2008-11-13 by Tom Steagald
So I did do a little lexical work after all and found that, according to Bauer, huparcho (related to huparxis) is frequently used as a substitue for einai ("to be") and therefore to "being."
The worthless slave says the owner reaps where he does not sow, which wordplay references the parable of the Sower, I think--well of course, because he expects the slaves to "sow" where he has not, but instead of sowing the guy buries what has been entrusted to him. Mercy is for sharing, but he hides that away in the name of fear... and my goodness, there is all sorts of stuff to do with that. Claypool used to say he was never less loving than when he was afraid. Ernest Campbell asks if we are believing in Christ or following Jesus...
I have wondered among my people if faith is a truth to be defended or a life to be lived, a castle of doctrine or a tent pitched among God's hurting people.
A Change in Course
2008-11-13 by Tom Steagald
While paradidomi is a thick and rich word, in the last couple of days I have found myself stuck, as it were, on the word "property" (uparchonta). I have neither time nor interest to chase down the use of the Greek word in other NT documents or liturgical history; what caught my attention was the fact that the same English word is used in many prayers: "O God, whose property is always to have mercy..."
Which makes me want to do something like this: That the land-owner, allegorically, is God after all (most commentators try to refuse that reading), who entrusts his "property" to his servants: his mercy to those who have needed it, each according to his need/ability. Some have needed much mercy, some little, and in fact the one who received little perhaps needed little (like the dutiful brother in Luke 15). Even so, the little is a lot, and the lot is a LOT and in the case of the first two servants, they went out and traded and received more ("Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy," Jesus says). But the one who knows the Owner to harsh and severe (this may be why the Elder brother never left home), buried the mercy he had received and, in effect, cut off the flow of mercy. Buried it in what? Legalism? Judgement? That is what makes him worthless.
The worthless slave defends his burying of the Owner's propoerty from a partial perspective (the Law?), but the prior generosity and grace that would let the owner entrust his property to him IS his essential property (that is, to be merciful). The owner has entrusted his servants, in the words of Paul, with the message and ministry of reconciliation--to "spread the wealth," as it were, to put his "property" to good use--but the worthless are those who bury that gift for one reason or the other. They do not "trade" in mercy and therefore find themselves, like foolish bridesmaids and the Elder Brother, outside the gates of the feast.
The church, too, often buries this property of mercy insteand of trading and becoming rich in God's property.
2008-11-12 by Stephen Schuette
While the images in this week’s parable are clearly economic it could be that this parable has as little do with our own economic circumstances as the mustard seed has to do with what we plant in our gardens. On some level there may be a connection, but I don’t believe it’s the obvious one and it probably takes the message off-course to even try to go there.
One resource suggested that a talent would be earned over 15 years of service. We are dealing with large amounts over a “long time” (vs. 19). So the two things the slaves are given are talents and time. And it’s clear the master knows his slaves’ aptitudes since he gives the least amount to the slave who performs most poorly (vs. 15).
In the flow of Matthew this parable is offered after leaving the temple (24:1), while Jesus is seated looking over the City on the Mount of Olives (24:3) with the disciples. Just before in the discourse are the apocryphal warnings (24:29ff). And it’s interesting to note that the entire discourse is framed by the word paradidomi (handed-over) (24:9, 26:2).
Thanks to Tom for drawing attention to this rich word! While my memory is faulty and my language skills are full of holes, I do recall my NT teacher many years ago pointing out that when this word is used in reference to Jesus the form is passive (was handed over). It richly begs the question of who is actually doing the handing over, who is in command of this plot, what authority (a typical Matthean concern) Jesus is actually under. I believe there’s a connection here with the apocryphal clarity that reveals that God is in control, and has been all along.
Within the parable the last slave is in the grip of his fear. That’s what has authority over him. And the irony is that he finds what he’s looking for….a judgmental master.
It’s clearly a mistake to make this parable into an allegory with the master representing God. On the Mount of Olives with the City in the background it makes much more sense for this parable to be a larger reflection about the hopes and fears that lead to living abundantly or hoardingly. Does Jesus see a rich heritage of God’s investment in a beloved people being buried, a light hid under a bushel, a spiritual constriction that lacks faithfulness and trust?
Just a few verses later it’s obvious the disciples did not get the message. They would count the cost rather than abundantly celebrate the blessing of Jesus (26:6-13). So what do we believe? Is faith and grace and love so scarce that it must be hoarded? Just try burying them. You’ll find that even what you buried turns to nothing. Maybe the point is community that's rich in exchange. That’s where the “value” is realized.
