Zephaniah 3:14-20, Presbyterian and Lutheran Traditions

A Song of Joy

¹⁴ Sing aloud, O daughter Zion;

shout, O Israel!

Rejoice and exult with all your heart,

O daughter Jerusalem!

¹⁵ The LORD has taken away the judgments against you,

he has turned away your enemies.

The king of Israel, the LORD, is in your midst;

you shall fear disaster no more.

¹⁶ On that day it shall be said to Jerusalem:

Do not fear, O Zion;

do not let your hands grow weak.

¹⁷ The LORD, your God, is in your midst,

a warrior who gives victory;

he will rejoice over you with gladness,

he will renew you in his love;

he will exult over you with loud singing

¹⁸ as on a day of festival.

I will remove disaster from you,

so that you will not bear reproach for it.

¹⁹ I will deal with all your oppressors

at that time.

And I will save the lame

and gather the outcast,

and I will change their shame into praise

and renown in all the earth.

²⁰ At that time I will bring you home,

at the time when I gather you;

for I will make you renowned and praised

among all the peoples of the earth,

when I restore your fortunes

before your eyes, says the LORD. (Zephaniah 3:14-20, NRSV)

The following comments on Zephaniah 3:14-20 are repeated here from December 19, 2009, two days ago, when it was the Presbyterian reading. Reference to previous sources is made there:

Zephaniah, whose oracles are placed “in the days of King Josiah” (Zeph. 1:1), begins with judgment on Judah (1:4). Gregory Mobley suggests that he condemns “practices prohibited by Deuteronomy . . . [which] suggests that he prophesied before Josiah’s reforms of 621 BCE (2 Kings 2:3)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, in the Introduction to Zephaniah). He turns to oracles against the nations (2:4-15), but returns to judgment on Judah (3:1-8) before balancing all of this judgment with the oracles of joy and salvation (3:9-20) which conclude the book

The joy of song rings out in today’s reading. “Sing aloud (yn09r!, rānnî). O daughter Zion; / shout, O Israel! / Rejoice and exult with all your heart, / O daughter Jerusalem!” (Zeph. 3:14). Why? “The LORD has taken away the judgments against you, / he has turned away your enemies” (v. 15a). For “the LORD has taken away the judgments against you,” Mobley refers to Isaiah (ibid., on v. 15): “Comfort, O comfort my people, / says your God. / Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, / and cry to her / that she has served her term, / that her penalty is paid, / that she has received from the LORD’s hand / double for all her sins” (Isa. 40:1-2). This, says, Kent Harold Richards, is “the reason for the people to sing” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Zeph. 3:15). “The king of Israel, the LORD, is in your midst,” says Zephaniah, “you shall fear disaster no more” (v. 15b, cf. Isa. 12:6). If this rejoicing can be linked to Josiah’s reforms–I’m speculating now–there is no tension between theocracy (God is king) and monarchy (Josiah is king), such as is evident in 1 Samuel 8. But according to Ehud Ben Zvi, “As in some other prophetic texts, here God is king (Sovereign), obviating the need for an ideal human king (a ‘messiah’)” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Zeph. 3:15).

“On that day,” says Zephaniah, “it shall be said to Jerusalem: / Do not fear, O Zion; / do not let your hands grow weak” (v. 16). For this verse, Mobley refers to Isaiah 41:10, 13; 43:1, 5 (op. cit., on v. 16). “On that day,” says Richards, no longer refers to the day on which punishment arises (1:9-10), but a day on which it can be said Do not fear, an introduction to words of salvation (see Isa 10:24)” (op. cit., on v. 16). “The LORD, your God, is in your midst,” says Zephaniah, a warrior who gives victory; / he will rejoice over you with gladness, he will renew you in his love; he will exult over you with loud singing (hn0!&r9B4, b ^erinnāh) / as on a day of festival” (vv. 17, 18a). For the reference to God as “a warrior,” Mobley refers to Exod. 15:3, and for “he will rejoice,” he refers to Isa. 62:5” (ibid., on v. 17). In reference to “with loud singing,” Richards says, “The same Hebrew word used to call the people to sing aloud (v. 14 [a verb, see above] now has the Lord responding in kind [with corresponding noun]” (op. cit., on v. 17).

To this point in today’s reading, the prophet has been speaking for and about the LORD. But now we hear again the voice of the LORD directly (cf. vv. 6:13). “I will remove disaster from you, / so that you will not bear reproach for it” (v. 18b, c). The meaning of the Hebrew here is apparently uncertain (cf. NRSV text notes b and c). The Jewish translation says, “He will soothe with His love / Those long disconsolate. / I will take away from you the woe / Over which you endured mockery” (Zeph. 3:17e, 18). Ben Zvi says, “The Heb. is extremely difficult. Tentative and at times quite divergent translations have been proposed. On possibility is: ‘Those who are afflicted because they are deprived of the festivals, I [i.e., the LORD] have gathered, they were from you, (they were) a sign on her (they were) a (source of) Mockery’ ” (op. cit., on v. 18 NJPS). If the latter is correct, it describes the affliction from which relief is now announced. Commenting on the NRSV, Mobley says, for “I will remove disaster from you, contrast with the beginning of the book, 1:2-3” (op. cit., on v. 18).

In any case, the two concluding verses clearly announce the restoration of Judah. “I will deal with all your oppressors / at that time,” says the LORD. “And I will save the lame / and gather (CBeqax3, ’ ^aqabbēts) the outcast, / and I will change their shame into praise / and renown in all the earth” (v. 19). “Oppressors,” says Richards, “includes those within Judah and those in other nations” (op. cit., on v. 19). “At that time,” says the LORD, “I will bring you home, / at the time when I gather (yc9B4Q1 , qabb ^etsî) you” (v. 20a, b). If there was any question about who the gathered outcast were (v. 19d), it becomes clear that the Judeans are being gathered and brought home. “For I will make you renowned and praised / among all the peoples of the earth, / when I restore your fortunes / before your eyes, says the LORD” (v. 20c, d, e, f). According to Richards, “Gather no longer carries the irony of gathering straw (see note on 2:1) but is more like the gathering a shepherd does of lambs (Isa. 40:11; Jer. 23:3)” (ibid., on Zeph. 3:20) In his earlier note, he said, “Gather together [Uww4Oqt4h9, hithqôš ^ešû]. The Hebrew term is used for the gathering of straw or sticks (see Ex. 5:7-12; Num. 15:32), contrasting with the gathering of people for rejoicing in 3:20” (ibid., on 2:1).

The the last two verses, at least (Zeph. 3:19-20), seem to anticipate the Babylonian captivity. Mobley suggests that vv. 19-20 are “perhaps a late addition to the words of Zechariah,” op. cit., on vv. 19-20. But Ben Zvi says,

The book concludes with a strong announcement of hope for the readership of the book; such positive conclusions typify biblical books. The fortunes of Israel/Judah will be rest9ored, and this restoration includes the gathering of the exiles (on this point, cf. Amos 9:14-15–though in Amos the image of restoration is agrarian). Because of its tone this v[erse, i.e. v. 20] has been included in Jewish liturgy. (op. cit., on v. 20)

2 Samuel 7:1-17, Presbyterian Tradition

7:1 Now when the king was settled in his house, and the LORD had given him rest from all his enemies around him, 2 the king said to the prophet Nathan, "See now, I am living in a house of cedar, but the ark of God stays in a tent." 3 Nathan said to the king, "Go, do all that you have in mind; for the LORD is with you."

