Exodus (Word Biblical Themes) 9780310115014, 9780849907937, 0310115019

Citation preview

General Editor

David A. Hubbard Old Testament Editor

John D. W. Watts New Testament Editor

Ralph P. Martin

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES Exodus JOHN DURHAM

ZONDERVAN ACADEM IC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC Exodus Copyright © 1990 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11501-4 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Durham, John I. Exodus: John I. Durham. p.  cm. Includes bibliographical references and index [if applicable]. ISBN 978-0-849-90793-7 1. Bible. O.T. Exodus—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II. Series. BS1245.2.D87 1990 222’.1206—dc20090-37368 Unless otherwise indicated, quotations from the Bible in this volume are the author’s own translation. Those from the book of Exodus are from the author’s volume, Word Biblical Commentary/Exodus, vol. 3. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

In grateful memory of John Isaac and Lula Frances Durham and in glad appreciation of Doc and DeDa Bailey, Parentes O m nes

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface 1. T he Them e of Exodus: G od Is, H ere 2. T he Sequence o f Story G od keeping his promise G od revealing his Presence G od proving his Presence G od providing and guiding by his Presence G od presenting his Presence Israel responding to G od’s Presence G od setttles down in Israel’s m idst 3. T he Sequence of Requirem ent How the requirem ents are applied to life Yahweh’s principles for covenant life w ith his Presence T he application o f Yahweh’s principles Yahweh’s restatem ent o f his principles 4. T he Sequence o f M emory Two lists of special names Contents

ix xi 1 9 12 18 29 46 56 66 79 81 84 86 89 93 97 100 vii

Two rituals of remembrance Three hymns of remembrance T he places, the objects, the persons, the acts of remembrance Notes Selected Bibliography Index of Scriptures

viii

104 108 112 123 127 129

EXODUS

FOREWORD

Finding the great themes of the books of the Bible is essential to the study of G od’s W ord and to the preaching and teaching of its truths. These themes and ideas are often like precious gems: they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered w ith some difficulty. Commentaries are m ost useful to this discovery process, b u t they are n o t usually designed to help the reader to trace im portant subjects systematically w ithin a given book of Scripture. This series, Quick-Reference Bible Topics, addresses this need by bringing together, w ithin a few pages, all of w hat is contained in a biblical book on the subjects that are thought to be most significant to that book. A companion series to the W ord Biblical Commentary, this series distills the theo­ logical essence of a book of Scripture as interpreted in the more technical series and serves it up in ways th at will en­ rich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship of G od’s people. Exodus is an exciting, eventful book. John D urham ’s commentary on Exodus in the W ord Biblical Commentary Foreword

ix

series (vol. 3) showed how the presence o f G od w ith his people is a major concern o f the book of Exodus. Now he has moved beyond th at to w rite about this and other fea­ tures that make Exodus the im portant book th at it is. T he preacher and the teacher, as well as earnest Bible students, will find insights here th at will make reading, teaching, and preaching texts from Exodus easier and more meaningful. This can help make the W ord of G od “come alive.” Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky

x

John D.W. W atts O ld Testament Editor Word Biblical Commentary Quick-Reference Bible Topics

EXODUS

PREFACE

T he com pletion in 1984 o f my W ord Biblical Com m en­ tary on Exodus, despite its bulk, left me still w ith things I w anted to say about this soaring second book in the Bible th at is in them atic term s so fully the first book of the Bible. I felt myself w anting to provide, in a m ore compact form, a survey o f the varied expressions o f the central theological them e of the book o f Exodus, the Presence o f G od in th e life o f his own people. I was also eager to share, in a brief and nontechnical presentation, a summary o f the seven years o f w ork presented in the translation, supporting notes, and commentary of th at W BC Exodus. John W atts’s invitation in May of 1988 to prepare this volume gave me the opportunity to do precisely th a t (In these pages, w hen the W ord Biblical Commentary volume is referred to, it will be identified as W BC 3— W ord Biblical Commentary, Volume 3.) As always, there are many to whom a debt of gratitude, far surpassing courtesy, m ust be extended. First and foremost, I must express my appreciation to, as well as for, my wife Betty, who was a partner in this writing as she is in every dimension Preface

xi

of my life. Hers is a lovely companionship of nurture that engages every day of life as a gift that is brand-new. To my caring congregation, the Greenwich Baptist C hurch, I am grateful for a measure o f affirmation and tru st that keeps me wanting to say and teach more this week than last week. A nd to my secretary M rs. M arian Lein who typed all this from my penciled scribble while fulfilling a wide range of additional duties, I here record my thanks. I have sought to provide, in the pages that follow, enough references to the text o f Exodus to enable the reader to “keep the place”— my suggestion is that the biblical text be kept in one hand as this volume is read in the other hand. I have w ritten in the hope that the reader might be guided in reading w ith understanding the text of Exodus, for which neither this book nor any other can ever be any substitute. W hen Moses protested to Yahweh his limitations of articularity in the face of w hat he was expected to do in Egypt, Yahweh rem inded him, “W ho p ut a m outh on a man? W ho makes him m ute or deaf or able to see or blind? Is it n ot I, Yahweh? Now get going. . . . ”

(Exod4:ll, 12a) I believe I know how Moses felt before this rem inder. I know how he felt after it. John I Durham June 1989 Greenwich, Connecticut

xii

EXODUS

1 THE THEME OF EXODUS: GOD IS, HERE

The book of Exodus begins in the book o f Genesis. T here it is that Israel and his sons, faced w ith famine, travel dow n from Canaanland to the Delta of Egypt, where the good management of one of their own has created a surplus food bank. They journey w ithout knowing th at it is Joseph who will be their benefactor, w ithout awareness th at G od has gone to Egypt before them all. Joseph knows, and in due course he says to his brothers, “You did not send me here, it was G od” (Gen 45:8), and “you had in m ind harm ing me— G od had in m ind something good” (Gen 50:20). To Joseph, the dreamer, the incredible history of his life in Egypt am ounted to more than fortunate coincidence. G od had sent him ahead of the brothers as a means of snatching life from death (Gen 45:5), to preserve his people of purpose (Gen 45:7) for an undertaking o f a proportion too vast for even Joseph to have dream t T he scope of that undertaking is suggested in the call o f A bra­ ham (Gen 12:1-3). Its need is dramatized in th e primeval The Theme of Exodus

1

history o f Genesis 1-11 and powerfully presented by the open ending of the Babel story th at concludes it (Gen 11:1— 9). Its reason lies in G od’s patient passion for the hum an family he has made. Its end lies beyond anything Joseph, o r even we ourselves, can have thought, and it will be in proc­ ess as long as the hum an family continues its exciting and creative existence. So it is th at the book of Exodus continues the narrative o f the book o f Genesis by telling us w hat has occurred since Joseph expressed the wish, on his deathbed, th at he be in­ cluded in the trip back from Egypt to the land prom ised to his fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This return trip is simply assumed by Joseph as inevitable (Gen 50:22-26). T he opening lines of the book of Exodus rem ind us, by repeating in summary form the genealogy of Genesis 46:8-27, th at the story is now being continued. They refer also to the transi­ tion made inevitable by mortality, and report th e fulfillm ent o f G od’s promise o f progeny making equally needful his parallel promise of land. Such a continuation is remarkable enough as the story o f a particular people, w hich it clearly is. Yet it is even m ore remarkable as a story o f every people w ho suffer oppression and pain and the need o f rescue. They are Israel, and so our ancestors in faith, these sons so carefully named. T heir sur­ vival is at stake, we are soon to learn, in the narrative o f the Pharaoh’s attem pt to manage them . B ut if we recall th e uni­ versal beginning to the story so obviously being continued here, we have to recognize that these “seventy souls” are also us. As the poet o f Deuteronom y 32:8 sings it, “In the Supreme G od’s legacy to the nations, in H is division o f the sons of hum ankind, H e established the limits of the peoples correspondent to the counting o f the Sons of Israel.”

2

EXODUS

This remarkable statem ent, too often and incorrectly em ended by translators and commentators at least from the tim e of the Septuagint, is entirely consonant w ith the ancien t gazetteer o f Genesis 10, w hich lists seventy nations as descendent from Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the three sons o f Noah. T he nations before Israel are counted as seventy, and here in Exodus, the book of Israel's birth, the nation of Israel is also counted, at its very foundation, as seventy.1 T hus the book o f Exodus may be seen as a beginning begun already in the Book o f Beginning, Genesis, and at the same time itself the beginning o f a story th at is even yet a long way from its end. For the book o f Exodus is th e begin­ ning o f th e O ld Testament, and therefore o f the Bible; it is the account o f the beginning o f the nation o f Israel, and therefore the account of th e beginning o f the kingdom o f G od— and the first confession o f a coming of G od th at we Christians have come to call Incarnation. T here is an extensive range of literary form in the book o f Exodus, from prose to poetry, from story to specification, from prayer to proclamation, from commandment to covenant formulary, from building plans to protocols o f social behavior, from miracle-narratives to revelations o f mystery, from etiology to ritual, from the characterization o f hum ans to the description o f the Divine. However, every sentence o f it, even every syllable o f it, has an incredibly unified theolog­ ical purpose, a purpose th at melds the m ost disparate com­ ponents imaginable into a single, glorious whole, pulsating w ith a single confession. This confession is made in every way imaginable: stated, th en restated, declared, described, illustrated, symbolized, set fo rth in m etaphor, in ritual, in story, in requirem ent, in architecture, in dialogue, in geographic term s, in promises, in disobedience and its consequences, in appearances and disappearances, in epiphany so awe-filling as to inspire flight

The Theme of Exodus

3

and yet cause frozen immobility. Forty chapters of an almost infinite variety, the book of Exodus still has b u t a single end, and is just a series of variations on a single, simple theme. Every w ord of the forty chapters in some way serves that single, simple theme. A ll th at is superfluous of it, or ancillary to it, has long since been w orn away. T he book of Exodus is the farthest thing from a literary unity, a fact which every honest reader of its text has noticed since early in the C hristian era, at least O ne of the m ost fascinating aspects of the book is the way it tumbles over itself in its rush to declare its incredible good news, the m anner in which it has been stretched apart here and there to make way for yet other sequences setting forth its p o in t This literary diversity, indeed, has presented such a mare’s nest to the source-form-tradition-redaction-canon critics that no tw o of them have proposed the same apportionm ent, or a common pedigree, for the theoretical pericopae of the book of Exodus. Yet this complex collection o f different-shaped and different-sounding literary pieces has been woven into one unvaried theological assertion, and the exposition o f that assertion forms the insistent purpose o f the book. T hat as­ sertion, summed up in its simplest statem ent in the special covenant name of God, Yahweh (a name defined in the O ld Testament only in this book) may be stated succinctly: G od is here, or better still, G od is, here. T he story of the book of Exodus is a story of G od’s Presence. Every tu rn of its ongoing narrative is a part o f a cumulative confession of the palpable reality of His Near­ ness. The covenantal formulary of the book of Exodus is a response to G od’s Presence. Every general and particular requirem ent of its life-shaping obligation is a part of a stud­ ied response to the astonishing revelation that he has come to be w ith his people. T he liturgical expectation o f the book of Exodus is a rem inder of G od’s Presence. Every w ord and 4

EXODUS

every action of its ritual ceremony is a protocol o f memory designed to keep Israel aware that he is always and immedi­ ately at hand. The architectural-implemental symbolism of the book of Exodus is a pictographic representation of G od’s Presence. Every material and each dimension of the Taber­ nacle, the furnishings w ithin it and the space and the altar before it, are a prom pting of sensory perception to the con­ tinuing signal, “H e is here. He is, here.” Thus the book of Exodus is, in a remarkably singular way, a one-theme book of the Bible, a book that focuses a spectrum of theological confession, implication, and symbolism in the presentation of a single assertion of faith. Given the book’s composite nature in literary source and form alone— not to m ention its diverse liturgical, legal, and political interests— this uniform ity of theological emphasis is almost incredible. Almost incredible, however, only until one remembers what the theological emphasis is. For the confession that G od has come, and is here, is nothing less than the subject of the Bible, both O ld Testament and New Testament alike. In a way, the book of Exodus anticipates all the rest of the Bible. A nd in a way, the book of Exodus may be taken as a symbol, perhaps even an anticipatory summary, of the major emphasis of the entire Bible. I have sought elsewhere, in the W ord Biblical Commen­ tary Exodus, 1987, (henceforth called W BC 3) to dem onstrate in detail how this is true. There,2 I have suggested that the whole of the book of Exodus can be seen as an expression of “the theology o f Yahweh present w ith and in the m idst of his people Israel,” a theme attested to by the narratives of Israel’s rescue and by the provisions for Israel’s response. N one of this is to suggest th at the book of Exodus is n o t a complex tangle o f traditions derived from the theologicalliterary legacy o f many years and many contexts of need in many places. A cursory reading o f the text o f Exodus, even in English translation, is sufficient to establish th at much, The Theme of Exodus

5

and the history of the literary-critical analysis of Exodus from the last quarter of the nineteenth century forward is a cumulative presentation of ever-smaller and more diverse pieces. A nd yet we have the book in forty chapters that fairly cry out to be considered as a whole. W hatever we may notice in the way of repetition or inconsistency in these chapters, and however obvious may be the seams stitching the chapters together, the book of Exodus has a canonical form, a form in w hich it has been transm itted through the centuries, a form given it by theological literati whose interest was the confes­ sion of faith. T he dissection of the book into its proposed sources and contexts of expression has contributed to our understanding of the book as it came into being. B ut of equal im portance, at least, is the book of Exodus in the only form about which we can be absolutely certain, the form in which we have received it as one part of the text of the Bible. T he assem­ bled book has an integrity all its own, different from the sources upon which it is dependent. It sets forth a message and an emphasis that none o f those sources, insofar as we can recover them , can be seen to have presented. T hat mes­ sage and that emphasis are theological. They confess the Presence of G od and give the evidence for the confession, as well as its implications for Israel’s life in faith. The subject of this slim volume is this confession, in all the forms in which the book of Exodus presents it. I regard the book of Exodus as the book th at gives the prim ary pre­ sentation of the them e of the Bible, the book, therefore, that influences the shape of the Bible as no other one book does, the book that may thus be considered, in a way, the begin­ ning of the Bible. I have attem pted in the chapters that follow to survey the book’s presentation of this them e by summarizing and discussing as three separate blocks of mate­ rial the three obvious layers of Exodus in its biblical form: a 6

EXODUS

story layer, a requirem ent layer, and a layer concerned w ith making the story real and the requirem ents urgent to each new generation— a memory layer. I have entitled these layers “sequences,” both to suggest the single purpose of material we see in separate places in the canonical form o f Exodus and also to emphasize th at the layers, while separate in subject, are presentations o f one theme. Each o f the layers is dictated by, and is an expression of, the one them e, Presence of God, and each of them has been considered in the sequence o f their logical developm ent. Event precedes report (story), report becomes the basis o f expectation (requirement), and repetition (memory) keeps both event and its report current and real. In the presentation th at follows, textual questions and problems of translation, source- and form -literary proposals, the reconstruction of historical circumstances, the compara­ tive evaluation of commentary and monograph theory are om itted as outside the concern of this focused survey o f the them e of Exodus and its varied expressions. These m atters have been treated repeatedly and in detail elsewhere, by myself and by many others. W hether any o f these treat­ m ents are even minimally adequate remains to be dem on­ strated, probably in discussion w ith Moses, Joshua, and A aron in some context of existence yet to come. I regard them all as im portant, as the W ord Biblical Com m entary Exodus will show, b u t they are outside the purview o f the present survey of themes. T he story sequence of the book of Exodus, as the prim ary and narrative presentation of its them e, has been considered first. T hat story, the story of G od’s Presence w ith his people Israel, is related in Exodus 1:8-6:13; 6:28-11:10; 12:21— 50; 13:17-14:31; 15:19-18:12; 19:1-20:21; 24:1-18; 32:1-34:9, 29-35; 40:34-38. In th e canonical form o f the book o f Exodus, this story has been pulled apart at appropriate points to allow the insertion o f material having to do w ith The Theme of Exodus

7

requirem ents posed by the reality of G od’s Presence and w ith the remembrance of that reality to the generations beyond the story, those for whom the past m ust become present if a requirem ent is to be taken seriously. T he in­ serted passages of requirem ent— 18:13-27; 20:1—17; 20:2223:33; 34:10-28— have been considered the second se­ quence, and the inserted passages of remembrance— 1:1-7; 6:14-27; 12:1-20; 13:1-16; 15:1-18; 25:1-31:18; 35:140:33—have been considered the th ird sequence, though the requirem ent and remembrance sequences often blend in reciprocal concern. Thus I have attem pted to deal w ith the them e of the book of Exodus, and the them es th at them e has stimulated in a quite thematic way, w ith the them e and its subthemes dictat­ ing the sequence o f treatm ent This is not a theory o f the sequence of composition o f th e book of Exodus, though it may suggest hints in such a direction. It is rather an attem pt to take the them e and its subthemes as they are, in a narra­ tive w ith defining addenda that have been a guidance to a great many believers across at least tw o dozen centuries. I confess at the onset th at I am one of them , and I find great honor in belonging to a process of belief at the beginning of which stands the towering b u t stammering figure of Moses, son o f the Levite Amram and his wife Jochebed.

8

EXODUS

2 THE SEQUENCE OF STORY

T he place of story in hum an experience has yet to be appreciated adequately, except by young children, for whom the nourishing connection betw een imagination and experience remains unbroken. T he young, of whatever chronolog­ ical age, accept imagination and reality as one. T he word fantasy is a grown-up invention designed to cover the em­ barrassment produced by a loss of the gift for dreaming. A nd the use of “story” as a euphemism for “lie” is a serious adult miscalculation, n o t least since one of the more eager re­ quests children make of adults is, “Tell me a story.” Story is im portant to each of us, and at every level of our existence. We each have a story, and a thick cord of a story made up of many stories. W hat and who we are at any given point in the time-line of our living is an amalgam of event, influence, and response; and our recollection and recounting of that amalgam is a story that is part af c t, part perception, and all truth. Event is followed immediately by memory. Thus is begun a process of selection that preserves, in accord w ith a complex variety of influences, only w hat is o f first The Sequence of Story

9

importance to the one w ho remembers and reports the remembrance. W hen this process o f recounting moves from an individ­ ual to a community level, the major difference in the process is the function of many memories and the addition of more controlling influences. A nd th e end of the process, insofar as it ever has an end, is in this case both more universal and m ore refined. T he Bible is a product o f such a process, and the initial event and memory at its foundation is the event and memory of the Exodus. N orthrop Frye has made the provocative suggestion that “as the Exodus is the definitive deliverance and the type of all the rest [of “the rises and restorations”], we may say that mythically the Exodus is th e only thing that really happens in th e O ld Testament.”1W hile such a statem ent may seem at first to be an excessive oversimplification, I w ould suggest th at we may go beyond it, as Frye proceeds to do,2 though he follows a somewhat different path. T he Exodus is n o t “the only thing that really happens in th e O ld Testament,” even in m ythopoeic term s—b u t it is the event which, along w ith its recollection and recounting, shapes n o t just the O ld Testament b u t the entire Bible. W hile this point has been accepted along them atic lines, and in reference to specific biblical books for some tim e,3 it is now being given broader application along literary, theologi­ cal, and even sociological lines.4 T he story retold in th e narrative sequence o f th e book o f Exodus is n o t only a real story, it is my story as a C hris­ tian, and th e “my story” o f Jews and, in a very different way, th e “my story” o f oppressed and yearning people o f m any tim es and in many places.5 Its reach into o u r lives is guaranteed first o f all by o u r ow n deep need: We w ant the G od w ho came th en to come now, and we need th e Pres­ ence th a t settled am ongst Israel at Sinai to settle am ongst us now. T here is a sensation th a t somehow we are reading 10

EXODUS

autobiography w hen we read th e Exodus story believingly, a feeling o f déjá vu, an aura o f expectancy. T he barriers o f tim e and distance fall away, and we are somehow there, o r there is somehow here, because th e story o f G od’s coming and th e response o f th e sons (and daughters) o f Israel is n o t only th e story o f th e Bible— it is th e story o f every hum an being. T hink then, as you read the following summary o f the sequence of story in the book o f Exodus, th at you are read­ ing a diary you once kept, or th at you are hearing a remem­ brance o f your ow n pilgrimage of struggle from oppression to freedom. Each one of us has an Egypt, a wilderness, and a promised land; and each one o f us is on a journey from the fragm entation of our own special enslavements to the wholeness o f the place where we can be absolutely free, in G od’s Presence. We do n o t have to travel to the Nile D elta o r to the Sinai D esert to be in those places of the soul, and we are not bound in our own story by the constraints o f any time. T he sequence o f story in th e book o f Exodus is perm e­ ated w ith w hat H arold Bloom has called “the uncanny,”6 the reach from the past that bum s like a laser through the layers o f repression and pretense and self-assurance to pull us up short, to confront us w ith the reality that is timeless because it is the single, ultim ate reality of hum an existence: God. It is by no means fortuitous th at G od is revealed in the story o f Exodus as YHW H, “the One W ho Always Is.”7 It is a logically sequential emphasis th at reminds Israel at the far end o f the O ld Testament story, in a program for th e revival o f the covenant-faith th at returned to the story o f the Exodus, “H ear, Israel: Y H W H is our God, Y H W H [who is] O ne” (Deut 6:4). Is it any w onder th at Jesus, according to the Gospel of M ark (12:29), should begin his recitation o f the first o f all the commandments w ith this confession, o r that the first theologian o f the C hristian faith should w rite rapturously to the C hurch at Ephesus o f “one body and one The Sequence of Story

11

Spirit, . . . one hope . . . , one Lord, one faith, one bap­ tism, one G od and Father of us all, the one before all and through all and in all” (Eph 4:4-6). As our G od is O ne, so also our story is one. W hatever its forms, its images, its details o f time and place, its language and its syntax, its simplicity or its sophistication, its breadth or its lim itation of exposure, its familiarity or its exclusivity, our story is one story. A nd finally, it has but tw o characters. Ultimately, it will have b u t O ne. God keeping his promise T he beginning of the sequence of story in the book o f Exodus is determ ined in one way by the ending o f the se­ quence of story in the book of Genesis. There the family who by G od’s own covenant-promise belongs in the fair and fecund land o f Canaan is instead, if by reason of necessity, in the delta land of Egypt They have come there from hunger, and they have found a hospitable sanctuary in a context o f favorable disposition. They do n o t belong there, however, and the very first sentence of the Exodus story gives us notice of th e move­ m ent o f the winds o f change. A new Pharaoh has come to the seat of power, and while our interest is fixed on th e identity of this unnam ed king, th e interest o f the narrator of the story is fixed on a far more crucial point: This leader has no experience o f Joseph and thus no disposition o f favor tow ard Joseph’s family. T hat family, we have been rem inded by th e first sequence o f m emory in the book o f Exodus (1:1-7, see pp. 100-102), has been growing rapidly from its beginning in Jacob’s twelve sons— so rapidly, in fact, th at they have become “a teem ing swarm.” T hat very language is norm ally used to refer to great shoals off i sh (Gen 1:21; Ezek 47:9), infestations o f small rodents and reptiles (Lev 11:29-30), and even the flood o f frogs th at 12

EXODUS

inundates the Pharaoh, his court, and his country in the second o f the proving mighty acts (Exod 8:1-15). T he first sequence of memory thus provides a bridge full of prospect, from the promise of G od to the Fathers in faith to the fulfillm ent of that promise in the destiny of their de­ scendants. These are the called-out Fathers, and their descen­ dants are the election family, and their story is the beginning o f the salvation history, the account of God’s making a way back for the hum an family in rebellion. G od’s promise to the Fathers was twofold: a numberless progeny and an expansive land (Gen 12:1-2; 15:5, 18-21; 17:3-8). Exodus 1:1-7 leans backward toward the first part of that promise by naming the twelve fathers who represent the foundation of its fulfillm ent and by reporting the amazing proliferation o f their offspring. We are thus prepared for the necessary next step, the provi­ sion of the land G od has promised. As always (see pp. 97100), the sequence of memory has a theological purpose— a point we m ust not allow our concern for demography or historical identification to obscure. Thus are we reminded, at the very outset o f the Exodus story, that w hat is happening in the Egyptian Delta is o f God. The listing of Jacob’s sons, the report of the rapid growth of their families, the allusion to th e form er favor Joseph enjoyed— all these describe the unfolding process o f election, and prepare us for the story to come. G od is placed at the center of events in Egypt indirectly, w ithout being m entioned even once. A nd the grand schemes of the Pharaoh o f Egypt to control and to lim it this people o f Israel are know n to us for w hat they are: a futile waste o f energy and time. It is a beginning like the beginning of Genesis 22 or the book of Job or the Passion narratives of the Gospels: we know how the terrible story will come out, and thus it holds for us no horror, only hope. This hope is enhanced by th e rem arkable tension o f the blessing o f G od’s m ultiplication o f Israel (the positive The Sequence o f Story

13

fulfillm ent o f p art one o f his covenant-promise) w ith th e awful oppression this blessing provokes. This positive, w ithout the constraint o f Joseph’s high position, con­ tributes to a horrendous negative. T he m ore num erous Israel becomes, th e nearer they are to the fulfillment o f th e second p art o f G od’s covenant-prom ise— b u t th e m ore nu ­ merous they become, the greater is the new Pharaoh’s fear o f them as a threat, and the m ore draconian, therefore, are his measures o f control and containment. There is a subtle psychology at w ork in this narrative: the good which G od does for Israel increases the harm at­ tem pted toward them by Pharaoh. T he dramatic multiplica­ tion of their num ber brings closer the time w hen they will be able to manage and defend a land all their own; b u t it also makes their Egyptian neighbors ever more fearful o f them and thus ever less hospitable tow ard them . T he rapid expan­ sion of their num ber makes their need of their ow n place more and more urgent, but it also seems to make their going to such a place less and less possible as the Pharaoh piles restriction onto requirem ent. O f course this tension is n o t coincidence— it is a narra­ tive in medias res, into w hich we are drawn by both empathy and theology. Though G od is m entioned in the book of Exodus for the first time in its seventeenth verse, and then only in connection w ith the reverence o f the midwives, his Presence is implicit from the opening, “A nd these are the names” of 1:1. H e is the determ inant force behind all th at is taking place, including the increasing recalcitrance o f the Pharaoh himself. We are in the hands of a brilliant theo­ logian who is also a m aster storyteller. H e has woven the traditions available to him into a fabric so engaging th at it virtually makes his points by induction. Even the names he gives us are all laden w ith meaning, from Reuben, “Behold, a son!” to Joseph, “Increasing O ne.” Even “Fair O ne” and “Fragrant O ne,” the tw o believing and therefore blessed 14

EXODUS

midwives, are a part o f th e cumulative lesson, which is de­ clared betw een the lines: “G od is, here.” T he electing, calling G od of the Fathers has n o t relaxed his attention upon his people, n o t even for a m om ent Thus while the Pharaoh is attem pting to wear the Israelites down, body and spirit, by unrem itting hard labor, and to bring into check their high rate of healthy births by genocide, at first in secret and then as public policy, the G od w ho Is, and who is here, is at w ork to set into m otion step one of the fulfillm ent of the second half of his covenant-promise. C oincident w ith these events, a m an o f the family o f Levi had taken to wife a young woman w ho was also Levite. T he wife became pregnant and gave b irth to a son. (2:1-2) This son, w ho is given the Egyptian name Moses, “boychild,” the Hebrew yeled o r our own English “lad” or “kid,” is the beginning of G od’s move to bring Israel to him self and to the land he promised to their Fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. By a w onderfully w itty piece o f table-turning, this Hebrew boy-child throw n into the Nile as the Pharaoh has commanded, protected by the provision o f a w aterproof container, is rescued by the daughter of the Pharaoh w ho desires him dead, the father of the next king o f Egypt, for whom the boy-child, in m anhood, will become a nemesis. Then, to add ridicule onto joke, the boy’s ow n m other is p u t on the payroll o f the Pharaoh as wet-nurse-in-residence! It is as delicious a piece o f wool-pulling as one m ight wish for, and there can be no doubt at all by whose design all these events transpire. From the narrative of the faith o f the midwives (1:17-21) to the corporate cry o f oppressed Israel w hen this Pharaoh dies (2:23-25), there is no direct m ention o f G od in this narrative; b u t we never once can have even the slightest doubt about the reality o f his electing Presence. The Sequence of Story

15

By the engaging compactness of biblical narrative, Moses is taken from infancy to manhood. We are given no relief by digression. The account is moved steadily and suspensefully forward, w ithout one wasted word. Moses’ fatal blow against an Egyptian abusing a Hebrew reveals th at he has n o t been compromised by his adoptive Egyptian family. But the result of this action is that he is ostracized by both his adoptive nation and by his biological family. To the Egyptians, he has become a m urderous criminal. To the Israelites, he has be­ come a liability, bringing them small advantage b u t trem en­ dous risk. He is left w ith litde choice, and his flight to Midian shows that his m other has given him more than milk: Midian is where the other branch of the family, the Hagar-IshmaelKeturah-Esau descendancy, is know n to have a nomadic resi­ dence (see pp. 51-53). Midian is for Moses a strange new land, but also an old familiar land. The other side of the family of his Fathers is there. But much more im portant, the God of his Father is there, and is worshiped there. Moses’ arrival in Mid­ ian, and his surprising reception there, are further evidence of the providence of the calling, electing God. This point is made dramatically by w hat happens next, and by Moses’ own summary interpretation of these events. H e meets the seven daughters of a priest of M idian whose name is “Companion of G od,” and w ho is a priest who worships YHW H (Exod 18:10-11). Moses defends these girls against the bullying herdsm en who habitually delay their watering o f their father’s flock, thus endearing him self to these sisters, to one of them particularly, and to their father. In another flash of compact narrative, Moses settles down w ith the M idianite priest and becomes a husband and then a father. Following this event, Moses offers his under­ standing of all that has happened to him. H e names his new son “Stranger T here,” explaining, “a stranger have I been in a land foreign to me” (Exod 2:22). 16

EXODUS

Moses, belonging neither to the Egyptians in Egypt nor to his own people in oppressive bondage there, has come at last to a place of belonging. He has a wife in Midian, a son, sisters-in-law, and a father-in-law, at least For the first time in his life, he has a home. In Egypt, he was a sojourner, a tourist, a foreigner. In M idian, he is a resident, a native son, one member o f an accepting family. A nd we are struck by the steady unfolding of God’s providential arrangements for the people of his purpose. B ut Moses’ people in Egypt are still strangers in a land that is foreign to them . T heir fathers, and his, w ent there for a temporary stay in the time of Joseph. As his stay there has come to an end, so must theirs. And, deftly, that is the direc­ tion which this brilliant narrative now takes. “Now while these many days were passing,” says th e storyteller, yet another point o f turning was reached, and passed, in Egypt T he Pharaoh of Moses’ birth, early man­ hood, and criminal flight died. As has always been the case, in every nation ruled by power, this death m eant transition, and those whose lot was bad hoped for some change for the better. For the very first tim e in the sequence of story in Exodus, th e sons o f Israel cry out for help to G od (2:23), hoping for some relief, some slight improvement o f their difficult circumstances. This is graphically suggested in this summary verse by the use twice of the w ord ‘avodah, “agonized labor,” by the verb and the noun for “groaning,” and by tw o separate verbs for “cry out in need.” “A nd so of course G od heard”— he always hears the earnest cry of his people if it is honest— and hearing, he remembered the covenant-promise to the Fathers, w ho are named, to make unmistakably clear w hat is now to take place. The sequence of story is begun w ith a report of change, a change that makes the fulfillm ent of the first part of G od’s covenant-promise more a liability than an asset. A nd so this prologue to its main sequence is ended w ith a The Sequence of Story

17

report o f yet another change, one th at is to make their life in Egypt harder still. Similarly, the first sequence o f memory begins the book of Exodus w ith a listing o f “the names of the sons of Israel,” a looking back to the covenant-promise and a looking forw ard to its fulfillm ent. A nd it is echoed at both the begin­ ning of the prologue to the sequence of story (“the people o f th e sons of Israel,” the Pharaoh calls them , 1:9) and here at its conclusion (“the sons o f Israel,” 2:23, and the “covenant w ith Abraham, w ith Isaac, and w ith Jacob,” 2:24). T he whole th ru st of this introductory prologue to the sequence of story, then, is G od keeping his promise to his election-people— to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to Jacob’s twelve sons, and now to the rapidly multiplying families o f these sons. T he first part o f the promise has come to suffi­ cient fulfillm ent to require the beginning o f the fulfillm ent o f the second part. G od has remembered. Indeed, he has never forgotten. W hat he has done in the past guarantees w hat he will do in the future. T he plight of the present is to be short-lived. G od knows the suffering o f Israel, “by expe­ rience” (2:25), and he has already been at w ork for them , long before their cry for help. G od revealing h is P resen ce T he hero of the sequence o f story in the book of Exodus, as indeed in the book of Exodus as a whole, is God. As we have seen, though G od is m entioned at only tw o points in th e first tw o chapters (and at that in b u t six o f the fortyseven verses making up those tw o chapters) his promise and therefore his activity are implicit in every line o f th at pro­ logue. T he story moves next to G od’s revelation of his Pres­ ence to Moses, a sudden and dramatic announcem ent th at he has been at hand all along. It is as if Moses turns a com er in the desolate wilderness of Sinai and finds G od awaiting 18

EXODUS

him there. T he surprise, from the reader’s point of view, is th at Moses was surprised. B ut then those o f us w ho could be expected most of all to know are often the ones w ho are m ost of all surprised by G od’s self-revelation. This narrative has frequently been called the account of the call of Moses. Obviously, it includes the report o f th at call experience, b u t this is a narrative about God, n o t Moses. Moses here is the representative recipient o f G od’s self-revelation. H is call experience is a response to this reve­ lation of G od’s Presence. Even his protests at his call are a carefully framed opportunity for us to be told m ore about G od’s adequacy than about Moses’ inadequacies. Moses is a medium of the message o f the revelation, b u t he is by no means the sole object o f i t So also is Israel to be, at the climax o f the story sequence o f Exodus, a medium o f a message of revelation. G od’s revelation o f his Presence be­ gins w ith Moses and w ith Israel; b u t it does n o t in any sense end w ith them . Thus does every feature of the story drive tow ard a single purpose, the purpose of establishing th at G od is, and is here. Everything superfluous to th at purpose has either been om itted or in some way bent tow ard its service. This concentration of the sequence o f story in Exodus is obvious as long as the narrative is read o r heard as a whole, as it was intended to be. T he biblical scholarship o f the century following 1875, invaluable though many o f its con­ tributions certainly are, has trained our eyes to look too much on the supposed pieces o f the narratives o f the Bible and n o t enough on the narratives as a whole. We have too often treated the sequences o f story in the Bible in a way which would seem to us utterly absurd were we to try it on the sequences of story o f Dickens or Tolstoy or Hugo or M ann. We m ust n o t neglect w hat R obert A lter has called th e “composite artistry” o f the biblical narratives8 if we are to understand the real subject and purpose o f these stories. The Sequence of Story

19

O f no sequence o f story in the O ld Testament is this more true than it is o f the sequence of the story of G od’s selfrevelation in Exodus. Deep in the wilderness around M ount H oreb (“Desolate Waste”), while attending his family’s flock, Moses experi­ ences a theophany. It is im portant th at we keep in m ind th at this report follows immediately upon the statem ent that G od has heard the m ultiplied cries o f Israel in Egypt, has seen them , and knows by experience their suffering. His purpose in Israel has been under way since Abraham. H is promise to Abraham and his election of Abraham’s deseendancy is coming rapidly to fulfillm ent. W ithin the cruci­ ble of Israel’s oppression, he has molded a deliverer, and even as their cry for help comes to a crescendo, G od reveals both his Presence and his intention to Moses. The flaming thornbush that attracts Moses’ attention is of course a theophanic symbol. T he storyteller describes it as the appearance o f a mal'akh, “the messenger of YHW H in a blaze of fire from the middle o f a thom bush.” W hat Moses sees is the form, apparently, o f the thornbush, for w hat draws him toward this sight is the fact that despite the fire, the thornbush retains its form: “the thornbush, envel­ oped in the flame, was still the thom bush— none of it was destroyed!” This strange fire is the fire of guidance in the wilderness (Exod 13:21-22), the fire of Sinai (Exod 19:18; D eut 4:12,15,33), the fire o f the flaming sword constantly turning in every direction and guarding th e way to the tree of life (Gen 3:24). N orthrop Frye has called it “the fire of life,”9 and Samuel Terrien has described it as “a symbol of prom pt becoming,” that “does n o t consume its own fuel and survives its own death” and “suggests the slow and sus­ tained becoming of historical transform ation.”10 As poetic as these elegant and somewhat abstract de­ scriptions are, the Exodus narrative is far m ore direct: T he th o rnbush all aflame b u t unconsum ed is the visible symbol 20

EXODUS

o f the Presence of God, an "unusual sight” th at attracts Moses’ attention. O nce he approaches the bush for a closer look, the sight of a symbol is displaced by th e sound o f G od’s voice. As always in the O ld Testament, the visual dimension of the Presence o f God is deemphasized, and the audible dimen­ sion is given primacy. The self-revelation of G od is deliber­ ately non-iconic, deliberately conceptual, and focused on specific, action-oriented event This is precisely the reason why all accounts of God’s appearances throughout the O ld Testament are only vaguely visual, involving obviously everchangeable forms such as fire (as here) or cloud (Exod 14:19— 20; Isa 6:1-4) or man-messenger-God (as in G en 18 and 19) or “something like a mosaic pavement of lapis lazuli, like the span of the heavens in depth” (Exod 24:10) or all God’s “goodness” passing by (Exod 33:18-34:9). Here, as in every other case in the O ld Testament, the word almost immedi­ ately eclipses the image, which functions almost solely as an attention-getter. Thus before Moses can look closely at the thornbush, he hears a voice calling his name. H e responds and learns that he is on holy ground and hearing the voice of the G od of his father (3:6), who is the G od also of the three great Fathers in faith, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. T hat voice is the subject of this story, n o t the fire and not Moses. A nd the announce­ m ent the voice makes is the one which the beginning o f the Exodus sequence of story has prepared us to expect: YHW H, fully aware of his covenant-promise to the Fathers and of the difficult plight of Israel in Egypt, is now about to set into m otion the fulfillm ent of the second part of his promise. He is bringing the multiplying progeny out o f Egypt and into the land he has in m ind for them , “a good and roomy land, a land gushing w ith milk and honey” (3:8), where they can fulfill the purpose of their election. Moses further learns that he is to be the one sent, the The Sequence of Story

21

chosen deliverer w ho is to lead Israel forth from Pharaoh's tight grip. This revelation draws from Moses a protest o f inadequacy, and this protest is the storyteller’s brilliant springboard into th e heart of his narrative. Moses’ inade­ quacy is real. H is protest is no exaggeration. G od him self does n o t deny his frightened “W ho am I, th at I am to go along to Pharaoh, th at I am to bring the sons of Israel forth out o f Egypt?” (3:11) It is by no means Moses who is qualified to deliver Israel from the Pharaoh’s bondage. G od has never once had such an option in view. As the subsequent narra­ tive repeatedly shows, w hat is to be done, in Egypt and beyond it, can only be done by G od himself. T hat is the point o f the revelation on H oreb, and of the announcem ent th at G od is beginning the deliverance phase of his w ork of election for and w ith Israel. A t the very outset of this proc­ ess, G od establishes w ho and how he is. W ho and how Moses is is entirely secondary. To Moses’ thrice-repeated emphatic I, G od replies in­ stantly, “T he point is, I AM w ith you” (3:12). Moses has the wrong I emphasized. How like us, whenever we are faced w ith a challenge, to think first of ourselves and the resources we lack. T he teller o f the sequence of story in Exodus knows his reader because he knows himself, and knows him self be­ cause he knows God. A nd by this brilliant tu rn of the narra­ tive of Horeb, he pulls us, in sympathy, into Moses’ position, and so prepares us for the real lesson he wants and needs to teach. “I AM w ith you,” says God, the real hero and center o f this entire account This declaration appropriately shifts our attention, along w ith that of Moses, to the real issue: It is God w ho has elected Moses, and us, and it is not w hat Moses, or we ourselves, can and cannot do that is im portant, it is w hat God can do. To that question, Moses turns immediately, and the way is opened for the single most im portant revelation of the Bible, a revelation for w hich we are now prepared by G od’s emphatic I AM, 'ehyeh in Hebrew. 22

EXODUS

“Suppose I do go to Israel in Egypt,” Moses says, “and report that I am sent by the G od of their fathers— they may well say ‘So what?’ W hat then am I to say to them?” (3:13) Moses' use o f the tide “the G od of your fathers,” an echo of th e title given to him by the voice from the thornbush in Exodus 3:6, makes clear that the question he anticipates from Israel, no doubt the very question rising in his own mind, has little to do w ith identity and much to do w ith authority. Though the literal translation of the question posed by Moses is, “W hat is his name?” the meaning of the question m ust be understood in the light o f Moses' protest of 3:11 and God’s response to it. It m ust be understood in the light of the broader significance of the Hebrew w ord shem, “name,” and of the answer G od gives in 3:14. Shem in reference to G od is (like th e nouns kabod, “glory,” and panim, “face”) a reference to G od’s Presence. T he O xford H ebrew Lexicon defines shem as th e equivalent o f “reputation” and as an embodi­ m ent of “th e (revealed) character” o f Y H W H .11 G od’s an­ swer to Moses’ question is a description o f his “revealed character,” an assertion of his eternal being, a claim of au­ thority, and a summary o f his self-revelation. By no means is this answer a name. In effect, Moses asks God, “Just w hat are You able to do?” Thus is G od’s answer unmistakably clear, taken quite literally, and w ithout any of the em endation, ingenious sub­ stitution, or imaginative im position th at have frequently been heaped upon i t “Ehyeh ,asher ’ehyeh, ” G od says, “I AM the O ne W ho Always Is.” This response is anticipated by G od’s emphatic “I AM ” in 3:12 and echoed by his state­ m ent to Moses for Israel at the end of 3:14, “I AM has sent me forth to you.” M ore literally still, the answer o f 3:14 is “I AM th at I AM ,” or even “I AM always I AM .” Ehyeh occurs once in 3:12, and three times in 3:14, and becomes th e basis The Sequence of Story

23

for th e revelation of the tetragram YHW H, a name generally transliterated “Yahweh,” in 3:15. D . J. M cC arthy refers to “the spell o f repetition” cast by these four “I AM s”12 and J. P. Fokkelm an notes th at the explanation o f the nam e is given before the name itself is given.13 N orthrop Frye suggests, “we m ight come closer to w hat is m eant in the Bible by th e w ord ‘G od' if we under­ stood it as a verb, and n o t a verb of simple asserted existence b u t a verb implying a process accomplishing itself.”14 T he late R oland de Vaux has proposed th at “I AM th at I A M ” is equivalent to “I am Yahweh” (“͐ ani YHW H ”),15the self-confessional, self-revealing phrase th at occurs so frequently in th e O ld Testam ent in a varied series o f forms. T he play of these words based on the verb hayah, “to be,” obscured in English translation, is obvious in Hebrew: hayah ’ehyeh yihyeh Yahweh ’ehyeh ’asher ’ehyeh

“to be” “I am” “he is” “The O ne W ho Always Is” “I am that I am”

T he usual personal pronoun plus a participle is replaced by 'ani Yahweh

“I (am) the O ne W ho Always Is”

T he 'ani, “I,” functions as ’ehyeh, “I am,” and Yahweh, “the O ne W ho Always Is” functions as a participial form o f the irregular verb hayah, “to be.” This phrase, then, is fur­ ther compacted to “I (am) H e,” equal to “I (am) the O ne,” as in these powerful confessions in Deutero-Isaiah: “I (am) the O ne W ho Always Is, no other is— M older of right, C reator of dark, 24

EXODUS

M aker of wholeness, C reator of ‘wrong’— I (am) the O ne W ho Always Is, M aker of all these things.” (Isa 45:6-7) “I (am) first and I (am) last — apart from me, there is no G od.” (Isa 44:6) “I, I (am) He, Canceler of your rebellions for my own good —your sins I just won’t think about.” (Isa 43:25) In each o f these references, as in the 6,823 occurrences o f Y H W H in th e O ld Testam ent, th e special m eaning o f th e unique name is at least implicit; often it is explicit.16 This tetragram is, in a way, G od’s foundational and u lti­ m ate self-revelation in the O ld Testam ent. T hus th e signif­ icance o f Exodus 3:14-17, th e only passage in th e O ld Testam ent in w hich G od him self is represented giving th e explanation o f his ow n special name, cannot be overstated. In a way, these verses are a com pact summary o f the entire sequence of story in th e book o f Exodus— G od is; really, he is. W ithout beginning, w ithout ending, before any be­ ginning and beyond any ending we can imagine, an eternal Presence, eternally in th e present tense, always b o th here and there, never once leaving his people (which is to say th e hum an family entire) n o t even for an instant, the O ne W ho Always Is. W hat remains is that this eternal, never-absent Presence be dem onstrated and proven beyond any doubting, first to Moses, then to Israel, and then to Pharaoh, his government, and the people of Egypt Having connected his name Yahweh w ith the title, “the G od of the Fathers . . . Abraham . . . Isaac . . . Jacob” The Sequence of Story

25

(3:15, b u t also 3:6, 13, 16), the O ne W ho Always Is pro­ ceeds to anticipate th at proof by predicting as impending the Exodus from Egypt, the fulfillm ent o f the covenant-promise of land, and the necessary coercion of th e Pharaoh and his nation to this intention. In a dramatic preview of w hat is to come, and in a repetition of the m otif o f 3:11-12, th at it is he alone who will be able to bring these predictions to fulfill­ m ent, Yahweh declares emphatically (“Now I know very well,” 3:19) that no power save his can induce the Pharaoh to release Israel. Yahweh therefore will stretch forth his hand, and for from being merely cooperative, the Pharaoh will drive Israel from the Delta, and the Egyptians will load them down w ith expensive gifts as they go. In this promise, the sequence of story through w hat is now Exodus 13 is briefly summed up, and the narrator turns immediately to the first step in Yahweh’s dem onstration of his eternally present Being, the persuasion of Moses, his deliverer. The three signs given to Moses as symbols to Israel and to Egypt of the authority w ith which he comes to them from Yahweh have a triple function in the sequence o f story. T he first function of these signs is the one made obvious by Moses’ concern about his ow n credibility: “Look here, they w on’t tru st me, and they w on’t pay attention to my report” (4:1). T he second function of the signs is Moses’ concern about Yahweh's credibility, a concern th at permeates this narrative from 3:13 through 4:17. It is Yahweh in whom Moses and Israel and the Egyptians m ust believe if the Exodus is to take place. Moses is b u t a messenger, the one w ho is to announce and then interpret a series of staggering events. There is yet, however, a th ird function o f the signs; it is the m ost im portant if least obvious: its target is those n o t a part of the historical Exodus w ho have yet to be convinced and so to come to belief. T he signs are the first h in t o f the proof of Yahweh’s Presence, the anticipation of the sequence 26

EXODUS

o f extraordinary events by w hich the generations yet to come, ourselves included, can become a part o f the theo­ logical Exodus, the Exodus in faith, the ongoing Exodus, the never-ending opportunity for Exodus. We, too, are elected as recipients of the self-revelation, as channels o f election, as a people in a m ovement of Exodus. A t the same time, the three signs, along w ith the ques­ tions that call them forth, present us w ith a tension o f doubt and belief. O n the one hand, Moses and Israel yearn for the freedom they think they cannot have, hoping for a relation­ ship they believe will be denied them . O n the other hand, Yahweh acts to establish the tru th o f his claim of Being, to dem onstrate the reality of his Presence. It is a tension be­ tw een whose polarities we ourselves vacillate, so in this addi­ tional way this ancient story is our story. T he signs of the staff which became a serpent and of the Nile water changed to blood on the dry earth (the first dem onstrated, the second only predicted here) are of course perform ed by the Yahweh-Moses partnership in Egypt The sign of th e skin-diseased hand is n o t repeated in Egypt though a m uch m ore severe infection of skin disease afflicts Miriam in the Sinai-to-Paran wilderness (Num 12), as a result of h er rebellion against the authority of Moses. If there was an original narrative of Moses’ employing this sign in Egypt it may have been om itted in the final sequence of story in the book of Exodus because of the negative implications o f this infectious skin disease.17 Moses’ fu rth er resistance even after Yahweh’s dem onstra­ tion o f tw o signs and the prediction o f a third is a dramatic indication of the tension betw een tru st and doubt, confi­ dence and lack of confidence, obedience and rebellion throughout the sequence of story in Exodus. Yahweh ’s un­ derstandably irritated response includes yet another empha­ sis o f his claim of Being: his twice-repeated and doubly emphatic assertion, “I AM w ith your m outh.” Moses at last The Sequence of Story

27

capitulated (“Pardon, Lord: please send anybody you w ant to send,” 4:13), and A aron is introduced as Moses’ spokesper­ son, just as Moses is himself Yahweh’s spokesperson. O nce more, it is made unquestionably clear to us that the Presence and the power that will count in Egypt, as anywhere else, is Yahweh’s, and that w hat Yahweh will do there is an addi­ tional dimension of his self-revelation. So Moses sets off for Egypt, w ith Jethro’s blessing (4:18), and w ith the further assurance of Yahweh that Moses is empowered to do the w ondrous deeds he has just witnessed. Yahweh also announces his plan to make the Pharaoh’s m ind obstinate as a means of proving beyond any cavil, Israelite or Egyptian, that he is both present and in control. In the Yahweh-Moses partnership, Moses is to deliver the announcem ents and the warnings, then put into m otion the signs Yahweh has empowered. Yahweh will prevent the Pharaoh from being convinced prematurely, from coming around too soon, before the events and causes that prom pt the Exodus are know n to have only one possible explana­ tion: the powerful Presence of Yahweh in Egypt, and w ith his people Israel. By allusion to w hat is now the ten th of the mighty acts w ith w hich Yahweh intends to prove his Presence, the con­ trast betw een the power of Yahweh and that of the divine representative of Egypt’s gods, the Pharaoh, is made. Yah­ weh declares that his son, his firstborn, Israel, m ust be per­ m itted to leave Egypt to worship him, warning Pharaoh, w ith a pointedly parallel phrase, that “your son, your first­ born,” will otherwise be killed. It is the announcem ent o f how things are to be, the preview of the conclusion to the proof of the Presence acts, and also the reason for that con­ clusion. Many times over in the sequence of story through Exodus 15, this declaration is remade. T he strange narrative of Yahweh’s fearful encounter w ith Moses during the journey from M idian to Egypt has 28

EXODUS

apparently been included in the sequence o f story at this point as a means of assurance. Moses, like all the rest of the Israelites of th e Exodus and the wilderness wandering, could n o t be perm itted to bypass the im portant symbol-inthe-flesh of the covenant commitment. B om in Egypt and reared in Pharaoh’s household, Moses could be assumed to have had at m ost only the partial circumcision o f the Egyp­ tians, a “disgrace” according to Joshua 5:9. T hus at the beginning o f his w ork as Yahweh’s deliverer, Moses had to be properly circumcised, just as the new generation b om in the wilderness had to be circumcised, even though they were adults. By this act, the “disgrace” of their neglect was rolled away, and the place where this occurred came to be called Gilgal, “roll-away” (Josh 5:2-9). The paragraph is a difficult one, n o t least because of the ambiguity o f its pronouns and its apparent reference to halfobscure practices connected apparently w ith both puberty and marriage. As the sequence of story now stands, how­ ever, this passage provides a dramatic, if somewhat startling, conclusion to Yahweh’s revelation of his Presence and the difference that Presence demands. It is followed only by brief notices of Moses’ rendezvous w ith A aron and their arrival and favorable reception by Israel in Egypt. G od proving h is P resence Despite the positive reception given initially by Israel to Moses and Aaron, and to their announcem ent of Yahweh’s impending rescue (4:29-31), the first approach to Pharaoh ends disastrously. N ot only is their request for Israel’s release for a pilgrimage to Yahweh turned down— it is put down as absurd and as an indication th at Israel does n o t have suffi­ cient w ork to keep them busy. T he outcome o f w hat was to be the first step to freedom is thus a quick-march deeper into oppressive slave labor. T he people of Israel are to meet, The Sequence of Story

29

w ithout reduction, the quotas of bricks expected o f them and gather the chopped straw heretofore supplied them by their Egyptian masters. W hen these quotas are n o t m et, the Israelite section leaders are whipped by their Egyptian bosses. This, in turn, leads them to protest their treatm ent to Pharaoh himself, who gives them the reason for their new hardship: “Lazy is w hat you are, lazy you are indeed, saying, ‘Let us go; let us offer sacrifice to Yahweh.’ Now go get to work! Straw will n o t be provided you, and you will produce the full measure of bricks!” (5:17-18). Thus do the section leaders tu rn on Moses and Aaron, and thus does Moses tu rn on Yahweh: “W hy have you sent me here for this?” (5:22) In view of the high promise con­ nected w ith Yahweh’s revelation of him self on H oreb/Sinai, the question seems a reasonable one. T he negative response of Pharaoh and the acceleration of hardship for Israel am ount to an apparent cancellation of Yahweh’s claims of Presence and power. Indeed, the Pharaoh arrogantly pleads ignorance of any Yahweh and indifference therefore to his commands and to the requests of his people Israel. A nd, as the Pharaoh cancels all Moses’ plans w ith apparent im­ punity, even Moses’ confidence in Yahweh is underm ined. C an Yahweh really save his elect people from further Egyp­ tian oppression? Has not their situation deteriorated rather than improved? Has Yahweh’s self-revelation been m isun­ derstood, or misleading, or has it come to a sudden, defeated halt? This pattern of divine promise apparently negated is a didactic device that recurs in biblical narrative. H ere as else­ w here18 it provides a dramatic focus for what actually hap­ pens by giving the appearance that w hat G od has promised is simply not possible. Pharaoh is thus allowed to set him self 30

EXODUS

up for a terrible fall—Yahweh even assists him in his fool­ hardy display of hubris. Alm ost w ithout our realizing it, the sequence of story has drawn us into a m ighty contest, upon whose outcome rests the ultim ate fete o f Israel, and thus o f Yahweh’s own purpose o f redem ption for the hum an family. T he form of the narrative through the final escape of the Exodus itself is set by this introductory account in 5:1— 6:1, as is the tension upon w hich the story is th ru st forward. Before the contest is continued, th e sequence o f story o f the book o f Exodus is interrupted by an appropriate re­ m inder of Israel’s covenantal com m itm ent from th e tim e o f th e Fathers: Abraham , Isaac, and Jacob. Beginning w ith a fourfold repetition o f the self-proclam atory statem ent, “I am th e O ne W ho Always Is” ('ani Y H W H , 6:2,6-8), this section specifies th e continuing fulfillm ent o f th e covenant-prom ise to th e Fathers in the im pending Exodus from Egypt, justifies by genealogy th e choice o f first A aron th en Moses as Yahweh’s partners in th e deliverance, and moves into a preview o f the proof-of-Presence chapters in 7:8-11:10, 12:21-50. This inserted section, one of three lengthy blocks of ma­ terial (6:2—7:7; 25:1-31:18; 35:1-40:33) setting fo rth priestly and liturgical interests, is often regarded as an interruption of the continuity of narrative of Exodus, in part a duplica­ tion of inform ation given already and in part a supplem ent to that information. A consideration of this section as a p art o f the whole of the sequence o f story of the book o f Exodus, however, rather than as a block of inserted material, gives it a somewhat different appearance. W hat we have here, at the m ost appropriate point in the sequence of story, precisely w hen things are looking bad for Yahweh’s promise and so for Yahweh’s people, is a rem inder o f the covenant-promise to the Fathers, of the consequent election of Israel, and of Yahweh’s self-revelation of his event-bringing Presence to Moses on Horeb. The Sequence of Story

31

In a way, Exodus 6:2-13 renews the very beginning o f the book of Exodus, a part of the sequence of memory (see below, pp. 100-102) from the priestly circle. It also reempha­ sizes the essential dictum of faith presented to Moses on H oreb/Sinai and summed up in the special name YHWH, “The O ne W ho Always Is.” A nd it provides a justification, in another inserted sequence of memory, for the signifi­ cant role of Aaron, the prototypical “chief” or “high” priest. T hen it resumes the narrative sequence after these urgent rem inders at the very point at which the movement tow ard Exodus runs into the brick wall of the Pharaoh’s ignorance and self-congratulating arrogance. T he 6:2-7:7 passage is not, therefore, a duplicatory inter­ ruption of the sequence of story. It is rather a didactic aside in medias res, an essential lesson at a teachable m om ent of need, a rem inder at a point of initial difficulty (before the far more difficult circumstances yet to come) of tw o essential realities: (1) the covenant-promise of Israel’s election by Yahweh and (2) the Presence of Yahweh moving to fulfill that promise. W hat remains is th e proof of that Presence, and that proof is made in the progress tow ard the fulfillm ent of the promise. As the sequence of story continues, heading into greater difficulties and more discouragements, we have been given a bright N orth Star by w hich to guide our course: it is Yahweh w ho has promised, and Yahweh is, here. W hatever happens in the moment, we m ust live according to the longer view faith affords us. The gauntlet Pharaoh has throw n down in his arrogant ignorance, “who is Yahweh?” (5:2), is taken up by Moses and A aron in their next reported audience w ith Pharaoh. They make “a w ondrous deed” (7:9) to establish their authority and the credibility o f their claims about Yahweh. This won­ drous deed is a variation on the sign of the staff-become-aserpent given first to Moses on H oreb (4:2-5) and then

32

EXODUS

presumably to Israel in Egypt (4:30), a variation dramatically augmented. W here Moses saw his staff transformed into a nachash, a “serpent” he clearly assumed to be dangerous, this same staff, now called “Aaron’s staff,” becomes in front of Pharaoh a tannin, a “m onstrous snake” (7:10). Nachash is a generic term , the equivalent of the common use in American English of the word snake. Tannin, at least in most of its fifteen O ld Testament occurrences (I suggest in all of them), refers to a reptile of horrendous proportions, such as the prim ordial sea monster. The connection of Pharaoh w ith this term (Ezekiel calls the Pharaoh a tannin in 29:3 and 32:2, and DeuteroIsaiah implies as much, Isaiah 51:9) underscores its use here. Thus the “m onstrous snake” which Moses’ staff becomes before Pharaoh is a dramatic expansion of the sign of the staff, and a clear prediction of how things are going to tu rn o u t The prim ordial sea m onster is a plaything to Yahweh, so the Pharaoh of Egypt can hardly be more. W hen Yahweh changes A aron’s staff into a tannin (an allusion to the sea m onster and a derisive nickname for Pharaoh) and the Pharaoh’s “wise scholars and magicians” repeat “by their arcane arts” this same incredible transform ation, “then, sud­ denly, A aron’s staff gobbled up all their staffs!” (7:12c). The use of “staff” instead of “m onstrous snake” in this statem ent is a further rem inder of the sign in progress as well as an announcem ent of Yahweh’s superiority. T he statem ent that Pharaoh remained unconvinced by this double miracle is no surprise to us— we have been told already that such would be the case (3:19; 4:21-23). We have also been told already th at Yahweh will rain upon Pharaoh and his Egypt “an array of extraordinary deeds,” after which Pharaoh will be eager for an Exodus of Israel (3:20). To that array of proving deeds, the sequence of story now moves, and we know already what the outcome is going to be.

The Sequence of Story

33

T he language by w hich the extraordinary deeds are de­ scribed as “plagues” is inappropriate, except perhaps from the perspective of the Egyptians, w ho suffer their effects. These deeds are Yahweh’s proving actions, by which he demonstrates in progressive fashion the reality of his claim o f Being and Presence, to Israel, to Egypt, and finally to Pharaoh’s court and to Pharaoh himself. They are nothing less than actions o f self-revelation on Yahweh’s part. Any attem pt to explain these mighty acts as exaggerated natural phenomena is likewise inappropriate. They are specif­ ically called “extraordinary deeds” (3:20), “great deeds o f vin­ dication” (6:6; 7:4), “signs and wondrous deeds” (7:3), “an act of a God” (by Pharaoh’s learned men, 8:19), “my whole arse­ nal of blows” (by Yahweh, 9:14), and “stroke of judgm ent” (also by Yahweh, 11:1), and their specific intent is to demon­ strate beyond any question Yahweh’s incomparability (note 8:10 and 9:14). They are a means of theological statement, not a description of unusual natural history in the delta of Egypt, and they are presented in the sequence of story of Exodus as miracles. W hatever opinions we may have about the nature of the miraculous, the meaning of Yahweh’s mighty acts for the sequence of story of Exodus will be seriously distorted if we attem pt to rationalize their miraculous content We m ust also keep in m ind the cumulative impact these “wondrous deeds” are intended to have, n o t only upon Israel and upon the Egyptians and Pharaoh, b u t also upon the suc­ cessive hearers and readers of this sequence of story. We are given from the start of that sequence the confession the mighty acts are to demonstrate: Yahweh is, Yahweh is here, Yahweh is here keeping his promise of salvation to his cove­ nant people. All who doubt that confession in any way are left, by the mighty acts, w ith no reason for further doubt. Even the last resister to belief, the Pharaoh himself, is able to hold out only because Yahweh, in order to make the proof

34

EXODUS

completely obvious, prolongs Pharaoh’s resolve n o t to give in. First Israel, then “the learned m en” of Egypt, then the courtiers of Pharaoh and the Egyptian people come to belief. But the Pharaoh, because of Yahweh’s firming of his resolve, holds out beyond all reason. The verses of the sequence of story depicting this resistance, seen all together, show the dramatic repetition o f this im portant theme: A n ticipating the Resistance:

3:19: 4:21: 5:2:

7:3:

“Now I know very well that the king of Egypt will not give you permission to go. . . .” “And I will make his mind obstinate, and he will not send out the people.” But Pharaoh replied, “Who is Yahweh, that I should pay attention to his voice, and so send out Israel? I have no knowledge of Yahweh, and Israel, I am not about to send out!” “At the same time, I will make Pharaoh stubbornminded, then pile up signs and wondrous deeds in the land of Egypt; Pharaoh will pay no attention to you. . . .”

T h e Resistance in A ction:

7:13: 7:14: 7:22-23:

8:15:

But the mind of Pharaoh was unchanged. He paid no attention to them, just as Yahweh had predicted. So Yahweh said to Moses, “The mind of Pharaoh is heavy and dull; he refuses to send out the people.” So Pharaoh’s mind was again obstinate; he paid no attention to them, just as Yahweh had predicted. Pharaoh turned his back on them, entered his palace, and put the whole business out of his mind. The minute Pharaoh saw that there was an end to the frogs, however, he steeled his mind and would pay no attention to them, just as Yahweh had predicted.

The Sequence of Story

35

8:19:

8:32:

9:7:

9:34-35:

Then the learned men said to Pharaoh, “This is an act of a God.” But Pharaoh’s mind remained obsti­ nate, and he would pay no attention to them, just as Yahweh had predicted. Once again, however, Pharaoh steeled his mind, this time as well, and he would not send out the people. Yet when Pharaoh sent out and saw that not even a single animal from the livestock of Israel had died, Pharaoh’s mind remained heavy and dull, and he did not send out the people. Yet Pharaoh, seeing that the rain and the hail and the thunderclaps stopped, gave in once more to wrong­ headedness, and so steeled his mind; he did, and the members of his court did. Thus Pharaoh’s mind re­ mained unchanged, and he did not send out the Is­ raelites, as Yahweh had predicted through Moses.

Yahw eh Reinforcing the Resistance:

9:12:

9:16:

10:1-2:

36

Yet Yahweh made obstinate the mind of Pharaoh, so he paid no attention to them, just as Yahweh had predicted to Moses. “In fact for this one reason alone will I cause you still to stand firm, to the end that I show you my strength, in result of which my name will be cele­ brated throughout the earth.” Next, Yahweh said to Moses, “Go to Pharaoh— because I have made heavy and dull both his mind and the minds of the members of his court, to the end that I be taken seriously through these signs of mine right in their own territory, and to the end that you may recount again and again in the hear­ ing of your son and your grandson that I amused myself aggravating the Egyptians, and that I set my signs against them in order that you may know by experience that I am Yahweh.” Thus: EXODUS

10:20:

10:27:

11:9-10:

Yahweh once more made Pharaoh’s mind obstinate, however, and he did not send out the sons of Israel. At that very moment, Yahweh made Pharaoh’s mind obstinate, and he did not consent to their going out Then Yahweh said to Moses, “Pharaoh will pay no attention to you: my purpose is that my wondrous deeds may be many in the land of Egypt.” So Moses and Aaron did all these wondrous deeds in Pharaoh’s presence, and Yahweh made Pharaoh’s heart obstinate, and he did not send out the sons of Israel from his land.

Even after the Pharaoh has at last been allowed by Yahweh to relent, following the devastation of the tenth mighty act, with its threat of term ination for the Egyptian nation, Yahweh once again turns Pharaoh’s mind. Though Israel has fled the delta w ith the eager consent of Pharaoh and his nation, Yahweh’s proof of his Presence remains unfinished still: 14:4:

14:8:

14:17—18:

“. . . I will make Pharaoh’s mind obstinate; he will come chasing after them, and I will win myself glory over Pharaoh and all his force, so that the Egyptians will know by experience that I am Yahweh.” Thus Yahweh made obstinate the mind of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, so that he chased after the sons of Israel. . . . “. . . Just watch me making the Egyptians’ minds obstinate, so that they will come after them, en­ abling me to win myself glory over Pharaoh and over all his infantry, over his chariotry and over his riders. Thus the Egyptians will know by experi­ ence that I am Yahweh, in my winning glory for myself over Pharaoh and over his chariotry and over his riders.”

The Sequence of Story

37

W ith this final forced resistance o f Pharaoh, and th e total defeat th at follows it, the proof of Yahweh’s Presence, to the Egyptians and to Israel, is both complete and effective. T he Egyptians’ force o f “six hundred crack chariots” (14:6) was drowned in the onrush of the m anipulated sea. A nd as for Israel, safe and dry on the Sinai side of the sea, 14:30-31:

Thus did Yahweh rescue Israel that day from the power of the Egyptians. Israel saw the Egyp­ tians dead upon the edge of the sea, and Israel saw the great power that Yahweh unleashed against the Egyptians. So the people were in awe of Yahweh— and in consequence, they put their trust in Yah­ weh and in Moses, his servant

The climactic celebration of this proof, and also, in its root form the oldest, is the victory hym n of Moses and M iriam in Exodus 15:1-21, often called “the Song of the Sea,” and is treated more fully as a part of the sequence of memory (see below, pp. 108-12). In its present and obviously m uch ex­ panded form, this hym n celebrates the proof of Yahweh’s Presence in the victory over the Pharaoh and his forces at the Sea (15:1b—12, 21). Also it celebrates this proof in the guid­ ance of Israel through the wilderness into the promised land, in the paralysis through fear of those who would deny Israel access to that land and those who would vie w ith Israel for its control and possession (15:13-16), and even in the fulfillm ent of the ancient covenant-promise in the establishment o f Israel in that land w ith Yahweh dwelling amongst them and ruling “forever and w ithout interruption” (15:17-18). The conclusion to the hymn, in fact, makes reference to the Tem­ ple built by Solomon on the hill of Zion, the “new Sinai,” and to the Jerusalem theology of Yahweh’s unending kingship from there (compare 15:17-18 w ith Psalms 47, 93, 96-99). T he hymn is thus a summary of Yahweh’s salvation of, and 38

EXODUS

special provision for, his elect people Israel, across at least three centuries. T he nucleus of this hymn, however, is its dramatic state­ m ent o f Yahweh’s real and incomparable19Presence. Yahweh is called “m ight” and “song of Praise,” “salvation,” “G od,” and “G od of my father,” and “a w arrior,” and is described as the one who has throw n “Pharaoh’s chariots and his whole force into the sea.” Pharaoh indeed is depicted as an arrogant egomaniac buoyed by a groundless self-confidence: “I will chase, I will catch, I will loot, My battle lust will satisfy itself, I will empty, I will possess!” (15:9) A nd Yahweh is presented as one w ho has at his command the ancient primeval deep, and w ho has b u t to blow w ith his wind to send this proud king and all his force sinking down like lead into the collected waters (15:8,10). T he end of all this, the end also of the sequence of proving mighty acts is the recurring rhetorical question, “W ho is like you among the gods, Yahweh? W ho is like you, magnificent in holiness, awesome in praiseworthy deeds, doing the extraordinary?” (15:11) This is w hat the mighty acts and Egypt are all about, the establishment beyond any question o f the powerful, all­ ruling, and saving Presence of Yahweh. It is a proof th at is presented, w ith an inexorable and progressive rhythm , by the developm ent of a rising series of parallel themes. T he The Sequence of Story

39

first of these themes is the belief of Israel, superficially per­ suaded w ith ease (4:29-31) b ut just as easily lapsing again and again into disbelief (5:20-21; 14:10-12). The second of them is the belief o f Pharaoh’s “wise schol­ ars and magicians,” his advisers, his people, and ultimately the Pharaoh himself. T he third of them is the divinely prom pted disbelief of the Pharaoh, by which Yahweh’s proof of his Presence is carried beyond any conceivable need for further dem onstration. A nd the fourth o f them , an invisible but ever-present motif, is our own belief in Yahweh’s acting Presence, the belief of all who hear or read or in any other way come to know this sequence of self-revelation. Thus are the mighty acts presented as an accelerating sequence of self-revelation, following the authenticating prologue miracle o f the rod and the m onstrous snake (7:813). The first o f them , the changing o f water from the river Nile into blood (the extent of the transform ation varied ac­ cording to the source of the narrative), is immediately dupli­ cated by “the learned m en of Egypt” (7:14-25). Because o f this duplication, Pharaoh, w ho has already confessed his total ignorance of Yahweh (5:1-2) is n o t even slightly im­ pressed, and therefore is convinced of nothing. T he second mighty act, the teeming m ultiplication of the frogs along the Nile (8:1-5, also w ith a varied report), is also duplicated by the “learned m en,” a tie of discom forting result, as it served more to aggravate Pharaoh’s problem than to provide him w ith a victory. O nce the frogs are killed by Yahweh, Pharaoh remains indifferent both to the Hebrews and to their G od Yahweh. W ith the third mighty act, there is the beginning o f a breakthrough. T he learned m en of Egypt are unable to tu rn “the loose soil of the earth” into a swarm of gnats, and they even advise Pharaoh that the blanket o f gnats aggravating Egypt is “an act of a G od” (8:16-19). Still the Pharaoh does n o t believe, despite the confession o f his wonder-workers 40

EXODUS

th at their power, though considerable, has been surpassed. So there follows th e fourth mighty act, a devastating mixed swarm of flying insects which, according to the tradition preserved by Psalm 78:45, “ate on” the Egyptians (8:20-32). This time there is a second breakthrough: T he Pharaoh is concerned enough by the effect of this annoyance to pro­ pose a concession, giving Moses permission to offer sacri­ fices in Egypt, and when th at proves unacceptable, to take Israel into the nearby wilderness for such worship. H e has even come to enough belief to request Moses to “pray in my behalf” (8:28e). W hen th e insect swarm departs, however, he cancels the permission he has given, raising a question about his sincerity to start w ith. The fifth mighty act, “a decimating epidemic” throughout the Egyptians’ livestock (9:1-7), appears to have some effect on Pharaoh until he learns that the epidemic has not affected Israel’s livestock. Perhaps he thinks the epidemic a curious and passing fluke, or perhaps he is too reluctant to risk losing the Israelite flocks and herds. W hatever the case, he will n o t perm it Israel to depart Egypt. T he sixth mighty act, an infec­ tion of inflamed swellings breaking into septic sores on hu ­ mans and animals alike (9:8-12) produces the additional breakthrough of a total defeat of Egypt’s learned men. They not only cannot duplicate the infection, but they are helpless to prevent it even in their own bodies. This time, for the first time, Yahweh’s strengthening of Pharaoh’s resistance implies that he is about to come to belief. W ith Yahweh’s interfer­ ence, however, that belief is of course impossible. T he seventh mighty act, a destructive and death-dealing hailstorm (9:13-35), reveals a fu rth er breakthrough: Some members of the court o f Pharaoh, his closest advisers, have come to belief in Yahweh’s word, and they heed Moses’ warning. Israel is spared the storm , while every unprotected person, animal, and crop outside the land o f G oshen suf­ fers devastation. Pharaoh for th e first tim e confesses his The Sequence of Story

41

wrongheadedness, and his guilt, and his people’s guilt, and promises Moses and Israel w ith determ ination, “I will send you out; you shall certainly stay no longer.” But once more, after the storm, Pharaoh “steeled his m ind,” along w ith the unconvinced members of his court. A nd this time, appar­ ently, it was w ithout any interference from Yahweh. T hus once more, Israel remained stuck in Egypt. In the eighth and n in th of the mighty acts, Yahweh again prevents w hat appears to be impending belief and surrender by Pharaoh. T he eighth m ighty act brings upon Egypt a vast blanket o f swarming locusts th at proceeds to devour the sprouting vegetation w hich has escaped the devastating hail­ storm (10:1-20). T he prediction o f this agricultural last straw brings an additional breakthrough in th e belief of all Pharaoh’s closest advisers, his courtiers, w ho ask, “Just how long is this impasse to bring ruin upon us?” They advo­ cate compliance w ith Yahweh’s dem and for Israel’s release. Pharaoh appears once again to be weakening, b u t the nego­ tiations break dow n because o f his insistence th at only th e “able-bodied m en” go out o f Egypt to worship, a condition designed to prevent Israel’s departure for good. Therefore the locust swarm arrives, and Pharaoh calls for Moses and A aron, confesses his guilt, and asks for prayer to Yahweh for forgiveness. W hen this prayer is made, how ­ ever, and the locusts are gone, Yahweh once m ore inter­ venes, preventing Pharaoh’s belief and thus his fu rth er cooperation. T he n in th mighty act, th e descent o f an eerie darkness over the entire land of Egypt (except for th e places o f Israel’s dwelling), follows m uch the same pattern, albeit m ore briefly (10:21-29). Pharaoh, groping in the thick dark­ ness along w ith his people, sends for Moses and makes the greatest concession to th at point: A ll Israel may go out to worship Yahweh, leaving behind only their livestock. W hen Moses refuses even this condition, before Pharaoh can make any response of his own, Yahweh again makes his 42

EXODUS

m ind obstinate, and he orders Moses to get out and never to return, on pain of death. T he ten th mighty act is announced by Yahweh as “one final stroke of judgm ent” th at will prom pt Pharaoh to allow, indeed to demand, an unrestricted exodus (11:1-10). Pharaoh’s response to Moses’ report o f this announcem ent is n o t given, though Moses’ furious departure from Pharaoh (ll:8e) and the summary reference to Yahweh intervening to make Pharaoh’s heart obstinate (11:9-10) leave no doubt as to w hat it was. W hen the ten th mighty act befalls Egypt, and the firstborn of man and beast alike have been struck dead, the final breakthrough is made. Pharaoh grants Israel unconditional perm ission to leave Egypt. H e even requests, in w hat may be taken as his own confession o f belief, “bless even me” (12:32d). T here is now no interference from Yah­ weh, and at last the Exodus takes place, to the great relief o f all the surviving Egyptians. As we have seen already, however, Yahweh intervenes yet once more, even after the Exodus has taken place, to the u tter panic of Israel and then the total destruction of Pharaoh and his elite chariot corps. This ultimate proof of Yahweh’s Pres­ ence to Pharaoh can hardly be for Pharaoh’s benefit, since it includes Pharaoh’s death. Further, while Yahweh’s accel­ erating pressure on Pharaoh makes sense so long as Pharaoh arrogantly doubts Yahweh’s power, if n o t his existence, why would Yahweh himself prevent Pharaoh from making the moves of faith Yahweh has been attempting to bring Pharaoh to make? The contemporary reader may well wonder why m ention of such incredible and miraculous reverses have been given no notice in the amply kept Egyptian records of the eighteenth and the nineteenth dynasties. A nd more impor­ tant still, how could Yahweh use another hum an being, even one as apparently narcissistic and unpleasant as Pharaoh, as a pawn to prove a point to Israel, a people both separate from and a burden to Egypt? The Sequence of Story

43

T he answer to these varied questions is one. To under­ stand it, we m ust open ourselves to the very different con­ text from which and for w hich this sequence of story was originally w ritten. To begin w ith, w hat we have here m ust be interpreted as a theological confession of belief, and n o t as an historical record in narrative form. W hatever histori­ cal core may lie behind any o f the sequence of story in the book o f Exodus, th at story in its present form is m ythopoeic narrative, a sequence of confession in symbols, the presentation o f th e tru th th at is m ore true than simple fact. T hat there was an Egypt, a sojourn there o f some o f A bra­ ham’s descendants, an oppression o f those descendants by a new and unfavorable dynasty, an ensuing conflict and an eventual separation, even an escape, can hardly be doubted. B ut th at historical core, long since lost to us irretrievably in centuries of layers o f confessional overlay, is n o t the con­ cern o f th e sequence o f story o f Exodus. We read these lines too m uch as we w ould a newspaper account, asking o f them the questions such an account m ight stimulate. We need rather to read them as we w ould read a hym n, a prayer, a credo, a serm on w ritten by D ante or Shakespeare or M ilton. W hat happens to the Pharaoh in Yahweh’s proving of his Presence is similar to w hat happens to Job in Yahweh’s prov­ ing of the integrity of “my servant Job.” We are told at the beginning of the book of Job that Job is nonpareil in all the earth, “an innocent and righteous man who has rever­ ence for G od and turns his back to evil” (Job 1:8; 2:3). All th at is to come upon him is a dem onstration of th at in­ tegrity— so we are told throughout the sequence of story proving Yahweh’s Presence that Yahweh’s purpose is, pre­ cisely, that proof. It is a proof in four dimensions, as I have indicated already. Yet it is, in a way, a proof beyond those dimensions, a universalized proof, in which the Pharaoh o f

44

EXODUS

Egypt is a symbol of the great sea m onster of the deep, defeated by Yahweh in the ordering which made life on earth a possibility, and in which Israel is a symbol of every and any people of faith, of whatever time and of whatever place. This sequence of story announces that G od is, that G od is here, and that his Presence means help, and rescue, and the eventual trium ph, on his terms and by his schedule, of his intention. To ask w hether G od actually uses (and abuses) one hum an being, no m atter how nasty that person might be, to teach a lesson to another hum an being, or to many other hum an beings, is to think of G od in blatantly anthropom or­ phic terms, and thus to m isunderstand him completely. We are here dealing w ith theology, exuberantly confessed. To say that those who composed and compiled the sequence of story of the book of Exodus have presented us w ith a picture of G od that troubles us is far more a condemnation o f the narrowness of our view and far more an indictm ent of the poverty of our theological imagination than it is of theirs. The question, “W hat really happened at the sea of reeds?” is not only irrelevant to the sequence of story and the sequence of memory in Exodus, it is a question that diverts us alto­ gether from the purpose and impact of those sequences. It is a question that reveals an adult weakness to use intellect, and then, inevitably, emotion, in the contem plation of texts for which only faith is an adequate resource. The real happening at the sea was the proof o f Yahweh’s Presence, the demonstra­ tion that Yahweh is here, revealing his Presence in his deeds. The Hebrew singers and storytellers used the language of their time to tell us about it. O ur attempts to read that lan­ guage only as we read the language of our time is at best ignorant and lazy, and at w orst an avoidance for selfish rea­ sons o f what the biblical story is actually saying to us about God’s Presence and G od’s salvation.

The Sequence of Story

45

G od pro v id in g a n d guiding by his P resen ce As Israel journeys onward from the rescue at the sea into the wilderness, and heads tow ard the place where they are to m eet Yahweh in worship, his proof to them of his Presence is augmented. T he provision involves physical nourishm ent (meeting the need of both food and water) and protection from marauding enemies. T he guidance involves direction through a barren, uncharted desert and m ountain land to the place where Yahweh would present him self to them . This fu rth er dem onstration o f Yahweh’s Presence is a testi­ mony of the continuation o f his providence in the election o f his covenant people. Interw oven w ith these them es o f dem onstration, provi­ sion and guidance, is the them e of Israel’s dissatisfaction, set fo rth in the sequence o f story by the narratives of bickering, complaint, and rebellion, narratives th at extend beyond the book of Exodus into the book of Numbers (Num 11,13-14, 16-17, 20). This interweaving is in effect a continuation o f the tension in the sequence o f story created first by the reluctance of Moses, then continued by the stubbornness o f the Egyptians, especially th at of Pharaoh— both on his own and also as a result o f Yahweh’s interference. W hatever Yah­ weh attempts, in the pursuit o f his purpose w ith and for Israel, there is always opposition o f some kind from some quarter. From the beginning, however, we know by faith how this story will come out, and that no opposition to Yahweh’s intention and providence can come to any ulti­ mate trium ph. Indeed, the narrative device of this section o f th e sequence o f story of Exodus is th at Israel’s need and Israel’s opposition serve only to call forth fu rth er demon­ strations o f Yahweh’s already proven Presence. T he first such com plaint calling fo rth a dem onstration arises from a need for potable w ater (15:22-27). A rriving at a source o f w ater after three days’ dry travel, Israel 46

EXODUS

“grum bled against M oses” w hen they found th a t w ater too bitter to drink. M oses called o u t to Yahweh for help in this crisis, and Yahweh showed him a kind o f w ood th at w ould remove the w ater’s bitterness. T he wood, like M oses’ staff, is a symbol o f Yahweh’s miracle-making power. W hen the w ater became potable, Yahweh, his Presence in provision thus dem onstrated, invited Israel to make a response. It is a revelation and a response th at seems almost to be a preview o f Sinai: A t th at very spot, he [Yahweh] established for them a requirem ent and a divine guidance and there he pu t them on trial; thus he said, “If you will pay careful attention to the voice of Yahweh your God, and do th e right thing according to his standard, and be obedient to his commandments, and m eet all his requirem ents, all the diseases th at I put upon the Egyptians I will no t p u t upon you: for I am Yahweh your healer.” (Exod 15:25-26) O n the one hand, this assertion and promise of Yahweh is a reminder of the Presence-proving mighty acts in Egypt; on the other hand, it is an anticipation of the Sinai revelation and the Sinai covenant. T he provision of drinkable w ater demon­ strates Yahweh’s Presence w ith Israel in the wilderness, and more, it attests to the continuing effectiveness of his provi­ dential care. T hat Presence and the guidance and provision it effects raise the question of an appropriate response. A nd Yahweh’s statement sets forth the options of response, speci­ fying the standard accompaniments of ancient Near Eastern covenant-making: blessing (in this case, protection and heal­ ing) for obedience and judgment for disobedience. The state­ m ent even ends w ith the statement w ith which the Sinai revelation of covenant requirem ent begins, “I am Yahweh” (15:26 vis-à-vis 20:2). The Sequence of Story

47

The second complaint of Israel in the wilderness is a cry for food. W hat had become of the flocks and herds Moses had so insisted on bringing out of Egypt (10:24-26, “not a hoof is to remain here”) after only six weeks (16:1) of journey we are not told. But the grumbling against Moses and Aaron was unanimous: “you have brought us out into this wilderness to kill this whole crowd by starvation!” The people initially address this complaint to Moses and Aaron as a direction of access, not of accusation. That is, the real object of complaint (and the only one who can provide any remedy for it) is Yahweh. As Moses says: “N ot against us are your grumblings, but against Yahweh” (16:8). Thus again does Yahweh dem onstrate the Presence he has proven by providing for Israel’s need— Israel’s com­ plaints are presented throughout the sequence of story no t as stimuli to Yahweh’s provision, b u t as embarrassing lapses o f m istrust and even unbelief. Israel was told, “Approach the Presence of Yahweh.” W hen they turned to face the wilder­ ness (the direction of their travel), Yahweh’s glory— his kabod or Presence— appeared in a cloud (16:10), and Moses was told to say to Israel, “Between dusk and dawn, you are to eat meat, and in the m orning you are to be stuffed w ith bread; then you will know by experience that I am Yahweh your G od.” (Exod 16:12) The remedy o f Israel’s need is anticipated in this promise, in term s reflecting the almost hum orous excess of Israel’s com­ plaint, and the purpose of that remedy is stated succinctly: T he Presence is to be dem onstrated by provision, and Israel is to know that Yahweh is, and is here, by their experience of his providence. T hat very evening the promise of meat was fulfilled, and in the m orning that followed, so also was the promise of 48

EXODUS

bread— a double dem onstration of Yahweh’s providential Presence. Both the quails and manna are clearly regarded, wherever m entioned in the Bible (see also Num 11; Ps 78:2329; Ps 105:40; John 6:31-33; 1 C or 10:2-4), as miraculously provided. A ttem pts to explain them as naturalistic phenom ­ ena of some sort are inappropriate, as misplaced as are the similar attempts to explain the mighty acts in Egypt. The quails are only briefly m entioned in the sequence o f story of th e book of Exodus; a fuller account of their arrival, their gathering, and their consum ption is given in the paral­ lel, b u t expanded, narrative of Numbers 11. T he m anna is described much more fully here, and much more briefly in Numbers 11. T he manna was entirely strange to the Is­ raelites—thus their name for it, m an Hu, “w hat is it?” They regarded it as a kind of miracle bread, a view enhanced by its miraculous adequacy to their daily need and by its miracu­ lous m ultiplication for the sabbath, w hen they were n o t to harvest it. A nd Yahweh gave instructions that one day’s ra­ tion of it for one person be kept so that the generations of Israel yet to come could see for themselves this dem onstra­ tion of Yahweh’s providing Presence. As the journey toward Yahweh’s m ountain continued, a second water crisis arose, at a place called Rephidim, desig­ nated by Exodus 19:1-2 and Numbers 33:15 as the final place of encampment before Sinai. This time, there is no water of any kind, and again the people grumble against Moses. They accuse him once more of an Exodus th at can only end in death, this time of thirst (17:3; in 14:11-12, they expected death at the hands of the pursuing Egyptians; in 16:3, death by starvation). Yet again, however, Yahweh’s proven Presence is demon­ strated, this time as Yahweh directs Moses to “a rock in H oreb” on which he will be standing, and w hich yields a spring of fresh water w hen Moses, following Yahweh’s in­ struction, strikes it w ith his rod. The designation of this The Sequence of Story

49

rock as “in H oreb” connects this miracle of supply w ith the m ountain of Yahweh’s revelation of his Presence to Moses, and it also confirms the proxim ity of the wilderness destina­ tion toward which Moses is leading Israel. Because of their complaining, even in the face of all they have experienced, Moses calls the place of their encampment “Testing and Dissatisfaction” (Massah and M eribah). The justification of this accusation by descriptive name is a trenchant summary of Israel’s unbelievable disbelief and an indication of the continuing tension of the sequence of story of the book of Exodus: They had asked, “Is Yahweh present w ith us, or not?” He had promised to be present, of course. A nd he had proven that Presence, beyond any reasonable doubt and beyond even the Pharaoh’s divinely pressured doubt. He had dem onstrated th at Presence, by his provision of water and meat and bread in the barrenness of the wilderness. A nd yet his own chosen people, the elect descen­ dants of Abraham, those who had seen it all w ith their own eyes, could still somehow doubt, and actually ask, “Is Yahweh present w ith us, or not?” Already their greatest doubt and their most incredible disobedience are in view, and beyond that the litany o f doubts and disobedience of every disbeliev­ ing believer throughout the range of the O ld Testament story, the biblical story, and even our own story of belief and disbelief. Also at Rephidim, Israel encountered the first in w hat was to be a series of armed enemies intent on blocking their way. O nce again, Yahweh must dem onstrate his proven Presence, this time by enabling Israel’s forces to defeat the forces of Amalek, who had joined battle w ith them. Moses took up a position on a hilltop overlooking the battlefield and lifted his hands, perhaps holding “the staff of G od.” Israel was able to prevail against Amalek only as long as Moses continued hold­ ing up his hands; thus w hen Moses grew tired, A aron and H ur, the son of Caleb, supported his hands until Joshua had 50

EXODUS

defeated the Amalekites. The involvement of Yahweh in this deliverance is emphasized n ot only by th e reference to the staff of God, and by th e divine encouragement (or perhaps even power) transm itted through Moses' uplifted hands. M ore specifically it is underlined still by Yahweh’s promis­ sory curse utterly to “efface the recollection of Amalek,” a curse Moses is to w rite down in “the book” (perhaps “The Book of the Wars of Yahweh” quoted in Numbers 21:14-15). Yahweh’s involvement is also emphasized by the altar nam ed “Yahweh is my standard,” a name explained so: “Because a hand has been against Yah’s throne, there will be battle betw een Yahweh and Amalek, from one generation to another” (17:15-16). T he interference of Amalek w ith Israel’s progress tow ard H oreb/Sinai is taken by \ as an attack upon himself, and it becomes an opportunity for yet another dem onstration of his Presence w ith Israel, this tíme in providential protection and the enhancem ent o f mil­ itary skills and strength. T he final narratives of Yahweh’s provision and guidance in the sequence o f story in the book of Exodus b oth involve Moses’ father-in-law, Jethro/R euel/H obab. T he first o f those narratives (18:1-12) is a narrative of reunion; the sec­ ond o f them (18:13-27) is a narrative of guidance. T he first one provides a logical conclusion to the story of Moses’ departure from his family in M idian and his retu rn to Egypt to bring fo rth his people Israel. T he second is an im portant anticipation o f w hat is to transpire in Yahweh’s presentation o f his Presence to Israel assembled at Sinai. A nd it is also an instructive memory of th e beginnings of Israel’s legal sys­ tem — one th at is illuminating for the sequence of require­ m ent extending from Exodus 20 through Exodus 23 (see pp. 86-93). T he narrative of reunion is an appropriate ending o f the Exodus story, w ith its summary, for Jethro’s benefit, o f all th at had transpired in Egypt and at the sea. In them atic The Sequence of Story

51

term s also, it is the im portant conclusion to the separation m otif set forth repeatedly in the sequence of story in the book of Genesis and hinted at in the account of Moses’ discovery of home in M idian (Exod 2:16-22). This narrative, therefore, seems logically in place. T he narrative o f guidance, however, seems, at least in term s of a logical sequence, to be out o f place, presupposing as it does th e application to living o f the requirem ents and instructions of Yahweh (see pp. 89-93) th at have yet to be given in the Exodus sequence o f story. Indeed, it w ould appear to fit th e sequence o f story better following Exodus 24, after the covenant w ith Yahweh has been sol­ emnized, or even following Exodus 34, after th at covenant has been renewed and Israel is making ready to depart Sinai. This problem o f sequence cannot have been over­ looked by the compilers o f the book o f Exodus, so the narrative o f guidance m ust have been placed w here it is for some good reason. I suggest th at the reason is them atic and theological. T he separation m otif is reflected in the stories o f Cain (Gen 4:10-16), Hagar and Ishmael (Gen 21:8-21), K eturah’s sons (Gen 25:1— 6), and Esau (Gen 25:19-34; 27:1-45; 28:6-9; 32:3-6; 33:1-20). O ver against these stories of nomadic wan­ dering in the East are the stories of those who settle into a life in locations more or less fixed in the land promised: Seth (Gen 5:3), Isaac (Gen 24:1-10; 25:6), and Jacob (Gen 28:1-5; 33:12—18; 35:5-15). T he only meeting in later life of the half-brothers Ishmael and Isaac was at their father’s burial at the cave of M achpelah (Gen 25:9, 11-18). Jacob and Esau, following their reunion upon Jacob’s return from Paddanaram, were not able to dwell in the same area (Gen 36:6-8). T he subsequent journey of Jacob and his sons to Egypt, following the travel and the prosperity there of Joseph, amounts to a further separation from the Esau branch of the family, nowhere m entioned in the O ld Testament as having

52

EXODUS

any connection whatever w ith the famine in Canaan, the sojourn in Egypt, or the Exodus from there. A t the begin­ ning of the sequence of story in Exodus, therefore, the family of Abraham, Yahweh’s election-people, stands di­ vided, separated into tw o branches by the greed, jealousy, and strife that followed them. Consequently, it is a m atter of urgency th at the family be reunited before Yahweh’s great presentation to them of his Presence, his invitation of them into covenantal response, and his fulfillm ent for them of his promise of land. So Moses becomes the medium of reconciliation and re­ union of the tw o parts of Abraham’s family: His newfound family in M idian turns out to be, in what I have elsewhere called “one of those remarkable connections so recurrent in the Bible,”20 just the other branch of his ancestral family. Jethro becomes the symbol of the C ain/K eturah/Ishm ael/ Esau side of the family— the nomadic, “Eastern,” transJordan side. A aron becomes the symbol o f the Seth/S arah/ Isaac/Jacob side, the settled, “W estern,” promised-land side. In the communion meal symbolizing this reunion, for this reason, the principal figures are Jethro and Aaron. Moses is not m entioned as even having a part in that meal, and it is Jethro, not Aaron, who receives and distributes the meat and the bread (Exod 18:12). T he references to Moses’ tw o sons at the beginning o f this account of reunion are a fu rth er testim ony to these connections. Jethro has kept Moses’ family during his ab­ sence; he now brings Zipporah and the tw o boys (only one is m entioned in Exodus 2:21-22 and 4:25, though 4:20 refers to “sons”) to rejoin Moses “in the wilderness where he was camped, there at the m ountain of G od” (18:5). T he interpretation of G ershom ’s name, “a stranger have I been in a land foreign to m e” is repeated (see 2:22) in reference to Moses’ stay in Egypt, and the second son’s name is given as Eliezer, “my G od is help,” in reference to the deliverance o f The Sequence of Story

53

the Exodus: “T he G od of my father was my help; thus he rescued me from Pharaoh’s sword” (18:4). Jethro is reported to have heard about the Exodus, and perhaps also the mighty acts of Yahweh and the dem onstra­ tions of his proven Presence— for th at reason he came to Sinai, bringing Moses’ family to him. Even so, however, Jethro quite naturally has to hear the w onderful report at first hand, from Moses himself. U pon hearing it, Jethro blesses Yahweh, summarizing Moses’ proof and dem onstration of the Presence of Yahweh, and making a confession o f faith in Yahweh th at is all his own: “Now I know for certain th at Yahweh is greater than all the gods” (18:11a). This con­ fession, and th e fact that Jethro presides at the com m union meal—w hen added to his role in guiding Moses in applying the principles of life in covenant w ith Yahweh, and consid­ ered w ith the fact th at Yahweh presents him self to Moses and Israel in the territory of M idianite nomadism— has given rise to the supposition that Moses first learned about Yahweh from Jethro. T he narrative of guidance in Exodus 18:13-17, however logically a non sequitur it may be, meshes w ith the prepara­ tion of Israel for Yahweh’s presentation of his Presence. Just as the tw o sides of the family of Abraham need to be re­ united before Yahweh comes to them , so also does Moses need instruction in the application to life o f Yahweh’s re­ quirem ents and instruction. O nce again, it is Jethro who stands out as the figure of authority, Jethro w ho gives Moses pointed and detailed counsel, counsel Moses is reported as following to the letter and w ithout question. Indeed, Jethro represents the counsel he gives as a divine command (18:23), the obedience of which will ensure G od’s Presence (18:19). T he whole impression of this narrative is consonant w ith the picture of Jethro as Moses’ m entor, and A aron’s, in all m atters relating both to the worship of Yahweh and also to life in obedience w ith Yahweh’s expectation.

54

EXODUS

T he stim ulus for Jethro’s advice to M oses is th e obvi­ ously impossible w orkload th e people’s needs have placed upon Moses. They m ust wait long hours for M oses to get to them and th eir requests, and th e num ber o f them needing an interpretation of th e divine “requirem ents and instruc­ tions” is rapidly exceeding th e tim e and energy M oses has to give. Moses’ explanation is th at th e inquiries of th e peo­ ple are actually inquiries o f G od. T he im plication is th at only Moses, as th e interm ediary passing along Yahweh’s instructions, is in a position, o r has th e authority, to deal w ith them . Jethro’s advice is linked to this valid point. Moses m ust continue his role as authoritative intermediary, b u t he m ust save his time and strength for th at unique task by delegating responsibility to carefully chosen “m en o f ability” and integrity for the routine, repeated problems for w hich divine guidance has already been obtained and successfully applied. Jethro says, “Every complex problem, they shall bring to you, and every routine problem they shall deal w ith. T hus will things be lighter for you: they will carry the load w ith you. If you follow this procedure, as G od charges you to do, th en you will he able to stand up under the pressure, and all this people as well will go to their ow n place satisfied.” (18:22b-23) This advice Moses followed to the letter, and w hen he had selected these “leaders” and “set them in charge” of units o f the people of decreasing size from a thousand to ten, They decided cases for the people on a continuing basis: th e difficult problems, they brought straight to Moses; every routine problem, they dealt w ith. (18:26) The Sequence of Story

55

W hat we are given here, albeit in a somewhat developed form, is an ancient tradition of the origin and working of the legal system of Israel, w ith its A ncient Near Eastern distinc­ tion betw een laws of principle, universal in application (apodictic laws), and laws of situation, restricted in application (casuistic laws) and based on precedents and solutions previ­ ously successful. T he them e that has drawn these Jethro narratives to their present location, as I have said already, is the preparation of Israel for Yahweh’s presentation to them of his Presence. T hat preparation comes first in the reunion of the divided descendants of Abraham, second in the instruction Jethro gives for worshiping Yahweh and for applying to life the principles of living in covenant w ith him — principles soon to be revealed in the sequence of story as an integral part of Yahweh’s presentation of his Presence. By placing these Jethro narratives here, before the giving of the requirem ents and instructions w ith which they are in one way or another concerned, the storytellers of Exodus have given a striking emphasis to the need for special preparation for the unique moments of faith. A nd they have, at the same time, given an im portant rem inder of the desert origins of Israel’s faith. G od p resen tin g h is P resence Yahweh’s presentation of his Presence to Israel while the nation was gathered on the plain before H oreb/Sinai is the very center of the sequence of story of the book of Exodus. In a way, it is the center also of the sequence o f story of the O ld Testament, and of the Bible, taken as a whole, for the coming of G od is the subject of the biblical story. The account of the presentation, the event toward which the entire sequence of story of Exodus has been moving, is resonant with an excitement the contemporary reader tends too often to miss. A fter so many weeks of turm oil in Egypt; 56

EXODUS

after the heart-stopping suspense of the final, unbelievable release, the hope-shattering pursuit and the miraculous res­ cue at the sea; after the frightening shortages and wonderful provisions of the wilderness; and after the arrival of Israel at Horeb/Sinai (the mountain about which Moses had told them so often and toward which he had led them so urgently), the people’s expectancy had to have been at manic levels. The narrative of Yahweh’s self-revelation— even at this distance, and despite much rearrangem ent and some over­ lay— still tingles w ith excitement. It continues a suspense that has been building from the beginning of the sequence of story, and sets in m otion an imagery that echoes in every O ld Testament reference to the coming of God. Following the further notice (cf. 18:5) of Israel’s arrival at Sinai, we are told that “Moses w ent up towards G od.” As it now stands, Exodus 19 includes at this point both a covenant-renewal sequence of memory (19:3b— 6), a response to it (19:7-8), and a further authorization of Moses (19:9). T he narrative of Yahweh’s presentation of his Presence thus actually begins w ith his instructions for the preparation of Israel (19:10-15). These instructions, which serve to heighten the drama of the moment of self-revelation, make the point that the pro­ tocols of dress and readiness for the arrival of Yahweh’s Presence are a reflection of the specialness of the experience. The people are to be “set apart for holiness” by: 1. washing their clothes, 2. contemplating the experience before them for tw o days, 3. learning the boundaries of Yahweh’s powerful holi­ ness, boundaries they are not to cross, upon pain of death, and 4. abstaining from sexual intercourse— in keeping w ith the requirem ents reflected elsewhere in such pas­ sages as 1 Samuel 21:1-6 and Leviticus 15:16-33. The Sequence of Story

57

Since both ritual uncleanness and holiness are regarded in the O ld Testament as communicable by any physical con­ tact, even an indirect one, the boundaries of the people’s approach to Yahweh’s m ountain were to be protected by the stoning or shooting (by archers or slingers) of any person or beast w ho violated them . These preparations made, and these prohibitions ob­ served, on the third day after Israel’s arrival at Sinai, at day­ break, the awesome event, long anticipated, happened. T he report of it even now rumbles w ith an ominous, distant thun­ der and echoes w ith the eerie vibrato of the ram’s horn draw­ ing nearer. We can almost feel the prickly static of the lightning near at hand, and find ourselves half eager and half reluctant to peer through the brightness of its licking illumi­ nation into the thick cloud and heavy smoke as the whole m ountain shakes beneath our feet. The experience of H oreb/ Sinai is our experience. The sequence of story in Exodus puts us there, if we read it w ith faith. Despite Moses’ interm ediary role the im portant original insistence of this account— that Yahweh’s presentation of his Presence was to all Israel— still shines through. This essential emphasis is clearly made by (1) the preparation o f all the people for the advent o f the third day, a preparation justified by the statem ent, “They are to be completely ready by the third day, because on the third day Yahweh will come down, before the eyes of the whole people, onto M ount Sinai” (19:11); (2) the report that, w hen the third day arrived, “Moses led the people out from the camp to encounter G od” (19:17a); (3) the reaction of the people to their experi­ ence of Yahweh’s self-revelation of his Presence, “and all the people were experiencing the rumblings of thunder and the bolts of lightning and the sound of the ram’s h o rn and the m ountain smoking: and as the people took it in, they trem bled and drew some distance back” (20:18); and (4) the continuing tradition th at Yahweh’s own voice, sounding

58

EXODUS

fo rth from the fire, was heard by all the people: “These words [the Ten Commandments] Yahweh spoke to all your congregation before the m ountain, from w ithin the fire, the cloud and the heavy darkness, a great voice.” (D eut 5:22; see also D eut 4:11-14,32-33,35-36; 5:4,23-26). It is an experience absolutely unique in the biblical record. T he only narrative even generally parallel to it is the story in Acts 2 o f the advent, upon the confused disciples, of the Holy Spirit of God. Well might Israel have been terrified to the point o f death, even before they heard Yahweh speaking. A nd then that voice came—who can imagine the sound of it? W hat it spoke was this: “I am Yahweh, your God, who brought you forth from the land of Egypt. . . . You are not to have other gods. You are not to make for yourself a shaped image. . . . You are n o t to employ the name o f Yahweh your G od to an empty purpose. . . . Remember the sabbath day. . . . Give honor to your father and your m other. . . . You are n o t to kill. You are not to commit adultery. You are n o t to steal. You are n o t to give against your neighbor a lying testimony. You are not to desire for yourself the house of your neighbor.” (Exod 20:2-4a, 7a, 8a, 12a, 13-17a) This succinct form of the Ten Commandments is my at­ tem pt to suggest their original and briefer statem ent, a com­ pactness that justifies the designation “the Ten W ords” in Exodus 34:28 and Deuteronomy 4:13 and 10:4. We may rea­ sonably surmise an even briefer, more memorable form for The Sequence of Story

59

these ten principles o f living in covenant relationship w ith Yahweh, especially in view o f their inclusion in th e se­ quence of story of Yahweh’s self-revelation of his Presence on M ount H oreb/Sinai. As th at story now stands, both in the book of Exodus and in other recollections of it in Deuteronom y 4 and 5 and elsewhere in the O ld Testament, these ten principles are that presentation— an integral part, indeed the essential part— of Yahweh’s theophany to Israel. They are not to be taken out of the sequence of story as disruptive o f it (as some literary critics have done) for they are that story, n o t an intrusion into i t T heir beginning is a repetition of Yahweh’s self-presenta­ tion (“I am Yahweh”), a link w ith the fathers (“your G od”), and a summary o f the proof and dem onstration o f his Pres­ ence (“w ho brought you fo rth from the land o f Egypt”). T heir order describes the tension of revelation and re­ sponse th at the H oreb/Sinai presentation o f Presence is: T he first four commandments are principles guiding Is­ rael’s relationship to Yahweh; th e last six are principles guiding Israel’s relationships to one another and to the larger hum an family because of their relationship w ith Yah­ weh. These commandments are th e fundam ental pattern for Israel’s response to Yahweh’s self-revelation, through their daily worship and by their daily behavior. T he statem ent “I am Yahweh” is a declaration, as we have seen, o f Yahweh’s real and active Presence in Israel’s midst. T he Ten W ords th at follow are an explanation by expecta­ tion of w hat and how Yahweh is, and is here. They identify and describe the Yahweh w ho has come to Israel by stating w hat he requires o f those w ho know th at he is and is here. They set fo rth a covenant of being w ith the G od w ho is— Israel is to be a certain way because o f the way Yahweh is— “the O ne W ho Always Is.” They are a gift to an Israel needing to know how to live in G od’s company. Yahweh’s theophanic address to Israel is therefore 60

EXODUS

introduced with a statement of his nature (“I am Yahweh”) and continues with a statement of their identity (“your God, who brought you forth from the land of Egypt”). It then moves on to a compact summary of what this means for their living. The first of Yahweh’s expectations is absolute priority and total loyalty. Those who are to be as his people are to have no other gods—they are to seek out and worship him alone. T he next three expectations are descriptions of how Israel is and is not to express devotion to Yahweh. They are n o t to use any shaped image as a means of focus for their worship, individual or corporate. They must worship him as he is, mysterious and invisible, and n o t as they m ight envision him to be or w ant him to be. They are to be completely serious about Yahweh’s Presence among them , respecting his Pres­ ence as symbolized by the gift of his name, Yahweh. T hat name and Presence is n ot to be used “to em pty purpose.” In relation to this priority— this acceptance of Yahweh as he presents himself, and this respect for the Presence declared by his name— Israel is also to observe w ithout lapse the final day o f each week (the day of stopping kept by Yahweh him ­ self) as a day th at belongs to Yahweh. It is a day set aside for remembering w ho he is so that Israel may know and remem­ ber w ho they are. As the second, third, and fourth of the commandments are extensions of the first commandment, so the final six com­ mandments are built on the foundation laid by the first four. As Yahweh is to be honored for his priority above all life, so one’s father and m other are to be honored for their priority, in Yahweh’s ordering, in the lives of their children. Though this fifth commandment has frequently been directed (by par­ ents especially) toward children, its primary address here is toward adult children, those who are responsible above all for obedience to the covenant, those who are to guide the young and keep the old. T he sixth of Yahweh’s words is a prohibition against any The Sequence of Story

61

act o f killing, the introduction o f violence into the covenant community. T he prohibition is n o t against the killing o f war or capital punishm ent, both of w hich the law o f the O ld Testament permits. It refers to a standard of conduct w ithin the covenant community th at Yahweh expects, and is thus primarily a religious prohibition and n o t a social one. T he same can be said of the seventh o f Yahweh’s words. T he prohibition against adultery here is religious rather than social: A dultery is a denial o f Israel’s specialness and, there­ fore, a denial o f Yahweh’s specialness. For this reason, adul­ tery becomes the charge against the covenant community for the worship of idols (Exod 32:21-34; Isa 57:1-13; Jer 3:6-9; Ezek 23:36-49); adultery was for Israel a turning away from commitment to Yahweh. So also the eighth o f Yah­ weh’s words is a prohibition against an activity th at breaches Israel’s unique human-divine relationship by breaching hu ­ man relationships through the destruction o f tru s t This commandment forbids stealing o f any kind. The last tw o of Yahweh’s Ten W ords prohibit, respec­ tively, the compromise of the reputation of another member of the covenant community, through a lying testimony, and the compromise of one’s own integrity, through an obsessive lusting after something that belongs to another. The reputation of one’s neighbor in the covenant commu­ nity was im portant to that neighbor for obvious reasons. It was im portant to the potential slanderer because of the im­ portance to himself as well as to the whole community o f congenial relationships. Above all, Yahweh’s reputation as God of the community was also at stake. Behavior inimical to Yahweh’s expectation would erode the witness Israel was called to be. T he tenth of the Ten W ords similarly prohibits behavior th at may lead to the disintegration o f personal integrity, and so is, in a way, a kind o f summary com m andm ent Desiring for oneself th at which belongs to another could provide the 62

EXODUS

gateway to the violation of any other one, or even to all, of the other commandments. As in the commandment preceding it, this commandment, too, is first o f all religious and no t social in its concern. T he expanded statem ent of the second, third, fourth, fifth, and ten th of the commandments is an indication of w hich o f the fundam ental principles o f living in covenant w ith Yahweh gave Israel the greatest difficulty. T he longer the statem ent, the more detailed its specification o f people, reasons, or rewards for obedience, the m ore probable is a history o f avoidance, loophole chasing and rationalization. In the second, fourth, and ten th commandments in particu­ lar, the seams o f expansion are especially obvious, and they indicate a history of struggle on Israel’s part to become the people Yahweh desired them to be. These expansions belong, however, to the sequence o f re­ quirem ent in the book of Exodus and n ot to the theophanic address of Yahweh to Israel presented as so central a part of the sequence of story. T hat sequence is best read as a dramatic continuum moving from Moses’ preparation o f Israel for Yahweh’s theophany (the central feature of w hich is his statement of the Ten Words) to the report of Israel’s reac­ tion after experiencing this event and then to their response to the event in the making, breaking and remaking of covenantal commitment. T he sequence o f Yahweh’s presentation o f his Presence to Israel at H oreb/Sinai thus moves from 19:l-3a to 19:10-20a to 20:1-21. T he pow erful tension o f this sequence is far more obvious w hen presented in a serial reading, om itting the interpolations made for a variety of reasons: In the th ird m onth o f the Exodus o f the sons o f Israel from the land o f Egypt, on th e very day they came to th e wilderness o f Sinai . . . Moses w ent up tow ards C od. . . . So Yahweh said to Moses, "G o to th e The Sequence of Story

63

people, and set them apart for holiness today and tomorrow. They are to wash their clothes. They are to be completely ready by the th ird day, because on the th ird day Yahweh will come down, before the eyes o f the w hole people, onto M ount Sinai, You are to estab­ lish boundaries for the people all around, warning, ‘Be careful about going up onto the m ountain, or even touching its outcropping: all w ho touch the m ountain will certainly be executed— no hand is to touch him; rather is he to be stoned to death o r m ortally shot, w hether beast or m an he is n o t to live.’ W ith the draw n-out signal of the bell-horn, they are to come up to the m ountain." So Moses w ent down from the m ountain to the peo­ ple. T hen he set the people apart for holiness, and they washed their clothes. Next, he said to the people, “Be completely ready by the third day. D o n o t have inter­ course w ith a woman.” A nd so it was, on the third day, w hen the m orning was breaking, that there were rumblings of thunder and flashes of lightning, and a heavy cloud upon the m ountain. The sound of a ram’s h o rn was very strong, so much so that all the people in the camp were terri­ fied. T hen Moses led the people out from the camp to encounter God. They took a position at the bottom of the mountain. T he whole of M ount Sinai was smoking from the Presence o f Yahweh, who came down upon it in the fire— indeed, the smoke of it boiled up like smoke from the pottery-kiln, and the whole m ountain shook violently. The sound of the ram’s horn mean­ while was moving, and growing very strong. . . . Thus Yahweh came down upon M ount Sinai, to the top of the m ountain. . . . T hen Yahweh21 spoke all these words, saying,

64

EXODUS

“I am Yahweh, your God, w ho brought you forth from the land of Egypt. . . . You are n ot to have other gods. . . . You are not to make for yourself a shaped image......... You are not to employ the name of Yahweh your G od to empty purpose. . . . Remember the sabbath day. . . . Give honor to your father and your m other. . . . You are n o t to kill. You are not to commit adultery. You are n o t to steal. You are n o t to give against your neighbor a lying testimony. You are n o t to desire for yourself the house of your neighbor. . . .” A nd all the people were experiencing the rumblings of thunder and the bolts of lightning and the sound of the ram’s horn and the m ountain smoking: and as the peo­ ple took it in, they trem bled and drew some distance back. T hen they said to Moses, “You speak w ith us, and we promise we’ll hear—b u t don’t let G od keep speak­ ing w ith us, lest we die!” But Moses replied to the peo­ ple, “D on’t be afraid, for it is w ith the purpose of giving you the experience that G od has come, so that rever­ ence for him might grip you and prevent you from sin­ ning.” So the people took a position at a distance, while Moses approached the thick cloud where G od was. T he conclusion to the story of Yahweh’s self-revelation on H oreb/Sinai is thus a brief notice of Israel’s response to this fascinating and frightening event, an anticipation of the

The Sequence of Story

65

role Moses is to have (as Yahweh’s spokesman to them and as their spokesman to Yahweh) and also a h in t of w hat is to come in the way of their response, both positive and nega­ tive. T hat tw o-part response forms the conclusion to the sequence of story in the book of Exodus, and to that double conclusion we now turn. Israel resp o n d in g to G od’s P resence Israel’s response to Yahweh’s presentation o f his Pres­ ence to them at H oreb/Sinai follows immediately, in the sequence o f story, after the narrative o f frightened response in Exod 20:18-21. T he large block o f m aterial explicating and applying the Ten W ords, Exodus 20:22-23:33, is a p art o f th e sequence o f requirem ent o f the book o f Exodus, inserted at a point appropriate to its purpose b u t neverthe­ less posing an inevitable disruption o f th e dram atic flow and tension of the sequence o f story. So also Exodus 25:131:18, a p art of the sequence o f m em ory o f th e book o f Exodus, is intrusive o f the continuation o f the narrative o f Israel’s response— it too is inserted into the story at a logi­ cally appropriate point, b u t these chapters o f instruction and specification o f the media o f th e w orship o f Yahweh obscure, in th eir present location, and w ith their emphasis o n w orship and daily life in com m itm ent to Yahweh, th e m om entum o f the story o f Israel’s response. T hat momentum is set off by Yahweh’s appearance to, and address of, Israel. It then progresses from a loyal response to a negation of that response (in a betrayal that is disloyalty), to a crisis in which Yahweh threatens to withdraw altogether his Presence just given, and finally to a resolution of that crisis and a renewal of covenant relationship. The insertion of the collection of legal-religious requirements applying the ten principles Yahweh has stated, and of the array of symbolic objects designed to aid worship in Yahweh’s Presence,

66

EXODUS

stretches the sequence of the story of response apart at tw o vital points. Once the inserted material is removed, the se­ quence of story is immediately and obviously restored, as this reading of these verses together, in comparison w ith their location in the received text, makes clear: 20:21:

24:1-2:

So the people took a position at a distance, while Moses approached the thick cloud where God was. Then to Moses he said, “Climb up toward Yahweh: you, and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and bow down in worship at a respectful distance. Moses by himself is to come close to Yahweh—the others are not to come close, nor are the people to climb up with him.”

A t this point there is a narrative describing the ceremony o f the entry of the people of Israel into covenant w ith Yah­ weh (24:3-8), followed by the movement up onto the m oun­ tain of the group of leaders specified in Exod 24:1, where they experience “a vision of G od” and partake of a commu­ nion meal (vv 9-11). T hen Yahweh calls Moses fu rth er up onto the m ountain still, first w ith Joshua and then alone (vv 12-14). T he sequence of story then continues: 24:15-18:

So Moses climbed up higher on the mountain, and the cloud concealed the mountain. Thus the glory of Yahweh settled onto Mount Sinai, and the cloud concealed it six days; then on the seventh day Yahweh called out to Moses from the midst of the cloud. The spectacle of the glory of Yahweh, to the eyes of the sons of Israel, was like a consum­ ing fire at the mountain’s peak. Then Moses went into the midst of the cloud, climbing up higher on the mountain. In fact, Moses was on the mountain forty days and forty nights.

The Sequence of Story

67

32:1:

Then the people realized that Moses was long overdue coming down from the mountain, and so they came together against Aaron, and they said to him. “Get busy! Make gods for us who can lead us, because this Moses, the man who brought us up from the land of Egypt, we have no idea what has become of him.”

T he sequence of story in th e book of Exodus continues this narrative of rebellion and covenant breaking through its compromising course to the account of Yahweh’s mercy and the subsequent renewal o f his covenant relationship w ith Israel. H ere as throughout the sequence, the dom inant them e is Yahweh’s Presence and the difference in living that it demands. T he them atic structure of the sequence o f story is b uilt on the revelation, the proving, and the presentation of that Presence. This is so to such an intense and obsessive degree that when, suddenly and unbelievably, Israel’s behav­ ior raises the prospect of Yahweh’s disappointed withdrawal, the impact is staggering. W hat Yahweh has given to Israel, above all, is himself. Israel’s doubt, because of Moses’ absence, amounts to a rejec­ tion of that g ift T he whole sequence of story is suddenly reversed. Israel, alone in the wilderness, this people so newly become God’s people, can only become a nonpeople, whose situation is far worse than it ever was in the dependent bondage of Egypt. It is a powerful and stark presentation of the reality of Israel’s position throughout history, a paradigm also of the church. W hat is the situation of a community of faith w ith no faith? How can a godly people be godly if they are God-less? W hat is to become of a people who are a people only because G od is among them , if G od departs from them? W hen absence replaces Presence w hat happens to hope? T he Presence of Yahweh is the keystone of the architec­ ture of the sequence of story in Exodus, and the possibility 68

EXODUS

of its withdrawal plunges the narrative into chaos. Israel is left w ith no place to go and no reason to be. This shrill and panic-bringing dissonance is entirely deliberate, brilliantly achieved, and, w ithout the additions that blunt its sharp counterpoint to most of the rest of th e sequence of story in Exodus, it is powerfully effective. The tension of the struggle in Egypt w ith an ambivalent Pharaoh, of the miraculous rescue at the sea, and of the various shortages and perils of the wilderness is resolved w ith Israel’s arrival at Sinai. There, the divided family of Abraham is at long last reunited. Amidst joyous celebration, Moses prepares the people for Yahweh’s arrival “on the third day.” This expectation creates a new kind of tension, one only increased by Yahweh’s advent and the sound of his voice from the fire and the thick cloud upon the m ountain. W hen a terrified Israel pleads w ith Moses to spare them any such experience in their future, he reassures them: Yahweh’s advent to them has their faith as its purpose, th at they might have reverence for him, and so be prevented from sinning (Exod 20:20). This reassurance serves the function, in the sequence o f story, o f anticipating, at the unlikeliest point imaginable, w hat is actually to occur. In other words, Yahweh’s proof of his Presence, and his dem onstration o f it, and his A dvent in presentation of it, do n o t work. They are somehow, incredi­ bly, not enough for Israel. In Egypt, w hen conditions grow more difficult, they com­ plain. A t the sea, w hen the Pharaoh’s pursuit seems about to snatch failure from the arms o f success, they forget all they have seen and whimper about graves. In the wilderness, w hen thirst and hunger overtake them , they whine as though they have never been freed, rescued, and guided— moaning about the great cuisine they enjoyed as slaves in Egypt. A t H oreb/Sinai, w hen the event toward which Moses has drawn them (and for which they have longed and The Sequence of Story

69

prepared themselves) actually arrives, they are terrified and plead w ith Moses to spare them any such encounter in the future. Indeed, they complain about their blessing as though it were a curse. How can we imagine that, w ith the entry o f these people into covenant w ith Yahweh, things are to be any different? How can they hope to see more than they have seen, or experience more than they have experi­ enced already? T he point, o f course, is th a t they have n o t seen, despite their looking, and have n o t really experienced w hat has happened all around them . They are a paradigm o f th e com m unity th at claims to believe, yet does not, really, in every age. T heir making o f covenant w ith Yahweh, solem n and impressive though its symbolic ceremony, seems almost too good to be true following so m any doubts after so many rescues and mercies. G iven the sequence o f story preceding it, and th e terrible narrative o f covenant breaking th at we know will follow it, we may be excused for thinking o f Joshua 24, and o f Joshua’s reluctance to perm it Israel to enter into a covenantal com m itm ent th at he fears they will n o t keep. Moses’ climb up Sinai at Yahweh’s command, accompa­ nied by Aaron, his sons Nadab and A bihu, and seventy o f Israel’s elders has, in th e present composite of the sequence o f story,22 a double purpose. First, Moses is to receive and pass along to Israel the term s, the symbols, and th e cere­ mony of the people’s entry into covenant w ith Yahweh. Second, Moses and Israel’s leaders are to receive an en­ hancem ent o f their authority as leaders in a unique, and still more intim ate, experience of Yahweh’s Presence. Following Yahweh’s instructions, Moses repeats to the peo­ ple the guiding principles of life in covenant w ith Yahweh, then builds at the base of H oreb/Sinai an altar and twelve stone pillars, the former a symbol of Yahweh’s Presence, the latter a symbol of the presence of each of the twelve tribes. 70

EXODUS

Next, he delegates young men to offer the wholly burned offerings and the completion sacrifices that are standard ac­ companiments of covenant making in the O ld Testament. From these sacrifices, Moses takes the blood, dashes half of it upon the altar representing Yahweh’s Presence and, after reading out “the book of the covenant,” dashes the second half of the blood upon the people, w ith these words: “See now the blood of the covenant that Yahweh has contracted w ith you, a covenant made specific by all these words” (24:8). “All these words” refers both to the Ten Commandments and to the extended and specific application of them repre­ sented by the sequence of requirem ent of 20:22-23:33 (see pp. 89-93). Then, well up on the mountain, Moses, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and the elders (representing the “m en of ability” which Jethro had counseled Moses to single out) experience by Yahweh’s invitation a special vision of his Presence, and eat and drink together a meal of communion. The obvious pur­ pose of this unique event is the equipm ent and authentication of Israel’s leaders for the tasks of presentation, interpretation, and guidance they are to undertake. T heir “seeing,” their vi­ sion, o f “the G od of Israel” is absolutely unique in the O ld Testam ent W hat they literally see is described as “something like a mosaic pavement of lapis lazuli, like the span of the heavens in depth” (24:10). It is a composite suggestion, a re­ flection of the midnight blue of an endless night sky and the precious building blocks of divine dwelling places, not unlike our own “pearly gates and streets of gold.” Every w ord of this covenant-making narrative is, in some way, a variation of the them e of Yahweh’s Presence and Israel’s logical, expected, and hoped-for response. Moses is then called higher up the m ountain, where he is to be given additional instructions for both Israel and the leaders, while Israel on the plain below is treated to “the spectacle of the glory of Yahweh” at the top o f the m ountain. The Sequence of Story

71

T he note at the very end o f this narrative, th at Moses was a long tim e up on the m ountain in Yahweh’s Presence, prepares us for the unexpected tu rn the sequence of story in the book of Exodus takes as it now moves tow ard its conclusion. As we have seen already, taking the block of text inserted from the sequence of memory (Exod 25-31) out of the se­ quence of story restores the original, dramatic narrative. T hen Exodus 24:18 and 32:1, read consecutively, present the problem. Moses’ long absence gives rise once again to Israel’s doubt, and then to rising panic. These are the people who doubted and feared following the ten mighty acts, the deliv­ erance at the sea, the variety of provision and guidance in the wilderness, and even the long-expected and carefully prepared for presentation by Yahweh of his Presence at H oreb/Sinal Now, immediately after their great experience of that moment, and despite w hat they have seen w ith their own eyes and heard w ith their own ears, they grow afraid w ith Moses gone and in that fear they ask A aron to “make gods for us who can lead us.” Demanding golden jewelry from the people of Israel, A aron “made a calf w ith a shaped sheathing.” This object was received w ith acclamation as symbolic of the power that made possible their exodus from Egypt. A aron’s construc­ tion of an altar before this image, and his declaration of “a sacred feast day for Yahweh,” make plain that Israel is here attem pting to worship Yahweh, not some new and different deity o r array of deities. Israel’s sin w ith the golden calf is n o t an attem pted displacement or replacement of Yahweh, b u t rather an attem pt to worship him in ways of their choos­ ing instead of in ways specified by him. They even attem pt to mimic their covenant ceremony w ith Yahweh, offering “wholly burned offerings” and bringing “completion offer­ ings” (cf. 24:5), but their desire for a visible symbol of their invisible C od has been denied them already. 72

EXODUS

The mystery of G od’s holy divinity requires us to receive and to worship G od on his terms, n o t ours. G od m ust be m et at a place, and in a m anner, of his choosing. His choices are almost always surprising to us, precisely because our choices are almost always so predictably self-oriented. O ur life in faith must struggle constantly to be open to his guid­ ance, in both our worship and our com m itm ent T he lesson of the golden calf is that self-oriented worship is always a disaster, for both faith and behavior. In the light of the sequence of story to this point in Exodus, we can hardly be surprised at Israel’s foolish aban­ donm ent of the covenantal com m itm ent Given the contin­ ued record of complaining, doubting, and wishy-washiness, we m ight well have expected this defection. A stonishm ent gives way to disgust in the ancient memory of the event that is preserved for us in Psalm 106:19-20: They made a calf at Horeb, They bowed themselves down to an overlaid image. They swapped their Presence for a likeness of a grass-eating bull. It is one more turning back, worse than all the rest, for this time Israel, and n o t just Yahweh, has made promises. Yahweh’s Presence has brought deliverance and guidance and provision and unique relationship. Israel’s selfishness has met that Presence w ith doubt and complaint and fear and an attem pt at manipulation. T he response to the revelation has turned from praise to rebellion. The anger of Moses at this turning is predictable. The judgment of Yahweh is astonishing. Moses shatters the tablets on which Yahweh had w ritten the Ten Words, in a graphic reflection of what Israel has done. T hen he grinds the golden calf into powder, mixes it w ith water, and forces Israel to drink the mixture. Next, he sends the loyal Levites through The Sequence of Story

73

the camp, swords in hand, slaying the rebels, whatever their relationship. Finally, he returns up the m ountain tow ard Yahweh to plead w ith Yahweh on Israel’s behalf. Probably, Exodus 3234 is a composite account,23 and those various actions by Moses, along w ith Yahweh’s responses and the interaction betw een the tw o, represent layers of tradition. In its present composite form, however, this sequence of story has a trem endous impact, w ith Moses’ anger and almost panicstricken attem pts to correct the terrible wrong suggesting a futile anticipation of w hat Yahweh’s judgm ent m ust in­ evitably be. By every standard of ancient N ear Eastern covenant mak­ ing, the result of Israel’s willful violation o f the commitment so willingly and so solemnly made should be abandonm ent of the relationship, curse replacing blessing. T hat is exactly w hat Yahweh proposes to do. H e is, w ith their violation o f the term s of the covenant, under no further obligation to them . He n o t only can abandon Israel w ithout further ado, he really should do so. Com m itm ent has given way to com­ promise, and the response to the revelation of G od’s Pres­ ence has turned from praise to rebellion. T here is no surprise in the severity of Yahweh’s proposals of severance and destruction; the surprise is n o t in w hat Yahweh pro­ poses to do but in w hat Yahweh does do. A t first, Yahweh proposes to bring Israel to an end as his nation, and to make of Moses alone a great nation (32:10). From this course of action Moses dissuades Yahweh by re­ m inding him of w hat the Egyptians m ight say, “For an evil purpose he brought them out, to slaughter them in the mountains, and to obliterate them from the face of the land” (32:12), and of his promise to the Fathers of a numberless progeny and a wide land (32:13). Next, Yahweh commands Moses and Israel to leave H oreb/Sinai, the place of his Presence, announcing th at 74

EXODUS

while he will send a messenger before them to clear the prom ised land o f opposition to them , he will no longer travel in their m idst or go up among them into the land he has given to their Fathers (33:1-2). This “dreadful news” is understandably received by Israel w ith great lam entation— here and henceforth, they put away all festive dress (33:4). They no longer have any cause for celebration, w ith Yahweh gone fro m them . This desperate situation prom pts M oses to ask Yahweh to set aside w hat he has proposed to do, w hat indeed he has every right: to do, and to go up w ith Israel through the wilderness and into th e land prom ised to them . W ithout Yahweh’s Presence, this people, w ho have only just becom e a people, will be once m ore a nonpeople: it is only in his Presence th at M oses and Israel are “separated from all th e people w ho are upon th e surface of the earth” (33:16). A nd so it is that Yahweh decides what he will do w ith Israel (cf. 32:34 and 33:5e). C ontrary to all expectation, against what Yahweh himself has said that he would do, and in violation of w hat is correct by all the standards of covenantal obligation, Yahweh decides to remain bound to the people who have rejected him, to go up w ith them in spite of their rebellion, to show them grace instead of just and fair pay­ m ent, to give them blessing instead of curse. U nderstandably elated, Moses boldly asks Yahweh to show him his glory, th at is, his Presence. This request sets in m otion a second revelation to Moses of Yahweh’s special nature. T he first such request, made by Moses in his first m eeting w ith Yahweh on H oreb/Sinai, prom pted the reve­ lation o f the special name Yahweh, “th e O ne W ho Always Is,” along w ith Yahweh’s explanation o f its meaning (3:1314). This first request led to Yahweh’s declaration “I AM, I REALLY AM ,” and the gift of the special name containing th at confession. T he second request of Moses prom pts Yahweh’s own The Sequence of Story

75

description of how he is, a description that begins where the first response to Moses left off, w ith the special name, Yahweh. Thus at the beginning of the sequence of story in Exodus Yahweh declares to Moses, “I AM, and my name saying that is: Yahweh.” A nd here at the conclusion to the sequence of story, Yahweh declares to Moses, “Yahweh! Yah­ weh! This is how I AM .” These tw o special gifts of knowing are like brackets of revelation enclosing their own exposi­ tion, for nearly every line of the narrative betw een them illustrates them . Yahweh is tenderly protective o f Moses, arranging for him to ascend the m ountain for the special revelation he is to receive, guiding him to a place of special shelter, and in­ structing him to prepare replacement tablets for the Ten W ords, in anticipation of the renewal of Israel’s shattered covenant relationship. Then, w hen Yahweh’s instructions have been followed, and Moses is safely in the “fissure o f the rocky cliff,” Yahweh descends onto the m ountain “in the cloud,” passes in front of Moses, and calls out: “Yahweh! Yahweh! — a G od compassionate and favorably disposed; — reluctant to grow angry, and full of unchanging love and reliableness; — keeping unchanging love for the thousands; — taking away guilt and transgression and sin; — certainly not neglecting just punishm ent, holding responsible for the guilt of the fathers both sons and grandsons, to the third and fourth generations.” (34:6-7) Moses’ immediate response to this profound self-descrip­ tion by Yahweh was to bow low to the ground, prostrating himself in worship. No other response would seem appro­ priate. Simply reading this magnificent recital should be

76

EXODUS

enough to prom pt in any believer a similar response, since it is the one place in th e entire Bible where G od is represented describing him self in detail. T here is little reason to doubt th at this description repre­ sents an ancient confession of belief about Yahweh. It is directly reflected in eight O ld Testament passages (Num 14:18; N eh 9:17; Pss 86:15; 103:8; 145:8; Joel 2:13; Jon 4:2; Nah 1:3) and alluded to in other places in the O ld Testa­ m ent. Its summary listing, and the m anner in which pieces and even phrases of it appear elsewhere in the O ld Testa­ m ent suggest that this description grew to its present form across many years, and was subject to alteration and expan­ sion to fit varying circumstances. Its content here supports such a view, for the description handily summarizes the se­ quence of story in the book of Exodus. Yahweh has been compassionate toward Israel in Egyptian bondage, and favorably disposed tow ard them , has rescued them and brought them to himself. Despite all their com­ plaining, at the sea and in the wilderness and even at H oreb/ Sinai, he has been slow to anger and consistent in his un ­ changing love toward them. Now, despite the negation, from their side, of the covenant relationship, he has (by agreeing to continue along w ith them) taken away their guilt, their transgression, and their sin. Even so, for their own sake, he has taken seriously their disobedience o f their own free promise, and is holding them responsible for it. They re­ main, though forgiven and disciplined, Yahweh’s own pos­ session, his people, despite their stubbornness, just as Moses asks (34:9). Thus is it both possible and necessary for th e broken covenant to be remade. This renewal Yahweh proceeds to initiate, n o t by a review o f each of the Ten W ords b u t by emphasizing the commandments (and specific applications o f them) th at have been violated in the making and the worshiping of the golden calf. Yahweh announces, “Look: I The Sequence of Story

77

am making a covenant” (34:10). A nd the emphasis of this covenant is precisely the point at which Israel compromised the first covenant, absolute and undiluted loyalty to Yahweh, and to Yahweh alone. For this reason, the very first direct command of this covenant-renewal sequence is a command to Israel to avoid compromising entanglem ents w ith the peoples w ho will be their neighbors in the land o f prom ise (34:12-13). Follow­ ing this command is a sequence o f requirem ent (see pp. 93-95) th at begins w ith th e first tw o o f the Ten W ords, the tw o violated first of all in the making and the w orship o f the golden calf. T he sequence moves on th en to a sum­ mary series o f seven requirem ents, directly linked to th e kinds o f compromise th at w ould lead unavoidably to th e violation o f these first tw o o f the Ten Com m andm ents (34:18-26). The covenant-renewal sequence ends w ith a command to Moses to w rite down these words (designed to prevent an­ other golden-calf-type lapse) and w ith a note that Yahweh24 w rote down on the stone tablets, once more, the Ten W ords. N o account is given of any ceremony of renewal parallel to the one described in Exod 24, b u t we may well assume that one took place, laying particular stress on total loyalty and commitment to Yahweh, whose “very name” is “Jealous,” and whose jealousy is justified, because it is jealousy only of those who have made promises to him. Such a report of a ceremony o f covenant renewal would have made an appropriate ending to the sequence of story in the book of Exodus. T he fact th at no such ending is pro­ vided, we m ust remember, is primarily because the sequence of this story does n o t end w ith the end of Exodus, or o f Leviticus, or even of Numbers. T he story of Israel’s response to the revelation of G od’s Presence concludes w ith a kind of supplem entary postscript

78

EXODUS

reestablishing th e authority of Moses as Yahweh’s spokes­ m an after the debacle of the golden calf. We are told that Moses, descending from H oreb/Sinai after his long period in Yahweh’s Presence, had a shining face. So obvious was this condition that A aron and the Israelites were frightened by him. W hen Moses called out to them , and then spoke to Israel’s leaders w ithout harm ful results, Israel too ap­ proached him. O u t of regard for the people’s feelings, Moses began wearing a veil in their presence except w hen he was reporting to them some w ord from Yahweh. O n those occa­ sions, out of respect for Yahweh’s W ord and symbolizing the divine authority of the words he spoke, Moses left off th e veil. T he donning of the veil thus signified the differ­ ence betw een Moses’ own words and those he reported from Yahweh. W hereas Moses’ first descent from H oreb/Sinai w ith the stone tablets containing Yahweh’s Ten W ords m et w ith re­ jection and chaotic orgy, this second descent, w ith the new tablets, m et w ith acceptance and an awed respect. Israel’s response to Yahweh’s Presence became once m ore both w orshipful and obedient For a while. Each one o f us, in a quite personal way, knows both how long and, sometimes, at least, why. G od settles dow n in Isra e l’s m idst There is one brief note more in th e sequence o f story in the book o f Exodus. It comes following the final sequence o f memory, w hich describes the im plem entation of Yah­ weh’s instructions for th e media o f Israel’s worship in his Presence. W hen Moses and those assisting him com plete all the w ork o f building the Tabernacle, its C ourt, its furnish­ ings, and the priestly vestm ents and equipm ent, Yahweh’s Presence fills the Tabernacle. This brief ending paragraph to

The Sequence of Story

79

the sequence of story in the book o f Exodus is exultant, almost hymnic in nature. We are very nearly given the im­ pression that Yahweh, eager to take up his residence among this people for whom and from whom he has suffered so much, comes rapidly b u t majestically into the place symbol­ izing his Presence, as soon as it is ready. A nd there in their midst, Yahweh guides his people Israel, in their travels and in their living.

80

EXODUS

3 THE SEQUENCE OF REQUIREMENT

As I have noted, at the end o f chapter 1 and at the begin­ ning of chapter 2, the sequence of story in Exodus has been pulled apart at appropriate points for the insertion of w hat I call sequences of requirement and sequences o f memory. This rearrangement of w hat came to be the canonical form o f our book of Exodus took place, in all probability, across a lengthy period of time and in successive layers related to the evolving need of the community of belief. It was done so brilliantly that the book o f Exodus that has come down to us presents us w ith a quite remarkable unity. So remarkable is this unity, indeed, that we are tem pted to think of Exodus, w hen we first begin to read it, as an uninterrupted contin­ uum. We can almost understand the tradition that ascribed this text, along w ith the other four books of the Pentateuch, to Moses. U pon a closer reading, however, the seams of the book of Exodus become more and more obvious to us. D ifferent literary styles, distinctive sets of special terms, unique em­ phases, contrasting sets of particular concerns, repeated and The Sequence of Requirement

81

conflicting versions o f the same events, and the presence side by side o f sections of narratives, sections o f ceremony, sections of religious requirem ent, sections of social regula­ tion, and sections of liturgical arrangem ent and symbol— all give us an increasing sense of the patchw ork quilt appear­ ance of Exodus. A t the same time, however, upon a sensitive reading of all of Exodus, or even large sections of it, we cannot escape an impression of wholeness, a certain sense of oneness, the unity that strikes us on a first reading. This unity is of course a unity of theme. Everywhere Exodus is a report and exposition of the theological theme, Yahweh’s Presence among his peo­ ple, among those who believe, at least some of the time, both that he is and is here, and who struggle, therefore, to live in accord w ith such a reality. In the Exodus volume of th e W ord Biblical Commentary, I have attem pted to examine Exodus in some detail in its com ponent parts. In that same volume, however, I have also tried to present a translation and a commentary treatm ent that w ould present the them atic consistency of Exodus, and would make plain our need to think as carefully of the oneness of the book of Exodus that we have as we do o f the variety of separate narratives, and legal and liturgical collections, th at may have preceded it. My concern in this compact survey is to emphasize this oneness of them e by presenting in sequence the three major types of material th at are woven together in Exodus, each in its own separate sequence. This admittedly artificial appor­ tionm ent of the text has three advantages: • It enables us to perceive the full weight o f each o f the three components, apart from the interweaving of the other two. • It enables us to see how consistently the one m otivat­ ing them e o f Presence governs each com ponent, no 82

EXODUS

m atter how different its separate styles and ap­ proaches. • It gives us a clearer perception o f the unity the canoni­ cal Exodus presents to us by showing how its separate parts work. The sequence of story in the book of Exodus presents us w ith a narrative account of the revelation, the proving, the demonstration, and the presentation of Yahweh’s Presence and a narrative account of Israel’s response to that sequence of A dvent The sequence of story is thus above all a record of events. As event inevitably prompts reaction, so the event of Yahweh’s coming and his subsequent invitation of Israel into covenant prompts reaction. T hat reaction is given guidance by a sequence of requirement, setting forth an application of the principles of living in the Presence of Yahweh. By “re­ quirem ent” I mean to suggest all that is generally referred to by such term s as “law” (in both general and particular state­ ment) and “commandment” (in both simple and expanded form). “Requirem ent” here is a general term , inclusive of the principles of life in covenant w ith Yahweh and the applica­ tions of those principles. The events recorded in the sequence o f story in the book of Exodus occur, of course, as all events do, only once in time. If the requirem ent that an event stimulates is to be kept by those who come after, the event must somehow be kept alive, a m atter of the present rather than o f the past. That, of course, is where the third com ponent, the sequence o f memory, comes into play. In no book of the O ld Testa­ m ent are these tw o additional sequences, crucially supple­ m ental to the sequence of story, presented so effectively as they are in the book of Exodus. T here are three sequences of requirem ent in Exodus, and one brief section in the sequence of story describing how these requirem ents were applied. Each of the requirem ents The Sequence of Requirement

83

listed is a specific response to the need o f Israel to live and work differently because o f the reality of Yahweh’s Presence.T heir declaration, no less than the declaration of the story of Exodus, is that G od is, and is here. H ow the requirements are applied to life In the present arrangement of Exodus, a brief description of how Yahweh’s principles for living in covenant w ith him are to be applied is given in the sequence o f story when Israel first arrives at Sinai, even before Yahweh’s self-revelation and giving of those principles. T hat description is included as a part of the narrative of the rendezvous of Moses and Israel w ith Jethro and Moses’ family. The story has been discussed above, as a narrative of guidance. O f concern here is the description o f how Moses is to apply Yahweh’s principles for life in his Presence, a description given before the principles themselves are given, probably because of a need to present the Jethro traditions all in one place. As we have seen already, Jethro, who has been m entor and man-in-charge to Moses, A aron, and Joshua, critiques Moses’ procedure in applying Yahweh’s “requirem ents and instructions” to Israel’s everyday problems. U pon his advice, Moses divides the problems being brought to him into tw o categories. He delegates authority for dealing w ith repetitive situations to a series of carefully selected “m en o f ability, who have reverence for God, m en of firmness who hate a dishonest profit” (18:21). This division of the problems falls into “complex” problems and “routine” problems. T he com­ plex, which involve a new application o f the “requirem ents and instructions” of Yahweh to a situation w ithout prece­ dent, Moses must deal w ith him self because the application may involve the consultation of Yahweh. The routine, for which such consultation is either unnecessary or has previ­ ously been made, can be handled by the “able m en.” Thus 84

EXODUS

does Moses reduce both his own workload and the waiting period for those w ho wish to consult him. T he resultant pattern of application is as follows: Yahweh, Revealing H im selfy Yahweh’s Principles for Living in His Presence Given at H oreb/Sinai to All Israel The Basic Application of These Principles Is Universal and U nconditional Any Special A pplication R equired by a U nique Situation Is Made First by Moses A ny Special Application R equired by a Recurrence o f a U nique Situation Is Made by Moses’ “Able M en” According to Already Established Precedent Israel, Yahweh’s Covenant People T he movement o f application is from the source o f guid­ ance, Yahweh, to those in need o f guidance, Israel. T he movement o f guidance is from universal principles to the particular situation posed by a specific set o f circumstances. T he authority for guidance is ultimately Yahweh, b u t estab­ lished solutions of guidance may be repeated continually if th e conditions calling for guidance are the same. T he entire process is operative because of, and under th e inspiration of, Yahweh’s Presence. Indeed, apart from th at Presence the The Sequence of Requirement

85

principles w ould be unnecessary, w ith neither source no r purpose. W hat we have here— set into the sequence o f story describing the revelation, the proving, the dem onstra­ tion, and the presentation of th at Presence— is yet another attestation of the reality of th at Presence. In all likelihood, it is an ancient tradition o f the beginning of Israel’s legal system. Y ahw eh’s p rin cip les fo r co v en an t life w ith h is P resen ce The Ten Commandments, in w hat I have described above (see pp. 58-63) as their compact original form 1 (the Ten W ords m entioned in Exodus 34:28 and D euteronom y 4:13 and 10:4) are a part of the sequence o f story in Exodus. They are presented as a crucial part o f the revelation of Yahweh’s Presence at H oreb/Sinai. They are the words of Yahweh himself, heard n o t just by Moses, b u t by Israel along w ith Moses, w hen the people were assembled after careful prepa­ ration at the foot of the m ountain. A ny attem pt to remove the commandments from the sequence o f story o r to relo­ cate them is thus both misguided and misleading. The commandments as they are presented to us in Exodus 20, however, are also a sequence o f requirem ent within the sequence of story. They function as an integral p art of the story of H oreb/Sinai, but they constitute, as well, the foundation for all o f Yahweh’s “requirem ents and in­ structions,” his fundam ental principles for life in covenant relationship w ith his Presence. As they stand in the received text o f Exodus, six o u t o f ten of these basic principles have an expanded form , and the additions to them make quite clear th at they were re­ ceived and applied as fundam ental requirem ents. These Ten Com m andm ents are th e principles for living in covenant th at are given specific application in th e largest 86

EXODUS

sequence o f requirem ent in th e book of Exodus, “T he Book o f the C ovenant” o f 20:22-23:33. T he basic implication of these ten principles for living in covenant w ith Yahweh’s Presence has been set forth already, as a part o f the survey of the sequence of story. T hat basic implication has, however, been supplem ented in the com­ mandments th at have been expanded, and this supplem enta­ tion is strictly a part of the sequence of requirem ent and does n o t belong to the sequence o f story. M ost extensively supplem ented are the four command­ m ents having to do w ith the prim ary aspect o f Israel’s exis­ tence, the relationship w ith Yahweh. It is understandable th at these commandments were the ones m ost difficult to obey. They are still, because they require that G od be given first place in our lives, absolutely and w ithout reservation, and th at everything connected w ith him in any way be taken seriously.2 O nly G od is to be god to those w ho enter into covenant w ith him (20:3). G od must be taken on his term s alone; he will n o t present him self to us on our term s. We are n o t to impose on him a form, a concept, a behavior, or even a theology inconsistent w ith w ho and w hat and how he is. H e is jealous, justifiably so, o f those w ho have made promises to him. H e takes us seriously and expects us to take him seri­ ously (20:4-6). H is name, the symbol o f his Presence among us, m ust be treated w ith consonant respect; failure to do so is the equivalent o f a failure of belief and will inevitably provoke punishm ent (20:7). T he day of his rest, the sabbath, is to be a day set apart for holiness, for the recreation th at joyful worship is. N o labor is to be undertaken on th at day, either directly o r through some substitutionary person o r animal. G od rests on the seventh day and expects those in covenant w ith him to do so as well (20:8-11). T he six commandments guiding Israel’s relationship w ith other members o f the covenant community and w ith the The Sequence of Requirement

87

hum an family beyond th at community are n o t so fully ex­ panded. This is in part, no doubt, because they were— w ith the exception of the fifth commandment and the ten th commandment— somewhat easier to obey. Despite their hum an direction, however, these commandments too are requirem ents of Yahweh, and keeping them honors him. T he requirem ent of respect for one’s parents, a requirem ent addressed prim arily to adults (for whom parental care as well as child care is a basic responsibility), was apparently so poorly kept th at it alone among the commandments came to have a reward tacked onto it. This supplem ent has a double edge: a long life for honoring one’s parents, a short life for dishonoring them (20:12). Rebellion against one’s parents could be a capital offense by O ld Testam ent law (21:15,17; Lev 20:9; D eut 21:18-21; 27:16). T he sixth, seventh, eighth and n inth commandments re­ ceived no expansion. The ten th commandment, somewhat easier to abuse, received a supplem ent somewhat akin to that added to the fourth commandment, closing loopholes for abuse. In a way, indeed, the ten th commandment serves as a summary requirem ent, descriptive as m uch of an attitude as of a deed. Taken as such, it forms a kind o f matching bracket to the first commandment: T he first principle of life in covenant requires an uncompromising loyalty to Yahweh; this one requires an attitude o f heart and m ind that would close off much of the possibility of violating the other prin­ ciples of life in covenant These ten basic principles o f living in relationship w ith Yahweh’s Presence thus set forth his fundam ental expecta­ tions of his people, and so constitute, both logically and actually, the first sequence o f requirem ent in the book o f Exodus. T he question o f how these principles were to be applied to the circumstances and problems of everyday liv­ ing is taken up by the second, and necessarily most complex, of the sequences of requirem ent.

88

EXODUS

T he application of Yahweh’s orinciples T he longest o f the three sequences of requirem ent in Exodus has been inserted into the sequence of story imme­ diately after the account of Yahweh’s presentation of his Presence upon H oreb/Sinai and o f his giving directly to Israel his ten principles for living in covenant w ith him. This location is entirely appropriate, since this collection o f “guiding decisions” and “guiding principles” is a summary o f concrete application of the principles stated by the Ten W ords, made to m eet the needs arising from the problems o f everyday living. These specific applications were arrived at and p u t into practice along the lines described in the narrative of Jethro’s advice in Exodus 18:13-27. They are perhaps the clearest example in the O ld Testament of the transition from the basic requirem ents o f Yahweh’s covenant law to the more specialized application of those requirem ents made neces­ sary by the occurrence o f particular situations o f need. Like such other collections o f O ld Testament legal mate­ rial as the “Holiness Code” o f Leviticus 17-26 or the wideranging laws of Deuteronom y 12-26, this “Book of the Covenant,” so named from the reference of Exodus 24:7,3 is a diverse collection. It reflects a wide range of contexts and probably the passage of a long period of time. It is made up o f laws applying the principles o f the Ten W ords, and other principles derivative from them , to particular life situations. It also has laws setting forth entirely new principles con­ nected w ith the Ten W ords in only th e most general ways. T he first type, the case laws which we may call “guiding decisions,” make up most o f the first half of the collection, roughly 21:1-22:17. T he second type, the universally applicable laws we may call “guiding principles,” make up m ost of the second half, roughly 22:18-23:19. The entire collection is n ot given unity The Sequence of Requirement

89

by any commonality of literary form or subject m atter, how­ ever, b u t by its presentation as guidance originating in Yahweh and by its single purpose, the shaping of Israel’s life in covenant w ith Yahweh’s Presence. A pointed indication of this unity of origin and purpose is given in the beginning of this lengthy sequence o f require­ m ent, w ith its clear reference to Yahweh’s presentation of his Presence on H oreb/Sinai and its specification o f the divine authority for the entire collection: So Yahweh said to Moses, “H ere is w hat you are to say to the sons o f Israel: ‘You yourselves have seen that from the heavens I have spoken w ith you.’” (20:22) A further indication of this same unity is made by the beginning (20:23) and the ending (23:32-33) of th e entire collection, each of which is, in content and application, a summary of the first tw o principles set forth in the “Ten W ords.” I have set forth in my commentary (WBC 3) a detailed analysis and explanation of the Book of the Covenant.4 My purpose here is to deal w ith the “guiding decisions” and “guiding principles” as reflections of th e Presence and Response-to-the-Presence them es that govern the sequence o f requirem ent in the book of Exodus, just as they govern also the sequence o f story and th e sequence of memory. T hat many of these laws are an application to specific situa­ tions in Israel’s life is obvious. Some commentators, indeed, have worked out lists of equivalents.5 Too rigid a connection of the Ten W ords to this diverse collection is a mistake, however. T he prim ary bond betw een the tw o lies in the guidance they offer Israel for living in response to Yahweh’s Presence among them . W hether a given “guiding decision” or a given “guiding principle” can be linked to a given commandment is, in the final analysis, 90

EXODUS

quite irrelevant. Every part o f the sequence of requirem ent is from the same source and to the same end. T hus the instructions about the building and the use of altars (20:24-26) are intended to guard against the diluting influence of syncretism. T he collection of “guiding deci­ sions” related to th e treatm ent o f slaves and th e establish­ m ent of their rights (21:2-11) is a reflection of Yahweh’s concern for every hum an being. T he collection dealing w ith harm done to others, w hether it is brought about deliber­ ately or through negligence, and w hether it results in death or injury (21:12-36), is an indication of Yahweh’s desire for concord and harm ony among those in covenant w ith him. T he collection concerned w ith property— w hether live­ stock, crops, money or other possessions, including virgin daughters (22:1-17)— is connected w ith Yahweh’s dem and for honesty in all relationships among his people (cf. 20:17). The three offenses for which the death penalty is speci­ fied (22:18-20) each represent an attack upon Yahweh him ­ self, the first by an attem pt to escape or alter his will, the second as a sexual deviation reflecting syncretism, the th ird as a violation of the first of the Ten W ords. T he collection of “guiding principles” sympathetic to the cause of the defenseless “newcomer,” the widow, the or­ phan, or the poor is a rem inder th at Yahweh, in Israel’s midst, will hear the distressed cries of such persons and “will be furious” (22:21-27). This them e is sounded repeatedly by the great prophets o f the eighth and seventh centuries. O f course, Israel is n o t to “make light” o f G od by ignoring his “guiding principles,” by showing disrespect for a leader in the covenant community, by holding back from Yahweh’s use th at to which he is entitled, or by eating food improperly gained. Since Yahweh among them is holy, so also m ust they be holy (22:28-31). T he collection of “guiding principles” and “guiding deci­ sions” th at begin the final chapter o f this lengthiest of the The Sequence of Requirement

91

sequences o f requirem ent is also concerned w ith ethical and humane behavior. Like 22:21-27, it addresses honest testimony in legal matters, humaneness toward animals, even those belonging to an enemy, and fair treatm ent o f “newcomers” (23:1-9). Yahweh present among Israel de­ mands of them truth, honesty, and kindness. T he require­ m ent of seventh-year rest for the land, and seventh-day rest for Israel, their slaves, their “newcomers,” and their animals is o f course an expansion o f the principle o f the fourth commandment. It is a recognition of Yahweh at hand and pausing that they m ight pause (23:10-12). Exodus 23.T3 is a kind o f summary requirement, a restate­ m ent in a way of the first com m andm ent It functions there­ fore as a conclusion to the “guiding decisions” and the “guiding principles.” The requirem ents that follow it am ount to a supplementary addendum dealing w ith the calendar of the sacred festivals (23:14-17) and w ith miscellaneous in­ structions related to sacrifices and offerings (23:18-19). T he three sacred festivals are linked to the three climactic ingatherings of the agricultural year: the first grain harvest (of the w inter barley), th e early crop harvest (of w heat and spelt) seven weeks later, and the final autum nal harvest (of all the crops). O n each o f these occasions, every Israelite male was “to appear in the Presence o f the Lord, Yahweh” (23:17), in testimony of his Presence among them in the giving of the bounty o f the crops. T he miscellany dealing w ith sacrifices and offerings is an even more specific applica­ tion of the first of the Ten W ords than 23:13, w hich intro­ duces this addendum. T he final section (23:20-33) of this longest of the three sequences of requirem ent functions as a kind of epilogue to the entire Book of the Covenant. It is much broader than the conclusion it is sometimes made out to be, for its orienta­ tion is toward Yahweh, and undiluted loyalty to Yahweh, rather than toward the preceding collection of requirements.

92

EXODUS

Its emphasis is upon serving and worshiping Yahweh alone (23:20-24). It looks forward to the fulfillm ent of the second part of Yahweh’s covenant-promise in the settlem ent of the land promised to the Fathers, a land to be vacated by Israel’s competitors gradually (23:27-30), a land the borders of which are the expanded borders of Davidic-Solomonic glory (23:31). Thus the theme of this ending of the Book of the Covenant is, like that of its beginning in 20:22-23, the application o f the guiding principles laid down in these first tw o o f the Ten Words. A nd the warning accompanying this explanation is that any openness, in any manner, to the other gods available to Israel for worship, will lead to entrapm ent, disobedience, and failure (23:24,32). Yahweh’s restatement of his principles This sequence of requirem ent is largely repetitive, in that m ost of the principles listed in it or inferred by it have been given already in either the Ten W ords or in the Book of the C ovenant Its difference from w hat we are given elsewhere lies largely in its focus. T hat focus is one o f context This sequence has been woven into the narrative of Israel’s first disobedience of the covenantal commitment as an account of the renewal of th e shattered covenant relationship. Its orientation, therefore, is dictated by the circumstances o f disobedience which first led to the violation o f Israel’s covenantal commitment. Thus this sequence emphasizes total loyalty to Yahweh (as opposed to the disloyalty o f mak­ ing and worshiping the golden calf). It deliberately pulls together the principles from the Ten W ords and the applica­ tion o f them in the Book of the Covenant th at would pre­ vent the kind o f disloyalty Israel had just shown. The first, the second (34:14-17), and the third (34:21) of the commandments are stressed, and the keeping of the calendar of the harvest festivals (34:18, 22-24, 26a) which involve an The Sequence of Requirement

93

acknowledgement of Yahweh as provider, in Yahweh’s Pres­ ence. The tem ptation to give credit to the agricultural deities of Israel’s neighbors is thus ruled out, as is the tem ptation to honor their fertility deities: The firstborn of flock, of herd, and of each family in Israel belongs only to Yahweh present among them (34:19-20). They are to keep leaven from the sacrifices and respect the special sanctity of Passover (34:25), and they are not to boil a kid in its m other’s milk (34:26b), both requirements protective against syncretistic influence. Some o f the requirem ents listed here replicate in verbatim (or near-verbatim) form requirem ents listed in 23:12-19. A nd the emphasis here, as there, is upon a complete, un ­ compromising loyalty to Yahweh. Thus w hen Yahweh says, at the beginning of this sequence, “Look: I am making a covenant” (34:10), and at the end of it, to Moses, “you your­ self w rite these words, for on the basis of these words I have made a covenant w ith you and w ith Israel” (34:27), we are being given a directed renewal, a renewal shaped by the disobedience th at has disrupted the covenant relationship and made its renewal a necessity. This emphasis is fu rth er underscored by the recurrence (see 20:5) of the m otif of Yahweh’s justified jealousy: “Indeed you are n o t to bow down in worship to an­ other god, because Yahweh’s very name is ‘Jealous’: he is a jealous G od.” (34:14) O nce more in relation to Yahweh’s covenant require­ m ents, the fulfillm ent of the promise of land is anticipated, and w ith a double implication. T he promise will be fulfilled to those in an obedient covenant relationship w ith Yahweh’s Presence—b u t they are to guard themselves carefully against any alliance w ith the people already living in that land w hich m ight prom pt them once again to a shattering of their covenantal promises to Yahweh (34:14-16). EXODUS

“These words” which Moses is to w rite down as a basis for making yet again a covenant, by Yahweh and for Israel (34:27), are specifically the focused words of renewal, di­ rected to the point o f the disruption: Israel’s divided, com­ promised loyalty. M ore broadly, of course, all the words, o f both principle and application, o f law and covenantal living by it, are summed up in that phrase. A nd this third and last of the sequences of requirem ent in the book of Exodus ends as the very first of them began, w ith a reference to the ten principles of Yahweh for life in covenant w ith his Presence: H e w rote upon the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten W ords. (34:28c)

The Sequence of Requirement

95

4 THE SEQUENCE OF MEMORY

Exodus, like th e rest o f the Bible o f w hich it is a part, may be said to have begun in an event, an event th at led in tu rn to a sequence of events. T he report o f th at event and the other events it prom pted became th e sequence of story th at forms the framework of Exodus. T he event of Exodus, o f course, is the coming of the Presence o f Yahweh, the “O ne W ho Always Is.” T hat event, and its report, in turn, gave rise also to a sequence of requirem ent, a series of expectations guiding the response of Israel to the revelation th at the God who is, is here. These expectations, set forth as both common obliga­ tions and also as obligations unique to special situations, am ount to a validation of the report of event. They do so because the keeping of requirem ent is the surest evidence that the report of the event has been believed, and th at the event has thus been taken seriously. T he revelation o f Yahweh’s Presence to Moses on H oreb/ Sinai led to a proving of the reality and power o f that Presence to Israel and to the Egyptians. T hat proof was supported by a dem onstration of Yahweh’s Presence to The Sequence of Memory

97

Israel in the wilderness, and it was brought to a dramatic and powerful climax by the theophany to all Israel at H oreb/ Sinai. A n integral part of th at theophany to Israel was the revelation of the ten principles of living in response to Yahweh’s Presence here among us; and th at revelation became the basis of an array of guidance in applying the ten princi­ ples to problems of daily life. Revelation stimulated re­ sponse, and response needed requirem ent to guide it. T he “law of Moses,” in both its general and its specific statem ent, is the summary of that requirem ent, the road map for jour­ ney in covenant w ith Yahweh. Event thus led to report, and report became the basis of expectation. Those who reported the event, to begin w ith, were those who had experienced it. A nd they were the ones for whom a response, of some kind, was inevitable. Even the negative response of the golden calf was yet a response. But w hat of those o f generations still to come— those for whom the bad times in Egypt, the Exodus from oppression, the deliverance at the sea, the provision in the wilderness, and even the theophany and the awesome speaking at Sinai would be someone else’s story? W hy should they respond, to a covenant they had not made? How could they see a deliverance they had n o t shared as their deliverance, and how could the Presence so real to those w ho had gone before them be real also to them? It is, in a way, th e pressing question of every faith in any time, th e necessary and con­ stant preoccupation o f every leader of worship, w hether pastor, priest, or parent. The answer to these questions lies in w hat M artin N oth has called “actualization” or “re-presentation.”1Re-presentation is remembrance and renewal through confession o f faith, through the retelling o f the story of the events o f faith, through the ceremonies and the symbols of worship. As N oth has put it, “‘Re-presentation’ is based then on this: th at G od and his activity always are, here and now, though 98

EXODUS

hum an beings, in their unavoidable temporalness, cannot com prehend this here and nowness except by re-presenting the activity o f G od again and again in their w orship.”2 As D euteronom y 5:2-3 puts it, “Yahweh our G od contracted w ith us a covenant at Horeb. N ot merely w ith our fathers did Yahweh contract this covenant— rather w ith us, we ourselves, those right here, all o f us living right now!” This same insistence is present in the revelation to Moses o f the name Yahweh, the name th at above all symbolizes G od’s Being and Presence, the name about w hich Yahweh says “This is my name from now on, and this is to bring me to m ind generation after generation” (Exod 3:15d). “Yahweh” is to be G od’s zeker, the “remembrance” th at will make his Presence real to the generations of Israel yet to come. Such is the point also of Psalm 111:4, which declares: “Remembrance [zeker] creates his extraordinary deeds.” There are seven sequences of memory in the book of Ex­ odus, each in its own separate way presenting an array of reminders, all of them supplemental to the sequences of story and requirement. These sequences of memory are in­ tended as catalysts of re-presentation, designed to actualize as here and now the past events that provoke present faith. The memories they call up, and sometimes even create, have the effect of making events in time timeless. These memories— names heavy with history, rituals summarizing crucial times and events, hymns reviewing the past and leaning into the future, visible symbols of Yahweh’s constant nearness— are each and all a means of making event real and so of making requirem ent not only justified but also a happy privilege. They function in ways similar to the favorite texts and hymns The Sequence of Memory

99

of our worship. O r, at a much higher and more solemn level, they function as does the reflection of Holy Week, or the Communion of the Lord’s Supper, or th e joy of the worship of Advent and Christmas Eve. The single continuous and persistent rem inder of the book of Exodus, and indeed of the entire O ld Testament, is of course the tetragram itself, the name Yahweh, the “O ne W ho Always Is,” occurring some 6,823 or more3 times throughout the O ld Testament. Every time this name was seen, every time it was pronounced,4 it was a confessional re-presentation of the G od who is and is here.5 Indeed the sequence o f the story o f Yahweh’s deeds and the sequence of the statem ent o f Yahweh’s requirem ents, often repeated, be­ came both an illustration of the meaning of the name Yah­ weh and a means of re-presentation. The poetic summary of covenant theology now located in Exodus 19:4-6, and no doubt employed as a set piece for ceremonies of covenant renewal, serves as an example: “You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and that I then lifted you upon wings of eagles and brought you to myself. So now, if you will pay very careful attention to my voice, and keep my covenant, then you will be my own special treasure from among all peoples — for to me belongs the whole earth— and you yourselves will be my own kingdom of priests and holy people.” Two lists of special names T he first tw o of the seven sequences of memory in the book of Exodus are lists of names, lists th at on a first reading

100

EXODUS

may seem to have only a rem ote connection w ith th e se­ quence o f story or the sequence of requirem ent in Exodus. T he first of them gives to Exodus its Hebrew tide, w e'elleh shemot, “and these are the names.” T he second of them is an obvious attem pt to legitimize A aron, by tracing in detail his lineage from Levi. B oth lists may well strike the reader o f the English text as largely unpronounceable and em inently skippable. These lists, however, deserve a closer look. The names they record frequently have a theologically confessional sig­ nificance all their own. The lists themselves are a reflection of the intense interest of ancient Israel’s theological histori­ ans and worship leaders in having the right people in the right place at the right time, and in charge o f things. B ut m ost of all, these lists present us w ith tw o interlinked sequences of memory, a theological-historical means of re-presenting, as here and now, Israel’s significant religious p ast A partial listing o f the names th at clearly have a theologi­ cal meaning will establish the first point: Reuben Simeon Levi Joseph Yachin Shaul Amram Yitshar C hebron Uzziel Yochebed Zikri Mishael Eltsaphan

“Behold, a son!” (connoting a special blessing in the O ld Testament),6 1:2 “H e Surely Heard!” “Joined” “Increasing O ne,” 1:5 “H e Makes Firm ,” 6:157 “A sked For” “Exalted People,” 6:18 “First O il” “U niter” “My M ight Is El” “Yahweh’s H onor,” 6:20 “My Remembrance,” 6:21 “W ho Is T hat Is God?,” 6:22 “G od Has Treasured”

The Sequence of Memory

101

Sitri Elisheva A bihu Eleazar Elqanah

“My H iding Place” “My G od Is Seven,” 6:23 “My Father Is H e” “G od Has Aided” “G od Has C reated,” 6:24

As for the second point, the list in Exodus 1:1-5 includes the names also listed in the summaries of Genesis 35:22-26, 46:8-27, 49:3-27, and Deuteronomy 27:12-13 (compare also Deuteronomy 33:2-29, which is missing the name of Simeon). This list emphasizes the direct descent from the pa­ triarchal Fathers themselves to the generation sojourning in Egypt, the proof of Yahweh’s Presence there, and the Exodus through the wilderness to H oreb/Sinai—the mountain of his nearness, his guidance, and his covenant w ith Israel. These twelve tribal fathers are each the great-grandsons of the Father in faith himself, Abraham, the grandsons of Isaac, and the sons of Jacob/Israel. A more legitimate line of predecessors could hardly be imagined, for these sons are the beginning of the fulfillm ent o f the promise o f a vast progeny, and they are themselves the fathers of the genera­ tion who are to see the beginning of the fulfillm ent o f the promise of land. These twelve sons are the bridge from the Fathers to the future. By the time they die, that future, promised over and over to Abraham, has already become the present: Israel’s progeny has become “a teeming swarm.” Indeed, they became so many they were a strength to be reckoned w ith by their num bers alone. T he land was simply filled w ith them . (Exod 1:7) A nd, as Galatians 3:29 makes plain, these fathers in faith are, through faith, our fathers too. The list in Exodus 6:14-27 confirms this legitimacy still further. It traces the genealogy of the first tw o sons of 102

EXODUS

Jacob/Israel through their first generation, and the geneal­ ogy of the third son, Levi, through his first three generations (to A aron and Moses), and the genealogy of A aron through his second generation, to Pinchas. This concentration on A aron, him self presented as in “the seventh generation from Abraham” (counting Abraham as the first generation of Yahweh’s call), is of course an attem pt to lend authority to the house of A aron, as the preem inent priestly family. But the much larger purpose o f this list here is to embrace both A aron and Moses as appro­ priate descendants of the covenant-promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Moses and A aron being absolutely the right people in the right place at the right time, taking the charge given them by Yahweh himself. M ore im portant still is the presentation of these tw o lists as interlinked sequences of memory. Each of them brings the past into the present and impels the present tow ard the future. They do so not only by the listing o f the names of those who have come before the Exodus, those w ho have in Yahweh’s multiplying Presence become a vital part of mak­ ing the Exodus a necessity. They also do so by listing the names of those w ho would lead that Exodus, and be present at, and a vital part of, the b irth of Yahweh’s special posses­ sion, his priestly and holy people. These leaders bring th at people into the future Yahweh is opening, a future A braham had been told would hold a blessing for “every family of the earth” (Gen 12:3), a company that includes us. For Israel, every one of the names had its own special im portance, calling the past into the present by the memory o f faces and of faith, o f adventures, of deeds, of sacrifices, of miracles. T he fact that the names th at are know n to us— Abraham, Isaac, Jacob/Israel, Reuben, Levi, Judah, Joseph, Benjamin, A aron, Moses— are fewer in num ber by no means alters these lists as a stimulus to keeping the story and honoring the requirem ents of faith. They are like the names The Sequence of Memory

103

of those members o f our own families w ho have made us w hat we are. T he simple calling out of such names, even in the silent hearing of our hearts, is enough to make the past present, and the future a greater privilege and greater responsibility. Family names, given names, nicknam es, names o f inti­ m ate familiarity— they are the m ost effective sequence o f memory o f all, for they call to our present n o t merely event h u t personhood, n o t just example b u t heritage, n o t only remembrance of persons past b u t necessity in the present moment. A nd these are the names . . . (1:1) Thus did the boy grow. His m other . . . called his name “Moses.” (2:10) T hen Moses said, “Show me, please, your glory.” Yahweh replied, “I will call out the name Yahweh in your presence.” (33:18-19) H e took his place beside him there, and he called out the name, Yahweh. (34:5) A nd the angel said to her, “. . . you are to call his name Jesus.” (Luke 1:30— 31) Therefore G od . . . gave him the name above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven, on earth and in the deep, and every tongue confess, “Jesus C hrist is Lord, to the glory of G od the Father.” (Phil 2:9-11) Two rituals of remembrance T he related requirem ents of the ritual of Passover and Unleavened Bread and the dedication to Yahweh of every 104

EXODUS

firstborn life in Israel function in Exodus as requirem ents of recollection. They have been inserted into the sequence of story as sequences of memory (as have the lists of names of 1:1-5 and 6:14-27) at those points in the story that provide their justification. T heir purpose, then, is to call from the past to the present that story, to make the fathers’ Exodus experience the Exodus experience also of the sons and the sons’ sons, down all the generations. T heir parallels, in our own remembrance in and for worship, are the service of communion and the service of the dedication (or chris­ tening or baptism) of new born children. This note of recollection is sounded w ithin the tw o se­ quences themselves. O f Passover/Unleavened Bread, the text says, “This day is to be for you a day of remembering. You are to observe it, a day sacred to Yahweh, generation after generation: you shall observe it as a requirem ent forever” (12:14). O f the dedication to Yahweh of every first­ born life, the text says, “Keep in mind this day in which you went out from Egypt, from the non-status of slaves, because by strength of power Yahweh brought you out thence. . . . You shall explain to your son on that day as follows: ‘This is because of what Yahweh did for me in my coming out of Egypt’ A nd it is to be for you a sign upon your hand and a reminder between your eyes, in order that the instruc­ tion of Yahweh may be in your speech, because w ith a strong power Yahweh has brought you forth from Egypt. So you are to keep this requirement at its scheduled time year after year.” (13:3,8-10) The origin of the Passover meal of a flock animal in a nomadic spring festival and the origin of the eating of unleav­ ened bread cakes in a spring harvest festival have been fre­ quently pointed o u t8 It is not the origin of the observance o f The Sequence of Memory

105

Passover/Unleavened Bread that is of first importance here, however. W hile such a tradition was certainly an asset to the keeping of these requirements, the purpose for keeping them , firmly fixed in the re-presentation of the Exodus experience, was that the successive generations of Israel might remember, and so bring that experience from the past into the present. The Passover, to be celebrated in “the first of th e year’s m onths,” was a memory of the meal carefully, but hastily, prepared and eaten w ith unleavened bread cakes and bitter herbs. The main course of this meal was a yearling male of the flock, either a lamb or a goat, from which also some blood was used to mark “the tw o doorposts and the lintel they support” of the houses where Israel dwelled. T he unleavened bread cakes were a symbol of the haste necessary in the preparation o f this meal— note the se­ quence o f story at Exodus 12:34: So the people took up their dough before it could rise; their breadboards were wrapped up in their coats and carried upon their backs. W ith this reference it is instructive to compare the report, at Exodus 12:39, of what happened at the first stop in the journey of the Exodus: A t the first stop, they baked the dough which they had brought from Egypt into round, flat, unleavened breadcakes— it had not risen, because they were pushed out of Egypt and had no chance to linger, indeed they had packed no food for themselves. T he bitter herbs were in memory of the bitter experience o f the oppressive bondage in Egypt. T he consecration in Israel of every first-born life, of the hum an family or of the herd or the flock, is a second ritual 106

EXODUS

o f remembrance connected w ith the Exodus experience. Like Passover/Unleavened Bread, this ritual too appears to have had an ancient, pre-Exodus origin, perhaps even in connection w ith hum an sacrifice. In the sequence of mem­ ory in the book o f Exodus, however, it has been linked to Israel’s obligation to make a grateful response to Yahweh's protection of Israel’s firstborn during the devastation of Egypt’s firstborn. In Exodus 13:3-10 the instructions given in 12:14-20 are substantially repeated, as a part o f the speci­ fications connected w ith th e sacrifice or the substitutionary replacem ent o f the firstborn. This expensive requirem ent, too, was a means o f bringing th e Exodus experience from the past into the present, as a timeless act o f the perpetually present Yahweh: “It is necessary, w hen your son asks you, in due course, ‘W hat is this?’ th at you say to him, ‘W ith a strong power, Yahweh brought us out of Egypt, from the non­ status of slaves. For w hen Pharaoh was stubbornminded about sending us forth, then Yahweh killed all the firstborn of the land o f Egypt, from hum an firstborn to the firstborn of domesticated animals. For that rea­ son, I am sacrificing to Yahweh all the males that open the womb, except all my firstborn sons, whom I am replacing.'” (13:14-15) T he detailed specification regarding these rituals of re­ membrance, and their establishment as requirem ents of Yah­ weh forever, make plain that they were seriously regarded. It is hardly fortuitous th at each of the tw o major elem ents of the Passover meal had a prehistory separate from the other. T heir combination, in this one festival, linked the separate festive occasions o f tw o distinct occupations, th at of the nomadic flock keepers and th at o f the settled land cultiva­ tors. But their function in com bination was to stimulate the The Sequence of Memory

107

memory of faith, in the time o f the year that has always spoken of new life and new beginnings. T he flock animal thoroughly roasted and consumed by a household (12:3-4), the taste of unleavened bread cakes and bitter herbs, the accompanying recitation o f the story of the tenth mighty act and the Exodus it provoked, after so much disappoint' m ent—this ritual of remembrance was so that a new genera­ tion m ight taste and smell and feel the anxiety and euphoria of the fathers’ deliverance as their deliverance. T he costly requirem ent of every firstborn life, likewise, was so that the successive generations of Israel m ight realize w ith gratitude the seriousness of their obligation to Yahweh. This second ritual gave Israel a taste o f the Exodus experi­ ence in a different dimension o f life. First, a hasty meal, w ith bread made quickly, and w ith a taste of bitter along w ith a taste of sweet; second, a perpetual requirem ent of ransom from oppression. In such a m anner, Yahweh’s past Presence will always continue as Yahweh’s Presence now. We should n o t be surprised that Jesus made these rituals of remem­ brance the basis of our own C hristian re-presentation of his Passion on our behalf, or that the church has made so much of “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin o f the w orld,” or that we should confess a grateful belief in the vicarious suffering of “the first-born o f all creation.” In this way we know Easter to be reality here and now and for us, an event th at happens as fact in our lives on the first day o f every week. Three hymns of remembrance No sequence o f memory in worship is likely to lack a po­ etic and musical dimension. The singing of God’s praise is certainly a vital part of the worship of ancient Israel, as the book of Psalms alone is sufficient to show. It is, therefore, no surprise that Yahweh’s powerful Presence in the constitutive 108

EXODUS

event of Israel’s faith would be celebrated in a hymn of eclec­ tic form which was expanded across th e years to celebrate additional events regarded as testimony to his Presence. The point of origin for this hym n is undoubtedly Yahweh’s deliverance o f Israel at the sea: “I will sing to Yahweh, for he has risen proudly: horse and chariot alike he has cast into the sea!” (Exod 15:1,21) A t least this stanza, and perhaps also some part o f the first o f the three hymns woven here into one can be taken as con­ tem porary in origin w ith the deliverance being celebrated. This point of departure, however, is simply a beginning medium for the message of Exodus, th at the incomparable Yahweh is dramatically and effectively present among his people. In a way, this hym n in three parts is a summary o f the foundational theological premise of all o f Exodus and, therefore, of the O ld Testament as well: Yahweh’s sovereign Presence rescues, protects, and establishes those who, by faith, would be his own people. T he bulk of the hym n (15: lb —12), as we w ould expect, given its setting, is concerned w ith Yahweh’s delivering Presence at the sea. Its tw o supplem entary divisions deal respectively w ith the guidance o f Israel, by Yahweh’s Pres­ ence, through the wilderness (vv 13a, 14-16) and w ith the leading of Israel to the place where his Presence dwells in holiness (vv 13b, 17-18). Each one o f the three hymns presents Yahweh as entirely incomparable: First hymn:

“W ho is like you among the gods, Yahweh?

The Sequence of Memory

109

W ho is like you, magnificent in holiness, awesome in praiseworthy deeds, doing the extraordinary?” (v 11) Second hymn:

“T he peoples have heard— they are worried. . . . Terror and dread have fallen over them — against the greatness o f your arm, they are struck dumb as stone.” (vv 14a, 16)

T hird hymn:

"Yahweh reigns forever w ithout interruption.” (v 18)

In close connection w ith this emphasis, a recurrent one in the O ld Testament, the special name of Presence, Yah­ weh, the “O ne W ho Always Is,” is sounded as a dom inant chord. In the first line of the first hym n (15:1) and in the last line of the third hymn (v 18), this confessional name is set; and counting these tw o occurrences and the shorter form Yah in verse 2, the name is sounded ten times in the eight­ een verses of the three hymns. In addition, it is the antecedent of no fewer than thirtysix pronouns in the same eighteen verses. A ltogether, th at is forty-six references to Yahweh in eighteen verses— small wonder that verse 3b declares, “Yahweh is his name!” Yahweh is the name of his incomparability: T he fact th at he is, and is here, and always is, and always is doing things for his people— these attributes make Yahweh unlike any o f the gods worshiped by Israel’s neighbors, and in their times o f incomprehensible lapse, by Israel’s people themselves. Thus does the first hym n (15: lb - 12), the foundation for this composite celebration of the pow erful Presence of Yah­ weh in Israel, sing the song of Yahweh’s great victory over

110

EXODUS

Pharaoh’s formidable force at th e sea. Pharaoh is repre­ sented as confident of his victory over Israel (v 9), b u t he is swept aside by Yahweh, w ho manipulates n o t only the wa­ ters and currents o f the sea, b u t even the “ancient deeps” th at he brought under control in the creation o f the w orld (vv 5, 8).9 T he second hym n (15:13a, 14-16), in logical sequence, commemorates the guidance of Israel through the wilderness and through an array of competing peoples, all of whom, despite their undoubted military prowess, are de­ scribed as being overcome by weak-kneed anguish w hen they hear o f the mighty arm of the incomparable and uncon­ querable Yahweh. T he third hym n (15:13b, 17-18) con­ cludes the confessional recital by celebrating the arrival o f Israel at Zion, the new Sinai, the place of Yahweh’s dwelling among his people in the great Temple built by Solom on in David’s city, Jerusalem. A series of additional motifs interlace this composite poem, each of them attesting Yahweh’s incomparable Presence among his people. His control of the primordial deep, his defeat of the Pharaoh (who is sometimes connected w ith the chaotic deep), and his stunning impression of the peoples who might oppose Israel are supplemented by other references. These recall his action toward Israel as a redeeming kinsman (see also Exodus 6:5-8) and his creation of Israel as his own people, his “firstborn son” (4:22), “established” by him in the promised land to which he has brought them (15:17). A nd finally, this entire tapestry of themes is capped by a reference to the continuing and uninterrupted kingship of Yahweh, his perm anent rule (15:18). So three hymnic memories, each o f a different and succes­ sive mighty accomplishment of Yahweh’s Presence, have been woven together in rhythm ic re-presentation of the Ex­ odus experience. As we have seen, that experience was made necessary by the fulfillm ent of the first part of Yahweh’s The Sequence of Memory

111

covenant-promise to the Fathers. T hen in turn, the Exodus made necessary the movement into the promised land and into the new Sinai, M ount Zion in Jerusalem, in fulfillm ent of the second part o f that covenant-promise. H ow many times over this poem was recited, and sung in worship, we cannot calculate. Each of those times, however, Yahweh (“the O ne W ho Always Is H ere”) was remembered. H e still is. We remember Yahweh and the revelation of his Presence in the sequence of story in the book o f Exodus, w hen we sing “Rock o f Ages, C left for M e”—just as we bring to m ind C hrist and his Passion w hen we sing “O Sacred Head, Now W ounded.” O u r singing, no less than Israel’s, is a re-presenting sequence o f memory. The places, the objects, the persons, the acts of remembrance T he concluding sequence of memory in the book o f Exodus is a sequence of thirteen chapters. It is inserted into the sequence of story as a series of Yahweh’s instructions for the media of Israel’s worship in his Presence (25:1-31:18) and as a report of Israel’s obedience to those instructions (35:1-40:33). These tw o parts o f this sequence of memory are logically placed into the sequence of story. T he instruc­ tions immediately follow the account of Israel’s entry into covenant w ith Yahweh, and the obedience of those instruc­ tions follows the account of the renewal of that covenant after the disobedience w ith the golden calf. W hile the tw o sections deal necessarily w ith many of the same concerns, and are therefore inevitably repetitive, they are n o t the mirror-image parallels they are sometimes made out to be. T heir repetitions have a didactic purpose, their sequencing is logically different, and their emphases reflect separate ap­ proaches to a single theme. Indeed, a more appropriate conclusion to the book of

112

EXODUS

Exodus than the one provided by this lengthy sequence of memory can hardly be imagined, because it presents in so single-minded a m anner the fundam ental them e of Exodus, the Presence of Yahweh. For this reason, despite the length of the sequence and the often painstaking detail of the in­ structions given in its thirteen chapters, it can be given them atic summary in fairly brief compass. T he tw o parts of the sequence are an extended prepara­ tion for the worship of Yahweh by the people who have covenanted w ith him and w ith each other to live in his Presence. T heir premise is worship as confession. They be­ gin w ith a call for an offering of special materials for the manufacture of the symbols, the spaces, and the equipm ent of that worship (25:1-9; cf. 35:4-9). They end w ith an an­ nouncem ent of the satisfactory com pletion of all the w ork instructed by Yahweh (40:1-33). The tw o parts of the sequence and also the book of Exodus itself are then brought to conclusion by a solemn report of the one m om ent tow ard which the combined se­ quences o f story, requirem ent, and memory have all been moving: the settlem ent in Israel’s camp of the glorious Pres­ ence of Yahweh (40:34-40). It is an entirely apt conclusion that is at the same time a beginning, for the final phrase o f Exodus is a reference to Yahweh’s Presence now w ith Israel “throughout all their joumeyings.” T he first section of this sequence o f memory moves for­ ward from the assumption that, following the acceptance of the conditions o f the covenant w ith Yahweh, Israel m ust make preparation for his residence among them . “They are to make me a holy place,” says Yahweh, “and I will dwell in their midst” (25:8). This them e is the recurrent, almost obsessive, m otif o f the entire section, which moves in a logical progression from the instructions for the making o f the A rk to the instruc­ tions for the implements kept near the A rk, to the plan for The Sequence o f Memory

113

the sanctuary and m ost holy shelter of the Presence (the Tabernacle). N ext the section moves to the A ltar o f B urnt Offerings outside the Tabernacle, and the Tabernacle Fore­ court in which it is placed, to the special vestm ents o f the priests and the directions for their authority-giving prepara­ tion, to a miscellany dealing w ith special accessories o f w or­ ship, w ith the artisans w ho are to make them all, and w ith the special worship occasions of atonem ent and sabbath. T he second section begins w here the first one left off, w ith the sabbath, and the artisans w ho are to perform the labor of manufacture. It then moves to the narrative o f con­ struction (which m entions first the Tabernacle, and then the A rk and the implements of the Presence kept near it), then to the equipm ent o f the Tabernacle C ourt and th e C ou rt itself. Finally (following a summary o f the metals used in the Tabernacle and its Courtyard), the section moves to an ac­ count of the making of the sacral vestm ents, to a summary o f the fulfillm ent of Yahweh’s instructions and an account o f the setting up and the consecration o f the Tabernacle and the cleansing of the priests in preparation for worship. The constant theme throughout the thirteen chapters of the tw o sections, the m otif symbolized and depicted and cele­ brated in every conceivable way, is that Yahweh, who is, is here. N o space, no object, no material, no person, and no movement is mentioned anywhere in these chapters that is n ot a reminder of Yahweh’s Presence. We are presented here w ith architecture as worship and w ith movement as liturgy, w ith objects and motion as remembrance and re-presentation. It is a lesson we have largely lost, and one we need urgently to relearn. O ur church buildings are too devoid of remembrance and too preoccupied w ith practicality, and the sacerdotal pres­ ence in our services of worship is altogether too person- and personality-oriented. Each structure, each space, each object, each person, each act in this sequence o f memory serves as a rem inder o f

114

EXODUS

th e basic point o f th e sequence o f story in th e book o f Exodus and as justification o f each expectation in the se­ quence of requirem ent. T he materials to be used in m aking th e media o f w orship were to be only the best available, were to be given freely (25:1-9, paralleled by 35:4-9), and were given, so joyously and so abundantly th at a halt had to be called w hen th e am ount o f gifts became so excessive th at they created an obstruction (35:1-36:7). A nd at th e very end o f this extensive accum ulation o f rem em brance, Yahw eh comes, settling upon th e array o f rem inders, im buing them w ith his glory. T he A rk and the A rk-Cover (25:10-22, paralleled by 37:1-9) represented the place o f supreme focus for Israel’s attention to the Presence o f Yahweh: W here the A rk was, Yahweh promised to m eet Moses “by appointm ent,” and said, “I will speak w ith you, from above the A rk-Cover, from betw een the tw o cherubs upon the A rk o f the Testimony” (25:22). “T he Table of the Presence” (Num 4:7) was an object near the A rk on w hich were to be placed containers for bread, incense (Lev 24:7), and wine (25:23-30), suggesting Yahweh’s Presence in the gift o f sustenance. T he Lampstand (25:31-40), w ith its bud-and-bloom symbolism and its seven burning lamps, was a rem inder of Yahweh’s Presence everwakeful and life-giving (compare Jeremiah 1:11-12 and Psalm 121:4 and probably also Num bers 17:1-11). Each o f these objects m ost intim ately associated w ith Yahweh’s Presence was either overlaid w ith pure gold or made entirely of it. T he Tabernacle, the shelter for these opulent rem inders o f the Presence, was similarly made o f the best available materials, b u t was to be arranged in tw o sections o f nearness (26:1-37). Its H oliest Space, the place where the A rk and the A rk-Cover were positioned, was to be set apart by an elabo­ rately embroidered curtain. W ithin and near this H oly o f Holies only the most precious and rare materials were used; The Sequence of Memory

115

farther from it, in the Holy Space o f the rem ainder o f the Tabernacle, special (but less precious and rare) materials were used. Even the movement into the holiness of the Tabernacle was in this way surrounded by a heightened and increasing awareness of Yahweh’s Presence. T he Tabernacle was to stand in the center of Israel’s camp, and w ithin that Holy Space was a Holiest Space, made unmistakable by the rising value o f the materials leading to it and into it. The construction of this Tabernacle, however, gave yet another im portant reminder: It was entirely portable, and could be conveniently relocated. Yahweh’s Presence was n o t to be considered stationary. Israel was in covenant w ith a moving Presence. It is an emphasis of remembrance th at we would do well to imitate, given our tendency to isolate G od and m atters religious from our daily living, and our relega­ tion of them to the church buildings we visit only at care­ fully scheduled times. The A ltar (27:1-8) and the Tabernacle C ourt surrounding both it and th e Tabernacle (vv 9-19) are of course similarly portable, and a further suggestion of the movement toward and away from the m ost intim ate space of Yahweh’s Pres­ ence. T he metal accessories and overlay of this altar were to be made of copper, as were the pedestals supporting the shielding draperies of the Tabernacle C ourt. A nything (and o f course anyone) coming close to Yahweh’s Presence m ust always be good, better, best. This too is an emphasis o f recollection we very m uch need. T he Holy Spaces and their furnishings having been de­ scribed, the sequence of memory moves next to a descrip­ tion o f the elaborate vestm ents and the ordination of the priests. By their m inistry o f worship they joined the three circles o f nearness to Yahweh: the Tabernacle C ourt, the Holy Space, and the H oliest Space o f the Tabernacle itself. T he priests, referred to as A aron and his sons, were yet another rem inder o f Yahweh’s Presence. T heir vestm ents

116

EXODUS

(28:1-43, paralleled by 39:1-31) were specifically symbolic o f th at Presence: T he Ephod of gold, the material used most often for the objects closest to Yahweh’s Presence, includes also the engraved onyx-stones through which Israel was to be brought to m ind in Yahweh’s Presence. T he Breastpiece of Judgment, attached to the Ephod, was through its twelve engraved gemstones to keep Israel before Yahweh and to signify the glow of the Presence through Israel The U rim and the Thummim placed inside this Breastpiece were to suggest Yahweh’s judgment and specific direction of his people. The Robe of the Ephod was a rem inder of Yahweh’s plenty and nearness, and the engraved Flower on the Turban was a rem inder that Israel and all that Israel undertook were set apart to Yahweh— made what they were by him and in need of becoming what they were called to be in his Presence. In sum, every article of the sacral vestments made the same point, each w ith its own specific accent: Yahweh Is here, we are his, and we must both know this and show this.10 These priestly vestments were designed specifically to call the worshipers’ attention to the object of, and so the reasons for, worship. They disguised the worship leader’s personal­ ity instead o f calling attention to it. They were, rightly, a denial of the self-puffing tendency so obvious in so many places where the worship of G od should be taking place. T he authority-granting ordination of “A aron and his sons” (29:1-46, paralleled by Lev 8:1-33), likewise, was also an attestation of Yahweh’s Presence, in his provision for Israel’s sustenance, both physical and spiritual. Indeed, this section ends w ith a remarkable summary of the promise o f Yahweh’s Presence sounded in the first nineteen chapters of Exodus, turning the “proof of the Presence” narratives in The Sequence of Memory

117

the sequence o f story into a “Presence-giving proof” confes­ sion in the m inistry of worship in Yahweh’s Presence: “So I will dwell in the m idst o f the sons of Israel, and I will be their God, and they will know th at I am Yahweh their G od who brought them forth from the land o f Egypt on account of my dwelling in their midst. I am Yahweh their G od.” (Exod 29:45-46) Following the chapters o f instruction for the building of the A rk and the Ark-Cover, the Table, the Lampstand, the Tabernacle, the A ltar, the Tabernacle C ourt, for the making o f the vestm ents of the priests, and for the ordination of the priests, there are three appendices, giving further instruc­ tions regarding the preparation o f Israel for worship in Yah­ weh’s Presence. T he first appendix deals w ith four accessories to th at w or­ ship: (1) the G olden A ltar o f the Special Formula Incense (30:1-10, paralleled by 37:25-28), (2) the “m ost holy” incense to be used on it (30:34-38), (3) the Bronze Laver for Cerem o­ nial A blutions (30:17— 21, paralleled by 38:8), and (4) the Special Formula A nointing O il (30:22-33). T he golden incense altar and the special and expensive m ixture burned upon it were fu rth er indications of the uniqueness of the H oliest Space of Yahweh’s Presence, be­ fore which the altar was placed and the special incense was burned. T he special and expensive oil for anointing the fur­ nishings o f worship and th e priests was also a testim ony o f the difference made necessary by Yahweh’s Presence, as was the Laver for Ceremonial Ablutions: T he priests were to wash their feet before approaching the Tabernacle in w hich were the special symbols of focus of Yahweh’s Presence, and they were to wash their hands before handling the imple­ m ents o f his Presence. T he instructions for the payment o f the atonem ent money (30:11-16) appear to have been 118

EXODUS

located in th e middle o f this first appendix because o f Israel’s need to provide for the upkeep o f the Tabernacle, its fur­ nishings, and equipment. T he second appendix is a report of Yahweh’s designation o f th e artisans w ho are to undertake the w ork specified by his instructions for the media of worship (31:1-11, paralleled by 35:10-19; 35:30-36:1). T he artisan in charge is to be Bezalel, whose name means "In El’s protecting shadow,” and whose native ability Yahweh has augmented w ith additional wisdom, discernm ent, and skill. Bezalel is to have an assist­ ant, Oholiab, w ho is similarly to have a divine enhancem ent for the complex w ork at hand, as also are all the w orkm en to be employed. As only the best materials, are appropriate to the worship of Yahweh’s Presence, so also only the m ost artistic m inds and the m ost skilled hands are appropriate to undertake the molding of these materials. T he third and final appendix is a list o f instructions for the keeping o f the sabbath (31:12-18, paralleled by 35:1-3). This list, a considerable elaboration o f the fourth command­ m ent, is an appropriate conclusion to the first seven chap­ ters of this longest sequence o f memory, in its rem inder o f the requirem ent o f a day regularly set apart for remembering Yahweh and w hat it means to be his people. T he sabbath was to become “a sign” betw een Yahweh and Israel, “a perpetual covenant,” “a sign in perpetuity” (31:13,16-17). As Yahweh him self “rested and so caught his breath” on the seventh day (31:17), so Israel was to do, th at they m ight remember and better know his Presence. T he second section of this longest o f the sequences of memory reports, as we have seen, th e fulfillm ent of Yah­ weh’s instructions for the media of worship in his Presence. T he materials called for were given by Israel in complicating abundance. T hen th e Tabernacle, w ith its furnishings and equipm ent, and the Tabernacle C ourt, and its equipm ent, were duly b u ilt The Sequence of Memory

119

T he metals used in this w ork am ounted to astonishing totals, a lavish testimony to the im portance given to symbolizing the nearness of Yahweh’s Presence: Approximately 2,210 pounds of gold, 7,601 pounds of silver, and 5,330 pounds of copper are reported (38:24-29).11 T he weaving, sewing, and decoration o f the sacral vestments of the priest are described, w ith a sevenfold repetition (39:1, 5, 7, 21, 26-27,31) o f the statem ent that this w ork was done “exactly as Yahweh had commanded M oses,” and a final summary o f the fulfillm ent of all Yahweh’s instructions is made, using m uch the same phrase (39:42-43). T hen, at last, the Tabernacle was set up and its furnish­ ings arranged, and A aron and his sons were anointed to their special w ork o f worship. A stimulus had been pro­ vided for each o f the five senses in the range o f the acts o f worship these priests were to carry out. N o avenue of mem­ ory is neglected in the construction o f the Tabernacle and its equipm ent, in the authorization and attire o f the priest­ hood, and in the acts of worship they were to offer and to guide— acts described in m inute detail in Leviticus. In every conceivable way, the Tabernacle, its C ourtyard, their fur­ nishings and equipm ent, and the vestm ents of the priest are a multi-media declaration of the fundam ental them e of the book of Exodus,12 the Presence here o f the “O ne W ho Always Is.” So also should the places and the persons which stand at the center of our worship be a remembrance o f the Presence, the mercy, and the saving activity o f our G od— the “O ne W ho [still] Always Is.” There does not exist in the Bible a book more perm eated w ith its purpose or more consistently and constantly an expression of its them e than the book of Exodus. T he an­ nouncem ent that G od is, here, is made, in one way or another, in its every paragraph, and very nearly in its every sentence. It is an announcem ent o f wide-ranging implica­ tions, and yet it is a confession summed up in the single

120

EXODUS

four-consonant name YHW H, Yahweh, the “O ne W ho Always Is.”

A t the beginning of the book of Exodus, indeed in its very first verse, we are given the report of a journey of Jacob/Israel’s twelve sons. They w ent down into Egypt, in a journey we can remember, from the sequence of story in Genesis, as one guided and accompanied by Yahweh. The heart of Exodus describes another journey, undertaken by a much-multiplied Israel— and also guided and accompanied by Yahweh— out of Egypt to Yahweh’s special m ountain, H oreb/Sinai There, as never before, Israel learned w hat Yahweh’s companionship meant. A nd so at the end of the book of Exodus, still further journ eyings beckon—b u t they too will be undertaken w ith the guidance and in the com­ pany of Yahweh, th e “O ne W ho Always Is.” He is, still, this guiding and accompanying God, and he is, still, here. N o one of us has to live beyond or w ithout his Presence. That, at last, is the them e of the book of Exodus. Small w onder that Yahweh should keep calling out to us “T he O ne W ho Always Is! T he O ne W ho Always Is!” (Exod 34:6)— despite manifold evidences to the contrary, we still have difficulty believing him, just as Israel did so many proofs ago. Yet he is, still, and he is still here. Before life, w ithin life, beyond life, he is still. A nd if the center of our worship were different, and our knowledge of the sequences of story and requirem ent and memory in the Bible were more complete, and if our behavior were more an acknowl­ edgement of his will than of our wants, we w ould know th at he is and that he is here. Thus does G od cry out to us still, “T he O ne W ho Always Is! The O ne W ho Always Is!” A nd thus does he wait for our response, given honestly as well as earnestly, “H e is, and he is risen! The Lord is risen indeed!” The Sequence of Memory

121

NOTES

Chapter 1 The Theme of Exodus: God Is Here 1. Compare the suggestion of Michael Goldberg, Jew and Christians Getting Our Stories Straight: The Exodus and the Passion-Resurrection (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985), 26: “The story also tells us right from the start that it is more than just a story about Israel; as a master story, it is about all humankind.” 2. See especially the summary statement, “The Book of Exodus as a Whole,” xix-xxiv. 3. See the brief summaries in Exodus, WBC 3, pp. xxvixxxiv and the eighty-three pericopae bibliographies, passim. Chapter 2 The Sequence of Story 1. Northrop Frye, The Great Code: The Bible and Literature (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1982), 171. 2. “On the same principle the resurrection of Christ, around which the New Testament revolves, must be, f orm the New Testament's point of view, the antitype of the Exodus.” Ibid., 171-72. 3. See for example Harald Sahlin’s article, “The New Exodus of Salvation According to S t Paul” in The Root of the Vine, ed. Anton Fridrichsen (London: A. and C. Black, 1953), 81-95, and Bernhard W. Anderson’s “Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah,” in Israel’s Prophetic Heritage, ed. B. W. Anderson and W. Harrelson (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1962), 177-95. Notes

123

4. Note the fascinating theory of Michael Goldberg, who calls the Exodus narrative “the Jewish master story” that both informs and forms the lives of human beings in Jews a n d Christians Get­ ting O u r Stories Straight: T he Exodus a n d the Passion-Resurrection (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985). And compare the approach of J. P. Fokkelman, who says the Exodus “provides a foundation for the whole Bible” in “Exodus" in The Literary G uide to the Bible, ed. Robert Alter and Frank Kermode (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1987), 56-65. 5. Michael Walzer, Exodus a n d Revolution (New York: Basic Books, 1985). 6. See “Exodus: From J to K, or the Uncanniness of the Yahwist,” in Congregation: Contemporary Writers Read the Jewish Bible, ed. David Rosenberg (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1987), 9-26. 7. See Exodus, WBC 3 (Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1987), 27-41. 8. See The Art o f Biblical N arrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981), 131-54. 9. Frye, op. cit., 161-62. 10. In The Elusive Presence: Tow ard a N ew Biblical Theology (New York: Harper and Row, 1978), 110-50. 11. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, eds., A Hebrew a n d English Lexicon o f the O ld T estam ent (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952), 1027-28. 12. “Exod 3:14: History, Philology and Theology.” C atholic Biblical Q uarterly 40 (1978): 311-22. 13. In “Exodus,” op. cit., 63. 14. Frye, 17. 15. In “The Revelation of the Divine Name YHWH” in Proclamation a n d Presence, eds. John I Durham and J. R. Porter. New corrected edition (Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1983), 70-71. 16. See the extensive summary review of Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, In Search o f God: T h e M e a n in g a n d Message o f the Everlasting N am es, trans, by Frederick H. Cryer (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), 14-49. 17. See further WBC 3, pp. 45-46. 124

EXODUS

18. As for example in the patriarchal stories of Genesis 12, or the history of Israel in and beyond the Babylonian exile. 19. For a helpful survey of this important theme, see C. J. Labuschagne, T h e Incomparability o f Yahweh in the O ld Testa­ m e n t (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1966). 20. See Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 238-53. 21. So reads the Septuagint; the Masoretic text has “God” (’Elohim ).

22. For a detailed consideration of the “jigsaw-puzzle appear­ ance” of Exodus 24, see Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 340-48. 23. See more fully on this point Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 41619, 426-28, 435-36, 440-42, 445-46, 450-52, 458-60, 465-66. 24. The text says, “He wrote”—for a justification of my view that Yahweh, not Moses, is the antecedent of this pronoun, see Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 457, 462-63. Chapter 3 The Sequence of Requirement 1. See more fully the summary review of Eduard Nielsen, T he Ten C om m andm ents in N ew Perspective, Studies in Biblical Theol­ ogy 7, second series. Transí. D. J. Bourke (London: SCM Press, 1968), 78-93, and Walter Harrelson, T he Ten C om m andm ents a n d H u m a n Rights (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), 33-42. 2. John I Durham, “Christians and the Ten Command­ ments,” A d va n c ed Bible S tu d y (a publication of the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, Nashville, Tenn.), vol. 7, no. 4, (July-September 1977), 39-125. 3. See also the references in 2 Kings 23:2, 21; 2 Chronicles 34:30, which probably refer to some part, probably a large part, of the book of Deuteronomy. 4. See Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 305-37. 5. See, for example, Delbert R. Hillers, Covenant: The History o f a Biblical Idea (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1969), 89-97, and, more generally, Nahum M. Sama, Exploring Exodus: T he Her­ itage o f Biblical Israel (New York: Schocken Books, 1986), 130-89. Chapter 4 The Sequence of Memory 1. Noth’s article, which appeared originally in Evangelische Theologie 12 (1952), 6-16, can be found in English as “The Notes

125

‘Representation’ of the Old Testament in Proclamation” in In ­ terpretation 15 (1961), 50-60 and in C. Westermann, ed., Essays on O ld Testam ent H erm eneutics (Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1963), 76-88. 2. “D ie Vergegenwa ̈r tigung des A .T . in der Verkündigung, ” Evangelische Theologie 12 (1952), 13. 3. See Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 287-88. 4. Note Exodus 3:15-16; 33:19; 34:6-8; Numbers 6:22-27; see Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 39-40, 452-54. 5. See pp. 20-28, and note the comment of Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, In Search o f G od: T h e M e a n in g a n d Message o f the Everlasting N am es, transí. F. H. Cryer (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), 40: “We could perhaps affirm that the biblical di­ vine Name expresses the conviction o f God’s active and helpful presence, not as an expression about the past, but rather as a statement of confidence about the present and future: ‘He Is [here and is now helping].’” 6. On the meaning of this name, and of the other eleven sons of Jacob/Israel, see Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 4-5. 7. For the meanings of all the names in the list of 6:14-25, see Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 80-83. 8. See the extensive survey of “The Primitive Passover” of J. B. Segal, T h e H ebrew Passover, from Earliest T im es to A.D. 70 (London: Oxford University Press, 1963), 155-88. 9. For a fuller treatment of this important point, see Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 199-207, and the bibliography cited there. 10. Exodus, WBC 3, p. 390. 11. On the calculation of these totals, see Exodus, WBC 3, pp. 490-91. 12. See, for a fascinating and detailed summary of this point, Menahem Haran, Temples and Temple-Service in A n cie n t Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978), 149-259.

126

EXODUS

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Buber, Martin. Moses: T h e Revelation a n d the C ovenant. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958. Childs, Brevard S. T h e Book of Exodus. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974. Daube, David. T h e Exodus Pattern in the Bible. All Souls Studies, II. London: Faber and Faber, 1963. Durham, John I. Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 3. Waco, Tex.: Word Books 1987. Goldberg, Michael. Jews a n d Christians G etting O u r Stories Straight: T h e Exodus a n d the Passion-Resurrection. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985. Haran, Menahem. Temples a n d Temple-Service in A n c ie n t Israel. Winona Lake, In.: Eisenbrauns, 1985. Originally published by Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978. Harrelson, Walter. T h e T en C o m m a n d m en ts a n d Human Rights. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980. Herrmann, Siegfried. Israel in Egypt. Studies in Biblical Theology, second series, 27. Translated by Margaret Kohl. London: SCM Press, 1973. Hillers, Delbert R. C ovenant: T h e History o f a Biblical Idea. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1969. Hyatt, J. Philip. Exodus. New Century Bible. London: Oliphants, Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1971. Selected Bibliography

127

Knight, George A. F. Theology as N arration. Edinburgh: Handsel Press, 1976. McCarthy, D. J. O ld Testam ent C ovenant: A Survey of C urrent Opinions. Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1972. Mettinger, Tryggve N. D. In Search o f God: T h e M e a n in g a n d Message o f the Everlasting N am es. Translated by Frederick H. Cryer. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988. Nicholson, E. W. Exodus a n d Sinai in History a n d Tradition. Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1973. Sama, Nahum M. Exploring Exodus: T h e Heritage o f Biblical Israel. New York: Schocken Books, 1986. Segal, J. B. T h e Hebrew Passover, from Earliest T im es to A.D. 70. London Oriental Series, 12. London: Oxford University Press, 1963. Terrien, Samuel. T h e Elusive Presence: Toward a N ew Biblical Theology. Religious Perspectives, 26. San Francisco: Harper and Row 1978. deVaux, Roland. Ancient Israel. Vol. 2: Religious Institutions. Translated by John McHugh. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965. Walzer, Michael. Exodus a n d Revolution. New York: Basic Books 1985. Zimmerli, Walther. I A m Yahweh. Translated by Douglas W. Stott. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1982.

128

EXODUS

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

O LD TESTAMENT

Genesis M l 1-21 3:24 4:10-16 5:3 10 11:1-9 12:1-2 12:1-3 12:3 15:5 15:18-21 17:3-8 18 19 21:8-21 22 24:1-10 25:1-6 25:9 25:11-18 25:19-34 27:1-45 28:1-5

2 12 20 52 52 3 2 13 1 103 13 13 13 21 21 52 13 52 52 52 52 52 52 52

Index o f Scriptures

28:6-9 32:3-6 33:1-20 33:12-18 35:5-15 35:22-26 36:6-8 45:5 45:7 45:8 46:8-27 49:3-27 50:20 50:22-26

52 52 52 52 52 102 52 1 1 1 2 , 102 102 1 2

Exodus 1:1 1:1-5 1:1-7 1:2 1:5 1:7 1:8-6:13 1:9 1:17-21 2:1-2 2:10

1 4 ,104 102,105 8 , 1 2 ,13 101 101 102 7 18 15 15 104

2:16-22 2:21-22 2:22 2:23 2:23-25 2:24 2:25 3:6 3:8 3:11 3:11-12 3:12 3:13 3:13-14 3:13-14:17 3:14 3:14-17 3:15 3:15-16 3:16 3:19 3:20 4:1 4:2-5 4 :ll-12a 4:13 4:17

52 53 16,53 1 7 ,18 15 18 18 2 1 ,2 3 ,26 21 2 2 ,23 26 2 2 ,23 2 3 ,26 75 26 2 3 ,124 25 2 4 ,2 6 ,99 126 26 2 6 ,3 3 ,35 3 3 ,34 26 32 xii 28 26

129

4:18 4:20 4:21 4:21-23 4:22 4:25 4:29-31 4:30 5:1-2 5:1— 6:1 5:2 5:17-18 5:20-21 5:22 6:2 6:2-13 6:2-7:7 6:5-8 6:6 6:6-8 6:14-25 6:14-27 6:15 6:18 6:20 6:21 6:22 6:23 6:24 6:28-11:10 7:3 7:4 7:8-11:10 7:8-13 7:9 7:10 7:12 7:13 7:14 7:14-25 7:22-23 8:1-5 8:1-15 8:10 8:15 8:16-19 8:19 8:20-32 8:28 8:32

130

28 53 35 33 111 53 29,40 33 40 31 3 2 ,35 30 40 30 31 32 3 1 ,32 111 34 31 126 8 , 102,105 101 101 101 101 101 102 102 7 3 4 ,35 34 31 40 32 33 33 35 35 40 35 40 13 34 35 40 34,36 41 41 36

9:1-7 9:7 9:8-12 9:12 9:13-35 9:14 9:16 9:34-35 10:1-2 10:1-20 10:20 10:21-29 10:24-26 10:27 11:1 11:1-10 11:8 11:9-10 12:1-20 13:3-4 12:14 12:14-20 12:21-50 12:32 12:34 12:39 13 13:1-16 13:3 13:3-10 13:8-10 13:14-15 13:17-14:31 13:21-22 14:4 14:6 14:8 14:10-12 14:11-12 14:17-18 14:19-20 14:30-31 15 15:1 15:2 15:1-12 15:1-18 15:1-21 15:3 15:5

41 36 41 36 41 34 36 36 36 42 37 42 48 37 34 43 43 3 7 ,43 8 108 105 107 7 , 31 43 106 106 26 8 105 107 105 107 7 20 37 38 37 40 49 37 21 38 28 109-10 110 3 8 ,109-10 8 38 110 111

15:8 15:9 15:10 15:11 15:13-16 15:13,17-18 15:14, 16 15:17 15:17-18 15:18 15:19-18:12 15:21 15:22-27 15:25-26 15:26 16:1 16:3 16:8 16:10 16:12 17:3 17:15-16 18:1-12 18:4 18:5 18:10-11 18:11 18:12 18:13-17 18:13-27 18:19 18:21 18:22-23 18:23 18:26 19 19:1-2 19:l-3a 19:1-20:21 19:3-6 19:4-6 19:7-8 19:9 19:10-15 19:10-20 19:11 19:17 19:18 20 20:1-17

39, 111 39, 111 39 3 9 ,110 3 8 ,109, 111 109, 111 110 111 38 110-11 7 3 8 ,109 46 47 47 48 49 48 48 48 49 51 51 54 5 3 ,57 16 54 53 54 8 , 5 1 ,89 54 84 55 54 55 57 49 63 7 57 100 57 57 57 63 58 58 20 5 1 ,86 8

EXODUS

20:1-21 20:2 20:2-4 20:3 20:4-6 20:5 20:7 20:8 20:8-11 20:12 20:13-17 20:17 20:18 20:18-21 20:20 20:21 20:22 20:22-23:33 20:23 20:24-26 21:1-22:17 21:2-11 21:12-36 21:15 21:17 22:1-17 22:18-20 22:18-23:19 22:21-27 22:28-31 23 23:1-9 23:10-12 23:12-19 23:13 23:14-17 23:18-19 23:20-24 23:20-33 23:27-30 23:31 23:32 23:32-33 24 24:1 24:1-2 24:1-18 24:3-8 24:5

63 47 59 87 87 94 5 9 ,87 59 87 5 9 ,88 59 91 58 66 69 67 90 8 , 6 6 ,71, 8 7 ,93 90 91 89 91 91 88 88 91 91 89 91-92 91 51 92 92 94 92 92 92, 93 92 93 93 93 90 5 2 ,7 8 ,125 67 67 7 67 72

Index of Scriptures

24:8 24:9-11 24:12-14 24:15-18 24:18 24:7 24:10 24:18 25:1-9 25:1-31:18 25:8 25:10-22 25:23-30 25:31-40 25-31 26:1-37 27:1-8 27:9-19 28:1-43 29-35 29:1-46 29:45-46 30:1-10 30:11-16 30:17-21 30:22-33 30:34-38 31:1-11 31:12-18 31:13 31:16-17 31:17 32:1 32-34 32:10 32:12 32:13 32:1-34:9 32:21-34 32:34 33:1-2 33:4 33:5 33:16 33:18-19 33:18-34:9 33:19 34 34:5

71 67 67 67 72 89 2 1 ,71 72 113,115 8 , 3 1 ,66, 112 113 115 115 115 72 115 116 116 117 7 117 118 118 118 118 118 118 119 119 119 119 119 6 8 ,72 74-75 74 74 74 7 62 75 75 75 75 75 104 21 126 52 104

34:6 34:6-7 34:6-8 34.9 34:10 34:10-28 34:12-13 34:14-16 34:14-17 34:18 34:18-26 34:19-20 34:21 34:22-24 34:25 34:26 34:27 34:28 35:1-36:7 35:1-40:33 35:1-3 35:4-9 35:10-19 35:30-36:1 37:1-9 37:25-28 38:8 38:24-29 39:1 39:1-31 39:5 39:7 39:21 39:26-27 39:31 39:42-43 40:1-33 40:34-38 40:34-40

121 76 126 77 7 8 ,94 8 78 94 93 93 78 94 93 93 94 93-94 94-95 5 9 ,8 6 ,95 115 8 , 3 1 ,112 119 113,115 119 119 115 118 118 120 120 117 120 120 120 120 120 120 113 7 113

Leviticus 8:1-33 11:29-30 15:16-33 17-26 20:9 24:7

117 12 57 89 89 115

Numbers 4:7 6:22-27

115 126

131

11 12 13-14 14:18 16-17 17:1-11 20 21:14-15 33:15 Deuteronomy 4 4:11-14 4:12 4:13 4:15 4:32-33 4:33 4:35-36 5 5:2-3 5:4 5:22 5:23-26 6:4

10:4 12-26 21:18-21 27:12-13 27:16 32:8 33:2-29 Joshua 5:2-9 5:9 24 1 Samuel 21:1-6

132

4 6 ,49 27 46 77 46 115 46 51 49

60 59 20 5 9 ,86 20 59 20 59 60 99 59 59 59 11 5 9 ,86 89 88 102 88 2 102

29 29 70

57

2 Kings 23:2 23:21

125 125

2 Chronicles 34:30

125

Nehemiah 9:17 Job 1:8 2:3 Psalms 47 78:23-29 78:45 86:15 93 96 97 98 99 103:8 105:40 106:19-20 111:4 121:4 145:8 Isaiah 6:1-4 43:25 44:6 45:6-7 51:9 57:1-13 Jeremiah 1:11-12 3:6-9

Ezekiel 23:36-49 29:3 32:2 47:9

62 33 33 12

Joel 2:13

77

Jonah 4:2

77

Nahum 1:3

77

77

44 44

38 49 41 77 38 38 38 38 38 77 49 73 99 115 77

21 25 25 25 33 62

115 62

N EW TESTAMENT

Mark 12:29

11

Luke 1:30-31

104

John 5:2-9 6:31-33

29 49

Acts 2

59

1 Corinthians 10:2-4

49

Galatians 3:29

102

Ephesians 4:4-6

12

Philippians 2:9-11

104

EXODUS

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES Joshua TRENT C. BUTLER

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC Joshua Copyright © 1991 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11576-2 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Butler, Trent C. Joshua: Trent C. Butler. p.  cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-849-93247-2 1. Bible. O.T. Joshua—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II. Series. BS1295.2.B87 1991 222’.206—dc2090-28364 Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface Introduction Method o f Approach Themes in Joshua 1. Leadership of the People of God Moses, the shadow behind Israel’s leaders Leadership pointing to the past Leadership through action 2. The Land God Gave Land as gift Land as possession Land as inheritance Land by lot Land under the ban Land of rest 3. The Law That Leads G od’s People Torah defined Joshua’s call to obey Torah Torah as community responsibility Torah and daily life Torah obedience as love Torah and disobedience Torah as covenant keeping

vii ix 1 2 6 23 23 28 32 35 35 40 42 43 44 48 51 51 52 54 55 55 56 57

V

The Word of Yahweh Word of God and written Torah Functions o f word of God The faithful word 4. Loyalty T hat Characterizes G od’s People Loyalty as unique to Israel Loyalty in community Loyalty as individual devotion Loyalty as covenant commitment 5. The Lord Behind History God who speaks God who acts in history God who makes demands G od is present Epilog: The People of G od Notes Index of Scriptures

VI

57 58 58 61 63 63 64 68 68 75 76 79 95 105 111 116 119

CO N TEN TS

FOREWORD

Finding the great themes of the books of the Bible is essen­ tial to the study o f G od’s Word, and to the preaching and teaching of its truths. But these themes or ideas are often like precious gems; they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered with some difficulty. The large commentaries are most useful to this discovery process, but they are not usually designed to help the student trace the important subjects within a given book of Scripture. The Quick-Reference Bible Topics meet this need by bringing together, within a few pages, all o f what is contained in a bibli­ cal volume on the subjects that are thought to be most signifi­ cant to that volume. A companion series to the Word Biblical Commentary, these books seek to distill the theological essence of the biblical books as interpreted in the more technical series and to serve it up in ways that will enrich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship o f G od’s people. Joshua is an up-beat narrative about the fulfillment o f G od’s promises to an obedient people. It is the natural sequel to Deuteronomy. Dr. Trent Butler builds on his intensive research vii

for his Word Biblical Commentary on Joshua to sketch the dominate themes o f this intensely theological book. This volume is sent forth in the hope that it will contribute to the vitality of God’s people as we, too, try to occupy the promised land which G od has for us. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky

viii

John D.W. Watts Old Testament Editor Word Biblical Commentary Quick-Reference Bible Topics

Foreword

PREFACE

Learning biblical languages, researching for articles in scholarly journals, writing commentaries, all of the work the biblical scholar does has one ultimate goal— understanding the major topics Scripture teaches and helping the church under­ stand and bring to life those topics. In that sense this small volume represents the completion of the work on Joshua begun so many years ago and brought to major expression in the Word Biblical Commentary, Volume 7. The present book seeks to summarize the lessons learned from Joshua in writing the commentary and make those lessons available to a wider audience. A ll translations of Joshua in this book come from the commentary. This volume is released to its wider audience with the prayer that it will help the church better understand the church’s na­ ture as G od’s people and help it to know its Lord. The volume is also released in gratitude to the editors and to numerous colleagues who have encouraged and inspired me to continue working in the book of Joshua. This book is due in no small part to my son Kevin and his assistance on the computer, and ix

to my wife and her patience in letting me retire to the study for one more book. Certainly other topics could be dealt with from Joshua. Also, the themes chosen for exposition here could be dealt with more clearly and comprehensively. I hope the present work will in­ spire readers to search Joshua and all o f G od’s Word to find the truths he has taught his people and to determine how those truths should impact a believer’s life. In this work, I have quoted from my own translation o f Joshua as found in the volume o f the Word Biblical Commentary. When reference is made to that book, Volume 7, it is abbreviated W BC 7:— (page number). It is appropriate that I release this volume to the publisher at the Christmas season when one greater than Joshua took up the same Hebrew name and came to deliver G od’s people, not alone from enemies occupying the Promised Land, but from the ultimate enemy Sin, thus giving us salvation that reaches into the promised world to come. I release this manuscript with the prayer that it may help its readers face anew the call to com­ mitment to be loyal people o f the Lord in, over, and above history, and that it may call forth faith to know and follow be­ cause “I will put my laws into their minds, and I will write them upon their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Heb 8:10 nasb ). Trent C . Butler Brentwood, Tennessee

x

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION

The assignment: write a brief study on the themes of the book of Joshua. This raises a probing question: How does one dis­ cover themes that are both important within the narrative structure of Joshua and are o f interest to readers approaching the twenty-first century? The task calk for research into the nature o f biblical narrative and sensitivity to the concerns of the modem church and world. Research into biblical narrative literature has only recently begun to ask questions concerning how to determine and define narrative themes. Final answers are not yet available. Individual scholars have proposed numerous methods o f approach to bib­ lical themes. Thus we are compelled to describe our approach to biblical narrative as we begin this volume. The following lines will sketch one possible method for determining which themes are important within the narrative structure of biblical literature. We will then apply the method to the book o f Joshua to determine significant themes. The remaining chapters will take up each theme and trace its meaning within the book with occasional references to the modem situation.

1

Method of approach The type of literature To know the themes of a piece of literature, we must know the kind of literature with which we are dealing. We will ex­ pect different things from satire, comedy, biography, court records, personal letters, and historical research. Most often, the type of literature will reveal the major theme of a book. A salvation oracle from a prophet or priest requires us to deal with the topic of salvation. A hymn of praise points to the topics o f praise and worship. A letter calls forth the theme o f rela­ tionships between the writer and recipients. A n apocalyptic work makes investigation of persecution and future hope para­ mount. The list could be extended indefinitely. The point is clear. The major theme of a work is more than the sum o f major vo­ cabulary items the writer used. A salvation oracle may never use the word salvation. A hymn may not explicitly mention worship. No one vocabulary item will define the relationship between writer and recipient of a letter. Only knowledge of the type of literature can give the necessary information to lead to the literary work’s major theme.

The literary structure The type of literature represents a general category with many individual literary works within the category. Comparing the individual works and finding their common elements and intention lets us define the category. Part of the definition will include general structural elements which recur in most pieces of literature that belong to the literary type. Thus a lament may be described as having the following elements: address to God, statement of the complaint, expression o f trust in G od’s help, plea for G od’s help in the specific situation, description of

2

JOSHUA

enemies, and a concluding vow to praise and honor God for deliverance.1 Such general structural elements of a literary type find spe­ cific form in the individual work of literature. The structure of the individual work gives clues as to the major themes. Where the work varies from the usual structural elements of the literary type, where it creates new elements, where it repeats or other­ wise gives special emphasis to elements, what it places in the introduction and conclusion— all these elements o f literary structure provide strong evidence of the major theme o f the work. In one way or another the specific structure will point to the major point of discussion between author and audience, will show how various sides respond to the point of discussion, and will describe the author’s solution to the situation. The author’s solution will either affirm and expand that o f the audience, or it will modify or deny that o f the audience. Important topics appear both at the point of affirmation and at the point(s) of denial. This means an author can have both negative and positive themes. Such topics come to light as we study the lit­ erary structure of the individual work.

Vocabulary and vocabulary fields A topic can appear without ties to specific vocabulary as noted above, but a writer often highlights a theme by repeat­ ing certain key terms and phrases. The writer may use such terms because the audience uses them and finds strong em otional support in them. The writer may make very subtle or not so subtle shifts in meaning by placing these important terms in new contexts or by illustrating them in ways that give new definitions to old words. Vocabulary items, as such, do not constitute literary or theological themes. Rather, literary themes emerge from (1) the interaction among related vocabulary items and (2) the distinctions between the audience’s understanding Introduction

3

o f these vocabulary items and the author’s definition o f those items. Themes emerge from vocabulary or word study not simply through classical dictionary definitions but through examination o f their functions in the context of the literary work and in the social/theological context of the audience.

Characterization Characterization creates literary themes. A writer, even of history, chooses heroes and villains carefully. Heroes become in some sense role models for the audience. The goals the hero seeks to attain, the hero’s actions, the hero’s speeches, and the hero’s final fete combine to set forth an understanding o f hu­ man purpose and destiny. Sim ilar portrayal o f the villain(s) provides the n egative th em e(s). Sim ilarly, h eroic goals unfulfilled and a villain’s goals undefeated may represent liter­ ary themes specifically directed to the new generation repre­ sented by the audience.

Transition points Delay in action and transition points often allow the author to interject important topical statements. These may appear indifferent forms: repeated ritual acts; long speeches; summary statements; character description; theological definitions. Such statements al­ low the author to address the contemporary audience as well as to make historical descriptions. Precisely at such transition points in the narrative, we expect to discover the points of tension which the author addresses and the options which the reading or listening audience faces.

Larger literary context The larger literary context serves as a checkpoint by which to judge whether the criteria stated above have been used correctly 4

JO SH U A

to isolate the writer’s themes. If the context under immediate consideration is part of a larger literary whole, then the topics emphasized will prove to be significant within the larger liter­ ary work. Topics from the smaller context not taken up in the larger context should not be emphasized as major themes by modem study. Thus, in the present study of the book of Joshua, we must concentrate on topics which stretch forward through the Former Prophets—Judges, Samuel, Kings. We may also want to see how Joshua carries forward themes from its immediate literary predecessor— the P entateuch (G en esis through Deuteronomy). From the standpoint o f evangelical Christian­ ity, we will want to look at an even larger context, that of the New Testament. How does the New Testament expand the themes of Joshua in light of the supreme revelation in Jesus Christ?

Limits Our own literary work cannot be infinite and endless. We must choose to examine only certain topics, not all those found in Joshua. We will want to examine those themes that (1) ap­ pear to have major significance in the book of Joshua, (2) ei­ ther are unique to Joshua in the biblical literature, on the one hand, or appear to be significant in light of the New Testament, and (3) seem to have the potential to speak to significant needs of the contemporary church and world. Such a statem ent must be modified somewhat. We must not elim inate a statem ent simply because we see no potential meaning for the modem world, for a major theme in biblical literature stands there pre­ cisely through the working of the Holy Spirit and has strong potential for meaning as the Spirit continues to work in the life o f the church and its individual members. Still, we seek to work with topics for which modem application is most appar­ ent in hopes of being an instrument of the Spirit in speaking to the lives of his people. Introduction

5

Themes in Joshua The method described could be extended, adding other lit­ erary techniques to refine the method and establish an even longer list of themes. We will use these six methodological cri­ teria to determine themes in the book of Joshua.

Joshua as biography Joshua represents a complex type o f literature. It is closely associated with Judges, Samuel, and Kings—books whose subject matter is historical events and persons. Thus, our first impres­ sion is to classify the book as history writing and define history writing to determine the overarching themes o f Joshua. This approach is only a first step, however. History writing is too large a category to deal with. Royal annals, chronicles, personal diaries, oral traditions, political propaganda. . . one can go on and on with various literary types that belong to the major category o f history writing. We must ask what kind o f history writing the book of Joshua represents. In so doing, we must consider the Jews’ traditional classification of Joshua as part of the Former Prophets. In a real sense, Joshua is history writing from a prophetic perspective. That is, the book of Joshua does not simply choose selected historical facts and line them up in chronological order. Joshua expects those historical facts to provide insight into the meaning of life in G od’s world under God’s direction. It expects G od’s people to understand life in the present with him in light o f life in the past with him. Similarly, it points to hope for life in the future because of the reality o f a life of hope in the past. The facts of past history become a literary tool for the inspired writer to provide a spiritual message for the present. Only be­ cause the book of Joshua has this inspired prophetic element do we continue to seek out its themes and employ those themes to guide our life under God.

6

JOSHUA

To say the book of Joshua has a prophetic element or is pro­ phetic history writing still does not define its literary type. Prophecy can be presented in the familiar collections of oracles or prophetic speeches that we see in Isaiah or Micah. It can be presented in the question and answer mode of Habakkuk, the narrative style of Jonah, the woes of Amos or Nahum, the priestly style of M alachi, or the apocalyptic combination o f narrative and vision of Daniel. Prophecy is more a personal function than a literary type. We still must ask the literary nature of the pro­ phetic history in the book of Joshua. To determine literary structure, we must look at the indi­ vidual elements of structure in the book of Joshua. How can we in one sentence describe each of the sections of Joshua? The following picture develops.2 1 :1 -9 1 :1 0 -1 8 2 :1 -2 4 3 :1 -5 :1 5 :2 -9

5: 10-12 5 :1 3 -1 5 6 :1 -2 7 7 :1 -5 7 :6 -9 7 :1 0 -2 6 8 :1 -2 9 8 :3 0 -3 5

Introduction

Joshua is inducted into Moses’ office. Joshua functions as commander of Israel and of East Jordan troops. Joshua sends spies to see the land; they report back to him. Joshua directs the crossing of the Jordan and re­ ceives the renown of Moses. Joshua sanctifies the negligent people by circum­ cising them. The sanctified people celebrate Passover. Joshua passes the test administered by the Prince of the Host of Yahweh. Jericho is given into Joshua’s hands. Joshua leads a futile attack against A i after Achan’s sin and the spies’ foolish advice. Joshua leads a public lamentation ceremony. Joshua leads a public trial at Yahweh’s command. Joshua captures A i. Joshua builds an altar and leads a covenant cer­ emony according to the law o f Moses. 7

9 :1 -2 9 :3 9 :4 -1 4 9 :1 5 9 :1 6 -2 1

9 :2 2 -2 3 9 :2 4 -2 7 1 0 :1 -5 1 0 :6 -1 4 1 0 :1 5 -4 3 1 1 :1 -4 1 1 :5 -1 5 1 1 :1 6 -2 3 1 2 :1 -2 4 1 3 :1 -7 1 3 :8 -3 3 1 4 :1 -5 1 4 :6 -1 5 15:1-17:18 18:1-19:48 1 9 :4 9 -5 0 19:51

8

Southern kings gather for war against Joshua. Gibeon seeks peace because o f fame o f Joshua. Gibeonites come to Joshua with evidence, but men o f Israel make him accept evidence. Joshua accepts men’s decision and makes covenant o f peace. M en o f Israel make foolish expedition against Gibeonite cities but do not capture anything or anyone. Joshua curses Gibeonites to perpetual cultic service. Joshua graciously rescues Gibeonites from men of Israel and gives them place as cultic servants. Southern kings hear of exploits o f Joshua and gather for battle. Gibeonites appeal to Joshua, who defeats the kings. Joshua directs punishment and pursuit mission. Northern kings gather to battle Israel. Joshua captures northern kings and land following Yahweh’s commands through Moses. Joshua’s accomplishments summarized as fulfillment o f the law o f Moses. Joshua’s accomplishments are listed parallel to those o f Moses. Yahweh describes land that remains to Joshua. Moses’ allotments summarized. Eleazar and Joshua begin allotm ent process ac­ cording to the law o f Moses Joshua blesses Caleb with his inheritance. Judah, including C aleb, and Joseph, including Ephraim and Manasseh, receive their lots, Joshua leads other seven tribes to spy out and take their inheritance. Joshua receives an inheritance. Eleazar and Joshua complete the distribution.

JO SH U A

Joshua obeys Yahweh as given in Moses’ commands and sets up cities of refuge. Eleazar and Joshua obey Yahweh’s will as given in 2 1 :1 -4 2 Moses’ commands and provide cities for the land­ less Levites. 2 1 :4 3 -4 5 Yahweh fulfilled all His promises. Joshua sends the obedient eastern tribes home 2 2 :1 -8 across Jordan. Phinehas, the priest, settles an altar dispute be­ 2 2 :9 -3 4 tween eastern and western tribes. 2 3 :1 -1 6 Joshua delivers his farewell sermon, admonishing the tribes to obedience. 2 4 :1 -2 8 Joshua leads tribes in covenant commitment to Yahweh. 2 4 :9 -2 3 Joshua, Joseph, and Eleazar are buried. 2 0 :1 -9

Looking at the individual units reveals quite clearly that the narrative structure o f the book of Joshua has one center. Joshua is the actor on stage at every important juncture. The book of Joshua tells the story of Joshua. The subject of the lead sentences of the book of Joshua is Joshua. The further the book continues, the greater the fame and glory of Joshua. The narrative structure of the book does not concentrate so much on conquest and land distribution as it does on the person and work o f Joshua. The concentration o f the narrative structure is not total, however. A t important points, Joshua disappears briefly. He does not explicitly lead the Passover celebration (5:10-12), but he had prepared Israel to celebrate Passover by circumcising the men. Joshua heard a word from Yahweh or initiated an action to begin each major section (1:1; 2:1; 3:1; 4:1; 5:2; 6:2) until chapter 7. There, the sons o f Israel (7:1)— represented in the one man Achan— initiated the action. Only under this heading did Joshua undertake a futile action (7:2). Even then, Joshua’s actions under G od’s leadership finally corrected the situation. Again, Joshua is the major actor (8:1, 30) or the one causing Introduction

9

the enemies’ actions (9:1-3) until a major wrong is commit­ ted. Then the men o f Israel accept the Gibeonites’ evidence, having failed to inquire of Yahweh (9:14). Joshua then made peace and signed an agreement to let the Gibeonites live (9:15). Finally, Joshua graciously rescued the Gibeonites from the sons of Israel (9:26). Joshua again took first place in the allotment of the land (13:1), but Eleazar also shared the spotlight, even being men­ tioned before Joshua (14:1; 17:4; 19:51). Still, when an action occurred, the actor was Joshua (14:13; 15:13; 17:14-18). This continued in chapter 20, where Joshua set up the cities of refuge; but in chapter 21 Eleazar appeared again beside Joshua. In 22:2 Joshua acted alone, dismissing the eastern tribes and preaching to them to be faithful to the law of Moses. Suddenly in 22:10-34, Joshua disappeared. Phinehas, the priest, occupied center stage to settle the altar dispute between east and west. C an we explain Joshua’s lapses from the stage? Perhaps! In the early chapters Joshua disappeared in the time of blame. The narration shifts the center of attention away from Joshua only when Israel violates the law of Moses. In the second half of the book, Joshua is called to share the central actions with the priest when cultic actions take place at a worship center. When the problem becomes totally cultic, the priest alone is involved. Thus, context appears to dictate when Joshua must yield the central position to another character. Such brief exits do not change the central structure of the book. They only show Joshua’s willingness to work with other officials and to acknowledge the limits o f his role. The book remains a story about Joshua, the leader par excellence. In some sense the lit­ erary type of the book is biography, documenting the life of a leader in Israel after Moses. That biography is then structured in a particular way to make its unique points and present its unique themes. Showing that Joshua is a biography of a leader leads us far down the path to the book’s major themes. A biography sets up

10

JO SH U A

the central figure as a person of importance whose example be­ comes a role model to follow or to avoid. A biography forces us to look at personal themes rather than abstract themes. In this case the biography of a leader means we must look at personal leadership themes. We must determine what makes Joshua a leader, what tasks a leader faces, where a leader gets leadership in accomplishing those tasks, and how a leader faces failure as well as success. To know exactly how to do this, we must go still further. We must follow the outline of the method given above to better define the themes inherent in a biography o f a leader.

Literary structure of the biography Biography can be a complex genre using many literary tech­ niques to give historical perspective and character development of the central character and several other major personalities. Flashbacks, monologs, personal descriptions, conversations, dreams, personal reflections, moving back and forth among several contemporaneous events, and other complex literary techniques allow biographers to delve deep into personality make-up and present psychological analysis of people in all their complexity. The book of Joshua is much simpler in its tech­ niques and much more direct in its structure. It describes the character’s actions and presents the character in dialog, par­ ticularly in dialog with God. A s elsewhere in the Ancient Near East, biography had the office and function of the person as its theme, not the personal character traits and emotions. Biography featured the public life rather than the private, per­ sonal affairs of its subject. Life and office became practically identical. Biography was much more interested in the typical that later generations could emulate and repeat rather than in individual fate. In dealing with the public rather than the private person, biography often began with the public birth—the installation Introduction

11

into office—not with the private birth to a mother. The installa­ tion report opening the biography often introduced the major themes taken up in the biography proper. Such topics include se­ curing peace from external and internal enemies, establishing social justice within the nation, and preserving the purity of the cult Thus in the book of Joshua, the center of attention is Joshua and his office. The book begins with a report of his installation in office as leader of the conquest and of the division of the land. These functions establish peace with enemies externally and internally, setting up a society at rest, thus a society with social justice and a pure cult. The book tells how Joshua carried out these public functions. A ll private details— even names of family members—are passed over without mention. We do not meet Joshua, the individual person; we meet Joshua, the na­ tional leader. In his official function Joshua secures peace for the people and peace among the people. He lays the demands o f the Law of Moses before the people to secure social justice. He delivers a divine ultimatum as to their choice o f G od, seeking to ensure the purity of the cult. Structural elements easily separate the book of Joshua into distinct units. Chapter 1 initiates Joshua into his office and sets out the task facing Israel, including the tribes east of the Jordan. Chapters 2 through 5 show Joshua’s effective leadership and make him and the people cultically ready to fulfill the mission G od has set before them. Chapters 6 through 11 show Joshua obediently overcoming all opposition to conquer the land. Chapter 12 summarizes the conquest and closes the first half o f the book. Chapter 13 shows the second stage o f Joshua’s mission—apportioning the land west o f Jordan as Moses had apportioned that east o f Jordan. Joshua had to do this even though much o f the promised land remained to be conquered. Chapters 14 through 17 show how land was provided for Judah, Ephraim, and Manasseh. Chapters 18 and 19 show how Joshua motivated the remaining 7 tribes to determine and possess their allotment.

12

JO SH U A

Chapters 20 and 21 set up a just social system for inadvert­ ent murderers and for landless priests. The second half of the book then finds its conclusion in the summary statement of 21:43-45. Joshua had solved the problems with external foes. Chapter 22 establishes internal peace among feuding tribes and sets forth the basic rule o f cultic purity agreed to by all the people. Chapters 23 and 24 conclude the book with Joshua’s sermon and his leading Israel to renew the covenant with God. The biographical epilog (24:29-33) then reports Joshua’s death and burial, the fulfillment o f the promise to Joseph to bury his re­ mains in the promised land, and the death and burial of Eleazar the priest. The structure of Joshua thus can be outlined as follows: I. The Introduction: Joshua’s initiation as leader after and under Moses (1:1-18) II. The Body: Joshua establishes external and internal rest (2:1-21:45) A . Joshua leads in conquest o f the land (2:1-12:24) 1. Joshua helps the people prepare for conquest (2:1-5:15) 2. Joshua leads the people to conquer the land (6:1-11:15) 3. Joshua’s conquest summarized (11:16-12:24) B. Joshua and Eleazar demonstrate social justice in action distributing the land (13:1-19:51) C . Joshua establishes justice and peace for underprivi­ leged (20:1-21:42) D. Summary: G od fulfilled all his promises (21:43-45) III. Conclusion: Joshua and Eleazar establish cultic purity (22:1-24:28) A . Joshua commissions the eastern tribes (22:1-6) B. Phinehas leads to cultic agreement among the tribes (22:7-34) Introduction

13

IV.

C . Joshua leads people to covenant agreement (23:1— 24:28) Epilog: Leaders buried and promises kept (24:29-33)

The structure of the book o f Joshua thus leads us to look at seven basic themes: (1) Leadership after Moses (2) Rest (3) The land (4) Justice (5) Pure worship (6) Divine promises (7) Covenant religion The methodological areas studied below may provide further themes or new structure for these themes.

Vocabulary fields of the book of Joshua Special words punctuate the inspired biography o f Joshua. With these words, the author underlined themes the readers needed to ponder. Using the outline above, words can be se­ lected which recur frequently and which carry thematic weight for the author. Obviously, some words will occur many times without carrying them atic weight—such as “to be,” “and,” “have,” “say”—and other words necessary to carry normal nar­ rative along. A vocabulary review shows that some words recur in all sections o f the book: “Yahweh,” “Joshua,” “M oses,” “land,” “giving,” “possession/inheritance,” “rest,” “servant of Yahweh,” “Reuben,” and “G ad.” Other words such as “Torah,” “obey,” “ban,” “covenant,” and “altar” influence some sections but not all. Still other words—such as “ark of the covenant,” "rebel,” “loyal,” “dread by the inhabitants”—play significant roles in individual sections or even in isolated narratives, but do appear in other sections of the book. Further study of transition points 14

JO SH U A

in the book may help explain the diffusion and concentration of vocabulary items. For the moment, let us note that the vo­ cabulary items of significance can be organized under a few categories: 1. Leadership Joshua Moses Great Until this day

2. Land Giving Possession Inheritance Rest Oath to fathers Ban Land Lot

4 . Loyalty Covenant Servant Reuben Loyal Rebel Faithful

3 . Law Torah Word Obey Commandment

5 . Lord Yahweh With you Ark Wonders Anger

Characterization in the book of Joshua Strangely for our taste, characterization does not play a strong role for the author of the biography of Joshua. This apparently results from the nature of Near Eastern biography with its em­ phasis on office more than on office-holder. The individual character traits of Joshua disappear behind the official of Moses carrying out the commands of Torah and the spoken words of Yahweh and thus accomplishing his mission. The author never takes time to step back from the action to describe Joshua or to picture Joshua in repose or in reflection. Rather, Joshua remains in constant action throughout the book’s twenty-four chapters. Introduction

15

The simple-minded devotion to action shows the inspired writer’s understanding o f leadership o f Israel after M oses. Leadership consists in obedient action much more than in devel­ oping a public image dominated by certain popular personality traits.

Transition points in the book of Joshua Certain key transition sections sparkle with diamonds o f theological truth in somewhat irregular intervals through the book o f Joshua. Each o f the individual conquest narratives as well as the other individual narratives o f the book have impor­ tant themes which a total study of Joshua must investigate, but the transitions show us where the author chose to place the narrative weight. A t least the following elements stand out as compositional markers leading us down the path to the key themes of Joshua. 1. Theological prologue: leader and people defined (1 :1 -1 8 ). Here we find divine marching orders for Israelite leadership af­ ter Moses, the chain o f command in Israel illustrated, and the call for national unity. The Israelite leader has a clear task— take the land; a sure guidebook—the Torah o f Moses; and a reassuring promise— I am with you. He has other leaders to help him accomplish the task, and he has assurance from the tribes most tempted not to participate— they will obey his leadership. 2. Culitc interlude: worship as the center of identity (8:30-35). This passage shocks modem readers by intruding on the conti­ nuity of the conquest narratives. The story turns from war to worship, from G ilgal to Shechem, and from conquest to cov­ enant. The author used the transition shock to call attention to important themes—place o f worship, allegiance to Torah, chain o f command, universal instruction in Torah, and fulfill­ ment o f Torah. Joshua must not be read as a simple book of holy war, conquest, and selfish grabbing o f land. It must be seen rather as pointing to leadership after Moses in the light o f the 16

JO SH U A

Torah of Moses. Only after we have taken a break in the action to learn this lesson should we return to the action of conquest and learn the rest of the story. 3. Theological summary: promises fulfilled (1 1 :2 3 ). Ten chapters (2-11) lay out the conquest narratives. One transi­ tional verse gives the meaning. The major goal of the conquest narrative deals not with human activity and human achieve­ ment. Conquest narrative does not become a manual for future battle; nor does it become a universally valid theology of warfare. Conquest narrative points to God’s faithfulness, to Israel’s posses­ sion by grace, and to God’s goal for his people— rest from battle. 4. Theological review: the task ahead (1 3 :1 -7 ). N arrative breaks the bonds o f past history, pointing beyond itself to fu­ ture goals. N o leader dies without new fields to conquer. New tasks and new challenges stare each new generation and its leaders in the face. Joshua faced old age (note the artistic in­ clusion joining 13:1 and 23:1) with a large conquest task re­ maining. A s so often in biblical narrative, the author used divine monolog to make this important transition. Incompleteness and a task remaining did not mean Joshua had failed as leader. Rather, it called for new trust in G od to fulfill new promises and for new commitment to the parallel task of distributing the land. Fair distribution took priority over total destruction o f enemies and total conquest o f land. (The first chapters o f Judges return to this theme.) 5. Theological acclamation: God is faithfid (21.43-45). Repeti­ tion among transition statements underlines the importance of a theme. The conquest summary underlined God’s faithfulness (11:23). The distribution summary does the same. A task remain­ ing and land unconquered do not detract from God’s faithfulness. They only reassure the new generation called to cooperate with God in bringing new promises to fulfillment. G od’s people have no basis for com plaint God is perfectly faithful. His Word proves true in human history. N o enemy threatens God. He defeats ev­ ery one he faces when and how he chooses. Introduction

17

6. A theological program: life with God anywhere (22:1-6). The speech of a hero can mark transition as easily as divine speech. W hen such speech forms a literary inclusion with previous transition material, as 22:1-6 does with 1:12-18, then the reader seeking important themes must certainly pay close attention to the passage. The literary signals are especially important for the modem reader here, for we are tempted to see 22:1-6 as an interlude preparing for the interesting story to follow. Thus, at the first reading, we pass over it without marking its thematic importance. A s the author turned to the task of the future in 13:1-7, so the future stands in perspective here. The unity of God’s people must endure the strains o f rest even more than the stress of war. The unity of God’s people must endure even the absence o f symbols and of the rites of unity. The unity o f G od’s people comes from obedience to the Torah of Moses. Such unity can be preserved no matter where G od’s people live and no matter what worship conveniences they are missing. 7. Theological justification: leave Torah, lose land (23:1-16). M ost narrative books have important introductory and con­ cluding transition statements, moving into and out of the major story line. Joshua doubles up on the exit transition, presenting first the hero’s concluding speech and then the concluding ritual (ch 24). Both point to the future. Past promises are secure (11:23; 21:43-45). Future promises stand tied to human com­ mitment. The message reaches the people through the chain o f command. The message calls for awareness o f the past, knowledge o f the task remaining, confidence in G od to ac­ complish the task, commitment to obey God’s Torah and to love him, and trust in G od strong enough to avoid the temp­ tation of other gods. The message centers on warning. Fulfillment o f promises can turn to fulfillment of threats. Life in the land without Torah will mean life without the land. 8. Theological hope: covenant with God (24:1-28). A unique covenant ceremony pairs with Joshua’s farewell address to conclude the book of Joshua. This models Israel’s hope for identity in all 18

JO SH U A

ages. The story has featured fighting and land distribution. The conclusion features Joshua’s intense efforts to bond Israel to God through covenant ritual and personal commitment. A gain, the place is Shechem, as in the transition ritual at 8:30-35. The mediators are the officials in Joshua’s chain of command. The in­ troduction is historical review. The featured performer is not Joshua nor his armies, but Yahweh, the G od who fights and forms Israel’s history. The conclusion is a call for absolute commitment to this God, a commitment that excludes all other commitments and that admits the impossible nature of fulfilling the commitment. The result is the covenant between Yahweh and Israel based on To­ rah. That is the basis for life in the inherited land. These eight transition sections guide us to themes in Joshua. Taken together, they represent a call to unity among God’s people in following God’s Torah to be faithful members of God’s covenant, resisting all temptations to follow other gods, and depending on G od to complete the unfinished task through new leaders like Joshua. Meanwhile, God’s people rest from battle, enjoying life in the land God has faithfully given in fulfillment o f all his promises. God’s faithfulness stands proven in history. The future will render a verdict on Israel’s faithfulness. Stem , concluding warnings in the book of Joshua caution the reader not to be too optim istic concerning Israel’s faithfulness or concerning God’s leniency with an unfaithful people.

Larger literary context A few general and quite apparent observations would be appropriate. The book of Joshua builds strongly on the foundation of Deuteronomy, a foundation based on a covenant structure of faithfulness to Torah centered in the D ecalog (D eut 5 ). Deuteronomy looks for one people to serve one G od at one sanctuary or face the covenant curses. Such service is a service of love of God and devotion to his word.3 Introduction

19

Judges follows Joshua and provides the reverse side of life. A s Joshua is the biography of a faithful leader in the shadow of Moses, so Judges is the biography of a faithless nation in the shadow of their sin because they lack faithful leadership and need a king.4 First Samuel then shows G od providing a king for his people; but the very first king foreshadows the history of kingship, being more willing to meet immediate needs with human actions than to meditate on Torah, understand God, and wait for his actions. The failed leadership o f Saul contrasts with the pious leadership examples o f Samuel before G od and David waiting to come after him.5Second Samuel features God’s covenant king for His covenant people. Here is the beginning o f what Joshua could not provide—permanent leadership for G od’s people. Second Samuel gives for David what the book of Joshua did not give for Joshua—characterization. Precisely, that characterization separates David from Joshua, for it shows the weakness and sin o f David, something never seen in Joshua.6 Joshua thus stands as the model for leadership in Israel, while David stands as the human example o f leadership— strongly committed to Yahweh, yet fully involved in the world and its strong temptations. Here another nuance of leadership theology appears. Leadership is not condemned to destruction for occasional unfaithfulness. Joshua 24 had already noted the impossibility o f total faithfulness. Rather, the condemnation o f leadership comes only in Kings. First and Second Kings show the demise o f united Israel and the destruction of the two separated kingdoms.7 Such destruc­ tion is not explained in terms of warfare and political/military strength. Destruction is explained in terms o f leadership un­ faithful to G od’s Torah. The precedent set by Joshua and by David was not enough. The covenant warnings of Deuteronomy and o f Joshua 23-24 faded into ancient tradition which mod­ em kings refused to believe. Saul’s course of reliance on human strategy and the obvious need for strong actions in the face of crisis became the model for kingship in Israel and in Judah.

20

JO SH U A

The example o f Canaan and Phoenicia depending on various gods for various actions replaced the demand for a unified people at a unified worship place worshiping and trusting one God. This short rehearsal o f themes from Deuteronomy, Judges, Samuel, and Kings shows the themes isolated in Joshua repre­ sent themes of the larger context Deuteronomy through Kings centers on leadership of the one people o f G od seeking to pro­ vide rest in the land through covenant faithfulness to the one God, a faithfulness seen in obedience to Torah. The slow train named Method has reached its destination. The type of literature has raised LEADERSHIP as the pervad­ ing theme o f Joshua. Structure has revealed leadership after Moses, rest from battle, life in the land, justice, pure worship, divine promise, and covenant as central themes. Vocabulary has pointed out leadership, land, law, loyalty, and Lord as organizing themes around which m ajor vocabulary items can be studied. The transition statements focus on leadership, unity, covenant, life in the land, and the call for faithfulness to match God’s faithfulness. We will use the organizing categories of the vocabulary sec­ tion as the organizing principle for the work that follows and will seek to study the themes of Joshua under those categories. These will all point us to one final question, the question we consider key to Joshua and to Old Testament theology as a whole, namely: Who are the people of God? We will address that question in a concluding epilog.

Introduction

21

1 LEADERSHIP OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD

The biography of Joshua answers the basic question: W hat is the leader of G od’s people like? The word leader does not occur. No one narrative or transition section explicitly describes leadership. The central leader, Joshua, occupies no office known by later Israel. Still, literary type and structure show that lead­ ership is the overarching theme of the book of Joshua. Study of the larger literary context only fortifies this conclusion. To study leadership is to study the person of Joshua, the demands placed on him, his actions, and his titles.

Moses, the shadow behind Israel's leaders Leadership in the book of Joshua begins with Moses, not Joshua. Joshua is only the official or minister of Moses (1:1). He is not a slave or servant. He is a youthful page freely serving his master.8 As such, Joshua had made many youthful mistakes. He went up the holy mountain with Moses (Exod 24:13). Coming down, Joshua reported to Moses that he heard the sound of war in the Israelite camp below (Exod 32:17), but Moses corrects his impression, noting that it was the sound of singing (v 18). 23

Then in the wilderness God sent his Spirit upon the elders near the Tent of M eeting, even two who stayed in the camp rather than go to the tent received the Spirit. Joshua protested, asking Moses to make them quit prophesying (Num 11:28), apparently an attem pt to protect M oses’ exclusive position. Moses corrected him, expressing his desire that all God’s people could be prophets. He may also have been protecting the Tent o f meeting as the place of revelation, since he apparently had a permanent position there (Exod 32:11). Joshua 1 marked the transition point in Joshua’s life and ministry. He moved from minister of Moses to the installed leader o f God’s people. Youthful mistakes o f the past did not matter. It was time to forsake such defensive behavior and as­ sume responsibility. Assuming leadership did not mean moving out of the shadow o f Moses, however. Rather, for Joshua, it meant moving further into that shadow. Death did not remove Moses from the Israelite scene. Death only moved Moses’ mode o f leadership from m ortal human leader to eternal director through the Word, the inspired Torah he left behind. Every leader who came after Joshua would face the same situation. Leadership in Israel meant fo llowship o f the Torah of Moses. Joshua’s first instructions from God did not concern military strategy; they concerned the leader’s guidebook (1:7-8). Leadership in Israel m eant devoted study o f G od’s Word (compare Deuteronomy 17:18-20.) Such study was not to be in crisis, or of an intermittent nature. It was to be daily study. Only a leader devoted to Torah study could demand such study from the people. Only such a devoted leader could meet the criteria of Torah God uses to judge leaders (compare 2 Kings 17:34-40). Torah sparked renewal and hope for G od’s leader (compare 2 Kings 22-23). Leadership for God’s people is thus tied tightly to Torah, the Law of Moses. To be a leader is to be a follower of Moses and his Torah. The call to leadership was not a call to rebellion, to military coup, to the establishment of one’s personal style and image. The 24

JO SH U A

call to leadership was a call to more o f the same, to following the tradition, to staying on Torah’s path without any deviation. The result would be courage, conviction, prudence, prosperity, and success—for devotion of Torah guaranteed the presence of God. Leadership in the shadow of Moses set the model for servantleadership, for Moses was the “servant o f Yahweh” (Josh 1:1). This tide placed Moses in a different category than Joshua. Joshua’s title related him to Moses. He was Moses’ official or minister (Josh 1:1). Moses’ title related him to Yahweh as his servant. The title is not unique to the book o f Joshua. Moses humbly, reverently appropriated the title to himself in seeking to de­ cline God’s call to leadership (Exod 4:10). In so doing he iden­ tified him self with a slave bought with money (Exod 13:3,14). The Exodus event clim axed with Israel recognizing that Moses was Yahweh’s servant so that the people put their trust in him and in Yahweh (Exod 14:31). In so doing they used “servant” in an entirely different sense. “Servant” in this context meant a high government official or advisor to the king. The Hebrew term could be applied to Pharaoh’s officials (Exod 5:15— 16; 7:20; 9:20 and others). In his own eyes the meek Moses kneeled as God’s slave. In the eyes o f Israel he stood tall, earning their complete trust as Yahweh’s highest representative. For the inspired writers of the Old Testament, that was Moses’ style o f leadership, a style seldom transferred or attributed to others. Moses was the one leader remembered consistently as the servant o f Yahweh (Josh 1:1-2, 7, 13-14; 8:31, 33; 9:24; 11:12, 15; 12:6; 13:8; 14:7; 18:7; 22:2, 4 -5; compare 1 Kings 8:53,56; 2 Kings 18:12; 21:8). Even Israel’s latest literature named Moses as Yahweh’s ser­ vant (Neh 1:7-8; 2 Chron 1:3; 24:6; Mal 3:22). Moses was the esteemed servant without parallel. His leadership had freed Is­ rael from slavery and established the nation. The Torah he gave led Israel throughout its history, no matter what its political status or organization. His Torah explained Israel’s destruction and loss of national power. For Israel, to speak of the servant of Leadership o f the People o f G od

25

Yahweh was to speak of Moses. Prophets could be called “ser­ vant of Yahweh” (1 Kings 14:18; 2 Kings 17:13). Kings, especially David, could be called God’s servant (2 Sam 3:18; 7:8). Because o f David, his servant, G od promised to preserve his people and kingdom (1 Kings 11:13; 2 Kings 19:34). Because the people forgot the Torah of Moses, G od’s servant, David’s political kingdom disappeared from history (2 Kings 21:8-15; compare 23:25-28). The prophet proclaimed hope for a new servant, a humble, suffering servant who would be a mediator for the people with God (Isa 53), imagery certainly pointing forward to Jesus of Nazareth, but imagery drawn partly from the history of Moses, the servant of Yahweh. The shadow of Moses thus extended beyond his death (Deut 34:5) over the nation’s entire history. The first Israelite leader to work in that shadow was Joshua. He shared with Moses the self-identity o f slave o f Yahweh, pleading for Yahweh’s mercy (Josh 5:14). Such prayer came to characterize Israel’s prayer tradition (Pss 86:2; 116:16; 123:2). However, never in his lifetime does the biblical record indicate that Joshua earned the respectful title, “servant of Yahweh.” He constantly stood in the shadow o f Moses, the servant of Yahweh, studying the Torah of Moses and fulfilling the com­ mands and promises of Moses. Finally, Joshua obtained the title, “servant of Yahweh”— at his death (Josh 24:29). In life he served as the minister of Moses. In death he became the servant of Yahweh. Thus he finally received that title one could not confer upon oneself except as a title of humility in prayer. The title was not basically a kingly title, used to exercise rule and authority over others, as it could easily become in a royal court. Rather, “servant of Yahweh” was a title conferred on a leader by the followers who recognized in the leader perfect obedience to Yahweh. For Israel, of course, perfect obedience to Yahweh meant perfect obedience to the Torah of Moses. God’s first commission to Joshua concerned dedication to the Torah of Moses (1:7-9). That task, received

26

JO SH U A

at Moses’ death, Joshua faithfully pursued and kept until his own death. Thus he became known as “servant of Yahweh.” A sad note appears at this point. Joshua willingly served in Moses’ shadow. A t Joshua’s death the nation stepped out of that shadow. N o one came forward to serve in the shadow of Joshua, much less in the shadow of Moses. Joshua left an impact on the people he led. “Israel served Yahweh all the days of Joshua and all the days of the elders who extended beyond Joshua’s time and who knew all the work of Yahweh which he did for Israel” (24:31). Joshua did not leave a new leader behind as had Moses. “And all that generation also were gathered to their fathers; and there arose another generation after them who did not know the Lord, nor yet the work He had done for Israel” (Judg 2:10 n a s b ) . Disregard for the shadow of Moses dominated a whole era of Israel’s history, an era summarized as “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes (Judg 21:25 n a s b ) . A s leader, Joshua failed at one point. Leadership should produce leaders for the next generation. Joshua dedicated him­ self to the Torah of Moses but did not train someone else to do the same. Thus his leadership died out at his death. A t many points Joshua represented the supreme example of leadership in the shadow of Moses. He maintained an effective chain of command. He began by working through the national officials (1:10; 3:2). He concluded his ministry by summoning the officials at many levels of authority for final instructions and encouragement (Josh 23:2; compare 8:33). Joshua reminded them of God’s history with them and then concluded a covenant with them (ch 24). He left behind elders who effectively led the people (24:31). Joshua not only worked with the chain o f command to communicate God’s will to the people. He also cooperated with the priests God had set up to lead in the religious side of Israel’s life. Joshua led the priests to assume prominent leadership roles at the Jordan miracle (chs 3-4) and in the conquest of Canaan (ch 6). Thus Joshua maintained the social order Moses had set Leadership o f the People o f God

27

up, giving the priests custody of the ark o f the covenant. Joshua acknowledged other roles of the priests. C hief Priest Eleazar played a prominent role in allotting the land (14:1; 17:4; 19:51; 21:1). Thus his burial is noted as parallel to that of Joshua (24:33). Joshua worked not only with his compatriot Eleazar but also with the younger Phinehas (22:13), letting the young priest settle the unity-threatening religious dispute with his own genera­ tion rather than taking matters in his own hands. Joshua thus knew how to share leadership with authorized religious officials. He also knew how to share leadership with representatives of the people. He cooperated with the “heads of the fathers o f the tribes of the sons of Israel” (14:1) in distributing the land. These are apparently the same people as the “chiefs” o f 17:4. When a particular tribe had trouble, its leaders could readily approach Joshua and the other leaders, challenging Joshua and his chain of command to do what Moses had commanded (21:1). In a dif­ ferent approach, a leadership team from the tribes worked with the priest to prevent a split among the tribes (22:14, 21,30-31). Joshua, then, did not perform as a one-man show. He studied Moses’ Torah, used Moses’ organization, and successfully led the people with the help of various levels of leadership among the people.

Leadership pointing to the past Joshua tried to help future generations. He left memorials to teach them the way o f Yahweh. Israel’s landscapes lay strewn with items pointing the people o f God to their past history with Yahweh. An Israelite tourist guide could easily follow Joshua’s tracks, stopping to explain the lessons from Joshua’s experiences with God. Parents had reason to remember Joshua as they took children to worship or on pilgrimage. Joshua had left behind a program to teach young children their nation’s history with God. Israel had difficulty forgetting Joshua’s story, which was actually God’s story; for throughout the land lay markers of the past calling forth faith in the future. We can hear the tour leader now: 28

JO SH U A

“Here at Gilgal we see twelve stones standing tall. They came from the River Jordan, where the faithful priests stood as they held the ark o f the covenant high, marking the dry land God had created through the flooding Jordan. These stones call forth the praise o f G od from his people. He made it possible for us to cross the Jordan and have a homeland. The story of that crossing reminds us o f another. Remember the other time God led his people through the currents? O f course, in similar fashion to the Jordan crossing, Israel had crossed the dry sea out o f the land of Egypt, fleeing from slavery (Josh 4 :9 ,2 2 -2 3 ). Israel has no excuse for forgetting God. These stones remind us; indeed, they call the whole earth to know ‘the hand o f Yahweh that it is strong in order that you may have respectful awe before Yahweh all the days’ (2:24). “Even the name of Israel’s first camp in the promised land tells us a story. Here we stand on Gibeath-haaralotha, or as we say today, ‘the hill of foreskins.’ Joshua led Israel to identify themselves anew as the obedient people of God. He directed a ritual in which all eligible males were circumcised, a ritual Israel had neglected during the wilderness wanderings. This neglect, along with their slavery in Egypt, made Israel a reproach in God’s eyes and in the eyes of their neighbors. Joshua, the man of Moses’ Torah, rolled away that reproach. Thus he could call the first camp site— here at ‘the hill o f foreskins’— G ilgal, meaning ‘rolled away’ (5:9). This day we come to G ilgal and remember the God who rolls away our shame as we obediently serve him. “Joshua’s memorials point us to the bad times as well as the good,” continues our guide. “Come with me to the Valley of Achor, or, more appropriately, the Valley of Aching (7:24). Look at this great pile of stones. It reminds us of Israel’s aching, and especially of the aching of the family of Achan. You know the story. Achan refused to obey G od’s command. He took a robe and some gold and silver from the war loot after the vic­ torious battle of Jericho. In so doing, he caused Israel to lose the first battle of A i. God called on Joshua to exercise leadership Leadership o f the People o f God

29

in the realm of justice as well as in war. Through prayer and ritual Joshua followed God’s instructions, found the guilty man, and led Israel to execute proper punishment. These memorial stones at Achor point us to obey God and avoid the ache of his punishment. “Nearby, we see another heap of ruins. This is A i, aptly named for our day, since A i means, ‘The Ruin.’ Having resolved the case of Achan’s aching, Joshua led Israel to capture and destroy A i. The heap of ruins here shows us the reward God’s people reap as they follow God’s plans for life (8:28). A second heap stands here at A i. It is a burial heap. Joshua sentenced the king of A i to the humiliating death by hanging, then fol­ lowed Moses’ Torah (Deut 21:22-23) by removing the body at sunset and burying it. This heap of stones marks A i’s city gate and the final resting place for A i’s king, who dared oppose God and his people (8:29). “Even as God’s people go to worship, we find a memorial from Joshua. We notice servants drawing water from the wells and cutting wood to prepare for our sacrifices. These are the G ibeonites, who tricked Israel into signing a peace treaty. Joshua’s leadership turned even a treacherous peace treaty with foreign enemies into an advantage for God’s people. The trickery of Gibeon produced needed laborers for God’s worship in the place God chose (9:27). “Our tour of Israel takes us next to Makkedah,” asserts our guide. “Here we see the famous cave. You cannot enter the cave, however. Joshua led the people to close up the cave’s mouth with large stones, for the cave is the burial place for the five southern kings who formed a coalition against Joshua. Again, Joshua humiliated them, then followed Moses’ Law in taking their bodies down from the tree and burying them in this cave before sunset (10:27). G od’s opponents cannot hide. No cave is too deep or dark for God and his people to discover its occupants. Look at the cave. Remember the power of God over any enemies who threaten you. 30

JO SH U A

“Joshua’s memorials do not always point us to the dead. Liv­ ing memorials he left behind point us to the task that lies ahead. Joshua did not defeat all the people occupying the promised land. Some continue to live among us and threaten our exist­ ence (13:13; 15:63; 16:10). Peoples and land remain to be conquered before God’s plan and our mission are accomplished. “Joshua’s leadership, like that of all mortals, had its limits. Old age (13:1; 23:1) caught up even with him. He had to leave part of the task to future generations (compare Judg 1:1-36; 2:1-5,20-23; 3:1-4). “Such generations had a role model to follow. Joshua was not the only faithful leader of his day. Caleb, his faithful cohort among Israel’s original spies (Num 13:6), remained faithful and illustrated how to take the land assigned the tribes (Josh 14:6-15). Every time we go down to Hebron, we remember the faithful example of Caleb and the task that still remains (compare Judg 1:9-20). “We need to turn our attention to one other place— Shechem. Here we find, perhaps, Joshua’s most important me­ morials. Here stands an altar Joshua built. On its stones we see copies of Moses’ Torah. We remember how Joshua taught Israel the Torah, calling both blessing and cursing upon them as Moses had taught (Josh 8:30-35; compare Deut 27). Joshua thus left us the practice of gathering all Israel together to hear G od’s Torah and to commit ourselves to that Torah. Joshua did more than that. A t the end of his days he gathered us once more to Shechem and led us to commit ourselves to G od’s covenant. He wrote down our commitment in the Torah and set up a stone of witness. Every time we see the altar at Shechem and the memorial stone here, we recall our commitment. We cannot plead ignorance. We have pledged to obey God. When, instead, we deny him, then these memorials from Joshua witness against us and call us back to our commitment. “This is a good note on which to conclude our tour of Joshua’s memorials scattered for us over the promised land he led us to Leadership o f the People o f God

31

occupy. I hope you have learned the lesson o f past memorials. Joshua’s leadership and that o f all good leaders is not limited to the problems o f the present. Joshua, the good leader, looked forward and set up concrete memorials to let God’s people rememher many things, namely, what G od had done; what happened to those who opposed God; the example o f faithful heroes of the past; the task that remained unfinished; and the commit­ ment to G od and to his covenant that should never die.” [Methodobgical note: We have used the book’s expression “until this day” to follow Joshua’s leadership in establishing memorials. We have not exhausted every use o f the expression, for the phrase does not always point to memorials present at the time o f the author o f the book o f Joshua. O n some occa­ sions the expression “until this day” pointed to Joshua’ day and realities which did not point to concrete memorials beyond that day. (See Joshua 22:3,17; 23:8-9.)]

Leadership through action Joshua stepped from the shadow of Moses to lead by example. Both God and the eastern tribes challenged him to action, ac­ tion characterized by “conviction and courage” (1 :6 ,1 8 ). The remainder o f the book shows that Joshua accepted the chal­ lenge. He showed conviction in his constant attention to Moses’ Torah, in his handling the case o f Achan’s rebellion (ch 7), and in his final speech and covenant mediation. Only a person of conviction could face Israel with such de­ mands. Only a person of conviction could interpret Israel’s past as a past o f false gods, gods o f the fathers beyond the river and in Egypt (24:15-16). Only a person of conviction could know the holy jealousy of God so well that he could bluntly tell Israel, “You are not able to serve Yahweh, because a holy G od is he, a jealous deity is he, one who will not forgive your sins and transgressions.” (24:19) 32

JO SH U A

Joshua strode forth in action because he had conviction about the nature o f G od and the history o f his people. Only a person o f such conviction can lead G od’s people. The next generation lost its convictions, dabbled a bit with each god they encountered, faced G od’s judgment, and looked for a leader with conviction to lead them back to their covenant commitment with G od (book of Judges). Joshua showed not only conviction but also courage in leading G od’s people. His courage enabled Joshua to risk look­ ing foolish in order to carry out G od’s commission and guide the people into fulfillment of G od’s promises. Courage called the east Jordan tribes to forsake the comfort o f territory won and homes settled to show their loyalty and unity with the other tribes (chapter 1). Courage challenged purity-conscious priests to step into the flooding Jordan River carrying the precious A rk of the Covenant. Courage was required from grown men, faced with the need to endure circumcision to symbolize their commitment to G od (chapter 5). Courage called the priests to circle a fortified enemy city daily, blowing trumpets against the world’s oldest habitation and expecting the walls to fall (chapter 6). Courage led people into battle. Courage demanded people divide the land according to G od’s lots rather than according to the strength and pressures individual tribes might exert. Courage allotted some o f the best land to levitical priests to fulfill G od’s teaching (chapter 21). Leadership is going down G od’s path with conviction and courage. Such conviction and courage come because the leader knows G od’s presence, the presence that was with Moses (1 :6 ,1 8 ). In summary, leadership normally includes planning: setting goals; determining strategy to achieve the goals; allotting re­ sources in ways that will set priorities to achieve the goals. Here it appears that Joshua had a definite advantage. God had already set the goals. In most cases he determined the strategy for each action. He promised the necessary resources. O n occasion, as Leadership o f the People o f God

33

with the battle strategy o f A i, Joshua set up some strategy, but more often God provided the battle plans. Joshua simply had to have the faith to execute G od’s plans. Joshua’s leadership operated in the shadow o f M oses. It worked through tribal, national, and priestly organizations. It sought to leave memorials to provide leadership and courage for God’s people far beyond Joshua’s lifetime. Joshua’s leadership worked to accomplish the tasks God had set out and to fulfill commands o f the Torah of Moses. It unified the tribes in taking the land, distributing the land, and in committing themselves to G od’s covenant. But Joshua’s leadership failed in one crucial point. It did not train leadership for the future, leadership which could maintain the unity of the people and continue the loyal commitment to G od’s covenant. Still the verdict on Joshua is unanimous. He was great. God made him great (3 :7 ), a greatness com parable only to the greatness o f Moses (4:14). W hat one element characterized that greatness? People knew God was with Joshua as the Lord had been with Moses (3:7; compare 1:5; 6:27). Human greatness rests on divine presence. The greatest office a human can occupy is that of “servant o f Yahweh.”

34

JOSHUA

2 THE LAND GOD GAVE

Leadership for Joshua had one focus: gaining the promised land for God’s people. But what, in the book of Joshua, is sig­ nificant about this land? It is land which must be conquered, possessed, and distributed. It is also land not possessed, land that remains. Before all this, it is land that has been promised, is being given, and should be inherited. It is land under G od’s holy ban. The topic of land thus reveals itself as a theme with complexity, a theme viewed within the book from different perspectives. To understand it in all its complexity, we must examine land from each of these perspectives.

Land as gift Above all else in the book of Joshua, the land is a gift, “the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel” (1:2). This can be stated both with a participle indicating present action (1:2) and with a Hebrew perfect tense indicating past action (1:3). Even before Israel crossed the Jordan, the land was theirs. God is giving and had given it to them. The gift is assured. No questions remained. N o room for doubt was left. 35

Still, the gift did not come without action. Israel had to receive the gift. Israel had to follow God’s instructions, cross the Jordan, and possess the land (1:11). G od had not made an idealistic gift without roots in reality. G od had made a gift; he expected it to have concrete form. He had a gift. He wanted his people to own and control that gift. Israel, about to cross the Jordan, had reason to believe they could possess the gift. Part of Israel had already possessed their gift, their land (1:13-15). Land in Joshua thus has two parts— land possessed east o f the Jordan and land to be possessed west o f the Jordan. Both parts were G od’s gift to his people; both parts were the concern of all Israel. The part that had possessed the gift was not relieved of responsibility. That part must co­ operate until all the land was possessed. This land as gift was not just a theological ideal Israel had dreamed up. It was a reality the occupants of the land recog­ nized (2:9). The gossip network worked in Canaan to let the peoples west of the Jordan know precisely what was happening east of the Jordan. For them it was obvious that ordinary human power could not have accomplished what Israel had accom­ plished. Yahweh had acted in Egypt and beyond the Jordan. Now he was poised to act in Jericho. Who knew that better than a Canaanite prostitute who greeted Jericho’s tourists? Rahab, the prostitute, knew how her people reacted to the news: courage disappeared, replaced by dread and fear (2:9,11; compare 2:24; 5:1). They waited fear­ fully for Yahweh to cause Israel to possess what he had given. Israel, too, knew Yahweh would let them possess the gift. Israel’s representatives bargained with the prostitute on that basis (2:14) and testified to Joshua o f God’s gift, a testimony based on their experience with the faithful prostitute (2:24). They had more than that one experience on which to base their confidence in Yahweh’s gift. Israel’s history rested on the promise of the land to Abraham (G en 12:7) and his descendants (Exod 6:4). Joshua’s commission rested on that promise (Josh 1:6), 36

JO SH U A

but no generation could rest assured they would see the promise fulfilled. The rebellious wilderness generation had heard Yahweh swear they would not see the land (5:6). Even Joshua’s generation, commissioned to fulfill the prom­ ise, could not idly anticipate winning every city. Yahweh could give an unfaithful people into the hands o f the enemy (7:7). Normally before each battle, Israel heard Yahweh’s specific promise to give the enemy into Israel’s hand (6 :2 ,1 6 ; 8 :7 ,1 8 ; 10:8, 19; 11:6). Typically, also, Yahweh gave each enemy into Israel’s hands (20:30, 32; 11:8). So under Joshua’s leadership, his generation o f Israelites saw the promise to Abraham become reality (21:43). Israel had received the gift of the land. The gift o f the land theme thus displays part of its complex­ ity. We must ask the question: When does God give the enemy and the land into Israel’s hand, and when does he give Israel into the enemy’s hand? Joshua phrased the question in a drastic form— “Alas, O Lord Yahweh, why have you so certainly caused this people to pass over the Jordan to give us into the hand of the Amorites to bring about our destruction? If only we had been content to live beyond Jordan” (7:7). Threat to the gift brings an even greater threat, one to the integrity o f God; for if Israel’s name is cut off from the earth, “then what will you do for your great name?” (7:9b). Giving the land is thus more than simple military action with assured results. Giving the land is the way God chose to establish both his and his people’s reputation in the world. Even such great stakes did not guarantee immediate success. G od had shown patience in working and waiting with the wilderness generation. He was willing to show the same patience and make the same demands on the conquest generation. He could explain their defeat: “Israel has sinned. They have transgressed my covenant which I commanded them” (7:11). Only a faithful covenant people could expect to receive the gift of the land. The history of promise never made the gift au­ tomatic for a particular generation. The gift continued to be The Land God G ave

37

reserved for a people o f covenant, not for a people craving ex­ otic goods and wealth. The land as gift changed meaning at one specific moment in history. A promise became reality. A hope became a posses­ sion. A theological teaching became a personal testimony to a living experience. When this happened, the mode of commu­ nication also changed. Now one could say, “their inheritance which Moses had given to them beyond the Jordan eastward” (13:8), or they could refer to Joshua giving land to C aleb (14:13), and even to the sons of Israel giving land to Joshua (19:49-50). The gift of land could now be located in time, in space, and by human agency. Now the gift had concrete boundaries encompassing specific cities. Now one could know if the entire gift had been received or if more should be expected. One could know that “there remains a great amount o f land to possess” (13:1) and could explicitly describe the boundaries of the remaining land (13:2-6). Land as gift was not simply a mass of community property. The gift had specific recipients. Moses gave land to each tribe east o f the Jordan “for their clans” (13:15, 24, 29). Land was not up for grabs to the strongest military leaders, the richest bidder, or the most clever political opportunist. Land was for each clan among God’s people. Land was not a human property available to be awarded as prizes for service to the country and its leader. Land was God’s gift to the families of his people to be used to support the family and to unite the tribe. This becomes evident with the one tribe that did not par­ ticipate in the gift of the land. Levi had been set aside for G od’s service (Num 18:20; Deut 18:1-2). N o member of the tribe needed farm lands to work. They did need cities in which they could live among the people as they served God and his worship place. The Levites received no gift of land (Josh 13:14,33; 14:3— 4; 18:7). They received places to dwell with enough land for their cattle to graze (ch 21). Such cattle would provide food, clothing, and— especially— animals for sacrifice. 38

JO SH U A

Levites lived in the cities. They did not exercise political control, nor did they own the sown land where farmers grew crops (21:12). G ift of land thus suited the needs of each of the tribes. This did not mean each tribe got all it wanted (17:14). It also did not mean all the land was given without human labor. Israel had to fight for its land. If the Joseph tribes wanted a larger gift, they had to fulfill God’s commission to cut down the forests and prepare the land for agricultural use (17:15-18). Note that in clearing the land they faced strong opposition. They had to clear the land in faith that God would give it to them by defeating their enemies. G ift of land had to be received in faith that the God who promised was strong enough to deliver on his promises. G ift fulfilled promise (21:43). It also symbolized threat. G ift was not guaranteed eternally. Israel could forfeit the gift. Trust in nations and their gods rather than trust in Yahweh threatened disaster. A n unfaithful Israel would “wander away lost off this good land which Yahweh, your God, has given to you” (23:13b). The God who had proved faithful to his words of promise would also prove faithful to his words of threat (23:14-15). Faithless Israel faced destruction (23:15). Yahweh remained sovereign even over His past promises and past actions. He controlled all land. He had given Mount Seir to Esau and the Edomites while letting his people go down and eventually endure slavery in Egypt (24:4). He could take the land he had given Israel and give it to someone else. Israel had not earned the land nor constructed its material improvements (24:13). The land as gift stood as symbol calling for faithful service to the Giver of the land (24:13-18). Land was tied to covenant. Land belonged to covenant people and only to cov­ enant people. Otherwise, the people wandered off the land into Exile, waiting for G od’s next move without any grounds to command how, when, or if God would act. Only the future history of Israel and the future words and acts of God would determine if the gift of land would remain in Israel’s hands. The Land. God Gave

39

Land as possession Land as gift had to become land as possession. Joshua’s first command to the people said, “Prepare provisions for yourselves, because within three days you (pl) will be crossing over this Jordan to enter in order to possess the land which Yahweh your G od is giving you to possess it” (1:11). Scholars have argued long and hard about a supposed basic meaning of the Hebrew term yarash (see W BC 7:17). Does M icah 6:15 prove its meaning is “to tread upon?” Do Genesis 15:3-4 and Jeremiah 49:1-2 show that “inherit” was the origi­ nal emphasis? Or do the numerous appearances in Deuteronomy point to a technical military term? We may never know if a single meaning existed in the mind of any Hebrew speaker or what that meaning might have been. The word has developed a complexity of meaning beyond any simple English word and beyond any simple definition. For our purposes, a traditional use can be shown to lie behind yarash in the book of Joshua. This use appears in the blessing Rebekah received from her family that her descendants would “possess the gate of those who hate them” (G en 24:60). Study of Deuteronomy (2 :1 2 ,2 1 -2 2 ,2 4 ,3 1 ; 4:47; 6:18) confirms this meaning; compare further Numbers 13:30; 21:24,32,35; 33:53. To “possess” includes “to dispossess.” It involves taking land by force from someone who occupies the land. It means winning the right to transfer the title o f the land from the defeated to the victor. In other contexts, yarash may mean something else, but in the context o f conquest in Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua, yarash means “dispossess and take over.” This is the way G od chose to complete the link between promise to patriarch (G en 15:7) and life in the land (Josh 1:11; compare G en 22:17; 28:4; Num 33:53; Deut 1 :8 ,2 1 ,3 9 ; 3:12, 18, 20; 31:3). G od’s gift o f land thus involved human partici­ pation in battle. In Joshua 3:10 Joshua could use a form of yarash to say Israel’s G od would “drive out” or “dispossess” the long 40

JO SH U A

list o f peoples then inhabiting the land. “Dispossession” was G od’s activity as well as Israel’s. (Compare 8:7.) Possession of land involved all Israel. Moses gave the tribes east of the Jordan possession o f their land. T hat did not com­ plete their participation in land possession activities. They, too, had to cross the Jordan armed for battle to help the tribes west of the Jordan gain possession o f their land (1:14—15). Tribes having won their land were not free to exercise possession of that land until all the tribes could exercise land possession rights (22:4, 9; Hebrew achuzzah). God did not intend Israel to be a loosely related collection of fiercely independent tribes. He called the tribes o f Israel to gain their identity as part o f the one people of God, each acting on behalf o f the other. Israel’s G od even provided an option for his people east of the Jordan. If they thought their land was ritually impure be­ cause the chosen worship place was not in their territory, then they could move west o f the Jordan. G od would provide a pos­ session for them there. Trying to set up worship in opposition to Yahweh’s way was not the answer. Trusting him to provide them a possession in the “land o f the possession o f Yahweh” was (22:19; Hebrew achuzzah). After their series of military actions, Israel had destroyed the many city state kings of the land and possessed their land both east (1 2 :1 ,6 ) and west (12:7) o f the Jordan. G od had fulfilled his promise (11:23), but still “there remains a great amount of land to possess” (13:1). Possession o f the land was not only a past event. It was also a future goal. Joshua’s advanced age in­ terrupted the parade o f possession. So did the tribes’ failure or inability to dispossess some o f the native inhabitants (13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-13; compare 19:47). This left the rest o f the task to another generation, but the next generation did not fulfill the task. They could not blame Yahweh. He had “dispossessed” the nations (23:9; compare 21:43). He stopped only when Israel stuck with the nations rather than with Yahweh (23:8, 12-13). The blame lay with The Land G od G ave

41

Israel. They lacked the committed leadership to accomplish the task. Only with David did the proper leadership in M oses' shadow come forth to com plete the task. Still, the divine promise stood: “I will dispossess them before the sons of Israel” (13:6; compare 23:5). The example o f Joshua’s generation also stood. As Caleb phrased it, “If, however, Yahweh be with me, then I will dispossess them, just as Yahweh spoke” (14:12; compare 15:14). Joshua’s challenge to his generation called succeeding generations to action: “How long will you prove yourselves to be lazy cowards in regard to entering to possess the land which Yahweh, the G od of your fathers, has given you?” (18:3).

Land as inheritance Yahweh gave Israel the land to possess as an inheritance from him. The image created here is significant. A n inheritance passes to a new generation at the death o f the patriarch. God was the father passing his inheritance on to his sons. This in­ heritance proves unique. The Father did not die, nor did the sons get sovereign, everlasting control of the inheritance. Here we see the limits o f human language used to symbolize and communicate truths about the reality o f human relationships with God. G od the Father wanted to share with his children from his “estate.” He willingly gave them the land he controlled. He let them control his property. Why? Because He had prom­ ised the patriarchal fathers he would give them the inheritance (1:6). Right to possess an inherited homeland belonged to Israel by virtue of divine oath sworn to a previous generation, not by virtue of land laws they could enforce in human society. Israel’s inheritance remained an inheritance Yahweh had to give, one they had to (dis)possess. Interestingly, the term inheritance or homeland (Hebrew, nachalah) does not appear in the first half of the body of the book (chs 2-12). Rather, it becomes important only after the con­ quest is complete and the distribution of the land begins. God 42

JO SH U A

commanded Joshua to distribute the land as an inheritance, even the uncontrolled, unconquered land that remained (13:6). The tribes east of the Jordan had their inheritance from Moses (13:8). The service of God in making sacrifices for him consti­ tuted the Levites’ inheritance (13:14, 33). N o territory, only cities and pastures, formed their inheritance (ch 21). Joshua’s task was to define the inheritance of the nine and a half tribes (13:7). He accomplished this in chapters 14-19, with the help of Eleazar and his lot (14:1-2). Caleb’s inheritance was unique, sworn to him “forever” because “you remained totally loyal to Yahweh, my God” (14:9). Inheritance was tied so closely to the clan or family that daughters received inheritance to protect family claims when no sons were available to claim the inheritance (17:4-6). The inheritance involved concrete boundaries that could be surveyed and written up (18:4). The ultimate action for Joshua was to let the people go, each clan to its inheritance (24:28). Gift pointed back to the promise God made to the patriarchs. Possession pointed to present ownership wrested from previous inhabitants. Inheritance pointed to claims for the future. N o government or private action seeking to assure ownership of the clan’s posses­ sion would ever be valid, for inheritance rights came from God, not from human agencies. (Compare 1 Kings 21:3.)

Land by lot Divine inheritance easily left room for human manipulation. A tribe could claim its territory was too small (17:14). Or a tribal territory might be too large (19:9). Past promises had to be fulfilled (14:9), and each family’s claims had to be considered (17:3-6). How could humans make decisions with divine author­ ity? How could they avoid the dangers of human manipulation? G od had the answer. Joshua did not make decisions alone. He had a selected commission with representatives from each tribe survey the land and divide it into appropriate portions. Then he The Land God G ave

43

relied upon Eleazar the priest to symbolize God’s presence in the activity. The decision itself as to which tribe got which territory be­ came quite “mechanical.” The lot decided. This followed God’s instructions through Moses (Num 26:52-56; 33:54). The lots were apparently stone objects used to gain impartial decisions, decisions usually interpreted as coming from G od (Prov 16:33). Casting lots was often connected with the high priest (Lev 16:8), but pagan sailors also cast lots (Jon 1:7). We would expect Eleazar to be present to cast the lots for Joshua. Such expectations ap­ pear to be confirmed, since the lots were cast in Shiloh at the tent of meeting (18:1; 19:51). Still, the text surprises us. Usually no actor is named. Again, we would surmise that the passive constructions favor divine action by the divine represen­ tative— the priest. One text names the thrower o f the lots: “Joshua threw the lots for them in Shiloh before Yahweh” (18:10; compare v 6). Israel did not have to fear human manipulation o f land claims as the tribes received their inheritances. Human manipulation disappeared because “mechanical” lots were used to show God’s will as Moses commanded and because Joshua, the great, re­ spected leader in Moses’ shadow, threw the lots. The lot fell for each tribe and for each o f the Levitical families. The mysteri­ ous lot had faithfully determined Israel’s property claims once and for all. The lots’ results stood written in Joshua’s records. New inheritance claims came only within a clan or family. The family’s claims had been allotted. N o room for human manipula­ tion remained. Faithful Joshua had carried out the commands G od gave Moses. Israel could not ask for anything more.

Land under the ban Holy war9 is the major theme o f the book o f Joshua if one listens to most theological discussions of the book. Indeed, the systematic theologian may want to reflect on the function and 44

JO SH U A

meaning of the image o f God, the Warrior, in the book o f Joshua and elsewhere in Scripture. The theologian may seek to de­ scribe the adequacy o f that image of God in light o f the Bible’s em phasis on the Suffering Servant, the G ood Shepherd, the Prince o f Peace, and the crucified Messiah. In so doing the theologian must deal honestly with the structure and contents o f Joshua. The book o f Joshua does not explain the nature or reason for war. It does not reflect upon the image o f G od, the Warrior. Joshua assumes war as a human activity; indeed, as the human activity by which territory changes hands among nations. Joshua joins the members o f its environment in assuming that divine power and authority is revealed through human wars. For the book o f Joshua, the question never comes down to, “Would God fight?” or “Why would God fight?” or “Is it moral to speak of God participating in the bloodshed of war?" The book of Joshua focuses on God’s promise to the fathers. He bound him self to give his people the land. To give them the land, other people had to lose the land. Deuteronomy used this situation to warn Israel against human pride, explaining that the gift o f the land did not reflect Israel’s righteousness. It reflected the occupying nations’ wickedness (D eut 9 :4 -6 ; compare Lev 18:24-25,27-28; Deut 18:12). Judges explained the remaining nations as needed to teach untrained generations of Israelites the art o f warfare (3:1-2). Joshua does not explain why the nations lost the land. It simply underlines God’s positive note. God promised to give the land. He did give the land. Israel possessed and inherited the land. For Joshua, the question is how a land occupied by strong enemies with ancient claims can be transferred to a young, up­ start nation without experience or power. Joshua’s answer is quite simple. Israel possessed the land through the ban (Hebrew cherem). The ban represented God’s way of doing war to protect Israel from the temptation to worship other gods (Deut 7:1-4). The same treatment awaited an Israelite city which fell to the The Land. God Gave

45

seduction of foreign gods (Deut 18:12-17). The ban was not Israel’s normal procedure in warfare. Normally, Israel would of­ fer a city the opportunity to surrender peacefully (Deut 20:10). A rebellious city faced the ban, but then only the males stood under the ban (Deut 20:13-14). The total ban was God’s spe­ cial warfare technique on the cities of the promised land to preserve the infant nation’s religious fidelity (Deut 20:16-18). The book of Joshua presumes the deuteronomic regulations for conquest and Deuteronomy’s stories of Moses applying the ban east of the Jordon (Josh 2:10; compare Deut 2:34; 3:6). Joshua centers attention on how Israel reacted to G od’s way of war. They could be self-seeking, wanting human glory rather than glory for God. They could be greedy, wanting war’s booty for themselves rather than giving it to God. They could be sly and conniving, pretending to follow G od’s instructions but doing so only halfway. The ban tested Israel’s faithfulness. How would they react? Jericho presented the first test (6:18). Would covetousness prove Israel’s downfall, so that “you would then set up the camp o f Israel for the ban” (6:18)? C an banning Israel be banned? Apparently not. “They set everything in the city under the ban, male and female, young and old, cattle, sheep, and donkey were devoted to the sword” (6:21). “The city they burned with fire and everything which was in it. Only the silver and the gold and the utensils o f bronze and iron they gave to the treasury house o f Yahweh” (6:24). A las! That was not the whole story. “The sons o f Israel dis­ regarded the ban. Achan . . . took part of the banned goods. Then the anger o f Yahweh burned against the sons o f Israel” (7:1). A n Israel polluted by sin became overconfident, deciding its own strategy for battle (7:3). They met defeat. Why? “Israel has sinned. They have transgressed my covenant which I com­ manded them. They have taken from the banned goods, stolen, deceived, and put them among their own things. Unable to stand before their enemies, the sons o f Israel turn their backs 46

JO SH U A

to their enemies, because they have become banned goods. Never again will I be with you if you do not banish the banned goods from your midst” (7:11-12). The ban represented God’s covenant. Breaking the ban broke Israel’s covenant relationship with God. It transferred Israel from being God’s people to being God’s banned goods, from victors to vanquished, from sanctified to sinners. Refusal to carry out the ban was theft and deception. G od took the ban seriously, so seriously that only capital punishment could remove Israel from God’s list of banned goods (7:15). Israel learned the dramatic lesson. They put A i to the ban (8:26). Here, however, exceptions were made, “according to the word of Yahweh, which he commanded Joshua" (8:27). Rules for the ban were not absolute. G od’s direct command could modify ban laws as he chose. The ban was not an inflex­ ible system of an inflexible God. It was a divine test to determine the loyalty of a people as well as a divine method to deliver an uncontaminated gift of land to his people. It was also a method which cost the inhabitants of the land their confidence, bringing fear to their heads (2:10; 10:1-2). Thus Yahweh’s method became Joshua’s method (10:28,35, 37, 39). “Everything that breathed he put to the ban just as Yahweh, the God of Israel, commanded” (10:40; compare 11:12, 21). The obedient Joshua found that God made his task easier. “For it had been Yahweh’s idea to harden their hearts to en­ counter Israel in battle in order that they could put them to the ban without their having opportunity to plead for mercy. Indeed, this was so that they might annihilate them just as Yahweh commanded Moses” (11:20). W hat then is the message of the ban for the book of Joshua? To protect Israel against the major sin o f idolatry, God commanded her not to show mercy to the enemy. To enable her to keep the commandment, God caused her enemies to fight her rather than seek mercy and peace. (W BC 7:130) The Land God Gave

47

To forsake the ban was to forsake Yahweh. Israel did that once (7:1). It brought a lesson Israel never forgot (22:20). Israel possessed G od’s gift of land because God placed that land under the ban and because Israel under Joshua obediently carried out the ban. Ideally, Israel should have had the perfect situation—possession of a land with no one left to tempt them to forsake Yahweh. The ideal did not match reality. Reality described what remained: “a great amount of land to possess” (13:1). T hat meant a great number of foreign people with a great number of foreign gods giving Israel a great number of temptations. Israel faced the future with a great challenge. They faced it with the experience of G od’s ban, a ban which proved G od’s power to give Israel the land. They faced the challenge with G od’s promise to deliver that land to them. Seldom again would they put an enemy under the ban. Why? Because seldom again would they have a leader like Joshua. Instead, they had im patient leaders like Saul (1 Sam 15). Wars of conquest gradually turned to wars of defense against invaders, wars in which the laws of ban did not apply. God remained active in Israel’s battles on and off the battlefield, and G od’s inspired spokes­ men, looking to the future, prophesied continued protection of and a prosperous future for his people. Such language underlined G od’s active involvement in all aspects of the life of his people against any temptation to see G od as a passive observer o f hu­ man life. Such language also declared G od’s deliverance from trials and tribulations where only divine activity could explain such deliverance. Finally, such language testified to the sover­ eignty of G od over every type o f opponent which might claim power that belonged only to the one God. The ban meant no power could oppose Yahweh and emerge victorious.

The land of rest The ban was an intermediate word for Israel. It provided a means for an end. It was not the goal. The goal for Israel in the 48

JO SH U A

book of Joshua was rest (1:13,15). “Rest” says little to the English' speaking world, but for the Hebrew-speaking world, nuach brought great meaning. Rest was the spiritual and physical condition of the person God delivered from trouble (Ps 116:7). One of life’s great complaints was that I “have found no rest” (Jer 45:3 n a s b ). The Temple was God’s “resting place” (Ps 132:8 n a s b ). Rest was the needed change of routine from daily labor (Exod 20:12; Deut 5:14). The king’s word could be “comfort­ ing” (2 Sam 14:17 n a s b , with a form of the Hebrew nuach). “To rest” was to stand still and firm as did the feet of the priests in the Jordan River (Josh 3:13) or as did the stones set firmly in the ground (4:38). God’s goal for Moses and the Israelites in the wilderness was to give them rest (Exod 33:14), a theme repeated in Deuteronomy (3:20; 12:9-10; 25:19). Rest was a national goal, not a tribal or individual one. N o tribe or group o f tribes was to enjoy rest “until Yahweh gives rest to your brothers just as to you” (Josh 1:15). After helping the Israelites capture Jericho, Rahab and her clan received their reward—rest outside but near the camp of Israel (6:23). In 11:23 Israel had “rest” from war, but that rep­ resents another Hebrew word (shoqtah), emphasizing still, quiet, silent, inactivity (compare 14:15; Judg 3:11; 5:31; 8:28; P s 8 3 :l). “Rest” (nuach) means more. “Rest” was the fulfillment of God’s promise to the fathers with no enemies to threaten them (Josh 21:44). W hat G od promised Moses (Exod 33:14) and the East Jordan tribes (1:13-15; 22:4), he brought to pass in his­ tory. Rest is not a theoretical, spiritual state enjoyed by indi­ viduals; it is a “state o f the union” the nation enjoys. Rest is a lasting state (23:1) measured in months and years. Rest offers G od’s people a choice. They may choose to reject G od’s rest (see Isa 28:12). Thus Joshua concluded his ministry among Israel with a final sermon (ch 23) and a covenant cer­ emony (ch 24) calling on Israel to accept G od’s rest by obeying His word. But Israel refused to listen. Rest was lost and regained as an intermittent possession (Judges). The Land God Gave

49

Finally, David led the nation to enjoy anew G od’s rest (2 Sam 7 :1,9-11). That prepared the way for God’s promise to “establish the throne o f his (Solom on’s) kingdom forever” (2 Sam 7:13 n a s b ; compare 1 Kings 8:56). But that did not solve the problem. The future was not secure. Moses had already painted the picture of a dreary future for a disobedient people: “the Lord will scatter you among all peoples. . . . and among those nations you shall find no rest (targia), and there shall be no resting place (manoach) for the sole of your foot” (Deut 28:65 n a s b ).

Rest can be a reality for Israel. It can be a goal lost and looked forward to again. It can even be a goal regained. W hatever stage Israel finds herself in, rest is a term with a concrete content. It represents freedom from enemy op­ pression and deadly war. It represents life lived with God by the gift of G od---- Rest, not war, is the ultimate goal of Israel---- B u t . . . rest could be won only through war (W BC 7:22). Thus, rest for God’s people in God’s land comes through G od’s ban. This is the theme of land in Joshua. Land is a distinct geo­ graphical location(l:4, chs 13-21) as well as a promise to the fathers, a gift from God, a possession for a specific generation of people, an inheritance pointing to long-term possession through the gen­ erations. Land does not come into possession through magical means. Land is claimed by other people. God’s people must wage war under God’s conditions to gain possession of the gift. But continuing war is not the goal. The ban is not the eternal prac­ tice. Even possession of the land is not the final purpose for the book of Joshua. The theme of land possession points to rest. God prepared land for his people in order to prepare them for His kind of life, the life of rest.

50

JO SH U A

3 THE LAW THAT LEADS GOD’S PEOPLE

G od’s people could possess G od’s gift o f land and enjoy rest because God had given them the way that leads to rest. That way is law or to use the more far-reaching Hebrew term—Torah.10 Torah ordinarily meant instruction, particularly instruction one received from a priest on religious questions (Jer 18:18; Ezek 7:26; Hos 4:6; Hag 2:11-13). In like manner, Isaiah’s teaching was Torah for his followers (Isa 8:16). Wise men produced Torah (Prov 13:14), a practice with roots stretching back into Israelite family life (Prov 1:8; 4 :4 ,1 1 ). Above all, Torah was instruction God gave his people for obedient living in commitment to him (G en 26:5). Israel was supposed to do everything possible to remember and testify to God’s Torah (Exod 13:9). God tested to see if they would be faithful to keep Torah (Exod 16:4), but Israel could not pass the test (Exod 16:28).

Torah defined Torah referred, then, to teaching, particularly God’s teach­ ing, received in several forms. Som e forms o f Torah came 51

through oral teaching. T hat instruction might be passed on by word o f mouth for generations. Some Torah might be written down. Normally, however, when Israel heard the word “Torah,” it signified one thing; the Torah of Moses. Moses’ chief task had been to teach Israel God’s way (Exod 18:20). His teaching soon appeared in written form. Some was written on stone tablets (Exod 24:12) and some in the book of the covenant which Moses read to Israel (Exod 24:7). Ultimately, Moses’ Torah became a large book filled with the teachings G od had given his people through Moses (Deut 28:58; 30:10; 31:24), a book stored by the ark of the covenant in the worship place (Deut 31:26). A s such it warned God’s people of the curses they could bring down on themselves, but it also served as a constant guide to the leader of God’s people: when he (the king Yahweh chooses) sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for him self a copy o f this law (Torah) on a scroll in the presence o f the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read it all the days o f his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, by carefully observing all the words o f this law and these statutes, that his heart may not be lifted up above his countrymen (literally brothers) and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, to the right or the left, in order that he and his sons may continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel. (Deut 17:18-20 NASB)

Joshua’s call to obey Torah Yahweh did not choose a king in Joshua’s generation. In­ stead, he installed Joshua as the prime example o f a leader in the shadow of Moses. G od’s commissioning speech to Joshua centered in faithfulness to Torah: “Just have great conviction and courage to obey carefully the whole Torah which Moses, my servant, commanded you. Do not turn away from it to the 52

JO SH U A

right nor to the left so that you may prudently prosper every­ where you go. This book of the Torah shall not depart from your lips. You shall meditate upon it day and night in order that you may obey carefully according to everything which is written in it, because then you shall make your paths successful, and then you will be prudently prosperous” (Josh 1:7-8) Torah, in the book of Joshua, is first of all the leader’s leader. Torah programmed Joshua for success and wisdom. A leader in Joshua’s position would expect to spend time recruiting and training an army, gathering public support, and studying military strategy. God had another path for Joshua. He called Joshua to solitary study of Moses’ Law. Why? G od did not need a leader with such natural ability and military genius that he could win by his own wits. Such a leader would simply become proud and self-confident, ignoring God and his way of life. Solomon and Rehoboam served later as prime examples of this. G od’s plan for a leader was to avoid all opportunity for pride (Deut 17:20). G od wanted a leader to know God’s role in the people’s military history, G od’s call to covenant obedience, and G od’s promise to be present and lead to victory, giving Is­ rael the land. Only extended experience with God’s Torah could produce that type of person. Torah obedience was not a lifestyle that rulers imposed on the lower classes. Torah obedience was a lifestyle that leaders modeled before the people they led. To­ rah obedience was the only path to success (compare 2 Kings 17:37; 22-23). The call to Torah obedience placed the leader in an awk­ ward position. He was not the principal lawmaker for his people. He was a law-taker. He did not stand in a position to claim new revelation from God, revelation which updated or superseded previous revelation. The basic rules for the life of the people as individuals and as a people stood ready at hand for each gen­ eration of Israelite leaders after Moses. New insights concerning life with God and continuing historical acts of God might find their way into inspired writings (Prophets and Writings), but such The Law That Leads G od’s People

53

writings still only supplemented the irreplaceable Torah. From first to last in the nation’s history, leader and people searched Torah to know God’s will. They knew Torah was the criterion for judgment in their lives before God. The leader had many functions, but all other duties became subservient to the daily duty to study and follow Torah. “Only he who obeyed Moses the leader of Israel could expect success in his leadership endeavors” (W BC 7:19). Joshua set the example for all of Israel’s leaders after Joshua. In the midst of the campaigns of conquest, he led the people to the place God chose— Shechem. There he built the altar as God commanded through the Torah of Moses (8:30-31). He copied the Torah for the people to see (8:32). He carried out the covenant ceremony as Moses commanded. He read the Torah to the people, reading every word (8:33-35). Torah was not a secret book the leader could use to control and dominate the people. The people did not have to wait for the leader’s good pleasure to know G od’s teaching. G od com­ manded that the leader teach the people. Obediently, Joshua did so. Torah obedience became public priority number one for every person dwelling in Israel. This meant no class of people in Israel had a monopoly on God’s will. Nothing gave one person closer access to G od than another. Social class, education, gender, citizenship, family roots, clan history—none of these at times imposing qualifications—singled out one person for closer relationship to God than another. “Women and children, and the aliens active among them” (8:35) had rights and re­ sponsibilities to hear and heed God’s Torah.

Torah as community responsibility Knowing Torah, moreover, was not a contest at which one person took pride in excelling over another. Keeping Torah was both an individual and a corporate function. When one person disobeyed Torah, the entire community suffered (Josh 7). The sin of one person brought the entire community to Shechem to 54

JO SH U A

renew covenant and rehearse Torah (8:30-35). Each individual had responsibility before God and before the community to keep Torah. The community as a whole and as a group of individuals had responsibility to see that no one transgressed the Torah. The community which dealt properly with transgression and re­ newed covenant commitment to Torah could expect to hear the leader bless the people as Moses commanded (8:33). Thus, they could regain their identity as covenant people of God. “With the law of Moses and the leadership of Joshua, Israel could again pass over into the covenant, be the people of God, and enjoy the blessings o f God” (W BC 7:95).

Torah and daily life Torah gave direction to all of life. Since Torah was so impor­ tant for Israel’s leaders and in Israel’s public ceremonies, one could easily conclude that Torah directed public life, that is, political and worship life, but that daily life on the farm or in the village required a different kind of direction. The temptation lay near to turn to the model of the original inhabitants o f the land for direction. Such a model centered on the cult o f Baal and its promise of fertility for family, flocks, and fields. Joshua showed such a model had no claim in Israel. He sent the East Jordan tribes back across the river with one command ringing in their ears, “Only, be exceedingly careful to obey the com­ mandments and the Torah, which Moses, the servant of Yahweh, commanded you, to love Yahweh, your God, and to walk in all his ways and to obey his commandments and to cleave to him and to serve him with all your heart and with all your being” (Josh 22:5).

Torah obedience as love Here we learn the nature of Torah. Torah is more than an objective set of rules forced on an unwilling, or at best, neutral people. Torah obedience is not a human effort to win G od’s The Law That Leads G od’s People

55

favor and thus to ensure personal security with God and perpetual safety in the land. Long before Jesus summarized the com ­ mandments in terms o f love (M att 22:34-40), Joshua summoned the East Jordan tribes to Torah obedience, an obedience best il­ lustrated in love o f God (Josh 23:11). Love of G od is more than an emotional attachment. Love of God is a moral attachment, an attachment so intense that one commits oneself to obey G od’s Torah without question. Such obedience does not transform the free human creation into a moral robot. Such obedience stems from trusting love so deep that it knows the Beloved would never have moral expectations that led to less than the best for the people loved. Torah obedience “is the definition o f the people of God. The human-God relationship is not a legalism done in fear, nor a business transaction done with pride of achievement. It is a love and devotion relationship, obeying and worshiping out of free choice” (W BC 7:245).

Torah and disobedience Torah allows no excuses for disobedience. The people re­ turning to their land in rest heard Joshua set before them the same demand God had originally set before him (23:6; compare 1:7). Such a demand did not come in ideal circumstances. God, through Joshua, sent the people out to live in the land while remnants of the nations still lived among them (23:7). Torah obedience should come despite the strongest o f temptations. Foreign worship and alien gods would constantly lure Israel to follow them and forsake Yahweh. Torah would constantly call Israel back to Yahweh. Trust in the G od of Torah should al­ ways prove stronger than the call o f false gods and false worship, but such trust was not easy. Such trust required “great courage” (23:6). The book of Joshua left Israel with the haunting question, Did Israel have the strength and courage required to follow Torah rather than succumb to the lure o f Baal and the other gods native to the land? 56

JO SH U A

Torah as covenant keeping Torah obedience is covenant keeping, for the words of covenant are written in the book of Torah (24:26). The covenant relation­ ship is the Torah relationship, a relationship requiring courage, love, devotion, and total commitment. To make covenant words on a par with Torah words is to modify the definition o f Torah. The ending of the book of Joshua implies that Torah of Moses is not G od’s only Torah. “Joshua wrote these words in the book of the Torah of God” (24:26). The Torah of Moses stood tall in the com­ manding position over all Israel’s history, but God had further instructions for His covenant people. Such words may consciously advocate adding the book of Joshua to Torah o f Moses, leading to Israel’s larger canon o f Scripture. Such words called Israel to remain faithful to Torah of Moses while at the same time listening to the words of faithful leaders who called them to covenant obe­ dience. The covenant words, explaining and calling for obedience to Torah of Moses, could also be written into the Torah of God. Torah was not the only writing preserving the word of God. The “book of the upright” (Josh 10:13) preserved words that became part of Scripture (compare 1 Samuel 1:18 and the early Greek translation of 1 Kings 8:12-13). God worked in many ways to preserve his word, even using writings that eventually faded from history. Such writings proved to be God’s intermediate step on the way from proclamation of word in history to preservation of word in the Bible. (Compare Joshua 18:9, a border description which may lie behind the following chapters of Joshua. )

The Word of Yahweh Torah is not the only vocabulary item used for authoritative directions from God. The book o f Joshua also points to the spoken word of God. Different Hebrew vocabulary items are used to talk about oral word of God. Both the noun formulation, “word o f God,” and the verbal formulation, “Yahweh said,” are used. The Law That Leads G od’s People

57

Word of Qod and written Torah Hebrew root vocabulary items dabar and 'amar appear with little distinction in meaning. The verbs communicate Israel’s belief that God’s word came in direct oral form as well as in the written form of the Torah of Moses. God spoke to Joshua di­ rectly, giving directions, for example, for Joshua’s leadership and Israel’s actions (1:1-9). Such oral speech by God sent Joshua back to Moses’ Torah. The implication here is that Israel knew G od speaking in two ways: oral and written. The two ways were complementary, not contradictory. One manner o f speaking pointed the listener to the other. New oral revelation did not try to replace traditional written revelation. Rather, the oral word of God reinforced his written word. Such reinforcement could include interpretation for a specific situation. God told Joshua the specific regulations for the ban on A i (8:27) though Moses had already taught the general regulations (Deut 20:16-18; compare Josh 11:6, 9). A t other times Joshua carried out Moses’ command totally (Josh 10:40; 11:12). A s situations changed, God brought a new word giving directions for the new situation. God gave Joshua explicit in­ structions to carry out the conquest of the entire land with explicit descriptions o f the land’s boundaries (1:1—4). Joshua became old, and much work remained unfinished (13:1). God recognized Joshua’s age, personal needs, and limits. He issued another word that turned Joshua from conquest to land distri­ bution (13:1-7). Again this oral word was related to the Torah o f Moses, simply showing when to carry out the original word Moses received (14:5).

Functions of word of God G od’s word was not limited to one mode or one function of speech. He did not always face Israel and Joshua with commands in the imperative mode. He also addressed encouraging words to 58

JO SH U A

Joshua (3:7). Such words gave Joshua a motivation to carry out God’s commands. These words pointed to a sign of divine presence in Joshua’s actions with Israel. Word of God thus functioned both to give his people directions and to lead them to follow those directions. Such encouraging, directing words followed Israel step by step through the land (6:2-5; 8 :1,18; 10:8; 11:6). Chapter 3 shows another facet of the word of God. Joshua served as mediator of God’s word. God spoke to Joshua, and Joshua relayed the message to the people. The people recog­ nized what God was doing and followed Joshua’s commands, knowing they came from God (compare 4:8). Addition of the Hebrew word tsiwwah to our vocabulary items for word of God leads another step forward here: “But the priests who carry the ark were standing in the middle of the Jordan until everything was com plete which Yahweh commanded Joshua to speak to the people according to all which Moses commanded Joshua” (4:10). Careful reading of chapters 3 and 4 shows that God directed each step Joshua and the people took in crossing the Jordan. This direction came in the form of oral word of God to Joshua. This is summarized in 4:8: “The sons of Israel acted just as Joshua had commanded. They carried twelve stones from the middle of the Jordan just as Yahweh had spoken to Joshua.” We are tempted to ask, “How does Moses fit into this picture?’ This calls us to a closer look. The summary in 4:10 reaches back further than to 3:1 It marks the conclusion to all that began in chapter 1 and relates specifi­ cally to 1:3, then on back to Deuteronomy 11:22-25; 32:44-47. God promised Moses an obedient Israel would conquer the land. He told Moses to lead the people to the edge of the land and pre­ pare the people to cross the Jordan into the promised land under Joshua. Joshua 4:10 shows that Israel was God’s obedient people, ready to receive God’s promises to Moses. Action of the moment might feature conversation between God and Joshua for the people; ultimately, however, even word of God to Joshua fulfilled word of God to Moses (compare Josh 20:1-2). Torah formed the foundation The Law That Leads God's People

59

for all of God’s conversation with his people. The entire conquest followed the plan God gave Moses to give to Joshua (11:15,23). G od’s conversation with Joshua filled still another function for Joshua. It interpreted what G od was doing for his people at the present moment. G od not only commanded Joshua to cir­ cumcise the people (ch 5). He also interpreted the meaning of that particular circumcision rite. Through the circumcision, G od “rolled the disgrace of Israel away from you” (5:9). Israel was not simply an obedient people ready for conquest. They were a purified people no longer tainted by the social disgrace o f slavery in Egypt nor by the cultic disgrace of uncircumcision in the wilderness. Israel became aware o f their freedom from disgrace and thus their renewed freedom to serve God because G od spoke to Joshua. A s often in the early Old Testament narratives, God’s word did not always come directly from Yahweh. A t times it came from a messenger seen as a man (Josh 5:13-15; compare Gen 18). The messenger revealed to Joshua the holy nature of the place where they met, at the same time connecting Joshua to Moses and his call to service through the same speech pattern (Exod 3:5). G od’s oral word for Israel could become a word of judgment for a sinful people (Josh 7:10-13). The word of judgment served not simply to supply information and condemn. It became a word o f guidance, leading Israel to the way to restore the covenant relationship. Restoration o f covenant relationship demanded drastic action, in Israel’s case in Joshua 7, capital punishment for the guilty family. This word o f judgment thus shows how serious God takes his demands for obedience. When his people took his word with the same seriousness, they became a restored people. A restored people could again hear G od’s word o f en­ couragement and direction to take the land (8:1). G od’s word for any one situation was not autom atic and predictable. G od expected his people to inquire after his word (9:14). When they did not, they found themselves acting against G od’s will. Again, G od directed them through the situation,

60

JO SH U A

but only after a serious breach of God's directions and a dispute among the people threatened to divide G od’s people. Moses and Joshua could not claim a monopoly on G od’s word. G od also spoke to the Levites (13:14,33; compare Num 18:20; Deut 10:9; 18:2). The Levites, however, had to go to Joshua to en­ sure he carr i ed out G od’s word to them (Josh 21:2). Joshua was also not the only person who knew the word o f God as given to Moses. Caleb remembered G od’s promise to him and his clan through Moses. He acted on this word, asking Joshua to fulfill it (14:6; 15:13; com pare N um bersl4:24; Deuteronomy 1:36). Joshua and G od honored such forthright faith (Josh 14:13). Women could act in similar fashion, asking the rights Moses gave them be recognized (Josh 17:4; compare Numbers 27:1-11). They had obeyed Moses (Num 36:1-12) and claimed their land rights from Joshua. The book of Joshua reminds us of one other important element o f G od’s word. G od could communicate to his people without words. He gave to them the mysterious device know as the lot. With this they could determine his will for distributing the land. Lots were apparently stone objects used to gain impartial decisions. The people saw them as more than just impartial decision-givers. They saw the lots as mediators o f G od’s decision, thus G od’s silent word (see Joshua 14:2; 15:1; 16:1; 17:1; 21:4). The lot was probably used in identifying Achan as the culprit in Joshua 7. Using the lot, Israel learned what “Yahweh commanded by the hand of Moses by lot” (21:8).

The faithful word G od’s word could be commanding, directing, encouraging, judging, or simply communicating information. It could come through Moses, through Joshua, through a messenger, to Levites, or to Caleb. It could be spoken, written, or even silent. It could apply to men, to women, to priests, or to the nation. One thing remained the same. God was faithful to his word. “N ot a single The Law That Leads God's People

61

word fell from every good word which Yahweh spoke to the house of Israel. Everything came to pass” (21:45). W hatever situation Israel found itself in, one constant remained. She could not blame God. “God had faithfully done for Israel what he promised. Blame belonged on Israel’s shoulders, not G od’s” (W BC 7:235). Thus “the faithful community of God reads his­ tory as the story of G od’s directing promises” (W BC 7:236). Past history with G od’s word means one can trust that word for the future. Trust in that word runs in two directions. God will bring the blessings He promises (23:5), but people of G od must also remember, “it will be the case that just as every good word which Yahweh, your God, spoke to you has come upon you, just so Yahweh will bring upon you every evil word until he has destroyed you from upon this good land which Yahweh, your God, has given to you” (23:15). The good word of promise is not a static object which creates an eternal condition. G od’s word is a dynamic reality, going forth in written and oral forms to his people, calling to covenant obedience. It changes a people without land to a conquering nation controlling all the land. Equally, it can change a disobedient nation in charge o f its destiny to a slave people carried off their land in utter defeat. G od’s word remains in control of history, calling forth a faithful people to study Torah (23:6), follow him, and see his good words come to pass. Such a Torah-studying people cannot pay atten­ tion only to good words with promises of blessing; they must listen equally as carefully to the evil word with its threat of judgment and curse. Both are the authoritative word of the one God. That word points us to look back and see what God has done (24:2-13) so that we can look at the present to see that word’s demand on us (24:14-24) and can look to the future to know how he will respond to us as he continues to act in the history of his people (ch 23).

62

JO SH U A

4 LOYALTY THAT CHARACTERIZES GOD'S PEOPLE

The book of Joshua identifies one major characteristic that separates the people of God from all other people. Yahweh’s people have no other gods. They are absolutely loyal to Yahweh. Modem Christians see nothing unusual here. Loyalty to the one God is the only option they know. Many today could not even name another god. A large percentage have no personal acquaintance with people who worship another god. In our culture the only options have traditionally been: to worship or not to worship. Then we choose our denomination and fight the other ones.

Loyalty as unique to Israel Israel’s culture was quite different. Everyone worshiped someone. Everyone but Israel worshiped more than one someone. The quest was not loyal devotion to one god to the exclusion of others. The quest was loyalty to a personal god while not offending the other gods who controlled the many different arenas of life. Religiously, one had to cover all bases. In such a 63

world, Yahweh distinguished himself among the gods. He called for absolute devotion to him self and rejection o f anyone else. He was all or nothing at all. H is call separated him from all other religious practice. To worship Yahweh meant to break the rules o f Near Eastern religious custom. It meant to snub other peoples and their religious traditions. It meant to deny the reli­ gious practices which objective observation might claim to have worked adequately through the long centuries in the land of Palestine. To worship Yahweh, to obey Torah, meant to be odd, different from all the other peoples o f the world.

Loyalty in community The East Jordan tribes represent one side of this identity of loyalty. They represent community loyalty, loyalty to the people of God. Israel learned community in the tedious classroom of history. Their tradition gave them few examples of loyalty. Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau, Joseph and his brothers— all modelled self-interest, jealousy, separation, rivalry, and even ha­ tred. Only in their brief better moments did unity and community shine forth. After Joshua, the period of the Judges would feature brief cooperative actions separated by long periods o f isolation. Tribal jealousy and even tribal annihilation marked this period for Israel. N ext Saul and David struggled for leadership. Then David faced opposition from his own sons. Solomon’s united reign led to the dissatisfaction of the northern tribes and their decision to follow Jeroboam rather than Solomon’s son Rehoboam. Separation continued through the end o f the kingdoms and into the Exile. Exile thrust Israel’s people into all parts o f the world. The Diaspora became a continuing reality. Return from Exile introduced other divisions—people from Exile and people who had faithfully cared for the homeland; people who returned faithfully to the land and people who chose to stay behind in Babylon; people in the land and the diaspora scattered over the earth. Gradually, the split between Jews and Samaritans emerged and deepened. 64

JO SH U A

Finally, sects such as the Essenes gave vivid life to the different theological viewpoints within the one people of God. The rise of the Christian church brought a split that appeared to be final. Through all this, the book of Joshua offered an example of the community loyalty God expected and of how to deal with threats to that loyalty. The example centered in the East Jordan tribes—Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. They had no personal reason to appear in the activities of the book of Joshua. They had conquered their land. Moses had given them their tribal inheritances. God had given them rest. They were ready to settle down and enjoy life in the land. But Joshua quickly interrupted such plans. Pointing them to G od’s word through Moses, Joshua called the East Jordan tribes to arms in support of their West Jordan kin (Josh 1:12-15). N o one tribe was to enjoy possession of its inheritance until all the tribes could find rest in their inheritances. The East Jordan answer serves as a model for all the people of God: “Everything which you have commanded us, we will do; everywhere you send us, we will go” (1:16). Community loyalty places personal desire under the com­ mand of G od’s chosen leader. The leader whose actions reflect God’s presence gains the absolute obedience of the people. They are willing to promise, “Every man who rebels against your or­ der and does not obey your words to the last detail which you command us shall be put to death” (1:18). The East Jordan tribes had learned the meaning of being part of the people of God. Israel was not a loosely organized group, joining together only in crisis situations. Israel was not just a people with sim ilar worship patterns joining for occasional national worship ser­ vices. Israel was a unified body. Threat to Israel did not lie in geographical differences. It lay in the threat to lose their sense of loyalty. N o matter where people lived or what their personal economic situation, Israel had to remain one body dedicated to one land. The call for Israel to act went out to all Israel, not a part of Israel. When any one part did not possess its inherited Loyalty That Characterizes G od’s People

65

land in rest, no part of Israel could rest. Rest and land possession came to all at once. Thus the East Jordan armies left their houses and families to cross the Jordan in march of conquest (4:12). The movement goes in the other direction. When the book of Joshua lists Israel’s accomplishments in conquering the land, it begins not with the accomplishments listed in Joshua. It begins with the accomplishments of the East Jordan tribes (12:1-6). Every care is taken to emphasize the work of all Israel. N o group can laud itself over other groups within God’s people. When G od’s people function properly, all can point to the part they played. Together under God they conquered the land, inherit­ ance enough for all the tribes of Israel. Similarly, before land is apportioned to the West Jordan tribes, the inherited land of the East Jordan tribes is listed (13:1-33). To list Israel’s land is to list the land of twelve tribes, not just that of those Joshua led west of the Jordan. Even when the land distribution action simply shifts locations, the point is renewed that the East Jordan tribes are part of Israel and have allotments given by Moses (18:7). East Jordan tribes were not forgotten when Israel set up cit­ ies of refuge (20:8) nor when Israel established cities for the Levites (21:7, 36-39). The action of the book may center in conquest and distribution of West Jordan, but the theme of the book is the community loyalty of all twelve tribes. A subpoint here is the tribe of Levi. The cultic tribe of priestly helpers did not expect a tribal allotment. Still, the allotments repeatedly include Levi among the tribes and explain why Levi did not have an allotment (13:14,33; 18:7). A concluding act o f land allotment is to give cities where the Levites can live and carry out their responsibilities even though they do not have an of­ ficial territory. These cities of the Levites form another joining element in Israel, for the cities come from each of the tribes (ch 21). East Jordan tribes may be separated from the main body of Israel geographically by the Jordan River. Levites may be separated sociologically by their cultic function and by their 66

JO SH U A

status as not owning land and not forming a political subgroup. Both remain solid parts of the community of Israel. Israel cannot be described without describing East Jordan tribes and Levites. Community loyalty is an overarching characteristic of Israel. The East Jordan tribes and community loyalty take center stage in chapter 22. They kept their word spoken in chapter 1 (1:12-15; 22:1-4). They joined all Israel in having obligation to obey the Torah (22:5). They received Joshua’s blessing (22:6-8) and could possess their land (22:9). There they faced the problem: isolation. How did a people separated geographically maintain their community loyalty? Their answer: build an altar of witness to remind them of the religious and historical ties that bound them to their people west of the Jordan. This created a greater problem. Had the search for commu­ nity loyalty violated the command of Torah obedience? Tribes of West Jordan thought so. Moses allowed no other altars except where Yahweh chose. A separate altar meant separate worship. The altar could not be a sign of community loyalty. It repre­ sented community division. Worse, it represented apostasy from Yahweh. It represented a refusal to learn the lesson of history, history which occurred east of the Jordan in Peor (Num 25). It represented a threat to the entire community of G od’s people. The West Jordan tribes did not react in jealousy or with a view to their own superiority. They had a solution, one that involved sacrifice on their part. They were willing to share their inherited land with the East Jordan tribes to preserve community loyalty and to prevent divine wrath (22:19-20). Such drastic action was unnecessary. East Jordan tribes had acted to preserve community loyalty, not disrupt it; to main­ tain loyalty to Yahweh, not to rebel against him. They were looking to the future and protecting themselves against future dangers, against being forgotten or unwanted among the com­ munity called Israel. They wanted a witness all could use to remember the ties between east and west. The one thing which joined east and west was the common witness to Yahweh as Loyalty That Characterizes G od’s People

67

the one God. This was the social and religious cement which held community loyalty together. “C ult and geography could separate. Proclamation of Yahweh as the present G od unified” (W BC, 7:250).

Loyalty as individual devotion Community loyalty was matched by individual loyalty. In the book o f Joshua, Caleb stands out as the supreme example of individual loyalty. “I was forty years old when Moses, the servant of Yahweh, sent me from Kadesh Barnea to spy out the land. I re­ turned the word to him just as it was on my heart. My brothers who went up with me caused the heart o f the people to melt, but I remained totally loyal to Yahweh, my G od.” (14:7-8) Caleb carried out the task G od sent him on and brought back the report God expected. He let neither human fear nor crowd frenzy detour him from the faith. He was loyal to his community and to his God. He received his reward (14:14). Such individual loyalty lay at the root o f all that was Israel. Only with indi­ viduals expressing full commitment to Yahweh and his will could Israel hope for community loyalty. In the book of Joshua and through much o f the Old Testament, individual loyalty seems to take a back seat to community loyalty. The example o f Caleb reminds us of the strong role of individuals in forming the community covenant loyalty that stands as the backbone of Israel’s identity.

Loyalty as covenant commitment Individual and community loyalty find their concrete expres­ sion in the covenant. God made covenants with two individuals

68

JO SH U A

before He made the covenant with the nation. Both individual covenants had results reaching far beyond the individual. With Noah, God promised that a flood would never again destroy the earth and its life (G en 9:1 1 ,1 5 ). With Abraham, G od es­ tablished the covenant o f circumcision, promising to make Abraham the father of a great nation and to give that nation a land to live in (G en 17:1-14). G od remembered his covenant with Abraham and acted in the Exodus to fulfill that covenant (Exod 2:24; 6:4-5). Through Moses, G od established his covenant with the people Israel in the wilderness at the holy mountain. This covenant Israel was called to keep. Through it G od would make Israel a holy na­ tion, a kingdom of priests, a personal possession (Exod 19:5-6). This was a covenant of obedience based on experience of God’s saving power. T h e people o f Israel freely com m itted them selves to obey covenant law and be people of Yahweh (Exod 19:8; 24:3). The covenant regulations became a book Moses could read to the people, eliciting the people’s renewed commitment to keep the covenant (Exod 24:7-8). This is the foundation for the book of Deuteronomy which sees the Ten Commandments as the cen ter o f th e coven an t (D eut 4 :1 3 ). T h e teach in gs o f Deuteronomy reflect the covenant God made or renewed with the people in Moab, reinforcing the covenant made at the holy mountain (Deut 29:1). It is a covenant for future generations (Deut 29:14-15) and has two possible responses: obedience or rebellion, with corresponding results: blessing or curse (Deut27-28). The basis o f covenant was the Law or Torah Moses wrote and placed beside the ark of the covenant (Deut 31:9,25-26). The word covenant is a relatively rare word in the book o f Joshua except for the formulaic name o f the symbol o f G od’s presence—the ark of the covenant. The reality o f covenant dominates the entire book. Having crossed the Jordan, Israel delayed conquest activities until the people had “rolled away” their social disgrace o f slavery in Egypt and their national Loyalty That Characterizes God’s People

69

disgrace of not keeping the covenant o f Abraham through cir­ cumcision. They ate the Passover meal, remembering the Exo­ dus and wilderness experiences and the covenant commitment which went with those experiences (Josh 5). The first battle resulted in breaking G od’s covenant and facing the conse­ quences (7:11, 15). For the first time, Israel learned in practical historical event rather than in the more theoretical sermons of Moses what breaking God’s covenant brought. The punishment of Achan and his family impressed upon Israel the sovereign seriousness of God in his expectations of his people and of his commitment to his threatened curses as well as to his promised blessings. Covenant was not an interesting game one played spasmodically with God. Covenant was: • a relationship one constantly maintained; • a relationship initiated by God; • a relationship based on God’s saving actions; • a relationship desired by the people because of the love and power God had displayed for them; • a relationship demanding loyal obedience to the Torah from the people; • a relationship to which the people had freely committed themselves; • a relationship which did not stand permanent and certain no matter how the people acted; but • a relationship which must be daily kept or formally renewed. Joshua interrupted battle plans to take his people to the place God had chosen—Shechem—and there renew God’s covenant with his people (8:30-35). Such covenant renewal returned to the basis o f the covenant—G od’s Torah. Joshua used every means possible to impress upon the people the contents o f To­ rah. He wrote it. He read it. He gave the blessings and the curses. He let every person hear every word. Only with the serious na­ ture o f covenant fresh in their memories could Israel proceed 70

JO SH U A

with its plans for conquest. Conquest belonged to a covenant people, not to a greedy people. Soon, however, Israel compromised covenant. Israel did not investigate the situation closely enough and made a covenant with the Gibeonites. This covenant came when Israel did not inquire of Yahweh (9:14). This covenant explicitly violated the Torah of Moses and the Covenant of Yahweh (Deut 7:2). Joshua saved the day for Israel. He brought Gibeon under the curse (Josh 9:23), rather than Israel, and made Gibeon subservient to Israel. Rather than separating Israel from her covenant with God, the incident came to make Gibeonites an essential part of Israel’s preparations for worship of God. Having so narrowly missed covenant disaster, Israel could conclude the conquest. In fact, the covenant with the Gibeonites became the rallying point for the next enemies Israel would meet (Josh 10:1). The importance of covenant for the book o f Joshua becomes evident in chapters 23 and 24. The climactic chapters of the book turn to covenant forms and covenant language to identify the nature of G od’s people and show the goal o f conquest. Chapter 23 reminds Israel o f covenant threat: “When you transgress the covenant of Yahweh, your God, that he commanded you, and you go off and serve other gods and bow down in worship to them, then the anger o f Yahweh will bum against you and you will quickly wander away, lost from this good land which he has given to you.” (23:16) Covenant threat means breaking of relationship with God in favor of other gods. It means refusing to love God (23:11). It means not obeying Torah. It means loss o f land. It means forfeiture of divine gift. It means curse rather than blessing. It means rest is not the final word for people in the land. Blessing will last only as long as total faithfulness to Yahweh lasts. Loyalty That Characterizes God’s People

71

W hen Israel begins to experiment with other gods, trying to be like the nations and worship every god possible, doom is imminent. Doom means loss of the promised and given land. Doom means aimless wandering, searching for a home like the ancient patriarchal father. Doom means destruction, death, disintegration of the people of God. (W BC 7:257) Doom is not the final word. Renewal is. Chapter 24 shows how a people under threat can come to G od’s place of worship and renew the covenant. Covenant renewal means memory of what G od has done in the past. It means recognition o f who G od is. It means free commitment to Yahweh in full knowledge o f his jealousy and o f his total commitment to the blessings and curses o f the covenant. It means risking commitment to the impossible. Human logic leads people away from covenant renewal. Logic says covenant renewal is the option of desperation or hallucina­ tion. Covenant renewal appears to be human promise without chance o f fulfillment. Covenant renewal appears to be guaran­ teed breaking of the covenant and thus guaranteed punishment from God. Covenant renewal appears to be an invitation to G od to bring on the covenant curses. Still, Israel enters the covenant. Why? “Far be it from us, the forsaking o f Yahweh to serve other gods, for Yahweh is our God. He is the one who brought us up and our fathers from the land o f Egypt, from the house o f service, and who did before our eyes these great signs. He protected us in all the way in which we went and among all the peoples through whose midst we passed. Yahweh drove out all the peoples, indeed the Amorite living in the land, from before us. Yes, we will also serve Yahweh, because he is our G od.” Israel enters the cov­ enant anew not because of something Israel can do to keep the covenant. Israel enters the covenant because she knows what Yahweh has done and can do. Yahweh has provided all the 72

JO SH U A

necessary evidence. His acts in history have shown he and he alone is Israel’s God. Israel thus found themselves without any options. Only one G od proved great enough to serve. Only one G od proved to deserve their loyalty. Only one God fulfilled the conditions to be God. Yahweh had proved to be the only God. Israel knew their limitations. They could not serve God. They must meet G od with their failures. Still, they had no other place to turn. The compelling evidence o f national and personal history with Yahweh provided all the reason necessary to pledge loyalty to him in covenant renewal. In such renewal Israel confessed that G od’s covenant expectations were fair and were good for their lives. Israel confessed that they should follow G od’s way of life. Israel chose loyalty to G od as the path they wanted to take. Covenant thus defined loyalty for Israel. Covenant meant one people served one God by obeying one Torah in all situa­ tions. Covenant loyalty thus joined individuals and tribes into the covenant community. Covenant loyalty marked Israel off from all other peoples as the one people loyal to only one God for all areas o f life. Covenant loyalty identified Israel as the people of the Lord o f history.

Loyalty That Characterizes G od’s People

73

5 THE LORD BEHIND HISTORY

Joshua is the star of the book of Joshua, commanding center stage throughout the book. The hero, however, is Yahweh, the living Lord of Israel and Israel’s history.12Joshua calls others to action. He gives commands. He receives credit for victories. He becomes great. Joshua is involved in all the action, but Yahweh remains sovereign. Often, he gives opening directions and then apparently disappears from the action to let Joshua occupy the stage of history; but ultimately and actually, Yahweh has initiated and concluded the action. He has caused events to turn out the way they did. Final praise goes to Yahweh, not to Joshua. Joshua may appear to have the limelight, but Yahweh stands behind the decisive acts. He is the hero. The central topic of the book o f Joshua is thus Yahweh, the God of Israel; but how does one describe Yahweh? The book takes little time in offering adjectives or titles to describe God. Often it assumes readers already understand the basic nature of God. In fact, it assumes that the reader knows the promises to the patriarchs and the acts of the Exodus. The reader is ex­ pected to know the name of God—Yahweh—and its meaning 75

(Exod 3 :6 ). The reader is expected to know Joshua’s previous preparation for leadership under G od (Deut 1:37-38; 3:21-22, 28; 31:2-8, 14-15, 23). One is expected to understand the covenant relationship G od initiated (Exod 19-24; 34). The reader can retell the religious history o f Abraham and Jacob beyond the river with other gods. The book of Joshua does not try to introduce Yahweh to Israel or to the readers of the book. The writer, instead, tries to reemphasize with new examples what the reader should already know but can so easily forget. In many ways, the book of Joshua is a review o f the topic o f Yahweh, the G od of Israel. The inspired author leads readers to remember that God speaks, acts in history, demands, faithfully fulfills his word, gives, is angry and jealous, and is present with his people.

God, who speaks The opening and basic statement o f the book of Joshua about G od is a simple one: G od speaks. The Old Testament knows nothing of an absentee landlord God or an impersonal Creator who leaves and ignores his creation. The G od o f the O ld Tes­ tament, and especially o f the book o f Joshua, is the G od who consistently maintains contact with his people, giving his word to direct their life. We reviewed much o f the evidence at this point in looking at the Torah or Law of G od as it was expressed in the word o f God. Here we need to reflect upon the meaning o f G od’s speaking for our consideration o f the nature o f G od himself. To say that God speaks to his people is to say that God is personal. G od enters into conversation with his people. He does not treat his people as puppets or robots. He respects their free­ dom, outlining his plans for them and letting them choose to follow his plans or those o f their own conceiving. He does this in every area o f their life. He calls a leader (1:1-9). He en­ courages the leader (3:7-8). He guides them in establishing ways to communicate their history and their faith to future 76

JO S H U A

generations (4:1-3). He directs the actions of the people in their history (4:15-16), but not when the people do not ask for di­ rection (9:14). He establishes rituals to ensure the people are in right relationship with God (5 :2 ,9 ). He sanctifies the leader of the people, preparing him for the tasks ahead (5:15). He gives instructions for battle (6:2—5; 8:1-2; 10:8; 11:6). He condemns a sinful people but shows them how to deal with their sinful­ ness (7:10-15). He recognizes the physical condition of his aged leader and adjusts plans accordingly (13:1-7). He sets up cities of refuge, establishing a system of justice for inadvertent killings (20:1-6). He recites his history with his people to encourage a new generation to follow him and renew the covenant with him (24:2-13). G od’s direct speech drives the book o f Joshua forward, af­ fecting battle, ritual, and legal systems, as well as the direct personal relationship between G od and people. Life of the people of God thus depends upon the spoken word of God. If God does not speak, God’s people are without direction in ev­ ery area of life. Speech of God is something more than past event recorded in community memory or in written Torah. A s we have seen above in discussing the Law o f God, word of G od delivered in the past plays a dynamic and central role in the book of Joshua. G od’s people do not survive simply on those authoritative words from the past. They need something more. They need words which give direction to new situations arising in the present. People of God live in this dynamic interaction between words from the past and words for the present. Words from the past remain authoritative. They must be fulfilled. They may be promises to the fathers still to be fulfilled, commands from the past governing the covenant relationship as the command to love (22:5), promises to individuals or groups which the people must recognize and fulfill (14:6-14; 17:36), or threats for the future (23:15-16). Each word from the past has meaning for the present. Such words from the past do not The Lord Behind History

77

cover all situations. G od’s people need more. They need the word o f the present to thrust G od’s people into action on his mission for today. They need to know who G od’s choice for present leadership is. They need to receive encouragement for leader and people facing tough choices. They need conviction of present sin and assurance that forgiveness is available. They need direction away from current actions when new situations and conditions call for a change of plans. They need a call to covenant renewal. They need a new understanding of the se­ rious bond the covenant forms between G od and people. In a sense, the people o f the book always need more than the canon of Scripture. They also need the personal witness of the G od who speaks, directing them to the book and directing into the arena of modem life with its demands and situations. They need to know how under current conditions "to obey the commandments and the Torah, which Moses, the servant of Yahweh, commanded you, to love Yahweh, your God, and to walk in all his ways and to obey his commandments and to cleave to him and to serve him with all your heart and with all your being.” (22:5) G od’s people can find out how to do this because Yahweh, the God of Israel, is a God who spoke in the past and who con­ tinues to speak in the present day. The God who gave his Word still gives his word. Modem readers of the book of Joshua ask one further ques­ tion: How did (does) God speak to his people? Here the book o f Joshua offers little assistance. It simply assumes that God speaks, that his people understand his word, and that his people face the decision to obey or not to obey that word. Normally, the “how” question is ignored. In chapter 5 the mysterious figure of the “prince of the host o f Yahweh” represents G od to Joshua. In determining the tribal territories, the more objective “lot” is used. Otherwise, language 78

JO S H U A

o f normal human conversation appears. God speaks like a per­ son to a person, usually Joshua. The Bible thus does not give a “canonical” method by which God must speak to his people. Rather, the Bible leaves the freedom for G od to speak as he chooses. The Bible assumes that God’s people can hear his voice and respond to it. Thus, conversation between God and his people can occur as portrayed in Joshua 7:6-15. The biblical question is not how God speaks nor how people hear. The biblical question is: Do people listen and respond? The book of Joshua joins the entire biblical canon in calling people to expect God to speak and in challenging them to follow the message they receive. A major aspect of God’s nature is his ability to speak like a person. The G od of the Bible is the God who has spoken and who continues to speak.

