Baruch 4:36-5:9, Episcopal Tradition

36 Look toward the east, O Jerusalem,

and see the joy that is coming to you from God.

37 Look, your children are coming, whom you sent away;

they are coming, gathered from east and west,

at the word of the Holy One,

rejoicing in the glory of God.

5:1 Take off the garment of your sorrow and affliction, O Jerusalem,

and put on forever the beauty of the glory from God.

2 Put on the robe of the righteousness that comes from God;

put on your head the diadem of the glory of the Everlasting;

3 for God will show your splendor everywhere under heaven.

4 For God will give you evermore the name,

"Righteous Peace, Godly Glory."

5 Arise, O Jerusalem, stand upon the height;

look toward the east,

and see your children gathered from west and east

at the word of the Holy One,

rejoicing that God has remembered them.

6 For they went out from you on foot,

led away by their enemies;

but God will bring them back to you,

carried in glory, as on a royal throne.

7 For God has ordered that every high mountain and the everlasting hills be made low

and the valleys filled up, to make level ground,

so that Israel may walk safely in the glory of God.

8 The woods and every fragrant tree

have shaded Israel at God's command.

9 For God will lead Israel with joy,

in the light of his glory,

with the mercy and righteousness that come from him. (Baruch 4:36-5:9, NRSV)

For the following comments, there is some reference to those of December 24, 2005 (Saturday in the week of the fourth Sunday in Advent, Reference for December 24, Year Two); but the comments are essentially rewritten.

Baruch was a scribe to whom Jeremiah dictated a scroll to be read in the temple and the palace (Jer. 36:4-19). After King Jehoiakim burned the scroll that predicted the Babylon conquest and devastation of Jerusalem (v. 29), Jeremiah dictated another scroll to Baruch (vv. 28-32). For this, and perhaps other support of Jeremiah, Jeremiah presents what Leo G. Perdue, revised by Robert R. Wilson, calls “an oracle of salvation addressed to Baruch” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Jer. 45:1-5). Although Baruch laments his situation, “Woe is me! The LORD has added sorrow to my pain; I am weary with my groaning, and I find no rest” (Jer. 45:3; cf. Jeremiah’s own earlier laments, 11:18-23; 12:1-6; 15:10-21; 17:14-18; 18:18-23; 20:7-12, 14-18), Jeremiah, while repeating the prediction of disaster (Jer. 45:4, 5a), reassures Baruch, “but I [says the LORD] will give you your life as a prize of war in every place to which you may go” (v. 5b). Against Jeremiah’s advice (Jer., chap. 42), Johanan took Jeremiah and Baruch to Egypt with others (43:1-7), in flight from the deteriorating situation in Judea, in the aftermath of the murder of Gedaliah, the governor appointed by the Babylonians (41:1-3).

The book of Baruch is included in the Apocrypha, “recognized as Deuterocanonical Scripture by the Roman Catholic, Greek, and Russian Orthodox Churches” (cf. Eileen M. Schuller, ed., Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books, HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, p. 1293). Although the Book of Jeremiah apparently leaves Baruch with Jeremiah and other Judeans in Egypt (see above), the Book of Baruch places Baruch in Babylon with the exiled Judeans. “These are the words of the book (biblivon, biblion) that Baruch son of Neriah son of Mahseiah son of Zedekiah son of Hasadiah son of Hilkiah wrote in Babylon, in the fifth year, on the seventh day of the month, at the time when the Chaldeans took Jerusalem and burned it with fire” (Bar. 1:1-2). According to Carol A. Newsom, “Whether the fifth year is calculated from the exile of 597 BCE (see 2 Kings 24:10-17) or of 586 BCE (see 2 Kings 25:8-12) is not stated. The reference to the burning of Jerusalem suggests the latter” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Bar. 1:2). She notes that Baruch was taken to Egypt (as noted above), but reports “a later tradition, reflected in Baruch and other Jewish sources (Seder Olam Rabbah 26; Midrash Rabbah Song 5:5; Babylonian Talmud Megilla 16b) [which] assumes that Baruch went to Babylon” (ibid., in the Introduction to Baruch). She adds, “These sources are full of historical inaccuracies and belong to the realm of legend rather than history. It was a relatively common practice during the late Second Temple period to compose edifying works that expanded the biblical tradition (e.g., Prayer of Manasseh, Jubilees, Ps.-Philo, Biblical Antiquities), and it is within this context that Baruch should be situated” (ibid.). Probably for similar reasons, Mark E. Biddle says, “the book of Baruch was probably written sometime between 200 and 60 BCE; it is set, however, during the Babylonian exile of the early sixth century BCE and attributed to Jeremiah’s friend and secretary, Baruch son of Neriah (Jer. 32:12; 36:4; 43:3; 45:1)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, in the Introduction to Baruch).

Biddle outlines Baruch as “two main sections, each of which consists of two parts”:

First section: “an introduction (1:1-14) and a corporate confession of sin (1:15-3:8)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The second section . . . two poems

a hymn in praise of Wisdom (3:9-4:4)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

a rhetorical address by Jerusalem to the people of Israel (4:5-29)

and a rhetorical address to Jerusalem (4:30-5:9). (ibid.)

Today’s reading concludes the book with part of the “rhetorical address to Jerusalem” according to Biddle’s analysis. According to Newsom, “Baruch consists of three originally independent compositions, a prose prayer , a wisdom poem, and a poem of consolation, that have been joined together and given a narrative introduction” (loc. cit.), but in spite of this complex understanding of the books composition, in the end her sections of the book are similar to Biddle’s analysis.

Following Jerusalem’s “address to the people” (Bar. 4:5-29), she is addressed in turn. “Take courage, O Jerusalem, / for the one who named you will comfort you” (Bar. 4:30). Newsom compares Isaiah 51:12 and 62:2. “Wretched (deivlaioi, deilaioi, masculine plural) will be those who mistreated you / and who rejoiced at your fall. / Wretched (deivlaiai, deilaiai, feminine plural) will be the cities that your children served as slaves; / wretched (deilaiva, deilaia, feminine singular) will be the city that received your offspring” (vv. 31-32). The masculine reference is apparently to the soldiers “who mistreated you,” and the feminine references are to cities, in particular, to Babylon (unnamed), “the city that received your offspring” (i.e. the “offspring” of Jerusalem). “As in 4:6, etc.,” says Biddle, “the enemies of Jerusalem are unnamed. Elsewhere both Edom (see Ps. 137:7; Isa. 34; 63:1-6; Ob. 8-14) and Babylon (Ps. 137:8; Isa. 13; 47) are singled out. Contrast the attitude toward Babylon in [Bar.] 1:11-12” (op. cit., on Bar. 4:31-35). “For just as she rejoiced at your fall,” says Baruch, “and was glad for your ruin, / so she will be grieved at her own ( eJauth:V, heautēs, feminine singular) desolation” (v. 33). Although the reference seems to be principally to Babylon (cf. vv. 34-35), this verse implies Edom, which, says Newsom, “was especially blamed for having gloated over Jerusalem’s destruction (Isa. 34; 63:1-6; Lam. 4:21; Ob. 8-14; Mal. 1:2-5)” (op. cit., on vv. 30-35). “I will take away her pride in her great population,” says Baruch, apparently speaking for God, “and her insolence will be turned to grief” (v. 34). The “great population” certainly refers to Babylon rather than to Edom. “For fire will come upon her from the Everlasting (oJ aijwvnioV, ho aiōnios, ‘the Eternal’ = God, cf. Rom. 16:26) for many days, / and for a long time she will be inhabited by demons” (v. 35). For “fire,” Newsom refers to Jeremiah 50:32; 51:30,58, and for “inhabited by demons,” to Isa. 13:21, references to the downfall of Babylon.

