Isaiah 49:13-23, Episcopal Tradition

13 Sing for joy, O heavens, and exult, O earth;

                        break forth, O mountains, into singing!

            For the LORD has comforted his people,

                        and will have compassion on his suffering ones.

14 But Zion said, "The LORD has forsaken me,

                        my Lord has forgotten me."

15 Can a woman forget her nursing child,

                        or show no compassion for the child of her womb?

            Even these may forget,

                        yet I will not forget you.

16 See, I have inscribed you on the palms of my hands;

                        your walls are continually before me.

17 Your builders outdo your destroyers,

                        and those who laid you waste go away from you.

18 Lift up your eyes all around and see;

                        they all gather, they come to you.

            As I live, says the LORD,

                        you shall put all of them on like an ornament,

                        and like a bride you shall bind them on.

19 Surely your waste and your desolate places

                        and your devastated land-

            surely now you will be too crowded for your inhabitants,

                        and those who swallowed you up will be far away.

20 The children born in the time of your bereavement

                        will yet say in your hearing:

            "The place is too crowded for me;

                        make room for me to settle."

21 Then you will say in your heart,

                        "Who has borne me these?

            I was bereaved and barren,

                        exiled and put away-

                        so who has reared these?

            I was left all alone–

                        where then have these come from?"

22 Thus says the Lord GOD:

            I will soon lift up my hand to the nations,

                        and raise my signal to the peoples;

            and they shall bring your sons in their bosom,

                        and your daughters shall be carried on their shoulders.

23 Kings shall be your foster fathers,

                        and their queens your nursing mothers.

            With their faces to the ground they shall bow down to you,

                        and lick the dust of your feet.

            Then you will know that I am the LORD;

                        those who wait for me shall not be put to shame. (Isa. 49:13-23 NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from yesterday when the Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions honored Holy Innocents Day. The comments then were based on earlier comments and indicated there.

This reading appears in a context where the LORD has promised return and restoration for captive Israel “I have kept you and given you / as a covenant to the people, / to establish the land, / to apportion the desolate heritages; / saying to the prisoners, ‘Come out,’ / to those who are in darkness, / ‘Show yourselves’” (Isa. 49:8a, b, c, d, 9a, b). The promise is, “Lo, these shall come from far away, / and lo, these from the north and from the west, / and these from the land of Syene” (v. 12). This leads into the opening verse of today’s lesson, in which the whole cosmos is called upon to praise the LORD for the restoration and return of Israel. “Sing for joy, O heavens, and exult, O earth; / break forth, O mountains, into singing! / For the LORD has comforted his people / and will have compassion on his suffering ones” (Isa. 49:13). But the people express disbelief. “But Zion said, ‘The LORD has forsaken me, / my Lord has forgotten me’" (v. 14). God responds to this pessimistic view. “Can a woman forget her nursing child / or show no compassion for the child of her womb?” (v. 15a, b). Even mothers may forget (v. 15c), but God will not forget Israel. We may take note of the maternal imagery used of God. “See,” says the LORD, “I have inscribed you on the palms of my hands” (v. 16a). According to Victor R. Gold and William L. Holladay, in this way, “God protests his love for Israel” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Isa. 49:14-16). Jerusalem will be rebuilt. “Your builders outdo your destroyers,” she is told, and she will be freed from “those who laid you waste” (v. 17).

“The imagery shifts from builders,” says J. J. M. Roberts, for “children, and the exiles returning to repopulate Jerusalem are portrayed as ornaments of jewelry worn by the city (cf. Lam. 4:1-2)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Isa. 49:18). “Lift up your eyes all around and see; / they all gather, they come to you. / As I live, says the LORD, / you shall put all of them on like an ornament, / and like a bride you shall bind them on” (v. 18). The LORD promises that Israel will be a fully populated, perhaps even overpopulated, land. “Surely your waste and your desolate places / and your devastated land–surely now you will be too crowded for your inhabitants, / and those who swallowed you up will be far away” (v. 19). Israelite children returning from exile will be surprised at this: “The children born in the time of your bereavement / will yet say in your hearing: / “The place is too crowded for me; / make room for me to settle” (v. 20). Benjamin D. Sommer notes that the LORD’s promises to end the devastation of Israel’s land and repopulate it (vv. 19-20), are “a recollection and reversal of the prophecy of doom in 6:10-12” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Isa. 49:19-20). The LORD predicts Zion’s response (cf. v. 14): “Who has borne me these? / I was bereaved and barren, / exiled and put away–so who has reared these? / I was left all alone–where then have these come from?” (v. 21). Sommer sees here, “a dialogue between God and Zion, which is personified as a bereaved woman. Her ‘children’–the Judeans–have died or been sent into exile. Jerusalem’s population fell after the Babylonians destroyed the city in 586 BCE, and it remained small even when the Persian king Cyrus allowed exiled Judeans to return there” (ibid., on vv. 14-23).

The predicted overpopulation of Judea (v. 20) would raise certain issues, but the good news is the return of the exiles, especially of the children. A few years ago, we were contemplating the loss of children on a day when the newspaper headline said, “An entire generation of children--swept away” (Houston Chronicle for Dec. 28, 2004, in reference to the effects of the tsunami in ten nations of southeast Asia). Israel, depopulated first by the Assyrians, and then (in Judah) by the Babylonians, had lost a generation of children, but the promise is restoration. Early reports about the devastation of the tsunami exceeded 52,000 persons (Yahoo News), some ten times the initial estimates for the 9/11/01 disaster in the U.S., and many more times the final numbers. The devastation of the recent Hurricane Ike did not result in as much human loss of life, but did cause terrible hardship for many. The conquest and exile of Israel, of course, was an unnatural disaster, perpetrated by evil human beings, and hopefully of a kind that will be prevented in the future (in spite of various genocides in recent decades). The death and destruction of the tsunami was not perpetrated by choice and action of evil human beings. We call such things natural disasters--some, including some insurers, call them "Acts of God." For people whose religion teaches that God is almighty and also infinitely good, those in the Judeo-Christian tradition, for example, such surd evils as this tsunami and its devastation pose severe problems, like the perplexity of Job. There often is no immediate comfortable answer. We are left to hold on and continue to believe in the God who "makes all things work together for good" (Rom. 8:28 NRSV text note n). In the meantime, tremendous human needs continue to call for compassionate action.

The assurance of restoration continues, especially the restoration of the children. And it will be "soon" “I will soon lift up my hand to the nations,” says the LORD, “and raise my signal to the peoples; / and they shall bring your sons in their bosom, / and your daughters shall be carried on their shoulders” (v. 22). “The upraised hand and signal will identify an assembly point for the repatriation of dispersed Israelites by Gentiles (cf. 11:11-12; 43:6-7; 60:9; 656:20),” says Joseph Blenkinsopp (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Isa. 49:22-26). Israel’s former oppressors must become foster parents–nannies? household slaves?–caring for the former exiles. “Kings shall be your foster fathers, / and their queens your nursing mothers. / With their faces to the ground they shall bow down to you, / and lick the dust of your feet. / Then you will know that I am the LORD; / those who wait for me shall not be put to shame” (v. 23).

