Epiphany of Our Lord (A, B, C)

by Norman Beck

We have a responsibility in our ministry to observe and to preserve the festival of the Epiphany in some way each year, not only on the years in which January 6 happens to be a Sunday. The Sundays after the Epiphany will not have much special meaning unless we observe Epiphany itself in some way that will bring it to the attention of the members of the congregation. If we do not have a worship service within our usual setting, perhaps we could gather a group of young people — or people of all ages — and go Epiphany caroling to members of the congregation and community who are older, are shut-in, or otherwise are special in some way. This activity would also be a reminder to us that a substantial portion of the Church, i.e., the Eastern Orthodox tradition, observes January 6 as the Festival of the birth of the Christ. A carol singing would also highlight the beautiful Epiphany hymns on the Day of Epiphany.

If an Epiphany carol singing event is not chosen, some other unusual worship setting produced by the Worship Committee of the congregation could be most meaningful for those who plan it and participate in it. For example, worship could be in a public place to illustrate that this is the festival of revealing Christ to the “nations.” It could be held in a circle on the floor or within a circle of chairs. The setting should be appropriate for a relatively small number of participants, and the setting as well as the message should be memorable. With a little imagination and some preparation, a group of youth or adults could act out each of the four texts in simple drama form, not necessarily with a narrator and following the dialogue verbatim, but with a measure of creative inspired imagination not unlike that displayed by the writer of the Matthean tradition that became Matthew 2:1-12. The accounts could also be memorized by four different persons and presented in the form of biblical storytelling.

Isaiah 60:1-6

This is a truly beautiful text, especially when we consider its original “life situation.” Certainly the people who first shared this message had vivid memories of the darkness that they and their parents and grandparents had experienced through defeat, the destruction of Jerusalem, and decades of exile in Babylon. Now they dared to hope and to dream of a glorious future when the glory of the Lord God would shine again on them and when people from all nations would come to that light. In their minds they pictured the return of parents with young children coming to Jerusalem from every direction. They visualized also pilgrims and foreigners bearing gifts that — in contrast with the total losses suffered during deportation and the flight of refugees — would restore the economy of their city. They expressed this in terms of camels laden with precious metals and perfumes, a picture of the greatest imaginable value brought on the largest “trucks, trains, cargo planes, and ships” known to them at that time. We can be joyful with them within our imaginations without at this point trying to make any Newer Testament application of this text. The Newer Testament application can come in our use of the Matthew 2:1-12 account.

Psalm 72:1-7, 10-14

This is obviously a Royal Psalm intended for use at the coronation of a new king or at some commemoration in honor of a king. We notice the high expectations of the song writer and of the people with respect to their king. They were especially concerned about justice for all and about righteousness in all relationships within the realm. Most of all, they were concerned about justice for the poor.

Within our own experience the theme of justice for the poor becomes extremely significant when national, state, and local governments directly or indirectly withdraw sustenance from those who have the greatest need among us. As members of communities of faith, we have the responsibility to hold our government units accountable through our direct actions and participation in government, advocacy, voting, and so on. In addition, we can and should do everything that we can to employ those who are poor, provide skills training opportunities, and to provide immediate assistance in terms of food, medical care, rent, mortgage payments, and utility payments. The Day of Epiphany can become a time when we recover some of this kind of service, a service that the Judaisms of the time of Jesus’ public ministry, the early Church, and traditionally people within the Islamic tradition have provided. Our efforts locally and through regional and national church bodies have sometimes been very significant. Certainly much more can and should be done.

The mention in Psalm 72:10 of kings from Sheba and Seba in Arabia bearing gifts of great value and falling down in front of the Israelite king — something that was very rare within Israel’s history — is apparently the reason for the selection of this psalm in connection with Matthew 2:1-12 on this occasion within our lectionary. The writers of the Matthean tradition probably used both Isaiah 60:1-6 and Psalm 72 when, inspired by the Spirit of God, they prepared the Matthew 2:1-12 account.

