Daily Scripture Readings     

Sunday (July 18, 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/cgi-bin/lectiond.cgi

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, Year C (now current). “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.

Sunday

AM Psalm 63:1-8(9-11), 98

PM Psalm 103

Joshua 6:15-27

Acts 22:30-23:11

Mark 2:1-12

From the Sunday Lectionary:

(Cf. the RCL)

Amos 8:1-12 & Psalm 52 or

Genesis 18:1-10a & Psalm 15;

Colossians 1:15-28; Luke 10:38-42

(Cf. BCP)

Psalm 15

Genesis 18:1-10a (10b-14

Colossians 1:21-29

Luke 10:38-42

Sunday

Morning: Psalms 19; 150

Joshua 6:15-27

Acts 22:30-23:11

Mark 2:1-12

Evening: Psalms 81; 113

Sunday

Morning Pss.: 103, 150

Numbers 27:12-23

Acts 19:11-20

Mark 1:14-20

Evening Pss.: 117, 139

16th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year C

Amos 8:1-12

Psalm 52

Colossians 1:15-28

Luke 10:38-42

Sunday, July 17-23, Year C

Genesis 18:1-10a

Psalm 15 (1)

Colossians 1:15-28

Luke 10:38-42

Semicontinuous reading and psalm

Amos 8:1-12

Psalm 52 (8)

* The Eighth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two

 

Sermon, Mary and Martha, Hillcrest UMC, July 18, 2010

 

For the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for July 4, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

 

Episcopal and Presbyterian Readings:

 

Joshua 6:15-27

 

            15 On the seventh day they rose early, at dawn, and marched around the city in the same manner seven times. It was only on that day that they marched around the city seven times. 16 And at the seventh time, when the priests had blown the trumpets, Joshua said to the people, “Shout! For the LORD has given you the city. 17 The city and all that is in it shall be devoted to the LORD for destruction. Only Rahab the prostitute and all who are with her in her house shall live because she hid the messengers we sent. 18 As for you, keep away from the things devoted to destruction, so as not to covet and take any of the devoted things and make the camp of Israel an object for destruction, bringing trouble upon it. 19 But all silver and gold, and vessels of bronze and iron, are sacred to the LORD; they shall go into the treasury of the LORD.” 20 So the people shouted, and the trumpets were blown. As soon as the people heard the sound of the trumpets, they raised a great shout, and the wall fell down flat; so the people charged straight ahead into the city and captured it. 21 Then they devoted to destruction by the edge of the sword all in the city, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys.

            22 Joshua said to the two men who had spied out the land, “Go into the prostitute’s house, and bring the woman out of it and all who belong to her, as you swore to her.” 23 So the young men who had been spies went in and brought Rahab out, along with her father, her mother, her brothers, and all who belonged to her–they brought all her kindred out–and set them outside the camp of Israel. 24 They burned down the city, and everything in it; only the silver and gold, and the vessels of bronze and iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the LORD. 25 But Rahab the prostitute, with her family and all who belonged to her, Joshua spared. Her family has lived in Israel ever since. For she hid the messengers whom Joshua sent to spy out Jericho.

                 26 Joshua then pronounced this oath, saying,

 

“Cursed before the LORD be anyone who tries

to build this city--this Jericho!

At the cost of his firstborn he shall lay its foundation,

and at the cost of his youngest he shall set up its gates!”

 

                 27 So the LORD was with Joshua; and his fame was in all the land. (Joshua 6:15-27, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here with some editing from July 20, 2008 (the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from July 23, 2006 (the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two):

 

The story of the capture of Jericho continues in today’s reading. It was reported yesterday that the people marched around the city of Jericho once each day for six days (Josh. 6:8-9, 11,13-14), following the LORD’s instructions (vv. 2-5), which Joshua passed on to the people (vv. 6-7, 10). “On the seventh day,” we are told, “they rose early and marched around the city seven times” (v. 15a), surely a sign of what was to come. “And at the seventh time, when the priests had blown the trumpets, Joshua said to the people, ‘Shout! For the LORD has given you the city’ ” (v. 16).