2 Samuel 23:13-17b, Presbyterian and Lutheran Traditions

13 Towards the beginning of harvest three of the thirty chiefs went down to join David at the cave of Adullam, while a band of Philistines was encamped in the valley of Rephaim. 14 David was then in the stronghold; and the garrison of the Philistines was then at Bethlehem. 15 David said longingly, "O that someone would give me water to drink from the well of Bethlehem that is by the gate!" 16 Then the three warriors broke through the camp of the Philistines, drew water from the well of Bethlehem that was by the gate, and brought it to David. But he would not drink of it; he poured it out to the LORD, 17 for he said, "The LORD forbid that I should do this. Can I drink the blood of the men who went at the risk of their lives?" Therefore he would not drink it. (2 Samuel 13:13-17b, NRSV)

The following comments are based on relevant comments on 2 Samuel 23:13-17 from the comments on 2 Samuel 23:1-7, 13-17 from August 22, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 17, Year One); compare earlier comments from December 19 in the years 2005 and 2007.

The end of 2 Samuel, chapters 21-24, serves as a kind of appendix with a variety of stories and poems. Chapter 23 begins with what are called “the Last Words of David” (2 Sam. 23:1-7), followed by a section called “David’s Mighty Men” (vv. 8-39 (the section title in some printings of the NRSV). Steven L. McKenzie calls the latter “David’s Heroes” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 2 Sam. 23:8-39). Three great warriors are described in 23:8-12, but, according to McKenzie, the following verses are “not about the three warriors just listed but about three anonymous members of the honor guard of the thirty” (ibid., on vv. 13-17).

“Towards the beginning of harvest,” says the narrator, “three of the thirty chiefs went down to join David at the cave of Adullam, while a band of Philistines was encamped in the valley of Rephaim” (v. 13). Adullam was “an ancient settlement, most likely Tell esh-Sheikh Madkur in the Judean hills ca. five miles south of Beth-shemesh. Nearby is a cave where David and his early followers camped (1 Sam. 22:1)” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Adullam). The Valley of Rephaim is “the broad valley or plain southwest of Jerusalem, modern Baqa” (ibid., s.v. Rephaim), and so close to Adullam. “During the harvest,” says Shimon Bar-Efrat, commenting on the NJPS equivalent of “towards the beginning of the harvest” (NRSV), means “in the hot, dry season” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on v. 13). “David was then in the stronghold,” we are told; “and the garrison of the Philistines was then at Bethlehem” (v. 14). According to P. Kyle McCarter Jr. the “Cave of Adullam [was] David’s private stronghold during his days as a leader of outlaws and a refugee from Saul’s justice (see 1 Sam. 22:1), and the episode reported here in vv. 13-17 probably belongs to that period” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 2 Sam. 23:13). By McKenzie’s account, the episode may be a little later. “Since a garrison of the Philistines was then at Bethlehem,” he says, “this must have been early in David’s reign or even before he became king. Bethlehem [was] David’s hometown, hence his fond remembrance of the water there” (op. cit., on v. 14). On that occasion, “David said longingly, ‘O that someone would give me water to drink from the well of Bethlehem that is by the gate!’ ” (v. 15). Thinking they were fulfilling David’s desire, “Then the three warriors broke through the camp of the Philistines, drew water from the well of Bethlehem that was by the gate, and brought it to David” (v. 16a). However, they apparently had misread David’s wishes, for “he would not drink of it; he poured it out to the LORD, for he said, "The LORD forbid that I should do this. Can I drink the blood of the men who went at the risk of their lives?” (vv. 16b-17a). And David did not drink the water for which the three had risked their lives (v. 17b). McCarter says, “Because David regards the water as the blood of the men who went, he pours it out on the ground in accordance with religious law (cf. Lev. 17:10-13; Deut. 12:23-24)” (ibid., on vv. 16b-17). McKenzie calls this “a great honor to the three men” (op. cit., on vv. 16-17).

Matthew 18:1-14, Episcopal Tradition

18:1 At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" 2 He called a child, whom he put among them, 3 and said, "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me. (Mt. 18:1-5 NRSV)

6 "If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were fastened around your neck and you were drowned in the depth of the sea. 7 Woe to the world because of stumbling blocks! Occasions for stumbling are bound to come, but woe to the one by whom the stumbling block comes!

8 "If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than to have two hands or two feet and to be thrown into the eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into the hell of fire. (Mt. 18:6-9; cf. Mk 9.42-48; Lk 17.1-2 NRSV)

10 "Take care that you do not despise one of these little ones; for, I tell you, in heaven their angels continually see the face of my Father in heaven. 12 What do you think? If a shepherd has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray? 13 And if he finds it, truly I tell you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray. 14 So it is not the will of your Father in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost. (Mt. 18:10-14; cf. Lk. 15:1-7 NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from yesterday when the Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions honored Holy Innocents Day. The comments then were based on earlier comments and indicated there.

Today’s reading is a little less than half of the fourth major speech of Jesus presented by Matthew, dealing with issues of Christian life especially within the Christian community, that is, the “church” ( ejkklhsiva, ekklēsia). The term “church” ( ejkklhsiva, ekklēsia), which occurs frequently in Acts and the Epistles, occurs only three times in the Gospels, all in Matthew (16:18, twice in 18:17). The NRSV has “member of the church” for ajdelfovV (adelphos, “brother,” Mt. 18:15, 21 AV/KJV) in the context of Matthew 18:17 (cf. TNIV). This speech of Jesus is concluded by Matthew’s typical closing formula, “When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went to the region of Judea beyond the Jordan” (19:1; cf. 7:28-29; 11:1; 13:53; 26:1). In a separate file, Greatness - Temptations - Lost Sheep, it is evident from the diverse contexts of parallel passages that Matthew has characteristically made a topical arrangement here.

In Mark and Luke, an argument about “which one of them was the greatest” (Lk. 9:46; cf. Mk. 9:33, 34) led to Jesus’ saying about welcoming the child (Lk. 9:47-48; Mk. 9:36-37), in Mark’s case, including the statement about servanthood, “Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all” (Mk.9:35b). In Matthew, the disciples ask Jesus directly, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” (Mt. 18:1), which prompts Jesus to use a child as an object lesson. “He called a child, whom he put among them” (Mt. 18:2); compare Mark’s longer version, “Then he took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them” (Mk. 9:36). Luke refers to the disciples’ argument (Lk. 9:46; cf. Mk. 9:33), “But Jesus, aware of their inner thoughts, took a little child and put it by his side (Lk. 9:47). “Truly I tell you,” says Jesus according to Matthew, “unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven’ ” (Mt. 18:3); compare “Jesus answered him, ‘Very truly, I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of without being born from above” (Jn. 3:3); and compare “Jesus answered, ‘Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and spirit’ ” (Jn. 3:5). According to Dennis C. Duling, in the context of Matthew, “change [means] repent (see 3:2),” and “become like children [means being] without concern for social status (see Mk. 10:15)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 18:3). In reference to “become like children,” J. Andrew Overman says, “a child’s social status was little better than that of a slave (Gal. 4:1)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mt. 18:3). In John’s Gospel, of course, Jesus refers to the spiritual transformation called being born again/from above.

In Mark and Luke the child brought forward represents those whom the disciples should welcome, that is respect and treat kindly. “Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me” (Mk. 9:37; cf Lk. 9:48a. Luke adds the principle that “the least among all of you is the greatest (Lk. 9:48b). Matthew’s variation presents the child as one to be welcomed, but also as an example of humility. “Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me” (Mt. 18:4, 5). Duling comments on, “Whoever becomes humble . . . is the greatest,” saying, “Reversal of status characterizes the kingdom (see 20:26-27; 23:11-12; Mk. 10:43-44; Lk. 14:11; 18:14; 22:26; Jas. 4:6, 10; 1 Pet. 5:5)” (op. cit., on Mt. 18:4).

