Gen. 19:1-17 (18-23) 24-29

The Depravity of Sodom

19:1 The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2 He said, "Please, my lords, turn aside to your servant's house and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you can rise early and go on your way." They said, "No; we will spend the night in the square." 3 But he urged them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he made them a feast, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. 4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; 5 and they called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, so that we may know them." 6 Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, 7 and said, "I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have not known a man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof." 9 But they replied, "Stand back!" And they said, "This fellow came here as an alien, and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them." Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and came near the door to break it down. 10 But the men inside reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. 11 And they struck with blindness the men who were at the door of the house, both small and great, so that they were unable to find the door.

12 Then the men said to Lot, "Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone you have in the city-bring them out of the place. 13 For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it." 14 So Lot went out and said to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, "Up, get out of this place; for the LORD is about to destroy the city." But he seemed to his sons-in-law to be jesting.

15 When morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, "Get up, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or else you will be consumed in the punishment of the city." 16 But he lingered; so the men seized him and his wife and his two daughters by the hand, the LORD being merciful to him, and they brought him out and left him outside the city. 17 When they had brought them outside, they said, "Flee for your life; do not look back or stop anywhere in the Plain; flee to the hills, or else you will be consumed." (Genesis 19:1-17, NRSV)

18 And Lot said to them, "Oh, no, my lords; 19 your servant has found favor with you, and you have shown me great kindness in saving my life; but I cannot flee to the hills, for fear the disaster will overtake me and I die. 20 Look, that city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one. Let me escape there-is it not a little one?-and my life will be saved!" 21 He said to him, "Very well, I grant you this favor too, and will not overthrow the city of which you have spoken. 22 Hurry, escape there, for I can do nothing until you arrive there." Therefore the city was called Zoar. 23 The sun had risen on the earth when Lot came to Zoar. (Genesis 19:18-23, NRSV)

Sodom and Gomorrah Destroyed (Mt 11.23-24; Lk 17.28-32)

24 Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the LORD out of heaven; 25 and he overthrew those cities, and all the Plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. 26 But Lot's wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

27 Abraham went early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the LORD; 28 and he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah and toward all the land of the Plain and saw the smoke of the land going up like the smoke of a furnace.

29 So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the Plain, God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had settled. (Gen. 19:24-29, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of January 30, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two):

Based on the chiastic structure cited from Jon D. Levenson on Saturday (Jan. 30, 2010), we come today to part B’ (Gen. 19:1-29), which reports the destruction of Sodom, as announced in part B (Gen. 18:16-33) (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Gen. 18:1-19:37). As today’s reading begins, we are told that “the two angels (Myk9xAl4m0aha, hammal’ākîm) came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of Sodom” (Gen. 19:1a). Assuming that the three men mentioned earlier (18:2) are in fact the LORD and two attendants (cf. 18:16-17, 22, 33), angelic attendants as it now appears (cf. Levenson, ibid.., on Gen. 19:1-3), it is these two attendants that now appear at Sodom. However, Rabbi J. H. Hertz appears to distinguish the LORD from the three men/three angels. Of the “three men,” he says, “One to announce the tidings of the birth of Isaac; the second to destroy Sodom; and the third to rescue Lot. ‘An angel is never sent on more than one errand at a time’ (Midrash)” (Pentateuch & Haftorahs, 2^nd ed., 24^th printing, 1981, on Gen. 18:2). If that interpretation is correct, the first angel’s mission has been completed, so only two appear at Sodom. The Rabbi points out that “this is the first time the visitors are referred to by this term [‘angels’]” (ibid., on 19:1).