 

As Joshua’s instructions continue, he introduces what K. Lawson Younger calls “the first implementation of the ‘cherem,’ a ritual act” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Josh. 6:17). “The city and all that is in it shall be devoted (Mr@He, ch‘rem) to the LORD for destruction” (v. 17a). The key word here means “dedication to exclusion from profane use, to destruction, or to solely cultic use, ban, what is banned,” and the phrase “be devoted . . . for destruction” means here “fall under the ban” (William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 10th corrected impression, 1988, s.v. Mr@He, ch‘rem; cf. the verb MrH, ch-r-m, hifil conjugation, “devote to the ban . . . dedicate to destruction, especially. war booty, men, cattle). The New Jewish Publication Society translation says, “The city and everything in it are to be proscribed for the LORD” (v. 17a NJPS 1985, 1999), on which Carol Meyers says, “Proscribed denotes the sacral extermination, or ‘cherem,’ of the enemy, a linking of violence and sanctity common to war ideologies. The destroyed enemy items–people, animals, and objects–are consecrated to the deity who made the victory possible.” She adds that the ‘cherem’ is also mentioned in the Moabite Mesha stele” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, p. 474, on Josh. 6:17-19). On an Internet web site, “Bible and History,” the translation of the “Moabite Stone – The Mesha Stele – 930 BC” includes the following: “And Chemosh said to me: "Go take Nebo against Israel"; and I went by night and fought against it from break of dawn till noon, and I took it and slew all, seven thousand men, boys (?), and women, and girls, for I had devoted it to Ashtar-Chemosh,” (credited to George A Barton, Archaeology and the Bible, Seventh Edition, p. 460-461, on the Internet site, “Bible and History,”at http://www.piney.com/BabMoabite.html, accessed July 18, 2010). This part of the war is not mentioned in 2 Kings 3:1-27, but the Israelite narrators do note that the King of Moab “took his firstborn son who was to succeed him, and offered him as a burnt offering on the wall” (1 Kgs. 3:27), as an act of desperation because he “saw that the battle was going against him” (v. 26). “And great wrath came upon Israel, so they withdrew from him and returned to their own land” (v. 27). Herbert G. May suggests comparing this account with “the ban of destruction against Amalek in 1 Sam. 15” (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1962, reprint 1972, sec. 253 n, p. 294, on Josh. 6:17).

 

As Joshua’s instructions continue, he exempts Rahab and her family from the ban, according to the spies’ promise (Josh. 2:14, 17-20). Joshua says, “Only Rahab the prostitute and all who are with her in her house shall live because she hid the messengers we sent” (v. 17b). And he warns the people against keeping any of the things devoted to destruction: “As for you, keep away from the things devoted to destruction, so as not to covet and take any of the devoted things and make the camp of Israel an object for destruction, bringing trouble upon it. But all silver and gold, and vessels of bronze and iron, are sacred to the LORD; they shall go into the treasury of the LORD” (vv. 18-19). Of the phrase, “bringing trouble upon it [i.e., upon the Israelite camp],” Younger says it “anticipates the next story (7:25)” (op. cit., on v. 18). According to Herbert G. May, the phrase “ ‘the treasury of the LORD’ (compare 24) is written [some time later than Joshua] from the vantage-point of the later Temple at Jerusalem (see 9:21).” And May adds that “the allusion to vessels of iron would also reflect a time later than Joshua, for Iron did not come into significant usage until after 1200. Note similarly that 26 belongs to a time at least as late as the ninth century, for it is a post eventum prophecy (see 1 Kg. 16:34)” (op. cit., sec. 253 o, p. 294, on Josh. 6:19). Without getting into the question of whether Joshua, speaking under inspiration, might make such a specific prediction, we may at least assume that the later narrator of Joshua had reliable early sources.

 

In the account of the capture of Jericho, at the decisive moment, we are told, “the people shouted, and the trumpets were blown. As soon as the people heard the sound of the trumpets, they raised a great shout, and the wall fell down flat; so the people charged straight ahead into the city and captured it” (v. 20). And it appears–with the exception to be noted in the matter of Achan (7:6-26)–that the people carried out the cherem ban, as “they devoted to destruction by the edge of the sword all in the city, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys” (v. 21). But as promised, Rahab and her family were spared. “Joshua said to the two men who had spied out the land, ‘Go into the prostitute’s house, and bring the woman out of it and all who belong to her, as you swore to her. So the young men who had been spies went in and brought Rahab out, along with her father, her mother, her brothers, and all who belonged to her–they brought all her kindred out–and set them outside the camp of Israel” (vv. 22-23). And we are told that “her family has lived in Israel ever since,” because “she hid the messengers whom Joshua sent to spy out Jericho” (v. 25). Apart from Rahab and her family, the Israelites “burned down the city, and everything in it; only the silver and gold, and the vessels of bronze and iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the LORD” (v. 24).

