|
Daily
Scripture |
||
|
Sunday
(October 31, 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 |
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 ( |
||
|
Sunday AM Psalm 24, 29 PM Psalm 8, 84 Ecclus. 36:1-17 1 Cor.
12:27-13:13 Matt. 18:21-35 Eve
of All Saints: PM: Psalm 34;
Wisdom 3:1-9; Revelation 21:1-4,22-22:5 From the Sunday
Lectionary: (Cf. the
RCL) Habakkuk 1:1-4;
2:1-4 & Psalm 119:137-144 or Isaiah 1:10-18 & Psalm 32:1-8; 2 Thessalonians
1:1-4, 11-12; Luke 19:1-10 (Cf. BCP) Psalm 32 or 32:1-8 Isaiah 1:1-10 2 Thessalonians
1:1-5 (6-10) 11-12 Luke 19:1-10 |
Sunday Morning: Psalms 103; 150 Ecclus. 36:1-17 or
Zeph. 1:1-6 1 Cor. 12:27-13:13 Matt. 18:21-35 Evening: Psalms 117; 139 |
Sunday Morning Pss.:
108, 150 Ecclus. 4:1-10 or
Micah 1:1-9 1 Cor. 10:1-13 Matt. 16:13-20 Evening Pss.:
66, 23 |
|
31st
Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year C Habakkuk 1:1-4;
2:1-4 Psalm
119:137-144 2 Thessalonians
1:1-4, 11-12 Luke 19:1-10 |
Sunday, October
30-November 5 Isaiah 1:10-18 Psalm 32:1-7
(6) 2 Thessalonians
1:1-4, 11-12 Luke 19:1-10 Semicontinuous
reading and psalm Habakkuk 1:1-4;
2:1-4 Psalm
119:137-144 (144) Reformation
Day, Oct. 31 Jeremiah
31:31-34 Psalm 46 (7) Romans 3:19-28 John 8:31-36 |
|
|
* The Twenty-third
Sunday after Pentecost, references for the Sunday closest to November 2, Year
Two |
||
For the Lutheran
Episcopal and Presbyterian
Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 36:1-17
A Prayer for God's People
36:1 Have mercy upon us, O God of all,
2 and put all the nations in fear of you.
3 Lift up your hand against foreign nations
and let them see your might.
4 As you have used us to show your holiness to them,
so use them to show your glory to us.
5 Then they will know, as we have known,
that there is no God but you, O Lord.
6 Give new signs, and work other wonders;
7 make your hand and right arm glorious.
8 Rouse your anger and pour out your wrath;
9 destroy the adversary and wipe out the enemy.
10 Hasten the day, and remember the appointed time,
and let people recount your mighty deeds.
11 Let survivors be consumed in the fiery wrath,
and may those who harm your people meet destruction.
12 Crush the heads of hostile rulers
who say, “There is no one but ourselves.”
13 Gather all the tribes of Jacob,
16 and give them their inheritance, as at the beginning.
17 Have mercy, O Lord, on the people called by your name,
on
The following comments are repeated here with some editing from November 2, 2008 (the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from November 5, 2006 (the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two), when comments were repeated with revision and supplement from October 31, 2004, two years ago (Monday of the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two).
In Ecclesiasticus, chapter 36, Ben Sira offers "a
prayer for the deliverance and restoration of 
In the above table, numbers like “1a” and “1b” represent the first and second lines of a two line verse. Some would call these “half lines” or hemistichs (2 hemistichs = 1 stichos, stivcoV , “a line of writing, a verse”). The Hebrew verse numbering here is based on The Wisdom of Ben Sira; portions of the Book of Ecclesiasticus from Hebrew Manuscripts in the Cairo Genizah Collection, 1899, available on the Internet by entering “Ecclesiasticus Hebrew Cairo Genizah” in the Google advanced search (showing this search engine address: http://books.google.com/books?id=F2gVAAAAYAAJ&dq=Ecclesiasticus+Hebrew+Cairo+Genizah&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=wOwz5VkKMT&sig=j5i4_ZzBNoHc5HF0g4_s96VP3u4&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPR3,M1; it would be simpler to do your own search as indicated above; accessed Nov. 1, 2008.)
