Daily Scripture Readings     

Friday (July 2, 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.

Friday

AM Psalm 140, 142

PM Psalm 141, 143:1-11(12)

Num. 24:1-13

Rom. 8:12-17

Matt. 22:15-22

[Walter Rauschenbusch, Washington Gladden & Jacob Riis]:

http://www.satucket.com/lectionary/rauschenbusch_gladden_riis.html

Psalm 72:12-17

Isaiah 46:8-11; James 2:14-18; Matthew 7:7-12

Eucharistic Readings:

Psalm 119:1-8

Amos 8:4-6,9-12; Matthew 9:9-13

Friday

Morning: Psalms 88; 148

Num. 24:1-13

Rom. 8:12-17

Matt. 22:15-22

Evening: Psalms 6; 20

Friday

Morning Pss.: 130, 148

Num. 13:1-3, 21-30

Rom. 2:25-3:8

Matt. 18:21-35

Evening Pss.: 32, 139

 

Year C Daily Readings

Psalm 66:1-9

Jeremiah 51:47-58

2 Corinthians 8:1-7

* Friday 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 18, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

 

Episcopal and Presbyterian Readings:

 

Numbers 24:1-13

 

24:1 Now Balaam saw that it pleased the LORD to bless Israel, so he did not go, as at other times, to look for omens, but set his face toward the wilderness. 2 Balaam looked up and saw Israel camping tribe by tribe. Then the spirit of God came upon him, 3 and he uttered his oracle, saying:

 

"The oracle of Balaam son of Beor,

the oracle of the man whose eye is clear,

4 the oracle of one who hears the words of God,

who sees the vision of the Almighty,

who falls down, but with eyes uncovered:

5 how fair are your tents, O Jacob,

your encampments, O Israel!

6 Like palm groves that stretch far away,

like gardens beside a river,

like aloes that the LORD has planted,

like cedar trees beside the waters.

7 Water shall flow from his buckets,

and his seed shall have abundant water,

his king shall be higher than Agag,

and his kingdom shall be exalted.

8 God who brings him out of Egypt,

is like the horns of a wild ox for him;

he shall devour the nations that are his foes

and break their bones.

He shall strike with his arrows.

9 He crouched, he lay down like a lion,

and like a lioness; who will rouse him up?

Blessed is everyone who blesses you,

and cursed is everyone who curses you."

 

10 Then Balak's anger was kindled against Balaam, and he struck his hands together. Balak said to Balaam, "I summoned you to curse my enemies, but instead you have blessed them these three times. 11 Now be off with you! Go home! I said, 'I will reward you richly,' but the LORD has denied you any reward." 12 And Balaam said to Balak, "Did I not tell your messengers whom you sent to me, 13 'If Balak should give me his house full of silver and gold, I would not be able to go beyond the word of the LORD, to do either good or bad of my own will; what the LORD says, that is what I will say'?  (Numbers 24:1-13, NRSV)

 

The following comments are based on those of July 4, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from July 7, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two), when comments were revised and supplemented from July 2, 2004 in an email sent July 1, 2004, for July 2-4.

 

As noted yesterday Balak is stunned by Balaam’s second oracle (Num. 23:18-24) in which he blesses rather than curses Israel. “Do not curse them at all,” he says, “and do not bless them at all” (v. 25). “In this second narrative segment between oracles,” says Nili S. Fox, “Balak, in distress, wants to abandon cursing Israel if that will nullify the blessing. The foolish Moabite king, in contrast to the seer, is not resigned to God’s will as a fait accompli” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Num. 23:25-24:2). “Balak abandons the hope of a curse, and would be satisfied if the prophet withheld his blessing from Israel,” says Rabbi J. H. Hertz. “But hoping against hope, he invites Balaam to make a third attempt” (Pentateuch & Haftorahs, 2nd ed., 24th printing, 1981, on Num. 23:25). And so, in spite of Balaam’s reminder that he must do “whatever the LORD says” (v. 26), Balak decides to try again.

