Blog Archives

January 25th, 2020

1/25/2020

For the gospel text this Sunday, the Third Sunday after the Epiphany, we are going back to the Gospel according to Matthew, where we started at the beginning of the church year. But now we are at the fourth chapter [verses 12-25], and we will go on from there for the next few weeks.

All throughout this gospel account, the connections to the Old Testament are strong, and that makes sense, since this is the first book of the New Testament. And the way in which this writer connects his work to the Old Testament is fascinating.

The first Old Testament fulfillment prophecy within this gospel account has to do with the virgin giving birth to a son, Immanuel (1:23), and I have already mentioned before that this special verse in Isaiah (7:14) is at the center of the first main section in Isaiah. But I do not think I mentioned these words of the author of The Book Around Immanuel: Style and Structure in Isaiah 2-12 [Andrew Bartelt, Eisenbrauns, 1996, page 256]: “The break between [‘and she will call his name’] and [‘Immanuel’] divides chaps. 2-12 into equal halves of 3200 syllables.” Can you believe that?!

Another fulfillment prophecy that I wrote about quite recently was the one concerning Jesus as a Nazarene (2:23). I mentioned that this prophecy is unique in that it seems that the writer does not have simply one prophet in mind. Matthew says that the action of Jesus living in Nazareth means that there are prophets, in the plural, whose prophecies were fulfilled by that action.

Although it is impossible to say what the writer intended or what he had in mind—because we cannot interview him today, and we are not mind-readers anyway, something in the mind needs to be articulated to be shared—one thing I would like to mention here is that the writer MAY be pointing to the following two ‘prophets’: Samson, because he had a Nazirite vow—and that word is close to Nazareth (Judges 13), and Isaiah, specifically his prophecy that a shoot would come forth from the stump of Jesse (Isaiah 11)—since the Hebrew word ‘shoot’ is close to the word Nazareth.

Now if those two things were ‘in mind’, there would be a nice structure to this prophecy, in a somewhat similar pattern to the structure that is found in an Old Testament book like Leviticus and a New Testament epistle like Hebrews. These two writings have a structure that is like a one-third/two-thirds structure, like that of the tabernacle or temple, if you would be looking down at it from above. There would be the place for offerings at the one-third spot, and there would be the holy of holies at the two-thirds spot. [For more detail on this topic, see “The Structure of Hebrews: A Word of Exhortation in Light of the Day of Atonement”, in A Cloud of Witnesses: The Theology of Hebrews in its Ancient Contexts, T & T Clark, 2008, pages 20-22.] Both the tabernacle and the temple are gone, but a reminder of those structures continues with the literary structures of some significant texts in the scriptures.

With the book of Judges, we are a significant distance from the beginning of the Old Testament, and with the book of Isaiah, we are at similar distance from the end of the Old Testament. To give you an idea of the approximate distance, the English Standard Version Bible that I was looking at [copyright 2001 by Crossway Bibles] just had the basic text—it was not like a study bible which can have very little text and very many notes. This version of the bible had the story of Samson starting on page 255. And the prophecy of Isaiah which dealt with the branch was on page 695, and the Old Testament stopped on page 970, about 275 pages later. The difference between 255 pages and 275 pages is not that much, especially when considering that Isaiah continues for many more pages after chapter 11.

Another interesting point to be made is that, if there is a one-third and two-thirds division within a literary work, you may think of the ‘opposite ends’ of those divisions as being at the following three points in the writing: the beginning, the middle, and the end. And the middle point is probably the most important point to point out, since it usually goes unnoticed; the beginning and the end are always noticed. And usually there is something at the beginning that indicates the important middle, so it is not missed.

The type of structure where there is a significant change in the middle may be seen in several places within both testaments, and I believe I have mentioned these examples before: The second creation account in Genesis, chapter 2, has a negative-positive structure, with its turning point being the ‘face’ of the ground, with the word ‘face’ appearing near the beginning of the first creation account to give you a hint as to its importance. Within the first chapter of 1 Timothy, from verses 3 through 17, there are a series of negatives, and then the turning point is the gospel of the glory of the blessed God (verse 11), with the gospel being brought up at the beginning of the epistle with references to Jesus and grace.

