Sunday Morning Greek Blog

May 22, 2011

Honoring Galilee

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 7:43 am

Note: Second paragraph edited on 12/26/21 to clarify I’m speaking of chapters in John’s gospel.

Isaiah 9:1–2 [TNIV; MT & LXX 8:23–9:1] says:

Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the nations, by the Way of the Sea, beyond the Jordan—

2The people walking in darkness
have seen a great light;
on those living in the land of deep darkness
a light has dawned.

Let me start by recapping John chapters 2–4, because the whole context is important for what I have to say about the last part of chapter 4. In chapter 2, Jesus goes to Cana in Galilee, where, at a wedding celebration, he turns water into wine. Then he returns to Jerusalem, where he gets everyone mad at him by overturning the tables of the money changers. Nicodemus, however, in chapter 3, seems to understand who Jesus really is, and comes to Jesus asking about eternal life. Some debate whether Jesus’ words end after John 3:15, but setting that debate aside for a moment, John closes out chapter 3 with a discourse on who Jesus is and what his relationship is to the Father. In chapter 4, Jesus “needs” to go through Samaria to get to Cana again, and encounters the woman at the well. There he speaks to her of living water, and in the end, he spends a few days ministering to those whom the woman had brought to Jesus to hear his words. In the last part of John 4, Jesus is back in Cana, and he’s ready for another miracle.

Four times in John 4:43–54, John mentions that Jesus has gone “into Galilee” (εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν eis tēn Galilaian /ace tayn gah lee LIE ahn/). In v. 44, John says that Jesus had mentioned that a prophet was without honor in his hometown. Cana was not his hometown (Matthew indicates his home town was Capernaum), so some think he may be referring to those who were against him in Jerusalem (see Craig Blomberg’s commentary in The Historical Reliability of the John’s Gospel, p. 105). He also says in v. 46 that Jesus specifically went back to Cana of Galilee, where he had performed his first sign of turning water into wine. In this pericope, Jesus heals a royal official’s son at a distance; he doesn’t even lay hands on or see the son, but simply speaks the word at the pleading of the distraught father.

So why the emphasis on Galilee here? If you read the opening quote from Isaiah, you’ve probably figured it out already. John is demonstrating that Jesus is the light to the Gentiles, Samaritans and Galileans alike (John’s excursus on God’s purposes for Jesus in chapter 3 is further evidence of this). Jerusalem (= the leaders of Israel) is rejecting him (see also the first part of chapter 5 where the Jewish leaders want to kill Jesus for healing on the Sabbath), but the Gentiles receive him with joy, wonder, and extraordinary faith. Chapters 2–4 form a unit that validates the fulfillment of prophecy from Isaiah 7–11. Matthew used the first verse of the prophecy (Isaiah 7:14: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel.”) to indicate fulfillment of the whole prophecy; John takes a different route to show the same prophecy is fulfilled.

Sorry this is so short today, but between a leaky ceiling, a watery mess in the basement, and trying to move into my own place myself this weekend, time is short.

Peace!

May 16, 2011

It Comes in Threes, Part β

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Ephesians,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament,Numbers (Cardinal & Ordinal) — Scott Stocking @ 10:54 pm

Okay, so maybe there is something more to this pattern of threes. I am sure I only hit “Publish” once to submit my “It Comes in Threes” blog post this morning, yet somehow it wound up posting three times. Hard to believe that is any kind of coincidence.

Here is what I am thinking on all this. As Jesus kicks off his ministry here, the disciples must have thought they had it pretty good. After all, this man was going to be king of the Jews (or so they thought) and would overthrow Rome and Herod and anyone else who stood in the way of reestablishing a theocracy in Israel. Now I know I am spiritualizing here, but it seems rather obvious that whatever good things the world has to offer, Jesus offers more, and that more is so much better than anything we could ask or imagine. The water-turned-wine is better than the first stuff the steward brought out. God’s creation is great, but heaven is that much greater.

In keeping with the theme of water, I happened to look up the word for “draw” (ἀντλέω antleō), as in “draw the water out of the jar.” It occurs four times total, all in John—twice here in chapter 2 and twice (you shouldn’t be surprised) in chapter 4 with the woman at the well, where he speaks of drawing “living water.”

One more thing about threes: Paul and John both spent a considerable amount of time in Ephesus. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians has numerous patterns of three in it, so I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that John has patterns of three as well. Did Paul learn that from John, or John from Paul? What is it about Ephesus and the number three?

  • “Grace” (χάρις charis) appears three times Ephesians 1, three times in Ephesians 2, and three times in Ephesians 3.
  • “To the praise of his glory” (εἰς ἔπαινον δόξης eis epainon doxēs) appears three times in Ephesians 1:1–14.
  • Paul prays for three things for the Ephesians in 1:18–19, and the letter is divided into three sections around those themes.
    • “that you may know the hope to which he has called you,
    • the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints,
    • and his incomparably great power for us who believe”
  • God has done three things for us in Christ in 2:5–6:
    • Made us alive with Christ;
    • Raised us up with Christ;
    • Seated us with him in the heavenly realms.
  • There is another pattern of three threes in 2:12, 19, and 3:6.
  • There are two sets of three pairs in Ephesians 5:15–6:9.

