For the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for May 26, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

Episcopal and Presbyterian Readings:

Ecclesiastes 9:11-18

11 Again I saw that under the sun the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favor to the skillful; but time and chance happen to them all. 12 For no one can anticipate the time of disaster. Like fish taken in a cruel net, and like birds caught in a snare, so mortals are snared at a time of calamity, when it suddenly falls upon them.

Wisdom Superior to Folly

13 I have also seen this example of wisdom under the sun, and it seemed great to me. 14 There was a little city with few people in it. A great king came against it and besieged it, building great siegeworks against it. 15 Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered the city. Yet no one remembered that poor man. 16 So I said, "Wisdom is better than might; yet the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heeded."

17 The quiet words of the wise are more to be heeded

than the shouting of a ruler among fools.

18 Wisdom is better than weapons of war,

but one bungler destroys much good. (Ecclesiastes 9:11-18, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from June 11, 2008 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 8, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from June 14, 2006 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 8, Year Two, and the week of Trinity Sunday, 2006), when comments were repeated from June 9, 2004 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 8, Year Two), in an email sent June 7, 2004, for June 7-13).

Qoheleth observes an apparent injustice in human life, that honor and goods are not earned by ability or merit. “The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favor to the skillful” (Eccl. 9:11a). This apparent injustice is seemingly random, “time and chance happen to them all. For no one can anticipate the time of disaster” (vv. 11b-12a). These matters are “ultimately determined by God” (Raymond C. Van Leeuwen, HarperCollins Study Bible, 1993, on Eccles. 9:11). The point is made with a kind of parable: “Like fish taken in a cruel net, and like birds caught in a snare, so mortals are snared at a time of calamity, when it suddenly falls upon them” (v. 12b).

Although Qoheleth maintains that wisdom is better than folly, he recognizes that it may not always be rewarded or properly recognized. He introduces another example: “I have also seen this example of wisdom under the sun, and it seemed great to me” (v. 13). If the former point was made with a brief parable–or should we say, a pair of similes?–the next point is made with an illustrative story. The setting is a small, underpopulated city that comes under attack. “There was a little city with few people in it,” says Qoheleth, but “a great king came against it and besieged it, building great siegeworks against it” (v. 14). On one reading, the attack was unsuccessful and the city was spared. “Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered (Fl01m9U, millat; piel; for the final vowel, pathach, cf. Gesenius Hebrew Grammar, edd. E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley, 2^nd ed. 1910, reprinted 1985, sec. 52 l) the city. Yet no one remembered that poor man.” (v. 15 NRSV, cf. AV/KJV). He was not honored, received no “medal,” for saving the city. But another reading presents a different outcome. “Present in the city was a poor wise man who might have saved it with his wisdom, but nobody thought of that poor man” (v. 15 NJPS). The NJPS text note c says that “who might have saved” is translated by “others” as “who saved.” The translation, “might have saved,” represents the fourth sense of the perfect tense listed by Gesenius, “to express actions and facts, whose accomplishment in the past is to be represented, not as actual, but only as possible (generally corresponding to the Latin imperfect or pluperfect subjunctive), e.g. Gen. 31:42 except the God of my father . . . had been with me, surely now hadst thou sent me away empty (yn9T!H4L01w9, [šillachtānî]) (sec. 106 p). According to Machinist, “some traditional commentators (e.g., Rashi, Ibn Ezra) sought to mitigate the expression of vulnerability by proposing that nobody thought of that poor man does not refer to the time after he had saved the city, when people forgot his achievement, but to the time before, when his true wisdom was not yet known” op. cit., p. 1618, on v. 15). Leong Seow favors the understanding of the action as possible rather than actual, saying, “delivered should probably be translated ‘could have delivered’ ” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001). On either understanding of the story, the point is this: “no one remembered/thought of that poor man” (v. 15b). Van Leeuwen sees verse 15 as ambiguous. “Poverty limits wisdom, for either the poor man delivered the city and was not honored, or he would have been able to deliver it, had he been taken seriously” (op. cit., on vv. 13-18). We all know people who think they could run the city, the corporation or the nation better than the ones charged with doing it, and maybe some of them are right sometimes. But Qoheleth’s point is that the poor man was truly wise. That he was not properly honored is a part of the “vanity” of life under the sun.