The prophecy fulfillment that is brought up in the text for this coming Sunday may also have that same pattern behind it. Finding a pattern does NOT prove that it is the intention of the author—as I indicated above. It DOES mean that we still have much more work to do on these texts. Dividing the text by chapter and verse is a very artificial way of looking at the text. The writers just had the text to work with, and usually this meant not even having spaces between the words; paper was an extremely valuable thing. And the words of the text were—and still are—extremely valuable, even priceless.

The writer makes the point of Jesus living in Capernaum by the sea, and the writer connects this to the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali, and he writes the following:
And leaving Nazareth he went and lived in Capernaum by the sea, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali, so that what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled: ‘The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles—the people dwelling in darkness have seen a great light, and for those dwelling in the region and shadow of death, on them a light has dawned.’
Could this prophecy be the center of a section within this book? It could be. In front of the above text is another reference to Immanuel at 8:10. And, after this text, there is a refrain that appears elsewhere in this book (5:25; 10:4), and it has the word ‘not’ in it. It is in 9:11b—which in the English translations is at 12b.

There are six times that the word ‘not’ is used, but only in the first half of this section (from 8:11 to 9:11a; the word ‘not’ is in the original language and may not appear in the translation). Another interesting thing is that there are 148 words to the first word of our quotation above, and then there are 148 words from that point to the end of that section. Even if this is a coincidence, the New Testament text is extremely important; it appreciates the Old Testament, but, more importantly, it gives us a new start in Jesus Christ. ‘The people dwelling in darkness have seen a great light….’

0 Comments

January 18th, 2020

1/18/2020

0 Comments

We not only have short attention spans, but we have small perspectives as well. It is difficult to remember the beginning of a story when you reach the end, and it is difficult to see the bigger perspective of the entire story when you are starting at the first part of an ancient text.

One of the first examples that was brought to my attention many years ago was the presence of Jesus, both at the beginning and the end of the Gospel according to Matthew. At the beginning of the work, Jesus is ‘Immanuel’, God with us (1:23). And at the very end of the work, he promises to be always with his disciples, ‘to the end of the age (28:20).’

Someone worked very hard to make that gospel account a cohesive group of words. The words were not just a bunch of unrelated events in the life of Jesus. They had a purpose, a goal.

The gospel text for the Second Sunday after the Epiphany is from the Gospel according to John [1:29-42a], and the perspective of that account is huge. It not only goes back to the very beginning of time (see John 1:1), but it reaches all the way to the present and speaks to those who are reading or hearing those special words (see John 20:31).

This special gospel account also connects to the other accounts and supports those things which happen in the other gospel accounts, but those things are not directly and clearly brought up in this account. The institution of Baptism occurs in the Gospel according to Matthew, and in the Gospel according to John, Jesus connects himself to water on more than one occasion. One day, on the last, great day of a feast, Jesus stood up and said, ‘If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, “Out of his heart will flow rivers of living water (7:37-38; ESV).”’ The institution of the Lord’s Supper occurs in the other three gospel accounts, and in the Gospel according to John, Jesus talks about people eating his flesh and drinking his blood (see John 6).

The gospel text for this Sunday is near to the very beginning of this account, and many things are new. In this account we do not have an actual description of Jesus’ baptism, a sign of the beginning of his public ministry, but we do have John the Baptist testifying and supporting that event. That should be good enough for us, right?

There are two words that appear in the perfect tense and that emphasize an important past action that continues to have an effect [for more details about this tense, see page 577 of Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, by Daniel B. Wallace, published by Zondervan, 1996]. These are the words ‘to see’ and ‘to witness’. John the Baptist says in John 1:34: ‘And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.’

I believe there, in this first chapter, there is a strong connection to very near the end of the work, this gospel account’s portrayal of Jesus’ crucifixion and death. For many chapters, the writer has been going on and on about all the things that have happened to Jesus. Then these words go in a different direction; it is as if the writer was directing his attention to the reader or listener; it is quite unusual. Here are these words from John, chapter 19 (I will provide some verses before the sentence to give you a context):

Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away. So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth—that you also may believe (verses 31-35).

The words ‘to see’ and ‘to bear witness’ are near the end of that quotation. And they both are in that same, perfect tense. Given the great detail that these gospel writers have shown, I do not think that this is a coincidence. These two significant actions in the past have significant ramifications. And it is so clear when the writer is speaking to those who are reading or hearing these words.

