Daily Scripture Readings

Monday (August 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.

Monday

AM Psalm 80

PM Psalm 77, [79]

Judges 6:25-40

Acts 2:37-47

John 1:1-18

[Samuel David Ferguson]:

http://www.satucket.com/lectionary/Samuel_Ferguson.htm

Psalm 119:9-16

Sirach 51:13-26; 2 Peter 1:16-21; John 3:1-15

Eucharistic Readings:

Jeremiah 28:1-17; Psalm 119:89-96;

Matt. 14:13-21

Monday

Morning: Psalms 62; 145

Judges 6:25-40

Acts 2:37-47

John 1:1-18

Evening: Psalms 73; 9

Monday

Morning Pss.: 57, 145

Joshua 7:1-13

Rom. 13:8-14

Matt. 26:36-46

Evening Pss.: 85, 47

 

Year C Daily Readings

Psalm 127

Ecclesiastes 2:1-17

Colossians 3:18-4:1

* Monday in the week of the Tenth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year Two

 

For the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for July 19, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

 

Episcopal and Presbyterian Readings:

 

Judges 6:25-40

 

Gideon is Told to Destroy the Altar of Baal

 

            25 That night the LORD said to him, "Take your father's bull, the second bull seven years old, and pull down the altar of Baal that belongs to your father, and cut down the sacred pole that is beside it; 26 and build an altar to the LORD your God on the top of the stronghold here, in proper order; then take the second bull, and offer it as a burnt offering with the wood of the sacred pole that you shall cut down." 27 So Gideon took ten of his servants, and did as the LORD had told him; but because he was too afraid of his family and the townspeople to do it by day, he did it by night.

 

Gideon Destroys the Altar of Baal

 

            28 When the townspeople rose early in the morning, the altar of Baal was broken down, and the sacred pole beside it was cut down, and the second bull was offered on the altar that had been built. 29 So they said to one another, "Who has done this?" After searching and inquiring, they were told, "Gideon son of Joash did it." 30 Then the townspeople said to Joash, "Bring out your son, so that he may die, for he has pulled down the altar of Baal and cut down the sacred pole beside it." 31 But Joash said to all who were arrayed against him, "Will you contend for Baal? Or will you defend his cause? Whoever contends for him shall be put to death by morning. If he is a god, let him contend for himself, because his altar has been pulled down." 32 Therefore on that day Gideon was called Jerubbaal, that is to say, "Let Baal contend against him," because he pulled down his altar.

 

Gideon Musters Forces against the Approaching Enemy

 

            33 Then all the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the east came together, and crossing the Jordan they encamped in the Valley of Jezreel. 34 But the spirit of the LORD took possession of Gideon; and he sounded the trumpet, and the Abiezrites were called out to follow him. 35 He sent messengers throughout all Manasseh, and they too were called out to follow him. He also sent messengers to Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali, and they went up to meet them.

 

The Sign of the Fleece

 

            36 Then Gideon said to God, "In order to see whether you will deliver Israel by my hand, as you have said, 37 I am going to lay a fleece of wool on the threshing floor; if there is dew on the fleece alone, and it is dry on all the ground, then I shall know that you will deliver Israel by my hand, as you have said." 38 And it was so. When he rose early next morning and squeezed the fleece, he wrung enough dew from the fleece to fill a bowl with water. 39 Then Gideon said to God, "Do not let your anger burn against me, let me speak one more time; let me, please, make trial with the fleece just once more; let it be dry only on the fleece, and on all the ground let there be dew." 40 And God did so that night. It was dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground there was dew. (Judges 6:25-40, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here from August 4, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from August 7, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year Two).