As today’s reading proper begins, Jerusalem is called to look for her returning exiled peoples. “Look toward the east, O Jerusalem, / and see the joy that is coming to you from God. / Look, your children are coming, whom you sent away; / they are coming, gathered from east and west, / at the word of the Holy One, / rejoicing in the glory of God” (Bar. 4:36-37). Herbert G. May and James A. Sanders refer (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Bar. 4:37) to Isaiah 43:5, “Do not fear, for I am with you; / I will bring your offspring from the east, / and from the west I will gather you up.”

“Take of the garment of your sorrow and affliction, O Jerusalem,” says Baruch, “and put on forever the beauty of the glory from God. / Put on the robe of the righteousness (hJ dikaiosuvnh, hē dikaiosynē ) that comes from God; / put on your head the diadem of the glory of the Everlasting (oJ aijwvnioV, ho aiōnios)” (5:1-2). Biddle compares 4:20, “I have taken off the robe of peace / and put on sackcloth for my supplication; / I will cry to the Everlasting all my days” (op. cit., on 5:1-2). He also refers to Isaiah 52:1; 61:3, 20. Newsom says, “These verses reverse the image of 4:20,” and with reference to Isaiah 52:1; 61:10, she adds Psalms of Solomon 11:8 [7?], “Jerusalem, put on (the) clothes of your glory, / prepare the robe of your holiness, / for God has spoken well of Israel forevermore” (Pss. of Sol., 11:7, James H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, 1985, p. 662). The verse numbering apparently varies. An older translation says, “8 (7) Put on, O Jerusalem, thy glorious garments; / Make ready thy holy robe; / For God hath spoken good concerning Israel, for ever and ever” (cited on the Internet as translated from Greek and Syriac manuscripts by G. Buchanan Gray, in R. H. Charles, ed., The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, vol. 2, 1919, 631-652, at http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/ot/pseudo/psalms-solomon.htm, accessed December 23, 2009). A reason is given for this advice to change robes. “for God will show your splendor everywhere under heaven. / For God will give you evermore the name, / ‘Righteous Peace, Godly Glory’ ” (Bar. 5:3-4). “Giving a new name,” says Biddle, signifies a change in status. Renaming Jerusalem is a frequent prophetic theme; see Isa. 1:26; 60:14; 62:2-4; Jer. 33:16; Ezek. 48:35” (op. cit., on v. 4).

Again Jerusalem is called to look and see her returning exiles. “Arise, O Jerusalem, stand upon the height; / look toward the east, / and see your children gathered from west and east / at the word of the Holy One, / rejoicing that God has remembered them” (v. 5; cf. 4:36-37). “See Isa. 40:9; 43:5; 51:17; 60:4,” says Newsom, adding “cf. Psalms of Solomon 11:3” (op. cit., on v. 5). The Psalms of Solomon text says, “From the north they come in the joy of their God; / from far distant islands God has assembled them” (Pss. of Sol. 11:3, Charlesworth ed.; cf. the online edition cited above). In Isaiah, the prophet is told to announce good news from the top of “a high mountain” (Isa. 40:9a, b, d), for “I [the LORD] will bring your offspring from the east, / and from the west I will gather you” (Isa. 43:5b, c). Compare Isaiah 60:4, “Lift up your eyes and look around; / they all gather together, they come to you; / your sons shall come from far away, / and your daughters shall be carried on their nurses’ arms.” “For they went out from you on foot,” says Baruch, “led away by their enemies; / but God will bring them back to you, / carried in glory, as on a royal throne” (v. 6). To this Biddle compares Isaiah 49:22 and 66:20. “For God has ordered,” says Baruch, “that every high mountain and the everlasting hills be made low / and the valleys filled up, to make level ground, / so that Israel may walk safely in the glory of God” (v. 7). To this we may compare Isaiah 40:4-5 (cf. ibid., on v. 7):

Every valley shall be lifted up, / and every mountain and hill be made low;

the uneven ground shall become level, / and the rough places a plain.

Then the glory of the LORD shall be revealed,

and all people shall see it together,

for the mouth of the LORD has spoken. (Isa. 40:4-5, NRSV)

Israel’s future blessedness is compared to the shade of “every fragrant tree”: “The woods and every fragrant tree / have shade3d Israel at God’s command” (Bar. 5:8). Biddle compares the following (ibid., on v. 8): “I will put in the wilderness the cedar, / the acacia, the myrtle, and the olive; / I will set in the desert the cypress, / the plane and the pine together” (Isa. 41:19.). Newson compares, “The forests shaded them as they passed by; / God made every fragrant tree to grow for them. / So that Israel might proceed under the supervision of the glory of their God” (Psalms of Solomon 11:5-6 (6-7) ) (op. cit., on Bar. 5:8). The Psalms of Solomon text is from the editions cited above. “For God will lead Israel with joy,” says Baruch, “in the light of his glory, / with the mercy and righteousness that come from him” (Bar. 5:8). To that, Newsom compare the following (ibid., on v. 9):

Arise, shine; for your light has come, / and the glory of the LORD has risen upon you.

For darkness shall cover the earth, / and thick darkness the peoples;

but the LORD will arise upon you, / and his glory will appear over you.

Nations shall come to your light, / and kings to the brightness of your dawn. (Isa. 60:1-3, NRSV)

As is apparent from many citations above, Biddle is likely correct in saying, “Most of Baruch is made up of pastiches of biblical passages copied or paraphrased (e.g. Dan 9; Job 28; Isa. 40-66)” (ibid., in the Introduction to Baruch).

Isaiah 60:1-6, Presbyterian Tradition

Restoration of Jerusalem

60:1 Arise, shine; for your light has come,

and the glory of the LORD has risen upon you.

2 For darkness shall cover the earth,

and thick darkness the peoples;

but the LORD will arise upon you,

and his glory will appear over you.

3 Nations shall come to your light,

and kings to the brightness of your dawn.

4 Lift up your eyes and look around;

they all gather together, they come to you;

your sons shall come from far away,

and your daughters shall be carried on their nurses' arms.

5 Then you shall see and be radiant;

your heart shall thrill and rejoice,

because the abundance of the sea shall be brought to you,

the wealth of the nations shall come to you.

6 A multitude of camels shall cover you,

the young camels of Midian and Ephah;

all those from Sheba shall come.

They shall bring gold and frankincense,

and shall proclaim the praise of the LORD. (Isaiah 60:1-6, NRSV)

On December 24, 2007 (Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Ref. for Dec. 24, Year Two), comments were extensively rewritten based on those of December 24, 2005 (Saturday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two; Christmas Eve, Presbyterian ref. for Dec. 24). The following comments are based on those of December 24, 2007, with some editing and supplement:

This reading comes from a section of Isaiah that Joseph Blenkinsopp calls “the glory and destiny of Zion.” He adds that “this section is generally considered to be the nucleus of chs. 56-66, having much in common with chs. 40-55” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Isa. 60-62). Arise (ym9Uq, qûmî ), shine (yr9Ox, ’ôrî ) for your light (j`r27Ox, ’ôrēk) has come, / and the glory of the LORD has risen upon you (j`y9lafA, ‘ālayik)” (Isa. 60:1). The verbs and pronouns here are feminine, supporting Blenkinsopp’s explanation that this is “an address to Zion imagined as a woman (cf. 52:1-2, 7-12; 54:1-17)” (ibid., on vv. 22). The feminine verbs and pronouns continue through this reading (vv. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), and on through the chapter, for example the reference to “your people (j`m0efa, ‘ammēk)” (v. 21). Jerusalem’s light will shine in contrast to the surrounding darkness. “For darkness shall cover the earth,” says the prophet, “and thick darkness the peoples; / but the LORD will arise upon you, / and his glory will appear over you” (v. 2). This sign of Jerusalem’s restoration and blessed condition will attract nations and kings. “Nations shall come to your light, / and kings to the brightness of your dawn” (v. 3). J. J. M. Roberts says, “The light of God’s glory has dawned for Jerusalem ([Isa.] 4:5; 9:2), and the nations will be drawn to that light (2:2-5; 11:10; 42:6-7; 49:6)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Isa. 60:1-3).