 

And Joshua rounds off the victory, the cherem victory, with a poetic “oath”:

 

“Cursed (rUrxA, ’~rûr) before the LORD be anyone who tries

to build this city—this Jericho!

At the cost of his firstborn he shall lay its foundation,

and at the cost of his youngest he shall set up its gates!” (v. 26b, c, d, e)

 

In the last line, as noted above, May sees a “post eventum prophecy” that curses the man “Heil of Bethel [who] built Jericho; he laid its foundation at the cost of Abiram his firstborn, and set up its gates at the cost of his youngest son Segub, according to the word of the LORD, which he spoke by Joshua son of Nun” (1 Kgs. 16:34).

 

With the report of Joshua’s spreading fame, today’s reading closes. “So the LORD was with Joshua; and his fame was in all the land” (Josh. 6:27).

 

According to May, “A few years ago an outstanding archaeologist [J. Garstang] stated that there could be no doubt that it was the fourth city level (City D) at Jericho (Tell es-SulÛân) which was captured by the invading Israelites and devoted to destruction, the date of its fall being narrowed to between 1385 and 1250” (op. cit., sec. 253 h, pp. 293-4 on Josh. 6:1-7:1). May adds: “Double city walls presumably destroyed by an earthquake were pointed out; layers of burnt brick and grey ash, pockets of charcoal, charred roof beams, and carbonated grain and food were taken as mute evidence of the accuracy of the Biblical tale” (ibid., p. 294). But later archaeological work has failed to support these conclusions. May adds:

 

But more recent excavations have necessitated a revision of these conclusions. The Middle Bronze Age occupation came to an end perhaps after the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt in 1580, and to this period must be dated the city which earlier had been ascribed to Joshua. Little evidence of a Late Bronze Age (1550-1200) city was found; there were the remains of the foundations of a wall and a contemporary floor a little more than a yard square on which was a small oven and a 14th cent. Juglet. A so-called ‘Middle Building’ found by Garstang belongs to the second part of the Late Bronze Age, perhaps contemporary with the Late Bronze tombs, the date of which is uncertain, with suggestions ranging from 1350 to the late 13th cent. Kathleen Kenyon, director of more recent excavations, has affirmed that present evidence points to the middle of the 14th cent. for the end of the Late Bronze occupation, but that there might have been a later settlement. It may be that Joshua’s Jericho was not much more than a fort above the spring. (ibid., sec. 253 i)

 

According to Robert C. Dentan, “the complete devastation of the city represents the radical break between the old Canaanite society and the new Israelite one” (NOAB, 2nd ed., on Josh. 6:15-27). Warfare then–as also now–had terrible effects. As for Joshua’s command, “The city and all that is in it shall be devoted to the LORD for destruction” (Josh. 6:17), and the assurance that “the LORD was with Joshua” (v. 27), one can only trust, with Abraham, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” (Gen. 18:25).

 

Acts 22:30-23:11

 

Paul before the Council

 

            30 Since he wanted to find out what Paul was being accused of by the Jews, the next day he released him and ordered the chief priests and the entire council to meet. He brought Paul down and had him stand before them.

            23:1 While Paul was looking intently at the council he said, “Brothers, up to this day I have lived my life with a clear conscience before God.” 2 Then the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near him to strike him on the mouth. 3 At this Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! Are you sitting there to judge me according to the law, and yet in violation of the law you order me to be struck?” 4 Those standing nearby said, “Do you dare to insult God’s high priest?” 5 And Paul said, “I did not realize, brothers, that he was high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a leader of your people.’ “

            6 When Paul noticed that some were Sadducees and others were Pharisees, he called out in the council, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. I am on trial concerning the hope of the resurrection of the dead.” 7 When he said this, a dissension began between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. 8 (The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, or angel, or spirit; but the Pharisees acknowledge all three.) 9 Then a great clamor arose, and certain scribes of the Pharisees’ group stood up and contended, “We find nothing wrong with this man. What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?” 10 When the dissension became violent, the tribune, fearing that they would tear Paul to pieces, ordered the soldiers to go down, take him by force, and bring him into the barracks.

            11 That night the Lord stood near him and said, “Keep up your courage! For just as you have testified for me in Jerusalem, so you must bear witness also in Rome.” (Acts 22:30-23:11, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here from August 17, 2009 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 17, Year One), when they were repeated from October 6, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 5, Year Two), comments were repeated from July 20, 2008 (the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from August 20, 2007 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 17, Year One), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from October 9, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 5, Year Two), from July 23, 2006 (the Sunday closest to July 20, 2006), from July 18, 2004, in an email sent July 17, 2004, for July 17 and 18, and from August 15, 2005 (Monday of the week of the Thirteenth Sunday after Pentecost, Year One).