I have Ephesians memorized, so I’ve spent a lot of time there (figuratively speaking) myself. So what is the number three going to mean for me? Well, I just got approved for a third floor apartment that I’ll be moving into on the third Saturday of this month. Does that mean I made the right choice? I have three kids. I hope and pray they are safe. I’m pretty sure I’m going to be tossing and turning tonight wondering about the significance of all this.

Peace! Εὶρήνη! Shalom!

It Comes in Threes

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament,Numbers (Cardinal & Ordinal) — Scott Stocking @ 6:47 am

I wanted to write just a quick note to follow up on one of my brief musings yesterday about τῇ ἐπαύριον (tē epaurion ‘on the next day’) occurring three times in chapter 1 and then chapter 2 beginning with “On the third day.”

The cardinal number “two” (δύο dyo) appears three times in chapter 1. The cardinal number “three” (τρεῖς treis) appears three times in chapter 2, which is introduced by a phrase with the ordinal for three: “On the third day.” Granted, John did not form his chapter divisions, so again, there’s not too much exegetical significance in how many times a number occurs in a chapter. But what is more than mere coincidence in my mind is that the word for the “banquet-master” (ἀρχιτρίκλινος architriklinos /ar khee TREE klee nos/; /kh/ sounds like German ch in Bach) occurs three times in the story of the wedding at Cana. Why is this more than coincidence? The word derives from three Greek words that mean, literally, “ruler of three beds,” according to the Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon and the NASB Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionary. To prepare a large banquet table, a host would place three beds (κλίνη klinē; the verb form of this word means “recline”) together to make a large enough table for the guests. Of course, the number of beds would have varied depending on the size of the feast, but that’s not really the point here.

In 2:19, after Jesus cleanses the Temple, Jesus says, “destroy this temple, and in three days I will rise again.” Just as God signaled the coming of the Messiah as early as Genesis 3:15 with the Protoevangelion (“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”), so John here is signaling to his readers early on the significance of the third day. I don’t have time to explore this more in depth on a Monday morning, but I wanted to get it out there before it slipped my mind.

Peace!

It Comes in Threes

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 6:46 am

I wanted to write just a quick note to follow up on one of my brief musings yesterday about τῇ ἐπαύριον (tē epaurion ‘on the next day’) occurring three times in chapter 1 and then chapter 2 beginning with “On the third day.”

The cardinal number “two” (δύο dyo) appears three times in chapter 1. The cardinal number “three” (τρεῖς treis) appears three times in chapter 2, which is introduced by a phrase with the ordinal for three: “On the third day.” Granted, John did not form his chapter divisions, so again, there’s not too much exegetical significance in how many times a number occurs in a chapter. But what is more than mere coincidence in my mind is that the word for the “banquet-master” (ἀρχιτρίκλινος architriklinos /ar khee TREE klee nos/; /kh/ sounds like German ch in Bach) occurs three times in the story of the wedding at Cana. Why is this more than coincidence? The word derives from three Greek words that mean, literally, “ruler of three beds,” according to the Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon and the NASB Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionary. To prepare a large banquet table, a host would place three beds (κλίνη klinē; the verb form of this word means “recline”) together to make a large enough table for the guests. Of course, the number of beds would have varied depending on the size of the feast, but that’s not really the point here.

In 2:19, after Jesus cleanses the Temple, Jesus says, “destroy this temple, and in three days I will rise again.” Just as God signaled the coming of the Messiah as early as Genesis 3:15 with the Protoevangelion (“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”), so John here is signaling to his readers early on the significance of the third day. I don’t have time to explore this more in depth on a Monday morning, but I wanted to get it out there before it slipped my mind.

Peace!

It Comes in Threes

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 6:46 am

I wanted to write just a quick note to follow up on one of my brief musings yesterday about τῇ ἐπαύριον (tē epaurion ‘on the next day’) occurring three times in chapter 1 and then chapter 2 beginning with “On the third day.”

The cardinal number “two” (δύο dyo) appears three times in chapter 1. The cardinal number “three” (τρεῖς treis) appears three times in chapter 2, which is introduced by a phrase with the ordinal for three: “On the third day.” Granted, John did not form his chapter divisions, so again, there’s not too much exegetical significance in how many times a number occurs in a chapter. But what is more than mere coincidence in my mind is that the word for the “banquet-master” (ἀρχιτρίκλινος architriklinos /ar khee TREE klee nos/; /kh/ sounds like German ch in Bach) occurs three times in the story of the wedding at Cana. Why is this more than coincidence? The word derives from three Greek words that mean, literally, “ruler of three beds,” according to the Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon and the NASB Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionary. To prepare a large banquet table, a host would place three beds (κλίνη klinē; the verb form of this word means “recline”) together to make a large enough table for the guests. Of course, the number of beds would have varied depending on the size of the feast, but that’s not really the point here.

In 2:19, after Jesus cleanses the Temple, Jesus says, “destroy this temple, and in three days I will rise again.” Just as God signaled the coming of the Messiah as early as Genesis 3:15 with the Protoevangelion (“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”), so John here is signaling to his readers early on the significance of the third day. I don’t have time to explore this more in depth on a Monday morning, but I wanted to get it out there before it slipped my mind.

Peace!