A common motif holds the larger passage together, the “child” (paidivon, paidion, Mt. 18:2, 3 [plural], 4, 5) and the “little ones” (oiJ mikroiv, hoi mikroi, vv. 10, 14). Dale C. Allison, Jr., notices the change in vocabulary:

This block of moral teaching [Mt. 18:1-14], which presupposes a communal setting, begins by referring to literal children (v. 2), but by vv. 10-14 ‘little ones’ designates believers (cf. 10:42). The transition from one thing to the other is probably marked by the change in vocabulary . . . The former teaches that one should become like little children, for only by this will one enter the kingdom (v. 3). One should humble oneself as a child, for in the kingdom the humble will be great (v. 4; cf. 23:12). (Dale C. Allison, Jr., The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 867, on Mt. 18:1-14).

Some professional therapists have much to say about one's “inner child.” An internet search for this phrase will turn up an amazing variety of approaches. One sight offers a test to use in answering the question, “How Old is Your Inner Child?” One question: “What's your preferred Pet?” Some answers: “Hamster,” “Puppy,” and others, including “I live in a community that doesn't allow pets.” Another question: “Finally, what do you want to be when you grow up?” Some answers: “Fireman,” “Princess,” “Not interested in growing up,” “I already am grown up, thank you very much.”

Sorting these approaches out, or even these answers, would take me “out of my area,” so to speak. But Jesus did say, “Become like children.” I sometimes wonder how to relate Jesus' call for self-denial, “If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me” (Mk. 8:34), with one of the goals of therapy, insight leading to self-actualization. Can denying oneself and finding oneself be related? Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me” (Mt. 18:3-5). If we believe that we are made in God's image, and continue to live thanks to his gracious provision for our lives, then we may pray with St. Augustine: “Thou movest us to delight in praising Thee; for Thou hast formed us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless till they find rest in Thee” (from his Confessions, Book 1, Chapter 1, on the Internet at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.vi.I_1.I.html [accessed again Dec. 28, 2009]. Pardon the old-fashioned English! It comes with this older translation.) I would add that, at least for the Christian believer, true wholeness would include respect for our most fervent desires (our “inner child”), and for God's desires for us–his commandments, if you must. God wants what is truly best for us. If we really understood that, we would want it too.

In Matthew, Jesus moves on to warnings about temptations. “If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone (muvloV ojnikovV, mulos onikos) were fastened (kremasqh:/, kremasthē) around your neck and you were drowned in the depth of the sea” (Mt. 18:6; cf. Mk. 9:42; Lk. 17:2). Where the NRSV translations in Matthew and Luke have “stumbling block,” the Greek text has the verb skandalivzw (skandalizō ), “to cause to be brought to a downfall, cause to sin” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2000, s.v. skandalivzw, skandalizō ); compare “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones . . .” (Mt. 18:6 AV/KJV; cf. also “causes . . . to stumble” TNIV). Luke uses the same verb, skandalivzw (skandalizō ), but in his different phrasing, the NRSV translation represents the verb with an English verb, “than for you to cause one of these little ones to stumble” (Lk. 17:2b). J. Andrew Overman apparently finds the “stumbling block” implied by the expression, and refers to it “as an image for causing someone to sin (Sir. 9:5; 25:21; 34:7; 1QS 2:12; T. Reuben 4:7)” (op. cit., on Mt. 18:6). In Matthew the reference to “stumbling blocks” becomes specific in the next verse. “Woe to the world because of stumbling blocks (skavndala, skandala)! Occasions for stumbling (ta; skavndala. ta skandala) are bound to come, but woe to the one by whom the stumbling block to; skavndalon, to skandalon) comes!” (Mt. 18:7). The noun skavndalon (skandalon) is defined as “an action or circumstance that leads one to act contrary to a proper course of action or set of beliefs, temptation to sin, enticement to apostasy, false belief, etc.” (BDAG, s.v. skavndalon, skandalon).

Matthew’s “fastened” (kremasqh:/, kremasthē) replaces Mark’s “hung” (perivkeitai, perikeitai). Both verbs can refer to putting the millstone in place, in Mark, “to be positioned around some object or area, be around, surround” (BDAG, s.v. perivkeimai perikeimai), in Matthew, “to cause to hang, trans. hang (up),” active voice, but here passive, “that a millstone were hung around that person’s neck” (BDAG, s.v. kremavnnumi, kremannumi). “The verb k. [k.] by itself can also mean crucify” [supported by citations from classical Greek], cf. Acts 5:30; 10:39 (ibid.). If Matthew had that association in mind, his change would add a certain severity to the warning. Luke retains Mark’s verb and other wording, but simplifies somewhat “Jesus said to his disciples, ‘Occasions for stumbling are bound to come, but woe to anyone by whom they come! It would be better for you if a millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown ( e[rriptai, erriptai, for Mark’s bevblhtai, beblētai) into the sea than for you to cause one of these little ones to stumble” (Lk. 17:1-2). Both words for “throw” imply forceful motion, but Luke’s verb rJivptw, (hriptō), “to propel something with a forceful motion, throw” is a little stronger (cf. BDAG, s.v. bavllw, ballō, and rJivptw, hriptō).

In Matthew and Mark, Jesus continues with possible causes of stumbling that one would be better to do without. “If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than to have two hands or two feet and to be thrown into the eternal fire” (Mt. 18:8, which combines separate verses for the hand and foot in Mk. 9:43, 44); “And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into the hell of fire” (Mt. 17:9; cf. Mk. 9:47-48, which has “hell, where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched” for Matthew’s “the hell of fire”). Mark’s concluding saying about salt (Mk. 9:48-50) is rather different from the saying about salt in Matthew and Luke in a different context (probably from Q; Mt. 5:13; cf. Lk 14:34-35).

Given these warnings about putting stumbling blocks in the way of children (v. 6), and further warnings, “cut it off,” that is, your hand or foot, if it “causes you to stumble” (v. 8), or “if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out and throw it away” (v. 9), what would Jesus say about the child abuse reported in our world? As noted above, the warning not to “put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me” (v. 6), according to Allison, refers to members of the Christian community. I should think that the warnings of verses 6-10, though they do directly refer to Christian believers, would appropriately apply also, and perhaps especially, to the treatment of children. Child abuse has been recognized as a horrific problem in our world, a problem that Jesus would surely address with such warnings. According to Allison, the “great millstone” (Mt. 18:6) is called a “donkey millstone” (loc. cit.). It’s a picture of certain drowning.

The parable of the Lost Sheep is found in Matthew (Mt. 18:10-14) and in Luke (Lk. 15:1-7). While the parable itself is similar in both Gospels, more succinct in Matthew, the contexts are different. In Matthew the shepherd leaves “the ninety-nine on the mountains” to search for the lost sheep (Mt. 18:12), but in Luke he leaves them “in the wilderness” (Lk. 15:4), which, given the topography of Israel, might not be very different. In Luke’s version, the shepherd calls his friends and neighbors together to share in the rejoicing (v. 6), and “there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents” (v. 7), but in Matthew’s version, it is only the shepherd whose rejoicing is singled out (Mt. 18:13). For texts of the parallel versions see the separate file mentioned above, Greatness - Temptations - Lost Sheep.

