Note: In the following the three Episcopal readings are listed (OT, Gospel, Epistle), then the three Presbyterian readings, then the Lutheran readings. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

Episcopal Readings:

Proverbs 23:19-21, 29-24:2

19 Hear, my child, and be wise,

and direct your mind in the way.

20 Do not be among winebibbers,

or among gluttonous eaters of meat;

21 for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty,

and drowsiness will clothe them with rags. (Proverbs 23:19-21, NRSV)

29 Who has woe? Who has sorrow?

Who has strife? Who has complaining?

Who has wounds without cause?

Who has redness of eyes?

30 Those who linger late over wine,

those who keep trying mixed wines.

31 Do not look at wine when it is red,

when it sparkles in the cup

and goes down smoothly.

32 At the last it bites like a serpent,

and stings like an adder.

33 Your eyes will see strange things,

and your mind utter perverse things.

34 You will be like one who lies down in the midst of the sea,

like one who lies on the top of a mast.

35 "They struck me," you will say, "but I was not hurt;

they beat me, but I did not feel it.

When shall I awake?

I will seek another drink."

24:1 Do not envy the wicked,

nor desire to be with them;

2 for their minds devise violence,

and their lips talk of mischief. (Proverbs 23:29-24:2, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from May 30, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 25, Year Two).

Within what R. B. Y. Scott has called “Book III of Proverbs” and entitled “The Thirty Precepts of the Sages” (Prov. 22:17-24:22, Proverbs; Ecclesiastes; introduction, translation, and notes, Anchor Bible, 18, 1965; cf. Ronald Worden, A Topical Arrangement of Proverbs, 2^nd ed., 1985, p. ii), the content changes from the kind of sentence proverbs that make up most of Books II (10:1-22:16) and IV (25:2-29:27). As noted earlier (Monday, May 24, 2010), titles within the text of Proverbs itself (22:17; 25:1) mark the beginning and end of this section, which is characterized by passages of more extended discourse than that of the sentence proverbs that precede and follow. And so, Harold C. Washington has called 23:29-35, the bulk of today’s reading, “A vivid description of the ill effects of drunkenness,” and he refers for comparison to “vv. 20-21; 20:1; 31:4-5” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Prov. 23:29-35). Paul E. Koptak recognizes this unit, but combines it with preceding verses and calls the whole “The Seductions of Sex and Wine (23:22-35)” (Proverbs, The NIV Application Commentary, 2003, p. 548).

But today’s reading also includes Proverbs 23:19-21, which anticipates the theme of “drunkenness.” “Hear, my child,” says the sage,” and be wise, / and direct your mind (j~B@l9, libbekā, lit., ‘your heart’) in the way” (v. 19). “The theme of keeping the heart continues from verses 15-18,” says Koptak. “To listen and receive teaching is to be wise, say these parents (cf. 23:15 [taking ‘child’ literally, and not as a metaphor for ‘student’]), to keep the heart on the ‘right’ (yašar, ‘straight’) path” (ibid., on Prov. 23:19-21). Richard J. Clifford explains here: “The idiom ’aššer běderek in 4:14 and 9:6 means simply ‘to walk in the way’ (= ‘to conduct oneself’). Our saying means to walk according to one’s own (instructed) mind. To listen to one’s own mind (lit. ‘heart’) rather than to evil companions is difficult, especially for young people” (Proverbs, The Old Testament Library, 1999, p. 213, on Prov. 23:19-21).

The instruction for the “child” is clear: “Do not be among winebibbers, / or among gluttonous eaters of meat; / for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, / and drowsiness will clothe them with rags” (vv. 20-21). “There are serious obstacles to acting out of one’s own convictions,” says Clifford;

two of these are alcohol and luxurious living. Excessive consumption of alcohol (and meat) symbolizes here a decadent style of living. In Deut. 21:18-21 the verbs ‘to quaff’ and ‘to devour’ describe a son who refuses to listen to his father and mother; he is judged deserving of death. There may be an allusion to that ancient law here, except that here not listening to father or teacher leads to poverty rather than death. Anyone trying to play at being rich by conspicuous consumption will end up poor. (ibid.)

The reading passes over verses 22-28 and continues on the subject of drunkenness, beginning with a series of questions. “Who has woe? Who has sorrow? / Who has strife? Who has complaining? / Who has wounds without cause? / Who has redness of eyes?” (v. 29). The answer follows immediately. “Those who linger late over wine, / those who keep trying mixed wines” (v. 30). “If we have a riddle in 23:29,” says Koptak, “the answer is provided: The person who has these problems is the one who lingers over wine” (op. cit., p. 549, on vv. 29-34). Instruction, or rather, warning, follows. “Do not look at wine when it is red, / when it sparkles in the cup / and goes down smoothly” (v. 31). The warning is supported by a description of the effects of drunkenness. “At the last it bites like a serpent, / and stings like an adder. / Your eyes will see strange things, / and your mind utter perverse things” (vv. 32-33). Clifford finds here that “Humor at the expense of the drunkard continues. As in the portrait of the naive youth (7:6-23), v. 31 catches the fascination with imagined pleasures. The pleasure turns out to be like a snakebite, with hallucinations, vertigo, and blackout” (op. cit., pp. 213-214, on vv. 31-35). The potential drunkard is told, “You will be like the one who lies down in the midst of the sea, / like one who lies on top of a mast” (v. 34). “The text is difficult,” says Washington, “but the comparison is evidently to the dizziness and nausea of seasickness (cf. Ps. 107:26-27)” (op. cit., on v. 34). “Such physical horrors,” says Clifford–referring to the hallucinations, vertigo, and blackout cited above–“teach fools nothing (v. 35cd), for by definition they cannot learn from rebuke. The description begins with the visual and tactile sensations that the wine produces and develops the effects of the drink in images: the bite of a snake, the sway of the sea, and the nausea of a sailor. The author cites the foolish thinking of the drunkard. Isaiah 5:11 paints a similar picture: ‘Ho, you who rise early in the morning to pursue liquor, who tarry in the evening, inflamed by wine’ ” (op. cit., p. 214, on 23:31-35). As the chapter concludes, the drunkard is described as in denial. “ ‘They struck me,’ you will say, ‘but I was not hurt; / they beat me, but I did not feel it. / When shall I awake? / I will seek another drink” (v. 35).