God who acts in History The God of Joshua puts actions to his words. He tells Joshua what to do and then provides the promised results. The narra­ tive generally describes the activities o f Joshua and the people. They cross the river. They carry stones. They set up ambushes. They march around walls. They discover kings in caves. They spy out land. They announce boundaries. They listen to Joshua speak. The overwhelming majority of action verbs in the book have Joshua or the people as subjects. Divine acts and human acts The concluding and transition sentences most often feature Yahweh as subject. The people have acted. Yahweh has brought the results. Joshua’s introductory summary in 1:11 displays this theme: “Prepare provisions for yourselves, because within three days you will be crossing over this Jordan to enter in order to The Lord Behind History

79

possess the land which Yahweh your G od is giving you to possess it.” Israel must prepare provisions. Israel must cross the Jordan. Israel must enter the land and possess it. A ll along, however, Yahweh gives the land. This is the nature of Yahweh, the G od o f Israel. He acts in the history of his people, but he acts along­ side of and through the actions of his people. Yahweh is not the lone cham pion like a G oliath, marching out alone to challenge the enemy by himself. Instead, G od is the leader of a people. He plots the course of action. He speaks with his people and communicates his plan. They accept the plan and move out in action. A s they do, they find God fulfills his promise, prepares their way, and lets them accomplish their purpose even against overwhelming odds. The action of God is normally accompa­ nied by action of his people, action he has called them to take. Responses to divine acts G od acts in different ways to fulfill his purposes in history. The book of Joshua illustrates some o f these. He uses the gossip systems of the enemy people to frighten them and prepare them for defeat (2:8-11; compare 9:9-11; 10:1-2; 11:1). Such gossip systems even teach lessons about the nature o f God himself. It caused Rahab to confess, “Yahweh your God it is who is G od in heaven above and upon the earth below” (2:11; compare Deut 4:39; 1 Kgs 8:23). Other nations often confessed that their gods had led them into battle and brought victory. M ost nations had specific gods of war who were expected to lead their armies to victory. Such gods o f war might or might not be the high, national god. Such gods could face challenges from other gods. Wars in heaven could ensue. A god or a group of gods could challenge the heavenly regime and come away victorious. The god leading a nation’s armies might face serious challenges in the heavenly 80

JO S H U A

realm. Victory as god on earth did not secure the god’s claim as eternal ruler of the heavens. The reverse case was also true. Claim as the national god ruling the heavens did not set a god up for eternal security. The god’s fortunes often depended upon the nation’s fortunes in battle. Thus, the major gods o f Egypt took differing roles in the heavenly realms as the different dy­ nasties came and went. The gods of Babylon took new forms and identities as historical fortunes changed or as the whims of kings gave loyalty to one rather than the other. Israel’s god was different. Yahweh was the G od of heaven and earth. Earthly fortunes might lead people, particularly en­ em ies, to confess or not confess Yahweh’s unique nature. Yahweh’s great acts in Egypt and east o f the Jordan could acti­ vate the gossip chain and terrify the inhabitants of Canaan. His acts in history testified to his eternal power and dominion. They could lead people to recognize G od’s nature. Such acts did not change Yahweh’s nature or increase his realm. He was Lord of heaven and earth by nature, not by historical act. He had no need to fear that another god could rob him of territory or limit his rule in heaven through earthly acts. Yahweh had no competition, in reality. N o other god existed who could compete with him. Historical acts only gave evidence of eternal reality. G od was the only God in heaven and on earth. Through the story o f Rahab, Israel confessed this eternal nature of Yahweh. Sadly, Israel could not learn the lesson for long. Yahweh’s acts were not the only reality in Israel’s history. Israel’s refusal to learn the lesson o f those acts was the parallel reality. Israel kept searching for other gods on earth who could complement and supplement the acts of Yahweh. They wanted to compartmentalize Yahweh into the god of war or the god of politics. They were quite generous with other gods, offering them places beside Yahweh in the Temple and in the local high places. They gladly let the foreign gods take over responsibility for fertility or for protection of the family or for protection of the dead. Israel suffered through a long, torturous history of idolatry The Lord Behind History

81

because they would not learn the lessons of God’s acts in history, a lesson that Rahab, the Canaanite prostitute, readily learned. Israel did learn enough of the history lesson to proceed with the conquest. The spies came back to Joshua from Jericho with a far different report than the spies brought back to Moses from Hebron: “They told Joshua that Yahweh had given into our hand the whole land. A ll the inhabitants of the land even melt before us” (Josh 2:24; contrast Num 13:25—33). God had used reports of Canaanite gossip channels to help convince Israel what it should have learned in the Exodus. Yahweh had no peers. He alone was Lord of heaven and earth.

Divine acts as wonders The acts of Yahweh were not simply normal historical events for which Israel gave credit to Yahweh. The acts were far beyond what people normally expect in history. Yahweh could work with the priests in the ark of the covenant “in order that you may know the way which you are to follow, since you have never passed over in the way” (Josh 3:4). Israel looked for more. They looked to Yahweh to “perform wonders among you” (3:5). This Hebrew word (niphla'o th) is not a major vocabulary item in the book of Joshua. In fact, it occurs only the one time. Where it occurs is important. It introduces the entire conquest narrative. It becomes the subject heading for all that is to follow. Every act of conquest is one of the “wonders” o f God. No matter how intensely Israel works to fight the enemy, the final result is a divine “wonder.” A wonder describes hu­ man reaction to events totally unexpected in the human realm. They are unusual, impossible, miraculous. Such events astound human observers. They lead the human witness to recognize human limitations and to praise God for his greatness and power. Thus, wonders belong to the language of praise and appear in the great majority of cases in biblical psalms. Wonders are God’s historical actions which far exceed all human expectations. 82

JO S H U A

In this sense, wonders are not necessarily the breaking of “natural laws.” Rather, they are the exceeding of human imagi­ nation. Wonders are G od’s acts delivering his people or his worshiper from an impossible historical situation. In the book of Joshua, the “wonders” center on the crossing of the Jordan in parallel to the crossing of the Red Sea done “on the morrow” (3:5); but wonders are not limited to that one event. The morrow extends through the entire conquest event. W hat Yahweh did to give Israel the land was Yahweh’s wonders for Israel. The ability to cross the river and take the land did not come from normal human capabilities. Such ability came only because Yahweh was working in Israel’s history on their behalf. The living God Such wonders had two results. They drove out the native inhabitants of the land and proved the presence o f the “living G od” (3:10; compare Hos 2:1; Pss 18:47; 42:3; 84:3; Deut 5:23; 1 Sam 17:26; 2 Kgs 19:4, 26; Jer 10:10; 23:26; Dan 6:21). This title, like that of the God of heaven and earth, gains meaning only in contrast to the other gods of Israel’s environment. Such gods depended on their worshipers for life. They had to be created by the worshiper from gold, silver, and wood. They had to be painted or plated, and fed, and carried in procession. They had to be placed on the divine throne in their temples. Israel could easily see Yahweh in the same light. In fact, Israel often wanted to. Israel wanted to build bull images to represent God’s presence. They were tempted to look upon the ark o f the covenant as the throne upon which God sat and which they could carry in processions to represent his presence. They desired to see their sacrifices as necessary to G od’s well-being. They tended to confine God to his house in their Temple. They sometimes succumbed to the idolatrous notion of creating Yahweh in the image of Baal. God and his inspired writers would not let Israel The Lord Behind History

83

do that without warning. Yahweh was not like the gods o f the nations. Yahweh was different. He had a life of his own apart from the actions and buildings of his people. Yahweh was dis­ tinctive. He was the one and only “living God.” Only Yahweh is active and alive. Only Yahweh intervenes in the affairs o f His people. G od’s actions for his people prove his power and demonstrate the nature of his person. (W BC 7:46-47) This became most clear in the conquest. Yahweh had no Temple, nor had Israel built any image to represent him. The ark o f the covenant represented his presence but offered noth­ ing visible to prove that presence. G od had to act in Israel’s history to prove his presence as the only living God. By leading his people across the Jordan and by giving them victory over their enemies and possession of enemy territory, Yahweh proved his vitality, power, and life. He had life in and o f him self with­ out any creative action on the part o f his people. He was the source o f their life, not the result of their living actions. The God whose presence Israel saw symbolized in the ark of the covenant was the only “living G od.” Thus he and he alone was “Lord of all the earth” (3:11,13; compare M ic 4:13; Zech 4:14; 6:5; Ps 97:5; 114:7). This title carried multiple meaning for Israel because the Hebrew term for “earth” carried multiple meanings. It could mean “land.” A s such it pointed to Yahweh as the God o f the land of Canaan. The gods of the people in­ habiting the land before Israel claimed to be god of the land. They made false claims. Before Israel set foot on the land, Yahweh was god of all the land. Canaanite gods faced their limits. They were the gods of the people who worshiped them. They were the gods of Canaan. They could call themselves “god o f the earth,” but that earth had severe limits. Yahweh appeared to many to be in the same category. He had to fight to get land, and then could claim to be G od only 84

JOSHUA

of the land he conquered. Israel knew differently. Yahweh faced no territorial lim its. “Land” m eant more than the land o f Canaan. It meant the entire earth. It included all kingdoms and all kings. Yahweh was G od o f the land and o f the whole earth no matter how great or small the kingdom his people ruled at the moment. Israel’s loss of territory or status did not affect Yahweh’s realm. The one who rode the ark o f the covenant was “Lord o f all the earth.” This theological theme gave Israel hope throughout her ex­ istence. Israel could rule the kingdom of David and Solomon, or Israel could languish in exile in Babylon. This did not affect the power o f Yahweh. He remained the Lord o f all the earth with ability and authority to act once more in history to give Israel the land and establish the people anew. History depended on Yahweh’s purposes and plans, not on one nation’s military fortunes.

Divine acts and worship G od’s acts in history thus provided meaning for the titles Israel used to describe God. God’s acts also gave content to Israel’s worship and teaching. Parents could use the memorials Israel left scattered over the land to teach children the lessons of history. Such lessons did not center on human heroes or on dates and places. Such lessons centered on what Yahweh had done for his people (4:6-7, 20-24). The lessons o f history had a much wider audience than children in view. The memorial stones were set up at G ilgal, Israel’s early worship center. There Israel came to worship. There Israel observed Passover (5:10). The memorial stones taught Israel at worship the reason for worship. They worshiped the God who had given them the land, the God who dried up the Red Sea and the Jordan River to establish his people in the land promised to the fathers. Such knowledge should lead Israel to worship and to “have respectful awe before Yahweh all the days” (4:24). The stones’ audience The Lord Behind History

85

extended beyond Israel and their worship. They testified “so that all the peoples of the earth might know the hand of Yahweh that it is strong” (4:24). This focus on witness to the nations is a natural comple­ ment to the titles of Yahweh. If he is the only living God, the Lord of heaven and earth, the Lord of all the earth, then he is the only reasonable object of worship for all the peoples of the earth. Israel cannot expect jealously to protect a monopoly on Yahweh. Israel must expect the actions to witness to Rahab and her Canaanite friends. Israel must expect Yahweh’s acts in his­ tory to call forth praise from all peoples, not just Israel. A ll too often, however, Israel sought alone to worship Yahweh while joining the nations in the worship of their gods. Israel answered the call o f Baal and Ashteroth, of Marduk and Ashur to come and worship. Israel failed to call all the peoples of the earth to know the hand of Yahweh. The actions behind the book of Joshua and the writing of the book were done for Israel’s benefit. Israel should have learned the lessons of history. She should have seen that God’s plan involved the nations as well as Israel. Israel should have understood that the God of all the earth had purposes far beyond one nation. Israel remembered the promise to the fathers that Israel would gain the land. Israel conveniently ignored the call to the patriarchs to provide blessing for the nations. G od’s historical acts provided the evi­ dence that God had power over the nations. They also provided Israel evidence of G od’s continuing concern for the nations. A t times Israel acknowledged the first evidence. Seldom did Israel accept the consequences of the second, even though the nations learned the lesson of fear (5:1).

Divine acts as judgment G od’s acts in history did not always bring immediate posi­ tive results for Israel. The lesson of the wilderness stood always before them. In Egypt and in the wilderness Israel had become 86

JO S H U A

a disgrace. In G od’s purposes “the men of war coming out of Egypt were finished off who did not listen obediently to the voice of Yahweh” (5:6). God could work in history to judge Israel as well as to give them victory. Judging Israel did not mean cutting off Israel. Just as he let a generation die in the wilderness, so he raised up a new generation to accomplish his plans and possess the land (5:7). God’s actions did not lead to a com er where God had no new options. G od’s actions led to a people who were willing to let him work with and through them to accomplish his purposes. The meaning o f G od’s acts in history was not always clear to God’s people or even to God’s chosen leader. Especially was this true of G od’s acts of judgment. Such acts apparently threatened G od’s people. After the initial defeat at A i, Joshua had no doubt God was still a Lord of all the earth, active in history. The problem was in how the Lord was acting. Had he played a treacherous trick on Israel, planning to destroy them rather than give them the land? Joshua asked, “Alas, O Lord Yahweh, why have you so certainly caused this people to pass over the Jordan to give us into the hand of the Am orites to bring about our destruction?” (7:7). Such honest, straightforward conversation with God proved the only way to learn his plans and the meaning of his actions. Human logic concluded that Yahweh had reversed the course of all he had done. The confession of faith evoked by the gossip channels’ report of Yahweh’s deeds would turn to derision. Worse, it would mean defeat for God’s people and thus great damage among the nations to Yahweh’s reputation (7:9). Certainly, that was not G od’s purpose. God responded to Joshua to show the problem. Divine acts and covenant G od’s acts in history grow out of the covenant relationship. G od did not act in a capricious way, one time helping Israel, the next defeating them in random fashion. God worked as Israel’s covenant partner. Israel sinned. They broke the covenant. The Lord Behind History

87

T hat meant one thing. “The sons of Israel turn their backs to their enemies because they have become banned goods” (7:12). A s seen in the discussion above, Israel executed the ban as G od’s way o f giving them the land. When Israel failed to ex­ ecute the ban, Israel became banned. Israel had to deal with the sin, the breaking o f covenant in their midst, before they could expect Yahweh to act in history on their behalf. This theme, though difficult to explain, is important in Joshua and through the Old Testament. Covenant obedience does not earn G od’s support in battle. Israel does not come before G od with claims on God: You must act as we want because we have acted as the covenant laid out. Both as obedient people and as disobedient people, Israel comes before G od as a dependent people. His actions have preceded their knowledge o f him. His actions have made them his servants long before they have entered his covenant. Covenant obedience is a response to previous divine action. Cov­ enant obedience does not make demands upon God. Covenant obedience maintains the relationship in which G od can con­ tinue the actions for his people which he had earlier begun and promised. Covenant disobedience severs the relationship, leading God to act in a new way. G od’s action is now one of action to restore the relationship rather than to maintain his saving works for his people, works which continue the fulfill­ ment of his purposes and promises. To continue to be the agent and recipient of G od’s saving acts, Israel had to find G od’s way of restoring the covenant re­ lationship. God graciously pointed the way to restoration. The way of restoration may seem harsh. The sinner had made him­ self an enemy of God. Thus, he had to be treated as the other enemies who lived in the land. He had to become part of the banned goods and suffer the destruction all banned goods suffered (7:15). Even the one who suffered such punishment recognized its justice. Therefore, prior to punishment, he had to “set forth glory to Yahweh, the God of Israel, and give him praise” (7:19).

88

JO S H U A

The act of punishment thus witnessed to G od’s justice and to his right to expect praise from his people. When the ban was completed, the way to covenant renewal was again open. T hat way led through renewed battle and victory, showing God acting again for Israel, and through Shechem and covenant renewal worship, in which Israel as a whole committed them­ selves anew to the covenant relationship. Thus Israel learned the nature of God’s wonders, G od’s saving acts in their history. Historical acts begin in God’s plans for his people. They embrace the people into the covenant relationship which God initiates and the people freely accept. The acts continue as they complete G od’s purpose, fulfill his promises to the fathers, and testify to the covenant relationship with his faithful people.

Different kinds of divine acts God acts for his people in history in different ways. The people of Israel performed elaborate ritual acts at Jericho. The walls fell flat. The text does not explicitly say God made the walk fa ll, but certainly that is what the reader is expected to understand (6:20). Joshua executed intricate military strategy in the second battle of A i, but the result was already known, for “I have given into your hand the King o f The Ruin and his people and his city and his land” (8:1). G od even gave explicit military instructions (8:18). W hen Adoni-Zedek of Jerusalem and his southern coalition challenged Joshua, “Yahweh threw them into a panic” (10:10; compare Exod 14; Judg 4; 1 Sam 7). This set them up for Israel to destroy them. God participated in this, too, sending down well-aimed hailstones to kill the enemy and not harm Israel (10:11). Joshua asked for more. He needed daylight to complete his mission. G od supplied the daylight by acting against the gods o f the enemies. He made the sun and moon stand still in the sky (10:13). Thus, G od acted through Joshua to show his power over the symbols of the great gods of the enemies. The Lord Behind History

89

One sentence summarized all this, “There has never been a day like it before or since when Yahweh listened to the voice o f man, for Yahweh fought for Israel” (10:14). God could fight for his people by listening to and bringing to pass the prayer of his leader. Joshua could even promise the Israelite chiefs that “Yahweh will act accordingly against all your enemies when­ ever you are fighting them” (10:25). The promise came true. “A ll these kings and their land Joshua captured at one time because Yahweh, the God of Israel, fought for Israel” (10:42). Fighting the enemies of his people is part of the nature of Yahweh. He may use various ways to accomplish the task. He may let the human leader gain glory as well as himself (6:27). He may use what we would call natural miracles as in the falling o f the Jericho walls or ‘suspending the movement’ o f the heavenly bodies. He may simply use good military strategy as in the defeat of A i or the pursuit of the southern kings and the destruction of the northern kings. The means are not important. The central theme is that Yahweh carries out his plans for his people, acting for them in ways they cannot act for themselves.

Divine love and divine destruction Such language causes problems for many people. They do not want to talk of a God who wages war. They want only to speak of a God who loves. It is somehow more satisfying to the human mind to have a God who calls for us to love and who demonstrates that love continuously. The question must be raised: How is love demonstrated in an imperfect world filled with human evil and satanic powers? Does love not demonstrate itself in opposing such evil, in de­ feating evil and allowing the powers of good and love to prevail? But, the retort comes, how can defeating a whole country of people, including women and children and animals, be part of a plan of love, a plan o f making God’s good prevail and doing away with evil? The question allows no quick, slick, simple 90

JO S H U A

answer. Human logic does not have the power to justify the slaying of innocents. Human power does not have the right to take one historical example and use it as a precedence case for following the same strategy in a different human situation. That the Bible reports one instance of God using force to rid the world o f evil nations does not justify people using G od’s name and military means to fight current battles and destroy current populations. A t most, the biblical theologian must in faith say that G od’s ways of dealing with evil are justified because God is just. In the fighting of the conquest, G od demonstrated clearly that he is willing and able to become involved in the most difficult situations his people face. He is willing to participate in the situa­ tions filled with moral uncertainty just as much as he is willing to participate in situations where love and good obviously prevail. God does not isolate his actions to those places and times where his goodness and love can obviously and easily reveal themselves. He also acts in cases where humanity sees only darkness and despair. He operates, however, in light of eternal plans, plans of which humans can know only in part. G od’s justice and goodness can be judged only on the basis o f such plans and only on the basis of his eternal definitions, not on the basis of our finite viewpoints and our limited definitions. The book of Joshua explicitly raises the moral problem a notch further: “For it had been Yahweh’s idea to harden their hearts to encounter Israel in battle in order that they could put them to the ban without their having opportunity to plead for mercy. In­ deed this was so that they might annihilate them just as Yahweh commanded Moses” (11:20). God caused people to oppose his people and have no opportunity to become a part of his people. Can this be justified? Has the book of Joshua presented a less than biblical view of God? Is this the Old Testament God working in ways for beneath that of the New Testament Father of our Lord Jesus Christ? Or have we missed the inspired narrative’s point? The focus is on what God has done for his people Israel. The Lord Behind History

91

Israelite obedience was made easier by G od, who caused the inhabitants o f the land to resist any temptation to plead for peace---- Here is a biblical lesson which has always been difficult for the people o f G od to learn. Deuteronomy commanded Israel to obey God, destroy the inhabitants, have no mercy, make no covenant, make no marriages (7:1-3). Such a command had a divine purpose. It removed the temptations to follow other gods. From the days of the Judges and especially from the period of Solom on onward, the great temptation was to make political alliances through covenants and political marriages between royal families (1 Kgs 11:1-8; 16:31; 20:30-43). To protect Israel against the major sin of idolatry, God commanded her not to show mercy to the enemy. To enable her to keep his commandment, G od caused her enemies to fight her rather than seek mercy and peace (W BC 7:130). G od’s actions in history encompassed more than simply working through Israel to bring his plans to pass. He worked in the hearts of even the enemies to accomplish his purposes. In this way, too, he showed that he was, indeed, Lord of all the earth. N o people could withstand him. He could work with them in any way he chose. He was sovereign even over the mental ca­ pacities of the enemies. Because of this, Israel could testify, “N ot a single man stood before them from all their enemies; rather all their enemies, Yahweh gave into their hand. Not a single word fell from every good word which Yahweh spoke to the house of Israel. Everything came to pass” (23:44-45).

Divine acts and future generations G od’s acts in history are not limited to one particular era. He worked through Joshua to give Israel the land. Joshua became old and advanced in years, ready to retire from the conquest task. G od led him to retire, but only after Yahweh promised to 92

JO S H U A

keep up the fight: “all the inhabitants o f the hill country from Lebanon unto M israphoth Mayim, all the Sidonians, I will dispossess them before the sons of Israel, only cause it to fall to Israel for an inheritance just as I commanded you” (13:6). The era o f Joshua would pass. The fighting o f Yahweh for his people would continue. G od’s purposes would come to pass despite the passing of mighty leaders. Neither Moses nor Joshua was necessary for God to act in history. God could and would act how and when he chose. The remainder o f the Bible and of human history testifies to this. God has acted, acts, and will continue to act for his people to bring his purpose to comple­ tions. This is biblical testimony. M odem historians and philosophers o f language have a problem with such statements. They want history to be the realm of human actions and thus expect the historian to explain events through the rules o f cause and effect, rules that pre­ sumably can be repeated in similar circumstances. They do not necessarily want to eliminate faith and God from human dis­ cussion. They simply want to bracket God out of the discussion when they are doing scientific history. Thus, they may not want to give the title history writing to a book such as Joshua. It be­ comes simply a source book for the modem historian to use in reconstructing history, but cannot be graced with the title a work o f history. Such treatment of the book o f Joshua and its events can be defended by human logic and with specific defi­ nitions of history. Such logic and rules o f definition ignore the biblical perspective on history and the biblical view o f God. The Bible refuses to isolate God in his heavenly palace, aloof from the actions of human history. Likewise, the Bible refuses to grant humans the power to explain all events on earth through the rules of cause and effect. The Bible portrays his­ tory in the language of faith, not in the language o f the “sci­ entific historian.” The language o f faith sees more at work than does the language of the “scientific historian.” The language of faith sees human history as a cooperative effort between God The Lord Behind History

93

and his people to establish divine purposes. It sees God working to empower his people to accomplish his purposes. It sees G od as the primary cause of human history. This is not to say God is the only cause and that human actions are always divinely caused. The Bible goes to great lengths to describe human pride and rebellion in its exercise of freedom to oppose divine plans and actions. The Bible thus describes human history as a battleground in which forces of evil combat G od for the minds, the wills, the hearts o f people. Both the forces o f evil and G od work through human agency to accomplish their purposes. History is not simply a battle between God and Satan. H is­ tory encompasses all human actions. Human actions are not, however, simple actions resulting from totally free human de­ cisions. Human actions are actions resulting from people with commitments. Some human commitments are to other human beings in love, trust, and joint action. Some human commit­ ments are to powers of evil in outright rebellion against what the person knows to be right and good. Some human commitments are to God and his purposes. The complex interactions of these human commitments—which may all lie in the depths of a single individual— eventually give the im petus to human history. Explanation of human commitment, human will, hu­ man decision-making requires more than mere descriptions of cause and effect. Such explanation also invokes those forces that work to influence such commitments. The Bible and Christian faith hold to God as a major Actor in such explanations. The Bible and Christian faith go further. They hold that God is not content simply to work through human beings. A t times God chooses to work within the events of history. N o video camera can record such actions. N o physical eye can describe the hows and wherefores of such actions. On the other side, some events are beyond human imagination. N o human causes suffice to explain the events. The major such event is the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Once the reality of that event is granted, the possibility of God’s 94

JO S H U A

actions in human history cannot be denied. The question then becomes not, does God work in history? but, in what ways does he work and in what events has he worked? The biblical record testifies to many events in which God works. The language of faith then extends that testimony to say that the possibility, yea, the probability, exists that God continues to work in human history.

God who makes demands God speaks. God acts in history. G od makes demands. The covenant relationship is not a one-sided relationship with no expectations on Israel. Rather, the relationship makes impos­ sible demands. “You are not able to serve Yahweh, because a holy God is he, a jealous deity is he, one who will not forgive your sins and transgressions. If you should forsake Yahweh and serve strange, foreign gods, he will turn and do evil to you. He will finish you off after having been so good to you.” (24:19-20) This part of G od’s nature provides the tension of the bibli­ cal narrative. An all-giving, always forgiving god would make no demands on the people. The people would stand under no threat. The conclusion of the story would be assured from the first. Threat, punishment, loss of power, exile would all be im­ possible. The story would feature one victory after another by a self-indulgent people. G od is not like that, so the story is not like that. Israel’s story is one of trying to meet God’s demands, a story with tremendous successes and horrendous failures. The book of Joshua has its share o f both. God makes leadership demands. To be leader of God’s people is not a position of honor to be enjoyed and rewarded. The leader o f G od’s people must listen to the demands of God. The Lord Behind History

95

Leadership in Israel is leadership following G od’s orders, not unfettered leadership accomplishing personal desires. A t every turn Joshua turned to Yahweh for direction prior to issuing or­ ders to the people. Yahweh’s orders did not always follow the dictates o f human reason. Cross a flooded river. March openly around a walled city for seven days. Circumcise adult males. Search out and destroy a family of your own people. Make a strong, wily enemy people servants in your own worship place with daily contact with government officials. Stop the success­ ful conquest in the final phases just because the leader is getting old. Take important cities away from tribes to give them to priests. Such demands would not fill the pages of military strat­ egy published by most military academies. They did fill G od’s strategy demands on Joshua. The demands of leadership continued away from the field of action. God called on Joshua to study the Torah of Moses con­ tinually. The leader had to subject himself to religious tradition, to the teachings of his predecessor. The leader was not called on to initiate brilliant strategy of his own and to reformulate the expectations of the people in his own image. Rather, the leader had to carry on the methods and demands o f the previous generation of leadership. New leaders expect the right to cre­ ate new leadership styles and new directions for the people. Leaders want to place their own imprint on the life and history of the people. Joshua was called to imitate and continue more of the same much more than to set personal, individual marks on the nation’s history. Leadership demands called for courage and strength. Joshua had to become the first role model for Israel’s leadership in the shadow of Moses and his Torah. A s such, he had to trace a path unlike that the people might expect. They would look for lead­ ers like those in Egypt or in Canaan. They would look for strong personal initiative. They would expect a leader who exhibited his power for all to see to impress his own people and the enemy. Yahweh demanded that Joshua retreat to the study with the 96

JO S H U A

Torah of Moses. Did it take more courage to follow the N ear Eastern leadership role model or the M osaic model? Joshua also had to lead a people not fully committed to the M osaic Law, as the example of Achan showed quite early. Did Joshua have the courage to enforce the Law o f Moses in the face o f popular opposition? Was Joshua willing to stake his leadership on G od’s demands and directions, or would he compromise those demands to satisfy the desires o f the people? Leadership demands placed Joshua against Near Eastern models, against personal desires o f the people, and against political and military situations with seemingly little chance o f success. Could he face these and meet G od’s basic command: “Have I not commanded you, ‘Have conviction and courage. Do not tremble or get all shook up, for with you is Yahweh your God everywhere you go’?” (1:9). Was G od’s promise o f his presence sufficient reason to follow his leadership demands in face of other lead­ ership styles and demands? That was the basic question Joshua faced. The book of Joshua illustrates Joshua’s faithfulness in following God’s demands. He listened to divine orders, relayed these to his leadership staff or to the people, and carried them out just as they were given. He thus became a role model for all future leaders of God’s people. This became clear in his very first confrontation with the people. He faced the group most likely to give him trouble, the people from East o f Jordan who already had their assigned territories and had no obvious reason to cross the Jordan and continue the battle. Joshua showed them he knew the Torah o f Moses. He also showed them he had a plan for the future, a plan which made further demands on their time and commitment to the people Israel. They swore allegiance to him, recognizing that he con­ tinued the leadership style of Moses: “According to all the way in which we have obeyed Moses, so we will obey you---- Every man who rebels against your order and does not obey your words to the last detail which you command us shall be put to death” (1:17-18). The Lord Behind History

97

The people East of Jordan recognized one need in Joshua’s life, the same need Yahweh had pointed out—conviction and courage (1:18; compare vv. 6, 7, 9). A courageous leader who stuck to his convictions could meet Yahweh’s leadership de­ mands. Such a leader could expect the fo llowship o f G od’s people. Such a leader had to meet one other implied demand of God: He had to recognize that he was not the fu lly-empow­ ered, independent leader. Yahweh had a heavenly army much more powerful than any earthly army. That army had a “prince o f the host of Yahweh” (5.T4). Joshua had to obey commands from on high and recognize leadership higher than his own before he could effectively issue commands to God’s people. Joshua led the earthly hierarchy, but he stood in a chain of command. He had to obey a higher general’s orders.

Ritual demands Yahweh also had ritual demands. The reader of Joshua comes away with memories of battles and conquest. The student of the structure o f the book of Joshua realizes that religious ritual surrounds, and to a large extent dominates, the stories of battle and conquest. Priests lead the way through the Jordan and around Jericho. Circum cision, Passover, and acknowledgem ent o f holy ground prepare the way to Jericho. Prayer and religious ritual determine the fate o f Achan and enable Israel to rebound from defeat to capture A i. Rededication to the Torah o f Moses and covenant of God interrupt the conquest narrative almost before it has begun. The priest and the lot play an important role in the distribution of territories to the tribes. The process is in­ terrupted as the tribes regather at Shiloh around the tent of meeting. The death of the high priest plays a crucial role in the law of the cities of refu ge. The last distribution of territory is to the levitic priests. The final story of the book is a dispute over the place 98

JO S H U A

of worship, settled by the priest. The final actions are a cov­ enant sermon and covenant renewal ceremony. The demands of worship thus dominate the structure of Joshua and probably should dominate the themes we study from the book to a greater extent than they usually do. 1. Study of Torah. Yahweh’s first ritual demand is the study of Torah. This is for the leader, Joshua, but it is also for the people. Covenant renewal is time for lessons in Torah (chs 8; 24). The people must know God’s history with his people and God’s expectations of his people. Because the people know both God’s actions and G od’s demands, they are ready to commit themselves to obey God’s covenant demands: “Far be it from us, the forsaking of Yahweh to serve other gods, for Yahweh is our God. He is the one who brought us up and our fathers from the land of Egypt, from the house of service, and who did before our eyes these great signs. He protected us in all the way in which we went and among all the peoples through whose midst we passed. Yahweh drove out all the peoples, indeed the Amorite living in the land, from before us. Yes, we also will serve Yahweh, because He is our God.” (24:16-18) The study of Torah leads the people to know God, his acts, and his demands. Such knowledge results in a pledge to serve God and meet his requirements. In ritual God’s people learn and give themselves to the God who demands. 2. Leadership of priests. Yahweh’s second ritual demand is the leadership of priests. Joshua was the leader, but he had con­ stantly to recognize the important role of religious leaders. The priests led through the Jordan. The priests led around Jericho. The priests participated in the distribution of land. The priests mediated the dispute over the worship place of the East Jordan tribes. The priests lived among each of the tribes. Political and military leadership was not enough. God had reserved certain The Lord Behind History

99

places for the priests. Leaders such as Joshua had to recognize the priests’ role and encourage them in performing that role. A n important part o f that role was to keep before the people the ark of the covenant, symbolizing the presence o f God. Priests, not Joshua, had charge of the worship place and the symbol o f G od being with his people. In his demands, G od had divided leadership responsibility. Leaders had to accept G od’s way o f dividing leadership rather than seeking to gain more power at the expense o f someone else. Joshua provided a role model in letting the priests exercise their prescribed functions while limiting him self to those areas in which G od gave him leadership authority. 3. Worship requirements. The third ritual demand centered on worship requirements. God expected male members of the community to undergo circumcision as a sign o f the covenant people o f Abraham and as a symbol of a new generation com­ mitted to the demands of Yahweh and cleansed by Yahweh. Circumcision was done in the traditional way God expected— with flint knives rather than the newly-invented metal ones. He expected them to keep Passover, remembering G od’s acts in Egypt and committing themselves to till the land and depend upon its fruits for their food. G od expected them to worship where he chose. Thus they went to Shechem to renew the covenant. Likewise the East Jordan tribes’ altar was a witness but not an altar of worship. Also, the tent of meeting was set up, and the second portion of the distribution of the land occurred at Shiloh. Worship was not a human plan displaying human ca­ pabilities to God. Worship was a human response to G od’s great acts, a response made following the way G od had demanded. 4. Covenant demands. The final ritual demand centered on covenant. This was an extension o f the worship demand and has been discussed above under loyalty. God expected his people to gather at Shechem and renew the covenant, learning anew G od’s demands and committing themselves to those demands. Here Israel gained identity as the people of the G od who had 100

JOSHUA

acted in their history and thus had the right to make covenant demands, which they willingly chose to follow. Ethical demands God’s demands could be summarized as ethical demands. The center o f Torah demands were ethical. The book o f Joshua summarizes these in one sentence: “Only, be exceedingly careful to obey the commandments and the Torah, which M oses, the servant o f Yahweh, commanded you, to love Yahweh, your God, and to walk in all his ways and to obey his commandments and to cleave to him and to serve him with all your heart and with all your being.” (22:5) G od’s demands are not based on a tyrant/helpless vassal re­ lationship. They are based on a relationship between a G od of love whose people love him in return. This love of God shows itself in all he has done for his people, calling the patriarchs, freeing the slaves in Egypt, making the covenant, guiding the people through the wilderness, and giving them the land. His love is also shown in his anger and jealousy. G od’s anger bums against his covenant people when they break the cov­ enant (7:1). G od’s anger guards the trust relationship. Israel broke the trust relationship they had with God. They refused to do what they had committed themselves to do. They stole part of the banned goods they had devoted to Yahweh. Anger is the response to a breach of that trust Anger is the response that shows God takes the relationship seriously and expects the agreed-upon demands of the relationship to be fulfilled. N ot to react in anger would mean that G od had not intended for Is­ rael to take the relationship seriously and that G od did not take the relationship seriously. Lack o f anger would mean shallow commitment. Absence of anger would mean the relationship The Lord Behind History

101

could be an off-again, on-again arrangement at either party’s whim. The covenant was not simply a business deal with both parties signing a contract for a specified time or until a better deal came along. The covenant was an emotional commitment of the very heart and being of God and of Israel. Such emotional commitments bring em otional responses when they are broken. Israel learned the hard way that God took the covenant commitment seriously and responded in burning anger when Israel refused to take it seriously. Anger was not an eternal emotion o f God. God showed Israel how to respond to his anger. He provided ritual action, indeed radical ritual action, Israel could take (ch 7). When Israel did take the covenant relationship seriously enough to fall on her knees before G od and seek to renew the relationship, then God led them back in the way. When Israel followed God’s way back, then “Yahweh repented of his burning rage” (7:26). G od’s jealousy is another part of his emotional attachment to the covenant people. Jealousy in our terms is the reaction of a lover against the person who steals the heart of the beloved. The Canaanites attributed such emotions to their gods. Rival gods entered into lovers’ quarrels. For Yahweh, jealousy took another turn: It was both jealous and zealous. In his zeal to protect and maintain his love relationship with Israel, God placed demands upon his beloved people. He expected them to be holy, morally pure and perfect, just as he was. He expected them to be faithful, committed only to him as he was committed only to them. He loves them so much that he wants their undivided love in return. He will not share them with any other god. God turns his jealous indignation against the un­ faithful worshiper, not against the rival lover. He punishes the people who try to serve him along with some other god. God’s jealousy cannot tolerate this. He has given undi­ vided love and wants the same from them (cf. Exod 20:5; 34:14-16). (W BC 7:275) 102

JO S H U A

Uniquely, the jealousy o f God means God’s people cannot serve him: “You are not able to serve Yahweh, because a holy God is he, a jealous deity is he, one who will not forgive your sins and transgressions” (24:19). The nature o f God himself prevents Israel from serving him. His holy purity and jealous love both tie him in total devotion to his people and tie them off from fulfilling his demands. This has drastic consequences. G od will not forgive Israel’s sins (cf. Exod 23:21). His expectations of them are too high. His love for them is too great. He cannot easily ignore their wrongdoings, their casual flirtations with other gods. The gods of the neighbors would simply wait for the worshiper to come back. Yahweh goes out to discipline the errant lover until she returns. (W BC 7:275) Still, Israel does not think these demands are too high. In fa c e of the warning of God’s holy jealousy, Israel insists, “N o, but it is Yahweh we will serve!” The holy jealousy of G od is not a repulsive attribute which terrifies His people. It is part of the attraction of God. Only a God who expects so much and loves so exclusively can fulfill our expectations. We do not want to worship one who loves and leaves as we do. We commit ourselves to the One whose expectations are so high we can never fulfill them, but whose nature is so perfect that He can expect and demand no less because He expects and performs those demands for Himself.

Go d is faithful God expects his leader and his people to know and follow Torah. Central to Torah are the promises God made to the fa­ thers. A s seen above, the gift of land is basic to these promises. G od has not truly created a people until he has given them land of their own to till and rule independently of any other The Lord Behind History

103

peoples or nation. The book o f Joshua centers on this aspect of God. G od’s speech, opening the book, promises, “Every place where the sole of your foot steps, to you I have given it, precisely as I told M oses---- it is you who will cause this people to inherit the land which I made an oath with their fathers to give to them.” (1 :3 ,6 ) G od faithfully remembers the promises o f Torah just as he expects the people to remember the demands o f Torah. G od promised to fulfill that oath to the fathers, but only to a faith ' ful generation (5:6). The generation o f Joshua was the faithful generation. “Joshua took all the land, according to all which Yahweh spoke to Moses” (11:22). The climax o f the conquest narrative reaffirms this: “Yahweh gave to Israel all the land which he had sworn to give to their fathers, and they possessed it and lived in it. Yahweh gave them rest all around, according to everything which he had sworn to their fath ers.. . . N ot a single word fell from every good word which Yahweh spoke to the house o f Israel. Everything came to pass” (21:43-45). If we had to isolate from the conquest narratives of the book of Joshua the one theme the writer wished to impress upon the readers, it was this: Yahweh has done his part. He is faithful. You can see what he has done in the past. You know you can trust him for the future. The corollary to this theme is similar: If you are in trouble, you cannot blame Yahweh. Past history shows his nature. He is faithful to keep his promises. The book of Joshua goes even one step further. If you are in trouble, you had better look at Yahweh’s demands and your faithfulness. Why? Because Yahweh is not only faithful to his promises. He is also faithful to his warnings: “You all know with all your hearts and with all your being that not one word has fallen from all the good words which 104

JO S H U A

Yahweh, your God, spoke concerning you. They all have come to pass for you. N ot one word has fallen from among them. And it will be the case that just as every good word which Yahweh, your God, spoke to you has come upon you just so Yahweh will bring upon you every evil word until he has destroyed you from upon this good land which Yahweh, your God, has given to you. When you trans­ gress the covenant o f Yahweh, your God, that he com­ manded you, and you go off and serve other gods and bow down in worship to them, then the anger o f Yahweh will bum against you and you will quickly wander away lost from upon this good land which he has given to you.” (21:14-16) God is faithful to his promises and to his threats. The lesson is clear. His people must be faithful, too.

God is present G od’s faithfulness shows itself in his presence.13 The theme o f presence is the repeated sign in chapter 1. G od promised Joshua victory over all his enemies. The only evidence Joshua had that victory would actually come was the promise of G od’s presence (1:5). That presence was not a new theme. Joshua had seen evidence of God’s presence previously, for it was the power of presence with Moses. Leadership in Israel had one necessary quality. The leader had to have G od’s presence, the same pres­ ence that had been with Moses. The presence was an unlimited presence. Joshua did not have to go to the place o f worship. He did not have to be sure the priests were with him. He did not have to ensure he had taken the ark of covenant. Sanctuary, priests, a rk . . . all could symbolize G od’s presence, but none was nec­ essary. G od was present “everywhere you go” (1:9). Thus, Joshua could have conviction and courage. He had no reason to tremble or to lose heart. He never had to rely on his own power and ability. He always had G od’s power and The Lord. Behind History

105

ability to call upon. God called his leader to service, but that was never solitary service. It was always service in the eternal presence of God. Israel expected God to be present with their leader. The East Jordan tribes answered Joshua’s call to cross the Jordan with a united Israel with one demand: “According to all the way in which we have obeyed Moses, so we will obey you. Only let Yahweh your God be with you just as he was with Moses” (1:17). Joshua had to lead just as Moses had led. Joshua could not presume to lead in his own strength. He had to lead in the strength o f the One who had been with Moses. Joshua could meet that condition. Yahweh had made that promise in calling Joshua to service. The understanding that God was present with his people had a long history in Israel. It rooted in the life of the patriarchs. G od promised to be with them on their long, fearful journeys through unknown territories (Gen 28:15; 31:3; Exod 3:12). The theme was part of Israel’s understanding of holy war, war in which God directed his people to carry out certain instructions such as the ban and in which he promised to lead them with his presence. This is the meaning in the opening chapter of Joshua in its more limited sense (compare Num 14:43; Judg 6:11-16; 1 Sam 17:37; 2 Sam 7:9). Thus, the theme of divine presence appears in the laws of Deuteronomy only in the laws for battle (Deut 20:1-4). The narrative of Deuteronomy speaks o f G od’s presence in the wilderness wanderings (2:7) and in Joshua’s preparation for conquest (3 1 :6 ,8 ,2 3 ). The theme o f divine presence expresses one o f the basic roots o f Israelite faith, the be­ lief that Yahweh is the G od of Israel who accompanies, leads, protects, fights, and goes with the men he has chosen for his work. (W BC 7:12) Divine presence was not simply an invisible, unprovable promise. Divine presence brought specific accomplishments. For

106

JO S H U A

Joshua, this meant victory in battle—victory the people could see. God used the victory to do two things in the midst o f the people o f Israel. He made Joshua great, and he gave evidence that his presence was with Joshua just as it had been with Moses (3:7). This at least implies a definition of human greatness for Is­ rael. Israel could recognize human greatness through achievements of the human leader, but Israel knew that those achievements did not come through the leader’s own ability and skill. Those achievements pointed beyond the leader. They pointed to G od and his presence. Human greatness was a direct result of divine presence. This meant that human greatness brought recogni­ tion for the individual, but its basic result was to bring praise to God. The great human was simply an agent allowing God to work out his purposes and achieve his plans through his presence. To recognize that presence, Israel turned to its original great hero— Moses. Israel knew the story o f Moses and what he had accomplished. Israel knew that those accomplishments came through the presence o f Yahweh. Anytime another Israelite leader accomplished acts similar to Moses’ feats, Israel knew God was present with that leader. The leader did not take time to revel in his own greatness. Instead, he or she gave credit to God’s presence and turned to the next task in God’s commands. In Joshua’s case the evidence for divine presence was simple. Yahweh would drive out the inhabitants of the promised land. Then Israel would know beyond any doubt that the living God, Yahweh, the God of Israel, was present among his people (3:10). The battle of Jericho presented the first clear piece of evidence. There “Yahweh was with Joshua, and his reputation was in all the land” (6:27). This implies that Joshua’s feat at Jericho did more than show Israel that Yahweh was present with him and among them. It witnessed to everyone in the land of Canaan that Yahweh was with Joshua, building Joshua’s reputation. One may even take the statement a step further. A s seen above, in The Lord Behind History

107

Hebrew “land” and “earth” are the same word. The writer of the book of Joshua may have intended for the readers to see the full implication of what Yahweh was doing through Joshua. Yahweh was making Joshua’s name great and thus proving his divine presence throughout the entire earth. Presence of God was not an unconditional, eternal guarantee. God’s presence came to a faithful covenant people. When Israel broke the covenant, they heard a different kind of word from Yahweh: “Never again will I be with you if you do not banish the banned goods from your midst” (7:12). Instead of enforcing G od’s ban on the goods captured in Jericho, Israel in the person o f Achan had taken some o f the banned goods for themselves. This transformed Israel into “banned goods.” A people under the ban could not expect the presence of God with them. The holy G od could not be present with a sinful people. The pres­ ence of the holy God with banned goods led to the destruction of the banned goods. Apparently, the whole plan of the book of Joshua could not be accomplished. Israel had refused to be the faithful generation which could experience G od’s presence. The key promise to Joshua in the book is the presence of G od. Divine presence is the prayer o f the people for Joshua, the basis of Joshua’s exaltation, and the hope of possessing the land. Passing over the covenant has let all this pass away. A ll is not totally hopeless. There is a big ‘if.’ Obedient people will destroy the banned goods in their midst and again experience divine presence. Israel must choose between the presence o f God and the presence of banned goods. (W BC 7:85) To experience the divine presence, Israel had to be the people o f the covenant. Otherwise they were choosing to be the people o f the covenant curses. To be G od’s people is to experi­ ence G od’s presence. N ot to experience God’s presence is to be banned goods, apart from G od, under the covenant curse, and 108

JO S H U A

in danger of destruction which was the eventual fate of banned goods. Joshua did not have a monopoly on divine presence. G od promised his presence to leaders carrying out his purpose. Caleb called on the divine presence as the guarantee o f his success in driving the mighty Anakim out o f Hebron and other cities (14:12). Phinehas, the priest, could testify to G od’s presence among all the people as a result of solving the threatened civil war between East and West Jordan tribes. When it became evident that no wrong had been committed and the tribes were still united in purpose, the priest declared, “Today we know that Yahweh is in our midst, because you have not disobeyed Yahweh in this disobedience. In that way, you have delivered the sons o f Israel from the hand o f Yahweh” (22:31). Disobedient Israel would have to face the threat o f divine punishment. Obedient Israel could live in the blessing and protection of the presence of Yahweh. T hat presence not only led G od’s people as they traveled in unknown places and guar­ anteed victory as God led his people into battle. T hat presence also witnessed to the unity and obedience o f his people. That presence guided the people to solve problems which threatened the very life of the nation. Amidst the arguments of men, the promised presence of G od reveals itself and brings peace. (W BC 7:249) For the book of Joshua, G od is the One who speaks, who demands, who acts in history, who is faithful, and, above all, who is present with his people. It is this God who makes cov­ enant with his people and guides them to victory over the people o f the promised land and who leads them to distribute the land fairly among the tribes. It is this G od who calls them to service even knowing they cannot meet his zealous, jealous demands, nor escape his anger, and must face the threat o f loss o f land and exile. Still, this G od is so great and perfect that Israel can The Lord Behind History

109

only commit themselves to serve him, knowing the impossibility of the task. God accepts such a people as his covenant people and seeks to lead them further along the path to accomplish his purposes.

110

JO S H U A

EPILOQ THE PEOPLE OF GOD

The Old Testament as a whole, and the book of Joshua in particular, have a wide variety of themes. In the pages above, we have been able to touch on only a few of those topics. Study of the individual themes, however, does not tell the whole story. One must look further than the individual parts. One must ask the purpose, the intention of the whole. Having looked at leadership, land, law, loyalty, and Lord, we still do not have the larger picture. W hat is the total theme, the overarching goal of the book of Joshua? The present writer thinks the goal of the book, and quite probably of the Old Testament as a whole, is to give identity to the people of God.14The Bible is written by members of the people of God to a larger group. This larger group claims to be people of God. In the eyes of the inspired writer, however, they do not all give evidence of the marks of God’s people. The inspired book o f Joshua in its entirety provides a standard with which people who claim to be a part of G od’s covenant people can examine themselves and see if they really meet God’s test. That test involves a series of questions.

Ill

1. Have you committed yourself to the covenant God has made with his people? For Israel this was a public commitment as part o f the people of God. It involved the ceremonies apparent in 8:30-35 and in chapter 24. It meant having listened to the en­ tire Torah of God read publicly. It meant having rehearsed God’s history with his people. It meant knowing the serious nature of being the people of the G od who expressed him self not only in presence and love but also in anger and jealousy. It meant say­ ing publicly with God’s people, “Yahweh, our God, we will serve. His voice we will obey” (24:24). 2. Are you willing to accept the consequences of that commit­ ment? Com m itm ent to Yahweh sets you off from all your neighbors. They had freedom to worship all the gods they could find—to participate in the exciting, alluring worship rituals connected with the fertility gods. They had freedom to go to another god for help when the god they were calling on did not seem to be able to give help at the present moment in the present kind of need. In freedom they could call on the ancient traditions o f the land, which seemed to have worked well enough for many generations. They could worship at the many ancient worship places which had been used in the land for centuries. They did not have to limit themselves to the one place Yahweh chose for them. They were free to use their creative talents to form images o f their gods and ensure the presence of those gods among them. To commit oneself to the covenant of Yahweh was to give up all these freedoms and to worship where Yahweh said to worship without any image to ensure that Yahweh was even present. It was to agree to worship him and him alone, knowing the threats Yahweh had made against those unfaithful to him: “You are not able to serve Yahweh, because a holy G od is he, a jealous deity is he, one who will not forgive your sins and transgressions. If you should forsake Yahweh and serve strange, foreign gods, he will turn and do evil to you. 112

JO SH U A

He will finish you off after having been so good to you all.” (24:19-20) 3. Do you know why you serve Yahweh? Yahweh is different from all other gods. He is not limited to one area o f life. He is not just the god o f the sun or the god of fertility or the god of the household or the god o f war. Yahweh is the G od who proved his power when he had no people, when the fathers had other gods whom they “served beyond the rivers and in Egypt” (24:14). Yahweh is the G od who could begin to build his kingdom with one person: “I took your father Abraham from beyond the river and caused him to go through all the land of Canaan” (24:3). Yahweh is the only G od o f fertility. “I multiplied his seed” (24:3), fulfilling his promise to Abraham and the fathers and producing the nation o f Israel. Yahweh is the G od of the wanderer, leading Abraham from M esopotamia to Canaan and Israel from Egypt through the wilderness (compare 2 4 :3 ,7 ). Yahweh is the God over the nations. Israel’s enemies had two m ajor homes— M esopotam ia and Egypt. Yahweh took Abraham from Mesopotamia and Israel from Egypt. In Canaan, Israel faced smaller enemies all around. “I gave to Esau [the Edomites] Mount Seir” (24:4). “1 brought you all to the land of the Amorites, the ones who dwell beyond the Jordan. They fought you, and I gave them into your hand. You possessed their land” (24:7-8). Yahweh is the G od over all prophets. “B alak ,. . . king of Moab, rose and fought against Israel. He sent and called Balaam, the son of Beor, to curse you. But I did not consent to listen to Balaam, and he actually blessed you. I delivered you from his hand” (24:9-10). Yahweh is the G od of war. “I struck Egypt---- Your eyes saw what I did in Egypt---- The lords of Jericho— the Amorites, Epilog: The People o f God

113

the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Girgashites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites—fought against you. I gave them into your han d.. . . But it was not by your sword nor by your bow. I gave to you a land in which you did not exert yourself and cities which you did not build, and you lived in them” (24:5, 7 ,1 1 -1 3 ). Yahweh is the God of agriculture. “(I also gave) vineyards and olive orchards, which though you did not plant, you are eating” (24:13). Yahweh is the God who controlled the land and gave it to whom he pleased. He gave it to show his faithfulness to his word: “Yahweh gave to Israel all the land which he had sworn to give to their fathers, and they possessed it and lived in it” (21:43). Yahweh, the Lord of all the earth and sovereign in war, is above all the God who shapes rest and peace for his people. “Yahweh gave them rest all around, according to everything which he had sworn to their fathers” (21:44). You serve Yahweh because he is different from all other gods. His difference attracts you. His difference proves his claim to be the only God who can exert influence over your lives. His difference justifies his demand for exclusive allegiance. His dif­ ference makes you willing to choose in freedom to serve him and put aside all other gods. You serve Yahweh because of who he is and what you choose. 4. Do you know God’s Torah demands on Israel? Have you paid attention to the covenant ceremonies? Have you realized that the reading of Torah is more than a public ritual done for pomp and circumstance? Have you seen Torah directed to you per­ sonally, calling you to embrace its demands as the lifestyle you choose, the lifestyle God has set out as the best for you? Do you see Torah as God’s gracious gift to you setting out the boundary lines of life with God and giving you freedom to shape your life within those boundary lines? Are you willing to share Torah with all those with whom G od shares it—“including women and children, and the aliens 1 14

JO SH U A

active among you” (8:35)? Will you witness against yourself that you have submitted your life to Torah no matter what the con­ sequence? 5. Do you understand the one word that summarizes Torah? Are you ready to make love the central characteristic of your life? “Only be exceedingly careful to obey the commandments and the Torah which Moses, the servant of Yahweh, commanded you, to love Yahweh, your God” (22:5). “You must guard your­ selves carefully to love Yahweh, your God” (23:11). Being people o f God does not mean drearily keeping a series o f laws in order to be good or to escape punishment. Being people of God does not mean keeping a Torah scorecard to show how good you are and stroke your pride. Nor does it mean cowering in fear, looking behind every rock, knowing that be­ hind the next turn God will have someone waiting to jump out and get you because he found the one place you stepped across the Torah boundary. Being people of God is being in love with the most wonderful Person you ever met. It means joyfully searching for ways to please the Beloved because o f the wonder o f the love that dominates your life. It is celebrating a lifelong love affair with the living God, the Lord of all the earth. Such a love affair calls for courage, for faith, and for conviction as you live in G od’s rest. That is the book of Joshua, a summary o f the people o f God committed to the covenant, accepting the consequences of that commitment, knowing why they serve God, knowing the demands o f Torah, understanding love as the center of Torah. Joshua shows how God defined and demonstrated leadership, gave land and law, demanded loyalty, and acted as Lord. Joshua holds up what once was and invites people to believe it can happen again.

Epilog: The People o f God

115

NOTES

1. For a discussion of laments, see A. A. Anderson, Psalms, New Century Bible Commentary (London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1972), 1,36-39; Claus Westermann, Praise and Lament in the Psalms (Atlanta: John Knox, 1981); Leslie C. Allen, Psalms, Word Biblical Themes (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1987), 59-74; Trent C. Butler, “Piety in the Psalms,” Review and Expositor 81 (Summer, 1984), 385-94. 2. This is worked out mote fully in Trent C. Butler, “The Form of the Book of Joshua and Its Significance for Old Testament Research,” an unpublished paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Anaheim, Calif., Nov., 1985. 3. See Deuteronomy commentaries for further development of these themes: John D. W. Watts, “Deuteronomy,” The Broadman Bible Commentary (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970), I, 175-296; Gerhard von Rad, Deuteronomy, The Old Testament Library (Phila­ delphia: The Westminster Press, 1970); P. C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1976); A. D. H. Mayes, Deuteronomy, The New Century Bible Commentary (London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1979).

116

C O LO SS1A N S

4. See Edward R. Dalglish, “Judges” The Broadman Bible Com­ mentary (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970), II, 377-463; J. Alberto Soggin, Judges, The Old Testament Library (Philadelphia, The Westminster Press, 1981); Trent C. Butler, “The Royal Theme in the Book of Judges,” an unpublished paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Anaheim, California, November, 1989. 5. See Ben E Philbeck, Jr., “ 1 and 2 Samuel,” The Broadman Bible Commentary (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970), III, 1-145; Ralph W. Klein, 1 Samuel, Word Biblical Commentary 10 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983). 6. See A. A. Anderson, 2 Samuel, Word Biblical Commentary 11 (Dallas, Tex.: Word, 1989); Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theol­ ogy (London: Oliver & Boyd Ltd., 1962), 1,306-26. 7. See M. Pierce Matheney, Jr., and Roy L. Honeycutt, Jr., “1 Kings” and “2 Kings,” The Broadman Bible Commentary (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970), 246-396; Simon J. DeVries, I Kings, Word Biblical Commentary 12 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1985); T. R. Hobbs, 2 Kings, Word Biblical Commentary 13 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1985). 8. For further discussion of Joshua’s “office,” see Word Biblical Commentary 7,9-10. 9. On holy war theology, see Gwilym H. Jones, “The Concept of Holy War,” The World ofAncient Israel, ed.R .E. Clements (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 299-321; Elmer A. Martens, God’s Design (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981), 44-46, 60-63, 204-6; John H. Yoder, ‘“To Your Tents, O Israel’: The Legacy of Israel’s Ex­ perience with Holy War,” Studies in Religion 18 (1989), 345-62. 10. For a theological discussion of law, see Brevard S. Childs, Old Testament Theology in a Canonical Context (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 50-62; R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1978), 104-30.

117

11. For a discussion of covenant, see Trent C. Butler, “Covenant,” Holman Bible Dictionary (Nashville: Holman, 1991), 308-12; R. Davidson, “Covenant Ideology in Ancient Israel,” The World of An­ cient Israel, ed. R. E. Clements (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 323-48. 12. For an overview of the biblical understanding of history, see Trent C. Butler, notes and “Summary of the Doctrine of History,” Disciple’s Study Bible (Nashville: Holman, 1988), 1680-81,1855-57. 13. Samuel Terrien, The Elusive Presence (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1978), has used divine “presence” as the central theme for bib­ lical theology. 14. For a brief overview of “people of God,” see R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology, 79—103.

118

COLOSSIANS

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

Genesis 9:11 9:15 12:7 15:3-4 15:7 17:1-14 18 22:17 24:60 26:5 28:4 28:15 31:3

69 69 36 40 40 69 60 40 40 51 40 106 106

Exodus 2:24 3 3:5 3:12 4:10 5:15-16 6 6:4 6:4-5 7:20 9:10

69 76 60 106 25 25 76 36 69 25 25

13:3,14 13:9 14 14:31 16:4 16:28 18:20 19-24 19:5-6 19:8 20:5 20:12 23:21 24:3 24:7 24:7-8 24:12 24:13 32:11 32:17,18 33:14 34 34:14-16

25 51 89 25 51 51 52 76 69 69 102 49 103 69 52 69 52 23 24 23 49 76 102

Leviticus 16:8 18:24-25

44 45

18:27-28

45

Numbers 11:28 13:6 13:25-33 13:30 14:24 14:43 18:20 21:24 21:32 21:35 25 26:52-56 27:1-11 33:53 33:54 36:1-12

24 31 82 40 61 106 38,60 40 40 40 67 44 61 40 44 61

Deuteronomy 1:8 1:21 1:36 1:37-38 1:39 2:7

40 40 61 76 40 106 119

2:12 2:21-22 2:24 2:31 2:34 3:6 3:12 3:18 3:20 3:21-22 3:28 4:13 4:39 4:47 5 5:14 5:23 6:18 7:1-4 7:2 9:4-6 10:9 11:22-25 12:9-10 17:18-20 17:20 18:1-2 18:2 18:12 18:12-17 20:1-4 20:10 20:13-14 20:16-18 21:22-23 25:19 27-28 27 28:58 28:65 29:1 29:14-15 30:10 31:2-8 31:3 31:6 31:8 31:9 31:14-15 31:23 31:24

120

40 40 40 40 46 46 40 40 40,49 76 76 69 80 40 19 49 83 40 45 71 45 60 59 49 24,52 53 38 60 45 45 106 46 46 46,58 30 49 69 31 52 50 69 69 52 76 40 106 106 69 76 76,106 52

31:25-26 31:26 32:44-47 34:5 Joshua 1:1-18

69 52 59 26

12-13,16, 24,33,105 1:1 9,23,25 1:1-9 7,76 58 1:1-4 1:1-2 25 1:2 35 13 35,59,104 50 1:4 1:5 34,105 32,33,36,42, 1:6 98,104 1:7-9 26 1:7-8 24,53 25,56,98 1:7 1:9 97-98,105 1:10-18 7 1:10 27,33 1:11 36,40,79-80 1:12-18 18 1:12-15 65,67 1:13-15 36,49 25 1:13-14 1:13 48 1:14-15 41 48-49 1:15 65 1:16 1:17-18 97 106 1:17 1:18 32,65,98 2:1-21:45 13 2:1-11:23 17 13,42 2:1-12:24 12-13 2:1-5:15 7 2:1-24 2:1 9 2:8-11 80 2:9 36 2:10 46-47 2:11 36,80 36 2:14 29,36,82 2:24 3:1—5:1 7 27,59 3:1-4:24 59 3:1-17

9 3:1 3:2 27 82 3:4 3:5 82-83 76 3:7-8 3:7 34,58,107 40,83,107 3:10 3:11 84 3:13 49,84 9 4:1 85 4:6-7 4:8 59 4:9 29 4:10 59 4:12 66 4:14 34 4:15-16 77 85 4:20-24 29 4:22-23 85-86 4:24 49 4:38 5:1-15 33,59,70,78 5:1 36,86 5:2-9 7 5:2 9,77 5:6 37,87,104 5:7 87 5:9 29,59,77 5:10-12 7,9 85 5:10 5:13-15 7,60 26,98 5:14 5:15 77 6:1-11:23 12-13 7,27,33 6:1-27 6:2-5 58,77 6:2 9,37 6:16 37 6:18 46 89 6:20 6:21 46 49 6:23 46 6:24 34,90,107 6:27 7:1-26 32,54,60-61, 102 7:1-5 7 7:1-3 92 7:1 9,46-47,101 7:2 9 7:3 46 C O LO SSIA N S

7:6-15 7:6-9 7:7 7:9 7:10-26 7:10-15 7:10-13 7:11-12 7:11 7:12 7:15 7:19 7:24 7:26 8:1-29 8:1-2 8:1 8:7 8:18 8:26 8:27 8:28 8:29 8:30-35 8:30 8:31 8:33-35 8:33 8:35 9:1-3 9:1-2 9:3 9:4-14 9:9-11 9:14 9:15 9:16-21 9:22-23 9:23 9:24-27 9:24 9:26 9:27 10:1-5 10:1-2 10:1 10:6-14 10:8 10:10 10:11

79 7 37,87 37,87 7 77 60 47 37,70 88,108 47,70,88 88 29 102 7,99 77 9,58,60,89 37,41 37,58-89 47 58 30 30 7,16,19, 31,54,70,112 9 25 54 25,27,55 54,114 10 8 8 8 80 10,60,71,77 8,10 8 8 71 8 25 10 30 8 47,80 71 8 37,58,77 89 89

Index o f Scriptures

57,89 90 8 37 90 30 47 47 47 47 47,58 90 8 80 8 37,58,77 37 58 25,47,58 25,59 13 8 47,91 47 104 17-18,41, 49,59 8,12 66 41 25,41 41 50 13 12,66 8,17-18,77 10,17,31,38, 41,48,58 38 42-43,93 43 8 25,38,43 31,41 38,43,60,66 38 38 38 38,43,60,66 43 12

10:13 10:14 10:15-43 10:19 10:25 10:27 10:28 10.35 10:37 10:39 10:40 10:42 11:1-4 11:1 11:5-15 11:6 11:8 11:9 11:12 11:15 11:16-12:24 11:16-23 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:23 12:1-24 12:1-6 12:1 12:6 12:7 13:1-21:42 13:1-19:51 13:1-33 13:1-7 13:1 13:2-6 13:6 13:7 13:8-33 13:8 13:13 13:14 13:15 13:24 13:29 13:33 14:1-19:48 14:1-17:18

14:1-5 8 10,27-28 14:1 14:1-2 43 14:2 61 38 14:3-4 14:5 58 14:6-15 8,31 77 14:6-14 14:6 61 14:7-8 68 25 14:7 14:9 43 14:12 42,109 14:13 10,38,61 68 14:14 14:15 49 15:1-17:18 8 15:1 61 10,61 15:13 42 15:14 15:63 31,41 16:1 61 16:10 31,41 61 17:1 43 17:3-6 43 17:4-6 10,28 17:4 17:12-13 41 17:14-18 10 39,43,61 17:14 39 17:15-18 17:36 77 18:1-19:48 8,12 18:1 44 18:3 42 43 18:4 18:6 44 25,38,66 18:7 18:9 57 18:10 44 19:9 43 19:47 41 19:49-50 8,38 19:51 8,10,28,44 20:1-21:42 13 20:1-9 9-10 20:1-6 77 20:1-2 59 20:8 66 20:30 37 20:32 37

121

21:1-42

9-10,33,38, 43,66 21:1 28, 21:2 60 61 21:4 66 21:7 21:8 61 21:12 39 21:14-16 104-5 21:36-39 66 21:43-45 9,13,17-18, 104 21:43 37,39,41,114 21:44 49,114 21:45 61 2 2 :1 -2 4 :2 8 13 13,67 22:1-34 67 22:1-4 22:1-6 13,18 9 22:1-8 22:2 10,25 22:3 32 41,49 22:4 22:4-5 25 22:5 55,67,77-78, 101,115 22:6-8 67 13 22:7-34 9 22:9-34 22:9 41,67 10 22:10-34 22:13 28 28 22:14 32 22:17 22:19-20 67 22:19 41 22:20 47 22:21 28 28 22:30-31 109 22:31 2 3 :1 -2 4 :2 8 13-14, 20,71 9,18,49, 23:1-16 62,71 17,31,49 23:1 23:2 27 23:5 42,62 23:6 56,62 56 23:7 23:8-9 32 23:8 41

122

23:9 23:11 23:12-13 23:13 23:14-15 23:15-16 23:15 23:16 23:44-45 24:1-28 24:2-13 24:3 24:4 24:5 24:7-8 24:7 24:9-10 24:11-13 24:13-18 24:13 24:14-24 24:14 24:15-16 24:16-18 24:19-20 24:19 24:24 24:26 24:28 24:29-33 24:29 24:31 24:33 Judges 1:1-36 1:9-20 2:1-5 2:10 2:20-23 3:1-4 3:1-2 3:11 4

5:31 6:11-16 8:28 21:25 1 Samuel 1:18

41 55,71,115 41 39 39 77 39,62 71 92 9,18,20,49, 72,99,112 62,77 113 39,113 114 113 113-14 113 114 39 39,114 62 113 32 72,99 95,112 32,103 112 56-57 43 9,13-14 26 27 28 20,33,49 31 31 31 27 31 31 45 49 89 49 106 49 27 20 57

7 15 17:26 1737

89 48 83 106

2 Samuel 3:18 7:1 7:8 7:9-11 7:9 7:13 14:17

20 26 49 26 49 106 50 49

1 Kings 8:12-13 8:23 8:53 8:56 11:1-8 11:13 14:18 16:31 20:30-43 21:3

20 57 80 25 25,50 92 26 25-26 92 92 43

2 Kings 17:13 17:37 18:12 19:4 19 :26 19:34 21:8 21:8-15 22-23 23:25-28

20 25-26 53 25 83 83 26 25 26 24,53 26

2 Chronicles 1:3 24:6

25 25

Nehemiah 1:7-8

25

Psalms 18:47 42:3 83:1 84:3 86:2

83 83 49 83 26

COLOSSIANS

97:5 114:7 116:7 116:16 123:2 132:8

84 84 49 26 26 49

Proverbs 1:8 4:4 4:11 13:14 16:33

51 51 51 51 44

Isaiah 8:16 28:12 53

51 49 26

Jeremiah 10:10 18:18 23:26 45:3 49:1-2

83 51 83 49 40

Ezekiel 7:26

51

Daniel 6:21

83

Hosea 2:1 4:6

83 51

Jonah 1:7

44

Micah 4:13 6:15

84 40

Haggai 2:11-13

51

Zechariah 4:14 6:5

84 84

Malachi 3:22

25

Matthew 22:34-40

55

OTHER LITERATURE NASB New American Standard Bible

Index of Scriptures

123

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES 1 and 2 Kings T. R. HOBBS

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC 1 and 2 Kings Copyright © 1989 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11485-7 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Hobbs, T. R. (T. Raymond) 1 and 2 Kings: T. R. Hobbs. p.  cm. Biography: p. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-849-90795-1 1. Bible. O.T. Kings—­Criticism, interpretations, etc. I. Title. II Title: First and Second Kings. III. Series BS1335.2.H62 1989 222’.506—dc2089-16468 Unless otherwise noted, all Scriptures are from the Revised Standard version of the Bible. Copyright © 1952 [2nd edition 1971] by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Quotations indicated WBC are from the author’s own translation in the Word Biblical Commentary, 2 Kings. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Dedicated to the Memory o f Michael Hobbs (1939-1988)

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface 1. Introduction The perspective o f 1 and 2 Kings Sources Structure Historical background 1 and 2 Kings’ place in Scripture 2. Kings The role o f kings in Israel Kings and Torah Royal examples In the final analysis 3. Prophets The nature o f prophecy in Israel Prophets and kings Prophets and politics Prophets and history Elijah and Elisha vii

ix xi 1 1 4 6 7 11 13 13 16 18 21 27 27 30 31 33 34 Contents

4. The People o f G od The nature o f G od's people “Israel” Responsibility People and covenant Worship 5. The Covenanted Land W hat and where? Center and boundaries U se and mismanagement Shrinking limits Land and loss 6. Sin and Judgment The language o f sin Sin, judgment, and law Judgment 7. Hope, and the Anger o f God Context The anger o f G od Hope Restoring fortunes 8. Conclusion Notes Bibliography Index of Scriptures

1, 2 KINGS

41 41 44 45 46 50 53 53 55 56 58 60 65 65 69 74 77 77 78 81 83 89 95 97 101

viii

FOREWORD

Finding the great themes o f the books o f the Bible is essential to the study of God’s Word, and to the preaching and teaching o f its truths. But these themes or ideas are often like precious gems; they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered with some difficulty. The large com­ mentaries are most useful to this discovery process, but they are not usually designed to help the student trace the impor­ tant subjects within a given book o f Scripture. The Word Biblical Themes meet this need by bringing together, within a few pages, all o f what is contained in a biblical volume on the subjects that are thought to be m ost significant to that volume. A companion series to the Word Biblical Commentary, these books seek to distill the theo­ logical essence o f the biblical books as interpreted in the more technical series and to serve it up in ways that will enrich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship o f G od’s people The Books o f Kings narrate that exciting and important period o f Israel’s history when kings and prophets walked ix

Foreword

the land. God was at work through them-—sometimes, in spite o f them. In this volume, Professor T. R. Hobbs has caught the heart o f the writers’ insights and allows us to share that vision and feel those convictions. This volume is sent forth in the hope that it will con­ tribute to the vitality o f G od’s people, renewed by the Word and the Spirit and ever in need of renewal. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky

1, 2 KINGS

Joh n D . W. W atts O ld Testam ent E ditor W ord B ib lic a l C o m m en tary

x

PREFACE

The books o f 1 and 2 Kings comprise a masterful state­ ment about the history o f G od with his people at a very important time in that history. From the end o f the eleventh century B.C. to the early part o f the sixth century B.C ., Israel experimented with having a monarchy. These books cover a period slightly shorter than this. Commentaries on the books o f Kings (see, for example, W BC 12 and 13*) provide for a close and careful exami­ nation o f the text, the language, the variant readings, the historical background, and the final construction o f the narrative. That work is invaluable, and any serious student o f this part o f the O ld Testament needs to wrestle with the same problem s and issues with which the com­ mentaries deal. However, there is also great value in stepping back to ex­ amine the full canvas, and to sketch in broad strokes some of the major themes which emerge from a study o f the books. * word Biblical Commentary, Volumes 12 and 13.

xi

Preface

Not only is this o f great value, but it is also a welcome task, and I am grateful to the O ld Testament Editor o f the Word Biblical Commentary, Dr. John D. W. Watts, for the invita­ tion to tackle it In such a task one must always be wary o f the danger of systematizing a work which was written in an ordered and disciplined, but unsystematic form. That is, the themes which I have chosen to expound in this volume are themes which I think are o f value, and I think they are o f value because they impress me as such when I read the text Such a thematic approach is a perfectly sound method o f biblical study— as long as one is aware o f what one is doing. The danger is, o f course, in supposing that such themes are all that can be said about the rich narrative o f 1 and 2 Kings. The narrative under discussion is a well-crafted one which rewards the readers each time they come to it seek­ ing insight and understanding. It is a story o f faithfulness and apostasy, o f courage and cowardice, o f remarkable wis­ dom and equally remarkable stupidity. Like all good stories it has its heroes and villains, but also like all good stories it often surprises the reader with the image reflected from its pages as if from a mirror. That is the genius o f these books. That is also the way these books function as the Word o f God. Like David listening to the story told by the outraged Nathan, we all too often fail to recognize our own reflec­ tion and we condemn too easily the faults and sins o f oth­ ers— faults and sins that we ourselves could rightly own. It is my hope that the readers o f this small volume will be encouraged by its pages to read again the books it seeks to expound. N o writer on the books o f Kings can be unaware o f the contribution made to his or her understanding o f the short, but effective, work o f Jacques Ellul, The Politics of God and the Politics of M an.1 Ellul concentrated on 2 Kings, and brought to bear on the book his understanding o f politics 1, 2 KINGS

xii

and theology. He developed an approach quite different from the one we will take. Ellul chose to concentrate on various characters and has provided a very valuable and stimulating study which is to be recommended. A number o f people have encouraged and assisted me in the writing o f this study, and deserve my thanks. This book was completed during the first part o f a sabbatical leave, and I would like to thank the principal o f McMaster Divinity College, Dr. Melvyn Hillmer, as well as the senate and board o f trustees for providing the opportunity to concentrate on writing for an extended period o f time. My colleague, Dr. Stuart Frayne, Hurlburt Professor o f Preaching at Mc­ Master Divinity College, read the completed manuscript and from his wisdom, experience, and common sense made nu­ merous suggestions for improvement For this act o f kind­ ness I am very grateful. Any errors and clumsiness o f style that remain are entirely my responsibility. Two items o f information are in order concerning cer­ tain abbreviations used in this volume: (1) References in the text which refer to the companion volumes in the Word Biblical Commentary are abbreviated, e.g., W BC 12:322, indicating a reference to Volume 12, p. 322. Volume 12 is 1 Kings in the Word Biblical Commentary, and Volume 13 is 2 Kings. (2) In some instances, verse numbers in the Hebrew Bible differ from those in English versions. W hen such a reference is cited, the Hebrew enumeration will be given first, followed by the English verse number(s) in brackets. In the early stages o f the writing o f this book my brother, Michael Hobbs, died of cancer. I loved him and will miss him, and to his fond memory this book is dedicated. T. R. Hobbs McMaster University

xiii

Preface

1

INTRODUCTION

The perspective of 1 an d 2 K in gs The division between 1 and 2 Kings is quite artificial and occurred relatively late in the books' history. The material from the first chapter o f 1 Kings to the last o f 2 Kings should be treated as one literary u n it A s we shall see, it is a composition using information from many sources, but in its final form it is a unity. In Jewish tradition, this part o f what Christians know as the O ld Testament has been desig­ nated part o f the “Former Prophets," and m odem critical scholarship has seen Kings as part o f the “deuteronomistic history." W hat do these terms mean? W hat relationship do these books, which are usually seen as “history,” have to the prophets? Further, what do 1 and 2 Kings have to do with the book o f Deuteronomy? First, it will be helpful to note the differences between 1 and 2 Kings, and those parts o f the books o f Chronicles which cover the same period o f Israelite and Judaic history. The books o f Chronicles are concerned with different

1

Introduction

aspects o f the same history—the origin and development o f religious ritual and religious personnel in that history. For example, a comparison o f the two accounts o f the reform o f Josiah (2 Kgs 22,23; 2 Chr 34,35) shows that the Chronicles account pays far more attention to the role o f the priests in the reform, and the practice o f the Passover, which Josiah reinstated in Jerusalem. Further, the reign and reform o f Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18-20; 2 Chr 29-32) is treated in a similar fashion by the chronicler. Such comparisons clearly show the emphasis o f the chronicler, but what o f the writer o f l and 2 Kings? It is important to note what the chronicler omits in his retelling o f the accounts o f 1 and 2 Kings, which he probably had before him when he wrote. Nothing is found in Chroni­ cles o f the activities o f the great prophets o f Israel N o men­ tion is made o f the role o f Isaiah in the reign o f Hezekiah. And, most important o f all, nothing o f the activities o f the great prophets Elijah and Elisha is found in Chronicles. This omission throws into sharp focus their presence in such a large part o f 1 and 2 Kings. So, a major difference between the two accounts is that the writer o f 1 and 2 Kings includes much more material about the prophets in his history. But we can say more. Beyond the stories about prophets, the writer o f 1 and 2 Kings tends to look at the history he is writing from the prophetic point of view. Prominent in his scheme o f things is the Word o f God, uttered by the prophet It often determines the history that follows. The same con­ cern for correct worship o f God, for proper treatment o f society’s marginalized persons, that is found in the poetry o f the prophets is also found in 1 and 2 Kings. This double emphasis— on the stories about prophets on the one hand, and the historic role o f the prophets on the other— provides 1 and 2 Kings with a distinct prophetic flavor. But what does Kings have to do with Deuteronomy? After all, that is surely the source of the term deuteronomistic. The 1, 2 KINGS

2

same material designated “Former Prophets” (Joshua through 2 Kings) in Jewish tradition is called deuteronomistic history (often Dtr for short) for reasons o f literary style and presenta­ tion. Literary style is, o f course, often a difficult thing to detect, but it is not impossible. The book o f Deuteronomy, for example, has long been regarded as distinct from the rest o f the Pentateuch because o f its marked style. It tends to be pedantic and to have a Hebrew dialect which can be called crude. Its sentences are relatively short and there is a tend­ ency to use the same words, or clusters o f words, over and over again. (The reader is referred to the works o f Driver and Weinfeld for several examples o f the style.)1 In addition to this, the book o f Deuteronomy is presented as one long speech of Moses. Unlike the other books of the Pentateuch, action is kept to a minimum. Instead, ideas are presented, usually in a homiletic or didactic manner. In Deuteronomy, Moses persuades, cajoles, threatens, and en­ courages with the spoken word. In the deuteronomistic his­ tory as a whole, and in 1 and 2 Kings in particular, speeches, spoken prayers, or editorial comments accomplish the same purpose. Further, it is in these speeches— e.g., Joshua’s at Shechem (Josh 23, 24) or Samuel’s at Mizpah (1 Sam 8), or prayers (e.g., Solomon’s at the dedication o f the temple, 1 Kgs 8), or prophetic comments (2 Sam 7; 1 Kgs 18), or other im­ portant comments (1 Kgs 4; 9)—that the deuteronomistic ten­ dencies o f the history become clear. But beyond this, when Israel and Judah are seen going into exile, the evaluation o f the history at that point bears remark­ able similarity to the judgments found in the book of Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy 4 and 28 anticipate the apostasy, judgment, and exile o f the people. And the reforms carried out by Josiah (2 Kgs 22, 23) have long been recognized as dependent upon the standards set down in Deuteronomy. W hat does this tell us about the author o f 1 and 2 Kings (and indeed o f the whole deuteronomistic history)? He is a 3

Introduction

“deuteronomist” insofar as he sees in the book o f Deuteron­ omy the standards which the people o f Israel and Judah must maintain in their public and religious lives in order to be called the people o f God, and to remain bound to him in covenant This does not mean, o f course, that the other books o f the Pentateuch are unimportant, any more than the choice o f one particular Christian theologian over another as one’s favorite, means that the others are o f no value. It was simply the author’s decision that the message o f Deuteronomy, exemplified in the history o f the people, needed to be heard again. Sources The writer did not just sit down and write a story. He chose instead to compile a cohesive narrative o f the history o f his people, which would demonstrate the validity o f the principles set out in the book o f Deuteronomy. To be true to the past he needed to rely on known contemporary under­ standings o f the past, and to be true to his overall task he needed to offer his readers a narrative worth reading. To accomplish the first part o f this task he used many extant literary sources—like any good historian— and also tradi­ tions about the p ast It will be helpful for an tinderstanding o f the work to mention some o f these sources. Undoubtedly our writer was dependent upon written records from archival sources. He was writing during the Exile (ca. 500 B.C .). To give some perspective to the material he is dealing with, he was removed one hundred years from Josiah, two hundred years from Hezekiah, three hundred years from Elijah and Elisha, and four hundred from the reign o f Solomon. A s in m ost ancient Near Eastern central­ ized bureaucratic administrations, records were kept in Israel and Judah, and must have been used for the kind o f historical narrative we find in 1 and 2 Kings. These records 1, 2 KINGS

4

would include incidents from the reigns o f former kings, matters o f foreign policy, records from the original building and subsequent repairs o f the temple. The beginning of 1 Kings (chs 1,2) is seen by many scholars as the conclusion to the “Throne Succession Story” o f King David’s reign. It has also been argued that at times the writer lapses into a detectable archival style, thus betraying the source o f his information. Be that as it may, the narrative o f 1 and 2 Kings is no haphazard or fanciful creation, but is in part a careful compilation from a variety o f official sources. The writer’s familiarity with the prophetic tradition shows he also had access to the stories about the prophets. The precise relationship between the account o f Hezekiah’s reign in 2 Kings 18-20 and the account o f the same events in Isaiah 36-38 is difficult to determine, but our writer was fully aware o f the role o f this major prophet in these critical events in Judah’s history. He was familiar enough, too, with those prophetic circles that had preserved the stories o f the deeds o f the two great prophets Elijah and Elisha. These stories had been preserved and were undoubtedly retold as inspiration to others who followed in their steps, so that by the time o f the prophet Amos (ca. 750 B.C.) there was already a consciousness o f stand' ing in the tradition o f “[Yahweh’s] servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7). Alongside the stories o f these major figures are brief anec­ dotes o f the activities o f other prophets—Ahijah of Shiloh (1 Kgs 11:29-39), the anonymous prophet from Judah (1 Kgs 13), Jonah ben Amittai (2 Kgs 14:25)—and the overall impression is o f a story unfolding according to the Word of God through the prophets. Other material o f a nonarchival nature, such as the tradition o f Solomon’s gift o f wisdom (1 Kgs 3) and the visit o f the Queen o f Sheba (1 Kgs 10), was also used. The matter o f the unity o f the books o f 1 and 2 Kings is vigorously debated among scholars, and centers around the 5

Introduction

so-called double redaction o f the deuteronomistic history. This is the theory that there was an original deuteronomistic history written during the reign o f Josiah, and that this ver­ sion was edited and expanded during the period of the Exile. The purpose o f the new edition was to take account of the events that followed the death of Josiah. Readers of DeVries’s commentary on 1 Kings (WBC 12:lii) will note that he allows for a considerable number o f “postdeuteronomistic addi­ tions” to the text o f 1 Kings, which included “instructional” and “ideological” material. In my work on 2 Kings (WBC 13:xxii-xxv), I found that the number o f such additions was minimal and unimportant My position then, as now, is that the arguments for an earlier edition o f the history written during the reign o f Josiah, have not been persuasive. Such differences in matters o f scholarly opinion will per­ sist Ancient books were not protected by copyright or any­ thing like it, and in some cases there is strong evidence for additions being made to a biblical book. An example o f this is Jeremiah 52, which is almost an exact copy o f 2 Kings 24:18-25:30, and which comes after the statement “Thus af r are the words o f Jeremiah” (Jer 51:64). This should not be interpreted in a negative way. The fact that a document is reinterpreted by later generations o f readers testifies to the power o f the work and o f its message.

Structure Like style, structure is sometimes a subjective matter, and what one interpreter sees as structure, another will n o t Structure is often something which we impose on a text to help us in our reading o f it Ancient literature is not always easy to read. Its literary conventions are not those with which the twentieth-century reader is familiar. The tenden­ cies in Hebrew narrative to switch subjects arbitrarily, to 1, 2 KINGS

6

avoid descriptive passages, and to use repetition can be con' fusing, so it is helpful if the reader can put the narrative into some kind o f recognizable framework. However, in such an exercise, we must always bear in mind that this framework is what the reader sees, not necessarily what the writer con­ sciously intended. The opening chapters of 2 Kings continue the story o f the prophetic presence in Israel with the depiction o f Elijah’s de­ parture and the succession of Elisha. The chapters are in the form of what some interpreters call an “inversion,” or, to use the more technical phrase, an extended chiasmus. This is a device in which ideas, words, and themes are repeated in reverse order and in a different setting. It is the opinion of some that the whole of 1 and 2 Kings is constructed in this way; that there is a progression from Solomon, through the division o f the kingdom and the local wars, through the reigns of Omri and Ahab, and into the activities o f the great prophets Elijah and Elisha. Here a turning point comes in the narrative and previous events are now mirrored, as the for­ tunes o f Israel and Judah are reversed and the steps are re­ traced though the reigns of Hezekiah and Josiah until the land is lost and the grandeur of Solomon’s reign and the size o f his territory are nothing but a memory. There is value in this hypothesis, and since we are attempting to sketch the large picture rather than the small details, it might be helpful for the reader to bear this pattern in mind H istorical background The historical background o f a book such as 1 or 2 Kings is important as an aid to tinderstanding. It does not tell us everything we need to know about an author, but it does help fill in some o f the necessary detail. Here we make a distinction between the writer’s own historical background

7

Introduction

T h e M onarchy in Israel/Ju d ah b .c

E gypt

XXII Dyn 930 Shishak (925) 920 910

Judah

Israel

A ram

Mesopotamia

Solomon (960-927) Rehoboam (926-910) Abijah (909-907) Asa (906-878)

900 890

Jeroboam (927-906)

Nadab (905-904) Baasha (903-882) Ben Hadad I Elah (881-880)

Zimri

880 Jehoshaphat (877-853) 870

Omri (879-869) Ben Hadad II Ahab (868-854)

860

850 840

830

Qarqar (853) Jehoram (852-841) Ahaziah (840) Athaliah (839-833) Joash (832-803)

820 810 Amaziah (802-786) 800 790 Uzziah (785-760) 780 770 760

Jotham (759-744)

Shalmaneser III

Ahaziah (853-852) Jehoram Hazael Jehu (839-822)

Jehoahaz (821-805) Jehoash (804-789) Jeroboam (788-748)

Adad Nirari III

B..C .E G Y P T JU D A H IS R lM O 750X ID Y N

(743-728)

Zechariah (747) Shallum (747) Menahem A h az (746-735)

740

Tiglath-pileser

Rezin

P ek ah i(735-734) (734-731) Hoshea (730-722)

730 Hezekiah (727-699

086

Sargon II

Fall of Sam aria (722)

720 710T irh ak 700

Shalmaneser V

Sennacherib (?)

Manasseh (698-644)

690

Esarhaddon Asshurbanipal Amon Josiah (641-610) Necho 600

Jehoahaz (609) Jehoiakim (608-598) Jehoiachin (598) Zedekiah (598-586)

Nebuchadrezzar

590 F all of Jerusalem

570 these dates are approximate and based on the newly developed chronological scheme of J. H. Hayes and P. K. Hooker in A New Chronology for the Kings o f Israel and Judah.2 In the above chart, only those foreign rulers who threatened Israel and Judah with invasion are listed. The arrows show the origins and approximate times of invasion of, or attacks upon, Judah and Israel during the time of the monarchy.

and the background o f the events he describes. In the first case, it is clear that the books were completed during the Exile o f Judah in Babylon. The last events described in Kings provide us with the necessary clue for this. Jerusalem had been sacked twice in just over a decade, during the reign o f Jehoiakim (597 B.C.) and again during the reign o f his succes­ sor, Zedekiah (586 B.C.). The royal family had been taken into exile with the leading citizens o f the land; and all that was important to Judah—temple, king, land—had been lo st The writer, who must have experienced these last events, tries to make sense o f this tragedy in terms o f the religious traditions o f his people, which included the Ex­ odus, the Law-giving at Sinai, and the covenant. A s Robert Polzin has expressed it It is as though the Deuteronomist is telling us in Deuteronomy, “Here is what G od has prophesied con­ cerning Israel,” but in Joshua-2 Kings, “This is how God’s word has been exactly fulfilled in Israel’s history from the settlement to the destruction o f Jerusalem and the Exile.”3 This story begins with the close o f the reign o f David (1 Kgs 1,2). W hat follows is a history o f the monarchy in Israel and Judah. It is a history o f great promise under Solomon, the wise temple-builder and architect o f a powerful adminis­ trative empire. But it is also a story o f a promise squandered, as ideals are lo st Both commentaries provide detailed analy­ ses o f questions o f history as well as a chronology o f the period from Solomon (ca. 960 B.C.) to the close o f the mon­ archy (586 B.C .), so there is no need to repeat the details here. Instead, the chart on pages 8-9 provides a general guide to the fortunes o f Israel and Judah during this period. The arrows indicate periods and direction o f political and mili­ tary pressure 1, 2 KINGS

10

1 an d 2 K ings' place in Scripture The books o f 1 and 2 Kings stand in their own right as a major part o f the deuteronomistic history. In fact, they form the climactic ending to the whole story o f G od’s history with his people up to the time o f writing. Beyond this, the books also form a source o f information for the later work o f the writer o f 1 and 2 Chronicles. Undoubtedly, the tradition o f Solomon’s wisdom and the achievements o f the courtiers o f Hezekiah have influenced the formation o f the book of Proverbs (Prov 25:1), as well as other parts o f the Wisdom Tradition. Within the context o f the prophetic tradition and the literature which emerged from it, found now in what is known as the “Latter Proph­ ets” (Isaiah through Malachi), these books provide a series o f historical examples o f the force o f the prophetic word. One can imagine as one listens to the preaching o f Amos or Hosea, Jeremiah or Isaiah, that standing in the shadows nodding approval are the ghosts o f Elijah and Elisha. The same concerns for the less fortunate, for moral responsibil­ ity o f leaders, and for the proper understanding o f history as G od’s history, are present throughout the prophetic tradi­ tion. Indeed, the figure o f Elijah, like that o f Moses, enters into the hopes o f that tradition as the coming kingdom o f G od is anticipated (Mal 3:24 [4:5]). In the eschatological hopes o f sections o f Judaism in the period we know as the “intertestamental period,” both Eli­ jah and M oses continue their roles as harbingers o f the coming kingdom. But for us it is the influence o f 1 and 2 Kings on the New Testament that is m ost im portant In the New Testam ent some o f the same interests we find in the O ld Testament are present while others have tindergone some transformation. One might expect Jesus, who was raised as a first-century Jew, to use in his teachings illustrations from the Hebrew Scriptures, and he does— 11

Introduction

but from a different perspective. For example, Solomon, rather than being seen as an example o f wisdom, is used by Jesus as an example o f ostentation (Matt 6:29). In the Gospels, Jesus is portrayed as patterning much o f his ministry on that o f the prophets, particularly the work of Elijah and Elisha. In the transfiguration o f Jesus, as recorded in the opening verses o f Mark 9, Jesus is accompa­ nied by two prophetic giants, Moses and Elijah. He acknowl­ edges openly the role o f Elijah played by John the Baptist (Matt 11:13; Mark 9:11-13). H is concern for widows (Luke 7:11—17), for Gentiles (Mark 7:24-30), and for the hungry (Mark 6:30-44) reflects the concerns o f both Elijah and Elisha. That these two prophets influenced his understand­ ing of his ministry is seen most clearly in Luke 4:24-27, in which he holds them up as models o f concern. The Letter to the Hebrews sums up the impact o f the narratives o f Elijah and Elisha, among others, when it lists those past heroes o f the faith who . . . through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced jus­ tice, received promises, . . . escaped the edge o f the sword, won strength out o f weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. Women received their dead by resurrection. (Heb 11:33-34)

1, 2 KINGS

12

2

KINGS

The role of kings in Israel Much o f the narrative o f Kings is taken up with stories o f varying lengths about the kings o f the united Israel and the kings o f the separate nations o f Israel and Judah. But to understand the richness o f this narrative we need to step back a little into the early history o f the monarchy. The historical beginnings of kingship in Israel are given to uS earlier in the deuteronomistic history, in 1 Samuel 1-12, with its story o f the transition and transformation o f Israel from a tribal society to a monarchy. This transition was adifficult one because it meant some major changes for Israel in her political and social structures and in her understanding o f her relationship with God. The difficulties, both anticipated and experienced, are found mirrored in Samuel’s reaction to the original request by the elders for a king. The reaction is at first negative and kingship is judged as a rejection o f God’s king' ship (1 Sam 8:6-9). But eventually Samuel acquiesces to the move and at the command o f God grants the elders’ request 13

Kings

The story o f the request for a king, especially in 1 Samuel 8-12, has been the subject of much scholarly debate, and most of the debate has centered around the question o f a double view o f kingship in these chapters. Many believe that this double view, with a positive and negative element, re­ flects the original literary sources used by the deuteronomist, one with a positive outlook on monarchy, and one with a negative one. This is entirely possible. The subsequent his­ tory o f the monarchy shows that both attitudes were present throughout. Some prophets, for example Isaiah, accepted the institution o f kingship and worked within its framework (Isa 7:1-17; 11:1-16), whereas others, such as Hosea, found the institution a hindrance to the people’s understanding of God (Hos 5:1; 7:7; 8:4). It is also important, however, to see what the final effect o f this narrative is. It is not a clumsy collection o f sources with conflicting viewpoints, but a clever portrayal o f the opposing reactions to kingship which would have evolved at the time. Such a move would not necessarily have met with universal approval since so many had so much to lose as well as gain. The narrative o f the monarchy’s founding reflects the ambivalence which greeted it. Forms and models for kingship were available through­ out the ancient Near East at this time, and the elders cer­ tainly wished to take advantage o f what those forms had to offer by way o f a style o f ruling. After all, they wanted a king “like all the nations” (1 Sam 8:5). A t the same time, each nation’s version o f kingship was unique to that nation. And while comparisons are helpful, to complete the picture we also need to look at the distinctive features o f Israelite kingship. W hat kingship offered Israel was on the one hand "more taxes, military conscription, arbitrary police, the impossibil­ ity o f limiting power,”1 and even the danger o f the “repaganization o f Israel.”2 And it is clear that there are dangers 1, 2 KINGS

14

in the move, as Samuel so clearly points out (1 Sam 8:10-14). But, on the other hand, the introduction o f kingship also offered new opportunities for worship and understanding. Monarchy was rationalized for two very good reasons. First, there was a serious military threat (the Philistines) to the very life o f Israel. Second, the old regime represented by Samuel’s sons was corrupt and not up to dealing with the new challenge. In practical terms, monarchy meant a centralization o f power in one person and his administration. This, it seems, was the price which the elders were willing to pay for secu­ rity and safety (1 Sam 8:19-22). Connected to this central­ ization o f power was the development o f a symbolic center, Jerusalem, in which a new theology was bom . The symbols included the temple, the palace, and the trappings o f monar­ chy, together with the ideological support known as the “David-Zion traditions.” These are the religious ideas which became associated with the new institution. They provide a new focus for the notions o f G od’s faithfulness, election o f Israel, and protec­ tion o f his people (e.g., Ps 2). They also offer support for the new institution and give it validity. These traditions find their clearest form in the covenant with David, which has its first exposition in 2 Samuel 7, but is expanded and restated in Psalms 89, 110, and 132, among others. The covenant captures the essence o f the importance o f the new institu­ tion. David (and his successors) are chosen by G od as a symbol o f his faithfulness. David is promised (not uncondi­ tionally) a continuing dynasty in Jerusalem. But this new opportunity also presents a new challenge. The deuteronomist’s history o f the period o f the judges is hardly a flattering one, and already an early experiment with kingship had failed (Judg 8:22-9:57). Stability had come with Samuel, but cannot continue. The unspoken question is, can the new institution o f monarchy preserve and perpetuate the 15

Kings

old covenant values? Will the difference between authority and despotism be maintained? Will kingship succeed?

Kings an d Torah O ne o f the distinguishing features o f Israelite kingship is its relationship to the Torah (lit: “instruction.” This term captures the broader concept much better than the more common translation, “Law.”) Ancient Near Eastern nations such as the Hittites, the peoples o f Mesopotamia, all had “law-codes” dealing with the daily life o f their citizens— regulating matters o f property, relationships, management o f resources, and sexual access. But whereas these other law-codes have come down to us with the names o f kings attached— the Lipit-Ishtar Code, the Hammurabi Code, the Laws o f Eshnunna— the Torah o f Israel is always “the Torah o f M oses.” Its originator was not a king, but one who spoke with G od face to face, and who is remembered not as a ruler, but rather as a prophet (Deut 18:18). This places the Israelite king’s relationship to the Torah and to G od on an entirely different footing than that o f the kings o f neigh­ boring nations. He is not the proclaimer o f the Torah, but is him self under its rule. A s one scholar has put it, “the king’s power was not unrestrained and was repeatedly checked by the terms o f G od’s covenant with his people. Deuteronomy, which acts as a prologue to the deuteronomistic history, anticipates this in chapters 16-18, particu­ larly in Deuteronomy 17:14-20 with the so-called Torah o f the king. But again, this is not a torah from the king, but a torah which regulates the behavior o f the king. It is inter­ esting to note in 1 Samuel 8:11 that Samuel describes the possible behavior o f a despotic king as “the mishpat o f the king.” This is the word which elsewhere in the Old Testa­ ment is often translated “judgm ent” There might be a touch 1, 2 KINGS

16

o f irony here, almost as if Samuel is saying, “This is how a king will be judged.” With this in mind, it seems plausible that the “rights and duties o f the kingship” (1 Sam 10:25) which Samuel gave to the people have something to do with this “royal torah.” In 2 Kings 11:12, when the Davidic monarchy was restored after a brief interval, Jehoash is given “testimonies” at his coronation. This is a legal term, and possibly refers to the same thing. Another aspect o f the monarchy in Israel, at least in the case o f David (2 Sam 5:1-5), Reboboam (1 Kgs 12:1-20), and the restored Jehoash (2 Kgs 11:4), is that the reign o f a king is negotiated with the elders and representatives o f the people. In 2 Kings 11:14, these negotiations are called a “covenant,” and covenants have stipulations or regulations governing them. It is clear that there are some limits on the monarchy in Israel, and recently some scholars have argued that Deu­ teronomy 16-18 forms a kind o f constitution o f the monar­ chy, that is, the conditions under which a king would be allowed. To be noted is that his power is not absolute. It is to be shared by judges, priests, and prophets. The royal Torah in Deuteronomy 17:14-20 and Samuel’s exposition o f it in 1 Samuel 8:10-18 have reminded many interpreters of Solomon, but the image here is o f any king in Israel, or in the ancient Near East in general. Here is de­ scribed the potential for abuse and the costs o f the new sys­ tem. Deuteronomy 17:14-20 expressly prohibits abuse in terms o f self-aggrandizement and too many marriage alliances with foreign nations. The counter to abuse is the copy of “this torah” which he is to keep before him. In 2 Samuel 7, we find the covenant with David and his successors. The Lord will provide David with a “house” (i.e., dynasty; note the play on words). David and his successors will be corrected and punished if they sin (v 14), yet God’s

17

Kings

faithfulness will remain. More than once in the ongoing his­ tory o f the monarchy these sentiments are repeated in thor­ oughly deuteronomistic language. In 1 Kings 2:1-4 David’s last words to Solomon include the admonition to obey the Torah o f Moses, that the promise o f G od might be fulfilled. In 1 Kings 9:1-9, further exposition is found in God’s re­ sponse to Solomon. Here, not only is the fate o f the monar­ chy in the balance (vv 4,5), but also the possibility of exile of the entire people is raised (vv 6-9). To summarize, the limitations o f kingship in Israel entail the king’s submission to the Torah, exclusive worship o f God, and proper treatment o f the people. Royal exam ples If Polzin’s characterization o f the relationship o f Deu­ teronomy to the deuteronomistic history is correct (see In­ troduction), then the narrative o f 1 and 2 Kings will provide many illustrations o f how this is worked out in the history o f Israel and Judah. However, we should be aware that al­ though Polzin is correct when the entire history is viewed from beginning to end, when the reader begins at 1 Kings 1 there is a slightly different perspective. Given what we know o f the beginnings o f kingship in Israel, when we begin to read the opening sentences o f 1 Kings we cannot claim the omniscience o f the author, but we are faced instead with the question o f how the ensuing history will expound the principles o f Deuteronomy. The simplest answer is, o f course, by telling a story. But this is a story with its own literary conventions, which are not immediately recognizable to the modem reader. To our eyes the treatment o f the material appears uneven, repetitive, and arbitrary. But, if we take it on its own terms we find it to be a richly textured story, with no small measure o f irony. We also find that on occasion the writer invites us to pause with him 1, 2 KINGS

18

and examine the characters o f the kings in more detail. This practice o f slowing down the pace of a narrative, so that a relatively short incident is given long coverage, is a literary device which some have called “retardation." It is obvious that the writer devotes a lot o f space to some kings and little to others. This does not mean that those given small coverage are any less important, but rather that those on whom he dwells are particularly appropriate for illustrating his main themes. The space devoted to them gives him opportunity to develop their characters by describing the actions they per­ form. Let us look at a selection o f the kings he treats. 1 and 2 Kings begins with the close o f the reign o f David (1 Kgs 1, 2). This section is regarded by many as a “succes­ sion narrative,” an account o f the reasons why Solomon became king after David— after all, he was not the oldest o f David’s sons. The David we encounter here is not the David o f the early days. Instead he is an old and weak man (1 Kgs 1:1). He is ignorant o f the affairs o f his court (1 Kgs 1:11), and he is manipulated by both Nathan and Bathsheba (1 Kgs 1:12-27). Finally he takes some measure o f control (1 Kgs 1:28— 37), and offers his charge to Solomon (1 Kgs 2:1-9) before he dies. But the main actors in these opening chap­ ters are Nathan, Bathsheba, and Solomon. In fact, it is to the success o f Solomon that these chapters direct us. Solomon has more space devoted to him in 1 and 2 Kings than any other king except David, and the reasons for this are several. First, because of all he accomplished it is likely that there were more records from the reign o f Solomon than any subsequent king. Second, in the writer’s scheme o f things the succession o f Solomon was very important for showing in no uncertain terms the fulfillment of the promise o f 2 Samuel 7. Third, the ultimate story of Solomon provided a perfect illus­ tration o f the writer’s theological viewpoint The lesson of Solomon is one which was emphasized very early in the negotiations for monarchy. Solomon did indeed 19

Kings

accomplish a great deal. He won a civil war and overcame a challenge to his succession (1 Kgs 1,2). As king, he set out to build the temple in Jerusalem (1 Kgs 6) and when that was completed he then built a large palace complex for his court (1 Kgs 7). He gained wisdom (1 Kgs 3), developed trade throughout his empire, and became known throughout the world for his wealth and wisdom (1 Kgs 4,10). But this narra­ tive from 1 Kings 1-10 is almost a setup for the fall which followed. A simple but vital principle was given early in the history o f kingship, when Samuel was tempted to anoint the most physically impressive o f Jesse’s sons. G od said, “D o not look on his appearance or on the height o f his stature, because I have rejected him; for the Lord sees not as man sees; man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the h eart” (1 Sam 16:7) It is the heart, the will o f Solomon which is turned away to other gods by the wives he married for political reasons (1 Kgs 11:4). He died, not famous, or universally known, but as an apostate. His kingdom is threatened, and the dark side of the covenant promise, the side o f judgment now reveals itself. In the stories o f Rehoboam and Jeroboam, Solomon’s suc­ cessors, it is this theme which is illustrated. Rehoboam wrecked the negotiations for the royal covenant with Israel by listening to the “young men” who spumed the advice o f the elders o f Israel and led the king to abuse his people with harsh slave labor (1 Kgs 12). Jeroboam, like all headstrong revolutionaries, was motivated initially by the welfare o f his people, but eventually led them into deeper and deeper apostasy (1 Kgs 12,13). By the time o f Omri and Ahab, the rift between the repre­ sentatives o f God and the will of the king had become deep. In all the confrontations between the house of Omri and the prophet o f the Lord, the king broke the covenant law (1 Kgs 1, 2 KINGS

20

21:1—15) and despised the word of God given by the prophet (1 Kgs 22:5-28), only to finally fell victim to judgment (1 Kgs 22:29-36). The same pattern is echoed later by the Judean Jehoiakim in his confrontations with the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 36). Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18-20), like Solomon, began well. He in­ troduced worship reforms in Jerusalem, and rid the city of many practices o f Canaanite worship. But he faltered when Sennacherib invaded (2 Kgs 19:1-7), and consequently be­ came sick with a symbolic skin disease (2 Kgs 20:1-11). He also allowed a potential enemy a foretaste o f the temple and palace treasures when he showed them off to Babylonian visi­ tors (2 Kgs 20:12-19). Finally, there is Josiah (2 Kgs 22:1-23:30) who, like Hezekiah, did so well with his reforms, and his rebellion against Assyria. O f Josiah it is said that he was unequaled in virtue— yet he died a tragic and untimely death at Megiddo (2 Kgs 23:28-30). Each o f these portraits is done with skill and subtlety, and each serves as an illustration o f the growing apostasy o f the people o f Israel and Judah, led by their kings. Ellul is correct in stating that such presentations are not for imitation. But neither are they simply for reading. They are, rather, for meditation because in each o f these kings is found an atti­ tude o f the human heart.

In the fin a l an alysis Throughout Kings the writer repeats a formula o f evalua­ tion, either “he did evil in the eyes o f the Lord” or “he did what was right in the eyes o f the Lord.” This formula recalls the standards by which these kings were to be evaluated, not human standards but divine ones. It also, incidentally, sets the limits to what we can know o f these kings, because the writer uses only that which illustrates this perspective. 21

Kings

Although the formula is used o f almost every king and sounds almost mechanical, it is, in af c t, used in a subtle way which has important consequences for our theological un­ derstanding o f 1 and 2 Kings. In the first place, all the kings o f the northern nation o f Israel who are evaluated are judged to be apostates. There is one king, Hoshea, who is damned with the feint praise that he is not as bad as his predecessors (2 Kgs 17:2). And there are two, Zimri and Shallum, who are not judged at all (1 Kgs 16:1—13; 2 Kgs 15:13-15), no doubt due to their remarkably short reigns. But the rest are damned. And for each, the fault is that o f following in the sins o f Jeroboam ben Nebat, who at the beginning o f the separate history o f Israel deliberately set her on a course o f apostasy. For Jeroboam, rejection o f the house o f David (1 Kgs 12:16) meant rejection o f David’s G od as well. There is a biblical principle, expounded by the writer o f 1 and 2 Kings, that the sons should not be punished for the sins o f the fathers (2 Kgs 14:6), but this is not the principle at work here. It is one thing for a son or successor to be absolved o f blame for the sin o f a father, but it is quite another thing when the son and his successors deliberately choose to imitate the actions o f the father. Jeroboam was an apostate, and none o f the successive Israelite kings chose to alter this course. Some, like Omri and Ahab, chose to fur­ ther the apostasy and are condemned as being the worst kings ever (1 Kgs 16:25,30-34). This brings them into seri­ ous confrontation with the spokesmen o f God, Elijah and Elisha. The judgment o f the writer o f Kings is that no king in Israel ever attained the ideal. In the words o f another biblical writer, and in another context, “all have sinned and fell short o f the glory o f God” (Rom 3:23). With the nation of Judah, matters are a little more compli­ cated. O f the twenty monarchs after Solomon, including Athaliah the usurper (2 Kgs 11), eight are accounted as good. They are Asa (1 Kgs 15:14), Jehoshaphat (1 Kgs 22:43), Jehoash 1, 2 KINGS

22

(2 Kgs 12:2), Amaziah, with qualifications 2 Kgs 14:3,4), Azariah (2 Kgs 15:3), Jotham (2 Kgs 15:34), Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:3), and Josiah (2 Kgs 22:2). The standard o f behav­ ior is set by David, whose heart was faithful to God. Some, like Hezekiah and especially Josiah, were very faithful. O f the twelve remaining, Athaliah is not evaluated, probably because she was not a “legitimate” monarch o f the southern kingdom. Note that there is no formal introduction or dis­ missal o f her reign. The eleven left are all judged as apostate. They either follow the ways o f Rehoboam, or imitate the kings o f Israel. Six are compared to Manasseh, either directly or by implication. The strongest condemnation o f all is re­ served for Manasseh himself. O f him it is said that he “behaved . . . according to the disgusting actions o f the nations whom Yahweh had driven out before the Israelites.” (2 Kgs 21:2 W BC). The accusation is telling on two counts. First, it shows that in the author’s mind, the standard of behavior is the deuteronomic law (see Deut 18:9—14). And, second, it is the most damning o f all accusations because it shows that Manasseh acted as though the giving o f the land — a promise o f the Exodus and Sinai covenant according to Deuteronomy—had never taken place. He, like Ahab, chose to live “before the covenant.” In Judah, there is a mixture o f obedience and disobedience, o f faithfulness and apostasy. It is tempting to view these judgments o f the deuteronomist’s in a way that makes his theological evaluation o f the two nations, Israel and Judah, sound mechanical. They had sinned, therefore they were punished. But he does not mistreat his sources by forcing them into this rigid scheme. He is aware that the history of a nation is never so neat and tidy. There are aberrations, differences, and ambiguities which must be accommodated. In fact, in his treatment o f the kings o f Israel and Judah, there are surprises. One o f the blessings of keeping the covenant is “length of days,” or long life. Conversely, disobedience leads to being 23

Kings

"cut off.” However, the apostate king Ahab, who is most strongly condemned for his sins, reigned a total o f twenty-two years (1 Kgs 16:29-22:40). Jehu reigned for twenty-eight years (2 Kgs 9:1-10:36), Jeroboam II reigned for forty-one years (2 Kgs 14:23-29), and Manasseh for an impressive fifty-five years (2 Kgs 21:1-18). In af c t, o f the twenty-seven “bad” kings of Israel and Judah, one (Manasseh) reigned for over fifty years, one (Jeroboam II) reigned for over forty years, five reigned for over twenty years, and eight for more than ten years. There seems to be no hard and fast correlation between faithfulness and length o f reign. Nor are material prosperity and territorial expansion restricted to “good” kings either. In af c t, after David and Solomon, the two kingdoms see their greatest expansion (2 Kgs 14:25) during the reigns o f Jeroboam II in the north (a bad king) and his contemporary Uzziah in the south (a good but leprous king). The most significant losses in the south happened during the reigns o f the good kings Hezekiah and Josiah. Another interesting treatment by the author is o f those kings generally regarded as good. They include Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoash, Amaziah (qualified), Azariah, Jotham, Hezekiah, and Josiah— all o f Judah. The fete o f most o f these is anomalous. Asa dies with a disease o f the feet (1 Kgs 15:23) which some believe may have been gout (disfigurement had a strong negative symbolic meaning in the Bible). Jehoash o f Judah was not only a good king, restorer o f the Davidic dynasty, but also a reformer o f the temple. He died prematurely, assassinated by his own peo­ ple in Jerusalem (2 Kgs 12:19-21). Amaziah also was assassi­ nated (2 Kgs 14:17-22). Azariah (Uzziah) died a leper (2 Kgs 15:5). Hezekiah’s kingdom suffered invasion and he him­ self—another great reformer— suffered from skin disease (2 Kgs 20:1-11). Finally, Josiah, the greatest reformer, died 1, 2 KINGS

24

prematurely at the hands o f an invading foreign king (2 Kgs 23:28-30). W hat is the significance then o f the anomalous fates o f the good and bad kings o f Israel and Judah? First, it is clear that the writer offers a much more complex interpretation o f the history than a simplistic “sin and judgment” model. He takes sin seriously, and he takes the judgment o f the Exile seriously; but he interprets the history from a fuller perspec­ tive. O n the one hand are the kings o f Israel and Judah, acting as though they were free, making their own choices (frequently the wrong ones); and on the other hand is God, truly acting as a free agent From the beginning, under the leadership o f her kings, the nation o f Israel as a whole has chosen to live in apostasy and under judgm ent This is estab­ lished very clearly in the record o f the reign o f Jeroboam ben Nebat (1 Kgs 12,13). There are temporary delays o f the judgment and occasional enlargements o f territory and growth in prosperity, but these do not prevent the eventual judgm ent They happen because o f God’s grace and mercy (2 Kgs 13:5,22; 14:25-27). Many o f the kings o f Judah behaved “in the ways o f the kings o f Israel.” Here and in prophetic literature (e.g., Jer 3, 4) the implication is that Judah can therefore expect the same consequences (2 Kgs 17:19). Thus it is that “good” kings can do nothing to halt the inevitable move toward judgment. Their deformities, sicknesses, and untimely deaths cast a long shadow on Judah’s history as well. The delay in judgment for Judah is not due to any human action, but “for my own sake and for the sake o f my servant David” (1 Kgs 11:11-13; 2 Kgs 19:34; 20:5-6). Thus a picture is drawn, as Ellul points out, o f kings and humans acting in seeming independence— yet with each act further enslav­ ing them— and o f G od acting in freedom, bound only by his word and his honor. 25

Kings

3

PROPHETS

The nature of prophecy in Israel Prophets are no strangers to readers o f the O ld Testament In the traditional Jewish reckoning, prophetic material makes up one third o f the Hebrew Bible—the Tanak, a word coined from the initial letters o f the Hebrew words for “Law” (Torah), “Prophets” (Nebi’im), and “Writings” (Kethubim). The prophets appear on its pages as men and women who declared the Word of God for specific human situations. They had a special relationship with God which gave them peculiar insight into the nature o f historical situations (an insight which was often at odds with the generally accepted view of things), and unique understanding o f the nature and will of God. The best way o f conveying the essence of prophecy is to let one of them speak for himself (italics are mine). B u t as fo r m e, I am filled w ith pow er, w ith the Sp irit o f the L o r d , an d w ith justice and m ight,

27

Prophets

to declare to Jacob his transgression and to Israel his sin. (Mic 3:8) The historical origins o f prophecy are obscure, and a vari­ ety o f people in the early days o f Israel’s life in Canaan were called prophets— for example, Deborah and Samuel, who were both otherwise known as judges. Gideon’s call to de­ feat the Midianites (Judg 6) is remarkably similar to the call o f Jeremiah (Jer 1:4-10), but he too was better known as a judge. W hat emerges in the prophetic tradition, as Israel’s history develops, is the consciousness that the prophets have o f standing in a great tradition o f speakers for God, a tradi­ tion that began with the prophet par excellence, Moses. This is especially true in Deuteronomy and the deuteronomistic history. In Deuteronomy 18:18 the perpetuation o f a Mosaic prophetic tradition is promised, and many o f the subsequent prophets follow in Moses’ footsteps. These foot­ steps follow the path o f the covenant between G od and his people. Like Moses, many o f the prophets act as negotiators between the two partners, praying for the people on the one hand, but declaring the Word o f G od without compromise on the other. The covenant involved an exclusive worship o f the God o f Israel who rescued her from Egypt This is a theme which echoes again and again in the literature o f the prophets. Like Elijah, the true prophet is jealous for the Lord. But beyond this, the covenant involved a moral imperative o f mutual car­ ing and support among the people o f God. Each member o f the covenant community was special and was to be cared for by others. Finally, the covenant involved an absolute depend­ ence upon God for help, deliverance, and sustenance. These ideas form the framework from which the prophets operated. Another interesting feature about the prophetic tradition is that it became most vocal during the time o f the monarchy. The prophets became the watchdogs o f the monarchy. This 1, 2 KINGS

28

link between prophet and king became so strong that when the monarchy disappeared during the Exile, Jewish tradition maintained that prophecy also ceased—to be revived again only at the coming o f the Messiah, a point well appreciated by the writer o f Acts (see especially Peter’s speech in Acts 2:14-40). Like Moses, many prophets found themselves to be critics o f the status quo, especially when what passed for the status quo was detrimental to the covenant ideals. It was often the case that this status quo was established and maintained by the king. The prophets’ attitude o f confrontation with established power gave rise to the uncompromising nature of biblical prophecy. Each prophet speaks with the unshakable conviction that the Word o f G od is to be listened to and obeyed. There are no half measures. Two ways are set out, one leading to life, the other to death. The people must choose. To refuse to choose is to opt for death (1 Kgs 18:21). The language o f the biblical prophets is therefore strong and forceful. It is often full o f hyperbole, as the passion o f the prophet for the Word o f G od and the well-being o f the audience takes over. A t times it is almost as though language is inadequate to express what is in the mind o f the prophet. “Fire in the bones” is experienced, but how does one give voice to it? Because o f the nature o f the task the prophets were given, and because o f the nature o f the circumstances into which they were thrust, the prophet’s involvement in the task was absolute. Prophecy allowed for no compromise, and as a result the personal lives o f the prophets were deeply af­ fected. Few were married— and to never marry was unusual in ancient Israel. Many were alone and rejected, and many were persecuted. They lived for the Word o f God, which they received through visions, through dreams, through un­ derstanding and reflection— which they then passed on to the people. They were, in the words o f one o f their number, 29

Prophets

watchmen, burdened with a heavy responsibility, which was not for the weak.

Prophets an d kings Prophets abound in Kings. That faithful friend and advi­ sor to David, the prophet Nathan, was active in the struggle for the succession, and he took part in the anointing o f the new king, Solomon. In 1 Kings 11:11—13 Solomon is ad­ dressed by God, presumably through a prophet, concerning his apostasy. It was by a prophet, Ahijah o f Shiloh, that G od announced to Jeroboam that the kingdom would be split after the death o f Solomon (1 Kgs 11:29-39). W hen the northern nation seceded, and the southern king Rehoboam wanted to force them back into a united kingdom through war, it Was a prophet, Shemaiah, who thwarted this move (1 Kgs 12:22-24). An anonymous “man o f G od” (one o f the terms for a prophet) prophesied against Israel and foretold the rise o f Josiah (1 Kgs 13:1-10). But as that chapter shows, even the prophet himself was subject to the Word o f God; he died because o f disobedience. Ahijah o f Shiloh reappears in 1 Kings 14:2-15. He cannot be tricked by Jeroboam, and he announces the coming demise o f the dynasty o f Jeroboam, and raises the possibility o f a future exile o f Israel Lesser-known prophets appear in the narrative, such as Jehu ben Hananiah who foretold the destruction o f the house o f Baasha (1 Kgs 16:1-4). Even Joshua ben Nun was given prophetic status (1 Kgs 16:34) when Hiel restored Jericho. During the activities o f Elijah, at least one hundred faithful prophets were persecuted by Jezebel (1 Kgs 18:4). From 1 Kings 20:13-15 we learn that one part o f a prophet’s role was advice in warfare. Later in the same chapter (vv 35-43) another anonymous prophet appears before the king on a matter o f foreign policy—how to treat a captured enemy 1, 2 KINGS

30

king. These roles are found again in 1 Kings 22:1-28 as the majority o f court prophets advise in favor o f the campaign against Ramoth Gilead, and find in their midst one dissenting voice (vv 13-23), that of Micaiah ben Imlah. Other prophets appear in the narrative, such as Jonah ben Amittai (2 Kgs 14:25) and Isaiah o f Jerusalem (2 Kgs 19:1— 20:19). Huldah the prophetess (2 Kgs 22:14) advises Josiah on the content and meaning of the book o f Torah found during his repairs o f the temple. Anonymous prophets (2 Kgs 21:1015) condemn the reign of Manasseh for its wickedness and corruption. Finally, when the writer o f 1 and 2 Kings wishes to summarize the moral condition o f the people and their kings, he turns to general prophetic statements which capture his meaning well (2 Kgs 17:13,23; 23:27; 24:2-4). In addition to knowing and using the royal archives, the writer o f Kings must have had access to countless stories of prophets throughout the history o f Israel and Judah which had been preserved by the faithful followers and supporters o f the prophets. Taking these with the stories o f the kings and the political fortunes and misfortunes o f the kings and prophets, our writer weaves an historical narrative which sees things clearly sub specie aeternitatis. It is history, but history interpreted according to the will o f God in that history. It is a powerful exposition o f the statement made by Amos o f Tekoa that “surely the Lord does nothing without revealing his secret to his servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7). Prophets an d politics W hen one surveys the role o f the prophets in 1 and 2 Kings, the question o f the prophets’ relationship to political life inevitably arises. In our minds so much o f what prophets do in these narratives can come under a political label rather than a religious one. But we have to remember that this kind o f distinction between religious and political, or sacred and 31

Prophets

secular, is our distinction, one that would not have been recognized by the ancient Israelite. In the ancient Near East in general, and in ancient Israel and Judah in particular, all o f life was seen as having some connection with religion or religious ideology. The nature o f “politics” for Israel consisted in the acknowledgement o f a group identity: one people (Israel), one G od (Yahweh), and obedience to the covenant instructions which bound them together. It would be impossible, for example, to go through the law-codes o f the O ld Testament and to separate out the “religious” from the “secular.” All law presupposes the existence and identity o f Israel’s God, Yahweh, as the deliverer from Egypt Israel’s identity as a people is to be seen only in relation­ ship to her God. She is the “bride” o f Yahweh (Hos 1-3, Jer 2:1-10), the “son” of Yahweh (Hos 11:1), his “special people,” his “heritage.” Israel does not have an identity apart from God. Therefore, members of this community live their lives in light o f this relationship with God. Nothing—whether it be agriculture, family life, neighborly relations, warfare, or government— can be seen apart from God. Deuteronomy makes this very plain, and this concept is carried into the deuteronomistic history. It is understandable that the prophets’ speaking out (on behalf of God) on matters o f national policy appears political from our point o f view. But every aspect o f Israel’s life was seen by them as being under the judgment of God. Nathan’s involvement in the succession intrigue as the death o f David approached is to be seen not just as political, but also as con­ nected to God’s promise to David in 2 Samuel 7. The involve­ ment o f Ahijah and Shemaiah in the split of the kingdoms is indeed involvement in political activity (1 Kgs ll:29ff; 12:22ff), but it has a religious and moral dimension as well— these events are a judgment o f God on the people. In af c t, all the prophetic pronouncements in 1 and 2 Kings relate to the 1, 2 KINGS

32

political life o f the people, since the political life is the arena in which the ideology (covenant) is to be worked out in prac­ tice. Therefore, apostasy has political as well as religious con­ sequences. A s other prophets were to expound, mistreatment o f one’s own people, especially the poor and marginalized, is not only a social scandal, but a religious sin. Prophets an d history According to the deuteronomistic history, the role o f the prophet is not simply one o f meddling in the political life o f the people. The role o f the prophet is far more important and one might say, awe-inspiring, because the prophet and the Word o f G od he or she utters is at the heart o f the meaning o f history. A s Gerhard von Rad put it: There . . . exists . . . an inter-relationship between the words o f Jahweh and history in the sense that Jahweh’s word, once uttered, reaches its goal under all circumstances in history.1 This is not a magical relationship between word and his­ torical action, nor is it a relationship caused by what von Rad called “the power inherent in” the word. For the deuteronomist, history makes sense only as the fulfillment o f G od’s Word. The history o f Israel and Judah, from the perspective o f the deuteronomist and his contemporaries, had ended in disaster, the Exile. How was this to be understood? Was it the result o f an abandonment by God? O r was there some other purpose to it all? The deuteronomist presents it as the inevitable conclusion to the action o f the Word o f G od in history. One way o f developing this theme was by showing that major events in the life and history o f Israel and Judah were not merely fortuitous, nor the result o f capriciousness on 33

Prophets

the part o f God, but given purpose by the Word o f God. Von Rad has done a great service by listing the eleven “promise-fulfillment” texts in 1 and 2 Kings. Premise 2 Sam 7:13 1 Kgs 11:29-39 1 Kgs 13 1 Kgs 14:6-16 1 Kgs 16:1-4 Josh 6:26 1 Kgs 22:17 1 Kgs 21:21-23 2 Kgs 1:6 2 Kgs 21:10-15 2 Kgs 22:15-20

Fulfillment 1 Kgs 8:20 1 Kgs 12:15b 2 Kgs 23:16-18 1 Kgs 15:29 1 Kgs 16:12 1 Kgs 16:34 1 Kgs 22:35-40 1 Kgs 21:27-29 2 Kgs 1:17 2 Kgs 24:2 2 Kgs 23:302

The history o f Israel and Judah are not so much controlled as given meaning, and that meaning comes by the Word o f God given through the prophets. A s we have seen, there is freedom for men and women to act within this history, but ulti­ mately, there is no escape from moral responsibility. God’s Word continually interrupts human activity to evaluate and to pass judgment Nowhere is this more clear in 1 and 2 Kings than in the stories associated with the personalities and ac­ tions o f the two great prophets Elijah and Elisha. E lijah an d Elisha Elijah and Elisha deserve separate treatment Almost onethird o f the material in 1 and 2 Kings is devoted to their activities. They step onto the stage o f Israelite history at a time o f crisis. Omri had established a firm hold on the north­ ern kingdom, and his son Ahab consolidated that hold in a way similar to Solomon’s—by an extensive building program 1, 2 KINGS

34

and by alliances with neighboring countries. Ahab married Jezebel, daughter o f the king o f Tyre and, by all accounts, became controlled by this woman o f very strong character. For Israel’s worship o f Yahweh, the alliance between Ahab and Jezebel was a disaster. Baalism was established throughout the country, and open conflict broke out between the agents o f Jezebel and the worshipers o f Yahweh. Ahab acquiesced in this policy, and the worship o f Yahweh—the G od who had rescued Israel from Egypt—was in danger o f extinc­ tion. It is into this setting that Elijah comes. 1 Kings 17-2 Kings 2 is taken up with stories o f Elijah, almost without a break, and 2 Kings 2-13 covers the ministry o f Elisha, with a brief detour into the activities o f Elisha’s protege, Jehu, in chapters 9 and 10 and a look at the events in the south in chapters 11 and 12. These stories, which are quite varied in form and purpose, were undoubtedly taken from a corpus o f stories about these prophets collected by their supporters and followers, the “sons o f the prophets.” There are some slight differences in the presentation o f the stories connected with each prophet The Elijah stories tend to be longer, and in their present form each story takes up a chapter, whereas the Elisha stories move from theme to theme quite quickly. (In the W BC 12, 13, attention is paid to the literary presentation o f these stories and their narrative and plot development, and that material does not need re­ peating here.) A significant feature of both collections o f sto­ ries is that Elijah and Elisha are presented as very human characters, both o f whom have doubts and disappointments in their ministries. The relationship o f the two prophets is fascinating. A t one point Elisha is referred to as the one “who poured water on the hands o f Elijah” (2 Kgs 3:11), and at another point as one who “ministered to” Elijah (1 Kgs 19:21). Both o f these refer­ ences point to a close relationship o f master and servant or teacher and disciple, although little of this is given any form 35

Prophets

in the rest o f the stories. This close relationship is reflected in the story o f the departure o f Elijah in 2 Kings 2, when Elisha alone is allowed to cross the Jordan and witness the depar­ ture, whereas the other followers, the “sons o f the prophets,” stand at a distance. Elijah makes his appearance in the O ld Testament in a very abrupt manner in 1 Kings 17:1. This might well be for literary effect, but it also indicates that the original readers were prob­ ably familiar with the man, and for them he needed no intro­ duction. Although the “sons o f the prophets” are mentioned in the collection o f Elijah stories (1 Kgs 20:35-43), it is not in direct association with Elijah. These supporters o f the proph­ ets (see WBC 13:25-27) were obviously active during Elijah’s time, but it was during the ministry o f Elisha that the con­ nections are most closely seen. It is quite possible that Elisha was originally an “outsider” to this group. His appointing in 1 Kings 19:19-21, and the story o f his succession in 2 Kings 2:1-18, appear as if they might be making a strong case for Elisha’s assumption o f the mantle o f Elijah against some op­ position from the group itself. Whatever the precise relationship, it is clear that a third figure, who binds the two together, is Moses. The story o f Elijah’s departure in 2 Kings 2:1-18 has too many allusions to events in the life o f Moses and Joshua for it to be acciden­ tal. The precise point o f the Jordan crossing is the same, the actions are the same, and, like Moses, Elijah has no visible grave. Elisha becomes Elijah’s Joshua, commissioned to carry on the prophetic task on this side o f the Jordan. G od had not left himself without witness (cf. Acts 14:17) at this, a crucial time in the history o f Israel—the years following the death o f the apostate Ahab (2 Kgs 1:1). The question that arises is, can things improve, or will they get worse? Elisha the prophet offers answers to this question. If we move back to the stories o f Elijah and examine them, several well-worn prophetic themes emerge. In the 1, 2 KINGS

36

first stories o f the widow in Zarephath (1 Kgs 17:8-16,17-24), the dominant theme is reciprocal compassion. In a time of famine, Elijah has been provided for by G od (1 Kgs 17:1-7) until the food is exhausted. He is then sent to Zarephath, in Gentile territory, where a widow has been chosen to provide for him. Her complaints quickly give way to willingness to assist the prophet o f God, and she and her son are provided for as well. In the story o f the death and revival o f the widow’s son (1 Kgs 17:17-24) a similar compassion is shown. Through prayer Elijah restores the son to his mother. In 1 Kings 18, the issue is exclusive worship of Yahweh, a matter over which conflict had broken out between Jezebel’s supporters and the worshipers o f Yahweh. It was a question o f the very survival o f the name and reputation o f Yahweh in the north. If Jezebel had her way, the northern kingdom would lose its distinctiveness and its identity as a partner in the covenant with God. No more serious question could be faced by a prophet o f God. The Carmel confrontation demonstrates the absolute incomparability o f Yahweh. And Elijah’s mocking o f the prophets o f Baal (1 Kgs 18:25-29) anticipates the similar derision o f false gods by the great prophet o f the Exile (Isa 44:9-20), and echoes the wonder expressed in Deuteronomy4:6-7,32-40, at the uniqueness o f Israel and her experience with God. On these matters the prophet will brook no compromise. The next chapter, 1 Kings 19, deals with the matter o f the prophetic task. Here, Elijah is disillusioned and obvi­ ously somewhat depressed. H is vision is blurred by his selfcenteredness. H e retreats eventually to Horeb, wishing to die. G od’s response is simple. Elijah is to stand once again where M oses stood. He is, in effect, recommissioned. So Elijah returns to continue his work— to raise up kings, to appoint a successor, and to continue to champion the cause o f the covenant. Elijah’s whole being was subject to this commission. 37

Prophets

The best-known story o f Elijah concerns Naboth's vine­ yard, and Ahab and Jezebel’s cowardly maneuvers to wrest it from him (1 Kgs 21). The issue here is justice, based on the covenant The divisions o f the land o f promise in Joshua 13-18 are based on the notion that the land is a gift from G od (see ch 5 below). Each tribe and each tribal member is granted a place in that promise; therefore, it is a sin to remove a neighbor’s landmark (Deut 19:14; 27:17), and a disruption o f the covenant to take someone else’s land. Thus it is that when Elijah confronts Ahab on the matter, he uses very specific language, “Have you killed, and also taken possession?" (1 Kgs 21:19). It is the language o f the Deca­ logue, which forbids both murder (Deut 5:17) and the covet­ ing o f a neighbor’s field (Deut 5:21). Each o f these themes is repeated in one form or another in the stories o f Elisha Elisha, too, shows compassion to those in need (2 Kgs 4:1-4); is jealous for the exclusive worship of Yahweh (2 Kgs 3:13,14); experiences doubts and despair over his prophetic task (2 Kgs 6:32,33); and is concerned with matters o f justice (2 Kgs 8:7-15). The deuteronomic law com­ manded care for the powerless in society— the widow, the orphan, and the stranger (Deut 14:29; 16:11,14). And it is precisely these people who experience the care and compas­ sion o f the two great prophets Elijah and Elisha Apart from these two prophets, so powerfully portrayed in these stories, several other characters stand o u t A s one might expect, however, the kings and their courtiers are rarely shown in a sympathetic light Ahab is the arch apostate who finds a worthy opponent in Elijah. Ahaziah’s claim to fame is a fall down some stairs, an illness, and a search for healing in a foreign country (2 Kgs 1). The two kings in 2 Kings 3 panic when they find themselves lost in the desert (2 Kgs 3:10). The kings o f Israel and Syria misin­ terpret the need o f Naaman, and almost begin a war over the issue o f his visit to Elisha (2 Kgs 5:1-7). Court officials fare 1, 2 KINGS

38

no better. The pompons arrogance o f the captain's disbeliev­ ing reaction to Elisha’s prophecy in 2 Kings 7:1,2 results in his untimely death (2 Kgs 7:16-20). On the other hand, it is frequently the lesser known and the unimportant who become agents o f healing, restoration, and fulfillment. In 2 Kings 3:11 it is a servant o f the king o f Israel who guides the panic-stricken kings to seek out Elisha. In 2 Kings 5:2,3 it is a young Hebrew slave-girl who begins the process o f Naaman’s healing. In 2 Kings 7 it is the un­ likely quartet o f outcast lepers who discover that the Syrian army besieging Samaria has fled and who carry the good news to the king. Even Gehazi, the discredited servant o f Elisha, helps in the restoration o f the Shunemite's land when she returns from exile (2 Kgs 8:5). There is a wonder­ ful principle at work here. Paul captured it well in his first letter to Corinth. For consider your call . . . not many o f you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were power­ ful, not many were o f noble birth; but G od chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, G od chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong, G od chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are. . . . (1 C or 1:26-28) Jesus himself chose the “ignorant and unlearned” to follow him. He associated with tax collectors, and accepted those whom others deemed unacceptable. In Elijah and Elisha, Israel knew that “there was a prophet in Israel,” and that “there was a G od in Israel” This is a theme repeated many times in the narratives (1 Kgs 17:24; 2 Kgs 1:3,16; 3:11; 4:9; 5:2,3), and recognized more often by foreigners than by Israelites! Elijah earned the reputation o f a “troubler o f Israel” (1 Kgs 18:17) and Elisha earned the 39

Prophets

respect o f kings (2 Kgs 8:7-10; 13:14), but they had in com­ mon the heart and soul o f prophecy: the uncompromising championship o f the Word o f G od in human affairs. In George Mendenhall’s words, they had a vision o f a Transcendent deity whose govern­ ance over the historical process made inevitable the de­ struction o f a petty political power that regarded the deity as a mere security blanket with which to cover up . . . oppression and corruption.3

1, 2 KINGS

40

4

THE PEOPLE OF GOD

In 1 and 2 Kings, monarchs reign over and lead their people, but are themselves under a higher law. Alongside them, prophets proclaim that higher law with their utter­ ances o f the divine Word. They stand as guardians of society, proclaiming the will o f the covenant God, Yahweh, and play­ ing an intermediary role between the people and God. Thus, both kings and prophets represent forms o f leadership. A third form o f leadership is that o f the priest, who, while not absent from 1 and 2 Kings, is certainly not very prominent. But what o f the people, who are led by both king and prophet? How are they understood in Kings? The nature of G od's people The writer o f 1 and 2 Kings would have had a consider­ able knowledge o f the history o f the people o f Israel and Judah, and o f the early literature o f the people. The history o f Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the ancestors o f Israel whose

41

T he People o f G od

stories are recorded in sections o f Genesis, would have been familiar to him in some form, and he acknowledges the covenant with the patriarchs (2 Kgs 13:23; 17:15). The tradi­ tions about the slavery in Egypt, the Exodus, the wilderness wanderings, and the covenant at Sinai are all clearly known and cited by him (2 Kgs 17:7-18). Further, the role o f Moses, the architect o f the newly-freed society, was also part o f his knowledge. These facts are crucial elements in the forma­ tion o f the notion o f the “people o f G od.” They are founda­ tional to Israel’s self-understanding, and part o f the personal and public history o f the writer. We ought also to guard against reading too many mod­ em , Western concepts into the term “people.” U nfortu­ nately this occurs all too often in O ld Testament studies, but we cannot stress enough some o f the differences in meaning between a biblical (i.e., ancient Mediterranean) understanding o f “people” and a m odem N orth American understanding. Biblical terms like “people o f Israel” carry with them quite different sets o f meaning than terms like “people o f Canada” or “the American people.” The latter terms encompass a variety o f different ethnic backgrounds and languages, something that would have been unthink­ able in the ancient Near East. For us, binding forces are mainly symbolic, like the flag, the country, or a political ideology. In the biblical world, the binding force was kinship— real or supposed. A ll came from one father, Abraham, and all were therefore related. In the Bible this is seen m ost clearly in the stories o f the twelve sons o f Jacob/ Israel, who become tribal heads. Even though the socio­ political form o f the people o f G od underwent several far-reaching changes throughout biblical history— from tribal clan, to tribal league, to monarchy, to priestly theoc­ racy— it never lost this sense o f belonging. This sense o f group identity was always very strong, so much so, that 1, 2 KINGS

42

even at the end o f the biblical period o f their history, this people is still known as “Israel” (Mal 1:1). The outward form that this people took prior to the mon­ archy was that of a theocracy; they were a people ruled by G od and his Law. This Law was given to Moses at Sinai and formed the basis of the community after Sinai. In Joshua and Judges, the Law is presupposed as foundational to the life and well-being of the people. A glance at these books will show that kinship predominated the people’s self-understanding. What political life existed was dominated by males, and politi­ cal decisions were made almost exclusively by male elders. Even in those relatively early days, priests, prophets, and judges shared various combined religious, civil, and military powers among them— as is seen in the careers of Deborah, Gideon, Samuel, and, of course, Moses. Many decisions were made at the local, that is village and town level. The story of Ruth offers a good example o f this. A s we have seen, a decisive shift comes with the advent o f monarchy, and our writer is fully aware of the nature o f this shift. He understands well the nature o f monarchical society. In this society there was a lessening o f the power and in­ fluence o f the elders (1 Kgs 12:6-11), and a concomitant growth in the power of the newly created center o f society, the king’s court (2 Sam 8:15; 1 Kgs 4:1-6). Decisions that will affect the entire population o f Israel are now made by a small group, and an impersonal administration is empow­ ered to carry out those decisions. Tasks are shared among a different set o f people, some known, some unknown, and some even non-Israelite. Dominating the whole scene is the political will o f the central figure, the king. In such circum­ stances, the fate and well-being o f the people o f G od as­ sumes a new importance. God, o f course, remains faithful, but the loyalty and faithfulness o f the people is now put to new tests. 43

The People o f G od

“ Israel” For the modem reader, the use o f “Israel” (the older term for the people o f God) in 1 and 2 Kings may cause some confusion, stemming from the fact that the term now has a broader meaning, while still retaining some o f the old. It is clear that the term is applied to the populace of the tribes, then under control of the monarchy. Solomon, after his vic­ tory in the civil war following the death of David, becomes king over “all Israel” (1 Kgs 4:1), that is, the territory left to him by David. The same meaning is implied in the use of “Israel” in 1 Kings 6:1, and possibly 8:1. Elsewhere, this terri­ tory is also called “the kingdom” (1 Kgs 11:31). In other passages, however, a clear distinction is made be­ tween Judah, the southern kingdom following the split after Solomon's death, and Israel, the northern kingdom consist­ ing o f ten tribes. Thus in 1 Kings 1:35 and 4:35, the phrase “Israel and Judah” applies to what previously was referred to as “all Israel.” The distinction is maintained in 1 Kings 13 in the story of the man o f God from Judah and the prophet from Israel In the same vein, Jeroboam’s appeal to the northern tribes to reject Rehoboam’s attitude and rule is prefaced with the phrase “O Israel!” (1 Kgs 12:16). Further, the phrase “my people Israel,” which is used in 2 Samuel 7:8 of the entire covenant community, is used in 1 Kings 16:2 exclusively of the northern kingdom. Yet there persists throughout 1 and 2 Kings an understand­ ing o f “Israel” as referring to all the recipients of God’s grace at the Exodus, as hearers of his Law at Sinai, and partners in the covenant with him. Thus when Solomon is made king, he asks for an understanding mind to govern “thy great people” (1 Kgs 3:9; see also 8:41). When the kingdom is split, it is the result o f Solomon’s disobedience to a law which God gave to “the people o f Israel” (1 Kgs 11:2, see Deut 17:17), and by way of contrast, Hezekiah removed from the temple the bronze 1, 2 KINGS

44

cult object which “the people o f Israel” had revered since the time of Moses (2 Kgs 18:4). Finally, when kings o f either the north or south are ad­ dressed in prophetic terms in 1 and 2 Kings, they are addressed by the “G od o f Israel” (in other words, the G od o f Sinai and o f the covenant). It is this G od who announces through the prophet Elijah that a drought will come on the northern nation o f Israel (1 Kgs 17:1), but it is also this same G od who announces to Josiah through Huldah the prophetess the consequences o f the breaking o f the cove­ nant (2 Kgs 22:15). There is, then, some ambiguity in the terminology used to refer to the people, but no discontinuity. Ultimately, for the writer o f the history o f the monarchy, all the people o f G od are bound by the covenant to the same G od regard­ less o f whether they are known as “Israel” or “Judah.” This position is basic to the prophetic tradition, which had to face the same ambiguity. A t times, the northern nation o f Israel is addressed (Hos 4:1; 5:1) and, at times, the southern nation o f Judah is (Jer 4:3). O n occasion, the ambiguity is lessened by the use o f specific references to places such as Samaria or Jerusalem (Mic 1:5), but on other occasions the ambiguity remains. However, the continuity remains also, no matter what the outward political form o f the people. Responsibility Although the fundamental concept of the people of God applies to Israel in one form or another throughout the Old Testament, the shift in political structure from tribal to monarchical does have an effect on one aspect o f Israel’s existence. In the period o f the judges, responsibility for Is­ rael’s disobedience and apostasy rests entirely with the people. It is consistently “the people of Israel” who “did what was evil in the sight of the Lord” (e.g., Judg 2:11; 3:7,12; 4:1; 6:1). 45

The People o f G od

In the period o f the monarchy, our writer makes plain time and again that it is now the monarchs who “did what was evil in the sight o f the Lord” (e g., 1 Kgs 15:26,34). In so doing, the kings followed in the ways of the archapostate Jeroboam, and “made Israel to sin” (1 Kgs 15:25,26). Increased power o f leadership involved increased responsibility to lead properly. It is this point which is taken up by some o f the prophets, such as Jeremiah, who are placed in opposition to the leaders o f Israel and Judah (Jer 1:18,19; Mic 3:1,9). But good leadership, in part, is dependent upon a willing­ ness to be led well, and the new system in no way absolves the people o f their own responsibility to worship and fear Yahweh. Shepherds have an enormous responsibility for those whom G od has given into their charge, and numerous prophetic voices have been raised to make this point (Jer 19-23; Ezek 34). But ultimately it is the lament o f the prophet that “my people have . forsaken me, the fountain o f living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, bro­ ken cisterns, that can hold no water” (Jer 2:13). Being in the tradition o f the prophetic outlook on human affairs, our writer is fully aware of this (see 1 Kgs 14:21,22). People an d covenant In the O ld Testament as a whole, and certainly in the understanding of our writer, the basis for the relationship between G od and his people, and the justification for God’s claim to their obedience and reverence, is the covenant (berith). No other concept has dominated the discussion on the Old Testament more than the covenant, and the atten­ tion is well-deserved. It is a central topic, o f great importance to the understanding o f the nature o f the people o f G od in 1 and 2 Kings and elsewhere. To describe the notion o f covenant as “a formal agreement or treaty between two parties, with each assuming some obli1, 2 KINGS

46

gation” is correct, but only partly so. Although many parallels have been found in the political world o f the ancient Near East, the concept cannot be confined to the world o f politics, particularly politics as we understand it. Strictly speaking, a covenant is not a business contract, although trading partners form “covenants” with each other to further trade. Some scholars have emphasized the element o f obligation laid upon the partners in a covenant; but again, it is this, and more than this. Other kinds o f agreements are encompassed by the term, such as the agreement between two close friends, David and Jonathan (1 Sam 18:3), which certainly transcends any concept o f a formal contract. Interpreters have long been aware o f the many parallels between the O ld Testament idea o f covenant and the nu­ merous treaties drawn up between nations o f the ancient Near E ast Some o f the treaty texts date from as early as the fifteenth century B .C ., and as late as the seventh. They span much o f the history o f Israel in O ld Testament times. So much o f the language and form is the same that it ap­ pears that O ld Testament writers and leaders saw the cove­ nant concept as a perfect illustration o f the relationship o f G od to his people. There is nothing unusual in this; other biblical writers have taken institutions o f daily life in the biblical world and used them as illustrations o f spiritual concepts. The language o f salvation is the language o f war­ fare and slavery. G od is likened to a warrior or a father, and the people o f G od are regarded as a family. If the inter­ national treaty was so widespread, then it would have pro­ vided an excellent aid to understanding Israel’s relationship to God. International treaties have been classified into two types: the parity treaty, an agreement between (more or less) equals; and the suzerainty treaty, an agreement between a conquer­ ing overlord and a vassal. The unequal relationship between G od and Israel is well-illustrated by this latter form, and the 47

The People o f G od

book o f Deuteronomy shows a remarkably close affinity to the pattern and language o f the known suzerainty treaty texts. Yet if we understand the analogy only as a formal political one, we have not fully understood the nature o f the relationship between G od and Israel. Aside from the fact that illus­ trations tend to be incomplete, they must be understood properly. Although the treaty texts are from the realm o f international politics, we must not view that realm as though it were a duplicate o f modem politics. We need to see it in the social and cultural context o f the ancient Near East, especially in light o f the way relationships were perceived and how they functioned. From the perspective o f our individualistic way o f perceiv­ ing and living our lives, it is difficult for us to understand that in the ancient (and modem) Mediterranean world, relation­ ships had a much stronger element o f dependence, especially dependence upon persons with power. A s one writer has recently expressed it, “Ideal superiors are benevolent auto­ crats or paternalists, good ‘fathers’ on whom subordinates like to depend.” The relationship between suzerain and vassal is not so much that between “boss and underling,” as be­ tween “patron and client,” with mutual dependence being a prominent element o f the bond between the two. The vassal/ client is dependent on the suzerain/patron for protection and status; in turn, the patron is dependent upon the client for respect and honor. To a large extent it is the “good name” o f the patron that the client is responsible for in keeping his side o f the relation­ ship. Thus it is that the suzerain/patron always presents him­ self in an extended, self-serving introduction in the treaty texts. Thus it is too, that G od prefaces the Decalogue with a self-presentation claiming honor and exclusive worship. This understanding o f the relationship between partners o f a covenant is also seen in another model from the ancient 1, 2 KINGS

48

Near East, the “covenant o f grant,” a gift o f land and status to a client king by a god. This form is thought to offer some insight into the background to the covenant with David. This rather lengthy diversion into the notion o f covenant is important as background to its use in 1 and 2 Kings. It stresses the element o f the personal relationship between the two partners, an element which tends to get lost if the covenant is seen only in rather cold political terms. In 1 and 2 Kings the term “covenant” is applied to a num­ ber o f situations. The trade agreement between Solomon and Hiram o f Tyre (1 Kgs 5:26 [5:12]) and the agreement bringing an end to war between Israel and Syria (1 Kgs 15:19; 20:34), are called “covenants,” and would probably have been formal­ ized in the same way that many parity and suzerainty treaties were. W hen Jehoiada the priest conspires to overthrow the usurper queen Athaliah, he allies himself with the palace guard in a “covenant” (2 Kgs 11:4). When the revolt is over, God, king, and people are reunited in a “covenant” (2 Kgs 11:17) reminiscent o f the agreement between David and the northern tribes (2 Sam 5:3) and the agreement between Rehoboam and the northern tribes left in tatters by Solomon (1 Kgs 12:6-16). Basic to Israel’s understanding o f her status before G od is the agreement made between G od and Israel’s ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Reminiscent o f the “covenant o f grant,” its strongest element is the notion o f “gift.” It repre­ sents an act o f grace, o f munificence. It is recalled as such in 2 Kings 13:23, and its rejection is lamented in 2 Kings 17:15. Its twin is the covenant made between G od and Israel at Sinai, when the Torah was given to order the life o f the covenant people. Because o f the nature o f these books as part o f the deuteronomistic history, it is no surprise to see this covenant referred to again and again in 1 and 2 Kings. Its most impor­ tant symbol, the ark o f the covenant, is at the very center o f 49

T he People o f G od

Israel’s life, in its most sacred place, the Holy o f Holies (1 Kgs 6:19; 8:1-21). Centuries later, Josiah’s workmen redis­ covered the covenant Torah, and he attempted to restore the covenant to its rightful place in the life o f God’s people (2 Kgs 23:2-21). The tragedy is that in spite o f God’s faithfulness to Israel (1 Kgs 8:23), most references to the covenant in 1 and 2 Kings are o f Israel’s rejection o f it King Solomon, appointed as leader and example o f the people o f God, fails to keep the covenant (1 Kgs 11:11). Elijah’s lament recalls the incessant indictment o f the book o f Judges that the people had forsaken the covenant (1 Kgs 19:11,14). Finally, the north­ ern kingdom is judged for rejecting the covenant with G od (2 Kgs 17:35,38; 18:12).

Worship To give honor to the senior partner in the covenant, to protect his name and reputation as a faithful client, and to ascribe to him his proper attributes are the correct actions and attitudes o f the vassal. In religious terms, this is called "worship.” The Decalogue, so fundamental to Israel’s life and faith, begins with the words 'I am the LORD your G od, who brought you out o f the land o f Egypt, out o f the house o f bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness o f anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the L o r d your G od am a jealous God.’ (Deut 5:6-9a) This encapsulates the commitment involved in a covenant relationship. It involves exclusive honor to one, not favors

1, 2 KINGS

50

scattered promiscuously to many. G od is Israel’s God, and Israel is God’s people. Given the nature o f a covenant relationship, the terms used o f the attitude o f one partner to another are personal ones like “serve” ('abad), “fear” (yareh), and “love” (’aheb). These terms are staples o f the vocabulary o f Deuteronomy and the deuteronomistic history. Outward forms o f worship pertaining to the covenant were the temple in Jerusalem, which stood as a symbol o f G od’s abiding presence with the people; the sacrificial sys­ tem, by which the worshiper could be absolved o f sin or express his devotion to God; and the ark o f the covenant, always a reminder o f God’s commitment and faithfulness to Israel Important though these outward forms were, a more important element was a will to worship on the part o f the people—the right attitude o f heart and mind, and subsequent behavior consistent with what was said and done in worship. It is the judgment o f the writer o f Kings that this will was mostly absent from Israel Solomon’s heart was turned away from God (1 Kgs 11:2), and this was not simply a temporary lapse of attention, but a deliberate, w illful and consistent atti­ tude (1 Kgs 11:11). Most subsequent kings followed su it The reforms carried out by some were unsuccessful not because they were not well-intentioned, but because the general will o f the people was otherwise. A t least, that was the opinion o f their own prophets. W hen the people were taken into exile, the cause for judgment was simple: They did not worship God. They did not give to G od the service, the fear, and the love which was rightfully his. Elijah’s com­ plaint in 2 Kings 1 that the king does not know that “there is a G od in Israel” is sounded time and again throughout their history. In the final analysis, since Israel’s heart was not willing to worship, the symbols lost their validity, and our writer ends 51

The People of God

his history o f the people with the sad picture o f the city, temple, and people being plundered and destroyed by a for­ eigner. This sets a serious theological problem before us. Knowing what we do o f the chosenness o f Israel and the covenant-faithfulness (hesed) o f God, what significance does this have for the future o f the people? We shall attempt an answer to this in a later chapter, but first we turn to another important topic, that o f the land.

1 ,2 KINGS

52

5

THE COVENANTED L A N D

W hat an d where? The land which Israel occupied for much o f her early history, and which she eventually lost, has an importance in world history far beyond its size. Geographically, the land forms part o f the fertile crescent, that great arc o f watered and arable land which stretches from the northern shore o f the m odem Arabian Gulf, along the valley o f the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and along the eastern shore o f the Mediterranean Sea, until it reaches the border o f Egypt at Wadi el-Arish (the Brook o f Egypt in the O ld Testament). The land occupied by Israel comprises only a small section o f this great crescent, and in the frequently noted limits o f “Dan to Beersheba,” the land was about the size o f the state of Vermont But that small tract o f land formed a vital link in the crescent, which was a major trading route o f the ancient world. Historically, it was a link between the great civiliza­ tions and empires o f North Africa (Egypt) and the land o f 53

The Covenanted Land

Akkad (Assyria and Babylon). It frequently passed into the hands o f one or the other, relieved by brief periods of “independence” when the threats and problems were more local. Beyond this, however, the Bible looks on this land as a symbol, a gift from G od and an integral element in the covenant relationship between G od and the people. It is at the center o f the promise to Abraham (Gen 15:7; 17:1— 8). It is (he goal o f the Exodus (Exod 3:7-12), and with the system­ atic conquest under Joshua, the land is received as a gift. W hen Israel had settled in the land, there developed a basic understanding o f the relationship between people and land which is so important in the O ld Testament Here, in the land, Israel can find rest and peace (Josh 21:44). The subse­ quent relationship between the people and the land was perceived in such a way that any threat to the land, any invasion or penetration o f its borders, was understood as a serious threat to the covenant community itself. Therefore, during the period o f the judges such invasions were resisted with force. During the period o f the monarchy this percep­ tion was strengthened by the establishment o f fortresses and garrisons along the borders (1 Kgs 9:15), the develop­ ment o f a strong physical center (Jerusalem, temple, and palace), and the growth o f the status o f the king, especially under David and Solomon. This was a safe land (2 Sam 7:8-11), a prosperous land (Deut 8:7-10) that was given, not earned (Deut 8:17,18). It is in this light that the “ordnance survey” o f the land in Joshua 13-19 is to be understood. The lists o f place names and geo­ graphical features is confusing and at times tiresome to read, but the main point the reader should bear in mind here is that Joshua’s division o f the land, at God’s command, is part o f the covenant agreement The land is a gift to all the people; there­ fore, all the people have a proportionate share in the land. In a sense, this passage represents a kind o f land reform pro-

1, 2 KINGS

54

gram in which the land once controlled by the Canaanite city-kings is distributed to the people o f Israel as a gesture of God’s covenant grace and love. It is against this briefly sketched background that the understanding o f the land in 1 and 2 Kings ought to be seen. Center an d boundaries If, as many interpreters have suggested, the opening chap­ ters o f 1 Kings are part o f the “succession history” o f David and Solomon, then this helps explain why the notion o f land is replaced by the term “kingdom” (mamlakah) in these early chapters. The use o f “kingdom” reflects the new political reality in Israel after David. The gift o f the land is now under the control of a central figure, the king (1 Kgs 2:12,15,22). This politically controlled territory is, however, larger than the original gift. Solomon inherited a territory which ex­ tended farther north than the boundaries established in Numbers 34:1-12, as being from the Brook of Egypt to Lebohamath (not “entrance to Hamath” as in so many modem translations). Solomon’s northern border extended to the Eu­ phrates and to the city of Tiphsah (1 Kgs 4:24). Neither of these northern limits corresponds with the northern tribal allotments in Joshua 19, and the differences probably reflect the changing fortunes o f Israel throughout her history. Boundaries, while defended and often delineated, were rarely stable. However, the climax of the reign of Solomon, seen in his building of the temple and in his prayer in 1 Kings 8, clearly shows that he did not inherit this extended kingdom by accident, but rather that it is the culmination of the promise to David, and it is bound up with the covenant. Blessed be the L o r d , the G od o f Israel, who with his hand has fulfilled what he promised with his mouth to David my father. (1 Kgs 8:15) 55

The Covenanted Land

A t the center o f this land stands a new and important symbol associated with the reign and activities o f Solomon, namely the temple. Its importance for our writer is reflected in the space he devotes to its careful construction (1 Kgs 6:1-38). In the very center o f the temple stands the ark representing the covenant between G od and the people (1 Kgs 8:1-14). But the temple has a greater significance. In keeping with the numerous promises in the book o f Deu­ teronomy (e.g., Deut 12:5,6), it is the place G od has chosen to dwell with his people, and the focus o f his care and concern, his hearing o f prayer (1 Kgs 8:27-30). Thus it is that the prayer spoken “toward the city which thou hast chosen and the house which I have built for thy name” upholds the army in battle (1 Kgs 8:44,45) and brings for­ giveness to the repentant sinner (1 Kgs 8:46-53). The symbolic limits o f this land can be extended, either through marriage and political alliance (1 Kgs 3:1-2), or through the inclusion o f a non-Israelite, a foreigner (noker) who acknowledges the sovereignty o f Israel’s G od (1 Kgs 8:41-43). This land is important, as is the place o f the people in it, and one o f the strongest punishments meted out by Solomon is to displace a person, to banish him from Jeru­ salem (1 Kgs 2:26). Use an d m ism anagem ent Walter Brueggemann, in his excellent book The Land, makes a distinction between the land as gift and the land as “managed”-—by which he means the overtly human element in the treatment o f the land.1It is the element o f controlling the land, as opposed to depending upon it, o f selfish use as opposed to grateful use. Part o f the understanding o f land in 1 and 2 Kings involves this element o f “management” of land, and the writer shows a close connection between the misuse o f the land and the people’s misfortune.

1, 2 KINGS

56

In the account o f Solomon’s reign there is a paragraph outlining Solomon’s organization o f the country for purposes o f taxation (1 Kgs 4:7-19). The report o f the tax divisions is found in a lengthy narrative giving details of Solomon’s administration, the amount of provisions needed for his court, and his reputation for wisdom (1 Kgs 4:1-5:14 [4:1-34]). The administrative structure is slightly larger than David’s (2 Sam 8:15-18), and includes the office of “minister o f forced labor.” The administrative divisions for the purposes o f taxation number twelve, but do not follow the territorial allotments for the tribes. They are clearly in the interest o f efficiency, and to ensure this, some o f the local governors are related to the king (Dor and Hazor). On purely political and economic grounds, given the reali' ties o f Solomon’s day, one might argue in favor o f Solomon’s policies. But the perspective o f the writer is not purely politi­ cal, and he is aware that this disregard for the older tribal allotments, coupled with the absence o f Judah from the dis­ tricts obliged to pay taxes, does not bode well for the land. The distribution o f the land in keeping with the covenant is now being ignored. The absence from the narrative o f any command from God that might legitimize Solomon’s actions highlights the contrast between his actions and proper use of the land. A similar case o f “management” comes with the choice o f a new northern capital, Samaria (1 Kgs 16:24). The older capi­ tal, Tirzah, was replaced by a newly created city, built on the hill o f Shemer and fortified. We can only guess at the reasons for the new choice. Perhaps Samaria was closer to the interna­ tional trade routes. It was certainly more central, and had clear access to the coast Whatever the reasons, archaeologi­ cal excavation at the site has shown that the new capital was an impressive city with large, well-made walls. W hat is clear is that the choice was made by Omri and Omri alone. A l­ though Samaria became the capital city o f the north, unlike 57

The Covenanted Land

Jerusalem in the south it could claim no special status of having been chosen by G od It is never the place “where God dwells.” It is one of Omri’s “works o f greatness” (1 Kgs 16:27), a human construction, made without reference to G od The third case is probably one o f the most famous in 1 Kings, the story o f Naboth’s vineyard and its expropriation by Ahab and his wife Jezebel (1 Kgs 21). The story is wellknown and the details do not need to be repeated W hat is most interesting is the challenge made by the prophet Elijah. It is clear from his question (1 Kgs 21:19) that Elijah does not see this action as simply a case o f criminal theft, for he alludes to the covenant Law, the Decalogue, and by implication accuses Ahab o f breaking that law (cf. Deut 5:17,21). H is choice o f words is precise: Ahab is guilty o f killing a fellow Israelite without cause (ratsach). Management o f land, in this case the redistribution o f land for selfish gain, is a breach o f the covenant, a misuse o f the gift, and for this sin Ahab is to be judged Shrinking lim its Throughout Israel’s history, the boundaries o f the land frequently fluctuate, and very often are penetrated by ene­ mies. A t times, these shifts in the borders are deliberate and result from the willful action o f Israelite kings; but at other times these shifts are the result o f circumstances beyond the control o f Israel’s kings, and are often seen as a precursor o f judgment In both types o f cases, however, there is often the sense that the shifts are wrong, ill-advised, and carried out for reasons which have little, if anything, to do with the concept o f land as covenanted gift. Solomon’s reign is eventually judged to have been a failure, not because he was politically inept, but because his heart was “turned aside.” He lost a sense of perspective, and this loss is set clearly within the context of the numerous alliances

1, 2 KINGS

58

through marriages with the daughters o f foreign kings (1 Kgs 11:1-7). In this way foreigners are introduced into the land and domain o f Israel, but not in the sense o f Solomon’s own prayer (1 Kgs 8:41-43). These foreigners do not acknowledge Israel’s God. On the contrary, they bring with them their own gods and set up their idols, polluting Israel’s faith and witness. The same thing is seen in the marriage o f Omri to Jezebel o f Tyre (1 Kgs 16:29— 34). This union results in the attempt by the queen to annihilate the prophetic witness to Israel’s G od in the northern kingdom. In 1 Kings 15:9-24, further willful redistribution o f the land is carried out as the result o f costly and unnecessary wars between Israel and Judah. The outcome is the an­ nexation o f Benjamin by Judah, and the introduction o f the Syrian king Ben-hadad into the local politics o f Israel and Judah when the southern king Asa appeals to him for help. He responds for the price o f large tracts o f covenanted land in the north. The subsequent wars between Israel and Syria (1 Kgs 20; 22) degenerate into trials o f strength between two nations, with little reference to God’s will. W hen G od’s will is revealed to Jehoshaphat and Ahab through the prophet Micaiah ben Imlah, it is ignored in favor o f the kings’ wishes, with disastrous results (1 Kgs 22). In addition to these willful changes in the limits o f the land there is a series o f changes which are beyond the control o f Israel and Judah, the result o f invasions by stronger powers. Throughout, there is little appeal to God. Soon after the division o f the kingdom into the separate nations o f Israel and Judah, the Egyptian Pharaoh Shishak (Sheshonk) in­ vaded (1 Kgs 14:25-28). According to the writer o f 1 Kings, Jerusalem was the target and suffered badly at the hands o f the invader. But the Egyptian’s own account shows the full extent o f his raid. He attacked the Negev desert, took many fortified cities o f Israel and Judah along some o f the main routes, and returned to Egypt unopposed. 59

The Covenanted Land

In spite o f David’s subjugation o f the Philistines (2 Sam 4-5), pressure is reapplied in the south and west by these people (1 Kgs 15:27; 16:15-20), and time and effort must be spent containing them. In the east Syrians lay claim to Is­ raelite territory (1 Kgs 20:1-6) and begin a series o f wars which are fought back and forth in each country. Chapters 15-17 o f 1 Kings are taken up with a new and more dangerous pressure now exerted by the imperial army o f Assyria. After the north af lls to the armies o f Shalmaneser and Sargon in 722 B.C ., Assyrian attention is eventually turned to the south during the reign o f Hezekiah (2 Kgs 1820). The net result is a loss o f territory and the destruction of numerous fortified cities. Finally, the Babylonians invade twice and effect the fell o f Jerusalem, as well as the looting and destroying of the temple (2 Kgs 24,25). Rarely in these narratives is appeal made to C od for help— and when it is, as in the case o f Hezekiah, the motives are clearly warped. Throughout this history o f invasion it is clear that Israel and Judah are vulnerable. The sense o f “rest from enemies round about" is destroyed. There is occasional respite, and at times old borders are restored, wounds are healed, and invasions are stemmed. But this happens not because Israel’s army was reorganized, or because the two nations fought better. The reason is the same one which gave Israel life and existence in the first place, the grace and mercy o f God. It was by the Word o f G od that Israel de­ feated the Syrians (1 Kgs 20:13-34). It was by the grace and mercy o f G od that Israel, under Jeroboam II, was able to restore the borders once again to Lebo-Hamath (2 Kgs 14:17-27). L an d an d loss We suggested earlier that our writer’s task in composing 1 and 2 Kings was to offer an explanation for the Exile. The 1, 2 KINGS

60

Exile meant loss o f the land, as well as the other symbols o f the covenant, because o f invasions by the Assyrians in the latter years o f the eighth century B.C. and by the Babylonians in the opening decades o f the sixth century B.C. The people o f the northern kingdom were scattered throughout the Assyrian empire and were replaced by different groups from other parts o f the empire. The result was an admixture o f customs and religions which virtually destroyed the old af ith. In the south, the Babylonians took away the leading citizens o f the population to work within the infrastructure o f their own empire. Thus the southern nation lost its effec­ tive political and religious leadership. But this is a descriptive, historical sketch. Other ques­ tions remain. W hat did it mean for the existence o f Israel as G od’s people? W hat did the destruction o f her most cher­ ished symbols o f covenant signify? Was it possible for Israel to be Israel away from her covenanted land? These and many other questions must have plagued the exiles. Some o f the questions are not answered by the writer o f Kings, but are tackled by other writers o f the Exile and postexilic pe­ riod. However, in his interpretation o f what happened, our writer lays a strong foundation upon which these later writ­ ers could build. He is writing from the perspective o f one in exile, and at a time when the loss was a reality. He understands these events within the context o f the covenant and the relation­ ship o f the land to the covenant Put as simply as possible, the loss is a result o f the breaking o f the covenant relation­ ship, and a forfeiture o f its benefits. This is a principle with which he is already familiar because it is set out clearly in his “charter,” the book o f Deuteronomy (Deut 4:25-31). For making graven images, for forsaking their covenant God, the people will be scattered among the nations. There they will be forced to worship “no-gods” o f wood and stone. In a sense, it is what they have already chosen for themselves. 61

The Covenanted Land

Already in the account o f the reign o f Solomon the theme is picked up in numerous allusions to the continued faithfulness o f the king (or lack o f it) and the fate o f the land. In 1 Kings 6:11-13 Solomon is reminded that if he walks before God as David walked, in obedience to the Torah, G od “will dwell among the children of Israel, and will not forsake my people Israel” (v 13). The conditional nature o f the relationship is clear, and the danger o f disobedience is obvious. In his dedicatory prayer, Solomon acknowledges the possibility o f exile (1 Kgs 8:46-53). W hen the people sin, if they repent and pray, Solomon implores God to then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin o f thy people Israel, and bring them again into the land which thou gavest to their fathers. (1 Kgs 8:34 italics mine) Exactly the same theme is repeated in a much extended form in 1 Kings 8:46-51. Here is a precursor o f what eventually happened at the end o f the monarchy. Also in the account o f the reign o f Solomon is a longer exposition o f David's deathbed command to his son (1 Kgs 2:1-4). In 1 Kings 9:1-9 the responsibility o f Solomon the king is amplified, and the fate o f the entire people is brought under his responsibility, for if he, as leader, s ins, then I will cut off Israel from the land which I have given them; and the house which I have consecrated for my name I will cast out o f my sight; and Israel will become a proverb and a byword among all peoples. (1 Kgs 9:7) Already then in the account o f the reign o f Solomon, the writer has established the precarious nature o f the covenant relationship. Loyalty to the covenant—and to the covenant

1, 2 KINGS

62

God—is crucial for the survival o f the relationship, and for the continued enjoyment o f the covenant benefits. The ques­ tion raised in the opening chapters o f Kings is whether the relationship can survive the next several hundred years of monarchy. In the remainder o f the narrative o f 1 Kings, the theme lies dorm ant We have already looked at incidents o f lost land (1 Kgs 9:10-14), broken land (1 Kgs 11:9-13), border pressure (1 Kgs 11:14-40), and border penetration (1 Kgs 14:25-28), as well as the reasons for these events. A t times, individual kings and their dynasties (“houses”) are judged (1 Kgs 14:4-16), but nothing more is said o f the loss o f the entire land. With the opening o f the narrative o f 2 Kings, the theme reemerges. The opening words o f 2 Kings 1 again introduce into Israel’s history the nation o f Moab, which is now in rebellion against Israel. The rebellion is described more fully in chapter 3, and the juxtaposition o f this loss with the years following the death o f Ahab, Israel’s archapostate, is significant The opportunity for improvement after his reign is lost, and things get worse. In 2 Kings 8:20-22 Judah loses both Edom and the border city o f Libnah. By 2 Kings 10:28-36, the reign o f Jehu— which had begun with such good intentions— ends with the loss o f a substantial part o f Israel’s territory on the east side o f the Jordan River. The Syrian threat continues, and is stayed only because o f the compassion o f G od (2 Kgs 13:22-25). The greatest historical illustration o f the writer’s original interpretation o f the loss o f the land is seen in the eventual destruction o f the northern kingdom by Assyria in 722 B.C. This destruction was preceded by several invasions and in­ cursions into Israelite territory. But in 722 Israel fell victim to the inhuman Assyrian policy o f splitting up communities o f people and scattering them throughout the empire. The policy effectively destroyed any cohesive resistance, and 63

The Covenanted Land

had a devastating effect upon the victims. It resulted in the collapse o f all social structure, and it forced the intermin­ gling o f nations and customs. It meant the annihilation o f a community. The writer’s interpretation o f these tragic events is sim­ ple. He revives the notion that the loss o f land and national identity is the result o f the willful rejection o f the covenant relationship (2 Kgs 17:7-18). The catalogue o f sins found within this chapter echoes again and again the prohibitions o f Deuteronomy (WBC 13:219-41). By the same token he anticipates the fate o f Judah with his simple statement in verse 19, “But not even Judah kept the commandments of G od. They copied exactly what Israel had done.” The subsequent history o f Judah follows the reigns o f Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, and the collection of kings who bring the account to an end (Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah), and there is little in these stories to give hope. Hezekiah allowed the Babylonian emissaries to view the national treasures, symbolically anticipating their plunder later by Nebuchadrezzar (2 Kgs 20:12-19). In spite o f his attempted reforms, Manasseh took Judah to depths never before seen (2 Kgs 21:1-17). And despite the valiant attempts o f Josiah (2 Kgs 22, 23), Judah’s restoration to a covenant relationship was ultimately impossible. It becomes only a matter o f time before Judah suffers the same fate as Israel To summarize, the writer o f Kings seeks to explain how the covenant land was lo st Since possession of the land was dependent on keeping the covenant, breaking the covenant jeopardized tenure o f the land. Persistent disobedience and disloyalty brought that tenure to an (albeit temporary) end. To see whether this picture holds any hope for the future for Israel and the land, we must first examine in more detail our writer’s notion o f sin and judgm ent 1, 2 KINGS

64

6

SIN AND J UDGMENT

Examining the topics o f sin and judgment more closely and in a more systematic way reveals the reason for the Exile and the loss o f the land. In other words, here we touch the question o f meaning for the deuteronomist, and this meaning encompasses the life (and potential death) o f the people o f God, and their role in the passage o f events. These themes then are o f the greatest importance in understanding the books o f 1 and 2 Kings. T he language of sin Within the language o f ancient Israel there was an entire vocabulary relevant to doing right and wrong, and to the sanctions that were applied to wrongdoers as well as the bene­ fits which came to the righteous. This language was not limited to what we would term “ethics”; what it encompassed was far broader. It involved the practice o f justice, individual and social ethics, and religion— not as separate institutions, but rather as areas o f life which were closely intermingled. An 65

Sin and Judgment

infraction o f the rules o f behavior regarding any area o f life was regarded as a "sin,” against which sanctions were ap­ plied. 1 and 2 Kings uses four words for such infractions. In order of frequency, the first is 'asham, which is used only once (2 Kgs 12:17), without explanation. The term is usually translated “guilt," but we must be careful not to read into this term the Western psychological understanding o f guilt as a feeling o f having done wrong. “Guilt” in this con­ text is more an attribute. According to Leviticus 5:15-19 it can be removed by an offering o f a certain value, a tax paid to the priests and restitution to the one offended. During the reforms o f Jehoash, some adjustment is made in the system o f payment o f the “guilt money” (2 Kgs 12:17). The context for the guilt payment seems to be that o f a wrong done to others, and has little to do with our writer’s exposition o f Israel’s sin and judgm ent The Hebrew word 'awon occurs in 1 Kings 8:47; 17:18; and 2 Kings 7:9. It is often translated as “sin” or “wrong­ doing.” The first occurrence in Kings is in the dedicatory prayer o f Solomon, wherein Israel is to repent o f her sin as the first step to restoration. The second occurrence is in the woman o f Zarephath’s verbal attack on Elijah after the death o f her son. This death, she believes, is a result o f her “sin” which Elijah has now brought back to notice by his presence in her house. The third o f these occurrences is in the words o f the lepers who are looting the deserted Syrian encamp­ m ent By not sharing their good fortune with other Israelites they are doing wrong and their 'a won will overtake them (see also Num 32:23). In other words, they will be punished for it In the case of both ’asham and 'awon (which are common elsewhere in the O ld Testament), the writer o f 1 and 2 Kings shares assumptions about their meanings with other Old Tes­ tament writers, and neither is explained. The two remaining words are used in association with other words and are placed in certain contexts to give them 1, 2 KINGS

66

broader application. In 1 Kings 8:50 the word pesha"'is translated “transgression.” The word is found in six other places, but in quite different, and nonreligious, contexts. In 1 Kings 12:19 it is used to describe the secession o f the northern tribes from the united monarchy. It is an act o f “rebellion.” In 2 Kings 1:1; 3:5,7 it is used similarly o f the declaration o f independence o f Moab. For several years, probably since the time o f David, Moab had been a vassal territory to Israel, and shortly after the death o f Ahab, Moab successfully rebelled against Israel. Israelite-built cities were destroyed, Israelite inhabitants were slaughtered or enslaved, and Israelite rule was thrown off. Precisely the same word is used to describe the same action taken by Edom not long after this (2 Kgs 8:20, 22). In applying this term to the action o f Israel against God, the writer has used a metaphor from the realm o f interna­ tional politics— the same realm from which “covenant" was taken. Israel’s sin against G od was that o f willful rebellion, an expression o f the desire to be free o f the relationship that bound the people and G od together. This is, o f course, a clearly prophetic view o f the relationship between G od and the people. This is the action o f a people who honor with their lips, but whose heart (i.e., will) is far from obedient (Isa 29:13), a people who “long ago . . . broke your yoke and burst your bonds; and . . . said, ‘I will not serve’” (Jer 2:20). The fourth word which is used o f the sinful action o f the people is the most common, occurring almost eighty times in 1 and 2 Kings. It is the Hebrew word chat'ah, normally translated “sin.” In 1 and 2 Kings the word first appears in the prayer of Solomon at the dedication o f the temple (1 Kgs 8:22-53). This section o f 1 Kings has long been recognized as a programmatic statement, outlining the theological perspec­ tive o f the deuteronomist, so it is an important place to start. The exposition o f the term here shows it to refer to an act against G od (1 Kgs 8:46) or to an action committed against 67

Sin and Judgment

another Israelite, a “neighbor” (1 Kgs 8:31). The word repre­ sents an action for which there are serious consequences. Defeat in battle and loss o f honor can result (1 Kgs 8:33). Natural disasters, such as drought, can even be blamed on chat'ah (1 Kgs 8:35). But there is more to be said. The willful nature o f the action is seen in the prayer o f repentance in 1 Kings 8:47, “We have sinned, and have acted perversely and wickedly.” The same point is clearly made again in 1 Kings 8:50. From this point on in 1 and 2 Kings, the vast majority of occurrences of the term concern one specific manifestation of chat'ah, and that is what we have come to understand as apostasy. In its English form, the word derives from the Greek meaning “to stand outside, or apart from” something. In the Old Testament, it is the opposite of repentance (shubh). It is a “turning away” (meshubah) from God, which seems to have been a word coined by Jeremiah (Jer 3:6,8,11,12; 8:5). With the use of this compound of the verb “to turn” (shubh) the element o f deliberate and willful action is retained. This par­ ticular manifestation of chat'ah casts an unavoidable shadow over the unfolding history o f Israel and Judah. It is the “great sin” (2 Kgs 17:21) o f the first king o f the northern nation, Jeroboam, who set up idols in the north as rivals for G od (1 Kgs 12:25-33). It is also this sin which stains the whole o f the subsequent life o f the northern nation. King after king is given the dubious distinction o f following in Jeroboam’s footsteps and encouraging Israel to reject Yahweh, the G od o f the Exodus (e.g., 1 Kgs 14:16; 15:26,30,34; 16:26; 2 Kgs 10:29,31; 13:2,11; 14:24; 15:9,18,24,28). In the south, Manasseh is credited with the same pervasive influence. Moreover Manasseh shed very much innocent blood . . . besides the sin which he made Judah to sin so that they did what was evil in the sight o f the LORD. (2 Kgs 21:16)

1, 2 KINGS

68

In the narrative o f the struggle for succession to David’s throne, one further shaft of light is shed on the term’s meaning. W hen Adonijah had begun preparations for his coronation as David’s successor, Bathsheba approached the dying king with a plea for herself and her son. She reminded the king that he had promised the throne to Solomon, and asked him to make good his promise, “Otherwise it will come to pass, when my lord the king sleeps with his fathers, that I and my son Solomon will be counted offenders” (1 Kgs 1:21). The word translated “offenders” is a form of the word chat'ah, namely chat'aim, a word elsewhere trans­ lated “sinners” (Ps 51:15 [51:13]). Bathsheba was clearly con­ cerned about her status in the royal court. If Adonijah became king, she and her family would be regarded as out­ siders, illegitimate claimants to the throne and not a part o f the inner group, the holders o f power. She feared the attri­ bution to her and her family o f willful rejection o f the king’s authority. This use, incidentally, is remarkably close to the religious authorities’ use o f the term “sinner” in the Gospels. Regardless o f the different terms for “sin” in 1 and 2 Kings, two points emerge. The first is that the act o f sin is a deliber­ ate, willful action. It involves a choice— and in the case of Israel and Judah, the choice made was the wrong one. The second is that throughout this story we are never far away from sin as the cause for the destruction o f a relationship, in most cases the destruction o f the relationship between God and the people. In other words, we are never far away from the principles o f the covenant Before exploring this further, we ought to turn to an examination o f the role of Torah in the theme o f sin and judgment Sin, judgm ent, an d law There is little doubt that the concept o f Torah (translated “Law” in most English versions) is o f great importance to the 69

Sin and Judgment

writer o f 1 and 2 Kings. We have suggested that the standard by which he judges Israel and Judah is the book o f Deuteronomy, a book o f Torah. A t the very beginning o f the story o f the reign o f Solomon he sets out his presuppositions clearly when he records David’s charge to Solomon: Keep the charge o f the L o r d your God, walking in his ways and keeping his statutes, his commandments, his ordinances, and his testimonies, as it is written in the law [Torah] o f M oses, that you may prosper in all that you do and wherever you turn. (1 Kgs 2:3) In some forms o f Christian theology the concept o f Law has received a rather negative image, reduced by some simply to a tool to point out sin. This is a rather unfair image, and it is in complete contrast to the sense o f joy which surrounds the meditation on Torah in Psalm 119: “Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out o f thy law [Torah]” (v 18); and again: “In the way o f thy testimonies I delight as much as in all riches . . . I will delight in thy statutes; I will not forget thy word” (vv 14-16). Even today Jews celebrate the role o f the Torah in their life with the annual festival o f Simhat Torah, “rejoicing in the Torah.” Part o f our problem is that we narrow the concept too much to fit our modem, Western idea o f what “Law” is, or should be, and we fail to appreciate the breadth o f the term in the Old Testament For us, laws are made by legislative bod­ ies, usually elected by the people. We make a rigid distinction between civil and criminal law, and between private morality and legislated public behavior. Courts are distinct institu­ tions, and their officers are distinct persons. Their behavior and functioning are accompanied by types o f ceremonies. Courts have “police” powers to enforce their decisions. For us, law is absolute and impartial (symbolized by blind justice), 1, 2 KINGS

70

and a court case is usually adversarial, with one participant winning and the other losing. We take this form o f law and justice for granted, but in the world o f the O ld Testament, few, if any, o f these presuppositions would be held. Some laws were legislated by the king, but there are few examples o f this in the O ld Testament. Distinctions between private and public morality, between civil and criminal law, and between sacred and secu­ lar law were nonexistent The roles o f the O ld Testament judges were ambiguous, and the office seems to have been a slowly evolving one. While justice was often done “in the gate” (Ruth 4:11; 2 Sam 19:8), this area was not a law court in the modem sense o f a separate location dedicated solely to this purpose. The gate was also the meeting place o f the elders, and probably the market area o f the city. Finally, while the concept o f justice may have been an absolute one, the practice o f law was dependent much more on negotia­ tion between antagonists in a case, and on the social status, wisdom, and common sense o f the arbitrator. These points are worth pondering because they show the different orientation o f the O ld Testament system o f justice. This orientation was much more toward the maintenance and restoration o f relationships. Thus it is that some o f the severest penalties were reserved for actions that would de­ stroy social patterns. Actions causing disruption o f the fam­ ily were harshly treated. Actions breaking the barriers that bound the group together were harshly treated. Adultery, which today is reduced to the level o f a pastime, was likewise treated severely. Laws did not apply to all people, only to members o f the community. In sum, the Law was not for the protection o f the rights o f members o f society, but rather for the preser­ vation o f the community o f Israel. If we can understand the different orientation o f the Old Testament concept and

71

Sin and Judgment

system o f justice, then we can understand better the use o f the term Torah in 1 and 2 Kings, and indeed in the entire Old Testament Solomon, now head o f the people, is charged in 1 Kings 2:3 with a serious responsibility. This charge is repeated in a slightly longer form in 1 Kings 9:4-9. He is to maintain his allegiance to the Torah, and to live according to the Torah in all its breadth and depth. Only then will the throne be retained, and only then will the people prosper and thrive. This is the standard by which Israel and Judah, and their respective kings, will be judged. W hat is at stake here is not the preservation o f law and order, but rather the very exis­ tence o f the people o f G od as a chosen and favored people. It is the covenant and Torah which bind the two together. But the charge to Solomon is not kept, even by Solomon. This is the simple analysis o f the deuteronomist Jehu, who assumed the throne in order to stem the tide o f disobedience and apostasy in the north, is himself judged to be a failure. “[He] . . . was not careful to walk in the [Torah] o f the Lord the G od o f Israel with all his heart” (2 Kgs 10:31), and as a result the territory o f the community began to crumble away (v 32). The cause o f the Exile and destruction o f the northern nation is likewise simply stated. The L o r d warned Israel and Judah by every prophet and every seer, saying, “Turn from your evil ways and keep my commandments. . . . But they would not lis­ ten. . . . ” (2 Kgs 17:13-14; see also vv 37-40) Like Israel, Judah too rejected the Torah (2 Kgs 17:19), and produced a king, Manasseh, who rivaled Ahab for his disobe­ dience and apostasy. O f his reign and his people it is stated: “I will not cause the feet o f Israel to wander any more out o f the land which I gave to their fathers, if only 1, 2 KINGS

72

they will be careful to do all that I have commanded them, and according to all the [Torah] that my servant M oses commanded them.” But they did not listen, and Manasseh seduced them to do more evil than the na­ tions had done whom the Lo r d destroyed before the people o f Israel. (2 Kgs 21:8-9) Here we find an important clue to the Exile. Before the reign o f Manasseh was over the people had chosen not only to disobey, but to act worse than the Canaanites who pre­ ceded them in the land. By rejecting the Torah they had in effect chosen to live as though they had not been favored and chosen by G od— as though they had not entered into a covenant with God. Only two "bad” kings are recorded as having obeyed the Torah in specific incidents. Amaziah o f Judah, son o f the assassinated Joash, avenged his father’s death, but stopped short o f extending his vengeance to the children o f the assas­ sins. The reason for this was the modification (in Deut 24:16) o f the law which dealt with criminal behavior and families (Exod 20:5). The rest o f the record o f Amaziah’s reign is a sad one. The other obedient king was, o f course, Josiah, who em­ barked on a widespread reform o f worship in Judah and in parts o f the north, inspired specifically by the instructions o f the book o f Torah found during the repairs o f the temple (2 Kgs 22:8,11; 23:1,24). But it seems that, however well-intentioned these actions were, they were not fully successful. Perhaps a small measure o f stability was restored to the community, but in the final analysis two kings could do little to prevent the complete breakdown o f community life and worship, or to stem the tide o f the Babylonian invasion. Judah suffered the same fate as Israel— invasion and exile from the land—because Judah, like Israel, had rejected the very thing which would have 73

Sin and Judgment

bound the community together and preserved its special identity, the covenant Torah. J udgment Seeing the concept o f Torah within the context o f the covenant helps us in our understanding o f the themes o f sin and judgment in Kings. Whatever form it takes, judgment is the result o f disobedience to the Torah and rejection o f the covenant— in other words, a deliberate abandonment o f the relationship between the people and God. This act o f rebellion is not merely the breaking o f law, but a refusal to live within the relationship established by covenant This is no light thing, because this relationship alone gave Israel her reason for being, and her distinct character. Israel has no identity apart from God. According to biblical testimony, G od is the author o f Israel’s life. John Goldingay expresses it well: The notion o f election is a key to understanding the notion o f Israel It is not even that G od makes an already existent people his own, he brings a people into being. They only exist as a people because o f an act o f God. . . . W hat is distinctive about Israel is not that they see themselves as God’s people . . . but that they see themselves as Yahweh’s people. . . 1 The sad commentary made by 1 and 2 Kings is that the very source o f Israel’s life was rejected. It would be a mistake then to see the concepts o f sin and judgment in 1 and 2 Kings as working in a sort o f mechanical way, as though there were an automatic penalty for the breaking o f a certain rule. The whole matter is much more personal. If there is a metaphor which epitomizes the covenant rela­ tionship in the Old Testament, it is that o f family. Sometimes 1, 2 KINGS

74

it is seen as being like the relationship between a hither and son (Hos 11:1), and as being like the relationship between a husband and wife (Jer 2:1-4). The writer o f 1 and 2 Kings does not use these images, but through his knowledge and understanding o f the works o f the prophets (2 Kgs 17:13) he would have been well aware o f them. A s we have seen, the notion o f covenant is important to the writer's way o f inter­ preting life, and the covenant is at its heart a relationship. Under the tutelage o f Manasseh, the people o f G od chose to live as though they were not the people o f God. They aban­ doned this special relationship. The breaking o f such a rela­ tionship causes loss o f honor and deep pain for the senior partner. O n the part o f the rebel, there is a forfeiture o f the benefits o f the relationship. Just as a wayward spouse abandoning the responsibilities o f a family also abandons the pleasures, comfort, support, companionship, and shared property o f the family, so Israel, in abandoning her covenant relationship, also gave up her right to be called God’s special people, as well as the privileges o f this unique relationship.

75

Sin and Judgment

7

HOPE, A N D THE ANGER

OF GOD

Context We have placed the writer o f 1 and 2 Kings in the period of the Exile. H is work concludes with Jerusalem being de­ stroyed by the Babylonian army of Nebuchadrezzar, and the main citizens o f the country being taken into Babylon against their will. A puppet regime was established in Mizpah, but it soon fell victim to a local nationalist remnant which had support from the Ammonites. These events took place in 586 B.C. and shortly afterward. The narrative of 1 and 2 Kings probably was completed within a few years o f these events; The writer was still able to refer to royal and court records in some form. Other archival material relating to the temple was cited in detail, and probably not from memory. Like most good historians, the deuteronomist speaks as much to his own age as of the past. H is work is an interpreta­ tion o f the past, and he has shown how the consistent apostasy o f Israel and Judah led to the loss o f land, commu­ nity, and— almost— loss o f identity. He reads the past from a 77

Hope, and the Anger of God

perspective shared by the prophets. He also is one o f the first writers o f the exilic and postexilic period to seek mean­ ing in the events o f the Exile, and to offer a basis for recon­ struction. Ralph Klein puts it clearly: The task o f the hour was for Israel . . . to acknowledge G od's justice, to listen to his voice and to do his law. And then, though D tr even is short on details, Israel could hope that Yahweh, in his unpredictable freedom would act as Savior once more.1 The question is, after the writer o f Kings’ pessimistic view o f the history o f the people o f Israel and Judah from conquest to Exile, does he offer hope for the future? If so, how? In answering these questions here, we are not dealing with the entire O ld Testament message o f hope. Much has been written on the way the O ld Testament as a whole is forward-looking; that message can be taken for granted. We are dealing rather with the contribution made by this writer to an understanding o f G od as a G od o f hope and grace. The anger o f God A t first there seems to be little to relieve initial pessimism because, not only is the judgment o f the Exile seen to be the result o f a consistent pattern o f apostasy, but it is also con­ sidered to be the result o f an angry reaction on G od’s p art One Hebrew expression for this reaction is a combination o f two words: charah, often translated “inflame,’’ and 'aph, which is the word for “nostril.” The term occurs numerous times in other parts o f the O ld Testament, and three times in 1 and 2 Kings. According to 2 Kings 13:3, this reaction o f G od’s to the sins o f Israel was the cause o f Israel’s defeat at the hands o f Hazael o f Damascus. This is exactly the same reason given for the numerous invasions and periods o f

1, 2 KINGS

78

oppression in the book o f Judges (Judg 3:7). G od has a similar reaction to the activities o f Manasseh (2 Kgs 23:26). And it is for this reason that he finally casts Judah out his presence (2 Kgs 24:20). Another Hebrew expression which captures the same reac­ tion on God’s part is a form o f the verb ka 'as, which is often translated “to provoke to anger.” For example, Jeroboam ben Nebat provoked God to anger with his apostasies (1 Kgs 14:9, 15; 15:30). The same is said of Baasha (1 Kgs 16:2,7,13), Omri (1 Kgs 16:26), Ahab (1 Kgs 16:33; 21:22), Ahaziah (1 Kgs 22:54 [22:53]), people of Israel (2 Kgs 17:11,17; 23:19), Manasseh (2 Kgs 21:6,15; 23:26), and people of Judah (2 Kgs 22:17). To state as boldly as this that the judgment on the people was a direct result o f the anger o f G od makes it seem as though the action o f G od was arbitrary, hasty, and vindic­ tive. In fact, this view o f G od has caused considerable debate and heart-searching among students o f the O ld Testament for centuries. Some explanations have excused this kind o f vocabulary as part o f a primitive view o f G od which Was later outgrown. Others have seen it as simply a way o f speaking conditioned by the world view o f the time, and not to be taken seriously by modems. Still others have found the whole concept o f an angry G od offensive, and have rejected it Before we pass too hasty a judgment upon the concept, let us consider it further. Several things need to be noted about the O ld Testament understanding o f the anger o f God. The first is that, although some o f the same language is used o f the anger o f G od as well as the anger o f humans, as Bruce Dahlberg has stated, “. . . there is a qualitative and theolog­ ical difference between human anger On the one hand and divine anger on the other.”2 Human anger is often viewed negatively in Scripture. It is accepted when it is directed against injustice or exploitation (2 Sam 12:5) or when faith is lacking (2 Kgs 13:19), but in the majority o f cases it is seen 79

Hope, and the Anger of God

as an unprofitable attitude. In Genesis 4:5-8 it leads to mur­ der, and in the wisdom literature o f the Old Testament (Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes) it is condemned as cruel (Prov 27:4) or as fitting for a fool (Prov 14:17). In contrast to the hot-tempered person, the ideal is the “cool” person (Prov 17:27) who is able to control (but not deny) the emotions. Another aspect o f human anger is its irrationality, as seen in the poem condemning the “raging” o f the Babylonians against G od and God’s people (2 Kgs 19:27). This raging is bom of arrogance. Another insight into human anger is seen in the childish sulking of the disappointed Ahab when he was chastised by the prophet (1 Kgs 20:43) and when his request was refused by Naboth (1 Kgs 21:4). The second thing to be noted about the Old Testament understanding of the anger of G od is that it is not an attribute in the theological sense, so much as an emotion. Like most emotions described in the Old Testament, anger is revealed by what God does. But this emotion is not an arbitrary one which flares up at the slightest pretext (this is more character­ istic o f what the Old Testament understands o f human anger). It is rather an emotion that is aroused only after the severest provocation. G od is “gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love” (Joel 2:13). The notion o f the anger o f G od is a difficult one to com­ prehend, especially in a society in which open emotion is traditionally not shown. By way o f almost complete contrast, the cultural milieu o f the Old Testament is refreshing in the expression o f emotion and in the way it describes the expres­ sion of emotion. M ost of the attitudes and emotions which we would normally describe by referring to some internal, hidden characteristic o f the person, the Old Testament de­ scribes by referring to some physical, and therefore very pub­ lic, gesture. The English “to respect,” which does not necessarily have any outward manifestation in our culture, is matched by the

1, 2 KINGS

80

expression “to lift the face” in the O ld Testament (2 Kgs 5:1). What we would call being “sad” or “depressed,” in Hebrew is called having a “fallen face” (Gen 4:6). “To pay attention” is “to give ear to,” or “to incline the ear to” (Ps 78:1). For G od to be angry is for him to give outward expression to the sense of rejection, to the loss and pain o f the broken relationship be­ tween him and his people. It is therefore not “incalculable or arbitrary,” as was claimed by Rudolf Otto, nor is it divorced from moral issues. A s Heschel put it when describing the drive behind the prophetic message, “His anger is aroused when the cry o f the oppressed comes to his ears.”3 Finally, one ought always to bear in mind the moral alter­ native to an “angry G od” in this sense. That is a G od with­ out emotion, devoid of feeling and interest in the affairs of human beings— a G od who is apathetic. Such a G od would not be deserving o f worship or o f praise. Hope The sense o f hope in 1 and 2 Kings is expressed in a much more subtle way than is the idea o f judgment. The events of the previous few years had given an awful and terrifying reality to the prophets’ warnings o f judgment. The ruins o f the capital city and the devastation o f the surrounding coun­ tryside were proof enough o f the seriousness with which the announcements o f judgment were to be taken. But what of the future? O ut of these ashes could a new nation, a new people o f God, arise? Or, in the words of the psalmist, “Has G od forgotten to be gracious? Has he in anger shut up his compassion?” (Ps 77:9). The writer o f Kings did look forward to a continuing future relationship between G od and the people (see W BC 13:xxx-xxxviii, 359-69). The writer does not say this in so many words— it is expressed in a much more subtle manner. Through his interpretation o f events, the writer sets down a 81

Hope, and the Anger of God

solid foundation upon which later exilic writers can build. Often, in a work o f literature the final images are the most dramatic and those impressions are the most lasting; and 1 and 2 Kings is no exception. It would be helpful for us to look again at the closing chapter o f 2 Kings. The question o f the relationship o f 2 Kings 24-25 to Jeremiah 52 complicates matters (for further study, see WBC 13:359ff). Regardless o f source and comparative length, each account o f the fell o f Jerusalem offers a distinctive contribu­ tion to the development o f O ld Testament themes. Second Kings 25 is a series o f six vignettes about the end o f the state o f Judah and its institutions. First, the king's fete is recorded (vv 4-7). Next, the city is systematically burned (vv 8-12). Then the temple is burned and looted (vv 13-17). After that, the religious and political leaders are executed (vv 18-21). Then the newly appointed governor is assassi­ nated (vv 22-26). Finally, the “legitimate” king (who had been exiled prior to all o f this) is released from prison and treated well in Babylon (vv 27-30). The message o f this series of vignettes is clear— every sym­ bol o f religious, civil, or military life in Judah was destroyed. Even the puppet regime o f Gedaliah failed, and those who assassinated him did not remain to reconstruct a new society, but fled to Egypt But all is not lost because some symbols remain intact The temple vessels and the king, Jehoiachin, although in Babylon, are intact The significance o f this becomes clear when we recall the building o f the temple in 1 Kings 6-8. In all the detail o f its construction one important theme resounds: the temple and all its furnishings and utensils combine to symbolize the presence o f G od with his people (1 Kgs 8:12-15). In its final form, then, this concluding chapter o f 1 and 2 Kings presents on the one hand, a picture o f the widespread de­ struction o f Judah and Jerusalem, but on the other hand, the continuity o f certain symbols o f af ith in exile in 1, 2 KINGS

82

Babylon. It is clear from contemporary events, such as those described in Jeremiah 27-29, that the presence o f these symbols in Babylon was the source o f continued hope for the people. It means, further, that the center o f the renewed life o f the people was no longer Judah and Jerusalem, but Babylon* A s Israel had been called out o f Egypt to enter the Land o f Promise, so Israel would be called out o f the north country and the lands where she had been scattered to enter again the new land o f promise (Jer 16:13). In the words o f Robert Carroll, The deuteronomist’s view is, "Only in exile and among the exiles is there hope for the future,” but that princi­ ple needs to be made more precise so as to reflect the proper nuance o f the [writer]. “Only in the Babylonian exile and among the Babylonian exiles is that hope to be found.”4 Restoring fortunes Within that literature o f the O ld Testament which schol­ ars call the deuteronomistic literature, there is a common theme. From the book o f Deuteronomy, through the narra­ tive o f 1 and 2 Kings, to the book o f Jeremiah (whose sec­ tions o f prose bear a close similarity to the speeches o f the deuteronomistic literature), there is anticipation o f the con­ tinued apostasy o f the people, the judgment of the people, and the future restoration o f the people. The exposition of this theme in 1 and 2 Kings is but one stage in its develop­ ment. Let us look at some aspects o f this development more closely. We shall briefly examine three passages: Deuteron­ omy 4:15-31; 1 Kings 8:14-53; and Jeremiah 32:1-44. In the Introduction, I quoted from the work o f Robert Polzin:

83

Hope, and the Anger of God

It is as though the deuteronomist is telling us in D eu­ teronomy, “Here is what God has prophesied concern­ ing Israel,” but in Joshua-2 Kings, “This is how God’s word has been exactly fulfilled in Israel’s history from the settlement to the destruction o f Jerusalem and the Exile.” With Polzin and others, I view Deuteronomy as an integral part o f this masterwork, the so-called deuteronomistic history. In Deuteronomy 4, toward the end o f the first major speech of M oses in the book, the themes o f judgment and restoration are addressed head-on. In verses 15-19 M oses warns the people, who are about to enter the land, o f the dangers o f apostasy and idol-making. The reason is that Israel is Yahweh’s special possession (v 20). In verses 21,22 there is a brief reference to M oses’ own fate. M oses was judged for his disobedience, and G od, in his anger, refused him entry into the Promised Land. This is an important statement. Even M oses, the architect o f the covenant soci­ ety, is not exempt from the standards G od sets out, nor from the penalty for disobedience. Verses 23,24 make a statement about the uniqueness o f God, and his “jealous” nature. This is followed in verses 25,26 with another warning against apostasy, and by a pre­ diction o f the judgment o f exile where the people will “serve gods o f wood and stone” (vv 27,28). In other words, they will have what they wished for! From this position o f exile and banishment the people will repent (vv 29,30), and will be restored because o f God’s mercy and grace, and because G od will not forget the covenant (v 31). Polzin points out that there is an implied tension between the judgment o f God on the one hand, and the mercy of G od on the other. In his opinion, this tension is also seen in the way the speech o f Moses is constructed. He uses the 1, 2 KINGS

84

helpful notion o f a “dialogue,” two voices struggling with an issue o f supreme importance to the readers. O n the one hand is “the voice o f retributive justice,” and on the other, “the voice o f unconditional and inexplicable election.”5 This is a very helpful image to bear in mind because it is repeated again and again throughout the history which follows, and is clearly in evidence in the early chapters of Judges. Here, sin and judgment are juxtaposed with grace and deliverance. In another “speech,” this time in the form o f a prayer, these two contrasting themes are picked up. A t the scene o f the dedication o f the temple in 1 Kings 8, the king, Solomon, offers a prayer (vv 14-53) which contains within it much o f the language o f Moses' speeches in Deuteronomy, as well as many o f the same themes. A t the same time, the prayer reflects the different setting. Solomon be­ gins his prayer with a summary o f G od’s faithfulness. A t the heart o f this summary is the promise made to David, con­ cluding with the appeal to David for constant faithfulness. Verses 27-30 contain a brief prayer concerning the temple. This is followed by a series o f prayers covering different topics: an offense against a neighbor (vv 31,32), defeat in battle (vv 33,34), drought (vv 35,36), famine (vv 37-40), the arrival o f a foreigner (vv 41-43), battle (vv 44,45), and finally exile because o f sin against G od (vv 46-53). In each case raised in the prayer, the potential problem is resolved when prayer toward the place where God dwells is answered. In the case o f exile, repentance brings forgive­ ness and a return to the land. The key is the graciousness and mercy o f the G od who brought Israel out o f Egypt The dialogue continues, but there is no conflict between the “voices” here, rather, as in a true dialogue, there is a search for meaning and for understanding o f the relationship be­ tween G od’s judgment (which seems perfectly justified) and G od’s mercy (to which Israel’s past history gives adequate testimony).

85

Hope, and the Anger of God

This dialogue is repeated in Jeremiah 32, but with a signif­ icant difference. In this narrative, which has all the flavor o f deuteronomistic writing, the voices are distinct and a true dialogue merges between the prophet and God himself. This story o f Jeremiah 32 is probably one o f the best known in the book o f Jeremiah. It is about the purchase o f a field in Anathoth at the time o f the Babylonian invasion. The story is full o f drama. In verses 1-5 the historical setting is given. The city is under siege. Jeremiah had warned o f this and for this boldness he was put in prison. The message is ominous and dear, "Behold, I am giving this city into the hand o f the king o f Babylon” (v 3). The command for Jeremiah to buy his cousin’s field in Anathoth (vv 6-8) follows immediately. When the cousin then shows up offering to sell the field, it confirms that the command came from God (v 8). Jeremiah obeys the command, then receives a hint as to the reason for the order. Given the circumstances, it is sur­ prising. For thus says the L o r d o f hosts, the G od o f Israel: Houses and fields and vineyards shall again be bought in this land. (Jer 32:15) This brief explanation stirs Jeremiah to prayer, seeking an answer to this puzzle. In the prayer (vv 16-25), the prophet reviews the past history o f G od with the people. The pattern is familiar. Although G od had rescued Israel from Egypt and given them a land, Israel has disobeyed by rejecting the Torah and now she is suffering the consequences. For much o f his previous life Jeremiah had devoted himself to the proclamation o f these consequences, so the judgment had come as no surprise to him. W hat had surprised him was the order to buy land! Notice the sense o f confusion in verses 24,25: 1 2 KINGS

86

W hat thou didst speak has come to pass, and behold, thou seest it Yet thou, O L o r d G o d , hast said to me, “Buy the field for money and get witnesses”— though the city is given into the hands of the Chaldeans. The explanation comes in the concluding speech o f G od in verses 26-44 and consists o f three elements. First, Jeremiah is right—the judgment of God upon the people was justified, and in this section o f the response there is an extended expo­ sition o f the nature o f the apostasy of Judah, similar to the accusations brought against Israel in 2 Kings 17. Second, God will bring the people back to the land and will renew his covenant with them (vv 36-41). Third, and most important, this is not the action o f a confused God, but o f the same God who brought Israel into existence in the first place. He is just, but also m erciful For thus says the LORD: Just as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so I will bring upon them all the good that I promise them. . . . for I will restore their fortunes, says the L o r d . (Jer 32:42-44) G od’s anger reveals his reaction to sin, but his fundamental disposition is still one o f grace. The understanding of the Exile in 1 and 2 Kings cannot be seen apart from this broader understanding o f judgment and exile in the entire work o f the deuteronomist The historical events he is interpreting needed to be seen for what they were—the judgment o f God upon an apostate people. But it is the judgment o f a God who had graciously brought this na­ tion into existence, saved her from slavery, bound himself to her in covenant, and given her a land. Such a God does not give up easily. 87

Hope, and the Anger of God

The writer sets the stage already for the return from exile in Deuteronomy 4 and in 1 Kings 8, reminding the reader occasionally throughout his narrative o f the gracious, saving action o f God. H e saved them from enemies in the time o f the judges (Judg 2:18). He promised to answer their prayers o f repentance (1 Kgs 8:46-53). He rescued them on a number o f occasions from the attacks o f hostile neighbors (2 Kgs 13:4-6; 22,23). He extended their borders even under the reign o f an apostate king (2 Kgs 14:23-26) and turned back the might o f the Assyrian army when Judah was threatened with extinc­ tion (2 Kgs 18:13—19:37). Even in exile there was a sense of continuity with th e existence o f the temple utensils. These symbols o f the presence o f G od were indeed im­ portant, but the hope for the future was seen even more in the continuity o f G od’s involvement in the life o f the peo­ ple. The action o f judgment was the action o f a God who had time and again shown that he cared for his people. H is behavior was consistent with what had been revealed before. The judgment was no arbitrary act, nor was it an abandon­ ment o f his heritage. Had it been either o f these, there would be no grounds for hope. A s it was, with his exposition o f the temporary nature o f the Exile, hope was kept alive.

1, 2 KINGS

88

8

CONCLUSION

The writer o f 1 and 2 Kings composed a skillfully penetrat­ ing narrative through which his readers could view, and un­ derstand, their p ast A s part o f the deuteronomistic history, 1 and 2 Kings follows the pattern o f narrative interspersed with summary speeches, prayers, or lengthy editorial comment Robert Polzin’s book Moses and the Deuteronomist examines the mode o f writing and composition from the books of Deuteronomy through Joshua, and later studies have traced this pattern through other parts o f the history. In the com­ mentary (WBC 13:xvi-xix), I examined this and other fea­ tures o f the writer’s style and technique, as did Professor DeVries (WBC 12:xxxviii-xlix). Recently, a fine essay on 1 and 2 Kings, written by George Savran, was published in the important volume, The Literary Guide to the Bible. This essay is highly recommended.1 It is important to appreciate that the books o f 1 and 2 Kings are not simply a repository o f stories about favorite individual Judeans or Israelites. While Solomon is an im­ portant (and somewhat tragic) figure, we do the narrative a 89

Conclusion

disservice by extracting the stories about him and treating them, whether in sermon or Bible study, as though they were without context The same is true o f Elijah or Elisha. These prophetic giants must be seen within the grand sweep o f Is­ rael’s history from conquest to Exile. They are part o f the sad decline o f the people o f God, and their strong voices o f oppo­ sition raised against injustice and apostasy serve to heighten the tragic seriousness o f that decline. As the writer himself points out, the people had been warned continually by the prophets, yet still persisted in their willful waywardness (2 Kgs 17:13,14). This is in af c t the heart o f the writer’s message. In our survey o f themes we have kept this in mind and sought to see what the entire narrative o f 1 and 2 Kings contributes to our understanding o f the role o f kings, proph­ ets, people, land, sin, judgment, and hope. O ur writer also takes the past very seriously, and in this regard he can rightly be called a historian. It would be impossible in this volume to become involved in the wideranging and complicated debate on the meaning and prac­ tice o f history. The debate will continue for many years to come. Again, in the commentary on 2 Kings I examined some o f the features o f this debate (W BC 13:xxx-xxxviii), and DeVries examined the issues in his volume (WBC 12:xxix-xxxviii). The writer did not pen the history o f an­ cient Israel in the same way a m odem historian would, but he could hardly be expected to do th at George Savran understands history correctly as "a selection o f details, the imposition o f a pattern o f organization, and the expression o f a historian’s point o f view.”2 M odem historians would select different details, impose a different pattern o f organi­ zation, and express a different point o f view, but that does not make the older way o f writing any less valuable as history. A t a time when much o f what passes for history is the collecting o f masses o f data— much o f it without con­ nection or meaning— it is refreshing to read something 1, 2 KINGS

90

which paints a picture in large but recognizable strokes. A s the boy in Dylan Thomas’s Christmas essay found out, it is disappointing to receive each year “books that told me ev­ erything about the wasp, except why.” The writer o f 1 and 2 Kings writes to understand and to inform, but he also writes with a deep passion. His passion is bom o f the fact that he writes about his own people and his own G od and the relationship between the two. A s Abra­ ham Heschel said, To comprehend what phenomena are, it is important to suspend judgment and think in detachment; to com­ prehend what phenomena mean, it is necessary to sus­ pend indifference and be involved.3 If the writer may be called “prophetic” in any sense o f the word, then he wrote with what Heschel called “pro­ phetic pathos,” and this moves him out o f the role o f “pure historian.” The prophets do not offer reflections about ideas in general. Their words are onslaughts, scuttling illusions o f false security, challenging evasions, calling faith to account, questioning prudence and impartiality.4 Prophets, whether they proclaim their words from the roof­ tops, in the marketplaces, or, as our writer does, through story, are an embarrassment. They make us uncomfortable because they deal with the issues o f life that really matter. The “bottom line” for our writer is the state of the relation­ ship o f his people to God, and nothing is more basic. He writes as a believer, as part o f that people. The writer’s belief is not bom simply from a reflection on his people’s past, from which he can draw conclusions. H is belief is bom rather o f a contemplation o f the biblical 91

Conclusion

G od— the G od o f Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the G od of Moses, Gideon, and Samuel. This G od is not narrowly de­ fined, nor is his truth limited, as the hymn writer stated, “to our poor reach o f mind.” This is a G od beyond human understanding (and control)— a G od who reveals himself in action and word, and who makes no excuses for himself. There is here— as in all contemplation o f the nature, character, and activity o f God— an element o f deep mystery. That God should judge his people is a mystery, but so is the af c t that he should love them in the first place. That he then chooses to restore and bless broadens the mystery. In an age when “information” rather than “knowledge” proliferates and when instant solutions to everything from the problem o f self-esteem to space travel are considered our prerogative, it is important to discover again this element o f mystery in the universe and in life. In his story o f Alexander the Great, the historian Arrian records the end o f this remarkable man’s life. Alexander had conquered the world while still young, but finally fell ill. His physicians cared for him and his priests prayed for him. It seemed inconceivable that this great man should not sur­ vive. But Arrian concludes this part o f his account, “But the gods’ command was made public, and soon afterward Alexander died— this being the better thing.”5 The “better thing” was to accept the mystery of the ultimate limitation of humans. N ot even Alexander could transcend this human condition. There is only one God, and the writer o f Kings writes in that conviction. In him, humans face an ultimate mystery whom they cannot control or manipulate. And in the history o f Israel, it is his will which is being demon­ strated. Having witnessed the exile o f a people once so blessed, and having felt the pain of bewilderment and confusion, the writer pulled his resources together to instruct, to condemn, and also to encourage. His knowledge o f G od is o f a God 1, 2 KINGS

92

whose disposition is one o f grace, and on this he builds a platform for future hope. He is an encourager. Much has been made in recent years o f the work o f the great literary figures o f the Exile and o f the postexilic period — men like the writer o f Isaiah 40-55, Ezekiel, the chroni­ cler, Ezra, Nehemiah, and the lesser-known prophets like Haggai and Zechariah and Malachi. They reconstruct a peo­ ple, a faith, and a religion out o f the loss o f land, temple, and king. Ezekiel has been called “the pastor o f the exiled con­ gregation,” and deservedly so. But it is the deuteronomist’s masterful exposition o f the past which provides the platform on which he can construct hope for the present and future.

93

Conclusion

NOTES

Preface 1. J. Ellul, The Politics o f C od an d the Politics o f M an , trans. G . W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972).

Chapter 1 Introduction 1. S. R. Driver, A C ritical an d Exegetical Com m entary on D ew teronomy, IC C (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1903). M. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy an d the Deuteronom istic School (Oxford: Oxford Uni­ versity Press, 1972). 2. J. H. Hayes and P. K. Hooker, A New Chronology for the K ings o f Israel an d Ju d ah (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988). Other chrono­ logical schemes exist, and comparisons are invited with S. J. DeVries “Chronology of the OT,” Interpreter’s D ictionary o f the Bible, vol. 1 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), 580-90. J. Bright, A History o f Israel, 3d ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1981), 465-73 (based on the work of W. F. Albright). 3. R. Polzin, Moses and the Deuteronom ist (New York: Seabury Press, 1980), 19.

Chapter 2 Kings 1. J. Ellul, The Politics o f G od an d the Politics o f M an , 18. 2. G . E. Mendenhall, “The Monarchy,” Interpretation 29 (1975):160. 3. F. S. Frick, “King,” H arper’s Bible D ictionary (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1985), 527.

95

N otes

Chapter 3 Prophets 1. G. von Rad, “The Deuteronomistic Theology o f History in the Books o f Kings,” in Studies in Deuteronomy, trans. D. Stalker (London: SCM Press, 1953), 74-91. 2. Ibid, 78. 3. G. E. Mendenhall review o f R. R. Wilson, Prophecy an d Soci­ ety in A ncient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980) in B iblical Archeologist 44 (1981), 190. Chapter 5 The Covenanted Land 1. W. Brueggemann, The L a n d (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977), 71-89. Chapter 6 Sin and Judgm ent 1. J. Goldingay, Theological Diversity and the Authority o f the O ld Testam ent (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 62. Chapter 7 H ope and the Anger of God 1. R. W. Klein, Israel in Exile: A Theological Interpretation (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979), 43. 2. B. T. Dahlberg, “Anger,” in Interpreter’s D ictionary o f the Bible, vol. 1 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), 1:135. 3. A. Heschel, The Prophets, vol. 2 (New York: Harper and Row, 1960), 86. 4. R. P. Carroll, From C haos to Covenant: Prophecy in the Book o f Jerem iah (New York: Crossroads, 1981), 248. 5. R . Polzin, Moses and the Deuteronom ist, 19. Chapter 8 Conclusion 1. G. Savran, “1 and 2 Kings,” in The Literary G uide to the Bible, eds. R. Alter and F. Kermode (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U niver­ sity Press, 1988), 146-64. 2. Ibid. 3. A. Heschel, The Prophets, vol. 1 (New York: Harper and Row, 1960), xii-xiii. 4. Ibid., xiii. 5. Arrian, The C am paign s o f Alexander, trans. A. de Selincourt (Harmondsworth, U .K.: Penguin Books, 1971), 394.

1, 2 KINGS

96

BIBLIOGRAPHY

All quotations in the body o f the text can be found in the various books listed below. Included in this list are those works cited in the text as well as others which may be of interest to the reader who would like to explore the general topics in more detail. Aharoni, Y. The L a n d o f the Bible. Tr. A. F. Rainey. 2d ed. Philadel­ phia: Westminster Press, 1979. Arrian. The C am paign s o f A lexander. Tr. A. de Selincourt. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1971. Blenkinsopp, J. A H istory o f Prophecy in Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983. A good m odem introduction to the prophets. Brueggemann, W. The L an d . Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977. __________. The Prophetic Im agination. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978. One o f the best popular introductions to the prophets. Carroll, R. P. From C h aos to C ovenant: Prophecy in the Book o f Jerem iah. New York: Crossroads, 1981. A detailed study o f the activity o f the deuteronomists.

97

Bibliography

Driver, S. R. A C ritical an d Exegetical Com m entary on Deuteron­ omy. IC C Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1903. Ellul, J. The Politics o f G od a n d the Politics o f M an . Tr. G. W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972. Goldingay, ]. Theological Diversity an d the Authority o f the O ld T estam ent Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. Goldingay treats the topic of the "people of God” as a test case in this interesting book. Hayes, J. H., and P. K. Hooker. A New Chronology for the K in gs o f Israel a n d Ju d ah . Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988. This book provides the basis for the dates in the chart on pp. 8-9. The topic of Old Testament chronology is an extremely complicated one (see WBC 13:xxxviii-xliv), and this book offers a new and workable approach. Heschel, A. The Prophets. 2 vols. New York: Harper and Row, 1960. Hobbs, T. R. "2 Kings 1 and 2: Unity and Purpose,” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 13 (1984) 327-34. _____. “The Search for Prophetic Consciousness: Some Com­ ments on Method,” Biblical Theology Bulletin 15 (1985): 136-41. Klein, R. W . Israel in Exile: A Theological Interpretation. Philadel­ phia: Fortress Press, 1979. Malina, B. J., and J. H. Neyrey. C allin g Jesu s N am es: The Social V alue o f L ab els in M atthew. Sonoma, Calif.: Polebridge Press, 1988. Apart from its intrinsic value, this book has an excellent series of charts on the differences between North American and Mediterranean culture. These differences are appealed to on many occasions in the present volume. McCarthy, D. J. Treaty an d Covenant. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1972. Mendenhall, G. E. “The Monarchy,” Interpretation 29 (1975):15570. _______. Review of R. R. Wilson, “Prophet and Society in Ancient Israel” in B iblical Archeologist 44 (1981):189-90. Polzin, R. Moses and the Deuteronom ist. New York: Seabury Press, 1980. Pritchard, J. B., ed. Ancient N ear E astern Texts Relating to the O ld Testam ent. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955. 1, 2 KINGS

98

Savran, G. “1 and 2 Kings” in The Literary Guide to the Bible, Eds. R. Alter and F. Kermode. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1988,146-64. Tadmor, H., and M. Cogan. II Kings: A New Translation with an Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 11. New York: Doubleday, 1988. von Rad, G. "The Theology of History in the Books of Kings,” in Studies in Deuteronomy. Tr. D. Stalker. London: SCM Press, 1953. Weinfeld, M. Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic School Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972.

99

Bibliography

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

O LD TESTA M EN T

Genesis 4:5- 8 4:6 15:7 17:1-8

80 81 54 54

Exodus 3:7-12 20:5

54 73

Leviticus 5:15-19

66

Numbers 32:23 34:1-12

66 55

Deuteronomy 4 4:6,7 4:15-31 4:25-31 4:32-40 5:6- 9 5:17

101

3,88 37 83,84 61 37 50 38,58

5:21 8:7-10 8:17,18 12:5,6 14:29 16-18 16:11 16:14 17:14-20 17:17 18:9-14 18:18 19:14 24:16 27:17 Joshua 6:26 13-18 13-19 21:44 23,24 Judges 2:11 2:18 3:7

38,58 54 54 56 38 16.17 38 38 16.17 44 23 16,28 38 73 37

34 38 54 54 3

45 88 45,79

3:12 4:1 6 6:1 8:22-9:57

45 45 28 45 15

Ruth 4:11

71

1 Samuel 1-12 8 8-12 8:5 8:6-9 8:10-14 8:10-18 8:11 10:25 16:7 18:3

13 3 14 14 13 15 17 16 17 20 47

2 Samuel 4 ,5 5:1-5 5:3 7

60 17 49 3,15,17,19,32

Index o f Scriptures

7:8-11 7:13 7:14 8:15 8:15-18 12:5 19:8

54 34 17 43 57 79 71

1 Kings 1,2 1-10 1:1 1:11 1:12-17 1:21 1:28-37 1:35 2:1-4 2:1-9 2:3 2:12 2:15 2:22 2:26 3 3:1,2 3:9 4 4:1 4:1-6 4:1-34 4:7-19 4:10 4:24 4:35 5:12 6 6:1 6:1-38 6:11-13 6:19 6:27 7 8 8:1 8:1-14 8:1-21 8:12-15 8:14-53 8:15

5 ,10,19,20 20 19 19 19 69 19 44 18,62 19 70 55 55 55 56 5,20 56 44 3 44 43 57 57 20 55 44 49 20 44 56 62 50 58 20 3,55,88 44 56 50 82 83,85 55

1 ,2 KINGS

8:20 8:22-53 8:23 8:27-30 8:31 8:33 834 8:35 8:41 8:41-43 8:44,45 8:4 6 8:46-51 8:46-53 8:47 8:50 9 9:1-9 9:4-9 9:7 9:10-14 9:15 10 11:1-7 11:1 11:1-13 11:2 11:4 11:9-13 11:11 11:11-13 11:14 11:14-40 11:29-39 1131 12 12,13 12:1-20 12:6-11 12:6-16 12:15 12:16 12:19 12:22-24 12:25-33 13 13:1-10 14:2-15 14:4-16 14:6-16

34 67 50 56 68 68 62 68 44 56,59 56 67 62 56,62,88 66,68 67,68 3 18,62 72 62 63 54 5 59 50 30 44,51 20 63 51 25 50 63 5,30,34 44 20 20,25 17 43 49 34 22,44 67 30 69 5,34,44 30 30 63 34

14:9 14:15 14:16 14:21,22 14:25-28 15-17 15:9-24 15:14 15:19 15:23 15:25 15:26 15:27 15:29 15:30 15:34 16:1-4 16:1-13 16:2 16:7 16:12 16:13 16:15-20 16:24 16:25 16:26 16:29-34 16:29-22:40 16:30-34 16:33 16:34 17:1 17:1-7 17:8-16 17:17-24 17:18 17:24 18 18:4 18:17 18:21 18:25-29 19 19:11 19:19-21 19:21 20 20:1-6 20:13-15 20:13-34

79 79 68 46 59,63 60 59 22 49 24 46 46,68 60 34 68,79 46,68 30,34 22 44,79 79 34 79 60 57 22 68,79 59 24 22 79 30,34 36,45 37 37 37 66 39 3,37 30 39 29 37 37 50 36 35 59 60 30 60

102

20:34 20:35-43 20:43 21 21:1-15 21:4 21:19 21:21-23 21:22 21:27-29 22 22:1-28 22:5-28 22:13-17 22:17 22:29-36 22:35-40 22:43 22:53

49 30,36 80 38,58 21 80 38,58 34 79 34 59 31 21 31 34 21 34 22 79

2 Kings 1 1:1 1:3 1:6 1:16 1:17 2 2-13 2:1-18 3 3:5 3:7 3:10 3:11 3:13, 14 4:1-4 4:9 5:1 5:1-7 5:2,3 6:32,33 7 7:1-2 7:9 7:16-20 8:5 8:7-10 8:7-15 8:20

38,51 36,67 39 34 39 34 36 35 36 38 67 67 38 35,39 38 38 39 81 38 39 38 39 39 66 39 39 40 38 67

103

8:20-22 8:22 9 9:1-10:36 10 10:28-36 10:29 10:31 10:32 11 11:4 11:12 11:14 11:17 12 12:2 12:17 12:19-21 13:2 13:3 13:4-6 13:5 13:11 13:14 13:19 13:22 13:22-35 13:23 14:3,4 14:6 14:17-22 14:17-27 14:23-26 14:23-29 14:24 14:25 15 15:3 15:5 15:9 15:13-15 15:18 15:24 15:28 15:34 17 17:2 17:7-18 17:11 17:13

63 67 35 24 35 63 68 68, 72 72 22,35 17,49 17 17 49 35 23 66 24 68 78 88 25 68 40 79 25 63 42,49 23 22 24 60 88 24 68 5,24,31 79 23 24 68 22 68 68 68 23 87 22 42,64 79 31, 75

17:13,14 17:15 17:17 17:19 17:21 17:23 17:34-40 17:35 17:38 18-20 18:3 18:4 18:12 18:13-19:37 19:1-7 19:1-20:19 19:27 19:34 20:1-11 20:5,6 20:12-19 21:1-17 21:1-18 21:2 21:6 21:8,9 21:10-15 21:16 22-23 22:1-23:30 22:2 22:8 22:11 22:14 22:15 22:15-20 22:17 23:1 23:16-18 23:19 23:24 23:26 23:27 23:28-30 23:30 24-25 24:2 24:2-4 24:18-25:30 24:20

72,90 42,49 79 25,64, 72 68 31 72 50 50 2 ,5 ,2 1 ,6 0 23 45 50 88 21 31 80 25 21,24 25 64 64 24 23 79 73 31,34 68 2 ,3 ,6 4 ,8 8 21 23 73 73 31 45 34 79 73 34 79 73 79 31 21, 25 34 60,82 34 31 6 79

Index of Scriptures

25:4-7 25:8-12 25:13-17 25:18-21 25:22-26 25:27-30

82 82 82 82 82 82

Psalms 2 51:13 77:9 78:1 89 110 119:14-16 119:18 132

15 69 81 81 15 15 70 70 15

Proverbs 14:17 17:27 25:1 27:4

80 80 11 80

Isaiah 7:1-17 11:1-16 29:13 36-38 40-55 44:9-20 Jeremiah 1:4-10 1:18, 19

1 ,2 KINGS

14 14 67 5 93 37

28 46

2:1-4 2:1-10 2:13 2:20 3-4 3:6 3:8 3:11 3:12 4:3 8:5 16:13 19-23 27-29 32:1-44 36 51:64 52 Hosea 1-3 4:1 5:1 7:7 8:4 11:1 Joel 2:13 Amos 3:7 Micah 1:5

75 32 46 67 25 68 68 68 68 45 68 83 46 83 83,86,87 21 6 6,82

32 45 14,45 14 14 32, 75

3:1 3:8 3:9

46 28 46

Malachi 1:1 4:5

42 11

NEW TESTAM EN T

Matthew 6:29

12

Mark 6:30-44 7:24-30 9 9:11-13

12 12 12 12

Luke 4:24-27 7:11-17

12 12

Acts 2:14-20

29

Romans 3:23

22

1 Corinthians 1:26-28

39

Hebrews 11:33, 34

12

80

5

45

104

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES 1 and 2 Chronicles RODDY L. BRAUN

ZONDERVAN ACAD EM IC

To the good people of Our Savior Lutheran Church Arlington, Virginia In appreciation for twelve years of our ministry together. “I thank my God in all my remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine for you all making my prayer with joy, thankful for your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now.” (Philippians 1:3–5 rsv) ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC 1 and 2 Chronicles Copyright © 1991 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11579-3 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Braun, Roddy. 1 and 2 Chronicles: Roddy Braun. p.  cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-849-90790-6 1. Bible. O.T. Chronicles—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Bible. O.T. Chronicles. English. Braun. 1990. II. Title. III. Title: 1 and 2 Chronicles. IV. Series. BS1345.2.B72 1991AA 222’.606—dc290-36380 Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from the author’s translation. Scripture quotations marked RSV are taken from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Copyright © 1952 [2nd edition 1971] by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

CONTENTS

Foreword Introduction 1. The God of the Fathers 2. The Temple David and the temple The temple in 1 Chronicles 22-28 Solomon and the temple The temple and the post-Solomonic kings Priests and Levites The purpose of the temple 3. The Kingdom of God David David in the Deuteronomistic History David in Chronicles Solomon in the Deuteronomistic History Solomon in Chronicles Post-Solomonic kings of Israel Chronicles and Messianism The kingdom of God in the New Testament

V

vii 1 5 7 9 11 14 18 19 25 26 28 30 34 36 42 43 44

4. The People of God: All Israel The rise of David (1 Chronicles 10-12) David and the ark (1 Chronicles 13-17) All Israel and the temple All Israel in 2 Chronicles 10-36 Apostasy in the north Israel in the New Testament 5. The Word of God 6. Divine Retribution Uzziah and Ahaz Hezekiah Manasseh and Josiah The last kings of Judah Seeking and forsaking God The marks of prosperity Forsaking Yahweh 7. The Perfect H eart Joy as an expression of a perfect heart The perfect heart in the New Testament 8. The Mercy of God 9. The Promised Rest “Rest” in the Deuteronomistic History “Rest” in Chronicles Summary Notes Bibliography Index of Scripture Passages

iv

47 47 48 49 51 54 57 61 69 74 76 79 80 81 84 87 91 93 95 99 105 106 109 112 115 119 121

1, 2 C H R O N I C L E S

FOREWORD

Finding the great themes of the books of the Bible is essential to the study of God’s Word, and to the preaching and teaching of its truths. But these themes or ideas are often like precious gems; they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered with some difficulty. The large com­ mentaries are useful in this discovery process, but they are not usually designed to help the student trace the important subjects within a given book of Scripture. The Quick-Reference Bible Topics meet this need by bringing together, within a few pages, all of what is con­ tained in a biblical volume on the subjects that are thought to be most significant to that volume. A companion series to the Word Biblical Commentary, these books seek to distill the theological essence of the biblical books as interpreted in the more technical series and to serve it up in ways that will enrich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship of God’s people. The books of Chronicles present an alternative retelling of the story which began with Adam and culminated with Foreword

V

David and Solomon’s heirs in Jerusalem. Roddy L. Braun has extracted the most important themes from that story which give it relevance and meaning for us. This volume is sent forth in the hope that it will contribute to the vitality of God’s people, renewed by the Word and the Spirit and ever in need of renewal. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky

vi

John D. W. Watts Old Testament Editor Word Biblical Commentary Quick-Reference Bible Topics

1 , 2 C H R O N IC L E S

INTRODUCTION

Casual readers of the Old Testament are prone to make two common errors in their approach to the Old Testament. First, in their study of the prophets they tend to treat the prophets’ words as completely theological and ignore the his­ torical background of the book. Secondly, in studying what we usually term the historical books, they concern them­ selves only with the historical aspect of the work and ignore its theological message. In both cases, the result is a misread­ ing of the divinely intended message. The study of Chronicles presents a unique opportunity to see the theological side of what we usually call a histori­ cal writing. We have in the books of Samuel-Kings the commonly acknowledged source which the Chronicler used in writing his own “history” of Israel. This permits us to view in much clearer perspective the alterations, dele­ tions, and additions which the author has introduced into his text. W hile the possibility of error must be acknowl­ edged with regard to smaller changes, and the possibility of textual difficulties is always possible, we are on firmer Introduction

vii

ground in appraising the larger additions which the C hron­ icler has made to his work. Accordingly, in this book pri­ mary attention will be directed to material found in those sections of Chronicles which have no parallel in SamuelKings. W hile it has in the past been considered scholarly ortho­ doxy to view the two books of Chronicles and the books of Ezra and Nehemiah as coming from the pen of the same author, this theory has faced serious criticism of late. Ac­ cordingly, in this work Ezra and Nehemiah will be left aside. Readers wishing to explore that relationship in more detail may test the unity or disunity of this literary corpus by considering the themes presented in this book and compar­ ing them with the text of Ezra and Nehemiah. Among critical scholars, two larger sections of 1 Chroni­ cles are often denied to the Chronicler: chapters 1-9 and chapters 23-27. Since the inclusion of these chapters in the material of this book would not alter substantially its con­ tents (the themes of “all Israel” and of priests and Levites found there are well-represented elsewhere in Chronicles), minimal attention has been paid to them in this work. Years ago, Gerhard von Rad saw in some of the speeches in Chronicles certain characteristics which led him to define these speeches as “Levitical sermons.” In recent years, some attention has been given to the attempt to define the literary type which is of the essence of the book of Chronicles. One term that has been used in that connection is midrash, a name applied to ancient Jewish commentaries upon a por­ tion of Scripture. The midrashim (pl.) are of a nonlegal and often fanciful nature. W hile such attempts are of interest, and a similarity in the manner in which such sermons and works have dealt with a biblical text is present, no meaning­ ful breakthrough can be said to have occurred in Chronicles studies, and the matter has not been pursued here. Chroni­ cles is what it is—a writer or writers, believed by adherents viii

1, 2 CHRONICLES

of church and synagogue to have been working under di­ vine inspiration, pondering another text which he would have accepted as authoritative and retelling that story with particular emphasis upon matters which he considered cru­ cial for the people of his own day. W hether that process be called sermonizing or a reflection of devotional piety, the result is the same. The books of Chronicles are a message to people based upon an earlier message, which the later au­ thor has adapted to his particular situation and to his un­ derstanding of God’s deeds with his people. Readers of the Bible today follow the same process in applying the text to their own situation. It is this same task of interpreting the biblical message for a new audience in a later day that falls to preachers and teachers of church and synagogue as they seek to make God’s Word relevant to the people whom they serve. There is much we do not know about Chronicles. We do not know who the writer or writers were, nor when the book was w ritten, or to whom. Earlier opinions which placed at least the great bulk of the book as late as 300 B.C. or even later appear to be yielding to others which place the work earlier, even as early as the Exile.1 Many emphases of the book would be most appropriate in the period sur­ rounding the building of the second temple, which was dedicated in 515 B.C. W ithin the canon of the English Bible, the books of Chronicles immediately follow the books of Kings and pre­ cede the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and are usually termed “history.” However, in the Hebrew canon Chronicles is the last book of the Bible, a position which it seems to have had in Jesus’ day according to the reference in Matthew 23:25. (The last martyr to whom he refers seems certainly to be the Zechariah whose murder is recorded in 2 Chronicles 24:2021.) It is a puzzling anomaly that in the Hebrew canon Chron­ icles is preceded by Ezra-Nehemiah, a book or books which Introduction

IX

certainly deal with a later historical period. As such, both are parts of the third portion of the Jewish canon usually referred to with the rather nondescript term, “the Writings,” while, for example, the books of Samuel and Kings are found in that part of the canon called the Former Prophets, which reached canonical status some time earlier. This third portion of the Hebrew canon was apparently still only loosely organized in New Testament times, where it is referred to as “the Psalms,” after its most prominent p a rt It would remain for the rab­ binic council meeting in Jamnia in 90 A.D. to define clearly the contents of this last part of the Hebrew canon. At any rate, however, the term “history” is not an appropriate desig­ nation for writings in which theological interpretation and prophetic preachment is so prom inent The following outline of the two books, which recognizes the important position of 1 Chronicles 22-29 in unifying two parts of the work often pitted against each other, may be helpful to the reader:.I I. Genealogical Prologue, 1 C hr 1-9 II. The United Monarchy A. The David History, 1 C hr 10-21 B. Transitional Unit, 1 C hr 22-29 C. The Solomon History, 2 C hr 1-9 III. The Divided Monarchy, 2 C hr 10-36 In this volume, translations are regularly my own, unless otherwise noted. Some effort has been made to remain as close to the Revised Standard Version as possible, except in the use of the Tetragrammaton, which has regularly been transliterated “Yahweh,” and in other cases where clarity or precision demanded otherwise. Occasionally, a Hebrew word or grammatical term may appear in this volume. I hope that such terms will aid those who know at least some of the Hebrew language. For the readers unfamiliar with that language, I have sought to make the meaning clear X

1, 2 CHRONICLES

within the contrat. I hope that I have succeeded. W here a reference is identified WBC 15, I am quoting from the translation of Raymond Dillard in his volume 2 Chronicles in the Word Biblical Commentary, volume 15. Roddy L. Braun O ur Savior Lutheran Church Arlington, Virginia

Introduction

xi

1 TH E GOD OF TH E FATHERS

O Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, our fathers, keep for ever such purposes and thoughts in the hearts of your people, and direct their hearts toward you. (1 Chr 29:18) The Bible is first of all a book about God. Theology in all of its branches is words or study (Greek logos) about God (theos). It is especially necessary to make this point at the begin­ ning of a study of Chronicles, where it might be particularly easy to lose sight of that fact. Lengthy genealogies, the promi­ nence of such topics as the temple, David and Solomon and Israel’s other kings, and retribution (even divine retribution) can divert our attention from the God whom the inspired writer we shall call the Chronicler saw as the very center of his community’s faith and life. Chronicles is meant to be read in the context of the entire Old Testament story of God’s dealings with his people. That is made apparent, first of all, from the first nine chapters of T h e G o d o f t h e F a th e r s

1

the work, in which “the story” is summarized by means of a lengthy genealogical prologue. (A New Testament writer, Matthew, will use the same means several centuries later to span the entire history of Israel from Abraham to Jesus; see Matt 1:1-17; also Luke 3:23-38.) The God with whom the books of Chronicles have to do is the Creator God and the God of all creation. His people reach all the way back to Adam, Enoch, Methusaleh, and Noah (1 C hr 1:1-4). They include all of the sons of Noah’s son Shem, or the Semites as we know them today; and not only the Semitic peoples, but the descendants of Japheth and Ham (1 C hr 1:5-16), includ­ ing Egyptians and Canaanites alike. Israel’s God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael (1 Chr 1:28), the progenitor of the Arab tribes. He is the God of Jacob/Israel and Esau/Seir, the father of the Edomites (1 Chr 1:34-54). He is the one and only God, as David will confess in his prayer, to whom belongs the kingdom, the power, and the glory, to whom belongs everything in heaven and on earth (1 Chr 29:10-13). But in a special sense this God, who revealed his name and character to Moses as Yahweh (conventionally translated L o r d ), is the God of Abraham (1 C hr 1:28, 34), with whom he entered into a special covenant and through whose de­ scendants he promised to bring blessing upon all the families of the earth (Gen 12:1-4). Yahweh is the God of the fathers, or patriarchs—of Abra­ ham, of his son Isaac, of Isaac’s son Jacob (renamed Israel in Gen 35:10), and of the twelve tribes or subdivisions named after Jacob’s twelve sons, to which the name Israel has come to be attached. The lengthy genealogies of 1 Chronicles 2-8, introduced with the simple “These are the Israelites: . . . ,” spare no detail and make no compromise with the reader’s patience or interest in establishing that point. It is about this Yahweh as God of the fathers, God of Israel, that we read most frequently in the books of Chronicles. 2

1, 2 CHRONICLES

David prays to him as “Yahweh, the God of our father Israel” (1 C hr 29:10). He is, in words that we read repeat­ edly, “the God of the fathers” (2 C hr 24:18,24; 28:6, 9,25), “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel” (1 C hr 29:6), and most frequently simply “the God of Israel” (2 C hr 6:4; 7:11, 16; 13:5; 15:4, 13). It was he who chose David to be king over Israel forever (1 C hr 28:4), and upon the throne of whose kingdom Solomon would sit as king (1 C hr 29:23). Though he cannot be confined to an earthly temple, yet he has deigned to place his name in his house in Jerusalem, where rests the ark of his presence (1 C hr 28:2). It is be­ fore this God that the priests and Levites minister, and before whom his people Israel is to worship. It is he who speaks to his people by the m outh of his prophets (2 C hr 36:15). It is he, “the God of heaven,” who will stir up the spirit of the Persian king Cyrus to release a captive remnant of “his people” to return to Jerusalem in Judah to build him a house (2 C hr 35:23). Chronicles therefore is not summoning the people of its day to the service of a new deity, or even to new forms of service. The writer is urging them to take up again their loyalty to the God who long ago made them his people and who has dealt with them so faithfully in the past. He is summoning them to the same institutions which their fa­ thers knew, and to the obedience of the same statutes which their fathers obeyed. In such a program they would find the blessing and prosperity which God desired for his people. Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike are strong to empha­ size the connection or relationship between this “God of the fathers,” the God of the Hebrew Scriptures, and their own faith. The New Testament, for example, cannot be under­ stood properly except in terms of its claim to be the fulfill­ ment of the Old Testament. We have already referred to the tracing of Jesus’ lineage to David and Abraham, and even beyond that to Adam and God. The God of the Fathers

3

“Son of David” is a regular designation of the One who is viewed as the fulfillment of the Messianic promise to David (cf. Matt 1:1; Mark 10:47; Rom 1:3-4), and the charge brought against Jesus before Pilate was that he claimed to be the king of the Jews (Luke 23:3). The preaching of the apos­ tolic age, as evidenced in the sermon of Stephen (Acts 7), tells the Old Testament story as a part of its own story. Jesus proclaims his own unity with that Father (John 10:30), and prays to him from the cross (Luke 23:34). The God who spoke to the fathers through the prophets “has in these last days spoken to us through a Son” (Heb 1:1-2). Thus a prin­ ciple exemplified so early in Old Testament history contin­ ues to be a significant part of the message of the church.

4

1, 2 CHRONICLES

2 TH E TEM PLE

Now Solomon planned to build a temple for the name of Yahweh, and a royal palace for himself. . . . And Solomon sent word to Huram the king of Tyre: “. . . Behold, I am building a house for the name of Yahweh my God and dedicate it to him for the burning of incense of sweet spices before him, and for the continual offering of the showbread, and for burnt offerings morning and evening, on the sabbath and the new moons and the appointed feasts of Yahweh our God, as ordained for ever for Israel. The house which I am build­ ing will be great, for our God is greater than all gods. But who is able to build him a house, since heaven, even highest heaven, cannot contain him? Who am I to build a house for him, except as a place to burn incense before him?” (2 Chr 2:1, 3-6) At the center of the books and of the concerns of C hron­ icles stands the temple. Sometimes the focus is on the tem­ ple per se, sometimes the concern is broadened to include T h e T e m p le

5

the ministers and services of the temple. Sometimes these concerns are explicit; at other times they are partially ob­ scured by the larger presentation of which they are a part, but of which they in fact stand at the heart. By way of example, 1 Chronicles 10-12 portrays the rise of David—but it will be the function of David, in company with Solomon, to build the temple. First Chronicles 23-27 deals principally with the priests and Levites, as do many other sections of Chronicles, but their function is the ministry of the temple. In 2 Chronicles 10-36 the post-Solomonic history of Israel is told, and we will show that the concept of retribution lies at the base of the Chronicler’s presentation. However, that history also revolves around the temple. The temple is central too, we might recall, in Deuteron­ omy (D) and the Deuteronomistic History (DH), that por­ tion of the Old Testament showing marked similarities to Deuteronomy in vocabulary, style, and content and consist­ ing of the books of Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings. Deuteronomy’s insistence upon a single sanctuary, com­ monly understood as the Jerusalem temple, is well known (cf. Deut 12:1-14; 26:1-4). The narrative up to the erection of the temple by Solomon moves steadily if slowly and cir­ cuitously to that point. And the overwhelming significance of that event for the writer is clear not only from the amount of space devoted to its building and dedication (1 Kgs 6-8), but also from the length and content of the speeches placed on Solomon’s lips by the author (1 Kgs 8:12-53,54-61). It is also on the basis of their relationships to the Jerusalem tem­ ple that post-Solomonic kings of both Israel and Judah are judged; and the fate of the temple and its vessels constitutes a significant part of the narrative of the af ll of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 24:13; 25:13-17). As is often the case, however, the writer or writers of Chronicles, whom we without prejudice call “the Chronicler,” 6

1, 2 CHRONICLES

often adopts and develops a principle enunciated earlier by D and DH in a much more consistent and thorough man­ ner. (See especially the concept of “retribution” in chapter 6, and “rest” in chapter 9.) Israel’s history from David and Solomon to the temple, and afterward to the fall of the nation, is told for the sake of the temple. David and the temple This perspective on Israel’s history may not seem as clear with respect to David as it does to Solomon, even though many scholars have emphasized David’s role in the construction of the temple (and in Chronicles in general) at the expense of Solomon. The first chapters of what we might call “The David History” (1 C hr 10-21) speak of David’s rise to power in accordance with God’s will and word and of Israel’s unanimous consent to that rule (1 C hr 10-12). Yet the purpose for which David has been chosen as king by Yahweh is the building of the temple in conjunc­ tion with Solomon. The same kind of support—unani­ mous and enthusiastic—will be sought for Solomon by David and accorded him by “all Israel” (cf. 2 C hr 29, espe­ cially vv 23-25). Following David’s acclamation as king at Hebron by “all Israel” (2 C hr 11:1-3), David moves immediately to the con­ quest of Jerusalem, destined to be the site of Yahweh’s tem­ ple (2 C hr 11:4-9). After the inclusion of a potpourri of lists (1 C hr 11:10-12:37), the purpose of which is to demonstrate the extent of David’s popular support (1 C hr 12:38-40 [in Hebrew, these are verses 39-41]) by all Israel, attention turns immediately to the ark of the covenant, the centerpiece of the temple (1 C hr 13:1-14). The failure of this first mission, later explained as due to the failure of the Levites to carry the ark (1 C hr 15:2, 14-15), provides opportunity for the inclusion of assorted notices from 2 Samuel 5 highlighting The Temple

7

David’s fame and family and portraying his victory in warfare (1 Chr 14:1-16; see especially verse 17, which is added by the Chronicler). The ark is clearly central again in chapters 15 and 16, with emphasis now—perhaps added by a later au­ thor—upon the various Levitical families and their tasks (1 C hr 15:4-24; 16:4-6). The ark is successfully delivered to Jerusalem (1 C hr 16:1-4) and properly cared for by its Leviti­ cal attendants, as is the tabernacle, which according to the Chronicler’s presentation was left at Gibeon together with the altar of burnt offering (1 C hr 16:39-42; cf. 2 C hr 1:1-6). From Gibeon it will later be brought to Jerusalem to rejoin the ark (2 C hr 5:5). W ith these arrangements taken care of, attention can be­ gin to be focused upon the temple itself, and this is done in 1 Chronicles 17, the Chronicler’s version of the dynastic ora­ cle of 2 Samuel 7. Here it is affirmed that not David, but one of his sons, i.e., Solomon, will actually build the temple.1 This focus upon the temple appears to be interrupted by 1 Chronicles 18-20, which chapters recount various wars of David from 2 Samuel 8,10, 12, and 21. The writer’s reason for including these chapters is difficult to say. It may be that the author has simply repeated them “because they were there,” or because he wished to show David’s prowess, or to depict David as a bloody warrior unfit to build the temple (cf. 1 C hr 22:8). However, the Chronicler’s own addition in 1 Chronicles 18:8 (see 2 Sam 8:8, where the reference to Solomon’s use of the bronze is absent) points to the use of the spoils of battle in the manufacture of the temple vessels (cf. 2 C hr 5:1). A more direct focus upon the temple is resumed in 1 Chronicles 21 (2 Sam 24), which concludes with David’s sacrifice at and purchase of the threshing floor of O m an the Jebusite. One may expect that the significantly higher price paid for the threshing floor (six hundred shekels of gold in 8

1, 2 CHRONICLES

1 Chronicles 21:25 versus fifty shekels of silver in 2 Samuel 24:24) is indicative of the higher value which the Chronicler wishes to place upon property purchased for such a noble endeavor. A t any rate, David’s offering and prayer is in 1 Chronicles 21:26b answered directly by Yahweh with fire from heaven, and once again the Chronicler adds his own conclusion to the description of the events: A t that time, when David saw that Yahweh had an­ swered him at the threshing floor of O m an the Jebusite, he made his sacrifices there. For the tabernacle of Yahweh, which Moses had made in the wilderness, and the altar of burnt offering were at that time in the high place at Gibeon; but David could not go before it to inquire of God, for he was afraid of the sword of the angel of Yahweh. Then David said, “Here shall be the house of Yahweh God, and here the altar of burnt offeringfor Israel.” (1 C hr 21:28-22:1 RSV, italics added) W ith the ark in Jerusalem, the Levites correctly ordered for its service, the location of the temple defined, and the prop­ erty purchased, all appears to be in readiness for the work on the temple to begin. There remain, however, several unanswered questions. W ho is the divinely chosen successor of David, who will build the temple? How will it be built? W here will the funds come from? W ho will tend its altars, maintain its ordinances, and lead its worship? These questions are addressed in 1 Chroni­ cles 22-28. The temple in 1 Chronicles 2 2 -2 8 The answer provided to the first question is clearly, “Solomon.” T hat is the primary apologetic thrust of

The Temple

9

1 Chronicles 22,28-29. (Chapters 23-27 are probably a later addition to the Chronicler’s work, but are nevertheless di­ rected primarily toward the functionaries of the temple, the Levites, ch 23; the priests, ch 24; the singers, ch 25; and the gatekeepers, ch 26. Only with chapter 27 does the au­ thors) turn to David’s civil officials.) The writer in this im­ portant section demonstrates that Solomon was divinely chosen to build the temple in no less than three ways:2 1. By the use of the concept of rest (see pp. 105-13), he affirms that David could not build the temple, since he was a “man of war” and had “shed blood” (1 C hr 28:3; cf. 1 C hr 22:7). Solomon, whose very name means “peace,” was the chosen temple builder, in whose days Yahweh would grant the peace, rest, and quietness which are the prerequisites for building his temple (1 C hr 22:9-10; 28:6-7). 2. In the Chronicler’s account, both 1 Chronicles 22 and 28 show signs of being modeled upon a literary form for the induction of an individual into an office, and specifically upon such a form as is found in connection with Moses’ induction of Joshua (Josh 1). There Joshua is inducted, for example, for the twofold task of conquering the land and apportioning it to the tribes of Israel (Deut 31:7-8; Josh 1:5-6). The book of Joshua in fact follows the same outline (conquest, chs 1-12; apportionment, chs 13-21; final mat­ ters, chs 22-24). In that context it then becomes most sig­ nificant that the only task given to Solomon throughout chapters 22 and 28 is the construction of the temple: Now, my son, may Yahweh be with you, so that you may succeed in building the house of Yahweh your God, as he has spoken concerning you. (1 C hr 22:11) He will not fail you or forsake you, until all the work for the service of the house of Yahweh is finished. (1 C hr 28:10) 10

1, 2 CHRONICLES

We may accordingly conclude that the reason that Chroni­ cles modeled its presentation upon that of Joshua was to affirm that Solomon was the divinely chosen temple builder. 3. The Chronicler states in so many words that Yahweh chose (Heb. bähar) Solomon to be his son (1 C hr 28:6), to build his sanctuary (1 C hr 28:10) and his palace (1 C hr 29:1). No other Old Testament writer speaks of the election of any king after David! We thus feel justified in maintaining that the principal purpose of 1 Chronicles 22, 28-29 is to designate Solomon as the divinely chosen temple builder. In looking at these chapters, other themes and functions in relationship to the temple also become clear. Chief among these is the desire to indicate the profuse amount of materi­ als provided by David and the people to construct the tem­ ple (22:1-5, 14-16; 28:14-18; 29:1-9). Prominent also is the desire to solicit and gain the support of Israel’s leaders (28:1) and, indeed, of all Israel for both the temple project and for Solomon’s leadership (29:6-10, 20-25). Finally, the plans which David gave to Solomon for the temple (and, according to the present text, even the most detailed arrangements of the temple) are said to be plans from the hands of Yahweh himself (28:19; cf. verses 11-18). The total effect from reading these chapters, including the beautiful prayer attributed to David (29:10-19), is of a di­ vinely ordained and defined project to be completed by King Solomon, to which David and all Israel respond with piety, joy, unanimity, generosity, and obedience, both to the Lord and to his chosen king and temple builder, Solomon. Solomon and the temple Chronicles begins the story of Solomon’s reign with the account of Solomon’s sacrifices at Gibeon, as does 1 Kings 3:4. But for the Chronicler this mention becomes The Temple

11

the occasion for a Solomon-led procession of all Israel to the legitimate tent of meeting of Moses, where the legiti­ mate bronze altar is located. This act of Solomon’s faithful­ ness forms the backdrop against which Yahweh’s first epiphany to Solomon occurs, culminating in Yahweh’s as­ surance of unequaled wisdom, wealth, and honor for Solomon (2 C hr 1:7-13). Verses 14-17, which the Chroni­ cler has transferred to this location from 1 Kings 10:26-29 in preference to the rather disparate account of 1 Kings 3:16-4:34, pictures fittingly and briefly Solomon’s military strength and the wealth which followed. W ith chapter 2, Chronicles moves directly to its concern for the temple. After his initial statement of the theme (v 1; Heb. 1:18*), Solomon gathers laborers for the task and ar­ ranges with Huram for the necessary materials (vv 1-15). But the Chronicler has used Solomon’s correspondence with Huram not only to request timber for his building opera­ tions, but also through the rewriting of Solomon’s message (vv 2-9) has included what amounts to both a confession of faith for Solomon and a significant statement of the purpose of the temple as seen by the writer (vv 3-5). Chronicles finds Kings’ description of the temple as only a place of prayer inadequate, and supplements it strongly with references to sacrifice (vv 4, 6; Heb. vv 3, 5). Solomon’s request for a craftsman to direct the more delicate work, which in Kings had stood quite alone (1 Kgs 7:13-14), is also made an origi­ nal part of Solomon’s request. Huram’s reply is similarly altered. It concerns itself not only with the formalities of diplomatic correspondence as in Kings, but also adds as a kind of qualifying phrase to the statement concerning Solomon’s wisdom the phrase “who will build a temple ” for Yahweh and a royal palace for himself (2 C hr 2:12, Heb. * In th e H ebrew original tex t, it is 1:18. T h is abbreviated form w ill be used to indicate a v ariatio n in references.

12

1, 2 CHRONICLES

v 11). As well, his reply outlines the arrangements made for Huramabi to serve as a craftsman for Solomon.3 The description of the temple’s construction in 2 Chroni­ cles 3-5 is largely parallel with 1 Kings 6-7, where the tem­ ple and its cult could hardly be more central. However, Chronicles adds in 5:11-13 a characteristic note concerning the participation of the Levitical singers in the ceremonies marking the transfer of the ark into the temple. Solomon’s lengthy dedicatory prayer is likewise repeated almost verba­ tim (2 C hr 6:12-40 = 1 Kgs 8:22-53), although Chronicles alters the final verses to refer to the resting of the ark in its place and to the Davidic covenant rather than to the events of the Exodus. Immediate divine approval for Solomon’s prayer is indicated by the appearance of fire from heaven, as in the case of David’s prayer from the threshing floor of O m an (2 C hr 7:1; cf. 1 C hr 21:26). After the completion of the dedicatory feast, which the Chronicler has expanded to fourteen days (2 C hr 7:9; cf. 1 Kgs 8:66), the participation of the Levites is again noted (2 Chr 7:6), and a second appearance of Yahweh to Solomon is recorded (vv 11-22). Once again in this second discourse as framed by the Chronicler there is considerably more empha­ sis upon the temple than was the case in Kings (1 Kgs 9:2-9, where the dynastic emphasis is more central; cf. 1 Kgs 9:4-5). The significant insertion of the Chronicler in 2 Chronicles 7:12b-15 concentrates once again upon the temple as a place of sacrifice (v 12b) and upon the need for repentance and seeking Yahweh’s face, all of which are clearly major themes for the author.4 A fter inclusion of much of the material of 1 Kings 9:1028, where the Chronicler’s literary sensitivities are apparent in that he has smoothed out much of the disparate charac­ ter of the Kings account, the entire temple pericope reaches its conclusion for the Chronicler with Solomon’s inaugura­ tion of the weekly, monthly, and annual sacrifices, together The Temple

13

with the appointment of the divisions of the priests, Levitical singers, and gatekeepers as directed by David (2 C hr 8:12-15). The end of the temple narrative per se is reached in the following verse, also unique to Chronicles: Thus was accomplished all the work of Solomon from the day the foundation of the house of Yahweh was laid until it was finished. So the house of Yahweh was com­ pleted. (2 C hr 8:16) The account of the visit of the queen of Sheba and other closing notes climax the report of Solomon’s prosperity, marking his God-pleasing reign (2 C hr 9:1-31). The temple and the post-Solomonic kings This central position of the temple is retained in the narra­ tive of both the disruption of the kingdom under Rehoboam and the subsequent narrative of post-Solomonic kings. It was probably the Chronicler who first emphasized the role of Jeroboam in the schism. Chronicles notes that the priests and Levites in all Israel resorted to Rehoboam from wherever they lived because Jeroboam had dismissed them from serving as priests to Yahweh and appointed his own priests for the high places he had made (2 Chr 11:13-15). And those who had set their hearts to seek Yahweh God of Israel came after them from all the tribes of Israel to Jerusalem to sacrifice to Yahweh. (2 C hr 11:16 RSV)

The Chronicler has reserved his definitive statement concerning the temple (and the dynasty), however, for the confrontation between Jeroboam and Abijah (2 C hr 13). In the speech placed in Abijah’s mouth prior to his battle with 14

1, 2 CHRONICLES

Jeroboam, the north is taken to task for its apostasy from the Davidic dynasty and from the worship in the legitimate temple in Jerusalem. However, the major emphasis both here and throughout the remainder of the work is clearly upon the temple. The north has forsaken Yahweh, the true God, since the people there have driven out Yahweh’s priests, the Aaronites and Levites, and installed priests like other nations (2 C hr 13:9). Judah, on the other hand, has not forsaken Yahweh, for its people have the legitimate priesthood and keep the prescribed ceremonies (vv 9-11). The result is that Yahweh is with Judah, and her victory is assured. There is no evidence that the Chronicler ever devi­ ated from this view of the unique significance of the Jerusalem sanctuary. We may cover the remainder of 2 Chronicles in a more cursory way. This is so because, once the temple has been established and its significance also for Israel and Judah after the schism has been confirmed, its position, while no less significant, is often more in the background as the tale of retribution unwinds. As a part of his reforms, Asa repairs the altar of Yahweh (2 C hr 15:8) and gathers the faithful from both north and south to Jerusalem for sacrifice and a covenant before the Lord (vv 8-15). Jehoshaphat proclaims a fast throughout Judah when threatened by a coalition of Moabites, Am­ monites, and Meunites, and his prayer of faith “in the house of Yahweh, before the new court,” is recorded (2 C hr 20:612) as well as Yahweh’s answer there given by the prophet Jahaziel (vv 15-17). The entire history of Joash revolved around the temple, for he was, according to Chronicles, raised secretly in the temple for six years during the reign of the wicked Athaliah by the wife of Jehoiada the priest (2 C hr 22:11-12), and then crowned as king in the temple with the support of the priests and Levites (2 C hr 23:1-21). He made plans to restore The Temple

15

the house of the Lord, and reinstituted the tax levied by Moses (2 Chr 24:4-14). But after the death of Jehoiada, the princes of Judah and the king “forsook the house of Yahweh, the God of their fathers, and served the Asherim and the idols” (v 18), with the result that wrath came upon Judah and Jerusalem (vv 18, 23-24). Chronicles reports that during the reign of Amaziah, King Joash of Israel seized all the gold and silver and vessels found in the temple (2 C hr 25:24). Uzziah attempted to bum incense in the temple and became angry with the priests who attempted to dissuade him, and was stricken with leprosy in the temple as a result (2 C hr 26:16-20). Judah’s fortunes seem to reach their nadir under the wicked King Ahaz, who shut the very doors of the house of Yahweh and built altars in every comer of Jerusalem and constructed high places throughout Judah (2 C hr 28:24-25). It is left to King Hezekiah, for whom the Chronicler’s devotion is almost boundless, to reverse this situation. It takes the Chronicler four lengthy chapters (2 Chronicles 29-32) to recount his heroics. The temple is cleansed, sin offerings are made for “all Israel” (29:20-24), and the Levites are set in their offices and consecrated. Chronicles con­ cludes: Thus the service of the house of Yahweh was restored. And Hezekiah and all the people rejoiced because of what God had done for the people; for the thing came about suddenly. (2 Chr 29:35b-36 RSV) Invitations are then sent throughout Israel, from Beersheba to Dan, urging the people not to be recalcitrant, but to “yield themselves to Yahweh, and come to his sanctuary, which he has sanctified forever. . .” (2 C hr 30:8). And we are told that “some men from Asher, Manasseh, and Zebulun repented and came to Jerusalem” (2 C hr 30:11) to keep the feast. The resulting celebration is described in 16

1, 2 CHRONICLES

considerable detail (vv 13-27), and is obviously designed to parallel that of Solomon and his people upon the dedication of the temple (v 26). W hen the celebration has been completed, high places are destroyed in both south and north (2 C hr 31:1), and the priests and Levites are again set in their courses and provision made for their upkeep (vv 2-19). This part of Hezekiah’s reign is fittingly concluded with the Chronicler’s own summary: So Hezekiah did throughout all Judah. He did what was good, right, and faithful before Yahweh his God. And every work that he undertook in the service of the house of God and in accordance with the law and the commandments seeking his God, he did with all his heart, and prospered. (2 C hr 31:20— 21) Manasseh reversed many of Hezekiah’s reforms, not only rebuilding the destroyed high places, but also building idola­ trous altars to the host of heaven in the very temple courts and putting an idolatrous image in the temple (2 Chr 33:1-5). After his repentance it is reported that he cleansed the tem­ ple of the foreign idols “and restored the altar of the Lord” (vv 15-16). Josiah’s finding of the book of the law in the temple is, of course, well known (2 Kgs 22), and requires little supple­ mentation by the Chronicler, except to note that the temple repairs were under the direction of the Levites (2 C hr 34:1418). The story of Josiah’s Passover, however, is liberally sup­ plemented to emphasize both the magnitude of the offerings and the position of the Levites (2 C hr 35:1-19). Chronicles, like Kings, relates that Nebuchadnezzar carried part of the temple vessels to Babylon during the reign of Jehoiakim, and that after Zedekiah’s rebellion the temple was burned and its treasuries and vessels were looted (2 C hr 36:7,18-19). The Temple

17

It seems appropriate that the final verse of the book ex­ presses its concern in terms of the temple: Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, “Yahweh, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem which is in Judah. Whoever is among you of all his people, may Yahweh his God be with him. Let him go up.” (2 C hr 36:23 RSV, emphasis added) Priests and Levites Closely associated with the temple are priests and Levites. We shall confine our attention to them to a few observations for three reasons: (1) The study is extremely complex, and no agreement has been reached on the subject. (2) W hile priests and Levites are prominent in Chronicles, many, if not most, of the passages dealing with the Levites in particular are often considered later additions to Chronicles. This is true, for example, of 1 Chronicles 1-9 (see especially 6:1-81; 9:10-34) and chapters 23-27, of which all but the last chapter is devoted exclusively to the priests and Levites. It is also true to a lesser degree for such passages as 2 Chronicles 5:11-13; 8:14; 29, and 31:11-19. The nature of the difficulty becomes apparent in such passages as 1 Chronicles 15, where Obededom is named three times (vv 18, 21, 24) in at least two different positions, or in chapter 25, where three groups of Levites are headed by Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun (as also in 1 Chronicles 16:41), while in 1 Chronicles 15:17, Asaph and Heman occur with Ethan. It is also clear in the explicit but limited involvement of the Levites in such passages as 2 Chronicles 5:4 and even 5:12-13 or 35:3 as contrasted with the elaborate detail of, for example, 1 Chronicles 15 and 2 Chronicles 23, or 29-31. W hat is in question, then, is not the involvement of 18

1, 2 CHRONICLES

the priests or Levites in the Chronicler’s work, but rather the degree of elaboration and detail associated with that involvement. By its very nature such elaboration is most difficult to detect, and different readers will arrive at con­ trary judgments. Finally, however, (3) the subject of priests and Levites can be left aside without disruption of the Chronicler’s message because their positions and activity are so closely bound up with that of the temple. The writer may well have been closely involved in the affairs of the priests and Levites—he may even himself have felt strongly about the relative impor­ tance of the two groups. (See, for example, 2 Chronicles 29:34.) Ultimately, however, it was not the position of priest or Levite, but that of the Jerusalem temple at which they served that was determinative for the writer’s position. The purpose of the temple Finally, we must ask why the temple was of such impor­ tance to the Chronicler, and why it is for our study. The temple was for Chronicles, like Kings, the place where God had caused his name to dwell, to which prayers might be directed with the assurance they would be heard. However, Chronicles found this understanding inadequate in another sense, and in two cases (2 C hr 2:4; 7:12) has described the temple also as a place of sacrifice. The temple is God’s house, but he is not confined there (2 Chr 6:18 = 1 Kgs 8:27, stated earlier in 2:6, a section unique to Chronicles). Notice also that while 1 Chronicles 28:2 speaks of the temple as a house of rest “for the ark of the covenant,” 1 Chronicles 23:25—which is perhaps late—speaks of God’s dwelling in Jerusalem forever. But the occasional inclusion of an an­ cient bit of poetry such as that found in 2 Chronicles 6:1-2 (cf. 1 Kgs 8:12-13) or 2 Chronicles 6:41 (cf. Ps 132:8-9), where the temple is viewed as the resting place of both the The Temple

19

ark and Yahweh, suggests that in the writer’s mind the two concepts were not always clearly distinguished. For the writer, it is certainly fair to say, participation in the observances of the Jerusalem temple was most closely identified with faith in and seeking Yahweh. “Yahweh is our God,” Abijah could proclaim before Jeroboam, because Judah had not forsaken the Lord. She had legitimate priests and Levites, and the temple services were being observed as ordained (2 C hr 13:10-12). Hezekiah’s invitation to the north to return to Jerusalem to worship, which would have been delivered shortly after the fall of the north to the Assyrians in 721 B.C., is full of significance: Do not be stiff-necked now as your fathers were, but yield yourselves to Yahweh, and come to his sanctuary, which he has sanctified for ever, and serve Yahweh your God, that his fierce anger may turn away from you. (2 C hr 30:8) Indeed, Judah’s own unfaithfulness will be symbolized by the destruction of the temple which they had forsaken (2 C hr 36:19). In his own age, whenever it may have been, the author’s faith must have looked upon the restoration of the proper temple services as the first priority in the reestablishment of the nation. The special appeals to the north throughout the book suggest a writing from the time when such an appeal would have been particularly appropriate, but such occa­ sions in a long and contested history would not have been uncommon. A call for faithful dedication to the temple serv­ ice would be equally appropriate if the author wrote some­ time before the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 B.C., at the end of the Exile in 538 B.C.—as the current ending of the book would suggest (2 C hr 36:22-23)—at the time of the dedication of the second temple (Ezra 6:15-22), or at a later 20

1, 2 CHRONICLES

period when the temple had been rebuilt but was not being given the faithful devotion it deserved and required. For this last period, see the book of Malachi, usually dated in the first half of the fifth century B.C., or Ezra and Nehemiah, at the end of the same century. Amid the doubts, disappointments, and despair of whatever age, the message of the writer rang out: “O people of Israel, return to Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. . . . Do not be like your fathers and your brothers, who were faithless . . . ” (2 C hr 30:6-7). And for Chronicles, that meant returning to the temple at Jerusalem. Readers in our day are apt to be somewhat put off by such a concentration upon a building, no matter how exceptional, and upon institutions which are at best reminders of and pointers to a greater reality. W ithout denying the close and positive relationship between the physical and the spir­ itual, we are apt to be uncomfortable in the face of an appeal which identifies symbol and reality so closely, and equates faith in God and presence at a building so nearly. Perhaps this is an equation which we are simply unable or unwilling to grasp. In the New Testament we will find such of the faithful as Mary the mother of Jesus, Zechariah and Elizabeth, Anna and Simeon, in the temple. Joseph and Mary take the young Jesus to the temple, and the only event in Jesus’ life recorded in the Gospels between his infancy and the beginning of his ministry is a visit to the temple with his family at the age of twelve (Luke 2:42) for the Passover. Despite the opposition he incurred, Jesus regularly frequented the temple and the synagogues. His disciples later would do the same, normally withdrawing only when required to do so. The temple and synagogue were important and vital institutions in the early days of the church. Nevertheless, the symbolic and temporary nature of even these sanctified precincts is clearly recognized, as they were The Temple

21

also in the Hebrew Scriptures. To the woman in Samaria who asks Jesus about the locale of the approved place of worship, Jesus responds: “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when nei­ ther on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you wor­ ship the Father. . . . But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:21, 23-24 RSV) Moreover the same Gospel of John actually views Jesus himself as the replacement for the temple. W hen pressured by the Jews to give a sign to justify his cleansing of the temple, which story John symbolically places at the begin­ ning of Jesus’ ministry, Jesus replies: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19 RSV). The Jews naturally interpret the reference to be to the physical tem­ ple, which they note had been under construction for no less than forty-six years. But John states, “he spoke of the temple of his body” (2:21). W hen that is present of which the physical temple is only the symbol, the symbol fades into insignificance. A parallel thought occurs in the Revelation of John, which concludes with the vision of a new heaven and a new earth, and the holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God. But the writer exclaims: “And I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb. And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine upon it, for the glory of God is its light, and its lamp is the Lamb.” (Rev 21:22-23 RSV) 22

1, 2 CHRONICLES

W hen God himself dwells with his people, there will no longer be need of such material symbols of his presence as the temple. U ntil that time, however, our relationship with the spiritual is mediated through the physical. The incarnation of Jesus is the strongest testimony to that fact, and the sacraments of the church are aptly referred to as “the means of grace.” W ith all their failings, religious sym­ bols continue to speak to us in terms we can understand of the God who does not dwell in houses made with hands, but who nevertheless condescends to tabernacle with his people (John 1:14).

The Temple

23

3 TH E KINGDOM OF GOD

Then Abijah stood up on Mount Zemaraim which is in the hill country of Ephraim, and said, “Hear me, O Jeroboam and all Israel! Ought you not to know that Yahweh, the God of Israel, gave the kingship over Israel for ever to David and his sons by a cove­ nant of salt? . . . and now you think to withstand the kingdom of Yahweh in the hand of the sons of David. . . . (2 Chr 13:4, 8 rsv ) The kingdom of God is, as the passage above indicates, “the kingdom of Yahweh in the hand of the sons of David.” Yahweh himself had rejected Saul’s house in favor of David’s. “Saul died for his unfaithfulness,” writes the Chronicler. “Therefore Yahweh slew him and turned the kingdom over to David the son of Jesse” (1 Chr 10:13-14). In DH it may be true that prior to Solomon’s death the identity of the specific Davidic king who would sit upon the throne was questionable, and that after Solomon’s defec­ tion the ten northern tribes remained a kingdom (1 Kgs T h e K in g d o m o f G o d

25

11:34-35) and Jeroboam was offered what might likewise be called an “eternal dynasty” (1 Kgs 11:38), but this is not the case in Chronicles. W hile God’s People might dwell in Israel or Judah (see pp. 49-56), God’s kingdom is associated solely with the south, where the kings of David’s line rule. And in every case, which of David’s descendants will occupy the throne is clearly stated. In understanding the significance of the Davidic dynasty in Chronicles, and its relationship to the temple, the presentation of the reigns of David and Solomon is crucial. David The significance of David for Chronicles is well-known and commonly recognized. David figures prominently in 1 Chronicles 11-29, dominating no less than nineteen of the two books’ sixty-five chapters. And they are important chapters. It is commonly recognized that the subjects of the temple, the priesthood, and the Levites lie at or near the center of Chronicles, and these three topics also figure prominently in these “David” chapters. Nor has the differ­ ent picture which Chronicles paints of David over against that of Samuel-Kings escaped notice. No less a figure than Julius Wellhausen commented: See what Chronicles has made out of David: The founder of the kingdom has become the founder of the temple and the public worship, the king and hero at the head of his companions in arms has become the singer and master of ceremonies at the head of a swarm of priests and Levites, his clearly cut figure has become a feeble holy picture, seen through a cloud of incense.1 Gerhard von Rad’s important monograph2 pointed to the significance of David throughout Chronicles, and that 26

1, 2 CHRONICLES

significance has continued to be affirmed by most scholars. And yet the picture is not as clear as it might be. Some of the space devoted to David in Chronicles might be at­ tributed to the fact that in Samuel-Kings also David is a dominant figure. The story of his reign fills all of the book of 2 Samuel, or twenty-four chapters. Moreover, David actually makes his appearance in 1 Samuel 16, and is actu­ ally of equal importance to Saul— if not surpassing Saul— in the remaining fifteen chapters of that book. Viewed in that light, the proportion of space devoted to David in Chronicles is considerably less. It is not always proper to judge the importance of a per­ son, theme, or topic by the number of words or chapters devoted to it, of course, although it is certainly not a bad measure to begin with in biblical studies. Consider, for ex­ ample, that in the Old Testament Israel arrives at Sinai, the site of God’s covenant with his people and the giving of the Law, in Exodus 19, and does not leave until Numbers 10:11. O r consider that, in the New Testament, each of the Gospel writers devotes a disproportionately large space to the Pas­ sion History, a single week in the life of Jesus. But to be weighed also is the fact that, in his considerably briefer work, the Chronicler devotes a minimum of nine chapters to Solomon, compared with eleven in the Deuteronomistic History (1 Kgs 1-11), and that 1 Chronicles 22, 28, and 29 have Solomon as much as David as their subject. Indeed, if the temple lies at the heart of Chronicles, these chapters must be attributed first of all to Solomon, since in them he is designated as the divinely chosen instrument to build the temple, while David is explicitly disqualified from that activity due to the many wars which he conducted. To see more carefully Chronicles’ attitude toward David and Solomon, it is necessary to review the portrait of these two kings as the writer found it before him in Samuel-Kings. We can focus our attention upon (1) the manner in which The Kingdom of God

27

the rise of the king to power is depicted, including the response of the people to his kingship; (2) his position in the dynastic lineage; (3) his relationship to the cult (public worship); (4) the role attributed to him in the division of the kingdom; and (5) the general evaluation given him by the respective writer. Finally, we will include other materials which point to the significant role Solomon occupied for the writer of Chronicles. David in the Deuteronom istic History In the Deuteronomistic History (DH), David is anointed king while Saul still occupies the throne, and “the Spirit of Yahweh came mightily upon David from that day forward” (1 Sam 16:13 RSV). W hile the writer presents the difficulties which David experienced in his rise to power vividly and in detail, the support which David receives from the people is presented as ever-increasing (1 Sam 16:6-8, 16; 2 Sam 3:36). And his ultimate success in the achievement of his Godgiven role seems assured from the time of his anointing by the prophet Samuel at Yahweh’s command (1 Sam 16:12). Yahweh’s presence with David is repeatedly affirmed (1 Sam 18:14, 28; 2 Sam 5:10; 7:3). And even prior to the Dynastic Oracle of 2 Samuel 7, friends and foe alike repeat­ edly voice the conviction that Yahweh has chosen David to rule over his kingdom (1 Sam 20:15; 23:17; 24:20; 25:28; 26:25; 28:17; 2 Sam 3:9-10, 18). Although Samuel records numerous events picturing David as deceptive, no judgment is pronounced upon these acts. The writer instead emphasizes David’s constant loyalty to Saul as Yahweh’s anointed (1 Sam 22:14; 24:6, 17; 2 Sam 1:16), contrasting David’s guilelessness with Saul’s treachery and deceit (e.g., 1 Sam 18:12-16, 28-29; 2 Sam 3:1). After Saul’s death, David is first anointed ruler over Judah (alone) at Hebron, where he rules seven and one-half years. 28

l, 2 CHRONICLES

After an extended period of conflict with Saul’s house, Israel too makes a covenant with David, and David rules over “all Israel,” i.e., a united Judah and Israel, for thirty-three years from Jerusalem (2 Sam 5:3-5). Although David is not permitted to build the temple, the Dynastic Oracle of 2 Samuel 7 promises that a nameless seed “who will come forth from his loins” will both have his kingdom established and will build the temple (vv 12-13), so that even if a king commits iniquity Yahweh will not with­ draw his steadfast love (Heb. hesed) from him (vv 14-15). References to David’s position as the founder of the dynasty and the recipient of the promise are frequent throughout Kings. Concerning David’s relationship to Israel’s worship, Samuel reports that David had the ark brought to Jerusalem immediately upon his conquest of the city (2 Sam 6) and that he pitched a tent for it. No details are given concerning this tent, although one might assume that, if not in violation of tradition, it would have been quite elaborate. There is no mention of the involvement of cultic personnel, nor is there any indication that David made any provisions for construc­ tion of the temple, although the later statement that Solomon “brought in the things which David his father had dedi­ cated—the silver, the gold, the vessels—and stored them in the treasuries of the house of Yahweh” (1 Kgs 7:51) could possibly be so interpreted. At only two points does DH record God’s displeasure with David. Following David’s adultery with Bathsheba and his murder of her husband Uriah, Yahweh sends the prophet Nathan to condemn David (2 Sam 12:1). W hile David’s sins are forgiven upon his confession, much of the remainder of the C ourt History seems to place David under the curse announced by 2 Sam 12:10-11: “Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house . . . . I will raise up evil against you out of your own house . . .” (r s v ). David’s The Kingdom of God

29

action in conducting a census of Israel is similarly con­ demned, but the acceptance of his sacrifice again points to his forgiveness (2 Sam 24). O n his deathbed David, at the urging of Bathsheba and Nathan, appoints Solomon as his successor, so that the perpetuation of the dynastic line through him continues to be acknowledged (1 Kgs 1). Although Kings does not record a customary closing eval­ uation of David, it is clear that the author considers David the primary example of the good king, in comparison with whom other kings are judged. Numerous kings are judged in accordance with whether they “walked in the way of David” or “did right like David” (1 Kgs 3:3, 14; 9:4; 11:4, 6, 33, 38; 2 Kgs 14:3; 16:2; 18:3; 22:2). In one case David’s murder of Uriah is included in such a formula as the sole example of David’s misconduct (1 Kgs 15:5). David in Chronicles Most of the material picturing David as the scheming or ruthless leader of an outlaw band or as a man who could control neither his own passions nor his family is absent from Chronicles. However, the reason lies perhaps not so much in the writer’s desire to aggrandize David as in the desire to sharpen his focus upon the temple, and in the related desire to demonstrate the support of “all Israel” for every work of David (and Solomon) in that regard. For details of the Chronicler’s presentation of these two aspects of David’s career, see the summary provided under “All Israel,” pages 47-50. Here it may be stated simply that any and every sign of opposition to David’s rule has been omitted, that David’s kingship is recognized as in accord with Yahweh’s word and supported by “all Israel,” and that, after his anointing, David proceeds immediately to the cap­ ture of Jerusalem (1 C hr 11:4-9), destined to become the home of the ark and the temple. This concern is central in 30

1, 2 CHRONICLES

chapters 13-16, which conclude with the ark in Jerusalem, and in chapter 21, which culminates with David’s choice of the threshing floor of O m an as the site for the temple. In 1 Chronicles 17 the dynastic oracle of 2 Samuel 7 is reproduced with minor variations. David’s affair with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah are omitted. O ur sur­ vey of the temple materials in 1 Chronicles 22, 28-29 has shown how David undertook preparations for both build­ ing materials and workmen for the task ahead, entrusted to Solomon the task of erecting the temple, and provided Solomon with inspired plans to guide the work. David him­ self, however, is forbidden to build the temple because he “had shed much blood, and waged great wars” (2 C hr 22:8). (Compare also 1 Chronicles 17:4, where David’s disqualifi­ cation to build the temple is expressed more strongly than in 2 Samuel 7.) The book of 2 Chronicles contains some thirty-five refer­ ences to David without parallel in Kings. By far the most sizable group of these, apart from passages that speak only in general terms of David as the father of Solomon, has to do with David’s relationship to cultic matters. Some of these have to do with building operations per se; in particular, 2 Chronicles 3:1 relates carefully how Solomon began to build the temple “in Jerusalem, on M ount Moriah, where Yahweh had appeared to David his father, at the place that David had appointed, on the threshing floor of Om an the Jebusite” (RSV). All in all, however, it appears that Chronicles has given a minimum of attention to David’s role in the building of the temple. The focus is rather, as we shall see, upon Solomon, who conducts a census like David, secures timber and crafts­ men like David, and begins construction of the temple at the place sanctioned by divine approval and appointed by David. In drawing this parallel between David and Solomon, how­ ever, the Chronicler does not disparage the work of The Kingdom of Cod

31

Solomon, but rather presents it as a part of a unified effort culminating in the completed temple. Two related but different concerns are apparent in the remainder of the references dealing with David and the cult. The first of these has to do with David’s relation to the music of the temple service. This is a new emphasis, since 1 Chronicles had spoken only of the personnel in charge of the music. But 2 Chronicles 7:6 speaks of the Levites who stood at their posts with instruments of music which David himself had made. A similar reference occurs in 2 Chroni­ cles 29:26— 27.3 Yet another kind of reference occurs in 2 Chronicles 29:30, where Hezekiah commands the Levites to sing praises with the words of David and Asaph the seer. Such an associ­ ation of David with the lyrics of temple song is otherwise unknown in Chronicles, although the traditions of David’s expertise in this area are well-known in other parts of the Old Testament (cf. 2 Sam 1:17-27; 23:1-2, and the psalm titles). W hile David was connected with Gad and Nathan in the previous passage, he is here associated with Asaph, who is called a seer. Closely related to these passages, and at times intertwined with them, are others referring to David’s organization of the priests and Levites. This concern was also found in 1 Chronicles, although it is difficult to determine which passages are original with the Chronicler. The same difficulty is to be found in 2 Chronicles, where there is no agreement upon the authenticity of such passages as 8:14, 23:18, 29:25-30, and 35:4 and 15. However, there appears to be little reason to doubt the statements of 2 Chronicles 29:25-30 that the Levites connected with the temple music traced their office back through David and his prophets. If any of the other passages are from the hand of the Chronicler, the entire Levitical organization, without respect to individual function, may also be traced back to 32

1, 2 CHRONICLES

David, although it was Solomon (2 C hr 8:14) who imple­ mented those plans. That such was the case seems probable in view of 1 Chronicles 16:4. O f special note is the one case in which David and Solomon are coupled with regard to their directive for the Levites: And he [Josiah] said to the Levites who taught all Israel and who were holy to Yahweh: “Put the holy ark in the house which Solomon the son of David, king of Israel, built; you need no longer carry it upon your shoulders. Now serve Yahweh your God and his people Israel. Prepare yourselves according to your fathers’ houses by your divisions, following the directions of David king of Israel and the directions of Solomon his son. (2 C hr 35:3-4 RSV) In Chronicles, as in DH, David is regarded as the founder of the dynasty. Abijah’s famous speech reminds Jeroboam that “Yahweh has given the kingship forever to David and his sons by a covenant of salt” (2 C hr 13:5). In keeping with this dynastic emphasis, Chronicles has added as the conclu­ sion of Solomon’s dedicatory prayer in 2 Chronicles 6:41-42 a quotation from Psalms 132:8-9, which refers not only to the arrival of the ark in the temple but also to Yahweh’s steadfast love (Heb. hesed) for David. All in all, however, there appears to be little change in the position accorded to the dynasty by Chronicles. In Chronicles as in Samuel-Kings, David remains the ex­ emplary king in comparison with whom others are judged. However, this occurs far less frequently in Chronicles than in Kings. In only four cases has the Chronicler taken over from DH a direct or implied statement of evaluation which mentions David (2 C hr 7:17; 28:1; 29:2; 34:2). In only one case has he added such an evaluation, noting that at the time of Rehoboam Judah walked for three years “in the way of The Kingdom of God

33

David and Solomon” (2 G ir 11:17), a phrase which parallels David and Solomon in a way quite inconceivable in the earlier history. We may then summarize by noting that Chronicles has probably idealized David’s rise to power to some degree, omitting all references to opposition to his reign and stress­ ing the unanimous support of all Israel for that kingship. The great bulk of the C ourt History of David (2 Sam 91 Kgs 2) has been omitted, including David’s affair with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah, although the reason for this is more open to question. The Chronicler has viewed David as the originator of the musical instruments of the cult, a contributor to the lyrics of some of the chants, and the one responsible for those Levitical groups concerned with music in the temple. It is probable that the Chronicler has also viewed David as responsible for the remaining Levitical divisions, although the precise nature of his activity here is more difficult to evaluate. Chronicles has also stressed David’s preparations for the building of the temple, and has him decree the build­ ing site, arrange for workmen and materials, and announce Solomon as the actual builder. O n the other hand, we find no discernible attempt to emphasize David as the founder of the dynasty, and the use of David as a standard by which other kings are judged is minimized. The significance of this observation will become more apparent in studying the Chronicler’s portrait of Solomon. Solomon in the Deuteronomistic History Though it seems to have been the understanding of DH that Solomon was the divinely chosen successor of David (2 Sam 12:24; 1 Kgs 5:3-5 [Heb. w 15-17]), the author has not permitted this viewpoint to dominate his narrative of Solomon’s accession to the throne. This is apparent above all 34

1, 2 CHRONICLES

from the inclusion in his work of the so-called C ourt History of David which relates in detail the strife among David’s sons as to which will succeed him. It was only in response to Adonijah’s power play that Solomon—supported by Bathsheba his mother, Nathan the prophet, Zadok the priest, and not least by Benaiah and David’s army (1 Kgs 1:8)— emerged as the new king of Israel. Solomon then proceeded to secure his throne by arranging for the deaths of Adonijah and Joab, the general who had supported Adonijah, and by banishing Abiathar the priest. W ith all opposition effectively silenced, DH remarks pithily: “The kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon” (1 Kgs 2:46). DH divides Solomon’s reign into two distinct periods. The first of these extends from the beginning of his reign to the erection of the idolatrous high places, and views Solomon as an obedient king whose reign was characterized by the divine blessings of wisdom, prosperity, and peace. The erection of the temple occupies the center of Solomon’s reign, and his dedicatory prayer points to that event as the climax of God’s promises to Israel (1 Kgs 8:56). DH con­ cludes this period of blessing with the account of the visit of the queen of Sheba and a summary of Solomon’s wealth (1 Kgs 10). The second period of Solomon’s reign, however, sees Solomon as an apostate king who disobeyed Yahweh’s com­ mand by marrying foreign wives, who erected high places for their gods and joined them in their idolatry. Solomon’s fre­ quenting of the high places prior to the building of the temple seems to have been largely condoned by DH, but the same surely cannot be said of the report in 1 Kings 11. There Solomon’s marriage to foreign wives is explicitly condemned as a violation of God’s command (v 2). It is twice stated that Solomon’s heart was not completely true to Yahweh (vv 4,6), and the high places he built are clearly considered idolatrous. It is commonly acknowledged that the strictures against The Kingdom of Cod

35

kingship in Deuteronomy 17:16-17 refer in particular to Solomon (see 1 Kings 10:23-29), so that Solomon becomes in effect the parade example of the evils of kingship. As a result, Yahweh becomes angry with Solomon (1 Kgs 11:9), and the division of the kingdom announced in verses 11-13 is the direct punishment for Solomon’s sin. The ac­ count then proceeds immediately to speak of the “adver­ saries” (Heb. śātān, vv 14,23,25) whom God raised up against Solomon, marking the reversal of the conditions reported in 1 Kings 5:4 (Heb. 5:18), when there was “rest on every side” and there was “neither adversary (śātān) nor misfortune,” so that Solomon could undertake the construction of the temple. Jeroboam’s rebellion is given divine sanction by the prophet Ahijah (1 Kgs 11:31-39), the narrative of which is introduced with the words, “This was the reason why he [Jeroboam] lifted up his hand against the king” (v 27), followed again by a de­ tailed reporting of Solomon’s responsibility (v 33). Shemaiah’s oracle preventing Rehoboam’s attempt to regain the north gives additional force to the divine decree (1 Kgs 12:24). The customary notice concerning Solomon’s death is recorded in 1 Kings 11:41-43, and nothing favorable is re­ ported concerning him in the remainder of the work. The writer never alters his view of Solomon as apostate until his death, as the one responsible for the high places to which the writer was so opposed, and as the sole cause for the disruption of the united kingdom. O n the contrary, atten­ tion is specifically called to the fact that Josiah, whose re­ forming activity is the second high point within DH, broke down the high places Solomon had built, at last reversing the idolatrous practices begun by Solomon (2 Kgs 23:13-14). Solomon in Chronicles The picture of Solomon found in Chronicles stands in sharp contrast to that of DH. For the Chronicler, Solomon 36

1, 2 CHRONICLES

is, like David, king by divine choice, greeted with the unani­ mous support of all Israel and dedicated wholeheartedly to the cult. Like David, he too ends his long reign, as he had begun it, in peace and prosperity. But Solomon surpasses David in two ways. First, he is the divinely chosen temple builder. Secondly, in keeping with the added significance accorded Solomon as temple builder, Chronicles presents Solomon even more consistently as one who, from first to last, was completely faithful to Yahweh. The manner in which Chronicles has restricted this pre­ sentation of Solomon to these concerns and the consistency with which the writer has pursued them can be fully appre­ ciated only by an exhaustive comparison of DH and Chroni­ cles. Here we can sketch only a few of the more striking details. 1. Chronicles presents Solomon, like David, as king by di­ vine choice. The wording of the dynastic promise in 1 Chron­ icles 17:11 (“I will raise up your offspring after you, one of your own sons . . .”, italics added) is perhaps only slightly more explicit than 2 Samuel 7:12-13, but the manner in which Chronicles has worked even the name Solomon into his statement of the promise in 1 Chronicles 22 is decisive: “Behold a son shall be bom to you; he shall be a man of rest (›îš menûhā h). I will give him rest from all his ene­ mies round about; for his name will be Solomon (šeōmōh), and I will give peace and quiet (šālôm wešeqet) to Israel in his days. He shall build a house for my name. He will be my son, and I will be his father, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel forever.” (vv 9-10) W hat was left open in the Dynastic Oracle is here made explicit: Solomon is the king divinely chosen by Yahweh to sit upon his throne. In David’s second speech, the name The Kingdom of God

37

“Solomon” is similarly inserted: “It is Solomon your son who shall build my house and my courts, for I have chosen (Heb. bàhartî, see page 11) him to be my son, and I will be his father” (1 C hr 28:6 RSV). 2. Secondly, Chronicles presents all Israel as unanimous in her support of Solomon. The competition and opposition to Solomon’s kingship found in the early chapters of 1 Kings vanish in the face of the unanimous support of all Israel:

And they made Solomon the son of David king the sec­ ond time, and they anointed him as prince for the Lord, and Zadok as priest. Then Solomon sat on the throne of Yahweh as king instead of David his father; and he pros­ pered, and all Israel obeyed him. All the leaders and the mighty men, and also all the sons of King David, pledged their allegiance to King Solomon. And the Lord gave Solomon great repute in the sight of all Israel. . . . (1 Chr 29:22b-25a) Here, it should be noted, even David’s other sons are among Solomon’s supporters. 3. But, above all, Chronicles presents Solomon as a king who— again like David his father— was a dedicated and zeal­ ous patron of the cult, and, more specifically, of the Jerusalem temple and its functionaries. The writer, again, found the ma­ terial for such a position at hand. The construction of the temple was for DH also the chief event of Solomon’s life, totally occupying three lengthy chapters of his account of Solomon’s reign (1 Kgs 6-8). Chronicles has, however, not simply reproduced the material of DH. Bypassing the mate­ rial of 1 Kings 3-4, the writer has moved almost immediately to express Solomon’s interest in the temple. The totality of 2 Chronicles 2-8 is devoted exclusively to that subject, intro­ duced already in 2:1 (1:18, Heb.): “Solomon purposed to 38

1, 2 CHRONICLES

build a temple for the name of Yahweh and a royal palace for himself” (RSV). However, Chronicles’ interest in Solomon’s cultic con­ cerns is evident in ways other than the sheer bulk of the material devoted to the subject. He has shown his interest in Solomon and the temple to be a lively one by the different way in which he has used his source material as well as by his structured and sympathetic treatment of the entire pericope. In other portions of Chronicles the writer has confined himself largely to the deletion of some materials and the addition of others, with some minor alterations and com­ ments. But Chronicles’ account of Solomon, while depend­ ent upon DH to a degree in almost every case, has amounted to almost a rewriting of the entire pericope. We must limit our comments to a few examples. Chronicles begins the narrative of Solomon’s reign with the sacrifices at Gibeon (2 C hr 1:1-6), as had 1 Kings 3:1-4. But for Chronicles this is not a heterodox religious pilgrim­ age to a high place, but an orthodox procession of all Israel, led by its king, to a legitimate site of worship, since Moses’ tent of meeting and the bronze altar are also there. The materials of 2 Chronicles 2 provide a second example. After the initial statement of the theme (v 1), Solomon gathers laborers for the task and arranges with Huram of Tyre for the necessary materials. But the Chronicler has used Solomon’s correspondence with Huram not only to request timber, as did DH (1 Kgs 5:3-6, Heb. 17-20). Through rewriting Solomon’s message, he also includes what amounts to a con­ fession of faith for Solomon and a significant statement of the purpose of the temple as a place of sacrifice (v 6). Solomon’s request for a craftsman to direct the more delicate work— which stood quite alone in 1 Kings 7:13-14—is made part of Solomon’s original request. Huram’s reply is similarly altered. Explicit statements added by the Chronicler assure us that the structure of the entire unit has been thoughtfully The Kingdom of Cod

39

considered. The temple pericope (chs 2-8) is clearly delin­ eated by remarks both at the beginning (“Now Solomon purposed to build a temple for the name of Yahweh . . . ,” 2:1) and the end (“All the work of Solomon was completed, from the day of the foundation of the house of Yahweh until Solomon had completed the house of Yahweh,” 2 C hr 8:16). O ther stages within the temple narrative are similarly marked (cf. 3:1 and 5:1) and the conclusion added by Chron­ icles in 8:12-16, which understands the dedicatory festival as the institution of the regular temple services. We may conclude, then, that as was the case with David, the Chronicler has ignored almost everything except cultic matters and Solomon’s involvement in them. The essential similarity in the treatment of David and Solomon—both ruling by divine choice, both ruling with the unanimous consent of all Israel, both dedicated wholeheartedly to the temple and the cult—has commonly been overlooked or ignored by scholars intent on demonstrating the greater role attributed to David in the Chronicler’s thought. For the purpose of argumentation, two ways in which Chronicles’ presentation of Solomon surpasses that of David may be pointed out. First, as has been noted repeat­ edly, it was in fact Solomon who built the temple. All of David’s preparatory instructions and preparations notw ith­ standing, David is not permitted to erect this special house where God would cause his name to dwell, where Yahweh himself would rest among his people, this house of sacrifice where Yahweh would hear the prayers of his people. This greatest of all privileges was denied to David, the man of war, and given to Solomon, the man of peace. Secondly, Chronicles has removed from the life of Solomon every taint of sin or fault—lengths to which he did not go in the depiction of David. O f the entire account of 1 Kings 11 nothing remains. There is here no story of Solomon’s marriage to foreign women, or of high places 40

1, 2 CHRONICLES

(idolatrous or otherwise), and therefore the blame for the division of Israel and Judah does not rest upon him. Evi­ dence from certain manuscripts of the Septuagint supports the conclusion that Chronicles was the first Old Testament writer to make Jeroboam responsible for this schism.4 Nevertheless, it would appear to be erroneous to pit David and Solomon against one another in the C hroni­ cler’s thought. It seems most likely that the writer wished to present the work of both as a single unit centering in the erection of the temple. W ith that in mind, we then can point to 1 Chronicles 22, 28, and 29 as the Chronicler’s bridge unit for joining together the two parallel halves of this part of his work, i.e., the David History and the Solomon History. Three specific passages can be pointed out where this paralleling of David and Solomon becomes explicit. Kings concludes the feast dedicating the temple by noting that Israel “went to their homes joyful and glad of heart for all the goodness that Yahweh had shown to David his servant and to Israel his people” (1 Kgs 8:66 RSV). Chronicles alters this passage to read “joyful and glad of heart for the good­ ness that Yahweh had shown to David and to Solomon and to Israel his people” (2 C hr 7:10, RSV, italics added). Secondly, when Chronicles wishes to point to the faith­ fulness of Israel during the first part of Rehoboam’s reign, the Chronicler states: “. . . for three years they [Israel] made Rehoboam the son of Solomon secure, for they walked for three years in the way of David and Solomon” (2 C hr 11:17, italics added). Such a statement would have been inconceivable for DH, who considered Solomon’s idol­ atry the cause of the schism between north and south. Finally, Josiah’s words to the Levites at the conclusion of his reforms contain two examples where Solomon is placed beside or above David, one of these even with regard to Levitical arrangements: The Kingdom of God

41

And he [Josiah] said to the Levites who taught all Israel and who were holy to Yahweh, “Put the holy ark in the house which Solomon the son of David, king of Israel, built; you need no longer carry it upon your shoulders. Now serve Yahweh your God and his people Israel. Prepare yourselves according to your fathers’ houses by your divisions, following the directions of David, king of Israel, and the directions of Solomon, his son. (2 Chr 35:3-4, italics added) Post'Solomonic kings of Israel Since Solomon was, according to Chronicles, blameless in his relationship to God, the fault leading to the rending of the kingdom under Rehoboam clearly did not lie with him, but with Rehoboam and the north. (Second Chronicles 10:15, which reproduces 1 Kings 12:15, must be judged an example of the author’s retaining a statement from his origi­ nal which he has otherwise chosen to dismiss.) Chronicles has, however, been able to reproduce the conclusion of the first part of that narrative from 1 Kings 12:19 without alter­ ation: “So Israel has been in rebellion against the house of David to this day” (2 C hr 10:19). This position is enunciated forcefully in 2 Chronicles 13, quoted at the head of this chapter. W hile it is possible here to read the emphases upon dynasty and temple as equal and supplementary (dynasty and temple), the emphasis, rather, lies upon the religious activities of the opposing dynasties. Jeroboam and his people have driven out the legitimate priests (v 9), while Abijah and his people have priests minis­ tering to Yahweh who are legitimate Aaronites and Levites and who maintain the prescribed temple services (vv 10-11). In this sense the north is “withstand[ing] the kingdom of Yahweh in the hands of the sons of David . . .” (v 8), and can be said to be fighting against Yahweh himself (v 12). 42

1, 2 CHRONICLES

The outcome of the ensuing battle is not in doubt: “Thus the men of Israel were subdued at that time, and the men of Judah prevailed, because they relied upon Yahweh, the God of their fathers” (2 C hr 13:18). Chronicles and Messianism In the remaining chapters of Chronicles, no emphasis upon the Davidic dynasty per se is apparent. The “kingdom of the Lord” is present, to be sure, and a king of David’s line sits upon its earthly throne. However, that kingdom is embodied in the “all Israel” who in faithful obedience to the Lord supports his worship at the temple in Jerusalem. The climax of this last part of the Chronicler’s history is clearly reached with the reign of Hezekiah (2 C hr 29-32), but the focus of his kingship too is clearly to be found in the temple. He restores the service of the house of the Lord (29:35) and his invitation to the north is an invitation to return, not to his kingship, but to the sanctuary of the Lord (30:8). Josiah’s rather anticlimactic reign too is conspicuous be­ cause of the religious reforms already related in 1 Kings 22, These are, however, supplemented by additional reforms reaching into the north (2 C hr 34:6), with the establishment of the priestly and Levitical offices as directed by David and Solomon(!), and the celebration of a Passover, the likes of which had not been seen since the days of Samuel (2 C hr 35:4, 18). The final words of the book mention no Davidic hope, not even of the sort adumbrated in the final verses of DH in 2 Kings 25:27-29. It is instead the Persian king Cyrus to whom Yahweh is represented as speaking, and who gives decree that Yahweh’s people return to Jerusalem to build him a house (2 C hr 36:22-23). Some have nevertheless concluded that Chronicles does maintain a Messianic hope, based upon the significant The Kingdom of God

43

position of the Davidic dynastic in such passages as 2 Chronicles 13:5, or upon the apparent fervor of such passages as 1 Chronicles 12:38-39 (Heb. w 39-40), or the position of Zerubbabel in Ezra and Nehemiah (cf. Ezra 5:2). W ith the increasing doubt of the unity of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah, it seems wiser to assume that Chronicles viewed the work of the Davidic dynasty as essentially com­ pleted with the construction of the temple, in which the hopes of the kingdom of God among Israel now lay. Israel’s hopes for the present lay in her relationship to the temple, which was the embodiment of God’s kingdom, or rule, in her midst. The kingdom of God in the N ew Testament Among the most common phrases found in the New Tes­ tament are “the kingdom of God” and, in the wording pre­ ferred by Matthew, “the kingdom of heaven.” The kingdom of God means, as one scholar put it, “all the trouble that God went to to establish his rule among people.” The New Testa­ ment sets itself forth as being the record of the establishment of that rule. This kingdom, it should be noted, is the kingdom of God in the hands of the son of David. Jesus is Israel’s king, from the line of David, both David’s son by the flesh and David’s Lord by virtue of his divinity. That he commonly applies to himself the ambiguous title “Son of man” can mean, accord­ ing to the Hebrew idiom, an ordinary man (cf. Ps 8:4; Ezek 34:2; 35:2; 36:1); in dependence upon the vision of Daniel 7:13, it can mean a heavenly figure. That he avoided the use of the word “king” is a realization that Jesus was not the kind of king commonly expected. Compare Jesus’ conversation about kingship with Pilate in John 18:33-37. Both Matthew and Mark summarize the message of Jesus as being Good News about the kingdom of God: 44

1, 2 CHRONICLES

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel.” (Mark 1:14-15 RSV; cf. Matt 3:2; 4:17) The same is true of Luke, who presents Jesus’ initial activ­ ity after his temptation as a sermon delivered in the syna­ gogue in Nazareth. This sermon quotes Isaiah 61:1-2 and concludes with Jesus’ words: ‘“Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing’” (Luke 4:21 RSV). That this is un­ derstood as the message of the kingdom of God is clear from words spoken to another audience shortly thereafter: “I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other cities also; for I was sent for this purpose.” (Luke 4:43 r s v ) It would carry us too far afield in a work of this nature to consider the important questions of the specific nature of that kingdom and the degree to which various New Testament writers viewed that kingdom as already realized with Jesus’ presence or as a kingdom to make its appearance at a later day—in particular, at the last great day of the Lord (cf. Luke 17:20-21; 19:11; Acts 1:3,6). Nevertheless, it is again the book of Revelation which sounds the final and triumphant note in the biblical drama of the kingdom of God: Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. . . . The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. (Rev 19:6; 11:15 KJV) W ith that hope, and for that victory, God’s people in all ages have waited and trusted. The Kingdom of God

45

4 THE PEOPLE OF GOD: ALL ISRAEL

Now when all this was finished, all Israel who were present went out to the cities of Judah and broke in pieces the pillars and hewed down the Asherim and broke down the high, places and the altars throughout all Judah and Benjamin, and in Ephraim and Manasseh, until they had destroyed them all. Then all the people of Israel returned to their cities. . . . (2 Chr 31:1, italics added) Chronicles is concerned from first to last with the concept of Israel, the people of God. It is concerned with who belongs to this people, and what sorts of activities they are about. The rise of David (1 Chronicles 1 0 -1 2 ) Chronicles goes to great lengths to show the participation of all Israel in David’s rise to power and his coronation as Israel’s king. Indeed, this appears to be the author’s primary purpose in the drafting of chapters 10 through 12. The People of Cod

47

A tendency in this direction lay before the author in DH. There too David assembled “all Israel” to Hebron (2 Sam 5:1) and all Israel proceeded to Jerusalem to take the city (2 Sam 5:6; cf. 6:1-2). But Chronicles, as is its custom, has carried through this theme much more pervasively. The rea­ son for the alteration found in 1 Chronicles 10:6 (“Thus Saul died . . . and his three sons and all his house died together”; cf. 1 Sam 30:6) is due to this tendency to include all of the nation in the acts of its kings. The same can be said of the omission of 2 Samuel 1-4 from Chronicles. For simi­ lar alterations compare 1 Chronicles 11:1 with 2 Samuel 5:6. The remainder of chapters 11 and 12 brings together various lists of David’s soldiers, including the tribal listings of 12:24-37 (Heb. 12:25-38). Here too the purpose is to show the support given David by all Israel, cf. 12:38-39 (Heb. vv 39-40): All these warriors, equipped for battle, came to He­ bron with perfect heart to make David king over all Israel. And also all the rest of Israel was of one mind to make David king. David and the ark (1 Chronicles 1 3 -1 7 ) The same theme is apparent also in the account of the transferrai of the ark to Jerusalem (chs 13-17). Again the text, unique to Chronicles, points this out with almost hu­ morous thoroughness: Then David consulted with the commanders of the thousands and hundreds, with every leader. David said to all the assembly of Israel: “If it seems good to you . . . let us send to our brethren who remain in all the lands of Israel, together with the priests and the Lev­ ites in the cities of their pasture lands, that they may 48

1, 2 CHRONICLES

gather to us, and let us bring back the ark of our God to us, because we did not seek it in the days of Saul.” A ll the assembly said to do so, for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people. (1 Chr 13:1-4, italics added) The narrative is then continued with words borrowed from 2 Samuel 6:1-11, but again with added emphasis upon the participation of all Israel in the proceedings: “So David assembled all Israel . . . and David and all Israel went up . . . and David and all the Israelites were celebrating with all their might . . . " (1 C hr 13:5-7, italics added; see also 1 Chronicles 15:3, 28). A ll Israel and the temple W hile chapters 17-21 are much more closely related to the writer’s source (in 2 Samuel 7-11:1; 12:26, 30-31; 21:18-22; 24), the emphasis upon the unanimous participation of all Israel returns to the fore in 1 Chronicles 22 and 28-29 and in 2 Chronicles 1-9. In the former, David designates Solomon as the divinely chosen builder of the temple; the latter reports the events of Solomon’s reign, including the construction and dedication of the temple. All Israel’s leaders are to help Solomon in his work (1 C hr 22:17, perhaps a later addition to the Chronicler’s work). After revealing this to Solomon, David summons all the leaders of Israel to Jerusalem (1 C hr 28:1), and the position of the entire assembly is emphasized repeatedly (1 C hr 28:8, 21; 29:1, 6, 20). Sacrifices are offered for “all Israel” (29:21), and Solomon is obeyed by “all Israel” (29:23). Verse 24 is particularly pointed in its wording: All the officers and mighty men, as well as all of King David’s sons, pledged their submission to King Solomon. (1 Chr 29:24) The People of God

49

During Solomon’s reign, too, the participation and sup­ port of all Israel is noted at particularly significant mo­ ments. Chronicles transforms Solomon’s sacrifice at the idolatrous high place at Gibeon into a legitimate sacrifice before the tent of meeting, which was located there (1 C hr 16:39-40). Fittingly, all Israel participates with him (2 C hr 1:2-3). Again, the participation of all Israel in bringing the ark up to the completed temple had already been mentioned by Kings (1 Kgs 8:1-3; 2 C hr 5:3-5). The same is true of the dedicatory feast for the temple (2 C hr 7:8; cf. 1 Kgs 8:65). In these same passages the broadest geographical extent of Israel is mentioned—from the entrance of Hamath in the north to the wadi of Egypt in the south. After the death of Solomon and the division of the king­ dom, the concept of “all Israel” admittedly changes. Like DH, the Chronicler has Rehoboam appear before “all Israel” at Shechem to be made king (2 C hr 10:1 = 1 Kgs 12:1). The Chronicler can use “Israel” and “all Israel” for the northern tribes (cf. 2 C hr 13:4, 5, 15,18), in contrast to the southern tribes, which are variously designated as “Judah” (2 C hr 14:4, 7), “Judah and Benjamin” (2 Chr 15:2, 8-9; 31:1), and “Judah and Benjamin and the inhabitants of Jerusalem” (2 C hr 34:9). But the name “Israel” also applies to the south, or at least a portion of it (2 C hr 24:5-6). The use of such a qualifying phrase as “the people of Israel who dwelt in the cities of Judah” (2 C hr 10:17 = 1 Kgs 12:17) points to a narrower meaning of Israel as the faithful component among the peo­ ple. And while the Chronicler admittedly concentrates upon the southern tribes, he does not forget that the entire land, including the north, is within the ideal limits of the holy land “from Beersheba to Dan” (2 C hr 30:5). True wor­ shipers from both north and south will compose the true Israel (2 Chr 31:1; 35:17-18). 50

1, 2 CHRONICLES

A ll Israel in 2 Chronicles 1 0 -3 6 The w riter’s concern for all Israel in the post-Solomonic period shows itself primarily in tw o ways: (1) Various southern kings in this period are viewed as active in the north, both in military activities and in introducing reli­ gious reforms; and (2) the participation of Israelites from the n orth in the legitimate worship at Jerusalem is regu­ larly noted. Chapters 10-36 show a continuing concern for the prob­ lem raised by the apostasy of the north. This concern is portrayed on several different levels. First, Chronicles reports that Abijah (13:19), Asa (15:8), and Jehoshaphat (17:2) all captured various northern cities and, in the last case, fortified them. W hile this fact alone could be used to support the writer’s vindictiveness toward the north, this need not be the case. Immediately after the division of the kingdom, Chronicles records that priests, Levites, “and those who had set their hearts to seek Yahweh the God of Israel came . . . from all the tribes of Israel to Jerusalem to sacrifice to Yahweh” (11:16 RSV), thus strengthening the kingdom of Rehoboam. The significance of the terminology here is readily apparent, since the phrase “to seek Yahweh” is the Chronicler’s way of describing faithful Yahwists. The statement that these people came to Jerusalem, and that they came to sacrifice to Yahweh, like­ wise reflects a characteristic emphasis of Chronicles. After Asa’s reforming activity in both north and south is mentioned (15:8), Chronicles also tells of a covenant made at Jerusalem which includes people from “Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon” who were at this time “sojourn­ ing” (Heb. gērîm) in the south. The language is again explicit: “for great numbers had deserted to him from Israel when they saw that Yahweh his God was with him ” The People of Cod

51

(15:9). The tw in themes of seeking Yahweh and sacrificing to him are again present in the description of the covenant (15:11, 13). In addition to the fact that sizable numbers from the northern tribes recognized the legitimacy of the south’s dy­ nasty and cult and defected to the south, Chronicles fre­ quently relates various types of religious reforms pursued by Judean kings. As mentioned, Asa removes idolatrous images from Judah and Benjamin, and also “from the cities which he had taken in the hill country of Ephraim . . .” (15:8). Hezekiah’s religious zeal in bringing people back to Yahweh is noted as extending “from Beersheba to Dan” (30:5). All Israel was to come to Jerusalem to keep the Passover, and it is noted that, while his messengers met with some scorn and ridicule in their journeys, “some men1 from Asher, Manasseh, and Zebulun humbled themselves and came to Jerusalem” (30:11, WBC 15). The favorable response to Hezekiah’s invitation on the part of these northerners resulted in their participation in Hezekiah’s delayed Passover, which is the high point of the Chronicles narrative of the post-Solomonic kings. W hile there is less emphasis upon the involvement of the north in Josiah’s Passover, where the role of the Levites receives pri­ mary attention, the mention of “all Judah and Israel who were present, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem” (35:18) clearly includes the northern tribes and indicated that “all Israel” (v 17) should also be understood to include the north. This means that a contingent from the north was present for Asa’s covenant ceremony (2 Chr 15) as well as for both of the major festivals celebrated by post-Solomonic kings, the Passovers of Hezekiah and Josiah. It is also reported that these same three kings undertook reforming activities in the north. Asa destroyed the idols in both north and south (15:8). W hile 2 Kings 18:4 had noted 52

1, 2 CHRONICLES

Hezekiah’s reforming activity in the south, Chronicles as­ cribes to the Israel present for the Passover (which we have seen included a delegation from the north) the destruction of high places also in Ephraim and Manasseh (31:1). The account of Josiah’s reform in 2 Kings 23:15-20 includes the destruction of high places in the north. And although it is rewritten by the Chronicler in a more general fashion, it retains its emphasis upon reforms both in the south and in “the cities of Manasseh, Ephraim, and Simeon, and as far as Naphtali” (2 C hr 34:6). A scattering of other references pointing to an ongoing concern for the Israelites of the north also occurs. These include the double mention of the sacrifices offered for all Israel at Hezekiah’s rededication of the temple (29:24), per­ haps recalling the similar statement of 1 Chronicles 29:21. W ithin his account of Josiah, the Chronicler has included two episodes dealing sympathetically with the north. W hile Kings says the money collected for the necessary temple repairs was deposited in a chest in the temple (2 Kgs 22:4), the Chronicler has not only rewritten that to reflect more favorably upon the priests and Levites, but describes the Levites as receiving the offering “from Manasseh and Ephraim and from all the remnant of Israel and from all Judah and Benjamin and from the inhabitants of Jerusalem” (2 C hr 34:9). The comprehensiveness of this passage sug­ gests the degree of the writer’s concern. In the story of the discovery of the scroll in Josiah’s time, the Chronicles ac­ count significantly introduces the north as an object of Josiah’s concern (34:21) whereas according to the basic text of 2 Kings 22:13, King Josiah makes inquiry only concern­ ing the south. In none of these cases, it should be noted, does the Chronicler berate the north or its representatives, but they are apparently accepted as completely equal to the faithful of the south. The People of God

53

Apostasy in the north Finally, our consideration of the “all Israel” theme should look at three passages in which the writer has dealt at greater length with the north’s apostasy. Chronicles ascribes the primary responsibility for the dissolution of the united mon­ archy to Jeroboam, largely absolving Rehoboam and Judah from guilt. The Chronicler has inserted his views of the north’s apostasy in a lengthy speech by Abijah where two objections are raised: (1) Yahweh has given the kingship over Israel to David and his sons forever (2 C hr 13:5, 8), and (2) the north has forsaken Yahweh in driving out the Aaronic priests and the Levites from their territories, while the south has retained the legitimate priesthood and cult. It is therefore clear that Israel has forsaken Yahweh, and that he is not with them. Judah’s victory is assured “because they relied upon Yahweh” (2 C hr 13:18). A half-million of the enemy’s troops are killed. The second passage, which has been inserted into the reign of Ahaz, is very different in its focus. In keeping with his dogma of retribution (see chapter 6), the writer has stated that as a result of the wickedness of Ahaz, Judah was given into the hand of the king of Syria and some 120,000 Judeans fell before Pekah of Israel “because they had forsaken Yah­ weh” (2 C hr 28:5-7). Moreover, the writer also reports that 200,000 women and children were taken captive by Israel and brought as spoil to Samaria. But a prophet of Yahweh was there (!), who urged the north to return their captives. Both his message to the soldiers and the reactions of the soldiers and the people are exceptional. The prophet Oded condemns the north because, while Yahweh was angry with Judah and had handed its army over to Israel, Israel had overstepped its allotted task both in the severity of the at­ tack (v 9) and in its plans to make slaves of the women and children, who are described as relatives (Heb. mē›ăhēkem, 54

1, 2 CHRONICLES

v 11). Israel is reminded at the same time of its own sins and of the additional wrath which the present plans will bring upon Israel (vv 10-11). The response of the Samaritan princes is remarkable in­ deed. Reiterating their own guilt, they persuade the armed men to leave the captives with them (v 14). The princes themselves then took the captives, provided them with food, clothing, and transportation for the infirm, and returned them to Jericho, a city apparently in Israelite hands at that time but whence they could easily enter Judah. W. Rudolph has remarked concerning the character of these first “Good Samaritans,” upon which the New Testament story in Luke 10 seems to be at least remotely dependent.2 This passage notes the existence of faithful prophets of Yahweh in the north—more explicitly in Samaria—as well as of people obedient to their message. Although it is true that the emphasis here is upon Israel for overextending Yahweh’s punishment upon Judah, the sins and guilt of both Israel and Judah are acknowledged. But an equal emphasis falls upon the godly character of the Samaritans, who re­ spond positively to the prophet’s words and have compas­ sion upon their relatives from Judah. The third passage requiring special attention in a discus­ sion of all Israel is 2 Chronicles 30:1-31:1, where the par­ ticipation of all Israel in Hezekiah’s Passover is a major com ponent We have mentioned Hezekiah’s invitation to the northern tribes to come to Jerusalem for the Passover and indicated that there was a more positive response than that suggested by many translations of 2 Chronicles 30:11. Here we need to call attention to the contents of Hezekiah’s invitation in verses 6-9. W hile it would be easy to emphasize the guilt which the message attributes to the north, as a result of which Israel has been laid waste by Assyria, to do so would negate the major thrust of the passage, which is clearly a call to repenThe People of God

55

tance. The rem nant left by the Assyrians is urged to take heed to the negative example of their faithless fathers, to give themselves to Yahweh and to return to his sanctu­ ary (v 8). They are given at least three reasons why they should do this, the first two of which are stated in terms of results: that Yahweh’s anger might turn from them (v 8) and that their exiled relatives might find mercy in the hands of their captors and return to Israel. But the third reason for Israel to repent is to be found in the nature of Yahweh himself: “For Yahweh your God is gracious and merciful, and will not turn away his face from you, if you return to him” (v 9). Yahweh’s grace, therefore, is readily available to those of the north who repent and turn to him, although it is apparent that for the Chronicler this “repentance” included a recognition of and return to the Jerusalem temple. In the account of the Passover which follows, the note of the north’s involvement is never permitted to wane. Verse 18 seems to state that, in particular, the representatives of various northern tribes had not been permitted to prepare themselves properly for eating the Passover as prescribed. Yet Hezekiah’s prayer for forgiveness would be equally rele­ vant to the south. That prayer proclaims emphatically that “setting the heart to seek Yahweh” is more important than obedience to cultic laws. Chronicles is then careful to add the note of Yahweh’s approval (v 20), “And Yahweh heard Hezekiah, and healed [forgave?] the people.” The inclusion of the north among the people of Israel present in Jerusalem (v 21) and with “all the assembly” (qōl haqqā hāl , vv 23, 25) may then be assumed. The latter verse mentions specifically both the “whole assembly that came in from Israel” and also sojourners, resident aliens (Heb. gērîm) who had come in from the land of Israel to participate in the fourteen-day feast. The emphasis in the preceding verses upon the involvement of all parts of Israel strongly suggests 56

1, 2 CHRONICLES

that the paralleling of the event with the days of Solomon in verse 26 may refer specifically to the participation of both north and south in the feast. This would be particularly significant at the time of Hezekiah, when the north had just fallen to the Assyrians and ceased to exist as an independent kingdom. Such a reading of Chronicles takes on added significance now, when the definitive break between Jews and Samari­ tans is being dated much later than it was in earlier decades,3 and when the unity of Chronicles and EzraNehemiah is no longer taken for granted. Earlier scholars maintained that at least a major purpose of ChroniclesEzra-Nehemiah was to voice its opposition to the north. This attitude was found primarily in Ezra-Nehemiah, whence it was exported to Chronicles as well. Viewed im­ partially, Chronicles instead maintains that faithful Yahwists in both north and south who recognized the unique position of the Jerusalem temple belonged to the true Is­ rael, the people of God, and were invited and welcome to participate in its worship.4 Israel in the N ew Testament The concept of Israel and the question of who “all Israel” consists of is not confined to the O ld Testament. Just as the New Testament was concerned to show its relationship with “the God of the fathers” (see chapter 1), so it absorbs also the name and the concept of Israel. One principle which the New Testament uses in detailing the life of Jesus is what has been called recapitulation. This means in brief that whatever happened to Israel in the Old Testament happens again to and in Jesus. W hen as an infant Jesus goes down to Egypt to escape Herod’s wrath and then returns, Matthew quotes as a fulfillment the words of Hosea 11:1: “O ut of Egypt I called my son” (r s v ). Just as Israel of The People of God

57

old, God’s children, came up from Egypt, so does Jesus, the new Israel (Matt 2:15). After his baptism, which the church has regularly related to the deliverance experienced in the Exodus, Jesus under­ goes a forty-day temptation in the wilderness, corresponding to Israel’s forty years (Matt 4:1-11). The phraseology of Mark, which speaks only of Jesus being with the wild beasts, and of angels ministering to him (1:13), is particularly sugges­ tive here. Jesus undergoes all that befell Israel of old, but with this exception: He yielded to no temptation. He com­ mitted no sin. Luke even reports that at the Transfiguration Moses and Elijah, embodiments of the Old Testament’s legal and prophetic traditions, appeared speaking with Jesus “and spoke of his departure [exodus], which he was to accomplish at Jerusalem” (Luke 9:30 RSV). Jesus is the embodiment of Israel of old, the perfect Israel existing in a single person. It is in that connection also that the great Servant Songs of Isaiah (Isa 42:1-9; 49:1-6:52:1353:12; 61:1-4) are applied directly to Jesus in explanation of the servant role in which he appeared. The words spoken by the Father at Jesus’ baptism, “‘Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased’” (Mark 1:11 RSV) are taken from both Psalm 2:7, a Messianic psalm, and from Isaiah 42:1. The Son of Man, Jesus would say, “‘came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many’” (Mark 10:45 RSV). But just as Israel of old came to be restricted ultimately to Jesus, the one perfect Israelite, so from Jesus proceeds a new Israel. The fact that Jesus called twelve apostles to follow him, and that upon the death of Judas it was felt necessary to choose another to preserve the number twelve (Acts 1:15— 26), recalls the twelve tribes which originally composed “all Israel” and which the Chronicler was insistent on maintain­ ing. The church, the Body of Christ, was itself to be the new 58

1, 2 CHRONICLES

people of God, the New Israel. Those who share the faith of Abraham are the children of Abraham (Rom 4:16). The problem of the relationship between the old Israel, the Jews, and the New Israel is discussed openly and pointedly (Acts 15, Gal 2, and Rom 9-10).

The People of God

59

5 THE WORD OF GOD

Yahweh, the God of their fathers, sent persistently to them by his messengers, because he had compassion on his people and on his dwelling place; but they kept mock­ ing the messengers of God, despising his words, and scoffing at his prophets, till the wrath of Yahweh rose against his people, till there was no forgiveness. (2 Chr 36:15-16) The God of Israel, the God of the fathers, is a God who reveals himself to his people. He does this through his Word, spoken of old through spokesmen like Moses and encapsulated in the Torah, conventionally translated “Law,” and through the prophets of the past and present. References to the Law are not rare in Chronicles. It is above all the “law of Yahweh” (cf. 1 C hr 16:14; 22:12; 2 C hr 12:1; 17:9; 19:8, and others). It is also the Law of Moses (2 C hr 23:18; 30:16), and the Law in “the book of Moses” (2 C hr 25:4). This law is sometimes referred to in partic­ ular circumstances, such as the descriptions of Levitical The Word of God

61

arrangements (2 Chr 23:18-21) and the temple tax (2 C hr 24:9). King Jehoshaphat sends princes and Levites throughout the land to teach “having the book of the law of Yahweh with them” (2 Chr 17:9). The book of the Law found by Josiah in the temple is named by the Chronicler “the book of the law of Yahweh given through Moses” (2 Chr 34:14). Nevertheless, one gets the impression that the Law per se is not of paramount importance in Chronicles. God has spoken and continues to speak through his messengers, the prophets, though the form and content of their messages may differ, even radically, from age to age and from situation to situation. So when Chronicles states that Saul died because he did not keep the word of Yahweh (1 Chr 10:13), it seems clear that it is the word of a prophet that is in view. In the same way, Israel anointed David as king over Israel, says 2 Samuel 5:3; and the Chronicler adds, “according to the word of the Lord by Samuel” (1 C hr 11:3). The Chronicler introduces his list of David’s mighty men with the phrase: These are the heads of David’s mighty men who sup­ ported him strongly in his kingdom with all Israel to make him king according to Yahweh’s word concern­ ing Israel. (1 C hr 11:10) God addresses David through the prophet Nathan (1 C hr 17:3 = 2 Sam 7:3, apparently negating Nathan’s earlier ad­ vice, which should accordingly be understood as personal in nature) and through the seer Gad (1 C hr 21:9 = 2 Sam 24:11). David himself relates the directive that forbids the building of the temple to a direct word from the Lord not recorded elsewhere: ‘“You have shed much blood and have waged great wars; you shall not build a house to my name . . .’” (1 C hr 22:8; cf. 28:3, 6). Words of other prophets recorded in Samuel-Kings, such 62

1, 2 CHRONICLES

as Shemaiah (2 C hr 12:5, 7), Micaiah (2 C hr 18), and the prophetess Huldah (2 C hr 34:22 = 2 Kgs 22:14), are also passed on. Further prophets named in other canonical writings are also referred to in Chronicles, though their words are not recorded. Jehoram is said to have received a letter from Elijah the prophet (2 Chr 21:12). O ther events from the reigns of Uzziah and Hezekiah are said to have been recorded by the prophet Isaiah (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32), whose prayer for Hezekiah is also noted (2 Chr 32:20). Jeremiah is said to have uttered a lament upon Josiah’s death (2 Chr 35:25) and to have been ignored by Judah’s last king, Zedekiah (2 Chr 36:12). More interesting and unusual, however, are instances in which the Chronicler portrays God as speaking through otherwise unknown prophets and by unexpected means. In 2 Chronicles one reads also the words of Azariah, son of Obed (15:1-7), Hanani the seer (16:7-9), and of Jehu the son of Hanani (19:1-3) who chronicled the life of Jehoshaphat (20:34). Here too one finds references to the words of Eliezer the son of Dodavahu (2 Chr 20:37), and to Obed, a prophet of Yahweh who was active in the north in the reign of the wicked Ahaz and who brought about the work of the first “Good Samaritans” (2 Chr 28:8-15). Second Chronicles speaks also of a nameless “man of God” who prophesied during the reign of Amaziah (25:7-9), and of another simi­ larly unknown prophet (25:15-16). All appear to give em­ phasis to typical emphases of the Chronicler as known from the framework of his books and through the mouths of such kings as David, Solomon, and Abijah: Yahweh is with his people when they are with him; if they forsake him, he will forsake them. Israel’s call is to be faithful to the Lord, to avoid foreign alliances, to keep his Law, including the pre­ scribed worship at the Jerusalem temple. The Word of Cod

63

Chronicles, however, does not confine the word of Yahweh to prophets of the traditional stamp. The same Spirit of God which came upon Azariah (2 C hr 15:1-7) is also said to have motivated one of David’s mighty men, Amasai, to have spoken a verse in praise of David (1 C hr 12:18), and to have done the same to a Levite of Asaph’s line, Jahaziel, in the assembly of the house of Yahweh (2 C hr 20:5, 14-17). This is also true of Zechariah, the son of the priest Jehoiada (2 C hr 24:20-22), who was subsequently stoned to death in the temple courts by the command of King Joash (2 C hr 24:20-22). That Chronicles stood at the end of the canon in the time of Jesus seems assured by his reference in Matthew 23:35 to the murders of Abel and of Zechariah as the first and the last recorded in the Old Testament. The Word of God, in brief, is becoming either more or less institutionalized, depending upon one’s purview. Sol­ diers, like David’s mighty man, and especially Levites, whom we would define as members of the temple choir, are in­ creasingly being viewed as vehicles of the divine Word. And the Spirit who clothed such exceptional heroes as Gideon (Judg 6:34), Jephthah (Judg 11:29), and David (1 Sam 16:13) is now operative in the more ordinary affairs of everyday life, and in particular among the priests and minor clergy of the Jerusalem temple. Such an understanding will reach its acme in 1 Chronicles 22-26, often considered a later addition to the Chronicler’s original work. In that five-chapter pas­ sage, the musical work of the three chief groups of Levites— Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun— is routinely described as prophesying (1 C hr 25:1-4; see also 2 Chronicles 29:30; 35:15). That is not to say that the discovery of God’s Word and will is to be found only among the institutional clergy. Vari­ ous kings, such as David, Solomon, and Josiah, seem to proceed in many of their activities with the understanding that their decisions are divinely guided. This is particularly 64

1, 2 CHRONICLES

true with reference to the arrangements of and for the Levites, where it appears that fundamental decisions are tied to the Mosaic Law, but ongoing regulations are the work of David, Solomon, and perhaps other kings (1 C hr 23:1-6; 2 C hr 8:12-16; 29:25-30; 35:1-6). David is in fact said to have received the plans for at least the basic temple structure “in a writing from the hand of Yahweh” (1 C hr 28:19). Apparently no further explanation seemed neces­ sary to the writer. Finally, one must be aware of a communication between God and at least some of his people which lay outside of all ordinary and institutional channels. Two times the Lord is said to have appeared to Solomon in a dream (2 C hr 1:7-13; 7:12-18). The Lord responds to the people’s repentance with forgiveness (2 C hr 12:6-7). They pray, and the Lord answers (2 C hr 32:24). Hezekiah even prays for people who celebrate the Passover in uncleanness and not according to the prescriptions of the sanctuary. And Yahweh hears his prayer and forgives or “heals” (wayyirpā›) the people (2 C hr 30:20). This is true even of such a miscreant as Manasseh (2 C hr 33:12-14). The Word of God, as one of the ancient prayers of the church puts it, is not to be bound, but is to be preached to the joy and edifying of God’s people. Even Pharaoh Necho of Egypt can become the means through which Yahweh communicates his will to people. In the final analysis only the rejection of that Word, sent persistently by the Lord because of his compassion, results in God’s wrath poured out without healing or forgiveness (Heb. marpē›), until the land enjoys its sabbaths and the Word is again heard (2 C hr 36:15-16, 21-22). Again, significant New Testament developments in the doctrines of the Word of God might be mentioned. Chief among these is the designation of Jesus C hrist as the Word (Greek logos) of God, through whom God has spoken his The Word of God

65

final and definitive word. The writer of Hebrews connects directly with the Old Testament witness when he notes: In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. (Heb 1:1-2 RSV) The Prologue of John draws both upon rabbinic sources and Greek philosophy. In the former, God’s Word was one of those elements like the Law, wisdom, the Messiah, the glory of God, and the spirit of God which were considered preexistent. In the latter, Greek philosophy, the logos was, among other things, both an emanation from the divine and the divine reason which ordered all things. The Prologue announces: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and with­ out him was not anything made that was made. (John 1:1-3 RSV) It is John’s further pronouncement that this preincarnate Word has become incarnate, or taken on human flesh, in Jesus, God’s unique Son in whom we see the Father: And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, the glory as of the only Son from the Father. . . . And from his fulness have we all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the 66

1, 2 CHRONICLES

only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known. (John 1:14,16-18) This language and theology is continued and expanded in the church. The Nicene Creed does not use the title “Word,” but does refer to Jesus as “begotten of his Father before all worlds, God out of God, Light out of Light, true God out of true God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom [i.e., Jesus, the Word] all things were made. . . .” Thus with the fullness of God’s revelation achieved in Christ, most Christians anticipate no further revelation; the final chapter of the Bible is usually read as a warning against those who would claim to have new revelations from God (Rev 22:18). God’s powerful Word, incarnate in his Son Jesus, will continue to govern and preserve all things until his final appearing.

