Sunday Morning Greek Blog

February 5, 2012

Does the Structure of Exodus 21:1–27 Tell the Patriarchs’ Story?

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Exodus,Hebrew,Old Testament,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 8:40 am

I really enjoyed my Old Testament exegesis classes in seminary with Dr. Gary Hall, who is retiring from Lincoln Christian Seminary this year. Each week, we had a passage to dissect, and we always followed the same pattern. The systematic method he taught us has stuck with me all these years, which is one reason why I love teaching hermeneutics. It has also opened up new depths of understanding to difficult passages, and has helped me discover the eternal principles behind the earthly stories of those who have gone before me.

Exodus 21 Assigned

One such passage that sold me on the value of discerning structure in the Bible is Exodus 21:1–27. I believe we had actually been assigned Exodus 21:12–27, which is set off in the TNIV with the heading “Personal Injuries.” However, when I looked at the passage in the Hebrew Bible that week, I noticed that vv. 1–27 were a complete paragraph. Dr. Hall had taught us to pay attention to such structural clues, so I took it upon myself to expand the assigned passage and see what I could discover from that. I was amazed at what I found, but I was even more amazed when I took into account the literary and historical context of the passage.

Here is the structure of the passage:

1 Introduction

    2–11 Hebrew Slaves

        12–14 Striking a man/conditionality

             15 Physically attacking Father/Mother

                16 Kidnapping

             17 Verbally attacking Father/Mother

        18–25 Striking a man or a pregnant woman

        [18–19 Striking a man]

    [20–21 Striking a Slave]

        [22–25 Striking a pregnant woman]

    26–27 Hebrew Slaves

Exodus 21 Considered

If you’ve read my posts regularly or if you’ve ever taken a class that talks about the structure of a biblical passage, you will instantly recognize this as a chiasm, a passage that presents ideas in one order and repeats them in reverse order. The key point about a chiasm is that whatever is at the center of the chiasm is the focus. So when I discovered this structure, I thought a couple things were unusual:

  1. Why were the two nearly identical laws about parents not together? and
  2. Why was “kidnapping” inserted between the two commands, especially when kidnapping isn’t mentioned in the Ten Commandments?

I need to answer both those questions together, because there is a connection. I do remember when I was looking at this passage in some English texts that one English version (I thought it was my RSV confirmation Bible, but I can’t locate it now to confirm) actually had the chutzpah to flip verses 16 and 17 around, because the translators thought as I did at first glance that they belonged together. The answer to my second question came when I looked at the Hebrew: the word “kidnap” is translated from the Hebrew phrase וְגֹנֵ֨ב אִ֧ישׁ
(wə·ḡō·nēḇ ʾîš, \wuh-goh-nayv eesh\), which literally means “the one stealing a man.” Aha! Stealing: now that is something in the Ten Commandments. Now I’m getting somewhere.

גָּנַב is the same word translated “steal” in the Ten Commandments. “Stealing” a man meant not only removing that man from his covenant community, but also taking away the life he had planned for himself. גָּנַב is often used of stealing things and people. It’s presence here, especially in the center of the structure (see above), indicates the seriousness of the crime of kidnapping. It is on a par with striking or cursing your parents, and the abuse and murder of slaves. All crimes listed here could be punishable by death, especially with the presence of the lex talionis at the end of this passage.

So now I was at least part way to an answer. Kidnapping was the ultimate form of mistreatment of another person. That is why it was at the center of the passage.

Exodus 21 in Context

But there was a larger question to answer. I had only dealt with the central elements, but what about the rest of the paragraph? I asked myself, “What do treatment of slaves, mistreatment of parents, and kidnapping have in common?” The answer stuck out like a sore thumb. Joseph. Joseph’s brothers kidnapped him. Strike one. They sold him into slavery. Strike two. They lied to their father Israel, which would be equivalent to a curse, about what happened to Joseph. Strike three. So the first story out of the gate after hearing the Ten Commandments is like a slap in the face to all of Israel. “You did it to Joseph, which is how you wound up in slavery in Egypt in the first place. Go and sin no more. Even though God intended it for good (Genesis 50:20), don’t let that be an excuse to try it again.”

Conclusion

I hope you can see how important structure and context is in determining the meaning and significance of a passage. Moses brilliantly structured Exodus 21 (or God did so for Moses) not only to communicate his statutes, but to place those in the historical context of God’s people.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

January 29, 2012

“I Am” Statement of Yahweh (Exodus 3–6, esp. Exodus 3:14)

Filed under: "I Am" Statements,Exodus,Hebrew,John Gospel of,Old Testament — Scott Stocking @ 8:33 am

As I was reading through the early chapters of Exodus last week, I was not only reminded of the “I Am” statements of Jesus in John’s gospel, but I gained some new insight into the overall application of those statements. I want to share that with you in this post.

Face to Face at the Bush

Exodus 3 is the story of Moses’s first encounter with God at the burning bush in Midian. This is also the chapter where we have the story of God revealing his personal name to Moses: יְהוָ֖ה “Yahweh” (English texts set in small caps: LORD). But the text leading up to that revelation is a story that deserves the *facepalm* of all *facepalms*! God has been preparing Moses to confront Pharaoh and deliver the Israelites from Egyptian slavery. You’d have to admit, that’s a pretty big task in those days, considering most kings and their subjects wouldn’t give a second thought about having you beheaded or drawn and quartered for merely approaching the king without invitation let alone confronting the king.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Moses approaches the burning bush when Yahweh calls out to him. He removes his sandals, because he’s on holy ground. Yahweh proceeds to identify himself and his purposes for calling Moses, while Moses does his own reverent version of a facepalm (Exodus 3:6b). Listen to what Yahweh says to Moses in Exodus 3:6–10 (NIV) and see if you detect a pattern:

I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.

I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt.

I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and

I am concerned about their suffering. So

I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land…

And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and

I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing them.

So now, go.

I am sending you to Pharaoh to bring my people the Israelites out of Egypt.

Yahweh makes seven(!) “I” statements here about who he is and what he will do, and he affirms that he has the power to do all this through Moses. I suppose God could have done it without all the pomp and circumstance of the plagues, but then how would anyone ever know what God thinks of kings who exalt themselves to positions of deity? But here’s the facepalm moment: after God affirms that he’s going to do all this through Moses, what does Moses say?

“Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?” (Exodus 3:11).

*FACEPALM!*

Evidently Moses didn’t have Verizon, because he obviously didn’t hear God the first time. The creator of the universe is speaking to Moses, giving him more information about himself than he’s ever given to any other patriarch (except perhaps Abraham), and Moses is worried about himself! Duh, Moses, it’s not about you; God just confirmed that!