Ephesians 3:1-12

This text was most likely chosen for use on the Day of Epiphany because of the mention in Ephesians 3:6 and 8 of participation by Gentiles, along with those who were of Jewish background, in the one Church with its one faith and one Lord. These are very important Epiphany themes.

Matthew 2:1-12

This story is so well known that we may hardly notice how it was constructed. The inspired writers made good use of their Older Testament resources and in the process produced some quite remarkable subtle polemic against the Persian Zoroastrian magi religion that was still a significant factor in the East at the time of the development of this text. According to the subtle polemic in this text, Zoroastrians who are truly wise will bring their most precious gifts and fall down to worship the baby Jesus. The story is told so simply and beautifully that, accustomed to it as we have been from our childhood, we hardly stop to think about it. With some mature reflection we might ask whether the Herod of history would be so careless that he would not send spies to follow the magi to the home of any newly born “king of the Jews” who would be a threat to his own plans to be followed in power by one or more of his favorite sons. Also, with mature reflection we might be interested in how differently the Matthean and Lukan redactors developed their infancy narratives. The Matthean writers moved the action from Bethlehem to Egypt, back to Bethlehem, and then north to Nazareth. Luke started in Nazareth, moved the action to Bethlehem, and then returned to Nazareth. If we try to understand the story genre used in both of these infancy accounts, we shall not be unduly troubled by these very different geographical scenarios. Each writer used research, inspiration, and creativity. The purpose of each writer was primarily theological and only secondarily historical. Should our purpose not be the same today, since we believe that we are inspired and led by the same God who inspired and led them?

by Norman Beck

Psalm 29
The specific life setting of Psalm 29 is apparently a thunderstorm hitting the entire west coast of Canaan and moving inland along a broad front that extends from Lebanon in the north to the wilderness of Kadesh in the south. The awesome sounds of the storm are attributed anthropomorphically to the Lord God, whose voice is acclaimed as full of power and majesty. It is only in regard to this voice of the Lord God in the storm that there is any notable connection with the specifics of the account in Matthew 3:13-17 about the baptism of Jesus.

Isaiah 42:1-9
This text, or at least Isaiah 42:1-4, is generally considered within traditional Christian interpretation to be the first of four “Servant Songs” (42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-11; and 52:13–53:12) within the extensive document attributed to Isaiah. Their content indicates that they have had a long and complex history of development. After their final redaction, in their canonical form the “Suffering Servant” is usually interpreted within Judaism to be, not an individual but the people of Israel (“chosen,” “the one in whom God delights,” “who will bring forth justice to all nations,” a developing religious civilization intended by God to be engaged in “tikkun olam,” i.e., “repairing the world.”). The identification of the “Suffering Servant” as Israel is actually made within the canonical text in Isaiah 49:3.

Some of the followers of Jesus, however, within a few decades after his death claimed for Jesus the qualities of the “Suffering Servant Israel” and considered his life to have been the fulfillment of the role and purpose of “Suffering Servant Israel.” Therefore, from the perspective of many followers of Jesus, Israel in the sense of Jewish people and Jewish religion apart from the spiritual experiences of followers of Jesus no longer had any legitimate reason to continue to exist. Christian “rejection and displacement” theology regarding Judaism, preponderant ever since the last third of the first century of the common era, continues this point of view regarding Judaism and the Jewish people and has been a factor in depriving Jews of civil rights in lands controlled by Christians, the murder of Jews during the Christian Crusades, and the persecution and death of millions of Jewish men, women, and children during the Inquisition, the pogroms in Eastern Europe, and the Holocaust. Fortunately, however, since the end of World War II, as a result of more objective historical studies in general, more objective historical-critical studies of Scripture, constructive Jewish-Christian dialogues, and statements drafted and adopted by a variety of Christian groups, many Christians are replacing their “rejection and displacement” theology regarding Judaism with a theological perspective that recognizes the ongoing validity of Judaism and the richness of Jewish theological development during the past nineteen centuries.