The Word of Cod

67

6 DIV IN E RETRIBU TIO N

In those days Hezekiah became sick and was at the point of death, and he prayed to Yahweh; and he answered him and gave him a sign. But Hezekiah did not make return according to the benefit done to him, for his heart was proud. Therefore wrath came upon him and Judah and Jerusalem. But Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of Yahweh did not come upon them in the days of Hezekiah. (2 Chr 32:24-26) By retribution is meant a reward or punishment corre­ sponding to a good or evil deed. In that connection, it is fair to say that in Chronicles a good deed, as represented in the actions of a faithful king or people, always results in bless­ ing, and that an evil deed, as defined by the author, always results in bane. The concept of retribution, like many significant ele­ ments in the Chronicler’s theology, is introduced in a major speech of David to Solomon. It is reiterated in prophetic D iv in e R e tr ib u tio n

69

speeches throughout the work and serves as the governing and organizing principle in the presentation of the histories of the post-Solomonic kings. This dogma is expressed most clearly in the Chronicler’s recitation of the histories of the post-Solomonic kings. It is fair to say that retribution is the dominant principle influ­ encing the manner in which the Chronicler has dealt with the history of the various kings as he found them in the books of Kings. The principle of retribution is given first expression in David’s second speech to Solomon: “If you seek him [the Lord], he will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will reject you forever” (1 Chr 28:9). It is reiterated explicitly in almost identical words through various prophets whom the writer presents as appearing from time to time: “The Lord is with you, while you are with him. If you seek him, he will be found by you, but if you forsake him, he will forsake you” (2 C hr 15:2; cf. 2 Chronicles 12:5; 14:7, and 16:7). In every case in which the work of the Deuteronomic Historian might be considered deficient in this regard, Chronicles in some manner adjusts his text to remedy that deficiency. This is seen already in the reign of Solomon’s son Rehoboam. Kings has noted without further explanation that during the reign of Rehoboam Judah had been invaded by Shishak of Egypt (1 Kgs 14:25). Chronicles, however, provides a cause for this invasion corresponding to his doc­ trine of retribution: Judah has been unfaithful, has aban­ doned God, and has forsaken the Law of the Lord (2 C hr 12:1, 2, 5). The words of the prophet Shemaiah make the correspondence complete: “Thus says the Lord, ‘You aban­ doned me, so I have abandoned you to the hand of Shishak’” (2 C hr 12:5). The terminology here is very general—no specific action of Judah is referred to. W hat is important is often not the details, but the principle that is involved. In a similar but 70

1, 2 CHRONICLES

positive frame, we will read of kings who repent (2 C hr 12:12), who rely upon the Lord, and who seek the Lord. The account of Rehoboam is a model of Chronicles’ his­ toriography. Kings has reported Shishak’s invasion as dating in Rehoboam’s fifth year. Chronicles fleshes out its account by adding material to complement this schema. Since retri­ bution in Chronicles is always immediate, the writer con­ cludes that Judah’s apostasy occurred in the fourth year, and that, correspondingly, Rehoboam enjoyed a three-year pe­ riod of faithfulness (identified here as walking in the ways of David and Solomon, 2 C hr 11:17). Such obedience results in a prosperity expressed by three of the means which we shall see are regularly indications of God’s blessings: building op­ erations, military might, and large families (11:5-12, 18-21, 22-23). Shishak’s invasion during the fifth year results in military defeat and subjugation. Concerning Rehoboam’s repentance, see page 101. Chronicles uses the brief reign of Abijah for a different purpose, silently reversing the position represented in Kings that Abijah was an evil king. Instead, the mention of his warfare with Jeroboam of the north provides the oppor­ tunity for a detailed speech summarizing the author’s posi­ tion: Judah has the legitimate king and the legitimate priesthood, while Israel is in rebellion against God. W ith that in mind, the outcome of the battle is never in doubt. Five hundred thousand Israelites are slain, “and the men of Judah prevailed, because they relied upon Yahweh” (2 C hr 13:18 RSV). Additional signs of the prosperity attending Abijah follow: Abijah captures three additional cities of Israel, grows in strength, and has a large family (vv 19-22). Jeroboam, on the other hand, is struck down by God him­ self (v 20). Judah’s next king, Asa, is regarded very highly by the writer of Kings, who remarks that he “was wholly true to the Lord all his days” (1 Kgs 15:14). However, the Chronicler Divine Retribution

71

found in the Kings account three elements needing explana­ tion: (1) it is noted he had war with Baasha of Israel (1 Kgs 15:16), (2) he made a treaty with Ben-hadad of Damascus (foreign alliances are always considered a violation of faith in God), and (3) in his old age, Asa had sore feet (1 Kgs 15:23). To adjust this material to his understanding of rewards and pun­ ishments, the Chronicler characteristically divides Asa’s reign into two separate periods. The first period builds upon the statement of Kings that Asa’s heart “was wholly true to Yahweh all his days” (1 Kgs 15:14). The reforming activity mentioned in Kings is ex­ panded and includes the removal of high places in Judah and in portions of the north as well (2 C hr 14:3; 15:8). O ther signs of Asa’s prosperity are also added. Four times it is stated that the land “had rest” under him (1 C hr 14:1, 6-7; 15:7). Asa’s building operations are named (2 C hr 14:6-7), and he is victorious in an otherwise unknown battle against Zerah the Ethiopian, which also serves as the occasion for a prophetic speech by Azariah. This speech is replete with the terminology of retribution: “Yahweh is with you, while you are with him. If you seek him, he will be found by you, but if you forsake him, he will forsake you. For a long time Israel was without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law; but when in their distress they turned to the Lord, the God of Israel, and sought him, he was found by them. In those times there was no peace to him who went out or to him who came in, for great disturbances afflicted all the inhabitants of the lands. They were broken in pieces, nation against nation and city against city, for God troubled them with every sort of distress. But you, take courage! Do not let your hands be weak, for your work shall be rewarded.” (2 C hr 15:2-7 RSV) 72

1, 2 CHRONICLES

W ith such prophetic encouragement, a second round of reforming activities then follows (15:8-18). Idols are re­ moved in both north and south, and mention is made of sojourners from Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon who deserted to Asa in Jerusalem when they saw “Yahweh was with him” (15:9). The covenant ceremony climaxing the re­ forms in Jerusalem includes the provision that “whoever would not seek Yahweh, the God of Israel, should be put to death . . . ” (15:13). The Chronicler’s own termination of the account continues: And all Judah rejoiced over the oath; for they had sworn with all their heart, and had sought him with their whole desire, and he was found by them, and Yahweh gave them rest round about, (v 15 RSV) It is an oddity of the Chronicler’s style that, despite other alterations in his account, he regularly retains the expressed evaluation of DH. Verse 17, dependent upon 1 Kings 15:14, states that the high places were not taken away out of Israel. W hile these seeming contradictions may be due to the work of a later editor, they are so common as to suggest that the Chronicler himself has simply not cared to extend his edito­ rial work to that detail. However, DH included in a matter-of-fact way an account of Asa’s undated alliance with Ben-hadad of Syria against Baasha of Israel. Chronicles never allows such a foreign al­ liance to pass without condemnation, since it represents for him a lack of faith in Yahweh. The Chronicler presents the prophet Hanani to condemn Asa in the thirty-sixth year of his reign. His pronouncement of retribution, predicting continuous wars for Asa as the outcome of this faithlessness, results in a show of Asa’s anger both against the prophet and against the people. The description is once again general and rather colorless: “And Asa inflicted cruelties upon some Divine Retribution

73

of the people at the same time” (2 C hr 16:10 RSV). The reference to Asa’s diseased feet (2 C hr 16:12 = 1 Kgs 15:23) follows, with the notation added that even when his disease was severe, Asa did not seek Yahweh, but sought help from doctors instead. In summary, three particular aspects of Chronicles’ han­ dling of the Asa account are instructive: 1. The Chronicler accepts the basic evaluation of DH as his own, as is almost always the case. The only exceptions are Solomon and Abijah. 2. Chronicles again divides the reign of a given king into two or more periods depending upon the details avail­ able from Kings and from an assessment of those details. Thus the doctrine of retribution is applied not only to the reign of a given king as a whole, but to each element within it as well. 3. In cases such as that of Asa, to whom the Chronicler is quite favorably disposed, religious zeal is normally demon­ strated very early and for a prolonged period of the king’s reign.1 Aspects of this doctrine of retribution could be demon­ strated from the reign of almost every king of Judah who follows.2 However, for our purposes it will be sufficient to note several particularly striking examples of the author’s style. Uzziah and Ahaz Kings had reported briefly that Uzziah—also named Azariah—did what was right, reigned fifty-two years, but died a leper (2 Kgs 14:21-22; 15:1-7). Perhaps in view of his extremely long reign, which would of itself be considered a sign of God’s blessing, Chronicles adds examples of his pros­ perity and notes that his prosperity was the result of his seeking God (see p. 81) in the days of a certain Zechariah, 74

1, 2 CHRONICLES

who is surely meant to be understood as a priest. This pros­ perity includes building operations, victory in warfare, a large army, fame, and strength (2 C hr 26:6-15). To explain Uzziah’s leprosy, Chronicles adds in verses 16-20 Uzziah’s anger at Azariah and his fellow priests when they warned him not to enter the temple precincts to bum incense. As a result, Uzziah is smitten by God and dies a leper. A second example involves King Ahaz, the worst of the kings according to DH (2 Kgs 16). Chronicles again adds to the account specific statements and examples of negative retribution: God gave him into the hand of the king of Syria, who defeated him and took captive a great number of his people and brought them to Damascus. He was also given into the hand of the king of Israel, who defeated him. . . . For Pekah the son of Remaliah slew a hun­ dred and twenty thousand in Judah in one day, all of them men of valor, because they had forsaken the Lord, the God of their fathers. (2 C hr 28:5-6 RSV) After Ahaz’s appeal to Assyria for help, which the Chronicler again considered evidence of a lack of faith (2 C hr 28:16 = 2 Kgs 16:7a), Chronicles again adds specific examples of attacks upon and defeats of Judah (2 C hr 28:17-18). This explanation is offered of these events: “For the Lord brought Judah low because of Ahaz king of Israel, for he had dealt wantonly in Judah and had been faithless to Yahweh” (v 19 RSV). Ahaz even appealed to the gods of Syria for help, “but they were the m in of him, and of all Israel ” (v 23). The statements of verse 24 are surely meant to be a kind of negative climax to Judah’s history. Judah now found itself as evil as its brothers and sisters in the north (who had at least listened to the words of a true prophet of the Lord, vv 8-15): Divine Retribution

75

And Ahaz gathered together the vessels of the house of God and cut in pieces the vessels of the house of God, and he shut up the doors of the house of the Lord; and he made himself altars in every corner of Jerusalem. In every city of Judah he made high places to bum incense to other gods, provoking to anger the Lord, the God of his fathers. (2 Chr 28:24-25 RSV, italics added) Hezekiah Hezekiah, with Josiah, is among the kings most in favor with DH. He indicates this not only by stating that they “did what was right” (2 Kgs 18:3; 22:2), but also in ascribing to them the removal of the idolatrous high places erected by Solomon, which were the cause of the rending of the north­ ern kingdom from Solomon’s son Rehoboam (1 Kgs 11:1— 13). The positive significance of Hezekiah for Chronicles is seen first of all in the length of the account of his reign (2 Chr 29-32), but also in the specific kinds of activities engaged in by Hezekiah and the blessings attributed to him.3 It is he who in the first month of the first year of his reign (2 Chr 29:3) reopens the doors of the temple closed by the faithless Ahaz. Hezekiah’s speech to the Levites at the begin­ ning of his reforming work is again replete with explicit statements of retribution theology: “Hear me, Levites! Now sanctify yourselves, and sanc­ tify the house of Yahweh, the God of your fathers, and carry out the filth from the holy place. For our fathers have been unfaithful and have done what was evil in the sight of Yahweh our God; they have forsaken him, and have turned away their faces from the habitation of Yahweh, and turned their backs. They also shut the doors of the vestibule and put out the lamps, and have 76

1, 2 C H R O N I C L E S

not burned incense or offered burnt offerings in the holy place to the God of Israel. Therefore the wrath of Yahweh came on Judah and Jerusalem, and he has made them an object of horror, of astonishment, and of hissing, as you see with your own eyes. For lo, our fathers have fallen by the sword and our sons and our daughters and our wives are in captivity for this.” (2 C hr 29:5-9 r s v , italics added) The remainder of the chapter recounts Hezekiah’s restora­ tion of the temple worship, including especially the reorder­ ing of the Levites (vv 10-36). O ther specific activities attributed to Hezekiah include an invitation to the separated brethren of the north to join them in keeping the Passover in Jerusalem, an invitation which was accepted, it should be noted, by many northern­ ers (2 C hr 30:18-25). It was probably this participation of the north which occasioned the Chronicler’s statement con­ cluding the festivities: So there was great joy in Jerusalem, for since the time of Solomon the son of David king of Israel there had been nothing like this in Jerusalem, (v 26 RSV, italics added) After the account of additional reforms in both north and south (2 C hr 31:1) and in the temple (vv 2-19), Chronicles concludes the reforming activity of Hezekiah with the words: Thus Hezekiah did throughout all Judah; and he did what was good and right and faithful before the Lord his God. And every work that he undertook in the service of the house of God and in accordance with the law and the commandments, seeking his God, he did with all his heart, and prospered, (vv 20-21 RSV) Divine Retribution

77

A similar statement of retributive blessing stands at the end of Chronicles’ account of Hezekiah’s engagement with Sennacherib of Assyria. An introductory phrase, “after these things and these acts of faithfulness . . . places this encounter within the context of Hezekiah’s faithfulness (2 C hr 32:1a), and here too Hezekiah’s words to his troops are reminiscent of those of a prophet: “Be strong and of good courage. Do not be afraid or dismayed before the king of Assyria and all the horde that is with him; for there is one greater with us than with him. W ith him is an arm of flesh; but with us is Yahweh our God, to help us and to fight our battles.” (vv 7 -8

r sv )

The writer’s praise of Hezekiah reaches its climax after the victory from that same battle. Characteristic features of blessing abound: So the Lord saved Hezekiah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem from the hand of Sennacherib king of Assyria and from the hand of all his enemies; and he gave them rest on every side. And many brought gifts to Yahweh to Jerusalem and precious things to Hezekiah king of Judah, so that he was exalted in the sight of all nations from that time onward. (2 C hr 32:22-23 RSV, italics added) Unfortunately, Kings had also reported the sickness of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:1). His breach of faith in the matter of the Babylonian envoys is admitted by Chronicles, but covered over with the prosaic and nonspecific vocabulary regularly found in such instances (cf. 2 Kgs 12:7-8,12): But Hezekiah did not make return according to the ben­ efit done to him, for his heart was proud. Therefore 78

1, 2 CHRONICLES

wrath came upon him and Judah and Jerusalem. But Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of Yahweh did not come upon them in the days of Hezekiah. (2 Chr 32:25-26 RSV, italics added) It is surely a sign of the writer’s boundless praise for Hezekiah that, despite such a negative note at the end of his reign, there nevertheless follows an addition from the Chronicler’s hand pointing to his riches, honor, building operations, and general prosperity (vv 27-30). To my knowl­ edge, such a situation does not occur elsev'here in the book. Manasseh and Josiah The reign of Manasseh is similarly divided into two peri­ ods. The material provided Chronicles by DH in the case of Manasseh presented a difficult problem. Manasseh is judged as completely evil, as a result of whose sins Judah would be destroyed without remnant (2 Kgs 21). And yet he had the longest reign of any king of Israel, fifty-five years! Accord­ ingly, Chronicles appends to the Kings account the story of Manasseh’s punishment (2 C hr 33:11) and subsequent re­ pentance (vv 12-13, 19; see p. 103). Following that repen­ tance, Manasseh’s reign is characterized by the customary blessings: building operations and religious reforms. Note­ worthy is the fact that, despite this radical change in the report concerning Manasseh, that of his son Amon which follows nevertheless states that “he did what was evil in the sight of Yahweh, as Manasseh his father had done” (v 22 RSV), although without his father’s repentance (v 23). The account of Josiah also presented our writer with a problem. Josiah’s reign, of course, marks the high point of DH’s history of Judah. However, 2 Kings 23:29 reports his death in battle at the hands of Necho of Egypt. Chronicles Divine Retribution

79

therefore inserts a cause for such a defeat and death: Josiah had disobeyed a command of God given him through the Eqyptian pharaoh (2 Chr 35:21-23). His death, therefore, is in keeping with the general principle of retribution: Blessing follows obedience, and punishment follows disobedience. And the greatest disobedience is failure to hear the voice of Yahweh, even if from the mouth of a foreign ruler. T he last kings of Judah Judah’s end is told in Chronicles in a very sketchy way following the death of Josiah. Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah all “did what was evil” in the eyes of Yahweh (2 C hr 36:5, 9, 12), as reported also in Kings. Concerning Zedekiah it is added that “he did not humble himself (i.e., repent) before Jeremiah the prophet, who spoke from the mouth of the Lord” (2 C hr 36:12), and that he violated an oath given to King Nebuchadnezzar “who had made him swear by God” (v 13). Chronicles adds as a final summary of Judah’s unfaithfulness: All the leading priests and the people likewise were exceedingly unfaithful, following all the abominations of the nations; and they polluted the house of Yahweh which he had hallowed in Jerusalem, (v 14 RSV) Judah’s final and ultimate sin, however, which seals her destruction, is that of failure to repent at the preaching of the prophets: Yahweh, the God of their fathers, sent persistently to them by his messengers, because he had compassion on his people and on his dwelling place; but they kept mocking the messengers of God, despising his words, and scoffing at his prophets, till the wrath of Yahweh 80

1, 2 CHRONICLES

rose against his people, till there was no remedy. (2 C hr 36:15-16 r s v ) As a result the temple is destroyed, its vessels carried to Babylon, and the land left barren “until the land enjoyed its sabbaths” (2 C hr 36:21), a final punishment which is perhaps at the same time viewed as a purification necessary for God’s subsequent redeeming activity. It thus seems clear that Chronicles has adopted the dogma of retribution, personal and immediate as well as communal and prolonged, as the framework into which the lives of the various kings are fitted, and has regularly added whatever details were necessary to make each individual fit into this scheme. Opinions vary as to whether these addi­ tions are based on historical data available to the writer but subsequently lost, or whether, as seems more likely to me, they were logical deductions based on the writer’s theology. Seeking and forsaking God The two contrasting terms used most frequently through­ out Chronicles for presentation of this dogma are those introduced in 1 Chronicles 28:9, “to seek” (dāraš), and “to forsake” (‹āzab). It is readily apparent that for Chronicles, which uses the term some forty times, dāraš entails much more than its common translation, “to inquire of.” Instead, dāraš is a more general term, including all that might be involved in “keeping the faith” and thus remaining true to Yahweh (cf. 2 C hr 12:14; 14:3; 15:12; 30:19). Similarly, ‹āzab and its near synonym, mā‹al, “to act unfaithfully,” are the most general of terms. The Chronicler’s addendum follow­ ing Saul’s death significantly parallels his unfaithfulness and his failure to “seek” Yahweh (1 C hr 10:13-14). To further define the content of this “seeking” is diffi­ cult. That it involved a commitment may be seen from its Divine Retribution

81

frequent occurrence in such phrases as “to set (hēkîm) the heart to seek Yahweh,” as well as in various covenant con­ texts where the decision of the people for Yahweh would be of primary importance. That such seeking demanded the avoidance of foreign gods is explicit in such passages as 2 Chronicles 17:3 and 25:15,20. That it required a positive relationship to the Jerusalem temple might be assumed, and is explicit in at least one case (2 C hr 20:3-4). That this “seeking” involved observable conduct of a certain sort is clear from the account of Asa’s covenant, where those who do not seek Yahweh are to be put to death (2 C hr 15:12— 13), although in only one instance is this seeking explicitly related to the observance of the Law (2 C hr 17:4). The emphasis upon faith and commitment is strongly accented. Two aspects of the Chronicler’s presentation stand in bold relief: (1) In numerous cases the need for complete reliance on Yahweh is given extended treatment, both in various prophetic speeches as well as in the editorial framework of the book. The key word often found in such a context is š ā ͑an, “to rely upon” (cf. 2 Chronicles 13:18; 14:10; 16:7-8). A similar point is made in Jehoshaphat’s address to his troops prior to their engagement with the Moabites. There, Jehoshaphat’s words “Believe (Heb. ›mn, hiphil) in Yahweh your God, and you will be established; believe his prophets, and you will succeed” (2 C hr 20:20) recall Isaiah’s demand for faith in the face of the Syro-Ephraimitic encounter (Isa 7:9). In this victory, as in numerous others, Israel’s victory is as­ sured when she has shown the necessary faith; the narration of the battle is couched in terms often reminiscent of the holy war, again recalling Isaiah. In further agreement with Isaiah, Chronicles regularly looks upon any type of foreign alliance as a sign of apostasy from Yahweh (cf. 2 Chr 16:7; 20:37). The positive side of the doctrine of retribution is that prosperity results when the proper relationship with God 82

1, 2 CHRONICLES

exists. The Chronicler has introduced this important ele­ ment, too, in David’s first speech to Solomon (1 C hr 22:11, 13), which is ultimately dependent upon Joshua 1. The note of prosperity reoccurs in 1 Chronicles 29:23, where it is used to describe Solomon’s reign even before it has begun. The key word of Chronicles in this regard is the causative active (hiphil) of slh, “to prosper,” which he uses eleven times without precedent in DH. (Slh is used in the hiphil only five times in the entire Deuteronomic corpus: Deuteronomy 28:29; Joshua 1:8; Judges 18:5; and 1 Kings 22:12,15.) But the full significance of the writer’s use of this term is apparent only from observing its distribution throughout Chronicles. The Chronicler has reserved the prosperity denoted by this term for precisely that group of kings to whom he is most favorably disposed: Solomon (2 Chr 7:11), Asa (2 Chr 14:6), Jehoshaphat (2 Chr 20:20), Uzziah (2 Chr 26:5), and Hezekiah (2 Chr 31:21). Direcdy in the case of Uzziah and Hezekiah, and somewhat less directly with Asa, this prosperity is related to the seeking of Yahweh. The reign of Hezekiah, the post-Solomonic king most in favor with Chronicles, is aptly concluded with the words, “Hezekiah prospered in all his works” (2 Chr 32:30). In several cases also the breach of this relationship with God is cited as the actual or potential cause for a lack of prosperity. Abijah’s important discourse points out that it is impossible for the north to “succeed” in its war with Judah since God is with Judah and Israel is accordingly fighting against God (2 C hr 13:12). Zechariah’s words following Judah’s apostasy after the death of the priest Jehoiada also point out the impossibility of Judah’s success when she has transgressed Yahweh’s commandments and thereby is for­ saken (2 C hr 24:20). The statement concluding the first part of Uzziah’s reign, “as long as he [Uzziah] sought the Lord, God made him prosper” (2 C hr 26:5), clearly foreshadows the second part of Uzziah’s life when he was unfaithful in entering the temple to bum incense. Divine Retribution

83

T he marks of prosperity The many and varied ways in which the Chronicler por­ trays the prosperous nature of the reigns of God-pleasing kings is one of the most striking characteristics of his account and is highly reminiscent of the recital of covenant blessings and curses found in such passages as Deuteronomy 27 and 28. First it is, for example, frequently stated of the godly king that Yahweh was “with him” (Solomon, 2 C hr 1:1; Judah at the time of Abijah, 2 C hr 13:12; Jehoshaphat, 2 C hr 17:3; Asa, 2 C hr 15:9). Echoes of this ancient formulation also occur, although modified by their inclusion in larger literary forms or under the influence of the Chronicler’s theology. Hence, variations of the statement are applied to Jehoshaphat (2 C hr 20:17), Hezekiah (2 C hr 32:8), and perhaps Pharaoh Neco (2 C hr 35:21) in the context of “holy war.” Its use by David in 1 Chronicles 22:11 in an imperfect (jussive) form, “may Yahweh be with you,” as well as by Jehoshaphat in 2 Chronicles 19:6, is probably influenced by connections with the form used for induction of an official to an office.4 The conditional formulation in 2 Chronicles 15:2, “Yahweh is with you, while you are with him,” is an obvious alteration of the standard phrase under the influence of the Chroni­ cler’s doctrine of retribution. Secondly, the concept of “rest” (menûhā h), introduced by the Chronicler in 1 Chronicles 22:9, is afterward applied to various other periods in Judah’s history to point to the peace or rest attending a God-pleasing reign. (For other aspects of the “rest” theme, see chapter 8.) This is most apparent in the description of the first part of Asa’s reign, where three oc­ currences of the Hebrew “to rest” (nûah), are joined with one of “quietness” (šāqat): . . . Asa his son reigned in his stead. In his days the land had rest for ten years. And Asa did what was good 84

1, 2 CHRONICLES

and right in the eyes of Yahweh his God. . . . And the kingdom had rest under him. He built fortified cities in Judah, for the land had rest. He had no war in those years, for Yahweh gave him peace. And he said to Judah, “Let us build these cities, and surround them with walls and towers, gates and bars; the land is still ours, because we have sought Yahweh our God; we have sought him, and he has given us peace on every side.” So they built and prospered. (2 C hr 14:1-2,5b-7 RSV; Heb. 13:23,14:4b-6, italics added) Both hēnîah and šāqat are used to describe a portion of Jehoshaphat’s reign (2 C hr 20:30). Concerning Hezekiah, Chronicles concludes by adding to a narrative generally taken from Kings the phrase, “Yahweh . . . gave them rest on every side” (2 C hr 32:22). Chronicles has also pointed out the prosperity which be­ longed to the reigns of God-pleasing kings in numerous other specific ways. In most of these, it appears that the description of the unprecedented prosperity of Solomon’s reign as presented in Kings and repeated by Chronicles has been used as a basis. Thus Chronicles repeats the tradition of Solomon’s riches (1 Kgs 3:12-13; 10:22 = 2 C hr 1:12-13; 10:22) and applies it also to Jehoshaphat (2 C hr 17:5) and Hezekiah (2 C hr 32:27). The closely related honor and fame are likewise marks of Solomon in both 1 Kings 3:12-13 and 2 Chronicles 1:12, but the Chronicler inserts a similar no­ tice into his account of David (1 C hr 17.1 7), Jehoshaphat (2 C hr 17:5), Uzziah (2 C hr 26:8, 15), and Hezekiah (2 C hr 32:27). Statements that a king became great or strong are common, beginning again with Solomon (2 C hr 1:1) and continuing with Rehoboam (2 C hr 11:17), Abijah (2 C hr 13:21), Jehoshaphat (2 C hr 17:1, 5, 11), Uzziah (2 C hr 26:8, 15), and Jotham (2 C hr 27:6). The large armies of various kings are referred to as evident Divine Retribution

85

testimony of their prosperity and strength (2 C hr 13:3; 14:8; 17:3-19; 26:11-15), as are the victories they achieve in battle (Abijah—2 C hr 13:13-20; Asa— 2 C hr 14:12-15; Jehoshaphat—2 C hr 20:1-30; Amaziah— 2 C hr 25:11-13; Jotham—2 C hr 26:7; Hezekiah—2 C hr 32:22). For David, see 1 Chronicles 18:1-20:8. Particular notice should be taken that in this almost complete list of Chroni­ cles’ favorite kings, Solomon, the “man of peace,” is notice­ ably absent. Terminology of the holy war is again present in relating that the “fear of Yahweh” fell upon the surrounding nations during the reigns of Asa, Jehoshaphat, and David (2 C hr 14:14; 17:10; 20:29; 1 C hr 14:17). Another method used to demonstrate the prosperity of God-pleasing kings is in reporting the building activities un­ dertaken during the God-pleasing portions of their reigns. While many of these are related to the temple and its envi­ rons (2 Chr 15:8; 24:4; 27:3; 29:3; 33:17 [of Manasseh!]; 34:815 = 2 Kgs 22:3-6), an equal number are concerned with all kinds of secular building operations, including fortifications. Note again the comprehensive nature of the list: Solomon (2 C hr 8:2-6); Rehoboam (2 C hr 11:5-12); Asa (2 Chr 14:5); Uzziah (2 Chr 26:6-8); Jehoshaphat (2 C hr 17:12); Jotham (2 Chr 27:3); and Hezekiah (2 Chr 32:8,28-30)! It is also stated by Chronicles that the kings of the world brought gifts, not only to Solomon (2 C hr 9:23 = 1 Kgs 10:23), but also to Jehoshaphat (2 C hr 17:11), Uzziah (2 C hr 26:8), and Hezekiah (2 Chr 32:23) as well. In the last case, the gifts brought to Hezekiah are paralleled with those brought to Yahweh. It is accordingly clear that the writer of Chronicles has gone to great lengths to describe the prosperity enjoyed by God-pleasing kings in accordance with his understanding of divine retribution. In a few cases these elements are already present in the Chronicler’s presentation of David, but in most the prosperity attending Solomon’s reign as presented 86

1, 2 CHRONICLES

in Kings has been adopted by Chronicles and used as a model to describe the reigns of post-Solomonic kings. Forsaking Yahweh The negative counterpart of “seeking” Yahweh is repre­ sented generally by the verb “to forsake” (‹āzab), and the root m ‹l, “to act unfaithfully.” This apostasy is often very general in nature, as indicated in instances where Chroni­ cles, after recounting a section from Kings which details a king’s wicked practices, concludes with a generalizing phrase such as “because they had forsaken the Lord” (2 C hr 21:10; 28:6). But at other times this “forsaking” is more closely defined by the context as referring to such transgressions as failure to observe the law (2 C hr 12:1, 5) or idol worship (2 C hr 24:18; 7:22 = 1 Kgs 9:9). Forsaking Yahweh most commonly involves the relation­ ship of the individual to the Jerusalem temple. This is assured by the account surrounding Jehoiada’s death, when Judah “forsook the house of Yahweh . . . and served the Asherim and the idols” (2 Chr 24:18), as well as by the summary of the apostasy preceding Hezekiah’s reform: For our fathers have been unfaithful and have done what was evil in the sight of Yahweh our God; they have forsaken him, and have turned away their faces from the habitation of Yahweh, and turned their backs. They also shut the doors of the vestibule and put out the lamps, and have not burned incense or offered burnt offerings in the holy place to the God of Israel. (2 C hr 29:6-7 RSV, italics added) The relationship between this unfaithfulness to and for­ saking of Yahweh and the cult is also seen in the program­ matic speech of Abijah in 2 Chronicles 13, which expresses Divine Retribution

87

the Chronicler’s judgment upon the northern tribes. The statement that the north has forsaken Yahweh (2 C hr 13:11) is preceded by an account which specifically mentions the expulsion of the Aaronites and Levites from their offices by Jeroboam (v 9). O n the other hand, the south can affirm that it has not forsaken Yahweh, since the legitimate priesthood still serves there, together with the prescribed temple serv­ ices which include such minutiae as the daily offering of the shewbread and the lighting of the golden lampstands (2 C hr 13:9-12). Forms of the verb “to act unfaithfully” (the root m ‹l), are familiar from the priestly vocabulary of the Pentateuch and such works as Ezekiel. They occur some sixteen times in 2 Chronicles and appear even more general in the viewpoint expressed than does ‹āzab. This can be seen from the sum­ mary manner in which the root is used to describe the reigns of Ahaz (2 C hr 28:19, compare 29:6) and Manasseh (2 C hr 33:19), as well as Judah’s condition which ultimately led to the Exile (2 C hr 36:14, compare 1 C hr 5:25; 9:1). At times, however, this “unfaithfulness” has direct reference to one’s relationship to the temple (2 C hr 26:16, 18; 36:14). In sharp contrast, all five occurrences of the root m ‹l in Ezra and Nehemiah deal with the problem of foreign marriages, providing additional evidence that those books do not stem from the same author(s) as Chronicles.5 As might be expected in view of the details with which Chronicles has described the prosperity resulting from “seeking” Yahweh, the results of unfaithfulness to God are also presented in considerable variety and detail. Forsaking Yahweh results in war (2 C hr 16:9; 21:6), defeat (2 C hr 24:23-24; 25:17-24; 28:6, 19; 30:7), disease (2 C hr 16:12; 21:14, 18; 26:19), and conspiracy (2 C hr 24:25; 25:27). That the details themselves are rather insignificant for the Chron­ icler can be seen from the fact that he is quite commonly content to describe the results with the equally general 88

1, 2 CHRONICLES

phrase that “wrath” came, or did not come, upon the offend­ ing party (2 C hr 12:7, 12; 19:2; 32:26). To forsake Yahweh means simply to be cast off or forsaken by him, with all his blessings (1 C hr 28:9). W hile Yahweh is with those who seek him, he is not with those who are unfaithful to him (2 C hr 13:12). In only one case does it appear that Chronicles has failed to carry the dogma of retribution through to its complete and logical conclusion without mention of repentance (see pp. 100-04). King Jehoshaphat, for whom the Chronicler shows great sympathy, is rebuked by the seer Hanani for his alliance with Ahab of Israel. And it is reported that “wrath has gone out against you from Yahweh” as a result (2 C hr 19:2). However, this rebuke is immediately tempered with the note that “some good” was found in him, since he had destroyed the Asherahs from the land (v 3). In summary, then, we may conclude that the doctrine of retribution is by all accounts the principle governing the Chronicler’s presentation of the post-Solomonic kings. The great majority of the alterations, additions, and dele­ tions to the text of Kings made by Chronicles are easily explicable on the basis of this single teaching. In that light, it is surprising that for Chronicles retribution is not the final word. *

*

*

Retribution in the New Testament is both affirmed and denied. O n the one hand the chief teaching of the Christian faith is that people are unable to merit God’s approval by their good deeds, and hence are justified only by God’s grace through faith in C hrist Jesus. Even faith, the apostle Paul affirms, is not to be considered a meritorious work, but is itself a gift of God (Eph 2:8). O n the other hand, the value and necessity of good works is repeatedly affirmed. God’s people are created for good works (Eph 2:10), and faith Divine Retribution

89

always produces good works. In fact, “faith” which does not produce good works is really no faith at all (James 2:17). In that light, final judgment can be affirmed to be based upon works. Those who will inherit the kingdom are those who have fed the hungry, given drink to the thirsty, welcomed the stranger, clothed the naked, and visited the sick and imprisoned (Matt 25:34-36). Their faith has borne fruit, resulting in that loving obedience which is the mark of God’s people.

90

1, 2 CHRONICLES

7 THE PERFECT HEART

And the people rejoiced over their generous contributions, for it was with a perfect heart that they had made these generous contributions to Yahweh; David the king also rejoiced with great joy. (1 Chr 29:9) Studies of Chronicles are frequently less than sympa­ thetic, and are apt to point to the concern for temple and priesthood, and the emphasis upon required participation in temple worship in a quite rigid and colorless way. To do so, however, is to miss a vital part of the Chronicler’s em­ phasis: The people of God participate in these and other God-pleasing activities with wholehearted dedication, gen­ erosity, and joy, because their participation flows from hearts that are pure and undivided in loyalty to Yahweh. The result for Chronicles is a book permeated by unity, gratitude, enthusiasm, and exultation. This oneness of mind and intent is seen already in the concept of “all Israel.” It is important for the author that the people of God are one people, unified not only in their The Perfect Heart

91

loyalty to Yahweh but in their activities undertaken in his name. But this unity of heart and mind is also an internal thing. Individual Israelites also are to be marked by attitudes and actions that flow from single, perfect, undivided hearts. This is first seen in the words with which the Chronicler has concluded his account of the troops who came to Hebron to make David king. They came to Hebron with a “perfect heart” (Heb. lēbā b šālēm) to make David king (1 Chr 12:39). All the rest of Israel, too, is of a single heart (Heb. lēb›ehad) to make David king. David exhorts Solomon to serve Yahweh with “a perfect heart and a willing spirit” (1 C hr 28:9) and includes a prayer that Solomon may keep God’s command­ ments with a whole heart (29:19), for Yahweh is the one who searches every heart and understands every thought (28:9). This linkage of heart and mind is also found in 2 Chroni­ cles 6:38,15:12, and 34:31, where the contexts are appropri­ ately repentance, seeking the Lord, and obeying his law. The perfect heart is in 2 Chronicles 19:9 identified with faithful­ ness, and that of course is the disposition which the Chroni­ cler is seeking to express. O ther expressions are also frequent. Israelites are to give generously from an upright and perfect heart (2 C hr 29:17). They are to return to Yahweh with all the heart (2 C hr 16:38), seek Yahweh with all the heart (22:9), and act with all the heart that they might prosper (31:21). It is striking that Chronicles does not state in so many words that either David or Solomon served God perfectly. This is, however, affirmed of the remainder of the kings with whom the Chronicler was particularly pleased—Asa (2 C hr 15:17 = 1 Kgs 15:14), Jehoshaphat (2 C hr 22:9), Hezekiah (2 C hr 31:21), and Josiah (2 C hr 34:31 = 2 Kgs 23:3). In the frequency of his usage of the phrase “with all the heart” the writer is probably once again dependent upon 92

1, 2 CHRONICLES

the format provided him by DH; however, with characteris­ tic style he has expanded and deepened that emphasis. Joy as an expression of a perfect heart The same is true concerning expressions of joy in Chroni­ cles. In 2 Kings 8:66 Solomon dedicates the temple with great joy and gladness of heart. Chronicles captures this attitude and repeats it on numerous appropriate occasions. For example, the feast following David’s acceptance as king in Hebron by all Israel is marked with such elaborate joy and feasting that some have seen in it a messianic, or even es­ chatological, element: All these, men of war, arrayed in battle order, came to Hebron with full intent to make David king over all Israel; likewise all the rest of Israel were of a single mind to make David king. And they were there with David for three days, eating and drinking, for their brethren had made preparation for them. And also their neighbors, from as far as Issachar and Zebulun and Naphtali, came bringing food on asses and on camels and on mules and on oxen, abundant provisions of meal, cakes of figs, clusters of raisins, and wine and oil, oxen and sheep, for there was joy in Israel. (1 C hr 12:38-40, Heb. vv 39-41) This note of joy returns at appropriate points through­ out the books. The transfer of the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem is attended by great joy in Chronicles (1 C hr 15:25-28) as in DH (2 Sam 6:12-15), although the sacral nature of the festivity is more pronounced in Chronicles. The presence of the Levites with their musical instruments must have added substantially to the festivities in the w riter’s mind. The association of the Levites and singers The Perfect Heart

93

with such joy will be marked again: 1 C hr 15:16, 2 C hr 23:18, and 29:30. This note of joyous eating and drinking is also found in David’s gathering of the assembly in 1 Chronicles 29:22, when the assembly “ate and drank before the Lord . . . with great gladness,” and at the dedication of the temple in 2 Chronicles 7:10. In this last case the reference is taken from 1 Kings 8:66, although, as is often the case, Chronicles has added additional emphasis to his source by lengthening the duration of the feast: At that time Solomon kept the feast seven days, and all Israel with him, a very great congregation, from the entrance of Hamath to the Brook of Egypt. And on the eighth day they held a solemn assembly, for they had kept the dedication of the altar seven days and the feast seven days. O n the twenty-third day of the sev­ enth month he sent the people away to their homes, joyful and glad of heart for the goodness that Yahweh had shown to David and to Solomon and to Israel his people. (2 C hr 7:8-10) In the remainder of Chronicles, the covenant of Asa (2 C hr 15:15) and Joash’s reform (2 C hr 24:10) occasion this kind of joy. Above all, however, it is repeatedly mentioned in conjunction with Hezekiah’s Passover, when the celebration is again lengthened to fourteen days and we are reminded, “there was great joy in Jerusalem, for since the time of Solomon the son of David king of Israel there had been nothing like this in Jerusalem” (2 C hr 30:26; cf. vv 21, 23). One of the stronger arguments for the unity of Chronicles and Ezra is surely the similarity in tone (and vocabulary) of this account with the story of the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezra 3:13) and its dedication (Ezra 6:22), where the note of joy is prominent. 94

1, 2 CHRONICLES

A similar attitude expressed repeatedly in Chronicles is that of generosity. This attitude reaches its peak in 1 Chroni­ cles 29, which describes the contributions made by David and Israel’s leaders for the construction of the temple. Here alone the verb “to offer freely” occurs no less than six times (vv 5 ,6 ,9 ,1 4 ,1 7 [twice]): I know, my God, that you test the heart, and have pleasure in uprightness. In the uprightness of my heart I have freely offered these things, and now I have seen your people, who are present here, offering freely and joyously to you. (1 C hr 29:17) In this single passage, it might be noted, are combined the concepts of uprightness of heart, joy, and generosity. The note of generosity is found again characteristically in 2 Chronicles 31:5, associated with Hezekiah’s Passover, and in 35:8, with the Passover of Josiah. In these cases it is again apparent that Chronicles has been influenced by DH, from whom these themes and attitudes have been “borrowed.” In the case of generous offerings, the Chronicler is also dependent upon the tabernacle pericopes of Exodus 25-30 and 35-40. However, he has characteristi­ cally magnified both the number of occasions in which he has introduced the theme and the degree of the joy and generos­ ity. The result is a narrative in which the rather routine and prosaic is given warmth and color by people and events which reflect the writer’s perception of what life in God’s kingdom is to be like. Faithful to him with a perfect heart, their lives are marked by generosity and joy. The perfect heart in the N ew Testament Readers of the New Testament will feel a particularly close and common bond with such passages speaking of The Perfect Heart

95

uprightness of heart, joy, and generosity. Jesus warns his followers that something more is required than the right­ eousness of the scribes and Pharisees, which is often por­ trayed as a righteousness in conformity with external requirements (Matt 5:20). Thus the commandment “you shall not kill” is violated not only by those who murder, but by those who are angry and hate (Matt 5:21-22), and the person who looks upon a woman lustfully commits adul­ tery (Matt 5:27-28). Works of piety are not performed to be seen by people, but are matters between God and his peo­ ple (Matt 6:1-8). It is the pure in heart who will see God (Matt 5:8). Examples could be multiplied. The New Testament is also a book of generosity and com­ passion. God, Paul affirms simply and directly, loves a cheer­ ful giver (2 Cor 9:7). It is the merciful who will receive mercy (Matt 5:7); he who sows bountifully will reap bountifully (2 Cor 9:6). God’s people will be enriched for great generos­ ity (2 Cor 9:11), and are given the promise that they will always have enough of everything for their own needs and for every good work as well (2 Cor 9:8). The message of joy in the Lord is still another theme which the New Testament carries forward. A few examples will suffice to point the interested reader in the proper direc­ tion. The angel of the Lord who appears to the shepherds to announce the birth of Jesus says: “Be not afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which will come to all the people; for to you is bom this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:10—11 RSV, emphasis added) Jesus’ parables of the Lost Sheep and the Lost Coin speak of the joy among the angels of heaven over a single sinner who repents (Luke 15:1-10). And the parable of the Prodi­ gal Son, which might better be named the parable of the 96

1, 2 CHRONICLES

Two Lost Sons, is surely meant to condemn those who find no joy in the repentance of a lost brother (Luke 15:11-32). Joy is listed second, preceded only by love, in Paul’s listing of those fruits of the Spirit which are to be reflected in the Christian’s life (Gal 5:22-23). O ne New Testament let­ ter, Philippians, is commonly called “the epistle of joy” be­ cause of that note which occurs so frequently there (cf. 1:4, 18-19; 2:2, 17-18, 29; 3:1; 4:1, 10, and especially 4:4-7, in which joy is the dominant Christian virtue stemming from God’s nearness): Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. Let all men know your forbearance. The Lord is at hand. Have no anxiety about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your re­ quests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which passes all understanding, will keep your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. (Phil 4:4-7)

The Perfect Heart

97

8 TH E MERCY OF GOD

Many of the people, many of them from Ephraim, Manasseh, Issachar, and Zebulun, had not purified them­ selves, but ate the passover in violation of what was written. But Hezekiah prayed for them, saying: “May the Good Lord pardon every one who sets his heart to seek God, Yahweh, God of his fathers, even though not according to the sanctuary’s rules of purity.” And Yah­ weh heard Hezekiah, and forgave the people. (2 Chr 30:18-20) The study of divine retribution points to a detailed correspondence between obedience and prosperity and between disobedience and punishment, a correspondence which out­ lines the justice of God in bold terms. It underscores in bold lines the preachment of the Law: “‘You shall be holy; for I, Yahweh your God am holy’” (Lev 19:2) and, “‘You shall have no other gods before me’” (Exod 20:3). And, such a study points to the God who will “by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the T h e M e rc y o f G od

99

children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Exod 34:7). But the Chronicler also knows of another side of God’s nature, prominent in what has almost become a creedal statement in the Old Testament: “Yahweh, Yahweh, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faith­ fulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiv­ ing iniquity and transgression and sin. . . . ” (Exod 34:6-7) It is this mercy and grace which is celebrated in the re­ sponse borrowed from the Psalms and incorporated in the text to be sung by the Levites: “O give thanks to Yahweh, for he is good; because his steadfast love (Heb. hesed) lasts for ever” (1 C hr 16:34). This same response is repeated by all Israel at the dedication of the temple in words found only in Chronicles (2 C hr 7:3). One finds God’s grace—pure, unmerited love of God— in places we seldom notice. Because of his love God chose Abraham to receive his promise (Gen 12:1-3). That same love led him to keep his promise to Abraham and to choose Israel as his people (Deut 7:7-8), to bring them into the promised land, and to make his promise of an everlasting kingship to David (1 Chr 17). The Chronicler also knows of a grace of God in the affairs of daily life which surpasses strict retribution and justice and is available through prayer and repentance. W hile the Chronicler’s language is frequently general and even vague here, instances such as that in 2 Chronicles 12:6-12 are clear in their intent. Israel has forsaken God, and has in turn been forsaken by him and given into the hand of Shishak of Egypt. But Chronicles adds: 100

1, 2 CHRONICLES

Then the princes of Israel and the king humbled them­ selves and said, “The Lord is righteous.” W hen Yahweh saw that they humbled themselves, the word of Yahweh came to Shemaiah: “They have humbled themsieves; I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance, and my wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak. Neverthe­ less they shall be servants to him, that they may know my service and the service of the kingdoms of the countries.” (2 C hr 12:6-8) After repeating a segment of Kings recounting Shishak’s pillaging of the temple (2 C hr 12:9-11 = 1 Kgs 14:26-28), Chronicles again adds: “W hen he [Rehoboam] humbled himself the wrath of Yahweh turned from him, so as not to make a complete destruction . . .” (2 C hr 12:12). The Chronicler cites examples of past repentance for the people’s guidance (2 C hr 15:4). Hezekiah’s letter assures even the rebellious north that the grace and mercy of God will not permit him to ignore those who turn to him: “O people of Israel, return to Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, that he may turn again to the remnant of you who have escaped from the hand of the kings of Assyria. . . . Do not now be stiff­ necked as your fathers were, but yield yourselves to Yahweh, and come to his sanctuary, which he has sanc­ tified for ever, and serve Yahweh your God. . . . For if you return to Yahweh, your brethren and your chil­ dren will find compassion with their captors, and re­ turn to this land. For Yahweh your God is gracious and merciful, and will not turn away his face from you, if you return to him.” (2 C hr 30:6, 8-9 RSV) The Mercy of God

101

Hezekiah also prays for the pardon of those who ate of his Passover without being able to observe the strict rules of cleanliness: “‘The good LORD pardon every one who sets his heart to seek God, Yahweh, the God of his fathers, even though not according to the sanctuary’s rules of cleanness’” (2 Chr 30:18-19 RSV). And we are told, “Yahweh heard Hezekiah, and healed the people” (v 20). Another verse from the account of Hezekiah exemplifies how significant the Chronicler’s perception of repentance and grace is for his understanding of Yahweh’s dealings with his people: In those days Hezekiah became sick and was at the point of death, and he prayed to Yahweh; and he an­ swered him and gave him a sign. But Hezekiah did not make return according to the benefit done to him, for his heart was proud. Therefore wrath came upon him and Judah and Jerusalem. But Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabi­ tants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of Yahweh did not come upon them in the days of Hezekiah.” (2 C hr 32:24-26 RSV, italics added) Josiah’s exemption from the punishment coming upon Judah is based upon a similar statement, in this case bor­ rowed from Kings (2 C hr 34:26-28=2 Kgs 22:18-22). Chronicles alone reports that the wicked King Manasseh was deported to Babylon (2 C hr 33:11). But the account continues: W hen he was in distress he entreated the favor of Yah­ weh his God and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers. He prayed to him, and God received his entreaty and heard his supplication and brought him 102

1, 2 CHRONICLES

again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that Yahweh was God. (2 Chr 33:12-13 RSV) It is probable, as mentioned earlier (p. 79), that the Chroni­ cler was struck by the utter inconsistency of Manasseh’s great wickedness and his unparalleled reign of fifty-five years. He concluded, on the basis of his understanding of God’s ways, that Manasseh must have repented to enjoy such a long reign. Finally, however, it was Israel’s refusal to repent that led to the Exile. Zedekiah would not humble himself before the prophet Jeremiah (2 Chr 36:12), and the priests mocked and scoffed at the prophets until there was no “healing” or for­ giveness (vv 15-16). It would require another pure and un­ merited act of God’s love to stir up Cyrus to proclaim release to his people so that they might return and build him a house in Jerusalem (2 C hr 36:22-23). *

*

*

W ithout minimizing the element of God’s justice, the New Testament is above all and from first to last a hymn of praise to the mercy of God and an exhortation to those who would follow him to exhibit that same kind of mercy. The vocabulary here is rich and varied: mercy, grace, love, kind­ ness, compassion, etc. But all point to a God who so loved the world as to give his Son for its salvation (John 3:16). The Song of Zechariah correctly summarizes the Old Tes­ tament promise as “the mercy promised to our fathers” (Luke 1:72 RSV, emphasis added), and the words from Isaiah chosen by Jesus for reading in the synagogue in Nazareth as he began his ministry are words which essentially outline a ministry of mercy (Luke 4:18-19). Jesus is the one who has come to call, not the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Luke 5:32). The self-righteous, The Mercy of God

103

who think they are well and need no physician and despise others, reject the ministry of the one who receives sinners and even eats with them. The parable of the Good Samari­ tan is a parable about mercy. The Good Samaritan showed mercy, and Jesus’ hearers are commanded to go and do like­ wise (Luke 10:29-37). Those who place themselves under God’s mercy are those for whom the Messiah came—like the tax collector of another parable (Luke 18:9-14), the ten lepers (Luke 7:11-19), or the blind Bartimaeus, the recovery of whose sight serves as a symbolic opening to the Passion narrative (Mark 10:46-52).

104

1, 2 CHRONICLES

9 THE PROMISED REST

Then [David] called for Solomon his son, and charged him to build a house for Yahweh, the God of Israel. David said to Solomon, “My son, I had it in my heart to build a house for the name of Yahweh my God. But the word of Yahweh came to me, saying, 'You have shed much blood and have waged great wars; you shall not build a house for my name, because you have shed so much blood before me upon the earth. Behold, a son will be born to you; he will be a man of rest [Heb. m enûhâ]. I will give him rest [Heb. nûah hiphil] from all his enemies round about; for his name shall be Solomon [Heb. šelōmō], and I will give Israel peace [Heb. šālôm] and quietness [Heb. šeqet] in his days. He will build a house for my name, and he will be my son, and I will be his father, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.'” (1 Chr 22:6-11) The theme of a divinely provided rest extends from the earliest to the latest writers of Holy Scripture. Not counting The Promised Rest

105

the Sabbath rest of Genesis 2:1-3, which is of a different sort and belongs to the latest tradition of the Pentateuch—a tradition probably akin in both content and date to that of 2 Chronicles 36:21—the concept of rest is first introduced in association with the ark of the covenant in Numbers 10:33-36. Here we are told that the ark went before the company of Israel a three days’ journey to seek out a resting place for Israel. In the apparently ancient poem embedded in verses 35-36 Yahweh’s own movements are identified with those of the ark: W henever the ark set out, Moses said, “Arise, O Yahweh, and let thy enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee flee before thee.” And when it rested, he said, “Return, O Yahweh, to the ten thousand thou­ sands of Israel.” (Num 10:35-36 RSV) O f all of the theological motifs developed by the Chroni­ cler, perhaps none is pursued in so striking a manner as that of the concept of rest (verb nûah, noun m enûhâ). This con­ cept is of vital importance for understanding the relation­ ship of David and Solomon, and the relationship of them and the Davidic dynasty to the temple. It becomes at the same time a significant element within his theology of retri­ bution and, finally, is suggestive for the development of a later tradition developed by the New Testament writer of Hebrews. “Rest” in the Deuteronomistic History To appreciate the Chronicler’s use of the concept of rest it is necessary to review the same concept as it occurs in Deuteronomy and the DH. In Deuteronomy 12, the unifica­ tion of Israel’s worship at a single site was integrally bound up with the nation’s rest in the promised land: 106

1, 2 CHRONICLES

You shall not do according to all that we are doing here this day, every man doing whatever is right in his own eyes; for you have not as yet come to the rest [m enûhâ] and to the inheritance which Yahweh your God gives you. But when you go over the Jordan, and live in the land which Yahweh your God gives you to inherit, and when he gives you rest from all your ene­ mies round about, so that you live in safety, then to the place where Yahweh your God will choose, to make his name dwell there, thither you shall bring all that I command you: your burnt offerings and your sacrifices, your tithes and the offering that you present, and all your votive offerings which you vow to the Lord. (Deut 12:8-11 r s v ) The Priestly writer (P), too, senses a connection between God-given rest in the promised land and the erection of a single place of worship. After the story of Joshua’s conquest of the land is finished in Joshua 11:23 with the statement that “the land had rest from war,” the first event recorded by P after the apportioning of the land is the erection of the tent of meeting at Shiloh (Josh 18:1). The Deuteronomic writers, however, do not apply this principle consistendy. Joshua 21:43-45 includes the rest fol­ lowing the conquest of Palestine as indicative of the fulfill­ ment of all God’s promises to his people (cf. also Joshua 23:1). However, a similar idea occurs frequently describing the periodic and temporary periods of peace enjoyed by various of Israel’s judges (cf. Judg 3:30 and 5:31). Both the connection between “rest” and temple building and th e inconsistency in the use of the motif are seen in DH’s account of the dynastic oracle to David in 2 Samuel 7. The oracle begins with the words, “Now when the king dwelt in his house, and Yahweh had given him rest from all his enemies round about . . . ” (2 Sam 7:1-2). In the oracle The Promised Rest

107

which follows, however, it is not David but one of his off­ spring who will build the temple (2 Sam 7:12-13).1In a later passage (which Chronicles omits in his telling of the story of the temple dedication), DH has Solomon write to King Huram of Tyre: “You know David my father, that he was not able to build a house for the name of Yahweh his God because of the warfare which surrounded him, until Yahweh subdued them beneath the soles of his feet. But now Yahweh my God has given me rest round about. There is no adversary nor evil occurrence. So behold I am planning to build a house for the name of Yahweh my God, as Yahweh spoke to David my father, saying, ‘Your son, whom I will put in your place, upon your throne, will build the house for my name.’” (1 Kgs 5:3-5, Heb. 5:17-19) Here David’s failure to build the temple is seen as the natural result of the fact that he was regularly involved in wars, which prevented him from doing so. Thus it has fallen to Solomon to erect the temple. And his blessing pro­ nounced following the dedication of the temple makes clear once again the relationship between God’s promises, the conquest of the land, the erection of the temple, and rest: “Blessed be Yahweh who has given rest to his people Israel, according to all that he promised; not one word has failed of all his good promise, which he uttered by Moses his servant. Yahweh our God be with us, as he was with our fathers; may he not leave us or forsake us; that he may incline our hearts to him, to walk in all his ways, and to keep his commandments, his statutes, and his ordinances, which he commanded our fathers.” (1 Kgs 8:56-58 r s v ) 108

1, 2 CHRONICLES

“Rest” in Chronicles The Chronicler, it should be admitted, has omitted both of these last two passages from his narrative. He has appar­ ently done this, however, not because he considered them unimportant, but for exactly the opposite reason! He has decided to use them as the theme for his entire account, and has thus chosen to omit them from the narrative by his account. In the case of David’s wars, mentioned by Kings as pre­ venting David from building the temple, Chronicles has heightened David’s involvement and made Yahweh’s rejec­ tion of him as temple builder explicit. David is a “warrior” (1 C hr 28:3), who has “shed much blood and . . . waged great wars” (1 C hr 22:8). Therefore Yahweh himself has ex­ plicitly forbidden him to build his temple, and given that task to his son Solomon the “man of peace”: The word of the Lord came to me [David] saying, “You have shed much blood and have waged great wars; you shall not build a house to my name, because you have shed so much blood before me upon the earth. Behold, a son shall be bom to you; he shall be a man of peace. I will give him peace from all his enemies round about; for his name shall be Solomon (šelōmô ), and I will give peace (šālōm ) and quiet (šeqet) to Israel in his days. He shall build a house for my name.” (1 C hr 22:8-10 RSV) As evidence of the consistency with which the Chronicler has applied this concept, it should be noted that he has re­ moved both occurrences of forms of nûah, “rest,” from his account of the dynastic oracle to David in 2 Samuel 7 which he has otherwise largely repeated in 1 Chronicles 17. The opening verse is simply altered to read, “Now when David dwelt in his house, David said . . . ” (1 Chr 17:1; cf. 2 Sam The Promised Rest

109

7:1). And the troublesome “I will/have given rest” of 2 Samuel 7:11 is simply altered to “I will subdue (Heb. root kn ‹) all your enemies” (1 C hr 17:10). Thus the writer has removed both the promise of and the reality of rest from the reign of David, since such rest is for him the prerequisite for the building of the temple. Solomon is the chosen temple builder, as is shown by the fact that he enjoyed a rest which his father David did not. Three further developments in the concept of rest need to be mentioned. First, with the temple completed and Israel at rest in its land, the temple itself becomes the resting place o f Yahweh. Then King David rose to his feet and said, “Hear me, my brethren and my people. I had it in my heart to build a house of rest for the ark of the covenant of Yahweh and for the footstool of our God; and I made preparations for building. (1 C hr 28:2 RSV, italics added) It is therefore fitting that, at the end of Solomon’s dedica­ tory prayer, the contents of 1 Kings 8:50b-51 are omitted in favor of a quotation from Psalms 132:8-9. The passage in Kings mentions God’s activity for Israel in the Exodus. “And now arise, O Yahweh God, and go to thy resting place, thou and the ark of thy might. Let thy priests, O Yahweh God, be clothed with salvation, and let thy saints rejoice in thy goodness. O Yahweh God, do not turn away the face of thy anointed one! Remember thy steadfast love for David thy servant.” (2 C hr 6:41-42 RSV) 110

1, 2 CHRONICLES

W ith the statements that “the glory of Yahweh filled the temple” (2 C hr 7:1) and “the glory of Yahweh filled Yahweh’s house” (2 C hr 7:2), Solomon’s prayer is certainly pic­ tured as answered. W ith Israel at rest in its land, and the temple erected, God himself takes up his rest among his people in his house. Secondly, other kings in particular favor with the Chroni­ cler are said to have enjoyed rest as a sign of the prosperity which marked their reigns. (See pp. 84-85.) This is true of Asa (2 C hr 14:5; 15), Jehoshaphat (2 C hr 20:30), and Hezekiah (2 C hr 32:22).* Any reference to rest is surpris­ ingly absent from the account of Josiah’s reign, where the signs of prosperity are restricted to religious reforms. Finally, attention might be directed to the New Testa­ ment, which continues the concept of a divinely granted rest. Jesus, for example, invited those who heard him to come to him and experience the rest which he offered: “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matt 11:28-30 RSV) Here the rest offered by Jesus to those accepting him is paralleled with the easy yoke and the light burden, and would stand in contrast to the heavy burdens associated with the legalism of the Pharisees. The book of Hebrews resumes the concept of a divinely provided rest in a promised land, and raises it to a higher key. Moses and many of those who left Egypt with him were unable to enter the promised land because of their unbelief, * 2 C hronicles 32:22 reads w ayyānah, in th e H ebrew , as suggested by th e S eptuagint and V ulgate, instead o f wayenahâlēm.

The Promised Rest

111

the Hebrews writer argues (Heb 3:11-18). That means that the promise still remains, since God can surely not be un­ faithful: “So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the peo­ ple of God” (Heb 4:9). To a people facing religious assimilation, as were perhaps the Israelites of the Chronicler’s day—to a people facing religious persecution, as were perhaps those to whom He­ brews was written—to all people in all ages—the message remains the same. “Let us therefore strive to enter that rest” . . . (Heb 4:11). The God of the fathers still speaks to his people through his Word, and that Word of God is still “living and active” (Heb 4:12). Those who hear must not refuse to hearken to his voice, but must “draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith” and thus enter into the heavenly rest (Heb 10:19, 22). The great crowd of witnesses throughout the ages encourages us as we seek to overcome the trials that are before us (Heb 12:1). Summary The themes we have met in the books of Chronicles are generally not unique to it. Topics such as the kingdom of God, Israel, the temple, the W ord of God, and divine retri­ bution are at the very center of the O ld Testament revela­ tion. Nevertheless, standing firmly in the line of O ld Testament tradition, the Chronicler emphasizes some items and minimizes others as he thinks best to bring the W ord of God to bear upon the particular circumstances of his day. Since the Chronicler judged the temple to be of central importance for his day, he has stressed the importance of Solomon, who built the temple. Doubtless to protect the reputation of Solomon the temple builder, he removed all signs of misconduct from the reign of that king. It was not 112

1, 2 CHRONICLES

Solomon the temple builder who was responsible for the division of the kingdom, but others who followed after him. Though the temple may be a significant symbol for the writer, it must be said that it is also much more than that. The temple is the place where one normally draws closest to God. It is the place where God’s praises are chanted, where sacrifices are offered to his name, where priests and Levites lead the people in offering the devotion and praise that spring from a pure and thankful heart. It is difficult even today to find fault with such a perception. M odem readers are apt to be disturbed by Chronicles’ presentation of the dogma of retribution, which seems so rigid and contrary to human experience. This is a subject, it should be noted, which was troublesome already in O ld Testament books, such as Ezekiel and Job, where it was generally found wanting. But to the Chronicler’s credit it ought to be noted that concepts such as mercy and repen­ tance, which, strictly speaking, have no place in a rigid understanding of retribution, are all-important parts of his theology. It is still difficult for us to rise to that level of understanding. In other areas too, Chronicles shows itself to possess a positive and sensitive understanding of the ways of God and people. Contrary no doubt to the popular feelings of his day, he continued to view inhabitants of the land previ­ ously occupied by the northern tribes as brothers, and fought energetically to see that others did so also. U lti­ mately he viewed faith in Yahweh, which admittedly ex­ pressed itself in support of and worship at the Jerusalem temple, as the only thing that mattered in one’s relationship to God. He knew that faithfulness, mercy, purity of heart, unaffected joy, and cheerful generosity were marks of those who possessed that faith. The Promised Rest

113

To that end he set himself about the task of considering the Word of God which he had received, and applying it to himself and the people of his day. We may not know exactly how that word was received in his or other days. But to this day those who apply themselves sympathetically to his mes­ sage and his methods still have God’s promise spoken through a better-known and perhaps more conventional prophet, that his word will not return void, but will accom­ plish that for which it was purposed.

114

1, 2 CH RO N ICLES

NOTES

Introduction 1.See R. Braun, 1 Chronicles, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 14 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1986), xxviii-xxix, for a summary of posi­ tions held. Chapter 2 The Temple 1. While debate concerning the variant readings in this most important chapter has been profuse, it appears that the differences are insignificant. Cf. WBC 14,195-200. While less polemically so, it was clear already in the mind of DH also that it was actually Solomon who built the temple. 2. See R. Braun, “Solomon, the Chosen Temple Builder: The Significance of 1 Chronicles 22, 28, and 29 for the Theology of Chronicles,” Journal of Biblical Literature 95 (1976):581— 90, for a detailed exposition of these points. 3. R. B. Dillard, 2 Chronicles, WBC 15 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1987), 4-5, has demonstrated that Chronicles* figure of Huram is modeled upon the craftsman of the tabernacle in Exodus 31 and 35, Oholiab. 4. On seeking Yahweh, see p. 81; on repentance in Chronicles, p. 100. Notes

115

Chapter 3 The Kingdom of God 1. J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel (New York: Meridian Books, 1957), 182. 2. G. von Rad, Das Geschichtsbild des chronistischen Werkes (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1930). 3. In such close proximity it is possible that the reference to Hezekiah’s action in stationing the Levites in the temple with certain instruments “according to the commandment of David and of Gad the king’s seer and of Nathan the prophet” (2 Chr 29:25) may refer as much to the musical instruments involved as to the installation of the Levites, although it is impossible to be certain. 4. See R. Braun, “Solomonic Apologetic,”Journal of Biblical Literature 92 (1973):503-16, especially p. 512. In the original account of Kings, Jeroboam first returned to Israel in 1 Kings 12:20. Note the present unevenness between 1 Kings 12:2-3a and verse 20. Chapter 4 The People of God: All Israel 1. See R. Braun, “The Significance of 1 Chronicles 22, 28, and 29 for the Structure and Theology of the Work of the Chronicler” (Diss. Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, 1971), 190, for the justifica­ tion of this translation. 2. W. Rudolph, Chronikbücher, Handbuch zum Alten Testa­ ment (Tübingen: Mohr, 1965), xxi, 291. 3. See R. J. Coggins, Samaritans and Jews: The Origins of Samaritanism Reconsidered (Atlanta: John Knox, 1975), and the many references there. 4. See R. Braun, “A Reconsideration of the Chronicler’s Atti­ tude Toward the North,” Journal of Biblical Literature 96 (1977): 59-62. The apostle Paul pursues the nature of the true Israel further in Romans 9-11, modeled upon the premise that “all Israel will be saved.” Chapter 6 Divine Retribution 1. Cf. Jehoshaphat, 2 Chronicles 17:3; Hezekiah, 2 Chronicles 29:3, 32:4; Josiah, 2 Chronicles 34:3; and contrast 2 Kings 22:3. 2. Cf. R. Braun, “2 Chronicles,” Harper's Bible Commentary, ed. J. L. Mayes (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988), especially pp. 363-71. 116

I, 2 CHRONICLES

3. Concerning Hezekiah’s reign, see H. G. M. Williamson, Israel in the Books of Chronicles (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 119-31; R. B. Dillard, 2 Chronicles, WBC 15:226-61. 4. On this literary form see R. Braun, 1 Chronicles, WBC 14:221-25. 5. See R. Braun, “Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah: Theology and Literary History,” Supplement to Vetus Testamentum 30 (1979): 52-64, for additional evidence. Chapter 9 The Promised Rest 1. It is probably the writer’s inconsistency in the use of the concept of rest that has resulted in divergent translations of the perfect verb forms with prefixed waw (“and”) in verses 9b-11 as either past or future, including the "I will give/have given you rest” in verse 11. For discussion, see 1 Chronicles, WBC 14:198-99.

Notes

117

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ackroyd, P. I and II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah. Torch Bible Commentary. London: SCM Press, 1973. Braun, R. L. 1 Chronicles. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 14. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1986. _____ “A Reconsideration of the Chronicler’s Attitude Toward the North,” Journal of Biblical Literature 96 (1977): 59-62. _____ “Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah: Theology and Literary History,” Supplement to Vetus Testamentum 30 (1979): 52-64. ______“1 Chronicles,” “2 Chronicles,” Harper’s Bible Commen­ tary, James Mayes, ed. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988, 342-71. ______“Solomonic Apologetic in Chronicles.” Journal of Biblical Literature 92 (1973): 503-16. ______“Solomon, the Chosen Temple Builder: The Significance of 1 Chronciles 22,28, and 29 for the Theology of Chronicles,” Journal of Biblical Literature 95 (1976): 581-90. Coggins, R. J. The First and Second Books of Chronicles. Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New English Bible. Cambridge: Cam­ bridge University Press, 1976. ______The Origins of Samaritanism Reconsidered. Atlanta: John Knox, 1975. Bibliography

119

Cross, F. M. “A Reconstruction of the Judean Restoration,” Jour­ nal of Biblical Literature 94 (1975): 4-18. Dillard, R. B. 2 Chronicles. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 15. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1987. Japhet, S. "The Supposed Common Authorship of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah Investigated Anew,” Vetus Testamentum 18 (1968): 330-71. Lemke, W. E. "The Synoptic Problem in the Chronicler’s His­ tory,” Harvard Theological Review 58 (1965): 349-63. McKenzie, S. L. The Chronicler's Use of the Deuteronomic History. Harvard Semitic Monographs 33. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1984. Myers, J. M. 1 Chronicles. Anchor Bible, vol. 12. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965. ______2 Chronicles. Anchor Bible, vol. 13. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965. Newsome, J. D. "Toward a New Understanding of the Chronicler and His Purposes,” Journal of Biblical Literature 94 (1975): 201-17. Petersen, D. L. Late Israelite Prophecy. Studies in Deutero-Prophetic Literature and in Chronicles. SBL Monograph Series 23. Mis­ soula: Scholars Press, 1977. Throntveit, M. A. When Kings Speak. Royal Speech and Royal Prayer in Chronicles. SBL Dissertation Series 93. Atlanta: Schol­ ars Press, 1987. Welch, A. C. The Work of the Chronicler. London: Oxford Univer­ sity Press, 1939. Williamson, H. G. M. 1 and 2 Chronicles. New Century Bible Commentary. London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1982. ______Israel in the Books of Chronicles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. ______"The Accession of Solomon in the Books of Chronicles.” Vetus Testamentum 26 (1976): 351-61.

120

1, 2 CHRONICLES

INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES

28:29 31:7-8

OLD TESTAMENT

Genesis 2 .1-3 12:1-3 12.1-4 35.10

106 100 2 2

Joshua

11.23 18.1 21:43-45 23:1

10 10 10 83 107 107 107 107

Judges 3:30 5:31 6:34 11.29 18:5

107 107 64 64 83

1

1-24 15-6 1:8

Exodus 20:3 25-30 34.6-7 35-40

99 95 100 95

Leviticus 19.2

99

Numbers 10.11 10.33-36

27 106

Deuteronomy 7:7-8 12 12:1-14 12:8-11 17.16-17 26:1-14 27 28

100 106 6 107 36 6 84 84

I n d e x o f S c r i p tu r e s

83 10

1 Samuel 16 16:2-8 16:12 16:13 18:12-16 18:28-29 20:15 22 14 23:17

27 28 28 28,64 28 28 28 28 28

24.6 24.17 24:20 25.28 26.25 28 17 30:6 2 Samuel 1-4 1 .16 1.17-27 3:1 3.9-10 3:18 3:36 5 5:1 5.3 5:3-5 5:6 5:10 6 6:1-2 6:1-11 6 .12-15 7 7-11:1 7:1

28 28 28 28 28 28 48 48 28 32 28 28 28 28 7 48 62 29 48 28 29 48 49 93 8, 28-29,31, 107,109 49 109 121

71-2 73 79-11 7 12-13 8 88 9-1 Kgs 2 10 12 12 1 12 10-11 12 24 12.26 12.30-31 21 21:18-22 23.1-2 24 24 11 2424

107 28,62 117n 37, 108 8 8 34 8 8 29 29 34 49 49 8 49 32 8, 24,49 62 9

1 Kings 1 1-11 18 3-4 3.1-4 33 34 3 12-13 3 14 3 16-4.34 5 3-5 5 3-6 5.4 6-7 6-8 7:13-14 8:1-3 8:12-13 8:12-53 8.22-53 8:27 8.50-51 8 54-61 8 56 8 56-58 8 65 8 66 9.2-9

30 27 35 38 39 30 11 85 30 12 34, 108 39 36 13 6, 38 12,39 50 19 6 13 19 110 6 35 108 50 13,41,94 13

122

94 99 9:10-28 10 10:22 10.23 1023-29 10:26-29 11 11 1-13 11:4 11.6 119 11:11-13 1127 1131-39 11:33 11.34-35 1138 1141-43 12.1 12:2-3a 12:15 12:17 12:19 12 20 12:24 14:25 14:26-28 15:5 15:14 15.16 15.23 22 22.12 22.15

30 87 13 35 85 86 36 12 35,40 76 30 30 36 36 36 36 30, 36 25 26, 30 36 50 116n 42 50 42 116n 36 70 101 30 71-73,92 72 72, 74 17,43 83 83

2 Kings 8:66 12.7-8 12:12 14:3 14:21-22 15:1-7 16 162 16.7a 18:3 18:4 20.1

93 78 78 30 74 74 75 30 75 30,76 52 78

21 22:2 22:3 22 3-6 22.4 22:13 22 14 22.18-22 23:3 23 13-14 23:15-20 23.29 24:13 25 13-17 25:27-29 1 Chronicles 1-9 1.1-4 1.5-16 1.28 1:34 1:34-54 2-8 5.25 6.1-81 9:1 9:10-34 10-12 10-21 10:6 10:13 10:13-14 11-29 11:1 11:3 11.4-9 11:10 11:10-12:37 12.18 12:24-37 12:38-39 12 38-40 12.39 13:1-4 13:1-14 13 5-7 13-16 13-17 14.1

79 30, 76 116n 86 53 53 63 102 92 36 53 79 6 6 43 18 2 2 2 2 2 2 88 18 88 18 6-7,47 7 48 62 25,81 6 48 62 30 62 7 64 48 44,48 7, 93 92 49 7 49 30 48 72

1, 2 C H R O N IC L E S

14:1-16 14:6-7 14:17 15 15.2 15:3 15:4-24 15 7 15 14-15 15:16 15:17 15.18 15:21 15:24 15:25-28 15:28 16 16:1-4 16:4 16-4-6 16:14 16:34 16:39-40 16:39-42 16:41 17 17 17-21 17:1 17:3 17:4 17:10 17:11 17:17 18-20 18:1-20:8 21 21:9 21:25 21:26b 21:26 21:28-22:1 22 22-26 22-28 22:1-5 22:6-11 22-7 22:8

8 72 8, 86 18 7 49 8 72 7 94 18 18 18 18 93 49 50 8 33 8 61 100 50 8 18 8 31,100,109 49 109 62 31 110 37 85 8 86 8,31 62 9 9 13 9 10-11,27,31, 37,41, 49 64 9 11 105 10 8,62,109

I n d e x o f S c r i p tu r e s

22 8-10 22.9 22.9-10 22:11 22:12 22.13 22:14-16 22:17 23-27 23 23:1-6 23.25 24 25 25:1-4 26 27 28-29 28:1 28:2 28:3 28:4 28:6 28:6-7 28:8 28:9 28:10 28:11-18 28:19 28:21 29 29:1-9 29.5 29:6 29:6-10 299 29:10 29:10-13 29.10-19 29.14 29:17 29.18 29:19 29:20 29:20-25 29:21 29:22 29:22-25 29.23

109 84 10,37 10,83,84 61 83 11 49 6 , 18 10 65 19 10 10 64 10 10 10-11,27,31, 41,49 11,49 3,19,110 10,62,109 3 11,38,62 10 49 70,81,89,92 10-11 11 11,65 49 95 11 95 3,49,95 11 91,95 3 2 11 95 95 1 92 49 11 49, 53 94 38 3,49,83

29-24 36:21 2 Chronicles 1-9 1:1 1:1-6 1.2-3 1:7-13 1:12-13 1:14-17 2 2-8 2:1 2:1-15 2:2-9 2:3-6 2:4 2:6 2:16 3-5 3:1 5:1 5:3-5 5:4 5:5 5:11-13 6:1-2 6:4 6:12-40 6:18 6:38 6:41 6:41-42 7:1 7:2 7:3 7:6 7:8 7:8-10 7:9 7:10 7:11 7:11-22 7:12 7:12-15 7.12-18 7:16 7:17 7:22

49 106 49 84-85 8, 39 50 65 85 12 39 38,40 5, 39 12 12 5 19 19 38 13 31,40 8,40 50 18 8 13,18 19 3 13 19 92 19 33,110 13, 111 111 100 13, 32 50 94 13 41,94 3,83 13 19 13 65 3 33 87 123

8 2-6 8 12-15 8 12-16 8 14 8 16 8 29 91-31 9 23 10-36 101 1 0 15 1 0 17 10:19 10 22 11.1-3 11.4-9 115-12 11 13-15 11 16 11 17 11 18-21 1122-23 12 1 12 2 12:5 12 6-7 12:6-8 12:6-12 12 7 12:9-11 12 12 12 14 13 13 3 13 4 13 5 13:8 13 9 13 9-11 13 9-12 13 10-11 13 10-12 13 11 13 12 13 13-20 13 15 13.18 13-19 13 19-22 13.21

124

86 14 40, 65 18, 32-33 14,40 18 14 86 6,51 50 42 50 42 85 7 7 71,86 14 14,51 34,41, 71, 85 71 71 61, 70, 87 70 63, 70,87 65 101 100 63,89 101 71, 89, 101 81 14, 42, 87 86 25, 50 3, 33,44, 50, 54 25, 42, 54 42, 88 15 88 42 20 88 42, 83-84,89 86 50 43, 50, 54, 71, 82 51 71 85

141-2 14.3 14 4 14 5 14 6 14 6-7 14 7 14.8 14 10 14 12-15 1 4 15 14 5-7 15 15.1-7 15.2 15 2-7 15 4 15.8 15 8-9 15 8-15 15 8-18 15:9 15.11 15:12 15.12-13 15 13 15 15 15.17 16 7 16 7-8 16.7-9 16.9 16.10 16 12 16 38 17:1 17.2 173 17:3-19 174 17:5 179 17 10 17 11 1 7 12 18 1 9 1-3 19.2 19.3 19 6

85 72, 81 50 111 83, 86 72 50,70 86 82 86 111 85 52 63,64 50, 70 72 3, 101 51-52, 72, 86 50 15 73 52, 73, 84 52 81,92 82 3,52, 73 73, 94 73, 92 70, 82 82 63 88 74 74, 88 92 85 51 82, 84, 116n 86 82 85 61-62 86 85-86 86 63 63 89 89 84

19 8 19 9 20 1-30 20 3-4 20 5 20.6-12 20 14-17 20 15-17 2 0 17 20 20 20 29 20.30 20.34 20.37 216 21:10 21.12 21 14 21.18 22 1 22 8 22.9 22:11-12 23 23 1-21 23 18 23:18-21 24.4 244-14 245-6 249 24.10 24.18 24:20 24.20-22 24 23-24 24:24 24 25 25 4 25.7-9 25.11-13 25.15 25 15-16 25 17-24 25 20 25:24 25 27 26 5 26.6-8 26:6-15

61 92 86 82 64 15 64 15 84 82-83 86 85, 111 63 63, 82 88 87 63 88 88 12 31 92 15 18 15 32,61, 94 62 86 16 50 62 94 3, 16, 87 83 64 16, 88 3 88 61 63 86 82 63 88 82 16 88 83 86 75

ly 2 C H R O N IC L E S

26:7 26 8 2611-15 2615 26:16 2616-20 26.18 26 19 26 22 27 3 27 6 28.1 28:5-6 28 5-7 28.6 28.8-15 28 9 28:10-11 28:14 28.16-18 28.19 28:23-24 28 24-25 28.25 29 29-32 29.2 29.3 29:5-9 29 6 29.6-7 29 10-36 2917 29 20-42 29 23-25 29 24 29 25 29 25-30 29.26-27 29 30 29-31 29:34 29 35 29 35-36 30 1-31 1 30 5 30 6 30:6-7 30.6-9 30.7

86 85, 86 86 85 88 16, 75 88 88 63 86 85 33 75 54 3, 87-88 63, 75 3, 54 55 55 75 75,88 75 16, 76 3 7 16,43, 76 33 76, 86, 116n 77 88 87 77 92 16 7 53 116n 32, 65 32 32, 64, 94 18 19 43 16 55 50, 52 101 21 55 88

I n d e x o f S c r i p tu r e s

30:8 30:8-9 30.9 30:11 30:13-27 30:16 30:18 30:18-19 30:18-20 30:18-25 30:19 30:20 30:21 30:23 30:25 30:26 31:1 31:1-21 31:2-19 31:5 31:11-19 31:20-21 31:21 32:1a 32:4 32:7-8 32.8 32:20 32:22 32:22-23 32:23 32:24 32:24-26 32:24-36 32:25-26 32:26 32:27 32.27-30 32:28-30 32:30 32:32 33:1-5 33:11 33:12-13 33.12-14 33:15-16 33:17 33:19 33:22 33:23

16,20,43,56 101 56 16,52,55 17 61 56 102 99 77 81 56,65,102 56,94 56,94 56 57, 77, 94 47,50,53, 77 17 77 95 18 77 83, 92 78 116n 78 84,86 63 85-86,111 78 86 65 102 69 79 89 85 79 86 83 63 17 79,102 79,103 65 17 86 79,88 79 79

34:2 34:3 34:6 348-15 34:9 34:14 34:14-18 34:21 34:22 34:26-28 34:31 35:1-6 35:1-19 35:3 35:3-4 35:4 35:8 35:15 35.17 35:17-18 35:18 35:21 35:21-23 35:23 35:25 36:5 36:7 36:9 36:12 36:13 36:14 36:15 36:15-16 36:18-19 36:19 36:21 36:21-22 36:22-23 36.23 15:2

33 116n 43, 53 86 50,53 62 17 53 63 102 92 65 17 18 33, 42 32,43 95 32,64 52 50 43, 52 84 80 3 63 80 17 80 63,80,103 80 80,88 3 61, 65, 81 17 20 81 65 20,43,103 18 84

Ezra 3:13 5:2 6:15-22 6:22

94 44 20 94

Psalms 2:7 8:4

58 44 125

1 3 2 :8 -9

1 9 ,3 3 ,1 1 0

1 0 :4 5 1 0 :4 6 - 5 2 1 0 :4 7

I s a ia h

58 104 4

7 :9

82

4 2 :1 -9

58

5 2 :1 3 -5 3 :1 2

58

1 :7 2

6 1 :1 - 2

45

2 :1 0 -1 1

96

6 1 :1 -4

58

2 :4 2

21

E z e k ie l 3 4 :2

44

3 5 :2

44

3 6 :1

44

7 :1 3

H o sea 1 1 :1

57

3 :2 3 -3 8

2 103

4 :2 1

M a tth e w 1:1

4

1 :1 -1 7

2

45

4 :4 3

45

5 :3 2

103

7 :1 1 -1 9

104

1 0 :2 9 -3 7

55 104 96

1 5 :1 1 - 3 2

97

1 7 :2 0 - 2 1

45

1 8 :9 -1 4

104 45

2 3 :3

4

2 3 :3 4

4

Jo h n

58

1 :1 -3

45

1 :1 4

4 :1 - 1 1

58

1 :1 6 -1 8

67

4 :1 7

45

2 :1 9

22

5 :7 -8

96

2 :2 1

22

5 :2 0

96

3 :1 6

103

5 :2 1 -2 2

96

4 :2 1

22

5 :2 7 - 2 8

96

4 :2 3 -2 4

22

6 :1 -8

96

1 0 :3 0

1 1 :2 8 -3 0

111 64

2 5 :3 4 -3 6

90

9 -1 0

59

1 8 :3 3 -3 7

2 C o rin th ia n s 9 : 6 - 8 , 11

96

G a la tia n s 2

59

5 :2 2 - 2 3

97

E p h e sia n s 2 :8 , 1 0

89

P h ilip p ia n s 1 :4

97

1 :1 8 - 1 9

97

2 :2

97

2 :1 7 -1 8

97

2 :2 9

97

3 :1

97

4 :1

97

4 :4 -7

97

4 :1 0

97

H e b re w s

2 :1 5 3 :2

2 3 :3 5

4 59

58

1 5 :1 - 1 0

1 9 :1 1

N E W T E S T A M E N 5T

103

4 :1 8 -1 9

10 44

1 :3 -4 4 :1 6

Luke

9 :3 0 D a n ie l

R om ans

66 2 3 ,6 7

1 :1 - 2

4 ,6 6

3 :1 1 - 1 8

112

4 :9 ,1 1 -1 2

112

5 :1 7 - 1 9

108

1 0 :1 9 ,2 2

112

1 2 :1

112

1 3 :2 3

85

1 4 :4 -6

85

4 44

Jam es 90

2 :1 7 A c ts 1 :3

45

1 :6

45

1 1 :1 5

45

58

1 :1 5 - 2 6

58

1 9 :6

45

1 :1 3

58

7

1 :1 4 -1 5

45

15

M a rk 1:1 1

1 2 6

4 59

R e v e la tio n

2 1 :2 2 -2 3

22

2 2 :1 8

67

1,

2

C H R O N IC L E S

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES Psalms LESLIE C. ALLEN

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC Psalms Copyright © 1987 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11570-0 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Allen, Leslie C. The Psalms: Leslie C. Allen. p.  cm. Bibliography: p. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-849-93082-9 1. Bible. O.T. Psalms—­Criticism, interpretations, etc. I. Title. II. Series. BS1430.2.A335 1987 223’.20687-884 Biblical quotations have usually been taken from the translation in the volumes of the Word Biblical Commentary, Psalms 1-50, and 101-150, copyright © 1893by Word, Incorporated; used by permission. Scripture quotations marked RSV are taken from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Copyright © 1952 [2nd edition 1971] by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

To Joy

CONTENTS

Foreword 1. Introduction Compilation Types o f psalms 2. Function Temple settings Wisdom settings The changing scenes o f life 3. Praise A n editorial concern The praise o f thanksgiving Praise in the lament Praise in the hymn 4. Faith Faith in disorientation Faith in orientation Faith in reorientation

7

9 11 12 17 25 26 31 33 43 44 48 52 56 59 59 67 71 Contents

5. Blessing Blessing in creation Blessing in worship Blessing in everyday life 6. Salvation Salvation as existential reality Salvation and covenant Salvation as a theological heritage 7. Hope Grounds for hope Existential hope Eschatological hope 8. Scripture The authority o f the Psalms David as exemplar The Psalms in the New Testament Notes Bibliography Index of Psalms Cited

PSALM S

75 75 80 83 87 88 90 97 101 101 106 111 117 118 122 126 131 133 135

8

FOREWORD

Everyone has favorite Psalms. Yet the book o f Psalms is still a closed treasure to most o f us. So many o f them do not obviously speak to us in our deepest need. This is a book that can help to open that treasure and make it possible for the reader to claim many more o f them as personally relevant It explains in language all can under­ stand the way the Psalms have been collected and arranged and leads the reader through the different kinds o f psalms before showing how they were used in different settings. These hymns and poems have proved to be remarkably adaptable to changing forms o f worship through the cen­ turies, yet, in all these changing forms, the Psalms keep the worshipers’ attention focused on basic themes o f G od’s goodness. These consist in emphasis on God’s blessing and on his salvation. The Psalms then lead the worshiper to cultivate responses in praise, faith, and hope. Like the teacher described in Matthew, who “brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old,” Leslie Allen here provides for the reader a spiritual feast, the fruits o f his study o f Psalms in their original tongue. The reader who wishes to 9

Foreword

go more deeply into the foundations o f what is written here will want to see the volume on Psalms 101-150 (No. 21) by Leslie Allen in the Word Biblical Commentary. Dr. Allen’s insightful book recognizes that the Psalms speak to each o f us differendy. Each reader comes to this book from a different perspective, yet the Psalms have prayers and songs for each o f us. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky

PSALM S

John D. W. Watts O ld Testament Editor Word Biblical Commentary

10

1

INTRODUCTION

O f all the O ld Testament books Psalms has a special place in the hearts o f Christians. Such is its popularity that it is easy to purchase a copy o f the combined New Testament and Psalms. Every believer has a list o f favorite psalms, while probably paying little attention to the rest Little oases o f familiarity punctuate a desert o f unfamiliarity. The very for mat o f the Psalter lends encouragement to this tendency. The individual psalms do not function as chapters in a book. Their consecutive numbering carries no warranty o f consec­ utive content Many o f the psalms have their own titles, which increases a sense o f beginning afresh with each new number. A s a result readers feel little inducement to get inside the world o f the Psalms. People commonly attach a label to the Psalter, calling it “the bymnbook o f the Second Temple.” This has some claim to truth, but on reflection it serves to accentuate the formlessness o f the collection. Hymnbooks, as we know them, are arranged thematically according to particular doc­ trines and to periods in the church calendar. In no way do 11

Introduction

the psalms follow such an orderly pattern! A rare exception is the run of psalms celebrating God’s kingship, Pss 96-99. Even here it is noticeable that the affiliated Ps 93 is separate from its fellows. Are there any unifying principles behind the overall col­ lection? Indeed there do appear to be, but it is good to appreciate its relatively random nature. There is a danger in trying to systematize the Psalms, the danger o f wanting to find links that were never really there. The appearance of randomness is a witness to the gradual accumulative nature o f this book. Here are centuries o f devotion crammed into one book. In this respect the Psalter is a microcosm o f the Bible as a whole. It is a rich heritage to which many genera­ tions have contributed through all the changing scenes o f human history, and so generation after generation can take it to their hearts, feeling kinship with its pages. Nowhere is the scriptural interweaving o f divinity and humanity more evi­ dent than here. Before we can tackle the themes o f the Psalms, there is a certain amount o f background information for the reader to grasp. We need to find our way into and around the Psalter, so that we evaluate its contents aright. Com pilation There is more than* one way o f analyzing the Psalms. Perhaps the best approach to begin with is to look at the end o f the process which resulted in the canonical collection, and to discern the final editorial shape that has been im­ posed upon it 1. The five “books.” There is a consciousness that the hun­ dred and fifty psalms comprise an anthology, a literary whole. Evidence o f this consciousness lies in the fact that the overall collection has been divided into five sections or “books.” The rabbis saw a parallel here with the Pentateuch, PSALM S

12

the five books o f Moses, as if the Psalter was planned as a counterpart, the five books o f David. It is a plausible sugges­ tion, but scholarly attempts to verify it, for instance by envis­ aging lectionary parallels between pentateuchal passages and the Psalms, have not won general acceptance. Each o f the “books” has been given its own conclusion in the form o f a doxology. Book One consists o f Pss 1-41 and ends with Ps 41:13: Blessed be the Lord the G od o f Israel from everlasting and to everlasting! Amen and Amen. Books Two, Three, and Four end similarly, at 72:18, 19; 89:52 and 106:48, thus marking their dimensions as Pss 4272, 73-89, and 90-106. Ps 106:48 shows that “Amen (and Amen)” was modeled on a congregational response to a call o f praise, in affirmation and involvement: Blessed be Israel’s G od Yahweh from everlasting to everlasting, and let all the people say “Amen.” These doxologies did not originally belong to the individual psalms among which they are numbered, but are related to the preceding section o f psalms as a literary finale, an ova­ tion in God’s honor. Book Five, Pss 107-150, does not have a doxology o f the same type. It is generally thought that its last psalm, Ps 150, has the function o f a doxology for both Book Five and the whole Psalter. In this series o f asides which punctuate the collection we hear literary tributes o f praise, in reaction to the portrayal of G od given within each of its sections. 2. The individual collections. This scheme of books and doxologies is a final arrangement superimposed upon a large 13

Introduction

amount o f earlier editorial work. The Psalter has grown by the accumulation o f separate collections. It is like a well loved bymnbook which over the years has gone through a number o f editions, gradually enlarging its scope. The primary collections which were utilized to build up the book o f Psalms as we know it may be detected from the headings to individual psalms. Two collections represent the repertoire o f Levitical choirs in the temple. Pss 42-49, 84, 85, and 8 7 ,8 8 name “the sons o f Korah” in their headings, while Pss 50,73-83 are ascribed to “Asaph.” Another group o f psalms mentions not their singers but apparently the scene in which they functioned: the “Songs o f Ascents,” Pss 120-134. These were probably processional songs, sung as choirs and congregation “went up” through Jerusalem to the temple in sacred procession at festival time. Here then is evidence o f a system o f worship in which these psalms once played a role. They were meant to be sung and heard within a worshiping community whose hearts were in tune with the words o f faith and praise. Another collection may be detected from the content o f its psalms. In certain psalms the content highlights the person o f the Davidic king. Now scattered throughout the Psalter, originally they were probably a single collection. These royal psalms include Pss 2 ,4 5 ,1 0 1 ,1 1 0 , and 132. The society in which these psalms were first used did not have a constitu­ tion that demarcated religion from politics. It idealized a particular form o f monarchy as the potential sphere o f God’s will and gave it a role in its offi cial religion. The backbone o f the first half o f the Psalter is made up o f two collections associated with the name o f David, Pss 3-41 and 51-71. We are uncertain to what extent the Davidic ascription was originally intended to refer to authorship o f each o f the psalms within the collection. There can be no objection in principle to the view that David composed psalms, in the light o f the traditions elsewhere in the O ld PSALM S

14

Testament that associate him with music and poetry. Certain o f the “Davidic” psalms, however, exhibit late features and would sound strange on David’s lips. It may be that very early cores o f the Davidic collections were gradually supple­ mented. Anyway, there eventually grew up a belief that cred­ ited David with authorship o f all the Davidic psalms, a belief that is reflected in the colophon at 72:20, “The prayers o f David, the son o f Jesse, are ended.” This trend continued into later times, so that the Greek version o f the Psalter and Hebrew manuscripts found at Qumran variously increase the number o f Davidic ascriptions. In the New Testament Ps 2 is credited to David, at Acts 4:25; so too is Ps 95 in Heb 4:7, following the Greek version. Eventually the Psalter was considered “the treasury o f David,” to use the famous title o f Spurgeon’s commentary. Certain o f the Davidic psalms have narrative headings which associate the compositions with particular events in David’s life. They probably reflect later interpretation in most cases. They and the Davidic ascriptions in general reveal a perspec­ tive o f the Psalter which will merit close attention in a later chapter. 3. Editorial arrangement. The Psalms are not simply a stringing together o f various collections. Gerald H. Wilson has drawn attention to evidence o f deliberate arrangement behind compilation o f the Psalter.1 The second group o f Korahite psalms are Pss 84, 85, 87, and 88. Is there any evidence to suggest that Ps 86 has been deliberately inserted? A perusal o f Pss 85-87 does indicate an overlap o f theologi­ cal content. Ps 85 and Ps 86 both celebrate in their early parts the forgiveness and steadfast love o f G od (85:2,7; 86:5) and in their latter portions his steadfast love and faithfulness (85:10; 86:15). Similarly, Pss 86 and 87 both affirm a convic­ tion that G od is to he worshiped by nations other than Israel (86:9; 87:4-6). So Ps 86 has been dovetailed into its Korahite neighbors in order to highlight their theological themes. 15

Introduction

The nameless Ps 33 has been incorporated into a series o f Davidic psalms, apparently in order to accentuate the con­ tent o f 32:10,11: The one who trusts in the Lord— lovingkindness shall surround him! Rejoice in the Lord and exult, you righteous ones. . . . A s in the former case, steadfast love or “lovingkindness” is hailed as a key attribute o f G od (32:10; 33:5, 18, 22), an attribute that is worthy o f “rejoicing” on the lips o f the “righteous” or “upright” congregation (32:11; 33:1). The message o f this editorial arrangement is that God’s gracious character should ever draw forth a response o f praise. Why is the Asaphite Ps 50 separate from its fellows in Pss 73-83? It seems to function as a bridge between the Korahite and Davidic collections (Pss 42-49; 51-71) because it shares adjacent concerns. Ps 50 begins with a description o f Zion as a setting for God’s revealing o f himself in judgment, in seem­ ing echo o f 48:1-3. It includes a discussion o f the role o f sacrifice (50:8-15, 23) which is matched by the concern o f 51:16-19. So Ps 50 Serves to ease the linking o f the two separate collections and, in the process, to stimulate theolog­ ical thinking. These examples o f editorial ordering show a thoughtful interest in the thematic linking o f particular psalms. In our own aim to group the material o f the Psalter under themes we will not be engaging in any alien task. More remains to be said in later chapters about the impact o f the completed Psalter upon the observant reader. Enough has been said, however, to reveal a lengthy architectural process o f amass­ ing blocks o f material and building them together into larger wholes and eventually into an overarching unity. The book o f Psalms is like an old English manor house built over the centuries in different styles, Tudor, Jacobean, and Georgian, PSALM S

16

each o f whose later architects has labored with appreciation o f the work o f his predecessors, and has added his own distinctive contribution with sensitivity. Types of psalm s Another way o f getting inside the Psalter is to take a cross-section of it and examine the various kinds o f psalms within it. It is obvious to everybody that Ps 3 is quite differ­ ent from Ps 2. The differences between psalms were put on a scholarly basis by Hermann Gunkel in the first three decades o f this century and by Sigmund Mowinckel, and their work has been developed especially by Hans-Joachim Kraus and Claus Westermann.2 The academic approach to the Psalter is founded upon this perspective, which bears the name o f form criticism. A brief sketch o f the results will be given here. It has proved o f inestimable help in finding one’s way through a veritable storeroom of literary objects left higgledy-piggledy. Form criticism has been concerned to identify and group similar psalms and to analyze the patterns o f characteristic elements found in the resultant groups. The overall ap­ proach is a good servant but a bad master. It performs the valuable service o f comparing scripture with scripture in such a way as to categorize psalms and to discern the stan­ dard elements o f expression used in each group o f psalms. In the process, however, there is a danger of blurring the indi­ viduality o f particular psalms as they are judged in the light o f hypothetical, generalized ideals. 1. The individual lament. This is the type most repre­ sented in the Psalter and predominant in the Davidic collec­ tions. Roughly a third of the Psalter belongs to this category. It is a poignant prayer wrung from personal crisis, such as severe sickness or social victimization, from which the suf­ ferer seeks to be set free. There is a basic structure which 17

Introduction

examples o f this type tend to exhibit to a greater or lesser degree: (1) an initial petition explicitly addressed to God, (2) a stylized description o f the crisis, (3) an affirmation o f trust in God, (4) a main section o f petition and (5) a vow o f praise, once the prayer has been answered. A specimen o f the individual lament that exemplifies these elements is Ps 56: (1) Be gracious to me, O God, (v la) (2) for men trample upon me; all day long foemen oppress me; my enemies trample upon me all day long for many fight against me proudly. (vv lb , 2) A ll day long they seek to injure my cause; all their thoughts are against me for evil. They band together, they lurk, they watch my steps. (vv 5 ,6a) (3) W hen I am afraid, I put my trust in thee. In G od, whose word I praise, in G od I trust without a fear. W hat can flesh do to me? (vv 3,4) Thou hast kept count o f my tossings; put thou my tears in thy bottle! Are they not in thy book? . . . Then my enemies will be turned back in the day when I call. This I know, that G od is for me. In God, whose word I praise . . . , in G od I trust without a fear. W hat can man do to me? (vv 8-11) (4) A s they have waited for my life, so recompense them for their crime; in wrath cast down the peoples, O God! (vv 6b, 7) (5) My vows to thee I must perform, O God; I will render thank offerings to thee. PSALM S

18

For thou hast [or. wilt have] delivered my soul from death, yea, my feet from frilling that I may walk before G od in the light o f life. (vv 12,13) The fourth element is frequently longer, notably in 89:1318,22-28. The second element is often quite complex, with a threefold perspective: (a) what my enemies have done to me, (b) what I am suffering, and (c) what G od has done to me. Ps 102 is an example o f this comprehensive complaint, which relates to society, self, and God: (a) All day long my enemies insult me, they use my name as a curse, ridiculing me. (v 8) (b) My life is vanishing in smoke; my bones bum like embers . . . I lie awake and am like a solitary bird on a rooftop. (vv 3-7) Ashes I eat for my food. (v 9a) My life is like a lengthening shadow. I am shriveled up like grass. (v 11) (c) With my drink I mingle tears because o f your anger and your wrath; you have picked me up and thrown me away. (vv 9b, 10) He has brought low my strength part way through my course, he has decreed a short life for me. (v 23) 2. The communal lament. This is the collective counter­ part to the individual lam ent The communal lament re­ sponds to national crisis. It is represented much more sparingly in the Psalter: examples are Pss 44, 74, and 79. It has a similar structure, with addition o f two extra elements, slipped into the second and penultimate positions respec­ tively: a reference to G od’s work o f salvation in the past and

19

Introduction

a double wish or petition concerning the people and their enemies. Ps 79 is a good instance to look up and study in terms o f its various parts. These are the standard ways in which prayer in response to dire need is expressed in the book o f Psalms, whether voiced by individuals or on behalf o f the people o f G o d This praying is marked by realism and frank speaking: f aith and pain are here an explosive combination o f human chem­ icals. It is characterized by logical structuring, with the evi­ dent intent o f persuading G od to intervene by means o f impressive arguments. One o f the elements o f lament, the affirmation o f trust, may be expanded into a complete com­ position. Ps 23, everybody’s favorite psalm, belongs to this category. Other instances are the individual Pss 4, 16, and 131, and the communal Ps 129. 3. The song of thanksgiving. N ot surprisingly the “please” factor o f the Psalter finds a sequel in a “thank you.” The vow o f praise which closes the lament hints as much. The thanksgiving song, which represents a fulfilling o f the vow, logically follows the lament as the eventual expression o f gratitude for answer to specific prayer. Examples o f such individual songs are Pss 18, 30, 116, and 138. Strictly there appears to have been no distinctive form o f communal thanksgiving, but the individual form could be adapted to fill this lack: Ps 124 is a rare instance. The six elements common to most thanksgiving songs are: (1) and (2) a resolve to sing, with an introductory summary o f release from crisis, (3) a description o f the crisis, (4) a report that G od has heard the prayer o f lament and acted affirma­ tively, (5) generalized teaching, and (6) renewed thanksgiving. Ps 30 is a clear model o f this type: (1)&(2) I will extol you, O Lord, for you have drawn me out and have not allowed my enemies to rejoice over me. PSALM S

20

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

O Lord my God, I called for help and you healed me; O Lord, you brought my soul up from Sheol: from those going down to the Pit you made me live. (vv 1-3) But I!— I said in my security: “I will never be moved!” O Lord, in your favor you made me stand more erect than mountains o f strength. You hid your fece— I was dismayed. (vv 6 ,7) [I said:] “To you, O Lord, will I cry! And to you, my Governor, will I plead for mercy. . . Hear, O Lord, and be merciful to me. O Lord, be my helper.” You have changed my wailing to dancing for me; you have removed my sackcloth and girded me with rejoicing. (vv 8-11) Sing praises to the Lord, O you saints o f his, and praise his holy name. For in his anger is death, but in his favor is life. Weeping may tarry in the evening, but joy comes at dawn. (vv 4 ,5 ) so that my soul shall sing your praise and not weep, O Lord my God, I will praise you forever. (v 12)

4. The hymn. This is another key category, distinct from the previous pair. The term hymn has a narrower sense than in Christian usage. Like the song o f thanksgiving it majors in praise. The difference is that the thanksgiving song is crisisoriented along with the lam ent It is a response to what G od has just done in the experience o f the believing person or community. The thanksgiving song is the religious equiva­ lent o f a burst o f applause immediately after a performance 21

Introduction

at the theater or concert hall. The hymn, on the other hand, lacks such immediacy. It surveys the character and work o f G od in a general fashion and from further afield. If, as the final psalm asserts, it is the obligation o f “everything that breathes” to “praise Yahweh” (150:6), it is hardly surprising that the hymn developed with a variety o f forms. The simplest kind is that exhibited in the shortest psalm, Ps 117, which has two elements, (1) an imperative call to praise in v 1 and (2) the reason for praising in v 2: (1) Praise Yahweh, all nations, laud him, all you peoples, (2) because his loyal love has towered over us and Yahweh’s faithfulness is everlasting. This basic pattern is followed in longer hymns, such as Pss 113 and 146 and in solo adaptations, Pss 103 and 104. Other hymns double this pattern by repeating the pair o f elements, such as Pss 100 (vv 1-2,3-4,5); 147 and 148. Themes o f the hymn are G od’s roles in creation and in human history, and his dynamic attributes o f steadfast love and power. A hymn may take a number o f themes in its stride, like Pss 33 and 136. O r it may specialize, like Pss 103 (steadfast love), 104 (creation), and 105 (history). There are subgroups o f hymns, such as the psalms o f divine kingship mentioned earlier. The Songs o f Zion, nota­ bly Pss 46, 48, 76, and 87 praise G od as the Lord o f Jeru­ salem and o f temple worship. A number o f the royal psalms, particularly Pss 2, 21, 72, and 110, in focusing upon the Davidic king, were meant to honor G od as Lord o f the Davidic covenant. The term “royal psalm” is not strictly a form-critical category: it can take the form o f a lament (Ps 89) or a song o f thanksgiving (Pss 18,118). There are also smaller groupings o f psalms, such as the

PSALM S

22

wisdom psalms and prophetic and priestly liturgies, which need not be mentioned in the present survey. Enough has been said to indicate the general range o f expression covered in the pages o f the Psalter. The religious contexts in which this range was evidently used and its relation to the gamut o f human experience will be the topics o f the next chapter.

23

Introduction

2

FUNCTION

For Christians today the Psalter has a variety o f uses. In a church setting a psalm may be employed as a scripture reading before a sermon based upon i t In certain denominations the Psalter is used as a lectionary; antiphonal recitation or chanting o f set psalms makes a rich contribution to the worship and prayer o f the service. The psalms have also been paraphrased for the congregation to sing as hymns. In quite a different setting, the Psalter is read and studied by individual Christians as an aid to personal devotion. In motel rooms travelers find a Gideon Bible which in its preface urges them to turn to Ps 23 for help in time o f need, to Ps 19 for the doctrine o f the twofold revelation o f G od and to Ps 15 for business and professional principles. W hat o f the Psalter in its Old Testament context? The answers to this question are not immediately obvious. The Psalms are a medley o f voices calling in the dark, and we can no longer see plainly where the owners o f these disembodied voices are or what they are doing. Perhaps we do not need to peer and our question is improper curiosity. Yet

25

Function

there are clues inside and outside the Psalter which help to clarify the different backgrounds behind the Psalms and which can enrich our understanding o f them. Tem ple settin gs Sigmund Mowinckel urged that m ost o f the psalms were composed for use in a temple setting,3 and the majority o f subsequent scholars have followed his lead in general, if not in his particular reconstructions. 1. The communal lament. The habitat o f the communal lament seems not unnaturally to have been the national sanctuary. Solomon’s prayer associated with the dedication o f the temple in 1 Kgs 8 supports a setting in the courts af c ing the temple: W hen thy people are defeated before the enemy . . . , if they . . . pray and make supplication to thee in this house, then hear thou in heaven. . . . W hen heaven is shut up and there is no rain . . . , if they pray toward this place . . . , then hear thou in heaven . . . (vv 33-36) So do the exhortations o f Joel in reaction to a severe plague o f locusts that threatened the very existence o f the Judean community. There is mention o f the convening o f a national assembly in the temple area and o f priestly utterance o f a communal lament (Joel 1:13,14; 2:15-17). Similarly, 2 Chr 20 gives details o f a national convocation in the temple court and the king’s voicing o f such a lament (vv 4-12). Both 2 Chr 20 and Joel go on to relate a divine response in the form o f a prophetic oracle, a phenomenon that finds a parallel in Ps 85. This psalm is a prophetic liturgy, a composi­ tion in which two sets o f voices are heard, one o f which is that o f a temple prophet. The first half, vv 1-7, is a communal PSALM S

26

lament, while a solo voice breaks into the second half, v 8-15, transmitting God’s reply: Let me hear what G od the Lord will speak. He speaks peace to his people, . . . (v8) [RSV does not express what needs to, and may, be said] In this case the answer consists o f a single word, “peace,” shalom in Hebrew. It spells reconciliation to G od and the renewal o f good relations, and so an end to the wrath evident in the national crisis, mentioned earlier in the psalm. Verses 9-13 are a prophetic exposition o f the reply, equating this shalom with the “steadfast love” and “salvation” for which the people had asked in v 7: Surely his salvation is at hand for those that fear him . . . Steadfast love and faithfulness will meet; righteousness and peace will kiss each other. . . . Ps 60 envisages a similar situation: the oracle spoken by G od “in his sanctuary” (vv 6-8) follows the communal lament o f vv 1-5. One may look up and compare the divine oracle o f 12:5. 2. The individual lam ent Similarly the lament o f the individual had its natural habitat at the sanctuary. The poignant narrative o f the childless Hannah pouring out her heart at the sanctuary o f Shiloh and the blundering priest who at last understands her state o f mind and gives her his blessing (1 Sam 1:9-18), adds human flesh and blood to the anguished voices that ring out in the Psalter. So does the story o f Hezekiah’s resorting to the Jerusalem temple and dramati­ cally spreading out in Yahweh’s presence the intimidating letter from the Assyrian emperor (2 Kgs 19:1,14-19). These narratives suggest that when the heading to Ps 102 defines the following lament as “a prayer for a sufferer when he feels

27

Function

weak and pours out his worries before Yahweh,” the final phrase refers to the ark housed in the temple, which was regarded as the token o f God’s presence. The person who recited his or her lament or had it recited hoped for an affirmative word from God. Lam 3:55-57 ap­ pears to testify to such a phenomenon as a previous experience, while hoping for a fresh answer to prayer: the divine word in that case was “do not fear.” The reassurance is akin to Eli’s response “go in peace” in 1 Sam 1:17. Within the Psalms themselves there is evidence that is best interpreted as pointing to divine intervention through a priest or prophet. Such intervention seems to underlie statements in certain individual laments that G od has heard the prayer, such as 6:8-10 and 28:6. Ps 28:5 represents a prophetic assurance about the psalmist’s foes: Because they do not understand the works o f the Lord and what his hands have done, he will tear them down and not rebuild them.4 Similarly, in 22:21 “You have answered me!” is the glad cry that prompts in vv 23-31 the psalmist’s anticipation of singing a thanksgiving song.5 3. The thanksgiving song. A sanctuary setting for the song o f thanksgiving is evident from material in the Psalter itself, which in turn supports the view that normally the lament, its precursor, was uttered there. Originally Ps 107 was a psalm for use at a formal service o f thanksgiving held during the great pilgrimage festivals, at which the grateful were urged: Let them offer thanksgiving sacrifices and recount in loud song what he has done . . . . Let them extol him in the congregation o f the people . . . . (vv 22,32)

PSALM S

28

Ps 100 was employed for this same purpose according to its heading, “a psalm for the thank offering.” Evidently it functioned as a processional hymn inaugurating the service. The formula that appears in both 100:4,5 and 107:1, “Give Yahweh thanks, for his goodness, for the everlastingness o f his loyal love,” supports such a setting. In Jer 33:11 it is described as the joyful cry o f worshipers participating in the thank offering service. Ps 103 with its celebration o f God’s steadfast love seems to have been a solo hymn sung on such an occasion. Ps 116 makes explicit mention o f the service as an opportunity o f testifying before the assembled congregation to what G od had done, praising him directly in song, and offering a libation and sacrifice o f thank offering in the temple courts, while 30:11 highlights dancing. Part o f the celebration was a fellowship meal using the meat of the thank offering, which the worshiper enjoyed with his family and friends according to Deut 12:17,18 and Ps 22:26. 4. The hymn and other temple poems. It is not difficult to envisage the hymns as generally functioning in a choral and congregational setting. A number o f hymns refer to the mu­ sic and song that resounded in temple worship, such as 33:1-3: Exult in the Lord, you who are righteous . . . ! Praise the Lord with a lyre. Make music for him with a ten-stringed harp. Sing to him a new song; play beautifully with a joyful sound. There are informal versions o f the songs o f Zion, Pss 84 and 122, which attest the joy o f pilgrimage to the temple. Pss 24 and 132 preserve references to a sacred procession to the temple, in which the ark was carried. The entrance liturgy o f 29

Function

Ps 15 lets us hear a priest’s answer to a would-be worshiper at the temple who inquires about moral qualifications for worship. The ancient custom surely inspired the similar challenge in the Sermon on the Mount, at Matt 5:23,24, to settle squabbles before worshiping God. In Pss 91 and 121 we overhear the priest dismissing the pilgrim with a power­ ful word o f benediction. It is clear that the Psalms must be read with controlled imagination in order to compensate for the general lack o f precise rubrics. Reconstruction o f the institutional setting of many o f the psalms, with the help o f evidence scattered inside and outside the Psalter, brings them to life. Sympa­ thetic study transforms the flatness o f the printed page into three-dimensional fullness, and its silence into voices echo­ ing in the temple courts. The settings help to shed light on the theological meaning o f the Psalter which is to be dis­ cussed in later chapters. For now, we may reflect on the strong institutional flavor that pervades many o f the Psalms. The institution o f the temple obviously lies at the heart o f the faith evident in the Psalter. Here was a people that did “not neglect to meet together” (Heb 10:25) but found en­ couragement in frequenting the sanctuary that symbolized the religious unity o f Israel. “How good, to be sure, how fine it is for brothers to stay together!” exclaimed the psalmist in wonderment at the con­ course o f pilgrims who had come for the festival (133:1). For them it was a place o f joy and fellowship. The institution was not remote from human realities. It satisfied their needs and amply met their expectations. It provided secure refuge and strong assurance when they voiced their cries o f distress there; as well, it afforded an opportunity for testimony and praise when the tide o f life turned in their favor. The temple was a place where human experience found corresponding religious expression, instead o f having a deaf ear turned to fundamental personal and social concerns. Israel in its PSALM S

30

humanity met with G od via the forms and ceremonies o f the temple courts, and went away transformed and blessed. Here surely are criteria for the institutional structures o f the Christian faith, o f whatever denominational flavor, to check whether they are o f God. If so, the Christian “house o f G od” will be a meeting place with him and an indispensable fountain o f deep faith: How precious is your lovingkindness, O God, that human beings find refuge in the shadow o f your wings. They are refreshed from the rich provision o f your house, and you make them drink from the river o f your delights. For with you is the fountain o f life; and in your light we shall see light! (36:7-9) W isdom settings Certain psalms were not composed with the temple in view. The wisdom psalms have their roots in quite a different setting, which is shared by the better known wisdom literature, Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes. The setting is the world o f the wisdom teacher. Religious authority in Israel lay in three quite diverse areas according to Jer 18:18, the spheres o f the priest, the prophet, and the wisdom teacher. From these areas stemmed the eventual O ld Testament canon o f law, prophets, and writings. Wisdom teaching had a theology and ethical system o f its own, though these overlapped with the covenant traditions o f Israel. It investigated the ques­ tions posed by human experience and endeavored to relate the individual to society, and both to God. It possessed dis­ tinctive forms o f expression, which makes it practicable to recognize wisdom terminology and themes in the Psalter. 1. Wisdom psalms proper. There are only a handful o f what one might call pure wisdom psalms: Pss 37, 49, 112, and 127. Their habitat was presumably the social setting o f 31

Function

wisdom literature. Unfortunately little is known about this setting, although teaching and discussion were clearly corner­ stones o f its existence. It was the ancestor o f Judaism’s rab­ binic movement and of the Talmudic school attacked to every medieval synagogue. 2. Wisdom psalms for the temple. More in number are psalms composed for temple use which betray wisdom influence to a greater or lesser extent: examples are Pss 32,34,73, and 111. 3. Torah-wisdom psalms. A third category is most interest­ ing. It comprises Pss 1,19— at least, vv 7-14— and 119, and so has the distinction of providing the first psalm and the longest psalm. These so-called Torah-wisdom psalms reflect a late development of wisdom thinking that wedded the sepa­ rate concerns of wisdom and o f the Torah. Torah is often rendered “law” but it has a wider connotation of divine reve­ lation. Literally meaning “pointing the way,” it has the sense o f giving directions for the road of life. An important feature of the Torah-wisdom psalms is their stress upon meditation: Blessed is the man who has not walked in the counsel o f the wicked . . . But in the Lord’s Torah is his delight and in his Torah will he muse by day and night. (1:1,2) The placing of Ps 1 at the head o f the whole collection of the Psalter, with the obvious function o f an introduction, is highly significant. It represents a loosing o f the temple psalms from their institutional moorings and gives them a new role as sacred poems for private devotion and group discussion For Judaism this new tradition was one o f the positive fac­ tors that permitted it to survive after the temple was de­ stroyed in A.D. 70. A s for Christian usage, this final stamp on the Psalter anticipates and justifies centuries o f devotional usage in the realms of homiletics and literature as well as in the private place o f prayer and spiritual reflection. In its final PSALM S

32

form the Psalter becomes a collection o f sacred literature released to individuals worldwide as a divine light for the path o f life. James Gilmour, a Victorian missionary to Mongolia, spoke for many when he wrote: When I feel I cannot make headway in devotion, I open the Psalms and push out my canoe and let myself be carried on the stream o f devotion that flows through the whole book. The current always sets toward God and in most places is strong and deep. The changing scenes of life Walter Brueggemann has provided a key to the Psalms in his development o f an insight perceived by the hermeneutical scholar Paul Ricoeur, and his application o f it to the Psalter.6 What follows borrows from and builds upon his work. It has managed to put on an academic and existential basis what saints down the ages have known instinctively and devotionally, that the Psalms are treasures dug deep from the mines of human life. The value of the Psalter is that it mirrors a broad spectrum of human experience. Life may be divided into three phases, orientation to the world around, disorientation, and reorientation. The Psalms too bear witness to these phases. Expressing the characteristically different moods and feelings o f the phases, they relate them to a G od who is above them all but sympathetically alert to the instability of the human frame: For he knows our make-up, he is mindful that we are dust. Man is as shortlived as grass. He blossoms as briefly as a wild flower . . . . But Yahweh’s loyal love stays from age to age upon those who revere him . . . . (103:14—17) 33

Function

W hen the sun is shining and the ship o f life is running on a smooth course, there are psalms to read that turn the happy cry “God’s in his heaven— all’s right with the world” into a song o f praise to G od as the giver o f all good things. Such psalms will be o f little use, even mockingly hurtful, when the skies darken and life’s frail bark founders in the storm, nor are they meant to be relevant then. That is when despair, which finds its outlet— and begins to find its resolu­ tion— in the aggrieved cry “‘Do you not care if we perish?’” (Mark 4:38), has a counterpart in the psalms o f disorienta­ tion. W hen the storm is over and life returns to an even keel, yet another group o f psalms comes into its own, nudg­ ing relief and renewed optimism into thanksgiving and praise to God; these are the psalms o f reorientation. These three categories o f psalms are closely allied with the very types taught by form criticism and show how uner­ ringly those various types relate to the gamut o f human experience, clothed though they are in the dress o f a particu­ lar culture. The different stylistic forms dovetail with human fortunes. The diligent student can turn what might have seemed the stones o f sterile scholarship into the bread o f life, as each day requires. 1. The psalms of orientation. These may be detected by a telltale motto that runs through a surprising number o f formcritical categories and brands them as o f the same stock. The hymn to G od as Creator declares in tones o f awesome praise: You are the one who founded the earth . . . so that it cannot move for ever and ever. (104:5) The various hymn subgroups take up the cry. The hymn o f divine kingship affirms: Yea, the world is established; it shall never be moved; thy throne is established from o f old. (93:1,2) PSALM S

34

The song o f Zion applies the message o f Jerusalem: G od is in its midst— it will not slip! G od will help it at the break o f dawn. (46:5) The hymn-like variety o f royal psalm makes the confident assertion: For the king is trusting in the Lord and in the lovingkindness o f the M ost High, he will not be shaken. (21:7) The entrance liturgy promises to the person who honors the moral requirements o f the sanctuary: The one doing these things shall not be shaken forever. (15:5) The psalm o f priestly benediction gives a pledge o f God’s care to the pilgrim leaving for home: He will not let your foot stumble. (121:3) A psalm o f normative wisdom pronounces about the right­ eous person: Never will he be shaken. (112:6) Finally, an affirmation o f trust declares o f God: Because he is my right hand, I shall not be shaken. (16:8) The motto earmarks these various technical categories, iden­ tifying them as psalms o f orientation, except that in the case o f the affirmations o f trust only Ps 16 is clearly included in this group. 35

Function

The psalms o f orientation all move within the theological orbit o f divine blessing. It is noticeable that in most cases the motto o f stability is carefully safeguarded from any suspicion o f humanistic self-sufficiency. The truth is not that a person is fine, but that he or she owes the fine condition to God. For the psalmists nothing in this world has an innate stabil­ ity but only a derived, God-given one. The national institu­ tions o f the temple and the monarchy and even the universe are solid and have lasted for centuries— and look like lasting for centuries longer— simply because they are judged to be expressions o f the divine will and so share something o f divine stability. For the orientation psalm, life is permeated by G od’s good will, a factor that is never ignored. According to this perspective a happy life guards itself from the tempta­ tion o f forgetting G od and claiming to be self-made— of which Deut 8:11-18 gives pastoral warning. Rather, it relates constantly to the Giver. Ps 16:8 prefaces the motto o f stabil­ ity with an accompanying attitude o f faith: “I have always put the Lord in front o f me.” It would be easy to despise the psalms o f orientation. It is true that there is danger in going along with the status quo and enjoying it for its own sake. With hindsight the phase o f orientation can be seen to include elements o f smugness and self-delusion. Each o f the phases has its pitfalls. There is an opposite danger, however, o f writing off broad tracts o f human experience. The many psalms that reflect this phase are true to life in that they correspond to the periods o f comparative stability that occur in the lifetimes o f most peo­ ple. Moreover, the psalms o f orientation have standards to live up to and ideals to aim a t The motto “I shall not be moved” does not imply “I shall not move”! The Hebrew terminology connotes stability, not stagnation. Indeed, 16:11 prayerfully affirms that in such seasons “you make me to know the path o f life”. There is to be movement in a Godordered direction. An advantage o f the period o f orientation PSALM S

36

is that the human heart, at leisure from itself, can look away, wonder at the phenomena o f the world around, and reflect insightfully on them, along the lines o f 104:34: May my reflections please him, as I have rejoiced in Yahweh. The shock o f disorientation certainly has a creative effect eventually, but orientation finds creativity in its own steady progress. 2. The psalms of disorientation. Clouds o f imperfection scud across every blue sky o f human orientation. There come times in most lives, however, when the noonday sun turns to darkness and the heavens fall in cataclysm. The communal and individual laments are reactions to such dire crisis, when one’s bearings are lost and one cannot cope. It is for this reason that extremes o f language and logic occur in them. They are in no way intended as models for prayer offered during a period o f orientation. The two calamities that find clear expression in the individual laments are perse­ cution and serious illness. The latter blow continues to bedevil human society despite leaps in medical knowledge. Persecution, as a type o f social alienation, has counterparts in personal crises prevalent in modem times, such as loss o f employment, bereavement, and marriage breakdown. A t such junctures the individual laments are the voices o f men and women who have been there before us and have wrestled with the agonizing eclipse o f the stability that was synonymous with life. There came a time when the bastions o f human life, hitherto hailed as mountains o f immovability, crumbled and fe ll The communal laments o f Pss 74 and 79 react to the fell o f Jerusalem, temple and all. The royal lament o f Ps 89 is aghast at the impending fall o f the Davidic monarchy, in the light o f divine promises o f permanence. In the laments there is no triumphalism that can readily 37

Function

exorcize the evil. N or is there a stoic passivity that grits its teeth and rests patiently in the inscrutable will o f God. In­ stead, one finds the gamut o f human emotions that make up the sequence o f human reactions to crisis: numb shock, denial o f the painful reality, depression and frustration-ridden anger, in fact, all the stages which have to be lived with and through until the final stage, a moving forward in expectation o f a new phase o f life. In a situation of human misery the psalms o f disorientation are companions that understand— unlike Job’s misnamed comforters— and behind them stands the God o f compassion who knows our frame and somehow is there in the darkness. The admirable quality of Israel’s reli­ gion is that it had institutional room for the human realism exposed by trauma, witnesses though the laments were to the inadequacy o f religious and other institutions and the break­ down o f faith as conventionally understood. 3. The psalms of reorientation. Life goes on, and in very many cases turns the comer. The song o f thanksgiving en­ visages the dynamic intervention o f G od in the human situa­ tion. Recovery from serious sickness and rehabilitation into society were readily interpreted as answers to prayer, in the light o f the oracle that followed the lament. Accordingly the change for the better called for an expression o f gratitude to a G od who picks up the broken pieces and puts them back together again. One song o f thanksgiving, Ps 30, looks back over the three experiences o f life, the old orientation in vv 6-7a, the trauma o f disorientation expressed via a lament in vv 7b-10 and the now all-encompassing experience o f reori­ entation in vv 1-5 and 11-12: I said in my security: “I will never be moved!” . . . you made me stand more erect than the mountain---You hid your face— I was dismayed!. . . You have changed my wailing to dancing for me---PSALM S

38

There is a radical note about both the lament and the song o f thanksgiving that binds them together: they attest an emotional nadir and zenith in human experience. The thanksgiving song gives voice to an emotional high, just as the lament expresses an emotional low. A temporary factor marks the song o f thanksgiving, related as it is to a specific service o f thank offering. Yet the song o f thanksgiving also marks the beginning o f a new experience. There is a debt to C od which no single song can discharge. Praise, to be adequate, must be lifelong, characteristically declared the thanksgiving song: O Lord my God, I will praise you for ever. (30:12) There is a new sense o f commitment to G od as dynamic deliverer, which is expected to leave its mark on future living. Justice must be done to the temporary and permanent qualities o f the song o f thanksgiving. Perhaps it may be compared to the love letter written during an ardent courtship that eventually is to mature into satisfying mar­ riage and parenthood. The ardor o f romantic emotions will not survive the first year or so o f marriage, but the underly­ ing truths it expresses remain perennially valid. Accord­ ingly the song o f thanksgiving representing reorientation gives voice to the excited beginnings o f new life rising from the ruins o f personal crisis. The phase is destined to give way to a more settled one which will be both like and unlike the phase o f old orientation. Like, in that it will be marked by the stability, steady progress, and appreciation o f life enjoyed before. Unlike, in that it will reflect a maturer faith that has found in tragedy and survival schooling in wisdom, and wrested out o f them a deeper relationship with God. The psalm o f orientation stands outside the phases o f 39

Function

disorientation and reorientation, which belong back to back as expressions o f the need and gift o f deliverance. The Songs o f Zion, a grouping with similar theme and theology, were sung seemingly before and after the Exile: it was not regarded as foolish that they should be used after the restoration o f a ruined city and sanctuary. Accordingly the orientation psalms can give expression to precrisis and postcrisis experiences. The Psalms express the latter truth in theological language: the blessing associated with orientation follows the salvation celebrated in reorientation. After redemption from Exile came resettlement in the land (107:1-3,33-42). “Deliver your people and bless your inheritance” (28:9) was a fitting se­ quence o f petitions. Victory belongs to the Lord. Your blessing is upon your people. (3:8) Orientation can be experienced as a low-lying valley or a high plateau. The steady road up and toward heaven invests everyday life with a spiritual interpretation, whether its sta­ bility be o f an older or newer variety. There is a realism about the Psalms that should commend them to a generation which with some justification accuses the church o f turning a blind eye to the actualities o f human life and failing to integrate experience and faith. The Psalter comes face to face with human experience and does not shrink from verbalizing it and relating it to a kaleidoscope o f divine truth. The measure in which Christians find the blatancy o f the laments embarrassing is the measure by which they must judge their own openness to life. The Psalms function as honest gauges o f human experience. Whatever a person’s lot, he or she can read a group o f psalms with which to find rapport and a route to God. John Calvin in the preface to his commentary on the Psalms well described the Psalter as PSALM S

40

an anatomy o f all the parts o f the soul, for there is not an emotion o f which anyone can be conscious that is not here represented as in a mirror. O r rather, the Holy Spirit has here drawn to the life all the griefs, sorrows, fears, doubts, hopes, cares, perplexities, in short, all the distracting emotions with which the minds o f men are wont to be agitated.7

41

Function

3

PRAISE

The book o f Psalms owes its English title to the Greek version o f the O ld Testament via the Latin Vulgate. It was obviously derived from an element in the headings o f many Psalms, the very term psalm, which in Hebrew refers to a composition sung to the accompaniment o f a stringed in­ strument. The title was already current in the New Testa­ ment, for instance in Luke 24:44. It evokes the music o f the temple and the use o f the Psalms in temple worship. In the Hebrew Bible the tide is quite different, and at first sight is a misnomer. It is sepher tehillim “book o f praises” or simply tehillim “praises.” The latter term is related to the liturgical exhortation “Hallelujah,” “praise Yah(weh).” It oc­ curs in the singular, tehilla, as a heading to Ps 145, and could be regarded as the equivalent o f the form-critical category o f the hymn, although in 22:25 it refers to a song o f thanksgiv­ ing. Similarly Philo o f Alexandria referred to the book o f Psalms in Greek as humnoi “hymns.” From a form-critical perspective it appears most unreason­ able to fasten on one category out o f many in choosing an 43

Praise

overall title for the Psalter. An editorial note refers to the Davidic collections in Pss 1-72 as “prayers,” which may like­ wise stand for “laments” although these are a form o f prayer restricted to the phase o f disorientation. Numerically there are a few less hymns, o f various types, than laments in the book o f Psalms. Laments amount to as much as a third o f the Psalter and so might have a better claim as a title if major representation were the criterion. Why, then, was the He­ brew book labeled “praises”? An important factor is that laments predominate only in the first half o f the total collection, in Books One and Two. In the second half there is a preponderance o f hymns. This leaning toward praise as the book becomes more complete seems to be due not simply to a desire to redress the balance but to a conviction that “man’s chief end is to glorify God,” as the Shorter Catechism enjoins. A n editorial concern 1. The doxologies. The presence o f the doxologies, which in the final edition conclude Books One to Five o f the Psalter, is evidence o f a yearning to praise God. It is charac­ teristic o f the Israelite hymn that praise is not rendered to G od for its own sake, as in some modem choruses. Rather, it is grounded in explicit reasoning, for instance in Ps 117: Praise Yahweh . . . , because his loyal love has towered over us and Yahweh’s faithfulness is everlasting. A t first sight the doxologies break the pattern by not giving grounds for praise. In fact, each Book preceding the doxology is regarded as a multitude o f good reasons for praising God. The doxology responds to those reasons with its call to praise and its congregational “Amen.” Likewise, the bomPSALM S

bardment o f calls to praise in the final Ps 150 is a reaction to the mass o f praiseworthy material to be found in the preced­ ing psalms. 2. Praise in Book Five. Gerald H. Wilson has convincingly demonstrated the praise-oriented structure o f Book Five o f the Psalter.8 Its forty-four psalms seem to af ll into three sections: Pss 107-117,118-135, and 136-150. Each section has a core o f psalms, the first and third being two groups o f Davidic psalms, Pss 108-110 and 138-145, and the second the Songs o f Ascents, Pss 120-134. Each o f the three sec­ tions uses an initial formula o f praise and a separate final one. Pss 107, 118, and 136 begin their sections with the formula “Give Yahweh thanks for his goodness, for the ever­ lastingness o f his loyal love.” A s we have seen, this formula properly and originally belonged to the thank offering ser­ vice. In time it also became a general ascription o f praise and was taken over into the hymn. By way o f climax the initial formula o f Ps 136 is reinforced by the refrain that repeats its last part: “for his loyal love is everlasting.” Correspondingly, each o f the three sections in Book Five ends with Hallelujah psalms, namely Pss 111-117,135, and 146-150. These psalms are ones which commence and/or conclude with the added liturgical call “Hallelujah.” The alert reader will note that Ps 114 has no Hallelujah. Why not? The reason lies in a tradition, for which there is abun­ dant textual evidence, that it should be combined with Ps 115. These editorial techniques, used to indicate the extent o f sections within a larger collection, attest the key role o f praise. Praise is the fitting note on which to begin and to end, the A and Z o f good psalmody. 3. Remodeled psalms. Ps 106 illustrates further an edito­ rial emphasis on praise. Despite keenly argued attempts to classify it as a hymn, it is better identified as a communal lament, especially in view o f the petition and vow o f praise in V 47, which mark its climax.9 Hymnic elements there

45

Praise

certainly are in the psalm, but they have been used in the service o f the lament, as often happens. The psalm’s per­ spective has been altered from lament to praise by two factors: the framework o f Hallelujahs, with which the psalm has been supplied in vv 1 and 48, and the added doxology, which the framework interpreted as a hermeneu­ tical key to the psalm. Accordingly, the elements o f praise are highlighted over against those o f prayer. These ele­ ments are certainly worth pushing to the fore; already they have an important function in the basic psalm. There is a double stress on G od’s steadfast love, at beginning and end (vv 1, 7,45), and a triple mention o f his role as savior in vv 4-10,21, and 47. A similar phenomenon has occurred in Ps 115. Again, it is basically a communal lament or more strictly a liturgy o f lament. The Hallelujah postscript and its incorporation into its present grouping o f Hallelujah Psalms indicate a change in the balance o f emphasis toward the existing elements o f praise. The anti-idolatry satire in vv 4-8 is an implicit confes­ sion o f praise to the true God, which serves to amplify the positive praise in v 3. The concluding ascription o f praise in vv 16-18 celebrates his transcendent power as the sole G od who has a unique and exclusive claim to human expressions o f praise: Heaven is Yahweh’s heaven, but the earth he has entrusted to mankind. The dead cannot praise Yah(weh) . . . . But we will bless Yah(weh) from now on and for evermore. The overall effect o f these editorial emphases on praise is that o f a red-letter Bible in which certain material is forced upon the reader’s attention by making it stand out from PSALM S

46

seemingly less important content. The result is a playing down o f the human situation, so crucial at an earlier level o f the Psalter, and a focus upon the person and work o f God. Ps 107 is another instance o f reinterpretation with similar intent, although it is carried out in a different manner.10 A s noted earlier, it was originally sung at the thank offering service. Like Ps 100, which was a “psalm for the thank offer­ ing,” as its heading says, it functioned as a general and com­ munal introduction before individuals took their distinctive part in the service. Ps 107 begins with the thanksgiving formula attested in Jer 33:11: Give Yahweh thanks for his goodness, for the everlastingness o f his loyal love. It continues with a dramatic description o f four kinds o f possible danger that might lie behind the discharge o f vows at the service: losing one’s way in the wilds, imprisonment, dire illness, and shipwreck. So it is tied to personal and specific experiences, to which glad testimony might be made in a public setting. Like the song o f thanksgiving, this related composition is open toward general praise. However, Ps 107 in its present form has been transformed into a hymn proper. Verses 2 ,3 have been inserted: Let Yahweh’s redeemed ones say so, whom he has redeemed from the enemy’s power, gathering them from other countries, from east and west, from north and overseas. This insertion and also the addition o f vv 33-43 turned the psalm into a celebration o f the return from Exile— comparable with the “redemption” o f the Exodus— and o f

47

Praise

the resettlement in the land o f promise. The rather sensa­ tional instances o f escape from danger became four descrip­ tions o f the release from exile, in two cases focusing upon the national sin that underlay the divine punishment o f Exile (vv 11,17). The purpose o f the composition was broad­ ened into communal praise for national salvation and for G od’s providence that gave a new lease on life in the land. These cases o f reinterpretation are a testimony to the vitality o f the Psalms. So treasured were they that they lived on, keeping pace with new situations o f God’s people and expressing the spirituality o f fresh generations o f believers who wanted to praise God. The praise of thanksgiving 1. Introductory hymns. Hymnic praise had a key role in the thank offering service. This may be gauged from the processional hymn o f Ps 100 and from what was evidently a solo hymn belonging to the same setting, Ps 103. Ps 100 widens the perspective o f the service from the individual’s enjoyment o f G od’s goodness and steadfast love to a com­ munal experience, membership in the covenant community. Similarly, although Ps 103 begins with characteristic demon­ strations o f steadfast love that were to be attested in the course o f the service— deliverance from sickness and op­ pression (vv 3-6)— it moves on to the Mosaic revelation o f the nature o f God. Credal terms are used, which echo Exod 34:6: Yahweh is affectionate and dutiful, patient and lavish in loyal love. (v 8) Verses 9-18 are a sermon on this “text.” They teach that the loyal or steadfast love which was celebrated as God’s chief virtue in the individual testimonies o f thanksgiving was PSALM S

48

perennially at work among his people. The rhetorical calls to praise in vv 19-22 imply that only cosmic adoration might do justice to God’s praiseworthiness, but they conclude with the obligation o f each individual to join the universal chorale: Bless Yahweh, you angels o f his. Bless Yahweh, all his creatures, in all places where he rules. Bless Yahweh, I tell myself.

. .

The psalmist’s self-exhortation is an implicit message to ev­ ery worshiper at the thank offering service to lift his or her own heart in earnest praise. Let them progress from observation o f the joy o f others to participation in that contagious joy! 2. Congregational praise. The song o f thanksgiving was itself by no means devoid o f hymnic praise. Just as the term “give thanks” was borrowed by the hymn, so the general term “praise” was employed in the thanksgiving song. This sharing o f terms illustrates the degree o f overlap in the two types. The public appear to have been encouraged to attend the service o f thank offering, just as in many Christian de­ nominations the relatively private sacrament o f baptism is regularly celebrated in the presence o f the community o f faith. The custom served in part to overcome a happy prob­ lem experienced by the one who primarily gave thanks. How could he or she express adequately gratitude to G od for bounty which meant the difference between life and death? The question is actually posed in 116:12: How can I repay Yahweh for all his benefits to me? One solution has been observed in the previous chapter: to praise G od throughout the rest o f one’s life so that life 49

Praise

itself would be turned, as it were, into a perennial thankoffering service. In practice this presumably meant regular attendance during festival time at other people’s services o f thanksgiving and making them one’s own. Another solution was to invite the congregation to boost the volume o f praise by voicing it on one’s own behalf, as in 22:23,24: You who fear the Lord, praise him! . . . For he has not despised and has not detested the affliction o f the afflicted; and he has not hidden his face from him, but when he cried for help, he heard him. Parallel cases appear in 32:11 and 118:2-4. The service in­ volved the congregation not simply as silent and perhaps envious spectators o f another’s good fortune, but as partici­ pants whose own hearts were turned to G od and whose own lips sang his praises in fresh appreciation. 3. Singing theology. This congregational involvement was also served by what is often called the didactic element in the song o f thanksgiving; in the first chapter it was referred to as generalized teaching. Such labels are helpful as long as it is realized that in the Psalter learning has praise as its intended end product as well as an appropriate mindset and lifestyle. Statements o f a propositional type are regularly represented in the song o f thanksgiving. Ps 116 may be used to demon­ strate their role. Verse 5 makes a general statement concern­ ing some o f God’s attributes: Yahweh is dutiful and true, our G od shows affection. In justification o f this sweeping statement the psalmist points in v 6a to an activity characteristic o f God: “Yahweh takes care o f simple folk.” Then in v 6b he exposes PSALM S

50

the personal foundation o f this exercise in religious logic: “When I was down, he saved me.” The passage seems to establish theology from personal experience, reasoning from what G od has just done, to what G od habitually does, to what G od is. A better way o f describing the process would be to say that Israel’s theology has found yet another confir­ mation in a believer’s experience, which provides a testimo­ nial to the character o f God. Personal experience is o f a piece with traditional theology. The credal statement o f v 5, which has its roots in the traditional formulation o f Exod 34:6, was here no “commandment o f men learned by rote,” as Isaiah sadly complained about worship in his day (Isa 29:13 RSV). It had been verified in personal experience. There is a shift from a focus upon that experience to a “pure” theological affirmation. The two are organically linked: thanksgiving is employed as the handmaid o f theology. In another song o f thanksgiving, Ps 30, there is a passage which reads like a hymn: Sing praise to the Lord, O you saints o f his, and praise his holy name. For in his anger is death, but in his favor is life; Weeping may tarry in the evening but joy comes at dawn. (vv 4 ,5 ) The final contrast may evoke a night o f vigil in the sanctuary until a divine oracle is delivered in the morning. O r it may be a poetic metaphor for the darkness o f distress giving way to the glorious light o f deliverance. The preceding contrast pits two o f God’s attributes against each other, anger and favor, in acknowledgment o f his sovereign mystery. How­ ever, it finds his favor to be the predominant factor and so the focus o f communal praise. Ps 18 is a poem in which thanksgiving and praise oscillate.

51

Praise

It moves backwards and forwards between celebrating the particular experience o f salvation and making general statements in praise o f God’s faithfulness, in vv 20-24,28,29 and 32ff on the one hand, and vv 25-27 and 30,31 on the other. The second half o f the psalm begins with a rhetorical ques­ tion o f divine incomparability, which form-critically belongs to the hymn: For who is a god, apart from the Lord? And who is a rock, except our God? (v 31) The first half o f the psalm concludes with an exclamation o f praise in v 30: “G od—his way is perfect!” The structural highlighting o f pure praise is significant The hymnic pas­ sage o f 138:4-6 is worth looking up: it likewise gives a key role to praise, placing it at the heart o f the psalm. P raise in the lam ent 1. Comfort and challenge. Not even laments are devoid of praise. Those whose sufferings are expressed in such psalms experienced mental torment How could they reconcile the G od they had known as a friend with a God who was now distant and seemingly alien? The torment comes to a head in the agonized question, why? This question is characteristic of the lament, notably in 22:1, “why have you forsaken me?” However, their previous experience o f a positive relationship with God brings a measure of comfort It brands their present experience as atypical and so, hopefully, temporary. Normal relations would be resumed, it is hoped, because o f who God is and because o f his ties with the believer as “my God” (22:1). Reminiscence of God’s positive revelation o f himself also functions as a challenge to God. Let him intervene and prove himself real and powerful in the present situation, in a man­ ner consistent with previous experience! Psychologically the PSALM S

52

function o f provocative challenge precedes that o f comfort, as the negative context o f the questions in 77:7-9 suggest: Will the Lord spurn for ever, and never again be favorable? Has his steadfast love for ever ceased? . . . Has G od forgotten to be gracious? (RSV) In this latter case the overall context is significant. The challenge follows an expression o f nostalgia, seemingly for the historical past celebrated in standard hymns when G od revealed him self as savior o f the covenant people. Challenge turns to comfort in the second and positive half o f the psalm. The Exodus period becomes a theological window through which to glimpse the perennial activity and being o f God: What god is great like our God? Thou art the G od who workest wonders. . . . (vv 13,14 RSV) 2. Remembering God’s salvation. A basic element o f the communal lament, occurring early in the composition, is the reference to God’s saving activity in the p ast A n instance is the appeal to G od in 74:2: Remember thy congregation, which thou hast gotten o f old, which thou has redeemed to be the tribe o f thy heritage! (RSV) Ps 44:1-3 is comparable. In the royal lament o f Ps 89 the hymn o f vv 1-18 and the history o f the divine foundation o f the Davidic dynasty narrated in vv 19-37 both have a challenging function. The psalmist sets before G od his own standards and implicitly urges him to live up to them. 53

Praise

3. The affirmation of trust The communal and individual laments possess a standard element o f praise that defines the relationship between G od and the individual or community. In Ps 79 the voicing o f the relationship constitutes a final appeal: Israel is “thy people, the flock o f thy pasture” and so dependent upon their divine patron and shepherd. Praise in the laments is by no means disinterested, nor can it be in its life setting o f desperate crisis. It is a weapon in the psalmist’s armory, but it owes its sharpness to the truth o f G od’s dynamic being and to the sincerity o f the speakers)— it is in no way synonymous with flattery. Just as prayer is nothing apart from the reality o f a powerful G od to pray to, so this form o f praise essentially depends upon the objective and subjective reality o f the ties between G od and believers. In the cry for help which the lament represents, such praise is insisting that G od’s ability to give help is proven from past experience. One o f the individual laments, Ps 86, makes a propositional statement about G od’s benevolent, forgiving nature the basis o f the appeal for deliverance: For thou, O Lord, art good and forgiving, abounding in steadfast love to all who call on thee. (v 5 RSV) Later the psalmist counters the persecution o f his enemies with a fuller form o f the same theological proposition: But thou, O Lord, art a G od merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness. (v 15 RSV) The “but” o f 86:15 is a phenomenon not infrequently found in the individual lament. Claus Westermann has recognized that it introduces a crucial element o f praise in the lam ent.11 PSALM S

54

A n affirmation o f trust is often so prefaced. It finds in G od an ally against misfortune. An example is “But you, O Lord, are a shield around me” (3:3). Craigie well comments: If one gazes too long upon the enemy and his might, the enemy grows in the mind’s eye to gigantic propor­ tions and his citadels reach up to the skies (Deut 1:28). The hypnotic power o f the enemy is broken when one turns one’s gaze toward G od who is able to fight and grant victory (Deut 1:29,30).12 Other instances worth studying in their context are 13:5; 22:3; 59:8, and 102:12-17. Praise and faith join forces in such affirmations o f tru st 4. Highlighting praise. In the case o f the thanksgiving song it was noticed that in two cases a hymnic passage was put at the heart o f the composition (see Pss 18 and 138). The phenomenon is more evident in the lam ent There is a ten­ dency to set a hymnic section at the center o f a lament: O Lord, your lovingkindness is in the heavens, your faithfulness reaches to the clouds. . . . How precious is your lovingkindness, O God, that human beings find refuge in the shadow o f your wings. . . . For with you is the fountain o f life; in your light we shall see light! (36:5-9) Other cases can be seen in 74:12-17; 80:8-11, and 86:8-13. Pyramid-like, prayer rises to a high point o f praise which encapsulates its faith and hope; then it descends, bolstered by the praise. The sequence o f prayers, praises, and prayers in Book Two o f the Psalter (Pss 42-64, 65-68, and 69-71 [72]), to which Wilson has drawn attention, seems to be a large-scale reproduction o f this pattern.13

55

Praise

P raise in the hymn 1. Acrostic theology. The acrostic or alphabetic pattern used in the case o f two hymns, Pss 111 and 145, employs short and relatively independent statements, and so lends itself to theological declarations o f a propositional type. Examples are: H is activity is marked by majesty and splendor, and his loyalty continues for ever. (111:3) Yahweh is good to all, and his compassion covers all his handiwork. (145:9) This element o f praise also occurs in two wisdom psalms which have an acrostic structure, Pss 37 and 112. 2. Amplifying praise. The happy problem observed in the case o f the song o f thanksgiving, the problem o f doing jus­ tice to G od’s praiseworthiness, recurs in the hymn. How can God’s people praise him enough? One attempted solution is to call for music, for instance in 81:2: Raise a song, sound the timbrel, the sweet lyre with the harp. (RSV) Pss 92:3 and 150:3-5 are similar. Another attempt is a rhetorical call to other nations or to the world o f humanity, to participate in praise. An example occurs in Ps 117, which celebrates the intimate relationship between G od and Israel, yet calls upon “all nations,” as if hired choristers, to swell the volume o f the praises o f Israel, which are not loud enough to do justice to their object: Praise Yahweh, all nations . . . , because his loyal love has towered over us. . . .

PSALM S

56

Ps 100 exhibits a similar phenomenon. Yet praise can never be impersonal or on a “rent-a-crowd” basis. In such cases the rhetorical call seems to imply in plain speech a triumphant claim: “If other nations examine our experience, they will be constrained to acknowledge the reality and power o f Yahweh.” This understanding is supported by the parallels to the m otif in reorientation and disorientation contexts: Then it was said among the nations: “Yahweh has done a great work in his dealings with them.” (126:2) Why should the nations say, “Where is their God?” (79:10; 115:2) The call to other peoples can be presented in an explicitly provocative way as a rhetorical challenge: For great is the Lord, and greatly to be praised; he is to be feared above all gods. (96:4 RSV) The claim is made on the basis o f Yahweh’s role as Creator (v 5). Especially impressive is the role o f praise imaginatively assigned to the constituent parts o f the universe, celestial and terrestrial, inanimate and animate, in Ps 148. Yahweh is envisaged as the praiseworthy focus o f all created life and phenomena. All the elements o f nature and society owe to him their characteristic essence and function, and to him is due the glory. "Let the gnat make music with the whirring of his wings,” as F. B. Meyer paraphrased part o f v 10. A t the other end o f the scale are the solo hymns. The self-exhortation to praise “Bless Yahweh, my soul,” found at the beginning and end o f Pss 103 and 104, was meant as a

57

Praise

model and incentive for each worshiper—nobody was to be present in body but absent in spirit! The Psalter is indeed a book o f praises. The concentration upon praise that was a dominant concern o f editorial activity in the Psalms seems to retreat from their humanness and to concentrate on divineness in a theoretical or at least de­ tached fashion. So be it: this is but one approach among many discernible in the Psalter, and Christianity with its traditional stress on systematic theology cannot cavil. A t least, the Psalms are as much concerned with a divine “thou” as with a divine “he.” Its theology very often constitutes an awesome confrontation with G o d The raw materials o f the editorial approach were certainly there to be highlighted W hen S t Paul enjoined the Thessalonian believers to “rejoice always” and to “give thanks in all circumstances” (1 Thess 5:16,18), was he alluding to the habit o f the Psalter to praise in each o f life’s phases? If so, his exhortation is far from the glib “Hallelujah, anyway” policy advocated by tri­ umphalist preachers. Praise is a constituent part o f most o f the different types o f psalm With various functions it be­ longs to all three phases o f life, orientation, disorientation, and reorientation. Tate and Brady caught the spirit o f the Psalter when they taught the church to sing Through all the changing scenes o f life, In trouble and in joy, The praises o f my G od shall still My heart and tongue employ. The Psalms regularly declare that the dead do not praise G o d for instance in 6:5; 30:9, and 115:17. They are affirm­ ing that it is the prime function and duty o f the living to do so. Human life without praise o f G od is inconceivable for the Psalter. Praise is the hallmark o f true humanity and the fulfillment o f human potential. PSALM S

58

4

FAITH

Praise and faith are the head and tail o f the same penny, the outside and inside o f the same p o t. They are closely allied as expressions o f a godward relation, so that Ps 71 glides easily from mention o f “my trust” to that o f “my praise” (vv 5, 6). Faith is so pervasive an element in the Psalms that it is difficult to do justice to i t it is the very air that the Psalter breathes. However, a family o f words re­ volves round faith. This range o f terms is a fruitful basis o f study. Furthermore, the pattern o f phases, orientation, dis­ orientation, and reorientation may serve as an organizational model. “Trust in him at all times” (62:8 RSV) is the overall message o f the Psalter— in whatever phase o f life one hap­ pens to be. Faith in disorientation It is in the laments that faith flowers m ost luxuriantly. Disorientation is a period when negativism governs life, outside and within. Doubt, fear, perplexity, and despair are

59

Faith

negative reactions spawned by the disintegration o f normal life. Ironically faith can feed as well as fight such foes. Why should the believer be beset by crisis? 1. The protest of faith. There is a tone o f protest and even resentment in 43:2,3: For you are the G od o f my stronghold; why have you rejected me? Why must I wander about in darkness . . . ? A similar sense o f perplexity occurs in the communal lament o f P s 44: All this happened to us, but we did not forget you and we did not act deceitfully in covenant with you. O ur heart did not turn back nor did our foot turn aside from your path. (vv 17,18) The passage is provocatively resonant with the language o f faith, a true faith that issued in a corresponding lifestyle o f obedience. Faith is here loyalty, a sense o f commitment to the covenant relationship. Search though they may, the community can see no adequate reason why this crisis should suddenly be sent by G od at this time. A cherished set o f religious expectations has been shattered, they protest Life no longer makes sense. In 22:1 the cry “My God, my God, why have you for­ saken me?” makes the same point on the individual level. It continues in a similar vein. Traditional piety taught that trust was the prelude to certain deliverance, and Israel’s hymns— “the praises o f Israel”— celebrated this truth (vv 3-5), but the psalmist’s experience ran counter to this ex­ pectation. He could look back on a whole lifetime o f com­ mitment to God:

PSALM S

60

I was cast upon you from the womb; from my mother’s belly, you have been my God. (v 10) Yet it had neither shielded him from the onset o f crisis nor brought G od rushing to repel the intruder. N ot deliverance but disappointment was his lot. Faith received an aching wound. The experience is an example o f the chaos that disorientation stirs up in the human heart It is devastating because nothing in life is sacrosanct, nothing is able to escape the onslaught unscathed. Disorientation spells the end o f life as it was habitually known. Even faith cannot immediately bridge the gap. The very existence o f the lament indicates a degree o f faith, but underlying it is the all-too-human cry, “I believe, help my unbelief.” 2. The testimony of faith. Faith is wounded by crisis, but not killed. Yet there is an early stage in disorientation, short or long, when faith in the sense o f finding any religious meaning in life is seemingly dead. There is an indication o f this experience in some communal laments. The psalm leader breaks into a collective prayer with a solo affirmation o f faith in a mighty God. A certain instance is 74:12-17: Yet G od my King is from o f old, working salvation in the midst o f the earth. . . . Thou has fixed all the bounds o f the earth; thou hast made summer and winter. (r sv ) The reader can look up other passages which appear to have this role, 44:6-8 and 94:16-23. Ps 115:9-11, a priestly exhortation in a liturgy o f lament, has a similar function. The impression given is that the leader ventures into paths o f assurance where he knows that the congregation cannot yet follow him in honesty. He speaks on his own account as

61

Faith

a pastoral comforter o f the community, to direct them to a light gleaming in the darkness, which he at least can glimpse. “My G od” (44:4; 94:22) or “my King” (44:4; 74:12) has a positive ring: it is an appeal to a continuing relationship. 3. The appeal of faith. Ps 31:14 uses the same claim to dif­ ferentiate between the dire crisis and a factor that spells hope: But I— I have trusted in you, O Lord, I have said “You are my G od.” The psalmist claims protection as a committed “servant” o f God, and appeals to “lovingkindness” (v 16) or “steadfast love” (r sv ), G od’s attribute o f loyalty to his own. He has believed exclusively in Yahweh and never strayed into pagan religion (v 6). He matches the commitment o f the old days o f orientation with a new and appropriate commitment: “Into your hand I commit my spirit” (v 5). It fits the phase o f disorientation as a desperate turning to G od for help. Ps 86 is worth reading in this connection: the whole o f it is similarly resonant with faith that expresses itself within the sphere o f a divine-human relationship. Ps 119, Torah-wisdom psalm though it is, has no ivory tower for its setting, but a situation o f stress. In it the poet regularly refers to himself as “your servant” and once to Yahweh as “my G od” (v 115). Here typically it is the Torah to which he “cleaves” (v 31) and in which he “trusts” (v 42) and “believes” (v 66). Ps 7:1 combines the relational address “my G od” with a synonym o f trust, “I have sought refuge in you.” This verbal phrase and the cognate noun “(place of) refuge” are standard psalm language for faith in God. Recourse to God’s protec­ tive power is the basis o f the beautiful prayer in 57:1, Be merciful to me . . . , for in thee my soul takes refuge; PSALM S

62

in the shadow o f thy wings I will take refuge, till the storm s o f destruction pass by. (RSV)

The imperative “be merciful” is a relational verb: in Hebrew thinking it has the connotation o f being true to one’s obligations to a dependent: 86:2,3 and 123:2 are worth looking up and comparing.14Ps 59:9,16 looks forward to the time when G od will be celebrated in thanksgiving as a proven “fortress and a refuge in the day of my distress.” Ps 141:8 describes this turning to G od in faith thus: Truly to you, Yahweh, Lord, are my eyes directed. In you I seek refuge: do not expose me to death. In 61:3 an affirmation o f trust describes G od as “my refuge, a strong tower against the enemy” (RSV). Prov 18:10 echoes such a formula o f commitment when it describes the name o f Yahweh as “a strong tower; the righteous man runs into it and is safe.” 4. Faith as the answer to fear. It is this recourse to protec­ tive power that proves to be an antidote to natural fear: The Lord is the refuge o f my life; o f whom shall I be afraid? . . . Even though an army encamps against me, my heart shall not fear. Even though war rises up against me, in spite o f this, I am confident (27:1,3; cf. 3:3,6) Ps 23, an affirmation o f trust expanded into a complete composition, has as its actual or remembered background the phase o f disorientation. It gives a prominent place to the powerful protection afforded by the presence o f God, which keeps fear at bay. Two word pictures divide the psalm into halves, the image o f the shepherd in vv 1-4 and that o f the 63

Faith

hospitable host in vv 5, 6. O n the other hand, two direc­ tional perspectives split the psalm differently, the testimony or meditation o f vv 1-3 with its third-person mention o f Yahweh, and the prayer o f vv 4, 5 which employs more intimate direct address. (The final “Yahweh” in v 6 is a con­ cluding device which returns full circle to its occurrence at the beginning, v 1.) The effect o f the different groupings is to highlight the overlapping v 4, with its conviction o f the fear-quelling pro­ tective presence o f God. The throbbing heart o f the psalm lies at this point: Even though I shall walk through the valley o f the shadow o f death, 1 fear no evil. For thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff— they comfort me. (RSV) 5. Faith as certainty. Trust has a ring o f subjective cer­ tainty when the verb “know” is used to express it “This I know, that G od is for me” is the climactic assertion o f confi­ dence in 56:9 (r sv ). Fear has found natural room in the psalmist’s heart but his turning to G od in trust is able to dislodge i t When I am afraid, I put my trust in thee. . . . in G od I trust without a fear. W hat can flesh do to me? (vv 3 ,4 RSV) To reapply Martin Luther’s imagery, he could not stop this bird landing on his head, but by faith he could prevent it nesting in his hair. In comparison with his powerful God, human oppressors are cut down to size as weak “flesh.” PSALM S

64

There is a looking forward to the announcement o f God’s positive intervention through a prophetic oracle or “word”

(vv 4 ,10). The term “know” is also used as the climax o f a lament in a forward-looking context at 140:13: I know that Yahweh will undertake the cause o f the afflicted, securing justice for the needy. The psalmist is here envisaging his own cause as bound up with God’s typical vindication o f the oppressed. In Israelite theology G od is one who rights wrongs and champions the underdog. Herein lies not only the hope o f other victimized believers, as v 13 also hints, but also his own hope. Similar concluding assurance about the future is ex­ pressed in an impressive “I believe” at 27:13: I believe that I will see the goodness o f the Lord in the land o f the living. The calm conviction o f survival is the corollary o f having turned over to G od the threats to his life, in the passionate petitions o f vv 7-12 which precede. These concluding state­ ments in psalms o f lament correspond to the final stage o f disorientation. This stage is marked by a positive openness to the future, by a sure hope that there is life out there beyond the cataclysm o f crisis. In 13:5,6 such confidence is expressed with the verb “trust”: the psalmist is confident that G od will intervene in loyal help (“steadfast love,” “salvation”) and expects that soon his praying will be changed to praising: But I have trusted in thy steadfast love; my heart shall rejoice in thy salvation. 65

Faith

I will sing to the Lord, because he has dealt bountifully with me. (r sv ) 6. Faith in God’s word. In some laments an extra element is appended, a reaction to receipt o f the desired oracle. It often includes the language o f faith. In 6:8,9 there is no such terminology, but the passage glows with confidence that G od’s promise o f vindication, just given to him, will come true: Depart from me, all workers o f wickedness, for the Lord has heard the sound o f my weeping. The Lord has heard my supplication. In Ps 28 the prophetic oracle seems to be represented in v 5: Because they do not understand the works o f the Lord and what his hands have done, he will tear them down and not rebuild them. Relief at receiving it prompts first an outburst o f praise that the appeal to G od to hear prayer (v 2) has been honored, and then a declaration o f faith: Blessed be the Lord, for he has heard the voice o f my supplications. The Lord is my strength and my shield; my heart has trusted in him. (vv 6,7) Faith receives a fillip from answered prayer. There is a simi­ lar profession at the end o f Ps 55. Verse 22b evidently func­ tions as the mediation o f a divine response, while v 23 expresses a conviction that G od will implement his promise by punishing his guilty enemies:

PSALM S

66

He will never permit the righteous to be m oved But thou, O God, wilt cast th an down into the lowest pit; men o f blood and treachery shall not live out half their days. But I will trust in thee. The psalmist “trusts” G od to vindicate him. The faith expressed in these answered laments might be called second-degree faith. By contrast the first-degree faith o f petitionary lament has been bolstered simply by a prior life o f faith and by attendance at the sanctuary where the faith was expressed. The other type o f faith has an extra basis, the divine response. Yet it is not to be despised as easy or undemanding. There was still a considerable gap between the divine promise and its eventual implementation in fact The situation o f crisis bewailed in the lament had not yet changed. O n returning home the one who had prayed would not find immediate reorientation. By faith, however, he clings to the word given to him, sure that his problems will be resolved. The divine word enables him to return to the old situation with confidence and hope. Faith in orientation Faith, in the Psalms, is by no means a foxhole phenomenon, even though its vocabulary is most evident in the laments. Just as the laments make vigorous mention o f pre-disorientation faith, so the psalms o f orientation speak o f faith as the founda­ tion o f ordinary life. It does not need crisis to create it 1. Faith fosters stability. The motto o f orientation is asso­ ciated with faith more than once. In Ps 21, a royal psalm, faith is the secret, humanly speaking, o f the king’s stability:

67

Faith

The king is trusting in the Lord, and in the lovingkindness o f the M ost High, he will not be shaken. (v 7) This faith is not self-confidence, but a reflection o f divine faithfulness, and therein lies its validity. G od has established the institution o f kingship and is committed to i t There has to be a complementary commitment on the part o f the king. It takes the form o f faith. Ps 16 attests that the ordinary believer “shall not be shaken” inasmuch as his life is marked by “putting the Lord always before” him (v 8; 54:3 and 86:14 are worth comparing). Here might be mentioned 125:1, al­ though the motto occurs in an affirmation o f trust within a communal lament: Those who trust in Yahweh are like Mount Zion, which is immovable, abiding forever. Faith is again the human means o f security. Despite a situa­ tion o f crisis, in this case life evidently still had a modicum o f orientation. T his residue o f stability encourages expecta­ tion o f a fuller enjoyment o f blessing in the future. The affirmation o f 125:1 is applying a m otif drawn from the Songs o f Zion to the theme o f faith. In one o f this partic­ ular group o f hymns G od’s presence in Zion guarantees its stability: G od is in its midst—it will not slip! G od will help it at the break o f dawn. (46:5) The community’s response is one o f faith, in a refrain: The Lord o f hosts is with us; the G od o f Jacob is our stronghold. (vv 7,11, cf. v 1) PSALM S

68

G od’s special localization within the temple implies his pro­ tective presence with the community. Proof o f this is given in a manner typical o f the Songs o f Zion, a harking back to an archetypal victory won in connection with Jerusalem (vv 5b, 8-10; 48:3-7, and 76:3, 5, 6 are comparable). Luther caught the spirit o f the psalm in his hymn “A Mighty Fortress is O ur God.” 2. Faith brings blessing. The informal counterparts o f the Songs o f Zion, Pss 84 and 122, breathe an atmosphere o f faith. Ps 84 culminates in a specific mention o f faith: “O Lord o f hosts, blessed is the man who trusts in thee!” (v 12 RSV). This appreciative sentiment is a response to the bless­ ings already promised in temple worship and yet to be real­ ized after returning home. Faith in the G od o f Zion is the door to receiving blessing. It is clear that Israel’s religious institutions were incarnational stimuli for faith. They repre­ sented G od in forms that eyes could see and ears could hear—and feet could walk among: O ur feet are standing within your gates, Jerusalem (122:2). 3. Faith is commended. If sacred history provides fuel for faith in Ps 46, it teaches lessons for faith in a hymn that celebrates Yahweh as the Lord o f Israel’s history, Ps 78. That psalm uses history to warn against having “no faith in G od” and not “trust[ing] his saving power” (v 22). It urges each new generation o f God’s people to learn from history an attitude o f faith and obedience: so that they should set their hope in God, and not forget the works o f God, but keep his commandments; and that they should not be like their fathers . . . , whose spirit was not faithful to God. (vv 7,8) 69

Faith

Similarly a wisdom poem teaches its hearers to “trust in the Lord and do good” (37:3). 4. Faith, true and false. The orientation psalms spell out the direction o f faith by differentiating it from substitute forms and warning against them as false. True faith is exclu­ sive and forbids any truck with the idolatry o f pagan reli­ gion: They have acquired another (god). I will not pour out their libations o f blood, and I will not take their names upon my lips. (16:4; cf. Job 31:26,27) It was observed earlier that an individual lament pleads that such a faith has been a mark o f pre-disorientation piety: I have hated those who keep vain idols, but I have trusted in the Lord. (31:6) Faith in G od also rules out faith in materialism, whether money (see 49:6; 52:7; compare 62:10 and Job 31:24, 25) or armaments (see 20:7 and 33:16; compare 44:6). It also runs counter to an alternative faith in humanity: D o not trust in rulers, in an earthling who cannot save. H is breath leaves him, he returns to his native earth: on that day his policies have perished. How fortunate is the one whose help is Jacob’s God, whose hope is set on Yahweh as his God. (146:3-5) 5. Faith ensures deliverance. In the lament o f Ps 22 the traditional religious truth that trust led to deliverance was cited with mingled doubt and hope: PSALM S

70

O my God, I cry out by day, but you don’t answer . . . . O ur fathers trusted in you; they trusted and you delivered them. (vv 2,4) This truth may be glimpsed in its habitat o f orientation in the benediction o f Ps 91. The promise is given to the be­ liever that “because he cleaves to me in love, I will deliver him” (v 14 RSV). There is a provident admission that the golden days o f orientation may not last forever. Assurance is given, however, that G od’s protective power would be at work in such a case, as Ps 22 is eventually able to acknowl­ edge. Likewise the promise is made in 112:7, 8 that if bad news comes, the trusting heart will be able to overcome the paralysis o f fear, and if social alienation befalls the believer, his faith will see him through: He is not afraid o f bad news: his mind is firm, trusting in Yahweh, his mind is steady, he will not be afraid as he awaits looking at his foes with gratification. Faith in reorientation A t first sight the psalms o f reorientation add little to the Psalter’s theme o f faith. But life is like being on an escalator moving the wrong way: one has to move forward in order to stay in the same place. So it is a tribute to this particular phase o f life that it promotes a reaffirmation o f truths pro­ fessed in the salad days o f orientation and claimed in the dog days o f disorientation. The language may not differ, but the life o f the believer who uses it has been a pilgrimage from frith to frith. 1. Faith refueled. One lament looks forward to the song o f thanksgiving as a celebration o f Yahweh’s protective power in personal experience: 71

F aith

Thou hast been to me a fortress and a refuge in the day o f my distress, (59:16 RSV) A royal song o f thanksgiving begins exuberantly with a piling up o f statements o f praise which all use the terminology o f faith: The Lord is my cliff and my stronghold and my deliverer, my G od is my rock in whom I seek refuge, my shield and my horn o f salvation, my safe retreat (18:2) Here indeed is faith’s vindication, which in turn reinvigorates faith. 2. Faith commended. Personal experience can have a se­ quel in the commendation o f faith to others, in the teaching style that characterizes the song o f thanksgiving: “Blessed is the man who seeks refuge in him” (34:8) and “Blessed is the man who made the Lord his trust” (40:4). In Ps 116 the psalmist declares how right he was to keep his faith during the period o f disorientation, when people around him proved so untrustworthy: I had faith, even when I declared, “I am suffering acutely.” I said in my alarm, “A ll men are unreliable.” (vv 10,11) In Ps 118 a grateful king teaches a similar lesson, which experience has just taught him, that recourse to human allies and counselors comes a poor second to trust in Yahweh: It is better to take refuge in Yahweh than to trust in men. It is better to trust in Yahweh than to trust in rulers. (vv 8,9) PSALM S

72

3. Faith lost and won. Ps 73 is a unique song o f thanksgiv­ ing in that it celebrates deliverance not from a physical crisis, although that had been no stranger (see v 14), but from spiritual and intellectual doubt This is what the stumbling o f feet means here in v 2, as v 3 explains: A s for me, my feet had almost stumbled, my steps had well nigh slipped. For I was envious o f the arrogant, when I saw the prosperity o f the wicked. (RSV) The song, written from a wisdom perspective, discusses the problem o f an unjust providence. The psalmist had discov­ ered the truth shrewdly expressed by John Dryden, that “virtue in distress and vice in triumph make atheists of mankind.” In this situation faith and experience were sign­ posts pointing opposite ways. The one thing that stopped him from following the latter road away from God was a sense of commitment not to God himself but to fellow believers: If I had said, “I will speak thus,” I w ould have been untrue to the generation o f thy children. (v 15 RSV) Eventually his faith is rekindled, in a visit to the temple, seemingly at festival time when traditional hymns celebrat­ ing G od’s providential judgment were sung. H is cold heart is warmed; he is able to apply the hymnic language to the prosperous renegades whom he had envied. He goes on to confess that the materialistic attitude which had had a corro­ sive effect upon his faith was animal-like, and to exult in a new sense o f the reality o f God: When my soul was embittered, . . . I was like a beast toward thee. 73

Faith

Nevertheless I am continually with thee; thou dost hold my right hand. . . . but G od is the strength o f my heart and my portion for ever. (vv 21-23,26 RSV) The logical conclusion o f the psalm, expressed in v 1, is: “Truly G od is good to [Israel].” A t first hearing it. sounds trite, but the same language can express a low or high level of faith. Here the spiritual stance is that o f Dostoevsky’s Chris­ tian testimony: “It is not as a child that I believe and confess C h rist My ‘hosanna’ is born o f a furnace o f doubt”

PSALM S

74

5

BLESSING

The motto o f thè phase o f orientation in human life, “we shall not be moved,” is a neutrally descriptive statement. In the usage o f the Psalter, however, it has a firm theological basis. N ot only is faith in G od hailed as the secret o f a steady life, but the divine origin o f such stability is emphasized by grounding it in blessing. The theology o f orientation relates to a G od who blesses. B lessin g in creation The reader o f the O ld Testament is well prepared for the Psalms’ association o f the theme o f blessing with G od’s role as Creator. H e or she has encountered the association at the opening o f Genesis, where the narrative o f creation makes much o f G od’s pronouncement o f blessing, upon animals, humanity, and even the Sabbath day (Gen 1:22,28; 2:3). A regular theme o f the hymns o f praise in the Psalter is G od’s work in creation. Here too it is related to blessing.

75

Blessing

Two hymns, Pss 8 and 104, make use o f the same traditions as G en 1 and develop them in tones o f praise. 1. God’s viceroys. Ps 8 celebrates human power over the world, especially over the rest o f animate creation. It envis­ ages the pioneer who tames the wilds and brings them under control so that they function as his own environment Verse 5 affirms: Thou hast made him little less than God, and dost crown him with glory and honor. (RSV) Crowning is a general metaphor o f blessing in 65:11 and 103:4; in this case the crowning “with glory and honor” paints a more precise picture o f king-making. It sets human power in a corrective context o f accountability, just as the vassal king crowned by his overlord was not only a sovereign but also a subject Judah’s political history in the late preexilic period included two bitter experiences o f the loss o f royal independence. Pharaoh enthroned Eliakim, giving him the trappings o f nationalistic royalty in the form o f a new Yahwistic name, Jehoiakim, and Nebuchadnezzar enthroned Mattaniah as Zedekiah, probably with the same underlying intent (2 Kgs 23:34; 24:17). In Ps 8 an admission that Yahweh is the power behind the human throne is communicated by its frame o f praising declarations o f G od’s majesty as king o f the world in vv 1 and 9: O Lord, our governor, how majestic is your name in all the earth. A s in G en 1:27, 28, it is G od who empowers humanity to function as his regent and thus as agent o f his will. 2. God’s extended family. Ps 104 widens the perspective o f blessing so that it encompasses not only humanity but the whole o f the animate world, just as Gen 1:22, 28 present parallel mandates o f blessing to both the animal and human PSALM S

76

sectors o f creation. The psalm betrays its setting in the sphere o f orientation by the version o f its motto in v 5: it is because G od has founded the earth so firmly that “it cannot move for ever and ever.” The world in which humanity finds itself is a safe place to live in, affirms the hymn, because it has a God-given security. By this blessing humanity is set free from a basic anxiety, and in positive terms is free to get on with the work o f maintaining and promoting life. It is the human worker who is the concern o f the central stanza, vv 14-23. The opening theme o f the stanza is human labor in the fields, tending the cattle and producing food and even wine “to gladden the heart.” Its closing note is the long day devoted to human labor, from m om to evening. Yet the boon from this toil depends upon initial divine giving: the vegetation for animal and human consumption grows by G od’s design and at his behest. In this rural presentation o f human life the environment is essentially shared with animals. There is the conception o f a divine economy that governs even birds and wild beasts. Mountain terrain beyond humanity’s utilitarian concern is prized not for its idyllic beauty but as the habitat o f wild goats and conies. Nonproductive trees are regarded as being there for birds to nest in. The division o f time into night and day is evidence o f God’s programmed cycle o f activity for animals and humans. Everywhere the psalmist looks he sees signs o f an ordered structure which is the gift o f a G od who blesses. In this representation o f the world animals, birds, and humans live together in mutual respect, coexisting and in part cooperating. The next stanza o f the psalm, vv 24-30, celebrates G od as maker o f all creatures great and small, and as constant sup­ plier o f their vital needs. They are portrayed as his family, ever dependent on the benevolent hand o f their divine par­ ent for the sustenance o f life. He it is who ensures the continuity o f life from generation to generation. A s one 77

generation dies, he “creates” another with his life-giving en­ ergy. There is a dynamic relationship between G od and the creatures he has made: apart from his continuous interven­ tion in blessing all life disintegrates and disappears. 3. God's universal love. Two other hymns praise G od as the regular supplier o f food to the world. Language similar to that o f Ps 104 is used in 145:15,16: The eyes o f all look to you and you give them their food in due time. You open your hand

In Ps 136:25 the role o f G od as one “who gives food to all living creatures” backtracks to an earlier theme o f the psalm, that o f creation, broached in vv 4-9. G od’s initial work o f creation was not a static activity that, once done, left the world to its own devices. It had as its corollary a continuous providence whereby food is given “to all flesh.” The refrain o f praise that punctuates each declaration made in Ps 136, “for his loyal love is everlasting,” has a remarkable use in this contest o f creation. Normally “loyal love” relates to aspects o f G od’s faithfulness in the covenant relationship with Is­ rael. Here, however, it is widened to his care for all his creatures. The same usage occurs just as strikingly in 145:8, 9, where the formula o f Exod 34:6 is extended from a cov­ enant setting to one o f universal providence: Yahweh is dutiful and compassionate, patient and greatly loyal. Yahweh is good to all, and his compassion covers all his handiwork. Similarly 33:5 and 119:64 attest that “the earth is full o f the Lord’s lovingkindness.” A covenant attribute has been PSALM S

78

expanded to cover the faithful relationship that binds the Creator to his creatures in a world that has no independent existence. This reinterpretation in universal terms has a relevance beyond the Psalter: it recurs as the theological fulcrum o f the book o f Jonah (Jon 4:2). From a long-term perspective it brings the reader o f the Bible a good step closer to the universal love o f G od celebrated in the New Testament, which integrates the covenantal and universal meanings o f “steadfast love” found in the Old. Yet it serves to warn the Christian against a form o f otherworldliness that despises the natural world o f space and the senses. In these psalms C od’s steadfast love has become part o f the vocabulary o f material blessing, for which Israel gives thanks not as the chosen people but as part o f the human race. 4. God’s enabling. Another hymn, Ps 29, makes C od’s control over the forces o f nature the basis for more particu­ lar assurances: The Lord will give protection to his people; the Lord will bless his people with peace. (v 11) Because o f his lordship over nature he is able to care effectively for his own. There is a hymnic formula describing Yahweh as “maker o f heaven and earth” which in the Psalms links blessing for Israel or for its individual members with his work in creation. Seemingly it had deep roots in ancient worship at Jerusalem, for it is used in the benediction spo­ ken to Abraham by the Jebusite priest-king Melcbizedek (Gen 14:19). Ps 115:15 is part o f a priestly benediction issued to the congregation in the temple courts: “May you be blessed by Yahweh, maker o f heaven and earth.” By right o f creation Israel’s G od controls the world, and by this power he is able to do more than his people can ever ask. This is the power that is reassuringly invoked as the generous mea79

Blessing

sure o f his blessing. In 121:2 it is characterized as “help” that undergirds the daily life o f the believer: The source o f my help is Yahweh, maker of heaven and earth. B lessing in worship A blessing similar to that in Ps 115, given in the name o f the “maker o f heaven and earth,” is uttered in 134:3 as a blessing “from Zion.” Similar, but without the creation for­ mula, is the benediction o f 128:5, “May Yahweh bless you from Zion.” These references indicate how closely blessing is linked with the temple. Indeed, 133:3 makes the categorical statement that Zion “is where Yahweh has ordered the bless­ ing to be.” Lev 9:22, 23 and 2 Chr 30:27 suggest that in Israelite tradition an act o f sacrificial worship concluded with a priestly benediction. Luke 1:21, 22 alludes to this tradition as part o f the priestly duties o f Zechariah, the fa­ ther o f John the Baptist. O n certain occasions the king exer­ cised this priestly role, according to 2 Sam 6:18. Ps 24 appears to refer to divine blessing as the sequel to worship in the sanctuary (vv 3,5): W ho shall ascend into the mountain o f the Lord and who shall stand up in his holy place? . . . He will receive blessing from the Lord. . . . It is presumably not coincidental that the last o f the Songs of Ascents concludes with a benediction (134:3). 1. The mutuality of blessing. One can speak o f a cycle o f blessing, for the term “bless” is also used o f the praise that Israel offers in worship. There is an interchange o f the two kinds o f blessing in Ps 134. There is first a call, evidently to the congregation standing in the temple courts, to “bless” or PSALM S

80

praise Yahweh, raising their hands toward the temple as a gesture o f worship. Then another cry rings out, invoking divine blessing upon those who bless him. The cycle o f blessing to and from G od reminds the Christian o f Eph 1:3, “Blessed be the G od and Father o f our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing. . . .” (RSV). In Ps 134 the order is based on religious practice whereby worship was concluded with a benedic­ tion. God’s blessing is the gracious byproduct o f worship. 2. The theology of benediction. In Num 6:24-26 there is a prescribed form o f words which has been carried over into Christian worship: “The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face to shine upon you . . . and give you peace.” The interpretive comment on the benediction in V 27 is significant: “So shall they put my name upon the peo­ ple of Israel, and I will bless them.” It suggests that the priestly benediction, uttered in the form o f petitionary wishes, would be followed by Yahweh’s implementation o f the benediction. Divine blessing was not simultaneously mediated through the human words. Rather, Yahweh heard and honored the formal wishes of his ministers by bestowing blessing upon the subse­ quent lives o f his worshipers. Both divine sovereignty and the implicit power of the benediction find expression here. Evi­ dently the priestly benediction, although generally expressed in the form o f wishes, by grace has the virtual force o f a promise, like a check which is subsequently honored. This procedure sheds light on 115:12-15, where the multiple assur­ ance that Yahweh will bless is followed— strangely at first sight—by a benediction in wish form: May you be blessed by Yahweh, maker o f heaven and earth. (v 15) The passage makes good sense, for the benediction carries with it a divine undertaking that G od would honor it 81

Blessing

3. A promise kept. Ps 67:1, “May G od be gracious to us and bless us and make his fece to shine upon us” (RSV) echoes part o f the benediction formula o f Num 6:24-26. Seemingly G od’s dutiful compliance with the covenant rela­ tionship and his smile o f favor are here invoked in a prayer for blessing rather than in a benediction. If so, the relation o f the prayer to the rest o f the psalm is by no means clear. It may be the case, as some scholars consider, that the Hebrew verbs are intended as imperfect and refer to G od's habitual attitude: “G od is customarily gracious to us and makes his face. . . .” The psalm then expresses gratitude for blessing received, specifically in the harvest (v 6), and gives praise that G od is one who honors the benediction uttered in his name. The imperfect form o f the Hebrew verbs in the repeated clause o f vv 6, 7, with the apparent sense “G od blesses us” lends some support to this interpretation. 4. Pledges to pilgrims. Another echo o f the Aaronic bene­ diction occurs in Ps 121, with its sixfold use o f the verb “keep.” The setting is best explained as the imparting o f a priestly blessing to a pilgrim before he leaves the holy city at the end o f a festival. H is own conviction o f faith, taught to him by his period o f worship, is clinched by a priestly or prophetic voice in vv 3-8, speaking in tones o f solemn promise. The promise begins with the motto o f orientation expressed in a form which places the onus for its implemen­ tation upon God: “He will not let your foot stumble; . . .” Ps 91 may have originated in a similar setting. The “shelter of the M ost High” and “shadow o f the Almighty” (v 1) then refer to recourse to the temple in demonstration o f the pilgrim’s faith. The kernel o f the official promise is vv 9,10: Because you have made the Lord your refuge, the M ost High your habitation, no evil shall befall you, no scourge come near your tent. PSALM S

82

Worship at the temple is crowned with a promise that in consequence orientation will be the pilgrim’s lot, and disori­ entation will be kept at bay. B lessing in everyday life The benediction builds a bridge between worship and returning to pick up the threads o f everyday life. The pil­ grim set out on his return journey with rich assurances o f blessing ringing in his ears. It is easy to see from the phe­ nomenon o f the benediction how essential the institution o f the temple was for the life o f the Israelite. He met with G od in t emple worship; this G od goes back with him into the secular world, preserving, protecting, and prospering: Yahweh is your guardian, Yahweh is your protection at your right hand. (121:5; cf. 16:8; 91:15) 1. Life sustained and fulfilled. Blessing essentially spells life and the perpetuation o f life; it is defined in 133:3 as “life for evermore.” Human existence was much less cushioned than in modem Western society. Harm loomed time and again, and threat o f harm even more. “Guard me” or more basically “keep me,” is the petition in 16:1, in a psalm which most probably has a setting o f orientation. The earnest request takes up a term belonging to the priestly benediction. It re­ minds God to act in compliance with his promise and trust­ fully expects that he would do so. To stay alive and fit to work would be bounty indeed. Not to be given up to Sheol in death (v 10) was a prospect worthy of praise. To be directed by God, so as to enjoy life and its pleasures, was veritable blessing: You make me to know the path o f life, the full rejoicing o f your presence, 83

Blessing

the perpetual pleasantness by your right hand. (v 11; see Eccl 3:12,13; 9:9) Another term belonging to the vocabulary o f blessing is usually rendered “peace,” but is perhaps more accurately defined as fulfillment. This term occurs at the end o f the benediction in Numbers 6:24-26. It appears in blessing contexts in the Psalter, such as at 29:11, “The Lord will bless his people with peace” (cf. 128:6; 147:14). There is a useful definition of the range o f blessing in Ps 144. In vv 12-14 the people offer prayerful wishes for what the R SV loosely paraphrases in v 15 as “blessings.” They comprise sturdy sons and daughters, good crops, flocks that lamb well, and healthy, well-fed cattle. These were the natural concerns o f the post-exilic community as it endeavored to build up a stable and strong society in the face o f great odds. There was a prayerful expectation that G od would meet them at the very point o f these needs. In contexts o f blessing, the concern for children, as befits a seriously underpopulated society, appears often, for instance in 107:38; 115:14; 147:13, while the expression o f depen­ dence on G od for crops is reflected in 67:6; 132:15 and 147:14. In the difficult economic conditions o f the post-exilic period especially Judah needed all the help and morale build­ ing it could get The help that Yahweh could give was taken seriously. 2. Dependence on God. This factor o f support from Yah­ weh is well expressed in a description o f Yahweh that applies to all o f life’s phases, whether orientation (16:5), disorienta­ tion (119:57; 142:5; cf. Lam 3:24) or reorientation (73:26). He is “my portion,” attests the believer concerning the G od who blesses. The origin o f the phrase is generally seen in the phenomenon that the tribe o f Levi had no portion of land allotted to them but instead depended for their suste­ nance on gifts and offerings made to Yahweh. In the Psalter PSALM S

84

the term has been spiritualized, but not so as to exclude the material sphere. It is Yahweh who is the believer’s suste­ nance, his ultimate life-support system and the source o f all that fulfills his potential Ps 1:3 insists that steady growth in life depends intrinsically upon God, encountered through the Torah: So shall he be like a tree, . . . which shall yield its fruit in its season, and its foliage shall not wither. So, in all that he shall do, he shall prosper. A religion which has such concepts o f blessing cannot be accused o f being preoccupied with the soul. In this religion G od has a key role in all the enterprises o f human life, in its goings out and comings in (see 16:7, 8 and 121:8; see also Deut 28:6,8). Individuals, by themselves and in society, are creatures o f flesh and blood, engaged in work as well as in worship. The G od o f the Psalter is concerned with the whole person and with the total society. Christians need to ask themselves how they may integrate this healthy sound­ ing message with the dominant otherworldliness o f the New Testament and traditional Christianity, and with the urban cocoon that shields them from the world o f nature. Acts 14:17 and 1 Tim 6:17 are worth looking up in this connec­ tion. They are indications that the message o f the Psalter is not to be forgotten.

85

Blessing

6

SALVATION

If the theology o f the orientation psalms is a theology o f blessing, the theology o f the psalms o f disorientation and reorientation has in view a G od who saves. A negative role o f blessing is to keep misfortune at bay. When misfortune does strike, the divine activity to which appeal is made is that o f salvation. Interest in the steady maintenance o f life is replaced by a new concern, for sheer survival. There is an obvious tension here, which prompts the question why blessing is unable to do a perfect work, why it lets the serene “forever” o f orientation be replaced by the poignant “how long?” o f disorientation. To pose the question is to recall that “why?” is the question which in the lament preoccupies an anguished victim and ties him to his past in unhelpful regret The fact that it does not find a regular answer sounds a warning: to ask our texts this question from an intellectual perspective is fu­ tile. It is enough to know that there were beneficent re­ sources in the religion o f the temple and in the Psalter, ready to be set in motion when crisis invaded life. The theology o f the Psalms is pastoral rather than theoretical. 87

Salvation

Salvation a s existential reality “Save me!” is the tegular cry o f the sufferer to God, for example in 3:7; 6:4, and 69:1. Similarly, in the communal lament o f Ps 80 a plea for his intervention, “that we may be saved!” is the recurring refrain (vv 3 ,7 ,1 9 r sv ). It is a child’s instinctive clutching in time o f sudden danger at the sleeve o f a trusted adult It acknowledges that the crisis is beyond one’s ow n . capabilities, God-given though they are. A graphic illustration o f this truth appears in the rescue o f the shipwrecked mariners in Ps 107: “A ll their expertise [is] wrecked” (v 27). It is this element that characterizes disorien­ tation and triggers off the mechanism o f prayer. 1. A biblical truth. The Christian may be so influenced by systematic and evangelical theology and indeed by New Tes­ tament texts concerning salvation that he or she is embar­ rassed by the existential nature o f the concept so prevalent in the laments. Is not religious salvation humanity’s true need? Such embarrassment may reflect a stoical unwilling­ ness to relate personal faith to the stark realities o f human life— and so to the divine resources for meeting them. It is good to recall a factor that is generally overlooked, that the New Testament remained true to this dimension o f salva­ tion, at times freely applying its vocabulary to personal crisis. In line with Ps 107, Acts 27:31 speaks o f being “saved” from shipwreck; v 24 indicates that a theological perspective is not absent. In 2 C or 1:10 S t Paul discusses in a blatantly theological way his being “delivered” from some unspecified crisis, perhaps sickness or physical assault. James 5:15 (RSV) declares that intercessory prayer “will save the sick man.” These texts show an alertness to human crisis and a turning to G od in the tradition o f the Psalter. 2 Tim 4:17 (RSV) describes the outcome o f the preliminary hearing o f Paul’s trial as being “rescued from the lion’s mouth,” in apparent reference to the petition o f Ps 22:21. Presumably he had PSALM S

88

utilized the lament section o f Ps 22 in prayer before and during the hearing. After the favorable outcome o f the hear­ ing he transformed the petition into an element o f thanks­ giving, namely the report o f God’s intervention. 2. Images of crisis. The lament tends to describe the crisis not in terms o f particular and variable personal experiences but with standard images that highlight its destructive power and the emotional wounds it has inflicted. Even the general term distress or trouble is a conscious metaphor in those places where it is contrasted with the “wideness” o f reorien­ tation. “You knew about the distress o f my soul. . . . you set my feet in a broad place” exclaims the psalmist in an affirmation o f trust (31:7, 8). Other cases may be found in 4.T; 18:6, 19; 25:17, and 118:5. “Distress” literally means “narrowness” and reflects a situation o f being cramped or pushed into a tight com er so that one is unable to realize life’s potential. It is no accident that the English expressions stress, distress, anguish, and straits have also developed from the same basic meaning. They all reflect the human experi­ ence o f unnatural confinement. A similar metaphor, very widespread in the Psalter, is that o f the trap, net, or pit which robs the victim o f the human right o f freedom. It may be found, for instance in 25:15; 31:4, and 116:3. Other metaphors abound, expressing disori­ entation in terms o f negative sensations: • it is darkness (18:28; 143:3). • it is drowning in deep water (18:16; 69:1,2,15; 124:4,5). • it is a living death, depriving human existence o f any intrinsic quality. This image pervades Ps 88 and expresses so well its depth o f anguish. A metaphor that may reflect the over-reacting characteristic o f deep depression is the nightmarish por­ trayal o f enemies as wild animals in Ps 22 (cf. 57:4). In the description o f crisis at vv 12,13,16 the psalmist feels himself surrounded by bulls, lions, and dogs. The same obsessive 89

Salvation

images reappear in reverse order in the main passage o f petition: “dog,” “lion,” and “wild oxen” (vv 20,21). 3. God’s transforming power. These multiple images o f chaos serve to express the intolerable and excruciating na­ ture o f disorientation. In retrospect they also have the func­ tion o f enhancing by contrast the subsequent reorientation. A s already noted, the confinement o f distress gives way to being at large and having room to move: to experience G od’s deliverance is to be “led . . . out to the broad place” (18:19). Likewise, G od dispels the darkness by “lighting] my lamp” (18:28). The factor that brings about reorientation is so essentially divine that “the Lord is my light” (27:1). He it is who breaks the snare and lets the bird flutter to free­ dom (124:6, 7). He is the rescuer who saves from drowning (18:16). He gives a new lease on life, terminating a living death and bringing up its victim from a veritable Sheol (30:3). Each negative image gives way to a positive coun­ terpart, not by a natural swing o f fortune but by a divine intervention that is a response to human prayer. This is the dynamic faith o f the psalmists. They dared to believe that human distress was God’s concern and that he was ready to stoop into disoriented lives and “[raise] the needy high above affliction” (107:41). Salvation an d covenant While the phase o f orientation is interpreted in the Psalter as under the control o f the universal God o f creation, the phase o f reorientation is not viewed as a divine response to humanity as such. Deliverance is the privilege o f the people of God. It operates within the circle o f the covenant “I am in­ deed your servant” and that is why “you have loosed my fet­ ters,” affirms the psalmist in thanksgiving (116:16). Because he was a true member o f the community o f faith, the faithful Lord o f the covenant intervened on his behalf. The prayers o f PSALM S

90

disorientation also find it necessary to refer to this factor as a condition o f salvation, which they claim to m eet 1. Two types of psalm. This covenant perspective helps explain the double attitude to human sinning encountered in the laments, which Christians have found disconcerting. Sometimes sinning is acknowledged as the cause o f crisis— but at other times this is firmly denied. Christian tradition has selected seven psalms as the “Penitential Psalms”: Pss 6, 32,38,51,102,130, and 143. M ost o f them explicitly include confession o f sins or allusions to sinning. Consequently it is often regarded as less significant that a number o f other psalms appeal to integrity o f life. Far from groveling before G od, their demeanor is o f one who approaches him “like a prince,” to use Job’s words in Job 31:37. If these psalms are taken seriously, it is not difficult to relate them to a Christian framework o f theology by dismiss­ ing them as sub Christian, and to discard them as “Jewish” attempts to be justified by works. Such treatment is reminis­ cent o f the reaction o f certain Christians who would jettison the Sermon on the M ount as legalistic. The seizing upon certain psalms as normative for Christian usage and the vir­ tual decanonizing o f the contrary group betray an unwilling­ ness to enter the theological world o f the Psalter and to recognize that both types o f psalm stem from a common covenant perspective. 2. The randomness of crisis. A factor that helps explain the double reaction to crisis in the laments, and which may be discussed first, is the existential nature o f the distress which occasioned them. There is a randomness about human mis­ fortune which makes it seem so unfair and prompts the perplexed question why? Why is my loved one struck down with cancer, while my neighbor’s spouse stays in the pink o f health? Why has my marriage broken down, while my neighbors continue to enjoy married bliss? Why did I lose my job, while my neighbor still draws a good salary? Why 91

Salvation

has my boy landed in prison, while my neighbor's is a model citizen? Why have I suffered a nervous breakdown, while my neighbor handles stress with ease? Such a litany o f modem woes corresponds to the situation o f distress underlying the laments o f the Psalter. There is no standard answer to these questions, as the re­ sponse o f Jesus to the disciples’ question—“who sinned, this man or his parents . . . ?” (John 9:2)— serves to acknowl­ edge. Obviously many factors, knowable and unknowable, have contributed to such situations, and personal responsibil­ ity is a relevant factor to varying degrees or not at all. It would be foolish to conclude automatically, “It is because I’m a sin­ ner that this misfortune has befallen me.” Yet an objective analysis o f the situation leading up to a particular crisis might prove incriminating for its victim and disclose that serious wrong on his or her part was responsible to a large degree. On the other hand, it might reveal that no particular blame could be laid at the victim’s door. The variability o f these responses applies to the laments and songs o f thanksgiving. It is significant that in Ps 107 two o f the four cases o f averted crisis are explicitly grounded in human reprehensibility (vv 11,17), while the other two are eloquently silent on this point. The lament speakers search their consciences and are sometimes able to discern why they, rather than their neighbors, are suffering. Others can think o f no such wrongs—unless, as Job grumbled, one rakes up some forgotten misdemeanors from the remote past (Job 13:26). 3. God’s part in human crisis. In the case o f Job and the psalmists it is necessary to observe that a strong factor o f divine providence was understood to be present in the hu­ man situation. There was an act o f God, in a theological sense. Thus an experience o f social harassment was not ade­ quately explained by human causation: “You deposited me in death’s dust,” it could be said o f G od (Ps 22:15). PSALM S

92

Christians praying in time o f crisis find themselves talking in these same terms. I can well remember as an eleven-yearold boy, minutes after being told o f my mother’s death, pounding the pillow with my fist and demanding, “Why did you have to let her die?” The psalmist too believed that G od’s providential activity lay at the root o f human crisis. This factor at times increased the victim’s perplexity, but his divine involvement was not doubted. Disorientation meant to experience the wrath o f God. It is important to grasp that this divine attribute or activity does not necessarily have a retributive role. If the victim is conscience-stricken in the sense described above, then it clearly does. But o f itself it characterizes G od in an alien role and constitutes an amoral, violent force beyond human control. It is so used in 6:1: O Lord, do not rebuke me in your anger and do not chastise me in your wrath. Craigie rightly commented that “there is no confession o f sin and there is no explicit statement o f penitence.”16 Psalm 102 is another lament that mentions God’s wrath in amoral terms: Ashes I eat for my food, with my drink I mingle tears because o f your anger and wrath. . . . (vv 10,11) The inclusion o f both laments in the Penitential Psalms is a result o f jumping to conclusions about divine wrath. In Ps 88 the question why Yahweh has cast o ff the victim and hidden his face from him (v 14) is not answered by the reference to his destructive wrath in v 16, which serves rather to illustrate the severity o f G od’s rejection. Similarly, the question in 74:1, “Why does thy anger smoke against 93

Salvation

the sheep o f thy pasture?” is not intended as self-evident, but presents an attitude o f utter perplexity. Yet in a psalm which features confession o f sin, wrath clearly has a retributive role. One example is 38:1-5: O Lord, do not rebuke me in your wrath. . . . My flesh has no soundness because o f your indignation and my bones have no health because o f my sin. Ps 85:2, 3 is worth looking up and comparing. G od is the referee who imposes penalties for infringement o f the rules. The game o f life has to be played according to the rules, which for Israel were laid down in its covenant traditions. In a situa­ tion o f crisis the plea that comes readily to the psalmists’ lips flows from a relationship with God by virtue o f the covenant. However, when sin is admitted, the relationship becomes complex. God’s self-imposed tasks in the covenant, like those o f a parent in relation to his family, are twofold, to look after individual members o f the covenant family and to maintain harmony by discipline. What unifies the two tasks is the pro­ motion o f the ultimate interests o f family members. Even if a son or daughter has committed an offense against the ethos o f the family, he or she is still a member o f the family. A s the disrupter, he or she is expected to apologize and seek to re­ store the harmony befitting the relationship. This kind o f family relationship pervades those laments that include confession o f sin, such as Pss 25,32 ,3 8 ,3 9 , and 79. Ps 32 is a song o f thanksgiving that looks back to a crisis that represented fair punishment It draws from the experi­ ence the general lesson that every “godly” person should pray at such a time and would find forgiveness and help from God. The Hebrew word for “godly,” hasid, refers to one who is on the receiving end o f G od’s hesed, steadfast love or covenant loyalty, as a member o f the covenant circle. Ps 25 likewise pleads G od’s steadfast love (v 6). Forgiveness is PSALM S

94

sought “for your name’s sake” (v 11), that is, so that G od may thus be true to his self-revelation as the covenant G od who desires harmony. Ps 79, a communal lament, pleads at the outset that, sinners though they are, they are also within the circle o f the covenant: they are “thy saints”— the same H e­ brew term as is used for “godly” in 32:6—and “thy servants” (79:2). 4. Human and divine “righteousness.” In the chapter on faith it was observed that the vocative phrase “my G od” dominates the psalms o f lament. This is another version o f the claim to a joint relationship. Yet another is the appeal to G od’s “righteousness.” In 5:7, 8 mention o f his righteous­ ness and his “lovingkindness” (“steadfast love,” RSV) occur almost in the same breath and are obviously poetic variants. Righteousness basically means conformity to a norm. In this case the norm is the covenant Righteousness is not here a moral attribute, but connotes acting in a manner consistent with covenant commitment and doing the right thing in the light o f i t The reader can look up other cases o f this special­ ized sense o f the term in 35:24 and 71:2. In 143:1 it is paral­ leled with G od’s faithfulness. Yahweh is “righteous” (RSV), celebrates 129:4 in tones o f thanksgiving: he is loyal to the obligations he has voluntarily undertaken in the covenant Appeal to covenant membership is understandably present in laments which can find no retributive force in their particular experience o f crisis. A s observed above, crisis is no respecter o f persons, and does not match moral culpa­ bility. It is hardly surprising that a number o f psalms make this poin t Pss 7 ,1 1 ,1 7 ,1 8 , and 139. A s for Ps 139, its treatment o f the omniscience and om­ nipresence o f G od in terms o f praise is no theological idyll. Its final verses reveal that it is grounded in the hurly-burly o f the game o f life. It appeals to the divine referee to take the psalmist’s side against accusations o f foul play. “Examine me, O God, and know my mind” (v 23) is an invitation based 95

Salvation

upon a belief in personal innocence. With the same mingled tones o f praise and protest the apostle Paul affirmed in 2 Cor 11:31 (r sv ): “The G od and Father o f the Lord Jesus, he who is blessed for ever, knows that I do not lie.” Pss 7 and 17 move in a similar orbit o f false accusation. Ps 18, a royal thanksgiving for military victory, dwells at length on personal “righteousness,” that is, a general consis­ tency with the obligations o f the covenant (vv 20-24). It goes on to draw out the truth that, when crisis comes, G od hon­ ors such consistency with deliverance: With the faithful, you show yourself faithful; with the blameless, you show yourself blameless. With the pure, you show yourself pure, and with the twisted, you deal tortuously. . . . He is a shield for all who seek refuge in him. (vv 25-30) There is here no theological statement o f moral perfection, but the emphatic expression o f a lesser claim o f not being a backslider, to use a Christian term. N or is there considered to be any manifestation o f pride; humility, rather than selfrighteous pride, is professed: For thou dost deliver a humble people; but the haughty eyes thou dost bring down. (v 27, RSV) The point is that the attack from the king’s national ene­ mies had not simultaneously functioned as a divine judg­ ment for apostasy. It was not unreasonable, therefore, that Yahweh should have come powerfully to the aid o f his covenant partner, with no reservations. Yet this aid is not taken for granted, but, once given, becomes the object o f enthusiastic, grateful praise, in vv 1-3 and 31-50. Ps 11, a lament-related composition, makes the same point from a stage further back. It honestly claims that its crisis is o f PSALM S

96

the nonpunitive type. So there is no ambivalence in the divine-human relationship, and an appeal for God to protect his own is an uncomplicated matter. Here again there is no manifestation o f pride. Rather, the psalmist throws himself upon G od as the object o f his trust: “In the Lord Ihave sought refuge” (v 1). Similar comment might be made about Ps 44, a communal lament which robustly professes loyalty to God (vv 17-21) and significantly concludes with appeal to God’s own unchanging loyalty, his steadfast love, or “lovingkindness”: Arise! Help us! And redeem us because o f your lovingkindness. (v 26) Overall, the Psalter appears to be saying that G od honors his own, but that “backsliding” constitutes a complication that has to be dealt with before covenant aid can be received. Essentially the expectation o f receiving it is grounded not in human self-confidence but in the faithfulness o f the G od o f the covenant. Salvation a s a theological heritage It is obvious that when the psalmist pleads, “save me,” the term is not being used in the evangelistic sense in which it was used o f Cornelius in Acts 11:14. The psalmist already moved within the active orbit o f God’s covenant relation­ ship with Israel, entered by birth and made his own by faith, as 22:10 and 71:6 affirm. Yet there is in the Psalms a looking back to God’s archetypal work o f salvation. 1. Sacred history. In the communal laments a standard element is the harking back to the saving work performed by Yahweh at the outset o f Israel’s covenant history. A nota­ ble instance is 74:2, where G od is urged to act in a manner consistent with his initial acquisition and redemption o f the community o f faith at the Exodus:

97

Salvation

Remember thy congregation, which thou hast gotten o f old, which thou hast redeem ed to be the tribe o f thy heritage! (RSV) The appeal seems to echo Exod 15:13,16 or a similar tradition. In the same way a song o f thanksgiving appears to declare that Exod 15:2 has become true again in recent experience: “Yah(weh) is my strength and protection; he has become my savior” (118:14). Craigie has suggested that there is an allusion to Exod 15:11-13, an individual lament, in 17:7: Reveal the wonder o f your lovingkindness, you who deliver by your right hand those seeking refuge from assailants.17 To return to the communal lament, 44:1-3 celebrates “our fathers!’]” occupation o f Canaan by God’s enabling. So too does Ps 80 under the allegory o f a vine in vv 8 ,9 : Thou didst bring a vine out o f Egypt . . . . It took deep root and filled the land. (RSV) In both these cases past salvation serves as a model o f hope for present deliverance. 2. Contemporary relevance. G od’s salvation o f “our fa­ thers” is described in 22:3-5 as a theme o f Israel’s hymnic praises. Ps 105 might be cited as such a hymn. It exults in Israel’s present enjoyment o f a heritage that stretches back to the patriarchs, with whom Israel’s foundations as God’s chosen people were laid. Ps 114 presents an imaginative treatment o f the Exodus and occupation o f Canaan, which transports worshipers back to the scene, making them feel as if it were all just happening. Israel’s origins in theological PSALM S

98

history are relevant as the basis o f their contemporary self­ understanding. Another dramatic characterization o f history is the description o f the crossing o f the Red Sea in the hymnic pas­ sage o f a lament-related composition, 77:11-20. Seemingly the psalmist’s sufferings were bound up with those o f G od’s people. Both personal and communal hope was found in looking back to their ancient history as proof that “Thou art the G od who workest wonders” (v 14 RSV). Yahweh’s power once prevailed over the waters o f chaos which could have overwhelmed Israel, killing it at birth. So there was hope that present chaos would meet its match in God. Verses 10-24 o f Ps 136 present in a hymn the sacred events from Egypt to Canaan in terms o f their once-for-all significance as a guarantee o f G od’s perpetual “steadfast love.” In vv 23, 24 the theme o f the Exodus is evidently treated again, now with a contemporary nuance: Yahweh remembered “us” when we suffered in Egypt and rescued “us.” In principle we were there participating in that salva­ tion, declares Israel, and we still now enjoy its benefits. 3. Christian echoes. In the New Testament the death and resurrection o f Jesus stand out as basic saving events to which the church looks back as the once-for-all work o f G od and as the ground o f its self-understanding. We can now appreciate that in one sense there is nothing new about such an interpretation. The New Testament has picked up a cue provided in the Old, which already recognized certain events in human history to be o f crucial theological signifi­ cance. The memory o f them stayed green in the praises o f every generation o f G od’s people. In Christ G od has acted in a manner consistent with his former revelation, so that the proclamation o f his new work spells “the power o f G od for salvation” (Rom 1:16 RSV).

99

Salvation

7

HOPE

Hope is faith with its face turned to the future. Several examples o f the vocabulary o f faith given in the fourth chapter would fit equally well at this point. The overlap o f faith and hope may be illustrated from their terms being placed together in parallelism, as in 71:5: For thou, O Lord, art my hope, my trust, O Lord, from my youth. (RSV) Other examples o f this tendency may be found in 25:20,21; 33:18,20; 146:5; 147:11. Faith is essentially a commitment to G od and to his protective power not only in the present but also for the future. Grounds for hope 1. God’s covenant. The basis o f assurance for a future better than the present is the relationship established by G od with his people. Occasionally the substance o f hope is 101

Hope

encapsulated in a categorical statement, an assertion which affirms this covenant basis for hope. A clear instance is at 94:14 in the course o f a lam ent The tide o f disorientation will eventually turn For the Lord will not forsake his people; he will not abandon his heritage. . . . (RSV) In 9:18 a more oblique assurance is given: The poor will not always be forgotten nor will the hope o f the afflicted perish forever. The context makes plain that “the ones who know your name” (v 10) are in view and that Yahweh is the implicit agent, remembering his own. The roots o f this covenant relationship in theological history are the theme o f Ps 78. The psalm teaches a lesson in religious education, with the aim that the next generation should set their hope in G od and not forget the works o f God, bu t keep his commandments. . . . (v 7 RSV) One might render that verse “set their confidence in G od”: the line between faith and hope is very tenuous here. In favor o f the Revised Standard Version’s translation is the parallelism o f a closely related term with a word which defi­ nitely denotes hope in the Hebrew o f Job 4:6. Hope is envis­ aged as a commitment o f the whole life to God. It entails the adoption o f a lifestyle that matches the traditions o f the covenant. Yahweh is to be the target o f human existence. This hope essentially depends upon an understanding o f the historical era from M oses to David as the focus o f G od’s revelation o f him self to “our fathers” (78:5). This PSALM S

102

understanding was passed down from generation to genera­ tion as the basis o f Israel’s self-understanding. A n arc is traced from “our fathers” to “children yet unborn” (v 6): the future o f the people o f G od is rooted in the p ast 2. God’s steadfast love. Since the covenant involved not only commitment to G od but G od’s commitment to his people, it is not surprising that the covenant attribute o f his unchanging loyalty is presented as the source o f Israel’s hope. Twice in the Psalter G od’s people are designated as those who “hope in his steadfast love” or “lovingkindness” (33:18; 147:11). In both cases the nuance o f the Hebrew term hesed is his habitual provision o f deliverance to members o f his community whenever they are in need. Yahweh comes to the rescue o f his own as their faithful ally. Ps 33 rises to a climax in the petitionary wish, “May your loving kindness be upon us, O Lord, as we have depended on you” (v 22). There is a personal laying hold o f the general statement o f v 18 cited above. The praising community acknowledge themselves to be in the role described there and turn theol­ ogy into prayer. A perusal o f this hymn discloses the perva­ siveness o f steadfast love: it is celebrated in vv 5 ,1 8 and 22. A s Lord o f creation and Lord o f the covenant, Yahweh is equally characterized by the quality o f steadfast love. Indeed, the term permeates the Psalter and makes it the book o f G od’s grace. The reader o f this book may have noticed how, in reflection o f this phenomenon, this particular divine virtue has found its way into every chapter thus far. Seem­ ingly one cannot keep it out o f a discussion o f any aspect o f the Psalms.18 Here it is God’s readiness to help his own, without which they cannot face the future. Ps 138, a song o f thanksgiving, gives a further example o f this attitude o f hope. In v 2 the grateful mention o f steadfast love refers to specific deliverance, as it does in the thanksgiv­ ing formula, “Give thanks to Yahweh, for . . . his steadfast love is everlasting.” The actual formula is reflected in v 8: 103

Hope

Yahweh, your loyal love is everlasting. D o not abandon the product o f your hands. Although no vocabulary o f hope is present, clearly here is one who hopes in Yahweh’s steadfast love. The renewal o f his previous experience o f God’s saving help, celebrated in v 2, may not be taken for granted. There has to be a petition for it to be manifested afresh whenever necessary in the precarious course of human life. In Ps 100 there is a similar movement from past and present to the future on the basis o f God’s steadfast love. In this case, although the thank-offering service seems to have been the original setting o f the psalm, as the heading indi' cates, it is nevertheless a hymn and so widens the perspec­ tive o f steadfast love from specific thanksgiving to general praise. It is an attribute which marks Yahweh’s habitual rela­ tionship to his people. In v 5 the note o f permanence latent in the Hebrew term and expressed in the thanksgiving for­ mula is pressed into service as a feature o f the covenant relationship: For the Lord is good: his steadfast love endures for ever, and his faithfulness to all generations. (RSV) The reasons for praise began in v 3 by celebrating God’s past creation o f Israel as his people. It is a truth o f contemporary validity: “It is he that made us, and we are his.” Verse 5 moves forward to a reassuring declaration o f the future im­ plications o f this basic fact for “all generations,” because o f his steadfast love. The classic statement o f this divine basis for human hope is to be found outside the Psalter, in Lam 3:22-24. The vic­ tim o f Jerusalem’s destruction testifies that he “will hope in” G od because o f the everlasting nature o f his steadfast love, PSALM S

104

which is “new every morning.” A s for the Psalms, this rela­ tion between steadfast love and hope is given unequivocal expression in 130:7,8: Put your hope, Israel, in Yahweh, for with Yahweh there is loyal love and redemption with him in abundance, and he it is who will redeem Israel from all their iniquities. Redemption took its theological cue from G od's work at the Exodus, but it found ample confirmation in God’s treat­ ment o f his people since then. Here it is aligned with stead­ fast love, as it is also in Deut 7:8,9. Confession is made that present adversity is the result o f sinning, but the community is urged to take seriously as a pointer to their future a deduc­ tion from the oft-revealed character o f God. N ot condemna­ tion but deliverance is to be their lot. The argument from past to present and future on the basis o f the formula “his steadfast love endures forever” also seems to underlie a Song o f Zion, Ps 48: We have thought on thy steadfast love, O God, in the midst o f thy temple. . . . this is God, our G od for ever and ever. He will be our guide for ever. (vv 9 ,1 4 RSV) Again this is a m otif o f hope, a lthough the specific vocabu­ lary o f hope is not employed. 3. God’s majestic unchangingness. The “forevem ess” o f G od is also presented as a hope m otif in 102:12-22 and 123:1,2 (see also 92:7,8 and 135:13,14). In Ps 102 a reversal o f Israel’s grim fortunes is expected in the future. The ground o f this expectation is his heavenly kingship above the time-bound earth: Yahweh is “enthroned forever” 105

Hope

(v 13). Verses 25-28 present similar reasons why Israel may hope in a positive future. The divine king o f creation is immortal, and he is immune from the obsolescence that marks his creation: “You are the same, and your years do not end.” Because he lives, there is hope that his people too will live. In 123:1, 2 the language o f hope is used in conjunction with the truth o f God’s supernatural kingship. When the suffering community keeps on looking to Yahweh “till” he comes to their aid, the object o f their hoping gaze is one who is “enthroned in the heavens.” E xistential hope 1. Hope during crisis. Like a rope thrown to a drowning person, the hope o f the Psalter is effective amid the harsh realities o f human existence. Whenever the lamenter wearily asked G od “How long?” there was a stirring o f hope. W hat kept the victims o f disorientation going was the conscious­ ness o f a higher reality which encouraged them to daringly envisage positive life beyond their present living death. “And now, what have I hoped for, O Lord? My hope is for you!” is the sufferer’s question and answer in 39:7. The trusting declaration o f 62:1 has a similar emphasis: For G od alone my soul waits in silence; from him comes my salvation. (RSV) Ps 119 gives this basic statement a characteristic twist when repeatedly in its setting o f distress it makes the Torah, which represents God, the focus o f hope: “I put my hope in your word” (v 114, see also vv 43,49,74,81,147,166). The eyes are the physical organs metaphorically associ­ ated with hope. They look up to G od in heaven, awaiting his championship o f his oppressed servants (123:1, 2). PSALM S

106

Sometimes they grow tired and sore, waiting for a deliver­ ance that seems never to come: My eyes grow dim with waiting for my God. (69:3 RSV) Yet still one waits— “I have waited for you all the day long” (25:5)— clinging to a conviction that G od is bound to inter­ vene eventually: For the poor will not always be forgotten, nor will the hope o f the afflicted perish forever. (9:18) When famine strikes or death threatens from another quarter, hope in God is all that can see its victims through the crisis: Lo, the Lord’s eye is upon those that fear him, upon those that depend on his loving kindness, to rescue their soul from death and to keep them alive in famine. (33:18,19) This God-centered hope gave to sufferers a morale which would otherwise have been completely lacking. The refrain o f Pss 42/43 places on record a mental dialogue that keeps utter despair at bay: O my soul, why are you downcast and so disturbed within me? Wait patiently for God, for I will praise him again. . . . (42:5,11; 43:5) The references to God’s eventual intervention as the ground o f praise are like the noticing o f milestones along the road, which remind the weary traveler o f his hoped-for destina­ tion and encourage him to plod on prayerfully.

107

Hope

Yet, as the third chapter observed, although the praise o f the thanksgiving song is necessarily absent from the lament, the lament does know its own praise. It is grounded in previous experience o f G od and in his known character. A t 71:14, in the light o f v 8, this type o f praise is also an expression o f hope, which defi andy counters the catcalls o f perse­ cutors: But I will hope continually and will praise thee yet more and more. (RSV) The religious phenomenon awaited by the suffering psalmist was a divine oracle o f response: I have waited for you, O Lord; you will answer, O Lord my God. (38:15) This waiting for a ruling from the sanctuary is described as a desire more ardent than that o f “watchmen for the morn­ ing” (130:5, 6). The comparison is an apt one: the sufferer knew an experience o f darkness and an onslaught o f danger that affected him even more intensely than the potential perils o f the night troubled the sentries peering from the town’s watchtower. 2. Hope in God’s word of promise. Even when the divine word did come, the need to hope was not removed. Ps 27:14 appears to be an official message, implicitly assuring that G od would intervene on the psalmist’s behalf, but urging confident morale during the time lag between this promise and its fulfillment: Wait for the Lord! Be strong, and let your heart be bold. Yes, wait for the Lord.

PSALM S

108

Hovering between disorientation and reorientation, one psalmist responds to a favorable oracle not only with praise to G od but also with encouragement to others who still waited for good news: Be strong and take heart, all you who are waiting on the Lord. (31:24) The one who has been helped turns into a helper o f others. There is a beautiful pastoral concern here. It is also evident in 22:26: The afflicted shall eat and shall be satisfied; those who seek him shall praise the Lord— may your hearts live forever! It is probable too that the exhortation in 130:7, “Put your hope, Israel, in Yahweh,” originally represented a sequel to the receipt o f the divine word awaited in v 5. The person to whom deliverance has been promised can testify to a needy community from the higher vantage point he has reached in his personal pilgrimage. From a still higher position the thanksgiving song bears witness to the full experience o f salvation as the attaining o f one's hopes: I waited patiently for the Lord, and he turned to me and heard my cry. A nd he raised me from the pit o f desolation, from the slimy mud, and he set my feet upon a rock; and he made firm my footsteps. (40:1,2) Again the context refers to a pastoral expectation that others will be encouraged in their faith by his testimony: 109

Hope

Many will see and will fear, and they will trust in the Lord. (v 3) Answered prayer confers an uplifting ministry. 3. Hope for life's continuance. Hope, like faith, blossoms best in the phase o f disorientation, according to the Psalter. But it would be false to conclude that the phase o f orientar tion knows nothing o f hope. Eschatological hope will be discussed a little later, but the believer’s hoping trust in G od as a regular phenomenon also finds a place in the Psalms. M ention o f 78:7 has been made earlier, comparable is 71:5: For thou, O Lord, art my hope, my trust, O Lord, from my youth. (RSV) A. A. Anderson has aptly compared the promise o f G odgiven orientation in Jer 29:11 (RSV), “I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans . . . to give you a future and a hope.”19There is a projection o f this covenantal hope upon the larger screen o f creation in 104:27 (and probably thence in 145:15). Animate creatures are perceived as a family o f G od’s dependents, trusting him for their daily supply o f food: “In hope all o f them look to you.” This imaginative perspective— also evident in the portrayal o f lions at prayer in v 21!— vividly communicates what elsewhere in the Bible is expressed objectively rather than subjectively: it is only G od’s upholding that keeps the world in continued existence. The vivid language o f 104:27 appears to underlie the eschatological hope ascribed to creation in Rom 8:19, “the creation waits with eager longing. . . .” There the m otif is interestingly linked with prophetic language o f disorientation in v 22; Isa 21:3 may be fruitfully compared.

PSALM S

110

Eschatological hope The Psalter has its own brand o f eschatological hope in the sense o f expecting an epoch-making divine intervention which would inaugurate the fulfillment o f Israel’s earthly des­ tiny. Von Rad’s characterization o f the Old Testament as a piece o f literature o f constantly growing but never fulfilled expectation20may require some refinement, but insofar as it is true it includes the Psalter, where hope o f an eschatological kind is concerned. Israel already knew the Christian affirmadons that “in . . . hope we were saved” and that for dais hope “we wait . . . with patience” (Rom 8:24,25). In Ps 37, a wisdom psalm, the ancient motif o f inheriting the land is pro­ jected forward and given afresh as an ultimate hope to those who “wait for the Lord” and obey him (v 34). Verses 3 ,9 ,1 1 , 22,29 illustrate the pervasiveness o f this motif in the psalm, to which appeal is made as a longed-for ideal. An old under­ standing o f Israel’s destiny as heirs o f the land is reemployed. This also happens in 125:3: The scepter o f wickedness will surely not remain over the land allotted to the righteous, or else the righteous might turn their hands to wrongdoing. Here the hope is pressed into the service o f wisdom’s ethical concerns as an incentive to perseverance in well doing. 1. God’s character. Eschatological hope is grounded in God’s own being. In 86:8,9 it is because o f Yahweh’s unique­ ness that universal worship at Jerusalem is a future certainty: There is none like thee among the gods, O Lord, nor are there any works like thine.

I ll

Hope

A ll the nations thou hast made shall come and bow down before thee, O Lord, and shall glorify thy name. (RSV) In 102:13-22 the citation o f prophetic hopes that Jerusalem would be restored as a religious center o f universal homage is founded solidly upon the truth o f Yahweh’s ever­ lasting kingship, as a direct and logical corollary (see too vv 25-28; also see 69:6,34-36). Yahweh’s role as king must involve his eventual intervention to set the world to rights: Let the hills sing for joy together before the Lord, for he comes to judge the earth. H e will judge the world with righteousness, and the peoples with equity. (98:8,9 RSV; cf. 96:10-13) It was the nature o f G od that dictated and guaranteed Israel's future hope. N ot “that” but “when” was the only uncertainty: Remember me, Yahweh, when you show your people favor, notice me when you save them. (106:4) G od’s self-grounded promise was a time bomb o f latent en­ ergy, ticking away until its set time should come. 2. God’s purposes for his people. Israel’s conviction o f a divine purposefulness meant that “he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion . . .“ (Phil 1:6). It is to this G od, who does not leave things half finished, that prayer is addressed in the post-exilic Ps 126. Earlier he had been experienced as one who “restored Zion’s fortunes” (v 1). The return from exile was the inauguration o f pro­ phetic promises, with which the phrase “restore fortunes” is mainly associated. Unfortunately the time o f G od’s great PSALM S

112

work (vv 2, 3) had given way to a period o f small things (Zech 4:10). Yet the post-exilic community had known Yahweh as the saving, restoring G od, as the fulfiller o f psalmodic hopes (see 14:7) in addition to prophetic expecta­ tions. To such a G od they brought their appeal that he repeat, and so fulfill, his saving activity: “Yahweh, restore our fortunes” (v 4). 3. God’s royal promises. Ps 126 belongs to the Songs o f Ascents, a self-contained collection which places no little stress on eschatological hope. Within the collection the ex­ hortation to Israel in 130:7, 8 to maintain its hope, a hope grounded in G od’s steadfast love, assumes a forward-looking role; so too does the similar 131:3. Both psalm endings prepare the way for an elaboration o f Israel’s hope in Ps 132, which is a royal psalm that cites divine warrant for the Davidic dynasty enthroned in Zion. In the post-exilic and so post-monarchical collection o f the Songs o f Ascents (Pss 120-134) this royal psalm obviously acquired meaning for the future, as indeed the fanfare o f future expectation in the two preceding psalms clearly indi­ cates. Ps 132 carries great weight in its present context O f all the Songs o f Ascents, it stands out as the longest compo­ sition. Its importance is also indicated by its climactic posi­ tioning near the end o f the collection: Pss 133 and 134 necessarily close it with notes o f benediction (133:3; 134:3). In the light o f the collection’s favorite theme, a key purpose o f Ps 132 is to glorify Zion, the sacred place o f pilgrimage. It is no accident that statements o f Zion’s role in Yahweh’s purposes find firm mention in it (vv 13-17). The psalm adds a new dimension to Zion’s destiny by stressing that the Davidic monarchy was to play a crucial part in it (“there,” v 17). Accordingly a royal psalm became a focus o f Israel’s hopes for its future under God. Much the same may be said o f the role o f the royal psalms to be found throughout the final form o f the Psalter, as 113

Hope

Claus Westermann has observed.21 It is reasonable to assume that originally the royal psalms comprised a single collection. If so, the dismembering process evident in the Korahite and Asaphite collections has been carried to extremes in this case. They are scattered throughout the total collection, as if at random. However, they seem to function like the fruit in a well-made cake, ensuring that with every slice o f psalmody testimony to the royal hope is present. The strateg ic placing o f certain royal psalms supports this interpretation. Just as Ps 132 had a climactic role near the end o f the Songs o f Ascents, so Books Two and Three significantly end with royal psalms, Pss 72 and 89. The royal theme is obviously o f prime importance in the redactional ordering o f the Psalter: Ps 2, the first psalm after the introductory Ps 1, belongs to the royal collection and is probably a late pre-exilic specimen. Indeed, Westermann has suggested that at one stage there was a Torah-wisdom edi­ tion o f the Psalter which began with Ps 1 and ended with Ps 119.22 If so, Pss 2 and 118, both royal psalms, were given pride o f place as the A and Z o f the edition inside its Torahwisdom wrappings. The royal psalms were originally pre-exilic compositions. They attested the importance o f the existing Davidic monar­ chy in the theological thinking o f Israel and also in its institutional religion. It is characteristic o f the Psalter to give new meaning to old material, and this feature finds a fresh mani­ festation in the royal psalms. Although the monarchy ceased to be part o f Israel's his­ tory at the end o f the pre-exilic period, as Ps 89 tragically laments, it lived on as part o f Israel’s hope, substantiated by G od’s sworn word “forever” (89:1-4,28-37). In the context o f the canonical Psalter the import o f this psalm shifts from pleading lament to praise o f God’s dynastic promises, in defiance o f ongoing world history. The editorial doxology o f 89:52 is justified! Already in the late shaping o f the Psalter PSALM S

114

what might with reservations be called a messianic signifi­ cance has been attached to these royal psalms. History has become eschatology. The New Testament’s novel interpre­ tation is not that it gives the royal psalms a messianic role, since that is nothing new, but that it relates them to the person and work o f Jesus as the Christ and proclaims the presence o f Israel’s king and the dawn o f its eschatologi­ cal hope.

115

Hope

8

SCRIPTURE

A t first sight the presence o f the book o f Psalms in the scripture canon o f Judaism and Christianity is astonishing. How elastic the concept o f scripture must have been to regard what are obviously human words as divine revelation! Essentially the Psalter constitutes a response to G od in prayer and praise. However, by New Testament times the authority o f the Psalms is not the existential authority o f believers who have lived through good times and bad, and left on record their impressions for posterity to benefit from. The authority o f the Psalter is much higher: no less a biblical formula than “as it is written” introduces a chain o f psalm references in Rom 3:10 and 15:9. In Heb 1:7 the statement o f Ps 104:4, indubitably human in the light o f v 1, is pre­ sented as God’s words (“he says”). Likewise, in Heb 1:8, 9 the extravaganza o f the court poet in honor o f a royal wed­ ding (Ps 45:6, 7) is graced with the same formula. The im­ plied presupposition has already been made plain in Heb 1:1: as part o f the O ld Testament, the Psalms have a place in G od’s inspired communication to Israel. Such an accolade

11.7

Scripture

deserves some explanation. Let us try to recover the process whereby human words became acknowledged as vehicles of divine truth. The authority of the P salm s A key factor is the Psalter’s function as temple literature. In pre-exilic and post-exilic history the temple was an insti­ tution that mediated Yahweh to his people. 1. Priestly and prophetic contributions. The personnel of the temple were invested with authority as his mouthpieces. The prophetic liturgies bear clear witness to this phenom­ enon: G od’s prophets delivered divine oracles, which they introduced in their own persons before using the divine “I”: “I hear a voice I had not known” (81:5, 6-16) and “O that today you would listen to his voice!” (95:7,8-11). The prophetic introduction in 85:8, “Let me hear what G od the Lord will speak” (RSV), is followed by a third-person exposition o f the divine message of “peace” (vv 9-13). The royal Ps 132 consists not only of the king’s prayer but also of answering assurances that are grounded in Yahweh’s oracles concerning Zion and the role o f the monarchy in his purposes for Zion (vv 11, 12, 14-18). Other royal psalms cite divine oracles, namely 2:7-9 and 110:1, 4. Interestingly it is this prophetic element to which the Letter to the Hebrews at­ taches not a little importance. Heb 1:5, 13; 5:5, 6; and 7:21 quote the oracles o f Ps 2:7 and 110:4 as the statements of God himself. Heb 3:7-11 (cf. 4:3 ,5 ,7 ) cites the prophetic Ps 95:711 with a formula “as the Holy Spirit says. N “ ot a little stress is laid on divine first-person language in the Psalms as the basis o f the argument in Hebrews concerning the purposes o f God. A similar testimony to divineness in the Psalter is given by the contribution made by priests. There are priestly liturgies which relate to access to the temple courts and to departure from them. The entrance liturgy o f Ps 15 mainly consists o f a PSALM S

118

priestly response to a pilgrim’s question (vv 2-5; cf. 24:3-6). The priest functioned as the spokesperson o f G od in pre­ senting ethical standards. So he did when he bestowed bene­ diction, for instance, in 121:3-7, in response to a worshiper’s expression (vv 1,2) o f a need to have his faith strengthened: He will not let your foot stumble; . . . Yahweh will guard you from all danger, he will guard your life. Ps 91 is similar. The text and perspective o f vv 1, 2 are uncertain and may represent a pilgrim’s own confession o f faith, but vv 3-13 cannot be other than a priestly response, which is capped by a formal, divine oracle in vv 14-16: Because he cleaves to me in love, I will deliver him; I will protect him, because he knows my name. W hen he calls to me, I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, . . .(RSV) Such prophetic and priestly contributions to the Psalms claim divine authority. Significantly in both types God’s rev­ elation is given not only in first-person communications but also with third-person language. The way was thereby open to regarding other third-person pronouncements as invested with divine authority in this book that partook o f the insti­ tutional character o f the temple. 2. The temple as a divine institution. Judah after the Exile took seriously the divine role o f the temple and listened carefully to the testimony o f Ps 78 that with David and the building o f the temple G od had inaugurated a new era. The post-exilic community reveled in their participation in this temple era, as the books o f Chronicles bear witness. The musical and choral organization went back to David and to 119

Scripture

the prophetic authority o f Gad and Nathan, and accordingly were inspired by G od (2 Chr 29:25). The praises o f Yahweh sung by the Levitical choirs used “the words o f David and o f Asaph the seer” (2 Chr 29:30). Again the prophetic ascription was intended to stamp the temple constitution as di' vine— in this case its psalmodic element David was regarded as God’s minister in setting up a system that reflected his will (cf. 1 Chr 15:16-24; 16:4-7,41). So, returning to the Psalter, it is not difficult to regard the choral collections o f Asaph and the sons of Korah as expres­ sions o f God’s own desire that he should be praised in this way. By a natural extension such an understanding was easily ascribed to psalms not explicitly associated with Levitical choirs, as they became part o f the treasury o f temple psalmody. In accord with this conception is the phenomenon observed in the third chapter, the role o f the doxologies as responses to God’s praiseworthiness elaborated in the pre­ ceding blocks of material. A t this level the humanity o f the Psalms was played down, while those elements that explicitly glorified G od were highlighted. The doxologies regard hu­ man phenomena as trappings for this divine centrality. They turn the Psalms into affirmations about G od and so serve to reinforce their authoritative nature. 3. The authority of wisdom teaching. There is another factor to be taken into account as a further step toward the canonization o f the Psalter, whereby it gained binding author­ ity for Israel’s teaching about God. A number o f modes of inspiration are reflected in the biblical literature, and the di­ rect mode o f the prophetic variety is by no means the only one. Wisdom literature had its own concept o f divine author­ ity. The wisdom teacher was a source o f religious authority for Israel along with the prophet and the priest, according to Jer 18:18. Human observation, reflection, and discussion were channels through which divine inspiration came. The wisdom teacher spoke o f his words as divinely authoritative: PSALM S

120

For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding . . . (Prov 2 :6 RSV) The descriptions o f King Solomon, whom 1 Kings regard­ ed as the sage par excellence, reflect this double perspective. Wisdom was credited to Solomon inasmuch as it was exer­ cised by him, according to 1 Kgs 4:30,34 and 10:4,6-8—but primarily it was G od’s, for “all Israel . . . perceived that the wisdom o f God was in him” (3:28 RSV). The divine stamp of wisdom teaching is relevant for the Psalms. The wisdom psalms, both those not composed for use in the temple and those which employed wisdom language with a temple set­ ting in mind, must have brought into the Psalter their own religious authority. 4. The Psalms as Torah. In this connection the impor­ tance o f Ps 1 as an introduction to the Psalter cannot be underestimated. If, as some scholars have urged, Pss 1 and 119 once flamed an edition o f the Psalter designed for a wisdom setting, then wisdom’s authority was regarded as extending from Ps 2 to Ps 118. Be that as it may, the presence o f Ps 1 served to invest the book o f Psalms with a distinctive aura. In itself Ps 1 represents a late development o f wisdom thinking which fused wisdom concerns with high regard for the Torah. In this context Torah is not to be understood as relating simply to the Pentateuch: it had gained a wider literary perspective. In Ps 119 there seems to be literary dependence on Deuteronomy— and also on the books o f Proverbs, Isaiah, and Jeremiah. Prophetic sources and wisdom material, as well as a pentateuchal book, were interpreted as Scriptures in which G od had made known his character and his pur­ poses for his people. In turn the function o f Ps 1 appears to be to interpret the Psalms that follow as Torah or the written revelation o f God.

121

Scripture

The final verse o f the book o f Hosea is a wisdom postscript which casts wisdom’s aura o f authority over the prophetic book: Whoever is wise, let him understand these things; whoever is discerning, let him know them; . . . (Hos 14:9 RSV) Even more categorically, Ps 1 seems to identify the Psalter as Torah and to commend it from this perspective as the fitting object o f the believer's absorbed meditation: In the Lord’s Torah is his delight and in his Torah will he muse by day and night (v 2) This introductory statement about the Psalter made by Ps 1 is an extreme one, but it represents only further pro­ gress along the path trodden by the doxologies in character­ izing the Psalms as God-centered compositions. Brevard S. Childs has rightly commented concerning this shift in un­ derstanding: “Because Israel continues to hear God’s word through the voice o f the psalmists’ response, these prayers now function as the divine word itself.”23 D avid a s exem plar Childs has also found canonical significance in the historicizing Davidic superscriptions, in that David was viewed as a representative person “who displays all the strengths and weaknesses o f all human beings.”24 1. The Davidic superscriptions. Thirteen psalms have headings which relate them to episodes in the life o f David. M ost o f the superscriptions interpret enemies in their par­ ticular psalms as historical personages or groups who are mentioned in 1 and 2 Samuel: Saul (Pss 18, 54, 57, 59), PSALM S

122

Absalom (Ps 3), an unknown Cush (Ps 7), Doeg the Edomite (Ps 52), due Philistines (Ps 56), and Abimelech in particular (Ps 34) and the Arameans (Ps 60). Other headings give biographical identifications in topo­ graphical terms, in Pss 63 and 142, while a lament featuring confession o f sin is linked with Bathsheba in the heading to Ps 51. There are good reasons for classifying most o f these references as the result o f a historicizing process similar to the “connective” type o f midrashic exposition o f the Psalms practiced by the rabbis.25 Using linguistic and thematic analogies, they endeavored to connect individual psalms with personages and events in O ld Testament history. The Greek version o f the Psalms continues this hermeneutical process, linking further psalms with David and also with other historical characters and incidents. W hat was the motivation behind the Davidic captions? Childs’ interpretation o f David as a typical human figure is impressive, but it has met with some scholarly dissent Is not his “everyman” approach a contradiction o f the concern for ancient history in these superscriptions? Does not the process represent rather a reductive, retrograde shift from leaving the Psalms open to use by anybody at any it me toward an antiquarian exclusiveness? These criticisms are not unreasonable. If Childs is tight, further argumentation is necessary to justify a leap from Davidic history to contempo­ rary relevance. 2. Role modeling in Chronicles. Appeal to the Chroni­ cler’s theological approach to history may begin to build a bridge between past and present In Chronicles the age o f David and Solomon marks the start o f a new era o f grace which extends to the Chronicler’s own time. It establishes positive criteria whereby the lives o f subsequent generations may be judged. In general the planning and building o f the temple provided a new key for explaining Israel’s existence thereafter. David’s generosity in his material provision for 123

Scripture

the temple is presented as a model for Israel which the Chronicler surely intended his own generation to note (1 C hr 29:18). To Solomon are revealed God’s principles o f dealing with his people (2 Chr 7:14), which became the criterion for assessing future kings (see 2 Chr 36:11-16) and in particular, for explaining the eventual rehabilitation o f Manasseh (2 Chr 33:12,13), who for the Chronicler was a prototype o f post-exilic Judah. Hezekiah’s reign reestablished the religious ideals asso­ ciated with the reigns o f David (2 C hr 29:2, 25-30) and Solomon (30:26). Josiah urged the Levites o f his day to com­ ply with ancient directions laid down by David and Solomon concerning their part in temple worship (35:4). T his presentation o f the first two Davidic kings as mod­ els for Judah and its leaders in a post-exilic presentation o f history is suggestive for the Psalter. Was this focus associ­ ated with a comparable interpretation o f David as a model for individual piety? If so, much is achieved toward span­ ning the gap between ancient history and contemporary relevance. The ancient hero became a standard o f spiritual­ ity for members o f each generation o f G od’s people, how­ ever hard times were and even when sin had triumphed. N ot only the historicizing superscriptions but even the sim­ ple headings “psalm o f David” would carry the message o f a spiritual model from whom each hearer or reader was in­ vited to learn. 3. The editorial function of Ps 19. Is there any evidence in the Psalter itself for a modeling focus upon David? The purpose o f Ps 19 is worth considering in this respect O f itself it is a Torah-wisdom composition prefaced with a creation hymn. Contextually it interrupts a sequence o f royal psalms, Pss 18, 20, and 21. The discussion o f similar insertions in the first chapter encourages us to ask whether we can detect a positive intention in this case. In fact there is a remarkable overlap o f terminology between Ps 18 and PSALM S

124

19:7-14. Yahweh is hailed with the language o f trust as “my rock” in 18:2,46 and 19:14. His “judgments” or “ordi­ nances” feature in 18:22 and 19:9. The attaining o f human blamelessness is mentioned in 18:23,25 and 19:13. What is postulated o f Yahweh in Ps 18 is in three cases applied to his Torah in Ps 19, in an inverted order. Yahweh shows himself pure (18:26), and his Torah is pure (19:9). Yahweh gives light (18:29), and so does his Torah (19:8). Yahweh’s way is perfect (18:30), and so is his Torah (19:7). More­ over, in the superscription o f Ps 18 David is described as Yahweh’s servant, while in 19:11 the psalmist describes him­ self prayerfully as “your servant” The accumulation o f parallels leads to a clear conclusion: the purpose o f setting the two psalms side by side was to relate David’s experience to the individual pious believer who sought models for personal living from the “Torah” o f the Psalms. The application carries further a process already evident within Ps 18: twice a connection is traced between David’s spirituality and generalized teaching, in vv 20-24/ 25-27 and 28-29. In his relation with G od David was an exemplar for “all who seek refuge in him” (v 30). Ps 19 has been placed next to Ps 18 in order that its second half may develop these hints which explicitly present David as a role model. From this perspective David is no longer the servant o f Yahweh only in his special role as partner in a royal covenant. Now the term does not elevate him above Israel, but paradoxically brings him down to the level o f the Israelite, who was committed by the bonds o f a wider covenant to serve the same God. The description o f “presumptuous sins” as an overpowering force in 19:13 may have been viewed as a reinterpretation o f David’s military enemies, in terms o f spiritual warfare. Overall, the editorial message is that for the pious student o f Torah the psalms o f David open up fresh vistas in teach­ ing how to live for God. 125

S a ip tu n

The P salm s in the New Testam ent The New Testament received the Psalms as part o f the Jewish Scriptures. It is worth asking what messages the Christian ear first heard from this heritage. Only a brief answer is possible here, which can by no means do full justice to the evidence, since the Psalter was the part o f the Writings which the New Testament enthusiastically took to its heart, just as in the rest o f the Jewish canon Deuteronomy was the part o f the Law it prized and the book o f Isaiah was its favorite among the Prophets. 1. Christ in the Psalms. The O ld Testament provided a theological substructure, to use C . H. Dodd’s phrase, for the Christian faith.26 It served to exegete the person and work o f Jesus. There was a process o f mutual interaction, for the O ld Testament was understood as explaining the phenomenon o f Jesus, while in turn this phenomenon explained the O ld Testament. For the church all things became new. New light was cast upon everything, including the O ld Testament. From this fresh perspective the Psalms had something else to say beyond their earlier messages. In the Letter to the Hebrews Jesus is regarded as the archetypal lamenter who through his experience o f salvation from death became an agent o f salvation for others. See Heb 5:7-9 and compare Ps 22:24: He [God] has not hidden his face from him, but when he cried for help, he heard him. Accordingly, as risen from the dead, Jesus became the archetypal giver o f thanks: “I will proclaim thy name to my brethren, in the midst o f the congregation I will praise thee.” (Heb 2:12 RSV ;Ps 22:22) PSALM S

126

A s heir to the royal psalms he is the king who is mysteriously associated with G od in a metaphysical relationship: “Thou art my son, today I have begotten thee”. . . . (1:5 RSV, 5:5; cf. Ps 2:7) “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, the righteous scepter is the scepter o f thy kingdom. . . .” (1:8, 9 RSV; cf. Ps 45:6, 7) He is the priest-king who has a sacrificial ministry: “Thou art a priest for ever, after the order o f Melchizedek.” (5:6 RSV; cf. Ps 110:4) H e has too a heavenly position o f honor next to God, which guarantees the ultimate triumph o f his cause: “Sit at my right hand, till I make thy enemies a stool for thy feet”. . . . (1:13 RSV; cf. Ps 110:1) By a natural fusion o f psalmodic and christological ideas he is also the king o f creation: “Thou, Lord, didst found the earth in the beginning, . . . thou art the same, and thy years will never end.” (1:10,12 RSV; cf. Ps 102:25-27) A s archetypal representative o f a new humanity, he has experienced in his own way the subordination and royal exaltation o f Ps 8:4-6, made “‘lower than the angels’” and “‘crowned . . . with glory and honor’” (Heb 2:6-9 RSV). Once Jesus has come and done his work, a new understand­ ing o f Ps 40:6-8 leaps out at the reader: the verses serve to 127

Scripture

confirm the fact that Jesus has replaced a system o f sacrifice with a new order based upon his own obedience to God, as Heb 10:5-10 explains. The hermeneutical interaction be­ tween the Psalter and the new revelation is a creative power that generates new praise to God. Much o f this reinterpretation o f the Psalms is common to other parts o f the New Testament. In particular Ps 22 with its contrasting pattern o f suffering and triumph became an obvious quarry for christological parallels. In the Gospels the lamenting first half runs through the story o f the cross. The initial verse received the honor o f quotation on the lips o f the dying Jesus: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt 27:46 r sv ; Mark 15:34) Doubtless this solemn citation inspired further use o f the psalm. Material from the lament section colored the termi­ nology o f the passion narrative and so conveyed a message that this tragedy was in accord with the divine will (see Matt 27:35, 39,43; Mark 15:24, 29 and Luke 23:34, 35; compare Ps 22:7, 8, 18). The Fourth Gospel is more explicit: Ps 22 yielded a prophecy o f the humiliation o f Jesus: “They parted my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:24 RSV; Ps 22:18) The beginning of the second half of Ps 22, v 22, resonant with God-given triumph, was not only cited in Heb 2:12 but also found an echo in the evangelists’ narrative of the resurrection: “Do not hold me, for I have not ascended to the Father, but go to my brethren and say to them, I am PSALM S

128

ascending to my Father and your Father, to my G od and your G od.” (John 20:17 RSV; cf. Matt 28:10) 2. The Psalms and the Christian believer. The christological dimension o f the Psalter in the New Testament did not displace a prizing o f the Psalms for their perennial, pastoral value. The force o f 2 Tim 4:17 has been considered already, in the sixth chapter. The Letter to the Hebrews quotes an affir­ mation o f faith as still relevant for the writer and his readers: “The Lord is my helper, I will not be afraid, what can man do to me?” (13:6 RSV; cf. Ps 118:6) The prophetic warning o f Ps 95:7-11, “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts . . . ,’” rings out again with contemporary urgency as the incisive, searching word o f God, “sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division o f soul and spirit . . .” (Heb 3:7; 4:12 RSV) Similarly, in the Letter to the Romans the truth that the Israelite community of faith had a hope in God which was not disappointed (Ps 22:5) finds an echo in a comparable situation of communal suffering (Rom 5:5). The solace of the psalms of disorientation is demonstrated afresh in Rom 8:36. It cites the self-descriptive element of a çommunal lament, Ps 44:22, and relates it to Christian persecution and martyrdom: “For thy sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.” (Rom 8:36 RSV) A t first sight the reference is surprising and looks out o f place. Were not present sufferings insignificant in compari­ son with eternal glory (8:18)? Was not the love o f Christ an 129

Scripture

all-conquering power which took persecution and death in its triumphant stride (8:35, 38)? Yes indeed, but triumph is not triumphalism. The apostle was human enough to know that the sword, and fear o f the sword, inflicted pain from which Christians are not yet immune (see vv 23,26). Cries o f anguish escape from Christian lips as readily as from Israelite lips. In pastoral vein Paul lingered on the pangs o f disorien­ tation, for which the noblest o f causes is no anodyne. It is in accord with this pastoral note that mention o f suffering is tenderly wrapped around with “the love o f Christ” and “the love o f G od in Christ” (vv 35,39). For the New Testament writers the Psalter continues to preach the gospel o f a G od who cares; they pointed to Jesus as the loving mediator o f this care. Prayer and praise, faith and hope still flowed from the human heart in living rapport with the Psalms. Voicing o f them in lament and song now rise to G od through the fitting agency o f a Lord who repre­ sents G od before humanity and humanity before God.

PSALM S

130

NOTES

1. The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985), pp. 139-197, esp. pp. 174-176. 2. Much of this work is locked up in German publications. English readers may refer to H. Gunkel, The Psalms: A Formcritical Introduction (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967); S. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 2 vols. (New York: Abingdon, 1962); H. J. Kraus, Theology of the Psalms (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1986); C. Westermann, The Psalms: Structure, Content and Mes­ sage (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1980); and Praise and Lament in the Psalms (Atlanta: John Knox, 1981). 3. The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, vol. 1, pp. 1-12. 4. For this interpretation see P. C. Craigie, Psalms 1-50 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983), pp. 236-241. 5. This interpretation, advocated by Kraus and others, has been followed by Craigie, Psalms 1-50, pp. 198-200. 6. This hermeneutical frame of reference is most easily accessible to the reader in Brueggemann’s The Message of the Psalms (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984), pp. 9-11 and then passim. 7. Commentary on the Book of Psalms, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, reprinted, 1949), p. xxxvii. 8. The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, pp. 188f. 131

Notes

9. See my Psalms 101-150 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983), pp. 49-51 for elaboration. 10. See Psalms 101-150, pp. 60f., for discussion. 11. Praise and Lament in the Psalms, pp. 70-75. 12. Psalms 1-50, p. 73. 13. The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, pp. 164,190. 14. See my Psalms 101- 150, pp. 9,160. This insight relies on the research of K. W. Neubauer in his Berlin dissertation of 1964. 15. C. Westermann has emphasized the role of blessing in the Old Testament in Elements of Old Testament Theology (Atlanta: John Knox, 1982), pp. 85-117. 16. Psalms 1-50, p. 92. 17. Psalms 1-50, p. 163. 18. See K. D. Sakenfeld, Faithfulness in Action (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), pp. 83-100. A more detailed treatment may be found in her The Meaning ofHesed in the Hebrew Bible (Missoula, Mont: Scholars Press, 1978), pp. 215-231. 19. The Book of Psalms (London: Oliphants, 1972), vol. 1, p. 512. 20. G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vol. 2 (London: SCM Press, 1979), p. 319. 21. Praise and Lament in the Psalms, pp. 257f. 22. Praise and Lament in the Psalms, p. 253. 23. Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: John Knox, 1979), p. 513; cf. Westermann, Praise and Lament in the Psalms, p. 253. 24. Introduction to the OT as Scripture, p. 521. 25. See my Psalms 101-150, pp. 278f., with reference to the work of E. Slomovic and others. 26. The subtitle of his book According to the Scriptures (London: Nisbet, 1952) was The Substructure of New Testament Theology.

PSALM S

132

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen, L. C. Psalms 101-150. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1983. Anderson, A. A. The Book of Psalms. 2 vols, The New Century Bible. London: Oliphants, 1972. Anderson, B. W. Out of the Depths: The Psalms Speak for Us Today. revised ed. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983. Bonhoeffer, D. Psalms: The Prayerbook of the Bible, tr. J. H. Burtness. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1970. Brueggemann, W. The Message of the Psalms: A Theological Commentary. Augsburg Old Testament Studies. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1984. Childs, B. S. Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1980. Craigie, P. C. Psalms 1-50. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1983. Gunn, G. S. God in the Psalms. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1956. Guthrie, H. H. Israel's Sacred Psalms: A Study of Dominant Themes. New York: Seabury Press, 1966. Johnson, A. R. The Cultic Prophet and Israel's Psalmody. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1962. 133

Bibliography

Miller, Jr., P. D. Interpreting the Psalms. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986. Weiser, A. The Psalms: A Commentary, tr. H. Hartwell Old Testa­ ment Library. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962. Westermann, C. The Psalms: Structure, Content and Message. tr. R. D. Gehrke. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1980. _____ . Praise and Lament in the Psalms, tr. K. R. Crim and R. N. Soulen. Edinburgh T. & T. Clark, 1981. Wilson, G. H. The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985.

PSALM S

134

INDEX OF PSALMS CITED

1 1:1-2 1:2 1:3 2 2:7-9 2:7 3 3:3 3:6 3:7 3:8 4 4:1 5 :7-8 6 6:1 6:4 6:5 6 :8-10 6 :8-9 7 7:1 7:9 8 .4-6 8:5 9:10

135

114,121 32 122 85 14, 15, 17, 22, 114, 121,1 27 118 118,1 27 17,123 55,63 63 88 40 20 89 95 91 93 88 58 28 66 95, 96,123 62 76 127 76 102

9:18 11 11:1 12:5 13:5-6 13:5 14:7 15 15:2-5 15:5 16 16:1 16:4 16:5 16:7-8 16:8 16:10 16:11 17 17:7 18 18:1-3 18:2 18:6 18:16 18:19 18:20-24

102,107 95,9 6 97 27 65 55 113 25, 20,118 119 35 20,35 83 70 84 85 35, 36, 68,83 83 36,84 95,9 6 98 20, 22, 51, 55, 122,124 96 72,125 89 89,9 0 89,9 0 52,9 6

18:22 18:23 18:25 18:25-27 18:25-30 18:26 18:27 18:28 18:29 18:30-31 18:30 18:31-50 18:31 18:32ff. 18:46 19 19:7-14 19:7 19:8 19:9 19:11 19:13 19:14 20 20:7 21 21:7

125 125 125 52 96 125 96 52, 89,90 125 52 52,125 96 52 52 125 25,124 125,132 125 125 125 125 125 125 124 70 22, 67,124 35,68

Index

22 22:1 22:2 22:3-5 22:3

HA 225 22:7-8 22:10 22:12 22:13 22:15 22:16 22:18 22:20-21 22:21 22:22 22:23-31 22:23-24 22:24 22:25 22:26 23 23:1-4 23:1-3 23:1 23:4-5 23:5-6 23:6 24 24:3-6 24:3 243 25 253 25:6 25:11 25:15 25:17 25:20-21 27:1 273 27:7-12 27:13 27:14 28:2 283 28:6-7 28:6 28:9

PSALM S

70, 71,88 52, 60,128 71 60,98 55 71 129 128 61,97 89 89 92 89 128 90 28,88 126,128 28 50 126 43 29,109 20,25 63 64 64 64 64 64 29 119 80 80 94 107 94 95 89 89 101 63,90 63 65 65 108 66 28 66 28 40

29 29:11 30 30:1-5 30:1-3 30:3 30:4-5 30:6-7 30:7-10 30:8-11 30:9 30:11-12 30:11 30:12 31:4 31:5 31:6 31:7-8 31:14 31:16 31:24 32 32:6 32:10-11 32:11 33 33:1-3 33:1 33:5 33:16 33:18-19 33:18 33:20 33:22 34 34:8 35:24 36:5-9 36:7-9 37 37:3 37:9 37:11 37:22 37:29 37:34 38 38:1-5 38:15

79 84 20 38 21 90 21,51 21,38 38 21 58 38 29 21,39 89 62 62,70 89 62 62 109 32, 91,94 95 16 50 16 29 16 16, 78,103 70 107 16, 101,103 101 16,103 32,123 72 95 55 31 31,56 70, 111 111 111 111 111 111 94 94 108

39 39:7

94 106

40:1-2 40:3 40:4 40:6-8 41:13 42-64 42-49 42 42:5 42:11 43:2-3 425 44 44:1-3 44:4 446-8 446 4417-21 4417-18 4422 4426 45 45:6-7 46 46:1 46:5 46:7 46:8-10 46:11 48 48:3-7 48:9 48:14 49 49:6

109 110 72 127 13 55 14 16 107 107 60 107 19 53,98 62 61 70 97 60 129 97 14 117,127 22,69 68 35,68 68 68 68 22 68 105 105 31 70

50 50:8-15 50:23 51-71 51 51:16-19 52 52:7 54 54:3

14,16 16 16 16 91,123 16 123 70 122 68

136

55:22 55:23 56 56:1 56:2 56:3-4 56:4 56:5-6 56:6-7 56:8-11 56:9 56:10 56:12-13 57 57:1 57:4 59 59:8 59:9 59:16

66 66 123 18 18 18,64 65 18 18 18 164 65 19 122 62 89 122 55 63 63,72

60 60:1-5 60:6-8 61:3 62:1 62:10 62:8 63 65-68 65:11 67:1 67:6-7 67:6 69-71 69:1 69:2 69:3 69:6 69:15 69:34-36

123 27 27 63 106 70 59 123 55 76 82 82 82,84 55 88,89 89 107 112 89 112

71:2 71:5-6 71:5 71:6 71:8 72 72:18-19

95 59 101 97 108 22,114 13

137

72:20 73-83 73 73:1 73:2 73:14 73:15 73:21-23 73:26 74 74:1 74:2 74:12-17 74:12 76 76:3 76:5 76:6 77:7-9 77:11-20 77:13-14 77:14 78 78:5 78:6 78:7-8 78:7 78:22 79 79:2 79:10 80:3 80:7 80:8-11 80:8-9 80:19 81:2 81:5 81:6-16 84 84:12 85 85:1-7 85:2-3 85:2 85:7 85:8 85:8-15 85:9-13

15 14,16 32 74 73 73 73 74 74,84 19,37 93 53,97 55 61,62 22 69 69 69 53 99 53 99 119 102 103 69 102,110 69 19, 20, 37,54 95 57 88 88 55 98 88 56 118 118 14, 15,29 69 14,15 26 94 15 15,27 118 27 27,118

85:10 86 86:2-3 86:5 86:8-13 86:8-9 86:9 86:14 86:15 87 87:4-6 88 88:14 88:16 89 89:1-18 89:1-4 89:13-18 89:19-37 89:22-28 89:28-37 89:52

15 15,62 63 15, 54 55 111 15 68 15,5 4 14, 15,22 15 14, 15,89 93 93 22, 37,114 53 114 19 53 19 114 13,114

91 91:1-2 91:1 91:3-13 91:9-10 91:14-16 91:14 91:15 92:3 92:7-8 93 93:1-2 94:14 94:16-23 94:22 95:7-11 95:7 95:8-11 96-99 96:4 96:5 96:10-13 98:8-9

30 119 82 119 82 119 71 83 56 105 12 34 102 61 62 118,129 118 118 12 57 57 112 112

100 100:1-3 100:3

47, 48,57 22 104

Index

100:4-5 100:5 101 102 102:3-7 102:8 102:9 102:10-11 102:10 102:11 102:12-22 102:12-17 102:13-22 102:13 102:23 102:25-28 102:25-27 103 103:3-6 103:4 103:8 103:9-18 103:14-17 103:19-22 104 104:1 104:4 104:5 104:14-23 104:21 104:24-30 104:27 104:34 105 106:1 106:4-10 106:4 106:7 106:21 106:45 106:47 106:48 107-117 107 107:1-3 107:1 107:2-3 107:11 107:17 107:22

PSALMS

22,29 104 14 27, 91,105 19 19 19 93 19 19 105 55 112 106 19 106,112 127 22, 29,57 48 76 48 48 33 49 22, 57, 76,78 117 117 34,77 77 110 77 110 37 22,98 46 46 112 46 46 46 45,46 46 45 45, 47,88 40 29 47 48,9 2 48,9 2 28

107:27 107:32 107:33-43 107:33-42 107:38 107:41

88 28 47 40 84 90

110 110:1 110:4 111-117 111 111:3 112 112:6 112:7-8 113 114 115 115:2 115:3 115:4-8 115:9-11 115:12-15 115:14 115:15 115:16-18 115:17 116 116:3 116:5 116:6 116:10-11 116:12 116:16 117 117:1 117:2 118-135 118 118:2-4 1185 118:8-9 118:14 119 119:31 119:42 119:43 119:49 11957

14,22 118,1 27 118,1 27 45 72 56 31,5 6 35 71 22 45,98 45,8 0 57 46 46 61 81 84 79,8 1 46 58 20,29 89 50,51 51 72 49 90 44, 56 22 22 45 22, 45, 114,121 50 89 72 98 32, 114,121 62 62 106 106 84

119:64 119:66 119:74 119:81 119:114 119:147 119:166

78 62 106 106 106 106 106

120-134 121 121:1-2 121:2 121:3-8 121:3-7 121:3 121:5 121:8 122 122:2 123:1-2 123:2 124 124:4-5 124:6-7 125:1 125:3 126 126:1 126:2-3 126:2 126:4 127 128:5 129 129:4

14, 45, 113 30 119 80 82 119 35 83 85 29 69 105,106 63 20 89 90 68 111 113 112 113 57 113 31 80 20 95

130 1305-6 130:5 130:7-8 130:7 131 131:3 132 132:11 132:12 132:13-17 132:14-18 132:17 133:1

91 108 109 105,113 109 20 113 14,2 9, 114 118 118 113 118 113 30

133:3 134 134:3 135 135:13-14 136 136:4-9 136:10-24 136:23-24 136:25 138-145 138 138:2 138:4-6 138:8

139

80, 83,113 81 80,113 45 105 22, 45,78 78 99 99 78 45 20,55 103,104 52 103

139:23 140:13 141:8 142 142:5 143 143:1 143:3 144:12-14 144:15 145 145:8-9 145:9 145:15-16

95 65 63 123 84 91 95 89 84 84 43 78 56 78

145:15 146-150 146 146:3-5 1463 147 147:11 147:13 147:14 148 148:10 150 1503-5 150:6

110 45 22 70 101 22 101,103 84 84 22 57 13 56 22

Index

Leslie C. Allen Leslie C . Allen is Professor o f O ld Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary. Formerly he was Lecturer in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Judaism at London Bible College for more than twenty years. He holds the M A . . degree from Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, in Classics and Oriental Studies. H is Ph.D. is from the University College o f London, in Hebrew. Among his publications are The Greek Chronicles Parts 1 and 2 and The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah for The New International Commentary on the O ld Testament, as well as the section on Psalms 73-150, in A Bible Commentary for Today edited by Howley, Bruce, and Ellison.

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES Isaiah JOH N D. W. WATTS

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC Isaiah Copyright © 1989 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11507-6 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Watts, John D.W. Isaiah: John D.W. Watts. p.  cm. Bibliography: p. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-849-90669-5 1. Bible. O.T. Isaiah—­Theology. 2. Bible O.T. Isaiah—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II Series. BS1515.2.W38 1989 224’.106—dc1989-30790 Quotations from the Scriptures in this volume are the author’s own translation unless otherwise indicated. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

To R eid

C O N TEN TS

Foreword. Preface P a r t 1: K n o w in g G o d a n d H is W ays 1. K now ing G o d B etw een th e golden m om ents U n ch an g in g prom ises P ride an d h u m ility T h e v ision o f th e ideal G o d ’s in v itatio n s 2. K now ing G o d in th e W orld T h e o w n er o f “th e lan d ” T h e C re a to r o f th e heavens an d th e e a rth 3. K now ing G o d am ong H is O w n People T h e H o ly O n e o f Israel G o d in Z ion H oly S p irit P a r t 2: S e r v in g G o d a n d H IS P l a n 4. In tro d u c tio n A m atter o f divine decision G o d ’s p roblem A m atte r o f tim ing vii

ix xi 1 3 10 11 14 17 22 28 32 34 38 38 41 44 47 49 51 53 55 Contents

Living betw een the times 5. Governing Servants and T heir Service G od’s strategy Ahaz: Eighth century B.C. Hezekiah: Eighth century B.C. Persian emperors: Sixth-fifth centuries B.C. 6. W orshiping Servants and T heir Service Israel’s role in serving G od In the w orld In Jerusalem’s Temple In quietness and solitude Conclusion Appendix A T he New Testament’s use of Isaiah Appendix B Isaiah in Handel’s Messiah For Further Reading in Recent Literature Index for Scriptures

ISAIAH

56 58 58 62 67 69 79 79 85 87 98 107 110 113 115 117

FOREWORD

The Book of Isaiah is the M ount Rushm ore of biblical prophecy. Sculpted on its massive slopes are the major them es of Scripture: who G od is, w hat he has done for his people, and how he expects us to serve him. Side by side w ith these themes stand the figures of the key players in the drama of Israel’s life: the prophet himself, the sons of David who ruled Judah from Uzziah to Zerrubabel, and Cyrus, the pagan Persian whom G od sovereignly commandeered for sacred service. No other p art o f the Bible gives us so panoramic a view of G od’s handiwork in Israel’s history nor such clear perspec­ tives of his lordship over the nations. If Beethoven’s nine symphonies loom as landmarks on the horizon o f classical music, Isaiah’s sixty-six chapters m ark the apex o f prophetic vision. T heir music, their majesty, their mystery combine to inspire, challenge, and intim idate the saints of G od from the least to the greatest, from the m ost naive to the m ost pro­ found. N o other part of Scripture will be well understood w ithout help from the text of Isaiah. John W atts’s innovative and sensitive treatm ent of the prophetic them es is a gift to all who treasure the Bible’s tru th and aim to live by i t x

Foreword

W ord Biblical Themes, a companion series to the W ord Biblical Commentary (WBC), seeks to distill the theological essence o f the biblical books as interpreted in the more technical series and serve it up in ways th at will enrich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship o f G od’s peo­ ple. Professor W atts, as O ld Testament editor of both series, is admirably qualified to make an early contribution to the Themes. H is two-volume w ork on Isaiah in the W BC has set high standards and has been warmly welcomed by schol­ ars, pastors, and students alike. This exposition of the settings and teachings o f Isaiah is sent forth in the hope that it will contribute to the vitality o f G od’s people, renewed by the W ord and the Spirit and ever in need o f renew al. Fuller Theological Seminary Pasadena, California

ISAIAH

David A. H ubbard General Editor W ord Biblical Themes W ord Biblical Com m entary

x

PREFACE

Yahweh and his servants T he Book of Isaiah is one o f the greatest in the Bible in tw o respects. O n the one hand, its presentation o f the char­ acter and w ork of G od is revelation at its best. O n the other, it treats the them e o f serving G od and those w ho do it as comprehensively as any part of Scripture. T he m ain them es o f this book fall into these tw o categories. T he treatm ent of knowing G od uses the names th at are applied to him m ost frequently. These names in tu rn fall into tw o categories: G od in his governance o f the world, the nations, and Canaan, and G od as he is know n and w or­ shiped in his temple. The service of G od may also be divided into tw o basic forms that correspond to the understanding of G od’s w ork and presence. There are servants of G od who relate to him in governing, and there are servants who are related in worship. Again the treatm ent in this book deals w ith them accordingly. Before each of the sections a group of pertinent them es th at are basic to Isaiah’s presentation are treated. References in the text that follows w hich refer to the companion vol­ umes in the W ord Biblical Com m entary are abbreviated as W BC, w ith volume 24 referring to Isaiah 1-33 and volume 25 referring to Isaiah 34-66. xi

Preface

PA RT 1 K N O W IN G GOD A N D HIS WAYS

1

KNOW ING GOD

T he V ision of Isaiah begins w ith G od’s com plaint th at Israel, his own people, his children, had rebelled against him (1:2). H e had done so m uch for them and given them so much, but they did n ot know him. They did n o t understand (1:3). This them e is central to th e book. Israel failed o r was unw illing to recognize w hat G od had done and was cur­ rently doing for and w ith them . T his unwillingness was rebellion against G od’s revelation, his leading, and his calling. They preferred to th in k o f G od as passive, n o t stirring until they sum m oned him . They preferred to seek knowledge and understanding o f themselves and th eir situ­ ation o r th eir fate on their ow n o r by pagan astrology, magic, or idolatry. In fact G od had show n him self to th eir fathers through his ow n initiative. H e sought them out. H e called. H e revealed himself. T heir proper role lay in re­ sponding to him , in seeing his w ork, hearing his w ord, in paying attention to his call. By turning to him , knowledge and understanding were available. N onetheless this they were unw illing o r unable to do. Even after th e exile and its judgm ent on the kingdom s o f Israel and Judah for th eir 3

Knowing God

refusal to recognize G od in their history, their lives, or th eir future, m ost o f them continued in the same way— and of­ ten, so do we. T he condem nation and adm onition o f th e V ision of Isaiah applies to us as w ell Isaiah takes up the basic problem th at was identified in Genesis w hen Adam and Eve could n ot let alone the Tree o f the Knowledge of G ood and Evil. Knowledge is necessary in both cases, b u t there is a right form and a wrong form. Isa 1:18-19 pleads w ith Israel to be ready to discuss the issue w ith God: “Come now! Let us test each other . . . become willing and obey.” Like Genesis 3, any other course is under­ stood to be rebellious refusal and punished accordingly. T he V ision assumes and proclaims G od’s revelation of his intention and his interpretation of his acts. It calls on G od’s people to see G od at work, to hear and pay attention to G od’s instruction, to know and understand what he is doing and saying. We are called to repent, to tu rn to G od so that G od can tu rn to us and make events tu rn in our favor. We are challenged to “be willing,” to “test G od” (KJV, “reason to­ gether”), and to “wait” on him in hope. In 6:9-10 the issue of understanding is addressed again. The prophet is told that the time for gaining understanding is passed, and he is given to understand how this should have been achieved. T he heart (mind) must be sensitive and recep­ tive. T hen people can “see w ith their eyes” and “hear w ith their ears.” T hen they can “tu rn and have healing.” Godly knowledge and understanding is gained in that way. B ut Israel has refused to do th a t Judgment is decreed on the N orthern Kingdom in the eighth century B.C. She will not be allowed to repent at that stage. Yet the book will go on to offer new opportunities to the post-Exilic community for this knowl­ edge and understanding. O ne of the gifts that G od bestows on the king (11:2) is a spirit o f understanding and knowledge. So that w hich G od had sought in vain from his people is given freely to the Davidic king so th at he can fulfill his function properly (WBC 24:172). ISAIAH

4

O ne of the ideal conditions that will characterize the achievement of God’s society on earth is that the “knowledge of Yahweh shall cover the land as waters cover the sea” (11:9). How central and how im portant this knowledge of G od is (WBC 24:173). Israel does not improve. Israel “is not a discerning people,” but continues to be blind and deaf to G od and his calling (27:11). But a day is coming when the deaf will hear and w hen the blind will see, when “those errant of spirit will know understanding” (29:22-24). In this time it will be clear that the one “who does not understand” is an idolater. 30:12-18 provides an illustration of what being “rebellious sons, not willing to heed Yahweh’s instruction” (30:9) leads to. “Rejecting this word” (30:12), they refuse to go along w ith God’s plan. They will not accept a passive role in world poli­ tics as G od has called on them to do since the days of Uzziah, so that they can assume a new role as G od’s spiritual repre­ sentatives to the world. This calls for a willingness on their part to tu rn inward in faith and to rest on God’s grace and promises. In returning and rest you could be saved. In quietness and in trust could your heroism consist But you are not willing! (30:15; cf. W BC 24:397) 32:1-8 provides an illustration of what it would be like if “a king should reign in righteousness and . . . princes should rule with justice” (32:1). If the world were turned on its head so values would be right, “if the eyes of those who see should look, and the ears of those who hear should hearken and the mind of the hurried have sense to know” (32:3-4a), then things would be rig h t The fool would be recognized for what he is (32:5-6), and the noble person would act nobly (32:8). The people of G od are still often blind and unperceptive about the ways of G od and consequently do not perceive clearly the false ways of leaders in government. W hen we are 5

Knowing God

blind and irresponsible, we stand judged along with the fools and knaves whom we fail to identify and remove (WBC 24:413-14). In 37:20, Hezekiah concludes his prayer for deliverance from Sennacherib’s siege of Jerusalem w ith the words: Now, Yahweh, our G od, deliver us from his hand, and all the kingdoms of the land shall know th at you are Yahweh, you alone. (37:20) Hezekiah pleads w ith G od to see and react to w hat he sees (37:17), although Hezekiah him self has often rejected G od’s plan; in fact this very opposition to G od’s policies an­ nounced to his father (chaps. 7-9) was responsible for his present predicam ent Nevertheless, Israel understood G od’s great acts o f salva­ tion (like the Exodus) as a prim e means o f revelation. So she now prays for deliverance th at can be a new means o f revela­ tion to all th e neighboring peoples (WBC 25:37). 41:20 reads: In order that they may see and know, th at they may position themselves and understand (these) together th at Yahweh’s hand has done this and that the Holy O ne of Israel has created i t This comes at the end o f tw o chapters in which G od has announced th at good news is coming to Jerusalem and in w hich he calls on Jewish exiles to carry it to them . Israel complains o f hum an frailty (40:6-7) and o f divine neglect (40:27). T hen G od urges Israel to recognize that all the great things that are happening in her day have been designed by G od to serve her interests. If this leaves Israel “poor and needy,” it is because she does n o t need power or wealth to fulfill her role. Cyrus will take care o f those things. She is ISAIAH

6

called to worship, rejoice, and sing praises to God. He will take care of her other needs. T he New Testament stresses a similar them e for C hris­ tians. Paul says “G od’s power is made perfect in weakness” (2 C or 12:9, NIV). H eb 13:14 points beyond the privations o f this w orld to “the enduring city,” and 1 Pet 1:8 (NIV) calls on believers to be “filled w ith inexpressible and glorious joy.” Isaiah notes th at Israel still needs urging in this respect G od does just th at in 49:22-23, calling on Jerusalem in verse 23 to recognize his plan working out in history: A nd you will know that I am Yahweh, I in whom those waiting will never be disappointed. H e then assures her o f universal recognition: A nd all flesh will know th at I am Yahweh, your Savior and your redeemer, M ighty O ne of Jacob! (49:26b) A single leader (possibly Zerubabbel; W BC 24:197-98) confesses to being tutored to be w hat Israel clearly had never learned to be, n o t rebellious: My Lord Yahweh has assigned me a student’s tongue to know how to sustain a weary one (with) a word. H e wakes up m orning by m orning— he wakes up my ear to listen as students do. My Lord Yahweh has opened my ear. A nd I, on my part, have n o t been rebellious. I have not turned my back (to him). (50:4-5) T he people continue to “forget” G od (51:13), b u t G od continues to reveal him self and hopes the people may know him . 7

Knowing God

My people shall know my name in that day because I am the one w ho keeps saying “Behold me!” (52:6) T he great servant passage (52:12-15) announces astonish­ ing success and ends w ith the assurance: “A nd that of which they had heard nothing they understand” (52:15b). A t this point in the book G od’s plan should be clear and under­ standable for all to see. H e is working out a way for Israel and Jerusalem through the Persians: first Cyrus and now Darius. T he great chapter 53 is a very complicated passage dealing w ith understanding. O ne has died, despised and rejected (53:3), b ut the recognition comes that “he died for our trans­ gressions” (53:4-5a). Furtherm ore, we understand that heal­ ing and wholeness have come to us because of his suffering and death (53:5b— 6). T hat G od can actually bring about such healing and effect good through w hat is a wrongful punish­ m ent and death is a mystery. Yet we all know of instances in which something like this happens. T he New Testament points us to the unique m om ent w hen a cross was lifted be­ tw een heaven and earth w ith that resu lt But such a climax does n o t make all blindness or rebellion disappear in Israel, or in the church. Isa 56:10 complains: H is watchmen are blind. N one of them knows anything. Revelation 1-3 also portrays the churches o f Asia having lost their eager faith and love. T he frustration of trying to please G od is pictured in 58:2 as they are apprised of their rebellions. Even as they seek me day by day and delight to know my ways.

ISAIAH

8

Just “meaning well” does n o t please God. T he required knowledge m ust include an understanding o f G od’s will and his requirements. T he people are devout in their fasting and self-denial (58:3b). B ut this turns to “strife and contention,” even to violence (52:4a). They are told: You may n ot fast as (you have) today (if you want) to make your voice heard on high! (58:4b) T he worship G od chooses is: O pening the bonds of wickedness, undoing the bindings of a yoke, and sending out the oppressed to be free. (58:6) A t this stage Israel is still learning the lessons it had desper­ ately needed in chapter 1 on how to worship, and we are still learning them , too. A generation is condemned in chapter 59 because of wickedness. They have n ot know n a way of peace and there is no justice in their paths. (59:8a) But the promise is renewed to the new generation in Jerusalem that G od will now act on their behalf: you will know that I am Yahweh, your Savior and your Redeemer, the M ighty O ne of Jacob. (60:16b) As the book moves toward the climactic m om ent w hen a new Jerusalem, a new creation, is revealed w hen all may come to worship, there are still those who w ant nothing to do w ith it. G od says:

9

Knowing G od

I spread out my hand all day tow ard a rebellious people who are walking in ways th at are not good, after their own thoughts. (65:2) These are “forsaking Yahweh and forgetting the m ount o f his holiness” (65:11). T he last great scene has one verse on knowledge even for th at day w hen faith becomes sight: A nd you will see and your heart shall rejoice. . . . A nd it is know n th at Yahweh’s hand (is) w ith his servants and indignation (is) w ith his enemies. (66:14) T he Book o f Isaiah portrays the need to know G od, w hat he is doing, and w hat he wants. It is very realistic in recog­ nizing that most of us do n o t w ant to know, o r in knowing, refuse to accept th e knowledge as our guide. Yet knowing and obeying means life; refusing and rejecting means death.

Between the golden moments Biblical history records a few, short, golden moments such as the life of Abraham, the Exodus from Egypt, the year at Sinai, the renewal of the Covenant and the occupation o f Canaan (Deuteronomy-Joshua), David and Solomon’s reigns, and the restoration of Jerusalem (Ezra-Nehemiah). Between these are long, drab periods like Jacob and his sons in Egypt (four hundred years), the two-hundred-year period of the Judges (Judges-1 Samuel), the divided monarchy to the Exile (ca. four hundred years). Obviously, biblical life is much more occupied w ith life in the valleys of experience than w ith mo­ m ents on its m ountaintops. Life and history are still experi­ enced in such terms. Isaiah depicts a long history of one of these drab periods w hen the lighter, better moments are relatively few and n o t ISAIAH

10

very significant It highlights and celebrates some of those that are surprising: the survival of Jerusalem’s royal house and throne in 733 B.C. and 720 B.C. (chaps. 7-9) and (chap. 11), the survival of Jerusalem in 701 B.C. (chaps. 36-39), the return of Sheshbazzar’s small expedition and of Zerubabbel's efforts to rebuild the temple in 538 and 518 B.C., and Ezra-Nehemiah’s work in 468 and 443 B.C. T here is nothing here to compare w ith the Exodus or the united monarchy, b u t drab periods can be the showcases for heroism o f a peculiar sort and of grace that is noteworthy. Twelve generations of Israelites and Judeans experienced that kind of grace, b u t they often failed to note the smaller heroic moments that Isaiah depicts. Readers of the book are shown the overarching strategy of G od that shaped those centuries, and they can rejoice in the per­ sistent grace and providence that stood watch over an unsee­ ing, unhearing, unknowing, and nonunderstanding people. God’s promise and purpose continued to be valid for his people if they would only hear, see, believe, and obey.

Unchanging promises W hat are those unchanging promises? W hat are the forms th at have to change from age to age? Israel had lived with some fixed ideas concerning God’s commitments and, therefore, of her fate/future. From Abra­ ham came the firm promise of being a numerous people and of occupying the land of Canaan. From Sinai came a covenant w ith twelve tribes that they were the heirs of Abraham and would live under G od’s laws in God’s land, enjoying his pres­ ence and blessing. From David came the first full control of the promised land and its blessings as well as the promise of an abiding throne in Jerusalem. All of these were fulfilled to varying degrees during the period between the Exodus and the Exile, but they were also for the most part lost during the painful centuries depicted in Isaiah 1-39. The divided N orth­ ern Kingdom became an Assyrian province in 731 B.C. A fter a century and a half of abject vassalage, Judah and Jerusalem 11

Knowing God

were devastated by the Babylonians in 586 B.C., and the king was murdered, although a relative survived in Babylon w ith­ out country or throne. Israel’s prophets record these devastations. They insist that the Lord, Israel’s God, had deliberately brought them about because the people and the kings had broken covenant w ith him. They were no longer capable of being his people and accomplishing his purpose. Things needed to be changed, and offending persons, groups, and institutions had to be removed. A t th e same time, there were num erous questions af c ing those w ho sur­ vived these calamities. H ow could G od do this and still rem ain true to his promises to David to give him an heir o n his throne in Jerusalem forever? W hat w ould happen to G od’s prom ise to Abraham to give him a land and a “seed” forever? These seemed to prom ise th at Israel’s existence as a people, a nation under a Davidic king, was guaranteed in Canaan forever. O ther questions turned on how the provisions o f the Sinai Covenant applied to the situation. The Book of D euteron­ omy and the Prophet Jeremiah approached Israel’s problem from this direction, seeing a context for understanding the disaster as punishm ent for breech of covenant but also open­ ing the door to covenant renewal beyond the judgm ent The Vision o f Isaiah (like the other prophetic books) tack­ les these questions head on. It first establishes God’s prove­ nance on a broader base, more like that relating to Noah and his sons (Genesis 6-10) as well as his Creator-lordship over all nature. O n the understanding that he is Lord o f all history and all the nations, he summons first Assyria and then Persia to assume imperial control of the government over all the land (Canaan) as well as a wider frame of empire that encom­ passed the know n world. Thus the economic and political netw ork of tribes and city-states (like that described in Gene­ sis 10), which had in varying forms and degrees been the way of life in the Middle East for over a millennium, was brought to an end. A new age of empire was begun. ISAIAH

12

It is in this sense that the Assyrian is summoned into Canaan (chaps. 8-10) and the Persian is given Babylon’s em­ pire (chaps. 45-47). G od has now fashioned a new frame of reference, but what shape would the fulfillm ent of his pur­ pose and promises take? Obviously they could no longer be the same as they had been before. The new setting also allowed for some accomplishments that the older order did not. The promise to Abraham had spoken of a blessing through Abraham for all the clans of the earth (Gen 12:3). Even David’s wider scope of authority only reached the na­ tions of “the land” (Psalm 2), that is, of Canaan. David’s reign also was promised a wider reach and influence than the land of Canaan and the politics of that age could accommodate. So while the change to imperial age brought an end to the geographical identity of the twelve tribes in Canaan and the political identity w ith Israel’s own king in Jerusalem, it also opened new possibilities for living out and experiencing th e gracious purpose of G od in Israel’s existence as a people. T he prophets opened doors to the faith, the hope, and even th e understanding that related to these. T he Book of Isaiah draws its own particular picture of th at future w ith God. First, they said, things are n o t always w hat they seem. Knowledge and understanding require th at one keep up w ith G od’s goals, decisions, and strategies if one is to evalu­ ate events and their significance. Isaiah contends th at Israel’s troubles in the eighth century were due to her own apostasy, the working out of rebellion th at began w ith the division o f the kingdom; th at the Assyrian’s invasions were n o t sim­ ply the w ork of a greedy, violent neighbor, b u t were the intended w ork of G od himself; th at Ahaz’s policies o f ap­ peasement were n o t simply the traitorous and cowardly poli­ cies of a weak and idolatrous king, b u t were in obedience to the revealed purposes of G od w ith the Assyrian; th at Hezekiah’s rebellions were not the courageous and princi­ pled w ork of a hero, b u t the unwise and willful sin of a rebel against G od’s announced strategy for Judah th at almost lost him his capitol and his throne a century before it had to be.

13

Knowing God

Isaiah further sees the Persian emperors, Cyrus (explicitly) and Darius and Artaxerxes (implicitly) n ot as rapacious con­ querors, b u t as servants of G od w ho will build his tem ple in Jerusalem. This list could be extended. Seen from G od’s perspective, things are often different than one usually judges them to be. Second, the prophet said that the divine promises are still valid. G od’s strategy still has a vital role for Israel in this new and very different age. This new role is even furthered by Israel’s condition: being scattered through the empire. A num ber of the older forms of fulfillm ent, however, are n o t m entioned, the twelve tribes in Canaan and th e Davidic kingship being tw o that are om itted. T he new shape o f prom ise-fulfillm ent in Isaiah revolves around w orship in a rebuilt Jerusalem and o n Israel contin­ uing to be recognized as G od’s Servant (parallel to Cyrus), even in Babylon. G od’s purpose is furthered by a servantleadership in Jerusalem, even w hen th a t involves submis­ sion to abuse (chap. 50) and death (chap. 53). T he V ision takes up aspects o f A braham ’s prom ise and David’s role th a t have n o t usually been stressed; Israel’s new servant role is to highlight these.

Pride and Humility G od’s problems w ith m ankind have turned on the hum an tendency tow ard arrogant pride and ambition. Genesis makes this plain in the stories about Adam, Eve, and C ain (chaps. 3-4) and the tow er o f Babel (11:1-9). Isaiah picks up the them e and reemphasizes th at such haughty pride is ulti­ mately intolerable to God. T here is a day belonging to Yahweh of H osts upon everything high and raised and upon everything lifted up— and it shall fall. . . . A nd the haughtiness of the hum an shall be brought dow n and the exaltation of m en shall be abased ISAIAH

14

and Yahweh alone shall be exalted in that day. (2:12,17; see W BC 24:37) Politically, the fell of Babylon is portrayed as the symbol of every tyrant’s af te: "How oppressing has ceased! Arrogance has ceased! Yahweh has shattered the staff o f the evil ones, th e rod o f rulers. . . . A ll the land is at rest, is quiet. They break into joyful song.” (14:4b-5,7; W BC 24:204) Israel’s rebellion against G od and G od’s strategy is, at least in part, m otivated by this prim eval passion. She, too, w anted to be a nation like th e nations (1 Sam 8:20). This was granted to h er w ith th e result th at she shared their fete. T he post-Exilic com m unity continued to show signs o f these ambitions, and idolatry and paganism continu­ ally pandered to these passions, despite the lessons o f th eir history Indeed, he has hum bled those living in the height, H e makes a lofty city fell, H e makes it fell to earth, H e makes it even touch the d u st (26:5) T he absolute requirem ent for successful servanthood is humility. It leads to the “knowledge and understanding” th at Israel lacked. It makes it possible to “see” w hat G od is about and to “hear” w hat G od is saying. O nly then are obedience and faith possible. T he Prophet Isaiah found it necessary to withdraw from public life to get this: “I will wait for Yahweh w ho is hiding his face from the house o f Jacob and I will hope for him ” 15

Knowing God

(8:17). T he V ision stresses this in term s o f “willingness and obedience”: If you become willing and shall obey, the good of the land you may eat, b u t if you refuse and shall continue obstinate (by a) sword you may be devoured. (1:19-20) G od assures the individual who is “contrite” and “lowly in spirit” that his reviving presence will be w ith him or her (57:15). H e evokes from his listening worshipers a form o f service that allows each one: A day for a hum an to hum ble himself. . . . Is n o t this the fast I would choose: opening the bonds of wickedness, undoing the bindings o f a yoke, and sending out the oppressed to be free? . . . Is it n o t sharing your bread w ith the poor, and th at you bring homeless poor persons into your house? W hen you see one naked and you cover him, and you do not hide your self from your own flesh, then your light will break out like the dawn and your healing will spring up in a hurry. . . . T hen you may call and Yahweh will answer (58:5a, 6 ,7-8a, 9a). This service is one o f the acts o f justice and mercy (58:9b10), and w hen one: honors (the Sabbath) by n o t doing your own way n o t seeking your own pleasure or speaking an (idle) word. (58:13c) Nehemiah’s program (Nehemiah 5) aptly fits this description. Jesus’ words in M att 6:5,23:6; Luke 11:42— 43,20:46 speak to ISAIAH

16

the imperative for humble service and the abomination o f pride, especially in its religious expression.

The vision of the ideal * T he Book of Isaiah is a very realistic book in most ways. It recognizes the inevitable religious results of Israel’s apostasy and Jerusalem’s infidelity. It sees th e political effects o f the rise of empires w ith unclouded vision. It sees the only hope of Exilic and post-Exilic Judaism to lie in being a nonpolitical religious community dependent on th e patronage of the Per­ sian emperor. O ne central dream gives structure to the book. It is paral­ lel to M icah’s use of the same passage (4:1-3). In 2:2-4 Isaiah pictures an exalted Zion as a worship center to w hich people from all nations will come. There they will encounter God, be taught his ways, and learn to walk in his paths. H is w ord and his law will go out from Zion. This vision of Zion’s future and Judaism’s future is fulfilled in Isaiah 66 and in the work of Ezra and Nehemiah. Jerusalem was rebuilt The temple became a functioning worship center for Judaism, and Jews from all over the know n w orld made their way to Jerusalem for its festivals and to learn what it m eant to be a Jew. This continued despite several interrup­ tions until A.D. 70 w hen Jerusalem was attacked and the tem­ ple finally destroyed. There is also a picture of a child to be bom to the H ouse of David in 7:14. Ahaz does have such a child. T he fulfill­ m ent o f that prophecy is hailed in 9:6-7 w ith all the extrava­ gant royal language th at only a monarchy based on divine promises to David and the psalmic ideals of Psalm 2 and others could m uster. Ahaz’s throne is secure. Hezekiah does succeed him in i t 10:28-34 pictures Yahweh’s approach to defend his city. 11:1-5 pictures G od’s gift of his Spirit to make the new m onarch capable of reigning in the style and * Used by permission, The Theological Educator 35 (1987): 84-90.

17

Knowing God

fashion o f his ancestor, David. 11:10-16 pictures the politi­ cal goals th at needed to be accomplished by a Hezekiah faced w ith the power o f Assyria and w ith the dispersal of so many f orm Israel in th at time. Some of them had been taken into exile; others had fled the terror at home. A real king would need to restore Israel’s capacity to function as a nation and to accept all those voluntary and involuntary exiles back to their homes. T he Book of Isaiah is realistic again in recognizing th at Hezekiah, following his own dreams o f power, came to his day of helplessness (chaps. 21 and 36-39). In this period the Book o f Isaiah records a vision o f w hat could be in international relations (chap. 19). Israel could play a crucial role in creating a peaceful coexistence w ith Assyria and Egypt. But again the book is realistic in recognizing that this did not come to pass. T he role of Egypt and Assyria in chapters 28-33 confirms the grim picture of reality. A fter the fell of Jerusalem and the beginning of the exile, Israel and the broken rem nants of Jerusalem are given a vision of restoration in term s th at are powerful (chaps. 40-44). Yahweh will raise up a new em peror w ith the assigned task of restoring Jerusalem. C hapters 45-48 show this to be fulfilled in the rise o f Cyrus and the policies of religious tolerance that he effected. However, Jerusalem’s actual restoration would come under his successors, Darius w ho supported Zerubabbel’s work (chaps. 49-54) and Artaxerxes who commissioned Ezra and Nehemiah (chaps. 59-66). This shows that much of the great idealistic vision in Isaiah was directly tied to hopes for Israel’s political and religious future. These optimistic pictures were sometimes superseded by the realistic recognition of failures (as in Hezekiah and in Egypt) or by realistic success (as in the post-Exilic restoration of the temple w ith Persian support). Radical ideals. But beyond and sometimes intermingled w ith these ideals o f temple and Davidic kingship are others that are even more radically ideal Micah adds a picture o f complete ISAIAH

18

peace (4:4) to the passage that it shares w ith Isa 2:2-4. In it there is a picture of individual freedom and toleration in which “all nations may walk in the name of their gods; we will walk in the name of the Lord our G od for ever and ever.” This was preceded in both M icah and Isaiah by a beautiful picture of disarmament and promise th at war will be no more. Persia achieved a partial realization o f such religious tolerance. But her determ ination to extend h er empire into Greece ruined all hope of peaceful coexistence w ith h er neighbors and eventually led to her downfall. T he overtones o f this idyllic vision o f peace among peo­ ples continue to haunt th e Book o f Isaiah. In 11:6-9 th e description o f an ideal Spirit-endow ed king is followed by a pastoral picture o f Jerusalem becom ing a simple village in w hich violence has no part. N ot only is there none o f th e m ilitary violence th at had stalked Jerusalem’s history as a national capital, there is no sign o f th e social violence th at brought Yahweh’s condem nation in 1:15,21-23. T here is even n o tension betw een nature’s traditional predators and th e innocent children. It is as though G od’s vision w ould take hum anity back to conditions like those in Eden. T he Bible pictures no such existence among hum ans since Adam and Eve were expelled from Eden. C ain and A bel began a reign o f violence th at had continued unbroken to th a t tim e and th at continues dow n to our ow n tim e. B ut the Book of Isaiah insistently inserts a rem inder th a t this violence can in n o way be correlated w ith w hat G od in ­ tended. Alongside th e revelation o f how G od w orks in th e m idst o f this violent and rebellious w orld, dealing o u t retri­ bution on its ow n term s and w orking out ways to make it possible for his ow n to w orship him , there persists this rem inder o f the ideal w hich G od intended in creation and still w ants for it. T he picture is resumed in 65:17-25. T he final verse picks up the them es of 11:6-9, including the refrain, “They will neither harm n or destroy in all my holy m ountain.” But this is preceded by the announcem ent of a totally new creation. 19

Knowing God

T hat is w hat it would take to gain this kind o f society. The Bible does n o t picture G od turning back the clock of time or the causality of decisions and deeds. It does rem ind its read' ers of G od’s creative power and th at none of the w orld’s violence is his idea or the result of his essential will. This passage relates the ideal to Jerusalem’s needs and dreams. G od relates to these. H e certainly cannot “rejoice” in the realistic picture of Jerusalem in th at period or since. H e pictures a totally new creation in w hich he can “rejoice” w ithout hesitation. In it the tragic realities of hum an life, such as infant mortality, economic uncertainty, and religious frustration, will n o t exist C hapter 66 returns to the violent, disruptive conditions of the fifth century B.C. (and o f hum an existence generally) to show how G od achieves victories even in that milieu, though the rebellion leaves a bitter taste in his m outh (66:24). The kinds of visionary passages. T he overview o f ideal or visionary elements in Isaiah has dem onstrated their perva­ sive presence in the book. It has also shown how various are the kinds of visions prevalent there. Some of these varieties may be classified. T he m ost prevalent is the vision of Yahweh G od of H osts at w ork in the real w orld of international politics to bring judgm ent and salvation. Through the use of this power G od deals w ith Israel and Judah, begins a new age, and restores Zion and the temple as places to w hich true seekers can go to find him and to worship him. It portrays G od as the one who summons the Assyrian as his rod of judgm ent and Cyrus, the Persian, as the one to restore Zion. A second picture portrays G od dealing w ith the deterio­ rated social situation th at came from decades o f war (chaps. 24-25). The curse of death was in the land and dominated all else. G od exercises his sovereign privilege to decree an end to killings and vengeance and an end to the curse that was brought on by the carnage (25:6-9). Sometimes things reach a state of hopelessness where only G od’s direct sovereign ISAIAH

20

intervention can change them . The V ision believes him ca­ pable of such decree. A nother visionary elem ent portrays the Davidic king in the way G od wanted him to function (chaps. 9 and 11). It was a vision that could have become a continuing reality in Hezekiah, b u t the vision only contrasted w ith Hezekiah’s failures to fulfill that role, and the vision of Davidic kingship does not recur in the book. A nother visionary feature is of a totally different society in which there is no violence of any kind (11:6-9 and 65:17-25). This ideal goes beyond even the vision of peace related to the new worship of 2:4 in which disarmament and political peace between nations will be achieved (see also Mic 4:4-5). It re­ captures the pastoral scene in Eden again (Genesis 2) where humans and animals are totally at peace w ith each other. A nother recurrent ideal is one of a nature w ithout desert or destructive elements (34:14-15), which recurs in relation to Israel’s return to a devastated Judah (40:4-5; 41:18-19; 42:15-16; 44:23; 55:12-13, and so on.). A constitutive visionary elem ent is that which pictures the achievement of an open, voluntary, and universal worship of Yahweh in Zion (2:2-4 and chap. 66). The function of these passages. W hat function do these pas­ sages fill in the Book of Isaiah and in the larger Scriptures? Especially, w hat do the idealistic passages portraying a com­ pletely nonviolent society and a nondestructive nature con­ tribute to the meaning of the book and o f Scripture? T he Book of Isaiah and the Bible as a whole show G od at w ork for the redem ption o f a people, elect and believing. T he passages that we have described in Isaiah teach us never to presume th at G od is “satisfied” w ith th e achievement o f certain goals, such as the building o f a new tem ple in Jerusalem or th e w orship there of a religious rem nant of his chosen ones. G od’s will moves far beyond that. H e holds to the “ideal” and will n o t settle for a partial, “realistic” achievement. H e 21

Knowing God

looks to the redem ption o f society so th at there will be no more violence there. H e is determ ined to achieve the redem ption of nature so there will be no more erosion or desert there. H e proposes nothing short of a whole new w orld based on the original model (Genesis 1-2). G od’s vision o f the world, o f society, and of nature has only begun to be fulfilled w hen a ransomed people are free to worship in Zion’s tem ple (Isaiah 66). M uch remains to be achieved before his ideal of a society w ithout violence and a nature w ithout devastation is achieved. Yet the Book of Isaiah proclaims that G od w ho created the heavens and the earth to begin w ith and who m anipulated the empires of history to do his will has the wisdom and the power to accomplish whatever he sets his m ind to do. The New Testament picks up the themes o f these passages. It sees beyond C hrist’s function in personal redem ption and redem ption of his church and the need for a cosmic redemption. Personal redem ption in the m idst of a fallen w orld is glorious, b ut it is not the whole picture of God’s goal. The victory of the “righteous” over the “wicked” is praiseworthy, but it is n o t complete. The creation of churches as islands of faith in an ocean of social unrest that makes up the w orld is not enough for God’s purposes. N ot un til th e entire cosmos is redeem ed can he be satis­ fied. T hat calls for a new heaven and a new earth, w ith a new nature in w hich hum an and animal life are reconciled and complementary, w ith a new society o f tolerance, faith, and peace. O nly th en can th e full heavenly chorus sing the praises o f redem ption fully achieved. T he ideal passages in Isaiah (as in the New Testament) are a rem inder of the nature and will o f G od th at cannot be satisfied w ith any­ thing less.

God’s invitations T he V ision documents G od’s continued welcome to all w ho w ould seek him or respond to him. Parallel to admoniISAIAH

22

tions to do G od’s will are the w onderful invitations. They begin in 1:18-19: Come now! Let us test each other, says Yahweh. If your sins are like the scarlet robes like the snow they may become white. If they are red like crimson, like wool they may become. If you become willing and shall obey, the good of the land you may eat! Provision can be made for forgiveness and atonem ent, b u t a willing and obedient spirit is required. G od continues to seek such to w orship and serve him. A nother invitation was extended to an incredulous Ahaz w hen Isaiah inform ed him that his fears were groundless. O nly faith is required. If you will n o t believe, certainly you cannot be confirmed! (7:9b) Yet G od offers to encourage that faith: Ask for yourself a sign from Yahweh your God, making it deep as Sheol or raising it to a height! (7:11) Ahaz refuses the offer, b u t G od gives the sign anyway. T he required faith is n ot a test of virtue b u t a necessity of life w ith God, and G od offers to help it along in any useful way. G od only requires a willing and obedient response th at only the person can express. T he invitations rise from G od’s will to be gracious to his people and to all who seek him: Surely, Yahweh waits to be gracious to you. Surely, he rises up to show you mercy, for Yahweh is a G od of justice. Blessed are all w ho wait for him! (30:18) 23

Knowing God

The strongest call for Israel to believe and obey comes in chapters 40-48. The tone is stronger than an invitation. God argues his case w ith pleas, proofs, and exhortations that Israel is still his servant, even in Babylon, that his salvation is still theirs. In the course of this argument he turns to the peoples of other nations (probably Canaan) w ith the invitation: Turn to me and be saved, all you borderlands! For I am God. There is no other. . . . For every knee bows to me! Every tongue swears (by me)! (45:22-23) T hat the invitation is open for any and all who will to share in Israel’s blessed estate is even clearer in chapter 55: This is the heritage of Yahweh’s servants, their right (given) by me. Oracle of Yahweh. Hail! Every one who thirsts, come to water! A nd whoever has no money come, buy, w ithout money and w ithout price, wine and milk. . . . Turn your ears and come to me. H ear that your soul may live. A nd I will make for you an age-long covenant The devotions of David—which are sure. . . . Seek Yahweh while he may be found! Call him while he is near! May the guilty forsake his way and the troublem aker his convictions. A nd may he tu rn to Yahweh that he may have compassion on him and to our G od that he may multiply pardon. (54:17e-55:l, 3,6-7) The invitation is given to everyone. It does not require an ability to pay. It does n ot exclude guilty sinners o r poor ISAIAH

24

suppliants. It does require, as in 1:18, willingness and obedience, and it does call for listening to G od’s word. T he ex­ te n t of the invitation is made explicit: it includes foreigners and eunuchs: Let the foreigner n ot say w ho has joined him self to Yahweh: “Yahweh will certainly keep me separate from his people.” Let the eunuch not say “See! I am a dried up tree.” For thus says Yahweh: To the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths and w ho choose w hat I will and who hold fast my covenant: I shall give them in my house and w ithin my walls hand and name. Better than sons and daughters, an age-long name I give to th em w hich will n o t be cut off. (56:3-5) This pronouncem ent makes no judgm ent on the rights o r wrongs of their condition, but it announces G od’s invitation to participate in his blessings, to m inister and worship in Yahweh’s name, and to be his servants. They, too, are invited to keep th e sabbath and hold fast the covenant. Foreigners who are joining themselves to Yahweh to m inister to him and worship the name o f Yahweh to be his servants, everyone keeping sabbath—n ot profaning it— and holding fast my covenant, I (will) bring them to my holy m ountain and make them to rejoice in my house of prayer. T heir b u rn t offerings and their sacrifices (are) acceptable on my altar. 25

Knowing God

For my house is to be called a house of prayer for all peoples. (56:6-7; W BC 25:250-51) T he basis for the invitation is defined in 57:15 (WBC 25:264): For thus says the one high and lifted up, Dweller Forever whose name is Holy: I dwell in the high and holy place w ith one contrite and lowly of spirit to revive the spirit of (the) hum ble ones and to revive the heart o f those practicing contrition. G od recognizes the difference betw een one who errs from his ways for a time, b u t is redeemable (57:16-19), and those properly called “adversaries” (KJV “the wicked”), w ho are thus considered incorrigible (57:20— 21; W BC 25:264). T he goal of the entire V ision focuses on the new tem ple in a new Jerusalem where those w ho respond to G od’s invi­ tation gather, worship, and serve. I pay attention to this (one): to a hum ble and contrite spirit who trembles at my word. . . . H ear the w ord of Yahweh, you w ho trem ble at his word! Look at me extending to h er (Jerusalem) (prosperous) peace like a river and the glory (wealth) o f nations like an overflowing stream (from which) you may suckle. . . . Like a person whose m other com forts (him), so I myself will com fort you and w ith Jerusalem you may (now) be com forted. (66:2b, 5a, 12,13)

ISAIAH

26

Refusing the invitation brings dire consequences. Those w ho reject it are identified as adversaries, rebels against G od and his cause. Even as these have fixed their choice on their ow n ways and their soul delights in their abominations, so I have fixed my choice on their afflictions and bring their w orst fears to reality for them . Because, w hen I called, no one answered. W hen I spoke, no one heard (me). Thus they did (what was) evil in my sight, and they fixed their choice on th at in w hich I took no delight. (66:3e-4; W BC 25:358) A nd it will be from a new m oon to its (following) new m oon, and from a sabbath to its (following) sabbath, all flesh will come to worship before me, says Yahweh. W hen they go out, they will look at the corpses of persons w ho were rebelling against me. For their worm will n o t die and their fire will n o t go out. But they will continue to be an abhorrence to all flesh. (66:23-24; W BC 25:366)

27

Knowing God

K N O W IN G GOD IN TH E W ORLD

2

G od is understood in Isaiah to be the sovereign ruler over all his creation and over Canaan particularly. This rule had been assigned to David and his successors on Zion’s throne (Psalm 2). T he Vision of Isaiah recognizes this assignment, especially in chapters 9 and 11 w here the Davidic king was called and established to exercise G od’s sovereignty over Canaan, its lands, and its kings. Yet the V ision also recognizes the failure of the monarchy. N orthern Israel no longer in any sense represented G od’s rule in the eighth century and was targeted for destruction (1:4-7; 9:8-10:19). The southern kings also proved unable to follow God’s plans; th at is, Hezekiah (chap. 22) and Josiah (chaps. 28-33). T he role of being ruler on G od’s behalf passed to the Assyrian. H e was to destroy rebellious king­ doms (7:17-10:25). H is assignment was specific, negative, and limited in time, b u t he was clearly G od’s instrum ent in a sense formerly reserved for a Davidic king. G od is know n in this relation to w orld powers by three names or tides: Yahweh o f H osts, O w ner of the Land, and C reator o f Heaven and Earth. ISAIAH

28

Yahweh of Hosts O ne aspect of G od’s being relates to his being lord and master, sovereign over societies, over nations, and over his­ tory. The title “Lord of H osts,” that is, “Lord of Armies,” expresses this. Isaiah uses the tide throughout. Yahweh is master of Israel, Judah, and Jerusalem, of their peoples, and of their rulers. H e establishes their leadership, determ ines their fate, prospers them w ith plenty, and judges them w ith deprivation. Isaiah understands that this Lordship extends as well to all the small nations in Canaan. T hat is the basis for the oracles over them in the book: the Philistines (14:29-32), Moab (15:1-16:14), Aram (17:1-8 as also 7:7-9), Phoenicia (23:1-18), and Edom (34:5-15). Yahweh is also Lord over the great nations beyond. Assyria’s rise to power is attributed to Yahweh’s decision (8:4-10,17-24), and his control continues over h er (10:519; 14:24-27; et passim). Babylon and its king come under Yahweh’s judgm ent (13:1—14:32,21:1-10). Arabia also earns his w rath (21:11-17), and Egypt and C ush are his concern (chaps. 18-19; et passim). G od uses the nations to accomplish his sovereign will. This is true in his use of Assyria to end the long regimes in Canaanite nations as well as in Israel’s Samaria. T he V ision of what in G od’s m ind could come to pass (chap. 19) pictures a world in which Egypt, Assyria, and Israel live in prosper­ ous peace, but the m ost specific example of G od’s use of a nation is portrayed in his dealing w ith the Persian rulers, Cyrus and his successors. Cyrus is raised up and established in pow er to be G od’s “servant,” even “his anointed.” H is task is very different from th at o f G od’s other “servant,” Israel. This task corre­ sponds to G od’s title as Lord o f H osts. Cyrus has had “his right hand strengthened to subdue nations . . . to open doors . . . [to] level city walls . . . [and] to shatter brass doors and cut apart iron bars” (45:1-2). H ere is the picture 29

Knowing God in the World

o f G od as w arrior and conqueror in history, preparing the way for th e astonishing rise o f C yrus to pow er over an em pire greater than had ever been know n to th at tim e— all "for th e sake o f my servant, Jacob, Israel, my chosen one” (45:4). W hereas Israel is called to a spiritual and humble m inistry before the Holy O ne, there is another side to G od’s relation to his creation. He is cognizant of and master of the use o f brute power, w hether its form be military, political, or social. G od is prepared to use that power fully; he had done so earlier through David (2 Samuel and passim in the Psalms). In Isaiah he is shown to be using th at power in the post-Exilic period through the empires, first the Assyrian and then the Persian, to create the conditions in Canaan and Jerusalem th at suited his purpose. (Daniel will later apply the same over­ sight and purpose to the Greek Empire, and John’s Apoca­ lypse will apply it to the Romans). G od is a realist, and he knows how to establish and use real political and military power to bring stability and a meas­ ure of justice to the time and over the area th at he needs. H e does so in order to make his holy purposes possible, th at his hum ble servants may exist and do his will. Cyrus was called and empowered, says th e Isaiah passage, “for the sake of my servant Jacob, Israel, my chosen” (45:4). G od says: I myself have aroused him w ithin my rights and I make all his paths straight. H e builds my city and sends out my exiles. (45:13; cf. 44:28) This is in the context o f the reminder: I myself have made the earth and I have created hum ankind upon it. I stretched o ut the heavens (with) my own hands and I commanded all their legions (of stars). (45:12) ISAIAH

30

This boggles the mind. T he C reator and Lord o f history has done all this, creating the w orld and ordering history, in order for his people to be able to serve and worship him properly! G od’s actions in directing history use the term “right,” “righteous,” or “w ithin my rights” (55:13). Also the w ord “salvation” appears regularly w ith it (45:8bc). T he expres­ sions assert G od’s “right” to regulate the nations as over against any perception of the “rights” of national deities and of the “right” he gives them to exercise authority over other nations. This particularly applies to their right to exercise dom inion in Canaan, Yahweh’s particular territory, and over peoples that Yahweh through David had claimed as his own. G od gives Cyrus, then Darius, and then Artaxerxes legiti­ macy as his own agents to m aintain civil order and to rebuild his temple city, Jerusalem (cf. W BC 25:133-35,158-62). T he one or other nation that is to carry out the Lord of H ost’s will in ruling and building, in m aintaining civil order and freedom of worship, is chosen for the task and granted G od’s own legitimacy. T hat nation or its ruler is G od’s tool for this purpose. To assume that the nation or ruler is more than this is to invite rejection and hum iliation (8:5-19; 13:17-19). These rulers and nations are tools in the hands of G od to fulfill his plan, to accomplish his purpose (14:24-27). They are considered “legitimate” or “righteous” only so long as they are accomplishing that purpose, which is to achieve “salvation” for G od’s own people. There are clearly tw o aspects of G od’s relation to people in this w orld. T he central one is expressed by Isaiah in the title “T he H oly O ne of Israel.” T he second is found in the tide “T he Lord o f H osts.” Yahweh covers both. T he Lord o f H osts corresponds to G od’s sovereignty over history and all th e forces th at compete in th a t arena: over kings and nations, armies and empires, governm ents and societies. G od uses these to create the conditions w ithin w hich th e hum ble may w orship and serve. H e also changes leadership and pow er to suit his purpose. Isaiah 31

Knowing God in the World

shows G od’s w ork stretching over centuries o f time; the view from any one person’s lifetime is bound to be partial and distorted.

The owner of “the land” Eras change some of the basic axioms w ithin w hich faith operates. A basic assum ption in the Pentateuch, particularly Deuteronomy, and in Israel’s orientation generally before the Exile, was th at the Lord intended all o f Canaan to be­ long to Israel. T he Law was given at Sinai but intended to regulate life “in the land” (see “Excursus: T he Land” W BC 24:316-27). T he Lord’s promise to Abraham included the people and “the land.” Deuteronom y and Joshua see “the land” as clearly distinct from Israel. It was already Yahweh’s land before Israel arrived. It was “a land the Lord your G od cares for. T he eyes of the Lord your G od are continually on it from the beginning of the year to its end. I send rain on your land” (Deut 11:10-12). It was a land inhabited by peoples of seven different ethnic groups (Deut 6.1 0 ,23; 7:1) whom the Lord promised to drive out (D eut 11:23). The extent of “the land” is defined: “from the desert to Lebanon and from the Euphrates to the w estern sea” (Deut 11:24, NIV). D eu­ teronom y recognizes th at Israel’s life “in the land” is contin­ gent on maintaining covenant (D eut 4:26). It also recognizes that Israel in Exile far from the land may still seek the Lord and find him (Deut 4:29). It is against this background that the Vision of Isaiah be­ gins to deal w ith the Exilic situation in w hich a large propor­ tion of Israel is no longer in the land and in which Persian control is complete and apparently perm anent. It moves to counter the hope expressed in Deuteronomy and Jeremiah that Israel’s future lay in a return to “the land” and a restora­ tion of the monarchy. Isaiah does not continue the assumption that Israel’s fu­ ture and the future of “the land” are inextricably linked or ISAIAH

32

that the Torah can only be observed “in the land.” It shows how Yahweh’s judgment has fallen on “the land” through the Assyrian armies. Repeated incursions devastated the nations that lived there: the Philistine cities (14:28-32); Moab (chaps. 15-16); the Arameans of Damascus (chap. 7); Edom (21:11— 12); and Tyre (chap. 23). The total devastation of “the land” is m ourned in chapter 24 (see W BC 24:313-22). Yahweh’s judgm ent fell on “the land” and “the peoples o f the land,” more precisely called “the border lands” (or “the ends of the earth”) and “the coastal lands” (or “the islands o f the sea”). This judgm ent is a part of G od’s action to end Davidic claims to be their liege-lord. T he nations now be­ come vassals of Assyria, Babylon, and Persia, as do Israel and Judah. W hen G od’s new era for Israel and Jerusalem is hailed (chaps. 40-48), these borderlands and coastal lands are called to be witnesses (41:1,5) and to be saved (45:22). T he lands are invited to send representatives to worship in Jerusalem’s new temple (66:18) as more distant peoples (66:19) are also called. This represents a fundamental difference from D euteron­ omy’s attitude tow ard these peoples. Instead of eliminating or driving them from the land, they are to be welcomed at Jerusalem’s festivals. Ezra still represents the exclusiveness o f Deuteronom y (cf. Ezra 9), b u t Isaiah represents a very differ­ ent accepting attitude. Note that the direction of movement in Isaiah 66 is toward Jerusalem. The New Testament will recognize a new era and a counterflow away from Jerusalem to Judea-Samaria and to the “ends of the land” (or “the earth”) (Acts 1:8). Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman of a day to come w hen “neither at this m ountain nor in Jerusalem” would worship be done, b u t “in spirit and in tru th ” (John 4:21). Isaiah’s trend is a step away from the identity of Israel’s hope w ith “the land” to a recognition of a legitimate place for Judaism out in the world, even while a rebuilt Jerusalem remains its symbolic center. T he New Testament takes one step further in w hich even 33

Knowing God in the World

th at geographic center is rem oved. The center of future at­ tention will be the heavenly Jerusalem (Rev 21:1-4), w hich parallels in wording many pictures in Isaiah. Isaiah seems to be saying th at the Torah’s linkage of Is­ rael’s life to “the land” belonged to th e form er age. G od may well be “the ow ner o f the land,” b u t his plans for Israel now involve his larger dom inion. His use o f the Persian emperors to rebuild the city o f Jerusalem and bring order in “the land” still show his concern, b u t Israel now functions on a differ­ en t level

The Creator of the heavens and the earth Every student o f Hebrew is aware th at th e w ord “create” in Genesis 1 is a rare w ord used only w ith G od as subject. T he highest concentration of uses of that w ord occurs in Isaiah 40-66. If diere should be any fear that Isaiah’s empha­ sis on G od as the ow ner o f Canaan represents a provincial and limited picture of God, this fact should dispel i t T he V ision begins w ith a disputation in which G od ac­ cuses his people. For this he summons the Heavens and the E arth as witnesses (1:2; W BC 25:93-94). W hen he is trying to persuade Israel in Exile th at he is arranging historical forces to help them achieve his destined goals for them , he reminds them that he created the universe (40:26,28; 42:5; 45:7,18). In powerful poetic images he pictures his own great being and power by contrasting it w ith the stars of the heaven that are as particles of d u st T he figure has only gained in meaning for our generation w ith our telescopes and m oon walks. We sing “How G reat Thou A rt!” and “H e’s G ot the W hole W orld in H is H ands” in response to just this teaching. T he point of these references in Isaiah is to insist th at the O ne w ho created the universe is great enough and skilled enough to manipulate historical forces to benefit his people if he so desires. G od uses this creative power to provide the means for Israel’s return and to encourage Jerusalem (41:20; ISAIAH

34

48:7). These tw o passages frame the long section (chaps. 40-48) in which G od appeals to Israel in exile to recognize their privileged position as his servants and to cooperate w ith his plan to redeem them . He pictures this effort to save them as a kind of new Exodus, recalling the miraculous and improbable event that was established in Jewish minds as the ultimate picture of salvation (Exod 6:1-15:21). G od does no t depend on favorable circumstances. H e creates the events he needs to accomplish his purposes. O ne may call them miracles. They testify to the sovereign, creative power of G od to save. Israel’s very existence is witness to G od’s creation o f her through all he has done (43:1, 7,15). She, like the universe and m ankind, is a product of G od’s creation. She reflects G od’s intentional, formative, constituting action, just as the creation of the w orld does. T he heart o f this section (chaps. 40-48) is chapter 45 which proclaims God’s choice of Cyrus to redeem Israel and restore Jerusalem. This chapter makes the awesome claim th at Yahweh, Israel’s God, set the events in m otion th at brought the Persian prince to be king of the Medes and the Persians and then to the conquest of all the territories from India’s border on the east to Greece on the west and Egypt in the southwest, w ith the specific purpose of having him restore Jerusalem and making it possible for Jews to w orship there. A ll w orld history becomes a frame for G od’s appear­ ance to m eet his worshipers in Jerusalem (chap. 66). In making his call to Cyrus, G od pictures him self as C re­ ator. H e insists that he alone is G od and th at his rule is universal (45:5-6). T hen he says: Form er of light, creator of darkness, m aker of peace, creator of violence, I am Yahweh, maker o f all these. (45:7) 35

Knowing God in the World

The claim is even more universal than that in Genesis 1. There Yahweh is portrayed as creator of all the positive things, such as order and light and dry land. H ere G od claims to originate both the positive and the negative. H e controls both “light” and “darkness,” both “peace” and “violence.” T hen G od pictures his w ork through Cyrus in parallel term s w ith his creation of the world. I myself have made the earth and I have created hum ankind upon i t I stretched out the heavens (with) my own hands and I commanded all o f their legions (of stars). I myself have aroused him (Cyrus) w ithin my rights and I make all his ways straight. H e builds my city and he sends out my exiles w ith neither bribe nor reward, says Yahweh of Hosts. (45:12-13) The speech identifies God, Lord of history, w ith God, Re­ deemer of Israel, and both w ith God, the C reator of all that exists. This magnificent and comprehensive statem ent shows how G od’s extensive power in creation is a macrocosm o f his work in history and of his work in the election and redemp­ tion of Israel. He creates all of i t T hen the climax o f G od’s creative w ork in Isaiah comes in “a new heaven and a new land,” in a Jerusalem w hich elicits joy and gladness (65:17-18). G od’s goals for his cre­ ation are also brought to accom plishm ent by his creative pow er w hen all things are created new. O u r hope for the present and th e future are based on the faith th at G od, the beneficent creator, is at w ork now and will bring all things to his desired end. John uses th e same faith for his climactic chapter w hen G od says “I am making everything new ” (Rev 21:5, NIV). T hat also includes “heaven and earth” and “Jerusalem.” ISAIAH

36

O u r hope rests on the belief th at God, our Savior, is also creator of all things. In this chaotic w orld there is no ulti­ mate hope in the constancy o f nature o r the goodness of historical processes. H ope is found now as it was for Exilic Israel in Isaiah’s firm conviction th at G od’s creative pow er w hich shaped the universe is directed tow ard redem ption and a new creation in w hich we are invited to participate. T hat is grounds for “joy and gladness” indeed (65:18-19).

37

Knowing God in the World

K N O W IN G GOD A M O N G HIS O W N PEOPLE

3

T he H oly O ne of Israel G en 1:27 refers to m an created in G od’s image. “Image” refers to a likeness made by casting or shaping by a form or mold. The product is n ot the same as the form, b u t is instead the opposite of the form, corresponding and fitting to it. C an it be that “created in G od’s image” means, n o t th at man is like God, b u t th at man corresponds negatively to God? W hat G od is, man is not? W hat man is, G od is not? D o the opposites correspond to each other? W hatever may be the case in Genesis, there is no doubt that the prophets stress these differences. G od exclaims: “I am G od and not man” (Hos 11:9b). Isa 2:10-18 expounds man’s tendency to be proud and arrogant when in fact only God can be properly exalted and high. Humanity that does not accept the fact that God is to be exalted and humans are to be hum ­ ble must experience humiliation; G od alone is to be exalted. This polar contrast is expressed throughout the V ision of Isaiah by the term for G od “the Holy O ne of Israel” and by the recognition that the proper attitude and position for his w orshiper is hum ility w ith a contrite demeanor. ISAIAH

38

G od’s holiness is best experienced and understood in the sanctuary where careful controls lim it contact betw een the holy and anything or anyone profane. Yet th e sanctuary makes contact possible in worship betw een the Holy G od and the less holy suppliant. This was true in the Tabernacle of Exodus-Leviticus and in Solomon’s temple. Isaiah por­ trays a time and place w hen Jerusalem will fulfill these func­ tions (2:2-4 and chaps. 65-66). T he book is n o t as concerned w ith sacrifice and priestly ordinances as Leviticus, b u t it is fully aware of the issues relating to G od’s holiness. G od was outraged by the violation of Jerusalem’s holy precincts through violence and injustice (1:10-15,21-25). T he threefold sanctus, “Holy, Holy, Holy,” greets the prophet at the entrance to God’s heavenly court (6:3) and brings im­ mediate recognition of uncleanness which m ust be purged. A nd so it is throughout the book. G od is holy. This aspect of G od’s being m ust be m et by contrition and worship. O ne responds to this by seeking G od in his holy place. This is done through pilgrimages to Jerusalem in 2:2-4 and in 66:19-21. Experiencing G od’s presence in the Holy C ity is open to everyone: to Israelites wherever they are as well as those from the nations (Gentiles) w ho wish to worship him . T he journey and the worship exercises are expressions o f hum ility and contrition th at are appropriate and appreciated by the Holy O ne of Israel. T he them e, however, is expressed elsewhere. G od’s holi­ ness is visualized in his being exalted. His city is exalted above all the m ountains (2:2). H is throne is “high and ex­ alted” (6:1). H e dwells in “a high and holy place” (57:15b). But he does n o t dwell there alone. H e seeks worshipers in these places to share his presence, those w ho can fit th at relation, who are “hum ble and lowly in spirit” (57:15b). Those who climb the m ountain in 2:2-4 seeking God, his instruction, and his justice are those w ho w ant to “walk in his ways” (2:3b). The prophet in G od’s throne room knows contrition for his condition and seeks relief from it (6:5). O nly then is he prepared to be G od’s messenger w ith a harsh 39

Knowing Cod among His O w n People

and difficult message (6:8-13). The “servants of Yahweh” who are invited to God’s free feast of all good things are not the good; they are the repentant and contrite (55:7). G od recog­ nizes the difference between himself and them (55:8-9) b u t holds out his open invitation to all, including the eunuch and the foreigner who in hum ility can maintain justice (56:1) and keep the sabbath (56:2). He wants his temple to be know n as “a house of prayer for all nations” (56:7c). This is the spirit and attitude o f the chosen one who sings: T he Spirit of my Lord Yahweh is on me because Yahweh has anointed me. To bring good news to poor persons, he has sent me, to bandage one w ith broken hearts, to proclaim liberty to captives and an opening to those imprisoned, to proclaim the year of Yahweh’s favor and our G od’s day o f vengeance, to com fort all m ourners. (61:1-2) These words are positioned in the V ision at a place that may represent Ezra’s mission. They were appropriated by our Lord Jesus C hrist as descriptive of his ow n mission (Luke 4:14-21). T he hum ility reflected in these words, like th at of the hum bled teacher in 50:4-9 and the one slain in the service o f Yahweh (53:3-5) and of the prophet (6:5), is characteristic of the hum ility expected of anyone serving the Holy O ne of Israel. B ut this is also true of every w orshiper of the Holy God, n o t only of the leaders. For thus says one high and lifted up, Dweller Forever whose name is Holy: I dwell in the high and holy place w ith one contrite and lowly o f spirit

ISAIAH

40

to revive the spirit of hum ble ones and to revive the heart of those practicing contrition. (57:15) This is in contrast to those pagans w ho establish “their bed on a m ountain, high and lifted up, and who go up there to sacrifice” (56:7). The pagan exalts himself; G od’s kind of w orshiper humbles him self or herself and thus qualifies for an exalted place where the truly Exalted O ne, the Holy O ne of Israel, lives. For the new temple in a new city that G od is having made in Jerusalem, he announces: I pay attention to this (one): to a hum ble and contrite spirit w ho trembles at my word. (66:2b) T he one w ho fits the mold, w ho is indeed in the image o f G od as his counterpart, matches hum ility and contrition to G od’s holy exaltation. In this, creation is perfected and crowned.

God in Zion There is no more than a hint in the Pentateuch that God has any special interest in Jerusalem. Early in Abram’s sojourn in Canaan he meets a certain Melchizedek, king of Salem, and receives his blessing (Gen 14:18-20). T hat is all. David’s conquest of Jerusalem and his determ ination to build a temple to Yahweh in his capitol (2 Samuel 6-7) changed th a t The temple and th e city, as they are celebrated in the Psalms, become a central focus for biblical worship and piety. T he temple takes the place and function of the Torah’s tabernacle (Exodus 25-40) and the sacrifices author­ ized there (Leviticus 1-16) as well as for the priesthood insti­ tuted there.

41

Knowing God among His Own People

Wh e n th e prophetic books refocus Israel’s faith for th e new era in w hich they no longer have a land o r country o f their ow n, Jerusalem assumes a central role. T he restora­ tio n of th e tem ple (Haggai and Zechariah 1-8) and th e later restoration o f th e w hole city (Ezra-Nehemiah) becom e th e goals of Judaism th a t give them a central and unifyting focus. In these developments the Bible also comes to emphasize an understanding o f G od as the one who is present and revealed in Zion and in Zion’s w orsh\ forms. As such, the a p e rie n te of seeing and worshiping G od in Jerusalem’s temple becomes the prototype for all liturgical and worship forms used by those w ho depend on the Bible for inspiration and dinection Isaiah is a pivotal book in shaping this view of “G od w ho dwells in Zion.” G od’s attitude tow ard Jerusalem in the eighth century is described in chapter 1. T he ravages of invasion leave Zion isolated and exposed (1:8), and the fact that she continues to exis t at all is due to G od’s grace (1:9). T he verses could be a summation of the situation pictured in chapters 36-37 and 2 Kgs 18-19 (WBC 24:38, 124). To this Jerusalem, G od addresses words of correction and o f invitation. H e rejecte their idea that worship for Yahweh consists in blood sacrifice (1:11-15). Instead he calls for pu­ rity and justice (1:16-17). H e insists th at sins can be forgiven (1:18). W hat is esse n tia l is willingness and obedience, desira and discipline. Refosal and rebellion are intolerable (1:19­ 20). U nfortunately, Jerusalem at th at tim e does not represent these essential elements. A vision follows o f w hat Zion and worship there must become (2:2-4). It will be elevated so that “all nations,” “many peoples,” will be drawn to it. It will be know n as “the m oun­ tain of Yahweh,” the place where “the house of the G od o f Jacob” is. W orship is portrayed as receiving instruction in the ways of G od so th at w orshipers may “walk in his paths.” T hen Zion is identified as the place from which .Torah (in­ struction or possibly the Pentateuch) comes, the place where ISAIAH

42

“the w ord of Yahweh” may be heard. There nations and peo­ ples may be affirmed by G od in ways of peace. This description stands in contrast to the Jerusalem of 1:10-23. It also stands in contrast to David’s Jerusalem, w hich was the capital from which his conquering armies moved, or Solomon’s Jerusalem, which was the headquarters for a small empire taxing and controlling almost all of Canaan (“the land”). To change the Jerusalem of 1:10-23 into that of 2:2-4 would take patience and would be a long process. The Vision of Isaiah recounts the process: 3:1-4:1 describes the disinte­ gration of the old systems, 4:2-6 describes in symbolic term s the caustic cleansing of the city and the creation of a protec­ tive canopy for the holy city. The Zion that the Psalms present is one in which God’s authority over the nations (that is, over history) is experi­ enced as the Davidic ruler is authenticated in his role and function. H e is also experienced in many other legitimate ways as well. Isaiah’s vision of Zion is a real possibility for post-Exilic Israel, where the older idea is no longer a possibil­ ity for them. T he Vision suggests that G od him self is respon­ sible for the change. He is n o t a victim of circumstance and historical change, b u t the creator, the initiator of the events that make the difference. The resulting possibility of worship in Zion is w hat he wants. To arrive at this he elim inates the nationalistic and politi­ cal elem ent from th a t worship. T he royal persons and of­ fices th at existed in eighth-century Jerusalem (chaps. 7-9) are no longer a p art o f th e picture after chapter 40. These powers and responsibilities are transferred to th e em peror (chap. 45). H e m ust make w orship in Jerusalem possible by m aintaining order, building roads, and providing m aterial resources as well as granting perm ission for th e building o f th e tem ple and the city. Yet there is to be no h in t o f em­ peror w orship there (“neither bribe n o r reward” [45:13; W BC 25:288]). To experience the presence of God in Zion meant being ready to be taught, being open to instruction in the ways of 43

Knowing God among His Own People

God, being prepared to live out those instructions (“to walk in his ways”) and to live in an intense and intimate sense of his presence as a “humble and contrite” devotee who is content to share his presence and experience his holy glory. To experi­ ence the powerful presence of G od in Zion meant to recog­ nize that worshipers on the right and on the left— even some who led the worship— come from different nations and peo­ ples. The God of Zion is G od of the whole earth, the only true God for all peoples. As worship on Zion is separated from the political and social processes, Isaiah portrays it as more intensely related to the mystery o f creation and to the ultim ate values of “light and darkness,” “good and evil.” G od in Zion controlled and determ ined these things.

Holy Spirit God, or his applied leading and power, is referred to re­ peatedly as “spirit” in Isaiah. T he term is descriptive o f the way in w hich G od is experienced and understood as he is at w ork in the w orld and in history. In 4:4 G od’s judgm ent on Jerusalem is called “a spirit o f judgm ent and a spirit o f burning.” T he description is of the cleansing and purging w ord o f God. Because of this w ork o f G od’s spirit, the people o f G od’s city o f the future can be called “holy.” In this way the judgments of G od are por­ trayed w ith a positive goal and function (WBC 24:50). Similarly, the use of hum an leaders by G od is perform ed through the w ork and presence o f G od’s sp irit This is shown fully in the beautiful picture o f the promised Davidic king (11:2): T he spirit o f Yahweh shall rest on him: a spirit of wisdom and understanding, a spirit of counsel and heroism, a spirit of knowledge, and fear, of Yahweh.

ISAIAH

44

The gifts that a successful king needs, which make rule and genuine commitment to God possible, are not character attributes inherent in the person. They are products of God’s gift of his spirit. Pss 51:12[10], 13[11], 14[12], 19[17] parallel Isaiah’s emphasis. There is an echo of the view of kingship that was present in 1 Sam 10:6,10; 11:6; 16:13,14; 19:9. Being of the elect line of David was not enough; one needed to be empowered and directed by God’s spirit (WBC 24:171-72). T he spirit of G od directs the Persian emperors, Cyrus (42:1-4; W BC 24:119) and Artaxerxes (59:19; W BC 24:287). This statem ent as much as any other marks the change in G od’s plan. W hat was the understanding of a special rela­ tion to a Davidic ruler before becomes the unction granted the emperors to carry out G od’s wishes. They owe their success and skill to God. T he spirit is claimed by post-Exilic leaders. In 48:16, Sheshbazzar says, “T he Lord Yahweh has sent me— and his spirit” (WBC 25:178). In 61:1, another (possibly Ezra) says, “The spirit of my Lord Yahweh is on me, because Yahweh has anointed me.” The speech goes on to spell out his tasks (WBC 25:302). T he New Testament shows a similar relation betw een Jesus and G od’s spirit. Jesus claims the passage from Isa 61:1-3 to be descriptive of his own mission (Luke 4:12-21). Luke portrays his m inistry as “full of the Holy Spirit (Luke 4:1). M ark describes Jesus’ baptism in term s of “the spirit descending on him like a dove” (Mark 1:10). Isaiah portrays G od’s spirit active in the redem ption of the whole people, “until spirit is poured upon us from above” (32:15-20). The enabling spirit of G od will equip and empower the entire people as was promised for the Davidic king (WBC 24:417). G od promises, “I pour my spirit on your seed” (44:3). His spirit brings revival and new life in place of “a spirit of fainting” (61:3). T he spirit of G od is also understood to have prepared the scroll o f judgm ent for Edom and the nations (34:16). Its

45

Knowing God among His Own People

w ork is parallel to Yahweh’s express command. In 40:7, the understanding o f spirit in relation to judgm ent (4:4) is used in a skeptical question about the weakness of hum anity in G od’s presence: Grass w ithers, a flow er fades w hen th e spirit of Yahweh blows against i t (40:7) But the answer relates “spirit” to “the w ord of G od” to em­ phasize its trustw orthiness. “Spirit” is not just w ind and power; it includes the will and understanding of God. It is controlled by the plan and purpose of G od (WBC 25:82). T he very next passage equates the inscrutability and in­ comprehensibility of Yahweh’s spirit as, indeed, of his own being: W ho can gauge Yahweh’s spirit? O r instruct him as his personal counselor? (40:13; W BC 25:90-91) T he Spirit o f G od here includes his mind, purpose, and plans, as well as his motivation and intended implementation.

ISAIAH

46

PART 2 SERVING GOD A N D HIS PL A N

4

INTRODUCTION

In the Israelite monarchy the servant of Yahweh was un ­ derstood to be the king. David and his successors combined w ithin their person and function all the counterparts to the revealed G od of Israel that were discussed in the first p art o f this book. The Davidic king was G od’s representative in ruling Canaan and all its peoples and nations. T he full and real exercise of this power had slipped very badly betw een Solomon and Uzziah, b u t the symbol was still there. T he Davidic king was patron of Jerusalem and o f its tem ­ ple. H e was responsible for the safety and worship o f the city. In the monarchy, the Davidic king was the person responsible for the covenant Israel had w ith God, as Josiah’s hearing of the read Torah implies. H e was also th e m odel o f the individual worshiper, as the large num ber of “lam ents o f the individual” in the Psalter shows. W ith the division of the kingdom under Rehoboam, some of this began to unravel. By the end of the reign o f Uzziah (late eighth century B.C.), t h e rising power of Assyria was beginning to be felt in Canaan. O ne way to view the message of the Book of Isaiah would be to study the way the roles of the servant of Yahweh, once inherent in the Davidic 49

Introduction

king, are redistributed in the period from the eighth century to after the Exile. T he governing functions of servanthood had to make place for the Assyrian before the Exile and for the Persian afterward. T he place of the Davidic king and his descendants is thus made subordinate w ith m uch narrow er functions. W orship in Jerusalem is corrupt at the beginning. Israel has lost its reason for being, and the individual worshiper is adrift and vulnerable. The worshiping functions of servanthood are redistributed to Israel in Exile, to a restored Jerusalem, and those who in hum ility see G od’s presence. T he latter part of Isaiah’s vision makes explicit w hat is implicit throughout: G od has a purpose or strategy in m ind for history and the world. Likewise, persons and societies are judged by their usefulness to th at strategy. For th at they should be “willing and obedient” (1:19), b u t too often they “resist and rebel” (1:20). T he kingdoms o f Israel and Judah do n o t conform to G od’s strategy and have to be elim inated along w ith many o f their neighbors. In fact an entire civilization (42:9; 43:18-19) is brought to an end and replaced for this reason. So the latter part of the book sets out to define who is a servant of Yahweh, what his purpose is, and what such a one should do. A t least five forms of servanthood emerge. Some of them are surprising. The older strategy had been to fulfill the promise to Abraham by having God’s people in God’s land fulfill God’s purpose through covenant. This took form first in the tribal league (Joshua-Judges) and then of a single kingdom w ith Jerusalem as its capitol (1 Samuel-1 Kings 9). This form splintered and finally collapsed. The new strategy is revealed in Isaiah. It centers in estab­ lishing Jerusalem as a temple city to which scattered Israel as well as those who wish from all those countries might come to worship (2:2-4; 40:9-11; 65:17-66:24). G od uses a variety of servants to accomplish this. A t the same time, they need to be in agreement with this strategy and obedient to God’s terms for achieving i t Those called include the descendants of anISAIAH

50

cient Israel, the rulers of the Persian and presumably succeed­ ing empires, the people of Jerusalem, submissive, suffering individuals, and the humble, contrite people from all nations who come to Jerusalem to worship and to learn. W ith all o f this G od faces a problem. T here are those who are identified as persistent rebels against G od’s ways and plans. O ld Israel is one who is unknow ing and cannot un ­ derstand (1:2-7; 2:6-8). T he old Jerusalem is compared w ith Sodom and G om orrah (1:10) whose worship is totally unac­ ceptable (1:11-25). A ll the proud and arrogant of m ankind come under similar judgm ent (2:10-22). In th e “form er tim es” the king o f Babylon (13:1-14:32; 21:1-10) and Hezekiah (chap. 22) are singled o u t as persist­ ent rebels. In th e latter tim es Exilic Israel seems to resist G od’s call (chaps. 40-48), while Jerusalem’s inhabitants join in persecuting th e suffering servant (chaps. 50 and 53) and are reluctant to accept G od’s challenge in chapter 54. O th ­ ers are recalcitrant in chapters 57, 59, and 65, while some actively resist th e restoration in 66:3b-6. T he bitterness o f this continued resistance is reflected in th e book’s last verse (66:24). G od’s strategy and his call to participate in its ac­ com plishm ent divides th e people and the nations. G od’s pleas are n o t successful in persuading them to unite in serving him .

A matter of divine decision T he Book of Isaiah assumes throughout th at G od con­ trols the destinies of persons, families, and nations. It sees this control used, n o t capriciously, b u t always to w ork out his strategy, to achieve his goals. T he book uses the w ord pāqad, meaning “to determ ine the af te of,” to describe this; it has often been translated “visit” o r “punish” (see W BC 24:325-26). It defines G od’s decision as to w hat will happen to a person or a group in a given situation or time, w hether they will be blessed or cursed, pushed into battle o r rescued from danger, granted rain and prosperity or condem ned to 51

Introduction

drought and deprivation. G od is a sovereign making deci­ sions and putting them into effect. In chapter 10 Israel’s fate is determined: destruction by the Assyrians. C hapter 6 had already spelled out the extent of that decision. Chapter 1 spoke of the effects of this destiny on Israel and of th e different decision about Jerusalem (see also chap. 4). The fate of the entire land of Canaan is fixed because of evil and sin (13:11), as is that of different ethnic groups and nations (chaps. 13-21). The height of negative decisions falls in chapters 23-27: Tyre’s destiny is fixed for seventy years (23:17); the armies of the highlands and the kings of the low­ lands will have their fates similarly decided (24:22). In chapter 26 Yahweh has determined the fete of tyrants (v 14) and deter­ mined Israel’s destiny even in the time of her distress (v 16). He will determine the fete of the people of the land of Canaan in accordance w ith their sins (v 21). H e will also determine the fete of Leviathan (21:1), whatever that name refers to (see W BC 24:348). The emphasis throughout is on God’s sover­ eignty. He is in full charge of things even as everything seems to be felling apart. He is the Lord of life and death (chap. 26; see “Excursus: Yahweh and D eath,” WBC 24:343), over curse and blessing (WBC 24:317), over the land and mankind. The fete of all fits together in God’s work to achieve his strategy. To bring about an entirely new era G od must rearrange older accounts and relationships and establish new ones. His form er relationship of patronage to “the land” of Canaan is effectively closed out, as chapter 24 demonstrates. T he same is true of his relation to the kingdom of northern Israel (Samaria) and of Judah as a kingdom. His relation to Israel and Jerusalem, however, simply takes on new forms, as we shall see. G od adopts the Assyrians to demolish the established political systems of Canaan and the Persians to build new ones. H e decrees hum iliation to the proud and exalted of m ankind (chap. 2) and elevation for the humble and the con­ trite (chap. 57). God, and G od alone, determines fete, and he does so w ith an eye on his goals and strategies, as well as on perm anent principles and values. ISAIAH

52

God’s problem W ith the whole of history in G od’s sovereign control, w ith his strategies of creation, election, and grace, one might won­ der why all the world is not the garden of Eden (Genesis 2) or the realm of peace and order that so perfectly reflects his purpose (Isa 11:6-9; 34:1-10; 65:20-25). The Book of Isaiah, like Genesis 3 and 4, points to G od’s problem: his hum an creation, called and blessed, won’t cooperate. They refuse and rebel (1:20); they “do n ot know or understand” (1:3); they are proud and arrogant (2:11-17a, 22; W BC 24:17). G od’s problem exists w ith the peoples in the land of Canaan (Philistines, Edom, Moab, Aram, Sidon, and Tyre), w ith distant kings and nations (Babylon and Egypt), w ith Is­ rael and Judah, and w ith Jerusalem and her kings. N everthe­ less, it continues w ith Israel in Exile and the rem nant left in Jerusalem. There are some who never give up, resisting to the end (66:24). G od has no choice but to condemn these to death and destruction if he is to get on w ith his beneficent and healing strategies for his people and for all peoples. Theology may think of God’s grace for all his creatures regardless of their response if G od is perceived as having no purpose or strategy for society or history. Yet when God’s creative and sovereign work is seen to be purposeful and di­ rected, when hum an destiny is seen as linked to that purpose and persons are called to cooperative work in relation to God’s creation, his society, his history, then one must make room for G od’s response to opposition, refusal, rebellion, and usurpation of his functions. The Book of Isaiah is aware of these conditions w ithin Israel and w ithout and assumes that God will ultimately have to deal w ith them in order to achieve his goals and to claim his own who are “willing and obedient” (1:18a), “humble and meek” (66:2b), “contrite and lowly” (57:15b), and who “make God their refuge” (56:13c). G od’s problem exists w ith the people o f the N orthern Kingdom w ho n o t only fail to recognize their destiny (1:2) b u t actively oppose Jerusalem (7:1-9). They had long since 53

Introduction

divided th e nation w hen Jeroboam rebelled against R ehoboam. They are doom ed and m ust be destroyed (1:2—7; 9:1-10:34). Rebellion was also present in a Jerusalem that became cor­ rupt and disorderly, in its priests and inhabitants, and had to be purged and renewed (1:8-31; 3:1— 4:6; 54:1-17; 61:1— 62:12). Many things had to change before the new city could be ready for true worship (2:1-4). Even as it is being prepared to receive the pilgrims, elements of paganism (65:3-5,11-12) and resistance (66:3-4,5b-6) are active in the city and its vicinity. Remains of the Lord’s judgm ent are observed by all who come to worship (66:24). This sad and depressing realism pervades the book. In the m idst of the hopeful and encouraging vision of G od’s deter­ m ined purpose of grace for Jerusalem, his people, and in­ deed all nations, there is the persistent rem inder th at n o t everyone is willing to participate, n o t even all o f Israel or Jerusalem (65:13-16). For a great part of the book “Israel” and “Jerusalem” are seen as collective term s of elect groups th at G od wills to save. In the end, however, it becomes clear th at incorrigible, self-willed, and determ ined opponents to G od’s strategy remain. They will n o t be there for the festival o f faith. They cannot be a part of G od’s party. O nly by moving to eliminate elements of the opposition (the nation of Israel, other nations in Palestine, Babylon, etc., and individuals of the new age who cannot adapt) can G od move on to establish his city as a refuge for the meek and contrite who want to share his presence and to cooperate in his plan. The establishment of a new age, the reform ation o f political structures and powers, and the reconstitution of Jerusalem were not enough. T he called and chosen people who had received so much from G od were still divided. There were persistent elements of “dross” or impurities in the fine metal. They still made trouble and had to be sepa­ rated out (65:13-16). Such were still there in New Testament churches (see 1-2 C orinthians and Revelation 1-3) and pre­ sumably are still there today. ISAIAH

54

A m atter of tim ing Time is of great concern to all of us. For G od it is an instrum ent to be used to serve his purpose. It is treated seri­ ously in the Book of Isaiah. Blocks of time are called “ages” (‘ô1ām ). G od’s strategies are designed for such ages or epochs. The Book of Isaiah implies a kind of unity o f consistency for God’s strategy during a period from the sons of Noah to the present and likens the turm oil of the sixth century B.C. to that of Noah and the flood (54:9). G od promises that the consis­ tency w ith which he held to his promises after the flood will be matched by his constancy in relations and forms be­ ginning in this new age of new covenants (54:10). So the new age, characterized by secular imperial government and by Jerusalem’s role in drawing pilgrim worshipers form all na­ tions and peoples is seen as different from the form er times (WBC 25:120,237). To understand G od’s plan and strategy the Book of Isaiah teaches that one m ust look to the long periods of time. His strategy belongs to the ages; there is developm ent and move­ m en t T he book depicts twelve generations over some three centuries. To make sense o f history one m ust think in term s of centuries and ages; only then can G od’s plan and strategy be understood. It is futile to try to live, believe, and behave in term s th at fit another time. T he period covered by the V ision of Isaiah (eighth to fifth centuries B.C.) is different from the times of Abraham, or o f Joshua, or of David. For Israel to try to act as though she were still in those periods ignores the changes that G od has instituted and the new strategies that he is im­ plementing. W hen Hezekiah or Josiah try to act like David or Joshua, they are rebuked and defeated. This is a different time, and there are different factors at work, all of which G od has ordained and determined. Early C hristianity lived under conditions not unlike those of post-Exilic Israel. They lived under an empire. They devel­ oped congregations. They used the Scriptures. O ne basic 55

Introduction

factor, im portant to Isaiah, is eliminated in their time: Jerusalem is destroyed and not replaced. This affected both Jews and Christians and changed the direction to which Isa­ iah had pointed.

Living between the times Ecclesiastes meditates on the problems of time (8:6-8 et passim). W alt W hitm an understood that nineteenth-century America was a time “between things ended and things be­ gun” (“A Clear M idnight”). A great deal of the Book of Isaiah depicts the generations that lived and worked “between the times,” that is, between the time G od made his decision to change the ages and strategies and the time when the new age was in full effect. Those three centuries “between the times” were full of ambiguity as persons tried to find their way, w hen so many things had changed and the old landmarks were apparently no longer valid. Some unexpected ones suc­ ceeded. Some, surprisingly, failed. A ll were called to heed the “signs of the times.” None was given the key to the future. Many readers o f the Book of Isaiah will feel th at the passages that relate to “living betw een the times” are relevant to this present age. Christians feel the tension of looking back to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and forward to his return: living betw een the times. Israel’s wilderness travel betw een Sinai and Canaan (Numbers 10-Joshua 6) is a paradigm o f the period in Isaiah betw een Uzziah’s time (chap. 6) and the coming o f Cyrus (chap. 45). C hapter 6 shows th at G od’s blessing o f power and leader­ ship has been taken away from Israel and Jerusalem and given to others. C hapter 10 identifies the Assyrians as the recipient of G od’s support. Judah’s problem and that of her k in g s becomes that of learning how to live w ith this strange m atter “betw een the times.” T he Book of Isaiah suggests th at the ones w ho did so successfully were not the ones who history and the religious society may have viewed as success­ ful. Living under the curse betw een the times requires some ISAIAH

56

skills that the driving energies of “successful” leaders do no t include. So the strong, the proud, the arrogant, the patriotic, and the visionary of days of glory do not do well. T he meek, the accepting, the humble, the acquiescing, quiet persons often do m uch better. So it is that Hezekiah (chaps. 22 and 36-39) and Josiah (chaps. 28-33), who are elsewhere portrayed as national heroes (2 Kings 18-20 and 22-23, respectively), are kings who are humiliated and unsuccessful in Isaiah. O n the other hand, Ahaz (chaps. 7-14) and Manasseh (by implication in chaps. 23-27), w ho are vilified in 2 Kings 16 and 21, are successful in keeping their thrones in extremely difficult periods. They are hum iliated and accept very hum ble posi­ tions for themselves and their country, b u t they act in ac­ cordance w ith their times, that is, they relate as best they can to G od's decreed change in their status and mission. In a similar way a m artyred leader is exalted in chapters 50 and 53 and a lone voice is honored in chapter 61 in contrast w ith the strident rebels th at speak so forcefully in chapters 57-58 and 63-64. Lessons for living “betw een the tim es” include taking the risk of faith (7:9b, 10-14; see W BC 24:321,94), living the promise, and hoping for the K ing/ Messiah (WBC 24:98-102). W hile “living between the times, we are challenged to rec­ ognize God’s sovereign grace even in the most difficult expe­ riences (chaps. 23-24; W BC 24:298-300). G od rules over both life and death (25:7-8), and he can protect his people from everything demonic (27:1). The hope for G od’s grace toward his people will ultimately prove justified (27:12-13).