 

In the reading for last Sunday (July 11, 2010), Paul and his party arrived in Jerusalem after being warned at Ptolemais against going to Jerusalem by the prophet Agabus (Acts 21:12). In the continuation we learn how the leading Christians of Jerusalem welcomed them (Acts 21:17) and rejoiced in the report of Paul’s ministry among the Gentiles (v. 19). But Paul is advised on ways to prove to the Jewish Christians of Jerusalem that he is not opposed to the Mosaic Law. He is to go through the rites of purification with four men under a vow, and pay for the shaving of their heads, which he does (vv. 21-26). But while Paul is in the temple completing this ritual process, he is accused by “Jews from Asia” of preaching against Jewish people and the temple, and of bringing Greeks into the temple (vv. 27-29). These opponents stir up a mob action, “trying to kill” Paul, which was prevented by the coming of the Roman tribune (vv. 30-31). And the tribune takes Paul into custody, as much, perhaps, for his protection as to investigate the incident (vv. 32-33). The crowd continues to cry out against Paul, shouting, “Away with him!” (v. 36, cf. 34-36). Paul surprises the tribune, who had mistaken him for “the Egyptian who recently stirred up a revolt” (v. 38), with his knowledge of Greek (v. 37) and his hometown, Tarsus of Cilicia (v. 39); so he is permitted to speak to the crowd, which he does “in the Hebrew language” (v. 38). By the words, “in the Hebrew language,” Luke means that Paul spoke “in the Aramaic dialect,” according to Beverly Roberts Gaventa, and “Paul’s use of Aramaic signals his identification with this Jewish audience” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Acts 21:40). This speech of Paul to the Jewish audience in the Jerusalem temple (Acts 22:1-21) is the second of three accounts in Acts of his conversion and call to be the missionary to the Gentiles (cf. 9:1-31; 26:12-23). In the temple the Jewish audience hears him out until he reports that the Lord “said to me, ‘Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles’ ” (22:21), which makes them angry and almost occasions another riot. But the tribune intervenes again and orders him to be examined by flogging (v. 24), from which is only prevented by Paul’s claim to Roman citizenship (vv. 25-29).

 

This brings us to today’s reading. The tribune “wanted to find out what Paul was being accused of by the Jews, [so] the next day he released him and ordered the chief priests and the entire council (pa:n to; sunevdrion, pan to synedrion) to meet,” and “he brought Paul down and had him stand before them” (v. 30). According to Christopher R. Matthews, “the tribune calls for an advisory meeting of the council” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Acts 22:30), but this was “to get evidence, not to try him” (ibid., on vv. 22:30-23:11). Since Paul is not on trial, though some have called for his execution (Acts 22:22), his opening claim of a “clear conscience” is understandable. “While Paul was looking intently at the council he said, ‘Brothers, up to this day I have lived my life with a clear conscience before God’ ” (23:1). But when “the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near him to strike him on the mouth” (v. 2), Paul’s response is harder to fathom. “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! Are you sitting there to judge me according to the law, and yet in violation of the law you order me to be struck?” (v. 3). According to Allan J. McNicol, this high priest, Ananias, was “the son of Nedebaeus who was Jewish high priest ca. A.D. 47-58” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Ananias, citing Josephus [Ant. 20.103, 131, 179, 205, refs. from Loveday Alexander, The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, on Acts 22:30-23:10]). When informed that he was addressing, or better, “insulting” (loidorei:V, loidoreis, from loidorevw, loidoreÇ, “revile, abuse tinav, tina, someone, BDAG), the high priest (v. 4), Paul claims ignorance and apologizes, noting that the Torah commands, “You shall not speak evil of a leader of your people” (v. 5, citing Exod. 22:28). According to Alexander:

 

Paul’s exchange with him [Ananias] is difficult to explain . . . even within the terms of Luke’s own interests; Barrett (1994-9: ii. 1062) says of this passage, ‘There is historical material behind this paragraph, but it is deep and remote.’ Luke’s account of the hearing does not follow exact judicial procedures, but it does convey some of the atmosphere of corruption and factionalism that pervades Josephus’ account of the procuratorship of Felix. Paul is able to exploit this factionalism to his own advantage (vv. 6-8), and Luke highlights a positive response to Paul from at least some within the Pharisaic party. (ibid.)