 

“Come now,” says Balak,” I will take you to another place; perhaps it will please God that you may curse them for me from there” (v. 27, cf. v. 13). So they move to “the top of Peor ( rOfP4ha, happe‘ôr) which overlooks the wasteland” (v. 28). Peor is “a mountain in Moab . . . apparently the site of a shrine to Baal (Num. 25:3, 5) with which Israelites were involved to their subsequent detriment (Num. 25:18; Josh. 22:17; Ps. 106:28). Its precise location is unknown” (The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, 2nd ed., 1996, s.v. Peor). Rabbi. Hertz locates the mountain “in the neighbourhood of Pisgah (Deut. iii, 27-29)” (op. cit.). And again Balaam directs Balak to “build me seven altars here, and prepare seven bulls and seven rams for me” (v. 29), and Balak follows directions, offering “a bull and a ram on each altar” (v. 30). According to the narrator, Balaam saw that it pleased the LORD to bless Israel, so he did not go, as at other times, to look for omens, but set his face toward the wilderness” (24:1). “This time,” says Fox, “Balaam does not search for omens in the process of seeking divine spirit, implying that he did so previously” (loc. cit.). The Rabbi finds this significant. Commenting on the word “enchantments” (Num. 24:1 JPS 1917, for NRSV “omens”), he says, “Or ‘omens.’ He would no longer, even outwardly, act the sorcerer and retire to a lonely mountain peak for his auguries. He would remain in the presence of Balak, and there and then speak as the Spirit of God moved him. ‘He now rose from the character of heathen seer to that of a true prophet’ (Abarbanel)” (op. cit., on 24:1).

 

“Balaam’s personality is an old enigma, which has baffled the skill of commentators,” says the Hertz (ibid., p. 668 in Introduction to “The Book of Balaam, Num. 22:2-25:9). On the one hand, he takes direction from the LORD (Yahweh), the God of Israel. “Then Balaam said to Balak, ‘Stay here beside your burnt offerings while I go aside. Perhaps the LORD [YHWH] will come to meet me. Whatever he shows me I will tell you’” (Num. 23:3). “It seems probable, says the Rabbi, “that he [Balaam] 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 worshipers of the true God, who are unconnected to Israel” (ibid.). On the other hand, his Babylonian origin and his methods suggest that he practiced divination, which is condemned (Deut. 18:10). Commenting on Numbers 23:1-6, Bernard W. Anderson says, “Babylonian diviners resorted to this kind of sacrificial ceremony to obtain an omen” (NOAB, 2nd ed.). It is interesting to note that Balaam followed this practice for the first two oracles, but, as noted above, forsakes it.

 

In preparation for the third oracle, Balaam “looked up and saw Israel camping tribe by tribe” (24:2a). “For the first time,” says Fox, “Balaam views the entire Israelite camp (cf. 22:41; 23:13)” (op. cit., on 24:2). The third oracle uses language that identifies Balaam as a prophet:

 

The oracle (Mxun4, ne’um) of Balaam son of Beor,

            the oracle (Mxun4, ne’um) of the man whose eye is clear,

the oracle (Mxun4, ne’um) of one who hears the words of God (lx27-yrem4x9, ’imrê-x’ēl),

            who sees the vision of the Almighty (yDaw hzeH3ma, machazēh šadday),

            who falls down, but with eyes uncovered; (Num. 24:3b, 4, NRSV)

 

