Sept. 1, 2024 -- 15th Sunday after Pentecost

                                        Biblical Words                                             [897]

Song of Solomon 2:8-13; Psalm 45:1-2, 6-9; James 1:17-27; Mark 7:1-8, 14-15, 21-23. 

At moments God’s Word is exuberant and spontaneous, especially after the great liberation from binding convention.   

Song of Solomon 2:8-13.  

To have a reading from the Song of Solomon is both surprising and delightful. 

This begins a group of readings from the third division of the Hebrew scriptures, the Writings, HakKetubim.  Our readings have moved through the historical traditions to the middle of Solomon’s glorious reign, and now for a while we will sample some of the literature of Solomon’s loves and wisdom.  This week alone is from the Song, then will follow a few weeks from Proverbs and Job. 

But what a transition!  We move from the staid piety of the Deuteronomist’s dedication of the Temple to the lover’s summons to hear “the voice of the turtledove” and to “come away”!  The poetry that plays so joyfully with images of fertile nature and the sprightly animal world reminds one of Shakespeare’s early narrative poetry, particularly Venus and Adonis. 

About full-blossomed spring as the time of new life and the powerful urge of the young and healthy toward love, what comment is there?  Let the poetry, which echoes through the history of English literature, speak: 

Arise, my love, my fair one,

      and come away; …

The flowers appear on the earth;

      the time of singing has come,

and the voice of the turtledove

      is heard in our land….

Arise, my love, my fair one,

      and come away. 

Interpreted through the ages as the summons of God to beloved Israel, as the wooing by Christ of his Bride the Church, it still has the lure and verve of a vigorous young man, alive to the vibrancy of new growth around him, making his urgent plea to the ravishing beauty behind the lattice, who is herself eager to be off! 

Psalm 45:1-2, 6-9.  

Only a little less exuberant about love is the Psalm reading, which says in its superscription that it is a love song (shir yedidoth).  Here we are dealing with a Royal Wedding.  The speaker begins with his own role and credentials: 

My heart overflows with a goodly theme;

      I address my verses to the king;

      my tongue is like the pen of a ready scribe. 

He is the clerk and witness of the ceremony, and his song will be the signed marriage license. 

Then we get the wedding portrait of the bridegroom, the king:  “You are the most handsome of men; grace is poured upon your lips…”  He is also a warrior, who has girded on his sword and ridden victoriously to defend truth and the right (verses 3-4, NRSV), whose enemies fall before him, and whose throne is a monument of stability and righteousness (verses 5-6).  In his most luxurious clothes and finest grooming he is ready for the wedding, and to the sound of the wedding march he processes into an ivory palace surrounded by a bevy of royal princesses, the bride herself standing in golden garments beside him (verses 7-9). 

The prescribed reading stops there, in mid ceremony, but the psalm goes on with the (minister’s) charge to the bride to appreciate her good fortune and her very enviable position (verses 10-13a).  The bride is then led to the king’s chamber for their nuptials (verses 13b-15), and the singer (perhaps speaking God’s blessing) winds up by praising the king’s posterity – and his own part in magnifying the king’s fame and glory (verses 18-19). 

James 1:17-27. 

The Epistle readings now shift to another letter in the New Testament, the Letter of James, quite different from the letter to the Ephesians we have heard for the last several weeks. 

This writing is addressed to “the twelve tribes in the Dispersion” (1:1), which at least means people outside Palestine, whether Judean, Judean-sympathizers, or entirely non-Judean believers in Jesus as the Christ. 

Comment on James the Brother.  It is romantic to think that the James who writes this letter is the brother of Jesus – as Church tradition in the fourth and later centuries gradually decided – but the concerns of the letter and the circumstances of those addressed do not fit well the historical situation of James the Just (as even his Judean opponents called him).  This James, the brother of Jesus, was the head of the Jerusalem church from around 41 CE (see Acts 12:17; Galatians 2:9 and 12; Acts 15:13 and 19).  This James was murdered in 62 CE by Zealots during the turbulence leading to the Judean revolt against Rome (reported by the Judean historian Josephus). 

The Letter of James was written in Greek and is a collection of memorable sayings in the manner of wisdom literature.  It does not have a structure of thought so much as a succession of themes, with sayings grouped around each theme. 

