Daily Scripture Readings
Monday (June 28, 2010)*
Daily Office Lectionary, The Book of Common Prayer, the Episcopal Church in the U.S.A., 1979; cf. The Revised Common Lectionary (RCL), Abingdon Press, 1992	Daily Lectionary, Book of Common Worship, the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., 1993	Daily Lectionary, Book of Worship Inter-Lutheran Commission on Worship, c. 1978 (2002 printing) ‡
http://www.satucket.com/lectionary/index.htm http://www.pcusa.org/lectionary YOU MAY NEED TO COPY AND PASTE THESE URLs IN YOUR BROWSER
‡ Daily Lectionary, Evangelical Lutheran Worship, ELCA, 2006. In the Evangelical Lutheran Worship book of 2006, the Daily Lectionary (pp. 1121-1153) is revised to correlate with the Sunday Lectionary (the Revised Common Lectionary) on the three year cycle: Year A, Year B (now current), Year C. “The readings are chosen so that the days leading up to Sunday (Thursday through Saturday) prepare for the Sunday readings. The days flowing out from Sunday (Monday through Wednesday) reflect upon the Sunday readings” (p. 1121).
Unless otherwise indicated, the scripture texts quoted are from The New Revised Standard Version (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers), 1989.
Monday AM Psalm 106:1-18 PM Psalm 106:19-48 Num. 22:1-21 Rom. 6:12-23 Matt. 21:12-22 Irenaeus: http://www.satucket.com/lectionary/Irenaeus.htm Psalm 145:8-13 Proverbs 8:6-11; 2 Timothy 2:22b-26; Luke 11:33-36 Eucharistic Readings: Psalm 50:14-24 Amos 2:6-10, 13-16; Matthew 8:18-22	Monday Morning: Psalms 57; 145 Num. 22:1-21 Rom. 6:12-23 Matt. 21:12-22 Evening: Psalms 85; 47	Monday Morning Pss.: 135, 145 Num. 9:15-23, 10:29-36 Rom. 1:1-15 Matt. 17:14-21 Evening Pss.: 97, 112
		Year C Daily Readings Psalm 140 Genesis 24:34-41, 50-67 1 John 2:7-11
* Monday in the week of the Fifth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two

For the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for June 14, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

Episcopal and Presbyterian Readings:

Numbers 22:1-21

Balaam

22:1 The Israelites set out, and camped in the plains of Moab across the Jordan from Jericho. 2 Now Balak son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites. 3 Moab was in great dread of the people, because they were so numerous; Moab was overcome with fear of the people of Israel. 4 And Moab said to the elders of Midian, "This horde will now lick up all that is around us, as an ox licks up the grass of the field." Now Balak son of Zippor was king of Moab at that time. 5 He sent messengers to Balaam son of Beor at Pethor, which is on the Euphrates, in the land of Amaw, to summon him, saying, "A people has come out of Egypt; they have spread over the face of the earth, and they have settled next to me. 6 Come now, curse this people for me, since they are stronger than I; perhaps I shall be able to defeat them and drive them from the land; for I know that whomever you bless is blessed, and whomever you curse is cursed."

7 So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand; and they came to Balaam, and gave him Balak's message. 8 He said to them, "Stay here tonight, and I will bring back word to you, just as the LORD speaks to me"; so the officials of Moab stayed with Balaam. 9 God came to Balaam and said, "Who are these men with you?" 10 Balaam said to God, "King Balak son of Zippor of Moab, has sent me this message: 11 'A people has come out of Egypt and has spread over the face of the earth; now come, curse them for me; perhaps I shall be able to fight against them and drive them out.' " 12 God said to Balaam, "You shall not go with them; you shall not curse the people, for they are blessed." 13 So Balaam rose in the morning, and said to the officials of Balak, "Go to your own land, for the LORD has refused to let me go with you." 14 So the officials of Moab rose and went to Balak, and said, "Balaam refuses to come with us."