4 But that same night the word of the LORD came to Nathan: 5 Go and tell my servant David: Thus says the LORD: Are you the one to build me a house to live in? 6 I have not lived in a house since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day, but I have been moving about in a tent and a tabernacle. 7 Wherever I have moved about among all the people of Israel, did I ever speak a word with any of the tribal leaders of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, saying, "Why have you not built me a house of cedar?" 8 Now therefore thus you shall say to my servant David: Thus says the LORD of hosts: I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep to be prince over my people Israel; 9 and I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I will make for you a great name, like the name of the great ones of the earth. 10 And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may live in their own place, and be disturbed no more; and evildoers shall afflict them no more, as formerly, 11 from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies. Moreover the LORD declares to you that the LORD will make you a house. 12 When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me. When he commits iniquity, I will punish him with a rod such as mortals use, with blows inflicted by human beings. 15 But I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. 16 Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me; your throne shall be established forever. 17 In accordance with all these words and with all this vision, Nathan spoke to David. (2 Samuel 7:1-17, NRSV)

On August 3, 2009 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year One), comments were repeated from December 21, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Advent, Year Two), when comments were repeated from August 6, 2007 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year One), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from December 21, 2005 (Wednesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two); the comments are repeated again here:

After “all the elders of Israel” make David king over all Israel (2 Sam. 5:3, cf. vv. 1-5), he conquers Jerusalem (vv. 6-11), decisively defeats the Philistines (vv. 17-25), and he brings the ark to Jerusalem (chap. 6)–thus effectively making Jerusalem both his political capital and his religious capital. He is given the promise of an everlasting kingdom (7:13, 16). The more immediate concerns are resolved, at least for the moment, and there is opportunity for the long-range view. “Now when the king was settled in his house, and the LORD had given him rest from all his enemies around him,” says the narrator (2 Sam. 7:1), “the king said to the prophet Nathan, ‘See now, I am living in a house of cedar, but the ark of God stays in a tent’ ” (v. 2). The statement about the LORD giving David “rest from all his enemies around” (v. 1) “really only makes sense after chapter 8 or chapter 12,” says Hans Wilhelm Hertzberg; “Chronicles therefore carefully omits it (1 Chron. 17:1)” (trans. J. S. Bowden, I & II Samuel, The Old Testament Library, 1964, p. 184, on 2 Sam. 7:1; cf. Steven L. McKenzie, NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 2 Sam. 7:1). Hertzberg adds that the presence of this statement “here is meant to show that the king’s plan to build the temple, and above all the promise evoked as a result, is the conclusion and crown of the whole” (loc. cit.).

At first, Nathan immediately approves the plan that David has not yet stated. “Go, do all that you have in mind,” he says; “for the LORD is with you” (v. 3). But he is soon brought up short, for “that same night the word of the LORD came to Nathan: Go and tell my servant David: Thus says the LORD: Are you the one to build me a house to live in?” (vv. 4-5). The prophet speaks for the LORD: “I have not lived (yT9b4wayA, yāšavtî) in a house (ty9baB4, b^evayith) since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day, but I have been moving about in a tent (lh,xoB4, be’ōhel) and a tabernacle (NKAw4m9b4U, ûv^emiškān)” (v. 6). And the LORD continues, “Wherever I have moved about among all the people of Israel, did I ever speak a word with any of the tribal leaders of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, saying, ‘Why have you not built me a house of cedar (Myz9rAx3 tyBe, bêth ’ ^arāzîn)?’ ” (v. 7). According to McKenzie, “The house (‘bayit’) David proposes to build is a temple. The LORD says instead (v. 11) that he will build David a house (‘bayit’), that is, a dynasty. The claim in vv. 6-7 that the LORD has never had a house (i.e., temple) seems to overlook the temple in Shiloh (1 Sam. 1-3)” (on vv. 5-7). But, according to Hertzberg, the “compiler” knows what he is about.

It seems remarkable here that the Lord claims that not since the Exodus from Egypt, i.e. never, has he dwelt in a house, when there were well-built houses at least in Shiloh, and even later, to hold the ark. As the compiler, of course, realized this, the only real way of interpreting the sentence is to make a distinction here between yāšab [bwayA], dwell permanently, abide, and šākan [NkawA], make a temporary stay. The tent-dwelling in the wilderness is here (and often) called miškān [NkAw4m9, noun related to the verb šākan, NkawA], dwelling in the latter sense, and even the stay at Shiloh appears to be regarded merely as an episode in a series of temporary stopping-places. (Hertzberg, p. 285, on 2 Sam. 7:4-7)

Shimon Bar-Efrat says, “In Shiloh, however, there was a House of the LORD (1 Sam. 1:7, 9). But there was also a Tent (Josh. 18:1; 1 Sam. 2:22), which symbolized the idea that the LORD is not restricted to one fixed place” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, p. 631, on 2 Sam. 7:6). Hertzberg sees the passage here as

an expression of the original and theologically legitimate view that the Lord is not bound to one place, but can make his dwelling anywhere. This, in the basic monotheistic conception, is what befits him. We could find in this passage the background to much of the prophetic polemic against the temple liturgy, just as in the New Testament also the worship of God in temples is regarded as a stage to be superseded (John 4:21; Acts 7:48f.; 17:24). The preservation of this trend of thought, despite the later construction of the temple, speaks for its age. In particular, in true prophetic fashion, the adornment of the future temple by cedar-wood is rejected. (loc. cit.)

The prophet Nathan, speaking for the LORD, redirects the focus from David’s desire to build a temple to Israel’s future and the LORD’s intention to build David’s “house,” that is, dynasty. To David’s implied question, stated by Nathan, “why have you not built me a house of cedar?” (2 Sam. 7:7 at the end), the Lord’s response first rehearses David’s history with him. “Now therefore thus you shall say to my servant David: Thus says the LORD of hosts: I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep to be prince over my people Israel; and I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all your enemies from before you” (vv. 8, 9a). On the phrase, “following the sheep,” McKenzie refers to 1 Sam. 17:15, 34, and adds, “Kings in the ancient Near East were often described as shepherds; see 24:17; 1 Chr. 11:2; Ps. 78:70; Isa. 44:28,” and on the term “prince” (dyg9n!, nāgîd), he gives the sense “king designate” and notes that it was translated “ruler” in 5:2” (on v. 8). Then the word from the LORD turns to the future: “I will make for you a great name, like the name of the great ones of the earth. And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may live in their own place, and be disturbed no more; and evildoers shall afflict them no more, as formerly, from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies” (vv. 9b-11a). By “place,” according to P. Kyle McCarter, is meant “not the promised land, in which Israel is already living, but the place where the Lord chooses to be worshiped (see Deut. 12:5, 11, 14, 18, 21, 26), i.e., the temple in Jerusalem” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 2 Sam. 7:10).

At this point we come to the main point. In this chapter, the word ty9Ba (bayith), construct form tyBe (bêth), “house” is used in four meanings. David now lives in his “house” (palace) (7:1, 2) and wants to build the LORD’s “house” (temple) (vv. 5, 6, 7, 13). But the LORD will establish David’s “house” (dynasty) (vv. 11, 16, 19, 25, 26, 27, 29), which honor’s David’s “house” (family status) (v. 18) (cf. William F. Stinespring, NOAB, 2nd ed., on chap. 7; cf. also Bar-Efrat, op. cit., on 7:1-29). David’s son will continue David’s dynasty. “When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom” (v. 12). God will “establish the throne of his kingdom forever” (v. 13). Even “when he commits iniquity,” though God “will punish him” (v. 14), God says, “I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you” (v. 15).

The covenant with Israel under Moses was conditional. “If you will diligently observe this entire commandment that I am commanding you, loving the LORD your God, walking in all his ways, and holding fast to him, then the LORD will drive out all these nations before you, and you will dispossess nations larger and mightier than yourselves” (Deut. 11:22-23). “See, I am setting before you today a blessing and a curse: the blessing, if you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I am commanding you today; and the curse, if you do not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn from the way that I am commanding you today, to follow other gods that you have not known” (Deut. 11:26-28).