Saving Face

Of course, it’s easy for us 3500 years later to look back on this story and be a little critical of Moses. The story does show his human side, and I wonder how many of us would have be willing to saddle up and head out without questioning God further on the matter. God isn’t afraid of having a conversation with us, and he’s big enough to deal with our questions and fears. He’s ever so patient with us as we muddle through life trying to figure out his will and purpose for us. But he also offers reassurance to us in the form of a promise that is repeated time and again in both the Old and New Testaments. He offered that promise to the patriarchs before Moses, and he offers it again to Moses in 3:12: “I will be with you.”

This is where the Hebrew gets very interesting, and most English translations relegate the significant issue to a footnote. The Hebrew word for “I will be” is the standard “to be” verb: הָיָה (hāyāh), but since Hebrew, like Greek, alters the spelling of its verbs based on the person and number of the verb, the form that is used in 3:12 is אֶהְיֶה (first person singular ʾehyeh; notice the letters are the same, except for the aleph א added to the front of the word). This is the exact same form that most English translations render “I AM WHO I AM” in 3:14 when God reveals his name! To their credit, most English translations have a footnote on v. 14 saying that this could be “I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE,” but in my opinion, that should be the translation in the main text. The form יְהוָ֖ה “Yahweh” that is used regularly throughout the Hebrew Old Testament is probably related to the third person singular form of the verb.

Hebrew verbs don’t have tense in the same way that English verbs do. Hebrew verbs either represent completed action (perfects) or incomplete action (imperfects). The verb form Yahweh uses for his name is imperfect (ironic, I know, but that’s the grammar). What I hear Yahweh saying to Moses here is that he will do whatever it takes, he will be whatever he needs to be, to deliver the Israelites from Egypt. That is a father showing ultimate love for his children: even if it comes to destroying every last trace of the Egyptian people and culture, God will deliver his people.

Facing Up

Once was not enough, though. God has to go back through the I statements again in Exodus 6, but the Israelites were too oppressed to hear it or believe it. So God’s mighty plagues were not just to break Pharaoh’s stubborn heart, but also to show Israel that he meant business about delivering them from the Egyptians. This is emphasized in the latter plagues that have no effect on the land of Goshen where the Israelites lived.

So what does all this have to do with the “I am” statements of Jesus? What occurred to me is that Jesus was doing for his audience what Yahweh did for Moses and the Israelites. His “I am” statements affirm that he is the savior and that he can and will do whatever it takes to deliver people from sin and Satan, even to the point of dying on a cross. Jesus stood up to the religious oppressors of his day and proclaimed the good news of God’s deliverance and love for his creation.

Many of us Christ followers I’m sure have done our own facepalms when friends or family just don’t comprehend the good news. Well, you’re in good company. Be patient and keep at it, because you might have to witness a lot of pain and suffering before the deliverance finally happens. And Christ offers the same assurance to us as Yahweh did to Moses: “Surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age” (Matthew 28:20 TNIV).

Peace,

Scott Stocking

Please check out my friend Eric Weiss’s post on this topic: http://theoblogoumena.blogspot.com/2011/05/exodus-314-and.html.

January 26, 2012

“Seer” in Old Testament: A Hebrew Word Study

Filed under: 1 Chronicles,1 Samuel,2 Chronicles,Hebrew,Old Testament,Prophet — Scott Stocking @ 10:12 pm

I’m digging into my archives from way back, when for a short time I sent out an e-mail called “Word of the Week” and when I contributed to the HarvestNet.org forum. I hope you enjoy!

The concept of the seer in the Old Testament (OT) may be connected to the priest who wore the Urim and Thummim. I don’t know if all of the individuals called seers were keepers of the Urim and Thummim, but if any were priests (e.g., Zadok, 2 Sam 15:27), they probably did. Seventeen of the twenty-eight occurrences of “seer” appear in 1–2 Chronicles, which one should expect, since Chronicles is the priestly account of the kings of Judah.

רֹאֶה

The NIV translates two Hebrew words as “seer” in OT, רֹאֶה (rōʾěh) and חֹזֶה (ḥō∙zěh). The first word is a participle (i.e., a verb used as a noun) form of the verb “to see” in Hebrew. OT authors used the word twenty-six times. The NIV translates רֹאֶה twelve times as “seer” and twelve times generically as anyone who “saw” something in the natural way. You will find the other two occurrences in parallel passages (2 Kings 25:19, Jeremiah 52:25), where the NIV translates them as “men of the king’s council,” which might be a little closer to “seer” in the religious sense. The word is used of Samuel eight times. In fact, the first time the word is used of Samuel (1 Samuel 9:9), the author makes a point of bridging the gap between the era of the seer and the rise of the “prophet.”

The Septuagint (LXX) in seven of those eight occurrences translates this as βλέπων, “one who sees.” This word by itself has no technical significance in Greek as far as I know relating to special prophetic function. The other occurrence connected with Samuel is translated προφήτης “prophet” in the LXX (1 Chronicles 26:28). Two other mentions of רֹאֶה refer to Hanani, an advisor to one of Judah’s kings. The LXX calls him προφήτης.

חֹזֶה

The second word (חֹזֶה) is found sixteen times in the OT, and with the exception of Isaiah 30:10, where the NIV translates it “prophets” in parallel with רֹאֶה, it is translated as “seer(s).” This is the main word used to describe those who were either in the employ of a king, or advised kings. (Hanani above is the only exception, but his(?) son Jehu is called a חֹזֶה in 2 Chronicles 19:2.) Ten of the sixteen times, it either refers to the “king’s seer” or to someone who advised a king (whether the king wanted him to or not; similar to the roles played by the men in 2 Kings 25:19). I include Amos in this count (Amos 7:12). The LXX uses ὁρῶν (“one who sees,” probably with emphasis on content of what is seen rather than the act of seeing) eleven times. βλέπων is used once (in 1 Chronicles 29:29; רֹאֶה Samuel and חֹזֶה Gad are mentioned together here; both are called βλέπων in the LXX).

There is also an interesting connection with חֹזֶה in that in a few instances, the seers were connected with music or poetry. In 1 Chronicles 25:5, the LXX identifies Heman as an ἀνακρουομένῳ “one who sings praise” or “one who prophesies with music.” He is one of the men chosen “for the ministry of prophesying, accompanied by harps, lyres and cymbals” (1 Chronicles 25:1; see also Judges 5:11). Asaph (one of the more prominent coauthors of the Psalms) is also mentioned as a seer (1 Chronicles 29:30).

Finally, Isaiah 30:10 (in addition to 1 Chronicles 29:29) mentions חֹזֶה and רֹאֶה apparently synonymously. רֹאֶה and חֹזֶה are most often translated προφήτης in the LXX and “seer” in the NIV, but חֹזֶה is occasionally translated ὁρῶν in LXX, especially of David’s seer Gad.