In Matthew the parable begins with an admonition: “Take care that you do not despise one of these little ones (mikroiv, mikroi),” says Jesus; for, I tell you, in heaven their angels continually see the face of my Father in heaven” (Mt. 18:10). The reference to “little ones” recalls the same term in v. 6, where Dennis C. Duling said, “Little ones who believe in me [is] no longer the literal children of vv. 1-4, but believers. It is not clear whether they are missionaries (see 10:42), disciples, recent converts, those of low social or economic status . . . or those weak in faith” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 18:6). J. Andrew Overman sees the “little ones” as “socially inferior or more vulnerable members of the church.” And in reference to “their angels,” he says, “it was believed that one’s guardian represented one in heaven (Acts. 12:15). In Acts, the believers at the home of Mary, John Mark’s mother do not believe Rhoda when she tells them Peter, released from prison, was “standing at the gate” (Acts 12:14). “They said, ‘You are out of your mind!’ But she insisted that it was so. They said, ‘It is his angel’ ” (v. 15). In Luke, Jesus tells the parable of the Lost Sheep on an occasion when “all the tax collectors and sinners were coming near to listen to him” (Lk. 15:1). On that occasion, “the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, ‘This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them’ ” (Lk. 15:1-2). David L. Tiede, revised by Christopher R. Matthews, notes that in Luke, chapter 15, there are “three parables on the lost and found. Only the first has a parallel in Matthew” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Lk. 15:1-32). They describe verses 1 and 2 as “the audience for the parables and a definition of the ‘lost’ ” (ibid., on vv. 1-2).

The NRSV text note b on Matthew 18:10 says, “Other ancient authorities add verse 11, For the Son of Man came to save the lost.” Many of the oldest and best manuscripts omit this verse. Bruce M. Metzger puts it this way:

There can be little doubt that the words h\lqen ga;r oJ uiJo;V tou; ajnqrwvpou ( zhthvsai kai;) sw;sai to; ajpolwlovV [ēlthen gar ho huios tou anthrōpou (zētēsai kai) sōsai to apolōlos, cf the text note cited above] are spurious here, being omitted by the earliest witnesses representing several textual types (Alexandrian, pre-Caesarean, Egyptian, Antiochian), and manifestly borrowed by copyists from Lk. 19:10. The reason for the interpolation was apparently to provide a connection between ver. 10 and verses 12-14. (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 1971, p. 44, on Mt. 18:11)

The “definition of the ‘lost’ ” seen by Tiede and Matthew in Luke’s present context may also have been a factor.

So we continue with the parable. In Matthew, Jesus says, “What do you (uJmi:n, hymin, ‘you’ plural, dative case due to the idiom, Tiv uJmi:n dokei:; Ti hymin dokei, lit. ‘What does it seem to you?’) think?” (Mt. 18:12a). The question is directed to the disciples (18:1). In Luke, Jesus says, “So he told them [i.e., the Pharisees and scribes who were grumbling about his welcoming and eating with sinners, v. 2] this parable” (Lk. 15:3a). In Matthew’s version of the parable, Jesus says, “If a shepherd has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray? And if he finds it, truly I tell you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray” (Mt. 18:12b, 13). While Luke’s version begins with a situation quite similar to that of Matthew’s version, Luke elaborates the shepherd’s rejoicing with friends and neighbors. “Which one of you,” says Jesus in Luke, “having a hundred sheep and losing one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness and go after the one that is lost until he finds it? When he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders and rejoices. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost’ ” (Lk. 15:4-6).

And the lessons drawn in the two versions differ. “So,” says Jesus in Matthew, “it is not the will of your Father in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost” (Mt. 18:14). “A shepherd,” says Overman, “a common image for a community leader (Num. 27:17; Jer. 3:15), must seek out even the lowliest person” (op. cit., on Mt. 18:12). In Luke, Jesus says, “Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance” (Lk. 15:7). According to Marion Lloyd Soards, “The mention of joy anticipates the declarations of joy in the following two parables, which share the theme of lost and found” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Lk. 15:6-7). The reference to needing no repentance is ironic for as noted above, in Luke, the parable is a response to the grumbling of the Pharisees and the scribes who were criticizing Jesus for welcoming sinners and eating with them” (15:2).

In Matthew, the Parable of the Lost Sheep emphasizes care for “one of these little ones” (v. 10). It is the third of six paragraphs that make up the fourth major speech of Jesus in Matthew. In Luke, the parable is one of a series of parables and related teachings on discipleship: “Parable on Humility” (Lk. 14:7-14), “Parable of the great dinner” (vv. 15-24; cf. Mt. 22:1-14), “the costs of discipleship” (vv. 25-33; cf. Mt. 10:37-38), “sayings about salt” (14:34-35; cf. Mt. 5:13; Mk. 9:49-50); the “Parable of the Lost Sheep” (15:1-9; cf. Mt. 18:12-14), the “Parable of the Lost Coin” (15:8-10), the “Parable of the Lost Prodigal Son” (15:11-32), and the “Parable of the Dishonest Manager” (16:1-9; titles from Marion Lloyd Soards (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007) on respective units [mostly traditional titles, in any case]). These arrangements reflect the editing and topical arrangement of both evangelists, each in his own way. Parables continue in Luke’s “Travel Narrative,” for example, the “Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus” (16:9-31) and the “Parable of the Unjust Judge and the Persistent Widow” (18:1-8, also both titles from Soards). But the set of three parables on lost people or things in Luke 15 stands out, emphasizing the Father’s (God’s) concern to redeem the lost. “Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance” (Lk. 15:7). In Matthew, the parable underscores God’s concern for every individual person. “It is not the will of your Father in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost” (v. 14). A Gospel song, “The Ninety and Nine,” may be found on the Internet at http://www.scriptureandmusic.com/Music/Text_Files/The_Ninety_And_Nine.html (accessed again, December 28, 2009; you may need to copy and paste the URL). The words are by Elizabeth C. Clephane, in 1868; the hymn tune (his first) by Ira Sankey (who worked with Dwight L. Moody), in 1874.

2 John 1-13, Presbyterian and Lutheran Traditions

Salutation

1 The elder to the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth, and not only I but also all who know the truth, 2 because of the truth that abides in us and will be with us forever:

3 Grace, mercy, and peace will be with us from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Father's Son, in truth and love.

Truth and Love

4 I was overjoyed to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we have been commanded by the Father. 5 But now, dear lady, I ask you, not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but one we have had from the beginning, let us love one another. 6 And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment just as you have heard it from the beginning-you must walk in it.

7 Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh; any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist! 8 Be on your guard, so that you do not lose what we have worked for, but may receive a full reward. 9 Everyone who does not abide in the teaching of Christ, but goes beyond it, does not have God; whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 Do not receive into the house or welcome anyone who comes to you and does not bring this teaching; 11 for to welcome is to participate in the evil deeds of such a person.

Final Greetings

12 Although I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink; instead I hope to come to you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.