57

Introduction

GOVERNING SERVANTS A N D THEIR SERVICE

5

God's strategy Knowing th at G od has a goal and a strategy for achieving th at goal through persons, through society, through history, and through worship leads to the recognition th at G od seeks those who will w ork w ith him tow ard those goals and w ithin the bounds set by th at strategy. It also makes clear th at there are many who insist on setting other goals which are n o t from G od and on using means other than those prescribed by God. G od needs servants at every level and in every p art o f life. This includes government and its use o f force to m aintain order and to build cities and roads. It centers in worship w ith its cultivation o f the sense of G od’s presence, holiness, and mercy. It assumes G od’s control of all things, his choice o f his servants, his appointm ent, call, and empowerment o f his servants, and his recognition and reward o f these serv­ ants. T he Book of Isaiah develops each of these. G od’s w ork in nature needs servants, too, b u t the V ision is content to describe G od in control o f fertility and pros­ perity, form ing th e desert as well as the fertile land, w ithout ISAIAH

58

emphasizing hum an participation. G od’s w ork in con­ trolling the universe and its forces are recognized by the V ision, b u t used only as background and proof o f G od’s pow er in history. T he V ision concentrates on G od’s need and use of servants in governing and in w orship. T he V ision does make repeated, b u t isolated, forays into another territory. It portrays things in an ideal state, as pre­ sumably, if all things were in order, G od w ould have them . But the main thrust of the Vision’s argum ent turns on realistic issues. It recognizes that neither Israel nor the na­ tions are malleable clay in G od’s hands, but m uch more often they are resistant and rebellious. G od’s work, and his serv­ ants’ w ork, is done under exactly such circumstances. H ere, however, the V ision notes that even w ithin such a miserable and broken existence there are open windows of opportunity that could lead to a very different kind of w orld than that which they now experience. Things could and can be different Some of these will be noted in th e development of this section. G od recognizes and calls his servants to recog­ nize these moments in time which create the opportunity to make a real difference; for example, the call to reform w or­ ship in Jerusalem under Uzziah (1:18— 20), Isaiah’s challenge to Ahaz not to resist Aram and Israel (7:1-9), the opportunity opened by Ethiopian messengers to Hezekiah (chaps. 18-19), th e opportunity given to Josiah (chap. 32), the opportunities in the rise of Cyrus (chaps. 44-45), o f Darius (chap. 49), and of Artaxerxes (chap. 63), and others. T he many factors of his­ tory move into certain constellations that offer opportunities for good for those governing as well as for the witnesses. These doors, however, only open for a m om ent They m ust be entered decisively and quickly, or they will close again. The Vision says that G od opens them and calls his chosen to enter them . G od’s strategy for this new era included the arrangem ent o f an entirely new political frame of reference (WBC 24:215). The empires of Assyria and Persia set the new stage on w hich the drama would be played. This closed certain doors 59

Governing Servants and Their Service

and opened others. It was a wider stage. Israel was scattered throughout the empire. Canaan was now simply one prov­ ince (or satrapy) in the great empire. The Vision insists that this was precisely God’s strategy. Israel’s political and national power are no longer factors or necessities. Its spiritual and religious distinctives are now all im portant. They will focus on Jerusalem as a worship center, a temple city. The emperor will help them build it. They will become the cata­ lyst that enables worshipers from all peoples and nations to go there for instruction and worship. T hat is G od’s new strat­ egy that Israel and the emperors are called to recognize and implement. Readers in the tw entieth century may recognize parallels. The political structures of the w orld have gone through tremendous changes. First, there were four centuries of in­ tense colonization by the W estern powers. This became a means of missionary activities of many kinds, and C hristian teaching and preaching spread in a thin line throughout the world. Then, in the tw entieth century that world collapsed. By mid century we entered the postcolonial era. G od gave a small window in the movement of time for intensification o f missionary effort, but of a very different kind, and the church has grown mightily in many parts of the “third world.” The w riter of the Book of Isaiah would n ot hesitate to claim for G od these great movements and changes in history, politics, society, and economics. H e would challenge us to look for God’s strategy that w ould bring people from all na­ tions and tongues to worship at his feet and then challenge us to hear G od’s call to participate w ith him and w ith his gov­ ernm ents in bringing this to reality. A window in time: “See the fields are even more w hite unto harvest” Time does not stand still nor is the window open forever. Many persons need to work together to make this hap­ pen. G od works w ith all of them . Some he encourages and enables. Some he restrains and redirects. Some he resists even to destruction. T he V ision pictures persons w ho are called to govern in accordance w ith his strategy and pointed ISAIAH

60

tow ard his goal. Some servants are called to govern and some are called to worship. B oth serve G od and his strategy. Both serve w ithin the knowledge and understanding of G od and his plans that he himself has provided. T he Book of Isaiah marks the passage o f G od’s recogni­ tion of legitimate government in Canaan and over Israel f orm a Davidic king in Jerusalem (Uzziah) to a Persian em­ peror. T he first moves reduced the Judean king’s position to that o f a vassal ruler of the city and its immediate environs while Assyrian armies destroyed Canaan’s social and govern­ m ental structures. It took a century and a half and the help of a succeeding Babylonian Empire to accomplish th a t T he Judean ruler’s life was preserved, b u t only as a king in exile living at the gracious table of the conqueror. G od’s announced strategy for the w orld and for Israel had opposition. Judean kings resisted the changes, as undoubt­ edly did many of their subjects. Nevertheless, the symbol of principle rejection and rebellion to G od’s way was Babylon: M erodach Baladan’s Babylon which rebelled against Assyria (chaps. 13, 14, 21, and 39) and th e Babylon of Nabunaid (chaps. 46-47) which stood in the way of Cyrus. U ndaunted, G od’s strategy for rebuilding a shattered city and restoring a broken people took shape through the Per­ sian emperors: Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes. Each w orked through a Judean leader: Sheshbazzar, Zerubabbel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. T he task of restoration was finally accomplished w ith Persian money and protection and w ith Jewish leader­ ship, priests, and a core of worshipers and w orkers. T he p attern was established for w hat we today call th e separate powers of church and state. G od is sovereign over b oth and is ultim ately to be thanked for both. N either can function w ithout the other. T he great buildings seem al­ ways to have required help from outside th e people o f G od. H iram o f Tyre aided Solom on. T he Persians aided Ezra and Nehem iah. H erod the G reat built th e beautiful tem ple in w hich Jesus w orshiped. T he Bible recognizes th e divine sanction th a t gives legitimacy to th eir rule and th eir 61

Governing Servants and Their Service

obligation to create conditions in w hich th e people o f G od can live and w orship. It is also clear th at there are nations and rulers th a t do n o t have such sanction, whose very existence is in opposi­ tion to the divine will. Babylon is representative o f this in Isaiah. U nderlings and bureaucrats may also hinder G od’s people even w hen th e em peror has given his blessing. Sometimes, however, the problem s relating to society and governm ent come from insiders, those among the people of G od, th e church, w ho oppose the plans of G od, w ho nei­ th er understand n o r agree to his ways. Every church group has its Judas. In the Book o f Isaiah the relative relations o f the govern­ ing powers are presented throughout in term s of the Davidic heirs, the imperial rulers, and Babylon as the outside med­ dler and rebel. T he pattern will be traced at three levels in the Vision. O ne m ight well organize the presentation differently w ith the same resu lt G overnm ental entities th at af­ fected Judah in the decade and a half th at Ahaz reigned in Jerusalem (734-716 B.C.) are portrayed in the Book of Isaiah as “the house o f David,” the Assyrian kings, and the king of Babylon.

Ahaz: Eighth century B.C. Ahaz and his son, presum ably Hezekiah, represent “th e house o f David.” H e is called th a t in 7:2. T he issue in these chapters is the survival o f th e throne. It is threatened, n o t by th e Assyrian em peror, b u t by jealous and am bitious neighbors such as Edom in 587 B.C. (This is true througho u t the period. T he greatest threats also to N ehem iah came from Jerusalem’s neighbors.) Ahaz is adm onished to ignore Syria and Israel. H e is to look instead at Assyria. T hat is the pow er to watch. T hat is w here G od’s direction will come from. A lthough Assyria’s incursions will be devastating (7:17— 8:8), the throne will survive. Ahaz will be able to place his ISAIAH

62

heir on the throne, something neither Rezin n o r the son o f Remaliah will be able to do. This is G od’s sign (7:14-16). H e is n o t finished w ith the Davidic dynasty. It will continue to be a keystone in his strategy and plan. In developing this them e, the Book o f Isaiah presents the most beautiful and powerful poetry concerning the Son of David in the Bible. This is, nonetheless, spoken about the heir to a throne threatened by ambitious and fractious neighbors, a country too weak to defend itself and soon to become the abject vassal of a foreign invader. T hat is just the point: the power and majesty o f G od will be revealed in this b irth and birthright (9:6-7) and in the vision of the right­ eous king th at the “Son o f David” was m eant and destined to be. This picture was and is true, n o t simply in the royal splendor of David’s victories and Solomon’s buildings, b u t also in the hum ility of vassalage and o f th e survival, after the throne no longer existed, in Sheshbezzar and Zerubabbel, even in a Nehemiah w ho shared no drop o f David’s blood. T he Book of Isaiah has seen in the Davidic house the purpose of G od w hich reached far beyond the real throne and royal power. It represented G od’s reign in Jerusalem and over the land and the world. This kingdom of G od is repre­ sented in the Davidic dynasty and the glory pictured there. It existed in its full glory more completely in the hum ble vassalage of Ahaz and his heir than in the ascending Assyrian emperor, although he, too, has a special role. T he child o f sign and promise, given of G od in Ahaz’s lowest hour, is hailed as: W onder Counselor, God-H ero Father of (the) Future Prince of Peace (9:5[6]) Such extravagant language was never applied to David o r Solomon in the royal Psalms or elsewhere. Now it is given to th e son born to Ahaz at the point w hen Judah ceased to have 63

Governing Servants and Their Service

an independent existence. To th at is added a promise and benediction: To the increase of rule and to peace (may there be) no end upon the throne o f David and upon his kingdom. To establish it and to confirm it w ith justice and w ith righteousness from now and to the age. May the Zeal of Yahweh o f Hosts do this! (9:6[7]) These are n o t just words spoken at a particular point in time. They are key passages in a book that is defining the way G od works in a period o f history in which th e last rem nants of David’s proud empire are crumbling and in which the throne itself will disappear. T he heirs will become royal guests (that is, prisoners) at the table of a foreign tyrant (Nebuchadnezzar) and will never again exercise royal rule in Jerusalem. In the face o f this, the book proclaims the perma­ nence and continuing significance o f “the son of David” in such terms. A nd there is more: A nd a shoot shall go out from the stump of Jesse. A Branch from his roots will bear fru it A nd the Spirit of Yahweh will rest on him: a spirit of wisdom and understanding, a spirit o f counsel and wisdom, a spirit o f knowledge, and fear, o f Yahweh. His delight (will be) in the fear of Yahweh: who does n o t judge by w hat his eyes see nor make decisions by w hat his ears hear. W hen he judges poor people w ith righteousness, or w hen he gives fair decisions to the afflicted o f the land, ISAIAH

64

or w hen he smites a land w ith the rod o f his m outh, w ith the breath of his lips he kills the wicked. A nd this shall be, (when) righteousness (is) the girdle of his loins and faithfulness (is) the belt of his w aist (11:1-5) T he passage goes on to picture a day of no violence in all G od’s holy m ountain. It closes w ith the words: For the earth shall become full of the knowledge of Yahweh as waters (are) coverings for the sea. . . . T he root of Jesse, who is standing as a signal to the peoples, to him nations will come seeking, and his resting place will be glory. (11:9-10) T he V ision sees a fulfillm ent o f the first verses in 61:l-3a, which begin “the spirit o f the Lord of H osts is on me.” H ere kingly grace and m inistry is perform ed by someone lowly and very unroyal. Jesus could identify him self and his mis­ sion w ith this passage, and his compatriots could recognize Messianic meaning here. A t the m om ent w hen power and worldly authority is being passed to the empires, the Book o f Isaiah portrays the unction and m inistry o f the Davidic house in its most glorious and effusive form. T he Gospels certainly agree. The ascendant power of the Ahaz generation was the As­ syrian Empire. A fter centuries of slow growth it burst upon the scene of the M editerranean seaboard in the person o f Tiglath Pileser, soon after the middle of the eighth century B.C. A major part of the Book of Isaiah is taken up w ith an exposition of its role in God’s great strategy. Its position as the m ost im portant nation o f its day is hailed in 7:17. T he thoroughness o f its invasion and domi­ nance is pictured like a plague or a flood in 7:18-8:18. T he 65

Governing Servants and Their Service

confusion as to w hat is going on and how the people o f G od should react to it is apparent in 8:9-22. T he rise o f Assyria is linked to Israel’s sin and G od’s judg­ m ent on h er in 9:8-10:4. Assyria is pictured as the irresistible “rod” of God’s anger in 10:5-11, and God’s determ ination to keep control of this pagan nation is assured in 10:12-19. G od’s w ork in history as explained to Jeremiah is both “to destroy and to build” (Jer 1=10). T he Assyrians were G od’s destroyers w ho were succeeded in this by the Babylo­ nians. G od’s strategy called for the power structures o f Canaan to be dismantled (6:11-13), and the Assyrians were G od’s wrecking crew to th at end—b u t they were m ore. They established a seat of power in Mesopotamia, w ith Canaan as its nearer colonies and w ith Egypt as its m ore distant dominion. This pattern continued w ith the Persians, although they revised and expanded their reign in Asia Mi­ n o r and tow ard the east. Assyria was the first o f G od’s impe­ rial masters. T he picture w ould n o t be complete w ithout the spoilers. O f course Aram and Israel (7:2) belong here, as do th e Canaanite states (chaps. 15-22) in the next generation. T he symbolic picture o f resistance to G od’s established order, however, is Babylon. She and her king make the first o f these symbolic appearances in th e Ahaz section (chaps. 1314; W BC 24:186-89). G od m ust deal w ith both Judah and Assyria as difficult, sometimes recalcitrant, servants, b u t Babylon was an en­ emy—a perm anent enemy for G od (13:19). She was such a symbol in the earliest civilizations, according to Genesis 1-9. In the latter reign o f Ahaz a particular person usurped the throne in Babylon, taking it away from Assyria. H is name was M erodach Baladan. H e held the city for more than ten years and then returned to power briefly at the death o f Sargon II. M erodach Baladan’s Babylon was a symbol o f successful rebellion against Assyria. It was a tem pting symbol that Ahaz refused to follow b u t to w hich Hezekiah succumbed tw ice ISAIAH

66

(see below). It is no w onder th at Babylon is seen in Scripture as a type of w orld resistance to G od and th at she seems to represent the Satanic Empire itself (Rev 14:8; 16:19; 17:5). W ith these observations, G od’s strategy becomes clear and the direction of the book is established. In 14:22-27 G od’s strategy calls for the destruction of Babylon (vv 22-23) and establishes the tem porary nature of his use o f Assyria in Canaan (vv 24-27). 19:12-17 describes the expansion o f imperial rule over Tyre and Egypt which placed the Meso­ potamian land-based power in position to vie for control o f M editerranean shipping. This advantage set the stage for Persian ventures in th at theater. 46:10-11 will use the w ord “strategy” to describe the role of Cyrus. T he burden o f government and power has been firmly placed in the emerg­ ing empires. They m ust do G od’s w ork o f tearing down and building up. They are essential elem ents in th e accomplish­ m ent of G od’s plan.

Hezekiah: Eighth c e n tu ry B.C. T he second cross section showing these elements o f gov­ ernm ent and power is in the reign of Hezekiah. In it the V ision shows how difficult it was for the Davidic Dynasty to come to term s w ith its new status in G od’s economy. T he section (chaps. 15-22; W BC 24:220-93) begins w ith emphasis on hopeful signs for the reign of Hezekiah. T hen it pictures a marvelous window of opportunity to achieve political bal­ ance and a long peace in Palestine. Sargon II had just come to power in 715 B.C., the beginning of Hezekiah’s reign. H e had his hands full in many parts of the empire and necessarily relaxed his attention on Palestine. Egypt had four different Pharaohs claiming the throne at the same time. Chapters 1819 picture the arrival in Jerusalem o f a delegation from one o f these claimants to Egypt’s throne, the eventually victorious Ethiopians. They are apparently seeking help in establishing their power in Egypt, or at least the assurance that there would be no outside interference until it was accomplished. 67

Governing Servants and Their Service

Both Assyria and Egypt needed peace on their borders be­ cause of internal troubles. Both could have prospered w ith borders open to trade. These chapters in Isaiah suggest that a window of opportunity for establishing such order, perma­ nence, and peace existed if Shabaka of Ethiopia and Sargon II of Assyria could have been brought to make common cause in the m atter. W ho could better act as intermediary than Hezekiah w hen Shabaka’s messengers came to Jerusalem (chap. 18)? C hapter 19 suggests that Judah could have been elevated to a position beside Egypt and Assyria if such had been accomplished (19:23-25). Instead o f being a m essenger o f peace and an interm edi­ ary for building bridges for prosperity and blessing, w hich w ould have required daring in hum ility and subordination o f prideful interests to th e larger good, Hezekiah and his governm ent brushed th e delegation aside, wringing their hands in dismay th at they w ould be draw n into Egyptian affairs. They apparently chose to follow Babylon’s example and throw off th e yoke o f Assyria. So instead o f the bright prom ise o f 19:18-25, they had to feel the pain o f the an­ nouncem ent o f Babylon’s fall in 21:9. Instead o f helping cem ent th e relation betw een G od’s w inners, Shabaka and Sargon II, Hezekiah chose to seek support from the ill-fated rulers o f lower Egypt’s cities despite Isaiah’s protests (chap. 20). Hezekiah was embarrassed and had to pay heavy tribute to th e Assyrians. Hezekiah neither acknowledged nor acquiesced to G od’s plan. Instead of the bright hopes of chapter 11 or of 19:19-25, his reign degenerated into a series of unsuccessful surrenders. T he most humbling is pictured in chapters 22 and 36-39. Hezekiah led a rebellion of the Palestinian states against As­ syria. Sargon II was dead. M erodach Baladan had seized Baby­ lon again. Hezekiah hoped that this signaled a change in Assyrian fortunes; history and the Book of Isaiah know that this was not true (WBC 25:22-25). The Assyrian commander was better informed about G od’s plans than was Hezekiah (36:10). Yet even he overstated his case. ISAIAH

68

How often G od must be placed in an awkward position by blind and rebellious servants as well as by arrogant and egotis­ tic ones. To support the use of Assyria in his grand design and also implement his determ ination to spare Jerusalem, G od arranges for both. T he Assyrian had to withdraw, w hether from illness to his troops or because of news from home (37:7,36); Hezekiah barely escapes death and survives in a reduced state during the rest o f his years (chap. 38). Babylon’s role is m entioned again (chap. 39). Merodach Baladan’s messengers are shown all of the palace and Jerusalem’s armaments (presumably before the humiliation and depriva­ tions of chaps. 36-37; Merodach Baladan was driven out of Babylon before Sennacherib came to Jerusalem). T hen Isaiah clearly shows that Babylon’s place is not a positive but a totally negative one in God’s plan. Hezekiah has submitted to her, and this will be fulfilled when his descendants will be exiled to Babylon to be prisoners in the king’s house, and some will be made eunuchs to serve in the harem (39:6-7). The words were fulfilled in Jehoikim’s removal to Babylon in 598 B.C. w ith his household (2 Kgs 24:10-16).

Persian emperors: Sixth-fifth centuries B.C. The third cross section involves Persian emperors, Jewish subordinates, and Babylon (again) in chapters 40-66. T he actual fall of Jerusalem and the beginning of the Exile are past. Isaiah is strangely silent about those events. G od an­ nounces a new age and new rulers for the new period. The Book of Isaiah presents this in term s of three generations of ruling servants. Cyrus. The first is presented in chapters 44-45. The con­ queror is named: Cyrus of Media-Persia. He is anticipated in 41:2 where G od claims credit for the approaching conqueror: W ho has aroused (one) from the east? W hom salvation calls to its feet? 69

Governing Servants and Their Service

(W ho) gives up nations before him th at he beats down kings? O f him G od says: See my servant whom I confirm! My chosen, in whom my soul delights! . . . H e does n o t shatter a bruised reed n o r put out a flickering wick. (Yet) truly he does extend (the) verdict. H e does n o t fail. N or is he discouraged until he confirms (the) verdict in the land and coastlands wait for his instruction. (42:1,3-4) T he specific mandate for Cyrus is spelled out: I keep you and appoint you to be a covenant (for) people, to be a light (for) nations, to open blind eyes, to release a prisoner from a dungeon, those w ho live in darkness from a prison-house. (42:6b-7) T he reference to the exiled people is unmistakable. G od’s way of helping Israel in h er distress is to call on this bright new conqueror and give him the mandate to assume control o f the land of Canaan and to bring release and salvation to the exiles. Cyrus is introduced by name in 44:28 and linked directly to the more specific assignment: T he one saying to Jerusalem: "Be inhabited!” and to the towns of Judah: “Be built up!” and to her ruins, “I will raise them!” (44:26) ISAIAH

70

G od says this o f himself. H e supports “his servant” Cyrus (vv 26 and 28) who in tu rn says: to Jerusalem, “Be built!” and to (the) temple, “Be founded!” (v 28) T hen G od concludes his appeal to Exilic Jews to recognize Cyrus: I myself have aroused him w ithin my rights and I make all his ways straight. H e builds my city and he sends out my exiles w ith neither bribe nor reward. (45:13) Ezra 1:1-4 attributes this w ord to Jeremiah b u t confirms the decree of Cyrus for the people to return: “T he Lord, the G od of Heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me to build a tem ple for him at Jerusalem in Judah.” So the change is made. T he Persian em peror w ho by this time has control, at least in name, of all the larger areas, proclaims him self the patron of Jerusalem’s temple. N o one b u t a Davidic king had done th at since Adoni-Zedek gave way to David. T he new age provided for the foreign em peror to be recognized as G od’s servant w ith specific assignments w hich included the broader task o f maintaining law and order throughout the empire, of releas­ ing enslaved peoples, and of rebuilding Jerusalem and its temple. The concept is m ind boggling! T hat history records that Cyrus and his successors actually did this is even more amazing. Cyrus then commissioned a Jewish prince, Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8), to lead a delegation from Babylon to Jerusalem for the purpose of returning vessels taken by the Babylonians to the temple which they are to rebuild in Jerusalem. Ezra records fifty-four hundred articles of gold and silver that 71

Governing Servants and Their Service

were committed to them (1:11). T he Book of Isaiah is appar­ ently picturing both this first expedition and Sheshbazzar: A nd now, Lord Yahweh, has sent me and his spirit. (48:16b) and Move out from Babylon! Flee from Chaldea! . . . Say: “Yahweh has redeemed his servant Jacob!” (48:20a, c) T he Judean prince is in a subordinate and dependent position under the em peror, b u t he plays a significant role in the restoration and the w ork o f rebuilding Jerusalem. T he hum bling process had gone from Ahaz (chap. 7) to Hezekiah (chaps. 22, 36-38), to M anasseh (2 C hron 33:11) to Josiah (whose hum iliation led to his death; 2 Kgs 24:29; 2 C hron 35:20-24), to Jehoikim ’s captivity (2 Kgs 24:12-16), and finally to Zedekiah’s m utilation and death (2 Kgs 25:47). Now Sheshbazzar assumes the hum ble role o f represent­ ing Cyrus in the restoration of the city and the tem ple. T his will be the pattern after th e exile. T he glory of an au­ tonom ous kingdom is no more. N evertheless, the w ork o f G od is still carried out through this hum ble and sometimes hum iliating role. A third factor in the picture in Isaiah is played by Babylon (see “Excursus: Babylon,” W BC 24:186-88). T he powerful empire had disintegrated in the mid sixth century under Nabonidus and Belshazzar. T he Book of Isaiah uses Babylon as the symbol of ultim ate rebellion against G od’s plan in chapters 13-14, and 21, and as the seducer of Hezekiah’s Jerusalem in chapter 39. Isaiah does n o t recognize expressly Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon as Assyria’s successor in God’s plan. Rather, in chapters 46-47, Babylon and its idols are pictured as humiliated. The gods are themselves taken ISAIAH

72

captive. They are shown to be helpless and useless. C hapter 47 is a taunting song against Babylon. Babylon is the ultimate symbol of hum anity’s pride (2:11— 22 and 13:12) which must be judged by God. The Assyrians, too, had succumbed to the tem ptation of pride and ambition (10:5-54), but Babylon is always the prime symbol here (13:19; 14:11-15; 45:5). By the sixth century B.C. G od had “finished all his work against M ount Zion and Jerusalem” (10:12). Baby­ lon had been a rebel against God’s strategy in th at first phase (chaps. 13-14,21). She is equally out of step now and cannot play any positive role. The early readers of the Book o f Isaiah in the late fifth century B.C. would have known, n o t only of Nabunidus’s hum iliating capitulation before the approach of Cyrus, b u t also of Xerxes’ destruction of a rebellious Babylon in 480 B.C., although this is n o t noted explicitly in Isaiah. They must surely have looked on it as one more fulfillm ent o f G od’s curse on Babylon in chapters 13-14. T he treatm ent of Babylon in the Book of Isaiah is a clear statem ent th at not every conqueror, because of his success, is to be considered G od’s champion. H e may, like Babylon, be G od’s archenemy— doomed for early destruction. Darius. T he second generation (chaps. 49-57) o f th e new order brings different players on stage, b u t the basic roles are the same. D arius has taken th e place o f Cyrus (WBC 25:180-81). D arius is recognized as th e one chosen to suc­ ceed Cyrus in his G od-appointed role as restorer o f Jacob (49:5, cf. 42:7). H e is honored as a “Light to the N ations” (49:6b). The passage recognizes that Darius was an unlikely candi­ date for emperor (49:7b). H e was in fact a military aide to Camlyses, not recognized as a possible heir to the throne. A rebellion killed Camlyses’ brother, and a usurper claimed the throne. M ost of the empire recognized the usurper, b u t the army, which had been w ith Camlyses in Egypt, and sev­ eral of Darius’s family stood firmly w ith him. Darius was able 73

Governing Servants and Their Service

to arrange the assassination of Gaumata, the usurper, and establish himself as ruler through a series of military cam­ paigns. So, for a second time, a very unlikely candidate as­ cends the throne (49:7; 52:13-15), and the Book of Isaiah ascribes credit for it to God, w ho uses him as he had Cyrus to further his strategy. Ezra 6 records an edict from Darius that supported the work to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem during the days of Haggai and Zechariah. This time a building was completed, services were held, and priests installed in the city. They cele­ brated Passover. The account in Ezra 6 credits Zerubabbel w ith the initiative in seeking aid from Darius. Zerubabbel, like Sheshbazzar, was a descendant of David (Ezra 3:2,8; 4:2-3; 5:2). He was the leader most strenuously opposed by the governors of the neighboring provinces (Ezra 5:3-17). Inexpli­ cably, Zerubabbel’s name is missing in the account of the com­ pletion of the temple (Ezra 6:13-18). T he Book o f Isaiah has a role for a Jewish leader in Jerusalem w ho is persecuted and oppressed (50:4-9) b u t w ho continues bravely and persistently in his w ork. T he account continues in chapter 53. T he people chant about someone w ho has apparently been executed, although they now recognize th at he had been innocent o f any crime. T he chorus confesses th eir own guilt in the m atter. T hrough the suffering and death o f the one w ho was innocent, th e entire group is declared guiltless. H e was despised and rejected (by) men, a m an of pains w ho was visited by sickness. Like one hiding (his) face from us, he was despised and we did n o t value him. Surely he bore our sickness! and our pains— he carried them! . . . H e was being w ounded because of our rebellions. H e was being bruised because of our wrongs.

ISAIAH

74

T he punishm ent for our wholeness was on him and w ith his stripes comes healing for us. (53:3-5) T he passage may be understood as drawing a parallel betw een D arius and Zerubabbel (WBC 25:224-25,227-29). Darius is th e unlikely servant w ho is finally recognized and succeeds; Zerubabbel is the suffering m artyr whose ef­ forts and death finally bring imperial recognition and help to Jerusalem. In this section, too, there are enemies w ho initially resist the rule of Darius and the leadership o f Zerubabbel, thus causing his death. They are identified in 49:26 as “oppressors.” They persecute th e “teacher” in 50:6. They set fires in 50:11. Some of these enemies may be identified as the jealous leaders of neighboring provinces. Ezra identifies some of these to be Tattenai, governor o f the entire satrapy of Trans-Euphrates, and Shettar-Bozenaiand, his aide (Ezra 5:3,6). These, rather than Babylon, become the symbol for rebellion and arrogance in this section. T here is also the h in t th at some of these enemies were actually among the Jews (see esp. 56:1-13). Artaxerxes. A third round in Isaiah’s picture of post-Exilic Judaism portrays the third of the Persian emperors who aided in rebuilding Jerusalem: Artaxerxes. Almost a century after­ ward, he and Judah are called to a renewal of the purpose that first accounted for the call and success of Cyrus. Is n o t this the fast I w ould choose: opening the bonds o f wickedness, undoing the bindings o f a yoke, and sending out the oppressed to be free? You shall break every yoke! (58:6) This echoes the words of 49:9:

75

Governing Servants and Their Service

to say to prisoners, “G o out,” to those in darkness, “Appear." spoken to G od’s servant (Darius) and those in 45:13: H e builds my city and he sends out my exiles. spoken to Cyrus. Artaxerxes is summoned to complete the w ork of Cyrus and Darius (chap. 60; W BC 24:290-95; and 61:4; W BC 25:298). Ezra’s return to Jerusalem (Ezra 7) and Nehemiah’s work (the Book of Nehemiah) occur in the reign of Artaxerxes. The city walls were rebuilt, the temple organized, and priestly serv­ ices established. The people were renewed in covenant w ith their God. This occurred because Artaxerxes renewed the edict to rebuild Jerusalem (Ezra 7:11-26) and sent both Ezra and Nehemiah to carry out these orders. This they did, and they completed the work. For the first time in a century and a half Jerusalem was a functioning city w ith an active temple. H ere the pattern is the same as in the first tw o rounds. G od uses the pagan empire and also has his own persons to be the ones directly involved in the work. Here, too, there is opposition. Ezra 4:9 identifies Rehum, Shimshai, and other officials in Palestine among the non-Jewish population. N eh 2:19 and 4:1-3 identifies Sanballet the H oronite, Tobiah the Ammonite, and Geshem the Arab as active opponents. There were opponents among the Jews as well (Neh 5:1-19; 6:17). T he Book of Isaiah pictures a Jewish leader like Ezra in 61:l-3a: T he spirit o f my Lord Yahweh is on me because Yahweh has anointed me. To bring good news to poor persons, he has sent me, to bandage ones w ith broken hearts, to proclaim liberty to captives and an opening to those imprisoned, ISAIAH

76

to proclaim the year of Yahweh’s favor and our G od’s day of vengeance, to com fort all m ourners, to assign (rights) to Zion’s m ourners. (61:l-3a) All the emperor’s favors for the city and the temple are no t enough. A person w ith special spiritual and religious gifts is needed to bring the healing and renewal that G od’s people require. G od is the ultimate one responsible for the govern­ m ent’s provisions for the people as well as for the blessings through a spiritual leadership. In this last section, enemies and opponents are still at work, but here they are located w ithin Israel. U ndoubtedly some of those w ho are judged for injustice in chapter 59 are neighboring leaders like those Nehemiah faced. T he crucial listing in Isaiah 65-66, however, includes Israelites still ad­ dicted to pagan customs (65:2-7) w ho m ust be separated from the people of G od (65:11-16) and finally be consigned to death (66:24). T here are also th e faithful leaders o f th e people o f G od w ho try to exemplify and to effect the strategy o f G od for his people. They often w ork under extrem e difficulty and at great risk and price. In Isaiah such were Ahaz (chaps. 7-14), Sheshbazzar (48:16-21), Zerubabbel (or w hoever is represented in 50:4-9; 52:1-12), and Ezra (or w hoever is represented in 61:l-3a). They were those w ho struggled to find ways to serve the purposes of God. They acted w ithout power, in weakness, w ithout glory, in hum ility and hum ilia­ tion, w ithout reward or apparent success. N onetheless, the Book of Isaiah accords them the right to stand as predeces­ sors of him w ho w ould serve G od by taking up their mis­ sion (Luke 4:14-21) and by paying the same price for his service (Luke 22:37; M ark 10:45; M att 20:28). H e w ould predict another destruction of the tem ple (M ark 13:2), and he w ould speak of resurrection as a rebuilding o f th e tem ple in three days (John 2:19). 77

Governing Servants and Their Service

T his pattern rem ained in effect for Judaism and early Christianity. Empire followed empire. T he people o f G od in synagogue and church, first w ith the tem ple and later w ithout it, learned to look to the governm ent for essential services w hich they knew th a t G od had provided, even though the rulers were pagans and nonbelievers. T he peo­ ple o f G od were thus free to do the things th at only they could do.

ISAIAH

78

6

W ORSHIPING SERVANTS A N D THEIR SERVICE

Israel's role in serving God In the Bible “Israel” refers to th e chosen people, heirs o f Abraham, under the covenant of Sinai. They are th e People o f God. From them priests for th e sanctuary are chosen. From among them rise the prophet-spokesm en for G od and the teachers of the Torah. T heir piety lies in conscious ad­ herence to the instructions of G od and in the sense o f his presence among them . As the children of Abraham, and as Jacob and his sons, Israel is the rem inder of G od’s promise. They lived w ith the hope o f its fulfillment. T heir experience in the wilderness teaches the idea of living in hope w ith the added factor of being a testim ony to G od’s marvelous salva­ tion from the land o f bondage. Israel, as twelve tribes living in the land of Canaan, is a clear symbol of promises fulfilled: a great people, Abraham’s descendants, living in G od’s land. T he Book of Joshua tells the story. T he books of Judges and 1 Samuel continue it. T hen Israel became a kingdom. U nder David and Solomon the promise to Abraham reached its zenith of fulfillm ent The whole land was under their control, and the people were 79

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

num erous, the country prosperous. W hen the kingdom was divided Israel came to be the term used for the ten n o rth ern tribes. T heir story is told in 1-2 Kings. T he tu r­ bulent history o f the N orthern Kingdom lasted tw o h u n ­ dred years (approximately 930-720 B.C.). D uring the last decades it was divided and often in civil strife before Assyria defeated it in 733 B.C. and finally incorporated it into its imperial structure in 720 B.C. The Book of Isaiah picks up this identification of Israel during the reign of Jeroboam (1:1), the middle of the eighth century B.C. In chapters 1-14, the generations of Uzziah and Ahaz, “Israel” is the N orthern Kingdom. The message of the book is that this kingdom of Israel is fated to be destroyed, a message parallel to th at o f 2 Kings. This is spelled out in 2:6-8 where Israel is n o t invited to worship in Jerusalem. In 5:24-25 the “woes” against her reach a climax of the Lord’s anger because “they rejected the law of the Lord of H osts and spum ed the w ord o f the Holy O ne of Israel.” In 7:7-9 Ahaz is told that the N orthern Kingdom w ith Aram will soon no longer exist. T he terrible picture of its disintegra­ tion is recounted in 9:8-21. W ith these sections the identifi­ cation of Israel as the N orthern Kingdom comes to an end. There are many indications, however, that G od is not fin­ ished w ith the people of Israel. There is hope for a rem nant (9:1,10:20-21). In succeeding generations the term “Israel” is used sparingly. In 17:4-11 there is a description of Israel’s role in G od’s future. G rief for the destruction is spelled out in 22:3-4. The sad picture of Israel’s collapse is continued in the generation of Josiah (28:1-8). O nly G od’s election grace of­ fers any hope or dignity for them (28:9-18). Yet God, who is identified as the Holy O ne of Israel, has no intention of letting the m atter rest there. C hapter 40 in­ troduces the generation w hen all Israel, including Judah and Jerusalem, has been humiliated. M ost of them are in exile, scattered over Mesopotamia, w ith remnants in Egypt. This pitiful, straggly leftover from the period of autonomous kingship is addressed by G od as “Israel” ISAIAH

80

He assures them that he is really the C reator of Heaven and Earth, the G od of their fathers, even as they hear him in Babylon. He assures them that they are still, and always will be, heirs of his elective grace, the people of the promise, the potential people of the covenant. He calls them to be his servants. H e has a job for them: to comfort, build up, and visit Jerusalem. Election is for service (see H. H. Rowley, The Bibli­ cal Doctrine of Election). Exilic and post-Exilic Israel is called anew to the service of God. Christians may well identify the church w ith this “Israel of God” (Gal 6:16) and the service to which it is called in the Book of Isaiah. T he exiles undoubtedly had a very low self-image. They had no power, no self-determination, no country of their own, no king. Nevertheless, G od found them ideally located and situated to do the work he had in mind. T heir immedi­ ate task was to encourage Jerusalem (40:1-2; for Jerusalem’s role, see below). Babylonian Judaism was challenged to an­ nounce G od’s approach to Zion (40:9-10). Jews in Babylon remained a center of Jewish influence for centuries; the Talmud was shaped there in its famous academy. Jerusalem, however, became the center of Judaism until its destruction in A.D. 70. Babylon’s, Alexandria’s, and Asia M inor’s roles were supportive in every way. Babylonian Jewery is specifically endowed w ith the serv­ ant mantle in 41:8-24. They are called “descendants o f Abraham ,” ones brought from the ends of th e land to be told, “You are my servant; chosen and n o t rejected.” They are assured o f G od’s help and support, o f being witnesses to G od’s miraculous revival of nature. They will overcome the basic problems of lack of knowledge and understanding th at plagued their forefathers. They are called to “see and know, to consider and understand that the hand of the Lord has done this” (v 20). They have been “deaf and blind” (42:1820), and therefore they have been “plundered and looted” (v 23). B ut now they should be able to know th at G od did this to them (vv 23-25). U nfortunately, they still do n o t understand (v 25b). 81

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

Beyond the trials by flood and fire (43:2), G od points to redem ption. H e has called them by name. They belong to him (43:1,4). They were “created for his glory, formed and made” for his purposes (v 7). Israel is to serve G od by being a witness to his acts and calling (43:10). In a w orld filled w ith those who deny G od’s rights and his tru th , Israel is called to witness on his behalf. They have been chosen to see, to .know, and to believe, to understand th at G od is the source and author of all good and of their destiny (43:10,12). T he C hristian church is heir to this calling and this service of witnessing to all the w orld (Matt 28:19-20; A cts 1:8). Israel is still called despite h er forefathers’ neglect of worship and their sin and rebellion (43:22-28). G od is doing a new thing (43:18-20), and it is all focused on revival for his people (43:20c-21). Israel is to share the service of G od w ith the Persian em peror (see the next section), b u t his calling is “for the sake o f Jacob, G od’s servant, Israel, G od’s chosen” (45:4). The em peror assumes part of the role th at Israel formerly was supposed to fill, b u t his part is supportive only. T he essentials of service continue w ith Israel, the people of God. Israel, like the church at a later time, had its own ideas of what G od wanted it to be. T he Book of Isaiah notes this resistance (43:9-13 and afterward). It did n ot want to share its role w ith Cyrus or w ith worshipers from the nations. It arro­ gated to itself pretensions of worldly power and selfish ambi­ tion. It would not accept the fact that being separated for G od meant renouncing all worldly things: power, wealth, and fame. Dependence on G od meant renouncing self and its pre­ rogatives. This it resisted, although God promised to provide all that was necessary through Cyrus, his chosen governor, through whom Israel would receive salvation and protection. This brings sharp words from G od in 46:3-13. God’s plan is fixed. He is determined to carry it out, but Israel’s resistance is intolerable. O ne more time G od appeals to Babylonian Israel in chapter 48 w hen the first expedition sets out for Jerusalem (48:16b, 20). ISAIAH

82

As th e role of the emperor increases and as time stretches out in getting Jerusalem rebuilt, Israel complains that it is being neglected and its prerogatives are being overlooked (49:1-4). Indeed the Vision turns more attention to Jerusalem. Israel is confused and restless in its role. C hapter 58 reflects this confusion: “W hy have we fasted, but you have not seen it?” (v 3). God’s reply calls for a total life that conforms to his standards: “to loose the chains of injustice, . . . to set the oppressed free . . . to share your food w ith the hungry, provide shelter . . . clothe th e naked” (vv 6-7) for their own kin as well as other hum an beings. They are admonished that rebuilding Jerusalem w ithout building up their service to oth­ ers in God’s name is useless. Building Jerusalem must be ac­ companied by honoring the sabbath (v 13) for the cycle to be complete. T he message is still valid for the people of God. Erecting church buildings should be a means of reaching out to the needy, of furthering the causes o f justice, and of worshiping G od in his holy place on his holy day; “T hen you will find your joy in th e Lord.” C hapter 59 brings recognition that, in the new era as in the preceding one, the greatest hindrance to the fulfillm ent of G od’s promises lies in the sins of the people themselves (vv 2-8). Because of this their own justice and deliverance are far away, while they walk in more darkness than light (vv 9-15). So G od’s retribution is still necessary (vv 15b—19). Redemption is still offered “to those in Jacob who repent of their sins” (v 20). 54:17b has the term “servants of the Lord” in the plural for the first time in the Vision. T he solidarity o f the chosen people is no longer possible. T he “heritage” will be received by some members of Israel b u t n o t by all. In chapter 55 the invitation to all who will to come is expressed. H ere in chapter 59 those who may come are defined as “those in Jacob w ho repent o f their sins” (v 20b). 63:7-13 recalls earlier days of Israel w hen people rebelled against the Lord even in the m idst o f their being saved. The reference is to th e wilderness experiences after the Exodus. 83

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

There, too, G od turned on the rebels (v 10). B ut they also remember the continued presence of “the Spirit of the Lord” who led the rest tow ard his promised land. C ontin­ ued election to heritage in the promise is sure, b u t only to those in Israel who are willing and obedient, who repent and hum ble themselves before God. For them the new Jerusalem is open and ready. T he separation is spelled out in 65:13-16 following a description of latter-day pagans doing exactly w hat earlier generations had been condem ned for doing. So th e excom­ m unication is complete. G od speaks almost bitterly, “I re­ vealed myself to those w ho did n o t ask for me; I was ready to be found by those w ho did n o t seek me” (65:1). Servanthood for Israel was a sure selection through Abraham . A t the same tim e, it required faith, obedience, and the will to belong to G od and serve him. Post-Exilic Jews learned th at n o t all of them were prepared to subm it to G od’s plan or his requirem ents. They joined a long line in Israel, from Esau to the w orshipers o f th e G olden Calf, to Saul and so on, w ho chose to exchange their heritage for som ething else. This way led to th eir ow n disinheritance and destruction. Even the new city bore silent witness to th eir rebellion and fate (66:24). This continued as a grim rem inder th at n o t all the children o f Adam, o r even o f Abraham , w ant to be a believing, obedient, joyful p art o f th e heritage G od has prepared for his saints. Nevertheless, G od is faithful, and the children o f A braham and th e w ider group o f the children o f Adam are issued an open invitation to the great celebration in the city of G od (1:19; 2:3; 40:1-2; 55:1-7; 66:19-23). Israel is the name of the people o f God, chosen, called, and redeemed, w ho are responsive, obedient, and hum ble in their readiness to serve. T heir service includes m aintaining the place of worship, w ith open doors, holy for G od, as well as witnessing to all peoples of the work, presence, and power of God, of his faithfulness, his holiness, his salvation, and his glory. They serve in supporting the cause of freedom ISAIAH

84

and justice, o f compassionate provision o f housing, clothing, and food for the needy. T he Israel of G od (Gal 6:16) and its service, w hich the Book of Isaiah portrays, is continued among the followers of C hrist as his words echo the same invitation and definition of service. Still, the same sad tru th follows the preaching o f the Gospel: not all are prepared to receive it, believe it, and live it. Yet to those who believe the call the reward is sure. T he Book o f Isaiah portrays th e goal o f G od’s strategy w hich has brought a new age into existence to be th a t o f creating conditions in w hich genuine w orship can take place. T he old age and th e old Jerusalem are condem ned for having allowed w orship to become totally depraved (1:10— 15; 21-25). T he only way G od can accept them is through a total repentance (1:18-20) and through a process o f purging and redem ption (1:25-28; 4:4). T he picture o f th e changed city portrays this goal (2:2-4). T he destructions portrayed in chapters 1-39 portray the process o f purification and destruction. C hapters 40-66 sketch the emerging picture of the service of worship for this new age.

In the world Israel is to be understood as G od’s servant in a prim ary sense. G od’s use of Cyrus as a governing servant does not displace Israel’s essential calling. She is summoned to “com fort Jerusalem” (40:1-11). She is assured of her contin­ ued election (41:8-16), despite her blindness (42:18-21) and failure to recognize G od’s hand in h er disasters (42:22-25). Israel is the centerpiece in G od’s great plan, the recipient of his redem ption and care (43:1-7). T he purpose o f Israel’s existence and calling centers in h er being G od’s witness: “You are my witnesses th at I am God!” (43:12c). To fulfill th at purpose Israel, scattered over th e whole empire, is in a far stronger position than Israel in Palestine could ever have been. 85

Worshiping Servants and T heir Service

G od’s condem nation o f Israel in 1:2-3 was th at Israel was a rebellious people “w ithout knowledge or understanding.” In 43:10-12 Exilic Israel is told: You are my witnesses, expression o f Yahweh and o f my servant, whom I have chosen, in order th at you may come to know and that you may confirm for me and that you may understand th at I am he. Before me, no god was formed, and after me there is none. I, I myself am Yahweh and apart from me (there is) no savior. I have announced (it), and I have saved and I have let it be heard. A nd no one among you is a stranger (to the facts). A nd you, yourselves, are my witnesses. Expression of Yahweh! I (am) God! See also 44:8. She is called to overcome the very conditions that led to her forefathers’ condemnation. The key words in verse 10 are “witnesses,” “servants,” “chosen,” “know,” “be­ lieve,” and “understand.” They have been central concepts through the entire book. Israel’s witness is to be directed first o f all to its ow n people, to rem ind them o f G od’s w ork in their history and to lead them to knowledge, faith, and understanding. Baby­ lonian Jews did this to a remarkable extent for a millennium. Babylon’s synagogues produced leaders and teachers. Its academy produced books, even the great Talmud th at is so revered in Judaism. From Babylon, Ezra and many other teachers emerged. The setting o f verses 8-9 indicate th at this witness will also apply to “the nations” as well. T he setting probably has the ISAIAH

86

nations of Canaan in view b u t is certainly not lim ited to them . T he impact of Jewish synagogues on Gentile life in Babylon, Palestine, Egypt, and later throughout the Roman Empire was n o t inconsiderable. The Book of Isaiah expects “many peo­ ples” to come to the new temple in Jerusalem (2:3) and lists those from Tarshish, Libya, Lydia, Tubal, Greece, and distant islands or coastlands among those who come to worship (66:19). T he New Testament testifies to the presence o f such groups at Passover in Jerusalem (Acts 2:9), and H erod’s tem ­ ple had an entire section designated for th e Gentiles. Jesus picks up the task which the Book of Isaiah saw as Israel’s central calling and places it upon his disciples: “You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the land [earth]” (Acts 1:8).

In Jerusalem’s Temple Servant Israel is also called to worship in Jerusalem’s tem ­ ple. Babylonian Jews were called to support efforts to rebuild and restore the city (40:2,9,11; 48:20-21), b u t the heart o f Israel’s calling relating to the city lies in worshiping there. T he appeal in 1:7-20 is addressed in the plural to a gathered congregation. T he issue is that their worship is unacceptable because o f their behavior. Sacrifice n o t accompanied by a faithful life is unacceptable. A remedy, however, is available. They can purge themselves by changing their lifestyle: Cease doing evil! Learn doing good! Seek justice! Remedy oppression. Bring justice to the orphan! Plead the cause o f the widow! (vv 16e—17) Sin and guilt can be forgiven and cleansed “if you become willing and shall obey” (v 19a), b u t th e ultim ate fault is to 87

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

“refuse and continue obstinate” (v 20a). By the end o f the book the people had experienced almost three centuries of th e results of refusal and obstinacy. T he lesson in the form of a beautiful poetic parable in 5:1-7 is addressed to a group, and as individuals they are called to consider what options G od has in this situation when: he waited for justice, behold bloodshed! For righteousness, behold a cry o f distress! (5:7) In chapter 40 individual exiles are summoned to “com fort Jerusalem.” In chapter 48 those w ho comprise the first expe­ dition to go to restore it are exhorted to leave Babylon. In 54:17c, for the first time, “servants of Yahweh” appears in the plural. This verse speaks of their “heritage.” N ot the heritage of corporate Israel, but that of the group who gather for worship in Jerusalem. This is followed by the great unbounded invitation for any and all who “thirst” to come and “drink” (55:1). The open invitation to participate in Jerusalem’s worship continues to the end of the book. Seek Yahweh while he may be found! Call him while he is near! (55:6) T he recognition that there is room for the repentant sin­ ner, which was a feature of chapter 1, reverberates again: May the guilty forsake his way and the troublem aker his convictions. A nd may he tu rn to Yahweh th at he may have compassion on him and to our G od th at he may multiply pardon. (55:7) There is the clear recognition th at G od is different: ISAIAH

88

As (the) heavens are higher than land so my ways are higher than your ways and my convictions than your convictions. (v9)

B ut then G od compares his blessings of rain for nature to his blessing through his w ord in worship: My w ord . . . does not return to me empty unless it has done w hat I will and succeeded in w hat I sent it (to do). (v 1 1 )

T he protest that the foreigner and the eunuch could be left out is answered by the assurance th at they, too, have an assured place: To the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths and who choose w hat I will and w ho hold fast my covenant: I shall give them in my house and w ithin my walls hand and name. Better than sons and daughters, an age-long name I give to them , which will n o t be cut off. Foreigners w ho are joining themselves to Yahweh to m inister to him and worship the name o f Yahweh to be his servants, (vv 4-6) T he words could n o t be more specific. “T he servants o f Yahweh” will include all who choose to worship him in the ways that he has stipulated: “keeping sabbath . . . and holding fast my covenant” (v 6c). T hen the temple is called “a house of prayer for all peoples” (v 7c). T he passage ends w ith a clarification: G od is still active in “gathering Israel’s 89

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

outcasts,* b u t there are so many “m ore than those already gathered” th at he would welcome in his house (v 8). T he shaping of the new congregation does n o t proceed w ithout problems. Judeans seek a “quick fix” for their prob­ lems by fasting and then complain that it has n o t brought immediate results (58:3). They still bring a m ixture o f hum an barbarism to their w orship and do n o t see how incongruous it is: See! For strife and contention you fast, and for hitting an adversary w ith a fist. You may n o t fast as (you have) today (if you want) to make your voice heard on high. (58:4) W ith this the book returns to a central theme: Is n o t this the fast I would choose: opening the bonds o f wickedness undoing the bindings of a yoke and sending out the oppressed to be free? You (plural) shall break every yoke! (58:6) We have noted above that this task of freeing the prisoners was the heart of the mandate given to the Persian em perors (42:7) and is picked up by his Jewish leaders in Jerusalem (61:1-3). In these verses (58:5-6) the members of the congre­ gation are called to take up the task. They, too, are to be liberators. They cannot simply sit back and wait for the government to do G od’s work. As individuals they m ust participate: Is it (the fast G od would choose) n o t sharing your (singular) bread w ith the poor, and th at you bring homeless poor persons into your house?

ISAIAH

90

W hen you see one naked and you cover him, and you do n o t hide yourself from your ow n flesh. (v 7) Jesus echoes these words in his parable of the last judgm ent (Matt 25:31-46). In Isaiah’s V ision the seekers move on through tim e as well as space tow ard that exalted city on a high hill (2:2). They seek the presence o f G od (2:3a), and they are prepared to learn his ways through the Torah w hich is taught there (2:3bc). These “ways” include the sense of social responsibil­ ity which is a requisite of true worship. T he tensions among the people and betw een the people and G od throughout the book and the journey come to a climax in chapter 65. T he near com pletion of the new city forces G od to deal promptly w ith those w ho continue in rebellion (65:2). Some of these refuse to give up their pagan rites (vv 3-5a, 11). O thers hold on to a violent lifestyle th at is incompatible w ith worship in the new city (66:5b). O thers insist on traditional sacrificial worship w ithout repentance (66:3-4). These are judged: Because I called, b u t you did n o t answer. I spoke, b u t you did n ot listen. So you did evil in my eyes and you chose th at in which I took no pleasure. (65:12bc) They are separated from G od’s servants (vv 13-15) and are assigned to slaughter (vv 12a, 15b). The last verse in the book is a rem inder of their fate (66:24). T he w orshipers in G od’s new city are a select group w ho have been called o f G od, b u t they have also chosen to seek him and are prepared to follow his way o f w orship and life. T he last passage in Isaiah calls on all these w or­ shipers to:

91

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

Rejoice w ith Jerusalem . . . all of you who love her. (66:10a) Those who had been called to “com fort Jerusalem” (40:1) may now be com forted by the Lord w ith Jerusalem (66:13) w hen he comes “to gather all the nations . . . th at they may see his glory” (66:18). Some of these are sent out to tell the nations th at Jerusalem is open and to help them come by all conceivable means of transport, and to bring offerings and worship in the city (66:19-20). In this m anner “all flesh will come to worship before” G od (66:23). So the second type of worshiping “servant” is th at of the great congregation made up of all w ho seek God, w ho are drawn to him, and w ho are willing and obedient. T heir worship is praise, thanksgiving, and communion. It is listening to God’s word, learning his instruction, living in his ways. It includes doing G od’s work for the poor and oppressed. It is a way of peace and is blessed by the Lord w ith joy, comfort, and tranquility even under pressure and perse­ cution. To learn from G od in Zion means to learn the mean­ ing of justice for everyone as the Torah (the Law) taught it. Learn doing good! Seek justice! Remedy oppression! Bring justice to the orphan! Plead the case o f the widow! (1:17) In the crucible of judgm ent the picture of the just person emerges: W ho among us can dwell indefinitely (with) devouring fire? . . . O ne walking (with) righteous acts, one speaking upright things, one despising gain from acts of oppression, one shaking his hands so as n o t to hold a bribe, ISAIAH

92

one stopping his ears so as n ot to consent to bloodshed, one shutting his eyes so as n ot to favor evil, only that one will dwell in the heights. (33:14c-16a) T he one called of G od defined his mission: To bring good news to poor persons, he has sent me, to bandage one w ith broken hearts, to proclaim liberty to captives . . . to proclaim the year of Yahweh’s favor, and our G od’s day of vengeance, to com fort all m ourners. (61:lb-3a) This moves well beyond the Law’s definitions b u t is w ithin th e kind of worship that G od wants. To worship in Zion pointed the way to a nonviolent world, to peace as G od’s will for all who would worship him. There “the w olf and the lamb will feed together” (11:6a): They will do no harm — they will n ot destroy in all the m ount of my holiness! (11:9a) T he result o f righteousness is peace . . . quietness and tru st for an age, so that people dwell in peaceful homes in secure dwellings and in quiet resting places. (32:17-18) Indeed you will go out in joy and be led out in peace. T he mountains and the hills break out before you in singing, and all the trees of the field clap their hands. (55:12) Jesus echoes the theme: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of G od” (Matt 5:9). 93

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

To worship G od in Zion means to learn hum ility and meekness. O nly those w ho are “contrite” and “hum ble” can experience the presence of G od in its fullness. “T he willing and the obedient” experience G od’s blessings (1:19). T he hum ble and the needy will rejoice and exult in G od (29:10). “The one who takes refuge in (God) will possess the land” (57:13b). G od welcomes “the contrite and lowly in spirit” to his high and holy place to dwell w ith him (57:15), and in the new temple G od says: I pay attention to this (one): to a hum ble and contrite spirit w ho trembles at my word. (66:2b) Jesus said, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth” (M att 5:5). To w orship G od in Zion is to recognize the fruits o f dedi­ cated service in suffering and even through death: My Lord Yahweh has assigned me a student’s tongue to know how to sustain a weary one (with) a word. . . . I gave my back to ones w ho beat me and my cheeks to those who plucked them bare. (50:4,6a) Surely he bore our sickness! and our pains— he carried them! (53:4) Yahweh laid on him the iniquity o f us a ll (53:6b) Even among the celebrants were some who had been dis­ owned for their faith (66:5). Jesus said, “Blessed are those w ho are persecuted because o f righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (M att 5:10). To worship G od in Zion is to experience how G od prepared the way for all w ho yearn for his presence and who are willing to do his will. ISAIAH

94

Ahaz faced seemingly impossible opposition, b u t G od showed him a way if he w ould confirm him self in G od (chap. 7; W BC 24:94). M anasseh’s generation faced a totally desolate land in w hich death was everywhere, b u t G od by sovereign decree “swallowed up death” (25:8; W BC 24:332-33). Israel in exile seemed to face impossible odds, b u t G od called them to rem em ber that, as creator o f the w orld, he had assets available beyond their ability to imag­ ine (chap. 40; W BC 25:93). H e used pagan em perors and their imperial resources to prepare a tem ple for believers to assemble to w orship him (chaps. 60 and 66). Jesus says, “Blessed are those w ho hunger and th irst for righteousness, for they shall be filled” (M att 5:6) and “W hoever seeks shall find” (M att 7:7). To worship in Zion is to be alive and to live as G od would wish. T he promise of life is inherent in the emphasis on “sons” in chapters 7-9 for Ahaz and for Isaiah (WBC 24:84). Hezekiah came to appreciate how precious life is in his psalm celebrating his gift of continued life: T he living! (Only) the living! H e it is who thanks you as I do today. (38:19) G od’s control o f death is vital to his people in th e dark days o f chapters 24-25. (See esp. 25:7 and 26:19; W BC 24:343.) To worship in Zion is to learn to be the servant o f the Lord that Israel was called and destined to be. In contrast to the role of ruler th at Cyrus is called to fill, Israel is to return to the role of worship and holy living th at began at Sinai. This role is secure for her even in exile (41:9), and it is for this purpose th at he redeems h er (WBC 25:106). Israel’s experience points to this end (43:27-44:2). It is for Israel to learn how to include the foreigner and the banned (56:6-7) and to worship after G od’s fashion through service to others (58:5-14). Jesus fit this pattern w hen he said: “W hoever wants to be great among you m ust be your servant. . . . For 95

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

even the Son of man did n o t come to be served, b u t to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:43,45). To worship G od in Zion is to know G od’s grace and restoration beyond judgment: Indeed you have been angry w ith me. May your anger tu rn that you may com fort me. (12: lb) Indeed w hen your judgments belong to the land they teach righteousness to the world’s inhabitants. (26:9b) For it was not a discerning people. Therefore he had no compassion on them. . . . But it will be in that day . . . you, yourselves, will be gathered. (27:l 1b - 12) D o you not know? . . . Yahweh is a G od of the long view. . . . H e does n ot faint! H e does not grow weary! . . . (Yet he it is who is) giving power to the faint and he multiplies strength to one w ith no m ight . . . Those waiting on Yahweh will renew strength. They will rise (on) wings like eagles. They will run, b u t n o t tire. They will walk, b u t n o t fain t (40:28-31) To worship G od in Zion is to know G od’s ultim ate tri­ um ph over evil: In that day Yahweh w ith his sword will decide the fate o f the hard, great, and strong one, o f Leviathan, a fleeing serpent, ISAIAH

96

Leviathan, a tw isting snake. A nd he will kill the m onster which is in the sea. (27:1) To worship G od in Zion is to know “w onder after won­ der” and know they are true and real. Therefore, see me again doing w onders for this people, the w onder and a wonder! (29:14a) Remember . . . I am God! T here is no other! . . . A nnouncing end from beginning. . . . Indeed, I have spoken. Indeed, I bring it to pass. I have planned (it)! Indeed, I do it! (46:9-11) To worship G od in Zion is to experience the spirit poured from on high; that is, a judgment: U ntil spirit is poured upon us from above. (32:15) I pour my spirit on your seed and my blessing on your offspring. (44:4b) and a leader w ho says: “A nd now, Lord Yahweh has sent me and his spirit!” (48:16) and “the spirit of my Lord Yahweh is on me” (61:1). Jesus spoke in term s like these (Luke 4:21), and Peter at Pentecost claimed the fulfillm ent of the out­ pouring of G od’s spirit (Acts 2:16). To worship G od in Zion is for the blind to see and the deaf to hear. It is to know the lifting of the curse spoken in 6:10, in w hich deliverance was promised: T he deaf hear in that day words (read from) a scroll. 97

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

A fter gloom and darkness blind eyes will see. (29:18) If the eyes of those who see should look and the ears of those w ho hear should hearken. (32:3) T hen blind eyes are opened and a deaf ear is cleared. (35:5) A nd you shall see and your heart will rejoice. (66:14) Jesus, too, spoke of worship as “seeing and hearing” w hen he was healing a blind beggar (Luke 13:42); “H e who has ears to hear, let him hear it” (Luke 14:35b). To worship in Zion, however, is to recognize th at this is a privilege th at many do n o t w ant and will n o t tolerate: “A wicked one shown mercy does not learn righteousness” (26:10). W orship in Zion is restricted to those who will do it in G od’s way (65:1-7,11-12). Those w ho refuse to do it th at way may n o t enter (65:1-16) and have only death as their fate (66:24). As G od is forced by hum an rebellion and recalci­ trance to recognize th at n o t everyone wants to worship in Zion, so m ust those who do come recognize this sad and bitter truth: “There can be no peace for the adversaries” (48:22; 57:20-21). W orship in the new city is open to all who seek G od and w ant to subm it to his instruction. Sadly, there are many who do not w ant this.

In quietness and solitude There is a third kind o f w orshiper w hich the V ision of Isaiah portrays. This kind is pictured as the m ost valued of all by the Lord. This one approaches G od alone in quietude to share his presence simply. Ahaz is offered such a com m union in the m idst of his busy life by the prophet Isaiah in chapter 7. H e is told: ISAIAH

98

“Take hold of yourself and be calm. D o n o t be afraid. . . .” If you will n ot believe, certainly you cannot be confirmed. (7:4a, 9b) This remains one of th e best descriptions o f personal faith to be found anywhere. To make oneself firm tow ard G od allows G od to confirm one in his purpose and in his care. (See “Excursus: T he Risk o f Faith” W BC 24:94-95.) Isaiah retreats into privacy from the tem pestuous public m inistry saying, “I will wait for Yahweh w ho is hiding his face from the house of Jacob and will hope for him ” (8:17). W aiting and hoping are essential elements of this quiet faith that G od treasures, as their repeated use in the Psalms show. Yet it is in the passages near the end of Isaiah, w hen the tensions and failures of the people are so evident, w here G od sighs his appreciation of the simple believing w orshiper m ost poignantly. God’s measured movements toward accomplishing his goals call for patient waiting. W hen so many want to act impa­ tiently and impetuously to force G od’s hand, he announces his goal and defines the one who can share it. See me laying a stone in Zion. A tested stone. A com er (stone) of value. A foundation (well) founded. H e who believes will n o t be in haste. (28:16) This may well call for continuation in faith when there is no understanding of the ways of God. The Book of Isaiah recog­ nized this: “Strange is his work. . . . Alien is his service” (28:21b). T hat G od could pronounce harsh and binding judg­ m ent on his own people (6:9-13) and carry it out was indeed strange and alien. That G od would call on a heathen king to effect his salvation for his people was stranger still (45:15). So faith had to include patience in waiting for G od to reveal his plan and effect his salvation. It had been so for 99

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

Abraham. It had to be so for believers during the span of history that Isaiah covers. It still is so today. W hen the signs of God’s judgment are so evident that terror seizes everyone, the question is asked, “W ho among us can dwell indefinitely (with) devouring fire?” (33:14). The situ­ ation is like that addressed in Habakkuk who asks “How long, O Lord?” in 1:1, to be answered, “The righteous by his faith will live” (3:2). The answer in Isaiah is also of an individual: O ne walking (with) righteous acts, one speaking upright things, one despising gain from acts of oppression, one shaking his hands so as n o t to hold a bribe, one stopping his ears so as n o t to consent to bloodshed, one shutting his eyes so as n o t to favor evil, only that one dwells in the heights. Rock fortresses (will be) his defense. His bread will be provided. H is w ater will be assured. (33:15-16) T he passage goes on to envision for this person a king and a city where G od reigns in supreme peace. W hat separates a person from G od is n o t vulnerability to his holy fire, b ut rather incompatibility in term s of character and com m itm ent It is n ot because a person is hum an that the fire is to be feared b u t because a person is a sinner w ho cannot stand in G od’s presence (WBC 24:427-28). As the pressures of international violence close in on Judah in chapter 30 and its leaders have still not learned to accept a passive role in international politics so as to be able to assume a new role as God’s spiritual representatives to the world, God calls again for one among them who is capable of turning inward in faith, of resting on G od’s grace and promises: In returning and rest you could be saved. In quietness and tru st could your heroism consist . . . ISAIAH

100

Surely, Yahweh waits to be gracious to you. Surely, he rises up to show you mercy, for Yahweh is a G od of justice. Blessed are all who wait for him! (30:15b, 18) This is indeed a very different kind of heroism, the heroism of waiting on the Lord, of meeting G od’s patient waiting w ith hope and faith that is willing to wait. This is a major theme in Isaiah (WBC 24:397). The tragedy for ancient Israel and so often for us lies in our insistence on trying to fashion our own salvation. We fail again and again. The solution is to learn to let God show his grace, to learn to wait. Such a person waits and hopes for that temple “not made with hands” (Heb 9:11) which is pictured here for the oppressed Judean where “Yahweh (will be) our king. H e will be our Savior” (33:22). As the V ision nears the accomplishment of G od’s goal, one m ight expect the light to break and all tensions to be released, but as the restoration of the C ity and its temple draws near, the more the tension grows and the m ore diffi­ cult it becomes to be G od’s person. C hapter 57 portrays a scene of chaos, paganism, and unbelief among G od’s people. A t the end, however, G od affirms that the position of the faithful is rock solid and invulnerable: T he one who takes refuge in me will possess land. H e will inherit my holy m ountain. (57:13) Among all those who had given up on waiting for G od to reward his own, who had turned to pagan, violent, and unethical ways to assure their living and their possessions, G od affirms those w ho simply find their peace in him. Final peace and ultim ate inheritance belong to those “w ho take refuge” in G od (WBC 24:160). G od’s goals and strategy are built around a simple truth: Thus says one high and lifted up, Dweller Forever whose name is Holy: 101

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

I dwell in the high and holy place w ith one contrite and lowly o f spirit to revive the spirit of hum ble ones and to revive the heart o f those practicing contrition. (57:15) N o m atter how high one’s view of G od is (as in 57:15a) or how exalted one’s picture of the position of the believer is (as in verse 15bc), the description of the one privileged to share th at spot is of hum ility and contrition. T he essential attribute of true faith is humility. A nd the common purpose o f G od and those w ho share the exalted and holy tryst is to revive those w ho are hum ble and contrite, those awesome “meek w ho will inherit the earth’’ whom Jesus spoke o f (M att 5:5). G od is very selective about th e ones w ho are invited to share his presence, to come to the inm ost part o f his temple. Those w ho are “adversaries,” w ho oppose his strategy and plan are excluded (57:21). T he proud and the haughty, the “successful” and knowledgeable, are n o t included. G od offers a place in his house, the temple, in his pres­ ence, to the contrite, the hum ble, and the lowly in spirit. There is no other requirem ent, none of race or creed. Those hum ble souls w ho w ould seek G od are welcomed w ith a promise o f spiritual renewal. How like G od to offer a spot in his highest place to persons who have the lowliest stations in life! Jesus pictures the beggar Lazarus in the bosom o f Abra­ ham (Luke 16:20-21) and tells the religious leaders th at the lowliest outcasts of society will enter the kingdom of heaven before them (WBC 25:164). G od waited in expectation for Israel (5:2,4,7). T he Prophet Isaiah waited in hope (8:17). W hen G od’s redemp­ tion is revealed, those redeemed will say, “We waited for him and he saved us” (25:9). T he righteous say, “We wait for you” (33:2). In the new age, “Those w ho wait for the Lord will renew strength” (41:31). G od says, “Those w ho wait for me

ISAIAH

102

will n o t be disappointed” (49:23); “Coastlands look tow ard me and hope for my arm” (51:5b). Sometimes the waiting can include persecution as in 50:410 or even martyrdom as in chapter 53. Hope, nevertheless, still rests in God: T he one w ho takes refuge in me will possess land. H e will inherit my holy m ountain. (57:13b) Sometimes the waiting is unrewarded: We wait for justice, b u t there is none. For salvation, b u t it remains far from us. (59:11b) B ut the prayer of the faithful confesses: From (that) age (until now) no one has heard o f— no one has attended— no eye has seen any G od except you w ho works for one w ho waits for him. (64:45) For those w ho wait, th e great experience of fulfillm ent awaits in the new heaven and the new earth as th e doors o f the temple open for worshipers from all the know n w orld (65:17-66:24). T he focus of the V ision is on those w ho were willing in faith to listen to G od and leave the fulfillm ent of th e V ision to him. Luke tells of tw o such Israelites “waiting for the consolation of Israel,” Simeon and A nna (Luke 2:25-38), w ho were “looking forward to the redem ption of Jerusalem” and were ready to greet the new -born Jesus. This w ork of “reviving the hum ble” is spelled out in detail:

103

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

Is n o t this the fast I w ould choose: opening the bonds of wickedness, undoing the bindings of a yoke, and sending out the oppressed to be free? You shall break every yoke! (58:6) It includes the struggle to help everyone be free and to gain justice for all. T he instructions, however, go beyond these broad movements: Is it n o t sharing your (sg) bread w ith the poor, and that you (sg) bring homeless poor persons into the house? W hen you (sg) see one naked and you cover him, and you (sg) do n o t hide your self from your ow n flesh, then your (sg) light will break out like the dawn and your (sg) healing will spring up in a hurry. (58:7-8a) The singular address is indicated, but its application is dis­ tributed among several. The first promise of light and healing is appropriate for Judah. The second address promises “legitimacy” or “righteousness,” w hich usually in Isaiah refers to the promise to the Persian ruler (WBC 25:133-35): Your (sg) legitimacy will walk before you. Yahweh’s glory will be your rearguard. (58:8b) A nd it is then addressed to the hum ble worshipers: T hen you (sg) may call and Yahweh will answer. You may cry o ut and he will say, “I am here.” (58:9a, b) T he tasks of social sensitivity and action are passed around to all the participants: those in government, the people of ISAIAH

104

God, and the person who seeks God’s presence and blessing. T he promise o f G od’s blessing and help are repeated for all of these (58:10-14): w hen you (sg) pour out yourself for a hungry one and you satisfy an afflicted person. (58:10a) The doing of helpful acts for the needy is paired w ith keep­ ing the Sabbath (58:13) as requisites for anyone to: delight in Yahweh. . . . ride on the heights of the land and . . . eat from the heritage of Jacob. (58:14) T he picture of G od’s attention to the hum ble person of prayer reaches its height in 66:2b. G od’s new creation of heaven and earth has just been described, a society w ithout the shortcomings of the current order. G od puts the tem ple project in perspective by comparing it to the great universe in which he dwells: T he heavens are my throne and the land is my footstool. . . . My own hand has made all these. (66:1a, 2a) T hen he utters the highest peak o f all his relations: I pay attention to this (one): to a hum ble and contrite spirit who trembles at my word. (66:2b) N ot th e priests w ith their sacrifices, n o t the mighty w ith their ostentatious offerings, b u t the "humble and contrite sp irit” W ith that, one is reminded o f all the quiet, simple, faith­ ful believers in congregations o f Israelites or C hristians w ho 105

Worshiping Servants and Their Service

fill th at description. T he O ld Testament pictures H annah (1 Sam 1:1-2:11). The New Testament honors Mary in the same way. H er words become th e example of hum ble re­ sponse to G od (Luke 1:38,46-47). These are the hum ble and contrite, th e lowly of spirit w ho tremble at G od’s word, who wait patiently, w ho hope and believe and pray. They share the inner circle around the Lord. T heir devotion con­ stitutes the bright spots in tim e which is otherwise often spoiled by violence, rebellion, and back talk.

ISAIAH

106

C O N C L U SIO N

The Vision of Isaiah sees a convergence of the work of many and different servants at tw o very practical points. O ne of them involves the restoration o f Jerusalem and its worship. Servants Israel, Cyrus, and various individuals are involved in that project in different but interrelated ways. Like the task of building and sustaining the institutional church today, the building of Jerusalem needed support from all sides. G overnm ent plays a role, too. It is not the church, nor should it dominate it, but it is responsible for creating a favor­ able climate of peace and order in which the church can survive. It supplies necessary aid. In the U nited States it has tax-free status and encourages charitable giving. In a society where all property is owned or controlled by the government it must assign the property and approve the funding if any building takes place. The latter situation existed at the tim e Isaiah was w ritten. T he prim ary responsibility, however, m ust rest w ith the congregation of believing, committed, and called people o f God. Coming from near and far, they m ust be those who encourage and support the building and the enterprise, as Israel in exile was called to do in Isaiah. 107

Conclusion

T hen there are the leaders who bridge th e gap betw een the elect and the government. They organize and exhort the form er, plead and work w ith the latter, while fending off enemies on all sides, to bring the project to successful completion or to keep the organism alive and functioning after­ ward. Like Sheshbazzar, Zerubabbel, Ezra, and Nehemiah, these church leaders exhort, organize, plead, pray, and w ork to make the restored Jerusalem all th at it is supposed to be as th e city of God. All of this stands in the service of that high moment w hen the seekers climb the hill to assemble in the presence of God. T hen the praises rise, the choirs sing, the people pray, and the glory cloud descends on the holy place. T hen the mighty congregation of people from all nations experiences the fruit of all that labor and devotion. The Holy C ity is populated w ith pilgrims and w ith God’s presence. Yet the Book o f Isaiah records one precious insight be­ yond that. G od’s pleasure is at its peak in the individual tryst w ith each hum ble and contrite soul th at seeks him o u t on Jerusalem’s high and holy m ountain (or anywhere else). In the simple and lowly attitude o f devotion and prayer G od’s creation achieves the goal for w hich it was intended. Those are the many facets that are summed up in the them e of building and restoring Jerusalem. There is a second focus that goes along w ith th at and also involves all o f G od’s servants. It speaks of service on G od’s behalf for th e needy and oppressed peoples. Israel thought of itself as imprisoned and poor, b u t it, too, was entrusted w ith support and succor for the needy. Cyrus was called to free the imprisoned and to restore the fallen. His successors in office were given parallel instructions which included aid to Israel as well. Israel’s leaders were called to announce and to exhort her to fulfill the role o f aiding the needy and comforting the m ourners. A nd the hum ble devotee was called beyond the exercise o f spiritual devotion to acts o f charity and love.

ISAIAH

108

W ith these tw o emphases, the building of the church and the work of charity to all in need, Isaiah speaks to us w ith a clear voice that is echoed in the Gospels. Love God, build his city, and care for his beloved poor. For those who wait, the great experience of fulfillm ent awaits in the new heaven and the new earth as the doors of the temple open for worshipers from all the know n w orld (65:17-66:24).

109

Conclusion

A PPEN D IX A

The New Testament's use of Isaiah Nestle’s G reek New Testament contains an index of New Testament quotations and allusions to O ld Testament texts. It shows (pp. 665-67) th at Isaiah has had an unusually great influence on the New Testament: 194 New Testam ent pas­ sages contain allusions to verses from 54 of Isaiah’s 66 chap­ ters. T he references are particularly frequent in Matthew, Luke/A cts, Romans, Hebrews, and Revelation. Three passages are quoted three times each. Isa 6:9,10 (“D ull the h eart of this people! Make its ears heavy and shut its eyes”) is quoted in M att 13:14-15, John 12:4, and Acts 28:26-27. It emphasizes the New Testament perception that Isaiah’s m inistry in a hostile and insensitive environm ent was m irrored in the chilly reception given Jesus and th e early Christians. Isa 40:3 (in the way the Septuagint translated it: “A voice crying in the wilderness”) is quoted in M att 3:3, M ark 1:3, and John 1:23, while Luke 3:4-6 alludes to i t T he parallel betw een the “bearer of good tidings” to an unbelieving, ex­ ilic community and John the Baptist is clearly drawn. 111

Appendix A

Isa 56:7 (“For my house is to be called a house of prayer for all peoples”) is quoted in M att 21:13, M ark 11:17, and Luke 19:46. The parallel betw een Isaiah’s view that the tem­ ple should be a place for singing, prayerful worship, and pilgrimage (in contrast to priestly sacrifice and liturgy) and Jesus’ view of worship w ithout sacrifice or priest is clear. Two passages are quoted twice. Isa 29:13 (“Because this people approaches me w ith its m outh . . . while its heart is far from me”) is quoted in M att 15:8-9 and M ark 7:6-7, while C ol 2:22 alludes to i t 1 C or 2:22 quotes verse 14. Isa 53:1 (“W ho believed our report?”) is quoted in 1 John 12:38 and Rom 10:16. T he New Testament w riters empathize w ith the basic climate of unbelief to which Isaiah testifies. A t key points in M atthew’s Gospel, Isaiah supplies just the right quotation. Isa 7:14 (in the Septuagint: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son”) fits M att 1:23. Simi­ larly, Isa 53:4 (“Surely he bore our sickness”) provides the comment in M att 8:16 on Jesus’ m inistry of healing and casting out demons. M atthew quotes from Isaiah fifteen times. Five of these are in the b irth narratives. In 4:15-16, Jesus’ ministry in Galilee recalls Isa 8:23-9:1, which begins w ith references to Zebulun and the Galilee of the Nations and continues “the people walking in the dark see a great lig h t” T he Beatitudes in M att 5:3-4 recall Isa 61:3 in references to m inistry to the poor and the m ourners. As noted above, Jesus’ m inistry to those possessed by demons recalls Isa 53:4 (“Surely he bore our sickness”). M att 12:18-21 reveals Jesus’ messianic identity to readers by quoting Isa 42:1-4 (“See my servant whom I confirm ”). Jesus explains his use of parables by quoting Isa 6:9-10 (“D ull the heart of this people”). Jesus cites the shallow faith o f the people in M att 15:7-9 by quoting Isa 29:11 (“Because this people approaches me w ith its m outh . . . while their heart is far from me”). M atthew’s description of Jesus’ trium phal entry into Jerusalem quotes Isaiah twice. In 21:5 his quotation mixes ISAIAH

112

words from Isa 62:11 w ith those o f Zech 9:9 (“Say to the daughter of Zion— see your king [Isaiah has ‘your savior’] comes to you”). M att 21:13 quotes Isa 56:7 in justification for the cleansing of the Temple: “For my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.” The use of Isaiah is remarkable in the New Testament for its ubiquitous appearance, strongest in Romans and M atthew but virtually everywhere else. The Revelation of John never quotes Isaiah but reflects its poetic wording in almost every chapter. A nother remarkable feature of the New Testament’s quo­ tations and allusions is that they are drawn from so m uch of the Book of Isaiah: 54 of the 66 chapters. T he Apostles and apparently many Jews o f that time knew the entire book well enough for it to be a part of their thought, the heritage th at shaped their views on everything. It was not the plot, the outline, or the thrust of the book which captured their inter­ est and imagination. Quotable quotes stuck in their minds and gave words to their thoughts.

113

Appendix A

APPENDIXB

Isaiah in Handel's Messiah Many in England and in the U nited States are probably more familiar w ith Isaiah’s words sung in George F. H andel’s Messiah than in any other setting. Charles Jennens was H andel’s librettist. H e arranged the oratorio in three parts: the b irth of Messiah, the crucifixion, and the resurrection. Texts from Isaiah play prom inent parts in the first tw o parts, often following the order of the Anglican Book of Com m on Prayer. The first part uses Luke’s account of Jesus’ b irth (Luke 2:8-14) to recite the basic narrative. H e introduces it w ith twelve recitatives and choruses. Four of these use words from Isa 40:1-5,9: “Com fort Ye,” “Every Valley,” “A nd the Glory of the Lord,” and “O , Thou that Tellest G ood Tidings to Zion.” Four others use Isa 9:1-6: “Behold Darkness,” “The People that Walked in Darkness,” “For unto Us a C hild Is Bom ,” while “O T hou that Tellest G ood Tidings” credits 9:1 as well as 40:9. Isa 7:14 makes the crucial announcem ent “A Virgin Shall Conceive and Bear a Son.” Isa 35:5-6 provides the words for “The Eyes of the Blind Shall Be O pened,” and ISAIAH

114

40:11 the words for “H e Shall Feed His Flock Like a Shep­ herd.” T he blending of prophetic and New Testament texts creates a tapestry of incomparable beauty which blurs the distinction betw een the original and applied meanings o f the texts. Isa 7:14 had already been appropriated by M atthew while 9:1,6 are alluded to in Luke 1:32-33,79. Isa 40:3 plays a role in M atthew’s call of John the Baptist (3:3), as in Luke’s ac­ count (3:4-6) as well as in Luke’s recounting of the words o f Simeon (2:30). T he New Testament accounts, however, do n o t use Isaiah 40 so intensely and effectively to place the b irth o f Jesus as a central event in G od’s action as does the Messiah. In Part 2 (The Crucifixion), Isa 53:1-6 tells the central story: “H e was Despised,” “Surely H e has Borne O ur Griefs,” “A nd w ith H is Stripes We A re Healed,” “A ll We Like Sheep Have G one Astray,” “H e Was C ut O ff from the Land of the Living.” John 1:29 (“Behold the Lamb o f G od”) had opened the section, and other words are taken from Psalms 2, 22, and 68. Isa 52:7 (“How Beautiful”) is a part o f the exultation th at leads up to the Hallelujah C horus. N o Isaiah texts appear in Part 3 (The Resurrection). O nly Job 19:22-26 introduces the section w ith “I Know th at My Redeemer Liveth.” The other texts are taken appropriately from 1 C or 15:22-22,52-57 and Rom 5:12-12; 8:31-34. Isaiah’s w onderful poetry fits the oratorio perfectly. Its powerful genre of poetic drama w ithin an imaginative frame of reference enables it to awaken em otion and imagination to the wonder and power o f G od at work in redem ption. H andel’s music adds a new and supportive dimension to i t

115

Appendix B

FOR FURTHER READING IN RECENT LITERATURE

Elizabeth A chtem eier. The Community and Message of Isaiah 56-66. M inneapolis: Augsburg, 1982. C h risto p h er R . Seitz, ed. Reading and Preaching the Book of Isaiah. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988. Jo h n D . W. W atts. Isaiah 1-33. W ord Biblical C om m entary 24. W aco, Tex.: W ord Books, 1985. ----------. Isaiah 34-66. W ord Biblical C om m entary 25. W aco, Tex.: W ord Books, 1987.

ISAIAH

116

IN D EX OF SC RIPTU RES

OLD TESTAMENT Genesis 1 1-2 1-9 1:27 2 3 4:26,29 6-10 6:1-15:21 6:10,23 7:1 8-10 11:1-9 12:3 14:18-20

34 22 66 38 21,53 4 32 12 35 32 32 13 14 13 41

Exodus 25-40

41

Leviticus 1-16

41

Deuteronomy 11:10-12 11:23-24

32 32

Joshua-Judges

50

1 Samuel-1 Kings 9

50

117

1 Samuel 1:2-2:11 8:20 10:6,10 11:6 16:13,14,19 2 Samuel 6-7

106 15 45 45 45 30 41

2 Kings 16 18-19 21 22-23 24:10

57 42,57 57 57 16

Ezra 1:1-4 1:8 3:2,8 4:2-3 5:2 5:3-17 6:13-18 7 9

71 71 74 74 74 74,75 74 76 33

Nehemiah 2:19

76

4:1-3 5 5:1-19 6:17 Job 19:22-26

76 16 76 76

115

Psalms 2:13,17 57 2:22,68 115 51:12[10], 13[11], 14(12], 45 19[17] Isaiah 1 88 80 1-14 1:2,2-7 3 , 51 ,53,54 ,86 1:3 3 , 53 28 1:4-7 1:7-20 87 1:8,9 4 2 ,54 1:10 51 1:10-15,21-25 39,4 3 ,85 1:11-25 5 , 42 1:15 19 42 ,92 1:16-17 1:18 25,42,53 1:18-19 4 , 23,59 1:19 84,93

Index of Scriptures

1:19-20 16,42,50 1:20 53 19 1:21-23 2 52 39 2:2 2:2-4 17,19,21,38,39,42, 43,50,54,85,91 2:3 39,84 21 2:4 2:6-8 51,80 38 2:10-18 2:11-22 5 3 ,73 2:12,17 15 3:1-4:6 43,54 51 4 43 4:2-6 44,46,85 4:4 88 5:1-7 102 5:2,4 , 7 5:24-25 80 39 6:1,3 39,40 6:5 6:8-13 40 6:9-10 4 ,9 7 , 111,112 6:11-13 66,99 33,98 7 7-9 6 , 11,29,43,95 7-14 57 7:1-9 53,59 7:2 62,66 9,99 7:4 7:7-9 80 9 , 23,99 7:9 7:9b, 10-14 57 23 7:11 7:14 16,17,112,114,115 63 7:14-16 65 7:17 7:17-8:8 62,65 7:17-10:25 28 8:5-19 31 8:9-22 66 16,9 9 ,102 8:17 8:23-9:1 112 21,28 9 80 9:1 114,115 9:1-6 54 9:1-10:34 9:5[6] 63 17,63 9:6-7 9:8-21 80 66 9:8-10:4 9:8-10:19 28

ISAIAH

52 10 10:5-11 66 73 10:5-54 10:12 73 10:12-19 66 10:20-21 80 10:22 51 17 10:28-34 21,28,68 11 17,65 11:1-5 11:2 19,44 11:6-9 19,21,53,93 11:9 5 11:9-10 65 11:10-16 18 12:1 96 13 14,17,61,66,73,77 52 13-21 13:1-14:32 29,51 52 13:11 13:12 73 13:17-19 31 13:19 66 61,66 ,73 14 14:4b-5,7 15 14:11-15 73 14:22-27 67 31 14:24-27 14:28-32 33 29 14:29-32 15-16 33 15-22 66 ,67 29 15:1-16:14 29 17:1-8 80 17:4-11 18 68 18-19 29,59 ,67 19 18,68 19:12-17 67 68 19:18-28 68 20 21 18,6 1 ,73 52 21:1 29,51 21:1-10 21:11-12 33 29 21:11-17 22 28,51,57,68 80 22:3-4 52,57 23-27 23:1-18 29 52 23:17 33 24 20 ,95 24-25

24:22 25:6-9 25:7 25:8 25:9 26:5 26:9 26:14,16,21 26:19 27:1 27:11 27:12-13 28-33 28:1-8 28:9-18 28:16,21 29:10 29:11, 13 29:14 29:18 29:22-24 30 30:9,12-18 30:18 32 32:1-8 32:3 32:15 32:15-20 32:17-18 33:2 33:14-16 33:22 34:1-10 34:5-15 34:14-15 34:16 34:17 35:5 35:5-6 36-37 36-39 36:10 37:7,36 37:20 38 38:19 39 39:6-7 40 40-44 40-48 40-66

52 16,20 57,95 95 102 15 96 52 95 57,97 5 , 96 57 18,28,57 80 80 99 94 112 97 98 5 100,101 5 23 59 5 98 97 45 93 102 9 3 ,100 101 53 28 21 45 6 98 114 42 ,69 11,18,57,68 68 69 6 69 95 61,69 69 4 3 ,80,88 ,95 15 24,33,35,51 34 ,69

118

40:1-2 40:1-5 40:1-11 40:2-9,11 40:3 40:4-5 40:6-7 40:7 40:8-16 40:9 40:9-10 40:11 40:13 40:26,28 40:28-31 41:1-5 41:1,3-4 41:2 41:8-25 41:18-19 41:20 41:27 41:31 42:1-4 42:5 42:6b-7 42:7 42:9 42:15-16 42:18-21 42:22-25 43:1,7 , 15 43:1-7 43:1-12 43:9-13 43:10-12 43:12c 43:18-20 43:20-21 43:22-28 43:27-44:2 44-45 44:3 44:4 44:8-10 44:23 44:26 44:28 45 45-48 45:1-2 45:4 45:5-6

119

81,84,92 114 85 87 111, 115 21 6 46 85 114 50,81 114 46 34 96 33 70 69 81 21 6 , 34 6 102 4 5 ,112 34 70 73 50 21 85 85 35 85 82 82 86 85 5 0 ,82 82 82 95 59,69 45 97 86 21 70,71 30,70,71 35,43 18 29 30,82 3 5 ,73

34,35 45:7 45:8bc 31 45:12 30,36 45:13 30,36,43,71,76 45:15 99 45:18 34 45:22 33 45:22-23 24 61 46-47 46:3-13 82 46:9-11 97 46:10-11 67 73 47 48 82,88 35 48:7 48:16 45 48:16b-20 77,82,97 48:20-21 87 48:22 98 18 49-54 73 49-57 83 49:1-4 73 49:5 73 49:6 49:7b 73 ,74 49:9 75 49:22-23 7 49:23 103 49:26b 7 , 75 50 14,51,57 50:4,6 9 4 ,103 50:4-5 7 50:4-9 4 0 ,74,77 50:6 75 50:11 75 51:5 103 51:13 7 52:4a 9 52:6 8 52:13-15 8 , 74 53 8 , 14,51,5 7 ,7 4 ,103 53:1 112 53:1-6 115 53:3-5 4 0 ,75 9 4 ,112 53:4,6 51 54 54:1-17 54 54:9,10 55 54:17b 83,88 54:17-55 24 55 24,83 24 55:1,3,6,7 55:1-11 84,88,89

55:7,8-9 55:12-13 55:13 55:15 56:1,2 56:1-13 56:3-5 56:6-7 56:7 56:10 56:13 57 57-58 57:13 57:15

40 21,93 31 41 40 75 25 26,95,112 40,41,113 8 53 51,52,101 57 94,101,103 16,26,5 3 ,94, 102,103 57:16-19 26 57:20-21 26 ,9 8 ,102 58 83 58:2 8 58:3 9 9 58:4 90 ,91 58:4-7 95 58:5-14 58:6 9 , 16,75 58:6-14 104,105 58:13 16 59 5 1 ,83 59-66 18 59:8 9 16 59:9-10 59:11 103 59:19 45 60 95 9 60:16 61 57 61:1-3 40,4 5 ,65 ,76,77, 9 3 ,9 7 ,112 61:1-62:12 54 62:11 113 63 59 63-64 57 63:3-5 54 63:7-13 83 63:11-12 54 64.45 103 65 51 ,90 65-66 3 9 ,77 98 65:1-7 65:1-16 98 65:2,11 10 65:2-7 77 65:10-11 91,98

Index of Scriptures

65:10-25 53 65:11-16 77 65:13-16 54,84 65:17-18 36 65:17-25 19,21 5 0 ,103 65:17-66:24 65:18-19 37 66 21,35 66:2 26,41,53,9 4 ,105 66:3-6 51-54,91,94 66:5 26 66:10 92 66:12 26 66:13 26,92 10,98 66:14 10 66:17 66:18,19 33,92 66:19-21 39,84,87,92 66:23-24 27 66:24 20,51,53, 54,77,84, 91,98 Jeremiah 1:10

66

Hosea 11:9

38

Habakkuk 1:1,3:2

100

Zechariah 1-8 9:9

42 113

NEW TESTAMENT Matthew 1:8 1:23 3:3 4:15-16 5:3-4 5:5 5:9

ISAIAH

87 112 111, 115 112 112 94 93

5:10 6:5 7:7 8:16 12:18-21 13:14-15 15:7-9 20:28 21:5 21:13 23:6 25:31-46 28:13 28:19-20

94 16 9 5 ,112 112 112 111 112 77 112 112,113 16 94 112 82

Mark 1:3 1:10 4:1 10:43,45 11:17 13:3

111 45 45 77,96 112 77

Luke 1:32-33 1:38,46-47 2:8-14 2:30 3:4-6 4:14-21 4:21 4:25-38 11:42-43 13:42 14:35 16:20-21 20:46 22:37 John 1:23 1:29 2:19 4:21 12:4

79 106 114 115 111, 115 40,4 5 ,77 97 103 16 98 98 102 16 77

111 115 77 33 111

Acts 1:8 2:9 2:16 28:26-27

33 87 97 111

Romans 5:12 8:31-34 10:16

115 115 112

1 ,2 Corinthians

54

1 Corinthians 2:22 15:20-22 15:52-57

112 115 115

2 Corinthians 12:9

7

Galatians 6:16

81,85

Colossians 2:22

112

Hebrews 9:11 13:14

102 7

1 John 12:38

112

1 Peter 1:8

7

Revelation 1-3 14:8 16:19 17:5 21:1-4 21:5

54 67 67 67 35 36

120

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES Daniel JOHN GOLDINGAY

ZO N DERVAN A C A D E M IC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC Daniel Copyright © 1989 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11497-0 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Goldingay, John. Daniel: John Goldingay. p.  cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-849-90794-4 1. Bible. O.T. Daniel—­Theology I. Title. II. Series. BS1555.5.G72 1989 224’.506—dc2089-38306 Quotations from the Scripture in this volume are the author’s own translation unless otherwise indicated. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

CONTENTS

Foreword. Preface 1. Introduction The book’s historical background The book’s origin 2. Faithfulness—Divine and Human Faithfulness in lifestyle Faithfulness in religious observance Faithfulness in prayer Faithfulness in worship 3. Sovereignty— Divine and Human The sovereignty of God and the Exile The God o f heaven who changes times and eras Sovereignty at work in the midst o f history (i) V

xi xiii 1 5 9 11 12 15 17 18 21 22 23 25 Contents

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

D A N IEL

Sovereignty at work in the midst of history (ii) Human decrees and divine decrees Insight— Divine and Human Insight as G od’s gift Insight as G od’s own attribute The insight expressed in quasiprophecy Daniel’s God and Daniel’s Prayer Petition and intercession Thanksgiving Confession The Powers o f Heaven God’s representatives and aides acting on earth Gabriel and the man in linen bringing G od’s revelation The leaders o f the nations Perspectives on History History in its richness and diversity, its unity and weakness History as a concentration o f disorder History as an experience o f wrath History as Israel’s continuing exile History in its insignificance The Time o f Crisis The attack on the holy ones The desolating rebellion The seventieth seven The king who asserts himself The End The rock hewn from a crag and the rule o f G od The humanlike figure, and the rule o f a holy people

28 30 33 33 36 39 45 45 50 52 59 59 61 62 67 67 69 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 87 88 89 vi

The freedom o f the sanctuary The end o f Israel’s Exile The climax o f wrath and the promise o f life W hen comes the End? The New Testament and after Notes Select Bibliography Index of Scriptures

vii

92 93 94 99 105 109 111

Contents

FOREWORD

Finding the great themes o f the books o f the Bible is essential to the study of God’s Word, and to the preaching and teaching o f its truths. But these themes or ideas are often like precious gems; they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered with some difficulty. The large com­ mentaries are most useful to this discovery process, but they are not usually designed to help the student trace the impor­ tant subjects within a given book o f Scripture. The Word Biblical Themes meet this need by bringing to­ gether, within a few pages, all of what is contained in a biblical volume on the subjects that are thought to be most significant to that volume. A companion series to the Word Biblical Com­ mentary, these books seek to distill the theological essence of the biblical books as interpreted in the more technical series and to serve it up in ways that will enrich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship of God’s people. Daniel is an exciting and meaningful narrative concerning Jews in exilic times followed by a series o f visions which interpret God’s actions affecting the Jews in the succeeding

ix

Foreword

centuries. In this book, Dr. John Goldingay has condensed the insights gained from his work on Daniel in the Word Biblical Commentary and has presented them here for pas­ tor and student and scholar. This volume is sent forth in the hope that it will con­ tribute to the vitality o f G od’s people, renewed by the Word and the Spirit and ever in need o f renewal. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky

D A N IEL

John D. W. Watts O ld Testament Editor Word Biblical Commentary Word Biblical Themes

X

PREFACE

The Book o f Daniel has been appreciated as children’s stories. It has been studied as a key example o f biblical apoca­ lyptic. It has been read as a preview o f events to unfold at Christ’s second coming. But none o f these interests in the book corresponds to its author’s priorities. He was concerned to bring a message of encouragement and challenge to people who were under pressure—people in lands far from home (where the book affirms the possibility of faithfulness, protec­ tion, and even success at the pagan court), and people under pressure in their own country (where they are browbeaten towards apostasy by a foreign overlord, and need to be reas­ sured that God really is in control o f their destiny). It speaks o f God’s faithfulness, God’s sovereignty, and God’s insight, and the way God shares those with people. It offers a perspec­ tive on the history of the post-exilic period, on the crisis that overcame Jews in Jerusalem in the reign o f Antiochus Epiphanes, and on the End God promised. It calls people to prayer and reminds them of how heaven is involved in their destinies.

xi

Preface

I much appreciated (he opportunity to contribute the volume on Daniel to the Word Biblical Commentary; I said everything I know about Daniel in the commentary, so there is virtually nothing here that does not appear in one form or another there, but I hope the form o f this book makes the themes o f Daniel accessible to another readership and draws them into deeper faith, surer hope, and steadier com­ mitment before Daniel’s God.

DANIEL

xii

1

INTRODUCTION

Two very different features have attracted readers to the Book o f Daniel. It opens with a series o f dramatic stories relating the adventures o f Daniel and three other men at the Babylonian and Persian court. The four distinguish them­ selves by their skill as counselors to a series o f kings, in particular by their ability to interpret the dreams and other omens which come to the kings. They serve at court with­ out compromising their commitment to the G od o f Israel. Indeed, they show themselves willing to accept martyrdom rather than go back on that commitment, while their G od honors their faithfulness by seeing that they escape when martyrdom threatens. The other feature o f the book is a series o f extraordinary dreams and other revelations given to Daniel himself, which dominate the second part o f the book. To a large extent these visions are couched in code and symbol— beasts com­ ing out o f the sea, a ram and a goat doing battle, unnamed northern and southern kings seeking to conquer each other. Many features o f the visions are thus puzzling to understand. 1

Introduction

The straightforward division between stories and visions is complicated by some subtleties which emerge when we look at the chapters one by one. Daniel 1 is clearly an introduc­ tion. It tells how four young exiles gain wisdom and prestige without losing holiness, and thus sets the scene for the stories that follow by explaining how the exiles came to be in Baby­ lon, in positions o f responsibility and bearing Babylonian names, and how they maintained their faithfulness to their God from the beginning. Further, it sets the book as a whole in the context o f the seventy years o f exile which are covered by both stories and visions, throughout which Daniel func­ tioned. It thus lays the foundation for a consideration o f the question when Jeremiah’s promise o f Jerusalem’s restoration will at last be fulfilled (see esp. Daniel 9). Daniel 2 illustrates Daniel in particular exercising at court those consummate gifts of insight which the introduction has attributed to him, and proving that the God of Israel is the source of true discernment But the story aspect to the chap­ ter gives way in the second half to a concern with the actual content o f God’s revelation to Nebuchadnezzar. The revela­ tion concerns the significance of Nebuchadnezzar’s own reign and that of three other reigns to follow, the last of which will be supematurally destroyed and replaced by God’s own rule. A s a story, Daniel 2 introduces further motifs which will reap­ pear in the stories in Daniel 3-6. The dream-revelation also links with later material, especially Daniel 7, where the seer receives another revelation concerning the Babylonian empire and three subsequent empires, the last of which is followed by God’s own rule. There is thus a particular link between Daniel 2 and 7. There is also a connection between the stories in Daniel 3 and 6. In both, Judean exiles in positions o f authority are put in a position where a royal edict requires them to con­ travene a fundamental requirement o f their faith. In both, they are indicted by jealous colleagues, accused o f treason, DANIEL

2

and sentenced to an unpleasant death. In both, the king rises in agitation to perceive that their G od has sent a heav­ enly aide to deliver them. In both, the king orders others to be executed in their stead, and declares that all peoples are to recognize the power o f their God. Daniel 4 and 5 also link, though in a different way. They concern two successful kings o f Babylon, father and son. One is an overbearing ruler who receives a portentous dream which his Babylonian advisers cannot interpret. Daniel, how­ ever, explains that it is God’s warning regarding divine judg­ ment to come. Judgment fells as G od said, but the king in due course finds mercy. In the succeeding story, in which Daniel himself and the queen mother refer back to events narrated in the previous one, that king’s sacrilegious son receives a portentous omen which his Babylonian advisers cannot in­ terpret, the writing of an enigmatic message on the wall. Daniel, however, again explains that it is God’s warning re­ garding divine judgment to come. Judgment fells as God said, but the king finds no mercy. The further revelations that follow Daniel 7 relate back to it and also relate to each other. Daniel 8 explicitly looks back to the revelation in chapter 7, and some o f the motifs in Daniel 7 reappear—notably a strange horn belonging to the last animal in the vision, small at first but growing very big and acting particularly aggressively. The structure of Daniel 8 par­ allels that o f Daniel 7—a vision concerning a series o f animals, and an interpretation that takes them as symbols of empires from Babylon onwards and promises God’s ending o f their oppression. The identity o f the empires which will follow Babylon, about which Daniel 2 and 7 are rather allusive, is clear here: they are Media, Persia, and Greece (v 20). The rule of Greece comes to a climax with the second-century ruler of the Seleucid empire, Antiochus IV (Antiochus Epiphanes). Daniel 9 takes up chapter 8’s concern with “insight” and takes further its promise concerning the restoration o f 3

Introduction

desolate Jerusalem and its temple. It begins with a question concerning Jeremiah’s prophecy o f an end o f the exile after seventy years, but its heart is a long prayer o f Daniel’s which arises out o f that prophecy. If Daniel 9 has links with earlier material in the book, these are with Daniel 1 as much as with Daniel 8. Daniel 10-12 is one revelation given special emphasis by its length and its location at the end of the book. The introduc­ tory vision (chapter 10) parallels the one in Daniel 8, but is on a larger scale. The actual account o f events to come (chapter 11) offers the plainest and most clear-cut o f the historical visions, explaining and decoding those o f earlier chapters. The portrait of the End (chapter 12) works out some of its implications for people whom death seems to rob o f the chance to share in them. The revelation as a whole links back with the stories by portraying Israel’s leaders experiencing the same afflictions as are described in Daniel 1-6 and chal­ lenged to be as steadfast as the heroes of the stories were. The book might thus be outlined as follows: 1. Exile and the questions it raises: story 2. A vision o f four empires 3. A trial of faithfulness and a marvelous deliverance 4. An omen interpreted and a king challenged and chastised 5. A n omen interpreted and a king challenged and deposed 6. A trial of faithfulness and a marvelous deliverance 7. A vision o f four empires 8. Aspects of this vision developed 9. Exile and the questions it raises: vision 10-12. Aspects o f this vision developed A number o f further stories about Daniel and further visions attributed to him appear in the longer Greek version DANIEL

4

o f the book (see e.g., the Jerusalem Bible) and in later collec­ tions of revelatory visions or “apocalypses.”

The book’s historical background The stories o f Daniel and his friends are thus set in the period of the Exile, in the sixth century B.C. But some as­ pects of the stories (e.g., the many Persian words they con­ tain) suggest that in the form we know them the stories come from well into the Persian period, which lasted from the latter part o f the sixth century to the latter part o f the fourth. With the visions, matters are even more compli­ cated. They include allusions to events long after Daniel’s day. Insofar as these are events which take place in Old Testament times, they are especially ones that belong in the second century B.C., when the rule o f Antiochus Epiphanes brought a great crisis to the covenant people. The Book o f Daniel thus refers to known historical events over a period o f nearly half a millennium, from the end o f the seventh century to the middle o f the second, and in understanding the book it is useful to have some overall idea o f the history o f the Jews over those centuries. In 611 the Assyrian Empire with its center in the north o f the area now known as Iraq fell before the renewed power o f Babylon, in the south o f Iraq, under King Nabopolassar (625-605). The people o f Israel had been promised by prophets such as Nahum that the Assyrians would fall because o f their inhumanity and pride. But the Babyloni­ ans were no better, as Habakkuk pointed out to G od, and Israel was soon in rebellion against them and inclined to ally with the Egyptians in seeking to throw o ff Babylonian overlordship. For Babylon, Israel was a useful buffer state on the edge o f their empire, and was a nuisance when it insisted on rebelling every time the Babylonians’ backs were turned. 5

Introduction

The two decades beginning in 605 thus saw a series of punitive expeditions to Israel by or on behalf o f Nabopolossar’s great son and successor, Nebuchadnezzar II (605-562), which came to a first climax with the sack o f Jerusalem in 597. More than one o f these expeditions led to the taking back to Babylon o f hostages from the royalty and the nobil­ ity in Jerusalem as a way o f depriving the city o f the leader­ ship to encourage further revolt, and these acts are the background for the story o f the displacement o f Daniel and his three friends, among others, in Daniel 1. After Nebuchadnezzar’s long reign his immediate succes­ sors (Evil-Merodach, 562-560; Neriglissar, 560-556; and Labashi-M arduk, for a few months in 556) reigned for only a short time and made little impression on the O ld Testa­ ment writers. The last Babylonian king, Nabonidus, reigned from 556 until the empire’s defeat by the Persians in 539. He also lacks direct mention in the O ld Testament, though he lies behind the surface at a number o f points, not least in Daniel. For most o f his reign he abandoned the city o f Babylon itself and moved his headquarters to Tema to­ wards the north-western end o f his empire. The reasons for this are a matter o f dispute; the move may have had a good political or religious rationale, though it was portrayed by his enemies within Babylon as the act o f a madman. Nabonidus’s dedication o f an image o f the god Sin and his withdrawal to Tema have been seen as underlying the stories o f Nebuchadnezzar building an image in Daniel 3 and going into exile in the wild in Daniel 4. The interest which the Nebuchadnezzar o f Daniel shows in dreams also parallels more closely what we know from elsewhere o f Nabonidus than what we know o f Nebuchadnezzar. Less disputedly, Nabonidus lies behind Daniel 5, since Belshaz­ zar was none other than Nabonidus’s son and regent dur­ ing his stay in Tema. Though Nabonidus returned east as the Persians advanced on Babylon, it was Belshazzar who DANIEL

6

effectively ruled there for the last decade o f the empire’s life. Babylon was actually taken and briefly ruled on behalf of the Persians by a general called Gobryas. In Daniel 6, the first post-Babylonian ruler of Babylon is one Darius the Mede. He is a puzzle, there being no reference to him outside Daniel within the O ld Testament or elsewhere. If we are to identify him with any otherwise known historical figure, it must prob­ ably be Gobryas. But the new emperor o f Babylon, the first Lord o f the enlarged Persian Empire, was Cyrus, who has already been mentioned at 1:21 and now appears at 6:28. The Persians ruled the middle east for two centuries. “Three . . . then a fourth” subsequent Persian rulers are alluded to in Daniel 11:2. The expression is probably a figure o f speech, as in Proverbs 30 and Amos 1-2, and the allusion may cover the sequence o f Persian rulers as a whole, though it may have in mind the three or four who are mentioned in the O ld Testament. After Cyrus these rulers (and their ap­ proximate dates) were Cambyses (530-522), Smerdis (522), Darius I (522-486), Xerxes I (486-465), Artaxerxes I (465424), Xerxes II (424), Sogdianos (424-423), Darius II (423405), Artaxerxes II (405-359), Artaxerxes III (359-338), Artaxerxes IV (338-336), and Darius III (336-30). In 336 Alexander the Great became ruler o f Macedon and in 333 invaded the Middle East, defeating the Persians and creating an empire that stretched from present-dayTurkey to India. Daniel 11 outlines the history o f the next two cen­ turies from a Palestinian perspective, concentrating on the reigns o f Antiochus III and IV, especially the latter. Alexander himself died less than a decade after crossing into Asia. H is empire was nominally controlled for some years by members o f his family, but its real rulers were Alexander’s former generals who had controlled the satrapies into which the empire was divided. Four major units eventu­ ally emerged from his shattered realm, though two were more 7

Introduction

powerful than die others. One was that focused on Egypt and ruled by Alexander’s general Ptolemy and his successors. The other was that focused on Syria and Babylonia and ruled by another general, Seleucus (once satrap o f Babylonia and then one o f Ptolemy’s generals: see Daniel 11:5), and his succes­ sors. These two realms lying either side o f Palestine were the ones that directly concerned Judea, which constituted a bone o f contention between them, as it had between earlier pow­ ers. The story in Daniel 11 thus relates substantially to rela­ tionships between these “northern” and “southern” kings. About 250, Ptolemy attempted to improve relations with the Seleucid empire by marrying his daughter to Antiochus II, but the plan M ed when Antiochus’s former wife took her revenge on the parties involved, provoking an Egyptian inva­ sion o f Syria ( 11:6-9). In the last decades o f the century Anti­ ochus III (223-187) in turn set about making war in the south, recapturing lost territory and in due course winning a key battle against the Egyptian army in Palestine at Banias (Caesarea Philippi) in 199. This enabled him to annex Palestine, though not to fulfill further ambitions on the Egyp­ tian empire, which were thwarted by the feared and then by the actual intervention o f Rome in the Middle East, and fi­ nally by Antiochus Ill’s own assassination (11:10-19). Seleucus IV (187-175), remembered for his attempted pillage o f the Jerusalem temple treasury (11:20), was suc­ ceeded by Antiochus IV (175-164)— Seleucus’s brother, but not the heir apparent (11:21-45). In Jerusalem he won the support o f the Tobiad family, a group willing to cooper­ ate with Antiochus in order to win power there, and not too concerned about detailed observance o f the Law o f M oses. Antiochus replaced the high priest, Onias III, who by his office carried authority in both religious and secular affairs, by his brother Jason, an ally o f the Tobiads. The Seleucid army then invaded Egypt and won spectacular but not conclusive victories; Antiochus’s designs there were DANIEL

8

finally frustrated by further Roman intervention ordering Antiochus off Egyptian territory. O n two occasions in the course o f his campaigns he also took action against Jerusalem, both to augment his financial resources from those of the temple and to put down a re­ bellion on the part o f conservative Jews against the Tobiad ruling party supported by Antiochus. The king then sta­ tioned a Syrian garrison in Jerusalem against the possibility o f further rebellion, but this involved also introducing the worship o f the garrison’s Syrian gods. Perhaps as a result o f a further act o f rebellion at that provocation, in due course orthodox Jewish worship was proscribed. Nominally con­ servative Jews then had to choose between apostasy and resistance. Courageous active rebellion saw the temple wor­ ship restored and Antiochus withdraw from Judea; he was assassinated at the end of 164.

The book’s origin The summaries we have given above indicate the striking double focus of the Book of Daniel. The stories center on Jews who lived in the sixth century and on issues that were important for people in the dispersion. The revelations, how­ ever, wherever we can be sure of the situation to which they relate, speak to the predicament o f Jews who lived in Jeru­ salem in the second century in the religious crisis brought about in Judea by the political policies of Antiochus IV. So was the book written in the sixth century or in the second (or some time in between)? Was it that G od led sixth-century believers to put into writing stories that di­ rectly spoke to issues that concerned their situation in exile, and also gave them previews o f events to unfold over the next four centuries which would be primarily relevant to Jerusalem in the second century? O r was it that G od led second-century believers to collect earlier stories o f the 9

Introduction

faithfulness which Jews experienced from G od and showed to God, and gave them further revelations regarding their destiny now, which built on that earlier material and which they could add to it? In discussing this question scholars have taken into ac­ cotant a number o f factors such as the nature o f the lan­ guages in which Daniel is written (a mixture o f Hebrew and Aramaic with a number o f words imported from Persian, Greek, and other languages). But the most significant deter­ minant o f their attitudes has been their attitude to that fundamental question o f what G od seems more likely to have done. In my opinion the second view is much the more likely; see further the discussion o f the visions in the book at the end o f chapter 4 below. But one’s attitude to this question makes no necessary difference to one’s understanding o f the contents o f the book, so that readers who take the tradi­ tional view that the book was written in the sixth century will not necessarily thereby find that they disagree about the book’s themes.

D A N IEL

10

2

FAITHFULNESS—DIVINE AND HUMAN

Daniel begins with a strange event: the G od o f Israel gives over to a cruel foreign power both Israel’s king and Jeru­ salem, with the temple and its effects. Yahweh had entered into commitment in perpetuity to David and his descen­ dants and to Zion and its shrine (see e.g., Ps 132). W hat has happened to the faithfulness o f God? Other Old Testament books have a clear answer to that question. Jerusalem and its monarchy fell because the people and the kings persistently resisted God’s will. God had entered into a covenant relationship with them, but that covenant required a response on their part. In the absence of that response, the relationship collapsed. The fall of Jerusalem is a sign of that. Daniel’s prayer in Daniel 9 shows that Daniel accepts that assessment of Israel’s position, but this makes it all the more striking that such an explanation of God’s strange behavior is missing here. It may be that the story omits to note that the Exile came about through Israel’s disobedience to G od because this was not directly relevant to the circumstances o f the later

11

Faithfulness— Divine an d H um an

generations for whom the book was written. By the time of Daniel’s later years most Jews in Babylon will have been people who were bom there; they were victims o f the Exile rather than responsible for it. Nor do the visions see the residents o f Jerusalem in the second century as personally responsible for the affliction that comes to them; they are victims despite the fact that very many o f them shared a desire to shape their lives by God’s word. The experience of being in exile and the experience o f being oppressed in their own land thus raised questions about the faithfulness o f God. These experiences also raise questions about the faithful­ ness o f God’s people. Circumstantial evidence suggests that being taken into exile put pressure on distinctive Jewish practices such as observance o f the sabbath, adherence to the food laws, and the rite o f circumcision; it is these that Genesis emphasizes as it tells the story of creation, flood, and God’s covenant with Abraham. In the stories in Daniel, the stress is on commitment to purity (Dan 1), avoidance o f idolatry (Dan 3), and insistence on prayer (Dan 6). In the visions, the underlying theme is the challenge to maintain faithful worship when Antiochus pressures the people into apostasy. A t such points Israelites are put on the spot with regard to their faithfulness to G od and forced to face the question o f whether they will maintain their commitment, trusting that as they do so G od will be faithful to them.

Faithfulness in lifestyle The issue arises first in connection with food. W hen they are taken into exile, as former members o f the Israelite royal family, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah are also in­ troduced to the Babylonian court. A s well as learning the Babylonian language, acquiring skill in Babylonian wisdom, and accepting Babylonian names, they are naturally expected D A N IEL

12

to share the food and wine o f the court.Daniel, on behalf of all four, demurs. It would be something that would “defile” them (1:8). W hat precisely would be defiling about it is not explicit Christians have often felt uneasy about the food laws in the Bible and have suspected that the Book o f Daniel is here falling into the external legalism o f which Christians are inclined to suspect Jews. It may be doubted whether the Bible’s food laws ever need be an expression o f legalism; and anyway the reference to “wine” does not fit the sugges­ tion that the background to the passage is the specific laws about food in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Daniel’s attitude need not imply that there was anything inherently wrong about the food the Babylonians ate (e.g., that it was un­ healthy or gained by unethical means or had been offered to a Babylonian god). The idea o f defilement presupposes that there are objects or activities that are quite in place for some people but not for others. There was food ordinary Israelites could eat which priests could not, and that helped to give outward expression to the difference between priests and people and helped to keep them separate. There was food foreigners could eat which Israelites could not, and that helped to mark the difference in God’s purpose between Israel and the na­ tions and helped to prevent Israel’s being swallowed up among the gentile peoples. A ll this reflects the fact that what we eat and drink, like what we wear and how we speak, is often an outward expression o f our self-identity and our commitments; we preserve these differences in order to pre­ serve ourselves. Although in Christ such differences be­ tween priests and people and between Israel and the world would be abolished, before Christ it was important that they be preserved. Preserving differences in this way is particularly important for people in exile or under persecution. Indeed, exile was an 13

Faithfulness— Divine an d H um an

inherently defiling experience (cf. Isa 52:11; Hos 9:3,4; Amos 7:17). It threatened the separate distinctiveness of Israel. For Daniel and his friends pagan food and drink epitomize the pagan uncleanness they associated with exile in a foreign land. So Daniel’s desire for abstinence symbolizes his avoid­ ing assimilation, his being faithful to the God of Israel. God’s own faithfulness manifests itself first in the funda­ mentally sympathetic reception Daniel receives from the offi­ cial in charge o f the exiles. But how can he translate sympathy into action? He would be risking his own head if he allowed Daniel,and his friends a diet which turned good-looking young men into skeletons. A t this point Daniel’s trust in God allows him to propose an astonishing wager, that ten days on a vegetarian diet (which would not seem as defiling as the king’s meat and wine) would leave them looking healthier than anyone. W hat gave Daniel the idea we are not told: it is out o f his mouth before there can be talk o f thinking it through or seeking God’s guidance. (See Jerome’s Commen­ tary on Daniel on this passage.) Daniel’s words are a challenge to G od as much as a gesture o f trust in God. It is a challenge which G od honors. There is a further hint o f the faithfulness o f G od in the closing observation, that Daniel remained in Babylon until the reign o f King Cyrus. The chapter’s opening note had raised implicit questions about the faithfulness of a G od who could let his people be taken into exile. Its closing note does not quite answer that question (it does not say why he did so), but it does imply his caring providence in looking after Daniel and enabling him to outlast not merely the great Babylonian king o f verse 1 but his entire empire! The experience of exile and affliction raises classic ques­ tions about the sovereignty and the faithfulness o f God. Daniel thus begins with a powerful declaration o f faith in a G od whose will can be accepted even when exercised in a strange way. G od has allowed, indeed initiated, a terrible D A N IEL

14

experience for Israel, but G od is in control and can be trusted; somehow all must make sense.

Faithfulness in religious observance (Daniel 3) The faithfulness of G od and the faithfulness o f exiled Israel come into focus again in the story o f the three young men who choose burning rather than apostasy. In the Dis­ persion the testing o f faithfulness in the fire took place liter­ ally for a few people, but also metaphorically for many others. The Exile itself is a white-hot crucible that threatens to consume Israel. Will they be faithful? Nebuchadnezzar erects a gigantic golden image— perhaps o f himself, more likely o f a god he worships—to be dedicated in the presence o f an impressive gathering o f state dignitaries. Any who would not prostrate themselves before the statue would be burnt to death. But a Jew could not so bow down before an image; that would contravene a fundamental aspect o f commitment to Yahweh. For most Jews there was no problem here, because ordinary people were not required to attend this ceremony. The people for whom it was a problem were those who had attained posi­ tions o f responsibility in the state, who would then have to discern where lay the limits to their acceptance o f the state's authority. A n impressive ceremony o f this kind, reinforced by the sanction attached to neglecting it, embodies the double pressure of the pagan state— its attractiveness and its un­ scrupulousness.1 The story takes for granted the faithfulness o f the three men at this point. There was no question o f their taking p art The crisis arose for them as a result o f another experi­ ence which became a familiar one for Jews in dispersion. Members o f the host nation become jealous at their success. They inform the king o f the action o f the three, which he can see as disloyalty to him and to the state, and as impiety. 15

Faithfulness— Divine an d H um an

O n all counts the penalty is that they must be burnt to death: “then whoever is the god who could rescue you from my power?” the king asks (3:15). Faithfulness to and trust in God find remarkable expres­ sion in the three men’s reaction to the king’s terrible chal­ lenge. First, they say they do not actually need to make any response regarding what the king has said (3:16). They trust G od to let events themselves determine the answer to the king’s blasphemous rhetorical question. But then they allow themselves one observation and one declaration o f intent. If their G od exists, they say, then this G od is quite able to rescue them from Nebuchadnezzar’s blazing hot furnace (3:17). It may seem odd for them to be treating the reality o f their G od as hypothetical (and because that seems odd, translators have often sought some alterna­ tive way o f understanding their words). But Nebuchadnezzar has treated their God’s existence as hypothetical, so they do the same for the sake o f argument. For themselves, they have no doubt that G od exists and that he can and will rescue them. Their confidence is the same as that Daniel showed when he made his wager over the vegetarian diet. Their declaration of intent is that even if God should not rescue them, they will still remain faithful to their commit­ ment (v 18). Again the translations vary, and the men have been thought to be saying that they will still maintain their stance even if God cannot rescue them or even if God does not exist, but that idea seems impossibly modem. Once more they are granting a theoretical possibility, that their God might not intervene, and assuring the hearers o f this story that even this would make no difference to their stance. They are not faithful only because God is faithful to them, the accusation the Adversary threw at Job. Nor are they faithful to death knowing that they will enjoy resurrection— that possibility is unmentioned. They are faithful just for the sake of the rightness o f their confession. DANIEL

16

A s in Daniel 1 G od manifests a faithfulness which re' sponds to theirs. Isaiah 43 promises God’s own presence when Israel walks through the fire o f exile. Here the divine aide who camps round those who honor God and delivers them from peril (Ps 34:7) enters the very fire to rescue them. Blasphemy is replaced by blessing, confrontation by récogni­ tion, opposition and persecution by tolerance and protection.

Faithfulness in prayer In a later story Daniel, too, falls foul of the jealousy of his colleagues; here in Daniel 6, however, ordinary events fail to provide his political enemies with a means o f bringing about his downfall, and they have to devise their own. Significantly, Daniel’s vulnerability lies in his religious commitment, as was the case with the other three men. So his enemies contrive to ban prayer. His response to the prohibition on prayer is to continue praying. There is no fuss or rush about it, such as characterizes every action o f his assailants. Nor is there any attempt to hide what he is doing: when prayer is fashionable, it is time to pray in secret (Matt 6:5,6), but when prayer is under attack, it is important to make clear that one renders to God the things that are God’s. Prayer seems an innocuous act, but here, at least, it was “more . . . revolutionary than outright rebellion would have been. Rebellion simply ac­ knowledges the absoluteness and ultimacy o f the emperor’s power, and attempts to seize it. Prayer denies that ultimacy altogether by acknowledging a higher power.”2 So Daniel is caught petitioning G od when he is only allowed to petition the king, and is denounced. A s was the case with the three men in Daniel 3, the accusation includes reference to his Jewish origin (6:13); the implication may be merely that a foreigner cannot be trusted to be loyal to the country in which he dwells, but there is a hint o f antiSemitism about the words. In contrast to the earlier story, 17

Faithfulness— Divine an d H um an

we learn nothing o f Daniel’s words or feelings as he ap­ proaches execution; here the king himself says all that needs to be said about the possibility o f Daniel’s escape (6:16). “In testing Daniel, the king knows . . . that he is testing G od.”3 Just as the fact o f God’s faithfulness did not ensure that Daniel’s friends would be preserved from the furnace, nei­ ther does it mean that Daniel will be preserved from the lion p it It does lead to G od’s aide being sent into the furnace to stand with Daniel’s friends, and also to God’s aide being sent into the pit to stand with Daniel, so that as they were pre­ served in the furnace, so is he in the pit, “because he had trusted in his G od” (6:23).

Faithfulness in worship Four centuries later, Jews in Jerusalem came under pres­ sures that were sufficiently similar to those experienced by Daniel and his three friends for their stories to be an inspira­ tion and a challenge once more. The people o f G od are again tested “by sword [cf. 2:6,12,13] and by fire [cf. Daniel 3], by captivity [cf. Daniel 1] and by becoming prey [cf. Daniel 6]” (11:33). Antiochus Epiphanes abolishes the daily sacrifices re­ quired by the Law o f Moses and makes worship o f his gar­ rison’s foreign gods the regular and mandatory worship of the temple (11:31). He is enabled to do this by the support o f Jews who in the eyes o f the orthodox have abandoned the covenant (11:30). Originally, perhaps, in their own eyes they had only been treating as insignificant some rather marginal requirements o f the Torah; they had not seen themselves as being unfaithful to Yahweh. But as events have moved on, so have the pressures on Antiochus, and so have the pressures he thus places on the Tobiads. They are drawn into coopera­ tion with a decision to abolish the distinctive practices of DANIEL

18

the Jewish religion. Antiochus thus “turns into apostates” people who had indeed “acted wickedly in relation to a covenant” (the term may refer to the covenant people whose oppression the Tobiads have already facilitated) (11:32). They still nominally maintain their Jewish faith but by their actions now they quite belie i t So what are other Jews to do? Over against the people who have abandoned their faith, Daniel’s vision puts “the people that acknowledges its God” (11:32). The passage uses the ordinary Hebrew word for “to know,” which has the same range o f meanings as the English word—to know facts, to know how to do something, to know a human being in a deeply personal way. In the prophets and elsewhere it is also used to mean “to acknowledge, to recognize, to commit oneself to”: that is, it denotes a knowing that involves the will as well as the mind and feelings. “To know the law” or “to know the Lord” is a matter o f obedience as well as acquaintance. That meaning fits well here. Over against people whose knowledge o f G od and the Torah did not extend to obeying it, the vision sets a people whose knowledge includes a commitment o f the whole per­ son. The Hebrew term for these people who are truly com­ mitted to G od is hasidim (cf. 1 Macc 2:42), a word still used today for people especially committed to obedience to the Torah. Their commitment or faithfulness expresses itself in offering “firm resistance” to Antiochus, which presumably included active attempts to prevent the implementing o f his edict to abolish the worship required by the Torah and to replace it with pagan worship (see 1 Maccabees 1, 2). Since Daniel’s vision describes how the community’s “discerning ones will enlighten the multitude” (11:33), it seems that the hasidim, the committed ones, who resisted Antiochus, actu­ ally comprised the body o f the Jewish community. Only the ruling party, the Tobiads, and people associated with them, accepted the edict. Hence many ordinary people went through the experiences described in Daniel 11:33. 19

Faithfulness— Divine an d H um an

Their faithfulness emulated that o f Daniel and the other three men. However, their experience o f God’s faithfulness did not correspond to that o f the four heroes. Admittedly they did receive a “little help”— the reference most likely being to the successes o f the first Judean activists (cf. 1 Macc 2-4), a real encouragement from G od (though not something to be compared with the moment o f ultimate victory, deliverance, awakening, and exaltation for whose coming they had to wait). It may have been those victories that drew into the resistance movement some people whose commitment could not be trusted in the long run (11:34). Perhaps it was the death o f some o f the leaders o f the move­ ment that exposed th at Now everything has to await the end which will come at the set moment (11:35). And in due course Antiochus indeed had to abandon his attempt to proscribe the Jewish faith. But this came too late for many o f Antiochus’s victims. W hat does God’s faithfulness mean for them? It is all very well for earlier chapters o f the book to tell stories about G od rescuing people from the fire and the lion pit, but more often the fire and the lions have devoured the martyrs. The stories in Daniel affirm that occasional experiences o f the faithful God intervening on Israel’s behalf are more important than the regular experience o f God’s nonintervention. Not that we are expected to manifest a heroism that cares nothing for our own destiny. The visions in Daniel, and particularly chapters 10-12, encourage us to look for deliv­ erance after death if not before it; and Christ’s resurrection is for us the guarantee that such a deliverance is not mere fanciful hope. “It was the same G od o f the three youths who was the G od o f the Maccabees. The former escaped fire, the latter were executed by fires; but both will conquer in the eternal God.”4

D A N IEL

20

3

SOVEREIGNTY— DIVINE AND HUMAN

O ne o f the characteristic convictions running through much o f the O ld Testament is the belief that G od is sover­ eign in the history o f Israel and in world events as they unfold, that G od is working out a purpose for Israel and for the world in these events, and thus that history is the arena in which the person and the purpose o f G od are made known. Admittedly the pervasiveness o f this theme in the O ld Testament and the distinctiveness o f Israel’s belief in this activity o f G od in history have been exagger­ ated: there are parts o f the O ld Testament where it is un­ mentioned, and the peoples around Israel also believed that their gods controlled their historical destinies. But when we have made allowance for the exaggerations, it remains a characteristic O ld Testament conviction that Yahweh is sovereign in history. It is a particularly impor­ tant m otif in the Book o f Daniel, though one that raises many questions. Both in the Exile and in the second cen­ tury, Israel goes through experiences that seem to belie belief in a G od who controls history. 21

Sovereignty — Divine an d H um an

Related to the m otif o f the sovereignty o f G od is the motif o f human sovereignty. The stories and the visions in Daniel concern how human kingship is exercised by Nebuchadnezzar and succeeding Babylonian and Persian rulers, and by successive Hellenistic monarchs leading up to Antiochus Epiphanes. They also concern how human king' ship and divine kingship interrelate, and how people work out their political responsibilities to earthly kings without compromising their religious responsibilities to the heavenly king. How does one render to Caesar and also render to God?

The sovereignty of God and the Exile A s we noted in chapter 2, the Book o f Daniel begins with an event which rings strange for people who believe that their G od is sovereign in history: the king o f Babylon at­ tacks Jerusalem and takes it, carrying o ff to Babylon its king and some o f the effects from the temple. It might seem to imply that Yahweh is no longer in control o f Israel’s history. O n the contrary, the book affirms, this very event is a strange act on the part o f their own God. It is G od who gives over to a cruel foreign power both the king and the city, with its temple and its effects. The book does not indicate how Israel is to understand these events, but it does affirm that G od’s sovereignty is being worked out in them. Daniel thus begins with a powerful declaration o f faith in the sovereignty o f God. He is in control, so somehow all must make sense. The end o f the opening chapter o f the book, as we noted, then returns to these questions, even if not quite to answer them. It draws attention to the fact that when Cyrus succeeds to the throne o f this empire, Daniel is still there, enabled by G od to outlast not merely the great

DANIEL

22

Babylonian king of verse 1 but his entire empire. God is sover­ eign in Israel’s history, even when things look otherwise.

The God of heaven who changes times and eras A t the heart o f Daniel 2 is a declaration o f praise o f G od as sovereign in history and in the affairs o f the nations. But the chapter begins with a portrait o f a human sovereign— a rather negative portrait. Disturbed by a half-remembered dream, Nebuchadnezzar the man of brilliance, achievement, vision, and generosity, appears as mistrustful, angry, arbi­ trary, and violent The account is cartoonlike, yet consistent with the portrayals o f Middle Eastern courtly life in works such as Esther, the Histories o f Herodotus, and The Thou­ sand and One Nights. The story illustrates the ambiguous prospects which at­ tach to involvement in the Babylonian cou rt A s in political life in the modem world, the power and glory o f participa­ tion in the affairs o f state would be attractive and an object o f wistful longing for people who were not part o f the secu­ lar power structure, which in that context would include Jews in general. A t the same time, Babylonian court life would be alien and frightening because o f its reputation for contention, betrayal, scandal, humiliation, and moral pres­ sure. These motifs recur in the Daniel stories. It is Daniel’s search for God’s revelation concerning Neb­ uchadnezzar’s dream that leads him into praise when he receives his revelation from G od (2:19-23). In the midst of this praise comes an abstract and systematic statement o f the sovereignty o f the G od o f heaven who is the G od o f the fathers. This G od “changes times and eras” (2:21), the suc­ cessive epochs ruled by one king or another, one empire or another. G od indeed controls history. “He removes kings

23

Sovereignty— Divine an d H um an

and establishes kings” (2:21). Daniel denies that history is determined by the planetary forces that the Babylonians studied (cf. Isa 40:25,26). It is under God’s direction. This is not to imply that it is fixed by God irrespective of the process of human decision-making. Daniel has often been regarded as an example (the O ld Testament example) o f apocalyptic thinking, in the sense o f speaking in terms of final events fixed since the beginning o f time, o f the whole world being under the power o f evil, o f a dualism o f this wicked world and the righteous world to come, o f judgment in the form o f an immutable fate, and o f a division o f world history into periods predetermined by G od.1 But if this is apocalyptic thinking, Daniel is not apocalyptic. Like the authors o f the Old Testament histories, Daniel assumes that human beings make real decisions which do shape history, yet that human decision-making does not necessarily have the last word in history. Daniel affirms the sovereignty o f G od in history, sometimes working via the process o f human decision-making, sometimes working despite it A s we have already noted, the Old Testament characteristi­ cally believes that Yahweh controls history, but elsewhere that conviction is generally expressed in connection with specific historical events (such as the victories o f Cyrus over Babylon, in Isaiah 41). It is expressed here with a universality that is unusual. Daniel’s testimony extends to God’s control of history as a whole. The dream which Daniel explains does not relate just to a chapter in a man’s life or a moment in an empire’s history. It offers a perspective on the future as a whole. It was the God of Israel who gave Nebuchadnezzar not only Jerusalem (1:2) but all his royal might and power (2:37), indeed gave him authority over all creation (2:38). The world rulers are under God’s control, and when God chooses they can be made to acknowledge it. Furthermore, and paradoxically, Daniel’s revelation— which speaks of G od ruling in the future—actually effects DANIEL

24

the rule of G od now. Nebuchadnezzar acknowledges that God already rules, “on earth as in heaven,” and by giving God’s servants authority over the sages and over Babylonian political affairs he institutes another indirect form o f divine rule in Babylon itself, “on earth as in heaven.” The fact that there is to be a new future, an End, does not mean we cannot hope for a new present— it makes a new present possible. W hen readers o f the Book o f Daniel, who have seen regimes passing just as Daniel described, join Nebuchadnez­ zar in acknowledging that G od is Lord o f history, they make that acknowledgment with even greater conviction. G od is Lord o f history, whether or not we can see the evidence of that in history at the moment. History is going somewhere, even if that can only be perceived by divine revelation and not read off from the events themselves.

Sovereignty at work in the m idst of history (i) Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 2 portrays God’s sover­ eignty at work on a grand scale as regime succeeds regime; its uncomfortable message comes home only for a successor several generations to come. Nebuchadnezzar’s later dream (Dan 4) brings it home to Nebuchadnezzar in person. The chapter begins with a declaration by this king who is the embodiment o f sovereignty on earth. But he uses his authority to testify to the sovereignty o f “God M ost High,” a description which appears more times here than in any other chapter in the Old Testament (4:2,17,24, 25,32,34). It is an expression at home on the lips of a pagan or an Israelite; to both it suggests a G od o f universal authority. Daniel 4 also uses the word “heaven” more often than any other chapter, sometimes as a periphrasis for G od or in the phrase “King o f heaven” (4:26, 37), but more commonly to refer to the sky or to the place o f God’s dwelling, set over 25

Sovereignty— Divine an d H um an

against the earth as the sphere o f Nebuchadnezzar’s rule and as the extent o f his humiliation. Daniel 4 is centrally con­ cerned with the kingship or sovereignty o f Nebuchadnezzar and the kingship or sovereignty o f the M ost High God, the King o f heaven, but from the beginning it makes clear the contrast between the sovereignty o f one who rules on earth for a time and that o f one who rules also in heaven and whose rule is unconstrained by time. H is testimony will subvert any tendency to be overimpressed by the signifi­ cance o f mere human government2 Nebuchadnezzar is a flourishing monarch and his dream concerns a flourishing, lofty, preeminent, verdant, protective, fruitful, long-lived tree—a common symbol for whatever is seen as ultimately alive, transcendent, life-giving, and sustain­ ing. It is a natural symbol for a king such as Nebuchadnezzar, who mediates God’s life, provision, and protection to his peo­ ple. He is treelike to them, the embodiment of life and destiny, as presidents and prime ministers can still seem to be in our world. To a degree, Daniel affirms this significance of leaders, in that he challenges Nebuchadnezzar to do justice and to take action on behalf of the needy (4:27). It is by the observing of such priorities that leaders prove themselves treelike to their peoples. When Daniel describes Nebuchadnezzar’s achievements he does not imply that the king has fulfilled this royal ideal, and when Nebuchadnezzar speaks o f his achievements, it is his (justifiable) pride in his building projects that he expresses, rather than his achievements in the area o f justice and mercy. A great national empire such as Nebuchadnezzar’s is the polit­ ical equivalent of the Indian god Vishnu, who was supposed to be the Preserver o f human life but whose huge image was traditionally carried in processions on a great wheeled throne that crushed anything that got in its path. The juggernaut which is supposed to be the preserver and provider easily

DANIEL

26

becomes the crusher and the destroyer, totalitarian and abso­ lute in its demands.3 It is apparently as much because o f the exaggerated signifi­ cance that comes to be attached to leaders as because o f their specific failures that they have to fall, lest it seem that in truth all things hold together in anyone other than God. The tree is to be felled, so that people may acknowledge the sover­ eignty o f the Most High over human sovereignty, not merely in the world above or in the age to come but in this world and in this age (4:14). Sometimes G od exercises this rule through earthly kings, but sometimes over human kingship, demonstrating the power to deprive the mighty of their au­ thority and to give it to “nobodies.” The tree is not, after all, a secure source o f life and provi­ sion, and the felling o f it will prove who is king. The one it symbolizes is to be reduced to an animal-like existence, living in the open, tethered to a metal ring, living off natural vege­ tation, exposed to the elements, his hair and nails growing wild. Reversal comes when Nebuchadnezzar looks to heaven (4:34), a phrase which suggests seeking God’s aid and thus implicitly recognizing that God is king— as Nebuchadnezzar does explicitly once more at the chapter’s close (4:37). H is own rule can be suspended or terminated; God’s cannot W hen Daniel first interprets the king’s dream to him, there is no hint o f his rejoicing in the disaster that hangs over the king. Daniel encourages us to long for G od to have compassion on world rulers, specifically the wicked ones, and he encourages the world to believe that judgment is never inevitable. We are to treat people in power as given their responsibility by God. We are to appeal to their hu­ manness, not to bait their sinfulness. The confession o f G od as king might seem to leave no place for human government Actually the chapter assumes that if G od’s kingship is ac­ knowledged, human sovereignty can then find its place. A t

27

Sovereignty— Divine an d H um an

the end of the story, even the majesty and glory o f human kingship are affirmed. Rule on earth as well as the rule of heaven come to belong to the one who is poor in spirit.4

Sovereignty at work in the midst of history (ii) Belshazzar’s story begins like Nebuchadnezzar’s, with a flourishing monarchy in royal majesty (5:1). But from the royal banquet issue sacrilege and blasphemy (5:2-4). The Ex­ ile might be thought to have established the power o f the gods of Babylon over the God o f Israel, and Belshazzar implic­ itly asserts the authority o f Babylon and its gods over the exiles and their God. That provokes the latter to prove that the God who is treated as powerless has power and to expose the powerless Babylonian gods for what they are. In interpreting the portent which Belshazzar has been given, Daniel begins by recalling the sovereign position that Belshazzar’s “father” Nebuchadnezzar occupied (5:18-20). He possessed royal authority and splendor, the power o f life and death, of ennoblement and disgrace. These are the kind of affi rmations the Bible elsewhere makes of God, and Daniel begins by reminding Belshazzar that Nebuchadnezzar pos­ sessed them only as the gift of God. All human authority and power are an echo and a servant of that divine authority and power from which they derive and on which they de­ pend.5 But Nebuchadnezzar’s power had become his weak­ ness and had to be taken away. And Belshazzar has failed to learn the lesson, manifesting the same pride in the presence o f the very Lord of heaven (5:23). Each of the two elements in this unique title for God, “Lord” and “heaven,” suggest the almightiness o f the One Belshazzar disdains. O n the surface the writing on the wall records the assess­ ment o f something in terms o f monetary weights, “counted at a mina, a shekel, and two halves.” But the three nouns D A N IEL

28

also suggest three verbal roots, as in English “pounds” and “halves” can be verbs as well as nouns. Understood as verbs, “counted out,” “weighed,” and “broken in half,” the words hint at three moments in God’s dealings with Belshazzar as king. G od appointed him; G od is evaluating him in the present; God is imminently terminating his dynasty. Belshaz­ zar is responsible to the heavenly sovereign for the way he has exercised his human sovereignty. G od will now exercise the sovereignty of heaven in bringing about Belshazzar’s fall. Daniel’s prophecy comes true with that common Middle Eastern phenomenon, a coup d’état The heavenly sover­ eignty apparently operates via ordinary earthly means, though how this works out we are not told—only the sovereign pur­ pose of God in die event is of interest. The end comes that very night, to make explicit that sovereign power o f God and the authority of God’s sage. The event illustrates how revolu­ tionary violence can be an important factor through which God works in history; though what it brings in is not the final rule of God but the rule of Darius the Mede to replace that of Belshazzar the Chaldean.6 The worldly empire is demonstrated to be subject to the God o f the Judean exiles. A t the beginning o f the story Belshazzar had flaunted the vessels captured from the temple in Jerusalem and encouraged the impression that Nebuchad­ nezzar was lord o f history and that the G od o f Jerusalem was powerless, but the end of the story confounds that impres­ sion. Leaders may seem to be the embodiment o f order, destiny, power, and divinity, but death comes to them, too, an incontrovertible denial o f their pretension to ultimate power and significance. Psalm 2 talks about God laughing when nations and gov­ ernments assert themselves against him and his purpose. He knows they always end up falling into the pit they themselves dug. Hearing God’s laughter is important for the Belshazzars of the world; it is a way God may get through to them.7 It is 29

Sovereignty— Divine an d H um an

important for their subjects, too, who can afford to take them less seriously than they sometimes realize, and may be able to stand up to them better when they do realize it H um an decrees an d divine decrees The state likes to have the support o f religion, even if it formally keeps the two separate. The institution that claims absolute authority is inclined also to claim the sanctions o f religion. Empires can have feet o f clay and can fall apart, so it is as well for them to use all means to reinforce their strength and unity.8 G od is acknowledged not for G od’s sake, but because this helps to undergird the state. The story in Daniel 3 describes an occasion when people were required to bow down before an image; the refusal o f the three Israelites to do so is described first as contempt o f the king’s decree, only secondly as impiety (and even there as refusal “to serve your gods”). The personal nature o f Nebuchadnezzar’s rage suggests that the statue embodies not only a national and a religious commitment but also a personal one. Nebuchadnezzar’s own standing was tied up with the statue. H is expectation is, “You shall have no other god but me.”9 C an any god rescue the three men from his power? Events in due course provide him with his answer. In the subsequent story in Daniel 6, Daniel himself ends up in the lion pit because a supposed human sovereignty allows itself to be used and manipulated in the name o f its own authority. Daniel’s jealous political colleagues engineer matters so that the law o f Daniel’s G od (6:5) and the law o f the Medes and Persians (6:8) are deliberately brought into conflict. A s their means o f putting Daniel out o f the way they utilize the state’s inclination to deify itself and the be­ liever’s obligation to confess no god but God. G od's Law

DANIEL

30

makes an absolute demand on human beings; so does the king’s law, because he contributes to the state’s stability and to the authority of his own position by insisting on the ir­ revocability of his injunctions. Once his decision is declared, it cannot be undone. Such firmness adds strength to good decisions, but compounds the weakness o f poor ones. The law is the law is the law. If the king accepts it, he has to accept unacceptable constraints and unfairness when the law is an ass; if he suspends it, he risks the collapse of the social order, and ultimately o f the state itself.10 Darius is unable to eat, relax, or sleep as he awaits the outcome o f the action forced on him (6:18). W hen daylight comes, he returns to the lion pit in turmoil and trepidation instead o f in the stately dignity and composure o f a mon­ arch. Daniel’s “long live the king!” (6:22) strikingly affirms Darius’s kingship, yet Darius’s own acknowledgment o f the living G od either side o f this greeting (6:20,26) relativizes this kingship o f his. And that is what the event itself does— the stand Daniel takes, as much as the deliverance he experi­ ences. One is reminded o f stories from the early years o f the church (Acts 4:18-20; 5:19,20; 12:1-10; 16:19-26). So “what happens when a state executes those who are praying for it?” They are “demonstrating the emperor’s pow­ erlessness to impose his will even by death. The final sanction had been publicly robbed of its power. Even as the lions lapped the blood of the saints, Caesar was stripped o f his arms and led captive in Christ’s triumphant procession. H is au­ thority was shown to be only penultimate after all.” 11 Daniel has obeyed God rather than the human sovereign, but has done no injury to the state (6:22). By putting loyalty to G od above loyalty to the state he has been loyal to the truth, and thus more loyal to the state than those who make more o f it than it is, and certainly than those who use it to serve their own ends. H is story witnesses to the fact that

31

Sovereignty— Divine an d H um an

heathen sovereignties do put believers under pressure, but that they are ultimately destined to bow before the name which is above every name. It is not merely a story about a miraculous escape from martyrdom, but about all human claims to sovereign immutability yielding to God’s abiding will and about the miracle o f the human sovereign himself acknowledging that.12

DANIEL

32

4

INSIGHT—DIVINE AND HUMAN

“Revelation” has been an important theme in the history o f theology over recent centuries, and scholars have debated over the sense in which the Bible is G od’s revelation and over the way G od is also revealed through creation or in history or through people’s religious experience. The theme is not a prominent one in the Bible itself, but it runs throughout Daniel. Most o f the stories note the insight of Daniel and the other young men, relate revelations given to them, and note the contrast between them and the Babylo­ nian sages who cannot interpret portentous events which happen in their m idst They thus demonstrate that the God o f Israel both possesses insight into history (as the One who is sovereign in history: see chapter 3) and shares it with the exiles. Each of the visions is a God-given unveiling o f the mystery of history and serves as both a warning and a prom­ ise concerning its outcome.

Insight as God’s gift One o f the first things we are told about the exiled young Jewish nobility among whom Daniel and his three friends 33

Insight— Divine an d H um an

are numbered is that they are "discerning in all aspects o f learning, knowledge and insight, and capable o f taking a place in the king’s palace” (1:4). They are people who will already have received some education to prepare them for political life; they are thus well-versed in that practical Is­ raelite learning such as appears in Proverbs. So that they can function in his court, Nebuchadnezzar determines to teach them also "the language and literature o f the Chaldeans” (1:4)— the language, script, and contents o f the cuneiform texts preserved among the Babylonian sages, which formed the basis o f their work as court counselors. These sages combined many o f the functions o f wise men, prophets, and priests in Israel. They were the guardians o f the sacred traditional lore o f Mesopotamia, which covered natural history, astronomy, mathematics, medicine, myth, and chronicle. This learning was applied to life by means o f the study o f the stars, o f dreams, and o f animal livers and other organs, and by means o f rites o f purification, sacrifice, incantation, exorcism, and other forms o f divination and magic. Their work presupposed that supernatural forces some­ times reveal what is to happen in the future, or unveil the significance o f events which have already happened, either o f their own accord or in response to human questioning. They were thought to do this through the arrangement o f natural phenomena such as the stars or through the form or behavior o f particular creatures. In light o f such revelations, afflictions could be removed or threatened events avoided by means o f the appropriate rites. By applying their learning in such ways to questions affecting king and nation, the sages acted as ad­ visers and protectors whom the king would frequently con­ sult (as Dan 2 ,4 ,5 presuppose). They comprised the king’s backup agencies and task forces, able to access vast informa­ tion resources to enable them to interpret data which might have implications for the future o f the state. DANIEL

34

A number o f names are used for the various groups o f sages, such as diviners, chanters, charmers, Chaldeans, and exorcists (see 1:20; 2:2, 27). The terms seem to be used randomly and interchangeably. The very variety o f the names o f the groups underlines both the anxiety built into the situation when they were summoned and the mockery with which the Israelites are invited to view the Babyloni­ ans’ toilsome attempts to control their destiny (cf. Isa 47:12,13).1 The O ld Testament is not opposed to divination and its associated rites as such; it rather claims that Yahweh has more distinctive and more direct ways o f communicating with Israel Thus while Nebuchadnezzar wishes the young Judeans to profit from Chaldean learning, their G od has other ideas. They receive “knowledge and discernment in all kinds o f literature and learning” such as make them ten times superior to all the sages in Nebuchadnezzar’s realm (1:17-20): a bold claim, whether in a Babylonian, a Persian, or a Greek context A s G od’s gift, then, the four men’s in­ sight has ceased to be merely rational/experiential court wisdom o f the kind that can be learned, and has become supematurally revealed knowledge such as they will be showing in succeeding chapters. Not for nothing will Daniel come to be called a prophet, in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the New Testament The Book o f Daniel itself does not use the word o f him, though this affirmation is virtually made by Nebuchadnezzar himself later when he declares that “the spirit o f holy deity” is in Daniel (4:8). W hile the Bible sometimes envisages G od’s spirit working in the human spirit through the ordinary analytical functioning o f the human mind, it more character­ istically associates the activity of G od’s spirit with the receiv­ ing o f extraordinary insights such as one might associate with intuition, creative imagination, or second sight. A per­ son who receives out-of-the-ordinary insights or revelations 35

Insight— Divine an d H um an

does so by the work o f the spirit o f God, as Joseph illustrates (Gen 41:38). Remarkable words are taken to have been breathed out by God’s own breath. Still later, in Belshazzar’s day, the queen mother also recalls how the divine spirit dwelt in Daniel, though she sets alongside this theological description an anthropological one, o f Daniel as a man with a remarkable spirit She also speaks of how he had been found by Nebuchadnezzar to be a person o f “insight” or divinely-given illumination, o f “ability” which turned an intellectual skill into a practical skill, o f “wisdom” in the sense o f supernatural intuition, and o f “knowledge” in the sense of God-given perceptiveness, all of which enabled him to interpret dreams, enigmas like the writing on the wall, and other opaque forms of divine revelation (5:11,12), in the way that the sages were supposed to. By allowing the four men to be exposed to alien wisdom but then portraying their God-given insight as superior, the Book o f Daniel makes the same point as Isaiah 47 with its overt attack on Babylonian divination. Indeed, it per­ haps makes it more strongly. It affirms that there is insight about life, history, and politics (the affairs the young men are concerned with) that only G od endows. Members o f the Israelite royal family have been taken into the service o f the Babylonian king but they have found themselves in a position o f leadership at his court, not through military or political achievement but through God-given wisdom.2

Insight as God's own attribute It is the story o f Nebuchadnezzar’s dream statue that gives us our first concrete portrait o f Babylonian and Israelite insight at work. In the Bible, as elsewhere in the ancient world, dreams are featured both as ordinary human experi­ ences and as a means G od uses to communicate with people. In neither are they the most common source o f such data, D A N IEL

36

but they were familiar enough to people. W hen G od speaks in dreams, it may be a straightforward verbal message or it may be one expressed in symbols which require interpre­ tation. Nebuchadnezzar’s sages possessed extensive dream books listing dream motifs and their meanings. His sum­ moning o f the sages implies that his dream is assumed to be o f state significance— it is not just an ordinary private dream, but an omen significant for the destiny of his empire. H is anxiety reflects the insecurity which attaches to that empire. The sages can hardly believe their ears, however, when they discover that Nebuchadnezzar expects them to tell him not only the meaning o f his dream but its actual content. Their profession involves applying the insights o f tradition and experience to data which the king gives them. But their confession o f helplessness once the king requires them to move beyond textbook answers to set questions under­ mines the validity of the answers they provide within those parameters and raises the question whether their whole profession is a sham. If they can divine the contents of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, their understanding o f its meaning compels respect. If not, the latter is no more than ordinary human opinion. They do not claim to be privy to the secrets o f the gods (2:11). But the wistful, sad admission by which they thus seek to excuse themselves exposes them and judges them (cf. the contempt expressed in Isa 44:25; also Jer 23:15-32). Jewish exiles might be tempted to fear that Israelite wisdom looked foolish in comparison with the resources o f the sages. Actually the Babylonians have only earthly tech­ niques which are no heavenly use (in the absence o f data) and heavenly beings who are no earthly use. The thisworldly insight o f the sages cannot compete with the su­ pernatural insight o f Daniel. The m otif o f the sages’ helplessness recurs in the Belshazzar story (5:8), driving 37

Insight— Divine an d H um an

home this key point that alien wisdom is helpless when G od intervenes to speak and act. Indeed, the story o f Nebuchadnezzar’s dream shows that the so-called sages also lack the diplomatic skill to handle the king with adroitness, and even fail to get their way when they want time (to devise a solution to the king’s conun­ drum); Daniel gets time (to seek a revelation from God). H is courageous undertaking to provide an answer recalls his instinctive boldness regarding the trial (1:12), while his deci­ siveness and calm confidence contrasts with the sages’ in­ credulous impotence. So Daniel and his friends lay hold on the resources there are in their God, and the mystery is revealed to Daniel (2:19). His responsive praise ironically takes up the sages’ confession that their gods’ dwelling is not among mere humanity (2:11), and denies that this makes God inaccessible. G od is one who possesses knowledge and insight. In particular, G od under­ stands history— the area the dream might be expected to con­ cern. A s the One who controls history, God has insight into history; as the One who has insight into history, G od can reveal its significance; as the One who actually can reveal the significance of history, G od is proved to be the One who controls history (2:20-23). Like Isaiah 40-55, Daniel denies that insight into history comes from the stars that the Babylonian sages studied, as if they shaped history. History is G od’s secret, and cannot be predicted or divined by means o f techniques such as those o f the sages— as they have now acknowledged. It can only be revealed. Even Daniel does not reveal it merely because he is a more skilful sage, but because he is granted access to supernatural sources o f information (2:30). Again Daniel resembles Joseph (Gen 41:16), whose portrait at many points anticipates Daniel’s. The reason Babylonian wisdom can be scorned is that something that works is now available. Con­ trary to the despairing assumption o f the sages, who believed DANIEL

38

that there were gods in heaven but did not think they re­ vealed themselves, the Book o f Daniel makes the key asser­ tion that the G od o f heaven reveals secrets.

The insight expressed in quasi-prophecy W hat is it that G od reveals? Daniel’s visions offer a series o f previews o f the history to unfold after Daniel’s day. The most detailed is the prophecy in Daniel 11 which outlines the rise, activities, achievements, and fall o f a series of kings. They are unnamed, but can be identified on the basis o f the events the visions refer to (see chapter 1 above and chapter 8 below). Such prophecies have no parallels elsewhere in the Bible, but there are a number o f parallels outside it from Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Greece, from the late second mil­ lennium to the Hellenistic period and after. One Assyrian example reads . . . a ruler will arise, he will rule for thirteen years. There will be an attack o f Elam against Akkad, and the booty o f Akkad will be carried off. The temples o f the great gods will be destroyed, the defeat of Akkad will be decreed [by the gods]. There will be confusion, disturbance, and unhappy events in the land, and the reign will diminish [in power]; another man, whose name is not mentioned [as a successor] will arise, and will seize the throne as king and will put to death his officials . . .3 Such “prophecies,” offering descriptions in predictive form o f the reigns o f various unnamed kings, seem to be quasi-predictions, not actual predictions. For the most part 39

Insight— Divine an d H um an

they relate events from before the speaker’s day as if they were future events. Only near the end do they express actual expectations or hopes o f the prophet’s day. It would, of course, be possible for God to reveal to Daniel ahead o f time the events o f the next four centuries, and this is what Jewish and Christian scholars have generally assumed he did. But in light o f the parallels just referred to, it seems that the people to whom the visions in Daniel were related would not take them as actual predictions. They would know that such prophecies had the form o f quasi­ predictions, not actual predictions, until they would come to the promises of deliverance toward the end. They would not assume that they were directly given by Daniel, but rather that they came from some unnamed seer of their own day (though they might reckon that Daniel himself was speaking through this seer: the phrase “I, Daniel” which recurs in Daniel 7 suggests this, as it is characteristically a phrase used by a person who cannot be seen or who speaks through someone else such as a prophet or a messenger). They might also have reflected that the God of the Bible is not inclined to reveal the details of the future in the way that would be required if these were actual predictions rather than quasi-predictions. God expects people to live and walk by faith (see Matt 24:36; Acts 1:7). Further, God is characteristi­ cally one who speaks to people in their own situation, not to other people about it centuries beforehand in a way that is not directly relevant then. Ezekiel’s contemporaries dis­ missed at least one of his visions on the grounds that it related to distant days. Ezekiel himself knew that God does not speak about distant days; God’s promises and warnings relate to that future which is coming upon a prophet’s hearers (see Ezek 12:27,28). So even if we did not have these ancient Middle-Eastern texts which reveal to us how the Jews would have under­ stood detailed “prophecies” of this kind, we would have D A N IEL

40

suspected that they were more likely quasi-prophecies than actual ones. The apparent exceptions in Daniel to the rule that G od declines to speak to people in detail about the distant future merely prove the rule, because the visions actually date from the 160s and concern for the most part events which are present and imminent, not distant, for seer and audience. The other visions in Daniel 7-12 are also quasi-prophecies, though not all of precisely the same kind. Daniel 7 and 8, for instance, incorporate motifs from myth, symbol, and allegory as well as scriptural allusion (see chapter 7 below). Symbols suggest features o f the entity being described (Antiochus = a horn= something aggressive and strong), but they also bring with them resonances from sacred tradition. The prophecies concerning postexilic history in Daniel are thus revelations from G od in a similar sense as the O ld Testament histories are. Both visionaries and historians ac­ quired their knowledge about historical events in the same way, from personal experience or from historical sources; but both offer a God-given understanding o f these events. Historians then tell o f these events in the past tense, seers speak of them as if they are still future. The revelations in Daniel 10-12 and elsewhere are sub­ stantially shaped by the Scriptures themselves: it was these Scriptures which mediated the author’s God-given under­ standing to him. Among key passages which influence the revelation are Ezekiel 1 -3 ,9 ,1 0 (in the introductory vision in Dan 10); Isaiah 8 :7 ,8 ,1 0 ; Ezekiel 7:19-27; and Habakkuk 2:3 (in the historical presentation in Dan 11); and Isaiah 26:19; 52:13-53:12; and 66:24 (in the portrait o f the End in Dan 12). It is the Scriptures which are the seer’s source o f insight. They enable him to make sense o f past, present, and future for his people. The past they have been through (the rule o f foreign empires over Judea, the comings and goings o f the Hellenistic period, the sufferings o f the Antiochene 41

Insight— Divine an d H um an

period) seems impossible to understand, but Scripture helps the seer to make sense o f them. The Seleucid oppression is like that of the Assyrians: as the latter fell, so will the former. The temple desecration is like that during the Exile: as that was reversed, so will this one be. The affliction brought upon people by Antiochus is like that o f Yahweh’s servant in Isaiah: in this case, too, it will give way to triumph. The feet that the quasi-predictions can make sense o f the past by relating it in the light o f Scripture implies grounds for trusting the actual prophecy’s interpretation o f what the future will hold (11:40-12:4). W hen the seer speaks about the past, he does so on the basis o f having historical data and having the scriptural text as a means o f interpreting it W hen he speaks about the future, he has only scriptural text (because G od does expect people to walk by faith) and he is providing an imaginary scenario, a possible embodiment o f the biblical text, which is not designed to be pressed to yield historical data. The fact that Antiochus does not die as 11:40-45 describes does not prove it is a fa iled prophecy, or a prophecy about someone other than Antiochus which is yet to be fulfilled. Its object is to provide not historical data but scriptural insight on the meaning o f events to come. Visions regularly use familiar forms, and the feet that this one uses the form o f the quasi-prediction need not suggest any doubt regarding whether it was a genuine vision. G od reaches people through means that speak to them, and the form o f quasi-predictions was one which could reach the seer and speak to his people. It provided them with a very vivid way o f affirming that puzzling events which have taken place really are within the control and purview of God. The seer thus seeks to provide insight on contemporary Jewish experience by looking at it in the light of various scrip­ tural texts. It is this insight which is mediated to the body of faithful Jews by “the discerning” (or “teachers,” as the term could alternatively be taken) (11:33), leaders who possess that DANIEL

42

wisdom which consists in awed submission to God, that un­ derstanding which has reflected deeply on God’s ways in history, and that insight which perceives how God’s cause will ultimately triumph.4 They use this to “enlighten the mul­ titude,” an activity which apparently denotes not teaching in general or exhortation to faithfulness but die interpretation o f the prophetic Scriptures for the persecuted community. The picture of a heavenly being reading off from a book the contents o f coming centuries might seem to imply a strongly deterministic view o f history. The march o f the king­ doms is the march o f toy soldiers programed by God.5 If this were so, one might have reckoned that G od could have pro­ gramed it better! But the awareness that these are quasi­ prophecies gives us a helpful new perspective on this aspect o f Daniel’s attitude toward history. Only retrospectively do the visions affirm God’s “control.” Events are described as inevitable (11:14, 27) when they are inevitable—when they have already happened. We have noted that when the vision turns to describing the actual future, it offers an imaginative scenario rather than a literal forecast, and this itself reflects the feet that events are not imposed on humanity but emerge from their will. G od will not be frustrated regarding the des­ tiny o f history, but events themselves unfold in the ordinary way that history does. It is with hindsight that one declares that everything that has taken place— even the hard things the people have gone through— is within the hand o f God. To say that history was prewritten is to deny that it is out o f control.

43

Insight— Divine an d H um an

5

DANIEL’S GOD AND DANIEL’S PRAYER

The Book o f Daniel contains three key references to Daniel’s prayer— one in the context o f his needing G od to reveal Nebuchadnezzar’s dream to him (Dan 2), one as the activity which involves his disobeying Darius (Dan 6), one as his plea for G od to restore Israel from their exile (Dan 9). They are prayers which involve petition, intercession, confession, and thanksgiving. The three accounts thus dis­ close central features o f the nature o f prayer. They also draw attention to central aspects o f the character o f the G od to whom we pray.

Petition and intercession Nebuchadnezzar insists that the sages tell him about the dream whose contents he will not or cannot specify, and Daniel makes an audacious, precipitate declaration that he will indeed do so. Then he goes home to get his friends to pray about it (2:16-18)! Literally he wants them “to ask for compassion” from God: that is the nature o f prayer. The 45

D aniel's God an d D aniel's Prayer

Hebrew and Aramaic words for “compassion” (English trans­ lations often use the word “mercy”) are related to words for the womb. They suggest the strong feelings of love and con­ cern appropriate to brothers and sisters from the same womb or to a mother in relation to the children o f her womb. So the G od to whom we pray is one who has the caring instincts o f a brother or sister or mother for us. O n the second occasion when Daniel petitions his God, the story describes him as “seeking grace" (6:11). “Grace” is another term from personal relationships, in the family or elsewhere. It suggests the caring favor that one person may show to another even though they have no legal obligation to them. Prayer involves casting oneself on the divine favor when we have no claim on God, and pleading with the G od o f grace. Alongside these words in the prayer in Daniel 9:4 comes the word “commitment” (English translations have expres­ sions such as “steadfast love”). In secular usage this word is more at home in life outside the family, in connection with relationships in the community and in political life. It is a word which denotes an attitude o f kindness or generosity or mercy which expresses itself in acts o f that kind and which thus initiates or presupposes a relationship o f mu­ tual loyalty and faithfulness between people. Applied to G od, it appears m ost commonly in the context o f prayer, in an appeal to the commitment inherent in the nature o f God. “Faithfulness” (or “reliability” or “constancy”) (9:13) com­ monly accompanies “commitment” in the O ld Testament, in references to G od and to human conduct Together “com­ mitment” and “faithfulness” suggest a steadfastness which can be relied on; in contradistinction from each other, they indicate on the one hand active kindness which gives what is good, and on the other protective faithfulness which guards from harm. In Daniel 9:13 the history o f Israel is the story o f DANIEL

46

G od’s faithfulness to Israel: God’s promises have been reli­ able, G od’s protection has been constant The history o f Israel can also be described as the story of God’s “right deeds” (9:16); these are themselves acts o f faith­ fulness, mercy, commitment and deliverance. The paradigm act o f this kind is the Exodus (9:15), the event which estab­ lished Yahweh’s reputation for doing the right thing. So prayer is an appeal to G od to do the right thing. That second occasion when Daniel petitions his G od takes him into the lion pit, because people are forbidden to petition anyone but the king. His prayer is unusual even apart from its bravery (see 6:11,12). The regular hours for prayer were the times of the morning and evening offering, especially the lat­ ter (cf. 9:21). Daniel, however, is accustomed to praying three times a day; we have no other reference in the Bible to anyone doing that (assuming that Psalm 55:17 is not describing some­ one’s regular practice o f prayer, any more than is the case with the “seven times” of Psalm 119:164). The regular posture for prayer was standing (e.g., Mark 11:25). Daniel, however, kneels to pray, implying prostrating himself as Muslims do; normally someone would only do that as an indication o f marked self-lowering in circumstances of particular solemnity or need. His praying “before his G od” also suggests a meekness in the presence o f authority: it is the term used in connection with addressing the king (e.g., 2:9, 10,11), though at the same time it thus indicates the actuality o f standing in a real person’s presence. Having an attic which could be used for a private meeting, for guests, or for prayer, would also be unusual; ordinary people would have a make­ shift shelter on the roof for these purposes. Facing the land, the city, and the temple during prayer is emphasized throughout Solom on’s prayer in 1 Kings 8 but is referred to rarely elsewhere outside Daniel. It may be that “turning to G od” (9:3), too, indicates facing Jerusalem, but that expression also implies that Daniel’s prayer is a 47

D aniel’s God an d D aniel’s Prayer

deliberate, purposeful act. The phrase is literally “to set the face”; it denotes determination when confronted by a crisis or a challenge. The deliberateness involved in such prayer is also suggested by Daniel’s describing it as “laying down” supplications, or causing them to fall, before Yahweh (9:20)— another expression which may hint at prostration o f the self before God. So Daniel is set forward as an amazing man o f prayer, but also as an example o f prayer to which, in some respects at least, others might aspire. They too belong to another city (despite Jeremiah 29) and need outward ways o f demonstrat­ ing to themselves as much as to others the fact that they live as strangers among the Chaldeans, whether they actually feel secure or insecure there.1 Daniel’s account of his prayer o f confession illustrates fur­ ther how prayer can be a matter o f actions as well as words. The actions add to the sense of seriousness and earnestness expressed by the words. Fasting, sackcloth, and ashes (9:3) are recognized indications o f grief and self-abasement in the context of calamity or loss experienced or threatened, or o f wrongdoing committed. Fasting involved abstaining from (regular) food during the day (not usually for the whole twenty-four hours). Sackcloth was dark, rough, cheap mate­ rial worn in contrast to the more presentable smart clothing in which someone would normally want to appear in public. The reference to ashes denotes the practice of putting ashes (or dust or soil) on the head or head and body, or o f lying or sitting in a pile of ashes. The background o f such practices presumably lies in the way shock, loss, and grief naturally express themselves in a loss o f interest in food and appearances, and in an inner gloominess which expresses itself outwardly in “the blues.” The practices themselves give formal, stylized, ritual expres­ sion to feelings people have or purport to have.

DANIEL

48

Fasting also features in the context o f a special meeting with God, or the seeking of a meeting with G od or a revela­ tion from God (cf. 10:2,3). Here there is no suggestion o f loss or grief; fasting indicates an abandoning o f normal hu­ man preoccupations for the sake of concentration on seek­ ing G od or being with God. So Daniel’s fasting may be seen as both an expression o f grief, to accompany his plea for divine action, and as an indication of seriousness in seeking God, to accompany his plea for divine revelation. A t the same time it is striking that Daniel’s period of selfdenial is coterminous with the period o f conflict among the supernatural powers (10:2,13). This hints that prayer can play a role in opening up the possibility of God’s purpose being fulfilled when human purposes conflict with that. Daniel’s seeking God on Israel’s behalf “opened an aperture for God to act in concert with human freedom. It inaugurated war in heaven. It opened a way through the impenetrable spirituality o f a foreign hegemony in order to declare a new and real divine possibility.”2 The Old Testament assumes that prayers meet with re­ sponses, and Daniel’s prayer in chapter 9 does receive one. The point expressed in loving hyperbole in Isaiah 65:24 (cf. 65:1) here becomes prosaic narrative reality: G od is so eager to respond to prayer (and the divine sovereignty in human affairs is so real) that the response comes before the prayer is actually over (9:20,21). The prayer offered the response to God’s prophetic word which made the fulfillment of that word possible. The promise o f fulfillment issues when Daniel turns to God, yet it issues before he actually prays his lament, so that the story affirms not only the importance o f prayer and the place it has in the outworking o f G od’s purpose (it is in response to prayer that G od acts) but also the importance o f God’s sovereignty (prayer is a means o f God’s own good will being put into effect). One person’s

49

D aniel's Cod an d D aniel’s Prayer

prayer brings about the restoration o f the people o f God; but it is a matter o f releasing that restoration which G od has already purposed.

Thanksgiving The thanksgiving Daniel offers when his first prayer is answered (2:20-23) parallels those o f the Psalms and uses their phrases and motifs. But its specific content recalls less the Psalms than Job (e.g., 1:21; 12:22; 32:8; 38:19)— another book which portrays the feelings and prayers o f an individ­ ual rather than being a liturgical composition like the Psalms themselves. The thanksgiving begins, however, with a very liturgical blessing o f God, like those at the end o f the books o f the Psalter (e.g., Ps 72:18,19). To bless someone is to express in solemn words one’s appreciation, gratitude, honor, recogni­ tion, or love; it suggests an acknowledgment o f communion with the one who is named in the blessing, in the light o f what they have come to mean to you.3 Praise applies this way o f speaking to God. The object o f Daniel’s blessing is the “G od o f heaven” (2:19). Such titles for deities are common throughout O ld Testament times among peoples such as the Canaanites, the Babylonians, the Persians, and the Greeks. In using them, Israelites indicate that their G od is not merely an Israelite peculiarity but the sovereign Lord, the one whom other peoples “ignorantly worship” (see Acts 17:23,24) insofar as they truly worship G od at all. Israelites may also be glad to use such expressions for G od because they thus avoid the actual name “Yahweh.” In some circles after the Exile peo­ ple came to avoid the name because they wanted to be sure they did not misuse it (cf. Exod 20:7); the name hardly appears in Daniel outside chapter 9. So here “the G od o f heaven” may be a reverential substitute for G od’s actual D A N IEL

50

name (cf. Matthew’s use o f the phrase “the kingdom o f heaven” for “the kingdom o f G od”). The phrase “the name o f G od” (2:20) is another ex­ pression which enables people to avoid actually saying “Yahweh.” It presupposes the way that someone’s name often revealed something o f their character or personal sig­ nificance. A s with human beings, then, G od’s name stood for G od’s person. One reason for using the tide “the G od o f my fathers” (2:23) may also be the desire to avoid the actual name o f God. In its own right, though, this descrip­ tion o f G od suggests that one is committed to Israel’s tradi­ tional faith, the faith handed down by their forebears, and that one believes that the G od who first became involved with Israel long ago is faithful to the children now, as to the forebears then. The tide “G od M ost High” is yet another expression which likely came into increasing usage partly because it provided an alternative to the name “Yahweh.” In the accustomed fashion o f a blessing, after the actual declaration o f it there follows a brief statement o f the reason for it: “wisdom and might are his.” The twofold confession is expanded in verses 21,22. Then the blessing returns to explicit thanksgiving, relating it to the same two divine characteristics, which have become not merely G od’s pos­ session but G od’s gift to Daniel personally. The personal nature o f the praise is developed in the rest o f verse 23 as it focuses more on the particular event which prompted this thanksgiving. To put it another way, the end o f Daniel’s praise is more explicitly like thanksgiving, the confession o f what G od has done for m e/us in response to m y/our urgent plea. In form, the beginning part could be the kind o f praise that comes in a hymn where the conçern is with acknowledging G od’s characteristic attributes and actions. But specific experi­ ences o f G od’s acting on their behalf feeds and strengthens their affirmations regarding those characteristic attributes 51

D aniel's God an d D aniel's Prayer

and actions. G od has answered Daniel’s prayer, and this is the praise such an experience generates. A dramatic effect is achieved by the way Daniel’s thanks­ giving is recorded at this point in Daniel 2. H is confession o f G od’s power and wisdom comes before his indicating the content o f what G od has actually revealed to him. Daniel is to speak o f the destiny o f Nebuchadnezzar’s empire, a reve­ lation which will evidence that power and wisdom o f the G od o f heaven. M ost o f the time the people o f G od have to live without revelations o f this kind, yet they are still called to confess, with Daniel, that power and wisdom on the basis o f a revelation which they believe will come but which they have not yet seen. Even if we do not see much evi­ dence o f the might and wisdom o f G od in international affairs, we are called to believe in that wisdom and power yet to be revealed, and to thank G od for it even before we see it. A related point emerges from the description o f Daniel as being “in prayer and thanksgiving” in Daniel 6. The combi­ nation o f terms suggests two mutually dependent major aspects o f praying (cf. Phil 4:6). Daniel evidently interweaves his pleas (for Israel, for himself, for the Babylonian state) with testimony to his conviction that God hears and an­ swers— the central confession o f the Psalms, which is indi­ cated by the term “thanksgiving.” Daniel is confident that the living G od knows his situation and peril and has already determined how to preserve him through it; he is confident o f that not least because of the personal experience he al­ ready has o f God’s responding to him in times of need, which his thanksgiving recalls.

Confession The longer prayer in Daniel 9 arises out of the reading of Scripture, and illustrates the interplay there can be between D A N IEL

52

the words o f Scripture and the words o f prayer, as Scripture stimulates prayer and prayer forms the appropriate response to Scripture. It is a confession like those in Ezra 9 and in Nehemiah 1, 9. Practically every phrase can be paralleled in other such instances o f prayers o f confession. It instinc­ tively but also consciously follows a hallowed and traditional way o f praying, probably as known both from the study and the worship o f the synagogue. The reality o f the individual’s experience o f life and of G od keeps the prayer o f the ongo­ ing community alive and real; the tradition o f the commu­ nity’s prayer over the centuries gives the individual’s prayer its means o f expression and its context in the prayer o f the whole community o f faith. In his way of speaking, Daniel alternates between “we/our” and “I/my,” and between “you” and “he” in referring to God. It is a prayer o f confession prayed on behalf of the whole people, so that “we/our” is appropriate. But Daniel is in the position of such intercessors as Moses and Jeremiah, and thus his “I/my” is also natural His confession addresses God as “Lord,” as “Yahweh,” as “my God,” and as “our God.” Only in this prayer does Daniel use God’s personal name “Yahweh,” which constitutes an appeal in prayer to the special relationship between Yahweh and the people who alone knew that name. But the prayer also uses the title “Lord” at a number of points where Israelite prayer would traditionally have used “Yahweh.” Given that this also reflects the developing inclination in Judaism to avoid uttering the actual name o f God, the occurrences o f the title “Lord” are suggestive o f reverence in prayer before the majesty o f God. Appeal to a special relationship with G od also underlies the references to “our God” and “my God.” Daniel uses “my God” in referring to his own prayer, “our G od” when he refers to those for whom he prays. H e appeals to “my G od” (the one who grants special revelations to him) to act as “our 53

D aniel’s God an d D aniel’s Prayer

God” (see especially 9:18-20 for the personal nature o f Daniel’s appeal on behalf o f the people as a whole). The prayer begins with praise of “the great and awesome G od who keeps his covenantal commitment with people who love him and keep his commands” (9:4). There is a courageous realism about beginning a prayer o f confession with a recognition o f the majesty o f God, a threat to those who fa il to yield to it; it is such failure that Daniel will have to go on to acknowledge. The fact that G od is also one who keeps covenantal commitment does not take the edge off this; it is a recognition that any failure with regard to the covenant relationship is Israel’s, not God’s. O n the other hand, the fa c t that Israel’s relationship with G od began from G od’s unearned commitment to Israel might open up the possibility that it could be reestablished on the same basis. Recognition that right is on Yahweh’s side is a key ele­ ment in a prayer such as this. It presupposes an acknowledg­ ment o f facts as they are. O ur description o f the recognition o f sin as “confession” is suggestive, because we also speak of “confession” o f faith: the essence of confession is the (public) acknowledgment o f facts, to the glory of God. Confession o f sin is thus a strange form o f praise, an act o f praise at the justice o f the judgment o f God.4 The central part of the prayer o f confession is the actual acknowledgment of wrongdoing (9:5-14). It takes the form of a statement in general terms of what the people have done and failed to do, a statement of God’s acts in response, and a contrasting of the consequent moral positions o f God and people (“right belongs to you, Lord, while a look o f shame attaches to us,” 9:7). Yahweh had given the people of Israel as a whole authoritative commands and directives through Moses and through the prophets; these were delivered to kings, lead­ ers of tribes and clans, and rulers o f the local community. But they have not loved God or kept God’s commands (the

D A N IEL

54

second phrase reminds us that the verb “love” denotes as much a moral as an emotional commitment). Admittedly, an element o f disobedience on their part was inevitable and not fatal to their relationship with Yahweh. If they had “turned” from wrongdoing (the standard Hebrew expression for repentance) they could “seek mercy from Yahweh”— or, more literally, persuade Yahweh to take a warm and favorable attitude toward them— so that the rela­ tionship would continue (9:13). They have not even done that. Indeed, they (leaders and people, present generation and past generations who con­ tinue to influence the present) have willfully fallen short of God’s expectations, avoided walking in the way G od prescribed, ignored the claims G od had on them, rebelled against God’s authority, trespassed on God’s rights, over­ stepped God’s instruction, turned their backs on G od’s commands, closed their ears to God’s warnings. A s a result Yahweh has with personal deliberateness and careful consid­ eration, but also with burning fury, ensured that the curse o f which they were warned has overwhelmed them. Thus their present experience is trouble, desolation, mourning, dis­ honor, and banishment The acknowledgment o f being in the wrong opens the way to a plea for mercy, a prayer for G od to turn back to the people in forgiveness and restoration (9:15-19: most mov­ ingly in the closing clauses, 9:19). Its most fundamental peti­ tion is that God may “listen” (repeated in verses 17-19). That is the standard first plea in a lament, for the nature o f such prayer is that it arises out o f a context where G od seems to have been ignoring Israel’s plight and her prayer. The other standard feature o f the prayer in a lament is the appeal to G od to act— here to turn away the burning divine fury from the city, to let G od’s face shine on the sanctuary instead, to look, to pardon, and to act without delay.

55

D aniel’s God an d D aniel’s Prayer

The plea is dominated by clauses and phrases that indicate the reasons why that should happen. It bases itself on the pattern o f God’s activity in the past, always doing the “right” thing. To do the “right” thing is to do the “just” thing; but G od’s justice is not one concerned above all to see wicked­ ness punished. To abandon anger at Israel’s wrongdoing (9:16) would now be in keeping with Yahweh’s just deeds, not in conflict with them. Yahweh’s justice indicates a con­ cern for what is right which rejoices in being merciful to the weak; and people who suffer as a result o f sin are still seen as people who suffer and need to be restored. Secondly, the plea bases itself on G od’s compassion. Al­ though “compassion” is a feelings word, it denotes feelings which issue in action, the action here being the willingness to “pardon” (9:19— not the usual word for “forgive,” which can be used of human forgiveness, but a word only used of God, and suggesting pardon by a superior). The Israel which acknowledges its God’s justice even when disaster comes to it can ask for his mercy. Only those who know that they are struck down as guilty before God, only they can appeal to God’s mercy.5 Thirdly, the plea bases itself on the fa c t that city and people bear God’s name—that is, they belong to Yahweh. With Yah­ weh’s own encouragement, Israel had depicted Jerusalem as the very center o f the world. Its desolation put a question mark by such theological assertions. But these assertions in­ volved God’s own name. God has to restore Jerusalem. As W. S. Towner comments: To the degree that he has committed himself to pre­ serving the safety o f those things which are named by his name . . . the G od o f Israel has limited and com­ promised his own freedom to act in the future.6 DANIEL

56

Prayers o f confession such as that in Daniel 9 belong to a covenantal way of thinking, one which understands the rela­ tionship between God and human beings by analogy with those human relationships which are based on a formal agree­ ment entered into in solemn and binding fashion. It is this which may explain a difference from earlier O ld Testament prayers for restoration. While the prayer incorporates some description of the afflicted state of the people for whom Daniel prays, material corresponding to the lament in a psalm of lament— complaint and protest with their characteristic “why?”—have disappeared in the light of the covenantal thinking which pervades a prayer such as this. The reason for suffering is not God’s neglect but God’s justice.7 The prayer is an acknowledgment o f the covenantal God, o f the breaking of the covenant through Israel’s failure to keep covenant commitment, and o f the appropriateness of God’s treatment of Israel in the framework of the covenant. Its appeal for mercy is based on the graciousness which lay behind God’s own covenant commitment. It is based implicitly on the possibility o f forgiveness and restoration announced in the covenant for people who, when punished and exiled, repent o f their covenant failure (see Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 30). If this is indeed how people prayed in those days, we can see how they came through the storms and stresses o f that terrible time.8

57

D aniel’s Cod an d D aniel’s Prayer

6

THE POWERS OF HEAVEN

Figures whom we commonly refer to as “angels” feature more frequently in Daniel than in any other book in the Bible (though they are still less prominent in Daniel than in a near-contemporary Jewish work such as 1 Enoch). Further, even Daniel says little or nothing about the nature or origin o f these heavenly beings, about how many o f them there are or how they are ordered, or about distinctions between good and evil beings among them. W hat Daniel does say indicates that consideration o f them requires more than jest or senti­ mentalism. They are not dainty figures in dresses but execu­ tives, messengers, and warriors whose very names (Michael, “W ho is like G od”; Gabriel, “Mighty man o f God”) some­ times draw attention to the uniqueness and might o f God which they mediate.

God's representatives and aides acting on earth To us, an angel is a figure who is clearly supernatural but also clearly distinguishable from God. The Greek word from 59

The Powers of Heaven

which “angel” comes, however, means a messenger; it does not distinguish whether human or supernatural The He­ brew and Aramaic term is the one which lies behind the name o f the prophet Malachi, “my messenger”: it, too, ap­ plies to a human as easily as to a heavenly being. It denotes not the being of someone but that person’s role. They are representatives, who speak or act on God’s behalf, mediating in the world the word and the will o f God. The term “holy ones” can also be used to denote both heavenly and earthly figures (see Daniel 9). When the term “messenger” does denote a heavenly be­ ing, it suggests not that this being is clearly distinct from God, but rather that it mediates the real presence o f God. Thus in Genesis “the angel o f Yahweh” and “Yahweh” can be hard to distinguish. The relative prominence o f these supernatural figures in Daniel does not imply that G od is now felt as remote and inaccessible, any more than is the case when the Gospels and Acts stress the involvement o f such beings in the story o f Jesus and o f the beginnings o f the church. It provides a way o f envisaging the means by which G od governs the world. In a polytheistic faith different roles can be attributed to differ­ ent gods, but Israel was aware that there was such a gulf between Yahweh and other supernatural beings that the same word hardly applied equally to both. Talk in terms o f the aides o f G od thus helps give expres­ sion to two truths about God. It portrays G od as really involved in the world, speaking and acting; but it safeguards G od’s exaltedness and transcendent authority by visualizing God’s speaking and acting as embodied in subordinate rep­ resentatives, like those o f the imperial authority. If one says that G od is (for instance) in the furnace rescu­ ing the three young men (3:28) or in the lion pit with Daniel shutting the lions’ mouths (6:22), one might seem to raise questions about how G od could be also seated on the throne D A N IEL

60

Controlling the destiny o f the whole universe. Israel had to affirm that Yahweh sat on the throne o f heaven. It also had to affirm that Yahweh really spoke and acted on earth. U n­ derstanding Yahweh as speaking and acting via a representa­ tive or aide who brought the words o f G od and the power of G od helped to safeguard both o f these truths about G od just referred to. In the story of the red-hot blazing furnace, Nebuchadnez­ zar has already referred to the fourth figure in the furnace as a “divine being” (literally a “son of the gods”). Isaiah 43:1-3 had promised God’s own presence when Israel walks through the fire. When that divine being, God’s aide, joins the three young men, this promise is fulfilled. Nebuchadnezzar’s dream about the tree (Dan 4) portrays the activity of God by means o f a more concrete analogy from the court Within his administration the king had watchmen who were the eyes and ears whereby he controlled and provided for his realm. God’s management of the affairs of heaven and earth is pictured by analogy with that of the human king; members of the divine council act as the eyes (Zech 4:10; 2 Chron 16:9) by which God keeps watch over the affairs of the realm and sees that the divine will is put into effect throughout it. The watchmen belong to heaven, are themselves supernatural beings, and bring the word o f God. They descend from heaven and speak in the hearing o f the earthly king, and thus implement the will o f God on earth. The true ministry o f angels is that of witnesses to God’s work and word, to the God who alone rules.1

Gabriel and the m an in linen bringing God’s revelation Gabriel (8:16; 9:21) is the first named angel in the Bible, though only one o f a number who appear in older parts of 1 Enoch. He brings God’s message to Daniel concerning the 61

The Powers o f Heaven

limits to affliction. His human appearance is stressed (as we have noted, his name “mighty man of G od” draws attention to it). It is thus unlikely that he is described as flying in Daniel 9:21. The notion that angels have wings derives from later confusion between angels, who are human in appear­ ance, and cherubim or seraphim. It may be Gabriel who appears again in Daniel 10, where we get the fullest account o f heavenly beings bringing G od’s revelation. A man in linen appears to Daniel. Linen is the garb o f a priest, so it seems here that the servant o f the heavenly temple also concerns himself with the affairs o f its earthly equivalent. But his appearance is o f such dazzling brightness and awesome splendor (paralleling the appear­ ance o f G od in Ezekiel 1, from which it derives) that it inspires a holy terror and deathlike trance in Daniel and his companions— almost as if they have seen G od and all but lose their lives as a consequence.2 Although his role is similar to that o f Gabriel, he has also been linked with the manlike figure o f Daniel 7 and with Michael; but there are no specific grounds for identifying him with one o f these figures. A s in Daniel 7, the scene in Daniel 10 has the allusiveness which often characterizes vi­ sion reports and which no doubt characterizes the visionary experience itself, and we must accept this allusiveness, which heightens the awesomeness of what is described. N or is it clear whether it is the man in linen who continues to speak in 10:16-20 or whether other figures speak there, though 12:5,6 makes explicit that two other “men” are also present at the scene.

The leaders of the nations Daniel 7 and 8 contain some allusive references to the heavenly army which is in some sense identified with Israel, DANIEL

62

but the theme is treated most explicitly (though still not entirely clearly) in Daniel 10,11. The O ld Testament assumes that the results o f battles on earth reflect the involvement o f heaven. Usually the picture is o f heavenly forces aiding Israel and enabling them to win against otherwise overwhelming earthly forces. W hen Israel loses, the presupposition will be that Yahweh fights against them. A few passages suggest that there are heavenly forces that oppose Yahweh, so that earthly battles reflect battles in heaven; whichever side wins in heaven, the equivalent wins on earth. Daniel 10:13 and 10:20-11:1 describe a struggle between heavenly beings, though the nature o f the struggle is again described allusively. Among those involved are the “leaders” or “kings” of Persia, Greece, and Israel; the passage uses ordinary Hebrew words for “leaders” and “kings” (as in 11:5) to refer in each case to a celestial being. Perhaps that hints at the idea that all entities that embody power have something human, earthly, structural, political, and visible about them, and also something heavenly, invisible, suprahuman, imma­ terial, and spiritual. They have an inner and an outer aspect, an outer form and an inner driving spirit. Israel’s leader is Michael (an ordinary Hebrew name); he is also described as “one o f the supreme leaders.” The conflict in heaven might be a verbal, legal one (cf. Zech 3) or might be a “physical” one. The speaker himself is acting as God’s messenger to Daniel, but he is also involved in the conflict in heaven—hence his return to resume the fight to ensure that Persia continues to be restrained from adversely affecting God’s purpose. But he warns that in due course the Greek leader will seek to implement his own purpose— that will be the heavenly equivalent to the Greeks attempting to implement their will, which also threatens God’s purpose.

63

The Powers o f Heaven

It is not that Persians or Greeks are consciously against G od or against Israel; Israel just happens to be in their way. The messenger and Michael are on the same side because of the messenger’s general concern with the fulfillment of G od’s purpose and because o f Michael’s particular involve­ ment with Israel. This is thus not the first occasion when they have made common purpose (11:1). Daniel does not think about history in a dualistic way. He is quite clear that God is sovereign in heaven and on earth. No other power rivals God. The divine purpose can be op­ posed and delayed, but not frustrated. Nor does Daniel imply that the real decisions about history are made in heaven, so that human acts make no difference to what happens. The revelation about Hellenistic history which follows makes clear that human beings are responsible for history. Armies have to fight as if the battle on the earthly plane alone counts. On the other hand, monistic thinking about history, which is more usual in our world, is an oversimplification. History is not merely the outworking o f human decisions. Not only do free human decisions contribute to the achievement of God’s purpose. The purposes of kings and nations are more than merely the decisions o f particular human beings. Something in the realm o f the spirit lies behind them. So the idea of the leaders o f the nations provides a way of thinking about history as people actually experience it. H is­ tory involves conflicts between peoples, which seem to reflect more than merely human factors—-for instance, it in­ volves unexpected victories in which one is inclined to see the hand of God and unexpected defeats in which the prom­ ises o f God seem not to be fulfilled. The power of the leader o f Persia mirrors Persia’s actual political power. The idea of the leaders o f the nations is a way of expressing the fact that diere is more to history and to reality than we can see: both individuals and states are more than merely themselves as historical realities. D A N IEL

64

The leaders must somehow be under God’s ultimate con­ trol. They are not demonic opponents. But neither are they simply God’s heavenly obedient servants. The job o f the leader of Persia is to represent Persian interests in a world in conflict “It has the right to contest for the best interests o f the Persian empire narrowly defined”; the leaders are not “idealized personifications” o f their nations, but “represent the actual spirituality and possibilities o f actual entities.”3 The notion o f conflict between the nations’ “leaders” also links with another experience we have with history. O ften events work out despite the intentions of the nations rather than through them. W hat nations do, for good or ill, is not always what they were planning to do. It is as if some power other than themselves shapes their destiny. The O ld Testa­ ment, of course, believes that Yahweh is this ultimate power. We will consider this theme further as we ponder the way Daniel looks at history.

65

The Powers o f Heaven

7

PERSPECTIVES ON HISTORY

We have seen in chapter 1 that this short book encom­ passes an extraordinarily wide historical sweep. History is not merely its background and context but its subject It is concerned with the meaning o f history and with the rela­ tionship between G od and history. In particular, it offers a series o f portrayals and assessments o f Middle-Eastern his­ tory beginning with the Exile.

History in its richness and diversity, its unity and weakness In Daniel 2, history to come is portrayed in a vision con­ cerning a statue made of four metals, which together sum up the variety o f valuable natural resources. Gold and silver sug­ gest what is majestic and precious, bronze and iron suggest what is strong and hard. The elements o f the statue stand for regimes which are to rule the Middle East, though the precise identity o f these is not made specific. A s we shall see, the identification o f the four regimes in Daniel 7 is easier; they are 67

Perspectives on History

a sequence o f empires lasting from the sixth century B .c. to the second. But one cannot necessarily infer (as interpreters generally do) that the interpretation o f Daniel 7 can be read back into Daniel 2. I myself think it is more likely that Daniel 2 refers to a sequence o f sixth-century kings. But it is important to grasp that Daniel 2 is more allusive than Daniel 7, and that no one can really be dogmatic about it. The point it is making does not depend on identifying the precise regimes to which it is referring. The statue stands for four regimes, and four is commonly a symbolic number suggesting completeness; it might not refer to precisely four reigns. The statue embodies a manyfaceted power, splendor, strength, and impressiveness— until we come to the feet, partly made o f clay pottery. This alien element suggests weakness and transience, the antithe­ sis o f the power and strength indicated by the metals. It threatens the stability o f the otherwise powerful edifice which towers above it. The unity o f the statue implies that the empire which the statue represents is one empire, ruled at the moment by Nebuchadnezzar but destined to pass to a sequence o f fu­ ture rulers. It was Nebuchadnezzar who brought to an end the rule o f Judah by the descendants o f David through whom G od had promised to rule there; he was the first gentile ruler directly to control Israel’s destiny. Beginning in his day the Jews are part o f secular history. Yet this does not mean that history is working against G od’s purpose and will. The sequence o f Middle-Eastern kings under which the Jews will henceforth live stands under G od’s sover­ eignty in the same real, though indirect, way as Judah’s own kings had. G od sets these kings’ story in motion; G od ter­ minates i t 1 There is a Persian scheme parallel to that suggested by the statue, which also pictures human epochs by means o f metals. DANIEL

68

It is possible that this scheme sees the mixed iron-and-clay age as the period of domination by demons.2 Daniel makes a striking contrast; his message continues on the human plane, there being no suggestion of a cosmic dual­ ism of good and evil forces, even when it speaks in terms of heavenly powers as well as earthly powers (see chapter 6). The rule o f gentile peoples over Jews is God-given, yet it is ulti­ mately to be brought to an end and replaced by the imple­ menting of God’s own direct rule (2:44). Postexilic history belongs to God as it unfolds and as it comes to its end.

History as a concentration of disorder Daniel’s vision of history is expressed on the broadest canvas in the vision in Daniel 7. It begins with the four winds o f the heavens stirring up the Great Sea, from which there emerge one by one onto the shore four strange and fearsome animals. In ordinary speech, the four winds could be just the ordinary winds that come from the four points o f the compass, while the Great Sea is a standard expression for the Mediterranean. Daniel’s vision invites us, then, to stand with him near the shore o f the Mediterranean at a spot such as the promontory at Jaffa where the waters crash onto the Rock o f Andromeda. Gales whirl from every direction and arouse the sea to a turbulent swell. But the motifs of fear­ some animals combined with those of wind and sea suggest that this is no ordinary seaside scene: they recall mythic material from Babylon and Canaan already reflected in ear­ lier parts of the Old Testament. There is a famous Babylonian account of how the world came to be created, which tells of rebellious monsters bom from the primeval ocean, and o f the sea monster being de­ stroyed by being burst by the winds. Similar motifs are fea­ tured in a parallel myth from Ugarit, a Canaanite city to the north o f Israel. Here, too, the forces o f chaos and disorder 69

Perspectives on History

are embodied first in the Sea, then in the seven-headed dragon, Leviathan, which Baal, the hero of the story, defeats and kills. In the O ld Testament, motifs such as these appear in the Psalms, where the powers o f evil asserting themselves in opposition to Israel and to God’s concern for order are also represented by the sea or the sea monster, which G od de­ stroys (e.g., Pss 9; 29; 46; 93). They reappear in the prophets, who are more explicitly concerned with the way the forces o f disorder are embodied in history when Israel experiences the collapse o f order in the world (e.g., Isa 51:9,10, in the context o f the Exile). The author o f Israel’s own account o f creation in Genesis 1 was apparently also aware o f the Baby­ lonian creation story, because at a number o f points Genesis 1 seems to be combating the false Babylonian picture, which Jews in exile in Babylon might have been tempted to find impressive. And Genesis 1 begins with that supernatural power o f G od which is embodied in the wind hovering over the watery Deep— though the animals that the Word o f G od then calls forth are “good” rather than sinister. Against this background, Daniel’s talk of four winds, heav­ ing sea, and huge animals must point to supernatural forces. The winds suggest the power o f God effecting the will o f God in history; the sea suggests the dense concentration o f energy which threatens to disrupt and overwhelm order in history; the animals suggest the embodiment o f that threatening en­ ergy in particular beings. Four winds and four animals indi­ cate the world-encompassing totality o f divine power and disorderly energy (cf. the fourfold stream o f Gen 2:10). The vision suggests both that the process o f history is an unsavory, unnatural, dark, and unreassuring one, and that the entities which embody its disorder are nevertheless called forth by God. It is on this basis that Daniel’s visions can join with the lament psalms in asking “How long will you make things work out this way?” There is a sense in DANIEL

70

which the whole o f history is called forth by God, yet the bulk o f it (as the sequence o f animals suggests) proceeds in a way which reveals no pattern or meaning, and no salvation history. The sequence begins with a creature that combines fea­ tures o f a lion, an eagle, and a man, a creature which stands for Babylon itself, the major power of Daniel’s own day and the power that had actually terminated the independent na­ tional life o f the people o f Yahweh by abolishing its monar­ chy and ruling it from Babylon. It ends with a fearful and terrifying creature which is not likened to any other, as the first three creatures are; it may actually be an elephant Evi­ dently the fourth regime is again a powerful and violent one, particularly when headed by its final king, a man o f arrogant spirit and persecuting tendency, symbolized by an extra, small horn which appears on the beast and grows to be very great W ho is this king? In the next vision, which follows on in content from this one, the “small horn” (8:9; cf. 7:8) is clearly Antiochus Epiphanes. This suggests that the fourth regime in Daniel 7 is the Greek Empire and that here, if not in Daniel 2, the histor­ ical perspective o f Daniel’s vision indeed spans the period from the sixth century to the second (see further the discus­ sion of Daniel 7 in chapter 8 below). The second and third animals might then stand for the Medo-Persian Empire and that o f Alexander (the fourth denoting the Hellenistic em­ pires which succeeded Alexander). More likely they stand for the Medes and the Persians considered as two separate em­ pires (the fourth denoting the Greek empire as a whole). Admittedly historians normally reckon these as one em­ pire during this period, as other chapters of Daniel refer to Medo-Persian law as if the Medes and Persians are one rule. What is apparently happening here, however, is that Daniel’s vision is utilizing a well-known “scheme” picturing history as divided into four ages, such as the one mentioned above 71

Perspectives on History

in connection with the statue in Daniel 2. The author is not primarily concerned with literally precise history and is willing to “stretch” history in order to be able to use the scheme he wishes to adopt—as happens with the 490 years in Daniel 9, and with other figures elsewhere in Scripture (see e.g., the 480 years o f 1 Kings 6:1 or the triple series o f 14 generations in Matt 1).

History as an experience of wrath A s we have just noted, Daniel 8 explicitly sees itself as following on Daniel 7 (see 8:1) and by implication invites us to see it as clarifying some o f the allusiveness o f that previous vision. Thus the kings to follow the Babylonians are explic­ itly Median, Persian, and Greek (8:21); the small horn is now indisputably Antiochus Epiphanes, and the crisis which hints at the End is the collection o f events which took place in Jerusalem in the 160s. The kings are now animals fighting each other, animals which thus symbolize national powers full o f aggressive strength. The origins of their human power do not come into focus here; there is no indication that it is either demonic or within the purpose of God. The vision reveals not the origin o f human power but its destiny. H om s, and the human strength they symbolize, are strong yet also strangely vulnerable.3 Each mighty, even ap­ parently unassailable human power is in due course broken by another— sometimes at the height o f its achievement, as if the effort involved in that achievement proves too much. G od can thus afford to view this process with distanced disdain; the nations will determine their own destinies. The pattem of history is then not one imposed on it by God from outside but one in which the arrogance of power works itself out as one empire arouses the envy o f another

DANIEL

72

which challenges and defeats the one which has grown ex­ cessively powerful. The postexilic period as a whole is a period of “wrath” (8:19). It is not one o f rebelliousness on Israel’s part like the time which led up to the Exile. Yet throughout the postexilic period Israel experiences harshness and affliction, perhaps in that G od is still punishing them for the sin that led to the Exile (cf. 9:24?), perhaps simply in that their enemies are treating them with hostility (cf. 11:30 for Antiochus’s wrath). Either way, there is a striking contrast between the promise set before people in the sixth century by a prophet such as Zechariah, who implied that the Exile as a time of wrath was about to end (e.g., Zech 1:12-17), and the experi­ ence o f the postexilic period as Daniel envisions it, where it is not a time o f God’s comfort but o f G od’s continuing absence.4

History as Israel’s continuing exile Daniel 9 begins with Daniel wondering about the fulfill­ ment o f a prophecy which Jeremiah uttered just before the fall o f Jerusalem (see Jeremiah 29:10). Some people had al­ ready been taken into exile, and Jeremiah was writing to urge them to settle down in Babylon— there was going to be no immediate return home. One suspects he sent a copy to the people still living in Jerusalem, who also still needed to take seriously his warnings about God’s judgm ent The prophecy thus spoke o f an exile which would last seventy years before people could return. The point was not a prediction o f an exile o f seventy rather than sixty-nine or seventy-one years, but a warning that exile would last a normal person’s life­ time, so that hardly any who went into exile would return. In the event, the beginnings o f the return from Exile in 537 took place not far from 70 actual years after Judah’s 73

Perspectives on History

submission to Babylon in 605, while the rebuilding o f the temple after the Exile (520-516) took place not far from 70 actual years after the final fall o f Jerusalem in 587. Thus 2 Chronicles 36:22 and Ezra 1:1 see the events o f 537 as the fulfillment o f Jeremiah’s prophecy, and Zechariah 1:12 and 7:5 imply the same connection with the period o f the re­ building o f the temple. Daniel 9, too, pictures Daniel himself wondering about the fulfillment o f the prophecy, apparently in 539. A t this point, as at others, however, the message in Daniel’s vision relates to events in the 160s. Far from being over within a year or two, as people expected around the time o f the fall of Jerusalem, exile and desolation have continued over centuries. While Jews were free to return and rebuild the temple, independence and prosperity never returned to Palestine; indeed, as the events o f the second century un­ folded, oppression and desolation increased rather than di­ minished. So how did history and prophecy match? When will G od terminate Israel’s exile? The answer comes by setting Jeremiah’s prophecy along­ side other warnings about exile in Leviticus 26, a chapter which speaks o f a sevenfold judgment on sin. In this light, it was quite possible to see why exile should continue way be­ yond the seventy unkept sabbath years that were due to be exacted (2 Chron 36:21). It could appropriately continue seven times seventy years, or four hundred and ninety years. Gabriel thus explains to Daniel that actually “seventy sev­ ens have been assigned for your people and for your sacred city” (9:24). Since Jeremiah’s seventy years originally de­ noted not a precise chronological period but rather such a time as would see the passing o f virtually everyone who was alive when he spoke, similarly Gabriel would hardly be sug­ gesting 490 years rather than 489 or 491. That is also implied by the slightly enigmatic nature o f the phrase “seventy sevens” (the word “years” does not appear). DANIEL

74

Indeed, after the symbolic time periods in Daniel 7 and 8 (see chapter 9) we would half-expect another symbolic time meas­ ure rather than a chronological one here. So we are not sur­ prised to discover that the figures have to be massaged if Gabriel’s prophecy is to be applied to any chronological pe­ riod o f precisely four hundred and ninety years. The figure is a symbolic one, suggesting a period during which God’s judg­ ment is exacted in full measure. It lasts much longer than was originally envisaged, but it is not interminable and not out of God’s control.

History in its insignificance Daniel 11 gives the details o f secular history more place than any other chapter in Daniel, yet renders history essen­ tially meaningless. The great historian H. A. L. Fisher con­ fessed, “I am unable to find any meaning in history.” Shakespeare’s Macbeth would agree: Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, creeps in this petty pace from day to day, to the last syllable o f recorded time . . . a tale told by an idiot, full o f sound and fury, signifying nothing. It is an attitude toward history very different from that o f most O ld Testament prophets and psalmists, which we noted at the beginning o f chapter 3 above. History unfolds as a pointless sequence o f invasions, battles, schemes and frustrations. Military power and political maneuvering are central themes, but military issues are not always settled by the size o f an army and political schemes come to nothing. It is a tale o f selfishness, irrationality, and chance. Once four great empires contained one another by each terminating 75

Perspectives on History

the rule of the last. Now two great empires mutually contain each other by frustrating each other’s aspirations to wider rule over a period of centuries and thus protect each other from the ultimate arrogance which must provoke G od to intervene. Beyond that, neither the hand of justice nor the hand o f God is visible in this history. The vision’s account matches the experience we often have o f history. The his­ tory o f the postexilic period, like our history, only has mean­ ing as one looks back at it in the light of a revelation of G od’s purpose which cannot be read off from history itself.

D A N IEL

76

8

THE TIME OF CRISIS

Critical study o f die Book o f Daniel has sometimes sug­ gested that the whole purpose o f the book was to address the crisis which came about in Jerusalem between 175 and 164 B.C., during the reign o f Antiochus Epiphanes. That is an exaggeration. Daniel 1-6 as a whole lacks any specific indication that this is the situation which the stories address, and offers many circumstantial indications that it is not. The stories’ portrait o f Nebuchadnezzar and their account o f the possibility o f faithful but successful service in the state hardly suggest that they were created to speak to that second-century situation. Antiochus is quite different from Nebuchadnezzar and the experience o f Jewish leaders in their relationship with the state in second-century Jerusalem was quite different from that o f Daniel and his friends in dispersion. The visions in the second half o f the book, however, do focus with increasing intensity on events in Jerusalem between 175 and 164.

77

The Tim e of C risis

The attack on the holy ones The fourth o f the fearsome animals in Daniel’s first vi­ sion (Daniel 7) sprouted ten horns (standing for the kings o f the Hellenistic Empires which succeeded the empire o f Alexander), and then grew a further small horn which stood for Antiochus. Three o f the ten horns are said to be uprooted before this small horn. W hile the “ten” may pos­ sibly be ten particular kings (e.g., those o f the Seleucid line), it may more likely be a round figure which should not be pressed. “Three,” however, looks more specific, though inter­ preters have varied in how they interpret the reference. Per­ haps the most likely candidates for the three places are Antiochus’s elder brother and predecessor Seleucus IV (for whose violent end Antiochus may have been thought in some way responsible), Seleucus’s eldest son Demetrius who was displaced by Antiochus in 175, and Seleucus’s younger son, also called Antiochus, who was proclaimed king and acted as co-regent with Antiochus IV for five years but was eventually killed, allegedly at Antiochus’s instigation. We have suggested in the previous chapter that the fourth empire in Daniel 7 is Greece and that the small horn on the animal which represents the Greek Empire is Antiochus Epiphanes, even though the portrait in Daniel 7 in isolation is too allusive actually to require that identification. Many commentators have reckoned that the fourth empire was Rome and that the small horn was thus some Roman figure. But that view depends on taking Daniel 7 in isolation from the rest o f the visions, and in particular on assuming that the small horn o f Daniel 7 and the small horn o f Daniel 8 are different figures. In fact, they are very similar. In Daniel 7 the small horn behaves in an impressive and humanlike way, comes to look bigger than the others, makes war on holy beings, and DANIEL

78

prevails over them. The king it represents makes statements hostile to G od and plans to change times set by decree, and those times (or perhaps those holy beings) are given into his control for a time limited to “three and a half periods” until his authority is taken away by God’s judgment. In Daniel 8 the small horn grows in several directions, attacks the celes' tial army, and overthrows some o f it It grows within reach o f the army commander, attacks the sanctuary itself, and is given control o f the daily offerings for a time limited to twenty-three hundred evenings and mornings, until it is broken by supernatural power. The interpretation further emphasizes the king’s trickery, power, and destructiveness. The features o f the two accounts o f the small horn are thus essentially similar: its size and strength, its partially successful attack on the holy/celestial beings, its interfer­ ence in God’s own realm, and the promise that its power has a limit set to it The different images and details in the accounts o f the small horn complement each other. In Daniel 8 it grows from one of four horns instead o f in the midst often : that is, Daniel 8 draws attention to Antiochus’s links with the four “parent” post-Alexander kingdoms instead o f his links with the long Seleucid and Ptolemaic lines. The differences between the two chapters do not mean that the portraits are at all in conflict. While they could denote different kings, juxtaposed in the same book they more naturally denote the same king. Given that the small horn in Daniel 8 is Antiochus, then, this is also the natural understanding o f Daniel 7. It is also the understanding presupposed by the oldest allusion to Daniel 7, in a section o f the Jewish work called the Sibylline Oracles which comes from a period not long after Antiochus. It is also presupposed by 2 Esdras, a later Jewish work from after the fall o f Jerusalem in A.D. 70. In 2 Esdras 12:10-12 G od explains to “Ezra,” “the eagle you saw rising from the sea represents the fourth kingdom in the 79

The Tim e o f C risis

vision seen by your brother Daniel. But he was not given the interpretation which I am now giving you. . . . ” Then God goes on to describe the Romans. 2 Esdras is explicit, then, that the understanding o f the fourth empire as the Romans was not Daniel’s own but a later, inspired reinterpretation o f the vision’s original meaning. It is this reinterpretation which is presupposed in the New Testament. But it is overtly a reinterpretation of the vision’s original meaning. The fourth animal’s small horn has features which mark it as more than merely animal. It looks like a human being and speaks impressively (7:8). In due course it will become clear that these are the looks and words o f covetousness with regard to worldly power and arrogance before G od (7:20,25). Antiochus’s attempt “to change times set by decree” (7:25) are often reckoned to involve the imposition o f a new calen­ dar (a 360-day lunar calendar to replace the 364-day solar one). Such issues were o f great importance in certain circles during the second century, but the more detailed accounts o f Antiochus’s interfering with Jewish religious matters o f which we read in succeeding chapters do not refer to changes in the calendar. Conversely it would be strange for Daniel 7 to single out one such feature o f Antiochus’s policy. More likely “changing the times” has the same meaning as it had earlier (2:21): it refers to deciding how history unfolds and how one regime follows another. These things are fixed by G od’s decree. In forcing his way to the throne and bull­ dozing his way through history Antiochus has defied G od’s shaping o f history and taken the helm o f history for himself.

The desolating rebellion We have seen that Daniel 8 views the postexilic period as a whole as a period o f wrath. It draws towards its close with Antiochus, as the story of the four Hellenistic empires itself D A N IEL

80

draws to a close (8:19, 23). Antiochus is portrayed as a per­ son o f ruthless boldness and artful cleverness (8:23-25). These are not mere randomly observed aspects o f a particu­ lar person’s character, but key elements in the standard por­ trayal of a wicked tyrant. He fulfills all that people dreaded o f the ultimate despot. Antiochus is described both as attacking the heavenly powers and as interfering with the worship o f the earthly sanctuary, halting the system o f regular offerings and sus­ pending the authority o f the Torah over Israel (8:10-12). These two acts are not independent or separate events: an attack on the Jerusalem temple, on the Israelite people, and on the priesthood is implicitly an attack on the G od who is worshiped there and on his supernatural associates who identify with Israel. Antiochus’s actual cultic innovation is described as “the desolating rebellion” (8:13); the similar expression “desolating abomination” appears in later visions (9:27; 11:31; 12.T1). These terms apparently parody the name o f the god B a'al Shamem, “Lord of heaven,” whose worship Antiochus intro­ duced into the temple. Antiochus perhaps believed that he could be identified with the God the Jews worshipped. “Rebellion” or “abomination” replaces B a'al, indicating a theological evaluation of Antiochus’s religious innovation— it is an act of rebellion against the true God, an act of mon­ strous sacrilege. “Desolating” (shomem) replaces “heaven” (shamem) because both words have the same letters, though they are pronounced differently. Again the replacement word offers a judgment of Antiochus’s actions. He brings desola­ tion to city and sanctuary (see 8:24,25; 9:26). Daniel does not give a straightforward, literal description o f what Antiochus actually introduced into the temple. It has often been understood as an image o f the god (or of Antiochus himself), but the account in 1 Maccabees 1 points rather to a rebuilding o f the actual altar to serve its new god. 81

The Tim e of Crisis

Either way, the rebelliousness which preoccupies Daniel’s visions is not Israel’s but the nations’. It is a rebelliousness which “reaches full measure” with Antiochus (cf. 8:23): the image suggests that G od is forbearing with the sin o f gen­ tiles, but that this involves allowing their sin to reach an extreme form which then necessitates a radical punishment which will also mean deliverance and blessing for Israel (cf. Genesis 15:16). Jesus and Paul take up the m otif o f rebels reaching full measure and apply it to the Jewish people, in the light o f their refusal to recognize Jesus (Matt 23:32; 1 Thess 2:16). Presumably, the m otif’s openness to being reapplied that way means it can be reapplied again to the Church if it turns its back on G od’s way (cf. Rom 11:17-22). A s well as being a call to loyalty under persecution, Daniel’s vision is thus also a call to humility and repentance on the part o f people not under persecution.

The seventieth seven Israel’s continuing exile reaches its lowest point in the events from 171-164 (seven chronological years!); but this will also be the time which sees its termination. Some specific indication o f the events o f this last “seven” appears in Gabriel’s closing words (9:26,27). It is a time o f devastation, battle, and desolation: such is the seriousness o f the trouble brought to people, city, and temple by the com­ bined forces o f heathen ruler(s) and usurper priest(s). The terms used to describe these events show that this crisis is seen as an anticipatory embodiment of the last great battle, a historical embodiment o f the first great battle be­ tween the forces of chaos and the forces o f order. Specifically, Gabriel speaks o f an anointed being cut off (presumably the high priest Onias III, displaced in 175 and killed in 171). His losing city and sanctuary sounds like a reference to Onias’s DANIEL

82

displacement and withdrawal for safety to Daphne, near An­ tioch, where he was eventually killed; it is this event which marks the beginning of the last seven years o f trouble. The “leader to come” who follows Onias is then Jason, who suc­ ceeded him as high priest and both corrupted and devastated the people of Jerusalem. The passage highlights the trouble brought to faithful Jews by fellow-Jews whom they saw as collaborating with gentile oppressors as well as by these oppressors them­ selves. It is probably this unholy alliance between reformist Jews and Antiochus that is the “covenant” which “prevails for the multitude”— virtually meaning “prevails against them,” the multitude being the main body o f Jews who wanted to remain loyal to the Torah. Halfway through the final “seven” during which this al­ liance is operative, the regular worship o f the temple is suspended and Antiochus’s repellant alternative is imposed, as Daniel 8 has already described. The desolating abomina­ tion appears “on a wing”— more likely indicating something Antiochus put on the altar with its winglike com ers than something he put on the temple roof with its winglike “pinnacles.” Devastation o f this kind must continue to over­ whelm desolate Jerusalem until what G od has decreed is exhausted.

The king who asserts himself Daniel’s last vision covers once again the same ground as the previous ones, but does so at each point in more detail. It tells us more about the detail o f events in the history o f the Middle East under the Hellenistic kings, more about the suffering o f the Jews in the 160s, and more about their vindication at the End. In chapter 1 we have noted the outline o f Antiochus’s involvement with the Jews as Daniel 11 relates it. From the 83

The Tim e o f C risis

beginning (11:21) the account implies a value judgment re­ garding Antiochus, a man whom no one would initially take any account o f because he had no right to the throne, but who carved a way to power with consummate ease by skillful diplomacy. From the beginning, too, the account puts its focus on his extraordinary military achievements in his relationship with Egypt, his intervention in matters which Jews saw as religious but which Antiochus will have seen as matters o f state, and his success in winning the allegiance of certain groups in Judea. These were people who in return for a share in the exercise o f power in internal Jewish affairs would cooperate with his policies and should be capable of ensuring that those policies were actually implemented in Jerusalem. The evaluation becomes most overt with 11:36-39. A s in other chapters, Antiochus is assumed to be attacking not merely a people and its religion but God. He acts as he pleases (and that standard description o f apparently unchal­ lengeable authority is one that regularly presages unexpected disaster). He exalts himself and magnifies himself. The verbs are ones only used in the Bible o f G od on the one hand, and on the other o f human beings who impiously assert them­ selves against G od and have judgment declared on them. Antiochus proclaimed himself Antiochus IV Epiphanes, “[God] Manifest,” used the title “G od” on coins, applied symbols o f deity to himself, plundered temples, and inter­ vened in religious matters in his realm. None o f this was peculiar to him; like leaders every­ where, Hellenistic kings regularly associated themselves closely with religion in various ways, to support their posi­ tion. If Antiochus took his divinity more seriously than most, as some scholars have thought, the reason may have been as political as the considerations that shaped other aspects o f his policies. It helped to bind his empire together

DANIEL

84

and to bind it to him. For Antiochus, as for other kings, religion was— among other things— the servant o f his po­ litical position. “The god o f his fathers” and “the god women love” (11:37) are probably key gods o f the northern and southern realms. The former would have been Apollo, whom Anti­ ochus replaced with Zeus as the god o f the Seleucid dynasty, to provide religious support for the irregularity involved in his becoming king. It is Zeus who is subsequently described as the “stronghold god” (11:38,39), as he was the god wor­ shiped as B a al Shamem by the Syrian garrison in Jerusalem. “The god women love” would then have been a god specially favored in Egypt, Adonis or Dionysus, who was slighted by Antiochus’s various encroachments on the southern kingdom. It was not only in his dealings with Jews that Antiochus subordinated religion to politics. It seems likely that early in Antiochus’s reign, either on Antiochus’s initiative or on that o f reformist Jews, the constitutional position o f Jerusalem was changed. It ceased to be the cen­ ter o f a community governing itself in accordance with its own laws (the Torah) and became á Hellenistic city-state like others by which Antiochus controlled his empire. Its citizenship would then comprise those who accepted a H el­ lenistic way o f life. Reform ist Jews might be able to see this as involving no compromise over essential tenets o f Jewish faith, but conservative Jews would view it as abandonment o f the Torah and o f the terms Yahweh had set for Israel’s covenant relationship, which excluded covenants with other peoples. The developments in Antiochus’s policies noted in chapter 1 eventually led, however, to the suspension o f regular Jewish worship and the setting up o f the “desolating abomination” already discussed in connection with Daniel 8 and 9. It seems that Jews who had been able to accept the

85

The Tim e of C risis

establishment o f a Hellenistic community now found them­ selves drawn into cooperation with a policy that no doubt went beyond their original expectations or desires. To Jews who had rejected such developments from the beginning, the abominations o f Antiochus were a provocation to which G od had to respond. They heralded the End.

DANIEL

86

9

THE END

A t the time when Nebuchadnezzar had his first dream, Daniel was able to tell him that his thoughts “concerned what is to happen in the future” (2:29): he was wondering how events would unfold over coming years and even after his own day. Nebuchadnezzar himself perhaps remembered as much about the night o f his dream, even if he could not remember the dream’s content, and he had that much check on purported reconstructions and interpretations of his dream. Daniel was also able to tell him that his dream related to “the end of the era” (2:28); Nebuchadnezzar may not have known th at “The end o f the era” is literally “the end o f the days,” a phrase that comes fourteen times in the O ld Testament. The word for “end” denotes not a single moment (Hebrew and Aramaic have other words with that meaning), but the last part or the aftermath o f something. “The days” are a period which may be long but will not be interminable, a period which will or must elapse before certain predic­ tions, promises, or warnings come true. “The end o f the 87

The End

days” is thus the time o f the fulfillment of these promises or warnings. This fulfillment may come at the End of the Age, but o f itself “the end o f the days” does not have an eschato­ logical meaning. It only acquires this association through being used in contexts which refer to the End. So Daniel points us toward a special significance attaching to the last part o f Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. It thus intro­ duces a feature which we have noted in a number o f the visions: they presuppose a setting in the Exile, but look beyond that to events in some generations’ time which will bring history to its climax.

The rock hewn from, a crag and the rule of God The fourth regime pictured by Nebuchadnezzar’s dream has a crushing power but an unexpected fragility, which it cannot mend in a lasting way (2:40-43). W hatever the iden­ tity o f this regime, its significance is to reveal that the imperial colossus will not stand for ever. It will be replaced not by a fifth regime but by a quite different sovereignty (v 44). There is no suggestion that it is Israel that exercises this rule; the sovereignty is G od’s own, apparently directly exer­ cised by God. The vision’s promise concerning the End is that God’s rule o f the world (often symbolized in the Old Testament in terms o f a mountain: see e.g., Isaiah 2:2,3) will then at last become reality. This will only come about by the act of God; in that sense it is heavenly and supernatural. But it will come about on earth, not merely in heaven. G od will change the Lordship o f this world, but not abandon this world. The qualities o f its new rule are not defined except by saying that it is G od’s and that it lasts, both qualities which contrast with those o f its predecessors. DANIEL

88

The humanlike figure and the rule of a holy people In the further vision of four regimes in Daniel 7, the last is again a powerful and violent one, particularly when headed by its final king, a man of arrogant spirit and persecuting tendency. A t the height of his achievement, however, G od’s court sits and declares judgment on him (7:11). This follows a person’s taking his seat on a throne (7:9,10). He is someone advanced in years and thus august and venera­ ble, judicious and wise, and someone o f bright, luminous ap­ pearance and thus of splendor and nobility. Indeed, the flames and fire and the myriad attendants hint that he is more than a mere human being, though in other respects he is human in appearance. There is no indication that the loca­ tion has changed since the description o f the previous verses; the events apparently take place on earth. A s at the royal court, books o f record (such as decisions the king has made, obligations he has imposed, and policy he has determined) are consulted. O ur attention is then directed to the heavens, from where descends a second figure, to be presented at court (7:13). The expression used to describe him has been literalistically rendered “a son o f man,” but this misses the fact that the Aramaic phrase is a relatively ordinary one meaning “a hu­ man being.” It has the word “like” in front o f it, in the manner of the animals referred to in 7:4-6 and the supernat­ ural figures in 8:15 and 10:16, 18, so we might translate it “something like a human being” or “one in human likeness.” The word “like” adds a note of mystery to the visions. To describe the figure as humanlike does not indicate whether he is actually human (any more than is the case with the one advanced in years, who stands for God); the parallel with those other supernatural figures might indicate he

89

The End

Stands for a heavenly being. His human appearance indicates a contrast between him and the animals. Human status was granted to the first animal and grasped after by the small horn; it suggests being in a position o f authority in the world. Thus this humanlike figure is fittingly invested as king (7:14). He is given a sovereignty on earth like G od’s own, one which replaces that o f the entities symbolized by the animals. W hat does the vision refer to? It is clear enough that the one advanced in years stands for God. But even the explana­ tory part o f the vision is rather reticent concerning who the humanlike figure stands for. Verse 18 tells us that “holy ones on high will acquire the kingship,” without quite saying that the humanlike figure actually represents them and without telling us who the holy ones themselves are. “Holy” in the O ld Testament is not essentially a moral term; it denotes the distinctive, absolute transcendence of G od rather than God’s moral nature. The term “holy” is then by extension applied to other supernatural beings, to earthly entities associated with deity such as shrines and their personnel, to Israel as a people distinctively set apart by God, and to people within Israel who do actually realize the vocation to be distinctively G od’s. So here the “holy ones” who are symbolized by the humanlike figure and who re­ ceive the kingship could be supernatural beings, or Israel as a whole, or the priesthood, or a group o f the faithful within Israel. “O n high,” too, could refer to Israelites or to super­ natural beings, though the term is more often used in the latter connection. The supernatural overtones o f “humanlike figure” and “holy ones on high” suggest that these figures cannot stand simply for that down-to-earth Israel to which visionary and audience belong. The humanlike figure and the holy ones more likely stand for supernatural entities who take over authority in the world on God’s behalf. O n the other hand, DANIEL

90

if the figures do stand for heavenly beings, these will proba­ bly be ones associated with Israel in some way, like Michael in Daniel 10-12. They are not merely a supernatural people quite separate from Israel. But the allusiveness o f these elements in the vision needs to be honored. Daniel parallels other biblical prophecies, which regularly become symbolic and allusive when they move from portraying current history to portraying the ulti­ mate fulfillment o f God’s purpose. So Daniel affirms that the worldly kingdoms will be replaced by G od’s rule; he does not make explicit how. The ultimate events and reali­ ties to come cannot be described straightforwardly like the kingdoms the beasts represent.1 The humanlike figure and the holy ones take no active role in the drama. The humanlike figure is simply invested, without his acting or striving. Nor do the holy ones fight— at least, not successfully. It is their suffering that brings their attacker’s downfall. One is reminded o f G od’s disarming principalities and powers through Christ’s being crucified (Col 2:15). The promise o f the End in Daniel 7, then, presupposes a situation in which a wicked power crushes the world, vaunts itself against God, oppresses those who belong to God, and tries to turn the helm o f history its own way (7:23-25). This goes on for a period o f time, then for double that. Its self­ assertiveness seems capable o f continuing for much longer, perhaps for double that time again, so that it lasts seven periods altogether— in effect for an eternity (it seems un­ likely that the periods referred to in 7:25 can be directly translated into chronological lengths o f time). Just as that seemed possible, Calvin notes, G od then began to seat himself, as he had previously appeared to be passive, and not to exercise justice in the world. For when things are disturbed and mingled with 91

The End

much darkness, who can say, “G od reigns”? G od seems to be shut up in heaven, when things are discomposed and turbulent upon earth. O n the other hand, he is said to ascend his tribunal when he assumes to himself the office o f a judge, and openly demonstrates that he is neither asleep nor absent, though he has hid from hu­ man perception.2

The freedom of the sanctuary In the context o f the more specific (though still symbolic) account o f events in the 160s which comes in Daniel 8, again the question arises, “How long will this be allowed to last?” The cry o f the holy ones takes up the cry o f afflicted Israel, often expressed in lament psalms. The response to the cry is “two thousand three hundred days,” after which the sanctuary will “emerge in the right” or be vindicated (8:13,14). Perhaps the two thousand three hundred days should be connected with a period such as the one which lasted from the removal o f the high priest in 171 to the rededication o f the sanctuary in 164, or that which lasted from the cessation o f sacrifice in 167 to the victory o f Judas the Maccabee in 160 (see 1 Maccabees 7). But the three and a half periods o f time in 7:25 have a symbolic rather than a literally chronological significance, as do the seventy “sevens” o f 9:24-27; there is some evidence that twentythree is also a symbolic number in postexilic writings, so we may be mistaken in trying to connect two thousand three hundred days with a particular period o f literally that chronological length. Whatever the precise reference o f the two thousand three hundred days, the vision promises that the period o f afflic­ tion will not go on for ever. G od has set the moment for it to come to an end (8:19). Antiochus will mysteriously fall (8:25). H is end is not merely the fruit o f historical forces, like DANIEL

92

the passing o f power from one empire to another at earlier stages. Even if the historical forces which bring the downfall o f evil can be traced, there is something supernatural to it, as there was something demonic about Antiochus’s actions, and as heaven itself was hurt by his attacks on the people of G od and the sanctuary of God. The end o f his horrendous affliction will also be the End (8:17). It can be identified with the closing scene of the history of Israel and the nations (2:28) and the moment o f a final judgment (7:26). Yet it is not an end which means that human history comes to a stop. By speaking o f the restora­ tion o f the sanctuary as earlier chapters have spoken of a new kingship on earth (2:44; 7:14,18,27), the vision takes for granted that human history on earth will continue.

The end of Israel’s exile A s we noted in discussing the book’s portrayal o f postexilic history, Daniel 9 sees this history as a prolonging of the Exile. The experience o f desolation continues as G od con­ tinues to exact judgment on Israel for the sins which led to the frill o f Jerusalem. The “End” in Daniel 9 is thus the end o f that exile. The affirmation that exile will last for seventy years, or even seventy sevens [of years], becomes a promise that exile will therefore have a term to it. An end will come. Gabriel’s opening words already advertise that Israel’s ex­ ile will not be merely endless and pointless trouble. The seventy sevens are designed to achieve something. Indeed, Gabriel tells Daniel, by the end o f the seventy sevens six things will have been achieved “for your people and for your sacred city” (9:24). Those words indicate that the concern o f the promise is Israel and Jerusalem. It does not have a world­ wide perspective (except insofar as all that G od does with Israel affects the destiny o f the whole world). A s in previous chapters, the writer is not speaking o f the end o f all history; 93

The End

and when sin is referred to it is that o f Israel and her postexilic oppressors, not the sin o f all the world. Gabriel speaks first of three negative achievements: “to end the rebellion, to do away with failures, to wipe away wayward­ ness.” The three expressions are approximately synonymous. Wickedness is being characterized as rebellion against God’s authority, failure to achieve God’s standards, and wandering from the way God prescribes. It may be that the promise that wickedness will be brought to an end applies both to Israel’s wickedness, a central theme in the prayer which precedes this promise (9:4—19), and to Antiochus’s wickedness, more com­ monly the theme in these chapters. But here the agency or the subject o f wrongdoing is not in focus. Gabriel is concerned with the objective result of that wrongdoing, the sacrilege in the sanctuary which he promises will be rectified. Three positives correspond to the three negatives: the sev­ enty sevens have been assigned “to bring in lasting vindica­ tion, to seal a prophet’s vision, to anoint a most sacred place.” The vindication will be the vindication of the sanctuary, al­ ready referred to in 8:14 where the related verb has been used. The desecration of the sanctuary has cast a slur on it, which will now be removed. The prophetic vision which will thus be sealed will be the prophecy o f Jeremiah with which the chapter begins and ends; it will be fulfilled and thus con­ firmed by God’s act of salvation. The anointing o f a most sacred place will be the act which effects the reconsecration o f the sanctuary after it had been defiled by Antiochus; the expression here is the one used in connection with the origi­ nal consecration of the sanctuary (see e.g., Exodus 30:26-29).

The climax of wrath and the promise of life Daniel’s last vision affirms that the “End” is indeed com­ ing (11:27 ,3 5 ,4 0 ,4 5 ; 12:4, 6, 9 ,1 3 )— the word underlines DANIEL

94

the punctiliar, definitive fact and finality o f the reversal G od promises. But events must always await the “set ti me” (11:27,29,35; 12:7): G od is in control and G od’s purpose is at work even in the abominations and the afflictions o f the Antiochene period, preventing the king from fulfilling all his own purposes. It is a time o f wrath (11:36), a time o f un­ precedented trouble (12:1), a time o f awesome events (12:6); but the idea o f wrath being “complete” (11:36) implies that it cannot go on without limit. A t a recognizable moment (11:40) the prophecy moves from depiction o f actual historical events to a visionary sce­ nario o f judgment and redemption. The End actually arrives. This has led some readers to assume that at this point in Daniel 11 (or at some earlier point in the chapter) the vision ceases referring to Antiochus and from now on concerns the Antichrist But there is no hint in Daniel 11 o f such a change. O n the contrary, verse 40 declares that “the south­ ern king will engage in a struggle with him,” and the “him” must be the northern king of previous verses, Antiochus. There is indeed a sense in which Antiochus himself is a demonic figure, as there is a sense in which the people he attacks are a heavenly people. Yet Antiochus was not literally fighting angels; rather, that was the significance o f his attack­ ing people and sanctuary (see 8:10-12). The visible realities such as the Jewish people and the Jerusalem temple had a transcendent significance which Antiochus denied. Heaven and earth are not two separate, discontinuous, disconnected worlds. Each underlies the other. So also Antiochus is an embodiment o f demonic pretension, but Daniel is not refer­ ring to there being an independently existent supernatural being separate from Antiochus who is using him or is fore­ shadowed by him. Rather the fact that Antiochus is an em­ bodiment o f godless wickedness means that the language used o f him could be used o f the Antichrist or Satan, and a passage like this one can help us to understand something o f 95

The End

the significance o f the Antichrist or Satan even though it was not originally written about them. The pagan scholar Porphyry (some o f whose work on Daniel is known to us through quotations in a commentary by the church father Jerome) inferred that verses 40-45 de­ scribe how Antiochus actually died, but the trouble is they do n o t The portrayal does not correspond to what actually happened. 1 and 2 Maccabees give different accounts o f his death, but they agree that it took place (at the end o f 164) in the course o f a not-wholly-successful campaign in Persia. Now we are familiar with the fact that biblical prophecy does not generally give a literal advance portrayal o f events; Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah such as Isaiah 9:2-7 are not literal pictures o f Jesus. They are portraits painted in the light o f Scriptures that people knew already, promises that those Scriptures would come true. But they do not give a basis for working out precisely how G od will bring about salvation or judgment. We could not have predicted the pre­ cise nature of Jesus’ ministry from the prophecies that are fulfilled in him— it is only in retrospect that people were able to see him prophesied there. A s we have hinted in chapter 4 above, similarly the por­ trayal o f the northern king’s end in Daniel 11:40-45 is not shaped by the nature o f the bare events themselves, as they would turn out historically, as if Gabriel was offering a literal preview of these. It is shaped as a whole as well as in its detail by the Old Testament theme o f the attack o f a gentile foe who is defeated and killed near the gates o f Jerusalem (e.g., Psalms 2; 46; 48; 76), a theme already reworked in prophetic passages such as Isaiah 10; 14:24,25; 31; Ezekiel 38,39; Joel 2:20; Zechariah 14, as well as by the prophetic portrayals o f judgment on Egypt (Isa 19; Jer 43:8-13; 46; Ezek 29— 32). So the portrait is not a failed attempt to give a literal account o f how matters will end, but a reliable promise that God’s Word will be fulfilled. DANIEL

%

The seer thus imagines Antiochus’s deeds reaching even beyond anything we have read of already. He attempts at last to win the ultimate victory over the southern king. In the course of doing so, he recapitulates Nebuchadnezzar’s inva­ sion, sparing Israel’s old enemies who had been in a position to take advantage over Israel then. He goes on to fulfill the prophecies that envisaged Nebuchadnezzar’s final defeat of Egypt itself. But the moment of triumph again heralds downfall. The final battle takes place near the gates of Jerusalem, as it must, but the one who had schemed against an unsuspect­ ing and vulnerable people finds himself God’s victim.3 The medieval scholars who divided the Bible into chap­ ters introduced a chapter division at this point, but the text itself continues without a break. It continues to relate what "will happen “at that time” (12:1)—the time o f which the previous verses had spoken in describing the last great bat­ tle, involving Antiochus. There is no hint that Gabriel is referring to some far future moment. Rather he continues to speak o f the unprecedented “time o f trouble” which Antiochus brought to the Jewish people as he sought to terminate the worship o f the true G od and to annihilate God’s people. Gabriel now reveals the supernatural event which lies behind Antiochus’s defeat. Michael, Israel’s representative in heaven, arises in the heavenly court on Israel’s behalf to point out that their names can be found written in the Book, the citizen list of the true Jerusalem. They have no business to be thrust precipi­ tously into the realm o f death. It is Michael’s victory at this point over Antiochus’s heavenly representative that means Antiochus is defeated on earth and that Daniel’s people “escape”: perhaps from dying, perhaps from the realm o f the dead. Certainly Gabriel goes on to speak of many who have died coming back to life: He may refer to people who died during the Antiochene crisis even though they maintained their faithfulness to God, or may have in mind the bulk of 97

The End

faithful Jews (those who were martyred and those who were not). They will be vindicated; their faithful leaders will re­ ceive great honor to reverse the shame o f their humiliation and death (12:3). People who were not faithful yet seemed to triumph will also awake, but for condemnation. In these verses Gabriel continues to portray the future on the basis of Scripture; the vision’s imaginative portrayal is not an attempt at literal prediction. Further, Gabriel is continu­ ing to promise a solution to a specific historical problem. He is not offering a piece o f systematically formulated theological teaching but a comforting vision. The oppressive reign of Antiochus will not last forever. The one who epitomized god­ lessness will fell. The people who resist him will be vindi­ cated. Those for whom that vindication comes too late will be brought back to life to resume the life they had lost, while those who led them in the way o f faithfulness will shine like stars. It is a picture way of affirming that G od will see that truth, commitment, and faithfulness will be vindicated. The martyrs will not lose their share in the life, glory, joy, and fellowship o f the people of God (no individualistic vision o f resurrection, this). And in fulfillment o f Gabriel’s words, Antiochus and his supporters have not been forgotten, like most of the dead. Wherever the gospel of Daniel has been preached through the whole world, what these men did has been spoken o f and their memory perpetuated. It is striking that other peoples began to hope for new life after death long before the Jews. Perhaps G od wanted Israel to learn to take this life really seriously and not in­ dulge in pie-in-the-sky beliefs. The grounds for the affirma­ tion that Daniel now makes perhaps lie for him in the nature o f G od as the One who is faithful to oppressed Israel. But as the earlier history o f G od’s dealings with Israel shaped the way the Book o f Daniel saw events in the second century, so Daniel’s vision o f the awakening and vindication o f the holy and discerning martyr shaped the DANIEL

98

way Jesus and his followers understood him. It was the death and resurrection of Jesus that more than any other event brought the End into history, so that by a feedback process, that Christ event is the vindication o f Daniel’s vision. Once again Daniel wishes to know how long the time of suffering will be, and (in words similar to the ones which appear in 7:25) he is told that it will last three and a half “set periods.” Like us, Daniel finds this more puzzling than illu­ minating, tries asking the question again, and is given a fur­ ther answer in terms of a number o f days— 1290 and 1335 (12:11,12). The figures probably have some significance in connection with the calendar. A s we noted in chapter 8, various calendars were in use in the second century, and the question of the right calendar was a topic of dispute. The Babylonians used a lunar calen­ dar with a year of 354 days, the Essenes a solar calendar with a year o f 364 days, the Hellenistic regimes a lunar-solar cal­ endar with a year o f 360 days. In each case the calendar was corrected to the true length o f the solar year, just over 365 days, by intercalating months. Daniel’s periods o f days can be related to all three calen­ dars and to several sets o f events in the 160s: that is, each could cover the time from one or other o f Antiochus’s edicts or its enforcement to one or other o f the events that marked the effective end o f the period of oppression. When comes the E n d? The New Testam ent an d after So, the abominations and the afflictions o f Antiochus, and the judgment and deliverance G od brought in response to them, were the “End.” In what sense? Daniel’s vision o f the ultimate establishment o f G od’s rule was not fulfilled in the historical periods to which the 99

The End

book refers, the Babylonian, the Persian, or the Greek. In this it parallels many prophetic oracles in the O ld Testa­ ment. These gave the impression that the Day o f Yahweh was about to dawn, but after them things continue as they have before. That happens again when Christ comes and speaks o f the imminent establishing o f God’s rule (see 2 Peter 3:4). Yet each prophet’s words were received as from God, even though they did not seem to have come true. This was partly because people believed that they would find their fulfillment in time, partly because they knew that they had seen some measure o f fulfillment already—hence the con­ viction that further fulfillment would also follow. So it is also with Daniel’s visions. The book itself has to handle the fact that promises o f the ultimate realization of God’s kingship have not been fulfilled. It does this, not by turning that kingship into something nationalistic (Yahweh is [to be] Israel’s king) or individualistic (Yahweh’s kingship is [to be] realized in the believer’s personal life) or other­ worldly (Yahweh’s kingship is [to be] realized in heaven) or humanly-generated (we are responsible for bringing in Yahweh’s kingship). It reaffirms a vision o f a universal, corpo­ rate, this-worldly, God-given reign of God. But it does that in the light of the conviction that this vision does find some partial realizations now. The empires that Daniel and his read­ ers knew did disappear; the rule of the God of heaven was reestablished in Jerusalem. There are no pointers in Daniel’s visions toward a per­ sonal messiah’s being integral to the final establishment of God’s rule, though when Jews o f the first century A.D. heard the man Jesus o f Nazareth proclaim that God’s rule was now arriving, they saw him doing things that in themselves sug­ gested the rule o f God brought into their midst. The reign which is at hand is the one which Daniel promised (2:44; 7:22). The time he spoke of is fulfilled. Jesus’ virgin birth D A N IEL

100

makes a parallel point to the picture o f the rock breaking off without human involvement (2:34).4 Jesus speaks of himself as the stone that crushes, the very embodiment o f the rule of G od (Luke 20:18; cf. Daniel 2:44,45). Luke actually opens his Gospel with Gabriel again appear­ ing at the time o f the evening offering, as in Daniel 9. That begins a chain o f events that lead via the birth of Jesus to his being presented in the temple, a chain o f events that take 490 days to unfold— another fulfillment o f the seventy sev­ ens o f which Gabriel spoke. (The New Testament does not link the Christ event with a period o f 490 years ending with Christ’s death.) The “humanlike figure” o f Daniel 7 provided a key image by which Jesus describes himself in the Gospels. In Daniel it is an ordinary expression which in the context does not denote a specific individual, still less a messianic figure. But by New Testament times, the expression had come to sug­ gest an individual “son o f man”— that phrase is a literalistic translation o f the Aramaic expression, as strange an expres­ sion in the Greek o f the New Testament as it is in English. The Gospels declare that Jesus is “that Son o f man” who “has authority on earth” (Mark 2:10; cf. Matthew 28:18). They thus use Daniel 7 to express the conviction that Jesus (not any other alleged messiah or hero) has ascended as “Son o f man” and will return with the clouds. Jesus and the Gospel writers had apparently also noted that Daniel 7 speaks o f the suffering o f the holy ones. O n the basis o f the fact that the “Son of man” stands for the holy ones, they can also connect with Daniel 7 their aware­ ness that “the Son o f man must suffer” (Mark 8:31) before he “comes in glory” (Mark 8:38) “with the clouds o f heaven” (Mark 14:62). Further, Jesus qualifies the statement that the Son of man came to be served (Dan 7:14) by declaring that he comes first to serve (Mark 10:45). It is in keeping with this affirmation that in Revelation the King among kings 101

The End

is also the lamb with the marks o f slaughter upon him (Rev 5:6; 17:14), which excludes any triumphalist under­ standing o f his kingship.5 A Christian who lives much later than New Testament times has to face other questions regarding the claim that Jesus brings about the rule o f G od in the world. That rule o f G od continues to be more an object o f hope than o f sight. We still pray, “may your rule come” (Luke 11:2). Precisely at moments when such a vision is difficult to believe, Daniel’s readers are urged to take it with utmost seriousness (2:45; 8:26; 10:21). And when the New Testament seeks to describe the End still to come, it again utilizes the way Daniel speaks o f the future—just as the Book o f Daniel itself had reused prophetic material from books such as Isaiah. Jesus’ discourse concern­ ing the End (Mark 13) speaks in Danielic fashion o f troubling rumors, the final affliction, many stumbling, the need to en­ dure to the end, the deliverance of the elect, the desolating sacrilege, the need to understand, and the coming o f the Son o f man in clouds with great power and glory. The same way of speaking influences the way Paul speaks o f the End in terms o f people rising and o f those who are still alive being caught up with them in the clouds (1 Thess 4,5). The account o f the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15 is also shaped by Daniel 7, while Paul’s portrait o f the lawless man in 2 Thessalonians 2 reflects the portrait o f Antiochus in Daniel. But no New Testament document is more thoroughly permeated with Old Testament phraseology and images than Revelation, and no O ld Testament book influences Revela­ tion more than Daniel— a book which had been written for a community under analogous pressure to that which affected the audience o f Revelation. In particular, John’s opening vision o f Christ and o f heaven (Rev 1, 4, 5) is shaped in part by Daniel 7 and also by the description o f the angelic appearance in Daniel 10, DANIEL

102

while the animals in Daniel 7 are an important source for the vision o f the animal in Revelation 13 and 17. Interpreters have argued hard and long over the identity o f the four kingdoms in Daniel’s visions and how they relate to empires after Daniel’s own day and into our own. But in a sense, such arguments miss the point. For the recipients of the book, what mattered was that they lived under the fourth regime, and when successive generations have re­ applied the scheme o f empires to their own day, in principle they have responded to the vision in the way it sought. W hether the mighty empire that controls their destiny is Rome or Turkey or Islam or Britain or America or Israel or Russia, the vision still applies. The very use o f symbolism in these visions encourages their reapplication to later embodi­ ments o f the same dark forces as those o f Daniel’s day. Even in his interpretations o f the visions Daniel does not say who they refer to, and thus he leaves the text open to being reapplied as international history continues to be a process in which one people after another dominates the world and seeks to make itself God. The cosmic significance which Daniel’s visions attach to Antiochus becomes especially illuminating in the nuclear age. Humanity now has the power to destroy itself and the world in which it lives. There is something utterly unprece­ dented about this situation, and something theologically quite novel. G od has allowed humanity to discover how to bring to an end the story which it did not begin. W hat is extravagance in Daniel’s visions is now reality. Daniel looks in the face the possibility o f human power and arrogance toppling the rule o f heaven over the world. It affirms that the powers o f heaven may be assailed and hurt, but that G od will still reserve the last word. The implication is not that human efforts for peace are unnecessary. The Daniel whose visions we are considering is the man o f political commitment and religious faithfulness o f 103

The End

whom we read in the stories about him. To say that human peace-seeking is unnecessary if peace must be God’s achieve­ ment is like saying that seeking righteousness is unnecessary if our relationship with God must be God’s gift (Romans 6:1). Paul’s response to that inference is not to qualify his affirma­ tion that everything depends on grace; it is to recall the objec­ tor to the fact that righteousness is an end, not a means. Similarly we seek peace because it is the godlike thing to do, not because God is necessarily dependent on our doing so. And as we do so, God may well choose to utilize our peace­ seeking in bringing peace about. It is possible to speed the coming of the day o f God (2 Pet 3:12)— or to delay i t

D A N IEL

104

NOTES

Chapter 2 Faithfulness—Divine and Human 1. N. W. Porteous, Daniel (London/Philadelphia: SCM/ Westminster, 1965; rev. ed. 1979). 2. W. Wink, Naming the Powers (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 110-11. 3. A. Lacocque, The Book of Daniel, trans. D. Pellauer (London/ Atlanta: SPCK/Knox, 1979). 4. Augustine, Sermon xxxii 15 on Psalm 15, as quoted by E. Bickerman, The God of the Maccabees (Leiden: Brill, 1979), v. Chapter 3 Sovereignty—Divine and Human 1. So J. Moltmann, Theology of Hope (London/New York: SCM/Harper, 1967), 133-34. 2. A. Bentzen, Daniel (Tübingen: Mohr, 1937; 2d ed. 1952). 3. D. Aukerman, Darkening Valley (New York: Seabury, 1981), 50-51. 4. See the comments of Theodoret in his commentary, pub­ lished in Patrologia Graeca 81:1255-1546. 5. A. Lacocque, The Book of Daniel, trans. D. Pellauer (London/ Atlanta: SPCK/Knox, 1979). 6. J. J. Collins, Daniel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), on the chapter. 105

Notes

7. Aukerman, 102-08. 8. R. S. Wallace, The Lord Is King: The Message of Daniel (Leicester/Downers Grove, I11.: IVP, 1979), on 3:8-12. 9. J. G. Baldwin, Daniel (Leicester/Grand Rapids: IVP/ Eerdmans, 1978). 10. W. S. Towner, Daniel (Adanta: Knox, 1984). 11. W. Wink, Naming the Powers (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 111. 12. Towner, Daniel. Chapter 4 Insight—Divine and Human 1. So E. L. Ehrlich, Der Traum im Alten Testament (Berlin: Topelmann, 1953), 92. 2. J. Boehmer, Reich Gottes und Menschensohn im Buch Daniel (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1899), 62-63. 3. From Ancient Near East Texts, ed. J. B. Pritchard (Princeton: Princeton University Press, revised 1969), 606; cf. Near Eastern Reli­ gious Texts Relating to the Old Testament, ed. W. Beyerlin (London/ Philadelphia: SCM/Westminster, 1978), 118-22. 4. H. Kosmala, Studies, Essays, and Reviews (Leiden: Brill, 1978), 1:149-53. 5. W. S. Towner, Daniel (Atlanta: Knox, 1984), on the passage. Chapter 5 Daniel’s God and Daniel’s Prayer 1. J. Calvin, Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Daniel, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: CTS, 1852-53), on the passage. 2. W. Wink, Unmasking the Powers (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 91. 3. J. Scharbert in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, eds. G. J. Botterweck and H. Ringgren (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 11:293. 4. G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vol. 1 (Edinburgh/ New York: Oliver and Boyd/Harper, 1962), 342-43,357-59,380. 5. See the comments of O. Plöger on this passage in Das Buch Daniel (Oütersloh: Mohn, 1965). 6. W. S. Towner, Daniel (Atlanta: Knox, 1984), on the passage. 7. C. Westermann, Praise and Lament in the Psalms (Atlanta/ Edinburgh: Knox/Clark, 1981), 171-72,206. D A N IEL

106

8. N. W. Porteous, Daniel (London/Philadelphia: SCM/ Westminister, 1965; rev. ed., 1979), on the passage. Chapter 6 The Powers of Heaven 1. K. Barth, Church Dogmatics iii, 3 (Edinburgh/New York: Clark/Scribner’s, 1960), 460-63. 2. R. A. Anderson, Signs and Wonders: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Edinburgh/Grand Rapids: Handsel/Eerdmans, 1984), on the passage. 3. W. Wink, Unmasking the Powers (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 89. Chapter 7 Perspectives on History 1. “Spätisraelitische Geschichtsdenken am Beispiel des Buches Daniel,” Historische Zeitschrift 193 (1961), 25-32. 2. So D. Flusser, “The four empires in the Fourth Sybil and in the Book of Daniel,” Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972), 166-68. 3. W. Lüthi, The Church to Come (London: Hodder, 1939) or the U.S. edition, Daniel Speaks to the Church (Minneapolis: Augs­ burg, 1947), on the passage. 4. S. J. DeVries, The Achievements of Biblical Religion (Lanham, Md /London: University Press of America, 1983), 342. Chapter 9 The End 1. S. Niditch, The Symbolic Vision in Biblical Tradition (Chico, Calif.: Scholars, 1983), 209-15. 2. J. Calvin, Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Daniel, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: CTS, 1852-53), on the passage. 3. P. R. Davies, Daniel (Sheffield: JSOT, 1985), 97. 4. See Chrysostom’s commentary published in Patrologia Graeca 56 (1862), 193-246. 5. W. Dietrich, “Gott als König,” ZTK 77 (1980), 251-68.

107

Notes

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aukerman, D. Darkening Valley. New York: Seabury, 1981. (A book on the Bible and political issues, focusing on the nuclear threat; suggestive for issues raised by a book such as Daniel.) Baldwin, J. G. Daniel. Leicester/Grand Rapids: IVP/Eerdmans, 1978. (The best conservative exegetical treatment) Calvin, J. Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Daniel. 2 vols. Tr. T. Myers. Edinburgh: CTS, 1852-53 and often reprinted. (Calvin is always worth reading for his theological exposition.) Collins, J. J. Daniel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984. (A form-critical treatment by an acknowledged expert on Daniel.) Davies, P. R. Daniel. Sheffield: JSOT, 1985. (A survey of current scholarly study.) Goldingay, J. Daniel. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 30. Dallas, Tex.: Word, 1989. (The detailed commentary which underlies the present work.) Heaton, E. W. The Book of Daniel. London: SCM, 1956. (An older brief commentary still worth reading because of its independ­ ence and insight.) Lacocque, A. The Book of Daniel. Tr. D. Pellauer. London/Atlanta: SPCK/Knox, 1979. (A more extensive independent exegetical commentary.) 109

Select Bibliography

Lüthi, W. The Church to Come. Tr. D. H. C. Read. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1939. American ed., Daniel Speaks to the Church. Tr. J. M. Jensen. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1947. (An exposition first written in the 1930s, a suggestive context for preaching on Daniel.) Montgomery, J. A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel. Edinburgh/New York: Clark/Scribner’s, 1927. (The classic critical commentary, still indispensable.) Porteous, N. W. Daniel. London/Philadelphia: SCM/Westminster, 1965. Rev. ed., 1979. (A warm, brief, theological commentary.) Russell, D. S. Daniel: An Active Volcano. Edinburgh/Philadelphia: St. Andrew/Westminster, 1989). The best brief exposition. Towner, W. S. Daniel. Atlanta: Knox, 1984. (A more adventurous recent theological exposition.) Wallace, R. S. The Lord is King: The Message of Daniel. Leicester/ Downers Grove, I11.: IVP, 1979. (A detailed exposition, moder­ ately conservative.) Wink, W. Naming the Powers. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. ------- . Unmasking the Powers. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986. (The first two parts of a three-part study of the way the Bible speaks of supernatural powers, such as Daniel often refers to.)

D A N IEL

110

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

Old Testament

Ezra 1:1 9

74 53

Genesis 1 2:10 15:16 41:16 41:38

70 70 82 38 36

Nehemiah 1 9

53 53

Exodus 20:7 30:26-29

50 94

Leviticus 26

Job 1:21 12:22 32:8 38:19

50 50 50 50

57,74

Deuteronomy 30

57

I Kings 6:1 8

72 47

2 Chronicles 16:9 36:21 36:22

61 74 74

111

Psalms 2 9 29 46 48 55:17 72:18-19 76 93 119:64 132

29,96 70 70 70,96 96 47 50 96 70 47 11

Proverbs 30 34:7 Isaiah 2:2-3 8:7-8 9:2-7 10 14:24-25 19 26:19 31 40:25-26 40-55 41 43 43:1-3 44:25 47 47:12-13 51:9-10 52:11 52:13-53:12 65:1 65:24 66:24

7 17

88 41 96 41,96 96 96 41 96 24 38 24 17 61 37 36 35 70 14 41 49 49 41

Index of Scriptures

Jeremiah 23:15-32 29 29:10 43:8-13 46

37 48 73 96 96

Ezekiel 1 1-3 7:19-27 9 10 12:27-28 29-32 38 39

62 41 41 41 41 40 96 96 96

Daniel 1 2,,4,6,12,17,18,22 14,23 1:1 1:2 24 34 1:4 13 1:8 1:12 38 35 1:17-20 35 1:20 1:21 7 1-6 4,77 2,3,23,25,34,45, 2 52,67,68,71,72,88 18 2:6 2:2 35 2:9 47 2:10 47 2:11 37,38,47 18 2:12-13 45 2:16-18 38,50 2:19 23 2:19-23 51 2:20 38,50 2:20-23 23,24,80 2:21 51 2:21-22 51 2:23 35 2:27 87,93 2:28 2:29 87 38 2:30 101 2:34

DANIEL

2:37 24 2:38 24 2:40-43 88 69,88,93,100 2:44 2:44-45 101 2:45 102 3 2, 6,12,15-17,18,30 3:15 16 3:16 16 16 3:17 3:18 16 3:28 60 3-6 2 3,6,25,26,34,61 4 4:2 25 4:8 35 27 4:14 25 4:17 25 4:24 25 4:25 25 4:26 26 4:27 4:32 25 25,27 4:34 25,27 4:37 5 3,6,34 5:1 28 28 5:2-4 5:8 37 5:11-12 36 5:18-20 28 5:23 28 6 2,7,12,17,18,30, 45,52 6:5 30 6:8 30 6:11 46 6:11-12 47 6:13 17 6:16 18 6:18 31 6:20 31 6:22 31,60 6:23 18 6:26 31 6:28 7 7 2,:3,40,41,62,67-69, 71, 72, 75,78-80, 89-92,101-03 89 7:4-6

7:8 71,80 7:9-10 89 89 7:11 7:13 89 90,93,101 7:14 7:18 90,93 7:20 80 7:22 100 91 7:23-25 7:25 80,92,99 93 7:26 93 7:27 7-12 41 3,4,41,62,72,75, 8 78-80,83,85,92,93 72 8:1 8:9 71 8:10 81,95 8:13 81 92 8:13-14 8:14 94 8:15 89 8:16 61 93 8:17 8:19 73,81,92 8:20 3 8:21 72 8:23 81,82 8:23-25 81 8:25 92 102 8:26 9 2-4,11,45,49,50, 52,57,72,74, 85,93,94,101 9:3 47,48 9:4 46,54 9:4-19 94 54 9:5-14 9:7 54 9:13 46,55 9:15 47 9:15-19 55 9:16 47,56 9:18-20 54 9:19 56 9:20 48 9:20-21 49 9:21 47,61,62 73,74,93 9:24 92 9:24-27

112

9:26 9:26-27 9:27 10 10:2 10:2-3 10:13 10:16 10:16-20 10:18 10:20-11:1 10:21 10-11 10-12 11 11:1 11:2 11:5 11:6-9 11:10-19 11:14 11:20 11:21 11:21-45 11:27 11:29 11:30 11:31 11:32 11:33 11:34 11:35 11:36 11:36-39 11:37 11:38-39 11:40 11:40-45 11:40-12:4 11:45 11-12 12 12:1 12:3 12:4 12:5-6 12:6 12:7 12:9

113

81 82 81 4,41,62,102 49 49 49,63 89 62 89 63 102 63 4,20,41,91 4,7,8,39,41, 75,83 64 7 8,63 8 8 43 8 84 8 43,94,95 95 18,73 18,81 19 18,19,42 20 20,94,95 95 84 85 85 94,95 42,96 42 94 18-20,94-99 4,41 95,97 98 94 62 94,95 95 94

16:19-26 17:23-24

31 50

14

Romans 6:1 11:17-22

104 82

Joel 2:20

96

I Corinthians 15

102

Amos 1-2 7:17

7 14

Habakkuk 2:3

41

Zechariah 1:12 1:12-17 3 4:10 7:5 14

74 73 63 61 74 96

12:11 12:11-12 12:13

81 99 94

Hosea 9:3-4

New Testament Matthew 1 6:5-6 23:32 24:36 28:18

72 17 82 40 101

Mark 2:10 8:31 8:38 10:45 11:15 13 14:62

101 101 101 101 47 102 101

Luke 11:2 20:18 Acts 1:7 4:18-20 5:19-20 12:1-10

102 101 40 31 31 31

Philippians 4:6

52

Colossians 2:15

91

I Thessalonians 2:16 4 5

82 102 102

2 Thessalonians 2

102

2 Peter 3:4 3:12

100 104

Revelation 1 4 5 5:6 13 17 17:14

102 102 102 102 103 103 102

Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha 2 Esdras

80

2 Esdras 12:10-12

79

I Maccabees 1 1-2 2:42 2-4 7 1 & 2 Maccabees 1 Enoch

81 19 19 20 92 96 59,61

Index o f Scriptures

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES Hosea -Jonah DOUGLAS STUART

ZONDE RVAN ACADE MI C

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC Hosea-­Jonah Copyright © 1989 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11504-5 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Stuart, Douglas K. Hosea-­Jonah: Douglas K. Stuart. p.  cm. Biography: p. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-849-90784-0 1. Bible. O.T. Minor Prophets—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II. Series. BS1560.S77 1989 224’.906—dc2089-33925 Quotations form the scriptures in this volume are the author’s own translation unless otherwise indicated. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

To my sister Twyla, student and teacher of the W ord

CONTENTS

Foreword 1. Introduction 2. Hosea G od’s covenant w ith Israel T h e attractions o f idolatry Prostitution T h e reliance o f the prophets on th e Law Blessings and curses: th e carrot and the stick Corporate and individual sin G u ilt and guiltiness Yahweh’s “wife” and “child” T h e distant past and the ultim ate future: the long view on Israel 3. Joel T h e Day o f the Lord T h e prophetic lam ent Conquest, human and divine T h e new age to come T h e Holy Spirit Vi i

ix 1 9 9 13 19 23 27 31 35 37 40 45 45 50 52 56 59 Contents

4. Amos Yahweh’s universal sovereignty Social justice: the poor and the rich T h e role o f leadership in corporate sin Divine prosecution o f covenant violators Exile T h e prophet as servant: messenger and intercessor 5. Obadiah T h e future o f the nations M ount Zion/jerusalem 6. Jonah Too narrow a view o f God’s love Hypocrisy and gratitude Forgiveness

Notes Bibliography Index o f Scriptures

CONTENTS

63 63 66 71 75 78 82 89 89 92 95 95 99 102 109 113 117

viii

FOREWORD

Finding the great them es o f the books o f the Bible is essential to the study o f God’s W ord and to the preaching and teaching o f its truths. These them es and ideas are often like precious gems: they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered w ith some difficulty. Commentaries are most useful to this discovery process, but they are n ot usually designed to help the reader to trace im portant subjects sys­ tematically w ithin a given book o f Scripture. T h is series, W ord Biblical Them es, addresses this need by bringing together, w ithin a few pages, all o f what is con­ tained in a biblical book on th e subjects that are thought to be m ost significant to that book. A com panion series to th e W ord Biblical Commentary, this series distills th e theologi­ cal essence o f a book o f Scripture as interpreted in th e m ore technical series and serves it up in ways that w ill enrich th e preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship o f G od’s people. T he prophets are not always easy to read or to understand in m odem term s. Douglas Stuart’s excellent commentary, ix

Foreword

H osea-Jonah in the W ord Biblical Commentary series (vol. 31; hereafter referred to in the text as W B C 31), provided detailed scholarly help in understanding these books. Now he has made these helps even more accessible in b rief com­ pass by writing on the dominant them es in these books. T h e preacher and the teacher will find insights here, n o t only into the teaching o f the prophets, but also into their relation to the Pentateuch and to the New Testament. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky

FOREWORD

Joh n D . W . W atts O ld Testam ent Editor

X

1

INTRODUCTION

T h e first five M inor Prophets In Latin th e word m inor means “smaller," and th at— n o t their relative im portance— is what distinguishes th e five prophetical books discussed in this volume from their larger (major) counterparts. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, and Jonah, like die other seven M inor Prophets, are n o t grouped together as they are by reason o f a strict them atic or chrono­ logical rationale. R ather, they occur in an order established partly by chronology, pardy by content, and pardy by an ordering principle n o t used in m odem W estern circles, namely, “catchwords” (vocabulary and/or concepts shared by one book w ith th e one after it). H osea T h e B ook o f Hosea, the longest o f the M inor Prophets, is a collection o f prophecies from a northern Israelite prophet who preached to a heedless nation from the 750s u ntil its 1

Hosea

capture and exile by the Assyrians in th e late 720s B.C. N orthern Israel had moved, by his day, far from obedience to the covenant that G od had revealed to his people though M oses. T hat history o f disregard for G od’s Law was espe­ cially expressed in Israel’s turning from orthodox worship to idolatry and polytheism. Baal, the Canaanite weather god, was a more attractive deity to worship than Yahweh, since Baal’s specialty was producing rain. Israel, like all ancient societies, was agriculturally based econom ically and thus ex­ tremely rain conscious. By contrast, Yahweh was seen by Hosea’s contem poraries as merely a national god, historically Israel’s deliverer, but currently less useful than Baal. Hosea often portrays Israel’s consistent unfaithfulness to the true God metaphorically as “prostitution” (Hebrew zn h). A prostitute is, after all, about as far away from marriage fi­ delity as is possible to imagine. T he frequent employment o f the concept o f prostitution has, however, led many people to the incorrect conclusion that chapter 1 o f the book de­ scribes Hosea’s marriage to a prostitute at God’s direction. In fact, Hosea is told by God only to get married to an Israelite woman, who, no matter her identity, will surely be tainted by the “prostitution’’ away from the Lord that taints all o f Hosea’s fellow citizens (1:2). In the prophetic metaphor o f marriage relationships, Israel should be Yahweh’s faithful wife. Instead, she has deserted him and needs again to be betrothed to him (2:2-20) after an imposed period o f confine­ ment (exile; 3:1-5). A word Hosea uses almost as much as “prostitution’’ is “return” (Hebrew šûb ). It is an O ld Testament equivalent for “conversion” and conveys often in Hosea the them e o f re­ turning to G od as Israel’s only hope. R eturn to G od and the blessings o f his covenant will characterize the new age after Israel’s inevitable destruction and exile as a nation— but return to him at any stage by any group, small or large, would also be the people’s only avenue o f salvation. INTRODUCTION

2

T h e Book o f Hosea intersperses prophecies o f doom (woe), Le., Israel’s near-term expectation, w ith prophecies o f glorious hope (weal), Israel’s long-term certain culm ination. Som e prophetical books are organized this way (e.g., Isaiah), while others have their passages o f woe at the beginning and their passages o f weal at the end (e.g., Amos). D uring the more than three decades that Hosea preached G od’s word to usually unresponsive audiences, Israel’s for­ tunes as a nation on the world scene were deteriorating. W ith the death o f Jeroboam II in 753 B.C., Israel’s prosperity and independence began to wane. T h e resurgent super­ power Assyria, under its king, Tiglath-Pileser III, increas­ ingly threatened the entire Palestinian area, and by 722 B.C. one o f his successors, Sargon II, had captured Samaria and annexed the entire north o f Israel to the Assyrian Empire. A succession o f Israelite kings, desperately trying to hold the nation together, turned in every direction for help except in the direction o f the Lord. Assassinations and usurpations put one king after another on th e throne in Samaria, but, as Hosea steadily proclaimed, there was no hope o f avoiding conquest by Assyria. Israel’s long record o f sin had made it unquestionably guilty o f breaking G od’s covenant, and from G od’s point o f view it was “N ot M y People” (1:9).

Joel Joel contains th e oracles o f G od given through a sixthcentury Judean prophet, from a tim e when the Babylonians had begun the final act o f destruction o f the once-proud nation o f Judah. Likening the huge, unstoppable Babylonian armies to a swarm o f locusts, Joel called for his people to repent— from the least to th e greatest, from the drunk to the priest, from the farmers to the young lovers (1:5-14). Israel’s foes were doing Yahweh’s bidding. T h e Babylonian army was merely a sign of, and in one sense an aspect of, the 3

Joel

Day o f the Lord (1:15; 2 :1 -2 ,1 1 ,3 1 ; 3:14). T his them e, no­ ticeably prom inent in Joel and Amos, derives from the an­ cient N ear Eastern concept that a truly great king could win any war he fought in a single day. “Day o f the Lord” language is used by the prophets to suggest the dramatic and decisive intervention o f the Lord as great universal king against his enemies— either morally decadent Israel proximately (1:15; 2 :1 -2 ,1 1 ), or th e enemies o f God’s people in th e ultimate future (2:31; 3:14). In addition to his references to Jerusalem via th e word “city" (as in 2:9) or “tem ple” (as in 1:13) and Judah via “the land" (as in 2:1), Jo el speaks directly o f Zion seven tim es, Jerusalem six tim es, and Judah three times. T his may reflect Joel’s location and his audience: Jo el inside Jerusalem under Babylonian siege, preaching to Judeans packed into the city as their last, indeed, forlorn hope o f survival. Joel is perhaps best known for his prophecy o f the out­ pouring o f the Spirit o f G od (2:28-32) quoted by Peter in his Pentecost sermon (Acts 2). H ere is the clearest statement in the O ld Testam ent o f the im portant doctrine o f the democra­ tization o f the Holy Spirit in the New C ovenant W hat was a rare and selective experience in O ld Testament times— the reception o f God’s Spirit by an individual— became in the new age inaugurated by the coming o f C hrist the standard experience o f every believer. T h e emphasis should indeed rest on “every," since Joel’s words underscore the role o f the Spirit in the lives o f people o f both genders, all ages, and all social classes.

Am os Amos records the words o f a Judean sheep breeder and fìg cultivation specialist who was inspired by G od to preach for a tim e (perhaps as little as a few months) in northern Israel,

INTRODUCTION

4

around 760 B.C. H e was not a professional prophet, trained as a disciple by a senior prophet as, for example, Elisha had been trained by Elijah and had him self trained a company o f disci­ pies (7:14-15; cf. 1 Kgs 19:21; 2 Kgs 6:1-2). Nonetheless, un­ der the inspiration o f God’s Spirit, Amos became so powerful a voice o f denunciation o f the N orth’s neglect o f the covenant that an official attempt was made to silence him (7:10-13). Considerable attention is given in the Book o f Amos to the m atter o f econom ic exploitation. T h e increasing urbanization and cosmopolitanization o f Israel in the eighth century B.C. had created a wealthy leisure class (e.g., 4:1; 6 :1-7) whose incomes were dependent on taking resources from th e poor by means o f unfair business practices, aided by manipulation o f the legal system (e.g., 2 :6 -8 ; 5:7; 8:5-6). In the fece o f such clear violation o f the Mosaic covenant’s requirements o f both fairness and compassion toward th e poor (e.g., Lev 19:9-18), G od could hardly accept the otherwise legitimate sacrifices o f his people as if there were nothing separating Israel from God’s approval (5:21-24). Like all the prophets whose words touch upon the sub­ ject, Amos recognizes the essential unity o f the people o f Israel, N orth and South. T h e northern ten tribes (Israel) had split from Judah (which also subsumed Sim eon) in 931 B.C. after th e death o f Solom on. T h e divided nation was a politi­ cal reality, bu t there is no rift G od cannot heal. Am os in­ cludes both Judah and Israel at the culm ination o f a long list o f states slated for divine judgment (chs 1 and 2), pairs Zion and Samaria (6:1), refers to the “entire family” o f Israel (3:1), and, especially, looks forward to the reunification o f N orth and South under the new David, whom we know to be C h rist Like all the prophets, Amos also foresees under in­ spiration that th e true people o f G od in th e eschaton w ill n o t be lim ited to a Palestinian nation, bu t w ill be enorm ous in scope, “all the nations that bear my name” (9:12).

5

Amos

Obadiah Obadiah, the shortest book o f the O ld Testament, is a single-topic book, an oracle against Edom in the classic style o f what are called “oracles against foreign nations.” It dates probably from about 586-585 B.C., ju st after the Babylonians had demolished Jerusalem, captured thousands, and sent large numbers o f refugees o ff into the wilderness. Obadiah’s prophecy condemns the Edomites for their role in aiding and abetting the Babylonian cause. Edom had been long jealous o f and hostile to Israel even though it traced its ancestry to Esau, the brother o f Israel’s ancestor Jacob. T h e Babylonian invasion o f 588 B.C. proved serendipitous for the Edomites. T h e Babylonians swept through Judah, con­ quering all, increasingly driving the surviving Israelites into Jerusalem and then besieging that w ell-fortifìed city for two years until its fall in 586. T h e countryside was completely undefended and ripe for the picking by Edomites, who sim­ ply moved out from their confined ancestral mountains to the southeast o f Judah, into the farmlands and villages aban­ doned by the fleeing Judeans (Obad 13). They also took delight in preventing Judeans from escaping the advancing enemy armies (with whom the Edomites had made an early peace) by capturing those heading southeast and turning them over to the Babylonians (Obad 14). Obadiah n ot only predicts disasters o f lasting conse­ quence for the Edomites as a result o f these scurrilous prac­ tices, but also describes the future deliverance o f Israel from all its enemies and its subjugation o f the promised land in th e glorious future (vv 17-21).

Jonah Jonah, unique among the prophetical books, is an account o f events in a prophet’s life rather than a com pilation o f his INTRODUCTION

6

prophecies. O f course, there are both b rief and lengthy bio­ graphical passages in other prophetical books, and the ac­ counts o f Elijah and Elisha in 1 and 2 Kgs, as well as the biographical material about Moses (the "paradigm” prophet, as it were) and other prophets in the Pentateuch and H istori­ cal Books provide parallels to Jonah. Nowhere else do any o f the sixteen books routinely classified as prophetical concen­ trate so m uch on narrative about a prophet and so little on his words. Especially interesting in Jonah are the descriptions o f his motivations. H e tried to flee from a G od whose influence he may have thought lim ited to the territory in w hich he was worshiped (l:3ff.). H e clearly resented the possibility that G od might use his preaching to bring the hated Assyrians to repentance (1:1; 3:2). H e was eloquently grateful at his own undeserved rescue from drowning (2:1-10) but furious at the sparing o f the equally undeserving Ninevites (4:1-3). H e learned to love a plant, yet begrudged God’s loving people and animals, even if they were fa r from perfect (4:5-9). Jonah is thus a study in hypocrisy, and thereby a warning against the same values in others o f any era— including ourselves. Jonah lived during the reign o f the Israelite king, Jer­ oboam I l (793-753 B.C.; 2 Kgs 14:25) and probably made his preaching visit to Nineveh spmetime during the kingship o f the weak, threatened Aššur-Dan III (773-756 B.C.). T h e rapid repentance o f the Ninevites (3:5-9) was exactly what Jonah had hoped against, but a sovereign G od who loves all nations had other plans, and a reluctant prophet became the messenger for a great message o f mercy.

7

Jonah

2

HOSEA

God's covenant with Israel Hosea, like all the O ld Testam ent prophets, preached on the basis o f a special theological understanding o f the rela­ tionship o f G od and his people. T his understanding was the Mosaic (Sinai) covenant A contract bound Israel and her God. T h e Hebrew word for it is berît, commonly translated “covenant.” In the New Testam ent the term is m ost frequently rendered by the G reek diathēkē, but the concept itself is m ost frequently expressed via the word nomos, usually rendered “law.” T h is is because the covenant is indeed a fully legal arrangem ent w ith the penalties o f law imposed upon the individual or group— or entire nation— who breaks it. In m ost m odem nations laws are thought to be the products o f a society, and it is “society” who is responsible for enforcing the law (via its courts, police, jails, etc., depending on the type o f law in­ volved in any given case). In the world o f the O ld Testam ent however, laws were far more likely to be conceived o f as

9

God's Covenant with Israel

originating from a divine source, and Israel’s laws, in fact, did. God, not society, gave the people o f Israel their laws, which together constituted the bent, covenant, to which the proph­ ets made such frequent reference. There exists a modem W estern tendency to regard laws as restrictions on freedom, stemming in part from the huge number o f laws enacted dur­ ing centuries o f legislative activity in most W estern nations, and the fa c t that many laws are only selectively enforced be­ cause they are widely regarded as archaic or otherwise unfair. T he biblical view o f the body o f laws contained in the Mosaic covenant, however, is that they constitute a generous gift from God, a divine grace for Israel, who without the covenant would be without God’s blessing. T h e O ld Testam ent covenant is found in th e Pentateuch in tw o interrelated and highly com patible statem ents. Its “first-generation’’ statem ent at Sinai begins in Exod 19 and carries through Lev 26, w ith a variety o f appendices in the Book o f Numbers. T h e “second-generation” statem ent is found in th e bulk o f th e Book o f Deuteronom y. W h en we speak o f a “first generation” we m ean th e first generation o f Israel, w hich only came officially to be a people w hen G od made it one, at M ount Sinai, w hen th e m ixed ethnic and religious stock called Israel gathered there under the leadership o f M oses and accepted one G od and one faith and one body o f law (cf. Exod 12:38; Judg 1:16). T h e “second generation” was th at o f th eir children, who were th e ones w ho actually entered the promised land in fulfill­ m ent o f th e divine oaths to the patriarchs, gaining by de­ fault w hat th eir parents, by disobedience, had squandered (Num 14:27-35). B o th o f these statem ents o f the covenant together, consistent w ith each oth er as they are w hile only partly identical in wording, are w hat th e prophets have in m ind w hen they are inspired to call Israel back to covenant obedience to th e Lord. HOSEA

10

T he O ld Testam ent covenant shares w ith other secondmillennium B.C. H ittite and Mesopotamian covenants an ele­ gantly simple structure, consisting o f six parts: Prologue (identification o f the parties to the covenant, etc.) Preamble (historical background explaining how the parties came to the point where they are now united in a covenant) Stipulations (the actual requirements, or laws; the largest part o f m ost covenants) Blessings and Curses (rewards and punishm ents for faithfulness or unfaithfulness, respectively, to th e stip­ ulations) W itnesses (those who confirm that the covenant is in force) Docum ent Clause (provisions for storage and reading o f the covenant document itself) These are all represented in a m anner easy to identify in the Pentateuch, as described by M endenhall1 and others.2 Underlying all prophetic preaching is the awareness o f this covenant relationship o f expected obedience. T he prophets portray Israel as a nation not in control o f its own destiny and not free to choose its own gods or observe its own standards o f law. Israel is a nation bound to Yahweh by the Mosaic covenant, and there can be no question that Yahweh will enforce his covenant against those who violate its terms. Hosea preached that Israel had treated the Lord’s covenant “like it was dirt” (6:7). T he Hebrew for this descriptive phrase (ke'ā dā m) has been translated “like Adam" or “as at [the northern Israelite city] Adam,* but its most likely literal meaning is simply “like dirt” (see W B C 31:98-99). T his is a way o f saying that Israel had “betrayed" its Lord (6:7). O f course, such disloyalty or disobedience had its consequences.

11

God’s Covenant with Israel

For Israel those consequences could only be the curses o f the covenant as spelled out in the Pentateuch. Among them was conquest in war, and this is what Hosea’s words predict, for example, in 8 :1 -3 : “Because Israel has transgressed my covenant . . . the enemy will pursue him .” T he passage o f w hich 8 :1 -3 is the beginning concludes at 8:14 w ith the awesome divine promise: “I will send fire into his cities and it will consume his fortresses.” Conquerors typically burned their foes’ cities in the ancient Near East, and that was what was going to happen to Israel (cf. 2 Kgs 25:9; Amos 1 :4 ,7 ,1 0 ; 2 :2 ,5 ; etc.). Israel’s only covenant was to be with Yahweh. Therefore, whenever the nation concluded a covenant with another power, w hether religious or diplomatic, they violated their covenant w ith the Lord. Israel’s contract with her God was in the form o f what we call a “suzerainty covenant,” a cove­ nant o f unequal parties. Israel was only the “vassal” in this covenant, inferior and dependent, and at the mercy o f her generous protector sovereign, the “suzerain,” who was, o f course, Yahweh. She had no authority to conclude any cove­ nants on her own, and thus when she tried to do so, w hich was frequently, she incurred the wrath o f her God. Hos 10:4 speaks o f the nation’s many international treaties in the sec­ ond half o f the eighth century B.C., undertaken in an attempt to shore up Israel’s increasingly precarious position between the tw o great powers o f that era, Assyria and Egypt From * God’s point o f view, these international covenants (also trans­ latable as “treaties”) were the equivalent o f “swearing emp­ tily.” They were, moreover, evidences o f Israel’s “deceit and fraud” (12:1) as Israel made trade agreements with Egypt and political agreements w ith Assyria (12:4) and vice versa (5:13; 7:11; 8:8-10). They trusted in politics, economics and other religions (2:8, 4 :1 2 ,1 3 ,1 7 ; 8:6; etc.) and thus scorned the O ne who should have been their only object o f trust: T h e covenant G od had given Israel, however, was not HOSEA

12

lim ited to obligations and punishments; it also contained promises o f hope (see also below, Blessings and Curses: T h e C arrot and the Stick). Thus Hos 2:16-23 envisions a day in the distant future from the point o f view o f the prophet and his contem poraries when there will be a new people o f God, faithful to him alone and the beneficiaries o f a new covenant that he will make for them and the whole earth (2:18). T his is the new covenant that we who are in C hrist have accepted as our own, and that w ill have its com plete fulfillm ent only in the age that is yet to come. A s the heirs o f the promises o f the covenant (Gal 3:29) we can identify w ith the Israelites in relation to it— but only to a p o in t It is the new covenant, n ot the old, to w hich we are parties. Som e stipulations o f the old covenant have been renewed in the new. These are essentially the Ten Commandm ents and the tw o great commandments (loving G od and neighbor), all o f w hich originate in the O ld Testam ent (Covenant) and are reiterated in one form or another in the New Testament (Covenant). W e are not obligated, however, to obey the O ld Testament ritual laws or Israelite civil laws, etc. T h e same generous God who gave to his people the first law has now given the law o f C hrist and has both m et and ex­ ceeded the demands o f the first law by the w ork o f his son.

T h e attractions of idolatry Throughout Israel’s history her loyalty to the Lord was fragile. T h e O ld Testam ent abounds w ith references to the nation’s practice o f idolatry, a habit that automatically violated the first and second o f the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:3-6) and thus incurred the judgments associated with violation o f the divine covenant Hosea often refers to idols and to the whole system o f idolatry. In 4:17, Ephraim, an alternate name for (northern) Israel, is described as “in league w ith idols.” In 5:1, the nation 13

The Attractions o f Idolatry

is said to have "decided to follow a blah,” a scathing attack on the worthlessness o f idols (cf. Jonah 2:8, where idols are called, literally, “worthless nothings”). O f course, idolatry had no sanction from God. Israel was on its own, in rebellion, when “with their silver and gold they made idols for them ­ selves.” In the coming exile, which Hosea predicts repeatedly and which occurred in 722 B.C., the Israelites would be de­ prived o f things they had come to depend on, including their idols: “for a long tim e the Israelites will remain without king, without official, without sacrifice, w ithout pillar, without ephod or teraphim” (Hos 3:4). Israel’s attraction to idolatry had manifested itself early in the nation’s experience. Accustomed to making idols in Egypt, the people returned to their habit even while M oses was on M ount Sinai receiving formal instructions against the practice (Exod 32). T h e golden bull idols destroyed at that tim e were later reproduced by Jeroboam I, the first king o f northern Israel (1 Kgs 12:28-33). They were worshiped steadily thereafter, including by Hosea’s contemporaries: “A t the bull o f Beth-Awen the inhabitants o f Samaria trem ­ ble” (Hos 10:5; Beth-Awen was a satirical name, meaning “House o f N othing,” for Bethel, w hich meant “House o f G od”). In 13:2, Hosea mocks the fect that in idolatrous wor­ ship, “human beings kiss bulls!” Israel’s tendency toward idolatry had also surfaced in the wilderness era, emerging full-blown ju st before the people were to cross into the promised land. Num 25 records the incident at Baal-Peor, where the people o f Israel seemed only too eager to prepare for yielding to the temptations o f the land o f Canaan by indulging their interest in idolatry and the ritual prostitution associated w ith it (see below). Hos 9:10 recalls this degeneration into idol worship: “But they came to Baal-Peor, consecrated themselves to ‘Shame’ and became detestable like their lover.”

HOSEA

14

W ith idolatry came its superstitions and primitive divination beliefs, including rhabdomancy (the practice o f trying to receive divine instruction by seeing w hich way a stick fell). A s well as we can reconstruct this practice from parallels elsewhere in the ancient Near East, a stick or staff was held upright w ith its lower end resting on the ground in the middle o f a circle drawn in the dirt. T h e circle was divided into sections labeled for the various options one was consid­ ering. T h e stick was dropped, and the option it fell across was considered the option advised by the god(s). Hosea’s inspired words protest this outrageously foolish procedure: “H e consults his wood! His staff advises him !" (Hos 4:12). W e must remember, however, that idolatry did not seem foolish to ancient people (as it does n ot seem foolish to the hundreds o f m illions who worship idols today). A s it was observed in Israel in Hosea’s day, idolatry had a num ber o f characteristics that made it a m ost attractive alternative to the revealed religion o f the Mosaic covenant. These charac­ teristics may be summarized as follows: 1. Idolatry claim ed to offer results that were guaranteed. A n idol was considered to capture some o f the essence o f the god or goddess it was designed to represent. If one was in th e presence o f an idol, one was guaranteed to be in the very presence o f the god for w hich the idol stood. Offerings placed in front o f idols had to be accepted (what could the lifeless idol do— shove the stuff away?). Thus the gods had to accept their suppliants’ offerings and were automatically obligated to respond by blessing them . 2. Idolatry indulged the selfish interests o f people. Idolatry was not merely a means o f worship using statues. It was an entire system o f life, w hich at its core was thoroughly m aterialistic. A quid pro quo logic underlay the system. Idols were supposed to give to you if you gave to them . T h e more you sacrificed, th e m ore they were required to bless

15

The Attractions o f Idolatry

your crops and your herds. A really religious person could becom e a really wealthy person. Idolatry, in short, was an early version o f th e m odem health-and-wealth gospel (cf. Hos 4:7). 3. Idolatry was easy. It allowed ritual w ithout ethics. In other words, frequency and generosity o f worship were the sole demands on an idolatrous believer. No covenant bound the believer to live a generous, faithful, upright life, doing acts o f love for his or her neighbor and for God. O ne could be selfish, even viciously oppressive o f others, and still be right w ith th e gods as long as one sacrificed frequently and substantially. 4. Idolatry was convenient Hosea describes the Israelites’ worship in this way: O n the m ountain tops they make sacrifices; O n the hills they bum offerings U nder oak and poplar A nd under terebinth, for their shade is nice. (4:13) T his echoes the statem ent in D eut 12:2 that pagan worship was conducted “on the hills and under every spreading tree,” a phrase repeated often by the prophets. G od’s revealed Law insisted that his people worship at one place, together, on occasions o f his designation (Deut 12:4-32; Exod 23; Lev 23). Idolatrous worship o f the kind the Israelites quickly adopted upon entering the promised land required no such inconve­ nience. People would worship any day o f the week, at any place. Pagan shrines dotted the landscape. A b it o f a hill, an altar, and some shade to make the process com fortable was all that was needed. By contrast, th e orthodox Israelites had to make the long trek to the sole central sanctuary (the temple at Jerusalem in Hosea’s day) from wherever they lived, three times yearly.

HOSEA

16

5. Idolatry was n orm al It was th e standard means o f worship, w ithout exception, in the ancient world. O rthodox Israelites were indeed odd by the standards o f any nation or group, including their fellow citizens who had abandoned the Lord’s covenant. Idolatry was th e settled, experienced Canaanite way— it was what had worked for m illennia be­ fore the Israelites arrived in Canaan. T h e locals ought to know what was best for agriculture, shouldn’t they? They ought to know what worked to make a family wealthy in that particular part o f the world, shouldn’t they? Wh a t about the superpowers (Egypt, Assyria) and the econom i­ cally successful neighboring states (Tyre, etc.)? W eren’t they idolatrous? Hadn’t it worked for them? W hy practice reli­ gion w ithout idols? W hy do something com pletely illogical in the opinion o f everyone but a few oddball Yahwistic prophets? W hy do something so silly as to worship an un­ seen god? 6. Idolatry seem ed log ical It made sense in a society that saw houses or ships built by groups o f individuals with vari­ ous specialties, and saw various types o f farmers produce various types o f crops and animals, that there must also be a m ultiplicity o f gods. Rather than a single general practitioner (Yahweh), why not a number o f gods and goddesses, every one a specialist in his or her own right? Idolatry, in other words, always involved polytheism and syncretism (the tend­ ency to accept different beliefs as valid). T his always seemed more appropriate to the m ajority o f the people than putting all o f one’s eggs in a single religious basket To idolaters, Yahweh hadn’t ceased to exist H e was merely assigned the limited, historically bound role o f national deliverer. T h e idea that he was the only God had been long abandoned. 7. Idolatry was pleasing to the senses. It allowed for the painting and sculpturing o f images o f all sorts (cf. Ezek 8:9ff.) w hich appealed to peoples’ artistic appreciation. It required

17

The Attractions o f Idolatry

bowing down to and kissing idols as one brought one’s sacrifices to them (1 Kgs 19:18), thus indulging the natural human tendency to substitute sensory ritual for real obedi­ ence (Hos 8:11-13; cf. Amos 5:21-24). 8. Idolatry was indulgent. M ost ancient people ate meat only as an act o f worship and would not have thought o f eating meat apart from religious ceremonies. Cooking meat and sharing it w ith an idol (in reality w ith the idol’s priests) was basic to worship. O rthodox Israelites were allowed to eat meat any tim e they wished (Deut 12:15,21). To others this seemed like wasting a perfectly good chance to kill two birds with one stone. Moreover, frequent and large-portioned wor­ ship meals accompanied by heavy drinking, out o f the ques­ tion for those faithful to the covenant, were quite acceptable in the idolatrous cults (cf. Amos 2:8). 9. Idolatry was erotic. Sex was a regular part o f the proc­ ess. W hen men brought their sacrifices to the idolatrous shrines, they could— with religious approval!— have ritual sex with the prostitutes there. Such sex was supposed to stimulate the powers o f nature to be fertile. A ncients tended to believe that all creation was actually procreation, based on their own limited observation that significant new things (ani­ mals, people, and even plants “bom ” from seeds) came into being by birth. Since idolatry was a system set up to help make people more prosperous, and since in the ancient world all societies were agrarian in economy, to stimulate nature’s fertility by having sex w ith a prostitute seemed a desirable way to worship. Naturally, it was highly self-indulgent. As might be expected, sexual preferences were accommodated. Heterosexuals had sex with women; homosexuals with men (cf. Amos 2:7; 2 Kgs 23:7). For such systemic violation o f God’s Law, Israel had to be punished, and m uch o f the Book o f Hosea is devoted to predicting and justifying that punishm ent. Hosea, however, looked beyond Israel’s idolatrous past and present to their HOSEA

18

eschatological future, when G od will have cleansed them from their idolatry. In the very last verse o f the book (14:8), G od states, predictively, “W hat will Ephraim have to do any more w ith idols?” T h e ultim ate answer, thank God, is “N othing.”

Prostitution Marriage is a strong legal bond in every society. As such it has been used often as a metaphor for other strong legal bonds, such as covenants. Prostitution is, however, in one sense the very opposite o f marriage. Marriage puts tw o peo­ ple together in a long-term relationship; prostitution puts tw o people together only in a b rief encounter. Marriages are threatened by infidelity; infidelity is automatic to prosti­ tution. Marriage is exclusive; prostitution is completely promiscuous. Marriage requires loyalty; prostitution avoids obligation. These contrasts with marriage made the concept and vo­ cabulary o f prostitution appropriate as a way o f speaking about covenant breaking, just as the concept and vocabulary o f marriage were appropriate to speaking about covenants themselves. A variety o f documents from the ancient Near East contain references to covenant breaking via the meta­ phor o f prostitution. Assyrian and Babylonian international treaty correspondence sometimes refers to kings or nations who had broken a treaty as “prostitutes.” In the O ld Testa­ ment, the Hebrew word for prostitution uses the root znh in its various derived nominal and verbal forms. T his root appears 111 times from Genesis to Nahum. In the m ajority o f instances, the word is used in a metaphorical sense rather than its literal meaning. T his is especially the case in the prophetical books, and m ost especially in one major prophet and one m inor prophet, Ezekiel and Hosea. For these two prophets, prostitution (znh) is a key vocabulary word, and the 19

Prostitution

concept is a key means o f portraying Israel’s unfaithfulness to the covenant she was supposed to keep w ith G od In Hosea, znh appears fifteen tim es,3 and only tw o o f these occurrences have reference to literal prostitution. O ne occasion is found in 4:10, where Hosea speaks o f prostitu­ tion both literally and figuratively in the same verse: They will eat bu t n o t be satisfied; they will practice prostitution but not break forth, because they have abandoned Yahweh to revere prostitution. T his verse is in the form o f a “futility curse,” a prediction o f unfulfilled expectations as a result o f sin. T h e first use o f “prostitution” in the verse is literal. It alludes to the ritual cultic prostitution that was designed to stimulate the powers o f nature. Through Hosea, G od says that the literal prostitu­ tion will not work. Israel will n o t “break forth ,” that is, be more productive in population and agriculture. In stating the reason for this, the verse makes it clear that Yahweh would not bless Israel because o f their revering (figurative) “prostitution,” that is, other gods in th eir infidelity to his covenant T h at is what “abandon Yahweh” means in H osea as well as elsewhere in the O ld Testam ent— the rejection o f exclusive faith in and obedience to Yahweh in favor o f other faith and worship. Su ch other faith and worship could be either instead o f or in addition to true orthodoxy. It made little difference. Failure to seek and obey only the Lord was religious prostitution. In 4:14, znh is likewise used both literally and figuratively: Shall I n o t punish your daughters, since they turn to prostitution? A nd your daughters-in-law, since they commit adultery? HOSEA

20

Indeed, th e m en make offerings w ith th e prostitutes, A nd sacrifice w ith the cult prostitutes! A people that lacks understanding must be ruined because it turns to prostitution. H ere the literal practice o f pagan worship prostitution is clearly in focus, probably in each o f the first four lines. In typical synonymous parallelisms (here betw een “daughters” and “daughters-in-law” and betw een “prostitution” [znh ] and “adultery” [n ’p ] in th e first couplet), the first line’s term s (“daughters” and “prostitution”) are paramount— that is, the topic o f individual adultery is n o t the focus here. In the final line o f the verse “prostitution” has its m etaphorical meaning once again. W hat has ruined Israel is its rejection o f G od, n o t a single type o f immorality, disgusting as literal prostitu­ tion is. A t th e very outset o f the Book o f Hosea, Israel’s “prosti­ tution” constitutes the m etaphorical them e for th e opening prophecy, th e subject o f w hich is G od’s impending rejection o f Israel. In 1:2, G od tells Hoseæ “M arry a prostituting woman and (have) prostituting children; because th e land has gone thoroughly in to prostitution, away from Yahweh.” T h e command makes a hyperbolic, that is, purposely exag­ gerative, point: Israel has so little interest in the Lord (“has gone thoroughly into prostitution”) that any woman H osea marries and any children he has w ill alm ost surely be tainted by the religious infidelity in the N orth. T h is was n o t an idle characterization, since, fo r example, there was n o t a single legitimate place o f worship in (northern) Israel. O nly th e tem ple at Jerusalem was legitimate, and in H osea’s day it, too, was corrupted by the presence o f shrines for th e w or­ ship o f pagan gods and goddesses. G od’s command did n o t m ean that Hosea could n o t find a decent wife to m arry o r th at his children would automatically grow up to be idol­ aters even if h e raised them otherwise. It was a way o f stating 21

Prostitution

th e seriousness o f the apostasy o f Israel during the last days o f th e reign o f Jeroboam II (703-753), when this revelation came to Hosea. O n e m odern translation, the New International V ersion (NIV), has misjudged the range o f meaning o f the root znh and has rendered H os 1:2 as follow s: “G o take to yourself an adulterous wife and children o f unfaithfulness because the land is guilty o f the vilest adultery in departing from th e Lord.” T his translation is misleading because adultery, nor­ mally rendered in th e Hebrew by th e root n’p, is quite different from prostitution. It is thus used only rarely in the O ld Testam ent as a m etaphor for infidelity to G od's covenant T h e NIV translators o f Hosea, apparently m oti­ vated by a desire to avoid suggesting that G od would com ­ mand som eone to marry a prostitute, ended up implying that he actually m arried an adulteress, thus missing th e w hole point o f H osea’s regular use o f znh in a nonliteral m anner. Fortunately, this is an isolated aberration, and in other m odem translations the reader can easily discern th at “prostitution” is norm ally a figurative reference to unfaith­ fulness. Hos 4:12 characterizes Israel as led astray by a “prostitut­ ing spirit” (rûah z enûnîm). T his is a condem nation o f a whole society’s way o f thinking and one o f many examples in the Bible o f the pervasiveness o f corporate sin. T h e breadth o f this corporate sin can be seen in 4:11 and 4:12 together: W ine and fru it o f the vine dulls the m ind o f my people! H e consults his wood! His staff advises him! For a prostituting spirit has led them astray, A nd they are prostituting themselves away from their God. HOSEA

22

Hosea cites tw o instances o f Israel’s corporate sin as a synec­ doche for its pattern o f “prostitution.” These tw o are drug abuse (in this case alcohol abuse) and the silly practice o f rhabdomancy. These instances o f personal debauchery and religious folly, respectively, are evidence o f what sort o f a national “spirit” inhabits Israel. In 5:4, Israel’s prostituting spirit is more broadly characterized by descriptions o f the nation’s “deeds,” their lack o f knowledge (i.e., exclusive faithfulness) o f the Lord, and their (selfish) pride. T h e final appearance o f znh in Hosea comes at 9:1: For you have prostituted yourself away from your God. You love the prostitute’s fee at every grain threshing floor. T his suggests a main motivation for the people's infidelity— materialism. Yahweh was ju st n ot seen as a fertility G od, specially able to bring the kind o f rich harvest that would fill the grain threshing floors w ith an abundance for the year ahead. W hat the nation wanted was a lot o f everything. They wanted wealth and the ease and pleasure it would bring. They failed to find Yahweh attractive any m ore (cf. 2 :7 ,1 3 ) because faithfulness to him , w ith all its required self-denial and generosity toward others, was hardly what would m eet their materialistic requirements. Israel should have stayed married to her divine husband. Instead, she chose prostitution— and reaped its rewards.

T he reliance of the prophets on the Law In O ld Testament tim es, laws were understood to be paradigmatic rather than exhaustive, and legal citation was therefore an irrelevant idea. A paradigmatic understanding o f law holds that it is not necessary in a law code to spell out \

23

The Reliance o f the Prophets on the Law

every possible situation requiring regulation, nor to identify every possible option for punishm ent in each o f those cases. It is enough that a law code should suggest how judges and juries should decide civil and crim inal legal cases by giving exam ples o f misdeeds and typical punishments, or exam ples o f regulations that would apply to typical societal practices. M odem W estern law codes are different They are o f the type that we call exhaustive. Every crime is defined precisely in the law code. I f it isn’t in the law code, it isn’t a crim e. Regulations must be spelled out in the code, as well. If they aren’t there, they aren’t binding on anyone and cannot be enforced. N ot surprisingly, in an attem pt to be exhaus­ tive, m odem W estern law codes contain thousands o f laws printed on thousands o f pages. Am erican federal tax laws alone occupy m ore than a thousand pages o f text, and court decisions and Internal Revenue Service guidelines on the federal tax law occupy thousands m ore. State and local laws and court interpretations magnify the total bulk o f the codes all the m ore. Even so, some people who com mit o f­ fenses against society are either never brought to justice or are never punished because o f what we popularly call “loop­ holes’’ in the law. T h e people who make the laws simply can’t think o f everything, and th e prosecutors or courts interpreting the laws are reluctant to apply any law to any case it does n o t precisely f it In other words, th e law codes are n o t really “exhaustive’’ even though they are supposed to be. N evertheless, m odem W estern nations are com mitted to the exhaustive law philosophy. N ot so in the world o f th e O ld Testam ent A ll law was paradigmatic, and there were no such things as loopholes. Laws gave a general idea to judges and juries o f how they should handle crim e or civil regulations, but nobody in the legal systems actually referred verbatim to the law codes in deciding a court case. Legal citation, as such, did not exist Judges and juries reasoned by general analogy to w ritten or HOSEA

24

common law in deciding court cases— they did n ot look a case up, read it, and see if its wording applied. Instead they used their own good judgment as to w hether its principle applied. Hammurabi’s Law, from about 1700 B.C. in Babylo­ nia, contains 282 laws, a very large number for its day, but still n o t even remotely “exhaustive.’’ Accordingly, the thousands o f court case records that have survived on clay tablets from cities and towns in Babylonia after Hammurabi’s Law was widely distributed never once m ention the Law or cite any o f its provisions. Legal citation was n ot a practice o f that era. T h e prophets do n ot cite the Law o f Moses either. T h at Law has 613 commandments bu t is still not cited anywhere in the prophetical books. It is cited frequently in the New Testament, but that is because by Rom an tim es legal citation had developed. In the past, some critics o f the O ld Testa­ m ent tried to argue that since th e prophets never cited the M osaic Law, it must not have existed in their day, being a later fabrication. T his we now know to be a w orthless argu­ m en t T h e lack o f legal citation, however, does present us w ith an im portant theological challenge: discerning how the prophets do in fact refer to the Law if they do not cite it verbatim. T h e answer, in sh o rt is that they refer to the Law by allusion. They don’t directly quote it; they allude to its provisions by making statem ents that are so similar to the Law or so consistent with it that it is obvious that they have it in m ind Hos 4:2 is a parade example o f prophetic allusion to the Mosaic covenant, specifically to the Ten Commandments: “Cursing, lying, murder, stealing, and adultery break forth in the land, and the idols crowd against one another.” In this single sentence, six o f the ten commandments are alluded to. T he correlation may be summarized as follows: Cursing (Heb. ’lh ):Commandment No. 3 (Exod 20:7; D eut 5:11)

25

The Reliance o f the Prophets on the Law

Lying (Heb. k hš):Commandment No. 9 (Exod 20:16; D eut 5:20) Murder (Heb. rsh):Commandment No. 6 (Exod 20:13; D eut 5:17) Stealing (Heb. gnp):Commandment No. 8 (Exod 20:15; D eut 5:19) Adultery (Heb. n ’p ):Commandment No. 7 (Exod 20:14; D eut 5:18) Idols (Heb dā m îm ):Commandment No. 2 (Exod 20 :4 -6 ; D eut 5 :8 -10)4 Hosea does not allude to the Commandments in the order they occur in the Pentateuch, nor by the identical vocabu­ lary words in all cases. He is n ot citing; he is alluding, in the same way that we speak o f “freedom o f religion” as guaran­ teed by die U .S. C onstitution even though that phrase does not occur in the C onstitution, but is only a summary o f what the First Amendment says about religion. Many o f the wording choices in the book reveal a depend­ ency on the Pentateuchal Law, and this dependency can be seen especially in statements that make sense only if one knows in detail the content o f the Mosaic covenant. For example, in 7:16, Israel’s coming judgment for its long his­ tory o f disobedience to Yahweh is described as resulting in “m ockery on them in the land o f Egypt.” In 8:13, the people are told that the Lord “will remember their guiltiness, and he will punish their sins. Behold they will return to E gypt" Such statements have often puzzled commentators unaware o f the significance o f the word “Egypt” in Deuteronomy, or o f the prophets’ awareness o f i t D eut 28:68 states that if Israel breaks the covenant, G od will send them back in misery5 to “Egypt” A literal return to the land from which they escaped is not meant, and the statement is enigmatic unless one recognizes that “Egypt” in the covenant curses is a metonymy for “land o f exile.” O nly w ith this im portant HOSEA

26

vocab u lary usage o f the covenant already established do Hos

7:16 and 8:13 make sense. Concentrated in the M osaic Law mainly in Lev 26 and D eut 2 8 -33 are the various types o f curses and blessings that constitute the covenant’s sanctions. W e will discuss these blessings and curses further in the pages ju st ahead. W hat is remarkable about their connection w ith Hosea is that he, like all other prophets, never m entions a prediction o f woe or weal that is not an allusion to one o f the types already found in the Law. In 1:5, for example, the prediction o f destruction via war echoes such predictions as found in Lev 26:25 and D eut 28:49. In 3:5, th e promised return from exile alludes to such promises in D eut 4:30 and 30:4 -5 . In 5:7, the m alediction that “a new people will eat their portions” shows a dependence on such Pentateuchal statements as D eut 28:33, “A people you do not know will eat what your land and labor produce.” In 13:15, the description o f coming drought reflects such predictions as that o f Lev 26:19 or that o f D eut 28:22-24. A nd so on. A final example o f Hosea’s use o f the books o f the Law may be seen in 1:9, where G od restates his name identically as revealed in Exod 3:14 but in the negative. T h e name revealed (or more properly, re-revealed) to Moses in Exod 3 in Hebrew is in the first person, Ahyeh rather than Yahweh. Hos 1:9 makes use o f this same name, Ahyeh, in the other­ wise incomprehensible sentence “You are not my people and I am not your Ahyeh [Le., not your Lord].” W ith the Law in mind, the statem ent has meaning. W ithout it, the resulting mistranslated Hebrew (“will not be to you” or the like) is strangely awkward.

Blessings and curses: the carrot and the stick W hat do the prophets talk about most? In a general sense it is the relationship o f Israel to Yahweh. But, specifically, 27

Blessings and Curses: The Carrot and the Stick

what topics do they m ost frequently touch upon? I f you put your finger randomly on a page o f O ld Testam ent prophecy, what would you have th e highest statistical chance o f pointing to? T h e answer is: blessings and curses. Hosea’s era (roughly 760-722 B.C.) was that o f th e end o f (northern) Israel H e preached doom, and th e words th e Lord had given him soon came true. H is m ost frequent assignment was describing covenant curses, explaining th eir necessity in light o f Israel’s history o f violating the M osaic covenant T h e doomsaying also demanded a broad look at the overall plan o f G o d A fter all, eloquent denunciations o f the nation and graphic depictions o f its coming destruc­ tio n rouse questions: Is that all? Is Israel’s history coming to a com plete end? Has G od abandoned th e nation he rescued from slavery in Egypt and brought to a land o f promise? Thus predictions o f immediate, short-range m iseries lead to predictions about the ultim ate, long-range future. Hosea, like other prophets, provides answers to both sorts o f con­ cerns, and these occupy the m ajority o f th e book that bears his name. Indeed, one can say that nearly all o f th e material in the book falls into one o f three categories: 1. Evidence that curses are warranted (e.g., 1:2; 2 :4 -5 ,1 3 ; 4 :1 -2 ,7 -8 ,1 0 -1 4 ,1 7 -1 8 ; 5 :1 -5 ,1 0 -1 1 ,1 3 ; etc.) 2. Predictions o f curses about to be fulfilled (e.g., 1 :4 -5 ,6 , 9; 2 :3 ,6 ,9 -1 3 ; 3:4; 4 :3 ,5 -6 ,9 -1 0 ,1 9 ; 5 :2 ,6 -1 0 ,1 4 -1 5 ; etc.) 3. Predictions o f ultim ate blessings, to follow th e tim e o f the curses (e.g., 1:10-2:1; 2:1 4 -2 3 ; 3:5; 6 :1 -3 ; etc.) T h e parts o f passages that contain evidence that curses are warranted are n o t self-contained units in themselves but subunits w ithin curse passages. T hat is, one does n ot find in Hosea passages that describe covenant-breaking sins con­ cluding w ithout saying what will happen as a resu lt T h e HOSEA

28

result (i.e., a curse or curses) is always specified. Indeed, one way that we know we haven’t yet come to the end o f a full prophetic judgment oracle is if we haven’t yet reached the point o f learning die curse(s) that will com e as a result o f the sin being recounted (e.g., 5:8—7:1; 13:2-16). T h e passages that contain predictions o f ultim ate blessings are often; however, self-contained (e.g., 14:1-8). T here is litde need to describe what Israel will do to redeem itself from exile and divine rejection, that is, the deeds that w ill precede its restoration blessings. T h e reason is, simply, that Israel cannot redeem itself. T h e blessings o f th e latter days will n ot be contingent on a long history o f good behavior in th e same way that the curses o f the immediate future are the result o f a long history o f bad behavior. R estoration bless­ ings are gifts o f G od’s grace, n o t rewards for deeds. N either evidence o f sin, n o r predictions o f curses, nor predictions o f restoration blessings are exhaustive. They are, rather, samples o f a fuller picture only partly painted by Hosea’s inspired words. O n e or tw o instances o f sin in a passage (e.g., 9 :1 0 ,1 5 in 9:10-17) suffice to suggest a whole range o f covenant violations. T h e m ention o f one or tw o types o f curses is enough to suggest th e full range o f divine judgments (twenty-seven types in all) summarized in the curse portions o f th e Pentateuch (Lev 26 and D eut 28-32). A single kind o f restoration blessing is enough to h in t at the broad range (ten types in the Pentateuchal lists in Lev 26 and D eut 4 and 30) o f good things ahead for th e people o f G od after their judgm ent is com plete.6 T h e M osaic covenant predicts tw o kinds o f blessings for Israel, immediate and eschatological, bu t th e prophets, in­ cluding Hosea, predict only one kind. T h at is a function o f their position in history. Hosea, one o f the earliest o f the classical or “writing” prophets is nevertheless at the end o f a m ajor tim e span in Israel’s history as a nation. T h e tim e for the immediate, or original, blessings o f the covenant had

29

Blessings and Curses: The Carrot and the Stick

ended. T h e original blessings were those G od gave to the people, as he had promised through Moses, initially upon their entering the promised land and thereafter until their end as an independent nation. Hosea was not called by G od to predict any more o f these blessings because G od’s plan was now to decimate and exile his people, not to keep bless­ ing them in the land o f promise. T h e original blessing era was ending. Hosea was called to predict the other kind o f covenant blessing, however— the eschatological kind. T h e restoration era, when such blessings would be experienced, had obviously n ot yet arrived, and the Israelites— those, that is, who were even willing to pay attention to the prophets o f Yahweh— needed the hope o f restoration blessings as an encouragement during the agony o f the punishment days ju st ahead (or already starting; cf., e.g., Amos 4:6-11). There are more and longer curse passages and their sup­ porting evidence-of-guilt passages in Hosea than there are restoration blessing passages. T h at is the usual ratio. Hosea’s contemporary audience was entering an era o f judgment, and G od obviously desired that they should not fail to un­ derstand what was happening to them (curse) and why (evi­ dence). It is also the case that the stick is more effective than the carrot in some circumstances. W hen the stick is immedi­ ately present and the carrot is a long way off, the carrot may have some effect, but the stick will have more. Thus all o f the prophets say somewhat more about the past and present o f their contemporaries than about the future, that is the eschatological restoration. M oreover, the m ajority o f those to whom they preached were the objects o f wrath rather than o f blessing. It makes sense that we should have more o f the one than the other. Quantity is not quality, o f course, and our appreciation o f theological them es cannot be based solely on ratios o f woe to weal in Hosea or other prophetical books. Hosea sees by G od’s revelation both the near and the distant. Both help HOSEA

30

shape behavior. W hile the nation’s fate was already sealed, righteous individuals in th e mid-eighth century B.C. were yet able to hope for the eventual blessing that the book describes. They lived in a wicked world, ju st as we do, and could, by trust in God, escape its ultimate consequences. They could also be reassured both by watching G od’s harsh word come true in their lifetim es, as well as by promises o f things that would come to pass even long after their life on earth was over, just as we should be reassured both by the New Covenant promises o f the second coming o f C hrist and the final judgment, looking toward eternal life. These promises guarantee to us that our obedience io the Lord and our membership in his people are not in vain. W e see a cursed world but know that its eventual redemption has been secured. Hosea’s audience could relate in the same way to the blessings and curses o f the Mosaic covenant

Corporate and individual sin Hosea uses the word "people” (Heb. ‘am ) seventeen tim es. In four o f these cases th e term occurs in statem ents about th e future restoration w hen Israel w ill be th e true and proper people o f G od (1:11; 2 :1 ,2 3 ). In th e remaining th irteen cases (from 1:9 to 11:7), however, what is said about th e “people” (most often, “my people”) is that they are in one way or another evil, deserving o f punishm ent. A n example would be that o f 4:5: “my people perish for lack o f know ledge,” or 10:14, “th e tum ult w ill rise against your people.” W h en H osea speaks o f sin, disobedience, rebellion, and wickedness, it is usually “you” (plural or col­ lective) or “they” w ho have done it; th e verbs and pronouns in such contexts are in the plural m uch m ore often than in th e singular. Frequently it is simply “Israel” or “Ephraim ” or th e like that are said to have sinned and to be deserving o f judgm ent In these and other ways, Hosea, like other

31

Corporate and Individual Sin

prophets, frequently preaches G od’s condem nation o f an entire society as a u n it T h e sins o f any individual are n o t noted, except for a special analogical purpose, th at is, the command about Hosea’s second wife, m entioned in chapter 3 bu t n o t by name, whom h e m arried after she had com m itted adultery and w ith w hom h e did n o t consumm ate th e marriage (3:3).7 O therw ise, if sin is m entioned in th e Book o f Hosea, it is corporate sin. Frequently the corporate sin Hosea prophecies about is national sin— that o f the N orthern Kingdom or, several times, o f Judah (4:15; 5 :5 ,1 0 -1 4 ; 6 :4 ,1 1 ; 8:14; 10:11; 12:2). Occasionally, a smaller group is in view. T h e priests (4 :4 ,9 ; 5:1; 6:9) or the prophets (4:5; 9:7-8) are condemned as a group for their sins and/or for their com plicity in the people’s re­ bellion against God. O n some occasions, corporate sin is identified in a city, such as Gilead (6:8; 12:11), Gilgal (9:15; 12:11), or Bethel (called in Hosea Beth-Awen; e.g., 10:5). “Gilead is a city o f evildoers,” says 6:8. “If Gilead is evil, what worthlessness they are!” says 12:11. T his does not mean that Hosea was unaware o f individual sin. It means simply that G od’s message through the prophet was directed to a people, n o t to individuals, and concerned the fate o f that people, rather than the fate o f individuals. Rarely, prophets were inspired to prophecy about the frites o f individuals, as in Amos’s words to Amaziah about the frite o f that priest and his family. Amos 7:17 records Amos’s pre­ diction o f Amaziah’s exile— which, however, ends with a statement about the exile o f the whole nation o f Israel, obvi­ ously the more significant p o in t T h e theological question m ost commonly raised by m en­ tion o f corporate sin is this: Is it fair that G od should judge an entire group w hen surely some o f its individual members were not party to th e sins being judged? T h e answer to this question is, in one sense, by definition yes, since it is G od’s HOSEA

32

behavior that sets the standards o f what is fair and what is n o t T h e answer, however, should also be yes from the standpoint o f a reasonable understanding o f G od’s verbal revelation. W e are told that he punishes people for their own sins, not those o f others (e.g., Ezek 18; 33:1-20). Thus whatever he does w ith regard to corporate punishm ent for corporate sins will n ot preclude his being fair to individuals. Equity for individuals, however, often takes on an eschatological frame rather than a this-world frame, as m uch o f Scripture (including but hardly lim ited to Job, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation) makes very clear. G od’s servants have no right to expect this life to be fair. They can expect only that the widespread unfairness o f this life w ill be over­ turned and compensated for by the final judgment and the rewards o f eternity. Biblical statem ents about punishm ent for corporate sin fit this standard. T hey do n o t assume that innocent people escape th e general punishm ent imposed upon th e general populace o f a nation or city or group. They are realistic, since life has always held such risks— for example, for inno­ cen t wom en and children in war or for livestock in severe drought or filmine (Hos 4:3). T hey never suggest th at th e tem porary m iseries o f this life, w hich itself is by definition temporary, constitute a final judgm ent o f G od. Israel’s geopolitical judgm ent in ancient tim es, or th e tem poral judgm ent o f its priests or prophets as a group, or any oth er corporate punishm ents, are essentially lim ited. O nly th e final judgm ent has th e ability to separate out individual sin from corporate sin and thus impose appropriate punish­ m ents o f everlasting duration. T h at Israel’s corporate punishm ents as announced by prophets like H osea are n o t perm anent is obvious in th e ex­ pectation o f restoration that surrounds such predictions. T h at all prophets were n o t corrupt even though con­ demned in group term s is obvious from th e fact th at H osea 33

Corporate and Individual Sin

and others like him (Amos, etc.) were exceptions to the prevailing prophetic corruption. A ll citizens were surely not actually involved in idolatry and other forms o f covenant breaking, as suggested by the fact that Hosea’s words were preserved by people who apparently revered their call to be separate horn the prevailing pattern o f sin. And so on. N evertheless, m uch o f th e world’s sin is corporate, rather than m erely individual— societally patterned and ac­ cepted sin, sufficiently pervasive that th e society (or subsec­ tion thereof) “as a w hole” or “on balance” is seen as wicked. Hosea’s preaching reflected this at virtually every turn: T h e “land o f Israel has gone thoroughly into prostitution” (1:2). Sinful Israel is treated as a single unit, corporately personi­ fied as Yahweh’s prostituting wife (2:2-15). “Ephraim is in league w ith idols” (4:17). O f Israel as a whole, G od says, “your sins are so many, your hostility so great” (9:7). If there is corporate sin, influencing individuals to par­ take in the group’s corruption, there is also the promise o f corporate redemption, inviting individuals to reject the pre­ vailing evil and submit themselves to G od’s will looking forward to being part o f a redeemed people: L et us return to Yahweh, For he has to m us apart, yet he will heal us; he has attacked us yet he will bandage us. (6:1) W hat will Ephraim have to do any more with idols? I will have responded and I will bless him. (14:8) It m ust surely b e stated that these corporate promises no more guarantee life for people bom into a group than the corporate curses condem n innocent individuals to a nega­ tive eternal fate. T here is a natural m erit in, even a necessity of, speaking o f nations and groups as corporate unities. T his

HOSEA

34

by no means negates individual responsibility. In our age o f emphasis on individual rights, the Bible’s strong representation o f corporate sin— and redemption— provides a wel­ come corrective.

Guilt and guiltiness M uch modem W estern psychological thinking differs from biblical revelation on the m atter o f guilt. Some forms o f psychotherapy and perhaps most popular psychologizing ad­ vocate the value o f introspection as one vehicle for the sup­ posedly therapeutic release o f harmful guilt. It has been pointed out by certain scholars that this notion o f guilt— as an internalized psychological disposition affecting one’s men­ tal state and behavior— is not what the Bible means by guilt.8 Biblically, guilt is n ot how you (rightly or wrongly) may feel about yourself or your life; guilt is guiltiness— trouble not with yourself but with God. From the Book o f Hosea it is clear that Israel had no trouble w ith guilty feelings— what many m odems think o f when they hear the word “g u ilt" Israel, indeed, might have benefrtted from some such feelings, in light o f the fact that her behavior was deserving o f punishm ent Instead o f advo­ cating a therapeutic release o f his people’s guilt feelings, G od through Hosea says: Ephraim’s iniquity is wrapped up, his sin is stored up. (13:12) O f the attitude o f th e people, G od says it is sinful and de­ serving o f punishment: T h eir heart is deceptive. Now they incur gu ilt (10:2)

35

Guilt and Guiltiness

O nly repentance can save the nation. G od will temporarily abandon them until such tim e as they turn from their guilty behavior to him, repentant: I will go back to my place until they suffer for their guilt and seek me. W hen in trouble they will search me o u t (5:15) T h e concept o f guilt, or guiltiness, is m ost commonly expressed via the word ›šm in Hebrew. A nother Hebrew term , dā m, can refer to guilt as well, th e guilt that comes from harming others. It means literally “blood,” but has a range o f meaning that covers our English notions o f “bloodshed,” “death,” and “murder,” as well as “blood-guilt” It is used in this latter sense in Hos 12:14: H is Lord w ill leave his blood-guilt upon him and will repay him for his contem pt T his statem ent leads to another about Israel's guilt, found in the very next verse o f the prophecy: Truly he has spoken terror against Ephraim, he has raised his voice against Israel: “Because he has incurred guilt w ith Baal, he must die.” (13:1) W e note that Israel's guilt is never described as a m atter o f their own imagination; they all too often saw nothing wrong w ith their behavior. Instead, part o f Hosea’s prophetic re­ sponsibility was to teach the people that they were genuinely guilty. H is preaching was intended to raise their awareness o f their guilt, w hich was real, and dangerous to them — not from the standpoint o f their em otional health, but from the standpoint o f the w rath o f God. H is message to them was HOSEA

36

not to “let it out” bu t to cut it out: “A s for you, Israel, do n o t incur guilt from Yahweh!” (4:15). Y ah w eh’s “w ife” and “child” Many ancient and m odem religions are sexually dualistic in their view o f deity. They believe that both male and female gods exist, and that many, if not all o f them , are paired. In some instances the pairing is a marriage; in others it is what we m ight call cohabitation— or even an affair. Such dualism is absolutely foreign to the teaching o f the Bible. T h e dualistic magical practices o f the Canaanites, such as “marrying” seed sown in fields in an effort to increase crop yields, or “marrying” cloth in clothing in an effort to stimulate the fertility o f flax o r sheep (Lev 19:19), or boiling a male goat kid in his m other’s milk (Exod 23.T7) were strictly out­ lawed, as was ritual sex in worship, also essentially dualistic (see above, T h e A ttractions o f Idolatry). T he worship o f any god other than Yahweh was forbidden, and this certainly in­ cluded the worship o f a goddess (cf. Exod 34:13; D eut 12:3). To the dualistic Canaanites, on the other hand, it was illogical to think that their god Baal would be celibate. H e had to have a consort, whom we know as A sherah (Judg 3:7; 1 Kgs 18:19). Since m ost o f the Israelites during m ost o f their history were not orthodox followers o f the revealed truth, bu t apos­ tatized idolaters, it is reasonable to imagine that at least some o f them would corrupt the worship o f Yahweh in the style o f dualistic Canaanite religion, and begin to believe that Yahweh ought to have a goddess consort, too. T his did, indeed, hap­ pen (cf. D eut 16:21; 2 Kgs 23:6). Extrabiblically, inscriptions and paintings found at the Sinai wilderness shrine o f Kuntillet A jrud prove that some Israelites from about the tim e o f Hosea worshiped “Yahweh and his A sherah.”9 T h at is, they simply borrowed Baal’s goddess girlfriend and gave her also to Yahweh. It wasn’t orthodox, bu t neither were they. It was

37

Yahweh’s “W ife” and “Child”

dualistic, forbidden by the Mosaic Law, but believed and prac­ ticed nevertheless. W h at about th e true biblical view o f Yahweh? Obviously he was n o t m arried to a goddess nor cohabiting w ith one. N evertheless, there is a sense in w hich he had a wife— though n ot a divine wife and n ot a literal wife. Yahweh’s “w ife" was, metaphorically, Israel, his people (cf. Isa 54:6; Jer 3:1; etc). Hosea reflects this metaphorical marriage especially in chapters 1-3 . Som e scholars operating from an essentially antisupem atural bias have assumed that the origin o f these chapters was in Hosea’s own experience w ith an unhappy marriage, w hich he then projected upon Yahweh and Israel in a theological manner. In feet, we have no reason to think that Hosea’s marriages (mentioned in C hs 1 and 3) were unhappy. Yahweh’s metaphorical marriage was, however, very unhappy, and it is the subject o f the elegant allegorical divorce story in 2 :2 -1 5 in w hich Israel is cast in the role o f a woman who keeps cheating on her husband, that is, relying on other gods instead o f Yahweh. In that passage, she is charged by Yahweh in a symbolic divorce proceeding: “Make the accusation that she is n ot my wife and I am n ot her husband” (2:2). She is called a “disgrace” (v 5); one who has taken “lovers” (w 5 ,7 ,1 0 ,1 2 ,1 3 ); and Yahweh is called her “first husband” (v 7). To w in her back he will “romance her” (v 14). She, happily, will eventually “respond . . . as she did when she was young,” that is, when Israel in the wilderness did n ot yet know the allures o f the gods o f Canaan and thought only o f the Lord. Hosea makes other, m uch briefer, allusions to th e meta­ phorical marriage o f Israel and her G od (e.g., 4:15; 8:9). T h e concept is found in many other parts o f Scripture as well (e.g., Ps 45; Ezek 16), particularly in its New Testam ent form , where th e church is the virgin “bride o f C hrist” (2 C or 11:2; Eph 5 :25-26; R ev 19:7; 21:20; 22:17) emphasizing, HOSEA

38

in contrast to Israel’s infidelity, a chaste people ready for eternal “marriage” to God. T h e oth er com m on family relationship m etaphor, used in th e Bible to express th e dependency o f Israel on G od, is th at o f “father” and “child” or “son.” T his kind o f language is used in th e New Testam ent in a considerably m ore literal sense to describe th e adoption in to th e family o f G od that th e believer in C hrist is privileged to enjoy (e.g., R om 8:16— 21; G al 3:26; Eph 1:5). M uch less com mon, however, is the m etaphorical identification o f th e people o f G od in a corpo­ rate sense as G od’s “child” in th e singular. Exod 4:22 (“Israel is my firstborn son . . . L et my son go”) is proba­ bly th e backdrop for Hosea’s employment o f th is rare m etaphor in 11:1: W hen Israel was a child I loved him . O u t o f Egypt I called my son. A s a classic instance o f sensus plenior (“fuller meaning”) in prophecy, this verse’s unusual wording referred n ot only to the exodus from Egypt o f the nation Israel, but o f the exodus from Egypt o f th e embodiment and savior o f that nation, Jesus C h rist Two verses later (11:3), Hosea returns to the father-child metaphor in a poignant illustration o f the love o f G od shown unstintingly to his offspring from the beginning o f the stub­ born child’s life: It was I who taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by th e arms; bu t they were n o t aware that I restored them to health. Israel was a wayward wife, a rebellious child. Fortunately for his people, G od was a husband who knew how to 39

Yahweh’s “W ife" and “Child”

lovingly punish and restore, and a father w ho knew how to lovingly discipline and m ake secure forever.

T h e distant past and the vittimate future: the long view on Israel Hosea’s original audience heard him preach during the years from about 760 to about 722 B.C. M uch o f his inspired message concerned the situation in those decades in the N orthern Kingdom. H e also assumed some ability on the part o f his audience to appreciate their history as a people, both in the recent and the distant past, as well as their ultimate fu­ ture. T he past was, o f course, a given, a m atter o f common knowledge. T he fu tu re was another m atter, though in gen­ eral terms ju st as knowable as the past to those who had faith in the true G od and listened to his prophets. O rthodox Israelites, few though they were, had an advan­ tage in looking at both their past and their future. It had long ago been revealed. Already through M oses th e story o f th e nation, from beginning to end, had been told. T h e Is­ raelites o f th e generation bom in th e wilderness had heard th e sweep o f history, including the basic account o f Israel’s rescue from Egypt, the wandering in th e wilderness, the conquest o f the promised land, the long tenure in that land, their eventual destruction as a nation and exile for sin, th eir return horn exile and resettlem ent, and their restoration as a new people in the Lord’s new kingdom. T h e sweep o f Is­ rael’s history is told in several places in the Pentateuch, but m ost systematically in D eut 1-4, and succinctly in D eut 4:2 0 -3 1 , where the entire period from th e captivity in Egypt to the New Covenant is summarized. A ll th e prophets reflect this perspective. Som e propheti­ cal books, usually th e longer ones, display knowledge o f it routinely. In others, m ostly th e shorter books, th e Pentateuchal outlines o f Israel’s past, present, and future are HOSEA

40

obviously assumed, even if n o t overtly displayed. In this regard, Israel is seen as a continuum in th e O ld Testam ent (and indeed all the more so in the New Testam ent, where the church is the automatic heir to the O ld Testam ent promises to Israel; G al 3:29). Every generation may be referred to as “you” w hether in the past, present, or future from th e point o f view o f the speaker and audience. Each generation is identified w ith all the others. T h e generation o f th e Exodus is also the generation o f the exile. A nd so on. (C f. the pro­ nouns in D eut 4:20-31.) T his general sense o f history is richly illustrated in Hosea’s many references to the past and future. H is audi­ ence hears about events o f tim es to them long past as well as some more recent to their own era, and also about events for them — and to some extent for us— yet to come. Particular attention is paid to th e past in the “retrospec­ tive” section o f th e book (after 9:9), although this is only a m atter o f degree and n ot o f kind. In 11:8, th e Abraham ic-era ruin o f Admah and Zeboiim (Le., around 2000 B.C.) is m entioned. T hese cities were neighbors to Sodom and G o­ m orrah, and shared in their destruction, described in G en 19. Hosea also makes use o f parts o f Jacob’s story (1750 B.C.?), in 1 2 :3 ,4 ,1 2 . G od’s guidance and protection o f his people has a long history, and reference to Jacob helps re­ m ind Hosea’s audience o f that fact. T h e Exodus o f Israel from Egypt (ca. 1440 B.C.) is som ething Hosea m entions of­ ten 2:15; 9:10; 11:1; 12:9; 13:4), as many o f the other prophets do. It was a point o f contact w ith th e belief, lim ited as it was, in Yahweh on the part o f the people to whom the prophets preached. Israelites may have had distorted views o f Yahweh and may not have worshiped him properly, es­ pecially in th e N orth, but they all knew th e story o f the Exodus. T h e prophets were inspired again and again to re­ m ind people that th e G od they represented was the one who brought th e nation into being in the first place. 41

The Distant Past and the Ultimate Future

Moses (12:13) and the wilderness wandering o f the peo­ ple’s ancestors (12:9; 13:5) were topics in Hosea’s preaching. H e referred as well to the incident at Baal-Peor in Moab, w hich took place just before the conquest o f Canaan (ca. 1400 B.C.), while the Israelites were at the end o f that wilderness period (Hos 9:13; cf. Num 25). T he story o f A chor’s rebellion (Josh 7) is alluded to in 2:15, as is the settlem ent and early history o f the tribes in the days o f Joshua (Hos 9:13; 10:1; 11:3-4). T h e account in Judg 19 o f the homosexuals’ sadistic gang rape at Gibeah, one o f the most outrageous crimes in the nation’s history, is referred to in 9:9 and 10:9. It should be understood that the crime itself was greatly compounded by the unwillingness o f the people o f Benjam in to punish those responsible, thus indicating the level o f immorality tolerated during the days o f the Judges. To this level, Hosea says Israel has once again sunk. T he demand o f the people at the end o f the Judges period (Le., ca. 1050 B.C.) for a king is also recalled, in 13:10 (cf. 1 Sam 8). Later events— though still prior to Hosea’s day— are men­ tioned also. A long history o f worship at the heterodox but highly popular worship center o f Gilgal over the years is taken for granted in 9:15. Years o f alliances and attempted alliances w ith Egypt and Assyria form the backdrop for state­ ments made in 5:13; 7:11; and 8:9. T h e history o f prophetic attempts to call the people back to Yahweh is behind part o f 12:10: I spoke through the prophets, I gave them many revelations and by the prophets I gave parables. In 1:4, Hosea brings his audience’s remembrance back to Jehu’s massacre o f the Israelite and Judean royal families in 842, nearly a century before. In 10:14, he speaks o f “Shalman’s destruction o f Beth-A rbel,” something we do HOSEA

42

not otherwise know about, b u t probably an event o f scandalous brutality in the recent memory o f Hosea’s audience.10 T h e near future is the subject o f so m uch o f Hosea’s preaching, th e content o f w hich has already been discussed above, that we need n ot elaborate on that here. T h e full range o f the covenant curses, including but hardly lim ited to conquest by a foreign power and exile, was what Israel could expect soon enough (beginning w ith the Assyrian exile in 722 B.C.). T h e distant future, however, was also part o f the purview o f the divine revelation through Hosea. Israel would spend “many days” in captivity (3:4), deported to a foreign land for their sins (e.g., 10:10). T his foreign land is often referred to by the metonymy “Egypt,” w ith or w ithout the added clarification that the actual term o f exile would be served in Assyria (7:16; 8:13; 9 :3 ,6 ; 11:5). T h e vast m ajority o f th e nation would n o t survive its conquest and exile, but would die, as metaphorically related in 4:16: Yahweh will pasture them Like a lamb in the “Expanse” [hell]. Exile would not be their end. A return from exile was part o f God’s great overarching plan for his people’s history, and this, too, is addressed in the book. Hos 10:10-11 predicts the return from exile (begun in 539 B.C .; cf. Ezra 1), as does 1:10-11, where the eschatological reunification o f the peo­ ples o f Israel and Judah into a single, united, true people o f G od is announced: “T h e Judahites and Israelites will unite. They will appoint themselves a single leader, and will come up from the land/be resurrected.” A similar statem ent, openly M essianic, is made in 3:5: “Afterwards the Israelites will return to seek Yahweh their G od and David their king. They will tu rn in fear to Yahweh and his goodness in the end tim es.” Israel’s great eschatological era o f blessing is further described in 2:16-23 and 14:1-8, passages rich 43

The Distant Past and the Ultimate Future

and ornate w ith adumbrations o f the New Covenant age and beyond. From 2000 B.C. (Admah and Zeboiim) to a tim e yet in the future for us, th e long view on Israel was given. There was no excuse for anyone who listened to Hosea to fail to see the plan o f G od. Paul says w ith regard to his description o f C hrist’s coming again, “Therefore encourage one another w ith these words” (1 Thess 4:18). From the past to th e fu­ ture, the history o f the people o f G od has always been under die control o f the G od o f that people. T his was surely en­ couraging to the faithful who heard Hosea preach, ju st as it is to us who read his prophecies from the printed page.

HOSEA

44

3

JOEL

T h e Day of the Lord W idely represented in the civilizations o f th e ancient Fertile C rescent was the concept that truly great kings could win a war in a single day.1 Lesser m onarchs might require weeks, m onths, or years to conclude an armed con flict, bu t a mighty sovereign was. one who could vanquish his enem ies the same day he set out to do so. W oe to his enemies on th e day that he chose to attack! They would be defeated, his rule over them quickly established, and their fortunes thus sud' denly reversed. From the point o f view o f the great sover­ eign’s faithful subjects or allies, what a com plete change was possible in ju st a day! They could go from oppression by their enemies to rescue, from hum iliation to exaltation, from danger to peace and freedom— all in the tim e it takes th e sun to make its circuit in the heavens. For Israel, Yahweh was their great sovereign who could win his wars in a day, and thus who could deliver Israel from all its foes any tim e he chose to. Even in their many compromises 45

The Day o f the Lord

with idolatry and polytheism, this notion o f the power o f the nation’s historical God was still retained. It undoubtedly surfaced more prominently when military danger threatened, and may have been heard less in good times. Nevertheless, it remained a hope o f the people, who genuinely believed that Yahweb would never abandon the nation he had brought out o f Egypt and settled in Canaan. Having adopted the polytheistic thinking o f their day, they saw no reason to think that the Lord should be offended if other gods were worshiped as long as he was worshiped, too. Thus they tended not to be aware that he was offended by their failure to worship him exclu­ sively, and that as time had gone by he had become no longer a benign, protective sovereign, but their enemy. They kept looking for his “day” to come— a day when he would deliver them from the Assyrians or Babylonians, establish them as independent over their own affairs, and prosper them. W hat they did not realize was that his day would be instead a day o f judgment for them. Joel employs the phrase “Day o f the Lord” (Hebrew yôm yahweh) five times, distributed fairly evenly through all three chapters o f his prophecy (1:15; 2 :1 ,1 1 ,3 1 ; and 3:14). T h e phrase does not occur incidentally. It is more like a tide or summary phrase in each o f its usages, and th e subject m atter that surrounds it is not unrelated, but in one way or another addresses the topic indicated by the phrase. In other words, the Day o f the Lord is the subject o f the Book o f Joel. Joel prophesied probably in the 590s or 580s B.C., as the Babylonians were closing in for the kill against Judah. H is contemporaries, to whom he preached, knew well the con­ cept o f the Day o f the Lord, and undoubtedly identified with it in the usual manner— thinking that it would represent deliverance for Israel and defeat for her foes, namely, the Babylonians. Prophets like Amos had tried to warn prior gen­ erations that for them the day would bring punishment, not deliverance, because they had made themselves the Lord’s JO EL

46

enemies by breaking his covenant (e.g., Amos 5:18-27). It had mostly fallen on deaf ears, and the generation that comprised Joel’s audience was at any rate more likely to concentrate their attention on Isaiah’s famous prediction o f the Day o f the Lord as a tim e o f punishment for the Babylonians (Isa 13:6,9). Yes, the day would indeed bring Babylon to wailing— but the day reserved for Israel would be ju st as bad. Jo el does n o t suggest that there would be only one Day o f th e Lord. A ny tim e th e G reat King intervenes decisively in hum an history to war against his enem ies, it can be term ed a Day o f the Lord. Joel’s words point to b oth a near-tim e (for him) day and a m ore distant, eschatological day. T h is is consistent w ith th e rest o f Scripture, w here several Days o f th e Lord can be identified. T h e fall o f the N orth in 722 was one such day (Amos 5) as was th e fall o f th e Sou th in 586 (Ezek 13:5) as was the com ing o f C hrist (Mai 4:5) as w ill be his second com ing (1 T hess 5:2; 2 Pet 3:10). G reat turning points in th e plan o f G od are Days o f th e Lord, because they represent decisive victories o f G od in our fallen world. In the first part o f the Book o f Joel (1:1 to 2:17), the Day o f the Lord refers to that day when Israel will be conquered by armies doing the Lord’s bidding. In the second part o f the book, including 2:31 and 3:14, the Day o f the Lord is a later one, that is, the eschatological day when the evil powers o f the world, including the nations governed by them , w ill be defeated and the righteous vindicated. Joel’s first pericope, 1:1-20 is a call to lam ent because o f the Babylonian invasion (likened to a locust plague). It warns o f the disasters that w ill accompany the Day o f the Lord that is coming in the near future for Judah. Verse 15 says: Woe for the day! For Yahweh’s Day is near. It comes as a mighty ruin from the Almighty. 47

The Day o f the Lord

T h e book's second self-contained passage, 2 :1 -1 7 , is similar. Again, the invaders are compared to locusts, though it is clear that “the Lord’s army” (v 11) is no group o f insects. In this passage the Day o f the Lord is clearly the topic, and the phrase itself is m entioned tw ice. T h e first instance is at the outset o f the chapter: Blow the horn in Zion, Sound the alarm on my holy m ountain. L et everyone that lives in the land trem ble, Because the Day o f Yahweh is coming, because it is near, T h e day o f darkness and gloom, T h e day o f clouds and blackness. Like the dawn spreading across the hills is the populous, strong nation. Nothing like it has existed from ancient times, N or will it again for generation after generation.

(2: 1- 2) T h e second instance is at 2:11: Yahweh has raised his voice before his army! How very great is his encampment! How strong are those who carry out his words! How great is the Day o f Yahweh A nd very fearful! W h o can endure it? In both instances, as throughout the passage, the Day o f the Lord refers to th e tim e o f an overwhelming invasion o f an enemy nation, whose troops do the Lord’s bidding and whose purpose is to crush Israel. T h e proper response on the part o f the people is repentance (vv 12-17), though there JOEL

48

is every likelihood that Joel’s audience for the m ost part did n ot th ink they needed any. Joel is organized, like some o f the other prophetical books (e.g., Ezekiel and Amos), in a woe-weal pattern, w ith judgments for past and present sins dominating the early part (1:1-2:17) and promises o f postexilic restoration dominating the latter part (2:18-3:21). A s we m ight expect, then, the final tw o references to the Day o f the Lord are in the context o f hope for the glorious future that the Lord has planned for those who belong to him: T h e sun w ill be turned into darkness A nd the m oon into blood Before the coming o f the Day o f Yahweh, G reat and fearfu l A nd everyone who calls on th e name o f Yahweh w ill be saved, because there will be escape in M ount Zion, that is, Jerusalem , ju st as Yahweh has said, among the survivors, whom Yahweh will call. (2:31-32) T his promise concludes the pericope (2:18-32) w ith a note o f optimism for the eschatological future. T h e near future may involve great destruction and distress for Israel, but the eschaton w ill contain compensations for the faithful (includ­ ing subjugation o f their enemies, abundance, acceptance, the favor o f God, the presence o f his Spirit, etc.). Joel’s final use o f the phrase Day o f the Lord comes at 3:14: M êlée! M êlée in th e valley o f the verdict! For the Day o f Yahweh is near in the valley o f the verdict! 49

The Day o f the Lord

T h e context is that o f judgment upon all the nations, when Israel is vindicated and its foes on the world scene con­ demned by divine verdict. T his verdict is essentially that o f what we would call the final judgment, and the picture o f the everlasting prosperity o f the Lord’s people in vv 17-21 is essentially that o f the new heavens and new earth, including the new Jerusalem (cf. G al 4:26; Heb 12:22; R ev 21:2ff.) still to come.