Still addressing Zion as a woman, the prophet’s promise of restoration and abundant blessing becomes more specific. “Lift up (yx9W4, ś ^e’î, feminine singular verb) your eyes (j`y9n1yfe, ‘ênayik, feminine pronoun suffix),” says the prophet to Lady Jerusalem, “and look around; / they all gather together, / they come to you; / your sons shall come from far away, / and your daughters shall be carried on their nurses' arms” (v. 4). According to Blenkinsopp, “Gentiles will be attracted to Jerusalem as to a zone of light in the surrounding darkness. Dispersed Judeans will return, assisted by Gentiles (also 49:12; 51:9-11; 60:8-9; 66:20)” (op. cit., on vv. 3, 4). Jerusalem’s blessing and bounty will be increased dramatically. “Then you shall see and be radiant; / your heart shall thrill and rejoice, / because the abundance of the sea shall be brought to you, / the wealth of the nations shall come to you” (v. 5). This abundance will include “a multitude of camels,” as well as “gold and frankincense”: “A multitude of camels shall cover you, / the young camels of Midian and Ephah; / all those from Sheba shall come. / They shall bring gold and frankincense, / and shall proclaim the praise of the LORD” (v. 6). And, if we look ahead at the next verse, we see that Jerusalem will have an abundance of animals for acceptable sacrifice. “All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered to you, / the rams of Nebaioth shall minister to you; / they shall be acceptable on my altar, / and I will glorify my glorious house” (v. 7). Benjamin D. Sommer comments: “Because the nations of the world will recognize and fear God, they will bring tribute to Zion. This passage deliberately echoes Isa. 2:1-4, but Deutero-Isaiah offers a different picture of what the nations will do: They will transport Judean exiles to Jerusalem and add to the city’s wealth. Isaiah’s universalism gives way to a more national set of concerns” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Isa. 60:4-16). According to Roberts, “Jerusalem will be enriched by the tribute of the nations, including that of several northern Arabian tribal groups from the east: Midian (Ex. 2:15); Ephah (Gen. 25:4); Sheba (Gen. 10:7; one might also think of the southern Arabian kingdom of the same name, 1 Kings 10:1-13); Kedar (21:13-27; Jer. 49:28-29); and Nebaioth (Gen. 25:13)” (op. cit., on Isa. 60:5-7).

“Arise, shine, for thy light has come” (Isa. 60:1 AV/KJV) has been set to music in different forms, not the least, by George F. Handel in The Messiah.

2 Samuel 7:18-29, Lutheran Tradition

David’s Prayer in Response to Nathan’s Prophecy of his Everlasting Dynasty

18 Then King David went in and sat before the LORD, and said, "Who am I, O Lord GOD, and what is my house, that you have brought me thus far? 19 And yet this was a small thing in your eyes, O Lord GOD; you have spoken also of your servant's house for a great while to come. May this be instruction for the people, O Lord GOD! 20 And what more can David say to you? For you know your servant, O Lord GOD! 21 Because of your promise, and according to your own heart, you have wrought all this greatness, so that your servant may know it. 22 Therefore you are great, O LORD God; for there is no one like you, and there is no God besides you, according to all that we have heard with our ears. 23 Who is like your people, like Israel? Is there another nation on earth whose God went to redeem it as a people, and to make a name for himself, doing great and awesome things for them, by driving out before his people nations and their gods? 24 And you established your people Israel for yourself to be your people forever; and you, O LORD, became their God. 25 And now, O LORD God, as for the word that you have spoken concerning your servant and concerning his house, confirm it forever; do as you have promised. 26 Thus your name will be magnified forever in the saying, 'The LORD of hosts is God over Israel'; and the house of your servant David will be established before you. 27 For you, O LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, have made this revelation to your servant, saying, 'I will build you a house'; therefore your servant has found courage to pray this prayer to you. 28 And now, O Lord GOD, you are God, and your words are true, and you have promised this good thing to your servant; 29 now therefore may it please you to bless the house of your servant, so that it may continue forever before you; for you, O Lord GOD, have spoken, and with your blessing shall the house of your servant be blessed forever." (2 Samuel 7:18-29, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from December 22, 2009, two days ago, when 2 Samuel 7:18-29 was the Presbyterian reading:

On August 4, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year One), comments were repeated from August 7, 2007 (Tuesday in the week of the Tenth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year One), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from December 22, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two); the comments are repeated again here:

David now responds in prayer to the LORD’s promises, including that of an everlasting dynasty (2 Sam. 7:5-16) delivered by Nathan the prophet (v. 17). Steven L. McKenzie compares this prayer of David to “Solomon’s prayers in 1 Kings 3:6-9 and 8:22-53” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 2 Sam. 7:18-29). We are first told that “King David went in and sat (bw,y0eva, wayyēšev) before the LORD” (v. 18a), which P. Kyle McCarter explains: “David went in (i.e. into the tent, 6:17; 7:2) and sat before the LORD (i.e., in front of the ark). But it was not customary to sit during prayer, so the meaning may be that David remained ‘before the Lord’ after others departed” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 2 Sam. 7:18). “Who am I, O Lord GOD,” says David, and what is my house (yt9yBe, bêthî; ty9Ba, bayith = ‘family’), that you have brought me thus far?” (v. 18b). (For the four meanings of “house,” ty9Ba, bayith, in this chapter, see yesterday’s comments, Monday, December 21, 2009.) “David’s humility,” says Shimon Bar-Efrat, “is shared by other leaders in the Bible, including Moses (Exod. 3:11), Gideon (Judg. 6:15), and Saul (1 Sam. 9:21)” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on 2 Sam. 7:18). “You [God] have spoken also of your servant’s house (yt9yBe, bêthî; ty9Ba, bayith = ‘dynasty’) for a great while to come,” says David (v. 19a). And he adds a request, “May this be instruction (hrAOT, tôrāh; cf. ‘law’ NJPS 1985, 1999) for the people, O Lord GOD!” (v. 19b). P. Kyle McCarter says of “May this be instruction for the people,” that it was “perhaps originally ‘ and you have shown me the generation to come,’ on the basis of the Hebrew and Greek texts of 1 Chr. 17:17” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 2 Sam. 7:19). That would continue the expression of gratitude rather than introducing a note of instruction or legislation. In any event, David’s expression of gratitude continues. “And what more can David say to you? For you know your servant, O Lord GOD! Because of your promise, and according to your own heart, you have wrought all this greatness, so that your servant may know it” (vv. 20-21). Bar-Efrat identifies the phrase, “this great thing” (NJPS, for “all this greatness” NRSV), as “the promise of a lasting dynasty” (op. cit., on v. 21). On the phrase, “according to your own heart,” McCarter says, “See 1 Sam. 13:14. The point is that the Lord has acted at his own initiative and not in response to some gesture by David, such as his offer to build a temple (see v. 2)” (op. cit., on v. 21).

David’s praise of the LORD continues, but McCarter sees this part as “An expansion of David’s prayer, replete with stereotypical language by the Deuteronomistic Historian . . . whose purpose was to incorporate the Lord’s benefaction toward the house of David into the larger context of his graciousness toward Israel as a whole” (ibid., on vv. 22-26). If there is noone like the LORD, says David (v. 22), there is also no nation like Israel, as David emphasizes by asking: “Who is like your people, like Israel? Is there another nation on earth whose God went to redeem it as a people, and to make a name for himself, doing great and awesome things for them, by driving out before his people nations and their gods?” (v. 23). “Redeemed,” says Bar-Efrat, pointing out the obvious, means “[the exodus] from slavery in Egypt,” and “[driving out]” means “from the land of Canaan,” or the conquest (op. cit., on v. 23), “And you established your people Israel for yourself,” says David, “to be your people forever; and you, O LORD became their God” (v. 24; cf. Exod. 6:7 and Deut. 19:10-15, cited here by McKenzie, op. cit.).