Acts 10:34-43
As we learn more about the political situation during the first century of the common era and become aware that some of the references to “the devil,” “Satan,” and “the evil one” in the Newer Testament may have been cryptograms referring to Caesar and to the oppressive Roman Empire, we wonder when we read a text such as Acts 10:34-43 whether the Lukan playwright may have very subtly been referring to Caesar and to zealous advocates of Roman Civil Religion when the playwright has Peter speak about Jesus going around doing good things and acting as a healer for everyone who was being oppressed by the devil. If “the devil” mentioned in Acts 10:38 was a cryptic reference to Caesar and to Roman Civil Religion, then representatives of Caesar and of Roman Civil Religion were the “they” who according to the next verse, Acts 10:39, crucified Jesus. The message of the cryptogram would have been especially subtle in Acts, since the writer of Acts repeatedly castigated “the Jews” for all of the evil that befell both Jesus and Paul and deliberately openly exonerated the Romans, in order to attempt to reduce Roman persecution of followers of Jesus. For much more about this, see, among other recently published books and articles, Norman A. Beck, Anti-Roman Cryptograms in the New Testament: Hidden Transcripts of Hope and Liberation, Revised edition (Studies in Biblical Literature 127, New York: Peter Lang, 2010).

Matthew 3:13-17
That Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist is one of the most certainly verifiable occurrences of his life. That Jesus had come to John to receive a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sin raised many difficulties in the minds of early followers of Jesus. We see already in Matthew 3:14-15 an attempt to emphasize the subordination of John to Jesus and to assure that for Jesus to submit to baptism by John would imply no tacit acknowledgment of sinfulness in Jesus. In the Lukan account, the baptism of Jesus is recorded in a single circumstantial participle, and the heavenly vision is connected more closely to Jesus’ praying to God than to his baptism in what may have been intended as a subtle de-emphasis of John. The Fourth Gospel has John explain that he must decrease while Jesus increases. The interesting quotation in Jerome’s writings, quoted from the Gospel According to the Hebrews, is another endeavor to overcome the same difficulty. In this quotation Jesus’ mother encourages Jesus to be baptized:

Behold the mother of the Lord and his brothers said to him, “John the Baptist is baptizing for the remission of sins. Let us go and be baptized by him.”

He said, however, to them, “What have I sinned that I should go and be baptized by him? [I have not sinned] unless by chance this very thing which I have said is [a sin of] ignorance.”

The explanatory process is carried even farther in the Gospel of the Ebionites as quoted by Epiphanius. In that quotation, after John has baptized Jesus and after the heavenly vision, John falls down in front of Jesus and says, “I beg you, Lord, baptize me!”

According to what we have in Matthew 3:13-17, the baptism of Jesus was said to be “fitting (appropriate) in order to fulfill all righteousness.” It was the proper thing to do in respect to all of the relationships involved, with God, with John and Jesus, and with the Israelite people for whom this baptism was a preparation for reception of the eschatological rule of God. In a similar manner, our baptism in the name of Jesus is appropriate, fitting, and proper in order to fulfill all of the relationships involved in our lives, especially with God perceived as Father through Jesus the Son of God by the power of the Holy Spirit of God and with other people in our family that is the Church.

The message of Matthew 3:13-17 is expressed most clearly in the voice from the heavens, changed slightly from its Markan source from “You are my beloved Son,” to “This is my beloved Son.” Jesus is proclaimed in this text to be God’s special, beloved Son, and God is said to be pleased with him. This quotation adapted from Psalm 2:7 and from Isaiah 42:1 indicates that Jesus was proclaimed in the Synoptic communities to be a combination of God’s chosen kingly figure (Psalm 2) to rule in God’s great kingdom and of the Servant figure (Isaiah 42:1) who does everything in a way that is pleasing to God.