In the passage for today there is strong emphasis on the power of the word. 

[God] gave us birth by the word of truth… (verse 18, NRSV),

Welcome with meekness the implanted word that has the power to save your souls (verse 21). 

The passage goes on to make very clear that the “word” involved is an instruction for how to live.  The hearers of the letter must be “doers of the word” and not only hearers.  They should be “not hearers who forget but doers who act” (verse 25). 

Our passage concludes with a declaration that is truly memorable: 

Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this:  to care for orphans and widows in their distress… (Verse 27.) 

Wherever God’s people, of whatever description, are dispersed, this should be the word “implanted” in them that constantly receives new “birth.” 

Mark 7:1-8, 14-15, 21-23. 

After many weeks pondering the Bread of Life in John 6, we return for the Gospel reading to Mark.  In one sense this is a big shift, but in another today’s reading continues the Judean-Christian tensions of John’s Gospel – tensions about the theology of food. 

This passage in Mark establishes a major break between the Jesus movement and the Judaism of Jesus’ time and later.   

As a reformer, Jesus is not simply reinforcing the old law; he is changing it.  He is definitely leaving out something (see the criteria in Deuteronomy 4:2)!  He is leaving out the whole body of dietary rules that so fractured table fellowship, even among Christians themselves (Galatians 2:11-14). 

(For an impressive interpretation of this passage from a Liberal (Reformed) Jewish viewpoint, see the Special Note below.)

The entire passage, 7:1-23, is a very composite, even inconsistent, block of Markan tradition.  Most careful interpreters agree on this, but differ a lot in how they describe its development. 

As likely as any is a simple reading of four stages in the development of the tradition behind the passage.  (This is NOT a description of stages of writing; it is stages in how Jesus people evolved their discussions of these related topics.) 

1.      The first issue was hand-washing before meals (verses 1-2, 3-4), a challenge raised by Pharisees against Jesus’ disciples – not against Jesus, but against his disciples, that is, a conflict between Pharisees and early Jesus followers.  This issue is raised but not actually addressed in the passage.  It is now subsumed in the next, later issue. 

2.      The second issue is scripture versus traditions (verses 5, 6-8).  Here Jesus elevates the hand-washing issue into a scripture issue:  He cites a prophetic passage that indicts the Pharisees because they place their oral tradition on an equal footing with Moses’ written torah.  Verses 9-13 (not included in our reading) is an add-on example to support the charge about that oral tradition:  the Pharisees supposedly elevate “qorban” vows above the written commandments concerning parents.  Most scholars recognize this was not historically true, but the Jesus tradition came to sharply oppose the Pharisaic “oral law.”  

3.      The third issue is Jesus’ revolutionary declaration about what actually defiles people (verses 14-15, 17-20).  Not what goes into people (like food from unwashed hands) defiles them, but what comes out of people (verse 15).  The basic concept is so far-out that Jesus has to have a special in-house session with the disciples to reinforce it (verses 17-19), a standard technique in Mark for addressing issues that came up in the later church.  This discussion does not develop naturally out of what precedes but is a profound theological extension of the rejection of the Pharisaic purity laws.  This is no longer a critique of the oral torah; it is a rejection of major parts of the Mosaic legislation itself.  This is the freeing of Jesus believers from living by Leviticus. 

4.      Finally, a Hellenistic (non-Judean) inventory of what comes out of people:   a list of human defilements (verses 21-23), which resembles lists of vices that appear in Paul’s letters (Romans 1:29-31; I Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21). 

The entire passage has moved from a local Pharisaic purity issue to a basic separation between two emerging world religions.  This section marks the departure of Jesus followers from mainline Judean practice, by at least 70 CE. 

Special Note:  A Jewish Interpretation of Mark 7:15.

The following is a discerning and far-sighted statement of the historical significance of this teaching of Jesus:  C. G. Montefiore, The Synoptic Gospels (2d ed., 2 vols., London:  Macmillan and Co., 1927), Vol. I, pp. 130-131. 

Mark 7:15:  “There is nothing outside a person that by going in can defile, but the things that come out are what defile.”  (NRSV)

(Paragraphing has been added to what in the original is a long unbroken text.)