May 15, 2011

John 1: The Word Was God

Filed under: John Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 8:47 am

qrcode
Download the link to this post for your smart phone or smart pad so you can have a ready reference for Jehovah’s Witness encounters.

I have sensed the anticipation of the masses (in my mind, the 15–20 of you who read this blog each week are the masses; humor me pleaseJ): “The Jehovah’s Witnesses have been beating down my door. I’m tired of debating John 1:1 with them. I never get anywhere. When will I get some help from the Sunday Morning Greek Blog?” (Again, humor me please.) Well help has finally arrived!

Before I begin, I want to give credit where credit is due. Daniel Wallace is the “go-to guy” for us Greek scholars when it comes to issues of Greek grammar. Some of what I will write today comes from his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, published by Zondervan and also available for the Logos Bible Software suite. Where I need to give him credit, I will either lead into the information with his name or simply use “(DW, pg #)” for a citation.

For those of you without immediate access to the Greek text, here is John 1:1 in Koine Greek (UBS 4th edition), transliterated, and in my English translation:

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

En archē ēn ho logos, kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon, kai theos ēn ho logos.

The Word was in the beginning, and this Word was with God, and this Word was God.

Now I know I have some out there who are keying in on that last phrase. Be patient, I’ll get there in a minute. The first thing to note here is that ὁ λόγος is the subject of all three clauses. I did not follow the literal word order in my own translation because I wanted to emphasize this point. I also used this in the last two phrases to translate the definite article (ὁ ho ‘the’, but see below for exegetical significance; a legitimate use of it if the context allows) to emphasize that the same Word that was in the beginning was and was with God. (The past tense is used here not to suggest that the Word was but is no longer God, but that even “in the [past event we call the] beginning,” the Word was considered to be God. The phrase Ἐν ἀρχῇ stands at the beginning to give the whole sentence this context.)

I can see your mental wheels turning out there. Some of you are asking: “How can the Word be both ‘with God’ and ‘God’?” Others are saying, “Wait, I recognize those Greek words, and the word order in that last phrase is ‘And God was the Word’! What’s up with that?” And of course, my Jehovah’s Witness fans (of whom I have none that I’m aware) are furious because I didn’t say “a god” for the anarthrous (= without the definite article) θεός. Let me begin with a primer on the definite article in Greek, because that is an important concept to understand for this passage and throughout Scripture.

The Definite Article in Koine Greek

The English definite article is the. In English, we often use the definite article when what it modifies has already been specified or defined (get it, define/definite) in some way. Consider the following sentences and see which ones sound more natural to your ears:

  1. We have love in our hearts.
  2. We have the love in our hearts
  3. We have love of God in our hearts
  4. We have the love of God in our hearts.

If you are like me and didn’t grow up in the hippie generation, sentences 1 and 4 sound the most natural. Sentence 1 does not seem to have any particular manifestation of love in mind, so it does not need the definite article. Additionally, sentence 1 could be interpreted as making a statement about a quality of our hearts: “We have loving hearts.” Sentence 4, however, specifies the kind of love we have, so it takes the definite article. In English, we could play around with the word order a bit and get rid of the definite article by using a possessive form of God, but use of the possessive by default usually eliminates the need for the definite article: “We have God’s love (or love for God) in our hearts.” Sentence 2 might make sense if you grew up in the hippie generation, but you would still have some definite manifestation of love in mind if you said it. Sentence 3 could be reworded in a qualitative manner: “We have hearts that love as God loves”; or “We have hearts loved by God.”

In Greek, the definite article usage is somewhat backwards from English and much more diverse. The definite article is used 19,870 times in the NT, which represents 14.4 percent of the total word count in the NT (that is approximately 3 out of every 20 words for the math-challenged out there). In Greek, if you have the phrase “love of God”, it is by default definite, and the definite article is not needed, although sometimes the author supplies it anyway. But if the author wants to send a message to his reader that he has some specific manifestation of a noun in mind, he will use the definite article. In other words, the definite article, when used with a noun, makes the noun “definite” or specific. That is why translators can justify translating it as “this [one]” or “that [one]” sometimes, as I did above.

Theology of John 1:1

Now that you’ve had your primer on the definite article, it is time to get into the meat of this passage. I mentioned in the previous section about the qualitative interpretation of sentences 1 and 3. This is a critical concept for the proper understanding of John 1:1. Although the Greek word order makes it look like we should translate the last phrase “And God was the Word,” you should know that Greek word order is much more fluid than English word order. First, notice that in the final phrase, λόγος has the definite article and θεός does not. This is the first clue that λόγος is the subject of the phrase, even though both nouns are in the nominative (= subject) case. Second, according to Daniel Wallace’s grammar (pp. 266ff), if John would have used the definite article with θεός, he would have been saying that the person of the Word was exactly the same thing as the person of God the Father. This is Sabellianism, a heresy of the early church that said God the Father himself (the first person of the trinity) left the throne and came to earth. But we know Jesus spoke often about his Father (who was always) in heaven.

Wallace continues (see also his “Exegetical Insight” in William Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek, 2nd edition, pp. 26–27): If the word order had been switched around, καί ὁ λόγος ἦν θεός, then the Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Arianists would be correct in translating the phrase “And the Word was a god.” This would emphasize θεός as a noun. You might also want to point out to your Jehovah’s Witness callers that θεός appears in John 1:6, 12, 13, and 18 without the definite article, but they still translate it God (capital G) in those places.

