Proper 22B (OT 27)

image: by Samuel D. Ehrhart - wikimedia

Mark 10:2-16

Initial Thoughts

  • There is a joke that the United Methodist Church is full of divorced ex-Southern Baptist clergy.

  •  It’s just too painful for many people to read this, and leave it uninterpreted.

    • “If it’s read out loud, you must preach on it,” Karoline Lewis in Working Preacher.

    • “A parishioner once told me that hearing this passage read in church felt like having someone dump garbage all over her. It didn't matter if she'd cleaned up and put on her Sunday best for church that morning, because after hearing these words she felt she like she couldn't get rid of the stink of her divorce. For this reason, we might anticipate any number of people listening a little more closely than usual to how you handle this passage.” (David Lose in Working Preacher)

  • This passage is used to argue both for and against marriage equality.

    • Against: Jesus declares that marriage is between a man and women.

    • For: The practice in most churches is to allow divorced people to remarry. This capitulation to culture is no different, and no less faithful than to allow for same-sex marriage. To argue otherwise is inconsistent and hypocritical. 

Bible Study

  • Divorce

    • Historical context: Patriarchal marriage

      • Only men can divorce women (not vice versa)

      • Men can divorce women for committing adultery or for displeasing them (“in any number of ways, including, according to one rabbinic source, "burning her husband's toast." Lose, Working Preacher

      • Result of divorce for a woman - family and public rejection and disgrace as well as social, economic devastation for her and her children

    • Amy Jill Levine refutes this idea:

      • “By placing Jesus in a (falsely reconstructed) setting where men were forbidden to talk to women, where women were treated as possessions rather than as human beings, where women could be divorced for the most trifling of reasons, Jesus’s encounters with women make him look like a first-century feminist.  

In some cases, such apologists take rabbinic comments on questions of divorce, women’s education, or women’s sexuality out of context, retroject them back into the Second Temple period, and then read Jesus as rejecting such negative Jewish views about women. For example, still frequently heard is the claim that Jewish men were tossing their wives out, forcing them either into starvation or prostitution, because “the rabbis” [quote, unquote] said that a man could divorce for any reason, such as his wife’s burning his dinner or because he found someone prettier (m. Gittin 9-10). Jesus is thus portrayed as offering women economic security.

However, Jesus is not engaging in social engineering to protect women’s rights: in Mark 10:12 he also forbids women from divorcing their husbands. Keeping a woman chained to a man who hates her does not help the woman. Moreover, Jewish women had marriage contracts (ketubot) to protect them financially in case of divorce, and it is likely that in the late Second Temple period the more conservative view limiting divorce to cases of adultery was the norm.” (https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/jewish-women-in-the-new-testament)

  • Jesus vs Pharisees 

    • “trying to test Jesus.” This is not a fair question. Pharisees not interested in honest discussion.

    • This is not a traditional back and forth debate regarding texts (Genesis over Deuteronomy), instead Jesus refuses that argument to focus on the bigger picture of “the least of these” - in this case women

    • Divorce is a result of Patriarchal marriage

    • “The [Genesis] passage is best translated as ‘the two persons-man and woman-enter into a common human life and social relationship because they are created as equals’” Fiorenza, In Memory of Her

    • The woman is not, according to Genesis, given to the power of the man, but rather the man who must sever all connections to be united with the woman.

    • Also the word Jesus uses χωρίζω- to separate is different from αποστατιον - divorce moving the conversation from legal terms to broken relationship

    • “Patriarchal practice drives a wedge into the unity and equality originally articulated in the marriage covenant.” Myers, Binding the Strong Man

  • Jesus never explicitly prohibits divorce. He simply points to God’s intended order, which is that people would be in healthy partnered relationships.

    • Jesus is actually expanding the cultural understanding of adultery. 

    • The concept that a man could commit adultery against his wife or that a woman could commit adultery against a man are equally forbidden by Jewish law.

      • A man cannot commit adultery against a woman, only against another man (by sleeping with the other man’s wife)

      • A woman could not choose to leave her husband and marry someone else (only men can initiate divorce and marriage)

    • The emphasis is on equality between men and women

    • The focus here is to protect the woman who is one of the “least of these”

    • “Adultery was considered an offense of one man against another man’s honor and property; a man (even a married man) who had sexual relations with another man’s wife wronged her husband (not his wife).” (Elizabeth Struthers Malbon, Women’s Bible Commentary, p. 487)

  • Mistakes we can make:

    • Take Jesus’ words at face value without appealing to cultural context of the time. His words to the Pharisees would have been nearly as controversial and counter-cultural to them as they are to us.