This section is of profound significance and value; it raises questions of the deepest importance. … For here Jesus enunciates a doctrine which appears not only to be new and emancipating, but which seems to constitute one of the two chief justifications or reasons for the main way in which Liberal Judaism looks at the old ceremonial law. 

For first of all came the old prophets of the eighth and seventh centuries  B.C.  They said:  The true service of God is not ceremonial, but moral; God desires love and not sacrifices, the knowledge of Him rather than burnt offerings. …This teaching is resuscitated by Jesus…

But here he says something which is akin to the prophetic doctrine, but is yet novel.  There were two aspects of the old ritual and ceremonial practices, two sides to them.  Some of them were supposed to affect God, and some of them were supposed to affect man.  The prophets dealt mainly with those which were supposed to affect, please, or propitiate God, and they tell us that God does not care for them:  it is not so that he is propitiated or pleased. 

In this section Jesus deals with those which were supposed to affect man, and these were mainly rules and customs about clean and unclean, which again depended upon conceptions – very old, widespread conceptions – about clean and unclean.  Just as the prophets upset the old ideas about the service of God, so here Jesus upsets old ideas about clean and unclean. 

As the prophets moralized and inwardized men’s ideas about the service of God, so Jesus moralizes and inwardizes men’s ideas about clean and unclean.  In a religious sense it is only man who can be clean and unclean; nothing else.  Only man can make himself clean and unclean; outside things cannot make him clean or unclean.  The conception of ritual or Levitical purity and impurity is overthrown and abolished.  Upon these two doctrines, the doctrine of Hosea, upon the one hand, the doctrine of Jesus, upon the other, the new attitude of Liberal Judaism towards the ceremonial Law depends. 

August 25, 2024 -- 14th Sunday after Pentecost

                            Biblical Words                                                       [896]

I Kings 8:(1, 6, 10-11), 22-30, 41-43; Psalm 84; Ephesians 6:10-20; John 6:56-69. 

The House of the Lord is honored as the house of prayer, but in time a faithful remnant finds a new holy center. 

I Kings 8:(1, 6, 10-11), 22-30, 41-43.  

The prophetic reading presents the highpoint of the Biblical presentation of King Solomon – the dedication of the Temple in Jerusalem. 

The Temple is such a vast element in Jewish and Christian religious language that it is worth dwelling on a bit.    

In general, the language used of temples in the ancient Near East made them the “houses,” the dwelling places, of the deities, and this is the language used of the Jerusalem Temple. 

The building (described in I Kings 6-7) was that of the private residence of a mighty lord.  It had a great front porch set off by two massive pillars, the only part of the temple seen by ordinary people (that is, non-priests).  Beyond that porch it had a main hall with upper windows, multiple lampstands, a food table, and an incense altar, all forming the main reception hall of the lord. 

But deep inside was a totally dark inner-most throne room where the god himself stayed and from which his “glory” might glow forth on special occasions.  Built into the walls around this temple structure were three stories of rooms used for stocks of supplies, for treasuries, and for the administrative work of the household staff (the priests). 

Out in the large front court was the slaughter site with elaborate bronze equipment for butchering, processing, and burning animals brought as offerings to the lord of the house. 

The opening of I Kings 8 refers to the ceremonies by which the Lord took possession of this house as his residence.  God’s own presence is represented by the ark of the covenant, and when it moved into the inner-most chamber, there was a great glow, shrouded in a bright cloud but so intense that the priests could not be near it (verses 10-11).  The holy Lord, in all God’s glory, has come to abide in the Temple.  (God inaugurates the Mosaic Tabernacle with this same overpowering glory, Exodus 40:34-35.) 

Solomon’s first words declare that this is God’s house (following the Greek text, translated in the RSV):  “The Lord has set the sun in the heavens, but has said that he would dwell in thick darkness.  I have built thee an exalted house, a place for thee to dwell in for ever.”  (If any words in this chapter come from the time of Solomon, these are the ones.) 

This is the faith of the old mythic age, when gods occupied actual space on earth, even if that space always represented a heavenly reality.  Solomon’s Temple originally participated in the ancient world’s mythopoeic unity of nature and society.  The Temple expressed this unity in its affirmations about the Lord Yahweh as enthroned king, victor over chaos, deliverer of the innocent, and giver of peace. 