Ben Sira prays, “Have mercy upon us, O God of all, / and put
all the nations in fear of you. / Lift up your hand against foreign nations /
and let them see your might" (vv. 1-3 NRSV = vv. 1-2 LXX), with particular
reference to the Seleucids (i.e. Hellenistic Syrians), who took control of
Ben Sira’s prayer asks God to “Hasten the day, and remember the appointed time, / and let people recount your mighty deeds” (v. 10 NRSV). Verse seven is the equivalent verse in the Septuagint, rendered as verse eight in the King James Version Apocrypha and the Hebrew, “Make the time (kairovV, kairos, cf. dfvm [df2Om, mô‘‘d], Heb.) short, remember the covenant (oJrkismovV, horkismos), and let them declare thy wonderful works.” The word oJrkismovV (horkismos) means “administration of an oath” (Liddell-Scott-Jones [LSJ], A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed., 1940, repr. 1966, s.v. oJrkismovV, horkismos).Harold C. Washington comments, “The appointed time [refers to] the awaited deliverance from domination by foreign rulers” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Sirach 36:10 NRSV). Compare Paul’s statements that “the appointed time (kairovV, kairos) has grown short” (1 Cor. 7:29, and his reference to “a plan for the fullness of time” (eijV oijkonomivan tou: plhrwvmatoV tw:n kairw:n, eis oikonomian tou pl‘rÇmatos tÇn kairÇn, Eph. 1:10). In a similar reference in Galatians, Paul uses a different word for “time”: “But when the fullness of time (to; plhvrwma tou: crovnou, to pl‘rÇma tou chronou) had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law” (Gal. 4:4).
We may infer that early Christians applied Jewish
expectations of the time of deliverance from their enemies to their own
understanding that in Christ the times of deliverance were being fulfilled; the
powers of darkness were defeated and the time of salvation had come. But Ben
Sira’s prayer continues in terms of
The prayer was answered to some extent a few years later,
after the Maccabean Revolt, when
Zephaniah 1:1-6 (Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions–This passage is not included in the Daily Office Lectionary of the Book of Common Prayer.)
1:1 The word of the LORD that came to Zephaniah son of Cushi son of Gedaliah son of Amariah son of Hezekiah, in the days of King Josiah son of Amon of Judah.
The Coming Judgment on
2 I will utterly sweep away everything
from the face of the earth, says the LORD.
3 I will sweep away humans and animals;
I will sweep away the birds of the air
and the fish of the sea.
I will make the wicked stumble.
I will cut off humanity
from the face of the earth, says the LORD.
4 I will stretch
out my hand against
and against all
the inhabitants of
and I will cut off from this place every remnant of Baal
and the name of the idolatrous priests;
5 those who bow down on the roofs
to the host of the heavens;
those who bow down and swear to the LORD,
but also swear by Milcom;
6 those who have turned back from following the LORD,
who have not sought the LORD or inquired of him. (Zephaniah 1:1-6, NRSV)
The following comments are repeated here from November 2, 2008 (the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from November 5, 2006 (the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two):
Zephaniah is called the “son of Cushi son of Gedaliah son of
Amariah son of Hezekiah,” apparently the king of
Many scholars attribute much of the book of Zephaniah to the monarchic period, but they agree that some portion of the book dates to the postmonarchic period. It is worth stressing that the division of the text of the book between words that go back to Zephaniah or monarchic times and words that come from a later time is nowhere made in the book. Moreover, the usual association between supposedly earlier sections and increased authoritative status (and supposedly later and less authoritative status) is contrary to the basic claim of the book, namely that it is in its entirety the Lord’s word, all equal in value. (op. cit., in the Introduction to Zephaniah)
Following the prose introduction in verse one, Zephaniah presents an oracle of judgment with broad, even universal scope. “I will utterly sweep away everything / from the face of the earth, says the LORD. / I will sweep away humans and animals; / I will sweep away the birds of the air / and the fish of the sea” (vv. 2, 3a, b, c). The LORD “will make the wicked stumble. / [He] will cut off humanity / from the face of the earth” (v. 3d, e, f). Mobley sees here “the scope of the destruction and the echoes of Genesis (cf. 1:2 with Gen. 7:23),” and adds that “the sequence humans, animals, birds, fish reverses the order of Gen. 1:20-26), [thus suggesting] the undoing of creation (cf. Jer. 4:23-26)” (op. cit., on Zeph. 1:2-3). According to Ben Zvi, “the translation [he follows the recent Jewish translation, NJPS 1985, 1999, similar here to the NRSV] suggests a universal scenario of destruction. The Heb. is more ambiguous. It can certainly be understood in such a way, but also as pointing to the total destruction of a particular area” (op. cit., on vv. 2-3).