But moving θεός to the beginning of the phrase gives it a qualitative force. In other words, John is not saying that the Word is God the Father, but that the Word has exact same divine qualities as God the Father. “The Word is divine” as Moffatt translates it, or “What God was, the Word was” is how the New English Bible renders it. So John used the only word order he could to indicate that Jesus was indeed the second person of the Trinity, distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Application to John 1:18

There is a curious phrase in John 1:18 that has scholars baffled, but I think the discussion above can help clarify. The phrase is μονογενής θεός (monogenēs theos /mȯ-nȯ-geh-NAYSS theh-OSS/ ‘only begotten God’). Copyists had problems with this over the years, trying to change it to “only begotten Son“, because that made more sense to some. But if we understand the phrase as an appositive construction, the θεός functions the same way as it does in the last phrase of John 1:1. Here’s how I might render it, although I’m sure translation committees would question me closely on this: “No one has ever seen God; the Only Begotten (μονογενής), that One who was divine (θεός) in the bosom of the Father, has made [him] known.”

Final Musings

Three times in chapter 1, John transitions with the phrase τῇ ἐπαύριον (tē epaurion dative case “on the next day”): vv. 29, 35, and 43 (he uses it only twice after that in 6:22 and 12:12). But John begins 2:1 “on the third day.” I don’t know that there’s any exegetical significance to this, but I just thought it something worth noting.

One more thing: many scholars have made the connection between John 1:51 and Genesis 28:12, Jacob’s ladder. I don’t have time to go into that connection here, but perhaps that could be grist for your mill.

Peace!

May 14, 2011

How Near the End?

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,Luke Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 12:04 pm

As I read through Luke 21 last week, I could not help but think of the recent earthquake and tsunami disaster in northern Japan. In Luke 21:11, Jesus warns that “great earthquakes” (σεισμοί μεγάλοι seismoi megaloi /sighss-MOI meh-GAH-loi/) will be one of the signs of the end. Luke 21:25–26 (my translation) says: “There will be signs (σημεῖα, plural of σημεῖον sēmeion /say-MAY-on/) in sun and moon and stars, and upon the earth [there will be] anguish of the nations in perplexity of the sound and surge (σάλος salos /SAH-loss/) of the sea… for the powers/works of heaven will be shaken” (σαλεύω saleuō /sah-LOO-oh/; note the word comes from the same root as σάλος). Now obviously, the Richter Scale had not been developed in biblical times, so I don’t think Jesus was predicting modern terminology, but perhaps the term “great earthquake” was borrowed from the Bible.

The modern technical term “great earthquake” refers to an earthquake of magnitude 8.0 or greater according to the United States Geological Survey (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/faq/?faqID=24). Looking at the recent history of great earthquakes reveals that they seem to come in a cycle of every 30–40 years. Before the Christmas 2004 earthquake in Indonesia, the previous recorded great earthquake had been 1965 in Alaska, and the one before that was a year earlier in Alaska as well. And of course, we can’t forget the “surge of the sea,” Katrina, which left an indelible impression on the city and residents of New Orleans, not to mention other major hurricanes and floods in recent years.

I have always been tempted to see the judgment of God in these events and other natural disasters. But creation—every microbe, ant, butterfly, bird, cat, dog, human, horse, elephant, mountain, and ocean, not to mention the earth, and the universe itself—is subject to decay. This decay is part of the overall judgment that came down in Genesis 3 and later in the “global” flood of Genesis 6–9. Before anyone starts questioning me about how the water of the earth could cover the Himalayas, let me just say that I’m one who holds to the antediluvian Pangaea theory, that is, the earth as God originally created it was all one land mass whose topography was nothing as it is today. During the flood event, Pangaea was divided, causing the waters of the deep to come forth (perhaps the ancients’ way of saying the ocean poured in when the land masses separated) and initiating what we know today as continental drift. Mountains are formed by the collision of land masses, and the earthquakes we experience today are evidence that the process is ongoing.

The “rim of fire” around the Pacific Ocean (the presence of numerous volcanoes from Mt. St. Helens up to Alaska and through its Aleutian Islands and down the east coast of Asia into the Indonesian archipelago) should not surprise us, then. Have you ever taken a wet beach ball and spun it around? You know the water flies off in every direction. Now magnify that to global proportions. As the earth rotates on its axis in an easterly direction, the water of the Pacific Ocean is like that water on a beach ball, except that earth’s gravitational field keeps the water from flying out into space. Imagine the entire weight of the Pacific Ocean being thrust against the east coast of Asia, Japan, and the Philippines. If continents are not rock solid, that’s going to cause some moving and shaking on both shores of the Pacific. (This is why some think part of California may eventually fall into the ocean, because it’s being pulled away from the North American Plate.) The strongest currents in the world are along the eastern coast of Asia and Australia, because the rotation of the earth forces the water to flow that way. The deepest trench in the world is located at a place where the small Philippine Plate is separating from the Pacific Plate.