T h e prophetic lam ent People who lived in ancient Israel heard laments a great deal. They heard funeral laments regularly, because their age was one when death was frequent and funeral processions a common part o f life. They also heard lament psalms sung in worship, since that practice, too, was a part o f daily life. Some prophetic laments are o f the psalm type, in which an appeal is made to God for rescue from distress, and trust in God’s ultimate goodness is expressed.2 T he majority o f laments in the O ld Testament prophetical books, however, are funeral laments, with a structure and subject matter paral­ lel to those laments that were sung for departed loved ones. A parade example o f the O ld Testament funeral lament is David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sam 1:19-27) after they were slain defending Israel against the Philistines. T he prophets often sang laments for Israel or its enemies. These were usually proleptic, anticipating a future time when the nation in question would m eet its doom. Som e are caustically critical o f the nation lamented, the funeral being an occasion for rejoicing on the part o f the people o f G od that an oppressor nation will have been eliminated from the earth. Ezekiel is especially known for his m ock funeral laments over Israel (e.g., Ezek 19) and various foreign nations (e.g., Tyre [ch 27]; Egypt [ch 30]). Amos’s predictive lament over the hill o f Israel in Amos 5:17 and Isaiah’s taunting JO EL

50

lam ent over th e fell o f th e king o f Babylon in Isa 14:4-23 are among other lengthy examples o f this prophetic form o f structuring a message from G o d Funeral laments had four typical ingredients in addition to whatever elements made the lam ent specific to a given person or group: (1) a call to mourning, (2) a eulogy for the now or future dead, (3) direct address to the now or future dead, and (4) a statem ent o f the greatness o f the tragedy to those who survive the departed T h e first pericope o f the Book o f Joel (1:2-20) contains these elements to one degree or another, and may thus be classified as a lament, or some­ what more specifically because o f its particular characteris­ tics, a call to lam ent In Joel 1:2-20 the lam ent form may be outlined as follows: w 2 -3 V4 vv 5 -7

vv 8 -1 0 vv 11-12 vv 1 3 -1 8 vv 19-20

C all to mourning, w ith direct address to those involved Greatness o f the tragedy to the survivors C all to m ourning (drunkards) and further description C all to m ourning (general) and further de­ scription C all to m ourning (fa rmers) and further de­ scription C all to m ourning (priests) and further de­ scription Appeal to the Lord and further description o f th e tragedy

Inherent in th e descriptions o f th e tragedy is th e elem ent o f “eulogy” since th e form erly abundant land, repeatedly re­ ferred to, is now laid waste. T h e land was the people’s basic financial resource. I f its vineyards were ruined (w 5 ,7 ,1 0 ) or its fig trees stripped bare (v 7) or its fields desolated (v 10) o r its olive trees w recked (v 10) or its grain and fru it 51

The Prophetic Lam ent

produce cut o ff (vv 11,12) everyone would suffer. N ot only plant life is “eulogized” in th e passage; the enemy invasion has w recked th e all-im portant stored grains and fruits (v 17) and has denied food to th e animals, b oth large and small cattle (v 18). How could an enemy invasion do all this? T he answer is found in appreciating the interaction o f human and divine warfare. Human armies did their part, in the ancient equiva­ lent o f what in m odem times is called a “scorched earth pol­ icy.” Armies seized whatever they needed to eat, salted land that was under cultivation to prevent those they were con­ quering from using it again (cf. Judg 9:45), burned fields (cf. Judg 15:4-5), and filled in water sources (cf. 2 Kgs 3:19,25). T his invasion was also the work o f God— he fought, too (2:1,25). Unleashing the curses o f the Mosaic covenant against Judah,3 G od added to the work o f their conquerors by bringing about a drought, so that the usually available coun­ tryside areas o f pasturage (vv 18,19) and the water sources (v 20) were dry. Joel and the Judeans o f his time had much, indeed, to lam ent T heir funeral was at hand. Death, the essential final curse o f th e covenant, was closing in on them because o f their sins Conquest, hum an and divine T he Day o f the Lord is the central, indeed, exclusive, topic o f the Book o f Joel. Since the Day o f the Lord derives from the concept o f decisive war conquest, much in Joel will obvi­ ously be about conquest. There are in fa c t three types o f conquest that are described in one way or another in the book: (1) a foreign nation's conquest o f Israel (Le., the Babylo­ nian conquest o f the 580s B.C.), (2) Yahweh’s divine conquest o f Israel, Yahweh being at the head o f his “army,” a force clearly not limited to human warriors, and (3) Yahweh’s di­ vine eschatological conquest o f the nations who had once JO EL

52

oppressed Israel, this conquest now rescuing rather than pun­ ishing Israel. W e have noted already that Joel’s lam ent in chapter 1 de­ scribes some o f the results o f the attack o f Israel’s human foe in a m anner that also focuses on the concom itant role o f Yahweh as Israel’s divine foe. A nother way o f expressing this is to say that no nation conquered Israel, w hether partially or entirely, w hether temporarily or permanently, o f its own initiative. God, who controls the events o f nations, was al­ ways behind any conquest o f Israel. Indeed, he was always behind any conquest o f Israel’s foes. Israel never won or lost a battle on its own. W hen it came to war involving Israel, th e Lord was fighting, too. Israel itself had once been a conquering nation on God’s behalf. It had defeated the Canaanites in fulfillm ent o f G od’s decision, already revealed to Abraham in G en 15, that the immoral Canaanite culture o f the promised land must be elim­ inated. As a conquering people, however, Israel was still only a token fighting force. Its army under human leadership could nevertheless be termed God’s army (e.g., 1 Sam 17:36), and it succeeded only because God also had his own heavenly army that actually did the fighting that really counted (cf. Judg 5:20). T he O ld Testament contains many references to G od’s fighting for Israel, on the clear premise that Israel would have no chance on its own to win in battle w ithout the Lord’s supernatural aid: T h e Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still. (Exod 14:14) T h e Lord your God, who is going before you, will fight for you, as he did for you in Egypt (Deut 1:30) For the Lord your G od is the one who goes w ith you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory. (Deut 20:4)

53

Conquest, Human and Divine

For the battle is not yours, but God’s. (2 Chr 20:15) Sometimes biblical references to battle do not even m ention Israel but describe the action as entirely the Lord’s, so cen­ tral is his support, and so essential to earthly success is his cosmic victory: T he Lord will march out like a mighty man, like a war­ rior he will stir up his zeal; with a shout he will raise the battle cry and will triumph over his enemies. (Isa 42:13) I will, however, have compassion on the family o f Judah. I will save them by Yahweh their God, but will not save them by bow, by sword— by warfare— by cavalry, by chariotry. (Hos 1:7) T h e Lord will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights in the day o f batt e. (Zech 14:3) In Joel, the conquering Babylonians are depicted as a human army impressive in its sheer numbers: . . . a nation has invaded my land, strong and innumerable . . (1:6) Like the dawn spreading across the hills is the populous, strong nation. Nothing like it has existed from ancient times, N or w ill it again for generation after generation. (2:2) It also becom es evident that the Babylonians are merely the visible representation o f a heavenly army led by Yahweh: Yahweh has raised his voice before his army! How very great is his encampment! How strong are those who carry out his words! (2:11) JO EL

54

A nd the Lord calk his forces o f destruction: “My great army w hich I sent among you” (2:25). Joel’s m ost obvious reference to th e direct warfare o f G od against the nations o f th e world who oppose Israel and therefore G od him self is found in th e eschatological battle judgm ent scene o f 4 :1 -2 1 , and particularly verses 9 -1 6 . W e note in this passage no m ention th at Israel’s hum an forces would even be involved in th e defeat o f th e nations. In ­ stead, those w ho had once conquered Israel w ill be defeated in battle and judged directly by Yahweh, w ho w ill hand power back to Israel, after forcibly taking it from th e hu­ man powers that once prevailed in th e tim e o f Joel. A fter a call to the nations to prepare for war, w ith every­ one required to fight (4:9—11), Yahweh invites— indeed commands— th e nations to attack Israel in th e Valley o f Jehoshaphat (Jeboshaphat means “T h e Lord judges/ has judged”) where they w ill be defeated by Yahweh’s su­ pernatural power (vv 14-16). Having accom plished this, Yahweh w ill th en restore Israel (vv 17-21) at th e expense o f these once great nations (e.g., Egypt, v 19). H ere th e con­ quest is o f a future, divine sort, a conquest over hum an forces by th e divine sovereign on behalf o f th e people o f G od. Israel was virtually always puny compared to its foes. U n ­ less Yahweh fought for his people, they really didn’t stand a chance in battle. Left to their natural devices, their lot was to be conquered by others. T his is exactly what happened to them in the early sixth century when Joel prophesied, and it happened because G od made it happen. T h eir eventual restoration as a people was on the same order: left to their own devices they could n ot possibly have managed i t Be­ cause “Yahweh is a refuge for his people, a stronghold for the Israelites” (4:16), however, it would occur. Conquests o f Is­ rael by others, or o f others by Israel, were always in the Lord’s hands.

55

Conquest, Human and Divine

T h e new age to come T h e O ld Testament prophetical books come from a rela­ tively b rief period o f tim e, from about 760 B.C. (Amos and Hosea) to about 460 B.C. (Malachi). These three centuries were times o f upheaval. It was during this period that (northem ) Israel and eventually Judah were conquered and exiled, so that G od’s people fell under the continuous domination o f foreign empires, never again to live as an independent nation. Although three hundred years is a long tim e from the point o f view o f an individual lifetim e, it is a short tim e from the point o f view o f the sweep o f history, and the prophets had th e sweep o f history in mind when they preached.4 T h e prophets saw their day as th e beginning o f the end o f the O ld Covenant era. T heirs was a bad tim e, but G od had revealed that the eventual future would be very different Israel was degenerating, was in th e process o f being throw n ou t o f th e promised land by an angry G od, and had n o hope o f escaping the divine wrath. T here was nothing more to expect in the current age by way o f divine blessing, national achievem ent prestige among the nations o f the world, etc. I f the faithful among G od’s people were to have hope, it would be found in anticipation o f the blessings o f a new age to come, not in a return to the present order o f things. In other words, the fulfillm ent o f Israel’s potential for good in the eyes o f th e Lord was n o t in a mere rebuilding o f current institutions or in a return to the status quo minus th e Babylonians. It was, rather, in an entirely new era o f history, in w hich G od and his people would finally be united together as they always should have been bu t rarely were, in w hich after a turning point o f great significance the people o f G od would know the Lord in feet rather than merely in name (cf. Jer 31:34). Joel reflects repeatedly this concept that Israel’s future was to be found not in th e ways o f the current age but in a JO EL

56

new age, very different from the old and very distant frodi what was for him the present. T h e manner in w hich G od would relate to his people in that new age would be differ­ ent, the m anner in w hich the people would behave would be different, and the place o f G od’s people in th e world would be different. Joel’s description o f the new age begins at 2:18, w hich is a turning point in the book. A fter unleashing covenant curses to an extent that spells disaster for Israel, G od will eventu­ ally turn to bless Israel Joel 2:18 summarizes th is expectation this way: B u t Yahweh has becom e jealous for his land A nd has taken pity on his people. Joel calls what the Lord will do in the new age "som ething great” (2:20-21), a “tw ofold” restoration o f what had been lost (2:25), a tim e o f “miraculous things” (2:26), and an age when “never again will my people be put to shame” (2:27). It will be a tim e characterized, according to the restoration blessings o f the M osaic covenant, by such happy conditions as return from exile (3:2, 7, 20), agricultural bounty (2:19, 22, 23, 24, 26), and freedom from oppression by enemies (2:20, 25 -2 6 ; 3 :2 ,9 -1 6 ,1 9 -2 1 ). In Joel, the new age to come is also characterized by three strong emphases: (1) the outpouring o f G od's spirit, (2) the changing o f the world order by decisive divine intervention, and (3) the transform ation o f the status o f the people o f G od from shame to exaltation. T h e outpouring o f G od’s spirit is die topic o f 2:2 8 -3 2 , the famous passage quoted by Peter at Pentecost (Acts 2:17-21). H ere is contained the prediction o f one o f the m ost signifi­ cant changes from the O ld Covenant to the New, th e de­ m ocratization o f the H oly S p irit In the O ld Testam ent era th e Spirit o f G od now and again “filled” (e.g., Exod 31:3) or 57

The New Age to Come

“rested upon” (e.g., Num 11:25) particular individuals for a long or short tim e, but was not generally possessed by all o f G od’s people (cf. Num 11:29). In the new age, however, God will pour out his spirit on “all flesh” (2:28)— male and fe­ male, old and young, slave and free (2:28-29). T h e true, eschatological Israel will finally be the kingdom o f priests that it was called into existence to becom e (Exod 19:6), each representing the tru th and power o f God, each exercising his or her spiritual gifts to the glory o f God. T his outpouring o f the Spirit would constitute a Day o f the Lord (2:31), a decisive day o f divine intervention in his­ tory. Joel’s poetic descriptions o f the darkness o f that day (2:30-31) are part o f the common prophetic message about the Day o f the Lord; it is not a day o f business as usual, but a turning p o in t T h e coming o f C hrist was the turning point o f the ages, providing as it did the opportunity that everyone who called on the name o f the Lord could be saved (2:32). T his m eant a changing o f the world order. Joel portrays that change further in 3 :2 -1 6 , in w hich the defeat and final judg­ m ent o f th e powers opposed to G od is vividly described. It will be a tim e when: T h e sun and m oon have darkened, T h e stars have stopped their shining. Yahweh roars from Zion, H e raises his voice from Jerusalem So that th e sky and the earth shake. (3:15-16) Finally, the new age will be characterized by the transfor­ m ation o f the status o f the people o f God. Shame among the peoples o f the world was their standing in the years follow­ ing Joel’s prophecy. Humiliated in war, stripped o f wealth and deported to foreign soil, they had little to take pride in. Through Joel, however, G od reminds all those faithful to JOEL

58

him at that tim e and in the future that he would "restore their fortunes” (Heb. Hêšîb šebût; 3:1). A cting on behalf o f his people, his possession (3:2), G od would tu rn the tables on the nations that had once oppressed them , giving them in kind what they had done to the Israelites (3:4-8), and thus giving his people refuge in him (3:16). T h e new station o f G od’s people is centered prophetically on the new Jerusalem (3:17,20), where holiness will prevail in contrast to th e sin that caused Israel’s problems in th e first place, and where Yahweh will provide for the needs o f his people (3:18) who will be free from threat o f attack or domination by the pow­ ers o f this world (3 :1 7 ,1 9 ,2 1 ).

T he Holy Spirit Six prophets speak o f the Holy Spirit: Isaiah (twelve times), Ezekiel (fourteen times), Joel (twice), M icah (twice), Haggai (once), and Zechariah (three times). O nly Isaiah uses language that we would translate as “Holy Spirit,” however. In Isa 63:10-11, G od speaks o f “my Holy Spirit,” H eb. rûah qodšî. Holy Spirit is more commonly a New Testam ent term w hich we nevertheless use appropriately to refer to the Spirit in the O ld Testam ent as w ell T h e frequency o f term s for H oly Spirit in the prophets may be summarized as follows:

Term My Spirit T h e Spirit Spirit o f the Lord H is Spirit Holy Spirit Spirit o f the Lord Yahweh Spirit o f G od

59

Occurrences in Prophetical Books 11 10 6 3 2 1 1 The Holy Spirit

A term, o f course, is n ot the same as a concep t W hat these figures show is that the concept o f G od’s Holy Spirit may be understood as expressed via a variety o f term s among the prophets, as long as it is also noted that the common denominator o f all such term s is th e Hebrew word rûah, “sp irit” Obviously, Joel is not the only prophet who speaks o f the Holy S p irit H e is also not the only prophet who speaks o f the outpouring o f that S p irit Isaiah, for example, predicts th e day when: the Spirit is poured upon us from on high, and the desert becom es a fertile field. (32:15) H e also quotes the Lord as saying: For I w ill pour water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground. I will pour out my Spirit on your offspring, and my blessing on your descendants. (44:3) Ezekiel, too, speaks o f G od’s pouring out his S p irit I w ill no longer hide my face from them , for I will pour out my Spirit on the house o f Israel, declares the Lord Yahweh. (39:29) W hat makes Joel's prophecy special in its prediction o f the Spirit in the new age is its emphasis on three factors: the identity, the response, and the rescue o f those who receive the Spirit. W ith regard to the identity o f the recipients o f the Spirit, Joel 2:2 8 -2 9 effectively eliminates sexism, ageism, and discrim ination based on social status from considération in connection w ith the gift o f the S p irit “Sons

JOEL

60

and daughters,” “old m en,” “young m en,” and “male slaves and female slaves” will all have the Spirit poured out on them . T h e age o f the Spirit is characterized, truly, by a lack o f distinction according to these categories as regards the w ork o f G od (cf. G al 3:28). T his surely does n o t mean, how­ ever, that all roles are blurred or abolished. N othing in Jo el 2 implies that in th e age o f th e Spirit m en and women are identical, that old and young are indistinguishable, or any such thing. It means that despite their distinctions, all peo­ ple, o f any age, dass, or gender, are equal when it comes to th e m atter o f possession o f the Spirit in C h rist They are also equal in potential o f response to the S p irit It would be absurd to suggest that Joel’s words look toward an era when everyone will have all spiritual gifts, or even the category o f gift addressed in 2:2 8 -2 9 , namely, prophecy. A ll w ill have something that O ld Testam ent prophets did, how­ ever. A ll will experience the indwelling o f the Spirit, who is a revealer o f th e things o f G od. Joel’s stylized expression, involving “prophecy,” “dreams,” and “visions” is m erely a synecdochic way o f making th e point that th e Spirit age w ill see all believers related to G od in th e m anner that th e O ld Covenant reserved in a m ore lim ited way, and for only a few. Jesus’ words similarly accent th e special privileges o f th e Spirit age: “Truly I say to you, among those b om o f women there has risen no one greater than Joh n th e Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom o f heaven is greater than h e” (M att 11:11). Rescue from destruction is the third advantage granted to those on whom the Spirit is poured out. T his is the point o f Joel 2:32, w hich promises: “A nd everyone who calls on the name o f Yahweh will be saved, because there will be escape in M ount Zion, that is, Jerusalem, ju st as Yahweh said, among the survivors, whom Yahweh w ill c a ll.” T h e statem ent at th e end o f this verse, that Yahweh will call “survivors,” is an instance o f th e common position in 61

The Holy Spirit

the prophets, based on th e panorama o f history revealed in the Pentateuch, that Israel must first be decimated and exiled before a remnant can be redeemed. T h e age o f the Spirit will, however, be characterized not merely by survival, but by abundance as the greater context, 2:18-32, demon­ strates. T his abundance will include salvation for all those who call on the Lord. W hen Joel’s audience heard him preach that “everyone who calls on the name o f the Lord will be saved” and that God’s Spirit would be poured out “on all flesh” (v 28), some or many o f them may have thought that this was a promise intended for Israelites only. Joel’s words, however, speak o f survivors o f the Day o f Yahweh, w hich is in Joel surely an event involving not merely Israel but “the nations” (4 :2 ,9 ,1 2 ). From the position we who are in C hrist occupy in th e age o f the Spirit, we know that it was certainly not merely Judeans or Israelites to whom the benefits spoken o f in this passage would be ap­ plied by the very Spirit o f whom it speaks.

JOEL

62

4

AMOS

Y ahweh’s universal sovereignty Yahweh was not a typical god A typical god was worshiped via idols, and Yahweh would allow none o f that. A typical god wanted to be given sacrifices w ithout any concern for the ethical behavior o f those who sacrificed to him or her. N ot so w ith Yahweh, whose covenant demanded obedience to the highest ethical standards. A typical god was worshiped at shrines in all sorts o f locations— the more the better. Yahweh insisted on being worshiped at only one location, Jerusalem. A typical god was worshiped frequently; every meat meal was part o f the system o f worshiping such gods or goddesses. Yahweh was to be worshiped in a more scheduled manner, w ith three major gatherings a year to constitute his nation’s common worship obligation. And so on.1 A typical god was also thought to have limited power. T h e prevailing polytheism o f the ancient world denied full power to any single god or goddess; power was shared by many gods, some w ith more, some w ith less, but none w ith all. A typical

63

Yahweh’s Universal Sovereignty

god also tended to have lim ited geographical jurisdiction. T he plural expression "the Baals” (e.g., 1 Kgs 18:18) alludes to this. Each Baal (Heb. for "lord”) was thought to have influence in a particular region w ithin Canaan. O n a larger scale, each na­ tion had its own national god: Chem osh in Moab, Hadad in Syria, Dagon among the Philistines, Marduk among the Baby­ lonians, e tc N o typical god, however, was the sovereign over all the world, supreme, w ith no rivals, no other gods having a share o f his or her power— but then, Yahweh was not a typi­ cal god. Foundational, nonnegotiable, intrinsic to the orthodoxy revealed to Israel at M ount Sinai was monotheism. T h e Book o f Amos, ever consistent with that Law, portrays Yahweh as sovereign over not only Israel, and not only over all the na­ tions, but over all creation, all individuals. As “Yahweh o f the Armies” (ş e bā›ôt, usually trans­ lated “Lord o f hosts”), he is supreme in heaven (3:13, e tc). T h e “armies” under his control are the host o f heaven, well known from elsewhere in the Scripture as angels and “princi­ palities and powers.” Yahweh is also the creator and sustainer o f the world, as evidenced in several places in Amos. For example, in th e so-called hymn fragments (bits o f a wellknown Israelite hymn o f the day, found in 4 :1 3 ,5 :8 , and 9 :5 6, whose words Amos employed to remind th e Israelites o f what they were supposed to believe), Yahweh is “shaper o f the mountains and creator o f the wind,” “who turns the dawn into darkness and walks the earth’s heights” (4:13). H e is also T h e one who made the Pleiades and O rion, W h o turns darkness to dawn A nd darkens day in to night, W h o summons the sea’s waters A nd pours them on the earth. Yahweh is his name! (5:8) AMOS

64

H e is further described in the final fragment o f th e hymn as: T h e Lord, Yahweh o f th e Arm ies, W h o touches the earth so that it crum bles, A nd all w ho live in it m ourn, A nd all o f it rises like th e Nile A nd sinks like th e N ile o f Egypt; W h o builds his upper cham ber in heaven, A nd has founded his storeroom on th e earth, W h o summons th e sea’s waters A nd pours them out on th e earth— Yahweh is his name! (9:5-6) A s creator and sustainer o f the heavens and the earth, Yahweh is obviously also powerful over the events o f nations. It is he who n ot only governs Israel and Judah, bu t also Syria (1:3-5), Philistia (1:6-7), Phoenicia (1:9-10), Edom (1:11-12), Ammon (1:13-15), and Moab (2:1-3). H e will control their futures, see that they are destroyed at the tim e his judgment also destroys Israel and Judah, and exile their survivors ju st as he will exile the survivors o f his own people. Yes, he has a people, but those who are n ot specifically that people are nonetheless fully under his control, even to the extent o f bearing "his name” (9:12), that is, being his to dominate. T h is we should understand easily enough, since Christians would hardly believe that G od has no power over non-Christians, or even less power over them than over those who acknowl­ edge him as Lord. Amos’s inspired words pointed out that Yahweh ruled, for example, in N orth A frica, the M editerranean islands, and Mesopotamia as well. In 9:7, an instance o f this claim to universal sovereignty, h e says: "A ren’t you ju st like th e

65

Yahweh’s Universal Sovereignty

Nubians in relation to me, Israelites?— O racle o f Yahweh. D idn’t I bring up Israel out o f the land o f Egypt, and the Philistines from C rete, and Aram from Kir?” H e has control over all territories and their populations. H e causes earthquakes (the rising and felling o f the land like that o f the N ile; 9:5), w hich may be described as the effect o f the roar o f his voice (1:2). H e determ ines the weather and thus the fertility o f th e land (e.g., 4 :6 -8 ; 1:2), crop pests (4:9; 7:1) as well as the course o f disease in the population (4:10). H e can, indeed, destroy the earth w ith fire (7:4). H e can determ ine th e future o f the individual (7:11,17) and o f groups (e.g., 9:11-13). A ll o f creation is under his sover­ eignty (e.g., 9:2-4). For those opposed to him, there is no hope for escape o f his judgment as 9:10 reminds: “A ll the sinners o f my people will die by the sword, those who say, No harm will come near us or affect us.” W hile for those who trust in him, his universal sovereignty is a great com fort. T he promises o f restoration and abundance that close the book (9:11-15) remind us o f his great power to protect and provide, to bless and to heal, to guide the future o f the nations and our own individual lives.

Social justice: the poor and the rich Politically, it was the nation o f Israel that constituted G od’s special people in O ld Testam ent times. Economically, however, there was a sense in w hich it was the poor who belonged especially to him. Ps 14:6 states: “If the plans o f the poor are frustrated, indeed Yahweh is his refuge.” Ps 140:12 assures: “I know that Yahweh secures justice for the poor and upholds the cause o f the needy.” Isa 11:4 promises the following o f the Messiah: “w ith righteousness he will judge the needy, w ith justice he will give decisions for the poor o f the earth.” Isa 25:4 praises G od for being “a refuge for the poor, a refuge for the needy in his distress.” AMOS

66

Among the m inor prophets, none was inspired to pay more attention to the needs o f the poor than Amos. T h e rela­ tionship o f social justice to econom ic issues was surely a nota­ ble emphasis o f his preaching. For example, in the book’s opening attack on the sins o f (northern) Israel for w hich it would be conquered and exiled, his first words identifying the injustices that prevailed in the N orth are: T his is what Yahweh said: Because o f the multiple crim es o f Israel I will not restore it; Because they have sold the righteous for money A nd the needy (Heb. 'ebyôn) in exchange for a pair o f sandals. They trample the heads o f the poor (Heb. dallîm ) into the dust o f the earth, A nd they keep the oppressed (Heb. 'anā wîm) from getting anywhere. (Amos 2:6-7) A fter m entioning the sin o f cultic prostitution associated w ith idolatry (v 7b), Amos returns immediately to the topic o f the oppression o f the poor: They stretch out on clothes taken as collateral, Beside every altar. They drink wine given to pay a fine, A t the house o f their god. (Amos 2:8) A m ost interesting fact about these charges against Israel is their contrast to th e charges that parallel them in the earlier portions o f Amos’s long, carefully patterned oracle against the Syro-Palestinian nations in chapters 1 and 2. 67

Social Justice: The Poor and the Rich

Aram, Philistia, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, and M oab are all de­ nounced for their vicious cruelties in or after wars, such as exterm inating populations in border wars or selling popula­ tions into slavery (1:3—2:3). In the case o f Judah and Israel, however, th e places in the pattern o f accusation reserved in the previous portions o f the oracle fo r citation o f heinous international crim es are filled by descriptions o f violations o f the M osaic covenant, Yahweh’s special law for his own people. W hat the other nations had done was a violation o f Yahweh’s im plicit covenant with all the nations o f the world, who, though lacking special revelation o f his Law, neverthe­ less could be held to general standards o f human decency and fairness (cf. Rom 1:18-32). W hat Judah (Amos 2:4-5) and Israel (2:6-16) had done, however, were subject to judg­ m ent according to the covenant revealed to them . In other words, such Israelite crim es as Amos cites are clearly ju st as odious as the pitiless savageries that other nations had been doing to each other in war. W hat exactly had been happening in Israel to the poor? T he answer is simply that they were being oppressed— used and abused for personal power and profit— by those more wealthy and powerful. T he reference to selling the righteous and needy in verse 6 is an allusion to creditors’ selling helpless debtors into slavery after foreclosing on loans. “Trampling die heads o f the poor” and “keeping the oppressed from getting anywhere” (v 7) is a way o f describing the systematic discrimi­ nation against the economically disadvantaged in Israel, who were routinely denied their rights by the courts, by the gov­ ernm ent, and by the well-to-do citizenry o f the nation. T he language o f verse 8 about taking clothes as collateral and wine in fines refers to violations o f the laws o f Exod 22:25-27 and D eut 2 4 :1 0 -1 3 ,1 7 . Those laws prohibited excessive or confis­ catory collateral for loans. In direct violation o f the law, poor people had their outer clothing taken from them to ensure repayment, while in the meantime they suffered during the AMOS

68

cold Palestinian nights. They were also fined heavily from their desperately needed crop harvests, such as their wine, to punish them for missed loan payment deadlines. T he divine Law, in order to protect the poor, had required that no interest could be charged by Israelites to their fellow citizens (Exod 22:25). Systematically violating this stipulation o f the covenant, ruthless Israelites had not only been charg­ ing interest on loans, bu t also exacting cruel penalties for failure to repay. T h e poor, o f course, were those m ost in need o f loans from tim e to time, especially in cases o f frugal har­ vests as a result o f bad weather. Seizing upon the dependency o f the poor on such loans, the exploiters saw a way to enrich themselves: lending during hard times at high interest rates, and then taking farms, houses (cf. Isa 5:8), produce, and even people for their own use or for resale whenever the poor could not repay. For such evils, overlooked by those who should have cared and openly practiced by those who didn’t, th e nation was to see calamity when the enemy invaded (Amos 2:13-16). In Amos 4:1, we read o f a leisure class in Israel, exemplified by wealthy, nonworking Samaritan women (a highly unusual thing in biblical times) who require their husbands to serve them (“W ho say to their masters, ‘G o get us something to drink.’”). Through Amos, G od says that they “oppress the poor and crush the needy.” How did they do this? They were able to grow wealthy and lazy because they had poor people working for them at miserable wages and under wretched conditions— people in at least some instances probably work­ ing on their own form er farms now in the hands o f their oppressors. In 5 :11-12, Amos describes the process: Because w hen you get a judgment against th e poor You take from him the produce o f his field, . . . For I am aware o f the frequency o f your crim es A nd the severity o f your sins— 69

Social Justice: The Poor and the Rich

Persecutors o f the righteous, bribe takers, W ho reject the claims o f the needy at the gate! By controlling the legal system, paying bribes as necessary, the rich could get richer at the expense o f the poor by foreclosing on property and by obtaining crushing fines against the poor, w hich had to be paid in produce from the fields o f the poor, produce then sold at very nice profits. T h e oppression didn’t stop there. A s the increased urbanization o f the nation resulted in the movement o f more and more people to the cities, a new opportunity for exploitation o f the poor was created. People who live on their own farms or near those o f friends or relatives can usually get food free or buy food at “producer prices.” Those removed from the land in cities must usually pay middlemen, who may if un­ scrupulous jack up prices beyond fair profits, since the poor o f the city have little recourse but to pay to eat. They cannot move back to the farms easily (farms that may have been taken from them or their parents anyway) and cannot ju st leave their jobs daily to walk out to the country to bargain for food. So they must pay the city price— and take what they get for their money. T h e whole process, from foreclo­ sure and debt slavery to inflated city prices for poor-quality food is condemned in Amos 8 :4 -6 : Listen to this, you who trample on the poor, Eliminating the oppressed people o f th e land, saying, “W hen will the New M oon be over so that we can sell grain, A nd the Sabbath so th at we can put wheat on sale, So that we can shrink the ephah and increase the shekel, A nd cheat w ith inaccurate scales;

AMOS

70

So that we can buy poor people for money, A needy person for a pair o f sandals, And sell the sweepings in w ith the wheat? Cheating people w ith small ephahs (grain measures), un­ derweight shekels (roughly half-ounce weights), and rigged scales violated the law o f God revealed in the Pentateuch (e.g., Lev 19:35-36). Amos, however, lived in a day when that law was scoffed at. In Israel there was supposed to be no favoritism showed either to rich or to poor, but rather equal justice under the law (Lev 19:15). W hat Amos saw in Israel was just the oppo­ site: rampant favoritism, unequal justice in the courts, ex­ ploitation o f the poor whom G od loved and for whom he had declared him self a special refuge. Is it any wonder, then, that Israel was bound for destruction as a nation? Indeed, Yahweh had sworn: “I will never forget all their deeds” (8:7).

T h e role of leadership in corporate sin W hat made Israel turn away from the Lord? There were a variety o f factors. Israel’s apostasy was hardly a sudden or spontaneous development, as is clear in the long story o f that apostasy told in the historical books o f the O ld Testament. Indeed, the prophets recognized that the tendency to rebel was always present,2 just as the Pentateuch had long before adumbrated.3 Among the many factors was one that could hardly be overlooked— leadership. Large groups o f people don’t usually act in a concerted fashion unless they are led. It may in fact be asserted that people do not normally even drift into the same sorts o f sin, that is, sin that is so common as to constitute a national characteristic, as those denounced in the prophetical books, by accident A ctions reflecting a national m entality are undertaken n ot randomly, but in response

71

The Role o f Leadership in Corporate Sin

to influences. A whole population does not just happen to decide to live a certain way, as if everyone at once independently got the same idea. Populations respond to ideas. They take hints from those who are influential. T h e many follow the lead o f the few. It is, in other words, highly unlikely that Israel as a nation would have rebelled so for from obedience to Yahweh’s cove­ nant if the nation’s leadership had not aided and abetted the process. T h e leadership o f the nation was not merely passively sharing the people’s sin; it was helping it along. T here are four classes o f leadership com monly m en­ tioned in th e Bible: kings, prophets, priests, and prom inent citizens. A ll four are m entioned in Am os. Interestingly prophet, priest, and king are involved together in a single passage, the only biographical passage in th e book, 7 :10-17 It concerns an attem pt by a priest, Amaziah, to keep a prophet, Am os, from preaching at th e royal sanctuary o f Bethel, by appealing to th e king, Jeroboam II. In ancient Israel, kings controlled religious practices to a substantial degree. They appointed priests, selected sanctuaries, pro­ vided funds for tem ple upkeep and offerings, etc.4 A m os’s preaching at B eth el was clearly critical o f th e king: h e was openly predicting th e annihilation o f the present dynasty, th e conquest o f Israel, and the exile o f the population as a punishm ent for th e nation’s sins. T h e high priest o f th e B eth el sanctuary, Amaziah, is quoted in 7 :1 0 -1 1 as reporting to the king that: “A m os has launched a conspiracy against you in the very heart o f Israel. T h e land cannot contain everything he is saying! For here is w hat h e said: ‘Jeroboam w ill die by th e sword and Israel w ill definitely b e exiled from h er native land.’” A l though A m os had never said that Jeroboam him self would “die by th e sword” b u t only th at G od would “rise up w ith a sword against Jeroboam ’s family” (7:9, a prophecy fulfilled

AMOS

72

via th e assassination o f Jeroboam ’s son, Zechariah, by Shallum ; cf. 2 Kgs 15:8-12), Amaziah chose to w ord his message to th e king in th e m ost damaging way, hoping to get royal support fo r his attem pt to expel Am os from th e N orth to th e prophet’s southern hom eland (7:12). Amaziah used as his justification fo r forbidding Am os to preach th e argum ent th at B eth el was in effect a personal, private pro­ tectorate o f th e king: “B u t don’t do any m ore prophesying at B eth el because it is a royal sanctuary, a state tem ple” (v 13). W h at Amaziah was doing is exactly th e sort o f thing an earlier prophecy o f Am os had condem ned Israelites for, th at is, commanding (true) prophets n o t to prophesy (2:12). W h o had th e kind o f authority that could prohibit a prophet from preaching? T h e national leadership did. W e do n o t know w hether Jeroboam confronted Am os directly o r not, bu t he may w ell have moved to discourage Am os from staying in Israel by speaking quietly to business lead­ ers about him . Am os was a traveling sheep breeder and sycamore fig cultivator rather than a professional prophet (7:14; cf. W B C 31:376-77). H is business in th e N orth may have been vulnerable to official pressure. H e him self was obviously n o t inclined to back down to Amaziah’s threats, and in response to them G od gave him a defiant reply: Now listen to Yahweh’s word, you who say ‘D o not prophesy against Israel, D o n o t preach against th e family o f Isaac.’ Therefore here is what Yahweh has said: T o u r wife w ill becom e a prostitute in the city, A nd your sons and daughters w ill fall by th e sword.

73

The Role o f Leadership in Corporate Sin

Your land will be divided up by a measuring line, A nd you yourself will die in an unclean land. Israel will definitely be exiled from its native land!’ (7:16-17) As high priest at the dominant sanctuary o f northern Israel, Amaziah was a powerful, influential leader. Unquestionably, Jeroboam the king was a leader. O rthodox prophets o f the Lord could also have been leaders against the prevailing degeneration, if they had not been suppressed at this tim e, as Amos’s contem porary Hosea also confirm s (Hos 9:7). False prophets, on the other hand, were apparently given suffi­ cient rein to exert considerable influence, along with the heterodox N orthern priesthood, in leading the people astray (cf. Hosea 4:5). T he fourth leadership group, the prom inent citizenry, may well have had an even greater role in keeping the nation in sin than the other three. It may reasonably be assumed that if large numbers o f them had asserted themselves in favor o f keeping the Mosaic covenant, the king, the priests, and the prophets would have been chastened. In fact the promi­ nent citizenry pushed in the opposite direction— subtly and steadily pressuring and/or inviting government and clergy to drift away from fidelity to the nation’s religious roots. In 3:10, Amos speaks o f “those who store up violence and destruction in their royal fortifications.” T he Hebrew term 'arm enōth, here translated “royal fortifications,” refers to the fortress­ like citadels w hich housed residences and administrative complexes, built at the heart o f Israel’s larger cities, where the nobility and wealthy citizens lived. These were the people who wielded the real power in the cities, and in the coun­ tryside as well— and they were no devotees o f the Sinai covenant (cf. 3:11; 4:1). In 6 :1 -7 , Amos preaches: AMOS

74

W oe to those com fortable in Zion, A nd who feel secure on M ount Samaria, Preem inent persons o f the leading nation, To whom the family o f Israel come! (v 1) T hese were members o f a privileged, leisure class, who could stay in bed w hen th e ancient equivalent o f th eir horoscope was n o t positive (v 3). They had th e m oney to buy luxuries (vv 4 ,6 ) and to indulge in idle pastimes (v 5). Because o f th eir influence for bad rather than good in the nation, they would “go in to exile at th e front o f th e exiles” (v 7). T hose used to being first in influence would be first in shame w hen th e Lord’s punishm ent was m eted out. T hese were people w ith b oth w inter and summer houses, some inlaid w ith ivory, m ansions in a real sense o f th e term (3:15). T h eir impressive cut-stone houses and lush vineyards (5:11) were symbols o f their rank, indications o f th eir societal supremacy. They were indeed leaders— leading Israel to tu rn from G od. G od, however, was aware o f th e severity o f th eir sins (5:12) and would punish accordingly.

Divine prosecution of covenant violators Amos 3 :1 -2 says o f Israel: Listen to this word that Yahweh has spoken against you, Israelites, against the whole family I brought up from Egypt* I have know n only you O f all the families o f the earth. Therefore I will punish you For all your sins. 75

Divine Prosecution o f Covenant Violators

T his b rief prose introduction and poetic quatrain summarize the im plications o f the Lord’s special relationship to his O ld Testam ent chosen people. Because they enjoy his per­ sonal care, they also cannot escape his personal attention to their need for punishm ent under his covenant A covenant is a law, and anyone who breaks a covenant may be considered a lawbreaker. G od’s covenant w ith Israel was a law, and w hen Israel broke that covenant, they were in danger o f punishm ent A law w ithout penalties would be a sham o f a law. T h e violator o f the law must pay. Because this understanding o f law fit the situation o f the people o f Israel in relation to G od’s covenant, the prophets frequently were inspired to imagine Israel as a defendant hauled into court and charged w ith crimes. They imagined the prosecutor in the court case to be Yahweh, Israel’s God. H e would cite the evidence against his sinful people, and they would have no recourse bu t to await the verdict o f the judge. W ho was that judge? H e, too, was Yahweh. Having com e to his decision, he rendered a verdict. W h o enforced the verdict? Yahweh did that as well. Obviously th e outcom e o f the case against Israel was d ear from th e start, since th e Lord Almighty could hardly be hoodwinked by his people— b u t that is part and parcel o f what we call the "covenant lawsuit” form in the prophets.5 Such lawsuits commonly contain the following com po­ nents. First, there is usually some kind o f reference to a summons to justice, that is, to appear in co u rt T h en th e judge (God) speaks. H e addresses the defendant Israel di­ rectly, proves th e guilt o f the defendant by evidence, and utters a judgm ent sentence. T hese com ponents may occur in a variety o f arrangements, bu t the order we have ju st described is common. Amos 3 contains tw o such covenant lawsuit scenes, both b rief and b lu n t T h e first is in verses 1 -2 , cited above, where "Listen . ."assum es that the nation has been brought into AMOS

76

court to h ėar the case against them . T h e Israelites are then addressed directly, their sins are described as plentiful ("all your sins”) and their judgment (broad, general punishment) is announced. Typically in the prophets, th e judgment sentence is introduced by “therefore” (most often H eb. 'alkēn or lā kēn) as in the third line o f the quatrain in verse 2. Thus these tw o short verses contain the digest o f a court scene in w hich the guilty nation as defendant is tried, convicted, and sentenced by the divine judge. Amos 3:9 -1 1 contains another such literary form , this tim e imagining the great nations o f the day, Assyria and Egypt, as expert cou rt witnesses to Israel’s evil, in th e ittakes-one-to-know-one vein. T his lawsuit reads as follows: A nnounce it at the royal fortifications in Assyria A nd at the royal fortifications in th e land o f Egypt Say: Assemble yourselves at M ount Samaria A nd see the great terror inside it, and the oppression in its midst. They do n ot know how to do right— O racle o f Yahweh— T hose who store up violence and destruction in th eir royal fortifications. Therefore this is what the Lord Yahweh said: A n adversary w ill surround the land And will bring down your defenses from you, And your royal fortifications will be plundered. Verse 9 summons the court, w ith expert witnesses brought in to condemn Israel, experts who themselves are well know n for their violence and cruel inhumanity. Israel’s evil is entered as evidence both in verse 9 (“great terror,” “oppression”) and verse 10 (“violence,” “destruction”). Speaking directly to the 77

Divine Prosecution o f Covenant Violators

defendant, Israel, in verse 11 the Lord pronounces the judg­ m ent sentence, introduced by “therefore” (Heb. lā kēn). Is­ rael’s judgment sentence is that it will be conquered by a foreign power in a conquest so total that even her bestdefended properties— the royal fortifications o f Samaria— will be plundered. Many times, the Prophet Amos does not provide the full covenant lawsuit form but one or tw o o f its elements. M ost typically, diese are (1) the evidence o f covenant breaking and (2) the judgment sentence. Citations o f evidence followed by quotations o f the Lord’s coming judgment are in fact found throughout the book. T h e key term “therefore” often signals to the reader that the judgment sentence portion o f the form is about to begin, although no single verbal clue occurs in every instance. Sometimes other vocabulary associated with court procedure will be an unmistakable indication that the covenant lawsuit concept stands in the background o f a given prophetic oracle (e.g., “testify” in 3:13). Many words o f judgment against Israel are recorded in Amos. M ost are not given w ithin the framework o f the full literary form that we call the covenant lawsuit. A ll, however, are given on the basis o f the Mosaic covenant, in w hich the Lord promised to punish Israel’s sins, in his role as the divine prosecutor o f violators o f his covenant E xile Jeremiah and Ezekiel are especially know n among the prophetical books for their frequent references to the exile o f G od’s people. They both lived at the tim e o f the begin­ ning o f the great Babylonian exile o f Judah, and it would be surprising if G od had n ot revealed much to them about the significance o f that turning point in their nation’s history. Amos, on the other hand, prophesied much earlier (about 760 B.C.), at a time when the nation o f (northern) Israel was AMOS

78

more prosperous, stronger militarily, and larger geographi­ cally than it had been for centuries. U nder Jeroboam II (793753 B.C.), by reason o f the mercy o f G od to the nevertheless wicked nation, Israel had won back territories lost since the days o f Solom on (2 Kgs 14:25-28) and was riding the crest o f prestige in the international community. It was hardly a time that people would consider the possibility that Israel might be exiled to a foreign land— unless, that is, they were listen­ ing to God’s prophet, Amos. It’s not that people in 760 B.C. didn’t understand what exile was. T h e deportation o f captured populations after warfare had been practiced since at least the beginning o f the second millennium (Le., 2000 B.C.) in the ancient Near East, judging from the three references to it in the epilog o f the Babylonian Law o f Hammurabi (1728 B.C.). H ittite treaties from the fourteenth and thirteenth centuries B.C. also make reference to the practice o f exile. B u t who would expect exile at a tim e o f national prosperity and power, especially if they didn’t take seriously the notion that their nation had offended their national God? Amos’s predictions o f Israel’s exile were thus n ot at all well received. They were, in fact, interpreted as a conspiracy to discredit the king (7:10). Proportionately, Amos preached about exile more than any other prophet, and it is little wonder that his frequent words on the subject m et w ith resistance. In Amos, exile is a m ajor them e. In fact, he even preached about the coming exile o f nations other than Is­ rael, such as th e Arameans (1:5) and the Amm onites (1:15). These words m ight have seemed welcome to some, if he had not so frequently also announced in the name o f the Lord Israel’s own coming deportation. In 5 :5 -6 , Amos attacks the covenantally illegal (Deut 12:2-14) bu t widespread practice o f worshiping at a variety o f shrines. T h e punishments to be expected will include exile: 79

Exile

D on’t seek Bethel; D on’t go to Gilgal; D on’t travel to Beersheba! Because Gilgal will surely go into exile, A nd B ethel w ill becom e trouble. Seek Yahweh and live, Lest he progress like a fire against the family o f Joseph A nd consume Bethel, w ith no one to quench i t T his highly patterned poem about three o f the favorite worship centers o f the N orth, all improper rivals o f Jerusalem, mentions three cities, then tw o cities, then one city, Bethel, the one place where Amos is known to have preached (7:10— 17). In the m ention o f Gilgal, the Hebrew wording is allitera­ tive: gilgal gālōh yigleh, the words for exile (gā lōh and yigleh) having prom inent g and l sounds as also found twice in the name Gilgal (gilgal). T he point o f this clever alliteration was not for entertainm ent’s sake, however, but a stem warning: Israel was headed for what in the ancient world was consid­ ered a disastrous fa te— exile. Through Amos, G od warned Israel even o f the geographi­ cal destination o f their exile. It would be Mesopotamia, ac­ cording to 5:27, which says “I will exile you past Damascus said Yahweh, whose name is the God o f the Armies.” Because o f the configuration o f the Fertile Crescent around the great Arabian D esert, to go east Israelites had first to go north (past Damascus). T h e Assyrians in Amos’s day were very weak, no threat to Israel6 God, however, was nevertheless planning the future o f his people and o f the Assyrians, and, in contrast to the popular thinking, it was clear from God’s revelation that Israel was headed to Mesopotamian exile. Amos preached that Israel as a w hole would be exiled (7:11) and made it clear that the prom inent people o f the

AMOS

80

land would n o t be excepted (6:7; 7:17). H e also preached that exile would n o t be m erely a displacement, but an awful ordeal as part o f th e national destruction: I f they go into exile in front o f their enemies, I w ill command th e sword to slay them there. I will fix my gaze upon them For harm and n o t for b en efit (9:4) It should be noted that d ie word “if” does n o t mean th at Israel m ight escape exile, but that among th e many form s o f decimation G od would employ against his rebellious people, exile was a leading one. A s th e broader context (9:1-10) indicates (especially 9:1), all Israel would be affected by divine wrath, w hich would n ot be lim ited for any o f th e peo­ ple to merely relocation. T h e exile occurred ju st as G od through his prophet had promised (2 Kgs 17:3-41), and Israel was never again an independent state among th e com m unity o f nations. In ­ stead it was made by th e conquering Assyrians a part o f th eir empire (722 B.C .), and th en becam e a part o f th e Baby­ lonian Em pire w hen Babylon com pleted its conquest o f Assyria (605 B.C .), and then passed to th e Persians (540 B.C .), th e G reeks (333 B.C.), th e Ptolem ies (323 B.C .), the Seleucids (200 B.C.), th e Rom ans (63 B.C.), etc. T h e exile, however, was n o t to be the final chapter in Israel’s history. In addition to predicting th e Exile, Amos was also inspired to predict its end. T h e book closes w ith this promise from G od (9:14-15): I w ill release my people Israel from captivity, A nd they w ill rebuild the ruined cities and live in them .

81

E xile

They will plant vineyards and drink their wine; They will make gardens and eat their fruit. I will plant them in their own land so that they will never again be uprooted from their land w hich I have given them , said Yahweh, your God. These words began to be fulfilled w ith the decree o f Cyrus in 539 B.C ., w hich allowed deported peoples to return to their homelands. T h e Persians did n ot agree w ith the Assyrians and Babylonians that exile was a good way to punish captured peoples and prevent local populations from rebelling against their rule. G od thus brought into being an empire that he used to fulfill the promise o f Amos 9:14-15. O f course, the promise o f return from exile was only a part o f the grand scheme o f restoration, described in part in Amos 9:11-15 and many other places in th e Pentateuch and Prophets. It was, however, the harbinger o f a new era, a starting point for a new people. T h e old Israel had been banished from the old promised land. T h e new Israel was to look to a new citizenship (2 Pet 3:13; cf. A cts 3:21; Rom 4:13) in a place that a postexilic, rebuilt Israel and Jerusalem could symbolize (Heb 12:18-24; R ev 21:1-4) but never actually equal.

T he prophet as servant: m essenger and intercessor Amos 3 :3 -8 contains a series o f questions showing natural linkages between certain kinds o f events. For example, verse 3 asks, “D o tw o people travel together without having met?” and verse 6 asks, “If a trumpet sounds in a city do not the people tremble?” T h e purpose o f these questions, the answer to which in each case is yes, is to prepare the hearer/reader for tw o main points made in the passage. T he first main point AMOS

82

is that o f verse 6b, itself also a question: “I f there is disaster in a city, has not Yahweh caused it?” It was im portant that the Israelites realize that their problems were punishments from their God, not random occurrences or neutral events. T h e second main point is contained in verses 7 and 8, w hich argue for the prophetic obligation to pass on to the people the revelation the prophet had received from G od: Indeed, the Lord Yahweh does n o t do something un­ less he reveals his counsel to his servants th e prophets. T h e lion has roared! W h o is not afraid? T h e Lord Yahweh has spoken! W ho will not prophesy? Amos obviously felt that he had no proper option but to obey the calling o f G od to prophesy. Jonah, an earlier contemporary o f Amos, had tried but failed to disobey G od’s command for him to prophesy to Nineveh. G od had been remarkably m erciful to Jonah, by pursuing him and forcing him to complete his assignment, however odious it was to the reluctant prophet In m ost other cases, G od was not nearly so indulgent Disobedient prophets might even incur fatal wrath (e.g., 1 Kgs 13; Jer 2 0 :1 -6 ; Hos 4:5; cf. Jer 23). A s Amos’s words suggest, the prophets were supposed to be the Lord’s “servants,” or as the Hebrew ' abā dîm may also be translated, “slaves” (cf. Jer 7:25). Being an obedient servant was n ot easy for the true prophets. It would have been much easier to be one o f the many false prophets, since they simply composed in th eir minds whatever they thought the people would want to hear (and therefore would pay for, prophets being paid by donations, as clergy have always been; cf. Amos 7:12; Luke 8:3).

83

The Prophet as Servant

Amos ran into th e kind o f hostility that other obedient prophets had encountered when they preached the tru th in places where it was not welcome (7:10-17). Yet there was n o other avenue for him to take— other than disobedience— if he was to fulfill the Lord’s word. A s a prophet, Amos was automatically a messenger. A ll prophets understood themselves as messengers sent from God, expected to reproduce faithfully what he had told them to say to the audience he had provided. In the ancient world, people were used to messengers being sent by someone w ith a message, arriving in a given place and seeking out their audi­ ence, speaking the message ju st as it had been entrusted to them , and then departing. T h e messenger would begin the text o f the message w ith words such as "T his is what X said” and would end portions o f the message w ith reminders such as “said X ” or “message o f X .” Indeed, the prophets routinely employ ju st such introductions and reminders in their speeches, making it clear that they regard themselves as messengers repeating what they have been told to say to the audience to whom they have been sent. They are clearly not making up their words or choosing their audiences. In Amos, for example, one finds “T his is what Yahweh said” (Heb. kōh ›ām ar yahw eh) introducing each section o f the compound oracle against Israel and her neighbor states in 1:3-2:16 (see 1 :3 ,6 ,9 ,1 1 ,1 3 ; 2 :1 ,4 ,6 ). Further, one finds many o f the individual sections in this same oracle closed by the words “Yahweh said” (Heb. ›ām ar yahw eh) or the words “oracle o f Yahweh” (Heb. n e>um yahweh) as in 1 :5 ,8 ,1 5 ; 2 :3 ,1 1 ,1 6 . Chapter 4 o f Amos is also notable for its frequent reminders that the prophet is n ot speaking his own word, but Yahweh’s, a fact he repeatedly emphasizes by seven times inserting the phrase “oracle o f Yahweh” (n e›um yahweh) in the passage. Amos, like other prophets, employs a number o f other variations o f these reminders o f his messenger role, such as AMOS

84

that found in 6:8 ("T h e Lord Yahweh has sworn by him self . . .”) o r the introduction to the judgment prediction in 8:7 (“Yahweh has sworn by Jacob's pride . . .”). These and other variations are helpful ways by w hich we can recognize what scholars sometimes call the “messenger speeches” in th e prophetical books. In other words, “Thus says the Lord” and the many similar expressions employed by the prophets are messenger speech “formulas” that identify for us the fact that an obedient servant (prophet) is saying something as a messenger o f God. From tim e to tim e one also observes a prophet functioning in a related bu t distinct role, that o f intercessor. A n intercessor is simply one who appeals to G od for help on behalf o f some person or group. Prophets sometimes did this. Abraham and M oses had interceded w ith G od on beh alf o f cities and nations (G en 18; Exod 34), and thus prophetic intercession was hardly a new idea. R ather, the prophets’ intercession can be understood as representing a natural adjunct to th eir role as servants, since a servant in th e course o f his or h er duties m ight reasonably be expected from tim e to tim e to ask a m aster for som ething on behalf o f th e family, or other servants, or th e like. Amos’s intercession on behalf o f the nation o f Israel is found in tw o b rief vision accounts. O f the five vision ac­ counts in the book (found in chapters 7-9), the first tw o contain visions that never actually came to pass— not because they were n ot true visions o f what Yahweh had planned for the future, bu t because Yahweh in his grace was willing to relent— “change his mind” as the Hebrew nihham ›a l is liter­ ally translated— based upon the intercessory plea o f his serv­ ant Amos. T h e first account is found in 7 :1 -3 . Amos reports: T his is what Yahweh showed me. H e was forming a swarm o f locusts when the late planting was beginning

85

The Prophet as Servant

to come up— the late planting after the king's mowing. It seemed as if they would completely devour the earth’s vegetation. I said, “Lord Yahweh, forgive! How can Jacob survive? He is so small!” Yahweh changed his mind about this. “It will not happen,” Yahweh said. T he prophet saw the future being planned, prayed for mercy, and his request was granted. Locust plagues were unstop­ pable in ancient times. They represented a great agricultural disaster (Deut 2 8 :38,42; Exod 10:12-15; Joel 1; Amos 4:9). A natural locust plague would be bad enough. A divinely created, supernatural locust plague o f the sort Amos saw could ruin all Israel. Amos, o f course, had preached judgment against Israel and expected i t Indeed, in the final three vi­ sions in the book he sees national disasters that would take place in the future, and he does not attempt to intercede to prevent them. Here, however, was a threat so severe— a di­ vine superplague— that he appealed to the Lord that it n o t occur. God graciously accepted his prophet’s plea, knowing full well, o f course, that he had yet other options for punish­ ing his people in mind. T he second vision account (7:4-6) concerns the possibil­ ity o f destruction by fire: T his is what Yahweh showed me. H e was calling for a rain o f fire. It devoured the great deep and would have devoured the fields. I said, “Lord Yahweh, stop! How can Jacob survive? He is so small!” Yahweh changed his mind about this as well. “It will not happen,” Yahweh said. T his vision account is similar in structure and vocabulary to the prior one. It concerns a somewhat similar sort o f threat, the destruction by fire o f all the nation’s vegetation. (“Fields,” H eb. heleq, refers here mainly to the land w ith AMOS

86

planted vegetation on it as opposed to, say, rock formations or barren soil.) N ote that in Joel 1, locusts and fire are also used together, although metaphorically, as tw o ways o f de­ scribing great agricultural devastation caused by the Lord’s wrath. Either locusts or fires can ruin a people, taking away their food (cf. Exod 10 w ith Judg 15:4-5). O nce again, how­ ever, the threatened future is discarded when the prophet, still an obedient servant and n ot insubordinate, appeals for mercy from Yahweh. In the three èubsequent visions, Amos sees a future hold­ ing for Israel widespread destruction (7:7-9), large-scale death (8:1-3), exile, and slaughter (9:1 10). He can surely have taken no delight in predicting this sōrt o f doom, but he did not appeal for relief from i t T he apparent reason is that such punishments, though severe, were not the total sort o f de­ struction represented by the disasters revealed in the first two visions. Amos, in other words, was not trying to prevent Israel from experiencing the wrath o f God or trying to show his influence w ith the Lord by challenging his plans. H e knew that Israel had to be punished. He simply prayed for grace to be shown to the disobedient nation he had been sent to preach to (cf. M att 6:14; Luke 23:34; A cts 17:30). A final point o f interest that these intercession accounts hold for us is that G od really is, as Jonah and others confess o f him , “gracious, compassionate, patient . . .” (Jonah 4:2; cf. Exod 34:6; Num 14:18; Pss 86:15; 103:8; 145:8; Nah 1:3; Neh 9:17). Intercession is not a manipulation o f God. It is an appeal to his character. A n obedient servant can certainly make such appeals, trusting that the M aster’s responses will be ju s t

87

Hie Prophet as Servant

5

OBADIAH

T h e future of the nations Obadiah is the O ld Testament’s shortest book. It contains only a single prophecy, describing G od’s judgment on Edom and other nations that had oppressed the Israelites by stealing territory from them when th e people o f Israel were too weak to do anything about i t In speaking o f th e future o f nations other than Israel, Obadiah is by no means unique. Indeed, th e book is a classic example o f th e category o f prophetic literature called “oracles against foreign nations.” T h ere are dozens o f such oracles in th e prophetical books. In fect every prophetical book in th e O ld Testam ent devotes at least some space to th e issue o f G od’s plan for various nations o f th e world, including bu t by n o means lim ited to his special people, Israel.1 There is a basic underlying assumption to all such oracles. It is this: those who are G od’s people and those who are not will eventually experience different outcom es. T h e people o f

89

T h e Future o f the N otion s

God will be saved and blessed— saved from whatever diffi­ culties, great or small, they or their generation may have encountered. Those who are n ot G od’s people will, how­ ever, neither be saved nor blessed. They will either be sup­ pressed or destroyed— suppressed w ithin the time bounds o f the history o f the present world, and/or destroyed from the point o f view o f eternity. It is not the case, however, that G od is described by the Bible as one who discriminates arbitrarily with regard to the fate o f nations. He chooses betw een or among nations on a consistent covenantal basis, not on the basis o f whim or favoritism. T h e oracles against foreign nations thus do not imply that only ethnic Israelites could be saved or blessed in O ld Testament tim es.2 Rather, they reflect the fact that G od had established a people who were specially his, and had given opportunity to others to join that people or to support them rather than oppose them . In O ld Testament times many from other nations did indeed jo in w ith the Israelites, and the Law made provision for incorporating such people into the people o f G od (e.g., D eut 23:8). O thers supported Israel, and were blessed for it (Gen 12:3; cf. Isa 19:23-25). Those who broke his covenant o f general decency,3 how­ ever, were n ot to be blessed, and those who opposed his people were by definition opposing him— and deserved his judgm ent Obadiah reflects this assumption. Edom deserved pun­ ishm ent, n o t because it didn’t know any better (cf. Jonah 4:11) bu t precisely because it did know better. W h at the nations m entioned in oracles such as Obadiah are to be judged for is that w hich they knew to be wrong bu t did anyway. Taking th e territory o f others is understood world­ wide to be wrong— yet that is what Edom did to Israel. W h ile the Babylonians had th e Judeans either in captivity or under siege in Jerusalem (i.e., from 588 onwards), the Edom ites simply moved in and took over large tracts o f OBADIAH

90

land in southern Judah, abandoned by th eir Judean owners as they fled for safety from th e Babylonians (Obad 11-13). (Edom had capitulated to Babylon earlier and thus was n o t in th e same danger that th e Judeans were.) T h e Edom ites also captured and turned over to th e Babylonians fleeing Judeans (Obad 14) instead o f showing compassion toward th eir brother nation. A s a result, th e judgm ent o f G od described in Obad 1 -9 was announced by Obadiah against Edom, including defeat in war, plundering by th e enemy, widespread slaughter o f th e population, and th e perm anent end o f Edom as a threat to Israel. We can summarize the future for Edom and nations like her compared to Israel: they m ust decrease because Israel must increase. If Israel is to be saved and blessed, the nations that would naturally try to prevent that from happening must be suppressed and punished. T his is the point o f Obad 15-21. Employing the terminology o f the Day o f the Lord,4 these verses describe how all the nations o f the world will be judged, and specifically how those who have done harm to Israel will have their fortunes reversed. In the same way that they oppressed Israel, Israel w ill now oppress them (v 15)— a punishment perfectly fitting the crim e. They will shrink in influence to nothingness (v 16) and be destroyed (v 18). T h e Israelites will once again inhabit the lands that were rightly theirs according to the divine plan, but which had fallen into the hands o f other nations. These included the western coastal plain, during Obadiah’s tim e in the hands o f the Philistines (v 19a); Samaria and Gilead, in the hands o f the Syrians and Assyrians (v 19b); Zarephath and adjacent southern Phoenician territory in the hands o f the Canaanites (v 20a); and the southern Judean region (Negeb) in the hands o f Edom (v 20b). T h e general principle o f this portion o f the book is that whatever parts o f the promised land were not in the possession o f the promised people would revert to them in the coming Day o f the Lord. 91

The Future o f the Nations

Edom was a prime offender among Israel’s immediate neighbor states during the era o f Obadiah, so it accordingly receives significant condem nation in this b rief book. In other books, other nations are m entioned more frequently (though Edom is virtually always present among those na­ tions being condemned in groups o f oracles against foreign nations). T h e point is that G od will one day rule over all the nations o f the earth in fulfillm ent o f the prayers o f his saints (cf. Ps 82:8; M att 6:10; cf. Joh n 12:31). Therefore his people the true Israel— from whatever ethnic stock they may be— w ill enjoy his eternal benefits (Obad 21).

M ount Zion/Jerusalem In D eut 12:5, the Israelites are told: “You shall seek the place that Yahweh your God will choose from among all your tribes to put his name there for his dwelling.” Though it had not yet been identified by name to the Israelites, that place was Jerusalem, the Jebusite city built on a narrow mountain promontory called M ount Zion in the hilly heartland o f Canaan. It was David who completed the conquest o f Jeru­ salem by capturing the walled Jebusite central city o f Zion (2 Sam 5:6-10) several centuries after Joshua had defeated the city’s Jebusite king (Josh 10:1-27; 12:10), and the Israelites, in the days o f the Judges, had taken the unwalled outer city, or what we today would call “greater Jerusalem” (Judg 1:8). David founded the national palace in Zion (1 Sam 5 :1 1 12), and his son, Solom on, built th e tem ple there (1 Kgs 6). W ith th e tem ple at the highest point on its m ount, Zion was the center o f Israel, th e place where G od had caused his name to dwell as a symbol o f his presence w ith his people (cf. 1 Kgs 8:27-29). A s th e historical headquarters for the kings, it was also appropriately designated as th e symbolic seat o f government for th e Messiah. A s Isaiah says, for ex­ ample, “In th e last days th e m ountain o f Yahweh’s tem ple OBADIAH

92

w ill be established as the ch ief among th e m ountains. It w ill be raised above th e hills and all the nations w ill stream to it” (Isa 2:2). Ezekiel’s symbolic vision o f th e new Jerusalem also describes th e M essiah ’s territory as that o f Jerusalem : “W h at remains on b oth sides o f th e holy portion and th e city property w ill belong to the prince” (Ezek 48:21; “prince” is Ezekiel’s term for Messiah). N ot surprisingly, then, Obadiah faithfully reflects this concept that M ount Zion/Jerusalem would be the location o f the future government o f G od over all the world on behalf o f his people. Obad 17 promises: O n M ount Zion will be deliverance. It will be a holy place. T h e family o f Jacob will dispossess those who dispossessed them . Obad 21 likewise looks forward to the day when Zion will be th e place o f refuge for all G od’s people, the site from w hich they will reign forever w ith the Lord: Those who have been rescued w ill go up to M ount Zion to rule over th e mountains o f Esau A nd to Yahweh will belong the kingdom. In the O ld Testam ent the three term s “Zion,” “M ount Zion,” and “Jerusalem ” are used relatively interchangeably. Obadiah uses “Jerusalem ” once (v 11) and “M ount Zion” tw ice (vv 17,21). H e does not use the single word “Zion” by itself, b u t does speak in verse 16 o f “my holy m ountain,” one o f many other term s vised in the O ld Testam ent to refer to M ount Zion/Jerusalem. T h e them e o f M ount Zion/Jerusalem as the dwelling place o f G od and the seat o f government in the eschaton is

93

Mount Zion/Jerusalem

taken up in the New Testament, so that Jerusalem becomes there a symbol o f heaven. T h e coming o f the heavenly Jerusalem to earth functions, then, as a symbol o f the victory o f G od over the evils o f the earth. R ev 21:2-3 paints this picture beautifully: And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out o f heaven from- God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I .heard a loud voice from the throne saying “Look, the dwelling o f G od is w ith humanity, and he will dwell w ith them . They will be his people, and G od him self will be w ith diem and be their G od.” T his section o f Revelation goes on to reflect further some o f th e kinds o f characteristics that are attributed to M ount Zion in Obadiah. Jerusalem w ill be a place o f refuge (Rev 2 1 :4 ,6 ; cf. Obad 17), a place where G od’s people be­ long (Rev 21:7; cf. Obad 17,21), and a place from w hich will emanate the judgm ent o f G od that elim inates evil (Rev 21:8; cf. Obad 1 6 -1 8 ,2 1 ). A ll C hristians are already citizens o f M ount Zion/Jerusalem (Heb 12:22-28). They can thus iden­ tify w ith the ancient promises o f G od through Obadiah concerning their future home.

OBADIAH

94

6

JONAH

Too narrow a view of God’s love G od’s command to Jonah recorded in 1:2 made it clear to the prophet that he was being asked to undertake an assign­ m ent loathsome to him— preaching the possibility o f G od’s mercy to the people o f Nineveh, Assyria’s leading city, the headquarters o f Israel’s m ost powerful enemy among the nations o f the world. Jonah 1:2 is often misleadingly translated in m odem English versions, giving the reader the impression that God was asking Jonah to preach against Nineveh because o f its “evil.” In fect, the verse should be rendered: “G o to the im portant city, Nineveh, and speak against it for their trouble is o f concern to m e.”1 It was G od’s concern for the trouble that Nineveh was experiencing that bothered Jonah. Jonah’s theology may n ot have been perfect, as evidenced by the fect that he hoped to “flee out to sea, away from Yahweh” (1:3), as if Yahweh’s divine jurisdiction ended or was limited as soon as one departed from the terri­ tory o f Israel. (The idea that gods had jurisdiction mainly in

95

Too Narrow a View o f God’s Love

those nations w here they were worshiped was widespread in the ancient Near East; cf. 2 Kgs 17:27; Ezra 1:3; 7:19.) H is im perfect theology, however, did n o t m ean that Jonah was n o t able to hear th e w ord o f G od clearly and understand its im plications. W h at he heard th e Lord telling him did n o t please him : N ineveh was in trouble, and G od wanted his prophet to go there and preach as a means o f helping, n o t harm ing, th e Assyrians. Assyria was n o t a nation easy to love by anyone’s standards, and it is n o t surprising that an Israelite prophet should resist th e call to a m inistry o f compassion in its leading city. Assyria had perfected the art o f exile, deporting captured populations on a massive scale from their homelands in or­ der to prevent any resurgence o f local opposition to the empire’s tyrannical rule in its conquered territories. Assyria had also justly gained th e reputation o f a brutal conqueror. W oe to the nation that tried to hold out against an Assyrian army! Torture and slaughter would be its fate, as was the case in the Assyrian conquest o f Egypt (Nah 3:8-10). Indeed, the Assyrian Empire was famous for its cruelty (Nah 3:19). But to refuse to preach the possibility o f divine mercy to one’s enemies, no m atter how malicious they may be, is simply too narrow a view o f G od’s love. Jonah was a seasoned prophet w ith plenty o f experience in pro-Israelite, anti­ foreigner preaching (2 Kgs 14:25). Those sorts o f assignments he presumably didn’t mind. He understood— correctly— that the enemies o f his people were automatically the enemies o f his God. T hat is, after all, a basic assumption o f oracles against foreign nations in the prophetical books.2 W hat he did not understand— or want to believe— however, was the fact that God actually loved his (God’s) enemies. H e should have been able to infer this im portant truth from the long history o f God’s mercy to Israel, but his view was too narrow. Like most Israelites, he assumed that God automatically loved Israel be­ cause it was his own nation, and that God would never think JONAH

96

o f Israel as an enemy. It fell to Jonah's contemporaries, Hosea and Amos, to preach to the people that their own nation had become God’s enemy (Amos 2:6-16; Hos 1:9; etc.) and that other nations than Israel could bear the Lord’s name (Amos 9:12). For Jonah, on the other hand, foreigners deserved only hate, Israel only love. T h e Book o f Jonah ends w ith a flashback (4 :5 -1 1)3 to the tim e when Jonah had completed his preaching in Nineveh and had gone outside the city to wait to see w hether or not it would repent, and therefore escape God’s wrath. In this situation G od teaches Jonah a lesson about divine love for people— even evil people— by means o f a plant. Jonah builds him self a shelter, undoubtedly o f rocks, since “lumber” as we know it was exceedingly rare and expensive in Mesopotamia, where Nineveh was located. T h e shelter had no roof, but G od miraculously gave it one via a leafy gourd that grew up quickly to cover the top o f the structure. Jonah had shade, and was “absolutely delighted” w ith it (4:6). H e quickly learned to care about the plant. T hen God sent a worm to attack the plant’s root and kill it, so that Jonah’s shelter was again roofless. G od then provided for Jonah a sweltering day, w ith a hot desert wind, so that he experienced a sort o f heatstroke, and wanted to die (4:7-8). T h e loss o f the plant was to him grievous indeed. G od pointed out how Jonah’s view o f G od’s love was too narrow, because his sense o f proportion about the value o f things was m istaken. Verses 10-11 tell us: Yahweh said, “You are so concerned about the climbing gourd w hich you did n ot have to lift a finger to grow, w hich came up overnight and died overnight Should n o t I be concerned about Nineveh, the im portant city w hich has in it more than a hundred tw enty thousand people who do n o t know their right hand from their left, as well as a large num ber o f animals?” 97

Too Narrow a View o f God’s Love

W hat the Lord refers to here is an im plicit scale o f value in living things. T his scale exists in all cultures, ancient and m odem, and is certainly basic to the Scriptures as well. It may be indicated very simply by the following table: Human Life Animal Life Plant Life

(highest value) (lower value) (lowest value)

Jonah loved his plan t It was at the bottom o f the value scale, but he cared about it very much. To him it had value, and he missed it very much when it was gone. God uses this affection for a plant to make his point about his love for Nineveh. If Jonah loved a plant, at the lowest value level, shouldn’t G od love the 120,000 people o f Nineveh, at the highest value level— or even the animals o f Nineveh, at a lower value level than the people but still more valuable than plants? In other words, people, no m atter how wicked, are still valuable to G od. They are intrinsically objects o f his love. He has created them w orthy o f his love (cf. Ps 8:3-8), and he definitely loves them . If Jonah could love a plant, G od could certainly love people— any people, even Assyrians. T h e nar­ row view o f G od’s love is a dangerous one, because it keeps people from being loved by G od’s people, and leads to dis­ crim ination against people on the sorts o f bigoted grounds that have been a shame to societies wherever they have sur­ faced. T h e Bible hardly portrays G od as a “softy.” H e w ill judge and destroy the wicked. B u t he does n o t do so arbi­ trarily or capriciously, and as the Scripture so explicitly states, he would prefer n ot to have to do so (1 Tim 2:4; 2 Pet 3:9). He prefers repentance to judgment, ju st as he did in Nineveh, and ju st as Jonah him self grudgingly acknowledges (Jonah 4:2). H e has loved the world, not ju st one nation or people (John 3:16), and our view o f his love must never forget that. JONAH

98

Hypocrisy and gratitude Jonah was not, as far as we learn o f him in the book that bears his name, stupid. N or is there anything to suggest that he was arrogant, thinking him self more im portant than oth­ ers. H e also does not seem to have been dishonest H e fesses up rather forthrightly when the sailors identify him as the cause o f the storm that threatens their lives (Jonah 1:9-12), and after his rather dramatic object lesson (1:15-17) he preaches ju st what G od told him to preach, when he gets to Nineveh. H e did, o f course, try at first to get out o f what was for him a highly objectionable assignment, but the book shows no evidence that he lied about his task either to the sailors or to G od or to anyone else. Nevertheless, there is a sense in w hich Jonah was hypo­ critical. T h e word “hypocritical” is used in a variety o f ways in m odem English; it has, in effect, developed a rather wide range o f meaning. Restrictively, it refers to som eone’s trying to seem som ething that he or she is not, that is, being phony or pretentious, especially w ith regard to attem pting to seem piously religious when one is actually not. M ore broadly, however, “hypocritical” tends to designate som ething or someone who displays ethical inconsistency, as in a selfinterested willingness to do one thing while saying that an­ other is right, o r to condem n som eone else for things that one is him self or herself doing. In this latter, broader sense, Jonah was hypocritical. H e displayed a hypocrisy about th e mercy that he received. G rateful to be blessed by divine mercy him self, he was n ot at all eager to see G od give similar mercy to his enemies. T hat ethical inconsistency is the sort o f thing that is popularly called “hypocrisy.” T h e Book o f Jonah itself is structured in such a way as to highlight Jonah's ethical inconsistency. T his structure may be represented as follows:

99

Hypocrisy and Gratitude

C h 1: C h 2:

C h 3: C h 4:

Jonah disobeys G od and admits he deserves to die. A fter being rescued from death by the fish, he eloquently thanks G od for the mercy he has been shown. Jonah preaches that disobedient Nineveh deserves to die unless it repents. A fter Nineveh repents and is rescued from death, Jonah is resentful o f the mercy Nineveh is shown.

It is dear in th e book that neither N ineveh nor Jonah de­ served to be rescued from death. G od in his grace neverthe­ less rescued both. Jonah was glad for this in his own case, but angry about it in the case o f Nineveh. In the structure o f th e hook, it is th e psalm th at Jonah prays in chapter 2 that especially calls attention to Jonah’s hypocrisy. T h e psalm is o f a category that we call a "thanksgiving psalm .” Su ch psalms were composed to he sung or prayed to G od in gratitude after a person or group had been delivered from some sort o f m isery or danger. These psalms typically have a five-part structure:

Thanksgiving Psalm Structure Introduction to th e psalm D escription o f past trouble Appeal to G od for help R eference to rescue by G od Vow o f praise/testimony

Jonah 2 :2 -9 v2 vv 3 -6 a v7 v 6a vv 8 -9

From the picture o f Jonah provided in the book, there is every reason to th ink and no reason to doubt that Jonah was sincerely grateful to G od for his own rescue from his own well-deserved punishm ent T h e psalm serves to reinforce this. Far from interrupting th e flow o f the narrative, it actu­ ally heightens the focus on Jonah’s ethical inconsistency, JONAH

100

because it partially "stops th e action” to record his gratitude to G od. H ere is an exciting story about a m an inside a fish, still alive, bu t instead o f details about how it felt for him to be in that predicam ent, we are given the text o f the psalm that he prayed to G od in thanksgiving for being alive. (O bviously, he had realized by th e tim e that he prayed the psalm that th e fish represented rescue from death.) A poem in the midst o f a narrative always draws attention to itself in some way, and this poem is certainly no exception. By the tim e th e reader has finished chapter 2, it is evident that Jonah has accepted, w ith an eloquent expression o f his indebtedness, th e gift o f life from a G od who had every right to put him to death instead (cf. 1:12). Jonah is indeed grateful. In term s o f gratitude, however, Jonah's final attitude resentm ent) "after preaching at N ineveh (4:1) contrasts markedly w ith that o f th e people o f th e w icked city them selves. T hey show th eir gratitude alm ost immediately (3:5) for th e chance given to them to repent by th e preaching o f this stranger who arrives at th eir gates. In Assyria at th is tim e it was accepted practice that an official visit to an im­ portant city (as N ineveh unquestionably was) should take three days: a first day to arrive and declare th e purpose o f one’s visit, a second day to m eet w ith officials and transact whatever business one had com e for, and a third day to be sent o ff on one’s return journey. In Jonah 3:3, N ineveh is accordingly referred to as a city requiring a three-day visit. T h e grateful responsiveness o f th e people o f N ineveh is shown in th e fect th at they did n o t wait for th e fu ll three days to pass before taking action. A s soon as Jonah began preaching— on th e first day o f his visit (3:4)— th e people believed G od, called for a fest, and w ent in to m ourning as a means o f appealing to G od for m ercy (3:5). T h e king him ­ self did likewise (3:6) and w ent further to make th e plea, w hich had started spontaneously on th e popular level, a m atter o f official state policy (3:7-9).

101

Hypocrisy and Gratitude

Here was a city and a king only too willing to receive an opportunity from G od to be spared— eagerly responding to a chance for life instead o f death. T h e background to their reasons for doing so includes the nature o f the troubles in general facing the Assyrian Empire at this time, and the A s­ syrian tendency toward what we would call superstition,4 but the point remains that they were glad to have a chance to be spared, and showed their thankfulness by heartfelt actions o f repentance. In the same way that Jonah had been glad for deliverance in chapter 2, they are shown to be glad for deliverance in chapter 3. In chapter 4 , however, it is Jonah who is not glad for their deliverance, even though he had been very glad about his own in chapter 2. H e could rejoice about his own deliverance and they about theirs, but he could n ot bring him self to rejoice with or for them. His gratitude stopped when others, for whom he had no love, were blessed, too. T his is the kind o f inconsistency that popularly is called “hypocrisy.” Jonah had fled from G od because he knew that God might be compassionate to those he— Jonah— wished to see receive no compassion (4:2). Jonah was grateful, yet his gratitude was limited to himself, and thus ultimately hypocritical.

Forgiveness As evidenced by its inclusion in that b rief compendium o f key Christian doctrines known as the Apostle’s Creed, the concept o f the “forgiveness o f sins” is im portant to our faith. W ithout forgiveness, after all, how could anyone gain eter­ nal life? Forgiveness is a rich biblical concept w ith both human and divine aspects. W hile G od’s forgiveness is neither on the same level or o f exactly the same type as human forgive­ ness, there are analogies between the two. T his is high­ lighted by the wording o f the Lord’s prayer, in w hich we JONAH

102

pray that G od will “forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" (M att 6:12). Interestingly, it is this portion o f the prayer that Jesus chooses to com ment on especially to his disciples: “For if you forgive people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. B u t if you do n ot forgive people their sins, your Father will n o t forgive your sins” (M att 6:14-15). T his teaching is “honored in the breach” in the life o f Jonah. W hen Jesus teaches that if we do n ot forgive those who sin against us, our sins will not be forgiven by G od, he does n ot mean G od’s ability to forgive depends upon ours, or that humans can manipulate G od to forgive them merely by be­ ing forgiving o f others. Rather Jesus’ words must be under­ stood as a reminder that repentance is proved in part by forgiveness. T h e nonforgiving person is not a true follower o f C hrist. T h e nonforgiving prophet, likewise, is n ot in tune w ith G od’s will. Indeed, th e linkage o f repentance and forgiveness, though widely ignored in this age o f “easybelievism” is an essential part o f the gospel (cf. M ark 1:4; Luke 5:32; 24:47). Jesus taught that our repentance is shown in part by our readiness to forgive those who sin against us: “If your brother sins, rebuke him , and if he repents, forgive him. If he sins against you seven tim es in a day and seven times comes back to you and says “I repent” [or “I am sorry”], forgive him ” (Luke 17:3-4). There are tw o levels o f forgiveness, but basically only one kind. T he levels are the divine and the human. Forgiveness itself, on either level, may be defined simply as not holding something against someone, that is, withholding retribution or punishment. Divine forgiveness is, however, also more than that. First, it involves the withholding o f a much greater magnitude o f punishm ent Second, the withholding o f divine punishment is based upon a prior transfer o f punishm ent G od never actually overlooks sin. From the divine point o f view, sin is always punished. T h e divine penalty for all sin was 103

Forgiveness

paid by C h rist T h e penalty was taken from those who de­ served it and placed upon the only one who did n o t W ith regard to forgiveness on the human level, consider a question especially relevant to the story o f Jonah. D o human beings have th e power to forgive? T h e answer is yes, they do, hut there is an im portant qualification to this answer. O n the one hand, human power to forgive is lim ited to human relationships w ith other people. Human beings have no power to forgive sin except as it involves their own attitudes and actions toward people who have wronged them . In other words, human forgiveness is a form o f self-control, n ot control over anyone else’s destiny. G od’s forgiveness, on th e other hand, involves control over people’s temporal and eternal lives. H is power to punish goes far beyond any hu­ man power to punish. In the Book o f Jonah, G od’s power to forgive had great consequence. Jonah’s did not. G od exer­ cised his forgiveness. Jonah withheld his. T h e prophets speak fairly often o f divine forgiveness, and only rarely o f hum an forgiveness. T h e Book o f Jonah ad­ dresses both. G enerally in th e prophetical books, three H e­ brew verbal roots are commonly used in referring to th e concept o f G od’s forgiveness o f sin: slh, w hich has a range o f meaning roughly th e same as the English word "forgive”; nś › w hich in addition to “forgive” can mean “lift” or “re­ move”; and kpr, w hich is m ost often translated “atone.” T h e prophets also convey th e concept o f forgiveness in images that do n o t necessarily contain any o f these particular vo­ cabulary words. Examples o f the latter would include M icah 7:19, (“you w ill tread our sins underfoot and hurl all our iniquities in to th e depths o f th e sea”), Isa 43:25 (“I, even I am he who blots out your transgressions for my own sake and remembers your sins no m ore”), and Jer 31:34 (“For I w ill forgive their wickedness and remember their sins no m ote”). In th e case o f Jonah, the concept o f forgiveness is m uch more strongly conveyed by th e situation described in JONAH

104

th e story than by th e use o f vocabulary usually associated w ith forgiveness. M ost o f the tim e that th e prophets speak about forgive­ ness, it is G od’s forgiveness o f Israel that they refer to, and particularly G od’s forgiveness o f Israel in the "latter days,” the eschatological era w hen he will have created for him self a new people to reflect his glory, a righteous people character­ ized by the feet that their sins have been forgiven (cf. the passages cited above and, e.g., Isa 33:24; Jer 33:8; Hos 14:2). A s Jerem iah quotes G od, “I will forgive the rem nant that I spare” (Jer 50:20). T h e new age to com e will be delineated in part by the general availability o f the forgiveness o f sins to all who believe. T his was by no means obvious under the O ld Covenant, In fact, it represents one o f the advances o f the New Cove nant over the O ld. T his is not to say that the means o f forgiveness was ultimately different in the O ld Covenant, only to say that th e fact o f righteousness by faith was hardly understood widely or clearly by O ld Testam ent figures in an age w hich assumed that righteousness was earned by ritual sacrifice and the keeping o f a covenant com plicated by many stipulations. There are, however, other emphases in the prophetical books on forgiveness, especially the sort that we m ight call “tem poral” In the story o f Jonah, three kinds o f temporal forgiveness may be considered as either described or implied: 1. God’s forgiveness o f Jon ah. Jonah deserved death bu t was rescued instead. T his was hardly a general forgiveness o f Jonah’s sins, a topic n o t in purview in th e book. It was a tem poral forgiveness o f one act o f rebellion, that is, Jonah’s running from G od’s assignment to preach at Nineveh. 2. G od’s forgiveness o f N ineveh. T h e city, like Jonah w hen he was running from G od, deserved death and, like Jonah, was rescued instead. T h is was, likewise, n o t a perma­ nen t forgiveness o f all th at A ssyria had done, bu t tem poral 105

Forgiveness

forgiveness provided to a generation o f inhabitants, involving no guarantees for th e longer term . 3. Jon ah’s forgiveness o f Nineveh. This, o f course, is nota­ ble by its absence. It didn’t occur— but it should have. Jonah even tried to avoid being part o f the process whereby G od could forgive— even temporally— the Ninevites. He thus im­ plicitly demonstrated that he was unwilling to forgive them himself. He wanted to go on hating his enemies, the Assyri­ ans, and how could he do that while at the same time forgiv­ ing them? O n the one hand, hating and forgiving are, after all, incompatible. Loving and forgiving, on the other hand, go together. T he relationship o f love and forgiveness is an im portant one. M icah says o f God: “W h o is a G od like you, who pardons sins and forgives the transgression o f the remnant o f his inheritance? You do not stay angry forever but delight to show m ercy” (Mie 7:18). H e says these words, o f course, about G od’s mercy to Israel— the true eschatological Israel made up from all peoples and nations. T h e description is also generally characteristic o f G od’s willingness to forgive, a willingness that in the case o f the Book o f Jonah was exer­ cised even on behalf o f a people as despicable as the Assyri­ ans. T his is what Jonah resents having to acknowledge. As the story says, T his [the sparing o f Nineveh] was absolutely disgusting to Jonah and he became angry. H e prayed to Yahweh: “This, O Yahweh, is exactly what I said when I was back in my own country. T h at is why I fled, earlier, on the open sea. I knew that you were a G od who is gracious, compassionate, patient, firm ly loyal, and one who decides against disaster. So, Yahweh, take my life from me. I would rather be dead than alive” (Jonah 4:1-3).

JONAH

106

Being forgiven by G od is easy for anyone to take. W h o would turn it down? Taking pleasure, however, in seeing G od forgive one’s enemies— people who really are evil— that is another matter. T he first sort o f forgiveness was fine w ith Jonah. T h e other would have involved loving people so maddening to him that he preferred to die rather than see it happen. Accordingly, an im portant question, n o t expressed in so many words in th e book bu t nevertheless raised for the thoughtful reader by th e story o f Jonah is: A re we like th e reluctant prophet? D o we readily accept th e forgiveness G od has provided for us in C h rist b u t resist th e idea that similar forgiveness should be granted to those w ho have harm ed us? D o we resent some o f th e forgiving th at G od does because it is in our minds letting evil people— oth er evil people— get away w ith something? T h at is a question th e Book o f Jonah leaves w ith us. It is an im portant question for us to ask.

107

Forgiveness

NOTES

Chapter 2 Hosea 1. G. Mendenhall, "Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition.” Biblical Archaeologist 17 (1954) 50-76; idem, Law and Covenant in the Ancient Near East (Pittsburgh: Biblical Colloquium, 1955). 2. E.g., M. G. Kline, Treaty o f h e Great King (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963). 3. Hos 1; 2; 2:2,5; 3:3; 4 :1 0 ,1 1,12,15,18; 5:3; 6:10; 9:1. In some verses the term occurs more than once. 4. For a fuller discussion, see W BC 31:70,72,76. 5. Because the consonantal (original) Hebrew spelling of “in miseries” and “in boats” is identical, many modem versions incor­ rectly choose “in boats” as part of the translation of Deut 28:68. 6. See W BC 31:xxxi-xlii. 7. Heb. literally “and I also to you,” thus R SV “so will I also be to you” [Le., having no relations]. NIV “and I will live with you” is exactly the opposite of what the Heb. intends. 8. E.g., Krister Stendahl, “The Apostle Paul and the Introspec­ tive Conscience of the West,” Harvard Theological Review 56 (1963): 199-215; also in S. E. Miller and G. E. Wright, eds., Ecumenical

Dialogue at Harvard: The Roman Catholic-Protestant Colloquium (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press Fund of Harvard University 109

Notes

Press, 1964), 236-56; cf. Karl Menninger, Whatever Became of Sin? (New York: Hawthorne Books, 1973). 9. Ze’ev Meshel, “Did Yahweh Have a Consort?” Biblical Ar­ chaeology Review 5:2 (1979): 24-35. 10. See W BC 31:171-72. Chapter 3 Joel 1. For the evidence, see Douglas Stuart, “The Sovereign’s Day of Conquest,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Re­ search 221 (1976): 159-64. 2. Eg., Jer 20:7-18. 3. See esp. W BC 31:xxxiv-xxxvii 4. See above, The Distant Past and the Ultimate Future: The Long View on Israel Chapter 4 Amos 1. On these contrasts see above ch 2, The Attractions of Idolatry. 2. See above, ch 2, The Distant Past and the Ultimate Future: The Long View on Israel. 3. See above, ch 2, The Reliance of the Prophets on the Law. 4. See R. deVaux, Ancient Israel (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965), 113-14. 5. For fuller documentation on the covenant lawsuit, see J. Harvey, “Le Rîb-pattem.” Biblica 43 (1962): 172-96; H. B. Huffmon, “The Covenant Lawsuit in the Prophets,” Journal of Biblical Literature 78 (1959): 285-95; L. A. Sinclair, “The Courtroom Motif in the Book of Amos.” Journal of Biblical Literature 85 (1966): 351355; G. E. Wright, “The Lawsuit of God,” in B. W. Anderson and W. Harrelson, eds., Israel’s Prophetic Heritage (New York: Harper and Row, 1962), 62-67. 6. See W BC 31:440-42,490-92 Chapter 5 Obadiah 1. For a complete listing, see W BC 31:405-6. 2. In this regard, it is useful to note that the nation of Israel

NOTES

110

was never ethnically pure (as evidenced in Exod 12:38; Josh 6:25; Judg 1:16; Ruth 4:18-22; etc.). 3. See above, ch 4, Yahweh’s Universal Sovereignty. 4. See above, ch 3, The Day of the Lord. Chapter 6 Jonah 1. The Heb. word rā'āh often means “trouble” rather than “evil.” Cf. W BC 31:444, 447-50. On the nature of Nineveh’s troubles in Jonah’s day, see 31:440,490-92. 2. See above, ch 5, The Future of the Nations. 3. On the identification of Jonah 4:5-11 as a flashback, see W BC 31:499-501. 4. W BC 31:490-94.

Ill

Notes

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen, L. C. The Books o f Joel, Obadiah, Jonah and Micah. New International Commentary on the Old Testament Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1976. Bartlett, J. “The Brotherhood of Edom.” Journal for the Study o f the Old Testament 2 (1977): 2-27. Bright, J. Covenant and Promise: The Prophetic Understanding o f the Covenant in Pie-Exilic Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1975. Craigie, P. Twelve Prophets. Vol 1. Daily Bible Study Series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984. Gemser, B. “The Rîb or Controversy Pattern in Hebrew Mentality.” Vetus Testamentum Supplements 3 (1955): 124-37. Gordon, C. H. “The Wine-Dark Sea.” Journal o f Near Eastern Studies 37 (1978): 51-52. Harrison, R . K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1969. Hayes, J. H. “The Usage of Oracles against Foreign Nations in Ancient Israel.” Journal o f Biblical Literature 87 (1968): 81-92. Hillers, D. Treaty-Curses and the Old Testament Prophets. BibOr 16. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964. 113

B ibliography

Hubbard, D. With Bands of Love: Lessons from the Book o f Hosea. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1969. Huffm on, H. “Prophecy in the Mari Letters.” Biblical Archaeolo­ gist 31 (1968): 101-24. _________. “The Covenant Lawsuit in the Prophets.” Journal o f Bibli­ cal Literature 78 (1959): 285-95. Kaiser, W. “The Promise of God and the Outpouring of the Holy Spirit: Joel 2:28-32 and Acts 2:16-21.” In The Living and Active Word of God: Essays in Honor o f Samuel J. Schultz. Edited by M. Inch and R. Youngblood. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1983. Keil, C. F. The Twelve Minor Prophets. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1969. Landes, G. M. “The Kerygma of the Book of Jonah.” Interpretation 21 (1967): 3-31. Mays, J. L. Amos: A Commentary. Old Testament Library. Philadel­ phia: Westminster Press, 1969. ______. H osea. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969. Mendenhall, G. Law and Covenant in the Ancient Near East. Pittsburgh: Biblical Colloquium, 1955. Meyers, J. “Edom and Judah in the Sixth-Fifth Centuries B. C .” In Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright, ed­ ited by H. Goedicke, 377-92. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1971. Moran, W. L. “New Evidence from Mari on the History of Prophecy.” Biblica 50 (1969): 15-56. Motyer, J. A. The Day of the Lion. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1974. Payne, D. “Jonah from the Perspective of Its Audience.” Journal for the Study o f the Old Testament 13 (1979): 3-12. Stuart, D. Hosea-Jonah. Word Biblical Commentary 31. Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1987. ______. “The Old Testament Prophets’ Self-Understanding of Their Prophecy.” Themelios (1980/81): 9-14. Watts, J. D. W. “An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 15 (1956): 33-39.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

114

______. The Books o f Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Wiseman, D. “Jonah’s Nineveh.” Tendale Bulletin 30 (1979): 29-51.

115

Bibliography

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

OLD TESTAMENT Genesis 12:3 15 18 19 Exodus 3 3:14 4:22 10 10:12-15 12:38 14:14 19 20:3-6 20:4-6 20:7 20:13 20:14 20:15 20:16 22:25 22:25-27 23

117

90 53 85 41 27 27 39 87 86 10, 111 53 10 13 26 25 26 26 26 26 69 68 16

23:17 31:3 32 34 34:6 34:13

37 57 14 85 87 37

Leviticus 9:9-18 19:15 19:19 19:35-36 23 26 26:19 26:25

5 71 37 71 16 10,27,29 27 27

Numbers 11:25 11:29 14:18 14:27-35 25

58 58 87 10 14,42

Deuteronomy 1-4 1:30

40 53

4 4:20-31 4:30 5:8-10 5:11 5:17 5:18 5:19 5:20 12:2 12:2-14 12:3 12:4-32 12:5 12:15 12:21 16:21 20:4 23:8 24:10-13 24:17 28-32 28:22-24 28:33 28:38 28:42 28:49

29 40,41 27 26 25 26 26 26 26 16 79 37 16 92 18 18 37 53 90 68 68 27,29 27 27 86 86 27

Index o f Scriptures

28:68 30 30:4-5 Joshua 6:25 7 10:1-27 12:10 Judges 1:8 1:16 3:7 5:20 9:45 15:4-5 19

26,109 29 27 111 42 92 92 92 10, 111 37 53 52 52,87 42

Ruth 4:18-22

111

1 Samuel 5:11-12 8 17:36

92 42 53

2 Samuel 1:19-27 5:6-10

50 92

1 Kings 6 8:27-29 12:28-33 13 18:18 18:19 19:18 19:21

92 92 14 83 64 37 18 5

2 Kings 3:19 3:25 6:1-2 14:25 14:25-28 15:8-12 17:3-41

52 52 5 7,96 79 73 80

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

17:27 23:6 23:7 25:9

96 37 18 12

2 Chronicles 20:15

54

Ezra 1 1:3 7:19

43 96 96

Nehemiah 9:17

87

Psalms 8:3-8 14:6 45 82:8 86:15 103:8 140:12 145:8

98 66 38 92 87 87 66 87

Isaiah 2:2 11:4 13:6 13:9 14:4-23 19:23-25 25:4 32:15 33:24 42:13 43:25 44:3 54:6 63:10-11

93 66 47 47 50 90 66 60 105 54 104 60 38 59

Jeremiah 3:1 7:25 20:1-6 20:7-18 23 31:34

38 83 83 110 83 56,104

33:8 50:20 Ezekiel 8:9 13:5 16 18 19 27 30 33:1-20 39:29 48:21

105 105 17 47 38 33 50 50 50 33 60 93

Hosea 1-3 38 1:2 2,21,22,28,34,109 42 1:4 28 1:4-5 1:5 27 1:6 28 1:7 54 1:9 3,27,28,31,97 1:10-11 43 1:10-2:1 28 1:11 31 2:1 31 2:2 38,109 2:2-15 34,38 2:2-20 2 2:3 28 2:4-5 28 38,109 2:5 2:6 28 23,38 2:7 2:8 12 2:9-13 28 2:10 38 2:12 38 2:13 23,28,38 38 2:14 2:14-23 28 2:15 41,42 2:16-23 13,43 2:18 13 31 2:23 32 3 3:1-5 2

118

3:3 3:4 35 4:1-2 4:2 4:3 4:4 45 4:5-6 4:7 4:7-8 4:9 4:9-10 4:10 4:10-14 4:11 4:12 4:13 4:14 4:15 4:16 4:17 4:17-18 4:18 4:19 5:1 5:1-5 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:6-10 5:7 5:8-7:1 5:10-11 5:10-14 5:13 5:14-15 5:15 6:1 6:1-3 6:4 6:7 6:8 6:9 6:10 6:11 7:11 7:16

119

32,109 7:17 14,28,43 8:1-3 27,28,43 8:6 28 8:8-10 25,26 8:9 28,33 8:11-13 32 8:13 31,32,74,83 8:14 28 9:1 16 9:3 28 9:6 32 9:7 28 9:7-8 20,109 9:9 28 9:10 22,109 9:10-17 12,15,22,109 9:13 12,16 9:15 20 10:1 32,37,38,109 10:2 43 0:41 10:5 12,13,34 10:9 28 109 10:10 28 10:10-11 13,32 10:11 28 10:14 11:1 28 109 11:3 23 11:3-4 32 115 28 11:7 11:8 27 12:1 29 12:2 28 12:3 32 12,28,42 12:4 12:9 28 12:10 36 12:11 34 12:12 28 32 12:13 11 12:14 32 13:1 32 13:2 109 13:2-16 32 13:4 12,42 135 26,27,43 13:10

32 12 12 12 38,42 18 26,27,43 12,32 23,109 43 43 34,74 32 41,42 14,29,41 29 42 29,32,42 42 35 12 14,32 42 42 43 32 31,42 39,41 39 42 43 31 41 12 32 41 12,41 41,42 42 32 41 42 36 36 14 29 41 42 42

13:12 13:15 14:1-8 14:2 14:8 Joel 1 1:1-20 1:1-2:17 1:2-20 15-14 1:6 1:13 1:15 2 2:1 2:1-2 2:1-17 2:2 2:9 2:11 2:12-17 2:18 2:18-32 2:18-3:21 2:19 2:20 2:20-21 2:22 2:23 2:24 2:25 2:25-26 2:26 2:27 2:28 2:28-29 2:28-32 2:30-31 2:31 251-32 2:32 3:1 3:2 3:2-16 34-8 3:7 3:9-16

35 27 29,43 105 19,34 53,86,87 47 47,49 51,52 3 54 4 3,4,46,47 61 4,46,52 3,4,48 48 54 4 3,4,46,48,54 48 57 62 49 57 57 57 57 57 57 52,55 57 57 57 58 59,60,61 4,49,57 58 3,4,46,47,58 49 58,61 59 57,59 58 59 57 57

Index o f Scriptures

3:14 3:15-16 3:16 3:17 3:17-21 3:18 3:19 3:19-21 3:20 3:21 4:1-21 4:2 4:9 4:9-11 4:9-16 4:12 4:16

3,4,46,47,49 58 59 59 50 59 59 57 57,59 59 55 62 62 55 55 62 55

Amos 1 1:2 1:3-5 1:3-23 1:3-2:16 14 15 1:6-7 1:7 1:9-10 1:10 1:11-12 1:13-15 1:15 2 2:1-3 2:2 2:4 -5 2:5 2:6-7 2:6-8 2:6-16 2:7 2:8 2:12 2:13-16 3:1 3:1-2 3:3-8 3:9-11 3:10

5 66 65 68 84 12 79 65 12 65 12 65 65 79 5 65 12 68 12 67 5 68,97 18 18,67 73 69 5 75,76,77 82,83 77,78 74

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

3:11 3:13 3:15 4 4:1 4:6-8 4:6-11 4:9 4:10 4:13 5 5:5-6 5:7 5:8 5:11 5:11-12 5:12 5:17 5:18-27 5:21-24 5:27 6:1 6:1-7 6:7 6:8 7-9 7:1 7:1-3 74-6 7:7-9 7:9 7:10 7:10-13 7:10-17 7:11 7:12 7:13 7:14 7:14-15 7:16-17 7:17 8:1-3 84-6 85-6 8:7 9:1-10 9:2-4 94 9:5 9:5-6

74 64,78 75 84 5,69,74 66 30 66,86 66 64 47 79 5 64 75 69 75 51 47 5,18 80 5 5,74,75 81 85 85 66 85,86 86 87 72 79 5 72,80,84 66,80 73,83 73 73 5 73,74 66,81 87 70,71 5 71,85 81,87 66 81 66 64,65

9:7 9:10 9:11-13 9:11-15 9:12 9:14-15

65 66 66 66,82 5,65,97 81,82

Obadiah 1-9 11 13 14 15-21 16 16-18 17 17-21 21

91 93 6 6,91 91 93 94 93,94 6 92,93,94

Jonah 1 1:1 1:2 1:3 l:3ff. 1:9-12 1:12 1:15-17 2 2:1-10 2:2-9 2:8 3 3:2 34 3:5 3:5-9 3:6 3:7-9 4 4:1 4:1-3 4:2 4:5-9 4:5-11 4:11 Micah 7:18 7:19

100 7 95 95 7 99 101 99 100,101,102 7 100,101 14 100,102 7 101 101 7 101 101 100,102 101 7,106 87,98,102 7 97,98,111 90 106 104

120

Nahum 1:3 3:8-10 3:19 Zechariah 14:3 Malachi 4:5

87 96 96

54

98 92

Acts 2 2:17-21 3:21 17:30

4 57 82 87

Romans 1:18-32 4:13 8:16-21

68 82 39

2 Corinthians 11:2

38

47

NEW TESTAMENT Matthew 6:10 6:12 6:14 6:14-15 11:11

92 103 87 103 61

Mark 4:1 Luke 5:32 85 17:3-4 23:34 24:4 7

121

John 3:16 12:31

103

Galatians 3:26 3:28 3:29 4:26

39 61 13,41 50

103 83 103 87 103

Ephesians 1:5 5:25-26

39 38

1 Thessalonians 4:18 5:2

44 47

1 Timothy 24

98

Hebrews 12:18-24 12:22 12:22-28

82 50 94

2 Peter 3:9 3:10 3:13

98 47 82

Revelation 19:7 21:1-4 21:2 21:2-3 21:4 21:6 21:7 21:8 21:20 22:17

38 82 50 94 94 94 94 94 38 38

Index o f Scriptures

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES Micah - Malachi RALPH L. SMITH

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC

To Our Grandsons Daniel and David Leverenz Proverbs 17:6

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC Micah-­Malachi Copyright © 1990 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11514-4 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Smith, Ralph L. Micah-­Malachi: Ralph L. Smith. p.  cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-849-90791-3 1. Bible. O.T. Minor Prophets—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II. Series. BS1560.S66 1990 224’.906—dc2089-49677 Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from the author’s own translation. Other versions identified in the Index of Scriptures. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

CONTENTS

Foreword 1. Introduction 2. Them es in M icah Introduction Yahweh is a God who speaks Yahweh is a God o f requirements Yahweh is a God o f redemption, restoration, and hope 3. Them es in Nahum Introduction T h e sovereignty o f G od T he guilt of Nineveh T he fall o f Nineveh 4. Them es in Habakkuk Introduction Evil is doomed T h e righteous shall live Faith is the victory 5. Them es in Zephaniah Introduction A day o f wrath A day o f worship A day o f decision v

vii 1 7 7 11 15 18 21 21 24 26 29 31 31 35 38 40 43 43 48 49 52 Contents

A new day 6. Them es in Haggai Introduction A realistic view o f the past A dissatisfaction with the present A sense o f divine calling A vision o f the future 7. Them es in Zechariah Introduction T h e form er prophets and repentance: a look back Night visions and the New Jerusalem: a look above Fasting or feasting: a look around and w ithin T h e nations and the Messianic Age: a look ahead 8. Them es in M alachi Introduction G od’s covenant love Israel’s filial failure Priestly malfeasance Skeptical "believers” G od’s coming messenger Robbers o f God Trial by fire 9. Theological R eflections on Micah-M alachi Theocentric in thinking and writing Societies and individuals bring judgment on themselves Righteousness and peace ultimately will prevail Notes

Selected Bibliography Index o f Scriptures M ICAH-M ALACH I

54 56 56 63 63 65 66 69 69 73 75 77 79 84 84 89 90 91 93 94 95 97 100 102 108 109 111 118 119

vi

FOREWORD

Finding the great themes o f the books o f the Bible is essential to the study o f God’s W ord, and to the preaching and teaching o f its truths. B u t these themes or ideas are often like precious gems; they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered with some difficulty. T h e large com­ mentaries are useful in this discovery process, but they are n ot usually designed to help the student trace the im portant subjects w ithin a given book o f Scripture. T h e W ord Biblical Them es m eet this need by bringing together, w ithin a few pages, all o f what is contained in a biblical volume on the subjects that are thought to be m ost significant to that volume. A com panion series to the W ord Biblical Commentary, these books seek to distill the theo­ logical essence o f the biblical books as interpreted in the more technical series and to serve it up in ways that will enrich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship o f G od’s people. In this volume, Ralph Sm ith draws upon his studies in the m inor prophets to present the central themes o f Micahvii

Foreword

Malachi. T his book is sent forth in the hope that it will contribute to the vitality o f G od’s people, renewed by the W ord and the Spirit and ever in need o f renewal. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky

MICAH-MALACHI

Joh n D . W . W atts O ld Testament Editor

Word Biblical Commentary Word Biblical Themes

viii

1

INTRODUCTION

T h e search for biblical them es on an academic level goes back to the works o f Gerhard von Rad, “T h e Form -Critical Problems o f the H exateuch” (1938), and that o f M artin N oth, A History o f Pentateuchal Traditions (1948). Von Rad argued that the H exateuch is built around six m ajor them es: • • • • • •

T he T he T he T he T he The

Primeval History H istory o f the Patriarchs Deliverance from Egypt Divine Revelation at Sinai W ilderness Wanderings Granting of the Land o f Canaan.1

M artin N oth listed the major themes o f the Pentateuch as: • Guidance out o f Egypt • Guidance into the Arable Land • Promise to the Patriarchs

1

Introduction

• Guidance in the W ilderness • Revelation at Sinai2 These m en believed they could identify the Bible’s m ajor them es and trace the growth o f them . T h eir w ork in this regard was confined largely to the Pentateuch or the Hexateuch and used traditio-historical criticism . T he search for biblical themes on a popular level is sim­ pler. It consists o f reading the biblical text as it stands, not­ ing the various themes as they arise in context, w ith a view to understanding the use and meaning o f each them e, then and now. Such a procedure keeps one’s study anchored to the text, thus resisting any tem ptation to press the biblical materials into a preconceived theological mold. T hose who read the last seven books o f the M inor Prophets (Micah-Malachi) in search o f biblical themes en­ counter an amazing variety o f materials. These books con­ tain oracles o f judgment and salvation, visions, warnings, disputes, admonitions, songs, hymns, and promises. O ne might think that a short collection o f writings, consisting o f only thirty-six chapters and belonging to the same literary genre (prophecy), would be homogeneous and consistent in subject m atter and style. But the themes o f each book differ greatly, although a basic unity undergirds them . M icah’s themes are concerned with social injustice, judg­ ment, and future hope. Nahum’s primary m otif is the destruc­ tion o f Nineveh. Habakkuk was concerned with the presence o f evil in the world and God’s seeming inactivity. However, the power and presence o f evil could not weaken Habakkuk’s faith in God’s goodness and sovereignty. Zephaniah’s primary theme is the coming o f world judgment. Haggai and Zechariah were engrossed in the rebuilding of the temple after the re­ turn from Babylon. Malachi lived at least a hundred years after the first group o f exiles returned to Jerusalem. The high hopes and dreams they had when they returned soon turned MICAH-MALACHI

2

to ashes. Discouragement, disappointment, doubt, and skepti­ cism were rife. Malachi tried, with little success, to stem the tide o f spiritual lethargy. Som e o f the great them es arching over other parts o f the O ld Testam ent are scarcely m entioned in these seven books. Su ch them es as th e Exodus, C reation, Sinai, and Covenant are n ot stressed— although a reader familiar w ith other parts o f the O ld Testam ent may find im plications o f them . These over-arching them es m ust have been part o f th e m ental framework o f these prophets. W h at these seven prophets addressed directly, however, were the immediate issues o f war and peace, pride, greed, oppression, judgment, th e nations, exile, land restoration, and the com ing Day o f the Lord. T he themes change with the changing times and situations. These writings cover the whole period o f classical prophecy from the eighth century B.C. (Micah) to the fifth century B.C. (Malachi). Tremendous changes in the fortunes o f the people o f God occurred during those years. Samaria, the capital o f the N orthern Kingdom, fell to the Assyrians in 722 B.C. They sent a large segment o f its population into exile in Meso­ potamia and brought people from Babylon into Samaria to take their place (2 Kings 17:24). In 586 B.C. Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians. T he temple was demolished and burned. A large segment o f the population was carried captive to Baby­ lon. In 538 B.C. Cyrus, king o f Persia, captured Babylon and issued a decree that the captives in Babylon were free to re­ turn to their homes and rebuild their temples. In all these acts o f history, the prophets and people o f God saw His hand of judgment and mercy. T hese seven prophets believed Yahweh had given them messages for their people and th eir tim e. A s tim es and circum stances changed, th e messages or them es changed. B u t underneath all the changes and varied them es o f these books, the basic unity appears. For example, the covenant

3

Introduction

name, Yahweh, is used predominately in all seven books. It occurs 280 times in these books, while th e name Elohim , “G od,” is used only 38 times. T h e only other name or titles for G od used in these books are: Eloah (Hab 1:11; 3:3); “My H oly O n e” (Hab 1:12; 3:3); “O R o ck ” (Hab 1:12); and Shep­ herd (M ic 2:12; 7:14; Zech 9:16; 10:3). Paul H anson notes that this predom inant O ld Testam ent use o f the name Yah­ weh for G od reflects an underlying faith in the one G od who redeemed his people from bondage in Egypt and gave them th e promised land. H anson says, “T h e awesome power o f Israel’s primal encounter was relived in th e hear­ ing o f the divine nam e.” T h e name Yahweh stands for grace, glory, righteousness and praise (Exod 34:5-6). U n ­ derlying th e variety o f them es in these seven books is one them e: ‘I am Yahweh your G od who brought you up from the house o f bondage. You shall have no other gods before me.'"3 How does one organize and present the biblical them es in these seven books? D o we make a list o f various them es, pull out certain passages from each book, and present the material under the heading o f these themes? O r do we take each book separately and present the them es in each book? Either way, we run the risk o f destroying the meaning o f the m aterial by forcing it into our theological mold. We have chosen the latter m ethod. Separate chapters examine each book. Each chapter consists o f a b rief introduction to th e book and a discussion o f each o f its m ajor themes. Technical questions o f date, authorship, transm ission o f the text, translation, and interpretation have been discussed in my commentary, M icah-M alachi, in the W ord Biblical Com m entary series, Volume 32 (usually identified in this book as W B C 32). T h e last chapter will summarize the theology o f all seven books. Is there any connection betw een the name o f a prophet and a them e in his book? T h e name M icah means “who is MICAH-MALACHf

4

like thee?” T here seems to be a play on that name in M icah 7:18, “W ho is like thee, pardoning iniquity?” (r s v ) T he name Nahum means “C om forter.” In Nahum 3:7 the prophet says, Wasted in Nineveh, who will bemoan her? W hence shall I seek com forters for her? (RSV) D . L. Petersen says that Haggai’s name, “festival,” resonates w ith the issue o f the restoration o f the cult (worship), and Zechariah’s name, “Yahweh remembers,” is a conservative name, “evoking a sense o f continuity with earlier Israelite tradition. Such a name suggests that Yahweh remembers what he did for and with Israel at an earlier period. A nd it presumes he will act again in a similar m anner.”4 Although there are obvious connections between the name o f a prophet and some aspect o f his message, we need to be cautious in using any play on words to discover biblical themes or interpret any passage. W e should, however, be sensitive to biblical meanings and methods. A ncient ways o f writing and thinking were not always the same as ours. We must listen to the text w ithout forcing it into shapes and molds not inherent to it. I m ust express my gratitude and appreciation to Joh n D . W . W atts and the editors o f W ord Books for the oppor­ tunity to contribute this volume to th e W ord Biblical Them es series. It has been a stim ulating and enlightening study. My sincere gratitude goes also to M rs. G loria W ells, who has done yeoman’s service in the production o f this manuscript. M y wife o f alm ost forty-five years, Dorothy, has supported and encouraged me all along the way, for w hich I am very glad. 5

Intraduction

T his small volume is dedicated to our grandsons, Daniel and David Leverenz. I pray that they and every reader will find and appropriate G od’s love, forgiveness, guidance, and sustenance offered in the pages o f these seven prophets.

Ralph L. Smith Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary Fort Worth, Texas

MICAH-MALACHI

6

2

TH EM ES IN M ICAH

‘ W ho is like Yahweh? (Micah 7:18)

Introduction T he book o f M icah is one o f the great books o f the Bible. It consists o f only seven short chapters. But its power and influence vastly outweigh its size. A lthough the book has often been ignored o f neglected, some o f its words are un­ forgettable. W ho can forget, for example, those words o f global disarmament and universal peace: They [Nations] shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, and they shall not train again for war. (4:3) T he words o f M icah are linked inseparably to the C hris­ tian faith by his prediction o f the b irth o f a ruler o f Israel in Bethlehem-Judah: 7

Themes in M icah

But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, small among the clans o f Judah, from you shall come forth for me one to be a ruler in Israel, whose origin is from o f old, from ancient days. (5:2) T h e prediction was fulfilled beyond th e prophet’s fondest dreams in the b irth o f Jesus o f Nazareth (M att 2:6). W herever the gospel is preached, th e words o f M icah will be remembered. M icah’s summary o f G od’s requirem ents o f man in 6:8 has been praised by great and small alike. Thom as Huxley, (1825-1895) the famous British scientist, called it “a perfect ideal o f religion.” It has been inscribed in the Library o f Congress as a summary o f religion. It has been sung in the Sistine Chapel on G ood Friday to the music o f the sixteenth-century Italian composer Palestina (1526-1594). A rtists and painters have portrayed their understanding and impressions o f the prophet on paper, canvas, and murals. In 1890 James Singer Sargent was commissioned to deco­ rate the walls o f the great hall in the Boston Public Library. By 1919 he completed “T he Frieze o f the Prophets” on the north end o f the hall. T he frieze consists o f eighteen mural paintings o f the prophets, nine on each side o f the central figure o f Moses. O n the far left are four prophets o f despair (Hosea, Obadiah, Joel, and Zephaniah). O n the extreme right are four prophets o f hope (Micah, Haggai, Malachi, and Zechariah). T he last three prophets on the right face the future w ith a look o f hope on their faces. M icah, the fourth from the right end o f the frieze, has his head turned away from the light. His left hand covers his eyes as he ponders the wrongdoings o f men and nations. Saul Raskin, a Russian-born Am erican Jew painted the prophet as a farmer lifting his eyes from the field toward M ICAH-MALACHI

8

Jerusalem, w hich to M icah was the center o f wealth and power. Behind him in the painting is a slave driver w ith lash lifted against the unfortunate laborers o f the grasping, heart­ less landlord. M icah stands betw een the evils in the coun­ tryside and the corruption in the city. Behind him shines the rising sun, as bright as the promises at the end o f the book.1 He will turn and show us compassion. He will tread down our iniquities and He will cast all our sins into the depths o f the sea. (7:19) U nlike Raskin, Hans W alter W olff does not see M icah as a farmer. Although a man from the country, M icah is neither a poor peasant nor an agricultural worker. H e is a prophet and an elder o f M oresheth, like th e leaders o f Judah, (Jer 26:17; 1 Sam 30:26). M icah knows what an elder has to do in a Judean tow n— sharing in the judicial process in the gate and, perhaps, imparting clan wisdom. H e knows at least three problems which that wisdom speaks against in Proverbs: oppression o f free citizens (M ic 2:2; 3:3, 10; Prov 14:13; 22:16); corrupt judging (M ic 3:11; Prov 17:15; 18:5); and undisciplined drinking (Mic 2:11; Prov 20:1; 21:17; 23:20-21). He knows justice and the forms o f laments (1:816; 2:1). W olff suggests testing the disputed passages in M icah on the basis o f w hether they might come from the sphere o f an elder in Judah in the last third o f the eighth century B.C.2 M icah probably was the youngest o f the quartet o f writing prophets who lived in the last half o f the eighth century B.C. T he other three were Amos and Hosea in the northern kingdom and Isaiah in the south. M icah’s m inistry may be dated by the reigns o f the three kings o f Judah m entioned in the superscription: Jotham (740-735 B.C.), Ahaz (735-715 B.C.), and Hezekiah (715-688 B.C.). M icah probably began 9

Themes in M icah

his m inistry before the fall o f Samaria in 722 B.C. because he refers to its coming doom in 1:6-7. M ost o f M icah’s m inistry was spent near the end o f the eighth century in Jerusalem, where he may have fled as a refugee from the onslaught o f Sennacherib’s army against southern Judah. According to Sennacherib’s account o f that invasion, w hich took place about 701 B.C., he captured fortysix walled cities and innumerable smaller villages. He says he carried away captive 200,150 people— young and old, male and female— and he also took as spoils o f war innumerable horses, mules, donkeys, camels, and cattle. He shut up Hezekiah, king o f Judah, like a caged bird within Jerusalem.3 Life in Israel and Judah was extremely difficult in those last decades o f the eighth century B.C. Assyria ruled with an iron hand. Foreign influences on society and religion were strong. Callused, unscrupulous businessmen in Israel op­ pressed the poor (2:1-2; 6:10-12). Prophets divined for money and priests taught for hire (3:11). Rulers and judges abhorred justice and asked for bribes (3:6-7; 7:3). People could n ot trust neighbors or immediate family (7:5). T h e godly man, it seemed, had perished from the earth (7:2). Against this historical, social and religious background, we may ask what are the major themes o f Micah? We find in his book the two major themes o f most O ld Testament prophets, judgment and hope. But in a sense M icah had only one topic: “Yahweh is Lord.” M icah was intoxicated with the presence and power o f God. O ther prophets might go about uttering wind and lies, saying, I will preach to you o f wine and strong drink. (2:11) M icah said: O n the other hand I am full o f power, the spirit o f God, MICAH-MALACHI

10

and justice and might, to tell to Jacob his transgression and to Israel her sin. (3:8) U nder the umbrella o f M icah’s theocentric message, we may detect at least three other important themes that answer the question incorporated in the meaning o f his name, “W ho is like Yahweh?” T he three major themes are: (1) Yahweh is a God who speaks; (2) Yahweh is a God o f requirements; and (3) Yahweh is a God o f redemption, restoration, and hope.

Yahw eh is a God who speaks People in M icah’s tim e were seeking a word from God, but they were seeking it in the wrong place and in the wrong way. They were consulting sorcerers and soothsayers (5:12), diviners and false prophets (3:7), but they were getting no answer from God. M icah said: Thus says Yahweh concerning the prophets the ones leading my people astray. . . . It shall be night to you w ithout vision, and darkness to you w ithout divination. . . . T he seers shall be ashamed, and the diviners will be confused, and all o f them will cover their lip because there is no answer from God. (3:5-7) T he message o f M icah is clear: people cannot force or ma­ nipulate God into speaking. A prophet or soothsayer cannot pry secrets out o f God. People do not find God; God finds them. God speaks to people, only on His terms. Sometimes when people speak to God, there is no answer. They will cry out to Yahweh, but he will n o t answer them .

11

Themes in M icah

B u t he will hide his face from them at that time, according to the wickedness o f their deeds. (3:4) However, M icah is certain that God does speak. He says: “. . . they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree, and none shall make them afraid; for the m outh o f the Lord o f hosts has spoken” (4:4 RSV). Four times in this book M icah claims to speak for G od by using the expression “Thus says the Lord” (2:3; 3:5; 4:6; 5:20). T he book opens with the assertion that “T he word o f the Lord came to M icah o f M oresheth” (1:1). T he word o f G od is specific. It came to or through M icah o f M oresheth. It is addressed to the people o f Samaria and Jerusalem (1:1, 6). It identifies specific sins and sinners. G od’s W ord is also both individual and universal: H e has declared to you, O man, what is good (6:8). Hear, you peoples all o f you; Listen, O earth and all her fullness (1:2). It is difficult to think in global or universal terms. T he human race is so divided and segmented— racially, religiously, nationally, and geographically— that it is almost impossible to see the whole world in one broad picture. O ur condition calls to mind the early days o f photography, when large group pictures were made with an oscillating cam­ era. Since the camera lens was not wide enough to take the whole group’s picture at once, the same person could appear on both ends o f the picture by standing on one side o f the group as the camera began and rushing to the other as the camera swung around. Now, however, we have cameras mounted on satellites that can photograph the whole earth from thousands o f miles above it MICAH-MALACHI

12

M icah understood that God can see the whole earth and address everything and everyone in it. H e believed God not only sees the whole world, but he also controls nature and history, in a purposeful, beneficent sense. N ot only is God’s W ord in M icah universal, addressing the nations throughout, it is also urgent. Three times the prophet uses the imperative form o f the word, “Hear” (1:3; 3 :1,9), and once he uses the word “hearken” in the imperative (1:2). T he urgency o f this word strikes us at once. “Hear all you people; hearken, O earth and all that is in it” (RSV). It says, in effect, “Pay attention.” Stop what you are doing and listen. N ot that this is easy to get people to do. Karl Menninger4 told o f a man standing on a street com er in the Chicago Loop in 1972 pointing at pedestrians as they passed and saying, “Guilty.” T he effect was almost eerie. People would hesitate, stare at him, then hurry on. People in M icah’s time were in a hurry, too. They did not want to be interrupted to listen to someone claiming to have a word from God. Bu t God was in a hurry as well. His word had a note o f urgency in it. “Hear, hearken, behold the Lord is coming. . .” (1 :3 r sv ). Many who heard M icah tried to silence him. They were satisfied with things as they were. They said to Micah, “‘Stop preaching,’ they preach. O ne (they) must not preach these things. Calamity will not overtake us.” (2:6) M icah said on behalf o f the Lord, A nd I will make Samaria a heap for the field, planting places for a vineyard. And I will pour out her stones into the valley and her foundations I will uncover. (1:6) Therefore, on your account Zion

13

Themes in M icah

shall become a plowed field and Jerusalem shall become a ruin, and the m ount o f the house a forest high place. (3:12) M icah realized the gravity o f the situation and he said, For this I will beat my breast and howl I will go barefoot and naked. I will lament like jackals, and m ourn like an ostrich Because incurable is her wound, because it has come to Judah . . . even [to] Jerusalem. (1:8-9) M icah saw his society as terminally ill’. H e was ready to dial 911. A re there parallels betw een M icah’s society and ours? Is our society in a state o f rigor mortis? A rnold Toyn­ bee once pointed to twenty-one civilizations and noted that the one in which we now live is clearly suffering from most o f the ailments that destroyed those that have died. But who among us is beating his breast and howling like a jackal? The Word of God was specific and clear as to what was wrong with society in Micah’s day. A t first, Micah used general words for moral evil: “transgression,” and “sin” (1:5). Then he identified religious or spiritual evils, pointing to “images,” “idols,” and “harlotry” as violations o f covenant command­ ments (1:7). He also identified other sins of his people: • • • • • •

devising wickedness (2:1) coveting and seizing fields (2:2) oppressing a man and his family (2:2) walking haughtily (2:3) stripping the robe from the poor (2:8) driving women and children o ff o f their land (2:9)

MICAH-MALACHI

14

• • • • •

eating people alive (3:3) leaders leading the people astray (3:5) committing commercial crimes (6:10-11) using violence and lies (6:12) committing murder and intrigue. (7:2b)

M icah saw that the wound o f such a society was incurable (1:9). He affirmed that his people would experience ruin and despair. But beyond the disaster was the hope and promise o f redemption and restoration.

Yahw eh is a God of requirements Someone said that prophetic religion is as hard as it is holy. M icah believed there was a sternness in God’s judgment: “[God] will by no means clear the guilty” (Exod 34:7 RSV) But some people in Micah’s day were moral and religious relativists. They said, “‘One should n ot preach of such things; disgrace will not overtake us”’ (2:6 RSV). Micah said that they abhorred justice, perverted equity, built Zion with blood, took bribes, divined for money, yet leaned on the Lord and said, “Is not the Lord in the midst o f us, no evil shall come upon us” (3:11 RSV). Such people hated good, loved evil, and tore skin and flesh from the bones o f the righteous (3:2). For them, there were no absolutes such as good and evil. W hat­ ever they thought was right, was right for them. But thinking something is right does not make it so. W ould a physicist say to a colleague, “We may disagree on the validity o f this experiment. W hat you consider correct is true for you but what I consider correct is true for me?” It is not what one thinks that determines truth in physics. G od created man and the universe, and he regulates life and the world w ith moral and physical laws. Those laws, grounded in the nature o f God, determine truth. Truth is one. It is singular. As Harold Bosley said:

15

Themes in M icah

W hen the ancient Israelite chanted his Shema, ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy G od is one Lord,’ he was giving the true religious final answer to all forms o f relativism w hether religious or moral.5 M icah’s term inology for sin and transgression indicates that G od had requirem ents and th e people should have know n them . T h e Hebrew word for “sin,” hata, means “to miss the m ark.” T here had to be a mark before one could miss it. T h e word for “transgression” is pesha w hich means “rebellion.” Pesha is a personal word about a son or a vassal w ho rebels against his father or his lord. M icah speaks o f the Lord G od being a witness against th e people (1:2). H e said to th e leaders o f Israel, “Is it not for you to know justice? (3:1). T h e greatest passage concerning G od’s re­ quirem ents is in 6:8: H e has declared to you, O man, what is good, and what is Yahweh seeking from you? Nothing but to do justice, to love devotion, and to walk humbly with your God. T h e first word, “declared,” is a causative form o f a verb expressing completed action. God had told, declared, shown “man” (Adam and all people) what is “good.” T he O ld Testa­ m ent contains no treatise on the nature o f goodness, truth or justice. T he people o f Israel knew they had been addressed by the Lord (Yahweh). They had been told what was required o f them , and what was required o f them was good. They were not given ethical abstractions. They knew good is what G od requires and evil is what God forbids. It is the will o f a partic­ ular God (Yahweh), not the gods o f the nations, that man has to follow to do that which is good. Several times we read in the O ld Testament “God is good” (Ps 100:5; 136:1). God him­ self is good (Mark 10:18). T he good is not a mere attribute o f MICAH-MALACHI

16

God; it is part o f his essence. T he good has no existence outside o f God. “W hat God wills, that is the good.”6 M icah identified the good w ith G od’s requirements. He lists three basic ingredients o f the good as three require­ m ents o f God: (1) do justly; (2) love devotion; and (3) walk humbly with God. There are three levels o f requirements here: (1) outward acts— “do justice,” (2) inner resources— “love loyalty,” and (3) humble relationship w ith God. Justice is the m ortar that holds society together. Disraeli said, “Justice is truth in action.” Raymond Calkins said, “True religion is something higher than religious observances.” It is not sacrificing animals, ourselves or others. It is not a creed to believe, a feeling we experience, or something we cannot do. Justice is fair-mindedness in action. It encompasses every area o f life: play and business, capital and labor, buyer and seller. Justice is the badge o f character. A t home or away, it rules out harsh, unfair treatm ent o f others, fault-finding, and conclu­ sions not founded in fact. O ne man said that to build on injustice is to build on a time bomb. No permanent social order or lasting organization is built w ithout justice. Bu t justice alone is not enough. To love mercy, kindness, devotion is a cut above “doing justice.” O ne can “do justice” without love. Loving “kindness” is the child o f love. Paul said, “Love suffers long and is kind.” Love is a matter o f the heart and emotions. Kindness enriches the giver and the receiver. But kindness and justice are not enough. T he basic ingredi­ ent o f goodness is humility. God seeks us that we may humbly walk with him. “To do justice” means to do what God re­ quires. “To love” means to give where no giving is required. But a humble walk with God is the one necessary ingredient o f goodness. It is only then that we will truly “do justice” and “love mercy.” It is not in the name o f justice, or even mercy, that Micah speaks, but in the name o f the one who alone is good (Ps 100:5; 136:1; Mark 10:18). It is only as we walk humbly with him that we approach “goodness.” 17

Themes in M icah

Yahw eh is a God of redem ption, restoration, and hope No one can ever accuse Micah and other classical prophets o f being soft on sin, crime, injustice, greed, oppression. No man ever loved his native soil more than Micah. He lamented and wailed like a jackal. He went around Jerusalem naked, or clad in a loin cloth, because of what was happening to his people and his native land (1:8). But he never gave up hope. He said: B u t I will watch for Yahweh, I will wait for the God o f my salvation, my God will hear me. (7:7) Perhaps no man ever preached a sterner message o f mer­ ited retribution for flagrant sins than Micah. He accused the wealthy land grabbers o f cannibalism. H e began his message w ith an announcem ent that the Lord him self was coming from his temple to destroy Samaria. H e would pour down her stones into the valley and uncover her foundations (1:16). M icah said to his people in Judah, Therefore because o f your account Zion shall becom e a plowed field; and Jerusalem shall becom e a ruin, and the m ount o f the house a forest high place. (3:12) M icah was sure that judgment was coming. He was frank and fearless in his proclamation o f judgm ent He told it like it was, w ithout regard for personal consequences. Those who were the target o f M icah’s condemnation tried to silence him. They said, “D o not preach such things” (2:6). Those people certainly did not invite him to dinner. They did not put food in his m outh so that he would preach what they wanted to MICAH-MALACHI

18

hear (3:5). He spoke the message God gave him— regardless o f the consequences. M icah affirms that his people will experience ruin and dis­ aster, but beyond the despair is the prospect of redemption. God’s last word is not judgment, but redemption, deliver­ ance, restoration. M icah’s harshest word o f judgment was the word about Zion being plowed as a field and Jerusalem be­ coming a heap o f ruins. The m ountain where the temple stood would become a forest. But that harsh word is followed with a word about that m ountain o f the house o f the Lord being exalted and becoming the highest mountain. A ll na­ tions would flow into it and be taught the ways o f God. Universal peace would reign in the earth (4:2-3). Three times M icah contrasted the degradation o f the “now” generation w ith what would come after judgment. In 4 :9 -1 0 he says, “Now you shall go to Babylon; but from there Yahweh will redeem you from the hand o f your ene­ m ies.” In 4:11-13 they were “now” surrounded by profane nations, but the nations did n ot know that this was only G od’s plan to thresh the nations like sheaves on a threshing floor. In 5 :1 -4 Jerusalem was “now” under siege. T he ruler in Jerusalem was weak, suffering hum iliation at the hands o f foreigners, but a new David would be bom in Bethlehem and would deliver his people. For M icah, the present was under judgment, but he had hope for a new day o f redemption. Perhaps he was speaking o f him self and his people when he said, D o not rejoice over me, my enemy! Although I have fallen I will arise. Although I sit in darkness Yahweh will be light to me. T he rage o f Yahweh I will bear because I sinned against him. U ntil he pleads my case

19

Themes in M icah

and brings about my justice. H e will bring me out to the light, and I will see his righteous. (7:8-9) M icah looked for the day when the smoke o f battle would clear, and swords would be turned into plowshares, and all military training camps would be abandoned. H e would re­ tire to his boyhood farm to sit under his vine and fig tree. There would be no reason to fear— no drug traffic, no bank robbers, no child abusers. A ll this would be possible because God would pardon iniquity, and forgive sins. He would have compassion on his people when they confessed their sins. H e would cast all their sins under his feet and into the depths o f the sea. W ho is God like thee, the one taking away guilt and passing over the rebellion o f the remnant o f his heritage? He does not keep his anger strong forever, for he delights in the steadfast love. He will turn and show us compassion. H e will tread down our iniquities, and he will cast all our sins into the depths o f the sea. You will give truth to Jacob, steadfast love to Abraham w hich you swore to our fathers from days o f old. (7:18-20) T he basic problem o f Israel was sin. O nly God could deal w ith it effectively; and he did, and does, in C hrist.

MICAH-MALACHI

20

3

THEMES IN NAHUM

“W hence shall I seek com forters for you?” (3:7)

Introduction Nahum is a short, powerful book. It has only three chap­ ters and forty-seven verses. Yet its opening words take away our breath with talk about Yahweh’s jealousy, vengeance, and anger against his enemies (1:2). By his power Yahweh rebukes the sea and dries up rivers. He makes vegetation w ither, mountains quake, hills m elt; and he lays waste the earth and its inhabitants (1:4-5). T his is poetry, but it is terrifyingly vivid poetry. Nahum’s book is a “literary m asterpiece.”1 Raymond Calkins called Nahum “the last o f the great Hebrew poets.”2 T h e beauty and vividness o f Nahum’s language appear in the expression, “T he clouds are the dust o f his feet” (1:3). T h e beauty o f such language seems inconsistent w ith the harsh themes o f G od’s wrath against Nineveh. W hy did Nahum describe G od’s wrath and judgment in such graphic 21

Themes in Nahum

style? Perhaps to emphasize the im portance o f the message: all evil will eventually be destroyed. T h e origin and unity o f the book o f Nahum are m atters o f much debate. Scholars have tried unsuccessfully to trace the history o f its form ation for more than a century. T h e book consists o f a num ber o f small units. T h e first eight verses are a broken acrostic on the nature and sovereignty o f God. But neither the form nor the subject o f the acrostic continue through the rest o f the chapter. Verses 9 -1 4 o f chapter 1 address Nineveh. Chapter 2 is a vivid poetic de­ scription o f the battle for Nineveh, ending in a b rief prose oracle o f judgment against her (2:13). Chapter 3 has a num­ ber o f units: a woe oracle or lam ent (3:1-4), an oracle o f judgment on Nineveh (3:5-7), a poetic comparison o f the fate o f Thebes and Nineveh (3:8-13), and some satirical warnings for Nineveh (3:14-17). It is n ot yet possible to determine all the processes that went into the origin, selection, and arrangement o f the ma­ terials in the book as it stands. Perhaps the book was used at one time in Israel in a religious festival celebrating the fall o f her enemies. Nahum was a prophet who lived in Elkosh (a Galilean town, probably, near present-day Capernaum) in the last half o f the seventh century B.C. Although Nahum is not called a prophet, the terms “oracle” and “vision” appear in the super­ scription (1:1). T he inclusion o f his book in the prophetical section o f the Hebrew canon also indicates he was a prophet Assyria was the dominant world power in Nahum’s time. She shared world power with Egypt until 663 B .c. Then Ashurbanipal, the king of Assyria, captured the Egyptian cap­ ital, Thebes, and Assyria became the sole potentate o f the world. Assyria was a cruel, ruthless conqueror. She slew many o f her captives. Many o f those not killed were abused, robbed, and deported from their homeland. Ashurbanipal, the last o f Assyria’s strong conquerors, died MICAH-MALACHI

22

about 627 B.C. W inds o f revolution began to blow through the empire. Captive people became restless as their bonds were loosened. In Judah, the young King Josiah started his reform in 621 B.C. after a copy o f the law was found in the temple (2 Kings 22:8-17). A t first, the prophet Jeremiah sup­ ported Josiah and his reform (Jer 11:1—13). But the reform faltered in the face o f resistance from some in Judah who had vested interests in the old system. It failed completely when Josiah was killed in 609 B.C. In this context, the little-know n prophet Nahum an­ nounced the end o f Assyria. His name appears only once in his book— and nowhere else in the Bible— but it is frequently corroborated in Northwest Sem itic inscriptions. T he name is an intensive form o f a word meaning “full o f com fort.”3 Nahum’s name, “Com fort,” is ironic if applied to his message to Assyria, for he says that he could not find any “com forters for her” (3:7 RSV). The book offers com fort for all who suffer abuse, injustice and oppression because its message is that evil is doomed. Assyria might run roughshod over the people o f the world, dispossessing them o f property, home and free­ dom (2:9-13; 3:19), but that would not last forever. Evil will be judged. W hat Assyria did to others would be done to her (2:13). G od did punish Assyria for her injustice and wickedness. T he same fate that befell Thebes happened to Nineveh in 612 B.C. It happened to Samaria in 722 B.C. and to Jerusalem in 586 B.C. God is no respecter o f persons. Judgment comes on all evildoers. In a sense, Nahum is a “foreign prophecy,” directed to­ ward Nineveh, though it serves as a warning to all nations. M ost O ld Testament prophetic books contain a series o f such prophecies (Amos 1-2 ; Isa 13-23; Jer 4 6 -5 1 ; Obad; Zeph 2 :5-15; Zech 9:1-8). These foreign prophecies indicate that Yahweh is sovereign over all nations, and that he will punish them for their wickedness. But he will also forgive 23

Themes in Nahum

them when they repent (Jon 3:10) and accept them as his people (Isa 19:23-24; Zech 8:22-23). Nahum, however, offers no hint o f forgiveness for Nine­ veh. Like the prophet Obadiah, who was almost his contem ­ porary, Nahum’s message is very short and directed almost exclusively to the destruction o f a foreign nation. Assyria was the focus o f Nahum’s message, and Edom was Obadiah’s villain. W . Gladstone W atson said o f Obadiah, [His] eyes were too full o f tears to see, his heart too bitter to feel, that the heathen must be included in God’s pur­ poses o f mercy, but he did believe that, in spite o f all appearances, God is sovereign and ultimately the king­ dom must be the Lord’s.4 Nahum’s eyes, like Obadiah’s, were also filled w ith tears, and bitterness was in his heart. H e had no compassion for Nineveh, but he did have a firm conviction that G od is sovereign over the whole world. T hree basic themes are interrelated in Nahum: (1) the sovereignty o f God, (2) the guilt o f Nineveh, and (3) the fall o f Nineveh.

T h e sovereignty of God T he first chapter of Nahum is a theological introduction to the Ode of Nahum, expressing profound faith in the rule o f God. Tyrants will be overthrown. God may be merciful. He may be patient. He must be just— his sovereignty demands it. T he book o f Nahum is “a kind o f theodicy, a vindication o f the providence o f God in the light o f human evil and cru­ elty.”5 It expresses the truth that God is the avenger who will make his enemies his footstool. He has power over the forces o f nature. He controls the wind and the storm. He makes the mountains quake and rebukes the sea. He raises up nations MICAH-MALACHI

24

(Hab 1:6), uses them as a rod o f his anger (Isa 10:5), and cuts them o ff because of their wickedness (Isa 40:23-24). Such language may be too strong for some whose idea o f God has been nurtured by the gospel o f Christ. Christians think and talk about the love o f God, and they should. But if they do not also speak of his wrath, anger, or vengeance, their faith may grow thin and flaccid. We need to hear the reverber­ ating words, “W ho can stand before his indignation? And who can abide in the fierceness o f his anger?” (Nah 1:6 RSV). Nahum knew that “the Lord is good and is a stronghold in the day o f trouble, and he knows those who trust in Him” (1:7). Bu t Nahum also knew that cognizance o f G od’s goodness and peace must be balanced w ith an understanding o f his justice and wrath. Otherwise loose notions o f sin and retri­ bution will result. T he goodness o f G od is not always as apparent as his power. In nature and in the orderings o f providence, many ugly facts seem to deny G od’s goodness and peace. But Nahum, in one o f Judah’s darkest hours, proclaimed the “good news” that G od’s goodness would triumph over tyranny and evil (1:15). It is easy to misunderstand G od’s jealousy, wrath, and vengeance. Many primitive or misguided people live in ter­ ror that some capricious act o f G od may fall upon them . W hen Nahum spoke about G od’s jealousy, wrath or vengeance, however, he was n ot thinking o f G od as being capricious. T he term s used in 1:2 to describe G od’s moral nature reveal his repugnance toward the sins o f greed, op­ pression, and brutality. “Jealousy” describes God’s zeal to keep his plans from be­ ing opposed or frustrated. H e is passionately determined that his rule be accepted throughout his realm. His victory will be for those who take refuge in him. T he idea o f “vengeance” may go back to the old “kinsman redeemer” concept, or it may be related to ideas in the old suzerain treaties. George M endenhall argued that the word na̅q a̅m normally translated 25

Themes in Nahum

“vengeance” is not used o f blood feuds. Instead it refers to instances in which the valid suzerain exercises his legitimate power either to save or punish, depending on the recipient’s relationship to him. T he suzerain claims, “Sovereignty is m ine” (Deut 32:25; Rom 12:19).6 Vengeance in the O ld Testament may mean “to punish” or it may mean “to vindicate.” In Joshua 10:13, it means punish. It means vindicate in Judges 11:36, 2 Samuel 22:48, Isaiah 61:1-4. In Nahum, it refers to God’s ability to punish, based on his nature as a jealous, judging God. He claims dominion over the entire world. Nineveh had come to represent evil opposed to God. He exercised his eternal power and judg­ m ent upon her.7 A ccording to Nahum, the Lord is patient and judicious in his use o f his great power, but he will n ot clear the guilty (1:3b).

T he guilt of Nineveh G od’s moral outrage expressed in his jealousy, anger, and vengeance is provoked by Assyria’s guilt. Nahum quoted one o f Israel’s creeds and applied it to Assyria, “T he Lord will by no means clear the guilty” (Exod 34:7). W hat had Assyria done to incur such guilt? First, she had “plotted against the Lord” (1:9) and “counselled villainy” (1:11). T he word translated “villainy” or “wickedness” is belîyya’al and may mean “those who throw o ff the yoke o f God. People who undermined the monarchy were called “sons o f Belial” (1 Sam 10:27; 2 Sam 20:1 KJV). Nahum says the opposition o f the king o f Assyria to Yahweh is an instrum ent o f evil or chaos (Nah 1:9,15). O ne o f Assyria’s chief sins was a failure to recognize Yahweh’s sovereignty. Twice Nahum says on behalf o f the Lord, “Behold, I am against you says the Lord o f H osts” (2:13; 3:5). O ther prophets also spoke o f G od’s sovereignty over Assyria. Isaiah said, MICAH-MALACHI

26

A h, Assyria, the rod o f my anger, the staff o f my fury! Against a godless nation I send him, and against the people o f my wrath I command him to take spoil and seize plunder, and to tread them down like the mire o f the streets. But he does not so intend, and his mind does not so think; But it is in his mind to destroy, and to cut o ff nations not a few. (Isa 10:5-7 RSV) Isaiah said that w hen th e Lord finished punishing Judah and Jerusalem , he would punish th e arrogant boasting and haughty pride o f the king o f Assyria (Isa 10:12-19). G od would break the power o f Assyria and trample him under foot (Isa 14:25; M ic 5 :5 -6 ; Zeph 2:13-15). To Yahweh, the king o f Assyria was “vile,” a light weight. T h e term “vile” in Nahum 1:14c means “light,” “small,” “o f no signifi­ cance.” N ot only was Assyria guilty because o f her plotting against G od; she was also guilty because o f her rapacious treatm ent o f captives. In the only lament in the book that begins with “woe,” Nahum says, Woe to the city o f bloodshed— full o f lies, full o f plunder! T heir prey never ceases. (3:1) Blood, lies, plunder, harlotries, corpses, filth, and sorceries characterize this passage (3:1-7). Evidently Assyria amassed huge wealth from her conquests. Nahum says, 27

Themes in Nahum

Plunder silver, plunder gold, No end to the treasure; heaps o f every precious thing. (2:10) Isaiah quotes the Assyrian king as saying, My hand has found like a nest the wealth o f the peoples; and as men gather eggs that have been forsaken so I have gathered all the earth; and there was none that moved a wing or opened the mouth, or chirped. (Isa 10:14 RSV) Nahum compares Assyria’s treatm ent o f her captives to a lion carrying captured prey to its mate and cubs in a den filled w ith mauled, broken carcasses. T he New English Bible captures the meaning very well: T he Lion w hich killed to satisfy its whelps and for its mate broke the neck o f the kill, mauling its prey to fill its lair, filling its den with mauled prey. (2:12) S. R . D river says that this effective figure o f “the ferocity, destructiveness and rapacity displayed by the Assyrians . . . might be illustrated from almost every inscription recording the exploits o f the Assyrian kings.”8 O ne inscription that illustrates Assyria’s ruthlessness comes from the Prisms o f Esarhaddon, king o f Assyria (680-669 B.C.). In Prism A he says that he hung the heads o f tw o captured kings: “Sandurri, king o f Kundi, and Abdimilkutte, king o f Sidon around the neck o f their nobles or chief-officials to dem onstrate to th e population the power o f A shur, my lord, and parade (thus) through th e wide MICAH-MALACHI

28

main street o f N ineveh w ith singers (playing on) samm û,— harps.”9 Assyria was guilty and Nineveh was about to fa ll. The fall of Nineveh Nineveh was the world’s greatest city in her day. In some ways she was alluring and enticing, possessing “graceful and deadly charms” (3:4 RSV). T h e city was the social and cul­ tural center o f the world, a place o f magnificent architecture, superior facilities in medicine, science, and literature.10 But she fell from her highest pinnacle to almost total oblivion in about fifty years (663 to 612 B.C.). Nineveh fell in 612 B .c. to a coalition o f forces from the Medes, Babylonians, and Scythians. Evidently Nahum wit­ nessed the height and eclipse o f Assyria’s 'power. It is not necessary to assume Nahum was an eyewitness to the battle for Nineveh. His account o f it was probably w ritten slightly before fighting began and in a place far removed from Nine­ veh itself. No doubt, Nahum had access to other accounts o f strategic battles. Here he portrays an oriental siege, with its horrors, cruelties, and savagery, so graphically that the reader can see and feel it. First comes the fighting in the suburbs (2:1). T he enemy storms the walls (2:5), then captures the city as its inhabitants try to flee in panic (2:6-8). Finally, the city is torched and the people killed with the sword (3:18). Nahum concludes his work by saying that all who hear the news o f Nineveh’s fell will celebrate. They will clap their hands— much like the victims o f H itler and Idi Am in did when they heard the news o f the tyrants’ overthrow. W hat are we to make o f the message o f Nahum that G od is a jealous, avenging, and angry G od who will not clear the guilty? We need to make allowances for the oriental poetical language and the times and circumstances in w hich the book is w ritten. We need to remember that Nahum presents tw o

29

Themes in Nahum

complementary faces o f God: the countenance o f a compas­ sionate liberator and an angry face toward those whose oppression makes liberation a constant necessity. Craigie says, “Nahum’s is a sturdy theology, not for the weak and squeamish.” Liberation involves judgment that “reveals the anger o f a righteous God against the ruthlessness o f human beings who think they can act w ith impunity.”11 Craigie has a timely warning for interpreters o f Nahum’s message o f Nineveh’s fa ll. Nahum was not setting out political theory or trying to enlist recruits against Nineveh. He emphasized that God would act. We are not to thirst to slaughter the enemy in battle so much as we are to seek to transform the evil w ithin ourselves and our society. For transform ation to occur in an individual and/or soci­ ety three traits o f great character must prevail: the capacity for a great love, for a great enthusiasm, and for a great indig­ nation. Nahum had the last o f these. The New Testament says, “Be angry and sin not.” Being angry is not always a sin. Sometimes it is a sin not to be angry. It is easy to feel superior­ ity to the attitudes reflected in Nahum. But along with love and forgiveness, righteous indignation is sometimes neces­ sary. To neglect the truths underscored by Nahum is to lose a valuable note in the biblical message.

MICAH-MALACHI

30

4

THEMES IN HABAKKUK

Behold the soul [of the wicked] is puffed up and is not upright w ithin him; but the righteous by his faithfulness shall live. (2:4) Introduction About 609 B.C., Habakkuk followed Nahum as a prophet in Judah. Nahum prophesied that Nineveh would be destroyed and her destruction celebrated universally (Nah 3:19). W hen Nineveh fell in 612 B.C. there must have been dancing in the streets o f Jerusalem because Jerusalem bore the brunt o f many o f Nineveh’s military campaigns. But any such celebration was short-lived because within a few years another terrible tyrant burst on the scene. In 605 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, crown prince of Babylon and the leader o f her armies, won a decisive victory at Carchemish over Egypt and what was left o f Assyria. T he battle o f Car­ chemish put an end to the Assyrian empire and ushered in the 31

Themes in H abakkuk

Neo-Babylonian period (605-538 B.C.). If Nahum expected a long period o f peace to follow the fall o f Nineveh, he must have been greatly disappointed. If Habakkuk had high hopes for Judah’s restoration and independence after Nineveh fell, his hopes were also dashed rudely to pieces. His own people’s wickedness (1:1-4) and the greed and ruthlessness o f the Babylonians created serious problems for Habakkuk (1:5-11). W hen one tyrannical overlord (Babylon) followed another (Assyria) and Judah herself experienced a moral and religious breakdown, Habakkuk began to ask questions concerning Yahweh’s indifference to prayer and his failure to act against evildoers. Yahweh said that he was raising up the Chaldeans, “that bitter and hasty nation” (1:6 KJV, RSV), to bring judg­ m ent on Judah. T he Chaldeans would run roughshod over the earth and gather captives like sand. They were proud, ruthless, and guilty men (1:5—11). T he Lord’s first answer, that he was going to use the terri­ ble Babylonians to punish Judah, created an even greater problem for Habakkuk. Habakkuk asked, how could a holy and everlasting God, whose eyes are too pure to look on evil, use treacherous and wicked men to judge and chasten people more righteous than they? (1:12-17). Habakkuk’s circumstances and experience did not m atch his theology. H e believed that G od is good, ju st, and right­ eous and that he is also sovereign. T h e Lord has the whole world in his hands. H e controls nations and nature. B u t if that is true, why is G od silent when we pray? W hy does he allow evil to go unpunished? How can a righteous G od use an evil agent to punish som eone m ore righteous than he? How long will G od perm it th e wicked to swallow the righteous? Shall they therefore empty their nets, and not spare continually to slay the nations? (1:17 RSV) MICAH-MALACHI

32

These were some o f the questions Habakkuk was asking as he sought an explanation for why things were happening as they were. He also asked for a time and a date when God would answer all his questions with complete clarity. A t first Habakkuk’s questions met only silence. T hen he decided to station him self on the tower to see what the Lord would say to him (2:1). Habakkuk wanted to know why the Lord allowed injustice to continue and when he would pun­ ish the evildoers. “W hy” was Job’s question, but the Lord never explained to him why he was suffering. “W hen” was a question Jesus’ disciples asked. Jesus told them that tim e is the prerogative o f God (Acts 1:7). It was not for them to know the day or hour o f his coming. Nor did G od ever answer Habakkuk’s questions o f why and when. God did tell Habakkuk, however, that there was an an­ swer to his question concerning the use o f a wicked agent to punish his own people. But the answer was n ot for Habakkuk alone. It was given for everyone. It was to be w ritten on a tablet in large letters and posted in a prom inent place so everyone could read it. T he answer took the form o f a vision and a promise, revealing something that would hap­ pen at a future “appointed tim e” (2:3). A lthough the promise was given to Habakkuk, it would not becom e a reality until later. Bu t the date for its fulfillm ent had already been set, and “it would surely come” (2:3). T he expression in Hebrew, “it will surely come,” is an in­ finitive absolute before an imperfect verb form. As such it is the strongest possible way to express certainty in Hebrew. T he time o f the fulfillm ent was not revealed to Habakkuk and his associates, but it was known to God. From a human van­ tage point it would tarry, but Habakkuk and his people were to wait expectantly. They were to be busy, however, and not to wait with bated breath and folded hands. People are often overly concerned with God’s timetable and with what others might do. O n one occasion Peter asked Jesus what would 33

Themes in H abakkuk

happen to John. Jesus said to Peter, “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? Follow me” (John 21:21- 22). T he answer the Lord gave Habakkuk to write on the huge tablet that day is “one o f the great verses o f the Bible.”1 Behold, he whose soul is not upright in him shall fail, but the righteous shall live by his faith. (2:4 RSV) T his verse is not only great because o f the truth it ex­ presses, but also because of the ever-widening influence o f the idea o f “salvation by grace” hidden in it. F. W. Farrar2 said that this text has in it a moral steadfastness, a deep trust in God and loyal allegiance to him. Its principle o f “justification by faith,” enunciated by a seer o f whom we know hardly anything beyond his name, is one o f the great links connect­ ing all that is spiritual and permanent in the O ld and New Testaments. T he Talmud did not overlook the significance o f this verse in Habakkuk. According to it, the rabbis had multiplied the laws o f Moses into 613 precepts, but David reduced them to 11 (Ps 15); Isaiah to 6 (Isa 33:15); M icah to 3 (Mic 6:8); and Amos to 1, “seek me and live (5:4). T his one necessary pre­ cept from Amos was set out still more clearly by Habakkuk in the verse, “The just shall live by faith.” Farrar said, It is no small glory to this prophet that he should have been commissioned to enunciate a message w hich sums up w ith such emphatic brevity, yet w ith such far-reaching fullness, alike the commands and the promises o f the O ld and New Testam ents.3 JeSus did not refer to Habakkuk 2:4 in summing up the gospel, but Paul made it the keynote o f his theology. He quoted part o f the verse in Romans 1:17 and Galatians 3:12 to MICAH-MALACHI

34

support his doctrine o f salvation by grace. T he writer o f H e­ brews used the Septuagint version o f this verse to point out his reader’s need o f endurance and the fact that they should not “shrink back” (Heb 10:36-39). This verse “became the rallying cry of both Lutheran and Reform ed theology.”4 It is the key to the whole o f Habakkuk. It does not furnish us intellectual or theological explanations for the problem o f evil. It supplies an existential answer. It says that evil is doomed, and the righteous will live by relying on God’s promises. It indicates two ways to live: the way o f the wicked, which leads to death, and the way o f the righteous, which leads to life. The way to life and victory is the way o f faith and commitment to God. Three major themes in the book o f Habakkuk relate closely to this verse: (1) Evil is doomed, (2) the righteous shall live, and (3) faith is the victory.

Evil is doomed Habakkuk complains in his first paragraph about the overwhelming presence and power o f evil in his society. Evil was everywhere: in the streets, in homes, businesses, govern­ ments, and among the nations. It seemed to Habakkuk that little was being done or could be done to stem the tide o f evil in his day. T he law was frozen, and justice never went forth victorious (1:4). Yahweh did not seem to listen to any prayer or do anything to save his people from violence and injustice (1:2-3). Habakkuk complained that his own people were commit­ ting crimes against each other, and Babylon, a cruel godless invader, was destroying them, too. To make him self rich, the invader treated captives like fish in a net and slaughtered nations without pity (1:14-17). But Habakkuk believed also that Babylon represented a cosmic evil which threatened God and his king. In chapter 3:8-15 Habakkuk spoke o f a battle between Yahweh and the rivers, the sea, and the waters, using 35

Themes in H abakkuk

metaphors from the Exodus and the crossing o f the Red Sea. O ld mythological language o f a battle with the dragon Tiamat is evident in 3:8-15. T he idea that waters symbolized cosmic evil was fairly com­ mon in the ancient Near East. A number o f O ld Testament passages portray Yahweh fighting against evil represented as waters. U nlike some ancient peoples, such as the Phoenicians or the Greeks, the Israelites were more at home with the desert than with the sea. W hen Habakkuk spoke about God’s wrath against the rivers and indignation against the sea (3:8), he was using the same kind o f language found in some of the Psalms, Job and Isaiah. Waters are personified as Rahab, Le­ viathan, Tanin or dragon (Isa 27:1; 51:9-10; Job 3:8; 7:12; 9:13; 26:12). Psalm 9 3 :3-4 says that the floods have lifted up their voices in rebellion against Yahweh. But God is mightier than the thunder o f many waters, mightier than the waves o f the sea. Job 26:12-13 says: By his power he stilled the sea; by his understanding he smote Rahab By his wind the heavens were made fair; his hand pierced the fleeing serpent. (RSV) Psalm 65:6 says that G od stills the seas and the roaring o f their waves. In Psalm 69:1-2, 14 the psalmist compares his enemies to water: Save me, O God! For, the waters have come up to my neck. I sink in deep mire, where there is no foothold; I have come into deep waters, and the flood sweeps over me. W ith thy faithful help rescue me from sinking in the mire; MICAH-MALACHI

36

le t m e b e d elivered from m y en em ies and from th e deep w aters. (RSV)

A nother psalmist compares his strong enemy to many waters: H e reached from on high, he took me, he drew me out o f many waters. H e delivered me from my strong enemy, and fro m th o se w h o h ated m e;

for they were too mighty for me. (Ps 18:16-17 RSV) Habakkuk knew the power o f evil was like a monster, like many waters. Such powers were too mighty for him and his people, but God was sovereign over the sea. W hen the apos­ tle John lived in exile on Patmos, he looked for a day when there would be “no more sea”— meaning “no more evil” (Rev 21:1). Revelation 12:7-12 reveals God to be as sovereign over evil as he is over the sea. It speaks about a war in heaven between M ichael and his angels and the dragon and his an­ gels. The dragon and his angels are defeated and cast out o f heaven. T he victory is attributed to the blood o f C hrist and the faithful witness o f Christian martyrs (Rev 12:11). Habakkuk learned not only that evil is doomed but also that character alone abides. “Tyranny (evil) is suicide,”5 and “he whose soul is puffed up w ithin him shall fail” (2:4a RSV). T h e message o f the five woes, w hich follows this verse, is essentially the same as that o f 2:4. T he haughty, dis­ honest th ief and exploiter m entioned in the five woes is doomed. It sometimes seems that the power structures o f this world are in the hands o f the wicked, but God is still on the throne. James Russell Lowell wrote: Careless seems the great Avenger; history’s pages but record 37

Themes in H abakkuk

O ne death-grapple in the darkness twix old systems and the Word; Truth forever on the scaffold, wrong forever on the throne— Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown, standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.6 D . M artyn Lloyd Jones said that the five woes in chapter 2 o f Habakkuk illustrate a universal principle o f history: “Every­ thing that is evil is under the judgment o f G od.”7 John Paterson noted that Habakkuk expresses his belief in the “ultimate decency o f things.”8 T hat may not be evident over a short period o f time, but in the long run it is true. Paterson observed that Nero may sit in his chariot as it clatters up Capitol H ill in Rom e and Paul may languish in a Rom an jail. But a day comes when people call their children “Paul” and their dogs “N ero.” We need to take the long look and ask what the centuries say against the hours. They say, “Evil is doomed; the righteous shall live by faith.”

T he righteous shall live I f the wicked are doomed and have no future, the other side o f the coin is that the righteous shall live. W ho are the righteous, and what does it mean “to live?” T he term “righteous” has more than one meaning in the O ld Testa­ m ent. In Psalm 1, the righteous are those who shun all forms o f evil and folly, and meditate on the law o f the Lord day and night. In Proverbs, the righteous are the “wise” ones con­ trasted against the foolish wicked (Prov 11:5-12). Sometimes Scripture gives checklists for those who would enter the temple to determine if a person is righteous. Such lists may

MICAH-MALACHI

38

be found in Ps 5, 15, 24; Isa 33:14-15. Ezekiel 18:5-9 gives one definition o f a righteous man: If a man is righteous and does what is lawful and right— if he does not eat upon the mountains or lift up his eyes to the idols o f the house o f Israel, does n ot defile his neighbor’s wife or approach a woman in her tim e o f impurity, does not oppress anyone, but restores to the debtor his pledge, commits no robbery, gives his bread to the hungry and covers the naked w ith a garment, does not lend at interest or take any increase, withholds his hand from iniquity, executes true justice betw een man and man, walks in my statutes, and is careful to observe my ordinances— he is righteous, he shall surely live, says the Lord God. (RSV) There you have it, one definition o f a righteous man. B u t are there other ways a person might be considered righteous in the O ld Testament? M ost O ld Testament theologians agree that “righteousness” in the O ld Testament means “con­ form ity to a norm ”— the covenant relationship between God and man. Habakkuk uses the term “righteous” three times (1:4, 13; 2:4). In 1:4 and 13, the term is used in contrast to the “wicked” (a term which might have been in the original form o f the text in 2:4). These verses define the righteous negatively: he is the victim o f his country’s ruthless invader and o f such social evils as violence, destruction, strife, and contention. But 2:4 at­ taches a slightly different meaning to the righteous than 1:4 and 13. In 2:4, the “righteous” is not puffed up. He is “right”

39

Themes in H abakkuk

on the inside, and is committed to serving the Lord faithfully, regardless o f times and circumstances. The apostle Paul and M artin Luther saw this kind of right­ eousness as the kind that comes by faith. Habakkuk came very close to the idea expressed in Genesis 15:6. God prom­ ised Abraham a great posterity, and even though Abraham and his wife were very old and the prospects for the fulfill­ m ent of the promise were almost nil, Abraham “believed God and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (RSV). Perhaps the translators o f the Septuagint, and certainly the apostle Paul, saw in Habakkuk 2:4 the idea o f “salvation by faith.”

Faith is the victory Contrary to a popular legend, M artin Luther did not say, after he climbed the twenty-eight steps in front o f the Lateran church and palace in Rom e in 1510, “T he just shall live by faith.” H e said, “W ho knows w hether it is so?”9 Luther went to Rom e searching for ways to attain peace w ith God. He spent a m onth saying confession, celebrating Mass at sacred shrines, visiting catacombs and basilicas, venerating bones and holy relics. He was greatly disillusioned by much that he experienced in Rom e, and he did not find peace there. Luther commented that he went to Rom e “with onions and returned w ith garlic.” It was not until Luther assumed the chair o f Bible at the University o f W ittenberg and began exegeting and teaching the Scriptures that he found peace with God. He said that he greatly longed to understand Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. W hat stood in the way was that one expression, “the justice o f G od.” He took it to mean that God is just and deals justly in punishing the unjust. Although he was an impeccable monk, Luther stood before G od as a sinner w ith a troubled conscience and no confidence that his m erit would assuage God. He says:

MICAH-MALACHI

40

Night and day I pondered until I saw the connection betw een the justice o f G od and the statem ent that ‘the just shall live by his faith.’ T hen I grasped that the justice o f G od is that righteousness by w hich through grace and sheer mercy G od justifies us through faith. Thereupon I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise.10 Luther’s translation o f Habakkuk 2:4 in the Germ an Bible reflects his personal experience. Behold he who is stiff-necked (obstinate), shall have no rest (Ruhe) in his heart, but the righteous shall live by his faith. Luther found rest, joy, and victory when he understood that justification was a gift from G od and not the result o f his m erit or m erits from saints. Habakkuk was not talking about personal salvation in his day. His problem was the wicked tyrant Babylon and the social and religious evils o f his own people. He remembered earlier days when the great saving acts o f G od delivered Israel from Egypt. He had heard how Yahweh came from Teman to subdue the enemies o f G od’s people (3:3-15). Now he wanted G od to do it again. He knew he was powerless to correct all the evils in society, but he believed that G od could and would save his people. I have heard and my belly quakes, my lips quiver at the sound, rottenness comes into my bones, my steps trem ble under me. I will wait calmly for the day o f distress to come upon the people attacking us. (3:16)

41

Themes in H abakkuk

Somewhere in the last section o f Habakkuk (3:16-19) the prophet’s fear changed to faith, and the change probably comes in 3:16c.11 Habakkuk was frightened when he thought o f the coming o f the Babylonians and when he remembered G od’s rescue of Israel at the Red Sea. Bu t he knew that “joy in the Lord” does not depend on outward circumstances. If the fig tree does not blossom, and no fruit is on the vines; the labor o f the olive fails, and the fields make no food; and the flock is cut o ff from the pen, and no ox is in the stall; yet I will exult (cohortative)12 in Yahweh I will rejoice (cohortative) in the God o f my salvation! (3:17-18) According to Donald Gowan,13 Habakkuk was saying “Even though I starve to death, yet I will rejoice in the Lord.” Gowan said these words haunted him more than any other in the Bible. He thought o f putting them on the wall o f his study, but that was not where they belonged. They belong inside a person as one’s entire orientation to life. These verses make clear what it means to live by faith. It means to go on doing the right thing, regardless o f what happens. Mate­ rial blessing may or may not come to the righteous, but true rest and joy will come to the person who waits in faith on the Lord. Faith is the victory!

MICAH-MALACHI

42

5

THEMES IN ZEPHANIAH

Seek Yahweh, all you humble o f the earth, who carry out his ordinances. Seek righteousness, seek humility. Perhaps you may be hidden in the day o f Yahweh’s wrath. (2:3)

Introduction If the book o f Habakkuk relates closely to the Protestant Reform ation and to Paul’s letters to the Romans and the Galatians, Zephaniah’s book might be linked to the Rom an C atholic tradition. T he medieval hymn Dies irae, dies illa “Day o f wrath, that day” is based on parts o f the book o f Zephaniah. T h e title Dies irae, dies illa also comprises the first four words o f Jerom e’s translation o f Zephaniah 1:15 in the Latin Vulgate. T his unique hymn was probably w ritten by Thom as o f Celano, a companion o f Francis o f Assisi, about 1255. In

43

Themes in Zephaniah

Latin, it consists o f seventeen three-line stanzas. T he first six stanzas give an awe-inspiring description o f Judgment Day. T h e rest o f the hymn consists mainly o f deeply personal pleadings for forgiveness and salvation. Originally this se­ quence or requiem was used as an Advent hymn. Soon it became a part o f the Italian missals used as a requiem in the Mass for the dead and as a sequence for A ll Souls’ Day.1 Dies irae became part o f the Tridentine Missal at the C ouncil o f Trent, and its use in the requiem Mass for the dead became mandatory.2 W herever the requiem Mass for the dead has been said since 1563 (Council o f Trent), the Book o f Zephaniah has been quoted. Bu t the use o f Dies irae has not been limited to those in the Rom an Catholic tradition. It has been translated into many languages and has appeared in many Protestant hym­ nals. It has been set to music by such great composers as Mozart and Verdi. It profoundly influenced the writings o f men like Sir W alter Scott and G oethe. It furnished the grand climax to Scott’s Lay o f the Last Minstrel (1805). Lockhart, Scott’s biographer, said that Scott murmured its lines as he lay dying. G oethe used Dies irae effectively in his well-known work, Faust. Philip Schaff called it the greatest hymn in the world. Peter Craigie says that the hymn contin­ ues to speak to us both as a reflection on the Judgment Day and as a prayer for mercy.3 We know very little about the man whose words inspired this great hymn. Zephaniah’s name probably means “Yahweh hides”— perhaps emblematic o f the terrible days o f the reign o f Manasseh (688-642 B.C.). T he writer o f Kings says the evil that Manasseh did in the sight o f the Lord was like the abom­ inable practices o f the surrounding nations. He rebuilt the high places, erected altars to Baal and the Asherah, and wor­ shiped the hosts o f heaven. He burned his son as an offering and practiced soothsaying and augury (2 Kings 21:2-6). He shed much innocent blood, filling Jerusalem from one MICAH-MALACHI

44

end to the other (2 Kings 21:16). T hat was the situation when Zephaniah was bom . T he superscription to Zephaniah’s book (1:1) traces his genealogy back four generations to a certain Hezekiah. A l­ though many assume this refers to King Hezekiah (the father o f Manasseh, who reigned in Jerusalem from 715 to 688 B.C.), we cannot be sure it is the same person. Hezekiah was a common name in Judah (1 C hr 3:23; Ezra 2:16; Neh 7:21), so this Hezekiah could have been someone other than the king. According to 2 Kings 21-22 there were only two generations between Hezekiah and Josiah, not three as the superscription suggests. Also, Amariah is not attested as one o f Hezekiah’s sons. T he social and religious conditions reflected in the book, however, fit into the period o f Manasseh and the early part o f Josiah’s reign. Zephaniah prophesied during the reign o f Josiah (640-609 B.C.), according to the superscription. T he southern kingdom o f Judah survived the Assyrian onslaught that destroyed the northern kingdom o f Samaria in 722 B.C. But Judah became a vassal state o f Assyria. Judah’s kings— Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, and Josiah— were little more than puppets o f Nineveh. A century o f subjuga­ tion took its toll on the lives o f the people o f Judah. A lack o f econom ic and religious freedom brought an incursion o f for­ eign influences, rites, and customs. Assyria’s influence was stifling, debilitating, degrading, and corrupting. A ll kinds o f idolatry were practiced in Jerusalem (Zeph 1:4, 5). There was an aping o f foreign dress, customs, and superstitions (1:6). Violence and fraud were common (1:9). Foreign traders took over the markets (1:10-11). Many were “thickened on their lees” (RSV, a phrase describing the collection o f the dregs in the bottom o f a wine barrel after years o f ferm entation)— they refused to do anything. They said in their hearts, “Yahweh will not do good or evil” (1:12). Judah was a shame­ less nation (2:11), haughty and rebellious (3:1-2). H er leaders were vultures— wanton, profane, faithless men (3 :3 -4 ,7 ,1 1 ). 45

Themes in Zephaniah

In 621 B.C., Josiah began his reform by cleansing the tem ­ ple. He removed the vessels made for the worship o f Baal, Asherah, and the hosts o f heaven (2 Kings 23:4). He broke down the houses o f the male cult prostitutes (2 Kings 23:7). He removed the horses dedicated to the sun and burned the chariots o f the sun with fire (2 Kings 23:11). He pulled down the altars on the roof o f the upper chamber o f Ahaz (2 Kings 23:12) and put away the mediums, wizards, teraphim, and idols o f the nations (2 Kings 23:24). But all o f Josiah’s good works were not enough to turn the Lord from his great wrath (2 Kings 23:26). No wonder Zephaniah was inspired to announce the Day o f the Lord was drawing near— Dies

irae, dies illa . Although the Day o f the Lord is a major theme o f Zepha­ niah, we must consider some preliminary questions before pursuing it further. O ne question concerns the position o f the book among the twelve m inor prophets. M ost scholars agree that Zephaniah precedes Nahum and Habakkuk chron­ ologically. Nahum probably preached close to the time o f the fa ll o f Nineveh (612 B.C.), and Habakkuk must have preached just before the rise o f the Babylonians and the battle o f Carchem ish (605 B.C.). But Zephaniah seems to address the situation in Jerusalem immediately before Josiah’s reform in 621 B.C. If Zephaniah preceded Nahum and Habakkuk, why does his book follow theirs in the canonical order? A simple answer would be that the books o f the Bible are not arranged in strict chronological order. T h e four Gospels are not arranged chronologically. Hosea was not the first o f the m inor prophets. T h at distinction goes to Amos. Length and catchwords, however, may have been factors in arranging some books in the Bible. Hosea may com e before Amos because it is longer. Joel may come be­ fore Amos because o f the catchwords “T h e Lord roars from Zion” (Joel 3:16 and Amos 1:2 RSV) and “the mountains shall drop down sweet wine” (Joel 3:18 and Amos 9:13 KJV). MICAH-MALACHI

46

Similarly, Zephaniah might have been placed after Habakkuk because o f the catchword, “hush” or “be silent” in Habakkuk 2:20 and Zephaniah 1:6. Zephaniah probably was placed before Haggai because the word “tim e” occurs in Zephaniah 3:20 and Haggai 1:2. O f course, factors other than length o f the book and catchwords must be considered before any final conclusion can be reached concerning the arrangement o f books in the O ld Testament. A nother preliminary question comes from the fact that the book o f Zephaniah is neither well-known nor well-liked. It has a somber tone, and the note o f judgment is seldom welcomed. Perhaps Zephaniah has an inordinate emphasis on wrath and judgm ent It is easy for m odems to dismiss Zephaniah’s message as one addressed to an earlier time and o f little relevance to the present. But such an attitude is very unrealistic. T h e judgment o f God is as real today as it was for Zephaniah’s age. Judgment was not Zephaniah’s only them e, nor is it G od’s last word. Joy, rejoicing, and hope follow judgment. Although judg­ m ent comes on Israel and the nations, a remnant will sur­ vive. T he nations will be converted (3:9-10). A tinge o f apocalyptic style appears in Zephaniah. His vi­ sion is universal. God will come in judgment on the world (3:8). Then there will be a new day. There will be a new unity, a new humility, a new purity, and a new security. There will be no more shame or sinning, no more lies and deceit, no more fear or reproach. T he Lord him self will “restore the fortunes o f his people” (2:7; 3:20). In the past, many O ld Testam ent scholars denied that Zephaniah wrote these passages o f hope. T h e same prophet, they said, could not preach judgment and hope at the same time. Few scholars hold such views today, however. In addition to questions o f position and authorship, ques­ tions o f date arise. John D . W . W atts says, “It is possible that Zephaniah planned the entire prophecy for presentation in

47

Themes in Zephaniah

temple services w ithin the decade before Josiah’s reform in 626 B.C ”4 Many still feel, however, that the book was not completed until the postexilic period. W hat are the major themes in Zephaniah? First, we should observe that the book is a theocentric one. T he name Yahweh occurs thirty-four times in its fifty-three verses. Zephaniah’s name occurs once, and that in the superscription. T he word “day,” referring to some future time, occurs eighteen times in this book. T he major themes must, therefore, revolve around the idea o f the “Day of the Lord.” Four themes are prominent in this book: a day of wrath, a day o f worship, a day o f deci­ sion, and a new day. A day of wrath Habakkuk began his book w ith a com plaint that G od would not act against evil (Hab 1 :2,4); Zephaniah begins his w ith a warning that the w hole world is on fire. H e says G od will sweep away everything: man, beasts, birds, fish. T h e inhabitants o f Jerusalem , the rem nant o f Baal, idolatrous priests, astrologists, and apostates will all experience judg­ m ent. T h e expression “day o f w rath” occurs three tim es in the book (1:15, 18, 2:2). O th er graphic term s used to de­ scribe the Day o f the Lord include: “b itter,” “distress and anguish,” “ruin and devastation,” “darkness and gloom,” “clouds and th ick darkness,” “trum pet blast and battle cry.” T h e Lord says he will “punish” offenders (1:8-9). T h e fire o f his jealous wrath will suddenly consume all the earth’s inhabitants (1:18; 3:3). We do not know what triggered Zephaniah’s announce­ m ent o f a sudden, cataclysmic world judgment. He gives no account o f his call or the occasion o f his message. It might have been a visit to the temple, with its hideous idols and pagan rituals, on a festival day. It might have been a trip to the market, with its feverish search for profit. It might have been MICAH-MALACHI

48

an invasion by the Scythians, a horde of ruthless tribesmen from the north. It might have been the death o f Assyria’s King Ashurbanipal in 627 B.C. W hatever the cause, it was the Lord who determined the time and content o f Zephaniah’s message. Was Zephaniah’s message new? Did it startle many o f his hearers? Possibly. T h e book, with its idea that a day o f wrath awaits every human being, is shocking to the careful reader today. If Zephaniah Stood at the gate o f the temple to deliver his message to the worshipers, as Jeremiah did, his message probably was a sur­ prise and shock to many. If Zephaniah was a prophet who worked closely with temple worship he might have incorpo­ rated some old, familiar prophetic traditions into his book to use in the temple celebration o f the Royal-Zion festival (a part o f the fall festival, celebrating God’s election o f David and Zion). A day of worship W orship seems to be universal, and it is a major theme o f Zephaniah. T he book begins w ith an announcem ent that God is going to sweep away everything from the earth, much as he did with the flood in the time o f Noah. T his threatened judgment would come not because the people were not wor­ shiping but because their worship was unacceptable. Some people were worshiping Baal. Some had turned to astrology. Some had become syncretistic in their worship, trying to combine fa ith in God with adherence to pagan religious prac­ tices. O thers turned their backs from following the Lord and did not seek him or inquire o f him (1:6). Zephaniah (1:7), like Habakkuk (2:20) and Zechariah (2:13), issues a call to worship, Be silent before the Lord God! Because the day o f Yahweh is near,

49

Themes in Zephaniah

because Yahweh has prepared a sacrifice. He has sanctified his guests. (1:7) W orship calls for a period o f quiet reverence before the Lord. T h e worshiper is to acknowledge G od’s holiness and sovereignty. Although the worshiper usually brought his own sacrifice, this passage reverses the order: the Lord him­ self would furnish the sacrifice and sanctify his guests. T he false worshipers in Judah would be the sacrifice, along with their possessions (1:8-13). Here was an indictm ent o f Judah’s present worshipers. They were preoccupied w ith activities offensive to G od’s holiness in the marketplaces, in govern­ m ent halls, and in the temple (1:7-13). In the Day o f the Lord, the blood o f the people, like the blood o f sacrificial animals, will be poured out as dust and their flesh will be o f no more value than the cow chips around the temple (1:17). Their silver and gold will not be able to buy deliverance (1:18). A glimmer o f hope comes in 2 :1 -3 . Zephaniah calls for a religious assembly to seek the Lord and to seek righteousness (2:1-3). Only the humble o f the land are invited to worship. T he prophet offers no guarantee that the worshipers will be spared: A ll he can promise is that “perhaps” the humble may be “hidden” in the day o f wrath. T his day o f judgment will come on all men (Heb. adam , 1:17) because they have sinned against Yahweh. T he human race as a whole has undermined and polluted the very reasons for its being. A sense o f the heavy cloud o f God’s wrath hangs over our world. We continue to live, but only because o f G od’s grace. Peter Craigie said that Zephaniah’s picture o f the situation was that the cosmos was out o f control and the earth was “tumbling helter-skelter to its doom.”5 A t times our world seems to be out o f control, tumbling like a renegade satellite to its fiery end. Man’s actions may cause the cosmos to be MICAH-MALACHI

50

out o f control, but he cannot put it back on track by himself. O nly God can do that. A nother significant passage about worship is in Zephaniah

2:11. Yahweh will come upon them w ith terror because He famished all the gods o f the earth; and each will worship him from his place among the islands o f the nations. Som e ambiguity exists as to the precise meaning o f this verse. It stands betw een the oracle o f judgment on Moab and Ammon (2:5-10) and the oracle against Ethiopia (2:12). It may be a part o f the form er oracle, but it may stand alone as a general statem ent about a tim e when all nations shall worship Yahweh. They will do so because all o f their gods have starved to death from inadequate sacrifices. If this is a separate verse, predicting a tim e when all the nations o f the earth will bow in worship before the Lord, it is a step be­ yond Isaiah 2 :1 -4 and M icah 4 :1 -5 , passages which see the nations coming to Jerusalem to worship. Zephaniah antici­ pates the nations worshiping the Lord in their own lands (see Isa 45:23; Mal 1:11; Joh n 4:23). Zephaniah does, however, charge Jerusalem w ith its own failure to worship. She obeys no voice; she accepts no discipline; she does not trust Yahweh nor come near her God. (3:2) T his distance and rebellion is surprising because o f the kind o f God Yahweh is, according to Zephaniah. T h e Lord is right­ eous and does no wrong (3:5). T he Lord is reliable. M orning 51

Themes in Zephaniah

by morning, he gives his judgment; at the sunrise he does not fail (3:5). T h e Lord is ruler: “T he King o f Israel, the Lord, is in your midst” (3:15 RSV). T he Lord is a loving God. According to Zephaniah 3:17, “T he Lord will rest in his love for his people” (m t ) or he will “renew them ” in his love (l x x , RSV) Zephaniah offers several elements o f proper worship. O ne is “drawing near to G od” (3:2 RSV). O thers are prayer (3:9) service (3:9), praise (3:14), and a humble, confident trust in God (3:2, 11-12). Worship is a strong theme in Zephaniah False worship can lead to the day o f G od’s judgment; true worship may help one survive such a catastrophe (2:3). Pure worship will characterize the lives o f those who participate in the eschaton with God (3:9). A day of decision T he Day o f the Lord will be a day o f decision. T he very tim e and circumstances o f the day depend solely upon God’s choice. Because it is my decision to gather nations, to collect kingdoms, to pour out upon them my fierce anger, all the heat o f my anger, because with fire o f my jealousy all the earth shall be devoured. (3:8) T h e term “my decision” is legal language, m îspa̅tî in H e­ brew. It is the expression o f a judge who has made a deci­ sion and has th e power and authority to execute it. Som e translations include: “my determ ination is” (k jv . ASV); “my decision is” (RSV); “I have decided” (n iv ); “I have made up my m ind” (t e v ); “I am determ ined (JB); and “for m ine it is” (n e b ). T h e point is that G od has decided on a day to judge th e nations. M an was n o t consulted and had no part in the MICAH-MALACHI

52

decision-m aking. A similar view o f G od’s judgm ent on the nations is described in Joel 3:12 -1 5 . L et the nations bestir themselves, and come up to the valley o f Jehoshaphat; for there I will sit to judge all the nations round about. Put in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe. G o in, tread, for the wine press is full. T h e vats overflow, for their wickedness is great. multitudes, multitudes in the valley o f decision! for the Day o f the Lord is near in the valley o f decision. T h e sun and the m oon are darkened and the stars withdraw their shining. (RSV) In the O ld Testament, time and space are interrelated. But space is not in control o f time. God is. Space is part o f cre­ ation. Tim e did not depend on the creation o f the heavenly bodies: they were not created until the fourth day after time began. There is a vast difference between Israel’s view o f the sun, moon, and stars and that o f her neighbors. W rites James Muilenberg, [In Israel] the mystery and meaning o f tim e is not re­ solved by appeal to the cosmic world o f space; among the other nations the heavenly bodies are deified and chronos spatializes tim e into extension and duration. In the one, tim e is grasped in term s o f purpose, will, and decision; in the other . . . ‘by those who gaze at the stars, who at the new m oon predict what shall befall you’ (Isa 47:13).6 In the Bible, God is in control o f time. T he great events o f holy history are his decision: Creation, the Exodus, the birth

53

Themes in Zephaniah

o f C hrist (Gal 4:4), Pentecost, and the coming o f the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1). Israel did not know the way o f her history; only God knew it. M an lives from the day o f his birth until the day o f his death not knowing what a day will bring. He can say, “T his is the day w hich the Lord has made” (Ps 118:24 RSV). H e knows, too, that a decisive, final day is coming. T he Lord o f hosts has a day when Israel and the nations will be held accountable for the days allotted to them (Isa 2:6 -2 2 ; Amos 1 :3 , 6 ,9 ,1 1 ,1 3 ) . T he psalmist cried, “My times are in your hands” to ex­ press the fact that man’s time is G od’s time (Ps 31:15). Habakkuk spoke o f a day when the answer to his question would be verified. God had it on his schedule, though Habakkuk did not know when. God was in charge o f time for Zephaniah, too. H e said, “A t that time, I will search Jerusalem with lamps, and punish the men who are thickening upon their lees” (1:12 RSV): “A t that time I will change the speech o f the nations into a pure speech” (3:9). “Behold, at that time I will deal with all o f your oppressors” (3:19 RSV), and “A t that time I will bring you home” (3:20 RSV). A new day Although the word new does not actually occur in Zepha­ niah the concept is there. T he idea o f change is expressed in 3:9. T he eschaton is often described in terms o f something “new.” T he psalmist and the prophets speak about a “new song” (Ps 96:1; 98:1; Isa 42:10). Prophets wrote that God would do “a new thing” (Isa 42:9; 43:19; 48:6; Jer 31:22); he would create a new heaven and a new earth (Isa 65:17; 66:22); he would make a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31). He would give them a new name (Isa 62:2), give them a new heart (Ezek 18:31; 36:26), and put a new spirit within them (Ezek 11:19). MICAH-MALACHI

54

Zephaniah said that in “tim e,” that is, in the eschaton, God would give his people a new speech and a new unity (3:9), a new humility (3:11-12), a new purity (3:13a), and a new secu­ rity (3:13b). In turn, the people o f God would have a new song (3:14), a new king (3:15), a renewal o f God’s love (3:17), a new name (3:19), and a renewal of an old promise (3:20). There is a reference to the promise to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3) in the terms, “name” and “home” as there was at the end o f M icah (Mic 7:20) W hen would all o f this happen? Only God knows. Tim e is in his hand.

55

Themes in Zephaniah

6

THEM ES IN HAGGAI

Yet once more, in a little while, I will shake the heavens and the earth, the sea and the dry land. And I will shake all nations, and the desirable things o f all nations shall come, and I will fill this house w ith glory, says Yahweh o f hosts. (2:6-7)

Introduction T he m odem traveler in England, sooner or later, will probably visit Coventry Cathedral. T he cathedral church o f St. M ichael was bombed and burned in November 1940 during the first Nazi air raid against Coventry. A ll that re­ mained o f the fifteenth-century church was the 300-foot spire and some o f the outside walls. For tw o decades, the charred hull o f that famous church stood as a grim reminder , o f the ravages o f war. By 1962, the people o f Coventry, helped by millions o f people around the world, built and consecrated a new cathedral. Bu t they left the ruins o f the old cathedral side by side with the new one. MICAH-MALACHI

56

In 586 B.C., the temple in Jerusalem was “bombed” and burned by Nebuchadnezzar, king o f Babylon. T he people o f Jerusalem must have felt the same shock and anger over the destruction o f their temple by the Babylonians as the people o f Coventry did over the destruction o f their cathedral by the Nazis. Both communities rallied and rebuilt their wor­ ship centers amid controversy. Both groups recognized that the mere reconstruction o f a building was not enough. They knew that God’s spirit must consecrate the “house” and the people alike, otherwise they would build in vain (Hag 2:5, Ps 127: l) 1 T he person primarily responsible for the rebuilding o f the temple in Jerusalem was the prophet Haggai. We do not know much about Haggai. We do not know whether he w it­ nessed the destruction o f the first temple. Nor do we know whether he had been a captive in Babylon. Haggai suddenly comes on the scene in Jerusalem in the fall o f 520 B.C., preaching the urgency and necessity o f rebuilding the temple. T he temple had been in ruins almost seventy years since its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar in 587 B.C. (2 Kings 25:8-9, 13—17; Jer 39:1-3; 52:3-13). Many people in Jerusalem were carried captive to Babylon when Jerusalem fell. Some of those left behind during the time the temple was in ruins probably continued to worship Yahweh at a makeshift altar near the temple site.2 T he Jews who remained in Jerusalem were not free to rebuild the temple because Babylon’s policy would not perm it it and because they lacked the necessary financial re­ sources. M ost local government officials were Samaritans— adversaries o f the Jews who returned from Babylon (Ezra 4:1-4). W hen Cyrus, King o f Persia, conquered Babylon in 539 B.C. the territory around Jerusalem became a part o f the Persian empire. Alm ost immediately Cyrus signed a decree perm itting all captive people in Babylon to return to their 57

Themes in Haggai

homelands, rebuild their temples, and get on with their lives (Ezra 1:1-4; 2 C hron 36:22-23). Although the biblical record is not clear, it seems that a small group o f Jews left Babylon, possibly in 536 B.C. under the leadership o f Sheshbazzar, a prince o f Judah, to return to Jerusalem with the vessels from Solom on’s temple (Ezra 1:8, 11; 5:14, 16). Evidently Sheshbazzar made an attempt to re­ build the temple soon after. But the work was soon aban­ doned, and for sixteen years no work was done on the temple. Suddenly, on the first day o f the sixth m onth o f the second year of Darius, king o f Persia, the prophet Haggai preached a powerful message to the governor and the high priest in Jerusalem. He admonished them to get busy rebuilding the temple (Hag 1:1-11). W ithin a m onth, the Lord stirred up the spirit o f Zerubbabel, the governor, and the spirit o f Joshua, the high priest, and the spirit o f the remnant o f the people. A ll o f them came and worked on the house o f the Lord (Hag 1:14). W hat made the difference? W hy would the people re­ spond so readily to one sermon from Haggai when they had neglected the work for sixteen years? Perhaps it was his zeal and enthusiasm. Undoubtedly, he was the prime mover in the rebuilding o f the temple. Perhaps the econom ic and political conditions were more favorable than they had been since the return. For whatever reasons, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, along w ith the governor and the high priest, led the reconstruction project. T he temple was finished and dedicated four years later, in 516 B.C. (Ezra 6:13-18). A s far as we know, Haggai’s m inistry lasted only about four m onths. There are four dates in his book:12 1)

. T he first day o f the sixth m onth o f the second year o f Darius, Aug. 2 9 ,5 2 0 B.c. (1:1) 2) . T he tw enty-fourth day o f the sixth m onth o f the sec­ o n d year o f Darius, Sept. 2 1 ,5 2 0 B.C. (1:15a) MICAH-MALACHI

58

3) . T he tw enty-first day o f the seventh m onth o f the second year o f Darius, O ct. 1 7 ,5 2 0 B.C. (1:15b—2:1) 4) . T he tw enty-fourth day o f the ninth m onth o f the second year o f Darius, D ec. 1 8 ,5 2 0 B.C. (2:10, 20) Haggai started the rebuilding and guided it through the early, critical times o f doubt, discouragement, and question­ ing. T his second temple is often called Zerubbabel’s temple. It could have been called Haggai’s temple because, almost single-handedly, he initiated the work and gave it the im­ petus needed for successful com pletion. T hen he dropped out o f sight. It is idle to speculate on what might have hap­ pened to him. There is no indication that he was around when the temple was finished and dedicated. Som e scholars have criticized th e w ork o f Haggai, saying that his only concern was w ith a building. Many fail to find any spiritual message here at all. O esterley and R obinson said o f Haggai, “His whole m ental outlook and utilitarian religious point o f view (see 1:9—11) is sufficient to show that he can have no place among th e prophets in the real sense o f the w ord.”3 R ecently Paul H anson accused Haggai and Zechariah o f surrendering th e prophetic word to the un­ critical service o f a particular political program (the hierocratic party) and leading the prophetic office down “an ignom inious path.” H e claimed that they gave up the revo­ lutionary elem ent, w hich was an essential ingredient in genuine prophecy “stemming from a vision o f Yahweh’s order o f m ercy and ju stice.”4 It is always difficult to assess a person’s motives, especially when that involves going back across centuries, by way o f literature. But it is not fair to say Haggai was only interested in building a building, even though it was a temple. Haggai’s immediate goal was to rebuild the temple, but as R . J. Coggins says, “It is also apparent that a larger context is envisaged. God is assuring the people o f his lasting presence with

59

Themes in Haggai

them .”5 Coggins rejects Hanson’s harsh political criticism o f Haggai and Zechariah. If we are to do justice to Haggai, we must recognize the significance he attached to the restoration o f the temple. It was to be the prelude to even greater acts o f God on behalf o f his people.6 R ex Mason also takes issue with Hanson. H e says: To dismiss the eschatological elements in the preaching o f Haggai and Zechariah as merely peripheral, or a de­ vice to secure support, is to portray them in term s o f near caricature since, as we shall see, the eschatological elem ent is central to their message.7 Perhaps Haggai’s understanding o f th e im portance o f re­ building th e tem ple may be found in the difference be­ tw een Israel’s idea o f the function o f a tem ple and that o f her neighbors. Temples were com m on in the ancient world long before David and Solom on built th e first tem ple in Israel. T h e lands o f Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Near East were filled w ith them . In those lands, tem ples were built as “hom es” for the various deities that th e peoples worshiped. People thought o f their gods as living on earth on large m anors or plantations or m ountain tops. These “hom es” were places where the divine touched th e human and the ultim ate source o f power could be accessible to man. M an’s duty, people believed, was to provide food, water, and deli­ cacies for the gods.8 T h e idea o f a temple in Israel was fundamentally different because her idea o f G od was different. A lthough Israel called the temple the “house o f G od” (Hag 1:2, 4, 7, 9, 14; 2:3, 7, 9), she did not think o f the earthly temple as being Yahweh’s primary dwelling place (1 Kings 8:23, 27, 30). Pa­ gan temples were filled w ith idols. T h e temple in Jerusalem, except in times o f apostasy, contained no image or anything representing G od’s being (2 Kings 2 3 :4-14; Ezek 8:5-17). MICAH-MALACHI

60

Pagan temples were places o f “sacred” prostitution associ­ ated w ith fertility cults. Israel’s temple was to be a place o f purification, cleanliness, and holiness. Pagan temples were places where sacrifices were offered to appease the wrath o f the gods and to cultivate their favor. In Israel, sacrifices in themselves had no power or value apart from the wor­ shiper’s actions and attitudes in the sight o f God. Classical prophets often berated people who broke the covenant, violated the Ten Commandments, and then came to the temple to offer sacrifices, thinking they would be delivered. Jerem iah said: Behold, you trust in deceptive words to no avail. W ill you steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, bum incense to Baal, and go after other gods that you have not known, and then come and stand before me in this house, w hich is called by my name, and say, ‘W e are delivered!’— only to go on doing all these abominations? (Jer 7:8-11 RSV) T he temple in Jerusalem was, in some sense, a royal sanc­ tuary. It was built by a king and, at least in part, financed by kings. Temple sacrifices and worship, in a proxy sort o f way, were for the benefit o f the entire covenant community. But the temple had problems. It was often politicized. Kings o f the north and south tried to control the temple personnel and service for their own causes. W hen Assyria took control o f Judah in 735 B.C ., foreign gods, cult objects and pagan practices prevailed in the tem ­ ple. T h e temple was destroyed in 586 B.C.— an event some classical prophets had predicted (M ic 3:12; Jer 7:14). R . E. Clem ents said that Jerem iah “seems to foresee no rebuilding

61

Themes in Haggai

o f the tem ple, nor any need to do so.”9 Jerem iah predicted that the ark would not be made again “because all o f Jerusalem would becom e G od’s throne” (Jer 3:17). B u t the burned-out hull o f the old tem ple and Ezekiel’s vision o f the restored tem ple at th e end o f his book (chs 40-48) were th e necessary ingredients th e Spirit o f G od used to inspire Haggai to lead in the restoration o f the tem ple. T he book o f Haggai is brief. It has only tw o chapters and thirty-eight verses. It is made up o f a framework and the oracles o f Haggai reported in the third person. T he frame­ work includes the superscription, and such descriptive state­ ments as “and the word o f Yahweh came by the hand o f Haggai the prophet” (1:3). Statem ents about dates and situa­ tions (1:12, 15; 2:1, 10, 20) were also part o f the framework o f the book. T h e first section (1:1-11) rebukes the people for their failure to rebuild the temple and challenges them to do it now. T h e second section describes the remarkable posi­ tive response o f the people to Haggai’s first sermon (1:12— 15a). (W ithin a m onth, the people were at work rebuilding the temple.) T he third section indicates some discourage­ m ent and disappointment in the early days o f rebuilding (l:15b -2:9). T h e last two sections o f the book talk about the pervasive, contaminating power o f evil (2:10-19), and the prince o f G od’s new kingdom (2:20-23). We have seen that “rebuilding the tem ple;” though a major them e o f Haggai’s, was not his only one. David Peterson has pointed out that Haggai was also concerned with the people’s psychological response to construction, with priestly respon­ sibility, and with civil order.10 Looking at the book o f Haggai in its present form, we may detect several significant themes: 1) a realistic view o f the past, 2) a dissatisfaction with the present, 3) a sense o f divine calling, and 4) a vision o f a bright future.

MICAH-MALACHI

62

A realistic view o f the past Haggai lived near the end o f the O ld Testam ent period and had a sense o f history. He knew about Israel’s exodus from Egypt (2:5), an event that occurred at least 750 years earlier. He knew about the promise God made to Israel at that tim e (2:6). H e was familiar w ith the form er glory o f the house o f the Lord (2:3,9). He was also acutely conscious o f the fall o f Jerusalem, the destruction o f the temple, and the end o f the monarchy (2:20-23). Although Haggai was familiar w ith his people’s past, he did not dwell on it or live in it. H e learned from the past. H e saw the judgment o f G od on the people for their failure to rebuild the temple (1:9-11). H e learned that it was Yahweh who gave the rain and withheld it (1:11). He insisted that it was Yahweh who gave the oil, wine, and produce and withheld them (1:11). It was Yahweh who smote the produce w ith blight, mildew, and hail, but th e people did not repent or turn back to the Lord (2:17). T his passage reminds one o f the words o f Amos “I smote you w ith blight and mildew, yet you did not return to me, says the Lord” (Amos 4:9). Evidendy Haggai was familiar w ith a passage in Jeremiah about Jehoiachin being G od’s signet ring ( Hag 2:23; see Jer 22:24). Haggai’s view o f the past was informed and realistic. Any­ one who ignores the past does so at his own peril. H e knew about the good times and bad times. H e also knew that one cannot live in the past or bring it back. O ne should learn from the past and build on it. A dissatisfaction with the present T h e Lord had been displeased w ith Israel in the past and brought judgment on them (1:10-11). G od was still dis­ pleased w ith the people, but he said that if they would go up

63

Themes in Haggai

to the mountain and bring wood and build “the house” he would take pleasure in it (1:7). Haggai, too, was certainly dissatisfied with the present conditions in Jerusalem. The people were living in “paneled” houses they built for themselves, while they left the house o f G od in ruins (1:4, 9; 2:3). T he people said it was not tim e to rebuild the Lord’s house (1:2). Perhaps they thought the seventy years o f Jerem iah’s prophetic clock had not expired. O r they may have been waiting for more favorable econom ic or political conditions. It was a tim e o f high inflation and low wages (1:6). T he people were never satisfied and never had enough. It was a tim e o f great expectations and devastat­ ing disappointments (2:3). It was a tim e when the work o f people’s hands was unclean (2:14) and a tim e o f empty barns and barren fruit trees (2:19). Haggai and his people were dissatisfied w ith the present. Dissatisfaction w ith the present can be a good thing. T he prodigal son would have remained in the pig pen if he had not developed a dissatisfaction with his present situation. A person will probably not change or do anything to improve his lot as long as he is satisfied w ith his present circum­ stances. B u t one does not have to be a prodigal to be dissatis­ fied with the present. Dissatisfaction w ith the present seems to be an inherent characteristic o f man. W olfhart Pannenberg said that people differ from all other creatures in that they are “open” to the world: “M en do not find lasting rest even with their own constructs.” A person’s “destiny” moves beyond culture, creation, and the world. M an is dependent on something that escapes him as often as he reaches for fulfillm ent. “In his infinite depend­ ence,” Pannenberg continued, “he presupposes w ith every breath he takes a corresponding, infinite, never ending, other worldly being before whom he stands.”11 T he New England author and physician, O liver W endell Holmes must

MICAH-MALACHI

64

have been thinking about the ceaseless human search for something new and better when he wrote: Year after year beheld the silent toil T h at spread his lustrous coil; Still as the spiral grew, H e left the past year’s dwelling for the new, Thanks for the heavenly message brought by thee, child o f the wandering sea. Build thee more stately mansions, O my soul, as the swift seasons roll! Leave thy low-vaulted past! Let each new temple, nobler than the last, Shut thee from heaven w ith a dome more vast, T ill thou at length art free, Leaving thine outgrown shell by life’s unresting sea.12 Haggai was dissatisfied w ith the ugly ruins o f the first temple, which, like a scar or wound, marred the landscape o f Jerusalem. T he people had walked around the ruins and had lived w ith them for almost seventy years. Now an over­ whelming sense o f dissatisfaction w ith the current condition came over the prophet and his people. T hat sense o f dissatis­ faction led the prophet to a sense o f a divine call. A sense of divine calling Haggai’s sense o f a divine call did not come through some dramatic spiritual or ecstatic experience such as those o f Isa­ iah, Ezekiel, or the apostle Paul. His call may have come through a feeling o f protest or outrage over the neglect o f the temple and over his people’s satisfaction with mediocrity. A t first, Haggai seems to have been a lone voice crying in the wilderness, “Build the temple o f the Lord.” But he was

65

Themes in Haggai

not speaking or acting alone. He was speaking the word o f Yahweh o f hosts and was doing what God sent him to do (1:12). Five times we are told that the word of the Lord came to, or by, Haggai (1 :1 ,3 ; 2 :1 ,1 0 ,1 9 ). M ost of Haggai’s specific messages are introduced with the words, “Thus says Yahweh o f hosts (1:2, 5, 7, 9, 13; 2:4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 17, 23). T he expression “Yahweh o f hosts” may refer to Yahweh as the God of the hosts o f heaven, meaning the stars or angels. Some­ times it refers to the hosts in God’s army. In any case it em­ phasizes Yahweh’s power and greatness. T he name Yahweh occurs thirty-four times in this book’s thirty-eight verses. Such frequent use o f the name for God implies that a con­ stant sense o f God’s presence dominated Haggai’s ministry. Haggai was a “driven” man on a mission for God. T he people’s quick positive response to Haggai’s message indicated their conviction that Yahweh had sent him (1:12). T his positive response to Haggai’s preaching stands in stark contrast to the people’s rejection o f the messages o f pre-exilic prophets. Haggai’s dynamic messages o f rebuke, challenge, encouragement, instruction, and hope, accompanied by the Spirit o f God, convinced his hearers that God had sent him. G od’s hand was upon him, but he was no “visionary.” A vision of the future Haggai was no visionary. He did not describe any grand theophanies or experiences with God. H e was a rather mun­ dane, functional, and practical person. His aims and goals were primarily immediate ones. Rebuilding the temple was only the first, necessary step in ushering in the new age o f the kingdom o f G od. Haggai knew that what he was build­ ing was in no way comparable to Solom on’s temple. There was no cedar from Lebanon, no skilled workers from Tyre (cf., 1 Kings 7:13), no gold or silver from the spoils o f David’s wars, and no fine-tw ined linen to use. MICAH-MALACHI

66

But Haggai believed that the future glory o f this “house” would exceed its form er glory. H e knew that when the tem­ ple was done, G od would take pleasure in it, and he would appear in his glory (1:7). He knew that the ingrained evil would someday be cleansed, and G od’s blessings would be visible to everyone (2:19). Haggai believed that someday God would shake the heavens and the earth, overthrow the thrones o f kingdoms, and bring in his own kingdom (2:23). Haggai said that the signet ring that had been removed from the hand o f Jehoiachin would someday be placed on the hand o f a “son o f David” (2:23), indicating that God was not permanently abandoning the line o f David. Was Haggai a visionary? T he word “vision” does not occur in his book. We are impressed by his bustling activity and his ability to get things done. Zechariah was a man more likely to see visions and dream dreams. “Haggai will handle the ham­ mer and nails,” Paterson said, “but Zechariah will supply the blueprints o f U topia.”13 Nonetheless, Haggai spoke about “God appearing in his glory” (1:8); about the silver and the gold belonging to God (2:8); about the latter glory o f this house being greater than the form er; and about God giving “peace,” shalom, in this place (2:9). A ll o f those things are objects of vision. T he temple was built and dedicated in 516 or 515 B.C. Nothing is said at that tim e about Haggai’s vision or his work. G od’s visible “glory” and the people’s prosperity did not return. As years passed w ith the hopes o f G od’s visible presence still unfulfilled, a doctrine grew up o f necessary things lacking in the second temple. Several lists emerged, and they were not all alike. But m ost lists agreed on one prom inent missing thing: the Shekinah, the rabbinic belief o f the divine presence. As Ronald Clem ents says, “T he most vital feature o f all [the Shekinah] was lacking.”14 T his sense that something was missing from the second temple apparently goes back to the time o f its rebuilding.15 67

Themes in Haggai

M en could refurbish the material structure, but only God could bestow his presence. T he postexilic period o f Israel’s history emphasized a growing transcendent aspect o f the divine nature. G od was conceived as the universal Lord who could not be lim ited to one place and one time. Clem ents says, “No wonder that some Jewish and Christian writers transferred the whole hope o f the divine presence in a per­ fect temple on M ount Zion to the realm o f heaven.”16 O ne o f the questions left unanswered in the O ld Testa­ m ent was, “W ill God indeed dwell on the earth?” (1 Kings 8:27 RSV). A temple was only part o f the answer. W hen Jesus said, “‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up”’ (John 2:19 RSV) he was speaking o f his death and resurrection as evidence o f the Incarnation. This claim o f Jesus to build a new temple was one o f the criticisms leveled against him by his Jewish contemporaries. A n interesting note added to 2:9 in the Septuagint says, “And peace o f soul as a possession to the creator o f the restoration o f this temple.”17 T he L X X annotator changed the interpretation o f the word shalom from the material to the spiritual. The G reek word for “res­ toration” is anastēsai the word for “resurrection.” Haggai saw a glimpse o f the glory that was to be. Perhaps he understood it primarily in physical and material terms. Later readers knew it mainly as spiritual glory.

MICAH-MALACHI

68

7

THEMES IN ZECHARIAH

T his is the word o f the Lord to Zerubbabel: N ot by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord o f hosts. (4:6 RSV)

Introduction T he book o f Zechariah is one o f the most neglected books in the Bible. Elizabeth A chtem eier says, “Zechariah is one o f those books o f the O ld Testam ent to w hich we usually give a passing glance.”1 Alm ost nothing in it is obvious. T he pas­ sages chosen from it for some lectionaries (2:10-13; 8:3-12, 16-17) are not from the troublesome visionary section. “They seem,” continues A chtem eier, “neither necessary nor profitable for the life o f the church.”2 Although the book o f Zechariah is obscure in many places, and the difficulty in interpreting it is enormous, that diffi­ culty should not intimidate the reader. It is w orth remember­ ing that this book is quoted more frequently in the New Testament than most O ld Testament books. Quotations from

69

Themes in Zechariah

or allusions to parts o f Zechariah occur more than seventy times in the New Testament, primarily in the Gospels and in Revelation. Some o f the book’s difficulty arises from questions con­ cerning its date, authorship, and unity. The idea that the prophet Zechariah wrote the whole book was generally as­ sumed until 1638, when Joseph Mede, a pious and learned Cambridge theologian, pointed out that Matthew 27:9 quotes Zechariah 11:12 as coming from Jeremiah rather than Zechariah.3 This was the beginning o f 350 years o f scholarly debate about the dates and background o f the materials in the book o f Zechariah. There seems to be a distinct break be­ tween chapters 8 and 9. M ost scholars divide the book into two main parts: 1 -8 and 9-14. Although these two parts have similarities, they also have significant differences. M ajor differences between the parts involve kinds o f lan­ guage, references to specific people and specific dates, and the im portance o f the temple: • In chapters 1 -8 , people’s names are prom inent. They include: Darius, king o f Persia; Zechariah, son o f Berechiah; Joshua, the high priest; Zerubbabel, the governor; Heldai, Tobijah, Jedaiah, a com m ittee o f ex­ iles; and Josiah, a local citizen. In chapters 9 -1 4 , the only proper name is “David” (12:8). • In chapters 1-8, three specific dates are found (1:1, 7; 7:1). In chapters 9 -1 4 , there are none. T he only term used to signal a tim e frame is “in that day.” • In chapters 1-8, references to the rebuilding o f the tem­ ple occur often enough to constitute what may be the central theme o f those chapters. In chapters 9-14, the temple is m entioned only three times (11:13; 14:20, 21), and then not prominently. • In chapters 1-8 , the language and literature are prima­ rily prose and contain eight vision accounts. In chapters MICAH-MALACHI

70

9 -1 4 , all is poetry and no traditional vision accounts are found. • In chapters 1-8, the pages are full o f references to an­ gels. In chapters 9 -1 4 , no angels appear. • In chapters 1-8, the role o f the priest is prom inent. In 9 -1 4 , no priest is mentioned. • In chapters 1-8, the role o f the prophet is similar to that o f the classical prophets. In chapters 9 -1 4 , the role o f the prophet has ill repute and is compared to that o f a person with an evil spirit (13:2). Even though major differences exist betw een the tw o parts o f the book, significant similarities, as mentioned, exist between them as well. T he tw o parts share such common themes as the importance o f Jerusalem and Zion; G od’s uni­ versal sovereignty; the necessity for, and provision of, divine cleansing; covenant promises and curses; evidence o f ten­ sion between various groups; and the role o f the humble (servant or shepherd) Messiah. These common themes have helped some scholars see a unity in the book— even though it may have passed through different hands and different periods o f refinem ent and edit­ ing before coming to its final form. T h e first eight chapters o f Zechariah are a “carefully crafted docum ent,” according to Achtem eier. She says o f them , “Nothing is out o f place in the text or needs to be rearranged.”4 Peter Craigie noted that if the two parts o f the book come from separate persons, “the fact that an editor has bound them together must not be overlooked.”5 W e must recognize the striking differences in the book, but we must also admit the presence o f unifying themes. Therefore, we will consider the biblical themes o f the entire book and not the different them es in its tw o separate parts. Various dates have been suggested for the different parts o f the book. Those dates range from the seventh century B.C.

71

Themes in Zechariah

to the second century B.C . There is a growing trend, how­ ever, to see the book as a unit and to assign the whole book to the last part of the sixth century B.C. We agree with A chtemeier that “there is no reason to assign them [chs 9—14] to a period other than the last half o f the sixth century B.C.6 A cursory reading o f this book shows the obvious differ­ ences between the sixth-century prophecy of Zechariah and eighth-century prophecy represented by Amos and Hosea. These latter books were addressed to Israel before the fall o f Samaria. They emphasized justice, mercy, righteousness, and covenant loyalty. They had little that was good to say about the temple, priests, and sacrifices. However, sixth-century prophecy, as seen in Zechariah, considers as major themes the restoration o f Zion, the temple, land, and the priesthood. Only three brief passages in Zechariah treat what we call ethical concerns (5:3-4; 7:9-10; 8:16-17). The work o f the eighth-century prophets was anchored in history; the words o f Zechariah are visionary and ambiguous. The reader o f Zechariah constantly needs an interpreting angel. The book directs attention toward an apocalyptic “end tim e.” T he difficulties in interpreting the book o f Zechariah ex­ tend to the search for major biblical themes. M ajor themes o f earlier books such as the Exodus, Creation, covenant, judg­ ment, and hope are present in Zechariah, but they are not dom inant Newer themes— such as the restoration o f Zion, the temple, fasting, the nations, the branch, and shepherds— recur throughout. T he question o f the relationship o f the book’s two parts also makes the search for themes more diffi­ cult. But the themes o f the book as a whole should be consid­ ered. Therefore, we will summarize the message o f Zechariah around four general motifs: (1) the former prophets and re­ pentance: a look back; (2) night visions and the new Jeru­ salem: a look above; (3) fasting or feasting: a look around and within; and (4) the nations and the Messianic Age: a lookahead. MIGAH-MALACHI

72

T h e form er prophets an d repentance: a look b ack Zechariah begins his book w ith a look back to the times o f “fathers” and the “form er prophets.” Zechariah is the only prophet to use the expression “form er prophets” (cf. 1:4; 7:7,12). However, similar expressions are found in Jerem iah 28:8, Ezekiel 38:17, and 2 Chronicles 24:19 and 3 0 :6-9. Later prophets and writers appealed to the words o f the previous prophets to authenticate and reinforce their own words and works. T he book o f Zechariah also begins w ith a command to repent (v 3). T he reason for the command to repent was that the word o f the Lord came to the prophet saying, “Yahweh raged against your fathers” (vv 1-2). The word for “rage,” often translated “very angry,” carries the idea o f “an outburst or a fit o f anger” (Isa 8:21; 2 Kings 3:27). T he form er prophets had commanded the “fathers,” R eturn to me, and I will return to you, says the Lord o f hosts. (1:3 RSV) T h e Lord had been angry w ith the fathers because o f their disobedience. H e commanded them to repent and they refused. “But they refused to listen, and gave a stubborn shoulder and their ears were heavy o f hearing. And they made their heart like a diamond from hearing the Torah and the words that Yahweh o f hosts sent by his spirit, by the hand o f the form er prophets. And there was great anger from Yahweh o f hosts.” (Zech 7:11-12) But G od does n ot keep his anger forever (Isa 57:16; Ps 30:5). God never closes the door to the person who will 73

Themes in Zechariah

“return” to him. T he invitation to return to God in repen­ tance is always open. Jesus said, “Behold I stand at the door and knock, if any one hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me” (Rev 3:20 RSV). A prophet o f the Exile said, Seek the Lord while he may be found, call upon him while he is near; Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; Let him return to the Lord that he may have mercy on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. (Isa 5 5 :6 -7 RSV) T he expression “seek the Lord while he may be found” does not mean that “it is now or never,” or that Yahweh cannot be found at any other time. It means that this is a very opportune time to seek him. Zechariah’s call for repentance uses the example o f the fathers. T h e form er prophets said to the generation before the exile, “R eturn to Yahweh and he will return to you.” But the fathers refused and judgment came. T he fathers and the prophets died. But around the feet o f Zechariah and his hearers the rubble, the ruined walls, and a “bombed-out” temple were grave reminders that G od’s word is true and endures forever. Now another prophet, Zechariah, speaks to the generation after the Exile the same message, “Return to me and I will return to you.” D . L. Petersen says, “W hat it took disaster to teach their fathers, they may learn without such punitive measures. But they do need to turn, just as their fathers finally did.”7 Peter Craigie called this passage “A n O ld Message for A New Age.” T he new day was about to dawn, but its dawning depended on the people’s turning from “their evil ways and evil deeds” MICAH-MALACHI

74

(1:4). W e cannot have a new society w ithout new people. Unless past sins and rebellion are remedied, there will be no new day. Unless the lesson o f the “fathers” is learned and put into practice, the people will go on like they are. We need to look back to our mistakes and those o f our fathers, correct them , and return to God.

Night visions and the New Jerusalem : a look above A series o f eight night visions follows the first oracle about repentance. These night visions, along w ith attached oracles to some o f them, form the core o f the first part o f the book. V ision reports are nothing new in prophetic materials. Amos, Isaiah, Jerem iah, and Ezekiel all report visions o f God or vi­ sions from God. However, these eight visions in Zechariah are reported as having occurred in a single night. D . L. Petersen defends the view that all eight visions occurred in one night, saying that there is unity and progression among the eight vision accounts.8 T here seems to be progression w ithin the series from the evening or tw ilight in vision one to the sunrise in vision eight. T he fifth vision may have happened about midnight because Zechariah seems to have been in a deep sleep (4:1) and the interpreting angel had to wake him. T he eighth vision occurred possibly at sunrise (6:1) and may imply that a new day was dawning for Judah and the world.9 Gerhard von Rad says that Zechariah regarded him self as placed exactly at the point o f a sudden, great, critical change in history. T h e Lord was coming from his temple betw een tw o mountains (6:1; cf. 2:16, 8:3, 9:1-10). T he night was far sp ent T h e day is at hand. T h e temple will be b u ilt T h e adversaries will be defeated (1:18-21). Prosperity will be­ come a reality (8:10-12). “T h e morning has com e.”10 W e m ust remember that the bringing in o f this new day will be th e w ork o f G od. Two verses in Zechariah are 75

Themes in Zechariah

especially im portant at this point: “B e silent, all flesh before th e Lord; for he has roused him self from his holy dwelling” (2:13), and “not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord o f hosts” (4:6). E. A chtem eier says the words o f 2:13 encompass the message o f Zechariah 1-8 : “T h e Lord o f hosts, the ruler o f the universe has set out on a new course o f action.”11 A ll flesh should be silent before him (see Hab 2:20; Zeph 1:7), because he is “rousing him self,” “he is preparing to act” and that action will change the course o f history. T h e second significant verse (4:6) also emphasizes that G od’s plan will n o t be achieved through m ilitary m ight or human power. Su ch power cannot bring in th e new society or a new age. O nly the Spirit o f G od can overcom e any great m ountain o f opposition (4:7). O ne great m ountain that must be removed before the kingdom o f God comes in its fullness is the mountain o f sin and uncleanness. G od removes the dirty clothes and the iniquity o f the high priest (3:4). H e will remove the guilt o f the land in one day (3:9). In vision 6 h e destroys the houses o f thieves and liars (5:1-4) and in the seventh vision he removes “wickedness” (represented by a woman in a basket) to Shinar (5:5-11). He will open a fountain for cleansing the sin o f the house o f David and inhabitants o f Jerusalem (13:1). In the eighth and final vision, four chariots came out be­ tween the two bronze mountains (6:1-3) as messengers and warriors o f God. T he colors o f the horses seem to have no special significance here. They are sent to patrol the whole earth (6:7). T hen Zechariah is told that those who went to the north country have “set my Spirit at rest” (6-8). T he horse patrol described in the first vision found the earth at rest, but that rest was a disappointment to those expecting a world upheaval that would result in the coming o f the new age. It was a rest imposed by the military powers o f this world. John Calvin called it an “accursed happiness” because the order is not God’s order, and the tranquility gained is at the expense MICAH-MALACHI

76

o f God’s people and plan. It is possible to create a false peace at home or in society, and call it good, when in reality “there is no peace” (Jer 6:14; 8:11). T he north country often represented evil in the O ld Tes­ tament because almost all invaders o f Israel came from the north, and because the dwelling place o f pagan gods was in the north. T he foe in the north is completely defeated. It is as though we are watching the last act o f a play in which all tensions and conflicts have been resolved.12 T he night vi­ sions showed Zechariah the secret o f the Power o f the uni­ verse. Like the psalmist, he looked up and said: I lift up my eyes to the hills. From whence does my help come? My help comes from the Lord, who made heaven and earth. (Ps 121:1 RSV)

Fasting or feasting: a look around and unthin A fter th e work on the temple had continued for tw o years, a delegation came to Jerusalem, probably from Bethel, to ask the priests and the prophets if they should continue “to weep and m ourn” in the fifth m onth. They had been doing so for several years (7:1-3), evidently in memory o f the destruction o f the first temple. Bu t fasting is not a major theme in the O ld Testament. There is no law o f fasting in the Torah, with the possible exception o f Leviticus 16:29. T he earliest report seems to be Judges 20:26. There are several references to fasting in the books o f Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, and Daniel. Among the prophets, Isaiah (ch 58), Jeremiah (14, 36), Joel, Jonah, and Zechariah m ention it. There are three references to fasting in the Psalms (35:13; 69:10; 109:24). M ost o f these references imply that abstinence from food, drink, work or sex may accrue m erit before God. 77

Themes in Zechariah

Zechariah’s response to the question o f the continuation o f fasting was to ask the delegation three other questions: (1) Did you fast for God or for yourselves? (2) Did you eat and drink for yourselves? (3) W hat did the former prophets say about fasting? It seems that Zechariah accused the people o f fasting or feasting for selfish motives. He implies also that the form er prophets were more interested in justice, truth, honesty, and kindness than in any ritualistic abstinence (7:710; 8:19). Fasting, in and o f itself, has no spiritual value. O nly as it provides tim e for soul searching or as it leads to a change in attitude and conduct is it o f intrinsic value. Jesus fasted forty days in the wilderness but it was not his abstinence from food that had intrinsic value. It was his clearer understand­ ing o f his messiahship that was significant in that experience. T he Pharisee lifted up his eyes and prayed," . . . I fast twice a w eek” (Luke 18:12). But it was th e publican, not the Phari­ see, who was justified. W hatever we do, we should do all for the glory o f God and n ot for selfish gain. Zechariah said the tim e would come when there would be no need to fast. “T he fast o f the fourth m onth, and the fast o f the fifth, and the fast o f the seventh, and the fast o f the tenth shall be to the house o f Judah seasons o f joy and gladness and for happy festivals; therefore love truth and peace” (8:19 RSV). But it was not feasting time yet, either. Econom ic hard­ ships, divisions, and strife among the people continued to plague the community. T he expression ‘am ha’ares, “people o f the land” may indicate that some o f the people were holding land that others claimed. Ezekiel 11:15-17 (RSV) speaks o f a struggle for title to some lands betw een those who returned from exile and those who remained behind. In another place, Zechariah describes the dire conditions in the land before the foundations o f the temple were laid. He said, “For before those days there was no wage for man

MICAH-MALACHI

78

or beast, neither was there safety from the foe for the one going out or coming in; for I set everyone against his neigh­ bor” (Zech 8:10; cf., 2 C hron 15:5). Unemployment was high. T he streets and highways were not safe. Every man was pitted against his neighbor. But soon, fasting would turn to feasting. God was rousing him self (2:17). He would not deal with the remnant as in form er days when he scattered them among the nations (8:11; 7:14). Rather than sowing their seeds in a time o f fear, the people would sow in a time o f peace, and they would reap an abundant harvest (8:12). May those who sow in tears reap w ith shouts o f joy! He that goes forth weeping, bearing the seed for sowing, shall come home with shouts o f joy, bringing his sheaves with him. (Ps 126:5-6 RSV)

T h e nations and the M essianic A ge: a look ahead M ost o f the O ld Testament makes a sharp distinction between the nations and Israel. T hat distinction is not made in Genesis 1-11. Bu t in Genesis 12 G od called Abraham out o f U r and promised him and his descendants a land. H e said they would be a blessing to the other peoples o f the world. A t Sinai, G od made a covenant w ith Israel, one branch o f Abraham’s descendants. He said to Israel: You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagle’s wings and brought you to myself. Now, therefore, if you will obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my own possession among all peoples; for all the earth is mine, and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. (Exod 19:4-6 RSV)

79

Themes in Zechariah

T h e relationships between Israel and the nations are a part o f the whole story o f the O ld Testament. However, the focus on Israel is so great that often the nations seem forgot­ ten. Israel knew she was a part o f one human race. Yahweh was the C reator and the father o f all the people o f the world.13 Som e parts o f the O ld Testament speak o f the na­ tions as enemies to be defeated (Ezek 38-39; Zech 12-14). O ther passages see them as coming to Zion to learn G od’s Law and to walk in his ways (Isa 2; M ic 4). Zechariah m entions the nations many times and echoes these thoughts. A t first, the nations were G od’s agents o f judgm ent on Israel in exile (1:2; 7:14; 8:20). B u t G od was angry w ith them because they went too far in their harsh treatm ent (1:15, 21; 12:9). G od will defend his people against the nations (1:21; 12:2, 9; 14:2, 9 ,1 2 ). Many nations will jo in themselves to the Lord and becom e his people (2:11; 8:20-23). There seems, then, to be tw o streams o f thought about the nations in Zechariah and in the O ld Testament in gen­ eral. O ne view is war-like. T he nations attack Israel and are attacked by Yahweh (Ezek 38-3 9 ; Joel 3:9 -1 7 ; Zech 12:3; 14:1-2), T h e other view is peaceful. The nations come to Zion to be blessed (Mic 4; Isa 2; 45:14; 49:22-23; 6 0:1-3; Zech 2:11; 8:20, 22-23). These two concepts stand side-byside in the O ld Testament under the umbrella o f the sover­ eignty o f God. Yahweh is sovereign over the whole earth (Zech 4:14; 12:1; 14:9). He is in control not only o f Israel’s destiny but that o f the nations as well. H. W . W olff believes that the idea o f the nations coming to Jerusalem to be blessed has its roots in the Abrahamic covenant. O ne verse in the story o f Isaac and Abim elech is very similar to Zech 8:23. Abim elech says, “We see plainly that the Lord is w ith you” (Gen 26:28; cf., Isa 45:14; Zech 8:23 RSV).14 John D . W . W atts, in his commentary on Isaiah (W BC MICAH-MALACHI

80

24), points out that Isaiah announced in the eighth century that Yahweh had changed his strategy in dealing w ith Israel and the nations. T he new strategy was that Israel’s role would no longer be that o f a Davidic world ruler. Israel and Judah were called to a passive political acceptance o f imperial rule. Jews o f the Dispersion were also to have a servant role. N ot many generations o f Jews accepted the servant’s role, however. W atts says, “T he vision [of Isaiah] traces a melan­ choly recital o f rejection for Yahweh’s strategy.”15 W atts un­ derstands that God made a sovereign decision to change the “game plan” in the mid-eighth century. He intended by it not only to punish his people but to accomplish historical goals o f his own that Israel failed to achieve. Yahweh had a vital, but different, continuing role for his people, a role more in keeping w ith the Abrahamic description than the Mosaic formulation. T he Book o f Zechariah maintains a ten­ sion betw een these tw o views. Zechariah refers not only to the nations but also to the Messiah in his look ahead. From the beginning o f Christian­ ity some passages in Zechariah have had a messianic inter­ pretation. O n the night Jesus was betrayed he said to his disciples, “You will fall away, for it is w ritten, I will smite the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered” (Zech 13:7 quoted in Mark 14:27 KVJ). F. F. Bruce says that there is “no doubt about the application o f the passage in M ark’s passion: the sm itten shepherd is Jesus. M oreover, according to M ark, it is Jesus him self who makes the identification. I have no doubt at all that M ark is right in ascribing this interpretation o f prophecy to Jesus.”16 A number o f passages from Zechariah are quoted or re­ ferred to in the New Testament as pointing toward the Messiah. Zechariah 9:9 is quoted in Matthew 21:5 and John 12:15. Zechariah 11:13 is quoted in Matthew 27:9. Zechariah 12:3 is quoted in Luke 21:24. Zechariah 12:10 in quoted in John 19:37 and Revelation 1:7. Zechariah 13:7 is quoted 81

Themes in Zechariah

in Mark 14:27. Zechariah 14:5 is similar to 1 Thessalonians 3:13. Zechariah 14:8 compares with John 7:38; and Zechariah 14:21 with John 2:16. T he evidence is overwhelming that Jesus and early Christians gave a messianic interpretation to many references in Zechariah. It is easy, however, to read too much o f the experiences o f Jesus into some passages in Zechariah. F. F. Bruce quotes w ith approval T. V. M oore’s saying that anyone who tries to interpret the “wounds between his hands” in Zech 13:6 as a prophecy o f the nail wounds in our Lord’s hands is guilty o f “the grossest misapprehension o f its meaning.” Bruce adds, “it is astonishing that so capable a Hebraist as E. B. Pusey should have been capable o f this m isinterpretation.17 Helm er Ringgren believes that one aspect o f the mes­ sianic hope in the O ld Testam ent has its roots in the role o f the king in the New Year festival. During that festival the king was anointed and proclaimed G od’s son. As time went on, the hopes expressed for the earthly king were trans­ ferred to a future king who would bring in G od’s universal reign o f peace and justice.18 Paul Lamarche finds a single messianic expectation in the portrayal o f the coming king (9:9-10), the good shepherd rejected by his people (11:4-17), Yahweh’s representative who was pierced (12:10—13:1), and the sm itten shepherd and the scattering o f the sheep (13:7-9).19 T here are at least three metaphors or figures for the “Messiah” in Zechariah: • “My servant the branch ” (3:8; 6:12); • Israel’s humble, triumphant king who will bring peace to the nations and whose dominion will reach from sea to sea to the ends o f the earth (9:9-10); and • T he good shepherd who is rejected by his own people (11:4-17; 13:1-9).

MICAH-MALACHI

82

T he precise interpretation o f these figures is debatable, and the reader should consult the larger commentaries for a thorough discussion o f possible views. A growing number o f scholars, however, interpret these figures messianically. D . L. Petersen notes that Joshua the high priest was told that Yahweh was bringing an individual, “my servant,” a branch who would bring cleansing to the land in one day. T he term “branch” is used to describe Jerusalem in Ezekiel 16:7. A future ruler o f the line o f David is called “branch” (Isa 11:1; Jer 23:5; 33:14-16; Zech 3:8; Elizabeth Achtemeier says that in the passage about the crowns (6:9-15) Joshua only stands in for the coming “branch.” The crowns are removed from Joshua’s head and set aside to be placed in the new temple as a reminder o f the coming messianic age. They remained in that temple through four long centuries until he whose right it was (Ezek 21:27) came. But as it turned out the crowns o f silver and gold (6:11) became a crown o f thorns. Jesus was crucified as the “King of the Jews” (Matt 27:28; Mark 15:26). Pilate recognized that he was Israel’s long-awaited king (John 19:19-22). A fter the res­ urrection, his followers recognized that the crucified one had been exalted as the Messiah (Acts 2:36). He rebuilt the temple in three days. E. Achtemeier says that although Zerubbabel’s temple has been destroyed, the crown that Joshua deposited in it has endured. In some Christian churches, the cross and the crown are made together “as a sign o f the fact that the crown now rests on the head o f Jesus C hrist.”21

83

Themes in Zechariah

8

THEMES IN MALACHI

Behold, I am sending my messenger and he will clear the way before me. A nd suddenly he will come to his temple, the Lord whom you are seeking. (3:1) Introduction “M alachi is like a late evening w hich brings a long day to a close,” F. W. Farrar says, “but he is also like a m orning dawn w hich brings w ith it the promise o f a new and more glorious day.”1 T h e book o f M alachi stands last in the M inor Prophets and in th e prophetical canon o f th e Hebrew and Protestant Bibles. T h e Jews called it “the seal o f the Prophets” and “th e last o f them .” Tertullian considered it a link betw een th e old and new dispensations, “the skirt and boundary o f C hristianity.” In one way, we know little about the person called “M alachi.” There is no consensus among scholars as to MICAH-MALACHI

84

whether M alachi, “my messenger,” was the writer’s name or his title. No other person in the O ld Testament is called Malachi. We do not know his date, his occupation, (other than that he was a prophet), or his ancestry. But in another way, we know him well “for there breaks through his writing,” as Mason puts it, “deep faith and intense pastoral concern.”2 W e may learn more about the intimate workings o f Malachi’s heart and mind by reading his book than we can learn about any other prophet, except Jeremiah. Jerem iah bares his soul before God and his people. W e can observe the turm oil o f his inner being in his confessions and accusa­ tions. M uch the same is true w ith Malachi. His “deep faith” is seen in his conviction that G od does not change (3:6), that he still loves his people (1:1-5), and that there is hope for those who fear God and “return to him ” (3:7; 4:2-3). Malachi’s “intense pastoral concern” is evidenced by the fact that he speaks about personal and religious matters. He is concerned w ith the priesthood, temple, sacrifices, and the way Yahweh should be worshiped. He is concerned about idolatry (2:11), divorce (3:16), skepticism (2:17), failure to tithe (3:8), sorcery, adultery, and the oppression o f the poor, widows, and orphans (3:5). M alachi saw the need for institutionalized religion, but he also saw that those institutions can and do pose a constant threat to the life of the spirit. Contrary to popular opinion, M alachi was no narrow nationalist or exclusivist. Malachi had a world vision o f the kingdom o f G od (1:11, 14). He knew G od’s name would be feared in all nations. H e knew membership in the kingdom was not a m atter o f birth or ancestry but a matter o f fearing G od’s name and having one’s own name w ritten in the book o f remembrance (3:16). R ex Mason has said that at a time when the community needed to establish its own identity, the prophets o f the restoration (Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi) all kept “an openness toward God’s purpose for people o f other nations.”3 85

Themes in Malachi

Elizabeth A chtem eier asserts that M alachi 1:11 and 14 speak o f a universal kingdom. She says that these verses do not refer to the worship o f dispersed Jews or pagans but “to the purpose that underlies every prophetic book: T he future establishm ent o f the kingship o f G od over all the earth.”4 W e can only estimate the date o f Malachi. No dates are m entioned in the book., Its position o f being last in the prophetic canon suggests that it is late and postexilic. T h e strong emphasis on priestly matters and the absence o f any reference to any Israelite king also point to a late date. T h e im portance o f the Persian governor (1:8) indicates a date in the Persian period (538-333 B.C.). There is a kinship between the book o f M alachi and that o f Nehemiah. T h e same social and religious conditions prevail in both. Tithing is stressed in both (Mal 3 :7 -1 0 ; Neh 10:37-39). Divorce and mixed marriage were a problem in both (Mal 2:10-16; Neh 10:30; 13:22—29). I have noted elsewhere that the book o f M alachi fits the situation in w hich Nehemiah worked “as snugly as a bone fits in its socket.”5 Nehemiah came to Jerusalem for the first time in 444 B.C. A date from 4 5 0 425 B.C. is likely for the time o f Malachi. T h e literary structure and style o f the book o f M alachi is different from other books o f O ld Testament prophets. T he book is made up almost entirely o f dialogues or disputations. Six almost independent sections follow essentially the same format: • First, a charge is made against the people or priests; • Second, the people or priests question or challenge the charge; and • Third, th e prophet recites evidence to support his charge. O ne w riter seems to be shaping the speeches o f all the participants in one vocabulary and style. O ther O ld MICAH-MALACHI

86

Testam ent w riters include dialogue and disputations in their works (Job, M ic 2 :6 -1 1 , Isa 28:23-29; Jer 2 :23-37; 3:1-5), but no other O ld Testam ent book consists entirely o f this literary form . In recent years, some conservative scholars have denied that the words put in the m outh o f Malachi’s opponents were ones they actually spoke in public. Joyce Baldwin says, “M alachi reads the attitudes o f his people and intuitively puts their thoughts into words.”6 Charles Isbell says that the author tried to anticipate the major question or objection that an opening abrasive decla­ ration would raise in the minds o f the hearers or readers. O n the basis o f this anticipation, he then posed the question that he believed his readers or audience would raise. Isbell continues: However, though the question or objection was actually raised by the author, it was attributed to the audience. In this way it appeared that a dialogue was developing between the speaker and the audience, when in actual fact only one speaker was involved, and he alone was responsible for both points o f view.7 T his scenario o f the way the speeches in M alachi origi­ nated seems too “cut and dried.” Pieter V erhoef is probably closest to the truth when he says: W hether the dialogues reflected the actual responses o f M alachi’s opponents is uncertain. It seems unlikely that they would have reacted in the precise term s o f the dialogue. . . . O n the other hand we may assume a certain reality in the minds and acts o f the addressees that would correspond w ith the words that were put into their mouths.8 87

Themes in M alachi

Elizabeth Achtem eier has an interesting explanation for the disputational form o f the book. She begins with a passage in Deuteronomy 17:8-13 which says that legal cases too diffi­ cult for local law courts to decide should be brought before the Levitical priests in the Jerusalem temple. T he book o f Malachi, then, is in the form o f one o f these court cases that has been moved from the village to the capital and tried be­ fore the priests in the temple, with the prophet playing the role o f the priests. The questions found in the book are not hurled at the prophet on the street, in some Socratic setting, and they are not scholastic questions characteristic o f the scribes. “Rather,” she says, “they are questions asked in a court o f law.”9 T h e proposals for the com position o f M alachi are many and continue to multiply. Fortunately, the ability to grasp the meaning and message o f the book does not depend on solving all literary and historical problems surrounding it. O ne o f the prophet’s chief concerns was to reassure his people that God still loved them. M alachi lived in a time o f despondency and depression. T h e high hopes o f the re­ turnees from Babylon were dashed on the hard rocks o f droughts, disappointments, and doubts. M alachi faced a wall o f apathy and indifference. Peter C raigie says, “He (Malachi) spoke o f faith to a people for whom religion had become humdrum and who were lackadaisical in their observance o f the ancient traditions.”10 M alachi faced the problems o f poverty, oppression, and unfaithfulness to marriage and covenant vows. M oral and spiritual laxity, pride, indifference, permissiveness, and skepticism were rife. M alachi tried to rekindle the fires o f faith in the hearts o f his discouraged people. Already the priests controlled the tem ple and the religious life o f the people. They had consolidated their authority to the point that they were arrogant and covetous. Su ch abuse o f power led to neglect o f proper institutional worship, personal MICAH-MALACHI

88

respect, and honor for G od and his laws. G iven th e plight o f the people and the position o f M alachi, several m ajor them es are discernible in his book w hich m ight help his people to “return.” These include: (1) G od’s covenant love, (2) Israel’s filial failure, (3) priestly malfeasance, (4) skeptical “believers,” (5) G od’s coming messenger, (6) robbers o f G od, and (7) trial by fire.

God's covenant love Perhaps the word that stands as the first word in M alachi— “G od loves you”— is the word Israel needed m ost to hear. In a tim e o f doubt, disappointment, and depression Israel needed reassurance that, in spite o f their failures and the lack o f spiritual and material blessings, they were still the people o f God. T he fact that God loves the world and that he chose Israel to be his servant is not expressed often in the O ld Testament. T h e word “love” is a covenant word. It is also an election word. God chose Israel because he loved her (Deut 7:7-8) and her fathers (Deut 4:37; 10:15). God made a covenant w ith Israel at Sinai and promised to love her, bless her, and multiply her (Deut 7:13). Love is a domestic term . It describes the lover’s attitude toward his beloved, the father’s toward his child, and a friend’s toward his closest compan­ ion. Love has in it the ideas o f intensity, totality, interiority, and bondedness. T h e amazing thing about G od’s love for M alachi and his hearers was its persistence. G od’s love had spanned the breaches o f all ten commandments. It survived the Babylo­ nian Exile. T he blessings o f covenant faithfulness were w ith­ drawn because o f the people’s unfaithfulness, but G od’s love was still in effect. T h e term “covenant” occurs six tim es in M alachi. T h e covenant o f Levi is m entioned three tim es (2:4, 5, 8). T h e covenant w ith th e fathers is cited in M alachi 2:10, and

89

Themes in M alachi

the covenant o f marriage is m entioned in M alachi 2:14. T h e messenger o f th e covenant is referred to in M alachi 3:1. In addition to these six uses o f the term “covenant,” M alachi uses other term s often associated w ith the covenant rela­ tionship. T h e word “hate” in M alachi 1:3 should be under­ stood as covenant language. W h en Yahweh says, “I loved Jacob,” he means, “I chose Jacob”; and when he says, “I hated Esau,” he means, “I did n ot choose Esau.”11 T h e word arur, “curse,” in M alachi 1:14 and 2:2 is a covenant word. So is the word for “G reat King” in M alachi 1:14. M alachi believed that G od was sovereign as “th e G reat King,” and G od had made a covenant w ith the “fathers” and w ith Levi. T hose covenants were still in effect, even after the Exile. A nother covenant word in M alachi is sequllah “special treasure” in M alachi 3:7. It occurs elsewhere in the O ld Testament at the inauguration o f the Sinai covenant (Exod 19:5) and in Deuteronomy 7:6; 14:2; 26:18 and Psalm 135:4. T he idea is that all the earth belongs to God, but those who fear him and revere his name will be his own special posses­ sion. A n Akkadian equivalent o f this term has been found in some old near Eastern texts o f covenant-grant treaties.12 T his indicates that the idea o f “special treasure” is very old. So M alachi began his dialogue by establishing the basic tenet o f Israel’s faith— that God still loved her. But that love had some curses attached to it as the price o f failure to keep the covenant.

Israel’s filial failure A n axiom in the ancient Near Eastern world, including Israel, was: A son honors his father and a servant fears his lord. (1:6) MICAH-MALACHI

90

O ne of the Ten Commandments says “honor your father and your mother” (Exod 20:12; Deut 5:16 RSV). The com­ mandment is stated in one place, “Every one of you shall revere his mother and his father” (Lev 19:3). In a time when the extended family was large and the members lived in close proximity to each other, it was important to have a respected leader for the family. One of the laws in the covenant code said, “W hoever strikes his father or his mother shall be put to death” (Exod 21:15 RSV). In Deuteronomy 27:16, a son is cursed who dishonors his father or mother; and in Deuteron­ omy 21:18-21 a stubborn, rebellious, disobedient son is to be stoned. Israel is called God’s son in Exodus 4:22 and Hosea 11:1. The people of Israel are frequently called God’s children (Deut 3 2 :5,8; Hos 1:10; Isa 1:2,4; Jer 3:14,22; Isa 63:8-10). The kings of the line of David were referred to as the adopted sons of God (2 Sam 7:14; Ps 2:7). Israel, as the “son o f God,” was to show the same respect and honor toward him as an earthly son was to show toward his human father. But Israel had failed to show that respect. The people despised God’s name (1:6). They offered polluted bread on the altar of the temple. They used blind, sick, lame animals for sacrifices. Priests “sniffed” at God’s requirement and were weary and bored with worship (1:13 RSV). People made vows and did not keep them (1:14; 2:14). They practiced sorcery, committed adultery, oppressed the poor and disadvantaged, and did not fear the Lord (3:5). Israel failed miserably as a son. The people did not honor God as Father. They did not “fear” or respect him as the Master and Lord of a servant. They did not offer him accept­ able worship and allegiance.

Priestly m alfeasance “Malfeasance” is a modem word but it describes an an­ cient as well as a modem act. W ebster defines the term as

91

Themes in M alachi

“wrongdoing or misconduct, especially in handling public affairs.” T he adjective “malfeasant” can mean “criminal.” Malfeasance often occurs after a long period o f time elapses during which one person or group gains almost absolute power in office. There is some evidence that the priesthood in Jerusalem became unusually corrupt during the latter days of the O ld Testament and intertestamental period. Perhaps that corruption and abuse o f power was beginning in Malachi’s time. This was especially unfortunate because Israel’s priests were primarily responsible for bringing the knowledge of God to the people (2:4-7). They were to instruct truthfully the people in the Torah, or teaching o f God. They were to guide and counsel people in right living. They were to fear God and walk in his ways (2:4-7). No higher estimation o f the priest­ hood is found in the Old Testament. But the priests turned aside from walking with God in the way; and when they did, they caused many to stumble (2:8). Hosea blamed the priests for his people’s lack o f knowledge o f G od (Hos 4:4) and said that the punishment would be the same— “like people, like priests” (Hos 4:9 RSV). Malachi traces the trouble to the priests’ failure to walk in the ways o f God. They regarded worship as having little importance. They deemed the whole sacrificial system as a mechanical routine and deemed their role a tiresome duty. T h e “walking w ith G od” is m ore than a physical exer­ cise. It suggests going the same way that G od is going. It means agreeing w ith him, enjoying true fellowship w ith him , and worshiping him. T he priests in M alachi’s tim e no longer walked w ith G od. Therefore, the honor and rever­ ence due him were missing. T h eir hearts were corrupted (2:2), and they forfeited their right to be priests. G od said, “So I will make you despised and abased before all the people” (2:9 RSV). These words should remind us o f the awesome responsibility o f people in God-given roles o f leadership in the church. MICAH-MALACHI

92

Skeptical “ believers” Perhaps the priests’ failure to walk w ith God and their nonchalant attitude toward their office led some people into agnosticism or skepticism. Skepticism led some Israelites into idolatry (2:11). They divorced the wives o f their youth and married foreign women (2:11,14). They questioned the justice o f God saying, “Everyone who does evil is good in the sight o f God, and he delights in them ” (2:17 RSV). They said, “It is vain to serve God . . . we deem the arrogant blessed; evil doers not only prosper but when they put G od to the test they escape” (3:14-15 RSV). Skepticism was natural to Israel’s religion and is found in some early O ld Testament passages. James L. Crenshaw says, “Skepticism belongs to Israel’s thought from early tim es,” and it is “intrinsic to biblical thinking rather than an intrader who took Israel by surprise.”13 Abraham questioned G od’s justice when he asked, “W ilt thou indeed destroy the righteous w ith the wicked?” (Gen 18:23 RSV) and “Shall not the Judge o f all the earth do right?” (Gen 18:25 RSV). Gideon asked the angel o f the Lord, “Pray sir, if the Lord is w ith us, why then has all this befallen us? And where are all his wonderful deeds which our fathers recounted to us?” (Judg 6:13 RSV). T he psalmist said, “T he fool hath said in his heart, ‘There is no G od’” (Ps 14:1; 53:1 n k jv ). Isaiah knew some skeptics in his time. W oe to those who call evil good and good evil, W h o put darkness for light and light for darkness W h o put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isa 5:20 RSV; cf., 32:5-8) Zephaniah accused his contem poraries o f thinking that “the Lord will not do good, nor will he do evil” (Zeph 1:12). Skepticism is voiced throughout the O ld Testament, so it 93

Themes in M alachi

should n ot seem surprising when M alachi addressed a group o f skeptics in his day. Skepticism grows out o f doubt, and doubt grows out o f disappointment. T he expectations for the coming o f the kingdom were high when the first group o f Jews returned from Babylonian captivity. And when the temple was re­ built, hopes were at their highest that the future o f Israel was imminent. Bu t promises o f glory and grandeur faded as years and decades passed w ithout fulfillm ent. D oubt and disap­ pointm ent slipped into skepticism. No wonder some people were saying, “Everyone who does evil is good in the sight o f the Lord, and he delights in them ” (Mal 2:17 RSV). Skepticism is not necessarily bad. Crenshaw distinguishes between skepticism, pessimism, and cynicism. He believes that skepticism includes both a denial and an affirmation. T he negative side o f a skeptic’s mental outlook consists o f doubting thought, but the fact that the skeptic questions a basic belief or affirmation indicates that it is “inappropriate to accuse skeptics o f unbelief.”14 Crenshaw asserts that the ma­ trix formed by the disparity between the actual state o f affairs and a vision of what should be sharpened critical powers and heightened religious fervor. “D oubt, it follows, is grounded in profound faith.”15 Malachi told those “skeptical believers” that the Lord was coming, and he would separate the gold from the dross. He would reward the righteous and destroy the wicked (3:2-3; 3:18-4:3).

God’s com ing m essenger G od’s response to the skeptic’s claim— that he no longer distinguished between good and evil, and that his promised coming was groundless— was that his coming was imminent and sure. G od’s coming would be preceded by a messenger who would prepare the way before him (Mal 3:1). In ancient times, a “forerunner” would go before the king’s carriage to MICAH-MALACHI

94

remove impediments and to make the ride o f the king as smooth as possible. Malachi’s statem ent probably rests on the prophecy in Isaiah 4 0 :3 -5 that one would prepare the way for the coming o f the Lord. T he importance o f this passage is underscored by the use o f the word, “behold” two times in 3:1. T he prophet resorts to irony in 3:1 when he suggests that the people “delight” in the messenger and are “seeking” the Lord. T hen he asks, “W ho can endure the day o f his coming and who can stand when he appears?” (3:2). It is not quite clear who the messen­ ger was. Som e scholars have identified the messenger with Malachi, Elijah, Nehemiah or the angel o f the Lord. T he New Testament interprets the messenger as John the Baptist (M att 11:10; M ark 1:2; Luke 7:27). Although Yahweh’s coming to the temple was to be pre­ ceded by a forerunner, his coming was to be sudden, not immediately necessarily, but at a tim e when it was not ex­ pected. Yahweh would come to the temple in judgment first. T he priests, sons o f Levi, would be purified. Cleansing must begin at the source o f the pollution. M alachi had blamed the priests for m ost o f Israel’s spiritual problems. God would sit as a refiner and act as a laundry man using “fullers’ “soap (3:2). A fter the spiritual leaders were cleansed, the people would be judged. Evidently the m ost common and serious sins o f Malachi’s time were sorcery, adultery, lying, and op­ pression. A ll o f these sins were grounded in a failure to fear G od (3:5). W here the skeptics claimed that G od was pleased w ith evildoers, the opposite was true. W hen he came, he would judge the evildoers.

Robbers of God T h e charges against the people were not all included in M alachi 3:4. T he charge in 3:7 is spiritual blindness. They were blind to their sins. They did n ot see any need to repent 95

Themes in M alachi

or return to God (3:7). T heir conscience was dulled by their long history o f disobedience (3:7). They asked, “How or why should we repent?” F. B . Huey says the question should not be interpreted as a sincere desire to come back to God. T h e question implies, “why should we return?” or “how can we return if we haven’t been away?” They were oblivious to any sense o f wrongdoing.16 O ne area in which Israel was unaware that she needed to repent was in the area o f tithing. Tithing was .not listed as one o f the Ten Commandments. There were obviously long periods in Israel’s history when she fa iled to tithe. There is evidence that tithing was not being practiced at this time (Neh 10:30 and 13:23-29). Perhaps the Jews o f this period did not think they could afford to tithe or that tithing was n ot im portant enough to worry about it. B u t Malachi shocked his hearers by saying that a failure to tithe was tantam ount to “robbing G od.” Stealing from another human was prohibited in one o f th e Ten Commandments. Now th e prophet is accusing his people o f robbing God. Failure to tithe was a measurable act o f disobedience. M alachi indicates that th e people’s fail­ ure to tithe was the reason for curses on the land: G od w ithholding rain and sending th e plague o f insects that were destroying crops (3:11). W h at is th e relationship be­ tw een people’s failure to obey and keep the covenant and G od’s failure to send covenant blessings? Leviticus 26 and D euteronom y 28 list a great many curses and blessings for those who break or keep the covenant. T his may be what is involved here. M alachi says, “H ere is one area in w hich you have disobeyed. You have robbed God. Now, bring all the tithes into the storehouse and see that I w ill pour you out a blessing until nothing is lacking” (3:10). We should be cautious in our interpretation o f this passage on tithing in Malachi. We should note first that the passage is not primarily about tithing but about the need to repent and MICAH-MALACHI

96

return to God. W ithholding the tithe is just one example o f an act o f disobedience that calls for repentance. Again, this passage is about a testing o f God. Though we are not to test God (Deut 6:16; M att 4:7), God on this occasion is willing to allow Israel to test him to prove to themselves and the world that he still loves them and is keeping his covenant. But this “is not a tit-for-tat arrangement, not a vending machine concept o f God, not a bargain by which Judah makes an in­ vestment and receives a reward,” Achtem eier says.17 Tithing alone is no guarantee that material blessing will fall from heaven. Amos said that if his people brought their tithes ev­ ery three days, rather than every three years, and their lives were filled with rebellion against God, he would not bless them (Amos 4:4-5). Blessings and repentance go hand-inhand. In the Bible, religion and ethics, worship and morality, are inseparable. God in the O ld Testament requires his true worshipers to have clean hands and pure hearts (Ps 24:4). In the New Testament, James says, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world” (James 1:27 RSV). Worship and morality sup­ port one another.

Trial by fire Malachi complained o f a blurring o f moral and theological values in his day. Many people could not or did not distin­ guish between the righteous and the wicked. Community val­ ues had been totally reversed. T he arrogant were blessed and the wicked seemed to prosper. People tested God and escaped any punishm ent (3:15). For his response to this reversal o f values, Malachi moved from the present “here and now” to the “not yet” and ultimately to the “coming day” (4:1). A society may decide to abandon any distinction between good and evil, but God never does. He hears those who fear his 97

Themes in M alachi

name and writes their name in his book o f remembrance (3:16), and he will spare them when he acts, as a man spares his son who serves him (3:17). T hen the scene shifts from the God who records human acts to the God who comes to judge the world. Those who have embraced evil will be burned as stubble, leaving them w ithout root and branch (4:1). Bu t those who fear his name will greet the coming day as the dawn. G od will arise with the brightness o f the sun in a world that has lived in dark­ ness. Like calves frolicking on an early spring morning, so G od’s faithful will rejoice (4:2). M alachi was not primarily concerned with the future. He was disturbed about the conditions “here and now.” There seemed to be no present solution to all o f the problems that faced him and his people. But he did not give up hope or faith in the promises o f God. H e believed that there was a difference betw een good and evil, between the righteous and the wicked; and he believed that one day God would come to judge the wicked and reward the righteous. Malachi was not teaching a doctrine o f salvation by works. Those who would be spared would be spared because they “feared” G od’s name. Those who perished would perish because they despised his name. T he book o f Malachi closes with tw o admonitions: (1) R e­ member the law o f Moses; and (2) behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day o f the Lord comes. T he law o f Moses, as interpreted in the New Testament, remains in effect for Christians. Elijah has come in the person o f John the Baptist (Matt 11:10). Malachi said that the new Elijah would turn the hearts o f fathers and children to each other and toward God. T he expression “turn the heart” is a graphic way o f saying they will repent and be reconciled to each other and to God. M alachi indicates that a failure to repent will result in a curse (Mal 4:6). Jesus came preaching repentance for the MICAH-MALACHI

98

kingdom o f G od was at hand. W h en th e people did not repent he upbraided them (M att 11:20). A ll are under a curse because all have sinned. Jesus bore the curse for all who will repent and tu rn to him in faith for redemption. Paul said, “C hrist redeemed us from the curse o f the law, having becom e a curse for us— for it is w ritten ‘Cursed be everyone who hangs on a tree’— that in C hrist Jesus the blessing o f Abraham m ight com e upon th e G entiles, that we m ight receive the promise o f the Spirit through faith” (Gal 3 :1 3 -1 4 RSV).

V

99

Themes in M alachi

9

THEOLOGICAL REFLECTIONS ON MICAH-MALACHI

James Barr, writing recently in Brevard Childs’s Festschrift, called attention again to the crisis in biblical theology.1 Barr agreed that biblical theology is in crisis, but not because its productivity has come to a halt. In fact, articles, essays, and monographs on themes relating to biblical theology have con­ tinued unabated since Childs’s Biblical Theology in Crisis was published in 1970. T he crisis, according to Barr, lay not in the cessation o f its activities but “in its loss o f status, its loss o f prestige, the loss o f its power to persuade.”2 O ne o f the difficulties with the very idea o f biblical theol­ ogy is the difficulty o f its definition. Theology means “the study o f G od,” but Barr says the study o f God should not be lim ited to a study o f the Bible. Theology or “the study o f G od” should include the study o f history, philosophy, psy­ chology, the natural world as well as a study o f the Bible. “Biblical theology” for some was not really theology at all because it limited its study to the biblical materials and be­ cause it simply attempted to organize the biblical materials in a descriptive way. For most systematic theologians theology MICAH-MALACHI

100

is a m odem critical construct and “a refining o f our concepts o f God in C hrist and in the church.”3 T his chapter is not theology as Barr understands the term . It may not even be biblical theology in the common understanding o f that term. It is an attempt to identify and organize the theological concepts in these seven books and to reflect on their significance then and now. Is this a legitimate exercise? Is there enough unity w ithin these books to talk about their “theological concepts”? Per­ haps we should not be surprised if we find differing con­ cepts in these seven books because they span a period o f about three hundred years (725-425 B.C .) including the pe­ riod o f the Babylonian exile. T h e following chart shows the probable dates and chronology o f these seven prophets M icah Nahum Zephaniah Habakkuk Babylonian Exile Haggai Zechariah Malachi

725-700 B.C. 626 b .c . 626 b .c . 605 b .c . 586-536 b .c .* 520 b .c . 520-518 b .c . 425 b .c .

T he first four o f these prophets lived before the fall o f Jerusalem. They warned their people o f coming judgment because o f their sins. Haggai and Zechariah were among the first postexilic prophets. They were concerned with the restoration o f the temple, the cleansing o f the land, and with bringing in the kingdom o f God. M alachi lived a hundred years after the Babylonian Exile. By that time efforts to re­ store the former glory o f the temple and the kingdom o f Israel had failed miserably. Even though the first and the last o f these prophets (Micah * Jerusalem fell in 586; in 536 the first group from Exile returned to the Jerusalem region.

101

Theological Reflections on M icah-M alachi

and Malachi) were separated by three hundred years and each prophet came from a different background and addressed his own unique situation, there is an underlying unity to their theological concepts. It is true that some o f them are more concerned with cultic matters (Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi) than others. Zechariah may have a tinge o f apocalyp­ tic in his writing and thinking. Nahum is primarily concerned with Assyria, a foreign nation; Micah stresses the need for social justice and emphasizes the great saving acts o f God (Mic 6:3-5). But basically all o f these prophets have the same theol­ ogy. Some common concepts that unite them are: (1) they are theocentric in their thinking and in their writing; (2) they all believed that societies and individuals bring judgment on themselves; and (3) they all believed that righteousness and peace ultimately will prevail.

Theocentric in thinking and writing G od is central in all seven o f these books o f prophecy. Each book begins and ends w ith either a word from God, a word about God, or a word addressed to God. T he same name, Yahweh, is used for God in all seven books. It occurs 280 times in 38 chapters. T he more general term Elohim is used for G od 38 times. G od’s name was continually on the lips o f these prophets. These prophets thought o f God as a person. He had a personal name. They did not use some general, abstract term such as “deity,” “the divine,” “the ground o f all being,” “the value-creating process,” or the “object o f ultimate concern” to refer to God. They used a particular specific name, Yahweh, because he was the one who had brought them out o f the land o f Egypt, out o f the house o f bondage (Mic 6 :4-5; Hag 2:5). They spoke o f Yahweh in personal terms. They believed that God spoke to them (Mic 5:10; 6:1; Nah 1:12; Hab 2:2; Zeph 1:3; Hag 1 :3 ,5 ,7 ,9 ; Zech 1:4; 2:6; 7:8; 8:2; Mal 1:2). He MICAH-MALACHI

102

came down and walked on the high places o f the earth (Mic 1:3). He was a God who made ultimate decisions (Zech 3:8). He chose some people and things (Hag 2:23; Zech 1:17; 2:12; 3:2) and did not choose others (Mal 1:3). He loves (Zeph 3:17; Mal 1:2) and is gracious and compassionate (Mic 7:19; Zech 1:13). He is faithful (Mic 7:20), righteous (Zeph 3:5), and good (Nahum 1:7). N ot only is the God o f these prophets loving, compassion­ ate, and faithful but he is also holy (Hab 1:12; 2:20; 3:3; Zech 2:13). Because he is holy, he cannot clear the guilty or look on wrong (Nah 1:3; Hab 1:13). His wrath and anger are aroused by sins o f idolatry, oppression o f the poor, lying, deceit, and violence (Mic 6:10-13; Nah 1:3-6; Zeph 1:17-18; 3:8b). A ll seven o f these prophets seemed to assume Yahweh’s sovereignty over nature, nations, and other powers divine and demonic. There are two explicit references in this mate­ rial to Yahweh as Creator: “T he word o f Yahweh concerning Israel . . . the O ne stretching out the heavens, and estab­ lishing the earth, and forming the spirit o f man w ithin him ” (Zech 12:1); and Is there not one father for all o f us? Did not one G od create us? (Mal 2:10) Yahweh is able to control the harvests (Mic 6:15; Hag 1:6, 10-11). He and not the diviners gives the rain. A sk from Yahweh rain in the time o f the spring rain! Yahweh is the one making the thunder clouds and gives to them heavy rain, and to each plant in the field. (Zech 10:1) He can open the windows o f heaven and rebuke the in­ sects that devour (Mal. 3:10). His way is in the whirlwind

103

Theological Reflections on M icah-M alachi

and the storm and the clouds are the dust o f his feet. He rebukes the sea and makes it dry (Nah 1:3-5). H e controls the plague and pestilence, the mountains and hills, the rivers and seas, and the sun and the m oon(H ab 3:5—11). H e shakes the heavens (Hag 2:6 ,2 1 ). He makes the earth desolate (Mic 7:13; Nah 2:10). He sweeps away everything on the earth like a flood and fire (Zeph 1:2—3). He is king o f Israel and the world (M ic 2:13; 4:7; Zeph 3:15; Zech 14:16). M icah calls Yahweh the “lord o f all the earth” (Mic 4:13). N ot only is Yahweh recognized as the lord o f nature, but he is seen as the lord o f all nations by these prophets. Perhaps all nations do not yet recognize his sovereignty but they will. Because the earth shall be full o f the knowledge o f the glory o f Yahweh, as waters cover the sea. (Hab 2:14) But Yahweh is in his holy temple. Hush before him, all the earth. (Hab 2:20) Hush, all flesh before Yahweh, because he is rousing him self from his holy dwelling-place. (Zech 2:13) Sometimes Yahweh’s sovereignty over the nations is seen in his use o f them to punish Israel (Mic 1:5; Hab 1:5-6, 12; Zech 14:1). A t other times G od shows his sovereignty over nations by bringing judgment on them (Mic 4 :11-13; 5 :6 ,1 5 ; 7 :1 0 ,1 6 -1 7 ; Nah 1 :8,14; 2:13; 3 :5 -7 ; Hab 2:15-17; Zeph 2:5, 13; 3:8; Hag 2:6; 21-22; Zech 1:15; 14:3). Sometimes the nations are described as coming to Jeru­ salem to be taught God’s Law. They will see the redemptive acts o f God for Israel (Mic 7:16) and be ashamed o f all their might. They will be humbled and perhaps humiliated. In an obvious recollection o f Genesis 3:14 the nations “will lick dust as the serpent, like the crawling things o f the earth.”

MICAH-MALACHI

104

They will come trembling from their dungeons and turn in dread and fear “to Yahweh our G od” (Mic 7:17). T his sub­ servient role given to the nations reminds us o f other O ld Testament passages where the nations become servants and slaves o f Israel (Josh 10:21; Isa 60:10-16; 61:5-7). Occasionally the nations are seen as being converted and brought into the kingdom o f God. M icah spoke o f a time when the mountain of the house o f the Lord would be lifted up above other mountains and many nations would flow in and be taught God’s ways and they would walk in his paths (Mic 4:1-4). Zephaniah referred to a time when Yahweh would change the speech o f the peoples to a pure speech so that “all o f them [will call] on the name o f Yahweh, to serve him with one shoulder” (Zeph 3:9). Zechariah said, “and many nations shall join themselves to Yahweh in that day. And they shall become my people” (Zech 2:11; cf., 8:20-23). Zechariah 9 :6 -7 speaks about a time when a half-breed people living in Ashdod will be cleansed and become like a clan in Judah, and Ekron like the Jebusites will become a part o f Jerusalem. W hen Israel’s new king comes into Jerusalem rid­ ing on a donkey, the implements o f war will be cut o ff and “he will speak peace to the nations, and he will rule from sea to sea and from the river to the ends o f the earth” (Zech 9:9-10). T his passage, unlike Psalm 72:9 and M icah 7:17, says nothing about the nations “licking the dust.”4 Malachi 1:11,14 antici­ pates a time when the name o f Yahweh will be great from the rising o f the sun to its setting. Zechariah 14:16 says that everyone in the nations that survive (the judgment) will go up to Jerusalem year after year to worship the king, the Lord o f hosts, and keep the feasts o f booths. None o f these seven prophets rises to the height o f theo­ logical expression attained by other o f the O ld Testament prophets. Isaiah 19:23-25 (RSV) sees an equality between Israel, Egypt and Assyria.

105

Theological Reflections on M icah-M alachi

In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrian will come into Egypt, and the Egyptian into Assyria, and the Egyptians will worship w ith the Assyrians. In that day Israel will be the third w ith Egypt and Assyria, a blessing in the midst o f the earth, whom the Lord o f hosts has blessed, saying, “Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work o f my hands, and Israel my heritage.” Isaiah 40-55 speaks o f Israel’s role toward other peoples as that o f a “light to the nations” and that o f a suffering servant. G od’s sovereignty in the O ld Testam ent includes nature, nations, and other cosmic powers (idols, gods, Satan, and cosmic forces represented by waters and sea monsters). Sur­ prisingly, idolatry seems to have been a serious problem in Judah immediately before the fall o f Jerusalem. Even though idolatry was prevalent, these prophets knew that idols had no real power or reality (see M ic 1:7; 5 :13-14; Nah 1:14; Hab 2 :18-19; Zeph 1:4-5; Zech 10:2). There is one interesting reference to Yahweh’s power over other “gods” in Zephaniah 2:11. Yahweh . . . weakened all the gods o f the earth and every man wall worship him from his place among the island o f the nations.” A comparison o f the translation o f this verse in the major English versions reveals a lot o f uncertainty about its precise meaning. John D . W. Watts comments that “the subduing o f the gods will lead to all men worshipping the Lord.” W atts notes also that the word translated “islands” or “coasts” can mean “jackals,” “ghosts,” or “demons” thought o f as inhabiting old ruins. “A major part o f God’s victory is over gods and demons (cf., Ps 82). Jesus* mastery o f the demons was understood as a sign that ‘the kingdom o f God had already com e.’”5 This passage in Zephaniah does not necessarily authenticate the MICAH-MALACHI

106

existence o f other gods, but it does present Yahweh’s claim to sole power in a language universally understood.6 “T he satan” appears in Zechariah 3 :1 -2 as an accuser o f Joshua because he was clothed in filthy garments. Joshua was the high priest in Judah and his filthy garments disqualified him from serving as priest before the Lord. “The satan” ap­ pears to be a member o f the heavenly council and is rebuked by Yahweh. Yahweh is sovereign over all members (angels) o f his heavenly council here just as he is in Job 1-2. T he role o f Satan in the O ld Testament is the subject o f much current debate. A growing amount o f literature is available on the su b ject7 Although many issues about Satan in the O ld Testa­ m ent are still being debated, it is clear that this passage in Zechariah presents Satan as a celestial figure who accuses Joshua before Yahweh and the heavenly council and who is rebuked by Yahweh the sovereign Lord. O ne further indication o f Yahweh’s sovereignty over “evil” is seen in his victory over the “waters” and the “sea” in Habakkuk 3. “W aters,” “seas” and the “floods” are often used in Near Eastern literature— including the O ld Testament— as symbols o f the forces o f chaos. Psalm 93:3-4 describes Yahweh’s power over the waters. T h e floods have lifted up, O Lord, the floods have lifted up their voice, the floods lift up their roaring. M ightier than the thunder o f many waters, mightier than the waves o f the sea, the Lord on high is mighty! (RSV) T his same theological concept o f G od’s sovereignty over “chaos” or “evil” represented by waters is seen in Psalms 18:4, 16; 4 6 :1 -3 ; 65:7; 6 9 :1 -2 ; 74:12-15; 77:16-19; 104:6-9; and in Job 38 :8 -1 0 and Revelation 21:1. A ll seven prophets were theocentric in their thinking and writing. 107

Theological Reflections on M icah-M alachi

Societies an d individuals bring judgm ent on them selves T he one overriding message o f these seven books— other than “Yahweh is sovereign”— is that “evil is doomed.” The very first book, Micah, begins by warning the peoples of the world that Yahweh is coming to bring judgment on the earth. Specifically he says that Samaria and Jerusalem will experience judgment because o f their sins (Mic 1:1-6). T he second book, Nahum is an eloquent expression o f Yahweh’s outrage against the dominant world power, As­ syria, for her cruel and ruthless treatm ent o f slaves and cap­ tive people. She piled up excessive treasures o f gold, silver, and precious things at the expense o f her victims (Nah 2:9). She was guilty and vile, full o f lies, booty, and plunder. She plotted evil and counseled villainy (Nah 1:11,14; 3:1). Can it be that nations and individuals in the ancient world did not believe in the judgment of God? Did they believe they could act with impunity? Did they believe that “might makes right” and there was no “payday some day?” If they did, that was a drastic mistake according to these prophets. M icah said that Samaria would become a heap in the field (Mic 1:6). Nahum said that Nineveh was no better or stronger than Thebes, the capital o f Egypt. Thebes was destroyed, so Nineveh would be also. Habakkuk said that God had already appointed a day for the overthrow o f Babylon and the arrogant. For the vision is yet for an appointed time. It hurries to the end and it will n ot lie. If it tarries, wait for it, because it will surely come. It will not be late, Behold, (the oppressor) is puffed up, his soul is not upright in him, but the righteous shall live by his faithfulness. . . . T h e arrogant man will not survive. . . . (Hab 2:3-5a) MICAH-MALACHI

108

The,clear message o f these prophets is that “evil is doomed.” Societies like Assyria, Babylon, and Israel as well as individu­ als would be judged. And the evidence is clear that they brought judgment on themselves.

Righteousness and peace ultimately will prevail T h e last word o f m ost true prophets is not judgment but hope. M ost true prophets were eternal optimists because they believed in the sovereignty and the grace o f God. O ne o f the great prophets in the O ld Testament, Jeremiah, was told “to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow. . . .” T hen he was to build and plant (Jer 1:10 RSV). M icah’s harsh word about the destruction o f the tem ­ ple (3:12) is followed immediately by the promise that the temple m ountain would becom e the highest o f mountains and peoples would flow into it (4:1). M icah envisioned a tim e when everyone would sit under his or her own fig tree and no one would make them afraid (4:4). H e said that Yahweh would not keep his anger forever because he delights in steadfast love. “He will turn and show us compassion. H e will tread down our iniquities .” (M ic 7:19). Nahum said: Behold, on the mountains the feet o f him who brings good tidings, who proclaims peace! Keep your feasts, O Judah, fulfill your vows, for never again shall the wicked come against you, he is utterly cut off. (Nah 1:15 RSV) Zephaniah’s book ends on a note o f hope: In that time I will save the lame, 109

Theological Reflections on M icah-M alachi

and the outcast I will gather. A nd I will give them praise and fame whose shame has been in all the earth. (Zeph 3:19) Haggai’s supporters were deeply disappointed with the dismal shape and size o f the temple they were building. But Haggai was an optimist. He said, “‘W h o is left among you that saw this house in its form er glory? How do you see it now? Is if not in your sight as nothing?’” (Hag 2:3 RSV). But Haggai knew Yahweh was with them . T hen he said, “T he silver is mine, and the gold is m ine” (2:8 RSV). T h e latter splendor o f the temple will be greater than the form er, and in this place Yahweh will give peace, shalom (2:9). Zechariah was a prophet o f judgment and hope. His book is full o f words o f warning, but he knew that Yahweh could remove any m ountain that interfered w ith his purpose. Yahweh said to Zerubbabel, “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit. . . . W hat are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain. . . . For who­ ever has despised the day o f small things shall rejoice . . .” (Zech 4 :6 -7 ,1 0 RSV). Five centuries after Zechariah, the apostle Paul wrote to the Rom an church in the spirit o f Zechariah but with more spiritual understanding. “If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, will he not also give us all things w ith him? W ho shall bring any charge against God’s elect? . . . we are more than conquerors through him who loved us” (Rom 8 :3 3 ,3 7 RSV). T h e ultimate outcome o f history according to these prophets will be a time when righteousness and peace will prevail.

MICAH-MALACHI

110

NOTES

Chapter 1 Introduction 1. Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology I (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1962), 129-305. 2. Martin Noth, A History of Pentateuchal Traditions (Engle­ wood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972). 3. Paul D. Hanson, The People Called (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1987), 56. 4. David L. Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah 1-8, The Old Tes­ tament Library (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984), 110,128. Chapter 2 Themes in Micah 1. For a copy of Raskin’s painting and its interpretation, see Cynthia Pearl Maus, The Old Testament and the Fine Arts (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1954), 530-32. 2. Hans Walter Wolff, “Micah the Moreshite— The Prophet and His Background,” in Israelite Wisdom, eds. John Gammie et al. (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1978), 78-79. 3. For a full translation of Sennacherib’s document, see D. Winton Thomas, Documents from Old Testament Times (New York: Harper and Row, 1961), 67.

I ll

Notes

4. Karl Menninger, Whatever Became of Sin? (New York. Hawthorn Books, 1973), 1. 5. Harold A. Bosley, “T he Book o f Micah: Exposition,” Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Twelve Prophets, T h e Interpreter’s Bible 6 (New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1956), 925. 6. R . Mehl, “Good,” in A Companion to the Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1958), 152.

Chapter 3

Themes in Nahum

1. Charles L. Taylor, “The Book o f Nahum: Introduction and Exegesis” Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Twelve Prophets, Th e In ­ terpreter’s Bible (New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1956), 953. 2. Raymond Calkins, The Modern Message of the Minor Prophets (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1947), 79. 3. Ralph L. Smith, Micah-Malachi, Word Biblical Commen­ tary 32 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984), 6 3 ,7 1 . 4. The Abingdon Bible Commentary (New York: AbingdonCokesbury, 1929), 785. 5. Peter C . Craigie, Twelve Prophets, T h e Daily Study Bible Series 2 (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1985), 61. 6. George Mendenhall, The Tenth Generation: The Origins of the Biblical Tradition (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1973), 6 9 -1 0 4 . 7. B. S. Childs, “T h e Canonical Shape o f the Prophetic Liter­ ature,” Interpretation 32 (1978):51. 8. S. R . Driver, The Minor Prophets, T h e Century Bible (Edinburgh: T. C . and E. C . Jack, 1906), 35. 9. James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1955), 291. 10. Edward R . Dalglish, Hosea-Malachi, T h e Broadman Bible Commentary 7 (Nashville: T h e Broadman Press, 1972), 231. 11. Craigie, 66.

Chapter 4

Themes in Habakkuk

The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah, T h e Cambridge Bible Com ­ 1.

John D. W. Watts,

mentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 4.

MICAH-MALACHI

112

2. F. W. Farrar, The Minor Prophets (London: James Nesbet and Co., n.d.), 166. 3. Ibid. 4. Donald E. Gowan, The Triumph of Faith in Habakkuk (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1976), 11. 5. John Paterson, The Goodly Fellowship of the Prophets (New York: Charles Scribner and Sons, 1950), 135. . 6. James Russell Lowell, “The Present Crisis," The Standard Library Edition of the Works of James Russell Lowell 1 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin and Co., 1890), 181. 7. D. M. Lloyd Jones, From Fear to Faith (London: InterVarsity Fellowship, 1953), 52. 8. Paterson, 136. 9. Roland H. Bainton, Here I Stand (New York: Mentor, 1956), 38. 10. Ibid,, 49. 11. For a discussion of the various ways of translating this verse, see the author’s commentary, W BC 32, p. 117. 12. A special form of the Hebrew verb, expressing emphasis. 13. Gowan, 84. Chapter 5 Themes in Zephaniah 1. John Julian, A Dictionary of Hymnology (London: John Murray, 1907), 296. 2. The Hymnal 1940 Companion (New York: The Church Pension Fund, 1956), 290. 3. Peter C. Craigie, Twelve Prophets, The Daily Study Bible Series 2 (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1985), 108. 4. John D. W. Watts, The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah, The Cambridge Bible Com­ mentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 155. 5. Craigie, 117. 6. James Muileriberg, “The Biblical View of Time," Grace Upon Grace, ed. James Cook (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1975), 33. Chapter 6 Themes in Haggai 1. Stephen Verner, Fire in Coventry (Westwood, N.J.: Revell, 1964), 13.

113

Notes

2. H. G. M. Williamson, Ezra-Nehemiah, Word Biblical Com­ mentary 16 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1985), 46. 3. W. O. E. Osesterly and T. H. Robinson, An Introduction to the Books of the Old Testament (London: SPCK, 1949), 409. 4. Paul D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), 10. 5. R. J. Coggins, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987), 34. 6. Coggins, 55. 7. Rex Mason, “The Prophets of Restoration,” Israel’s Prophetic Tradition, eds. Richard Coggins, Anthony Phillips and Michael Knibb (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 139. 8. G. Ernest Wright, “The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East,” The Biblical Archaeologist Reader (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books, Doubleday, 1961), 145. 9. Ronald E. Clements, God and Temple (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1965), 102. 10. David L. Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah 1-8, The Old Testament Library (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984), 33. 11. Wolfhart Pannenberg, What is Man? (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), 10. 12. Oliver Wendell Holmes, “The Chambered Nautilus,” American Writers (Boston: Guinn and Co., 1946), 213. 13. John Paterson, The Goodly Fellowship of the Prophets (New York: Charles Scribner and Sons, 1950), 228. 14. Clements, 126-27. 15. Ibid., 139. 16. Ibid. 17. Ralph L. Smith, Micah-Malachi, Word Biblical Commentary 32 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984), 156. Chapter 7 Themes in Zechariah 1. Elizabeth Achtemeier, Nahum-Malachi, Interpretation, A Bible Commentary (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1986), 108. 2. Ibid. 3. See H. G. Mitchell, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Jonah 26, The International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1912), 232. MICAH-MALACHI

114

4. Achtemeier, 109. 5. Peter C. Graigie, Twelve Prophets, Th e Daily Study Bible Series (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984), 156. 6. Achtemeier, 146. 7. David L. Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah 1-8, T h e O ld Testament Library (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984), 135. 8. Ibid., 1l l , 138-39. 9. Joyce Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Tyndale Com ­ mentaries (Downer’s Grove, 111.: InterVarsity Press, 1972), 130. 10. Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology II (New York, Harper and Row, 1965), 286. 11. Achtemeier, 108. 12. Ralph L. Smith, Micah-Malachi, Word Biblical Commen­ tary 32 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984), 32, 215. 13. For a discussion o f the question o f the unity o f the human race, see my article, “T he Race Issue in the Old Testament” in The Cutting Edge I, ed. H. C. Brown, Jr. (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1969), 32-41. 14. For a fuller discussion, see Smith, W B C 32, 240-41. 15. John D. W. Watts, Isaiah 1-33, Word Biblical Commentary 24 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984), chap. 25. 16. F. F. Bruce, New Testament Development of Old Testament Themes (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1968), 104. 17. Ib id , 114. 18. See Helmer Ringgren, The Messiah in the Old Testament (London: SC M Press, 1956). 19. For a summary o f Lamarche’s views, see my MicahMalachi, W B C 3 2,179. 20. Petersen, 176, 210. 21. Achtemeier, 133.

Chapter 8 Themes in Malachi 1. F. W. Farrar, The Minor Prophets (London: James Nesbet, n.d.), 230. 2. Rex Mason, “The Prophets of Restoration,” Israel's Prophetic Tradition, eds. Richard Coggins, Anthony Phillips, and Michael Knibb (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 149. 3. Mason, 151

115

Notes

4. Elizabeth Achtemeier, Nahum-Malachi, Interpretation, A Bible Commentary (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1986), 108. 5. Ralph L. Smith, Micah-Malachi, Word Biblical Commen­ tary 32 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984), 298. 6. Joyce Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Tyndale Com­ mentaries (Downer’s Grove, I11.: InterVarsity Press, 1972), 214. 7. Charles D. Isbell, Malachi (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980), 9. 8. Pieter A. Verhoef, The Books of Haggai and Malachi, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1987), 166 9. Achtemeier, 172. 10. Peter C. Craigie, Twelve Prophets, The Daily Study Bible Series 2 (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984), 225. 11. For a fuller discussion of this “love-hate” terminology in a covenant language, see my commentary, Micah-Malachi, p. 305; and Steven L. McKensie and Howard N. Wallace, “Covenant Themes in Malachi,” Catholic Bible Quarterly 45 (1983):549-63 12. Covenants or treaties in the ancient Near East were of two kinds: vassal (or obligatory) and grant (or promissory). The grant treaty was a promise of an emperor, usually to his son or servant, of land and/or a house. In the Old Testament, God promised Abraham a land and David a house. See my commentary, p. 338, for a fuller discussion. 13. James L. Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981), 196. 14. Ibid., 191. 15. Ibid. 16. F. B. Huey, “An Exposition of Malachi,” Southwestern Journal of Theology 30 (Fall 1988):18-19. 17. Achtemeier, 189. Chapter 9 Theological Reflections on Micah-Malachi 1. James Barr, “The Theological Case Against Biblical Theol­ ogy,” in Canon, Theology and Old Testament Interpretation, ” eds., Gene Tucker, David L. Petersen, and R. R. Wilson (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988): 3-19. 2. Ibid., 4. MICAH-MALACHI

116

3. Ibid., 9. 4. For a discussion of these passages see my commentary MicahMalachi, p. 257 and R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology, p. 95. 5. J. D. W. Watts, The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah, The Cambridge Bible Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 171. 6. Ibid., 171. 7. For a review of this literature see Peggy Lynne Day’s Ph.D. dissertation at Harvard University, Satan in the Hebrew Bible, June 1986 (microfilm), and Rivkah Kluger, Satan in the Old Testament Northwestern University, 1961.

117

Notes

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Achtemeier, Elizabeth. Nahum-Malachi. Interpretation Commen­ tary. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1986. Craigie, Peter. C. Twelve Prophets, vol. 2, The Daily Study Bible Series. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1985. Coggins, R. J. Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. Sheffield: Sheffield Press, 1987. Limburg, James. Hosea-Micah. Interpretation Commentary. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988. Mason, Rex. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Mays, James L. Micah. The Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1976. Petersen, David L. Haggai and Zechariah 1-8. The Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1984. Smith, Ralph L. Micah-Malachi. Word Biblical Commentary 32. Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1984. Verhoef, Pieter A. Haggai and Malachi. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich. Eerdmans, 1987. Watts, John D. W. The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. The Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: The University Press, 1975. MICAH-MALACHI

118

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

O LD TESTAM EN T

7:6

90

1 Kings

Genesis

7 :7 -8

89

1:7

67

7:13

89

1:8

67

90

2 :8 -9

67

88

2:19

67

2:23

67

1 -11

79

3:1 4

104

12

79

14:2 17:8-13

1 2 :1 -3

55

2 1 :1 8 -2 1

91

15:6

40

26:18

90

7:13

66

18:23

93

27:16

91

8:23

60

2 6 :28

80

28 32:5, 8

96

8:27

68

91

8 :2 7 ,3 0

60

91

32:25

26

2 Kings

1 9 :4 -6

79

Joshua

19:5

90 91 91 4

10:13 10:21 Judges

15

6:13

26

11:36 20:26

Exodus 4 :2 2

2 0 :1 0

21:15 3 4 :5 -6 34:7 34:7 Leviticus 16:29

77

93

19:3

91

10:27

96

30:26

21 -2 2

4 45

2 2 :8 -1 7

23

23:4

46

2 3 :4 -1 4

60

77

23:7 23:11

46 46

23:12

46

26 9

23:24 23:26 2 5 :8 -9

46

57

2 Samuel

4 :37 5 :16

89 91

7:14 20:1

91

2 5 :1 3 -1 7

26

1 Chronicles

6 :16

97

22:48

26

3:21

119

73 3

26

1 Samuel

26 Deuteronomy

3:27 26 105

46 57

45

Index of Scriptures

2 Chronicles 15:5 24:19

79

9 3 :3 -4 96:1

73

98:1

3 0 :6 -9

73

100:5

3 6 :2 2 -2 3

58

1 0 4 :6 -9

Ezra

1:8,

11

58

36, 107

4 9 :2 2 -2 3

80

54

5 1 :9 -1 0

36

54

5 5 :6 -7 5 7 :16

74 73

58

77 80

16, 17 107

109:24

77

118:24

54

6 0 :1 0 -1 6

77 79

6 1 :1 -4

26

6 1 :5 -7 62:2

105

121:1

2:16

45

4 :1 -4

57 58

1 2 1 :5 -6

58

135:4

57 90

136:1

16, 17

5:14, 16 6 :1 3 -1 8

127:1

Nehemiah

7:21 10:30

45

11:5-12

6 3 :8 -1 0

105

54 91

Jeremiah

1:10

Proverbs

86, 96

6 0 :1 -3

2 :2 3 -2 7 3 :1 -5

109 87

1 0 :2 3 -2 9

96

14:13

38 9

1 0 :3 7 -3 9

86 86

17:15

9

3:14, 22

87 91

18:5

9

3:17

62

20:1

9

6 :1 4 7 :8 -1 1

77 61

7:14

61

1 3 :2 2 -2 9 Job

1-2 3:8

7:12

36

9:13

36

26:12

36

2 6 :1 2 -1 3

36

3 8 :8 -1 0

107

2:7 5 14:1 15 1 8:16-17

38 91

1 :2 -4 2

5:20

8:21 10:5

93

10 :5 -7 10:1 2 -1 9

24

37 39

10:14 13:23

24:4 30:5

97 73

14:25

31:15

54

35:14 4 6 :1 -3

77

53:1

107 93

6 5:6

36

65:7 69:1 6 9 :1 -2 69:1 0

9 9

Isaiah

39 34, 39

9

8:11 1 1 :1 -3

2:6 -2 2

Psalms

1

21:17 22:16 2 3 :2 0 -2 1

107 36

1 9 :2 3 -2 4 19:23-25 27:11 2 8 :2 3 -2 9 3 2 :5 -8 33:15

107

4 0 :3 -5

107 36

4 0 :2 3 -2 4 42:9

14 91

2 2 :24

77 63

80

26:17 28 :8

73

51 54 93 73 25 26 27 28 23 27 24 105 36 87 93 34 95 25 54

54

31:32 36 3 9 :1 -3 4 6 -5 1

54 77 57 23

5 2 :3 -1 3

57

Ezekiel 8 :5 -1 7 11 :1 5 -1 7 11:19 1 2 -1 4

18:31

54

21:27 3 6 :19

39 83

3 8 -3 9

54 80

38:17 4 0 -4 8

62

105

7 4 :1 2 -1 5

107

4 5:14 45:23

51

1:10

7 7 :1 6 -1 9

107 106

47:13

53

48:6

54

4 :4 4 :9

MICAH-MALACHI

78 54 80 83

42:1 0 43:19

54

60

16:7 1 8 :5 -9

77 36

54 80

9

31:31

6 9:14 72:9

82

77 23

73

Hosea 91 92 92

120

2 :1 -4

11:1

91

3 :9 -1 7 3 :1 2 -1 5

1:14 1:14c

4 :1 -5 4:3

51

1:15

97 63

5 :4

34

Obadiah 23 24

12 108 16

1:3

12, 103

1:5

14, 104 , 108

1:7

1:8 1 :8 -9 1 :8 -1 6 1:9

2:1 2:2

10

14, 106 18 14 9 15 9, 10 9

2:3

12

2 :1 -3

14

2:1 -2 2:6 2 :8 -9

2:11 2:12 2:13

10 13, 15, 16 14 9 ,1 0 4

3:1

104 13, 16

3:2

15

3:3 3:3, 5 3 :4 3:5 3 :5 -7

4:7 4 :9 -1 0 4 :1 1 -1 3

19, 104 19

5 :1 -4 5:2

8 27

5:6, 13

104

102 11

5:12 5 :1 3 -1 4 5:20

6:1 6:8 6:1 0 -1 2

15 103 103

7 :2 -3 7:5

10 10

7:7 7 :8 -9

18 19

7:10, 16 -1 7

104

7:13

104

7:14 7:16

4 104 105

7:17 7:18 7:19

5 ,7 9, 103, 109

7:20

55

Nahum

9

1:3

11 10 11

12, 16, 3 4

6:15

15

12, 19

8,

12 102 102

6 :1 0 -1 3

1:1 1:2 1:2,

12

106

6 :4 -5

22 21 6, 7

26

1 :3 -5

104 103

1 :3 -6 1 :4 -5

13

1:7 :8, 14

3 :1 0

9

3:11

15

27 25, 109 29

2:1

29

2:5

29

2 :6 -8 2:9

108

2 :9 -1 3

2:10 2:12

21

23 28, 104 28

22, 26,

2:13 3:1

104

27, 108

22

3 :1 -4 3 :1 -7

27 29

3:4 3:5

26

22,

3 :5 -7 3:7

104

5, 21, 23

3 :8 -1 7 3:18

22 29 23, 31

3:19 Habakkuk

32

1 :1 -4 1 :2 -3 1:2, 4

35

1:4 1:5, 6, 12

1:6 1:11,

12

1 :1 2 -1 7

1:12 1:13 1 :14-1 7 1:17

2:1 2:2

48 35, 39 104 25, 32 4 32 103 3 9 ,1 0 3 35 32 33

102

2:3

33

2:4

31, 34, 39,

25 21, 103

1:3b

3 :6 -7 3 :7 -8 3:9

121

104 19

5:10

Micah

1 :6 -7

7

12 12

4:4 4:6

5 :5 -6

Jonah

12

106

109

4 :4 -5 4 :9

12,

108

105

54

3 :10

1:11, 14

4:1, 4

23

22

1 :9 -1 4

4 :1 -4

1:6, 9, 11, 13

1

80

53

1-2

1:6

14, 16, 109

80

Am os

1:1 1:1 -6 1:2

3:12 4

Joel

41, 104 2:4a 2 :1 5 -1 7 2 :1 8 -1 9

2:20

37 104 106 4 9 , 76, 103, 104

103

3

1:9-11

104 26

3 :3 -1 5

41

1:9, 15

26

3 :5 -1 1

104

1

3:3

107 4 , 103

Index o f Scriptures

3 :8 -1 5

35

1:2, 5, 7, 9, 13

3:16

41 42

1:2, 6 1:1 -1 1

3 :1 6 -1 9

62

1:3 Zephaniah

1:1

45

1:2-3

104

102

1:3 1 :4 -5

45, 106

1:6

4 5 ,4 9

1:7 1:7 -1 3

4 9 -5 0

1 :8 -9 1:9-11

48

50 45

1:3, 5, 7, 9

102

1:4, 7, 9 :6, 10-11

64 103

1

1:9-11 1:12—15a

45, 54

1:15

4 3 ,4 8

1:15a

1:18 2 :1 -3

3 :1 9 -2 0

1:1, 3, 12

1:2 MICAH'MALACHI

82, 103

4:1 4 :6

70, 76

58 62 58

4 :6 -7 , 10

4 :6 -7

76 75 76

110

2:3

6 0 ,6 4

6:1

75

6 :1 -3

76 83

51 27 45 52 48 45 51, 103 104 45

52, 55 47 45 52, 55 52

2 : 3 ,8

110

2:3, 9

63

2 :4 -9 , 11

66

2:5

57, 63, 102

2:6

63

2 :6 -7 21

2:6,

2:7 2 :8 -9 2:9 2 :1 0 -1 9

70 77 78 73

7:7, 12 7:8

20

59

7 :9 -1 2

73

2:14, 19

64 63

7:14

79

2:10, 2:17

2:17, 23 2:19, 23

2:20 2 :2 0 -2 3 2:23

66 67 62 6 2 ,6 3 63, 103

Zechariah 1 :1 ,7

70 73

7 :7 -1 0

102

8:2

102

8:3

75 69

8 :3 -1 2

8:10 8:1 0 -1 2 8:11 8:12

79

8 :1 6 -1 7 8 :19

69, 72

8:20

75 79 79 78 80

1:4 1:13

73, 75, 102

8 :2 0 -2 3

80, 105

103

8 :2 2 -2 3

1:15

104 80

9 -1 4

24 7 0 -7 2

9 :1 - 8

23

103

9 :1 -1 0

1:15, 21

60

82

67 60, 68 6 2 ,6 6

80

66

76 83

7:1 7 :1 -3

1:3

58

76

6:6 -8 6:12

1:2

54, 55

80

6 :9 -1 5

56

52, 104 105

6 :1 -1 3

104 60

52, 103

Haggai

1:1

3 :8

76

52

3:17 3:19

3 :4 ,9

6 2 ,6 6 62

72

3 :8 -9

3:14 3:15

59, 63

5 :3 - 4 5 :5 -1 1

3:8b

3:11 3 :1 1 -1 2

107 103

62

47 103

3:9

3:2

2:1

47 45 , 51, 106

3 :9 -1 0

79

50

23

3:7 3:8

75

2:17 3 :1 -2

5 :1 - 4

51

3:5, 8, 13

2:16

4 :1 4

2 :5 -1 5

3 :3 -4 3:5

103 49, 76, 1 0 3 -1 0 4

62

2 :5 -1 0

3:2 3:3

2:13

69 80, 105

59

43, 52

3 :1 -2

2:11 2:12

102

1:15b—2:11

2:3

2 :1 3 -1 5

2 :1 0 -1 3

7 0 -7 1 , 76

1:15b—2:9

4 8 ,5 1

2:11 2:12

1-8 2:6

48

2:2

2:7

67 60

1:12

1:12

50, 103

60

1:7 1 :7 -8 1:9

1:14 1:15

1 :1 7 -1 8

66 64 5 8 ,6 2

1:17 1:18-21

1:21

75 80

9 :6 -7 9 :9

75 105 81, 82

122

8 2 , 105

2 :1 1

85

9 :1 6

4

2 :1 4

89 , 91

1 0 :1

103

1 0 :2

106

1 0 :3

4

9 :9 -1 0

1 1 :4 -1 7

82

1 1 :1 2

70

1 1 :1 3 1 2 -1 4 1 2 :1 1 2 :2 , 9

2 :1 1 -1 4 2 :1 7 3 :1

93 8 5 ,9 4 8 4 -8 5 , 89,

81

1 2 :1 5 1 9 :1 9 -2 2

83

1 9 :3 7

81

2 1 :2 1 -2 2

34

A cts

9 3 -9 5

1 :7

33

3 :2

95

2 :1

54

70, 81

3 :2 -3

94

2 :3 6

83

80

3 :4 -5

95

8 0 , 103 80

3 :5

91

3 :5 -7

85 90

R om ans 34

1 :1 7

1110

8 :3 3 ,3 7

1 2 :3

8 0 -8 1

3 :7

1 2 :9

80

3 :8

1 2 :1 0

81

3 :1 0

9 6 , 103

1 3 :1 -9

82

3 :1 1

96

1 3 :1

76

3 :1 4 - 1 5

93

1 3 :2

71

3 :1 5 -1 7

97

1 3 :6

82

3 :1 6

85

1 T h e s s a lo n ia n s

1 2 :1 9 G a la t ia n s 3 :1 2

34

3 :1 3 -1 4

98

4 :4

54

82

1 3 :7

81

3 :1 8 -4 :3

94

3 :1 3

1 3 :8

82

4 :1 -2

97

H eb rew s

1 4 :1

104

4 :2 -3

85

4 :6

98

1 4 :1 -2

80

1 4 :3

104

1 4 :5

82

1 4 :8

82

1 4 :9 , 1 2

80

1 4 :2 0

80

4 :7

97

1 4 :2 0 -2 1

70

1 1 :1 0

95, 98

1 4 :2 1

82

1 1 :2 0

98

2 1 :2 5

81

2 7 :9 102

1 :3

8 9 , 103

1 :6

90, 91

1 :7 -1 0

86

1 :1 1

51

1 :1 1 -1 4

8 5 , 86 , 105

2 7 :2 8

81

1 :7

M a tth e w 8

1 :2

97

1 :2 7

2 :6

85

35

R e v e la tio n

1 0 4 -0 5

1 :1 -5

1 0 :3 6 -3 9 Ja m e s

N EW TESTA M EN T

1 4 :1 6

M a la c h i

26

85

70, 81 83

3 :2 0

74

1 2 :7 -1 2

37

2 1 :1

1.0 7

2 1 :1 1

37

O t h e r V e r s io n s A S V , A m e r i c a n S ta n d a r d V e r s io n

M a rk 1 :2

K J V , K in g J a m e s V e r s i o n 95

1 0 :1 8

16, 18

1 4 :2 7

82

1 5 :2 6

83

Luke

J B , J e r u s a le m B i b l e L X X , S e p t u a g in t N E B , N e w E n g lis h B i b l e N IV , N e w In te rn a tio n a l V e r s io n

1 :1 3

91

1 :1 4

8 9 .9 1

2 :2

8 9 .9 2

1 8 :1 2

78

89

2 1 :2 4

81

R S V , R e v is e d S t a n d a r d

92

Jo h n

T E V , T o d a y ’s E n g lis h

2 :4 -5 2 :4 -7 2 :8 2 :9 2 :1 0 2 :1 0 -1 6

123

7 :2 7

95

N K JV , N e w K in g Ja m e s V e r s io n

V e r s io n

89, 92

2 :1 6

82

92

2 :1 9

68

89, 103

4 :2 3

51

86

7 :3 8

82

V e r s io n

Index of Scriptures

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES John GEORGE R. BEASLEY-MURRAY

ZONDERVAN ACADEMI C

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC John Copyright © 1989 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11511-3 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Beasley-­Murray, George R. John: George R. Beasley-­Murray. p. cm. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-849-90024-4 1. Bible N.T. John—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. John. II. Series. BS2615.2.B385 1989 266’.507-dc1989-5299 Scripture quotations in this volume from the book of John, unless otherwise identified, are from the author’s translation in John, Volume 36, of the World Biblical Commentary, copyrighted 1987 by Word, Incorporated. See the Index for abbreviations for the other versions used in this volume. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

To P. H. Warwick Bailey my first pastor, through whom I learned o f C hrist

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface 1. Interpreting the G ospel o f Joh n A uthorship Purpose Jesus after the flesh — after the Spirit 2. T h e W ord M ade Flesh “T h e W ord” in ancient times C h rist— the W ord C h rist— the M ediator T h e only So n T h e “I am ” sayings 3. T h e Signs o f Jesus and T heir Significance T h e water into wine Two healings T h e feeding o f the multitude and walking on the sea T h e healing o f the m an b o m blind T h e raising o f Lazarus vii

ix xi 1 4 7 13 19 22 25 28 34 40 45 47 52 56 61 65 Contents

4. Jesus and the Jewish Festivals T h e Passover Festival T h e Festival o f W eeks T he Festival o f Tabernacles T he Festival o f the Dedication 5. Jesus and H is Own: T he U pper R oom D iscourses T he footwashing and prophecy o f betrayal T h e departure and return o f Jesus Jesus, the True V ine T h e opposition o f the world to the church T h e ministry o f the Spirit and the joy o f the disciples T he prayer o f consecration 6. T h e Glorification o f Jesus Notes Index of Scriptures

JOHN

69 71 76 78 82 87 88 90 93 94 95 97 101 111 113

viii

FOREW ORD

Already G eorge Beasley-Murray ’s John in the Word Bibli­ cal Commentary series has been hailed as a monumental study o f the “spiritual G ospel.” Scholars and students are discovering fresh insights and penetrating observations on this central New Testament book. N ot all readers today, however, are interested in the minutiae o f the academic de­ bate on the fourth G ospel. Rather, they are looking for guidance on the leading themes o f John as material for pulpit messages, Bible-class themes, and practical daily living. This book in the continuing series o f Word Biblical Themes is designed expressly for a general audience, especially busy pastors and preachers and layfolk who want to be informed by the most reliable teachers o f the church. Dr. Beasley-Murray brings to his assignment a wealth o f past experience— as minister o f a local congregation for many years, then seminary principal in charge o f the famed Spur­ geon’s College in London, and later professor at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. N ow retired from these key posts, he still is active in ix

Foreword

preaching and teaching. H e is eminently qualified to offer this study o n Joh n which distills and puts into succinct form the massive research o f his larger commentary. Dr. BeasleyM urray w orks with an eye always on his audience which will appreciate his easy style and helpful approach to this G ospel. N o one can fail to profit from his latest work. Department of Biblical Studies The University of Sheffield

JO H N

Ralph P. M artin New Testament Editor Word Biblical Themes, Word Biblical Commentary

X

PREFACE

Anyone who is concerned to gain an understanding o f the Christian faith will pay special attention to the four G ospels, in the endeavor to learn something sure about Jesus. T his has been true o f the present writer. O n reflection, how­ ever, he realizes that the G ospel o f John has occupied a unique place in his thinking, his life, his preaching, and his teaching. In his experience theological students find this book to be o f unparalleled interest, including even its com ­ plex background, which throws a flood o f light on the story it records. People in the churches are similarly fascinated when the unsuspected depths o f the G ospel are uncovered and explained to them. John's G ospel is the preacher's G ospel par excellence. It is therefore the more regrettable that preaching and teaching about this G ospel often remains on a superficial level and ignores much that lies waiting to be discovered and proclaimed. T his little book is intended to be a kind o f mini­ handbook to the profoundest book o f the Bible, to help preachers and teachers to grasp its message and worthily to xi

Preface

make it known. H opefully it may stimulate some to resort to the great commentaries that have been written on the G ospel, and so lead to the satisfaction o f attaining a fuller understanding o f the so-called “spiritual G ospel.” Chapter 5, on the U pper R oom Discourses o f Jesus, reproduces the substance o f an article which appeared in the Review and Expositor, volume 85,1968, pp. 473-83; the writer expresses his gratitude to the editor for permission to utilize it. George R. Beasley-Murray

JOHN

xii

1

INTERPRETING THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

Ever since the church realized that it possesses not one G ospel but four it has come to see that the G ospel o f Joh n is “different.” Som ething about its presentation o f Jesus m arks it o ff from the others, and makes it unique. A great deal o f discussion about this difference has taken place in m odem times. It used to be said that whereas Matthew, M ark, and Luke gave the bare facts o f the story o f Jesus, Joh n gave us the facts plus interpretation. We now know that that is an overstatement. Each o f the first three evangelists had his own understanding o f Jesus, and each wrote up his account in order that the light o f C h rist might shed its maximum illumination upon the circumstances o f the churches he knew. T hose m en had profound insight into the life and teaching o f Jesus and the revelation o f G o d that he brought. Yet everyone who has considered the matter agrees that these observations apply to the fourth evangelist and his G ospel in a very special way. O ne has only to pick up the book and read its opening sentences to realize what a unique slant the evangelist gives to the familiar story o f Jesus. There is 1

Interpreting the Gospel of John

something paradoxical about the introduction to this G ospel (1:1-18). It is written in the simplest language possible. In­ deed, the first five verses are not only in “basic G reek,” to coin an expression in imitation o f “basic English”; a beginner who has taken only his first steps in learning the language can make out those sentences. A nd yet the significance o f its ut­ terances about Jesus is nothing less than breathtaking. T h e Prologue plumbs the depths and scales the heights o f the doctrine o f C hrist beyond anything written in the Bible. It unveils the central place o f the So n o f G o d in revelation, in creation, and in redemption; and it relates all this not only to the record o f G o d ’s revelation in the O ld Testament but also to the religions and philosophies o f the ancient world from primeval times to the fashionable thought o f the evange­ list’s day. O ne o f the greatest teachers o f the early church, C lem ent o f Alexandria, who was acquainted with the thought o f the world o f the second century o f our era, wrote about this book: “John, perceiving that the bodily facts had been made plain in the gospel, being urged by his friends and inspired by the Spirit, com posed a spiritual gospel.” 1 It will be observed that in that statement there is no consciousness o f opposition between the “spiritual G ospel” and the earlier G ospels. T h e so-called M uratorian Canon, a report on the books o f the New Testament com posed in the period o f C lem ent’s ministry, elaborates what Clem ent said o f the fourth G ospel, and then adds: A lthough various points are taught in the several books o f the gospels, yet it m akes n o difference to the faith o f believers, since all things in all o f them are declared by one suprem e Spirit. T hat is a perceptive statement. T h e differences between the accounts o f Jesus in the synoptic G ospels and that in Joh n are

JOHN

2

acknowledged, but the four accounts are seen to be comple­ mentary, and the varied interpretations are ascribed to the operation o f the “one supreme Spirit.” O nce more, this aspect o f the composition o f the G ospels is especially apparent in John, which has more to say about the work o f the Holy Spirit in the church than any o f the other Gospels; and this G ospel specifically relates that work o f the Spirit to the understanding o f the words and deeds o f Jesus. We think, for example, o f the statement o f Jesus to the disciples in the U pper R oom : “I have spoken these things while remaining with you; but the Counselor, the H oly Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and will remind you o f everything that I have said to you” (John 14:25,26). T he Spirit, then, has the dual task o f bringing to remembrance what Jesus has said and o f instruct­ ing the disciples as to its meaning. T h at is precisely what we have in this “spiritual G ospel”— reminiscence o f the w orks and words o f Jesus as interpreted by the Spirit. O u r major task, accordingly, is to seek to interpret by the Spirit this interpretation o f Jesus from the Spirit. A ll other issues in the investigation o f the G ospel are subordinate to this supreme concern. It is well to recognize this at the outset, for in any case there is a great deal o f uncertainty about many matters which people like to know about a book, for exam­ ple, who wrote it, when it was written, where and for whom it was written, and the like. In particular, endless argument has taken place over the identity o f the author o f John. Books and articles have been devoted to it, sometimes with a ve­ hemence suggesting that the validity and authority o f the message o f the book stand or fall with its traditional ascrip­ tion o f authorship to the apostle John. In reality, this G ospel, like the others, is anonymous; it w ould be preposterous to commit ourselves to the view that the authority o f o ur four G ospels depends on the accuracy o f the ascription o f their authorship by churches in the

3

Interpreting the Gospel of John

second century. T h e truth o f their message depends on their connection with Jesus and the guidance o f the H oly Spirit given both to those who handed on the facts and their meaning and the evangelists themselves. In the case o f our G ospel there is clear indication o f the activity o f the Spirit alike in maintaining, understanding, and declaring the story o f Jesus, and this the church has thankfully recognized through the ages.

Authorship We have said that the fourth G ospel is anonymous. There is no m ention o f the author’s name, in contrast to Paul’s writings or the book o f Revelation (Rev 1:1, 4, 9). T here is, however, an additional chapter, written after the G ospel had been brought to its com pletion (at 20:30, 31), in which a statement as to the source o f the G ospel is made. A fter recounting the Easter conversation o f Jesus with Peter a reference is made to “the disciple whom Jesus loved,” and then it is affirmed: “T his is the disciple who bears witness about these things and who wrote these things, and we know that his witness is true” (21:24). T he statement calls forth two observations. First, the disci­ ple’s name is not stated, nor is it given anywhere else in the Gospel: we shall return to this issue shortly. Secondly, the natural inference from the assertion is that the writer is speak­ ing o f “the disciple whom Jesus loved” as someone other than himself, exactly as in 19:35: “T he man who saw this has borne witness to it— and his witness is authentic, and he knows that he tells the truth— that you, too, may believe.” In both pas­ sages the disciple is cited as an independent witness whose testimony is authentic; but in this passage the distinction be­ tween writer and disciple is emphasized: “We who know the man know that he is a reliable witness.” W hen, therefore, it is stated that the beloved disciple “wrote” these things, it must

JOHN

4

mean that he wrote down his witness. T h at is the point o f emphasis in the sentence. A nd although the writer does not explicitly say so, he certainly implies that the written testi­ mony o f the beloved disciple is the source and the authority o f what is written in this Gospel. T his is confirmed by the way the author speaks about the m an who stands behind this G ospel. H e calls him “the disci­ ple whom Jesus loved.” Since it is made clear that Jesus loved all his disciples (cf. 13:1, 2; 15:12-15) the expression m ust mean “the disciple whom Jesus especially loved.” There was an affinity between Jesus and this man beyond that between Jesus and the rest o f the disciples. T he first occasion when the expression is used is peculiarly instructive. Jesus had declared that one o f the disciples was to betray him; Peter therefore made signs to “the disciple whom Jesus loved” to ask who it was, for the Beloved Disciple was “close to the breast o f Jesus” (13:23). T h e expression is literally “in the bosom o f Jesus.” T h is physical position was possible because Jesus and the disciple group were reclining round the low table, with el­ bow s on cushions, according to the custom o f celebrating the Passover. T h e Beloved Disciple was reclining next to Jesus, and as host, Jesus was slightly forward. T h e disciple had but to turn toward Jesus and his head would then have been on his chest, and a whispered conversation could take place. But the expression “in the bosom o f” has a counterpart in the Prologue. It is written, “G o d no one has ever seen. T he only Son, by nature G od, who is ever close to the Father’s heart, has brought knowledge o f him” (1:18). T he expression “close to the heart o f . . . ” is the same as in 13:24, “in the bosom o f . . . ,” i.e., in closest intimacy with the Father. T he evan­ gelist evidently wished to convey the thought that just as Jesus was and is in closest fellowship with the Father, and therefore has been able to reveal G o d as none other before or since him, so the disciple whom Jesus loved was in closest intimacy with Jesus and has been able to reveal the truth he brought as no

5

Interpreting the Gospel of John

other person could. W hereas it is perfectly understandable that one who knew that disciple well should so speak about him, it would be incomprehensible for the disciple himself to describe him self in this way and imply such a comparison with the rest o f the disciples. W ho then was the favored disciple? Irenaeus, bishop o f Lyons in the last quarter o f the second century, named him as the apostle John (“John, the disciple o f the Lord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel while living in Ephe­ sus in A sia”).2 It is perfectly possible that the identification is correct. T hat would mean that the apostle Joh n was the au­ thority behind the G ospel that has so long borne his name. B u t there are difficulties about this. Various things said about the apostle Joh n in the early tradition are unlikely to be true, as, for example, when he is said to have written the G ospel after the death o f the emperor Dom itian (i.e., after the year A.D. 98 and after his release from Patmos, when he pursued an active ministry in the churches o f A sia Minor). T h e apostle in the years A.D. 100 and later w ould have been about a hundred years old! T h e beloved disciple was cer­ tainly a friend of Peter. If, as is likely, he was “the other disciple” with Peter, m entioned in 18:15, 16 (cf. the use o f that expression in 20:2, 3, 5, 8), then he was also a friend of C aiaph as, the high priest. T h at is explicitly stated in verses 18:15, 16. A n d that was how he was know n to the woman who kept the gate o f the high priest’s courtyard (18:15f). H e will then have been a member o f the highpriestly circle o f Jerusalem. T hat explains how it is that this G ospel gives so much information about the ministry o f Jesus in Jerusalem and Judea, o f which the other G ospels know nothing, and in particular how he knew so much about the trial o f Jesus before Pilate. T h e G ospel is written from the viewpoint o f a resident o f Judea (probably o f Jeru­ salem) in contrast with the synoptic G ospels, which convey the witness o f followers o f Jesus in Galilee.

JOHN

6

We cannot pretend to be able to solve this issue. T h e Christians for whom the G ospel was written would have know n the beloved disciple so well, they did not need telling w ho he was. We m ust be satisfied to know that he was privileged to be exceptionally close to Jesus, and therefore exceptionally well acquainted with the thought o f Jesus. H e was enabled by the Spirit not only to grasp what he heard and saw but to pass on to the churches that understanding o f Jesus; and the Lord gave him a disciple o f like mind, similarly illuminated by the Spirit, who was led to set down in writing for all subsequent generations the knowledge o f him which is life eternal (17:3).

Purpose T his leads on to the purpose o f the fourth G ospel. T h e evangelist him self has stated it in the intended conclusion, namely 20:30, 31: “N ow there were many other signs that Jesus did in the presence o f his disciples that are not recorded in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the S o n o f G od, and that through believing you may have life in his nam e.” It is possible to interpret these w ords in tw o ways: the G ospel was written that people who have not come to faith in Jesus as the C h rist and So n o f G o d may do so, and thereby gain the life o f the kingdom o f G od; or, the G ospel was written that those who believe in Jesus may have their faith deep­ ened, and grasp more fully its truth and its implications. Thereby they should experience in fuller measure the life o f the kingdom now and be assured o f possessing its fullness in the coming age. T h e curious thing is that there is a difference o f spelling o f the verb “believe” in our earliest manuscripts, one form favoring the form er interpretation and the other the latter. We cannot be certain which reading is right, b ut in any case

7

Interpreting the Gospel of John

either reading can be understood in either way! Irrespective o f that conundrum, the nature o f the G ospel itself suggests that there is no need to settle for an either/or here. T he G ospel has both an evangelistic thrust and a deeply instruc­ tive quality. It has power to awaken faith and to confirm faith, and was surely intended for use in m ission to those outside the churches and for building up those inside them. With regard to the latter purpose, the churches for which the evangelist wrote needed guidance in dealing with various groups o f religious people with whom they rubbed shoul­ ders. Som e o f these were in sympathy with the gospel, and som e far from it. There are some ambiguous references to Joh n the Baptist in the G ospel, which speak appreciatively o f Joh n ’s unique role as witness to Jesus and at the same time emphasize his secondary place to Jesus regarding the revela­ tion and salvation o f G od. T his is seen with special clarity in Joh n 1:6-9 and in 3:25-30. T hese passages may well have in view the contemporary followers o f Joh n the Baptist, who claimed that John was the Light o f m en and the R edeem er from G o d (these claims were actually made in later years by the Mandaeans, som e o f whom exist to this day). T h e evan­ gelist deals gently and tactfully with this issue, in view o f the honor in which Joh n was held by Jesus and by the church after him. It is likely that John also had his eyes on the “G nostics,” whose name means “the people who know.” Their views swept the nearer O rient in the second century, but it is evi­ dent that they were spreading in the first century also. T he system was syncretistic, a mishmash o f religion and philoso­ phy, at the root o f which was a dualistic view o f reality. They believed that all that is material is evil and that only what is spirit is good, a view congenial to the Eastern mind, and which has sometimes infected Christianity. Carried to its ex­ treme this doctrine effectively divides G od from the world, which in any case he could not have created, since (on this

JOHN

8

view) it is evil. It similarly makes the Incarnation o f the Son o f G o d impossible, for he could not have adopted a material body; and it further changed redemption to deliverance from the material world rather than from sin. But there were different degrees o f approximation to this kind o f teaching. T he paradoxical thing is that many Gnostics were drawn to the G ospel o f John. T he first commentary on the G ospel known to us was written by Basilides, a G n os­ tic!— and it became the instrument in the hands o f the church to oppose Gnosticism in the second century. T he truth is that many o f the Gnostics were not far from the kingdom o f G od, to use an expression o f Jesus (Mark 12:34), as we now know from the Nag Hammadi collection o f G nostic works recently discovered in Egypt. It is likely that the evangelist was acquainted with more than one sort o f G nostic, and that he wrote with a view to helping those that were “not far o ff” to see in the Christian gospel that which they really sought, and at the same time to combat the errors o f those who were leading members o f the church astray. T h e former would have been in m ind as he wrote the Prologue, with the great confession o f 1:14 (“the W ord became flesh . . .”!) and its climax in 1:18. T h e same motive is discerned in his description o f the death o f Jesus and what happened when a soldier thrust a spear into the body o f Jesus (19:32-35); his true humanity and real death were alike attested in that event. T h ose who stumble at Jesus and cause others to do so are m irrored in 6:60-69, a passage that finds an echo in 1 Joh n 2:18-20; the corrections o f the G nostics in the G ospel are calculated to ensure that true believers do not follow their example. M ore important than either o f these two groups, attention is consistently paid to the Jews among whom Jesus minis­ tered, with Jews o f the synagogues o f the evangelist’s day in mind in particular. T he opposition o f Jewish leaders is high­ lighted throughout the Gospel. Indeed, the evangelist has an

9

Interpreting the Gospel of John

odd habit o f speaking about “the Jew s” when he really has in mind the Jewish opponents o f Jesus, not the people (see e.g., 2:18, 20; 4:15, 16, 18; note the interchangeability o f “the Jew s” and “the Pharisees” in 9 :1 3 ,1 6 ,1 8 , 22; in the narrative “the Jew s” primarily denote the Jewish leaders generally, as can be seen in 18:28—31, 38-40; 19:7,12,15). T h is would be more understandable if the evangelist had been a Gentile Christian, but there is no doubt that he was a Jew whose whole outlook is rooted in Judaism, and that he wrote in order that Jews and Gentiles should be converted. In 7:11,12 he tells how “the Jews,” i.e., the people who had come to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast o f Tabernacles, talked about Jesus, but did so quietly “for fear o f ‘the Jew s’”! A n d many o f “the Jew s” believed in Jesus at that feast (7:31; 8:31)! T he notion that is gaining currency todày, that the fourth G ospel is anti-Semitic, is quite mistaken. It is due to a failure to observe the various ways in which the author uses the term “the Jew s,” and also to not recognizing that the evangelist is at pains to show how the message and m ission o f Jesus is firmly set in the context o f Israel’s faith, hope, and promise. Quite certainly the frequent attention to the hostile Jewish leaders in this G ospel, the grounds o f their opposition to Jesus, and his answers to them have in view the experience o f the churches for which he wrote; history was being repeated, in that the hostility shown to Jesus was now being directed to his followers. They needed to understand their own situation and how to cope with it in light o f what Jesus said and did when faced with similar opposition. Observe, moreover, that this concern o f the evangelist was not solely from a negative point o f view— i.e., to enable Christians to defend them­ selves against Jewish propaganda. H e also wished to rectify the misunderstandings o f his Jewish contemporaries. H e wrote to help them see in Jesus the fulfillment o f the revela­ tion o f G o d in the O ld Testament and the fulfillment o f the high points o f their worship, especially as expressed in the

JOHN

10

great feasts o f the Passover, Tabernacles, and Dedication. In short, he wrote to enable Jews to see in Jesus their M essiah, possessing a significance and stature greater even than the O ld Testament had made known. A ll this presupposes that the churches for which the evangelist wrote had among them a large proportion o f Jew s who were concerned to maintain their relationships with the synagogues. If the G ospel represents the witness o f the beloved disciple it was probably formulated in Palestine, where m ost Christian congregations will have been entirely Jewish, and their members will have continued to w orship in local synagogues as well as in their own Christian assemblies. Jewish Christians will have endeavored to continue these relationships even when, after the Jewish war with R om e, A.D. 66-70, they migrated to areas Outside the H oly Land, notably to adjacent Syria and to A sia M inor. We learn from the A cts o f the A po stles o f the hostility experienced by young Christians in the entire M editerranean area, not only o f their expulsions from synagogues, but o f accusations be­ fore Gentile authorities (cf. A cts 13:50; 14:1-7, 19; 17:4-9, 13; 18:12-17). T h is situation became exacerbated rather than being di­ m inished in the latter part o f the first century. A fter the destruction o f Jerusalem and its temple the Pharisees gained complete ascendancy over the Jewish people, and they refor­ mulated Judaism in long consultations extending over many years in Jamnia. A t some point in that period the deep opposi­ tion to Christians found expression in the Jewish daily prayers known as the Eighteen Benedictions, o f which the twelfth was modified to read: For apostates let there be no hope, and the dom inion o f arrogance [=Rom e] do thou speedily root out in our days; and let the Nazarenes [=Christians] and heretics perish as in a moment, let them be blotted out o f the 11

Interpreting the Gospel of John

book o f the living and let them not be written with the righteous. Blessed art thou, O Lord, w ho hum blest the arrogant.3 W hether that prayer had included the reference to the “Nazarenes” prior to the publication o f our G ospel we have no means o f knowing (we know who did it— Samuel the Small at the request o f Rabbi Gamaliel, Berakoth 28b— but we do not know the date o f its happening). T hat formulation o f the prayer, however, brought to a head a long process o f opposition to the Christian church, and above all, o f course, to Jewish Christians. It illustrates the attitude which the latter had to endure in areas o f Jewish domination. W ith all this in mind we read with quickened insight the controversies recorded in John 5, 7-9, the decision o f the Sanhedrin to bring about the death o f Jesus (11:45-54), and the warnings o f Jesus in 15:18-16:4. In pointing out this interest in the Jews we m ust not underestimate the importance o f the world o f nations to the evangelist. If the Jewish background o f the gospel is unm is­ takable, the awareness o f the outer world and concern for its peoples to learn o f the only Savior o f the world is equally evident. T h e Prologue relates the revelation o f G od in C hrist to the whole creation and to the whole o f humanity (“[All] that has come into being had its life in him, and the life was the light o f men; . . . T his was the authentic life, which enlightens every man by his coming into the w orld” 1:4, 9). T h e summary o f the gospel in John 3:16, probably a confessional statement well know n among the churches, makes it plain that the gospel is for every man, woman, and child in the world. S o also the death and resurrection o f Jesus has in view the redemption o f all hum ankind, even as that dual event witnessed the exaltation o f Jesus as Lord and Savior o f the world (see especially 12:31, 32). T h e fourth G ospel m akes it abundantly plain that the gospel proclaimed

JOHN

12

by Jesus, and which he is, takes into its scope the whole wide world, and there is no other Savior than he (4:42).

Jesus after the flesh — after the Spirit We have left to the last what is perhaps the m ost im por­ tant element in the interpretation o f Jesus by the evangelist. T h e evangelist’s desire to relate the story o f Jesus to the situation o f the churches in his day led him to an unusual procedure: in his account of the works an d words of Jesus he set the historical ministry of Jesus in Ju dea an d Galilee in indissoluble relation to the ministry of the risen Lord in the world of his day. T he observation has been made by more than one writer that when Luke wrote an account o f the origins o f the Christian church he did it in tw o volumes: volume 1, the story o f Jesus at work with his disciples among the Jews in Palestine; volume 2, the story o f the risen C h rist at work through his disciples among the nations o f the world. By contrast the fourth evangelist wrote one book to cover both concerns, so that Jesus after the flesh and Jesus after the Spirit are presented together in a single perspective. T h is brings with it the corollary that the relations o f Jesu s with his people during his m inistry are continuous with the relations o f the L o rd with his church after Easter. T h e m ission o f Jesus to his people and the m ission o f the risen L o rd to the w orld are one. In both he is the focal point o f both faith and opposition in the w orld, and his disciples are inextricably b oun d u p with Jesu s in his destiny. W ith him they experience the pow ers o f the kingdom o f G o d which he brought, the opposition o f the w orld to the preaching o f his gospel, and also the positive response o f many to that same gospel. T h is last feature happily is know n by the disciples in greater m easure than Jesu s him ­ self knew, in accordance with his ow n statem ent (14:12-14). T h is was the consequence o f his dying and rising for the 13

Interpreting the Gospel of John

w orld’s deliverance (12:31-32), and theirs was to be the privilege o f reaping the harvest he had sow n (12:23-24; cf. 4:37, 38). J. Louis M artyn sought to illustrate what is involved in the presentation o f Jesus in his ministry and Jesus after his resur­ rection by adducing the idea o f a drama played out on a twolevel stage, whereon the tw o sets o f actors simultaneously work out a single plot. C . H . D odd had already observed that the story o f the Samaritan woman in chapter 4 is presented as a play in which one set o f actors (Jesus, the disciples, the woman) is in the foreground and another group (the villagers, and the woman, who goes from one group to the other) stand at the back o f the stage. M artyn saw in the narrative o f the healing o f the blind man in John 9 an ideal test case for his analogy: the first seven verses describe a typical “sign” per­ form ed by Jesus; the rest o f the chapter tells what happens when a blind m an’s eyes are opened to G o d and the world, not alone by Jesus but by a Christian preacher, who did the same kind o f thing in the name o f Jesus. M artyn suggests that the tw o sections are not rigidly divided between past and present; rather, the whole narrative participates in the twolevel drama.4 T h e analogy is not to be pressed, but it is not difficult to see in the experience o f the blind man healed by Jesus, and the man’s encounters with his neighbors, his parents, and the Pharisaic leaders. It is a picture o f what many a Jew whose eyes were opened through the Light o f the W orld (9:5) experi­ enced in the time o f the church. T h e story was doubtless written to enable this parallel to be grasped. T h e English commentator Sir Edwyn H oskyns expressed the same kind o f understanding as M artyn, but without the image o f the twostory stage. Com paring the story o f the healing o f the para­ lytic at Bethesda in chapter 5 with that o f the man b o m blind he wrote:

JOHN

14

By a natural and unconscious symbolism the traditional narratives o f his [Jesus’] miraculous actions were related in such a way as to identify the converts with those who had originally been healed, and the later opponents o f Christianity with the original opponents o f Jesus. T he earlier narratives tended to become more and more clearly symbolical o f the later experiences o f the C h ris­ tians, the original history providing the framework within which reference was made to contemporary his­ tory, and the materials out o f which narratives and dis­ courses could be constructed.5 T h is accords with the passage to which we have already drawn attention, Joh n 14:12, 13: the w orks o f Jesus in his ministry are to be continued by his disciples after his death, and greater things will be done by them, since Jesus will be with the Father. “Jesus with the Father,” however, means not his absence, but his occupying the place o f power and glory, so that w hen the disciples pray in his name he will act. They becom e the agents o f the risen L ord for doing “greater things,” for in the resurrection era and the presence o f the Spirit the spiritual realities signified by the “signs” become available to people. They may, for example, receive bread o f life, not simply bread that perishes (ch 6), and the life o f the eternal king­ dom o f G od , o f which recovery from sickness or even resur­ rection from the grave are but reflections. T h e narratives in which these things are described are like mirrors, in which the readers in Jo h n ’s day can see their own experiences o f the L o rd ’s dealings with them and the consequences o f these events in the society o f their day. W hat we have pointed out with regard to the narratives o f the G ospel applies also to the teaching. T he French writer Xavier Léon-D ufour drew attention to the symbolism o f

15

Interpreting the Gospel of John

Joh n in this connection. H e pointed o u t that the presenta­ tion o f Jesus to the w orld outside Palestine entailed a transi­ tion from the cultural setting in which Jesus lived to that o f the churches in Jo h n ’s time and place. T h is involved changes in the significance o f the sym bolism in the differ­ ent settings. For example, am ong the Jew s bread is symbolic o f heavenly food, and heavenly food is thought o f in term s o f the Law; am ong C hristians (including Jewish-Christians) it becom es linked o n another level with the bread and wine o f the L o rd ’s Supper. These differing levels o f symbolism are both discernible in chapter 6, the former in verses 30-33, the latter in 51-58; yet they are not confined to those verses nor are they to be viewed as belonging exclusively to tw o different eras. O n the contrary, both are linked with the sign o f the feeding o f the multitude and are intertwined in the discourse. For this rea­ son Léon-D ufour urges that as John sought to unite the past and the present o f Jesus we should not contrast the two differ­ ent interpretations but seek a unified one and try to discover the relationship between the present reality o f the Spirit and the times past o f Jesus among his people. T his entails respect­ ing the distinctiveness and the due significance o f each context. T h e teaching o f Jesus recorded by the evangelist has to be related both to the setting o f Jesus am ong the Jews o f his time and to that o f his followers in their time. “I f we end up failing to recognize all this,” said Léon-D ufour, “it is be­ cause we allow ourselves to be dazzled by the light o f Easter.” To do that could result in the obliteration o f the roots o f o ur faith in w hat to ok place once for all through Jesus in the time o f Pontius Pilate in Israel. A ccordingly we m ust take seriously that the evangelist in the G ospel has brought alive the past o f Jesu s by showing its relevance for the present. H e has both projected the past o f Jesus into the

JOHN

16

present and enabled the present to be understood in light o f that past. Reflection on this issue will lead us to recognize that the key to this insight o f the evangelist is the doctrine o f the Holy Spirit. H e it is who teaches the disciples and calls to mind the words and works o f Jesus. H e acts as the agent o f the risen Lord, preserving the memory o f Jesus in the flesh and inter­ preting his words and deeds as he makes them live again in the experience o f his people. T his is not simply a case o f reminding people o f one who lived some time ago, and o f making his words “live” through a vivid repetition o f them. T h e Lord is present among his people, continuing to unfold his revelation through the Spirit. T his is clearly stated in John 16:12-15: I have many things to say to you, but you cannot en­ dure them now; but when he, the Spirit o f truth, comes, he will guide you in the entire truth; he will not speak on his own authority, but he will speak all that he hears, and he will disclose to you the things that are coming. T h e fullness o f truth into which the Spirit guides, ac­ cordingly, is the w ord that Jesus earlier spoke and continues to speak as the risen L o rd in an unbroken process o f in­ struction. T his the evangelist clearly understood. N o w on­ der, then, that he could describe in the same breath what the L ord did and said in the days o f his flesh and what he is doing and saying from the right hand o f G od. H e was acting on the truth o f what a contem porary o f his said: “Jesus C h rist is the same yesterday and today and for ever” (Hebrews 13:8 RSV)! In this witness to C hrist, as F. M ussner pointed out, tw o time horizons merge, that o f Jesus in Palestine and that o f Jesus in glory. T h e incarnate L ord who

17

Interpreting the Gospel of John

acted and spoke in the pow er o f the Spirit am ong his people speaks from heaven by the same Spirit to the evangelist. S o it com es about that “the evangelist becom es the inspired m outhpiece o f the glorified C hrist; he lends him his tongue, so that the C h rist speaks to the C hristian com m unity in Jo h n ’s very own language.”6 To grasp this feature o f the G ospel should lead the preacher, teacher, and church member who wishes to bear witness to the L ord to do the same, namely to lend his or her tongue to the risen Lord, and by the Spirit’s aid to let him speak that revelation o f his in the language o f today.

JOHN

18

2

THE WORD MADE FLESH

For m odem Western man, who has lost the key to the idiom o f the Word, the Prologue to the fourth G ospel is an enigma. People o f the nearer Orient and those o f the Mediter­ ranean area, who first contemplated this composition, will have been fascinated by it, and would have been lured on to read further about this unheard-of news o f the Word made flesh. U nlike the introductions to the other G ospels, the Pro­ logue to Joh n ’s G ospel is a complete composition. W hile written for the G ospel, it could conceivably be detached from it and serve as a catechetical statement as to who Jesus is. There is no evidence that it ever circulated on its own, but an increasing num ber o f scholars believe that the Prologue was based on a hymn that was in use prior to the writing o f the G ospel. It is noteworthy that the greatest affirmations in the New Testament letters as to the identity o f Jesus and his deeds are expressed in hymns to the praise o f Christ. I speak, o f course, o f notably Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20, 1 Tim othy 3:16, to say nothing o f the many snatches o f hymns in the book o f Revelation. 19

The Word M ade Flesh

T he poetic structure within the Prologue is clearest in verses 1-5, 10 -12b, 14, 16, and 18. T he statement about John the Baptist in verses 6 -8 will have been inserted by the evangelist, probably because in his time there were followers o f Joh n who declared that he was the Light that brings salva­ tion. T h e evangelist counters this by affirming that Joh n was sent by G o d to be a witness to the one and only Light o f the world. Verse 9 is uncertain; it would follow on verse 5 well, and closely link verses 1-5 to 10—12b; moreover, its thought o f the W ord as the light that illuminates every man contin­ ues that o f verses 4-5. O n the other hand, the assertion that Joh n the Baptist is not the Light, but was sent to bear witness to the Light, is well followed by the statement that the W ord is the au ­ thentic Light that illuminates all hum ankind. We m ust ac­ knowledge the uncertainty o f the origin o f the sentence. It is clear, however, that verse 16 follows directly on that o f verse 14, that verse 15 is written in the same strain as verses 6-8, and that verse 17 provides comment on verse 16. T he hymn o f the Word o f G o d may therefore have read as follows: In the beginning was the Word, and the W ord was with G od, and the W ord was G od. T his was in the beginning with G od. Everything came into existence through him, and apart from him not a thing came into being. W hat has come into being had its life in him, and the life was the light o f men; and the light shines on in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it. (This was the authentic light, which enlightens every person by his coming into the world.) H e was in the world,

JOHN

20

and the world came into existence through him, and the world did not know him. H e came to his own domain and his own people did not accept him. B ut to all who did accept him, he gave authority to become G o d ’s children. A n d the W ord became flesh, and pitched his tent among us, and we gazed on his glory, glory such as belongs to the only Son from the Father, full o f grace and truth. For a share o f his fullness we all received, even grace upon grace. G o d no one has ever seen. T h e only Son, by nature G od, who is ever close to the Father’s heart, he has brought knowledge o f him. If it be asked why the evangelist utilized a hymn to intro­ duce his G ospel the answer must be that it perfectly expressed his theology concerning Jesus. A nd indeed not simply his own, but that o f the churches he served. It has been pointed out that while verses 1-5 and 10-12 are stated in the third person, verses 14 and 16 are in the first person plural— the language o f confession. T he idea has been mooted that verse 14 is a confessional response o f believers to the utterances regarding the Word that have preceded, and that for a very important reason: the declarations concerning the Word in the earlier part o f the poem were common in the ancient world, but Christians alone can affirm verse 14, with its affir­ mation o f the incarnation o f the Word. T his introduction to the gospel has been aptly likened to an overture to an opera. T he function o f an overture is to prepare the hearers for the musical drama that follows and, not infrequently, themes and songs which occur in the opera 21

The Word M ade Flesh

are anticipated in the overture. It is no accident that many motifs within the Prologue occur in the G ospel itself. Am ong such we may mention the preexistence o f the So n o f G od (cf. 1:30; 17:5), his function as the Light o f the world and its life (8:12; 11:25), the gift o f the “only S o n ” in incarnation and in death for the world (3:16), the manifestation o f his glory (2:11; 12:23; 13:31), the unbelief o f the world in face o f it (12:41; 16:8-11), the faith o f those attracted by it (12:31,32; 17:6-19), and m ost striking o f all, the conclusion o f the G ospel with the confession o f Thom as, “My Lord and my G od !” followed by the stated purpose o f the G ospel that readers may come to a like faith in Jesus (20:28, 30, 31). A. Loisy wrote, “T h e theology o f the incarnation is the key o f the entire book, and it dominates it from the first line to the last.” 1 N ot only did Sir Edwyn H oskyns agree with that judgment; he went even further: “T h e figure o f Jesus as the embodiment o f the glory o f the W ord o f G o d controls the whole matter o f the Christian religion."2 “ T he W ord” in an cien t tim es T he opening phrase o f the Prologue points to the fact that affirmations about the W ord o f G o d had been at home in the ancient world for a millennium and more: “In the beginning was the Word . . . .” We recall the first sentence o f the Bible: “In the beginning G od created . . . .” T he association was inevitable for Jews, for they used to name the books o f the Bible by their first word; Genesis, therefore, was known as “In the beginning.” It was as if John wrote, “In that begin­ ning o f which Genesis speaks the Word was already there when G o d created the universe, and it was through him that G o d performed his creative w orks.” T he thought, however, was equally familiar to Israel’s neighbors, including the m ost distinguished o f them, who in turn held sway over the Jews. T he Assyrians and BabyloniJO H N

22

ans in early times com posed hymns about the W ord o f G od, in which the W ord appears as a quasiphysical power o f cos­ mic proportions. It is described as “the exalted powerful W ord . . . unfathomable and incomprehensible, closed up, m ysterious.” W hile the W ord is com pared with a raging storm or a bursting dam, or a net that catches all and from which none can escape, the hymns also speak o f the W ord’s beneficent and life-giving activity in creation. In Egypt the W ord was thought o f as a heavenly divine substance, flow ing out o f the m outh o f (the) god. Ptah was declared to be the creator o f the world, and his instrum ent o f creation was “the m outh which named all things,” i.e., the Word. Significantly in these ancient texts the creative W ord is associated with Wisdom. Thoth, the Egyptian Hermes, is ac­ knowledged to be the W ord and the god o f Wisdom. S o also the Ras Sham ra texts link the word and the wisdom o f El (i.e., God): “T hy Word, O El, is wisdom; wise art thou eternally.” T h at same connection is maintained in a whole series o f texts in the O ld Testament and early Jewish writings in their ac­ counts o f creation and G o d ’s maintenance o f the universe. In Proverbs 8:22-31 it is wisdom which was with G o d “from the beginning, before the world began,” and was pres­ ent as “the craftsman at his side” when creation was formed. T h e B ook o f W isdom 9:1, 2 sets W ord and W isdom in parallelism in the work o f creation: O G o d o f our Fathers . . . who made all things by your W ord and by your W isdom form ed man . . . Yet m ore remarkably, W ord and W isdom became linked with the Law (Torah, as the Jews called it). In the W isdom o f Jesus Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus) a description o f W isdom con­ cludes with the words, “A ll this is the covenant b ook o f the M ost High, the Law which M oses enacted to be the heritage 23

The Word M ade Flesh

o f the assemblies o f Jacob.” T h is identification o f Law with W isdom led to the (to us!) extraordinary notion that the Law was G o d ’s means o f creation. T he expression “in the begin­ ning” in Hebrew is a single word, and it can as well be rendered, “by the beginning.” O ne rabbinic commentator, favoring the latter meaning, drew the conclusion: “T he be­ ginning is nothing other than the Torah,” citing as evidence Proverbs 8:22. H ence G enesis 1:1 means that the Law was G o d ’s instrument in the creation o f all things. So, in Judaism Word, W isdom, and Law became interchangeable terms. From the ancient nearer O rient the concept o f the Word passed into the learning o f Greece and Rom e. Augustine, in a fam ous passage o f his Confessions, related how he pro­ cured “certain books o f the Platonists” and read in them m ost o f what is stated o f the W ord in the Prologue. But there were others besides the “Platonists” who so wrote o f the W ord (the Logos). Heraclitus in the sixth century B.C. described the W ord as “the omnipresent wisdom by which all things are guided”; he identified it with the word o f G od received by the prophets and regarded the W ord as virtually an equivalent for G od. T h e Stoics regarded the W ord as the com m on law o f nature, the soul o f the universe, maintaining its unity. Philo, the Jew o f Alexandria, a contemporary o f Jesus who sought to mediate the Jewish faith to the literary world o f his day, wrote m uch about the Word. H e spoke o f the W ord as the agent o f creation and the medium o f G o d ’s government o f the world. It is the M ediator, the H igh Priest through whom the world comes to G od, and even the A d ­ vocate (Paraclete) for the forgiveness o f sins. H e stated that for the mass o f people G od is unknowable, bu t the ordinary folk can know him in and through the Word. T h e W ord is the perfect M an, the M an o f G enesis 1, made in the image o f G od, as distinct from the m an o f G enesis 2, made o f the dust o f the earth. H e is the Father’s “eldest S o n ,” his “Firstborn.” There is no ground for believing that Philo’s writings were

JOHN

24

know n at first hand to the fourth evangelist; the two writers rather reflect the com m on thinking that was in circulation in their day. T he same has to be said o f the similarities between Joh n ’s writing and the works o f the Gnostics. In the dualistic thought o f this widespread movement the W ord was the M e­ diator between G od and the world. Through him the tran­ scendent G o d was able to create this lower material world, and because o f him m en and women may understand that they belong to G od and his world. S o the G nostics viewed the Word as the Redeem er who came in hum an form into the lower world to lead hum ankind back into the higher world o f G od. They called him the “second G o d ,” the So n o f G od, the Only Son, the Image o f G od, the Man.

Christ— the Word T h is b rief review suffices to show that the W ord o f G o d was an ancient and international concept, with connota­ tions buried deep in the cultures o f the Eastern and W est­ ern world. T here was, however, one factor in the use o f this term that decisively m odified its meaning for Christians: they commonly used it to denote the gospel o f C hrist, that is, the W ord o f G o d spoken through C h rist and about Christ. O nce it was grasped that the W ord o f G o d for the world is C hrist, the incarnate, crucified, and exalted Lord, the em ployment o f the term “the W ord” as an inclusive, descriptive title was inevitable; and in turn that invested the term with a unique meaning, and made possible a bridge to the religions and philosophies o f the ancient world. T. Bom an suggested that the effect produced by the use o f “the W ord” in the Prologue should be com pared with the ringing o f many bells in people’s hearing (see his exposition, Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek, 58-69).3 Certainly n o state­ m ent in the Prologue w ould have roused the interest o f 25

The Word M ade Flesh

pagan readers m ore than the astonishing assertion, “A n d the W ord became flesh. ” T his leads to an interesting question: in light o f the m ove­ ment o f the Prologue from the activity o f the W ord in C re ­ ation to the announcem ent o f the W ord made flesh, at what point in the passage do we begin to read o f the w ork o f the earthly Christ? T here is difference o f opinion about this. Som e see Jesus in his ministry as early as verses 4 and 5; others p u t the transition at verse 9; in either case the confes­ sional statement o f verse 14 summarizes the revelation o f the W ord in the historical Jesus just described, as though the evangelist meant “an d so the W ord became flesh . . . A n important question immediately arises. T h e Christian, indeed, can hardly avoid seeing in verses 10-12 a reference to the rejection o f Jesus by the majority o f his own people and the acceptance o f the gospel in the wider world, and similarly in verse 13 the ministry o f the Spirit after Pentecost. Never­ theless, there can be no doubt that the entire description o f verses 1-13 w ould have made perfect sense to non-Christian people o f all nationalities who knew about the Word. They acknowledged the W ord as G o d ’s means o f creation, as the source o f life, and the light o f all humankind, not least in view o f the relation o f Word and Wisdom. Such people were aware o f the darkness o f this world, the ignorance among many o f the W ord and its Wisdom, and even hostility to and rejection o f the Light. There is a persistent strain in the ancient poetry o f W isdom that depicts her as descending from heaven to find a place o f welcome on earth, but unable to find any. Enoch 42:2 is a late example o f this: W isdom went forth to make her dwelling am ong the children o f men, and found no dwelling place; W isdom returned to her place, and took her seat among the angels.