If we look ahead to the summary of Solomon’s life (1 Kings, chap. 12), it would seem that he fits the pattern of rejecting God anticipated by Deuteronomy. To David the LORD says, “Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me; your throne shall be established forever” (1 Sam. 7:16). The significance of this promise is underscored by the reminder that it was revealed to Nathan by the LORD in a vision: “In accordance with all these words and with all this vision, Nathan spoke to David” (v. 17).

David’s house includes Solomon, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Josiah, and the other kings of Judah. And though his dynasty appears to come to an end in the sixth century B.C. with the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and the exile of its inhabitants, hope lives on in the fate of King Jehoiachin (2 Kgs. 25:27-30), in Zerubbabel (Hag. 1:12, 14; Zech. 4:6-7). For Jews this hope remained alive in the Messianic expectations, and Christians see David’s dynasty as extending to the kingdom of Christ, who “will reign forever and ever” (Rev. 11:15).

Titus 1:1-16, Episcopal and Lutheran Traditions

Salutation

1:1 Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the sake of the faith of God's elect and the knowledge of the truth that is in accordance with godliness, 2 in the hope of eternal life that God, who never lies, promised before the ages began-- 3 in due time he revealed his word through the proclamation with which I have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior,

4 To Titus, my loyal child in the faith we share:

Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.

Instructions for Titus’ Ministry in Crete

5 I left you behind in Crete for this reason, so that you should put in order what remained to be done, and should appoint elders in every town, as I directed you: 6 someone who is blameless, married only once, whose children are believers, not accused of debauchery and not rebellious. 7 For a bishop, as God's steward, must be blameless; he must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or addicted to wine or violent or greedy for gain; 8 but he must be hospitable, a lover of goodness, prudent, upright, devout, and self-controlled. 9 He must have a firm grasp of the word that is trustworthy in accordance with the teaching, so that he may be able both to preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it.

10 There are also many rebellious people, idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision; 11 they must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for sordid gain what it is not right to teach. 12 It was one of them, their very own prophet, who said,

"Cretans are always liars, vicious brutes, lazy gluttons."

13 That testimony is true. For this reason rebuke them sharply, so that they may become sound in the faith, 14 not paying attention to Jewish myths or to commandments of those who reject the truth. 15 To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure. Their very minds and consciences are corrupted. 16 They profess to know God, but they deny him by their actions. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work. (Titus 1:1-16, NRSV)

The following comments on Titus 1:1-16 are repeated here from December 19, 2009, two days ago, when it was the Presbyterian reading. Reference to previous sources is made there:

The standard elements of the salutation in Titus are expanded and adapted to express Christian themes and theology, in a manner similar to that of Romans 1:1-7. The emphasis falls on Paul’s status as “a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the sake of the faith of God's elect and the knowledge of the truth that is in accordance with godliness” (Tit. 1:1). This truth includes “the hope of eternal life that God, who never lies, promised before the ages began” (v. 2), which is embodied in the tradition received by Titus, for “in due time he [i.e., God] revealed his word through the proclamation with which I [i.e., ‘Paul,’ or perhaps one of his close followers] have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior” (v. 3). So far, we have the identification of the sender of the letter, which would correspond to the signature, perhaps with titles added, with which letters are closed in our world.

The designation of the recipient, though brief, alludes to Paul’s relationship with Titus. “To Titus, my loyal child in the faith we share” (v. 4a). Titus was apparently a Gentile convert–a Greek–from Paul’s first missionary journey (Acts 13-14), who accompanied Paul on a visit with church leaders in Jerusalem (Gal. 2:1), who “was not compelled to be circumcised” (Gal 2:3). From other Pauline letters, one gets the impression that Titus, called here “my loyal child in the faith,” was more mature, to some extent, as much Paul’s equal as his “child in the faith.” Margaret M. Mitchell sums up activities of Titus on Paul’s behalf:

In the pastoral ministry to Corinth Titus played a crucial role, first as a key administrator of the collection for the saints in Jerusalem (2 Cor. 8:6, 16-17, 23; 12f:18), and later as Paul’s diplomatic envoy who successfully brokered a reconciliation between the apostle and the church, which had harboured doubts about Paul’s legitimacy and financial responsibility (2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6-7, 13-16). (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, in the Introduction to Titus)

Mitchell’s characterization of Titus is essentially correct, though we might suppose that the reconciliation preceded the finalization, at least, of the collection (cf. Rom. 15:25-28).

The salutation concludes with Paul’s standard greeting, “Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior” (Tit. 1:4b; cf. Phil. 1:2; Col. 1:2b). It is, perhaps, remarkable that in this salutation, in successive verses, the term Savior (swthvr, sōtēr) is used of God (v. 3) and of Christ (v. 4). This term is used of God the Father in the New Testament only eight times (Lk. 1:47; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Tit. 1:3; 2:10; 3:4; Jude 25). The fact that within the Pauline Epistles, the term only occurs in the Pastoral Epistles, and never in the so-called “undisputed letters” of Paul, is taken by some as one of the indications that Paul himself did not write these letters. Raymond F. Collins, for example, says,

Paul used the title ‘Savior’ (sōtēr) only once in his extant writings [i.e., those Collins counts as authentic]. To the Philippians he wrote that ‘our citizenship is in heaven and it is from there that we are expecting a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ’ (Phil. 3:20). On the other hand, the use of the ‘Savior’ title is one of the characteristic features of the Pastoral Epistles. . . . In 1 Timothy the title is always used in a theological sense [apparently, because in 1 Tim., the term is used of God the Father]. In 2 Timothy it is used in a christological sense [i.e. of Christ]. In Titus the title is used in reference both to God . . . and to Christ Jesus . .  This repetitive but diverse usage suggests that the title is a key element of the soteriology, theology, and Christology of the Pastoral Epistles. (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus; A Commentary, The New Testament Library, 2002, p. 308, in “Excursus 9: “Our Savior”)

Others, however, are not convinced that Paul himself did not write the Pastoral Epistles. “They were written,” says Walter L. Liefeld, not only by Paul the theologian or Paul the churchman, but by Paul the missionary” (1 & 2 Timothy/Titus, The NIV Application Commentary, 1999, p. 38, cf. pp. 24-38). For a vigorous defense of the view that Paul himself wrote the Pastoral Epistles, compare the views of William Hendriksen (Exposition of the Pastoral Epistles, New Testament Commentary, 1957, sixth printing, 1974, pp. 4-33). William Barclay offers a medial position, suggesting that the letters represent Paul’s thinking, based on genuine letter fragments, passed on in their present form by a close follower of Paul:

Clearly, apart from his great public letters, Paul must have had a continuous private correspondence . . . Now it may well be that in the later days there were some fragments of Paul’s correspondence in the possession of some Christian teacher. This Christian teacher saw the Church of his day and his locality in Ephesus threatened on every side. It was threatened with a fall away from its own high standards of purity and truth. The quality of its members and the standard of its office-bearers were degenerating. This teacher had in his possession little letters of Paul which said exactly the things that should be said, but, as they stood, they were too short and too fragmentary to publish. So he took them and amplified them and made them supremely relevant to his own situation and sent them out to the church.