David then turns to the LORD’s promises, calling upon him to do as he has promised: “And now, O LORD God, as for the word that you have spoken concerning your servant and concerning his house, confirm it forever; do as you have promised” (v. 25). By keeping his promises to Israel, says David, the LORD’s own “name will be magnified forever in the saying, ‘The LORD of hosts is God over Israel’; and the house of your servant David will be established before you” (v. 26). David repeats the promise to him of a house. “For you, O LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, have made this revelation to your servant, saying, ‘I will build you a house’ ” (v. 27a; cf. v. 11b). The promise gives David courage to pray with boldness, as he does here; “therefore your servant has found courage to pray this prayer to you” (v. 27b). “Your servant,” says McKenzie, is “a way of referring to oneself before a superior” (ibid., on vv. 27-29). As his prayer draws to a close, David affirms the Lord in direct address, “And now, O Lord GOD (hvhy yn!dox3, ’ ^adōnāy YHWH), you are (xUh-hTaxa, ’attah-hû’ ) God (Myh9lox<h!&, hā’ ^elōhîm)” (v. 28a), and he affirms the reliability of the Lord’s promise, for “your words are true, and you have promised this good thing to your servant” (v. 28b). David closes with a prayer for blessing, saying, “now therefore may it please you to bless the house of your servant, so that it may continue forever before you; for you, O Lord GOD, have spoken, and with your blessing shall the house (ty9Ba, bayith = ‘dynasty’) of your servant be blessed forever” (v. 29). As noted yesterday, the promise here of an everlasting dynasty has fueled Jewish messianic expectations and Christian eschatological hopes for Christ’s everlasting kingdom.

Galatians 3:23-4:7, Episcopal and Presbyterian Traditions

23 Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. 27 As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise. (Gal. 3:23-29, NRSV)

4:1 My point is this: heirs, as long as they are minors, are no better than slaves, though they are the owners of all the property; 2 but they remain under guardians and trustees until the date set by the father. 3 So with us; while we were minors, we were enslaved to the elemental spirits of the world. 4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5 in order to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children. 6 And because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!" 7 So you are no longer a slave but a child, and if a child then also an heir, through God. (Galatians 4:1-7, NRSV)

On January 31 and February 2, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Third Sunday after the Epiphany and Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), comments on Galatians 3:23-29 and 4:1-11 were based on earlier comments, for example, those of January 27, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Third Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), of August 26, 2007 (the Sunday closest to August 24, Year One), of December 24, 2007 (the Presbyterian reading), of June 7, 2008 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 1, Year Two), and of earlier comments as noted on these occasions. The following are based on relevant earlier comments, that is, comments through Galatians 4:7.

The discussion of salvation (justification) through faith in Christ rather than through works of the law continues. “Now before faith came,” says Paul, “we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed” (Gal. 3:23). In Galatians 3:24, the word paidagwgovV (paidagōgos), formerly translated as “schoolmaster” (KJV), is now translated as “disciplinarian” (NRSV), “guardian” (New Century Version) or “a kind of tutor in charge of us (NEB), in recognition of the fact that in the ancient world the paidagwgovV (paidagōgos) was a household slave with responsibility for the child. He was to bring the child to the teacher, but he was not the teacher himself. The original meaning of the Greek word paidagwgovV (paidagōgos) was “‘boy-leader,’ the man, usually a slave, whose duty it was to conduct a boy or youth to and from school and to superintend his conduct; generally he was not a ‘teacher.’ When the young man became of age, the paidagwgovV (paidagōgos) was no longer needed. In our literature [i.e. mainly, the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers] [it means] one who has responsibility for someone who needs guidance, guardian, leader, guide” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. paidagwgovV, paidagōgos). Today’s New International Version substitutes a verbal expression here: “So the law was put in charge of us until Christ came that we might be justified by faith” (Gal. 3:24 TNIV).

The Rabbinical tradition about the “men of the great assembly” who received Torah from Moses and Joshua through the elders and prophets begins with three instructions, including “Make a fence for the Torah” (M. Abot 1:1, ed. J. Neusner). Rabbi Aqiba, a famed scholar, mystic and martyr (put to death by the Romans in 135 C.E.), is cited later in Mishnah Abot (3:13):

            (1) “Laughter and lightheadedness turn lewdness into a habit.

            (2) “Tradition is a fence for the Torah.

            (3) “Tithes are a fence for wealth.

            (4) Vows are a fence for abstinence.

            (5) A fence for wisdom is silence.

The notion of the fence around the law was seen as a positive thing:

Now our Lawgiver [i.e. Moses] being a wise man . . . fenced us round with impregnable ramparts and walls of iron, that we might not mingle at all with any of the other nations, but remain pure in body and soul, free from all vain imaginations, worshiping the one Almighty God above the whole creation” (Epistle of Aristeas, 139, cited by H. D. Betz, Galatians, 1979, p. 165).

Paul’s view of the law, on the other hand, though he calls it “holy, just and good” (Rom. 7:12), and “spiritual” (Rom. 7:14), presents a rather negative view here in Galatians, as noted above. “For Paul himself,” says Betz, “the Jewish Torah plays a limited ‘positive’ role in God’s redemptive work. Neither the Torah itself nor the angels which gave it are evil. But the Torah of Moses is inferior to the promise of Abraham” (ibid., 169). Nevertheless, one should not conclude that Paul is in favor of sin, the “works of the flesh,” which he warns against in 5:19-21.

“But now that faith has come,” says Paul, “we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian (paidagwgovV, paidagōgos)” (v. 25). The point is that “in Christ [we] are all children of God through faith” (v. 26), which applies to Jews like Peter and Paul (2:15-16) or Gentiles like most of Paul’s converts at Galatia (and like most of us). “As many of you as were baptized into Christ,” adds Paul, “have clothed yourselves with Christ” (v. 27). For some, this is clearly a reference to baptism with water as a sign of one’s inner cleansing and conversion to Christian faith, G. N. Stanton says that “several scholars conclude that Paul is here citing an early baptismal liturgy. The person who is about to be baptized removes clothing, symbolizing the old order, and in baptism is clothed with Christ” (The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 1160, on Gal. 3:27-28). Another view, held by Quakers, is that baptism is an inward and spiritual experience. Robert Barclay’s “Proposition 12” includes the following:

Just as there is ‘one Lord, and one faith,’ so is there ‘one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), which is not ‘a removal of dirt from the body but . . . an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ’ (1 Pet. 3:21 RSV). This baptism is a pure and spiritual thing (Gal. 3:27), namely the baptism of the Spirit and of fire, by which we are ‘buried with him’ (Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12) so that being washed and purged of our sins, we may ‘walk in newness of life’ (Rom. 6:4). (Barclay’s Apology in Modern English, 1967; Newberg, OR: Barclay Press, 1991, pp. 10, 301, cf. pp. 301-326)

This Quaker view may be set in contrast with the view that has been called “baptismal regeneration.” According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1263, “By Baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and all personal sins, as well as all punishment for sin. In those who have been reborn nothing remains that would impede their entry into the Kingdom of God, neither Adam's sin, nor personal sin, nor the consequences of sin, the gravest of which is separation from God” (on the Internet at http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1263.htm, accessed again December 23, 2009). Mark J. Bonocore offers a vigorous defense of the doctrine of “baptismal regeneration,” and concludes by saying, “So, according to the Scriptures, Baptism is regenerational, sacramental, and intrinsic to one's acceptance of Christ. For, as the Lord says, it cannot be otherwise” ( “Baptismal Regeneration,” on the Internet at http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a25.htm, accessed again December 23, 2009). A sermon of Charles Spurgeon criticizes the doctrine of “Baptismal Regeneration”: “I find that the great error which we have to contend with throughout England (and it is growing more and more), is one in direct opposition to my text, well known to you as the doctrine of baptismal regeneration” (A Sermon, (No. 573), Delivered on Sunday Morning, June 5th, 1864, by the Rev. C. H. SPURGEON, At the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington, on the Internet at http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0573.htm, accessed again December 23, 2009).

