PILGRIM LUTHERAN CHURCH
  • Home
  • About Us
    • What We Believe
    • History
  • Events
    • Photo Gallery
  • Pastor's Blog
  • Bulletin
  • Contact

A Sabbath Day's Journey

By: Rev. Paul Landgraf
What is a Sabbath day's journey? First of all, it is a Jewish expression. We measure distances in meters or yards. The Jews had a certain distance that they could walk on Saturday before it would be considered work. So their synagogues that they went to on Saturday could not be very far away. The word appears only in Acts 1:12 and indicates a distance of about three-quarters of a mile.

With that in mind, I think it is important to remember the origins of Christianity. Just because we have an Old Testament, it does not mean that we call it the 'Outdated Testament'. Much of the Old Testament has a literary structure that we are not aware of because of our modern emphasis on chapter and verse divisions. Within many of these blogs, I try to get the reader to see a bigger picture, a larger perspective that often includes the Old Testament and the environment that was present when the New Testament was seeing the Light of the day.

Second, a Sabbath day's journey is intentionally short. These 'journeys' with a text, almost always one of the three readings for that Sunday, are deliberately brief discussions. This blog was never designed to be a comprehensive look at any text. Sometimes a specific word is studied in detail. But, as a whole, a blog entry, by itself, is meant to be quite brief.

Finally, since the term 'Sabbath day's journey' appears in Acts, it is meant to appeal to a wide variety of people. This blog is meant for those who cannot come on Sunday mornings. And it is also for those who do come on Sunday mornings but would also like a further study of the text. It is also for those who live somewhere else in the world (besides Drake and Freedom, Missouri, USA) and would simply like a further study of the text. It was meant to get these different groups of people to start thinking about the biblical texts. Part of the reason for this blog is that I am not able to have a bible class on Sunday mornings with either congregation, and so, to have a blog like this seemed like a good idea. I hope it is helpful for you, in whatever situation you may be.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. And thank you for taking the time to read this!

February 20th, 2021

2/20/2021

0 Comments

 
This year, with almost every Sunday in Lent, the Old Testament reading is from the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Old Testament. These five books were considered to be the first books translated into Greek, sometime in the third century B.C.

The reason I mention that is because sometimes the Greek brings a new perspective to the English translation. And the Greek was helpful for me with the Old Testament text for this First Sunday in Lent, from Genesis 22:1-18. This is the account of Abraham ALMOST sacrificing his son, Isaac.

Perhaps before this I was being influenced by the contemporary Jewish song, ‘Jehovah Jirah, my Provider….’ Most of the translations I have seen focus on the Lord PROVIDING for Abraham. But that verb, ‘to provide’, never shows up in the original language of the text—or even its Greek translation. The basic verb that appears in the text is ‘to see’.

To see is a very concrete way of choosing or selecting. Ultimately, seeing something (or someone) can lead to providing for something (or someone!). Sometimes for you to see something is important, and I would think you would agree that for someone who is important to see YOU is extremely important! In a very concrete way, the action of seeing leads to some meaningful and wonderful things. [For more details, you may wish to see Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing, 1988; page 328.]

Here is a somewhat-literal translation of the Hebrew and the Greek of two, somewhat obscure (and difficult) verses of the text; these translations use a concrete way of providing or selecting, using the verb ‘to see’:

Genesis 22:8

And Abraham said, “God will see to it for him, the lamb for an offering-up, my son.” And they walked, two of them, together.

Then Abraam said, “The God will see to it for himself, a sheep for the whole flesh-offering, son.” And going, both, at the same time….

Genesis 22:14

And Abraham called a name of that place, Yahweh Yireh (Yahweh will see), which it will be said, the day, ‘On the mountain, Yahweh, it will be seen.

And Abraam called [or ‘began to call’] the name of that place, ‘The Lord has seen,’ that they might say today, ‘In the mount, Lord, it was seen.’

This text does not seem to talk about the Lord being seen, although some translations can give that emphasis. Perhaps that is a good reason for using the word provide.

Like some other texts, this one has, as its main figure, the ‘angel of the Lord’. That type of angel appears in other places, not only in Genesis and the Old Testament, but it has also been seen several times in the New Testament.

The word ‘angel’ means messenger. And what I find very interesting about this text in Genesis 22 is that this angel calls to Abraham from heaven (see verses 11, 15). My question is: If this angel is a messenger, why does he not COME DOWN to deliver the message?

This happens one other place in the book of Genesis, in a very similar account (see Genesis 21). This time though, this messenger is called ‘the angel of God’ (verse 17). Hagar and Ishmael, Abraham’s other son, were sent away, and the text says that God heard the boy crying, and ‘the angel of God calls to Hagar from heaven….’ But why does he not show up as well?