 

Today’s reading is the second of five on Gideon (Judg., chaps. 6-8, as noted yesterday). It may be described as preparations for the battle with the Midianites in four scenes. In the first scene, the LORD tells Gideon to destroy his father’s “altar of Baal”: “That night the LORD said to him, ‘Take your father's bull, the second bull (yn9we0ha rPa, par hašš‘nî ) seven years old, and pull down the altar of Baal that belongs to your father, and cut down the sacred pole (hr!wex3hA, h~’ aš‘r~h) that is beside it’ ” (Judg. 6:25). According to Robert G. Boling, revised by Richard D. Nelson, “The dismantling of Joash’s altar [i.e., the altar of Gideon’s father, cf. 6:11] and the hacking down of the sacred pole associated with the goddess Asherah will provide legitimacy for Gideon’s alternate name, Jerubbaal (v. 32)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Judg. 6:25). Yairah Amit says, “In the Ugaritic pantheon Asherah is the consort of El, the old chief god. The word is used in the Bible both as the name of the goddess and as the term for a cultic object made of wood, which was evidently her symbol (see, e.g., Deut. 16:21-22)” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, p. 514, on Judg. 3:7). According to Daniel I. Block,

 

Scholars have long recognized . . . the reference to a second bull in this context to be pointless. Although many resolve the issue by deleting the reference to a second bull as a later scribal insertion, it is preferable to work with the received text and try to make sense of it. The most likely reading is provided by J. A Emerton, who derives hašš‘nî [yn9w0eha] from a different root (rather than ‘second’), meaning ‘to be exalted, of high rank’ (Judges, Ruth, The New American Commentary, vol. 6, p. 266 on Judg. 6:25-26;)

 

In a footnote (n. 556), Block adds that “Cognates have been suggested in Arabic and Syriac (where the root means ‘to sparkle, catch the eye’), as well as Ethiopic, Akk[adian] and Ug[aritic].” Amit essentially agrees: “The reference to two bulls here, and to the second bull in vv. 26 and 28, is problematic, and may reflect a textual error; therefore, it should be translated: ‘the bull that had been fattened for seven years’ ” (op. cit., p. 524, on 6:25). The New English Bible has “Take a young bull of your father’s, the yearling bull . . .” (Judg. 6:25 NEB; cf. text note t, “the yearling bull: prob. rdg.; Heb. the second bull, seven years old”; cf. also “Or Take a full-grown, mature bull from your father’s herd,” Today’s New International Version [TNIV], text note b on Judg. 6:25).

 

The angel of the LORD’s instructions to Gideon continue–after the instruction to tear down the altar and the Asherah pole, he is to “build an altar to the LORD your God on top of the stronghold here, in proper order; then take the second bull [‘the yearling bull’ NEB], and offer it as a burnt offering with the wood of the sacred pole that you shall cut down” (v. 26 NRSV). And Gideon complied with these instructions, but in secret. “So Gideon took ten of his servants, and did as the LORD had told him; but because he was too afraid of his family and the townspeople to do it by day, he did it by night” (v. 27 NRSV). “Gideon is shown as a coward,” says Amit, “a feature repeated in the first section (until 7:23)” (op. cit., pp. 524-525, on v. 27). According to Boling and Nelson, “Gideon remains an ambivalent figure (cf. vv. 15, 17). He is prosperous enough to command the assistance of ten . . . servants but is only b rave enough to act by night” (op. cit., on v. 27).

 

As the story continues, we are told that “When the townspeople rose early in the morning, the altar of Baal was broken down, and the sacred pole beside it was cut down, and the second bull was offered on the altar that had been built” (v. 28). There reaction was dismay. “So they said to one another, ‘Who has done this?’ After searching and inquiring, they were told, ‘Gideon son of Joash did it’ ” (v. 29). Upon learning that the altar of Baal was destroyed by Gideon, “the townspeople said to Joash, ‘Bring out your son, so that he may die, for he has pulled down the altar of Baal and cut down the sacred pole beside it’ ” (v. 30). If Block’s suggestion (above, borrowed from Emerton) holds, one might wonder with Gideon (cf. v. 27) how his father would respond to the loss of a prize bull. But even though the altar destroyed was his, Joash defends the action of his son. “But Joash said to all who were arrayed against him, ‘Will you contend for Baal? Or will you defend his cause? Whoever contends for him shall be put to death by morning. If he is a god, let him contend for himself, because his altar has been pulled down’ ” (v. 31). According to Boling and Nelson, “Joash, facing the zeal of his son, is no longer an avid supporter of Baal. The case against Baal is self-evident. A god unable to defend its own altar deserves no defense from others” (ibid., on vv. 30-31). Amit says, “Joash puts Baal to the test in the eyes of his believers. This motif is reminiscent of Elijah’s test at Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:20-40)” (op. cit., p. 525, on v. 31). And this incident is used to explain Gideon’s other name. “Therefore on that day Gideon was called Jerubbaal, that is to say, ‘Let Baal contend (br@y!, y~rev) against him,’ because he pulled down his altar” (v. 32). A certain irony–or more–is indicated by the name Jerubbaal here. According to Boling and Nelson, “Reflecting his father’s challenge in v. 31, Gideon’s assertive action vindicates his name Jerubbaal, Hebrew, ‘Let Baal Contend’ ” (op. cit., on v. 32; cf comments yesterday). But Amit sees the connection as “a folk etymology” here: “Jerubbaal [is] originally a theophoric name [a name honoring his god], praising Baal as founder. The component ‘Jeru,’ repeated in the name ‘Jerusalem,’ means to establish. The derivation of the name here as Let Baal contend . . . is a folk etymology” (op. cit., on v. 32).. Younger observes, “Ironically, the judge Gideon (‘hacker’), the son of apostate Joash, wears the Baal-name . . . a name that occurs with increasing frequency in chs. 7 and 8” (op. cit., on vv. 30-32).

