When I wrote about 2 Corinthians and the importance of story, I had not read this wonderful post. (HT: John Meunier.)
Category: Bible Passages
-
Real Guy Interpretation – A Homily
David Ker has challenged me, amongst others, to say precisely how we would handle 2 Kings 2:23-24. I actually didn’t notice the challenge at first, though I’ve been following the series.
I’m going to respond to the challenge by writing a homily. Most commonly I do not speak from a written text except when I’m working against limited time. So if I present a homily it will generally be from a written text. I’m imagining the congregation of my home church as the audience.
Scripture: 2 Kings 2:23-24 (If I was dealing with a congregation that would tolerate it, I’d read all of 2 Kings 2.)
Opening
A few years ago I was teaching a class on the Old Testament and we came to the command in Deuteronomy 18:21-28 which mandates that the parents of a son who is recalcitrant and refuses correction he should be brought to elders at the gate and should be stoned to death.
I expected that people would view this with horror and it was to lead into a discussion of dealing with difficult laws in the Bible. As it turned out a number of people exclaimed “Yes!”
As we discussed it turned out, not surprisingly, that nobody really wanted any teenagers–that’s the group they thought of in connection with this text–to die. They just thought there should be more discipline. Somebody ought to do something!
They had discounted the text before they had even read it, failing to notice that it wasn’t about disciplining, but rather about terminating the child.
You may be wondering just why I would start my discussion of a difficult text by citing another difficult text. But the story illustrates how we work around things that happen in the Bible, and then when someone points out the details and we’re shocked. That class started with the Deuteronomy passage as a sort of general admonition to discipline one’s children, and came to the point where they were ready to ask just why such a harsh law should be used.
Something similar happens with our story for today. Someone reads the story and then admonishes children, young people, or the whole congregation to respect their elders, pastors, or perhaps prophets.
But if you’re a Sunday School teacher who is doing that, be assured that somewhere out there is a child, or an adult for that matter, who is wondering how having 42 children mauled by bears is a proportional or just punishment for taunting even a prophet.
I’d like to suggest three phases in a simplified plan for learning from a Bible story.
The first is …
Hear the Story
Let’s ask ourselves just how we might not be hearing this story.
First, we make assumptions about the children that are involved. The Hebrew phrase used does indicate that they are not adults or probably even young adults. But in pictures I often see them portrayed as toddlers or preschoolers. Similarly we teach the story sometimes to fairly young children who may well assume we’re talking about them.
There’s nothing in the text, for example, to exclude the idea that this was a gang of teenage boys with sticks, stones, and maybe even spears who were not only taunting Elisha, but were threatening him. In that case, Elijah might have responded vigorously to the taunting in order to preempt more serious trouble.
But I’m not going to use that as an “explanation” of the story because, quite simply, the text doesn’t tell us that either. It tells us nothing about a threat. It simply speaks of taunting and of Elisha’s response.
But let’s look further. It’s interesting that Elisha doesn’t call for the bears. He simply curses them in the name of the Lord. Is he angry? We don’t know. What thoughts went through his mind? We don’t know. They taunted him and he cursed them.
After he curses them, two she-bears come out and maul them, though again the Hebrew might well be translated more vigorously than “maul.” I note here again that the text doesn’t say that God summoned the bears. That’s an interesting point. There are places where God specifically summons some means of destruction, but here the connection is not made explicit.
Can we assume the connection? I suspect we are supposed to do so, but it is not made explicit.
So what does the story actually say?
I would suggest that we need to hear the story in the context of the conflict going on in Israel. Elijah has faced many dangers in his life, and has now passed on his authority to Elisha. I wonder if Elisha wasn’t thinking more of his authority as a prophet in Elijah’s place than about any personal danger.
The action establishes his authority, his connection to God, and his power. Elijah prevented the rain; Elisha called for the she bears. Even if he didn’t do so explicitly, that’s the impression the story leaves.
The story isn’t about discipline, self-defense, or punishment. It’s about authority, in this case the prophet’s authority from God in the midst of the religious conflict between the worship of Baal and Yahweh, God of Israel.
So what’s the moral of the story? That’s one of the most dangerous questions to ask! It implies first that a story must have a moral, and second that there must be only one moral. In fact, a story can be told for many reasons. One we sometimes don’t think of is that it may simply be that the story tells us what happened.