Just perhaps those two events were not THAT important. It all worked out, both times in Genesis, for the angel to call from the heavens. With Abraham, the LORD certainly blesses him, and that can be done from a distance. With Hagar, the text even says that ‘God was with the boy, Ishmael (see Genesis 21:20a). God’s presence is so much better than the presence of an angel for just a few minutes.

Things all worked out in the rest of the Old Testament, so that the line of Abraham continued. And it does seem like it also worked out well in the New Testament.

The main messenger in the New Testament who was also God’s Son came down to deliver a very important message. He did not stay in heaven. He did not call down from the heavens. He went ALL the way down, and then, after a little while, he was lifted ALL the way up on an instrument of torture.

Special words about that very special messenger began to spread after that. Acts 5 relates the account of ALL the apostles being jailed, and an angel of the Lord shows up during the night to get them out. He not only leads them out, but he gives them instructions regarding what to do. And the word continues to spread … even today.
0 Comments

February 13th, 2021

2/13/2021

0 Comments

 
This year there are two options for the Old Testament reading for the Sunday of the Transfiguration, and those two readings connect with the two Old Testament figures who appear with Jesus, that of Elijah [2 Kings 2:1-12] and Moses [Exodus 34:29-35]. Both people are obviously significant within the Old Testament, but only in the Gospel according to Mark are the two initially described in this way: 'Elijah with Moses’ [verse 4]. In the two other (very similar) accounts, they are described as ‘Moses and Elijah’ [Matthew 17:3; Luke 9:30]. It may seem like a small difference, but little things may be important when the focus is ultimately the supposed ‘Son of God [Mark 1:1]’.
​
What perspective of Jesus in the Gospel according to Mark would put Elijah ahead of Moses? Elijah is usually compared to John the Baptist, and Elisha with Jesus; there are even some similarities with their names.

Jesus, in the Gospel according to Mark, has been compared to the living creature of the lion. The more actions that Jesus does within this account, and the distance that he puts between himself and his disciples, those two characteristics help to show Jesus as that lion figure. And perhaps it could be said of Elijah that he had some characteristics of a similar animal. This quote from the Concordia Self-Study Bible may be helpful:

Elijah’s rugged figure became a model of the ideal prophet in Israel. Jesus fulfilled 40 days and nights of desert fasting as Elijah had done; many believed he was a reincarnated Elijah (1 Ki 19:8; Mt 4:2; 16:14) [St. Louis, Missouri; Concordia Publishing House, 1986; page 512].

The typical text that is used for this Sunday [2 Kings 2:1-12] has Elijah handing over the work to Elisha. It seems like a pretty nice text. But there were lots of events that happened before and after that show how difficult it was for the prophets of the LORD in that situation. It may be good to review some of those events sometime.

There are also some significant differences between the Hebrew Old Testament of this historical section of the Bible and the intertestamental translation of those four historical books into Greek. What is interesting, first of all, is that some of those differences with the Greek have been seen in the Hebrew manuscripts found at Qumran. More work needs to be done in this area.

Another interesting point regarding this Greek translation is that the historic present is EXTREMELY frequent here. (That is when, instead of saying ‘he said this’, the text says, ‘he says this’.) To be more specific though, it is frequent within only SOME parts of the text.

Some have thought that this is just a matter of having two different translators, one earlier (who used the historic present) and one later (who did not). Another option would be two different literary themes within the book.

There are many times in Jesus’ ministry when the text in a particular gospel account has a lot of historic presents, but when he institutes the Lord’s Supper and when Jesus is on the cross, those are times that are basically without historic presents. (The only exception to this is Jesus’ speaking to John and his mother, so that he would take care of her after his death; see John 19:26-27.) These are very serious times, and the focus is on what is happening at that ONE time in ‘his story’.

Another literary possibility would be that sections of the historical text, those without the historical presents, the more serious and focused sections, those at approximate points of one-third and two-thirds, those two sections may imitate a layout of the tabernacle, that there is a place for sacrifice and then a place for the ‘Holy of Holies’. This serious progression through the text leads us on to a much better story, that of the Lord’s chosen people eventually returning from the Exile and coming back to the Promised Land. The point of all this is so that there can be the Promised ONE.

0 Comments

February 6th, 2021

2/6/2021

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament reading for the fifth Sunday after the Epiphany of our Lord goes back to Isaiah, chapter 40[:21-31]. The first eleven verses of this chapter was the Old Testament text a few weeks ago, for the second Sunday in Advent. This chapter is important enough to go back to hear from it again.

