B4, b ^edîl). Ben Zvi, commenting on the NJPS, says, “The expression the stone of distinction may be translated as ‘the stone of the plumb’ or ‘the plummet.’ The text implies and criticizes a sentiment akin to the one expressed in Hag. 2:3” (op. cit., on v. 10). On the words “day of small things,” Towner says,

This assurance seems to be addressed to those who have found the pace of restoration too feeble. The leadership of Zerubbabel promises renewed action. Now he is pictured at the end of the temple reconstruction process with plummet in hand. Recent commentators understand this object to be not a builders’ tool but rather an inscribed metallic tablet to be deposited in the finished structure. Such a practice is well attested in Babylonian and Persian texts. (op. cit., on v. 10a)

“These,” says the angel, “are the eyes of the LORD, which range through the whole earth” (v. 10b). As noted above, this may be the answer to the question in verse 4. “Then I [Zechariah] said to him, ‘What are these two olive trees on the right and the left of the lampstand?’ ” (v. 11). Zechariah repeats the question. “And a second time I said to him, ‘What are these two branches of the olive trees, which pour out the oil (bhAz!, zāhāv, lit. ‘gold,’ cf. NRSV text note b) through the two golden pipes? ” (v. 12). Mobley says, “Olive oil can have a golden hue. The olive trees then provide oil, here ‘gold,’ for the lamps” (op. cit., on v. 12). And Zechariah continues, “He said to me, ‘Do you not know what these are?’ I said, ‘No, my lord.’ Then he said, ‘These are the two anointed ones (rhA5c4y09ha-yn2B4, b ^enê-hayyitsts ^ehār, lit. ‘sons of olive-oil’) who stand by the Lord of the whole earth’ ” (vv. 13-14). Commenting on “the two anointed dignitaries [NJPS for ‘the two anointed ones’ NRSV], Ben Zvi says

the term is different from the one translated as ‘anointed’ in Lev. 4:3; 1 Sam. 2:10, 35; 26:9; Ps. 2:2, and passim. The two ‘sons of oil’ represent Joshua, the high priest, and Zerubbabel, the nonpriestly ruler who shares some royal responsibilities. It is not by chance that the text coins a unique expression rather than using a very common one. Most likely, the point is to avoid depicting Zerubbabel as a significant royal or messianic figure. Unlike the situation in the book of Haggai, Zerubbabel is not called ‘governor’ in Zechariah, but neither is he called ‘king,’ nor is it stated explicitly anywhere in the book that he is from David, nor can we assume that he was anointed. The openness of the text in this matter is remarkable, and hardly unintentional. (The high priest was presumably anointed–see Num. 3:3, 25–but his anointing did not carry any kingly attributes.) (op. cit., on v. 14)

But, based on the NRSV text, the two “anointed ones” are apparently Joshua the priest (Zech. 3:1-10; 6:11-13) and Zerubbabel, the heir apparent to the throne of David (Zech. 4:6, 7, 9, 10). Towner’s view differs somewhat from that of Ben Zvi.

At last the two olive trees are identified as the two anointed ones (lit. ‘sons of the oil’) and no doubt represent Joshua and Zerubbabel, the two heroes of the temple reconstruction effort in both Zech. 1-8 and Haggai. In Zechariah’s vision for the polity of the emerging Judean community, royal and priestly ‘messiahs’ (anointed ones) stand on either side of God, sharing leadership. The ‘oil’ referred to here is not that used for consecration of priest or king but rather that used for food and lamp fuel. If the lamp burns this very oil, then there is an exquisite interrelationship between the human and divine worlds, since human abundance would help feed the divine light. (op. cit., on v. 14)