The Role of the Seer

The role of the seer is very easy to discern in the OT. He spoke the word of God to the people or to kings. The title was prominent up through the beginning of the kingdom era, but the title gradually shifted to prophet (נָּבִיא), especially when Isaiah came on the scene. The seer was probably a little more politically connected than the prophet, but neither were strangers to the palace. And neither had a message that was any more popular with the people or the kings: they rarely minced words. Samuel was the hinge pin of history between the seer and prophet, as he ushered out the age of the judges and ushered in the age of the kings.

Conclusion

I suppose I could say my last two posts are a bit of a hinge pin as well. This blog originally started as my musings on reading through the Greek NT. But I can’t forget my Hebrew “roots” in seminary. Now that I’m reading through the OT again, I know I will have much to say on that. But for those of who are worried that my long blog title might extend to Sunday Morning Biblical Languages Blog, don’t worry. I like it just the way it is.

Peace & Shalom!

Scott Stocking


January 24, 2012

Old Testament Timeline

Filed under: 1 Chronicles,Chronology,Genesis,Old Testament,Septuagint — Scott Stocking @ 7:29 am

(Note: The first part of this was originally posted as Genesis Timeline.)

The Evidence from Genesis

Table 1 is a work in progress. As I was reading through Genesis, I took note of all the ages of the patriarchs and the timing of the significant events in their lives, when known. In some places, I had to make an educated guess (e.g., the birth of Jacob’s 12 sons, and especially of Joseph and of his sons), but I’m fairly confident I got close. I did not check this against anyone else’s chronology, but I’m open to comments or input on any data I may have missed. Years are given a.c., after creation, and I assume the years are literal and that there are no gaps, although I’m sure some would argue that point with me. At some point, I intend to do the backward chronology and put in the b.c. years, but I want to do a little more study on that first. I hope you find the chart useful.

I ordered the columns by year of death, year of birth, and year of birth of descendant so I could use Excel’s “high-low-close” graph feature to create a timeline (Figure 1). You will easily see that after the flood, age spans decrease dramatically. This is because the flood was a result, in part, of the protective vapor canopy around the earth condensing. That canopy allowed the new earth to flourish and blocked the harmful radiation of the sun, thus allowing longer life (and bigger dinosaurs). But more about that in a future post!

Table 1: Genesis Timeline: Years of birth, death, and significant events in the lives of the Patriarchs.

Figure 1: Genesis Timeline Chart

Figure notes: The y-axis represents years after creation. The bottom number with the red mark indicates the year of birth of the descendant to the right. The top number indicates the year of death of the father to the left.

[Added 1/27/2012]

The Evidence from Exodus and Beyond

I said this was a work in progress, so I’m going to keep adding to it. It shouldn’t surprise me that right after I post this, I run across something that throws a wrench in the works. I realize that patriarchal genealogies may not be comprehensive (usually only the sons are listed), but I have trouble believing that there are gaps, because the point was to show an unbroken line of descent. So what am I talking about here?

I was reading in Exodus 6 this morning (6:16–20 is what caught my attention) where the ages of Levi and his descendants are given. Levi lived 137 years, his son Kohath lived 133 years (LXX has 130), and Kohath’s son Amram, Moses’s father, lived 137 years (LXX has 132). The genealogy at 1 Chronicles 6 agrees with Exodus 6:16–20 with no additions. We don’t know the ages of the fathers when their sons were born, but working from the assumption that they were 60ish (since that seemed to be the pattern toward the end of the Genesis timeline above; we know Moses didn’t have kids until he was closer to 80; see Exodus 4:19–26 cf. 7:6) when their respective key descendants were born, and assuming Levi was born about 10 years before Joseph (ca. 2156 a.c.), there’s no way you can stretch out the chronology in 6:16–20 to fill the 430 years of Exodus 12:40! Table 2 is a proposed addition to the Excel sheet above.

Table 2: From Levi to Moses (hypothetical; revised in Table 3)

Notice that this hypothetical data puts Moses’s birth at 2336, a full 250 years before my proposed date above! What is going on here?

The key may lie in a closer look at the textual history of Exodus 12:40. The Hebrew text says that the Israelites were in Egypt 430 years. But the LXX and the Samaritan Pentateuch say they lived in Egypt and Canaan 430 years. Could it be that the mention of living in Egypt symbolized the fact that the Israelites did not yet have a permanent home anywhere, and so in Moses’s mind, that included the years from Abram’s settlement in Canaan to Jacob’s move to Egypt? If this is intended to imply 430 years from the time Abram settled in Canaan, where does that leave us? Here’s the math: Genesis 12:4 says Abram was 75 years old when set out from Harran. If Abram was born in 1946 a.c., 1946 + 75 = 2021. Add 430 to that, and you get 2451 a.c. for the date of the exodus, when Moses is 80 years old. Are you following me so far? Subtract 80 from that, and you get Moses’s birth year in 2371 a.c. So if I make Moses’s ancestors slightly older when they have their kids, I can make the chronology work a little better. Table 3 shows the revision.

Table 3: From Levi to Moses: final

At this point, I may as well bring in the other major chronological statement from the Old Testament and try to put everything into the more familiar B.C. years. Solomon began building the temple in the fourth year of his reign, 480 years (LXX has 440) after the Israelites came out of Egypt. Solomon’s reign is dated circa 971–931 B.C. (working from the chronology in William LaSor, David Hubbard, & Frederic Bush, Old Testament Survey [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972] p. 293), so Solomon began building the temple roughly 967 B.C. Adding 480 years to that puts the Exodus at 1447 B.C. So 1447 B.C. = 2451 a.c. That would put creation at 3898 B.C., give or take about 100 years depending on how you deal with the unknowns.

However, LaSor et al. suggest (p. 127) that the 480 years is a rounding, of sorts: 12 generations times 40 years/generation. But they significantly shorten that number, almost cutting it in half, and suggest that the exodus happened in the early thirteenth century B.C. rather than the mid fifteenth century B.C. I will have to save that debate for another time, though.

Conclusion

The puzzle of biblical chronolgy is fascinating, if only because I love to play with numbers. I realize I’ve made some “educated guesses” here, but as for the genealogies, I would have a difficult time believing there are any gaps in such detailed records. If you compare Matthew’s genealogy with the corresponding text in 1 Chronicles, it is clear that Matthew does leave out a few generations toward the end, but he’s certainly given enough information to connect us to his primary source material.

I believe in a recent creation, but I’m not so sure the earth itself is that new. After all, Genesis 1:1 says something was here before God made something out of it (“the earth was without form and void” doesn’t mean it didn’t exist at the time).

Peace

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

My views are my own.

Revision Note (01/30/2026): I had to redo the tables because this was originally created in an older version of the WordPress native editor and had some issues with extra columns.