13 The children of your elect sister send you their greetings. (2 John 1-13, NRSV)

On May 1, 2009 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One), comments were repeated from May 23, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 18, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from April 27, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One), when comments were repeated with some revision and supplement from April 15, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One). The revised comments are repeated again here:

The author, “the elder (oJ presbuvteroV, ho presbyteros),” addresses “the elect lady (ejklekth; kuriva, eklektē kyria) and her children,” probably the local Christian community. He professes to love them, “whom I love in the truth, and not only I but also all who know the truth, because of the truth that abides in us and will be with us for ever” (2 Jn. 1-2). He relates himself to the readers as those who both know and love the truth. David K. Rensberger, revised by Harold W. Attridge, says, “Truth is important in the Gospel and Letters of John. Here it probably relates to the controversy over false teaching” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 2 Jn. 1-3). “As in the Third Epistle,” says C. H. Dodd, “the writer does not give his name, but calls himself simply ‘The Presbyter’ [presbuvteroV, presbyteros]” (Johannine Epistles, The Moffatt Commentary, 1946, p. 143 on 2 Jn. 1). Dodd suggests that a “quasi-technical use of the term [elder, presbuvteroV, presbyteros] was current for a short time, mainly or even exclusively in the Province of Asia–the home, to all appearance, of our Presbyter” (ibid., p. 155, on 3 Jn. 1-2). “Christians of this province,” he adds,

seem to have spoken of ‘the elders’ (Presbyters) in referring to a group of teachers who formed a link between the apostles and the next generation (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist., III. 39. 3-4). ‘The Elders, disciples of the Apostles’ is the formula in Irenaeus (who came from the Province of Asia: Adv. Haer., V. 36, cf. V. 33. 3). They were apparently a small group; and it was quite possible for one of them to be spoken of, in appropriate circumstances, as ‘The Presbyter.’ Irenaeus, for example, several times refers to things which he had learned from ‘The Presbyter,’ or ‘The Presbyter, the disciple of the Apostles,’ without naming him (Irenaeus, op. cit., IV. 47. 1, 49. 1, I. 8. 17; Eusebius, op. cit., V. 8, 8). Papias, also a provincial of Asia, refers to ‘The Presbyter’ (Eusebius, op. Cit., III. 39. 15), meaning, apparently, the Presbyter John, whom he distinguishes from John the Apostle. It is probable that the term is here being used in a similar way. As Irenaeus spoke of his early teacher, who had transmitted to him the apostolic traditions, so Gaius and Demetrius spoke of their teacher, the man who stood to them for the authority of the Apostles, as ‘The Presbyter,’ simply. He need not have been, and probably was not, the same person as Irenaeus’s ‘Presbyter.’ He need not have been, though he may have been, the same as Papias’s ‘Presbyter John.’ In any case, we must suppose that he held so outstanding a position among Christians of the province of Asia, as a mediator of the apostolic tradition, that he could write, whether to an individual adherent or to a local congregation, under the title ‘The Presbyter,’ without feeling the necessity of adding his name. (ibid., pp. 155-156)

The greeting uses the language of greetings in other New Testament letters. “Grace (cavriV, charis), mercy ( e[leoV, eleos), and peace (eijrhvnh, eirēnē) will be ( e[stai, estai, future tense, indicative [declarative] mood) with us from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Father’s Son, in truth and love” (v. 3). The terms “grace, mercy, and peace are presented in a statement, they “will be with us,” rather than a wish, as in 1 Peter, “May grace and peace be yours in abundance” (plhqunqeivh, plēthuntheiē, aorist tense, optative [wish] mood) (1 Pet. 1:2b), or in Pauline epistles where the wish is implied by the dative case without a verb as in Philippians, “Grace to you (hJmi:n, hymin) and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:2 = Rom. 1:7b = 1 Cor. 1:3 = 2 Cor. 1:2 = Gal. 1:3, etc.). Second John is also unique in that it is the only New Testament Epistle in which the greeting refers to “us” rather than “you” (as above). In the Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus), neither pronoun is used with the words “grace, mercy and peace,” but the preceding “to Timothy . . . (1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 1:2) or “to Titus . . . (Tit. 1:4) focuses on the recipient. In 2 John, the presbyter closely identifies with the recipients, as though they were his own community, or perhaps closely related to his own community, saying “Grace, mercy and peace will be with us from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Father’s Son in truth and love” (v. 3).

After this greeting, John expresses joy, being “overjoyed to find some of your children ( ejk tw:n tek;nwn sou, ek tōn teknōn sou, partitive) walking in the truth, just as we have been commanded by the Father” (v. 4). Although the “deceivers” who “have gone out into the world” (v. 7), appear to be not, or perhaps no longer, associated with the presbyter’s community, the partitive expression, “some of your children walking in the truth,” may indicate his concern for others, left unmentioned, as well. He reminds the church, “dear lady (kuriva, kyria),” of the commandment to love. “But now, dear lady, I ask you, not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but one we have had from the beginning, let us love one another” (v. 5). “The new commandment to love one another,” says Pheme Perkins, “has been an identifying mark of Johannine Christianity from its beginning (Jn. 13:34-35; 1 Jn. 2:7-10)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 2 Jn. 4-6). John defines the love which is the new commandment. “And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment just as you have heard it from the beginning–you must walk in it” (v. 6; cf. Jn. 13:34; 14:15; 15:12-14).

As noted above, the elder warns against “many deceivers [who] have gone out ( ejxh:lqon, exēlthon) into the world” (v. 7a). Frederick W. Danker has defined the verb ejxevrcomai (exerchomai), which usually means “go” or “come out,” as “go/come out/away” but in a couple instances “Mk. 1:25; 8:11 (without reference to point of departure: come out, appear)” (The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 2009, s.v. ejxevrcomai, exerchomai). Possibly John says the deceivers “appeared” (cf. the Pharisees, Mk. 8:11), but more likely, that they have left this Christian community. Perkins calls them “secessionists” (op. cit., on vv. 7-9). But whether they come from within the community or from outside, the elder clearly regards them as a threat to his own people. He defines the deceivers as “those who do not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh ( ejn sarkiv, en sarki),” and adds, “any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist!” (v. 7b). The key here is the phrase, “in the flesh.” Contrast the statement in John’s Gospel, “And the Word (oJ lovgoV, ho logos) became flesh (savrx, sarx) and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth” (Jn. 1:14). In the Epistle, the elder clearly refers to the docetic heresy, according to which, Jesus, the Christ only “seemed” to be human. They exaggerate the spiritual and divine side of Christ while denying that he was fully human. “Be on your guard,” says the elder, “so that you do not lose what we have worked for, but may receive a full reward” (v. 8). The warning against the deceivers continues. “Everyone who does not abide (pa:V oJ . . . mh; mevnwn, pas ho . . . mē menōn) in the teaching of Christ, but goes beyond it, does not have God; whoever abides (oJ mevnwn, ho menōn) in the teaching has both the Father and the Son” (v. 9). In the Gospel of John, in connection with the analogy of the true vine, Jesus says, “Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered and thrown into the fire, and burned” (John 15:4-6). And he says, “If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. . . . As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you; abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love” (Jn 15:7, 9-10). In all these instances of the verb “abide,” it translates a form of the Greek verb mevnw (menō ), which basically means “remain, stay,” but in a transferred sense, of someone who does not leave a certain realm or sphere: remain, continue, abide,” for example, “of Christians in their relation to Christ [and] of Christ relating to Christians,” or “of Christians relating to God [and] of God relating to Christians,” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. mevnw, menō, meanings (1) and (1) (a) (b) ). Perkins says, “The secessionists who do not abide in the teaching of Christ by denying that the human Jesus is the Christ . . . have shattered that fellowship (1 Jn. 2:19. False teaching is a sign that the antichrist is at work in the world (1 Jn. 2:18; 4:1-3)” (op. cit., on vv. 7-9).

The elder specifically warns against any contact with the deceivers. “Do not receive into the house or welcome anyone who comes to you and does not bring this teaching; for to welcome is to participate in the evil deeds of such a person” (vv. 10-11). Rensberger and Attridge say,

Hospitality was essential to traveling missionaries and teachers in the early churches (see, e.g., 3 Jn. 5-8; also Rom. 12:13; 15:23-24; 16:1-2; Heb. 13:2; Didache 11:1; 112:1). By forbidding it to the opponents, the author hopes to hinder the spread of their teaching (see also Rom. 16:17; 2 Thess. 3:;6). In 3 Jn. 9-10, the author complains of similar tactics being used against him! (op. cit., on v. 11)

According to Perkins, “The severity of this demand, do not receive into the house (i.e., church) anyone connected with the secessionists, follows from the view that their activities are Satan’s final effort against God’s people” (on vv. 12-23). The elder has more to say, but prefers to deliver it in person. “Although I have much to write to you,” he says, “I would rather not use paper and ink; instead I hope to come to you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete” (v. 12). And he closes with a greeting from his own congregation. “The children of your elect sister (hJ ajdelfh; sou hJ ejklekthv, hē adelphē sou hē eklektē) send you their greetings” (v. 13).