Earlier, it appears that “my servant the Branch” (3:8) is Zerubbabel, but that later Joshua is called “Branch” (Zeph. 6:12). (Or is the “Branch” in 6:12 someone who is introduced to Joshua?). Gregory Mobley says of Zechariah 6:9-15, which he labels “the coronation,” that it

has difficulties, chiefly the absence of Zerubbabel. In 3:8, the Davidic term Branch seems to refer to Zerubbabel. In 4:1-14, two anointed ones, presumably Joshua and Zerubbabel, lead the community. In 4:9, Zerubbabel leads the Temple rebuilding efforts. Here, however, Joshua alone is the Branch and Temple-builder. What happened to Zerubbabel? As textual note b indicates, the Hebrew of v. 11 has the plural crowns. Probably an earlier reference to Zerubbabel has been lost. (op. cit., on Zech. 6:9-15)

King Darius I of Persia reasserted power after the weak rule of Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, and in the process, likely crushed any hopes for an immediate restoration of the Davidic dynasty and national sovereignty for Judah. But Judah was allowed, even encouraged, to practice her religion. Leadership in Judah under the Persians was by religious leaders, especially the priests such as Joshua.

As for the two witnesses in Revelation (see above), Bruce M. Metzger says they are “unnamed but resembling Zerubbabel and Joshua (Zech. 3:1-4, 14) as well as Elijah (vv. 5-6 [i.e. Rev. 11:5-6]; 2 Kg. 1:10) and Moses (v. 6; Ex. 7:17, 19). Their being “clothed in sackcloth [is] a sign that their prophecy was of repentance” (Bruce M. Metzger, , NOAB, 2^nd ed., on Rev. 11:3).

But we may take courage from God’s word to Zerubbabel in the above reading, which offers both promise and challenge: "Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, says the LORD of hosts" (Zech. 4:6). Joshua and Zerubbabel faced a difficult task, to rebuild a nation from scratch, as it were. They surely needed the guidance of the spirit of the LORD, or the Holy Spirit, as we might say.

Revelation 4:9-5:5

9 And whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to the one who is seated on the throne, who lives forever and ever, 10 the twenty-four elders fall before the one who is seated on the throne and worship the one who lives forever and ever; they cast their crowns before the throne, singing,

11 "You are worthy, our Lord and God,

to receive glory and honor and power,

for you created all things,

and by your will they existed and were created." (Revelation 4:9-11, NRSV)

The Scroll and the Lamb

5:1 Then I saw in the right hand of the one seated on the throne a scroll written on the inside and on the back, sealed with seven seals; 2 and I saw a mighty angel proclaiming with a loud voice, "Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?" 3 And no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it. 4 And I began to weep bitterly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. 5 Then one of the elders said to me, "Do not weep. 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." (Revelation 5:1-5, NRSV)

The following comments are based on relevant comments from October 27 and 28 (Tuesday and Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One), when the readings were Revelation 4:1-11 and 5:1-10), and on earlier comments as noted there:

Yesterday’s reading concluded with “the Trisagion, or ‘thrice-holy’,” as David E. Aune calls it (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Rev. 4:8) with “the four living creatures” singing,

Holy, holy, holy,

the Lord God the Almighty,

who was and is and is to come. (Rev. 4:8, NRSV)

In today’s reading, the worship in heaven’s throne room continues. “And whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to the one who is seated on the throne, who lives forever and ever, the twenty-four elders fall before the one who is seated on the throne and worship the one who lives forever and ever; they cast their crowns before the throne, singing” (vv. 9-10). “Cast their crowns,” says Bruce M. Metzger, [acknowledges] that all power comes from God” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Rev. 4:10; cf. Jean-Pierre Ruiz, NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Rev. 4:10). Aune calls it “an act of homage and worship” (op. cit., on v. 10). “Throne, here,” he adds, is “a pious circumlocution for the name of God” (ibid., on the second occurrence of ‘throne’ in v. 10). “You are worthy (a[xioV, axios), our Lord and God,” says the song of the twenty-four elders, “to receive glory and honor and power, / for you created all things, / and by your will they existed and were created” (v. 11). Aune notes that the term “worthy, a term applied to God as the creator, [is] also applied to the Lamb in two hymns (5:9, 12)” (ibid., on Rev. 4:11). “Our Lord and God,” says Ruiz, were “titles that were also attributed to the Roman emperor (Suetonius, Domitian 13)” (op. cit., on v. 11). “They existed,” says Metzger, means “in God’s mind from all eternity” (op. cit., on v. 11). On the words “sealed with seven seals,” he adds, “The number of seals has a magically protective significance, meaning that only a fully authorized person has the power to open it (v. 3)” (ibid.).