The fortieth chapter of Isaiah is the start of some very good news. And it comes quite clearly. That may be especially easy to see in the Greek translation of this chapter. Here is a somewhat-literal translation of the Greek of the first two verses and the ninth through the eleventh verses:

‘Comfort, comfort my people,’ says the God. ‘Priests, speak into the heart of Jerusalem; comfort her, because her lowliness has been fulfilled; her sin has been forgiven, because she has received from the hand of the Lord double, her sins.’

Upon a high mountain, go up, the evangelizing one of Zion. Raise with strength your voice, the evangelizing one of Jerusalem. Raise it up, fear not. Say to the cities of Judah, ‘Behold, your God! Behold, Lord! Lord comes with power, and the arm with lordship. Behold, his wage is with him, and the work is before him. Like a shepherd, he will tend his flock, and in his arm he will gather lambs, and those having in womb [i.e., pregnant] he will comfort.

Things that are repeated are important. Right at the beginning, there is the repetition of the word ‘comfort’. That is also in the Hebrew text. But the entire sentence in Hebrew is this: “’Comfort, comfort my people,’ says your God.” The Greek translation leaves out the word ‘your’. It is interesting that, with this word left out, a greater emphasis is given to the word ‘my’. And that seems like a good emphasis to have.

There is a famous Italian saying, ‘Traduttore, traditore.’ It basically means that a translator is a traitor. And that basically means that any translation cannot give everything that is in the original text. Something must be left aside, and that decision of what to leave aside is left in the hands of the translator. If something is left out of the translation, the translator is to be blamed.  

It seems that this translator of Isaiah wanted to emphasize the good news. This is also seen in the use of the word ‘evangelizing’. We often think of the word of someone who is evangelizing as someone who is described after the New Testament started, but an evangelizing one in the Old Testament is a messenger who had a very important message, usually authorized by the king. The basic word in the Hebrew is the word for ‘flesh’ and emphasizes the importance of a person bringing the message. But we see in the Greek word ‘evangelizing’ the importance of it being GOOD news.

There are basically two opposite emphases within the verses of the text. There is the reminder that God, like a king, has power, and there is also the reminder of God’s love—more specifically, his comfort. In the above Greek translation, the word ‘comfort’ appears four times, but it is only in the Hebrew twice, the first two words of the text. In the second half of the first verse, the word ‘comfort’ is used instead of the word ‘proclaim’. At the very end of the eleventh verse, the word ‘comfort’ is also used, but this time it appears instead of the word ‘guide’ or ‘lead’. A similar word is used in Isaiah 7:19 and is usually translated as ‘watering places’ [See the work by William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971; page 230]. There are some wonderful and comforting pictures within these words, whatever language they are.

With these slight changes within the Greek translation, some people have thought that the original Hebrew text that the Greek translators had was not the same one as the text that we have today. But there is another option. Traduttore, traditore. The translator may have betrayed the language in favor of the good news. 
0 Comments

January 31st, 2021

1/31/2021

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament reading for the fourth Sunday after the Epiphany of our Lord goes almost to the very beginning; it is a text that is near the end of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible). The text is Deuteronomy 18:15-20. The word Deuteronomy is actually Greek and means ‘second law’. It is a second giving of the law, but it is also a repetition of other things.

When you repeat yourself, you are treating what you are saying as something important. And our LORD is the same way. First and Second Chronicles do that. And the fourfold gospel certainly does that as well.

When you are repeating something that happened in the past, you can describe it as happening in the present, and that can make the event seem even more real and extremely important. You can get caught up in the action that you are relating and, instead of saying, ‘He did this,’ you can switch to saying, ‘He does this.’

To relate an all-important word from the LORD is literally serious business. That is not a time to get caught up in the excitement of telling the story. That is a time to get the story right, and to help the reader or the listener to focus ultimately on the One who is the BEST Storyteller AND the Word-inventor as well! He is the One on his eternal throne, and that throne points to the ramifications of his rule. And sometimes those ramifications are important to point out.

The ramifications of the LORD’s ruling are not too important in Deuteronomy. The retelling of the story in terms of promises kept by our LORD makes it important in terms of an agreement. And in the English translation of that book, there are verbs in all the various tenses—past, present, and future. Whatever is described, the LORD keeps his promises.

In the Greek translation of the Book of Exodus, there is a high frequency of the historical present (when you would expect a past tense, but the translator translated the verb into the present tense). The dynamics of the action itself are certainly important, but more important is their connection to our LORD’s kingship and rule. (For more details regarding this discussion, see the book by T. V. Evans, Verbal Syntax in the Greek Pentateuch, Oxford University Press, 2001, page 119f.)