In the Pastoral Epistles we are still hearing the voice of Paul, and often hearing it speak with a unique personal intimacy, but we think that the form of the letters is due to a Christian teacher who summoned the help and the spirit of Paul to his aid, when the Church of his day needed the guidance which only Paul could have given. (The Letters to Timothy, Titus and Philemon, The Daily Study Bible Series, 2^nd ed., 1960, pp. 16-17)

“I left you behind in Crete,” says Paul to Titus, “for this reason, so that you should put in order what remained to be done, and should appoint elders (presbuvteroi, presbyteroi) in every town, as I directed you” (Tit. 1:5). In the account of Paul’s ministry and mission in Acts, the closest he comes to Crete is when, “as the wind was against us,” says Luke, “we sailed under the lee of Crete off Salmone. Sailing past it with difficulty, we came to a place called Fair Havens, near the city of Lasea” (Acts 27:7-8). Some believe that, after two years of house arrest in Rome (Acts 28:30-31, cf. v. 16), Paul was released from prison in A.D. 62 and did further missionary work not recorded in Acts before being arrested again and put to death during the persecution instigated by Nero after the fire in Rome in A.D. 64. Leaving Titus in Crete and other travels mentioned in the Pastoral Epistles (cf. Tit. 1:5; 3:12-13; 2 Tim. 4:10-13) would have taken place between the first and second of two Roman imprisonments of Paul–the second being hypothetical, of course, since it is never mentioned in the New Testament. But in 2 Timothy, which on this theory would be from the second Roman imprisonment, Paul clearly expects to be put to death (cf. 2 Tim. 4:6-8), whereas, in an earlier imprisonment, he is uncertain of the outcome (cf. Phil. 1:20-26).

The content of Paul’s Epistle to Titus is comparable to that of his First Epistle to Timothy, whose task at Ephesus (1 Tim. 1:3-7) was similar to that of Titus on Crete. But Paul seems to use a more fatherly tone with Timothy, and to spell things out in more detail. While Paul also gives instructions to Titus, he comes a little closer, at least, to treating him as an equal.

As noted above, Titus is directed to “appoint elders in every town” on the Island of Crete (Tit. 1:5). The qualifications listed, “someone who is blameless, married only once, whose children are believers, not accused of debauchery and not rebellious” (v. 6), when combined with the qualifications for a bishop (vv. 7-9), are comparable to the qualifications for a bishop given in 1 Timothy (1 Tim. 3:2-7). The “bishop” ( ejpivskopoV, episcopos, v. 7), “as God’s steward, must be blameless; he must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or addicted to wine or violent or greedy for gain; but he must be hospitable, a lover of goodness, prudent, upright, devout, and self-controlled. He must have a firm grasp of the word that is trustworthy in accordance with the teaching, so that he may be able both to preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it” (vv. 7-9). Apparently, the terms “elder” (presbuvteroV, presbyteros, Tit. 1:5) and “bishop” ( ejpivskopoV, episcopos, v. 7), sometimes translated “overseer” (cf. NRSV text note d), are used here of the same office. Compare the reference to elders “who labor in preaching and teaching” in 1 Timothy (1 Tim. 5:17). To Timothy, Paul gives similar, but separate, credentials for “bishops” ( ejpivskopoi, episcopoi) (1 Tim. 3:1-7) and “deacons” (diavkonoi, diakonoi) (1 Tim. 3:8-13). To Titus, he gives one set of credentials (Titus 1:5-9) for persons who are first called “elders” (presbuvteroi, presbyteroi) (Titus 1:5) and then called “bishops” ( ejpivskopoi, episkopoi) (v. 7). “Elder and bishop (v. 7) are two terms for the same office in the church” (John Knox and William A. Beardslee, NOAB, 2^nd ed., on Tit. 1:5). Later, of course, presbuvteroV (presbyteros) became the normal designation of a “priest” in the Greek Orthodox Church. In the instructions to Timothy and Titus, I should think that Paul adapted his advice to the respective circumstances in Ephesus and in Crete

In the situation of the Pastoral Epistles, church order has not developed to the point represented by the letters of Ignatius of Antioch (early 2^nd century), when, at least from his perspective, the presbytery should be subordinated to the bishop for the sake of unity and harmony.

Wherefore it is fitting that ye also should run together in accordance with the will of the bishop who by God’s appointment rules over you. Which thing ye indeed of yourselves do, being instructed by the Spirit. For your justly-renowned presbytery, being worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the bishop as the strings are to the harp. Thus, being joined together in concord and harmonious love, of which Jesus Christ is the Captain and Guardian, do ye, man by man, become but one choir; so that, agreeing together in concord, and obtaining a perfect unity with God, ye may indeed be one in harmonious feeling with God the Father, and His beloved Son Jesus Christ our Lord. (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, Chapter IV, from The AnteNicene Christian Fathers, I, now in the Christian Classics Ethereal Library at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.ii.iv.html (accessed again December 18, 2009).

Titus is instructed to rebuke “many rebellious people, idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision [i.e. Jews]” (Tit. 1:10). Paul refers to sophists of the worst kind who “are upsetting whole families by teaching for sordid gain what it is not right to teach” (v. 11). He cites a line from what he calls “one of them, their very own prophet, who said”: “Cretans are always liars, vicious brutes, lazy gluttons” (v. 12). According to Mitchell, this criticism is “supported by a hexameter from the Cretan poet Epimenides (ca. 600 BCE)” (op. cit., on Tit. 1:12). According to Knox and Beardslee, “In ancient parlance ‘to Cretanize’ was to be a liar” (op. cit., on v. 12). “That testimony is true,” says Paul. “For this reason rebuke them sharply, so that they may become sound in the faith” (v. 13). And he warns against “Jewish myths,”for they are “not [to pay] attention to Jewish myths or to commandments of those who reject the truth” (v. 14; cf. 1 Tim. 1:4), an instruction that reminds us of later Gnostic speculations which elaborate the stories of Genesis, altering them to suit their theology. Titus, and we as well, should help people “become sound in the faith” (v. 13). William Barclay hears an echo of Jesus in verse 15. “To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure. Their very minds and consciences are corrupted” (v. 15). “So Paul strikes out the great principle–To the pure all things are pure. He had already said that even more definitely in Romans 14:20. To those who were constantly involved in questions about clean and unclean foods, he said: ‘All things are pure.’ It may well be that this phrase is not only a proverb; it may actually be a saying of Jesus. When Jesus was speaking about these countless Jewish rules and regulations, He said: ‘There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him; but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man’ (Mark 7:15)” (The Letters to Timothy, Titus and Philemon, The Daily Study Bible, 2^nd ed., 1960, p. 279, on Tit. 1:13-16). The chapter concludes with Paul’s assessment of these heretics. “They profess to know God, but they deny him by their actions. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work” (v. 16).

Titus 2:11-3:8a, Presbyterian Tradition

11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all, 12 training us to renounce impiety and worldly passions, and in the present age to live lives that are self-controlled, upright, and godly, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope and the manifestation of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. 14 He it is who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds.

15 Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one look down on you.

Maintain Good Deeds

3:1 Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, 2 to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show every courtesy to everyone. 3 For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, despicable, hating one another. 4 But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of any works of righteousness that we had done, but according to his mercy, through the water of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. 6 This Spirit he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. 8 The saying is sure. (Titus 2:11-3:8a, NRSV)

Much of Paul’s instruction to Titus in chapter two, is about what to teach. Before his exhortation to “declare these things, exhort and reprove with all authority” (Tit. 2:15), he provides a theological basis for such living. “For the grace (hJ cavriV, hē charis, feminine noun) of God has appeared, bringing salvation (swthvrioV, sōtērios) to all, training (paideuvousa, paideuousa, feminine participle) us to renounce impiety and worldly passions” (vv. 11, 12a). Margaret M. Mitchell says, “The grace of God has appeared (lit. ‘been manifested’) [means] in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ (cf. 3:4)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Tit. 2:11). “Bringing salvation” translates the adjective swthvrioV (sōtērios), which could be masculine or feminine, but the parallel with the feminine participle paideuvousa (paideuousa) shows that it is “the grace (hJ cavriV, hē charis) of God” that both brings salvation and trains us to renounce impiety and worldly passions. And further, the training is “to live lives that are self-controlled, upright, and godly” (v. 12b).