But the oracle turns specifically against
These, apparently still the “idolatrous priests,” are further defined as “those who have turned back from following the LORD, / who have not sought the LORD or inquired of him” v. 6). In contrast to these priests, when the Amalekites burned Ziklag, before David pursued them and rescued their captives, he directed the priest Abiathar to “Bring me the ephod,” which Abiathar did, and “David inquired of the LORD, ‘Shall I pursue this band?’” And the LORD answered, “Pursue; for you shall surely overtake and shall surely rescue” (1 Sam. 30:7-8).
1 Corinthians 12:27-13:13
27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers; then deeds of power, then gifts of healing, forms of assistance, forms of leadership, various kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But strive for the greater gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.
13:1 If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant 5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. 7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. 9 For we know only in part, and we prophesy only in part; 10 but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. 13 And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love. (1 Corinthians 12:27-13:13, NRSV)
The following comments are based on comments on 1 Corinthians 12:27-13:3 and 13:1-13 of March 19 and 20, 2010 (Friday and Saturday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year Two), when comments were based on those of October 10, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 5, Year One), and earlier comments as indicated there.
Earlier, Paul has appealed to the Corinthian Christians to be in unity and harmony within their diversity of gifts, using the analogy of the body that is “one and has many members” (1 Cor. 12:12). He reminded them that the body needs all its members; that “God has so arranged the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior members, that there may be no dissension within the body, but the members may have the same care for one another” (vv. 24-25). The reminder is repeated as today’s reading begins. “Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it” (v. 27). Then Paul returns to the subject of the gifts of the spirit, this time beginning with reference to different offices, gifted persons, rather than a list of gifts as such. He says, “God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets [cf. prophecy, v. 10], third teachers [cf. ‘utterance of wisdom . . . utterance of knowledge,’ v. 8]” (v. 28a). But this list reverts again to naming gifts or deeds rather than offices: “then deeds of power [cf. ‘working of miracles,’ v. 10], then gifts of healing [cf. v. 9], forms of assistance, forms of leadership, various kinds of tongues [cf. v. 10]” (v. 28b). From the fact that there is some repetition between the two lists, but not an exact one-to-one correlation, I take it that the list is not definitive and complete, presenting an exact, complete list of all the gifts; but rather is representative and exemplary. Compare the lists in Romans 12:6-8, also followed by an emphasis on love (v. 9; 13:8-10), and Ephesians 4:11, where the list identifies different church officers: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers.
In the present reading, Paul repeats the list again with
rhetorical questions: “Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do
all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do
all interpret?” (vv. 29-30). In Greek, rhetorical questions that begin with the
negative particle ouj (ou) imply that, from the questioner’s
perspective, an affirmative answer is expected. On the other hand, rhetorical
questions that begin with the other negative particle, mhv (m‘),
imply that , from the questioner’s perspective, a negative answer is expected. In
English, for example, the question, “Don’t all work miracles?” would imply the
answer, “Yes, of course.” But the form in the translation, “Do all work
miracles?” if it is not a genuine request for information, would normally imply
a negative answer. Certainly the form of the questions in Greek here implies
the answer “No, of course not!” The following translation of verses 29 and 30
brings out the force of these questions: “All are not apostles, are they? All
are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All don’t work
miracles, do they? All don’t possess gifts of healing, do they? All don’t speak
in tongues, do they? All don’t interpret, do they?” In this passage, at least,
Paul clearly implies that there is no one gift that everyone must have. It is
the Spirit himself that all should have, but not any one of his gifts (cf.