As we ponder the meaning of the season of Lent and the significance we would like for it to have this year for us and for the people with whom we live, we begin with these Ash Wednesday texts.

We see that in Joel 2:1-2, 12-17 and in Matthew 6:1-6, 16-21 the emphasis is on appropriate behavior. In Joel 2:1-2, 12-17 the Lord God commands the people to fast, weep, mourn, repent, and return to the Lord. In Matthew 6:1-6, 16-21 the guidelines are to help those who are in need, pray, fast, and to store up your treasures in heaven where they will never be lost. It is obvious that for those who selected these texts for use on Ash Wednesday the behavior commanded in these texts from Joel and from Matthew were very important, especially for the season of Lent. They then selected a portion of one of the best known penitential psalms in the Psalter (Psalm 51) to indicate appropriate prayer to accompany appropriate behavior. Finally, the grace of God was brought into this series of texts with the inclusion of the Apostle Paul’s passive imperative verb katallagete (“be reconciled” to God) in 2 Corinthians 5:20 and in Paul’s entreaty in 2 Corinthians 6:1 not to receive the grace of God in vain. The 2 Corinthians reading provides for us, therefore, a very important addition to the appropriate behavior emphasis of the Joel and Matthew texts. The inclusion of the 2 Corinthians 5:20b–6:10 reading suggests that we emphasize the grace of God along with appropriate behavior during Lent each year and perhaps once each three years make it the primary focus.

During the height of the Civil Rights Movement, many of us found in Isaiah 58 a message that resonated very well with us. It was that unless we are actively involved in social justice, in addressing the conditions in which people suffer economic and political oppression, as well as in being engaged in immediate and continued direct assistance to the oppressed, our fasting is no way acceptable to the Lord God. As a result, Isaiah 58:1-12 is now an alternative reading to Joel 2:1-2, 12-17 on Ash Wednesday. This inclusion of Isaiah 58:1-12 brings a very important dimension to our observance of Lent.

2 Corinthians 5:20b–6:10

Let us look more closely, first of all, at Paul’s passive imperative verb katallagete in 2 Corinthians 5:20. From a theological perspective, the passive imperative is one of the most significant grammatical constructions in Indo-European languages. Paul exhorts the followers of Jesus in Corinth and, because his exhortation here is sacred Scripture for us, also exhorts us to be reconciled to God by the grace of God. We believe that God makes this reconciliation possible by means of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus the Christ, through the great atonement proclaimed by Paul and elaborated upon by other Christian theologians later.

What, then, is our role in this reconciling action? According to the grammatical construction, we are passive. God in Christ is the active one. We are to be passive, to have this done to us. “Be reconciled to God!” we are told. We can, of course, choose to reject this reconciliation, but Paul urges his readers and hearers to permit it to be done, to be forgiven, to become a new creation in Christ, as described in the 2 Corinthians 5:20a portion that precedes this text. All are strongly urged to accept this grace of God from God and to live in this grace. In 2 Corinthians 6:3-13 and continuing in 7:2-4 Paul claims that he and his co-proclaimers are trying to put no obstacles in anyone’s path. He wants no obstacles of any kind to keep this message of passive reception of the grace of God from anyone who might want to hear it.

Our work, therefore, on Ash Wednesday and throughout the Lenten season, in accordance with this 2 Corinthians 5:20b–6:10 text, is to prevent any and all obstacles from hindering God’s action of reconciling us and others to God through Jesus as the Christ.

Let us look now at the other texts appointed for us for this day in the light of Paul’s admonition to us that we should “Be reconciled to God by the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Let us, as Martin Luther insisted, interpret Scripture by the use of Scripture. In this way, we shall be letting the “gospel” — which in the texts chosen for this day is in the “epistle” — shed light on the other texts selected.