Many Christians hold to a mediating view, understanding baptism as “an outward sign of an inward work of grace.” According to George Allen Turner (of Asbury Theological Seminary),

Luther was an Augustinian monk and his policy was to retain practices of the Catholic Church unless the Scripture specifically forbade them. Luther, in 1518, believed that the infant was regenerated at baptism through the merit of the faith of its sponsors. But in 1520, he believed that in baptism the infants themselves believed. After 1528, Luther retained this belief, but based it upon such texts as Matthew 28:19 and Mark 10:14. Since Luther accepted the Augustinian belief that baptism removed Original Guilt, he also accepted the Augustinian belief that baptism removed Original Guilt in infants. But Zwingli believed baptism was the outward sign of an inward work of grace. As applied to infants, it was true only "in virtue of God's promise that the children of Christian parents are as much members of the Christian church as Jewish children were members of the Jewish church.(16) In other words, the validity of infant baptism for the Christian rests on the analogy of the Old Testament. With Calvin, John 3:5 was not to be interpreted literally any more than Matthew 3:11. In other words, water is no more necessary than fire to make the new birth effective. (“Infant Baptism in Biblical and Historical Context,” Wesleyan Theological Journal, Vol. 5, Spring, 1970, pp. 11-22, online at the Wesley Center Online, http://wesley.nnu.edu/wesleyan_theology/wesleyjournal/1970-wtj-05.pdf, accessed December 23, 2009)

But Paul moves on to a fundamental principle in his understanding of the Christian community. If through spiritual baptism, however understood in relation to water baptism, we have clothed ourselves with Christ (Gal. 3:27), then “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (v. 28). Paul states a fundamental principle of unity and equality in the Christian community in terms of race, station in life (e.g. slave or free), and gender. The two or three Pauline statements in the New Testament used by some to promote the subordination of women to men and deny some roles to women merely on the basis of their gender (e.g. 1 Tim. 2:12) should be understood as specific instructions limited to specific situations and not generalized as universal principles on a level with the equality proclaimed in Galatians 3:28. Some of this advice, to women, for example, is no more a universal principle than the similar advice to slaves. It was an accommodation to cultural expectations in a time of potential persecution that would bring danger to the whole church. “And if you belong to Christ,” says Paul, “then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise” (v. 29).

Paul continues to compare being under the law to being in Christ. “My point is this: heirs, as long as they are minors, are no better than slaves, though they are the owners of all the property; but they remain under guardians and trustees until the date set by the father” (Gal. 4:1-2). Being under the law is being under “guardians [ejpivtropoi, epitropoi] and trustees [oijkonovmoi, oikonomoi]” (Gal. 4:2) (cf. “disciplinarian,” paidagwgovV, paidagōgos, 3:24). “Minors,” says Sheila Briggs, “like other members of a Roman family other than the father, had few rights” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Gal. 4:1).

As Paul continues, a new perspective appears. One of the issues has been whether to circumcise Gentile believers like Titus (Gal. 2:3), but the enslavement discussed in chapter 4 is to “the elemental spirits of the world” (Gal. 4:3), according to Bruce M. Metzger and John Reumann, “cosmic powers controlling the universe (4:8); or the rudiments of the world (earth, air, fire, water), or rudimentary rules and religious observances (vv. 9-10; Col. 2:8, 20)” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Gal. 4:3). When this is explained further, “when you did not know God, you were enslaved to beings that by nature are not gods” (v. 8), Paul seems to refer to worship of pagan gods. Are these the people “under the law” whom Christ came to redeem (vv. 4-5)? They must have been Gentiles who have come under some Jewish influence. “You are observing special days, and months, and seasons, and years” (v. 10). According to Ronald Y. K. Fung, “The issue, then, is ‘not the observation of religious usages as such . . . but the basis of the justification before God’; the legalistic approach advocated by the Galatian agitators and the gospel of free grace proclaimed by Paul are irreconcilably opposed to each other” (The Epistle to the Galatians, NICNT, 1988, p. 194 on Gal. 4:11, citing H. N. Ridderbos).

Galatians 4:1-7, says Fung, is “elaboration of . . . the preceding verses (3:23-29)” (ibid., p. 179). In the paragraph the image of being under the law gradually changes from minor children (Gal. 4:3) to slavery (v. 7a). The transition for the readers is from being “minors, no better than slaves” (v. 1) to children and heirs of God (v. 7b). The remedy, the basis for this transition, begins with the coming of Christ. “But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law” (v. 4). According to Briggs, “born of a woman, born under the law stresses Jesus’ human and Jewish birth, seen by Paul as the enslaved human condition, in contrast to the freedom Christ brings to those adopted as God’s children” (op. cit., on v. 4). The redemption through Christ, the purpose of his coming, is “in order to i{na (hina) redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption (uiJoqesiva, huiothesia) as children” (v. 5). The term uiJoqesiva (huiothesia), a compound of uiJovV (huios), “son,” and qevsiV (thesis), “placing” is “a legal technical term of ‘adoption’ of children [which] in our literature, i.e. in Paul, [is] only [used] in a transferred sense of a transcendent filial relationship between God and humans (with the legal aspect, not gender specificity, as major semantic component” (BDAG, s.v. uiJoqesiva, huiothesia). In this sense, the lexicon cites Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5; Rom. 8:15, where “pneu:ma uiJoqesivaV [pneuma huiothesias, ‘spirit of adoption’] . . . [is] opposed [to] pneu:ma douleivaV [pneuma douleias. ‘spirit of slavery’] = such a spirit as is possessed by a slave, not by the son of the house” (ibid.). Whereas, we were formerly children and heirs of limited status, “no better than slaves” (v. 1), we are now children and heirs of quality status. “And because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father (Abba oJ pathvr, Abba ho patēr)!” (v. 6; cf. Mk. 14:36; Rom. 8:15). Abba is “Aramaic for Father,” NRSV text note e). “So,” explains Paul, “you are no longer a slave but a child, and if a child then also an heir, through God” (v. 7).

It might appear that we are back where we started, because at the beginning of the paragraph we are legal minors who do not inherit “until the date set by the father” (v. 2). Fung explains:

We have consistently understood the references to the status of sons in [4:5-7] in the sense of full-grown sonship, because this appears to be the sense required by Paul’s argument in 3:26, and it is reasonable to suppose that this is also the sense intended in the present passage . . . While the main idea in the human analogy is that of an heir who is underage, in his application of it Paul has combined two metaphors (v. 3, “During our minority we were slaves . . .”) so that, instead of saying simply “When the fulness of time arrived, God sent forth his Son . . . in order that we might come of age,” he says “. . . in order that we might receive adoption as sons–and full-grown sons at that”–thus weaving together the idea of “becoming an adopted son from a slave” and that of “the heir coming of age.” (op. cit., p. 186, on Gal. 4:7)

Galatians 3:1-14, Lutheran Tradition

Law or Faith (Cp Rom 4.1-25)

3:1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified! 2 The only thing I want to learn from you is this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard? 3 Are you so foolish? Having started with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? 4 Did you experience so much for nothing?-if it really was for nothing. 5 Well then, does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?

6 Just as Abraham “believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,” 7 so, you see, those who believe are the descendants of Abraham. 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, declared the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “All the Gentiles shall be blessed in you.” 9 For this reason, those who believe are blessed with Abraham who believed.

