Jesus on divorce: Law or Grace?

Mark 10:2-16 is a text that has bedeviled people of faith for generations.  It seems to portray Jesus as a law giver.  Is he?  Perhaps a few observations regarding the conversation between Jesus and the Pharisees can give us a hint as to what is really going on here. 1) The Pharisees approach Jesus "to test him"(vs. 2).  This reveals that the question they ask Jesus they already know the answer to, and they expect Jesus to say something contrary to the law as they know it, (i.e.  they expect Jesus to say that divorce is not lawful when they believe it is); 2)  Jesus' question, "What did Moses command you?" is not the question they answered:  "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce."  (see Deut. 24:1) Jesus asked what was commanded; the Pharisees told Jesus, in effect, what they could get away with - a big difference; 3)  "Being joined" to a wife (vs. 7) means "to be faithfully devoted" to a wife, certainly a status implying care of wife as neighbor, (in faithfulness to the Great Commandment) not simply a legal arrangement.

(The following questions get at some of the issues for Law and Gospel preachers.  For a complete look at my thinking in this regard, purchase my guide to Law and Gospel preaching, Afflicting the Comfortable, Comforting the Afflicted, available from amazon.com.)

1.  How does the Word function in the text?  Jesus, the Word, is certainly functioning, at first glance, as lawgiver.  He is telling us what we may and may not do.  He is calling us to repentance for our "hardness of heart."  He is calling into question any practice that allows a person in authority to simply dismiss or discard another because they find them "objectionable." (Deut. 24:1)  But this same word, as overheard by the wives of the Pharisees, would have been pure gospel, for it would have revealed to them, "You are beloved of God.  You may not be cast aside.  You are as treasured in God's eyes as your husbands are."  So the audience will determine the function of the Word here.

2.  How is the Word not functioning in the text?  Again, it is the audience who will determine the function here.  If the audience is the Pharisees and those who identify with them, then there is no word of Gospel here, but only the call to repentance.  If the audience is understood to be the women who overheard this, then this is not a call to repentance but a word of pure Gospel.  There is no word of Law here for the vulnerable women who heard this exchange, only good news.

3.  With whom are you identifying in the text?  This text is unusual in that we could choose to identify with those who overhear the dialogue, or those involved in it.  As usual, we do well to steer clear of identifying with Jesus, so our choices are simply 1) the men (Pharisees and disciples), or 2) the women, who also could be identified as "the little ones" with whom Jesus interacts after this exchange.  It is telling that the disciples are consistent:  they understand neither Jesus' concern for vulnerable women, nor his concern for children.

4.  What, if any, call to obedience is there in this text?  The command to care for the "little ones" - any who are vulnerable - is clear here.

5.  Exegetical Work:  Several brief articles from the Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible are helpful in understanding this text.  First, the article on divorce (IDB, I, 859) reveals that "something objectionable" (NRSV) in Deut. 24:1 was very loosely defined.  Indeed there were two schools of thought as to what this meant:  "The Hillel school viewed this as a general term, and the Shammai school took it to mean adultery only."  A woman's inability to bear children was a common reason for divorce.  The article on marriage is also instructive (IDB, III, 278f).  Note the following:  "The husband has the power over his wife...She has rights and freedoms only within the context of this authority...  The husband may even revoke a vow that his wife made to God, if he sees fit. (Num 30:10-13)..." Finally, the article on woman is also revealing:  "The father received a bride price for his daughter and thus engaged in a contract with the prospective husband to make her sexuality available to him.  This transaction, however, was not a transfer of chattel property.  Rather it was the surrender of authority over a woman by one man to another." (IDB, IV, 864f)   All of this reveals why Jesus viewed wives as "the little ones" (i.e. vulnerable ones needing protection).  In his law-giving, Jesus was championing the cause of women who would be living in abject poverty, without support, if dismissed by their powerful husbands.

Blessings on your proclamation!