“When Lot saw them [i.e., the two angels],” we are told, “he rose to meet them, and bowed down with his face to the ground” (v. 1b). And, as Abraham did earlier, Lot extends hospitality to the strangers. “He said, ‘Please, my lords, turn aside to your servant’s house and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you can rise early and go on your way.’ They said, ‘No; we will spend the night in the square (bOHr4B!&, bār ^echôv)’ ” (v. 2). On “your servant’s house,” Rabbi Hertz points out that, “being a resident of a city, Lot dwelt in a ‘house,’ whereas Abraham’s abode was a ‘tent’ ” And “broad place [JPS 1917 for ‘square’ NRSV],” he adds, was “the ‘square’ of the city; and the climate being warm, it would be a natural place where a homeless visitor would spend the night” (ibid., on v. 2). “But he [i.e., Lot] urged them strongly,” says the narrator, “so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he made them a feast (hT,w4m9, mišteh), and baked unleavened bread (tOc0maU, ûmatstsôth), and they ate” (v. 3). The Rabbi points out that “unleavened bread . . . could be baked rapidly” (ibid., on v. 3). According to Levenson, “The contrast between Abraham and Lot . . . continues. Whereas Abraham sees the LORD (18:1), Lot sees only His two angelic attendants (19:1). Whereas Abraham runs to greet his visitors (18:2), Lot only rises (19:1) Whereas Abraham offers a sumptuous feast (18:6-8), Lot offers unleavened bread (19:3)” (op. cit., on vv. 1-3).

We have already learned about the “very grave . . . sin” of Sodom (18:20), which is now demonstrated. “But before they [i.e., the angel guests] lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; and they called to Lot, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, so that we may know (hfAd4n2v4, w ^enēd ^e‘āh) them’ ” (vv. 4-5). One meaning of the verb “know,” the meaning relevant here, is, according to William L. Holladay, “have intercourse with,” of “sexual relations” (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 10^th corrected impression 1988, s.v. fday!, yāda‘ ; cf. Gen. 4:1; 1 Kgs 1:4). Citing “all the people,” Rabbi Hertz says, “Emphasis is here laid on the fact that the inhabitants were all addicted to unnatural depravity. The rejection of Abraham’s plea was, therefore, justified” (ibid., on v. 4). According to Ronald Hendel,

The wickedness of Sodom consists of the shameful behavior of the men toward strangers. Rather than exhibiting hospitality and protection, as does Lot, the men of the city seek to sexually assault them (v. 5). Homosexual rape is a strategy of humiliation. This shameful behavior toward the strangers is exhibited by all the men of the city (v. 4). There are no innocents among them, in contrast to Lot. (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Gen. 19:4-5)

Lot protests. He “went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, and said, ‘I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly’ ” (vv. 6-7). And he makes a counter proposal. “Look,” he says, “I have two daughters who have not known a man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof” (v. 8). According to Rabbi Hertz, “The duty of protecting a guest is sacred in the East. As soon as a stranger had touched the tent-rope, he could claim guest-right. But the price which Lot was prepared to pay is unthinkable in our eyes, though a different view would present itself to the Oriental in those times” (op. cit., on v. 8). According to Hendel,

Lot’s response is to maintain his honor as host by protecting the strangers and to offer his virgin daughters as surrogate victims for the men’s sexual assault. His response shows that the men’s wickedness is not homosexuality as such, since the daughters are offered as suitable surrogates; their wickedness is sexual violence (gang rape) as the inverse of hospitality and protection. Lot’s offer of his daughters for gang rape is, however, also immoral and impugns his honor as a father. He later pays the price for this shameful offer when his daughters serially rape him (vv. 31-36). (op. cit., on v. 8)

Levenson says, Lot’s offer of his two daughters is surely connected to the tragicomic scene at the end of the chapter when they get him drunk and engage in incestuous relations with him (19:3-38)” (op. cit., on v. 8). But Lot’s offer is rejected with violence. “But they replied, ‘Stand back!’ And they said, ‘This fellow came here as an alien (rUG, gûr), and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.’ Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and came near the door to break it down.” (v. 9). “This one fellow,” says Rabbi Hertz, is “an expression of contempt.” And he adds that “to sojourn [JPS for ‘as an alien’ NRSV]” means “this newcomer presumes to judge our actions, and interfere with our customs!” (op. cit., on v. 9). According to Hendel, “The wicked men threaten to assault Lot (v. 9), though it is unclear whether sexual assault or murder is intended” (op. cit., on vv. 9-11).