JOHN

26

W hereas Jews typically maintained that they, and they alone, made a hom e for W isdom, i.e., in the Law given them by G o d (Ben Sira 24:6-8), the evangelist implies that people o f other nations made a place for the W ord in their lives, to w hom also G o d graciously ministered. In this he was not alone am ong members o f his race who pondered the issue. In the book entitled T h e W isdom o f Solom on, chapter 7, there is an unusual description o f W isdom, clearly akin to G reek thinking, wherein the following occurs: She is the brightness that streams from everlasting light, the flawless m irror o f the active power o f G o d and the image o f his goodness. She is but one, yet can do everything; herself unchanging, she m akes all things new; age after age she enters into holy souls, and makes them G o d ’s friends and prophets, for nothing is ac­ ceptable to G o d but the m an w ho m akes his hom e with wisdom . . . . She spans the world in power from end to end, and orders all things benignly (7:26-8:1). T his activity o f W isdom assuredly is not confined within Is­ rael’s borders! S o also the Prologue is consciously worded with a view to taking into account the universal ministry o f the W ord in the world, who is not alone the source o f all life but also the source o f the world’s “light” (it is “the authentic light that enlightens every person,” v 9). T his life and light has been operative among hum ankind from the dawn o f time, with varied responses from people (w 10-12), until at length the ministry o f the W ord came to its climax in a ministry in the flesh. Since the W ord is always the same in character, it is assumed that his service in the flesh was conducted in the same manner as that in the ages prior to his incarnation. However, in the earthly ministry the grace and truth o f the W ord was unambiguously revealed so that what was partially know n came to be luminously plain. 27

The Word M ade Flesh

C . H. D odd accordingly suggested that the whole passage from verse 4 is at once “an account o f the relations o f the Logos (the Word) with the world, and an account o f the min­ istry o f Jesus Christ, which in every essential particular repro­ duces those relations.”4 T his is especially clear with regard to verses 4-13, with which we were concerned; the description o f the activity o f the W ord in that passage holds good both o f the preincam ate and the incarnate Word, even if the language is more especially suitable to the latter. From this understand­ ing o f the Prologue D odd advanced to a further conclusion regarding the relation o f the Prologue to the whole Gospel. H e stated: We might put it thus: the Prologue is an account o f the life o f Jesus under the form o f a description o f the eter­ nal Logos (Word) in its relations with the world and with man, and the rest o f the gospel an account o f the Logos (Word) under the form o f a record o f the life o f Jesus. A nd the proposition ‘the W ord became flesh ’ binds the two together.5 T h at is profound insight into the nature o f the G ospel and its presentation o f Jesus, and I believe it to be a right inter­ pretation.

Christ — the Mediator It is evident that the dom inant concept o f the W ord in the Prologue is that o f M ediator: he is M ediator in creation (w l- 4 a , 10), in revelation (w 4b, 5, 18), and in salva­ tion (w 12, 13, 16). T h e opening statem ent m akes plain the ground o n which the W ord can fulfill such a role by defining his relation to G od . T h e evangelist has very care­ fully chosen his w ords, and we m ust as carefully consider them.

JOHN

28

T h e W ord was “in the beginning.” N ote the difference between “was” in this clause and “came to b e ” in verse 3, used in relation to the creation o f the world. T he latter statement declares that all things “came into existence” through him, whereas the force o f verse 1 is that “in the beginning he was there, with G o d ,” o r even, as some render it, “he always was with G o d .” T h e intent o f the opening statement is to make clear the existence o f the W ord before all time. Bultm ann rightly observed, “T h e beginning is not the first member o f a tem poral succession, but lies before all time and therefore before all w orlds.”6 In that unimaginable eternity before all time the W ord was “with G o d .” T h at is, he was “in the fellowship o f G o d ” (cf. 17:5, and 1 Joh n 1:2, 3). T h e expression conveys the thought o f the ineffable union o f the W ord with G od, which later in the G ospel is spoken o f in term s o f m utual indwelling o f the Father and the So n (cf. 14:10). T he final clause o f this opening sentence runs, “and the Word was G o d .” H e was “with G o d ” and “was G o d ”— at once distinction and identification! But is identification really meant? It is well known that whereas in the preceding clause the evangelist writes, “the W ord was with G o d ” (Greek ho theos, with the defining definite article), in this succeeding clause he writes, “and the W ord was theos, ” without the defi­ nite article. A difference o f expression is being made, but with what intent? Not, assuredly, in order to say, “the W ord was a god, ” as the Jehovah’s W itnesses maintain, citing cer­ tain Christian scholars in support (including J. Becker, au­ thor o f the m ost recent G erm an commentary on the G ospel at the time o f writing this work). Becker, o f course, is aware that the evangelist is using an earlier hymn to the Word, and he proceeds on the assumption that the language is originally that o f a pre-Christian author. We have already seen that the hymn expresses an under­ standing o f the W ord widespread in the ancient world. N o

29

The Word M ade Flesh

doubt religious devotees o f ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylo­ nia, and m ore recent Greece and R om e could have con­ fessed their faith in the W ord as “a god,” but not Christian believers in the one G o d o f the Bible, least o f all the evange­ list who wrote this sentence. H e is showing how this ancient faith in the W ord o f G o d comes to its true fulfillment in the So n o f G od, incarnate in Jesus. It is admittedly conceivable that the evangelist wished to say that Jesus was divine, using theos as a kind o f adjective. B ut there is an adjective in G reek that m eans precisely that, theios, which occurs twice in 2 Peter 1— o f the “divine pow er” (v 3) and o f the “divine nature” (v 4). If that is what was in the evangelist’s m ind he could have said so plainly. In reality what was in his mind is likely to have been in that direction, but more emphatic: “T he W ord was theos” means “the W ord was God in his nature. ” T hat is in harmony with the thought o f the W ord as M ediator o f creation, o f revela­ tion, and o f salvation, who before all time was in the fellow­ ship o f G od, and therefore one with G od. It is noteworthy that in the confession made by T hom as to Jesus (20:28) there is no limitation in expressing the unity o f Jesus with G o d as he cries, “M y Lord and my G od!” (in G reek ho kurios mou kai ho theos mou). T h is understanding o f John 1:1c is well con­ veyed by the NEB: “what G od was, the W ord was.” A fter the reaffirmation o f the truth o f verse 1 in verse 2, the function o f the W ord in the world as the life and the light o f all hum anity is declared. In view o f the dual relation o f verses 4-13 to the W ord before and after his incarnation in Jesus, we are to understand the bestowal o f life and light in verses 4 and 5 as including the life and light which come to man in both creation and new creation (viewing new birth in 3:3-8 as participating by the Spirit in the new creation). T h e same dual application holds good o f verses 9-13, al­ though verses 12c and 13 are peculiarly expressive o f the Christian experience o f regeneration by the Spirit.

JOHN

30

A ll the affirmations o f the Prologue from its beginning to verse 13 move to the climactic utterance in verse 14: “T h e W ord became flesh .” To all w ho shared the traditions o f the ancient O riental world about the W ord the statem ent is all b u t incredible. If it had said that the W ord descended from heaven to live within a hum an body for a while, that w ould have still been surprising, but at least it w ould have been com prehensible— stories o f the gods visiting the world in hum an likeness were n o t uncom m on (cf. A cts 14:11!). A n d for any w ho looked on this sphere as a lower world, unw or­ thy o f the divine, G o d and flesh are antitheses that can never be united. B u t that is precisely what is here affirmed: T h e unbridgeable gulf was crossed, and the W ord became flesh! T h e assertion banishes any shade o f D ocetism from authentic Christian faith. T h e W ord o f G o d became a real man, not a seeming one! A n d so the W ord “pitched his tent” among us (Greek eskenosen, form ing the noun skene, a tent). T h e old English term “tabernacled” points to what is in mind, namely the presence o f G o d with his people in the wilderness wander­ ings o f the Exodus. T h e pillar o f cloud by day and o f fire by night, which guided the Jews from Egypt to the prom ised land (Exod 13:21, 22), was a sign o f the presence o f G o d with his people; it rested on the “tent o f meeting” (Exod 33:7-11), and at the consecration o f the tabernacle it filled it with its glory (Exod 40:34-38). T h e Jews noticed that the G reek term for tent, skene, had the same consonants as the Hebrew sekina, the presence o f G o d which often manifested itself am ong m en in a show o f glory. It was actually said by one Jewish teacher that the consecration o f the tabernacle was the first day o f the Shekinah’s existence in the universe— a pardonable exag­ geration which nevertheless indicates the special connection between the glorious presence o f G o d in the m idst o f his people and the tabernacle during the wilderness wanderings. 31

The Word M ade Flesh

Accordingly the statement in verse 14, “he pitched his tent among us and we gazed on his glory,” is deeply evocative. O n the one hand it recalls the revelation o f G o d ’s presence with his people in the Exodus, and on the other it points to the fulfillment o f the Jewish hope o f a second Exodus, when G o d would deliver his people through the “second R e ­ deemer” (M oses being the first) for the salvation o f the king­ dom o f G o d (cf. Jer 31:31-33; Ezek 20:33-44; H os 2:14-23). W hen the Word “pitched his tent” and revealed his glory, the process o f redemption began. T he glory became visible in his total activity— in the “signs” o f his ministry (cf. 2:11), in his “lifting u p ” on the cross (12:23; cf. 19:35,36), and in the Easter resurrection (20:24-29). It was a glory such as could be revealed solely in “the only Son from the Father,” i.e., in G od’s only Son. T he term translated “only” (monogenes) means literally “the only one (monos) o f its kind (genos).” In the G reek Bible, it often is used to render the Hebrew w ord yahid, used o f an “only” or “beloved” child; b u t yahid is also trans­ lated by the term agapetos, “beloved.” A clear example o f the meaning o f the w ord is seen in Judg 11:34: Jephthah’s daugh­ ter is said to be “his only child (yahid); beside her he had neither son nor daughter.” T h e G reek Bible translates yahid in that passage in a tw ofold manner, monogenes . . . agapetos, i.e., “his only and beloved child.” In G en 22, where Isaac is three times stated to be A braham ’s yahid (w 2, 12, 16) the G reek Bible uses agapetos, “beloved” child; interestingly, H eb 11:17 w hen citing this story, uses monogenes, “only,” with reference to Isaac! It is evident that in our G ospel monogenes, which is used solely o f Jesus, has the simple meaning o f G o d ’s only Son. T he additional term “begotten,” which som e still wish to use, is not contained in the word itself. If, as som e think,

JOHN

32

there is in verse 14 any reminiscence o f the term in 1:13, “begotten o f G o d ” (a quite different word) the parallel would be to the begetting o f Jesus as a man, without hum an father, not to the generation o f the So n from the Father. But verse 14 is likely to have been form ed as an independent confes­ sional statement, and therefore is to be understood without reference to verse 13. T h e glory o f the W ord-become-flesh was “full o f grace and truth”— the latter is a pregnant and significant phrase, for it represents a frequent expression in the O ld Testament to describe the covenant mercies o f G od. A good example occurs in the revelation o f the glory o f G od to M oses, when the name o f G o d is proclaimed, con­ cluding with the description “abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (RSV). Surprisingly, perhaps, the term “grace” occurs only in this paragraph in the fourth G ospel (w 14-17), but the emphatic nature o f these statements shows their im­ portance to the evangelist. H e is here confessing, with the whole church o f G od, the nature o f the glory o f G od mani­ fest in Jesus the incarnate Word: It is full o f the steadfast love that pours itself out on the needy and undeserving. T he point is underlined in verse 16: from him we have received “grace upon grace,” i.e., inexhaustible grace, replacing grace received by fresh grace bestowed, a d infinitum! “Truth,” in the context o f the covenant faithfulness o f G o d in the O ld Testament, represents firmness and stability, therefore steadfastness and trustworthiness regarding the promises o f G od. Such com­ mitment o f G o d to his covenant love reaches its perfect ex­ pression in the “tabernacling” o f his only So n among men in order to bring to pass the reiterated promise o f salvation. W hen the W ord became flesh the kingdom o f grace and glory among mankind was assured. “We gazed on his glory . . . full o f grace and truth” is the testimony o f those who saw it in action in the world.

33

The Word Macie Flesh

The only Son T he final statement o f the Prologue echoes its opening utterance. U nfortunately we cannot be sure o f the original wording o f the second clause. Either we are to read “the only So n (by nature) G o d ” (monogenes theos) or “the only So n o f G o d ” (monogenes huios); the earliest m anuscripts o f the G ospel support the former, many others the latter reading. M ost textual critics accept the former reading on the ground o f the superior authority o f manuscripts and its greater diffi­ culty. In addition, this reading makes the link with the first sentence o f the Prologue more evident. T h e last clause o f verse 1, “the W ord was G o d ,” we interpreted as “the W ord was God in his nature ”; that is almost verbally the same as our rendering o f verse 18b, “the only Son, by nature God. ” T h e only So n is said to be “ever close to the Father’s heart” (literally “in the bosom o f the Father”); that is a more pic­ turesque and emphatic way o f saying, “the W ord was with God, ” which we interpreted as “in the fellowship o f G o d .” T h e fundamental thought o f verse 18, accordingly, is the same as that o f verse 1, bu t it has a particular nuance, in that it is concerned with the revelation brought by the Word. A contrast is being made with claims to revelations o f G od made by other religious leaders. “N obody has ever seen G o d ” includes all visionaries o f all religions, including those o f Israel. Manifestly it does not affirm that n o one has ever caught a glimpse o f G od, not when the writer is a Jew who know s his O ld Testament! Curiously, however, it is almost certain that the m an whom the Jews regarded as the closest to G o d in all time is consciously included in the affirmation, namely M oses. T h e evangelist has already referred to him in the previous sentence; as he pens verse 18 from an earlier com position he could not help thinking about M oses. Exod 33:18ff. tells how M oses asked to see the glory o f G od. T his was denied him, since “m an shall n ot see G o d and live.” B u t

JOHN

34

he was put in a cleft o f the rock as the L ord passed by, the hand o f G o d covering his face, and M oses was allowed to see G o d ’s back. That, and no more! A n d from that partial vision o f G o d proceeded the Law, in the eyes o f the Jew the m ost sacred part o f the revelation o f G o d in the O ld Testament. By contrast, the only Son, by nature G od, is “close to the Father’s heart.” T he primary reference is to his fellowship with the Father in his incarnate life; but it includes the relation to the Father o f the preincam ate existence o f the Word, and also that which he continues to know in his post-Easter existence (17:5). Accordingly the “exposition” o f G o d that he has given in the flesh, and ratified in the resur­ rection, is superior to all declarations o f G o d in time and is to be viewed as a “final” revelation. We observed earlier that the theology o f the Prologue is the key to the entire G ospel. T h at was primarily intended with regard to the presentation and interpretation o f Jesus in the G ospel. It is noteworthy that in the crucial statement as to the Incarnation o f the W ord, the glory revealed in him is de­ scribed as “such as belongs to the only Son from the Father. ” T h e glory o f the W ord was the glory o f the only Son. S o also the conclusion o f the Prologue affirms that the ultimate revelation o f the Father has been given through “the only Son, by nature G o d .” T he Son, like the W ord, discloses G o d because he is one with G od. T h at theme runs through the G ospel to its conclusion. T h e conclusion rams it hom e (20:24-31)! W hereas, however, the W ord as a title does not appear after the Prologue, “the S o n ” (or “S o n o f G o d ”) is the m ost characteristic term for Jesus in the G ospel. O ne o f the interesting features o f recent biblical studies is awareness o f the importance o f the concept “S o n o f G o d ” within Israel. M ost commonly it was applied to the nation in its relation to G o d as his adopted son (in E xod 4:2 2 ,2 3 Israel is referred to as G o d ’s firstborn son, in contrast to Pharaoh’s

35

The Word M ade Flesh

firstborn). In 2 Sam 7:14 it is made know n to David that his descendants will be as G o d ’s son. T he thought is developed in Ps 2:7 and 89:26, 27; the king on the day o f his coronation becom es G o d ’s adopted son. Naturally this led to the thought o f the M essiah as son o f G o d in virtue o f his repre­ sentative capacity, and his function as G o d ’s king, an idea developed by the Q um ran sectaries. We see this reflected in the high priest’s question to Jesus at his trial: “A re you the M essiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” T h at is a typical Jewish m ode o f expression, with its avoidance o f the name o f G od and the title So n o f G o d as designating the Messiah. It is important to observe that this level o f meaning given to “So n o f G o d ” appears in the account o f the disciples’ earliest reactions to Jesus in the fourth Gospel. They are introduced within the circle o f John the Baptist’s followers. They hear John’s testimony to Jesus, “Look, there is the Lam b of God! ” (That title is an apocalyptic designation for the Messiah, which we shall consider later in our reflections on the death o f Jesus.) It prompts Andrew and another disciple to spend a night with Jesus; on return he tells his brother, “We have found the Messiah! ” Nathanael, on being brought to Jesus by Philip, is overcome by the knowledge Jesus displays o f him and he cries, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God, you are the King of Israel! ” In this setting these titles ascribed to Jesus are syn­ onymous. T he G ospel will show the development o f the disci­ ples’ comprehension o f Jesus and the deeper significance that these terms receive through their application to Jesus. A stage in that development o f understanding is recorded in the evangelist’s account o f the aftermath o f the feeding o f the multitude, Joh n 6. T h e excitement generated by that event led a crowd to try to com pel Jesus to becom e king (6:14, 15); their enthusiasm melted away on hearing Jesus expound his m ission in term s o f giving bread o f life to the world, and many o f his adherents left him on that day (6:6066). W hen Jesus asked the Twelve if they, too, wished to go

JOHN

36

o ff Peter replied, “Lord, to whom are we to go? You have words o f eternal life. A n d we have come to believe and to know that you are the H oly O ne o f G o d ” (6:68, 69). T here is no alternative to Jesus! T he apostle’s answer reveals that the early enthusiastic expressions o f faith have given place to more mature belief and a deeper knowledge o f Jesus. They have come to see in Jesus “the H oly O ne o f G o d .” In this context the expression is likely to be a synonym for Messiah. There is a closely parallel statement o f Jesus himself in 10:36, where he makes reference to his being “consecrated and sent into the world,” i.e., to bring to hum ankind the saving sovereignty o f G od. B ut the expression inevitably re­ calls the common name for G od in the O ld Testament, “the Holy O ne o f Israel.” T he implication o f the title is that Jesus shares the holiness and therefore the nature o f him whom Israel confesses as the Holy O ne. T h at com ports with the word o f Jesus already cited, that the Father has consecrated and sent him into the world for his service. There is accord­ ingly ground for Bultm ann’s comment on Peter’s confession o f Jesus: “H e stands over against the world simply as the O ne who comes from that other world and belongs to G o d .”7 T his brings us back to the connection between the So n and the W ord in the Prologue. There we see the “only S o n ” (monogenes) as one with the Father in the eternal ages, sent by the Father to reveal him (v 18) and to redeem m an­ kind (v 14). T hese concepts appear again and again in the body o f the G ospel. In the fam ous text, Joh n 3:16: “G od so loved the world that he gave his only Son . . . ” the giving o f the So n includes giving for incarnation and giving in death for the life o f the world. T h e immediately following sentence (3:17) comprehends both ideas in the simple word “sent”: “For G o d did not send the So n into the world in order to condem n the world, but that the world might be saved through him .” Joh n 3:18 contemplates the effects o f the m ission o f the So n in salvation and condemnation, 37

The Word M ade Flesh

according to the response o f people; and in 3:19 these issues are expressed in language used o f the W ord o f G o d in the Prologue (1:5, 9-12). T he paragraph 3:31-36 gives another meditation on the sending o f the So n in similar vein as 3:16-21, only the accent in this passage falls on the task o f the S o n to reveal G od. T his is seen especially in verses 31-34. O n the one hand the So n bears testimony to what he has seen and heard (v 32), which includes seeing and hearing in his preincam ate state and in his continuing ministry among his people; on the other hand the Father has given to the So n the Spirit “without measure.” Rabbi A ha stated: T he H oly Spirit who rests on the prophets rests on them only by measure [i.e., in a limited fashion,] (Lev. Rab. 15, 2). To the immeasurable gift o f the Spirit to the So n o f G od corresponds the perfection o f the revelation through him. T h e paragraph ends with the assertion that the Father has placed “all things” in the hands o f the Son, hence the ulti­ mate issues o f salvation and judgment are bound up with faith in him or rejection o f him. T h e theme is further developed in 5:20-29. Just as there is a link between the So n and the W ord o f G od in the G ospel, so there is an even closer link between the So n (of God) and the Son o f Man. T he depiction in Daniel 7 o f one like a son o f man, coming with the clouds o f heaven to receive the kingdom o f G od and rule over it, is determinative for the use o f the title in the synoptic Gospels; in the earthly ministry o f Jesus as the Son o f Man, in his dying and rising and in his coming in glory, he is the instrument o f the king­ dom o f God. Something similar appears in the fourth Gospel. T he first statement concerning the So n o f M an in this G ospel provides a comprehensive preview o f his mediatorial

JOHN

38

work. “You will see heaven standing open, and the angels o f G od going up and coming down to the So n o f M an” (v 51). There is here a reminiscence o f Jacob’s dream, wherein an­ gels ascend and descend on a ladder between heaven and earth. T h e implication is clear: Jesus is the point o f contact between heaven and earth; this the disciples will see through his whole ministry— in the signs he perform s, the w ord he utters, the life that he lives, the death and resurrection that he accomplishes, till the goal o f his labors is attained when he welcomes the redeemed to the Father’s house (14:3). T his affirmation is a summary o f the service o f the So n o f M an for the achievement o f G o d ’s saving purpose for hum ankind. B ut we have just seen that the salvation o f hum ankind is the intention o f the sending o f the S o n o f G od! T his points to an interpenetration o f the w orks o f the S o n o f G o d and the So n o f M an in the fourth G ospel, o f which there are num erous examples. T h e classic statement o f the purpose o f the “giving” o f the only S o n o f G o d in 3:16 is immediately preceded by the first o f the three “lifting u p ” sayings o f the G ospel, viz. 3:14,15: A s M oses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the So n o f M an must be lifted up, in order that everyone who believes may have in him eternal life” (cf. also 8:28; 12:31-32). It is the task o f the Son o f M an to mediate the kingdom o f G o d to the world. In the discourse o f 5:19-29, however, this task is deliv­ ered to the Son by the Father: “T he Father loves the Son, and shows him everything that he him self does” (v 20). So he gives to the So n the power to raise the dead and to exercise judgment. Later on, however, it is affirmed, “H e gave him authority to pass judgment, because he is Son of M a n ” (v 27)! A clearer example o f the identity o f functions o f Jesus as So n 39

The Word M ade Flesh

o f G o d and So n o f M an could not be contrived. In reality the works o f the So n o f G od who is Son o f M an are ulti­ mately the w orks o f G o d through him. Accordingly his unity with the Father is emphasized: in term s o f the So n in 10:30 (“I and the Father are O n e,” cf. 10:29), and in term s o f the So n o f M an in 8:28 (“W hen you lift up the So n o f Man, then you will know th a t‘I a m ’ . . . ”).

The “ I am” sayings T h is last utterance naturally leads to a brief consider­ ation o f what are com m only know n as the “I am ” sayings o f Jesus in the fourth G ospel. T h e seven sayings in which Jesus speaks o f him self in various figurative ways, intro­ duced by “I am ,” are am ong the best know n passages o f the G ospel. T hey cry o u t to be preached on! T hey are, in order o f appearance, “I am the bread o f life” (6:35; cf. 41, 48, 51); “I am the Light o f the w orld” (8:12, cf. 9:5); “I am the D oor (or G ate o f the sheep)” (10:7,9); “I am the G o o d Sh eph erd ” (10:11, 14); “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25); “I am the Way, the Truth, and the life” (14:6); “I am the V in e” (15:1, 5). T h ese affirm ations set forth what Jesus is for the world, though in practice it is believers w ho understand these realities as they experience them. T h e various images describe differing aspects o f his saving w ork, m ore explicitly the life o f the divine sovereignty (the kingdom o f G od) which Jesus brings to the world. Since Jesus possesses the life-giving power o f the Father (5:21) R aym ond Brow n is right in observing, “Jesus is these things to m en because he and the Father are O n e .”8 T here is another group o f sayings in which “I am ” is used absolutely. C ertain o f these serve to identify Jesus, as in 6:20, w hen Jesus com es to his disciples o n the water and says to them , “I am (he), d on ’t be afraid.” A lm ost certainly

JOHN

40

we are intended in this passage to recall the com ing o f G o d to the Israelites in their peril at the R e d Sea (see Psalm 77:14-20). Similarly, w hen Jesus declared to the soldiers w ho came to arrest him in the garden, “I am (he),” his simple self-identification created an elem ent o f divine dread, inasm uch as at least certain o f the soldiers fell to the ground in confusion (18:5, 6). T h e other instances o f the absolute use o f the expression “I am” are yet m ore striking (8:20, 24, 58; 13:19); they recall the unique name o f G o d m ade know n to M oses in the vision at the burning bu sh (Exod 3:14) and certain affirm ations o f G o d in the central chapters o f the book o f Isaiah, notably in 43:10-13, 25; 45:5, 6, 18, 21, 22. T h e first o f these passages is especially instructive: “You are my w itnesses,” says the Lord, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am He. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me. I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior. I declared and saved and proclaimed when there was no strange god among you; and you are my witnesses,” says the Lord. “I am G od, and also henceforth I am He; there is none who can deliver from my hand; I w o rk a n d w h o c a n h in d e r m e?” (RSV) In the first sentence o f this citation the phrase “I am H e” has in Hebrew no verb; literally, it is simply “I . . . H e ” (the Hebrew m ind supplies the verb “am”). In the G reek transla­ tion o f the O ld Testament this is rendered simply “I am ” (ego

41

The Word M ade Flesh

eimi), and that is what our evangelist consistently writes. B u t in Isa 43:10 “I (am) H e ” is an abbreviation o f “I, I am H e, the L o rd ” o f the following verse 11. T here is indeed evidence that among the Jews “I (am) H e ” can appear as a substitute for “I am the Lo rd .” Later in the same chapter, v 25, the language is again noteworthy: “I, I am H e who blots out your transgressions”; in the G reek translation that appears, “I am ‘I A M ,’ who blots out your transgressions.” T h e second “I am ” is viewed as a reminiscence o f the name o f G o d revealed at the Exodus and so understood as a title. T hese associations o f the expression “I am ” were current in the first century o f our era, and were developed even further by the rabbis (on these developments see the inter­ esting discussion in C . H . D od d ’s The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, pp 93-96). T heir appropriation by and for Jesus suggests not so m uch a direct self-identification o f Je­ sus with G o d as a union with G od, by virtue o f which G o d speaks and acts through Jesus as his representative and medi­ ator o f salvation and judgment. We add one final reflection on Jesus in the G ospel o f John: time and again it is made clear by the evangelist that the relation o f Jesus to G o d becom es the great issue before which people divide (e.g., 7:43; 9:16; 10:19, and cf. 3:18-21; 12:31, 32). Perhaps we should not be surprised that this is m ost evident in the passage wherein Jesus uses the absolute “I am” m ost frequently and m ost challengingly (8:20, 24,58). W hereas there were those who were drawn to faith in Jesus then (v 30), the implicit claims in the expression evoked the m ost violent hostility possible (v 59). T h e tw ofold perspec­ tive o f the G ospel reminds us that precisely the same re­ actions occurred in the period when the G ospel was written; the decision for or against Jesus as the So n o f G o d — So n o f M an— W ord o f G o d became the ultimate cause o f the sepa­ ration o f the church and synagogue. It remains so to this day, but extends beyond the Jewish people to the religions and

JOHN

42

ideologies o f this world. Jesus is the touchstone o f the reve­ lation o f G o d and his redem ption o f hum ankind. Before this issue all m en and women are called to the bar o f decision. It is not solved simply by verbal agreement or disagreement with Jesus but by willingness to be committed to the G o d revealed in him. It is the task o f the church so to make him know n that the truth o f the revelation and the power o f the redem ption become lum inously clear— not a stumblingblock, but the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

43

The Word M ade Flesh

3

THE SIGNS OF JESUS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE

It is well know n that seven “signs” o f Jesus are recounted in the G ospel o f Joh n — quite certainly a num ber deliber­ ately chosen, seven being associated by the Jews with perfec­ tion. In the synoptic G ospels the evangelists do not describe the miracles o f Jesus as “signs”; they use rather the ordinary G reek term for miracle, namely dynamis (cf. dynamic, dyna­ mite). T h at term normally means “power,” but it can also have a concrete sense, a “powerful deed.” Conversely the term dynamis does not occur in any sense in the G ospel and Letters o f John. T h e term “sign” has a long history among the Jewish people. In the O ld Testament it is frequently used o f events, both natural and supernatural, that authenticate the m in­ istry and the message o f a prophet. T h e signs announced by Sam uel to Saul confirming the genuineness o f his message from G o d that Saul is to be king, is an interesting example o f natural events serving as signs (1 Sam 10:1-9); the super­ natural actions that M oses is told to perform before the Jewish elders illustrate the latter kind o f signs (Exod 4:1-8,

45

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

29-31). T h e judgm ents o f the L ord on Egypt, perform ed at the word o f M oses, are regularly referred to as “signs and w onders” (Exod 7:13 by anticipation, D eut 6:22 retrospec­ tively). In Jer 32:20 the whole series o f Exodus events, from the departure from Egypt to the entry into the prom ised land, are spoken o f as signs and wonders, and these are said to be continued by G o d throughout the earth “to this day.” Psalm 136 brackets those same events with the wonders o f G o d ’s actions in creation. A n im portant application o f “signs and wonders” is the expectation o f their taking place to herald the future, espe­ cially the final future o f the kingdom o f G od. A n early ex­ ample o f this is seen in Isa 7:10-16, but it becom es highly developed in later apocalyptic writings. T h e G ospels are at one in the application o f this teaching to Jesus: nothing less than signs o f the kingdom o f G o d are at w ork in this world in and through Jesus. T his understand­ ing o f the signs is clearly set forth in M att 11:5, 6, 12, 13; 12:28: 13:16, 17; M ark 3:27; Luke 4:16-21; 17:20, 21. T h e fourth evangelist both clarifies and emphasizes this interpre­ tation. H e sees the miracles as parables o f the kingdom that comes through the w ork o f the So n o f G od. T h e signs o f Jesus are powerful manifestations o f the kingdom in the earthly ministry o f Jesus, but they are also anticipations o f the “greater things” (14:12) o f the kingdom that comes yet more decisively in his own greater w orks— in his death and resurrection, the sending o f the H oly Spirit, and the final coming o f the L ord for last judgm ent and resurrection. A s in the O ld Testament the com ing o f G o d for his kingdom results in the gathering o f the G entiles to see his glory, (Isa 66:19), so the signs o f Jesus are revelations o f his glory. T he kingdom that comes through the S o n is the kingdom o f G o d in C hrist. O f this the signs o f Jesus are revelations. T he manner in which the signs o f Jesus are presented by our evangelist is o f particular interest. They dominate

JOHN

46

the story o f the public ministry o f Jesus, so much so that C . H. D odd called chapters 2-12 o f the G ospel “T h e Book o f Signs.” T h e general procedure o f the evangelist is to relate a sign, or tw o signs, and to follow on with teaching that ex­ plains the significance o f the sign(s). O n one occasion a mirac­ ulous sign is combined with a nonmiraculous event, each contributing to an exposition o f the gospel o f considerable length (see chapter 2, which describes the miracle o f the Wa­ ter into W ine and the Cleansing o f the Temple; the form er prepares for the Nicodemus discourse in chapter 3, the latter for the exposition o f the new order o f worship in chapter 4). There is even one instance o f tw o nonm iraculous signs being followed by an explanatory discourse, exactly as the miraculous signs are followed by like instruction (ch 12, the anointing o f Jesus by M ary and the Entry into Jerusalem, seen as signs o f the burial o f Jesus and his exaltation). It was D od d ’s merit to have perceived that in each episode o f signs plus discourse the gospel in its wholeness is presented, the good news o f C h rist manifest, crucified, risen, exalted, and bestowing life.1 It seems evident that the evangelist him self will have used these episodes time and again in his own proclam ation and teaching o f the gospel. H is procedure is an invitation to m odem witnesses to C h rist to use them in precisely the same way. It is now our task to review briefly the accounts o f the signs o f Jesus in the G ospel and consider the lessons that we are intended to learn from them.

The water into wine T h e first miraculous sign, that o f the Water into W ine, is bound up with a highly im portant nonm iraculous action o f Jesus, namely the Cleansing o f the Temple. We are certainly intended to perceive a relation betw een the tw o events, as is indicated by the evangelist’s placing the cleansing at the 47

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

beginning o f the ministry instead o f at its end, and even m ore because the discourses that follow are integrally con­ nected with the tw o signs (ch 3 with the Water into Wine, ch 4 with the Temple o f the Living Lord). It is highly u n ­ likely that in setting the account o f the temple cleansing at this point in the narrative the evangelist wishes to show that it is a different event from that recorded in the synoptic G ospels, still less to correct their dating o f it. Rather, it would appear that he has set this well-known happening at the beginning o f his G ospel and conjoined it with the sign o f the changing o f the water into wine in order to create a kind o f program chapter: whoever understands the miracle o f the W ine and the C leansing o f the Temple has the key to the ministry, death, and resurrection o f Jesus and their outcom e in the salvation o f the kingdom and existence o f the church. In churches o f our time the m ost com m on use o f the story o f Jesus at a wedding in C ana is to recount it on the oc­ casion o f a wedding, and so to convey from it a lesson for the happy couple. It tells o f a bride and bridegroom whose mari­ tal troubles began even in the m idst o f their wedding cele­ brations; fortunately Jesus was at hand, and som eone told him o f the calamitous situation, and he put it right. T h e moral o f the story is: W hen you find yourself in trouble, let Jesus know about it, and he will work things out for you; indeed, if you keep in touch with him he’ll prevent you from getting into that sort o f a mess! Such a use o f the narrative, without simplistic conclusions, is naturally permissible, but we may be sure that that was far from the mind o f the evangelist when he wrote it. T he comment in Joh n 2:11 indicates that the story has an intensely serious purpose: it is the first fulfillment o f the declaration to the disciples in 1:51 (heaven is to pour out its blessings upon earth through the So n o f Man) and so a revelation o f the glory o f Jesus. T h e description in verses 2 and 3 o f the presence o f Jesus and his disciples at the wedding, and the failure o f the wine

JOHN

48

to last is a hint o f how such a catastrophe came about. A Jewish marriage feast, when the bride was a virgin, lasted for fully seven days. Such a custom was possible am ong poor people because the guests brought gifts, including provi­ sions. Jesus and his disciples w ould have been viewed as a family for this purpose, but neither he nor they had gifts to bring; that will have occasioned M ary’s drawing the atten­ tion o f Jesus to the situation. It is hardly a plea for a miracle, but he had som e responsibility for it, and surely he could d o something to meet it! H is reply, “W hat have we to do with one another, woman?” uses familiar idiomatic speech and does not convey in a Jewish atmosphere the harshness that comes over in our language; it probably is intended to show that Jesus also shares his mother’s concern. In the latter part o f the G ospel the “hour” o f Jesus denotes the time o f his death (e.g., 7:30; 8:20, etc.), but here the statement that his hour had not yet come signifies rather his task o f bringing the kingdom o f G od, which will culminate in his death and resurrection. T hat work has been given him by his Father, and the Father alone can determine when it begins, not his mother. T he m ode o f meeting the need o f wine is clearly significant in a Jewish setting. Jars o f water intended for ritual cleansing o f people about to eat become, by the transforming power o f Jesus, vessels o f wine for celebrating the mercies o f G od. (Among pious Jews wine was almost exclusively used for reli­ gious purposes.) T he meaning o f the event is illuminated by one o f the best known passages o f the Bible o f the Jews, and a favorite description o f the kingdom o f G o d in their eyes, namely Isaiah 25:6-9: T h e L ord o f hosts will prepare a lavish banquet for all peoples on this m ountain; a banquet o f aged wine, choice pieces with marrow, and refined, aged wine. A n d o n this m ountain he will swallow up the covering 49

The Signs of Jesus an d Their Significance

which is over all peoples, even the veil which is stretched over all nations. H e will swallow up death for all time, and the L o rd G o d will wipe tears away from all faces, and he will remove the reproach o f his people from all the earth; for the L ord has spoken. A n d it will be said in that day, “Behold, this is our G o d for whom we have waited that he might save us. T h is is the L o rd for w hom we have waited; let us rejoice and be glad in his salvation” (NASB). T h at celebration o f the salvation o f G o d ’s kingdom m ade its beginning in the peculiarly suitable setting o f a wedding feast in Cana. T h erein the glory o f Jesus was m anifested (v 11), and the “h o u r” o f Jesus was adum brated w hen the kingdom came for the deliverance o f . the whole hum an race— note that the feast o f G o d is m eant for “all peoples”! (Isa 25:6). T h e reality symbolized by the wine o f the king­ dom o f G o d is none other than the “eternal life” o f the kingdom , w hich was m ade know n to N icodem us (John 3:1— 12), m ade possible by the lifting u p o f the S o n o f M an on his cross and to heaven (3:14, 15), and set forth for all hum ankind in the im m ortal w ords o f Jo h n 3:16. T h e Cleansing o f the Temple does not strictly fall within our purview in this chapter, bu t its connection with the first sign warrants mention o f it. In all four G ospels the event signifies less the action o f a zealous reformer to purify the worship in the temple than an act o f judgm ent (see Jer 7:4- 15) that presaged a new and more worthy order o f worship o f G o d (cf. the anticipation o f this in the kingdom o f G od, set forth in great detail in Ezek 40-48). T hat new order is achieved not by Jesus throwing the traders and their beasts out o f the temple but by the death to which his action leads (note the citation o f Psalm 69:9 in verse 17), and the resurrec­ tion which is inseparable from it.

JOHN

50

T his is made plain in the riddle-like utterance o f Joh n 2:19, spoken in reply to the demand o f the Jewish leaders for a sign o f his authority over the temple which, after all, was in their hands. “D estroy this tem ple” is an ironical call to the rulers to carry on as they have been doing, for that will surely lead to the destruction o f their temple (note the close parallel in M att 23:32-36). T he sign that Jesus will then give will be to raise it “in three days.” T his prophecy perfectly accords with the Jewish expectation o f a glorified temple in the kingdom o f G od. B ut in light o f the impending death and resurrection o f Jesus the “raising” o f the temple “in three days” assumes a profounder meaning than the Jewish leaders could know. T h e “destruction” o f the temple through the rejection o f the Lord’s A nointed (the “M essiah”) primarily relates to its pu r­ pose as a place o f meeting for G o d and the people. Since the rulers o f the temple have rejected G o d in the person o f his So n he rejects their temple (note M att 23:38: “Behold, your house is being left to you— desolate!” A n d see the elaborate description o f the abandonment o f the temple by G o d in Ezek 10:15-19; 11:22,23). T h e new temple that Jesus is to raise is stated in verse 21 to be “the temple o f his body.” A s the spiritual destruction o f the old temple is brought about in the destruction o f the body o f Jesus so the building o f the new temple is accom­ plished through the resurrection o f Jesus. T h e risen L o rd him self becom es the “place” where G o d is revealed, where his forgiveness and renewal are know n, and where fellow­ ship with G o d is experienced and forever maintained. N o t the church as the “body” o f C hrist, but the risen Lord in person is the temple o f the new order. T h at the symbolism can pass over to the church as the temple o f the Lord, in view o f the unity in the Spirit o f the L o rd and his people, is understandable (so in R om 12:4, 5; 1 C o r 12:12, 13; and cf. 1 Pet 2:4,5), but we m ust not impute it to this passage, where

51

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

the L ord in his redemptive activity is explicitly in view. T his is the root o f the revelation expounded to the Samaritan woman— and to the church and the w orld at large— in John 4:21-24.

Two healings In Joh n 4:46-5:47 we have a typical example o f the way the Book o f Signs was constructed. Two stories are related o f the miracle-working power o f Jesus. O ne concerns a child who is desperately ill and about to die, the other a man advanced in years whose life has been ruined by illness. To both Jesus gives new life, and a discourse is added which draws out the implications o f the signs. W hat kind o f a m an was it who came to Jesus to request that he should heal his son? T h e term used to describe him, basilikos, is properly an adjective and m eans “what belongs to a king,” and so “royal.” A s a noun it can be used to denote a member o f a royal family, o f the royal household, o f the court, and o f the king’s army. Josephus uses the word in all these ways, and m ore than once he uses it in the plural, o f the troops o f the king’s army. W hile therefore it is linguisti­ cally possible to translate the w ord here as a “royal official” (NIV, n a sb ) or “court official” (JB), it is m ost likely that this man was an officer in the army o f H erod Agrippa. Perhaps he was the centurion o f w hom Matthew and Luke wrote, whose “boy” was ill and who showed great faith in Jesus (Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:2-9). In that case the centurion will not have been a Rom an, as is so commonly assumed, but in all probability an Arab. Matthew speaks o f the sick person as the soldier’s pais. That is an ambiguous term; it can mean “boy” or “servant” (cf. the French garçon, boy, is still the usual term for “waiter” in a restaurant). Luke’s source gave him the term doulos, “servant” or “slave.” T he original tradition doubtless spoke o f

JOHN

52

the soldier’s “boy,” and the term was variously interpreted o f his child or his servant. John makes it clear that he was his son, and that comports with the urgency o f the officer in his approach to Jesus. A further point o f interest to note is that in both Matthew and Joh n Jesus raises an objection to the father’s request. M att 8:17 is now commonly recognized to be a question: Jesus asks the officer, “A m I to come and heal him?” T h e officer had been long enough among Jews to know that Jews don’t enter Gentile houses, since otherwise they would be rendered unclean. In John 4:48 Jesus re­ sponds to the officer’s request with a heavy-hearted sigh: “U nless you people see signs and wonders you will never believe!” (Note the remarkable parallel to this in M ark 9:19, a similar situation o f need.) In Matthew the centurion expressed his great faith in ask­ ing Jesus simply to exercise his God-given authority and com ­ mand the healing to take place; in Joh n the officer was told to go home, since his son was alive, and he believed the word o f Jesus and returned home without further question. T he clue to the meaning o f this incident is the statement, three times repeated, “your son lives” (see w 5 0,51,53). Since it has been explicitly stated that the boy was at the point o f death (v 47) the healing o f the child is a sign o f the power o f Jesus to give life. In the discourse that follows this is spoken o f as eternal life (5:24), and even resurrection life, which the Father has empowered the So n to bestow (5:21-29). T he Healing o f the Paralytic at Bethesda (5:1-9) has essen­ tially the same significance, even though the subject o f healing is very different. T he man in question has been ill for thirtyeight years, so presumably he was getting on in years. H e was one o f a number o f pitiable physical wrecks lying by the pool o f Bethesda, waiting for a miracle to happen to them (observe that the explanation o f their presence at the pool is not in the earliest manuscripts o f our Gospel, but it represents a popular

53

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

tradition noted by a later copyist in the margin o f his manu­ script). To judge from his response to the approach o f Jesus, who sympathetically asked if he'wanted to get well, the man had lost hope and faith as well as health. H is reply was like that o f many others in his condition— the complaint o f an embittered spirit. It is remarkable that Jesus selected such an individual as this among the many needy people waiting for a cure. T he man had no idea who Jesus was; he didn’t ask to be healed by him, and appears to have been altogether without faith. N ev­ ertheless, Jesus took pity on him and with a word restored him to health. It is that very word spoken by Jesus to him that points to the significance o f the healing: Egeire, i.e., “rise!” A t the utterance o f that word the paralytic was enabled to stand up, pick up his mattress, and walk. T h e healing was a sign o f the truth o f verse 21: “A s the Father raises the dead (egeirei) and gives them life, so also the So n gives life to those whom he wishes.” Jesus had given life to a man as good as dead. Such is the theme o f the discourse in 5:16-30. T h e discourse is sparked o ff by reference to the fact that the healing took place on the sabbath. Jew ish leaders at the pool saw a man who had become a new creation by the power o f G o d on the sabbath, but their gaze was entirely taken up with the mattress he was carrying. H e was breaking the sabbath law! W hen the Jews learned that Jesus was the one who had both healed the m an and commanded him to carry the m attress— both acts contrary to the sabbath law as they understood it— they were confirm ed in their wrath against Jesus. Here was another example o f Jesus acting as the law breaker! T h e tense o f verse 16 should be observed: “It was on this account that the Jews used to persecute Jesus, because he used to do such things on the sabbath.” T h e response o f Jesus to this criticism warrants closest attention: “My father has been working until now, and I also am working.” T his is a deliberate modification o f the Jewish

JOHN

54

understanding o f G o d ’s relation to the sabbath. G en 2:2 states that G od completed his work on the sixth day o f cre­ ation, and so he rested on the seventh day. Since the works o f creation were then finished, it was deduced that G o d ’s sab­ bath continues to this day. B ut that supposition raises a diffi­ culty: H ow does one reconcile the thought that G o d keeps his sabbath with what the Scriptures say o f his acts o f judg­ ment and salvation, e.g., in the Exodus? A popular answer to that question ran: G od rested from work on the world, but not from his work on the godless and the righteous. H e shows to the latter something o f their recompense and to the form er something o f their recompense (so Genesis Rabba \ .8c).2 In other words, G o d blesses the righteous in anticipa­ tion o f their gaining the life o f the kingdom o f G o d and brings judgment on sinners in anticipation o f their exclusion from it. Here then we see the significance o f our Lord ’s w o rd s,“. . . and I’m working too.” Jesus as So n o f G od does the w orks o f G o d on the sabbath. B ut the signs just described show that he brings to m en no mere anticipation o f the kingdom o f G od, but its reality— life from the dead! A n d he declares judgm ent on rejecters o f the W ord o f G o d which the Last Judgm ent will confirm. T h at is spelled out in verses 24-29. B ut there is a further element in the answer o f Jesus in verse 17 that infuriated the Jewish leaders: “My father is work­ ing . . . and I also am. ” Jesus, they said, was calling G od his own Father, and thereby he was making himself equal with G od. T h e former charge Jesus did not deny, but rather af­ firmed: Yes, G o d was his Father, and it was from him that his power and authority were derived. T he second charge, how­ ever, Jesus rebutted. H e did not make himself equal with G od. H e didn’t make himself anything! Indeed, he could do nothing o f himself! H e depended utterly and entirely on his Father for his works. It was the Father who gave him power to give life to people, as the healing o f the paralytic illustrated, and his

55

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

Father similarly has given him authority to judge humankind. Accordingly, to dishonor the Son is to dishonor the Father who sent him. These insights with respect to the works o f Jesus on the sabbath and his relation to the Father give insight into the heart o f Jesus’ understanding o f his mission. H is con­ sciousness o f unity with the Father combined with his sense o f utter dependence on his Father is observable right through the Gospel. It characterizes the life o f the incarnate So n o f G od, and his mission to bring life to all, from children (4:4653) to the aged (5:1-9). But as So n o f G od he is the Mediator not only o f life but o f judgment. H e makes it plain that the gospel he brings is a double-edged sword, and he demands that it be received responsibly.

The feeding of the multitude an d w alking on the sea A s in the preceding section, so here we have tw o signs followed by an explanatory discourse. U nlike the tw o for­ m er signs (but like the first recorded in the G ospel) these are “nature m iracles,” not healings o f people. T h e discourse is alm ost wholly taken up with the m eaning o f the first sign. T h e second, however, is not ignored in the discourse, but rather contributes an essential elem ent o f its Christological basis. T he Feeding o f the M ultitude is the best know n o f the miracles o f Jesus, and indeed it is the only miracle o f his that is reported in all four G ospels. N o t infrequently m odem preachers tend to romanticize the event (when they don’t render it innocuous!); attention is drawn more to the small boy who generously gave his lunch that others might share it than to the light that the event sheds on the Lord who multiplied the loaves. In reality it is a deeply theological narrative, closely linked with O ld Testament story, type, and

JOHN

56

prophecy, with its center in Jesus, in whom earlier revelation and redemptive action comes to its completion. T he details o f the event are familiar. W hereas the first three G ospels all mention that it took place in the wilder­ ness, our evangelist merely mentions that it happened in the hill country on the other side o f the lake from Galilee. Never­ theless he, as they, had the same fundamental conception in mind: T he synoptists saw in the feeding miracle a repetition o f the feeding o f the people o f G o d in the wilderness (see Exod 16:15-18,31-36) but through a greater than M oses, the C hrist o f G od; our evangelist assumes that understanding but emphasizes (through the discourse that follows) that Jesus, the Second Redeemer, was now bringing about the awaited second Exodus into the kingdom o f G od. T h e event, there­ fore, is recognized to be an anticipation o f the feast o f the kingdom o f G od for all nations (cf. Isa 25:6-9), but on a larger scale than the wedding in Cana o f Galilee (2:1-11). It is wholly characteristic o f our evangelist, however, that by a mere mention o f a date he orientates the event to the “hour” o f Jesus, by which the nations will be able to partici­ pate in the feast o f the kingdom. H e notes, “T h e Passover, the great festival o f the Jews, was near” (6:4). We shall consider at a later point the extent to which this reminder controls the interpretation o f the sign; meanwhile we observe that Jesus’ gift o f the bread o f the kingdom o f G o d is related in the dis­ course to the bread that was “broken” in death and is broken every L ord ’s Day in the L ord ’s Supper. It is inevitable that in discussions about the feeding mira­ cle the question should rise as to what really happened on that occasion. T h e report in the G ospels o f Jesus breaking five bread rolls and tw o pieces o f dried fish o n and on and on, till five thousand m en were satisfied, is too frankly su­ pernatural for many to accept. Various alternative explana­ tions accordingly have been offered. It is suggested, e.g., that

57

The Signs offesus and Their Significance

the sharing o f one person’s provisions was made by Jesus an example for others to follow, so that in the end nobody went hungry; or that the little that was available was broken into minute pieces, enabling a celebration o f the eucharist to take place in the wilderness which was spiritually satisfying to all present; or even that an O ld Testament story o f a prophet feeding a group o f hungry m en (2 Kgs 4:42-44) was attri­ buted to Jesus on an amplified scale. Such rationalizing ex­ planations can be neither proved nor disproved, though all freely admit that they are out o f harmony with the thought o f the writers o f the G ospels and o f their sources. In this connection one factor in John’s description o f the situation deserves to be weighed. He, and he alone o f the evangelists, states that there was an almost revolutionary aftermath o f the event. W hen the men present saw the “sign” that took place they concluded that Jesus m ust be the prophet that was to come into the world, i.e., the prophet like M oses, and they endeavored to seize Jesus and compel him to become king (verses 14, 15). In popular thought the “prophet like M oses” (Deut 18:15,18) was to do the miracles that M oses did; some thought that M oses himself would return and lead Israel into a second exodus, but others identified the prophet with the expected Messiah. W hatever the precise views o f the multitude on this occa­ sion, a full-blown messianic revolt centering on Jesus was about to take place. It was the most dangerous moment in the ministry o f Jesus, threatening to undo all that he had sought to achieve through his preaching and dem onstration o f the real kingdom o f G od. H is reaction is to be observed: some o f our earliest manuscripts and witnesses to the G ospel text at this point read that Jesus “f led to the hills” (the reading, he “departed to the hills,” is a later watering down o f the text by copyists who could not believe that Jesus did such a thing). Plainly som ething more than a call by Jesus for generosity in sharing food or arranging for a kind o f open-air eucharist was

JOHN

58

needed to account for that messianic “Revolt in the D esert” as H ugh M ontefiore called it. We take it to be an act o f G od in Christ, as the other signs o f Jesus were. In Matthew and Mark, as well as in John, an account o f Jesus’ Walking on the Sea follows at once that o f the feeding miracle. T he fourth G ospel alone explains why Jesus sent his disciples away from the place: they, too, were Jews with mes­ sianic longings and aspirations and were as susceptible to messianic fervor as the rest (cf. Luke 19:11); it was essential that they should be removed from the dangerous situation that had arisen as speedily as possible. S o Jesus went to the hills to pray and they were sent across the lake. A s they rowed, the waters became increasingly whipped up by a pow ­ erful wind. Jesus therefore ceased his praying and went to their aid. T h e text states that the disciples see Jesus “walking upon the sea and coming near the boat,” and they were terrified. D id Jesus really do that? Som e notable commentators, includ­ ing Bernard, have pointed out that the language can mean that Jesus walked beside the sea, as in John 21:1. Bernard believed that John was correcting a false understanding o f what actually took place: Jesus was walking beside the lake, and the disciples, not realizing that their boat had been driven close to the shore, thought that he was walking on the water, and in their fear they made a miracle out o f a perfectly ordi­ nary circumstance. Linguistically, Bernard’s view that “epi tes thalasses” can mean “beside the sea” is correct, but his interpretation o f what John was wanting to say is quite certainly far from the evange­ list’s mind. Mark uses exactly the same wording as John, and he goes on to say that the boat was “in the midst of the sea” (Mark 6:47). Matthew is equally clear and emphatic in his account (Matt 14:25). In John 21:lff. the situation described is wholly different; there the evangelist plainly states that Jesus stood “on the

59

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

beach,” and he goes on to tell o f the conversation o f Jesus with the disciples in that place. If John had wished to correct the churches’ (mis)understanding o f what Jesus was doing on or beside the sea he could have easily done so by writing unambiguously that Jesus was walking alongside the sea (para ten thalassan). Precisely this phrase occurs in M ark 1:14 and A cts 10:6. In reality it is this extraordinary situation that gives rise to the utterance o f Jesus which form s the reason for the evangelist telling the story: “Stop being afraid,” said Jesus: “I am (he). ” T he expression “I am” is reproduced elsewhere by John (see especially John 8:24, 28, 58; 13:19), and he intends us to recall the name o f the Lord revealed to M oses in the wilderness (Exod 3:14) as well as in the prophetic writings (see especially the central chapters o f Isaiah, notably Isa 43:10, 25). T he evangelist, when describing the present event, will doubtless have had in mind the description o f G od coming to the rescue o f the Israelite tribes at the R ed Sea in Psalm 77:16, 19 (NIV): T h e waters saw you, O G od, the waters saw you and writhed; the very depths were convulsed . . . . Your path led through the sea, your way through the mighty waters, though your footprints were not seen. So the evangelist saw Jesus, the revelation o f the Father, com­ ing to his disciples in their distress— in the Second Exodus! T he discourse that now follows is almost wholly taken up with the meaning o f the sign o f the Feeding o f the M ulti­ tude, but the Walking on the Sea is also presupposed. It is because Jesus can utter, “I am ” that he can also say, “I am the Bread o f Life” (6:35). A n odd feature o f the discourse is that it begins beside the lake (v 25) and ends in the synagogue at Capernaum (v 59). A t some point in it a change o f venue is

JOHN

60

presupposed. T his could throw light o n an element in the discourse to which we earlier alluded. In verses 25-29 Jesus addresses the m en who had followed him after the miracle in the wilderness, telling them to seek the bread that endures to eternal life which he, the So n o f M an, gives. In verses 30ff. certain Jews ask what work Jesus does that can compare with the gift o f bread from heaven that M oses gave and that the M essiah shall give, and they challenge him to do the same. It is evident that they had heard reports o f the feeding o f the crowd, and they disbelieved them and so opposed him, probably in the synagogue o f Capernaum . T he chief features o f the discourse that especially relate to the sign o f the feeding miracle are: (i) the affirmation o f Jesus that he is the Bread o f Life that satisfies the hunger o f hu­ mankind (v 35); (ii) he, unlike the manna that G od gave, is the real Bread that came down from heaven and gives life to the world, an assertion that implies his incarnation as the So n o f G od (w 32, 33); (iii) the Bread that Jesus gives is his flesh for the life o f the world, hence he must die to impart the living bread to the human family (v 51); (iv) the violent symbol o f the necessity o f eating his flesh and drinking his blood is employed (vv 53-58), emphasizing that it is needful not only to come to Jesus, and to believe on him, but to receive him — all which are really different aspects o f faith. For Jesus is both the giver o f the living Bread and is the living Bread. T his revelation is perfectly comprehensible to the people o f the new covenant as they celebrate its truth in the Lord’s Supper. In its essentials it can be grasped by any who reach the faith o f Peter that Jesus is the Holy O ne o f G o d and has the words o f eternal life (vv 68,69).

The healing of the m an born blind T h is graphic story is one o f the m ost fascinating in the four G ospels. T h e account o f the healing is briefly given 61

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

in verses 1-7, and the rest o f the chapter tells o f its conse­ quences. T hroughout the narrative the blind m an is on center stage, and the evangelist tells the story by recounting the differing reactions o f people to his changing situations. H e begins with the reactions o f the disciples o f Jesus to the m an’s blindness (vv 1, 2) and the contrasting response o f Jesus to it (vv 3-5). H e continues with the astonishm ent o f the m an’s neighbors (vv 8-12), the hostility o f the Jew ish leaders (vv 13-24), and the bewilderment and fear o f the m an’s parents (vv 19-23). T h e com passion o f Jesus on the now outcast m an concludes the healing narrative (vv 35-38), but a postscript is added: Jesus’ m ission is to make blind to see and seeing blind (vv 39-41). T h e disciples’ response to the sight o f the blind m an is typical o f the w orld o f their day, including the Jews. It was generally believed that all suffering was due to sin, hence all sufferers were punished for their sins. T h e Jerusalem Targum on D eu t 21:20 states that parents bringing a rebel­ lious son to the elders should say, “We have transgressed the W ord o f the Lord, therefore this o ur so n has been b o m to us, w ho is unruly and rebellious.” T h e possibility o f a child sinning before birth was also discussed by the rabbis. T hey were intrigued by the m ention in G e n 25:22 o f the tw ins Jacob and Esau struggling in R ebek ah ’s womb. O n e rabbi suggested that they went roun d trying to kill one another. Som eone else had the bright idea that w hen Rebekah walked past a synagogue Jacob struggled to get out (on the basis o f Jer 1:5), bu t w hen R ebekah passed an idol tem ple Esau struggled to get out (cf. Psalm 58:4)! Jesus dis­ m issed such speculations. T h is m an’s plight, he said, was not due to his or his parents’ sin; it was that the m an might have a share in the m ission o f the S o n o f G o d and that the glory o f his salvation be revealed in him. H e was to becom e a dem onstration o f the truth that Jesus is the Light o f the w orld (v 5).

JOHN

62

T h e m ode o f Jesus’ Healing o f the Blind M an reminds us o f M ark 8:23; doubtless his actions helped encourage the faith o f the man. T he latter was sent to wash in the pool o f Siloam, as Elisha sent Naam an to wash in the Jordan to heal his leprosy (2 Kgs 5:10-14). B u t saliva, mud, and washing in a pool make no blind person to see; it is the w ord and power o f Jesus that do that. T h e evangelist sees this illustrated in the meaning o f the name Siloam. It puts in a G reek form the Hebrew Shiloah, which is a participle meaning “sent.” T h e term related to the waters that were “sent” (i.e., gushed) into the pool, but in the G ospel the evangelist repeatedly m en­ tions that Jesus is the “Sen t O n e ” o f G od. T h e blind m an receives his sight as he washes in the pool nam ed “Sen t,” b u t he is healed by the Sen t O ne o f G od. Jesus is, as Joh n Chrysostom put it, the “spiritual Siloam .” T h e neighbors o f the blind m an could not believe the evidence o f their eyes as they looked on the beggar they knew, but who now saw. They took him to the Pharisees, who were their spiritual leaders and who ought to know about this miracle. T h e Pharisees, however, were nonplused. T h e heal­ ing had taken place on the sabbath; the miracle pointed to Jesus as an instrument o f G od, but its occurrence on the sabbath showed him to be a sinner! They therefore sent for the m an’s parents, to see if the healing were genuine. T h e parents were ready enough to attest the blindness o f their son and the fact o f his healing, but they were unwilling to say more for fear o f being thrown out o f the synagogue. T h e accuracy o f that observation has been questioned by some scholars. We know that about the end o f the first cen­ tury o f our era the daily prayers o f the Jews (used also in all synagogue services) included a curse on the Christians. It ran: Let the Nazarenes and the heretics be destroyed in a moment, and let them be blotted out o f the book o f life and not be inscribed with the righteous. 63

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

It is believed that this prayer was intended to bring about the exclusion o f all Jewish Christians from the synagogue, some­ thing that did not take place in the time o f Jesus and the early church. T he evangelist, it is suggested, was reflecting in this story what went on in his day, and was really addressing his contemporaries through it. U ndoubtedly John was relating this event to the Christians o f his day, b ut he was doing the same in every line o f his Gospel. In reality he had justification for his statement in this case. Jesus himself warned against being afraid to confess faith in him before men (Mark 8:37), and he pronounced a blessing on those who endured perse­ cution, were hated, insulted, excluded, and rejected because o f their connection with him (Luke 6:22; M att 5:11,12). T he book o f A cts illustrates the situation o f the blind man and his parents, and o f Christians generally. T he curse on the Nazarenes was but a reinforcement o f the attitude o f Jewish authori­ ties toward followers o f Jesus from the time o f the ministry o f Jesus onward. T h e rest o f the narrative shows the Pharisees endeavoring to discredit the testimony o f the blind man. They command him to “give glory to G o d ,” i.e., by confessing the truth (cf. Jo s 7:19). T hus, they were implying that he was a liar, that Jesus was a sinner, and that they were right. H e confessed the truth readily enough— that once he was blind, but now he can see! A n d he confessed his amazement at the rulers’ ignorance o f Jesus and their disbelief in the good he was doing. O utraged at this the Pharisees exclaimed, “You were b o m in utter sin, and are you trying to instruct us?” S o then they admitted that he was b o m blind! A nd that Jesus m ust have healed him! B u t they rejected him, and the miracle, and the one who perform ed it. W hen Jesus heard what had happened to the man he found him, and completed the process o f his healing, open­ ing his spiritual eyes to know w ho it was who had healed him. T his was the first time the blind m an saw Jesus, and he

JOHN

64

now learned that he was looking into the face o f the S o n o f Man. N o wonder he fell down before him and gave him glory! T he conclusion o f the story is an ironical but som ber ut­ terance o f Jesus: “for judgment I came into this world . . . We cannot but contrast John 3:17. Salvation is the primary intent o f the coming o f Jesus, but since salvation calls for faith and obedience, rejection o f the saving revelation entails G o d ’s rejection o f the rejecter. T he Light o f the world shows up the darkness, and the way out o f it. They who refuse to see the Light are confirmed in their blindness (9:40,41).

The raising of L azaru s A feature o f the La 2arus account strikes the observant reader immediately. Instead o f its describing a sign o f Jesus followed by an exposition o f its meaning, it reads like a narra­ tive interspersed with comments that reveal its meaning step by step. There is truth in that observation, although the ma­ jor elements in the story actually occur at the beginning and the end, and the intermediate steps are punctuated by con­ versations o f Jesus, notably with the disciples (vv 7-16), with M artha (vv 20-27), and with M ary (vv 28-32). T h e raising to life o f a dead person by Jesus is not a solitary occurrence in the G ospels. H is message to Joh n the Baptist, who had inquired whether he was indeed the M es­ siah, includes in a brief summary o f his w orks, “the dead are raised” (Matt 11:5). N ote the plural! T h e synoptic G ospels tell o f the raising o f Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:21-24, 35-43) and o f the widow’s son in N ain (Luke 7:11-17). In the case o f Lazarus, however, Jesus is confronted with a situation in which a man had been dead for four days— manifestly be­ yond all possibility o f recall by a kiss o f life. In the raising o f Lazarus we meet with the starkest expression o f G o d at work through Jesus among people in the extremity o f need. 65

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

T h e statement o f Jesus on learning o f Lazarus’s illness provides a clue as to how we are to understand what now takes place: “T h is illness is . . . for the sake o f the glory o f G od, that the So n o f G o d may be glorified through it” (v 4). In this G ospel the glorifying o f G o d through the So n prima­ rily takes place in the event when the S o n is glorified by G od, namely as he is lifted up via his cross to heaven. Jesus, on his way to his death, awakens a dead man. H is life-giving work becom es the occasion o f his giving up his own life, as the postscript to the story shows (11:47-53). T h e extraordinary observation in verses 5 and 6 is proba­ bly to be linked with this understanding o f the event. Jesus, comments John, loved M artha and M ary and Lazarus; when therefore he heard that Lazarus was ill he remained where he was tw o days more! T h e conundrum is illuminated by verses 11 and 17: T h e messenger from the sisters will have taken a day to reach Jesus; Jesus waits tw o m ore days; he takes an­ other day to reach Bethany, and is told that Lazarus had died four days earlier. Jesus will have realized on the m essenger’s arrival that Lazarus was already beyond healing and was dead. H is delay accordingly was for the even greater glory o f G od, the greater blessing o f the family o f Lazarus (though they could not yet know it), and the greater revelation o f the saving power o f G o d through his Son. T he conversation o f Jesus with M artha is the most impor­ tant in the chapter. H er opening words are not a rebuke but a simple expression o f grief and continuing faith in Jesus. H is affirmation that her brother will rise is accepted as a consola­ tory reminder o f the hope o f resurrection in the last day. But Jesus has more than the last day in view: H e illumines that day with the light o f the present kingdom o f G od and the pres­ ence o f the king: “I am the resurrection . . . ” T he power to raise the dead has been vested in him, hence the believer in him “even though he dies will come to life.” T he believer’s resurrection is assured by the Lord o f the resurrection.

JOHN

66

B u t more: “Everyone w ho lives an d believes in me will never, never die!” T he believer in Jesus “lives” even now, i.e., he has the life o f the kingdom o f G od, and over that life death has no power. O f the truth and the nature o f this specifically Christian hope the resurrection o f Lazarus is the sign. T h e conversation with M ary is much briefer, but it leads to a statement o f the evangelist as surprising as any­ thing in his G ospel. “W hen Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who had come with her weeping, he became angry in spirit and very agitated” (v 33). Virtually every English trans­ lation o f the Bible waters that down to mean that Jesus was “deeply m oved” in spirit, but the lexicographers and the great commentators protest that that is not what Joh n meant. R u d o lf Schnackenburg, the greatest contemporary scholar on Joh n ’s G ospel, wrote: T h e w ord . . . indicates an outburst o f anger, and any attem pt to reinterpret it in term s o f an internal em otional upset caused by grief, pain, or sympathy is illegitimate.3 T h e anger o f Jesus was due not to Lazarus’s death but the behavior o f his relatives and friends over his death. To use Paul’s language, they sorrowed “like the rest o f m en who have no hope” (1 T hess 4:13). D espite the O ld Testament, despite the signs o f Jesus attesting the kingdom o f G o d among them, and despite his own teaching they m ourned like the pagans. It was this unbelief o f the people o f G o d in the presence o f him who is the R esurrection and the Life, and who had come to raise Lazarus from death, that made Jesus angry. T h e same com m ent is repeated by the evangelist as Jesus approached the grave o f Lazarus (v 38). Why, then, did Jesus weep (v 35)? H is tears, if not caused by the unbelief that made him angry, will have been evoked by the sight o f 67

The Signs of Jesus and Their Significance

the havoc created by sin and death, the tragedy o f the h u ­ man situation in which even the people o f G od are engulfed. A n d so Jesus comes to the tomb. H e commands the stone to be removed from it, despite M artha’s expression o f hor­ ror. T h en he prays. B ut there is no petition, simply a brief giving o f thanks that his Father had “heard” him, i.e., had listened to him and granted his request. T h e praying had already been done! T here was no need to pray more. A c­ cordingly Jesus calls Lazarus with a great shout— “Lazarus, come out here!” It was like the shout o f the archangel and the trum pet o f G o d (1 T hess 4:16), and it had a similar effect. Lazarus came out, shuffling in his grave clothes. A t the w ord o f Jesus the bystanders released him from them, and Lazarus was free to live again. T hat the evangelist’s selection o f the signs o f Jesus should end with the account o f the raising o f Lazarus is entirely fitting, not only because o f its stupendous nature, or because it was chronologically the last, but above all by reason o f its meaning. M ore plainly than any other sign o f Jesus it brings into relief the meaning o f them all, namely that Jesus is the Redeem er, who by his living, working, dying, and rising brings to all hum ankind the life o f the kingdom o f G od. M oreover it makes transparently clear that in order for this life o f the kingdom to come to the world Jesus m ust give his own life— and take it again! (see Joh n 10:17, 18). It is Joh n who informs us that the raising o f Lazarus was the last straw for the Jewish Sanhedrin. It led them to ap­ prove the high priest’s recommendation that Jesus m ust die that the whole nation should not perish (11:49, 50). T h e later trial o f Jesus was but the form al ratification o f that decision. B u t as the evangelist noted, the high priest’s words are an extraordinary unconscious prophecy. Its language is strangely reminiscent o f the gospel summary in Joh n 3:16. T h e signs o f Jesus illumine the multifaceted truth o f that summary and encourage all to experience it for themselves.

JOHN

68

4

JESUS AND THE JEWISH FESTIVALS

T h e religious life o f the Jews was regulated by a com plex institution o f festivals or obligatory religious occasions. T he term “feast” conveys a misleading notion to m odem ears. T he fundamental festival was the sabbath day, hardly a day characterized by feasting. T hat day was ordained as “a sab­ bath to the L o rd ” (Exod 20:8-11), a rest day in his honor. Every new m oon was counted as a festival (Num 10:10), the seventh new m oon being observed with particular solemnity (Lev 23:24, 25), doubtless because o f its number. S o also the seventh year was viewed as “a sabbath o f rest for the land” (Exod 23:11). T h e passage o f seven sevens o f years led to the celebration o f the so-called Year o f Jubilee (Lev 25:8-55), which came to be viewed as a type or foreshadowing o f the kingdom o f G od (Isa 61:1, 2; cf. Luke 4:16-21). In addition, there were festal celebrations o f a special kind, often called “pilgrim feasts” (the Hebrew term for feast, hag, was related to the verb hagag, meaning “to make a pilgrim­ age”). T h e O ld Testament specifies three o f these, which were to be attended by all the m en o f Israel: 69

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

T h ree tim es a year all your m en m ust appear before the L o rd your G o d at the place he will choose: at the Feast o f U nleavened Bread, the Feast o f W eeks and the Feast o f Tabernacles. (D eut 16:16 NIV; note the slightly different wording o f Exod 23:14) Originally these were all agricultural festivals, but to each o f them a special significance was attached, for in them the people celebrated particular aspects o f G o d ’s dealing with his people in the sacred history. T h e festival o f Unleavened Bread was preceded by the Passover, commemorating Israel’s deliverance from Egypt. T he festival o f the H arvest (“W eeks”) memorialized the giving o f the Law, and the Ingathering (“Tabernacles”) was especially associated with the wilderness wanderings o f the people. Two other festivals came to be observed in the period shortly before the first century o f our era— the festival o f the Dedication and Purim. T h e former was instituted by Judas M accabaeus to commemorate the cleansing o f the temple af­ ter its desecration by Antiochus Epiphanes, and is the con­ text o f a dialogue between Jews and Jesus in John 10. T he latter was a lively celebration o f the deliverance o f Israel from Ham an through Esther and M ordecai, but is not mentioned in the New Testament. O ne o f the outstanding differences between the synoptic G ospels and John is that the form er record one visit only o f Jesus to celebrate a pilgrim festival in Jerusalem, and that in the last week o f his life, whereas John tells o f Jesus attending all the m ajor feasts (other than Purim). M oreover, while the synoptists doubtless assum ed the profound significance o f the Passover festival in relation to the death o f Jesus, they nowhere elaborate it, whereas the fourth evangelist makes a point o f linking these feasts to the redemption brought by Jesus. T he festivals o f Israel to a marked degree enshrined

JOHN

70

the heritage, faith, and hope o f Israel; Joh n is anxious to dem onstrate that by his w ord and action Jesus represents the fulfillment o f the festivals, and consequently the fulfillment o f the heritage, faith, and hope o f Israel. To the consider­ ation o f the outw orking o f this theme we now turn.

The Passover Festival T h e Passover was the first o f Israel’s festivals in the liturgi­ cal year, and, as it happens, the first to be m entioned in the fourth G ospel (2:13). It is possible that, like the other Jewish feasts, the Passover had an earlier history, maybe a shepherd’s rite when the Israelite tribes were nomadic shepherds. B ut it was given a unique significance through relating it to Israel’s deliverance from Egypt, just as the Passover itself became transformed into the Christian L ord’s Supper. In New Testament times the Passover lambs were bought and then handed to the priests to be slaughtered by them in the temple. T h is took place in the early afternoon; then the lambs were handed back to the persons to w hom they be­ longed for the Passover celebration in the evening. T h e lamb was eaten with bitter herbs dipped in a paste o f fruit and nuts. A t an appropriate point in the meal the appointed “son” (the group might not be a real family) asked the question, “W hy is this night different from all other nights?” T h e an­ swer was given in accordance with Exod 12:26 and 27, and Exod 13:3-16: T he L o rd ’s deliverance o f the Israelites from the Egyptians was recounted, followed by remembrance o f later experiences o f the Lord’s salvation, and prayer was made for a comparable deliverance from the oppressive power o f Rom e. T he place o f hope for Israel’s future salvation in the celebration o f the Passover has already been noted. T h e ex­ pectation o f a second Exodus under the second Redeemer, the Messiah, was a living hope in Israel during the time o f 71

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

Jesus and the early church. It features prominently in the fourth G ospel and in the book o f Revelation. W hen considering the sign o f the feeding o f the multi­ tude we observed the note o f time in Joh n 6:4: “T h e Passover, . . . o f the Jews, was near,” and we reflected on the likelihood that this was intended as a key to the meaning o f the sign. E. C . H oskyns expressed this in a typical com ­ pressed sentence: T h e m ovement from the miracle to the discourse, from M oses to Jesus, and above all from bread to flesh, is almost unintelligible unless the reference in verse 4 to the passover picks up 1:29, 36, anticipates 19:36 (Exod 12:46; N um 9:12) and governs the whole narrative.1 T h e discourse, as far as verse 35, is comprehensible in term s o f the gift o f manna given by the M essiah in the second Exodus. Jews frequently used the symbolism o f eating and drinking with regard to receiving the instruction o f the Law and W isdom (to the rabbis the two were the same). Ben Sira writes in the name o f W isdom (E cdus 24:21): W hoever feeds on me will be hungry for more, W hoever drinks from me will thirst for more. H e then proceeds to identify W isdom and the Law. John 6:38-50 develops the thought that the “bread” is he who came dow n from heaven to reveal the Father. T h e manna came from heaven; the So n o f G o d came from heaven. From verse 51 on, however, the “bread” is nothing other than the flesh o f Jesus, given for the life o f the world. “Flesh,” “given,” “on behalf o f”— this is sacrificial language. Jesus the Bread o f G o d is to die as the Lam b o f G o d for the sin o f the world (John 1:29). H e is G o d ’s Passover Lamb.

JOHN

72

T h e symbolism o f eating the flesh o f the S o n o f M an is a natural extension o f the concept o f Jesus as G o d ’s Passover Lamb, but the thought o f drinking the blood o f the S o n o f M an is a developm ent o f the fundam ental imagery o f verse 35 in the light o f verse 51: “com ing” and “believing” are replaced by “eating” and “drinking.” In both cases the ob­ ject o f faith is C h rist in his sacrificial offering o f his body and blood for the life o f the world. T h e language, admittedly, at first hearing will have been shocking to the Jew, but in the context o f the Last Supper o f Jesus and the Lord’s Supper o f the church it is entirely comprehensible. A d o lf Schlatter’s com m ent on this passage is w orth reflecting on: W hat we have to do with his flesh and blood is not chew and swallow, but recognize in his crucified body and poured out blood the ground o f our life, and hang our faith and hope on that body and blood and draw from there our thinking and our willing.2 T h e symbolic imagery o f eating and drinking is more widely used than we sometimes think. We can speak o f de­ vouring a book, drinking in the substance o f an address, swallowing a story (or declining to do so!), chewing over a matter, ruminating over an idea (to ruminate is to chew the cud!). Som etim es we say that we cannot stom ach an idea, or even a particular person. A n d I have heard a fond grand­ m other declare that she could eat her grandbaby! Such lan­ guage, strange as it may seem, is not uncom m on in Eastern religions with regard to sharing in the being o f G od. T h e m ost pertinent example o f this imagery occurs in the Tal­ mud. A certain Rabbi Hillel (not the fam ous rabbi o f that name) shocked his contemporaries by saying: “There shall be no M essiah for Israel, because they have already eaten him in the days o f Hezekiah.”3 73

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

Hillel may have wished to counter the apocalyptic ideas o f some o f his contem poraries, or more likely to oppose the preaching o f the Christians. In any case he appears to have thought that Hezekiah fulfilled the role o f the M essiah in light o f the ministry o f Isaiah and the m arvelous deliverance o f Israel from the power o f the Assyrians. It is noteworthy that the English translation o f the Talm ud substitutes the term “enjoyed” for “eaten.” T h e blessings awaited from the M essiah were enjoyed by Israel through king Hezekiah’s rule. W hen Jesus and the church use this language, how­ ever, it is m ore intensely personal. T h e m eaning is well expressed in Joh n 6:57: “Just as the living Father sent me and I live because o f the Father, so whoever eats me will live because o f m e.” T h e believer depends on and is sustained by the So n as the S o n in his life depended u p on and was sustained by the Father. In the account o f the trial and crucifixion o f Jesus several passages have the evident intention o f relating the death o f Jesus to the Passover. W hen the Jewish leaders hand Jesus over to the R om an governor for trial it is recorded: “they did not enter the G overnor’s residence so as not to become defiled, but that they might eat the passover lamb” (18:28). T h e irony o f the situation is evident: T h e Jewish leaders hold firmly to the ceremonial law while they are bent on bringing about the execution o f Israel’s prom ised Deliverer, the M essiah-Son o f G od. In their zeal to eat the Passover they unknowingly help to fulfill its ultimate meaning in the sacrifice o f the Lam b o f G od. A comparable note o f the time in Jesus’ trial is given in Joh n 19:14. W hen Pilate recognized that his efforts to re­ lease Jesus were o f no avail he took his place on the judge’s seat. T h e evangelist observes, “It was the Preparation Day for the Passover, the hour was about midday. . . .” T h e evangelist is conscious that this is a m om entous hour in world history. B u t it was significant also for the Jews, for at

JOHN

74

this hour they ceased their work, the leaven was gathered out o f the houses, and the Passover lambs were being pre­ pared for slaughter. T h e festival was virtually beginning and its fulfillment in the setting apart o f the Lam b o f G o d for his sacrifice was under way. This relating o f the death o f Jesus to the Passover comes to its climax in an eyewitness account o f the crucifixion, de­ scribed in John 19:31-37. T he Jewish leaders had requested Pilate to have the three crucified men killed and buried, so that their bodies should not remain exposed during the Passover festival and so defile the land. T he request was granted. Soldiers advanced to the crucified men and “broke” the legs o f two o f them. T he action was more brutal than the description; the custom was to smash the legs o f the crucified with an iron mallet, so causing great loss o f blood and as­ phyxia. T he men died at once. T he soldiers went to Jesus with the intention o f doing the same, but on approaching him they saw that he was already dead, and so had no need o f this treatment. O ne soldier accordingly thrust his lance into the side o f Jesus, presumably to make sure he really was dead; an efflux o f blood and water immediately took place. A t this point in his record the evangelist adds an emphatic declaration o f the truth o f his account: It rests on the evi­ dence o f an eyewitness whose trustw orthiness all acknowl­ edge. A n d he makes a comment: “T hese events happened in order that the scripture might be fulfilled, ‘N o t a bone o f his is to be broken.’ A nd again another scripture says, ‘They will look o n him whom they pierced.’” T h e latter citation is from Zechariah 12:10, describing the grief and repentance o f the Jewish people for their treatment o f G o d ’s representative, and the subsequent opening o f a fountain for cleansing their sin (in M att 24:30 and R ev 1:7 the Scripture is applied to the nations generally). T he evangelist includes this reference probably to dem on­ strate the reality o f the death o f Jesus, and so the reality o f his

75

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

hum anity in face o f those w ho in his day wished to deny it (cf. 1 Jo h n 4:1-6, 5:6-9). T h e form er citation is found, with more or less approxim ation to the wording, in n o less than three O ld Testam ent passages. In E xod 12:46 and N u m 9:12 it refers to the way in which the Passover lamb should be eaten: “not a bone o f it shall be broken,” i.e., in the roasting and eating o f it. In Ps 34:20 the w ords relate to G o d ’s care for the R ighteous Sufferer: “H e protects all his bones, not one o f them will be broken” (NIV). T h e evangelist will quite certainly have know n b oth these applications o f the w ords he cites. In light o f the im portance to him o f the Passover typology the application to the Passover lamb will have been forem ost in his mind: Jesus in his death brings to fulfillm ent the significance o f the Passover in relation to the present and the future; through his sacrificial death and risen life he enacts the Second Exodus and opens for all m ankind the prom ised kingdom o f G od . A t the same time he fulfills the role o f the R ighteous M an, w ho suffers on behalf o f the unrighteous b u t rem ains at all tim es in the care o f G o d — a care that results in resurrection to his pres­ ence and Lordship over the kingdom .

The Festival of Weeks T h e second pilgrim festival o f the Jew ish year was vari­ ously nam ed by the Jews. In E xod 23:16 it is called “the Festival o f the H arvest.” In D eu t 16:10 it has the name “Festival o f W eeks,” doubtless due to the com m and to count seven weeks from the day after Passover and to cele­ brate the festival o n the fiftieth day. T h is com m and, how ­ ever, led Jew s outside Palestine to give it the name “Pentecost,” a G reek term which simply m eans “fiftieth.” T h e festival lasted one day, although in the w orld outside Palestine it generally lasted tw o days (to be sure that it was celebrated o n the right day!). T h e agricultural aspect o f the

JOHN

76

festival in later times gave place to observance o f the day in celebration o f the giving o f the Law. . . Eleazar ben Pedath in the third century A.D. stated, “Pentecost is the day on which the Torah was given.” To this day it is know n am ong Jews as “the time o f the giving o f our Law.” T h ere is evi­ dence that it was so observed in the time o f Jesus and the early church. T he festival is not m entioned by name in the fourth G ospel. B u t from very early times it was realized that the unnam ed festival in John 5:1 was the Festival o f Weeks, i.e., Pentecost. T h e identification fits perfectly the content o f the discourse in the chapter. T h e emphasis throughout the dis­ course is on the authority o f Jesus. A s So n o f G o d he does what the Father does, for the Father shows him and teaches him to do his works, which include raising the dead and the exercise o f judgm ent (5:21-29). T h e latter half o f the discourse is a self-contained unit. It reminds us o f the trial scenes in the O ld Testament, when the Lord calls witnesses from the nations to testify on behalf o f their gods in face o f the overwhelming truth o f the only G od, whose witnesses the people o f Israel are (see, e.g., Isa 43:8-13; 44:6-11). H ere Jesus is opposed by Jews, who ask for witnesses to justify his claims. H e proceeds to call them, beginning with “A nother,” an unnam ed person but whose witness John knows to be true (5:32). T h at “O th er” is G o d himself, who has provided witness through Joh n the Baptist (vv 33-35), the works o f Jesus (v 36), and the W ord o f G o d in the Scriptures (vv 37-40). It is im portant to note that in verse 37 the witness o f the Father to Jesus is not through his voice but through the Scriptures, which the opponents o f Jesus do not grasp. They “search the Scriptures,” believ­ ing that in so doing they possess the life o f which they speak. B ut they are wrong! To read and study the Scriptures is not the equivalent o f swallowing spiritual vitamins that give eter­ nal life; they are given as the Father’s witness to Jesus, that 77

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

people who read them may repent and believe on him, and so receive from him the eternal life prom ised in the Scriptures. T h e upshot o f this is an astonishing turn o f the tables. T h e Jews believed that M oses, who interceded for their fore­ fathers when they worshiped the golden calf (Exod 32:30-32), continues to be their intercessor in heaven (so in the Assump­ tion of Moses, 12:6). O n this basis they looked for him to intercede for them at the last judgment, and so they set their hope on him (see Joh n 5:45). Jesus declared that, on the con­ trary, M oses was their accuser, not defender, for “he wrote about m e,” and “if you are not believing his writings, how will you believe my words?” Since the Law, in Jewish eyes, is the supreme element in the Scriptures, M oses m ust be accounted as the supreme witness to Jesus; accordingly on the day that the Jews celebrated the giving o f the Law they should the more readily receive his witness and the W ord o f G o d that Jesus brings. T h e Pentecostal festival thus gains its ultimate significance in the witness o f the Law, Prophets, and Writings to Jesus and his mission from G od. To celebrate the festival in the right way is to listen to their testimony and seek from Jesus the life o f the kingdom o f G o d o f which the Scriptures speak.

The Festival of Tabernacles T h is festival, w hich began o n the fifteenth day o f the seventh m onth (Septem ber/O ctober), was primarily a thanksgiving for the harvests o f wine, fruit, and olives. T h is feature was com bined w ith thankful rem em brance o f the blessings o f G o d up on his people during the forty years o f wanderings in the wilderness together with an anticipation o f their renewal at the second Exodus, w hen the kingdom o f G o d should come. “Tabernacle” is an old English w ord (derived from the Latin tabernaculum ) m eaning a h u t or

JOHN

78

shed or booth. “Festival o f Tabernacles,” thus, is simply the “festival o f ten ts.” A ll who kept it cam ped out in shelters o f leafy branches set o n housetops or around houses or in fields, so vividly recalling the time w hen their forefathers lived for a w hole generation under the open sky. Joh n 7 and 8 are set in this festival, and the central utter­ ances o f Jesus are clearly related to the outstanding events o f the festival. T h e structure o f signs-plus-discourse elsewhere in the G ospel is replaced by festival rites-plus-teaching o f Jesus concerning them. Each day at dawn priests, accom panied by the festival crowds, went in procession from the temple to the pool o f Siloam. T here an appointed priest filled a golden pitcher with water and carried it back to the temple. T h e psalm o f the kingdom in Isa 12 was sung, with its central words, “W ith joy you will draw water from the wells o f salvation.” T h e priests processed round the altar, and the temple choir sang the Hallel (Psalms 113-118), supported at appro­ priate times with the shouts o f the m en and boys, “Give thanks to the Lord!” and “O Lord, save us!” and the shaking o f branches. T h e priest who had drawn the water m ounted the altar and poured the daily drink offering o f wine into a bow l and then the water from Siloam into another. T h e crowd shouted, “Lift up your hand!” as a sign that the offer­ ing was completed. T h e whole procedure had in m ind the gift o f water in the desert w hen the Jews were in danger o f dying o f thirst (Exod 17:1-6), and the prophecy o f a river o f living water flow ing from the Jerusalem temple in the kingdom o f G o d (Ezek 47:1-11) plus that o f waters in the new age flow ing from Jerusalem to the eastern and western seas (Zech 14:8). T h ese passages o f Scripture were all read in the festival. T h e burning question that none can answer is at what time Jesus uttered Joh n 7:37,38. T h e saying is best rendered as follows: 79

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

“If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me, and let him drink who believes in me. A s the scripture said, ‘Rivers o f living water will flow from his heart.’” If the voice o f Jesus sounded across the temple court imme­ diately after the crowd had shouted, “Lift up your hand!” and the priest had done so, the cry o f Jesus w ould have been as a thunder clap from heaven. Even had it been at a later hour, or on the eighth day when no ritual drawing o f water took place, the significance o f the cry w ould have been plain to all. Jesus was claiming to fulfill the meaning and promise o f the festival for his people. A s G o d rescued the fathers in the desert by giving them water, so Jesus can do for his generation. A n d as the Jews looked to G o d to send the river o f living water from his presence in the kingdom o f G od, so Jesus offers the living water in the present, for he is the M ediator o f the life o f the kingdom. (Note, the water flow s from Jesus the Representative o f G o d and Savior, not from the believer; in Ezek 47 it comes from G od, and in Rev 22:1 and 2 it flow s from the throne o f G od and the Lamb.) T he evangelist is conscious that the present gift offered as Jesus was speaking required for its fullness the “lifting u p ” o f Jesus (on his cross to the throne o f G od) and the outpour­ ing o f the H oly Spirit o f the kingdom (John 7:39); but this the reader o f the G ospel on this side o f Easter and Pentecost fully understood. A n d we m odem readers can understand how astonished the temple police sent to arrest Jesus were on hearing these words; they could no more lay hands on Jesus than they could have attempted to lay hands on G od Almighty! But more was to follow. T he next sentence from Jesus recorded by the evangelist is in Joh n 8:12. It has been separated from the narrative o f chapter 7 by the story o f the woman caught in the act o f adultery. T his account is not in the earliest manuscripts o f

JOHN

80

our G ospel but occurs in various places in the G ospels and has evidently come from an independent source. A ccord­ ingly, 8:12 belongs (with 7:37, 38) to the festival o f the Tents. T h e background to this utterance is given in the Talmudic tractate: Toward the end o f the feast o f Tabernacles, people went down into the court o f the women. . . . G olden lamps were there, and four golden bowls were on each o f them, and four ladders were by each; four young men from the priestly group o f youths had jugs o f oil in their hands and poured oil from them into the individual bowls. W icks were made from the discarded trousers o f the priests and from their girdles. There was no court in Jerusalem that was not bright from the light o f the place o f drawing water. M en o f piety and known for their good works danced before them with torches in their hands, and sang before them songs and praises. A nd the Levites stood with zithers and harps and cym­ bals and trumpets and other musical instruments with­ out number. . . . T his procedure happened every night o f the festival, except on an intervening sabbath. It was intended to recall the pillar o f cloud by day and o f fire by night that was with the Israelites in the wilderness, a sign o f the presence o f G od. It had saved them from threatened destruction by the Egyptian army (Exod 14:19-25) and led them through the wilderness to the promised land. T he lighted lamps also brought to mind the promise o f the shining o f the light o f G od for their salva­ tion in the coming kingdom o f G o d (cf. Isa 60:14-22; Zech 14:5-7). In affirming “I am the Light o f the w orld” Jesus was again appropriating the symbolism o f the festival to show the ful­ fillment o f the history and hope o f G o d ’s people in his 81

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

G od-appointed ministry. A s Israel followed the Light from the land o f slavery through the wilderness to the prom ised land, so the believer following Jesus has “the Light o f life.” H e has both the promise o f life in the kingdom to come and its possession now. Jesus fulfills Tabernacles!

The Festival of the Dedication There is no reference in the O ld Testament to the Dedica­ tion Festival. It had its origin at a later time, in one o f the m ost astonishing and courageous episodes o f the history o f Israel. Antiochus Epiphanes, one o f the successors o f Alexander the Great, endeavored to unify his empire by establishing a single religion throughout its borders. In accordance with this pol­ icy he ordered the Jews to give up their religion and its laws and to adopt the worship o f Zeus. T h e climax o f his religious reformation was to set on the great altar in the temple o f Jerusalem a pagan altar, on which stood an image o f Zeus bearing his likeness. A n d on the twenty-fifth o f Kislev (i.e., December) 167 B.C. a sacrifice o f pigs was offered on this altar. T he turmoil and suffering that this attempted forced apostasy caused in Israel can well be imagined. In an incredible series o f battles with the forces o f Antiochus, Judas the M accabee (“the Ham m erer”!) led the Jews to victory. A n d on the twenty-fifth o f Kislev 164 B.C., three years to the day, the desecrated temple was cleansed and sacrifice was offered in accordance with the Law. T he people rapturously celebrated the rededication o f the temple and its altar for eight days, and it was decreed that a similar festival be held each year, beginning on the twentyfifth o f Kislev (see 1 M acc 4:36-59). T he festival remains to this day as one o f the m ost im portant o f Jewish feasts, not least aided by the fact that it can be held in the hom es o f the people. T h e festival was and is characterized by the use o f lights (possibly due to an earlier celebration o f the winter

JOHN

82

solstice). Josephus called it “the Festival o f Lights,” “because such a freedom shone upon u s.” A lampstand with eight lights was used, one candle being lighted on the first day o f the festival, then another each succeeding day, until all eight were alight. Rejoicing was the keynote o f the festival. A n account o f Jesus in the temple at the D edication Festi­ val is given in Joh n 10:22-39. It is stated that it was “w inter,” hence Jesus walked in Solom on ’s Porch, doubtless because it gave shelter from the biting wind. B u t it is likely that the reflection on the frosty tem perature related rather to the frozen spirits o f the Jew ish leaders (cf. Jo h n 13:30). A great deliverance from an A ntichrist was being celebrated, but a greater and m ore terrible power now tyrannized over the Jews, and there was no sign o f salvation. B ut there stood Jesus, the alleged perform er o f miracles, regarded by many as the M essiah, yet he didn’t keep the Law! W hat was one to make o f him? Som e o f the leaders therefore surrounded him and asked how long he intended to provoke them, and that he should tell them whether or not he was the Messiah. Jesus actually had never publicly claimed to be the Messiah, but much o f his teaching implied it. H ence he replied to them, “I told you, and you do not believe.” Nevertheless, after further conversation he stated som ething beyond anything they had expected: “I and the Father are on e” (v 30). It is im portant to observe that in the context this saying relates to the unity o f the Father and the So n in the w ork that they do. N one can snatch the sheep o f Jesus out o f his hand, for the Father gave them to him, and none can snatch them out o f the Father’s hand! Jesus and the Father are one in their work o f salvation. T h e language nevertheless points to a unity o f being, as is made plain in verse 38: T h e Father is in the So n and the So n in the Father. In fury the Jews alleged that Jesus had blasphemed. H e responded by citing a Scripture that sounds strange to us, but 83

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

which was o f deepest interest to the Jews, and which they debated at length. Psalm 82:6 reads in full: I said, “You are gods; you are all the sons o f the M ost H igh.” B ut you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler. It is evident from John 10:36 that Jesus presupposed, if not actually cited, both clauses o f the psalm. “You are gods,” . . . “you are all the sons o f the M ost H igh.” Jews under­ stood well that the term “god” can be applied to others than G o d himself. They discussed w ho is meant here— Israel’s judges (as representatives o f the supreme Judge), or angelic beings, or the people o f G od. M ost rabbis concluded that it was the last, more specifi­ cally Israel gathered at Sinai to receive the Law as the covenant people o f G od. T h at is evidently assum ed here; Jesus says, “the Scripture called them ‘gods’ to whom the w ord o f G o d cam e” . . . (v 35). It is harm onious with the O ld Testam ent teaching that Israel is G o d ’s (adopted) Son, as in E xod 4:22, 23: “Israel is my firstborn son, . . . Let my son go, so he may w orship m e.” T h e logic o f Jesus’ reply to his opponents is: “If the Scripture addresses G o d ’s people as ‘gods’ and ‘sons o f G o d ,’ how can you charge the representative S o n o f G o d with blasphemy when using this language o f him self?” In fact, Jesus went further than this: he spoke o f himself not simply as M essiah-Son o f G o d but specifically as “the one whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world.” In the festival that celebrated the deliverance o f Israel from a destroyer o f true religion and the consecration o f the temple for true worship, Jesus affirmed that G od had consecrated him as the Redeemer, whose deliverance issues in the king­ dom o f G o d and with it the worship o f G od under the new

JOHN

84

covenant. T he fundamental thought is the same as that made known by Jesus at the Passover, when he spoke o f him self as the new temple o f G od for all m ankind through his death and resurrection (2:19-21). H ere it gains color through its con­ text: Jesus is the fulfillment o f the Festival o f the Dedication! O u r review o f Jesus and the Jewish festivals shows how closely bound Jesus was to the revelation o f G o d in the O ld Testament and to the faith and worship o f his people ex­ pressed in their festivals. T he festivals were vivid reminders to the Jew s o f the experiences o f G o d in their nation’s his­ tory and o f the promises o f G o d to bring that history to a glorious destiny in the kingdom o f G od. A s they remem­ bered they included themselves in those experiences and those promises. In Jesus both the history and the prom ises came to fulfillment as he revealed in his words and deeds the kingdom o f G o d that brings salvation— to Jews and to all nations. T h is teaching will have been o f utm ost importance to the earliest readers o f the G ospels, who were in close touch with Jews who had not embraced the good news. We who belong to other times and races may also gain a securer grasp o f the gospel o f the kingdom as we contemplate the revelation o f Jesus in the festivals o f his people.

85

Jesus and the Jewish Festivals

5

JESUS AND HIS OWN: THE UPPER ROOM DISCOURSES

T h e discourses o f Jesus to his disciples, recorded in chap­ ters 13-17, are a distinctive feature o f o ur G ospel. M ark describes what Jesus said on that occasion in nine verses; Jo h n takes five chapters to do it— seventeen times as long! B u t there is a difference o f m ethod involved here. M ark tells o f Jesus instructing the disciples on various occasions earlier in the ministry (see, e.g., M ark 4:10-20; 7:17-23, and espe­ cially chapter 13), bu t Joh n reports none o f this. H e evi­ dently reserved all the instruction o f Jesus to the Twelve for the Last Supper, when Jesus will have sought to prepare his m en for what lay ahead o f them in the light o f his death. T his m ode o f compiling discourses o f Jesus, by bringing related teaching together, was followed by all the evangelists, and it is particularly plain in M atthew’s G ospel (compare, for example, M atthew 13 with M ark 4, and M atthew 2 4 ,2 5 with M ark 13). It looks as though Joh n originally drew up chapters 13 and 14 o f his G ospel as a complete discourse, since 14:31 brings it to a close. If that be so, chapters 15 and 16 were formed from 87

Jesus and H is Own: The Upper Room Discourses

the reservoir o f our L o rd ’s teaching that was available to him. It is also likely that the five passages on the Holy Spirit had earlier been brought together to tell what Jesus said about the Holy Spirit, and the evangelist set them in the discourses at appropriate points. It is a very plausible suggestion that every­ thing that is contained in John’s account o f the Last Supper had been remembered and repeated many times in celebra­ tions o f the Lord’s Supper, and so the whole story was even­ tually written up by the evangelist. People have often expressed their surprise that no report o f the words o f Jesus concerning the bread and wine is given in these chapters. T he explanation is probably that Joh n was aware that all Christians knew them well, and so there was no need to repeat them; he chose to provide in these discourses an exposition o f the meaning o f those w ords o f Jesus that were repeated in Christian services every Sunday. We shall divide the discourses as follows: T he washing o f the disciples’ feet by Jesus and prophecy o f his betrayal 13:1-30 T he departure and the return o f Jesus 13:31-14:31 Jesus, the True V ine 15:1-17 T h e opposition o f the world to the church 15:18-16:4a T h e ministry o f the Spirit and the joy o f the disciples 16:4b-33 T h e prayer o f consecration 17:1-26

The footwashing an d prophecy of betrayal T he introductory paragraph in verses 1-4 contains an ex­ traordinary contrast between the exalted dignity o f Jesus and the depths o f humility to which he stooped. H e had come from G o d and was going to G od, and the Father had given him “all things,” i.e., complete authority; but he stripped his JO H N

88

clothes and put on a towel to do a slave’s job! Therein was seen his love “to the limit” (v 1, rather than “love to the end”). T he task o f washing anybody’s feet was seen by the Jews as peculiarly demeaning; it was one o f the few things which the Law stated a Jewish slave should not be asked to do— it should be left to a Gentile slave. Jesus and his disciple group had been invited to use the U pper R oom for this occasion. It would have been carpeted, and custom demanded that they wash their dusty feet before they occupied the room. But there was no Gentile slave, and none o f the disciples were prepared to do such a thing, and so they did nothing about it. Jesus therefore took the opportunity o f teaching the disciples a lesson in humility: W hat they were not prepared to do for one another he, their “Lord and M aster,” did (v 14). It is clear, however, that there are profounder dim ensions to this narrative than what lies on the surface. Peter, protest­ ing at Jesus washing his feet, is told first that only later will he be able to understand what Jesus is doing and, secondly, that if Jesus does not wash his feet he will have n o part in him. Som ething extraordinarily important is entailed in this ac­ tion o f Jesus. T he clue to its meaning is given in verse 10: “H e who has bathed does not need to wash . . . but is clean all over.” T h at is the statement in the earliest manuscripts o f the G ospel o f John; later manuscripts have the addition after “wash”— “except the feet.” T his is quite certainly due to a scribe, who thought that the washing o f the feet by Jesus assumes an earlier bath. It then came to be commonly be­ lieved that the earlier bath was baptism, and the washing o f the feet represented the Lord’s Supper! In reality Jesus was telling Peter that what he was now doing had the meaning o f a complete cleansing that is gained by a bath. H is washing o f the feet o f the disciples, accordingly, is a sign o f the greater cleans­ ing that Jesus is about to achieve by his sacrificial self-giving. S o he is able to say later (v 10), “you are clean,” i.e., through 89

Jesus and H is Own: The Upper Room Discourses

the Word he had spoken and the action that points to the death he is about to die. T hat entails a deeper understanding o f the example o f humility that Jesus gave; it was not simply his stripping off his robe and stooping to wash disciples’ feet, but his stripping o ff his glory with the Father and stooping to the humiliation and pain o f the cross; this is, indeed, “love to the limit,” and such he would have his disciples show to all. A fter the footwashing, Jesus “became agitated in spirit” (v 21), clearly due to what he was about to make know n to the group. “O ne o f you will betray m e.” T h e news shocked them. N ow occurs the first m ention o f “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” T he identity o f the betrayer was revealed to this disciple by Jesus handing to Judas a piece o f bread dipped into the central dish on the table (cf. v 18). T he action is to be interpreted as a sign o f favor. Jesus offered Judas a sign o f friendship, and then commanded him to do at once what he intended to do. T hat compelled Judas to make up his mind whether to turn from his evil plan or to reject the offer o f Jesus and carry it out. Never has anyone been so completely put on the spot as Judas in that moment. H e chose to open his heart to the devil and shut out the C h rist o f G od. A n d so he went out. T h e evange­ list added “and it was night,” although the paschal m oon shone almost as brightly as the day. T he night was in the heart o f Judas. It always is when his kind o f bargain is made.

The departure an d return of Jesu s T he departure o f Judas leads to an exultant cry from Jesus, in striking contrast to the anguish m entioned in verse 21. T h e saying reminds us o f 12:23: T h e departure o f Judas and the arrival o f the G reeks to see Jesus alike signified that the beginning o f the end had arrived. T h e “glorification” o f Jesus clearly has in view his death, but 12:31,32 indicate that it embraces his exaltation to heaven also. T h e crucifixion-

JOHN

90

resurrection o f Jesus is an indissoluble event. G o d is glori­ fied in both aspects o f it, and he glorifies the S o n in that he made the S o n ’s sacrifice effective for all and raised him to be Redeem er-Lord. It is in this context that the “new com m and” to love as C hrist loved us is set. Note, it is a command, not a suggestion. A s G o d laid on Israel the Law as their part o f the covenant that they should be the people o f G od, so the So n o f G od, when initiating the new covenant, laid on his people one supreme command. T he addition, “as I have loved you,” is beyond our ability; it can be demanded only because the new covenant is charactem ed by grace and the gift o f the Holy Spirit. T he church thus becom es the People o f the New Life, and its hallmark is love in the Jesus manner. A s Christians fulfill their calling they show what a community o f love is like, and they learn to extend that love to the world outside its borders. Chapter 14 is occupied with the discourse o f Jesus on his departure and return. T h e disciples at the end o f chapter 13 are in a state o f shock: O ne o f them is to betray Jesus, Peter is going to deny Jesus, and Jesus is going away from them. W hat sort o f awful crisis lies ahead o f them? To that situa­ tion Jesus addresses the beautiful words o f 14:1, D o not let your hearts continually be in turmoil; keep on believing in G od, and keep on believing in me. Yet rarely did Jesus ask so difficult a thing. They were shortly to see him arrested, ridiculed, and condemned, learn o f his being flogged by Pilate’s soldiers, and finally see him from a distance nailed to a cross. H ow should they believe in him through all that? They didn’t. O nly in the light o f Easter were they to grasp that G o d ’s will was never m ore truly done than in those very events, and that in them was faith’s su­ preme ground and inspiration. 91

Jesus and H is Own: The Upper Room Discourses

T h e imagery o f the departure and return o f Jesus (in verses 2 and 3) is literally “hom ey” (the British expression is “hom ely”!). It m akes no reference to the terrible circum­ stances o f his “going away,” i.e., through crucifixion, and none to the splendor and glory o f his “com ing back.” It states in simplest term s that the death o f Jesus is for the purpose o f his securing a place in the Father’s house for his followers, and that he will welcome them into it on his return. In view o f references to the “coming” o f Jesus later in this discourse some scholars question whether verse 3 really has in view the coming o f C h rist for the victory o f his kingdom, or whether it refers to his coming in some other way, per­ haps through the coming o f the Spirit at Pentecost, or possi­ bly in death. To me these suggestions are very doubtful. In verse 18, “I shall not leave you orphans, I shall come back to you,” the context indicates that the reference is to Jesus coming back in the Easter resurrection. T h at is seen in verse 19, “A fter a little while the world will see me no longer, but you will see me; because I live you too will live.” T h e thought is expounded at length in 16:16-24, which plainly has in mind the resurrection o f Jesus. In verse 23, however, a quite different thought is in view. Jesus says, “If anyone loves me he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we shall come to him, and we shall make our dwelling with him .” T hat picks up the saying in verse 2, “in my Father’s house there are many dwellings.” Jesus goes away so that there may be a place for us in that “hom e,” but he declares that in this time the Father and the So n will “com e” to those who love him and they will make their home with them. T h e promise is a kind o f anticipation o f the coming o f the Lord and the welcoming to the Father’s home. T h e meaning o f all this is perfectly clear. T h e Lord who departs from this earthly scene through death comes and reveals him self as the conqueror o f death at Easter. H e

JOHN

92

com es to every one who believes in him, so that the believer may know som ething o f heaven on earth in this life; and he shall complete the joy o f fellowship with the Father and the Spirit when he comes to bring his people home. M arvelous promises! A nd we know som ething o f their fulfillment even now. Verses 25-31 form an epilogue to the first discourse. They hark back to the beginning o f chapter 14 and utter a bequest o f peace. In reality that is the salvation o f G od. Jesus m ust now complete the Father’s purpose, confront the devil, and win salvation for the world. Accordingly he tells his disci­ ples, “G et up, and let us go from this place”— that is, to meet the foe. T he battle m ust now be joined!

Jesus, the True Vine T he figure o f the vine (or sometimes vineyard) is frequent in the O ld Testament for Israel. It is remarkable, however, that whenever Israel is so described, the vine or vineyard is under the judgm ent o f G od for failing to produce fruit, or for producing only bad fruit (see especially Isa 5, but also Jer 2:21; Ezek 15:1-8; Ps 80:8-18). In contrast to this, Jesus is the True Vine; he fulfills G o d ’s purpose, not only in himself, but in those who are united with him in faith. O bserve that in this figure Jesus is not said to be the trunk and believers the branches; he is the tree in which the branches live and are therefore productive. T h e figure is closely similar to that o f C hrist as the body, in whom the believers are limbs (so 1 C o r 12:12: “as the body is one . . . so it is with C h rist,” RSV). In the allegory it is urged that the branches m ust “remain” in the vine (v 4). T he reality speaks o f a continuance in union with Jesus. Its meaning is spelled out in verses 7-10. It is to let his words remain in us— to heed them and live by them (v 7). It is to live in the love o f Jesus (v 9), i.e., in the consciousness o f his love for us, to rejoice in it and to depend upon it. It is to 93

Jesus and H is Own: The Upper Room Discourses

live in obedience to the Lover (v 10), since that shows the genuineness o f our responsive love. T h e result o f such “remaining” in Jesus is fruit bearing. A n d “fruit” would appear to mean all the manifestations o f genuine faith. Verse 16 further indicates that it includes also winning converts to C h rist as the fruit o f his suffering for them (“. . . that you should go forth and yield fruit”). B u t the ultimate product o f fruit bearing is love (v 17). T h at is the fruit that m ost delights the Lord.

The opposition of the world to the church In the opening paragraph o f this section causes o f the w orld’s opposition to the followers o f Jesus are described: the world’s hatred o f Jesus is directed to those who follow him (v 18); and the disciples o f Jesus, like their Lord, are not “o f this w orld,” i.e., they belong to a different world (v 19, cf. 3:31; 8:23; 18:36,37). T h e world may be counted on to make a similar response to them as it did to Jesus, i.e., rejection— and yet also, in measure, acceptance (v 20). There follows a grim warning o f an increase o f opposition to the disciples (16:1-4). T h is will lead to their exclusion from the synagogues, and even attempts to have them put to death. T h e first clause o f verse 2 reminds us o f the last beatitude o f Jesus in M att 5:11, 12, and especially its parallel in Luke 6:22, 23 (NIV): “Blessed are you w hen m en hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because o f the So n o f M an.” T h e second clause o f verse 2 finds a remarkable illustration in the Talmud (Num. Rab. 21.19a): the slaying by Phineas o f a Jew and o f a M oabite woman with whom the man cohabited is interpreted, on the basis o f N um 25:13, as an atoning sacri­ fice; the comment is added, “T h is alone will teach you that everyone who pours out the blood o f the godless is like one who offers a sacrifice.” T h e story o f the Christian church, JO H N

94

from the lynching o f Stephen to the last attempt o f a R om an emperor (Diocletian) to annihilate the church, along with the many attempts that have been made to do that same thing through the centuries to our own time, provides a continu­ ous exposition o f this passage.

The ministry of the Spirit an d the joy of the disciples T h e tw o longest statements relating to the H oly Spirit in the U pper R oom discourses fall in this section. We shall take the opportunity to consider all five o f them (14:15-17; 14:25, 26; 15:26, 27; 16:7-11,12-15). T h e first o f these sayings refers to the H oly Spirit as “another Paraclete.” T h at name is really the G reek w ord for the Spirit in these passages. It is often used in discussions about the H oly Spirit because it is difficult to find a real parallel for it in our language. O ften it denotes a legal adviser in court, but it is not a legal term like advocate, barrister, or attorney; it can have a m ore general meaning like “helper.” In 16:8-11 the legal associations are to the fore, and there the Spirit appears to perform the functions o f a prosecuting barrister in court. B ut in 14:25 and 26 and 16:13 and 14 his task is to recall and interpret the revelation given through Jesus. T h e chief w ork o f the Paraclete-Spirit is indicated in 15:26: “H e will bear witness concerning m e.” T h e Spirit is to “teach” and “rem ind” the disciples o f all that Jesus said to them (14:26). T h ese are complementary, alm ost identical tasks (note how remembering and under­ standing are closely linked in 2:17-22 and 12:16). T h e Spirit teaches as he reminds. Accordingly he brings no new revela­ tion, but points to that which Jesus brought, and enables the disciples to understand it. T h e Spirit will “bear witness” to Jesus, and so will the disciples (15:26 and 27). T h is affirmation w ould appear to m ean that the Spirit will bear joint witness with the disciples 95

Jesus and H is Own: The Upper Room Discourses

as they proclaim Jesus in the gospel. T h e saying is closely parallel to M ark 13:9,11, and the Q-saying in Luke 12:11,12 and M att 10:19, 20. It serves as a reminder o f the context in which the early disciples frequently preached the gospel— on trial for preaching Christ! But it also indicates that the H oly Spirit is the power behind the apostolic witness to Christ: H e makes it effective (cf. M ark 16:19, 20). T he H oly Spirit in his witness to Jesus will expose the world (16:8) and thereby reveal its wrong in relation to sin, righteousness, and judgm ent (16:9-11; for a striking example cf. A cts 24:24, 25). T he emphasis on unbelief as the major sin runs through Joh n ’s G ospel (cf. 1:11; 3:19; 15:22). T h e “w orld” saw in the death o f Jesus p ro of o f his wrong, but the Spirit is to bring hom e to people the fact that he was right (and righteous!), since his “lifting u p ” on the cross was one with his exaltation to the throne o f G od. T h at act, moreover, entailed the dethronem ent o f the devil, who led the world to oppose him and put him to death. T h e world accordingly shared in that judgment, and its continuation in rejecting Jesus as L ord continues to implicate it in that judg­ ment. To reveal the truth o f these realities is the task o f the Paraclete-Spirit. T he last Paraclete saying (16:12-15) expands what is stated in the second (14:26). T he Paraclete is to guide the disciples in all the truth revealed in Jesus, a necessary process because the disciples so little grasped its depths and heights; and the church needs that ministry ever after. T he Spirit teaches what he hears, just as Jesus taught what he heard from the Father; it is one revelation o f G o d in C hrist that is com­ municated. A final w ord on the Spirit’s ministry is apparently con­ tained in 16:25. It may especially relate to verses 16-24, but it extends also to the last discourses in their entirety, and perhaps is intended to apply to the teaching o f Jesus throughout his ministry. To this point Jesus has spoken JO H N

96

“in figures” (RSV, or “figuratively,” N iv). In the language o f Jesus the w ord actually means “proverbs,” “parables,” and “riddles”— all three; so we may understand Jesus as saying, “I have said these things to you in the obscure speech of metaphor. ” B ut in the com ing “h our,” i.e., after the death and resurrection o f Jesus, he will speak plainly o f the Father. T h is m ust refer to his instruction o f the disciples and the church through the H oly Spirit. It is a striking promise; along with the rest o f the Paraclete sayings it found fulfill­ m ent in the G ospel in which it is set, as also in the ministry o f the Spirit as G o d ’s people have sought to understand his Word.

The prayer of consecration T his matchless prayer is often called “the High Priestly Prayer o f Jesus.” Westcott, seeing the focal point o f the prayer to be in verses 17-19, aptly named it “the Prayer o f C onsecra­ tion,” 1 and that title we prefer. Com m only the prayer is di­ vided into three sections: Jesus prays for him self (vv 1-5), for his disciples (vv 6-19), and for his church (vv 20-26). We suggest subdividing the latter tw o sections, and will follow that pattern in our exposition. 1. Prayer for the glory o f the Son, vv 1 -5. In light o f 12:23, 2 7 ,3 1 ,3 2 the prayer that the Father may glorify the S o n will have in m ind tw o things: that the death o f the S o n may be an acceptable sacrifice, and that he be raised from death to the Father’s presence. W ith that prayer answered the king­ dom o f G o d will be opened for all believers. Such a coming o f the kingdom will issue both in the greater glory o f G o d and in entrance into it by the L o rd ’s people (vv 2, 3); for eternal life is the life o f the kingdom o f G o d in his presence and under his gracious care. 2. Prayer for the disciples of Jesus, vv 6-19. (a) Jesus prays for the disciples and “not for the w orld” (v 9). T h is exclusion

97

Jesus and H is Own: The Upper Room Discourses

o f the world from the prayer o f Jesus m ust be understood in its context. T h e disciples have been called to continue the mission o f the L ord to the world (v 18). Self-evidently this task includes mobilizing the church to engage in that m is­ sion also. It is as the church fulfills its calling that the world will recognize that Jesus has been sent to them by G o d (w 21, 23). To this extent the prayer o f Jesus for the disciples is indirectly prayer for the world also. T he key petition for the disciples is in verse 11: “Keep them in your name . . . that you have given m e,” i.e., through adherence to what Jesus has revealed to the disciples o f the “name” or the character o f G od. It is as they are kept in adherence to that revelation that the further prayer can be answered, “that they may be one, just as we are one.” (b) A profound extension o f the prayer that the disciples be “kept in your name” is made in verses 17-19: “Consecrate them in the truth. . . . For their sakes I consecrate myself, that they also may become consecrated in (the) truth.” In light o f the utterances o f Jesus during the Supper— “this is my body . . . this is my blood . . .” (Mark 14:22, 24)— “I con­ secrate m yself” m ust mean consecrate to death for the sake o f humankind. T h e continuance o f the prayer, however, “that they may be consecrated . . .” indicates an overlap in the meaning o f the consecration o f Jesus and that o f his disciples. H is dedication to death is made in order that they too may be dedicated to the task o f bringing the saving sovereignty to the world, and that in a like spirit as he brought it. H e alone through his redemptive w ork can introduce G o d ’s kingdom o f salvation into the world and open its gates for all; but his disciples can, and should, serve as its instrum ents as they proclaim the good news to the world. T his they will best do as they exemplify in their own lives the suffering love o f the Redeem er. 3. Prayer that all believers may be one, vv. 20-23. Here the petition o f verse 11b is expanded. It is to be observed that

JOHN

98

the single prayer for the church in the world is “that they may be one.” T h e nature o f this unity is strikingly defined: “as you, Father, are in me and I am in you.” It is a unity grounded in the being o f G od and in the redemptive action o f G o d in Christ. Its goal is equally profound: “that they also may be in u s” (v 21); “I in them and you in m e” (v 23). In the former petition the redeemed become one by participating in the fellowship o f the Father and the Son; in the latter, that partic­ ipation is through their union with the Son, for the So n o f G od is the one M ediator between G o d and man. Clearly, this is a unity that cannot possibly be achieved by the efforts that people— even Christian people— can make. It is the fruit o f G o d ’s redemptive work in Christ. A n d the prayer has been answered, so surely as G o d answered the prayer o f Jesus to glorify the So n that the So n may glorify him! Nevertheless, it is abundantly plain that the church is called to give expression to this unity created by G od. T h e unity has to become visible before the world. Accordingly Jesus prays, “that the world may believe . . . that the world may know.” T he church is to be the embodiment o f its gospel, that the world may not only hear the good news but see its power in bringing about a community o f Life and Love such as the world needs. 4. Prayer that believers may be perfected in the glory of the Son, vv 24-26. T h e prayer that the L o rd ’s people may be with him and behold his glory (v 24) is without indication o f time, apart from the fact that it follows his “glorification.” Since, however, the prayer has the church in view, and Jesus goes to prepare a place for his own and is to return to welcome them to the Father’s house (14:2, 3), it is likely that the glory o f his coming and the consum m ation o f the king­ dom o f G o d are primarily in mind. T h e petition o f verse 24 is grounded in verses 25 and 26. T h e goal o f C h rist’s revelation o f the Father’s name is stated 99

Jesus and H is Own: The Upper Room Discourses

in verse 26: “that the love with which you have loved me may be in them. . . .’’ It has a variety o f implications: an ever-increasing understanding o f the love o f the Father for the Son, an ever fuller grasp o f the w onder that that love is extended to believers, an ever-growing love on their part to the Father, and an ever deeper fellowship with him as they abide in the So n and he in them. In this way the command to love in 13:34 attains its ultimate fulfillment, and the prayer o f verse 24 its final exposition. T h e glory o f C h rist is the glory o f G o d ’s love. Seen by his people, it transform s them into bearers o f Christly love. Such is the goal o f history in the new creation brought about by the So n o f G o d — Revealer and Redeem er in the past, the present, and the future.

JO H N

100

6

THE GLORIFICATION OF JESUS

A ll four G ospels in the N ew Testam ent conclude with an account o f the circum stances that led to the death o f Jesu s — his arrest and trial, his crucifixion, burial, and resurrec­ tion. A n d each one emphasizes certain features in the h ap­ penings o f the last week o f the life o f Jesus. In this the fourth evangelist is no exception. H e selects elem ents in the familiar story that serve as pointers to the m eaning o f the event that was to change history and determ ine the destiny o f hum ankind for all time. A primary emphasis o f the evangelist in his description o f the suffering o f Jesus is that he who is here tried, humiliated, rejected, and crucified, is none other than G o d ’s K in g — the Lord o f Israel and o f the nations. N o account is given o f the trial o f Jesus before the supreme court o f the Jews, the San ­ hedrin (contrast Mark 14:53-64 and parallels). T hat Jesus was brought for trial before the Sanhedrin under the leadership o f Caiaphas is presumed to be known. John’s concern is limited to the trial o f Jesus by Pilate, and the governor’s dealings with Jesus and with the Jewish leaders, for in these the primary issues o f the life and death o f Jesus are most clearly seen. 101

The Glorification of Jesus

T h e first utterance o f Pilate to Jesus is a question, “Are you the king o f the Jews?” (John 18:33). T he question itself assum es what had taken place in the Jewish trial, notably the high priest’s question (“A re you the M essiah?”) and Jesus’ answer (“I am . . . M ark 14:61, 62). T h e translation o f M essiah as King o f the Jews was easy enough, but it placed Jesus in a situation o f lèse majesté, i.e., o f committing high treason, for Caesar alone could be recognized as king o f the Jews (see Joh n 19:15). T h e answer o f Jesus was first a negative statement as to the nature o f his kingdom: It is not a kingdom o f this world, the kind o f kingdom Pilate serves. T h at leads inevitably to a second question o f Pilate: “S o then you are a king?” T h at elicits a positive statement from Jesus: H is king­ dom is the kingdom o f truth. H e was b o m and came into the world to bear witness to this kingdom. For the kingdom o f truth is none other than the kingdom o f salvation. T he answer o f Jesus led Pilate to make an abortive attempt to release Jesus, but the Jewish leaders and the crowd gath­ ered with them called for the release o f Barabbas instead. Pilate therefore handed Jesus over to the soldiers that they should flog him. W hy was this done? In all likelihood, in hope o f satisfying the Jews with a lesser punishm ent than the ultimate one o f death. T he flogging, however, as practiced by Rom ans was o f appalling severity, frequently capable o f killing a victim. T his is to be borne in mind in the subsequent narrative; Jesus will have been in a condition o f near physical collapse, and it will have been apparent to all. Nevertheless, the soldiers were not finished with Jesus after his flogging. They wove a crown o f long thorns, to imitate a crown o f a divine king, and clothed him with a purple coat, then gave him the kind o f salutation they ac­ corded to the R om an emperor (“Hail, king o f the Jews!” is said in imitation o f the cry, “Hail, Caesar!”). Joh n records the soldiers’ cruel action, but not simply to show a sadistic act o f

JOHN

102

mockery; like Caiaphas, the soldiers said better than they knew. Jesus is G o d ’s king, and warrants m ore truly than C aesar the homage o f all hum ankind. W hen the soldiers took Jesus back to the governor, dressed as a parody o f a king, Pilate prom ptly led Jesus out to the crowd and cried, “Look, the M an!” It is improbable that this was done for spite. M ore likely it was to make Jesus appear as a pitiful figure w ho was plainly no danger to R o ­ mans o r Jews, and so to persuade the Jewish leaders to agree to release him. T he evangelist, o f course, will have had other thoughts in recording this. For him Pilate’s cry was a call to look at the M an sent from God, whose majesty was veiled by sacrificial love and whose suffering was the m eans o f bringing the kingdom o f salvation for all people, including those thirsting for his blood and those who were shedding it. Pilate’s ploy failed. H e therefore took his place on the judg­ m ent seat. Jesus will have been made to stand beside him. T he crowd awaited the sentence o f judgment. Instead, to their astonishment, Pilate called out to them, “Look, your king!” H e made the moment o f Jesus’ condemnation the occasion for declaring his kingship. In so doing he confronted the Jews with a mom entous decision: were they willing to send their king to death, or did they wish to relent? T his latter course they were unwilling to take. O n the contrary, they committed the greatest act o f apostasy in Jewish history: they declared, “We have n o king except C aesar.” In light o f Jesus’ proclama­ tion o f the kingdom o f G od, that was tantam ount to a re­ jection o f the reason for Israel’s existence. A fter that there was no more to be said. T he King o f the Jews was sent to the gallows. T he last word, however, was not with the Jewish leaders but with Pilate. It was customary for a condem ned criminal to have a card round his neck, stating the crime for which he was to die. Jesus was made to wear just such a placard. T h e 103

The Glorification of Jesus

wording was, “Jesus the Nazarene, the King o f the Jew s,” and it was written in multiple languages so that all w ho saw could understand. It was Pilate’s act o f revenge on the Jewish lead­ ers. They controlled their fury and asked that he add a single word to the card, namely, “I am ” (that is one word in the languages used). T he addition would have meant that Jesus claimed to be king, but that he was a liar. Pilate refused to change the inscription, and in so doing refused to change the truth into a lie. Jesus died as King o f the Jew s— rejected by those who should have owned him, but appointed by G o d as the King who saves alike Jews and people o f every nation under heaven. O f the rest o f the story o f the last hours o f Jesus on the cross there is one happening to which the evangelist attached greatest importance. Joseph o f Arimathea, a member o f the Jewish Sanhedrin, requested o f Pilate that he might give Jesus a proper burial (i.e., not one in a com m on grave, as the Jewish leaders had in view, 19:31). This he was permitted to do. H e and Nicodem us accordingly prepared the body o f Jesus for burial. Joseph supplied the grave clothes, Nicodemus the spices, but the evangelist notes that Nicodem us supplied a prodigious quantity— one hundred liters o f spices. In to­ day’s measures that represents sixty-five and a half pounds, an enormous amount to use on one individual. T he only peo­ ple recorded as receiving such a burial were kings. O ne may compare what happened at the burial o f King Asa, recorded in 2 C hr 16:14. A t the funeral o f H erod the G reat spices were carried by hundreds o f slaves. M ore to the point, it is stated that Onkelos, a contemporary o f our evangelist, at the death o f Gamaliel the Elder burned eighty liters o f spices. W hen asked why he had done so he cited the words o f Jeremiah (34:4-5) to king Zedekiah: “You shall die in peace, and with the burnings in honor o f your fathers (i.e., earlier kings) who were before you,” and he added, “Is not Rabbi Gamaliel far better than a hundred kings?” 1 D oubtless Nicodemus, if he

JOHN

104

had been similarly questioned, would have answered in a like spirit, “Is not Jesus far greater than all kings?” T h e death o f Jesus as the king who brings the kingdom o f salvation to the world has various im portant aspects to which Joh n draws attention. T he last w ord o f Jesus on the cross o f which he knows is his cry, “It is accomplished!” (19:30). T h e utterance indicates not alone that the earthly work o f Jesus has now come to an end, but that the task assigned him has been accomplished. If we ask what it is that has been accomplished, and allow Jesus to answer for him ­ self, we must say, “N othing less than the judgm ent o f the world!” S o Jesus declared in anticipation o f his hour (12:31). In the m urder o f the So n o f G o d sin has been revealed as a G od-opposing force that is God-destructive in its intent. But the unique and astonishing feature o f the death o f Jesus is that in the event wherein the world sought to destroy him, G o d gave his So n that the world might not perish! T h e So n o f G o d endured the judgm ent o f G o d that should have fallen on the would-be destroyers o f God! In virtue o f Jesus, the So n o f G od, bearing the judgment o f G od upon the world two immense consequences follow. First, Satan has no ground o f accusing humanity represented by the Mediator; he has been “thrown o u t” o f heaven and so has no access before G o d in heaven (John 12:31; the imagery is comparable to that in Job chs 1, 2). T his is a vivid way o f saying that sinful man is justified in Christ, and the decision cannot be reversed by any accuser (cf. R om 8:33, 34). Secondly, the M ediator is exalted from his cross to the right hand o f G od. T he vaunted “prince o f this world” has been dethroned and the C hrist o f G od enthroned. In the dying and rising o f the King o f Israel the kingdom o f G o d has come in fullness o f blessing to humankind, he is revealed as Lord and Savior o f the nations, and the doors o f the king­ dom have been opened for all who own him as Redeemer. T h is fundamental understanding o f the saving work o f

105

The Glorification of Jesus

Jesus is represented by the evangelist through a symbol that appears throughout his G ospel, namely, that o f a second Exodus that brings freedom, not for one nation but for all nations. John, and Joh n alone, records a request o f the Jew­ ish leaders that the m en who had been crucified o n that day should not be left to hang on the crosses, eventually to be devoured by vultures, but rather that they be killed and buried speedily, so that the land should not be defiled by the corpses during the Passover (John 19:31). T h is request was granted. Soldiers were sent to hasten the death o f the cruci­ fied men. A s we have noted, the soldiers did this to the tw o m en beside Jesus, and were about to do the same to him when they saw that he was dead already. T here was no need there­ fore to smash the legs o f Jesus, but one soldier thrust his spear into his side, presumably to make sure that he was truly dead. T his happening was observed by an eyewitness and through him was made know n to the evangelist, who saw it as deeply significant. T hese events happened, he affirmed, “that the Scripture might be fulfilled, ‘N ot a bone o f his is to be broken,’ and again another Scripture says, ‘They will look on him whom they pierced.’” There is no doubt as to the pri­ mary reference the evangelist had in view in this passage: T h e Passover Festival is about to be celebrated, the Passover lambs have been slaughtered (at the time when Jesus was crucified!), and his executioners were restrained from smashing his bones. Jesus accordingly dies as the Lam b o f G od, fulfilling the meaning and the hope o f Passover, and bringing about the “redemption” o f the world, i.e., real freedom, liberation, emancipation, and an Exodus from the powers o f sin and death for life in the kingdom o f G o d under the Savior Christ. In view o f the evangelist’s fundamental assum ption o f the unity o f the death and resurrection o f Jesus, it is to be ex­ pected that som e light on the L o rd ’s saving work should be JO H N

106

shed by the resurrection narratives. In this we are not disap­ pointed. A fter the preliminary accounts o f the finding o f the em pty tom b and the appearance o f the risen L ord to M ary M agdalene, the essential meaning o f the resurrection o f Jesus is concentrated into a single short paragraph, Joh n 20:19-23. T h e first words o f the risen L ord to the disciples gathered in the U pper R oom are “Peace to you!” or, in the language he had always used with his disciples, “Shalom !” Everybody know s that that term was and is the everyday greeting o f Jews in Palestine. B ut the occasion o f this use o f it was far from everyday. Shalom is the m ost comprehensive w ord for salvation in the O ld Testament. Primarily it denotes well­ being, health, completeness, prosperity, a relation o f friend­ ship with others and so in a wider context absence o f war; m ost o f all, however, it denotes a happy relationship with G o d and the world which he alone can establish. In the writings o f the prophets peace is the gift o f G o d which his people will know in the kingdom o f G od. T h e prophecy o f the coming o f the M essiah in M icah 5:2-5 con­ cludes with the famous words: H e will stand and shepherd his flock in the strength o f the Lord, in the majesty o f the name o f the Lord his G od. A n d they will live securely, for then his greatness will reach to the ends o f the earth. A n d h e w ill b e th e ir p e ac e. (NIV) W hen, therefore, the Lord, after his crucifixion and resurrec­ tion, uttered the greeting to his disciples, “Shalom to you,” it carried a fullness o f meaning such as it had never borne on the lips o f any man. A ll the prophetic anticipations o f the blessings o f the kingdom o f G o d had essentially been realized in the living, dying, and rising o f Jesus. H is “Shalom ” o f 107

The Glorification of Jesus

Easter evening is the complement o f “It is finished” on the cross, for the peace o f reconciliation with G od and man was achieved and was now imparted. T h e joy o f the disciples was a natural response to the sight o f their beloved Lord, an overwhelming gladness to see him alive after the appalling death that he had suffered (John 20:20). Later, their joy was to be deepened as they came to realize the profound significance o f the Easter events. For joy is an inseparable concomitant o f the kingdom o f G o d (as may be seen in such typical passages as Isa 25:6-9 and R ev 21:2-4). Paul reflects precisely this consciousness when he defined the kingdom o f G o d as “righteousness, peace, and joy in the H oly Spirit” (Rom 14:17). T h e accomplishment o f the salvation o f the kingdom o f G od by the crucified and risen Lord is accompanied by a com m ission to make the good news known. T h e L o rd ’s “Shalom to you” is to be proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and that in the Jesus manner. S o it is that in our G ospel the great com m ission runs, “A s the Father has sent me, I also am sending you” (John 20:21). In these words there is a reflection o f a principle o f representation that was fundamental to the Jewish people.- “O ne who is sent is as he who sends him .” It finds expression in the saying o f Jesus in Joh n 13:20, “H e who receives anyone I send receives me, and he who receives me receives the O ne who sent m e” (cf. M att 10:40 and Luke 10:16). Ju st as Jesus was sent as the representative o f the Father, and taught and acted with the authority o f G od , so the disciples are sent as the representatives o f Jesus to make know n the kingdom o f G o d with the authority and power vested in him. T h e followers o f Jesus, however, are ex­ pected to observe the way he exercised his authority. For he was sent to fulfill the vocation o f the Servant o f the L ord, in a spirit o f hum ility and obedience to the Father, as set forth in the songs o f the Servant in Isaiah 42-53. S o also the

JOHN

108

servants o f the Servant o f the L o rd are to go in like m anner, em bodying the message they proclaim in their living. T h e principle is set forth in w ords that need to be pondered by every servant o f the Lord: “T h e S o n o f m an also (i.e., he as well as his followers) came n o t to be served b u t to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for m any” (M ark 10:45 RSV). T h e balance betw een authority and hum ble service is difficult to achieve, b u t the secret was dem onstrated by the K in g o n his way to the cross; as the ancients used to say, “H e reigns from the tree.” It is im portant to observe that when the S o n was sent forth on his m ission by the Father he was conscious that he had n ot left the Father’s presence: “H e who sent m e is with m e,” he said (John 8:29). H is ministry was a partnership with the Father, aided by the H oly Spirit, the reality o f which was dem onstrated by the com passion and power in which he labored. S o also the representatives o f Jesus are sent out as partners with him in their mission. T h e risen L ord goes with those he sends (cf. the ending o f the G reat C om m ission in Matthew, “Look, I am with you to the end o f the age!” M att 28:20). T his authority and power o f the partnership o f the disci­ ples with their Lord is expressed in a graphic manner in Joh n ’s narrative. Having commissioned the disciples, the Lord said, “Receive (the) H oly Spirit” (John 20:22). T h e account is plainly symbolic. T h e unusual use o f the w ord “he breathed in them ” is reminiscent o f its use in G en 2:7, where we read, “G o d breathed into the nostrils o f A dam the breath o f life,” and again in Ezek 37:9, 10 (n iv ), where the prophet is bidden to call on the wind, “Breathe into these slain, that they may live.” We are meant to understand by this symbolic action that the risen L ord imparted to his disciples the H oly Spirit o f the new creation, which had been brought into being through his death and resurrection; thereby he enabled the service o f the kingdom o f G o d to be

109

The Glorification o f Jesus

carried out in the power o f the H oly Spirit o f the kingdom. From this m om ent on, the partnership o f the ParacleteSpirit and the disciples begins, so fulfilling the prom ises o f Jesus in Joh n 14-16 concerning the sending o f the Spirit. T h e salvation o f the kingdom o f G o d brought into being by the crucified and risen Redeem er is n o merely private enjoyment o f forgiveness o f sins and new life from the Lord. It is a salvation for the forgiveness and life o f all hum ankind. W ith the grace o f life is given the grace to communicate it. S o surely as we who believe have received the former, so surely are we intended to experience the latter. W hen the C h urch engages in its m ission in that faith, the reality o f the partnership o f the L ord o f the kingdom with his subjects is seen in the transform ation o f m en and women by the gospel o f the kingdom. In that spirit, let us go to it!

JOHN

110

NOTES

Chapter 1 Interpreting the G ospel of John 1. Reported by Eusebius, History of the Church, 3.31,3. 2. Against Heresies, 3.1,2. 3. The development of this prayer and its application to Chris­ tians have been widely discussed. For its wording and meaning see J. Jocz, The Jewish People and Jesus Christ (London: SPCK, 1949), 51-57. For its possible application in the fourth Gospel see History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel, J. L. Martyn, ed. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1979), 24-62, and especially the magisterial treatment of the subject by W. Horbury, “The Benediction of the Minim and Early Jewish-Christian Controversy,” JTS 33 (1982): 19-61. 4. See J. Louis Martyn’s treatment of this idea in History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel, 24-62. 5. The Fourth Gospel (London: Faber and Faber, 1943), 362. 6. The Historical Jesus in the Gospel of S t John (London: Bums and Oates, 1967), 46. Chapter 2 T h e Word M ade Flesh 1. Le quatrième Evangile (Paris: 1903), 98. 2. Hoskyns, The Fourth Gospel, 162.

Ill

Notes

3. Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek (Philadelphia: West' minster, 1960), 58-59. 4. The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: The University Press, 1953), 284. 5. Ibid., 285. 6. The Gospel of John (Oxford: Blackwell, 1971), 31. 7. The Gospel of John, 449. 8. The Gospel According to John, The Anchor Bible vol. 1 (New York: Doubleday, 1966), 535. Chapter 3 T h e Signs of Jesus and their Significance 1. The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 383-86. 2. See the Jewish Midrash, Genesis Rabba, 11.8c. 3. The Gospel According to John, vol. 2, (New York: Seabury, 1980), 335. Chapter 4 Jesus and the Jew ish Festivals 1. The Fourth Gospel, 281. 2. Das Evangelium nach Johannes, in Erläuterungen zum Neuen Testament (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1947), 116. 3. The Talmudic tractate Sanhedrin, 99a. Chapter 5 Jesus and H is Own: T h e U pper Room Discourses 1. The Gospel According to S t John, vol. 2 (London: John Murray, 1908), 238-39. Chapter 6 T h e Glorification of Jesus 1. The rabbinic work Semahoth:8.

JOHN

112

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

Old Testament Genesis 1:1 2 2:2 2:7 22:2 22:12 22:16 25:22 Exodus 3:14 4.1-8 4:22-23 4:29-31 7:13 12:26-27 12:46 13:3-16 13:21-22 14:19-25 16:15-36 17:1-6 20:8-11 23:11

113

24 24 55 109 32 32 32 62 60 45 35,86 45 46 71 72, 76 31 71 81 57 79 69 69

2314 23:16 32:30-32 33:7-11 33:18 40:34-38 Leviticus 23:24-25 25:8-55 Numbers 9:12 10:10 25:13 Deuteronomy 6:22 16:10 16:16 18:15,18 21:20 Joshua 7:19 Judges 11.34 1 Samuel

70 70 78 31 34 31 69 69 72, 76 69 94 46 76 70 58 62 64 32

10:1-9 2 Samuel 7:14 2 Kings 4:42-44 5:10-14 2 Chronicles 16:14 Job 1-2 Psalms 2-7 34:20 58:4 69:9 77.14-20 80:8-18 82:6 89:26-27 113-118 136 Proverbs 8:22-31 8:22

45 36 58 63 104 105 36 76 62 50 41,60 93 84 36 79 46 23 24

Index of Scriptures

Isaiah 5 7:10-16 12 25:6-9 42 43:8-13 43:10 43:10-13 43:25 44:6-11 45:5,6 45:18,21,22 53 60:14-22 61:1-2 66:19 Jeremiah 1:5 2:21 7:4-15 31:31-33 32:20 Ezekiel 10:15-19 11:22-23 15:1-8 20:33-44 37:9-10 40-47 47:1-11 Daniel 7 Hosea 2:14-23 Micah 5:2-5 Zechariah 12:10 14:5-7 14:8

93 46 79 49,50,57,108 108 77 42,60 41 41,42,60 77 41 41 108 81 69 46 62 93 50 32 46 51 51 93 32 109 50 79,80 38 32 107 75 81 79

New Testament Matthew 5:11-12 8:5-13

JOHN

64,94 52

8:17 11:5-6 11:12-13 10:19-20 10:40 12:28 13 13:16-17 14:25 23:32-36 23:38 24-25 24:30 28:20 Mark 1:14 3:27 4:10-20 5:21-24 5:35-43 6:22-23 6:47 7:17-23 8:23 8:37 9:19 10:45 12:34 13 13:9-11 14:22 14:24 14:53-64 14:61-62 14:62 Luke 4:16-21 6:22 7:2-9 7:11-17 10:16 12:11-12 17:20-21 19:11 John 1 1:1-4 1:1-5 1:1-13

53 46 46 96 108 46 87 46 59 51 51 87 75 109 60 46 87 65 65 94 59 87 63 64 53 109 9 87 96 98 98 101 102 36 46,69 64 52 65 108 96 46 59 29,30, 34 28 20,21 26,28, 30

1:1-18 1:2 1:3 1:4 1:4-5 1:5 1:6-8 1:6-9 1:9 1.9-12 1.9-13 1:10 1:10-12 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14

2,28 28,30 29 12,26,28, 30 20 20,26,28,30,38 20 8 12,20,26,27 38 30 28 20,21,26, 27 96 28,30 26,28,30,33, 71 9,20,21,26,31, 32,33,37 33 1:14-17 1:15 20 1:16 20,21, 28 20 1:17 1:18 5,9,20,28,34,47 1:29 72 22 1:30 72 1:36 1:51 39,48 2 47 2:1-11 57 2:2 48 2:3 48 2:11 22, 32,48, 50 2:17-22 95 2:18 10 2:19 51 2:19-21 85 2:20 10 2:21 51 3 47,48 3:1-12 50 3:3-8 30 3:14-15 39,50 3:16 12,22,37,39,50,68 3:16-21 38 37,50,65 3:17 3:18 37 3:19 38,96 3:25-30 8 3:31 94 38 3:31-34

114

3:31-36 4 4:15 4:16 4:18 4:21-24 4:37-38 4:42 4:46-54 4:47 4:48 4:50 4:51 4:53 5 5:1 5:1-9 5:16 5:16-30 5:19-29 5:20 5:20-29 5:21 5:24 5:24-29 5:27 5:32 5:33-40 5:45 6 6:4 6:14-15 6:20 6:25 6:25-29 6:26-35 6:30-33 6.35 6:38-50 6:41 6:48 6:51 6:51-58 6:57 6:59 6:60-66 6:60-69 6:68-69 7 7:11

115

38 14,47,48 10 10 10 52 14 13 52-53,56 53 53 53 53 53 12,14,52 77 53,56 56 54-56 39 39 38,53, 77 40,54 53 55 39 77 77 78 15,36,56-61 57, 72 36, 58 40,60 60 61 72 16,61 40,60, 61 72 40 40 40 16,61,72, 73 74 60 36 9 37, 61 12, 79-80 10

7:12 7:30 7:31 7:37-38 7:39 7:43 8 8:12 8:20 8:23 8:24 8:28 8:29 8:30 8:31 8:58 8:59 9 9:1-7 9:5 9:7 9:8-12 9:13 9:13-24 9:16 9:18 9:19-23 9:22 9:24 9:35-38 9:39 9:39-41 9:40-41 10 10:7 10:9 10:11 10:14 10:17-18 10:19 10:22-39 10:29 10:30 10:35 10:36 10:38 11:4-6 11.7-16 11:11 11:17

10 49 10 79 80 42 12, 79 22,40,80-82 41,42,49 94 41,42,60 39,40,60 109 42 10 41,42,60 42 12,14,61-65 62 14,40,62 63 62 10 62 10,42 10 62 10,63 64 62 65 62 65 70 40 40 40 40 68 42 83 40 40,83 84 37,84 83 66 65 66 66

65 22,40,66-67 65 67 67 67 68 12,66 68 47 95 39 22,32,90,97 14 97 12,14,22,39, 42,90,97,105 22 12:41 87-91 13 5 13:1-2 88 13:1-4 89 13:10,14-15 90 13:18 41,60 13:19 108 13:20 90 13:21 5 13:23-24 83 13:30 22 13:31 100 13:34 87,91-93 14 91 14:1 92,99 14:2 39,92,99 14:3 40 14.6 29 14:10 14:12 46 15 14:12-13 13 14:12-14 95 14:15-17 92 14:18,19,23 14:25-26 3,95 14:25-31 93 14:26 96 14:31 87 15 87,93-94 40 15:1 93 15:4 40 15:5 93 15:7-10

11:20-27 11:25 11:28-32 11:33 11:35 11:38 11:41,43 11:45-54 11:49-50 12 12:16 12:21-23 12:23 12:23-24 12:27 12:31-32

Index of Scriptures

15:10 15:12-15 15:16-18 15:18-16:4 15:19-20 15:22 15:26-27 16 16:1-4 16:8 16:8-11 16:12-15 16:13-14 16:16-24 16:25 17 17:1-5 17:3 17:5 17:6-19 17:11 17:17-19 17:20-23 17:24-26 18:15 16 18-28 18:28-31 18:33 18:36-37 18:38-40 19 19.1-3 19:5 19:5-6 19:7 19:12 19:14 19:15 19:19-22 19:30 19:31 19:31-37 19:32-35 19:35 19:35-36 19:36 19:38-40 20

JO H N

94 5 94 12 94 96 95 87,94-97 94 96 22,95,96 17,96 95 92,96 96 97-100 97 7 21,29, 35 22,97 98 97,98 98,99 99,100 6 74 10 102 94 10 103-6 102 103 41 10 10 74,103 10,103 103-4 105 104,106 75,106 9 4 32 72 104 107-10

20:2,3 20:5,8 20:19-23 20:22 20:24-29 20:24-31 20:28 20.30-31 21:1-4 21:24 Acts 10:6 13:50 14:1-7 14:11 14:19 17:4-9 17:13 18:12-17 24:24-25 Romans 8:33-34 12:4-5 14:17 1 Corinthians 12:12-13 Philippians 2:6-11 Colossians 1:15-20 1 Thessalonians 4.13 4:16 1 Timothy 3:16 Hebrews 11:17 13:8 1 Peter 2:4-5 2 Peter 1:3 1:4 1John 1:2

6 6 107-8 109 32 35 22,30 4, 7,22 59 4 60 11 11 31 11 11 11 11 96 105 51 108 51,93 19 19 67 68 19 32 17 51 30 30 29

1:3 2.18-20 4.4-6 5:6-9 Revelation 11 1:4 1:7 1:9 21:2-4 22:1-2

29 9 76 76 4 4 75 4 108 80

Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha Wisdom of Solomon 7:26-8:1 9:1-2 Ben Sira 24:6-8 24:21 1 Maccabees 4:36-59 1 Enoch 42:2 Assumption of Moses 12:6

17 23 27 72 82 26 78

Rabbinic Literature and Tractates Berakoth 28b 12 Sanhedrin 99a 73-74 Semahoth 8 104 Sukkoth 5:1 81 Genesis Rabba 11:8c 55 Leviticus Rabba 15:2 38 Numbers Rabba 21:19a 94 Jerusalem Targum: Deuteronomy 21:20 62 Other Versions: JB, Jerusalem Bible; N A SB, New American Standard Bible; NEB, New English Bible; RSV, Revised Standard Version

116

W ORD BIBLICAL THEMES 1 and 2 Corinthians RALPH P. MARTIN

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC 1 and 2 Corinthians Copyright © 1988 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11491-8 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Martin, Ralph P. 1 and 2 Corinthians: Ralph P. Martin. p.  cm. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-0849-90623-7 1. Bible N.T. Corinthians—­Theology I. Title II. Title: First and Second Corinthians III. Series: BS267f.2.M35 1988 227’.206  88-33821 Scripture quotations are from the author’s own translation. Scripture quotations marked RSV are taken from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Copyright © 1952 [2nd edition 1971] by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

For Nathan Douglas Knode bom on February 15,1987 true gift of God

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface 1. Paul’s Friends at Corinth Factions and frictions at Corinth 2. Paul’s Apostolic Service in Theory and Practice Apostle Other titles 3. The G od and Father o f Our Lord Jesus Christ God’s name as Father G od as Father and Son G od as Trinity 4. The Grace and Glory o f O ur Lord Jesus Christ 5. The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation Christ the power o f G od Christ the wisdom o f God The risen Lord The shrine o f the Spirit 6. Christian Living and Giving Paul’s exposition o f the Christian life Notes Index of Scriptures

7

9 11 15 21 35 35 46 53 57 63 68 73 93 94 97 100 103 116 118 126 129

Contents

FOREWORD

Paul’s letters to the Corinthian church have always held a special fascination for the people o f Christ. In them we read of our foibles, temptations, joys, and possibilities. And through them we see at work the patience, strength, courage, and wisdom of the great apostle. It does not stretch the imagination unduly to see our times as a neo-Corinthian age. We too have to grapple with factions quarreling over which leader is best; we too are forced to deal with sexual immorality in the believing com­ munity; we too have to cope with controversy in the use and importance o f spiritual gifts. Ralph Martin’s insightful, in­ formed, and winsome treatment o f these important letters is an outstanding contribution to all who care about biblical truth and seek to live by it. Word Biblical Themes, a companion series to the Word Biblical Commentary, seeks to distill the theological essence o f the biblical books as interpreted in the more technical series and to serve it up in ways that will enrich the preach­ ing, teaching, worship, and discipleship o f God’s people. Dr. 9

Foreword

Martin, as New Testament Editor of both series, is admirably qualified to contribute an early volume to the Themes. His works on 2 Corinthians and James in W BC have set high standards and have already been warmly acclaimed by schol­ ars and pastors alike. This exposition of the teachings and settings of the Epistles to Corinth is sent forth in the hope that it wi ll contribute to the vitality of God’s people, renewed by the Word and the Spirit and ever in need of renewal. Fuller Theological Seminary Pasadena, California

1, 2 CORINTHIANS

David A. Hubbard General Editor Word Biblical Themes Word Biblical Commentary

10

PREFACE

The two letters o f Paul to the church at Corinth still cast a spell on the modem reader who is prepared to enter with some imagination and thought into the scene they describe. The one outstanding feature of that scene is the vitality and exuberance o f these Christians in the busy metropolitan center o f Corinth. Paul had a special place in his affection for these people. The fact that he did not abandon them when they proved so obstinate says much about Paul’s role as a caring pastor and leader. But the lessons to be drawn from these letters are much more than those o f pastoral management and personal rela­ tionships, important as these surely are. A t the heart o f the Corinthian debate is the meaning o f the gospel and the role o f the church as a worshiping and witnessing community. These three words may well be placed on the agenda o f the church today: gospel, worship, witness. They sum up what is the church’s real business in the world of our day. The gospel defines our message; worship is the church’s reason for exist­ ing; and witness is the face we show to the world in all its plight While there may be other pressing items to be de­ bated and implemented from time to time, these, I am per­ suaded, are the continuing agenda items for the church in 11

Preface

every age and setting. Any study of 1 and 2 Corinthians is bound to be important as we wrestle with the way Paul dealt with these issues, and how he speaks the Word of God to our concerns today. It has proven a daunting task to compose a short and (we hope) readable account of Biblical Themes on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Yet the effort in prospect seemed worthwhile, if challenging; and as I look back on it, it has been a rich experience. W hether it has succeeded is not for the author to say. These letters offer a valuable case study o f life in an early Christian community. They have been examined from a vari­ ety of angles, with the current interest in sociology finding here a well-stocked seam o f data waiting to be mined. Books by Baird, Judge, Meeks, and Theissen will come to mind.1 Another recent interest has focused on Paul’s literary and rhetorical styles in debate with the Corinthians, with some valuable studies by Murphy-O’Connor, P. Marshall, and Tal­ bert contributing much to our understanding.2 I gratefully pay tribute to what one can learn from these approaches, though it is clear that in a little book like this, much must go unmentioned, if not unnoticed. I have tried to concentrate on and bring out the main items in the Corinthian discussion, and have chosen to highlight a few central theological concerns as providing a gateway to the meaning of the letters. Obviously in consequence many themes have been passed over, and I regret this. Further help to the would-be reader is provided by two sources I will suggest. Shortly to appear will be a full-scale exposition on 1 Corinthians written by James A. Davis, of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry, in Ambridge, Pennsylvania, in the Word Biblical Commentary series, which will offer a comprehensive treatment of all the problem passages ignored here. Mention may be made of the present writer’s 2 Corinthians, also in the W BC series, and his earlier (1984) title, The Spirit and the 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

12

Congregation: Studies in 1 Corinthians 12-15. I have tried not to duplicate material from these larger books. If one ruling theme pervades both letters it is the meaning o f apostleship or, as we may say, Christian leadership. The Corinthian books were written with leaders, both clergy and lay, in mind, and so it is pertinent to hear again what one of our best commentators has to say on this subject: “Apostle” [as] a powerful and imposing person, standing out for all the rights he could possibly claim, per­ forming miracles, and accepting adulation and support o f those whom he was able to impress . . . that [such] represent a permanent threat to Christianity is written on every page o f church history and is in itself a suffi­ cient reason for the continued study o f 2 Corinthians. This well-spoken analysis and tribute is even more timely to­ day than in 1973 when C. K. Barrett wrote the words.3 May this little handbook assist also in directing our attention to the role of the congregation and its leaders in the modem church. I am grateful for the secretarial help o f Shelley Theisen, and of Sandy Bennett with her team in the Word Processing Department at Fuller Theological Seminary, in preparing the manuscript

Ralph P. Martin The University of Sheffield Department of Biblical Studies

13

Preface

1

PAUL'S FRIENDS AT CORINTH

The apostle Paul’s first acquaintance with the city of Corinth came in A.D. 50 in the course of his second missionary journey. The record of his coming to Corinth is given in the narrative o f Acts 18:1-20, where he appears in various roles. (a) As a tentmaker he associated with a Christian cou­ ple Aquila and his wife Priscilla (18:2,3). This husband-andwife team played a significant part in early Christianity as we see from Acts 18:24-26, Rom 16:3, and 1 Cor 16:19 where we learn of a Christian group that met in their home. (b) As a disputant Paul engaged in debate in the Jewish synagogue (Acts 18:4). In the excavation of the Corinth o f Roman times a marble cornice block that could possibly have stood as the lintel of a synagogue doorway has been unearthed. It is in­ scribed with now broken wording, restored as “synagogue of the Hebrews.” While the dating o f this inscription is proba­ bly later than Paul’s day, the presence o f a strong Jewish element in the population is attested by the account in Acts 18. In particular, Crispus, a leader of the synagogue, is men­ tioned as a convert won over by Paul’s preaching (Acts 18:8; 15

Paul’s Friends at Corinth

1 Cor 1:14). Another official o f the Jewish meeting place, Sosthenes, is referred to both in the story of Acts 18:16 and in 1 Cor 1:1. (c) In his ministry as a herald o f the good news Paul had some success. According to Acts 18:5, with the arrival of his colleagues Silas and Timothy from Macedonia which evi­ dently sent gifts for his Christian work, Paul was able to devote his time and energy exclusively to mission work. A s a consequence he met with active opposition from within the Jewish community and had to remove to a new base o f operations. This he found in the house o f Titius Justus, a Gentile adherent. We may suppose that this move widened the appeal o f his message. Many others were attracted to the gospel, several bearing Greco-Roman names. Gaius is men­ tioned as a convert Paul baptized (1 Cor 1:14). The family of Stephanas may be added to the list, according to 1 Cor 1:16. This man evidently became a leader o f the infant congrega­ tion, since he is commended as one devoted with his family to Christian service (1 Cor 16:15), and he formed part of the later delegation that brought questions to the apostle in Ephesus (1 Cor 16:17). Fortunatus and Achaicus were the other two members whom the Corinthians deputed to visit Paul at the same time. A woman, Chloe (1 C or 1:11), is spoken o f in connection with her “family,” a term meaning either her kinfolk or more likely her dependent workers. Phoebe, too, should be included in this short list. She is named as “deaconess” of the church at Cenchreae (Rom 16:1), the port o f Corinth on its eastern side. The city stood on a narrow neck o f land connecting two seas, and its geo­ graphical location played an important part in deciding its economic and political fortunes, as we shall see. (d) The little cameo o f Acts 18:9-11 reveals Paul as a truly human being in need of encouragement and cheer. The mis­ sion at Corinth was not easy, and there was much to dis­ courage and disappoint God's servant. Luke’s account of the 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

16

oracle that came from the heavenly Lord mentions the prom­ ise o f deliverance from physical danger (“no one shall set upon you to do you harm,” v 10). The assurance is given that the Lord has “many people in this city,” a pledge that turned out to be true in the sense that as a result of Paul’s initial evangelism a congregation, meeting in various house groups, was established. We are able to identify by name no fewer than sixteen persons who became charter members of the infant Christian community. The composition o f the Corinthian church has been much discussed in recent years. A. Deissmann took the view, mainly on the basis of 1 Cor 1:26-29, that the majority o f the members belonged to the poorer sections o f the city’s life.1 In reply to this point o f view it should be remarked that when Paul writes that “not many” were wise, powerful or of noble birth he does not imply “not any.” E. A. Judge has come to an opposite conclusion, therefore.2 He argues that Corinthian Christians, like many of Paul’s converts, were part of the upper middle-class society. The fullest discussion is that provided by G. Theissen who has investigated the social stratification o f the Christian community.3 He gives due attention both to the evidence o f 1 Cor 1:26-29 and 11:18 which speaks o f “divisions,” partly socioeconomic, that enabled the rich people to come early to the common meal but prevented the slave classes from arriving on time when all the food was set out (see 11:21,33,34), and also the counterbalancing data. In the latter category we may draw attention to the following: Crispus is called the synagogue ruler, a title implying that he was responsible for the maintenance o f the building and its necessary repairs. He could only have done this if he was a man o f some wealth. The houses owned— or at least occu­ pied—by Crispus and Stephanas (1 Cor 1:14; 16:15) along with Titius Justus, according to Acts 18:7, also testify to some social standing in the community. “Chloe’s people” is 17

Paul’s Friends at Corinth

another indirect witness to a woman o f considerable social status, (iii) The clearest evidence is offered in the reference to Erastus who, in Rom 16:23, is described as “the city treasurer.” Given the fact that Paul wrote this tribute and commendation of Erastus while he was at Corinth, and that in 1929 an inscription, dated to the second half o f the first century, came to light, the likelihood that Erastus was both a prominent civic dignitary in Corinth and a member o f the congregation there is strong. Near the theater at Corinth the following fragmentary inscription can be seen. It runs: [. . . ] ERASTVS PRO AEDILIT[AT]E S P STRAVIT “Erastus in recognition of his aedileship laid [the pave­ ment] at his own expense.” The name in question is not a common one, though it does appear in Acts 19:22 and 2 Tim 4:20 in connection with Paul’s friends and in association with Corinth. The aedile was more like the modem director of public works, while the strict title for a finance officer in Greco-Roman cities is quaestor. But the two offices overlapped, and it is very likely that if Erastus is one and the same person in all these texts he was a person of some civic and social importance. So there are several strands of evidence to be brought together in assessing the social posi­ tion of the Corinthians to whom Paul wrote. (e) The final section of Acts 18:12-17 reveals Paul’s own standing as a Roman. After a relatively long period of ministry he was set upon by the Jewish population and hauled before Gallio, the Roman proconsul of Achaia, the district of south­ ern Greece whose affairs were administered from Corinth. Since 27 B.C. Achaia had been placed under the jurisdiction of the Roman senate.4 The background to this decision is found in Corinth’s economic importance and geographical 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

18

location. It had developed into a strong economic and urban center from the sixth century B.C. with an impressively large . population. Its site on the isthmus which joined the G ulf of Corinth to the north and the Saronic G ulf to the east gave it an assured place as a commercial center, situated on the land and trade route from northern Greece to the Pelopon­ nese and possessing two harbors. In the war between the Achaean League o f city-states.and imperial Rome it opposed the ally o f Rome, Sparta; and in turn Corinth was invaded and utterly destroyed by the Ro­ mans in 146 B.C. The city was deserted for about a century. In 44 B.C. Julius Caesar repopulated it, and dignified it with his own name as a Roman outpost. Its occupation as a R o­ man colony brought many settlers, and in turn led to the reestablishment o f Corinth as a city o f fine buildings, shops, theaters, and houses, with Roman influence to be seen ev­ erywhere. The interlude in Acts 18:12-17 with Paul the Roman citizen brought in front o f the bema or raised plat­ form o f Lucius Junius Gallio, older brother o f the philoso­ pher Seneca in A.D. 51 is quite in character with all that is known from ancient history and modem archaeology o f Roman Corinth. Corinth’s roads were laid out in the Roman pattern, with the bema in the civic center modeled on the rostra o f the Roman forum. In Paul’s day the city teemed with life. Building projects begun under the emperors Tiberius and Claudius were underway—a fact which Paul may well have exploited in his writing (1 Cor 3:10,11). The city was vibrant with prosper­ ity, and proud o f its reputation as the pleasure palace of the ancient world. Its trade, said the geographer Strabo, brought much wealth, and the banks flourished, according to Plutarch. Artisans employed their skills with bronze artifacts, pottery manufacture, and especially Corinthian lamps made of terra cota which were well-known throughout the ancient world (cf. 2 Cor 4:7). Agriculture also was a key to Corinth’s 19

Pawl’s Friends at Corinth

prosperity, and Paul can use the imagery of the field and the farm to make a point to his urban readers (1 Cor 3:6-9; 9:7,10; 2 Cor 9:6-10). The religious life of Corinth is well-attested. An impres­ sive Doric temple still stands in ruins on a small promontory overlooking the site. Since Corinth’s inception as a city it had sponsored the Isthmian Games among the Greek states, held in celebration of the sea god Poseidon, and it is conceiv­ able that the biannual event coincided with Paul’s visit in A.D. 50-51. If so, some of his language and idioms may well be accounted for (for example, 1 Cor 9:24-27). The fountain o f Peirene, though best preserved o f the Corinthian foun­ tains, is later than Paul’s day. O n the west side of the forum is an ornamental fountain in honor o f Poseidon and Aphrodite, the Greek goddess o f life, beauty, and passion, whom the Romans called Venus. Her main temple was set on Acrocorinth, a mountain fif­ teen hundred feet in elevation that dominates the site. Strabo’s remark that a thousand prostitutes serviced this temple now is treated with extreme caution, and the moral climate o f Corinth, often regarded as the epitome o f im­ moral ways, seems to have been no worse than other Greek cosmopolitan cities. The way the Corinthians gave to the Greek lexicon a new word, “to Corinthianize,” meaning to indulge one’s appetites to the full, is also to be taken with reserve. There were political reasons why writers wished to denigrate Corinth. O n the other side, however, we may remember that Rom 1:18-32 with its grim exposé o f life in Greco-Roman society was a passage written at Corinth. And it is undeniable that Paul encountered a wide variety o f moral problems in his subsequent pastoral dealings with his Corinthian converts. In summary, into this city Paul brought the message of Christ. A church was formed, and it grew. Paul’s friends, whom he regarded as his children (1 Cor 4:15; 2 Cor 6:13), 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

20

were a mixed lot, a veritable cross-section o f society in this cosmopolitan city o f southern Greece, famed for its preten­ sions to wisdom, its popular culture, its trade, its harbors, and its love o f life. By the grace o f God and the ministry of his servant a church was established. For reasons that we may piece together from Paul’s wider dealings with the mother church and its leaders at Jerusalem, with Antioch and Ephesus, Corinth became o f pivotal concern to Paul at this stage in his missionary career. Much to do with Paul’s relations with Corinth is still unclear. But one fact stands out. O f all the congregations founded by his apostolic serv­ ice none posed so many problems as the Corinthians, and no group of Christians so well illustrates what was to Paul the cost in pastoral care and concern o f being a servant o f Christ to his people. The remark Paul makes, at the climax of his tribulation list in 2 Cor 11:23-28, must surely have reflected his recent experience in his dealings with those who first read these words, “Aside from all the other things, there is the daily pressure that concern for all the congregations brings me” (11:28). No congregation brought Paul more “concern” (lit. anxiety) than the church at Corinth. We now turn to consider why this was so. Factions an d frictions at Corinth By various routes Paul learned that all was not well with the infant community. But to understand the issues we must first try to fit together Paul’s relations with Corinth once he left the city. After more than a year and a half o f living and teaching among them the apostle moved on (Acts 18:11,18). He came eventually to Ephesus as his next major base of operations (Acts 18:21; 19:1), where he settled for an ex­ tended period o f two years (Acts 19:10). Luke’s narrative passes over much that transpired in that period. From the data provided in the letters Paul wrote to Corinth during 21

Paul’s Friends at Corinth

this time (say, A.D. 52-54) we can put together a probable itinerary of his movements and contacts. (a) Sometime after reaching Ephesus Paul wrote a letter to which he later refers in 1 Cor 5:9. This is now no longer extant, though some scholars believe that 2 Cor 6:14-7:1 may be a fragment of it on the ground that there is apparendy a common theme. This has to do with the need to be separate from moral evil. But this identification is by no means compelling, as we shall see. (b) Rumors and reports from Chloe’s household (1 Cor 1:11) brought the news that the church at Corinth was split into groups. There was evidently a crisis o f authority within the church. It centered on the question of leadership, and from 1 Cor 16:15-18 we may infer that the delegation that came from Corinth to Ephesus supported Paul’s apostleship and understanding of the gospel. Other leaders, mentioned in 1 Cor 11:18, 19, appeared to have expressed a preference for apostles such as Peter or preachers such as Apollos (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). (c) About the same time presumably Paul received a letter from the Corinthians asking for his advice and guidance on certain issues affecting marital problems, the ordering of worship, and relations with the outside world (1 Cor 7:1; 8:1). There was some uncertainty about the nature o f spirit­ ual gifts (12:1) with which the Corinthians were richly en­ dowed (1:7). (d) Paul met the situation created by these matters as he wrote the letter known as 1 Corinthians. It was taken to Corinth perhaps by Timothy whose mission is commended in 1 C or 4:17 (see RSV, marg. “I am sending to you Timothy . . . to remind you o f my ways in Christ”). (e) About this time a more serious crisis broke out with the centerpoint the authority o f Paul himself. Perhaps Timo­ thy brought the news o f it back to Ephesus, though Paul may not have been unprepared for it since he expresses himself 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

22

forcefully in 1 Cor 4:18-21 and threatens that he will have to come himself to deal with some fomenting trouble. A t all events he did make a visit to deal with the issue in person. He later alludes to this as a “painful visit” (2 C or 2:1) because he was humiliated before the church, insulted by one prominent Corinthian believer, and forced to re­ turn to Ephesus in great distress. Two passages bear on his state o f mind at that time: 2 C or 2:1-11 and 7:8-13 as they indicate the steps he took to redress the wrong he felt he had suffered. (f) He wrote a “tearful letter,” at great cost to himself, to deal with the crisis (2 C or 2:4; 7:8). This was carried to Corinth by Titus who was instructed to meet Paul on his return at Troas to where Paul now headed (2 C or 2:12). In the interim, however, he was personally attacked in Ephesus and had to endure some form o f physical assault (2 Cor 1:8-11) which may or may not be linked with the trial he speaks o f as “fighting with beasts at Ephesus” (1 C or 15:32). H is life was seriously threatened and he was at the point of death— an extremity which is mirrored in much o f the writ­ ing o f 2 Cor chs 1-7. He was rescued by some divine inter­ position when all hope was gone, and lived to tell the tale o f G od’s deliverance (see 2 Cor 4:8-15; 6:4-10). (g) According to the plan outlined in 1 C or 16:5-9 but subsequently modified by the need to visit Corinth in re­ sponse to the critical situation referred to above, Paul left Ephesus to make his way to Macedonia. He came first to Troas where he hoped to meet Titus, but did not (2 C or 2:13). Instead, therefore, o f settling for a while at Troas he hurried over to Macedonia where, in fact, Titus was on his way to join him (2 C or 2:13; 7:5-7). These must have been dark days for Paul. N ot only had he suffered an attack from the outside, called “strife from without”; he also was faced with “fears from within,” referred to in 2 C or 7:5. We may identify the strife with the conflict endured at Ephesus, 23

Paul’s Friends at Corinth

presumably with the Roman or Jewish authorities; and the fears were real fears engendered by the sad prospect that his investment in the lives of the Corinthians had gone for nothing. He had hoped to hear good news from Titus, who was not to be found at Troas. (h) The sequel as Paul retells it was different. Titus came to Macedonia with a good report. The “letter o f tears” had worked effectively. The rebellious leader was disciplined, and the Corinthian church had come back to Paul’s side with renewed confidence. Such, evidently, was Titus’ first reading o f the situation, which lifted Paul’s spirits and inspired him with fresh hope to believe that all was well. In that assurance he wrote 2 Cor 1-9, exulting in the triumph of his gospel (2:14) in spite of his own frailty (4:7) and insecurity, and ex­ plaining why his travel plans were revised (2 Cor 1:15-22). Above all, he expounded the message o f reconciliation that had so recently been illustrated in the restoring o f amicable relations between the church and the apostle. With the air cleared o f suspicion it was time to charge Titus to return to Corinth to gather the collection for Jerusalem, which had been in abeyance (ch 8,9). (i) The last four chapters of 2 Cor are a puzzle. The view taken in this work is that they were written later than the composing o f chs 1-9 and in the light of a new situation that threatened. According to 11:4, 12-15, emissaries arrived at Corinth, perhaps wishing to exploit the recent disaffection with Paul on the part of a section of the Corinthian leader­ ship. These messengers were warmly received—but quickly reopened old wounds and insinuated that Paul was no true apostle or even not a Christian at all (10:7). He lacked all the qualities, gifts, and graces of an impressive apostolic figure; he was weak, insecure, and exposed to suffering at every turn. When Paul sensed that new danger he wrote a blister­ ing note, full of irony, invective, ridicule, and self-defense. This is 2 Cor 10-13, at the heart o f which is Paul’s “Fool’s 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

24

Narrative” (11:16-12:10). It was dispatched to Corinth in a bold attempt to ward off present danger, and to accomplish what previous efforts had failed to achieve. W hether it suc­ ceeded or not, we cannot say for certain. Paul, according to Acts 20:2, came to Greece, presumably Corinth; and thence he sailed for Jerusalem with the collection, presumably in­ cluding the money raised at Corinth. So we may believe that Paul’s last letter was the most effective o f all, and that the Corinthians were finally won over to his side. But perhaps not finally in another sense. By the time o f the letter called 1 Clement, written in A.D. 96 from Rome to Corinth, the church there was still racked by dissensions and infighting. The lesson is clear: there is no lasting reconcilia­ tion between antagonistic groups, even Christian groups, in this old eon, but every generation of believers needs to heed the apostle’s call to live in peace and unity (2 Cor 13:11). And we can only respond by a continued reliance on those forces that moved and motivated Paul in his role as a reconciling agent to bring together alienated parties at Corinth: “the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit” (2 Cor 13:14). The stage has been set to ask once more, what went wrong at Corinth? Why were there “factions” and “frictions”? And what were the real issues underlying the surfacing o f ugly situations and problems. Let us attempt an overview, with the details to be filled in as our later chapters unfold. Here was a company o f Christian people recently won over from pagan and pernicious ways (1 Cor 6:9-11; 12:2) and always in danger o f relapsing into past habits and vices (2 Cor 12:20,21). The threat to return to the corporate and personal life they had renounced and broken with by bap­ tism into Christ was ever present and always real. More than once Paul had to warn them against a false security (e.g., 1 C or 10:12) and a supposed immunity from moral dangers present in the society around them (e.g., 2 Cor 6:14-7:1). 25

Paul’s Friends at Corinth

But more was at stake than just the menacing world which created an ambience o f temptation and seduction. Tempta­ tion and seduction were real dangers (2 Cor 11:2, 3), but the ease with which some o f the Corinthians fell suggests that powerful factors o f another kind were at work to lead them astray. There were four. (a) Divisions within the congregation, which seems to have been dispersed into several house groups, were a source o f trouble. For one thing, it gave the impression that the church was split into factions each owning allegiance to Christian leaders (1 Cor 1:11-17). The root idea was taken from the practice common in the hellenistic mystery reli­ gions that the person who did the initiating, called a mystagogue, held some sort o f special power over the initiates. He was their mentor and guide, and they were beholden to him. The Corinthians imagined that the same idea applied to the service o f baptism. To have been baptized by Paul was a great privilege for some. They then looked down on others who had not had that privilege (see 1 Cor 12:15-26 for this kind o f superior attitude). Other believers were proud o f their allegiance to Peter (called Cephas, his Jewish name) who had come to Corinth after Paul’s first visit (1 Cor 9:5). Paul includes Cephas in the recital o f the resurrection appear­ ances (1 C or 15:5) but he is quick to add that both he and Peter shared a common faith (15:11). Apollos too was greatly admired by some, perhaps chiefly on the score that he was an eloquent preacher (Acts 18:24) and had greatly assisted believers in Achaia (Acts 18:27) who valued his special emphasis on argument and debate in refut­ ing the Jewish objectors. Paul, by contrast, seemed to be an unlearned preacher with no rhetorical flair or gift o f elo­ quence. He paled into insignificance when set alongside the powerful presence o f Apollos with his recourse to wisdom to explain the mystery of God’s salvation plan. 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

26

Yet Paul’s determination not to use rhetorical devices to persuade his readers— at least at the time o f writing 1 Cor and in reference to his first visit to the city—was inten­ tional. He explains his reasoning in 1 C or 2:1-5: W hen I came to you I came with no superiority in speech or wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony o f God. I decided to know nothing when among you but Jesus Christ, and even him as the crucified! I was with you in weakness and fear and much trembling; and my speech and proclamation were not in persuasive words o f wisdom but were validated by the Spirit and by power, that your faith might depend not on human wisdom but on divine power. The third name is less easy to pinpoint Evidently there was a cry heard in the assembly that some belonged to Christ (1 Cor 1:12). If they formed a Christ-party, they may well have been extremely Jewish in their orientation and sought to revive a faith in Jesus as Israel’s messiah and savior. Perhaps they were messianists who despised both Paul’s claim to be apostle to the Gentiles and Apollos’s wisdom which in turn had links with Alexandrian Judaism in Egypt, from where Apollos originated. These people would be wanting to press back to the simple Jesus o f the earthly ministry and to be linked with him in a way Paul mentions (and discredits) in 2 C or 5:16 by calling it “knowing Christ after the flesh,” as an earthly messiah. O r else, if this party is seen in the reference in 2 Cor 10:7 it became a badge of distinction to have seen Jesus in his earthly life. Since Paul did not qualify on that point, he was dismissed as inferior. But there is no certainty here. Several facts make it improbable that there ever was a Christ-party in rivalry to these apostolic groups mentioned.

27

Paul’s Friends a t Corinth

In 1 Cor 3:21 the human names alone are given, with no mention of a Christ group. Similarly, in 1 Clement 47:3, only the names o f Paul, Cephas, and Apollos are given as the way in which the Corinthians formed partisan groups. Thirdly, using 2 Cor 10:7 for another reason, we may argue that belonging to Christ was Paul’s own claim. This leads to the conclusion that 1:12 should be read as climaxing in Paul’s own retort by way o f denouncing all parties: Each o f you says, “I belong to Paul”; “I to Apollos”; “I to Cephas.” But I belong to Christ. The last remark, then, is Paul’s own confession, akin to what he says o f himself in 1 Cor 11:1. Charles Wesley’s stanza is exactly Paul’s point: Names, and sects, and parties fall; Thou, O Christ, art all in all. Paul sternly sets his face against all such divisions which so disfigured the Corinthian assembly. Baptism is a rite of initia' tion into one body (1 Cor 12:12,13,25), and is administered in the name of Christ, not an apostolic figure, however revered. His own task is not to gather disciples but to proclaim the gospel (1 Cor 1:17), which is his distinctive calling in life (1 Cor 9:16; 2 Cor 4:6). In any case, men and women come to faith not through human agency but as the gift of the Spirit (1 Cor 12:3). What then is Apollos? what is Paul? are his ques­ tions to his childish readers (3:1-9); not “who” but “what” is the issue. Both persons are accredited leaders and worthy of honor; but both are equally “servants through whom you came to believe” (3:5). This conclusion is reached at 4:6 and 7 which stands at the close of the section (3:5-4:7) within the Letter Body (identi­ fied by Dahl5 as 1:10-4:21). Paul has written about Apollos 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

28

and himself so that the Corinthians may learn by this illustra­ tion—as a child copies handwriting in ancient schooling, making the letters neither too large nor too small—not to exceed the limits laid down. Those limits are seen as the Lord of the church assigns ministry to each one (3:5), and so the Corinthians are not to behave arrogantly by favoring one preacher against the other (4:6). So let no one, boast about men (3:21), since all men and women in God’s service can only fulfill their calling as they promote Christ (a theme to which Paul returns in 2 Cor 10:15-18). (b) The Corinthians had but a precarious hold on Chris­ tian morality. The evidence for this shows itself in several problems that came to the surface both in their inquiries of Paul and his replies. There was evident pride in immoral con­ duct of the worst kind (1 Cor 5:1-13); a breakdown of the community life (6:1-8), especially at the common meal table (11:17-22); and a division over the issue o f how far one’s con­ science may stretch when it comes to attending feasts with idol-worshipers (8:1-13; 10:14-33). More seriously still, sex­ ual mores at Corinth were lax to the point o f condoning prostitution (6:12-20) and associating with people of bad dis­ position without regard to the baneful effects of such friend­ ships (1 Cor 15:33; 2 Cor 6:14-7:1). Paul’s response lies in sounding a clarion call to the highest ethical standards, based on applying one’s redemption to a life o f dedication to a holy Lord (1 Cor 5:7,8); an assertion o f the koinonia that unites believers as one body in one Spirit under one Lord; and a concern for the Christian neighbor whose “upbuilding” (oikodome is Paul’s favorite word in these chapters, to be observed shortly) is always to be sought by Christians (1 Cor 10:33; 14:5,12,26) and the primacy o f love (agape) whose traits are evident in the one chapter Paul devotes to its praise and practice (1 Cor 13). (c) In a church replete with gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 1:7) there was utter confusion about which “gifts-in-grace” 29

Paul’s Friends a t Corinth

(charism ata) were to be sought and prized (1 Cor 14:12; see 12:31 which reads as if it gave the point o f view o f the Corinthians). The special manifestation of ecstatic speech, called “speaking in tongues” or “tongues o f angels” (13:1), and women’s ministries in prophetic oracles were evidently highly regarded (1 Cor 12:29, 30; 14:4-19, 22-25, 33b-38). But while Paul was prepared to give some sanction to both Corinthian worship practices he was aware that both glossolalic speech and women’s prophetic ministries were fraught with dangerous consequences when they were allowed to get out o f hand and promote a wrongheaded understanding o f corporate worship. His concern then is to establish priorities in the interest of two sides to public worship that most effectively set forth the gospel. They are, first, the need for control and restraint since God does not sanction disorder or unseemly behavior (1 Cor 14:33,40), and, then, a desire to promote those parts o f worship which will lead the outsider or interested in­ quirer to be impressed with the presence of G od (1 Cor 14:23-25) and to be able to enter intelligently into the mean­ ing o f what the worship o f G od entails (1 Cor 14:16). True worship catches up the human spirit into the pres­ ence o f the divine; but it equally has a rational, intelligible side that informs and quickens the mind (1 C or 14:15). Those on the fringe o f church life are more likely to be lastingly influenced if they are able to make sense o f what Christian worship is designed to do; they will then not dis­ miss the assembling o f believers as a meeting place o f those possessed by a demonic spirit (1 Cor 14:9, 23). A very great danger arises when professed Christians are uncontrollably led into blasphemous utterances (1 Cor 12:1-3). (d) Most serious of all, as Paul judged the Corinthian scene, was a theological error. The importance o f being able to pin­ point what this wrongheaded notion was will be clear once we note that it explains most, if not all, of the symptoms that 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

30

marred church life at Corinth. The root idea was that at baptism believers entered the kingdom o f G od in its full­ ness (1 C or 4:8), and this belief inevitably led to the conclu­ sion that there was no hope o f a future resurrection (1 C or 15:12). N ot that the future resurrection was denied; rather, it was passed over as unnecessary since its reality had been telescoped into present experience. That, we may say, was the chief element in a type o f theologizing that came to take hold at Corinth after Paul’s departure from the city. But what caused its emergence? The best guess we may make points to the hellenistic ideas o f “spirit” (pneuma). In a Greco-Roman city like Corinth it is a reasonable assumption that religious life would be dominated by the power o f “spirit,” a divine force that came irresistibly on those who opened their lives to its influence and carried them away, often into a trance-like state and often into erratic and bizarre behavior. There is concrete evi­ dence for this in 1 Cor 12:2: You know that, when you were pagans, you were led away to dumb idols, as you were continually led. Paul, in 1 Cor 6:9-11, harks back to the old way o f life from which his readers had been set free. But it is clear that with his warning, “Don’t be deceived,” the pull of the old life was still being felt. The Corinthians were in constant danger of being drawn back— not only to immoral ways (which was bad enough) but to pagan thought patterns which, they imagined, could be accommodated to their profession as Christians. Much o f Paul’s Corinthian correspondence is taken up with seeking to unmask this false step and to raise strong theologi­ cal objections to the error that was at the heart of Corinthian beliefs and practices. “Spirit” was for them a key term, as we learn from 1 Cor 14:12 when read in the light o f 14:1: 31

Paul’s Friends a t Corinth

Since you are eager in striving for “spirits,” seek to excel for the building up of the church. They traced the incoming of “spirit”—now linked with the Holy Spirit— into their lives and experience to what oc­ curred in baptism, perhaps appealing to Paul’s teaching about being raised with Christ to newness of life (cf. Rom 6:1-14; Col 3:1). They misunderstood this teaching, however, at one significant point. Thinking of themselves as risen with Christ they imagined they already had entered upon an angelic exist­ ence. Three parts of Corinthian church life and worship are now explained, as our later chapter will show. (i) Their mar­ riage customs involved a type of spiritual union in which normal married relations were despised as “fleshly” since true believers, like the angels, were sexless (1 Cor 7:1-7, 36-40); (ii) “tongues of angels” (1 Cor 13:1) were a sign of the new age already begun and meant to be enjoyed in its present power; (iii) female members in exercising prophetic gifts of speech were breaking free from the mutual constraints of marriage, and as a badge of their full emancipation were discarding a head covering (1 Cor 11:2-16) and were laying claim to being innovative teachers (1 Cor 14:31-40). But the reason for their bid for independence was not sociological or feminist; rather, it rested on their supposed baptismal status as “like the angels of God” for whom there is no marriage or sexual distinction (see Luke 20:35,36). The Corinthian watchword was, therefore, “freedom” (1 Cor 6:12; 10:23), which was taken to an extreme, notably in the areas of sexual promiscuity and license. At the heart of a wrong religious idea was the practical misstep that led either to asceticism (as in 1 Cor 7) or indulgence without restraints (in 1 Cor 6). This puzzling situation can only be accounted for on one assumption. The Corinthians’ false sacramentalism and narrow individualism led them to prac­ tices Paul can only view with great alarm. He offered in 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

32

rebuttal two statements which recur throughout this corre­ spondence. We mention them here in outline in the hope that they will bring us to the very center o f Paul’s theology in these letters. First, he announced that he came to Corinth with the preaching of the cross as the main plank in his platform (1 Cor 1:18-2:5). We may stop to inquire why Paul found it needful to emphasize the centrality and cruciality o f the cross to a Christian congregation. The answer is that the Corinthi­ ans were in danger of allowing the cross to be swallowed up in the glory of the resurrection. The resurrection for them was the kingpin of their baptismal experience and it brought the gift of “spirit” and the new age in its full power. The cross, then, was but a station on the road to Christ’s glory in which they shared here and now. For Paul this understanding is fatally flawed. The cross is a historical event, since “Christ died for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:14-21), but equally it sets the pattern for all Christian living. It issues a call of dying to live, reminding those who profess the faith o f Christ cruci­ fied that they are summoned to a life always set under the cross. This is clear in one of Paul’s most moving passages: 2 Cor 4:10-12: We always bear in our bodily existence the dying of Jesus, so that the life too o f Jesus may be displayed in our mortal existence. For we as living persons are al­ ways being handed over to death for the sake of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be displayed in our mortal nature. Thus death is at work in our case, but it is life for you. Second, since the real issue under debate at Corinth was eschatological, that is, determined by the event celebrated by G od’s coming in Christ to remake the world and restore it to his saving purpose, Paul needed to assert what his 33

Paul’s Friends a t Corinth

understanding o f the Christ event was. It entailed a para­ doxical statement— and its paradox is perhaps the reason why the Corinthians misinterpreted it. They grasped one facet of truth and interpreted it in the light of their own hellenistic culture and enthusiastic experience as new con­ verts. For them, all things had become new— a conviction Paul shared (2 C or 5:17). He believed as passionately as any of his Corinthian friends that in Christ the decisive turning point in human history had been reached and life was radi­ cally transformed. But he was realistic enough to qualify this unbridled confi­ dence. Christians still live in a world o f evil powers; they have to wrestle with temptation and to resist the downward drag of their being still “in Adam” (1 Cor 15:45-50); and their mor­ tality must inevitably lead to death and dissolution, beyond which they cling to the hope o f resurrection in a new bodily existence (1 Cor 15:38, 42— 44; 2 Cor 5:1-10). This is the second member o f the paradox which some o f the Corinthi­ ans with their “realized eschatology” failed to grasp. Hence their denial o f a future resurrection (1 Cor 15:12; cf. 2 Tim 2:17,18). Paul insists on maintaining a tension in Christian living. The believers are already “in Christ” and part of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17); they have to live with the prospect o f a final redemption still to come, and to order their lives on the principle o f “as though” (1 Cor 7:29-31) by entering its life’s moral responsibilities and challenges yet cognizant that this world will pass away.

1, 2 CORINTHIANS

34

2

PAUL’S APOSTOLIC SERVICE IN THEORY AND PRACTICE

Apostle Both letters open on the same note. While Paul’s partner in ministry may not be the same— Timothy replaces Sosthenes in 2 Cor— the common theme is that o f apostolic service. Paul presents himself in both letter openings as “an apostle of Christ Jesus.” The other men are given the title “brother,” i.e., fellow Christian and colleague. Only Paul is the apostle. 1. Paul’s Calling—from God. It is clear that this designa tion stands at the center o f both letters for several reasons. First, the appointment of the apostle is traced back to the purpose o f God himself (1 Cor 12:28). For the establishing and good ordering of the church G od’s wisdom is seen in the gift of ministry. To be sure, all Christians have a part to play in building up the church (1 Cor 14:12) since all are gifted in one way or another (1 Cor 1:7; 12:4-11). But “the apostle” stands at the head of the list when Paul comes to consider the roll call of those summoned to particular ministry (see too, 35

Paul’s A postolic Service in Theory and Practice

Eph 4:11-16). The meaning o f the word is that one is com­ missioned by the risen Lord (1 C or 9:1) to proclaim the good news and lay the foundation which is identified as no less than Christ him self (1 C or 3:10,11). A s a skilled master builder, Paul was conscious o f his calling to this noble of­ fice, and faithfully acknowledges that Christ sent him . . . to preach the gospel (1 Cor 1:17). This was a vocation he accepted with all seriousness, regarding it as a calling not to be undertaken lightly but with due gravity and with a heavy sense of responsibility laid upon him (1 Cor 9:16). “Alas for me if I do not preach the gospel” echoes the conviction that he has a life-and-death mission to fulfill. The full implica­ tions o f such a ministry are made clear in 2 C or 2:15-17 where his apostolic work is pictured in contrast to that of his rivals, and the two types o f ministry are set down in stark detail. Here is a short paragraph worth our close scrutiny: We are an aroma o f Christ to God among those on the road to salvation— and among those on the road to ruin. Among those in the latter case [we are] a deadly fume that leads to death, but for those in the former a living-giving fragrance that leads to life. And who is adequate for this [kind o f ministry]? For we do not go about adulterating G od's message as our many [oppo­ nents] do. No, we speak as those who do so with sin­ cerity, whose word is from God and given in the sight of God as servants o f Christ. The ministry of Paul is distinguished in two ways: (i) it calls forth a double reaction from the hearers. The book of Acts makes it clear that Paul’s preaching did not permit his audience to remain in a fence-sitting neutrality once they had been confronted with the message o f C hrist Now Paul ex­ plains to the Corinthians the nature of the choice, “rejection 1, 2 CO RIN TH IA N S

36

or response,” which had accompanied his proclamation. To those who are destined to salvation the “word o f the cross” (1 Cor 1:18) was a perfume of Christ, offering life in him (2 Cor 2:16). But to the mockers and the disobedient it came as a smell o f death and doom. This contrast o f fragrance as opposed to a fume that is lethal probably is drawn from the way the Jewish rabbis spoke o f the law. The Mosaic law was likened to an aromatic medicine that proved health-giving to the righteous in Israel, but was fatal to the ungodly. Paul boldly takes over a Jewish use of picture language and applies it to the gospel he has been entrusted to announce. (ii) The ministry in God’s servant is marked by sincerity (2 C or 2:17; see 1:12) in contrast to “many” who made “mer­ chandise o f the word.” The latter is a strange phrase, proba­ bly a reference to certain contemporary religious teachers who put their preaching on a commercial basis by the con­ stant flourish o f the collection box. Paul had already made it plain (1 Cor 9:15-18) that he would have nothing to do with this type o f mercenary practice, even when he had the privi­ lege to be supported by his congregations. Here he mentions the only sort o f accreditation worth having, in verse 17b: “as servants of C h rist” 2. His Self-Estimate. Second, the reference to himself as numbered among those commissioned by God who are called to speak in Christ as in God’s sight puts us on the track of how Paul saw himself as an apostle. One o f the most revealing pieces o f autobiography is in 1 Cor 15:8-11: Finally he appeared to me as to one abnormally bom , as it were. I am the least of the apostles. I am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church o f God. But what I am, I am by the grace o f God; and his grace in my case has not been ineffective but I toiled more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace o f G od (working) with me. W hether then it was I or they (who 37

Paul's Apostolic Service in Theory an d Practice

labored), this is what we proclaim and this is how you came to believe. This personalized confession begins with Paul’s claim to be an authentic witness of the risen Lord. While he never refers to the episode on the Damascus road as such, it seems evident that he has that event in view in his use of the words “he appeared to me.” In spite of his previous record as a persecutor o f the church, he was privileged to receive a heavenly vision that both forgave the past and set him on the road to a new future. The link term which alone explains how Saul o f Tarsus became Paul the Christian leader is the grace of God. Though he ranks himself as a lowly person, as “the least o f the apostles,” he cannot deny how effectual the power of God has been in his life. He makes a twofold claim in all humility, saying two things about his ministry simultaneously. On the one hand he concedes, “I am a special case. I labored more than all the apostles and have credentials”— such as his congregation at Corinth (1 Cor 9:2)— “to prove it.” His work as a pioneer missionary (Rom 15:20; 2 Cor 10:12-16) is in view here. On the other hand, he draws back from the use o f the personal pronoun. No sooner has he written “I” as in “I toiled” than he retracts it lest it should give a wrong impression. “Yet not I, but the grace of G od” which was at work “with me.” In other words, he is conscious throughout his life’s ex­ perience that while it would be false modesty to deny his “success,” any achievement in church planting and growth is solely attributed to G od’s sovereign power. The same reminder has already been given in 1 Cor 3:6: “I planted, Apollos watered, but it was [only] G od who gave the growth.” C . K. Barrett appends a helpful and salutary com­ ment.1 “Merely to put a plant in the ground and pour water over it is nothing. It was not we, however, but . . . God who made [it] grow.” 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

38

So Paul surveys his apostolic calling. He admits the un­ likelihood (from a human point o f view) of his ever becom­ ing a believer, let alone an apostle. But then he sees in divine grace, which both drew him to God and empowers him for service, as 2 Cor 12:9 remarks, the sole explanation possible for such a transformation and such a record o f exploits and endeavors. By God’s grace (charis, the free favor o f heaven to the undeserving) he became a Christian; and by the same grace he was enabled to fulfill his charge as an “apostle of Christ Jesus” to the Gentiles, a ministry he sought to mag­ nify by humble dependence and thankfulness (Rom 11:13). 3. Paul’s Apostleship under Attack. One feature o f apostleship inevitably thrusts it into prominence in the Corin­ thian correspondence. A t Corinth Paul’s claim to be such a leader as a church planter and Christ’s authorized represent­ ative was hotly disputed. The counterclaims o f his rivals and opponents will need to be considered separately. The point we may make here is to note the way they viewed his apos­ tolic calling. The catchword in 1 Cor 15:8 may be used as a starting point. In the autobiographical section just examined Paul uses of himself the term ektroma, a word whose meaning is uncertain. The root idea is that of premature birth, an abortion, and so could be taken as “one hurried into the world before his time,” as Barrett translates. In what way could this be said of Paul, or would he use it of himself? Perhaps there is a deliber­ ate contrast between himself and the Jerusalem apostles (the “pillar” men of Gal 2:1-10) who had known Jesus in his earthly ministry. Paul, by contrast, had been “bom without a full term of gestation,” and had not known Jesus in his pre­ resurrection days. This limitation may then have been used to make a denial of his equality with the Twelve to whose witness to the resurrection Paul had just appealed (15:5). But the term ektroma is unnatural to express this idea, even if it is true that in 2 Cor 11:5 and 12:11 he will have 39

Paul’s Apostolic Service in Theory an d Practice

occasion to claim that he is in no way inferior to the so-called “highest ranking apostles,” meaning Peter or James or emis­ saries from the Jerusalem church. It has, therefore, been sug­ gested that the term is one of abuse and was coined by Paul’s enemies. They invented the term, meaning a malformed fetus and so a monster, and hurled it at him to discredit his apos­ tolic rank. Perhaps they had in mind his lowly demeanor or his insignificance as a person (2 Cor 10:10), with a lack of theoretical skills and a simple style o f preaching counting against him. To support the latter we may refer to the extended discus­ sion of Paul’s preaching method in 1 Cor 1:17— 2:5. He deliber­ ately set his face against using the eloquent wisdom of the world in his public speaking, and came to Corinth “in weak­ ness and in much fear and trembling” (2:3). His spoken utter­ ance (logos) and his proclamation of the good news (the kerygma) were not offered in the persuasive words o f (human) wisdom he confesses (2:4). The vital point to grasp is that it is the same reason he gives to justify both his lowly presence and his disdain of rhetorical finesse, namely so that the cross of Christ might not be emptied of its power with the conse­ quence that if this happened the Corinthians’ faith would rest on shaky ground (2:5). Yet Paul’s person and proclamation were evidently the butt of criticism, and his opponents sought to exploit both to their own advantage. There is, however, one further possibility for under­ standing ektrom a. With a side-glance at Ephesians 3:8, “to me, who am less than the least o f all Christians," it may be proposed that it was the Corinthians themselves who made playful allusion to Paul’s name. Paulos in Greek is reminis­ cent o f the Latin word for “little.” Their quick wit seized on this link, and called him the “little one,” which his enemies then used against him in contempt. In favor o f this sugges­ tion is that it links up with Paul’s own continued thought in verse 9. There he turns the criticism to his own advantage: I, 2 CORINTHIANS

40

“Yes, I am indeed the least [the same Greek root as in Eph 3:8] o f the apostles”; he is an apostle for all people since he has seen the living Lord and has the indispensable qualifica­ tion in being commissioned by him for his service (Rom 1:1, 5). It may be that he makes the same point in 1 C or 4:3: “as for me it is a very litl e thing (same Greek word again) that I should be judged by you.” In the checklist o f allegations brought against him at Corinth there was apparently the charge that he preached only an individualistic message, that is, his own version of the kerygma which, it was claimed, was at variance with the preaching of the original apostles. So Paul finds it needful to call in the evidence o f the leaders to whom the risen Christ appeared. “Whether then it was I or they, this is what we proclaim and this is how you came to believe” (1 Cor 15:11). We may surmise, too, with some evidence drawn from 14:36-38, that a faction o f the Corinthian congregation, per­ haps led by a group of women prophetesses, were disputing Paul’s role as the sole repository of divine truth, and claim­ ing to have received fresh revelations from the Lord to con­ tradict Paul’s apostolic authority. Whatever the occasion, he is clear that he needs to establish the gospel he brought to Corinth as the epitome of God’s saving truth. He goes about this task in several ways. In 1 Cor 15:1-5 he presents the following lines o f argu­ ment: (i) the “preached message” (15:1, lit. “the good news which I preached to you,” which is a cumbersome piece of tautology in Greek but needful to enforce his point) has been validated in the readers’ own experience (see 1 Cor 9:2). Paul can confidently appeal to the fact of Christian conviction, based on the way the Corinthians had received his message and were encouraged to stand firm in it. (ii) The danger is that they should drift from the Pauline gospel, and Paul warns that this sad eventuality would only show that their initial faith was “in vain”— a possibility he 41

Paul's Apostolic Service in Theory an d Practice

does not seriously contemplate. (in) Paul himself, though an apostle, was indebted to his predecessors and received from them the summary o f the christological creed (in w 3-5) which in turn he passed on to his hearers at the time o f his first visit to Corinth (in Acts 18). (iv) Moreover this saving message is none other than the same gospel shared by other preachers and leaders in the early churches (v 11). His optimistic conclusion is thus reached. Whoever it was that brought the gospel—Paul in the first place, followed by sub­ sequent visits of Peter and Apollos (1 Cor 9:5)— it is one and the same message. The creed expresses the common heritage o f the faith, centered in a crucified and risen Lord, which all agree on, and in whose service Paul claims to have an un­ qualified place. The sense o f parity with the Twelve lies at the heart o f this short but important section. The contents o f the kerygma will be discussed later. It is enough now to note the way Paul’s authority, clearly under fire, is defended by a series o f rea­ soned statements drawn from personal experience, congrega­ tional endorsement, and the consensus of other leaders in early Christendom. One other section (in 2 C or 10:12-18) needs to be consid­ ered in the context o f Paul’s ministry. In the background is the accusation leveled against him that he had no right to be an apostle and certainly no sanction either from the Lord or from the leaders in the Jewish mission to come to Corinth in the first place. The allegation is probably touched on at 2 Cor 11:7 where the most likely interpretation o f a difficult text is that the emissaries were claiming to be the sole repre­ sentatives of Christ at Corinth, and so, by inference, insinu­ ating that Paul’s mission was invalid because he was not a true Christian, and so a phony leader. He proceeds to counter this claim, and to offer his own understanding of what his apostleship meant in terms o f keep­ ing to the limits of the area designated to him as apostle to the 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

42

Gentiles. Some of the terms used are technical expressions and uncertain in meaning; but the chief thrust is clear. Paul, in typical fashion, cannot leave his argument without closing it in a tribute to the Lord who inspires all his service and to whom alone belongs the credit We may reproduce some of these verses with a comment to draw out the implied sense. We do not have the effrontery to class or compare ourselves with some who recommend themselves. . . . We, however, will not boast beyond proper limits, but only within the sphere o f service which G od has as­ signed to us as our sphere, a sphere that reaches as far as to you. . . . We did not go beyond the proper limits by boasting o f the work done by others, but we have the hope that as your faith continues to grow, so our work may, within the sphere we have, be greatly ex­ panded among you. . . . For it is not the person who recommends himself who is approved, but the person whom the Lord recommends. This difficult paragraph has a clear focus o f vision, even if the details are obscure. Paul has in his sights the Jewish Christian proselytizers who were molesting Gentile church members and endeavoring to undermine his authority. They implied that Paul had no right to come to Corinth in the first place. He replies to the effect that if any preachers are “out o f bounds” or “off limits” it is not he but those emissaries whose presence will appear at 11:4, 13-15. A t Corinth, Paul justifiably claimed to be the human founder o f the church (1 C or 3:6). The Corinthians are the seal o f his apostolic service (1 Cor 9:1,2). In any case, the final arbiter is the sanction o f the Lord to which he appeals in w 17 and 18, as well as his divinely appointed destiny to be the herald of the gospel (Acts 9:15; 22:21; Eph 3:1,2; 1 Clem 5:6,7 for the later witness building on Rom 15:17-20). 43

Paul’s Apostolic Service in Theory an d Practice

4. Apostle in Word and Life. The apostolic ministry was expressed chiefly by Paul’s spoken and authoritative words. Verbs such as “proclaim” and “declare” confirm this sense of importance he attached to his ministry as a spokesperson, called and commissioned by the heavenly Lord. He can sum up this aspect by citing the testimony o f the Psalmist (Ps 116:10, LX X 115:1; 2 C or 4:13) which joins together faith and the verbal utterance that flows from it. “We too believe and so we speak.” Yet Paul knew that he was but a carrier or container in which the message was conveyed to his hearers. In a moving passage (2 Cor 4:7-12) he comments on the “treasure” o f the good news committed to his charge, and proceeds to rehearse the way in which his own life is weak and expendable: But we have this treasure in clay pots, to show the preeminent power as God’s not our own. We are hard pressed in every way, but not crushed by it; thrown into perplexity, but not left to despair, harassed, but not abandoned; knocked down, but not knocked o u t (2 Cor 4:7-9) “The earthen vessels” (v 7, RSV) refers to pottery jars used to carry possessions; or more likely they are to be understood as vessels for holding oil for use in a lamp. Many such containers have been found in recent archaeological digs at Corinth. Paul sees his own life as a bearer o f the light of the gospel (2 Cor 4:4-6; Phil 2:16). The fragility o f such cheap clay pots is only too obvious, and this af c t emphasizes how little store Paul placed on his life. The series o f paradoxical remarks in 4:8 and 9 is a memorable commentary and as we have reproduced the translation above, the play on words can be easily seen. The final paradox is summed up aphoristically in the sentence, “Thus death is at work in our case, but it is life for you” (v 12). 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

44

Not all at Corinth tended to see things this way. When Paul returns to the theme o f the frailty and vulnerability of his apostolic service (in 2 Cor 11:23t29) it is clear that he is on the defensive. He cannot hide his record of suffering, hardship, and exposure to risk. Nor can he disguise the pres­ ence of “the thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor 12:7) which in some unexplained way was a hindrance to his ministry. All he can do is extol the grace of Christ that came to him in a surpris­ ingly novel fashion (12:8) and confess that when he is at his weakest he is conscious o f the divine power resting upon him. The section, 12:7-10, is a memorable tribute to the para­ doxical nature of the life of the apostle. In his extreme feeble­ ness he was made aware of God’s resources, and he came to learn the nature o f the apostolic service. To those who were demanding “proof” (13:3) o f his credentials and by implica­ tion criticizing Paul for lacking demonstrable signs and having no lordly bearing with its exemption from suffering, he points simply to the cross o f Jesus (13:4; see 4:10) and to the lesson he has learned there. True apostolic authority derives from human weakness reinforced by divine strength and dis­ played in the signs mentioned in 12:12: The marks of a [true] apostle were displayed [by God] among you in all persistence, [along with] signs and won­ ders and mighty works. This is a verse that seems to incorporate what the Corin­ thians themselves judged to be infallible and convincing evi­ dence o f authentic Christian work. Paul quotes it back to them, adding significantly the phrase “with great persever­ ance” to make clear the point that his apostolic insignia were to be found not simply in outward display but more compellingly in the endurance which characterized the whole ministry o f Jesus (Heb 12:2, 3) who has set the pattern of 45

Paul’s Apostolic Service in Theory and Practice

service for all time. In particular, Paul’s patience with refrac­ tory people like the Corinthians is the surest sign of his calling from God! Christian ministers and workers will continue to turn to Paul’s self-portrait in the Corinthian letter to find there a model for their own service. N ot all are called to be apostles. Indeed, Paul distinctly denies that this is a niche to be filled by more than just a few in the early church (1 Cor 12:29, “are all aposdes?” expects the answer, no). Yet if the circle is a narrowly defined one and the office o f apostle was restricted to that early generation o f leaders who were the church’s founding fathers and heroes (as Eph 2:20; Rev 21:14 imply), it still remains the case that Paul and his apostolic colleagues have left a pattern of ministry to be our incentive. It is based on the all-determinative paradigm o f Jesus himself who was among his disciples as the servant-Messiah (Luke 22:27), and which beckons later ages o f his would-be followers to accept as their own. Other titles The term “tide” is perhaps too pretentious. Paul’s claim is certainly to be an apostle; but he does not explicitly refer to himself by any other self-designation with one or two excep­ tions. (a) The first exceptional case is in 2 Cor 3:6 where he writes of himself: God gave us our adequacy to be servants o f a new covenant, based not on the letter but on the Spirit. Being a servant (lit. deacon) of the new covenant implied that he stood in a noble O ld Testament succession. The new covenant is a reference to Jeremiah 31:31-34, an oracle in which the prophet foretells the dawn of a new era o f God’s dealings with his people. The old order based on a “written 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

46

code” failed because the ancient people o f Israel were faced with a standard they had no power to attain. For that reason it is concluded sadly that “the law kills” (3:6) and became a “dispensation of death” (3:7) which, in turn, led to “condem­ nation” (3:9). These strong terms can only mean that the law set a target or a perfect standard. But the Jewish people, like all nations, who were sinfully weak, were unable to rise to it . The law, which Paul praised as “holy, righteous, good” (Rom 7:12, 14), had an honorable purpose, but it was only temporary. The illustration o f the law’s “parenthetic charac­ ter” (as Gal 3:16-22 describes it) is seen in the way in which the glory o f both the law (3:7, 11) and the lawgiver Moses (3:7), was only a passing one. The background is Exodus 34:25-35 which describes the splendor that shone from Moses’ face, when he returned from communion with God. That radiance, however, faded in time and at length it disap­ peared just as a suntan does with us after a visit to a beach resort. From the lawgiver, Paul argues to that which he rep­ resented, namely the Jewish understanding o f “salvation by law.” Law whose glory was once historically a reality, is now fading away. Indeed, its day is over, and its impermanence has given way to that which has come to stay, namely the gospel (3:10,11). O f that good news, “the new covenant,” Paul is a servant, and the glory o f G od once confined to Moses is open to all (3:18). (b) Another exception is “minister o f reconciliation” based on 2 Cor 5:18. He saw it as his life’s work and mission to announce “the message o f reconciliation” (5:19), as he de­ clared that “God was in Christ reconciling the world to him­ self” (5:18). The calling to be an ambassador for Christ is stated in this context with the important observation: [God] making his plea through us. We implore you, in Christ’s behalf. Be reconciled to God! 47

Paul's Apostolic Service in Theory and Practice

Yet Paul’s ministry of reconciliation has to be understood as more than a work discharged by public preaching, important as that side of his vocation was. He embodied in his whole demeanor and pastoral relationships the spirit of the good news he was charged to declare. His gospel was one of recon­ ciliation; yet he lived out that message by his total ministry as a reconciling power and uniting the Corinthians to one another and to himself as their divinely appointed leader. We may see this facet of his apostleship on display in 2 Cor 7:8-13. Even if my letter hurt you, I do not regret it. Though I did regret it— for I see that letter hurt you for a while—now I rejoice, not that you sorrowed but that your sorrow led to repentance. For you experienced godly sorrow so that you suffered no loss through us. For godly sorrow produces repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow leads to death. See what earnestness this godly sorrow has produced in you. . . . So then, when I wrote to you it was not on account o f the offender, or of the offended, but on your account. . . . Because of this we are en­ couraged. The historical setting o f chapter 7 is worth an extended comment. Its line o f thought and appeal go back to 6:11-13, which is one o f the tenderest pieces in pastoral solicitude in the entire Pauline library: We have spoken freely to you, Corinthians, and opened our hearts wide. We do not withhold our affection from you, but you withhold affection from us. In return—as I speak to [my] children—you do the same to us. The Corinthians are addressed as Paul’s "beloved chil­ dren” a sentiment recalling 1 C or 4:14 and 15 in which 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

48

he speaks o f him self the “father” in the gospel. He became closely united to them as the one who first introduced them to Christ and witnessed their new life as children of God. To vary the metaphor, he was the “best man” who led the bride to the heavenly bridegroom and rejoiced at the nuptial ceremony (2 C or 11:1, 2). Now, unhappily, they are estranged and alienated in their affections toward him. Even worse, they have crossed over the boundary line be­ tween the church where G od’s rule is acknowledged and the world in which the forces o f evil are dominant. Hence they are referred to in 2 C or 6:14-7:1 as having formed a liaison with unbelievers and have placed themselves under the dominion o f Satan (called Belial, an epithet drawn from the intertestamental Jewish literature). Paul, however, can­ not acquiesce with this situation, and appeals to these ag­ grieved children to quit their temporary aberration o f hostility and come over to his side once more. Another impassioned plea (7:2-4) follows, with its ringing tones o f confidence and optimism. Make room for us [in your hearts]; we have wronged no one, we have ruined no one, we have taken advantage o f no one. I do not say this to condemn you, for I have said previously that you are in our hearts; thus we die and live with you. I have more confidence in you: I take great pride in you. My encouragement is complete; I am overflowing with joy in all our distress. The reason for such exuberant conviction that the Corinthians will indeed come back to their allegiance and be restored to Paul’s loving care and favor is then rehearsed. On his part there is no strangeness or bitterness, though he did experience first apprehension and anxiety while he waited for Titus to return after the “tearful letter” (2 Cor 2:4,5) had been delivered. Paul hastened to Macedonia from 49

Paul's Apostolic Service in Theory an d Practice

Troas (2:13), not being able to settle even when a door of unexampled opportunity for evangelism lay wide open. In Macedonia the two men rendezvoused, and the news was good. The letter had done its work (7:8-12; see 10:10) and Paul saw in the report of Titus an occasion for fresh joy and satisfaction (7:6). The heavy weight on Paul’s pastoral heart had been lifted, and his spirit was free, as Titus met him with the excellent news that the Corinthian disaffection was over and their rebellion had been quelled. More reasons for joy follow (7:5, 6). N ot only has the church taken positive and courageous action, Paul’s own estimate o f the Corinthians themselves had been vindicated (as w 4, 14 make clear). He had confessed to Titus that he believed, deep in his heart, that all would be well. Now he has not been put to shame; rather, what he said is “found to be true” (v 14). The work o f reconciliation was— at least for the present— effective. And Paul’s gospel message “be reconciled to God” (5:20) was shown to be powerful not only in causing sinners to return to God but in restoring an alienated congregation that had forsaken its loyalty to the gospel and deserted its first love for the messenger, Paul. To complete the portrait o f Paul the reconciler we need to fit in the earlier proposal of 2 C or 2:5-11. But if anyone has caused sorrow, he has caused sorrow not to me but in some measure— I mustn’t put it too strongly—to all of you. The censure in question, which was inflicted on that person by the majority [of the church members] is enough for him, so that on the other hand, you should rather forgive and console him to pre­ vent his being swallowed up by excessive sorrow. So I urge you, therefore, to affirm your love for this person. The reason I wrote to you was to see if you would pass the test and be obedient in everything. If you forgive anyone, I also do the same. For what I have forgiven— if 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

50

indeed there was anything to forgive— it was done on your account in the presence of Christ, to prevent Satan from taking advantage of us; for we know well his designs. I

Here he reviews the outcome o f the visit he had paid, and focuses on his attitude to the one in the Corinthian assem' bly who had caused him pain. This person presumably was the individual who insulted him and fomented the trouble at Corinth, and he is also to be seen in the allusion in 7:12. The happy outcome o f the painful letter (2:4) was to bring this person to his senses, and lead him to repentance (if, as is likely, he is to be included in the salutary response o f 7:11). Paul is generous to the point o f bestowing his forgiveness on this person (2:10), as he summons the entire congregation to follow the example he has set: He will bear no grudge over injuries received, and sees that two extremes o f attitude are equally to be condemned. The church must not be lax in handling moral problems (as is the case in 1 Cor 5:1-13 which is a different scene altogether, involving an arrogant transgression o f the moral law); but it is just as destructive when the church refuses to grant pardon and restoration to the penitent sinner. Satan’s cause is well advocated by either o f these two polarities, as when the church is too tolerant of evil, on the one hand, and too rigorous in keeping the door o f readmission shut tight, on the other. Paul is seen in the intermediary role as reconciler in this historical interlude, a situation uniquely presented in his letter. The conclusion is irresistible: What this man preached he practiced, and he was the living embodiment of the gospel of a forgiving Father who seeks and saves the lost. The spirit in Jesus’ parables in Luke 15 lives on in Paul’s pastoral relations. He has earned the right to set himself up as a role model (1 Cor 11:1: “Be imitators of me, as I belong to Christ”). 2 Cor 12:14 shows that he looked on the Corinthian people 51

Paul’s Apostolic Service in Theory and Practice

as his beloved children whom he cannot abandon, in spite of their waywardness and indifference to his love. In summary, he was an apostle par excellence. But as Chrysostom reminds us, he was also a man, with tender human emotions and vulnerable to hurts and insults. Yet he overcame the natural tendency to fight back and to return injury with added vindictiveness. His entire relations with the Corinthian church exemplified his own teaching: Repay no one evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight o f all. . . . Do not be overcome by evil; but overcome evil with good. (Rom 12:17,21, RSV)

1, 2 CORINTHIANS

52

3

TH E GOD AND FATHER OF OUR LORD JESU S CHRIST

To say we believe in God is to talk the language o f theology. We are using the term “theology” in its strict sense to mean the understanding (logos) o f God (theos). What is not implied is, of course, the notion that Paul had a highly developed doctrine of such matters as were to occupy the church’s at­ tention in later centuries. There is no hint in Paul’s writings that he consciously drew upon a set of theological proposi­ tions to do with, say, the divine attributes or speculative con­ cerns which seek to relate God and his eternal nature and purposes. The nearest we get to the latter is in Ephesians, a document which holds a unique place in the Pauline library of letters. A s far as the Corinthian correspondence goes, we find the apostle engaging in mostly practical and pastoral matters. His letters are a good example o f “applied theology,” to use H. Conzelmann’s term.1 But his understanding o f God, while it may not be wrought out in any systematic way, still informs much o f his writing to the church with its manysided problems and needs. 53

The God and Father o f O ur Lord Jesus

Paul stood always in the tradition o f his Jewish ancestral faith, inherited from the O ld Testament Scriptures and in­ terpreted by his upbringing as a Pharisee (Gal 1:13,14; Phil 3:5, 6). In one place (2 Cor 11:22, 23) he offers a further sidelight on his Jewish background. Writing about the claims made by his opponents who came as rivals to Corinth he asks: Do they claim to be Hebrews? So am I. Do they claim to be Israelites? So am I. Are they Abraham’s descen­ dants? So am I. Are they Christ’s servants? I am more one than they— even if I am out o f my senses in claim­ ing this. . . . On the basis o f this claim to have been brought up and educated as a pious Jew it may be further said that this training would have left an indelible mark on Paul’s under­ standing o f God. It is true that there is some dispute over the exact circumstances which surrounded his early days in Tar­ sus and Jerusalem (see Acts 23:3; 26:5, which may be read in more than one way). It is uncertain if Paul, in Luke’s record, is tracing his boyhood upbringing to his life in Jerusalem as a pupil o f rabbi Gamaliel or to Tarsus, the Cicilian city o f his birth (Acts 21:39). W hat is more sure is that for Saul the ancestral traditions o f his Jewish faith and practice were in­ describably precious and influential. Though in one place (2 Cor 3:1-18) he is driven to deal critically with the central­ ity of Torah— the Jewish law and its interpretation— in the purposes of God, he reflects throughout his discussions in these two letters a deep appreciation of his Jewish heritage. The central elements that would have been dominant in Saul’s early life are three. First, the confession o f G od as one goes back to the Deuteronomic creed, “Hear, O Israel, Yahweh our G od is one” (Deut 6:4). This affirmation became embodied in the 1, 2 CO RIN TH IA N S

54

synagogue liturgy as the shema, a term taken from the opening verb, “hear.” It marked the characteristic ethos and piety o f Judaism in a way few religious watchwords do. Perhaps the nearest m odem parallel is Islam’s call o f the mosque and minaret, “G od is great.” Second, G od has graciously made his will known in his law, Torah. Pharisaic Judaism held this divine revelation in high esteem, since it had been granted by God to Moses and transmitted to Joshua, and then to the elders o f Israel and so on to the “great synagogue” (Sayings of the Fathers, 1:1: the opening sentence o f this part o f the Mishnah which brings together the sententious remarks o f the Jewish sages over many centuries). The Torah, embodying both the written law o f G od entrusted to Moses and its oral interpretation committed to the men of the Jewish religious authority from the time o f Ezra on, became so highly prized that it was given a kind o f independent status. It is not always clear how the rabbinic language is to be understood. The praise of Torah (explicitly celebrated in Ps 119) is often excessive and couched in figurative writing. But there is no denying the power Torah came to possess and the hold it exerted on minds akin to Saul’s in first-century Judaism. Paul, as a Christian, pays tribute to his upbringing: “the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good” (Rom 7:12; see Rom 7:14, “the law is spiritual”). These convictions need to be borne in mind when we come to evaluate Paul’s shift of perspective in 2 Cor 3 with its negative assessments of both, Torah regarded as the “letter that kills” (3:6) and the old covenant which is doomed to pass away (3:10, 11). Thirdly, it is not surprising that since Torah is one of the chief pillars on which the world stands (Sayings of the Fathers, 1:2), it should be regarded as a “precious instrument”— in a phrase drawn from the rabbinic writings— signifying God’s choice o f Israel as his elect people. The nation is twice blessed by God: On the one side, Israel is claimed as Yahweh’s special 55

The God and Father of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

people bound to him by covenant deed and tie, and on the other, the people are told that G od loves them. The token o f that love is seen tangibly in the gift o f Torah, which is a sign o f Israel’s privilege and destiny as a unique people. Torah became the visible expression o f G od’s love in the covenant he graciously made with M oses and the people of the Exodus and in which they were bidden to enter by obedience. Paul never abandoned this fundamental convic­ tion nor did he disown his Jewish past (Rom 9:1-5; 10:1), however much he might have to oppose some o f his compa­ triots as he does in 2 C or 11:13-15, and find fault with the “old covenant” in the light o f his experience o f Jesus Christ and the “new covenant” that came into the world with him (2 Cor 3:7-18). The telling phrase that marks the transition from the old order to the new age is in 2 Cor 5:17: “if anyone comes to be in Christ, there is a new creation.” Living as he did in the days of the new order in Christ, Paul is able to register some fresh understandings of God. Again, we may repeat it is not true that he jettisons his former beliefs in the God o f his fathers, and denies the value o f the covenant as a sign o f divine grace (Rom 11:1, 2). Rather, he saw God’s character in a new light. This is expressed in 2 Cor 4:4-6, which is important for one particular reason, namely, that it shows how Paul saw no incongruity in uniting the God o f creation and the G od o f saving revelation in Christ: . . . the revealed splendor o f the Gospel, that is the glory o f Christ who is the image o f God. . . . For it is the God who said, “Light shall shine out o f darkness,” who has shone in our hearts to illumine them with the knowledge of G od’s glory seen in the face o f Christ. Rather, what happened was that, with the coming o f Christ as the final revelation of God, God now wore a human 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

56

face and his person came into sharper focus. The scope of Paul’s conclusion that God for him was henceforth known supremely in the knowledge he received of Christ may now be examined. G od’s nam e a s Father The tag that reminds us that as a person prays so that person’s beliefs come to light is a sound one. We should therefore mark the way Paul’s prayer language reflects his faith in God the Father-Parent. As a frontispiece to a discussion on the way he has been helped in his traumatic sufferings in Asia when he faced a deadly threat to his life (2 Cor 1:8-10), Paul strikes the chord o f praise. Blessed (be) the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and the God of all encour­ agement (2 Cor 1:3) In point o f fact, two reasons are given for the occasion of this outburst; they are developed in some detail in the opening section o f the letter. First, he is full o f thanks to G od that in all the troubles that have weighed upon his spirit he has known the strength o f G od to carry him through. Suffering was Paul’s destiny as the apostle to the Gentiles (Col 1:24; cf. Eph 3:13), and this “fate” was made known to him at the outset o f his Christian life, according to Acts 9:15, 16. Yet Paul rests his faith in G od as Father who is made known in our Lord Jesus Christ (see 2 Cor 11:31). He is called “the Father o f mercies,” a Jewish desig­ nation Paul may well have remembered from the synagogue prayers in his former years. It describes G od as the Father who bestows mercy, who delights to hear his children’s cry in their distress (Ps 145:18,19). In this case, G od’s response was to afford his servant a full measure o f “com fort” (Gr. 57

The God and Father o f O ur Lord Jesus Christ

paraklesis, which may be variously rendered “encourage­ ment,” “strengthening,” or “solace”)— a term which recurs as both noun and verb no fewer than ten times in th e space o f five verses. The “comfort o f God” is to be seen in the way Paul was able to trace a divine purpose in his tale o f affliction borne for the gospel’s sake. Thereby the cause o f Christ and the gospel was advanced, and he was able to enter sympatheti­ cally into the experience o f others (2 Cor 1:4) as well as, in a mysterious way on which Colossians 1:24 is the best com­ mentary, see the purpose o f God for his church and king­ dom fulfilled (2 Cor 1:5-7). Later on, Paul will have reason to permit his readers to see more o f what those hardships en­ tailed (2 Cor 11:23-33). Here he is content simply to note the way in which G od the Father sustained him by his paraklesis amid his daily life as a suffering apostle (see too, 2 Cor 4:16; 6:4-10). The second reason for Paul’s jubilant note is given at verses 8-11. In relating the experience o f a crisis in Asia which exposes him to mortal danger he makes it plain that it was only by G od’s act o f delivering mercy that he and his fellow missionaries had been saved (2:10). Yet G od works by the prayers of his people, and Paul does not forget to tell that side of the story as well (2:11). Those who prayed to this faithful God (as 2 Cor 1:18 acknowledges him to be) are invited to share his gladness. Verse 11 is particularly interest­ ing as a window into Paul’s use o f language. He coins a verb o f fifteen Greek letters: “you help us by your prayers” (NIV) to convey three facets of his understanding o f prayer. Prayer is at one and the same time a ministry involving work (er­ gon), cooperation (the preposition syn, “together”) and sup­ port (the preposition is hyper, “under,” “underneath”). So faith in G od the heavenly Parent was a reality that expressed itself in prayer for assistance and timely help when imminent danger threatened, and Paul’s congregations were invited to 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

58

share such a ministry as an invaluable and cooperative support offered to Paul’s mission. In this instance prayer was effectual in releasing divine power which in turn resulted in an intervention that brought release from danger. The allusion to “so terrible a death” (1:10, Moffatt) suggests a life-threatening prospect which stared him in the face. Now he thankfully records how the heavenly deliverance came, though the details are not dis­ closed. Perhaps 1 Cor 15:32— “if as a mortal man I fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantage would it be to me, if the dead are not raised?”— refers to the same encounter. Some interpreters view the phrase about “fighting with beasts” as a literal and certain fact, and suggest that Paul was indeed condemned to the arena. Then he must have been rescued, like Daniel, by a marvelous intervention. After all, he did live to tell the tale! The phrase, rendered literally “as a man” (kata anthropon), must mean more than “as a human being,” since how else could Paul have been exposed to death? An alternative meaning is “after the manner of men [who have no hope o f resurrection]”; then Paul is pointing to the hopeless state he would have been in if he had had no prospect o f resurrec­ tion to cheer him in his trials when he af c ed death as his daily experience (1 C or 15:31: “I die every day”). A third option is that taken by the R SV which translates “humanly speaking,” suggesting that he is speaking in meta­ phorical language and perhaps with a proverbial expression for some deadly—but human— opposition he knew at Ephe­ sus (such as that mentioned in 1 Cor 16:8,9). There is also the historical question whether Paul as a Roman citizen would have freed the danger in capital punishment in a provincial center like Ephesus. If he were allowed to plead his citizen­ ship rights, the law protected him from such a fate (as it did in the different but equally threatening circumstance o f Acts 25:6-12). There are some other possibilities of interpretation, 59

The God and Father of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

namely that Paul is referring to an event that seemed likely to occur but never did happen. Yet verse 30 stands against this view since Paul was really in danger. O r else the lifethreatening event that he faced in Ephesus is to be identified with the situation o f Acts 19:23-41; yet that account hardly suggests a serious threat to his very life, and the idiom of “fighting with [wild] beasts” seems hyperbole in that case. We may never know the real cause o f Paul’s extremity. It looks to be tied in with the “death sentence” o f 2 Cor 1:9, 10, and may also connect with the grim prospect in a life-ordeath “choice” in Phil 1:20-24; 2:17. The most we can safely conclude is that somewhere in the Asian province, probably at Ephesus, during his three-year stay there (Acts chs 19 and 20) he faced a foreboding situation in which the end o f his life seemed close and by some judicial verdict he was under sentence, with little hope o f reprieve. He was, he says, like a man doomed to the arena with no prospect o f escape and no hope, except that for him as a believer in the G od and Father o f our Lord Jesus Christ, “who raises the dead” (2 C or 1:9) divine help was implored and granted. But— and this is the point o f Paul’s argumentative appeal to the Corinthians— even before the deliverance came he had the assurance o f “life after death” such as had sustained the Maccabean martyrs (see Dan 3:16,17; 2 Macc 7:14; cf. Heb 11:35), and his confidence was not misplaced. G od heard and answered his plea. Side by side with this moving episode and its sequel we need to set, as a counterpoint, the dialogue o f 2 Cor 12:1-10. The background here, to be sure, is not the same mortal peril as in the earlier text; but the “thorn in the flesh” did pose a challenge to Paul’s faith and did place a limitation on his missionary service. The real problem, however, lay else­ where, if 12:7a is taken in all seriousness. It was to save him from being puffed up with pride that God in his infinite wisdom and providence allowed the handicap to remain. 1, 2 CO RIN TH IA N S

60

The “thorn in the flesh” (12:7, KJV) is a curious phrase which is capable of at least two meanings. (i) It is clear that it was inherently evil as Satan’s emissary, and (ii) it came to him as an affliction, intended to “torment” him. Some definite weakness which restricted Paul’s missionary service is appar­ ently in mind, and “in the flesh” (te sarki) is most naturally understood as a physical problem, though sarx (“flesh”) does also have a common meaning in Paul of a human inclination to evil; and that sense could conceivably be true here. It was to prick the bubble of inordinate pride that the thorn was per­ mitted, and as a consequence Paul was kept humble. But verse 9b, “Therefore I will most gladly boast in my weaknesses,” reads strangely as a deduction from this way of identifying the reason behind the thorn. We should conclude that it was a distressing physical liability from which he sought to be free. The answer that came in response to his petitioning prayer for its removal was a paradoxical one. The thorn remained, but its sting was drawn, and its limiting purpose (so designed by Satan) was turned to good effect The bane became a bless­ ing; and, as one preacher comments, through God’s “no” Paul learned to hear G od’s “yes.” We may trace a threefold way in which this experience contributed to Paul’s understanding o f G od and his ways with his servants: (a) By this evil which was permitted to remain, G od’s purpose was achieved in keeping Paul in humble depend­ ence on him (12:7, “in order that I should not become con­ ceited”—which is one o f the key phrases in the dramatic autobiography). Paul was continually reminded o f his frailty and finitude, and he turns such a reminder to telling effect in his debate with the opponents whose lordly ways and overbearing disposition (see 11:20, 21) were regarded as the badge o f apostolic authority. (b) The divine oracle which promised, “My grace is suffi­ cient for you, for [my] power is fulfilled in [human] weakness” 61

The God an d Father of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

(12:9) makes it evident that Paul came to experience Christ’s presence and power in a new way. In the hard school o f dis­ cipline and suffering he learned lessons o f trust and reliance on God’s strength which presumably he could never have known except in this bitter frustration. As only those who are self-confessedly ignorant can really be taught, so only those who know their true need will find in Christ the supply and fulness of God, as 1 Cor 1:20-31; 2:12-16 illustrate. The Corinthians with their proud display of intellectual prowess and confidence in their native ability could not appreciate how Paul’s gospel and apostolic service were built on the power of love (1 Cor 8.1 ) and centered on a Jesus who was crucified in weakness (2 Cor 13:4). The very idea o f a suffer­ ing and sick apostle to them seemed a contradiction in terms, and a charismatic healer who could not heal himself stood self-condemned in their eyes. They needed to hear from Paul that it is God’s power, not human bravura, that authenticates the gospel. (c) Several interpreters, led by Sir William Ramsay2 in a former generation, have found in this incident on the thorn in the flesh an indication that Paul was an habitually sick man, attacked often (Ramsay proposed) by malarial fever, which is then identified as the nature o f “the thorn.” In this way Ramsay was able to explain Paul’s short stay in the low­ lands and unhealthy climate of Pamphylia (Acts 13:13), and his swift journey, beyond the Taurus Mountains, to the more bracing climate o f Galatia. Gal 4:13 and 14 was taken to con­ firm this view, and to illustrate the truth that illness, instead o f closing a door on service for Christ, actually prompted Paul to venture forth and to claim the Galatian towns for the gospel. This reading o f the evidence is necessarily speculative, but it is suggestive, and could well be true. But we have to come back to the candid conclusion that the identity o f the thorn is a mystery; and perhaps that is providentially so, that all sufferers for the gospel’s sake may 1, 2 CO RIN TH IA N S

62

claim some affinity with the ailing apostle. W hat should not be in question is Paul’s understanding o f the character of God as good and trustworthy whether the answers to prayers are affirmative (as in 2 Cor 1) or— as we say— negative (as in 2 Cor 12). Yet “negative” is not the correct term, as we have observed. Even when God’s power was concealed in Paul’s persistent weakness, the essence o f the gospel was unfolded and wonderfully displayed. More particularly the parenthood of God is revealed in the various ways that prayers are an­ swered. God a s Father an d Son Paul’s belief in one God was never compromised, given the enduring Jewish convictions he retained. He makes this clear in 1 Cor 8:4-6. We cannot be certain in this passage which has a creedal ring to it how much he is quoting from the Corinthians and at what point he is commenting on beliefs held in common. “We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world, and that there is no G od but one” (v 4) looks to be a quoted statement, with which Paul partly agreed and to which he partly took exception (see 1 Cor 10:19, 20). The monotheism o f the second statement, “God is one,” is clearly Paul’s belief as well, since it reappears in Gal 3:20, and in 1 Tim 2:5 in different settings. The issue in 1 Cor chs 8 and 10 is the problem of idol foods. The church was evidently in two minds over the propriety of eating food (especially meat) that had been for­ merly used in temple worship in contemporary hellenisticRoman religions. Only a portion of that meat was consumed in the sacrificial offerings to the gods; the rest, once formally presented to the deity, was offered for sale in Corinthian butchers’ shops. The question posed for Paul’s pastoral response is this: Was the Christian housewife at liberty to buy and use this 63

The God and Father of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

meat, which was often the best “cut” on display in the store (1 Cor 10:25) since all sacrificial foods had to be free from blemish? The “strong” among the Corinthian believers replied that she was able, because after all, idols were non­ existent and so couldn’t contaminate food. The alternative (mainly Jewish) view was that the housewife-shopper should refrain because idolatry did cast a spell over food, thus mak­ ing it unclean and unfit for human consumption by believers. The dilemma facing the church in a pagan society is illustrated in this way, and Paul shows some wise pastoral discretion, especially when the issues involved move from theological belief to practical matters such as whether or not Christians were at liberty to take a meal in a neighbor­ hood temple (1 C or 8:10). The latter question will be con­ sidered when we address Paul’s ethical teaching. For the present it is enough to note how his belief in G od is the starting point for his applied theology. Paul seems to be wanting to make two statements—not easily harmonized— at the same time. First, G od’s sole exist­ ence is affirmed, consonant with his Jewish and Christian tradition. Second, he sensed the danger presented by the de­ monic and the power that is exerted over sensitive minds (1 Cor 10:18-22). He grants that gods and goddesses do have an influence, since the threat of coming under alien influences is very real— at least to some of his converts. He writes as a Christian believer who must not consciously acknowledge any power save that of God; for the principle involved see 1 Cor 6:12: “everything is permissible for me,” which is the Corinthian slogan as he quotes it, then adding the comment, “but I will not be mastered by anything.” For that reason the gods are dubbed “so-called” (in 1 Cor 8:5), even if they did command a following and their existential reality is conveyed in such phrases as “the cup of demons,” “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21)’. Yet Paul is too much a monotheist to grant a real 1. 2 CO RIN TH IA N S

64

existence to any dualistic divine power, set up in rivalry to the only God of Old Testament and Christian faith. So he quickly qualifies his concession: “yet‘ to us there is but one God the Father, from whom all things come and for whom we exist,” with the distinctively Christian assertion added, “and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things come and through whom we exist” (1 Cor 8:6). It has long been recognized that here we have the first makings o f the Christian confessional formula, covering A r­ ticles I and II o f the later creed. Believers join the belief in God the Father and God the Son as the two persons in what later developed into full-blown binitarianism, that is, the confession of the Father and the Son as equal members of the godhead. In these epistles the mutual relationships within the Christian godhead are not systematically explored; rather they lie back-to-back. For example, in his rebuke to party divisions and the setting up o f apostolic figures as centers o f loyalty Paul retorts, “All things are yours” including the prized names o f Apollos and Peter and himself (1 C or 3:21, 22). Even those leaders’ names are only significant as they are seen as workers together with G od (1 C or 3:5-9; 2 C or 6:1) and servants o f Christ the Lord (2 C or 4:5). Life and death, this world and the age to come, present and future— the list recalls the wording o f Rom 8:38 and 39— are all held in the mighty grip o f G od whose promise is that all history serves his eternal purpose for the church. “You belong to Christ, just as Christ belongs to G od” is Paul’s final summing up. The note o f equality within the divine community o f the Father and the Son, evident in 1 C or 8:6 is now matched by the element o f subordination that makes Christ not inferior to G od but occupying a position given him by God. H is title is then o f lordship which is conferred by divine favor (Phil 2:9-11) which includes Christ’s role as head o f the universe (1 C or 15:25) and the church (1 Cor 65

The God and Father o f O ur Lord Jesus Christ

1:2). A t present he reigns in a mediatorial kingdom and awaits the day when as the risen Lord all his foes will be subject to him and “put under his feet” (1 C or 15:25 citing Ps 8:6). A t the Parousia Christ’s kingdom which is parallel with the church age and the present Regnum Christi will come to its appointed close; then Christ will surrender his kingdom to G od whose final kingdom, the Regnum Dei, will be all-inclusive (1 C or 15:28). Paul is once more caught in the dilemma o f his own faith. As a faithful Jewish pietist he can tolerate n o rivalry to God, no dualism that sets up a split within the divine nature. Hence the Son will at the last take his place within the sole monarchy o f God, a description Paul calls the Son’s becoming “subject to him who put everything under him” (1 Cor 15:28). The key word is “subject,” which in the Bible denotes not submission or slavery, in the popular sense o f the term, but as the English word properly implies, “being placed un­ der” and fulfilling one’s role by sharing in it, as 1 Pet 2:13 following Rom 13:1 well illustrates. A t the same time Paul is driven by all he knows of Christ as the resurrected Lord and the head o f a new humanity (1 C or 15:20, 21) to ascribe divine honors to him. In 2 Cor 3:12-18 he sets the present-day reader a conundrum with his assertion that “the Lord is the Spirit” (3:17). Apparently he means to link the Lord (who is Jesus) with the G od o f the O ld Testament to whom Moses turned for communion and transformation. The link factor is the Spirit who does for the Christian believer what Yahweh’s glory did for Moses. Their unveiled faces are irradiated by divine splendor as they “behold” (NIV marg. has “contemplate”) the glory o f Christ and are changed. Here is one o f the clearest places in Paul of what has been called his practice o f “eschatological exegesis” which puts the risen Jesus on a par with Yahweh in the Old Testament, and sees Jesus as eminently worthy o f divine worship and obedience. 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

66

It is natural for Paul then to conclude that what God did in old times for his ancient-people, he does today in his Son. Significantly, as with the church father Athanasius, the issue is one of redemption. It is in the soteriological exposition of 2 C or 5:17-21 that he reaches the most explicit expression on the unity of purpose that binds together the Father God and Jesus Christ. We should first offer a rendering o f those mag­ nificent statements wherein Paul’s gospel of salvation and rec­ onciliation is unfolded. If anyone comes to be in Christ, there is a new cre­ ation; the old order has gone, to be replaced by the new [in every way]. And this new order in all respects is G od’s doing, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and has given us the ministry o f reconciliation. Its terms are that in Christ G od was reconciling the world to himself, not charging humankind’s offenses against them. And he has entrusted us with the mes­ sage o f reconciliation. We are then ambassadors for Christ, with G od making his plea through us. We im­ plore you, in Christ’s behalf. Be reconciled to God! G od appointed him (who was without any acquain­ tance with sin) to be a sin-offering on our behalf, that in him we might become the righteousness o f God. The pivotal phrase, for our purpose in this strictly theological section, is v 19. The Greek is capable o f being understood in a variety o f ways (to be considered in a later chapter). W hat is clear is that a single purpose unites G od and the one in whom his presence was made known both to reveal his desire to win the sinful world back to himself in reconciliation and to execute that plan by becoming one with humanity in its sin in order to bring G od’s saving power, his “righteousness,” to bear on human relationships. No hint o f a division within the godhead as though Father 67

The God an d Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ

and Son were two separate “agents”— one intentionally acting, the other unwillingly passive-—is to be seen here. Rather, a singlemindedness of plan and its outworking is to be noted. Much mischief in theories of the Atonement has resulted from pitting the Father against his son Jesus, thereby making a mockery of the very unity Paul’s words celebrate. God as Trinity Once more we should remind ourselves that “Trinity” is a later technical term, employed to define the way the Chris­ tian godhead was conceptualized— and experienced. Yet if the test is one o f experience, it could be plausibly argued that the roots of trinitarian belief-based-on-experience go back to Paul and the Corinthian correspondence. Three passages stand out preeminently: (a) 2 Cor 1:20-22: To all the divine promises, however many they are, the “Yes” is in him; and that is why it is through him that we say our Amen to G od for his glory. Now it is God who confirms both us and you in our relationship to Christ. He has anointed us, set his seal upon us, and imparted the Spirit to us as a pledge. Here in an unself-conscious way Paul sets the purpose in God, made actual in Christ who confirms all his promises in the O ld Testament, alongside the manner in which truth becomes realized in experience. With a play on words, it is in the “Anointed one” (=Christ) that Christians are “anointed” in the sense o f being set apart for God’s use and service (cf. Acts 10:38). The outward sign, probably baptism, answers to the inner experience o f the Spirit in an act o f “sealing” which repeats the idea o f setting apart for ownership and possession (see NIV). 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

68

Thus the three “persons” o f the Christian godhead are brought into the picture in a statement on the different sphere o f operations which each one fulfills. The Father is the originator and chief actor; he works in human lives through Christ whose destiny is somehow shared by his people who own his name (as “Christians,” which became their later designation and title); and it is by the Spirit that G od comes to live in human lives, offering the first install­ ment (arrabon) of the final salvation whose reality is already known by its initial token. When it is recalled that arrabona is in modem Greek the word for an engagement ring, the sense will be immediately clear. The Holy Spirit, given to believers now, is the assurance that God’s work o f salvation will be ultimately completed, just as the engagement ring is a pledge that a wedding date is to be set and the marital union made real (see 2 Cor 5:5). Each “member” of the Trinity is thus accorded a role— in appointing the means o f salvation, becoming the agent through whom that salvation is actualized, and applying its benefits in human experience. Interestingly, this pattern be­ came the format followed by the later christological and ecu­ menical creeds, beginning with the Apostles’ Creed, which was a baptismal formulation adopted by the church at Rome in the mid-second century. (b) The same appeal to living experience underlies the more elaborately worded passage in 1 Cor 12:4-6. The gen­ eral theme is set by the apostle’s confidence that, though the gift o f the Spirit is one and is evidenced most plainly in giving voice to the confession “Jesus is Lord” (12:3), the gifts o f the Spirit are diverse and manifold. Paul will conclude (at 12:11), restating the fact that the Spirit acts in sovereign power whether to give or withhold particular charismata, i.e., gifts intended to build up Christ’s body, the church. In the inter­ lude o f 12:4-6 he shows how the acts of the Holy Spirit, which are really related to God’s bestowal of charismata, are 69

The God and Father of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

set in a structure that can only be described as trinitarian or at least triadic. The arrangement of his thought is as follows: The same Spirit . . . yet different kinds o f gifts; The same Lord (Jesus Christ) . . . yet different kinds of service; The same God (the Father) . . . yet different kinds o f operations. The three key themes— “gifts” (charismata), “services” (diakoniai) and “operations” (energemata) are linked, and it is difficult to draw firm lines of distinction. The most that can be safely concluded is that charismata are the ways in which divine grace (charis) becomes actual and concrete, to use E. Käsemann’s expression.3 The second term refers to ministries in which the gifts become real in practice; the last word suggests outworking with definite results. What Paul seems intent on stressing is the manifold variety in such gifts that proceed indiscriminately from the several members o f the godhead. All the “persons”— Father, Son, Spirit—combine to make possible a set o f “distributions” (diaireseis) to the members o f the church—a fact of giftedness Paul had recognized at the outset o f the letter (1 Cor 1:7). Thus the members of the divine reality called God are for Paul functional in granting gifts which in turn are intended to be employed for the triune glory. (c) 2 C or 13:14 presents its own complications o f syntax and meaning, especially regarding the phrase “the fellow­ ship o f the Holy Spirit.” The question is, did Paul mean the fellowship imparted by the Spirit or the fellowship which believers enjoy with the Spirit? The verse can be taken in either way, though the balance o f scholarly opinion has been in favor o f the second option, following the pattern set in 1 C or 1:9: “G od is to be trusted, by whom you were called into fellowship with his son, Jesus Christ our Lord” and 1 C or 10:16: “the cup o f blessing, over which we give 1, 2 CO RIN TH IA N S

70

thanks, is it not a [means of] fellowship with the blood o f Christ?” See too 2 C or 1:7, “we know that, as you share in the Sufferings, so also you share in the encouragement.” O n the other hand, there is no denying that “the grace o f the Lord Jesus Christ and the love o f G od” mean the grace made known in Jesus Christ and the love that G od has for his people, so it is natural to expect the third phrase to run: the fellowship created by the Holy Spirit. The relevance o f this sense to the context is seen in the way Paul closes the benediction by asking that such blessings may be “with you all,” a term that suggests that the whole church is in view. Finally, he has already (in 1 C or 12:13) paid tribute to the Holy Spirit as the agent o f the church’s unity, and it is fitting that to a divided congregation he would wish to appeal for a true koinonia made possible by the work o f the Holy Spirit. There is perhaps a polemical undertone to this concluding verse o f a lengthy section (2 C or chs 10-13) which has been defensive and combative throughout. The latest full study on this question, by J. Hainz, makes an interesting point, namely that there is possibly no need to set a hard-and-fast line between the two rival interpretations.4 The primary focus, Hainz remarks, is on “the fellowship of the church” made possible by the common share which all believers have in the Holy Spirit In this finale Paul breathes the spirit of prayer. He calls down on the church at Corinth the blessing of the entire godhead. The opening reference to “the grace o f the Lord Jesus Christ” recalls 2 Cor 8:9 with its appeal to the conde­ scension and love that brought the Lord o f glory to earth and to his destiny as the church’s redeemer. In that Incarnation the Father’s love is revealed, which matches “the love of Christ” in 5:14. In both cases it is the same love that Father and Son demonstrate for the church and its service to the world. Thirdly, the koinonia of the Holy Spirit is that bond that unites believers both in mutual regard and harmony (see 71

The God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ

2 Cor 13:11,12) and in the common life that derives from the life-giving Spirit (2 Cor 3:6, 17, 18) whom Christians have received at their initiation into Christ’s body (1 Cor 12:12,13) and as a down payment on their future and final redemption (2 Cor 1:22) and resurrection (2 Cor 5:5). The entire Christian godhead is thus in Paul’s mind and is invoked in this memorable way. Divine resources are made available to reinforce the apostle’s appeal for unity and amity.

1, 2 CORINTHIANS

72

4

THE GRACE AND GLORY OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST

A t the heart o f the gospel Paul brought to Corinth was the person o f Jesus Christ, “the Son o f God . . . whom we preached among you” (2 Cor 1:19). It is true that such a statement needs to be examined with some caution. For one thing, Paul has no speculative interest in christology or any set “doctrine o f Christ.” His presentation o f who Jesus was and is related directly to his own experience as a person to whom the Lord o f glory appeared in a life-directing manner, as 2 Cor 4:4-6 describes the “conversion” o f Paul. Recent studies put at the center of Paul’s entry on new life the awareness he had o f God’s glory shining in the person or face of Jesus; and the paragraph in 4:4-6 holds an important place in Paul’s autobiography. We must examine that section again. Yet, as a counterpoint to what was just said, Paul was no innovator who created a “doctrine o f Christ” solely out of his own experience. Nor did he receive it in a heavenly 73

The Grace and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

Vision unrelated to the ongoing life and community o f those who were his Christian predecessors or contemporaries. The evidence in 1 Cor 15:1-5 is crucial. It supports the view that Paul was indebted to his forerunners in Christ— to whom he refers almost casually in Rom 16:7 as being “in Christ before me”— for the understanding of an early Christian credo or statement of belief that he in turn passed on to the Corinthians: I make known to you, brothers, the good news which I proclaimed to you. You received it; you stand firm by it; through it you are being saved, if you hold fast to the message which I proclaimed to you— unless you be­ lieved in vain. I handed on to you, then, as a priority what I also received: that Christ died for our sins, in accordance with the Scriptures; that he was buried; that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures; and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the Twelve. The churches of the New Testament period were confess­ ing companies of men and women. By “confessing” we mean that they cherished and were committed to a body of teaching (however rudimentary and situation-oriented it may have been initially) that was believed to express the substance of the saving message. Only on the assumption of such a teaching that was ac­ cepted as normative can we account for two attested facts in early Christianity. One is the consciousness of the church’s being a distinct entity in the world over against both Jews and Gentiles (1 Cor 10:32). The other factor is the church’s mis­ sionary goal which, under the influence of Stephen and his followers, and then Paul, showed a concern to proclaim the good news to all people, irrespective o f ethnic origin. The main outline of that creed, which was essentially christological 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

74

is seen in the passage just cited. There are several tell-tale signs that stamp it as a “fixed” formula of Christian— specifically christological—belief: (i) the fourfold repeated “that” (hoti) to introduce each line in vv 3— 5; (ii) the vocabulary is unusual for Paul who does not normally write “in accordance with the Scriptures” in his preference for “as it is written” (twenty-nine times) to refer to the Old Testament; (iii) the lines run in parallelism and use the idioms in Isa 53, which is a favorite Old Testament chapter in other creedal passages (e.g., Rom 4:24,25); and (iv) most decisively the emphatic preface in 15:3 tells us that Paul is quoting what he in fact “received” and in turn “passed on” to the Corinthians at the time o f his initial evangelism in their city. To those generally accepted beliefs he alludes in v 11, as he calls on the other apostolic preachers for support. Paul’s invoking the consensus shared with other leaders is deliberate. He is on the defensive against the Corinthians who challenged his apostleship and no doubt alleged that he was an inferior apostle— or even that he was no true apostle (as 2 Cor 10:7 implies). But here is also another side to Paul’s strategy in building his case on a recited creed. One o f the chief problems at Corinth was the influence o f teachers who were claiming to be exponents of a message they had pri­ vately received. This is clear from 1 Cor 14:36: “Was it from you that God’s message went out? Did it reach you alone?” This is the literal rendering which the R SV expands to bring out the implied thought: What! Did the word o f G od originate with you or are you the only ones it has reached? From this translation we may catch the tone of Paul’s indig­ nant rebuttal. Against those who thought that they had a “com er” on God’s truth, and that the special revelation had come to them as highly favored individuals Paul retorts that 75

The Grace and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

this is not so. He brought the gospel in the first place. He was indebted to others who instructed him. And his message was consonant with that of the leading apostolic figures, espe­ cially the “highest-ranking apostles” (2 Cor 11:5; 12:11). Thirdly— and again we need to interject a caution— the presence o f an agreed statement that expressed the essence of Christian faith did not make it impossible for some to enter­ tain notions that Paul judged greatly in error. One place in the Corinthian letters offers a clear example of wrong-headed christological views—2 Cor 11:4—and to that passage also we must revert. What made that rival message so dangerous, in Paul’s eyes, was that it was being introduced to the Corin­ thians as a “different gospel” by those who came with a “dif­ ferent sp irit” More seriously still, it was not an alternative version that Paul could tolerate alongside his understanding of the saving message, as evidently he was resigned to having to live with the preaching referred to in Phil 1:15—18. The chiefest element in this presentation as it was brought on to the scene at Corinth was that it preached and exemplified “a rival Jesus whom we did not proclaim.” The outstanding dif­ ference from the Pauline message lay in its christology, and that novelty raised for Paul a warning signal, which prompted his fierce denunciations in 11:13-15. These people are bogus apostles, workers o f deceit, masquerading as Christ’s apostles. . . . Satan himself masquerades as a messenger of light It is no great sur­ prise, then, if his servants too masquerade as servants o f righteousness. Their fate will be what their deeds deserve. So Paul’s proclamation of Jesus Christ at Corinth, while adapted to meet the needs o f the hour, rested firmly in the accepted traditions he shared with other prominent apostles and went back to an early “creed.” A t the same time it was 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

76

challenged by freewheeling missionaries who appeared on the scene to offer a “rival” christology. Paul is at pains to expose and refute this, since (evidently) it ran counter to his teaching on the person and place o f Jesus Christ and was being offered to the Corinthians in a way that effectively opposed Paul's understanding o f both Christian ministry and the Christian life. It is time now to review Paul’s teach­ ing on these themes. 1. Since we have just mentioned Paul’s debt to his past, presumably the Jewish Christians who were located in Jeru­ salem and Antioch, it is fitting to recover from the obscurity o f their language one o f the most interesting christological allusions. 1 Cor 16:22 runs: If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be anathema. Maranatha. Maranatha is clearly not a Greek word, yet Paul is able to leave it untranslated in his letter written to Greek-speaking, Greek-reading people. The only explanation for this is that he expected his readers to know what the Aramaic word stood for, most likely because it was already part o f their vocabulary o f worship. A parallel case would be with presentday liturgical and worship words which we use without stop­ ping to translate them in English, such as Amen, Hallelujah, Hosanna. The puzzle with Maranatha is rather with the way the word is to be divided: whether maran atha, meaning “The Lord comes,” or marana tha “Our Lord, come!” The second choice is most likely to be correct, and thereby it confronts us with a prayer of invocation as the (risen) Lord is invoked in worship. A final question has to do with the setting, and again we have a choice. Either, the term is eschatological in bid­ ding the worshiper to anticipate with joyful acclaim the Parousia o f Christ, or, set in a service o f the Lord’s supper 77

The Grace and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

meal (1 C or 11:17-34), it expresses a hope and confidence that the presence o f the living Lord will come to greet those who take the bread and the cup “in remembrance o f” him, i.e., to make him real to faith. Either way the cry is an utterance o f expectant faith in the presence o f the risen Christ, whether at the end o f the age or at his table which is also an anticipation o f the Parousia (1 C or 11:26: “until he comes”). W hether eschatological or eucharistic in setting, the invocation is directed to one whose tide is Lord (mar, which recalls the Jewish use o f a divine tide used o f Yahweh) and whose living presence in the present is at the heart o f both the church’s sacrament and the church’s hope for the future. A solitary watchword like Maranatha is a win­ dow through which we glimpse the early Christians at their devotions; it is also a precious datum o f their belief in the present Lordship o f one whom they had begun to associate with their covenant God, if (as is very likely) Maranatha takes us back to an early Palestinian or Syrian community of Jewish-Christian believers whose language quickly passed over into cosmopolitan centers such as Corinth. 2. The present reign of Christ is the theme o f 1 Cor 15:23— 28, a section whose centerpoint has at v 25: “he must continue his reign”— the tense is present— “until he has placed all his enemies under his feet.” The present tense o f Paul’s infinitive verb, “to reign,” is distinctive, though heralded by the use o f the perfect tense in v 20: “But in reality Christ has been raised from the dead” where the verb, grammatically important, speaks o f a past event with continuing consequences that spill over into the present. There is both a “pastness”— he was raised on the third day (1 C or 15:4)— and a present significance to the Lord’s resurrection. Paul’s thought goes a step further in v 25 which highlights the contemporary rule o f Christ. Since these two vv (20, 25) make some em­ phatic pronouncements answering the present Lordship of 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

78

Christ, we should inquire why Paul found it needful to write as he did. U p to this point in his discussion he has been somberly negative in pointing to humanity’s involvement in Adam’s loss. He indicates the sentence o f death that has become universal as humanity’s condition (15:21). Yet the resurrec­ tion o f Jesus has spelled the dawn o f a new chapter in world history, involving two aspects: (i) “Death,” which is often thought o f in Jewish writings as a king or a kingdom that holds tyrannical control over its subjects, is now subject to the power o f the risen Lord. The iron grip that death had imposed on the human race, from Adam onward, has been broken, and death’s kingdom has been despoiled. Yet believers like all of humankind have to die, and death remains the “last enemy” (15:26) whose destruction awaits the future Parousia, when all Christ’s enemies will be finally brought into submission. So Paul checks the unwarranted conclusion that evidently some at Corinth had drawn. They were exulting in Christ’s present reign as though it was a real­ ity all on its own (1 Cor 4:8). Paul agrees with the statement that Christ’s rule has begun, but its power is not uncontested and awaits a fulfi llment in the future when “all his enemies” are set “under his feet,” with the last enemy clearly identified as death. At first sight it looks as if that subjection has already taken place (indeed, the hymnic passage in Eph 1:21,22 says as much). In v 27, citing Ps 8:6, Paul appeals to the submission as a past fect: “For God ‘has put everything under his feet.” But then he has to modify this quotation, which perhaps was being used as a proof text at Corinth by those who rejoiced in the kingdom’s fullness here and now, as they thought. So Paul enters a double warning. He remarks on what is obvious with a moment’s reflection, that God is not part of the present “reign of Christ” since it is God who is the one who does the subjecting. Paul needs to make room for a future “kingdom of God” as distinct from and subsequent to the 79

The G race and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

present rule of Christ (v 24, which clearly separates the two kingdoms). Christ’s present reign is by its nature an “inbetween kingdom”—but not a millennial reign which some have discovered here, paralleling Rev 20:1-10—that is prepa­ ratory to the ultimate divine reality of which v 28 speaks. The other caution comes in v 28a, introduced by the words, “But when he has done this” or, with a variant trans­ lation which is possible, “But when all things are subject to him [Christ].” Either way, Paul manifestly regards this sub­ jection of “all things” to Christ as an event in the indetermi­ nate future that, logically, has not yet taken place. (ii) The present fact, however, is not in doubt. Christ has begun his reign now. Victory over malevolent powers is known in the experience o f forgiveness o f sins, as Paul has already linked that forgiveness to Christ’s work in death and resurrection (15:4, 17). The enemies o f God’s people are therefore defeated in principle by Christ’s resurrection tri­ umph. Their final annihilation and removal from the scene, however, awaits a public judgment on them; and that sen­ tence, for the apostle, belongs to the future, the “not yet” needed to complement and complete the “already” secured redemption won at Easter day. The kingdom o f Christ is now; the final kingdom o f God will be then. It is in worship that the New Testament church pictures the present Lordship of Christ. There it focuses on the en­ throned Lord, and it sees God’s total rule over all evil forces as an accomplished fact. The songs of victory (heard in Phil 2:9-11; Eph 1:20-22; 4:8-10; 1 Pet 3:22; Rev 3:21; 5:1-14) remain rooted in history, and never move far from the scenes of historical redemption anchored to the cross of Good Fri­ day. But their vision is elongated to reach into the future in order to bring it near. Thus they can speak o f and celebrate Christ’s future triumph as though it were a present reality— as indeed it is to the church at worship caught up to the heavenly world. 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

80

But the dangers o f such triumphalism, if understood and celebrated without the counterbalancing reminder o f the church’s existence in the present evil age, are only too pain­ fully obvious. Sin, mortality, and satanic powers are still alive and active in the world and the church. The future reign of G od is not yet, however much we wish to see it and must work to promote its coming. It remains a hope to beckon us, and a challenge to inspire us. And in Christian worship which is celebratory in tone and based on a redemption that is already won for us the church greets the far-off divine event and seeks to order its life under the present leadership o f its risen Lord. It is mindful, at the same time, that it has a future hope and so remains a pilgrim people who have not yet entered into the full and final inheritance that awaits them. 3. A recall and “representation” o f what Christ did once for all in his Incarnation and death is at the heart of the Lord’s Supper, as described in 1 Cor 11:23-26. At the center o f the Christian memorial feast are the interpreting words spoken over the bread and the cup: “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance o f me. . . . This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me” (vv 24, 25, RSV). The “sacramental” significance of these words may be discussed later as we con­ sider the nature of the Christian life for Paul in these letters.. It is enough now to note that Christ’s coming into the world is intimately bound up with his “sacrifice”; body and blood given for others are two metaphors shot through with ideas drawn from the Old Testament-Jewish world of sacrifice and offering, reminding us of the Passover ritual which is explic­ itly in Paul’s mind in 1 Cor 5:7,8: Christ, our passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us, then, keep the festival . . . with the unleavened bread o f sincerity and truth. 81

The Grace and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

4. The mention o f Christ in a typological fashion which sees him prefigured in the Old Testament rite (Exod 12) paves the way for a consideration of 1 Cor 10:1-13. This passage will be mentioned again when we discuss the church as the new Israel, when contrasts will be drawn between the Corinthians and the people o f Israel passing through the Red Sea and the wilderness, and the application made to the Israel o f the new covenant. In this connection Paul makes use o f a tradition found among rabbinic commenta' tors and in Philo that the rock from which the Jews drank followed the people (10:4). Tosefta Sukkah 3.11 gives the most dramatic version on this mobile rock. Based on an interpretation o f Num 21:16-18, it was concluded that Miriam’s well, shaped like a rock, kept pace with Israel’s journeys over mountains and in valleys. Philo connects the moving rock with wisdom (Leg. A ll 2.286). The latest com­ mentator1 plays down the link with Philo and prefers to see as Paul’s main source the designation o f Israel’s G od as the Rock (in Deut 32:4,15,18,30, 31). As Yahweh was rejected by the wilderness generation (Deut 32:15, 18), so Christ’s presence in the “spiritual” food and drink o f the sacraments was abused at Corinth. What is o f interest is the way Paul openly connects this rock with Christ: “the rock was Christ” (v 4). The notion of Christ as in some unexplained way present before his birth as a human being and a member o f Israel’s community (Gal 4:4) is certainly arresting; and its use here is evidently intended to give a Christian flavor to the “eating and drinking” acts which are common to Israel in the desert and the church in the sacramental actions o f baptism and the Lord’s supper. Whether Paul held consciously to an understanding of Christ as possessing pretemporal existence, that is, he was alive in God before his coming to this world, is a matter that has divided recent students o f Paul. Certainly 1 Cor 10:4 could be interpreted in this way, though it could equally be 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

82

no more than a picturesque and forceful illustration to drive home Paul’s point. 5. Other passages in the Corinthian correspondence are more explicit. If the issue is whether Paul believed that Christ was “preexistent” in the sense we have given it, 2 Cor 8:9 says clearly that the Incarnation did involve a change of existence. He who was with G od became one with creation in order to elevate those who, though part o f his creation, may come to share the life o f G od himself. That statement, we believe, would be fair comment on and summary o f what Paul writes in more compelling terms: For you know the generosity o f our Lord Jesus Christ who— for your sakes and though he was wealthy— became poor, so that you by that poverty might become wealthy. We may pause to observe where Paul places the emphasis as he writes on the condescension o f Christ’s coming. “The grace o f our Lord Jesus Christ” is the frontispiece o f his declaration, as it becomes the first part o f the apostolic benediction in 13:14. W hether this means simply, “You know how gracious the Lord Jesus Christ was,” or has a deeper meaning, such as “You recall the event in grace which brought the Lord Jesus Christ into the world,” is not cer­ tain. The divine tide with “our” in 8:9 (and in 1 Cor 1:2) suggests that Paul is quoting a fixed liturgical formula, and is commenting on the stupendous miracle of God-becominghuman. Hence we may prefer the latter alternative if the verse is a preformed sentence borrowed by Paul. In support o f the first option, however, which has “generosity” in the translation, is the relevance o f that word to Paul’s con­ text. He is appealing for a generous response to the collec­ tion, and points to the highest example o f generosity in the Incarnation. 83

The G race and Glory o f O ur Lord Jesus Christ

In his being with God he was “rich,” a term suggesting the desirability and honor that belonged to his status. It is paral­ lel with Phil 2:6: “being in the form o f G od,” which in turn seems to imply a condition or status that ranked him on the side o f God over against the rest of creation, whether angelic or human. Col 1:15 expresses the same truth in terms o f his being the “image o f the unseen G od,” a designation drawn from the Wisdom literature (Wisd Sol 7), in which wisdom is described in highly personalized terms as enjoying intimate associations with the Most High (Prov 8; Sirach 24). Interest­ ingly, James 2:1, which is an unlikely source in New Testa­ ment christology, speaks o f Jesus Christ the Lord in exactly this way as one who shares and expresses the glory o f God, as in 2 Cor 4:4-6 which repeats the imagery of Christ as the “image o f G od.” Eikon (Paul’s word in 4:4) means more than mirror or likeness, however; it carries the idea that Christ is the faithful representation of God’s eternal nature since he shares in that nature. So it is a natural consequence for Paul to write that G od’s glory is to be seen in the face or person o f Christ (4:6, akin to John 1:14,18; Heb 1:1-3). Form, image, glory: these are all picture terms for convey­ ing the idea o f a personal relationship that joined the preincamate Christ with the Father. Paul’s word here is “rich” which adds in the dimension o f an estate to be highly valued and (maybe) retained at all costs. “He did not consider equality with God as a prize to be exploited” (Phil 2:6) is one way to render the next phrase in the drama o f the story o f Christ. The Pauline text is a deep mystery, but at least it tells us that there was a decision to be made, and at some cost. Instead of viewing his prize o f divine equality as an occasion for getting still more honor he chose to see it as a giving— o f himself. This “decision” led directly to his becoming one with us in an act Paul in our verse calls “becoming poor.” If we are correct in setting this dramatic condescension in the framework o f the Incarnation, then 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

84

poverty cannot be reduced to material lack (even though, at first glance, that is the theme of Paul’s application to the Corinthians in discussing the collection for the saints). Christ became poor by accepting our human lot, what Paul elsewhere calls an emptying (kenosis, Phil 2:7) and becoming a slave, that is, a servant to obey his vocation in obedience and service for others. The ultimate cost is not left in doubt. He became obedient to death, and that death put him on a cross (Phil 2:8; see Heb 10:5-10 for similar conclusions). Poverty and riches are the twin polarities of the purpose underlying what Paul is writing about The believers for whose sake the Lord came to identify with them in their humanness and sin are the direct beneficiaries of all he did. They are raised to share in his life with God, and to enter with him into his glory (Rom 8:17). This noble confession o f faith centering on the major motifs in the saga o f Christ has a practical purpose. It is intended to awaken the spirit o f generous giving. But for all its incidental character its broad scope and amazing sweep o f christological thought should not be missed. The picture Paul has and presents is o f the heavenly Lord who laid aside his glory and oneness with G od in order to make him self one with the poverty and wretchedness o f the human con­ dition. By this “downward” movement o f his coming from G od he intended to lift us to new heights o f intimate fel­ lowship with our creator and to share the relationship he also has enjoyed. O ur destiny, Paul writes elsewhere (Rom 8:29), is to be conformed to the image o f Christ as G od’s Son, in order that he might be the first-born in the family o f God. 6. “He came from God” is the way 2 Cor 8:9 may be un­ derstood. But such a phrase hardly does justice to what 2 Cor 5:19 says: In Christ G od was reconciling the world to himself. 85

The Grace and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

This enigmatic sentence may be taken in two or three dif­ ferent ways. The phrase “in Christ” may go with “God” to form a composite expression, thus God-in-Christ with the participle of the verb to follow. O r else “in Christ” refers to the means through which God reconciled the world (so Bar­ rett). Yet another sense is supplied by attaching God in Christ to the verb in an imperfect or continuous tense, i.e., “God in Christ was reconciling the world to himself.” Paul’s Greek, even if it is a quotation he uses, is less than precise; yet the sense required in the entire paragraph and the flow of the argument may point to the conclusion that Paul needs to show how God himself is personally involved. V 18 stresses how he acted through the agency o f Christ (dia Christou means just that). Unless v 19 is a piece of tautology, repeating the same idea for the sake o f emphasis, it needs to say something more than v 18. We interpret it as God’s com­ ing himself in Christ (en Christo) to our world. While the chief stress falls on divine reconciliation, Paul goes beyond the idea of agency (v 18) and mediation (mentioned in v 20: hyper Christou). He places at the center the affirmation of divine identification to underscore the personal presence o f God who in Jesus Christ entered our time-bound order and made himself one with the human race he came to recon­ cile and restore. He sent no angel to our race, O f higher or of lower frame; But wore the robe o f human form, And to our lost world came. Paul’s argument almost demands that the text in v 19 should mean something like this: in Christ God became one o f our human family and identified himself with it both in its humanness and so in its sinfulness (5:21). 7. To place a capstone on Paul’s expression of who Jesus 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

86

Christ was and is, the term Lord needs to be reckoned with. One o f the fullest expositions o f how Paul conceived of Christ’s Lordship is in 1 C or 8:5, 6 which we considered earlier. We now return to this passage with an inquiry as to how it “explains” the relation that Jesus Christ sustains to the various areas o f Christian belief. In particular let us note how Paul relates Christ’s title and office to G od him­ self, the cosmos, and the church. “One Lord” marks out the figure o f Jesus as different from and opposed to the “many lords” (v 5) o f contemporary hellenistic and oriental cults, and especially as opposed to the growing veneration o f the Roman emperor as “lord” (Latin dominus). Serapis was a popular deity hailed as lord by followers in the cult that revered the god as a helper and savior.2 Equally, with elements drawn from Egyptian religion, Isis was a familiar goddess in the Greece o f Paul’s day. The healer Asclepius commanded a wide following and devotion at Corinth where recent excavations have brought the ruins of an Asclepion (a complex o f buildings devoted to the worship o f the god) to light and he was known as “lord.” Soon the Roman emperor would make a bold claim that he or his genius was worthy o f worship and, as Suetonius was later to report o f Domitian (in the nineties o f the era), would have temples built to revere him as “our lord and god” (dominus et deus). For Paul the monotheistic Jew, all this would have been abhorrent, however much he might sympathize with the human aspirations for guidance, healing, and authority these cults were designed to m eet Yet he is forthright in claiming that Jesus Christ, a figure in recent history, who lived and died in Palestine within living memory, could only be re­ garded as “Lord” in the truest sense o f that title. Moreover, Jesus stood over against human beings (though one with the rest of creation by choice and design, as we just observed) and on the side of God. “Lord” representing the title 87

The Grace and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

accorded to Israel’s covenant God in the Greek Bible is appro­ priated as the suitable honorific name of the one whom God highly exalted and installed as Kyrios (Phil 2:9-11). The cosmic background to the tide “Lord” is also to be seen in 1 Cor 8:6. The one Lord, Jesus Christ is hailed as the one “through whom all things came to be.” This reference is tantalizingly obscure since it has no verb, and we are com­ pelled to insert “came to be” to complete the sense. The passage is part o f a hymnic or poetic tribute to the persons in the Christian godhead. “One Lord” is, as we saw, a confession of a single Lordship in a polytheistic society of competing divinities. “All things” refers to cosmic power, as in the paral­ lel hymnic acclamation o f Col 1:15-20; and paul associates the creation o f the universe, believed to be linked with cos­ mic and astral powers, with the preexisting Christ who was the divinely appointed agent by whom God made the world. John 1:3 and Heb 1:2 are closely parallel and relate the action o f God in the beginning with the activity o f the LogosWisdom figures that the early Christians saw to be an allusion to the cosmic Lord known to them as Jesus C hrist Kyrios, “Lord,” is a tide that may have arisen in early Chris­ tian circles as a result o f biblical exegesis in Old Testament passages such as 2 Cor 3:15-18 or, perhaps more probably, as a consequence of Christians’ setting Jesus at the center of their worship and calling on his name in a manner akin to the way Jews were said to identify themselves as Yahweh’s devo­ tees. It cannot be accidental, then, that this is how Paul desig­ nates the believing community in southern Greece at the head of 1 Cor. He greets the church o f God at Corinth “with all those who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours” (1 Cor 1:2). The precise expression “to call on the name of” the deity is both an act of confession (as in Rom 10:12-14) and an affirmation of belonging to the one whose name is thereby 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

88

invoked. The phrase denotes— in the Old Testament— allegiance to Yahweh as Israel’s covenant God (e.g., Gen 21:33 used of Abraham, the father of the faithful). In the New Testament generally and even in 1 C or 1:2 in particular it is a sign and badge o f belonging to the G od o f the promise made to Abraham which was fulfilled in Christ (2 Cor 1:20) and so, by transference, of belonging to Christ as Lord who is ranked as God. It is a natural corollary for Paul to make this shift from Yahweh to Christ in 2 Cor 3:17: “The Lord” [in the passage cited from Exod 34:34 which speaks o f Moses’ turning to God] represents the Spirit; and wherever the Spirit o f the Lord is, there is freedom. Yet “Lord” is more than a title for understanding the Old Testament and a label to denote one’s belonging to a new master; it is intensely practical and down-to-earth. Kyrios stands for the authority to which men and women are ac­ countable and it is in the light o f that responsibility they have to view their decisions and actions. This application comes out clearly in 1 Cor 6:12-19 and 7:17— 24. The first passage has to do with Christian morality which Paul interprets in the light of the use o f the body. The details may be given in a later discussion; here we are content sim­ ply to draw attention to 6:17: “But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.” The apostle is obviously making a play— although in a serious vein—with the word “united.” The erring Corin­ thians saw no harm or inconsistency in becoming united with prostitutes at the local brothel, on the mistaken as­ sumption no doubt that once their spirits were “saved,” they could indulge their bodily appetites and libido without re­ straint or conscience. Paul retorts that a union o f this kind

89

The Grace and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

is unthinkable for a professed Christian, whose true union is with the Lord as part of the nuptial bond (Gen 2:24; see 2 Cor 11:2) connecting Christ and his spouse. So the imperative is clear: shun immoral relations that destroy the union between the Lord and his people (6:18). Owning him as Lord has a direct bearing on one’s sexual and social conduct, and no fancy theologizing to do with being raised with Christ and so beyond the reach of high moral claims can ever excuse a Christian who allows his or her passions to be dominant. “All is permitted” (6:12) was the Corinthian slogan, which reap­ pears in our day as “everything goes; if it feels good, do it.” Paul’s thunderous comment and corrective is quickly added: “But I will not be brought under the power of anything.” How can he when he has professed Christ as Lord, as the sole authority and ruling power in his life? The second passage sets the same idea in the context of the social problems occasioned by slavery (1 Cor 7:17-24). Slavery was a commonplace part of the Greco-Roman soci­ ety in which the church was bom . Paul raised no standard o f revolt against this inhuman institution. We may ask why he did not— and find part o f the answer in his letter to Phile­ mon where “emancipation” (but not by a slaves’ uprising, which would have disastrous results for all concerned as Spartacus’s rebellion proved) trembles on his lips (in v 16). He adds a new dimension, hitherto unrecognized— taking the truant slave Onesimus back “no longer as a slave but more than a slave, as a dear brother, especially to me but how much to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord.” The last phrase from Philem 16 provides a clue to under­ standing the passage in 1 C or 7. There were opportunities for a slave to find freedom, chiefly by the payment o f a sum o f money deposited in a temple and transferred to the slave’s owner, as the hundreds o f names, inscribed in grati­ tude, on the walls o f Apollo’s shrine at Delphi testify. Paul encourages this procedure (7:21), but then moves from the 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

90

relationship “in the flesh,” i.e., as a human being in society, to the relationship “in the Lord” which comes in the re­ minder that all his readers, whether slaves or free persons, are under the vow o f obedience and loyalty to a higher power, namely Christ the Lord. The fact that in Greek one word (kyrios) may mean both an owner o f slaves and the heavenly Lord Jesus facilitated this transition o f thought. All the Corinthians in their society— whether slave master, free people, or slaves— are “bought at a price” (7:23). The same verse adds a new perspective, which may be called “living under Christ’s Lordship,” and the effect on this moral mandate is to be seen in the so-called Station Codes o f Eph 6:5-9 and C ol 3:22-4:1 (cf. 1 Pet 2:18-21). One final reference to the Lordship o f Christ claims our attention. The way that the Lord’s power was exercised, both as seen in the church’s Lord and then by extension in the lives of his apostolic representatives, was a topic of burn­ ing concern in the last four chapters of 2 Corinthians, the so-called “Letter o f Conflict.” The sense turns on what kind o f Lordship Christ was known to have commanded, and so on the question of how his earthly agents model their styles of authority. Paul’s answer to both questions is one and the same. The power o f Christ was held in restraint and he acted in lowli­ ness and meekness (2 Cor 10:1). He died in weakness on the cross, and at the resurrection the authority he assumed still bore the mark o f humility and grace (2 Cor 13:4). So his followers and agents are called to be primarily his servants (2 Cor 4:5), treading in the path o f the servant Messiah whose title to Lordship is most evident in a continuing min­ istry o f service and love. See 2 C or 13:10 where Paul, in direct contrast to those who came as emissaries to Corinth and adopted a haughty disposition and ruled over the con­ gregation with unfeeling arrogance (2 Cor 11:19), sets out the true ministry o f the apostles o f the Lord: 91

The Grace and Glory of O ur Lord Jesus Christ

When I am present I might not have to act harshly in accordance with the authority which the Lord has given me, the authority for building you up, not tearing you down. Equally impressive is the self-confession of an apostolic lifestyle in 2 Cor 1:24: This does not mean that we are ruling over your faith, but we are working with you for your joy. Both pieces of Pauline pastoralia show how clearly he un­ derstood his mission and how u f lly he had grasped the Lordship of the Christ who was among his disciples as one who serves (Luke 22:27).

1, 2 CORINTHIANS

92

5

THE GOSPEL, THE SPIRIT, AND THE CONGREGATION

Paul’s mission preaching at Corinth is spelled out in two places. The evidence o f Acts 18:1-18 gives some interesting pointers to the way Luke describes Paul’s ministry; and there is the no less informative statement in 1 Cor chs 1 and 2. Acts 18 regards Paul’s initial evangelism as one of “arguing” and “persuading” (18:4, 13). When Silas and Timothy came from Macedonia, no doubt bearing the gifts of the Philippians (2 Cor 11:9; Phil 4:15-18), Paul was released from some finan­ cial constraints which required him to do manual work as a tentmaker, a practice he had adopted from his stay in Thessa­ lonica (1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:9; cf. Acts 20:34). He began, we are told, to devote himself wholeheartedly to the ministry of preaching (Acts 18:5) as he bore witness to the Jews that Jesus was the fulfillment of Israel’s messianic hopes. Some success attended these efforts, but there was also opposition and discouragement. The verdict of Gallio’s tri­ bunal settled the first issue, thereby allowing Paul to continue his pastoral work for some considerable time (Acts 18:18). The vision he received of the heavenly Lord who reassured 93

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

him o f both divine protection and a reward for his labors prompted him to continue his endeavors, “teaching the word o f God among them” (Acts 18:11). So far the narrative in Acts is circumstantial and reportorial. We need to go behind the scenes to learn from the C orinthian letters something o f the apostle’s frame o f mind and disposition as he came to Corinth from the almost total rejection he had experienced at Athens (Acts 17:32-34). A t 1 C or 1:18 Paul is led into a discussion by the thought that if the preacher uses words o f eloquent wisdom the inevitable result is that the cross o f Christ is rendered in' effective. The content o f that message is then powerfully expounded and its effect on those who come within earshot o f it is clearly shown (vv 18-25). Three types o f reaction are a Christian response, a Jewish refusal, and a Greek rejection: Christ the power of God (a) To those “who are being saved” (a present tense) the cross represents the epitome o f divine power, leading to salvation (Rom 1:16). The association o f power with the humiliation and ignominy o f death on a Roman gibbet— a death reserved for the most degraded and despised in Roman society and regarded with universal horror as the “most cruel and shocking o f all punishments” (Cicero)—would seem very surprising. A t first sight the link o f power and the cross is certainly a paradox (see 2 C or 13:4), since the display of force and a submission to a shameful death in which the victim is most helpless and unable to move himself hold together mutually contradictory ideas. But Paul goes on to explain that in the very weakness of God, who in Christ suffered defeat at the hands of wicked men, divine wisdom is revealed and the heart o f G od is made known (1 Cor 1:25). W hat could never be grasped by human 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

94

inquiry or discovery stands open to full view at the cross, as the Spirit illumines the mind to appreciate and accept that in this act in history much more than the death of the man Jesus o f Nazareth is involved. “In Christ G od was reconcil­ ing the world to himself” (2 C or 5:19) and in that mysterious event the sins o f the world are carried away and the new age o f divine salvation is introduced. Those who have found in Christ crucified the secret o f life’s purpose and G od’s plan, decreed from o f old (1 Cor 2:7-10), realize that it is G od’s initiative and power that have led them to this blessedness; and so they give him their thanks for undeserved mercies shown to sinners who are now set on the road to salvation (1 Cor 1:21,31; 2 Cor 9:15). (b) “But they have not all heeded the gospel” (Rom 10:16). The proclamation of the cross, o f Christ crucified for our sins (1 Cor 15:3) and so the ground of our hope of eschatological salvation in the new world of God’s righteous rule (2 Cor 5:21), then as now, divides people into the stark categories of those who respond and those who reject. The Jewish hearers, with their insistent demand for “signs”— a feature seen in the ministry o f Jesus from its be­ ginning (Matt 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13) to its close (Mark 15:32), but at its most dramatic in the episode of Mark 8:11-13— refuse to believe that a crucified man can be their Messiah. Deut 21:23 proves that he must be under a divine curse. How can Messiah, a title of undisputed favor and honor, be identi­ fied with one who died “on a tree,” that is, as an outcast from Israel’s covenant community and under the ban of excommu­ nication? It is small wonder that the Jews drew the conclusion that Paul’s message was impossible to believe. Paul concludes that, seen solely in the light o f the Deuteronomic verse, the cross is and remains a “scandal,” a roadblock on the way to faith. But, as we learn from his wrestling with the same problem, light is given in two ways: 95

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

the crucified Jesus suffered and died, not for his own crimes but he died for others. So Deut 21:23 proves exactly what the Jewish debaters were denying: He became a curse for us (Gal 3:13, which goes on to quote the O T proof-text). Sec­ ond, the cross has to be seen in the light o f the resurrection which, for Paul ever since his thinking was reoriented on the Damascus road, reversed the judgment o f Good Friday and vindicated both the faithful ministry o f Jesus and G od’s strength-in-weakness (2 Cor 13:4). Paul’s rejoinder, when faced with the paradox o f the cross, is to proclaim boldly: He died an accursed death, but he assumed our curse (2 C or 5:21). He died our death, but G od brought him out o f defeat and shame to the glory o f Easter which is his glory (1 C or 15:42-45). (c) The Greeks found the cross to be a huge joke (1 Cor 1:23). It contradicted their cherished notions of divine wis­ dom; indeed, it taught the precise opposite of their axiom that the gods cannot and do not suffer mortal pain. The Greek divinities inhabited a lotus-land far removed from human mis­ ery. They remained aloof and were untouched by human misery. A good illustration comes in Aristophanes’ play, The Frogs (lines 632-34). The scene is set in the underworld of Hades where two travelers are each claiming to be divine. A simple test is devised to sort out the true from the false claimant, who is the god and who is his slave: You should flog him well, For if he is god he won’t feel it. Whichever of the two you first see Flinching or crying out—he’s not the god. The Christian answer lies in a God who entered our human life at every level, and tasted death at its bitterest This is divine wisdom in a mystery, and shows that “the foolishness o f God is wiser than men” (1:25). 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

96

Christ the wisdom of God The counterpart to the Jews’ insistence on credentials (1:22) was the Greeks’ love o f oratory and impressive public speaking. To them the acme o f learning was the presentation o f a well-ordered and persuasively uttered discourse on some lofty (and preferably novel) theme (Acts 17:21). It is not therefore to be wondered at that Paul’s preaching in Athens should be dismissed as the weird pronouncement o f a babbler (Acts 17:18-20). And Paul possibly felt that little good had been accomplished at Athens when he moved on to Corinth. But it would be too much to infer that he wrote 1 Cor 2:1-5 in retrospect o f having “failed” at Athens and that he resolved after that experience to abandon completely the more philosophical approach to preaching the good news. More likely, when faced with the challenges o f Corinthian culture and the needs that were evident in such a place, he came to see with particular intensity that his ministry was to offer a straightforward presentation of the cross (2:2). He would present a message decked out with no human embel­ lishments (2:1) and conveyed with no reliance on rhetorical persuasion (2:4). Indeed, his bearing and public proclamation were just the opposite of the qualities that marked out the accomplished Greek orator and debater. He came to Corinth “in weakness and in much fear and trembling” (2:3). He placed his sole reliance on the Spirit to provide both the proof and the power to drive home the message (2:4). His objective is clearly stated: “that your faith might not rest in human wisdom but in the divine power” the Spirit affords (2:5). This is a most revealing section, and may be said to be the first comment from Paul’s pen on an issue that runs through the correspondence with Corinth. The charge that his per­ son and his speech were beneath contempt would surface again in 2 Corinthians (10:10). And Paul would be forced on 97

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

to the defensive from the emissaries who came with allega­ tions that he was no rhetorically trained or gifted speaker, whatever his skills as a letter-writer at a safe distance may have been (2 Cor 10:1-2, 9). Paul does not deny the accusation, which is cited in 10:10; and at 11:6 he concedes the point that he is unskilled in public speaking. But he has already made it plain that his “simple” preaching style was one he had chosen to cultivate for theological reasons, namely that only in this way could the true nature of the gospel be honored and the Corinthians would be led to see that their faith was the gift of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:3) and not the result o f human persuasiveness such as popular speakers in hellenistic society exploited (2 Cor 2:17). It is no contradiction of the disavowal of Paul to resort to rhetorical devices when he proceeds to claim the gift of wis­ dom (1 Cor 2:6). The same gift is traced to the Spirit’s activity (1 Cor 12:8), so there cannot be anything pejorative about that claim: “among the mature (Gr. teleioi, a play on the word which evidently was part of the Corinthians’ proud boast, “to be perfect”; but Paul dismisses them as mere babes, 1 Cor 3:1-4; 13:11; 14:20) we do impart wisdom. . . . We impart a secret and hidden wisdom o f God.” The term “wisdom” needs a careful definition. Paul has been at pains to show that the apostolic preaching of the cross does not look to any human philosophy or man-devised argu­ ment for its persuasiveness and appeal. Reliance on such a prop, he avers, is foredoomed to failure (1 Cor 1:21). The “wisdom o f this age” (2:6) is, above all, fleeting, and vain. This is the conclusion he draws from the assurance that his mes­ sage is based on God’s truth and announced in dependence on the Holy Spirit (2:4). But there is a wisdom that is appropriate; it is based on divine revelation, not human ingenuity (2:6), and it is commu­ nicated to believing men and women by the Spirit (2:10-12). Wisdom is the gift of God; it leads to the true knowledge of 1, 2 CO RIN TH IA N S

98

God, not speculation or theory; and it is the mark o f the person who seeks to walk in God’s way and obey his voice. From his Jewish teachers Paul had learned this lesson well, and it is boldly brought over into the full light of Christ who is the wisdom of God incarnate in human form (1 Cor 1:24). “Wisdom” (sophia) plays a key role in the discussion of chapters 1-3 where the term is found sixteen times, while “the wise person” (sophos) recurs ten times in these chapters. C. K. Barrett1 helpfully distinguishes four categories o f the word’s use. A s a “bad” term it represents the Greek sophist with his eloquence and prowess in debate, and it shades off into an arrogance that has no room for the cross (1:22, 2:6). On the “good” side it can describe the gift of eloquence as a Christian virtue (12:8, this is Barrett’s classification o f a nontechnical sense, which may be questioned), and it shines in its truest Pauline sense when it means an understanding o f God’s sav­ ing plan, as clearly in 1:24,30; 2:6. In this last named category “wisdom” is the gift that comes alone from God who takes the initiative (2:10) and bestows the illumination o f the Spirit (2:12) intended to make “us wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim 3:15). This is elsewhere equivalent to the gift(s) of the Holy Spirit (2:14) to enable men and women to cry, “Jesus is Lord” (12:3) and to be baptized into the one body in the church’s fellowship (12:13). Since this understanding o f the way the single term “wisdom” is used in its various connotations is so important for Paul, and indeed forms the basis for his evangelistic preaching, a review is in order (based on 1 Cor 2:6-16): The bankruptcy of human wisdom, uninspired and unin­ formed by divine revelation, is seen most clearly in the way Christ was rejected and killed on the cross (2:8). The cross that men prepared for the Lord o f glory became, for Paul, the supreme example and illustration of human perversity, opposition, and rejection. Yet to see the events of history on 99

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

the surface did not go far enough. One must penetrate to the “hidden agenda” behind Good Friday. Beneath the evil designs of the Jewish leaders in the Sanhedrin and the cal' lousness o f the Roman authorities who carried out the sentence of death at Calvary stood the satanic agencies o f evil spirit powers, surnamed “the rulers o f this age” (2:8). Paul will later in this correspondence revert to the theme o f opposition from this quarter. In 2 Corinthians 4:4 he accounts for the strange blindness that afflicts unbelievers by reference to “the god o f this age,” an allusion to Satan the adversary o f G od and humankind. It was Satan’s min' ions who conspired to do away with the Lord o f glory, only to be startled to discover that what they plotted, planned, and executed led to their own undoing. A similar scenario, however strange it may seem to the modem interpreter, underlies another Pauline dramatic sidelight on the events o f Good Friday (Col 2:15): He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example o f them, triumphing over them in it, i.e., the cross. (RSV , marg.) The underpinning o f this amazing statement is worth investigating, with a brief rehearsal o f what seems to be the rationale involved. The risen Lord Paul’s proclamation o f the cross at Corinth was closely linked with the resurrection. This can be seen from the way he writes in 2 Cor 4:14. God is known as the one who “raised up Jesus” (from death). See too, 2 Cor 1:9 which Paul writes as a general description o f God “who raises the dead”— a piece of liturgical praise, borrowed from the synagogue worship. For him, however, the event o f resurrection in the case of 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

100

Jesus was invested with a tremendous significance, best seen in 2 Cor 5:17. With the coming and triumph of Christ over death a new world has been bom , a new eschatological epoch is here. The ringing declaration of 1 Cor 15:20, “Christ has been raised from the dead,” repeats that assurance. But all Christian truth is vulnerable to misinterpretation and wrongful understanding. Heresy has been defined as truth carried to unwarranted limits, and thus exaggerated out o f all proportion. So it was at Corinth. The believers there were led to see the present glory o f the risen Lord as the all-consuming reality (the title “Lord o f glory” in 1 C or 2:8 may be the Corinthians’ own ascription to Jesus). For them the existence o f Christ covered a two-stage pe­ riod: Jesus came into this world, and then he was promoted to a glorious state. A t their baptism (as we saw) they came to share that glory, and to regard themselves as fully raised with Christ as men and women o f the Spirit (see 1 C or 2:15; if that too was a Corinthian slogan, it shows the practiced effect of such a belief). Paul was driven to oppose this understanding with a three-step movement, in which Christ’s threefold status cor­ responds to Christian existence and experience. A s we set down this response, it should be clear that we are ready to see how the saving message bears upon the teaching con­ cerning the church in these letters. (i) Christ died and was raised (1 Cor 15:20a), Here, in a pregnant sentence, Paul and his disputants are agreed, though the apostle found it needful to add the qualifier: “[Christ] is the first fruits o f those who have died” (15:20b). He does so to ward off any suggestion that Christian resurrection has already taken place in baptism and that death can be avoided as a gateway to a future resurrection. This one reminder is really the key to unlock the main problem faced in 1 Cor 15. (ii) Christ’s present rule is a reality (as all concur) but only Paul emphasizes that it is a contested rule and is still 101

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

incomplete. The old order still remains, with its sad signs o f sickness, weakness, and above all death (1 C or 15:26, 5457). Hence Corinthian believers, though “raised” in bap­ tism, continue to die (1 C or 11:30); Paul is the ailing apostle who receives no physical cure (2 C or 12:9,10); and Satan is still at work in the world (2 C or 4:4) and in opposing the church (1 C or 5:5; 2 C or 2:11; 11:14,15; 12:7). The church lives in the “in-between” period which is the overlap o f the epochs (1 C or 10:11). It is caught in the tension o f being part o f fallen creation with its inherent weakness and proneness to sin (1 C or 5:1-13; 10:1-13; 2 C or 12:21) and its mortality in this age (1 C or 7:31; 2 C or 5:1-5), and being a present shrine o f the Spirit (1 C or 3:16-17) who is the pledge o f future expectation (2 C or 5:5) o f new life. (iii) Christ’s future lies beyond the Parousia, Paul is confi­ dent (1 Cor 15:23-28). In the same way the believer’s hope is set in the future triumph when the Spirit’s guarantee (2 Cor 1:22) will be honored and God’s ultimate reign will be achieved (1 Cor 15:28). The twin sacraments o f baptism (1 Cor 10:1-13) and the Lord’s supper (1 Cor 11:23-34) point forward to this time since both have a built-in eschatological dimension that prevents them from being taken as tokens of security in this age. This eschatological proviso also demands that believers look beyond the “symbol” of water, bread, and cup to that which they represent, actualize, and promise: The presence o f the Lord who both came once into history, is coming to meet his people as they obey his commands, and will come at the end time. The ethical insistence on obedi­ ence and a lively faith is a safeguard lest the sacraments should be treated as magic or superstition— or, perhaps even worse, as a substitute for “faith working by love” (see Gal 5:6). The day o f Christ will be an occasion o f moral accountability when the church members will be called to a reckoning (1 Cor 4:5; 2 Cor 5:10); and no religious observance, however well regarded, will compensate for a failure to cultivate a high 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

102

moral tone in Christian behavior or to practice a true com' munity that cares for the poor and despised (1 Cor 11:20-34). “Discerning the body” (11:29, RSV) is best understood as treating one’s underprivileged fellowbeliever in a way that befits the spirit o f genuine koinonia (1 Cor 12:22-26). The shrine of the Spirit Just as Paul links intimately the cross and the resurrection o f Jesus as two sides o f the same coin in order to bid his readers see the continuing power o f the cross as being in no way swallowed up by the risen glory o f Christ, so he intro­ duces the work o f the Holy Spirit in the church under a double aspect. The church is both a community indwelt and sanctified by the Spirit and a company o f frail, erring men and women who need constantly to be watchful (1 Cor 16:13), to take heed to their profession (1 C or 10:12), and to “perfect [their] holiness in the fear o f God” (2 C or 7:1). Above all, they are put on their mettle in regard to the call to true community life that does not allow pietistic individual­ ism to make them uncaring, or to indulge their spirituality in the more exotic and demonstrable gifts o f the Spirit that deny the very essence o f the saving message that has brought the church into being. These are the chief issues that concern us as we seek now to relate Paul’s gospel at Corinth to its down-to-earth con­ text in the life o f Christians in community. Four images of the church dominate the scene. The church is a building (1 Cor 3:9) in which Paul is the craftsman (1 C or 3:10) though the foundation is Christ him­ self (1 Cor 3:11); and it is a bride o f Christ with Paul’s role that o f the groomsman conducting the spouse to her hus­ band (2 Cor 11:2, 3; cf. John 3:29). A variation on this latter theme is the church as family under the parenthood o f G od (2 C or 6:18) who has both sons and daughters. The last 103

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

word is significantly added to the O T reference in 2 Sam 7:14 (cf. H o s l:10; Isa 43:6). Paul often regards himself in these epistles as the earthly parent o f the Corinthians (1 Cor 4:14, 15; 2 Cor 6:13; 12:14). The third image picks up the theme of the church’s role as a serving people (1 Cor 12:1— 11) by utilizing the metaphor of the body (12:12-13). We must examine this third image in some detail. But it is the fourth way in which the church is depicted that looks to be most distinctive in the Corinthian writing. The church as a temple of God (1 Cor 3:16, 17; 6:19, 20; 2 C or 6:14-7:1) paves the way for the relevance Paul must bring out as he shows how the church is called into being as a holy people o f God. (i) The church as a holy people. Paul’s pastoral theology, with its strategic approach, is very clear at the outset o f his Corinthian correspondence. The first letter will soon have to address serious moral issues and expose the woeful mis­ understanding o f what the Christians’ vocation should be. But Paul opens with a note of greeting that sees the church as it was intended to be rather than what it actually was. To the church o f God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy. . . . (1 Cor 1:2) The link terms are “sanctified” and “called to be holy,” and the common factor that unites them is the work of the Holy Spirit who is the author of new life (12:11) and the divine agent to ensure that the church is a true shrine for the wor­ ship of the holy God of Israel (see 1 Cor 6:19,20). The first readers must have been stabbed awake by these words when they were read out in public assembly. If the account in 1 Cor 6:9-11 is anywhere near the truth— and Paul would hardly have insulted and alienated his people by such a fearful tale of gross immorality if he intended to win them over to his side— the moral state in which the readers I, 2 CORINTHIANS

104

lived prior to their becoming Christians stood in direct con­ trast. To be a devotee o f pagan idols (1 Cor 12:2) was bad in all conscience— from the Old Testament-Judaic angle, which is Paul’s viewpoint. To be charged with all manner of pernicious and antisocial behavior would be a sad reminder. Yet against such a backcloth o f some o f them, the grace o f God shines more luminously. Now— in Christ and by the sanctifying Spirit— they have been washed clean, made holy, and set in right relationship with God. That was God’s in­ tention for his people; and Paul does well to remind them at the outset that, on God’s side, all provision for human restoration has been made. This ideal must challenge their present state, and alert them to what should be their true calling as the holy people of God in continuity with ancient Israel, a people also called to be “holy to Yahweh,” as the “saints o f God.” To be numbered among “the saints” on its biblical back­ ground implies two ideas. There is the thought o f separation from all that is evil and morally offensive to God; but given with equal emphasis is the idea that God’s holy people are dedicated to his service and truly belong to him as his pos­ session. Paul will illustrate the tension between what the Corinthians are in Christ, as sharers in the new eschatologi­ cal age (2 Cor 5:17), and what is to be their life in this present wicked world. He employs Old Testament imagery for this purpose to set forth the “eschatological tension” between God’s ideal and the need for believers to rise to their high destiny. (a) 1 Corinthians 5:6-8 A reading o f 5:1-5 is really mandatory to set the scene. Paul can hardly credit it, but reports have confirmed that the church has lost all sense o f moral responsibility and is actu­ ally condoning a glaring case o f incest. Indeed, the matter is 105

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

aggravated not only by the failure to deal with the offender, but by the church’s attitude o f continued arrogance (5:2). This may imply that what to Paul should have been an occasion o f discipline had been treated as a matter o f some self-congratulation; and would point to the idea that some Corinthians had accepted a gnosticizing teaching which de­ valued bodily “sins” as immaterial once the spirit had been saved. A t all events, Paul knows what must be done. This loose morality— for whatever reason it may claim to be ex­ cused— must be strongly rejected (5:2b). To drive home his ethical call Paul uses the illustrative pro­ cedures o f Passover. Before the days of the feast a ceremony was— and still is in the homes of pious Jews—performed to search out and destroy all traces of yeast or any kind of fer­ menting material. In old editions of the Passover service- book a picture of an old man with a candle is often placed as a frontispiece. This represents God who will search Jerusalem with lamps (Zeph 1:12), and is thereby encouraging Jewish housewives to do the same! At the close of the search, on the eve of Passover, a solemn declaration by the housewife is made that if any leaven has been inadvertently overlooked in the kitchen or house, it is pronounced null and void. Leaven is a symbol o f evil, suggesting to the rabbis that the rising o f the dough is an apt picture o f the swelling of pride. The Jews, at Passover, must be reminded that they were a poor and servile people when the Lord redeemed them from Egypt (Deut 7:6-11; 26:5-9). Against such a background the Corinthians are called to (i) clear out every trace o f moral evil (5:7) by dealing with the presence of arrogant sin in their midst (5:13); (ii) recall that they are the new Israel of God, summoned to be a holy people to the Lord and redeemed by the Paschal Lamb himself, who is typified in the lambs of Exod 12:3-7; and (iii) celebrate their new life as a festival o f joy and gladness with a recall that they should become what they are: “that you may be a new 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

106

batch without yeast— as you really are” (5:7). This is one o f the clearest evidences o f Paul’s fundamental position in re­ gard to ethical questions. He calls believers to act out their new status in Christ, to become what they in fact are. (b) 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 The church is the heir to Old Testament promises— and warnings. This salutary reflection on the need to live in the light o f the believer’s calling prompted Paul to deal with a prevailing mood at Corinth. The pith o f his admonition is that outward profession, expressed in a confidence that once baptism had been administered all was well, is “no safeguard for a careless life which takes liberties with itself” (Moffatt).2 This is the reminder in 1 Corinthians 10. He recalls how the O ld Testament people o f God had their special “moments of revelation” when God came uniquely near. They enjoyed their “sacraments” as they were “baptized into M oses” (10:2) and were sustained by the living-giving water out o f the rock (10:4). But, as they turned aside to idolatry, and became apostate from the true God, they quickly met a sorry fate (10:5-10). Paul takes these incidents— five in number, in Num 11:4-6; Exod 32:6; Num 25:1-9; 21:4-9; 16— and invests them with a significance for the church to which he is writing. The call is one o f self-examination (10:12) and it re­ bukes all presumption and blind trust in religious ceremo­ nial or any “once for all” status that makes the believers insensitive to the moral standards set by the gospel and demanded o f G od’s church in every age. The punch line is in 10:14: “Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry.” Put in another way, Paul is calling on the church to respect its dignity as G od’s ransomed com­ munity and to live in the light in its professed vocation as a holy people. 107

The Gospel, the Spirit, an d the Congregation

(c) 2 Cor 6:14-7:1 The critical questions o f how this passage fits into the flow of Paul’s thought and the presence o f unusual lan­ guage and idioms should not obscure the deeper issue of how it brings to light the true nature o f the church. If we read, in swift succession, 6:11-13 and 7:2-4 we are bound to think that the intervening verses are an interlude as a digression or even an insertion into the text. But it would be a hasty judgment to conclude that 6:14-7:1 is out o f place in the context. Paul is dealing with a refractory group in the church that is opposed to him and his gospel. He uses the appeal to the gospel (in 5:20) to summon them to be reconciled to God— by coming back to his cause and receiving him as their true apostle (6:13). Now he offers an exposition on the church as a neo-levitical community patterned on Lev chaps 17-26 to drive home both the real nature o f the church as the temple of the Lord, consecrated for holy worship and the folly of the readers’ ranging themselves on the side o f the world, called unbelieving and set under the power o f Satan (Belial) or idols. By a single stroke, using a series of O ld Testament quotations and allusions (six in number), he establishes the holy destiny o f the church at Corinth. So doing, he sum­ mons the disobedient members to respect their calling and leave the world’s side in order to attach themselves reso­ lutely to his gospel and apostieship. It is another way of saying to them, “We urge you not to receive God’s grace in vain” (6:1), which is what they would be doing if they re­ mained recalcitrant and failed to recognize their life as God’s sanctified church. (ii) The church as a worshiping, serving, witnessing commu­ nity. O ur attention is now directed to \ Cor chs 12-15 which are taken up with one central theme. A t first sight the discussion centers on “spiritual gifts” (12:1) but, as we get 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

108

into these chapters, it becomes clear that the organizing topic that pulls into its orbit several Corinthian and Pauline concerns is rather the nature o f the church and its place in God’s plan of salvation in this age. This is why chapter 15 is an integral part of the entire section, and really holds the key to the earlier chapters. In summary, the main problem at Corinth was a theologi­ cal one, and was focused on a denial of a future for the church (1 Cor 15:12). As we noted, a false notion of baptismal resur­ rection (1 Cor 4:8) gave some in the church the idea that, already raised with Christ, they had entered upon a heavenly existence now with a type of ecstatic worship that matched their celestial status. The question of Paul’s authority was at risk as well, and it seems that some women prophetesses (1 Cor 14:34-38) had stepped out of line by introducing this teaching which thrust the cross into the background and maximized the practical implication o f the resurrection here and now. A denial of a future resurrection and a climax to history led Paul into one o f his most complete expositions on the resurrection hope. The chief thrust of chapter 15 is to oppose those who held to four ideas simultaneously: (1) there is no resurrection in the future (they alleged) because it has already occurred in baptism (misunderstanding Rom 6:1-6); (2) there is no need to anticipate the future because they believed they had total salvation without remainder here and now. A popular version o f this mistake shows that the error is still with us. Recently a slogan was coined, “Let’s stop singing ‘In the Sweet Bye-andBye,’ and start celebrating about the fantastic Now-andNow.” (3) “How are the dead raised?” (v 35a) challenges the whole idea of resurrection after death; and (4) “with what kind o f body do they come?” (v 35b) casts doubt on the notion o f personal and bodily survival. Paul’s argument is designed to meet each of these four points. Building on the creedal affirmations (15:3-11) he goes 109

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

on to assert: death must precede resurrection as in the case o f Jesus himself; the hope of the resurrection lies in the future, when he comes (v 23); Christ’s resurrection after he died proves that resurrection is God’s plan for his people; and at the Parousia there will be a transformation of both the de­ parted and the living to account for a new bodily resurrection (vv 44,50-57). With this hermeneutical key we can now approach chap­ ters 12-14 under some customary headings. (a) The Christian’s Lord and Service Paul is led into this theme as he gives answers to queries brought by the Corinthians themselves. The initial theme is “spiritual gifts” (as in 14:1) within the setting o f public worship, as is evident from 11:2-16,17-34. By comparison he uses other phrases to denote private or family worship (14:4, 35) whereas his main interest is what goes on in a church context (see 12:27; 14:5, 19, 26, 33, 35). Certain practices, e.g., speaking in tongues, are permitted freely in a personal way, but in a church service other factors need to be reckoned with, such as the need to supply interpretation (14:5, 27, 28), the importance o f building up the whole church (14:4,31) and the effect on outsiders (14:23-25). In 12:1-3 Paul states the test o f all “gifts of the Spirit,” thereby announcing the axiom that the church lives by con­ fessing Christ as Lord. Not all religious experience is gen­ uinely Christian; in fact, some types are frankly pagan (12:2) and other manifestations (as in v 3) are shown to be subChristian by using language that is either inadequate (“Jesus is anathema,” in the sense o f Gal 3:13) or blasphemous (“Jesus is cursed,” a verdict that became a sign of the disavowal of one’s faith, as in the choice presented to Polycarp in the early second century). Authentic Christian experience stands un1, 2 CORINTHIANS

110

der the Lordship of Christ (Rom 10:9,10) and is the work of the Holy Spirit (John 15:26), with the reminder that it is the Spirit’s ministry to bind together the historical Jesus and the Christ o f faith so closely that both aspects are mutually illuminating and necessary. The same Spirit, having imparted the gift of the saving confession (“Jesus is Lord”), proceeds to enable all Christians, baptized into one body (12:12, 13), to perform a variety of tasks in a section where v 4 is matched by v 11. Three principles are made visible. (1) All believers have some gift (charisma, a gift-in-grace, designed to equip Christians to contribute to the well-being o f the entire community in some specific way). The worth o f the individual is highlighted in vv 7-11 with emphasis on “to each person.” (2) Not all have the same gift, which is clear as we mark the repetition of “different kinds” (in vv 4-6, NIV). (3) All gifts are designated to enrich the total family o f believers (v 7b) and all are granted at the sovereign disposing of the Spirit (v 11, which is one side o f the coin, marked by the Call in 12:31; 14:1, “desire the greater spiritual gifts”— cf. 14:12—which looks to be a quote from the Corinthians themselves). The list of nine gifts in vv 4-10 is significant; it is evidently related to the Corinthian scene, and should be treated as open-ended. Paul is giving pertinent examples, to be com­ pared with Rom 12:6-8; 1 Thess 5:19-22; Eph 4 :ll and 1 Pet 4:10, 11. The simplest way o f classifying these ministries in the church is under the rubrics of teaching, accrediting, and communicating. If this is done, the need of wise teachers and scholars, authentic prophets and leaders, and effective com­ municators and evangelists in the church and the world is as vital today as ever. Nor should we overlook the work of those gifted with the healing art (12:28) and the expertise o f admin­ istrative skills (12:28)— two gifts that happily are being redis­ covered in the present time. 111

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

(b) The Body Life Paul’s image of the church as body plays a central role, with the obvious points of connection bought out cautiously by William Baird:3 as body the church reveals, resembles, and represents Christ. The key lies in 12:13 with its empha­ sis on unity in the midst o f diversity and multiplicity in spite o f organic unity. The two phrases Paul employs to explain what that unityin-diversity means are “baptism in the Spirit” (parallels with Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5; 11:16 show that the phrase has to do primarily with initiation into the body life) and “drinking the Spirit” (12:31, NIV; but the verb could mean “to be immersed”). Both ways o f writing are rooted in experi­ ence and are “evocative,” i.e., relating to calling (vocatio). They add up to one conclusion: the Spirit inaugurates new life and incorporates Christians into one body. The life of that body is then outlined in 12:12-27, with four points registered: all Christians are necessary members of the body, and cannot ordinarily survive in isolation (vv 15, 16); all Christians need one another (vv 17-22); all Christians enrich one another (vv 23-25); and all Christians are involved with one another (vv 25, 26). The chief point, intended to be heeded, is v 25: “no division in the body,” harking back to 1:10; 11:18, though there are special ministries within the one body (12:28-30). (c) The Model That Motivates Verse 31 poses a statement as a question, “But you are eagerly desiring the greater gifts, are you?” (combining NIV and marg.). If this remark reflects the attitude of the Corin­ thian readers, what follows will be Paul’s corrective com­ ment in answer to the implied question: “Well, I intend to show you a still better way.” At this point Paul proceeds 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

112

to unpack what the “still better way” is all about: It is the way o f love (agape, whose definition is still elusive but probably is best described by a caring attitude to those in need and a bid to identify ourselves with God’s interests in other people). The point to grasp in context is that Paul is not offering love as another spiritual gift in a series; rather, he is insisting that love is the essential accompaniment of all charismata. Indeed, no charisma has effective and lasting value unless it is exercised under the control and motivation of love. Chapter 13 was originally composed as a hymnic or lyrical piece in praise of love, just as both Jewish sages and Greek religious poets praised some aspect o f God or the gods in a fulsome way. Whatever its original purpose, the lyric of love is placed here in the letter for an eminently practical reason. To the readers who were seeking (what they termed) the greater or greatest gifts of the Spirit (see 1 Cor 14:12), Paul gives the reminder that love is preeminent over all the charis­ mata which cry out. for agape to give them direction and intent (13:1-3). Moving eloquence and ecstatic speech— two notable qualities much prized at Corinth where Apollos’s in­ fluence (Acts 18:24) and glossolalic utterances stood high on the approved list—need love to inform them. The gift o f intellectual prowess was also highly regarded, but Paul has' already set up a danger signal (1 Cor 8:1). A practical, working faith is a desirable quality (see Mark 11:23), for by faith in God’s wonderworking power great things are attempted and achieved. Yet the danger is exhibitionism and showmanship by which “faith” is paraded and made a ground o f boasting. The warning given in Matt 7:22,23 is always to be heeded. Philanthropists who give their money or even their lives (RSV marg.) to relieve the distress of the needy are a rebuke to all professed believers. But the vital issue is always one o f motive (hence R SV marg. again). Accepting the trans­ lation of v 3 in RSV, NIV and most editors and commenta­ tors with the notable exception of Fee,4 we may find here a 113

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

climax in Paul’s list: “if I hand over my body to be burned [like the martyrs of Dan 3:28], but have not love, I am not benefited at all.” Again, the sacrifice of the martyr is breathcatching, but we need to recall that this is not a uniquely Jewish or Christian trait, as Buddhist monks who died in the petrol fires in Saigon, Vietnam, illustrate. Motive is once more the chief consideration, while underlining yet again Paul’s insistence that all true faith works by love (Gal 5:6). What is love anyway? The section in vv 4-7 will help us get a handle on a slippery word, often filled with all kinds of sentimental, erotic, and selfish notions. Paul’s measured words that follow are helpful in recoining the much abused term. There is a statement o f what love does: It is patient and kind (natural partners, as in Gal 5:22; Col 3:12; 2 Cor 6:6); there is a denial of a way o f life that love abhors (no less than eight undesirable qualities, all verbs, are listed). Love is not jealous, conceited as a windbag (Arndt-Gingrich-Danker’s Lexicon), proud (a damning sin at Corinth: see 1 C or 4:6, 18, 19; 5:2; 8:1), rude, selfish, irritated, with an unforgiving spirit, and evilly intentioned; there is a reminder that love is not a fair-weather quality. It endures in all circumstances, especially when tested and tempted to give up: Love is not love which alters when it alteration finds. In a final stanza Paul stresses the permanence of love (vv 8-13). The gifts of prophecy, tongues, and knowledge are all related to—because relevant for— this age. They have a value and need to be cultivated, within the constraints love also imposes (hence 14:1, 20). But their usefulness is condi­ tioned by their need, whereas love, because it is an expres­ sion of God’s own nature (1 John 4:7-12) will last forever. So love is supreme; it is an eschatological quality, i.e., in bringing the life o f the new age into human experience, 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

114

while still pointing forward to the “not-yet" element, along with faith and hope. Even so, it outshines them because (i) it is the very soul o f the other gifts (vv 1-3); (ii) it is supreme by its own excellence and virtue; and (iii) it is of the essence o f deity (1 John 4:16) and is seen most tellingly in him who is God incarnate (2 Cor 10:1). The last point is worth a sepa­ rate mention. It is true that 1 Cor 13 does not mention specifically the name o f Jesus, yet his spirit pervades it and it is his character we can see on display. For that reason, a recent expositor is led to conclude that this chapter stands out as the center o f Paul’s theology, and as an exquisite blend of christology, soteriology, and ethics. Her judgment5 is accu­ rate, and paves the way for our next chapter on the Chris­ tian life according to these Corinthian letters.

115

The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation

6

CHRISTIAN LIVING AND GIVING

The two epistles to Corinth are a wonderfully descrip­ tive case history o f an early Christian community. The church (as we saw) was made up o f a motley collection of men and women recently won over from a pagan back­ ground, yet oppressed by the claims o f an ever-present soci­ ety whose value system still held attraction for them. So great was the pull that some believers, misinterpreting Paul’s earlier letter (1 Cor 5:9,10), wanted to quit the world altogether and form a company o f recluses. Paul cannot sanction that solution to moral dilemmas. Instead, he bids them look at the issues squarely, and find a Christian voca­ tion in the place where they live, while using every oppor­ tunity to live in harmony with one’s family, if at all possible (1 Cor 7:12-16), and in freedom, if one can gain it (1 C or 7:21). Otherwise, the directive rings out: A s the Lord has apportioned to each person, as the Lord has called each person', so let his way o f life be. (7:17) 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

116

Each person should remain in the situation which he was in when G od called him [or her]. (7:20) Each person, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation to which God called him [or her]. (7:24) This simple-sounding counsel needed to be applied; and it can only be understood against a larger background. The Christians being addressed may be described in the following ways. Here is a résumé, which sums up our earlier discussion and brings together the coverage o f both epistles. (i) The preconversion lifestyle set down in 1 Cor 6:9-11 contains one o f the fullest descriptions o f the moral world from which Paul’s converts came. There is a list o f ten vices that marked out their “old life.” The two most hotly debated terms are given as malakoi and arsenokoitai, referring to pas­ sive and active partners in homosexual activity (so NIV “male prostitutes,” “homosexual offenders”; but not NEB, TEV). Other vv to be included are 1 Cor 12:2; 2 Cor 12:20,21. (ii) The turning point came in their response to Paul’s proclamation o f Christ’s death and resurrection leading to new life in the Spirit (2 Cor 3:6) and a share in the new creation (2 C or 5:17). Paul’s gospel o f reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18-21) had its call in a summons of “dying to live” (2 Cor 5:14, 15), certified in an acceptance o f Jesus as Lord (1 C or 12:3) and in baptism (1 Cor 6:11; 12:13) with which is linked the sealing o f the Spirit (2 Cor 1:21, 22; 5:5) and the hope o f resurrection which, in turn, threw moral responsi­ bility into prominence (2 Cor 5:6-10). The practical out­ working is seen in 1 Cor 15:34. (iii) But the Corinthians were faced with a persistent dan­ ger to relapse into former ways (1 Cor 15:33; 2 Cor 6:1; 6:147:1), urged on by erroneous teaching that encouraged moral laxity (1 Cor 6:12; 10:23) and a false reliance on sacramental efficacy (1 Cor 1:13-15; 10:1-13). At issue—as we o b serv ed 117

Christian Living and Giving

was the definition o f what it meant to be “spiritual” (pneumatikos), a status claimed by certain folk in the church (1 Cor 2:13; 14:37) and leading to a debating point whether the term “spirituality” was unconnected with morality. P aul’s exposition of the C hristian life Opposed to the enthusiasm and elitism (1 Cor 4:8; 11:19) that were rampant in a Christian fellowship that was both socially stratified between the rich, middle'income, poor, and slave classes and theologically confused and racked by dissension, Paul sets certain basic theological and ethical considerations. These are now to be listed, and in review they will sum up much o f the preceding discussion. (i) W hat modem scholarship has dubbed the “eschato­ logical reservation” or “proviso” designates the way the Christian life for Paul has a built-in tension between what is now and what belongs to the future. It is the “tasiological” (from tasis, a Greek word for strain, tension) factor that accounts for the way in which the Christian is a person sus­ pended between the “now” o f an inaugurated salvation (1 Cor 1:18, 30; 2 Cor 6:1, 2) wrought by G od’s reconciling deed (2 Cor 5:19) and the “then” o f a future that is promised but not yet actualized (1 Cor 15:23-28; 2 Cor 5:1-10). The church’s life is set at the intersection o f the two epochs (1 Cor 10:11; 13:12), straddling the past redemption and the beginning of new life-in-the-Spirit who is the “down payment” and the future consummation. The kingdom of Christ is present; the kingdom o f G od is future, although its signs and powers are visible now (1 Cor 6:9). (ii) The Christian is called to live now “as if” the final salvation were a reality (1 Cor 7:29-31), with a loose attach­ ment to the affairs of this world in anticipation of the ultimate epoch to come. The imagery o f 1 Cor 5:6-8 joins together these two facets: you are unleavened bread; now clear out the 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

118

leaven o f moral evil by becoming what you already are (i.e., sanctified in Christ, according to 1 Cor 1:2,30). With another image Paul states the same paradox in 2 Cor 5:1-10. We (al­ ready) have a building from heaven as our final destiny, but we shall not take possession o f it until the earthly tent we live in is taken down in death. Only then will what is mortal be swallowed up by (eternal) life (5:4). (iii) The sacraments are oriented to the same future, pointing forward to the Parousia (1 C or 11:26; 16:22). If there is a false reliance on the power o f religious ordinances to act irrespective o f moral considerations, they contain the force o f judgment (1 C or 10:5-13; 11:27-31). W hen they are rightly perceived as eschatological signs connecting the “already” to the “not yet,” the water o f baptism and the bread-cup symbolism o f the Lord’s table become the focal point o f unity (1 C or 1:13; 12:13) and the means o f confess­ ing a common life that runs through the body o f Christ (1 C or 10:16,17). “Body” plays a significant part in Paul’s understanding o f the Christian life, just as koinonia ethics is well illustrated in 1 Cor 11:29 by the use of “body” language to apply equally to the reality behind the bread and to the corporate aspect o f believers-in-fellowship at the supper meal. We turn to 1 Cor 6:12-20 to see the full range o f Paul’s “body” theology on display. No fewer than four meanings o f “body" (soma) are to be seen in one short paragraph. “Body” is normally, in our parlance, a person’s physical frame, but occasionally it takes on a more inclusive sense. For instance, “everybody” really means everyone, every sin­ gle person viewed as a group. Or, “W hen a body meets a body, coming through the rye” is Robert Burns’s way o f poetically describing two people meeting together. So we are preparing to consider a more complex way o f regarding the body idea, found in Paul. J. Weiss1 has put it memorably: “The body . . . [for Paul] is not only the material body 119

Christian Living an d Giving

. . . but the imperishable form o f the personality.” It stands for the real self, the whole person, as expressed in one’s physical presence in this life but pointing forward to a new existence beyond death (1 Cor 15:44-49). The specific sense Paul gives explains the puzzling verse in 1 Cor 6:18 (“he who sins sexually sins against his own body”). Union with a pros­ titute is an offense against the whole person— indeed against two persons, the man and the woman (6:15), and so the practice is a betrayal o f Christian profession as well as a degradation o f womanhood. The section o f 1 Cor 6:12-20 brings together several strands o f Pauline applied theology: (a) The body has been redeemed, with a price paid for its purchase (6:20). Chris­ tians are therefore in a very real sense not their own, nor are they to please themselves. Their whole being exists for God’s glory whose image they reflect (1 Cor 11:7) and whose destiny is to please him (2 Cor 5:9). (b) The body is made holy by the Holy Spirit who in­ dwells believers as the Presence of G od filled the Jerusalem temple (1 Kgs 8:11); it is therefore to be treated with respect and dignity, never defiled or abused, since it— like the church (1 Cor 3:16,17)— is the Spirit’s shrine (6:9). (c) The body is a member o f Christ (6:15); that is, it forms part of his body, the church o f which he is the head. Sexual irregularities cause damage to the integrity o f the persons involved, and so deform the body o f Christ by perverting the nuptial union between Christ and his bride (6:16; 2 C or 1 1 : 2 , 3 ).

(d) The body will be raised (6:14), which means that God has an eternal purpose for the body, albeit a “spiritual body” (1 Cor 15:44; 2 Cor 5:2, “a heavenly dwelling”), but with some connection with the human life we have known in this world. We shall give account then of what we have done “in the body” now (2 Cor 5:10). Paul cannot escape the moral claims o f the theology he espoused. 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

120

(iv) The cross of Jesus also stood at the center of, Paul’s message and ministry at Corinth. The cross functioned—to use a current expression— in a polyvalent fashion; that is, it served to convey meaning at several levels of perception and experience. Primarily, the cross was seen by the apostle as the unique vehicle of saving grace (1 Cor 1:17,18), announcing the reconciliation between God and the world of sinners (2 Cor 5:18-21). Yet equally it represents the paradigm of all Christian living (2 Cor 13:4) to be replicated in the experience of believ­ ers whose life is always seen by Paul as standing "under the cross” (sub specie crucis). As well as being the basis for salvation-in-experience (compare 2 Cor 8:9 with 2 Cor 6:9,10), the cross sets the pattern for how Christians are to live when they are living “no longer for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised” (2 Cor 5:15). A few illustrations drawn from these two letters may usefully conclude our study: (a) The believer is both the recipient o f divine grace (2 C or 6:1) and the person who is called to live under Christ’s Lordship (2 Cor 4:5) compelled by his love (2 Cor 5:14). The teaching on reconciliation, which is central to the second letter, has this existential element much to the fore. That is, the Corinthians are appealed to as already recon­ ciled persons (since God’s deed is final and complete) who at the same time need to keep open channels along which God’s grace may continue to flow. Their disaffection with the apostle has set up a blockage which Paul is concerned to remove. Hence the call is given in 2 C or 5:20, “Be reconciled to G od.” G od’s purpose is for his people to reflect the divine image seen in Christ (1 C or 11:3-10); at the same time they must be open to the activity o f the Spirit who seeks to fashion that image in increasing clarity in their lives (2 Cor 3:18; 8:23). But this hinges on the freedom by which they are called to live; and the Lordship o f Christ is the sole guaran­ tee o f that freedom (2 C or 3:15-17; see 1 Cor 6:17: “he who unites himself to the Lord is one with him in spirit,” NIV). 121

Christian Living an d Giving

(b) Christians are both forgiven individuals (since as indi­ viduals they are one with the world that is already reconciled to G od and they are among those whose sins are not counted against them, 2 Cor 5:19) and those who are called to show forgiveness to others who may have wronged them. Much o f 2 Cor 2:5-11 and 7:5-13 is erected on the single base of what is expected of a leader like Paul and o f a congre­ gation such as the Corinthians when faced with the moral challenge of church discipline and pardon, held in mutual tension. Paul has been affronted, but now he seeks restora­ tion and rehabilitation for the wrongdoer. The Corinthians have been lax, then over-rigorous in punishing him; and now they are appealed to that they may act in a positive way. The oscillation o f corporate behavior reaching from pride and permissiveness (1 Cor 5:1-13) through open indulgence and consent which required the “tearful letter'' (2 Cor 2:4), and now to a fierce vindictiveness in meting out punishment (2 Cor 2:6), and on to a welcoming attitude to those mission­ aries who denigrated Paul’s authority (2 Cor 11:4,19, 20)— these are the varying moods that showed themselves among the apostle’s readers. (c) Paul’s authority as the pioneer apostle and church builder (1 Cor 3:5-10; 2 Cor 10:13-18) is one that in turn is to be understood and evaluated according to the paradox that runs through both episdes. One example comes in 1 Cor 4:9-21 with its twin notes of Paul’s frailty and social disgrace, on the one side, and his strong attitudes which wield the rod o f discipline and punishment, on the other (v 21, KJV/AV). Another example can be seen in 2 Cor 6:3-10 with its “litany o f woes” to offset his status as one of the “servants of God” charged to fulfill a ministry that God gave him to exercise authority (2 Cor 13:10; cf. 10:8-11). The key to this strange amalgam of ideas is to be found in what happened to the Lord himself: He was rich and became poor for our sake (2 Cor 8:9); he was Lord but was crucified in weakness (2 Cor 13:4a), 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

122

yet he is still Lord. And we are like him, concludes Paul (13:4b)—weak yet strong, with a strength held in restraint and exercised always in love (2 Cor 5:14) and as servants, not lords, of the people of God (2 Cor 1:24). (d) Finally, as a result o f the good effect o f the “severe letter” (2 C or 7:8) and the clearing o f the air at Corinth with the storm clouds o f rebellion lifted, Paul believed, it was time to reintroduce the topic o f the collection for the saints (1 Cor 16:1-4). Titus was instructed to set the process in motion (2 C or 8:6,16,17) since he had brought the good .report on the Corinthians’ change o f heart to Paul (2 C or 7:13-16). The church o f Corinth, already known to be endowed with many graces (1 C or 1:7), is therefore encouraged to “overflow in this gracious service as well.” The “grace” (charis) referred to is responsiveness to human need, repre­ sented by the poor saints o f the Jerusalem church, and the sign that the Gentiles were one with the mother church in the capital city o f the ancestral faith. There is also an eschatological side to Paul’s plan to raise the collection; he explains this in Rom 15:19-33 which announces that Paul has wound up his missionary service in the east (from Jeru­ salem to Illyricum [Yugoslavia] forming a northeast quadrant in the ancient world) and is on his way to Rome and beyond. In that way, with his mission work completed, there is the prospect o f a “full number o f the Gentiles” brought in to the church as a prelude to the end time when the Deliverer will come from Zion (Rom 11:25, 26). The sign o f that final consummation o f the ages is that the Gentiles will make a pilgrimage to the holy city, as the prophets foretold (Isa 2:1-5; Mic 4:1-5). He sees his visit to Jerusalem with the Gentiles’ offerings and with Gentile delegates in attendance (2 C or 8:18-24; 9:5) as the final piece in the jig-saw puzzle that will come into place as a mark o f the fulfillment of G od’s ancient plan. 123

Christian Living and Giving

It is clear, then, that several strands o f Christian conviction and belief came together in Paul’s desire to help financially the distressed church in Zion— Christian com­ passion for the needy (Gal 2:10), a tangible expression o f unity to cement relations between the two ethnic wings o f the one church, and the furthering o f divine purposes leading to the wind-up o f the ages. These are all part of Paul’s motivation. Yet the most obvious reason for the collection should not be passed over. Paul is seeking to extract from the Corinthi­ ans a fulfillment o f their earlier pledge to assist him. In such a way they will be giving proof of the sincerity and reality of their loyalty to him and his apostolic authority. Some pieces o f evidence support this conclusion (2 C or 8:8): (i) in all this discussion through chs 8 and 9 he never once mentions “money” as such; instead his terms are either borrowed from the liturgical idioms o f the O ld Testa­ ment (“offering,” “service” [leitourgia]) or speak o f the spirit that should lead people to give (“fellowship” [kcoinonia], “blessing”), (ii) H is appeal to the generosity o f the Macedo­ nians (2 C or 8:1-7; 9:2, 13) underlines the way those congregations, such as Philippi (Phil 1:5; 4:10-19), were consistently true in their affection for him and practical in their support o f his apostolic ministry. (iii) The example o f men like Titus and other unnamed leaders (2 C or 8:18-24; 9:3) shows how highly Paul regarded them as faithful friends and coworkers. Colleagueship is one trait Paul val­ ued; but more than that, “they are the glory o f Christ” (8:23, lit transí.) which surely goes back to 2 C or 3:18. The Spirit’s work is to transform believers into Christ’s image; these men are living embodiments o f that design— and they are Paul’s supporters. (iv) And, in 2 Cor 9:7, 8 Paul lifts up the true spirit of giving as an exercise that shows how well his entire gospel has been understood: 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

124

Let each one give as he has decided in his mind, not regretfully nor under constraint: for it is the cheerful giver that God loves. God is able to make all grace to overflow to you, so that, in all things and at all times, you may have all you need and may overflow in every kind o f good work. The Corinthians who read these pungent words would recall the whole debate over “spiritual gifts” which had been ventilated in their assembly. Now Paul says the last word on the topic. It is an encouragement to give to others as freely as we have received from God, not treating our giftedness as a selfish possession (as 1 Cor 4:7; 13:1-3) but seeing it as a way to build up the body of Christ, whether at Corinth or in Jerusalem. It is a reminder that we share in Christ a common life whose hallmark is a true spirit o f koinonia with him and our fellow Christians (1 Cor 10:16,17; 12:7,11,12). And it isa call to gratitude that answers God’s gift of grace. Writes the apostle with a deliberate play on the word charis: You are lacking in no charisma, his gift-in-grace. (1 C or 1:7) You know the grace (charis) o f the Lord Jesus Christ. (2 C or 8:9; 13:14) You have received God’s grace (charis) in great measure. (2 Cor 9:8) You are responding to the grace (charis) of Paul’s apostleship. (1 Cor 15:10) Now, thanks (charis) be to G od for his gift beyond measure! (2 Cor 9:15)

125

Christian Living and Giving

NOTES

Preface 1. William Baird, The Corinthian Church-A Biblical Approach to Urban Culture (New York: Abingdon, 1964); E. A. Judge, The Social Patterns of Christian Groups in the First Century (London: Tyndale Press, 1960); W. A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians. The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983); Gerd Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982). 2. J. Murphy-O’Connor, St Paul’s Corinth: Texts and Archaeol­ ogy (Wilmington, Del.: M. Glazier, Inc., 1983); P. Marshall, Enmity in Corinth (Tübingen: Mohr, 1987); C. H. Talbert, Reading Corinthi­ ans. A Literary and Theological Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (New York: Crossroad, 1987). 3. C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (New York: Harper and Row, 1973), 322. Chapter 1 Paul's Friends at Corinth 1. A. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1927), 144. 2. E. A. Judge, Social Patterns, 58. 3. G. Theissen, Social Setting, 69-73. 4. See V. P. Furnish, “Corinth in Paul’s Time,” Biblical Archae­ ological Review 15,1988,15-27. 1, 2 CORINTHIANS

126

5. N. A. Dahl, Studies in Paul (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1977), 40-61. Chapter 2 Paul’s Apostolic Service in Theory and Practice 1. C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corin­ thians (New York: Harper and Row, 1968), ad loc. Chapter 3 The God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ 1. H. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), Introduction. 2. W. M. Ramsay, The Cities of St. Paul (New York: Longmans, 1908). 3. E. Käsemann, Essays on New Testament Themes (Naperville, I11.: Allenson, 1964), ch 3, discussed in R. P. Martin, The Spirit and the Congregation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), ch 1. 4. J. Hainz, Koinonia. Kirche als Gemeinschaft bei Paulus (Re­ gensburg: Pustet, 1972), 61. Chapter 4 The Grace and Glory of Our Lord Jesus Christ 1. G. D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 448-49. 2. V. P. Furnish, “Corinthi in Paul’s Time,” 25,26. Chapter 5 The Gospel, the Spirit, and the Congregation 1. C. K. Barrett, Essays on Paul (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1982), 6-14. 2. J. Moffatt, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1938), ad loc. 3. W. Baird, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians (Atlanta: John Knox, 1980), 52. 4. Fee, First Corinthians, 634. 5. O. Wischmeyer, Der höchste Weg. Das 13. Kapitel des Korintherbriefes (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlag, 1981), 230-33. Chapter 6 Christian Living and Giving 1. J. Weiss, Der erste Korintherbrief (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1910), ad loc.

127

Notes

IN DEX OF SCRIPTURES

Daniel 3:16, 17 3:28

OLD TESTAMENT

Genesis 2:24 21:33

90 89

Exodus 12:3-7 34:24-35 34:34

106 47 89

Deuteronomy 6:4 7:6-11 21:23 26:5-9

54 106 95,96 106

2 Samuel 7:14

104

1 Kings 8:11

120

Psalms 8:6

116:10 119 145:18,19 Isaiah 2:1-5 Jeremiah 31:31-34

129

66,79 44 55 57 123 46

60 114

Zephaniah 106

1:12

15:17-20 15:19-33 16:3 16:23

1 Corinthians 1:2 66,83,88,89,

NEW TESTAMENT

Acts 13:13 17:20-34 18:1-20 18:7 18:9-11 18:12-17 18:21 18:24-26 19:10 19:22 19:23-41 25:6-12 Romans 1:16 1:18-32 10:12-14 10:16 11:13 11:25,26 12:17, 21

1:7 62 94,97 15,42,43 17 16,94 18,19 21

15,26 21

18 60 59 94 20 88

95 39 123 52

43 123 15 18

1:11 1:12

1:14 1:17 1:18

104,125 29,35,70,123 16,22,26 27,28 16,17 28,36 37,94,118, 120

1:26-29 2:1-5 2 :7-10 3:5 3:6-9 3:10, 11 3:21 4:3 4:8 4:15 4:17 5:1-13 5:7,8 5:9

17 27,40,97 95,99 28,29 20,38,43,103 19,36,103 28,29,65 41 31,118 20 22

29,105 81,105-07, 119,122 22

Index of Scriptures

6:9-11 6:12-20 7:1-7 7:12-16 7:17 7:29-31 8:4-6 8:10 9:1 9:5 9:7, 10 9:15-18 10:1-13 10:4 10:12 10:23 10:33 11:1 11:18 11:23-26 11:29 12:2, 3 12:4-10 12:12, 13 12:15, 16 12:31 13:1-13 14:12 14:26 14:33b-38 15:3-5 15:5 15:8-11 15:12 15:20 15:23-28 15:25

31,104,117 29,32,64,89, 90,119,120 32 116 28,90,91 34,118 63-65,87 64 36,38,43 26 19 37 82,102,107, 117 82 25 32 29 51 17 81,102 103,119 25,30,31,35, 110,117 69,70, 111 28,99,111, 112,117 26 30,112 29,32,72, 113,115 30,31,35,111 29 30,41,75, 109 33,41,74-76, 95,109 26,39 37,41,125 31,34,109 78,101 78,79,102, 118 65,66

1, 2 CO RIN TH IA N S

15:28 15:32 15:42-45 15:45-50 16:5-9 16:8,9 16:15 16:17 16:19 16:22

66,80,102 23,59 96,110,120 34 23 59 16,17,22 16 15 77,78

2 Corinthians 1:3 57 58 1:4 23,57,58 1:8-11 1:9,10 60,100 1:19 73 1:20-22 68,69,72, 117 92 1:24 2:1 23 2:1-11 23,51 23,49 2:4 50,122 2:5-11 36,37,98 2:15-17 3:6 46,47,55, 117 3:7 47 66,89 3:17 3:18 47,66,72, 124 4:4-6 56,73,100, 102 4:6 28 4:7-12 19,44 5:1-10 34,118,120 5:14-21 33,47,50,67, 68,85,86,95, 117,121 34,101,105, 5:17 117 6:11-13 48 6:13 20,104 22,25, 29, 6:14-7:1 49,108,117 103 7:1

49 23 23,48,50,51, 123 8:8 124 8:9 71,83-85,122, 125 123,124 8:18-24 9:6-10 20,124 125 9:15 10-13 (chaps) 24,25,91 10:1 115 24,27,28,75 10:7 10:10 40,50,97,98 10:12-16 38,42,43 10:15-18 29,42,43, 122 11:2,3 26,49,103 24,43,76 11:4 11:12-15 24,56,76 11:22,23 54 11:23-28 21 12:1-10 60-63 45 12:7 12:9 39,102 12:11 39 12:12 45 12:20,25 25 13:4 45,91,94,96, 121,123 25,70-72,125 13:14 7:2-4 7:5 7:8-13

Galatians 2:1-10 2:10 3:13 3:20 4:13, 14 5:6

39 124 96,110 63 62 102,114

Ephesians 2:20 3:8 3:13

46 40 57

Philippians 2:6,7

84,85

130

2:8

2:9-11 Colossians 1:24 1:15-20 2:15

85 65,88 57,58 88 100

1 Timothy 2:5

63

2 Timothy 4:20

18

1 John 4:7-12,16

ABBREVIATIONS AV/KJV Authorized Version/King James Version The Allegory of the Laws (Philo)

Leg. A ll

LXX Septuagint, Greek translation of the Old Testament NEB

New English Bible

NTV

New International Version

RSV

Revised Standard Version

TEV

Today’s English Version

114,115

OTHER LITERATURE Sayings of the Jewish Fathers (Aboth) 1:1,2

55

Wisdom of Solomon 7 84 1 Clement 5:6,7 47:3

131

43 28

Index of Scriptures

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES Philippians GERALD F. HAWTHORNE

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC Philippians Copyright © 1987 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11567-0 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Hawthorne, Gerald F. Philippians: Gerald F. Hawthorne. p.  cm. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-849-90580-3 1. Bible N.T. Philippians—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Philippians II. Word Biblical Themes BS2705.2.H39 1987 227’.606  87-81771 Quotations from the holy Scriptures in this volume are the author’s own translation from the original languages unless otherwise identify. Scripture quotations marked PHILLIPS are from The New Testament in Modern English by J. B. Phillips. Copyright © 1960, 1972 J. B. Phillips. Administered by the Archbishops’ Council of the Church of England. Used by permission. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

To all my friends at Bethany Chapel, Wheaton Ho theos eulogoiē pantas hymōn

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface Introduction 1. The Character o f G od Transcendence and distinctiveness Immanence and activity 2. The Providence o f G od and the Problem o f Evil Posing the problem Attempts to solve the problem 3. The Person o f Christ Jesus Christ Christ Jesus/Jesus Christ Lord Paul’s reasons for saying “Jesus Christ is Lord” Paul’s meaning in “Jesus Christ is Lord” 4. The Christ-Hymn Author o f the hymn Sources for the ideas o f the hymn The purpose o f the Christ-hymn 7

9 11 13 21 21 24 31 32 34 41 42 43 48 51 52 54 61 61 63 66 Contents

5. The Call to Salvation Definition The need for salvation G od’s way o f salvation The place of faith in salvation Salvation or destruction 6. The Christian Life Sanctification The contest o f sanctification Divine-human elements in sanctification Steps toward sanctification 7. The Note o f Joy A n inner quality Affected by outer circumstance

77 77 78 81 84 87 89 89 90 91 97 107 109 109

Notes Bibliography Index of Scriptures

111 113 115

PHILIPPIANS

8

FOREWORD

It is a distinct pleasure to introduce Gerald Hawthorne’s study o f theological themes from Philippians. Conceived as a companion book to the author’s larger and more technical commentary on the epistle in the Word Biblical Commen­ tary series, it builds— as one might expect— on a solid foun­ dation o f careful and comprehensive exegetical work. Yet it is no mere precis or reworking o f the earlier commentary. That commentary which has received a bevy o f laudatory and appreciative reviews was designed to appeal to the scholar, the student, and the seminarian in the classroom. Here is a valuable distillation o f the chief themes o f Paul’s joyful letter. It is designed for the busy pastor, the Sunday school teacher, and the layperson who wants an overview, in personal and practical terms and expressed in understandable language, o f what this letter says to today’s church and world. Dr. Hawthorne is to be congratulated on achieving a fine balance. The exegetical discussions are largely taken for granted— and interested readers may go back to the Com­ mentary for details; the applications o f Paul’s letter are clear and pertinent. Many a sermon will surely be sparked by this volume in what, it is hoped, will be a continuing series. Fuller Theological Seminary Pasadena, California

9

Ralph P. Martin New Testament Editor Word Biblical Commentary Foreword

PREFACE

O n the one hand, to be asked to do a study on the theological themes in Philippians is a very great honor, and I owe a debt o f gratitude to Professor Ralph P. Martin for asking me to do this. O n the other hand, to attempt to fulfill such a request is a humbling experience indeed. W ho is capable o f writing on such great themes as God, Christ, salvation, and so on? When I began to bring together what Paul had to say in Philippians about God, plunging feverishly into the subject, I was arrested by the account o f Stephen’s sermon in the Book o f Acts. In rehearsing Israel’s history Stephen re­ counted how Moses saw a bush in flames without any signs o f it being burned up, and how he brashly turned aside to examine it more closely (katanoēsai), until he heard a voice that caused him to tremble all over— a voice that said, “I am God. . . ,” and, in effect, “D o you know where you are, or what you are doing?” (Acts 7:31,32). O f a sudden I realized that I was quite like Moses on the occasion o f the burning bush—not fully understanding 11

Preface

where I was or what I was doing. For I was eagerly studying Paul’s remarks about God, as though by close observation it would be possible to understand, to apprehend (katanoēssai) God, and thus be able to express him adequately. I was shat­ tered by this flash o f insight concerning my foolishness, and was forced to apologize to the Almighty for such thoughtless arrogance. This “encounter” stopped all my endeavors to proceed with my work, until I read on in Stephen’s sermon. The voice that caused Moses to tremble also commissioned him to trek on down to Egypt to do a work for God there. G od is a gracious God, full o f understanding, mercy, and forgiveness. He made me pause, to be sure, and to reflect, but then encouraged me to go on and finish. I have done that now, not with any sense that all o f the significant themes in Philippians have been dealt with, nor that those dealt with have been discussed adequately. But I send this volume on its way, confessing as I do so that I owe so much to so many people whose works I have read, and whose ideas have shaped my thinking. I am deeply grateful to each and every one, although they are too many to name. M ost of these, however, have been identified in a larger work on Philippians that I had the privilege o f writing (Philippians, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 43, Word Books, 1983), and that book may be consulted for a full bibliography should one wish to have this information in hand. I am also grateful to Jane and Lynn, and to Jack Levison, who helped me view these themes from different perspec­ tives, and who forced me to express my ideas more clearly. Especially do I owe a debt of love to Bill and Judy Pollard, who, by honoring us in an ineffable way, gave us courage to continue to study, to think, and to write. Gerald F. Hawthorne Wheaton (Ill.) College

PHILIPPIANS

12

INTRODUCTION

Philippi an d the beginning of the church This letter that bears the name, “To the Philippians,” was addressed to the church in Philippi. Philippi was then an important city in northeast Greece (Macedonia). The em­ peror Octavian made it a Roman colony, and gave to its citizens the rights and privileges o f those born and living in Rome. According to the account in Acts the church in Philippi began in a small way: Paul, on his second missionary journey, left Asia Minor for Macedonia, came to Philippi, went outside the city to the riverside, found a Jewish place o f prayer, preached the gospel, and Lydia, a prominent woman from that area, and a few others became Christians. The church apparently was first housed in Lydia’s home (Acts 16:9-40). In spite o f its small beginnings, it nevertheless grew and became an active Christian community, taking an im­ portant part in evangelism (Phil 1:3-8), readily sharing its own material possessions (4:16), and generously sending one o f its own people to assist Paul in his work and aid him while 13

Introduction

he was in prison (2:25-30). Paul visited this church on at least three different occasions (Acts 16:12, his initial visit, and Acts 20:1-6, which refers to his two later visits; cf. also 2 Cor. 2:13) and found it to be an increasing delight to him (PM 4:1).