The selected reading for today includes the beginning of chapter 24, with a new admonition: “Do not envy the wicked,” we are told, “nor desire to be with them; / for their minds devise violence, / and their lips talk of mischief” (24:1-2). Clifford comments here:

A new section (24:1-14)–on the different destinies of the wicked (or foolish) and the wise–begins with a warning. This admonition occurs three times in the thirty sayings (23:17-18, here, and 24:19-20). Common to all the admonitions is the verb qannē’, ‘to be jealous, zealous, envious,’ which also occurs in 1:15-19 and 3:31. The motive stated in the first and the third occurrence–the wicked have no future–is expressed indirectly here. Their malicious planning and speaking invites retribution. Verses 7-9 and 10-12 detail their self-destruction. (op. cit., p. 214, on 24:1-2)

1 Timothy 5:17-22 (23-25)

17 Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching; 18 for the scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain," and, "The laborer deserves to be paid." 19 Never accept any accusation against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 20 As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest also may stand in fear. 21 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels, I warn you to keep these instructions without prejudice, doing nothing on the basis of partiality. 22 Do not ordain anyone hastily, and do not participate in the sins of others; keep yourself pure.

23 No longer drink only water, but take a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.

24 The sins of some people are conspicuous and precede them to judgment, while the sins of others follow them there. 25 So also good works are conspicuous; and even when they are not, they cannot remain hidden. (1 Timothy 5:17-25, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of May 30, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 25, Year Two), when they were repeated with editing and supplement from May 20, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 18, Year One).

In 1 Timothy chapter 5, Paul gives Timothy instruction for dealing with Christian believers. “Do not speak harshly to an older man (presbuvteroV, presbyteros), but speak to him as to a father, to younger men (newvteroi, neōteroi) as brothers, to older women (presbuvterai, presbyterai) as mothers, to younger women (newvterai, neōterai) as sisters–with absolute purity” (1 Tim. 5:1-2). But he apparently subdivides some of these groups. According to Jouette M. Bassler, “commonplace advice relating to age groups opens a series of more specific instructions concerning other groups within the congregation: (widows (5:3-16), elders (5:17-22), and slaves (6:1-2); see also Titus 2:2-10)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 1 Tim. 5:1-6:2). In particular, Paul addresses the situations of widows (ch:rai, chērai) and elders (presbuvteroi, presbyteroi). “Widows who are really widows” deserve help (1 Tim. 5:3-8). But some widows are to be enlisted for ministry and service (vv. 9-16).

There is a similar double reference to the presbuvteroV (presbyteros), the “older man,” of verse 1 (NRSV), and the presbuvteroi (presbyteroi) who “rule well” and so are to be honored, “especially those who labor in preaching and teaching (v. 17). At this time and in this setting the office or position of church leaders called presbuvteroi (presbyteroi, “elders,” eventually “priests” in the Greek church) and that of ejpivskopoi (episkopoi “overseers” or “bishops,” depending on your church tradition) seem to be interchangeable (cf. Titus 1:5, 7). More structure within the forms of leadership seems to be implied here than by the reference to “bishops” (ejpivskopoi, episkopoi) and “deacons” (diavkonoi, diakonoi) in Philippians 1:1 (cf. Acts 6:1-6). The first Christians, mostly Jewish, would have been accustomed to the leadership of “elders.” And in the earliest years of the Christian church, the forms and structures of leadership must have varied, depending on the circumstances. But we can say that the situation represented by Paul’s instructions in the Pastoral Epistles (1 and 2 Tim., Tit.) is somewhat more developed than that implied by other New Testament texts, but not so far developed as the situation implied by the letters to various churches of Asia Minor from Ignatius of Antioch in the early second century. The situation described by Ignatius has been called leadership by a “monarchical bishop,” that is, one bishop as leader of the church or churches in a given locality, under whom serves a group of elders, the “presbytery” (presbutevrion, presbyterion), to which, to some extent at least, the bishop is responsible. Ignatius writes to the Trallians as follows:

For when you are in subjection to the bishop ( ejpivskopoV, episkopos) as to Jesus Christ it is clear to me that you are living not after men, but after Jesus Christ, who died for our sake, that by believing on his death you may escape death. Therefore it is necessary (as is your practice) that you should do nothing without the bishop, but he also in subjection to the presbytery (presbutevrion, presbyterion), as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ our hope, for if we live in him we shall be found in him. And they also who are deacons (diavkonoi, diakonoi) of the mysteries of Jesus Christ must be in every way pleasing to all men. For they are not the ministers of food and drink, but servants of the Church of God; they must therefore guard against blame as against fire. (To the Trallians, II, 1-3; trans. Kirsopp Lake)

The focus in today’s reading is on the elders (presbuvteroi, presbyteroi) as church leaders. “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor (diplh: timh:, diplē timē), especially those who labor in preaching and teaching,” says Paul (1 Tim. 5:17). By “double honor,” Paul means “honor conferred through compensation, honorarium, compensation” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. timh:, timē, meaning no. 3). Paul supports this admonition by quoting Deuteronomy. “You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain” (v. 18a, citing Deut. 25:4). He also quotes a saying of Jesus, “the laborer deserves to be paid” (v. 18b, cf. Lk. 10:7). “Elders,” says Margaret M. Mitchell, “should be amply financially compensated, as supported by the same arguments as in 1 Cor. 9:9 and 14” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 1 Tim. 5:17-20). In addition, these elders should be shielded from frivolous accusations. “Never accept any accusation against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses” (1 Tim. 5:19). With reference to the requirement of two or three witnesses, Mitchell refers to Deut. 19:15 and 2 Cor 13:1 (ibid., on v. 19). But when there is a real cause, action should be taken. “As for those who persist in sin,” says Paul, “rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest also may stand in fear” (v. 20). Paul gives Timothy himself a solemn charge: “In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels, I warn you to keep these instructions without prejudice, doing nothing on the basis of partiality. Do not ordain anyone hastily, and do not participate in the sins of others; keep yourself pure” (vv. 21-22).