But Solomon’s dedicatory prayer goes further and presents another perspective on the Temple.  (This perspective belongs to the “Axial Age,” which succeeded the old mythic orientation in several centers of civilization around the globe in the period 800 to 200 BCE; see Wikipedia, "Axial Age.")  

“Will God indeed dwell on the earth?  Even heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you [O Lord], much less this house that I have built” (verse 27, NRSV).  The transcendence of God beyond all spatial limits is affirmed, and will in the following ages gradually make a physical temple building unimportant if not actually objectionable. 

(To leap ahead to a dramatic and deadly example, see the speech of the martyr Stephen in Acts 7, in which the establishment of Solomon’s temple is presented as Israel’s apostasy from God.) 

A striking thing about Solomon’s benedictions and prayer is that nothing is said about sacrifices.  Fundamentally, in the old days the Jerusalem Temple was a place for sacrifices.  However, Solomon seeks God’s forgiveness and grace in response to prayers directed toward the Temple, making the Temple a focus of prayer rather than a place of sacrifice! 

Some typical moments of severe human crisis (including exile from the land) are enumerated with the request that God forgive and save those who pray toward the Temple (verses 31-53).  It is the prayer that matters.  God in heaven will heed the prayers; sacrifice does not matter. 

What the Temple provides is the direction of prayer.  Daniel in exile prayed, following Solomon, toward Jerusalem three times a day (Daniel 6:10).  The Muslims in Medina, living beside Jewish tribes, also prayed toward Jerusalem – until they were instructed by the Qur’an to change their practice and pray toward Mecca (Qur’an, 2:142-152). 

And yet, with or without sacrifices, Jerusalem has remained an intensely sacred and cherished place to Jews, Christians, and Muslims.  For many believers, the actual, physical place is holy, qualitatively different from all the profane space on the rest of the globe. 

And the holiest place in Jerusalem is the Temple mount! 

Psalm 84.  

The Psalm for this Sunday is a poignant expression of love for the Temple. 

The bene Qorah (“Of the Korahites” in the heading), the guild of singers to whom this psalm belonged, were apparently devoted to the Temple service, and expressed this in their songs.  See the opening of Psalm 42, another Qorahite psalm, as the speaker longs to see God and remembers “how I went with the throng, and led them in procession to the house of God…” (42:4). 

It has been suggested (by E.M. Poteat, Exposition in The Interpreter’s Bible) that three attitudes toward the Temple service are reflected in Psalm 84. 

First, the Temple servant who loves his calling yearns from a distance for the cherished courts (verses 1-4).  He envies the birds who can nest in out-of-the-way places around the court of the altar (like the swallows that build their mud-daub nests under the eaves of the high walls at the Mission in San Juan Capistrano). 

Secondly, there is the pilgrim who comes from a distance, his heart set on seeing God in Zion, wearied by his travel, passing the familiar landmarks loaded with legend and lore as he approaches the city (verses 5-8). 

And thirdly, there is the soldier or militia person on duty out on the borders (or, these days, in the very streets of the Old City) whose commander is a “shield” and God’s anointed.  For this person, God is “a sun and shield,” bestowing favor and honor on those who walk uprightly (verses 9-11).  Working among criminals and terrorists, this peace keeper is very clear that she/he “would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of God than live in the tents of wickedness” (verse 10, NRSV).  Doing duty as assigned, this is one who trusts completely in the Lord of hosts (verse 12). 

So multifarious are those who hope and pray toward Solomon’s Temple. 

Ephesians 6:10-20.  [A suggested alternative, related to the Temple, is Ephesians 2:14-22.]

The Epistle reading, our last one from the letter to the Ephesians, directs our attention to the warfare of faith, a warfare waged with enemies more unseen than seen.  “For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of the present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (verse 12, NRSV). 

The imagery suggests that this is a defensive battle; there is strong emphasis on “standing,” or perhaps it is “holding the line”!  “…so that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil…” (verse 11); “so that you may be able to withstand on that evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm” (verse 13). 

This standing up to the dark powers requires the armor (panoplia) of God:   the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, running shoes for delivering good news, the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the speech (rhema, not logos)  of God (verse 17). 