Qoheleth’s conclusion seems to imply the latter understanding: “Wisdom is better than might; yet the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heeded.” (v. 16 NRSV). The NJPS translation finds a couplet here:

So I observed: Wisdom is better than valor; but

A poor man’s wisdom is scorned,

And his words are not heeded. (Eccl. 9:16 NJPS)

The couplet suggests that more than forgetting the poor man’s wisdom is involved; his wisdom is scorned, not heeded.

The chapter and today’s reading are concluded with a couple proverbial expressions. The first presents a contrast of quiet words and shouting: “The quiet words of the wise are more to be heeded / than the shouting of a ruler among fools” (v. 17). Seow calls this “a proverb that can only be heard ironically in light of v. 16” (op. cit., on v. 17). The second proverb values wisdom over making war, but with a caveat. “Wisdom is better than weapons of war, / but one bungler destroys much good” (v. 18). Seow rephrases this. “The relative virtue of wisdom is readily negated by a single fool” (on v. 18). In summary, Machinist says, “the author asserts the potential value of wisdom over royal authority and military prowess, and yet admits the vulnerability of that wisdom, of its effectiveness, to human neglect and sin” (on Eccles. 9:13-18).

Galatians 5:1-15

5:1 For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.

The Nature of Christian Freedom

2 Listen! I, Paul, am telling you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. 3 Once again I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the entire law. 4 You who want to be justified by the law have cut yourselves off from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that counts is faith working through love.

7 You were running well; who prevented you from obeying the truth? 8 Such persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. 9 A little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough. 10 I am confident about you in the Lord that you will not think otherwise. But whoever it is that is confusing you will pay the penalty. 11 But my friends, why am I still being persecuted if I am still preaching circumcision? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed. 12 I wish those who unsettle you would castrate themselves!

13 For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another. 14 For the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 15 If, however, you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another. (Galatians 5:1-14, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from February 5, 2009 (Thursday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), when comments were repeated from June 11, 2008 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 8, Year Two), when comments were repeated from February 1, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Epiphany, Year One), when comments were repeated with revision and adaptation from June 14, 2006 (Wednesday of the week of Trinity Sunday, Year Two), when they were combined and repeated from June 9, 2004 (Wednesday of the week of Trinity Sunday, Year Two) in an email sent June 7, 2004 for June 7-13, with comments from February 3, 2005 (Thursday of the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One).

With the allegory of Hagar and Sarah (Gal. 4:21-51), Paul has drawn a contrast between slavery and freedom, with contrasts as indicated in yesterday’s comments. In transition to today’s reading he says, “So then, friends, we are children, not of the slave but of the free woman. For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Gal. 4:31-5:1). He as much as says that circumcision, if it is considered a necessary requirement for belonging to the people of God, is a form of slavery. “Listen!” he says; “I, Paul, am telling you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you” (5:2). Paul warns his Galatian Gentile Christian converts not to be circumcised–which the intruding “Judaizer” missionaries were demanding–because, according to Paul, it is a matter of principle. “Once again,” he says, “I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the entire law” (v. 3). Paul rings the changes on his thesis. Salvation is either by law, or by grace (Gal. 5:4). Paul surely assumes here what he states elsewhere, “It [the law] was added because of transgressions . . . Is the law then opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would indeed come through the law” (Gal. 3:19, 21). “For ‘no human being will be justified in his sight’ by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20, citing Ps. 143:2). Circumcision is seen as a test case. One who gets circumcised “is obliged to obey the entire law” (Gal. 5:3). Earlier, the test case was kosher food, and the Jewish avoidance of table fellowship with non-Jews lest they find themselves eating nonkosher food (2:11-14).