But enough of my amateurish geophysics: the point I’m getting at is that God’s “final” judgment on the world and humanity began at the fall in Genesis 3. “Natural” disasters are a part of this world we’re otherwise blessed to live on, and there aren’t too many more places out there in space where we could live without substantial technological adaptations. We often ask God, “Why do you allow such calamity?” He’s already told us (in so many words): “Because you live in a fallen world.” But he also says, “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world” (John 16:33, TNIV). Do people die deaths we think they don’t deserve in these natural disasters? Yes, but people who don’t deserve to die pass from this life all the time by “natural causes.” Death is tragic regardless of its cause and regardless of the innocence or guilt of the deceased, but Christ followers know someone who has risen, victorious over death, who is readily waiting for us to claim the eternal life he has promised.

So what do we have to look forward to? Luke 21 is too long for me to copy into this blog post, but know that on top of all the “natural disasters” coming our way, we’ve got persecution and trouble coming our way as well if we are Christ followers. Let me just leave you with a few key verses from Luke 21 (TNIV) that give hope in a world full of trouble, because no one says it better than Jesus:

14–15: “But make up your mind not to worry beforehand how you will defend yourselves. For I will give you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or contradict.”

19: “Stand firm, and you will win life.”

27–28: “At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

35–36: “For [all these natural disasters] will come on all those who live on the face of the whole earth. Be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man.”

Εἰρήνη! Peace!

May 1, 2011

“If I’ve Told You Once, I’ve Told You a Thousand Times…”

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,Luke Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of — Scott Stocking @ 8:23 am

I have an important message for all of us husbands, former, current, and future: for all the times our former, current, and future wives (respectively) said (or will say) things to us about their friends, jobs, or something that needed fixing in the house, and we quickly forgot those things until we were reminded that we weren’t good listeners, I grant general absolution. Before you start cheering, you former, current, and future wives, because for all those times we former, current, and future husbands (respectively) told you (or will tell you) things about the car, the electronics, or the computer but you failed to heed, leading to expensive repairs, I grant you general absolution as well. And need I say anything about what we tell our kids? You’re forgiven, kids, but don’t forget next time!

Have I unsettled you yet? Great! Know this, however: when you fail to take heed of things that someone else thinks are important for you to know, you are in prestigious company, namely, the company of the twelve apostles.

Three times in Luke’s Gospel (9:21–27, 43b–45; 18:31–34) Jesus tells his apostles, “Oh, by the way, I’m going to be turned over to the Jewish rulers and Roman authorities to be beaten, tortured, and killed, but I’ll come back in few days.” You would think that the first time that the man whom you most admire in the world drops this bomb on you, there would at least be some reaction from the apostles. (Actually in Matthew 16:21ff, Peter does rebuke Jesus for saying this, but Jesus turns around and promptly returns the rebuke in stronger terms, calling Peter “Satan,” but for whatever reason, Luke doesn’t record that in 9:21–27.) But like a stealth bomber at an Air Force air show, the statement zips right over their heads, and they never considered it again, until….

In Luke 9:21–27 (which is parallel to Matthew’s account in Matthew 16), Jesus first makes the statement, but then immediately begins talking about more stuff that we might be prone to forget: stuff like denying ourselves, taking up our crosses, and being willing to follow Jesus to death if necessary. So one might understand why his first statement went unnoticed. It reminds me a little of Moses in Exodus 3:5–14. God makes eight “I” statements to Moses about who he is and what he intends to do, most of which are miraculous or spectacular, but all Moses could key in on was the last statement: “By the way, Moses, I’m sending you to make sure Pharaoh knows I’m the one doing all this.” Moses’ response is not, “Wow, God, I’m so grateful to have your complete and total support and protection as I go back to the nation where I’m number one on the ‘Most Wanted’ list. I’ll get right on that.” Instead, Moses turns the attention back on himself. “Who am I?” (I can just see God giving Moses a Gibbs’ slap to the back of the head.)

Even if we take Peter’s response in Matthew into consideration, the point is that there is no apparent sadness among the apostles after Jesus says he’s going to die. When we get news that a loved one has cancer or was in a serious car wreck, are we, like Peter, more concerned about how this messes up our own agenda, or are we genuinely concerned about the well-being of our loved one? You see the point?

According to Luke, the apostles had eight days to process this first prediction (Luke 9:28) before something even more amazing took place, but only three of the apostles were in on that Transfiguration event. In that event, Jesus spoke about his coming death with Moses and Elijah, but again, the three in the inner circle are clueless, but understandably so. Luke 9:32 says the disciples were βεβαρημένοι ὕπνῳ (bebarēmenoi hypnō /beh-bah-ray-MEH-noi HOOP-no/ ‘burdened with sleep’), but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t because the conversation between three of Judaism’s most amazing men was boring! The sleepiness seems to be divinely induced, because in the next breath, they become “fully awake” (διαγρηγορήσαντες diagrēgorēsantes /dee-ah-gray-goh-RAY-sahn-tess/) and have once again completely missed the talk of their Lord’s impending death. Instead, Peter wants to build a booth, as if that will put off Jesus’ sacrifice.