January 23, 2012

Take Heart! (θαρσέω tharseō, Matthew 9:2, 22)

Filed under: 1 Samuel,Courage,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Matthew Gospel of,New Testament,Old Testament — Scott Stocking @ 8:50 pm

(Note: All Greek words are linked to www.blueletterbible.com.)

As I begin my fiftieth trip around the sun this year, I’ve determined to make several difficult choices that quite frankly have me scared and stressed. I took our congregation’s “401” class last week on spiritual maturity, which emphasizes acting out of love and faith, only to be confronted with the fact that the first major decision I made in 2012 was one out of sheer desperation, fear, and resignation. I started taking Dave Ramsey’s Financial Peace University this week at our church, which means I’m committed on Sunday afternoons for the next 12 weeks, but the opening session gave me a little hope. Personal relationships are looking up as well, and things at work are on a more or less even keel. In addition, I hope to be able to go see my kids a little more often this year. Still, that first difficult decision overshadows the positives I am anticipating.

Courage!

So when I saw Jesus’s encouragement Θάρσει (“Take heart!”) twice in Matthew 9 the other day, I had to sit up and take notice. Matthew 9 comes in the heart of Jesus dealing with many who come to him or are brought to him for healing. Jesus, of course, meets their physical needs, but he is ever mindful of their spiritual needs as well. In Matthew 9:2, Jesus declares that the paralyzed man’s sins are forgiven, which incites the teachers of the law to accuse him of blasphemy. Unfazed, Jesus proceeds to demonstrate he has the power to forgive sins by healing the paralyzed man. After the woman who suffered from a bleeding disease for 12 years touched Jesus’s garment, she was healed and greeted with the same word of encouragement.

The word is found five other times in the New Testament. Six occurrences are in the Gospels, and one is in Acts. Two of the occurrences are found in story of Jesus walking on the sea (Matthew 14:27, Mark 6:50) when the disciples are so terrified in the storm that they think Jesus is a ghost. John begins a major section of his Gospel with the phrase: “Do no let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me” (14:1 NIV). John teaches in chapters 14–16 on the ministry of the Holy Spirit and the troubles that his followers would face in the world. He ends that section with the word of encouragement: “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” (16:33 NIV). The two other occurrences of the word are found in Mark 10:49 and Acts 23:11.

Compassion

But that word by itself was only the tip of the iceberg that day as I was reading Matthew 9. When I got to the end of the chapter, verse 36 really hit home, because I felt like part of the crowd: “When he saw the crowds, he had compassion [σπλαγχνίζομαι] on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd” (NIV). The words for “have compassion” and “compassion” are two of my favorite Greek words, not only because you have to expel about a pint of spit to say them, but because they are so descriptive of the literal meaning: “bowels.” Yes, that is where the phrase “bowels of compassion” originates. Compassion comes from the gut in the Hebrew worldview, much deeper than the heart.

But leaving that word aside, the thing that really struck me was the condition of the people who came to Jesus: “harassed,” “helpless,” “shepherdless.” I’ve not forgotten I have a shepherd, even when I may wander off at times, but I’ve certainly felt the first two in the last few years. The shepherd has guided me through those times, but I often have to wonder what I’m supposed to be learning in the school of hard knocks.

The fact that I have a shepherd was reinforced even more when I came across an OT passage last week as a friend and I were reading through Six Battles Every Man Must Win by Bill Perkins, where he reminds us of the story of another shepherd, David. Before David secured his place on Israel’s throne, he was a fugitive running from Saul. During that time, however, he was not alone. Those who would become David’s “mighty men” gathered around him early in his fugitive life: “All those who were in distress or in debt or discontented gathered around him, and he became their commander. About four hundred men were with him” (1 Samuel 22:2). That sounds very much like the people who were gathering around Jesus in Matthew 9. And it sounds very much like my life currently. My life-résumé is a pretty good match for the “qualifications” of a mighty man.

Contentment

I know I don’t have the strength to dig myself out of my own problems. Some days, I wear my weakness on my sleeve, but only because I know that it is only through my weakness that Christ can perfect his power (2 Corinthians 12:9). I need my shepherd, Jesus, to guide me through. The path is mountainous and treacherous at times, but I know he’s got my back.

I remember going on a horseback ride as a teen through Chadron State Park in NW Nebraska. We had about 15 people riding single file along the trail, and we were going along a high ridge with a 45 degree slope that dropped about a thousand feet to my right (at least, it seemed that steep and deep). My horse decided to take his own route, and instead of staying on the main path, he moved to the right a bit and went between a tree and the slope. The path between the tree and the slope was no wider than the horse, but when I started to panic a bit, my dad reassured me that the horse knew what he was doing. It was only a short little detour, only ten feet or so, but I had to duck a bit to avoid the lower branches of the tree. The horse was sure footed though and got me safely back on the path.

That detour is a microcosm of what I’ve experienced in the past few years, poised precariously on the brink of disaster. But God has seen me through it, and for that, I am grateful. The road ahead still has its challenges, but I can be content knowing that my Savior holds me in the palm of his hand and will put me on the straight path in his own timing.

Conclusion

So my word to you is the same as Christ’s to the paralytic and the bleeding woman: Take heart! Know that his promise that he would never leave us nor forsake us holds true, even when we have trouble seeing the end result.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

December 4, 2011

Immersion (Baptism) that Saves: 1 Peter 3:18–22

Filed under: 1 Peter,Biblical Studies,Diagrams,Greek,Immersion/Baptism,New Testament,Old Testament,Romans,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 8:15 am

I have a couple notes for blog readers before I get into the main post today.

  1. For all readers: Instead of customizing the hyperlinks or providing transliterations and pronunciations, I am going to start hyperlinking the first occurrence of each Greek and Hebrew word in my blog to the entry in http://www.blueletterbible.org. That Bible study site has numerous resources available, including a link to hear the Greek or Hebrew word pronounced and the option to get a complete concordance listing of all occurrences of the Greek or Hebrew word. If you’re not already familiar with the site, I trust you will find it useful and engaging. (I am not being compensated for promoting BlueLetterBible at this time.)
  2. For those readers who use the sentence diagrams: At least once a week, it seems like the search engine feature in WordPress lets me know that someone hit on my site by looking for a diagram of a particular verse. I am pleasantly surprised to find I’m not the only one who has an interest in diagramming, in spite of how much I griped about it in junior high. For those of you who use the diagrams, I would appreciate knowing what your interest is in them so that I can get a sense if I need to do anything different with them or provide a different kind of diagram. Are you just curious? Are you a student looking for help on an assignment? (If the latter, I trust you aren’t passing off my work as yours!) Are you a preacher looking to better explain the passage? Whatever your interest, please drop me a short note in the comments. There’s obviously some interest in them, and I’m happy to share the fruit of my labor with you.