15 Once again Balak sent officials, more numerous and more distinguished than these. 16 They came to Balaam and said to him, "Thus says Balak son of Zippor: 'Do not let anything hinder you from coming to me; 17 for I will surely do you great honor, and whatever you say to me I will do; come, curse this people for me.' " 18 But Balaam replied to the servants of Balak, "Although Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not go beyond the command of the LORD my God, to do less or more. 19 You remain here, as the others did, so that I may learn what more the LORD may say to me." 20 That night God came to Balaam and said to him, "If the men have come to summon you, get up and go with them; but do only what I tell you to do." 21 So Balaam got up in the morning, saddled his donkey, and went with the officials of Moab. (Numbers 22:1-21, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of June 30, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two), when comments were repeated from July 3, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two):

Today’s reading is the first of six lessons on Balak and Balaam. The story of Balaam is, according to Nili S. Fox, an “independent composition, possibly originating from a different scribal circle than those associated with other portions of Numbers” (The Jewish Study Bible. 2004, p. 328 on Num. 22:2-24:25). It is inserted here, says Fox,

because the outcome of Balak’s scheme determines if Israel will inherit the promised land. The account is a contest in the divine realm between the God of Israel and those supernatural elements available to Balak. At times amusing, and somewhat mocking of the non-Israelite prophet, the message of this pericope [section] is serious. The intent of the LORD reigns supreme and cannot be superseded. Even the powers of a well-known non-Israelite prophet are ultimately controlled by God. (ibid.)

The Rabbi sees a distinct unit here, where chapters 22-24 were “probably known in ancient times as ‘The Book of Balaam’ Mflb rps [sēfer bil‘ām]” (op. cit., on Num. 22:2-25:9). “This is the reading,” he adds, “found in the Munich Manuscript—the only complete manuscript—of the Talmud, instead of Mflb twrp [pārāšath bil‘ām] as in the printed editions; Baba Bathra, 15a” (ibid.).

After the defeat of King Sihon of the Amorites and King Og of Bashan (Num. 21:21-35), the Israelites “set out and camped in the plains of Moab across the Jordan from Jericho” (Num. 22:1), ready to enter the promised land. But Balak, King of Moab, has other ideas. According to the narrator, “Now Balak son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites” (v. 2). As a result, “Moab was in great dread of the people, because they were so numerous; Moab was overcome with fear of the people of Israel” (v. 3). According to Rabbi J. H. Hertz, “The Israelites, fresh from victory over the Amorite kings, were now settled on the border of Moab, and filled both king and people of Moab with dread” (The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, second ed., 1981, on Num. 22:2-4). The narrator continues: “And Moab said to the elders of Midian, ‘This horde will now lick up all that is around us, as an ox licks up the grass of the field.’ Now Balak son of Zippor was king of Moab at that time” (v. 4). “On the connection between Balaam and Midian,” says Jo Ann Hackett, “see 31:8” (The HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Num. 22:4). According to Fox, “the elders of Midian refers to the leaders of Midianite groups who lived in Moab (cf. Gen. 36:35)” (op. cit., on v. 4). Of “the elders of Midian,” the Rabbi says they

conducted the general affairs of the desert tribes that had their origin in Midian, east of the Gulf of Akaba. There was no enmity on the part of Israel towards Moab (Deut. Ii, 29). Neither did Israel in any way cross the path of the Midianites or harbour any ill-will against them. Moses had spent many years in Midian; and Jethro, the Midianite priest, was an honoured guest in Israel’s tents. The plot of the Moabites and the Midianites against Israel was thus the outcome of ‘causless hatred’ (MnH txnW [śin’ath chinnām]), the source of the most terrible cruelties in human relations.” (op. cit., on v. 4)

Balak sends “messengers to Balaam” at Pethor “on the Euphrates” (22:5a), saying, “A people has come out of Egypt; they have spread over the face of the earth, and they have settled next to me. Come now, curse this people for me, since they are stronger than I; perhaps I shall be able to defeat them and drive them from the land; for I know that whomever you bless is blessed, and whomever you curse is cursed” (v. 5b, 6). According to David P. Wright, “If Pethor is Pitru (on the Sajur river, a tributary of the Euphrates), then Balaam lives some 650 km (400 mi) northeast of where the Israelites are. The story thus has Balak taking pains to find a prophet whose words are effective and to his liking” (The New Oxford Annotated Bible [NOAB], 3rd. edition, augmented 2007, on Num. 22:5). This embassy consists of “the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian [who] departed with the fees for divination in their hand; and they came to Balaam, and gave him Balak’s message” (v. 7). According to Fox,