At this point–perhaps as a personal aside–Paul gives Timothy some advice in regard to health. “No longer drink only water, but take a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments” (v. 23). Mitchell suggests that the reference to “a little wine,” is “in contrast to the asceticism of the opponents” (ibid., on v. 23). Earlier she says that the statement that the opponents “forbid marriage and demand abstinence from foods” is the “clearest statement of the opponents’ ascetic practices” (on 4:3). And Paul closes the chapter with a couple generalized observations. “The sins of some people are conspicuous and precede them to judgment, while the sins of others follow them there. So also good works are conspicuous; and even when they are not, they cannot remain hidden” (vv. 24-25).

Matthew 13:31-35

The Mustard Seed (Mk 4.30-32; Lk 13.18-19)

31 He put before them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in his field; 32 it is the smallest of all the seeds, but when it has grown it is the greatest of shrubs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches."

Yeast (Lk 13.20-21)

33 He told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed in with three measures of flour until all of it was leavened."

Use of Parables

34 Jesus told the crowds all these things in parables; without a parable he told them nothing. 35 This was to fulfill what had been spoken through the prophet:

"I will open my mouth to speak in parables;

I will proclaim what has been hidden from the foundation of the world." (Matthew 13:31-35, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from October 31, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One), when they were repeated from May 30, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 25, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from November 3, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One), when comments were based on earlier comments (as noted there)

The brief parable of the Mustard Seed occurs in the three Synoptic Gospels, and also in the Gospel of Thomas, as in the following table:

In the four versions of the Parable of the Mustard Seed, there are few significant differences. In each the seed represents the kingdom of heaven (Mt., GT) or of God (Mk., Lk.). In three versions attention is called to the mustard seed’s very small size, something perhaps taken for granted by Luke. In Mark it becomes “the greatest of all shrubs,” in Matthew “the greatest of shrubs,” in Luke, “a tree.” The Gospel of Thomas says “ it puts forth a great branch (and) becomes a shelter (skevph, skepē) for the birds of heaven.” It also says that the seed “falls on the earth which has been cultivated.” According to Dennis C. Duling, “the point of the parable is the contrast between small beginnings and great endings” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 13:31-32), a statement that could well apply to the versions of Mark and Luke.(cf. Christopher R. Matthews, HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Lk. 3:18-21). The Gospel of Thomas reference to cultivated earth shifts the emphasis somewhat from the end result to the process.

The Parable of the Leaven appears in Matthew, Luke and the Gospel of Thomas, as in this table:

In this parable, in which Matthew and Luke say the kingdom “is like yeast,” the Gospel of Thomas says the kingdom “is like [a] woman” who used the leaven (yeast), which she made “into large loaves.” One presumes that, as Matthew and Luke say, if “all of it was leavened,” it would have the desired effect, which the Gospel of Thomas spells out, “large loaves.” In this parable, only the Gospel of Thomas refers to “ears”: “He who has ears, let him hear,” but the Canonical Gospels have a similar saying in this context: “Let anyone with ears to hear listen!” (Mk. 4:9; cf. Mt 13:9; Lk. 8:8b; and Mk. 4;23; Mt. 13:43). The saying was apparently in the tradition used by the Gospel of Thomas, as well as in Mark as used by Matthew.

So, in the parables of the Mustard Seed and the Yeast or Leaven, the point is the amazing results–good results! The “smallest of all seeds” becomes “the greatest of shrubs . . . a tree” which becomes a home for the birds (Mt. 13:32). The kingdom of heaven will grow and prosper–amazing growth! According to J. Andrew Overman (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mt. 13:31-32) “the reference to ‘the birds of the air . . . branches’ alludes to the image of God’s rule over the kingdoms of the earth (Ezek. 17:23-24).” The parallel in Luke 13:18-19 omits the emphasis on “smallest and “greatest” found in Matthew and Mark, but still reports the transformation of “a grain of mustard seed” into “a tree.” Marion Lloyd Soards compares it to different Old Testament images of God’s kingdom. “The last phrase of this verse [i.e. ‘the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches’] reflects the wording of Ps. 104:12; Dan. 4:12, 21” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Lk. 13:19). Psalm 104 is about God’s creation and what it provides for creatures such as the birds. Daniel 4 is Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. Before his fall, he had “grown great and strong” (Dan. 4:22) to provide branches for the birds’ nests (v. 21). The point is the image of the greatness of his kingdom at its high point, not after his fall.

As noted yesterday, in Matthew, this is one of four explanatory paragraphs (Purpose of Parables, Mt. 13:10-17; the Sower explained, vv. 18-23; the Use of Parables, vv. 34-35; and an explanation of the parable of the weeds, vv. 36-43). Matthew’s version of the initial statement abbreviates Mark 4:33-34 somewhat, omitting the statement that Jesus “explained everything in private to his disciples” (Mk. 4:34b). Krister Stendahl puts it this way: “Mt. renders Mk’s concluding remark about Jesus’ use of parables by a chiastic parallelism with biblical ring and adds to it one of his formula quotations” (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1962, reprint 1972, sec. 685 h, p. 786 on Mt. 13:34-35). “Ps. 78:2,” he adds,

is here used as prophecy (some MSS refer it even to Isaiah), as is Ps. 110 in 20:43f. the quotation is reinterpreted on the basis of the Heb. text so that it now refers to the revelation of that which was hidden up to this time. This, again, strengthens the view that, to Mt., the use of parables was a way to reveal and yet to do so in a veiled manner according to the rules of Jewish apocalypticism. But to the disciples the inside story can and should be given; cf. the similar role of the Teacher of Righteousness, 1QpHab. 7:1-5. (ibid.)

Presbyterian Readings

Prov. 8:1-21

The following comments are repeated here from May 23, 2008 (Friday in the week of Trinity Sunday, refs. for the week of the Sunday closest to May 18, Year Two), when they were repeated from February 24, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Seventh Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two):

The argument for education, for “wisdom,” continues. “Wisdom” is introduced as raising her voice (Prov. 8:1), as standing “On the heights . . . at the crossroads” (v. 2) and crying out (v. 3). To the “simple ones” she offers prudence and intelligence (v. 5). Michael V. Fox comments on these verses:

Wisdom calls for attention. In naturalistic terms, this is the voice of reason, heard in wisdom teachings and in the individual mind. Wisdom calls to people in the most prominent public places, including the city gates, where many of the city’s commercial and legal transactions take place. Wisdom is international, offering her teachings to all mankind [‘all that live’ NRSV]. She is even available to the simple and the dullards, if they would just listen to her. (Michael V. Fox, The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, pp. 1460-1461, on Prov. 8:1-5, based on the Jewish Publication Society Tanakh Translation, 1985, 1999).