It may also be helpful to bring up some relevant verses from 1 John 5 (the word ‘testify’ is the same as ‘bear witness’):

For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

This is he who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree (verses 4-8; ESV).

Blood and water are two, extremely important things. Jesus, the Son of God, connects himself to both those things. Jesus HAS those things in himself. And Jesus gives those things out for a purpose, towards a goal, ‘that you also may believe’.

0 Comments

January 11th, 2020

1/11/2020

0 Comments

The celebration of the Epiphany of Our Lord was this week, and this Sunday is the first Sunday after the Epiphany, and this Sunday always focuses on the Baptism of Our Lord, a ‘manifestation’ of Jesus at the very beginning of his ministry. And, this year, we get to focus on the Gospel according to Matthew.

I wrote that we ‘get to’ because these are the first recorded words out of Jesus’s mouth in the New Testament. The Gospel according to Matthew is first for a reason—although I will not get into that topic here. But first words are important. And last words are important as well.

I believe that the last words of the first words of Jesus are very important. You are probably familiar with these words. Jesus says the following to John the Baptist as an excuse for Jesus to be baptized by John: ‘It is proper for us to fulfill all righteousness (3:15).’ This time I have a great interest in that final phrase, ‘to fulfill all righteousness’.
I have not found the phrase ‘all righteousness’ anywhere else in the ancient writings—except for one place. (If you find an occurrence somewhere else, please let me know!)

There are two interesting things about this second-century letter from Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans (the Christians who lived in Smyrna, on the western coast of what is now Turkey). First of all, the quotation below is an incredibly long sentence. There are a lot of things going on here that are interconnected. And, second, the cross is so central; note the two references to being ‘nailed’.

I glorify Jesus Christ, the God who made you so wise, for I observed that you are established in an unshakable faith, having been nailed, as it were, to the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ in both body and spirit, and firmly established in love by the blood of Christ, totally convinced with regard to our Lord that he is truly of the family of David with respect to human descent, Son of God with respect to the divine will and power, truly born of a virgin, baptized by John in order that all righteousness might be fulfilled by him, truly nailed in the flesh for us under Pontius Pilate and Herod the tetrarch (from its fruit we derive our existence, that is, from his divinely blessed suffering), in order that he might raise a banner for the ages through his resurrection for his saints and faithful people, whether among Jews or among Gentiles, in the one body of his church (The Apostolic Fathers; Third Edition; Edited by Michael W. Holmes; Published by Baker Academic in 2007; page 249).

Now, as I wrote above, there is a LOT there. Perhaps the writer’s larger perspective makes for larger sentences. I also think that both Jesus and the writer have a larger perspective with the phrase ‘all righteousness’.

This word, ‘righteousness’, obviously appears in the Old Testament. It goes back to Abraham and even Noah, but it ultimately goes back to God. He gets to use righteousness when and where it pleases him. In the quote above, when the writer finally gets to the timeline of Jesus’ life here on earth, in a way very much like the Creeds of the Church, he goes immediately from his baptism to his being nailed to the cross.

Matthew 3:15 is the very first time that the word ‘righteousness’ is used in this gospel account. It is used a total of seven times within this account (3:15; 5:6, 10, 20; 6:1, 33; 21:32), as well as once within the Gospel according to Luke (1:75) and twice within the Gospel according to John (16:8 & 16:10).

The last time the word is used within the Gospel according to Matthew, Jesus again brings up John the Baptist (21:32; ESV): ‘John came to you in the way of righteousness.’ Does righteousness have a way, a path? Is it a path that God starts us down and then it is up to us to finish it?

From the way that the text is going, it seems to be a much shorter path, and it seems that the path is one that focuses on the Lord and his messengers and not us. And it seems that Jesus had authority over this way or path of righteousness. But he ended up being baptized with a baptism for sinners, and then—fast forward down that path—he really ended up being nailed to the cross to pay for all that sin. That is the way of righteousness … all righteousness … not just some righteousness.

0 Comments

January 4th, 2020

1/4/2020

0 Comments

In the three-year series of readings, it is very unusual for a Sunday to have the same three texts for all three years. And for the Second Sunday after Christmas, whatever year it is, for the gospel text we remain focused on that well-known story from the Gospel according to Luke [2:40-52]: Jesus, as a twelve-year-old boy, is in ‘his’ temple.