The book of Exodus is where the LORD clearly reveals himself as King. Sinai was basically the location of his first throne on earth. And his first serious helper was Moses. Then there was the issue of having to deal with another important king, pharaoh. Then the LORD eventually goes with his people. Through these times, while there is a king somewhere in the picture, there is also the historical present in the text. The following are somewhat-literal translations of portions of the verses in Exodus that are indicated in Evans’ list (in Evans’ book, page 120) as containing historical presents:

2:13     And having gone out the second day, [Moses] sees two Hebrew men fighting, and he says to the unrighteous one, ‘Why are you hitting the neighbor?’

4:18     And Moses went, and he returned to Jothor, his father-in-law, and he says….

5:3       And [Moses and Aaron] say to [pharaoh], ‘The God of the Hebrews has called us to him; we will go, therefore, a three-days journey into the wilderness….’

10:7     And the servants of pharaoh say to [pharaoh]: ‘How long will this be a snare to us? Send away the men, that they may serve their God….’

10:9     And Moses says [to pharaoh], ‘With the young and the old we will go….’

10:28   And pharaoh says [to Moses], ‘Go away from me; beware yourself, that you look upon to see my face, and in the day you see me, you will die.’

10:29   And Moses says [to pharaoh], ‘I will not appear again to your face.’

18:14   And Jothor, having seen all the things which [Moses] does with the people, says, ‘What is this that you are doing with the people…?’

18:15   And Moses says to his father-in-law, ‘Because the people are coming to me to seek judgment from God.’

20:20   And Moses says to [the people]: ‘Have courage….’

32:1     And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people gathered against Aaron, and they say to him….

32:2     And Aaron says to [the people]….

32:17   And Joshua, having heard the voice of the people crying, says to Moses….

32:18   And Moses says [to Joshua]….

32:23   For [the people] are saying to [Aaron], ‘Make gods for us….’

32:27   And [Moses] says to [the sons of Levi]….

33:14   And he [the LORD] says to [Moses], ‘I will go before you….’

33:15   And [Moses] says to [the LORD], ‘Unless you yourself go with me, do not bring me up from here.’

33:18   And [Moses] says [to the LORD], ‘Manifest yourself to me.’

Hopefully these verses do seem a bit exciting since some of the verbs are in the present tense. More important is the extent of the LORD’s involvement in our sinful world. You can fast-forward to the New Testament to see a more complete answer to that. 
0 Comments

January 23rd, 2021

1/23/2021

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament reading for the third Sunday after the Epiphany of our Lord is, dare I say, quite exciting. And to get an even more exciting picture, might I suggest reading through an entire book of the Bible? It is not a long book, and this bigger picture might give you a perspective that you have not seen before, a perspective that was originally intended by the writer. How many letters do YOU write that you only expect a portion of them to be read?

Aside from the very special service of the Easter Vigil, this is the only time in the three-year series that the Old Testament text is from the book of Jonah [3:1-5, 10]. For you to read the entire book, only forty-eight verses long, may take less than ten minutes. Its storyline is well-known, and looking at it again as a whole may cause you to see something not noticed before. It is somewhat of an action-adventure drama that builds in intensity as it gets closer to the end.

In Hebrew writings, the end is not always the most important thing. The middle part of the book may include something even more important. Just for your information, in the middle of this book, there is also something important. There is the ‘psalm’ that Jonah prayed within the great fish. But there is a progression within that psalm as well. In 2:5, Jonah says that he will again look to ‘the temple of your holiness’. And in 2:8, Jonah says that ‘my prayer rose to you, to the temple of your holiness’. Some people see this second temple as a heavenly one, but even Daniel, when he prayed, faced the temple at Jerusalem (see Daniel 6, especially verse 10). So, there is a progression here, toward the LORD, within this middle point.

The action-adventure part of Jonah may be seen in a phrase that comes up several times within the entire book. There are four phrases that use the word ‘great’ and those phrases are translated somewhat literally, and also supplied with these four lines are short summaries of what happens before and after each occurrence. Note that each occurrence of ‘great’ is basically like this: ‘And he/they ____-ed a great ____.’

[The LORD wants Jonah to go to Nineveh and preach there; he goes in the opposite direction, on a boat, and a storm hits, and Jonah shares with the men regarding who the LORD is.]

‘And the men feared a great fear… (1:10).’

[Jonah gets the men to throw him overboard, and that stops the storm.]

‘And the men feared Yahweh with a great fear… (1:16).’

[Jonah eventually gets to Nineveh and preaches there; the people end up repenting, and God ends up not destroying them.