But attention soon turns to the “Lamb” (Christ). A question is raised. “Then I saw in the right hand of the one seated on the throne a scroll written on the inside and on the back, sealed with seven seals” (Rev. 5:1). This was “A scroll,” says Metzger, containing the fixed purposes of God for the future (Ezek. 2:9-10).” And “sealed,” he adds, means that it was “therefore both unalterable and unknown to others” (ibid., on 5:1). Aune notes that “the scroll written on the inside and on the back, technically an opisthograph, is unusual because papyrus rolls were usually used on one side only, though legal rolls could have a summary of the contents on the outside” (op. cit., on 5:1). Then John “saw a mighty angel proclaiming with a loud voice, ‘Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?’ ” (Rev. 5:2). “Worthy,” here, according to Aune, means “both able and authorized” (ibid., on v. 2). For a moment, the answer seems to be “no one is worthy,” for “no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it” (v. 3). According to John, this was a very disturbing development. “And I began to weep bitterly,” he says, “because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it” (v. 4). But he is quickly reassured. “Then one of the elders said to me, ‘Do not weep. 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’ ” (v. 5). The elder, of course, refers to Christ. Metzger says, “No created being is worthy to carry out God’s plan, only the Messianic king can do so; for his titles (Lion . . . Root), compare Gen. 49:9-10; Isa. 11:1, 10” (op. cit., on vv. 3-5). Following Metzger, Ruiz adds, “has conquered [refers to] the paradoxical victory of the cross and resurrection (Jn. 16:33)” (op. cit., on vv. 3-5). According to Aune, “Lion of the tribe of Judah (Gen. 49:9-10) [is] a metaphor for the king or Messiah expected to come from the royal tribe of Judah, a claim frequently made for Jesus (Heb. 7:14)” (op. cit., on Rev. 5:5). “Root of David,” adds Aune, “(see also 22:16), meaning stock of David or descendant of David, king of Israel, is a messianic title (see Isa. 11:1, 10; Jer. 23:5; 33.15; Zech 3:8; 6:12; Rom. 15:12)” (ibid.).

Matthew 25:1-13

The Parable of the Ten Bridesmaids

25:1 "Then the kingdom of heaven will be like this. Ten bridesmaids took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom. 2 Five of them were foolish, and five were wise. 3 When the foolish took their lamps, they took no oil with them; 4 but the wise took flasks of oil with their lamps. 5 As the bridegroom was delayed, all of them became drowsy and slept. 6 But at midnight there was a shout, 'Look! Here is the bridegroom! Come out to meet him.' 7 Then all those bridesmaids got up and trimmed their lamps. 8 The foolish said to the wise, 'Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.' 9 But the wise replied, 'No! there will not be enough for you and for us; you had better go to the dealers and buy some for yourselves.' 10 And while they went to buy it, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went with him into the wedding banquet; and the door was shut. 11 Later the other bridesmaids came also, saying, 'Lord, lord, open to us.' 12 But he replied, 'Truly I tell you, I do not know you.' 13 Keep awake therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour. (Matthew 25:1-13, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of November 30, 2008 (the First Sunday of Advent, Year One), and earlier comments, from July 14, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 13, Year Two), when comments were based, with editing and revision, on earlier comments from an email sent December 17, 2003, from July 12, 2004, in an email sent July 12, 2004 for July 12-18, comments from November 28, 2004 (Monday of the week of the First Sunday in Advent), from December 15, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Third Sunday of Advent, Year Two), from July 14, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 13, Year Two), and from December 20, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Third Sunday of Advent, Year Two).

The Parable of the Ten Bridesmaids is presented only by Matthew. But its admonitions to be watchful and ready are similar to admonitions in Mark and Luke, of which some are indicated in the separate file, Parable of the Ten Bridesmaids.