But perhaps the most important component of the believer’s defense against evil is prayer:  “Pray in the Spirit at all times in every prayer and supplication” (verse18).  The Apostle asks particularly that they pray for him, “so that when I speak, a message may be given to me to make known with boldness the mystery of the gospel, for which I am an ambassador in chains” (verses 19-20). 

The Apostle brings a challenge to the ones God would call, a challenge to stand firm as the spiritual defense force against evil. 

John 6:56-69.  

The Gospel reading dwells on the aftermath of Jesus’ lengthy discourse about the Bread of Life.  The sequels to the discourse force the hearers, including the disciples, to choose whether to stay with Jesus or to go away from the paradoxes and mysteries of his revelation and his offer of communion. 

A progressive scandalizing of his Judean hearers has unfolded, and in this last development, Jesus’ own disciples have become divided and many leave him.  The Judean leaders had already separated themselves from this sacramental mystification saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” (verse 52, NRSV).  Now it is the disciples who say, “This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?” (verse 60). 

To these doubting disciples Jesus reinforces the distinction between the realm of the spirit and the realm of the flesh, an emphasis introduced in his dialogue with Nicodemus (3:6).  “It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh is useless.  The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (verse 63, NRSV). 

There is a point at which the reality of the dimension of Spirit is real, or it is not – or is not yet.  Those who come to know that reality of Spirit through Jesus’ speaking (“the words that I have spoken”) experience (eternal) life. 

But, if the language of sacraments is hard, how about the language of ascension?  “Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?” (verses 62).  Those who come to this experience are the ones who “see” the Son of Man ascending to the Father, and this experience inaugurates the guidance of the Spirit among those who belong to Jesus (see 16:12-13). 

The crisis of doubt reduces the disciples to “the twelve,” who are mentioned in John only in this passage and at 20:24.  In response to Jesus’ challenge to them – to the effect, “Aren’t you leaving too?” – Peter makes his confession, in its Johannine version (compare Mark 8:27-29 and Matthew 16:16-19):  “Lord, to whom can we go?  You have the words of eternal life.  We have come to believe and know that you are the Holy One of God” (verses 68-69). 

Starting with five thousand hearers, plus their dependents, Jesus’ circle has shrunk to twelve – and “one of you is a devil” (verse 70).  These will remain as witnesses after his death brings new meaning to eating his flesh and drinking his blood. 

August 18, 2024 -- 13th Sunday after Pentecost

                                     Biblical Words                                          [895]

I Kings 2:10-12; 3:3-14; Psalm 111; Ephesians 5:15-20; John 6:51-58. 

Wisdom comes through Reverence of the Lord, and through the gifts that create human communion.  

I Kings 2:10-12; 3:3-14.  

The prophetic reading leaves the story of David behind and launches us into a range of topics related to Solomon, which will include in the next few weeks the theology of the Temple, the pragmatism of the proverbs, and the indignation of Job.

The Biblical presentation of Solomon is quite different from that of David. We do not get personally close to Solomon.  He is always in formal attire – and magnificent it is!  We may ogle the splendor that he brought to Jerusalem, making it a city of fine stone and cedar, and we may be impressed by the complex bureaucracy he implemented to administer his empire. And everyone knows of his hundreds of wives and more informal consorts, many of whom consummated diplomatic and dynastic arrangements with the nations and tribes from Egypt to Mesopotamia.

But perhaps their literary reputations are the best index of the fame of Solomon and David: 

·        Solomon was the patron of the carefully crafted but generalizing Proverbs;

·        David was the patron of the more intensely expressive Psalms.

The treatment of Solomon in the book of I Kings (chapters 3-11) is systematically organized in an "envelope" structure (1, 2, 3, 2', 1'):

1.  Narratives of Solomon's divine favor, ch. 3
2.  Details of administration and wisdom, ch. 4
3.  The Temple, 5:1-9:9
2'. Administration, wisdom, and wealth, 9:10-10:29
1'. Narratives of Solomon's divine disfavor, ch. 11

In the reading for this Sunday the main emphasis is on Solomon's choice.  At the beginning of his reign he goes to the great sanctuary at Gibeon and God appears to him in a dream (also a contrast to David, to whom God spoke only through prophets). 