‘And Jonah was displeased with a great displeasure….(4:1).’

[Jonah goes to a place where he can look at the city, to see what happens to it; God commands a tree to grow and give him shade from his ‘displeasure’—yes, this is the same word that was used regarding Jonah’s negative response to God’s kindness toward Nineveh.]

‘And Jonah was glad with a great gladness…(4:6).’

[And God lets the tree die, and Jonah has to deal with that, and the LORD compares that tree to Nineveh.]

There seems to be a progression within the text. And instead of a progression that one might expect; one, for example, from an emphasis on fearing the LORD to one of loving the LORD, the progression eventually focuses on Jonah instead of LORD, but with the progression from displeasure to gladness. Is this a proper end, to focus on Jonah’s gladness, and just because of a tree?!

Reed Lessing, in the Concordia Commentary Series on Jonah [St. Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House, 2007, page 347], points out that there is a structure seen in the number of words from the quotes that are near the end of this book. At the start of chapter four, Jonah’s quote is 39 words long. Yahweh responds with 3 words. Jonah also responds with 3 words. Then God says 5 words. Then Jonah responds with 5 words. Then Yahweh responds with exactly 39 words, the same number that Jonah had at the beginning of the chapter.

Perhaps that is why Yahweh includes his concern also for the ‘many cattle’. You could also say that the LORD literally has the last word.
0 Comments

January 17th, 2021

1/17/2021

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament reading for the second Sunday after the Epiphany of our Lord would never be able to match the significance of last Sunday’s text, that of the beginning of creation, the beginning of Genesis, the beginning of all of Scripture. But the text does have to do with beginnings; it has to do with the beginning of Samuel [1 Samuel 3:1-10].

Recently I mentioned that the ancient Greek translation does a good job in reminding us who live so many years after these events that this text is not a history lesson. This is a ‘life lesson’, like most of Scripture.

You can see that already in the title of the book. Instead of calling this book ‘First Samuel’, it is called ‘First Kings’ (and it goes up to ‘Fourth Kings’). Instead of being about a particular person, it is about what it means to have a king (or any powerful leader), what it means to have a king that people want, and what it means to have a king that God wants. We do not have kings in the United States at this time, but, in some ways, we actually do. Some people think that they can do basically whatever they want. That is being quite misguided. The only one who can actually do whatever he wants is God.

Within the Greek translation of First Kings, as well as in the books that follow, there is also the frequent use of the ‘historical present’. Instead of saying that something happened in the past, the translator sometimes put the verb into the present tense. I do not think he was being stupid and mixed up the two tenses. I also do not think that he was getting all excited and wanted to put the reader into the action by using the present tense. I think he is carefully looking at the text and determining what is happening because of the ramifications of something else and something important.

What a king does has ramifications, and that is connected to his ‘glory’ and ‘honor’, and that is primarily symbolized by his throne. In a way, within these historical presents, we are viewing the throne of God and seeing his significance and his glory. That significance or glory is often hidden, just as it was hidden when Jesus was on earth. But it certainly was there, and it certainly does have ramifications for today.

The first historical presents that appear in this book are right after Hannah receives the promise of a child—she and her husband get up, worship, and go [1:19]. The child, of course, was born—as promised, and the text for today has the LORD speaking to Samuel as a child. The LORD talked to Samuel at night. And after that experience, the text says, in the Hebrew, that ‘And Samuel laid down until the morning….’ But the Greek translation goes this way: ‘And Samuel sleeps until the morning….’

What the LORD had to say to Samuel was not very good news. Punishment was promised in the near future for the current priest, Eli, and his sons. And these are also ramifications of the LORD’s kingship, his ultimate rule over heaven and earth. This will not be good news, but it will be important news, just the same.

Here is where the historical present also pops up. The Greek translation of 1 Samuel (‘Kings’) 4:1-2 says that ‘…the Philistines gather themselves against Israel…and the Philistines prepare to fight with Israel.’ The translation could have said that they GATHERED themselves and PREPARED to fight. 

Eli was not very good, and his sons were extremely bad. And the ramifications for that evil were significant. And, unfortunately, Samuel’s sons were also not very good.