 

The story turns from conflict within Israel to the threat of outsiders. In the third scene, “all the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the east (Md,q@-yn2B4, benê qedem) came together, and crossing the Jordan they encamped in the Valley of Jezreel” (v. 33 NRSV). The recent Jewish translation takes Md,q, (qedem) as a proper name. “All Midian, Amalek, and the Kedemites joined forces” (v. 33a NJPS 1985, 1999), and Amit refers to the whole as “the Midianite army [that] had spread out across the Jezreel Valley,” adding that “troops from Gideon’s father’s house were not sufficient, so he called to his assistance his own and the neighboring tribes who were harmed by the Midianites” (op. cit., on vv. 33-35). Gideon was enabled to mobilize these troops as “the spirit of the LORD took possession of [him]; and he sounded the trumpet, and the Abiezrites [a part of the tribe of Manasseh, cf. The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, 2nd ed., 1996, s.v. Abiezer] were called out to follow him” (v. 34). Gideon also musters forces from nearby tribes. “He sent messengers throughout all Manasseh, and they too were called out to follow him. He also sent messengers to Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali, and they went up to meet them” (v. 35). Nancy L. Lapp describes “the Valley of Jezreel” as

 

the eastern section of the broad valley separating Galilee from Samaria. From the pass between the Hill of Moreh and Mt. Gilboa, where the town of Jezreel was located, the valley descends eastward along the Jalud River to the Jordan, with Beth-shan commanding its eastern entrance. The broader plain to the west, known as Esdraelon, is included as a part of the Valley of Jezreel by some scholars. (The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, 2nd ed., 1996, s.v. Jezreel)

 

Block raises a question here:

 

Why are Gideon’s clansmen, tribesmen, and countrymen so ready to respond to him [given his earlier hesitation]? Are they impressed with his leadership ability or his courage? Do they recognize him as the ‘valiant warrior,’ whom the messenger of Yahweh had addressed in v. 122? Not if one may judge from his expressed perception of his standing within his own family and his tribe (v. 15) when God calls him to military leadership or from the trepidation with which he destroyed the Baal cult site in the preceding account (v. 31). From the succeeding narrative of the dew and the fleece (vv. 36-40) it seems that nothing has changed internally or personally. . . . [so] the answer must lie in the opening clause of v. 34: the Spirit of Yahweh ‘clothed’ Gideon. This idiom expresses in more dramatic form the notion expressed earlier in 3:10: ‘The Spirit of the LORD came upon X’ that is, the Spirit took possession of the man.” (op. cit., pp. 271-272)

 

Block concludes, “As we have noted earlier and will witness repeatedly hereafter, if anything positive happens to Israel in the Book of Judges, the credit must go to God” (ibid.).