They surely did not know that they were up against angels (19:1)–likely nor did Lot–for “the men inside reached out their hands and brought Lot (FOl, lôt) into the house with them, and shut the door. And they struck with blindness (FOl, lôt; cf. Lot’s name) the men who were at the door of the house, both small and great, so that they were unable to find the door” (vv. 10-11). “Lot’s passivity,” says Levenson, “is patent and contrasts with Abraham’s daring challenge to God’s justice in the previous chapter (18:22-23). Gen. 19:29 will make it explicit that Lot’s escape is owing not to his own deeply irresolute character, but to God’s reliable commitment to Abraham” (ibid., on v. 10).

David M. Carr points out that “the main issue here,” as in 18:1-8, “is hospitality to secretly divine visitors” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Gen. 19:1-11). Carr adds:

Here, however, the sanctity of hospitality is threatened by the men of the city who wish to rape (know) the guests (cf. Judg. 19:22-30). Though disapproval of male homosexual rape is assumed here, the primary point of this text is how this threat by the townspeople violates the value of hospitality (contrast 18:1-16). Hospitality is valued so strongly in this context that this text positively portrays Lot’s offer of his virgin daughters in place of his guests. Though the text presupposes that a father would have extreme difficulty offering his daughters to such violence, Lot’s virtue is demonstrated by his willingness to go to such a length–and put his own body in danger (vv. 9-12)–to avoid violation of his guests. As a result of his protection of his guests, he, like Noah, “finds favor” with God (v. 19; cf.6:8) and he and his household are rescued out of destruction. (Ibid.).

If Carr’s interpretation indicates even a little sympathy for Lot’s position in this matter, Christiana de Groot does not share it. She says, “Lot’s offer makes graphically clear the value of women relative to men. The practice of hospitality is a practice of men protecting men from men. Women are not protected, and women can be the means by which men are protected. They are the sacrificial lambs.” (Christiana de Groot, The IVP Women’s Bible Commentary, p. 14, on Gen. 18-19). She adds:

This offer astounds and horrifies modern readers. What are we to assume about Lot’s offer? Are there clues in the text to indicate if it was condoned or condemned by God? Here an assessment of Lot’s character is helpful. If Lot had throughout been portrayed as a righteous man, then his offer might be sanctioned by the narrator. However, Lot’s actions both before and after this event show him to be self-centered. I suggest that the narrator wants us to conclude that Lot is not one of the ten righteous whom the angels have set out to find in Sodom and that his action is not condoned. As commentators note, his action is understandable, given the practice of hospitality in the context of patriarchy, but it is neither excused nor applauded. We are right to be horrified. (ibid., pp. 14-15)

With one crisis past, the story moves on to another. “Then the men said to Lot, ‘Have you anyone else here? Sons-in law, sons, daughters, or anyone you have in the city–bring them out of the place’ ” (v. 12). Commenting on “any besides [JPS for ‘anyone else’ NRSV],” Rabbi Hertz says, “Lot’s household is to be saved with him” (op. cit., on v. 12). The men explain their question: “For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it” (v. 13). “So Lot,” realizing the danger, “went out and said to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, ‘Up, get out of this place; for the LORD is about to destroy the city.’ But he seemed to his sons-in-law to be jesting” (v. 14). Hendel says, “Lot is ineffectual and rather comic as he fails to convince his prospective sons-in-law to flee (v. 14)” (op. cit. on vv. 12-23). According to Levenson,

Whereas Abraham, taking the impending destruction with the utmost seriousness, functions prophetically in hopes of averting the catastrophe, Lot is taken for a buffoon even by his own sons-in-law and cannot save them. Since Lot’s two daughters mentioned in v. 8 are unmarried, these sons-in-law are either engaged to them (so the Vulgate and Rashi) or married to two other daughters, who die in the conflagration along with their husbands. (op. cit., on v. 14)