    • Dismiss Jesus words as antiquated. Jesus believed that marriage was an important part of our created being. He goes beyond the letter of the law to go back to God’s intended purpose for humans - to be in partner relationships. To dismiss the need for taking marriage seriously is to debase God’s intended order. To dismiss the pain that divorce causes, even in divorces that are necessary, is to dismiss the human condition that grieves over the loss of an important relationship.

    • “Jesus describes marriage with utmost seriousness, as something that transcends contractual obligations and economic utility, as something rooted in human identity. This offers a sharp reproof to any who would construe marriage as a contract of convenience, casually formed and casually broken. It impels churches to promote and foster healthy marriages, and in the case of divorce and remarriage to extend compassion and facilitate healing.” (Matt Skinner, Working Preacher)

  • Children - from the least of these to the least of the least

    • Not just an effort of the lectionary to “soften the blow.”

    • Reveals the true nature of Jesus’ ministry, which is not to exclude, but to include.

    • Reveals how Jesus is acting on behalf of those that no one else would support. 

    • While the disciples are in the act of dismissing the children, Jesus is bringing them in.

    • “The disciples have bought into ancient society’s valuation of children - they are not important. Children have no status and no rights, and thus their presence is a nuisance. Jesus sees things differently. In fact, the rule of God belongs to persons like this - powerless, vulnerable, weak, persons, who are often deemed a nuisance. In rejecting the children, the disciples have not just made a slight error of judgment - they have missed the whole point of Jesus’ ministry.” (Charles Cousar, Texts for Preaching, Year B, p. 539)

    • What does it mean to become like a child?

      • Not about innocence, but about being powerless, vulnerable, credulous, utterly dependant

Thoughts and Questions

  • Everyone in the congregation has an experience with divorce. Everyone has either been divorced, had parents divorce, or is the friend of someone that has divorced or their parents have divorced.

  • The idea of marriage being a match of soul-mates is a new idea. For centuries, people married who was available in their cultural circle. Marriage was a property exchange, or a way to ensure stability for a woman, and a way to produce lineage for a man. Applying modern understanding to any Biblical teaching on marriage must be done with caution, because we are not really talking about the same thing anymore. 

  • While disciples were trying to dismiss the children, Jesus acted to bring them in. While the Pharisees wanted the Law to help them dismiss divorced women, Jesus acted to bring them in. The practice of divorcing for “burnt toast,” would leave a woman without any recourse. It would leave her without property, family, or any way of living beyond begging or prostituting. By speaking against this practice, he was acting in a loving, compassionate way. “This scene plays out while Jesus is on the way to Jerusalem, and his road takes him beyond the usual boundaries so that he may bring the gospel to all people” (Lose)

  • This passage has been used to keep women in abusive relationships, but the fact is that Jesus’ teaching is about freeing women from an abusive system.

Hebrews 1:1-4; 2:5-12

Initial Thoughts

  • Hebrews Series

    • 22B, Hebrews 1:1-4, 2:5-12

    • 23B, Hebrews 4:12-16

    • 24B, Hebrews 5:1-10

    • 25B, Hebrews 7:23-28

    • 26B, Hebrews 9:11-14 (if not All Saints Sunday)

    • 27B, Hebrews 9:24-28

    • 28B, Hebrews 10:11-25

  • Hebrews Overview

    • Check out this article from Christian Century -  “The New Testament’s most dangerous book for Jews: Reading and preaching Hebrews without supersessionism” by Jesper Svartvik

    • Who wrote it? No one knows

      • “Hebrews is well known for what we don’t know about it. We don’t know with any certainty its author, date, destination, or the place from which it was written.” (Common English Study Bible, introduction to the book of Hebrews, p. 433 NT)

      • “We wish we knew who wrote this curious epistle. Even though many names have been suggested - Apollos, Barnabas, Luke, Clement of Rome, Priscilla, and Silvanus, to mention a few - the arguments are not strong for any candidate. We actually have a firmer grasp of who did not write Hebrews than who did, since stylistic grounds alone, it is a virtual certainty that the apostle Paul did not pen this letter. But who did? The best answer to that question is the comment of Origen in the third century: ‘But who wrote the epistle, in truth God knows.’” (Thomas Long, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Preaching and Teaching: Hebrews, page 1)

    • When was it written? 70-100 CE

      • Before Clement of Rome (died in 99), who appears to have quoted it.