Later in the book, this time it was the sons of Israel who ‘gather’—another present tense—and they say that they want someone else to lead them [1 Samuel 8:4]. And after Samuel dies, the Philistines ‘gather’ against Israel and fulfill the prediction that Saul would die—he also was not a good leader [see 1 Samuel 28 for a good example of this].
​
Different groups of people gather at different times for different reasons. The fact that the LORD is connected to some of these verbs, that those actions are, ultimately HIS ramifications and not ours, that can be reassuring in these 'present' times. His Story has a much better ending.
0 Comments

January 9th, 2021

1/9/2021

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament reading for the first Sunday after the Epiphany of our Lord is so very special. With the traditional emphasis this Sunday on that very special baptism of our Lord, and with that dramatic point, only in this account [Mark 1:10], of the heavens being ‘torn open’, and also having the Spirit present—and there was the water of course—the Old Testament text is the first five verses of the entire Bible [Genesis 1:1-5].

Here is an attempt at a very literal translation of the first two verses of that text:

In beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was formless and empty, and darkness upon face of deep. And Spirit of God hovering upon face of the waters.

So much could be said about these words. So much HAS been said about these words. I remember one seminary teacher saying that more has been written about the two creation accounts in Genesis than the entire book of the Song of Solomon.

Beginnings are important. There is a German proverb that goes this way: ‘Aller Anfang ist schwer.‘ It means that all beginnings are difficult. That may be why the Gospel according to Mark starts out by describing the account as the ‘beginning of the gospel’. Some of the people who heard that account for the first time were having to die for what they believed. They were certainly having a difficult time, but, in that case, the beginning of the gospel was, in a way, an even more difficult thing—and certainly more important.

Now to create everything that exists is, of course, not at all difficult for God. But, in this beginning, it may be difficult to see all the important things that are present within this text.

One of the things that is often forgotten is the importance of numbers with the Hebrew text, the basic language of the Old Testament. In the Old Testament, letters also meant numbers. So, the letters would have a closer connection to numbers than we do in our English language.

The number seven is an important number in both Testaments, and the first verse has seven words, and the second verse has fourteen. This structure would have been helpful to the reader, especially since there were no spaces at all between words in the ancient manuscripts. Imagineifyouwouldhavetoreadthatway! And the importance of the number seven is foundational when it comes to the days of creation. And we even maintain that importance of the number seven when we continue to have seven days in a week. (I have been told that there was a push by the atheists during the Enlightenment to move to a ten-day week, to move society away from such a biblical number as seven; perhaps if they would have suggested a five-day week, that idea would have been more popular!)

It is sometimes difficult to see what is unusual in an Old Testament text, but when the words are compared with the ancient Greek translation of that text, sometimes an aspect of that unusual nature of the text is shown. That ancient translation, also known as the Septuagint, is over two thousand years old, so that text is sometimes a significant step closer than our present-day understanding of the Hebrew text.
​
Here are the same verses of the same text, but in the Greek translation, and in another attempt at a literal translation. Notice that there is no mention of a face in this text.

In beginning the God made the heaven and the earth. But the earth was unsightly and unfurnished, and darkness over the deep, and Spirit of God moved over the water.

(It may be helpful, on a side note, to point out that, in the Hebrew text, the word ‘face’ may have served as a hint to the structure of Genesis. It is seen two more times in this first creation account, at the beginning of the fifth and the end of the sixth day, within verses 20 and 29. If these days are laid out, not only as an account of what happened, but also as an outline for the text, the first three days may point to the first eleven chapters, and the second three days, to the rest of the book. And the beginning of the fifth day and the end of the sixth day may connect to the middle and end of that second section, and this ‘middle-and-end’ structure is a significant structural message in this book and in some successive books—see, for example, Genesis 30:2 and 50:19, and Exodus 24:15-18 and 40:34-38. This may also point to the fact that Jesus came in the ‘middle’ of time, and he also promised he would come at the very end of time. Within the book of Genesis and others, there is also the important aspect of the concentric structure—ABCBA—and the word ‘face’ is found in the middle of that structure in the second creation account—see 2:6.)

So, when does the word ‘face’ FINALLY appear in the Greek translation? The first appearance of the word comes within the second creation account that begins near the beginning of chapter two. I will give verses 5 through 7 of that text in an attempt at another very literal translation of the Hebrew:

And all of the shrub of the field not yet it appeared on the earth, and all of the plant of the field not yet it sprung up, for not he sent rain, Yahweh God, on the earth and man there was not to work the ground. But a stream came up from the earth and it watered all the face of the ground. And he formed, Yahweh God, the man dust from the ground, and he breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and he became, the man, to a soul living.

Here are those verses in the Greek, and a very literal translation is what has also been attempted here. And you may notice that the word ‘face’ appears twice, where it only appeared once in the text that is just above.

And all herb of the field before it was on the earth, and all the grass of the field before it sprang up, for he had not rained God on the earth, and a man was not to cultivate it. But a fountain rose up from the earth, and it watered all the face of the earth. And he formed God the man, dust from the earth. And he breathed into his face a breath of life, and the man became a living soul.