Introduction

Growing up as a sprinkled Presbyterian, I was understandably intrigued when I came to understand my need for a personal relationship with Christ and discovered the concept of “believer’s baptism.” It was a completely new concept to me, as I had never been exposed to it before my high school years. In college, when I got involved with the restoration movement, I still had many questions about the practice when I went to that first meeting at 1633 Q Street (now a parking lot) just off the University of Nebraska-Lincoln campus. That night, just a little over 30 years ago, I got shuffled off to the pastor’s office, where I met Terry & Kris Christlieb. I had several questions about baptism, and they answered them to my satisfaction that night, so much so that we invaded Capitol City Christian Church at 9 p.m., where I got immersed. I was sold from that point on.

I’ve had my ups and downs on immersion theology through the years. Is it an absolute necessity? Is it just a “work of the flesh”? When is the right time? Just what is the “effectiveness” of immersion when it comes to salvation? But when I ran across such passages as Romans 6 and 1 Peter 3:18–22, it was hard for me to diminish the importance of immersion in the life of a Christ-follower. And when I discovered the connection between Acts 2:38 and Matthew’s Last Supper account, I was convinced of the efficacy of immersion as part of the salvation and maturing experience of the Christ-follower.

1 Peter 3:18–22

Of all the passages on immersion, or baptism as many call it (βάπτισμα, βαπτίζω), 1 Peter 3:21 is the only one that comes out and says directly that immersion saves. Yet this gets overlooked so much, because those who are not convinced of the efficacy of immersion seem to think it means something other than what is plainly written on the page. But what is the author trying to communicate by connecting it to the Noahic flood? Is the flood what saves us, or the ark? The verse diagram in Figure 1 below places 1 Peter 3:21 in its larger context so that you can see what the connections are.

I want to jump down to 20b, where Peter says (my translation): “In the ark, a few, that is, eight people, were saved through water.” In this case, the water was destructive (see 2 Peter 2:5), but it had the power to save Noah by supporting the ark on its year-and-a-half voyage. The flood destroyed all living creatures except those on the ark and those that could already live in water, but the ark was the vessel that protected Noah, his family, and the other living creatures “through the water.”

Now for verse 21: The word for ark (κιβωτός) is feminine, but the relative pronoun that begins verse 21 is neuter, so it can’t refer to the ark. The most immediate antecedent to the relative pronoun is “water” (ὕδωρ; genitive is ὕδατος), which is neuter, so Peter is referring to the waters of the flood with this pronoun. So in verse 21, Peter says, “This water corresponds to immersion.” The word “corresponds to” (ἀντίτυπος) is actually an adjective in Greek that modifies βάπτισμα, so the phrase might be more accurately rendered, “This water is functional baptism” or more literally, “This water is typical baptism.”

Peter goes on to say that this baptismal water “now also saves you.” The “now also” is relative to the previous verse. Not only does the ark, then, typify salvation, but water does as well. Water is what destroyed sinful humanity, which is exactly what happens when someone is immersed into Christ. Romans 6:3–4 says, “Or don’t you know that all of us who were immersed into Christ Jesus were immersed into his death? We were therefore buried with him through immersion into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.”

What I found interesting is that the part that follows “now also saves you” has two nominative case nouns. “Removal” (ἀπόθεσις) and “appeal” (ἐπερώτημα) are both nominative case, agreeing with the nominative case of βάπτισμα, so they are essentially appositives to βάπτισμα. Here’s how a literal translation might look: “This immersion now saves you, not the body-dirt removal immersion, but the clear-conscience-pledge to God immersion.” But this rendition is missing the most important part of the verse, the final phrase.

The last phrase of verse 21 parallels the “through water” at the end of verse 20. “Through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” is the qualifier that gives the water its power to save. Just as the ark saved Noah and his family through the flood waters, the resurrection is what carries us through the act of immersion. Again, I refer you back to Romans 6:3–4, where this is made abundantly clear. So if I complete my literal translation with that phrase, it would look something like this: “This immersion now saves you through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, not the body-dirt removal immersion, but the clear-conscience-pledge to God immersion” (emphasis mine).

So immersion is really a two-way street to God. If we just get immersed for show (the “body-dirt removal immersion”), immersion is ineffective. God is not into rituals without substance. But if we come to the waters of immersion pledging ourselves to live for him with a clear conscience, he effects the power of the resurrection in immersion and destroys the old self. He renews us and rescues us from the wages of sin.

A quick note on βαπτίζω

Some have tried to argue that βαπτίζω does not mean “completely immerse,” because that is what the related word βάπτω means. But the –ίζω ending on βαπτίζω is an intensifier. It is quite similar, in sound and function, to the difference between the musical directions forte (loud) and fortissimo (very loud). So βαπτίζω is an intense form of dipping, or immersion. I don’t have to time to list the many verbs in Greek that indicate a similar pattern, but I assure you, they are quite common in the NT.

Conclusion

So immersion is certainly not just a work of the flesh. Just as the ark supported and sustained Noah and his family through the flood, so too the resurrection sustains us through the act of immersion. But beware of the “dunk ’em and ditch ’em” philosophy. Noah and his family certainly did not sit idly by on the ark for a year and a half. They worked hard daily to keep the animals and themselves fed and healthy. Immersion is not a terminal point in the life of a Christ-follower. On the contrary, it is a watershed moment (pun intended) where we tell God, “I’m sold out for you.”

Peace,

Scott Stocking

Figure 1: Diagram for 1 Peter 3:18–22 (Greek and English)

November 27, 2011

Adulteresses (μοιχαλίδες) in James 4:4; Excursus on Authorship of Hebrews and James

Filed under: Authorship,Biblical Studies,Greek,Hebrews,Hosea,James,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 9:15 pm

James is my next-favorite NT book/epistle, second only to Ephesians. James is often dubbed “The Proverbs of the New Testament,” and after having read through the first four chapters this week, it is easy to see why. Although it lacks the strict parallelism of most of the text of Proverbs in the OT, I have noticed a substantial number of word pairings in James. Some of them happen in the same verse or within one or two verses (e.g. 2:2–3), while others serve as inclusios for certain sections (e.g., 2:14–16). James is probably best known for its practical wisdom on controlling the tongue.

Adulteresses

What caught my attention while reading this morning was James’s use of the feminine plural noun for “adulteresses,” μοιχαλίδες, in James 4:4. Throughout the letter, James addresses his readers as “my brothers,” which is intended to be a generic reference to all believers regardless of gender, as was customary in those days. So when he addresses his readers with a feminine noun, he is undoubtedly trying to get their attention. What may escape some here, though, is the implied Old Testament connection. (See Table 1 for the way this is translated in different versions.)