Isaiah 54:1-13, Episcopal Tradition

The Eternal Covenant of Peace

54:1 Sing, O barren one who did not bear;

burst into song and shout,

you who have not been in labor!

For the children of the desolate woman will be more

than the children of her that is married, says the LORD.

2 Enlarge the site of your tent,

and let the curtains of your habitations be stretched out;

do not hold back; lengthen your cords

and strengthen your stakes.

3 For you will spread out to the right and to the left,

and your descendants will possess the nations

and will settle the desolate towns.

4 Do not fear, for you will not be ashamed;

do not be discouraged, for you will not suffer disgrace;

for you will forget the shame of your youth,

and the disgrace of your widowhood you will remember no more.

5 For your Maker is your husband,

the LORD of hosts is his name;

the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer,

the God of the whole earth he is called.

6 For the LORD has called you

like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit,

like the wife of a man’s youth when she is cast off,

says your God.

7 For a brief moment I abandoned you,

but with great compassion I will gather you.

8 In overflowing wrath for a moment

I hid my face from you,

but with everlasting love I will have compassion on you,

says the LORD, your Redeemer.

9 This is like the days of Noah to me:

Just as I swore that the waters of Noah

would never again go over the earth,

so I have sworn that I will not be angry with you

and will not rebuke you.

10 For the mountains may depart

and the hills be removed,

but my steadfast love shall not depart from you,

and my covenant of peace shall not be removed,

says the LORD, who has compassion on you.

11 O afflicted one, storm-tossed, and not comforted,

I am about to set your stones in antimony,

and lay your foundations with sapphires.

12 I will make your pinnacles of rubies,

your gates of jewels,

and all your wall of precious stones.

13 All your children shall be taught by the LORD,

and great shall be the prosperity of your children. (Isaiah 54:1-13, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from yesterday when the Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions honored Holy Innocents Day. The comments then were based on earlier comments and indicated there.

Jerusalem is addressed, according to Joseph Blenkinsopp, as “mother of a depressed and dispersed family, and as a woman destined no longer to be forsaken, bereaved, or infertile” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Isa. 54:1-3). He calls this a “major motif” in this part of Isaiah, with reference to Isaiah 49:14-21, 22, 25; 51:17-20; 52:1-2, 7-10; 60:1-12; 66:7-11. “Sing, O barren one who did not bear,” says the LORD through the prophet; “burst into song and shout, / you who have not been in labor!” (Isa. 54:1a, b, c). Jerusalem has been like a barren, childless woman. But the situation will change. “For the children of the desolate woman will be more / than the children of her that is married, says the LORD” (v. 1d, e). Jerusalem is told to “Enlarge the site of your tent, / and let the curtains of your habitations be stretched out; / do not hold back; lengthen your cords / and strengthen your stakes” (v. 2). It’s like a modern couple who needs a larger house, perhaps a new wing on the present house, because of an expected increase in the family. But the scale is national, not single family, in scope. According to Blenkinsopp, “Jerusalem represented as a tent, reminiscent of the tent in the wilderness, will be repopulated together with the other Judean cities” (ibid.). The metaphor continues. Jerusalem “will spread out to the right and to the left, / and your descendants will possess the nations / and will settle the desolate towns” (v. 3). According to Benjamin D. Sommer, “This passage is based on Jer. 10:17-25, where the Judeans who are about to be exiled lament the loss of their children and the destruction of their tent (symbolizing the Temple), their city and kingdom, and their social structure generally” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, p. 893, on Isa. 54:1-5).

The image shifts from mother and children to marriage, to the LORD as the husband and Israel as his unfaithful wife (cf. Hos. 1-3). But Jerusalem will no longer be a forsaken wife. “Do not fear, for you will not be ashamed; / do not be discouraged, for you will not suffer disgrace; / for you will forget the shame of your youth, / and the disgrace of your widowhood you will remember no more” (v. 4). The relationship with the LORD will be restored. “For your Maker is your husband, / the LORD of hosts is his name; / the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer, / the God of the whole earth he is called” (v. 5). How will it be restored? “ For the LORD has called you,” Zion is told, “like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit, / like the wife of a man’s youth when she is cast off, / says your God” (v. 6). “For a brief moment I abandoned you,” says the LORD, “but with great compassion I will gather you. / In overflowing wrath for a moment / I hid my face from you, / but with everlasting love I will have compassion on you, / says the LORD, your Redeemer” (vv. 7-8) “After the separation of the exile,” says Blenkinsopp, “there will be a spousal reconciliation between the LORD and Jerusalem (cf. Hos. 1-3)” (ibid., on vv. 4-8).

With the change of stanzas, says Sommer, “God switches from a marital metaphor to a simile based on the story of Noah (Gen. chs. 8-9)” (op. cit., on vv. 9-10). “This is like the days of Noah to me: / Just as I swore that the waters of Noah / would never again go over the earth, / so I have sworn that I will not be angry with you / and will not rebuke you” (v. 9). “The former metaphor implied,” says Sommer,

that the covenant between God and Israel is one of mutual obligation; that allusion to Noah recalls the notion of a covenant of grace, which God unilaterally grants to human beings. Deutero-Isaiah often moves back and forth between portrayals of Israel as God’s spouse and God’s child, hence insisting that both covenant models are valid; see 49:14-21; 50:1-3. (ibid.)

Isaiah continues to describe the blessings awaiting the LORD’s restored spouse. The one who has been afflicted, storm-tossed and not comforted (v. 11a), will have her stones set “in antimony,” and her foundations laid “with sapphires” (v. 11b, c). The once forsaken wife will have “pinnacles of rubies,” gates of jewels,” and a “wall of precious stones” (v. 12). Blenkinsopp compares the “new Jerusalem,” which “is adorned with precious stones and gems by builders supernaturally instructed” (Ezek. 28:13-19), and adds that “Christian apocalyptic literature draws on this imagery to describe the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:18-21)” (op. cit., on vv. 11-13a). Jerusalem’s “children shall be taught by the LORD,” she is told, “and great shall be the prosperity of [her] children” (v. 13).

Looking beyond the present reading, we note that Jerusalem will be established “in righteousness,” “far from oppression,” “and from fear,” because she will not fear, and terror “shall not come near” her (v. 14). Those who stir up strife with Jerusalem will fall (v. 15). The LORD controls the weapon makers, “the smith / who blows the fire of coals, / and produces a weapon” (v. 16). Jerusalem is promised that “No weapon that is fashioned against you shall prosper, / and you shall confute every tongue that rises against you in judgment” (v. 17a, b). We come to a sense of closure with Jerusalem’s encouragement. “This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD / and their vindication from me, says the LORD” (v. 17c, d).

