Proper 19 | Ordinary Time 24, Cycle B

In each of these texts selected for use in our worship services next Sunday there is a model that the hearer is urged to follow. Let us look at these models more closely in preparation for our proclamation and for our parenesis next Sunday. How will these models be helpful to us and to the people with whom we serve as we prepare this week for the message that we will be called by God to share during the worship services next Sunday?

Isaiah 50:4-9a

Within the context of the Suffering Servant songs of the Isaiah traditions near the end of the exilic period we hear this voice, we have this testimony, we perceive this model. It is the voice and the model of a prophet, perhaps of an ideal prophet or of the best elements of Israelite prophecy. Eventually within the ongoing Israelite and Jewish interpretation of this portion of the Suffering Servant songs with the addition of the word “Israel” in Isaiah 49:3 the voice and model became the voice and model of Israel itself. For the followers of Jesus during the embryonic period in the development of the Christian Church, in retrospective reflection over the life, suffering and death, and resurrection of Jesus as the Risen Christ of faith, it also became the voice of Jesus, the one now perceived within the developing Church as the Suffering Servant par excellence who suffered and died on the cross for all of us.

Perhaps we should say that for us today it is not a matter of whether it is Israelite prophecy at its best, Israel itself, or Jesus who is the Suffering Servant. The inspired prophets of ancient Israel, the people of Israel, and Jesus as the Risen Christ all have suffered for us. Can we and all other Christians accept the sharing of the Suffering Servant role with Israel and the Jews? After Auschwitz, do we have any other choice? Was the suffering of the Jesus of history, of Jesus the Jew, on the Roman cross for a few horrible hours greater than the suffering of a million Jewish babies and children torn from their mothers and thrown over the heads of their mothers into the packed gas chambers by the Nazis? If Jesus the Jew had been born to Mary the Jew in Germany, Poland, or elsewhere in the lands occupied by the Germans during the Holocaust, would his life have been spared? Of course, it would not have been spared.

In this Isaiah 50:4-9a Suffering Servant model, therefore, the suffering of Jesus the Jew can no longer be separated from the suffering of other Jews and from the suffering of others as well who are oppressed even today in the Sudan, China, and in many other places. Do we have the call and the courage to share this realization in some way as we use this Isaiah 50:4-9a model in our message next Sunday? If we lack the call and the courage to share it, let us remain silent next Sunday and not merely mouth our old, oft-repeated clichés that separate the suffering of Jesus from our time, from 20th and 21st century suffering. With this Isaiah 50:4-9a Suffering Servant model, neither should we retain without any attempt at repudiation the most vicious anti-Jewish expressions within our Newer Testament that contributed to the situation in Europe that made the success of the Nazi war against the Jews and against other powerless people in Europe possible. Perhaps there are times when we must say with the Jesus of Matthew 5, “It is written, but I say…” or with Paul in 2 Corinthians 3:6 that “the written record condemns and kills, but the Spirit makes us alive.” Cannot we permit the Spirit of God to “make us alive” today? Is the Lord God of revelation silent or even perhaps dead among us? Has God said nothing new for the past eighteen centuries? Cannot we be inspired individuals today? Of course we can. To the glory of God, we can and must.

Psalm 116:1-9

It is basic to this Individual Hymn of Praise and Thank offering genre to testify to everyone who is present concerning the seriousness of the problem that the psalmist has faced, the wisdom of turning to the Lord for help, the nature of the deliverance, and the necessity of offering thanks and praise to the Lord. As a result, the person offering the testimony automatically becomes the model to be followed. Even though we have many of these Individual Hymns of Praise and Thank offering within the biblical accounts, many of us have been conditioned within our tradition to refrain from offering ourselves as a model of this sort. Perhaps we should ask some respected mature persons within our congregations who have been in distress, have called upon the Lord, have been relieved from the distress, and praise God for that relief to share their experiences within the worship service next Sunday in order to provide contemporary counterparts to the psalmist’s song. Every congregation at any given time has several persons who have had such experiences and probably will be glad to tell about them if asked.

