Ghost Signs: Vandalia, Illinois

Bible in a Year: Returning in 2018

This calendar year, I’ve been reading through the Bible and taking informal notes on the readings. Since we so often read verses and passages and passages of the Bible without appreciating context, I’m especially focusing on the overall narrative and connections among passages.

Lord willing, this project will continue a little past the calendar year, into Lent 2018. I've been interested in discovering ways that the New Testament continues and connects to the Old Testament (which was the subject of my Lenten devotional published a couple years ago)--and in discovering points of rapprochement between Christianity and Judaism. But to help me with those goals, I purchased eight or nine wonderful books at the recent Society of Biblical Literature meeting, and now I need a few weeks to study them properly. Rather than rush things just to fit the project into 2017, I'll be back with these notes at the end of December or the first of January.

Bible in a Year: Luke

This calendar year, I’m reading through the Bible and taking informal notes on the readings. Since we so often read verses and passages and passages of the Bible without appreciating context, I’m especially focusing on the overall narrative and connections among passages.

This week I’ve been studying Luke. Luke is likely the only Gentile author among the New Testament writers. He wrote this book and Acts to someone named Theophilus (“lover of God”) in order to provide an account of Jesus’ life  and of the early church. But is Theophilus a particular person, or anyone who loves God?

As I wrote a few posts ago, a favorite book from my college religion courses was Gospel Parallels, which lays out the Synoptic Gospels—Mathew, Mark, and Luke—in order to show textual similarities and differences. Over 90% of Mark’s gospel is also found in Matthew and Luke, and the latter two gospels have material in common that is not found in Mark: the so-called “Q” material (likely meaning “Quelle,” the German word for “source”). Matthew and Luke also have material unique to their own gospels, implying other sources that they used. Unfortunately, we do not know what sources Luke used for the first fifteen chapters of Acts (that is, up to the point where Luke himself subtly and personally joins the story).

(Here is a site, based on another book, that provides the parallels of texts among the three Synoptics: http://www.bible-researcher.com/parallels.html)

While Matthew gives us the Wise Men and Herod’s murderous rage and the flight to Egypt, Luke gives us “the rest” of the Christmas story: the stories of John the Baptist and his family, Mary’s visit to Elizabeth, the Magnificat, the Benedictus, the journey to Bethlehem and the manger, the shepherds, the angels.  We also have Jesus’ circumcision, his presentation at the Temple, and the praise of Simeon and Anna. The only canonical story from Jesus’ growing-up years is found in Luke: the accidental abandonment at the Temple. Thankfully we have a positive story of the Jewish teachers at the Temple: not only did they enjoy his company but they also must have fed him and tucked him into bed at night for three days. Luke genealogy is different from Matthew’s.

There are several passages—-some of them quite beloved—that are unique to Luke’s gospel: Jesus’ first rejection at Nazareth, the stories of Mary and Martha, Zacchaeus, the widow’s son, the Walk to Emmaus, the brief story of the widow and her small contribution, the saying about the narrow door, and also the parables of the rich fool, the Prodigal Son, the Good Samaritan, the friend at midnight, the Pharisee and the tax collector in contrasting prayer, and others. Little wonder that Luke is a favorite among the gospels for many people, including myself. While in Dublin several years ago, I purchased a pewter goblet featuring Luke's symbol, the ox.

Here is a good outline of Luke’s gospel: http://www.crivoice.org/books/luke.html In his book The Writings of the New Testament, Luke Johnson points out that Luke together with Acts occupied about a fourth of the entire New Testament in terms of chapters—though the writing style is not verbose and is a high quality Greek.

Analogous to 1 Chronicles, Luke-Acts actually begins with Adam (in the genealogy of Jesus) and through the abbreviation of genealogy gives us a vision from the beginning of biblical history to Luke’s own time, when the apostle Paul was still alive and preaching. The narrative itself covers about sixty years.

Luke’s gospel lacks the darkness and irony of Mark and also the xenophobia of Matthew (Johnson, p. 202). The Romans and other Gentiles are not portrayed so negatively, and neither are Jews (although the Pharisees, Sadducees and scribes are, as usual, criticized by Jesus). Luke’s gospel seems to depict Christians as no political threat to Rome, and to depict Jesus’ life, teachings, suffering, and death as part of Israel’s history and consistent with the Hebrew scriptures (Johnson, pp. 202-203). But Luke-Acts also offer to Jewish contemporaries a chance to follow Jesus, and when many do not, Gentiles acceptably become part of the new community.