Balaam apparently has a reputation not only as a seer, but also as a diviner who can effectuate curses. The elders of Moab and Midian, sent to fetch him, are versed in divinatory techniques. Execration texts on pottery cursing rulers of Canaanite cities are known from Egypt (early 2^nd millennium). Prophets from the same period are mentioned in letters from the Mesopotamian city-state of Mari. (op. cit., on Num. 22:6-7)

Balaam’s first response is to delay his answer. “He said to them, ‘Stay here tonight, and I will bring back word to you, just as the LORD speaks to me’; so the officials of Moab stayed with Balaam” (v. 8). According to Hackett,

Balaam, a non-Israelite, maintains unexpectedly that he must confer with the Lord, i.e., with Yahweh, the God of Israel; see also vv. 12-13, 18; Gen. 26:28. Not unexpectedly, the God of Israel does not give Balaam permission to curse Israel for Balak king of Moab (v. 6). Equally unusual, the Moabites and Midianites in the story seem to accept that Balaam is dependent on the Lord for his blessings and curses, as if the Lord were the only god Balaam could possibly call on. (op. cit., on v. 8)

“Balaam is a prophet of the true God,” says Rabbi Hertz, “in familiar discourse with Him, and expects to receive some Divine communication in a dream or a vision of the night; cf. Gen. xx, 3. ‘This recognition of God’s revelation of His purposes concerning Israel to a non-Israelite is striking evidence of the universality of Judaism’ (Stanley)” (op. cit., on v. 8). God questions Balaam as though he didn’t know the story. He “came to Balaam and said, ‘Who are these men with you?’ ” (v. 9). Balaam explains the situation. “Balaam said to God, ‘King Balak son of Zippor of Moab, has sent me this message: “A people has come out of Egypt and has spread over the face of the earth; now come, curse them for me; perhaps I shall be able to fight against them and drive them out” ’ ” (vv. 10-11). God says, “You shall not go with them; you shall not curse the people, for they are blessed” (v. 12). So the first embassy failed in its mission, for “Balaam rose in the morning, and said to the officials of Balak, ‘Go to your own land, for the LORD has refused to let me go with you’ ” (v. 13). Of “the LORD refuseth” (JPS 1917, for “the LORD has refused,” NRSV), the Rabbi says, “Balaam suppresses the fact that God had forbidden him to curse Israel” (ibid., on v. 13). Given this refusal, “the officials of Moab rose and went to Balak, and said, ‘Balaam refuses to come with us’ ” (v. 14).

However, Balak was determined: “Once again [he] sent officials, more numerous and more distinguished than these” (v. 15), who “came to Balaam and said to him, ‘Thus says Balak son of Zippor: “Do not let anything hinder you from coming to me; for I will surely do you great honor, and whatever you say to me I will do; come, curse this people for me” ’ ” (vv. 16-17). Balak offered Balaam “carte blanche,” so to speak. But again Balaam must delay his answer overnight to consult the LORD (YHWH). “Although Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not go beyond the command of the LORD my God to do less or more” (v. 18). “You remain here,” he tells the messengers, “as the others did, so that I may learn what more the LORD may say to me” (v. 19). According to Rabbi Hertz, citing Joseph Butler,

A thorough[ly] honest man would without hesitation have repeated his former answer, that he could not be guilty of so infamous a degradation of the sacred character with which he was invested, as to curse those whom he knew to be blessed. But instead of this, he desires the princes of Moab to tarry that night with him also; and for the sake of the reward deliberates whether he might not be able to obtain leave to do that which had been before revealed to him to be contrary to the will of God. (op. cit., on Num. 22:19)

On the words “that I may know” (JPS, for “that I may learn” NRSV), the Rabbi asks, “After God had distinctly said unto him ‘thou shalt not curse this people,’ what need was there for him to say, ‘that I may know what the LORD will speak unto me more’? It is evident that he harboured evil thoughts in his heart (Ibn Ezra). ‘Balaam said, Perhaps I may persuade Him, and He will agree that I should curse’ (Rashi). So we may perhaps be surprised at God’s answer this time. “That night,” we are told, “God came to Balaam and said to him, ‘If the men have come to summon you, get up and go with them; but do only what I tell you to do’ ” (v. 20). “Without much hesitation,” says Wright, “God gives Balaam permission to go to Balak after Balaam’s second request” (op. cit., on Num. 22:7-21). But God’s will in the matter hasn’t changed. Note the words “but do only what I tell you to do” (v. 20, emphasis added). And, as permitted, Balaam goes. “So Balaam got up in the morning, saddled his donkey, and went with the officials of Moab” (v. 21).