Proverbs 1:20-33

Here, as in many other places in the collection of the Writings that we call the book of Proverbs, wisdom is personified as a woman crying out in the street, offering to help those who are simple and who foolishly turn away. The wisdom of God is the model here, warning those who reject her moral guidelines that they will realize their need for the wisdom that God provides only when it will be too late for them to respond.

Psalm 19

At the conclusion of this Hymn of Praise to God as the Creator of the universe and as the one who graciously provides the Torah, the model for us to follow is that of the person who rejects sin and acts of evil, calls upon God as one’s rock and redeemer, and asks that the person’s words and meditation be acceptable in the sight of God.

Wisdom of Solomon 7:26–8:1

The model to follow here is the person who lives with wisdom, with the wisdom that God so freely and graciously provides. Such a person is truly loved by God. How could anyone be so foolish as not to be and not to live like the person depicted in this model, the person who is attracted in this way to God?

James 3:1-12

The writer of this document urges the reader and hearer to understand the importance of controlling the person’s own tongue, what the person says. The tongue of a person, though it is a small portion of the person’s body, is like the mouth of a horse, for the horse will go in the direction of its mouth, a huge ship will be guided by a small rudder, and a little fire can cause a huge forest to burn. The person who can control that person’s tongue is the model to be followed here. No human without the power that God provides is strong enough and disciplined enough to provide that model for us to follow. Not here in this portion of the Epistle of James, but beyond it in the portion of the Gospel According to Mark selected for next Sunday will we see this model.

Mark 8:27-38

The model that this text provides within the context of the other readings selected for our use next Sunday is the model, of course, of Jesus suffering on the cross, and here in Mark 8:27-38 we are urged to take up our cross and to follow after Jesus. Jesus is depicted here as the Christ, not a military Messiah who leads his followers boldly into battle against his enemies, but a Messiah who is the Suffering Servant of the Lord, the Christ who dies on the cross. Jesus, as this Messiah, at first cautions his followers to tell no one about his identity in order that he may tell as many of his fellow Jews as possible what he believes, that the Lord God is coming very soon to remove the Roman oppressors, that at that time only the Lord God will be ruling over them and the Romans will be gone from the land. Jesus, as this Messiah, tells his followers to worship and accept the absolute claims of authority only of the Lord God, and no longer to submit to the absolute claims of authority of the Romans. He tells his followers not to talk with outsiders about his identity as a Messiah figure, because he wants to reach as many people as possible with his message of suffering resistance before he dies on the cross.

The Theology of this Mark 8:27-38 text and the dominant Theology of the entire New Testament tradition is a Theology of the Cross, a Theology of Jesus as the Christ crucified and risen from the dead. According to this Theology of the Cross, God did not intervene to prevent the death of Jesus on the cross, but God vindicated and validated him as the Christ by raising Jesus from the dead.

What then is our task, this week and at all times? We are urged to develop, to apply to our own lives, and to proclaim a Theology of the Cross that is adequate and appropriate for our time and place. What does this mean? It is our task to follow the role model of Jesus crucified and raised from the dead. We are no longer passively to endure needless and meaningless suffering in ourselves and in other people, but instead to join vigorously and fearlessly to oppose needless suffering, to do everything that we possibly can to overcome poverty, hunger, oppression, exploitation, abuse, disease, and death. It is our task to “go to the wall,” if necessary, for the sake of others. Is this not what is meant by the biblical injunction to “participate in the sufferings of Christ”? What a model to follow! What kind of example are we as pastors and worship leaders and members of our congregations providing? Is the priestly role of building up a congregation of power, prestige, and wealth the only role appropriate for us?

There are many in the Church who proclaim and who live not a “Theology of the Cross,” but instead a “Theology of Prosperity,” a “Theology of Success,” a message that says that if you, like us, accept Jesus into your hearts and no longer sin, you will be as happy and as successful as we are! The “Theology of Prosperity” is appealing to many people, to many who are poor and have no prosperity, as well as to many who have become wealthy and prosperous. It is not the Theology, however, of these texts, of Paul and the Four Gospels, of our biblical tradition.