She will “speak noble things,” “what is right” (v. 6), “truth” (v. 7a). Her words are “righteous,” not “twisted or crooked” (v. 8). One should take her instruction and knowledge rather than silver or choice gold (v. 10), “for wisdom is better than jewels,/and all that you may desire cannot compare with her” (v. 11). According to Harold C. Washington, “Wisdom’s value is incomparable” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on vv. 6-11). Wisdom lives “with prudence” and attains “knowledge and discretion” (v. 12). Wisdom says that “the fear of the LORD is hatred of evil” (v. 13a). She hates pride and arrogance, and perverted speech (v. 13b), but offers “good advice and sound wisdom . . . insight . . . strength” (v. 14). Fox, whose translation has “foresight” for “discretion,” says “Prudence . . . knowledge and foresight, better ‘cunning . . . knowledge of shrewdness.’ The virtues in question are practical savvy and good sense. These useful faculties come with wisdom, as do resourcefulness [‘sound wisdom’ NRSV] and courage [strength NRSV]” (on vv. 12-14).

Kings and rulers “reign and . . . decree what is just” (v. 15). “Insofar as rulers govern justly, they do so through wisdom” (Fox on vv. 15-16). One is reminded of the later work known as the Letter of Aristeas, in which a delegation of elders from Jerusalem are invited to a series of evening banquets by the Hellenistic King of Egypt, Ptolemy Philadelphus. Over a period of several evenings, they take turns in giving advice to Philadelphus on how to live and govern justly:

Taking an opportunity afforded by a pause in the banquet the king asked the envoy who sat in the seat of honour (for they were arranged according to seniority), How he could keep his kingdom unimpaired to the end? After pondering for a moment he replied, 'You could best establish its security if you were to imitate the unceasing benignity of God. For if you exhibit clemency and inflict mild punishments upon those who deserve them in accordance with their deserts, you will turn them from evil and lead them to repentance.' The king praised the answer and then asked the next man, How he could do everything for the best in all his actions? And he replied, 'If a man maintains a just bearing towards all, he will always act rightly on every occasion, remembering that every thought is known to God. If you take the fear of God as your starting-point, you will never miss the goal. (Letter of Aristeas, 187-189, trans. R. H. Charles, 1913, on the Internet web site Christian Classics Ethereal Library , at http://www.ccel.org/c/charles/otpseudepig/aristeas.htm, consulted again May 28, 2010).

Wisdom continues her discourse. She brings “riches and honor . . . enduring wealth and prosperity” (Prov. 8:18). She walks “in the way of righteousness,/along paths of justice” (v. 20), bringing wealth to “those who love me, and filling their treasuries” (v. 21). Fox notes that “wisdom promises material rewards, but she also emphasizes that she is superior to gold and silver (as in 3:14-15) and that she bestows wealth only in honest ways” (op. cit., on vv. 18-21).

2 John 1-13

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)

The following comments are repeated here from December 29, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the First Sunday after Christmas, ref. for Dec. 29, Year Two), when they were repeated from May 1, 2009 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One), when 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 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 William 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).

Matthew 12:1-14

This text is presented, together with parallel accounts from Mark and Luke, in the following table.

The following comments are repeated here from December 21, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 19, Year One), when they were based on those of May 23, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 18, Year Two), when comments were repeated from October 24, 2007 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 19, Year One), comments that were repeated from October 19, 2005 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 19, Year One). For recent comments based on Mark’s version of these accounts, see the comments on Mark 2:23-3:6 in the Archive for February 27, 2010 (Saturday in the week of the First Sunday of Lent, Year Two). For recent comments on Luke’s version, see comments on Luke 6:1-11 in the Archive for May 4, 2009 (Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Easter, Year One).

The first Sabbath controversy in this reading is set at a time when “Jesus went through the grainfields on the sabbath [and] his disciples . . . hungry, . . . began to pluck heads of grain and to eat” (Mt. 12:1; cf. Mk. 2:23; Lk. 6:1). When the Pharisees see it they challenge the disciples’ action: “Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the sabbath” (Mt. 12:2). In Mark and Luke the challenge takes the form of a question. “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the sabbath?” (Mk. 2:24); “Why are you doing what is not lawful on the sabbath?” (Lk. 6:2). In response, Jesus asks, “Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry?” (Mt. 12:3; cf. Mk. 2:25; Lk. 6:4). And he explains: “He entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him or his companions to eat, but only for the priests” (Mt. 12:4; cf. Mk. 2:26; Lk. 6:4; the ref. here is to 1 Sam. 21:1-6). The priest in this account was Ahimelech (1 Sam. 21:1, 2); Matthew and Luke eliminate Mark’s apparently mistaken reference to Abiathar, though Abiathar, while not yet priest, may have been involved, since, as Mordechai Cogan puts it, he “escaped the slaughter of the priests of Nob and joined David’s outlaw band (1 Sam. 22:2[0]-23)” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Abiathar).

Matthew only includes another question for the Pharisees. “Or have you not read in the law that on the sabbath the priests in the temple break the sabbath and yet are guiltless?” (Mt. 12:5). J. Andrew Overman calls this a “denunciation of the priests in the Jerusalem Temple, possibly referring to Num. 28:9-10)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mt. 12:5-6). According to Matthew, Jesus adds, “I tell you, something greater than the temple is here” (Mt. 12:6). And he quotes Hosea 6:6, “I desire mercy and not sacrifice” (quoted here, v. 7, and in 9:13; cf. Overman, on v. 7).

In Mark Jesus explains that “the sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the sabbath” (Mk. 2:27), which lead into the “punch line,” as it were: “so the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath” (Mk. 2:28; cf. Mt. 12:8, beginning with “for”; Lk. 6:5, where the saying has no conjunction, but says ‘The Son of Man is lord of the sabbath’).