According to William L. Holladay, the word Mxun4 (ne’um) is now a “fixed technical term in prophetic speech and in combination with other formulas, esp. kōh ’āmar yhwh: originally whispering, >declaration, decision” (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 10th corrected impression, 1988, s.v. Mxun4, ne’um). Of “who falls down,” Jo Ann Hackett says, it is “perhaps a reference to ecstatic behavior; see also 1`1:24-29; 1 Sam. 10:5-13; 19:20-24” (The HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Num. 24:3-4). The Rabbi comments on the words, “fallen down, yet with opened eyes” (v. 4 JPS 1917): the prophet, he says, is “overpowered by the inrush of the Divine Spirit, which renders the recipient weak and unable to stand on his feet. It is spiritual ecstasy; when the bodily senses become numbed, and only the eyes of the mind are opened to see the Divine vision and to comprehend the Prophetic message” (op. cit., on v. 4). Fox takes note of the divine name “the Almighty,” which he notes “also [in] v. 16,” and adds, “Heb. ‘Shadai’ is a epithet of God common in the patriarchal stories (e.g., Gen. 17:1; 28:3; 35:11. Its likely meaning, ‘high,’ is related to the Akkadian term for mountain” (op. cit., on 24:4). David P. Wright says, “Each oracle begins with a statement reflecting on Balaam’s prophetic knowledge or obligation, authenticating him as a prophet; after that follow the words of blessing” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Num. 24:3-4). According to Fox, “Balaam opens this oracle with self-praise.  He considers himself a true prophet of God” (op. cit., on 24:3-4).

 

This oracle is even more exuberant about blessings and a promising future for Israel. “How fair are your tents, O Jacob, / your encampments (jAyt,noK4w4m9, miškenōteykā, ‘dwellings’ NJPS 1985, 1999), O Israel!” (Num. 24:5 NRSV). According to Fox, “this idyllic portrayal of the Israelites in their homes is noted in the midrash. In Jewish liturgy this line begins the daily morning service, since tents and dwellings are understood to refer to the synagogue” (ibid., on v. 5). Israel is compared to flourishing plants: “palm groves that stretch far away,” “gardens beside a river,” “aloes that the LORD has planted,” and “cedar trees beside the waters” (v. 6). “The depiction of lush vegetation contrasts with the wilderness background of Balaam’s view of Israel’s encampment (24:1)” (ibid., on vv. 6-7). These plants will be well watered (v. 7a, b, cf. 6b, d); Israel’s “king shall be higher than Agag, / and his kingdom shall be exalted” (v. 7c, d).

 

Wright observes, “The mention of the king reflects the monarchic period. Agag, moreover is the later king of Amalek (1 Sam. 15:8” (op. cit., on v. 7). God’s power as Israel’s protector is emphasized with comparison with “a wild ox” (v. 8), “a lion,” and “a lioness” (v. 9). “God who brings him out of Egypt, / is like the horns of a wild ox for him; / he shall devour the nations that are his foes” (v. 8a, b, c). Note that it is God who defeats (“devours”) the enemy nations. “He crouched, he lay down like a lion, / and like a lioness; who will rouse him up?” (v. 9a). In other words, who dares to oppose the LORD God Almighty? “Blessed is everyone who blesses you [Israel],” says Balaam as he concludes the third oracle, “and cursed is everyone who curses you” (v. 9b). “The oracle ends,” says Fox, “by returning to the lion imagery at the end of the previous oracle (23:24), and reiterating the promise to the patriarchs that anyone who blesses Israel will be blessed in turn, but anyone who curses her is himself cursed (Gen. 12:3; 27:29)” (op. cit., on vv. 8-9). In that vein, “Far from being affected by blessings and cursings from without,” says the Rabbi, “Israel would himself be a source of blessing or cursing to others, according as they treated him. Hence let Balak and all Israel’s enemies be warned!” (op. cit., on v. 9).