For a well-written and very understandable biblical “Theology of the Cross,” amply illustrated with examples from his own experiences, see Philip L. Ruge-Jones, The Word of the Cross in a World of Glory (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2008).

Since Mark 9:30-37 is comprised of two loosely connected pericope units, most of the other texts selected for our use next Sunday branch out from Mark 9:30-37 in two different directions. Jeremiah 11:18-20, Psalm 54, and Wisdom of Solomon 1:16–2:1, 12-22 with their emphasis on threats to life and deliverance from evil, provide a backdrop for the second Markan passion-resurrection prediction in Mark 9:30-32, and James 3:13–4:3, 7-8a provides wisdom elaborations of the Mark 9:33-37 discussion of the problem of jealousy and greed among the early followers of Jesus. There are no significant direct linkages between the Proverbs 31:10-31 text extolling the virtues of an ideal housewife and Psalm 1 that compares and contrasts the good that will come to the person who delights in living in accordance with the guidelines provided in the Torah to the wicked person who will perish, unless these latter texts are seen to point out the contrast between the righteous people and people who are jealous and greedy.

Jeremiah 11:18-20

In this personal lament of Jeremiah, which is followed by five additional laments in Jeremiah 15:10-21, 17:14-18, 18:18-23, 20:7-13, and 20:14-18, Jeremiah claims to have been shown by the Lord that Jeremiah’s enemies have plotted to slaughter him, to destroy him and his message, and to blot out his name from the earth. Jeremiah is depicted as confident, however, that the Lord, to whom Jeremiah has committed his cause, will deliver Jeremiah and take vengeance upon the enemies of Jeremiah.

We can see that within the early traditions of followers of Jesus it was perceived that if the prophet Jeremiah had been told by the Lord that his life was in danger, certainly Jesus as the Son of God must have been told by God the Father when and where Jesus would be crucified. If Jeremiah had been confident of deliverance, so also Jesus must have been confident that the Lord God would deliver Jesus, if not in the avoidance of death, then certainly in the overcoming of death in the resurrection of Jesus from death to eternal life. The justice of God as judge is “gospel” within this text.

Psalm 54

The “gospel” is expressed more clearly here than in the Jeremiah 11:28-20 text. Particularly in Psalm 54:4 we see this in the claim that “God is the one who comes to rescue me; the Lord upholds my life!” The proclamation of the gospel continues in the words of Psalm 54:6b, “Your name, O Lord, is good,” and in Psalm 54:7a, “You have delivered me from every distress.” Even though the form of this Individual Hymn of Thanksgiving may have caused the psalmist to exaggerate somewhat, the message of good news is abundantly clear in this psalm.

Wisdom of Solomon 1:16–2:1, 12-22

The ungodly, who have no hope of immortality, abuse and torment the righteous, testing them to see whether God will help and protect them. The righteous, however, know the hidden purposes of God, that God has a prize for those who are blameless, to give them an eternity of life with God.

Mark 9:30-37

As in Jeremiah 11:18-20, Psalm 54, and Wisdom of Solomon 1:16–2:1, 12-22, there is bad news and there is good news in Mark 9:30-32. The bad news is that Jesus will be tortured and crucified by the Romans; the good news is that three days later God will raise Jesus from the dead. It is the good news of the resurrection of Jesus as Christ for us and as Redeemer of the world that is of the greatest interest to us. Because Jesus as the Risen Christ lives, we too shall live! This is the essence of the gospel as we who are Christians proclaim it.

Mark 9:33-37 is an indication that during the time of the Jesus of history and in the decades after his death there were problems of jealousy and greed among the followers of Jesus. The problems of jealousy and greed were undoubtedly greatly increased as various groups of followers of Jesus were formed, as this text and the text that we shall have the following week indicate. The solution to that problem during the 1st century, as well as now, lies in service to others rather than in the exercise of power over them. How frequently we are tempted to exercise the power that we have because of our position rather than for us to find fulfillment for our lives in service to God and to other people! The Jesus of history demonstrated service to God and to other people in a remarkable way. It is probable that Mark 9:37 is a statement of the Jesus of history only moderately embellished. Perhaps the Jesus of history took a child into his arms (probably on many similar occasions) and said something such as “Whoever takes care of a child such as this takes care of me, takes care of the whole world, and takes care of God!” (This text provides an excellent example for a “children’s sermon” and as an object lesson during a Service of Baptism.)