Rabbi Hertz, while commenting on Balaam’s character, rejects the notion that contradictions in the description of his character point to combining different sources here:

Balaam’s personality is an old enigma, which has baffled the skill of commentators. It seems probable that he had from the first learned some elements of pure and true religion in his home in Mesopotamia, the cradle of the ancestors of Israel. He thus belongs, with Melchizedek, Job, and Jethro, to the scattered worshippers of the true God , who are unconnected with Israel. But unlike these, he is represented in Scripture as at the same time heathen sorcerer, true Prophet, and the perverter who suggested a peculiarly abhorrent means of bringing about the ruin of Israel. Because of these fundamental contradictions in character, Bible Critics assume that the Scriptural account of Balaam is a combination of two or three varying traditions belonging to different periods. This is quite unconvincing; it is as if we were to maintain that the current life-story of Francis Bacon, for example, was due to the combination of two or three traditions belonging to different periods of English history, since no one man could at the same time be an illustrious philosopher, a great statesman, and ‘the meanest of mankind.’ Such a view betrays a slight knowledge of the fearful complexity of the mind and soul of man. (op. cit., p. 668, in a note on the “Character of Balaam”)

Romans 6:12-23

12 Therefore, do not let sin exercise dominion in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions. 13 No longer present your members to sin as instruments of wickedness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and present your members to God as instruments of righteousness. 14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Slaves of Righteousness

15 What then? Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! 16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that you, having once been slaves of sin, have become obedient from the heart to the form of teaching to which you were entrusted, 18 and that you, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. 19 I am speaking in human terms because of your natural limitations. For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to greater and greater iniquity, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness for sanctification.

20 When you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 So what advantage did you then get from the things of which you now are ashamed? The end of those things is death. 22 But now that you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God, the advantage you get is sanctification. The end is eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:12-23, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here with some editing from March 21, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Third Sunday of Lent, Year One), when comments were repeated from June 30, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two), when comments were repeated with some editing from March 17, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Third Sunday of Lent, Year One), when comments were combined and revised from June 28, 2004 in an email sent June 28, 2004, for June 28-July 4, from March 5, 2005 (Saturday of the week of the Third Sunday of Lent, Year One), and from July 3, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two). Some of the comments were used again on February 28, 2010 (the Second Sunday of Lent, Year Two).

In this section of Romans (chaps. 6, 7, 8), Paul discusses what we might call the inner workings of personal salvation–not that the corporate (group) aspects of Christian faith and living are excluded. Today’s lesson discusses implications for our present living. In the early part of Romans, chapter six, we have experienced a “reenactment of Holy Week” in our own lives, that is, “we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). “Our old self was crucified . . . that the body of sin might be destroyed” (v. 6) and we are “freed from sin” (v. 7) and “alive to God in Christ Jesus” (v. 11). Since we have been buried with Christ by baptism into death (Rom. 6:4), since “our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (v. 6), we have it made, don’t we? It’s a downhill slope and we can coast right through life into heaven, can’t we? No! (Or as some say these days, Not!) “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you” (Phil. 2:12-13). We need to continue to be intentional about Christian faith and living. Not that we are left to our own resources, “for . . . God . . . is at work in you.” Paul will describe living according to the Spirit in detail in Romans, chapter 8. But here he exhorts us. We still have a choice, so Paul gives strong warnings. “Therefore, do not let sin exercise dominion in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions” (v. 12). “No longer present your members to sin as instruments (o{pla, hopla, lit. ‘weapons,’ cf NRSV text note a) of wickedness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and present your members to God as instruments (o{pla, hopla) of righteousness” (Rom. 6:13). “Instruments or weapons,” says Leander E. Keck, “(See text note a) Like philosophers of his day, Paul often describes the moral life as a military or athletic struggle; see 13:12; 2 Cor. 6:7; 10:4; also Eph. 6:11-17” (The HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Rom. 6:13). “For sin will have no dominion over you,” says Paul, “since you are not under law but under grace” (v. 14). “Should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound? By no means! (vv. 1-2). “What then? Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!” (v. 15). Another rhetorical question states the alternatives: “Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?” (v. 16).