 

Paul takes note of this “factionalism”: When he “noticed that some were Sadducees and others were Pharisees,” he claims to be a Pharisee and believe in resurrection (Acts. 23:6), causing “a dissension . . . between the Pharisees and the Sadducees” (v.7). Parenthetically (NRSV, TNIV), Luke explains, “The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, or angel, or spirit; but the Pharisees acknowledge all three” (v. 8). Some “scribes of the Pharisees’ group” conclude, “We find nothing wrong with this man, and they ask, “What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?’ ” (v. 9), which reminds us of Gamaliel’s cautionary warning to the council (Acts 5:38-39). The Council remains undecided, and Luke tells us that “When the dissension became violent, the tribune, fearing that they would tear Paul to pieces, ordered the soldiers to go down, take him by force, and bring him into the barracks” (v. 10). Overnight, Paul is encouraged. “That night the Lord stood near him and said, ‘Keep up your courage! For just as you have testified for me in Jerusalem, so you must bear witness also in Rome’ ” (v. 11). Luke, who knows the outcome when he writes, anticipates the continuation in Acts, chapters 23-28, where Paul remains a prisoner. But during the storm and the shipwreck Paul will be the encourager who offers hope (Acts 27:21-26). We all need the kind of faith that Paul had to bring us through our own trials.

 

Mark 2:1-12

 

Jesus Heals a Paralytic (Mt 9.2-8; Lk 5.17-26)

 

            2:1 When he returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at home. 2 So many gathered around that there was no longer room for them, not even in front of the door; and he was speaking the word to them. 3 Then some people came, bringing to him a paralyzed man, carried by four of them. 4 And when they could not bring him to Jesus because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him; and after having dug through it, they let down the mat on which the paralytic lay. 5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” 6 Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, 7 “Why does this fellow speak in this way? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 8 At once Jesus perceived in his spirit that they were discussing these questions among themselves; and he said to them, “Why do you raise such questions in your hearts? 9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Stand up and take your mat and walk’? 10 But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he said to the paralytic—11 “I say to you, stand up, take your mat and go to your home.” 12 And he stood up, and immediately took the mat and went out before all of them; so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, “We have never seen anything like this!” (Mark 2:1-12, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here from February 25, 2010 (Thursday in the week of the First Sunday of Lent, Year Two), when they were based on those of July 14, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 13, Year One, when comments were repeated with some editing from January 14, 2009 (Thursday in the week of the First Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), and earlier, as indicated there.

 

The account of the Healing of a Paralytic and Forgiving his Sin occurs in an early sequence of events, mostly miracles, but some controversies, in Mark’s Gospel that is closely followed by Luke (Mk. 1:21-3:19; Lk. 4:31-6:19). Matthew has parallel material in chapters 8, 4, 9, 12 and 10 (cf Kurt Aland, ed., Synopsis of the Four Gospels, rev. printing, 1985, p. 342) Parallel passages for this reading are presented in the separate file, Healing a Paralytic; Forgiving Sin. According to Mark, Jesus returns “to Capernaum after some days” (Mk. 2:1; cf. “his own town,” Mt. 9:1), which would be returning from the preaching tour (1:45). In Matthew Jesus returns from the other side of the sea and the healing of the Gadarene Demoniacs (Mt. 8:28-34; cf Mk. 5:1-17; Lk. 8:26-37). Luke’s setting for the current account is less definite. “One day, while he was teaching, Pharisees and teachers of the law were sitting near by (they had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem); and the power of the Lord was with him to heal” (Lk. 5:17). In the preceding verse Jesus has withdrawn to pray (Lk. 5:16), and Luke’s previous locale is indefinite, “Once, when he was in one of the cities” (Lk. 5:12).

 