10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the things written in the book of the law.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law; for “The one who is righteous will live by faith.” 12 But the law does not rest on faith; on the contrary, “Whoever does the works of the law will live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us-for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”- 14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. (Galatians 3:1-14, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from December 22, 2009, two days ago, when Galatians 3:1-14 was the Presbyterian reading

The following comments are based on comments on Galatians 3:6:14 from August 16, 2009 (the Sunday closest to August 17, Year One), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from those on Galatians 3:1-14 of earlier dates as noted there:

The Book of Galatians has been analyzed as comparable to a lawyer’s speech in court (H. D. Betz, Galatians, a commentary on Paul’s letter to the churches in Galatia, Hermeneia, 1979). Betz compares the argument of the book to the practice of rhetoric in the Greco-Roman world, and sees the narrative portion, 1:13-2:14 as the background of the situation (the narratio in ancient rhetoric), 2:15-21 as a concise statement of the argument or thesis (the propositio), and chapters 3 and 4 as the arguments (probatio). Whether these technical terms from ancient legal rhetoric are necessary or not, it does appear that we have a series of arguments by which Paul seeks to defend his understanding of the gospel. In the three paragraphs of today’s reading, Paul develops three arguments in support of his gospel. As he begins the first argument, he chides the Galatian people. “You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?” (Gal 3:1a). In reference to his ministry there, Paul says, “It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified!” (v. 1b). “Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law,” he asks, “or by believing what you heard?” (v. 2). The chiding continues. “Are you so foolish? Having started with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh?” (v. 3). “Ending with the flesh,” says Shiela Briggs, is “an oblique reference to circumcision” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Gal. 3:3). Emphasizing the value of their original experience under his ministry, Paul asks, “Did you experience so much for nothing?–if it really was for nothing” (v. 4). Paul asserts that his preaching, and the response of the Galatian people, were moved by the Spirit of God. Paul asks, “Does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?” (v. 5). Their own experience should prove to them the value and sufficiency of Paul’s gospel.

The second argument uses Genesis 15:6; cf. Rom. 4:3, 16) to assert that Abraham’s “righteousness” was prior to his circumcision, and therefore not based on “works of the law.” “Just as Abraham ‘believed (ejpivsteusen, episteusen) God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness (dikaiosuvnh, dikaiosynē )’,” says Paul, “so, you see, those who believe (oiJ ejk pivstewV, hoi ek pisteōs, lit. ‘those of faith/belief’) are the descendants of Abraham” (vv. 6-7, citing Gen. 15; 6; cf. Rom. 4:3). The Genesis text says, “And he believed (Nm9x$h@v4, w^ehe’ ^emin; LXX ejpivsteusen, episteusen) the LORD; and the LORD reckoned it to him as righteousness (hq!d!c4, ts ^edāqāh; LXX dikaiosuvnh, dikaiosynē )” (Gen. 15:6). In his application of the Genesis text Paul refers to those who believe as “people of faith” (oiJ ejk pivstewV, hoi ek pisteōs) (v. 7, above; cf. ‘men of faith,’ the translation of Betz, op. cit., p. 137). This point is based on the promise to Abraham. “And the scripture,” says Paul, “foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith ( ejk pivstewV, ek pisteōs), declared the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘All the Gentiles (pavnta ta; e[qnh, panta ta ethnē ) shall be blessed in you” (v. 8, referring to Gen. 12:3). In the Genesis text the LORD promises Abram that “in you all the families of the earth (hm!d!x3h! tHoP4w4m9 lko, kōl mišp^echōth hā’ ^adāmāh; LXX pavsai aiJ pulai; th:V gh:V, pasai hai pylai tēs gēs) shall be blessed” (Gen. 12:3b). It’s fair to say that Paul’s term “Gentiles” would be included in the Genesis phrase, “all the families of the earth.” “For this reason,” says Paul as he concludes the second argument, “those who believe (oiJ ejk pivstewV, hoi ek pisteōs, lit. ‘the people of faith,’ cf. above) are blessed with Abraham who believed (su;n tw:/ pistw:/ =Abraavm, syn tō(i) pistō(i) Abraam, lit. ‘with the faith of Abraham’). Through a faith like Abraham’s, says Paul elsewhere, Gentiles become children of Abraham, who receive “the promise . . . to all his descendants, not only to the adherents of the law but also to those who share the faith of Abraham (for he is the father of all of us, as it is written, ‘I have made you the father of many nations’)” (Rom. 4:16-17, citing Gen. 17:10).

In beginning the third argument, Paul points out that “all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the things written in the book of the law’ ” (Gal. 3:10, citing Deut. 27:26). The third argument combines Deut. 27:26; Lev. 18:5; Hab. 2:4 (LXX) and Deut. 21:23 to show that “no one is justified before God by the law, for ‘The one who is righteous will live by faith’ ” (Gal. 3:11, citing Hab. 2:4). “But the law does not rest on faith,” says Paul; on the contrary, ‘Whoever does the works of the law will live by them’ ” (Gal. 3:12, citing Lev. 18:5). Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law,” says Paul, “by becoming a curse for us–for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’ ” (Gal. 3:13). According to Bruce M. Megzger and John Reumann, in the climax of this series, “the tree in Deut. 21:23 is referred to Jesus’ cross” (NOAB, 2^nd. ed., 1994, on Gal. 3:13). This was “in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith” (v. 14). So the promises to Abraham, including the first, “in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed” (Gen. 12:3), are for the Galatian Gentile converts to Christ.

Matthew 1:18-25, Episcopal and Presbyterian Traditions

            The Birth of Jesus the Messiah (Lk 2.1-7)

18 Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. 19 Her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly. 20 But just when he had resolved to do this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife, for the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins." 22 All this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet:

23 "Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son,

and they shall name him Emmanuel,"

which means, "God is with us." 24 When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife, 25 but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus. (Matthew 1:18-25, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of December 28, 2008 (the First Sunday after Christmas, Year One), when comments were repeated from January 1, 2008 (Tuesday in the week of the First Sunday after Christmas, the Festival of the Holy Name), when comments were repeated with some editing from December 24, 2007 (Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two; Presbyterian ref. for December 24) and from December 24, 2005 (Saturday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two, Christmas Eve; Presbyterian ref. for Dec. 24).

The Gospel reading is Matthew’s account of Jesus’ birth (Mt. 1:18-25). He reports the engagement of Joseph and Mary, and also, what for some must have been a surprising development: “Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit” (Mt. 1:18). J. Andrew Overman points out what we, and Mary, though apparently not yet Joseph, know. “Mary is a virgin, though pregnant (Lk. 1:34)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mt. 1:18). In reference to the word “engaged,” Dennis C. Duling says, “Marriage was not based on romantic love, but on a contract between families in which family status and economics played a role (e.g., dowry; bride-price). Marriageable age for girls was normally puberty, at which time the girl was contracted to her future husband (v. 19; see Deut. 20:7)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 1:18). “Before they lived together,” he says, “was the betrothal period,” and he adds, “to be with child before marriage dishonored the families, especially the males, and was grounds for Joseph’s dismissing her (see v. 19; ancient law even permitted her execution by stoning; cf. Deut. 22:13-21)” (ibid.). Joseph is presented as concerned, but compassionate. “Her husband Joseph, being a righteous (divkaioV, dikaios) man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly” (v. 19). “Henceforth,” says Duling, “Joseph (the man) dominates the story (cf. Lk. 1-2). “Righteous,” says Duling, “here meaning ‘law (Torah) abiding,’ and righteousness (3:15) are favorite Matthean terms (see note on 3:15; 13:17, 43; Lk. 1:6). In his later note, Duling says, “Righteousness [is] a favorite term of ‘Matthew.’ Here [i.e., in 3:15] it means right conduct, correct observance, in accord with God’s will as revealed in scripture” (ibid., on Mt. 3:15). Overman says, “only in Matthew’s Gospel is the character and the role of Jesus’ father developed” (op. cit., on v. 19).