 

In each of three oracles, Balaam has failed to satisfy Balak by cursing Israel. At this point, “Balak’s anger was kindled against Balaam, and he struck his hands together” (v. 10a). “This,” says Fox, “is a gesture of anguish and anger (cf. Ezek. 6:11; 21:19, 22; 22:13; Lam. 2:15)” (on v. 10). So Balak calls the deal off. “I summoned you to curse my enemies, but instead you have blessed them these three times. Now be off with you! Go home! I said, ‘I will reward you richly,’ but the LORD has denied you any reward” (Num. 24:10-11). This reaction, says Fox, was “no doubt exacerbated by the pronouncement that he who curses Israel will be cursed in turn” (on vv. 10-14). But Balaam as much as says, “I told you so, didn’t I?” “Did I not tell your messengers whom you sent to me, ‘If Balak should give me his house full of silver and gold, I would not be able to go beyond the word of the LORD, to do either good or bad of my own will; what the LORD says, that is what I will say’?” (vv. 12-13).

 

Romans 8:12-17

 

12 So then, brothers and sisters, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh-- 13 for if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. 15 For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received a spirit of adoption. When we cry, "Abba! Father!" 16 it is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ--if, in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him (Romans 8:12-17, NRSV)

 

After defining life according to the Spirit (Rom. 8:1-11), Paul directs, or rather, concludes, that we must live accordingly. “We are debtors,” he says, “not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh” (v. 12), because “if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live” (v. 13). But the tone is not so much that of exhortation as of rejoicing as he lists one benefit after another which accrues to the life of the Christian believer who lives “by the Spirit” and not “according to the flesh” (v. 12, cf. vv. 4, 5. 6. 7-8, 9, 10, 13, 14-17). Wilbur T. Dayton describes this passage as an ascent:

 

step by step to a pinnacle of Christian triumph perhaps unmatched elsewhere in Scripture. This culminates in verses 35-39. Verses 12-25 are steps up the mountain: they refer to freedom (vv. 12-14), sonship (vv. 15-17), compete redemption (vv. 17-23), and a stabilizing hope (vv. 24-25). (“Romans,” The Wesleyan Bible Commentary, vol. V, 1965, p. 52).

 

“For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God” (v. 14). In contrast the slavery to sin described in chapter 7 (esp. v. 6), John Knox and John Reumann comment, “The Spirit does not make slaves of us, but children of God” (John Knox, John Reumann, NOAB, 2nd ed., 1994, on Rom. 8:12-17), by adoption confirmed by the “witness of the Spirit.” “For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received a spirit of adoption. When we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’ It is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God” (vv. 15-16). The word “Abba” is described as the “Aramaic xBAxa (’abba’ ) vocative form, originally a term of endearment, later used as title and personal name; rarely used in ref. to God) father, translit. abba, Aram. form used in prayer (Dalman, Worte 157) and in the family circle, taken over by Greek-speaking Christians as a liturgical formula (Ltzm., Hdb. On Ro 8:15), transl. o Jpathvr [ho patēr] (= voc., s. s.v. pathvr [patēr]) Mk. 14:36; Ro. 8:15; Gal. 4:6” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [=BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., 2000, s.v. ajbba, abba).

 

“This freedom and sonship,” says Wilbur T. Dayton,

 

is not a goal toward which we strive in our own feeble efforts. It is a gift of God by the Spirit. . . . [With reference to v. 15, cited above, Dayton continues.] We actually receive the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of adoption. The term ‘regeneration’ stresses the new birth. ‘Adoption’ stresses the privileges and rights that go with one’s inheritance as son. Both are by the Spirit. We are born of the Spirit (John 3:5) and have the Spirit of adoption, whereby we confidently address God as Father. (The Wesleyan Bible Commentary, V, 1965, 2nd printing 1971, on Rom. 8:15-17)

 

Dayton clearly relates the sonship described here–clearly not excluding daughters–to the experience of conversion, turning from sin to God’s mercy and forgiveness, and thus to righteousness and holy living. Dayton points to the assurance that comes with a genuine experience of God’s grace.

 

How do we know? Paul says we have two direct witnesses–that of the divine Spirit and that of our own human spirit. Being self-conscious and self-determining beings, we have some valid knowledge of ourselves and of our condition. This is not to be despised. But in a matter of so great importance it is well to have it confirmed. This the Holy Spirit does. My spirit says, ‘It is well with my soul.’ The Holy Spirit responds, ‘Yes, you are a son [or daughter].’ He does not witness contrary to but, rather, with our spirits. (ibid.)