In Matthew, Jesus introduces the parable, saying, “Then the kingdom of heaven will be like this” (Mt. 25:1a). Coming as it does after the eschatological teaching of chapter twenty-four, Jesus’ parable of the wise and foolish bridesmaids has the obvious sense, “Be ready for the coming of the Lord!” Krister Stendahl notes the future reference here, “while the parables about the Kingdom in ch. 13 were introduced by the formula ‘The Kingdom of Heaven is like . . .’ we read here ‘Then the Kingdom of Heaven shall be like . . .” (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1962, reprint 1972, sec. 692 l, p. 794 on Mt. 25:1-13). According to Dennis C. Duling, this is the first of “three major parables about the coming (Greek parousia [parousiva] ) of the Son of Man for final judgment” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 25:1-46). He calls the “Parable of the ten bridesmaids, an allegory about readiness for the unexpected Parousia” (ibid., on vv. 1-13).

“Ten bridesmaids (parqevnoi, parthenoi; ‘virgins’ AV/KJV) took their lamps,” says Jesus, “and went to meet the bridegroom” (v. 1b). According to Stendahl, “Some good MSS read ‘the bridegroom and the bride’ in [v.] 1 and this may well be the original reading. By omitting ‘the bride’ the parable becomes an allegory, the groom being the Messiah (cf. 9:15 and 22:1-14)” (ibid.). However, while the longer reading, including “the bride,” is supported by Manuscripts D (5th/6th c.) X* (10^th c.) Q (9^th c.) and others, including early Latin and Syriac manuscripts, the shorter reading is supported by Manuscripts x (4^th c.) B (4^th c.) K (9^th c.) L (8^th c.) W (5^th c.) and others. K. Aland and others omit kai; th:V nuvmfhV (kai tēs nymphēs, “and the bride”) from their printed text and use the letter A to indicate that, in the judgment of the committee, “the text is virtually certain” (The Greek New Testament, 3^rd ed., 1975, apparatus to Mt. 25:1; cf. p. xii). Bruce M. Metzger explains the committee’s reasoning:

It can be argued that the words kai; th:V numfh:V [kai tēs nymphēs] (‘and the bride’), which are witnessed by a rather strong combination of Western and Caesarean witnesses, were omitted because they were felt to be incompatible with the widely held view that Christ, the bridegroom, would come to fetch his bride, the church. But it is doubtful whether copyists would have been so sensitive to the logic of the allegory. Furthermore, those who omitted the words envisaged the wedding as taking place in the home of the fiancée; those who added the words envisaged the bringing of the bride by the bridegroom to his home (or the home of his parents) where the wedding takes place. Since the latter custom was more common in the ancient world,¹ it is probable that the words are an interpolation by copyists who did not notice that the mention of the bride would disturb the allegorical interpretation of the parable. Only the bridegroom is mentioned in what follows. (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 1971, p. 62, on Mt. 25:1)

Metzger’s footnote 1 compares “Hilma Granqvist, Marriage Conditions in a Palestine Village, [vol.] II, 1935 and works by Joachim Jeremias.

In the parable, Jesus distinguishes two groups. ““Five of them were foolish, and five were wise” (v. 2). The wisdom of the five wise bridesmaids is illustrated by their preparations. “When the foolish took their lamps, they took no oil with them; but the wise took flasks of oil with their lamps.” (vv. 3-4). While Luke does not include the Parable of the Ten Bridesmaids as such, he does include instruction that makes a similar point. After Jesus’ instructions to his disciples not to worry (Lk. 12:22-34; cf. Mt. 6:25-34), he presents instructions that, as Stendahl puts it, use “the wedding motif as well as the basic point of [Matthew’s] parable” (loc. cit.). “Be dressed for action and have your lamps lit,” says Jesus; “be like those who are waiting for their master to return from the wedding banquet, so that they may open the door for him as soon as he comes and knocks” (Lk. 12:35-36, cf. vv. 37-38; cf. also Mk. 13:33-37; Lk. 13:25-28; 12:40–texts all included in the table in the separate file, Parable of the Ten Bridesmaids). Stendahl says that “the point in Mt. is made by stressing the wisdom of five of the maidens, the careful planning ([v.] 2: phronimos [frovnimoV]; cf. 25:45), rather than the staying awake” (loc. cit.).