Author, place, an d date N o writer in ancient times and scarcely any today ques­ tions that Paul wrote the letter to the Philippians. But from where did he write it, and when? And is it one letter or several? O n these questions there is a great divergence o f opinion. M ost scholars assume that Paul wrote Philippians from Rome. Others have suggested Corinth and Ephesus. A good case can also be made for Caesarea. But wherever Paul was when he wrote, it had to be a place where he was in prison, where there was a Roman praetorium (i.e. the em­ peror’s palace, or any provincial governor’s official resi­ dence, 1:12,13)*, and where there were members o f Caesar’s household (i.e. the royal entourage at the palace or the staff at a provincial capital, cf. 1:12, 13; 4:22). Hence, Rome (ca. A.D. 60), or Caesarea (ca. A.D. 58) are the cities frequently suggested as the most likely places, since each had a praeto­ rium with its entourage, and in each Paul was known to have been jailed. Unity of the letter An increasing number o f scholars are agreed in seeing Philippians not as a single letter, but as several woven into one— at least two, possibly three. The disjointed nature o f the letter as it stands (cf. the abrupt transition in tone and * Throughout this volume when reference is made to chapter and verse, it is the book o f Philippians that is referred to unless identified otherwise.

PHILIPPIANS

14

content between 3:1 and 3:2); Paul’s leaving his “thank you” to the end (4:10-20); and Polycarp’s reference in his own letter to the Philippians to Paul’s having written them sev­ eral letters (Pol. Phil. 3:2), are some o f the reasons given for suggesting the possibility that Philippians is a composite writing made up o f different letters, or letter-fragments, sent to Philippi, and then welded together into the single letter that is known today. But for other scholars the abruptness noted above is hardly an argument against the integrity o f Philippians, for the letter’s style and structure are not incon­ sistent with the characteristics o f private speech, nor out o f line with Paul’s style o f writing noted elsewhere (cf. Rom 16:16-18; 1 Thess 2:13-16). And although Polycarp says that Paul wrote several letters, he apparently knew and used no other than this one. P aul’s opponents Because o f who Paul was, a self-proclaimed apostle, “the least” o f them, “not worthy to be called an apostle,” a former persecutor o f the church o f G od (1 C or 15:9), and because o f how he lived as a Christian, that is to say, aggressively for the gospel (cf. 1 C or 15:10), all out for Jesus Christ (Phil 3:4-11), he seemed to attract hostility both to himself and to his message. So it is not surprising to learn that, when he wrote his letter to the Philippians, there were at least two groups o f people who opposed him. One was a group o f Christians who were jealous o f him, and who, while he was in prison, preached Christ more openly, thinking to make his life as a prisoner more difficult (1:15-17). The other was a group o f people who preached a gospel Paul would in no way identify himself with, and which, elsewhere, he called no gospel at all (cf. Gal 1:7). It is not possible to precisely identify this latter group. (1) Some have suggested it was made up o f Judaizers—Jewish 15

Introduction

Christians who taught that in addition to believing in Christ one must also keep the Jewish law, including regulations about food and drink and especially the command concerning circumcision. (2) Others have said that this group was composed o f those Judaizers who were influenced by gnosti­ cism and thus who claimed to possess a “super-knowledge” that made them perfect and gave them liberty to do what­ ever they wanted to do with their bodies. (3) Still others see this group as comprising evangelistic Jews, not Christians in any way, whose programs o f expansion conflicted with those o f the apostle. Whoever they were or whatever they taught may be ques­ tions that cannot be answered satisfactorily. But the presence and influence o f these people dictated Paul’s arguments in chapter 3: circumcision is worthless, personal pedigree is worthless, human achievement is worthless— all are worth­ less as far as establishing a right relationship with G od is concerned. Only Christ can do this, and Christ has in fact already done it Thus Christ is everything. Knowledge o f and faith in Christ are essential for salvation, and pressing on to know Christ is the all-important endeavor o f life.

Paul's reasons for w riting Philippians Paul’s reasons for writing to his Christian friends at Philippi were many. He wanted above everything else to con­ vey his continuing deep affection for them all (cf. 1:3— 8). He wanted to bring them up-to-date on the news about himself (1:12-16; 2:24), to inform them o f the erroneous but seduc­ tive teachings o f the opponents o f the true gospel (3:2— 21), and to encourage them to stand firm for the faith (1:27-30). He also wanted to inform them about Epaphroditus, their own messenger to him, and tell them how Epaphroditus had risked his life to carry out their orders and to fulfill the work o f Christ in their behalf (2:25-30). He wrote them to correct PHILIPPIANS

16

division within their ranks (1:27; 2:2-4; 4:2), to exhort them to rejoice irrespective o f circumstances (2:18; 3:1; 4:4), and to express his thanks for the gift o f money that they sent to ameliorate his situation in prison. Philippians bears all the characteristics o f a very personal letter, where the reasons for writing are various and numerous. It is like a chat, the subject matter changing without notice as in an informal conversation between friends. There seems, thus, to be no clear, identifiable, single reason for the existence o f this letter, but many.

Paul an d his encounter with Christ Paul, as he himself says, was brought up in a traditional Jewish home which rigidly kept to Jewish beliefs and customs (3:5). Although he was bom in Tarsus (Acts 22:3), the capital o f the Roman province o f Cilicia and the seat o f a famous Stoic philosophical school, he was taken away from there as a child and sent to Jerusalem, the holy city o f his people, to attend the school o f the rabbis, before the pagan world could gain possession o f his affections (Stauffer).1 Thus it is quite likely that the background for Paul’s think­ ing was not primarily Greek philosophy or Greek mystery religions as some have supposed, but Judaism, the teaching o f the rabbinic schools, and especially those in Palestine. In Jerusalem, under Gamaliel, the great Jewish rabbi, who was “held in esteem by all the people” (Acts 5:34), who was the grandson o f Hillel, Paul was thoroughly trained in the intricacies o f the holy law o f G od (Acts 22:3). He joined the order o f strict observance o f that law, the Pharisaic order (cf. Phil 3:5,6), earned the confidence o f his superi­ ors, and was moving toward a promising career as a brilliant teacher o f the law o f G od— all this, until a crisis event occurred in his life that totally revolutionized his thinking and altered his conduct, turning him around to proceed in 17

Introduction

precisely the opposite direction to that in which he had been headed. According to the account in Acts, while Paul was on a mission to Damascus to stamp out the followers o f Jesus, to rid the world o f those who belonged to the Way, men or women, “to destroy the church o f G od” (cf. Gal 1:13), he was confronted by the resurrected and living Jesus— the very Jesus whose followers he was harassing (Acts 9:1-6; 22:3-8; 26:4-16). A s a result the whole course o f his life was changed. Paul, who formerly persecuted the followers o f Jesus, became one himself and began now to preach the faith he once had tried to destroy (Gal 1:23). There is not the slightest hint, either in Luke’s account of Paul’s life (Acts), nor in his own autobiographical remarks to indicate that Paul was unhappy with his career, dissatisfied with or skeptical about his beliefs, or psychologically disturbed about anything he was doing—neither about his attacks on Jewish Christians nor about the stoning death of Stephen (cf. Acts 7:59-8:la; 9:1, 2). Thus no natural explanation can ac­ count for his dramatic conversion experience. Paul appears to have been convinced that he was on a divine mission, fortified with an inner assurance that what he was doing was right and good, that even his brutal activity was a zeal for God (cf. Rom 10:2), that his putting “bad” Jews— Le. Jews who believed that Jesus was the Messiah—to death was a matter of offering up acceptable service to the Almighty (cf. John 16:2). Hence, one can say with a degree o f confidence that there was nothing within Paul himself that triggered such a radical change in his life. Rather, as he himself said, it was some­ thing—more precisely, Someone outside him that brought about the change. It was a face-to-face meeting with Jesus. It was no vision merely, if his own testimony is to be believed, but a genuine encounter with the crucified, resurrected, living, challenging Jesus, whose real existence Paul could now no longer deny (Gal 1:15-16; 1 C or 9:1; 1 C or 15:7-9; PHILIPPIANS

18

cf. Acts 9:1-6; 22:3-10; 26:9-18). It was this spectacular meeting that transformed him from a persecutor o f Jesus into Jesus’ most devoted and loyal follower. The effects o f this personal encounter with Christ never wore off or wore thin. When Paul wrote to the Philippians many years after the Damascus experience, he still stressed the overwhelming and life-altering importance o f Christ. It is clear from what he wrote them that he had no regrets about having given up everything he had achieved before for Christ’s sake. He had no reservations either about urging others to follow his example (Phil 3:7, 8, 17). Paul was ob­ sessed with Christ, because for him Christ was everything he had been searching for in life and more. T h em es in P h ilip p ia n s

Philippians is an intensely intimate and personal letter. The church at Philippi, founded by Paul, was deep in his affections (1:7). For this reason he felt secure in revealing so much about himself (3:4-11), and expressing his anxious concern for their problems (2:1— 4; 3:17-19; 4:2-4). This is a letter that deals with many of the ups and downs that go to make up common, everyday life. It is in no way a tract on theology. And yet the themes that run throughout Philippians are theological. Paul thinks theologically and he cannot write even about the most mundane aspects o f existence—a quarrel in the church, ill­ ness in the family, and so on—without writing about God or Christ, or what God has done in C h rist The purpose o f this present volume, then, is to sort through Paul’s letter to the Philippians and bring together in one place, into some kind o f order, the various theological themes that are scattered everywhere throughout the letter. It is certainly the hope o f the present writer that, in the process o f taking this venture, what is vital will not become sterile, what is woven into the very fabric o f life will not 19

Introduction

become unraveled or lose any o f its beauty, and what is easily understood because o f its living context will not become abstract and incomprehensible because it has been extracted from the context and systematized. Rather, it is hoped that just the reverse o f this will be the result o f such an effort N ot all the themes that will be discussed here are necessar­ ily unique to Philippians. But they are nevertheless expressed in a unique way because of the particular situation in which the Christians at Philippi found themselves. The themes to which special attention will be drawn here are: (1) God, his distinctiveness, his sovereignty, and his activity in history; (2) the providence of God and the problem o f evil; (3) Christ, his special place in Paul’s thinking as this is expressed by the titles he uses to describe him, and (4) by his composition of a hymn about Christ—a hymn that is unique to Philippians; (5) salva­ tion, what it is and how it is achieved; (6) the Christian life, giving special attention to what characterizes it, and by what power it can be lived; and finally, (7) joy. This theme is not found only in Philippians, but certainly because it radiates through every part of the letter and because the words “joy” and “to rejoice” are found more times in this letter than in any other o f Paul’s letters, or many of them together, it is proper to say something about it in this volume. Inasmuch as it is possible to do so, the attempt here is to codify Paul’s thought about each o f these subjects without reading into the text something the apostle never said or intended. It is Paul’s thinking on each o f these topics that is important And yet it has been the position o f the church that divine inspiration filled this author, and that while the thoughts expressed in the letter to the Philippians were in­ deed the thoughts o f Paul, they were at the same time the thoughts o f God. This, then, is all the more reason to make certain that ideas are not read into the text which were not there at all by someone who now wishes to put these thoughts in an ordered form. PHILIPPIANS

20

1

THE CHARACTER OF GOD

Philippians is a letter written by a man to his friends, and not a treatise on theology. And yet what is striking about this letter is the many times the word G od (theos) is used within its brief compass— twenty-four times to be exact! Certainly G od was not at the periphery o f Paul’s thinking, but at the center. So, although it is a letter and not a theological tract, it is possible to learn from it a considerable amount o f infor­ mation about Paul’s theology, about his understanding of G od and his attitude toward God. To be sure, not every­ thing Paul believed about G od is to be found here, but the following things can be learned. Transcendence an d distinctiveness Paul uses throughout the Greek word theos—the term regularly used to translate the Hebrew words ’el, ’eloah, ’elōhim—when he writes about God. From his Jewish back­ ground and training he would have included in this title the rich understanding of the O ld Testament. For him, then, 21

T he C h aracter o f G o d

G od was the first and the last, the eternal, the Almighty, the Living One, Creator o f heaven and earth and everything in them. G od was master over the world and its kingdoms, transcendent Being, not dwelling in temples made by human hands, nor served by humans as though he needed anything. He is the one who exists in the light where no person can approach, exalted above time and space, unique, holy, allwise, invisible, immortal, king o f kings and Lord o f Lords (Gen 1:1; 2:4; Exod 3:14; 20:3,4; Lev 19:2; Ps 36:9; Isa 37:16; 40:25; 44:6; Hab 3:3; see also Rom 1:20-23; 11:36; 16:26,27; 1 C or 8:4-6; G al 3:20; Col 1:15, 16; 1 Thess 1:9; cf. Acts 17:24, 25; Eph 4:6; 1 Tim 2:5; 6:15-18). This was G od for Paul; and the Philippians who had been taught by Paul would have understood from this very word he used for God, theos, that G od was indeed unique, set apart from all other beings, different from, wholly other than everything else— sole, su­ preme, sovereign. He was theos, the one before whom all should bow in awe and reverence. Because o f this uniqueness, it is God, and only God, that Paul calls “Father” (1:2; 2:11; 4:20; cf. 2:15). By the use o f this new title, not unknown to O ld Testament writers, he in­ tended to convey to the Philippians, at the very least, the thought that G od is progenitor, that is, he is the source o f all existence—their existence (2:15), and that o f all other created beings as well (2:11). A s such he is the one to whom obedi­ ence is justly due (cf. Deut 14:1-3). Perhaps it is for this reason that Paul makes it clear to the Philippians that G od is the one to whom people are ulti­ mately to give their praise. A ll acts o f every person, he im­ plies, should be directed toward bringing glory to God, whether the good deeds o f Christians (1:11), or the acknowl­ edgement o f all creatures that Jesus Christ is Lord (2:11). “To the glory and praise of God, ” is the refrain that repeats itself in this letter. Paul also tells the Philippians that when they offer up PH ILIPPIANS

22

their sacrifices— not now the blood sacrifices o f animals, but their generous gifte given to meet the needs o f others— they are offering them to God, and this is the way it should be. These their offerings, then, that immediately benefit people, are in fact offerings that are made to God, are pleasing to God, and are accepted by G od (4:18). Christians should understand, therefore, that it is G od who ultimately deserves the gifts and sacrifices o f human hearts and hands (cf. Rom 12:1,2). Furthermore, when Paul writes to the Philippians explic­ itly about worship, that is, when he actually uses the verb “worship” (3:3), he makes it clear that it is G od who is to be worshiped. To be sure, the best texts do not actually include the word “G od” as the direct object o f the verb here. But both the context and the special word that Paul uses for “worship” (latreuō) indicate that for him G od is indeed its object and must be the object (cf. Exod 20:5; Deut 6:13; 10:12,20; Matt 4:10; Rom 1:9)— “We worship God,” he says (cf. TEV, R SV , Goodspeed, Phillips). In a guarded way he acknowledges that every knee will bow to Jesus as Lord (certainly to bow the knee is a gesture o f worship, 2:10,11). And he understands that some people worship G od incor­ rectly (he implies that only Christians are capable o f wor­ shiping G od in the right way, 3:2, 3), acknowledging that there are people who foolishly worship something other than G od as G od (3:19). But none o f these qualifications takes away completely from the fact that for Paul G od (theos) is finally the one to be worshiped. Consequently when Paul comes to offer up his own doxology o f worship, it is solely to G od that he directs it: “Now surely the glory belongs to G od our Father forever and ever. Amen!” (4:20). To God alone belongs the glory! Paul was most certainly a Christian. There is no doubt but that Paul believed Christ was divine; and Paul’s devotion to Christ was boundless (see chapter 3). But he is careful, 23

The Character o f G od

nonetheless, to make a distinction between G od and Christ, a distinction preserved throughout the letter to the Philippians. For example, the fruit o f righteousness is produced through Jesus Christ, but it is for the glory o f G od (1:11). Christians are called “children o f G od” (2:15), but not chil­ dren o f Christ. Righteousness comes through faith in Christ, but its origin is from G od (3:9). Only G od is the object o f prayer and thanksgiving and worship (1:3; 3:3; 4:6). Only G od is called upon to bear witness (1:8), and so on. Thus for Paul, God, theos, is in a class by himself, distinct from all others as unique. Im m anence an d activity G od may indeed be wholly other, supreme, sovereign, set apart from everything else, transcendent, unique. But it is clear from this letter that Paul does not therefore understand G od as one who simply created the universe, including hu­ mankind and the world, and then proceeded to absent him­ self from this creation, allowing it to run along on its own, governed solely by the laws he established for it Rather, Paul understands God as present within this world, actively sustaining it, interestedly governing its affairs, very much involved in it, and, more importantly, as one who is inti­ mately and kindly involved in the affairs o f the people in this world. He sees G od as interested in the immediate and ulti­ mate well-being o f these special objects o f his creative love and concern, drawing near them, intervening in their histo­ ries, giving them things to be thankful for, allowing them to experience pain and problems, setting the highest standards o f expectations for them, and actively participating in their lives so that they might reach these expectations. Notice how Paul gives expression to these ideas. 1. A s strange as it may seem, in the light o f the awesome majesty o f God, Paul makes it clear that individual people, PHILIPPIANS

24

people who believe in God, to be sure, can speak quite personally o f him as their God. Twice over Paul encourages this understanding by his own use o f the expression, “my G od” (1:3; 4:19). God, then, is not so far removed as to be impersonal. He is in fact so near as to belong to his people. “My G od,” therefore, is not a word o f arrogance, but the humble recognition that G od has willingly entered into a close and intimate relationship with his people. “G od is never so far off as even to be near/ our hearts are the homes he holds most dear. . . . ” 2. Although Paul perceived G od as separate from, above and beyond his creation, he was certain that G od was at the same time continuously expressing himself within his cre­ ation, at work in the lives o f the people he had made, reveal­ ing himself both in their individual and corporate histories. He leaves no doubt about this when he writes the Philippians, “G od is at work in you creating both the desire and the drive to promote good will” (2:13). The church at Philippi was composed o f men and women, who, along with their good qualities, had many deficien­ cies— conceit, pride, selfishness, unconcern for others, harmful ambition, and so on— deficiencies that work de­ structively within the individual and within the congrega­ tion. Paul was concerned that the Philippians change their ways and begin to serve each other following Christ’s exam­ ple (2:1-11). He begged them to work at bringing about healing (“salvation”) within their ranks, harmony among themselves, and concern for one another, and to keep at this supremely difficult task until it was finished. And he could encourage them like this—to get busy and do their part in restoring harmony to their divided community, because he was confident that they were not on their own in striving to solve their problems. He was certain that G od was already doing his part, already at work within them to help them bring to reality the very thing desired o f them and by them. 25

The Character o f G od

3. Paul makes still more clear his belief that God, though transcendent in character, is actively at work in human his­ tory when he recounts his experience with Epaphroditus (2:25-30; 4:18). The Philippian church had sent to Paul this extraordinary man. He brought their gifts to Paul, making him rich; and Epaphroditus was himself their supreme gift, intended by them to be at hand to take care o f the apostle’s every need. He endeared himself to Paul, whom Paul called his “brother,” “fellow worker,” and “fellow soldier” (2:25). But Epaphroditus fell ill. From Paul’s perspective he most certainly would have died had not G od intervened. Paxil does not say what the nature o f this sickness was, nor does he mention anything o f his own prayers for Epaphroditus’s recovery, or the laying on o f hands, or the calling o f the elders or the doctors, or the use o f medicine—although all o f these measures may have been employed. That o f which Paul was overwhelmingly convinced, and to which he gives sole expression, is that G od had stepped in and stopped the sickness. Paul perceived that the healing o f his friend was a sovereign, merciful act o f G od himself. “G od,” he wrote, “took pity on him; not only on him but on me as well” (2:27). 4. Because G od is not so for above this world that he has no contact with or concern for it, or cannot intervene in human affairs, prayer was for Paul a most meaningful en­ deavor. Hence, he was not at all hesitant to encourage his friends to pray, to bring to G od in prayer all the things that made them anxious (4:6). When he told them that if they did so, the peace o f G od would guard their hearts and minds (4:7), he was not saying that G od would automatically give his people precisely what they asked for when they asked for it. But he was saying still one more time that G od is decid­ edly at work in the lives o f human beings. He is actually present and operative to create within people a peace that will keep guard over their thoughts and feelings whether he PHILIP PIAN S

26

answers their prayers in precisely the way they had hoped for or n o t 5. This same notion o f G od as sovereign, supreme, tran­ scendent—who is nevertheless nearby, close to and involved in the histories o f individual people and whole communi­ ties— gives Paul confidence to tell the Philippian church that G od will meet and supply their every need out o f his marvelous wealth in Christ Jesus (4:19). When Paul talks o f their “needs” here, he does not have in mind their spiritual needs, or the needs that will be taken care o f only when they reach heaven. The needs he has in mind are like those men­ tioned earlier in verse 16, namely, present material needs that can only be met by present, material resources. And the G od Paul knows is that supreme being who owns the material resources o f this world and who is himself active within it to direct the dispensing o f these resources. He will supply the needs o f his people. It might be argued that the future indicative, “will supply,” should not be taken literally, that is, as a precise statement o f what G od most certainly will do (who is a human being to say what G od will do in a par­ ticular situation?). Might that statement be rather a prayer, expressing Paul’s wish for what G od will do for the Philippians— “In return for your meeting my needs, I pray that my G od may meet all your needs.” Nevertheless, it is a reitera­ tion o f Paul’s conviction o f what G od can do, because G od is present and operative within the world he has created (cf. 2 Cor 9:8). 6. G od is holy and exalted above all—G od most high. A s such he has set the highest standards o f expectation for his people. Paul speaks o f the “upward call” (anō klēseōs) o f G od (3:14). The meaning o f this expression evades precise expla­ nation, but it may at least give the direction G od has set for his people—upward, toward himself, toward goodness and life, not downward, tending toward evil and destruction. It is a call to come up to God. 27

The Character o f G od

Further, Paul calls attention to the “righteousness o f G od” (3:9). This is a term frequently used by Paul elsewhere and is explained by him in detail in other places (see R o­ mans, Galatians). But used here it again tells the Philippians o f a holy G od’s high expectations for his people. In essence, “the righteousness o f G od” is a call for human beings to be as right as G od is right, to be as just and good as God, to measure up to God, to measure up to G od’s standard o f moral perfection. And the call includes both expectation and demand. If this is so, and if people fall short o f such high expecta­ tions (as is clear from even a cursory reading of Philippians, cf. 1:15,17; 2:2-4,14; 4:2), and if all are thereby threatened with divine judgment because o f this failure (cf. Rom 1:18), it was necessary for G od to involve himself in human history in order to correct this fatal flaw, to rescue human beings from their predicament, to lift them up, and to make it possible for them to meet the divine demands placed upon them. And for Paul this is precisely what G od did. When Paul wrote to the Philippians about the righteousness of God (3:19), he was not only speaking o f a property that belongs to God— i.e. righteousness is something that be­ longs to God, G od is righteous. He was also speaking o f an action o f G od by which G od provides for all people the very righteousness that is required, the kind o f righteousness that will stand up in the day o f testing. It is a righteousness that comes from G od to erring people through faith in Jesus C h rist More will be said about this in chapter 5, but for now it is sufficient to note that for Paul G od is indeed the holy God, G od most high, who has set the highest expectations con­ ceivable for people to meet. But he is not so high and holy that he did not stoop to involve himself directly in human affairs, and most profoundly so in saving his people from destruction by providing them with the very righteousness PHILIPPIANS

28

he demanded from them. Thus G od for Paul is Savior in the ultimate sense o f this word (1:28). 7. Paul uses the Christ-hymn (2:6-11) to show that although G od transcends history, he nevertheless acts in history. He acts to exalt those who obey him, who humble themselves to serve others, who do not first seek their own benefit Paul uses the hymn to teach the Philippians a fundamental lesson o f life. Whereas they were acting in a spirit o f ambition, thinking themselves better than others, believing they were above serving their fellows, and studying how they might promote themselves and get ahead, the Jesus o f the hymn never once fought for his own honor and right and credit Rather through self-surrender, self-renunciation and self-sacrifice he pursued the benefit o f others. In doing this he obeyed God. So radical was his obedience to God, that he did not withdraw it even when he was faced with death. A s a result, so the hymn makes clear, G od stepped into human history and exalted Jesus. It brings to expression the idea that God sees the actions o f human beings, evaluates them, approves o f some, stands opposed to others, and acts to reward people whose attitudes and actions accord with his own self-giving nature. 8. In a form characteristic o f the letter-writing o f his day Paul gives thanks to G od (1:3). But for what? M ost certainly he thanks God for the partnership o f the Philippians with him, for their help in the gospel from early on until the time he wrote. He thanks G od for their gifts, their time, their energy, their personal involvement in the business o f pro­ claiming the good news that occupied all o f his own time. But a more careful reading o f the text discloses that Paul saw G od in all this good work o f the Philippian Christians. Paul saw God as the real motivating force behind the scenes who was prompting them to action. And further, Paul was confident that G od would continue this good activity within 29

The Character o f God

them, would never leave them alone, would never withdraw his power from them until the work he had begun within them was completed (1:3-6). Thus, not only does Paul thank G od for what the Philippians were doing, but for what G od him self was doing in them. Behind any good action, then, Paul ultimately saw G od at work, and for this he was deeply grateful. God, for him, was transcendent, wholly above and apart from his creation, and yet paradoxically he was immanent, present in it, busy carrying out his purposes, all o f which were good.

PH ILIPPIANS

30

2 T HE PROVIDENCE OF GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF EVIL

It is clear from the survey in chapter 1 that for Paul G od is not only transcendent— the Being above, and independent o f the worlds he created—but also immanent, the Being present within these worlds, the one who sustains them, governs their movements, and especially cares for, plans for, and provides for his people. In theological language this is called the providence of God. Although Paul never used this term, he affirmed its meaning. W hen one today talks about the providence o f God, that person has in mind the detailed providing care o f a personal God, the painstaking, watchful, attentive supervision o f this G od over his creatures— especially over those creatures made in his own image and likeness— and the affection he has for them which prompts him to act in their behalf and to provide for them in their neediness. This is a marvelous concept which can rather easily be af­ firmed when everything in life goes well, such as when sick people recover their health (cf. 2:25-30), when nice things happen to individuals. One can also rather easily say that back 31

The Providence o f God an d the Problem o f Evil

behind every good action God is there, already at work, ulti­ mately responsible for bringing that good act into existence. Posing the problem But what happens to one’s concept o f the providence o f G od when things do not turn out as one had hoped? What becomes o f one’s belief in the benevolent providing care o f G od when bad things happen to good people? It is only too painfully obvious from personal experience that life, even that o f the person o f faith, is often hurt-filled, sorrow-filled, and crushing. There is indeed about life in this world an ambiguity. It can be characterized as made up o f events pleasant and unpleasant, o f things good and bad, o f triumphs and tragedies. And to some it would appear that the unpleasant, the bad, the tragedies outweigh the pleasant, the good, and the triumphs. Where is the sovereign G od of whom it is claimed that he acts to intervene in human his­ tory in all o f this sadness? Where is evidence o f the detailed provident care o f a personal God? Here, o f course, one comes up against the age-old prob­ lem o f evil: How can a person continue to believe in a God who is all-knowing, all-powerful, absolutely good, both tran­ scendent and immanent, above this world and actively present in it, who provides for his people’s needs, and at the same time acknowledge the ubiquitous presence o f pain? How can a person continue to assert that this G od really intervenes in human history, and at the same time be aware that evil and not good seems to be on the throne? What Paul wrote to his friends at Philippi throws some light into the darkness of this difficult question. It is neces­ sary to keep in mind, however, that Paul was writing a letter, and not a tract. He was not consciously giving an answer to people who were directly asking questions about the prob­ lem o f evil in light o f the providence o f God. Nevertheless, PHILIPPIANS

32

what he says about this troublesome problem just in passing is worth noting and reflecting upon. It must be remembered that Paul was thoroughly con­ vinced that G od exists, that he is sovereign, that he is allpowerful and that he is transcendent over his creation. Paul was equally convinced that G od is at the same time actively at work within his creation, that he is good, even ultimate goodness, the source o f all grace, mercy, and favor (1:2), the G od o f peace, wholeness, health, soundness (4:7), who acts in history to bring healing, wellness, and salvation (1:28; 2:12-13). Further, this conviction about G od that Paul held to so tenaciously was not in the least shaken by his having at the same time to acknowledge the fact that this world was no paradise. He readily admitted the reality o f sickness and the pain that sickness can cause, not only to the one afflicted but to that person’s family and friends (2:26, 27). He was quite aware o f the devastating possibility o f death and the suffer­ ing it can bring (2:27). Paul knew from personal experience that professing Christians, “brothers” (1:14), can do good things with bad motives, that those whom he might have expected to be with him turned out to be against him, that those he had hoped would help him were intent on hurting him, stirring up more trouble for him while he was in prison (1:15-17). He was quite aware that even within a select commu­ nity— the church— people nevertheless could and did act out o f selfish ambition, party spirit, conceit, arrogance, selfinterest (2:3, 21); that they could and did fight with each other, creating disunity and disharmony, displaying a divided front against a concentrated enemy (1:27b; 2:2; 4:2). He ac­ knowledged the fact that good people suffer, even suffer while doing good or even because they are doing good (1:28, 29). The ultimate example o f which, Paul says, is Jesus him­ self (2:6-8). 33

The Providence of God an d the Problem o f Evil

And yet, without once glossing over the evil that exists in the world, or failing to recognize its presence at every turn, Paul nevertheless never weakens in his firm belief that God is sovereign and good and at work in this world to bring about goodness and wellness and wholeness. He is able to hold these two ideas together with equal conviction for the following reasons. Attem pts to solve the problem 1. Paul seems ready enough to grant that there is mystery in the operation o f providence. From his perspective G od does not universally work in ways that either he (Paul) or his friends could explain or would have planned or chosen for themselves (2:26, 27a; cf. 2 C or 12:7-10). Yet experience taught him that G od was guiding and blessing even though the manner o f that guidance and blessing could not readily be discerned or understood. 2. The many imperatives Paul uses in this letter imply he believed the providence o f G od takes into account human freedom— the freedom to make choices, whether good or bad, the freedom to decide on a course o f action that could become the immediate cause o f suffering and pain. The im­ perative mood is in effect an appeal o f will to w ill And without the power or authority to force one’s will on an­ other, any given command, no matter how good it is, may go unfulfilled simply because the person advised has chosen to ignore the advice. Hence, for Paul, providence works in people’s choices, among them, with them. If Paul’s commands to be unselfish, charitable, interested in the welfare o f others, and so on, are ignored by the Philippians— if they make bad choices as a result o f failing to follow his wishes, or do evil things as a result o f rejecting his orders— all is not lo st Even these bad choices and evil acts PHILIPPIANS

34

are somehow incorporated into the providential working o f G od (2:12,13; cf. Gen 45:8). 3. There is implicit within Paul’s remarks to the Philippians the idea that although G od is not in a hurry, he never­ theless is relentless in carrying out his plan to overcome dissolution, frustration, and destruction. He is inexorably acting to save and make whole (1:28; 2:13), to transform and make beautiful (3:21), to provide the context in which all will openly acknowledge the one he has exalted and made Lord (2:11), and thus submit to his rule which is a rule o f right­ eousness, justice, and goodness. 4. In thinking more deeply about so-called bad actions and the providence o f G od the apostle becomes so bold as to say that the suffering o f good people is permitted by God. Being even more radical, Paul tells the Philippians that the suffering they had experienced while doing good, their suf­ fering for Christ, was in fact a gift given them by G od (1:29). To be sure, the literal translation o f 1:29 is, “it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ to suffer for him,” which, because o f the use of the passive voice, could be construed to mean that G od had nothing to do with their suffering at a ll But the passive verb, “has been granted,” is what is called a “divine passive.” In such instances the passive statement can legitimately be transformed into an active statement that has G od as its subject (Jeremias).1 Such a use o f the passive voice here is but one more indication o f Paul’s firm conviction that: G od is in control o f all events. Therefore, the Philippi­ ans should not be upset by their bitter experience as if G od had forgotten them or were angry with them. O n the contrary, the verb . . . would remind them that even this trial comes to them as a gift o f his grace. (Martin)2

35

The Providence o f G od an d the Problem o f Evil

This is made very clear from the word Paul uses here for “give.” It is one o f his special verbs formed from the same root as the word “grace.” It conveys the idea o f the free, unmerited favor or kindness o f G od (cf. Eph 4:32). It de­ scribes privilege— an idea that is reflected in some o f the recent translations: “You have graciously been given the privilege o f suffering for Christ” (cf. TEV, NEB, JB, Phillips). Hence, the suffering of good people and the sovereignty o f a good G od were never viewed by Paul as mutually exclu­ sive— “if one, then not the other.” In this world created and controlled by G od even the evil that people do, the wicked choices they make that work harm to others, can be traced ultimately to the door o f one who is not only the all-mighty, but the all-good. Paul wrote out of faith and hope, to be sure. His, however, was not an infantile belief that the universe ought to be ordered to fit in with one’s own ego-centered desires and ambitions. Providence for him was not just a belief in divine favors or a belief that everything must turn out well in the end. It was a belief in an ordering o f history by a G od who is holy and righteous as well as merciful (Macquarrie).3 5. From personal experience Paul became convinced and made it clear to the Philippians that a benevolent provi­ dence, which allows for and incorporates the free choices of people— many o f those being evil choices—nevertheless produces good out o f ill. It is not generally considered a good thing for a person to be thrown into prison. And if it is a bad thing now, it was even worse in Paul’s day when the physical conditions o f prisons were terrible and the treat­ ment o f prisoners brutal. Yet although the apostle was a prisoner then, and was so not for wrong things he had done, but for good things, he nevertheless did not become bitter or resentful when he thought about his situation. Why? Because he saw G od at work in all these painful events that had happened to him. PHILIPPIANS

36

Instead of lamenting the ill that he was experiencing, he was happy for it, because he was confident that G od was using it as a catalyst to encourage more and more Christians to be­ come bold in speaking the gospel publicly. A s a conse­ quence, the very thing that Paul was most concerned to achieve—the rapid advance o f God’s good news (1:12-14)— but did not know precisely how to bring to reality was achieved. Many people long silent began to preach the gospel openly when they heard that Paul was in prison— some because they loved him deeply and wanted to do what he could not now do, others because they hated him and out o f envy wanted to hurt him still more. Even those things that rightfully could be termed “evil” were made to serve a good purpose. In reflecting on this experience Paul would not say that the envy and rivalry that motivated certain of these to preach the gospel were positive or constructive virtues. Nor was he applauding those who, because of selfish ambition sought to enhance themselves at his expense (cf. Gal 5:1921). But he would say and did say that these negative, de­ structive attitudes and actions could not keep good from coming to expression. In fact, he went so far as to say, at least in this one instance, that good came to expression precisely because o f such bad, negative, destructive attitudes and ac­ tions—that is, people were incited to preach the gospel (the good), because they were jealous o f Paul (the bad), 1:15-18. Thus, a person who is evil cannot take comfort from his evil, for he cannot be confident that the evil he plans and effects ever has the power to overcome the good. Why? Paul would answer: “Because God is at work in the world to turn the tables.” Although G od permits, even defends, the freedom o f peo­ ple to choose what they want to be and do, he nevertheless delights to turn their most terrible choices around in such a way as to make these choices productive o f the very best 37

The Providence of God and the Problem of Evil

possible results. Did not Paul affirm elsewhere, while reflecting on the things that in themselves had the power to break people down—death, life, angels, demons, trouble, hard­ ship, persecution, famine, nakedness, danger, sword— that G od loves his people? Did he not assert that G od is for them, that he stands with them in the middle o f these threat­ ening things, that he is actually working these all together for good for their benefit, that in everything they are con­ querors, even more than conquerors (Rom 8:28-38)? Like Paul, then, people o f faith do not naively deny or brush aside as minuscule matters those events that do in fact ride over them, hurt them, and bring them down to the grave. The person o f faith has the Capacity to see beyond these would-be destructive forces to G od who is above them, who is stronger than they, and who is using the things to work good in that person’s life. Paul’s word stands strong: In all these things we are more than conquerors, because o f G od who loves us. (Rom 8:37) In all these things! Although Paul may not have been able to explain it, yet he believed that G od can and does create good, not apart from the evil events that happen, but in them. 6. Finally, Paul is not afraid to say that the final reso­ lution to the problem o f evil lies outside o f this world, beyond time, on the other side o f the grave, but not apart from o r outside o f the providential care o f God. Once again, we turn to the Christ-hymn (2:6-11). Here Jesus is presented as a good person committed to doing good. Jesus did not consider his own interests first. He was not selfish. He was not filled with vain conceit. He was not greedy or grasping. O n the contrary he lived unselfishly. He poured him self out for others. He took a humble place and set him self to serve. Yet, paradoxically, those he aided put him PHILIPPIANS

38

to death. Those he served killed him. Those he helped cru­ cified him. G ood was rewarded with evil. Evil triumphed. Is this so? People without the faith-perception will invariably inter­ pret life’s events in precisely this way— evil on the throne; good on the cross. Hence, for them there is no advantage to being or doing good. To the person o f faith, however, the crucifixion o f Jesus was not the triumph o f evil over good; it was exactly the reverse o f this. But this final triumph did not take place in time. Rather it took place beyond time, beyond death, be­ yond the grave. Paul is saying, in effect, that many o f the most perplexing problems o f suffering in this world— many, if not most, o f the troublesome questions that arise because o f pain— can only be resolved in the resurrection life. The experience o f Jesus, therefore, becomes a paradigm o f hope for people who suffer and for all who ponder the suffering o f others.

39

The Providence of God and the Problem o f Evil

3

THE PERSON OF CHRIST

For the most part Paul’s letters are not systematic presen­ tations o f his thinking. What is true o f his letters in general is especially true o f this letter to the Philippians. A s I have said already, it is an intensely intimate and personal letter, dealing primarily with matters that involve Paul himself and his feelings, his friends and their problems. It cannot at all be considered a carefully worked out study in theology. Yet Paul does indeed write theologically. Why? He does so because his mind is absolutely filled with thoughts of God, Christ, Spirit, the end-times, resurrection, the return o f Christ, the new world— and more. Christ especially is at the center o f bis thinking, the driving force o f his being. Hence, it is not surprising that Paul refers to Christ at least forty-seven times within the compass o f this short letter. Christ was first, not only in the universe, and in the world (cf. C ol 1:18), but also in Paul’s own personal existence. This preeminence o f Christ pervades Philippians, but not in any formal way. Rather, the idea o f Christ’s centrality crops up everywhere, even in the most casual contexts, and in the 41

The Person o f Christ

most mundane comments. For every thought o f the apostle, even the humblest, is affected by the power and presence of Christ. Nevertheless, for the purposes o f this volume, an at­ tempt will be made to gather up and systematize Paul’s “random” remarks about Christ in his letter to the Philippians, and not leave them scattered about as they are. This can be done (1) by focusing attention on the titles Paul uses for Christ and later (2) by considering in detail the so-called Christ-hymn (2:6-11). In this chapter only the titles will be considered. Jesu s Paul rarely refers in any o f his letters to the person who transformed his life simply as “Jesus” (see Rom 3:26; 8:11; 1 C or 12:3; 2 C or 4:10-14; Gal 6:17; Eph 4:21; 1 Thess 1:10; 4:14), and never in Philippians (except at 2:10 in the Christhymn). This may be astonishing to those who are familiar with the Gospel tradition which says that “Jesus” was the name given to this special person in a special way by a special messenger to designate the special divine purpose o f his life— “to save his people from their sins” (Matt 1:21). Paul, however, was reluctant to use the name “Jesus,” at least without some other descriptive tide alongside it Why was this? Perhaps it was because in Paul’s day “Jesus” was such a common name that for the apostle it was not in itself capable o f distinguishing him or setting him apart suffi­ ciently from all other people (cf. Matt 27:16, in many Greek manuscripts). O r perhaps it was because for Paul “Jesus” was the name expressive merely o f Christ’s humanness. Cer­ tainly it was the name he bore from birth in Bethlehem, throughout his life on earth, up to and through his arrest, trial, and crucifixion (cf. Matt 1:21; Mark 1:9,14; 14:53; 15:1, 37, 43; passim). And although Paul does indeed use this name in contexts of Jesus’ resurrection and exaltation (Rom PHILIPPIANS

42

8:11a; Phil 2:10; 1 Thess 4:14), yet it may have been that for him “Jesus” was the name which belonged primarily to the days o f his humanity. Paul seems thus to have preferred, or felt the need for, some other designation by which to say clearly that this Jesus who was crucified was more than a man. Recall the apostle’s own words in 2 Corinthians 5:16: Even though we once regarded Christ from a human point o f view (that is to say, though we humans could only judge Jesus from all outward appearances to be no more than a humble suffering human), yet we regard him thus no longer (that is, from the perspective of experience and revelation we now know that he was more than a mere human, more than the name “Jesus” has the capacity to connote). In any case, it is true that the name “Jesus” figures hardly at all in this letter to the Philippians as a name for the m ost important figure in Paul’s thought and life. And if he did use it in Philippians 2:10, he did not do so with the intention o f saying, as some have suggested, that “Jesus” was the name Christians were to venerate above all other names. The expression, “at the name o f Jesus,” that occurs here (2:10) does not mean that everyone will bow before the name “Jesus.” Rather it means that everyone will bow before the name Jesus bears, that is to say, before the new name Jesus is given, i.e. “Lord” (a fuller discussion comes later in this chapter). Christ In Philippians Paul uses the designation “Christ” by itself more frequently than any other designation, when he refers to this most important person o f his life (1:10,13,15,17,18, 43

The Person o f Christ

2 0 ,2 3 ,2 7 ,2 9 ; 2:1,16,30; 3 :7 ,8 ,9 ,1 8 ). He uses it both with and without the definite article— “Christ”/ “the Christ”— with apparently no difference in meaning. He uses it with­ out explanation, without any indication o f its importance, without a word o f its long history o f meaning. And yet certainly his mind must have been full o f its rich signifi­ cance. The English word “Christ” is essentially a transliteration o f the Greek word Christos. Paul did not coin this word, for it was used in the Greek Bible, the Septuagint, to translate the Hebrew māšî ach, “messiah.” So in using this designa­ tion, “Christ,” Paul was simply borrowing an ancient word and concept to describe Jesus. Both words— Christ and Messiah—mean “anointed one,” or “the anointed one,” and in general they referred to persons who were selected out and equipped by God to undertake and accomplish special tasks, and who were thus dependent upon and responsible to God (cf. 1 Sam 16:1-3). In the O ld Testament “messiah” was a tide given to patri­ archs (1 Chron 16:22; Ps 105:12-15), to priests (Lev 4:3, 5, 16), even to a pagan ruler (Isa 45:1), to Israelite kings (1 Sam 10:1; 24:6), and more particularly to David as king, and to his descendants (2 Sam 22:51; Ps 89:35,36). The dominant mes­ sianic idea o f the O ld Testament that developed was thus one that centered in or revolved about the king o f God’s choosing, who was invested with authority, honor, and glory by means o f the act o f anointing with oil (cf. 1 Sam 16:1-3). W hen the Davidic monarchy was being threatened and eventually overturned, there came the promise to the Is­ raelites o f a future king, him self a descendant o f David, whose rule would be good and wise, secure and supreme (Isa 9:6, 7; 42:1-4; Ezek 34:23,24; 37:24, 25). Setbacks and disappointments continued to mark the history o f Israel and threatened to destroy their hope. Yet the people never surrendered to despair. Sometimes, it seems, the darker PHILIPPIANS

44

their history, the brighter the expectation o f their deliver­ ance shone (cf. 2 Apoc Bar 82-83). They fully anticipated the coining o f a powerful king, the son o f David, one per­ manently possessed o f the Spirit o f God, characterized by dignity and greatness (Isa 11:1, 2), who would shatter un­ righteous rulers, purge Jerusalem from invading nations, destroy the pride o f sinners, rebuke the godless, and lead the people in truth and goodness (Pss o f Sol 17:21-38; 18:5-7). H is kingdom would be a great and eternal kingdom o f righteousness. The preservation and persistence o f this expectation of a coming king-deliverer can be traced on into later Judaism (2 Apoc Bar 70:8, 9; 4 Ezr 12:32; 4Q Flor 1:11), and into the New Testament (Matt 2:4-6; cf. Acts 1:6). To be sure, the expectation of Messiah as king was only one type of messianic expectation. On occasion messianic ideas were fashioned un­ der the influence o f thinking about the prophet-like-Moses who was to come (Deut 18:15-19), about Elijah (Sir. 48:10; cf. Mark 8:28), about the Son of Man (Dan 7:13), about the high priest (4Q Testim 14; 1Q S 9:11). But the Davidic kingmessiah was the principal or dominant messianic motif, nonetheless (2 Sam 7:13; Pss 89:3, 4, 28, 29; 132:11, 12; Isa 9:7; cf. Mic 4:7; Dan 7:14; 2 Bar 73). What was different now in the New Testament was that for its writers the Messiah who was to come, the anointed o f the Lord par excellence, had in fact come and could be named. He was Jesus (Luke 1:31-33; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20; Matt 16:16; cf. Mark 15:26 par.). For the whole of the New Testament, messianism no longer stands under the sign o f expectation but under that o f fulfillment. Everywhere the Christ event is spo­ ken o f in the perfect or past tense. The writings do indeed look into the future as well, sometimes very intensively. But the One who is awaited comes as the 45

The Person of Christ

One who has already come. He is not someone un­ known; he is well-known to those who await him as they are to him (cf. Jn 10:14). (Brown:Rengstorf)1 But that which was most strikingly new and different in the New Testament, and probably the most difficult to ac­ cept, was that this long-expected Messiah who had come, this longed-for bringer o f salvation who had appeared, turned out to be no powerful political figure. Rather, he was a humble servant, no deliverer from Rome, but a savior from sin. He was no marching king who would establish rule with arms and armies, but the anointed o f the Lord who would show his strength by his weakness. The humbleness, weak­ ness, suffering, and death o f Jesus, then, did not discredit him, or prove him to be a false Messiah, as most might have inferred (cf. Acts 5:34-37); these were instead the very marks o f his messiahship, the means by which he acted as Messiah, to save his people. But the proof that this was so, the evi­ dence confirming that this “weak” Jesus was indeed the anointed o f God, was the resurrection. G od identified Jesus as his Messiah, his Christ, by raising him from the dead (Mark 8:31,32 pars; Acts 2:29-36; cf. C ol 1:12,13). Surely all o f this was in Paul’s mind whenever he used this word “Christ” in writing to the Philippians. A nd if here in Philippians as in his other letters he seems to em­ ploy this title as little more than a name, it was because he had already thoroughly explained to both his Jewish and Gentile audiences the new meaning o f this tide. “Christ”/ “M essiah”—-namely, the Son o f David, the hope o f Israel, the Savior o f the world (cf. Luke 2:10, 11)— was G od’s suffering servant, Jesus (cf. A cts 17:l-3a; Isa 53). It was possible for Paul to use “Christ” almost casually as a sobri­ quet—but one, nonetheless, with immense significance both to him self and to his readers. Thus in Philippians, as elsewhere in Paul’s writings, the PHILIPPIANS

46

apostle preferred to use “Christ” by itself without any other names or qualifiers, when he pointed his friends to the Deliverer, that supreme one who had accomplished the great work o f salvation in their behalf. He wrote here such things as: • “people preach Christ” (1:15-17) • “Christ is preached” (1:18) • “the gospel o f Christ” (1:27) • “the righteousness o f G od which is through faith in Christ” (3:9) • “the cross o f Christ” (3:18) Each o f these is a phrase pregnant with meaning. For to preach Christ, etc., was to proclaim that “Christ died for our sins” and was raised from the dead for our justification (1 Cor 15:3-5,12-22; cf. Rom 4:5). To Paul, Christ’s death and resurrection, were those events that put sinners right with God, delivered them from this present evil world, transferred them from the kingdom o f darkness into the realm o f light, freed them from the power o f evil, saved them from their sin, gave them life instead o f death. To Paul “Christ” means deliv­ erer, Messiah. Paul came to understand all this as a result o f his face-toface meeting with the risen Christ. He may have listened carefully to the earliest Christians’ message about Jesus; he may even have studied it carefully so as to know what was being said. But he bitterly opposed everything he had heard, until Jesus himself stopped him. From the moment o f that encounter with Jesus onward Paul’s life could only be summed up in one word— Christ. Christ and Christ alone now was the one who gave inspiration, direction, meaning, and purpose to his existence. Everything he did now could only be done for Christ. “Living is Christ,” he wrote (Phil 1:21) meaning that his life was totally determined and con­ trolled by his love for Christ. 47

The Person of Christ

Overpowered by Christ on the Damascus road and over­ whelmed by his majesty and love and goodness and forgive­ ness, Paul told the Philippians he could see no reason for existence except to be “for Christ” (1:21; cf. Rom 14:7-9). Thus it was that he committed himself to being the means by which Christ would become known, by which he would be made great in the eyes o f all peoples (1:20). For this reason also Paul gladly accepted such a radical transvaluation o f values for himself, so that those things he once considered most worthwhile—birth, religion, position in society, and so on—he now considered worthless. He had come to understand that to gain everything and lose Christ was to profit not at all. But to lose everything, if need be, and gain Christ was to become the richest o f the rich (3:7-10). Christ Jesu s/Jesu s Christ A t least fifteen times within this letter to the Philippians Paul combines the two designations, “Jesus” and “Christ” (1:1, 6, 8, 11,19, 26; 2:5, 21; 3:3, 12,14; 4:7,19, 21). Some may claim that it makes a difference to Paul in which order he places these names— i.e. when he wrote “Jesus Christ” he meant to direct attention to the man Jesus whom God raised up and to whom he accorded the dignity and position o f the Christ, but when he wrote “Christ Jesus” he meant to direct attention to the preexistent Christ who revealed himself in a man, Jesus o f Nazareth (Cerfaux).2 But their claim cannot be established from Philippians alone. For one thing, the num­ ber o f times this combination occurs here is too few. Fur­ thermore, in eight o f these occurrences the text is in question. Where some Greek manuscripts have “Christ Je­ sus,” others reverse the order and read “Jesus C h rist” The following, however, can be said with some degree of confidence: when Paul uses this double name he enhances PHILIPPIANS

48

the meaning o f both by making clear who the M essiah/ Christ is: “The Messiah is Jesus,” or “Jesus is the Christ.” There is no sufficient reason to say that when Paul cou­ pled “Christ” with “Jesus” he gave it no more meaning than that found in a double name such as Caesar Augustus. Surely Paul himself, as has been noted above, understood the full significance o f the word “C h rist” He stood firmly “within the history o f the living Messianic hope,” but he had personally come to know the Messiah, whom the Jewish world around him did not know and still expected. He knew him to be Jesus o f Nazareth. Hence, to write “Jesus Christ” or “Christ Jesus” was for him a powerfully moving proclamation that the crucified one, the one he had fought against and persecuted, was indeed the Messiah, the hope o f Israel, the Savior o f the world (cf. 1 C or 1:23, 24; 2:2). It can be imagined also that this truth was no less well understood by the Philippians, for the one who taught them was Paul himself, the Jew, the Pharisee, become Christian. Thus in this combined name, “Jesus Christ”/ “Christ Jesus” the Philippians, too, would have caught the signifi­ cance contained in it, namely, that the longed for deliverer, the long-awaited Savior, the hope not only of ancient Israel, but o f the new Israel, the Messiah, was Jesus. They too would have caught the sense o f dignity and power and worth in the name “Jesus” when it was bound, as Paul bound it, so closely together with the tide “Christ.” In this connection it is worth noting that the favorite expression of Paul, the one that is very important to him, but which he never fully explains—the expression “in Christ”— always appears in Philippians in the double form: never “in Christ” only but always “in Christ Jesus. ” In Christ Jesus the Philippians are called “holy ones, saints” (1:1; cf. 4:21); are to boast abundantly (1:26; 3:3); must 49

The Person o f Christ

govern their thinking and feeling (2:5); will find the peace of G od guarding their hearts and minds (4:7); will have their every need met (4:19). The upward call o f G od is in Christ Jesus (3:14). Thus, like Paul, the Philippians, too, are to allow the whole o f life to be determined by the fact of Christ Jesus. They stand before G od in him. Something o f the profundity o f this idea may be grasped when one makes the effort to understand that the early Christian writers perceived Christ Jesus not only as a single person in time and space, but also as a corporate person. Paul understood Adam to be an individual self and also a person who included all his descendants in himself, who in fact, embodied the whole world o f human beings. Likewise, he understood Christ Jesus to be the Last Adam, the progenitor o f a new race, a person who embodied all other persons in himself (see Rom 5:12-21; 1 C or 15:22, 45-49; cf. Phil 1:1 [NEB]: “G od’s people incorporate in Christ Jesus”). Paul had religious experiences in which Jesus o f Naz­ areth . . . was found to be more than [an] individual. He was found to be an ‘inclusive’ personality. And this means, in effect, that Paul was led to conceive o f Christ as any theist conceives o f God: personal, indeed, but transcending the individual category. Christ is like the omnipresent deity “in whom we live and move and have our being.” Jesus Christ . . . actually is, or con­ stitutes that ideal society: He is the ultimate Adam, to be incorporated in whom is to belong to the renewed society. (Moule)3 Thus when Paul writes to the Christians at Philippi about being “in Christ Jesus” he is telling them, in effect, that as for him, so for them, “living means Christ” (1:21). Since they are incorporated into Christ Jesus, all that he is they are, and all that he has achieved they have achieved— Christ Jesus is PHILIPPIANS

50

their life and hope and joy, for G od sees them in Christ Jesus, not as they are in and o f themselves. L ord Paul uses the descriptive title “Lord” (kyrios) fifteen times in Philippians, and most frequendy by itself, without any accompanying title or name— “rejoice in the Lord” (3:1), “the Lord is near” (4:5), and so on (see also 1:14; 2:24,29; 4:1, 2,4,10). But he also uses it in combination with other words as well. He uses it with “Jesus”— “I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy” (2:9), and with “Christ Jesus”/ “Jesus Christ”— “Christ Jesus my Lord” (3:8; see also 1:2; 2:11; 3:20; 4:23). The fullest, most honorific tide Paul uses o f Jesus is “the Lord Jesus Christ” (1:2; 4:23). The word “lord” (kyrios) comes from a root that means “having power,” “competent,” “decisive,” “principal.” The noun derived from this root identified a person as “lord,” Le. as the lawful owner o f slaves and property, as the lord over subject peoples, the master o f the house. A s “lord” one could dispose o f something or someone without consulting others, because he was the lawful owner o f that person or thing. From classical times “lord” (kyrios) was frequendy used to refer to the gods, those with the legitimate power and right to control designated spheres. For example, Zeus was viewed as the Lord o f all (Plato, Laws 12.13). “Lord” was employed also as a tide o f respect, especially when the person so ad­ dressed was a person o f a higher rank than the one using it. In the Septuagint, “lord” (kyrios) was also used to address people respectfully— “my lords” (Gen 19:2), or to refer to them as owners (Judg 19:22,23), or masters (Gen 27:29,37). But most frequendy “Lord” was used here to translate the divine name, Yahweh, the name o f G od that described not only his sovereign power over all creation (cf. Ps 97:5; Mic 51

The Person o f Christ

4:13; Zech 4:14; 6:5), but also the personal relationship in which he stood to his people (cf. Exod 15:1-3; Isa 64:1265:5). During the Roman period “lord” came to be used o f the emperor. For instance, Caligula liked the title. Nero was de­ scribed as “the Lord o f the whole world.” Domitian was hailed as “our Lord and God.” Eventually to make the confes­ sion, “Caesar is Lord,” became a sort of loyalty oath required o f citizens in the Roman Empire. W hen Paul wrote “Lord” in his letter to the Philippians he always ascribed the title to Jesus Christ— “Jesus Christ is Lord” (2:11; see also 1:2,14; 2:19,24,29; 3:1,8 ,2 0 ; 4:1,2, 4 ,5 ,1 0 ,2 3 ). How did he come to use it in this way, and what did he mean by doing so?

Paul’s reasons fo r saying “Jesu s Christ is L ord” The first question cannot be answered to everyone’s satis­ faction, for Paul himself does not precisely explain how he came to use the title “Lord” for Jesus. One can, however, offer suggestions based on what information is available. Per­ haps Paul’s strongest impulse to call Jesus Lord came from his own experience with Jesus (see the Introduction). This experience was so profoundly real that it transformed his life and revolutionized his thinking. Paul understood now that G od had raised Jesus from the dead, lifted him up above the limitations o f space and time, and exalted him to a position no other human being held or had ever held. Paul’s immediate response to Jesus was to obey everything he told him to do; it was as if Jesus now was the master and he the servant (cf. Acts 22:10). Thus, who­ ever wrote “the hour o f Damascus is the key to Pauline theology” was quite right No person knows all that happened to Paul after his con­ version and during his retreat to Arabia. But he himself PHILIPPIANS

52

discloses this much: He says that in Arabia (and Damascus) he received by divine revelation the gospel he was to preach, the gospel about Jesus Christ (Gal 1:1-17). Certainly while he was there he had time to reflect deeply on his encounter with Jesus and to square this experience with his knowledge o f the O ld Testament. And if his own growing inclination was to think o f the risen Jesus as his Lord, he like others before him was able to find scriptural evidence for this in the O ld Testament (cf. Ps 110:1: “The Lord says to my Lord: sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet”). When Paul returned and began to enter into fellowship with Palestinian Christians he learned that they, too, from earliest times, had been calling Jesus Lord. Seemingly from the moment o f the resurrection they were certain that G od had exalted him to the position o f universal Lord (kyrios). An indication o f this can be found in what appears to be a very early Aramaic prayer— M arana tha, “Our Lord, come!” (1 C or 16:22; cf. Rev 22:20), which, Paul writing to a Greekspeaking audience, quotes without translating. He did not need to translate it Although it was originally formulated in Aramaic among the churches in Palestine, among Aramaic­ speaking people, it had become a prayer familiar to all Chris­ tians everywhere hallowed through long usage in the liturgy— especially in that part o f the liturgy pertaining to the communion Supper. There in the celebration o f the eucharist Jesus was celebrated as Lord, and prayer for his return became an important and regular part o f the service (cf. 1 Cor 11:26). When Paul started out on his own preaching the gospel in the Hellenistic world, he included in it the bold assertion that Jesus Christ was Lord (cf. Rom 10:9). He did not bor­ row the title “Lord” from the non-Jewish savior-cults that abounded there, nor from the practice o f emperor worship, in order to more easily ascribe divinity to Jesus. Rather, he 53

The Person o f Christ

proclaimed Jesus as Lord first o f all because o f the profound impact o f Jesus upon his own life, and second, because he had already learned o f this title for Jesus from his Palestinian fellow-Christians. Thus from tradition and from personal experience Paul had come to understand that Jesus was indeed master not only o f his individual life, but also o f the church and o f the world. He was eager, then, to let everyone know that Jesus is Lord supreme— the one Lord who stands above and over against however many lords the pagans may have named or believed in (1 C or 8:5,6).

Paul’s m eaning in “Jesu s Christ is L ord ” The second question concerning what Paul had in mind when he used the title “Lord” to refer to Jesus— what did he mean?— is easier to answer. H e meant at least by this title that Jesus was his master, and that he himself stood in rela­ tion to him as slave (doulos, Phil 1:1). H e understood, therefore, that he had only one course o f action open to him—to obey the Lord Jesus Christ com­ pletely. This One had set the course o f his life; Paul gladly and openly acknowledged that Jesus Christ was his Lord (3:8). H e must act on Christ’s commands. And if Paul recog­ nized this relation for himself, he believed that it also applied equally to all others as well: “Before the name that Jesus bears,” he wrote, “every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” (2:10,11). Especially is this true o f Christians. They are those who presently acknowl­ edge the Lordship o f Jesus, and by such an acknowledge­ ment they declare themselves his servants, people prepared to do his will (cf. Rom 10:9a; 14:8). With their ancient creed on their lips— “Jesus Christ is Lord”— they declare that their whole earthly existence belongs to him (cf. 1 Cor 6:13b), and that all relationships and actions take on new PHILIPPIANS

54

dimensions because o f him (cf. C ol 3:22-24). A person has no right then to call Jesus “Lord” and not do what he says (cf. Luke 6:46)— indeed that person cannot do so. Yet paradoxically, from what Paul says elsewhere it is clear that to be a slave to this master was not the way to bondage. To be the Lord’s slave is the only way to becoming a truly free person, one who is free from the tyranny o f the law (Rom 7:1-6), o f sin (Rom 6:18-22), o f fear (Gal 4:8,9) and o f death (Rom 8:1-3). O ne might say that Paul used “Lord” (kyrios) as a tide for Jesus without intending thereby to equate Jesus with Yahweh (although in the Septuagint “Lord” [kyrios] was the Greek replacement for that sacred name), and without any intent to infringe on the idea o f monotheism. Yet it is equally true that Paul wanted to convey to his friends at Philippi by the use o f this term that Jesus was more than a mere human being. To be sure, in the letter to the Philippians Paul never addresses Jesus Christ directly either in prayer or thanksgiving. N or does he direct his doxology to him. Only G od the Father is the object o f prayer and thanksgiving (1:3; 4:6), and only G od the Father receives the doxology o f praise (4:20). In Philippians Paul is careful to distinguish between G od the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (1:2). He never calls Jesus “G od” (theos), although he says Jesus existed “in the form o f G od” (2:6). He is careful to say that although the “fruit o f righteousness” is produced by Jesus Christ, he adds that it is for the glory and praise o f G od (1:11). He calls Christians “children o f G od” (2:15), not “children o f the Lord Jesus Christ.” He notes that righteousness comes from God, but through faith in Jesus Christ (3:14). He says G od is the source o f peace, but the channel through which peace is conveyed to the Christian is Jesus Christ (4:7). Paul acknowledges that Jesus Christ is to be confessed as Lord, but it is G od who exalts him to this high position, and 55

The Person o f Christ

all this— the exaltation and confession— is for the glory o f G od the Father (2:9,11). This careful distinction on Paul’s part between Jesus Christ and G od the Father must be recognized. And yet Paul was convinced by revelation and personal experience that Jesus was more than simply a man; he was also divine. But how could he say this? How could one who had lived his life so long under the influence o f Jewish monotheism put this new insight and understanding into words? The use o f the title “Lord” allowed him to give expression to this staggering idea. It is seen first in the salutation to the Philippians— “Grace and peace to you from G od our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (1:2). Here Jesus Christ is clearly distinguished from G od the Father. Yet since he is Lord he can nevertheless be designated as the co-source o f grace and peace with G od the Father. One is thus forced to say with Moule that: The position here occupied by Jesus in relation to God, as well as in many other opening formulae o f the New Testament letters, is nothing short o f astounding— especially when one considers that they are written by monotheistic Jews with reference to a figure o f recently past history.4 With these words o f salutation Paul has put the Lord Jesus Christ and G od the Father on the same footing. One should note too that when Paul concludes his letter to the Philippians, he bids them farewell by saying simply, “The grace o f our Lord Jesus Christ be with you” (4:23). N o longer is it “The grace o f G od the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” Observing this, one comes to realize that for Paul the Lord Jesus Christ has the right to perform the divine role o f dispensing grace with full authority. He is here designated as PHILIPPIANS

56

the source o f grace, the fountainhead of free saving love (charis). And he can bestow this grace freely on his church. Further, Paul said that every creature in heaven, on earth, and under the earth will bow the knee before the Person who bears the name “Lord,” and will openly acknowledge that it is Jesus who is this Lord (2:10, 11). Such an act of bowing the knee that Paul here calls attention to is the ges­ ture o f full inner submission in worship to the one before whom the knee is bowed (Kittel:Schlier).5 So when Paul says that this action will be done before Jesus as Lord, it is clear he meant to say, in this oblique way, that Jesus will be worshiped by every creature in the universe, that the Lord Jesus Christ is equally the object o f worship with God. His intent becomes even more clear when one realizes that the latter part o f the Christ-hymn (2:11) is in reality a quotation from the Old Testament where what origi­ nally was said of Yahweh is transferred now to Jesus: I am God, and there is no other. I have sworn by my­ self . . . that to me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance. (Isa 45:22b-23) This staggering idea about Jesus Christ runs throughout Philippians helped on its way by the title “Lord.” Paul, by using “Lord” o f Jesus, has not the least desire to identify Jesus Christ with God the Father. He does not so much as hint at the possibility that Christ now usurps the place of God. He does not even breathe the words, “Jesus is G od.” And yet, because o f his personal experience with Jesus Christ, although he cannot fully explain what is on his mind, he now knows nevertheless that Jesus Christ is cer­ tainly more than a mere human-being— and he wishes to tell his friends at Philippi o f this. So he proceeds to say, in effect, that if God is savior (Ps 106:21; Phil 1:28b), so is the Lord Jesus Christ (Phil 3:20). 57

The Person of Christ

If Yahweh-God is the source o f joy (Neh 8:10), so is the Lord Jesus Christ (Phil 3:1; 4:4). If Yahweh-God is the stimulus to courage and strength (Josh 1:9), so is the Lord Jesus Christ (Phil 1:14; 2:30; 4:1). If Yahweh-God is near his people (Ps 119:151), so is the Lord Jesus (Phil 4:5). If G od is to be loved and served with all one’s mind, soul, and body (Deut 6:5; cf. Mark 12:30 par), and people are to press on to know Yahweh-God (Jer 31:34), so must it be with the Lord Jesus (Phil 3:8, 10). One feels the fervor o f Paul for Christ as he pours out his soul to the Philippians telling them that he gladly counts everything he has received, owns, achieved, whatever— as loss, filth even, when compared to the sur­ passingness o f gaining Christ and o f coming to know Christ Jesus as his Lord (3:7-10). Sum m ary For Paul “Jesus”— this name by itself—was not an ade­ quate name by which to give proper identification to the person who had blinded him with his majesty on the road to Damascus, and who, paradoxically at the same time, gave him sight to see and understand spiritual truths he had never dared dream o f before. “Christ” was a designation rich in meaning to Paul, and thus it was one he frequently used when talking to the Philippians about Jesus. “Christ”/ “Messiah” was the fulfill­ ment o f the age-long expectation o f the pious people o f God. Their hopes and dreams o f a thoroughly good king, o f a ruler who would shatter the forces o f evil and establish a righteous kingdom, a deliverer who would set the prisoner free, etc., had all been fulfilled now in Jesus. Thus it is not surprising that Paul often combines these two names— “Jesus” and “Christ” into “Jesus Christ” or “Christ Jesus,” the order seems to be o f little consequence. By joining them in this way he enhances the meaning o f PHILIPPIANS

58

both. Jesus is no longer merely a man from Nazareth, but he is the Christ, the looked for Messiah. And the Messiah is no longer the expected one. Rather the Messiah has come and he is Jesus. Expectations have been fulfilled. Hopes have materialized. The dreams have become reality—Jesus is the Christ! But not even this was adequate to express who Jesus is. Both “Jesus” and “Christ” are human names, which in them­ selves say little more than that this one was G od’s servant, one commissioned by God, one anointed with the Holy Spirit to do the will o f G od on earth. And if in some O ld Testament passages—most frequently in those that have to do with the end-times— the Messiah-fìgure appears to be a supernatural being (cf. Dan 7:13, 14), yet this is still not meaning enough to explain adequately who Jesus is. The resurrection o f Jesus Christ from among the dead told the earliest Christians that although he was indeed Messiah, the hope o f Israel and o f the world, he was more. And Paul’s own encounter with this resurrected and living Jesus on the Damascus road convinced him, too, that Jesus was more than a man sent on a mission by God. However it happened, “Lord” became the title that best described who Jesus was— the title which the earliest church settled upon (cf. Acts 2:32, 36), and which Paul delighted to use. It helped them to say that Jesus was divine, that he was God’s vice-regent exercising the power that be­ longs to God, but even more, that he shared the very nature o f G od (recall that “Lord” in the O ld Testament was the Greek word that translated Yahweh, and in the Hellenistic world was the title used to refer to deities o f various kinds), without having to say in so many words that he was God. “Jesus Christ is Lord” became Paul’s creed, perhaps the earli­ est creed o f the church. A s Lord he is to be served. A s Master he is to be obeyed. Paul, therefore, set the whole course o f his life to fulfill this obligation. 59

The Person o f Christ

4

THE CHRIST-HYMN

The New Testament notes that from the earliest period o f the church’s history Christians were a singing people. They regularly instructed themselves by the use o f psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). Originally their singing was o f the O ld Testament psalms. Soon, however, songs that were distinctively Christian began to be composed for use in worship and praise. Therefore, it is not surprising to learn that fragments or even whole sections of what seem to be very early Christian hymns have been found embedded in the writings of the New Testament (see Eph 5:14; Col 1:15-18; 1 Tim 3:16; 2 Tim 2:11-13; Rev 15:3, 4; 22:7). The most famous of these hymns is the beautiful hymn about Christ found at Philippians 2:6-11. It falls into two verses, one deal­ ing with the humiliation of Christ (vv 6-8), and the other with the exaltation of Christ (vv 9-11). Author of the hymn Traditionally readers o f this hymn have assumed that Paul wrote it as he wrote the other parts o f Philippians. In recent 61

Thè Christ'Hym n

times, however, this traditional assumption has been chal­ lenged, and arguments based on form, vocabulary, and christology have been set forth that point away from Paul as composer to someone other than the apostle. And yet, al­ though Paul played down his own skill as speaker/writer (2 C or 11:6), it is clear that he had the ability to clothe great ideas grandly (cf. 1 Cor 13), and that he had the rhetorical skill to write something as elegant as this hymn, if he chose to do so. Furthermore, it is possible to point to passages that are unquestionably written by Paul where rare words or words used only once in the New Testament are found (cf. 1 C or 4:10-13). So the fact that there are some words in this hymn found nowhere else in Paul’s letters is hardly an argument against its being composed by him. And finally, the fact that the hymn does not say that Christ’s death was a death “for us,” nor refers at all to Christ’s resurrection— themes that are central to Paul’s christology— and the fact that Paul does not present Christ as the Servant o f the Lord anywhere in his letters but here in the hymn, cannot in themselves prove that he did not write it. Does not context determine con­ tent? Could not the particular problems at Philippi ad­ dressed by this hymn have dictated its own special theme(s)? There is thus no fully sufficient reason to depart from the traditional view that Paul composed this hymn. Its author, as Collange has written, must have possessed a genius which is not at everyone’s disposal. A s well as from the literary as from the theo­ logical point o f view 2:6-11 concentrates into an exceed­ ing concise poem considerable theological substance and is the work of a master. It will be assumed from this point on that this master, the author o f this hymn, was Paul. PHILIPPIANS

62

Sources for the id eas of the hymn Many different sources for the ideas expressed by this hymn have been suggested, only three o f which can be men­ tioned here because o f space. One suggested source is the gnostic Redeemed Redeemer myth. This myth describes the descent into this world o f a “light-Person” from the highest god to bring knowledge (gnōsis) to the sons o f light, who have sunk down into sleep and darkness. He comes to tell them who they are and to remind them o f the lightworld from which they fell. He teaches them, too, the secret passwords by which they can make their way safely back up through the demon-filled starry spheres to their heavenly home. He himself goes ahead and prepares the way for them, the way he also must take to be redeemed. For while he is on earth he does not appear in divine form, but rather in hu­ man form so as not to be recognized by the demons. D is­ guised in this way he must, like other humans, endure contempt and misery, pain and suffering until he leaves this world and ascends back to the world o f light (Bultmann).1 The difficulty with such a suggestion is that it is hard to date this gnostic myth, if not impossible. It might be very late. There is, thus, the very real possibility that the myth was itself created by the themes o f the Christ-hymn rather than the other way around. Another suggested source for the ideas o f this Christhymn, and one that is quite popular today, is the Adam theme from the O ld Testament. Paul elsewhere makes good use o f Adam, especially when he contrasts him with Christ, the Last Adam (cf. Rom 5:1218; 1 C or 15:21,22,45). It is suggested that Paul is doing the same here: Adam and Christ were both human beings made in the image o f G od (Gen 1:26; Phil 2:6— “image” and “form” are treated as synonymous). But whereas Adam grabbed at becoming like God, with the consequence that he 63

The Christ-Hjmn

lost his share in God’s glory and became a slave, subject to corruption and death (Gen 3:5; 2:16, 17), Christ did not consider equality with God a prize to be snatched, and was therefore exalted by G od (Phil 2:6). Quite unlike Adam, who disobeyed (Gen 3:1-7), Christ chose the way of servanthood and mortality in obedience to God. The statement that Christ “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) is thus interpreted to mean not that Christ gave anything away that he had, but rather that he freely chose to descend to the level of fallen humanity and, in obedience to God, to share the mortality and corruptibility o f all such human beings (2:8). A s a consequence, quite unlike the first Adam who was cast down out of paradise because o f his selfseeking, the Last Adam, Christ, was lifted up and given the highest place because o f his self-giving. G od freely gave Christ that for which Adam grasped (Dunn, Ziesler.)2 The difficulty with suggesting such a source for the ideas o f the hymn lies in the fact that those who suggest it must claim that there was a two-stage movement during the life of Jesus— (1) one stage in which he was Son, equal with God, in the sense that he was all that a person should be, a gen­ uine human being, and (2) a second stage in which he con­ sciously chose to become what he was not before, a person subject to death, now like other human beings in their hu­ miliation. Thus, in a sense he became less than a human being should be. But one is forced to ask when was this choice made? And how did Paul know about it? And why is it not mentioned elsewhere? And is this second stage properly described? Is not the point being made much more striking and satisfying theologically if we understand Jesus on the cross not as less than fully human but as embodying and enacting that self-giving love which is the highest expression o f human work and dignity— the point, in PHILIPPIANS

64

fact, where a human being most reflects the character o f G od himself? (Wright)3 Still another suggestion, one that is adopted here, is that the themes o f the Christ-hymn were triggered by deep medi­ tation by Paul on one particular event from the life o f Christ as recorded in the Gospel tradition—Jesus’ washing o f his disciples’ feet (John 13:3-17). This is not to say that Paul knew and used the fourth Gospel, but that he and the writer of that Gospel had access to the same information. The parallels in thought and in the progression of action between John 13:3-17 an d Philippians 2:6-11 are striking. So precise, in fact, are these parallels that it is difficult to believe they are the result of mere coincidence. Both the fourth evangelist and Paul writing in the Christhymn begin what they have to say in a similar fashion. John starts his narrative by saying that Jesus washed his disciples’ feet because he knew that the Father had given everything into his hands and that he himself had come out from G od and was going back to G od (John 13:3), a remark that gives special emphasis to Jesus’ act o f humility. Paul, too, begins his hymn by saying that Jesus, being in the form o f G od and yet not taking advantage o f his being equal with God, took the form o f a slave, and did the work o f a servant (Phil 2:6-8), a remark that equally emphasizes Jesus’ act of humil­ ity. The entire hymn preserves the descent-ascent motif that is prominent in the Gospel story: John 13:3-17 1. Jesus knows that he came out from G od and was going back to God (v 3) 2. Jesus gets up from the table and lays aside his outer garments (v 4) 65

Phil 2:6-11 1. Jesus is in the form of G od (v 6) 2. Jesus empties himself— lays aside his divine nature (v 7, Moffatt) The

Christ-Hymn

3. Jesus takes a towel and wraps it about himself, puts water in a basin and begins to wash his disciples’ feet— the task o f servants (1 Sam 25:41; cf. Mark 1:7) (v 5) 4. Jesus finishes serving, takes again his outer garments, puts them on and sits down again at the head o f the table from which he got up (v 12) 5. Jesus says: “You call me Lord and rightly so, for that is what I am” (v 13)

3. Jesus takes the form o f a slave, and humbles himself (v7)

4. G od exalts Jesus to the highest place and gives him the name above every name (v9)

5. Every tongue is to call Jesus Christ, Lord (v 11)

It is also instructive to note that the purpose o f John’s account and o f Paul’s hymn is the same. The Johannine account is an acted parable to summarize the essence of Jesus’ teaching: “Whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to hold the first place among you must be everybody’s slave” (Mark 10:43, 44). The Philippian hymn powerfully illustrates Paul’s teach­ ing, which at this point is identical with that o f Jesus’ teach­ ing: humble, self-sacrificing service to one another done in love is what is expected from a would-be follower o f this Jesus (Phil 2:3,4). The purpose of the Christ-hymn Paul’s primary purpose for composing this hymn was not theological or christological but ethical. The goal he had in mind was not to give instruction in doctrine, but to rein­ force instruction in Christian living. And he did this by PHILIPPIANS

66

using Christ as the ultimate model for moral action, as the supreme example o f unselfish conduct. This is the most obvious and natural explanation for the appearance o f the hymn at this particular point in the letter, that is, immediately after Paul’s intense appeal to the Philippians to repent and to adopt a way o f life quite in contrast to that which they were then in the course o f pursuing (2:3,4). Nevertheless, in the process o f reaching his primary objec­ tive— to alter patterns o f living— Paul teaches profound truths both about the person of Christ and about the nature of God. He begins by declaring that before ever Christ be­ came a human being, in his preexistent state, he was "in the form o f G od” (v 6). The phrase “in the form o f God” is difficult to explain, if for no other reason than that the key word, “form” (morphē), occurs only two times in the New Testament and both times in this hymn (vv 6, 7). In spite of varying translations given for this word, ranging from “glory,” “mode of being,” “status,” or “condition,” to “image,” with accompanying varying interpretations, it is possible to fall back on the basic meaning o f the word, “form” (morphē), and proceed from there. In very early Greek writings “form” (morphē) was used to express the way in which a thing, being what it is in itself, appears to one’s senses. Morphē “always signifies a form which truly and fully expresses the being which underlies it” (MM). This word, “form” (morphē), then, would never be used o f a wolf in sheep’s clothing, for the outward appear­ ance would not at all conform to what the creature really was in itself. So when this word is applied to God, his “form” (morphē ) must refer to his deepest being, to what he is in himself, to that which cannot be reached by physical sight, because God is invisible. Cerfaux says o f the word morphē : “In fact the word has meaning here only as referring to the reality o f G od’s being.”4

67

The Christ-Hymn

“The form o f G od,” therefore, may be correctly understood as “the essential nature and character o f G od.” This somewhat enigmatic expression appears, then, to be a cau­ tious, oblique manner o f speaking by which Paul says that Christ was God, possessing the very nature o f G od (cf. TEV, NIV, Goodspeed, Knox, M offatt, Phillips) without his actually saying these precise words. It seems to be a state­ ment made by one who perhaps, although reared as a strict monotheist and thus unable to bring him self to say, “Christ is G od,” was compelled, nonetheless, by the sheer force o f personal encounter with the resurrected and living Christ to bear witness as best he could to the reality o f Christ’s divinity. That this explanation is the correct one is confirmed by the expression, “to be equal with G od,” which immediately follows (v 6). Literally translated it is, “the being equal with G od,” where the definite article (“the being”), as it often does in Greek, points back to something previously mentioned. In this case the only thing it could point back to would be the words, “form o f G od.” Therefore, the expression “being equal with G od” is an equivalent way o f saying “being in the form o f G od.” Still another difficulty in understanding the meaning of this hymn is the Greek word, harpagmon, in the sentence, “he did not consider that the being equal with God was harpagmon ” (v 6). This word appears only this once in the New Testament, not at all in the Greek translation of the Old Testament, and very rarely in secular Greek. Hence, to un­ derstand precisely what it means here in the hymn is not an easy matter at a ll Some understand harpagmon to mean “a snatching after,” “an act o f aggression.” To say then that Christ “thought it not robbery [harpagmon] to be equal with God” (KJV; see NIV, R SV) is to say that Christ, knowing himself to be equal with God, also knew that to be so was not the result o f an act PHILIPPIANS

68

o f aggression on his p art He knew equality with God was his by right, not by force. Others have extended this basic idea o f harpagmon— “aggressive action”— to give quite a different meaning to the hymn. These see “the being equal with G od” as something not yet possessed but desirable nonetheless, a thing to be grasped after as Adam grasped after being like G od (Gen 3:5). With such an interpretation the hymn is made to say that Christ was not equal with God, and what is more, he refused any temptation to use aggressive action to become so (cf. NEB). Others understand harpagmon to mean “a thing to be clutched and held on to.” Such an understanding of this word sees the hymn declaring that Christ already was equal with G od by nature, and as such had no need to cling to this status as though it could be wrested from him (cf. JB). Others yet argue that harpagmon is found here in the hymn in a standard Greek idiomatic expression that refers neither to an act o f acquiring something by force, nor to an act o f clinging to it greedily and selfishly. Rather this idiom refers to an attitude, a direction o f mind that one has toward something that is already in one’s possession. Thus in the hymn it is understood to mean that Christ’s attitude was not such as to regard his equality with G od as something to take advantage of, as something to be used for his own profit. Still others explain the meaning o f this difficult word and its implications for understanding the hymn as follows: harpagmon does not refer so much to a thing to be grasped, or to a thing to be clung to, as to the act o f snatching itself— acquisitiveness, the desire to get and to have. Thus to con­ sider oneself equal with G od does not mean that one considers he has the right to take everything to himself, to grasp. When the hymn says that Christ “did not consider the being equal with G od harpagmon, ” it intends to say that he did not at all believe his equality with G od gave him the 69

The Christ'Hymn

right to snatch, to grasp, to acquire everything for himself. Rather quite the contrary: “Jesus saw God-likeness essen­ tially as giving and spending oneself out” (Moule). In this connection, it is important to note that the partici­ ple at the beginning o f verse 6— “who being in the form o f God”— is often misleadingly translated as a concessive par­ ticiple— “who though he was in the form o f G od” (RSV , NASB, Goodspeed, Williams). It should, however, on the basis o f the context, more correctly be translated as a causative: Precisely because [Christ] was in the form o f G od he reckoned equality with G od not as a matter o f getting but o f giving. (Moule)5 Perhaps the best explanation o f the expression in which harpagmon is found is one which combines the last two suggestions made concerning it In contrast with the standard picture o f oriental despots, who understood their position as something to be used for their own advantage, Jesus understood his position to mean self-negation. . . . Divine equal­ ity does not mean “getting” but “giving”: it is properly expressed in self-giving love. (Wright)6 Verses 6 and 7, then, can be paraphrased as follows: “Christ Jesus, who, because he was in the form o f God, did not regard his equality with G od as something to be used for his own advantage, but to be used for the advantage o f others. Hence, he emptied himself. . . . ” T his idea is clearly spelled out as the hymn progresses with a profound statement introduced by the conjunction “but”— “not that, but this.” The being equal with G od does not mean filling oneself up, but on the contrary it means emptying oneself o u t C hrist who shared the nature PHILIPPIANS

70

o f God, who was equal with G od, nevertheless emptied himself. But what did this self-emptying entail? First, it is impor­ tant to realize that the hymn never once says what Christ emptied himself of. One should thus keep from asking such questions. Second, it must be noted that “to empty” is but one o f many meanings for the Greek verb (kenoō ) which underlies this translation. It also means “to pour o u t” One can imagine, then, that Christ who was in very nature God, but who did not reckon that this nature was characterized by acquisitiveness “effaced all thought o f self and poured out his fulness to enrich others” (Jones).7 Here, in a poetic, hymn-like way Paul was saying what he had said more prosa­ ically elsewhere— Christ put himself totally at the disposal o f people; he became poor to make everybody rich (2 C or 8:9; cf.E ph 1:23; 4:10). This expression, “he emptied himself,” is now defined more precisely by a series o f participles— “taking the form o f a slave,” “becoming in the likeness o f human beings,” “being found in human form” (vv 7, 8). These participles express the way in which Christ emptied himself. Paradoxi­ cally this act o f self-giving was accomplished by taking. Christ’s self-emptying was achieved by becoming what he was not before, his kenōsis by adding to what he was, not by subtracting from it Jesus Christ voluntarily chose to pour himself out for oth­ ers by taking the “form of a slave” (v 7). This does not mean that he merely disguised himself as a slave, having only the external markings of a slave. He really possessed the true character and attitude o f a slave. That is to say, in the Incarna­ tion the preexistent Christ entered the stream o f human life as a person without advantage, claiming no rights or privi­ leges o f his own, for the express purpose o f placing himself completely at the service o f all people (cf. Mark 10:45). Further, Christ poured himself out “by coming to be in 71

The Christ-Hymn

the likeness o f human beings” (v 7). The one who always was in the form o f G od (v 6), now becomes a man— Paul uses here two very different verbs in two very different tenses to make this point clear. And the expression, “in the likeness o f a man” with the one that immediately follows, “in human form, ” are not used with any intent by the hymn writer to water down the genuineness o f Christ’s humanity, or to cast doubt on its reality. They are not meant to say that Christ only appeared to be a man or that he only took the outward form o f a person as the gnostics later were to claim. Rather, these two expressions link up in hymnic fashion with that other expression, “form o f a slave” (v 7). Together they be­ come a threefold emphatic reiteration o f one fundamentally important idea—that Christ in the Incarnation fully identi­ fied himself with humanity, that he became truly human both in appearance and in thought and feeling, that he shared people’s plight genuinely. All these expressions to­ gether say in effect: Let there be no doubt—Christ was really and truly man, having to live the same kind o f life as any other man had to live. (Grayston)8 Thus when the hymn mentions the self-emptying act of Christ, it does not put the emphasis upon what he gave up, but rather on what he added to himself—“the form o f a servant,” “the likeness o f a man.” It implies that at the Incar­ nation Christ became more than God, if this is conceivable, not less than God. It is quite impossible to explain such a mystery—that the one who was in the form o f God, equal with God, could also be a human person to the fullest, possessing all the potential for physical, mental, social, and spiritual growth that is proper to humanity, and be both at the same time— divine and human. And yet the Philippian hymn clearly sets PHILIPPIANS

72

forth just such a paradox and affirms it, but does not try to explain it. The descent m otif o f the hymn, however, does not end here with the preexistent Christ becoming a truly human being. It goes on to say that as a man he humbled himself (v 8). Now this could mean merely that as a man Christ did not strive for some pinnacle o f human achievement “where the battle was fought for honour, right and credit” (Barth).9 It does mean that, but it means more than that, as the participle which follows makes abundantly clear: “He humbled himself by becoming obedient unto death” (v 8). This concise phrase, “by becoming obedient unto death,” describes the real nature o f humility in general, and o f Christ’s humility in particular. True humility is to choose the will o f G od over one’s own will. It is to decide to go God’s way rather than one’s own way. And in the case o f Christ humility was for him to purpose radically to obey God, even at his own expense, even if it cost him his life to do so, even if he must die by crucifixion! Now it is precisely at this point that there comes a striking change in the theme of the hymn— from descent to ascent, from humiliation to exaltation, from what Christ did, to what G od did. The transition is marked by a strong inferen­ tial conjunction that means, “as a consequence, therefore,” or “for this very reason.” Christ, the one who was in the form o f God, who was equal with God, emptied himself, putting himself in a position to serve human beings by be­ coming a human being, a servant, and humbled himself by setting himself strictly to obey God. This, then, is why G od in one dramatic act exalted him, super-exalted him, and gave him the name “Lord” before which name every knee will bow. This exaltation o f Christ should not be thought o f merely as a reward for his self-abnegation, or as a gracious gift be­ stowed by G od on Christ which excludes any merit on his 73

The Christ'Hymn

part. Rather it is to be seen as the natural consequence o f his humility. The inferential conjunction that begins this sec­ tion, “as a consequence, therefore,” points to an invariable law o f God’s kingdom: in the divine order o f things, selfhumbling leads inevitably to exaltation. It reflects the way things really are, the way the universe is made to work (cf. Matt 18:4; 23:12; Luke 14:11; 18:14). But in this hymn the exaltation o f Christ is more than the natural outcome o f his self-giving, his self-humbling. It is above all the affirmation by G od the Father that the Incarna­ tion and death o f Jesus were truly the ultimate revelation of divine love in action. In giving to Jesus the title [Lord], and in granting him to share that glory which, according to Isaiah xlv.23 (quoted in [Phil] 2:10), no one other than Israel’s God is allowed to share, G od the Father is as it were endors­ ing that interpretation o f divine equality which, ac­ cording to v 6, the Son adopted. (Wright)10 The hymn then is all o f one piece. The person who as­ cended is the very one who descended. The exaltation o f the crucified Jesus to the status o f Lord at the end o f the hymn is not to a position that only then became appropriate for him. It was his all along by virtue o f who he was— from the very beginning he existed in the form o f God, he was equal with God. Verse 11, the climax and end o f the hymn, returns full circle to its start, tying the whole together by claiming the title Lord for him who from the first shared the very nature o f God. In this understanding of this exquisite hymn Jesus Christ is viewed as preexistent, divine, one equal with God, who nev­ ertheless refused to take advantage o f all this for his own personal gain. Instead, he is seen to empty himself, make himself powerless, pour himself out, put himself in a position PHILIPPIANS

74

by becoming human to serve people, set himself to obey G od at any price. He is seen as considering his being equal with G od “not as excusing him from the task o f (redemptive) suf­ fering and death, but actually as uniquely qualifying him for that vocation” (Wright).11 That is why G od exalted him and gave him the highest name in heaven and on earth— “Lord.” Jesus Christ is Lord! The hymn is not only about Christ, explaining in a re­ markable way who he was, what he did, and his status now, but it is also a song about God. It makes crystal clear the true nature o f God. Because G od is Creator, Sovereign, Master, it is easy to assume that, since this is so, whatever G od wants G od gets. Hence, one might easily come to believe that the nature o f G od is to grasp, to reach out after everything and to hold it to himself. And one might also come to believe that God-likeness means having your own way, getting what you want (Moule). The Christ o f the hymn, however, shatters this miscon­ ception, showing that equality with G od is precisely the opposite o f this. Christ showed by his attitude and actions that for him to be in the form o f God, to be equal with God, meant that he must give and spend himself out, that he must put himself at the disposal o f others, that he must serve. Once again notice the force o f the words o f the hymn— “W ho, precisely because he was in the form o f God, did not consider that being equal with G od meant taking everything to himself, but rather giving everything away for the sake o f others” (2:6, 7). The hymn makes it unmistakably clear that contrary to whatever anyone may think about God, his true nature is characterized not by selfish grabbing, but by an open-handed giving. Understood in this way the hymn fits perfectly in the context o f chapter 2. Whereas the Philippians were acting selfishly, out o f a spirit o f rivalry, living in arrogance and pride, considering themselves better than others, taking care 75

The Christ-Hymn

o f their own personal interests first, living with a grasping attitude (2:3,4), Paul appeals to them as Christians, followers o f the Christ, to show by their conduct that they are indeed Christian men and women, people belonging to Christ, in­ dwelt by his Spirit, inspired by divine love (2:1). He asks them to think as Christ thought and to act as Christ acted, following the way o f self-abnegation. To understand that Christ’s self-sacrificing attitude, his fundamental orientation toward sharing, giving, and serv­ ing— to know that all this is but the proper expression o f divine character—-is at the same time to understand the nature o f Paul’s appeal. It is not merely an appeal to imitate C h rist Rather, by its very nature it is an appeal reminding the Philippians that such a life o f self-giving is in reality the outworking o f the life o f the Spirit o f Christ within them. Though the word [agapē (“love”)] is not used in the hymn itself, vv 6-8 might almost serve as a definition of what [love] means in practice— and vv 9-11 would then affirm that this love is none other than the love of G od himself, at work supremely in Christ and now also, by his Spirit, in his people. The implication is clear: as G od endorsed Jesus’ interpretation o f what equality with G od meant in practice, so will he recog­ nize self-giving love in his people as the true mark of life in the Spirit (Wright)12 In other words, Paul calls upon the Philippians to follow Christ’s example only because he knows that they through faith in Christ, share the nature o f Christ, a nature God-like in character, marked by unselfishness.

PHILIPPIANS

76

5

THE CALL TO SALVATION

D efinition The words salvation, and save, mean different things to different people. Yet fundamental to all the various mean­ ings is the basic idea o f deliverance, freedom, release. For example, Noah and all his family were “saved,” mean­ ing that they were delivered from death because o f the im­ pending flood (Heb 11:7). The Israelites were “saved,” meaning that they were freed from slavery to the Pharaoh (Acts 7:25). The lame man at the Gate Beautiful was “saved,” meaning that he was healed, freed from his crippling afflic­ tion (Acts 3:1-10; 4:12). Paul speaks o f his own “salvation” when he refers to his expected release from prison (Phil 1:19). He challenges his Philippian friends to work out their “salvation,” when he has primarily in mind that they take all necessary steps to restore to health and wholeness their church that had grown spiritually ill because o f inner strife (2:12; 4:2, 3). In the New Testament, however, the words “salvation,” or 77

The C all to Salvation

“save,” are most frequently used in a religious sense. The reason for this is plain in the pages o f the Bible: human beings fashioned in the likeness o f God, formed to worship G od and enjoy him, made to live in harmony with G od and with one another, created to co-rule with God, to be crowned like G od with glory and honor, find themselves instead estranged from God, hostile to God, dethroned, adrift in the world, alienated from G od and from one an­ other, slaves to fear, in bondage to death. They are people in need o f salvation, Le. o f deliverance from that which has come between them and God, and o f restoration to that ideal state from which they have departed (cf. Gen 3:23,24; Isa 59:2). The need fo r salvation The culprit in all this, the cause o f this “fall,” is given a name— “sin.” Sometimes in the New Testament sin is pre­ sented as though it were a separate entity, something quite apart from the individual, an evil power or force that con­ trols one’s actions against which the person stands quite helpless and from which he or she needs to be saved (cf. Rom 7:15-17). More often, however, sin is defined as an individual’s deliberate choice to turn away from G od to that which is not God, to forget God, to exclude God, to replace God: “They exchanged the truth about G od for a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (Rom 1:25). Sin is a choice against G od resulting in idolatry. It is a choice for which people are culpable and for which they will pay the tragic price— a darkening mind, an inability to distinguish good from evil, a lack o f any capacity to halt a steady decline toward wickedness and perversion, and the powerlessness to avert death at the end. Sin is a break in relations between G od and people, which results in a loss o f human freedom, PHILIPPIAN'S

78

and an involvement in human bondage (see Rom 1:21-31; 6:19,20,23). Now this is not an isolated problem, or the problem o f only a few. It is a universal problem: “A ll have sinned and come short o f the glory o f G od” (Rom 3:23). All suffer from a fatal flaw, a failure o f moral nerve. All thus are helpless to help themselves (cf. Rom 5:6). A ll stand under the judgment of God, under the wrath of G od (Rom 1:18; 5:9). All are des­ tined to reap the harvest o f sin since all are appointed to die (Rom 6:23). This then is the fundamental human predica­ ment from which everyone needs to be saved, delivered, re­ leased. Against this dark backdrop Paul’s remarks in the Philip­ pian letter about salvation are to be understood, especially as they are expressed in chapter 3. True, Paul does not here use the words “save,” “salvation,” “savior,” but the idea o f salva­ tion is paramount in his thinking as he draws back the curtain on his personal life. Here he shares with his friends in a most intimate way the beguiling nature o f sin and its devastating consequences, and then declares how it can be conquered and the sinner set free. Put simply, Paul is saying here, in effect: “Look! People are sinful with all that that entails [see above]. They cannot, therefore, extricate themselves or save themselves from this ultimate predicament by their own moral effort. W hat is humanly impossible is divinely possible. G od himself acts to save. G od does it by himself in his own way and tolerates no competition. G od does it by Christ and by faith in C h rist.” If Paul begins this section with harsh words against the Jews (3:2), it is not because he hates them and wishes to put them down. Rather it is because he loves them and wishes them to be saved (cf. Rom 9:1-4). The Jews o f Paul’s day were a people intent on keeping God’s law. Their sense of well-being, therefore, in the apostle’s mind, was due in large part to the fect that they believed they were performing 79

The C all to Salvation

accurately the works demanded by that law. They thus per­ ceived themselves to be good people, doers o f what is good and right. Astonishingly Paul calls them instead, “evil work­ ers” (3:2). Why? He does it not because he believed that what they were doing was morally wrong. Rather, he does it be­ cause he had come to realize that their reliance on “works” was in the end fatal for them—fatal in that such reliance is ultimately self-reliance, idolatry, an attitude toward life that tends to obscure or eliminate the need for G od who alone is the source o f true life and goodness. If Paul continues dais section by denouncing “confidence in human achievement” (3:3) he does so not to speak ill o f human accomplishments or to advocate that people make no attempt to achieve. He does it radier to reaffirm what he said earlier when he called the Jews “workers o f evil” (3:2). The very human tendency to believe that one can achieve a proper standing with G od and earn God’s favor by doing something, however great or good, is folly. The word Paul uses here for “human achievement” is the Greek word, sarx, literally “flesh.” It pictures a person at his or her highest and best, striving to achieve an adequate status before God, but without dependence upon God. It pictures people as relying on their own ability to do the will o f G od and to attain the goodness that G od requires without realizing that such goodness can be attained only by aban­ doning self and throwing oneself wholly on the mercy and grace o f God. Sarx is that self-reliance, that confidence in one’s own capacity to please G od and earn a favorable ver­ dict from the Judge which causes Paul to strike out so hard against it. Such confidence in human achievement (sarx) is futile. If Paul fills out this section now with a lengthy recitation o f his own status and accomplishments, it is not to call attention to what a good fellow he is. It is rather to under­ score again his fundamental thesis and to give concrete proof PHILIPPIANS

80

o f its correctness: No one can rely on human privilege and position or personal achievement to gain favor with God. If anyone could do this, surely he, Paul, could. He had the right pedigree, and had done all the right things (3:4— 6). But Paul, through a dramatic personal experience, which he does not explain here (see the Introduction), had been forced to make a profound reevaluation o f his own values. He came to see with horror that the things he had previ­ ously viewed as benefiting him had in reality been working to destroy him by blinding him to his need for the true righteousness that G od requires and that G od alone could supply. He understands now that all his struggle as a reli­ gious person to be good enough was a pure and simple usurpation o f God’s prerogatives. Hence, with abhorrence he counts everything he once valued as loss, filth even, and turns from it forever. G od’s way of salvation What then is one to do? How can one nullify the effects o f sin? How is one to extricate himself from the mortal predica­ ment in which he finds himself? How can one become good enough for God? What can one do to earn God’s favor? How can people save themselves? Paul’s answer to these questions is simply, “Nothing!” But lest one despair at such an answer, he hastens to add that though the sinner can do nothing to repair the breach, G od has done everything nec­ essary. Prompted by his great love G od has acted to save sinners (Rom. 5:8) Paul does not use the word salvation (sōtēria) here in Philippians chapter 3, perhaps because for him the terms “savior,” “to save,” and “salvation” belong properly to the end-times, to the consummation o f the age. Instead, when he refers to Christians’ present status he prefers to use a word that includes but exceeds the ideas contained in salvation. He 81

The C all to Salvation

uses the word “righteousness” (dikaiosynē), a favorite o f his which he borrowed from the Old Testament (cf. Isa 45:21; 46.T3; 51:5, passim) and then enlarged upon. He uses it to describe not only the release o f sinners from the bondage to their sin, but in effect, to refer to the total undoing o f sin. “Righteousness” for Paul is the giving back to people that which sin took from them, the ultimate goodness which G od demands, the raising of human beings to that standard o f their humanity originally divinely designed for them, the full restoration o f people to their right and proper relation­ ship with God, reconciliation! This kind o f righteousness, however, Paul now knows is a righteousness that cannot be achieved by human endeavor. It is the “righteousness o f G od” (Phil 3:9; cf. Rom 1:17). That is to say, it is the righteousness that originates with God. G od has taken the initiative to provide this righteous­ ness because o f his great love for people. It is his free gift to people which they cannot buy, which they cannot earn, which they cannot merit. Thus after years o f ignorant strug­ gle on his own part Paul is finally able to say with relief that he no longer has any intention or desire to be found (at the day o f judgment?) having only his own righteousness, his own goodness to present to God, a goodness earned by diligently keeping the law (3:9). Rather, he now possesses and wants to be found (at the day o f judgment?) having the true righteousness that G od himself supplies— the only righteousness that will stand the final test G od has acted to save, to accept back his erring, wander­ ing, alienated people and to restore them to fellowship with himself. But how did he do this? Paul says he did it through Christ (3:9)— the person o f Christ is positively essential in making this righteousness available to all. And although Paul does not explain here how this is so, he does this elsewhere (Rom, Gal), and it is contained in the gospel. The gospel he preached he called the gospel o f G od (Rom 15:16; 1 Thess PHILIPPIANS

82

2:2), or the gospel o f Christ (Rom 15:19; Phil 1:27), by which he meant good news about G od’s action to save the world o f mankind through the person and work o f Jesus C h rist Hence, the Philippians, who had heard the gospel, understood exactly what he meant when he wrote to them so concisely o f God’s righteousness given through faith in Christ (3:9)— C h rist though existing in the form o f God, equal with God, nevertheless emptied himself and became a human being. In this way he placed himself in a position by which as the Anointed o f the Lord he could come to grips with human sin and dethrone it He could thus encounter the demands o f God’s law and fulfill them, face the wrath o f G od against sin and avert it from the sinner, challenge the celestial or infernal powers and overthrow them, submit to death and destroy it, and hear the will o f G od and do it (cf. Rom 5:6-9; 10:4; Col 2:13-15; P M 2:8; cf. Heb 2:14,15). The person o f Christ is crucially central to the gospel. By him— the incarnate God— and by him only, by virtue o f his unique nature, his perfect life, his obedient death, and his triumphant resurrection, G od has worked to reconcile peo­ ple to himself, to redeem them from the bondage o f sin, to lead them out o f darkness into light, out o f death into life. All that people could not do for themselves, because they were weak, helpless, ungodly, and enemies, G od has done for them at immense cost to himself (see P M 2:6-11; Rom 1:17; 3:21-28; 5:6; 6:20-23; 8:37-39; 2 C or 5:18-20; G al 3:13; 4:3-7; C ol 1:12-22). In a truly amazing way, never fully explained by Paul, the Christ-event—the life and death o f Christ (Le. his selfsacrifice for human sin), and his resurrection— released into this fallen world the supreme power by which G od can act in love to make his enemies his friends, by which he can act to reconcile sinners to himself (cf. 2 C or 5:18, 19). This is not only the word o f Paul, but the consistent testimony o f the church from the time o f Jesus’ first disciples until today. 83

The C all to Salvation

The place of faith in salvation God, then, has provided for all people the required right­ eousness, which is his righteousness. And he has done this through Christ alone. But his wish is not that people have this righteousness thrust upon them, but that they choose to accept his gift with gladness and gratitude. This act o f accep­ tance o f God’s offer Paul calls faith. Hence, he continues his remarks here with the words, “the righteousness o f G od is made available through faith in Christ” (Phil 3:9). Paul saw faith (pistis) not as an alternative way for human beings to achieve God’s favor by their own efforts, a new kind o f deserving work, but as quite the opposite o f this. Faith is, in effect, an admission that one cannot earn God’s approval by what he does, but can only take God’s free offer of forgiveness and grace and love. And since God’s offer is made by virtue o f the life and above all by virtue of the death and resurrection o f Christ, the righteousness, the condition o f being truly right with God, must come through faith in Christ. Faith in Christ, therefore, in the strictest sense is not intellectual assent to a series of propositions about Christ, or beliefs about Christ. It is the act of personal trust and self­ surrender to C h rist It is the movement o f one’s whole soul in confidence out toward C h rist It is the reaching out and accepting o f Christ’s having done for people what they could never do for themselves. It is the “Yes!” of one’s whole personality to the personal address o f Christ. It embraces both an initial positive response to Christ, and a continuing attitude o f trust in and commitment to him. When Paul came to understand this, that in Christ God had already anticipated him, that in Christ God had already looked with favor on him (long before ever he had lifted a finger to gain this favor), that in Christ God had already been gracious and merciful toward him, that in Christ God PHILIPPIANS

84

had already acted to reconcile him to himself, and that in Christ G od had already accepted him unreservedly—when he understood all this he could make no other response than the response o f faith, accepting this offered gift in hu­ mility and thankfulness. With a sense o f deep gratitude he once and for all became Christ’s devoted follower. Thus it is that he wrote with such intensity: I count everything as loss because o f the one supreme value, namely to know Christ Jesus my Lord. For him I did in fact lose everything. But I consider it all as un­ speakable filth for the goal o f gaining Christ. Yes, I consider everything as unspeakable filth for the goal o f knowing Christ in the power o f his resurrection and in the fellowship of his sufferings. (3:8-10) Paul’s most fundamental need, and that o f every human being—to be reconciled to God— had been fully and com­ pletely met in Christ. Hence, he knew that he could afford to surrender everything else, but not C h rist From the mo­ ment he understood this, he never wavered in his fidelity to the decision he made regarding C h rist Philippians chapter 3 is Paul’s most thoroughly personal explanation o f salvation in this letter. And it is presented here not as a salvation that is solely future in its dimensions, but very much a present thing. The salvation or righteous­ ness o f G od under discussion is salvation/righteousness im­ mediately available. That is to say, people do not need to wait until the end o f time to find out if they have been accepted by God. G od accepts people today, now, just as they are, because o f the fact o f C h rist But salvation in the ultimate sense is eschatological. It does not belong only to the “now” period. Thus Paul more than once makes reference to the Day o f Christ or the Day o f Christ Jesus in his letter to the Philippians (1:6,10; 2:16).

85

The C all to Salvation

By this expression he means the end o f the world, the consummation o f time, the goal o f history, which the O ld Testament writers designated as the Day o f the Lord. The O ld Testament writers often viewed it as a day o f wrath and judgment (Isa 2:10-22; Joel 3:12-16a), a day to be dreaded, because God, who is righteous, stands threateningly op­ posed to all human unrighteousness and ungodliness (see Rom 1:18; 3:9-18; cf. Eph 2:3) o f both Gentile and Jew alike (Rom 1:18-32; 2:8-9). But Paul views it no longer with terror or distress. Why? Because as he says elsewhere, Christ has taken the full brunt of the divine wrath and the divine judgment against sin upon himself, thereby making it possible for G od to remain right­ eous even while he acquits the unrighteous (Rom 3:24-26). The cross o f Christ, therefore, becomes for Paul both the supreme revelation o f the “wrath o f G od” against sin (Rom 1:18; 2 C or 5:21), and o f the inexhaustible love, mercy, grace, and forgiveness o f G od by which he reconciles sinners to himself rather than drives them away from him to destruc­ tion (cf. Eph 2:16). Hence, the Day o f Christ is for Paul and for Christians not a day to be dreaded, but to be anticipated with fullness o f joy, because it is a day when they can expect the arrival o f one who is both friend and savior. Paul writes o f this anticipation in 3:20: “For our citizen­ ship is in heaven, and from heaven we eagerly wait for a savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (cf. also 3:11 where he refers passingly to the resurrection). This final appearance o f Christ will herald the completion o f G od’s saving work on earth. What began with the provi­ sion o f a proper standing before G od effected through the first coming o f Christ, by his life, death, and resurrection, is now to be capped off with the transformation o f the total person (sōm a) at Christ’s second coming— “the Lord Jesus will transform our bodies of humiliation so that they may become like his glorious body,” i.e. spiritual bodies, bodies PHILIPPIANS

86

inherently alive, no longer subject to corruption and dying (3:21; cf. 1 Cor 15:42-50). Every trace o f the person’s moral weakness, physical fee­ bleness, and mortality will be removed. Salvation in the ulti­ mate sense, then, is not negative only— deliverance from sin and death—but positive too. It includes the exchange o f weakness for strength, death for life, humility for glory. And the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, will bring about this radi­ cal transformation by the exertion o f that same power which he uses to subdue all tilings, the entire universe, to himself (3:21; cf. C ol 1:29). There is thus no need to be anxious that the power to save will ever be inadequate. Salvation or destruction Salvation also implies nonsalvation. If G od has acted in mercy and grace to save sinners by Christ’s death and resur­ rection, and if he has dignified people with the freedom to choose life or its opposite, i.e. to exercise faith or to refuse to believe, then it is not surprising to learn that Paul warns the Philippians o f those who have chosen against G od— “They are enemies o f the cross o f Christ, their god is their appetite, they esteem only what is shameful, their concern is for earthly things, they are people horizon-bound in their thinking” (3:18-19). Without trying at this point to identify these people, ex­ cept to say that they may possibly be religious people con­ cerned with certain rituals that affect the body, and without commenting at all on their moral behavior, it is nevertheless correct to point out that for the apostle they are people who reject the good news o f G od’s having acted to save them through Christ. They are people who are concerned with values that pass away, with values that have neither divine origin or lasting qualities. Hence, instead o f salvation their end is perdition, loss, 87

The C all to Salvation

destruction— which is banishment from G od who is life (3:19). What stands as a judgment against them becomes a warning to everyone. There exists the tragic possibility o f exchanging the glorious immortal G od for some lesser deity. Strangely, this potential has the greatest chance o f becoming reality in the realm o f the religious, where doctrine and ritual so easily become that to which people wholly devote themselves and to which they commit themselves com­ pletely. In this way they become idolaters (cf. Rom 1:21-23).

PHILIPPIANS

88

6

THE CHRISTIAN LIFE

Sanctification A s has been noted, Paul rarely uses the terms to save and salvation, except in contexts where he is referring “to the final stage o f the work begun by G od through Jesus Christ, namely [the] decisive laying aside of the coming wrath (Rom 5:9; 1 C or 3:15; 5:5; 1 Thess 5:9)” (Collange).1And it is often pointed out, too, that the words that Paul regularly uses to describe the present status o f Christians— “to justify,” “justification”— do not refer to a positive and qualitative change in the person justified. “Justification is strictly accep­ tance [by God], restoration to fellowship [with God], and not transformation o f character” (Ziesler).2 Remarks like these may lead one to conclude that salvation/justification has only to do with deliverance from the consequences o f sin, that is, from the wrath o f God, from eternal death, not at all with the present inner alteration o f one’s person and an accompanying alteration in thinking and conduct 89

The Christian Life

Nothing, however, could be farther from Paul’s mind than such a conclusion. In the words o f George MacDonald, The notion that the salvation o f Jesus is [only] a salva­ tion from the consequences o f our sins, is a false, mean, low notion. The salvation o f Christ is salvation from the smallest tendency or leaning to sin. It is a deliverance into the pure air o f G od’s ways o f thinking and feeling. It is a salvation that makes the heart pure, with the will and choice o f the heart to be pure. To such a heart, sin is disgusting. It sees a thing as it is— that is, as G od sees it, for G od sees everything as it is. . . . Jesus did not die [merely] to save us from punish­ ment; he was called Jesus because he should save his people from their sins. And if Paul’s words “salvation” and “justification” should in themselves happen to be technical terms with rather nar­ row meanings, yet it is clear from the whole o f Paul’s message that restoration to a right relationship with God (justification) is a meaningless term unless it is accompanied by a transfor­ mation o f character. It is the goal o f God’s action in Christ to recreate people in his image and likeness, to make the sinner a saint, the evil person good, the base, upright and noble (cf. 2 C or 5:17; Col 3:10). In the language o f theology this contin­ uing divine process toward goodness in this present life is called sanctification.

The context of sanctification Paul’s letter to the Philippians is an ideal letter to study in order to gain an understanding o f the meaning o f sanctifica­ tion. The Philippians had been brought into proper rela­ tionship with G od in Christ. They partook o f Christ’s righteousness by virtue o f their incorporation into him. It PHILIPPIANS

90

was not that G od treated them “as if” they were righteous. In Christ they were indeed righteous. But this righteousness has to be understood in light of the entire New Testament conception of eschatology. This is to say, that while the righteousness of God is something that properly belongs to the end o f time, yet it can be grasped by faith and revealed by faith even now in the present time. The Philippians lived “between the times,” so to speak, between the first and final comings of Christ and they partook o f the character o f two eras—this present age and the age to come. By faith, eschatologically, they were righteous—as righteous as ever they would be when the world ends and the new day dawns, because in Christ they were already in the new age. But as people living in the present age they were still experi­ encing the powers of darkness and evil pressing in upon them. Righteousness was both something that the Philippians al­ ready had, and also something for which they still waited (cf. Gal 5:5). They possessed it but not as they would hereafter. The “saint” o f N T theology is not a perfected being but a forgiven sinner, and sanctification (. . . the state o f ho­ liness), like [righteousness], is an eschatological reality, not a simple possibility for Christians who are still sub­ ject to the “powers” of this age, even though in principle those powers are defeated. Christians are indeed [saints] . . . ; nevertheless it is only by prayer and striv­ ing and by the power o f the Spirit that the eschatological [holiness] (2 Cor. 1.12; Heb. 12.10) and [righteous­ ness] . . . can be manifested even to the eyes o f faith in this mortal life (2 Cor. 4.7-18). (Richardson)3 D ivine/hum an elements in sanctification Nowhere is this paradoxical nature o f the Christian life more clearly illustrated than in Paul’s letter to the Philippians. 91

The Christian Life

Nowhere are the two ideas o f justification (what Christians are by virtue o f their being in Christ), and sanctification (what Christians are becoming by virtue o f their own striving and by the enabling power o f the Spirit) articulated more forcefully than here. To begin this study it is worth noting that Paul right off affirms the fact that Christians are “saints,” “holy people” (hagioi, 1:1). They are this because they are in Christ (1:1) and not because o f their own efforts to be good. And yet paradoxically, by using this very term Paul makes it clear that Christians are not exempt from any kind o f moral endeavor. “Saints” (hagioi) is a technical term by which Paul informs Christians that they are “God’s special people,” and as such are responsible to become like God. If G od is himself holy, i.e., perfect in purity and goodness and justice and love (cf. Lev 19:2-18), then as “holy ones,” that is, as God’s own people, Christians must strive to be like G od in character and conduct (cf. 1 Pet 1:16). In other words, relationship to G od demands a proper ethical response. Thus, at the very beginning o f this letter Christians are not only informed o f who they are because o f what G od has done for them in Christ, but o f what they are to become by means o f their own moral struggles. The highest calling for Christians is stated immediately, and the course is set for the direction along which the activity o f their entire lives must proceed. Further, the implication o f Paul’s prayer in 1:9-11— “I pray that your love may keep on increasing still more and more . . . in order that you may be filled with the fruit of righteousness that Jesus Christ produces”— is that Chris­ tians are people characterized by love (agape), and goodness (dikaiosynē ). This is to say, they are people who are ready to sacrifice and serve, to give and forgive, to help and sympa­ thize, to lift up the fallen and restore the broken (cf. Rom

PH ILIPPIANS

92

12:9,10; 1 C or 13:4-7; Gal 5:25). And they are such because they have been transformed by the power o f G od and are kept productive in love and goodness by the generative power of Christ (Phil 1:11). And yet the very writing down o f this prayer and the sending o f it along in the letter indicate that it was not only an appeal to G od to act for the Philippians, but an exhorta­ tion to the Philippians to act in their own behalf. Certainly the apostle intended the Philippians to overhear, as it were, what he had to say to God about them. Once again, then, the dual nature o f the Christian life becomes evident— G od works and the Christian must work. G od initiates love and fosters it, but the Christian is coresponsible with G od for its increase. Together they work to take love beyond mere feeling and desire, beyond intention solely, into a dynamic, ever-increasing action that discriminatingly seeks out the best for everyone and harm to no one (Phil 1:9-11; cf. Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:13). The clearest, most unambiguous statement o f God’s in­ tent to incorporate human volition and action into his di­ vine plan to achieve personal and corporate goodness is made by Paul in Phil 2:12,13: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is G od who is at work in you both to will and to do his good pleasure.” The word “salvation” that Paul uses here is not to be understood in a theological sense referring to the eternal salvation o f the human soul, but in the less ultimate sense of the restoration o f an ailing church to health. And here it is not the individual believer who is being called upon “to a personal application of salvation” (Müller).4 Rather, the en­ tire Christian community (note that the “you” is plural here) is being charged with responsibly taking whatever steps are needed to recover wholeness. The context favors this latter understanding of the word “salvation,” for 1:27-2:4 details 93

The Christian Life

symptoms o f a serious malady that had seized the Christian community at Philippi, a spiritual illness from which it needed to be delivered. Because the Philippians, as all Christians, were living between two ages— this present evil age and the new age o f righteousness— and were partaking o f the character o f both, they were still capable o f being motivated by party spirit, selfishness, conceit, pride and arrogance. All o f these are negative qualities that destroy unity and tear people apart from one another (2:2-4). O n the other hand, the Philippians had been recreated by the power o f God. They thus had been freed from the pow­ ers o f the kingdom o f darkness, this age, and delivered into the kingdom o f light and love— the new age (cf. C ol 1:12, 13). A s a consequence it was possible for Paul to appeal to them to get busy and work out their own salvation. In effect, he was saying: You chose to yield to the forces o f evil that have wreaked havoc in your church. Now you can also choose to resist these forces, to withstand them, to go on the offensive against them for good. And furthermore, as those be­ longing to the new age of righteousness you must! Therefore, obey and begin to work at achieving spiri­ tual health among yourselves (2:12). Stop grumbling. Stop arguing (2:14). Hurry! You do not have to wait for my coming. G et busy, for it is God, not I, who presides over this renewal and it is he who is effectively at work among you creating both the desire and the drive to promote good will toward one another. (2:12,13) Hence, it is clear that Christians individually and corpo­ rately have a very large part to play in the steady maintenance and strengthening o f the new life which they have received from G od as the result o f Christ’s death and resurrection. PHILIPPIANS

94

They too are very much responsible for that continuous, constant, plodding progress toward goodness o f character translated into goodness o f conduct called “sanctification.” Christians are given no encouragement whatever to say, “This work o f sanctification is God’s responsibility, not ours; it is the work o f the Holy Spirit, not ours. ” Christians are to act True, they are to act with humility and respect, with fear and trembling (2:12), but they are to act nonetheless. Chris­ tians are responsible for whether or not they make progress in righteousness, whether or not they become increasingly good people. While agreeing that this is true, one must nevertheless recognize and allow for this fact that Collange points out: [In 2:13 Paul] gives G od [the] dominant place at the very heart o f human activity; he it is who “energizes” the action o f man and even motivates it. But it must be noticed that Paul does not state this truth in a restrictive sense as though putting a bridle upon human freedom, but rather with a positive, outgoing meaning; hencefor­ ward no obstacle can any longer shackle the efforts o f men “directed at mutual good will” since G od himself is at work in these efforts. Divine action does not cur­ tail human action but rather provokes a reaction which it supports. Finally, then, and by way o f summary, because Paul under­ stands the ambiguous position in which Christians find themselves—between two ages, this age and the age to come— he understands the nature o f Christians: They are people who partake o f the characteristics o f both worlds. Hence he is able to acknowledge the fact, and not be surprised or shocked by it, that Christians are indeed capa­ ble o f allowing themselves to be motivated by jealousy and quarrelsomeness (1:15). He knows that Christians can and 95

The Christian Life

do intentionally hurt one another because o f personal ambi­ tion (1:17). He is quite aware that Christians can and do act selfishly, arrogantly, looking out for their own interests, not those o f others or o f Jesus Christ (2:3, 21). He realizes that Christians can and do fight among themselves and create disharmony and disunity within the community o f faith (4:2). He understands that Christians can and do grumble and complain (2:14), and worry and are anxious (4:6). He is indeed ready to recognize the hard facts of life in this world—the unpleasant things about Christians that every­ one would like to forget Paul refuses to hide such weak­ nesses as though they did not exist Nevertheless he is unwilling to accept or be tolerant with the status quo. Christians are also responsible for change and growth within themselves. Hence, the abundance of imperatives in Philippians: • conduct yourselves in a manner worthy o f the gospel of Christ (1:27) • strive for unity (2:2) • do nothing from selfishness (2:3) • look out for the interests o f others (2:3) • live in harmony (4:1, 2) • help those in need (4:3) • stop being anxious (4:6), and so on. Christ died not only to save people from the conse­ quences o f their sin, but from their sins. God’s action to save people through Christ was designed ultimately to make them good, and doers of that which is good. God’s intent in the cross was to create a community o f caring people, a group of people characterized by love, people who could never be blamed for having harmed anyone, only applauded for shining as lights in the darkness, for being children of God, Le., people o f goodness, in a world o f corrupt and sinful men and women (2:15). PHILIPPIANS

96

Steps tow ard sanctification Since sanctification is so very important and includes hu­ man effort, Paul is concerned that this effort not be left to chance or intuition. He wants the Philippians to know what they can do, what steps they can take to guarantee their progress in the Christian faith and life. The advice he gives the Philippians is o f such a nature that it can be made good use o f by Christians in all generations. For one thing, he tells them to forget the past (3:13). Recollection o f wrongs done in the past, o f past failures and sins can impede Christian growth. If these are allowed to fill one’s mind they have the capacity to paralyze with guilt or to fill one with despair. It is possible to forget past sins and faults, because God, in effect, has said in Christ: “I love you; I forgive you; I heal you. Sin is one very important reason you need me. I have acted to remove it from you. So forget this part o f your pasti” Furthermore, recollecting past attainments, permitting the mind to dwell upon successes and achievements can also retard Christian development. It may give Christians the false belief that they can put life in neutral and say, “We have arrived” (cf. 3:12). So forget the past, Paul urges. Forget it in such a way that the past, good or bad, will have no negative bearing on one’s present spiritual growth. Second, Paul encourages the Philippians (Christians) to live full out, to live straining toward what is ahead, to race for the finish line! (3:13 , 14). The words Paul chose in order to give this piece o f advice come from the athletic contests. One o f them is a rare word, used only here in the New Testament. Literally it means “to stretch full out” (epektein ­ om ai). It pictures the Christian as a runner in the Olympic games with his body bent over, his hand outstretched, his head fixed forward, his eyes fastened on the goal (Vincent).

97

The Christian Life

This word powerfully describes the need for concentration, for prodigious effort, and for the determination not to quit. Vividly it portrays the ceaseless personal exertion and the intensity o f desire that a person must have if he wishes to reach the goal— the high calling o f God. The other word, too, (diōkō, “I press on,” “I run”) under­ scores what has already been communicated by the verb “to stretch u f ll out,” reinforcing the idea that the Christian life can never be thought o f as static, but dynamic. This word also focuses on the necessity for striving, for constantly pur­ suing, for resolute determination in order to make life’s aim— Christ-like character and conduct— a reality. Thus, to be a true Christian is no easy matter; it is a difficult, chal­ lenging life that calls forth people’s greatest courage and moral strength. In some respects it would be easier to give one’s life blood once for all than drop by drop in the daily struggle o f life. M ost Christians, however, are called upon to travel this more difficult way. These two pieces o f advice in one sense were Paul’s motto for living. They together became the focus o f his life: I concentrate on this; I forget all that lies behind me and with hands outstretched to whatever lies ahead I go straight for the goal—my reward the honor o f my high calling by G od in Christ Jesus. (3:13,14 Phillips) Third, Paul says, “Pray!” (4:6). How do people gain and keep their equilibrium in a world heaving with anxiety-creating situations? How do Christians keep their balance? How do they ward off wor­ ries that sap their growth in the faith? Paul’s answer? By prayer! Believing that G od is, that he is greater than the greatest problem, that he is deeply interested in Christian development, and that he is the rewarder o f those who earnestly seek him (cf. Heb 11:6), Paul emphatically urges PHILIPPIANS

98

the Philippians to find release from their anxieties in prayer and more prayer. From personal experience Paul had learned that “the way to be anxious about nothing was to be prayerful about every­ thing” (Jones).5 So he writes to the Philippians, “Let G od know what is troubling you” (4:6). This may seem a rather quaint way Paul has o f broaching the subject o f prayer, “Let G od know”— as though G od needed to be informed about anything. Paul is telling the Philippians that while they must never think o f prayer as a means o f manipulating God, or as a way o f pressuring G od to do what they want— as a magic lamp, so to speak, rubbed to put G od at their se rv ic e prayer is nevertheless to be cherished. Prayer is an opportu­ nity to give expression to their concerns, to put into words their desires, to articulate their deepest yearnings. Paul is saying, in effect, that prayer is a conversation with a person, in this case the supreme Person o f the universe— “Let your request be made known to God.” Why? Because G od hears, knows, understands, cares about, and will re­ spond as he knows best to those things that could otherwise sink people in despair and stunt their growth as Christians. But when Christians bring their petitions to God, they may discover that many o f these anxious prayers wither away under his judgment, seen there for what they are— simply selfish requests. And if this happens, these, then, may be replaced with true prayers, prayers for grace to accept what is, or for the courage and strength to team up with G od to change what must be changed. “And pray with thanksgiving,” Paul continues (4:6). “Be grateful.” Gratitude to G od is a very big thing to Paul as can be seen from Romans 1:21, and from reading Paul’s own prayers (cf. Phil 1:3,4). To begin by praising God for the fact that in this situa­ tion, as it is, he is so mightily God— such a beginning 99

The Christian Life

is the end o f anxiety. To be anxious means that we ourselves suffer, ourselves groan, ourselves seek to see ahead. Thanksgiving means giving God the glory in ev­ erything, making room for him, casting our care on him, letting it be his care. The troubles that exercise us then cease to be hidden and bottled up. They are, so to speak, laid open to God, spread out before him. (Barth)6 A s a result o f bringing one’s anxieties to G od in prayer, Paul then writes, “the peace o f G od will guard your inner­ most selves” (4:7). God’s peace (eirēnē) about which Paul is here referring is not mere calmness and serenity. Rather, it is that which reaches out and creates health, harmony, and wholeness. This peace is the fundamental mark o f the mes­ sianic kingdom (cf. Isa 9:6, 7), nearly synonymous with messianic salvation (Acts 10:36; Eph 2:17; 6:15; cf. Isa 52:7). Peace, then, is characteristic o f the new age to come, the age o f the Messiah (Christ), the age to which Christians now belong. It is that wholeness o f the self, that health o f the soul, that harmony within a person and with G od that should characterize Christians to such an extent that their personal goodness will work creatively to benefit that part of the world in which they find themselves. So pray! And what begins with people informing G od about their anxieties ends with G od letting them know what really matters to him and filling their minds with peace, his creative, health-bringing calmness o f soul that frees them to think rightly and to take hold cooperatively with him to help answer their own prayers. Fourth, in a section where Paul focuses on moral excel­ lence (arete — the highest good o f human beings) as a worthy goal for which Christians should strive, he adds two further steps toward achieving. They fairly well sum up what needs to be done from the human side in the process o f sanctifica­ tion—-you must think and you must act (4:8, 9). Thought PHILIPPIANS

100

and practice, mind and body working together, are inseparable. Paul presents these two steps in a highly rhetorical fash­ ion spelling out in considerable detail how a Christian must think and act: Think about these things: about whatever is truthful, about whatever is majestic, about whatever is just, about whatever is pure, about whatever calls forth love, about whatever is winsome. Put into practice these things: the lessons you learned from me, and the traditions I passed on to you, and the things you heard from me, and the things you saw in me. When Paul says “Think about these things” (4:8) he uses a word that means “to reckon, calculate, take into account” It means also “to ponder or let one’s mind dwell on.” It implies that the Christian is to approach life critically, that is to say, carefully evaluating the worth o f the things he allows to govern his life. Fundamentally important to the develop­ ment o f Christians, to their progress toward goodness, is the training o f their minds to be able to distinguish between good and bad (cf. Phil 1:9,10; Heb 5:14), and the consequent rigorous disciplining o f themselves so that they will sponta­ neously choose the good. Paul knows that what people think about governs their conduct For this reason he not only encourages Christians to think, but he gives them some idea o f the things that they should think about He says in effect “Fit yourselves for proper action by filling your minds with proper thoughts.” And so he proceeds to make practical suggestions. 101

The Christian Life

1. Think about things that are true. 2. Focus your minds also on things that merit respect This phrase, “things that merit respect,” is the translation o f just one Greek word which is difficult to express in such a way as to include all the ideas contained in it— “things honest, honorable, noble, worthy, venerable,” and more. By choos­ ing this word Paul at least means to say that Christians must let their minds be occupied with lofty things, majestic things, things that lift them from the cheap and tawdry to that which is noble and good and o f moral worth. 3. Ponder things that are just; think about what it means to give to G od and people what is due them. This word points to the importance o f Christians thinking about duty and obligation and about what they must do to meet their obligations and fulfill them completely. 4. Think about things that are pure. By adding this word, “pure,” to the list o f things to think about the apostle is not asking that the Philippians fix their attention only on those things that foster chastity. He is concerned that they also ponder what is involved in producing purity in motives; he would have them consider that purity o f heart which per­ mits a person to see G od (cf. Matt 5:8). 5. Let your minds dwell on all those things that are lovely, amiable, attractive, winsome. These are the things that, when thought about and put into practice in life, elicit from others not bitterness and hostility, but admiration and affec­ tion. 6. Paul ends this list o f “good things” to think about, although he makes no pretense that this is an exhaustive list, with a word often translated, “things of good report” (k jv ). In fact, however, this word has a much more active meaning than that given by the old translation. It conveys also the meaning o f “winsome, attractive.” It is very similar in idea to the one immediately before it, and thus underscores an im­ portant Christian concept: think often and long about those PH ILIPPIANS

102

things that are likely to win people to the faith and will help them grow, rather than let your minds dwell on things that, when practiced, will give offense and drive people away from C h rist A s people think, so they act! These then are the excellent qualities Paul asked the Philippians to focus their minds upon. But it was never his desire that they should merely think about such lofty matters. It was his intent that they should put them into practice. And so he uses still another imperative— “Act! Do!” (v 9). Paul wants them to put into practice more than just the things he has listed in v 8. M ost o f these things were but the excellent qualities that belonged to the culture o f his day— good ideas borrowed from Greek moral philosophy. Hence what Paul has to say in v 9 follows v 8 and, thus, takes priority. Paul urges the Philippians to go beyond the standards o f con­ temporary culture. They are to put into practice, that is to say, loyally stand by, hold unswervingly to, allow their lives to be controlled by what they heard from him, i.e., be controlled by everything they heard him say that pertains to the gospel o f God’s saving act in C h rist Furthermore, he wants them to practice what they had seen him do. What the Philippians had heard from Paul was the gospel— God’s power to reconcile people to himself, the dy­ namic to transform lives and make people over from bad to good and from good to better. This gospel held within itself the energy to send these transformed people out as lights into the darkness, as healers into a sick world, as guideposts for life in the confusion o f conflicting ways to travel And the things that the Philippians had seen Paul do were things that perfectly coincided with his message. He practiced what he preached. Without arrogance he was able to say, in effect, “I never separated the grand ideas o f the Christian gospel from action. I never left them only as high-sounding words and phrases ringing about in people’s minds. Rather, I translated them all into deeds. I made it possible for people to 103

The Christian Life

see the teachings o f the gospel embodied in the way I lived. My conduct made visible and understandable what could have been abstract and elusive ideas. And you must do the same!” Without embarrassment or hesitation o f any sort Paul asserts: “Look! Follow my example! Imitate me!” (Phil 3:17; cf. 1 C or 11:1). “It is your responsibility as Christians not only to preach the gospel, but to live it.” Fifth, one final step toward sanctification is that Chris­ tians are constantly to keep before them Christ as their model. Selfishness is among the most destructive o f all sins, if not the most destructive. Its tendency is to push self to the center and G od to the periphery o f life, and, hence, it bor­ ders on idolatry. It sets people against people, destroys unity and cooperation and incites to strife. It makes self-interests primary. It is a fundamental characteristic o f this present evil age. Christians, as has been pointed out, while belonging to the new age still bear the marks o f the old. It is possible still for selfishness to rise up within them and hinder or destroy their progress toward perfection. How can the Christian combat selfishness and overcome it? Paul’s answer: Hold up constantly before your eyes the way o f Christ. In Christ you see one who was in the form o f God, in very nature God, who did not consider equality with G od some­ thing to be used selfishly to his own advantage. Rather, he poured himself out to benefit others; he became a human being and set himself to serve; he humbled himself and did not put himself at the center, but God. He determined to obey God. Hence, G od honored and exalted him. Now, says Paul, this attitude must be your attitude. The same frame o f mind toward life that controlled Christ’s mind and actions must also control yours. A s he set his own self aside and his self-interests and gave first place to the interests o f people and God, so you must do the same. And the “should” can become “is,” the “ought” can become a PHILIPPIANS

104

reality by steady, constant reflection on this course o f action that Christ took, by constantly pondering Christ’s conduct, by allowing one’s way o f thinking to be controlled by the way Christ thought. Sum m ary Sanctification, then, includes human effort. There are things that the Christian is expected to do, even required to do. Individual and community responsibility is a theme that pervades Philippians—volition and action, willing the good and doing the good characterize Christians of the new age. But never is this effort thought o f as a substitute for or as antecedent to G od’s saving work in Jesus Christ. The gospel is that people are reconciled to G od by the death and resur­ rection o f Christ, by the free gracious gift o f life offered them by God, not by anything they can do. No one by dint o f human effort can make himself acceptable to God. People can only in humility and awe reach out and take God’s free gift (3:3-11). Nor is the side o f sanctification that involves individual or corporate action ever to be thought o f as an effort indepen­ dent o f God’s continuing gracious prompting and enabling. The Christian life, as formulated by Paul, not only envisions one’s own obedience to G od’s commandments— the human determination to put these commandments into practice. It also envisions an obedience that proceeds from belonging to Christ and from the possession o f the Spirit which is at work within the individual Christian and within the church (2:12, 13). These two things must never be thrust apart or viewed separately— God’s will does not exclude human voli­ tion and action. It includes them, finding its purest fulfill­ ment in their fullest exercise.

105

The Christian Life

7

THE NOTE OF JOY

O f all the themes that can be detected in Philippians, joy is the most obvious. It, too, has great theological signifi­ cance, for here, as in the O ld Testament (cf. Pss 5:11; 9:1,2; Neh 8:10), joy is ultimately rooted in an unshakeable faith in G od and springs from a deep conviction that G od acts to save his people. Three word-groups in the New Testament are translated “joy,” “rejoice.” The first o f these, agalliaom ai/agalliasis, is used to describe shouts o f joy, singing, clapping o f hands, lifting up o f the voice in glad praise and prayer to G od (cf. Luke 1:14,44,47). It retains in the New Testament its defi­ nite religious sense. The second word-group, euphrainō / euphrosynē, although primarily intended to identify the inner, subjective feelings o f merriment and good cheer, also describes the outward expres­ sions o f that cheer, such as banqueting, eating, drinking, and making merry (cf. Luke 15:23,32). These two word-groups are the ones made most use of in the O ld Testament They are, however, used sparingly by the New Testament writers. 107

The Note o f Joy

The third word-group, chairō / chara /synchairō, although originally secular in usage, becomes the religious word-group for joy in the New Testament, used a total o f 140 times. “Joy” is the hallmark o f the Christian era— initiated at the birth o f Jesus (Matt 2:10), accented at his resurrection/ascension with the accompanying beginning o f the church age (Luke 24:52), and persisting to the present, even when Christians are subjected to suffering (cf. Jas 1:2; 1 Pet 1:6,7). Paul never uses words for joy from the first group, and rarely from the second. But the third group is his special word-group. H e alone o f the New Testament writers ac­ counts for more than fifty uses o f such words pertaining to joy. This kind o f joy is a distinctive, recurring theme in Paul’s letters, in spite o f the fact that so much o f his own life was marked by pain, disappointments, and afflictions o f vàrious kinds (cf. 2 C or 11:23— 30). The words in this group may at one time have been used to describe a mood that stemmed from physical comfort, well-being, and the benefits o f health. But these ideas form only a small part o f what Paul had in mind when he used them. He usually put these words for joy in contexts o f G od’s saving acts in C hrist and the hope for the future that belongs to the Christian because o f Christ. Because o f this the gospel he preached was a gospel o f joy—joy that is not primarily dependent on health, wealth, comfort, or general well­ being, but on God. Joy is a theme that pervades Philippians. Joy here is ex­ pressed by the words chairō (“to rejoice,” nine times— 1:18 [twice]; 2:17, 18, 28; 3:1; 4:4 [twice], 10), chara (“joy,” five times—1:4,25; 2:2,29; 4:1) and synchairō (“to rejoice with,” two times— 2:17, 18). To translate these words seems easy enough, but to understand what Paul meant by them is something much more difficult There appears to be a para­ doxical nature to his idea o f joy that is not always easy to grasp or express. PH ILIPPIANS

108

A n inner quality On the one hand, joy appears for Paul as that something within a person that is not at all able to be affected by external happenings. For example, Paul was in prison, not as a penalty for crimes done, but as a result of being a witness to Christ (1:13). Yet this unhappy state of affairs did not diminish his joy (1:18). People, fellow-Christians very likely, treated him with hostility, tried to hurt him, and were set on making his life still more miserable than it already was. Yet this did not affect his joy (1:18). Even the possibility of his life coming to a violent end could not keep the apostle from being doubly joyful (chairō and synchairō together in the same sentence—2:17). To quote Barth, joy for Paul was. “a defiant ‘nevertheless’ which [he set] like a full stop against” any resentment, self-pity, anxiety or fear that might otherwise have welled up within him. A ffe cte d by ou ter circu m stan ce

But on the other hand, joy seems also something that can be affected by external happenings. For example, Paul says that Christians at Philippi were his joy, or the source o f his joy, if they continued to stand firm in the Lord (4:1). The implication of this conditional expression is that any defec­ tion from the faith, any disloyalty to Christ on the part of the Philippians would rob Paul o f his joy. Again, it is clear that the Philippians were capable o f in­ creasing Paul’s joy by responding positively to his appeal for unity (2:2). Should they fail in this, therefore, their contin­ ued disunity would effectively diminish his joy. Further, Epaphroditus, a person sent by the Philippian church to be Paul’s assistant, fell severely ill while serving him. Had he died, had God not had mercy on Paul by sparing Epaphroditus’s life, Paul would have had sorrow on top of 109

The Note of Joy

sorrow—the very opposite o f joy (2:27; cf. 2 Cor 2:3). Epaphroditus’s recovery, therefore, was grounds for rejoicing (2:28, 29). Thus joy seems also to be something that can in­ deed be altered, heightened or diminished, affected in some way by external happenings. How is the paradox that joy is something unaffected, and yet also affected by external events, to be understood? How is one to reconcile Paul’s many remarks about joy and rejoic­ ing which appear again and again in this letter with appar­ ently conflicting meanings? The resolution o f this paradox, and an understanding o f what is intended by joy, may come from observing what else Paul wrote about this very important subject. One begins to suspect after careful observation that when he talked o f joy he was in reality describing a settled state o f mind character­ ized by what can best be described as peace— an attitude that viewed the world with all o f its ups and downs with equa­ nimity, a confident way o f looking at life that was rooted in faith, a keen awareness o f and trust in the living Lord o f the church (1:25,26). Over and over again Paul reminds himself and the Philippians— and all Christians, for that matter— to “rejoice in the Lord!” (3:1; 4:4,10). Hence, for Paul, joy is more than a mood or an emotion, more than a state or feeling, although it includes all these. Joy is rather an understanding o f existence that encompasses both elation and depression. It is a world-view that is able to accept with creative submission all events that come along, both o f delight and o f dismay. It is a perception o f reality that generates hope and endurance in affliction and temptation, ease and prosperity, because joy allows one to see beyond any particular event, good or bad, to the sovereign Lord who stands above all events and ultimately has control over them. Joy, to be sure, “includes within itself readiness for martyr­ dom,” but equally the eagerness to go on living and serving, even under the most difficult o f circumstances. PHILIPPIANS

110

NOTES

Introduction 1. E. Stauffer, N e w Testament Theology, J. Marsh, trans. (London: SCM Press, 1955), 35. Chapter 2 The Providence of God and the Problem of Evil 1. J. Jeremias, N e w T e sta m e n t T heology, J. Bowden, trans. (London: SCM Press, 1971), I. 9. 2. R. P. M artin, P h ilip p ia n s, NCBC (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1980), 84. 3. J. Macquarrie, P rinciples o f C h ristia n T heology, 2nd ed. (New York: Chas. Scribner’s Sons, 1977), 219. Chapter 3 The Person of Christ 1. K. H. Rengstorf, “Jesus C hrist,” NIDNT, C. Brown, ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976), II. 338. 2. L. Cerfaux, Christ in th e T h eo lo g y o f S a in t P aul (New York: Herder &. Herder, 1959), 501-505. 3. C. F. D. Moule, The Origin o f C hristology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 95. 4. Ibid., 150. 5. G. Kittel, ed., T D N T (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1964), I. 738-40. 111

Notes

Chapter 4 The Christ-Hymn 1. R. Bultmann, T heology o f th e N e w T esta m en t, K. Grobel, trans. (New York: Chas. Scribner’s Sons, 1951), I. 167. 2. J. D. G. Dunn, C hristology in th e M a k in g (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1980), 114-21; J. Ziesler, P a u lin e C h ristia n ity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983), 41-44. 3. N. T. W right, “H a rp a g m o s and the Meaning of Philippians ii.5-11,” unpublished paper. This paper in revised form has now been published too late for use in this book; see JTS 37 (Oct 1986) 321-52. 4. L. Cerfaux, 385. 5. C. F. D. Moule, “The Manhood of Jesus in the New Testa­ ment,’’ in Christ, F a ith a n d H istory, S. W. Sykes and J. P. Clayton, eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 97. 6. Wright, see on n. 3. 7. M. Jones, P h ilip p ia n s (London: Methenen & Co., 1918), 31, 32. 8. K. Grayston, T h e E pistles to th e G a la tia n s a n d to th e P hilippia n s (London: Epworth Press, 1957), a d loc. 9. K. Barth, T h e E p istle to th e P h ilippians, J. W. Leitch, trans. (Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1962), 64. 10. W right, see on n. 3. 11. Ibid. 12. Ibid. Chapter 6 The Christian life 1. J. F. Collange, T h e E p istle o f S t. P aul to th e P hilippians, A. W. Heathcote, trans. (London: Epworth Press, 1979), 140. 2. J. Ziesler, 85. 3. A. Richardson, A n In tro d u ctio n to th e T heology o f th e N e w T e sta m e n t (London: SCM Press, 1958), 237. 4. J. J. Müller, T h e E pistles o f P aul to th e P h ilip p ia n s a n d to P h ilem o n (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1955), 91. 5. M. Jones, 67. See J. H. Michael, T h e E p istle to th e P h ilip p ia n s MNTC (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1928), 197. 6. K. Barth, 122,123. PHILIPPIANS

112

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barth, K. The Epistle to the Philippians. Tr. J. W. Leitch. Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1962. Beare, F. W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians, BHNTC. London, New York: Harper & Bros., 1959. Brown:Rengstorf=Rengstorf, K. H., “Jesus Christ,” in the New Interna­ tional Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Ed. C. Brown. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976,330-43. Bultmann, R. Theology of the New Testament. Tr. K. Grobel. New York: Chas. Scribner’s Sons, 1951,I, 167. Cerfaux, L. Christ in the Theology of Saint Paul. New York: Herder & Herder, 1959,310. Collange, J. F. The Epistle of Saint Paul to the Philippians. Tr. A. W. Heathcote. London: Epworth Press, 1979. Dunn, J. D. G. Christology in the Making. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1980,114-21. Grayston, K. The Epistles to the Galatians and to the Philippians. London: Epworth Press, 1957. Hawthorne, G. F. Philippians, WBC 43. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983. Jeremias, J. New Testament Theology. Tr. J. Bowden. London: SCM Press, 1971,I,9. 113

Bibliography

Jones, M. Philippians. London: Methenen & Co., 1918. Kittel:Schlier= Schlier, H. TDNT. I, Tr. G. W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1964,738-40. Lightfoot, J. B. Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians. London: Macmillan, 1896. Macquarrie, J. Principles of Christian Theology. 2nd ed. New York: Chas. Scribner’s Sons, 1977,243,44. Martin, R. P. Carmen Christi: Philippians 2:5-11 in Recent Inter­ pretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1983. __ Philippians. NCBC, Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1980. MM= Moulton, J. H. and Milligan, G. The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1963. Moule, C. R D. “Further Reflexions on Philippians 2:5-11,” in Apostolic History and the Gospel. Ed. W. W. Gasque and R. P. Martin. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans,. 1970. _____ “The Manhood of Jesus in the New Testament,” in Christ, Faith and History. Ed. S. W. Sykes and J. P. Clayton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976,95-110. _ _ _ _ _ The Origin ofChristology. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer­ sity Press, 1977,95,126,150. Müller, J. J. The Epistles of Paul to the Philippians and to Philemon. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1955. Richardson, A. An Introduction to the Theology of the New Testa­ ment. London: SCM Press, 1958,237. Stauffer, E. New Testament Theology. Tr. J. Marsh. London: SCM Press, 1955,35. Vincent, M. R. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Philippians and Philemon. ICC. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1897. Wright, N. T., “HARPAGMOS and the Meaning of Philippians ii.5-11,” unpublished paper, recently published in a revised form in JTS 37 (Oct 1986) 321-52. Ziesler, J. Pauline Christianity. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983,41-44.

PHILIPPIANS

114

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

Old Testament Genesis 1:1 1:26 2:4 2:16-17 3:1-7 3:5 3:23-24 19:2 27:29 27:37 45:8 Exodus 3:14 15:1-3 20:3-4 20:5 Leviticus 4:3 4:5 4:16 19:2 19:2-18 Deuteronomy 6:5 6:13

115

22 63 22 64 64 64,69 78 51 51 51 35 22 52 22 23 44 44 44 22 92 58 23

10:12 10:20 14:1-3 18:15-19 Joshua 1:9

23 23 22 45 58

Judges 19:22-23 1 Samuel

51

10:1 16:1-3 24:6 25:4 2 Samuel 7:13 22:51 1 Chronicles 16:22 Nehemiah 8:10 Psalms 5:11 9:1-2 36:9 89:3-4 89:28-29

44 44 44 66 45 44 44 58,107 107 107 22 45 45

89:35-36 97:5 105:12-15 106:21 110:1 119:151 132:11-12

44 51 44 57 53 58 45

Isaiah 2:10-22 9:6-7 9:7 11:1-2 37:16 40:25 42:1-4 44:6 45:1 45:21 45:22b-23 45:23 46:13 51:5 52:7 53 59:2 64:12-65:5

86 44,100 45 45 22 22 44 22 44 82 57 74 82 82 100 46 78 52

Jeremiah 31:34

58

In dex o f Scriptu res

Ezekiel 34:23-24 37:24-25 Daniel 7:13-14 Joel 3:12-16a Micah 4:7 4:13 Habakkuk 3:3 Zechariah 4:14 6:5

44 44 45,59 86 45 52 22 52 52

New Testament Matthew 1:21 2:4-6 2:10 5:8 16:16 18:4 23:12 27:16 Mark 1:7 1:9 1:14 8:28 8:29 8:31-32 10:43-44 10:45 14:15 14:30 15:1 15:26 15:37 15:43 Luke 1:14 1:31-33 1:44 1:47

PHILIPPIANS

42 45 108 102 45 74 74 42 66 42 42 45 45 46 66 71 42 58 42 45 42 42 107 45 107 107

2:10-11 6:46 9:20 14:11 15:23 15:32 18:14 24:52 John 10:14 13:3-17 13:5 13:12-13 16:2 Acts 1:6 2:29-36 2:32 2:36 3:1-10 4:12 5:34 5:34-37 7:25 7:31-32 7:59-8:1 9:1-6 10:36 16:9-40 16:12 17:1-3 17:24-25 20:1-6 22:3 22:3-8 22:3-10 22:10 26:4-16 26:9-18 Romans 1:9 1:7 1:18 1:18-32 1:20-23 1:21 1:21-23 1:21-31 2:8-9

46 55 45 74 107 107 74 108 46 65 66 66 18 45 46 59 59 77 77 17 46 77 11 18 18,19 100 13 14 46 22 14 17 18 19 52 18 19 23 82,83 28,79 86 22 99 88 79 86

3:9-18 3:21-28 3:23 3:24-26 3:26 4:5 5:6 5:6-9 5:8 5:9 5:12-18 5:12-21 6:18-22 6:19-23 6:20-23 7:1-6 7:15-17 8:1-3 8:11 8:28-38 8:37-39 9:1-4 10:2 10:4 10:9 11:36 12:1-2 12:9-10 13:8-10 14:7-9 14:8 15:16 15:19 16:16-18 16:26-27 1 Corinthians 1:23-24 2:2 3:15 4:10-13 5:5 6:13b 8:4-6 9:1 11:1 11:26 12:3 13 13:4-7 15:3-5

86 83 79 86 42 47 79,83 83 81 79,89 63 50 55 79 83 55 78 55 42,43 38 83 79 18 83 53,5 4 22 23 92 93 48 54 82 83 15 22 49 49 89 62 89 54 22, 54 18 104 53 42 62 93 47

116

15:7-9 15:9-10 15:12-22 15:21-22 15:22 15:42-50 15:45 15:45-49 16:22 2 Corinthians 1:12 2:3 2:13 4:7-18 4:10-14 5:16 5:17 5:18-20 5:21 8:9 9:8 11:6 11:23-30 12:7-10 Galatians 1:1-17 1:7 1:13 1:15-16 1:23 3:13 3:20 4:3-7 4:8-9 5:5 5:13 5:19-21 5:25 6:17 Ephesians 1:23 2:3 2:16 2:17 4:6 4:10 4:21 4:32 5:14

117

18 15 47 63 50 87 63 50 53 91 110 14 91 42 43 90 83 86 71 27 62 108 34 53 15 18 18 18 83 22 83 55 91 93 37 93 42 71 86 86 100 22 71 42 36 61

5:19 61 6:15 100 Philippians 1:1 48.49.50.54.92 1:2 22,33,51,55,56 1:3 24,25,29,55 99 1:3-4 1:3-6 30 13,16 1:3-8 108 1:4 48.85 1:6 19 1:7 24.48 1:8 101 1:9-10 92,93 1:9-11 43.85 1:10 22.24.48.55.93 1:11 1:12-13 14 37 1:12-14 16 1:12-16 43,109 1:13 51,52,58 1:14 33 1:14-17 28,43,95 1:15 15,47 1:15-17 1:15-18 37 28,96 1:17 43 1:17-18 47.108.109 1:18 1:19 48,77 1:20 44 48 1:20-21 47,50 1:21 1:23 44 108 1:25 110 1:25-26 48.49 1:26 17,44,47,83,96 1:27 33 1:27b 16 1:27-30 93 1:27-2:4 29,33,35 1:28 57 1:28b 33,35,44 1:29 44,76 2:1 19 2:1-4 25 2:1-11 33.108.109 2:2 96 2:2-3 17,28,94 2:2-4

2:3 2:3-4 2:5 2:6 2:6-7 2:6-8 2:6-11 2:7 2:7-8 2:8 2:9 2:10 2:10-11 2:11 2:11-13 2:12 2:12-13 2:12-14 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:17-18 2:18 2:19 2:21 2:24 2:25 2:25-30 2:26 2:26-27 2:27 2:27-29 2:28 2:29 2:30 3:1 3:1-2 3:2 3:2-3 3:2-21 3:3 3:3-11 3:4-6 3:4-11 3:5-6

33.96 66,67,76 48,50 55,63,64,68,74 67,70,72, 75 33 29,38,42,61,62, 65,76,83 66 64,71 73, 83 51,56,66 43.74 23,54,57 22,35,51,52,56, 66.74 105 77 33.35.93.95 94 25 28.96 22.24.55.96 44,85 109 108 17 52 33,48,96 16,51,52 26 14,16,26,31 34 33 26,34 110 108 51,52,108 44,58 17,51,52,58, 108,110 15 79 23,80 16 23,24,48,49 105 81 15,19 17

In dex o f Scriptu res

3:7-10 19,44,48,58 3:8 51,52 3:8-10 85 3:9 24,28,47,82,83,84 3:11 86 3:12 48,97 3:13-14 97,98 3:14 27,48,50,55 3:17 19,104 3:17-19 19 3:18 44,47 3:18-19 87 3:19 23,28,88 3:20 51,52,57,86 3:21 35,87 4:1 14,58,108,109 4:1-2 51 4:1-3 96 4:1-5 52 4:2 17,28,33,96 4:2-4 19 4:4 17,51,58,108,110 4:5 51,58 4:6 24,55,96,98,99 4:6-7 26 4:7 33,48,50,55,100 4:8 101 4:8-9 100,103 4:10 51,52,108,110 4:10-20 15 4:16 13 4:18 23,26 4:19 25,27,48,50 4:20 23,55 4:21 49 4:22 14 4:23 51,52,56

PHILIPPIANS

Colossians 1:12-13 1:12-22 1:15-16 1:15-18 1:18 1:29 2:13-15 3:10 3:16 3:22-24 1 Thessalonians 1:9 1:10 2:2 2:13-16 4:14 5:9 1 Timothy 2:5 3:16 6:15-18 2 Timothy 2:11-13 Hebrews 2:14-15 5:14 11:6 11:7 12:10 James 1:2 1 Peter 1:6-7

46,94 83 22 61 41 87 83 90 61 55 22 42 82 15 42,43 89 22 61 22 61 83 101 98 77 91 108 108

1:16 Revelation 15:3-4 22:7 22:20

92 61 61 53

Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha 2 Apocalypse Baruch 70:8-9 73 82-83 4 Ezra 12:32 Psalms of Solomon 17:21-38 18:5-7 Sirach 48:10

45 45 45 45 45 45 45

Church Fathers Polycarp, Philippians 3:2

15

Dead Sea Scrolls 4 Q Florilegium 1:11 IQ S (Rule) 9:11 4Q Testimonia 14

45 45 45

118

Gerald F. Hawthorne Gerald F. Hawthorne is professor o f Greek at W heaton College. He is the author o f Philippians in the Word Bibli­ cal Commentary as well as Old Testament Canon and Apoc­ rypha and the commentary on Hebrews in the New Layman’s Bible Commentary. Dr. Hawthorne received the B.A. and M.A. degrees from W heaton College and the Ph.D. (in New Testament and Early Christian Literature) from the University o f Chicago.

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES 1 and 2 Thessalonians LEON MORRIS

ZONDERVAN A C A D E M IC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC 1 and 2 Thessalonians Copyright © 1989 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11573-1 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Morris, Leon. 1 and 2 Thessalonians: Leon Morris. p.  cm. Bibliography: p. Included index. ISBN 978-0-849-90797-5 1. Bible. N.T. Thessalonians—­Criticism, interpretations, etc. I. Title. II. Title: first and Second Thessalonians. III. Series. BS2725.2.M67 1989 227’.8106—dc189-56632 Quotations from the Scriptures in this volume are the author’s own translation unless otherwise indicated. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface Introduction 1. T he Living and True G od 2. Jesus C hrist O ur Lord 3. T he Last Things 4. The. Defeat o f Evil 5. T he C hristian Family 6. T he C hristian Life Notes Index o f Scriptures

V

vii ix

1 11 27 41 63 77 85

101 103

C ontents

EDITORS' FOREWORD

T he tw o Pauline letters to the church of the Thessalonians have the distinction o f being among the first pieces of extant correspondence betw een th e apostle and his congregations. They offer the m odem reader a wonderfully descriptive and appealing case history o f early Christianity, set in GrecoRom an society and beset by pressing problems o f a doctrinal and ethical character. They also reveal Paul’s handling o f those issues and the way he expected infant believers, only recently w on over from Hellenistic religious culture, to adopt th e C hristian way of belief and behavior. For C hristians in our day, living as we do in a society w hich has lost a lo t o f th e familiar landmarks o f traditional doctrine and ethical standards, these short letters have a particular appeal. D r. Leon M orris o f M elbourne, Australia, is no newcomer to the field of biblical exposition. In fact, he may be regarded as a veteran in this area, having produced an impressive array o f commentaries and studies on New Testament life and liter­ ature. N or is he unacquainted w ith the Thessalonian letters, vii

Foreword

since he has already released tw o volumes, in previous series, on these epistles. T he W ord Biblical Themes project, w hich aims to make the results of scholarly study readily accessible to lay people and m inisters o f the word, is fortunate to have secured his consent and cooperation in w riting the following small book. Students will still value Professor F. F. Bruce’s erudite contribution to th e W ord Biblical Commentary on the Thessalonian episdes (vol. 45; hereafter referred to in the text as W BC 45); to a wider audience, D r. M orris’s distillati on o f theological them es carries all the marks o f his own reflection and will prove a valuable companion volume and one to be used in its own rig h t The University of Sheffield Department of Biblical Studies England

Foreword

Ralph P. M artin New Testament Editor W ord Biblical Them es

viii

PREFACE

I count it a privilege to have been invited to w rite the W ord Biblical Themes book on the Thessalonian Epistles. The series is a significant one, w ith its emphasis n o t so m uch on the critical questions as on the theological ideas of the letters and their perm anent message for believers. There is a particular significance in studying the Thessa­ lonian correspondence because the tw o letters to th e church in Thessalonica m ust have been w ritten by about A.D. 50. M ost people hold them to have been the earliest letters o f th e great apostle (although some think Galatians was earlier). W hatever opinion may be favored on th a t question, there seems little doubt th at these letters were w ritten less than tw enty years after the crucifixion. It is fascinating to see how many of the great C hristian doctrines had already made their appearance by th at time. T he Thessalonian church had no great history o f earlier believers to inspire them such as we have w ith our stories o f great C hristians throughout the ages. We learn a good deal about these early believers from w hat Paul says, and we find ix

Preface

th at they have m uch to teach us. They made their mistakes, and there was m uch th at they did n o t understand, b u t they stood firm in difficult circumstances. O f course, th e counsel th e great apostle gave them is still full o f interest and inspira tion to C hristian people. We can all profit from a close study o f the great ideas expounded in these tw o letters. Leon Morris Melbourne, Australia

1,2 THESSALONIANS

X

INTRO DUCTIO N

Thessalonica an d its church Thessalonica was situated at the head o f th e Therm aic G ulf (now called the G ulf o f Salonika), w ith a fine harbor in front of it and a fertile plain behind i t These af c ts, taken w ith the additional af c t th at th e V ia Egnatia, th e main highway from Rome to places east, passed through it, m eant that the city was an im portant trading center (as it still is). It was th e capital o f th e Roman province o f Macedonia and its largest city. Paul came to this city o n his second m issionary journey. Together w ith Silas and Tim othy he had preached at Philippi, b u t he and Silas had been p u t in jail, and o n th eir release they had left th a t city (Acts 16:40). W hen he came to Thessalonica Paul w ent to th e synagogue, according to his custom . H e preached there o n three (apparently succes­ sive) sabbaths (Acts 17:2). T his m ight m ean th a t his stay in th e city was som ething just sh o rt o f a m onth, in w hich case he engaged in a short, intense campaign. T his is n o t

1

Introduction

impossible, although m ost people hold th at w hen he was no longer welcome in th e synagogue, Paul preached else' w here in th e city for a furth er period, so th a t he may have been there for several m onths. Abraham J. M alherbe thinks that Paul continued to evan­ gelize, perhaps using Jason’s home as his base. H e draws at­ tention to the insula, a type of apartm ent house frequently found in first-century cities, w hich “would contain a row o f shops on the ground floor, facing the street, and provide living accommodations for the owners and their families over the shop or in the rear.” They would also have “living quar­ ters for visitors, employees, and servants or slaves.”1 Jason, who “received” Paul and his company (Acts 17:7), was appar­ ently well-to-do, and he may well have been the proprietor o f such an insula. If so, it would have provided lodgings for the preachers, a place where they could earn their living (1 Thess 2:9), and a base for their evangelistic work. W hether this was what happened or not, we do not know. W hat we do know is that Paul centered his preaching on the necessity for the C hrist to suffer and rise and on the af c t that Jesus is the C hrist (Acts 17:3). T he result was a num ber o f conversions from among the Jews, together w ith “a great m ultitude o f the devout C reeks and no small num ber of the chief women” (Acts 17:4). This success, however, aroused opposition led by some Thessalonian Jews (doubtless angry at losing some of their adherents), and th ere was a rio t U nable to find Paul, angry m en dragged Jason, Paul’s h o s t and other believers before the city author­ ities. They gave a notable description o f th e preachers as “These th at have turned the w orld upside down” (KJV) and complained th at they were acting against Caesar’s decrees (Acts 17:6-7). T he authorities took “security” from Jason and the others, th en let them go (Acts 17:9). Luke does n o t say what form this security took, b u t it would seem that Jason and the others agreed to keep the peace. 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

2

T he riot and subsequent events made it impossible for Paul and his companions to continue w ith their mission in Thessalonica, so the new believers sent them off by night (Acts 17:10; this points to continuing danger and a need for secrecy). Now th e new little church was left to build up its life w ithout the presence o f its founders. Paul had been w ith them for only a short period. W hether we see th at period as a few weeks o r a few m onths, it m ight seem all too sh o rt a tim e for firmly establishing a new church. Thus, being on their ow n was quite a test for the new believers. T here was no long history o f the C hristian church and n o t many exam­ ples for the fledgling church to appeal to, and they had n o t had th e tim e or the opportunity to be given instruction in all aspects o f C hristian teaching. T hat the church did stand firm is made clear from Paul's subsequent history. H e w ent on to Berea, where his preach­ ing resulted in conversions (Acts 17:12), b u t Thessalonian Jews followed him and stirred up such opposition that he had to leave. H e w ent on to the intellectual center of A thens, a city where some believed b u t where Paul was mocked and where his successes were apparently limited. T hat m eant th at the apostle had had setbacks in four successive cities. In Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea, some very promising be­ ginnings had been ended w hen fanatical opponents had ru n him out o f town, and he was ridiculed in A thens. Small wonder, then, that w hen he got to C orinth he described himself as “in weakness and in fear and in m uch trem bling” (1 C or 2:3; J. B. Phillips renders, “I was feeling far from strong, I was nervous and rather shaky”). A very hum an Paul was clearly a very discouraged man at this point in his career. We do n o t have a full account of the travels of Silas and Timothy, b u t Luke tells us th at they were left at Berea w hen Paul w ent to A thens, that Paul asked for them to come to him as soon as possible (Acts 17.T4-15), and that they came to him in C orinth (Acts 18:5). This account is n o t complete because 3

Introduction

Paul was left in A thens alone w hen he sent Tim othy to Thessalonica (1 Thess 3:1-2). In due course Tim othy came back to him (1 Thess 3:6), which probably means th at he reached Paul in C orinth. A return to him in A thens does n o t allow suffi' d e n t time for the faith o f the Thessalonians to be know n “in every place” (1 Thess 1:8) and for them to have come to need the kind o f advice he gives in 1 Thessalonians. T he im portant point is th at w hen Tim othy brought him news o f th e situation in Thessalonica, Paul could see th at his w ork had n o t been in vain. H e had been driven out o f th e city before he had wanted to go, b u t th at did n o t m ean th at he had failed. Clearly th e church had been firmly established in Thessalonica, and C od had set his seal on the w ork his servant had done. So Paul w rote o u t o f a full heart to a church th at was dear to him.

Problems facing the new church Tim othy’s report had shown clearly th at on the whole the church was in good shape, b u t there were some problem areas, and Paul w rote to help his friends deal w ith the diffi­ culties th at confronted them . It is plain th at there was still fierce Jewish opposition, in w hich a principal feature appar­ ently was strong criticism of Paul, w hich he rebuts vigorously (1 Thess 2:3-8). There was some form o f persecution from pagans (1 Thess 2:14), and, of course, in a pagan city there was always a tem ptation to go back to the low moral standards o f those among whom the believers lived (1 Thess 4:4-8). A n interesting problem arose from Paul’s teaching about the Sec­ ond Coming. Some o f the believers seem to have held that this would take place very quickly, and w hen some o f their num ber died, they thought th at these fellow believers would lose their place in the glory (1 Thess 4:13-18). The tim e o f C hrist’s return is, o f course, n o t know n to believers, and Paul had to say something abou t this (1 Thess 5:1-11). 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

4

A curious feature is th at some o f the new believers had ceased to w ork for their living, w ith th e result th at they depended on the generosity o f others w ho did w ork, and Paul gave instruction about how to treat them (1 Thess 5:1415). Additionally, as has happened all too often in the history o f th e church, some o f the rank and file did n o t see eye to eye w ith their leaders (1 Thess 5:12-13). T hen there were those w ho did n o t agree w ith others about th e w ork o f the Spirit (1 Thess 5:19-20). T he apostle did n o t lack interesting topics on w hich to write. It is d ear th at Paul w rote n o t long after Tim othy made his report (1 Thess 3:6; cf. 2:17), and this, in tu rn , was n o t long after th e church was founded. As, however, th e faith o f th e Thessalonians was widely know n (1 Thess 1:8), we m ust allow for a few m onths to have elapsed. Putting all this together m ost scholars think th a t th e first letter is to be dated about A.D. 50, w hich makes it one o f th e earliest o f Paul’s letters, perhaps the earliest. Galatians may have been earlier, b u t no o ther letter o f Paul’s can predate these tw o, at least none among those th at have survived.

Paul the Pastor This early letter reveals to us Paul th e pastor as he deals w ith th e problem s th a t have arisen and strives to bring his converts th e insight they need as they go forw ard into th e largely uncharted path o f C hristian service. T he letter lacks a detailed treatm ent o f th e great doctrines o f th e faith th a t we find in some o f his o th er letters, b u t its early date and the glimpse it gives us o f Paul at w ork m eeting th e needs o f enthusiastic b u t as yet im perfectly instructed believers makes it very im portant for o u r understanding o f th e early church. In this letter we are also able to see some o f th e problem s th a t arose in the first days o f th e church and how those problem s were m et. T he result is a moving docum ent 5

Introduction

and one o f perm anent im portance for the C hristian church. A second letter T hen there came a second letter. T here are some scholars who hold th at 2 Thessalonians was n o t w ritten by Paul b u t by an im itator. They find a com bination o f likenesses to 1 Thessalonians and differences from it and feel that, on the one hand, Paul w ould n o t have repeated him self so closely and, on th e other, that, for example, the eschatology undergirding the tw o letters is mutually incompatible. In the first letter it is said th at the Second Coming is expected soon and will occur suddenly, while in the second it will be preceded by signs, specifically the appearance o f the M an o f Lawless­ ness. They think also th at there is a difference in tone, w ith the first letter being m uch warmer and m ore friendly than the second. For these reasons, they think it likely th at 2 Thessalonians was n o t w ritten by Paul b u t by someone at a later date w ho im itated him , b u t whose different ideas and m ore distant approach betray him. Against this it is fairly argued th at the resemblance pas­ sages are too close. T he ideas, th e style, and th e vocabulary are all Pauline. T he im itator m ust have thought w ith th e very m ind o f Paul! T he differences in eschatology are diffi­ cult to take seriously because it is p art o f the nature o f the apocalyptic form to embrace variety. Specifically, many apocalypses combine th e th oughts th at there will be signs before th e coming o f the End and th a t the End w ill come suddenly and unexpectedly. As for th e difference in tone, th a t is largely subjective. T he difference is n o t as apparent to some readers as it is to others, and in any case it is asking too m uch th a t any w riter should always w rite in th e same tone. W riters have their dismal m om ents as well as th eir brighter days. 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

6

A nother view is that Paul was joined in writing one or both letters by either Silas or Timothy, and that his colleague con­ tributed the major share. If either wrote both letters, we are up against the same problems as if Paul wrote them. If Paul wrote the first letter and Silas or Tim othy the second, we have the problem of accounting for the close similarity of m uch of the language. There is also the fact that Paul signed the second letter (2 Thess 3:17), so he must have agreed w ith all that is w ritten there. F. F. Bruce reminds us that Silvanus was one of the “leading m en among the brothers” (Acts 15:22) and thinks that he may well have played a responsible part in the composition of the letters (WBC 45:xxxii-xxxiv). W hile we cannot say that all scholars see Paul as the author of both letters, we can at least point to a respectable majority that take this view. N one of the objections is w ith­ o ut an answer, and in view of the express claim of the letter itself and o f its suitability to the Thessalonian situation as we know it, it seems best to see 2 Thessalonians also as a gen­ uine writing o f the great apostle. D ifferent recipients? If we cannot speak o f different authors, some scholars are prepared to thin k of different recipients. T he great G er­ m an scholar A dolf von Harn ack thought th at in th e T hes­ salonian church there were b oth Jews and G entiles and th at these were so divided th at Paul sent tw o letters, one for each section. H e thought th at 1 Thessalonians was ad­ dressed to th e G entile section and 2 Thessalonians to th e Jewish Christians. H e could point to th e reference to tu rn ­ ing from idols (1 Thess 1:9) as suitable for G entiles, b u t th e Jewish coloring he saw in th e second letter has n o t been apparent to m ost people. A second argum ent depends on the fact th at w here tradi­ tionally scholars have accepted the reading “G od chose you 7

Introduction

from the beginning” in 2 Thess 2:13, some very respectable textual authorities read “G od chose you as a firstfruit” (ac­ cepted by GNB, M offatt, etc.). T he logic o f this argum ent was based on th e observation th at the Thessalonians were n o t Paul’s first converts n o r were they the first converts in Macedonia; however, th e first C hristians in Thessalonica were Jews. T hus, if this reading o f th e G reek is accepted, it w ould make sense for the second letter to be addressed to Jewish believers. In the first place, this puts a lot o f stress on a variant read­ ing. It is not at all certain that “firstfruit” is correct, and many see the other reading as much more probable (as RSV, NIV, etc.). In the second, it is impossible to see Paul acquiescing in a situation where one o f his churches was so hopelessly divided that separate letters had to be sent to the tw o parts. His atti­ tude to division comes out in his sharp words in 1 C or 1:11— 17, where he deferred dealing w ith anything else in his letter until he had roundly condemned the cliques that had sprung up in the C orinthian church. “Has C hrist been parceled up?” he asks, “Was Paul crucified for you?” W hy should such a man meekly send separate letters to tw o groups of Christians who were so m uch at odds that they would not meet together? Such a procedure for Paul would have been incredible. O ther factors also m ilitate against such a view. T he ad­ dressees o f th e tw o letters are practically identical; there is n o indication th at th e letters were sent to different groups. A passage w hich is seen as m eant for the G entile part o f th e church (1 Thess 2:13-16) commends the readers for follow­ ing th e example o f the churches in Judea. This does n o t seem likely if they did n o t see themselves as at one w ith local Jewish believers. This view m ust be m entioned w hen we are discussing 2 Thessalonians, b u t it has little to commend it and m uch th at is against it. A b etter suggestion is th at o f E. Earle Ellis, th at 2 Thessa­ lonians is addressed to church leaders, “Paul’s Thessalonian 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

8

co-workers.”2 Even this suggestion comes up against th e feet th at th e addressees are such th at the tw o letters seem to be sent to th e same people. R eversal of order Some students think th at we have die tw o letters in the usual order only because 1 Thessalonians is th e longer and thus th e church p u t it first. They hold th at there are good reasons for thinking th at w hat we call 2 Thessalonians was w ritten first, and w hen we see this, we find sòme o f ou r problems solved. Thus, they m aintain, the troubles th at be­ set th e Thessalonians are at their height in 2 Thessalonians b u t seem to be in th e past in the other letter. Similarly the difficulties w ithin th e church are said to be som ething th at th e w riter has only just heard o f in 2 Thessalonians b u t are familiar to him in 1 Thessalonians. Such arguments are sub­ jective and they have n o t convinced very many. N or is the contention valid th at the reference to Paul’s ow n signature (2 Thess 3:17) w ould be required in a first letter b u t n o t in a second. If this were accepted, it w ould be a reason for reject­ ing m ost o f th e Pauline correspondence in th e New Testa­ m ent; m ost o f Paul’s letters are first letters to churches and lack a reference to a signature. A lthough th e position is sometimes argued w ith great earnestness, it m ust surely be rejected. T he problem s Paul deals w ith— such as th e Second Coming, th e idlers, th e persecutions— all seem to have progressed w hen we move from 1 to 2 Thessalonians. T he references to another letter in 2 Thessalonians (2:2,15; 3:17) seem to point to 1 Thessa­ lonians (unless we th in k o f a lost letter, fo r w hich there is n o oth er evidence). T here are personal rem iniscences in 1 Thessalonians th at are natural in a first letter b u t n o t nearly so natural if this was a follow up to a letter already dispatched. 9

Introduction

All in all the idea does n o t commend itself. In the end we are left w ith the conviction th at there was more behind the arrangement of these letters than the question of length. The early church evidently had good reason for placing 1 Thessalonians first, and we do weU to follow those believers.

Why the second letter? T he question then arises, W hy did Paul w rite a second letter so soon after the first and covering so m uch of the same ground? T he answer appears to be th at reports w hich came to Paul from Thessalonica showed th at many o f the same problems continued. T he second letter contains no defense o f Paul’s conduct like th at in the first, so Paul probably felt th at th at part o f w hat he w rote had accomplished its purpose. Nevertheless, there were still some uncertainties about the Second Coming, some people were still idle, some disheartened. So Paul w rote once more to inform and inspire. T he first letter had not accomplished all th at he had hoped? Very well; he would send a second. This is the letter of a pastor determ ined to do w hat is necessary to m eet the needs of those for whom he cared.

1, 2 THESSALONIANS

10

1

THE LIVING AND TRUE GOD

“You turned to G od from the idols,” writes Paul, “to serve God, living and true” (1 Thess 1:9). H e thus draws attention to a major shift th at had taken place in the lives and religious experiences of the Thessalonian Christians. They had for­ merly been adherents of the idols, who are here lum ped together as one undifferentiated mass of falsity and pretense. Idol worshipers may distinguish betw een one and another, b u t for Paul there was no great difference. They were all af l se, all purporting to be gods and af iling, all promising m uch and delivering nothing, all drawing devotion and serv­ ice from devout worshipers and leaving them empty. By contrast the believers had turned to the one God. In con­ trast to the idols, he is living whereas they are no more than inanimate objects of wood and stone. H e is the true G od where the idols are no more than shams. It is unsurprising, then, th at early in his letter Paul speaks o f one’s relationship to G od and sees this as central in the process of conversion, for Paul is a God-intoxicated man. In the Pauline corpus we find the w ord theos, “G od,” no less 11

The Living and True God

than 528 times. T he entire New Testament uses the w ord 1,314 times; thus, Paul’s use o f the w ord is disproportion­ ately greater than th at o f his fellow w riters. In fact the apos­ tle employs the term in m ore than 40 percent o f its occurrences. T he Pauline writings comprise no more than 24 percent of the total; hence, we see th at the apostle uses th e w ord “G od” nearly twice as often as we m ight expect T hroughout th e Pauline writings the w ord occurs on the average about once every 60 words. T he w ord occurs 36 times in 1 Thessalonians and 18 times in the second letter. Statistics can be as dull as ditch water, b u t at least these figures make it abundantly d ear th at Paul is very interested indeed in G od, in w ho he is and w hat he does. W hatever he is w riting about, he relates to God. G od's love brings salvation Such a concentration on G od m ight conceivably arise from a religion o f fear. We may be so afraid of a stem and judgmental Supreme Being that we spend a lo t of time find­ ing out w hat arouses the divine w rath and w hat worshipers m ust do to avoid th at wrath. T hat is n o t Paul’s way. Paul is certainly aware of the sterner side o f G od (and we shall come back to this later), b u t he is swept off his feet by the fact that th e G od w ho m ight be expected to be stem w ith sinners, o r at best indifferent to them , proves instead to be a loving and considerate God. H e directs both letters “to th e church of Thessalonians in G od the Father” (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1; the second has “G od our Father”). It is unusual to read o f being “in ” G od (though cf. Eph 3:9; C ol 3:3); Paul’s habit is to speak of being “in” C h rist T he new life Christians have, however, is a life in close fellowship w ith God, and this means th at G od in his love and in his mercy allows them to live in this close fellow­ ship. It accords w ith this th at Paul goes on to speak o f “our 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

12

G od and Father” (1 Thess 1:3), a typically C hristian way o f speaking. Jews m ight well use Paul’s words about the “living and true” G od (1 Thess 1:9), b u t they did n o t place an emphasis on G od as Father to th e extent th at Paul and other Christians did. They used th e term , o f course, b u t for them it was n o t typical and for C hristians it was. Two short prayers inserted into th e argum ent are instruc­ tive (1 Thess 3:11-13; 2 Thess 2:16-17). In b oth Paul links C hrist w ith the Father, w hich tells us something o f w hat he thought about his Savior. In both he calls G od “Father” and speaks o f him as active in th e lives o f his children. Thus the Father (together w ith C hrist) will “direct our way to you” (1 Thess 3:11): Paul looks to the Father to be active in the w ork th at the missionaries are doing and thus in prom oting the well-being of the converts. T he believers should then “abound in love,” and their hearts are to be strengthened “blameless in holiness before our G od and Father at the coming o f our Lord Jesus w ith all his holy ones” (v v 12—13). G od is n o t rem ote and uncaring. H e is deeply concerned about his people. H e is active in bringing about their growth in C hristian qualities, and his concern and his activity will persist to the end. T he second prayer is directed to C hrist and to “G od our Father who loved us and gave eternal encouragem ent and good hope in grace” (2 Thess 2:16). There is some discussion as to w hether we should see the love and the gift as emanat­ ing from both C hrist and the Father, b u t there is certainly no doubt that the Father’s love is spoken of and his activity is seen in encouraging his people. Yet another prayer is that th e Lord may direct th e converts’ hearts “into the love o f G od” (2 Thess 3:5). Grammatically this could mean direct them to love God, and this w ould agree w ith Paul’s general use of the expression “th e love o f G od.” In this context, however, it is more likely th at it is G od’s love for the believ­ ers that is in mind. In any case their love will always be a 13

The Living and True God

response to G od’s prior love. W hichever way we choose to interpret the love of God, it is im portant to see th at the Father does not look on believers w ith lofty detachm ent b u t rather w ith love. So it is that Paul can call the Thessalonians “brothers beloved by G od” (1 Thess 1:4). Paul can also speak of “the churches of G od” (2 Thess 1:4). Just as the churches are “in” God, so they belong to God. Paul does n ot think of the churches as no more than assemblies of like-minded people. They are assemblies of people who be­ long to God, and the assemblies as such belong to God. This, of course, tells us that G od is interested enough in believers to have them as his own. G od brings salvation T he love of G od brings people to salvation. Throughout these letters it is clear that our salvation does n o t rest on our own efforts: salvation is the gift of God. Thus “G od chose you from the beginning (or, as a firstfruit) for salvation . . . unto w hich also he called you” (2 Thess 2:13-14). The initiative in salvation does n o t come from the sinner b u t from God. M oreover, G od is “the G od o f peace” (1 Thess 5:23), w hich points to the same thing. H e does not acquiesce in a state of affairs w herein sinners rebel against his just order. H e takes the initiative to bring them back to himself, to restore the peace that had been disrupted by sin. Refer­ ences to grace underline the point (2 Thess 1:12; 2:16; and the salutations and farewells in both letters), for grace always means the absence of m erit in the recipient and the bounti­ ful generosity o f G od who gives. “G od did n o t appoint us for w rath b u t for the obtaining of salvation through our Lord Jesus C hrist” (1 Thess 5:9). T he w rath of G od is a reality insisted upon in Scripture, and we m ust n o t shut our eyes to its grim reality. Those w ho are saved are n o t saved from some imaginary trouble b u t from a 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

14

very real disaster. Thus, Paul exults th at G od’s purpose for believers is not eternal loss: G od’s purpose is salvation. A t this point the apostle does n o t spell out all th at salvation means, b u t its opposition to “w rath” dem onstrates th at he has in m ind a positive blessing in the presence of God. This is also involved in the references to “the gospel of G od” (1 Thess 2:2,8,9). T he very idea of “gospel,” w ith its good news o f w hat G od has done to bring about the salva' tìon of sinners, points us to the love and graciousness of God, b u t this is emphasized w hen the gospel is specifically said to be “of God." “O f” may mean that the gospel is pecu­ liarly G od’s o r that it originates from God. B oth are true and both are im portant T here is a similar idea involved w hen Paul speaks o f the way the message he and his friends preached had been re­ ceived. It is not easy to translate his words, b u t he says something like this: “Having accepted the w ord of hearing [i.e., th e w ord you heard] from us of G od [this awkward sequence puts emphasis on ‘o f G od’] you received n o t the w ord o f m en b u t as it is truly the w ord o f G od” (1 Thess 2:13). However difficult it is to find a precise English equiva­ lent for an unusual G reek passage, th e meaning is clear. Paul is saying emphatically th at w hen the gospel was preached in Thessalonica, his hearers had accepted w hat the preachers said, n o t as a piece of interesting hum an wisdom, b u t as the very w ord of God. T hat is the im portant thing. T he gospel is G od’s word, n o t a hum an invention. The G od who calls The divine initiative may also be brought out w ith the idea o f ‘call,’ an im portant part of Pauline theology. It is n o t ex­ pressed as frequently in the Thessalonian correspondence as in some of Paul’s letters, but it is interesting to see it in these early writings. For Paul it is clear th at people do n o t become 15

The Living and True God

Christians because on the whole they believe it is a good idea. They become C hristians because G od calls them , calls them out o f th eir self-centered existence, calls them into a life of fellowship and service.1 So Paul says that G od did n o t call us for im purity b u t in sanctification (1 Thess 4:7); he prays th at believers will be deemed w orthy of their call (2 Thess 1:11) and reminds his readers that he had taught them "that you should walk w orthily of th e G od w ho calls you into his own kingdom and glory” (1 Thess 2.T2). Paul often uses walking as a m etaphor for the steady (if unspectacular) progress that should charac­ terize the Christian. H is emphasis here is on the way th e call o f G od issues in changed lives. Changed lives are im portant, b u t we should notice th at it all begins w ith the divine call. In this passage Paul uses the present tense, which may be used to tell us th at G od is "the calling one,” the G od w ho calls. O r it may rem ind us that, while it is true th at G od has called us once and for all, it is also true that G od is constantly calling. As Mrs. C. F. Alexander expressed it, Day by day H is sweet voice soundeth, Saying, "Christian, follow M e.” T he present tense is used again w hen we learn th at “Faithful is he w ho calls you” (1 Thess 5:24; cf. Rom 8:30; 1 C or 1:9). O nce more there is the thought th at it is charac­ teristic o f G od to call people, he is “the calling one.” This tim e there is also the thought th at th e calling one is th o r­ oughly reliable. Long ago Abraham had said, “Shall n o t the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Gen 18:25), and th e thought here too is th at G od may be relied upon. H e will n o t let his people down. Paul adds "who also will do”: G od is n o t only a caller b u t a doer. T he G reek has no "it” (though, o f course, it is implied), and the simple expression "will do” places its emphasis o n th e divine activity. G od n o t only calls b u t 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

16

also sees through to its com pletion w hat th at call implies (cf.N um 23:19; Phil 1:6). T he same basic thought is brought out from another an ' gle w hen Paul writes, “he called you through our gospel” (2 Thess 2:14). T he past tense directs attention backward to the tim e w hen the little band o f preachers had visited Thessalonica and the voice of G od made itself heard through w hat they said. T he gospel directs our attention to th e good news of w hat G od has done for our salvation, and a call th at is effected through the gospel is another way o f saying th at it is G od w ho has called believers o u t o f their form er way o f life, called them through th e good news o f w hat he has done for th eir salvation in Jesus C h rist T hat the gospel is “o ur gospel” does n o t mean th at Paul is claiming any p art in originating the salvation to w hich “gospel” points. It means th at this is the message th at he and his fellow w orkers preach, a message th at they have fully appropriated so th at they have made it their own. They have experienced its power, and w hen they preach it, they preach it w ith convic­ tion. It is now “their” gospel as well as being in a different and fuller sense G od’s. G od defeats evil T here is a stem passage early in 2 Thessalonians in w hich Paul makes it dear th at G od is implacably opposed to evil and th at in the end he will entirely overthrow it. This is both a warning to believers to avoid every evil thing and an encouragem ent to them . N o m atter how powerful evil ap­ pears to be, its power is lim ited and its final overthrow certain. T he section about evil begins w ith th e surprising state­ m ent for believers patiently undergoing persecutions and af­ flictions that all this is “a dem onstration o f the righteous judgm ent of G od” (2 Thess 1:5). It is, of course, n o t so m uch 17

The Living and True God

the sufferings themselves that demonstrate God’s righteous judgment as the bearing of the believers as they experienced this evil. Paul and his colleagues boasted about the Thessalonians among the churches of G od “on account of your stead' fastness and faith in all your persecutions and the afflictions th at you endured” (v4). T hat they reacted in this way dem on' strates that G od was at work. It is a righteous thing that G od enables his servants to react to unm erited suffering and perse­ cution like this. We should also bear in m ind th at the attitude o f th e first C hristians tow ard suffering was n o t always identical w ith ours. We often see suffering as an unm itigated evil, and we do everything we can to avoid i t We rarely stop to reflect th a t suffering, rightly borne, develops character, o r th at we are appointed to suffer (1 Thess 3:3). Suffering is an ines­ capable p art o f life and one th a t can be valuable. O u r faith is n o t m eant to be some fragile thing th at m ust be kept in a kind o f spiritual cotton wool packing. It is to be robust and well able to face th e turm oil and th e troubles o f life in our day. W hen we find our need abundantly supplied so th at we are able to rem ain calm and steadfast in the middle o f life’s agonies, we have evidence o f G od’s “righteous judg­ m ent” (2 Thess 1:5) as did the Thessalonian C hristians. We do n o t fully discern th a t judgm ent w hen we see it only in the punishm ent o f those we regard as wicked. This right­ eous judgm ent is evident w hen G od’s people rem ain con­ stant in a feilen w orld th at brings suffering on all, w ith no escape for either good o r bad. O ne o f the things th at puzzles believers is th e way evil people prosper and succeed in many o f their aims. It was the problem w ith w hich Job wrestled agonizingly and w hich has never been solved to hum an satisfaction. O ne relevant feetor, however, is th e belief th at evil will be punished eventu­ ally, and Paul goes on to bring this o u t It is “righteous” (or

1, 2 THESSALONIANS

18

“just”) for G od to recompense evildoers. Specifically, those w ho afflict the Thessalonian C hristians will one day experi' enee affliction themselves (2 Thess 1:6). Evildoers m ust ex­ pect to experience the w rath of G od (Rom l:18ff). T he verb “recompense” suggests the idea o f paying w hat is due. Paul is saying th at justice demands th at those who do wrong should suffer for it and, in the end, they will do so. That he is looking forward to judgment day comes out in the following words. Suffering believers will enjoy “rest w ith us,” Paul says, “in the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven w ith his angels of power” (2 Thess 1:7). Those who do n o t know G od and do n ot obey the gospel are singled out as the future recipients of “eternal destruction from the face of the Lord” (w 8-9). The knowledge of G od may be spoken of as eternal life (John 17:3), and here we are confronted w ith the opposite. Paul is not writing about a vengeful G od b ut point­ ing out that those who reject the gospel and choose to live w ithout G od must in the end bear the consequences of their choice. There is a startling expression of this in the later statem ent about those who “did n ot receive the love of the tru th so that they should be saved.” Paul says “for this reason G od sends them a working of delusion so that they believe the lie” (2 Thess 2:10-11). M odem Christians find it difficult to as­ cribe such an act to God; we find it easier to think that evil people bring about their own delusions. The Bible, O ld Tes­ tam ent as well as New, however, sees G od as completely sovereign so that he works out his purpose through the evfl that people do as well as through their good deeds. This is a m ord universe, and G od has made it so. H e made this w orld such that “the w rath of m en” will praise him (Ps 76:10). The Book of Job makes it clear that Satan acts only w ithin limits that G od allows. Paul assures us that G od “gives up” evildoers to the consequences o f their sin (Rom 1:24,26,28). W hen

19

The Living and True God

the wicked receive the due consequences o f their deeds we are n ot to think that this is something which takes place quite apart from God. We are n o t to forget either that “G od has shut up all m en to disobedience, so that he may have mercy on all” (Rom 11:32). Even w hen he deals w ith the disobedient and evil, G od’s ultimate purpose is mercy. A ll this should be borne in m ind, b u t at this point our interest is basically in the fact th at evil will n o t go unpun­ ished. T he Thessalonian correspondence makes it clear that G od is just and, therefore, he will in due course punish evil as well as bring believers into eternal felicity. M oreover, we should be d ear th at this is th e w orking out of justice (2 Thess 2:12), n o t vengeance. Even th e M an o f Lawlessness, w ith all his blasphemous evil and all his awesome power, will be destroyed (2 Thess 2:8); nothing and no one can ulti­ mately escape the judgm ent and the justice o f God. Elsewhere Paul speaks o f the danger of believers acting “in lustful passion even as also the G entiles w ho do n o t know G od” (1 Thess 4:5). T his is n o t innocent ignorance b u t the kind o f thing Paul has in m ind elsewhere w hen he refers to G entiles “w ho did n o t approve to have G od in knowledge” (Rom 1:28). There and here he is referring to culpable igno­ rance and to a danger inherent in this situation. Believers w ho ought to know better may be seduced into the same kind o f conduct as the Gentiles. H e warns them th at “the Lord is the avenger of all such” (1 Thess 4:6). Again we see th at evil is punished. In tw o instances Paul calls G od to witness (1 Thess 2:5,10). O n both occasions he is referring to the absence o f bad deeds or th e presence o f good ones, b u t for our present purpose the im portant thing is th at G od takes notice o f w hat people do. T he G od o f whom Paul writes is witness o f th e deeds that we do and o f those th at we refuse to do. This has its relevance for those w ho break his laws and walk in the ways of evil. 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

20

G od a n d the life o f the servants o f G od We have seen th at G od has taken the initiative in bringing salvation; it is his call that initiates the whole process, and it is the good news o f w hat he has done in C hrist that provides the way of forgiveness. We should not think, however, that G od is simply a G od who cleans up the mess after people have sinned. H e does indeed provide a w onderful atonem ent for our past misdeeds, b u t he also looks to those whose sins have been p ut away to live lives th at m atch their forgiveness. T he Thessalonian correspondence makes it abundantly clear that G od is interested in the way believers live out their faith and that he provides for them . “This is the will o f God, your sanctification” (1 Thess 4:3). In context, the particular emphasis is on sexual purity. Paul is drawing attention to the laxity that was so characteristic o f Gentiles generally and making the point that believers m ust n o t be led astray by this bad example. In such a situation it is easy to take it for granted th at the way o f the G entiles is the accepted way of life. For believers, however, this is n o t the accepted way o f life. The lives of believers are n o t to be gov­ erned by the general level of m orality in the community in w hich they find themselves, b u t by w hat G od wills them to be and to do. Paul does n o t refer to any one specific command o f God, as he m ight well have done. H e chooses rather to draw attention to the will of God. Believers, o f course, notice th e way oth er people live, b u t w hen it is a m atter o f im itation they m ust choose th eir models carefully, as p a rt o f th e service o f God. Paul com­ m ends his readers for being im itators o f th e churches in Judea in Christ; th e same sufferings made th eir appearance in b o th and were borne in th e right spirit (1 Thess 2:14). Early in th e first letter Paul tells th e Thessalonian C hris­ tians th at th eir faith in G od is spoken o f “in every place” (1 Thess 1:8). They had profited from good examples before 21

The Living and True God

G od and had themselves become patterns for other C h ris' tians. W hen he delivers people from the consequences of their sins, G od wills for them that they should live in the best way o f all. In the passage just noted we see that this involves sexual purity, but, of course, it involves a great deal more. The will of G od applies across the whole range of C hristian living. Paul’s immediate subject is the importance of chastity, b u t he says a good deal more w hen he says that the will of G od is “your sanctification.” This is a comprehensive word, wide enough to cover the whole of life. In other words, while Paul is deal' ing w ith one particular evil, his warning directs attention to the fact that G od is interested in the way believers live throughout the whole of life. T he apostle is aware th at n o t everyone açcepts this view. H e takes notice of people who reject or disregard the injunc­ tion to sanctification and says th at they reject "not man b u t G od” (1 Thess 4:8). T he command he has given is n o t simply one that comes from the best hum an wisdom: Paul is telling them w hat G od has laid down as the way his servants should live. Again we have the thought th at G od is interested in all of life and th at it is he and n o t some lesser being who sets standards for believers. Paul uses the expression “this is the will of G od” again (5:18). This time it is immediately linked w ith the giving of thanks, b u t thanksgiving is the third o f three activities in this passage: "Rejoice always, pray incessantly, in everything give thanks.” We should take th e reference to th e will o f G od to cover all three. T he C hristian life is a life o f rejoic­ ing,.and n o t only on pleasant days. It is clear throughout this correspondence th at th e Thessalonian believers were going through tough times. Paul was n o t directing a con­ ventional exhortation to people w ho lived on easy street; he was w riting to people w ho were in trouble and w ho he knew were in trouble. In th at context he says “Rejoice l ,2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

22

always.” T he source o f th e joy o f C hristians is n o t to be found in the circumstances in w hich they find themselves b u t in w hat G od has done for them and continues to do for them . O u t o f th at joy and th a t spiritual com m union pro­ ceeds a sense o f constant prayer ("Prayer is th e C hristian’s vital breath”), and from constant prayer one finds a spirit o f thanksgiving. The apostle has set an example for his readers by beginning his letter w ith a statem ent of thanksgiving for the Thessalonian believers, assuring them that he and his friends remem­ ber them constantly in their prayers (1 Thess 1:2). H e interrupts his argument to tell them again that he gives thanks for them (1 Thess 2:13) and again to ask rhetorically what thanksgiving he can render to G od for all the joy the Thessalonians have given him (1 Thess 3:9). H e regards thanksgiving as something he "ought” to do (2 Thess 1:3; 2:13); it is n ot simply an option for people who like that sort o f thing. Notice further that Paul’s rejoicing on account of the Thessalonians is a rejoicing before G od (1 Thess 3:9). H e is not writing about some form of worldly exhilaration but about a spiritual joy that takes note of the presence of G od and is a joy that is part and parcel of living in the service o f God. We are all wrong if we think of the C hristian way as a grim path along which we m ust give away all the things we like. It is full of wonderful things for which we should be giving constant thanks. Some people try to live the C hristian life like they pay their taxes. Nobody likes paying taxes. W hen the time comes, we search high and low for every exemption we may lawfully claim. We reduce the am ount to the lowest total we can and then pay, grimly hoping that w hen the tax auditor is through we will have enough left over on which to live. It is possible to have a similar m entality in spiritual things. There are peo­ ple who see G od as something of a kill-joy, constantly making demands that his people give up this or that. They build 23

The Living and True God

themselves up to making the sacrifice and hope th at w hen it’s done diere will be enough left to make life bearable. This is a caricature of the C hristian way. T he G od we serve is a G od o f joy as well as a G od w ho sets before his own the highest o f standards. Those w ho serve him righl y do so n o t in a spirit o f grim resignation b u t rather one o f joy. Joy before G od is an integral part o f being C hristian. T he T iles' salonian letters have a good deal to say about the joy Paul felt over his converts, and this is n o t despite G od’s demands b u t a joy in th e presence o f God. Paul speaks o f “all the joy w ith w hich we rejoice on your account before our G od” (1 Thess 3:9), and he calls on the Thessalonians to rejoice always (1 Thess 5:16). H e rem inds them th at despite their many troubles w hen they were evangelized they received the w ord “w ith joy o f the Holy Spirit” (1 Thess 1:6). T he Thessalonian C hristians were themselves the joy of the apostle (1 Thess 2:19,20). It thus does n o t surprise us th at he boasted about them in th e churches o f G od (2 Thess 1:4). W orthy o f G od A nother way o f emphasizing the im portance o f believers living in the right way is brought o ut w ith the exhortation “th at you should walk w orthily of the G od who calls you into his own kingdom and glory” (1 Thess 2:12). We have already noticed the im portance o f this passage for w hat it teaches us about th e divine call Now we see that it also tells us som ething very im portant about the kind o f life w hich those w ho are called m ust live. As we said earlier, Paul often uses the m etaphor o f walking for the C hristian life; it points to the unspectacular b u t constant progress th at the C hris' tian should be making. For our present purpose, however, the adverb “w orthily” is the significant word. Christians know th at their own m erit does n ot bring about their salva' tion. Salvation is due to G od alone. Since Paul’s readers are 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

24

being saved, it is im portant th at they live lives th at befit their new station. H ere Paul sets the standard as high as it is possible to set i t They are to walk “w orthily of G od”; there can be no higher standard than th a t Sometimes the idea is given th at G od approves of people, as w hen Paul says, “We have been approved by G od to be entrusted w ith the gospel” (1 Thess 2:4). His verb “approved” strictly means “approved by test” and there may be the thought that G od had tested his servants before trusting them to preach the gospel. W hether this is Paul’s intent o r not, there is no doubting th át G od is concerned th at the gospel be preached and that the messengers to whom he en­ trusts it should be fitting preachers. In accord w ith this emphasis on fitness for die service o f God, the Thessalonians are to “walk” in such a way as to please G od (1 Thess 4:1). We have seen th at G od witnesses all th at believers do, and they should bear this in m ind and live constantly in such a way th at everything they do will be right in his sight and please him. Paul maintains th at he and his associates were approved by G od to be entrusted w ith the gospel and that, accordingly, they do n o t speak like peo­ ple w ho are trying to please their audiences. T heir purpose is to please God. Paul brings o ut the seriousness o f this m atter by saying th at G od “tests our hearts” (1 Thess 2:4). By contrast, those w ho persecute the church “do n o t please G od” (1 Thess 2:15; he adds, “and are contrary to all m en”). Paul is n o t laying on his converts the responsibility o f doing something he was n o t prepared to do himself. H e set out to do w hat was pleasing to God, and he looked to them to do the same. We are n o t far away from this w hen we find th at the preachers “were bold in our G od to speak G od’s gospel to you amid m uch conflict” (1 Thess 2:2). H e refers to the fact th at he and his friends had been insulted and m istreated in Philippi, b u t he does n o t say (as many would probably say) 25

The Living and True God

th at w hen they came to Thessalonica they were more cir­ cumspect and made sure th at they kept themselves o ut o f trouble. T hat m ight be the way of the world, b u t the mis­ sionaries had been entrusted w ith G od’s gospel, and, be­ cause it was G od’s, they m ust proclaim that gospel faithfully, no m atter w hat the cost to themselves. God’s gospel m ust be taken to the ends o f the earth. These letters have a good deal to say about the end of the age and the w onderful events that will then transpire. M uch of this concerns our Lord Jesus, and we will be looking at this teaching in another section. H ere it is appropriate th at we should take notice of the fact that G od is linked w ith these great events. We read that the Lord will come down from heaven w ith a shout, w ith the voice of the archangel “and w ith the trum pet o f G od” (1 Thess 4:16). Paul does n o t say w ho will blow this trum pet or precisely w hat the sound­ ing of the trum pet signifies, b ut the way he m entions it shows that G od is active in initiating the events of the great day. H e also tells us that, along w ith Jesus, “G od udii bring those w ho have fallen asleep through Jesus” (1 Thess 4:14). This means that we m ust see G od as active at the time o f Jesus’ return. It is easy to be so taken up w ith the coming of our Lord that we overlook the fact that the Father is just as m uch involved in those events as is his Son. We look to the Father to see to it that the dead in C hrist will rise and that they will be w ith him.

1, 2 T H E SSA LO N IA N S

26

2

JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD

In m odem times C hristians often refer to their Savior simply as “C hrist,” a habit th at we largely owe to Paul. T he w ord “C hrist” is the translation into G reek of the Hebrew w ord th at means “anointed.” In English we translit­ erate both, and thus we get th e tw o words “C hrist” (from th e Greek) and “M essiah” (from the Hebrew); b oth signify “anointed.” Among th e Hebrews in the O ld Testam ent there were many “anointed ones.” T he term is m ost fre­ quently used of the king, especially in the expression “the Lord’s anointed” (e.g., 1 Sam 24:10). A t times we read o f “the anointed priest” (Lev 4:3) and now and th en a prophet was anointed (1 Kgs 19:16). T he anointing was a solem n m ark o f consecration: the anointed one was set apart to serve G od in some special way. There were many “anointed ones,” b u t over the years the expectation grew th at in due course G od would send n o t just an anointed one, b u t the anointed one, someone w ho would do his will in a special way. This one w ould be greater in his own person and greater in the w ork th at he w ould do 27

Jesus Christ Our Lord

than all th e others. T he actual w ord “Messiah” is n o t often used o f him in th e O ld Testament, b u t th at the M essiah w ould come in due course was widely believed. This messianic hope seems to have burned brighter at some times than at others. N ot surprisingly, people looked for the Messiah w ith special eagerness at times w hen the nation was in deep trouble. People searched th e Scriptures for passages that w ould tell them something about this anointed one (cf. John 1:45). According to Alfred Edersheim, th e rabbis found 456 O ld Testament passages that should be understood o f the Messiah (Edersheim lists th e verses and quotes rabbinic passages where they are discussed1). Some o f these O ld Testam ent passages were doubtless n o t under­ stood to refer to th e M essiah until some tim e later than th e New Testament, b u t clearly there were many th at were un ­ derstood in this way from quite early days. T hus w hen Paul referred to Jesus as “the C hrist” he was using a term th at w ould arouse significant associations in all those familiar w ith th e Jewish Scriptures and th e discus­ sions th at arose from these writings. Sometimes this expres­ sion is used as a title, b u t this is rare in Thessalonians (possibly in 1 Thess 3:2; 2 Thess 3:5). Paul uses “C hrist” so often and in such ways (e.g., in letters addressed to G entiles where the tide w ould be meaningless) that, to all intents and purposes, it has become for him a proper name. T hat is th e way we norm ally use it today. T he term “C hrist” occurs in the Pauline writings 379 times out o f a New Testament total o f 529, so th at Paul has m ore than 70 percent of the total num ber o f references. H e uses it as many as 65 times in a single letter (Romans), whereas it is found no more than 25 times in any nonPauline w riting (viz., Acts, which is m uch longer than any Pauline letter). We see from all this th at no other New Testa­ m ent w riter remotely approaches Paul in his frequent use o f

1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

28

th e word; "C hrist” is a Pauline w ord. It is to this apostle th at we owe our habit o f referring to Jesus by this name. The w ord occurs ten times in each o f the Thessalonian letters, w hich is n o t as frequent as in some o f th e other Pauline writings, b u t it is still a substantial num ber. T he apostle uses th e name “Jesus” sixteen times in 1 Thessalonians and thirteen in the second letter. Thus, in this corre' spondence, it is th e hum an name “Jesus” th at is preferred (overall Paul uses this name 213 times; the m ost in any one o f his writings is 37 in Romans; by contrast, in John’s Gospel it is found 237 times). H e also uses “C hrist” a respectable num ber o f times, b u t in these tw o letters he uses “Lord” more than either, tw entyfour times in the first letter and tw enty-tw o times in the second. W ith this total o f ninety-five uses for the three ex­ pressions, we see th at in the Thessalonian letters Paul speaks often of the Savior w ho had come to mean so m uch to them . “Lord,” o f course, is n o t a name b u t a tide. It was used in a variety o f ways, for example, o f th e ow ner o f possessions (e.g., M att 20:8), and thus o f the ow ner o f slaves (e.g., Luke 14:21). It was not, however, confined to owners o f anything; th e term could be used as a form o f respectful address in polite society, m uch like our “sir” (e.g., John 12:21). It was a w ord th at m ust have been often o n th e lips o f people in the first-century Rom an Empire. In religious usage it came to signify m uch m ore than a polite form o f address. For example, in the Septuagint (the Greek translation o f th e Hebrew O ld Testament) it is charac­ teristically used to render “Yahweh,” th e name o f G o d It was also common in other religions, and pagans often referred to their deity as “L o rd ” In the Rom an Empire it was applied as well to th e em peror and sometimes expressed th e thought o f his “divinity.” It is unlikely th at Paul derived his usage from pagan sources and m uch more probable th at

29

Jesus Christ Our Lord

he was taking over the usage o f the Septuagint and giving to Jesus the title customarily used of Yahweh. O f course, w hen he used it in speaking or w riting to pagans, or people who had been pagans, he w ould n o t have been unm indful th at it was an exalted and meaningful title for them too. W hen Paul uses this term o f Jesus, h e is putting him in the highest place. It is n o t unlikely that sometimes Paul uses "Lord” to refer to G od the Father, following O ld Testament usage, b u t this is n o t frequent. Characteristically w hen he says "Lord,” he means Jesus. In some places he uses one of these expressions, thè name “Jesus,” or “C hrist,” or “Lord,” b u t quite often he combines them . In these letters his favorite combination is “Lord Jesus C hrist,” mostly in the form o f “our Lord Jesus C h rist” This combination occurs fourteen times in these tw o letters, and the form “Lord Jesus” occurs ten times. W hen he combines “Jesus” and “C hrist,” he prefers the order “C hrist Jesus,” which he uses seventy-three times in his letters (twice in Thessalonians), while “Jesus C hrist” is found eighteen times (not at all in Thessalonians; in a num ber o f other passages there is such variation in the m anuscripts th at it is impossi­ ble to be sure o f the original order). T here does n o t seem to be any significance in the order; it is just the way Paul speaks. Interestingly, w hen he includes “Lord,” the order is usually “Lord Jesus C hrist” (forty-nine times) rather than “Lord C hrist Jesus” (eight times). Jesus a n d God Paul does n o t say anywhere, in precisely these words, “Jesus is G od,” and m any m odem scholars find this signifi­ c a n t They feel th at th e apostle deliberately avoided at­ tributing deity to Jesus and assume th at he saw Jesus as less than fully divine. T hat he never says “Jesus is G od” is clear, b u t th a t he does n o t see Jesus as fully divine is m ore than I , 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

30

difficult to reconcile w ith some o f th e things he actually does say. Thus he addresses both letters, as we noted earlier, to “the church of Thessalonians in G od the Father and Lord Jesus C hrist” (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1; the latter has “our Father”). It is n o t easy to see how any created being, anyone less than God, could be linked w ith G od the Father in such a way. Clearly Paul put Jesus in the highest possible place. We see this also in the fact that in the same passages the church is said to be “in” the Lord Jesus C hrist as well as “in G od the Fa­ ther.” T he church is “in” C hrist in the same sense as it is “in” the Father; the one “in” covers both. How can the TheSsalonian church be “in” the Lord Jesus C hrist if he is no more than a first-century Jew? Especially as the churches in Judea are also “in” him (1 Thess 2:14). A lthough “in” may be con­ sidered a somewhat elastic w ord and the precise meaning in these passages difficult to bring to expression, it is not easy to see how a merely hum an Jesus could have a num ber of churches, so widely separated, “in” him. We m ight say a similar thing about the greeting that is so m uch a feature of any Pauline letter, “grace and peace to you” (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:2). In the second letter the grace and peace in question are expressly said to be “from ” G od and C hrist, and the same origin of these qualities is implied in the first If, on th e one hand, C hrist is in some sense one w ith G od, th en there is no great problem in seeing him as the bringer of such qualities to believers. If, on the other, he is no more than a man, how can he bring grace and peace to anyone? This is n o t a casual expression because the association of grace w ith Jesus is repeated (5:28; 2 Thess 3:18; it is linked w ith the Father and the Son in 2 Thess 1:12; 2:16). T he connection w ith the opening salutations and the closing greetings is, of course, found throughout the Pauline correspondence. It was habitual to the great apostle to link grace w ith the Lord Jesus. 31

Jesus Christ Our Lord

In b o th letters there is a prayer near the middle. In the first letter Patii speaks o f “G od him self and our Father and our Lord Jesus” and asks them to direct the path of Paul and his companions to th e Thessalonians. It goes on to pray th at “the Lord” will make the Thessalonians abound in love tow ard one another and tow ard all people and th at he will confirm their hearts blameless before G od the Father at the coming of our Lord Jesus (1 Thess 3:11-13). In the second letter the corresponding opening refers to “our Lord Jesus C hrist him self and G od our Father” and seeks th at the hearts o f the Thessalonians be encouraged and th at they be strengthened in every good w ork and w ord (2 Thess 2:1617). To some it is breathtaking to find C hrist n o t only linked w ith the Father b u t placed first (cf. 2 C or 13:13; Gal 1:1). To others the order is o f very little significance. W hatever we think o f th e order in which they are m en­ tioned, clearly in such passages the Father and the Lord Jesus are closely linked indeed, and th e reversal o f order in the second prayer may be held to give expression to this. W iliam Neil commented, “T he only theological significance to be attached to th e variations in order is th at there is complete equality in the apostle’s m ind betw een the Father and th e Son. It is only through his knowledge o f C hrist th at he has come really to know God. For him they are O ne.”2 F. F. Bruce cites th e first part of this passage and expresses his agreement: “W ith this we may agree, bearing in m ind th at for Paul th e equality was one o f purpose and action rather than a metaphysical equality” (WBC 45:196). It is n o t easy to know w hether Paul distinguished betw een “equality o f purpose and action,” on the one hand, and “metaphysical equality,” on the other. If he did, th en this is the way to p u t it. We must, however, also go on to ask w hether w hat he says means anything less than metaphysical equality. We should also add th at the church speedily affirmed the meta­ physical equality, and this came to expression in the creedal 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

32

statem ents o f th e early church. It is n o t easy to see how another prayer, “the Lord be w ith you all” (2 Thess 3:16), is to be understood w ithout seeing the Lord as sharing in the nature of th e Father. This may be in m ind also w hen Paul says th at G od has called his Thessalonian correspondents “into his ow n king' dom and glory” (1 Thess 2:12). So, too, G od called them “into the acquiring o f the glory o f our Lord Jesus C hrist” (2 Thess 2:14). T hus the final glory into w hich believers are called may be spoken of as G od’s glory or as C hrist’s glory. It is plain th at in Paul’s m ind th e tw o are n o t separated: he can speak indifferently o f either as th e one to whom th e glory pertains. A t the end o f th e first letter Paul w rites “I adjure you by the Lord th at . . . ” (1 Thess 5:27), th at is, “I p u t you on oath by th e Lord . . . . ” It is n o t impossible th at he w ould invoke an oath by a created being, b u t it is more likely th at we should see this passage as another indication o f the stature o f th e Lord as Paul saw him , as one w ho is to be ranked w ith th e Father rather than simply w ith hum ans. This is the implication o f a passage in w hich Paul brings out a stem side to C hrist’s activity. Patii warns the Thessalonians to beware o f committing a certain sin and adds, “because the Lord is the punisher concerning all these things” (1 Thess 4:6). W ith this we should take the reference to his punishing those “w ho refuse to know G od and w ho disobey the gospel” (2 Thess 1:8). Paul is in no doubt as to the greatness o f his Lord. From another point o f view the greatness of the Lord Jesus is brought out w hen Paul writes, “you know w hat commands we gave you through th e Lord Jesus” (1 Thess 4:2). H e does n o t detail th e commands at this point, b u t clearly he has in m ind the C hristian tradition th at goes back to Jesus himself. “Through th e Lord Jesus” may mean that the commands in question originated w ith G od the Father and that they came 33

Jesus C hrist O ur Lord

to the apostles “through" Jesus. O r it may signify something like “in the the name of the Lord Jesus.” A nother suggestion is that the preachers spoke as people in touch w ith the Lord Jesus. It is a difficult and unusual expression, b u t whichever way we take this phrase it is plain that for Paul the immediate origin of these commands is the Lord Jesus and, further, that he sees them as significant They are n o t to be shrugged off as though they were optional advice. Because they came through Jesus they are of continuing relevance. Jesus is not to be thought of simply as a man who died some years before, b u t as Lord of their lives. H is commands still matter. Similarly, Paul can “command you, brothers, in the name o f our Lord Jesus C hrist” (2 Thess 3:6), and he can “command and exhort in the Lord Jesus C hrist” (2 Thess 3:12). The “name,” of course, in some way sums up the whole person, and both passages indicate that definite orders which are linked w ith Jesus can be given. Somewhat less authoritatively Paul says, “For the rest then, brothers, we request and exhort you in the Lord Jesus . . .” (1 Thess 4:1). A lthough he comes short o f issuing a command in this passage, a request and an exhortation “in the Lord Jesus” must obviously be given due heed. Paul is aware th at w hat he is doing is something done in C h rist As he puts it elsewhere, he is sure that he has “the m ind of C hrist” (1 C or 2:16), and the requests he makes proceed from this standpoint Both he and the Thessalonians are “in” C hrist, and what Paul says m ust be understood in accordance w ith this. It is from this point of view th at the Lord Jesus is to be seen as directing believers along their C hristian way. It is “the Lord” to whom Paul looks to “direct your hearts into the love o f G od and into the steadfastness o f C hrist” (2 Thess 3:5). “The love of G od” m ight mean G od’s love for his people o r his people’s love for God. In Paul the form er meaning is almost invariable, b u t we need n o t think the other is excluded. A fter all, our love for G od is always an 1, 2 T H E SSA LO N IA N S

34

answering love: he first loved us, and it is this prior love o f G od that evokes our love for him. We should probably take “the steadfastness of C hrist” in m uch the same way. U n ­ doubtedly Paul is reminding his readers of the steadfastness that C hrist showed in very trying circumstances. Yet he is also praying that a steadfastness like th at may make its ap­ pearance in his friends in Thessalonica. H e is n o t urging them to pull themselves together to produce this desirable quality out of their own resources. H e is praying th at (he Lord will produce it in them. Again we see Paul looking for C hrist to do something that is quite impossible in one w ho was no m ore than a man. T he same thing is to be seen in prayers, such as those we have already noticed th at link C hrist w ith the Father. We gave attention to the implications of the link betw een the tw o, b u t we should also bear in m ind th at it is highly un­ usual to have anyone linked w ith the Father in prayers like those in these letters: prayers th at the preachers’ way should bring them to Thessalonica again, th at the Lord should in­ crease the love o f the converts for one another and for other people, and th at their hearts should be strengthened so th at they be blameless at the coming of the Lord (1 Thess 3:11— 13). It is similarly significant th at the Lord Jesus C hrist should be asked, along w ith the Father, to encourage the hearts o f the converts and to strengthen them in every good w ork and w ord (2 Thess 2.T6-17). How can a created being answer prayers like these? We should add to this th e petition th at “the Lord o f peace” should give peace to the converts (2 Thess 3:16). T he expression is found only here in the New Testament, b u t we find “the G od of peace” elsewhere (Rom 15:33; 16:20; 2 C or 13:11; Phil 4:9; 1 Thess 5:23; H eb 13:20). As “the Lord” in Paul almost invariably means Jesus C hrist, there is no reason to doubt that this is his meaning here. It is significant th at he uses an expression th at resembles so strongly a recurring way 35

Jesus Christ Our Lord

o f speaking o f the Father and, further, th at he looks to the Lord Jesus to bring peace to the believers at all times and in every place. W ith this we should take the fact that the first letter links faith, love, and hope and that the last-mentioned is the "hope of our Lord Jesus C hrist before our God and Father” (1 Thess 1:3). It is possible that the G reek should be taken to link faith and love w ith the Lord Jesus and not only hope. The sentence construction, however, favors the link w ith hope and so does the strong eschatological emphasis in the letter as a whole. Either way, Jesus is assigned a very special place. We should n o t overlook the fact th at in referring to the divine will for his correspondents Paul calls it “the will of G od in C hrist Jesus” (1 Thess 5:18). T hat the will o f G od should be “in” C hrist Jesus is yet another indication of the greatness o f Jesus as Paul understood things divine. Jesus is n o t like an angel, a submissive being w ho does the will o f God. H e is one in whom th at will resides. We may or may n o t be able to understand how the divine will relates to the Father and the Son, b u t there is no denying th at Paul sees Jesus’ place as central In this early correspondence we do n o t have a full account o f the way Jesus brings salvation, although we should notice th at “brothers beloved by the Lord” (2 Thess 2:13) points us to the mainspring of th at salvation. It was because the Lord loved them so m uch th at he brought about their deliverance from the sin into which they slipped so easily. Doubtless Paul’s thought on this deepened and developed w ith the pass­ ing of the years (we m ust bear in m ind that w hat we have in these letters was w ritten less than tw enty years after the cru­ cifixion), b u t a more likely reason for the absence of a full discussion o f the way salvation was wrought is th at it was not needed for the purposes of the Thessalonian letters. T here were other problems that troubled the Thessalonians, and Paul confines him self to dealing w ith these. 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

36

Even here Paul makes it clear th at “G od did n o t appoint us to w rath b u t to the acquiring o f salvation through our Lord Jesus C hrist” (1 Thess 5:9). W ithout specifically relat­ ing the death o f Jesus to salvation, he says that the Jews killed the Lord Jesus (1 Thess 2:15). H e later connects this w ith the love of G od and of C hrist. In a prayer th at links the tw o, he speaks o f him “w ho loved us and gave us eternal encouragem ent and good hope in grace” (2 Thess 2:16). T he verb “loved” is m ost probably to be linked w ith both th e Father and the Son, and th e aorist tense should be noted. A. L. M oore can say, “T he aorist tense probably indi­ cates th at Patii is thinking of the event in w hich this love was supremely displayed, the crucifixion of C hrist (cf. G al 2:20 ‘w ho loved me and gave him self for me’ . . . ).”3 Paul certainly has this in m ind w hen he speaks o f awaiting G od’s Son, “whom he raised from th e dead” (1 Thess 1:10), and again w hen he says, “if we believe th at Jesus died and rose . . . ” (1 Thess 4:14). There is no developed theory o f th e atonem ent in such passages, b u t plainly there is the deep conviction th at the death and the resurrection o f Jesus are im portant and th at they bring about our salvation. In an earlier section we saw th at the gospel is sometimes “the gospel of G od”; it is also “the gospel of C hrist” (1 Thess 3:2) and “th e gospel of our Lord Jesus” (2 Thess 1:8). This gospel is doubtless his gospel because it tells o f w hat he did to bring about salvation. C entral to the gospel is the tru th th at Jesus C hrist died on the cross to bring about th e for­ giveness o f sinners; thus, th e gospel is his in a very special sense. It is his also in th e sense th at this is the message he gave his followers to proclaim in his name. In cid en ta l references N ext we should note a series o f m ore o r less incidental references to the Lord th at bring out som ething o f Paul’s 37

Jesus Christ O ur Lord

view of his Savior. For example, he says th at he and his companions m ight have been “burdensom e as apostles of C hrist” (1 Thess 2:6). H e sees himself first and foremost as an apostle “of C hrist”: his commission is a commission from C hrist, and he was content to order all the rest o f his life in accordance w ith th at commission. Further, C hrist was such th at w hen he sent apostles they could make demands on people. They would naturally receive sustenance from be­ lievers, no m atter how burdensom e th at was. Again he says, “we request and exhort you in the Lord Jesus” (1 Thess 4:1); the simple m atter o f making a request to the converts was done “in” the Lord Jesus. It was p art of the way the lordship o f Jesus covered the whole o f life. It cov­ ered death, too, because Paul speaks o f “the dead in C hrist” (1 Thess 4:16). Even death, which seems to us to sever all ties, cannot sever the tie w ith C h rist In death, as in life, believers are “in C h rist” Päul n o t only has confidence in the Thessalonians, b u t he has confidence in them “in the Lord” (2 Thess 3:4). T he local church leaders are “those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord” (1 Thess 5:12), while the rank and file will encourage Paul if they “stand fast in the Lord” (1 Thess 3:8). Both the leaders and the led are “in the Lord,” w hich points to his superlative excellence. In such passages as these the apostle is n o t pursuing the them e of the lordship o f C h rist They come in at a variety o f points in the letters, and their incidental character shows us something o f the place th at Paul assigned to the Lord. H e refers to “the w ord of the Lord” w ith which we might compare “th e w ord of G od” (1 Thess 2:13). “This we say in the word o f the Lord,” he writes (1 Thess 4:15), thus making the Lord central to his preaching. Furtherm ore, he speaks o f “the w ord of the Lord” as having gone out from the Thessa­ lonians (1 Thess 1:8), so th at they had experience o f the same thing. W hen they set out to proclaim the C hristian message 1, 2 T H E SSA LO N IA N S

38

they did n o t set fo rth some profound piece o f Thessalonian wisdom th at they had thought up for themselves; they proclaimed “the w ord of the Lord.” There is a very lively piece of imagery w hen Paul asks his friends to pray for him “that th e w ord of the Lord may ru n and be glorified” (2 Thess 3:1). This is the same imagery as we see in Ps 147:15, where G od’s w ord “runs swiftly.” There had been some spectacular results w hen the w ord had first been preached in Thessalonica w ith the consequence that the church had been firmly founded there. Paul is now looking for the w ord of th e Lord to have a similar speedy effect elsewhere. Obviously he is n o t expecting a “w ord” by itself to do anything; it is “the w ord of the Lord” th at m atters. Throughout this section we have been concerned w ith a series of statem ents Paul has made or questions he has asked or instructions he has given. Yet he is n o t discussing the person o f C hrist, and we look in vain for any section we m ight conceivably label, “W hat Paul thinks about Jesus C h rist” These letters are n o t doctrinal treatises setting out theological tru th w ith all the qualifications and provisos that are necessary to guard oneself from straying into error. They are simply the apostle’s reaction to the situation at Thessa­ lonica as he knew it. H is converts were desperately imma­ ture, and they were on their ow n in a w orld violently opposed to many of the things they and Paul held m ost dear. They needed advice and encouragement, and th at is w hat Paul is giving them . W hat he says about Jesus w hen he is concerned to m eet the needs of his converts in a troubled situation, however, enables us to see something of the way he saw his Savior. H e certainly knew him as a man of Galilee; there is nothing docetic about Paul’s view, nothing w hich w ould deny o r qualify his humanity. Equally certain, though, he did n o t believe that ordinary hum an categories adequately described Jesus. Throughout this section, at point after point, we have 39

Jesus Christ O ur Lord

seen how Paul ascribes to Jesus activities th at we cannot help b u t see as pointing to a being greater than any hum an. P er' haps this is now here seen as plainly as w hen the apostle is writing about the happenings at th e last great day. T here is so m uch said on this topic, however, th at it m ust have a section all to itself. H ere we simply notice th at throughout this correspondence Jesus C hrist is consistently portrayed as one stirpassing all hum an categories, one who m ust be thought o f in th e same way in w hich we think of God.

1 , 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

40

3

TH E LAST THINGS

Q uite a large proportion o f these tw o letters is given to teaching about the Second Coming o f Jesus to this earth, the end o f life as we know it now and th e ushering in o f the final state o f affairs. Paul had given teaching on these things w hen he was in Thessalonica, and he can write, "Do you n o t re­ member th at w hen I was w ith you I told you these things?” (2 Thess 2:5). Part o f our problem as we approach this sec­ tion of our study is th at we do n o t know just w hat it was th at Paul had told them w hen he was w ith them . It is n o t difficult for us to gather th at some Thessalonians had m isunderstood w hat Paul had taught them and th at part o f th e apostle’s motivation to w rite was to correct this m isunderstanding. We do n o t know exactly w hat they had m isunderstood, and in all our discussions we labor under th e handicap th at we have no inform ation about th e things th at Paul had taught them about w hich there was no problem. We m ust, there­ fore, m aintain a reverent reserve. It is appropriate, o f course, th at we should give full weight to w hat Paul says, b u t it is also necessary for us to remember th at there was m uch th at 41

The Last Things

is im portant to this subject o f th e Second Coming w hich Paul does n o t m ention because it was n o t the subject of m is' understanding o r m isinterpretation. The dead in C hrist Let us start w ith what was evidently quite a problem to some of the Thessalonians, the plight o f believers who had died. From w hat the apostle says it would seem that some o f the new believers had understood him to say that all believers would have their part in the great events th at would take place w hen C hrist comes back to this earth at the end of the age. A fter the apostle left them , some o f their num ber died. These people would accordingly n o t be there to welcome the returning Lord and that apparently seemed to some ThessaIonian believers to mean that they w ould miss the glory and the joy of th at great day. Because they also seem to have bel ieved that th at day was not far off, they may well have thought this a great tragedy. For w ant of living only a short time longer, their friends had lost their part in the m ost won­ derful day of a ll W hat a tragedy! Paul sets himself to help them. He introduces what he has to say with, “We do n ot wish you to be ignorant, brothers” (1 Thess 4.1 3), a formula he uses a number of times (Rom 1:13; 1 C or 10:1, etc.). Mosdy it seems to lead up to some new, im portant teaching. Each time he uses it, Paul addresses his readers as “brothers”; he is telling them something new, but he does so in an affectionate way, not in any spirit of superiority. H e is w riting about those w ho “fall asleep.” It is signifi­ cant th at throughout the New Testament this is the way the deaths o f believers are reported. For those in C hrist the sting has been taken from death; it is now only a m atter o f falling asleep. T he other side of this is th at this way o f speaking is never used w hen the death of Jesus is reported. H e did n o t “fa ll asleep”; he “died.” H e underw ent th e full 1, 2 T H E SSA LO N IA N S

42

horror of death, and because he did those w ho p u t their tru st in him will never know th at horror. They simply fall asleep and awake in the presence of God. W ith this understanding as his starting point, Paul can say he does n o t w ant his readers to sorrow “even as also the rest w ho do n o t have hope.” This sweeping characterization o f the non-C hristian w orld is n o t w ithout justification. It would n ot he true to say that the pagan w orld of the first century unanimously viewed death as a horror; there were some who held that there w ould be an afterlife and there were some who took the thought of death quite calmly. Indeed, pagan w riters often used “sleep” as a euphemism for death. Those w ho viewed death calmly, however, were few. There is no evidence th a t th e common people ever re­ garded death as no m ore terrifying than sleep. T here can be no doubt th at as a w hole th e pagan w orld o f th e first cen­ tury had no hope w hen it contem plated death. D eath was th e end o f all real life, and, if there was some form o f life after death, it was seen as a shadowy existence in a H ades o f some so rt and far from th e full-blooded life o f th e here and now. Significantly, th e deceased were often called “shades.” T he gloomy inscriptions o n th e m agnificent tom bs o f the wealthy pagans form a strong contrast w ith th e utterances o f hope scratched over th e resting places o f hum ble believ­ ers. Bruce cites Catullus: T he sun can set and rise again But once our brief light sets There is one unending night to be slept through. H e also cites Theocritus: “hopes are for the living; the dead are w ithout hope” (WBC 45:96). Such statem ents dem onstrate th at Paul is n o t w riting about a commonplace view o f death th at can be applied to all 43

The Lost Things

the race. H e is talking about the difference th at C hrist’s saving w ork has made. T he salvation C hrist w on for believ­ ers has many aspects. O ne im portant distinction is th at sal­ vation has transform ed the C hristian’s understanding o f death (cf. 1 C or 15:55). We see this w hen Paul goes on to say, “those w ho sleep through Jesus, G od will bring w ith him ” (1 Thess 4:14). “Sleep through Jesus” is a m ost unusual ex­ pression, and its precise meaning has been the subject o f debate. O u r best understanding o f the w ords is th at the people in question were believers; they were “in” Jesus at the tim e o f their death. It is their relationship w ith him th at has made their death different from the death o f those out­ side C h rist T he New English Bible paraphrases, b u t brings o u t the meaning, w ith “died as C hristians.” The com ing of the Lord Having made it clear that deceased believers will be there w hen Jesus comes back to this earth, Paul goes on to further details of that coming. Perhaps we should notice in passing that our expression “the Second Coming” is n o t found in the New Testament; there we read simply o f “the coming.” Paul prefaces what he has to say on this subject with, “For this we say to you in the word of the Lord” (1 Thess 4:15); that is, he is n o t giving a private opinion. Speaking “in the w ord o f the Lord” surely means that what he now says has the full author­ ity of Jesus behind it. T he words he quotes are n o t found anywhere in our canonical Gospels, b u t there m ust have been many sayings o f Jesus that circulated orally in the early church (see Acts 20:35). A nother suggestion is that the words come from a revelation made to Paul or to a Christian prophet. The precise means by w hich the saying came to the apostle is not im portant. W hat matters is that it had the full authority o f Jesus behind it, so that Paul could cite it as giving teaching that the followers of Jesus must accept 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

44

Paul goes on to say, “we w ho are alive, w ho rem ain at th e coming o f th e Lord.” This has led many to the view th at Paul thought and taught th at he w ould be alive w hen Jesus re ' turns. Such people commonly see this as a widespread view o f the early church. B oth opinions may be correct. In every age o f the church there have been some believers w ho held firmly th at th e Lord w ould be returning in their lifetime. There is no reason why there should n ot have been many such in the first century o r even th at Paul may have been included among them . We cannot, however, deduce this from anything Paul said. T he words just quoted certainly do n o t teach as much. Long ago J. B. Lightfoot pointed o ut th at w hat Paul said could be paraphrased as, “W hen I say ‘we, 'I mean those w ho are living, those w ho survive to th at day.”1 T he G reek does n o t necessarily m ean any more than th a t T he words speak o f those living at th e tim e o f Jesus’ coming, b u t they say n o th ' ing about w hether the speaker w ould be among them o r n o t We should bear in m ind th at Paul has a habit o f classing him self w ith those to whom he is w riting at a given time. It is im portant to notice th at he says, “G od both raised the Lord and will raise us” (1 C or 6:14; cf. also 2 C or 4:14), w hich classifies him w ith the dead at thé coming of Jesus just as surely as th e passage we are looking at places him w ith the living. We cannot infer from his words anything about w hether Paul thought he w ould live to C hrist’s coming or not. W hat he is sure o f is th at his Lord will come. Some try to hold these passages in balance by saying th at at the time w hen he w rote the first letter to th e Thessalonians Paul thought th e coming o f the Lord was near. H is thought, it is alleged, was far from static. A s it developed over the succeeding years, he changed his m ind and held th at he w ould die before C hrist’s return. T he dates, how­ ever, are against this. Paul’s conversion m ust be dated in the early 30s, and 1 Thessalonians seems to have been w ritten 45

The Lost Things

about A.D. 50. T he date o f 1 Corinthians is n ot certain, b u t m ost scholars p ut it in the mid 50s (C. K. Barrett thinks early 54 or tow ard the end of 532). N o good reason has been suggested why Paul should have held the view for nearly tw enty years th at C hrist’s return was im m inent and then abandon it during the next three or four years. There is no reason for thinking th at the Thessalonians did n ot have a satisfactory understanding of the tru th that at the end of this age there will be a general resurrection and that believers w ho have died before that great day will be raised. Evidently they thought th at Jesus would return to earth first, and only after th at would the dead rise. Paul assures them th at believers still on earth will have no prece' dence over “those w ho have feilen asleep.” H e uses an em­ phatic negative to make it clear th at they will “certainly n o t” (niv ) have an advantage over their friends. Events a t the com ing of C hrist Paul proceeds to enlighten his correspondents about w hat will happen w hen C hrist comes. H e starts by saying, “T he Lord him self” will come (1 Thess 4:16), the “him self” making it clear th at he is referring to a personal coming, n o t th e sending o f a representative. H e lists three events th at will m ark th e coming as distinctive: a shout, an archangel’s voice, and G od’s tru m p et Perhaps we should notice th at there are those w ho thin k th a t Paul is talking about one loud noise w hich m ight be called any one o f these. T hus Frame gives th e m eaning as, “A t a command, namely, at an archangel’s voice and at a trum pet o f G od.”3 W illiam H endriksen finds tw o loud noises, th e “shouted command” and “th e archangel . . . sounding G od’s tru m p et”4 Such views are n o doubt possible, b u t it is m uch m ore natural to under­ stand th e apostle as m eaning th at there will be three sepa­ rate happenings. 1, 2 TH E SSA L O N IA N S

46

J. B. Phillips brings out something of the vigor of the original w ith his translation: "O ne w ord of command, one shout from the Archangel, one blast from the trum pet of G od and G od in Person will come down from Heaven!” Paul first refers to a "shout,” where he makes use of a w ord that expresses authority. It is used in a variety o f ways, such as the shout of an officer to his soldiers, the call of the shipmaster to his rowers, the cry of a hunter to his hounds, or the shout o f a charioteer to his horses. T he w ord has about it a note of urgency and authority. Curiously Paul does n ot say who will utter the shout, b u t we should probably understand that it is the Lord himself. Elsewhere we read that all who are in the tombs will hear the voice of the Son of G od (John 5:28), and it would seem th at it is this to w hich Paul refers. T here will also be the voice of an archangel. People have sometimes tried to identify th e archangel, and M ichael is usually favored because he is th e only archangel nam ed in th e New Testam ent (Jude 9; G abriel is nam ed in Luke 1, b u t he is n o t called an archangel). T his is a slender basis for identification. T he fact is th at since Paul does n o t name him , we have no way o f identifying him . A ll we can say is th at o n th at great day th e Lord’s voice will n o t be th e only one to be heard, there will be an archangel w ho will also u tter his voice. T he third phenom enon will be the “trum pet of G od.” Trumpets are often m entioned in the O ld Testament in con­ nection w ith great religious festivals (Pss 81:3; 150:3). R efer­ ences to a trum pet or a "great trum pet” at times of divine activity are particularly significant (Exod 19:16; Isa 27:13; Joel 2:1; Zech 9:14). It was evidently thought to be a very suitable accompaniment to the great things th at G od does. In Revelation we read of a voice like the sound of a trum pet (Rev 1:10; 4:1), w hich is one reason why some think of the trum pet here as another way o f referring to a great voice. This is certainly possible, b u t it seems better to think o f 47

The Last Things

three great sounds. Elsewhere Paul speaks o f "the last trum ­ pet” (1 C or 15:52) and adds the inform ation th at w hen it sounds, "the dead will be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed.” H e does n o t add this inform ation here, b u t then he is n o t giving a full account o f w hat is to take place on th at day. H e is dealing w ith a particular problem th at his converts in Thessalonica were facing. Nonetheless, th at a trum pet w ould sound is a thought to w hich Paul gives ex­ pression m ore than once. This majestic introduction is followed by the inform a­ tion th at th e Lord “will come dow n from heaven” and th en “the dead in C hrist will be raised firs t” T heir friends had feared th at they w ould miss the great day; instead, Paul tells them , they w ill have a place o f special honor in all th at will th en be done. It is interesting th at th e faithful departed are spoken o f as "the dead in C h ris t” W ith this we should compare “those w ho have fallen asleep in C hrist” (1 C or 15:18) and “th e dead th at die in the Lord” (Rev 14:13). Such expressions bring o u t the tru th th a t Jesus is Lord over death. H is people are “in C h ris t” T hey are in C hrist during th e tim e o f this earthly pilgrimage, and they do n o t cease to be “in C hrist” following their deaths. We should perhaps notice th at th e verb “will be raised” is passive. Paul is n o t saying th at they will rise, as though this were a natural process. H e is telling us o f som ething th at will be done to the dead believers, som ething th at G od will do to them . It is he w ho will bring them o u t o f th e tom bs into th e life o f the w orld to come. As we noted earlier, Paul is n o t giving a full description o f all that will happen at th e End. Some students o f Revelation 20 see here a reference to the first resurrection (Rev 20:5-6), b u t we should remember that the apostle is n o t differentiat­ ing the resurrection of believers from th at of nonbelievers. H e is distinguishing betw een those w ho die “in C hrist” and those w ho will still be alive w hen the Lord returns. H e is 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

48

dealing w ith a subject different from th at under discussion in Revelation 20. The “rapture” of believers Paul goes on to speak o f believers being caught up to m eet th e Lord, a process popularly called th e “rapture” (a term derived from the Latin w ord for “seize”). It is im portant to realize th at this is the only place in the New Testament that refers unambiguously to this “rapture.” There are other places th at some readers hold to refer to it, b u t none make it clear th at there will be a rapture o f believers. In some quar­ ters there is trem endous emphasis on the rapture, and peo­ ple have gone into detail as to th e way it will all take place. If we are to be biblical, though, we m ust beware o f going beyond w hat Paul says here, for there is no certainty that a rapture is in m ind in any other passage in th e New Testa­ m en t A nything we may say about it is speculation. Paul says three great things about the rapture: believers still alive w hen the Lord comes back will be reunited w ith believers w ho have died before them , they will be caught up w ith an irresistible force, and they will be w ith the Lord. These are th e things th at m atter. We will look at them in turn. 1. Reunion. Paul turns his attention to those believers w hò survive until that day. H e uses the emphatic “we” and adds “the living w ho remain” (1 Thess 4:17). H e has made it d ear that deceased believers will n ot be disadvantaged, b u t he is equally certain th at believers who are alive at that time will share in the wonderful happenings. H e puts some emphasis on “together w ith them ,” partly by placing it early in the sentence (it comes before the verb) and partly by reinforcing the preposition we translate as “w ith” by prefixing it w ith another w ord (which may be an adverb or a preposition), w hich itself conveys the idea of togetherness or simultaneity. 49

The Last Things

The result is to emphasize togetherness, to stress the fact that believers, w hether they have died prior to or lived through to the great day, will be together. The Thessalonians were dis­ turbed at their separation from believers who had died. Paul reassures them by pointing to their oneness in C h rist There will be no separation at the last great day. 2. “Caught up.” He goes on to say that the living believers will be “caught up in clouds to meet the Lord.” The verb is often used of violent action, a “snatching away” of a thing or a person. This may be a disaster as w hen the evil one snatches away the seed that is sown in someone’s heart (Matt 13:19) or when the w olf seizes the sheep (John 10:12). W ith such usage, it is comforting to know that nothing will snatch believers from the hand of the Son or of the Father (John 10:28,29). The w ord is also used of beneficial actions. Thus the Spirit of the Lord caught up Philip (Acts 8:39), and Paul speaks o f a man “caught up to the third heaven” or “to Paradise” (2 C or 12:2,4). W hen Paul was in trouble at the hands of the Jerusalem mob the commander ordered his soldiers to snatch him away from them (Acts 23:10). T he verb thus has to do w ith seizing by force, and Paul is here referring to a force great enough to separate living believers from this earthly life and to reunite them w ith their departed friends and w ith their living Lord. T he term “rapture” expresses something of the irresistible force that catches believers up, a force that neither they nor any of their opponents can resist We will be caught up, Paul says, “in clouds,” which accords w ith the fact that clouds are often associated in Scripture w ith the presence of God. There were clouds on M ount Sinai when the law was given (Exod 19:16), when the tabernacle was set up (Exod 40:34), and when the temple was brought into use (1 Kgs 8:10-11). We should also remember the cloud at the m ount of Jesus’ Transfiguration (Mark 9:7) and at his ascen­ sion (Acts 1:9). The present passage is in line w ith those 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

50

others, and it brings out from another angle the reality of the presence of God. 3. Meeting with the Lord. “To meet the Lord” makes use of an expression that may be used of ordinary meetings, w hether friendly or hostile. It is also used of more formal and official meetings. M oulton and Milligan note its use in the papyri: “The word seems to have been a kind o f technical term for the official welcome of a newly arrived dignitary— a usage which accords excellently w ith its N T usage.”5 There are many accounts o f emperors or other leaders paying offi­ cial visits th at are described using this term . It is suitable for a great occasion, and Paul uses it this way. W hen it is used of official welcomes, people apparently w ent out to m eet the dignitary and then escorted him back to the place w here he was going (cf. M att 25:6; A cts 28:15). This has sometimes been brought into an argum ent th at w hen believers are caught up to m eet th e Lord, they form a kind of welcoming party and escort him back to earth. This may indeed be the case, b u t we should be clear th at Paul does n o t say as much. Indeed it is difficult to see w hether he means th at w hen the Lord is united w ith his people (both th e dead and the living), he proceeds to earth or w hether he takes them w ith him back to heaven. Either possibility w ould accord w ith the language he uses here. We may be curious about the point, but we should recognize th at Paul is n o t trying to satisfy our curiosity. H e is concerned w ith the w onderful reunion th at G od will bring about and its perma­ n en t consequences. T he meeting, Paul says, will take place “in th e air,” a tru th w hich in any case follows from our being caught up to a m eeting in the clouds. We should also bear in m ind th e fact th at in Paul’s tim e th e air was seen as the abode o f demons. Satan may be called “the prince o f th e pow er o f th e air” (Eph 2:2). If this is in m ind in this passage, th en there will be th e thought th a t th e returning Lord has 51

The Last Things

defeated th e demons; they have been touted in w hat th e ancient w orld regarded as th eir ow n territory. T his w ould th en be an expression o f th e com plete defeat, brought about by C hrist, o f all th e forces o f evil “A nd so we shall be always w ith the Lord.” This is w hat it all leads up to, and Paul adds no more. O ther parts of Scrip' ture tell us o f harps and crowns, o f streets paved w ith gold and m uch more th at brings out the w onder and the splendor o f it all. H ere, however, Paul is making the one im portant point that to be w ith the Lord means to enter final bliss. It is his presence (rather than the splendor o f his surroundings th at is described elsewhere) w hich is th e ultim ate blessing. We are rem inded o f Jesus’ own words th at to know the Father and Jesus him self “is” (not “brings”) “th e life eternal” (John 17:3). Judgm ent It is a standard New Testament teaching th at w hen the Lord returns, life as we know it here on earth will cease and there will be a judgm ent of all, both the living and the dead. This will be the judgm ent of G od (Rom 2:16), b u t he will bring it about through C hrist (Acts 17:31). T hus we read o f people standing at the judgm ent seat o f G od (Rom 14:10) and elsewhere at the judgm ent seat o f C hrist (2 C or 5:10). In the passages we have looked at in connection w ith the com­ ing of our Lord thus far, we have seen only th at he will come in glory and th at he will reunite believers separated by death. Paul, o f course, is n o t unm indful o f the sterner aspects o f this coming, and elsewhere he devotes some space to bring­ ing out w hat this means. H ere he w rites to th e Thessalonians, “if indeed it is a just thing w ith G od to recompense affliction to those w ho afflict you” (2 Thess 1:6; the clause is introduced w ith “if,” b u t this throw s no doubt on the proposition; it means “if” [as in the 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

52

case]). Faul has just told his converts th at th e way they bear up under th e opposition of evil is a manifest token of G od’s righteous judgm ent (v 5) and they should never forget th at G od’s enabling of his people to endure persecution is part o f his "righteous judgm ent.” T hat does n o t m ean th at the per­ secutors will escape punishm ent for ever. W hat Paul is say­ ing here is th at in due tim e evil people will be punished. Justice demands i t Specifically, those w ho afflict G od’s peo­ ple will themselves be afflicted. This is n o t vengeance; there is nothing vindictive about w hat Paul is writing. T he apostle is simply making it clear th at G od has made this a m oral universe. Evil may go unpunished for a time, b u t n o t for ever. This is impossible w hen we see th at G od is th e G od revealed in th e Bible. W ith this understanding of justice as his point o f depar­ ture, Paul then links "rest” for the afflicted Thessalonians and, interestingly, “rest w ith us” (2 Thess 1:7). W hen we are thinking o f th e great apostle as bringing consolation and encouragem ent to his persecuted friends, it is easy to th in k o f him as living in a different atmosphere. We tend to forget th at he shared the same w orld as th at inhabited by the Thessalonians; he, too, was afflicted (cf. 2 C or 11:23-29). A t this point he is n o t dealing w ith his ow n sufferings b u t w ith those of his friends. It is a little hum an touch th at he remem­ bers th at he, too, knows w hat it is to suffer. T he w ord he uses for "rest” is often used in th e sense it has here, namely, rest from afflictions and troubles; th at is, relief. This rest, Paul says, will come about "at th e revelation o f our Lord Jesus from heaven.” H e has moved now from w hat is happening in the daily life o f th e Thessalonians to w hat will happen at the end o f the age. H e does n o t speak here o f the “coming” o f the Lord Jesus b u t o f the “revela­ tion” of the Lord. T he w ord speaks o f making know n some­ thing th at was n o t know n hitherto. To the world, Jesus was no m ore than a Galilean peasant To th e Thessalonians w ho 53

The Last Things

did n o t respond w hen the gospel was preached to them , he was simply a Jewish religious teacher, one whom they could easily reject and whose followers they could abuse w ith im­ punity. Yet w hen Jesus comes again, it will be a revelation. They will see him as he is, n o t as they, in their blindness, had fancied him to be. "A t the revelation” is more literally "in the revelation,” and this may perhaps signify that the pun­ ishm ent o f evil is part of the revelation. We should n o t think th at our Lord is neutral to evil. H e is opposed to it totally, and the retribution th at will eventually overtake evildoers is part of the revelation o f w hat he is. M ajesty As he speaks of the coming o f the Lord, Paul lets his readers know that this will n o t be in lowliness like his form er coming. H e will come "from heaven,” which points to his glorious origin, and he will come "with angels of his power,” which may well mean "with his powerful angels” as many take it (cf. Ps 103:20). A n objection to this way of looking at the expression is th at the passage is telling us something about our Lord and that it is his power rather than th at of the angels that is in view. T he Jerusalem Bible translates the phrase as "the angels of his power,” and if we take it this way, the passage is telling us th at Jesus will return in power w ith the angels appropriate to his nature and position. T he second thing we learn about the coming is th at it will be "in flaming fire” (2 Thess 1:8). Fire is associated w ith the divine presence in a num ber of O ld Testament passages (e.g., Exod 19:18; Ps 18:8), so it is a very suitable accompaniment o f the returning Lord. It is all th e more appropriate in that th e passage goes on to speak o f his "giving retribution” to sinners. We are rem inded o f some words in Isaiah: "For behold, th e Lord will come in fire, and his chariots like the storm-wind, to render his anger in fury, and his rebuke w ith 1, 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

54

flames of fire. Bor by fire will the Lord execute judgm ent” (Isa 66:15-16). Like the Lord in the O ld Testament, the Lord Jesus at his coming will provide the retribution th at is fit­ tingly described in term s of fire. The sinners singled out are "those who do n ot know G od and those who do n ot obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.” Paul is n ot referring to people who have never had the oppor­ tunity of knowing G od but rather to people who “did n o t approve to have G od in knowledge” (Rom 1:28). There are those who respond to the revelation G od has given them and those who reject i t Paul is saying that those w ho reject the light G od has given are guilty people and, in the end, they will be confronted w ith that judgment described in term s of flaming fire. T heir refusal to know G od is the result of deliberate choice, and this comes out in the fact that they are described also as “those who do n o t obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.” It is true that the definite article is repeated before the second expression, and it is possible to take this to mean th at a new group of people is in mind. Some who understand the pas­ sage this way think that the former expression means G entile sinners and the latter Jewish sinners. If such a distinction were in mind, it w ould surely n ot be expressed so obscurely that the reader has to make an inference to find it. T he lan­ guage in which the suggested distinction is made is far from definite and certainly insufficient to carry conviction. In any case, the whole passage is w ritten in the style of the oracles of the O ld Testament, where expressions like those we are con­ sidering would naturally be understood as forming an exam­ ple of synonymous parallelism. In other words, “those w ho do not know G od” and “those who do n ot obey the gospel o f our Lord Jesus” are tw o ways of describing the same people. They had been offered the same salvation as the Thessalonian Christians they were persecuting, b u t they had refused i t T heir refusal to obey the gospel was culpable. A t the coming 55

The Last Things

o f that same Lord Jesus whose gospel they had refused, they would pay the penalty of their refusal. This is explicitly spelled out by Paul. These sinners “will pay the penalty, eternal destruction from the af ce of the Lord and from the glory o f his might.” The word translated “penalty” is related to words like “just” and “retribution” in the previous verses. In other words, the apostle is continuing the thought o f justice; he is n ot talking about an arbitrary punishm ent b u t the working out of what is right. These sin­ ners will receive the just consequence of what they have done. We should n o t understand “destruction” as annihilation. R ather we should remember th at th e w ord may have the meaning “ruin” (RSV translates it this way in 1 Tim 6:9). In the present passage it is surely the opposite of “eternal life,” the life o f the w orld to come. Eternal life is, o f course, endless, b u t more im portant than this is the af c t that it is a life of a particular quality, a life in fellowship w ith G od. T he ruin of w hich Paul speaks here, he says, is “from” the fece o f the Lord, w hich we should understand in the sense “away from” the fece o f the Lord. Just as eternal life is life in the presence of the Lord, so eternal ruin is separation from the presence of the Lord (cf. M att 25:41,46). Paul speaks o f a grim reality. H e makes it clear that those w ho preach th e gospel are n o t idly playing a game in w hich it does n o t m atter w ho wins and w ho loses. They hold out eternal life and eternal ruin. T he refusal o f a careless genera­ tion to fece up to the only tw o possibilities ultimately open to them does n o t alter the reality. Those w ho reject the gospel will in the end exdude themselves from the presence o f the Lord. “Face,” o f course, in this expression stands for th e whole person. Those w ho refuse remove themselves from the divine presence. T he foolishness of this refusal is brought out by the addi­ tion of “and from the glory of his m ight.” Jesus had been a lowly person here on earth, and his messengers had had 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

56

nothing wonderful about them w hen they w ent to Thessalonica. Yet it is a mistake to take either of these considerations as pointing to ultim ate reality. W hen the Lord Jesus returns to this earth it will be in. splendor, and those who have re ' jected him and his messengers will find that they have re­ jected more than a peasant from Galilee and some penurious preachers. They have rejected a Lord who is both glorious and powerful. In the end, neither his glory nor his m ight will be hidden. Paul speaks o f the day “w hen he comes to be glorified in his holy ones" (2 Thess 1:10). We should n o t think th at the purpose of C hrist’s coming is concentrated on the punish' m ent of the wicked. T hat punishm ent has occupied us in the verses we have looked at, b u t attention has been fastened on it only because it was a topic of some importance for the Thessalonian Christians in their difficult situation. There is a m uch more positive aspect to the coming, and it is this to which Paul now turns. It is the glory that is the most signifi' cant aspect of the Second Coming, not the ruin of those who refused the glory. We should probably take “his holy ones” in this passage in the sense “his saints”; that is, those who have accepted the gospel and have been numbered among his followers. T he ex­ pression is quite general, and it is wide enough to include any w ho belong to the Lord, w hether their origin is in heaven or on earth. So it is theoretically possible to see here a reference to the angels as well as to the redeemed, b u t there does not seem to be any reason for thinking that Paul has angels in mind. It is much more likely that the “holy ones” are identical w ith “all them that have believed” later in the verse. T he returning Lord then will be glorified in his saints. This is an unusual expression (and in this precise form is found only in this passage in the New Testament). T here has been a good deal o f discussion about its precise meaning, b u t the most likely possibility is th at w hat the Lord has done in 57

The Last Things

those w ho have p u t their tru st in him will then be seen to be truly glorious. O n another occasion Paul referred to the tim e w hen he had become a C hristian and people who had know n o f his persecuting activities heard w hat had hap' pened. “A nd they glorified G od in me,” he says (Gal 1:24). It is perhaps something like th at which is in m ind here. It is w hat the Lord has done in those who are his own th at will be seen to be glorious. A nother unusual expression is joined to this, “and to be marveled at in all those w ho have believed” (“to be marveled at” does n o t occur anywhere else in the New Testament). T he thought is n o t very dissimilar to th at in the earlier part o f the verse. W hat C hrist has done in believers is something glorious; it is also something at w hich those w ho see it may well marvel. How could the Lord take sinners like Paul and those Thessalonians and make “saints” out of them? Paul may n o t know how he did it, b u t he knows th at he did do i t H e now says th at the miracle of grace will be such as to cause astonishm ent w hen it is fully know n at the last great day. We should n o t concern ourselves w ith the question, “W ho is it w ho will marvel on th at day?” It may be the angels, or those w ho have rejected th e gospel, o r the transform ed sinners themselves. Paul gives no attention to that question. H e is concerned only w ith the w onderful thing that happens in those w ho believe, a w onderful change that takes place right away and which the Lord will sustain until the end o f time and beyond. These then are the passages in which Paul gives sustained treatm ent to the m anner of the Lord’s return to earth and what it will mean. We should n o t overlook the fact that there are other occasions w hen he refers to the coming, although w ithout sustained treatm ent, and these occasions should n o t be overlooked. Perhaps we might start by noticing that the w ord “coming,” l ,2 T H E S S A L O N IA N S

58

parousia, can apply to comings of various kinds. Paul uses it for example of the “comings” of some of his helpers. He writes to the Corinthians of th e parousia of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (1 C or 16:17), and in another place he refers to that of Titus (2 C or 7:6). There are other such uses of the term in the New Testam ent There is even a reference to the parou­ sia of the Man of Lawlessness (2 Thess 2:9). Characteristically, however, it is used of the Second Coming. It does not have to be described in any way: “the coming,” used w ithout qualifica' tion, is the coming of Jesus, the parousia. Thus Paul asks his friends, “W hat is our hope or joy or crown of rejoicing— are n o t you?—before our Lord Jesus at his coming?” (1 Thess 2:19). The apostle makes it clear th at he held his converts in the highest esteem. H e has not been able to visit them, b u t that did n o t mean that he had forgotten them or that they had fidlen in his estimation. H e brings this out by telling them what they will mean to him on th at last great day. If they will mean so m uch to him at a tim e w hen all the attention will be elsewhere, namely, on the majesty o f the Lord, then it is impossible to exaggerate his concern for them here and now. O ther passages drive home the importance o f C hristian qualities by relating them to the Lord’s parousia. We see this in the prayer that G od the Father and our Lord Jesus will make the converts abound in love “so that he may establish your hearts blameless in holiness before our G od and Father at the parousia of our Lord Jesus w ith all his holy ones” (1 Thess 3:13). It is im portant that believers live uprightly, and it is not uncommon for Paul to emphasize the importance of love. For him it is only in love that people will be blameless in heart, and his prayer accordingly is for this to happen in his Thessalonian converts. H is reference to “holiness” is n o t to be overlooked. “Blameless” m ight be understood as signifying outstanding ethical achievement, but “holiness” is a religious term; it points to the state of the preachers before God. 59

The Last Things

We should bear in m ind that Paul’s w ord for “holiness” is an unusual one. In the G reek translation of the O ld Testa m ent it is never used of people b u t always refers to God. Elsewhere in the New Testament it refers to the Holy Spirit or to C hrist (Rom 1:4) and is part o f an exhortation to “perfecting holiness” (2 C or 7:1). So w hen Paul uses the term here, he is n o t making a matter-of-fact remark about some thing quite ordinary. H e is setting the highest possible stand ard before the Thessalonians and praying that G od will bring it to pass and that he will bring it to pass not only here and now b u t in such a way that it persists into the day w hen C hrist comes back. It is an extraordinary concept that believ­ ers will have this kind o f holy blamelessness before G od and the denizens of heaven. T he thought o f blamelessness at the parousia o f the Lord Jesus surfaces again tow ard the end o f th e first letter w hen Paul prays for it once more. H e asks th at the Thessalonians may be sanctified completely and th at their “spirit and soul and body be kept entire, blameless at the coming o f our Lord Jesus C hrist” (1 Thess 5:23). Again blamelessness is linked w ith sanctification; the tw o go together in a way that should lead us to th ink o f both a religious and an ethical aspect to the life o f th e believer. T here is also the thought o f comple­ tion. Paul uses an unusual w ord (the only occurrence in the New Testament) for “completely”; it brings to expression the thought th at nothing should be lacking in the sanctification for w hich he prays. H e goes on to bring this out by specifying the “spirit and soul and body” o f the Thessalonians. We should probably n o t understand this as an affirmation th at we are made up o f three parts, over against those w ho hold that there are only tw o parts (body and soul). There is no reason for thinking th at Paul has in m ind a strict classification o f the various segments th at go to make up a hum an being. H e is simply using an ordinary way of speaking to bring out his point th at I , 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

60

he looks fo r every part o f the Thessalonians to be affected by the sanctification for w hich he prays. T he apostle has another unusual w ord (found elsewhere in the New Testament only in Jas 1:4) w hen he looks for the believers to be kept “entire.” A standard lexicon says o f it: “a qualitative term , with integrity, whole, complete, undamaged, intact, blameless. ”6 T he w ord indicates th at th e people in question should be complete, sound, entire. Clearly Paul is stretching his vocabulary at this point to bring o ut th e tru th th at he is looking for the Thessalonian C hristians to live on th e highest plane. T hat they should fulfill all th at he looks for in this passage means th at they w ould have an extraordi­ nary standard indeed. H e prays th at they will have it and th at it should be manifest at C hrist’s parousia. O nce again th e coming o f the Lord is brought into a prayer for the utm ost in sanctification and ethical achievement. In one instance Paul brings the parousia into a request for the Thessalonians to act: “Now we ask you, brothers," he says, “w ith respect to the coming of our Lord Jesus C hrist and our being gathered to him th at you be n ot quickly moved" (2 Thess 2:1). T he w ord translated here “w ith respect to ” often has the meaning “on behalf of,” and it may have some­ thing of the flavor of “in the interest of the tru th concern­ ing.” It is n o t the w ord we w ould have expected in this place. The main thing that Paul is doing is directing the attention o f his converts to the parousia and urging them to live lives appropriate to the fact that one day they will be caught up to be w ith the Lord for ever. T hat th e coming of the Lord should be a strong stimulus to right C hristian behavior comes o ut in the prayers th at we have noticed. H ere we see m uch the same thing, b u t this time it comes in the form of an exhortation: “Seeing that one day we will be w ith the Lord, w hat m anner o f people ought we to be?” In our next chapter we will be looking at the manifesta­ tion o f the M an o f Lawlessness in th e last days. We will see 61

The Last Things

th en that he is the epitome o f all th at is evil. As Paul w rites about this evil figure, he brings him into connection w ith our Lord’s parousia. H e says that the Lord Jesus "will de­ stroy him w ith the breath of his m outh and bring him to nothing w ith the manifestation of his coming” (2 Thess 2:8). T he apostle is making it clear that C hrist will be far too powerful for the evil one and will n ot need to p ut forward all his might; "the breath of his m outh” will be sufficient (cf. Luther’s hymn, “A w ord shall quickly slay him ”). He is also saying that the parousia itself will bring about the undoing of the M an of Lawlessness. U p to now we have thought of the parousia as a wonderful and glorious happen­ ing that will bring com fort and strength to G od’s persecuted saints. It will deliver them from the trials and problems of this m ortal life and from the weakness that accompanies his peo­ ple in all they do. We are told in this passage that that is n o t all. The coming of the Lord in itself will bring evil down. The verb Paul uses is difficult to translate. It occurs twenty-seven times in the New Testament, and the King James Version rendered it seventeen different ways. The Revised Version reduced those variations to ten but introduced three addi­ tional translations. Every translation has increased the num ­ ber, and more than eighty renderings have been used. Thus, it is no small wonder that it is difficult to find a single (and simple) English equivalent. Basically the word has a meaning like "render inoperative,” "make null and void,” and this helps us to see what is in m ind here. The coming of Jesus in itself means the end of the power of evil. N o m atter how strong evil appears to weaker mortals, it cannot stand in the presence of the trium phant Lord.

1, 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

62

4

THE DEFEAT OF EVIL

Christians have always been opposed by evil forces, and they can never have felt that life is easy. Paul is certain that it will always be like this, b u t he makes it plain that the w orst of the evil forces will be encountered only at the end of this world. A t that time there will be an outbreak of evil headed by one whom he calls the “M an of Lawlessness,” a tide which occurs in the New Testament only in 2 Thessalonians 2. The tide “M an of Lawlessness” tells us something signifi­ cant about this being: he is n ot subject to law. Paul links him w ith “the rebellion” (2 Thess 2:3), a w ord w hich may mean religious or political rebellion and here seems to include both. H e is saying th at at the end of this age there will be a great uprising o f the forces o f evil in rebellion against G od and th at this rebellion will be led by a being who has no regard for law. This being is also called “the son o f perdi­ tion,” that is, his character will be “lostness.” H e will claim for him self the place o f highest authority and, n ot content w ith supreme political power, he will take his seat “in the sanctuary o f G od” (2 Thess 2:4), an expression 63

The Defeat of Evil

th at has been understood several ways. T he w ord "sanctuary" is sometimes used metaphorically o f the C hristian church (Eph 2:21) or o f the body of the C hristian (1 C or 6:19), from w hich some have deduced th at the M an of Lawlessness will take over the C hristian church and make it his base. Against this is the fact that, while the New Testament envisages that many will fall away in the last days, it does n o t teach th at the whole church will become apostate. In any case the w ord “sanctuary” mostly means a material building. It is used prop­ erly of the innerm ost shrine (just as the w ord “temple” in­ cludes the whole complex, w ith vestries, courtyards, and the like); “sanctuary” is the place where deity is especially thought to dw ell A ttem pts have been made to identify this shrine, b ut Paul gives us no clue to its whereabouts. H e is no t telling his readers where all this will happen but, instead, w hat it means. W hen the M an of Lawlessness takes his seat in the sanc­ tuary he is making a claim to the highest place o f all, the place o f God. Clearly Paul expects th at in th e end tim e wickedness will be present on a scale greater than anything previously know n and that there will be a leader w ho will claim for him self the place th at belongs only to God. In a very puzzling expression Paul says th at the Thessalonians know “w hat is restraining” this M an o f Lawlessness, and goes on to refer to “the mystery of lawlessness” th at is already at work, and further to “him who restrains” w ho will in due course be taken out o f the way (2 Thess 2:6-7). T here is a problem in identifying the restrainer, w hich is spoken o f both as neuter (“what is restraining”) and as masculine (“him w ho restrains”). Some identify the restrainer as the Rom an Empire, w hich m ight be thought o f in itself or in the person of its em peror. If this was Paul’s view, he was in error because the Rom an Empire has passed away and the M an o f Lawless­ ness has n o t yet made his appearance. Oscar C ullm ann saw “a reference to the missionary preaching as a sign pointing 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

64

to th e end,”1 while Paul, he thought, was th e personal re­ strainer. N ot many have accepted this view; nothing in the letter gives th e impression th at Paul saw him self as holding back the coming of the M an o f Lawlessness. O ther suggestions include the Jewish state (but how could that state hold back the eschatological forces of evil?) o r G od the Father or the Holy Spirit (but how can either be taken out of the way?). There seems little point in running through the conjectures. Probably the best suggestion is th at Paul has in m ind the rule of law as it is m anifested in ordered govern­ m en t In his day it was evident in the Roman Empire and since then it has been manifested in a variety o f states. It accords w ith the “Man of Lawlessness” th at his tim e o f tri­ um ph is seen in the doing away w ith law. As we noted earlier, his very title points to his being the antithesis of law; he is opposed to law and to all the institutions that uphold law. Paul speaks o f the parousia o f this being: he will have a “coming” th a t can be described w ith th e same w ord as th a t used so often o f th e coming o f C hrist. Paul goes o n to link this coming w ith “th e w orking o f Satan,” w hich he goes on to describe in several ways (2 Thess 2:9-10). It adds up to th e thought th at there will be a trem endous upsurge o f evil in th e last days and th a t Satan will be active through his m inions. It is perhaps n o t unnatural th at C hristians have spent a lot of time trying to determ ine just w ho the M an o f Lawless­ ness is and precisely w hat restrains him. Q uestions like this seem to have a perennial attraction for some believers. Paul’s interest, however, is n o t in such questions; his interest is rather in the total overthrow of th e powers o f evil. H e says th at the Lawless O ne will be revealed and immediately goes on, “whom the Lord Jesus will destroy w ith the breath o f his m outh and bring to nothing by the m anifestation of his coming” (2 Thess 2:8). N o action is necessary; th e very appearance o f the Lord Jesus will destroy th e m ight o f the 65

The Defeat of Evil

evil one. Paul speaks o f the misdeeds o f the followers o f the M an of Lawlessness and goes on to say th at G od is at w ork in sending the delusion they hold so firmly (even in the “w orking of error," whereby they “believe the lie” [2 Thess 2:11], a purpose o f G od is fulfilled). A ll those w ho reject the tru th will be judged (2 Thess 2:12). Persecution In addition to the passage in which he speaks o f the climactic opposition o f evil to G od at the end time, Paul has a num ber o f references to the evil th at people do here and now. So im portant is this to R onald W ard th at he begins his study o f the theology of the T hessalonian epistles w ith their teaching on sin.2 We should n o t think th at Paul has a m orbid interest in the way evil so easily flourishes in this imperfect world. R ather he is certain th at evil will n o t trium ph in the end. H e is sure of the existence of G od and the power o f God, and he is sure th at in C hrist G od has taken decisive action to defeat evil and to make it possible for sinners to receive forgiveness and to enter into newness of life, a life in w hich sin is n o t dom inant. Paul has a variety o f ways o f underlining the tru th th at C hrist has defeated evil and th at C hrist’s people may well take heart, n o m atter how difficult th eir circumstances. O ne feature o f the Thessalonian correspondence is the way th e apostle brings o ut the fact o f the trium ph o f good and the certainty that, in th e end, it will defeat every force o f evil C onsider Paul’s treatm ent of persecution. H e speaks o f th e persecutions already inflicted on G od’s people and shows th at these actions of evil people had n o t defeated the purposes o f God. Clearly this was something that m attered a good deal to him and to th e Thessalonians. T he new con­ verts had themselves undergone suffering, and Paul could 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

66

speak o f “all your persecutions and the afflictions you en­ dure.” These he sees as a dem onstration of G od’s righteous judgment, so that they should be deemed w orthy o f “the kingdom o f God, for w hich you also suffer” (2 Thess 1:4-5). Now no one in the New Testament believes th at there is any possibility th at the kingdom of G od will be overthrow n. Suffering for the kingdom is thus n o t in vain; suffering itself points to ultim ate victory. Paul also refers specifically to the persecution undergone by the churches of G od in Judea, a persecution like the one the Thessalonians had endured (1 Thess 2:14). N either had stamped o ut the people of G od, and in both cases there had been trium ph as well as suffering. Persecution entails more than the sufferings o f believers, however, and Paul goes on to particularize his argum ent w ith the killing of Jesus and the prophets and the persecu­ tion o f the C hristian preachers. These were certainly evil actions and no doubt it seemed to the persecutors, and pos­ sibly to bystanders who observed w hat was going on, that those who opposed the purposes of G od in such ways had accomplished a great deal. W rath Paul viewed such perceptions as superficial understanding. He ends the passage on the Judean persecutions by saying, “the w rath has come upon them to the end” (or “to the utter­ m ost”; 1 Thess 2:16). Some translations read “retribution” (e.g., NEB), but this is n ot the meaning of the Greek; the w ord means “w rath.” There is no question that this “w rath” is God’s wrath. Paul is surely referring to a preliminary manifes­ tation of the eschatological w rath, and he sees it as certain that the persecutors will receive it to the full. Some commen­ tators find it hard to see these words as genuinely Paul’s; they find a much softer attitude toward the Jews in Romans 9-11. 67

The Defeat of Evil

We should remember th at in Romans Paul is writing about G od’s purposes for Israel, not about the hite of those Jews who persecute the people of God. H ere in Thessalonians he is n o t concerned w ith the ultimate destiny o f the nation b u t rather w ith the tru th th at the persecutors will n o t succeed in destroying God’s church. They will only store up w rath for themselves. Paul has some other references to the divine w rath, and they press hom e the point th at believers need n o t fear th at w rath. T he apostle reminds the Thessalonians th at they are awaiting G od’s Son from heaven, "Jesus, w ho delivers us from the coming w rath” (1 Thess 1:10). T he present partici' ple is timeless, w ith a meaning like "the deliverer.” It does n o t mean th at Paul is talking in term s o f a "realized” es­ chatology. This is made clear by the fact th at he speaks o f the w rath specifically as "the coming w rath”; he is referring to the end o f the age. H e is saying th at w hen people p u t their tru st in Jesus they are safe, safe now and safe at the end o f the age w hen the divine w rath will be brought to bear on sinners w ho will receive the due reward o f their deeds. For our purpose, th e significant them e is the deliverance o f be­ lievers, n o t th e punishm ent o f sinners. Paul sees evil as over­ come in the lives o f believers and overcome in such a way th at they are secure eternally. This tru th is brought out in another way w hen the apostle writes, "God has not appointed us for w rath b u t for the ob­ taining of salvation through our Lord Jesus C hrist” (1 Thess 5:9). H ere we have both the negative and the positive aspects o f salvation: we do n o t experience G od’s w rath, b u t we do experience our Lord Jesus C hrist’s salvation. Paul looks right through tim e to G od’s setting up o f the final state of affairs, and there he finds believers delivered from the w rath. W rath is n o t God’s purpose for them — salvation is. O nce again we see th at evil is conquered.

1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

68

We sometimes get m uch th e same idea w ithout th e w ord “w rath.” Thus Paul refers to “those who perish, because they did n o t receive th e love o f the tru th in order th at they m ight be saved” (2 Thess 2:10). T he fact th at these sinners perish shows the seriousness o f G od’s opposition to all th at is evil. W ith that, however, we notice “the love o f the tru th ” th at leads to salvation. O nce again there is the thought th at G od and good are powerful and th at there is an ultim ate trium ph over evil for all those w ho p u t their tru st in G od. Suffering From another point o f view the troubles o f th e converts were those that Paul had predicted (1 Thess 3:4). They were n o t outside the control of God. Indeed, Paul says th at we C hristians “are appointed” to sufferings (v 3). This is an im­ portant part of the apostle’s understanding of trouble and o f life. It may connect w ith the persecutions we were looking at earlier, for persecutions certainly mean trouble. T he cause o f evil, however, may prosper w hen troubles of other kinds p u t believers in difficulties. Paul assures his readers th at this kind o f evil cannot defeat G od’s purposes in his people. Believers m ust n o t expect an easy path through life. They are appointed to suffer, and in some way they cer­ tainly will suffer. They are n o t to complain bitterly w hen suffering comes as though some strange and unexpected disaster had struck them . In a w orld as evil as th e one Paul lived in (and as th e one C hristians have lived in ever since) suffering is inevitable. Yet Paul is saying som ething m ore th an that. H e is saying th a t suffering is part o f G od’s p u r­ pose for us. W e may n o t understand why this should be so, b u t at least we can reflect th at suffering produces qualities o f character in those w ho endure it rightly, qualities o f character th at do n o t make th eir appearance in th e tim es

69

The Defeat of Evil

o f peace and ease. To understand th at C od has appointed us to suffering puts m eaning into life w hen dark and diffi­ cult days come. Indeed, suffering does n o t necessarily mean misery and unhappiness. Taken in the right way, and recognized as God’s meaningful discipline, it may mean the reverse. Paul says that w hen the Thessalonians “received the word,” they did so “in great affliction w ith joy of the Holy Spirit” (1 Thess 1:6). Becoming Christians had exposed them to hardships in a city that did n ot approve of what they were doing and was ready to ridicule and oppose them. They did not hold on to their newfound faith solely by a spirit o f grim determination. Like many believers in the centuries that followed, they found exhilaration in the m idst of their troubles. The Holy Spirit himself was in their hearts, and this meant joy. It m eant a joy that the w orld did n o t give and which the world could never take away. Paul appeals to his own experience when he says that he and his companions were entrusted w ith the gospel that they preach, “n ot as pleasing men, but G od who tests our hearts” (1 Thess 2:4). H e does n ot say in what way G od conducts these tests, b ut it is dear that the heavenly Father searches people’s innerm ost beings. In the fact that God then approves some to be his preachers, we see from quite a different angle that there are people in whom evil has been defeated. The Thessalonians had know n what Paul predicted: he had made him self quite dear (1 Thess 3:4; W. G. R utherford tries to bring out the significance of the continuous tense w ith “the warning was often on our lips”). Persecution would thus not have taken them by surprise. A lthough he had pre­ dicted that persecution would come, Paul was n o t sure how these infant believers would behave under stress, and he sent Tim othy to strengthen them (1 Thess 3:2). We see something o f his delight w hen Tim othy reported that they were stand­ ing up so well (1 Thess 3:6-10). In their own experience they 1, 2 T H E SSA LO N IA N S

70

had come to know something of the trium ph of G od over such evils as persecution. This had been a m atter o f legitimate pride for Paul and his colleagues. They boasted in the other churches about the way the Thessalonians had borne their persecutions. A n­ other thought was linked to this spirit of endurance, w hich we earlier discussed, in th at they saw it as no less than justice th at G od w ould in due course recompense the persecutors (2 Thess 1:4-7). Paul is clear that evil people will n o t escape indefinitely. Sooner or later their evil deeds will receive their due recompense in the providence of God. It is in line w ith all this that Paul recommends prayer, that the believers should be delivered from unreasonable and evil m en (2 Thess 3:2). They should n o t rely on their own strength in the face of such strong enemies as those that confronted them , b u t neither should they be dismayed. G od is stronger than evil and will in th e end decisively eliminate i t In the meantime, believers should use the weapon o f prayer and know that G od will surely answer them and n o t suffer evil people to prevail over them . In m atters like these Paul is no ivory-tower th eo rist H e knew w hat it was to suffer in the service of C hrist (2 C or 11:23-28). So now he speaks of his own sufferings and his endurance o f insults in the tim e before he came to Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:2). These things did n o t mean th at the progress of the gospel was prevented. These hardships sim­ ply m eant th at Paul w ent on to city after city founding new churches and bringing other people into G od’s salvation. G od is n o t defeated by the opposition evil people throw up before his messengers. Satan Sometimes Paul refers to the activity of the evil one, b u t w hen he does he is m indful th at G od is greater. T hat does

71

The Defeat of Evil

n o t mean th at Satan should be disregarded as completely ineffective. T he evil one is active and constantly opposes and harasses believers in their service of God. For example, the apostle tells his correspondents th at th e preachers, and specifically he himself, had w anted to come back to Thessalonica, b u t Satan had hindered them (1 Thess 2:18). We need n o t doubt th at G od overruled these plans in the sense th at he had other w ork for Paul to do at that time, b u t the in­ cidental glimpse of th e power allowed to the evil one is o f interest. H e does hinder the servants of G od and sometimes stops them from doing w ork they w ould very m uch like to do and w hich they see as setting forward the cause of rig h t A ll that he does, however, is w ithin the overarching purpose o f God: he can do nothing that G od does n o t perm it him to do. T hat means th at if he stops one of G od’s servants from accomplishing some service o f God, th en th at servant may be assured th at G od is in charge o f the w hole process. In ways we expect o r n o t the good purpose of G od is set forward. There are mysteries, b u t in th e end Satan cannot defeat the divine purpose. In another place we read that Paul had made an inquiry about the faith of the Thessalonian converts, “lest the tem pter had tem pted you and our work had been in vain” (1 Thess 3:5). H ad they fallen away, the w ork of the aposdes would have been “in vain,” but God did n ot allow th a t T he power of evil is not sufficient to overthrow the plan of God. Paul’s implication is that his inquiry had shown that the tem pter had been unsuccessful: the work that the preachers had done con­ tinued to develop. This is also the implication o f the apostle’s exhortation, “But you, brothers, do n ot be weary in doing good” (2 Thess 3:13). There is an emphatic “you” that sets the believers apart from the offenders m entioned in the previous verses. Broth­ ers in the faith (Le., Paul’s fellow believers) may be exhorted

1, 2 TH E SSA L O N IA N S

72

to continue w ith their good works; for them it is good, n o t evil, that finally trium phs. In the end, people cannot get away w ith sin, and Paul reminds his readers th at G od punishes evil (1 Thess 4:6). Satan is n o t specifically m entioned at this point, b u t there is a clear implication th at in the end the evil one will n o t be strong enough to preserve those w ho follow his ways. W hen they are confronted by God, th e lim itations of the power of evil will be m anifest G od will certainly punish wickedness, and there is nothing Satan can do to stop i t Believers are constantly being tem pted, and, although Patii does not always refer to Satan in this connection, he is sure that believers ought to be w arned against accepting low standards, and he is sure th at the trium ph o f G od will be manifest in them. Thus they are n o t to engage in “the passion of lust,” like the Gentiles w ho do n o t know G od (1 Thess 4:5); nor are they to live in uncleanness b ut rather in sanctifi­ cation (v 7). From the way he writes, Paul clearly expects that the Thessalonian believers will live sanctified lives. This is apparent also from a contem plation of their essen­ tial nature. Now th at they belong to C hrist, they belong to th e light and to the day, n o t to the night and to th e darkness (1 Thess 5:5). T heir conduct will manifest this tru th . They are n o t to engage in the worldly practice of returning evil for evil b u t always to do good “to one another and to all” (1 Thess 5:15). Clearly Paul expects their good to trium ph in such circumstances. H e also expects them to succeed w hen he says that they are to abstain from every kind of evil (1 Thess 5:22). This expres­ sion is sometimes understood in the sense “A bstain from all appearance of evil” (KJV), b u t while the word rendered “appearance” does indeed sometimes have this meaning, it is never the outw ard appearance th at does n o t correspond to the inward. It is more likely that the expression here means

73

The Defeat o f Evil

“every kind of evil,” b u t if it be taken as in the KJV, the meaning would be “every evil that can be seen.” Paul writes about evil that is real, n ot illusory, and he looks for the Thessalonians to overcome evil of every kind in the strength of God. The Idlers Paul exhorts the Thessalonians to w ork w ith their hands and earn their living (1 Thess 4:11-12). In this way they will both act in a suitable m anner tow ard outsiders and provide for their own living. H e has a series of references to people who were “disorderly” (1 Thess 5:14; 2 Thess 3:6-13), and w hat he says about them shows th at their failure to keep to th e proper order took the form of a refusal to w ork for their living. T he increased attention he gives the problem in the second letter shows that w hat he said in the first had n o t been heeded sufficiently. Paul sees this as bad for the disor' derly persons themselves and bad for the reputation of the church to w hich they belonged. This appears to have been a special problem for the Thessalonian church, because we do n o t hear o f it elsewhere in the New Testam ent Many scholars believe that these people did n ot w ork for their living because they expected C hrist’s return at any mo­ m ent. W hat was the point of working at a job w hen the Lord was about to appear and this whole world system be done away? O n the whole it seems that this is the m ost plausible suggestion, b u t other views are held. It may be that some o f the converts saw themselves as “spiritually minded” people who should give all their time to “spiritual” pursuits and al­ low their fellow believers the privilege of providing for their daily needs. O r perhaps they saw manual labor as demeaning and thought that those who had been made free by C hrist, who were now the children of God, could n ot be expected to w ork in the way slaves work. O r they may have seen some 1, 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

74

form o f “quietness” as the essence of the C hristian way (some scholars find this in certain forms of Gnosticism and think this was the case in Thessalonica, but Gnosticism has no t been shown to have affected this church). W hatever the cause, Paul sees the practice as deplorable and strongly urges his friends to see th at it should be aban­ doned. T he way in which he writes his instructions shows th at he is confident th at the Thessalonians will handle the problem. In such passages Paul is simply exhorting his converts to abstain from evil and to do the rig h t H e is obviously confi­ dent th at they will succeed, at least in the main. H e is n o t w riting about a lost cause b u t about a victory over evil that he expects to be realized in the Thessalonian believers, just as there is to be a victory over evil that will be realized at the end of this age w hen the M an o f Lawlessness will be finally overthrow n. There is also a victory th at is w on day by day by hum ble followers of Jesus w ho resist the tem ptations they constantly encounter and, in the strength of their Lord, experience their own trium phs here and now.

75

The Defeat of Evil

5

TH E CH RISTIAN FAMILY

In th e New Testament th e w ord “brother” is found 343 times. A few times the w ord refers to physical brothers, b u t far and away th e m ost frequent use o f the expression in the New Testament is for those w ho share membership in the heavenly family, those w ho are children o f the one heavenly Father. T he Jews had th e habit o f referring to fellow Jews as brothers, and th e early Christians, who, o f course, were Jews, sometimes used the term in th e same way (cf. A cts 7:2 and quotations from the O ld Testam ent in A cts 3:22; H eb 2:12). In those early days Jewish Christians were called “brother” by other Jews (Acts 2:37; 13:15), and C hristian Jews called other Jews by the same name (Acts 7:2; 28:17). Such passages probably tell us how th e C hristian usage origi­ nateci, b u t they are n o t the usual way Christians employed th e term . Jesus gave th e w ord a new meaning w hen he said, “W hoever does th e will of my Father w ho is in heaven is my brother and sister and m other” (M att 12:50). Jesus also dis­ couraged the use o f the title “Rabbi” for “one is your teacher 77

The Christian Family

and you are all brothers" (Matt 23:8). “B rothers” are those w ho have experienced the new b irth that makes them mem­ bers of one heavenly family and children of one heavenly Father. Thus the term comes to be used for fellow Christians, a use that occurs again and again throughout the New Testa­ m en t It is fascinating that, in a society where slaves were so little esteemed, the C hristian church viewed slaves and their owners as brothers in the Lord. It is n ot w ithout interest that “brotherhood” is n ot a common term in the New Testament (it occurs only twice). T he Christians were n o t so much inter­ ested in the abstract idea of brotherhood as in the fact that other Christians were their brothers and sisters in the Lord. The w ord “brother” is found in all parts of the New Testa­ m ent, b u t it is especially frequent in Paul (133 times). It occurs w ith surprising frequency in the short Thessalonian letters (19 times in the first letter and 9 times in the second letter). It is a mark of the warm th o f the bond that Paul found betw een himself and these correspondents. T he apostle speaks of the Thessalonians as “brothers beloved by G od” (1 Thess 1:4)1and again as “brothers beloved by the Lord” (2 Thess 2:13). There is probably n o t m uch difference betw een the two, for those who are beloved o f G od the Father are also beloved of G od the Son. Both expres­ sions point to the fundamental thing about the C hristian brotherhood: the love o f God. Christians are n ot brothers because they are bound together by some natural attraction; they are children of G od together because they share in the salvation the love of G od has brought about. N ot surprisingly this means th at they are bound to one another w ith strong bonds o f affection. Paul says th at he and his fellow preachers had been “affectionately desiring” the Thessalonians, w here he employs an unusual w ord which, it has been conjectured, was a term o f endearm ent taken from the nursery. W hether this is so or not, there is no doubt that 1, 2 T H E SSA LO N IA N S

78

the w ord expresses a very warm affection. T he apostle goes on th at they had been ready to im part to the Thessalonians “n o t only the gospel of G od b u t also our ow n souls, because you had become very dear (or, beloved) to us” (1 Thess 2:8). There can be no doubt th at Paul felt he was united to the Thessalonian believers by a very strong bond o f affection. Brothers share knowledge B rotherhood may be linked w ith common knowledge. Paxil writes “you know, brothers, our coming in to you, th at it was n o t in vain” (1 Thess 2:1). T he apostle thus appeals to their common knowledge of w hat had happened during his evangelistic campaign in their city. In the same spirit he speaks o f his conviction that they remember his “toil” and “labor” as he and his friends labored so th at they should n o t be a burden to the Thessalonians (1 Thess 2:9). There are things he m ust tell his fellow believers, b u t by way of re­ minder: “Now about the times and the seasons, brothers,” he writes, “you have no need th at I should w rite to you” (1 Thess 5:1). Even though there was “no need,” he does say a little about them nevertheless; he was a kind brother and did w hat he could to meet the needs of others in the family. H e made sure th at th e believers w ould n o t be lacking in the knowledge th at was im portant in the family. Similarly Paul rises “brothers” as his form o f address w hen he is saying “we do n o t w ant you to be ignorant” (1 Thess 4:13). O n this occasion he is conveying new inform ation to them , b u t brotherhood is again a m atter of shared knowledge. It if t s in w ith his idea of brotherhood th at he insists that his letter be read to “all” the brothers (1 Thess 5:27). T here may have been some special reason for this strong emphasis: his words mean “I adjure you by the Lord that the letter be read to all th e brothers.” This is a m ost unusual way of referring to the reading o f a letter, and it w ould have left the 79

The Christian Family

Thessalonians w ith no doubt that it was im portant for all to hear i t Some have felt th at the church was divided into tw o sections, Jewish and G entile, and th at this was a way o f ensuring th at everybody came to know w hat Paul had w rit­ ten. Such a division goes against everything we know about th e early church, and it is quite unthinkable th at Paul would have acquiesced in such a division. It is n o t m uch b etter w ith the suggestion th at Paul wants the letter read to church leaders as well as th e rank and file. Surely w hen the letter first came to the church the church leaders w ould be the first to know about it and to hear w hat was in i t It w ould be th e leaders w ho w ould have the re­ sponsibility o f ensuring that the rank and file came to know w hat Paul had w ritten, n o t the rank and file w ho would have to ensure th at th e leaders came to hear i t It is better to think th at the expression arises from Paul’s strong affection for his Thessalonian converts. H e had n o t been able to visit them , b u t w hen they heard this letter they w ould know th at th at was n o t his fau lt It was thus impor­ tan t th at they should all come to know w hat he had w ritten. A further suggestion is th at there were some, for example, th e idlers, w ho m ight well n o t w ant to hear w hat Paul w rote, and he insists th at they be made to hear. There may be something in this, b u t Paul’s affectionate desire th at all th e brothers know his attitude seems a better explanation.

Requests and instruction Q uite often Paul appeals to the fact of brotherhood w hen he is making some request o f his correspondents. “We ask you, brothers,” he writes, “to know those w ho labor among you and are over you in th e Lord and admonish you” (1 Thess 5:12), and he goes on to urge them to esteem their leaders highly in love for their w ork’s sake. Similarly it is to 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

80

"the brothers” th at he makes request th at they "adm onish th e disorderly, com fort the fainthearted, support the weak, be longsuffering tow ard all” (1 Thess 5:14). This is a reveal­ ing statem ent o f w hat brotherhood involves; brothers and sisters in the heavenly family have a constant care for each other. They should also look up to their leaders (to see th at their admonishments are heeded) and look out for each other (to do w hat they can to build up the life o f the commu­ nity, w hether by way of admonishm ent or encouragement). It is in line w ith this that Paul asks the believers at Thessalonica to pray for him (1 Thess 5:25; 2 Thess 3:1). It is also in line w ith w hat brotherhood means th at he asks them to stand fast and retain their hold on the traditions (2 Thess 2:15). H e similarly commands, "in the name of our Lord Jesus C hrist that you keep away from every brother who walks in a disor­ derly m anner and n ot in accordance w ith the tradition you received from us” (2 Thess 3:6). Paul also exhorts them n o t to grow weary in doing well (2 Thess 3:13). Interestingly he calls on th e Thessalonian C hristians in their capacity as brothers and sisters to take disciplinary action against offenders; they are to note these persons and n o t have fellowship w ith them . "But do not cotint him as an enemy,” Paul says, "but rather admonish him as a brother” (2 Thess 3:15). Being a brother in th e full sense is n o t all sweetness and lig h t Times will arise w hen it is necessary to take stem action against a fellow believer w ho is coming short of the standard he should attain. This is part of being a brother as Paul understands i t and he calls on his readers to do their duty. Interdependence of the brothers We are n o t to think o f all the brotherly help th at came to th e Thessalonians as flowing from Paul and his associates to th e new church. T hus we read that the Thessalonians 81

The Christian Family

became imitators o f the churches o f Judea. U nfortunately that im itation was due to the persecutions they, like the Judean believers, had undergone (1 Thess 2:14). It m atters a great deal th at they had profited from the examples of those earlier believers. Christians can be of help to other C hris­ tians by their dem onstration th at the grace o f G od will al­ ways see them through their troubles. T here is a somewhat different thought in Paul’s lam ent th at he and his associates had been "orphaned” from the Thessalonians (1 Thess 2:17). H is sense o f fellowship and brotherhood was such th at w hen he was n o t able to be w ith his friends as he wished he felt like an orphan. This points to a strong family feeling. This tim e the suffering is n o t on the side of the Thessalonians b u t on th at o f Paul, and the unex­ pressed thought is th at the presence o f the Thessalonian brothers w ould have brought him solace. We see something of this again w hen Paul says th at he had been “encouraged” by th e Thessalonians (1 Thess 3:7). H e had been separated from them and did n o t know how they were doing; they had undergone some form o f persecution, but how had they survived? It was an anxious time. But “brother Tim othy” (1 Thess 2:2) came to Paul w ith news that the new converts were going on in the faith, and Paul was greatly cheered (1 Thess 2:6-8). If it was true that Paul was a great help to the young Christians, it was also true th at these same young Christians were a great help to Paul. M ember­ ship in the family o f G od means helpfulness both ways. Indeed others besides Paul had profited from the broth­ erly attitudes of the Thessalonian Christians. Paul had no need to w rite to them about brotherly love because G od him self had taught these new members of his household (1 Thess 4:9; the w ord rendered “taught by G od” is found only here in the New Testament). T he result was that their loving helpfulness had gone out to all the Christians in Macedonia (1 Thess 4:9-10). Clearly the Thessalonian 1, 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

82

believers had learned that they were required to act in a brotherly way to others, as well as receive the blessing atten­ dant on fellowship themselves. B rotherhood also imposed obligations on Paul. Thus he says n o t simply, “we give thanks to G od for you,” but, “we ought to give thanks for you,” “we owe it to give thanks for you,” and he immediately adds, “as it is fitting” (2 Thess 1:3). H e repeats the th o u g h t “we ought always to give thanks to G od for you, brothers beloved by the Lord” (2 Thess 2:13; “we” is emphatic); whatever the case w ith the others, we owe it as a duty to give thanks. T he letters give most attention to the obligations brother­ hood imposes on the imperfectly instructed new believers at Thessalonica. Paul, however, does n ot overlook the fact that brotherhood imposes obligations on him, too. Paul sets a good example for us as well as for the early church. We find it easier to make strong criticisms of fellow Christians w ho do n o t act in the church as we think they should than to thank G od for them all and for the varied contributions they bring to the family of God. H igh standards Paul strongly desires th e best for his brothers and sisters, and in pursuit o f this aim he addresses a strong exhortation to them (“we ask and exhort you in th e Lord Jesus”) th a t they “walk” in th e way they had been instructed (1 Thess 4:1). H e goes o n to point to th e im portance o f sanctifica­ tion, and he emphasizes sexual purity, thus drawing atten­ tion to a standard very different from any commonly accepted in th e G reek cities o f th e first century. B rother­ hood does n o t m ean complaisance, turning a blind eye to th e faults o f another. It means a deep and genuine concern for th e prosperity o f each other at every level. A m ong o ther things, it means rem inding each other o f th e standards 83

The Christian Family

expected o f C hristians, w hatever th e standards in th e surrounding environm ent Paul has a rather unexpected tw ist to his argum ent for sexual purity. As he develops his th o u g h t he goes on to urge th at none “go beyond and defraud his brother in the m atter” (1 Thess 4:6). T he point of this is th at any brother or sister has the right to go into marriage w ith a chaste spouse. A ny' one who prevents this, besides committing a sexual sin, is perpetrating an act o f fraud—he o r she is robbing his o r her spouse o f som ething that is rightfully to be expected (an aspect o f sexual relationships n o t widely appreciated in our day).

1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

84

6

THE CH RISTIAN LIFE

In this chapter we will look at a num ber o f qualities to w hich Paul gives attention and w hich were im portant for the way those early Christians lived o ut their faith. For th at m atter, they are still im portant for those w ho are in earnest about their Christianity. There are qualities of character that set C hristians off from those w ho do n o t profess the faith, and these had to be made clear to the Thessalonians. They had no long tradition o f C hristian service to follow; they were pioneers of the faith. We owe m uch to early Christians like the Thessalonians. O n the one hand, they had heard the gospel, and they p u t their tru st in C hrist. They knew w hat it was to have their sins forgiven and to pledge their loyalty to their Savior. O n the other, they had no tradition o f C hristian service to o b ' serve, no host o f godly C hristian examples to follow. They were the first generation o f hum ble, ordinary Christians w ho had had n o contact w ith th e saving events in Palestine. They had to w ork o ut w hat th e C hristian way m eant for ordinary people. 85

The Christian Life

It is perhaps for this reason th at Paul unhesitatingly calls on them to imitate him. “For you know how you m ust imitate us,” he writes (2 Thess 3:7), where his “m ust” should n o t be overlooked. It is n ot that all believers m ust be clones of Paul. It is rather that there were so few C hristian examples for them to follow that it was necessary, n ot simply advisable, th at they should follow those few examples that they had. Paul bore in m ind that his example was im portant, as we see, for example, from the fact that he goes on to tell his readers that he and his associates had worked constantly to earn their living during the time w hen they evangelized Thessalonica. They did n o t do this because they did n o t have the right to be kept by those to whom they brought the gospel; they did have this right (1 C or 9:14). They w orked for their living “in order th at we m ight give ourselves to you as a pattern so that you should imitate us” (2 Thess 3:9). Early in his first letter, Paul reminds his readers th at they had become “im itators of us and of the Lord” (1 Thess 1:6; cf. 1 C or 11:1). It is perhaps a little unexpected that he puts the preachers in the first place in this expression, b ut histori' cally this is the way it had to be. T he preachers were the first contact these form er heathen had had w ith Christianity, and w hen they committed themselves to follow C hrist they nec­ essarily followed him in the way their teachers showed them . They imitated the preachers in order that they m ight imitate C hrist. In time they found other models, and they became imita­ tors of the churches in Judea (1 Thess 2:14). Those chtirches had experienced persecution before the Thessalonians did and thus set an example for other troubled churches to follow. T he Thessalonians m ust have often found themselves in situations for which they had no precedent Believers like these were pioneers of the C hristian way as it appears to ordinary, limited people, not to great people like Paul and Silvanus and Timothy. They sometimes got it right, and Paul 1, 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

86

praises them . If they got it wrong on other occasions, this was only to be expected, and we should be grateful to them for their blundering, first steps along the C hristian path. We can learn from their successes, and we can learn from their failures, and we can learn from die instructions Paul gives and his comments on their spiritual state. Sanctification We tend to think of “holiness,” “sanctification,” and re­ lated words in term s of ethical achievem ent A holy person, we think, is a good person. Now goodness is, of course, one of the qualities necessarily included in w hat Christians u n ­ derstand as a holy person. T he basic idea, however, is n o t that; it is rather that of being set apart for God. In O ld Testament days w hen an object was sanctified, it was w ithdraw n from common use and set apart for use in the service of God. For example, w hen the tabernacle was set up in th e wilderness, Moses was commanded to prepare a laver and sanctify (or consecrate) it (Exod 40:11). Previously it m ight have been used for all sorts of washings; after it was sanctified, it was to be used only in the service o f G od. A aron and his sons were also sanctified (Exod 29:44); they became priests, set apart from other duties so th at they be­ longed, in a particular way, to God. Every C hristian is to be sanctified, set apart to belong to God. This does not mean a physical separation from worldly people, but it does mean that the C hristian life is a life lived for God, n ot for one’s selfish concerns or for some hum an aim such as social or financial success, the service of the state, or the like. Sanctification receives unusual attention in our tw o let­ ters. T he w ord itself occurs four times, whereas in the m uch longer letter to th e Romans it is found only twice. T he actual w ord count does n ot in itself indicate the precise

87

The Christian Life

emphasis Paul is giving to the concept, b u t it is an interesting pointer. Paul relates th e term to sexual purity; he has the strong statement: "This is G od’s will, your sanctification, th at you should abstain from fornication” (1 Thess 4:3). This is further developed: “th at each o f you should know to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, n o t in the lust of strong desire even as the G entiles w ho do n o t know G od” (vv 4-5). As we saw in an earlier chapter, Paul goes on to say that fornication is an act o f fraud (robbing the future spouse o f the chastity th at spouse expects to be brought to th e marriage relationship). H e goes on to say, “For G od did n o t call us o n th e basis of uncleanness, b u t in sanctification” (v 7). To despise this command then means n o t to despise a man, b u t God, the G od w ho gives us his H oly Spirit (v 8). T he term occurs once in the second letter: “G od chose you a firstfruit for salvation in sanctification of spirit (or of the Spirit) and belief of tru th unto w hich he called us through our gospel” (2 Thess 2:13-14). H ere sanctification is clearly seen as relevant to the whole of life. A ll this means th at th e C hristian life is a life n o t only initiated by G od b u t sustained by G o d The call o f G od is, o f course, the prim ary thing (1 Thess 2:12; 5:24; 2 Thess 2:14); none o f us w ould be C hristians at all were it n o t for G od’s having called us. This call, however, is a call “in sanctifica­ tion” (1 Thess 4:7), which surely means that sanctification is basic to the C hristian way. Anyone who has been saved by G od belongs to G o d and G od gives his Holy Spirit to those he calls in this way (v 8). Believers are n o t left to their ow n devices in seeking to serve G o d divine strength and guid­ ance are given them . T his appears to be w hat is in m ind w hen Faul says th a t G od chose th e Thessalonians as a firstfruit for salvation “in sanctification o f th e Spirit” (2 Thess 2:13). Some exegetes have seen a reference to the hum an spirit, in w hich case th e passage means th at sanctification extends through th e 1, 2 T H E SSA L O N IA N S

88

w hole o f th e person, including his sp irit Yet it is m uch m ore likely th at the apostle is saying th a t sanctification is n o t brought about by hum an striving. It is th e H oly Spirit w ho w orks in and through people to make them th e very people o f G od. Either way, Paul is n o t talking about some placebo that leaves sinners basically where they were before. H e is refer­ ring to a spiritual upheaval that transforms the whole person. Sanctification means the setting apart o f all th at a person is and has so th at all now belongs to God. We see this also in the closing prayer at the end o f th e first letter: “Now the G od o f peace him self sanctify you wholly, and may your entire spirit and soul and body be kept blame­ less at the coming of our Lord Jesus C h rist Faithful is he w ho has called you w ho also will do it" (1 Thess 5:23-24). Again Paul makes it clear th at sanctification is th e w ork o f G od, n o t o f the believer, we are sanctified n o t by our strenu­ ous efforts to live close to G od, b u t by w hat G od does in us as we respond to his gracious call. In this passage there is also some emphasis on th e farreaching nature of sanctification w ith the use o f th e w ord “wholly,” w hich surely points to th e entire person. This is spelled out w ith th e words “entire spirit and soul and body”; no part o f us is left out. We are back at the priority o f th e divine w hen we read, “be kept blameless at the coming o f our Lord Jesus C hrist.” T he passive “be kept” points to something th at is done for us, n o t to something th at we do, and th at we are to be blameless at the coming o f the Lord Jesus shows th at G od’s w ork in us will last to the very end. This tru th is underlined w ith the assurance th a t G od is “faithful” and th at he w ho has called us “will do it” (cf. Phil 1:6). We can rely on G od, w ho has begun a good w ork in us, to see it through to the end. W ith another w ord for sanctifi­ cation, we have elsewhere the thought o f being kept blame­ less at the parousia (1 Thess 3:13).

89

The Christian Life

The Holy Spirit Part o f Paul’s teaching on sanctification is brought o u t w ith his use o f th e adjective “holy.” H e uses this, o f course, for th e “H oly Spirit,” whom G od gives to believers w ith the result th a t they are sanctified (1 Thess 4:8), as we have ju st seen. T he apostle can also appeal to w hat happened w hen th e gospel first came to th e Thessalonians. “O u r gospel did n o t come to you in w ord only,” he w rites, “b u t also in pow er and in th e H oly Spirit and in full assurance” (1 Thess 1:5). T he linking o f th e Spirit w ith th e gospel and w ith pow er shows th a t Paul is n o t ascribing w hat happened in Thessalonica to pow erful preaching or anything o f th e sort. H e is referring to th e power o f G od at w ork, transform ing useless and fearful lives. T here is a new pow er at w ork in those w ho have responded to th e gospel, a pow er th e H oly Spirit gives them . W ith th at goes assurance. Life always has its problems and uncertainties, and these can lead people to be w orried and anxious. The Holy Spirit at w ork in them does n o t tu rn them into brash achievers, proud o f their ability to cope, b u t the Spirit does give them assurance. Believers are assured that all of life is lived in the presence o f God, the G od w ho has a purpose for them and w ho will surely bring th at pur­ pose to pass. T he C hristian does n o t profess to be able to make sense of all life’s tangled skein; believers do n o t claim to have fathomed the purpose o f all th at happens. Believers, however, know God, and therefore they know th at there is a purpose, that the purpose is G od’s, and th at it is G od w ho understands how that purpose is to be worked out. To know this is to have “full assurance.” We have noticed references to the Holy Spirit’s sanctify­ ing w ork (1 Thess 5:23; 2 Thess 2:13). T he Spirit also does other things, and we should bear in m ind that Paul speaks o f the converts as “having received the w ord in great affliction 1, 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

90

w ith joy of the Holy Spirit” (1 Thess 1:6). T he trouble that the converts experienced was real, but so, too, was the pres­ ence o f the Holy Spirit w ithin them , and that Holy Spirit brought them joy. N either the afflictions that are so much part and parcel of this common life nor those that are spe­ cial, like the persecution the Thessalonians had experienced, can w ithstand the presence of th e Spirit of God. T he Spirit brought the believers joy, even in the m idst o f trouble. “Do n ot quench the Spirit” (1 Thess 5:19) is an exhorta­ tion that raises problems. T he w ord “quench” is used of putting out fires, and its suitability for acts in opposition to the Spirit is shown in that the Spirit came w ith w hat looked like “tongues of fire” (Acts 2:3; cf. M att 3:11) and that the Spirit brings light and warm th to the life of the believer. Problems arise about precisely what activity is in m ind here. Many commentators think there were conservative leaders who limited the enthusiastic use of ecstatic gifts, but this seems to be reading something into the passage; such gifts are not m entioned elsewhere in these letters. It is possible that it is prophecy that Paul has primarily in mind, for a reference to prophecy follows immediately, b u t the words about quench­ ing are general, and it is likely that the apostle has in m ind the tru th that it is possible to oppose the Spirit by conduct like idleness, immorality, and the like. H e may well be warning his readers against the loss of spiritual power and joy by engaging in any form of Spirit-quenching conduct. Holy ones a n d holy actions There are tw o passages where we read of “holy ones” a t the time of C hrist’s parousia. The Lord Jesus will come “w ith all his holy ones” (1 Thess 3:13), and he will come “to be glori­ fied in his holy ones” (2 Thess 1:10). We looked at those passages in our study of the last things and saw that they should be understood to refer to G od’s own people. They are 91

The Christian Life

those that G od has sanctified and w ho are thus properly called “holy ones.” T here are oth er passages th at employ th e w ord “holy.” T hus Paul exhorts th e Thessalonians th a t they should, “G reet all th e brothers w ith a holy kiss” (1 Thess 5:26). N ot m uch is know n about kissing in th e early church, b u t it is generally held th a t m en kissed m en and w om en kissed wom en during observances o f th e Lord’s Supper (although Tertullian, at th e end o f the second century, speaks o f a C hristian wife kissing “one o f th e brothers”). Paul is asking th a t a warm greeting be given from him to all th e members. T hat th e kiss is “holy” points to it as p art o f th e way th e consecration o f believers was w orked out. This kiss is n o t th e expression o f passion, n o r a m ere conventional greet' ing, b u t a m ark o f w arm th tow ard others set apart to belong to G od. Love It has often been pointed o ut th at C hristians brought a new idea o f love into th e w orld. W hereas previously th e best love had been a warm affection for someone o r som e' thing one esteemed highly, th e C hristians saw in th e cross, w here th e sinless Son o f G od died for sinners, the pattern o f a new love (Rom 5:8; 1 John 4:10). “G od is love,” they said (1 John 4:8,16), and this pointed to a love th at pro­ ceeded from th e nature o f God, n o t from th e nature o f attractive objects. It is because G od is the kind o f G od he is, a G od w ho is love, th at he loves sinners. H e loves because o f w hat he is, n o t because of w hat they are. Indeed, he loves them despite w hat they are, for to a pure and holy G od there is nothing attractive about sinners. W hen sinners respond to the love o f God, they find th at G od’s love remakes them . A new creation takes place (2 C or 5:17), and they become loving people. They begin to love, 1, 2 TH E SSA L O N IA N S

92

n o t because th e people they m eet are attractive, b u t because G od’s love has also made them loving. A num ber o f times Paul brings out the tru th th at G od loves the converts: they are “brothers beloved by G od” (1 Thess 1:4) or “brothers beloved by the Lord” (2 Thess 2:13). In view of the close relationship between G od the Father and the Lord Jesus C hrist, it is n o t wise to try to p ut too big a difference between the tw o expressions; both affirm a strong divine love. There is an interesting problem when Paul links “our Lord Jesus C hrist” w ith “G od our Father” and follows w ith a pair of participles in the singular, “who loved us and gave us eternal encouragement and good hope in grace” (2 Thess 2:16). It is n o t certain w hether we should see the Father as the subject of the participles or w hether the Father and the Son are so closely linked that a verb referring to both can be singular. For our present purpose w hat m atters is that we have another affirmation of the strong divine love that brought the good gifts o f hope and grace. In another little prayer Paul asks th at the Lord may “direct your hearts into the love of G od and into th e stead' fastness o f C hrist” (2 Thess 3:5). We would expect th at in a prayer like this “the love o f G od” w ould mean the converts’ love for God; we would think th at Paul would be asking that the converts would come to love G od more fully. Yet w hen th e apostle uses the expression elsewhere, it has the meaning “G od’s love for people.” It may well be th at here he is bear­ ing in m ind the possibility o f both meanings. T he love o f G od for us is primary, and he may well be praying th at the Thessalonians would respond to that love w ith an answering love. Then, w hen he goes on to steadfastness, he may well be thinking similarly o f th e steadfastness so typical o f C hrist and asking th at such steadfastness will make its appearance in the believers. W hile Christians, being loving people, will have a love for all, they will have a special affection for those who share w ith 93

The Christian Life

them in the common faith. So we find that the Thessalonian converts have been taught by G od to love one another (1 Thess 4:9), and, so im portant is this love, it does n o t surprise us that Paul prays th at the Lord will make the converts “increase and abound in love to one another and to all” (1 Thess 3:12). T he addition “and to all” is im portant; it shows clearly th at C hristian love is n o t confined to love w ithin the fellow­ ship. T he love of one another is im portant, b u t it is impor­ tant, too, th at C hristians n o t be self-centered, concentrating on affection w ithin the church to the neglect o f those out­ side th e church. T he people outside are yet w ithin the scope o f G od’s love and, therefore, of th e love of those who love like G od loves. It is a m atter o f thanksgiving for Paul that “the love o f each one o f you all for one another abounds” (2 Thess 1:3). It is o f interest that in the first letter he prayed that the love o f the believers for one another should grow and now he is able to give thanks for the answer to that prayer. We are rem inded th at it is im portant n o t only that there be love, b u t th at that love should grow. In one instance Paul reminds them o f distinctions w ithin th e community, namely, w hen he asks the believers to es­ teem their leaders “very highly in love for their w ork’s sake” (1 Thess 5:13). It is easy to be critical of those in places of leadership, b u t Christians see their w ork as im portant, and for the sake o f th at w ork they regard them highly and they regard them w ith love. A s love is to be characteristic o f their relationship to other people, even those outside the church, m uch m ore should love be their attitude to those w ho lead w ithin the church. R ight at th e beginning o f this correspondence, immedi­ ately after the greeting in the first letter, Paul gives thanks and prays for the Thessalonians “remembering your w ork o f faith and labor o f love” (1 Thess 1:3; he adds, “and steadfast­ 1, 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

94

ness of hope”). “Labor” means more than the occasional kind deed; it points to hard w ork and brings out the tru th th at truly loving people are ready to go to great pains for others as the outw orking of love. In this passage faith is linked w ith love, and this happens a num ber of times in these letters (1 Thess 3:6; 5:8; 2 Thess 1:3). It is im portant th at the tw o be seen to go together, for Paul is n o t w riting o f a love that people w ork up out o f their ow n resources. It is a love th at is the result o f their respond' ing to the love o f G od in C hrist, and this response is a re ' sponse in faith: they come to believe in C hrist. Just as we understand that love and faith are linked, so we m ust understand that love and holiness are connected. We see this in w hat Scripture says about G od himself. G od is love (1 John 4:8,16) and G od is also holy (Lev 11:45; I sa 6:3). T he tw o qualities go together in the Godhead. This means (among other things) th at G od is opposed to every evil thing (see above, pp. 85-86). It means, too, th at he is opposed to every evil in his beloved ones. Because he loves them , he wants the best for them , and he see th at doing evil dim in' ishes them . We m ust accordingly take seriously his demand th at b e ' lievers live holy lives (1 Thess 4:3-8; so also Lev 11:45; 19:2). We m ust n o t understand the love of G od as though it m eant complaisance. T he sentim ental person claims to love others and because of this kind of “love” takes no strong measures against any evil the “loved one” may do. N ot so God. We know his love because o f the cross, the cross on w hich his Son died to p u t away our sin. A ll too often we let our understanding of the cross stop there, b u t we should never forget th at the cross also shows us th e seriousness w ith w hich G od takes sin. In the light of the cross, those who really know the divine love cannot b u t have a horror of evil and a firm determ ination to live holy lives. N othing m oti' vates us to holiness like a right understanding o f love. 95

The Christian Life

Faith A t the heart of Christianity is the faith that Jesus died and rose again (1 Thess 4:14) and “belief of the tru th ” (2 Thess 2:13) is fundamental; those who do n o t believe the tru th face judgm ent (v 12). N ot all men have af ith (2 Thess 3:2), for some believe the lie (2 Thess 2:11). A ll who are saved have faith; they have p u t their tru st in C h rist Faith is the fundam ental C hristian attitude, and it is appro' priate th at Paul begins this correspondence by giving thanks for “your w ork o f feith” (1 Thess 1:3). Faith, of course, means total reliance on G od in C hrist for salvation, b u t af ith is n o t laziness. So Paul can pray that G od will fulfill every “w ork of faith” in the Thessalonians (2 Thess 1:11). Faith will necessar­ ily result in good works. Faith issues in w ork, n o t as leading to salvation, b u t as the outw orking o f salvation. T he central importance of af ith in the C hristian life comes out in the way Christians are called simply “believers” (1 Thess 1:7; 2:10; 2 Thess 1:10, etc.). Furtherm ore, “the w ord of G od” is active; it “works in you w ho believe” (1 Thess 2:13). Thus in those early days w hen Paul was separated from th e Thessalonians and could n o t bear the uncertainty about how they were progressing, he says, “We sent Tim othy . . . to strengthen you and encourage you for the sake of your feith,” and again, “I sent to know your feith” (1 Thess 3:2,5). It was their af ith th at m attered. If th at had collapsed all his w ork in the city was in vain. Timothy, however, brought him good news about their af ith and love (v 6), and their af ith was an encouragem ent to him (v 7). A ll this m eant th at their af ith remained and that, therefore, they were still on the C hristian path. Even though his fears had been dispelled, Paul was still deeply concerned about the af ith of his friends: “N ight and day,” he says, “praying exceedingly abundantly to see your af ce and perfect w hat is lacking in your feith” (1 Thess 3:10). 1, 2 THESSALONIANS

96

T he earlier verses had reassured him th at the Thessalonians were basically right, bu t they were still new C hristians and there were deficiencies th at could be made good and w hich Paul looks to see made good. If he could pray th at their faith m ight be made more perfect, w hen he comes to his second letter he can give thanks for the answer to th at prayer: "We ought to give thanks to G od always for you, brothers, even as it is fitting, because your faith is growing vigorously” (2 Thess 1:3). Clearly subse­ quent events showed th at Paul’s preliminary doubts about the faith of these converts had no real basis. They were going on in the faith, and their faith was growing. Indeed, Paul goes on to say th at he and his companions boast about the Thessa­ lonians in the churches of G od "for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions” (v 4). T heir faith was no fairweather faith. It proved steadfast during persecutions and afflictions. Hope It was apparently an early C hristian habit to group faith, hope, and love together (1 Thess 1:3; 5:8; Rom 5:1-5; 1 C or 13:13; Gal 5:5-6; C ol 1:4-5; H eb 6:10-12; 10:22-24; 1 Pet 1:21-22). We are n o t surprised at finding faith on such a short list, for th at is the basic C hristian attitude. N or do we w onder at love, for surely nothing is m ore im portant than living in love. B ut hope? In the m odem w orld, along w ith th e communities in w hich we live, we have mostly reduced hope to mindless optimism. M odem C hristians have too often lost the blazing certainty th at m arked New Testament hope. We now relegate it to a m inor place. Hope, however, is im portant N o movement has really gripped the hearts of any considerable num ber of people that has n o t given them hope. It is no gain, b u t a considerable loss, if we let go o f this significant New Testament teaching. The 97

The Christian Life

New Testament Christians so emphasized hope th at they could speak of C hrist as their hope (1 Tim 1:1; cf. C ol 1:27). They were saved in hope (Rom 8:24); hope was for them the anchor of the spul (Heb 6:18-19). By contrast, those w ho are w ithout hope are faced w ith sorrow (1 Thess 4:13). Hope was very im portant for the frequently dow ntrodden early believers. It is not surprising that the Thessalonian le t' ters have some interesting things to say about hope. Thus Paul refers to “the steadfastness o f your hope in our Lord Jesus C hrist before our G od and Father" (1 Thess 1:3). There is uncertainty as to w hether the words about C hrist and G od refer to the previously m entioned faith and love as well as to hope, but none about their reference to hope. The C hristian hope is bound up w ith what C hrist has done for our salva' tion, and it is a hope exercised before G od the Father. This is no idle em otion but rather a sterling quality, well based and exercised in the highest realms. In an interesting passage Paul asks, “For w hat is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing (are n o t you?) before our Lord Jesus at his coming?" (1 Thess 2:19). Something of his pride and joy in the Thessalonian converts comes through in this question, b u t it also implies his deep conviction th at the hope that m eant so m uch to him included the certainty that w hen the Lord Jesus comes back at the end of the age the Thessalonians will be there, sharing in the trium ph and the joy of that great day. H ope is n o t exhausted by anything in the present. Paul is fond of the m etaphor o f the C hristian’s armor, and he can speak of putting on a helmet, “the hope o f salvation* (1 Thess 5:8). H ope looks right through this present life to the culm ination of our salvation at our Lord’s return. T he helm et and the breastplate (which is here frith and love), are the tw o m ost im portant parts of defensive arm or (which is all th at Paul is concerned w ith in this place). W hen armed w ith faith, love, and hope, believers have all the arm or they 1, 2 T H E SSA LO N IA N S

98

n eed There is nothing more im portant for the C hristian life than these. Paul refers in a prayer to the divine gift of “eternal encour­ agement and good hope in grace” (2 Thess 2:16). This surely looks beyond this life to the eschatological fulfillm ent of the promises of God that means so much throughout these let­ ters. The Christian’s hope is for good things in this life cer­ tainly, b ut it looks also for the consummation o f it all in the perfect kingdom o f G od

99

The Christian Life

NOTES

Introduction 1. Abraham]. Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians (Philadel­ phia: Fortress, 1987), 17. 2. N ew Testament Studies, 17 (1970-71), 449-50. C hapter 1 T he liv in g and True God 1. D. E. H . W hiteley can say, “Perhaps the most striking feature of both epistles is the pervasiveness of the sense of God and His providence” (Thessalonians [London: Oxford University Press, 1969], 19). C hapter 2 Jesus C hrist O ur Lord 1. Alfred Edersheim, The Life a n d Tim es o f Jesus the Messiah (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1890), 2: 710-41. 2. William Neil, The Epistles o f P aul to the Thessalonians (Lon­ don: Hodder and Stoughton, 1950), 185. 3. A. L. Moore, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, New Century Bible (London: Nelson, 1969), 109-10. C hapter 3 T he Last Things 1. J. B. Lightfoot, Notes on Epistles o f S t Paul (London: Macmil­ lan, 1904), 66. 101

Notes

2. C. K. Barrett, A C om m entary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (London: A. and C. Black, 1978), 5. 3. J. E. Frame, A Critical a n d Exegetical Com m entary on the Epistles o f St. Paul to the Thessalonians (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1960), 174. 4. William Hendriksen, N e w Testam ent Com m entary: Exposi­ tion o f I a n d II Thessalonians (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1955), 116-17. 5. J. H. Moulton and G. Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testam ent (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1914-29), 53. 6. W. Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the N ew Testament a n d O ther E arly Christian Literature, trans. W. F. A rndt and F. W. Gingrich, 2d ed., rev. F. W. Gingrich and F. W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 564.

C hapter 4 T he D efeat of Evil 1. Oscar Cullmann, Christ a n d T im e (London: SCM, 1951), 164. 2. Ronald A. Ward, C om m entary on 1 & 2 Thessalonians (Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1973), 11. C hapter 5 T he C hristian Family 1. W hen the New Testament writers refer to people as “be­ loved by God,” they usually employ the adjective agapetos but Paul has here the participle ëgapëmenoi, the only place in the New Testament where this construction is used (although 2 Thess 2:13 and Jude 1 are very similar). Perhaps we can say that the perfect participle here puts some emphasis on God’s continuing love.

1, 2 TH ESSA LO N IA N S

102

IN D EX OF SCRIPTURES

OLD TESTAMENT Genesis 18:25 Exodus 19:16 19:18 29:44 40:11 40:34 Leviticus 4:3 11:45 19:2

16

47,50 54 87 87 50

27 95 95

Numbers 23:19

17

1 Samuel 24:10

27

1 Kings 8:10-11 19:16

50 27

103

Psalms 18:8 76:10 81:3 103:20 147:15 150:3

54 19 47 54 39 47

Isaiah 6:3 27:13 66:15-16

95 47 55

Jod 2:1

47

Zechariah 9:14

47

NEW TESTAMENT Matthew 3:11 1230 13:19 20:8 23:8

91 77 50 29 78

25:6 25:41 25:46 Mark 9:7

51 56 56 50

Luke 14:21

29

John 1:45 5:28 10:12 10:28 10:29 12:21 173

28 47 50 50 50 29 19,52

Acts 1:99 2:3 2:37 3:22 7:2 8:39 13:15 15:22

50 91 77 77 77 50 77 7

Index o f Scriptures

1640 172 17:3 17:4 17:6-7 17:7 17:9 17:10 17:12 17:14-15 17:31 185 20:35 23:10 28:15 28:17

1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 52 3 44 50 51 77

Romans 1:4 1:13 1:18f.f 1:24 1:26 1:28 2:16 5:1-5 5:8 8:24 850 9-11 11:32 14:10 15:33 16:20

60 42 19 19 19 19,20,55 52 97 92 98 16 67 20 52 35 35

1 Corinthians 1:9 1:11-17 23 2:16 6:14 6:19 9:14 10:1 11:1 13:13 15:18 15:52 1535 16:17

1, 2 THESSALONIANS

16 8 3 34 45 64 86 42 86 97 48 48 44 59

2 Corinthians 4:14 5:10 5:17 7:1 7:6 11:23-28 11:23-29 12:2 12:4 13:11 13:13

45 52 92 60 59 71 53 50 50 35 32

Galatians 1:1 1:24 2:20 53-6

32 58 37 97

Ephesians 2:2 2:21 3:9

51 64 12

Philippians

1:6 4:9 Colosssians 1:4-5 1:27 3:3

17,89 35

97 98 12

1 Thessalonians 12,31 1:1 1:2 23 13 13,36,94,96,97,98 14,78,93 :41 15 90 24,70,86,91 1:6 96 1:7 1:8 4,5,21,38 7,11,13 1:9 37,68 1:10 79 2:1 2:2 15,25,71,82 2:3-8 4 25,70 2A 20 2:5 2:6 38

2:6-8 82 15,79 2:8 2,15,79 2:9 20,96 2:10 16,24,33,88 2:12 15,23,38 2:13 8 2:13-16 4,21,31,67,82,86 2:14 2:15 25,37 2:16 67 5,82 2:17 72 2:18 24,59,98 2:19 2:20 24 3:1-2 4 3:2 28,37,70,96 18,69 3:3 69,70 4:3 72,96 3:5 3:6 4,5,95,96 70 3:6-10 82,96 3:7 38 3:8 3:9 23,24 96 3:10 3:11 13 13,32,35 3:11-13 3:12 94 13 3:12-13 59,89,91 3:13 25,34,38,83 4:1 33 42 4:3 21,88 95 4:3-8 4:4-5 88 44-8 4 20,73 45 4:6 20,33,73,84 16,73,88 4:7 22,88,90 4:8 4:9 82,94 82 4:9-10 4:11-12 74 42,79,98 4:13 4:13-18 4 26,37,44,96 4:14 4:15 38,44 26,38,46 4:16 49 4:17 79 5:1

m

5:1-11 55 5:8 5:9 5:12 5:12-13 5:13 5:14 5:14-15 5:15 5:16 5:18 5:19 5:19-20 5:22 5:23 5:23-24 5:24 5:25 5:26 5:27 5:28

4 73 95,97,98 14,37,68 38,80 5 94 74,81 5 73 24 22,36 91 5 73 14,35,60,90 89 16,88 81 92 33,79 31

2 Thessalonians 1:1 12,31 1:2 31 15 83,94,95,97 14,18,24,97 1:4 14-5 67 71 1:4-7 1:5 17,18,53 19,52 1:6 19,53 1:7 1:8 33,37,54

105

19 1:8-9 57,91,96 1:10 1:11 16,96 1:12 14,31 2:1 61 9 2:2 25 63 63 24 25 41 64 2:6-7 20,62,65 2:8 59 2:9 65 2:9-10 69 2:10 19 2:10-11 2:11 66,96 2:12 20,66,96 8,36,78,83,88,90, 2:13 93,96 14,88 2:13-14 17,33,88 2:14 2:15 9,81 13,14,31,37,93,99 2:16 13,32,35 2:16-17 39,81 3:1 3:2 71,96 38 3:4 35 13,28,34,93 3:6 34,81 3:6-13 74 86 3:7 3:9 86 3:12 34 3:13 72,81

3:16 3:17 3:18

33,35 7,9 31

1 Timothy 1:1 6:9

98 56

Hebrews 2:12 6:10-12 6:18-19 10:22-24 13:20

77 97 98 97 35

James 14

61

1 Peter 1:21-22

97

l John 4:8 4:10 4:16 Jude 1 9 Revelation 1:10 4:1 14:13 20 205-6

92,95 92 92,95 100 47 47 47 48 49 48

Index o f Scriptures

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES 1 Peter J. RAMSEY MICHAELS

ZONDERVAN A C A D E M IC

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC 1 Peter Copyright © 1989 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11488-8 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-­Publication Data Michaels, J. Ramsey. 1 Peter: J. Ramsey Michaels. p.  cm. Includes bibliographical reference. ISBN 978-0-849-90788-3 1. Bible. N.T. Peter, 1st—­Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II Title: First Peter. III. Series. BS2795.2.M53 1989 227’.9206—dc2089-37586 Quotations from the Scriptures in this volume are the author’s own translation unless otherwise indicated. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

To my colleagues in Religious Studies at Southwest M issouri State University, with gratitude, affection, and respect.

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface 1. The Author and Readers o f 1 Peter The apostle and his letter Peter, “rock” and shepherd The original readers o f the letter 2. The Past: Claiming a Heritage The book The stories Sarah Noah The martyrs Prophets and angels The Messiah 3. The Present: Living in a Hostile Society The ‘fiery ordeal' The troublemakers The state The household vii

ix xi 1 1 3 6 9 10 17 18 20 26 29 31 35 35 41 45 48 Contents

Slaves and slaveowners Wives and husbands 4. From Present to Future Following Jesus Christ Sharing Christ’s suffering The cross as example The cross as redemption Sharing Christ’s victory Victory over death: The resurrection o f Jesus Victory over demons: The journey to heaven Ministering in the family o f G od Ministry in the household Ministry in the congregation Mutual ministries The ministry o f elders 5. The Future: W hen Faith Becomes Sight The revelation Inexpressible joy 6. Conclusion: The Message o f 1 Peter Today Notes Index of Scriptures

1 PETER

49 51 57 58 59 60 61 65 67 70 77 78 81 81 86 93 93 97 101 107 111

viii

FOREWORD

Finding the great themes o f the books o f the Bible is essential to the study o f God’s Word and to the preaching and teaching o f its truths. These themes and ideas are often like precious gems: they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered with some difficulty. Commentaries are most useful to this discovery process, but they are not usually designed to help the reader to trace important subjects sys­ tematically within a given book o f Scripture. This series, Word Biblical Themes, addresses this need by bringing together, within a few pages, all o f what is con­ tained in a biblical book on the subjects that are thought to be most signifi cant to that book. A companion series to the Word Biblical Commentary, this series distills the theologi­ cal essence o f a book o f Scripture as interpreted in the more technical series and serves it up in ways that will enrich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship o f G od’s people. The New Testament document known as 1 Peter claims a distinctive place in the library o f the church’s canon. It ix

Foreword

represents an attractive and insightful bid to describe what the Christian life is meant to be in times o f stress. Its theol­ ogy is practical and down-to-earth; its tone and temper is that of applied Christianity. For this reason, above all, it makes a special appeal to the preacher and Bible class teacher. Many congregations and study groups will respond positively to the exposition of this letter, with contemporary relevance not far to seek. Professor J. Ramsey Michaels has already put the scholarly world in his debt by his thorough and suggestive commen­ tary in the Word Biblical Commentary series. Now he offers a fresh range o f insights and suggestions designed to stimu­ late further reflection and to assist pastors and teachers along with their groups in the understanding of this short, fascinating epistle. This book is brimful o f ideas and hints, based on a careful study o f the setting o f 1 Peter, intended to make the letter meaningful in today’s church and world. Ralph P. Martin Department o f Biblical Studies The University of Sheffield

1 PETER

X

PREFACE

Many years ago one of my students remarked enthusiasti­ cally that he considered the first epistle o f Peter a real “potboiler.” I did not have the heart to correct him. In fact, since he was British, I assumed he must have known of some obscure secondary meaning of the term “potboiler” that was unfamiliar to me. Because he is now a distinguished colleague teaching in an overseas seminary, he shall remain nameless. As I reflected on my friend’s misuse of words, I realized that the term “potboiler” actually does evoke some o f the true characteristics of 1 Peter. I presume my friend was try­ ing to tell me that he found 1 Peter “packed” or “loaded” with meaning and rich, powerful insights into the work of Christ and the responsibilities o f Christian believers— like a “pot boiling over.” If that is what he meant, he was not far off the mark. The imagery was there even though the word was not quite right. My own study of 1 Peter over the years, both devotional and scholarly, has only deepened my sense of wonder at the richness of this brief letter attributed to the prince of xi

Preface

Apostles. It was a rare privilege for me, therefore, to con­ tribute a volume on 1 Peter to the Word Biblical Commentary series (1988). The completion of the project has not dimin­ ished my fascination with this letter, nor has familiarity damp­ ened my appreciation of its unique testimony to Christ and Christian living. On the contrary, it has increased them im­ measurably. Now I am grateful to Ralph Martin and Word Publishing for the opportunity to highlight some major themes of 1 Peter for a somewhat wider audience in the present volume. 1 Peter is seldom listed among the major witnesses o f the New Testament It has not received the scholarly attention given to Paul—what is one short letter weighed against a dozen?—nor the attention given to any of the Gospels, or the Book of Acts, or even the Book of Revelation. It has never challenged the great preachers o f the church in quite the same way that the letter to the Romans or the Gospel of John challenged them. This is surprising in view o f the af c t that its author is supposed to have been the one to whom Jesus gave “the keys o f the kingdom of heaven” and the promise that “whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt 16:19). One reason for the comparative neglect of 1 Peter in the church and in the academy is its brevity, and another is its association with 2 Peter, which is almost certainly not the work o f the Apostle Peter but the product of the next genera­ tion in the development of the ancient church. Doubtless some of the uncertainty about the authorship o f 2 Peter has rubbed off on 1 Peter in the eyes of scholars. And as long as the need exists to interpret 1 and 2 Peter under a common rubric, the distinctiveness o f each is to some degree going to be lost. Once 1 Peter is separated from 2 Peter and Jude, and from the broad miscellaneous category o f “Catholic Epistles”

1 PETER

xii

or “General Epistles,” so as to be appreciated in its own right as a unique witness to Jesus Christ, its stock rises. This is precisely what has happened, by editorial decision, in the Word Biblical Commentary and Word Biblical Themes series. For example, 1 and 2 Corinthians were put together in a single volume in the themes series (though not o f course in the commentary) because their themes and the situations they presupposed were intertwined. This is not the case with 1 and 2 Peter, and the editors wisely decided (despite their brevity) to keep them separate in both series. For this, readers have every reason to be grateful. There is no one correct way to bring out the major themes of even a short letter such as 1 Peter. From a purely theologi­ cal standpoint, it can be done in relation to the Trinity— God, Christ, and the Spirit— as I attempted to do in the last few pages o f the introduction to the commentary (pp. lxviilxxv). In the present volume I have chosen instead to set forth the perspective o f 1 Peter on the past, the present, and the future of the people o f God, with special attention to the transition from present to future. For this idea (though not for its application to 1 Peter) I am indebted to Bruce J. Malina, whose thought-provoking article, “Christ and Time: Swiss or Mediterranean?” appeared in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly in January 1989. I have also made generous use, where appropriate, o f the thoughts and language of Christian poets and literary figures, among them Gerard Manley Hopkins, Gilbert K. Chesterton, Flannery O ’Connor, C. S. Lewis, and Amos Wilder, and of the language of certain familiar hymns and gospel songs. I have learned through the years that the books o f the New Testament are not only full of words but of music as well. The tools of biblical exegesis help us to get the words right, but if we want to hear the Word of God in all its power and fullness we must listen to the music. Few New Testament books are

xiii

Preface

richer in their music than 1 Peter, and sometimes the writers and poets can help us hear notes we might otherwise miss. If the wording of my quotations from 1 Peter seems unfa­ miliar, it is because I am using my own translation from the commentary. The reader will not go far wrong, however, with the RSV or the NIV. Comparison with the translation used in this volume may even be illuminating. A t 1 Pet 4:14, however, the longer text followed by the King James Version is to be preferred over all the rest. Those who are looking for bibliography, or for discussions o f alternative views on vari­ ous questions of interpretation in 1 Peter will not find such information here. For this, they are referred to the commen­ tary. The information explosion in biblical studies is such that even there only a sampling is possible. It is my hope that this modest volume might contribute in its way to the renewal o f the Christian church in our time. W hether it does or not depends on whether it falls into the hands of someone who will catch the spirit—not of this book, to be sure, but of 1 Peter itself—and help bring to realization Peter’s vision o f what it means to be the people of God in a world and a culture still far from God, the Father of Jesus Christ our Lord.