 

Gideon remains hesitant. “Then Gideon said to God, ‘In order to see whether you will deliver Israel by my hand, as you have said, I am going to lay a fleece of wool on the threshing floor; if there is dew on the fleece alone, and it is dry on all the ground, then I shall know that you will deliver Israel by my hand, as you have said’ ” (vv. 36-37). And the LORD “passed the test,” so to speak. “And it was so. When he rose early next morning and squeezed the fleece, he wrung enough dew from the fleece to fill a bowl with water” (v. 38 ). But Gideon still hesitates. He apologizes, “Do not let your anger burn against me,” he says, “let me speak one more time; let me, please, make trial with the fleece just once more; let it be dry only on the fleece, and on all the ground let there be dew” (v. 39). This reverses the terms of the first test, and the result is that “God did so that night. It was dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground there was dew” (v. 40).

 

“Gideon’s testing of God speaks to his unbelief,” says Younger (op. cit., on Judg. 6:33-40). “The tests with the fleece are God’s second sign to Gideon [cf. 6:17-22], and they are doubled. No character in the book receives more divine assurance than Gideon, and none displays more doubt.” “Gideon requires additional signs,” says Amit, “and tests God with two opposite tests, in order to be certain that it was not by chance, but by the LORD’s will, that Gideon will deliver Israel. This is the culmination of a ch which has as its theme Gideon’s fear” (op. cit., on vv. 36-40).

 

Acts 2:37-47

 

The First Converts

 

            37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and to the other apostles, "Brothers, what should we do?" 38 Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you, for your children, and for all who are far away, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to him." 40 And he testified with many other arguments and exhorted them, saying, "Save yourselves from this corrupt generation." 41 So those who welcomed his message were baptized, and that day about three thousand persons were added. 42 They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

 

Life among the Believers

 

            43 Awe came upon everyone, because many wonders and signs were being done by the apostles. 44 All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. 46 Day by day, as they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, 47 praising God and having the goodwill of all the people. And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved. (Acts 2:37-47, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here from June 19, 2009 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year One), when comments were repeated from April 14, 2009 (Tuesday of Easter Week, Year One), when the reading was Acts 2:26-41 (42-47), when comments were based on those of August 4:2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year Two), when comments on Acts 2:37-41 were repeated from June 22, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year One), when comments were repeated from August 7, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year Two), when comments were repeated from June 17, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year One).

 

This reading presents the response to Peter’s Pentecost sermon by those whom he addressed as “fellow Israelites” (Acts 2:29, cf. vv. 14, 22). Luke tells us, “Now when they heard this [i.e., Peter’s sermon, Acts 2:14-36], they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and to the other apostles, ‘Brothers, what should we do?’ ” (v. 37). In response, Peter says, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (v. 38). Later, Peter compares the experience of those [Jews] who responded here to that of those [Gentiles] at the house of Cornelius: “the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word” (Acts 10:44), when he tells those gathered for the Jerusalem Council:

 

My brothers . . . God made a choice among you, that I should be the one through whom the Gentiles would hear the message of the good news and become believers. And God, who knows the human heart, testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us; and in cleansing their hearts by faith he has made no distinction between them and us. (Acts 15:7-9)

 

Central issues in both experiences are the precondition of repentance (Acts 3:38), assumed for Cornelius–“He was a devout man who feared God with all his household; he gave alms generously to the people and prayed constantly to God” (Acts. 10:2, cf. vv. 4, 30-33), the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38) and cleansing of the heart (Acts 15:9), and the coming of the Holy Spirit to the believers. Baptism, present in both contexts, represents spiritual cleansing. Peter assures his audience: “For the promise is for you, for your children, and for all who are far away, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to him” (v. 39). Peter alludes to promises of Isaiah, “Peace, peace, to the far and the near, / and I will heal them” (Isa. 57:19), and of Joel, “Then everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved; for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls (Joel 2:32, my emphasis with bold print). And Peter continues, as “he testified with many other arguments and exhorted them, saying, ‘Save yourselves from this corrupt generation’ ” (Acts 2:40, cf. Deut. 32:5; Ps. 78:8). Peter’s sermon was an astounding success, for Luke tells us, “those who welcomed his message were baptized, and that day about three thousand persons were added” (v. 41).