But Paul gives thanks for the more positive and hopeful side of his message here. “ But thanks be to God that you, having once been slaves of sin, have become obedient from the heart to the form of teaching to which you were entrusted, and that you, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness” (vv. 17-18). Before proceeding, Paul admits to forming his message to fit his audience. “I am speaking in human terms (ajnqrwvpinon, anthrōpinon) because of your natural limitations” (v. 19a, cf. NRSV text note a, ‘Gk. the weakness of your flesh’). The present demand is to turn from sin, and turn to righteousness. “For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to greater and greater iniquity, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness for sanctification” (v. 19b).

“When you were slaves of sin,” Paul reminds his readers, “you were free in regard to righteousness” (v. 20). “Free in regard to righteousness,” says Keck, means “unable to ‘obey’ righteousness, See vv. 16, 18” (ibid., on v. 20). But Paul questions the benefits of that situation. “So what advantage (kavrpoV, karpos, lit. ‘fruit’) did you then get from the things of which you now are ashamed?” he asks. The end (tevloV, telos) of those things is death” (v. 21). He also reminds us of the advantage that pertains to righteous living. “But now that you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God, the advantage (kavrpoV, karpos, lit. ‘fruit’) you get is sanctification. The end is eternal life” (v. 22).

Wilbur T. Dayton labels the larger unit here (6:12-23) “A Holy Life,” and verses 12-14, “A New King” (The Wesleyan Bible Commentary, V, 1965, pp. 44-45). “Sin . . . was really a tyrant dominating your life and forcing it into channels you did not approve.” Dayton continues:

God never intended that the desires (Old English, “lusts”) of the body should be the master. They were made to be our servants for the development of a good and constructive life of happiness for the creature and to the credit and glory of God. But when the servant becomes king and rules to our ruin, we must rise up in the power of Christ, dethrone the natural impulses and desires, purify them in the cleansing fountain, and put them back in their place as servants. Only thus can the body be the holy temple of God. (ibid., p. 45)

“For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to greater and greater iniquity, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness for sanctification” (v. 19b). Dayton calls this “A New Principle of Conduct,” leading to “A New Result” (ibid., p. 46). As noted above, the advantages are sanctification and eternal life (v. 22). Paul summarizes: “For the wages of sin is death [cf. v. 21], but the free gift of God is eternal life [cf. v. 22] in Christ Jesus our Lord” (v. 23). According to Keck, “That death (both as the termination of life and as the tyrannous power during life) is the consequence of sin has been a theme since 5:12” (op. cit., on v. 23).

Matthew 21:12-22

Cleansing the Temple (Mk 11.15-19; Lk 19.45-48; Jn 2.13-25)

12 Then Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who were selling and buying in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who sold doves. 13 He said to them, "It is written,

'My house shall be called a house of prayer';

but you are making it a den of robbers." [cf. Jer. 7:11; Isa. 56:7]

14 The blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he cured them. 15 But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the amazing things that he did, and heard the children crying out in the temple, "Hosanna to the Son of David," they became angry 16 and said to him, "Do you hear what these are saying?" Jesus said to them, "Yes; have you never read,

'Out of the mouths of infants and nursing babies

you have prepared praise for yourself'?" [Ps. 8:2]

17 He left them, went out of the city to Bethany, and spent the night there.

Jesus Curses the Fig Tree (Mk 11.12-14, 20-25)

18 In the morning, when he returned to the city, he was hungry. 19 And seeing a fig tree by the side of the road, he went to it and found nothing at all on it but leaves. Then he said to it, "May no fruit ever come from you again!" And the fig tree withered at once. 20 When the disciples saw it, they were amazed, saying, "How did the fig tree wither at once?" 21 Jesus answered them, "Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only will you do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, 'Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' it will be done. 22 Whatever you ask for in prayer with faith, you will receive." (Matthew 21:12-22, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from December 1, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the First Sunday of Advent, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from April 5, 2009 (Palm Sunday, Year One), when comments on Matthew 21:12-17 were repeated from June 30, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two), when comments were repeated from December 4, 2007 (Tuesday in the week of the First Sunday of Advent, Year Two), when comments were repeated from July 3, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two), when comments were combined with revision and supplement from June 28, 2004 in an email sent June 28, 2004, for June 28-July 4, and from November 29, 2005 (Tuesday in the week of the First Sunday of Advent, Year Two).