We are exhorted to “strive for the greater gifts,” and Paul
will point out “a still more excellent way” (v. 31). Later, he will emphasize
the relative importance of the gift of prophecy as compared to the gift of
tongues in 1 Corinthians, chapter 14. Here (12:27-13:3), the transition begins
to prepare for that, but first directs our attention to the supreme importance
of love, the “still more excellent way” (12:31 and chapter 13). Without
love (ajgavph,
agape), the best speaking in tongues is mere noise. “If I speak in the
tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a
clanging cymbal” (v. 13:1). And in the same way, without love (ajgavph,
agape) the best of prophetic powers, or the faith for working of
miracles, is of no avail. “And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all
mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove
mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing” (v. 2). Paul speaks in the first
person here, with reference to himself. But clearly, he has in mind some at
In any event, as Ben Witherington III observes, there is hyperbole here.
To some extent, Paul’s hyperbole,
especially in vv. 1-3, is a mocking of the Sophistic boasting going on among
the inspired and eloquent ones in
Witherington cites C. A. Holladay in this connection:
The hyperbole recasts the self-portrait so that each item is stretched to the limit of incredibility because it is recast with the assumptions of the Corinthian enthusiasts. That is, even if he were to allow his apostolic work to be shaped by the assumptions of those Corinthians who are not content with speaking, but insist the apostle must speak with eloquence surpassing human capabilities . . . , yet . . . unmotivated by agap‘ it would be for nought. (“1 Corinthians 13: Paul as Apostolic Paradigm,” in Early Christian Literature and the Classical Intellectual Tradition, 1979, cited by Witherington (Conflict & Community in Corinth, 1994, p. 269, on 1 Cor. 12:31b-13:13)
Paul’s statement that “love is the fulfilling of the law” (Rom. 13:10) echoes the centrality of love within the Judeo-Christian tradition, from the Shema (Deut. 6:4-9) to Jesus’ response to the question about the “greatest commandment” (Mt. 22:34-40 and parallels) and beyond. We may compare a statement by Ben Zion Bokser and Baruch M. Bokser:
While the rabbis placed the love of man at the summit of human virtue, they also urged people to cultivate the love of God as the source from which all other virtues flow. This is taught by R. Reuben, who was asked to define the most reprehensible act a man may commit. His answer was: the denial of God’s existence, ‘For no man violates the commandments, “thou shalt not murder,” “Thou shalt not steal,” til he has renounced his faith in God.’ (Tosefta Shebuot 3:6, cited by Bokser and Bokser, edd., in the Introduction to The Talmud; Selected Writings, The Classics of Western Spirituality, p. 29)
Here, Paul waxes eloquent about love. “Love is patient,” he says; “love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things” (1 Cor. 13:4-7). According to Richard A. Horsley, “The positive qualities of love are the opposite of the Corinthians’ behavior presented elsewhere in the letter” (NOAB, 3rd ed., 2001, on 1 Cor. 13:4-7). “The second paragraph,” says Witherington, “has often been taken as a description of Christ’s character, which is true enough, but Paul intends it as a description of how a Christian ought to behave and of the way in which Paul has been attempting to behave. He contrasts blameworthy behavior, which seems to characterize the Corinthians, and the behavior that he is trying to model for his converts” (loc. cit.). Witherington comments on the meaning of ajgavph (agap‘ ), the term translated here as “love” (NRSV; “charity” AV/KJV).