So, instead of God breathing into Adam’s nostrils, the Greek text has him breathing into his face. And you may think that this is not a big difference. At the heart of the matter is not an understanding of the ancient words of the text, whether they are in Hebrew or in Greek.

More important is the fact that, instead of thinking about some aspect of knowledge or how nice it would be to be upon the face of water somewhere while on vacation, eventually we have to stand before the face of the Creator. It seems that the translator takes this into account and emphasizes the face of the first important person, Adam. And, because of the problem of sin, a significant amount of ‘The Book’ will emphasize the person (or the incarnation) of the Second Adam (see Romans 5).

0 Comments

January 2nd, 2021

1/2/2021

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament reading for the Second Sunday after Christmas is near the beginning of First Kings [3:4-15]. Several weeks ago, we looked at the beginning of 1 Samuel. The point was made then, and that point also applies to this book, that we should not look at this part of the Old Testament as simply information. The point of its presence in the Old Testament is much more important than that. SALVATION—not information—is the more important topic.

The argument was made several weeks ago that the translation of the Old Testament into Greek (the Septuagint) seems to support that emphasis. That translation happened between the Testaments, sometime after the rise of Alexander the Great, and that translation is helpful in understanding both testaments and their connection to each other. Will a similar emphasis on salvation appear within First Kings?

It probably should be said at this point that, in the Greek translation of the Old Testament, this book is called THIRD Kings. This different title helps a little to get the focus off a particular person and on to more important things—the job of those who were called ‘kings’ and especially the ULTIMATE King.

This book of First/Third Kings starts at the point of the transition between David and Solomon. The text for this Sunday has Solomon as the official king, and the Lord appears to him in a dream at night and basically says that he has one wish—he can ask for anything. Solomon ends up asking for wisdom, and the Lord ends up giving him that, along with several other things he did not ask for, because what he asked for was something so special.

Here is a somewhat-literal translation of the Hebrew text, the last verse of the reading for this Sunday:

And Solomon awoke, and, behold, a dream, and he came, Jerusalem, and he stood before the face of the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and he offered burnt-offerings, and he made peace-offerings, and he made a feast for all his servants.

Here is that same verse, but in a somewhat-literal translation of the Greek text:

And Solomon awoke, and, behold, a dream, and he arose, and he comes into Jerusalem, and he stood before the face of the altar, which was before the face of the ark of the covenant of the Lord in Zion, and he offered whole-burnt-offerings and made peace-offerings, and he made a large banquet for himself and for all the servants of him.

As always, much could be said about all the differences between the two texts, but this is the very first time in First (or Third) Kings that there is an historical present. Instead of saying ‘he came to Jerusalem’, the Greek text said that he ‘comes’. It almost looks like a mistake since the verb right before the word is in the past tense.

If Solomon would simply come to Jerusalem, that would not be an important event. But the ark of the covenant is there, and that is where the Lord promised to be. And Solomon had just talked to the Lord in a dream. And the emphasis on being before that special place, with the word ‘face’ being twice in the Greek text (when it is only once in the Hebrew), reminds us that it is an important thing to be before the Lord.

Being in the Lord’s presence has ramifications, and those can be indicated with the present tense. The book of Exodus has one of its first historic presents in a somewhat-similar situation. Moses talked to the LORD in the burning bush, and then he went to his father-in-law, and the Greek text has it that he SAYS something to his father-in-law—the text does not say that he ‘said’ something [the Septuagint, Exodus 4:18]. Talking to your father-in-law is not always important, but when the LORD talks you, the ramifications of THAT talk ARE important.
​
Ramifications are like a weight or significance, and that is the word for ‘glory’ in the Old Testament, and that is what the living creatures of the LORD’s throne show—the LORD’s glory, his ramifications, his significance. And it should not be surprising, then, that we have four gospel accounts and that these accounts are connected to these four living creatures of the LORD’s throne. We do not need four history lessons; we need one way of salvation. And those four accounts ultimately point to one very special thing.
0 Comments

December 26th, 2020

12/26/2020

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament reading for the First Sunday after Christmas is from Isaiah AGAIN, but it will not show up too frequently after this Sunday. It is a very special book in the Old Testament, and much could be said about it.
​
The variety of the words used within this book is amazing. The text for this Sunday is Isaiah 61:10-62:3, and the last verse of that text is a good example of some of the variety that is within the book. Here is a somewhat-literal translation:

And you will be a crown of splendor in the hand of Yahweh and a diadem of royalty in the hand of your God.