It is no accident, then, that Jesus’ second prediction of his death comes right after this Transfiguration event. I like the way Jesus puts it in 9:44: Θέσθε ὑμεῖς εἰς τὰ ὦτα ὑμῶν τοὺς λόγους τούτους (thesthe hymeis eis ta ōta hymōn tous logous toutous literally, ‘you yourselves place in your ears these words’). Usually when a command is given in Greek, as in English, you don’t have to use the pronoun “you,” because the subject is implied. But we know when we hear the pronoun “you” in an English command, the person giving the command means business. The same goes for the Greek here. Jesus expressly focuses on his disciples, because he wants them to know this. He would be delivered over into the hands of men, but he says nothing in this instance of his resurrection.

Jesus says this, though, knowing that the disciples won’t get it. The very next verse says that the disciples “didn’t understand” (ἀγνοέω agnoeō /ah-gnaw-EH-oh/ ‘to be ignorant’; same root for the word “agnostic”) and that the meaning of the words was “hidden” (παρακαλύπτω parakalyptō /pah rah kah LOO ptoh/) from them. Jesus is preparing his disciples for the worst, but if Peter’s response in Matthew is any indication, he does not want the disciples focusing on his impending death. He wants them to stay focused on ministry in the here and now. (I think this is one of the reasons Jesus teaches against worrying; worrying focuses on things over which we have no control, and we fail to live in the here and now as God wants us to.)

In Luke 18:31–34, as Jesus and his disciples are on their way to Jerusalem, he again predicts his death, and again, the Twelve fail to “understand” (συνίημι syniēmi /soo-NEE-ay-mee/) because the meaning is “hidden” (κρύπτω kryptō /KROO-ptoh/), but by this time, I’d have to think that the disciples were suspecting something unusual was in the works, even if they didn’t comprehend it completely. It isn’t until the penultimate verses of Luke (24:45–49) that Jesus, just after his resurrection, finally reveals to them the meaning of all that talk of his death that had remained hidden to them until that point. At that point, they finally had their “Aha!” moment and could truly and fully rejoice, because their knowledge and understanding were made complete.

Maybe that’s why many Christians (including myself) seem to “go through the motions” at times, because it hasn’t hit home yet just exactly what God is doing in our lives. We’ve been reading the book The Christian Atheist in Wednesday night class. The subtitle for the book is “Believing in God but Living Like He Doesn’t Exist.” I wonder if a better title might be The Christian Agnostic: Christians believe that God exists, but like the disciples in these prediction stories, we just haven’t figured out yet how God is working in our lives or what he’s really saying, and we’re afraid to trust.

I think a strong case could be made here for regular Bible reading as well. Some Christians complain that the Bible is too hard to understand in places, so they don’t want to read it. But how many times have those of us who have read through Scripture more than once come across passages that seem brand new to us? We know we’ve read those passages before, but for whatever reason, they just didn’t stick. But at just the right time, if we are faithful in reading his Word, God will reveal to us those things we need to know for our encouragement and strengthening. And if we don’t understand something right away, we shouldn’t worry: Jesus promises in Luke 12:11–12 that the Holy Spirit will teach us what we need to know and say when we need to know it and say it. That will be much easier to do if we’ve read our assignments ahead of time!

Other Musings

I don’t have time to explore this in depth in today’s entry, but after reading the parable of the 10 minas in Luke 19:11–27, I asked myself if the man who made himself king of a distant country is in fact Jesus in the story. I did a cursory reading of Blomberg’s interpretation of this parable (and its parallel in Matthew 25:14–30) in Interpreting the Parables, but he seems to think the element of the story of the man going off to be made king is extraneous to the core message of the parable. Still, I think something can be made of the Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees wanting to kill Jesus, and the execution of those who did not want the man to be king can be taken as judgment against those who reject Jesus’ lordship. The parable is rather harsh in this way, but it certainly warrants further exploration. Blomberg cites Josephus to explain this particular aspect of the parable:

This second parable closely parallels the details of the trip of Archelaus, son of Herod the Great, to Rome in 4 b.c. to receive imperial ratification of his hereditary claim to rule Judea, along with the Jewish embassy which opposed him and Archelaus’s subsequent revenge on the Judeans (cf. Josephus Ant. 17:299–323, Bell. 2:80–100).

April 24, 2011

Lost and Found

Filed under: Greek,Luke Gospel of,New Testament,Repentance — Scott Stocking @ 7:42 am

God never has accidents. This is not to say that God “controls” everything in such a way as to make free will a farce. Nor does this imply that God necessarily chooses to know all the free will choices everyone will make in the future: if he did, this would also bring free will into question, because nothing then could happen contrary to his knowledge of the future. (If C.S. Lewis is correct in Screwtape Letters, God sees past, present, and future in his “Now.”) All this to say that I think it is no accident that my reading this Resurrection Sunday is the Parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11–32). With apologies to the Olympic speed skating champion of the same name, I’m going to call this lost son Apollo, from the Greek ἀπόλλυμι (apollumi /ah POL loo mee/ ‘I destroy’, ‘I lose’).

To set the background of the story, I noticed a few things as I was reading. The one thing that sticks out most prominently to me is that there are three different Greek words used for the workers in the story:

  1. μίσθιος (misthios /MISS thee os/ [/th/ as in “thin”; always this way in Greek]), which means ‘hired hand’ (similar to the Greek word μίσθος (misthos /MISS thoss/ ‘pay’, ‘reward’)
  2. δοῦλος (doulos /DOO loss/) and its related verb δουλεύω (douleuō /doo LYOO oh/), ‘slave’ or ‘servant’ and ‘I slave’ or ‘I serve’.
  3. παῖς (pais /piess/ [like the word “pie” with an /s/ instead of a /z/ sound]) ‘servant’, ‘child’, ‘boy’, ‘girl’.