For the NT writers love is a matter of behavior, not feeling. In particular it is other-directed behavior, not self-directed action. This is the character of Christian agap‘. The word agap‘ is not uniquely Christian. Christians likely derived it from the Septuagint, where it is often used of God’s love, not ordinary human love. It is a unique privilege to be a bearer, by means of the Spirit, of God’s love. This love differs from both natural human affection (philia, so-called brotherly love) and eros (desiring love, usually related to physical attraction). (ibid.)
In a footnote, Witherington adds, “There is some obvious overlap between agap‘ and philia (cf John 21:15-19)” (ibid., n. 29). One might also compare John 15:14, “You are my friends (fivloi, philoi) if you do what I command you.” A similar comparison of various terms for love is presented by C. S. Lewis. He discusses romantic love ( e[roV, eros, poetic form of e[rwV, erÇs), “love: desire for a thing” (A LEXICON Abridged from Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, impression of 1958, s.v. e[rwV, erÇs). C. S. Lewis also discusses affection (storghv, storg‘ ), “love, affection, the natural affection of parents and children” (ibid., s.v. storghv, storg‘ ), which occurs in compounds in the New Testament, for example filovstorgoi (philostorgoi, plural of filovstorgoV, philostorgos), “loving dearly, devoted” (Rom. 12:10, the only NT occurrence); friendship (filiva, philia), “friendship, love” (Jas. 4:4, the only NT occurrence of this abstract noun form, but cf. the adjective fivloV, philos, “kindly disposed, devoted,” and filovstorgoi, philostorgoi, above); and ajgavph (agap‘ ), “love, the highest Christian virtue” (F. Wilbur Gingrich, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 1965, s.v. ajgavph, agap‘ ).
As Paul continues his eloquent praise of love, he says,
“Love never ends” (1 Cor. 13:8a). He contrasts love with some of the gifts listed
earlier. “But as for prophecies [cf. 12:10, 28, 29], they will come to an end;
as for tongues [cf. 12:10, 28, 29], they will cease; as for knowledge [cf.
12:8, 13:2], it will come to an end” (13:8b). These gifts have their limits.
“For we know only in part,” says Paul, “and we prophesy only in part; but when
the complete [NRSV for to; tevleion, to teleion, ‘that which is perfect’
AV/KJV] comes, the partial will come to an end” (vv. 9-10). Paul offers an
explanation with reference to himself: “When I was a child, I spoke like a
child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult,
I put an end to childish ways” (v. 11). But it is clear that his own experience
is an example for the others. “For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we
will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as
I have been fully known” (v. 12). “In these comparisons,” says Horsley, “Paul
becomes more rhapsodic, no longer ironic, glorifying the qualities he most
values–while still denigrating the Corinthians’ most valued spiritual gifts.
Against their sense of present transcendence, Paul emphasizes future
fulfillment” (op. cit., on vv. 8-13). Witherington says, “Verses 11 f. should
probably not be understood as saying that it is childish to speak in
tongues or to prophesy, since Paul himself still does such things. He is saying
that there is an age appropriate to such things and that now is that age. When
the completion of the age finally comes, then it will be time to set aside what
was appropriate and needful in that age. Only later will one know as one is
known by God” (op. cit., p. 271, on vv. 11-12). As for the reference to seeing
in a mirror (v. 12), Witherington says the “literal meaning is ‘in a riddle.’
Paul’s point is not to castigate mirror-making, which was a trade practiced in
As we reflect on Paul’s description of this kind of love, which is patient, kind, not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude; unselfish, not irritable or resentful, one wonders if we can live up to this standard. But within this description of love, it is clear that Paul is making a comparison with the spiritual gifts. In fact, the placement of this description between the discussion of gifts and church unity in chapter 12 and the comparison of tongues and prophecy in chapter 14 makes it clear that love is the supreme value. Prophecy and understanding, even with faith, are nothing without love (1 Cor. 13:2). What could be better than faith, hope and love? But “the greatest of these is love” (v. 13).