 

The remaining verses summarize the continuing life of this new group of Christian believers, who “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (v. 42). “Awe came upon everyone,” we are told, “because many wonders and signs were being done by the apostles” (v. 43). According to Christopher R. Matthews, “by performing wonders and signs the apostles fulfill Joel’s prophecy (2:19) and imitate Jesus (2:22)” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Acts 2:43). This early Christian group exists in shared communal life. “All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need” (vv. 44-45). According to Matthews, “the ideal use of possessions and money illustrates the proper response to the preaching of Jesus on this subject in the Gospel (see Lk. 6:20; 12:13-21, 33-34; 14:12-24, 33). For community of goods in the Dead Sea Scrolls, see 1QS 1.11-12; cf. Josephus, War 2.122 on the Essenes” (ibid., on vv. 44-45). Loveday Alexander notes “three new elements (teaching, fellowship, and the breaking of bread) [which] have now been added to the prayer that forms the backbone of the group’s regular activities (cf. 1:15)” (The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 1033, on Acts 2:42-47). But he suggests that Luke “does not on the whole show much interest in the regular, established patterns of church life, either in Jerusalem or in the Pauline mission”; but he notes that “the fellowship is the only item on the list to be expanded: the group’s unity finds practical expression in the common ownership of property (vv. 44-5)” (ibid.). Alexander might have noted the group’s generosity with “any [who] had need” (v. 44).

 

Luke tells us that “day by day, as they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the goodwill of all the people. And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved” (vv. 46-47). So the passage ends with the believers’ praise to God and good will with the people, and with the note of constant growth. Alexander says Luke “sums up this first stage of the church’s existence as an idyllic state in which the group is in harmony with its parent community . . . and with God: it is a paradise garden where praise and growth are both spontaneous” (ibid.). Perhaps so; Luke has presented the situation in a very positive light. But some of us have seen this spirit and atmosphere reproduced in smaller or larger communities of faith. Sometimes bickering and strife within the church kill the hope for this kind of fellowship and unity. Consider the following by W. T. Purkiser:

 

There was great concern for the poor and disadvantaged among early holiness people. They knew nothing of the separation between personal piety and social concern that has marked the evangelical church of the last half-century. Indeed, most of the great social reforms of the last half of the nineteenth century grew out of the work of dedicated evangelicals, many of whom were leaders in the holiness movement. (W. T. Purkiser, Interpreting Christian Holiness, chapter 5, online at the Wesley Center Online, at http://wesley.nnu.edu/holiness_tradition/purkiser/purkiser_ch5.htm, accessed August 1, 2010; ; you may need to copy and paste the URL address in your browser; or go to http://wesley.nnu.edu

) and search for “Interpreting Christian Holiness”).

 

Have we given up on the idea that there are real saints among us? Even so, God may surprise us with real saints. What about a community of saints? As with counterfeit money, counterfeit saints only emphasize the value of the real thing.

 

John 1:1-18

 

The Word Became Flesh (Gen 1.1-2.4a)

 

            1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being 4 in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

            6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. 9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.

            10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. 12 But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.

            14 And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father's only son, full of grace and truth. 15 (John testified to him and cried out, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.' ") 16 From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him known. (John 1:1-18, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here with editing and supplement from April 4, 2010 (Easter Day Year Two), when the were repeated from February 23, 2009 (Monday in the week of the Last Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), when comments were repeated from August 4, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year Two), when comments were repeated from January 14, 2008 (Monday in the week of the First Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), when comments were repeated from June 3, 2007 (Trinity Sunday, Year One, when the previous basis was indicated, repetitions with some revision as noted there. The comments are repeated again here:

 

The Prologue of John’s Gospel begins by affirming that Jesus, the Logos (LovgoV), was with God in the beginning, in fact was God (Jn. 1:1-2), and participated with the Father in the creation of the world (v. 3). A special emphasis is given to the creation of life which “was the light of all people (v. 4), shining in the darkness (v. 5). The Prologue (vv. 1-18) introduces major themes of the book, which serve as testimony or “signs” supporting these opening statements. The reading continues with the “testimony” of John the Baptist. “Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (v. 29). “He . . . is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit” (v. 33). We can be grateful for these two blessings, remission of sin, and cleansing within, not to mention the continued guidance of the Holy Spirit in our lives as we listen for his voice.