James 3:13-4:3, 7-8a

This “wisdom” text is certainly “wisdom” also for us. Have we not found that life is just as it is depicted in this text? The parenesis here can be applied to individuals, to groups, to nations, to all of humanity. What is taught in James 3:16–4:2 is similar to the basic teachings of many other great religions of the world, especially of the Buddhists. It is not unlike the teachings within the Hindu religions. We shall lose nothing by recognizing that these ideas are shared freely among the best of all of the other great religions of the world. At the same time, we can make this parenesis to be Christian parenesis by presenting it as appropriate that in response to the gospel of God’s grace shown in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ we can control and overcome our jealousy and our greed and can work and live in peace.

Proverbs 31:10-31

The opposite of a life that is tainted by jealousy and greed is depicted in this portrait of an ideal wife. From the perspective of the rabbinical tradition, she does everything that is needed within the home and household so that her husband can study the Torah at all times. How do we respond to this portrayal of an ideal life? Would the women in the congregations in which we serve want to be like this wife? Would the men want a wife like that? How would we portray the ideal wife and the ideal husband in our own context?

Psalm 1

With a wife who is as resourceful as the ideal wife depicted in Proverbs 31:10-31, her husband can, as it is expressed in Psalm 1:2, meditate day and night on the Torah that is revealed by God. There is no jealousy and there is no greed in such a household and in such a marriage.

Although few of us would expect any woman to be as industrious as the ideal wife depicted in Proverbs 31, our study of Proverbs 31:10-31 together with Psalm 1 can be very helpful for men and for women in our congregations. Should these and other texts be studied by men apart from women and by women apart from men, or is it more productive for men and women to study them in one group together? How are the Bible study groups arranged in the congregations in which we serve?

Whether studied by men apart from women, women apart from men, or men and women together, Psalm 1 is of primary importance in any study of the Psalter. It was placed where we have it in the collection of psalms for good reasons. As Denise Dombkowski Hopkins expresses it in her Journey through the Psalms, rev. ed. (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2002), 66, “The context for praying, singing, or preaching the rest of the psalms is set by Psalm 1 and its declaration of the Two Ways and the joy of the Torah. Psalm 1 serves as our guidepost at the entrance to the Psalter; it helps us to keep our bearings through life’s journey because it tells us that Torah articulates God’s intentions for us.”

Mark 9:38-50

It is clearly stated in this pericope that all evil and all evil impulses in a person’s life must be opposed by each person. In order to accomplish this, criticism of one’s self must be incisive, “cutting,” and complete.

The core saying in Mark 9:40, “Whoever is not against us is for us,” as with other core sayings of Jesus in Mark, was probably remembered by his followers because it had been stated by the Jesus of history on so many occasions. It should be noted that the Matthean and Lukan redactors in contexts that are somewhat different from that in Mark turned the saying of Jesus “inside out” to present Jesus in Matthew 12:30 and in Luke 11:23 as saying that “The one who is not with me is against me.” According to this Mark 9:38-50 text, however, other people who oppose evil in Jesus’ name are to be supported even if they are in a different group.

Mark 9:38-50, therefore, does not require that there be unity in organization or uniformity in practice within the Church. Cell division into a multitude of denominations in the Church to permit and even to encourage diversity and to provide a multitude of opportunities to live and to serve has biblical sanction in the core saying of Jesus in this text. Without opportunities for diversity, rapid growth of the Church is not likely to occur. What are the implications of this for those who have difficulty in accepting into participation and leadership positions in the Church persons whose lifestyles are different from those of the majority of the people in the established Church? Why is it so important for us to note the distinction in this text between self-criticism that is supported by Jesus and criticism of others that is rejected by Jesus? Why are we often quick to criticize others and slow to criticize ourselves?