God offers Solomon whatever he wants, and Solomon already has the wisdom to ask for understanding to govern well such a great people of God.  Specifically he asks for “a listening heart (leb shome'a) to judge your people” (verse 9, NRSV). This was, of course, the right door to pick, and God grants the wisdom and throws in wealth and long life as bonuses. 

The language of the whole episode makes it clear we are dealing with the Deuteronomistic speech writers of the late monarchic period.  In those days, a fairly precise theology of kingdoms rigorously faithful to the Lord had been worked out, based on prophetic and reforming experience. 

From that viewpoint, the basic assessment is clear:  Solomon started out right.  He was in awe of the magnitude of his task and knew he needed divine help to carry it out.  At the beginning of the concert, he and the Lord were on the same page.

Psalm 111.  

This Psalm reading is also used on the 4^th Sunday after Epiphany in the present year.  On that occasion we celebrated this short alphabetic acrostic as a modest hallelujah by a learned person among the singers at the temple. 

When it accompanies the Solomon reading, however, this psalm stands out because of verse 10:  “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," or more literally, “The beginning [or the basic principle] of wisdom is fear of the Lord.” 

This verse is the basic motto of the religious wisdom schools.  Though the basic idea is expressed often, the exact phrasing is found nowhere else. For example (these are my literal translations): 

• Proverbs 9:10 has, “the beginning (tehillath, not r’eshith) of wisdom is the fear of the Lord (Yahweh)”;
• Job 28:28 has, “the fear of the Lord (Adonai, not Yahweh), that is wisdom”;
• Proverbs 1:7 has, “the fear of the Lord (Yahweh) is the beginning (r’eshith) of knowledge (not wisdom)”;
• and finally Proverbs 4:7 has, “the beginning of wisdom is to acquire wisdom”!

There will be occasions in later readings to look further at wisdom in proverbs, but on the basis of this psalm, it may be said that if wisdom is getting right with the world, the beginning of wisdom is getting right with God.

Such was Solomon's procedure in the story, and to this, surely, the singer of Psalm 111 would have said, Hallelujah!

Ephesians 5:15-20.  

And this time our Epistle reading carries forward fairly explicitly our theme from the Hebrew scriptures!  “Be careful then how you live, not as unwise people but as wise…” (verse 15, NRSV).

The short passage moves on, assuming that getting drunk is not wisdom, but being filled with the Holy Spirit is.  In fact we may say that this passage, as part of today’s readings, adds the critically important ingredient of JOY.  

Wisdom heard and taken in (eaten) produces delight and singing.  Join in the banquet of wisdom “as you sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs among yourselves, singing and making melody to the Lord in your hearts, giving thanks to God the Father at all times…” (verses 19-20). 

John 6:51-58.  

The Gospel reading is not explicitly about Wisdom, but for many the sacraments are the means of preparing for divine wisdom. 

After several rounds in John 6 on the theme that Jesus is the bread of life, Jesus has just declared, “the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh” (verse 51).  Assuming that cannibalism is out of the picture, his perplexed Judean hearers ask, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

At this point we need to regroup enough to recognize that the whole dialogue has been going on with a major hidden agenda, namely, the Christian mysteries commonly known as the sacraments.  (Baptism is assumed in the background of 3:1-15.) 

Here, of course, Jesus’ words assume the practice and the theology of the Lord’s Supper. The hearers of this discourse know of  the breaking of the bread (of life) and the drinking of the wine (his blood). 

This sacrament is not described anywhere explicitly in the Gospel of John, as it is in the other Gospels and in Paul's first letter to the Corinthians (11:23-26).  The assumption in John may be that the details of the Lord’s Supper remain hidden until believers are introduced to it as the mystery of the new life.  Thus the details of the sacrament are not for public consumption, but there can be no question what is meant by the blunt statements of verses 53-56. 

Some new language is introduced here.  The terms “flesh” and “blood,” rather than “bread” or “food,” suddenly become the primary terms of Jesus’ discourse.  These are terms associated with animal sacrifice – the flesh of the animal to be eaten (in some forms of sacrifice) and the blood to be poured out at the altar or sprinkled in covenant ceremonies.  This was ancient sacrificial language, by which communion was restored between the divine and those making the sacrifice. 