 

The “high Christology” that appears in the first chapter of Hebrews–the Son, the “heir of all things, through whom [God] also created the worlds,” according to which the Son is “the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being,” sustaining “all things by his powerful word” (Heb. 1:2-3)–is practically equivalent to that of the opening verses of John’s Gospel. The “Word (LovgoV, Logos),” that is, Jesus Christ (Jn. 1:17), “was in the beginning with God” (v. 2), and all things were created, “came into being,” “through him” (v. 3). Moreover, it was “life,” “the light of all people,” that “has come into being in him” (vv. 3-4). Hebrews comes close, but lacks an exact equivalent of John’s statement, “the Logos (Word) was God” (Jn. 1:1, at the end), a statement that must be understood in connection with the statement that “the Logos was with God” (v. 1, in the middle). Raymond E. Brown notes that meaning of “was God” in John 1:1c “has been the subject of prolonged discussion” (The Gospel according to John I-XII, Anchor Bible, 29, 1966, p. 5, on Jn. 1:1).. He rejects the suggestion of some, for example, Moffatt, that the meaning is, “The Word was divine,” as “too weak,” and the suggestion of others that John used qevoV (theos) without the article in the sense of “divine” because the adjective (theios [qei:oV]) was “too literary” and “not in Johannine vocabulary.”

 

The NEB paraphrases the line: “What God was, the Word was”; and this is certainly better than “divine.” Yet for a modern Christian reader whose trinitarian background has accustomed him to thinking of “God” as a larger concept than “God the Father,” the translation “The Word was God” is quite correct. This reading is reinforced when one remembers that in the Gospel as it now stands, the affirmation of i 1 is almost certainly meant to form an inclusion with xx 28, where at the end of the Gospel Thomas confesses Jesus as “My God” (ho theos mou). These statements represent the Johannine affirmative answer to the charge made against Jesus in the Gospel that he was wrongly making himself God (x 33, v 18). (ibid.)

 

As noted above, Christ the Word (LovgoV, Logos) is credited with creating all things. “All things came into being through him,” says John, “and without him not one thing came into being” (Jn. 1:3a NRSV, cf. NEB). Due to a difference of opinion about where to end the sentence—that is, where to place the period—some translations read all of verse 3 as one sentence, for example, “All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made” (Jn. 1:3 AV/KJV, cf. TNIV). Since the earliest manuscripts were not punctuated, where to place the period is subject to the judgment of modern editors. In recent editions of the Greek New Testament, the balance of verse 3, o{ gevgonen (ho gegonen), “What has come into being” (NRSV Jn. 1:3b) is included with verse 4 as one sentence (cf. Kurt Aland and others, eds, The Greek New Testament, 3rd ed., 1975, ad loc; and Kurt Aland and others, eds., Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th ed., 4th reprinting, 1981, ad loc). So punctuated, the sentence reads, “What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people” (Jn. 1:3b-4 NRSV). Commenting on this version, David K. Rensberger, revised by Harold W. Attridge, says, “A major part of John’s message is that Jesus brought divine life into the world. Here this life is associated with creation; elsewhere it is described as ‘eternal life,’ the life of resurrection beyond death that is given now to those who believe in Jesus. See 3:16; 5:21-29; 6:32-40, 51-58; 11:25-26; 14:6; 17:1-3” (The HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Jn. 1:4). On the other hand, Bruce M. Metzger has reservations about this interpretation, since “other considerations favor taking o{ gevgonen (ho gegonen) with the preceding sentence” (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 1971, p. 195, on Jn. 1:3-4). Among other considerations, he says, “One of the difficulties that stands in the way of ranging the clause with ejn aujtw:/ zwh; h\n [en autō(i) zōē ēn] is that the perfect tense of gevgonen [gegonen] would require ejstin [estin] instead of h\n [ēn]” (ibid., n. 2, p. 196).

 

The “life” is identified as “the light of all people,” says John (on either interpretation of verses 3-4), and “the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome (ouj katevlaben, ou katelaben) it” (v. 5). Frederick William Danker explains the word translated as “overcome” (NRSV, TNIV; cf. “comprehended” AV/KJV)

 

1. ‘take over,’ grasp—a. in hostile sense seize Mk.9:18. In non-hostile sense secure Rom. 9:30 . . . b. of mental grasping (compare our ‘catch on’), perceive, comprehend Acts 4:13 . . . 2. in Jn. 1:5 ideas in 1ab above blend in the double sense of grasp as seize and comprehend.” (The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 2009, s.v. katalambavnw, katalambanō)

 

Of “did not overcome,” Raymond E. Brown asks, “Does this aorist [i.e., past tense verb] refer to a specific attempt of the darkness to overcome the light? Or is it a complexive aorist summing up a series of attempts (BDF, sec. 332)? Or is it a gnomic aorist indicating that darkness is always trying to overcome light (BDF, sec. 333)? If, as we think, this is a reference to the sin in Gen. iii, then the normal meaning of the aorist as a single past action is suitable” (The Gospel according to John I-XII, Anchor Bible 29, 1966, pp. 7-8, on Jn. 1:5).