In her book The Reluctant Parting, Julie Galambush points out that Luke’s theology of the fulfillment of scripture (and Matthew’s, too) has given Gentile Christians assurance of being part of God’s promises to Israel—and, in fact, the authentic kind of Judaism, to the exclusion of the broader community of Jews. Again, we are dealing with Christianity not as a major religion that looks disdainfully at its parent religion, but as a tiny sect that considers itself still Jewish and compares itself to other Jews. In her interest in showing how early Christianity and rabbinic Judaism went their separate ways, Galambush notes Luke’s gospel has been a popular source of religious validation for Gentile Christians, as well as for messianic Jewish movements (which, she points out, are not considered religiously Jewish by the larger Jewish community) (pp. 90-91).

One characteristic of Luke’s gospel is his concern for the poor (see, for instance, 6:3-4, 6:20-25, 16:22, 18:22, 21:1-3). In my study book, What’s in the Bible about Life Together? (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2008), I reflected on Luke 6:20-25:

“If you feel disdain for poor people, avoid Luke’s Gospel. one of Luke’s themes is the blessedness of the poor, to just ‘the poor in spirit’ (Matthew 5:3). The gospel is good news preached to the poor (Luke 1:52-53; 4:1-19)… God has special love for the por. When the kingdom of God comes, the poor will be redeemed, given pride and joy. The hungry will have food; the sorrowful will find happiness.

“What about the rich? According to Jesus, the tables will turn on them in the Kingdom if wealth is at the center of their lives and concern or the poor is lacking… A lack of money is a terrible source of heartache and worry… It’s tough to hang on to God’s promises when you’re choosing between paying for your medicine and buying food or when you made a financial decision that seemed sensible but now is failing. An abundance of money is a source of heartache, too, because in times of prosperity, we still worry… (p. 39). Luke gives those of us who are financially better-off to consider our uses of money and the devotions of our hearts.

(I'll return to these informal studies in a few weeks, after I delve into several books of Bible scholarship that I purchased this week at the Society of Biblical Literature meeting.)   

Bible in a Year: Mark

This calendar year, I’m reading through the Bible and taking informal notes on the readings. Since we so often read verses and passages and passages of the Bible without appreciating context, I’m especially focusing on the overall narrative and connections among passages.

This week I’m studying Mark. Back in the fall of 1981, I was a grad assistant for a lecture course on Mark at Albertus Magnus College, a women’s college at the time. The margins of my old Bible are filled with interesting insights that the professor offered during that course.

I had not thought of Mark, for instance, as a rather “dark” gospel. The story is framed by two declarations of Jesus as the (or a) Son of God, the first verse, and … the regretful declaration of the centurion who watched Jesus die (15:39). If you knew nothing about Jesus, you might ask, What kind of “good news” (1:1) is this?

Furthermore, Jesus’ identity is a matter of some mystery. Very early in the account, the powers that be want to destroy him (3:6), and his own friends and family consistently fail to understand him. Those who are on the “outside” (the demon-possessed, other Gentiles like that Roman soldier) do understand him. Some would like to proclaim Jesus, but he tells them to stay quiet (3:12), reflecting a theme of what scholars have called “the Messianic secret” in Mark (1:25, 34, 44, 3:12, 5:19, 43, 7:36, 8:30, 9:9, 16:7). Nearly from the beginning of the Gospel, Jesus creates misunderstanding and confusion.

At the end, Jesus’ own followers let him down. “And they all forsook him, and fled,” reads 15:50. (During that 1981 class, I wrote in the margin, “Now they understand!” That is, they realized that following Jesus would indeed involve suffering and possibly death, and at this stage they fled such a prospect.) Like the other gospels, Jesus’ women friends and relatives are most loyal to him (15:40). But the gospel ends with them, too, running away in fear (16:8). The somewhat abrupt beginning of Mark is framed with an abrupt ending.

Of course, we know now that the risen Jesus did appear to his followers and friends, male and female, and they gained new faith and courage. But if you just read Mark “cold” for the first time, you might scratch your head at the gospel’s sadness and irony. In her book The Reluctant Parting, Julie Galambush suggests that Mark's community may have been in a crisis situation during the dark times of the revolt against Rome in 67-73 CE.