 

John Wesley puts it this way: “The same Spirit beareth witness with our spirit - With the spirit of every true believer, by a testimony distinct from that of his own spirit, or the testimony of a good conscience. Happy they who enjoy this clear and constant” (Notes on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, Chapter VIII, on the Internet at

http://wesley.nnu.edu/john_wesley/notes/romans.htm#Chapter+VIII, accessed again, March 25, 2009).

 

A further result is our inheritance: “and if children, then heirs (klhronovmoi, klēronomoi), heirs (klhronovmoi, klēronomoi) of God and joint heirs (sugklhronovmoi, sygklēronomoi) with Christ—if, in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him” (v. 17). The preposition compounded with “heirs” to form “joint heirs,” sun (syn, as in Greek derivative words such a “symphony” and “synagogue”), emphasizes our relationship to Christ, “if, in fact, we suffer with (sumpavscomen, sympaschomen) him so that we may also be glorified with (sundoxasqw:men, syndoxasthōmen) him” (v. 17).

 

Dayton says,

 

The idea of sonship starts a whole new chain of ideas. In addition to awareness of sonship (v. 15) and the Spirit’s testimony to sonship (v. 16) there are the rights and benefits of sonship (v. 17). If children then heirs [citing v. 17ASB]. As sons [and daughters] we have promise of life. As heirs we have the life. Only here we do not await the death of another. It is an inheritance that we share with our living Father and Lord. Christ is an heir of God, eternally sharing with Him. So we share alongside Him–heir of what He is heir of. We are joint-heirs with Christ of the best that God has to give– Himself. To receive the full inheritance may involve suffering for us, as it did for Christ. ‘But we dare to suffer with Him in the confidence that we shall be also glorified with him, sharing the same eternal inheritance. (loc. cit.)

 

Matthew 22:15-22

 

The Question about Paying Taxes (Mk 12.13-17; Lk 20.20-26)

 

15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted to entrap him in what he said. 16 So they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that you are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one; for you do not regard people with partiality. 17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?" 18 But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, "Why are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites? 19 Show me the coin used for the tax." And they brought him a denarius. 20 Then he said to them, "Whose head is this, and whose title?" 21 They answered, "The emperor's." Then he said to them, "Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor's, and to God the things that are God's." 22 When they heard this, they were amazed; and they left him and went away.  (Matthew 22:15-22, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here from December 5, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the First Sunday of Advent, Year Two), when comments were repeated from July 4, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two), when comments were repeated from December 8, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the First Sunday of Advent, Year Two), when comments were repeated with supplement from July 7, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two) when comments were combined and revised from July 2, 2004 in an email sent July 1, 2004, for July 2-4, and from December 3, 2005 (Saturday in the week of the first Sunday in Advent, Year Two, with some repetition there from an earlier E-mail, sent December 5, 2003, for the weekend.).

 

Mark’s version of the reading about the question of paying taxes to the emperor (Mk. 12:13-17) and Luke’s version (Lk. 20:20-26) are presented with Matthew’s version in a table in a separate file, On Tribute to Caesar. For recent comments on Mark’s version, see the Archive for August 19, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 17, Year One). For recent comments on Luke’s version, see the Archive for June 16, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year One).

 

In today’s Gospel reading, Jesus responds to questions from the Pharisees about paying taxes to the emperor (Mt. 22:15-22; cf. Mk. 12:13-17 and Lk. 20:20-26, where the details are essentially the same). (Saturday’s reading will include the question from the Sadducees about the resurrection, Mt. 22:23-33, and the Pharisees’ question about the greatest commandment.). The Pharisees “sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians” with a question that, as it is introduced, seems innocent enough: “Teacher, we know that you are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one; for you do not regard people with partiality” (v. 16). But we are informed in advance that the question is a trap. “Then the Pharisees went and plotted to entrap him in what he said” (v. 15; cf. Mk. 12:13; Lk. 20:20). The question itself seems simple enough: “Is it lawful to pay taxes to the [Roman] emperor, or not?” (Mt. 22:17; cf. Mk. 12:14; Lk. 20:22).