 

Brown, who sees much of John’s Prologue as poetic, in four stanzas (1:1-2, 3-5, 10-12, and 14 and 16) sees verses 6-9 as a prose parenthesis between the second and third stanzas (ibid., pp. 3, 27-28), which he calls “John the Baptist’s Witness to the Light.” “There was a man sent (ajpestalmevnoV, apestalmenos) from God,” says John the Evangelist, “whose name was John [i.e., John the Baptist]” (Jn.l:6). The verb translated “sent” is a perfect passive participle, and is related to ajpovstoloV (apostolos, “Apostle.” John’s mission, as “sent from God,” was to bear witness to Christ. “He came as a witness (eijV marturivan, eis martyrian, ‘for witness, testimony’) to testify ( i{na marturhvsh/, hina martyrēsē(i), ‘to bear witness, to testify’) to the light, so that all might believe through him” (v. 7). This statement connects well with the testimony of John that follows the Prologue (Jn. 1:1-18), that is, verses 19-28 and following verses. According to Brown, “Boismard and others” have suggested that verses 6-7 were the original opening of John’s Gospel, before the Prologue was added (ibid., p. 27, on vv. 6-9). Be that as it may, the testimony of John the Baptist is put into a certain perspective. “He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light” (v. 8). Brown says, “one of the goals of the Fourth Gospel was a refutation of exaggerated claims made by the sectarians of John the Baptist. . . . Thus it may be that the sectarians claimed the title of light for John the Baptist (ibid., p. 28, on v. 8). “The true light (to; fw:V to; ajlhqinovn, to phōs to alēthinon),” says John the Evangelist,” which enlightens everyone (pavnta a[nqrwpon, panta anthrōpon), was coming (h\n . . . ejrcovmenon, ēn erchomenon) “ into the world” (v. 9). The NRSV text note b says, “Or He was the true light that enlightens everyone coming into the world.” At the beginning, “the true light” could be the subject of the verb “was” (h\n, ēn), as in the NRSV text, which Brown prefers (ibid., p. 9, on v. 9), or the predicate nominative, with “he” representing the verb ending. Another question is whether “coming” (or “was . . . coming”) modifies “the light” (= Jesus, the Logos) or “everyone.” Brown discusses both alternatives, but prefers the former, which “fitrs the context better, for in vs. 10 the stress is on the Word (= the light) as being in the world. We note too that ‘coming into the world’ is not used in John to describe men, but is used to describe Jesus the light; e.g., iii 19: ‘The light has come into the world (also xii 46). It seems, finally, that the contrast of vs. 9 with vs. 8 also demands this interpretation: John the Baptist was not the light; the real light was coming into the world” (ibid., p. 10).

 

“He (i.e., the light = Jesus) was in the world,” says the Evangelist John, “and the world came into being through him (cf. v. 3); yet the world did not know him” (v. 10). The irony of the world’s failure to recognize him continues. “He came to what was his own (ta; i[dia, ta idia, neuter plural), and his own people (oiJ i[dioi, hoi idioi, masculine [inclusive] plural) did not accept him). The distinction between neuter plural and masculine plural is not evident in the older translation, “He came unto his own, and his own received him not” (Jn. 1:11 AV/KJV), but it is clear in Greek. Given the context in which the Word (the Logos) created “all things” (v. 3), “the world” (v. 10), we should understand “his own people” (oiJ i[dioi, hoi idioi) as not simply the Jews, but all human beings. “But to all who received him,” says the Evangelist John—all, that is, whether Jews or Gentiles—“who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God (tevkna qeou:, tekna theou), who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God” (vv. 12-13). This anticipates “everyone who believes” (pa:V oJ pisteuvwn, pas ho pisteuōn) in 3:16 and Jesus’ reference to spiritual birth as opposed to physical birth (3:3-8).