So Paul addresses “You who want to be justified by the law,” that is, by getting circumcised, and says they “have cut [themselves] off from Christ”; “you,” he says, “ have fallen away from grace” (v. 4). These people, we remember, are those whom he addressed in the beginning. “I am astonished,” he said, “ that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel” (1:6). The gospel of circumcision is not Paul’s gospel. Rather, his gospel is a matter of faith, through the Spirit. “For through the Spirit, by faith, we eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness” (5:5). In a certain sense, circumcision is a matter of indifference, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything” (v. 6a), because the main point, says Paul, is “faith working through love,” which is “the only thing that counts” (v. 6b).

 Paul’s feelings about this come out in the graphic figures of the next paragraph (vv. 7-12). “You were running well; who prevented you from obeying the truth?” he asks (v. 7). The answer, of course, is the so-called “Judaizers,” those outsiders who came to Galatia after Paul’s first ministry there and attempted to persuade the believers to identify with Jewish Christianity through circumcision, keeping kosher in eating, and so forth. “Such persuasion,” says Paul, “does not come from the one who calls you” (v. 8), that is, from “God through Christ” (Sheila Briggs, NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Gal. 5:8). Paul compares this foreign “gospel” to yeast which might leaven “the whole batch of dough” (v. 9). Briggs calls this “the same proverb” which he uses “in 1 Cor. 5:6,” and adds, “He is concerned that his opponents will win over the whole Galatian community” (ibid., on v. 9).

Paul expresses confidence in the fidelity of his converts, saying, “I am confident about you in the Lord that you will not think otherwise,” and adding, “Whoever it is that is confusing you will pay the penalty” (v. 10). But he expresses some frustration. “But my friends, why am I still being persecuted if I am still preaching circumcision?” (v. 11a). According to Briggs, “Some of Paul’s opponents may have alleged he was inconsistent in his position on Gentile circumcision, perhaps pointing out that he had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16:1-3)” (ibid., on v. 11). Timothy, of course, counted as a Jew since he had a Jewish mother (Acts 16:1), which for Paul would have made the difference. Paul’s exasperation comes out in what Briggs calls “a negative and bitterly sarcastic allusion to circumcision” (ibid., on v. 12): “I wish those who unsettle you would castrate themselves (ajpokovyontai, apokopsontai)!” (v. 12). The verb, which literally means to “cut off,” as in cutting off “limbs or parts of the body” as far back as Homer (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [= BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. ajpokovptw, apokoptō), is use in the sense “make a eunuch of, castrate” in several ancient texts, for example, Philo, Leg. All. 3, 8 (ibid., meaning no. 2). Today’s New International Version softens it a bit, “I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!” (Gal. 5:12bTNIV). The King James version had softened it even more. “I wish they were even cut off which trouble you” (Gal. 5:12 AV/KJV). We may compare Paul’s coining a word to mock the “circumcisers,” “Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of those who mutilate the flesh (th;n katatomhvn, tēn katatomēn)” (Phil. 3:2). The term for circumcision is peritomhv (peritomē), “cutting around.” Paul substitutes the preposition katav (kata), as in katastrofhv (katastrophē, “ruin, destruction”) for the preposition periv (peri), “around,” in the word peritomhv (peritomē); the result is a perjorative, mocking term.

Paul again emphasizes freedom which, for him, is not ““an opportunity for self-indulgence,” but rather, though “you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another” (v. 13). Paul, as Jesus does, emphasizes “love” as the essence of the law. “For the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’” (v. 14; cf. Mt. 22:37, 39; Lev. 19:18).

Matthew 16:1-12

Jesus is Asked for a Sign (Mk 8.11-13; Lk 12.54-56)

16:1 The Pharisees and Sadducees came, and to test Jesus they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. 2 He answered them, "When it is evening, you say, 'It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.' 3 And in the morning, 'It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. 4 An evil and adulterous generation asks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah." Then he left them and went away.

The Yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mk 8.14-21)

5 When the disciples reached the other side, they had forgotten to bring any bread. 6 Jesus said to them, "Watch out, and beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees." 7 They said to one another, "It is because we have brought no bread." 8 And becoming aware of it, Jesus said, "You of little faith, why are you talking about having no bread? 9 Do you still not perceive? Do you not remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 10 Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 11 How could you fail to perceive that I was not speaking about bread? Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees!" 12 Then they understood that he had not told them to beware of the yeast of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. (Matthew 6:1-12, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from November 12, 2009 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), when they were repeated from June 11, 2008 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 8, Year Two), when comments were repeated from November 15, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), when comments were based on comments from November 10, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), and from June 14, 2006 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 8, Year Two).

Matthew’s reporting of the demand for a sign from Jesus appears twice, in chapters 12 and 16. The first occurs in a context shared with Luke about The Sign of Jonah (Mt. 12:38-42; Lk. 11:16, 29-32), and the second occurs in a context shared with Mark (Mt. 16:1-4; Mk. 8:11-13). Other traditions share this motif (e.g. Lk. 12:54-56; Jn. 6:30). These relationships are presented in the following table:

Although there is minor variation in the identity of the questioners, “Pharisees and Sadducees” (Mt. 16:1); “some of the scribes and Pharisees” (Mt. 12:38), “Pharisees” (Mk. 8:11), “others” (Lk. 11:16), and “they” (Jn. 6:30, apparently some from “the crowd” (Jn. 6:24) who are sincere seekers (cf. v. 34), they may be seen as two groups, the leaders who opposed or resisted Jesus’ teaching (Mt. Mk) and the “crowds” who remain undecided but show signs of earnest inquiry (Lk., Jn.). The “sign of Jonah” (Mt. 16:4; 12:39; Lk. 11:29) and the contrast between their ability to read the signs of the weather and the lack of ability to “interpret the signs of the times” (Mt. 16:3; cf. Lk. 12:56) appear to come from traditions or sources shared by Matthew and Luke; for the others there is just a request for a sign. But in all these passages, ironically, the request for a sign follows on the heels of (i.e. immediately or soon after) one of Jesus’ miracles.

The disciples ask for an explanation of the warning about the “yeast” of the Pharisees or of the Pharisees and the Sadducees or of Herod (Mt. 16:6; Mk. 8:15; Lk. 12:1), as indicated in the following table:

Jesus’ warning about “the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Mt. 16:6) leads to a reminder that Jesus has supplied the disciples’ needs (i.e. bread), in the Feedings of Five Thousand (v. 9) and Four Thousand (v. 10). But the warning really applies to “the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (v. 12). If it is ironic that the Pharisees and the crowds ask Jesus for a sign when he has just performed a miracle (see above), it is at least puzzling that the disciples appear to misunderstand as well. They ask for an explanation of the warning about the “yeast” of the Pharisees or of the Pharisees and the Sadducees or of Herod (Mt. 16:6; Mk. 8:15; Lk. 12:1). Jesus responds to their “literal” understanding of “yeast” as a reference to “bread.” “It is because we have brought no bread” (Mt. 16:7) or “. . . we have no bread” (Mk. 8:16) as a failure to understand the feeding miracles (the 5000 and the 4000). Jesus’ rhetorical question in Matthew, “How could you fail to perceive that I was not speaking about bread?” (Mt. 16:11) is reduced to a simple label of “hypocrisy” in Luke. “Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees, that is, their hypocrisy” (Lk. 12:1). Compare the “Woes” Jesus pronounced on the scribes and Pharisees (Mt. 23:1-36; Mk. 12:37b-40; Lk. 20:45-47).

We have the witness of faithful Christian believers over twenty centuries. Some Christians (or those who claim that label) have also done terrible things in the name of Christianity (the Inquisition, the Holocaust, etc., come to mind), but that should not detract from the examples of faithful Christian living such as the early martyrs, Francis of Assisi, Sister Mary Theresa, and many others, probably including the leaders in the church you regularly attend. We, like the Galilean crowds, may turn to Christ for nourishment, which he called “the bread of life” (Jn. 6:35).

As noted above, for the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for May 26, 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