This seems like a straightforward translation that deserves little comment. The description of ‘hand of Yahweh’ is somewhat similar to ‘hand of your God’. But what is the difference between a ‘crown of splendor’ and a ‘diadem of royalty’?

A good starting point may be to point out the difference between a crown and a diadem. Looking at these two words may be helpful, not only because we rarely have kings these days, but also because the kingship of God may be greatly misunderstood.
Although this does not work with many languages, to see what other words are similar to an unknown word may be helpful. And the words for crown and diadem are obviously different, but they do have some similarities.

The word ‘crown’ is similar to the verb ‘to surround’. [See The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon: With an Appendix Containing the Biblical Aramaic, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts, USA, 1996; page 742; hereafter BDB.] A crown surrounds the head. And the word ‘diadem’ is similar to the verb ‘to wrap’ or ‘to wind up’. And it is closely related to the word for ‘turban’ [BDB, page 857]. That would also surround the head.

What is interesting is that the word for ‘splendor’ is also connected to the word for ‘headdress’ or ‘turban’. It obviously means something like ‘beauty’ or ‘glory’, but for it to be connected to the same thing gives the idea that a crown or something significant on the head is an important item to be worn [BDB, page 802]. And the idea of surrounding or wrapping something is meant to be a powerful picture (see Isaiah 22:18 for a good example of this).

The king has a very important job. And to see the king’s face, to be in the presence of royalty, that is a very significant thing. God is the ultimate king, and we see the importance of his presence throughout the Old Testament, but also in the New.

It is also interesting that, on the Mount of Transfiguration, the only description of Jesus’ face in all three accounts was that it shown like the sun (Matthew 17:2). THAT would be something that you do not want to look at directly. It is also interesting that the only time Jesus accepts a crown on his head is when the cross will be his throne.
0 Comments

December 19th, 2020

12/19/2020

0 Comments

 
For all four Sundays in Advent in the ‘A’ series and for the first three Sundays in the ‘B’ series, the Old Testament texts have been from Isaiah. The Old Testament text for this Sunday, the Fourth Sunday in Advent, goes to a significantly different section of the Old Testament. The text for this week is from 2 Samuel [7:1-11, 16], but ultimately you might see a connection to Isaiah.


These four books of 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings are often simply seen as historical, but within them, there are more important things going on than simply history. Samuel is an important priest, and Israel’s desire to have a king is an important request—because it is clearly stated within the text that the LORD is their true king (see 1 Samuel 8). And the prophets show up to remind the ‘pseudo-king’ and the people who their true king is. And there are many ways in which they do this.


In Isaiah—but especially in Jeremiah and Ezekiel—there is sometimes the phrase, ‘Thus says the Lord.’ This verb is in the present tense. The emphasis is not on that the Lord said something in the past or that he will say something in the future, but that he is saying something in the present. It is therefore something important that is being said.
In the translation of the Hebrew text of these four books (1 Samuel-2 Kings) into Greek, there is a frequent use of this present tense, where one would normally expect the past tense. And the first occurrence of this in 1 Samuel is already in the first chapter!


The people involved are Elkanah and his wife, Hannah, and they have traveled to Shiloh, the special place where the LORD is to be worshipped. The priest there at that time, Eli, interacts with Hannah—although in the Greek text (verse 14) it says that Eli’s servant is the one who initially talks to her. But it is Eli who eventually promises that the Lord would grant what she was requesting—a child. And the following is a somewhat literal translation of the Greek text (verse 19) after Elkanah and Hannah are given this promise:


And they rise early, and they worship the Lord, and they go their way. And Elkanah entered into his house….


Those first three verbs are in the present tense instead of the past. This is something to which the translator is drawing our attention. The LORD has just promised to do something wonderful. And these verbs which follow that promise are in the present tense because there are ramifications or results of what the LORD does, especially what he does as our true king.


These historical presents are frequent in these books because the LORD’s existence as king is important, and that truth has many different ramifications for his people. As a throne would show that a king is important, there would be some texts where what the LORD is doing is certainly important. You can see that especially in the New Testament with Jesus.
​
For more information about the presence of these historical presents in this part of the Old Testament, you may wish to look at the following article. It is in German, but things could be worse. “Das Praesens Historicum in den griechischen Samuelbüchern,” in In the Footsteps of Sherlock Holmes: Studies in the Biblical Text in Honour of Anneli Aejmelaeus. Peters Publishing in Walpole Maryland, 2014.
0 Comments
<<Previous

    Archives

    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home
  • About Us
    • What We Believe
    • History
  • Events
    • Photo Gallery
  • Pastor's Blog
  • Bulletin
  • Contact