Even at the last minute Lot appears to have misgivings. “When the morning dawned,” we are told, “the angels urged Lot, saying, ‘Get up, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or else you will be consumed in the punishment of the city.’ But he lingered; so the men seized him and his wife and his two daughters by the hand, the LORD being merciful to him, and they brought him out and left him outside the city” (vv. 15-16). Levenson says, “Lot’s weakness and inconstancy would have done him in had it not been for the LORD’s mercy on him [NJPS for ‘the Lord’s being merciful to him’ NRSV] (v. 16)” (op. cit., on vv. 15-22). “When they had brought them outside, they (NRSV text note a Gk Syr Vg: Heb he) said (rm,xy0ova, wayyō’mer) ‘Flee for your life; do not look back or stop anywhere in the Plain; flee to the hills, or else you will be consumed” (v. 17). For the two pronouns “they” and “they” in this verse (RSV, NRSV) other translations have “they” and “he” (AV/KJV, JPS, cf. ‘one’ NIV, TNIV, NJPS). Rabbi Hertz, who suggested earlier that each angel had one mission, refers here to “the angel whose mission it was to rescue Lot” (op. cit., on 19:16 and 18:2)

But Lot protests again, in the part of today’s reading in parenthetical reference (vv. 18-23). “And Lot said to them, ‘Oh, no, my lords; your servant has found favor with you, and you have shown me great kindness in saving my life; but I cannot flee to the hills, for fear the disaster will overtake me and I die” (vv. 18-19). He asks for protection in a closer site. “Look, that city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one (rf!7c4m9, mits‘ār). Let me escape there–is it not a little one?–and my life will be saved!” (v. 20). “He [i.e., apparently the angel whose mission it is to save Lot] said to him, ‘Very well, I grant you this favor too, and will not overthrow the city of which you have spoken. Hurry, escape there, for I can do nothing until you arrive there.’ Therefore the city was called Zoar^b (rfaOc&, tsô‘ar)” (vv. 21-22). NRSV text note b says “That is Little.” These verses (17-22) apparently fit the pattern of what some would call an aetiological legend, a story about the naming of the place. In any event, according to Hendel, Lot “also resists the angels’ instructions to flee to the hills and pleads for a closer refuge, the little city of Zoar (which means ‘little,’ vv. 20, 22). And we are told that “the sun had risen on the earth when Lot came to Zoar” (v. 23). Levenson observes that Lot’s “weakness and self-interest . . . result in the sparing of one town (vv. 18-22), whereas Abraham’s audacious and principled intervention (18:22-33) proved unable to save anyone” (op. cit., on vv. 15-22). Carr, who sees Lot as “positively portrayed up to this point,” says that “his repeated lingering here compares negatively with Noah’s immediate compliance with God’s commands” (op. cit., on vv. 15-23).

As we return to the main part of the reading (i.e., that not in parenthetical references), we are told, “Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the LORD out of heaven; and he overthrew those cities, and all the Plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground” (vv. 24-25). This, of course, is the judgment that has been predicted (18:20-33). But another tragic element emerges. As Lot’s family was fleeing, his “wife looked back (cf. v. 17), and she became a pillar of salt” (v. 26). According to Rabbi Hertz,

She looked back and lingered behind, to be overtaken by the brimstone and fire from which the others escaped. A similar fate befell lingering refugees at Pompeii. ‘Her body became encrusted and saturated with a nitrous and saline substance, that very likely preserved it for some time from decay’ (De Sola). Ancient writers refer to this pillar as being still in existence. Josephus claims to have seen it. (op. cit., on v. 26)

Levenson says, “The report of the fate of Lot’s wife serves as an explanation for salt formations still evident in the vicinity of the Dead Sea” (op. cit., on v. 26). Abraham serves as a “witness” of this event, so to speak. He “went early in the morning,” we are told, “to the place where he had stood before the LORD; and he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah and toward all the land of the Plain and saw the smoke of the land going up like the smoke of a furnace” (vv. 27-28). According to Hendel, “The scene shifts to Abraham’s perspective on the hills above the plain, recalling Abraham’s effort to save the city on behalf of its innocents” (op. cit., on vv. 27-29). The episode closes with a kind of summary, which Hendel calls “a P [i.e., the Priestly Source] coda”: “So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the Plain, God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had settled” (v. 29). Rabbi Hertz sees here “the reason why Lot had been spared” (op. cit., on v. 29). Carr compares the “rain of destruction” on Sodom and Gomorrah with aspects of Noah’s flood (op. cit., on vv. 24-25).