Stumbling towards Jesus

In Mark 9:38-50 Jesus gives us three related prohibitions:  Do nothing to hinder
1) Your own faith; 2) The faith of others, or 3) Those who give faith to others.  Instead we are to do everything we can to move forward in faith, encourage others in their faith, and support those who move others forward in their faith (even if it is not the faith we embrace.)

(Following are questions which try to get at the concerns of Law and Gospel preachers.  For a complete understanding of my method, check out my new book available on this website.)

1.  How does the Word function in the text?  It is clear that Jesus, the Word, is bringing a word of Law here.  He is showing his listeners that the stumbling blocks they create in the lives of others or allow to exist in their own lives are capable of leading them into lostness.  This is serious business.

2.  How is the Word not functioning in the text?  There is no word of Gospel here, no word which presents Christ or his mercy.  There is a hint of God's generosity in mention of the reward for those who give a cup of water to the little ones, but otherwise the Gospel word is absent.  The preacher might do well to remind listeners that God's grace comes to all, for all stumble.

3.  With whom are you identifying in the text? We have a number of choices:  Perhaps we are one of the little ones who has stumbled in faith, because of something another person has done or said.  If so, we are called to faith, knowing Christ does not wish us to be lost. Or maybe we are one who has caused the stumbling of others, and we are called to repentance.  Or perhaps we are one who is struggling with a hand, foot, or eye that needs to be cut off, so that we might enter life. Or we may even be a person who is struggling to believe that another kind of believer is being used by God to bring faith to others.  Many choices today.

4.  What, if any, call to obedience is there in this text?  The call to obedience - the call to live in response to God's mercy - is explicit in the call to give a cup of water to drink to those who bear the name of Christ.  Because God has ministered to us, so we must minister to others.

5.  What Law/Gospel couplet is suggested by this text?  All of the choices of persons mentioned in the text give us couplets to consider:  stumbling in faith/finding faith; hindering faith/encouraging faith; lost/found.

6.  Exegetical work:  On occasion Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament is very helpful in unpacking the meaning of a text because of its attention to certain terms in the NT.  This week is a prime example.  In his extended discussion of the word "skandalizo" Kittel shows why Jesus is so vehement in his prohibition of stumbling blocks.  "In the New Testament, as in the Old Testament, what is at issue in 'skandalizo' is their relation to God... The 'skandalizo' is an obstacle in coming to faith and a cause of going astray in it... It is a cause of both transgression and distraction." (TDNT, VII, 344)  "[Jesus] realizes that a 'skandalon', a cause of unbelief, attaches to His words and deeds, and that this cannot be avoided...  The primary meaning is 'deep religious offence' at the preaching of Jesus, and this both causes and includes denial and rejection of Jesus... "Skandalizo means to cause loss of faith, to rob of eternal salvation." (p. 350-351)

7.  Insights from the pioneers of the New Homiletic?   Lowry's injunction to move our listeners from disequilibrium to equilibrium is appropos here since we are called from being causes of stumbling to recognizing our own need of grace to giving the little ones a cup of water.  The whole story is here: law leading to repentance, gospel leading to faith, mercy leading to obedience.

Blessings on your proclamation!

Loving Tempters

Peter's rebuke of Jesus, and Jesus' subsequent rebuke of Peter in Mark 8:27-38, the Gospel appointed for the 16th Sunday after Pentecost, is certainly one of the most well-known scenes in the New Testament.  After all, what more memorable encounter is there than one in which Jesus calls one of his closest disciples "Satan"?  What is often overlooked, yet likely true, is that what Peter did, he did out of concern for Jesus.  He did not even imagine that the only begotten Son of God would have to endure the Cross.  We continue to struggle with this today.

(The following sample questions were developed as a way of trying to get at some of the central questions Law and Gospel preachers must consider.  For a more complete look at this method, check out my book, available on this website.)