Paul’s sentence continues describing the Christian hope: “while we wait for the blessed hope and the manifestation ( ejpifavneia, epiphaneia) of the glory of our great God (qeovV, theos) and Savior (swthvr, sōtēr), Jesus Christ” (v. 13). The reference here to Jesus as “our great God and Savior” has been questioned. Jouette M. Bassler says, “NT writings rarely speak of Christ as God (but see Jn. 20:28; Heb. 1:8). This text may do so, but the translation given in textual note b, which does not refer to Christ as God, is equally possible. Elsewhere in these Letters [i.e., the Pastoral Epistles] Jesus’ humanity is stressed (see 1 Tim. 2:5)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Tit. 2:13). It may be surprising to some that the translation, “of the great God and our Savior” (NRSV text note b), which distinguishes “the great God” from “our Savior, Jesus Christ,” is found in the Authorized (King James) Version (cf. the American Standard Version of 1901), but not in most modern translations (e.g. RSV, NRSV, NIV, TNIV, NKJV [contrast AV/KJV], NASV [contrast ASV], English Standard Version, New Living Translation and others).

The issue here is not a matter of manuscripts with different wording, but of understanding the grammar of the Greek phrasing. Daniel B. Wallace accuses many respected New Testament Greek grammarians of failing to properly understand the implications of what is called “the Granville Sharp Rule,” which he defines, saying, “In Greek, when two nouns are connected by kaiv [kai, ‘and’] and the article [i.e., definite article, the Greek equivalent of ‘the’] precedes only the first noun, there is a close connection between the two. . . . At the highest level it may indicate identity” (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 1995, p. 270). He concludes a long section on this issue by saying,

Sharp’s rule has . . . been misunderstood, the net effect being to lessen certainty as to its value in christologically pregnant texts. It has been applied only with great hesitation to Titus 2:13 and 2 Pet. 1:1 by Trinitarians in the past two centuries. However, a proper understanding of the rule shows it to have the highest degree of validity within the NT. Consequently, these two passages are as secure as any in the canon when it comes to identifying Christ as qeovV [theos = ‘God’]. (ibid., p. 290, cf. pp. 272, 273, 276, 735)

Frederick William Danker defines the word translated “manifestation” here as an “ ‘extraordinary coming into view’ appearing, appearance, probably with connotation of splendor” (The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 2009, s.v. ejpifavneia, epiphaneia). While the term can refer to the coming of Christ as Savior (2 Tim. 1:9b-10), it can refer specifically to the future “coming” (parousiva, parousia) of Christ in glory, as in, “annihilating him [i.e., ‘the lawless one,’ 2 Thess. 2:3] by the manifestation ( ejpifavneia, epiphaneia) of his coming (parousiva, parousia)” (2 Thess. 2:8; cf. 1 Tim. 6:14), and so here. “Where Paul speaks of Christ’s ‘coming’ (Greek parousia; see 1 Cor 15:23; 1 Thess. 4:15),” says Bassler, these Letters borrow the terminology of the imperial cult and speak of his manifestation (Greek epiphaneia)” (loc. cit.). She sums up a bit: “Two appearances or manifestations of Jesus mark God’s plan of salvation: the incarnation is a manifestation of God’s grace (see also 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:16; 2 Tim. 1:10) and the parousia, or Second Coming, is a manifestation of God’s glory (see also 1 Tim. 6:14)” (ibid., on vv. 11-13).

“He it is,” says Paul [with reference to Christ], who gave himself for us that he might redeem ( lutrwvshtai, lytrōtēsai, aorist tense, middle voice, subjunctive mood of lutrovw, lytroō, ‘to redeem, ransom’) us from all iniquity and purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds” (Tit. 2:14). For the words “who gave himself,” Mitchell refers to “Gal. 1:4; 2:20; Eph. 5:2; 1 Tim. 2:6” (op. cit., on v. 14). “Redeem us,” she says, means “buy [us] back from slavery (Rom. 3:24; 1 Cor. 1:30; 6:20; 7:23; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:114; cf. Mk. 10:45)” (ibid.). “Declare these things,” says Paul to Titus; “exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one look down on you” (Tit. 2:15; cf. 1 Tim. 4:12).

These instructions continue in chapter three. “Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show every courtesy to everyone” (3:1-2). William Barclay finds here “six qualifications for the good citizen” in Titus 3:1-2: The good citizen is (1) law-abiding, (2) active in service, (3) careful in speech, (4) tolerant, (5) kind, (6) gentle (The Letters to Timothy, Titus and Philemon, The Daily Study Bible, 2^nd ed., 1960, pp. 296-297, on Tit. 3:2). “Qualities like these are only possible for the Christian,” says Barclay, “for they are only possible for the man in whose heart Christ reigns supreme. The welfare of any community depends on the acceptance by the Christians within it of the duty of demonstrating to all the world the nobility of Christian citizenship” (ibid., pp. 297-298).

Paul directs Titus to remind the people of Crete that they were once like their non-Christian neighbors. “For we ourselves,” he says, “were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, despicable, hating one another” (v. 3). But God has provided a remedy for such conditions, described here in what Mitchell has called “a tight creedal formulation, perhaps from an early hymn” (op. cit., on 3:4-7):

But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of any works of righteousness that we had done, but according to his mercy, through the water of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. This Spirit he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:4-7, NRSV)

This passage is one of the “sure sayings” (v. 8a; cf. 1 Tim. 1:15; 3:1; 4:9; 2 Tim. 2:8). We note here the paired expressions, “God our Savior” (v. 4) and “Jesus Christ our Savior” (v. 6; cf. comments on 2:13, above). Barclay lists seven “outstanding facts about the work of Christ for men [and women]” in this passage (vv. 3-7):

(1) What Jesus did for us is that he put us in a new relationship with God.

(2) This love and grace of God are gifts which no man could ever have earned or achieved; they can only be accepted in perfect trust and awakened love.

(3) This love and grace of God are mediated . . . through the church.

(4) . . . but the essential power behind it all is the power of the Holy Spirit.

(5) The effect of all this is threefold. It brings forgiveness for past sins.

(6) But the effect . . . is also present life.

(7) And lastly, there enters into life the hope of greater things. . . . The Christian is the man [or woman] who knows the wonder of past sin forgiven, the thrill of present life lived with Christ, and the hope of the greater life which is yet to be. (op. cit., pp. 299-302)

Paul gives some final admonitions to Titus. “I desire,” he says, “that you insist on these things, so that those who have come to believe in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works; these things are excellent and profitable to everyone” (v. 8b). Paul also gives a further warning against the teachings of the opponents. “But avoid stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. After a first and second admonition, have nothing more to do with anyone who causes divisions, since you know that such a person is perverted and sinful, being self-condemned” (vv. 9-11). Mitchell calls this a “condemnatory attitude toward the opponents,” and compares 1 Timothy 6:3-5 (op. cit., on vv. 9-11).

Luke 1:1-25, Episcopal and Lutheran Traditions

1:1 Since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, 3 I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the truth concerning the things about which you have been instructed.

The Birth of John the Baptist Foretold

5 In the days of King Herod of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly order of Abijah. His wife was a descendant of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 Both of them were righteous before God, living blamelessly according to all the commandments and regulations of the Lord. 7 But they had no children, because Elizabeth was barren, and both were getting on in years.