James 5:13-20

The writer of this epistle is directive throughout most of the document, and these final eight verses are not an exception. In the many and diverse situations of life, all persons are directed to pray for themselves and for each other. They should always help each other and ask God to guide them in the right path.

Numbers 11:4-6, 10-16, 24-29

The Spirit of the Lord is said to have rested also upon the two men, Eldad and Medad, who had not gone out with Moses to receive from the Lord some of the Spirit of God that had previously been only upon Moses. When Joshua complained about this to Moses and asked Moses to silence these two men, Moses responded with the famous words, “I wish that all of the people of the Lord were prophets! I would be greatly pleased if the Lord would put the Spirit of the Lord upon every one of them!” The saying of Jesus in Mark 9:40 is consistent with this.

Furthermore, Formgeschichte (form study) analysis of this text indicates that the account functions among other things as an etiology that provides an explanation of the origin of prophecy in Israel. Apparently many of the Israelites were opposed to some of the expressions of prophecy in Israel, especially when, as in this case, the prophecy did not coincide with the wishes of some of the people. God is said, however, in this account, to have validated prophecy in Israel with the words spoken through Moses in Numbers 11:29. In a way that is similar to the validation of the Torah through Moses in the “burning bush” account in Exodus 3:1-4:17. In Numbers 11:24-29 prophecy in Israel is validated through Moses as a legitimate extension of the Torah. The implications of this are considerable for Israel, both theologically and historically. According to Numbers 11:24-29, the Lord God will not be limited to revelation given directly through Moses. In this text, the Lord God uses Moses in order to authorize an ongoing process of revelation. The implications of this extend also to us today. We believe that God continues God’s ongoing process of revelation through each of us in the Church and not only in the Church.

Psalm 19:7-14

The revelation of the Lord God in the Torah is acclaimed beautifully in this psalm. Although prophecy is not mentioned as such in this psalm, we can see in this psalm that when the psalmist proclaims the merits of the Torah to the people the psalmist is speaking prophetically in the basic sense of prophecy, which is to proclaim something for God to the people.

Esther 7:1-6, 9-10; 9:20-22

In the context of the other texts selected for this day, these portions of the story about Esther provide a validation of a festival that is not mentioned or included anywhere in the Torah. Along with the validation of the festival of Purim, a celebration of the rescue of the Israelite-Jewish people from a decree of death to the Israelites-Jews issued by a cruel and vindictive oppressor, the Esther story is also validated as authoritative for Israel.

Psalm 124

This is one of numerous psalms celebrating the actions of the Lord God in rescuing Israel and its people from death and annihilation. It can be applied here to the rescue of the Jewish people in the Esther story. It can be applied, of course, also to the rescue of Jews in many other times as well, and to the rescue by God of Christians and of other people.

The unifying factor within the first three of these selections is obviously “the family,” more specifically “the ideal family” or “the family as it should be.”

Genesis 2:18-24

This text, the second half of the “Jahwistic” folk tradition “creation” account that we have in Genesis 2:4b-25, is evidence for the belief among the ancient Israelites that the Lord God instituted marriage, arranged the first marriage, provided the participants in the first marriage, and brought them together into a single monogamous unit.

Mark 10:2-16

In this text, we have the teaching of the Markan community regarding family life as it should be, the Markan community ideal! Possibly this was also the teaching of the Jesus of history regarding family life, regarding divorce, regarding remarriage, and regarding the place of children within a family. Let us look more closely at this text.