I recall a story that my mother used to tell titled “Jimmy and the Atheist.” In it, an atheist rescues Jimmy from a fire and then adopts him. As it stood, it was a story about the man’s love for Jimmy and Jimmy’s influence that brings about the conversion of the atheist. Stop the story earlier, before the conversion, however, and suddenly it’s a story about not judging people and how an atheist could be the most giving person in the town.
Stories are a most flexible means of communication, but at the same time they put more of the load of thinking onto the reader or hearer.
Thus we come to the next stage …
Enter the Story
What do I mean by this? I mean that the reader looks at the story without judging. Just look at the people who are in the story, how they behave, and try to see it from their point of view. We already have a basis on which to do this from our hearing of the story.
Why is this important? Because we tend not to learn from people and events when we stand over them in judgment.
When we look at the story and ask whether Elisha should have cursed the boys in the name of the Lord we often miss the opportunity to check on our own attitudes and actions. We know that 42 boys were mauled, but we don’t know how many there were.
Now be honest! How would you react to more than 40 young people coming toward you and taunting you? Would you be angry? Would you “curse them in the name of the Lord?”
The fact is that for many of us, it’s likely that the only thing lacking for us to play Elisha’s role is, well, the power. We do the cursing, but we’re fortunate that God doesn’t send two she bears each time we do.
If you don’t believe me, wait for the next time someone cuts you off on the interstate …
There’s another factor to remember here. In the ancient world, words were thought to have power. Cursing someone was a form of assault. This attitude probably lies behind another difficult Bible passage, Exodus 21:17 that says that someone who curses father or mother should die.
Applied today, that would be quite a population control measure!
But think of this from Elisha’s point of view. He’s the successor to a prophet who has stirred up many enemies. He needs to establish himself. He has work to do, and he also believes that curses might have power. At the least they must be challenged.
What would you do?
There’s something else that entering the story will help you to do. It will help you get out of the bad guy / good guy mode of thinking. The problem is that Elijah looks quite a lot like a “real guy” in this story. For the circumstances his reaction seems normal.
The Bible presents few flawless heroes. Even the greatest in Hebrew scripture, Moses, has his flaws. When he strikes the rock after he’s told to speak to it, he disobeys God, but notice that God responds miraculously even to a disobedient Moses (Numbers 20:10-13).
There is a time to look at heroes as heroes and see them in shining armor, so to speak. There are other times when it is important to see heroes as human beings with flaws. In Exodus 2:14, for example, we are told that Moses was afraid when he realized the king knew of his actions in killing an Egyptian. In Hebrews 11:27 we are told that he left Egypt, “not fearing the wrath of the King.” What’s the difference? It’s simply two perspectives on a hero.
So then we have the final stage …
Grow from the Story
If you have heard what the story actually says, and have entered into the story without judging the people, then you will be prepared to grow from what the characters can teach you. You may have wondered about my suggestion that you don’t judge the characters. There comes a time for judgment. Once you understand, once you recognize your own similar weaknesses as well as your strengths, it is time to do some judgment.
You judge what you should do and how you should live.
There are many things I hear in this story.
- It is important for God’s messengers to get respect.
- Words really do matter. I may not lean toward the same view as the ancients, but we may well be taking words too lightly in the modern world.
- It’s easy to react in anger when my authority or safety is threatened.
- Actions can have consequences beyond what I intend. Elisha didn’t say, “I want two she bears to rip up 42 of these boys. ” He just cursed them. Then came the she bears. Is it possible that Elisha was surprised?
Elisha was a real guy. He had real weaknesses and real strengths. He acted as he saw best.
You may be wondering how I could skip the big question: What about God? Why would God take the action that he did?
But you see, I think the answer lies in the same place. God works through real people, real guys and real gals. In order to do that, God often works more our way than his.
What would the results have been if Elisha cursed and nothing happened?
I can ask the same thing about my life and God. How many of my messes does God have to clean up?
God could, of course, choose to work through less real people. It would be much less messy than it is. But he hasn’t chosen to do it that way. He’s chosen to work with us flaws and all.
Conclusion
You may be thinking that this method leaves a lot of room for error. I certainly do! But that is another aspect of the way God works, giving us the opportunity to think and learn and gain experience, rather than bringing us under tight control so our errors don’t mess up the works.
There is one little test I’d like to suggest to help us stay on track. I call it the hanging test. In Matthew 22:34-40 Jesus gives the two laws of love. Love God with all your heart. Love your neighbor as yourself. He says the entire law and the prophets hang on these two.