      • After some time to develop a Christology and theology.

      • No direct mention of Temple destruction in 70.

    • Where was it written? Possibly Rome

      • In midst of some harassment

      • “The reference to those from Italy sending greetings (13:24) suggests that Rome may have been the destination of Hebrews, as does its use in the late first-century letter of Clement of Rome.” (Robert Spivey and D. Moody Smith, Anatomy of the New Testament, fifth edition, p. 391)

    • What is it? A sermon

      • “First, when we read through Hebrews and compare it to other literature of its day, it becomes clear that what we call the Letter to the Hebrews is not, in fact, a letter at all… The main body of Hebrews bears all the marks of an early Christian sermon, what the author calls a ‘word of exhortation,’... Hebrews appears to be an example of a sermon that is rabbinical in its design, Christian in content, and heroic in length.” (Thomas Long)

    • Outline 

      • Introduction 1:1-2:18

      • The argument 3:1-10:18

        • Jesus is Son (3:1-4:13)

        • Jesus is High Priest (4:14-10:18)

      • The implications 10:19-12:29

      • Conclusion 13:1-25

    • Theme

      • “The preacher is addressing a real and urgent pastoral problem, one that seems astonishingly contemporary. His congregation is exhausted. They are tired - tired of serving the world, tired of worship, tired of Christian education, tired of being peculiar and whispered about in society, tired of the spiritual struggle, tired of trying to keep their prayer life going, tired even of Jesus… Tired of walking the walk, many of them are considering taking a walk, leaving the community and falling away from the faith.” (Thomas Long)

Bible Study

  • 1:1-4

    • No salutation.

    • God used to speak through prophets. Now though, something has changed. The nature of our relationship with God is forever shifted because we no longer have messengers. We have the message.

      • Not undermining the message before. This should not be used to repudiate Jews or Jewishness.

      • “The word spoken in Jesus does not void the previous promises of God; it fuses, clarifies, and fulfills them; it brings them ‘to perfection.’” (Thomas Long, p. 14)

    • Jesus is the Son.

    • Son more important than a mere messenger. He is the message

    • Son is the light of God’s glory.

    • What did Jesus do?

      • Powerful message

      • Cleansing of sins

      • Sat down at right side of God

  • What gets cut out?

    • 1:5-14 seven references to Scripture about God and God’s son.

      • Reinforces idea that Jesus is the Son, not just a messenger (prophet or angel)

      • This is a direct connection to God, not mediated.

    • 2:1-4 Prepares listener for just how important this message is.

      • This is God’s message, and we must pay attention.

    • 2:5-12

      • Christ’s “Life”:

        • Glorious eternal Son, present at Creation, Expression of God’s glory

        • For  awhile lower, suffered, died on Cross

        • Triumphant, resurrected, seated at the right hand of God and eternal.

      • Setting the stage for a more extended description of who Jesus is, was, and will be.

        • Jesus is eternal, suffered for awhile, and is eternal again.

        • Much of the rest of the sermon is detailing why this matters.

      • Creation is set up with intention of humanity being in control. It was all set right under humanity to take care of and manage.

      • Human sin messed everything up, now its all “out of control.”

      • Jesus then was sent to clean up the mess, and set things right again - to get things back under control.

      • Jesus is using people to put it all back together.

      • Jesus calls us brothers and sisters, which reveals that we are to be unified with Jesus - his life, death, and glory.

  • Two themes of this passage - and all of Hebrews

    • Jesus is superior to all. Present in creation and in the eschaton.

    • Jesus really suffered, and this was necessary for the redemption of the world (not because of wrathful God, but for total union with humanity)

  • God’s grace is shown to us through Christ. This includes his suffering, death, and resurrection. The glory that Christ now shares is the glory that is offered to those who still follow. The “out of control” nature of this world is just for a short while.

Job 1:1; 2:1-10

Initial Thoughts

  • A Story about Theodicy (the problem of evil or how God can be good in the midst of great suffering)

  • Week 1 of four weeks in Job.