Another Sabbath controversy occurs in connection with a healing in a synagogue, when a man was present with “a withered hand” (Mt 12:9, 10a; Mk. 3:1; ‘a man whose right hand was withered’ Lk. 6:6). According to Mark, they, that is, the Pharisees (cf. Mk. 2:24; 3:6), “watched him to see whether he would cure him on the sabbath, so that they might accuse him” (Mk. 3:2; cf. Lk. 6:7). In Matthew, it’s a direct challenge. “They asked him, ‘Is it lawful to cure on the sabbath?’ so that they might accuse him” (Mt. 12:10b). In Mark, Jesus proceeds directly to the healing (Mk. 3:3). Luke points out that he did what he did “even though he knew what they were thinking” (Lk. 6:8a). But Matthew has Jesus lead up to the healing with rhetorical questions that turn the challenge back on the Pharisees. “He said to them, ‘Suppose one of you has only one sheep and it falls into a pit on the sabbath; will you not lay hold of it and lift it out? How much more valuable is a human being than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the sabbath’ ” (Mt.12:11-12).

It was apparently common among Jews of Jesus’ day to help an animal on a sabbath day (cf. Mt. 12:11), but the Essenes apparently would not (cf. CD 11:13-14 and Overman, on vv. 9-14). According to Dale C. Allison, Jr.,

Probably many but not most Jewish teachers of Jesus’ day would have thought it wrong, unless a life were at risk, to heal on a sabbath. In defence Jesus . . . appeals not to scriptural precept or example . . . but to the human sentiment of his hearers. He assumes that their common practice is to help animals on a sabbath . . . He then makes the inference from the lesser to the greater: if it is lawful to do good to an animal on a sabbath, surely it is lawful to do good to a human on a sabbath. (The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, 860, on Mt. 12:9-14).

Then Jesus healed the man. “Stretch out your hand,” he said, and when “he stretched it out . . . it was restored, as sound as the other” (Mt. 12:13; cf. Mk. 3:5; Lk. 6:10). Mark notes that Jesus “was grieved at their hardness of heart” (Mk. 3:5), and Luke notes that the scribes and Pharisees (6:7) “were filled with fury” (v. 11); but all report their decision to destroy Jesus (Mt. 12:14; Mk. 3:6) or discussion of “what they might do to Jesus” (Lk. 6:11). It seems that the “plot” of the Book of Mark is this “plot” (conspiracy) against Jesus, which was anticipated from the beginning of the Sabbath healing account (Mk. 3:2; cf. Mt. 12:10; Lk. 6:7). One might think that it comes very early in Mark (chap. 3) as compared with Matthew and Luke, where major speeches come earlier, but given the pace of action in Mark, the timing of this conspiracy is comparable in Mark to the other two Gospels.

Lutheran Readings

Ezekiel 39:21-29

Israel Restored to the Land

21 I will display my glory among the nations; and all the nations shall see my judgment that I have executed, and my hand that I have laid on them. 22 The house of Israel shall know that I am the LORD their God, from that day forward. 23 And the nations shall know that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity, because they dealt treacherously with me. So I hid my face from them and gave them into the hand of their adversaries, and they all fell by the sword. 24 I dealt with them according to their uncleanness and their transgressions, and hid my face from them.

25 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Now I will restore the fortunes of Jacob, and have mercy on the whole house of Israel; and I will be jealous for my holy name. 26 They shall forget their shame, and all the treachery they have practiced against me, when they live securely in their land with no one to make them afraid, 27 when I have brought them back from the peoples and gathered them from their enemies' lands, and through them have displayed my holiness in the sight of many nations. 28 Then they shall know that I am the LORD their God because I sent them into exile among the nations, and then gathered them into their own land. I will leave none of them behind; 29 and I will never again hide my face from them, when I pour out my spirit upon the house of Israel, says the Lord GOD. (Ezekiel 39:21-29, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from February 20, 2010 (Saturday in the week of the Last Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), when comments were based on those of May 16, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 11, Year Two), and those of February 9, 2008 (Saturday in the week of the Last Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), when comments were repeated from March 4, 2006 (Saturday in the week of the Last Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two):

According to Katheryn Pfisterer Darr, chapters 38 and 39 of Ezekiel are about “the final Battle: Yahweh defeats Gog and his hordes” (The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. VI, 2001, p. 1512, title for Ezek. 38:1-39:29; cf. Marvin A. Sweeney, The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Ezek. 38:1-39:29; and David L. Peterson, HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Ezek. 38:1-39:29). Gog is identified in the LORD’s address to Ezekiel, “Mortal, set your face toward Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince (wxro xyW9n4, n ^eśî’ rō’š) of Meshech and Tubal” (Ezek. 38:2, 3; 39:1). To this adjectival use of wxro (rō’š, lit. “head”), compare “the chief priest Seraiah” (wxroh! Nh2Ko hy!r!W4-tx@, ’eth-śārāh kōhēn hārō’š, 2 Kgs. 25:18). Some have understood wxro (rō’š, lit. “head”) as a proper name, and translated the phrase as “prince (xyW9n4, n ^eśî’) of Rosh” (ASV 1901, NAS 1995, TNIV text notes on Ezek. 38:2, 3; 39:1; cf. William L. Holladay, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon, 10^th corrected printing, 1988, s.v. IV wxro, rō’š, where the dagger symbol † indicates that this is the only occurrence of this term as a proper name in the Hebrew Bible). The Septuagint translation, a[rconta RwV (archonta Rōs), agrees. But this possible translation is not acknowledged in the Authorized (KJ) Version margin, notes of the NRSV, nor the text of the New Living Translation or the New Century Bible.

There have been various attempts to identify Gog and Magog with some historical or contemporary ethnic group or nationality. According to Keil and Delitzsch, “the army of Gog consisted not only of wild Japhetic tribes, who had not yet attained historical importance, but of Hamitic tribes also, that is to say, of peoples living at the extreme north (Npoc! yt1K44r4y1, yark ^ethay tsāphōn, v. 6) and east (Persians) and south (Ethiopians), i.e., on the borders of the then known world” (Keil, C. F., & Delitzsch, F. 2002 [reprinted, Eerdmans, 1983, from earlier]. Commentary on the Old Testament. Hendrickson: Peabody, MA, from the Logos [Libronix] Library System). Darr says:

The original identity of Gog of Magog is, to my mind, forever shrouded in mystery. Did Ezekiel (if, in fact, he authored this text, or at least some portion of it) have a particular individual in mind? Did he draw from legendary tales about a fearsome military figure from the past? Did Gog represent a contemporary barbarian horde threatening the Mesopotamian plain? Was he a personification of darkness (the Summerian word for ‘darkness’ is gûg), evil, and/or chaos? . . . Fortunately, discerning the significance of the Gog of Magog material within the book of Ezekiel does not hinge upon recovering the original identity of Yahweh’s opponent. (loc. cit.; cf. Walter Eichrodt, Ezekiel; a Commentary, The Old Testament Library, 1970, p. 522, on Ezek. 38:1-9)

Daniel I. Block, who understands wxro (rō’š ) as a common noun (“chief”), says, “The popular identification of Rosh with Russia is impossibly anachronistic and based on a faulty etymology, the assonantal similarities between Russia and Rosh being purely accidental” (The Book of Ezekiel, Chapters 25-48, NICOT, 1997, p. 435, on Ezek. 38:1-2bf).