As I wrote a few posts ago, a favorite book from my college religion courses was Gospel Parallels, which lays out the Synoptic Gospels—Mathew, Mark, and Luke—in order to show textual similarities and differences. Over 90% of Mark’s gospel is also found in Matthew and Luke, and the latter two gospels have material in common that is not found in Mark: the so-called “Q” material (likely meaning “Quelle,” the German word for “source”). Matthew and Luke also have material unique to their own gospels, implying other sources that they used.

A basic outline of Mark:

The beginning of Jesus’ story, John the Baptist, Jesus’ baptism, and the wilderness temptation (1:1-13). There are no “Christmas stories” here.

Jesus’ ministry in Galilee (1:14-9:50)
Jesus’ miracles of healing
His teaching about the Sabbath, fasting, his true kindred
His parables (chapter 5)
Other miracles like the thousands fed, the walk upon the sea, the healing of the Gentile woman’s daughter, and others
The Transfiguration, and Jesus’ teachings about his death and resurrection

Jesus and his group journey to Jerusalem (10:1-52)

Jesus’ final week (11:1-16:8)
The Palm Sunday entry
The cursed fig tree
The temple incident
Disputes with Sadducees and Pharisees
The Apocalyptic Discourse
The Last Supper and Gethsemane
Jesus’ arrest, trial, execution, death, and resurrection

A later addition to Mark’s gospel, including extra teaching to the disciples by the risen Jesus (16:9-20)

In his Writings of the New Testament, Luke T. Johnson points out that we don’t really know Mark’s identity's community, and the reasons why he wrote (p. 148). While we an figure out that Mark was the major source for Matthew and Luke, we don’t know Mark’s sources (p. 149). My old Harper’s Study Bible suggests the traditional idea that Peter the disciple who informed Mark, and that Mark may have been the young man strangely referred to in 14:50-51.

Johnson (I keep wanting to call him “Luke,” because that’s what all of us students of his call him) notes that Mark has an triadic “architectonic principle”: things appear in threes, like the three seed parables (4:3-32), three sets of public opinion (6:14-15, 8:27-28), three predictions of Jesus’ suffering (8:31, 9:31, 10:33-34), and of course Peter’s three details (14:66-72) (p. 151).

Johnson discusses several aspects of Mark’s structure (pp. 151-153). But one very key turning point is the declaration of Jesus’ identity by Peter (8:27-30), followed by the Transfiguration (9:1-7). At this point in the story, the assurance that Jesus is the Son of God connects with the opening verse, the centurion’s realization, and also Jesus’ own declaration in 14:62 (pp. 152-153).

The original ending of Mark seems to be 16:8, attested to by the earliest manuscripts. The longer ending of 16:9-20 does give us a famous verse about snake-handling.

I like Johnson’s ideas about Mark’s gospel: “Mark’s readers would naturally, as we still do, identify themselves with the disciples. Mark therefore uses that relationship to teach his readers. The message is mainly one of warning against smugness and self-assurance. He seems to be saying ‘If you think you are an insider, you may not be; if you think you understand the mystery of the kingdom and even control it, watch out; it remains alive and fearful beyond your comprehension. If you think discipleship consists in power because of the presence of God, beware; you are called to follow the one who suffered and died. Your discipleship is defined by his messiahship, in terms of obedience and service’” (p. 158).

A wonderful, always timely warning and reminder.

Bible in a Year: Matthew

Caravaggio, "The Calling of Saint Matthew"

This calendar year, I’m reading through the Bible and taking informal notes on the readings. Since we so often read verses and passages of the Bible without appreciating context, I’m especially focusing on the overall narrative and connections among passages.

This weekend I'm studying Matthew. As I wrote a few posts ago, a favorite book from my college religion courses was Burton Throckmorton's Gospel Parallels, which lays out the Synoptic Gospels—Mathew, Mark, and Luke—in order to show textual similarities and differences. Over 90% of Mark’s gospel is also found in Matthew and Luke, and the latter two gospels have material in common that is not found in Mark: the so-called “Q” material (likely meaning “Quelle,” the German word for “source”). Matthew and Luke also have material unique to their own gospels, implying other sources that they used.