1.  How does the Word function in the text?  The Word, Jesus, is questioning, rebuking, and exhorting.  All of these are different functions.  The summary rebuke is a strong word of Law: "You are setting your mind not on divine things, but on human things."  This shows clearly the sinner's need of repentance.  This Word, as Luther would say, "breaks the rock in pieces."  It exposes are unwillingness to go the way of the Cross, and our desire to have a discipleship that involves little sacrifice and little denial, yet a full measure of Christ's glory.

2. How is the Word not functioning in the text?  There is no gospel word here.  There is no word of comfort, forgiveness, or promise.  This word is all rebuke and exhortation.  As the preacher works with this text, a clear word of gospel will need to be given, but it will come from outside this text.

3.  With whom are you identifying in the text?  Clearly our place is with Peter, the crowd, and the disciples.  We are those who do not want to believe that the way of the Cross is the way of life.  We continually reject this way, and try to figure out ways to make the way of Glory the way to life.  We are those who want to save our lives now and in the age to come.

4.  What, if any, call to obedience is there in this text?  The denial of self, taking up of our cross, and following, are all response to God's work.  They are not prerequisite to God's work, but a faithful response to God's work.  We only dare take up our cross once faith in God's power and love has been firmly planted in our heart.

5.  What Law/Gospel couplets are suggested by this text?  The text itself provides us with a number of couplets that work well:  setting one's mind on human things/setting one's mind on divine things; losing life/saving life; refusing the cross/ taking up the cross.

6.  Exegetical work:  If we compare the Synoptic accounts of this scene we note that only Mark includes the comment in vs. 32, "He said all this quite openly."  Of course, this is in stark contrast to Mark's comment following Peter's Messianic confession:  "And he sternly ordered them not to tell anyone about him."  Mark wants to make it clear that, while Jesus was not keen on people hearing about his Messiahship, he was very interested in them understanding that "the Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again."  Eugene Boring, in his commentary (The NT Library series), suggests that Isaiah 55:8-9 may be in the background here:  "God's 'thoughts,' God's 'way of thinking' is different from human thinking." (242)  Lamar Williamson, in his commentary (Interpretation) suggests that this scene is the "theological fulcrum" of Mark's gospel:  "The question of Jesus' identity is here answered by Peter's confession that he is the Christ (v.29), and immediately the theological focus shifts to what it means for Jesus to be Christ (v. 31) and for his followers to be Christians (v. 34), themes which will dominate the remainder of the Gospel." (150)  It is also interesting to note what Kittel brings up in his discussion of the word 'rebuke'.  He notes that according to Midrash on Gen 22:7 Satan rebukes Abraham and argues that he should spare Isaac, his only Son. (TDNT, II, 625)  Interesting.

7.  How does the Crossings Community model work with this text?  Cathy Lessmann, in her work on this text, archived under Gospel B 2012 for Pentecost 16, presents an interesting model.  She highlights Peter's mistaken notion of Jesus' role in the world, as a bringer of peace and justice, and notes how this also leads us away from God's peace and justice. She suggests that we could also substitute "a bringer of morality" as a mistaken notion of Jesus' role and be led astray as well.  All this can be found at crossings.org/text study.

Blessings on your proclamation!

Gospel Irrespressible

Mark 7:24-37, the gospel text appointed for the 15th Sunday after Pentecost, is a unique text.  In this text there are all sorts of hints that Jesus wants to hide his presence and his miracles, and furthermore, that he is healing only reluctantly.  Of course, we are well acquainted with the so-called Markan secret, whereby Jesus regularly orders his followers to "tell no one" of the extraordinary events which surround him, yet here Mark shows us how irrepressible this gospel word is.  In spite of himself, Jesus agrees to heal the Syrophonecian woman's daughter and the deaf man with the impediment of speech.  Could it be that God's healing grace is so out-of-control that not even Jesus can stop it?  Hm...  Now there's something to ponder.

(The following questions are taken from my book on Law and Gospel preaching, Afflicting the Comfortable, Comforting the Afflicted.  If you find these questions helpful, I recommend you purchase the book and become fully acquainted with the method.)