1 PETER

xiv

1

THE AUTHOR AND READERS OF 1 PETER

The apostle an d his letter A quick survey of all the letters contained in the New Testament gives the impression that Paul had something close to a copyright on the title, “apostle of Jesus Christ [or Christ Jesus].” No less than five o f his letters begin with this self-designation, while in four others he begins by referring to his apostleship in some way. The only other New Testa­ ment figure to call himself an apostle is Peter in the two letters attributed to him: “Peter, apostle o f Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 1:1); “Symeon Peter, servant and apostle o f Jesus Christ” (2 Pet 1:1). Other writings may of course have been written by apostles— the gospels of Matthew and John, the three letters of John, Hebrews, and Revelation— but none of these make an explicit claim to that effect (at most there is an implicit, though anonymous, apostolic claim at the begin­ ning of 1 John). With respect to literary self-consciousness, there seem to have been only two apostles, Peter and Paul. If the apostolic claims of 1-2 Peter are accepted, then 1

The Author and Readers o f 1 Peter

these two letters are a precious legacy from one very close to Jesus who was given the “keys o f the kingdom o f heaven,” judicial authority to “bind and loose” in the church (Matt 16:19), and the responsibility to “feed” or “shepherd” Jesus’ followers (John 21:15-17). Many o f the ancient church fathers had serious doubts as to whether 2 Peter came directly from Peter’s hand— or even from Peter’s lifetime— and most modem scholars share those doubts, but the claims o f 1 Peter are taken far more seriously. Though it is widely acknowledged that Peter the Galilean fisherman whose first language was Aramaic may have had some secre­ tarial help in composing this elegant epistle in Greek, there is little reason to doubt that the ideas are Peter’s own and that the life situation addressed is one that Peter himself could have faced. Unlike 2 Peter, 1 Peter was generally known and accepted in the church from the early second century on. Its claim to authenticity is strong. In view o f all this it is surprising that 1 Peter has occupied such a modest place in the New Testament in comparison with the letters o f Paul. This can be attributed in part to its brevity, in part to its association with the less widely ac­ cepted 2 Peter, and in part to its superficial resemblance to the letters o f Paul. If a person’s expectation o f what a New Testament letter should be is shaped entirely by Paul’s let­ ters, the tendency is to regard 1 Peter as if the author were trying to be like Paul but not quite succeeding! W here, some have asked, is justification by faith? Where are the great debates over the law? Where are the memorable Pauline themes o f the body o f Christ and life in the Spirit? W hen Paul’s letters are allowed to set the agenda, 1 Peter is not properly appreciated. O n the other hand, when 1 Peter is read for itself, its own rich contribution to Christian life and thought becomes readily apparent No one will argue that the significance o f 1 Peter outweighs that o f the thirteen letters attributed to Paul. Yet significance is not measured by I PETER

2

length. The value o f 1 Peter lies in the fact that it represents “another voice” besides Paul’s, a voice o f one speaking, no less than Paul, as an “apostle o f Jesus Christ.” The opening of 1 Peter establishes once and for all Peter’s apostolic authority over his readers, and he has no need to invoke that authority again. Instead, he builds common ground with his readers as “fellow elder” to those who give leadership to their congregations (5:1). With the elders he testifies to the sufferings o f Jesus Christ on the cross, and he shares with elders and all believers in the coming glory o f Christ’s return. Peter does not command his readers to do what he wants, but rather “appeals” to them to fulfill their own calling as the people o f God (cf. 2:11). H is letter is neither a manifesto nor a book o f rules, but a gift— nothing less than “true grace from G od” (5:12). For the most part he allows his words to stand on their own merit, without constantly reminding the congregations o f who he is or o f the authority with which he writes. P e te r, “ ro ck” an d shepherd

W ho then was “Peter”? The answer seems simple enough. In the gospels, he is “Simon, son o f John,” a Galilean fisherman who answered the call o f Jesus, and at some point— either at his call (John 1:42) or later, when he recognized Jesus as Messiah (Matt 16:18)— acquired the nickname “Cephas” (Aramaic) or “Peter” (Greek), meaning “Rock.” Jesus tells him, “You are Peter, and on this rock [petra] I will build my congregation” (Matt 16:18). In view o f Jesus’ parable about the wisdom o f “building on the rock” (Matt 7:24-25), it appears that Jesus is conferring on “Peter” a great honor. Yet there is irony in the pronouncement too because in a few short verses Peter will be unable to accept the prospect o f Jesus’ suffering and death, and Jesus will say to him, “Get back in line, Satan! You are a scandal to me, for 3

The Author and Readers o f 1 Peter

your concern is not with the things o f God, but with human things” (Matt 16:23). Six days later, at the Transfiguration, “Peter the Rock” will say, without thinking, “Rabbi, it is good for us to be here; let us make three tabernacles, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah” (Matt 17:4 / / Mark 9:5-6). W hen Jesus is arrested, Peter, despite all his claims to the contrary (Matt 26:33 / / Mark 14:29), will desert Jesus with the rest o f the disciples. W hen asked about his relationship to Jesus, he will deny three times that any such relationship exists. In light o f these subsequent events, there is indeed irony in Jesus’ designation o f Simon as “Peter,” the Rock. Some “rock” this fearful disciple turned out to be! All talk, and no action! Peter is not heard from again in Matthew and is mentioned in Mark only when the angel commands the women at the tomb to tell his disciples “and Peter” that Jesus will regather the scat­ tered disciples and lead them back to Galilee (Mark 16:7; cf. 14:27). In John’s Gospel there is a reunion in Galilee, and Peter does play a conspicuous part in that reunion. In some re­ spects he is rehabilitated. His three affirmations o f love for Jesus (John 21:15-17) can be read as the undoing of his threefold denial—both taking place in the light and warmth of a “charcoal fire” (21:9; cf. 18:18). He is given a new role as shepherd o f Jesus’ flock with the repeated command, “Feed my lambs. . . . Tend my sheep. . . . Feed my sheep.” Yet there is irony even in Peter’s rehabilitation. He fails to recog­ nize the risen Jesus by the lake in Galilee until the anony­ mous “disciple whom Jesus loved” tells him, “It is the Lord” (21:7). He is later rebuked for being too curious about the subsequent fate o f the beloved disciple (21:20-22). The setting is Jesus’ solemn prediction o f Peter’s death (intro­ duced by “Truly, truly, I say to you,” 21:18), but even this pronouncement is not without irony. It is a prophecy, to be sure, but a prophecy couched in the form of a riddle: 1 PETER

4

“When you were young, you girded yourself and walked wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands and another will gird you and take you where you do not want to go.” If this is said “to show by what death Peter was to glorify G od” (John 21:19), what kind o f death was it, the heroic death of a martyr or the natural death o f a feeble old man unable to dress himself? Later Christian tradition decided for the former, but the saying itself leaves the issue unre­ solved. The death o f any true believer “glorifies G od,” but the prophecy does little to illumine the exact circumstances o f Peter’s death. If he was a martyr, he was an unwilling one, taken “where you do not want to go,” and not the kind who follows the precedent o f Jesus in “laying down his life” freely (John 10:17-18). The latter was what he had claimed when he said to Jesus earlier, “I will lay down my life for you” (13:37), but the fulfillment (if it is that) falls short of the aspiration. Tradition has made of Peter a heroic martyr in the time of the persecution o f the church by Nero in A.D. 64, but there is no biblical evidence to support this. The alterna­ tives often proposed, that 1 Peter is either written before 64 or else is written by someone other than Peter, should not be accepted as the only possible alternatives. A third possi­ bility is that Peter lived into the seventies, perhaps even the eighties, and died an unremarkable death. If so, the letter we know as 1 Peter may well be the work of his later years. The glimpses of Peter provided by Mark, Matthew, and John suggest that Peter was not consistently a noble or heroic if gure in early Christianity. There was in his earnest and im­ petuous pronouncements something all too human, even at times faintly comic. He is taken more seriously, however, in Luke’s Gospel (e.g., 22:31-33; 24:34) and in the Book of Acts, where his sermons, miracles, and visions mark decisive steps in the expansion of the early church (e.g., Acts 2:14-36; 3:110; 10:9-16,34-43). He is also taken more seriously, as we

5

The Author and Readers of 1 Peter

would expect, in the two New Testament letters attributed to him. Here the irony of Matthew, Mark, and John is remem­ bered but not perpetuated. In 2 Peter he is represented as being aware of his own impending death, but with no hint that it is to be a martyr’s death or in any way particularly heroic (2 Pet 1:13-14). In 1 Peter he recalls the imagery of a “rock” or “stone” as the foundation of Christian faith and life (1 Pet 2:4-8), but without reference to himself. The “living Stone” on which the temple o f God is built is unmistakably Christ himself. His reminder that Christ “the foundation of the comer” is for unbelievers “a stone for stumbling and a rock to trip over” (Greek: petra skandalou, lit., “rock o f scan­ dal,” 2:8) may even contain a wry echo of Jesus’ stinging re­ buke to him years before, “You are a scandal to me” (Matt 16:23). The irony is there, and he lets it stand, but he calls no attention to it. In 5:1-4 Peter assigns to the elders of the congregations to which he writes the role o f shepherd (“Shep­ herd the flock of God that is in your care,” v 2). To the extent that he is their “fellow elder” (v 1), he too is a shepherd, but he assigns no uniqueness to his own role. He and they alike await the appearing of Christ, the “chief shepherd” (v 4), to whom all shepherds and sheep are finally accountable (cf. 2:25). In short, Peter makes nothing o f the prerogatives assigned to him, whether ironically or in all seriousness, in the gospels. Though he bears the authority of an “aposde of Jesus Christ” in 1 Peter, he writes this letter as one of us, a man who lives in the same world we do, subject to the same aggravations and prone to the same kinds of mistakes. Because of this, and not in spite of it, we do well to ponder his words carefully, even across the span of nineteen centuries. The original readers of the letter To whom was 1 Peter written? Obviously to Christians who recognized and valued Peter’s authority. According to 1 PETER

6

Paul’s account in Galatians, it was agreed that Paul had been “entrusted with the task o f preaching the gospel to the Gen­ tiles just as Peter had been to the Jews” (Gal 2:7). This would suggest that the proper sphere o f Peter’s mission and pas­ toral concern was Jewish Christianity. Yet Peter in the Book o f Acts is portrayed as the first to bring the Christian message to Gentiles (Acts 10:9-16,44-48). A t the council in Jerusalem he claims that “in the early days G od determined that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word o f the gospel and believe” (Acts 15:7). Which group is the implied audience o f 1 Peter? Here too the signals are mixed. Right at the outset the readers are ad­ dressed as “a chosen people, living as strangers in the diaspora of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia” (1:1). Such terms as “chosen people” and “diaspora” suggest a Jew­ ish (i.e., Jewish Christian) audience. The word “diaspora” is still used today for the Jewish community scattered through­ out the whole world. The beginning of 1 Peter calls to mind the Jewish Christian letter of James, addressed to “the twelve tribes of the diaspora” (James 1:1). This impression is height­ ened later in the letter when Peter calls his readers “a chosen race, the King’s priesthood, a holy nation” (2:9) and refers to those outside their number as “Gentiles” (2:12; 4:3). Yet at the same time the readers are described in ways that would hardly have been appropriate if they were actually Jews. Peter refers to their life before they knew Christ as a life o f “ignorance” (1:14). Whatever their failures, the Jews were hardly ignorant of God or o f the laws o f God. No firstcentury Christian, Jewish or gentile, would have described Judaism as “the empty way of life that was your heritage” (1:18). No group of Jews would ever have been depicted as having once done “what the Gentiles wanted, as you went along with them in acts o f immorality and lust, drunken or­ gies, feasts, revelries, and lawless acts of idolatry” (4:3). Indi­ viduals might have done so, of course, but such a blanket 7

The Author an d Readers o f 1 Peter

indictment makes it unmistakably clear that Peter has in mind Gentile Christians who turned from idolatry to the worship o f one God and to faith in Jesus Christ (cf. Paul in 1 Thess 1:9-10). 1 Peter is best understood, therefore, as a circular or “diaspora” letter addressed to an undetermined number of gentile Christian congregations in five Roman provinces of Asia Minor: “Pontus, Cappadocia, Galatia, Asia, and Bithynia” (1:1). The list begins and ends with provinces bordering the Black Sea, and it appears that the order in which the provinces are listed roughly describes the itinerary or “postal route” to be followed by the person delivering the letter (probably Silvanus, 5.T2). Why would Peter address communities of Gentile Chris­ tians as if they were Jews? He does so for two reasons, one related to the past, the other to the present. The first is that he wants to give them a new heritage— a whole new past— to replace the “empty way o f life that was your heritage” (1:18), and the only heritage he can give them is his own, the heritage of the Jews and Judaism. The second is that he wants to underscore certain real parallels between their ex­ perience and the experience o f the Jews, above all the experi­ ence o f being “aliens and strangers” in the cities and provinces where they live (2:11). These two purposes will be the subject matter of the next two chapters. Only by reading 1 Peter through the eyes o f those Gentile Christians to whom it was first directed can we understand its message to us, and to the different— yet not so different— situations we face today.

1 PETER

8

2

THE PAST : CLAIM ING A HERITAGE

What exactly was the “Jewish heritage” Peter wanted his Gentile readers to claim for their own, and on what basis was it theirs? These questions can be answered with respect to three aspects of Jewish identity: first, the Scripture; second, Jewish stories, both oral and written, and the heroes and heroines of those stories; third, the Messiah. These are obviously not all there is to Judaism, either in Peter’s day or our own. Peter says nothing of Jewish laws, whether about food, the Sabbath, the temple, circumcision, or ritual purity. Consciously or not, he avoids the thorny issues addressed at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, the issues that divided Paul from his opponents in Galatians. He has nothing to say to the question of whether Gentile converts to Christianity must be circumcised and eat kosher food. Either these debates had been settled in accord­ ance with the decree sent to the gentile churches and recorded in Acts 15:23-29, or they simply held no interest for Peter at the time he wrote the letter. 1 Peter is more interested in Jewish identity and in the stake that even gentile Christians have in it rather than in the details of Jewish practice. 9

The Past: Claim ing a H eritage

T h e book

Judaism is routinely called a religion o f the book, though it is far more than that. When Gentiles in the first century began to “turn to God from idols, to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven” (1 Thess 1:9-10), it was by no means inevitable that they would embrace the Jewish Scriptures along with Jesus, the Jewish Messiah. These Scriptures, after all, were the work o f a foreign people and had been translated into Greek from a strange barbarian tongue. They did not mention Jesus ex­ plicitly, and they went on and on about alien and primitive laws and customs. In the second century, some Gentile Christians would try to eliminate passages that seemed irrel­ evant or inappropriate, and some would dispense with the Jewish Scriptures altogether. The most extreme o f these was Marcion, from Sinope in Pontus on the Black Sea, within the circle of churches to which 1 Peter had been written. Yet long before Marcion, several o f the New Testament writ­ ers— among them Matthew, Paul, John, and Peter— quoted freely from the Jewish Scriptures, which they were coming to regard as the “O ld Testament,” in order to show that these ancient and foreign-sounding documents pointed un­ mistakably to Jesus as Messiah o f the Jews and Lord and Savior o f the Gentiles. Their intent in finding Jesus Christ in the Jewish Scriptures was not only to proclaim Jesus Christ but to commend these Scriptures to Gentile Chris­ tians as true revelation from God, “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteous­ ness” (2 Tim 3:16). 1 Peter is part of this early concern to promote respect for the Jewish Scriptures among Gentile Christians. Peter does this by explicit citations from the psalms and the prophets, often introduced by the formula, “It is written.” These cita­ tions are not mere footnotes to his argument that readers 1 PETER

10

might take seriously or ignore as they choose. Rather, the citations come at crucial points in the letter and contribute significantly to Peter’s argument. Without them, 1 Peter would not be the letter it is, and perhaps not even a coherent piece o f correspondence. For example, in 1:13-21, the heart o f Peter’s positive commands to his readers is found in vv 15-16: “like the Holy One who called you, be holy in all your conduct, for it is written, ‘Be holy because I am holy.’ ” First comes the application of the text and then the text itself, in this case Lev 19:2 (cf. also Lev 11:44; 20:7,26). In 1:22-25 he makes the point that Christian love is unremitting and eternal because the Christian gospel is eternal. This time he introduces the citation abruptly, with “for” (literally, “be­ cause”) instead of “It is written”: “For ‘all humanity is like grass, and all its glory like the wild flower; the grass withers and the flower falls away, but what the Lord has said endures forever.’ What he has said is the message of the gospel that has been proclaimed to you” (vv 24-25). Here Peter does not claim explicitly to be quoting from a written text (though he is in fact quoting Isa 40:6-8), nor does it matter to his argu­ ment whether he is or not. The last sentence makes it clear in any case that the “word o f the Lord,” which created flowers and grass and mortal flesh and will endure long after they are gone, is the same as the “word o f the gospel” preached some years before to these Christians in Asia Minor (cf. 1:12). Be­ cause o f this, the readers of this letter are children of the Creator and Sustainer o f the universe. If we have accepted the Christian gospel, we have both a past and a future. Our lives are shaped neither by the changing cycles of nature nor by the whims of society and its rulers, but by the will of “the living and enduring God” (v 23). In 2:6, Peter resumes the practice o f quoting Scripture explicitly: “For it says in writing, ‘Behold I am laying a choice and precious stone, a cornerstone in Zion, and the person who believes in him will never be put to shame’ ” (cf. Isa 11

The Past: Claim ing a Heritage

28:16). The citation affords him the opportunity to draw into his argument in a more informal way two other texts, Ps 118:22 (“the stone which the builders rejected has become the foundation o f the com er”) and Isa 8:14 (“a stone for stumbling and a rock to trip over”). All three texts have in common the word “stone,” and Peter’s argument is that the “stone” to which they all refer is Jesus Christ. He interprets his texts already in 2:4-5, before citing even the first of them: “As you come to him, the living Stone, rejected by people generally but in God’s sight choice and precious, you yourselves, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house for holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” Peter’s procedure is the same as in 1:15-16: first the inter­ pretation of the text, then the text itself. This order probably reflects the experience of the Gentile Christians to whom Peter was writing: first they met Jesus Christ in the proclaimed message; then they found him (with the help of Peter and other Jewish Christians) in the Jewish Scriptures. It also re­ flects the experience of many Christians today. Once we have come to know Jesus Christ as Lord and become part of a serious Christian community, we discover prophecies and promises of him in the Old Testament. Finding Christ in the Old Testament is a favorite pastime of Christian interpreters. For Peter, however, even the discovery of Jesus Christ in the Jewish Scriptures is not an end in itself or something he does in order to score points in debates with the Jews over the meaning of their Bible. Rather, his intent is to make a point about Christian identity. The real question he addresses is not “Who is Jesus Christ?” but “Who are we?” If Jesus is the “living Stone” mentioned in the two passages from Isaiah and the one from the Psalms, then we who belong to him are “living stones” (2:5). Peter’s metaphor o f “living stones” is important not for itself (as, e.g., in John the Baptist’s statement that “G od is 1 PETER

12

able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham" [Matt 3:9 / / Luke 3:8]) but in relation to the metaphor o f a temple. Like Paul (cf. 1 Cor 3:16), Peter compares the Chris­ tian community to a temple, a place for God to dwell on earth. Like the temple in Jerusalem at the time o f Jesus, it is an unfinished structure. Christians are “being built into a spiritual house” as they come to Jesus for salvation (2:4). If it is true that 1 Peter is written after A.D. 70, it is likely that the recent destruction o f the temple in Jerusalem lent special point and poignancy to Peter’s metaphor. Christians can get along without a literal temple, Peter is saying, because they are themselves, through Jesus Christ, the temple and house o f God. When Peter speaks later o f judgment beginning “from the house o f G od,” it is the same as beginning “from us” (4:17). If the metaphor o f “stones” is not an end in itself, neither is the metaphor o f the temple as such. Christians are not a temple merely in order to be something, but to do some­ thing. They are a temple “for holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (2:5). Peter’s letter is the biblical basis for the time-honored Christian tradition of “the priesthood of all believers.” This term in Protestant tradition has often been used to refer to the right of Christian believers to interpret Scripture ac­ cording to the dictates of their individual consciences in­ stead o f being bound to the decisions o f an institutional church or an authoritative clergy. But this is not Peter’s meaning. There was in his time no “institutional church” or “authoritative clergy” to worry about. He himself provides for his readers an interpretation o f certain biblical texts. Though he may have argued previously with the Jews about some o f these texts, he assumes that his gentile Christian readers will accept his interpretations without question. This could be because he writes with the authority of an apostle, but more likely it is because he considered his 13

The Past: Claim ing a Heritage

interpretations a matter on which all right-minded Chris­ tians would naturally agree. The “priesthood o f believers” in 1 Peter, though based on Jewish Scripture, does not have to do with the interpretation of Scripture itself but with the offering of “spiritual sacrifices” (2:5). These sacrifices Peter defines both as Christian worship and Christian conduct. To offer them up to God is “to sound the praises of him who called you” (2:9) or simply to “glorify G od” (4:16) or “revere Christ as Lord” (3:15) in word and action. They are the work not of a specially appointed clergy but o f the whole people o f God. Peter’s words reinforce the words o f Paul in Rom 12:1, urging that we present ourselves as “living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—which is your spiritual worship.” The designation o f Christians as a “priesthood” is repeated in 1 Pet 2:9, where it is one designation among several. We are not only “the King’s priesthood,” but a “chosen race,” a “holy nation,” and a “people destined for vindication.” Here Peter does not bother to cite a specific passage, but draws loosely on titles originally applied to Israel in Exod 19:6 and Isa 43:2021. He does this without a trace o f anti-Judaism or antiSemitism, as if he were saying, “God has taken these titles of honor away from those wicked Jews and transferred them to us Christians.” The Jews are not Peter’s enemy. Christ the “living Stone” was “rejected by people generally” (2:4), not by the Jews in particular. Yet Peter does maintain that Gentile Christians now have a share in the identity, and consequently in the honor, that God conferred on the Jewish people cen­ turies before. In their experience they have reenacted the experience of Israel: “Once you were no people, now you are God’s people; once destitute of mercy, you have now received mercy” (2:10). Here he draws yet again on the language of Jewish Scripture, in this case the prophet Hosea (cf., e.g., Hos 1:9-10; 2:23). Just as Israel did not know God until he loved her and drew her to himself, so the Gentiles did not know 1 PETER

14

God until Jesus Christ called them through his messengers “out of darkness into his marvelous light.” Though he makes no claim that they have displaced, or are displacing, Israel or the Jews as the people o f God, Peter wants to assure his gen­ tile Christian readers that Israel’s history is their history and that Israel’s hope of salvation is their hope too. Christian identity is obviously not the same as Jewish identity. For one thing it has no racial or ethnic base, and for another it is founded uniquely on the person and work o f Jesus Christ. Yet to Peter our Christian identity is at least a corollary of Jewish identity. Both are founded on a common Scripture, and it is natural for Peter to draw on that Scripture to remind us of the privileges we share with Israel. Though Peter draws generously on words from Isa 53 in describing the behavior o f Jesus before his Passion and its implications (2:22,24-25), he does not actually quote a pas­ sage of Scripture again until 3:10-12. Here he turns his attention to Ps 34:12-16, a text of central importance to his argument in the last half o f the letter. As in 1:24 he intro­ duces the citation with a simple conjunction (in this case “for”) without the formal expression, “It is written.” Again it scarcely matters whether or not his readers understand that he is quoting from a biblical text. The words speak for them­ selves. Peter has made the wisdom o f the psalmist his own wisdom. The psalm is no longer an ancient Jewish text but a prophetic word o f warning and promise to gentile Christians in Asia Minor and equally a word o f warning and promise to Christians today. It blends gracefully with Peter’s advice to all who read his letter to be “o f one mind, sympa­ thetic and full of brotherly affection, good-hearted and humble of mind,” not to “return evil for evil, or insult for insult,” but rather to “bless” those who curse them “so that you may inherit blessing” (3:8-9). In the psalm quotation Peter simply says it another way: they must “stop the tongue from evil and the lips from speaking deceit,” they must “turn

15

The Past: Claim ing a Heritage

from evil and do good,” they must “seek peace and pursue it” (3:10-11). That is the way “to love life and see good days.” The accompanying warning is that “the eyes of the Lord are on the just and his ears are open to their prayers, but the face o f the Lord is against those who do evil” (v 12). This quotation, placed roughly in the middle of 1 Peter, strikes several chords that are sounded again and again in the letter, both before and after. First, there is Peter’s characteris­ tic emphasis on sins of speech. He repeatedly warns his read­ ers against “slanders” (2:1) and implies that they themselves have been, or will be, slandered and falsely accused of various crimes (2:12,15; 3:16; 4:14-15). He sets forth the example of Jesus as one who “was insulted, but . . . would never insult in return” (2:23), and he explicitly warns Christians never to trade “insult for insult” with their enemies (3:9). Second, there is a characteristic accent on the sin of “deceit.” In 1:22 Peter urges a brotherly affection that is “pure” (literally, “without hypocrisy”) and in 2:2 an appetite for “spiritual milk,” the very life of God given in mercy, as something “pure” (literally, “without deceit”). In 2:1, he tells us directly to get rid of “all malice,” “all deceit,” and “hypocrisies,” while in 2:22 he describes Jesus as having “committed no sin, nor was deceit ever found on his lips.” Third, the command to “turn from evil and do good” is a consistent theme throughout 1 Peter. Christians are repeatedly urged to “do good” in the face of slander (2:12,1 3 ,15,20; 3 :6 , 16-17; 4:19) to the extent that “doing good” virtually defines what a Christian is. Fourth, the warning that “the eyes of the Lord are on the just” while “the af ce of the Lord is set against those who do evil” captures concisely the promise of vindication that dominates the latter half of the letter. If Christians “do good” and maintain a good conscience, those who slander and oppress them will be “put to shame” at the last day (3:16). Better to suffer now for doing good than on that day of retribution for doing evil! (3:17). On the day of God’s judgment, Peter asks, “what will be the end 1 PETER

16

of those who are disobedient to the gospel o f God?” (4:17). Knowing this, Christians should follow the example of Jesus, who “never threatened [his enemies], but left them in the hands of him who judges justly” (2:23). In his last chapter (5:5), Peter finds the same principle of the vindication of the just in still another passage of Scripture: God “opposes the arrogant, but gives grace to the humble” (drawing on the words of Prov 3:34 and making them his own). These examples demonstrate something o f the uses Peter makes o f the Jewish Scriptures. He does not read them in the heat o f controversy or conflict but in much the same way any rabbi might do in instructing his Jewish flock. Yet Peter is not a rabbi (at least not in this letter). H is “flock” is widely scattered, very far away, and not actually Jewish. Far more is going on in 1 Peter than simply the interpretation of Scripture. What is new is o f course the life, teaching, death, and resurrection o f Jesus C h rist Christianity is first of all a story, and Peter tells that story as convincingly as any New Testament writer. But Judaism had its stories too, and Peter saw the Christian story of Jesus (in part at least) in relation to the Jewish stories that preceded it Some o f these were written down in the Jewish Scriptures, some n o t These stories, like the Scriptures themselves, Peter appropriates and adapts to Christian purposes for his gentile Christian readers. These are Christian stories, Peter insists, and their heroes and heroines provide for Christian believers in his own time a pattern for discipleship. Now, after centuries o f familiarity with what Christians call the “Old Testament,” many o f us have been raised on these stories as well. Let’s look at them anew through Peter’s eyes. The stories Only three biblical figures are named in 1 Peter: Sarah, Abraham, and Noah. Beyond these, Peter is content to deal 17

The Past: Claim ing a Heritage

in classes or types rather than individuals: the “holy wives” (of whom Sarah was one), the martyrs, the prophets, and the angels. He alludes very generally to a number o f biblical stories on the assumption that his readers can fill in or imagine details for themselves. 1 Peter stands as evidence that many such stories were widely told and known even among gentile Christians in the first century. Two, however, Peter mentions specifically: the story o f Sarah when she learned she was going to have a child and the story o f Noah and the flood. Sarah The “story” in 1 Peter is nothing more than a passing allu­ sion. Peter is urging wives to defer to their husbands’ author­ ity even when the husband is not a Christian. They are not to nag their husbands but win them over quietly, through purity of conduct and “a humble and quiet spirit” (3:1-4). Peter offers as an example “the holy wives who hoped in God” (v 5), probably the four matriarchs o f Israel: Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah (the wives o f Abraham and Isaac, respec­ tively, and the two wives o f Jacob). Peter views the “holy wives” as Christians before the coming of Christ. They were “holy” even as Christians are called to be holy (cf. 1:15; 2 :5 ,9), and they “hoped in God” even as Christians do now through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (cf. 1:21). Among the “holy wives” Peter singles out Sarah, who “obeyed Abraham when she called him ‘Lord’” (3:6). That is all there is to the story! The reference is to the occasion when Sarah overheard the angel telling Abraham that she was to have a child. Sarah, according to the Greek translation of Gen 18:12, laughed and said, “This has never yet happened to me because my Lord is too old.” The interest of the Genesis narrator, and of most Jewish commentators on the passage, centered on the problem o f Sarah’s irreverent laughter, but 1 PETER

18

Peter’s attention is drawn instead to the single word “Lord.” Amused and skeptical Sarah may have been, but at least she called Abraham her “lord”! On this one word Peter builds support for his advice to Christian wives in Asia Minor to defer to their husbands’ authority. Just as in the case o f the irony surrounding his own name and his personal history in the Gospel tradition, Peter “plays it straight.” He ignores the irony in Sarah’s story to make a sober and serious point about her relationship to Abraham. Peter’s use of the story is strange because any of his readers who were familiar with the story at all would have known that “Sarah laughed.” The irony is still there, just beneath the surface, especially when we remember that the women to whom Peter was writing were not married to Abraham or anyone like him, but more likely than not to husbands “disobedient to the word” (3:1). Peter lets the irony in the story do its work without help from him, just as he did in 2:8 when citing a biblical text about “a stone for stumbling and a rock to trip over.” His point is not that Christian wives in Asia Minor must literally call their husbands “Lord” (that title is everywhere else in 1 Peter reserved for Jesus Christ), still less that they must obey his every whim. Rather, Peter’s argument is from the greater to the lesser: if in an ideal biblical relation­ ship Sarah “obeyed” Abraham and called him “Lord” (even in her laughter), they should at least treat their husbands in a less-than-ideal relationship with deference and common re­ spect Though he does not say it, they might well have con­ cluded that a little laughter would do no harm either! That he is still referring to less-than-ideal relationships is clear from his concluding words, “do good and let nothing frighten you” (3:6). The ideal of Christian marriage is attainable, Peter knows, only in situations where both husband and wife are believers, and even then it is not to be taken for granted. Peter addresses the latter situation briefly in 3:7, but with­ out invoking Abraham as an example to the men. Certainly 19

The Past: Claiming a Heritage

there were aspects of Abraham’s behavior toward Sarah that he would not have wanted his male readers to imitate! Instead, he works with the assumption that all Christians, not just the women, are “children of Sarah” (just as to Paul men and women alike are the “seed o f Abraham,” Gal 3:2829). In 1 Peter a ll Christians are consistently called to “do good and let nothing frighten you” (cf. 2:15,20; 3:13-14). All Christians are to have “that imperishable quality o f a humble and quiet spirit” (3:4). There is nothing distinctly feminine about such characteristics. In other contexts they belong to Peter’s description o f the “imitation of Christ” (e.g., 2:21-23; Cf. 3 :9 , 16; 5:5). Peter’s argument recalls that of Paul in Rom 4:16-25— except that Sarah and not Abraham is at the center. Sarah’s story is ours as well through Jesus Christ, “delivered to death for our sins and raised to life for our justification” (Rom 4:25). We too have discovered that the God o f Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah is the God of Jesus who “raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope might be in G od” (1 Pet 1:21). In a society that offers us many celebrities and few heroes, the heroes and heroines o f our biblical past (and of our Sunday school memories) are as valu­ able to us as they were to the wives and husbands o f Asia Minor. The “holy wives” hoped for offspring in fulfillment of G od’s promises; we hope for eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, in fulfillment o f the same eternal promises. Noah A strong interest among early Christians in the story of Noah and the flood is shown by their preservation o f Jesus’ saying, “As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be in the days o f the Son of Man” (Luke 17:26 / / Matt 24:37). Peter finds two significant parallels between Noah’s day and his own. The first, which leads him into Noah’s story, is the presence 1 PETER

20

and reality of evil or “disobedient” spirits (1 Pet 3:19-20). The second is the experience of being “saved through water”— the waters of the flood in Noah’s day, the waters of baptism in our own (3:21). A cluster of other parallels are implied but not quite stated: God was “waiting patiently” then, just as now; an ark was built for those being saved, just as Christians now “are being built into a spiritual house” (cf. 2:5); “few” were saved then, just as Christians are few in number in Peter’s world (all these in 3:20). Peter sees Noah and his fam­ ily, like Sarah and Abraham, as Christians who lived long before the coming of Christ. Peter comes at the story of Noah rather obliquely. We do not usually think of evil spirits when we think of Noah, but Noah’s story in Genesis is closely linked to an account o f a strange incursion of evil into the world before the flood (Gen 6:1-8), implying that the flood followed as a judgment from God. Peter builds on an earlier three-part summary of the work of Jesus Christ that was probably already part of an early Christian creed: 1. Christ was “put to death in the flesh” (v 18) 2. He was “made alive in the Spirit” (v 18) 3. He “went to heaven” (v 22) It was not unusual for the early Christians to summarize Christ’s work in such concise formulas (cf., e.g., Rom 1:3,4; 1 Tim 3:16), but what is unique to Peter is his accent on part 3, Christ’s journey to heaven, and his explanation of its pur­ pose. In the course of his journey, Christ “went and made proclamation to the spirits in refuge who were disobedient long ago . . . in the days of Noah,” vv 19-20). Who were these “disobedient spirits” and what did they have to do with Noah? Some have identified them as all the people who died in the flood, others with the disobedient angels or “sons of God” who took human wives, according to 21

The Past: Claim ing a Heritage

Gen 6 :2,4, and so brought divine judgment on the ancient world. More likely they are the offspring of this evil union (Gen 6:4). In all likelihood Peter identifies them with the “spirits” mentioned in the gospels, the “unclean” or “evil” spirits Jesus encountered in his ministry and from which he delivered many who were sick or possessed. The victory over evil that began in Jesus’ Galilean ministry is completed, ac­ cording to Peter, after his resurrection. Peter is drawing on more than just the story written in Genesis. He is indebted as well to Jewish traditions about the angels and their evil offspring preserved in certain popular apocalyptic works from the second century B.C. and later, above all 1 and 2 Enoch. The mysterious offspring are called “Nephilim” in the Hebrew Bible (“miscarriages” according to some interpretations, “giants” according to others), but in Enoch quite explicitly “evil spirits” (cf. esp. 1 Enoch 15.8-10). They are the link between Noah’s day and the time of Jesus, for they were still active in the world to which Jesus came. They were not “in prison,” as most translations would have it, for if they were, what would be Christ’s proclamation to them? Would it be an announcement of their release? It is hard to imagine redemption through Christ releasing de­ monic forces into the world! Would it be an announcement o f their subjection to Jesus Christ (3:22)? This is possible, yet it is hard to imagine what further “subjection” might mean in the case of spirits already “in prison”! More likely, the spirits are “in refuge,” like the evil spirits inhabiting Babylon accord­ ing to Rev 18:2. Christ’s proclamation to them is that their safe havens are no longer safe. With all “angels and authori­ ties and powers” (v 22), even they must now give way to Christ’s authority. The subjection o f these “disobedient spir­ its” is the measure of the universality of his rule. Peter’s vi­ sion, no less than Paul’s, is “that at the name o f Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to 1 PETER

22

the glory o f God the Father” (cf. Phil 2:10-11). The lordship o f Jesus Christ so dramatically introduced in this unique pas­ sage guarantees to Christians a deliverance comparable to that of Noah and his family. Just as in the days of Noah, the people of God in Peter’s day were being “saved through water”— in this case the water o f baptism—from a world under judgment. Such stories as these, whether in Genesis or in 1 Peter, leave many of us uneasy in the twentieth century. First, our scientific world-views tend to consign the “sons o f G od” and their offspring in Gen 6 to the realm o f “myth,” and with them the argument o f this part o f 1 Peter. Second, it is difficult for some to take seriously the notion that the times we live in are as evil and ripe for universal judgment as the days of Noah. Doesn’t human progress mean anything? Hasn’t technology made our lives easier and more produc­ tive? W hat could be wrong with that? Third, many evangeli­ cal Christians who are otherwise inclined to accept both Genesis and 1 Peter at face value are put off by Peter’s notion that “baptism saves” (3:21). In light of all this, what do the stories o f the disobedient spirits and o f Noah have to say to us today? With regard to myth, it is important not to assume that myths are necessarily fictions or untruths. Joseph Campbell has called myths “the world’s dreams,”1 and just as the G od o f the Bible is revealed often in dreams, there is no reason why G od cannot reveal truth— even historical facts— in something identified by scholars as “myth.” C. S. Lewis once wrote: “Just as God, in becoming Man, is ‘emptied’ of His glory, so the truth, when it comes down from the ‘heaven’ o f myth to the ‘earth’ o f history, under­ goes a certain humiliation. Hence the New Testament is, and ought to be, more prosaic, in some ways less splendid than the Old. . . . Just as G od is none the less G od by being Man, so the Myth remains Myth even when it 23

The Past: Claim ing a Heritage

becomes Fact.”2 We do well, therefore, to listen carefully to Peter’s ancient stories, enter with wonder and imagination, like children, into the world they reveal to us, and try to hear what they are saying. If we do this, we answer the second objection as well, for we are better prepared to accept the stubborn fact o f evil in the world— no less in our world than in Noah’s world, or Peter’s. The real difficulty is not that the world is better or more peaceful than Peter portrays it, but just the oppo­ site: that it is as bad as he portrays it, or worse. We are therefore compelled to ask, “How can this be if Christ has tamed all the evil spirits and put them under his sovereign control?” The answer is that Peter has here given us a “vision” o f what Christ has accomplished in principle, not a sober account of what is already true in fact. If it were already true, there would be no more evil in the world. The Kingdom o f G od would have come. Nothing that Peter says here prevents him from reminding us near the end o f his letter that “Your opponent, the devil, is on the move like a roaring lion ready to swallow [his prey]” (5:8). In 1 Peter, as in every book o f the New Testament, the victory o f Jesus Christ over the forces of evil is “already, but not yet.” Finally, how is it that baptism “saves”? Protestants espe­ cially have insisted that salvation is by faith alone, apart from any legal or ritual act we may perform, however valid or praiseworthy that act may be. Moreover, what do the com­ fortably heated waters of a baptismal tank or a few drops splashed on a baby’s head by a priest have in common with the destructive flood that overwhelmed the entire world in Noah’s day? Natural as such questions are, they reveal how bland and commonplace baptism has become in many o f our churches. Yet Paul called baptism nothing less than a death and burial with Christ preparatory to rising with Christ to a new life (Rom 6:4). To Peter it suggests the flood, and the danger o f death by drowning.3 Noah and his family were 1 PETER

24

not drowned, however; the waters o f death sustained them in the ark and became the means of their salvation. Chris­ tians therefore do not “die” in baptism according to Peter. Baptism in 1 Peter is not death or burial, but resurrection (cf. V 21, “through the raising o f Jesus Christ”). This means that baptism is not so much the putting off o f the old life as the putting on o f the new, not the “removal of the filth of the flesh” but an “appeal to God out of a good conscience.” The “appeal” (or “pledge,” as it is sometimes translated) is probably viewed here as a public appeal, identifying individ­ uals once and for all as Christians in their respective cities or villages. Far from the badge o f respectability it has become in the small towns o f “Christian” America, baptism in Peter’s time was a stigma in the eyes o f many fellow citizens, an open invitation to slander and ridicule. To undergo baptism was to declare oneself a Christian publicly and to be ready to take the social consequences. To maintain a “good con­ science” was to stand true to that public commitment no matter what the inconvenience or cost (3:16; cf. also 2:19, “out o f a conscious commitment to G od”). Because Peter would have assumed that those unwilling to take such a step were not genuine Christians, he has no hesitation in saying that baptism “now saves you” (v 21). Baptism is for Peter the guarantee that a person has identi­ fied himself or herself irrevocably with Jesus Christ, even to suffering and death if it comes to that. It is consequently the guarantee of sharing with Christ in his resurrection and jour­ ney to heaven. In a context of hostility within the social order and the impending judgment of God, Peter understands “salvation” as rescue or deliverance, like the deliverance of Noah and his family from a world under judgment in their day. Because most of us do not live in such a crisis situation, we have spiritualized “salvation” into a kind o f eternal inward blessedness, but the old stories told and retold—Noah’s story and now Peter’s—remind us that salvation is, first, survival 25

The Past: Claim ing a H eritage

and, second, vindication in the day when God judges the world. An old gospel song catches the spirit of 1 Peter better than most commentaries: “God gave Noah the rainbow sign: no more water but fire next time!” Peter has reached back into the Noah story for the imagery o f water. Before he is finished, he will have something to say o f fire as well (1 Pet 4:12,17-19; cf. 1:6; also 2 Pet 3 :5 -7 ,10-13). The martyrs The rest o f the biblical stories in 1 Peter are left untold. Peter mentions none o f their particulars. Instead, he refers to them as a class—what literary critics might call a genre— on the assumption that his readers can think of any number of specific examples to illustrate his point. The clearest case of this is 1 Pet 4:6, where he expands on a standard designa­ tion o f God as “the One who stands ready to judge the living and the dead!” (v 5). This expression was a commonplace in Judaism: God would judge both the living and the dead at the end of the age on the basis of how faithfully they had kept his law. In a gentile Christian setting, however, more explanation was required. What mattered to the gentile Christians was the gospel of Jesus Christ, not the law, and their question would have been “How can God judge the dead if they have not heard the gospel o f Jesus Christ?” Peter’s answer is not to explain the significance of the Jew­ ish law as a basis for judgment, as Paul for example does in Rom 2.1 Peter exhibits little or no interest in the law. Rather, he calls attention to those among the dead who did hear and believe the gospel of Jesus Christ— Christians before the coming of Christ, like Sarah and the “holy wives” and like Noah and his family. He states that “the gospel was proclaimed to those who are dead so that even though condemned in the flesh among people generally, they might live before God in the Spirit” (4:6). The point is that some now dead heard the 1 PETER

26

gospel while they were still alive and paid the price o f obedi­ ence to it, the same price that Christians may have to pay today. Yet God rewarded their obedience and faithfulness with the sure hope of resurrection, just as he will reward our obedience under similar circumstances. What group does Peter have in mind here? What examples could he have cited? His brief reference should be read in the broadest possible terms, as all the righteous, all the faithful believers, whose stories are told in the Bible and Jewish tradi­ tion. His perspective is much like that o f the Wisdom of Solomon, a Jewish work written in Greek some decades be­ fore 1 Peter and circulated widely among Jews and Christians alike: But the souls o f the righteous are in the hands of G od and no torment will ever touch them. In the eyes of the foolish they seemed to have died and their departure was thought to be affliction, and their going from us to be their destruction; but they are at peace. For though in the sight o f men they were punished, their hope is full of immortality (Wisd Sol 3:1-4, RSV). If we are looking for something more specific, many exam­ ples can be found in Heb 11, written possibly to Rome at a date close to the writing o f 1 Peter from Rome. The author o f Hebrews tells brief stories o f many of the heroes and heroines of faith—Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Rahab—and, when he runs out o f time, lists also Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel, and (as a group) the Jewish prophets and martyrs of Scripture and later tradition. Despite the long roll o f names, many o f the particulars of these stories are left to the readers’ memory or imagination. Although conflict and suffering is not the major emphasis in Hebrews as it is in 1 Peter, the author does mention that Noah “condemned the world” when he built 27

The Past: Claim ing a H eritage

the ark (11:7), and that all the righteous up to Abraham were “foreigners and strangers on earth” (11:13), much like Peter and the Christians to whom he was writing (cf. 1 Pet 1:1; 2:11). Moses “chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than enjoy the pleasures of sin for a short time” and “regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ of greater value than the treasures of Egypt” (11:25, 27). Prophets and martyrs suffered all kinds of affliction and death for their faithfulness to the God of Israel (11:32-38). Martyred or not, they “all died in faith” (11:13) and for their faith received God’s ap­ proval and the hope of resurrection (11:39). These, in all likelihood, are “the dead” o f whom Peter writes in 4:6. They received the “gospel” in their day just as surely as the Christians of Asia Minor had received it from the messengers of Jesus Christ in theirs (Heb 4:2: “For we also have had the gospel proclaimed to us just as they did”; cf. also v 6). The word of God is eternal, and always the same word, whether it is heard as the word of creation, the word of prophecy, or the explicit message of redemption through Jesus Christ (cf. again 1 Pet 1:23-25). In principle, the right­ eous of all ages are “gospel” people, and therefore Christians. Their common story, as Peter sees it, is our story as well. They believed, they suffered for their faith, they were faithful, they were vindicated. Peter has not the time, and feels no need, to spell out in detail their names and the circumstances of their struggles. Where the author of Hebrews cut his list of heroes short and left it to his readers to fill in the rest of the stories for themselves, Peter dispenses with the list altogether and contents himself with the general principle that God rescues his people from suffering and rewards their faithful obedi­ ence (cf. 2 Pet 2:9). Still, the passage opens for us the pages o f the Old Testament to remind us that when we suffer be­ cause o f our commitment to Jesus Christ, we are not alone but stand surrounded by a “great cloud of witnesses” (Heb 12:1) who have been this way before. 1 PETER

28

Prophets and angels Peter uses biblical stories also to enhance our sense o f won­ der and mystery at the great salvation provided for us through Jesus Christ. This time the “heroes” are the prophets (1 Pet 1:10-12). As in the case of the martyrs, it is not a question of one particular incident involving Jewish prophets, but a whole class of incidents. Peter fastens our attention on an aspect of the prophets’ role not often noticed. He reminds us that they not only gave out authoritative answers from God to the people of Israel— “Thus saith the Lord!”—but that they asked God many questions as well. There was much about the plan of salvation that they did not understand. Like Sarah and her husband, like Noah and his family, and like the “dead” who accepted the gospel in their lifetimes, these prophets were Christians long before the coming of Christ. They had the “spirit of Christ” among them, and with Christ’s help they predicted “the sufferings intended for Christ and the glorious events that would follow” (1:11). Yet they themselves did not understand “the time and circum­ stances” of the events they were predicting. Therefore they made “careful and diligent inquiry” (1:10) and were told “that their ministry in regard to all this was not for their own benefit but for yours” (v 12). They were given a revelation, but the “revelation” was that for the time being nothing more would be revealed! Peter may have in mind here such incidents as Daniel’s prayer for the restoration o f Jerusalem after seventy years of desolation, with the response from G od that the desolation would be for seventy weeks o f years (Dan 9). O r Daniel’s question after a series o f visions, “How long . . . until the end of these wonders?” and “W hat shall be the issue o f these things?” (Dan 12:6,8). Although certain precise time periods were mentioned, Daniel was finally told that “the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end” (12:9). The 29

The Past: Claim ing a Heritage

visions were not for Daniel’s own generation but for a much later time, and this is the point Peter wants to emphasize to his readers centuries later. The prophets prophesied “not for their own benefit, but for yours.” Another example is the prophet Habakkuk, who stood on his watchtower “to see what God will say to me” and was told, “the vision awaits its time. . . . If it seem slow, wait for it; it will surely come” (Hab 2:3). This was interpreted later by sectarian Jews to mean that “the final age shall be prolonged, and shall exceed all that the Prophets have said” (Qumran Pesher [Commentary] on Hab 74). Most o f the apocalyptic book known as 4 Ezra consists of questions by “Ezra,” the prophet who sees a series o f visions from God, as to when and under what circumstances the visions he has seen will come to pass. He too is told that the visions are for a later indefinite time. These examples show that questions and uncertainties about ancient prophecies o f the Messiah and the coming of God’s Kingdom persisted in Judaism right up to Peter’s day and beyond. It is to such uncertainties that Peter refers. He has just made the point that Jesus Christ, now invisible to human eyes, will soon be revealed with “praise, glory, and honor” to those who love him and believe in him. Then Christians will rejoice “with inexpressible and glorious delight” (1:7-8). The great salvation made possible by the work of Jesus Christ is beyond human comprehension or imagination. Even the prophets who predicted it did not un­ derstand it! Almost as an afterthought, Peter suggests that even the angels, who normally explained things to inquiring proph­ ets, were baffled by G od’s saving plan and still are. They desire to look down from heaven on what Christ has accom­ plished, but it is a mystery hidden even from their eyes! Yet this profound mystery “has been announced to you through those who brought you the gospel with the Holy Spirit sent from heaven” (1:12). Though Peter and the Christians of 1 PETER

30

Asia Minor still did not know what it was to meet Christ face to face, they shared in the good news of “the sufferings intended for Christ and the glorious events that would follow”— his death, his resurrection, his journey to heaven as Lord, and the hope o f his appearing with glory and joy. The salvation of which the prophets had spoken was theirs in principle, even though they still awaited its visible and tangible realization. W hen we read 1 Peter, we stand where its first readers stood, and with them we read the Old Testa­ ment through Peter’s eyes. There is much that we may not understand about the salvation Christ has won for us, but it begins with the “gospel” or “good news.” The “gospel” in 1 Peter is the same gospel found in every other New Testa­ ment book, but Peter will explain it and develop its implica­ tions in a manner distinctly his own. The M e s s ia h The Jewish heritage for Peter consisted of, first, the Scrip­ tures, second, Jewish stories, and third, the Messiah. O f these the third was by far the most important, for it was the basis of the other two. Only the news that the Jewish Messiah had come in the person of Jesus gave these Gentiles a reason to read the Jewish Bible or listen to Jewish stories. As far as Jews were concerned, “Messiah” in Hebrew (the equivalent o f “Christ” in Greek) meant “the anointed one,” usually an anointed king or priest. Already in Paul’s letters, however, and certainly by the time 1 Peter was written, “Christ” had become a name more than a title among Gentile Christians. Peter was an “apostle of Jesus Christ” (1:1), not “apostle o f the Messiah Jesus.” Christians were “sprinkled with the blood o f Jesus Christ” (1:2), not with the blood o f an anointed king. One can read Paul and 1 Peter without even remembering the Jewish origins o f the designation “C h rist” This is because the Christians had profoundly reinterpreted the Jewish 31

The Past: C lam in g a Heritage

notion of messiahship. Jesus is “Christ” more by virtue of his sufferings than his kingly power (cf. Luke 24:26,46). The ancient prophets told of “sufferings intended for Christ” (1:11), as Peter demonstrates concretely from Isa 53:4-12 in 2:22 (“He committed no sin, neither was deceit ever found on his lips”), 2:24 (“He carried our sins”), and 2:25 (“By his wounding you have been healed” and “you were going astray like sheep”). Twice Peter introduces references to Christian suffering with the phrase, “for Christ also suffered” (2:21; 3:18). Twice he mentions “the sufferings o f Christ” in relation to future glory (4:13; 5:1). Even when Christ is identified as the choice and precious “Stone” o f biblical prophecy, he is “the stone which the builders rejected. . . . a stone for stumbling and a rock to trip over” (2:7). He is by no means the Messiah of popular expectation. When Peter wants to emphasize the power and sover­ eignty o f Jesus, he prefers the term “Lord” (e.g., 1:3), again following the precedent of Paul. In alluding to Isa 8:13 (“you must revere the Lord himself”), Peter identifies the “Lord” explicitly as “Christ”— meaning Jesus (1 Pet 3:15). Similarly in 1 Pet 1:25 and 2:3, the “Lord” referred to in certain Old Testament settings (i.e., the God of Israel) is assumed without discussion to be the same as Jesus Christ. The common early Christian interpretation of Ps 110:1 (“The Lord says to my lord, ‘Sit at my right hand’ ”) was that the Jewish “Messiah” or “Christ” was to be understood not merely as a descendant of King David but as David’s “Lord” (David being the pre­ sumed speaker in the psalm). The term “Lord” was taken to be applicable both to G od and to Jesus the Messiah. Once this happened, “Messiah” or “Christ” was no longer necessary as a title but came to be read, more often than not, as part of Jesus’ name. Peter’s acquaintance with this interpretation can be seen in his reference in 3:22 to Jesus “at the right hand of G od.” So closely is Jesus Christ identified with God that it is sometimes difficult to be sure whether Peter is referring 1 PETER

32

to God or Jesus when he speaks of “the Lord” (in addition to 1:25 and 2:3, cf. also 2:13 and 3:12). Aside from Jesus and God, only Abraham is called “Lord” in 1 Peter (3:6), and in this instance (as we have seen) Sarah’s laughter is almost audi­ ble behind the text if we listen for it! 1 Peter lays claim to a Jewish identity and a Jewish past on behalf of its gentile Christian readers. This heritage involved Jewish Scripture, Jewish stories, and the Jewish Messiah, but above all it involved the God of the Jewish people revealed decisively now to the rest of the world in Jesus of Nazareth. For a Gentile to accept God’s “Messiah” or “Christ” (strange as that word was to a Greek or Roman) was to accept the God of Israel and to acknowledge this “foreign” deity as the only real God— a major step indeed! Following the precedent of most o f Paul’s letters, Peter identifies this God right at the outset in relation to Jesus as “the G od and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” It was “by raising Jesus Christ from the dead,” Peter reminds these Gentiles, that the G od of the Jews “gave us new birth” and “brought us to a living hope” (1:3). It was through Jesus, he reiterates, that “you are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope might be in G od” (1:21). In short, they have come to share the status o f the Jews as “a chosen race, the King’s priesthood, a holy nation, a people destined for vindication” (2:9). A marvelous blessing, or so it sounds as we read these words from the vantage point o f the twentieth century! Yet in its own time it was by no means an unmixed blessing. W hat Greek or Roman in his right mind would want to take on the identity of the Jews, or share in the precarious situa­ tion the Jews faced in many cities and provinces o f the Roman Empire? Anti-Semitism has a history far older than Christianity. Jews had gained certain political rights and a measure of social respect in parts of the empire, but the respect was hard won, long in coming, somewhat fragile, and 33

The Past: Claim ing a H eritage

in any case far from universal. Many ancient writers ac­ knowledged the Jews’ legitimacy because they were a real “nation” and a very ancient one at that, with well-defined laws and a very wise founder— Moses. Yet others distrusted them because o f the strangeness o f those same laws, particu­ larly the ones about diet, circumcision, and the Sabbath. Why would any Gentile who was not bom into the Jewish nation want to claim its identity? Those who did— at least those in view in 1 Peter— do not seem to have adopted these specific customs, yet they did claim, and Peter wants them to claim, the Jewish identity. This they did by virtue o f their fascination with the Jewish Messiah and his God, and hence with the Jewish Scriptures and Jewish stories with their heroes and heroines. For this, their fellow citizens in the provinces o f Asia Minor where they lived probably viewed them with more suspicion than they viewed actual Jews, not less. Why were these people pretending to be Jews when they were not? They did not have the excuse that they were bom into it nor that they literally belonged to this ancient and honorable nation. Therefore they did not have the political legitimacy that actual Jews had. Though Peter called them a “nation” (2:9), they were not a nation in the eyes either of the Romans or of the actual Jews. They were instead a voluntary associa­ tion o f Gentiles worshiping (from the Romans’ viewpoint) a “strange god.” Peter is writing at a time when neither the emperor nor his provincial governors knew exactly how to treat these Christians. They are not yet suffering persecu­ tion as a matter o f official policy, but as we read 1 Peter we sense that all the makings o f future persecution are present and that such things as social discrimination, hostile ques­ tioning, and slander were already common experiences. If the heritage o f the past that Peter provides for Christians is a glorious one, their present is not so glorious. It is a time of aggravation and of the prospect o f something far worse. 1 PETER

34

3

TH E PRESENT : LIVING IN A H O STILE SOCIETY

T h e ‘f ie ry ordeal'

Peter’s rhetoric about the social situation facing himself and his readers is most vivid in chapter 4 o f his letter. “Dear friends,” he begins, “don’t be surprised at the fiery ordeal breaking out among you to put you to the test, as though something strange were happening to you” (4:12). His grim and urgent announcement is that it is now “time for the judgment to begin from the house of God, and if it is from us first, what will be the end o f those who are disobedient to the gospel of God? And ‘if the just person is barely saved, what will become o f the godless and the sinner?’ ” (4:17-18). Peter’s words have an apocalyptic ring to them, like Jesus’ warning to the women o f Jerusalem on his way to the cross: “Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’ For if they do this when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?” (Luke 23:30-31). The apocalyptic tone continues in chapter 5: “Pay attention! Wake up! Your opponent, the devil, is on the 35

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

move like a roaring lion ready to swallow [his prey]. Resist him, firm in faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being accomplished in your brotherhood throughout the world” (5:8-9). Many students o f 1 Peter have suggested that this per­ spective does not govern the letter as a whole, but that in the course of composing it Peter either heard o f or actually began to experience an outbreak o f serious persecution at the hands o f the Roman government. The relative calm o f 1 Pet 1:1-4:11 is thereby contrasted with the alarm and fiery intensity of 4:12-5:14. The distinction, however, cannot be maintained. Already in chapter 1, Peter speaks in a similar vein. Even while promising his readers joy at the “salvation about to be revealed at the last day” (1:5— 6a), Peter adds a sobering qualification: “— though now for a little you must suffer affliction in various ordeals. [You must suffer] so that the genuineness o f your faith— a quality more precious than gold which, though perishable, is [also] tested by fire— may be found to result in praise, glory, and honor at the time when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:6b—7). H is rhetoric is somewhat more disjointed here than in chapters 4 and 5, but the point o f it is much the same. The only difference is that a metaphor comparing Christian suffering with the process of refining gold in a smelter's furnace has given way in chapter 4 to the explicit term “fiery ordeal.” To what is Peter referring? Does he mean that Christians were literally being burned at the stake, as Polycarp was in Asia Minor in the mid-second century?1 If not, were they suffering physi­ cal violence, however administered? These questions must be answered by looking at 1 Peter as a whole, not by jump­ ing to conclusions on the basis o f a few highly rhetorical passages. Even in the context of his reference to a “fiery ordeal,” Peter goes on to explain more precisely what he has in mind. He speaks of “sharing in the sufferings of Christ” (4:13) 1 PETER

36

and o f suffering “for being a Christian” (4:16) or “when God requires it” (4:19). He also mentions the possibility o f being “ridiculed for the name o f Christ” and of the Spirit o f God being “blasphemed” by those who do the ridiculing (4:14). Clearly, he does not concentrate on only one possible scenario— for example, a fiery or bloody persecution—but mentions a range o f experiences or types of “suffering” that his readers might or might not have to undergo. It must be kept in mind that Peter is writing to the churches o f Asia Minor from a thousand miles away and simply does not know all that has taken place among them, much less what might take place. The purpose of his rhetoric is to prepare them for an eventuality, not to fortify them in a known situation of bloodshed and violence. Some have inferred that Peter is generalizing from a crisis that has broken out in his own community. His identification of the place from which he is writing as “Babylon” (5:12) lends some support to this theory, given the ancient significance of Babylon as the empire that oppressed the people of God by leading the Jews into captivity in 586 B.C. The designation “Babylon” is applied to the city of Rome in the Book of Reve­ lation (cf. Rev 17:18), and it is natural to infer that Rome is meant in 1 Peter as well. The sinister depiction of “Babylon” in Rev 14:8; 16:19; 17:5-6, and throughout chapter 18 makes it easy to believe that Peter is writing from Rome and that the “fiery ordeal” of which he speaks is originating from that city—or even that the persecutions facing the readers of the letter are a matter of imperial policy. Many have suggested, in fact, that the sudden outbreak of persecution against Chris­ tians in the time of Nero (i.e., c. A.D. 64) took place even as Peter was preparing his letter to Asia Minor. Peter is said to have assumed—mistakenly, as it turned out—that the perse­ cution would become worldwide, and he warned the Chris­ tians in Asia Minor accordingly. Others have supposed that 1 Peter was written in the second century, after persecution 37

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

had become imperial policy, by someone other than the Apostle Peter. Both theories read too much into the “fiery” language o f chapter 4 and the reference to “Babylon” in 1 Pet 5:12. Though “Babylon” in that verse undoubtedly refers to Rome and stands as a clear self-testimony that Peter is writ­ ing from Rome, it carries with it none o f the disgust and terror evident in “Babylon the Great, the mother o f prosti­ tutes and o f the abominations o f the earth, . . . the woman, drunk with the blood o f the saints and the blood o f the witnesses o f Jesus” (Rev 17:5-6). “Babylon” here at the end o f 1 Peter is simply the counterpart to “diaspora” at the beginning (1:1). It is the place o f exile, the place where Christians, like the Jews o f old, are “aliens and strangers” (2:11), living precariously in a culture that does not share their faith or their ethical commitments. Peter in Rome and his readers in Asia M inor are in the same boat, a counter­ culture in Roman society like the Jews but without the Jews' ancient credentials as a nation. 1 Peter is not ad­ dressed to a specific crisis, therefore, but speaks to situa­ tions faced by Christians everywhere and in every generation. Sometimes the hostility between the dominant culture and the people o f G od is readily apparent, and persecution looms almost visibly on the horizon. Some­ times the tensions are muted and the threats to faith more subtle, as in the “Christian” or “Judeo-Christian” cultures o f the W est It is a difference in degree, not in kind. Biblical Christianity is never a “culture,” but always, at least to some degree, a counterculture. American democracy, capitalism, European socialism, even some forms o f communism may appropriate certain o f its values (e.g., the doing o f good, respect for others and especially those in authority, thrift, modesty, hard work, etc.), but other Christian traits (above all the love o f one’s enemies and a radical and exclusive

1 PETER

38

commitment to the lordship o f Jesus Christ) are apt to be unpopular in even the most “enlightened” societies. Hence the lasting relevance o f 1 Peter. If 1 Peter is not addressed to an actual present crisis, why the crisis language? Is Peter simply an alarmist, punctuating his legitimate concerns with a cry of “Fire!” and a dramatic summons to martyrdom? To some extent the urgency o f his words echoes the urgency o f the entire New Testament, from John the Baptist’s “Repent, for the kingdom o f heaven is near!” (Matt 3:2) to the concluding promise and prayer of the Book o f Revelation, “ ‘Yes, I am coming soon. . . .’ Amen. Come, Lord Jesus” (Rev 22:20). With virtually every New Testament writer, Peter claims that “The end o f all things is near” (1 Pet 4:7). A t one level, the “fiery ordeal” mentioned in 4.T2 is simply a corollary o f this sense that the present order o f things is coming to an end. Another possible factor, however, is an awareness o f the fate o f the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. If the gentile Chris­ tian readers o f 1 Peter are seen as “honorary Jews” laying claim to a Jewish heritage and a quasi-Jewish identity, then the temple at Jerusalem is their temple as well. Their reac­ tion to the destruction of the temple by Roman armies in A.D. 70 would not have been to rejoice at the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecies (e.g., in Luke 21) or at the misfortune o f “the wicked Jews” responsible for the death o f Jesus, but rather to join with the Jews in mourning over the disappear­ ance o f the ancient and revered house of God. The Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts present the Jerusalem temple as the headquarters first of Jesus himself (e.g., Luke 2:41-50; 21:37-38) and later o f his followers after his resurrection (e.g., Luke 24:53; Acts 2:46,5:42). The tem­ ple’s recent destruction by Roman armies could well have prompted the notion that Christians, even gentile Chris­ tians, were a new temple of God in a spiritual sense, “being

39

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

built into a spiritual house for holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 2:5). At the same time, the perception of that catastro­ phe as a judgment o f God on the Jerusalem temple could have triggered Peter’s urgent warning that it was “time for the judgment to begin from the house of God, and if it is from us first, what will be the end o f those who are disobedient to the gospel of God?” (4:17). If God judged his ancient people by destroying their temple of stone and mortar, he could just as easily judge his new people, the spiritual temple built on Jesus Christ, the foundation stone. This time it would not be a matter of destruction but of putting his people to the test, so that their faith might emerge all the stronger (1:6-7). This judgment or “fiery ordeal” comes down finally to “various ordeals” (1:6), an accumulation of small harassments or aggra­ vations of which Peter has heard but of which he has no specific or detailed knowledge. Peter’s conviction is that the God o f Israel has a purpose in all these things. Positively, G od’s intent is to refine and purify his people that their faith may be shown to be gen­ uine “at the time when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:7). Nega­ tively, God’s intent is to begin the process o f final judgment on the whole world. The effect o f the “fire” o f G od’s pres­ ence and power is to perfect and vindicate the righteous while destroying evil and those who do evil. The apocalyptic judgment of God starts in the particulars of countless small confrontations, whether in Rome or Asia Minor, between Christian faith and Greco-Roman culture, confrontations that often begin in the household but can spread quickly to arenas of public discourse such as the marketplace and the courts. Peter has no specific case histories to recite, yet much o f his letter is taken up with general references to such confrontations and to the proper conduct of Christian be­ lievers in the face o f slander, harassment, and aggravation. It is in this setting that Peter gives his answer to the question 1 PETER

40

af c ing every serious Christian in every generation and every culture, “How should we then live?” The troublem akers The source o f tension, whether in Peter’s community or in the communities to which he is writing, remains unidentified through the first chapter of 1 Peter and into the second. In chapter 2, however, he reminds his readers that Jesus himself was “rejected by people generally” (2:4) and that to “unbe­ lievers” Jesus is still “a stone for stumbling and a rock to trip over” (2:8). Peter’s stem verdict on such people is that to such a fate “they were appointed” (2:9). Later it becomes clear that in mentioning “unbelievers” he is not referring merely to differences o f opinion over theological matters. The disre­ gard that these “unbelievers” have for Christ carries over to a disregard for those in Roman society who identify themselves as Christians. Peter refers vaguely to those who “accuse you of doing wrong” (2:12) or who “denounce your good conduct in Christ” (3:16). From the standpoint o f the Christians they are troublemakers indeed. It is not clear from Peter’s words whether he has in mind mere gossip and slander or whether he knows o f specific formal accusations being brought against Christians before ruling magistrates. Quite likely his language is purposely gen­ eral in order to cover any eventuality. When he speaks of the possibility o f a Christian suffering “as a murderer, or a thief, or criminal” (4:15), he seems to refer to actual trumpedup charges presented in court to discredit Christians and the Christian movement It is fair to assume (especially in the wake of the brief outbreak of persecution in Rome under Nero) that he knew o f cases where this had taken place. His counsel is that if such a thing should happen, believers must make absolutely sure there is no substance to any charges leveled against them. Their hands and their consciences must 41

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

be clean so they can know in their hearts that they are suffer­ ing for their Christian faith and for no other reason (4:16). It is unlikely, however, that formal charges in court are Peter’s only, or even his principal, concern. Along with “murderer,” “thief,” and “criminal,” he mentions “busybody” (4:15), a term more appropriate to the category o f slander or name calling than to formal criminal charges. This is probably where his emphasis lies. Because of their high moral standards rooted in Judaism and in the teachings of Jesus, Christians may well have been denounced by fellow citizens as selfappointed guardians of public morality. Even pagan philoso­ phers sometimes took such a role on themselves. Epictetus, a contemporary, speaks of Cynic philosophers who thought it their duty to “oversee” the conduct of others: “who is treating his wife well, and who ill; who quarrels; what household is stable, and what is not; making his rounds like a physician and feeling pulses” (Dissertations 3.22.72). Such behavior did not make them popular. Plutarch de­ scribes the busybody who “creeps in, searching out with slan­ derous intent drunken revels and dances and all-night festivals” (Moralia, 517A). Christians and Jews frowned on such activities as well (cf. 1 Pet 4:3-4), and it is not difficult to see how they might have acquired a reputation for spoiling other people’s fun! In some cases the reputation may even have been well deserved (cf. Paul’s warnings in 1 Thess 4:11— 12; 2 Thess 3:11; 1 Tim 5:13). Peter’s intent is that Christians should bear testimony to their fellow citizens in such a way as to bring no reproach on the name of Jesus Christ. They should live according to their own faith and ethical standards while respecting the privacy of others. They should leave judgment and retribution to their God and refrain from pass­ ing their own judgments on the conduct of others. That way, any slanders brought against them will be just that, with no basis in fact. Then they will know they are suffering “for being a Christian” and for no other reason. They will have no 1 PETER

42

need to be “ashamed” but will be able to “glorify God” freely and in good conscience (4:16). Although 1 Peter is often read as a tract on physical suffer­ ing and martyrdom, it is striking that much of the abuse said to be facing Christians is verbal abuse. They can expect to be “accused” (2:12), “denounced” (3:16), and “ridiculed” (4:14). When Peter urges them to “put to silence the ignorance o f the foolish” (2:15), he is referring to the silencing o f foolish talk. It is largely a war of words, not of fire or sword or instruments of torture. Yet it is not for that reason a small thing. Because the Spirit of God rests on Christians when they are “ridiculed for the name of Christ,” those who ridicule them are guilty o f blasphemy of the Spirit (4:14; cf. vv 4-5). In the world of the Bible, words matter. The ancients did not subscribe to the principle that “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but names can never hurt me.” Words and names are weapons with enormous potential for either good or ill. For a Christian believer, words as well as actions must be brought under the lordship of Jesus Christ. Jesus himself was a victim of words before he was a victim of nails and a spear, yet he never used words for retaliation (2:22-23). Like him, Christians must not return “insult for insult, but on the con­ trary, bless—for this is what you are called to do, so that you may inherit blessing” (3:9). Peter commands his readers in the words of the psalmist to “stop the tongue from evil and the lips from speaking deceit” (3:10). They are to be silent when silence is appropriate and let their good deeds speak for them (3:1), yet when challenged they must be “ready to answer any­ one who demands from you an accounting of the hope that is yours” (3:15). When they do speak, it must be with both kind­ ness and integrity. They are to “get rid of all malice . . . and all deceit, as well as hypocrisies, jealousies, and slanders of every kind” (2:1). When they use words to worship God and minister to each other, whoever does the speaking must do so “as one bringing words from God” (4:11). 43

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

Peter’s accent on the crucial importance and utmost seri­ ousness o f the spoken word echoes the teaching o f Jesus himself (cf. Matt 12:35-37), and this accent is aptly echoed in turn by a poem o f Amos Niven Wilder: Speak holy words— too many blasphemies, Too many insolent and strident cries And jeers and taunts and maledictions rise. Speak faithful words— too many tongues that please, And idle vows and disingenuous pleas, And heartless and disheartening levities. Speak quiet words— the constellations wait, The mountains watch; the hour for man is late Likewise to still his heart and supplicate. Speak chastened words— for anguish is at hand, Intolerable, that none can understand, And writs of ill no mortal eye has scanned. Speak gentle words— for fallen on the knives These sentient hearts and these exceeded lives Bleed till their pitying Advocate arrives. Speak holy words— and O Thou tarrying Lord, Leave not Thy cherished to the power of the sword; Come with Thy hosts and rout the opprobrious horde.2 1 Peter preserves Judaism’s ancient hope that God would indeed “Come with His hosts and rout the opprobrious horde.” With the psalmist, Peter knows that “the eyes of the Lord are on the just and his ears are open to their prayer, but the face of the Lord is set against those who do evil” (3:12). Those who now blaspheme God and the people of God will one day “answer to the One who stands ready to judge the living and the dead!” (4:5). Yet it is not the task of Christians 1 PETER

44

to threaten their adversaries or call down divine judgment on the troublemakers. The Maccabean martyrs in Jewish tradi­ tion did that, at least in their final agonies,3 and Christ could have done it too, but he did not (2:23). For Christians to do so in the face of mere slander would only make their enemies’ charges come true. They themselves would then have been the troublemakers. In principle, Christians are “free,” Peter says, by virtue of being redeemed through Jesus Christ, but they must not make their spiritual freedom “an excuse to cause trouble” (2:16). The role of Christian believers is rather to love their enemies, returning good for evil and a blessing for a curse (3:9). This is the imitation of Christ (2:23). Peter never quite brings himself to the point o f saying “Love your enemies” in just those words. Already in Peter’s time the words were too radical, too demanding. Yet the spirit o f that command of Jesus (cf. esp. Luke 6:27-36) controls the ethical perspective of 1 Peter from beginning to end, even as it must control any ethic calling itself Christian in our genera­ tion or any other. The state Peter is always careful to distinguish the troublemakers who slandered Christians from those who administered justice in the Roman Empire, whether in Rome itself or in the provinces. He does this for two reasons: first, to blame the state for the harassment of Christians would only con­ firm suspicions that the followers of Christ were a subver­ sive group in the empire, a threat to households and to the stability o f the social order; second, Peter gives the impres­ sion that he is still genuinely confident and optimistic about Roman justice, even after the outbreak o f persecution under Nero. He sees the emperor and his appointed magistrates as somehow representative of the entire Roman citizenry. All human beings (even the troublemakers!) deserve deference 45

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

and respect simply because they are creatures o f God (2:13). Preeminent and sovereign among them is the emperor, the “first citizen” o f Rome, and next to him his appointed magis­ trates, whether in Rome or in the provinces. Peter wants his readers to demonstrate respect for their fellow citizens by respecting the emperor and his emissaries (cf. 1 Tim 2:1— 2, “for all people— for kings and all who are in authority”; also Titus 3:1-2). The proper task o f those in authority is “to punish wrongdoers and commend those who do good deeds” (2:14), and Peter implies every confidence that if Christians “do good” (2:12 , 15), their good deeds will not go unrewarded. A t the same time he implies that those who slander them unjustly will be punished as “wrongdoers,” or, at the very least, put to silence (2:15). Peter’s vision in chapter 2 is that the Roman state will not turn out to be the enemy o f the Christian movement but its protector, not out o f favoritism but out o f simple justice. He holds out the hope that even the troublemakers will ex­ perience a change o f heart from observing the good works o f Christians, and consequently come to “glorify G od on the day o f visitation” (2:12). Writing from the same Roman church that had received Paul’s letter a decade or two ear­ lier, Peter stands in a tradition established by Paul in Rom 13. He agrees with Paul that Christians should submit to imperial authority and that “rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong” (Rom 13:1,3). But where Paul wrote abstractly o f “sovereign authorities,” “the rulers,” or “the authority,” Peter refers directly and concretely to “the emperor” and to “magistrates . . . sent by him.” More important, Peter stops short o f saying that “the existing authorities are ordained by G od” (Rom 13:1) or that the emperor is “G od’s servant” (Rom 13:4). The emperor represents the Roman people; he does not repre­ sent the G od o f Israel. Like every human being, he is G od’s creature and as such deserves honor and respect from 1 PETER

46

Christians “for the sake o f the Lord” (2:13). That is as far as Peter is willing to go. Within the New Testament, 1 Peter stands somewhere be­ tween the viewpoint of Paul, who saw Rome as a power estab­ lished by God to rule over the Mediterranean world, and that o f John in the Book o f Revelation, who saw the Roman Em­ pire as a horrible beast brought out o f the sea by the devil to make war against the people o f God (Rev 13:1-7). Clearly, Peter is closer to Paul than to the Book o f Revelation, yet we have seen that he does not hesitate to call the city of Rome “Babylon” (5:12). He is also careful with his vocabulary. He tells his readers to “submit” or (better) “defer” to the emperor just as they should defer to any human being out o f common respect. The notion of “obedience,” however, he reserves for a believer’s relationship to God or to Jesus Christ (cf., e.g., 1 :2 ,14,22). If the two obligations should ever come into con­ flict, there is not the slightest doubt where the priority lies. Peter in this letter is the same Peter who speaks in Acts 5:29: “We must obey G od rather than human beings.” Christian believers, set free from “the empty way o f life that was your heritage” (1:17), are now “God’s slaves” (2:16). Clearly then, responsibilities to God and each other take precedence over responsibilities to fellow citizens and to the emperor. Yet none o f their obligations can be neglected. For the sake of survival and an effective mission for Christ in the Greco-Roman world, Peter strives for a balance: “show re­ spect for everyone and love for the brotherhood, reverence toward God and respect for the emperor” (2:17). Again he is careful with his vocabulary. Jesus in Matthew and Luke said, “Love your enemy,” while in John he said, “Love one an­ other.” Peter says, “love one another” but “respect everyone” (implicitly at least even the enemy). Honor is appropriate both to God and the emperor, but not the same honor. To Peter, “reverence” or “fear” is the honor due to God, while “respect” is appropriate to the emperor, as to every human 47

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

being. Peter echoes the spirit if not the letter of Jesus’ com­ mand, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mark 12:17). He is more guarded than Paul in his endorsement o f imperial authority, perhaps because he holds out just the shadow o f a suspicion that a time might come when the emperor and his magistrates will not “punish wrongdoers and commend those who do good deeds” (2:14), but instead cause those who believe in Jesus Christ to “suffer for doing good” (2:20; 3:17; 4:19). That such suspicions were in fact justified is clear to us now from the Book of Revelation. The household The order and stability o f the Roman state was built on the order and stability of households. The household was a kind o f state in miniature. Yet the optimism with which Peter views the state does not carry over to the household to quite the same extent. The narrowing of his focus to the household (in 2:18-25 and 3:1-6) gives Peter the opportu­ nity to explore possible circumstances in which Christians might have to “suffer for doing good.” The reason is that not every slaveowner is as just or fair toward his household slaves as the emperor is (in Peter’s eyes) toward his subjects, nor does every husband treat his wife with kindness or respect. Peter is interested specifically in the cruel slave­ owner (2:18) and in the hostile or unbelieving husband (3:1). Despite his confidence that those who make trouble for Christian believers have no standing or decisive influence among the ruling authorities, he knows that in certain households the troublemakers are in charge, and it is to hard situations of this kind that he directs his primary attention. The oppressed Christian slave and the oppressed Christian wife serve as samples o f what it means to live for Jesus Christ and suffer unjustly in hostile surroundings. Drawing on 1 PETER

48

traditional catalogs of household duties known to ancient philosophers and moralists, Peter adapts these “household codes” to particular situations in which Christians faced the hostility of authority figures who did not share their faith. Slaves and slaveowners Christian slaves should “defer” to the authority o f their owners, Peter writes, in the same way that all Christians should defer to the authority of the emperor and his magis­ trates. In the case of the emperor, the question does not come up, “W hat if a particular emperor is cruel and unjust?” Certainly the memory o f Nero meant that this question, though unspoken, was very much in Peter’s mind and in the minds of his readers. Yet it was not an expedient question to put in writing; better to assume that the emperor is always just and fair in the best tradition o f Roman justice. The question is more easily dealt with in relation to households, where standards o f justice and kindness varied enormously. Peter makes the point that the responsibility to be a good slave extends even to situations where the slaveowner is harsh and cruel (2:18). In Roman times, even a just slave­ owner would have a slave beaten when the slave stole from him or mismanaged his property or mistreated other slaves, but Peter is more interested in “worst case scenarios,” in which a slave does his best for the slaveowner, yet is cruelly mistreated (2.T9-20). When this happens, it becomes a mat­ ter of “suffering for doing good,” a major theme in 1 Peter as a whole. “To that purpose you have been called,” Peter writes (2:21), and it is apparent from his words that he is not referring to a specific “calling” to be a slave, but to the destiny of all followers o f Jesus Christ in a hostile world. Jesus himself used the metaphor o f slavery somewhat differently to make the same point: “ ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute 49

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also. They will treat you this way because they do not know the One who sent me” (John 15:20-21; cf. Matt 10:24-25). Any Christian can expect to have to “suffer for doing good” under certain circumstances, just as Jesus did on his way to the cross and just as a slave does if he is unfortunate enough to belong to a cruel owner. Peter is doing two things in this passage. First, he is giving real advice to real slaves on the assumption that there were slaves among his readers in the provinces of Asia Minor. Sec­ ond, he uses the position of the slave in an unfriendly house­ hold as a metaphor for the position o f every Christian believer in an unfriendly society—an unfriendly empire in af c t, even though he has only good things to say about impe­ rial authority. The fact that Peter does not also address slave­ owners, even briefly, as Paul does in Col 4:1 and Eph 6:9, could suggest an awareness on his part that there were few if any Christian slaveowners in the congregations o f Asia Minor. On the other hand, Colossians and Ephesians were also written to Asia Minor, and though these letters say much less to slaveowners than to slaves, they do complete the household code by at least including them. More likely, Peter omits any advice to slaveowners because they do not serve appropriately as a metaphor for the experience o f suffering for doing good. He has just designated all Christian believers as “slaves o f God” (2:16), and it is natural to follow this up with some reflection on what it means to belong to God, on the one hand, yet to have to cope with hostile human authori­ ties, on the other. Despite the emphasis on “submission” or “deference” to human authorities, it is the obligation to God that controls—and if necessary supersedes— all other obliga­ tions. Deference to slaveowners must be “with deep rev­ erence” (2:18), not reverence toward the owner but reverence toward God (cf. 2:17). Whenever a Christian slave— or any Christian— endures unjust affliction, he or she does so 1 PETER

50

“out o f a conscious commitment to God” (2:19), and when this happens Peter calls it “grace before God” (2:20). Only God makes it possible to “suffer for doing good,” and God is the guarantor that such suffering will turn out to God’s glory (cf. 4:16). The relationship between slaves and slaveowners is not an easy one to reconstruct or understand in twentieth-century America. Peter’s advice to Christian slaves is only partially applicable to Christian employees who work for unfair or demanding employers today. We now have all kinds o f op­ tions and recourses that were not available to Christians in the Roman Empire. The value o f the section lies not so much in its specific advice to slaves as in the setting it provides for Peter’s profound notion o f the imitation of Christ. Peter alone among the letter writers o f the New Testament has developed the implications o f the radical command of Jesus in the gospels, “Follow me.” For Paul, as for the Gospel of John, the controlling imperative is to “believe” in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, so as to receive the salvation that Christ provided by his death on the cross. Peter, while not ignoring faith, has made a more considered attempt to do justice to the Synoptic Jesus and the invitation to follow in his footsteps and imitate his behavior. More o f this in the next chapter. Wives and husbands If the world of slaves and slaveowners is rather remote, the world o f marriage is still very much with us, even though marriage customs have changed over the years. Peter turns his attention to Christian wives in 3:1-6 and begins his advice with the now familiar command to “defer” to the one in au­ thority—in the Roman world, the husband. Like the Apostle Paul, Peter endorses the dominant view of his time that authority in the household and the marriage relationship rests with the husband (cf. Col 3:18; Eph 5:22-24). He is not 51

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

preoccupied with the “worst case scenario” to quite the same extent here as in the case of slaves, but he does focus largely on husbands who are “disobedient to the word”— that is, who do not believe in Jesus Christ. Mixed marriages were a problem for Christians in cases where the wife was a believer and the husband was n ot It was less of a problem the other way around because the expectation and assumption of the culture was that a wife would naturally adopt her husband’s religion. Hence Peter uses up six verses to address Christian wives and only one (v 7) to address Christian husbands. Both Peter and Paul are often viewed from our twentiethcentury perspective as traditionalists, even male chauvinists, with regard to sexuality and the marriage relationship, but it should be remembered that Peter is not telling Christian wives to “submit” or “defer” to their husbands’ wishes in every respect. This would obviously mean adopting their husbands’ religion (in most cases the Roman civic religion of the period) and renouncing their Christian faith. This was society’s expectation. Peter is writing to women who must have been viewed already as highly insubordinate by many o f their fellow citizens simply for remaining Christians. By Roman standards they were “liberated women” (perhaps dangerously so) and by no means the meekly submissive wives most husbands wanted. Their situation, therefore, was precarious. Peter’s concern is that these women not aggra­ vate an already tense situation by attempting to nag their husbands into the Kingdom of God. They must instead win their husbands over by letting their “reverent and pure con­ duct” do the talking for them (3:1-2). This leads to the most explicit statement found anywhere in the New Testament on the subject of women’s adornment (3:3-4). It is often the case in our culture that flamboyant dress and make-up is the hallmark of the “traditional” or “sub­ missive” woman (e.g., the “Total Woman” of the early seven­ ties). Feminists usually prefer more plain and modest apparel. 1 PETER

52

Quite the opposite was true in the Roman Empire, where lavish dress and adornment was a sign of liberation for female adherents of certain Eastern religious cults such as those of Artemis and Isis. These women were widely regarded as sexu­ ally provocative and therefore a threat to the social order and to the stability of households. Peter wants to make sure that Christian wives, “liberated” though they may be from their husbands’ religion, are not perceived by their husbands— or anyone else—as religious troublemakers o f this kind. His point is not simply that extravagant clothing is inappropriate for the Christian woman—though he undoubtedly believes this is the case. His point is rather that clothing and outward appearance— of any kind—is not what counts in the sight of God. What matters is not “your braided hair” or “the gold you put on” or “the clothes you wear” (3:3) but the real person underneath all the clothes, the braids, and the gold jewelry, “the person hidden in your heart, with that imperishable quality of a humble and quiet spirit.” In God’s sight this is the most lavish adornment of all (3:4). Despite first impressions, Peter is no traditionalist. His affirmation of women as persons created in G od’s image and embodying the Spirit o f G od identifies him as a genuine Christian fem inist The “humble and quiet spirit” of which he writes is not the spirit o f feminine submissiveness but a spirit that should characterize every Christian, male or female (cf. 3 :8 , 16, 5:5-6). It is in this connection that Peter introduces the example of the “holy wives” o f Israel, and Sarah in particular. These women “hoped in G od” (3:5) as every Christian now hopes in God (cf. 1:21). Christian wives are “children” of Sarah— and Abraham— for the same rea­ son Christian men are “children” o f Sarah and Abraham: because they have been redeemed through Jesus Christ. They are in all respects “co-heirs of the grace o f life” (3:7). Christian wives, like Christian slaves, are representative o f all Christian believers in two principal ways: they are 53

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

called to “defer” to those in authority over them (3:1,5; cf. 2:18), and they are called to “do good” (3:1-2,6; cf. 2:20). It is important to be clear about which o f these responsibilities has the priority. Is the doing o f good to be defined in terms o f submission to authority, or is submission defined by the doing o f good? W hat is it that Christians owe to those in authority? Do we “do good” by always doing what we are told, or by “doing the will o f G od” and being ready to face the consequences even in the face o f ridicule and persecu­ tion. Peter’s answer is that Christians owe the state, Chris­ tian slaves owe their owners, and Christian wives owe their unbelieving husbands deference and respect, but above all they owe them the gospel o f Jesus Christ, “an accounting of the hope that is yours” (3:15), whether by word or example. The goal of “good conduct” by Christians in Roman soci­ ety— or any society— is that fellow citizens (even the trouble­ makers) “may, from observing your good works, glorify God on the day of visitation” (2:12). For wives, the goal is that their husbands might be won over “once they have observed your reverent and pure conduct” (3:2). Peter is far from certain that these things will happen. It is equally possible that trouble­ makers, cruel slaveowners, and unbelieving husbands will stubbornly “denounce your good conduct in Christ,” and in such cases the goal is that they might be “put to shame” (3:16) either by the just intervention of Roman law (cf. 2:15) or (more likely) by the judgment o f God. Christian wives, there­ fore, have nothing to fear if they “do good” (3:6), and the same is true o f Christians generally: “So have no fear of them and don’t be troubled” (3:13-14). The “household duty codes” in 1 Peter are not the nar­ rowly conformist tracts they may appear to be on a casual reading. The philosophy they express is not “Don’t rock the boat,” but “Don’t rock the boat unnecessarily, or on your own whims.” In some respects, the “boat” was already rock­ ing more than was safe. So far as it is in their power, Peter 1 PETER

54

wants his readers to be good and loyal subjects o f the em­ peror, good and useful slaves if that is their lot, good and loving wives to their husbands. His word to us in every gener­ ation is to make sure that if we get in trouble with the state or our fellow citizens or employers or co-workers or with our spouses, it is because of our faith and not because o f our personal stubbornness or selfishness. He sees no intrinsic virtue in suffering for suffering’s sake, only in “suffering for doing good.” Therein lies the imitation of Jesus Christ.

55

The Present: Living in a Hostile Society

4

FROM PRESENT TO FUTURE

The threefold division of past, present, and future is a natural one, yet the nature of the material in 1 Peter requires a transitional step: Past/Present— From Present to Future— Future. The reason lies in a perception of time more charac­ teristic of the ancient world than o f our own. Bruce J. Malina has argued1 that time has become for us in America and Northern Europe a very measurable thing and conse­ quently very abstract. The present is but a tiny dot. Because our immediate needs for food and survival are met, we live for the future. W hat really counts is planning for that fu­ ture, often a distant future, and to a lesser extent remember­ ing the past. But in the ancient Mediterranean world, the world of the Bible, and in primitive societies even today, the present is a broad expanse o f immediate experience and im­ mediate needs encompassing in itself a remembered recent past and a “forthcoming” near future. The latter arises so directly and inevitably out o f present experience that it is every bit as “real” as the present. Beyond this, the ancients had the notion o f a more distant future in the sense in which 57

From Present to Future

we look to the future, but for them this future was not nearly so real. It was an “imaginary” future in distinction from the “forthcoming” future that they saw embedded in present experience.2 Malina’s thesis is dramatically illustrated in 1 Peter. Ma­ lina remarks that the past was not important to the ancients except for certain Roman elite groups interested in family and the veneration o f ancestors.3 As we saw in chapter 3, however, the past was important also to the Jews and to Gentile Christians seeking an identity on the basis of Judaism’s past. That identity, once established, helps explain the tensions and troubles o f the present. Christians are ob­ jects o f scorn and slander in the present because, like the Jews, they are “aliens and strangers” in Roman society. They have an “allotted time” in that society that they must spend in “reverent fear” o f the God who redeemed them (1:17). They are called by God to live out their “remaining time in the flesh no longer for human impulses but to do the will o f G od” (4:3). Peter’s principal concern is with this troublesome present and with a “forthcoming” future implicit in the present situ­ ation. It is this “forthcoming” reality that constitutes the transition from present to future in 1 Peter. To understand the transition, it is necessary to understand Peter’s vision o f the Christian life both as an imitatio Christi (following Jesus Christ) and as a life lived in community (ministering in the family of God). Following Jesus Christ Unlike such heroes of biblical stories as Sarah, Noah, and the prophets or martyrs of Israel, Jesus Christ in 1 Peter is not a figure o f the past but of the present, broadly understood. “Foreknown before the creation of the world,” he has now “appeared in the last o f the ages” (1:20). Though invisible 1 PETER

58

(1:8), Christ is part of the present just as surely as Christians are “now” the people of God (2:10), having “now” returned to their Shepherd (2:15) and “now” being saved in baptism through the power of his resurrection (3:21). The way from the present into the future in 1 Peter is the way of Christian discipleship. Peter builds on the command o f Jesus, “Follow me,” directed to him and his brother An­ drew at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in the Gospel of Mark (1:17) and echoed in the very last words of Jesus to him (or anyone else) after the resurrection according to the Gospel o f John (21:22). In light of such personal references in the Gospel tradition, the strong accent on “following” Jesus in a New Testament letter attributed to Peter is not surpris­ ing. It is, however, distinctive in relation to the dominant emphasis in Paul’s letters on “faith” and “believing.” Faith or belief is a notion easily intellectualized. Although Paul did not so intend it, faith can be— and sometimes is— reduced merely to the holding o f certain opinions about doctrine or the passive acceptance o f the divine gift o f salvation. Peter himself can speak of faith in G od in Pauline terms (cf. 1:21), though he more commonly uses the word “obedience” for a person’s initial acceptance of the Christian message (1:2,22; cf. Paul in Rom 1:5; 15:18; 16:26). “Following” is the more dynamic term for it represents not merely an acceptance or a confession but an action. It is nothing less than the embark­ ing on a journey with Christ to the cross and far beyond. To follow Jesus Christ is to participate both in his suffering and in his victory. Sharing Christ’s suffering Discipleship in the gospels is frequently linked to Jesus’ passion. “If anyone would come after me,” Jesus announces, “let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses 59

From Present to Future

his life for my sake and the gospel’s will save it” (Mark 8:34— 35). When Jesus tells Peter in the Gospel of John, “Where I am going you cannot follow now, but you will follow later,” Peter is said to have replied, “Lord, why can’t I follow you now? I will lay down my life for you” (John 13:36-37). Discipleship involves the prospect, or at least the possibility, o f a violent death. The same is true in Peter’s letter: “Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you might fol­ low in his footsteps” (1 Pet 2:21). 1 Peter has often been de­ scribed as a persecution document. If this means that bloody persecution was going on at the very moment 1 Peter was written, the term is certainly inaccurate. But if it means that persecution was part of the “forthcoming” future that Peter saw arising out of the present circumstances of Christians in the Roman Empire, then the term is appropriate. The cross as example. What was it about the suffering and death of Jesus Christ that made it a if tting example to be imitated? Above all, it was undeserved or unjust suffering. Jesus suffered for doing good, not for doing evil, and in the course of his suffering he continued to do good: “He commit­ ted no sin, nor was deceit ever found on his lips. He was insulted, but he would never insult in return; when he suf­ fered, he never threatened” (2:22-23). Jesus practiced nonre­ taliation in the face of both insult and injury, and Peter wants us to face the future in the same way: “Do not return evil for evil, or insult for insult, but on the contrary, bless—for this is what you are called to do” (3:9; cf. 2:21). Our “calling” as believers is to replicate in our lives the attitude and the behav­ ior of Jesus Christ on his way to the cross. This means a clean break with sin and a firm commitment to “do good” in the sense of doing the will of God: “Now that Christ has suffered in the flesh, you too must arm yourselves with the same re­ solve—for he who suffered in the flesh is through with sin— so as to live out your remaining time in the flesh no longer for human impulses but to do the will of God” (4:1-2). 1 PETER

60

Peter is not bothered by the difficulty, obvious to us, that Christ was the sinless and divine Lord (1:19, 2:21) while we are mere fallible human beings. If Jesus is our example, Peter assumes, he is an example that can be imitated. This is not “perfectionism” as an abstract ideal but simply a practical, even naive, appeal to Christians to break with sin and “do good.” Peter has no interest in debating theoretically whether or not such a break is possible. He merely says, “Do it.” To the extent that we “share in the sufferings of Christ” in this way, he tells us to “be glad, so that when his glory is revealed you may rejoice all the more” (4:13). The cross as redemption. The cross in 1 Peter is more than an example. It is also the instrument of our redemption. In this respect, Peter is in agreement with Paul and virtually every other New Testament writer. Almost at the beginning o f his letter he identifies Christians as those “consecrated by the Spirit for obedience [i.e., acceptance o f the gospel] and sprinkling with the blood of Jesus Christ” (1:2). He reminds his readers that they were “redeemed . . . not with perish­ able things such as silver or gold, but with precious blood, like that o f a faultless and flawless lamb— the blood o f Christ” (1:18-19). Having described Jesus’ behavior in the face of unjust suffering (2:22-23), Peter concludes, “He him­ self carried our sins in his body to the cross, so that we, having parted with those sins, might live for what is right” (2:24). If Christ “suffered for you” in order to set an example (2:21), it is clear that he also “once suffered for sins, a just man on behalf of the unjust, that he might bring you to God” (3:18). The metaphor of the lamb and the reference to the sprin­ kling of Christ’s blood indicate that Peter regarded the death of Christ as a sacrifice (cf. Exod 12:5,24:3-8; Isa 53:7). Much has been made of the theme of the Passover lamb in 1 Peter, to the extent even of suggesting that the whole letter is a Passover (or Easter) homily. In Greek the term pascha, an 61

From Present to Future

adaptation o f the Hebrew pesach, “Passover,” closely (but co­ incidentally) resembles the verb for suffer (i.e., pascho), which is common in 1 Peter. But there is little evidence that Peter has in mind the Passover lamb in any exclusive sense. The lamb could be that, or it could be the lamb of Yom Kippur, the Day o f Atonement, or it could be the lamb that Abraham told Isaac that God would provide according to Gen 22:8, or it could be the lamb to which the suffering servant of God is compared according to Isa 53:7. All that “lamb” or “sprinkled blood” suggests is sacrifice in a general sense, not a particular Jewish ritual or religious festival. Like a sacrificial victim, Jesus Christ according to Peter was without fault or imperfection (1:19), a “just man” who “committed no sin” (2:22, 3:18). W hat exactly did his sacri­ fice accomplish? Christian theology commonly understands Christ’s death as an “atonement,” the removal o f the guilt or penalty o f sin in order to make forgiveness possible. But to Peter it is even more. Jesus Christ is not a passive sacrificial victim in Peter’s theology o f the cross, but an active sinbearer and destroyer of our sins. If not quite the great high priest o f the Epistle to the Hebrews (cf., e.g., Heb 2:17; 4:14-15; 5 :5 -6 , 10; 6:20; 7:1-28), Jesus is nevertheless the one who “carried our sins in his body to the cross, so that we, having parted with those sins, might live for what is right” (2:24). He did not merely atone or compensate for our sins so that we can go on sinning and continually be forgiven. He quite literally did away with our sins, just as John the Baptist said he would do in the Gospel o f John: “Look, the lamb of God who takes away the sin o f the world!” (John 1:29; cf. 1 John 3:5: “But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. No one who lives in him keeps on sinning”). This explains Peter’s simple optimism about the possibility o f Christians putting their sins behind them once and for all and doing only what is good for the rest of their lives (4:1-2). 1 PETER

62

The one who “suffered in the flesh” and is consequently “through with sin” (4:1) is probably to be understood as Jesus himself. To Peter, Jesus is “through with sin” not in the sense that he was once a sinner and gave it up (both 1:19 and 2:22 are against this), but in the sense that he finished dealing with sins when he carried them to the cross and left them there (cf. Heb 9:28). He suffered for sins “once” (3:18), and when they are gone, they are gone. Christians must “arm them­ selves with the same resolve” to be done with their sins forever (4:1-2). Christian “realists” will object that this is an utterly unre­ alistic view o f the Christian life. Centuries o f Christian ex­ perience and the classic interpretations of Paul on the clash of the “old nature” and the “new” in the life o f the believer cry out in protest against what Peter is saying. There is a “naiveté” in 1 Peter exceeded only by the naiveté o f 1 John: “No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him” (1 John 3:6); “No one who is bom of God will continue to sin, be­ cause God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been bom of God” (1 John 3:9). Yet it is a naiveté that we need to hear. The kind o f “realism” that begins by insisting on the inevitability o f sin in the lives of believers is not going to make an impact for Christ by word or example in a hostile society. Peter knows this. He also knows that his readers have already made a decisive break with their past (1:18,22-23; 4:3-4), and he dares to hope that their resistance to “the impulses that once drove you in your ignorance” (1:14) will continue (cf. 2 :1 , 11). He himself is realist enough to tell us to “remain constant in your love for each other, for love covers many sins” (4:8). He knows as well as the author o f 1 John that “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:8-9). 63

From Present to Future

If there is a key to the realization o f his command to put away sin and “do good,” it rests not with individuals but with loving and forgiving Christian communities (see below, Min­ istering in the family of God). 1 Peter cuts through all the modem theological debates over whether the cross of Jesus Christ is simply an example of love and dedication or the divinely appointed means o f re­ demption from sin. Traditionally, the so-called liberals have seen it as the former, while “conservatives” or “evangelicals” have resolutely insisted on the latter. In 1 Peter, without question, it is both. In 2:21-25 he moves naturally and easily from the cross as example (vv 21-23) to the cross as redemp­ tion (vv 24-25). The two aspects are not in tension in his mind, for to him each requires the other. Christian believers are able to put sin behind them and follow in the footsteps of Jesus Christ only because they have been redeemed through his blood. And redemption through the blood o f Christ re­ quires more than a passive acceptance of the saving benefits o f his death. It requires in some sense an active participation in the death itself. To be a Christian believer is to follow Jesus Christ in the way o f the cross. Peter is not saying that his readers will necessarily be martyred, still less that they should seek martyrdom. His confidence rather is that their good deeds will “silence the ignorance o f the foolish” (2:15). “W ho then is going to harm you,” he asks rhetorically, “if you are partisans for what is good?” (3:13). Yet he immediately adds that “even if you should have to suffer in the cause o f justice you are blessed” (v 14). He knows that “suffering” takes many forms, begin­ ning with social discrimination and verbal abuse, and that his readers are already suffering in various ways. Their “vari­ ous ordeals” (1:6) are all part o f the way of the cross. Peter wants, first, to prepare them for the possibility that things may get worse before they get better and, second, to direct their attention beyond even the cross to the victory o f Jesus 1 PETER

64

Christ and the hope of vindication. The journey on which they have embarked does not end with the cross any more than Jesus’ journey ended there. The future in 1 Peter is filled with hope and not despair. Sharing Christ’s victory The risen Jesus in Luke’s Gospel reminds two of his disci­ ples o f the biblical prophecies that the Messiah would “suffer these things and then enter his glory” (Luke 24:26). Peter too refers to “the sufferings intended for Christ and the glorious events that would follow” (1:11). He himself, like the elders of the congregations in Asia Minor, is a “witness to the suffer­ ings o f Christ and a sharer as well in the glory to be revealed” (5:1; cf. 4:13). It might seem that the “glory to be revealed” belongs to the ultimate, or what Malina would call the “imaginary,” future, a time of “inexpressible and glorious delight” (1:8) when the Christ who is now unseen will make himself visi­ ble. But the “glorious events” that were to follow Christ’s suffering (1:11) belong at least in part to the broad expanse of the present and to a “forthcoming” future bom o f present circumstances. In connection with the “glory'' o f Christ, Malina’s distinction between a remote, “imaginary” future and an immediate or “forthcoming” future begins to break down. Although some of Peter’s language looks well beyond present experience, it is likely that Peter viewed the world in much the same way as Gerard Manley Hopkins, though with a different literary gift: The world is charged with the grandeur o f God It will flame out, like shining from shook foil; It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze o f oil Crushed. Why do men now not reck his rod? Generations have trod, have trod, have trod; 65

From Present to Future

And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil; And wears man’s smudge and shares man’s smell; the soil Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod. And for all this, nature is never spent; There lives the dearest freshness deep down things; And though the last lights off the black West went Oh, morning, and the brown brink eastward, springs— Because the Holy Ghost over the bent World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.4 The “glorious events” o f Christ in a “bent world” can be reconstructed and enumerated from many statements in 1 Peter. They must have included Jesus’ resurrection (1:3; 3:21), which is explicitly defined as giving him “glory” (1:21); also his journey to heaven (3:22) and his enthronement at God’s right hand, “with angels and authorities and powers in submission to him” (3:22). Last comes the visible “revelation” of Christ to his people with glory and salvation (1:5, 7 , 13; 4:13; 5:4). Even this final glory is already “resting” on Chris­ tian believers through the power o f the Spirit of God, in situations where they are “ridiculed for the name of Christ” (4:14; cf. Luke 12:11). Although it belongs to the future— even to Malina’s “imaginary” future—the glory o f Christ is also present in our darkest moments, brooding as Hopkins’s “Holy Ghost over the bent / World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.” “Glory” is left undefined in 1 Peter but always refers in some way to Christ’s victory or vindication. “Glory” is vindi­ cation seen from the positive side; when vindication is viewed negatively the accent is rather on “shame” (2:6-7, 3:16) and on the judgment of God on Christ’s adversaries. Christians who share in Christ’s suffering are also called to share in his victory or vindication. This too is part o f the journey. Peter sees two aspects to the victory o f Jesus Christ: victory over 1 PETER

66

death and victory over demons. They are the stages o f his journey to heaven and to the “right hand o f God” (3:22). Both were of decisive significance to Christians facing hostility in the Roman Empire, and both are o f significance to us even after nineteen centuries. Victory over death: the resurrection of Jesus. Almost at the beginning o f his letter, Peter announces that God “in his great mercy gave us new birth by raising Jesus Christ from the dead” (1:3). By virtue o f their rebirth, Christians have a “living hope, an indestructible, incorruptible, and unfading inheritance” (vv 3-4). Their lives are pointed toward the future and toward “a salvation about to be revealed at the last day” (v 5). The language of “being revealed,” like the language o f “glory,” could suggest that salvation belongs to the ultimate or “imaginary” future, but Peter dispels such a notion by further describing salvation as “the outcome o f your faith” (1:9). “Faith” is to be understood here not as “belief” but as “faithfulness” in the “various ordeals” o f the present that results in “praise, glory, and honor at the time when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:7). Salvation in 1 Peter does not come to us like a package sent from a distant planet but springs from present circumstances, however difficult, and from our obedient response to these circumstances. This be­ comes even clearer in chapter 2, where Peter, changing the metaphor, urges us to “grow up to salvation now that you have tasted that the Lord is good” (2:2-3). Whether seen as the end of a growth process or as the end o f a journey, “salvation” or “vindication” is something toward which we are moving, not something for which we are merely waiting. Christians are “a people destined for vindi­ cation” (2:9). The purpose of Christ’s suffering was to “bring you to G od” (3:18), not just to belief in G od or the knowl­ edge o f God, but to God himself in heaven. Religious people commonly speak o f “going to heaven” when they die, but it is surprising how seldom this expression occurs in the New 67

From Present to Future

Testament. More surprising, the only person actually said to have “gone to heaven” in the New Testament is Jesus himself (1 Pet 3:22; cf. Acts 1:9-11). The only way to “go to heaven” in Peter’s view is to follow Jesus there! The difference between Peter’s view and the popular “religious” view is that for Peter it is not a journey that begins at death. It is a journey that begins the moment a person undertakes to “follow” Jesus as a disciple. The Christian life in 1 Peter is a kind of pilgrimage, like the journey to the heavenly city in the Epistle to the Hebrews (cf. Heb 11:10,14-16; 12:22; 13:14). Peter tells the gentile Christians o f Asia Minor that “you were going astray like sheep, but you have turned now to the Shepherd and Guardian o f your souls” (2:25). They are in the Shepherd’s care, not as those placidly safe in the fold, but as those who will follow the Shepherd wherever he may lead. Their experience closely parallels that of Jesus’ disciples in Mark’s Gospel, to whom Jesus had said that the Scripture, “I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered” (cf. Zech 13:7), was about to be fulfilled, adding that “after I am risen, I will lead you into Galilee” (Mark 14:27-28; cf. 16:7). The “missing link” in the context of 1 Pet 2:25 is any explicit reference to Jesus’ resur­ rection. Jesus is “carrying our sins in his body to the cross” in V 24, and suddenly in v 25 he is very much alive again, welcoming Gentile converts as “the Shepherd and Guardian o f your souls.” The resurrection is clearly implied though not stated. Jesus has to be the risen Shepherd of the sheep (cf. Heb 13:20-21) in order for the disciple’s journey even to begin. In chapter 3 the resurrection of Jesus becomes explicit. Jesus is not only “put to death in the flesh” but is “made alive in the Spirit” (3:18). It is “in that state” (v 19)— as the risen Lord— that he makes his journey to heaven and leads his disciples there. In repentance and faith they experience the cleansing of conscience, “the removal of the filth o f the 1 PETER

68

flesh” (v 21; cf. 1:22; 2 :1 , 11). In baptism they make their appeal to God out of a cleansed conscience and are assured future salvation “through the raising of Jesus Christ” (v 21). If the justice o f the Roman Empire fails them in times of ridicule and persecution, they have the far more secure hope of resurrection and eternal life. Some scholars have drawn from Peter’s emphasis on bap­ tism the conclusion that the entire letter is based on a baptismal sermon or homily preached to new converts and later cast into the form of an epistle. Appeal is made to such phrases as “new birth” (1:3), “purified your souls” (1:22), “bom anew” (1:23), and “newborn babies” (2:2), as well as the single explicit reference to baptism in 3:21. Such an elaborate theory is unlikely. It is more plausible that Peter, because he does not know his distant readers person­ ally, approaches them on the basis of the one thing he knows they have in common with believers in his own congregation— they have believed in Christ and been baptized. Because baptism was the one experience that united all Christians whatever their location or external circum­ stances, it was natural and appropriate for Peter to appeal to baptism in a circular or diaspora letter intended for a large and distant group o f congregations. In Peter’s view, baptism united Christian believers not only with Jesus Christ but with the righteous of Israel’s past, like Noah and his family. With all the people of God, Christian believers now have the hope that “even though condemned in the flesh among people generally, they might live before God in the Spirit” (4:6). The principle that “God is not the God of the dead but of the living” (e.g., Mark 12:27) is here stated another way: God the Judge of both living and dead is the God of both because even the righteous dead will come alive through Jesus Christ (4:5-6). If believers have suf­ fered for doing good, they will “inherit blessing” (3:9) for theirs is the way of “those who love life and see good days” 69

From Present to Future

(3:10). By the power of Jesus’ resurrection, they are called to journey toward “his marvelous light” (2:10), or “his eternal glory—after you have suffered a little” (5:10a), and this se­ cure hope assures them that God will “prepare, support, strengthen, and establish” them in the trials of the present” (5:10b). Like Jesus in the Gospel o f John, Peter assures the faithful that they will not die, but that even if they die at the hands o f their enemies they will live again (cf. John 11:25-26). Victory over demons: the journey to heaven. The most distinctive contribution o f 1 Peter to the Christian hope of vindication is the notion o f Jesus’ victory over demons and the demonic by virtue o f his journey to heaven. In common with Paul and virtually every other early Christian writer, Peter proclaims that Jesus by his resurrection conquered death (cf. the words attributed to Peter at Pentecost in Acts 2:24-32). Peter alone, however, picks up the related thought that Jesus after his resurrection completed the work begun in his public ministry o f subduing “unclean spirits” and set­ ting free those who were demon-possessed (see, e.g., the ac­ counts o f Jesus’ exorcisms in Mark 1:23-27; 5:1-20; and 9:14-29). Without question, confrontation with demons and the demonic was a conspicuous feature o f Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. A s a consequence o f his ministry o f exorcism, Jesus himself was accused of being demon-possessed and o f cast­ ing out demons by the power o f “Beelzebub, the ruler o f demons” (e.g., Mark 3:22). “No one can enter a strong man’s house,” he countered, “unless he first bind the strong man; then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mark 3:27). Jesus’ entire ministry can be regarded as the “binding o f the strong man” (i.e., Beelzebub or Satan) and the “plundering o f his house” (i.e., the freeing of his victims). M odem Christians, even those who are quite conser­ vative in their beliefs, do not find it easy to relate to such features of the Gospel story. In this respect they have ample 1 PETER

70

precedent Even the Gospel o f John ignores the fact that Jesus was an exorcist— though it does cite Jesus as saying, “Now is the judgment o f this world; now is the ruler of this world cast out” (John 12:31; cf. 14:30; 16:11). Although there are hints that Jesus’ followers on occasion cast out de­ mons after his resurrection (Acts 16:16-18), there is little evidence that the practice was encouraged (Acts 19:13-16). Paul does not mention “exorcisms” among the gifts o f the Spirit in 1 Cor 12:8-11; if he endorsed them or knew of them at all, he must have classified them either under “gifts o f healing” or “the working o f miracles” (1 Cor 12:9-10). James seems to remember Gospel stories in which demons recognized the identity o f Jesus (cf., e.g., Mark 1:24; 5:7), but he uses them only to illustrate a point: “Even the demons believe— and shudder” (James 2:19). So far as most o f the New Testament is concerned, the story o f Jesus and the “unclean spirits” is an unfinished story, and most twentiethcentury theologians would be content to leave it that way. 1 Peter is a conspicuous exception. In connection with the traditional belief that Jesus Christ “was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit” (3:18), the author adds that “in that state he went and made proclamation to the spirits in refuge who were disobedient long ago while God was waiting patiently in the days of Noah” (3:19-20a). This is his first explicit reference to Christ’s “journey.” Two verses later he concludes with Jesus “at the right hand of God, now that he has gone to heaven, with angels and authorities and powers in submission to him” (3:22). In both instances the journey is described in relation to certain supernatural beings, first “spirits,” and then “angels and authorities and powers.” The latter expression is universal in scope, like similar phrases in the letters of Paul (e.g., “every ruler and every authority and power” in 1 Cor 15:24, or “the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places” in Eph 3:10; see also Rom 8:38; Eph 1:21, 6:12; Phil 2:10; Col 1:16; 2:10,15). 71

From Present to Future

Like Paul and like the author o f Hebrews, Peter picks up the language of certain biblical psalms to express his belief in the supremacy o f Jesus Christ and the universality of his reign. Just as he uses the language o f Ps 110:1 (“Sit at my right hand”) for Christ’s supremacy, so he adopts that of Ps 8:7 (“You have subjected all things under his feet”) to describe Christ’s universal lordship (cf. the explicit citation o f Ps 8:7 to much the same effect in Heb 2:5-9 and by Paul in 1 Cor 15:27). Paul had used the two texts in a similar way in Eph 1:20,22, where God is said to have made Christ “sit at his right hand in heavenly places” (Eph 1:20) and “subjected all things under his feet” (1:22). “All things” are defined in the context as “every ruler and authority and power and dominion and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come” (1:21). Without an actual cita­ tion o f the text or even an explicit allusion, Peter makes the same point: Christ’s rule is universal. Nothing and no one stands outside or beyond the reach of his sovereign rule and his righteous judgment. The outer limits o f Christ’s rule are typified by “the spir­ its in refuge who were disobedient long ago . . . in the days o f Noah” (3:19-20). These “disobedient spirits” of 1 Peter are best understood as corresponding to the demons or “un­ clean spirits” of the Gospel tradition. The reference to their disobedience, in fact, is Peter’s explanation of the origin of demons. Like the authors o f the Jewish apocalypse known as 1 Enoch, Peter views these “spirits” as offspring o f the un­ godly union described in Gen 6:1-4 between the “sons o f G od” and the “daughters o f men”: “But now the giants who are bom from [the union of] spirits and the flesh shall be called evil spirits upon the earth. . . . They will become evil upon the earth and shall be called evil spirits” (1 Enoch 15.8-10). Peter links these spirits with Noah and the flood (3:20), apparently on the assumption that their disobedience

1 PETER

72

“while God was waiting patiently” was what brought the floodwaters over the earth “in the days o f Noah.” The spirits in 1 Peter are not in “prison” (see above, p. 22) but in “refuge,” like the evil spirits inhabiting doomed Baby­ lon according to Rev 18:2.5 What would it mean, after all, to bring evil spirits into subjection to Christ if they were already “in prison”? Even Jesus, during his earthly ministry, had given the legion of “unclean spirits” a refuge, according to Mark 5:10-13, by allowing them to enter the bodies of two thou­ sand pigs! The purpose of his proclamation in 1 Peter is not to release the spirits from prison— this would be anything but “good news”!—but to notify them that whatever refuges or safe havens they may have once enjoyed are no longer safe. Now at last they must prepare to yield to Christ’s universal lordship (cf. 3:22). The key term in this passage is not “in refuge” but “dis­ obedient” These spirits were “disobedient” in Noah’s time just as the troublemakers in the Roman Empire are said to be “disobedient” to the Gospel of Jesus Christ in Peter’s day (cf. Peter’s use of the same word in 2 :8 ,3:1, and 4:17). This is the reason they have a place in Peter’s letter. 1 Pet 3:18-22 is not a digression but an integral part o f his argument. The point is not that demons “symbolize” or represent the slanderers, the cruel slaveowners, or the unbelieving husbands who were causing trouble in various ways for the Christians of Asia Minor. Nor is it that these troublemakers are literally demonpossessed. The point is rather that if Christ could bring the notorious “disobedient spirits” o f Noah’s time under subjec­ tion, he can and will do the same to the human troublemakers who oppose the Christian gospel. No evil person or group, no social or political entity, however powerful it may be or however threatening to Christian believers, stands outside Christ’s universal dominion. With “angels and authorities and powers in submission to him” (3:22), there is nothing for

73

From Present to Future

Christians to fear either in the household or in the market­ place or in the courts (cf. 3 :6 , 13). Jesus Christ is Lord of all. Peter is not interested in the phenomenon o f “demon possession” in the strict sense, for he has broadened the definition o f the demonic to include “disobedience” to God wherever it is found.6 He leaves open the question whether the taming or subjection o f disobedient powers is an aspect o f redemption or o f judgm ent Those “disobeying the word” will “stumble,” he says, just as they were “appointed” to do (2:8), and he asks rhetorically, “W hat will be the end o f those who are disobedient to the gospel o f God?” (4:17). Yet the possibility remains that husbands, for example, who are “disobedient to the word might be won over by their wives’ conduct” (3:1). It is fair to assume that Peter leaves the door open in a similar way for troublemakers generally. It is possi­ ble either that those who “accuse you o f doing wrong . . . may, from observing your good works, glorify God on the day o f visitation” (2:12) or that, if they continue to “de­ nounce your good conduct in Christ,” they will end up being “put to shame” by divine judgment at the last day (3:16). Either way, Christians will be vindicated against their enemies just as certainly and decisively as Christ was vindi­ cated in his confrontation with the “disobedient spirits” from the time o f Noah. Because o f this, there is no reason to be contentious. Victory and vindication are assured. The proper stance of the Christian is “good conduct” (2:12; 3 :1 -2 ,6; 3:16) after the example o f Jesus himself (2:21-23). Respect and kindness even toward enemies and nonretaliation in the face o f insult and injury (3:9) is an attitude that for Peter arises not out o f weakness but out o f strength and out o f the conviction that through the resurrection and heavenly journey o f Jesus Christ victory is assured. To say that victory is assured, how­ ever, is not the same as saying that victory is already won. Nothing in Jesus’ proclamation to the “disobedient spirits” 1 PETER

74

prevents Peter from sounding an alarm to his readers a chap­ ter and a half later: “Pay attention! Wake up! Your opponent, the devil, is on the move like a roaring lion ready to swallow [his prey]. Resist him, firm in faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being accomplished in your brother­ hood throughout the world” (1 Pet 5:8-9). This passage raises at least two questions. First, why is the devil not included with the “disobedient spirits” and all the “angels, authorities and powers” brought under subjec­ tion to Christ? Second, if the devil is “on the move like a roaring lion,” how do we “resist” him while at the same time practicing nonresistance toward his human agents? The an­ swer to the first question is that Christ’s victory over the spirits by virtue o f his journey to heaven is Peter’s “vision.” It is not something self-evident in everyday experience or in the state o f the world as Peter perceived it— or as we perceive it, even with the “eyes o f faith.” Almost a century after Peter, an early Christian Gnostic was so carried away with the notion of Christ’s victorious journey that he wrote, “We suffered with him, and we rose with him, and we went to heaven with him”7 but Peter himself never goes go this far. Although Christ is victorious over the powers of evil in principle, his victory has yet to be realized in the “bent world,” the world we actually live in, “seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil.”8 In such a world it is by no means surprising that the devil is “on the move like a roaring lion, ready to swallow his prey.” 1 Peter from beginning to end presupposes the devil’s activity, even while attempting to put it within the larger perspective o f the glory of God. He acknowledges that “now for a little you must suffer affliction” (1:6) and holds out the hope of eternal glory “after you have suffered a little” (5:10). The 75

From Present to Future

devil’s rage and the suffering it brings are insignificant in comparison to Christ’s victory (cf. Rom 8:18,2 Cor 4:17), yet it is real, and Peter does not make the mistake of ignoring it. T he second question is, “How do we ‘resist’ the devil?” Peter’s advice corresponds closely to that o f James (“Resist the devil and he will flee from you,” James 4:7) or to that of Paul in Ephesians: “Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might. Put on the full armor of God so that you may stand against the tricks o f the devil. . . . Wear the full armor of God so as to resist in the evil day, and when you have done all this, to stand” (Eph 6:10-11,13). In none o f these passages is it possible to equate “resistance” to the devil with resistance to our human adversaries. Paul explicitly cau­ tions that “our warfare is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the world powers o f this darkness, against the spiritual forces o f evil in heavenly places” (Eph 6:12). When Jesus warned his disci­ ples “not to resist the evil one,” his accompanying illustra­ tions make it clear that he was referring not to the devil but to specific human enemies (Matt 5:39-42). The devil is to be resisted under all circumstances! Flannery O ’Connor says of a character in one of her novels that he is “of the Devil because nothing in him resists the Devil. There’s not much use to distinguish between them.”9 Religious fanaticism comes into being as soon as we identify our enemies with the devil simplistically and without qualifica­ tion. The fanatic sees evil only as something outside himself, never as something within himself. Peter does not make this mistake. Despite the parallel between the “disobedient spirits” and the enemies of Christianity in the Roman Empire, the devil in 1 Peter is “on the move like a roaring lion” not merely in the mischief wrought by these enemies but in the tendency of Christian believers themselves to deny or compromise their faith under pressure. To be “swallowed” by the devil is not to be slandered, harmed, or even killed by troublemakers or by 1 PETER

76

the Roman authorities. It is rather to give up one’s faith. No one is ever “swallowed” by the devil except by one’s own consent. When Peter says, “Resist him, firm in faith” (5:9), the second phrase interprets the first. We resist the devil not by engaging in hostile action against anyone but by trusting God. Peter says, “Humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, and when it is time he will lift you up. All your anxiety throw on him, for he cares about you” (5:6-7). James says, “Submit yourselves, therefore, to God. As you resist the devil, he will run from you” (James 4:7-8). The two commands amount to much the same thing for our relation to the devil— and to our enemies—is determined by our relationship to God. The only way to fight evil is to “do good.” Peter’s counsel echoes that of the Apostle Paul: “Do not be overcome with evil, but overcome evil with good” (Rom 12:21). When called upon to suffer for their faith and hope, Christian believers must never “be ashamed” but must “glorify God” and “entrust their lives to the faithful creator in the doing of good” (1 Pet 4:16,19). This is how they follow Jesus Christ in his journey to heaven and his victory over the demonic world. M inistering in the fam ily of God Not all of 1 Peter is occupied with the individual in relation to God, the devil, and human enemies. The Christian life is more than the achievement of individuals following Christ in the way of discipleship. It is a life lived in community. Peter’s principal metaphor for this life together is that o f the family. Besides “reverence” toward God” and “respect” for everyone, including the emperor, it is necessary to have “love for the brotherhood” (1 Pet 2:17). The entire letter, in fact, is written to the Christians of Asia Minor on behalf of “your brother­ hood throughout the world” (5:9). The Christian community, whether local or worldwide, is a brother-and-sisterhood. The key to “facing outward” as witnesses for Christ to a hostile 77

From Present to Future

world is “facing inward” toward one another in love and mu­ tual ministry. The very purpose of new life in Christ is “for pure brotherly affection” so that believers might “love one another unremittingly from the heart” (1:22). To be sure, the family or household is not Peter’s only image for the Christian community. A cluster o f other im­ ages, mostly ethnic or political and all derived from a sense o f identity with Israel and the Jews, can be found in chapter 2. Christian believers corporately are “a chosen race, the King’s priesthood, a holy nation. . . . G od’s people” (2:910). Yet these metaphors do not illuminate the way in which Christians are to treat one another. They are di­ rected toward the worship o f G od and witness for G od in a hostile world (“to offer up spiritual sacrifices. . . . To sound the praises o f him who called you out o f darkness into his marvelous light,” 2 :5 , 9), not toward the responsi­ bility o f love, mutual support, and mutual ministry within the worshiping congregation. For this aspect, Peter prefers the metaphor o f the family or household, a sphere o f life in which he has already shown interest in connection with the hostility and tension faced by Christian slaves (2:21-25) and Christian wives (3:1-6). Yet, for the most part in 1 Peter, the scene o f Christian love in action is not the actual household but the worshiping congregation (4:7-11; 5:1-5). The household is more often a mission field, a place where be­ lief confronts unbelief (3:1-6), than a place o f prayer and mutual ministry based on a common faith. Ministry in the household Only very briefly, addressing Christian husbands in 3:7, does Peter afford himself a glimpse o f what marriage can be­ come when both husband and wife are believers. The brief reference is obviously not an adequate basis for a full-orbed view of Christian marriage, nor is it intended as such. Peter 1 PETER

78

says nothing about children, as Paul does (however briefly) in Eph 6:1-4 and Col 3:20-21. He has no word about divorce and no advice for single parents. He is interested only in the way a Christian husband should treat his wife. Ordinarily in Roman society he could expect that his wife would become a Christian too if she was not one already, but he must be wise enough to leave the choice to her. He “must know how to live with a woman” whoever she may be and whatever her faith. He must show her “respect,” or “honor,” as “somebody weaker”—weaker physically, Peter assumes, but also weaker in terms o f prestige and power in the society. Weakness does not normally bring a person “respect” or “honor” in any culture. Quite the contrary. We would have expected him to say, “Respect your wife despite her weak­ ness,” not because o f it. Peter, however, is already presup­ posing a distinctly Christian vision o f weakness and power, in which G od honors and exalts those who are— or make themselves— “last” or “least” in the eyes o f the world (cf., e.g., Jesus’ teaching in Mark 9 :3 3 -3 7 ,10:42-45; M att 18:1— 4; also Paul in 1 C or 12:22-24). W hat is true in the sight o f G od must be true as well among the people o f God. The “respect” and “honor” a woman lacked in Rom an society could be and should be hers from her Christian husband. Obviously, Peter could just as easily have said “Husbands, love your wives,” as Paul did in Eph 5:25 and C ol 3:19, but he does not. He limits himself to the more formal and im­ personal term, “respect” or “honor,” possibly because he is looking more at the social roles in marriage than at the personal relationships between a husband and a wife. “Love” (Greek, agapao) is a verb that Peter reserves for all Chris­ tians in relation to all other Christians—viewed as one’s “brothers” and “sisters”— in the Christian community. He never uses it in relation to one’s “neighbors” in Roman society or one’s “enemies,” nor does he use it for specific relationships such as that o f a wife to her husband or a 79

From Present to Future

husband to his wife. “Love” among Christians is for “one another” (1:22, 4:8) without distinction or discrimination. The household in the Roman Empire was an institution intended to support and undergird the authority o f the state and the emperor. Households were viewed by Roman philosophers as the very fabric o f the empire, just as today the strength o f families is widely viewed as the key to the strength: o f America. Peter, however, saw the family poten­ tially, if not actually, as a safeguard against the abuses and shortcomings that he saw as all too prevalent in the empire. If to Roman philosophers it was a kind o f empire in minia­ ture, Peter wanted it to function as a church in miniature. He knew it did not always do so— often because the hus­ band was not a believer— yet the family becomes his model for the worshiping and ministering congregation. W hen both husband and wife are Christian believers, they are “co-heirs o f the grace o f life,” and Peter is confident that their “prayers will not be hindered” (3:7b). He does not labor the point, but one suspects Peter might have agreed with Clement o f Alexandria in the third century, who, in interpreting Matt 18:20, asked, “But who are the two or three gathered in the name o f Christ in whose midst the Lord is? Does he not by the ‘three’ mean husband, wife and child?”10 Peter expresses himself somewhat differently, but his point is much the same. It is not the presence of the Holy Spirit or the risen Lord that interests him, but “grace,” specifically the “grace o f life” that belongs to the future, yet decisively shapes Christian households and congregations even in the present. Peter designates Christian husbands and their wives as “co-heirs” o f this grace prophesied long ago by the prophets (1:10) and still waiting “to be brought to you when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:13). Peter comes back again and again to this “grace” operative in advance in varied forms in the ministry and worship o f the congregations to 1 PETER

80

which he writes (4:10, 5:5), and even in his own ministry of letter writing to those same congregations (5:12). Ministry in the congregation The proper sphere of ministry in 1 Peter, as in the New Testament generally, is the “church” or worshiping congrega­ tion. Although the actual word “church” (Greek, ekklesia) never occurs in this letter, the ministry of Christian believers to one another in worship assemblies is described twice, in 1 Pet 4:7-11 and 5:1-5. The difference between the two pas­ sages is that in the first Peter assumes the equality of all mem­ bers in the congregation, with each ministering to the others on the basis of the spiritual gifts he or she has received (4:7— 11; cf. Paul in 1 Cor 12:4-11; 14:26-33; and Rom 12:3-8), while in the second Peter distinguishes clearly between “elders” and “You . . . who are younger,” addressing each in turn but emphasizing throughout the responsibility of the “elders” to exercise leadership over the congregation (5:1-5; cf. 1 Tim 3:1-13; 5:17-22). It is natural to ask how Peter is able to reconcile in his mind these two very different perspec­ tives on Christian ministry, but this question can be answered only after each has been examined in its own context. Mutual ministries. Peter’s depiction of Christian ministry in 4:7-11 is governed by the firm conviction that “The end o f all things is near” (v 7)— the same conviction that governs everything he writes. If individual discipleship is a journey in the footsteps of Jesus Christ toward heaven and the future, Christian life in community is a life shaped by an awareness that G od’s future is breaking into the present. Only by look­ ing together toward that future is it possible to work effec­ tively as the people o f God. Peter attempts to build community in these distant con­ gregations not “horizontally,” by turning the eyes o f Chris­ tians toward each other, but “vertically,” by fixing their 81

From Present to Future

attention on G od and what G od intends. W hen he tells them to “Prepare yourselves mentally, therefore, and attend to prayers” (4:7b), he is simply reiterating what he had said in chapter 1: “Gird yourselves for action, therefore, in your mind, and with full attention set your hope on the grace to be brought to you when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:13). Peter would have appreciated Augustine’s comparison o f two Christian believers united in the love o f Christ with two eyes in a single body. Like a person’s eyes, they are separate and do not look at each other, yet are focused together on God as the object o f their common vision. “To­ gether they meet in one object,” Augustine wrote, “together they are directed to one object; their aim is one, their places diverse.”11 W hat is true for two people is just as true for whole communities o f believers. They will find unity not by self-consciously trying to “relate” to each other, but by looking together in prayer and hope toward the God who called them and for whom they live. Within this community, Peter knows no hierarchy. All Christian believers are to have love “for each other” (4:8), practice hospitality “toward one another” (4:9), and be minis­ ters “to each other” (4:10). Love is the dominant command here, as everywhere else in the New Testament, and love is focused in 1 Peter specifically on those who share a common faith in God through Jesus Christ (cf. the perspective of John’s Gospel and epistles, as, e.g., in John 13:34; 15:12; 1 John 4 :7 , 11,21; 2 John 5). Mutual hospitality and ministry are but the concrete expressions of mutual love. Before love can lead to ministry, however, or to hospitality toward those who min­ ister, it must lead to mutual forgiveness. The first thing Peter says about love is that it “covers many sins” (v 8b). He is not referring to the illegitimate concealment of wrongdoing but to forgiveness in the context o f a community of believers. Peter is recognizing and emphasizing the social character o f most o f the sins that Christians commit. What we do ordinarily 1 PETER

82

affects those we love, for good or ill—both our actual family members and the members of our new family in Christ. Sins committed in—or against—the community of faith must find forgiveness and cleansing in that same community. Internal or individual “sins of the heart” do not come into the picture here. Only in a communal setting of mutual love does Peter envision a realization of the ideal expressed elsewhere in his letter o f “having parted with . . . sins” (2:24) or being “through with sin” (4:1) as a result o f the death of Jesus Christ. Hospitality was a virtue of great importance in the Roman church. Both Paul (Rom 12:13) and the author of Hebrews (Heb 13:2) had urged the Roman Christians to practice it, while Clement, a Roman elder near the end of the first cen­ tury, held up Abraham, Lot, and Rahab as classic biblical ex­ amples o f this virtue to the church at Corinth (1 Clem. 10-12). Peter too lists mutual hospitality (4:9) as an appropri­ ate expression o f Christian love. He shows little evidence of firsthand knowledge of the Asian congregations to which he writes, but he does know they are widely scattered, probably not affluent, and therefore dependent on the generosity and good will of their members. Hospitality among Christians in the first century was not a matter o f courtesy or etiquette but o f survival. Within particular congregations, it was necessary that some be will­ ing to open their homes as house churches (cf. Rom 16:5,1 Cor 16:19, and in Asia Minor Col 4:15 and Phlm 2). Among the various congregations, it was necessary that itinerant prophets and teachers, as well as messengers from one con­ gregation to another, be welcomed, fed, and lodged (cf. 3 John 5-8; also the extensive discussion in the second cen­ tury in the Didache, chs 11-13). Knowing that the well­ being o f the Christian movement in Asia Minor, and o f the individual congregations that comprised it, depended on hospitality, Peter singles out this virtue as the simplest and most basic expression o f mutual love. Because he also knew 83

From Present to Future

that hospitality was sometimes taken for granted or abused by those receiving it, he adds that it should be given “without complaining.” For himself, his unstated hope is that the hospitality o f his readers might include the warm reception of his letter and of Silvanus, the messenger who will deliver it (5:12). For the present, however, he leaves himself out o f it and is content to urge on his readers hospi­ tality “toward one another” in general rather than specific or personal terms. It is a responsibility incumbent on all, a ministry in which everyone participates. Other ministries depend on “spiritual gifts” (Greek, charisma, 4:10). Peter assumes that the congregations to which he is writing are “charismatic” in much the same sense as the congregations established by Paul (e.g., at Thessalonica and Corinth). Yet he does not attempt to list a whole range o f “gifts of the Spirit,” as Paul does in 1 Cor 12. He does not even call them “gifts o f the Spirit” or mention the Holy Spirit at all in this connection. Peter may have taken his cue from Paul himself, who in a more simplified list o f gifts in his letter to the congregations at Rome had also omitted any reference to the Spirit (cf. Rom 12:6-8). It cannot be inferred, therefore, that Peter saw no link be­ tween the Spirit and the work of ministry in the local con­ gregation. If the Spirit was at work in the ancient prophets (1:11), in the evangelization and consecration of new con­ verts throughout the Roman Empire (1 :2 ,12), and in the testimony of Christians to those who ridiculed and harassed them (4:14), it would be natural to find the Spirit introduced in connection with the ministry of believers to one another. A possible reason why Peter does not mention the Spirit explicitly is that he does not view the Spirit as an independ­ ent entity in quite the way Paul does, but more as a pointer to something (or Someone) else. The Spirit in 1 Peter is the “spirit of Christ” (1:11) or “the Spirit o f G od” or o f G od’s

1 PETER

84

glory (4:14). For the translator, it is even difficult to know when the term should be capitalized and when not. In the present passage, “God” and not “Spirit” is said to be the source and power behind all the varied ministries in the Christian congregation, and “God” is also the one to whom all ministries are accountable. Such expressions as “God’s diversified grace” (4:10), “words from G od,” “strength that God provides,” and “so that in all things God may be glori­ fied” (4:11) contribute to a remarkable God-centeredness in these brief directives of Peter to a typical congregation. God is above all the author of “grace” (Greek, charis). The future “grace to be brought to you when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:13), the grace of which Christian women and men are “co­ heirs” (3:7), is here seen as “diversified,” operating in advance in the words and deeds with which Christian believers minis­ ter to one another. It is at once the object of future hope and the core of present experience and practice. Peter makes no attempt to classify the varied gifts o f G od to the people o f God. He is content to divide them into gifts o f speaking (“as . . . words from G od”) and o f serving (“out o f strength that G od provides”). Under the first heading come the gifts o f tongues, prophecy, exhortation, and teach­ ing, while the second might include healing, helping the poor, administration, settling disputes, and supervising cor­ porate worship. A t the end o f his letter (5:12) Peter sees himself and the letter he has just written within this frame­ work o f mutual ministry. 1 Peter itself is described as “true grace from G od.” Peter asks to be accepted by his readers as part o f their extended congregation. He too is a “good man­ ager of G od’s diversified grace,” and his written words, like words spoken in their worship assemblies, cry out to be received and welcomed as “words from G od.” H is expecta­ tion was that his letter would be actually read aloud in their congregations assembled for worship and mutual ministry

85

From Present to Future

(cf. Paul’s expectation according to Col 4:16). The conclud­ ing salutation in 1 Pet 5:12-14 could have appropriately followed the summary o f ministries in 4:7-11 in a smooth and natural sequence. The summary ends with a doxology (v 11b), as if Peter is about to bring his letter to a conclusion. This is not the case, however, in the letter as it stands. Peter has more to say on the subject o f ministry in the family of God, and he will say it in the intervening chapter. The ministry of elders. The address, “Dear friends,” in 4:12 introduces a new major section of 1 Peter (4:12-5:11) with its own perspective on ministry (5:1-5) and its own doxology at the end (5.1 0 -11). O ur expectation is that he is going to say, “Dear friends, I appeal to you,” just as he had done two chapters earlier (in 2:11). Instead, he postpones the “appeal” until 5:1, and when it comes it is an appeal not to all believers indiscriminately but to “any elders among you.” In mentioning “elders,” Peter discloses an aspect of Christian ministry which he had not even hinted at in 4:711. Elders in the ancient church seem to have been the first converts to Christianity in any given city or geographical area. In some instances they were given positions o f respon­ sibility in the congregation on the basis o f their seniority. Although Paul mentions and gives credit to Epaenetus, “the first convert in Asia for Christ” (Rom 16:5), and to the household o f Stephanas as “the first converts in Achaia” (or Greece), he nowhere refers to “elders” in his earlier letters. Only in the Book o f Acts (14:23; 20:17) and in the Pastoral letters (1 Tim 5 :1 -2 , 1 7 , 19; T it 1:5) are elders explicitly asso­ ciated with churches established by Paul (for other churches, cf. James 5:14). Peter’s apparent assumption in writing 1 Peter is that some o f the distant congregations that will read his letter are ruled by elders and some are not. He therefore includes both an “all-purpose” section on mutual ministry (4:7-11) and a section geared specifically toward congregations in which 1 PETER

86

pastoral responsibility rests with a group o f elders. The prin­ ciples o f love, hospitality, and ministry expressed in 4:7-11 are applicable everywhere in light o f the conviction that “the end o f all things is near” (4:7), but in congregations ruled by elders the demands o f the time place a special burden on them. It is not a matter o f hierarchy but of de facto responsi­ bility. In describing the “fiery ordeal” facing the people of God, Peter states that it is “time for the judgment to begin from the house of God” (4:17). His language draws on the imagery o f Ezek 9:6, where the judgment o f God began not only from the “sanctuary,” or temple o f G od in Jerusalem, but “from the men who were elders, inside the house.” This imagery, suggested to him perhaps by the recent destruction o f Jerusalem and its temple by Roman armies, provides the occasion and opportunity to focus on Christian “elders” and their responsibility in a comparable crisis. 1 Pet 4:12-19 thus serves as the indispensable setting for Peter’s directives to “any elders among you” in 5:1-5. Peter writes to them as their “fellow elder” (5:1), perhaps because he was himself an elder of the Roman church but more likely as one of the founders of the Christian move­ ment generally (cf. “apostle of Jesus Christ” in 1 Pet 1:1). A s an authority figure in the movement, his concern is not to assert that authority over the elders o f Asia Minor but to establish common ground with them. His approach is remi­ niscent o f John’s approach to his readers in Rev 1:9 as “your brother and companion in the suffering and kingdom and patient endurance that are ours in Jesus.” If every Christian believer is a “witness to the sufferings of Christ” and a “sharer as well in the glory to be revealed” (5:1), then elders in the congregations have this responsibility and this privi­ lege in double measure, and so too does Peter.12 The form of Peter’s advice to elders in 5:1-5 recalls the form o f the household duty codes in 2:18-25 and 3:1-7, ex­ cept that here he begins not with those who are subservient 87

From Present to Future

but with those in positions of leadership and in fact concen­ trates most of his attention on them. In the Greco-Roman household, Peter was concerned with those who were subor­ dinate and powerless. In the case of slaves and slaveowners he addressed eight verses to slaves and none to their owners. In the case of wives and husbands he addressed six verses to wives and only one to husbands. In the Christian congrega­ tion, or “household of G od,” Peter is more concerned with those in power, for their leadership and example will be a key factor in the congregation’s response to the “fiery ordeal” (4:12) and the threat of “your opponent, the devil . . . on the move like a roaring lion” (5:8). He therefore devotes four verses to “elders,” just half a verse (5:5a) to “younger ones,” and a final half verse (5:5b) to the mutual responsibilities of both groups. These directives to elders in Asia Minor recall the farewell speech o f Paul in the Book o f Acts to the elders of Ephesus at the port o f Miletus (Acts 20:17-38). Paul had said, “Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock in which the Holy Spirit has made you guardians. Be shepherds to the church of God, which he bought with his own blood” (Acts 20:28). Peter, in the same vein, urges the elders, “Shepherd the flock o f God that is in your care” (1 Pet 5:2a), adding that these pastoral duties must be performed “not out of compulsion but willingly before G od” (v 2b). The contrast is not between duty and free choice, but between a sense o f duty based on one’s own ego and a sense o f duty based on the will o f God. Peter knows that the human ego is by far the more severe taskmaster, and the experience o f too many ministers today bears him out. Possibly he speaks out o f his own experience. In any event he wants the ministry o f elders to be a free and joyful response to the love o f God, not a compulsive act of self-gratification. Because money is the commonest measure o f self-gratification, he adds that greed cannot and must not be their motivation. They must 1 PETER

88

minister to their people “not greedily but with enthusiasm” (v 2c). Their incentive “before G od” must come from within— from their own hearts and wills— not from the anticipation of material rewards. Most important o f all, elders must not “lord it over your respective congregations, but be examples to the flock” (5:3). Peter himself has set the example. He does not lord it over them by “talking down” to them as an apostle— his initial self-identification as “apostle o f Jesus Christ” in 1:1 was suf­ ficient to make the point—but as their “fellow elder” (5:1) makes them his peers and colleagues. Their responsibility is to treat the congregations under their care in the same way. Peter also has in mind the model o f Christian leadership that Jesus held before his disciples as they approached Jerusalem. Perhaps he is remembering Jesus’ words as recorded in Mark: “You know that those considered rulers among the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. That is not how it is among you: who­ ever wants to be great among you will be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you will be the slave of all” (Mark 10:42-44). Peter is not quite so radical in addressing the elders of Asia Minor as Jesus had been with him and the other disciples. He does not tell the elders they have to be “slaves.” Yet the principle is the same. If the elders want their people to be “servants” o f God and of Jesus Christ (cf. 2:16), they themselves must be “examples” o f servanthood, not of power or self-assertion. The accent on servanthood guarantees that the principle o f mutuality expressed in 1 Pet 4:7-11 is not violated in 5:1-5. A s soon as he tells the “younger” (i.e., the members of each congregation) to “defer to the authority o f elders,” Pe­ ter hastens to add, “All of you with each other, then, clothe yourselves with humility, for God ‘opposes the arrogant, but gives grace to the humble’ ” (5:5). Nor has Peter forgotten that the “end o f all things is near” (4:7). W hen he promises 89

From Present to Future

to faithful elders an “unfading crown o f glory” at the time the “chief shepherd” appears (v 4), he is not promising them anything different from the hope held out to every genuine believer in Christ. The “crown” has nothing to do with the authority to rule, but is more like a victor's wreath made from an unfading flower known as the “amaranth.” It repre­ sents “praise, glory, and honor at the time when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:7) and is simply another expression for the “living hope,” or the “indestructible, incorruptible, and unfading inheritance reserved in heaven” for all who love Christ and await his coming. Elders gain their “crown” in the same way as everyone else in the congregation, by doing what they were called to do (cf. 2:21,3:9). To “elder” and “younger” alike, Jesus Christ will come as “chief shepherd,” for all have shared in the common experi­ ence of “going astray like sheep” and all have “turned now to the Shepherd and Guardian o f your souls” (2:25). No room is left for the pride o f one group over against the other. Only in showing humility toward one another, Peter implies, is it pos­ sible to “humble yourselves under the mighty hand o f God” (5:6). Without such humility, we would be bowing down to a mere abstraction. God, the God o f the future, is most real to us now in the persons o f those involved with us in the family of God and engaged with us in the work o f ministry: our husbands, our wives, our children and our parents, our “elders” and our “flock.” Whether in the literal household or in the metaphorical “brotherhood” o f Christian believers, we find ourselves poised between present and future. We are accountable to the Christ, the “chief shepherd,” when he comes, and because we are, we are accountable to each other even now. We draw consolation from “the God of all grace” in the hope that “when it is time he will lift you up” and will “prepare, sup­ port, strengthen and establish” us (5:6,10). In the meantime, Peter’s vision is of Christians doing these things for one 1 PETER

90

another in the ministry o f elders and in the varied ministries of all who exercise their spiritual gifts “as good managers of God’s diversified grace” (4:10). If we are involved individually in a pilgrimage in the footsteps of Jesus Christ to the throne o f God, we are corporately the recipients o f God’s future grace at work even now in the family o f God. In one sense we are moving toward the future on the dangerous path o f discipleship in a hostile world. In another sense that same future comes to us, for Peter sees its dawning in the shared life and worship and the mutual ministries of Christian households and congregations.

91

From Present to Future

5

TH E FUTURE: W HEN FAITH BECOM ES SIGH T

The preceding chapter was a long one because present and future are so dynamically intertwined in Peter’s thought and language. Throughout most of 1 Peter the future is a “forthcoming” future—to use Bruce Malina’s terminology once again—not an “imaginary” future.1 Either the future grows inevitably out of the present circumstances of Christian discripleship, or else it makes itself evident in advance in the present circumstances of Christian ministry and worship. But what of the “imaginary” future in 1 Peter? In the first place, there is reason to quarrel with the term. Though Peter knows of an ultimate and truly final future to the plan of God, he in no way regards it as “imaginary.” On the contrary, he seems consciously to curb his imagination so as to speak of the ulti­ mate future only with the greatest caution and restraint. The revelation Peter takes deeply to heart a traditional saying o f un­ known origin: “The eye has not seen, the ear has not heard, 93

The Future: When Faith Becomes Sight

nor has it come up in the human heart what God has pre­ pared for those who love him.” Paul had quoted this saying in 1 Cor 2:9, adding as his own comment, “But God has revealed it to us by the Spirit” (v 10). To Paul the traditional saying refers to “God’s hidden wisdom” (v 7), the mystery of the cross o f Christ. Peter, like several other early Christian writers,2 applies it instead to the unseen and unimagined future in store for believers in Jesus Christ. The decisive “revelation” in 1 Peter is future, not present. The time “when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1 Pet 1 :7 ,13) or “when his glory is revealed” (4:13,5.1 ) is the object o f hope, just beyond the horizons o f present experience. Even salvation is not yet our full possession but is something “about to be revealed at the last day” (1:5). All these things, as pointed out in the preceding chapter, belong to the “forthcoming” future. Peter sees intimations of the future “glory” even in the most distressing of present circumstances (4:14). Christians already are following in the footsteps of the unseen Christ to the cross and to heaven (2:21, 3:18). The process of “growing up to salvation” (2:2) is well under way. Yet there is also a measure o f reserve about Peter’s vision of the future that is not characteristic of most of the “revelatory” or “apocalyptic” literature in Judaism and early Christianity. In certain respects the future remains “imaginary,” but because Peter is not so bold as to “imagine” it in all its visible splendor— as John does, for example, in Rev 21-22—he leaves it a mystery. The notion o f a future “time when Jesus Christ is revealed (1:7,13) implies that for now he is invisible even to those who believe: “You have never seen him, but you love him. Even now, without seeing, you believe in him” (1:8). He who “appeared in the last of the ages for your sake” (1:20) has disappeared again from human view, having “gone to heaven” and taken his place “at the right hand of God” (3:22). The great future hope in 1 Peter is not so much for a “coming” o f the Christ who is distant as for a 1 PETER

94

“revealing” or “unveiling” o f the Christ now hidden from our eyes.3 In that “revealing” will be found the fullness of the “grace” now experienced in bits and pieces (1:13; cf. 4:10) and the full realization of “praise, glory, and honor” for those who had been faithful in moments of trial (1:7; cf. 4:14). Peter never ventures to explain or describe what this will mean concretely for those who await this “revelation.” A ll that matters is that they will see the Christ whom they now love and worship in faith. The hope o f Christians in 1 Peter is not unlike the hope expressed by the author o f 1 John: “Beloved, now we are God’s children, and what we shall be­ come has not yet been disclosed. We only know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he really is” (1 John 3:2). The accent on “revelation” is a notable feature o f apocalyp­ tic writings. “Apocalypse,” in fact, means “revelation.” Peter’s vision o f the future is in some respects reminiscent of con­ temporary Jewish and Christian apocalypses, and in other respects quite different. In the Jewish apocalypse o f 4 Ezra, dating from a generation or two after 1 Peter, God promises that “the time will come when . . . the city which now is not seen shall appear, and the land which is now hidden shall be disclosed. And everyone who has been delivered from the evils that I have foretold shall see my wonders. For my son the Messiah shall be revealed with those who are with him” (4 Ezra 7.28; cf. 12.32; 13.26,32).4 According to another pas­ sage, “Just as no one can explore or know what is in the depths o f the sea, so no one on earth can see my son or those who are with him, except in the time of his day” (4 Ezra 13.52). The apocalypse known as 2 Baruch speaks o f a heavenly temple which is not “this building that is in your midst now” but “that which will be revealed, with me, that which was already prepared from the moment I decided to create Paradise” (2 Bar 4.2-3). It also promises faithful Jews that they will “see that world which is now invisible to them, 95

The Future: When Faith Becomes Sight

and they will see a time which is now hidden to them” (51.8). When God establishes an eternal kingdom in this new world, “then joy will be revealed and rest will appear” (73.1). 1 Peter shares with these apocalyptic writings an interest in that which is “revealed” at the last day, but differs from them in two ways. First, the apocalyptic visions contemplate the revealing not just of a person—the Messiah, or deliverer of the people of God—but a whole mythology: a “city,” a “land,” a “temple,” indeed a new “world.” In 1 Peter it is Jesus Christ and him alone who is revealed. Peter leaves the rest to the imaginations of his readers. Second, in apocalyptic lit­ erature, whether Jewish or Christian, the “revelation” is not only future but present as well. The very genre of the work is based on the assumption that the prophet or seer who is writing has already been granted a supernatural glimpse of the wonderful things to come. Indeed, the author of 2 Baruch addresses God as “the one who reveals to those who fear that which is prepared for them so that you may comfort them. You show your mighty works to those who do not know. You pull down the enclosure for those who have no experience and enlighten the darkness, and reveal the secrets to those who are spotless, to those who subjected themselves to you and your Law in faith” (2 Bar 54.4-5). In 1 Peter, by contrast, Jesus Christ and he alone is “re­ vealed.” At most, Peter can speak of “glory” or “salvation” or “joy” being revealed along with Christ, but there is no city, no temple, no visions of a land or a new world. Peter, moreover, does not take on himself the role of a prophet or seer who is privileged to see the “revelation” in advance.5 If he is indeed Peter, he has seen the earthly Jesus, but, in regard to Jesus as he will be “revealed” at the last day, Peter has no edge on his readers. What he says to them he could just as easily have said to himself: “You have never seen him, but you love him. Even now, without seeing, you believe in him, [and] you will re­ joice” (1:8). The “revelation” hidden from the eyes of 1 PETER

96

prophets and angels (vv 10-12) is hidden from Peter’s eyes as well. 1 Peter contains apocalyptic themes in that it looks to the revealing of Jesus Christ as the solution to the aggrava­ tions and tensions facing Christians in the Roman Empire. Yet it is not an “apocalypse” or an essentially “apocalyptic” work. The “apocalypse,” or “revealing” of Jesus Christ,” is not something that happens now in the visions of a prophet, as in the Book of Revelation (1:1), or in the calling of a mis­ sionary, as it was for Paul (Gal 1:2). It is rather the object of hope, not for a gifted few, but for all who love Jesus. This author has seen no visions. He walks by faith and not by sight, and urges his readers to do the same. Inexpressible joy “Salvation” and “glory” at the last day then are objective realities in 1 Peter. They are words to describe what God will finally do for his people. The “praise, glory, and honor” of 1 Pet 1:7 simply expands on the single word “glory” to sum­ marize the vindication for which suffering believers patiently wait. But “joy” or “delight” is something different. It is a sub­ jective reality. “Joy” is not what God does for us, but rather what we feel or experience as a result of what he has done for us. This too belongs to Peter’s “imaginary” or “final” future. The note of joy is almost as conspicuous in 1 Peter as in Paul’s letter to the Philippians.6 The words of the King James Version echo in the old gospel hymn: I have found the joy no tongue can tell How its waves o f glory roll! It is like a great o’erflowing well, Springing up within my soul. It is joy unspeakable and full of glory, Full of glory, full o f glory; 97

The Future: When Faith Becomes Sight

It is joy unspeakable and full of glory, Oh, the half has never yet been told.7 In the hymn, and in the King James Version, “joy unspeak­ able and full of glory” is the believer’s present possession. In 1 Peter itself, however, the accent is on future, not present, joy. Having mentioned “a salvation about to be revealed at the last day” (1:5), Peter adds, “Then you [will] rejoice” (1:6) and concludes that “you [will] rejoice with inexpressible and glori­ ous delight when you each receive the outcome of your faith, your final salvation” (1:8b- 9).8 The present is a time of suffer­ ing affliction, at least “for a little” (1:6,5:10), and a time for “faith” in the sense o f patient endurance (1:6-7). Although the message o f 1 Peter has frequently been characterized as a message o f “joy in suffering,” Peter is enough o f a realist to know that in the human situation suffering in itself is not a cause for joy. He is no masochist. The most he will say about present joy is, “to the extent that you share in the sufferings o f Christ, be glad, so that when his glory is revealed you may rejoice all the more” (4:13). Christians can “be glad” not because they are suffering but because they know that when they suffer they are following in the footsteps o f Jesus Christ. The only suffering that can be a cause for gladness is suffering “unjustly,” or “for doing good,” because these were the circumstances o f Jesus’ suf­ fering. And even this “gladness” is not the “inexpressible joy” o f the last day. Peter has two words for joy: one (Greek, chairein) for the gladness or consolation o f sharing the lot o f Jesus Christ and the other (Greek, agalliasthai) for the unspeakable delight or jubilation o f seeing Jesus face to face at his “revelation.” Joy in its most profound sense in 1 Peter is a mystery for it belongs to that “imaginary” (yet unimag­ ined) future still hidden from human view. Joy is by far the most fascinating aspect o f that future, and Peter speaks o f it only with hesitation and wonder. 1 PETER

98

Some o f our finest Christian writers have caught the note of mysterious joy in the Christian message, whether from 1 Peter or the New Testament generally or their own experi­ ence. C. S. Lewis speaks of “approaching the source from which those arrows o f Joy had been shot at me ever since childhood.”9 Flannery O ’Connor, suffering from the lupus that was to take her life, wrote in 1956 to a friend, “Picture me with my ground teeth stalking joy—fully armed too as it’s a highly dangerous quest The other day I ran up on a wonder­ ful quotation: ‘The dragon is at the side o f the road watching those who pass. Take care lest he devour you! You are going to the Father of souls, but it is necessary to pass by the dragon.’ That is Cyril o f Jerusalem instructing catechu­ mens.”10 She captured the spirit not only o f Cyril, but of Peter as well. Even more eloquently, Gilbert K. Chesterton concluded Orthodoxy, his great work of Christian apologetics, with this paragraph: Joy, which was the small publicity o f the pagan, is the gigantic secret o f the Christian. And as I close this chaotic volume I open again the strange, small book from which all Christianity came; and I am again haunted by a kind o f confirmation. The tremendous figure which fills the Gospels towers in this respect, as in every other, above all the thinkers who ever thought themselves tall. H is pathos was natural, almost casual. The Stoics, ancient and modem, were proud o f concealing their tears. He never concealed His tears; He showed them plainly on his open face at any daily sight, such as the far sight o f H is native city. Yet He concealed something. Solemn supermen and imperial diplomatists are proud o f restraining their anger. He never restrained H is anger. He flung furniture down the front steps o f the Temple, and asked 99

The Future: When Faith Becomes Sight

men how they expected to escape the damnation o f Hell. Yet He restrained something. I say it with rever­ ence; there was in that shattering personality a thread that must be called shyness. There was something that He hid from all men when he went up a mountain to pray. There was something that He covered up constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was some one thing that was too great for G od to show us when He walked upon our earth; and I have sometimes fancied that it was H is mirth.”11 The intriguing suggestion that the “Messianic secret" in the ministry of Jesus was joy is a good point at which to take leave of Peter and his remarkable vision of past, present, and future in the plan of God and in the life of the people o f God.

1 PETER

100

6

CONCLUSION: TH E M ESSAGE OF

1 PETER TODAY

What remains is the more formidable task o f assessing the testimony o f 1 Peter to the Christian “brotherhood through­ out the world” (5:9) now, nineteen centuries after it was written. This is a task that individual readers and Christian communities must decide for themselves. A commentator can try to describe or recapture what an ancient writer has done. If the writing is Holy Scripture, as 1 Peter is, the commentator may want to bear his own testimony as to what its implications are for the very different world in which we live. The commentator deserves a hearing because he has “paid his dues” by virtue of a long and careful involvement with the text But in the end, it is not the commentator (scholarly or otherwise) who decides what 1 Peter has to say to us today. It is the people o f God who must decide, people who are presumably not so different from the first-century slaves, wives, and husbands o f Asia Minor to whom the letter was first written. The expression “priesthood of all believers” has undergone some significant changes since 1 Peter was written. Luther and 101

Conclusion: The M essage of 1 Peter Today

the Protestant Reformation adapted this term from the lan­ guage of 1 Pet 2:5,9, applying it to the right of every Christian to interpret Scripture in the light of individual conscience and the leading of the Holy Spirit. Peter would not have been sympathetic to the individualizing of his imagery o f priest­ hood, but he would have appreciated the notion that the task o f interpreting the will of God and the word of God rests with the people of God, not with a hierarchy of either bishops or highly trained scholars. This is all the more true of a document like 1 Peter itself, in which so much o f the content has to do with the people of God, their identity, and their responsibilities to God, each other, and the world. For Christians to interpret 1 Peter for today is to engage in self-definition. It is not simply to ask, “What does this old book mean?” It is to ask the far more immediate and urgent questions, “W ho are we? Where did we come from? What is our calling in this world? What is our role in American life? Where are we going?” All that I offer here are one man’s reflections on these universal questions. They are the product o f my exegetical study of the text, but inevitably the product as well o f my own experience and reli­ gious convictions. It could hardly be otherwise. If 1 Peter is “Protestant” in initiating its own distinctive version of the “priesthood of all believers,” it is “Catholic” in the sense that it is one o f the earliest of Christian encyclical letters (i.e., a circular letter to a large segment of the church). Only Acts 15:23-29 and the letter o f James can claim even the possibility of being older. Moreover, it is the first encyclical from the Roman church and is attributed to the man regarded in Roman Catholic tradition as the first bishop o f Rome. It stands as evidence that Peter was indeed in Rome in the first century and played a significant role in the life o f that church. Yet its perspective on the institutionalization of religion is more “anabaptist” than Catholic—or Protestant, for that mat­ ter. Despite the “respect” or “honor” urged toward the state 1 PETER

102

in 1 Peter, this letter is resistant to any formal establishment o f religion. “Respect” is due the emperor as a human being and a human magistrate, but “reverent fear” is for God alone (2:17), the God of Israel and the Father of Jesus C hrist It is likely that this reserve about institutions would have been maintained even in a Christian empire. The kind o f civic religion that identifies or mixes the values of, say, American culture with Christian faith or with the teaching o f Jesus Christ finds little support in this letter. For exam­ ple, the efforts o f Billy Graham and the Nixon administra­ tion on July 4, 1970, to adapt Peter’s “honor the emperor” into “honor America” or “honor the nation” may have been good for American patriotism in a troubled time, but were hardly true to the intentions o f 1 Peter itself. It is one thing to urge “respect for the emperor” in a general sense, but it would have been quite another for Peter to initiate an “Honor the Empire” festival or even to sanction participa­ tion in such a festival proclaimed by the imperial authorities in Rome or Asia Minor. Such “honor” would have been far too religious, too close to “reverent fear” for this author, and it is doubtful that he would have viewed things any differently in twentieth-century America. In this sense, 1 Peter is an “anabaptist” work. The “church” (if Peter were to use that word) is a believers’ church in that its membership is made up not o f people bom into a particular religious tradition, but o f people “bom anew” who have “purified their souls” by faith in G od through Jesus Christ (1:21,22). Because o f their conversion experience, they have no vested interest in Roman society or its institu­ tions. This remains true even though Peter urges respect for that society and those institutions. He insists that Christians are not, and must not be, out to destroy the Roman Empire or the Roman household. It is not their role to subvert either the practice of slavery or the traditional husband-wife rela­ tionship in the household. They are not to be “busybodies” 103

Conclusion: The M essage o f 1Peter Today

(4:15) spying out other people’s behavior or legislating other people’s morality. Their role is to respect their fellow citizens in the framework of existing institutions and live in such a way that their fellow citizens might in turn respect them and be drawn to their new faith. There are no formulas for social reform in 1 Peter, only the hope of life and salvation “at the time when Jesus Christ is revealed.” For a Social Gospel, one must look to the Old Testament and to other parts of the New. It would be easy to conclude from all this that 1 Peter is both otherworldly and highly individualistic. When read in this way it calls those who want to be “saved” or “bom again” into a life of private piety and individual witness. It is indeed tempting to view 1 Peter as an otherworldly statement of Christian faith, centering on the redeemed individual, the rejection o f life in the world, and an individualistic hope of heaven. Such an outlook is summed up in the words of the old gospel song (cited from memory): This world is not my home, I’m just a-passing through; My treasures are laid up somewhere beyond the blue; The angels beckon me from heaven’s open door, And I can’t feel at home in this world anymore. It is not hard to think of passages in 1 Peter on which such lyrics might have been based (e.g., 1:1,3 - 4 , 17-19; 2:11), and yet the individualistic and otherworldly perspective of the old song must be recognized as far from Peter’s intention. The difference lies in the fact that Christians, despite hav­ ing no vested interest in the social or political order in Rome or in America, are themselves a social order in 1 Peter, a “people,” and not merely an assortment of “saved” individu­ als. Peter views them as “a chosen race, the King’s priesthood, a holy nation, a people destined for vindication” (2:9). He establishes their identity on the basis of ancient Jewish stories 1 PETER

104

and the ancient Jewish Scriptures. They are “honorary Jews,” a new Israel, yet somehow without displacing the old. Like the Jews in the Roman Empire (and in many other cultures) they are “aliens and strangers” (2:11), “a chosen people living as strangers in the diaspora” (1:1). Their place— our place— in human society according to Peter is not unlike that de­ scribed by an anonymous Christian writer a century later: For the distinction between Christians and other peo­ ple is neither in land nor language nor customs. For they do not dwell in cities in some place of their own, nor do they use any strange variety of dialect, nor practice any extraordinary kind of life. . . . Yet while living in Greek and barbarian cities, according as each obtained his lot, and following the local customs, both in clothing and food and in the rest of life, they show forth the wonderful character of their own citizenship. They dwell in their own fatherlands, but as sojourners in them. They share all things as citizens, and suffer all things as strangers. Every foreign country is their fatherland, and every fatherland is a foreign country. . . . They pass their time on the earth, but they have their citizenship in heaven. They obey the appointed laws, and they surpass the laws in their own lives. They love everyone and are persecuted by everyone. They are unknown and they are condemned. They are put to death and they gain life. . . . To put it shortly, what the soul is in the body, the Christians are in the world. The soul is spread through all the members o f the body, and Christians throughout the cities o f the world. The soul dwells in the body, but is not of the body, and Christians dwell in the world, but are not of the world.12 This ancient quotation is far truer to the vision o f 1 Peter than the lyrics o f “This World Is N ot My Home.” 105

Conclusion: The M essage of 1 Peter Today

The familiar rendering of 1 Pet 2:9 in the King James Ver­ sion, “a peculiar people,” though inaccurate in its own time and even more misleading today, still captures something o f the strangeness with which the world perceives Christians when they live as God called them to live. It is akin to the strangeness and suspicion with which many societies have viewed the Jews. Peter’s appreciation o f the basic “Jewishness” even o f Gentile Christian communities in his world holds out the possibility of the building o f new bridges between Jew and Christian even today. Beyond this, the people of God in 1 Peter are also a pilgrim people following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ. Here again 1 Peter stands in— or rather behind— the anabaptist tradi­ tion. More than any other New Testament writer, Peter com­ bines the emphasis o f Paul and the Gospel o f John on believing in Jesus Christ with that of Jesus himself (as pre­ sented in the Synoptic Gospels) on following him as disciples in the way o f the cross. He achieves in this respect a balance found nowhere else in the New Testament. It is possible to imagine 1 Peter as a letter that Paul might have written if he had paid more explicit attention to the teaching o f Jesus, or a letter that Mark, Matthew, or Luke might have written if they had adopted the letter form. Where 1 Peter goes beyond the gospels is in showing that the pilgrimage o f discipleship, like the pilgrimage o f Jesus, leads past the cross to the resurrec­ tion, and finally to the presence of the God o f Israel. It is like the journey to the heavenly Jerusalem in the letter to the Hebrews (e.g., Heb 12:22— 24; 13:14), except that Peter has little interest in the splendor and trappings o f a heavenly city or temple. What matters is that it is a pilgrimage toward the experience of seeing Jesus face to face and, therefore, a pil­ grimage toward joy.

1 PETER

106

NOTES

Chapter 2 The Past: Claiming a Heritage 1. Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth (New York: Doubleday, 1988), 15. 2. C. S. Lewis, Miracles (New York: Macmillan, 1948), 161, n. 1. 3. For a literary development o f this theme, read the short story, “The River,” by Flannery O ’Connor, in A Good Man Is Hard to Find (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1955). 4. G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (Harmondsworth, England: Penguin, 1962), 239.

Chapter 3 The Present: Living in a Hostile Society 1. See the second-century Martyrdom of Polycarp, especially chs 13-17. 2. Amos Niven Wilder, “To Pulpit and Tribune,” in Grace Confounding (Philadephia: Fortress, 1972), 46. 3. See, e.g., 2 Macc 7:34-36: “But you, unholy wretch, you most defiled o f all men, do not be elated in vain and puffed up by uncertain hopes, when you raise your hand against the children of heaven. You have not yet escaped the judgment o f the almighty, all-seeing God. For our brothers after enduring a brief suffering

107

Notes

have drunk of ever-flowing life under G od’s covenant; but you, by the judgment of God, will receive just punishment for your arro­ gance.” See also 2 Macc 7 :1 7 ,19,31; 4 Macc 9 :5 , 10:11. C h apter 4 From P resent to Future 1. Bruce J. Malina, "Christ and Time: Swiss or Mediterranean?” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 51.1 (1989): 1-31. 2. See ibid., 10-17. 3. Ibid., 5-6. 4. Gerard Manley Hopkins, "G od’s Grandeur,” in A Little Treasury of Modern Poetry (New York: Scribner’s, 1946), 45. 5. The word commonly translated "prison” (Greek, phylake̅) is different from the words used in 2 Pet 2:4; Jude 6; and the Enoch literature for the imprisoned "angels who sinned” before the flood, and the same as that used in Rev 18:2, where Babylon is said to be a "haunt” or "refuge” for "every unclean spirit” as well for "every un­ clean and hateful bird.” 6. Cf. the "three unclean spirits, like frogs,” provoking the "kings of the whole world” to assemble for battle at Armageddon, according to Rev 16:13-14. 7. Treatise on the Resurrection, 45.25-28, attributed to Valenti­ nus or one of his disciples in the second century (B. Layton, The Gnostic Treatise on Resurrection from N ag Hammadi [Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979], 17). 8. From the poem, "G od’s Grandeur,” cited above in note 4. 9. Flannery O ’Connor, The Habit of Being (New York: Farrar/ Straus/Giroux, 1979), 367. 10. Clement o f Alexandria, Stromateis, or "M iscellanies,” bk 3, ch 10, in Alexandrian Christianity, ed. J. E. L. Oulton and H. Chadwick (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, n.d.), 71. 11. Cited from Augustine in Patrologia Latina, 35.2025, by Paul Hinnebusch, Friendship in the Lord (Notre Dame, IN: Ave Maria Press, 1974), 116-17. 12. "W itness” here does not mean "eyewitness” o f the actual sufferings of Jesus. Peter was in any case not an eyewitness o f Jesus’ crucifixion according to the gospels, but like the other disciples deserted Jesus at the time of his arrest (cf. Mark 14:50). "W itness”

1 PETER

108

refers rather to anyone who bears testimony to the gospel o f salva­ tion through Jesus’ death.

Chapter 5 The Future: When Faith Becomes Sight 1. Bruce J. Malina, “Christ and Time: Swiss or Mediterranean?” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 51.1 (1989): 10-17. 2. Notice, e.g., the echoes of this saying in 1 Clem. 34.8; 2 Clem. 11.7; and M art Pol. 2.3. 3. Cf. John 16:16, “A little while, and you will see me no more; and again a little while, and you will see me.” 4. These quotations from Jewish apocalyptic writings are taken from J. H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983). 5. Even if he had been a prophet, he would not have had this privilege. In his view, the only thing “revealed” to the ancient proph­ ets was actually a nonrevelation: i.e., that the messages they brought were “not for their own benefit but for yours” (1:12). 6. See G. F. Hawthorne, “The Note o f Joy,” in Philippians, Word Biblical Themes (Waco, TX : Word, 1987), 107-10. 7. Inspiring Hymns (Grand Rapids: Singspiration, 1951). 8. W illiam Tyndale straddled the fence in his 1534 edition o f the New Testament (reprinted by Cambridge University Press in 1939) by making the rejoicing future in 1:6 (“in the which tyme ye shall reioyce”) but present in 1:8 (“ye beleue, and reioyce with ioye vnspeakable and glorious”). 9. C. S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1955), 230. 10. Flannery O ’Connor, Collected Works (New York: Library o f America, 1988), 979. 11. G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (New York: John Lane, 1931), 298-99.

Chapter 6

Conclusion: The Message of 1 Peter Today

1. Epistle to Diognetus 5 .1 -2 ,4 -5 , 9-12; 6.1-3.

109

Notes

IN D EX OF SCRIPTURES

O L D TE ST A M EN T

Proverbs 3:34

17

Isaiah 8:13 8:14 28:16 4 0 :6 -8 43:20-21 53 53:4-12 53:7

32 12 11-12 11 14 15 32 6 1 ,6 2

G en esis 6 6 :1 -4 6 :1 -8 6:2 6 :4 18:12 22:8

23 72 21 22 22 18 62

Exodus 12:5 19:6 2 4 :3 -8

61 14 61

Ezekiel 9 :6

87

Leviticus 11:44 19:2

11 11

20:7 20:26

11 11

D aniel 9 12:6 12:8 12:9

29 29 29 29

H osea 1:9-10 2:23

14 14

H abbakkuk 2:3

30

Psalm s 8:7 34:12-16 110:1 118:22

111

72 15 3 2 ,7 2 12

Zechariah 13:7

68

N EW T E ST A M EN T M atthew 3:2 3 :9 5:39-42 7:24-25 10:24-25 12:35-37 16:18 16:19 16:23 17:4 18:1-4 18:20 24:37 26:33

39 13 76 3 50 44 3 xii,2 4 ,6 4 79 80 20 4

M ark 1:17 1:23-27 1:24 3:22 3:27

59 70 71 7 0 ,7 3 70

Index

5:1-20 5:7 5:10-13 8:34-35 9:5-6 9:14-29 9:33-37 10:42-44 10:42-45 12:17 12:27 14:27 14:27-28 14:29 16:7 Luke 2:41-50 3:8 6:27-36 12:11 17:26 21 21:37-38 22:31-33 23:30-31 24:26 24:34 24:46 24:53 John 1:29 1:42 10:17-18 11:25-26 12:31 13:34 13:36-37 13:37 14:30 15:12 15:20-21 16:11 18:18 21:7 21:9 21:15-17 21:18 21:19

1 PETER

70 71 73 60 4 70 79 89 79 48 69 4 68 4 4 ,6 8

39 13 45 66 20 39 39 5 35 3 2 , 65 5 32 39

62 3 5 70 71 82 60 5 71 82 50 71 4 4 4 2 ,4 4 5

21:20-22 21:22 A cts 1:9-11 2:14-36 2:24-32 2:46 3:1-10 5:29 5:42 10:9-16 10:34-43 10:44-48 14:23 15 15:7 15:23-29 16:16-18 19:13-16 20:17 20:17-38 20:28 Rom ans 1:3 1:4 1:5 2 4:16-25 4:25 6:4 8:18 8:38 12:1 12:3-8 12:6-8 12:13 12:21 13 13:1 13:3 13:4 15:18 16:5 16:26 1 Corinthians 2:7 2:9

4 59

68 5 70 39 5 47 39 5 ,7 5 7 86 9 7 9 , 102 71 71 86 88 88

21 21 59 26 20 20 24 76 71 14 81 84 83 77 46 46 46 46 59 8 3 , 86 59

94 94

2:10 3:16 12 12:4-11 12:8-11 12:9-10 12:22-24 14:26-33 15:24 15:27 16:19

94 13 84 81 71 71 79 81 71 72 83

2 Corinthians 4:17

76

Galatians 1:2 2:7 3:28-29

97 7 20

Ephesians 1:20 1:21 1:22 3:10 5:22-24 5:25 6:1-4 6:9 6:10-11 6:12 6:13

72 7 1 , 72 72 71 51 79 79 50 76 7 1 , 76 76

Philippians 2:10 2:10-11

71 23

Colossians 1:16 2:10 2:15 3:18 3:19 3:20-21

71 71 71 51 79 79

4:1 4:15 4:16

50 83 86

1 Thessalonians 1:9-10

8 , 10

112

4:11-12

42

13:20-21

2 Thessalonians 3:11

42

James 1:1 2:19

1 Tim othy 2:1-2 3:1-13 3:16 5:1-2 5:13 5:17 5:17-22 5:19

46 81 21 86 42 86 81 86

2 Tim othy 3:16

10

Titus 1:5 3:1-2

86 46

Philemon 2

83

Hebrews 2:5-9 2:17 4:2 4:6 4:14-15 5:5-6 5:10 6:20 7:1-28 9:28 11 11:7 11:10 11:13 11:14-16 11:25 11:27 11:32-38 11:39 12:1 12:22 12:22-24 13:2 13:14

113

72 62 28 28 62 62 62 62 62 63 27 28 68 28 68 28 28 28 28 28 6 8 , 106 106 83 6 8 , 106

4:7 4:7-8 5:14

68

7 71 76 77 86

1 Peter 3 , 6 , 4 1 , 82 1 1:1 1 , 7 , 8 , 2 8 , 3 1 , 3 8 , 87, 8 9 , 104 36 1:1-4:11 1:2 3 1 , 4 7 , 5 9 , 6 1 , 84 1:3 3 2 , 3 3 , 6 6 , 6 7 , 69 6 7 , 104 1:3-4 1:5 6 6 , 6 7 , 9 4 , 98 1:5- 6a 36 1:6 2 6 , 4 0 , 6 4 , 7 5 , 98 4 0 ,9 8 1:6-7 7 , 36 l:6 b -7 4 0 , 6 6 , 6 7 , 9 0 , 94, 1:7 9 5 , 97 30 1:7-8 1:8 5 9 , 6 5 , 9 4 , 96 l:8 b -9 98 1:9 67 1:10 2 9 , 80 1:10-12 2 9 , 97 2 9 , 3 2 , 6 5 , 84 1:11 1:12 1 1 , 2 9 , 3 0 , 84 1:13 6 6 , 8 0 , 8 2 , 8 5 , 9 4 , 95 1:13-21 11 7 , 4 7 , 63 1:14 1:15 18 1 1 , 12 1:15-16 1:17 4 7 , 58 1:17-19 104 1:18 7 , 8 , 63 1:18-19 61 1:19 6 1 , 62 1:20 5 8 , 94 1:21 1 8 , 2 0 , 3 3 , 5 3 , 59, 6 6 , 103 1:22 1 6 , 4 7 , 5 9 , 6 9 , 78, 8 0 , 103 1:22-23 63 1:22-25 11 1:23 1 1 , 69

1:23-25 28 1 5 , 32 1:24 11 1:24-25 33 1:25 2 4 1 , 4 6 , 67, 78 1 6 , 4 3 , 6 3 , 69 2:1 2:2 1 6 , 6 9 , 94 2:2-3 67 3 2 , 33 2:3 2:4 1 3 , 1 4 , 41 12 2:4-5 2:4-8 6 2:5 1 2 , 1 3 , 1 4 , 1 8 , 2 1 , 40, 7 8 , 102 11 2:6 66 2:6-7 32 2:7 2:8 6 , 1 9 , 4 1 , 73, 74 2:9 7 , 1 4 , 1 8 , 3 3 , 3 4 , 41, 6 7 , 7 8 , 1 0 2 , 1 0 4 , 106 78 2:9-10 2:10 1 4 , 5 9 , 70 2:11 3 , 8 , 2 8 , 3 8 , 6 3 , 69, 8 6 , 1 0 4 , 105 2:12 7 , 1 6 , 4 1 , 4 3 , 46, 5 4 , 74 2:13 1 6 , 3 3 , 4 6 , 47 4 6 , 48 2:14 2:15 1 6 , 2 0 , 4 3 , 4 6 , 54, 5 9 , 64 4 5 , 4 7 , 5 0 , 89 2:16 4 7 , 5 0 , 7 7 , 103 2:17 2:18 4 8 , 4 9 , 5 0 , 54 2:18-25 4 8 ,8 7 2:19 2 5 , 51 49 2:19-20 2:20 1 6 , 2 0 , 4 8 , 5 1 , 54 2:21 3 2 , 4 9 , 6 0 , 6 1 , 62, 9 0 , 94 2:21-23 1 6 , 2 0 , 6 4 , 74 2:21-25 64, 78 2:22 1 5 , 1 6 , 32, 63 2:22-23 4 3 , 60, 61 2:23 1 7 , 45 3 2 , 6 1 , 6 2 , 6 8 , 83 2:24 2:24-25 1 5 , 64 2:25 6 , 3 2 , 6 8 , 90 3 5 8 , 68 3:1 1 9 , 4 3 , 4 8 , 5 4 , 7 3 , 74 3:1-2 5 2 , 5 4 , 74

Index

3:1-4 3:1-6 3:1-7 3:2 3:3 3:3-4 3:4 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:7b 3:8 3 :8-9 3:9

18 4 8 ,5 1 ,7 8 87 54 53 52 2 0 ,5 3 1 8 ,5 3 ,5 4 1 6 ,1 8 ,1 9 ,3 3 ,5 4 ,7 4 1 9 ,5 2 ,5 3 ,7 8 ,8 5 80 53 15 1 6 ,2 0 ,4 3 ,4 5 ,6 0 ,6 9 , 7 4 ,9 0 3:10 4 3 ,6 9 3:10-11 16 3:10-12 15 3:12 1 6 ,3 3 ,4 4 3:13 6 4 ,7 4 3:13-14 2 0 ,5 4 3:14 64 3:15 1 4 ,3 2 ,4 3 ,5 4 3:16 1 6 ,2 0 ,2 5 ,4 1 ,4 3 ,5 3 , 5 4 ,6 6 ,7 4 3:16-17 16 3:17 1 6 ,4 8 3:18 2 1 ,3 2 ,6 1 ,6 2 ,6 3 ,6 7 , 68, 71, 94 3:18-22 73 3:19 68 3:19-20 2 1 ,7 2 3:19-20a 71 3:20 2 1 ,7 2 3:21 2 1 ,2 3 ,2 5 ,5 9 ,6 6 ,6 9 3:22 2 1 ,2 2 ,3 2 ,6 6 ,6 7 ,6 8 , 71, 73, 94 4 3 5 ,3 6 ,3 8 4:1 6 3 ,8 3 4:1-2 6 0 ,6 2 ,6 3 4:3 7 ,5 8 4 :3 -4 4 2 ,6 3 4:4 90 4:4-5 43

1 PETER

4:5 2 6 ,4 4 4:5 -6 69 4:6 2 6 ,2 8 ,6 9 4:7 3 9 ,8 1 ,8 7 ,8 9 4:7-11 7 8 ,8 1 ,8 6 ,8 7 ,8 9 4:7b 82 4:8 6 3 ,8 0 ,8 2 4:8b 82 4:9 8 2 ,8 3 4.10 8 1 ,8 2 ,8 4 ,8 5 ,9 1 ,9 5 4:11 4 3 ,8 5 4:11b 86 4:12 2 6 ,3 5 ,3 9 ,8 6 ,8 8 4:12-5:11 86 4:12-5:14 36 4:12-19 87 4:13 3 2 ,3 6 ,6 1 ,6 5 ,6 6 , 9 4 ,9 8 4:14 xiv, 3 7 ,4 3 ,6 6 ,8 4 ,8 5 , 9 4 ,9 5 4:14-15 16 4:15 4 1 ,4 2 ,1 0 4 4:16 1 4 ,3 7 ,4 2 ,4 3 ,5 1 ,7 7 4:17 1 3 ,1 7 ,4 0 ,7 3 ,7 4 4:17-18 3 5 ,8 7 4:17-19 26 4:19 1 6 ,3 7 ,4 8 ,7 7 5 3 5 ,3 6 5:1 3 ,6 ,3 2 ,6 5 ,8 6 ,8 7 ,9 4 5:1-4 6 5:1-5 7 8 ,8 1 ,8 6 ,8 7 ,8 9 5:2 6 5:2a 88 5:2b 88 5:2c 89 5:3 89 5:4 4 6 ,6 6 5:5 1 7 ,2 0 ,8 1 ,8 9 5:5-6 53 5:5a 88 5:5b 88 5:6 90 5:6-7 77 5:8 2 4 ,8 8

5:8-9 5:9 5:10 5:10-11 5:10a 5:10b 5:12 5:12-14

3 6 ,7 5 77,101 7 5 ,9 0 ,9 8 86 70 70 3 ,8 ,3 7 ,3 8 ,4 7 ,8 1 , 8 4 ,8 5 86

2 Peter 1:1

1

1:13-14 2:9 3:5-7 3:10-13

6 28 26 26

1 John 1:8-9 3:2 3:5 3:6 3:9 4:7 4:11 4:21

63 95 62 63 63 82 82 82

2 Joh n 5

82

3 Joh n 5 -8

83

Revelation 1:1 1:9

97 87

13:1-7 14:8 16:19 17:5-6 17:18 18 18:2 21-22 22:20

47 37 37 3 7 ,3 8 37 37 2 2 ,7 3 94 39

114

WORD BIBLICAL THEMES 2 Peter -Jude RICHARD J. BAUCKHAM

ZONDERVAN ACADEMI C

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC 2 Peter, Jude Copyright © 1990 by Word, Incorporated Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 ISBN 978-0-310-11494-9 (softcover) Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Bauckham, Richard. Jude, 2 Peter: Richard J. Bauckham. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-849-92792-0 1. Bible. N.T. Jude—Criticism, interpretation, etc. 2. Bible. N.T. Peter, 2nd— Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II. Title: Jude, Second Peter. III. Series. BS2815.2.B38 1990 227’.9306—dc2089-49676 Scripture quotations in this volume from Jude and 2 Peter are from the author’s translation in Jude, 2 Peter, Volume 50, of the Word Biblical abbreviations for the other versions used in this volume. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 /LSC/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

IN MEMORY OF

Colin Hemer distinguished New Testament scholar and Christian friend to many who died on 14 June 1987

CONTENTS

Foreword Preface JU D E Introduction 1. Morality and Judgment 2. Christian Living 3. Jesus the Lord 2 PETER Introduction 1. Justification and Righteousness 2. Freedom— True and False 3. Christian Hope 4. Scripture Notes Index of Scriptures vii

ix xi 1 3 11 19 29 39 41 51 67 79 97 109 111 Contents

FOREWORD

Finding the great themes o f the books o f the Bible is essential to the study of God’s Word, and to the preaching and teaching o f its truths. But these themes or ideas are often like precious gems; they lie beneath the surface and can only be discovered with some difficulty. The large com­ mentaries are most useful to this discovery process, but they are not usually designed to help the student trace the impor­ tant subjects within a given book of Scripture. The Word Biblical Themes meet this need by bringing together, within a few pages, all o f what is contained in a biblical volume on the subjects that are thought to be most significant to that volume. A companion series to the Word Biblical Commentary, these books seek to distill the theo­ logical essence o f the biblical books as interpreted in the more technical series and to serve it up in ways that will enrich the preaching, teaching, worship, and discipleship o f God’s people. The two letters which carry the names of Jude and 2 Peter in our Bibles are not everyone’s immediate favorites, and ix

Foreword

both devotional and scholarly study has tended to overlook them. With Richard Bauckham’s edition o f the Word Biblical Commentary, Volume 50, this situation has been re­ dressed. And the importance of these two small New Testa­ ment books has been brought into prominence once again. Dr. Bauckham’s commentary has already been hailed as groundbreaking, as recent literary finds from a JewishChristian-gnostic library were pressed into service and Jewish pseudepigraphical books were used to illumine the biblical text. A s I mentioned in a survey o f recent com­ mentaries (in New Testament Books for Pastor and Teacher, Westminster Press, 1984), Bauckham’s volume has the rare distinction of being an English-speaking study that is now an international front-runner. A ll this accolade should whet the reader’s appetite for the fare which Dr. Bauckham has made available in a semipopular and attractive presentation for the Word Biblical Themes series. This short book will be a much-sought-after addition to any minister’s library. It is sent forth in the hope that it will contribute to the vitality o f God’s people, renewed by the Word and the Spirit and ever in need o f renewal. The University of Sheffield Sheffield, England

JU D E, 2 PETER

Ralph P. Martin New Testament Editor Word Biblical Themes Word Biblical Commentary

x

PREFACE

This volume is based on the detailed exegetical work to be found in my volume in the Word Biblical Commentary, Jude, 2 Peter. Where the exegesis and interpretations I offer in this volume are controversial, detailed justification for them, with evidence and interaction with other views, will always be found in that commentary. In this volume I have largely avoided discussion of other interpretations and have concentrated instead on positive exposition o f the message o f these letters as I learned to understand it in the course of writing my commentary. I hope this will not be taken to be an arrogant disregard for views which differ from my own. The point is simply that I have already considered those views, I hope fairly and usually in detail, in the commentary, and I wished to do something different here. I have also read most of what has been published on these letters since I wrote the commentary, but have found no reason to change the views I expressed before. However, it is only fair to warn the reader that on many points of detailed exegesis and broad interpretation of these letters, on which I state my xi

Preface

views in this volume, there is no scholarly consensus. But we must all take the risk of interpreting Scripture to the best of our abilities in the light that has so far fallen on it for us. There is no biblical translation, however literal, which does not embody many disputed decisions about the inter­ pretation of the text (as well as, o f course, the most original form o f the text). In this volume I have usually quoted from the translations o f Jude and 2 Peter which I published in my commentary. I have taken care to do so especially when my translation differs from the most commonly used trans­ lations in a way that is really significant for interpretation. Justifications for my translations appear in the commentary. Other biblical quotations in this volume are usually from the Revised Standard Version. Jude and 2 Peter have often been treated as letters with a very similar outlook directed to very similar church situa­ tions, if not precisely the same situation. But in my commen­ tary I argued that, in spite o f the fact that 2 Peter borrows some material from Jude, they are in af c t very different works, facing different problems in different ways in differ­ ent contexts. I have therefore not attempted in this volume to deal with the two letters jointly, but have tried to hear and to convey the distinct message o f each separately. Jude is treated before 2 Peter (rather than in the canonical order), because I consider that Jude was written first and was used by the author o f 2 Peter. Neither Jude nor 2 Peter has enjoyed a high reputation in modem biblical scholarship. Many biblical scholars have compared them unfavorably with other New Testament writings, especially the Pauline letters, and some have been openly contemptuous of them. I am convinced that much of this denigration and criticism of Jude and 2 Peter is based on ignorance. Because they have simply accepted a scholarly tradition which regards these works as of little interest or value, many biblical scholars scarcely bother to read them, JU D E, 2 PETER

xii

let alone to study them carefully, to reexamine the forms of interpretation which have become conventional or to at­ tempt a fresh, unprejudiced evaluation. The attempt, by a strong tradition o f modem New Testa­ ment scholarship, to set up Paul as a standard o f excellence, by which most other New Testament authors fall short to a greater or lesser degree, is to be questioned. The point o f the New Testament canon is, in part, its diversity. United in the broad contours o f early Christian belief, the various New Testament writings are different in style of thought and expression, reflecting their authors’ differing gifts, varied insights and interests, different backgrounds and contexts. They are complementary. If we lacked any o f them, our understanding o f the apostolic faith and teaching would be to some degree poorer. No doubt, if we had to choose, we should all prefer to be without some than to be without others. But the canon means precisely that we do not have to choose. O ur concern should be, not with whether one is more valuable than an­ other, but with the particular contribution each has to make. If we read and study Jude and 2 Peter with this posi­ tive concern, we shall discover, as generations o f Christians have before us, two o f the many scriptural voices through which the Word o f God speaks to us today. Richard Bauckham University of Manchester

xiii

Preface

JUDE

INTRODUCTION

Author, place, an d date The “Jude” to whom the letter o f Jude is ascribed is Judas the brother of Jesus (Mark 6:3). This is made quite clear by the phrase “brother of James” (v 1), which distinguishes this Judas from others o f the same name by mentioning his rela­ tion to James the brother of the Lord, the only man in the early church who could be called simply “James” without risk o f ambiguity. Many modem scholars have considered the letter pseudepigraphal, written by a later Christian who attributed his work to the brother of the Lord. But the arguments for this view (which cannot be discussed here) are exegetically weak. The general character o f the letter, when properly understood, supports the view that it was written by Jude the Lord’s brother himself.1 Jude was one of the four (half- or step-) brothers o f Jesus (Mark 6:3), but we know much less about him than about his elder brother James. From 1 Corinthians 9:5 and some other evidence in early Christian literature, it seems that, whereas 3

Introduction

James remained resident in Jerusalem and became the leader of the church there, the other brothers of Jesus were travel­ ing missionaries, preaching the gospel throughout Palestine and perhaps also elsewhere.2We do not know who the read­ ers to whom Jude’s letter was first addressed were, except that they were most probably Jewish Christians. But since the problem of false teaching which occasioned the letter is a particular one, the letter was certainly addressed to a specific church or group o f churches. The letter contains no secure indication o f date: it could well date from the fifties A.D. and be one of the earliest of the New Testament documents, or it could have been written rather later, toward the end of Jude’s missionary career. The special interest o f the letter o f Jude is that it is one o f the very few surviving documents o f early Palestinian Jewish Christianity— the original Christian movement from which the whole o f the rest o f the early Christian movement de­ rived. It offers us a glimpse o f the convictions about Jesus and the Gospel which were preached by the earliest Jewish Christian missionaries in Palestine. The opponents In verses 3 and 4 Jude explains that his letter is not the extended discussion of Christian salvation he had intended to write, but a more ad hoc response to the news that the churches have been infiltrated by a group of itinerant teach­ ers whose lifestyle and message he considers dangerous to his readers. To appreciate Jude’s message today, we need some understanding o f the character of these opponents, with whom his letter is preoccupied. Although they have often been identified as Gnostics, there is no clear evidence of Gnostic teaching in what Jude says about them. What is clear is that they were antinomians, who took Christian free­ dom to mean freedom from all moral constraint. They seem JU D E , 2 PETER

4

to have been itinerant prophets, like many o f those who traveled around the early Christian churches. They were ac­ cepted at the church’s fellowship meals (v 12a), where they laid claim to charismatic inspiration, manifested in visions (v 8: “dreamings”) through which they received their antinomian teachings. On the strength o f this charismatic authority of their own, they disparaged the angels who were regarded as the guardians of the moral order (v 8b) and evidently regarded themselves and their followers as the truly spiritual people, distinguished from more conventional Christians by their Spirit-inspired freedom from all external authority (cf. v 19). It is possible, but not certain, that this charismatic antinomianism represents a distortion of Paul’s teaching about Christian freedom from the law. In any case, Jude sees in it a rejection of the authority of the Lord Jesus (vv 4,8). Against it, his letter insists on the necessary moral implications of the Christian gospel. The structure of the letter Many misunderstandings o f the letter of Jude have arisen from a failure to appreciate its literary structure. The general structure of the letter can be analyzed as follows: Analysis of the Letter Address and greeting (1-2) Occasion and theme o f the letter (3-4) A. The appeal to contend for the faith (3) B.

The background to the appeal: the false teachers, their character and judgment (4) (forming introductory statement o f theme for B 1)

Body o f the letter (5-23) B l. The background: a commentary on four prophecies of the doom o f the ungodly (5-19)

5

Introduction

A 1. The appeal (20-23) (i) Four exhortations on Christian living (20-21) (ii) Advice on dealing with offenders (22-23) Concluding doxology. (24-25)

In this analysis it should be noted especially that the initial statement o f the theme of the letter (vv 3-4) contains two parts (here labeled A and B) which correspond, in reverse order, to the two parts of the body o f the letter (labeled B 1 and A 1). The main purpose o f the letter is the appeal “to contend for the faith” which is announced in verse 3 and spelled out in verses 20-23. But verse 4 explains that this appeal is necessary because the readers are in danger o f being misled by false teachers. The claim in verse 4 that these teachers are people whose ungodly behavior has already been condemned by God is then substantiated by the exegetical section (vv 5-19), which argues that these are the people to whom the scriptural types and prophecies of judgment refer. Thus we should not be misled by the length and central position o f the discus­ sion o f the false teachers (vv 4-19) into considering it the main object of the letter. This section establishes the danger in which the readers are placed by the influence of the false teachers. So it performs an essential role as background to the appeal, but the real climax o f the letter is only reached in the exhortations o f verses 20-23. In verses 4-19 Jude establishes the need for his readers to “contend for the faith,” but only in verses 20-23 does he explain what “contending for the faith” involves. Thus his negative polemic against the false teachers is subordinate to the positive Christian teaching o f verses 20-23, where he combines awareness of the danger of the false teachers’ in­ fluence with a pastoral concern for their reclamation. He then concludes with a truly magnificent doxology (vv 24-25), which is, in effect, a confident prayer that God will preserve JU D E , 2 PETER

6

the readers from spiritual disaster and achieve his eschatologi­ cal purpose for them.

Jude’s exegesis The form of the exegetical section (B1: vv 5-19) requires further explanation. Together with its introductory state­ ment of theme (B: v 4), it can be analyzed as follows: Analysis o f the Commentary Section Introductory statement of theme “Text” 1: Three Old Testament types and interpretation including secondary “text” la: Michael and the devil “Text” 2: Three more Old Testament types and interpretation including secondary allusions (Ezek 34:2; Prov 25:14; Isa 57:20; 1 Enoch 80:6) “Text” 3: A very ancient prophecy (1 Enoch 1:9) and interpretation “Text” 4: A very modem prophecy (a prophecy of the apostles) and interpretation

4 5 -7 8 -1 0 9 11 1 2 -1 3 1 2 -1 3 1 4 -1 5 16 1 7 -1 8 19

This section is not, as it might at first seem to a modem reader, mere undisciplined denunciation. It is a very care­ fully composed piece of scriptural commentary (in my com­ mentary on Jude, I called it a “midrash” *) which argues for the statement made in verse 4: that the false teachers are people whose condemnation has long been prophesied. It does this by showing that the libertine teaching and behav­ ior o f the false teachers corresponds to that o f the ungodly people of the last days, whose judgment at the coming o f the Lord is foretold in scriptural types and prophecies. Both the assumption that Scripture is prophetic o f the last times in which the author and his readers are living, and the * Midrash is the Jewish term for a commentary on Scripture.

7

Introduction

exegetical methods used to apply Scripture to the present, resemble ancient Jewish types o f scriptural commentary such as those found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Jude cites a series o f four main “texts” (vv 5-7,11,14-15, 17-18) and comments on each (vv 8-10,12-13,16,19). The “texts” are not always actual quotations. The first two are summary references to Old Testament figures who are taken to be types o f the ungodly o f the last days. The third is a prophecy quoted from the apocryphal apocalypse o f Enoch (1 Enoch 1:9), while the fourth refers to predictions o f the apostles, summarized in the author’s own words. The passages o f commentary contain further allusions to Scripture, introduced to help the exposition o f the main “texts.” The most prominent o f these is the reference to an apocryphal account o f the burial o f Moses in verse 9. But in each case the transition from “text” to commentary is clearly marked by a reference to “these” or “these men,” which indicates that Jude’s opponents (“these”) are the people to whom the “text” refers, and by a transition from the past or the future tense to the present tense, indicating that the type or prophecy is now being fulfilled in the present. Another feature o f the exegetical method is the use of catchwords to link the “text” with the commentary and to link “texts” together. These are usually lost in English translation, but an example which survives in the R SV is “revile” in verses 8-10. We have to appreciate that in this commentary section Jude is engaging, in a very learned and skillful way, in the kind o f scriptural exegesis which contemporary Jewish exegetes practiced. The result is sometimes strange to us, but it belongs to the attempt o f the earliest Jewish Christians to understand and explain their faith within their own reli­ gious culture. Many modem readers have been especially puzzled by Jude’s use o f apocryphal literature. He evidently had great respect for the Jewish apocalyptic work we know JU D E , 2 PETER

8

as 1 Enoch, which he not only quotes explicitly in verses 14-15, but also echoes elsewhere, especially in verses 6, 12-13. The reference in verse 9 is to an apocryphal text no longer extant, though it may have been the lost ending of the Testament o f Moses.3 Precisely what status, in relation to the canonical Scriptures o f the Hebrew Bible, Jude gave to these apocryphal works, we cannot tell. We need not sup­ pose that he included them in his canon o f Scripture, espe­ cially since his quotation from 1 Enoch (vv 14-15) is paired with a clearly nonscriptural prophecy, an oral prophecy of the apostles (v 18). But these apocryphal works must have been valued in the circles to which Jude belonged. Themes Despite its brevity, the letter o f Jude is quite rich in con­ tent, owing to its masterly composition and its remarkable economy o f expression, which at times achieves an almost poetic effect. Its major themes are all closely connected with the specific aim o f the letter: to warn the readers against the danger o f the antinomian teaching of the opponents and to advise them on their response to this dangerous situation. For convenience we can identify three major topics: morality and judgment, Christian living, and the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

9

Introduction

1

M ORALITY AND JUDGMENT

Jude is not engaged in a purely doctrinal controversy about matters such as the nature o f G od or the divinity o f Christ. H is concern is not so much with orthodoxy as with orthopraxy. H is point o f difference with his opponents concerns the moral implications o f the gospel. In common with all the New Testament writers, he holds that faith in Jesus Christ entails a corresponding way o f life. Those who acknowledge Jesus as Lord must live in obedience to him. Jude therefore perceives his opponents to be a serious dan­ ger to the faith and the salvation of his readers because they deny the moral implications o f the gospel. They are antinomians, i.e., people who not only neglect the moral com­ mandments in practice, but reject them in principle and teach others to do so too. In this attack on the moral implications o f the gospel, Jude sees that the gospel itself (“the faith,” v 3) is at stake, since G od’s purpose in the gospel is to save sinners, not to promote sin. In order to highlight the moral seriousness o f Christian faith, Jude insists on the reality o f divine judgment for those who 11

M orality and Judgm ent

deliberately flout the moral authority o f the Lord and teach others to do so. The opponents A s we have noted in the introduction, Jude puts his con­ demnation o f his opponents into the form o f a scriptural commentary (vv 5-19), of which verse 4 is the opening state­ ment o f theme. The commentary is designed to show that the character of the opponents, as people who practice and teach immorality, identifies them as people whose judgment has been prophesied. We shall first of all gather the informa­ tion Jude supplies as to the character o f the opponents, before turning to his conviction of their coming judgment. The opponents are first described by the single, potent word “ungodly” (v 4: Greek asebeis). This is a catchword which Jude picks up again later (vv 15,18). His brief letter in fact contains six occurrences of words belonging to the word group aseb-, more than any other New Testament writing. Four o f these occur in the quotation from Enoch (vv 14-15), which Jude surely selected partly because its repetitive use of these words emphasizes the ungodliness o f those who are to be condemned at the judgment. Although the basic meaning of the aseb' words in Greek is irreverence to the gods or God, in Jewish usage, which provides the background for Jude’s use, they had a strong ethical sense. Because, for the Jew, God’s commandments regulate the whole of human life, an irreverent attitude to God is shown in unrighteous conduct. For Jude this word aptly sums up the antinomianism of the false teachers: unrighteous behavior stemming from an irrev­ erent rejection of the authority of God’s commandments. These ungodly people “pervert the grace of God into im­ morality.” The Christian gospel proclaimed God’s free grace or favor to sinners, delivering them from condemnation and sin. Properly understood, this meant that sinners were set JU D E , 2 PETER

12

free to live righteously. But there is a good deal of evidence for an antinomian misinterpretation of Christian freedom in some early Christian circles (1 Cor 5:1-6; 6:12-20; 10:23; 2 Pet 2:19; Rev 2:14,20; cf., the danger suggested in Rom 3:8; 6:1,15; Gal 5:13,1 Pet 2:16). Jude’s opponents took this line, interpreting the Chris­ tian’s liberation by God’s grace as a liberation from all moral constraint. In this way they perverted the purpose o f G od’s grace—which is to make sinners righteous— into a justifica­ tion of immorality. The additional statement in verse 4 that they “deny our only Sovereign and Lord Jesus Christ” does not mean that they were guilty of christological heresy. Rather, it is by rejecting his moral demands that they in effect deny him. They repudiate his Lordship— a point which Jude takes up again in verse 8. O ld Testam ent com parisons In verses 5-13 Jude compares his opponents with wellknown examples of sin and judgment from the Old Testa­ ment. The material is carefully structured. The first set of three Old Testament examples (vv 5-7), with the application o f them to Jude’s opponents (vv 8-10), characterizes the opponents as people who practice flagrant immorality, while the second set o f three Old Testament figures (v 11), with its exposition (vv 12-13), characterizes them as people who teach others to behave immorally. If we look closely at the three examples o f sin in verses 5-7, we shall see that two main points are made. One point links the first and second examples; the other links the second and third. The faithless generation of Israel in the wilderness (Jude is thinking o f Numbers 14; cf. Deut 1:32; 9:23; Ps 106:24-25) and the fallen angels are examples of apostasy. Israel was the Lord’s own people, who had experi­ enced his liberating grace in the Exodus, but went on to 13

M orality and Judgm ent

reject his authority over them. The angels are “the sons of G od” o f Genesis 6:1-4, as interpreted in Jewish tradition (v 6 alludes specifically to passages in the account o f them in 1 Enoch 6-11). They left their position of heavenly power, which they had exercised in the service of God, in order to subvert God’s purpose on earth. The false teachers resem­ ble both groups in that having once accepted the authority o f the Lord, they now reject it (v 8). But a common theme also links the sin of the angels with that of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, who are said to have “practiced immorality in the same way as the angels” (v 7). The point here is that, in Jewish tradition, the initial sin o f the angels was their sexual desire for and union with women. The corresponding sin of the Sodomites was not, in this instance, homosexual desire, but their desire for sexual relations with angels (Gen 19:4-11). The two cases had al­ ready been compared in Jewish tradition, as examples of out­ rageous transgression o f the order of creation. By picking out these extreme— even bizarre— examples, Jude wishes to characterize immorality as violation of the created order o f the world. The opponents are doubtless not guilty of this particular sexual perversion, but their sexual misconduct (they “defile the flesh,” v 8) is a deliberate rejec­ tion of the divinely ordained order o f things. We are re­ minded that Christian obedience to Christ is not a matter of a new and different morality, replacing the order o f creation, but precisely a restoration and fulfillment of God’s moral purpose in creation. Christian living consists not in flouting, but in fulfilling, the moral order o f creation. The three Old Testament figures in verse 11 have to be understood in the light of their portrayal in Jewish exegetical tradition in Jude’s time. In this light their common character­ istic is that they led others into sin. Cain was not simply the first murderer, but the archetypal sinner who corrupted the whole race of Adam. Balaam was the prophet who, in his JU D E, 2 PETER

14

greed for financial gain, hurried eagerly to advise Balak to entice Israel into sin and so brought about the apostasy of Israel at Beth-peor (Num 25:1-3; cf., 31:16). Korah, who con­ tested the authority of Moses and was said to have disputed the divine origin of certain laws, gathering followers around him, had become the archetypal antinomian teacher. It is therefore as teachers of immorality that the opponents are said to be following in the footsteps of these three. The series of metaphors in verses 12-13 reinforce the point. O f special interest are the four metaphors from na­ ture, one from each region o f the universe (clouds in the air, trees on the earth, waves o f the sea, stars in the heavens). Each of these portrays the opponents precisely as teachers— clouds and rain which promise benefits but fail to deliver them, trees which produce no fruit, waves which corrupt what they touch, stars which go astray from their courses and so mislead those who look to them for guidance. Fur­ thermore, each is also an example of nature failing to fulfill the laws ordained for her. In this lawlessness o f nature, Jude sees an image o f the lawlessness o f his opponents. Once again the sense o f an order o f creation, which these people are transgressing and teaching others to transgress, lies in the background. Spiritual pride One final point about the opponents can be gathered from verses 8, 10, and 19. They claimed prophetic inspiration in visions (“dreamings,” v 8), and they gathered around them an elitist group of other people who similarly claimed to possess the Spirit (hence they “create divisions,” v 19). Evidently, their antinomianism was rooted in spiritual pride. They were the people who really possessed the Spirit, and in this con­ sciousness o f spiritual elevation they felt themselves liberated from the moral constraints with which unspiritual people are 15

M orality and Judgm ent

burdened. The order o f creation no longer bound them, for they were spiritual people. They expressed their new being, their sense o f moral autonomy, in expressions of contempt for the angels who acted as guardians of the moral order of creation (v 8). But Jude has a keen sense o f the irony o f this claim to spiritual superiority. In fact, they are not spiritual (pneumatikos), possessing the Spirit, but natural, earthly, unspiri­ tual (psychikos; v 19) people, who follow their own natural instincts, “their own desires for ungodliness” (v 18). Their indulgence o f the flesh (v 8) shows this. In their pretended knowledge o f the spiritual world, they “slander whatever they do not understand” (the angels), while at the same time their behavior shows that what they understand only too well are their sexual drives. These people who claim to be spiritual, superior to the angels, prove themselves to be liv­ ing only on the subhuman level of the beasts (v 10). Jude’s exposure o f these spiritual impostors is a warning against every tendency to a pseudospirituality in which peo­ ple claim to be liberated or raised above that created order which is subject to the moral authority o f God. Those who try to exceed their human place in creation usually plunge below it But those who truly possess the Spirit live under the Lordship o f Christ, which is the fulfillment o f the moral order o f creation and the restoration of the properly human place in creation. Judgm ent Jude’s O ld Testament examples are examples not only of sin, but also o f judgment. They were among the best-known examples o f divine judgment in history. But they were more than that Like many Jews and early Christians, Jude read the Old Testament history as pointing forward to the last days and the consummation o f history. The way that God JU D E, 2 PETER

16

has already acted in history, in salvation, and judgment pro­ vides the model for the way he will finally fulfill his purpose for history, in eschatological salvation and judgment. God’s end-time action will, o f course, surpass his acts in history, but it will also correspond to them. New Testament typology can therefore be appropriately described as eschatological typology: God’s acts in the Old Testament history are types which point forward to, and are surpassed by, his final acts in Christ. Thus Jude’s examples of divine judgment are not just examples. They are types which point forward to the judgment o f the last day, at which the Lord Jesus will exercise the judgment which belongs to his eschatological saving work. They are in a sense prophecies of the judgment on the sinners of the last times. We can therefore understand that Jude follows his two sets o f Old Testament types with two actual prophecies. One, ascribed to Enoch, describes the eschatological coming of the Lord to judge the ungodly (vv 14-15). The other is a summary o f the prophetic teaching of the apostles, who commonly warned newly established Christian communities about the ungodly people of the last times, in which they were living (v 18). Although the quotation does not explicitly say that these ungodly people will incur judgment at the Lord’s com­ ing, this threat is to be understood. Jude’s argument is that because his opponents conform to these types and prophecies o f ungodly people, they will in­ cur the prophesied judgment on such people. It should be noted carefully that this identification o f his opponents as figures o f prophecy is not fatalistic, but functional In other words, by their behavior these people identify themselves with the doomed ungodly o f prophecy. The ungodly whose fate at the judgment is prophesied are, so to speak, an open category into which any who behave like that put them­ selves. They can also remove themselves from that category by repentance; Jude has not given up on his opponents, as 17

M orality and Judgm ent

verses 22-23 will show us later. But verses 4-19 are not addressed to the opponents themselves, as a call to repen­ tance. They are addressed to Jude’s readers, as a warning of the danger in which their opponents place them: the danger o f incurring the judgment which behavior like that o f the opponents incurs. Jude, like most New Testament writers, writes as though the coming of Christ to eschatological judgment—the Parousia, the end of history—will occur within the lifetime of his contemporaries. This should be no great problem to us. At a superficially literal level, this common early Christian as­ sumption was a mistake. But at a profounder, theological level it expressed an important truth. Whether or not we shall survive to the judgment, we must all live in the light of it What will be exposed when Jesus Christ brings God’s pur­ pose in history to its fulfillment is the final truth of all our lives. Those who have lived their lives deliberately counter to his purpose—who have known the way to righteousness but have made a deliberate choice to be sinners—must perish under that exposure. It cannot be otherwise if God is right­ eous, if he has made us so that we cannot fulfill ourselves except in righteousness, and if he has promised that right­ eousness, for the good of his whole creation, must in the end prevail.

JU D E, 2 PETER

18

2

CHRISTIAN LIVING

The condemnation o f his opponents as ungodly people whose judgment has been prophesied is not the main point of Jude’s letter. It is a point which very much needed to be made, in order to alert his readers to the danger they were in. But it was subsidiary to the positive main point, which was to urge his readers to resist the influence of the false teachers and to continue to live faithful Christian lives in obedience to the gospel. To remind them o f the central characteristics of faithful Christian living was Jude’s unsensational, but necessary, aim in writing. Contending for the Faith Jude announces the purpose of his letter in verse 3: it is to appeal to his readers “to carry on the fight for the faith which was once and for all delivered to the saints.” Here “the faith” is used in the sense of the content of what is believed. Much later than Jude the term came to imply a detailed statement of Christian beliefs such as we have in the 19

Christian Living

creeds o f the early church. But this is not Jude’s meaning. He uses “the faith,” as Paul sometimes does (e.g., Gal 1:23), to mean simply “the gospel,” the central Christian message of salvation through Jesus Christ. In the situation to which he writes, it is not some particular point of orthodox belief that is at stake, but the gospel itself. The antinomian teach­ ing o f the opponents, by denying the moral implications of the gospel, is undermining the whole point of the gospel, which is to save sinners from sin and make them righteous. Jude has two ways o f enabling his readers to identify “the faith” correctly, in distinction from the perversion o f the gospel taught by the opponents. In verse 3, he calls it “the faith which was once and for all delivered to the saints”; in verse 20, he calls it “your most holy faith.” The first o f these descriptions recalls the readers to the original missionary preaching o f the apostles who founded their church(es). In that first preaching of the gospel in that area, the apostles handed on to their first converts (“the saints”) the authentic Christian message (“the faith”) as they themselves had received it from their Lord. They handed it on “once and for all” because it is the message of the “once and for all” salvific action o f God in the history o f Jesus Christ (Rom 6:10; Heb 9:12,26-28; 10:10; 1 Pet 3:18). So the essential Christian message cannot change. O f course, this does not imply a rigid adherence to a particular formulation o f the gospel. The way the gospel needs to be expressed, and its implications in different contexts, may need to change: in the various New Testament writings themselves we see different ways o f expressing and drawing out the implica­ tions of the gospel. But the essential message itself is given once and for all. This is why early Christian teachers, like Jude and Paul (Rom 16:17; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 1:9), referred their readers back to the gospel as it was first received by those churches from their founding apostles as the standard by which all subsequent teaching was to be tested and false JU D E , 2 PETER

20

teaching exposed. For the same reason, the scriptural record o f the apostolic gospel in the New Testament must serve as the standard and test o f all Christian teaching for us. In calling the gospel “your most holy faith” (v 20), Jude again implies that it is the gospel his readers have received and believed, as distinct from the false gospel now being intro­ duced by his opponents. It is “most holy” because it comes from the holy God and makes its recipients holy. It makes them “the saints” (holy ones, v 3), a people who belong to God and must therefore live lives obedient to him, reflecting his righteousness (cf., 1 Pet 1:14-16). In this way Jude indi­ cates that the moral implications of the gospel are integral to its very nature. The antinomianism o f the false teachers amounts to another gospel. So how does Jude expect his readers “to carry on the fight for the faith” (v 3)? He does not ask them to start fighting on behalf of the gospel, as though the fight only begins now that the gospel is threatened by the false teachers. The Greek word he uses (epago̅nizesthai) probably indicates that they are to continue a fight in which they are already engaged. The false teachers and their message are not the enemy against whom they fight (the metaphor of fighting, taken from the Greek games, need not imply an enemy at all). It is not a case of defending the gospel against attacks. Rather, Jude’s readers are in danger of being deflected from their fight by the false teachers and their message; so that Jude has to urge them not to listen to the false teachers, but to carry on the fight in which they were already engaged before the false teachers arrived. The fight which Jude has in mind is that which Chris­ tians carry on by being faithful to the gospel in their lives, by living out the gospel in the life o f the church (cf., Phil 1:27). The struggle of Christian living is a contest on behalf of the gospel, not in the sense o f merely defending the gospel against attacks, but in the offensive sense of positively promoting the advance and victory of the gospel in human life. The false 21

Christian Living

teachers are a threat to Jude’s readers because they are per­ suading them not to live out the gospel in their lives, in effect to give up contending for the faith. It becomes clear, as we have already seen in the introduc­ tion with reference to the structure of Jude’s letter, that Jude’s notion o f contending for the faith is not spelled out in verses 4-19, but in verses 20-23. In verses 4-19 he is alerting his readers to the danger which makes it necessary for him to appeal to them to go on contending for the faith. The appeal itself consists of the positive exhortations to faithful Christian living which appear in verses 20-21, along with the pastoral advice on dealing with the false teachers and their disciples in verses 22-23. These verses (20-23) are not, as they have so often been treated, an appendix o f secondary importance, but the climax o f Jude’s letter.

Four essentials of C hristian living Jude provides his readers with a masterly succinct sum­ mary of what it means to live in faithfulness to the gospel (vv 20-21). These four commands are doubtless not original but drawn from traditional forms o f Christian teaching. A f­ ter all, Jude intended nothing new. He wrote to recall his readers to what they had known since the time of their instruction as new Christians. If they are to resist the false teaching, they must simply go on living as they already know Christians should live. This is always the most impor­ tant response to teaching which threatens the integrity of Christian discipleship. But if the commands are not new, Jude has carefully se­ lected this set of four. That the four commands encompass the whole of Christian life is indicated by the fact that they incorporate two patterns o f three which were very familiar in early Christian teaching. The second, third, and fourth o f Jude’s injunctions refer respectively to the three persons JU D E , 2 PETER

22

o f the Trinity—the Holy Spirit, God, Jesus Christ— indicating that the way of life demanded is a response in faith to the trinitarian God as he is known in the gospel. The first, third, and fourth injunctions represent the famil­ iar triad o f faith, love, and hope— a way of summarizing what is involved in living according to the gospel, which Paul also took over from early tradition. The first command is to “build yourselves up on the foundation of your most holy faith.” It evokes the image of the Christian community as a building— the eschatological temple of God— of which the gospel is the foundation. (Paul in a different, though not contradictory, use o f this image regards Jesus Christ himself as the foundation, 1 Cor 3:11.) The meaning is not that each of Jude’s readers should build himself or herself up, but that all should contribute to the spiritual growth o f the whole community. If they build on the foundation o f their holy faith, then the community they build will be a holy one, living out the moral requirements o f the gospel. The second command is to pray with the inspiration o f the Holy Spirit. The opponents falsely claimed the inspiration o f the Spirit. It is perhaps significant that in contrast to the visions and prophecies which the opponents put forward as the effects of their possession of the Spirit, Jude makes prayer in the Spirit one o f his four essentials of Christian living. Visions and prophecies may be important to the life of the church, but Spirit-inspired prayer is essential to the life of the church and to the life o f each and every Christian. The opponents misunderstood the Spirit as raising them above the life of creaturely obedience to God. Their visions and prophecies fed this spiritual conceit Prayer is less open to such distortion. It makes us aware of our dependence on God. Prayer inspired by the Spirit o f Christ expresses our relation to God as our Father, on whom we are wholly de­ pendent and to whom we owe absolute obedience. 23

Christian Living

The third command, to “keep yourselves in the love of G od,” can be well expounded by a Johannine parallel (though it refers to remaining in Christ’s love, rather than God’s): “Now remain in my love. If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love” (John 15:9b-10). It is not that G od’s love for us is conditional, but that we can exclude ourselves from it if we do not respond to it by living as he demands of us. Finally, the fourth command characterizes Christian living as living toward its eschatological goal. The idea o f “waiting,” which is frequently used in early Christian literature to de­ scribe the orientation of Christian life toward the Parousia, is not intended to suggest a purely passive attitude. It de­ scribes the way in which the whole existence o f the early Christians was lived in the light of the coming Parousia, when the truth of all human lives will be exposed under God’s judgment. It means living in readiness for that day. It means living all the time as we would want the Lord Jesus to find us when he comes. Jude has made it more than plain that those who live ungodly lives, deliberately flouting God’s saving intention in Christ, can expect only condemnation at the judgment. But those who live out the gospel in their lives can expect “the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life” (v 21). We should note carefully that it is mercy they expect. Their faithful Christian lives do not entitle them to eternal life as a right. Only as forgiven sinners can they receive eternal life through God’s mercy. What distinguishes them from the ungodly is that they take their forgiveness seriously. D ealing with those who err The manuscript evidence for verses 22-23 constitutes one o f the most confused textual situations in the New JU D E, 2 PETER

24

Testament, and it is impossible to be sure what the original text was. In my commentary I argued that the most proba­ ble original text is that o f the oldest extant manuscript (P72), which should be translated: Snatch some from the fire, but on those who dispute have mercy with fear, hating even the clothing that has been soiled by the flesh. Jude’s language here is strongly influenced by Zechariah 3:2-4, which accounts for the metaphors he uses. W hat would otherwise be rather obscure instructions would not have been for his first readers, because he takes for granted their familiarity with the usual early Christian procedures for dealing with those guilty of serious sin and propagators o f dangerously false teaching. He assumes that his readers, in a spirit of Christian love, are going to warn the false teachers and their disciples o f the danger o f judgment they are incur­ ring and call them to repentance. The first of his two instructions refers to those with whom this approach is successful. By warning and restoring the sinners, Jude’s readers will “snatch some from the fire.” The metaphor (taken from Zech 3:2, but given new mean­ ing) envisages the sinners as poised on the brink of hell-fire and saved at the last moment from plunging into it. We see both the seriousness with which Jude takes the threat of imminent judgment hanging over his opponents and also that he is far from content to leave them to their fate. The extremity of their danger arouses his pastoral concern to save them from it. He also anticipates, however, that some will not respond to their fellow-Christians’ loving rebuke, but “dispute” (i.e., argue against it) continuing to assert their antinomian teaching in self-justification. But not even these are to be 25

Christian Living

abandoned to their fate; far from it. Jude’s readers must continue to “have mercy” on them, to seek their salvation by prayer and whatever other means might be available. But Jude is also very conscious o f the danger which these unre­ pentant teachers o f error constitute for his readers. His advice is to “have mercy with fear, ” i.e., taking the greatest possible care to avoid being influenced by them. His read­ ers must fear the judgment o f God, which they too will incur if they are infected by the sins o f these sinners. Just as earlier he had compared the false teachers with rocks, close contact with which causes shipwreck (v 12: “dangerous reefs”), so now he uses the metaphor (taken from Zech 3:3-4) o f clothes soiled by the body’s excretions to suggest the contaminating effect o f their sin on everything around them. Probably he means that personal contact with the false teachers should normally be avoided (cf., 2 John 1011) for fear o f their influence. In these instructions we see Jude as a true Christian pastor in a serious situation. His pastoral concern embraces both his readers, who need to be protected from the dangerous influ­ ence of the false teachers, and the false teachers themselves, and those who have already been won over by them. Despite their apostasy, the latter are no less than the former the object of his continuing love. The strong emphasis on judgment in his letter has not hardened his heart against them. It has awakened his pastoral concern for them. He combines abhor­ rence for the sins they are promoting, firm belief in God’s judgment on sin, with a genuinely Christian desire for the reclamation of even the most obstinate. The goal of Christian living The words of verse 21, “keep yourselves in the love of God,” might suggest that it lies solely within the power and

JU D E , 2 PETER

26

responsibility of Jude’s readers to remain faithful and attain the goal of salvation: eternal life. This power and responsibility are certainly real and needed to be stressed against the antinomianism of the false teachers. But they are only one side o f the coin, as Jude himself makes quite clear. Jude’s deliber­ ate literary technique of making catchword connections be­ tween parts of his letter links these words o f verse 21 (“keep yourselves in the love o f G od”) with his opening description of his readers in verse 1: “loved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ.” Jude is confident that his readers are kept safe by God for the Parousia o f Jesus Christ, when they will enter into their final salvation. Because they belong to Jesus their Lord, God keeps them safe for him until he comes to claim them as his own. Thus the readers’ own responsibility to keep them­ selves within the love o f G od is enclosed within G od’s lov­ ing keeping of them. The mystery o f human responsibility within the divine sovereignty is not, however, explained by Jude. His point is not a theoretical but an existential one: Christians can exercise their real responsibility to remain faithful to G od within a sustaining assurance of God’s power to keep them in his love. Jude returns to this point in his magnificent concluding doxology (vv 24-25), which is not only an ascription of praise to God but also a confident prayer that God will preserve his readers from the spiritual disaster with which the false teaching threatens them and bring them to the eschatological destiny he intends for them. This destiny is portrayed in the words: “to present you without blemish in the presence of his glory, with rejoicing” (v 24). Jude here pictures the last day as the eschatological festival o f worship, in which the achievement o f G od’s purposes for his people will take the form o f his presentation o f them as perfect sacrifices in the heavenly sanctuary, offered up to the glory

27

Christian Living

o f G od amid the jubilation o f the worshipers. This, in the end, is the purpose o f Christian living. All Jude’s concerns in his letter, to combat the false teaching for the sake o f the health o f the church and the Christian obedience o f its members, are finally aimed at this goal: that they should in the end be found fit to be a sacrificial offering to God.

JU D E , 2 PETER

28

3

JESUS THE LORD

In the short letter o f Jude we cannot expect to find a complete Christology. He did not write for that purpose. But there is enough relevant material in it to give us im­ portant insight into the way Jesus was regarded in the Palestinian Jewish Christian movement o f which Jude was a leader 1 Jesu s the Messiah Jude never uses simply the personal name Jesus; nor does he ever use the title Christ (Messiah) without the name Jesus. He always uses the two in combination: Jesus Christ (vv 1,4, 17, 21, 25). Already, in the Jewish Christianity of Palestine, “the Messiah” was on the way to becoming a kind of surname for Jesus. But this was certainly not because the meaning of the designation Messiah was being forgotten, as though it were becoming a mere name without meaning. Rather it was because Christians needed a way of distinguishing their Jesus from others who bore this very common name. They could, 29

Jesus the Lord

and sometimes did, call him “Jesus o f Nazareth,” as nonChristian Jews did, but they preferred “Jesus the Messiah” because it distinguished Jesus in the way that was theologi­ cally decisive for them. It indicated not only which Jesus it was that they preached but also why they preached him. That God had anointed Jesus as his Messiah was the fundamental theological fact about Jesus which made them Christians and gave them their gospel. The belief that Jesus was the Messiah was what distinguished Christian Jews from other Jews. So fundamental was this designation of Jesus that it spread from the earliest Palestinian church to all other branches o f early Christianity and gave Christians the name by which they became universally known. For the first Christians, Jesus’ messiahship meant that he was the descendant o f David whom G od had anointed as his eschatological viceroy, the one who was accomplishing G od’s final purpose in history, the agent of final salvation and judgment. It indicated the uniqueness and finality of Jesus’ role in the divine purpose; and it suggested that, as God’s vicegerent, he exercises God’s authority to save and to judge. However, it is noteworthy that Jude is content to call Jesus “Jesus the Messiah” (Jesus Christ) only in the opening address and greeting of his letter (v 1, twice). Once he moves into the body of his letter he always combines “Jesus Christ” with “our Lord” (vv 4, 17, 21, 25). This is because he is not content to leave the implication o f Jesus’ divine authority implicit, as it is in the designation Messiah; he wishes to make it explicit, as it is in the title Lord. The title “Lord” Jude’s emphasis on the Lordship of Jesus is characteristic of early Christianity generally, but in his case it should also be connected with his polemic against the false teachers. Their error was precisely to repudiate the moral authority of JU D E, 2 PETER

30

Jesus as the Lord of his people and as the coming Judge of the world. Hence Jude’s first reference to Jesus’ Lordship is in his summary statement o f the error and danger of the false teachers (v 4), and takes the emphatic form: “our only Sovereign and Lord.” Here Jude uses not only the word which early Christians very commonly used to designate Jesus as “Lord” (kyrios), but also a word meaning “Master” or “Sovereign” (despote̅s), which was very rarely used of Jesus. To this combination of titles we shall return. After verse 4 Jude three times calls Jesus “our Lord” (vv 17, 21: “our Lord Jesus Christ”; v 25: “Jesus Christ our Lord”). He also calls Jesus “the Lord” in verse 14 (we shall discuss this usage shortly). In verse 9, however, “the Lord” is probably God rather than Jesus. More problematic is verse 5, where the majority of manuscripts read “the Lord who saved a people out o f the land of Egypt . . . ,” but some important textual authori­ ties have “Jesus who saved a people out of the land of Egypt. . . .” Some scholars accept the reading “Jesus”; oth­ ers prefer “the Lord” and understand it to refer to Jesus; others also prefer the reading “the Lord” but interpret it as a reference to God. I have argued elsewhere for this last posi­ tion.2Jude is not in verse 5 referring explicitly to the preexis­ tent Christ, but he is referring to the same divine Lordship which is now exercised by Jesus Christ. The divine judg­ ments of verses 5-7 are cited by Jude as types o f the last judgment which will be carried out by the Lord Jesus. So the fact that the reference o f “the Lord” varies in verses 5,9 , and 14 between God and Christ is natural. Jude is concerned throughout with that divine authority to judge which God has now delegated to his Messiah Jesus. It is this authority (kyriote̅s) which his opponents reject (v 8) when they “deny our only Sovereign and Lord Jesus Christ” (v 4). It has often been said that in the earliest Jewish Chris­ tianity, Jesus was called Lord primarily with reference to his 31

Jesus the Lord

future (and imminent) coming as Savior and Judge. The Aramaic invocation from the earliest churches, which has been preserved in Greek transliteration as “Maranatha” (1 Cor 16:22; Didache 10:6) and which should probably be understood to mean “O ur Lord, come!” (ma̅ra̅na ̅’ 'a̅tha )̅ , certainly points in that direction. But it also shows that the coming Lord can already be addressed as Lord in the present. Moreover, he is addressed as “our Lord.” In other words, he has already gathered a community who now ac­ knowledge him as their Lord, while awaiting his coming to complete their salvation. It is doubtful if there was ever a Christology in which the Lordship o f Christ did not evoke his constitution of the Christian community (through his ministry, death, and out­ pouring o f the Spirit) and his present status as Lord (through his resurrection and exaltation by God) as well as his future coming as eschatological Savior and Judge. Jude has no occasion to refer to Christ’s already accomplished work of salvation— except typologically in verse 5, which implies that the new people o f God have been saved through a new exodus. But in calling Jesus “our Lord” he takes for granted the work o f salvation which has made Jesus Lord o f his people, the Christian community. Jude’s focus, owing to the aim o f his letter, is on the present Lordship of Jesus over his people, who owe him obedience as Lord now, and on his future coming to judge those who reject his Lordship (vv 14-15) and to complete the salvation o f those who ac­ knowledge that Lordship (v 21). The L ord ' coming to judgm ent (v 14) In verses 14-15 Jude quotes an apocryphal prophecy of Enoch which begins, “Behold, the Lord came with his ten thousands o f holy ones, to execute judgment on all. . . .” In its original context (1 Enoch 1:9) this is a prophecy o f the JU D E , 2 PETER

32

eschatological coming o f G od to judge the wicked. The pas­ sage in 1 Enoch is based on a series o f O ld Testament texts about “the day o f the Lord” (especially Deut 33:2; Isa 40:4, 10; Jer 25:31; Mic 1:3-4; and Hab 3:3-9), which were under­ stood in Jewish apocalyptic writings as prophecies o f the coming o f God at the end of the history o f this age to judge the wicked, to save his people, and to establish his kingdom. But “the Lord” is not in the original text o f 1 Enoch 1:9. The subject there is unstated, but it must be understood from 1:3-4 to be “the great Holy One,” “the eternal G od.” Jude has supplied the subject, and in doing so has interpreted the prophecy as a reference to the Parousia o f the Lord Jesus. In doing so, Jude is following a practice which seems to go back to the earliest Christians’ interpretation o f the Old Testament, in which “day of the Lord” prophecies o f the coming o f G od to judgment were applied to the Parousia of Jesus Christ as judge. For example, Zechariah 14:5b (“Then the Lord your G od will come, and all the holy ones with him”) lies behind several New Testament passages about the Parousia (Matt 16:27; 25:31; Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26; 1 Thess 3:13; 4:14; 2 Thess 1:7; Rev 19:14), while Isaiah 40:10 (“Behold the Lord God comes with might . . . behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him”) is echoed with reference to the Parousia in Revelation 20:12. And 2 Thessalonians 1:7-8 is dependent on Isaiah 66:15-16 (“For behold, the Lord will come in fire . . . to render his anger in fury, and his rebuke with flames o f fire . . .”). Similarly, the O ld Testament phrase "the day o f the Lord” itself was applied to the Parousia, with “the Lord” under­ stood as Jesus (1 Thess 5:2; 2 Thess 2:2; 2 Pet 3:10; cf., 1 Cor 1:8; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14). It should be noted that many o f the O ld Testament prophecies which were thus interpreted o f the Parousia begin with the words, “Behold, the Lord will come . . .” (or similar). In adapting the quotation from 1 Enoch 1:9 to read, “Behold, the Lord came . . .” (i.e., 33

Jesus the Lord

“will come”: The past tense is used, as often in the Old Testament prophets, to express the certainty o f a future event), Jude was not only applying the prophecy to the com­ ing of the Lord Jesus; he was also conforming it to the familiar form o f words in such prophecies. The most interesting point about this early Christian exegetical practice is the way the eschatological coming of God is interpreted as the eschatological coming o f Jesus. In the Old Testament prophecies “the Lord” represents, in the Hebrew text, the divine name, the tetragrammaton (YHWH). In New Testament times Jews considered the name too sacred to pronounce. In reading the text aloud, they usually substituted a word meaning “Lord.” In H e­ brew this was >ado̅na̅y (“my Lord”). Some Greek-speaking Jews reading the O ld Testament in Greek were beginning to use the word kyrios (“Lord”) for this purpose: This is the word which New Testament quotations o f the Old Testa­ ment regularly use as a substitute for the tetragrammaton. (It seems that this was a common, but not the universal practice, and that, for example, other Greek-speaking Jews were in the habit o f substituting despote̅s [“M aster,” “Sovereign”] for the tetragrammaton.) Thus, when early Christians applied O ld Testament texts about the eschato­ logical coming o f “the Lord” to Jesus’ Parousia, they were in effect transferring the divine name to him (as Phil 2:9-11 makes quite clear). This is what Jude is also doing in verse 14. It is important to note that early Christians did not apply Old Testament texts about “the Lord” to Jesus indis­ criminately. In most New Testament quotations from the O ld Testament which use “the Lord” (kyrios) to represent the tetragrammaton, “the Lord” is not Jesus but God. There are examples, besides the “day o f the Lord” prophe­ cies, o f the application o f such texts to Jesus, but they rep­ resent an occasional, rather than a consistent, exegetical JU D E , 2 PETER

34

practice. It seems that the practice began with a quite spe­ cific class o f texts— “day o f the Lord” prophecies applied to the Parousia— and spread to a few other, but by no means to all, passages. This observation gives us a most important insight into the way that Christians first perceived the divine Lordship of Jesus. They did not simply identify Jesus with God, as though everything the Old Testament said about God could be applied to Jesus; but they saw Jesus as the one who carries out God’s eschatological purpose of salvation and judgment. Therefore the royal and judicial authority which Jesus as God’s Messiah exercised was God’s authority. In this way the christological title “Lord”— indicating Jesus’ royal and judi­ cial authority as God’s anointed viceroy— coalesced with God’s name “Lord” (representing the tetragrammaton), which indicated God’s royal and judicial authority. A s the one who exercises God’s authority on the last day, the divine name in prophecies o f the last day can refer to Jesus. Jude’s use of “the Lord” in verse 14 therefore carries a surprising amount of significance. It designates Jesus as the one whom God has appointed to carry out the whole of his eschatological purpose on his behalf, who therefore acts with God’s authority to save and to judge, and who there­ fore bears the divine name itself. Though it does not simply identify Jesus with God, it strongly assimilates Jesus to God. The Lordship o f God is Jesus’ Lordship; and God is known now and in the future only through Jesus. The seeds of all later Christian thinking about Jesus’ divinity can be found in this original Jewish-Christian understanding o f Jesus as the one through whom all God’s eschatological action oc­ curs and therefore as the one to whom Christians address, in worship, their acknowledgment o f the divine Lordship. It was only a matter of time before the one who was worshiped as Lord had to be explicitly understood as belonging to the being of God. 35

Jesus the Lord

Our only Sovereign an d Lord (v 4) We have already noticed that this emphatic statement of Jesus’ authority as Lord is deliberately placed at the outset of Jude’s condemnation o f the false teachers. In their fla­ grant immorality, they were denying Jesus’ exclusive author­ ity, as their Lord, to command and to judge, and subjecting themselves instead to other lords (cf., Matt 6:24; Rom 6:1223; Gal 4:3, 8-9; 2 Pet 2:19). But there are two other points to notice about the phrase. First, it reinforces a point we have already made: that Jesus’ authority as Lord is God’s authority exercised by Jesus. The word despote̅s was normally used in Greek either for the master o f a household, with absolute authority over his family and slaves, or for the ruler o f a state, whose unlim­ ited power over a people was thought of by analogy with the master o f a household. Jews quite commonly used it o f God, and this Jewish use was sometimes continued by Christians (Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; Rev 6:10). Sometimes Jews used it as a Greek substitute for the tetragrammaton (YHWH). Most probably Jude uses it o f the royal and judicial authority of Jesus (so that “Sovereign” is a better translation than “Master”),3 not with any meaning distinct from that of “Lord” (kyrios), but simply to reinforce the meaning. But the whole phrase— “our only Sovereign and Lord”— would carry, to Jewish ears, a strong indication of divinity. It is the kind of phrase which Jews used to confess the exclusive Lordship of the one God o f Israel and to refuse idolatrous allegiance to other lords.4 For Jewish monotheists it was inconceivable that “our only Sovereign and Lord” could be other than God. That Jude can speak of “our only Sovereign and Lord Jesus Christ” is remarkable testimony to the extent to which he identified Jesus’ Lordship with God’s. When Christians worship and serve Jesus as their only Lord, the only one to whom they owe absolute obedience, JU D E , 2 PETER

36

they are not infringing monotheism but expressing monothe­ ism in its Christian form. Jesus’ Lordship is not another Lordship alongside or in competition with God’s; it is not even subordinate to God’s. It is God’s Lordship. The second point o f interest about the phrase is more purely historical. The word despote̅s is hardly ever used of Jesus in extant Christian literature before the late second century. The only instance apart from Jude 4 is 2 Peter 2:1, whose author is dependent on Jude and has simply taken the usage over from Jude 4. However, we do know, from the third-century writer Julius Africanus, that in Palestinian Jewish Christianity the relatives of Jesus, who continued to be Christian leaders in the Jewish-Christian churches down to at least the early second century, were known as hoi desposynoi, “the people who belong to the Sovereign.”5 The term would have meant virtually “the royal family,” suggesting the special dignity which Jewish Christians often attributed to the relatives of Jesus because o f their relationship to the Messiah Jesus. But the use o f this term for the relatives o f Jesus indicates that in Palestinian Jewish-Christian circles Jesus must have been called ho despote̅s. Jude’s use o f this term for Jesus therefore reflects an unusual usage which helps to locate his letter firmly within the Palestinian Jewish-Christian circles where Jesus’ brothers were leaders.

37

Jesus the Lord

2 PETER

INTRODUCTION

Second Peter presents itself as a testament or farewell discourse of the apostle Peter, written in the form of a letter shortly before his death (1:14). Its object is to remind the readers of Peter’s teaching and to defend this teaching against objections raised by certain false teachers.1 The structure of the letter The structure of 2 Peter can be analyzed as follows: Address and Greeting (1:1-2) T 1 Theme: a summary of Peter’s message (1:3-11) T 2 Occasion: Peter’s testament (1:12-15) A 1 First apologetic section (1:16-21) Two replies to objection 1: that the apostles based their preaching o f the Parousia on invented myths (1:16-19) Reply to objection 2: that Old Testament prophecies were merely the products of human minds (1:20-21)

41

Introduction

T 3 Peter’s prediction o f false teachers (2: l-3a) A 2 Second apologetic section (2:3b-10a) Reply to objection 3: that divine judgment never happens (2:3b- 10a) E1 Denunciation of the false teachers (2:10b— 22) T 4 Peter’s prediction of scoffers (3:1-4) (including objection 4: v 4) A 3 Third apologetic section (3:5-10) Two replies to objection 4: that the expectation o f the Parousia is disproved by its delay (3:5-10) E2

Exhortation to holy living (3:11-16) Conclusion (3:17-18).

In this analysis three types o f passage are identified (apart from the opening and concluding passages): those which belong to the genre o f testament (labeled T 1-T 4), those which are apologetic in character (labeled A 1-A 3), and two passages of an exhortatory nature (E1, E2). Second Peter is clearly a letter (1:1-2) written to churches to which 1 Peter was addressed (3:1). But it also belongs to the literary genre o f “testament,” which was well known in the Jewish literature o f the period. In such testaments an Old Testament figure, such as Moses or Ezra, knowing that his death is approaching, gives a final message to his people, which typically includes ethical exhortation and prophetic revelations o f the future. The genre had definite thematic and formal characteris­ tics. In 2 Peter, four passages (T1-T 4 in the analysis) particu­ larly resemble the Jewish testament literature and clearly identify the work as Peter’s testament. In 1:12-15, a passage full of conventional testament language, Peter describes the occasion for writing as his awareness of approaching death and his desire to provide for his teaching to be remembered after his death. This teaching is summarized in 1:3-11, which JU D E, 2 PETER

42

is in form a miniature homily, following a pattern used in farewell speeches. It plays a key role in the book, as a defini­ tive summary of Peter’s ethical and religious instruction. Then there are also two passages of prophecy (2:l-3a; 3:1-4) in which Peter foresees that, after his death, his message will be challenged by false teachers. The rest of 2 Peter is structured around these four pas­ sages belonging to the testament genre. It includes three apologetic sections which aim to answer the objections the false teachers raise against Peter’s teaching. There are four such objections, but only the last of them is explicitly stated as such (3:4). In the other three cases, the objection is im­ plicit in the author’s denial of it (1:16a, 20; 2:3b). These apologetic sections give the work its polemical character, as not simply a testamentary statement o f Peter’s message but also a defense o f it against objections. They make it impor­ tant to take account o f the polemical aim of the letter when we try to appreciate its teaching. Finally, there are two pas­ sages (E1, E2) which contrast the libertine behavior of the false teachers (denounced in 2:10b-22) with the holy living expected of the readers if they are faithful to Peter’s teaching (3:11-16).

Authorship and date The problem of the authorship o f 2 Peter is best consid­ ered in connection with the form and structure of the letter. In the Jewish literature of the time, testaments were pseudepigraphal. They were attributed to Old Testament figures long dead and were probably understood to be exercises in historical imagination, putting into the mouth of these fig­ ures the kind of thing they might have been expected to say. This establishes an initial presumption that 2 Peter is like­ wise a work written in Peter’s name by someone else after his death. 43

Introduction

It remains possible that the testament genre could have been used by Peter to write his own, real testament. But it should also be noticed how the predictive character of the testament genre is used in 2 Peter. Instead o f reflecting the situation in which Peter is said to be writing, the whole work is addressed to a situation after Peter’s death. His two predictions o f false teachers function as pegs on which is hung the apologetic debate with these teachers about the validity of Peter’s message. Moreover, whereas the testamen­ tary passages speak o f the false teachers in the future tense, predicting their rise after Peter’s death (2:1— 3a; 3:1-4; cf. 3:17), the apologetic sections and the denunciation o f the false teachers refer to them in the present tense (2:3b— 22; 3:5-10,16b). It is difficult to read 2 Peter without supposing the false teachers to be contemporaries o f the author, with whom he is already in actual debate. The alternation o f predictive and present-tense references to them is therefore best understood as a deliberate stylistic device by which the author conveys the message: These apostolic prophecies are now being ful­ filled. In other words, Petrine authorship is a fiction, but it is one which the author does not feel obliged to maintain throughout his work. In that case, it must be a deliberately transparent fiction, a literary convention which the author expected his readers to recognize as such, just as modem readers are not likely to mistake a historical novel for factual history. For these and other reasons, most modem scholars con­ sider 2 Peter to be pseudepigraphal, though some still de­ fend Petrine authorship. The most cogent additional reasons for denying Peter’s authorship are the Hellenistic religious language and ideas and the evidence for dating the work after Peter’s death in the mid-sixties. Scholars differ widely on the date o f 2 Peter, which many consider to be the latest New Testament writing. But the clearest evidence JU D E , 2 PETER

44

for a postapostolic date is 3:4, which indicates that the first Christian generation has died. This passage may well sug­ gest that the letter was written at the time when this had only just become true, ca. A .D. 80-90. This was the time when those who had expected the Parousia during the life­ time o f the apostolic generation would face the problem o f the nonfulfillment o f that expectation, but there is no evi­ dence that this continued to be felt as a problem in the second century. If 2 Peter was written not by Peter, but after his death, why did the author present his work in the form o f Peter’s testament? Probably because his intention was to defend the apostolic message in the period after the death o f the apos­ tles (cf. 3:4) against teachers who held that, in important respects, the teaching o f the apostles was now discredited. Whereas they were claiming to correct the apostles’ teach­ ing, the author o f 2 Peter regards it as normative for the postapostolic church. By writing in Peter’s name he claims no authority o f his own, except as a faithful mediator o f the apostolic message, which he defends against attacks. The form o f the letter as an apostolic testament is therefore closely connected with its apologetic purpose as a vindication o f the normative author­ ity of the apostolic teaching. That the author chose to write Peter’s testament is probably best explained if he was a leader o f the Roman church, which had counted Peter as the most prestigious of its leaders in the previous generation. Thus, in my view, the pseudepigraphal device expresses a justified claim by the real author to be faithfully trans­ mitting the tradition o f apostolic teaching and appropriately reinterpreting it for the new circumstances of postapostolic churches. There may be some readers who are not con­ vinced by this approach and prefer to think o f 2 Peter as a letter written by the apostle himself shortly before his death in A.D. 64 or 65. They will find that while my own view 45

Introduction

o f the authorship o f the letter very occasionally affects the argument o f the following chapters, for the most part it makes little difference. The opponents The opponents have usually been identified as Gnostics; but this identification, as recent scholarship recognizes, is insecure. The only features o f their teaching which are clear from our author’s refutation o f it are eschatological skepti­ cism and moral libertinism. The Parousia had been expected during the lifetime o f the apostles, but the first generation o f Christians had now passed away. In the opponents’ view, this proved the primitive Christian eschatological hope to have been mistaken (3:4, 9a). There would be no eschatological judgment (2:3b), no divine intervention to eliminate evil and establish a world o f righteousness. This attitude seems to have been based on a rationalistic denial of divine interven­ tion in history (cf. 3:4b) as well as on the nonfulfillment of the Parousia prophecy. But it was also related to the ethical libertinism o f the opponents. They claimed to be emancipat­ ing people from fear o f divine judgment and therefore from conventional Christian morality (cf. 2:19a). Evidently, they felt free to indulge in sexual immorality and sensual excesses generally (2 :2 ,10a, 13-14,18). This teaching involved a critique o f the traditional teaching inherited from the apostles. The opponents claimed that the apostles had simply invented the idea of the Parousia (1:16a) and denied the inspiration of the eschatological prophecies of the Old Testament (1:20— 21a). Depending on the correct in­ terpretation of 3:16b, they either appealed to Pauline teaching about freedom in support of their libertine views or they be­ lieved Paul’s expectation of the imminent Parousia discredited his teaching. There is no basis in 2 Peter itself for supposing that these JU D E, 2 PETER

46

teachings of the opponents had a Gnostic basis. They are more plausibly attributed to the influence of popular pagan attitudes. The false teachers probably aimed to disencumber Christianity of elements which seemed to them an embar­ rassment in their pagan cultural environment: its apocalyptic eschatology, always alien to Hellenistic thinking and espe­ cially embarrassing after the apparent failure o f the Parousia hope, and its ethical rigorism, which contrasted awkwardly with the permissiveness of pagan society. From a general fa­ miliarity with Hellenistic religious debate, they were able to deploy current skeptical arguments about eschatology and divine revelation. They may have seen themselves as rather daring radicals trying to clear a lot of traditional nonsense out of the church. In response to this challenge, the author o f 2 Peter mounts a defense o f the apostolic expectation o f judgment and salvation at the Parousia, and o f the motivation for right­ eous living which this provides. H is definitive summary o f Peter’s teaching (1:3-11) al­ ready stresses the need for moral effort if eschatological salvation is to be assured. This positive statement is then backed up by apologetic arguments in the rest o f the letter. The author argues that the apostles’ preaching o f the Parou­ sia was soundly based on their witnessing o f the transfigura­ tion, when God appointed Jesus to be the eschatological judge and ruler (1:16-18), and on the divinely inspired prophecies of the Old Testament (1:19-21). Old Testament examples prove that divine judgment does happen and pre­ figure the eschatological judgment (2:3b-10a). A s G od de­ creed the destruction o f the ancient world in the Flood, so he has decreed the destruction o f the present world in the fire of his eschatological judgment (3:5-7,10). The problem o f the delay of the Parousia is met by traditional arguments drawn from Jewish tradition. The delay is long only by human standards, not in the perspective o f G od’s eternity. 47

Introduction

It should be seen as G od’s gracious withholding o f judg­ ment so that sinners may repent (3:8-9). Such arguments enable the author, at a time when the hope o f the Parousia had become problematic, not to let it fade by postponing it indefinitely, but vigorously to reassert the traditional Chris­ tian hope and its relevance. Throughout his work, he is concerned that the hope for the vindication and establish­ ment o f G od’s righteousness in the future (cf. 2:9; 3:7, 13) necessarily motivates the attempt to realize that same right­ eousness in Christian lives (3:11,14). Theological character The peculiar theological character o f 2 Peter lies in its remarkable combination o f Hellenistic religious language and Jewish apocalyptic ideas and imagery. O n the one hand, for example, the author summarizes Peter’s teaching in a passage which, in its ethical and religious terminology, is perhaps the most Hellenistic in the New Testament (1:311), though the Hellenistic language is carefully controlled by the Christian content. O n the other hand, he accurately and effectively reproduces Jewish apocalyptic ideas, espe­ cially in 3:3—13. This combination o f theological styles is explained by the author’s intention o f interpreting and defending the apostolic message in a postapostolic and Hellenistic cultural situation. When he states the Christian message positively (1:3-11) he does so in terms which make contact with the ideals and aspirations of contemporary pagan culture. He is here en­ gaged in the task o f translating the gospel into terms intelli­ gible in a new cultural environment. But this is a delicate task which requires care lest the real Christian content of the gospel be lost. In the author’s view, that was happening in his opponents’ version o f Christianity. In their attempt to adapt Christianity JU D E , 2 PETER

48

to Hellenistic culture, they were compromising essential fea­ tures of the apostolic message, advocating mere pagan skepti­ cism about eschatology and mere acquiescence in moral permissiveness. In order to defend the gospel against this ex­ cessive Hellenization, therefore, the author resorts to sources and ideas close to the apocalyptic outlook of the primitive church, including the letter of Jude, which is one of his sources. He sees that if Hellenized Christianity is not to be­ come a merely paganized Christianity, apocalyptic eschatol­ ogy has to be reasserted, along with the ethical motivation it provides. Second Peter thus keeps a careful balance. It offers a degree of Hellenization o f the gospel message; but it pro­ tests, in the name of apocalyptic eschatology, against extreme Hellenization. The latter would dissolve the real Christian substance of the message. Second Peter is a valuable witness to the church’s difficult transition from a Jewish to a Hellenistic environment, and it provides an instructive example o f the way in which the message o f the gospel must be preserved through the neces­ sary process of cultural translation. Relationship to Ju d e There are such close resemblances between certain passages o f Jude and 2 Peter that some kind o f literary relationship between the two works seems certain. Alm ost all modem scholars consider that 2 Peter has used Jude as a source. But the material common to the two letters has frequently misled scholars, as well as ordinary readers, into supposing that they must be aimed against the same oppo­ nents and reflect the same situation in the life o f the early church. In fact, careful study o f 2 Peter’s use o f Jude shows that the author has adapted the material he derives from Jude for his own, rather different, purpose. He found Jude’s 49

Introduction

letter useful because Jude was writing against opponents who promoted libertinism and because o f Jude’s stress on the coming judgment o f such people. But the opponents the author o f 2 Peter faced also had characteristics quite distinct from those o f Jude: their explicit, argued skepticism about eschatology and their critique o f apostolic teaching. These required a different, fuller apologetic response. W hereas Jude faced a problem that arose and could be met within the religious culture o f Palestinian Judaism, 2 Peter belongs to a later church situation, where the pagan Hel­ lenistic environment presented both a new challenge and a new opportunity for the gospel. Themes We shall divide the teaching o f the letter into four major topics: justification and righteousness, the meaning of free­ dom, Christian hope, and the nature of Scripture. But we shall frequently notice that these topics are all intercon­ nected in the argument of 2 Peter.

JU D E, 2 PETER

50

1

JUSTIFICATION AND RIGHTEOUSNESS

Posing the issue The central theological issue in 2 Peter is the relation between ethics and eschatology. As we have seen, this was also an important concern of Jude’s, but the issue is focused more strongly and dealt with in more detail in 2 Peter. This is because o f the particular character o f the false teaching which this letter opposes. The two main planks o f the oppo­ nents’ teaching were eschatological skepticism and ethical permissiveness. These two features were closely linked since the opponents’ denial o f future judgment implied, for them, the removal o f moral sanctions and freedom from moral restraint. Freedom from fear of divine judgment was at the same time a liberation from moral constraint. A s a result, 2 Peter’s central concern is to insist on the necessary con­ nection between the practice of righteousness in Christian life now and the attainment o f eschatological salvation in the future. Christianity is “the way of righteousness” (2:21) which leads “into the eternal kingdom o f our Lord and 51

Justification and Righteousness

Saviour Jesus Christ” (1:11). Progress in the way o f right­ eousness is, in some sense, a condition for entry into the eternal kingdom o f C h rist In order to focus our consideration of this issue, it may be useful to point out at once two theological dangers which arise in making future salvation conditional on the practice of righteousness. One of these we might call the problem o f the Reformation, because it was the central issue in the debate over justification between Roman Catholics and Protestants in the sixteenth century. If final salvation is made dependent on the Christian’s progress in ethical righteousness (in sixteenth-century terms, “inherent” as opposed to “imputed” righteousness), the danger, which Luther so clearly saw, is of a self-centered ethic and an anthropocentric eschatology. The pursuit o f righteousness becomes self-interested— it is the means of achieving one’s own salvation—and heaven exists purely in order to reward one’s efforts to be righteous. A t its worst, this approach makes ethics and eschatology into the instruments o f the human pursuit o f self-justification and self-deification. The second danger we may call the problem o f contem­ porary Christianity in its concern for social and political righteousness in the world. Here the danger is o f an individ­ ualistic pursuit o f one’s own ethical righteousness in order to inherit salvation in the next world. Eschatology becomes the means o f assuring pious Christians that they will be re­ warded for their piety while their godless neighbors will get their deserved punishment in the end. Again the connec­ tion between ethics and eschatology degenerates into a self-interested distortion o f both. The two dangers are not unconnected, o f course, and they come together in the dev­ astating critique o f 2 Peter which was launched in a famous, influential essay by the Lutheran scholar Ernst Kasemann.1 For Käsemann, 2 Peter succumbs to both these dangers, and he therefore sees it as a prime example o f Christianity’s JU D E , 2 PETER

52

lapse from the Pauline gospel into “early Catholicism.” This criticism does not do justice to 2 Peter, but it is worth bearing in mind because it raises important questions about the theology o f 2 Peter. Ethics an d eschatology in 1 :3 -1 1 This passage plays a key role in 2 Peter. A s we can see from the reference to it in 1:12, 15, it is a summary o f the apostolic message which Peter bequeaths to the church as his testament. A s such it is the fundamental positive statement about the relationship o f ethics and eschatology which the rest o f 2 Peter then aims to defend against the oppo­ nents’ objections. It is also relevant to remember that this passage is the best example of our author’s translation of Christianity into Hellenistic religious language. These verses follow a standard homiletic pattern, which consists of three sections: (a) a historical/theological section, which recalls the acts of God in salvation history (vv 3-4); (b) ethical exhortations, based on (a) and with (c) in view (vv 5-10); (c) an eschatological section, in which salvation is promised and judgment threatened (v 11). This formal structure embodies a theological structure o f thought. The ethical exhortations o f the central section (vv 5-10) are framed by the saving act o f God in the past (vv 3-4) and the prospect o f salvation or judgment in the future (v 11). The saving act o f God in the past is the basis for the ethical behavior expected o f the readers, while the eschatological prospect provides a motive for ethics. To move from the salvation experienced in the past to the salvation which can be finally attained in the future one must pass 53

Justification and Righteousness

through the central section— ethical progress in the present. In some sense, final salvation is conditional on appropriate ethical behavior— though this does not, as we shall see, mean that the latter is what actually achieves or “earns” final salvation. Thus the structure o f the passage already indicates a balance between a stress on the prevenient saving action of God, which precedes all Christian endeavor, and, on the other hand, the need for human ethical endeavor along the way which leads to final salvation. To understand this theological structure in more detail, we need to look care­ fully at each o f its three sections. Prevenient grace (1 :3 -4 ) These verses read: His [Christ’s] divine power has bestowed on us [Chris­ tians] everything necessary for a godly life, through the knowledge o f him [Christ] who called us by his own glory and might, by means of which he has bestowed on us the very great and precious promises, so that through them you may escape the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire and become sharers of the divine nature. This sentence, which is typical of 2 Peter’s rhetorical style, takes some unraveling. Christ’s “divine power” and “his own glory and might” are synonymous phrases which describe the event of Jesus Christ—his incarnation, ministry, death, and resurrection— conceived in Hellenistic religious terms as a manifestation of divine power. By means of this divine saving act, Christians are said to have received four things: First, knowledge of Christ (“knowledge of him who called us”). The author of 2 Peter uses two words for “knowledge” (epigno̅sis, used here and in 1:2,8; 2:20, and gno̅sis, used in 1:5, JU D E, 2 PETER

54

6; 3:18) in different senses. Epigno̅sis is the fundamental knowledge of God in Christ which is gained in conversion and makes a person a Christian; gno̅sis is the knowledge which can be acquired and developed in the course of Chris­ tian life. In 1:3 the reference is to the knowledge gained in conversion. Secondly, through this knowledge Christ “has bestowed on us everything necessary for a godly life.” The word trans­ lated “bestow” (do̅reisthai), found here and in verse 4, was used especially of royal and divine bounty. It stresses the fa­ vor and generosity o f God in granting us grace. So the em­ phasis is on salvation as gift. Though the special concern of 2 Peter is the living of a godfearing life, the author here roots the Christian’s ability to live such a life in the generous, freely given grace o f God in Christ. He has given us “everything necessary for a godly life.” We do not have to add to God’s grace from our own human resources. What we have to do is to live a godly life out of the resources of divine grace which have been given us. Thirdly, there is Christ’s calling of Christians. Though only mentioned in verse 3, the mention is important because it is taken up in verse 10 (“confirm your call and election”). Christians have been called by Christ to be his people, but this calling has still to reach its goal in his heavenly kingdom. So between the call and its goal lies Christian discipleship in response to the call and on the way to the goal. Finally, Christ has bestowed on us his promises. These are promises which Christ gave but have yet to be fulfilled. Their content, still to be attained by Christians in the future, is that believers should “escape the corruption that is in the world . . . and become sharers of divine nature.” We postpone a consideration o f the meaning of this description of the eschatological hope until the next chapter, but we should note here that once again what Christ has already given us (promises) points forward to a goal yet to be attained. The 55

Justification and Righteousness

author now goes on to describe the way from one to the other as the ascent of a ladder o f virtues. The ladder of virtues (1 :5 -7 ) If we compare this list with other New Testament lists of virtues, it appears distinctive in two ways: in terminology and in form. As far as terminology is concerned, although some distinctively Christian terms are included in this list (“brotherly affection,” “love”), in general its ethical terms cor­ respond much more closely to the terminology of Hellenistic moral philosophy than do other New Testament lists (with the exception of Philippians 4:8, which is also notably Hel­ lenistic). Three terms in 2 Peter’s list are markedly Hellenistic in flavor and occur only once each in other New Testament lists: virtue (arete), godliness (eusebeia ), and self-control (enkrateia ). “Virtue” especially encapsulates the Hellenistic ethical ideal of virtue as the achievement of human excel­ lence. Plainly, the author, in accordance with his general con­ cern to translate the gospel into terms which make contact with its Hellenistic environment, has sought to bring the Christian ideal of the virtuous life as close as possible to the moral ideals familiar to his pagan contemporaries. But we cannot properly assess this procedure until we have consid­ ered the second difference between this and other New Tes­ tament lists of virtues: its form. Second Peter 1:5-7 uses the literary device known as sorites, or chain argument. This is the structure: A . . . B, B . . . C, C . . . D (and so on), a favorite Hellenistic rhetorical device which occurs quite often in Jewish and early Chris­ tian literature. A particular type o f sorites was the ethical sorites, the chain or ladder o f virtues used by Stoics and other writers on ethics as a memorable summary o f their view o f the good life. A rabbinic example (Mishnah, tractate Sota 9:5) will illustrate the form: JU D E , 2 PETER

56

Zeal leads to cleanliness, and cleanliness leads to purity, and purity leads to self-restraint, and self-restraint leads to sanctity, and sanctity leads to humility, and humility leads to the fear o f sin, and the fear o f sin leads to piety, and piety leads to the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead. In this example, as in some others, the chain o f virtues leads to an eschatological climax (resurrection). Second Peter does not have an eschatological climax within the sorites, but the eschatological goal of the sorites follows in verse 11. The peculiarly Christian character of 2 Peter’s sorites re­ sults from the combination of two distinctive features: (a) the list begins with faith and ends with love, and (b) each virtue derives from the preceding one. This second feature is fre­ quently obscured in translation. The Greek (literally: “by means o f your faith supply virtue” and so on) implies that each virtue in the list is the means o f producing the next. But the difficulty o f putting this nuance into an English translation which preserves the form o f the sorites no doubt accounts for the inaccurate English rendering: “add to your faith virtue” (KJV), “supple­ ment your faith with virtue” (R SV ), “add to your faith good­ ness” (NIV). These translations are very unfortunate in relation to the issue o f justification, since by introducing the idea o f adding, which is not in the Greek, they suggest that faith needs supplementing by moral effort. They imply salvation by faith and works. W hat the sorites actually sug­ gests, however, is that faith is the root out o f which all virtues grow. It is not supplemented with virtue, but devel­ ops into virtue. The sixteenth-century mediating formula, 57

Justification and Righteousness

“faith working through love” (from Gal 5:6), might be an appropriate description o f the concept. It would be a mistake to attach any significance to the order of items in the list, with the exception of the first and last (faith and love). In an ethical sorites of this sort, it is not possible to give some kind of psychological explanation of how each virtue develops out of another. The idea is simply that the virtues are interconnected, but the precise order in which they are listed is random. However, what is certainly deliberate and significant is that faith is placed first, as the root of all the virtues, and love is placed last, as their culmination. The last virtue in a list of this kind is not simply the final or even the most important, but the virtue which encom­ passes all the others. Thus the Hellenistic elements in the list are given a decisively Christian interpretation by their place in a list o f virtues rooted in Christian faith and culminating in Christian love. They witness to the fact that Christian ethics cannot be totally discontinuous with the moral ideals o f non-Christian society. But the new context in which they are set ensures that they are subordinated to and are to be interpreted by reference to the comprehensive Christian ethical principle o f love. Thus ‘‘self-control,” for example, is not for Christians a virtue simply in itself or for the reasons it was valued in Stoicism, but because self-discipline is a necessary element in the practice o f Christian love. Thus 2 Peter remains faithful, in a new context, to the central insight of Jesus’ moral teaching: that love is the all-inclusive ethical principle, the requirement which sums up the whole o f the Law and the prophets (Matt 22:40). The salvific necessity of good works The following verses (8-10) insist that the ladder o f virtues must be climbed if final salvation is to be attained. The knowledge of Christ and the forgiveness of sins received in JU D E, 2 PETER

58

conversion and baptism lose their value unless moral prog­ ress follows. The exhortation to “make all the more effort to confirm your call and election” (v 10) does not mean, as seventeenth-century Calvinists thought, that Christians’ moral progress provides them with a subjective assurance of their election. It means that the ethical fruits o f faith are objectively necessary for the attainment o f final salvation. The divine initiative in our calling to be Christians will not reach its goal—our entry into Christ’s kingdom— unless it is rati­ fied by our response in moral effort. Finally, the way the eschatological goal is attained, accord­ ing to verse 11, is highly significant: “in this way entry into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Saviour will be richly provided for you.” The phrase, “will be richly provided,” indicates the lavish provision made by the divine generosity. Thus, while the whole passage emphatically regards the ethi­ cal fruits of faith as necessary to the attainment o f final salvation, this phrase rules out the notion that the latter is, in any strict sense, a reward deserved in justice for the Chris­ tian’s good works. Final salvation is the gift o f G od’s gen­ erosity which far exceeds any human merit. In spite of the passage’s stress on human participation in the attainment of salvation, it ends as it began (v 3) with an attribution of salvation to God’s grace. In summary, this passage (1:3-11) plainly presents both the priority of God’s grace to all human participation and the excess of God’s grace beyond all human achievement. It also makes clear that the Christians’ response to God’s grace in faith is the root from which the whole of their ethical obedi­ ence to God must grow. Within this context, however, it lays great stress on the necessity for faith to bear fruit in ethical behavior, because without it final salvation cannot be attained. Because of this stress, the teaching of the passage is, in sixteenth-century terms, more “Tridentine” than “Lutheran.” The Council of Trent’s decree on justification is closer to the 59

Justification and Righteousness

teaching of this passage than are the Lutheran formularies. But the reason for this correspondence must be appreciated. It lies in the polemical context in each case. The Council of Trent perceived in Lutheran teaching (largely mistakenly) an antinomian threat similar to that posed by the opponents in 2 Peter. In both cases, this perceived threat of antinomianism leads to a stress on the importance o f good works for the attainment o f salvation in the future. As a polemical correction this emphasis is quite justified. Second Peter, it must be admit­ ted, lacks any stress on the scandal of the gospel as the mes­ sage of God’s love for sinners which accepts and welcomes the most wicked. But it emphasizes another side of the matter which must not be forgotten: the fact that God’s love in the gospel does not succeed until it makes sinners into saints. However, this passage (1:3-11) does not stand alone in 2 Peter. As we have noticed in the introduction to 2 Peter, it is important to recognize the balance our author achieves be­ tween Hellenistic and apocalyptic material. In this case, we must put 1:3-11, with its strongly Hellenistic flavor, alongside the little apocalypse of chapter 3. If some readers feel that the specter of a self-interested ethic and an anthropocentric es­ chatology still seems to linger around the former passage, it will be thoroughly dispelled by the latter. Esch atologicalrighteousness Second Peter 3:11-14 again makes the link, so characteris­ tic of 2 Peter, between ethics and eschatology, between the Christian practice of righteousness now and the hope of the new world which is coming at the Parousia. The key to this link really comes in verse 13: “we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness is at home.” It is very notable that the only feature o f the new world which the author considers worthy o f comment is that it will be a world in which God’s will will be done. O f all the points he could JU D E , 2 PETER

60

have made, drawing on the prophetic promises o f the eschato­ logical kingdom of God, only this he considers really essen­ tial: that in the new heaven and the new earth God’s righteousness will reside. Here he stands within the main­ stream of Jewish and Christian eschatology, at the heart of which is the theocentric hope for the eventual triumph of God’s will over all evil, the vindication and establishment of God’s righteousness in his world. The same theocentric hope characterized the teaching of Jesus and is enshrined in the opening petitions of the Lord’s Prayer: “Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as in heaven.” In the apocalyptic situation—typical of the Jewish and Christian literature in which this hope comes to most pow­ erful expression— where those who love righteousness are few and oppressed, and evil seems to be taking over G od’s world, the hope for the time when G od’s righteousness is going to triumph universally is a necessary presupposition for morality. It sustains the practice of righteousness by giv­ ing the assurance that righteousness is worth maintaining, that it is the final reality of things that must prevail, however much the present situation might otherwise suggest the opposite. Hence the false teachers’ denial o f this future tri­ umph of divine righteousness really was, as the author of 2 Peter perceived, a serious undermining of Christian ethical motivation. The theocentricity of verse 13 becomes more apparent when we notice the personification o f Righteousness and the background to this in Jewish apocalyptic. There is probably an echo of Isaiah 32:16, which portrays the coming age of salvation, beyond judgment, as one in which justice will pre­ vail: “Justice will dwell in the wilderness, and righteousness will abide in the fruitful field.” From this, 2 Peter borrows not only the words, but also the thought that Righteousness, represented as a person, will no longer be a temporary and occasional visitor, but will take up permanent residence. 61

Justification and Righteousness

In view o f the close association in Jewish thought be­ tween righteousness and wisdom, the apocalyptic version of the Jewish myth of personified divine Wisdom is also very illuminating for our passage. First Enoch 42 tells how Wis­ dom, who is at home in heaven, came down to dwell with people on earth, but could find no home on earth and so returned to heaven to make her permanent home there among the angels. Wickedness, on the other hand, found a ready welcome among human beings and dwelt with them. The contrast here between personified Wisdom and per­ sonified Wickedness makes it clear enough that the former could equally well be called Righteousness. The story por­ trays the present age as an evil one in which Righteousness is unwelcome on earth. It thus sets the scene for many passages in the Parables o f Enoch which portray the new age, to be inaugurated by the Son o f Man, as a transformed heaven and a transformed earth in which righteousness or wisdom (the terms are used virtually interchangeably) will find a home on earth (e.g., 45:4-5; 46:3; 48:1; 49:1-3). Second Peter 3:13 belongs in this tradition. Righteous­ ness, like Wisdom, is a personified divine quality. In this world—the pagan environment of 2 Peter’s readers— G od’s righteousness is not welcome and cannot be at home. But after the judgment, when evil will have been purged from the world, God’s righteousness will at last find a home on earth as well as in heaven. Because the inhabitants o f that world will welcome her, she will settle permanently among them. Thus the inhabitants o f that world must be people who love God’s righteousness, who therefore love righteousness now, who practice righteousness now and are impatient for the day when injustice will end and G od’s righteousness prevail on earth (v 12: “waiting for and hastening the com­ ing o f the Day o f G od”). This is the real point o f 2 Peter 3:11-14. Only someone who now wants Righteousness to JU D E , 2 PETER

62

dwell in the world will be able to live with Righteousness in the new world. The link between ethics and eschatology in these verses does not produce a carrot-and-stick morality o f self-interest. The only reward offered to righteousness is more righteous­ ness: a world characterized by God’s righteousness. Those who live by the hope for the universal establishment of God’s righteousness in the world must be people who love righteousness for its own sake. Living in eager expectation of the time when God’s righteousness will prevail entirely and forever, they cannot but make every effort to reflect and promote righteousness in their lives now (3:11,14). Thus the corollary o f hoping for a world in which right­ eousness will dwell must be active righteousness now. Ethics and eschatology belong together because Christian living is living toward the coming o f G od’s kingdom of righteousness; it is a practice o f righteousness sustained by the hope of the universal triumph of G od’s righteousness; it is a promoting o f righteousness which is constantly straining toward that time when G od’s will prevails entirely and forever. Thus the apocalyptic perspective of hope for the coming o f God’s righteousness in the whole creation should dispel not only the specter o f a self-interested ethic, but also that of an individualistic pietism. Those who embrace this hope should be concerned with more than their own righteous­ ness. But to see how 2 Peter has its relevance not only to the Reformation issue of justification, but also to the contempo­ rary Christian concern for righteousness in the world, we need to turn back to chapter 2. N oah an d Lot The way in which the eschatological hope sustains the righteous person’s practice o f righteousness in an 63

Justification and Righteousness

unrighteous world is given concrete illustration in 2 Peter by means o f two O ld Testament models o f the righteous person: Noah and Lot. For these we turn to the passage 2:4-10, in which the reality o f divine judgment is demon­ strated by reference to three classic O ld Testament exam­ ples o f judgment: the judgment o f the fallen angels, the Flood, and the destruction o f Sodom and Gomorrah. A s in Jude 5-7, on which 2 Peter is here partly dependent, these examples are not just illustrations o f the principle o f divine judgment; they also function as types o f the coming judg­ ment at the Parousia. But the author has developed an element in this typology which he did not find in Jude. The Flood and the destruction o f Sodom and Gomorrah were classic examples o f G od’s discriminatory judgment, in which not only the wicked are condemned, but also the righteous, however few, are spared. Hence Noah and Lot become in 2 Peter types o f faithful Christians who hope for deliverance at the Parousia, but meantime must live right­ eously in the midst o f an evil society doomed to judgment. It is significant that in his accounts of Noah and Lot the author does not focus on aspects o f their deliverance (such as the ark), but on aspects o f their previous life among their evil contemporaries. He must have meant these accounts to have existential relevance to his readers, living amid the pressures o f a predominantly pagan society. A s models for his readers, the author seems to have deliberately chosen righteous men in worst-case situations, living almost alone in flagrantly unjust societies, standing for righteousness in situations where wickedness seemed wholly triumphant. His readers must have felt themselves a beleaguered minority in the great pagan cities. The appeal o f the false teachers was, no doubt, that they offered a way o f relaxing the tension by giving up the concern for righteousness. In Noah and Lot the author offers his readers people who stood faithfully for righteousness in far more extreme situations than those his JU D E , 2 PETER

64

readers faced. But what is even more striking about the way he portrays these models is that they not only resisted the temptation to conform to their environment, they also resisted the other temptation of righteous people in such situations: the pietistic temptation to leave the world to the devil and to cultivate their own holiness. Both men were concerned with more than their own righteousness. In this respect, as models o f righteous people in an un­ righteous world, the pictures o f Noah (v 5) and Lot (vv 7-8) are complementary. Noah is presented as a man who pro­ claimed righteousness, Lot as a man who suffered for right­ eousness. In the case o f Noah, the author draws on Jewish traditions which represented Noah as a preacher o f repen­ tance.2 Not content with the assurance of his own salvation in the coming judgment, Noah sought to avert the judgment from his contemporaries by turning them to righteousness. Noah was a “herald o f righteousness” who made sure that the claims of righteousness did not go unheard even in a world intent on silencing them. In the case of Lot, the extended picture o f his distress (vv 7b— 8) may again be based on Jewish tradition which has not otherwise survived, or it may be original to the author. In any case, the stress on this point is very significant. Lot suffers in an evil society, but not because he is a victim o f the wicked who has personally suffered at their hands. His torment is the inner distress of a conscientious person surrounded by blatant evil and helpless to prevent it. Lot is presented as the genuinely righteous person, who loves righteousness, longs to see righteousness done in the world, and is afflicted by its absence from the world around him. He is the kind of person whose practice of righteousness, in a world where evil seems triumphant, is sustained by the hope o f the triumph of God’s righteousness in the future. If 1:3-11 stood alone, it might promote a somewhat pietis­ tic concern with one’s own virtue. It is balanced, however, 65

Justification and Righteousness

by the apocalyptic emphasis o f the rest o f the letter on a theocentric concern to see God’s righteousness done in God’s world. O f course, the apocalyptic perspective speaks to the extreme situation, in which the righteous are power­ less to prevent the evil o f an overwhelmingly oppressive society. It therefore tends to set all its hopes on an imminent divine intervention to establish universal righteousness fi­ nally and forever. The extremity o f the situation and the imminent ex­ pectation naturally belong together. The more extreme the contemporary Christian’s experience of injustice permeating society, the more he or she will understand this apocalyptic perspective. But not even Noah is represented as giving up on his contemporaries. People who love righteousness for God’s sake will promote righteousness in society through whatever opportunity is afforded them. Their impatience for the world in which righteousness will be at home will not allow them simply to wait passively for it. But the greater the injustice they confront, the more their love of righteousness will need to be sustained by the hope that, in the end, God’s righteous­ ness will unequivocally prevail.

JU D E, 2 PETER

66

2

FREEDOM —TRUE AND FALSE

In the great pagan cities of Asia Minor, Christian morality, with its rigorous standards inherited from Judaism, clashed with the generally low moral standards o f pagan society. The insidious attraction of the teaching o f the false teachers whom the author of 2 Peter opposes was that it removed this difficulty. And it did so in the name o f freedom, that im­ mensely potent but deeply ambiguous word. “They promise them freedom” (2:19). The gospel, claimed the false teachers, has set us free from moral rules. Admittedly, the apostles who founded our churches taught us Jewish morality, but they were Jews, still under the influence of their Jewish back­ ground. They failed to see that Christ has set us free from all that. So the opponents probably argued. They could repre­ sent their message as an updating of Christianity which dis­ pensed with old-fashioned morality and brought Christianity into line with the moral standards o f their society. Their watchword “freedom” also implied freedom from the fear of judgment, and so brought their eschatological skepticism into play in the interests of moral permissiveness. Eschatological 67

Freedom—True and False

sanctions for morality—the threat o f divine judgment— they dismissed as an incredible myth, invented as an instrument of social control. Christians whom Christ has set free ought no longer to be burdened with moral obligations enforced by the threat of judgment. A nim al behavior W hat this vaunted freedom o f the false teachers really amounts to the author o f 2 Peter exposes in his long passage o f denunciation (2:10b-22). A curious feature o f this pas­ sage is the recurrence o f references to animals, with whom the false teachers are repeatedly compared or contrasted. The theme begins in verse 12, where the author has bor­ rowed it from Jude 10. The false teachers are like animals who live not by reason but by mere instinct. The basic thought is similar to Jude's, but the context is slightly differ­ ent (vv 10b-13a)1 and the analogy has been expanded be­ yond Jude’s use o f it The animal stupidity o f the false teachers is revealed in their attitude toward the powers o f evil. In their brazenly immoral behavior they take no notice o f the danger they run o f falling into the grip o f demonic forces and sharing their fate. In their boasted freedom they scoff at the powers o f evil, confident o f their immunity from judgment. But like animals, unaware that they are likely to be hunted and slaughtered, the false teachers, lacking all knowledge o f the realities o f good and evil, fail to see the danger they are in if they continue in immorality. They are in fact throwing in their lot with the forces o f evil they scoff at, are falling into their power, and so will perish with them on the day when all evil will be eliminated from G od’s creation. Thus the false teachers, who think themselves so superior to more conventional believers, in fact lack all real understanding of their own situation. Their thinking is on the level o f the unreasoning animals JU D E , 2 PETER

68

This being so, their behavior sinks to the level o f mere animal instinct. As so often happens with people who think themselves superior to moral rules, their freedom means, in practice, a life devoted to sensual self-indulgence. The picture which the author goes on to paint of the life of these people who think themselves so enlightened and so liberated is dom­ inated by physical excess of every kind: gluttony, drunken­ ness, sexual immorality, and greed. Their greed (v 14) is a key point, which is developed in the comparison with Balaam (vv 15-16). These people are in the business of religious teaching in order to make a good living for themselves out of it. They expect to be supported by their followers in some style. And this is one of the roots of their distortion o f the gospel, for the motive distorts the message. Religious teachers motivated by greed will preach what people want to hear. The corruption o f themselves and their message (and consequently of their disciples) may have hap­ pened only gradually as they failed to resist the temptation that comes to everyone who depends on religious teaching for his or her living. They found that an effective way to win disciples and support was to relax the rigor of the Gospel. The more they slipped into self-indulgence themselves, the more their teaching pandered to the natural tendency to selfindulgence in their hearers. Their own pleasure-seeking life­ style became dependent on their sanctioning a similar lifestyle among their disciples. They, and their followers, became trapped in a vicious circle of mutually dependent self-interest. So much for their supposed freedom! In their greed they invite comparison with Balaam (vv 1516), the prophet who tried to sell his services for money (Num 22). When the king of Moab wanted to hire Balaam to curse the people of Israel, Balaam at first refused because he knew this would not be God’s message. But he was swayed by his greed and became willing to deliver a false prophecy. His motive distorted his message. Balaam’s judgment was so 69

Freedom— True an d False

affected by his greed that he actually thought he could suc­ ceed in his plan of opposing God’s will. This was “madness” (v 16), comparable with the false teachers’ belief that they can sin with impunity. But in Balaam’s case even his donkey knew better than that! It was the donkey who told Balaam what an ass he was being. The savage humor continues to expose the level to which the false teachers have sunk by comparing them with animals. The comparison is now in the animal’s favor. The animal theme recurs at the end of the chapter (v 22), where two proverbs are quoted, one about a dog (from Prov 26:11), the other about a pig. Since the reference to a dog would not suggest pet dogs, but the packs o f pariah dogs that roamed the streets scavenging, both proverbs refer to animals regarded as dirty and disgusting. The point of both is that the animal, having got rid o f its filth, returns to it, apparently drawn by an irresistible attraction to dirt. Dogs have a nasty habit o f vomiting and then, unable to leave things alone, returning to sniff round their vomit. The story o f the sow, well-known in the ancient world,2 was that the sow wandered into the public baths and, because pigs enjoy splashing around in water, had a good bath and left the bathhouse in a state of unaccustomed cleanliness. But as soon as she came upon an inviting patch of mud she could not resist the urge to wallow in it. The picture illustrates the false teachers’ apostasy. When they became Christians, in conversion and baptism, they washed away all the filth of their pagan past, but they are now reverting to it. They are once again wallowing in the im­ morality o f the world as though nothing had happened to them at all. But in fact they are now in a worse state than before their conversion. In verse 20 the author alludes to the man in Jesus’ story (Matt 12:43-45; Luke 11:24-26) to whom the dispossessed demon returned with seven companions more evil than itself. JU D E , 2 PETER

70

Similarly, apostates like the false teachers do not simply return to their pre-Christian past, because in the meantime they “have come to know the way of righteousness.” Their apostasy involves sinning with full knowledge against God’s moral demands and spuming the grace which is available through Christ for holy living. The culpability is greater than that of sins committed in ignorance during their preChristian life. Their ignorance now— their stupid, animal­ like disregard for moral categories— is no excuse because it is an ignorance they have willingly embraced in their delib­ erate rejection of the light they once enjoyed. The verdict is harsh, but realistic, and the only hope o f their reclamation lies in such a harshly realistic exposure o f their dangerous condition. Freedom an d slavery It has become apparent that the much-vaunted freedom o f the false teachers is quite illusory. They have fallen into a common trap of misunderstanding freedom as absolute au­ tonomy. They wished to be free of any obligation to anyone or anything, free to please only themselves. But human be­ ings are not made to be autonomous. Those who try to be end up subject to all manner of things which dominate and degrade their lives, including their own excessive physical drives and their own insatiable appetite for self-gratification. The most dedicated pursuers of selfish pleasure remain ad­ dicted to their pleasures long after they have ceased to enjoy them. The author’s most significant comment on the false teachers’ way of life is 2:19: “They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption; for ‘people become slaves of whoever overpowers them.’” They promise freedom— this is the potent appeal of their teaching—but they cannot give what they promise because they themselves are slaves. In their illusory pursuit of autonomy, they have 71

Freedom— True and False

yielded themselves to sin and so become subject to Corrup­ tion (here personified as a slavemaster). The author clinches the point by quoting a common proverb: “People become slaves of whoever [or whatever] overpowers them.” “Corruption” (phthora) in verse 19 should not be under­ stood as moral corruption, but (as in 1:4, to which we shall turn shortly) as the physical result of moral corruption: mor­ tality. The idea of enslavement to corruption is also found in Romans 8:21, which similarly personifies phthora: “the cre­ ation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay (phthora ) and obtain the glorious freedom of the sons of God.” The whole of the physical world seems, in its present condition, inescapably subject to eventual physical dissolution. Sin is the self-destructive urge to consent to and to become involved in this process of destruction which is also God’s judgment in­ sofar as he allows sin to take its self-destructive course. To this bondage to sin and death there is an alternative. Once the desire for absolute autonomy is recognized as illusory and unobtainable, we can see that the real choice is between these: alienating subjection to forces destructive of human reality and liberating obedience to the truth of human existence. The former is slavery to sin, the latter is obedience to righteousness. Each has its eschatological con­ sequence: slavery to sin leads to destruction, obedience to righteousness leads to eternal life (see Rom 6:16-23). The latter form of obedience is not experienced as slavery, be­ cause it is in accordance with human nature and leads to the true fulfillment of human nature. It is experienced as liberation from sin and the hope of liberation from mortal­ ity. It is true human freedom, freedom not to do whatever one chooses, but the freedom freely to be what one was created to be, to fulfill oneself in right relation to God and to others (righteousness). Although the author o f 2 Peter does not describe in chap­ ter 2 the Christian alternative to the false teachers’ way of JU D E, 2 PETER

72

living, he suggests its character by the “way” terminology, which refers to Christianity as an ethical way o f life. It is “the way of truth” or “the true way” (2:2), “the straight way” from which the false teachers have strayed (2:15), and “the way of righteousness” (v 21). Christianity is not just any way o f living, and true Christian freedom is not the freedom to choose just any way o f living. Christianity is a definite kind of way, the right way which leads in the right direction, the way characterized by righteousness. Christian freedom is the freedom to live in this way. It is the way that 2 Peter has described more fully in the ladder of virtues (1:5-7). To live in the way of righteousness is also to obey Christ as Lord. This is why the false teachers, who reject the way of righteousness, “deny the Master who bought them” (2:1). This means (like Jude 4, on which it depends) that they reject his moral authority. But the word despote̅s, which Jude uses in the sense of a ruler, 2 Peter takes in its other sense of a master of slaves and so is able to extend the image with the words “who bought them.” Christ is the Master of his Christian slaves because he has bought them (at the cost of his death). The image is the rather common New Testament one o f redemption as the transferral o f slaves by purchase from one owner to another (cf., Acts 20:28; Rom 6:17-18; 1 Cor 6:20; 7:23; 1 Pet 1:18-19; Rev 5:9; 14:3-4). Those who were once slaves o f sin are now slaves o f Jesus Christ. T h e image, however, is paradoxical, for it involves the sense of liberation from slavery to sin. To be slaves of Jesus Christ is, in another sense, to be set free from slavery. The paradox expresses the early Christian discovery that to serve Jesus Christ is to be truly free. It is to be liberated from all that oppresses and degrades human life and to find fulfillment in glad and free obedience to the only one who can rightly claim our absolute obedience. Because we were made for God, giving ourselves wholly to anything except God is en­ slavement; but giving ourselves wholly to God is liberation. 73

Freedom— True and False

Liberation from m ortality The false teachers are enslaved to mortality (2:19). Their way of life leads to final destruction. By contrast, Christ has given to Christians the promise of escaping from mortality: “so that through them [his promises] you may escape the corruption that is in the world because o f sinful desire and become sharers of divine nature” (1:4). However, these words require some careful discussion. The whole of this description of Christ’s promises is couched in Hellenistic religious terminology, which the au­ thor has taken over for Christian purposes but in such a way as to make contact with the religious aspirations of his con­ temporary society. We must, therefore, understand it ini­ tially against the background of Hellenistic views o f human destiny. The two parts o f the promise— escaping corruption and sharing in divine nature—belong closely together, but it will be convenient first to consider each in turn. “The corruption [phthora] that is in the world” is not moral but physical corruption: decay, transitoriness, mortal­ ity. Throughout Hellenistic religious literature is found the contrast between the incorruptibility of divine nature and the corruptibility o f everything in this material world, in­ cluding the human body. Hellenistic Jewish writers in the Diaspora had already, before Christianity, taken over this contrast and used it in expressing the Jewish hope o f eternal life beyond death in terms intelligible in the cultural world of their time. The contrast was also used by Paul (cf., 1 Cor 9:25), who saw the whole o f this world in bondage to corruption (Rom 8:21) and Christians as awaiting the eschatological gift o f incor­ ruptibility (1 Cor 15:42, 52-54; Gal 6:8). The Christian hope, then, as 2 Peter 1:4 puts it, is to escape mortality by the gift (whether at death or at the Parousia is not clear) of an immortal form o f life. JU D E, 2 PETER

74

However, we should notice very carefully the phrase “because o f sinful desire,” which significantly modifies the typical Hellenistic view o f the matter. In Greek thought, it is simply the materiality of this world which accounts for its decay and mortality. Our plight is our entanglement in the physical world, and immortality is possible only by escape from the physical. Genuinely moral considerations are irrel­ evant— or at least subordinate to the fundamental problem o f materiality. But 2 Peter 1:4 attributes mortality not to materiality as such, but to sin. “Sinful desire” is the root cause o f evil, through which mortality has entered the world (cf. Eph 4:22). The escape from mortality is the negative side o f the coin, o f which the positive is becoming “sharers in divine nature.” The phrase must be understood with reference to its origin in a Hellenistic religious context. There “divine nature” does not refer to the nature o f the one God but to the nature o f the gods, the immaterial beings of the divine world. Hel­ lenism divided reality into this material world, which is cor­ ruptible by nature, and the immaterial, divine world, which is incorruptible, immortal by nature. Not only the one su­ preme G od but all the many other immortal beings partici­ pate, in this sense, in divine nature. Human nature straddled the two worlds. Its physical part, the body, belonged to the corruptible world; its spiritual part, the mind, belonged to the immortal world of the gods. The aspiration o f much Hellenistic philosophy and religion was for the soul to es­ cape its involvement in this corruptible world and recover its true, godlike nature, participating in the immortality of the gods. Diaspora Judaism had already taken over the terminology o f this way o f thinking in order to express its own religious tradition in terms appropriate to its Hellenistic environ­ ment. When Jewish writers spoke o f human destiny as “divinization” and “sharing in divine nature,” they were 75

Freedom— True and False

using such language in a way consistent with Jewish monotheism. They did not mean that human beings be­ come in any proper sense “gods,” still less that they are absorbed into the nature o f the one God. But they did hold that the human being, created in the image of God, is capa­ ble, by G od’s grace, o f resembling G od in his immortality and incorruption. To share in the divine nature is not to participate in the essence o f the one God. It is to become immortal, to become one o f those heavenly, immortal be­ ings whom pagans improperly called “gods.” A t most, it means to be like God in his immortality. Second Peter certainly uses this terminology in the way Jewish writers had already used it. To become sharers in di­ vine nature is simply to receive from G od the “godlike” char­ acteristic o f immortality (whether at death or at the Parousia is not specified). A stronger doctrine o f “deification,” such as has become characteristic o f Eastern Orthodox theology, cannot be based on this text. (In a general way it has much more support from the Pauline doctrine of Christian partici­ pation in the Holy Spirit, which is by no means unconnected with the immortality o f the resurrection life: Rom 8:11; 1 Cor 15:42-53.) Second Peter has been much criticized for its use o f Hel­ lenistic religious language, as though the integrity o f the gospel has been lost through translation into an alien cul­ tural form. The language o f 1:4, as a signal case of this, has been a particular target o f attack. However, we have already noted that the Hellenistic dualism behind the language does not go uncorrected, even in this verse. Moreover, it is unfair to neglect the fa c t that this verse’s expression o f the eschato­ logical hope in Hellenistic terms is significantly balanced by expression in terms of Jewish apocalyptic eschatology in chapter 3. The hope o f immortality in this verse should not be divorced from the hope for the triumph of God’s right­ eousness in 3:13. JU D E , 2 PETER

76

More positively, however, the author o f 2 Peter should be given credit for engaging in the necessary Christian mission­ ary task o f translating the gospel into terms which make contact with the ideals and aspirations of its non-Christian context. The risks involved in this task have to be taken if the gospel is to mean anything to its hearers. The Hellenistic world’s aspiration to godlike immortality was by no means completely alien to the Christian gospel’s promise of eternal life in Christ. It was right that it should not be denied, but rather taken up and critically fulfilled in the Christian message o f the resurrection. The modem evangelist needs, in the same way, to identify contemporary non-Christian aspiration to human fulfillment and to show how the good news o f Jesus Christ meets people in these aspirations. Such aspirations fundamentally arise from human nature created in the image o f God though, o f course, they take varying forms in different human cultures. They are all incomplete. But they provide at least an initial point o f entry into the relevance o f the gospel to human life as people experience it in a particular culture. They may be distorted by sin and need to be corrected by the gospel, but they are not funda­ mentally alien to the gospel. Properly understood in its context, 2 Peter 1:4 makes the same point as Romans 6:16-23: enslavement to sin leads to eschatological destruction, but the way of righteousness leads to liberation from mortality through the divine gift of eternal life in Jesus Christ.

77

Freedom— True and False

3

CHRISTIAN HOPE

Aspects of 2 Peter’s eschatology have already been treated in the previous two chapters. In this chapter we shall focus on the author’s refutation of the eschatological skepticism o f his opponents. These false teachers rejected the future eschatological expectation o f the early Christians. There would, in their view, be no divine intervention to bring the history of this world to a conclusion, to complete the divine purpose in history, and to establish God’s kingdom forever. There would be no Parousia o f Jesus Christ to judge the wicked and complete the salvation of the faithful. In some ways these teachers resembled some modem attempts to remove future eschatology from the Christian message. Part o f their motivation, like that o f such modem attempts, was the incredibility, as they saw it, o f future eschatology in their cultural context. But 2 Peter is written out o f the conviction that future eschatology is not an inessential, culturally relative way of expressing Christian belief, which had to be abandoned when Christianity moved from a Palestinian-Jewish to a 79

Christian Hope

pagan-Hellenistic environment. Difficult though it was for the Hellenistic mind to accept, it was integral to the Chris­ tian gospel. The author therefore engages in a serious debate with his opponents. He deals with a series of specific objections they raised to the Christian hope as it had been preached by the apostles. We should note that his defense of future eschatol­ ogy is therefore oriented to the particular objections raised and felt by those influenced by the Hellenistic cultural con­ text o f the late first century. It will not necessarily answer all objections raised and felt by people today, but we may find it still relevant to some o f them. We may also learn from the author’s perception o f the need to maintain the future hope as a nonnegotiable element o f the Christian message, closely related to the integrity of Christian living. In this, the main­ stream tradition o f the church in his time and afterward followed him. The evidence of the transfiguration The false teachers did not dispute that the apostles had taught that Jesus Christ would come at the imminent end o f history to judge the world and to establish his kingdom. So they had to argue that the apostles were mistaken in this. In fact, they argued that the apostles had invented the idea of the Parousia; it was not part o f the Christian revelation which Jesus Christ had commissioned them to preach. Rather, it was their own human addition to that revelation. Thus the false teachers charged the apostles with teaching “cleverly concocted myths” (1:16), using the word “myth” in the derogatory sense it quite often had in ancient religious controversy: a story which purports to be true but is not. The charge is that the eschatological teaching of the apos­ tles was not what it claimed to be—prophecy inspired by God—but the fabrication of mere human cleverness, JU D E , 2 PETER

80

presumably for some unworthy motive. The Epicureans held that Greek stories of punishment in the afterlife had been invented as instruments of moral control, to keep people in fear. Since there are other indications that the false teachers were familiar with arguments deployed in Hellenistic religious debate about prophecy and revelation, they may have said something similar about the Christian expectation of judg­ ment at the Parousia. This would reinforce the link they evi­ dently made between their eschatological skepticism and their moral libertinism. In 1:16-18 our author (writing in Peter’s name) denies this charge and claims that the teaching o f the apostles about the Parousia was not invented, but based on their eyewitness tes­ timony to the transfiguration of Jesus. In other words, it was an integral part of the special teaching role of the apostles which was to testify to that of which they had been eye­ witnesses (cf., Acts 1:21-22). Modem readers may not immediately recognize how the event of the transfiguration of Jesus, as described in 2 Peter 1:17-18 (cf., the Gospel accounts in Matt 17:1-8; Mark 9:28; Luke 9:28-36), can be a basis for the expectation o f his Parousia. The point is that the transfiguration is here under­ stood as God’s appointment of Jesus as his Messiah, his eschatological vicegerent. This office o f Messiah involved the task of subduing the rebellious world to the divine rule, a task which Jesus had not yet fulfilled (cf., Heb 2:8). But if God had already appointed Jesus as the eschatological judge and king, the time must be coming when Jesus would be manifested to the world in triumphant glory. His manifesta­ tion in glory to the apostles on the mountain had been a foretaste o f the glory in which he will appear on the last day. This meaning of the transfiguration is conveyed through the author’s allusions to the messianic Psalm 2, which is echoed in the words of the heavenly voice (cf., Ps 2:7) and suggested by the phrase “the holy mountain” (cf., Ps 2:6: “I 81

Christian Hope

have set my king on Zion my holy hill”). According to Psalm 2, God has enthroned his anointed king, the Son o f God, on Mount Zion precisely in order to subdue the rebellious world to divine rule (Ps 2:8-9). If the transfiguration was God’s installation of Jesus as the Messiah of Psalm 2, it must have had his Parousia directly in view. The emphasis of the account is on the apostolic witness to the fact that God himself had chosen Jesus as his vicegerent, appointed him to the office, and invested him with glory for the task. The apostles had seen the glory given him by God and heard the voice from heaven declaring him the Messiah. Therefore, the apostles’ expectation o f the Parousia was soundly based on this divine action and declaration. The evidence of O ld Testam ent prophecy The author has a second reply to the charge that the apostles simply invented the Christian hope: “Moreover, we [Peter and his fellow-apostles] place very firm reliance on the prophetic word, to which you would do well to attend, as you would to a lamp shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts” (1:19). As well as the divine declaration at the transfiguration, the apostles had also, as a reliable basis for their expectation of the Parousia, the Old Testament prophecies inspired by God. Such prophecies, o f course, are frequently interpreted in the New Testament as prophecies o f the coming o f Jesus as judge and king. We noticed some o f these prophecies earlier (cf., chapter 3 on Jude) and the fact that a Parousiarelated interpretation of them goes back to the earliest Christian teaching. Rather than considering the transfiguration and the Old Testament prophecies two distinct bases for the apostolic expectation of the Parousia, it might be better to see them as together forming the basis for that expectation. The apostles JU D E , 2 PETER

82

knew that the prophecies referred to the Parousia o f Jesus Christ because at the transfiguration G od had identified Jesus as the one who was to establish his eschatological rule as predicted in prophecy. The prophecies predicted the final triumph o f God’s kingdom in history; the transfiguration identified Jesus as the messianic king who would accomplish that triumph. This verse’s comparison of Old Testament prophecy with a lamp shining in a dark place we shall leave for consider­ ation in the next chapter, in the context o f 2 Peter’s view of Scripture. The scoffers In 1:19 the objection raised by the opponents is not ex­ plicitly stated, but is implicit in the author’s denial o f it. In 3:3-4 the opponents (prophesied by Peter before his death, now active after Peter’s death) are explicitly quoted: “Where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, everything remains just as it has been since the beginning o f the world.” This is the author’s own formulation o f their principal objection to the expectation o f the Parousia, set out explicitly no doubt because o f its importance as an argu­ ment which was carrying weight among his readers. He replies to it at length in 3:5-10. The attitude of the false teachers is suggested by the word “scoffers” (3:3, borrowed from Jude 18). In the Wisdom litera­ ture of the Old Testament, the scoffer is the person who despises and ignores religion and morality (Prov 1:22; 9:7-8; 13:1, etc). Second Peter uses the term to describe his oppo­ nents as people who mock divine revelation. Their objection to the Christian hope is not raised in an open spirit o f intel­ lectual inquiry, but with an attitude o f scorn. These people are out to discredit a teaching they consider absurd. Their attitude of cynical mockery is also conveyed by the way the 83

Christian Hope

author phrases the beginning of their objection, “Where is the promise o f his coming?” In the Old Testament, this kind o f rhetorical question is used to express skeptical scoffing at the convictions of believers (e.g., Ps 42:3,10; 79:10; Jer 17:15; Mal 2:17). The core o f their objection is that the apostolic prophecy of the Parousia has been disproved by the lapse of time. They point out what has become generally known to modem scholars as “the delay o f the Parousia.” The Parousia had been expected during the lifetime o f the first Christian generation. Indeed, the reported sayings of Jesus seemed to predict this (Mark 9:1; 13:30; John 21:22-23). But that generation (“the fathers”) had now passed away, and still nothing had hap­ pened. Thus the expectation o f the Parousia had not been fulfilled within the allotted time span, and so could be con­ sidered disproved. This objection probably reflects what for a period in the late first century, when people would be likely to have considered the first generation o f Christian believers now passed, was an acute problem for the Christian hope until it was successfully surmounted and forgotten. The false teachers were no doubt able to exploit a genuine source o f perplexity for 2 Peter’s readers, as is shown by the serious attempt the author makes to meet the problem. However, the last phrase of verse 4 reveals a further di­ mension to the skepticism o f the false teachers. Since the death of the first generation, they maintained, everything re­ mains unchanged—just as it has done since the beginning of the world. It seems that the failure of the Parousia hope only confirmed the opponents’ assumption that divine interven­ tions in history do not happen. The course o f the history of the world has always continued, they thought, without catastrophic acts o f divine judgment to disrupt its natural course. There was no reason to expect that the future would be any different. This rationalistic assumption about the uni­ formity of history and nature probably contributed as much JU D E, 2 PETER

84

to their eschatological skepticism as did the delay of the Parousia. It brings their objection close to some difficulties modem Christians may have with traditional eschatology in view of our scientific understanding of the universe. Indeed, the whole objection, as formulated in 2 Peter 3:4, sounds remarkably similar to a famous statement of the mod­ em theologian Rudolf Bultmann, explaining one reason why he was convinced that the message o f the New Testament needed to be “demythologized” in order to be made intelligi­ ble to modem people: The mythical eschatology is rendered fundamentally obsolete by the simple fact that the Parousia of Christ did not immediately take place, as the New Testament expected, but that World-history went on, and, as ev­ ery responsible person is convinced, will continue to go on.1 W hat Bultmann calls “the modem scientific world view” allows for no end to history— or at least for no theologically significant end to history. The sovereignty of G od’s Word The part o f the scoffers’ objection which the author tack­ les first is their rationalistic assumption o f the necessary stable continuance of the world without divine interruption. Their confidence that the world will continue unchanged indefinitely is based on no more solid basis than the claim that it always has continued unchanged. The author shatters this facile rationalism with his belief that the world, and its continuance as a stable habitation for humanity, are radically contingent on the will o f God. His evidence is that the world was brought into existence by divine decree (3:5), and by divine decree (“the word of 85

Christian Hope

God”) was again destroyed in the Flood (3:6). He describes these events in terms of the ancient Jewish cosmology re­ flected in the Genesis accounts, according to which, at the creation, the world— sky (“heavens”) and earth— emerged out of a primeval ocean (Gen 1:2, 6-7, 9). Creation was the establishment o f a habitable space within the primeval chaos. The world exists because the waters o f chaos—which are now above the firmament, beneath the earth, and surround­ ing the earth— are held back by the divine decree and can no longer engulf the world. (So the world can be said to have been “created out of water and by means of water by the word of God,” v 5.) But the potential of the waters o f chaos to engulf and de­ stroy the world is restrained, not abolished. That this is so was demonstrated in the Flood, when God decided that his cre­ ation had been so ruined by sin that he would wipe the slate clean, as it were, and make a fresh start with the one remain­ ing righteous man and his family. According to Genesis 7:11, the waters of chaos, which had been confined at the creation above the firmament, poured through the windows of the firmament to inundate the earth. The Flood was a kind of reversion of the world to primeval chaos in order for it to be remade. The world exists by divine decree and has already been once destroyed by divine decree. It is therefore not unreason­ able to believe the word of God which has already decreed, in prophecy, that the world will be destroyed once more (v 7). In stating that this (eschatological) destruction will be by fire, the author follows a common Jewish view of his time, which held that there are two universal judgments—one in the past by water (the Flood), the other in the future by fire. This scheme of cosmic history, while not as such taught in Scrip­ ture, was deduced from the Genesis account o f the Flood (along with God’s promise, after the Flood, never again to destroy the world by flood) and from the prophecies of JU D E, 2 PETER

86

eschatological judgment by fire (e.g., Isa 34:4; 66:15-16; Zeph 1:18; Mal 4:1). Following this scheme, our author, like many o f his con­ temporaries, sees cosmic history divided into three great peri­ ods: the world before the Flood, the present world which will end in the eschatological conflagration, and the new world to come (3:13). There are, as it were, three events of creation: the initial creation, the unmaking and recreation of the world in the Flood, and the unmaking and recreation o f the world in the fire of the final judgment. The argument is therefore that, since God created the world initially and has already destroyed and recreated it once, in the Flood, we can believe his promise that he will destroy and recreate it again in the future. The form o f this argument may initially make it seem of little value for the modem reader. The author clearly uses cosmological ideas current in his time which must now be regarded as mythological— in other words, they are evoca­ tive symbols, rather than literal descriptions o f historical events. But if we look for what was being expressed in these symbols, we shall find something still valid today. The essen­ tial point is that the continuance of the world as a habitable space for humanity cannot be taken for granted, as though nothing could conceivably interrupt it. In very early times, humanity was more at the mercy of natural catastrophes than in later historical periods, and people were probably more aware o f the potential o f the forces o f nature to over­ whelm and obliterate human history. They knew that the continuance of the world as an environment for human life ultimately depended on God’s will restraining these forces. The depiction of the Flood as an unmaking of creation, a universal reversion to chaos, is more than a picturesque way of describing whatever we may or may not find it possible to believe “actually happened” in some prehistoric natural 87

Christian Hope

catastrophe. It is a most powerful expression o f this aware­ ness that the catastrophically destructive potential of nature is held in check only by God’s will. The stability of the world as we now experience it is no guarantee in itself that it will continue indefinitely. It is radically contingent on God’s will. The idea of the two universal destructions—by water and by fire—makes a further point: that God’s will for his creation is not for its indefinite continuance as it is. This is because he intends the elimination of evil from his world. So endemic is evil in the world as it is, that creation must pass through the fire of his judgment and be renewed before it is a world fit for righteousness to dwell in (3:13). The difference between wa­ ter and fire perhaps suggests that future judgment will not be simply the same kind o f thing as the Flood was believed to be. It will be a much more radical renewal of creation, since the Flood eliminated evil from the world only temporarily, whereas the judgment to come will remove all potential for evil from God’s creation forever. We need to try to grasp the essential point which these verses convey in a mythological way. But we cannot do so by means of the kind of “demythologization” which Bultmann applied to New Testament theology in general, i.e., by remov­ ing any reference to the world of human history and nature. These verses teach precisely the contingency of that world— not just the existential world of human inner subjectivity— on the will of God, and his intention to fulfill his purpose for that world, his creation. It is in human history precisely in its inextricable involvement with the natural world that God will act to judge and renew. Alien as the cosmology of these verses is to us, the essential point is not alien to a modem understanding of the universe. We know very well that the continuity of an environment in which humanity can survive and flourish is not to be taken for granted, as though nothing could interrupt it. The forces of nature retain their appalling potential to interrupt and JU D E , 2 PETER

88

obliterate human history, while modem humanity faces the additional threat of our own newly acquired power to use the forces of nature to destroy ourselves. Although the es­ chatological conflagration to which verse 7 alludes must be understood as an image, not a literal description, of the es­ chatological judgment, it is an image which remains powerful today, evoking both the threat of nuclear holocaust and the eventual reabsorption of our planet into the expanding sun. These thoroughly scientific possibilities of reversion to chaos remind us of the contingency of human history in this world. They may help to refute our modem equivalents of the false teachers’ facile rationalistic assumption that the world can be counted on to continue just as it always has done. But only by provoking a religious awareness that human history in this world is contingent on the will of God can they show us the credibility of the Christian hope. Thus there is no value in a literalistic identification o f the eschatological conflagration of 2 Peter with nuclear holo­ caust or some other destructive possibility within the hori­ zon o f our scientific view o f the universe. Our author is not interested in predicting mere physical catastrophe. In his biblical perspective, human history is not at the mercy of chance or futility. The God who created the cosmos out of chaos is in sovereign control o f the forces of chaos. The fire is the fire o f God’s moral judgment. Even that judgment is not an end in itself; it is for the sake o f the new world of righteousness which he will once again create out of chaos. The fire of judgm ent Since we have just suggested that the image o f fire should not be taken literally, it will be useful to look in more detail at the description o f the final judgment in 3:10, 12, before turning to the second stage of the author’s reply to the scoffers. 89

Christian Hope

In both 3:7 and 3:10, the fire is described as affecting the physical world and as effecting judgment. In 3:7 it is “the heavens [i.e., the sky] and the earth” which are reserved for fire, but this cosmic conflagration will mark “the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly people.” In 3:10, the physical destruction o f the sky is clear (“the heavens will pass away with a roar, the heavenly bodies will be dissolved in the heat”), as it is also in 3:12 (“the heavens will be dis­ solved in flames and the heavenly bodies melt in the heat”). That this picture of the physical dissolution o f the sky is also a picture of the judgment of human beings is less clear only because o f the textual problem at the end of verse 10. In my commentary I have argued that we should accept the difficult but well-attested reading, eurethe̅setai, giving the translation: “the earth and all the works in it will be found,” and understand this to mean that the earth, the scene of human wickedness, and all the deeds o f human wickedness committed in it will be discovered by God (“will be found” is a “divine passive” with a judicial sense). In other words, the earth and its inhabitants, with their evil deeds, will be made manifest before God and his judicial scrutiny.2 To this we should add the probable significance o f the phrase “with a roar” (rhoize̅don) earlier in the verse. Though this could describe the roar of the flames which consume the sky, it is more likely a reference to the thunder of the divine voice, which is a standard element in theophany descriptions (cf., Ps 18:13-15; 77:18; 104:7; Joel 3:16; Amos 1:2). Like the “divine passive” at the end o f the verse (“will be found,” meaning “God will find”), it is a reverentially oblique way of indicating that the whole verse really describes the coming o f the divine Judge to judgment. When the wrathful voice of God thunders out of heaven and the fire of his judgment sets the sky ablaze, the firmament and the heavenly bodies will dissolve in flames, and the earth, the scene of human wicked­ ness, will be exposed to his wrath. Then it will be impossible JU D E , 2 PETER

90

for the wicked to hide from God’s judicial scrutiny. They and their evil deeds will be discovered by him and condemned. Once this meaning o f the verse is seen, it becomes clear that physical destruction o f the world is ancillary to the event of God’s judgment o f the wicked. Moreover, the na­ ture of the physical description is determined by a prescientific picture of the world in which the sky, with the heavenly bodies in it, is the physical barrier which intervenes between God, who dwells above the sky, and the earth, which the wicked inhabit. Clearly, we cannot take the physical descrip­ tion literally, and we may legitimately wonder how far the author did. His concern was to evoke a picture of divine judgment rather than to predict its physical form. This is not to say that the end of the history of this age will not involve the material world of nature. Human history, in­ cluding human evil, is too inextricably involved with the nat­ ural world for that to be conceivable. It seems that the author of 2 Peter, like some other biblical writers (cf., Rom 8:21; Rev 21:1), did expect the natural world to be radically recre­ ated. It is surely not only their righteous human inhabitants that make the new sky and the new earth (3:13) “new.” But how this new creation of the world will take place we cannot imagine and the author of 2 Peter cannot tell us. The delay of the Parousia In 3:8-9 the author responds to the most prominent and disturbing element in the opponents’ case for rejecting the traditional Christian hope: that the Parousia was expected within the lifetime o f the first Christian generation, and this expectation had not been fulfilled. The author’s response is not new. He takes up two arguments which had already been used by Jewish writers. O f course, these writers had not faced the specific Christian problem of the Lord’s appar­ ent failure to come within the expected period, but they had 91

Christian Hope

faced the recurrent problem of the delay o f the Jewish es­ chatological expectation. During the period in which Jews had been expecting the final intervention of God to fulfill his purposes in history, to save his people and judge the wicked, the end was always expected soon. This was entirely natural. Hope for the end always arose out o f a specific situation in which people felt that the evil o f the contemporary world cried out for God’s intervention to end it and finally establish his righteous kingdom. Eschatological hope is naturally impatient. It was the same in early Christianity. Those who had seen God’s final acts o f salvation so dramatically begun in the life, death, and resurrection o f Jesus, and the coming of the Spirit, natu­ rally expected the process to reach a rapid conclusion. The arrival o f God’s kingdom was underway; surely its final tri­ umph would be soon. Those who lived in the excitement of the beginnings of the Christian movement felt themselves to be living in the beginnings of the eschatological kingdom itself. Naturally, they were impatient to see it come in power and assumed they themselves would live to do so. However, the Jewish hope had already survived a long pe­ riod of disappointing delay. It had done so without any loss of the sense of imminence, but it had done so by evolving a characteristic tension between the sense of the imminence of the end and an acknowledgment and partial understanding of its delay. Two o f the ways in which Jewish apocalyptic thought had already sought to understand God’s delay in fulfilling his final purpose for history are taken over by the author of 2 Peter in 3:8-9. In the first place, God, who determines the time of the Parousia, does so from a different perspective on time than that o f men and women. This point is made by an allusion to Psalm 90:4, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past.” The allusion shows that, since God is not limited by a human life span but surveys the JU D E, 2 PETER

92

whole course o f history, periods which by human standards are o f great length may, from his perspective, be very short. Those who complain o f the delay of the Parousia, impatient to see it in their own lifetime, are limiting the divine strategy in history to the short-term expectations of human beings. But God’s purpose transcends such expectations. Thus the false teachers’ accusation, that it is now too late for the Parousia to be expected, is based on their own evaluation of “lateness,” not on G od’s. O f course, the figure o f a thousand years is not meant to give some new chronological indication o f the period be­ fore the Parousia. The point is simply that a delay which seems to us very lengthy may not be so significant within the total perspective on the course o f history which G od commands. The author is not dispelling the imminent ex­ pectation (he continues to speak as though his readers will live to see the Parousia: 1:19; 3:14). He is not indefinitely postponing the Parousia, as though it need no longer be realistically expected. H is readers are to live in continual readiness for the Parousia (3:14), which will come unexpec­ tedly, like a thief (3:10), as Christians had always said o f it. But they are not to be disturbed because it has not come within any specific period. Because G od alone surveys the whole o f history, he retains the date o f the end in his own knowledge and power, and it cannot be anticipated by any human calculation. However, the author does more than appeal to the wise but unknowable sovereignty o f G od over the times. He also offers, in verse 9, some insight into the reason why G od has, from the human perspective, deferred the end— an insight which is surely not intended as a complete explanation o f the matter, but as some help toward living with the delay. The delay is a respite which G od has graciously granted his people before his intervention in judgm ent It derives from one o f the fundamental attributes o f God, his forbearance, 93

Christian Hope

which characterizes God as “slow to anger” (Exod 34:6), mercifully deferring his judgment so that sinners may re­ pent and escape condemnation. God delays the Parousia because he is not willing that any o f his Christian people should perish. (The actual referent o f “any” and “all”— in the words: “it is not his will that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance”— is the same as that o f "you” earlier in the verse and, therefore, certainly limited to Christians. This is because the author wishes to turn this teaching in a practical direction: his readers should take advantage o f this respite, as he urges in verses 14-15. But, of course, the principle enunciated here can be validly ex­ tended to God’s desire that all people should come to re­ pentance and salvation.) Understood in this light of G od’s mercy, the delay o f the Parousia should not be a matter o f complaint. On the con­ trary, 2 Peter’s readers, especially those whom the false teachers have enticed into sin, should take advantage o f the opportunity to repent. And lest anyone should think that sinners can presume on G od’s forbearance, taking advan­ tage o f the delay by not repenting, the author immediately stresses (v 10) that G od will not defer his judgment indefi­ nitely. A s Jesus’ parable had made clear (Matt 24:43-44; Luke 12:39-40; cf., 1 Thess 5:2; Rev 3:3; 16:15), the day o f judgment will come upon sinners with the unexpectedness o f a burglar breaking in while the householder sleeps. Second Peter’s arguments must have helped the church, along with other considerations, to surmount the problem o f the delay o f the Parousia. They could now see that the temporal element in the first Christians’ expectation of the Parousia within their own lifetime was really quite inci­ dental to the substance of their hope. The hope itself is essential to Christian faith because it is inconceivable that the biblical God, if he is God, will not eventually achieve his purpose o f overcoming all evil in his world. In the hope for JU D E, 2 PETER

94

the world in which righteousness will be at home (3:13) not only the truth of God’s promises, but his goodness and his power, are at stake. The problem of the delay of the Parousia is in the end a form o f the problem o f evil, in which also the goodness and power of God are at stake. It is: why does God continue to tolerate evil in his world and not bring about his kingdom now? Our answers to this problem of eschatological delay are necessarily as fragmentary as our answers to the problem o f evil. Indeed, in neither case do we ever achieve real an­ swers. We only find ways of living faithfully and hopefully with the problem until G od himself answers it in fulfilling his promises. Meanwhile, we cannot abandon the hope for the world in which God’s righteousness will be at home without abandoning faith in God’s righteousness itself. To abandon that hope, as the author of 2 Peter saw very well in his conflict with the false teachers, is to undermine the struggle for righteousness in God’s world now.

95

Christian Hope

4

SCRIPTURE

Second Peter is unique among the New Testament docu­ ments in that it includes explicit comment on the nature of both Old and New Testament Scriptures. We shall take the three relevant passages (1:19; 1:20-21; and 3:15-16) in turn. The value of O ld Testam ent prophecy (1:19) We have already seen, in the preceding chapter, how this verse fits into the author’s argument against the false teach­ ers. Against their charge that the apostles had invented their teaching about future eschatology, the author argues that the apostles (“we”) based their hope for the future soundly on Old Testament prophecy: “we place very firm reliance on the prophetic word, to which you would do well to attend, as you would to a lamp shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.” In the simile of the lamp in the darkness, the author compares the world in its present condition to a place that is shrouded in darkness during the nighttime, whereas the age 97

Scripture

to come (which the advent o f Jesus Christ in glory will inaugurate) will be like the day which dawns after the night­ time and floods the place with light. Prophecy is like a lamp that gives enough light for tasks which need to be per­ formed during the night, but which becomes superfluous when daylight arrives. Just as the arrival o f day is heralded by the appearance o f the morning star, Venus, which ac­ companies the first glimmerings o f the dawn, so the appear­ ance o f Jesus Christ himself in his messianic glory will signal the dawn o f the eschatological day, the “day o f eter­ nity” (3:18) which will never end. (For Jesus as the morning star, cf., also Revelation 22:16, which, like this passage, probably alludes to the prophecy o f the messianic “star” in Numbers 24:17.) The darkness o f the present world is its ignorance of God. Prophecy is a lamp in this darkness because it is a pro­ visional, partial revelation o f God. It points forward in hope to the full revelation o f God which will be possible for the first time at the Parousia and will characterize the age to come. The author locates this eschatological revelation in the hearts o f his readers (“until the day dawns and the morn­ ing star rises in your hearts”), but not because he is denying that the Parousia will be an objective, cosmic event. He is concerned here with only one aspect o f the Parousia. His point is that for believers, who now live by the light of prophetic Scripture, the Parousia will mean that such light will be superseded by the full revelation o f G od in Christ flooding their hearts. It is worth noting that this understanding of prophetic Scripture is parallel to the understanding of the transfigura­ tion as a prophetic event in the preceding verses (1:16-18: see the discussion o f this passage in chapter 3). The transfigura­ tion o f Jesus was a preliminary glimpse of the divine glory in which he will appear on the last day; it is therefore a prophecy pointing forward to that full revelation. Similarly, prophetic JU D E, 2 PETER

98

Scripture gives an anticipatory glimpse of the full revelation of God and so enables us to live in hope of the latter. When he gives this role to the “prophetic word,” the au­ thor is certainly thinking primarily of actual prophecies of the Parousia and the last day, on which the apostles had based their teaching about the Christian hope. But the term “prophetic word” was used more generally for Old Testament Scripture as such. In contemporary Jewish understanding of Scripture (from which this term comes), predictive proph­ ecy was found in many parts of Scripture besides the books known as “the prophets” (for example, in the Psalms). More­ over, the whole of Old Testament Scripture could be de­ scribed as prophecy, because all its authors were spokespeople for God. Inspired by the Spirit, they conveyed God’s word— just as those who were called “prophets” in the original, nar­ rower sense did. The Jewish understanding of Scripture as the inspired Word of God, which the church took over, had come about through applying to the whole of Scripture the analogy o f prophecy. The analogy cannot be taken too strictly: the way in which other scriptural writers (such as the writers o f Wisdom Literature) were inspired by the Spirit and con­ veyed God’s Word in their writings cannot be exactly the same as the way the prophets were inspired and conveyed God’s Word. But the extension o f the category of prophecy to cover the whole of Old Testament Scripture was a way of recognizing that, in some analogous way, the rest o f Scrip­ ture is also God’s inspired Word. Although in 1:19 the reference is primarily to prophecies which actually predict the Parousia, and so illumine our present darkness with hope, the function here ascribed to such prophecies is more broadly true o f the whole of Scripture. G od’s revelation of himself within history, which reaches us through Scripture, is a preliminary, anticipatory revelation pointing forward to the full revelation o f himself 99

Scripture

at the end o f history. It is a light in the darkness; it gives real but by no means full and perfect knowledge. O ur knowl­ edge o f G od now is always ignorance as well as knowledge. It is enough to be going on with, like a lamp by which we can find our way in the darkness. But when we live by it, we live by faith and hope, not yet by sight (cf., 2 C or 5:7; Heb 11:1). This is important to remember, lest we seek in the scriptural witness to Christ a clarity and fullness o f revela­ tion which are unavailable this side o f the Parousia. Unless we remember it, we shall become either disillusioned or presumptuous. Forgetting that we cannot yet live in the day o f eternity, we shall either give up living toward it by the light we do have; or else we shall pretend that we do already live in it, with absurd and sometimes dangerous conse­ quences. Thus even with regard to the Christian claim to find God’s self-revelation in Scripture, an appropriate de­ gree o f Christian modesty is required. In 1 Corinthians 13, Paul makes the same point as 2 Peter 1:19, but in different images. He contrasts the “imperfect” kind of revelation o f God which is available now (in “knowl­ edge” and “prophecy,” vv 8-9) with the “perfect” revelation to come in the future (when “knowledge” and “prophecies” will therefore “pass away,” vv 8-10). Then he writes: “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood” (v 12). The inspiration of O ld Testam ent prophecy (1 :2 0 -2 1 ) The meaning o f these verses is disputed. Much depends on the correct translation o f verse 20, since this is a case in which translation and interpretation cannot be separated. In my commentary I have argued in detail for the follow­ ing translation o f the two verses: JU D E , 2 PETER

100

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of scripture derives from the prophet’s own interpreta­ tion, because prophecy never came by human impulse, but people impelled by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. M ost translations adopt a significantly different interpre­ tation o f the end o f verse 20 (e.g., R SV : “no prophecy of scripture is a matter o f one’s own interpretation”), although the NIV is similar to my translation. The difference is fun­ damentally over whether verse 20 refers to the origin o f Scripture (as in my translation and the NIV) or to the exegesis o f scripture (as in most translations and most com­ mentators). In my commentary, I have argued that consideration of the context, the sequence of thought in these two verses, and the use of the same technical terminology in other Jew­ ish and Christian writers for discussion o f the inspiration of prophecy, amount to a strong cumulative argument for the translation I have given. In that case, the way that verse 20 has often been used in the past, as having something to teach us about the way we should interpret scripture, has been mistaken. In verse 20 it is assumed that the way scriptural prophecy usually came about was that the prophet was given by God a sign (e.g., Jer 1:11,13; Amos 7:1), a dream (e.g., Dan 7:2; Zech 1:8), or a vision (e.g., Ezek 37:1-10), which the prophet then interpreted. His prophecy, as recorded in Scripture, is there­ fore an interpretation of the revelation he received from God. The signs, dreams, and visions were themselves extremely ob­ scure, and really constitute prophecy only when given an in­ terpretation. The question then is whether this interpretation was a God-given, inspired interpretation (as the prophetic books themselves claim: e.g., Amos 7:8-9; Ezek 37:11-14) or merely the prophet’s own interpretation, which could cer­ tainly not be relied on as correct. In the latter case, prophetic 101

Scripture

Scripture would not be the inspired Word of God, but merely the product of the human minds of the prophets. The false teachers were evidently claiming that this was the case. When it was said that the Christian hope for the future was soundly based on prophecies in the Old Testa­ ment, the false teachers denied that these prophecies came from God. While the prophets may indeed have received signs and dreams and visions, their prophecies were their own human interpretations o f these, not God-given inter­ pretations. They could therefore be disregarded. In reply, the author denies this view (v 20) and goes on to explain why it is false (v 21). No prophecy in the Old Testa­ ment Scriptures, he claims, originated from human initiative or imagination (“human impulse”: literally, “the will o f a hu­ man being”). The Holy Spirit of God inspired not only the prophets’ dreams and visions, but also their interpretations of them. When they gave these interpretations, they were “impelled” (literally, “carried along”) by the Holy Spirit, so that when they spoke the prophecies recorded in Scripture they were spokespeople for God himself. The key terms in these verses (“their own,” “impelled by the Holy Spirit,” “from G od”) had already become techni­ cal terminology in Jewish discussion o f the divine origin o f biblical prophecy. O ur author reflects an accepted view, which was concerned to deny that the prophets o f the O ld Testament spoke anything that was their own. Rather, what they expressed was a message from God. They acted as G od’s spokespeople, it was sometimes said, just as an am­ bassador delivers a message which is not his own but given him by someone else. They were able to do this because they were inspired by the Spirit, who enabled them to dis­ cern and to convey G od’s message. Although this terminol­ ogy represents a systematic conceptualization o f the nature o f biblical prophecy which was developed in the Diaspora Judaism o f New Testament times, it essentially reflects the JU D E , 2 PETER

102

O ld Testament prophets’ own understanding o f the matter. In the O ld Testament, false prophets are characterized as those who speak a message which is the product o f their own mind (Jer 23:16,26; Ezek 13:3), not received from G od (Jer 23:18, 21-22). True prophets do not speak on their own initiative (cf., Jer 20:9; Amos 3:8) but, as they con­ stantly assert, convey a message that has come to them from God. O f course, if this understanding o f prophecy is taken very strictly, it should apply only to the prophetic oracles within the Old Testament, which are explicitly spoken as “the word of the Lord.” The psychological experience o f the prophets, in which they were aware of receiving a message from God, would not have been the experience which lies behind the writing o f most other parts of the Old Testament Scriptures. But the claim that these, too, were “inspired by G od” (2 Tim 3:16) acknowledges that they also come from God and con­ vey his message. The Pauline letters (3 :1 5 -1 6 ) The churches to which 2 Peter was written were located in the same area as those to which 1 Peter had been written (see 2 Pet 3:1, with 1 Pet l.1 ). A t least some of them must therefore have been churches founded by Paul. They would have held Paul in high esteem and regarded the letters Paul had written to them, along with any other o f Paul’s letters that they knew, as a theological authority. This is why our author takes the trouble to point out that his own teaching in 3:14—15a agrees with Paul’s, both in the letter or letters Paul had written specifically to 2 Peter’s readers and in “all his letters.” The author says that the point he has been making (that the Christian hope should be a motive for repentance and righteousness) is a point which Paul made not only in writing 103

Scripture

to 2 Peter’s readers but also in all the Pauline letters he knew. It is true o f most, if not all, of Paul’s letters as we know them that Paul exhorts his readers to live righteously in view o f the coming Parousia and judgment. So we cannot tell from this reference to its subject matter which Pauline letter (or letters) had been specifically addressed to 2 Peter’s readers. But be­ cause of the location of these churches, the reference is pre­ sumably to Galatians, Colossians, Ephesians, or to more than one of these (unless we postulate Pauline letters which have not survived). What is more significant is the fact that the author knows several Pauline letters. It seems that from an early date, perhaps even before Paul’s death, copies o f Paul’s letters circulated to churches other than their original recipi­ ents. We cannot, o f course, tell how many of Paul’s letters our author knew (“all his letters” means all the letters of Paul he knew, not all the letters o f Paul we know!). But he must have known a collection of some letters of Paul, which presumably was used in his church. In what the author says about Paul and his letters, we can distinguish three very significant points. In the first place, his reference to “the other scriptures” (v 16) implies that he regards Paul’s letters as Scripture and puts them in some sense in the same category as the O ld Testament (since “the other scriptures” must include the O ld Testament, whether or not the phrase also refers to early Christian writings other than Paul’s letters). The term “scriptures” here is certainly (as always in the New Testa­ ment) used technically to refer to inspired, authoritative writings. Behind this implied use o f the term for Paul’s letters must lie the reading o f Paul’s letters in Christian worship as authoritative literature, alongside, and in the same way as, the Old Testament. A s soon as Paul’s letters were being treated in this way, it was natural that the same term should come to be applied to them as Christians used (following Jewish usage) for the Old Testament JU D E , 2 PETER

104

However, this certainly does not imply that there was as yet a canon of New Testament Scriptures, i.e., a fixed collec­ tion o f authoritative apostolic writings. A t this stage, in the late first century, each church would have had its own small collection of apostolic writings, which they read in worship and otherwise treated as authoritative records of the teach­ ings o f Jesus and the apostles. Such collections would have differed from church to church, and each was an open col­ lection to which other works could be added. The process o f collecting and sifting early Christian literature, which would eventually produce an agreed canon o f New Testament Scriptures, was still in its early beginnings. The second point is the author’s indication o f what there was about Paul’s writings which enabled them to be treated as normative Christian literature, alongside the Old Testa­ m ent They too were inspired by God, as the author suggests when he says that Paul wrote “in accordance with the wis­ dom given to him” (v 15). “Given” is a “divine passive,” meaning that God gave him wisdom, and Paul’s wisdom is therefore charismatic wisdom, a gift o f the Spirit. Paul’s gift o f wisdom (cf., 1 Cor 2:6-13) was his God-given insight into the truth and meaning o f the gospel. To say that Paul’s letters were written in accordance with the wisdom given him by G od is really to say the same as our author had said of the Old Testament prophetic Scriptures in 1:20-21. Like the prophets, Paul did not speak out of his own wisdom, but in accordance with the wisdom given him by God. It is this that accounts for the treatment o f Paul’s letters as Scrip­ tures, set alongside the Old Testament. They are authorita­ tive writings inspired by God. Paul himself, in 1 Corinthians 2:6-13, speaks o f his teach­ ing as embodying the wisdom given him by the Spirit. More frequently, he speaks o f “the grace [charis] given” to him (Rom 12:3; 15:15; 1 Cor 3:10; Gal 2:9; Eph 3:2, 7; cf., C ol 1:25). By this he means the gift o f his apostolic commission, 105

Scripture

the divine enabling by which he receives and understands God’s purpose in the gospel (Eph 3:2-10) and by which he speaks and writes with the authority o f one who conveys God’s message (Rom 12:3; 15:15-16). Second Peter’s phrase, therefore, faithfully reflects Paul’s own consciousness o f his apostolic authority and charismatic inspiration. Finally, the author condemns the false teachers’ misinter­ pretation of Paul. In doing so, he implies something about the way to interpret Scripture correctly. No doubt the false teach­ ers had to discuss Paul’s teaching because he was a major authority in the churches where they were active. Second Peter 3:16 says that they “distort” some things in Paul’s letters which are “hard to understand.” This may mean that they gave Paul’s teaching an unacceptable meaning and rejected it (as they did the Old Testament Scriptures), or it may mean that they misinterpreted Paul’s teaching in such a way as to support their own misguided views. In the former case, they probably interpreted Paul’s state­ ments about the imminence o f the Parousia (e.g., Rom 13:11— 12; 16:20; 1 Cor 7:29; Phil 4:5; 1 Thess 4:15) in such a way as to suggest that his expectations were not fulfilled and so his teaching about the Parousia had been shown to be mistaken (cf., 2 Pet 3:4). In the latter case, they may have used Paul’s doctrine of justification and freedom from the law to support their antinomianism, and quoted him in support o f their of­ fer of “freedom” (2 Pet 2:19; cf., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17). There is really no way of deciding for certain whether they rejected Paul’s authority or whether they claimed Paul’s authority for their own views. In either case, the author suggests that it was because they were “uninstructed and unstable” that they misinter­ preted the difficult parts of Paul’s letters, as well as the other Scriptures. Readers have sometimes supposed that our au­ thor himself found parts o f Paul’s letters hard to under­ stand, but in fact he clearly suggests that such passages are JU D E, 2 PETER

106

open to misinterpretation only by “uninstructed and un­ stable” people. In other words, the false teachers, for all their pretensions to be teachers, had never taken the trou­ ble to acquire a broad, sound knowledge o f apostolic teach­ ing. The passages they misinterpret in Paul are not therefore passages which are just inherently obscure and which any­ one would find difficult (of course, there are such passages in Scripture), but passages which are liable to be misunder­ stood unless they are interpreted in the light o f the rest o f Paul’s teaching and o f the apostolic teaching generally. Without a sufficient general understanding o f Christian teaching, the false teachers are not only “uninstructed” but also “unstable,” i.e., likely to go astray in their interpretation o f particular passages o f Scripture. It follows that the way in which 2 Peter’s readers will avoid being led astray and falling from their “stable position” (3:17) will be through proper and thorough instruction in the general thrust o f the apos­ tolic teaching. The most serious dangers o f misinterpreting Scripture arise when we focus on individual passages with­ out developing a broad understanding o f the general teach­ ing o f Scripture.

107

Scripture

NOTES

Jude Introduction 1. For detailed argument to this effect, see my Jude, 2 Peter Word Biblical Commentary, volume 50 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983), and also my forthcoming book, Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark). 2. For a detailed discussion, see chapter 2 o f my Jude and the

Relatives ofJesus in the Early Church. 3. For reconstruction o f the story to which Jude alludes, see my

Jude, 2 Peter, 65-76, and Jude and the Relatives ofJesus in the Early Church, chapter 5. Chapter 3 Jesus the Lord 1. This chapter summarizes a full discussion o f Jude’s Christology in my Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church, chapter 6. 2. Jude, 2 Peter, 43,49, and more fully in Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church, chapter 6. 109

Notes

3. In my commentary ( Jude, 2 Peter, 39) I preferred the transla­ tion "Master”; but in Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church, chapter 6 ,I have argued that "Sovereign” is more appro­ priate. Second Peter 2:1 ("the Master who bought them”— i.e., as slaves) takes despote̅s in the sense of "master of household slaves.” 4. Cf. Josephus, Jewish War 7:323, 410; Antiquities of the Jews, 18:23. 5. Julius Afiricanus, quoted in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 17.14.

2 Peter Introduction 1. For the topics discussed in this Introduction, see not only my Word Biblical Commentary, but also my article, "2 Peter: An Ac­ count of Research,” in Aufstieg und Niedergangder römischen Welt, Part II, vol. 25/5, ed. W. Haase (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1988), 3713-52.

Chapter 1 Justification and Righteousness 1. E. Käsemann, "An Apologia for Primitive Christian Eschatol­ ogy,” Essays on New Testament Themes, tr., W. J. Montague, Studies in Biblical Theology 41 (London: SCM Press, 1964), 169-95. 2. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 250-51.

Chapter 2 Freedom, True and False 1. For the way that 2 Peter has revised Jude's reference to angels, making it into a reference to evil angels, see Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 261-64. 2. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 279-80.

Chapter 3 Christian Hope 1. Quoted in M. Werner, The Formation of Christian Dogma, tr. S. G. F. Brandon (London: A. & C. Black, 1957), 26. 2. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 316-21. JU D E, 2 PETER

110

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

O LD TESTAM EN T

Genesis 1:2, 6-7, 9 6:1-4 7:11 19:4-11 Exodus 34:6 Numbers 14 22 24:17 25:1-3 31:16 Deuteronomy 1:32 9:23 33:2 Psalms 2 2:6 2:7

111

86 14 86 14 94 13 69 98 15 15

13 13 33

81-82 81-82 81

2:8-9 18:13-15 42:3, 10 77:18 79:10 90:4 104:7 106:24-25

82 90 84 90 84 92 90 13

Proverbs 1:22 9:7-8 13:1 25.14 26:11

83 83 83 7 70

Isaiah 32:16 34:4 40:4 40:10 57:20 66:15-16

61 87 33 33 7 33,87

Jeremiah 1:11, 13 17:15

101 84

20:9 23:16 23:18 23:21-22 25:31

103 103 103 103 33

Ezekiel 13:3 34:2 37:1-10 37:11-14

103 7 101 101

Daniel 7:2

101

Joel 3:16

90

Amos 1:2 3:8 7:1 7:8-9

90 103 101 101

Micah 1:3-4

33

Index of Scriptures

Habakkuk 3:3-9

33

Zephaniah 1:18

87

Zechariah 1:8 3:2 3:2-4 3:3-4 14:5

101 25 25 26 33

Malachi 2:17 4:1

84 87

Romans 3:8 6:1 6:10 6:12-23 6:15 6:16-23 6:17-18 8:2 8:11 8:21 12:3 13:11-12 15:15 15:15-16 16:17 16:20

13 13 20 36 13 72,77 73 106 76 72, 74, 91 105-06 106 105 106 20 106

NEW TESTAM EN T

Matthew 6:24 12:43-45 16:27 17:1-8 22:40 24:43-44 25:31

36 70 33 81 58 94 33

Mark 6:3 8:38 9:1 9:2-8 13:30

3 33 84 81 84

Luke 2:29 9:26 9:28-36 11:24-26 12:39-40

36 33 81 70 94

John 15:9-10 21:22-23

24 84

Acts 1:21-22 4:24 20:28

JU D E , 2 PETER

81 36 73

1 Corinthians 1:8 2:6-13 3:10 3:11 3:17 5:1-6 5.5 6:12-20 6:20 7:23 7:29 9:5 9:25 10:23 13 15:42 15:42-53 15:52-54 16:22

33 105 105 23 106 13 33 13 73 73 106 3 74 13 100 74 76 74 32

2 Corinthians 1:14 3:17 5:7 11:4 Galatians 1:9 1:23 2:9 4:3

4:8-9 5:6 5:13 6:8

36 58 13 74

Ephesians 3:2 3:2-10 3:7 4:22

105 106 105 75

Philippians 1:27 2:9-11 4:5 4:8

21 34 106 56

Colossians 1:25

105

1 Thessalonians 3:13 4:14 4:15 5:2

33 33 106 33,94

2 Thessalonians 1:7 1:7-8 2:2

33 33 33

2 Timothy 3:16

103

Hebrews 2:8 9:12,26-28 10:10 11:1

81 20 20 100

33 106 100 20

1 Peter 1:1 1:14-16 1:18-19 2:16 3:18

103 21 73 13 20

20 20 105 36

2 Peter 1:1-2 1:2 1:3

42 54 55,59

112

1:3-4 1:3-11 1:4 1:5 1:5-7 1:5-10 1:6 1:8 1:8-10 1:10 1:11 1:12-15 1:14 1:16 1:16a 1:16-18 1:17-18 1:19 1:19-21 1:20 1:20-2 la 1:20-21 1:21 2 2:1 2:l-3a 2:2 2:3b 2:3b-10a 2:3b-22 2:4-10 2:5 2:7-8 2:9 2:10a 2:10b-13a 2:10b-22 2:12 2:13-14 2:14 2:15 2:15-16 2:18 2:19

113

53-55 42-43,47-48, 53-54, 59-60, 65 55, 72, 74-77 54 56-58,73 56-58,73 55 54 58-59 55,59 51-53, 57, 59 42 41 80-81 43,46 47, 81, 98 81-82 82-83,93, 97-100 47 43, 101-02 46 97,100-03, 105 102 63,72 37, 73, 110 43-44 46, 72 43,46 47 44 64-66 65 65 48 46 68 43,68-71 68 46 69 73 69 46 13, 36, 67, 71-72, 74, 106

2:19a 20 21 22 3 3:1 3:1-4 3:3 3:3-4 3:3-13 3:4 3:4b 3:5 3:5-7 3:5-10 3:6 3:7 3:8-9 3:9a 3:10 3:11 3:11-14 3:11-16 3:12 3:13 3:14 3:14-15a 3:14-15 3:15 3:15-16 3:16 3:16b 3:17 3:18

46 54,70 51, 71, 73 70 60,76 42, 103 43-44 43,83 83-84 48 45-46,84-85, 106 46 85-86 47,85-89 44,83 86 48, 86, 89-90 48,91-94 46 33, 47, 89-91, 93-94 48,62 60,62 43 62,89-90 48, 60-63, 76, 87-88, 91, 94 48,93 103 94 104 97, 103-07 104, 106 44,46 44, 107 55,98

2 John 10-11

26

Jude 1 3 3-4 4

45

3, 27, 29-30 11, 19-22 4 5-7, 12-13, 29-31, 36-37, 73 19

5-7 5-13 5-19 6 7 8 8-10 9 10 11 12 12-13 14 14-15 15 16 17 17-18 18 19 20 20-21 20-23 21 22-23 24 24-25 25

8, 13-14, 31 13 6-7, 12 9, 14 14 5, 13-16, 31 8, 13 8-9,31 15-16, 68 8, 13-14 5,26 8-9, 13, 15 31, 34-35 8-9, 12, 17, 32-33 12 8 29-31 8 9, 12, 16-17, 83 5, 8, 15-16 20-21 22-24 6, 22 24,26-27, 29-32 18, 22, 24-26 27 6,27-28 29-31

Revelation 2:14 2:20 3:3 5:9 6:10 14:3-4 16:15 19:14 20:12 21:1 22:16

13 13 94 73 36 73 94 33 33 91 98

PSEUDEPIGRAPHA

1 Enoch

6, 18, 22 1:3-4 31-32

9 33

Index of Scriptures

1:9 6-11 42 45:4-5 46:3 48:1 49:1-3 80:6

JU D E, 2 PETER

7-8, 32-34 14 62 62 62 62 62 7

Testament of Moses 9 Early Christian Literature Didache 10:6

Other Versions NIV, New International Version RSV, Revised Standard Version

32

114