Psalm 51:1-17

The portion of Psalm 51 selected here puts emphasis on the penitential prayer. The obstacles to be removed in this instance are the psalmist’s sins (and our sins). These sins are great, but the appeal is that God’s mercy is greater than our sins. From our Christian standpoint, the forgiveness of our sins is accomplished by God through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus perceived as the Christ. We recognize, however, that the Israelites and Jewish people prior to, during, and after the pre-Christian era called upon the mercy of God with no reference to Jesus, and we can and should assume that God has been able to forgive them. To assume anything less would be to try to limit God.

In the portion of Psalm 51 that follows verses 1-13, the psalmist shows an awareness that God does not need burnt offerings and other sacrifices in order to be able to forgive sins. God is interested in our broken and contrite heart. When our hearts are contrite, then the offerings and sacrifices will have value.

Has this changed since the time the psalmist wrote or sang this psalm? Which is the more inclusive concept, atonement or forgiveness? Do we today always require atonement of each other (of our children for example) before we will forgive them? Within our cultural milieu is it possible that an overemphasis on atonement theology places an unnecessary limitation upon God and upon our perception of God?

Atonement theology is useful and valuable within our understanding of God’s grace, but perhaps it should be seen as only one of the ways in which we may perceive God’s action in Christ and in history. Atonement theology was a way in which some of the followers of Jesus after the crucifixion of Jesus saw some very important good that God had brought about through that tragic event. Atonement theology is one of the ways in which we continue as Christians to see the crucifixion of Jesus, but it is only one of the ways in which we understand the crucifixion of Jesus. Considered together with the resurrection of Jesus, we see the action of God as a vindication of Jesus and of his life. God did not prevent the Romans from crucifying Jesus, but we believe that God vindicated Jesus and made the Romans powerless via the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. For more about this, see Hans Küng, On Being a Christian (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976, pp. 419-436).

Joel 2:1-2, 12-17

This text elaborates on the ideas of Psalm 51 beautifully and even more vividly. Again in relation to this text, let us consider the issues and questions raised above about atonement and forgiveness. Atonement is very important in “classical” Christian theology. There is no subject, however, in which Jews and Muslims are more significantly different from Christians than on the subject of atonement. Jews and Muslims understand and teach that no person, even God, can atone for the sins of someone else. For Jews and for Muslims, each person is totally responsible and accountable for that person’s own sins.

Forgiveness, on the other hand, is very important for Jews and for Muslims, as well as for Christians. We agree within these three religions that we should always seek forgiveness from people whom we have harmed and then also from God, asking God to spare God’s people, as this Joel 2 text indicates.

For more about the understanding among Jews and among Muslims that no one can atone for the sins of someone else, see Hassan Hathout, Reading the Muslim Mind (Plainfield: American Trust, 1995, pp. 33-35), and my Blessed to be a Blessing to Each Other: Jews, Muslims, and Christians as Children of Abraham in the Middle East (Lima, Ohio: Fairway Press, 2008, pp. 51-54).

Matthew 6:1-6, 16-21

A glance at the Synoptic parallels shows that except for Matthew 6:19-21 the components of this pericope are peculiar to Matthew. We can say, therefore, that the materials in Matthew 6:1-6 and 16-18 are best understood as teachings of the leaders of the Matthean community in Jesus’ name. The positive aspects of these teachings are certainly applicable for us today as Christians. We should help those who are in need, we should pray to God, and we should fast, but we should do none of these in order to be praised. The negative anti-Jewish aspects that condemn the Jews and their leaders in these verses are not applicable for us today.

Isaiah 58:1-12

As indicated above, the inclusion of Isaiah 58:1-12 as a text to be read and reflected upon on Ash Wednesday and throughout the Lenten season brings a very important dimension to our observance of Lent. It reminds us that if want to do something that is truly important during Lent or at any other time, we should help people who are in need, especially those who are oppressed economically, politically, socially, and in any other way. That is what the inspired speaker and writer in this Isaiah tradition text said and apparently did. That is what the Jesus of history said and that is what the Jesus of history did. There can be no doubt about that.