The framework for this teaching of the Markan community regarding marriage, divorce, remarriage and the place of children is a controversy dialogue between the Markan Jesus and the Markan Pharisees who have come to the Markan Jesus “in order to try to cause him to fall.” The Markan Pharisees are the typical opponents of the Markan Jesus here, and their motives are labeled as sinister by the Markan writer and community. As Eduard Schweizer in The Good News According to Mark, trans. by D. H. Madvig (Atlanta: John Knox, 1970) 202, observed, real life Pharisees would hardly have asked such a radical question as “Is it in accordance with the Torah for a man to divorce his wife?” since for the Pharisees divorce was regulated by Deuteronomy 24:1-4, legislation designed to protect the wife and to guarantee for her a measure of freedom. At the most, real life Pharisees might have asked the Jesus of history what, in his opinion, should be the attitude of 1st century Jews in Galilee and Judea in view of the expectation of Jesus and of many other Jews in that area at that time that God’s rule would soon be experienced in a new, more direct manner. The radical question is included in Mark 10:2, probably because the Markan community, in establishing its own identity, was impelled to raise questions such as this. It needed to provide authoritative answers within this “Gospel,” its evolving compilation of Jesus’ teachings as guidelines for the people of the Markan community. Since, as the Markan community self-consciously was establishing its own identity, it was doing this for the most part over against its Jewish antecedents, it is not surprising that it tended to be comparatively strict, similar to the Qumran community in this respect. The Markan writer obviously rejected the Jewish Torah legislation of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 in favor of the “two as one flesh” ideal descriptions in the Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 creation accounts. Probably perceiving the Genesis 1 and 2 accounts to have priority over Deuteronomy 24:1-4 both in time (as earlier than Moses) and in scope (for all people, not merely for the Israelites), the Markan writer chose to base the teachings of the Markan community upon Genesis 1-2 and accused the Markan Pharisees of hardness of hearts (Mark 10:5) stating that because of such hardness of hearts Moses provided some possibility of a certificate of divorce.

In our translation and use of Mark 10:2-16, it is important that we recognize and emphasize that in the theological opinion of the leadership of the Markan community divorce was not permitted. They, or at least the writer of the Gospel According to Mark, used the technique of controversy dialogue to clarify their own position and to show that it had priority over the position of the Pharisees on that subject. Since the controversy dialogue itself has relatively little value for us today, the controversy dialogue should be treated as secondary in our own proclamation and teaching, just as it was secondary in their situation. Our primary interest is in the position of the Markan community — which became sacred Scripture for us — as we reflect upon the issues of marriage, family life, divorce and remarriage as possibilities under certain circumstances, and the place of children today. Accordingly, it would be advisable for us to translate the word Pharisaioi in Mark 10:2 as “some religious leaders,” which is, of course, what Pharisees were at that time, and to express the text of Mark 10:5b in English as “He wrote this commandment to our ancestors and for you because of human intransigence.” Just as the new Markan community of followers of Jesus found it to be necessary to define the concept of “family” and related matters for itself, so also followers of Jesus in each new period of time since then find it to be necessary to define these concepts for themselves in relation to their own traditions.

The narrow issue here (divorce) is negative — much too negative to be the focal point in our message next Sunday. The bigger, broader, and better issue is “family,” and for that Genesis 2:18-24, Mark 10:2-16, and to a lesser extent, Hebrews 1:1-4; 2:5-12, are all helpful.

In our homiletical application, the ideal family situation should be lifted up as the model for which to strive constantly and conscientiously, with the full realization and recognition that we must also be non-judgmental and compassionate regarding less-than-ideal situations and that every “real” situation is to some extent less-than-ideal.

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

These portions of the Epistle to the Hebrews, which is the longest sustained argument within the Newer Testament, depict the person and work of Jesus the Christ as perceived by the inspired writer who composed it. The portions of this document that have been selected for our use next Sunday may have been chosen because of the emphasis on family relationships in Hebrews 2:11b-12 and 2:13b-14. These portions of the document have a rather tenuous connection to the Genesis 2:18-24 and Mark 10:2-16 readings appointed for this occasion.

Psalm 8

Perhaps the reference in Psalm 8:2 to the mouths of babies and infants praising God and extolling the greatness of God with sounds that we as adults cannot understand is the reason that this beautiful psalm was selected for use on this occasion. God, who is said to have established the moon and the stars with God’s own fingers, has given to us responsibility to manage and to protect life on the earth. How majestic, how awesome, therefore, is the name of the Lord!