Table 1: Translations of μοιχαλίδες in Several Logos Versions, with Footnotes and Cross References

Version

Translation of μοιχαλίδες

Footnotes and X-refs

KJV 1769

Ye adulterers and adulteresses (!)

Note that the translators didn’t exclude males in 1769!

ASV 1901

Ye adulteresses

  

RSV 1971

Unfaithful creatures!

  

NIV 1984

You adulterous people

  

NRSV 1989

Adulterers!

  

NASB 1995

You adulteresses

Jer 2:2; Ezek 16:32

ESV 2001

You adulterous people!

Isa. 54:5; Jer. 2:2; Greek: “You adulteresses!”

TNIV 2005

You adulterous people

Isa 54:5; Jer 3:20; Hos 2:2–5; 3:1; 9:1

NLT 2007

You adulterers!

Greek: “You adulteresses!”

NIV 2011

You adulterous people

Isa 54:5; Jer 3:20; Hos 2:2–5; 3:1; 9:1; An allusion to covenant unfaithfulness; see Hosea 3:1.

Of course, if you have a good study Bible at hand, you may have seen some of these verses in the cross-reference apparatus (whatever study Bibles I have are still buried in my boxes). The imagery of Israel as an unfaithful wife or adulterous woman in the OT is certainly prominent. Ezekiel 23 has a graphic (dare I say X-rated) description of Oholah and Oholibah, the two adulterous sisters, who respectively were symbols for Samaria’s (northern kingdom) and Jerusalem’s (southern kingdom) religious promiscuity with other gods. Hosea lived the parable, so to speak, by marrying a woman whom he knew was a prostitute, and God told him to do it! (See specifically Hosea 3:1, which is the only time this word is used in the LXX text of Hosea.) By calling his readers “adulteresses,” James minces no words and makes no friends. He cuts to the chase and puts the fear of God into his hearers by comparing them to their faithless ancestors who were exiled.

Did James Write Hebrews?

Several years ago, I heard Larry Pechawer (at least, I recollect it was Pechawer) do a somewhat tongue-in-cheek paper on the authorship of Hebrews. Pechawer postulated that Hebrews had been written by Paul, because three of the first four words in Hebrews begin with a Paul-like sound (Πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως πάλαι). That’s not exactly an exegetically sound method of determining authorship, but to his credit, he did offer some other substantive evidence for Paul’s authorship, although it was admittedly weak.

The reason I mention this is that James, in 1:2, has three successive π-words: πειρασμοῖς περιπέσητε ποικίλοις. Now as with Pechawer’s theory on Hebrews, such alliteration may be just that: alliteration. In my college days, I had argued that Hebrews had been written by Luke, because the Greek is high quality, and the author claims to have written a short (βραχύς) letter, which is true when Hebrews is compared to Luke and Acts.

But perhaps there is something to the theory of James’s authorship of Hebrews. James, after all, was the half-brother of Jesus, so he certainly has the knowledge of the Jewish sacrificial system inherent in Hebrews in his favor. James also held a leadership position in the Jerusalem church, so he certainly would have known the individuals mentioned in the final greetings in Hebrews, including Timothy. “Those who come from Italy” could refer to visitors from Italy to Jerusalem, as opposed to the letter originating from Italy, as one might expect if it had been written by Luke or Paul. As the church father Origen said, only God knows who really wrote Hebrews, so my musings here won’t solve that eternal question, but it is an interesting conjecture to me nonetheless.

Hebrews 13:17–18: A Less-Authoritarian Translation

If you followed the posts when I was teaching the How to Understand the Bible class at the beginning of the fall, you may have seen the link to the word study on πείθω. Most translations render the word “obey” with respect to the leaders, but that is not a common translation for the word in the NT. More often than not, the word has the idea of “confidence.” That’s why I like the TNIV and NIV (2011) translation of the verse: “Have confidence in your leaders.” I believe this translation puts more responsibility on the leaders to be men and women of high character. This doesn’t mean that Christ-followers shouldn’t be obedient to leaders, but that obedience should come from a relationship based on trust, not just obligation. You want to follow leaders who have impeccable, reliable character.

The same word is used in vs. 18 and is usually translated “we are sure”, so translating it as “confidence” in vs. 17 is completely consistent with the context. For other occurrences of the word, click the link at the beginning of this section to open the PowerPoint presentation on the word study.

Peace to all this Christmas (with a capital C) season.

Scott Stocking

By the way, the new NIV (2011) Study Bibles are available now. If you are shopping for a study Bible and prefer the updated translation of the NIV (essentially the TNIV repackaged), make sure you look for the cover you see here. There are many study Bibles based on the NIV, but not all have adapted to the updated translation. If you’re in doubt, check the “front matter” and look for the copyright date of the Bible text (as opposed to the copyright date of the study Bible itself). If the study Bible uses the new NIV, it will show a copyright date of 2011 for the Bible text, and no earlier than 2011 for copyright date of the study Bible itself. The older NIV was copyrighted in 1984, so that would be the latest copyright date for the biblical text found on that page.

September 5, 2011

Guide to Selecting a Bible

Filed under: Biblical Studies,New Testament,Old Testament — Scott Stocking @ 11:42 pm
Tags: , , ,

Learning Outcomes

After taking this class, the participant will be able to:

  • Explain the differences, benefits, and disadvantages of the three major translation theories;
  • Describe the source and purpose of the tools included in a study Bible;
  • Use different versions in personal Bible study based on personal needs and preferences.

Step 1 of the Bible study method we’ll be discussing is “Get a Bible.” Sounds simple enough, right? Go to Parable or Divine Truth, grab one off the shelf, pay for it, and be on your way. But what do you find when you get there?

So how do you decide? It depends on what you want.

Translation Theories

Literal translations try to stay as close to the word order and standard meaning of the words as possible. These sometimes seem very choppy to read and they tend translate idiom literally rather than translating the meaning of the idiom. If you want technical accuracy, try a literal or word-for-word translation like the New American Standard Bible (NASB), English Standard Version (ESV), or the King James Version (KJV).Note the translation of Psalm 1:1–2 from the English Standard Version:

Blessed is the man
who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
    2 but his delight is in the law of the Lord,
and on his law he meditates day and night.

Paraphrase or free translations are on the opposite end of the spectrum. Examples of paraphrases would be The Message (Eugene Peterson) and The Living Bible (Kenneth Taylor). These tend to take great liberty with the original text (when the original text is consulted!) or work from another English version and attempt to rewrite the text in contemporary, colloquial language. Here is Psalm 1:1–2 from The Message, translated and paraphrased by Eugene Peterson (note: Eugene Peterson has consulted the original texts in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek):

(The Message)

How well God must like you—
you don’t hang out at Sin Saloon,
you don’t slink along Dead-End Road,
you don’t go to Smart-Mouth College.
2 Instead you thrill to God’s Word,
you chew on Scripture day and night.