Heb. 11:1-12

Faith as the Assurance of Things Hoped for, the Conviction of Things not Seen

11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 Indeed, by faith our ancestors received approval. 3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was made from things that are not visible.

The Faith of Abel, Enoch, and Noah (Gen 4.1-16; 6.5-8.22)

4 By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain's. Through this he received approval as righteous, God himself giving approval to his gifts; he died, but through his faith he still speaks. 5 By faith Enoch was taken so that he did not experience death; and "he was not found, because God had taken him." For it was attested before he was taken away that "he had pleased God." 6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, for whoever would approach him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. 7 By faith Noah, warned by God about events as yet unseen, respected the warning and built an ark to save his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir to the righteousness that is in accordance with faith.

The Faith of Abraham (Gen 15.1-6; 21.1-7; 22.1-14; 48.8-16; 50.22-25)

8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to set out for a place that he was to receive as an inheritance; and he set out, not knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he stayed for a time in the land he had been promised, as in a foreign land, living in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he looked forward to the city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God. 11 By faith he received power of procreation, even though he was too old--and Sarah herself was barren-because he considered him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore from one person, and this one as good as dead, descendants were born, "as many as the stars of heaven and as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore." (Hebrews 11:1-12, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of January 2, 2007 (Tuesday in the Week of the First Sunday after Christmas, References for January 2, Year One), when comments were repeated with revision and supplement from January 30, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two); and also on comments on Hebrews 11:8-16 from February 1, 2009 (the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), when comments were based on earlier comments as noted there.

The writer to the Hebrews has concluded his description of salvation from sin through the once for all time sacrificial death of Christ and his entrance into the heavenly sanctuary. Much of the remainder of the Epistle consists of exhortations to endure the Lord’s discipline (chap. 12) and advice about practical Christian living (chap. 13). But first, there is a long list of what Cynthia Briggs Kittredge calls “witnesses to faith” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, subject heading for Heb. 11:1-12:2) to consider. Three antediluvians (persons who lived before the flood) are mentioned briefly, Abel, Enoch, and Noah. “By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain’s” (Heb. 11:4). As we know, “Cain brought to the LORD an offering of the fruit of the ground, and Abel for his part brought of the firstlings of his flock, their fat portions. And the LORD had regard for Abel and his offering, but for Cain and his offering he had no regard” (Gen. 4:3-5a). “In either case,” says F. F. Bruce, “the material of the sacrifice was suitable to the offerer’s vocation” (The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT, rev. ed., 1990, p. 281, on Heb. 11:4). Bruce adds this explanation:

Why was there this discrimination? Cain was dejected because his offering was disregarded, but God pointed out to him the way of acceptance. ‘If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is couching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it’ (Gen. 4:7). This rendering of the Massoretic text is quite in line with the later prophetic teaching about sacrifice; sacrifice is acceptable to God not for its material content, but insofar as it is the outward expression of a devoted and obedient heart. Let Cain gain the mastery over the sin which threatens to be his undoing, and his sacrifice will be accepted as readily as Abel’s was. (ibid.)

The faith of Enoch is mentioned briefly. “By faith Enoch was taken so that he did not experience death; and ‘he was not found, because God had taken him.’ For it was attested before he was taken away that ‘he had pleased God’ ” (Heb. 11:5, referring to Gen. 5:21-24). Noah’s faith is commended because he respected God’s warning “and built an ark to save his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir to the righteousness that is in accordance with faith” (v. 7).