But that old sacrificial communion is now replaced by a new union in which humans, previously caught in the death of the world, are now offered the heavenly source of rebirth and new life.  This new kind of union is offered by him who said, “Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them” (verse 56). 

After the sacramental statements have been made, the whole discussion of the bread is given a final summary: “This [the sacrament of the Eucharist] is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever” (verse 58). 

Those sharing in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper were caught up in the salvation promised by Wisdom, which is known in this Gospel as the Word (the Logos) of God, which “became flesh and lived among us” (John 1:14). 

August 11, 2024 -- 12th Sunday after Pentecost

                                   Biblical Words                                      [894]

II Samuel 18:5-9, 15, 31-33; Psalm 130; Ephesians 4:25-5:2; John 6:35, 41-51.

Revolutions test people’s truth-telling, and some must trust that their Lord taught the true way.

II Samuel 18:5-9, 15, 31-33.

The prophetic reading leaps ahead in the saga of the reign of King David. The prophet Nathan had pronounced God's punishment on David for his sin against Uriah:  “I will raise up trouble against you from within your own house…” (II Sam. 12:11). 

The punishment is worked out in the stories that follow concerning David’s sons.  David had six sons before he came to Jerusalem (II Sam. 3:2-5). The first and third die in the events about to be narrated, and the fourth is later displaced as a would-be king by Solomon. The great drama, however, on the scale of a Greek tragedy, is that of David and Absalom.  The Lectionary skips most of this long and intriguing story, but I will summarize it here. 

David's crime consisted of sex and violence, and the incident that starts the retribution is a violent sexual assault by David's eldest son, Amnon, upon his half-sister Tamar. Tamar's full brother Absalom bides his time, then assassinates Amnon during the sheep-shearing festivities (II Sam. 13).

Absalom was banished to his mother's home country for years, but he was a very popular showman-type prince, now the heir to the throne.  Therefore David's Commanding General, Joab, pulls off a ruse by which David lets Absalom return (II Sam. 14). Absalom soon promotes himself as a kind of popular deputy king, and thereby “stole the hearts of the people of Israel” (II Sam. 15:6), that is, he led a rebellion of the tribes of Israel against the kingship of David.

There clearly was something special about David's departure from Jerusalem (II Samuel 15:13-16:14).  This narrative is a prolonged, semi-liturgical process.  There is a succession of declarations of loyalty by some and of enmity by others. The king's movements out of the city are carefully marked:  at the last house in the city (15:17) all of his loyal forces pass in review; down in the Kidron valley on the east side of the city he has the priests turn around and take the ark of the covenant of God back into the city while he moves on to face his trials without it (15:24-29).  

David then ascends the Mount of Olives in dress and attitude of lamentation surrounded by weeping supporters (15:30). On the summit of the Mount he proposes to Hushai, the loyal court counselor, that he return to Jerusalem and confound the counsel of Absalom (15:32-37).  As David moves on beyond the Mount a servant of the house of Saul brings much-needed supplies, and as he reaches Bahurim (place of weeping) he is cursed and mocked by another member of the house of Saul, whose life he spares because God may be speaking through him (16:1-14).

In this long departure narrative, each party’s future in the kingdom is determined by his response to the lamenting and humble king who is abandoning his city to a rebellious son.

Absalom, the darling of the people, has won the capital city. However, in the great battle out in the forest to determine the longer future, he fights too quickly and loses (18:1-18). Absalom himself is on the battlefield, and as disaster strikes he flees through the trees, only to be caught in a great oak.  A cohort of Joab’s tough guards surrounds and kills him.  This in spite of the instructions given directly and publicly by David to Joab and his brothers to protect the boy Absalom (II Sam. 18:5).  Joab and his men know where David's true political interest lies, whatever his sentiment for the rebel son.

We hear, finally, how an African runner from the battlefield brings the news to David, and the reading ends with David's gasping, almost incoherent cries of grief at the loss of his son Absalom. 

The words and themes of this grief inspired the title and story of a great American novel by William Faulkner (Absalom, Absalom!).

Psalm 130. 