Mark’s pace slows a bit to give detailed attention to Jesus’ healing of the paralyzed man (Mk. 2:1-12; cf. Mt. 9:1-8; Lk. 5:17-26). To this point, the opposition to Jesus has been the demons (Mk. 1:23-26, 32, 34), but now we meet a series of events in which the opposition of scribes Pharisees and even the Herodians (3:6) comes to light. Mark refers to the large number of people gathered (Mk. 2:2) as an obstacle for those trying to bring the paralyzed man to Jesus (v. 3). “And when they could not bring him to Jesus because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him; and after having dug through it, they let down the mat on which the paralytic lay” (Mk. 2:4). For Luke, the presence of the crowds is noted, but it emphasizes the fact that “the power of the Lord was with him [Jesus] to heal” (Lk. 5:17). He also tells how the paralyzed man’s friends had to let him and his bed down from “the roof,” “through the tiles (kevramoi, keramoi)” (Lk. 5:19). This, incidentally, is the only instance in the New Testament of the word kevramoV, keramos, defined as “a roof tile” (F. Wilber Gingrich, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed., rev. Frederick W. Danker, 1983, s.v. kevramoV, keramos), in the New Testament. This meaning is cited from Herodas (3rd c. B.C.); an earlier meaning “clay,” or “earthenware vessel,” is cited from Homer and others (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., 2000, s.v. kevramoV, keramos). According to Marion Lloyd Soards, “Through the tiles is Luke’s adjustment of Mark’s story to present a tiled roof rather than the mud-plaster roof in which Mark’s account says the people ‘dug’ a hole through which to lower the paralytic” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Lk. 5:19).

 

Matthew omits all reference to the overcrowding and the need to let the paralyzed man down through the roof (Mk. 2:2-4; Lk. 5:19). He also abbreviates the reference to the scribes’ charge of blasphemy (Mt. 9:3; cf. Mk. 2:6-7; Lk. 5:21). But the main outlines of the healing and the ensuing controversy are clear in each Gospel. Matthew says, “And just then some people were carrying a paralyzed man lying on a bed” (Mt. 9:2a), and proceeds immediately to the point of the story, “When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven’ ” (Mt. 9:2b, 5; cf. Mk. 2:5, 9; Lk. 5:20, 23). In Matthew and Mark, Jesus addresses the paralytic as Tevknon (Teknon), literally “child” (“son” NRSV), whereas in Luke, he says “Anqrwpe (AnthrÇpe),” literally, “O man” (“Friend” NRSV). In the English translation, the words “your sins are forgiven” are identical in the three accounts, but in Greek, Matthew and Mark have the present tense form ajfiventai (aphientai), whereas Luke’s version has the perfect tense form ajfevwntai (apheÇntai, which is found in several mss. of Mk.). According to I Howard Marshall, the perfect tense form “expresses the abiding force of the forgiveness,” as compared with Mark’s “punctiliar present” (Commentary on Luke, NIGTC, 1978, p. 213, on Lk. 5:20).

 

But these words assuring forgiveness didn’t set well with “some of the scribes.” “Why does this fellow speak in this way? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Mk. 2:7; cf. Mt. 9:3; ‘the scribes and the Pharisees,’ Lk. 5:21). When this way of healing is challenged by the scribes, the discussion seems to come to a focus in the point of the story–apart from the healing, of course. Jesus says, “But so that you may know (eijdh:te, eid‘te, second person plural verb ending) that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins–he said to the paralytic–I say to you (soiv, soi, second person singular pronoun), stand up ( e[geire, egeire), take (ai\ron, airon) your mat and go (u{page, hypage, second person singular imperative verb forms) to your home” (Mk. 2:10-11; cf. Mt. 9:6; Lk. 5:24). Mark knows, of course, that Jesus is divine. “The beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mk. 1:1; cf. 15:39). But he lets the story speak for itself. Sometimes, that’s the best Christian witness. Tell what you know. Jesus doesn’t really unscramble the issues, but he asserts an authority that amazes the crowd (Mk. 2:12; Mt. 9:8; Lk. 5:26). The point is not that the paralysis was caused by sin–cf. John 9:3–but it’s certainly possible that they both troubled the man, and that Jesus combined both spiritual and physical healing.

 

Some events in the Gospels are called controversy stories, for example, when Jesus’ disciples plucked heads of grain on the sabbath and were challenged by the Pharisees (Mk. 2:23-28). Others are called miracle stories, for obvious reasons, but Jesus’ healing of the paralyzed man has been called a mixed form. The issues of healing and forgiveness seem intertwined, as noted above. Form critics call the Healing of the Paralyzed Man a “mixed type” because it combines a miracle of healing with a controversy dialogue which leads to a striking saying–a “Pronouncement Story” (Vincent Taylor’s translation of R. Bultmann’s “apophthegm” category). The climactic saying fits with both kinds: “But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins . . . I say to you, stand up, take your mat and go to your home” (vv. 10-11; note the indications of singular and plural, above). The healing of the paralyzed man symbolizes the spiritual healing of forgiveness of sins. The Son of Man’s authority–Jesus’ authority–to forgive sins is proclaimed to all.

 

As noted above, for the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for July 4, 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