 

John continues, describing what we call the incarnation of Christ: “And the Word (LovgoV, Logos) became flesh (savrx, sarx) and lived (ejschvnwsen, eschēnōsen) among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth” (Jn. 1:14). The verb translated “lived” (NRSV) is related to skhnhv (skēnē, “tent, tabernacle), which would imply a temporary “tenting” or “tabernacling,” though the term skhnhv (skēnē) is used of the heavenly tent or tabernacle (Heb. 8:2; Rev. 13:6; 15:5; 21:3), which we would assume is permanent. According to Rensberger and Attridge, “Flesh [means] human, with all the limitations of mortality that this implies. Such a statement about the divine Logos would have seemed extraordinary in ancient religious thought” (op. cit., on v. 14). But they add,

 

The OT speaks several times of God coming to live among the people of God (e.g., Ex 25:8; Ezek. 37:27; Zech. 2:10-11) and associates the presence of God with God’s glory (Ex. 16:10; 24:15-18; 29:43-46; 40:34-38; 1 Kings 8:10-11; Pss. 26:8; 63:2; Ezek. 11:22-23; 44:4). Many of these passages have to do with the tabernacle or the temple; cf. [Jn.] 2:18-22. (ibid.)

 

In another parenthetical reference to the witness of John the Baptist (a prose interlude in the poetry of the Prologue, as translated by Brown, op. cit., p. 4, cf. p. 35), John the Evangelist says, “John testified to him and cried out, ‘This was he of whom I said, “He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me’ ” ’ (Jn. 1:15, cf. v. 30). “From his fullness,” says John the Evangelist, “we have all received, grace upon grace (cavrin ajnti; cavritoV, charin anti chariots). The law (oJ novmoV, ho nomos) indeed was given through Moses; grace (hJ cavriV, hē charis) and truth (hJ ajlhvqeia, hē alētheia) came through Jesus Christ” (vv. 16-17). Divine grace is evident, of course, in the Old Testament as well as the new. Verse 17, says Brown,

 

merely spells out what has been said in 16 by naming the two occasions of God’s demonstration of covenant love, namely, in the gift of the Law to Moses on Sinai, and in Jesus Christ. Verse 17 suggests more clearly than the hymn the superiority of the enduring love expressed in Jesus Christ, and vs. 18 spells out that superiority. Naturally it is the failure of Moses to have seen God that the author wishes to contrast with the intimate contact between Son and Father. (op. cit., pp. 35-36. on vv. 17-18)

 

Brown refers to Exodus 33:18, where Moses asks to seek God’s face, but is refused.

 

In the Prologue, Jesus is called “the Word,” Logos, Jn. 1:1), “the true light” (v. 9), the “Word” which became “flesh” (v. 14), and “the only Son” (v. 18). In verse 18, the original text probably read as follows:

 

God no one has ever seen; only begotten God (monogenh;V qeovV, monogen‘s theos [uiJovvV, huios, ‘Son,’ in many mss.], the one who is in the bosom of the Father, he (lit. ‘that one’) has made him known. (John 1:18, my translation)

 

Compare these translations:

 

No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known. (Jn. 1:18 NRSV)

 

No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known. (Jn. 1:18 TNIV = Today’s New International Version, © 2001).

 

Translators of the Revised Standard Version (1946) were aware that the original text probably read “only begotten God” (monogenh;V qeovV, monogen‘s theos), but felt that it would be confusing to many readers or when read in worship, and so they continued the familiar translation, “only Son [footnote God]” (cf “only begotten Son” in the Authorized, King James Version). The more recent versions cited above use enough paraphrasing to bring out John’s meaning. In light of his emphasis on the divinity of Christ throughout the Gospel, the phrase “only begotten God,” probably confusing to later scribes, is considered to be John’s original text.

 

Brown says, “If John has been described as the pearl of great price among the NT writings, then one may say that the Prologue [i.e. 1:1-18] is the pearl within this Gospel” (op. cit., p. 18). “From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace” (v. 16).

 

 

As noted above, for the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for July 19, 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