8 Once when he was serving as priest before God and his section was on duty, 9 he was chosen by lot, according to the custom of the priesthood, to enter the sanctuary of the Lord and offer incense. 10 Now at the time of the incense offering, the whole assembly of the people was praying outside. 11 Then there appeared to him an angel of the Lord, standing at the right side of the altar of incense. 12 When Zechariah saw him, he was terrified; and fear overwhelmed him. 13 But the angel said to him, "Do not be afraid, Zechariah, for your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you will name him John. 14 You will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth, 15 for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He must never drink wine or strong drink; even before his birth he will be filled with the Holy Spirit. 16 He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. 17 With the spirit and power of Elijah he will go before him, to turn the hearts of parents to their children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." 18 Zechariah said to the angel, "How will I know that this is so? For I am an old man, and my wife is getting on in years." 19 The angel replied, "I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to bring you this good news. 20 But now, because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their time, you will become mute, unable to speak, until the day these things occur."

21 Meanwhile the people were waiting for Zechariah, and wondered at his delay in the sanctuary. 22 When he did come out, he could not speak to them, and they realized that he had seen a vision in the sanctuary. He kept motioning to them and remained unable to speak. 23 When his time of service was ended, he went to his home.

24 After those days his wife Elizabeth conceived, and for five months she remained in seclusion. She said, 25 "This is what the Lord has done for me when he looked favorably on me and took away the disgrace I have endured among my people." Luke 1:1-25, NRSV)

The following comments on Luke 1:1-25 are repeated here from December 19, 2009, two days ago, when it was the Presbyterian reading. Reference to previous sources is made there:

The Prologue of Luke: Dedication to Theophilus

Luke begins his Gospel with a dedication to Theophilus, “I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus (kravtiste Qeovfile, kratiste Theophile) (Lk. 1:3). We may compare a similar reference to Theophilus in Acts 1:1. The name Theophilus (QeovfiloV, Theo-philos) means “Friend” or “Lover” of God. It could refer to a real person, an acquaintance, perhaps patron, of Luke, or to an ideal, perhaps hypothetical, Christian reader of Luke-Acts. David L. Tiede, revised by Christopher R. Matthews, says that “Theophilus . . . who bears a common Greek name also used by Jews, may be Luke’s literary patron but is otherwise unknown” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Lk. 1:3). They also point out that “some take the name to be symbolic of any interested reader” (ibid.). Beverly Roberts Gaventa says, “Following a literary custom of his day, Luke gives his work [i.e., Acts] a formal dedication” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Acts 1:1). Marion Lloyd Soards says that Luke may be addressing “a person of prominent social standing, since Theophilus is designated ‘most excellent’ [kravtistoV, kratistos], terminology typically applied to persons of high official or socioeconomic status” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Lk. 1:3).

Luke’s prologue to his Gospel, 1:1-4, is one long complex sentence, as indicate by the punctuation (K. Aland et al., The Greek New Testament, 3^rd ed., 1975; AV/KJV; NRSV), though Today’s New International Version (TNIV)–perhaps in a concession to limited modern attention spans–divides it into two sentences (vv. 1-2 and 3-4). The dedication (v. 3) is the main clause, with the main verb e[doxe kajmoiv (edoxe kamoi, lit. ‘it seemed [good] to me,’ cf. AV/KJV), “I decided” (NRSV, cf TNIV), but it includes the subordinate phrase with a circumstantial participle, “after investigating (parhkolouqhkovti, parēkolouthēkoti) everything carefully from the very first,” The initial subordinate clause provides background circumstances, “Since ( =Epeidhvper, Epeidēper, ‘whereas, inasmuch as, since,’ Frederick William Danker, The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 2009, s.v. ejpeidhvper, epeidēper) many have undertaken (ejpeceivrhsan, epecheirēsan, aorist tense verb) to set down (ajnatavxasqai, anataxasthai) an orderly account ( dihvghsiV, diēgēsis) of the events that have been fulfilled (ta; peplhroforhmevna . . . pragmavta, ta peplērophorēmena . . . pragmata) among us” (v. 1). Luke is clearly aware of previous Gospel accounts, Mark, for example, and likely the so-called “Q” source, among others. According to Danker, the noun dihvghsiV (diēgēsis) is a “record, [used] of a literary account” (ibid., s.v. dihvghsiV (diēgēsis), related to the verb dihgevomai (diēgeomai), “ ‘make a detailed account about an event or circumstance,’ recount, relate, tell ” (ibid., s.v. dihgevomai, diēgeomai). The compound verb (participle) translated “have been fulfilled” means to “ ‘reach a point at which nothing is lacking,’ of events or matters of interest, come to fruition” (ibid, s. v. plhroforevw, plērophoreō ). It’s a compound of plhrhV (plērēs), “filled up, full,” and forevw (phoreō ), “bear constantly, wear” (ibid.). It’s as if Luke has in mind the whole of his Luke-Acts account as the fulfilment of prophecy.

Another subordinate clause (v. 2) refers to Luke’s sources. His “orderly account” was “set down . . . just as they [i.e., accounts of the events fulfilled among us] (v. 1) “just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word” (v. 2). Tiede and Matthews says, “Eyewitnesses (stressed by ancient historians), who are also servants of the word, have handed on traditions about Jesus. The author does not claim to be an eyewitness” (op. cit., on v. 2). Some have tried to suggest that Luke puts himself in the “third generation,” so to speak, that is, that the first level of tradition was the eyewitnesses, the second level was the servants of the word, and that Luke himself is within the third level of tradition. But the eyewitnesses and servants of the word may be considered the same–at the same level–as Tiede and Matthews suggest. Since according to the account in Acts, when Paul was arrested in Jerusalem and kept in custody first there and then in Caesarea (Acts 23-26), Luke was with him but not in custody, he would have had opportunity for the kind of careful investigation he professes to have made (Lk. 1:3).

The purpose of all of this is stated, “so that ( i{na, hina) you may know the truth (ajsfavleia, asphaleia, “certainty,” Danker, op. cit., s.v. ajsfavleia, asphaleia) concerning the things about which you have been instructed (kathchvqhV, katēchēthēs). “The truth (Greek asphaleia),” say Tiede and Matthews, “emphasized in Greek by its position at the end of the sentence, connotes the security offered by the narrative” (ibid., on v. 4).

The Birth of John the Baptist Foretold

Luke then continues with the story of Zechariah and Elizabeth, who would become the parents of John the Baptist. “In the days of King Herod of Judea,” he says, “there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly order ( ejfhmeriva, ephēmeria) of Abijah” (v. 5a). With apparent reference to the complex sentence that forms the prologue (vv. 1-4), Tiede and Matthew point out that “Luke’s style abruptly shifts and imitates that of the Greek OT (the Septuagint)” (ibid., on 1:5-2:52). We might suggest that when composing freely on his own, as in the prologue, Luke is capable of a rather sophisticated level of writing in Greek–his native language, to be sure–but for much of the material in the Gospel and in Acts, the first part at least, his writing style reflects that of his sources, though he is clearly willing and able to “correct” or “improve” such sources as Mark’s Gospel. “In the days of King Herod of Judea,” says Soards, “refers broadly to 37-4 BCE. The specific time in view in this story is probably 7-6 BCE (See Mt. 2:1, 15)” (op. cit., on v. 5). The term “priestly order” ( ejfhmeriva, ephēmeria), related to ejfhvmeroV (ephēmeros), “for the day,” referred to “a class of priests who performed daily . . . duties for a fixed period in the temple at Jerusalem, division . . . There were 24 such divisions, each one of which took care of the temple duties for one week (1 Chron. 23:6; 28:13 al.)” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. ejfhmeriva, ephēmeria). Of the twenty-four priestly orders, according to Elwyn E. Tilden and Bruce M. Metzger, “Abijah’s was the eighth (1 Chr. 24:10)” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Lk. 1:5).