Matthew 18:21-35
Forgiveness
21 Then Peter came and said to him, "Lord, if another member of the church sins against me, how often should I forgive? As many as seven times?" 22 Jesus said to him, "Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven times.
The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant
23 "For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves. 24 When he began the reckoning, one who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him; 25 and, as he could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, together with his wife and children and all his possessions, and payment to be made. 26 So the slave fell on his knees before him, saying, 'Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.' 27 And out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt. 28 But that same slave, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and seizing him by the throat, he said, 'Pay what you owe.' 29 Then his fellow slave fell down and pleaded with him, 'Have patience with me, and I will pay you.' 30 But he refused; then he went and threw him into prison until he would pay the debt. 31 When his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place. 32 Then his lord summoned him and said to him, 'You wicked slave! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. 33 Should you not have had mercy on your fellow slave, as I had mercy on you?' 34 And in anger his lord handed him over to be tortured until he would pay his entire debt. 35 So my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother or sister from your heart." (Matthew 18:21-35, NRSV)
The following comments are repeated here with some editing from June 18, 2010 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two), when comments were based on those of November 21, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 16, Year One), when comments were based on those of November 2, 2008 (the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two), those of June 20, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two), and those of November 24, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 16, Year One), when comments were based on those of November 5, 2006 (the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two), and of November 19, 2005 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 16, Year One), when comments were adapted from an email message sent November 21, 2003.
On Forgiveness
Matthew 18:3-35, which we take to be the fourth major speech of Jesus in Matthew, concluded by the typical formula, “When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went to the region of Judea beyond the Jordan” (19:1), is enclosed in continuous quotation marks (NRSV, cf. TNIV), but with one exception in Peter’s question (v.21). The placement of quotation marks in the Bible is determined by modern editors and translators, since the ancient manuscripts did not use them. But the placement here is clearly fitting. Following the discussion of dealing with a church member who sins (Mt. 18:15-20), the Gospel reading a week ago (Sunday, Oct. 24, 2010), Peter has a question for Jesus. “Then Peter came,” says Matthew, “and said to him, ‘Lord, if another member of the church [NRSV text note m, ‘Gk. if my brother] sins against me, how often should I forgive? As many as seven times?’ ” (Mt. 18:21). The Lord’s answer is short and to the point, “Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven times” (v. 22). Jesus’ number, seventy-seven times, is a multiple (11 x 7) of Peter’s suggested “seven times” (v. 21). Elwyn E. Tilden and Bruce M. Metzger say, “Forgiveness is beyond calculating” (NOAB, 2nd ed., 1994, on Mt. 18:21-22). According to J. Andrew Overman, the emphasis is placed on forgiveness as “the guiding principle in church relations and resolving conflict” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mt. 18:21). Similar numbers appear in Genesis 4:24 (cf. ibid.), but in that context vengeance, not forgiveness, is the subject. According to Terence E. Fretheim,
Whereas God avenged the death of Abel, Lamech takes vengeance into his own hands; he exacts death only for an injury; he appropriates God’s own measures and intensifies the level of retribution, so much so that only a blood feud could ensue (see Matt. 18:21-22 for Jesus’ reversal of Lamech’s boast). The song shows how Cain’s violence had been intensified through the generations. Progress in sin and its effects matches the progress in civilization. (The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 1, 1994, p. 375, on Gen. 4:17-26).