In the continuation, the writer honors the faith of Abraham and Sarah, who, despite their advancement in years, trusted God and received the promised son Isaac. The record starts when Abraham is still in Haran (Gen. 11:31-12:3). “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to set out for a place that he was to receive as an inheritance; and he set out, not knowing where he was going” (Heb. 11:8; cf. the call, Gen. 12:1-3, and his journey to Canaan, vv. 4-5). The record in Hebrews sums up much of Abraham’s lifetime in Canaan briefly. “By faith he stayed for a time in the land he had been promised, as in a foreign land, living in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise” (Heb. 11:9, omitting the period in Egypt (Gen. 12:10-13:1; the pursuit of the kings of the east (Gen. 14), and the like, but focusing on matters directly related to the faith of Abraham and Sarah, including notice of the extension of the promises to Isaac and Jacob (v. 9). According to the writer to the Hebrews, Abraham “looked forward to the city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (v. 10). According to Harold W. Attridge, “the city with divine foundations was traditionally Jerusalem; see Ps. 87:1; Isa. 54:11. Hebrews reinterprets such language in terms of a ‘heavenly’ reality; see 12:22)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Heb. 11:10). Kittredge agrees, saying “the city [is] the heavenly Jerusalem” and its “foundations [are] contrasted with tents (v. 9)” (op. cit., on Heb. 11:10). This theme anticipates the “new Jerusalem” of Revelation, and St. Augustine’s characterization of “the City of God” over against “the city of this world.”

The glorious city of God is my theme in this work, which you, my dearest son Marcellinus, suggested, and which is due to you by my promise. I have undertaken its defence against those who prefer their own gods to the Founder of this city,—a city surpassingly glorious, whether we view it as it still lives by faith in this fleeting course of time, and sojourns as a stranger in the midst of the ungodly, or as it shall dwell in the fixed stability of its eternal seat, which it now with patience waits for, expecting until “righteousness shall return unto judgment,” and it obtain, by virtue of its excellence, final victory and perfect peace. (From the opening paragraph of Augustine’s City of God, in the Christian Classics Ethereal Library on the Internet at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf102.iv.ii.i.html, accessed again January 31, 2010)

Although the major example of faith is Abraham (11:8-12, 17-19), major tests of faith relate to Isaac: “Abraham received power of procreation, even though he was too old” (v. 11), and, when tested by God, he “offered up Isaac” (v. 17). We should not overlook Sarah’s faith. According to Kittredge, “In some manuscripts, Sarah is the subject of the sentence: ‘By faith, Sarah received the power of procreation . . .’ Sarah’s faith in the unseen is parallel to Abraham’s, and she is one of the heroic people of faith” (op. cit., on Heb. 11:11). Kittredge thus defends what we might call the “traditional reading”: “Through faith also Sarah herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised” (Heb. 11:11 AV/KJV). F. F. Bruce defends the view that Abraham, not Sarah, is the subject of the sentence (op. cit., pp. 294-296, on Heb. 11:11), listing several reasons, but concluding “The one firm argument against taking v. 11 as a statement of Sarah’s faith lies in the fact that the phrase traditional rendered ‘to conceive seed’ just does not mean that; it refers to the father’s part in the generative process, not the mother’s” (pp. 295-296). But other translators apparently side with Kittredge in seeing the verse as a reference to Sarah’s faith. The Revised Standard Version, second edition (1971) makes Sarah the subject, the one whose faith is described. The New International Version (1978/1984) makes Abraham the subject. But later editions of each reverse the interpretations of their respective earlier translations, for Today’s New International Version (2001) makes Sarah the subject, whereas the New Revised Standard Version (1989) makes Abraham the subject. The variety of manuscript readings leads the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament editors to rate their reading at this point “D,” showing “a very high degree of doubt concerning the reading selected for the text” (UBS Greek New Testament, 3^rd ed., 1975, on Heb. 11:11, cf. p. xiii). Bruce M. Metzger notes “the difficulties of this verse [that] are well known” and quotes a majority of the Committee to understand Abraham (v. 8) as the subject, “By faith, even though Sarah was barren, he [Abraham] received power to beget . . .”; though he also presents the alternative, “By faith he [Abraham] also, together with barren Sarah, received power to beget. . . .” And Metzger cites several major commentaries on each side of this issue (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 1971, on Heb. 11:11). In any event, whether the grammar and vocabulary refer here to the faith of Abraham or Sarah, one cannot deny her part in the matter. But the following verse clearly refers to Abraham, as the writer describes a miracle. This faith in the possibility of a child born to elderly parents for whom, in merely human terms, it would be impossible, amounts to faith in the resurrection of the dead–life from that which is not alive. “Therefore from one person, and this one as good as dead (nenekrwmevnou, nenekrōmenou), descendants were born, “as many as the stars of heaven and as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore” (v. 12; cf. Rom. 4:18-25).