Dynamic equivalent translations take a middle-of-the-road approach between literal and paraphrase. They arrange the word order so it sounds more natural to the reader, like reading a newspaper or popular novel. Here is Psalm 1:1–2 from both the new edition of the NIV (©2011) and the New Living Translation, which we usually place on the screen for Mark’s sermons:

(NIV: tends to be a little closer to the literal)
1 Blessed is the one
who does not walk in step with the wicked
or stand in the way that sinners take
or sit in the company of mockers,
2 but whose delight is in the law of the Lord,
and who meditates on his law day and night.

(NLT, second edition, a little closer to the paraphrase)
1 Oh, the joys of those who do not
follow the advice of the wicked,
or stand around with sinners,
or join in with mockers.
2 But they delight in the law of the Lord,
meditating on it day and night.

Study Bibles

A study Bible is not a translation theory like the three described above, but a tool that combines the insights of a number of different resources in order to give you a broader picture of the context, meaning, and application of Scripture. Keep in mind that the notes in a study Bible represent someone else’s interpretation of the passage or verse. These notes should not be considered “Scripture,” but scriptural helps. Study Bibles come in every shape and size, for any number of demographic categories you can conjure up, and for most major versions of the Bible.

Some good study Bibles are The Life Application Bible (available with different Bible versions), The Archaeological Study Bible (with 1984 NIV), and the 1984 NIV Study Bible. Study Bibles may also have cross-references to parallel passages or to similar wording in other verses. Following these cross-references in your study time may serve to enrich your understanding of Scripture and help you see its interconnectedness.

Comparing Translations

Most online and app-based Bible Web sites will give you the opportunity to compare translations of a verse or passage. This is often helpful in Bible study when you have a passage who’s meaning may not be quite clear or that speaks to a difficult concept.

Note on the New International Version (NIV)

The New International Version underwent an update for 2011. The previous version of the NIV was published in 1984, over a quarter century ago. In 2001, Today’s New International Version (TNIV) was published, which included gender-neutral language where the original author was addressing both men and women. The 2011 edition of the NIV is essentially the TNIV with some minor adjustments. The TNIV is no longer being published. The new NIV Study Bibles have now gone through a couple versions since the 2011 update. Personally, I’m using the Zondervan NIV Study Bible edited by Kenneth Barker, the first one to come out after the update.

Since I first published this guide, I have also had the opportunity to contribute study notes to the Jeremiah Study Bible, available with the NIV, NKJV, and ESV.
 Here is a comparison of Hebrews 13:17–18 in the NIV 1984, TNIV, and NIV 2011 editions.

NIV 1984

TNIV

NIV 2011
17 Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.

18 Pray for us. We are sure that we have a clear conscience and desire to live honorably in every way.

 17Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.

18Pray for us. We are sure that we have a clear conscience and desire to live honorably in every way.

 17 Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.

18Pray for us. We are sure that we have a clear conscience and desire to live honorably in every way.

Peace!
Scott Stocking

September 2, 2011

HUB: How to Understand Your Bible: Week 1

Filed under: Biblical Studies,New Testament,Old Testament,Psalms — Scott Stocking @ 6:15 pm

Here is a synopsis of what we covered Wednesday night. We had nine people in class. What a great start! I hope you all come back next week.

Week 1 Learning Outcomes: After this week’s lesson, the class member should be able to:

  • Discuss with others what the Bible says about itself by citing key passages;
  • Recall the main reason for reading the Bible;
  • Describe the dual roles of love as they relate to the main reason for reading the Bible; and
  • List the five “big-picture” themes of the overall biblical story.

The following is adapted from Jake Christian’s curriculum

Read the following Scripture passages to prepare for class:

  • Psalm 119
  • 2 Timothy 3, especially verses 14–17
  • Matthew 22:37–40
  • 1 John 2:3–6
  • 1 John 3:16–18
  • Ephesians 4:11–16

The Big Picture:

  • Created for Oneness
  • Otherness Introduced
  • Otherness Expanded
  • Otherness Abated (I modified this from the handout)
  • Redeemed into Oneness

Some questions to consider (no right or wrong answers; just reflection):

  • What words or concepts come to mind when you think about the Bible?
  • What have been your successes in reading and studying the Bible?
  • Where do you want to experience some growth in reading and studying the Bible?
  • What does the Bible say about itself?
  • Who has had the most influence on your understanding of the Bible?

Next Week’s Topic: Introducing the Bible Study Method:

  • Get a Bible
  • Read it.
  • Think about how it applies to your life.

June 19, 2011

“I Am the Door of the Sheep”; “I Am the Good Shepherd” (John 10:7, 11)

Filed under: "I Am" Statements,Biblical Studies,Christology,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament,Old Testament,Psalms,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 8:47 am

Well, the summer solstice is just around the corner, and so is the end of my time reading through the Gospels. I read the first part of the crucifixion story this morning in John 19, and that has some interesting tidbits I may come back to:

  • Barabbas’s name is Aramaic for “Son of the Father,” or more colloquially, “Daddy’s Boy” (בַּר bar ‘son’ + אַבָּא abba ‘father, daddy’, perhaps with definite article); Jesus is the “Son of God [the Father]”: irony at its finest!
  • Three times, Pilate said he could find no charge against Jesus, and he seems to work tirelessly (and with concern for his own integrity) to try to release Jesus, even justifying his innocense to the Jewish leaders and the crowd, to no avail;
  • Jesus tries to ease Pilate’s worries about handing him over to be crucified by telling him, “The one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.” Note that Jesus cannot be accusing the God the Father here, but either Judas or the high priest.

But I digress from my intentions this morning. I want to tackle two more of the “I am” statements of Jesus found within a few verses of each other in chapter 10: “I am the Door of the Sheep” (v. 7) and “I am the good shepherd” (v. 11). The two statements are obviously closely related, but I will deal with each one separately, even though there will be some overlap.

“I Am the Door of the Sheep” (John 10:7)

I’m going to reproduce here my table (Table 1) from an earlier post that shows the connections between the seven “I am” statements of Jesus and the seven signs he performed, with today’s two statements highlighted: (2/13/2012: You can click the “I Am” statement to open the blog post for that statement.)