In chapter 39, Ezekiel predicts the defeat of Gog’s armies (Ezek. 39:1-10). According to Stephen L. Cook, “As in the holy wars of the biblical conquest narrative (Deut. 7:2; 20:16-18; Josh. 6:24), everything of the enemy’s is burned as material devoted to the LORD alone. The huge quantities of war material (enough wood for fuel for seven years) identify this as an apocalyptic, rather than a mundane victory” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Ezek. 39:9-10). The burial of Gog is predicted in “a place for burial in Israel, the Valley of the Travelers east of the sea; it shall block the path of the travelers, for there Gog and all his horde will be buried; it shall be called the Valley of Hamon-gog” (39:11, cf. vv. 11-16). According to Peterson, this is “Hebrew ‘Valley of the Obarim’; however, perhaps one should read ‘Abarim’ [cf. NRSV text note a], a mountain range east of the Dead Sea in northern Moab. The place of burial would be outside the land, hence avoiding contamination from corpse impurity (see Num. 19:11-13) and allowing for purification (Ezek. 39:12-16)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Ezek. 39:11). A further consequence of Gog’s defeat is a feast for the wild animals (vv. 17-20). Peterson calls this “an elaboration of v. 4b. Ezekiel is to summon birds and animals for a sacrificial feast, perhaps with allusions to earlier Canaanite myths; cf. Isa. 34:5-7; Zeph. 1:7” (ibid., on vv. 17-20). According to Sweeney, “The feast of the birds and wild animals recalls the covenant curses (e.g., Deut. 28:16-44) in which Israel is fed to the birds and animals, but they are now applied to Israel’s enemies (Lev. 26:22; Deut. 28:26)” (op. cit., on vv. 17-29). He adds, “The sacrificial feast reverses the imagery of the banquet on Zion (Isa. 25:6-10)” (ibid., on v. 17)

Today’s reading presents what Peterson calls “concluding oracles” (op. cit., on vv. 21-29). It leads into Ezekiel’s concluding section on Israel’s restored temple and land (chapters 40-48). Block calls this section “The Final Word” (op. cit., p. 477, on 39:21-29). He challenges those who question the authenticity of this passage.

Because of shifts in chronological perspective, the disappearance of Gog from the scene, the presence of three variations of the recognition formula, and a series of novel features, scholars are virtually unanimous in deleting some or all of these verses as later expansionistic modifications. Nevertheless, this segment displays strong signs of authenticity, including numerous echoes of earlier prophecies of Ezekiel. (ibid., p. 479, on vv. 21-29)

The LORD continues to speak. “I will display my glory among the nations,” he says; and all the nations shall see my judgment that I have executed, and my hand that I have laid on them” (Ezek. 39:21). He adds, “The house of Israel shall know that I am the LORD their God, from that day forward” (v. 22). “These verses,” says Block, “are transitional.” “Their backward look to Yahweh’s war with Gog is reflected in the references to ‘the judgments that I have executed,’ and ‘from that day and onward’ [Block’s trans.] (viz., the day of Yahweh’s victory). But the prophet’s gaze also begins to turn toward the future, as evidenced in the consecutive perfects [i.e. perfect or past tense verb forms ‘converted’ by the waw consecutive prefix to imperfect or future tense meaning]: ‘I will set [yT9t1n!v4, wentattî] my glory among the nations,’ ‘all the nations will experience [Uxr!v4, w ^erā’û] my judgments,’ and ‘the house of Israel will know [Ufd4y!v4, w ^eyād ^eû] that I am Yahweh’ ” (ibid., on vv. 21-22). The LORD explains again the reason for Israel’s captivity. “And the nations shall know (Ufd4y!v4, w ^eyād ^eû, another ‘consecutive perfect’) that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity, because they dealt treacherously with me” (v. 23a). “So I hid my face from them,” says the LORD, “and gave them into the hand of their adversaries, and they all fell by the sword” (v. 23b). Sweeney says, “The image of God hiding His face, namely turning away from Israel and choosing not to help them, is common in the Bible (e.g. Deut. 31:17-18; Ps. 13:2), but is found only here in Ezekiel, and never in Priestly literature” (op. cit., on Ezek. 39:23-24). It’s a different image, of course, but Sweeney does take note of the LORD’s departure from Jerusalem on his “throne chariot” (Ezek. 10:1-11:13), and his return in 43:1-12). But God’s hiding his face is explained: This was judgment upon their unfaithfulness to him. “I dealt with them according to their uncleanness and their transgressions, and hid my face from them” (v. 24).

This punishment of Israel is now to be reversed. “Therefore thus says the Lord GOD (hOhy9 yn!dox3, ’ ^adōnāy YHWH): Now I will restore the fortunes of Jacob, and have mercy on the whole house of Israel; and I will be jealous for my holy name” (v. 25; cf. 36:22. cf. vv. 20-21, 32). Stephen L. Cook, calls the words “now I will restore, a shift in focus to a stage before the end times” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Ezek. 29:25). It will be a genuine restoration, not a superficial touch-up job. “They shall forget their shame,” says the Lord GOD, “and all the treachery they have practiced against me, when they live securely in their land with no one to make them afraid, when I have brought them back from the peoples and gathered them from their enemies’ lands, and through them have displayed my holiness in the sight of many nations” (vv. 26-27). But it will be an act of God’s grace, not something Israel has earned, as Ezekiel has noted earlier:

Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord GOD: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations to which you came. I will sanctify my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and which you have profaned among them; and the nations shall know that I am the LORD, says the Lord GOD, when through you I display my holiness before their eyes. I will take you from the nations, and gather you from all the countries, and bring you into your own land. I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will put my spirit within you, and make you follow my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances. Then you shall live in the land that I gave to your ancestors, and you shall be my people, and I will be your God. (Ezekiel 36:22-28, NRSV)

According to Cook, “The victory and restoration are linked here with the familiar language and narrative line of Ezekiel (5:8 [reversed]; 26:26; 34:28–30)” (ibid). “Then, says the LORD, “they shall know (Ufd4y!v4, w ^eyād ^eû, consecutive perfect) that I am the LORD their God because I sent them into exile among the nations, and then gathered them into their own land. I will leave none of them behind” (v. 28). And the restored relationship with God will be permanent, for “I will never again hide my face from them, when I pour out my spirit upon the house of Israel, says the Lord GOD” (v. 29; Cook refers to 36:27; 37:9, 14 Zech. 12:10; Joel 2:28-29, ibid., on v. 29). The descriptions of God’s rebuilding Israel from the ground up, so to speak, describe the spiritual reconstruction and renewal that is illustrated by the vision of the valley of dry bones which come to life in chapter 37. Where there was hopelessness, God will restore life: “I will lay sinews on you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath (H1Ur, rû ^ach) [or wind or spirit, NRSV text note c] in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the LORD” (37:6).

1 John 3:1-10

3:1 See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and that is what we are. The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. 2 Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is. 3 And all who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.

4 Everyone who commits sin is guilty of lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that he was revealed to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 6 No one who abides in him sins; no one who sins has either seen him or known him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. Everyone who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. 8 Everyone who commits sin is a child of the devil; for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The Son of God was revealed for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. 9 Those who have been born of God do not sin, because God’s seed abides in them; they cannot sin, because they have been born of God. 10 The children of God and the children of the devil are revealed in this way: all who do not do what is right are not from God, nor are those who do not love their brothers and sisters. (1 John 3:1-10, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from April 24, 2009 (Friday in the Second Week of Easter, Year One), when they were repeated from May 16, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 11, Year Two), when comments were repeated from April 20, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Second Sunday of Easter, Year One), when comments were repeated from April 8, 2005, (Friday in the week of the Second Sunday of Easter, Year One).

Christian believers are called “children of God” (1 Jn. 3:1; cf. Jn. 1:12-13). This is the result of God’s love: “See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God” (1 Jn. 3:1a). The divide between those who know God and recognize Jesus, and those who don’t (v. 1), carries over from John’s Gospel: “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father. And I lay down my life for the sheep” (John 10:14-15). But “the world does not know us” because “it did not know him” (1 Jn. 3:1b).

This relationship has a future: “what we shall be has not yet been revealed” but “we will be like him, for we will see him as he is” (v. 2). In response to this assurance, “all who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure” (v. 3). God revealed a similar pattern at Mt. Sinai:

I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; you shall have no other gods before me. (Exod. 20:2-3)

It’s not that one keeps the commandments in order to establish a relationship with God. When the relationship with God is a given fact–I am the LORD your God–then the expectations are stated. In a similar way, John says that those so related to the Father will “purify themselves as he is pure.” That means that one should be careful to avoid sin (1 Jn. 3:4-6) and do what is right (v. 7). “Everyone who commits sin (oJ poiw:n th;n aJmartivan, ho poiōn tēn hamartian) is a child of the devil” (v. 8), but “Those who have been born of God do not sin (aJmartivan ouj poiei:, hamartian ou poiei)” (v. 9). On the face of it, these two statements present a most rigorous standard for the conscientious Christian. Who among us never sins? The fact that the verbs are in the present tense, a present participle (v. 8), and a present tense main verb (v. 9) helps. Today’s New International Version seeks to bring out the continuing or habitual sense of these present tense verbs:

Those [No one] who are [is] born of God will not [omit ‘not’] continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them [him]; they [he] cannot go on sinning, because they have [he has] been born of God. (1 Jn. 3:9, TNIV [& NIV]).

But C. H. Dodd sees more difficulty:

The teaching of this passage raises a difficulty when it is compared with other parts of the epistle. In i. 8-10 the writer has repudiated in the strongest terms the suggestion that anyone may claim to be sinless. Yet here he says, Anyone who is born of God does not commit sin. In ii. 1-2 he contemplates the case of a Christian who commits sin, and assures him that there is a remedy. Yet here he declares that the child of God cannot sin. C. H. Dodd, Johannine Epistles, The Moffatt Commentary, 1946, p. 78, on 1 Jn. 3:1-10).

He notes, as we have, the use of present tense verbs. “In iii. 4-10 the relevant verbs are uniformly in the present or imperfect tense” (p. 78). “These expressions therefore should properly refer, not to single or occasional acts of sin, but to habitual sin, or a continuous sinful state” (ibid., pp. 78-79). Dodd offers a translation which would emphasize this understanding:

Anyone who keeps on sinning has never seen Him and does not know Him; He cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God. (ibid., p. 78)

“All this is true,” says Dodd. “Yet it is legitimate to doubt whether the reader could be expected to grasp so subtle a doctrine simply upon the basis of a precise distinction of tenses without further guidance.” So, after further discussion, he adds:

The apparent contradiction is probably not to be eliminated (though it may be qualified) by grammatical subtlety. In i. 8-ii. 2 on the one hand, and in iii. 4-10 on the other, the author is writing from different points of view, and concerning himself with different problems. The heretical teaching might have different effects upon its adherents. Some of them were led to assume that, being 'enlightened,' they were already perfect in virtue. Others thought it did not matter whether they were virtuous or not, provided they were 'enlightened.' The complacency of the former was castigated in i. 8-10. The moral indifference of the latter is in view in our present passage. In combating it, the author uses all the resources of antithesis to set forth the essential polarity of ethical religion. God and the devil, children of God and children of the devil, doing right and doing wrong–these represent absolute contraries. To be born of God, to belong to God, to remain in God, to have His word in us, and to do right–these all stand on the one side of a dividing line: there is no alternative but to do wrong, and so to belong to the devil and to show oneself his child; To claim to be a child of God, and yet–to be indifferent to moral obligations, is to confuse the whole issue. Of the personal problem raised for one who acknowledges all this, and yet is conscious of sin, he is not at this moment thinking. He is concerned to establish the one fundamental point. When he is facing the facts of personal experience, he is well aware that the pattern of life is not such a perfect chess-board, with its black and white separated by rigid lines. The actual and the ideal do not coincide. Nevertheless, it may be by contemplating the ideal that we best understand the final truth of things which underlies the actual. (ibid., pp. 80-81)