Lent is the season of the Church Year in which we focus on our study and reflection upon the Jesus of history. There are a multitude of texts in the Four Gospels that are evidence of words and actions of the Jesus of history in support of those who were oppressed during that time. There is very little evidence in support of Jesus himself fasting, other than at the beginning of his public service in the Synoptic Gospels, and nothing about his giving up for a few weeks a bad habit that was obviously harmful to himself or to others. If we want to be like Jesus during Lent, or better yet throughout the year and during our entire lives, let us do whatever we can to change systems that rob the oppressed and give excess bounty to the rich, within our own nation and throughout the world.

A unifying factor present in all four of these texts selected for Lent 1 in Series C is the concept of deliverance. According to Psalm 91, the person who trusts in the Lord will be delivered from all danger. In the Deuteronomy 26 confession of faith it is said that the Lord (the God of our Fathers) heard our voice when we were slaves in Egypt and rescued us. The temptation account in Luke 4:1-13 has Jesus demonstrate that if you worship the Lord your God (as perceived by the Israelites, the Jews, and the early followers of Jesus) and serve only the Lord, you will be delivered from the power of the devil. Finally, in Romans 10:8-13 Paul wrote that if you confess with your lips and believe in your heart that Jesus the Risen Christ is Lord, you will be saved.

Psalm 91:1-2, 9-16

This well-known psalm that extols the wisdom of trusting in the Lord God Almighty was obviously chosen for Lent 1, Series C, because Psalm 91:11-12 was quoted by the “devil” in the Luke 4:1-13 temptation of Jesus account, our Gospel reading for next Sunday, illustrating how the Scriptures can be misused when the wrong person quotes them in the wrong way! It is apparent that Psalm 91 in its historical setting in ancient Israel was not referring specifically to Jesus who would be born hundreds of years later, but to anyone who would be wise enough to trust God completely. Certainly the Jesus of history was not to enjoy the “long life” promised in verse 16; neither was the Jesus of history rescued (v. 15) from death on the Roman cross.

Psalm 91 shares the thought in verses 11-12 that was further developed within the Zoroastrian religion of angels guarding faithful people. Although we would certainly support the wisdom of unconditional trust in the Lord God Almighty, there is well-documented evidence that in spite of this trust Jews were tortured and killed by their Seleucid adversaries at the time of the Maccabean revolt, Jesus was tortured and then died on a Roman cross, first-century followers of Jesus were torn to pieces by hungry lions and tigers from Africa for the amusement of decadent Romans, millions of Jews of all age groups were starved, gassed, and slaughtered by the Nazis, and the practice of torture of prisoners continues in the world today. Perhaps we should recognize that ultimately with God there is salvation for the faithful, but that penultimately “the angels” have been known to fail us.

Deuteronomy 26:1-11

Perhaps Gerhard von Rad in his Old Testament Theology I (New York: Harper & Row, 1962) overestimated the importance of this great offering response in the formation of Israel’s traditions. Nevertheless, we can learn from it not only how Israelites and Jews have perceived the Exodus as a saving act but also how the offering should function liturgically as a central focal point in active worship. Offering, confession of faith, and proclamation through word and sacrament are closely related elements. Nothing is more “dead” liturgically than our “time for the collection.” We should return to the earlier Israelite and Christian practice of bringing our own gifts and offerings to the altar with joy, grief, or whatever emotion may be appropriate.

Luke 4:1-13

As we search for new meanings in this temptation of Jesus account, we become aware that there is almost certainly a subtle anti-Roman cryptogram (often now called a “hidden transcript”) within the three temptations of Jesus in this account. Only the Roman Emperor was the “devil” who had authority over all of the known kingdoms of the mid-first century world of the followers of Jesus. Only the Roman Emperor at that time, via the powerful Roman Civil Religion, was demanding that all of the people within that empire bow down in submission to him and to his authority. Faced with this challenge, conscientious followers of Jesus found comfort and gained courage to resist that idolatry from this story about how Jesus had rejected the claims and demands of this Satan, this devil, and they asserted with Jesus that “You shall worship the Lord your God, and God only shall you serve!” With this bold assertion, Jesus and many other first-century Jews and followers of Jesus took the way of the cross. For us also, we shall worship and serve only the Lord our God and no one nor any thing else. That is the way of ultimate deliverance.