Deborah, Barak, and Finding Fidelity
2008-11-12 by Marcia Mount Shoop
The lectionary gives us Judges 4:1-7 this week.
In the face of extreme military might and cruelty Deborah, a judge and a prophetess, summoned Barak, a military officer, to trust God and to go after the leader of the Canaanite army. She calls in Barak to rally the troops against Sisera in a story of Israel's triumph before decline.
Yes, it is weird that this name, Barak, appears on the scene this week so soon after a new president-elect with a very similar name is chosen in our country…
But for all who want to read something into it, I tried and I really don’t think we can! Afterall, God doesn’t speak to us in code language (I would argue that to be true even in John’s Revelation). Barak (in Hebrew it means “lightning”), a military officer, understandably has trouble trusting Deborah’s instincts given the twenty years of persecution they had endured and some possible tribal disunity (that plays out later in Judges). The fact that he wants the prophetess to go with him (v. 8) isn’t necessarily a sign of weakness or cowardice; it could be more about how much he wants some divine assurance that this is really going to go down the way Deborah says it will. But all that conjecture is outside of the bounds of the passage the lectionary invites us to use in our preaching this week. And, even if it wasn’t, I do not think the discussion gets us where this passage is inviting us to go.
The perennial transitions of the people of God often give birth to strong leaders—and sometimes those leaders come through, other times they disappoint. Here there are an array of unlikely movers and shakers that do their part to cooperate with God’s attempts to help Israel get out from under Canaanite oppression.
Keep reading in Judges and you’ll wonder sometimes whether Israel did much better with the land entrusted to them than their oppressors did, but for now, in this passage, we are called to focus on just how attuned we might need to be to God’s unlikely hopes for us. Here a strong woman calls out the underdog military strength of her people to trust God’s promise to provide. Our own hesitancy to trust that promise today won’t necessarily thwart what God envisions for us. But our halting efforts to listen and act on God’s call may mean we miss the forest for the trees and the journey becomes more circuitous than it needs to be.
Fidelity allows for God’s relationship with humanity to deepen. Consistent contact and communication makes the scope of God’s creative hand in our lives more broadly effective. Our salvation history invites us to see that this kind of consistency has been a problem for us. Staying close to God and letting God stay close to us on an every day, every way basis brings with it the promise of not just endurance in adversity, but a better way to live out who God made us to be. The story here is, once again, about dependence on God. Israel is having trouble with covenantal consistency. This theme plays out again and again in scripture. True to form, fidelity gets you somewhere in this chapter of the salvation story.
Let's Start with Psalm 123
2008-11-12 by Marcia Mount Shoop
Calvin liked using the Psalms in worship; he preached on them and they were regularly sung. People were steeped in their rhythms and language, as well as in the range of human experience and emotion that they embody. So, before we get to the parable I’d love to spend some time in the Hebrew Scriptures. We’ll start with Psalm 123.
This is a psalm of people on the move—those engaged in transition, pilgrimage, going home, or maybe just going somewhere that promised some sort of satisfaction (whether it be spiritual, material, emotional, etc.). It expresses a collective experience. The psalm moves from the “I” to the “us” in its expression of our absolute dependence on God and in its plea for mercy. We are waiting, Lord! We’ve had enough, Lord! We have had more than our fill, Lord!
If scholarly hunches are correct and this Psalm is post-exilic, then we have a telling moment of human experience on our hands—one that can speak volumes to us in our current American context. Coming home doesn’t solve all of our problems. Arriving at our destination doesn’t solve all of our problems. In exile or post-exile, we need God’s mercy and God’s help to live differently than we have been able to in the past.
No more contempt, no more scorn, no more hardness of heart from those who seem to have it all—that’s what the psalmist seems to want, and that’s not too far off the message the American people just shouted out in our country’s election. The moment of truth comes when spaces are opened for changes to occur. Will we continue to ask God to guide us, help us, and stretch us into new ways of being together? Or will new people in power succumb to passivity, stubbornness, or arrogance? Staying in contact with our dependence on God even when exile appears to be over is an urgent, if not subtle, need.
“So our eyes look to the LORD our God, until he has mercy upon us.” And when there are moments of mercy, let our dependence elicit thanksgiving; and when scorn and contempt recycle themselves in our common life, let humility and our dependence on God diminish any harm they might inflict.
[First Page] [Prev] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 [Next] [Last Page]
Login - (This login is for administrators and bloggers. Usernames and passwords for GoodPreacher subscribers will not work here.)