Table 1: Linking the “I Am” Statements with Jesus’ Miracles

“I Am” Statement

Sign/Miracle
John 6:35: I Am the Bread of Life John 6:1–15: Jesus Feeds the 5000+
John 8:12: I Am the Light of the World John 9:1–12: Jesus Heals a Man Born Blind
John 10:7: I Am the Door of the Sheep John 5:1–15: Healing of the Invalid at Bethesda [Sheep Gate]
*John 10:11: I Am the Good Shepherd John 6:16–24: Jesus Walks on Water
John 11:25: I Am the Resurrection and the Life John 11:38–44: Jesus Raises Lazarus from the Dead
*John 14:6: I Am the Way, the Truth, and the Life John 4:43–54: Healing of the Official’s Son
John 15:1: I Am the True Vine John 2:1–11: Water into Wine

One of the first connections to note out of the gate (pun intended) is that Jesus’ third sign is healing a man at the pool by the Sheep Gate (προβατικῇ probatikē, literally “of the sheep”; the feminine form is elliptical or shorthand because the word for “gate”, which is feminine, is not in the text there) in the walls of Jerusalem (John 5:1–15). This is the city gate through which the sheep entered when being brought to town for the market or the Temple. I will grant that Jesus’ statement, “I am the door of the sheep” (ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ θὑρα τῶν προβάτων egō eimi hē thura tōn probatōn) is more agrarian and rural than it is commercial and political, but the connection is significant nonetheless, because chapter 5 is the only time the Sheep Gate is mentioned in the Gospels. The Sheep Gate is mentioned three times in Nehemiah in connection with rebuilding the wall. It is probably not coincidence, then, that the high priest and his fellow priests had the responsibility to rebuild that section of the wall and rehang the gates (Nehemiah 3:1; cf. Hebrews 4:14, where Jesus is called our “great high priest”).

This “I am” statement has a connection to John 14:6 as well. In John 10:9, Jesus repeats the “I am” statement, this time without the sheep (“I am the door”), and the salvific connection is obvious (TNIV modified to reflect Greek word order): “Through me, whoever enters will be saved.” The phrase “through me” (διʼ ἐμοῦ di’ emou; the emphatic form of the pronoun is used) comes first in 10:9, even before the conjunction, which is a grammatical tool for emphasizing a phrase. The same phrase is found in John 14:6 (“no one comes to the Father except through me“) at the end. (Don’t ask me why, but Greek scholars say that an element of a Greek sentence can be emphasized at the beginning or the ending of a sentence; just one of those quirky things about Greek.) Here’s the beautiful part: normally you might think a prepositional phrase like “through me” should be common enough, right? Want to guess how many times it occurs in John? If you said “twice,” you are exactly right! Because it appears at the beginning of the phrase in 10:9 and at the end of the phrase in 14:6, I would say we have an inclusio here. Was it intentional by John? Perhaps not. Did God have a hand in ordering the text that way? I certainly think so.

Now if we have an inclusio, we need to look at the text in between and see what’s going on. Jesus does make his other statement about being a good shepherd two verses later in 10:11, but two other significant events are bracketed by the “through me” statements. The first is the resurrection of Lazarus from the dead and Jesus’ accompanying “I am the resurrection and the life” statement. More on that in a future post. The other significant event is the Last Supper, in which Jesus washes his disciples’ feet. In 13:8, Jesus makes another statement about his exclusivity as the Savior: after Peter objects to Jesus washing his feet, Jesus replies (my translation, emphasizing the present continuous aspect of the verbs), “Unless I am washing your feet, you are not having any part with me [μετʼ ἐμοῦ met’ emou].” This act of washing the feet is the act of a good shepherd who cares for his sheep, so we now turn to that “I am” statement.

“I Am the Good Shepherd” (John 10:11, 14)

In Table 1 above, I make a tentative link between “I am the good shepherd” (Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός egō eimi ho poimēn ho kalos) and Jesus walking on the water in John 6. Here’s the connection, but again, it is tentative: Only Matthew records that Jesus called Peter to walk on the water (14:28–31); perhaps John doesn’t record this because he doesn’t want to call attention to Peter’s lack of faith in that instance. The connection has its “degrees of separation,” but it’s more than just about feet and water.

Jesus had stayed behind when his disciples set out in the boat in John 6. But when he saw the disciples were having trouble managing the boat in the strong winds, Jesus left whatever shelter he had sought out and walked out onto the raging sea to get to those he loved. He was looking out for his sheep. This reminds of the parable of the wandering sheep in Matthew 18:10–14, only in the walking on the water pericope, the wilderness is the sea itself. I can imagine that even for the son of God, walking on the water was not the safest thing to do, let alone doing it in a storm, yet Jesus says in the latter part of John 10:11: “The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (repeated in vv. 15, 17, 18).

The concept of the good shepherd has its roots in the Old Testament. King David, of course, was a shepherd himself, and Psalm 23 is a popular treatise on how the Lord shepherds us on a daily basis. Ezekiel 34 is an extended treatise on the bad shepherds of Israel, who had led the nation on the path of exile. A few relevant passages from Ezekiel make the connection between Jesus’ “I am the good shepherd” statement and Jesus’ walking on water even more pronounced (all excerpts from the TNIV):

For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. As shepherds look after their scattered flocks when they are with them, so will I look after my sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on a day of clouds and darkness (34:11–12).

As for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I will judge between one sheep and another, and between rams and goats (34:17; note parallel to Matthew 25:32–33).

I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken (34:23–24).

They will live in safety, and no one will make them afraid…. Then they will know that I, the Lord their God, am with them and that they, the house of Israel, are my people, declares the Sovereign Lord. You are my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, and I am your God, declares the Sovereign Lord (34:28b, 30–31)

Live It Out

I find no shortage of irony that the one John called “The Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (1:29b) is also the door (or gate) for the sheep and the good shepherd. Both of these statements emphasize Jesus’ compassion for his flock. He protects us from thieves and bandits who would rob us of our joy. He is a refuge for us in times of storm and disaster. And he is the only one through whom we can be saved and have the promise of eternal life.

In John 21:15, Jesus has an emotional exchange with Peter to restore him to service after his denial. Three times, Jesus asks Peter, “Do you love me?” Twice Jesus uses ἀγαπάω (agapaō) and once φιλέω (phileō), but Peter always responds with φιλέω. I don’t think much can made of the difference in the different words used for “love” as some have, but that’s not my point here. Jesus responds, “Feed my lambs” or “Feed my sheep.” Can we model the shepherding of the Savior? Some days it’s easier than others, but if Peter was forgiven for his triple-denial and went on to be instrumental in commencing the church, what great things can we do for God?

I had a stormy period this past month. Last month would have been my 19th anniversary with my (now ex-)wife, and I found myself craving the intimacy I once had with her. It was a struggle to get through that, but God, who is never unfaithful, continued to be faithful to me as I worked through my issues. I’ve come out on the other side now, but as much as I know I’m forgiven for the past, I still find that it haunts me at times. I need to trust that my shepherd is watching out for me in those times when I wander into the wilderness and know that as I “bleat” for his presence, protection, and love, he will hear me and come running to me to give me the only comfort that matters.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.