Romans 10:8b-13

For Paul, as a Jew, Adonai was Lord and no one who would believe in Adonai as Lord would ever be put to shame. For the Apostle Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus the Risen Christ, Jesus as the Risen Christ was also Lord and all who would believe that Jesus the Risen Christ is Lord would be delivered, saved from sin, death, and the power of the “devil,” whether the devil was perceived as the Roman Emperor or any other personification of evil. With great boldness and excitement Paul proclaimed that now there is no longer any important distinction between Jewish background and non-Jewish background followers of Jesus, because the same Lord (whether Adonai or Jesus the Risen Christ) is Lord of all, of Jewish background and of non-Jewish background followers of Jesus who will believe that God has raised the Jesus of history from the dead as Lord of all. Paul was thrilled by the insight that now Jewish background and non-Jewish background followers of Jesus could be together within the same olive tree (Romans 11:17-24). Paul, and others among early followers of Jesus, with the reluctant consent of Peter and of James, the brother of Jesus, in Jerusalem, brought Adonai and Jesus the Risen Christ together as one Lord and eventually most Christians have followed them. Marcion during the mid-second century CE and other followers of Jesus who have separated Jesus from Adonai as Marcion separated them, have taken a different path. Let us take the path of Paul.

Jerusalem and the temple in Jerusalem are prominent in many of these texts selected for Lent 2, Series C. It is in Jerusalem and at its temple that the beauty of the Lord is seen (Psalm 27). Jesus’ death and his departure from the earth will occur in Jerusalem (Luke 13:31-35), and Jesus expresses his love for the city and for its people.

Transformation is another theme present in several of these texts. In his letter to the Philippians, Paul proclaims that the Lord Jesus Christ will transform our lowly body and make it conform to his glorious body. Within the Genesis 15:1-12, 17-18 promise and covenant text, Abram was said to have been transformed in a sense as the Lord caused the smoking fire pot and flaming torch to pass between the pieces of Abram’s offering and made the covenant of land and many descendants with him.

Psalm 27

This psalm of trust in the Lord includes a statement of faith (27:1), a plea for a response from the Lord (27:7-9), and an admonition to the self to wait patiently for the goodness of the Lord during the lifetime of the psalmist (27:13-14). The setting, as indicated above, is the temple in Jerusalem. Nothing is asked that is beyond the limits of this life.

Genesis 15:1-12, 17-18

Perhaps the most significant factor for us as Christians in this ancient covenant ratification story is the statement in Genesis 15:6 that Abram believed the Lord that Abram’s descendants would be like the stars, too numerous to count, and that the Lord considered Abram’s belief in the Lord to be the right relationship for the establishment of a covenant with God. The Apostle Paul drew heavily on Genesis 15:6 in building his argumentation in Galatians 3 and in Romans 4 that our belief in God will be considered the right relationship for us in the sight of God.

Philippians 3:17–4:1

This selection occurs within the sharply polemical portion (3:1–4:7) of the letter that may have been inserted here by a Pauline editor from another letter of Paul. The polemic in 3:18-19 is directed against “Christians” who claim to follow the cross of Christ, but actually are considered by Paul to be enemies of the cross of Christ. Probably they were Christians who in the opinion of Paul were compromising their Christianity by participating in certain activities of Roman Civil Religion in order to avoid the persecutions that Paul and other followers of Jesus faced and in order to benefit in material ways. In Paul’s opinion, the citizenship of such pseudo-Christians was in Rome and they were destined with Rome for destruction. Paul’s citizenship, and the citizenship of those who supported Paul against the religion of Roman patriotism and the claims of its adherents, was in heaven, in God’s kingdom, not Caesar’s, from which Paul waited for Jesus the Risen Christ (not for Caesar) as the Savior who would subject Rome, its Emperor, and everything else to himself.