And while I quote these from Jesus, he quotes them from the Hebrew scriptures. I suggest that the lesson you take from these stories will show the most growth if it hangs nicely on the two hooks Jesus provided.
Real people, real stories, real God.
Will I really learn?
That would be about 15 minutes if I resisted the temptation to expand, which I rarely do. But still, I should get them out in less than 20 minutes. Lots of questions are left, but I think that’s a good feature in a homily.
-
2 Corinthians – The Importance of the Story
I’m reading Frank J. Matera’s fine commentary on 2 Corinthians
, and today was reading about Paul’s recitation of his history with the Corinthians as the basis for what he was about to teach them. I warn you that this post is only partially about 2 Corinthians. It is more broadly about the importance of seeing the stories involved in each passage of scripture.
The word “story” gets used a great deal when talking about Biblical interpretation these days. I want to be careful in explaining how I am using it here. I am not suggesting that we each have a story (though we do) and that any story is equally valid. Rather, I’m suggesting that the story of God’s revelation is important in understanding scripture overall, and that the particular stories of prophets, apostles, and audiences are critically important in understanding and applying passages effectively.
More than one story can intersect as well. In both letters to the Corinthians we can look at a story of God revealing himself to the believers in Corinth, using the apostle Paul and others in doing so. There is the story of Paul living out his life as an apostle of Jesus Christ. There is a story of preservation in that this content is made available to us. Finally, there is a story of God bringing his word to me and to you in our particular circumstances.
This doesn’t mean that just any story will do and that we must give equal credence to all stories. In fact, paying close attention to the stories will bring us to a more focused view of the meaning of various passages.
No commentator that I know of ignores the story of Paul’s interactions with the Corinthians. I have previously enjoyed Gordon Fee’s commentary on 1 Corinthians
, which I regard as the best single-volume, pastor accessible commentary I have ever read. Fee is very concerned with Paul’s story as indeed he must be. Similarly Matera is very conscious of that continued story in the commentary I’m currently reading. I bring these two together, because both relate the story in such a way as to preserve the unity and the coherence of both letters.
In 2 Corinthians, the story helps us see some important elements of being a servant who proclaims God’s word. Paul can sound quite boastful as he defends his own ministry and integrity. He is quite conscious of the problem as he writes, but nonetheless he knows that his integrity, his calling, and his reliability are inextricably linked to the proclamation of his gospel.
This second letter, or more likely fourth letter assuming we’re missing two, teaches that the gospel manifests itself not merely in a set of beliefs, but also in a life. It is especially important for those chosen to proclaim the gospel to display the gospel in their lives.
I think 2 Corinthians is particularly susceptible to being mined for theological quotes, because the letter as a whole is difficult, yet it so obviously contains many theological gems. But we may miss the emphasis of those gems by pulling them out of their setting.
Let me illustrate this from 1 Corinthians, which I think is also very subject to quote mining. Chapter 12 is frequently used in charismatic circles as a chapter about gifts. The emphasis is on determining just what each gift means and what the person having that gift will be able to do. But Paul is not primarily attempting to catalog gifts. His concern is with the source of these gifts and how they are to be used. He’s telling the church in Corinth that the gifts that they have are to be used in unity under the authority of the one Spirit.
Chapter 13 is a beautiful chapter, but frequently those talking about gifts and worship skip straight over it to get to chapter 14 where we’re talking about nuts and bolts again–fun stuff! But Paul didn’t just let his mind wander into some special spiritual realm in order to write chapter 13. Read it carefully with chapters 12 and 14, and you’ll see how Paul’s definition of love is also a way to describe how one uses God’s gifts under God’s Spirit. It connects closely with what precedes and follows it.
Note here that in narrowing he focus from a general treatise on gifts to a discussion of the source and purpose of those gifts, we also broaden the discussion to cover Christian behavior in general. Chapter 12 provides a pattern for using any and all of our gifts, talents, and resources, and then chapter 13 names that “love” and expands on just what it means.
Chapter 14, in turn, is frequently mined for quotes to apply to almost any worship setting, but the fact is that most of our churches do not have a worship service like the one in Corinth that they need to bring into line with God’s Spirit. Be honest now! How many churches can say that at their worship services, “each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation” (1 Corinthians 14:26 ESV)?