But, for Joseph, the story takes a surprising turn–a “development,” as we might say. “But just when he had resolved to do this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, ‘Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife’ ” (v. 20a). The words “son of David” remind us of, and connect with, the genealogy. “Angels and dreams,” says Overman, “frequently communicate God’s plan in Matthew” (ibid., on v. 20). Upon brief inspection, it appears that Overman is correct for a few instances in the Infancy Narratives (chaps. 1, 2), for example, Matthew 1:20, 24; 2:13, 19. Angels “wait on” Jesus after the temptation (Mt. 4:11), and an angel appears at the empty tomb on Easter morning (28:2, 5). But other instances of “angel” or “angels” in Matthew are limited to Jesus’ teaching, not dreams or manifestations. For the word “dream,” Duling says it is “a means of divine communication [and] recalls Joseph the dreamer (Gen. 37:5-11) and dream interpreter (Gen. 40:41)” (op. cit., on v. 20). The angel who appears to Joseph is not named, but possibly Gabriel (whose name appears in the Bible only in Dan. 8:19; 9:21; Lk. 1:19, 26, and Tobit 1:14). Matthew is clear about the fact that Jesus is not the physical son of Joseph, for “the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit” (v.20b, cf. “Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born,” v. 16). Of “the Holy Spirit,” Duling says he is “creative divine agency (see. v. 20; 3:16; 22:43; 28:19; Lk. 1:35)” (ibid., on v. 18).

“She [i.e., Mary] will bear a son,” says the angel, “and you are to name him Jesus [ =Ihsou:V, Iēsous], for he will save his people from their sins” (v. 21). The name =Ihsou:V (Iēsous, ‘Jesus’) is the Greek form of the name Joshua, and is translated as “Joshua” in Hebrews 4:8 where it refers to the Joshua of the Old Testament, who led Israel in the conquest of the promised land as reported in the Book of Joshua. The Hebrew name f1wuOhy4 (y ^ehôšu ^a‘ ; Aramaic f1Uwy2, yēšû ^a ‘, Ezra 3:2) is related to the hifil form of the verb fwy (y-š-‘ ), which, according to William L. Holladay, means “help, save, rescue” (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 10^th corrected impression 1988, s.v. fwy, y-š-‘ , hifil, meaning no. 2). The angel’s interpretation, “he will save his people from their sins,” is well taken.

Matthew says that this is in fulfillment of prophecy. “All this took place,” he says, “to fulfill what had been spoken by (uJpov, hypo) the Lord through (diav, dia) the prophet” (Mt. 1:22). This is the introductory formula that introduces what the prophet, in this case, Isaiah, said, that is to be quoted. “Look, the virgin (parqevnoV, parthenos) shall conceive and bear a son, / and they shall name him Emmanuel” (v. 23). This is the first of a series of what have been called “formula quotations.” For most of them, the introductory formula is abbreviated, omitting the “by the Lord” phrase, though, with the pattern set by Matthew 1:22, it is clearly understood. For example, “Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet Jeremiah” (Mt. 2:17), introduces the quotation from in relation to the slaughter of the innocents of Bethlehem, “A voice was heard in Ramah, / wailing and loud lamentation, ‘ Rachel weeping for her children; / she refused to be consoled because they are no more” (Mt. 2:18, quoting Jer. 31:15). Consistent use of the preposition through (diav, dia), that is, “through the prophet,” shows that spoken “by (uJpov, hypo) the Lord” is understood, though not repeated again (except in 2:15). Duling lists fourteen such quotations “introduced with almost identical formulas; see 2:5b-6; 2:15b; 2:;17-18; 2:23b; 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 13:35; 21:4-5; 26:56 (see 26:54); 27:9-10” (op. cit., on 1:22-23). “These formula quotations,” he adds, “emphasize that events fulfill prophecy, and thus God’s will” (ibid.). Thus, “This was to fulfill what had been spoken through the prophet Isaiah” (Mt. 12:17), continues the formula as first set in 1:22. The word of the Lord comes through the prophet Isaiah, but it is the word spoken by the Lord. The prophet is not a mere channel, God’s typewriter, so to speak. His personality and capabilities are involved. As we understand Jesus to be fully divine and fully human, so do we understand inspired scripture. There is a human side to Isaiah’s life and work, including his prophecy. And as a man of the eighth century B.C., he probably focused mainly on the immediate threat to Jerusalem

In the first of these formula quotations, Matthew quotes Isaiah, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman (hmAl4fahA, hā‘almāh, ‘the young woman’; LXX hJ parqevnoV, hē parthenos, ‘the virgin’; Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion hJ nea:niV hē neanis, ‘the young woman’) is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel (lxe Unm0A%f9, ‘immānû ’ēl, lit. ‘God [is] with us’; LXX Emmanouhl, Emmanouēl )” (Isa. 7:14). As is well-known, Matthew’s use of the word “virgin” (parqevnoV, parthenos) in 1:23 is based on the Septuagint text of Isaiah 7:14; in the Hebrew text the prophet used the word hmAl4fa (‘almāh), which means “young woman,” as is recognized by the later Greek translations of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion with nea:niV (neanis, ‘young woman’). I should perhaps point out that the Christian doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus depends on the clear statements of Matthew and Luke in the New Testament, and is not affected by what Isaiah said in 7:14 (though the latter is often brought into the discussion).

But there are some important considerations in reference to Isaiah’s text. In the context of Isaiah 7:14, the prophet is responding to the concerns of King Ahaz of Judah about the Syro-Ephramite war. “In the days of Ahaz son of Jotham son of Uzziah, king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram [i.e., Syria] and King Pekah son of Remaliah of Israel went up to attack Jerusalem, but could not mount an attack against it” (Isa. 7:1). In the context the real military threat to Judah was not this alliance between Israel and Syria, which would be short-lived, but the military might of the rising superpower to the east, Assyria. Speaking for the LORD, Isaiah offers a sign.

Ask a sign of the LORD your God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, and I will not put the LORD to the test. Then Isaiah said: ‘Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary mortals, that you weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel. He shall eat curds and honey by the time he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted. The LORD will bring on you and on your people and on your ancestral house such days as have not come since the day that Ephraim departed from Judah-the king of Assyria.’ (Isa. 7:11-17, NRSV)

But God spoke through Isaiah of the birth of Jesus centuries later. “Look, the virgin (parqevnoV, parthenos) shall conceive and bear a son, / and they shall call him Emmanuel” (Mt. 1:23, citing Isa. 7:14 LXX). The Isaiah text has hm!l4f1h! (hā‘almāh), which William L. Holladay translates as “girl (of marriageable age), young woman (until the birth of first child)” (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 10^th corrected impression 1988, s.v. hm!l4f1, ‘almāh). When Joseph awoke he followed the angel’s command (Mt. 1:24) and when Jesus was born, “he named him Jesus” (v.

The child to be born within months is the sign for Ahaz. “For before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good,” in other words, while he is still very young, “the land before whose two kings [i.e., Syria and Israel] you are in dread will be deserted” (Isa. 7:16). So the reference to the “young woman” in Isaiah 7:14 is to someone alive at the time, in the eighth century before Christ. But, according to a theological principle, the sensus plenior, or the “fuller sense” of scripture, there is a higher level of meaning, of which God was fully aware, but Isaiah the prophet was likely not fully aware. Matthew clearly applies this text to the birth of Jesus, and makes no reference to a child born in the days of Ahaz and Isaiah. As Christians we must accept what Matthew has said. It seems to me that the principle of the sensus plenior (i.e., the fuller sense) of scripture, provides a way to understand this quotation and its application to Jesus.