Job 1:1; 2:1-10

Job is presented in this literary drama as the ideal man, with supposedly the ideal wife and family, perhaps with the ideal friends. He and his faith in God will be stretched, however, to the limit when first his wife an later his friends test his patience. Perhaps the message is that within this life there is no place in which the ideal man and the ideal family can be seen. Nevertheless, we are to live and to keep our relationship of faith in God, regardless of what may happen to us.

Psalm 26

This psalm could be considered to be an expression of the thought of Job as he suffered physically and mentally and yet maintained his integrity and his faith in God. Are there men and women in the congregations in which we serve whose situations are similar in many ways to the situations of Job and of this psalmist as both are presented here?

Most of our attention both exegetically and homiletically in preparation for next Sunday should probably be focused on Amos 5:6-7, 10-15 and Mark 10:17-31. These two tests provide similar prescriptions for life. “If you wish to live,” they both say, “seek the Lord God, who is good, for the Lord God gives life!”

What are some of the implications of this for us here and now? An answer is clearly expressed. “Show respect for life, for marriage, for the property of other people, and for your parents,” they say, and beyond that, “Protect and provide for the poor. No longer exploit them. Instead, help them. Do more for them than is required by the civil legal system of the land.”

Let us examine the social and political situation in which each of these two texts originated, and then look at our own in preparation for our message for next Sunday.

Amos 5:6-7, 10-15

Socially, it is apparent that many of the rich and prosperous residents of the Northern Kingdom Israel were severely exploiting the poor people of that land economically. Government policy permitted those who were rich to expand their wealth greatly at the expense of the poor. Politically, there was little effective opposition to the policies and practices of the rich men and women who controlled the government and the economy of that land — except for the prophet Amos, a visitor from the Southern Kingdom Judah. After Amos had proclaimed the message that he was called and inspired by the Lord God to proclaim, the social, political, and religious leaders of the Northern Kingdom — through Amaziah, the priest at Bethel — “advised” Amos to flee away to his own land of Judah, to eat his bread there, to prophesy there if he wishes, but never again to prophesy at Bethel (Amos 7:10-15).

The text suggests that God had revealed to Amos that soon the Northern Kingdom would be destroyed. Perhaps Amos himself perceived this because of his awareness of the international political situation. Certainly by the time that the Amos traditions had been fully formed, the “house of Joseph” and its people had been utterly destroyed by the Assyrians and only a few refugees remained, most of whom were poor and many of whom had been sustained only by sheep and goat herding in barren areas. Within this social and political situation the message of the prophet Amos was expressed and eventually recorded.

Mark 10:17-31

Socially, politically, economically, and religiously during the lifetime of the Jesus of history the Jews in Galilee and in Judea were a heavily oppressed people within their own land. They had none of the autonomy that had been enjoyed by the wealthy people of the Northern Kingdom who had been condemned by Amos. The only Jews in Galilee and Judea during the time of Jesus who were relatively prosperous were those few who cooperated fully with the Roman occupational forces as priests managing the Temple, as tax collectors, and as business contractors. Even these lived in a precarious position, subject to the wishes and whims of the Romans and endangered by the actions of Jewish revolutionaries, the Zealot guerrilla forces, primarily teenage boys whose daring attacks on isolated Roman guards were always met by severe Roman reprisals. Under the conditions in which the Jews in Galilee and Judea lived during the time of Jesus, it is apparent from Mark 10:21 and similar texts that the Jesus of history advocated direct assistance to poor and destitute Jews by the few Jews such as the man depicted in this Mark 10:17-22 account who through full cooperation with the Roman occupational forces managed temporarily to have significant possessions.

Formgeschichte (form study) analysis of the Mark 10:17-22 account indicates that, as in the somewhat similar account in Mark 12:28-34, it is likely that much of the Jesus of history level is still discernible in this Mark 10:17-22 account, even though there had been additions and probably many deletions during the development of the account throughout the reminiscences of followers of Jesus level and the pre-Markan level to the Markan level of development. A careful reconstruction of a scenario during the Jesus of history level provides something similar to the following dialogue.