You may think that the following perspective makes too much of the text, but I see a connection between Jesus, that twelve-year-old in the temple, and Jesus, when he was older, cleansing that same temple. Jesus as a twelve-year-old appears only in the Gospel according to Luke, but the cleansing of the temple appears in all four accounts.
How can this text be connected to the other accounts? First of all, it is important to note that there is quite a variety when it comes to stating when Jesus actually cleansed the temple.

In the Gospel according to John, it seems that he did it at the start of his ministry (John 2:12-16). In both the Gospel according to Matthew and the Gospel according to Luke, it seems that he did it on Palm Sunday (Matthew 21:1-12; Luke 19:28-45). In the Gospel according to Mark, it seems as if he did it the day after, on Monday of Holy Week (Mark 11:1-15).

The question people most often ask is this: ‘When did he ACTUALLY cleanse the temple?’ He probably did it more than once, perhaps several times. But we do not have four historians answering this question; we have four evangelists answering this question. And we have them answering with four different perspectives regarding the good news. With this information, we could say that Jesus not only cleansed the temple a variety of times, but he also cleansed the temple in a variety of ways.

Incidentally, you can also see this variety in Jesus’ statement regarding the moneymakers and Jesus’ accusation that they were, at some point in time, making the temple into a den of robbers. In the Gospel according to Matthew, Jesus said to the people that ‘you are making it a den of robbers (21:13)’. That is obviously not a nice thing to be doing something bad at the present time. In the Gospel according to Mark, Jesus said to the people that ‘you have made it a den of robbers (11:17)’. That was even worse. They did something bad in the past, and that bad thing still had ramifications for the present time. In the Gospel according to Luke, Jesus simply says that ‘you made it a den of robbers (19:46)’. It was made that way in the past. The implication here is that, although bad behavior happened in the past, it is now possible to do something better. What Jesus ACTUALLY said at that point in time is not a good direction to head. Each gospel account gives a slightly different perspective on the problem and tries to point to Jesus as THE best solution.

Yes, in the Gospel according to Luke, Jesus was concerned about setting the situation right again. A lot of the people at that time had messed things up. Everybody messes things up. But Jesus was there to set things right.

Jesus certainly cleansed the temple at least once during Holy Week, but, in the Gospel according to Luke, it seems to me that he also does it another time. And, since this gospel account is connected to the living creature of the ox, and since the ox is a domesticated animal and very gentle, it seems to me that Jesus also cleanses the temple when he is only twelve years old. And it seems that he cleanses that temple in a very gentle way.

There are different ways in which to say that a person is amazed. Later in this text, Mary and Joseph are ‘astonished’ at seeing Jesus (verse 48), which is almost like being amazed. But the base part of that word literally means to hit. It seems similar to a type of amazement where you hit your head with your hand. But when the teachers are listening to the boy Jesus, they, along with the others who heard him, were ‘amazed’ (verse 47). And this word, in its literal sense, means to ‘stand out’. (In its transitive form, it has the primary sense of ‘change, displace’; in its intransitive form, it is out of the sense of becoming separated from something or to lose something; this was taken from BDAG, University of Chicago Press, 2000, page 350.)

I cannot think of a gentler way in which to cleanse the temple than for Jesus to amaze people by simply talking to them. They ‘stand out’ because of what he said; they were amazed. The dictionary reference I mentioned above also describes the word, in the sense that it is used here, as ‘the feeling of astonishment, mingled with fear, caused by events which are miraculous, extraordinary, or difficult to understand’.

They ‘stand out’ because they listened to Jesus. That temple will be gone soon anyway. Jesus wants the people to focus on a much better temple of himself, the God-man. But, of course, he wants to do that in a very gentle way.

The four gospel accounts are not there to contradict each other. They are there to support the good news in four different ways. If you think that you are okay on your own, then how the four different accounts relate to one another can be bothersome. If you know that you need to be rescued, then each one of them is precious.

From almost the beginning, these four accounts were put together in a codex or book form, and that was a way in which the differences among the accounts could be easily compared, and that comparison was encouraged because each account was so important. The good news comes in different ways and does different things in different situations.

For those who are stubborn, Jesus comes as a powerful lion. For those who are weak, Jesus comes as a powerful ox. Either way, he definitely comes. And, either way, we are definitely amazed.

0 Comments

A Sabbath Day's Journey

January 25th, 2020

January 18th, 2020

January 11th, 2020

January 4th, 2020

Archives