John 2:1-11, Presbyterian and Lutheran Traditions

2:1 On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. 3 When the wine gave out, the mother of Jesus said to him, "They have no wine." 4 And Jesus said to her, "Woman, what concern is that to you and to me? My hour has not yet come." 5 His mother said to the servants, "Do whatever he tells you." 6 Now standing there were six stone water jars for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. 7 Jesus said to them, "Fill the jars with water." And they filled them up to the brim. 8 He said to them, "Now draw some out, and take it to the chief steward." So they took it. 9 When the steward tasted the water that had become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward called the bridegroom 10 and said to him, "Everyone serves the good wine first, and then the inferior wine after the guests have become drunk. But you have kept the good wine until now." 11 Jesus did this, the first of his signs, in Cana of Galilee, and revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him. (John 2:1-11, NRSV)

The Wedding at Cana (John 2:1-11, with or without the transitional verse 12) has been the Gospel reading on several occasions, most recently on March 2, 2009 (Monday in the week of the First Sunday of Lent, Year One), and on January 7, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Second Sunday after Christmas, ref. for Jan. 7, Year One). The following comments are based on those, and earlier comments as noted there:

In the Gospel of John, the first chapter reports the introduction of several disciples to Jesus (and to us): two disciples (Jn. 1:35) including Andrew (v. 40), then Simon Peter (vv. 40-41), Philip (v. 43) and Nathanael (vv. 45-51). The second chapter, and our present reading, begins by reference to “the third day” (Jn. 2:1). If we count “the next day” (1:29) as the second day, and the same phrase in verses 35 and 43 as the third and fourth days, the wedding at Cana would be put on the fifth day–but that is not likely what John meant. According to Raymond E. Brown,

Theodore of Mopsuestia . . . counts this as the third day after baptismal scene of i 29-34, with the first day mentioned in i 35, and the second in i 43. Although this is certainly a possible exegesis, most exegetes now count from the day of Philip’s and Nathanael’s call, suggesting that that day and the next (or perhaps two intervening days) were spent in the journey from the Jordan valley to Galilee. Since the second Cana miracle also occurs ‘after two days’ (iv 43), some suggest a purely symbolic reference to the resurrection. (The Gospel according to John, I-XII, Anchor Bible, vol. 29, 1966, p. 97, on Jn. 2:1).

On this “third day,” says John, “there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there” (Jn. 2:1). According to Brown, who shows the Jewish days as starting at sundown (Saturday evening-Sunday, as we would count it, for their Sunday,

the Mishnah (Kethuboth 1) ordained that the wedding of a virgin should take place on Wednesday. This would agree with the guess that i 39 immediately preceded the Sabbath; the action of i 40-42 would have taken place on Saturday evening-Sunday; that of i 43-50 on Sunday evening-Monday; Monday evening-Tuesday would have been the second day of the journey; and Jesus would have arrived at Cana on Tuesday evening or Wednesday morning. (ibid., p. 98 on v. 1).

Harold W. Attridge observes that, “according to 21:2, Cana, in central Galilee, was the hometown of Nathanael (1:45)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Jn. 2:1-12).

For John’s calling Mary “the mother of Jesus,” Brown observes, “Among Arabs today the ‘mother of X’ is an honorable title for a woman who has been fortunate enough to bear a son. John never calls her Mary” (loc. cit.). Although we are simply told that Mary “was there,” we may assume that it was by invitation, for “Jesus and his disciples had also (kaiv, kai, adverbial) been invited to the wedding” (v. 2). The focus is clearly on Jesus and Mary. The Greek wording of verse 2 is as follows: “And (de;, de, necessarily second–postpositive–in Greek, but first in English) was invited (ejklhvqh, eklēthē, passive voice, singular, referring to Jesus) also/too (kaiv, kai, adverbial) Jesus and (kaiv, kai, adverbial) the disciples of him to the wedding”; or simply put: “Jesus was also invited–implying Mary’s invitation–and his disciples (something of an afterthought) to the wedding.

With the setting established, John introduces a problem. “When the wine gave out,” he says, “the mother of Jesus said to him, ‘They have no wine’ ” (v. 3). This comment does not necessarily request a miracle from Jesus; Mary is simply informing him of the situation, and thus John alerts us as well. “Most commentators,” says Brown, “including Catholics like Gaechter, Braun, Van den Bussche, Boismard, Charlier, see no evidence in Mary’s request of the expectation of a miracle” (ibid., on v. 3). Jesus’ response to his mother has caused considerable debate. “Woman,” says Jesus, “what concern is that to you and to me? My hour has not yet come” (v. 4). The Greek wording of the question seems brief, almost abrupt. Tiv ejmoi; kai; soi/, guvnai; (Ti emoi kai soi? literally, “What [is that] to me and to you?”) Brown interprets this statement by comparison with an Old Testament idiom that implies no disrespect.

In the OT the Hebrew expression has two shades of meaning: (a) when one party is unjustly bothering another, the injured party may say, ‘What to me and to you?’ i.e., What have I done to you that you should do this to me? What subject of discord is there between us? (Judg. xi 12; II Chron xxxv 21; I Kings xvii 18); (b) when someone is asked to get involved in a matter which he feels is not business of his, he may say to the petitioner, ‘What to me and to you?’ i.e., That is your business; how am I involved? (II Kings iii 13; Hos. xiv 8). Thus, there is always some refusal of an inopportune involvement, and a divergence between the views of the two persons concerned; yet (a) implies hostility while (b) implies simple disengagement. Both shades of meaning appear in NT usage: (a) appears when the demons reply to Jesus (Mark i 24, v 7); seemingly (b) appears here. (ibid. p. 99, on v. 4, cf. p. 102).

We also note the reference to Jesus’ “hour,” which he says, “has not yet come” (v. 4b; cf. 7:30; 8:20; cf. also statements that the “hour” has come, 12:23, 27[twice], 13:1; 17:1). In any event, Mary instructs the servants, “Do whatever he [i.e., Jesus] tells you” (v. 5). John, as narrator, informs us: “Now standing there were six stone water jars for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons” (2:6). A large stone jar found by archaeologists in the “burnt house” at Jerusalem (destroyed by the Romans), is a likely example of the kind of jars used here (v. 6). Professor James Charlesworth, of Princeton Theological Seminary, sees the jars as an example of a kind of obsession with ritual purity in the first century (lecture in Houston several years ago). Ceramic jars would be much easier to work with, but were considered subject to impurity, whereas stone jars were not. Jesus clearly does not disregard his mother, for to the servants, he says, “Fill the jars with water.” And we are told, “they filled them up to the brim” (v. 7). Next, Jesus “said to them, ‘Now draw some out, and take it to the chief steward.’ So they took it” (v. 8). As we know, John reports this event as a miracle, which he calls a “sign” (shmei:on, sēmeion, v. 11; cf. 2:23; 3:2; 4:54; 20:31). The indication of the miracle comes when John tells us about the chief steward’s response. “When the steward tasted the water that had become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward called the bridegroom, and said to him, ‘Everyone serves the good wine first, and then the inferior wine after the guests have become drunk. But you have kept the good wine until now’ ” (vv. 9-10). So we have it on the authority of the chief steward–as reported by John–that a miracle has occurred in the transforming of water to wine.