Parallel versions of Jesus’ Cleansing of the Temple are presented in a table in a separate file, Jesus Cleanses the Temple. For recent comments on the versions of this event in Luke and Mark, see the Archives for March 28 and 29, 2010 (Palm Sunday and Monday of Holy Week, Year Two). For recent comments on John 2:13-17, see the Archive for January 16, 2010 (Saturday in the week of the First Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two). For recent comments on John 11:45-54, see the Archive for September 13, 2008 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 7, Year Two)

The following table presents a diagram of today’s reading from Matthew and the parallel passages in other Gospels. Note that John’s account of the Cleansing of the Temple comes very early in his narrative (Jn 2:13-25). This difference in John’s sequence of events from that of the other Gospels is discussed in the comments for January 16, 2010, as noted above.

Matthew 21:10-22 and Parallel Passages *
Jesus in Jerusalem (Cleansing the Temple), Return to Bethany
Matthew 21:10-17	Mark 11:11	Luke 19:45-46
The Cursing of the Fig Tree
Matthew 21:18-19	Mark 11:12-14	Luke 13:6-9
The Cleansing of the Temple
Matthew 21:12-13	Mark 11:15-17	Luke 19:45-46	John 2:13-17
The Chief Priests and Scribes Conspire against Jesus
	Mark 11:18-19	Luke 19:47-48	John 11:45-53; 8:1-2
The Fig Tree is Withered
Matthew 21:20-22	Mark 11:20-26		John 14:13-14; 15:7; 16:23
* Based on Kurt Aland, ed., Synopsis of the Four Gospels, 1982, secs. 271-275, pp. 237-240

In the above table, the references in bold, larger type represent passages in a common sequence, so to speak. The other references are for passages with common material but in different contexts.

In Matthew, we are told that when Jesus “entered Jerusalem, the whole city was in turmoil, asking, ‘Who is this?’ ” (Mt. 21:10). Mark reports his entering Jerusalem and the temple, but not the turmoil or the question (Mk. 11:11a). Matthew presents the crowds answer to the question. They “were saying, ‘This is the prophet Jesus from Nazareth in Galilee’ ” (Mt. 21:11). At this point Mark reports that “when he [i.e., Jesus] had looked around at everything, as it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the twelve” (Mk. 11:11b). “Then Jesus entered the temple,” says Matthew, “and drove out all who were selling and buying in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who sold doves” (Mt. 12:12). Mark reports the same actions (Mk. 11:15b), but only after reporting Jesus’ return from Bethany on the following day (Mk. 11:12), and his cursing the fig tree on the return (Mk. 11:13-14). Luke’s brief report (Lk. 19:45) follows his report of the entry (Lk. 19:28) and Jesus’ weeping over Jerusalem (Lk. 19:41-44). To the report of the cleansing, Mark adds that Jesus “would not allow anyone to carry anything through the temple” (Mk. 11:16). John, who apparently places the Cleansing of the Temple at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (Jn. 2:13-17), arranges his narrative to highlight the raising of Lazarus (Jn. 11:1-44) as the “last straw,” so to speak, which precipitated the Pharisees’ and Chief Priests’ decisive action against him (Jn. 11:46-48).

The three Synoptic Gospels report Jesus’ saying based on quotations from the Hebrew Bible: “My house shall be called a house of prayer” (Mt. 21:13b; Mk. 11:17b, adding “for all the nations”; Lk. 19:46a; cf. Isa. 56:7); “but you are making it a den of robbers” (Mt. 21:13c; Mk. 11:17c with “have made it” = Lk. 19:46b). Matthew reports that “The blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he cured them” (Mt. 21:14). According to Dennis C. Duling, “The blind and the lame were unclean and presumably should not have been in the temple (see Lev. 21:16-20; 2 Sam. 5:8)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 21:14). “Every day,” says Luke, “he was teaching in the temple” (Lk. 19:47), but neither Mark nor Luke mention healings at this point. But all the Synoptic Evangelists report that the chief priests and scribes (“and the leaders of the people,” Lk.) take note of Jesus’ activities. “But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the amazing things [including the healings] that he did, and heard the children crying out in the temple, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David,’ they became angry” (Mt. 21:15). Mark says, “And when the chief priests and the scribes heard it, they kept looking for a way to kill him; for they were afraid of him, because the whole crowd was spellbound by his teaching” (Mk. 11:18; cf. Lk. 19:47b, 48). The words “kept looking” apparently refer to Mk. 3:6, where, after Jesus heals the Man with the withered hand, “The Pharisees went out and immediately conspired with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him” (cf. C. Clifton Black, revised by Adela Yarbro Collins, HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mk. 11:18). In Matthew, the chief priests and the scribes” (Mt. 21:15) challenge Jesus. “Do you hear what these are saying?” they ask (Mt. 21:16a), in reference to those repeating the triumphal entry acclamation, “Hosanna to the Son of David” (Mt. 21:15, cf. v. 9). Jesus responds with another biblical quotation, “Yes; have you never read, ‘Out of the mouths of infants / and nursing babies / you have prepared praise / for yourself’?” (Mt. 21:16b, citing Ps. 8:3 LXX). And Matthew reports that “He left them, went out of the city to Bethany, and spent the night there” (Mt. 21:17; cf. Mk. 11:19, for which this is the second departure from Jerusalem for the night, cf. v. 11).