We are called in our time to proclaim our Lord Jesus Christ rather than the Caesars of today as Savior, and to renounce those who, while claiming to be Christian, follow them.

Luke 13:31-35

This text is one of several in Luke that indicate that many of the Pharisees were friendly and supportive of the Jesus of history, and it is likely that many of them were. His message was also their message. In every instance in the Lukan account, however, the Lukan writer arranged the context and the situation in such a way that the Jesus of this Third Gospel turns against the Pharisees, denounces them, and embarrasses his Pharisee hosts in front of their friends, even when Jesus is a dinner guest.

With regard to the lament over Jerusalem, it is likely that the speaker here, as in Luke 11:49, was at one time the “Wisdom of God,” a supra-historical hypostasis. After the divine Wisdom calls in vain for men to follow her, she departs and will not return until the Messiah comes. Some followers of Jesus, possibly in “Q” material communities, may have seen in the resurrected Jesus the same qualities that had earlier been attributed to the “Wisdom of God.” This association was probably particularly appropriate in “Q” communities with their interests in motifs that Richard Edwards in A Theology of Q (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976, p. 84), identified as a) eschatological hope, b) wisdom teaching about the present, and c) either a reference to the prophets as models and examples or the use of the prophetic-messenger forms of speech. In the text represented in Luke 11:49 and 13:34-35 the “Q” communities probably used wisdom and prophetic forms and images in presenting their case against Jews who would not unite with them (Edwards, p. 133). Once the association of the Wisdom of God with Jesus had been made, the Matthean tradition placed the account into a Jerusalem setting after the entry of Jesus into the city and made Matthew 23:19 into a prophecy that the inhabitants of Jerusalem would not see Jesus again until they will say, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.” The Lukan writer placed the account prior to the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem and made it into a prediction that Jesus would not be killed until he would enter the city of Jerusalem, but that once he was there he would surely die at the hands of those whom he would have liked to have gathered together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings to protect them from danger from predators. The inhabitants of the city would have to wait until Jesus would finally go there and then they would say, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord!”

Once the association of the Wisdom hypostasis with Jesus had been made, the lament became virulently anti-Jewish. Jerusalem was then accused of continuously killing the prophets and stoning the ones sent to her. The quotation based on Jeremiah 22:5 and 12:7 became external anti-Jewish condemnation, and Psalm 118:26 was given a variety of new messianic possibilities. For more details about this reconstruction of the development of this tradition, see Barnabas Lindars, New Testament Apologetic (London: SCM Press, 1961, pp. 171-173).

Since Luke 13:34-35 and Matthew 23:37-39 as they were developed within the early Church are viciously anti-Jewish with their unfair condemnation of Jerusalem for killing its prophets and in their glorying in the forsaken and desolate condition of the people of Jerusalem after 70 CE, other accounts from the Gospels should be used instead of these in the Church today to demonstrate the love and concern that the Jesus of history had for his fellow oppressed Jews. If these texts are used, they should be redacted and addressed to the Christian people of God today self-critically, perhaps in words such as follows: “O my people! O my people! How you have turned from me! How many times have I wanted to gather together your children as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you have not wanted me to do this.” A redaction of these verses that would reverse the process of their development within the early Church would put them back once more into a series of sayings of Jesus such as they were when they were circulated in “Q” materials.

If the reader of the lectionary is not willing to redact the texts in this way in order to reverse the process of their development, we may do so in the way in which we use these texts in the sermon or homily for next Sunday, by applying them self-critically to ourselves in the Church. Then they will have a useful impact today.

Luke 9:28-36

See the discussion of this text in the LAST SUNDAY AFTER THE EPIPHANY (TRANSFIGURATION SUNDAY).