Zechariah’s “wife was a descendant of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth” (v. 5b). So, as Tiede and Matthew observe, “John’s parents both came from priestly families” (op. cit., on v. 5). The parents are described as a part of the righteous remnant of Israel. “Both of them were righteous before God,” says Luke, “living blamelessly according to all the commandments and regulations of the Lord” (v. 6). According to Tiede and Matthews, “Zechariah and Elizabeth are portrayed as the epitome of faithful Israel” (ibid., on v. 6). But there was a problem, for “they had no children, because Elizabeth was barren, and both were getting on in years” (v. 7). Tiede and Matthews say, the phrases, “no children [and] on in years recall the stories of Sarah and Abraham (Gen. 18:11) and Hannah and Elkanah (1 Sam. 1-2). See also Judg. 13:2-25” (ibid., on v. 7). According to Soards, “The mention of Elizabeth, the righteousness of the couple, their childlessness, and their advanced age all anticipate the appearance of the angel and are not directly related to Zechariah’s Temple service. The description also echoes images and lines from the Hebrew Bible (Gen. 15:3; 16:1; 25:2; 29:31; Judg. 13:2-3; 1 Sam. 1:2; Ex. 30:6-8)” (op. cit., on vv. 5-7)

“Once,” we are told, “when he [i.e., Zechariah] was serving as priest before God and his section ( ejfhmeriva, ephēmeria) was on duty, he was chosen by lot, according to the custom of the priesthood, to enter the sanctuary of the Lord and offer incense” (vv. 8-9). Tiede and Matthews say, “Each group[ of priests was probably on duty for a week twice each year” (op. cit., on v. 8). They add, “Individuals chosen by lot were understood to be divinely appointed (see Acts 1:24-26). Only priests could enter the sanctuary and approach the divine presence” (ibid., on v. 9). But according to Soards, “The privilege of offering the incense was normally granted only once in a lifetime” (op. cit., on v. 9). Luke’s emphasis is not on the privilege as such, but rather Zechariah’s encounter with the angel Gabriel on that occasion. “Now at the time of the incense offering,” says Luke, “the whole assembly of the people was praying outside. “The people,” say Tiede and Matthews, “share in the bloodless sacrifice of incense by praying” (op. cit., on v. 10). “Then there appeared to him an angel of the LORD, standing at the right side of the altar of incense” (v. 11). Later, the angel gives his name, Gabriel, to Zechariah (v. 19, cf. v. 26; the angel that appears to Joseph, Mt. 1:20-24; 2:13, 19, remains unnamed).

Zechariah reacts to the appearance of Gabriel with fear. “When Zechariah saw him, he was terrified; and fear overwhelmed him” (Lk. 1:12). “Fear,” say Tiede and Matthews, is “a common human reaction to divine manifestations (Isa. 6:5-6)” (ibid., on v. 12). But Zechariah is reassured by Gabriel. “But the angel said to him, ‘Do not be afraid, Zechariah, for your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you will name him John ( =IwavnnhV, Iōannēs)” (v. 13). According to Soards, “The name John (Heb. ‘J[eh]ohanan’) means ‘God has shown favor’ ” (op. cit., on v. 13). “You will have joy and gladness,” says Gabriel, “and many will rejoice at his birth, for he will be great in the sight of the Lord” (vv. 14, 15a). Tilden and Metzger vv. 14-17 a “canticle in honor of John” (op. cit., on vv. 14-17). Zechariah is told that John will be a Nazirite. “He must never drink wine or strong drink; even before his birth he will be filled with the Holy Spirit” (v. 15b). Soards compares Num. 6:1-4; Judg. 13:4-5; and 1 Sam. 1:11 LXX). “He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God,” says Gabriel. “with the spirit and power of Elijah he will go before him, to turn the hearts of parents to their children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord” (vv. 16-17). “He will go before him,” say Tilden and Metzger means, “he will be the forerunner of the Messiah (Mal. 4:5-6; Mt. 11:14)” (op. cit., on v. 17; cf Soards on v. 17). According to Tiede and Matthews, “The spirit and power of Elijah defines John’s prophetic task of turning many of the people of Israel to repentance (3:3; Mal. 4:5-6)” (op. cit., on v. 17).

Zechariah’s response is, perhaps, not what we might have expected, but certainly understandable, given the circumstances. “Zechariah said to the angel, ‘How will I know that this is so? For I am an old man, and my wife is getting on in years’ ” (v. 18). Tiede and Matthews say, “Zechariah’s question expresses doubt (see also Sarah in Gen. 18:12-14; cf. Mary in v. 34), though as a priest he should perhaps recall the biblical precedents pertinent to his situation” (ibid., on v. 18). In response, “the angel replied, ‘I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to bring you this good news” (v. 19). “Gabriel,” says Soards, “means ‘God is my hero’ and is one of two angels named in the Hebrew Bible (Dan. 8:16; 9:21)” (op. cit., on v. 19). Tiede and Matthews call him “an official emissary of God’s court (see v. 26; Dan. 8:16; 9:21; cf. Tob. 12:15)” (op. cit., on v. 19). “But now,” says Gabriel, “because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their time, you will become mute, unable to speak, until the day these things occur” (v. 20). As we know, Zechariah will regain his ability to speak when he confirms the child’s name (vv. 63-64).

“Meanwhile,” says Luke, “the people were waiting for Zechariah, and wondered at his delay in the sanctuary. When he did come out, he could not speak to them, and they realized that he had seen a vision in the sanctuary. He kept motioning to them and remained unable to speak” (vv. 21-22). According to Tilden and Metzger, “he could not speak,” means that “he was unable to pronounce the priestly blessing for which the people were waiting” (op. cit., on v. 22). “the people perceive that Zechariah has seen a vision,” say Tiede and Matthews, “but his muteness keeps Gabriel’s message a secret until Zechariah speaks prophetically (vv. 67-79). And Luke tells us, “When his time of service was ended, he [i.e., Zechariah] went to his home” (v. 23).

Although it is not yet public knowledge, we learn that the promise of a child is fulfilled. “After those days his wife Elizabeth conceived and for five months she remained in seclusion. She said, ‘This is what the Lord has done for me when he looked favorably on me and took away the disgrace I have endured among my people’ ” (vv. 24-25). “Among the Jews,” say Tilden and Metzger, “barrenness was regarded as a sign of divine disfavor and therefore a disgrace (see Gen. 16:2 n.; 30:23; 1 Sam. 1:1-18; Ps. 128:3)” (op. cit., on v. 25; cf. Soards, op. cit., on v. 25). The note on Genesis 16:2, by Bernhard W. Anderson, says, “In antiquity both barrenness and fertility were traced to God ([Gen.] 20:17-18; 30:2; 33:5; 1 Sam. 1:6)” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Gen. 16:2). So, Elizabeth welcomes the news, and the pregnancy, as the Lord’s blessing that took away her disgrace (v. 25).

Luke 1:39-48a (48b-56), Presbyterian Tradition

39 In those days Mary set out and went with haste to a Judean town in the hill country, 40 where she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the child leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit 42 and exclaimed with a loud cry, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. 43 And why has this happened to me, that the mother of my Lord comes to me? 44 For as soon as I heard the sound of your greeting, the child in my womb leaped for joy. 45 And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her by the Lord."

The Magnificat

46 And Mary said,

"My soul magnifies the Lord,

47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

48 for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant. (Luke 1:39-48a, NRSV)

Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed;

49 for the Mighty One has done great things for me,

and holy is his name.

50 His mercy is for those who fear him

from generation to generation.