John appears to begin an enumeration of Jesus’ miracles (signs) here. “Jesus did this, the first of his signs (shmei:a, sēmeia), in Cana of Galilee, and revealed his glory; and his disciples believed him” (v. 11). A second sign is enumerated later, in reference to Jesus’ healing of the royal official’s son, again in Cana (4:46-54). “Now this was the second sign (shmei:on, sēmeion) that Jesus did after coming from Judea to Galilee” (4:54). However, we have already read of other signs that Jesus performed. “When he was in Jerusalem during the Passover festival,” says John, “many believed in his name because they saw the signs (shmei:a, sēmeia) that he was doing” (2:23). Nicodemus, also in Jerusalem, tells Jesus, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God, for no one can do these signs (shmei:a, sēmeia) that you do apart from the presence of God” (3:2). And there are further references to “signs” (6:2; 20:31). One could perhaps explain the reference to a “second sign” in 4:54 as the second sign in Galilee, or by assuming that John’s narrative sequence is more topical than chronological so that the signs in Jerusalem (2:23, 3:2) were in fact later than the healing of the royal official’s son (4:46-54). But I prefer a simpler explanation, namely, that certain miracles/signs were of profound significance for John, those that he described in some detail. It is these key signs, as it were, that he chooses to enumerate, let us say: (1) the water to wine at Cana (2:1-11), (2) healing the royal official’s son at Cana (4:46-54), (3) healing the lame man at the pool called Bethzatha (5:1-18), (4) feeding the five thousand (6:1-15), (5) Jesus walking on the sea (6:16-21), (6) healing the blind man (9:1-41), (7) the raising of Lazarus (11:1-57), and, we might add, (8) the resurrection of Jesus himself (20:1-31). John was fully aware of “many other signs (shmei:a, sēmeia)” that Jesus did–as was his final editor (cf. 21:24-25). But these seven (or eight) were selected for special emphasis, and it was these that he first began to enumerate, though the explicit process of enumeration breaks off after the second.

Some see this story as an example of Jesus’ creative power: water to wine. At one level, what Jesus did spared the bridegroom embarrassment. The steward’s comment perhaps points to the story’s significance as a parable: while the religion of the Hebrew Bible was good, the best wine comes with Jesus and the revealing of “his glory” (v. 11). Brown finds the significance of this miracle as spelled out in verse 11 (op. cit., p. 103): “Jesus did this, the first of his signs, in Cana of Galilee, and revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him” (Jn. 2:11). “Thus,” says Brown, “the first sign had the same purpose that all the subsequent signs will have, namely, revelation about the person of Jesus.” Brown raises and answers four questions about this miracle. “(1) How did Cana reveal the glory of Jesus?” (p. 104). His answer is “Messianic replacement and abundance,” by which he refers to the common theme in John that Jesus replaces the motifs of several Jewish feasts.

The headwaiter’s statement at the end of the scene, “You have kept the choice wine until now,” can be understood as the proclamation of the coming of the messianic days. In the light of this theme Mary’s statement, “They have no wine,” becomes a poignant reflection on the barrenness of Jewish purifications, much in the vein of Mark vii 1-24.

The abundance of wine (120 gallons . . .) now becomes intelligible. One of the consistent OT figures for the joy of the final days is an abundance of wine. (ibid., p. 105)

Brown asks more questions, but I’ll list them briefly. His answers are fascinating, but the Anchor Bible commentary series is readily available in many libraries. Question (2): “How did Cana complete the call of the disciples?” (p. 105). Note the affirmation of John 2:11. “(3) The symbolism of the Mother of Jesus, the ‘woman,’ at Cana.” Brown refers to the woman of Revelation, chapter 12, which is likely a symbol of the people of God. “However, often in the Bible collective figures are based on historical ones” (p. 108). Brown’s fourth point (4) is about “The choice wine at Cana and the Eucharist.”

I see the miracle at Cana as a manifestation of Jesus’ creative power. I am coming to see the placement of this story as a key to the overall meaning of John’s Gospel.

Mark 10:13-16, Episcopal Tradition

Let the little children come to me

13 People were bringing little children to him in order that he might touch them; and the disciples spoke sternly to them. 14 But when Jesus saw this, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the little children come to me; do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs. 15 Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it.” 16 And he took them up in his arms, laid his hands on them, and blessed them. (Mark 10:13-16, NRSV)

This brief selection is part of the longer reading that has been used frequently, for example, Mark 10:1-16 (February 11, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Fifth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), March 12, 2008 (Wednesday in the week of the Fifth Sunday of Lent, Year Two), and earlier. The following comments on Mark 10:13-16 are based on relevant portions of the earlier comments.

After the section on the teaching about divorce (Mk. 10:1-12; cf Mt. 19:1-9; Lk. 16:18), we come to a brief episode in which Jesus blesses the children, appropriate for the day when we remember the Holy Infants. The accounts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are presented in the following table:

The three Synoptic Gospels each report that “People were bringing little children to [Jesus] in order that he might touch them” (Mk. 10:13a; cf. Mt. 19:13a; Lk. 18:15a). Each Gospel reports the stern rebuke of the disciples (Mk. 10:13b; cf. Mt. 19:13b; Lk. 18:15b). Mark introduces Jesus’ rebuke by saying he was “indignant” (Mk. 10:14a), and follows with Jesus’ saying, “Let the little children come to me; do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs” (Mk. 10:14b; cf. Mt. 19:14b; Lk 18:16b). [The identical wording in the English translations conceals minor differences between Mt. and Lk., who have different word order in Greek, and different tenses of the infinitive “come,” aorist in Mt., present in Lk.].

For Jesus, the best interests of children were a high priority, and so should they be for us. According to C. Clifton Black, revised by Adela Yarbro Collins, their purpose in bringing the children “that he might touch them,” was for him “to convey some benefit (cf. [Mk.] 1:41; 3:10; 5:27-28; 6:56; 8:22). Blessing a person (v. 16) is also a way of conveying a benefit” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mk. 10:13). Dennis C. Duling, says “Lay his hands on them,” was “to impart a blessing (see Gen. 48:8-16)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 19:13). Of “kingdom of God,” Black and Collins say, “Children represent the type of character needed to enter the kingdom of God (cf. 9:33-37)” (op. cit.., on v. 14). For Jesus, the children represent the childlike faith that is necessary for entering the kingdom of God. “Truly I tell you,” says Jesus in Mark, “whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it” (Mk. 10:15; cf. Lk. 18:17). Black and Collins refer to Matthew 18:3 and John 3:3-5, and say, “The connection between this passage and [Mk.] 9:33-37 suggests that receiving the kingdom as a child means receiving it without the ambition to be a figure of authority, but being content to be last of all and servant of all (9:35)” (ibid., on v. 15). According to Mark, Jesus “took them up in his arms, laid his hands on them, and blessed them” (Mk. 10:16; cf. Mt. 19:14; Lk. 18:16 Mark and Luke add Jesus’ call for receiving the call as a child: “Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it” (Mk. 10:15; Lk. 19:17; cf. Jn. 3:3, 5). Mark’s closing statement, “He [Jesus] took them [i.e., the children] up in his arms, laid his hands on them, and blessed them” (Mk. 10:16), is condensed by Matthew to “And he laid his hands on them [the children?] and went on his way” (Mt. 19:15).

C. M. Tuckett notes the repetition of the idea of Mark 9:37 in 10:15 and says that “many have regarded [9:37] as more appropriate.” He adds that:

the idea of a child as an example to imitate is not easy to interpret. Children in the ancient world were of the lowest status in society . . . [but] perhaps . . . this is precisely what Mark (unlike Matthew) has in mind. The Kingdom is for those who are like children in the ancient world, i.e. the poor, the hungry, the dispossessed, those without rights and without any esteem amongst their contemporaries . . . Followers of Jesus . . . must recognize their radical dependence on God for all that they have and all that they are . . . Taken in this way, the saying in v. 15 is not so out of place within vv. 13-16: only if disciples become like children in this sense can they be ‘received’ by Jesus, i.e. become true followers of the crucified one. (C. M. Tuckett, The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2004, p. 907 on Mk. 10:13-16)

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net