Matthew 10:24-33

As the Teacher, So the Disciple

24 "A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above the master; 25 it is enough for the disciple to be like the teacher, and the slave like the master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household! (Matthew 10:24-25; cf. Luke 6:40; Jn. 13:16; 15:20)

Whom to Fear

26 "So have no fear of them; for nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing secret that will not become known. 27 What I say to you in the dark, tell in the light; and what you hear whispered, proclaim from the housetops. 28 Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. 30 And even the hairs of your head are all counted. 31 So do not be afraid; you are of more value than many sparrows. (Matthew 10:26-31, NRSV; cf. Luke 12:2-7)

Acknowledge Christ before Others

32 "Everyone therefore who acknowledges me before others, I also will acknowledge before my Father in heaven; 33 but whoever denies me before others, I also will deny before my Father in heaven. (Matthew 10:32-33, NRSV, cf. Luke 12:8-9)

The following comments are repeated here from October 14, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 12, Year One), when comments were used from May 24, 2009 (the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Year One), when comments were repeated from May 16 and 17, 2008 (Friday and Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 11, Year Two), when comments on Matthew 10:24-33 and 34-42 were repeated from October 17 and 18, 2007 (Wednesday and Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 12, Year One), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from May 20, 2007 (the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Year One), when comments used from earlier as noted there.

It is commonly observed that the overall structure of the Gospel of Matthew includes five major speeches of Jesus alternating with groups of narrative episodes. The action episodes demonstrate Jesus power and authority, and the growing conflict with his opposition. The speeches, in which Matthew uses topical arrangement of material found in various parts of Mark and Luke, also play a part in advancing the action with more focus on the disciples and the developing Christian community.

Today’s reading continues from parts of Jesus’ second major speech in Matthew, in which Jesus summons and names “his twelve disciples” and gives them “authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to cure every disease and every sickness” (Mt. 10:1). For an outline of the references for parallel passages for this discourse, see the separate file, Jesus’ Second Major Discourse References. This commissioning and instructing of the disciples continues through verse 42, and the end of the speech is marked by Matthew’s formula, “Now when Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went on from there to teach and proclaim his message in their cities” (11:1; cf. 7:28-29; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1). The parallel passages presented in the separate file, Disciple-Teacher, Fearless Confession, focus mainly on passages which Matthew and Luke have drawn from a common source, though there is a hint of parallels with Mark as well.

Earlier parts of Jesus’ Mission Speech in Matthew have warned of persecutions for the disciples as they attempt to carry out their mission. Jesus’ warnings that the disciples will undergo persecution “because of me” (Mt. 10:18), perhaps even martyrdom (cf. v. 21), seem to anticipate later persecution faced by Christians. Matthew undoubtedly includes these instructions and reminders as challenge and encouragement for fellow Christian believers in his own time (later in the first century) to be faithful to their Christian witness in the face of rejection and persecution.

But today’s reading begins with Jesus’ reminder that “A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above the master” (Mt. 10:24; cf. Lk. 6:40a; Jn. 13:16; 15:20a). “It is enough,” says Jesus, “for the disciple to be like the teacher, and the slave like his master” (Mt. 10:25a). In Luke’s brief form of the saying, Jesus mentions qualification of a disciple: “but everyone who is fully qualified will be like the teacher” (Lk. 6:40). “If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul,” says Jesus, according to Matthew (cf. Mt. 9:34), “how much more will they malign those of his household” (Mt. 10:25b). John, whether he had access to Matthew or, more likely, to traditions also used by Matthew, generalizes, but also anticipates a possible positive response: “If they persecuted me, they will persecute you; if they kept my word, they will keep yours also” (Jn. 15:20b).

Encouragement for the disciples follows: “So have no fear of them” says Jesus (Mt. 10:26a), “for nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing secret that will not become known” (v. 26b; cf. Lk. 12:2; cf. also Mk. 4:22 and Lk. 8:17). Jesus directs the disciples to proclaim his message openly. “What I say to you in the dark,” he says, “tell in the light; and what you hear whispered, proclaim from the housetops” (Mt. 10:27). According to J. Andrew Overman, this is “a denial of any secret or esoteric teaching” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Mt. 10:27). What Matthew’s version commands, Luke’s version anticipates as accomplished. “Therefore whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered behind closed doors will be proclaimed from the housetops” (Lk. 12:3).

The disciples are exhorted not to fear martyrdom, but rather punishment in hell. “Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Mt. 10:28; cf. the elaborated version in Lk. 12:4-5). If God cares for the sparrows, will he not care for them? “Are not two sparrows sold for a penney?” says Jesus in Matthew. “Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father” (Mt. 10:29). Luke has Jesus ask about “five sparrows sold for two pennies” (Lk. 12:6). “And even the hairs of your head are all counted,” says Jesus in Matthew (Mt. 10:30; cf. Lk. 12:7a). And, concluding this lesson on the value of birds, Jesus says, “So do not be afraid; you are of more value than many sparrows” (Mt. 10:31; cf. Lk. 12:7b). The encouragement is also for those who respond to the message. “Everyone therefore who acknowledges me before others, I also will acknowledge before my father in heaven” (Mt. 10:32). Luke’s version varies a little. “And I tell you, everyone who acknowledges me before others, the Son of Man also will acknowledge before the angels of God” (Lk. 12:8). And the obverse is true, “but whoever denies me before others, I also will deny (Lk. ‘will be denied’) before my Father in heaven (Lk. ‘before the angels of God’)” (Mt. 10:33; Lk. 12:9; cf. Mk. 4:22; Lk. 8:17, and Mk. 8:38; Lk. 9:26).

Eventually that includes us. You and I “are of more value than many sparrows” (v. 30), and so may expect God’s gracious care. It was a part of the disciples’ mission to “acknowledge” Christ before others, but this instruction surely anticipates the witness of the church in the years following Jesus’ resurrection and ascension. The efforts of many Christians over the centuries to take this admonition seriously have led to serious, even life-threatening consequences, time and again.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net