51 He has shown strength with his arm;

he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts.

52 He has brought down the powerful from their thrones,

and lifted up the lowly;

53 he has filled the hungry with good things,

and sent the rich away empty.

54 He has helped his servant Israel,

in remembrance of his mercy,

55 according to the promise he made to our ancestors,

to Abraham and to his descendants forever."

56 And Mary remained with her about three months and then returned to her home. (Luke 1:39-56, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of December 21, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Advent, Presbyterian reference for Dec. 21, Year Two), when comments were repeated from December 22, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Advent, Year One, Presbyterian reference for Dec. 22), whencomments that were repeated with minor adaptation from December 23, 2004, (Thursday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year One), on December 21, 2005 (Wednesday of the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two), were used with further adaptation:

This reading follow’s Luke’s account of the Annunciation, in which the angel Gabriel informs Mary about the forthcoming birth of Jesus (Lk. 1:26-38). Mary comes from Nazareth (v. 26) to visit Elizabeth. “In those days Mary set out and went with haste to a Judean town in the hill country, where she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth” (vv. 39-40). While the term “hill country” could apply to almost any part of what Denis Baly calls “a mountainous spine running its length [i.e., the length of ‘the land of Palestine’] between the Jordan River to the east and the Mediterranean Sea to the west” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. “hill country”), the hill country of Judea (cf. v. 65) would likely be not far from Bethlehem, and perhaps not far from Jerusalem (compare Zechariah’s service in the temple, vv. 8-23). “When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting,” says Luke, “the child leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit” (v. 41). According to David L. Tiede, revised by Christopher R. Matthews, “That the child leaped in her womb already signals John’s role as forerunner to Jesus, as does Elizabeth’s filling with the Holy Spirit and prophetic acclamation of Mary in vv. 42-45 (see v. 67)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Luke 1:41). According to Marion Lloyd Soards, “Elizabeth’s being filled with the Holy Spirit may also acknowledge the presence and the power of the Holy Spirit at work in relation to the unborn John in her womb” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Lk. 1:41). In a recent sermon, the Reverend Vicki M. Davis says, “That image – the child leaping in Elizabeth’s womb when Mary enters, Mary herself carrying Jesus in her womb – strikes me as the central metaphor in this passage for this juncture in the church year, and it is a metaphor that speaks to the way in which Christ enters our lives and how we respond – or not” (“The Child leaped in her womb,” Dec. 24, 2006, the Fourth Sunday of Advent, at St. Mark’s Episcopal Church, New Canaan, CT, on the Internet, at http://www.stmarksnewcanaan.org/docs/TheChildleapedinherwomb.pdf, accessed Dec. 21, 2009).

In response to Mary’s greeting, “filled with the Holy Spirit” (v. 41), Elizabeth responds with what Tiede and Matthews call a “prophetic acclamation of Mary in vv. 42-45 (see v. 67)” (op. cit., on v. 41):

Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And why has this happened to me, that the mother of my Lord comes to me? For as soon as I heard the sound of your greeting, the child in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her by the Lord. (Lk. 1:42b-45, NRSV)

Elizabeth concludes by summing up Mary’s response to Gabriel. “Mary is blessed,” say Tiede and Matthews, “because she believed the angel’s message about her pregnancy (vv. 30-38; see also v. 42; cf. 11:27-28)” (ibid., on v. 45). “Prior to his birth,” says Soards, “Jesus is designated Lord ” (op. cit., on v. 43).

Mary responds in poetic lines that have been called the Magnificat, from the first word in the Latin version: “My soul magnifies [magnificat, first in Latin word order, cf. Greek Megaluvnei, Megalynei] the Lord, / and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, / for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant (Lk. 1:46-48a NRSV). Mary’s song has been compared to Hannah’s prayer (1 Sam. 2:1-10), as was noted in yesterday’s comments on the latter. The following table, copied from yesterday, shows points of comparison.

As noted yesterday, Hannah’s song has been classified as a community song of thanksgiving because it anticipates good things for God’s people under Samuel’s leadership. In a similar way, much of Mary’s song does the same, anticipating the salvation to be brought by her son Jesus. As noted above, Mary “magnifies the Lord,” and her “spirit rejoices in God” (Lk. 1:46b, 47; cf. 1 Sam. 2:1b, c). Mary’s exclamation that God “has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant (douvlh, doulē, feminine noun). / Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed” (Lk. 1:48). While this verse is not an exact parallel to lines of Hannah’s song, its tone certainly echoes Hannah’s relief at no longer being barren. Compare “my victory” (1 Sam. 2:1e) and “the barren has borne seven” (v. 5c). Mary continues with reasons for calling her blessed: “for the Mighty One has done great things for me, / and holy is his name” (Lk. 1:49). For “the Mighty One” as a reference to God, compare “there is no Rock like our God” (1 Sam. 2:2c). For “holy is his name,” compare “There is no Holy One like the LORD” (1 Sam. 2:2a; cf. also Ps. 111:9). For “great things for me,” which “the Mighty One has done,” compare the following lists in both songs. “His mercy (to; e[leoV aujtou:, to eleos autou) is for those who fear him,” says Mary, “from generation to generation” (Lk. 1:50; cf. Ps. 103:13, 17). She echoes the “steadfast love” (ds,H,, chesed, cf. to; . . . e[leoV, to . . . eleos LXX) of Psalm 103:17 [LXX 102:17], which could also refer to Hannah’s list of God’s many benefits.

Mary says, “He [God] has shown strength with his arm; / he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts” (Lk. 1:51; cf. Ps. 89:10 and 2 Sam. 22:28). Note Hannah’s reference to “arrogance” (1 Sam. 2:3b) and her statement, “The bows of the mighty are broken, / but the feeble gird on strength” (v. 4). “He has brought down the powerful from their thrones,” says Mary, “and lifted up the lowly” (Lk. 1:52). For “brought down the powerful,” compare Job 12:19; and for “lifted up the lowly,” compare Job 5:11. For both compare the contrasts in 1 Samuel 2:4, 5, 6, 7, and 9. Note that Hannah sings, proclaiming that “The Lord makes poor and makes rich; / he brings low, he also exalts. / He raises up the poor from the dust; / he lifts the needy from the ash heap, / to make them sit with princes / and inherit a seat of honor” (1 Sam. 2:7, 8a, b). In a specific contrast, Mary says, “he [i.e., God] has filled the hungry with good things, / and sent the rich away empty” (Lk. 1:53; cf. 1 Sam. 2:5; Ps. 107:9). Mary celebrates not only the favor shown to her by the LORD (vv. 48, 49), but the blessings for her people. “He has helped his servant Israel, / in remembrance of his mercy, / according to the promise he made to our ancestors, / to Abraham and to his descendants forever” (Lk. 1:54-55). Hannah’s song, of course spells out the benefits not only for her self, but for her people, through her son Samuel, we would assume, but surprisingly, through Israel’s future king. “The LORD will judge the ends of the earth; / he will give strength to his king [LXX ‘kings’ plural], / and exalt the power of his anointed (H1yw9mA, māšî ^ach, LXX cristovV, christos)” (1 Sam. 2:10c,d, e). While Mary’s song does not specifically mention Jesus’ role as Messiah, it’s clearly implied in the context. For God’s “promise” to ancestors, to Abraham and his descendants, Elwyn E. Tilden and Bruce M. Metzger refer to Genesis 17:7; 18:18; 22:17; and Micah 7:20 (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Lk. 1:55), which focuses on the promise to Abraham, but in addition Tiede and Matthews say “the promise to David (2 Sam. 7:11-16; 1 Chr. 17:10-14) is also fulfilled” (op. cit., on v. 55).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net