(Here is a site, based on another book, that provides the parallels of texts among the three Synoptics: http://www.bible-researcher.com/parallels.html)

If you’re reading the Old Testament through to the New, Matthew’s gospel provides a segue by starting with a genealogy back to Abraham, reminding us of the genealogies of Genesis and 1 Chronicles, as well as the census material in the Torah. Matthew’s genealogy does omit some generations, but also likes Jesus to the tribe of Judah through the families of David, the Davidic kings of the southern kingdom through the deportation to Babylon and the post-exilic period.

Matthew gives us half of what I think of as the “total” Christmas story: the Magi from the east, Herod’s murderous rage and Joseph and Mary’s escape with their son to Egypt, reminding us of the birth narrative of Moses. The linkage of Jesus with the Emmanuel prophecy (Isaiah 7:14) announces God's presence among the people in Jesus, which continues across the gospel (18:20, 25:34-45, 28:20).

We’ve no accounts of Jesus’ childhood or young adulthood until he presents himself for baptism to John the Baptist, connected to Second Isaiah’s exilic declarations of hope and promise (Isa. 40:3). As with many heroes in religion and mythology, Jesus undergoes a time of testing before he begins the main journey of his life (chapter 4). Jesus dwelled in Capernaum, a mix of Jewish and Gentile heritage as reflected in Isaiah’s words (4:15-16). Gathering disciples and crowds, he taught on the side of the mountain (Chaps. 5-7), and continued to teach while also performing miracles of care and healing (chaps. 8-9). Needless to say, the mountain setting of Jesus' sermon, along with Jesus' teachings of Torah and faithfulness, give us a very Moses-like image.

Matthew arranges Jesus’ teachings in five discourses (chapters 5-7, 10, 13, 18, 24-25), and uniquely gives us teachings such as the wicked slave (18:21-35), the landowner (20:1-18), the ten virgins (25:1-13), the talents (25:14-30), and the narrative of the last judgment (25:1-46). Although Mark contains no birth narratives, Matthew otherwise retains Mark’s basic geographical framework (the Galilean ministry, chapters 4-18; the journey to Jerusalem, 19-20; and the week in Jerusalem, 21-28:15). Jesus' teachings are filled with Jewish themes of lovingkindness, mercy, prayer, faithfulness to God, God's radical faithfulness to his people, the idea of having a minyan (quorum) for prayer, and others. In announcing the kingdom of heaven, Jesus signals a coming fulfillment of God's promises, as do people's identification of him as the prophet promised by Moses and/or the Son of David. Jesus himself prefers the name Son of Man (ὁ υἱὸς τοὺ ἀνθρώπου) that reminds us of Daniel's apocalyptic passages. But Jesus also links these themes to his own person, sometimes cryptically.

Here are ways that Matthew frames the material:

10: The meanings of servanthood and discipleship

11-12: Implications of Jesus’ own servanthood

13: Parables of the kingdom

14-17: Jesus’ own signs of the kingdom, e.g., the miraculous feedings, Peter’s confession, the Transfiguration, and others. 

18: Teachings on humility and the community (ekklesia)

19-23: Jesus’ humble entry into Jerusalem and the controversies (his anger at the Temple moneychangers, his anger at the Pharisees, his anger at the fig tree, parables of his approaching death

24-25: The Olivet Discourse on sufferings of the end of the age, and the coming of the Son of man.

26-27: The trial and execution of the Son of man. 

28: Jesus’ resurrection and Great Commission.

In his Writings of the New Testament, Luke T. Johnson considers Matthew as instruction for a community trying to distinguish itself from the Pharisaic tradition in the Judaism of that time. Jesus becomes not only the authoritative interpreter of Torah but also the fulfillment and personification of Torah (pp. 183-190). This is not a rejection of Torah, however (p. 185) but a call to understand Torah via Jesus. Helpfully, Johnson calls the Sermon on the Mount “a sketch, not a system” for interpreting Torah (p. 188). Being a disciple (student) of Jesus will require ongoing study, prayer, and service.

Helpfully, too, Johnson compares the personification of Jesus as Torah to something already done in Scripture: the personification of Torah as Sophia (Wisdom) in Proverbs and the Wisdom of Solomon, not to mention the Mishnah’s Haggadic traditions (p. 189).