In addition to the meaning of the name Jesus, we are presented here with the name Emmanuel (v. 23). As indicated above, the phrase means “God [is] with us.” This, too has a double meaning. God is with the kingdom of Judah under Ahaz in the time of Isaiah when faced with serious military threats. Or he would be if they only trust him. But the coming of Christ as the Savior of the world means, in the “fuller sense,” that God is with us all.

“When Joseph awoke from sleep,” says Matthew, “he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her [i.e., Mary] as his wife, but had no marital relations with her until ( e{wV, heōs) she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus” (Mt. 1:24-25). So, as in the case of Mary (Lk. 1:26-38), Joseph responds to the angel’s announcement accordingly. Based on the word “until” ( e{wV, heōs), Duling says, “The author’s birth narrative does not seem to imply the perpetual virginity of Mary (see also 13:55)” (op. cit., on v. 25).

Luke 1:57-66, Lutheran Tradition

The Birth of John the Baptist

57 Now the time came for Elizabeth to give birth, and she bore a son. 58 Her neighbors and relatives heard that the Lord had shown his great mercy to her, and they rejoiced with her.

59 On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him Zechariah after his father. 60 But his mother said, “No; he is to be called John.” 61 They said to her, “None of your relatives has this name.” 62 Then they began motioning to his father to find out what name he wanted to give him. 63 He asked for a writing tablet and wrote, “His name is John.” And all of them were amazed. 64 Immediately his mouth was opened and his tongue freed, and he began to speak, praising God. 65 Fear came over all their neighbors, and all these things were talked about throughout the entire hill country of Judea. 66 All who heard them pondered them and said, “What then will this child become?” For, indeed, the hand of the Lord was with him. (Luke 1:57-66, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from December 22, 2009, two days ago, when Luke 1:57-66 was the Presbyterian reading:

The following comments are based on those of December 6, 2009 (the Second Sunday of Advent, Year Two), comments that were based on those of December 9, 2007 (the Second Sunday of Advent, Year Two; cf. comments for the Presbyterian reading of December 22, 2007), when comments were based on those of December 4, 2005 (the Second Sunday of Advent, Year Two), and comments on Luke 1:57-66 from December 22, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two), when comments were repeated from an E-mail sent December 22, 2003, for December 23, 2003.

While serving his turn in the temple of Jerusalem, Zechariah was informed by “an angel of the Lord” that his “wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you will call his name John” (Lk. 1:13, cf. vv. 8-20). When Zechariah expresses some disbelief, “How will I know that this is so? For I am an old man, and my wife is getting on in years” (v. 18), the angel, Gabriel, says “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” (v. 20). And when Zechariah emerged from the temple, Gabriel’s prediction was realized, for “he could not speak to them [i.e., to the people]” (v. 22).

Before reporting the birth of John, Luke’s narrative reports the annunciation, the announcement of Jesus’ birth, to Mary (vv. 26-38), and Mary’s visit to Elizabeth (vv. 39-56), including Mary’s song of praise, known as the Magnificat (vv. 46-55). So, as today’s reading begins, we come to the birth of John. “Now the time came for Elizabeth to give birth, and she bore a son” (Lk. 1:57). According to David L. Tiede, revised by Christopher R. Matthews, “The episodes of ch. 1 are timed by the months of Elizabeth’s pregnancy (vv. 24, 26, 36)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Lk. 1:57). Elizabeth’s “neighbors and relatives heard that the Lord had shown his great mercy to her, and they rejoiced with her” (v. 58). “The birth,” say Tiede and Matthews, “is seen as a sign of the Lord’s mercy” (ibid., on v. 58). They refer to their earlier note: “Childlessness was considered a disgrace (see Gen. 16:4; 30:23) requiring God’s intervention” (ibid., on v. 25).

As was custom for Jewish infant boys, Zechariah and Elizabeth made preparation to circumcise the child, which would include naming him. “On the eighth day,” says Luke, “they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him Zechariah after his father” (v. 59). The Hebrew Bible passages that command circumcision do not include the command to name the child (cf. Gen. 17:12; 21:4; Lev. 12:3). But Jewish custom is to name the child at the time of his circumcision. In answer to the question, “Why do we wait until the circumcision to name a boy?” Rabbi Menachem Posner answers as follows:

When a child is circumcised he is entered into G-d's covenant with Abraham and his descendants, he joins a chain linking him to the very beginning of our nation. It is only fitting to give him his Jewish name after he has become a full-fledged member of the Jewish nation.

Perhaps another reason why we postpone naming a child until the circumcision is because the first ‘Jewish name’ was given in conjunction with this mitzvah. As we read in Genesis (17:5, 10):

‘And your name shall no longer be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham. . . . This is My covenant, which you shall observe between Me and between you and between your seed after you, that every male among you be circumcised. . . .’ (on the Internet at “Ask the Rabbi,” chabad.org, http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/612216/jewish/Why-do-we-wait-until-the-circumcision-to-name-a-boy.htm; copy and paste the URL in your browser)

Those who were going to name the boy Zechariah, did not include the parents, for “his mother said, ‘No; he is to be called John’ ” (Lk. 1:60). “In Luke,” say Tiede and Matthews, “the mothers, Mary (see v. 31) and Elizabeth, name the children (cf. Mt. 1:21, 25)” (op. cit., on v. 60). According to G. W. H. Lampe, “The name is given by inspiration; Elizabeth can know it only supernaturally, and the story implies that Zechariah is deaf as well as dumb” (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1962, reprint 1972, p. 825, sec. 719 i, on Lk. 1:59-74; cf. Tiede and Matthews, op. cit., on v. 62). Luke tells us, “They said to her [i.e., to Elizabeth], ‘None of your relatives has this name’ ” (v. 61). So “then they began motioning to his father to find out what name he wanted to give him” (v. 62). And Zechariah fulfills Gabriel’s command (v. 13). He asks for a writing tablet and writes, ‘His name is John’ ” (v. 63a). The people there (neighbors? cf. v. 58) are surprised, for, we are told, “All of them were amazed” (v. 63b). And as the angel said, “you will become mute, unable to speak, until the day these things occur” (v. 20), Luke says, “Immediately his mouth [i.e., John’s mouth] was opened and his tongue freed, and he began to speak, praising God” (v. 64). By this act he confirmed his faith and submission to God’s plan. And fear–reverential fear–spread: “Fear (fovboV, phobos) came over all their neighbors, and all these things were talked about throughout the entire hill country of Judea” (v. 65). According to Marion Lloyd Soards, “Fear (rendered ‘awe’ in 5:26) designates humble, reverent recognition of the limits of human understanding and power before God (2:9; 7:16; Acts 2:43, 46-47; 5:5, 11; 19:17)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on v. 65). According to Tiede and Matthews, “The neighbors’ fear expresses their awareness of divine action” (op. cit., on v. 65). They refer to their earlier comment, “Fear [is] a common human reaction to divine manifestations (Isa. 6:5-6)” (ibid., on 1:12). In the present context, they add, regarding “Throughout . . . Judea,” that, “as here, Luke often indicates in summary fashion the wide circulation of news” (ibid., on v. 65, with ref. to 4:14-15). The reaction of the people is explained. “All who heard them pondered them and said, ‘What then will this child become?’ For, indeed, the hand of the Lord was with him” (v. 66).

Parents look forward to the child's first words, don't they? They marvel at simple expressions. But when an older man is struck dumb for a while, his later utterances may count as something of a miracle. But his first spoken words of which we know are the prophecy known as the Benedictus (Lk. 1:67-79). (The Benedictus is the reading for Friday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two, which will be superceded by the Christmas week readings this year. For brief comments on the Benedictus, see the Presbyterian reading in the Archive for December 23, 2007 (the Fourth Sunday of Advent, Year Two).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net