When we compare Gospel accounts, it sometimes seems that Mark has an eye for a variety of details, whereas Matthew tends to focus on what he regards as the main points. After the triumphal entry, both have Jesus enter the temple, then leave to spend the night at Bethany (Mt. 21:17; Mk. 11:11). But at that point Matthew has already told us about Jesus' cleansing of the temple, overturning the money-changers' tables, and so forth (Mt. 21:12-13 [14-16]), whereas these events come later in Mark (11:15-17 [18]), sandwiched between two parts of the Cursing of the Fig Tree (Mk. 11:12-14; Mt. 21:18-19) and its Withering (Mk. 11:20-25; Mt. 21:20-22). In Matthew’s account, the fig tree withers “at once” (Mt. 21:19), whereas in Mark, the cursing of the fig tree is separated from the tree’s withering by the account of the cleansing of the temple (Mk. 11:15-17) and the conspiracy against Jesus (Mk. 11:18-19). It was the morning of the following day as Jesus and the disciples returned to the city when they found “the fig tree withered away to its roots” (Mk. 11:20). This “sandwich pattern,” characteristic of Mark (cf. the healing of the hemorrhaging woman, Mk. 5:25-34, which is sandwiched between two parts of the account of the healing of Jairus’s daughter, Mk. 5:21-24, 35-43), emphasizes the point. Those who were conspiring against Jesus are the withered “fig tree” (note that Luke presents a similar thought in another context in the form of the Parable of the Unfruitful Fig Tree (Lk. 13:6-9).

According to Dennis C. Duling, “the only cursing miracle in the Gospels emphasizes the power of faith and foreshadows the coming destruction of Israel (cf. 3:10)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, 2^nd ed., 2006, on Mt. 21:18-22). As such it seems to relate to the point of the Cleansing of the Temple. “You are making it a den of robbers” (v. 12). We might remember that some Jews were also critical of those who controlled the temple. Herodian rulers appointed high priests without regard to succession from Aaron (Josephus). Earlier the successors of Judas Maccabeus had assumed royal titles, though not from the line of David, and also made themselves priests while, though from the tribe of Levi and the family of Matthias the Priest, they were not in the succession of Zadokite priests. The reaction of more pious Jews to this irregularity of succession, and probably also to various abuses and oppressions by the Hasmonean rulers, led to criticism of the established priesthood. The Habakkuk Commentary from Qumran, for example, calls the High Priest a “wicked priest” (1QpHab col. 8, lines 8, 16; col. 9:9, cf. “The translation of

The Pesher to Habakkuk,” on the Internet web site, MoellerHaus Publisher, works by Fred P. Miller, c. 2010, at http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/peshtran.htm, accessed again June 27, 2010). We should “keep our own house in order,” so to speak. Let our churches be “houses of prayer,” and not “dens of robbers.”

The sequence varies, but the Cursing of the Fig Tree (Mt. 21:18-22; Mk. 11:12-14, 20-25), the Question about Authority (Mt. 21:23-27; Mk. 11:27-33; Lk. 20:1-8), the Parable of the Two Sons (Mt. 21:28-32), and the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen (Mt. 21:33-46; Mk. 12:1-12; Lk. 20:9-19) all occur in close proximity to the Cleansing of the Temple. We must continually remind ourselves that this opposition came from a small handful of Jewish leaders at the time, and not Jews in general then or now.

As noted above, for the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for June 14, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net