A fellow Jew, relatively prosperous because he “did business” with the Romans, after hearing Jesus express Jesus’ belief that soon only the Lord God would be ruling over them, approached Jesus and asked for Jesus’ opinion.

“My good man,” he said, “what do you think that I should do so that I may receive God’s gift of eternal life?”

“Why do you address me as your ‘good man’”? Jesus replied. “No one is truly good except God alone! You know the commandments: ‘Do not ever murder anyone, nor commit adultery, nor steal nor defraud anyone. Honor your father and your mother.’ “

And the man said to Jesus, “Sir. I have carefully observed all of these commandments from the time that I was young.”

Jesus looked at him with compassion and said, “One thing is lacking with you. Go! Sell what you have accumulated and give to the oppressed poor people in our land. Then you will have treasures in heaven!”

The man was dismayed about this reply and went away looking very sad and depressed, for he was a man who had accumulated many possessions.

Jesus looked at those who were with him and said, “How difficult it is for people who have accumulated wealth by cooperating fully with the oppressive Romans to let God and only God rule in their lives. I think that it must be easier for a camel loaded down with a heavy burden to go through the eye of a needle than for a man such as that, who has accumulated wealth by cooperating fully with the oppressive Romans and making it easier for the Romans to oppress the rest of us, to let only the Lord God and not the Romans rule that person’s life.”

Those around Jesus then said, “Who then will be saved?”

Jesus said to them, “People with their selfish attachments and limitations are not able to be saved, but God has no such limitations. All things are possible for God!”

The social, political, economic, and religious situations in which we live are different from those of the time of either Amos or Jesus, but probably in most instances closer to the situation at the time of Amos than at the time of Jesus. Much of what Amos apparently condemned could rather easily be condemned among us.

Each of us should analyze the social, political, economic, and religious situation in which we live and in which we are called to proclaim the message from God next Sunday. The prescriptions for life derived from these two texts remain valid today and will remain valid for all of us in this life. The implications of this for us also remain valid. The message that we will proclaim next Sunday will hardly be living, dynamic “Word of God” unless we apply it boldly and courageously to the particular social, political, economic, and religious situation in which we live and work. That is our prophetic call.

Hebrews 4:12-16

In the context of Amos 5:6-7, 10-15 and of Mark 10:17-31, the words of Hebrews 4:12-13 are incisive:

“For the word of God is living and active, sharper than the sharpest two-edged sword. It penetrates until it separates one’s psyche from one’s spirit. It slices into the places where one’s bones are joined together from the marrow in one’s bones. It exposes a person’s most intimate fantasies and speculations. No person whom God has created is invisible to God. All are stripped bare and exposed to God’s eyes, to God, to whom we are fully accountable.”

The writer continues in Hebrews 4:14-16 to assure the reader and the hearer that since we have Jesus as the “great, supreme priest, the Son of God,” we can “with courage and confidence approach God’s throne of grace, in order that we may receive mercy and find grace to rescue us and to sustain us in our hour of need.” That is certainly what we need.

Psalm 90:12-17

These concluding verses of Psalm 90, though not originally intended directly for us, certainly are applicable also to us as we “approach God’s throne of grace” with our people next Sunday.

Job 23:1-9, 16-17

Near despair, the character Job in this poignant drama searches for God, wanting to present his case, to reason with God in the presence of God, but cannot find God. For him, God is the Hidden God, like Martin Luther’s concept of deus absconditus. How can we help those for whom God is experienced only as the Hidden God? How can we maintain our faith in God when God is deus absconditus from us? We need more of the Job drama than these eleven verses to be touched by God here.

Psalm 22:1-15

The emotions expressed in this portion of Psalm 22, best known to us because the Markan writer and the Matthean redactors suggest that these were the emotions of the Markan Jesus and of the Matthean Jesus on the cross, are almost identical to the words of Job 23:1-9, 16-17.

If we use Job 23:1-9, 16-17 and Psalm 22:1-15 within our worship services next Sunday, we have the responsibility to explicate and interpret them. If these readings express the emotions of even one person within the worshiping congregations in which we serve, we must not fail to stand with them.