The Psalm reading repeats the selection of the 5th Sunday after Pentecost. There we focused on the powerful opening word, “Out of the depths I cry to you…” Here we may think of the depths of David's grief over Absalom. 

But we may also think of David in that deep valley between the royal city and the Mount of Olives, sending the ark of God back into the city, trusting that God will work God's own will in these turbulent events. “If you, O Lord, should mark iniquities, Lord, who could stand?”

At that point in the narrative, there is only an outside chance that David will even survive, much less return in triumph.  All is absolutely in God's hands.  If God gave us everything we deserve, there would be NO hope.  Yet David's conduct on that departure from Jerusalem sustains both his personal faith – “I wait for the Lord, my soul waits” – and the root faith in Israel's destiny – “It is [the Lord] who will redeem Israel from all its iniquities.”

Ephesians 4:25-5:2.  

In the Epistle reading we have proceeded in the letter to the Ephesians to the “ethical” section, which usually follows the “doctrine” part of the letter.  The Apostle has just said, “You were taught to put away your former way of life, your old self…and to clothe yourselves with the new self, created according to the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (4:22-24, NRSV).  Now, in today’s reading, we can see a set of mini-commandments, telling the hearers how to live the new life in detail. 

We have a list of eight basic “commands,” each of which is elaborated in the full text. 

Let all of us speak the truth to our neighbors. 

Do not let the sun go down on your anger. 

Thieves must give up stealing (and work to share with the poor). 

Let no evil talk come out of your mouths. 

Do not grieve the Holy Spirit (“grieve” means disappoint, betray). 

Put away from you all bitterness. 

Be kind to one another. 

Be imitators of God…and live in love, as Christ loved us… 

John 6:35, 41-51.  

The Gospel reading continues our focus on Jesus as the Bread of Life in John 6. 

This whole chapter has three major parts, 

• the miracles of the feeding of the five thousand and walking on the water (verses 1-21), 
• the dialogues about the Bread of Life (verses 22-59), and 
• the impact afterwards on Jesus’ followers (verses 60-71).  

Our reading for today is the central section of the dialogues on the Bread. 

As commented before, John 6 contains a mini-history of early Christian faith.  In fact, our chapter moves from a great popular following to a little dedicated core, from five thousand or more Jesus followers to a set of twelve committed disciples (verses 66-67).  Between the crowds at the beginning and the small group of disciples at the end are the Judean authorities who challenge the Jesus claims. 

In last week’s readings, those speaking to Jesus were the “crowd” (verses 22, 24), and they were told that the manna in the wilderness was not the real heavenly bread that gives life to the world, but that Jesus himself is that bread.  The concluding punch line was, “I am the bread of life.  Whoever comes to me will never be hungry…” (verse 35, NRSV). 

Most of our reading for today presents the responses to Jesus by “the Judeans.”  [“Judeans” is the actual New Testament word later translated in European languages as “Jews.”]  After the popular audience (the “crowd”) has heard of Jesus as the heavenly Bread, the religious authorities raise objections.  “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know?  How can he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” (verse 42). 

We clearly have reflected here the kinds of objections to Christian claims for Jesus raised by followers of Pharisaic and Rabbinic Judaism in the middle and late first century of the Christian era.  It was one thing for Jesus followers to claim that Jesus was the Messiah – the Davidic ruler-to-be who would return Israel to its ancient glory.  Now to talk about a heavenly Man come to earth (which is what “Son of Man” means in John, see verse 27) is a great break from Moses (see verse 32) and contrary to what is known about the human Jesus of Nazareth! 

Jesus’ reply to this objection includes the argument that not everyone is included in the salvation sent from heaven.  How or why is God’s own mystery, but God “draws” some to the heavenly gift while others are not so “drawn.”  “No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me; and I will raise that person up on the last day” (verse 44, NRSV). 

This discourse is aware that the mainline Judean community would increasingly refuse the proclamation of Jesus as the bringer of God’s reign.  Here (as elsewhere in the Gospels) the Christian belief is expressed that God ultimately directs people’s response to or rejection of Jesus. 

Our reading ends with a final note that is very provocative and surprising.  Verse 51 concludes the discussion about Jesus as the “living bread,” but adds, “the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” 

Flesh is a new word.  It opens a whole new discussion, which is next week’s reading from the Gospel.