I can relate to the story of the Prodigal Son all too well, but not in the way you might think. In my adult life, I have known several times when God was calling me to do something or warning me not to do something, but did not always recognize what he was trying to tell me. In 1981, after I graduated from high school, I knew God wanted me at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. God brought several people into my life in my four years there who helped solidify my foundation in the faith. However, in 1983, as I was loading up to move back to UNL for the school year, I felt an incredible pull to stay in Omaha and not return to UNL for that school year. There is a part of me that still wishes I would have heeded that call: I wound up in one of the worst relationships of my life that caused me (and her) great heartache. However, out of the ashes of that failure to discern God’s will, I also met a man who would become one of my best friends and mentors, and who still is today. Through him and his wife at the time, I was encouraged to attend Lincoln (Illinois) Christian Seminary. In 1987, when I packed up my Chevy S10 with pretty much everything I owned, I knew without a doubt that God wanted me in seminary in Illinois.

But somewhere during my 23 years in Illinois, I got “lost.” I won’t go into details, because the choices I made were intensely personal. Yet God has blessed me and prepared me in so many ways for where I am today, that I cannot imagine my life having taken another course. (Well, I can, but like Aslan said in the Chronicles of Narnia [I think it was in The Horse and His Boy], “It’s not permitted for you to know what might have been,” or something to that effect.) At one point, perhaps five or six years ago, I started feeling the tug to come back to Nebraska. I attributed it to homesickness, but I know now that God had indeed begun the process of calling me home. I was not “spending my possessions on wasteful living,” but I knew I didn’t have my financial priorities in order, going into debt when I had no prospects for a decent job in Illinois.

In the last two years, after my wife filed for divorce from me, I found myself feeling very much like Apollo in a far off land. I had been trying on and off for several years to find full-time employment. The editing work I had became steady, but the pay was woefully late. At every turn, I was turned down for positions for which I was adequately or more than adequately qualified. The best I could do was to maintain some part-time teaching and substitute teaching assignments. In the year or so before moving back to Omaha last September, I began hearing the Nebraska Cornhusker fight song playing in my head, even when my cell phone wasn’t ringing. I was flat broke, and the best job I could come up with was $100/week preaching at a congregation of less than 10 and about $150/week part-time at the IGA. I was broke, at rock bottom, and I felt as Apollo did (and not without cause), that most people were better off than me.

I had become a δοῦλος to my stubbornness to remain in Illinois near my kids. I had no money, no vehicle, and no prospects for gainful employment. I fought tooth and nail to find employment (some weeks submitting more than a dozen résumés for professional jobs, not to mention the countless near-minimum-wage jobs) to keep me near my kids, but still, “There Is No Place Like Nebraska” kept ringing in my ears. It was inevitable: I had to return “home.” I knew job prospects were better here, and even though my parents didn’t have a family business that I could jump into as a μίσθιος, I knew I stood a better chance of being a μίσθιος for someone else, and I could stay with my parents until I got back on my feet. And that is exactly what happened: My first full business day back in Omaha, I got hired for a FT temp position at West Corporation. What I learned there directly related to the FT permanent job I have now, a job that pays better than any other job I’ve ever had, and a job that stretches me to use all of my God-given skills and talent. I have truly been blessed by heeding God’s call, even if it means I am separated from my kids by the miles. But I have to trust that God has brought me here for a reason yet undisclosed, and that I am preparing the way for my kids to reunite with me at some point in the future.

Now that you have my testimony, I have a few more comments about the parable itself. One of my favorite songs of all time is “When God Ran,” the story of the Prodigal being greeted joyously by his father, who ran to meet him in the distance. That is what God the Father does when we return to him. Apollo was welcomed back with great fanfare. I have been blessed to have the support of my family here in my months of transition, but I think sometimes we overlook the lessons from the son who stayed home and slaved (his words, δουλεύω) for his father, complaining that he never once got even a goat to celebrate with his friends. In fact, when he heard the celebration coming in from the field, he called one of the “servants” (παῖς) to ask him what was going on. Notice here first of all that the servant does not have a possessive pronoun associated with it, so he probably isn’t the elder son’s servant. He’s not one of the hired hands (μίσθιος) either. However, the word παῖς can also mean ‘child’ (male or female); but again, without the possessive pronoun, we can’t say for sure it was one of the elder son’s children. I tend to think it was a child, though, rather than a slave (δοῦλος), because of the answer (and I embellish here): “Uncle Apollo has come home, and grandpa’s throwing a party!”

The son complains, but the father’s answer I think gets overlooked all too often. No, not the answer about “My son was dead but now is alive; my son was lost but now is found.” I’m talking about the verse before that, verse 31: “My child, you are always with me, and everything that is mine is yours.” If the father in the story represents God the Father, then should we not take this message to heart as well? We have the riches of God at our disposal; all we need to do is ask.

“Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ” (Ephesians 1:3, emphasis mine). This Resurrection Sunday, I celebrate my life resurrected, for I had become as dead in Illinois, and now am alive again in Nebraska; I had lost my way in Illinois, but have found it again in Omaha. Even so, my life here is nothing compared to the eternal reward that awaits me in his glorious kingdom.

Εἰρήνη Peace! And have a blessed Resurrection Sunday!

April 17, 2011

Guarding against Yeast

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Luke Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 3:01 pm

Luke 12:1 offers some interesting grist for this blogger’s mill this morning. The chapter begins with Jesus telling his disciples: “Guard (προσέχω, prosechō) yourselves from the yeast (ζύμη, zumē ‘leaven’, ‘yeast’), which is hypocrisy, of the Pharisees,” which represents the literal word order in the Greek text. It is punctuated in the UBS 3rd and 4th editions to emphasize that “yeast” and “hypocrisy” are in an appositive relationship. Of this, I have no doubt. But the writings of Scripture in their original hand almost certainly did not have punctuation, let alone word spaces. Papyrus and other epigraphic surfaces were precious, and the writers didn’t waste space with punctuation. Perhaps I’m overanalyzing here, but there are times when it is appropriate to be suspicious of punctuation in the Greek text. I have, after all, written a 20-page paper about a comma in Acts 2:42, but I promise I will not spend 20 pages on the comma here.

There are two ways the passage could be read, and I will make a quick comment on the difference before moving on. Most English translations render the verse similar to the NIV/TNIV: “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.” In this translation, translators move what they consider to be the appositive phrase, “which is hypocrisy,” to the end of the sentence. But word order in Greek is often significant. What if the appositive phrase is not just “which is hypocrisy,” but “which is the hypocrisy of the Pharisees” (i.e., what if there shouldn’t be a second comma)? Then the passage takes on a subtle nuance: “Guard yourselves from yeast, which is the hypocrisy of the Pharisees.”

Now I don’t want to imply here that the real substance “yeast” is inherently evil or bad for you (any dieticians out there are welcome to chime in on any nutritional properties of yeast). Nor do I want to say that bread made with yeast is bad, because Jesus calls himself “The Bread (ἄρτος artos) of Life” in John’s Gospel, but stick with me for a minute and I’ll come back to that. I think I am on solid ground to suggest that Jesus is not talking about yeast itself, but its properties. Most of us know that yeast is added to bread to give it more “volume” and to soften the texture. Unleavened bread, what many of us in the Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ use for our weekly celebration of the Lord’s Table, is dry and flat. Some congregations use the Jewish unleavened matzo crackers for the same purpose. Jews had to rid their houses of yeast at the first Passover, not because it was an unclean food, but because they didn’t have time for the “fluff and flavor” before they escaped Egypt.

Yeast “bloats” the dough, makes the final product less dense, but does add some flavor to the product. I believe Jesus is speaking here of yeast in the context of Passover. The hypocrisy of the Pharisees (for which yeast is a symbol in Luke 12:1) is that they were adding requirements to the law that weren’t essential to the core principles of the law. In some cases, they bloated the law, adding more to it than was required. For example, in the previous chapter (Luke 11:38), the Pharisees were amazed that Jesus did not “immerse” (βαπτίζω baptizō) his hands, (presumably his hands are meant and not his whole body, although the text does not say that specifically) as was their custom, even though, according to Craig Keener in the IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament, this was not a requirement of the Old Testament law. He had also issued several warnings (“woes”; see earlier blog on that topic in Matthew) to Pharisees and teachers of the law at the end of the previous chapter for adding burdens to the people.

The Pharisees often soften the law in places as well, but typically this happens when the money trail leads back to them. In Mark 7:11, Jesus condemns ––the Pharisees for nullifying the commandment to honor your father and mother so they could take the Korban into the Temple treasury.

So those warnings are fresh in the minds of his disciples when Jesus speaks to them in Luke 12:1. Jesus is, in one statement, giving his disciples some reassurance that his harsh words to the Jewish rulers (one of them mentions Jesus’ “hubris” for confronting the Pharisees and teachers of the law even though Jesus was their guest at dinner!), but also preparing them for his teaching about whom to fear in the first part of chapter 12.

Jesus’ ministry was all about simplifying and restoring what the Pharisees, Sadducees, and teachers of the law had mucked up over the years. Love God. Love your neighbor. Act justly. Show mercy. Repent. Have faith. Forgive. Fear God. I am speaking to myself with this next statement as much as I am speaking to others: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”

I said I would return to Jesus’ statement about being the Bread of Life. Jesus does use this statement about himself, but it comes on the heels of the feeding of the 5000+, and he directly references that event in the pericope leading up to his statement. But he also uses the more general word for food in that section, βρῶμα (brōma), so it is fairly clear to me that he is not referencing the leavened bread that the 5000+ ate for their lunch, but is using “bread” as a symbol for “food” (the technical name for that kind of figure of speech is synecdoche /sin EK doe key/, the part represents the whole). Johannes Behm, in his article on ἄρτος in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Vol. 1, pp. 477–78) says the phrase has no parallel in Jewish literature. He also says that some ancient Greek writers still distinguished wheat bread from barley bread (μᾶζα maza, could this be matzo?).

Peace

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.