Yet I’ve heard verse 40 (“decently and in order”) used to argue that one can’t make any change in the bulletin at all, or that nobody other than the pastor and designated readers should speak.
Getting into the pastoral situation in which Paul finds himself would help us apply this properly. Perhaps we should move our focus from verse 40, as important as that is, and look more at verse 26. When we actually have two or more people wanting to speak at once, then we could try working on some of the other verses. Right now, most of the churches I visit are singularly short on “lessons” and “revelations” not to mention the rest.
To return to 2 Corinthians, I am getting the feeling that God is challenging me through Paul’s experience to make myself a better example of the gospel that I claim to teach.
But watch out even there, because 2 Corinthians also tells us about God using the weak. How to I make myself a better example? I let God use my weaknesses. The gospel, after all, is about grace, not about my strength or brilliance.
-
Lectionary Notes
One of my devotional practices is to keep track of the weekly lectionary texts (not the daily and often not special days during the week), and read them through daily using different versions and different reference sources.
I keep notes online when I have time. I haven’t publicized this very much because I have been quite irregular, but I really like to get some kind of a note from these passage on a daily basis, so I’ve added the feed to the far right sidebar.
Today I posted on another passage where I think the lectionary cuts off in an unfortunate way.
-
N. T. Wright on Women in Ministry
It’s no surprise that I like this, considering it’s N. T. Wright. I like reading or listening to him even when I disagree. (HT: Allan Bevere)
While I like his comments in general, I’m particularly interested in his approach to deriving his point from scripture.
He goes first to the story. What was it that Paul did. That leads him to Romans 16:7, certainly a controversial story, though I agree with Wright’s take on it. Then he goes to the overarching story by rooting his idea in the resurrection and the persons who proclaimed it. Finally, he looks at 1 Timothy 2 and sees it in the context of these two larger stories.
This process leaves us more subject to theological reflection than would a direct text->doctrine approach, but it helps us resolve the question of what constitutes advice for a particular time and place and what is a broader principle.
-
Choosing Bible Reading
I was reading an excellent post by Martin LaBar (Sun and Shield) today about our reading choices. He’s commenting on a study that shows that we tend to select reading that confirms our already existing views.
Now I suspect there’s nothing terribly surprising about that. At least most of us assume that other people only read to support their own prejudices. We, of course, just choose to read only the truth!
This idea connected with some current reading. My daughter and her family, who obviously know me well, sent me a gift card for Barnes and Noble for my birthday, and I used it to get a commentary I’ve been wanting, Frank J. Matera’s commentary on II Corinthians. I’ve been reading it for part of my devotional time.
In the exceptional introduction to the book, Matera finds a common theme for the book that connects the gospel to apostolic ministry. To summarize and paraphrase (a fuller explanation of this is on page 14), Paul preaches God who raises the dead, but to participate in this resurrection, one must participate in Christ’s suffering and affliction. Paul becomes part of Christ’s suffering through his suffering in his ministry to the church.
Thus the book presents a picture of ministry that is almost entirely the opposite of the waythe world–and often the modern church–see it. We like to think of great leaders, strong and capable people, called to carry their natural gifts into service, for which they get due reward. That is not New Testament, Christ-like service, however.
While we quote a text or two in 2 Corinthians, on topics like new creation, imputation, and cheerful giving, that is only a tiny portion of the theme–the theme of the book is a defense of Paul’s apostolic minsitry as a fragile, weak vessel used by God.
So what does this have to do with reading choices?
Ask yourself how much time we spend studying various books of the Bible. I recall, for example, that books like Romans and Galatians were pretty popular in the seminary where I studied. Second Corinthians? Not so much.
Indeed, we didn’t really get the whole books of Galatians and Romans. I took a class titles Exegesis of Romans in Greek in my undergraduate program, and we never got past chapter 8. Chapters 9-16? The professor mentioned them a few times, but I had to work on those on my own later.
In graduate school I took a course in Galatians. With effort we got through chapter 4. We missed chapters 5 & 6.
But one of the things 2 Corinthians does is provide us with the application of salvation by faith to ministry–ministry by faith.
Perhaps we ought to spend some serious time on the portions of the Bible that are a bit less popular.
-
A Thought on Leviticus 16:13
I was struck by the wording of Leviticus 16:13 tody. There is a long list of instructions, followed by the clause “that he may not die.” It’s just 2 words in Hebrew.