The delayed return of the bridegroom, “As the bridegroom was delayed, all of them became drowsy and slept” (Mt. 25:5), can be compared to the “waiting [of slaves] for their master to return from the wedding” of those mentioned in Luke 12:36; compare the charge to the slaves to “beware, keep alert . . . Therefore, keep awake” when their master goes “on a journey,” Mk. 13:33-35). In Matthew, Jesus’ parable continues with the actual coming of the bridegroom: “But at midnight [cf. Lk. 12:38; Mk. 13:35b] there was a shout, ‘Look! Here is the bridegroom! Come out to meet him” (Mt. 25:6); compare the possible nighttime return suggested in Luke, “If he comes during the middle of the night, or near dawn” (Lk. 12:38), and in Mark, “for you do not know when the master of the house will come, in the evening, or at midnight, or at cockcrow, or at dawn” (Mk. 13:35).

While the sayings in Luke briefly describe what is to be expected at the master’s return, Matthew’s parable gives a detailed account. “If he comes during the middle of the night, or near dawn, and finds them so [i.e. ‘alert,’ v. 37],” says Jesus, “blessed are those slaves” (Lk. 12:38). In another context in Luke, Jesus says, “Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.’ But he will say, ‘I do not know where you come from; go away from me, all you evildoers!’ There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrown out” (Lk. 13:26-28; cf. Mt. 7:22-23; 25:41). In Matthew’s parable, the bridesmaids respond to the midnight shout. “Then all those bridesmaids got up and trimmed their lamps” (Mt. 25:7). But some have a problem. “The foolish said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.’ But the wise replied, ‘No! There will not be enough fore you and for us; you had better go to the dealers and buy some for yourselves’ ” (vv. 8-9). One might wonder who would be selling lamp oil at midnight, but that would not necessarily relate to Jesus’ point here. “And while they went to buy it,” says Jesus, “the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him into the wedding banquet; and the door was shut” (v. 10). And Jesus tells us that the foolish bridesmaids were thus locked out. “Later,” he says, “the other bridesmaids came also, saying, ‘Lord, lord, open to us.’ But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I do not know you’ ” (vv. 11-12). And Jesus concludes the parable with the admonition, “Keep awake therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour” (v. 13; cf. Lk. 12:35; Mk. 13:33; Mt. 24:42; Lk. 12:40). Stendahl notes repetition here of “the refrain from the preceding chapter [cf. Mt. 24:42], but,” he says, it “does not fit too well for the details of the Matthean parable since all ten fell asleep (5)” (loc. cit.).

Some who read Jesus' parable of the wise and foolish bridesmaids (Mt. 25:1-13) are inclined to interpret it as an allegory, letting the oil which the wise bridesmaids took with them, and the foolish bridesmaids neglected, represent the Holy Spirit. Having the oil, that is, the Holy Spirit, makes all the difference in the outcome. “Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him” (Rom. 8:9b). Dale C. Allison, Jr., calls the parable

an allegory of the parousia of Christ, the heavenly bridegroom: the virgins represent the Christian community, the delay of the bridegroom is the delay of the Son of Man’s return, the sudden coming is the unexpected arrival of his parousia, and the spurning of the foolish virgins is the great assize [judgment]. (The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 878, on Mt. 25:1-13)

Allison adds that the delay of the parousia “means yet again that no one knows the date of the Son of Man’s parousia,” that the wise virgins “reveal that religious prudence will gain eschatological reward,” and that the foolish virgins “reveal that those unprepared at the end will suffer eschatological punishment” (ibid.).

I would see the main point of the parable as emphasizing the need to be ready when the Lord comes. But if for Zerubbabel, it was "not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, says the LORD," how much more is it so for us? Jesus said, “I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate [or Helper], to be with you forever" (Jn. 14:16). He "will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you" (Jn. 14:26). "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth" (Jn. 16:13). May you know the spiritual power that comes through God's Spirit, and find his renewal and refreshment.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net