In Matthew, Jesus addresses his mission to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” (15:24). It seems the most Jewish Gospel but also the most angry in terms of the Jewish leadership. We get Jesus’ bitter diatribe in Matthew 23, but we also get strong connections of Jesus with the Jewish scriptures and traditions. Jesus by no means repudiates the Torah, but interprets it by his own authority. At the same time, Jesus provides hope for Gentiles, too (12:18, 15:28, 24:14, etc.), and among the gospels only Matthew uses the word “church” (ekklēsia).Yet (likely reflecting tensions within Matthew’s community) the Gospel is also a little hostile toward Gentiles, for Jesus frequently criticizes or makes light of the practices of non-Jews (Johnson, p. 191).

Matthew’s desire to distinguish his community of Jesus-following Jews from the Jewish leadership of his (rather than Jesus’) time, had far-reaching results. In her book The Reluctant Parting, Julie Galambush discusses the bitterness of Jesus’ and Matthew’s language toward Pharisees and other leaders (e.g., pp. 72-77). For instance, the seven “woes” of chapter 23 “is disturbing in its rancor and has long provided fodder to those seeking proof that Jews are legalistic, hypocritical, and self-serving” (p. 73). But this and other bitter passages reflect heightened tensions between Jesus’ followers an the Pharisees in Matthew’s period, not Jesus’. But the prophecy of the temple’s demise—an event that had taken place within the reader’s memory—serve to underscore Jesus’ credibility in the debate” (p. 74).

Tragically, Matthew’s gospel has provided generations of Christians with material to become anti-Jewish or antisemitic— as well as to feel self-righteous and persecuted whenever someone disagrees with them. Galambush continues, “Read through the lens of Christianity’s triumph over the entire Western world, Matthew’s predictions [of persecution of Jesus-followers by Jews] appear grandiose and self-serving. Anything Christians suffer is proof of their righteousness and a produce to eternal exaltation over everything and everyone else. Such a reading... ignores the reality of Matthew’s original social and historical setting” (p. 74). So we must not accept Matthew’s portrayal of the Pharisees as “self-serving religious bullies” but understand, instead, that Matthew was a leader who trying to maintain the community in an embattled time when its future was very unclear (p. 74). (Think of the way you think about the rival sports team of you own favorite team.) During the last third of the first century, Pharisees themselves were struggling, too, hoping to save an embattled and persecuted Judaism.

While keeping in mind Matthew's reasons for his more bitter passages (and repenting if we have our own prejudices toward Jews), we also turn to this gospel for rich teaching. Luke Johnson (who also discusses Matthew’s characterization of Jews) notes that Matthew contains more homiletical material than Mark: Matthew is “broadly catechetical” for his community because it contains instructions for the community about piety, church discipline, and instructions for missionaries (p. 176).

Matthew also connects to Judaism in positive ways, as I noted above: for instance, he makes over seventy references to the Scriptures, fewer than Mark. Like the other gospel writers, he recognizes that the suffering and death of the Messiah was not an expected outcome---and yet it was, if one mines the rich Scriptures about Jewish suffering and hope and understands therein predictions and patterns of Jesus' own experience.  (See my list here.)

Another, more subtle connection to the scriptural heritage (and another reason not to be anti-Jewish), is the way the gospel describes human failure in the face of God's wonderful works, just as the Old Testament does. This is something we'll see throughout the New Testament. Remember how the Israelites failed again and again as they traveled through Wilderness? If the Pharisees and others didn't "get" Jesus, Jesus' own followers failed to "get" him, too, missing the point of his teachings, disappointing him in his darkest hour---and, of course, Judas sold him out and Peter denied him. (Peter doesn't get rehabilitated in this Gospel, although it's surely assumed.) Mark's gospel is even darker in this regard. The Bible is very truthful about God's nature and human nature alike.

I'm thinking about Jesus’ parting words: "Go and make disciples [students] of all nations." How do you be Jesus' follower and student? Telling people about Jesus is one way, of course, but also by acting in the ways of humility, mercy, and service that Matthew's very Jewish Jesus teaches throughout the gospel. Circling back to Matt. 25:31-46, we know Jesus is already among those who are in need, whoever and wherever they may be. To tell people about Jesus, is also to be where Jesus already is.