It seems to me that the Israelites approached the issue of God’s judgment against them very differently than we do. Rather than seeing contact with God as essentially safe activity and death or harmful results as requiring explanation, approaching God is seen as deadly. It’s survival that requires explanation.
This is hardly a new thought, and one should note some other differences, for example that the word “judgment” can be misleading in this context.
I’m posting from my Palm Centro, so I’ll be brief and probably miss a large number of nuances!
Tags: Leviticus
-
Psalm 107 and Artificial Divisions
I did the Old Testament/Psalms portion of my lectionary reading today from the Jewish Study Bible. The notes draw attention to the difficulty in separating Psalm 107 into the next book. The division between books 4 and 5 of the Psalms occurs between Psalm 106 and 107. But these divisions are later than the text itself.
One should be aware that the Psalms are a collection, and that they are individually composed. This makes their context within the book somewhat different in nature than the context of a particular chapter in another book. For example, when I look at a chapter in Samuel-Kings, I look for it’s place in the overall scheme of the history presented. In Isaiah or Jeremiah, while I realize that individual oracles were written at different times, I look for some sort of thematic arrangement. The Pslams are a bit looser than that, or at least we are less certain of just why the collection was arranged. Certainly, it is a collection of material by more than one author.
The Jewish Study Bible points out that Psalm 107 fits into the theme of Psalms 103-106, and indeed resembles them more than it does Psalm 108. They also suggest moving the word “Hallelujah” from the end of Psalm 106 to the beginning of Psalm 107. I would need to look at this further, but I am less impressed with that suggestion, even though I suggested that the Hallelujah at the end of Psalm 104 be moved to the beginning of Psalm 105 when I wrote on it in graduate school.
That change would result in an envelope of Hallelujah around Psalm 105 and again around Psalm 106, while Psalm 103 and Psalm 104 have an envelope of “Bless the LORD, O my soul.” I think that single move I suggested back then works very well.
The thematic difference is more impressive, but I do see some thematic ties that point in both directions. I’m not certain this division should actually be changed, though we should realize it’s later than the original collection, if “original collection” is even valid in reference to the Psalms.
I’m going to link to Bob McDonald at Bob’s Log,who has done much more work on the Psalms than I have (and that’s an understatement!), in the hopes that he will comment.
-
Leviticus 6:8-13
Baker takes a series of short sections here, and I’m not grouping them into any larger passage, because I’m under some pressure and these short sections are working for me right now.
Let me note also that while the electronic edition of Rahlf’s LXX that I’m using today (GnomeSword) follows the English verse divisions, the print edition of Rahlf’s follows the Hebrew division. So the passage there is 6:1-6.
The idea of having a fire from sacrifice going on 24 hours a day doesn’t sound much like modern worship, but there are really two key elements in this passage that I think can be applied to modern worship:
- The fire burns continuously. Three times in the LXX text we read that it is never to go out.
- There is a continuing ritual for keeping it clean. There is care taken in carrying out this command as with every other one in Leviticus.
There appears to be an error in the notes of the Orthodox Study Bible, which bases the notes on the English verses, and thus the notes on our passage for today indicate they are about 6:9. But they are interesting, and connect this daily sacrifice with the continual offering of Christ in heaven. The continuous worship provides an “open door for uninterrupted worship of God and fellowship with Him” only now this is through the sacrifice of Jesus.
Milgrom adds an interesting note. With Baker, I have emphasized the continual worship, and I think this is an important point. But Milgrom points out:
… The sacrifices offered up at the inauguration of the public cult were consumed miraculously by a divine fire (9:24), and it is this fire which is not allowed to die out so that all subsequent sacrifices might claim divine acceptance… (p. 389, emphasis in original)
This raises another point to me for the modern church. How careful are we with the spiritual fires that God lights? We have waves of revival and then for various reasons we let them die out or treat them with contempt. There’s a “fire” that was lit in Christianity back with Jesus and then at Pentecost. But we often neglect one end or the other, either the connection back to that original flame, or the need to keep it actively burning in our modern world. Both are necessary to keep up the continuing fire.
Abbreviations:
OSB – Orthodox Study Bible
NISB – New Interpreter’s Study Bible
Milgrom – Milgrom, Jacob. Anchor Bible: Leviticus 1-16.
Baker – Leviticus portion written by David H. Baker, of the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary on Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
Chapter 6 deals with sacrifices for sins that appear to be quite deliberate.