Luke works the saying about forgiveness into a context on the peril of causing “one of these little ones to stumble” (Lk. 17:2, cf. vv. 1-4). In its own way, Luke’s “multiple” of seven, “seven times a day” (v. 4) also intensifies the emphasis on forgiveness. In reference to Peter’s question in Matthew, William Barclay says,
Peter thought that he was being very generous. . . . [He] was not without warrant for this suggestion. It was Rabbinic teaching that a man must forgive his brother three times. Rabbi Jose ben Hanina said, ‘He who begs forgiveness from his neighbour must not do so more than three times.’ Rabbi Jose ben Jehuda said, ‘If a man commits an offence once, they forgive him; if he commits an offence a second time, they forgive him; if he commits an offence a third time, they forgive him; the fourth time they do not forgive.’ The Biblical proof that this was correct was taken from Amos. In the opening chapters of Amos, there is a series of condemnations on the various nations for three transgressions and for four (Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 13; 2:1, 4, 6). From this it was deduced that God’s forgiveness extends to three offences and that he visits the sinner with punishment at the fourth. It was not to be thought that a man could be more gracious than God, so forgiveness was limited to three times. (The Gospel of Matthew, The Daily Study Bible Series, rev. ed., 1975, vol. 2, p. 135 on Mt. 18:21-35).
Barclay suggests that Peter thought he was being more than generous, “for he takes the Rabbinic three times, multiplies it by two [and] for good measure adds one, and suggests, with eager self-satisfaction, that it will be enough if he forgives seven times” (ibid.). Jesus responds with a multiple of seven: “seventy-seven times” (v. 22; or seventy times seven NRSV text note n). Whether that amounts to seventy-seven (77) or seventy times seven (490), it’s a very large number for this context. Luke presents a version of this saying (Lk. 17:3) which was compared with the instruction on dealing with “another member of the church [who] sins against you” (Mt. 18:15, cf. vv. 15-20) yesterday: “And if the same person sins against you seven times a day, and turns back to you seven times and says, ‘I repent,’ you must forgive” (Lk. 17:4). Compare the previous verse, “Be on your guard! If another disciple sins, you must rebuke the offender, and if there is repentance, you must forgive” (v. 3). Luke’s version of Jesus’ response, “seven times a day” (Lk 17:4), has no cut-off point. Seven times a day for how long? It wouldn’t take long to exceed four hundred ninety (490) times. In both Gospels, Jesus essentially says, forgiveness should be unlimited when there is repentance. “In other words,” says Barclay, “there is no reckonable limit to forgiveness” (ibid., on Mt. 18:21-35).
The Parable of the Unforgiving Slave
The point of Jesus’ exchange with Peter about how many times one should forgive another church member is illustrated in Matthew by a story, the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant (Mt. 18:23-35, not reported in the other Gospels). A king “wished to settle accounts with his slaves” (v. 23). The debt of the first slave is reckoned as “ten thousand talents” (10,000 times 15 years of wages for a laborer; “a talent was worth more than fifteen years’ wages of a laborer,” NRSV text note o on Mt. 18:24). “Ten thousand talents,” says Dennis C. Duling, is “an unimaginable amount” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 18:24). When the slave “could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, together with his wife and children and all his possessions, and payment to be made” (v. 25). But the slave “fell on his knees before him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’ And out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt” (vv. 26-27).
But the parable continues, for “that same slave, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and seizing him by the throat, he said, 'Pay what you owe’ ” (v. 28). The denarius was the usual day’s wage for a laborer” (NRSV text note j on v. 28), so the debt of “a hundred denarii” amounted to one hundred days’ wages (as opposed to the amount of 15 years’ wages owed by the first slave). The second slave’s plea for mercy, “Have patience with me, and I will pay you” (v. 29) echoes the first slave’s plea (v. 26). But the first s slave “refused; then he went and threw him into prison until he would pay the debt” (v. 30). When fellow slaves inform the king of “all that had taken place” (v. 31), the first slave is summoned; and the king says to him, “You wicked slave! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. Should you not have had mercy on your fellow slave, as I had mercy on you?” (vv. 32-33). With that rebuke, the parable comes to the point. But Jesus adds, “And in anger his lord handed him over to be tortured until he would pay his debt” (v. 34). One may wonder how, given that circumstance, he would manage to pay. But Jesus continues with an application. “So my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother or sister from your heart” (v. 35). At the rates cited above, the larger debt was 150,000 years’ wages! When we are forgiven, are we not to pass it on? It appears that one ought to be more than ready to forgive, if not from Christian love, at least for self preservation!
As noted above, for the Lutheran
Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.