 

Matthew sees the question as motivated by “malice” (v. 18). According to Elwyn E. Tilden and Bruce M. Metzger, “If Jesus approved paying taxes he would offend the nationalistic parties; if he disapproved payment he could be reported as disloyal to the empire” (NOAB, 2nd ed., 1994, on Mt. 22:17). A former student of mine, Dr. Sue Scott, passed on an interesting perspective on this incident. When Jesus asked for a coin and his opponents produced one which bore the emperor’s “head” and “title,” they proved to be breaking the commandment about “graven images”:

 

You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” (Exodus 20:4, NRSV)

 

J. Andrew Overman comments on the question, “Whose head?” “Only coins from the imperial mint, probably silver denarii, had images and inscriptions honoring the emperor as divine” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mt. 22:20). The Rabbis would have considered the image as such as breaking this commandment. By that standard, the Pharisees in effect condemned themselves.

 

Jesus’ first response seems the sharpest in Matthew. “But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, ‘Why are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites?’ ” (Mt. 22:18). “But knowing their hypocrisy, he said, ‘Why are you putting me to the test?’ ” (Mk. 22:15). “But he perceived their craftiness . . .” (Lk. 20:20). When writing later, perhaps Matthew’s sharpness reflects unpleasant tension between his Christian community and neighboring Pharisaic synagogues. In any case, Jesus’ question about the coin, “Whose head is this, and whose title?” (Mt. 22:20 = Mk. 12:16); “Whose head and whose title does it bear?” (Lk. 20:24) and his conclusion, underscored by Matthew’s “therefore” and Luke’s “then,” foiled their attempt to entrap him. “[Then] Give [therefore] to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mt. 22:21b; Mk. 12:17; Lk. 20:25).

 

N. T. Wright offers a subtle, but more complex, understanding of Jesus’ response on this occasion. He proposes “that Jesus’ cryptic saying should be understood as a coded and subversive echo of Mattathias’ last words,” which he quotes from 1 Maccabees 2:66-8. The final sentence, in effect a call to arms against the Syrian oppressors, says, “Pay back the Gentiles in full, and obey the commands of the law,” which Antiochus Epiphanes had forbidden them to do. According to Wright, Jesus’ response echoes Mattathias. “Pay Caesar back what he is owed!  Render to Caesar what he deserves!” (Jesus and the Victory of God, 1992, 1996, p. 504). But in context, there is “a second layer of meaning.” Jesus

 

was facing a questioner with a Roman coin in his hand. Suddenly a counterpoint appears beneath the coded revolutionary meaning; faced with the coin, and with the implicit question of revolution, Jesus says, in effect, ‘Well then, you’d better pay Caesar back as he deserves!’ Had he told them to revolt? Had he told them to pay the tax? He had done neither. He had done both. Nobody could deny that the saying was revolution, but nor could anyone say that Jesus had forbidden payment of the tax. (ibid., p. 505)

 

But Wright adds that “Jesus the Galilean envisaged a different sort of revolution from that of Judas the Galilean. He was not advocating compromise with Rome; but nor was he advocating straightforward resistance of the sort that refuses to pay the tax today and sharpens its swords for battle tomorrow.” (ibid.). “The real revolution,” says Wright, “would not come about through the non-payment of taxes and the resulting violent confrontation. It would be a matter of total obedience to, and imitation of, Israel’s God; this would rule out violent revolution, as Matthew 5 makes clear. Jesus was summoning his hearers to the real revolution, which would come about through Israel reflecting the generous love of YHWH [God] into the whole world” (ibid., p. 507).

 

As noted above, for the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for June 18, 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