  • Major theological points of the book of Job by: Mayer Gruber, "Job: Introduction," in The Jewish Study Bible, ed. Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, Jewish Publication Society Tanakh translation (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 1499-1500.

    • While some suffering is brought about by sin, sometimes the innocent suffer as well

    • to argue contrariwise misconstrues the character of the person who suffers unjustly as well as that of God

    • how God can be affirmed as good and just in the light of such innocent suffering is a mystery beyond our finite human comprehension

  • The land of Uz - “These initial words signal the fable-like character of the frame-story… Many scholars located this in the land of Edom, across the Jordan from the land of Israel. But it is really a never-never land somewhere to the east, as befits the fable and the universalizing thrust of the whole book. In this regard, the fact that ‘uts in Hebrew means “counsel” or “advice” invites one to construe this as the Land of Counsel.” (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, volume 3, The Writings, p. 465)

Bible Study

  • BACKGROUND - God and Satan

    • Tell the story of Chapter 1 before heading into chapter 2

    • Satan is not the evil anti-God as depicted in Milton or Dante, but rather the Satan (in hebrew Satan is preceded by the article “the”) 

      • “The Adversary: The Hebrew is hasatan, and it invariably uses the definite article because the designation indicates a function, not a proper name. The word satan is a person, thing, or set of circumstances that constitutes an obstacle or frustrates one’s purposes. Only toward the very end of the biblical period would the term begin to drop the definite article and refer to a demonic figure.” (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, v. 3 The Writings, p. 466)

    • “The Adversary” works for and on behalf of God- as a servant of God

    • Satan acts on God’s behalf in this story- not against God

    • Do not get bogged down in God and Satan discussion as that is not the focus of this story

    • What came before (chapter 1)? Job loses everything but nothing happens to him because “the Adversary” is restricted from hurting Job

      • V. 14-15 Oxen and Donkeys get taken, young men killed

      • V. 16 Sheep and young men are killed in a fire

      • V. 17 Camels are taken, young men killed

      • V. 18-19 Sons and daughter die in house collapse

      • The result? God allows the Adversary to hurt Job, but not kill him

  • Job comes from the post-Exilic Jewish community - a community which has lost everything and was also tempted to, in light of losing the land, the Temple, their homes, and many loved ones, reject God.

    • “Job was meant to address, among others, the socioeconomic inequities suffered by the (righteous) Jews in the early post exilic Yehud, both from fellow Jews and from the Persian colonial masters.” Madipoane Masenya, The Africana Bible, p.238

    • Not just about individual loss, but Job is a stand-in/representation of how the greater community is called to respond to great communal loss

  • FOCUS - v.8-10 and generally the book of Job

    • Where does suffering come from? From God or something else?

      • Job claims suffering comes from God-”shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?”

      • God as sovereign is tempting but also carries great difficulty- do you believe in a God who allows or even causes suffering?

    • Who suffers? The faithful or those who are unfaithful?

      • While some suffering is brought about by sin, at other times the innocent suffer. 

      • Suffering is not a sign of sin - correlation, but not always causal

    • How do we respond to suffering? remain in relationship or leave?

      • Job remains in relationship with God - he does not “Curse God and die!”

Thoughts and Questions

  • All of the questions described in the FOCUS section can be explored by a congregation. We all experience suffering

  • We cannot control the world, but we can control how we choose to respond to the world and the joys and sufferings it presents

  • Is hardship an excuse to sin? No. Jesus too lost everything- yet remained faithful to the end. Explore why do we believe? because we anticipate good things for us or because our faith reveals the true essence of the world?

    • CS Lewis in The Screwtape Letters, the demon Screwtape to his nephew Wormwood "Our cause is never more in danger than when a human, no longer desiring, but still intending, to do our Enemy's [i.e., God's] will, looks round upon a universe from which every trace of [God] seems to have vanished, and asks why he has been forsaken, and still obeys."

Thanks to our Psalms correspondent, Richard Bruxvoort Colligan (psalmimmersion.com,@pomopsalmist). Thank you to Scott Fletcher for our voice bumpers, Dick Dale and the Del Tones for our Theme music (“Misirlou”), Nicolai Heidlas (“Sunday Morning”,"Real Ride"and“Summertime”) and Bryan Odeen for our closing music.

Pentecost BEric FistlerMark, Hebrews, Psalm 1-74, Job1 Comment