John 6:27-40

27 Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For it is on him that God the Father has set his seal." 28 Then they said to him, "What must we do to perform the works of God?" 29 Jesus answered them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent." 30 So they said to him, "What sign are you going to give us then, so that we may see it and believe you? What work are you performing? 31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.' " 32 Then Jesus said to them, "Very truly, I tell you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." 34 They said to him, "Sir, give us this bread always."

35 Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37 Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never drive away; 38 for I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40 This is indeed the will of my Father, that all who see the Son and believe in him may have eternal life; and I will raise them up on the last day." (John 6:27-40, NRSV)

The following comments are based on the comments of March 25, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year One), and earlier comments as noted there.

This passage begins with the final verse from Saturday’s reading, in which Jesus tells the people, “Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you” (Jn. 6:27). The crowd has just caught up with Jesus and found him (v. 25). They were the ones who, in Jesus’ words, sought him out “because you ate your fill of the loaves” (v. 26). Their focus, Jesus says, is on immediate material needs. When they raise their sights a bit, they ask, “What must we do to perform the works of God?” (v. 28). Jesus’ answer sounds familiar, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent” (29). Nathanael believed (Jn. 1:49-50). The disciples believed (2:11). In the context of the discussion with Nicodemus, emphasis is put on believing in the Son whom God sent into the world (3:16-18). On the testimony of the Samaritan woman, many Samaritans believed (4:39-42). The list could go on, but the point is the theme that pervades the Johannine narratives.

These people ask Jesus for a sign. “What sign are you going to give us then, so that we may see it and believe you? What work are you performing?” (v. 30). If you or I were in Jesus’ place, we might have said, “I just fed five thousand of you with five barley loaves and two fish. What sign more do you need? But he delays his response, as they add, “Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat’ ” (v. 31; cf. Ex. 16:15; Num. 11:7-9; Neh. 9:15; Ps. 78:24; 105:40). In this way, their very questions, as it were, have drawn the parallel between Moses feeding them manna, and Jesus feeding the multitude. But in his response, Jesus goes further. ““Very truly, I tell you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world” (vv. 32-33). Their response, “Sir, give us this bread always” (v. 34) reminds us of the response by the woman of Samaria, “Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water” (Jn. 4:15). But it is not clear that they moved past this point, as the Samaritan woman did when she brought the people of the town out to see Jesus (Jn. 4:39-42).

At this point, Jesus asserts his claim. “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty” (v. 35), to which we may compare the earlier claim made to the woman of Samaria. “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, but those who drink of the water that I will give them will never be thirsty. The water that I will give will become in them a spring of water gushing up to eternal life” (4:13-14). But the crowd in chapter six is like the observers in Jerusalem earlier. “When he was in Jerusalem during the Passover festival, many believed in his name because they saw the signs that he was doing. But Jesus on his part would not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to testify about anyone; for he himself knew what was in everyone” (2:23-25). On this other Passover occasion, he tells the crowd in Galilee, “But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe” (6:36), to which we may contrast Jesus’ words to Thomas after his resurrection: “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe” (20:29).

Jesus add a statement that should reassure the true believers. “Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never drive away” (v. 37). In fact, he is on a mission from heaven, “for I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me” (v. 38). Jesus asserts the claim to be “He who comes from above” (3:31), “he whom the Father has sent [who] utters the words of God” (3:34). Similar statements about Jesus put his claim to be “the bread of life” (6:35) in context. He is in a position to give reassuring words to believers. He can prevent us from falling away. “And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day” (v. 39). And we may look forward to resurrection and eternal life as we remain in him. “This is indeed the will of my Father, that all who see the Son and believe in him may have eternal life; and I will raise them up on the last day” (v. 40).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net