1. How does the Word function in the text?  Jesus, the Word, is functioning to heal, albeit reluctantly.  In the case of the Greek/Syrophonecian woman (Matthew has her as a Canaanite), Jesus initially refuses her, but later agrees to exorcise the demon from her daugher, although the way Mark tells it, Jesus simply reports to the woman that the healing is accomplished; he doesn't seem to have anything at all to do with it.  Likewise, in the healing of the deaf man Jesus shows signs of exasperation.  In verse 34 we are told that Jesus "sighed"; this might be better translated "groaned".  It is almost as if Jesus was saying, "Ok, let's get this over with."  It is noteworthy that both of these healed ones are from pagan lands.  It's almost as if Jesus is being forced to kneel before the healing will of God, so he heals in spite of himself. Curious, to say the least!

2.  How is the Word not functioning in the text?  There is no word of Law that points to our need for Jesus, except what could be gathered metaphorically, that we are all filled with "demons," and "dumb and deaf" in some regard.  We are all in need of exorcism and healing - release from our sins.

3.  With whom are you identifying in the text?  In this text we have several options:  we could identify with those who bring others to Jesus, seeking healing for them, or we could identify with those needing healing.  In both scenes we have the infirmed who were brought to Jesus by others.

4.  What, if any, call to obedience is there in this text?  Perhaps the call to obedience ("Follow me!") is the call to bring others to Jesus.   Perhaps we should take a clue from these compassionate advocates and spend time imploring Jesus that he provide healing and release for others.

5.  What Law/Gospel couplet is suggested by this text?  In my book (pg. 29) I outline Herman Stuempfle's classic law/gospel couplets.  Despair/hope and alienation/reconciliation are several of his favorite pairings.  They might provide fodder for thought, if we assume the place of the infirmed.

6.  Exegetical work:  Kurt Aland's seminal work, Synopsis of the Four Gospels, often opens up gates to understanding that would otherwise have remained closed to us.  If we look at these stories side-by-side with their Matthean parallel (Mt. 15:21-31) we see a number of interesting details:  1) Only Matthew and Mark report these stories; 2) Mark, alone includes the detail that "[Jesus] entered a house and did not want anyone to know he was there.  Yet he could not escape notice..." (vs. 24) and after the second miracle, "Jesus ordered them to tell no one: but the more he ordered them, the more zealously they proclaimed it." (vs. 36).  Mark seems eager to bear witness to the irrespressible joy that the Word brings. Finally, we note in the parallel stories that Mark provides an abundance of detail in the healing of a single deaf/dumb man, while Matthew only says that great crowds brought many who were in need of healing and Jesus healed them.  Mark clearly wants us to know that this particular man was healed in this particular way.  It would be a frutiful exercise to inquire why this is.

Blessings on your proclamation!

Playing Church

Jesus' words to the Pharisees and scribes in the gospel lesson appointed for Pentecost 14 from the seventh chapter of Mark are unsparing in their criticism:  "Isaiah prophesied rightly about you hypocrites, as it is written, 'This people honours me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.'" There can hardly be a more condemnatory word than this aimed at worshipping folk, and we do well to heed the warning, lest we too find ourselves merely "acting" in our discipleship.

(The following questions try to get at some of the fundamental concerns of a preacher planning to preach a Law & Gospel sermon.  For a complete method on this genre, my book, Afflicting the Comfortable, Comforting the Afflicted, may be purchased from Amazon or Wipf & Stock Co.)

1.  How does the Word function in this text?  Jesus is in full accusatory mode in this text.  His words are words of Law.  They show clearly our need of forgiveness and time for amendment of life. He even lists the sins of which he speaks:  "fornication, theft, murder, adultery, envy, slander, pride, and folly.

2.  How is the Word not functioning in the text?  There is no Gospel word in this text - no word that clearly says, "Here is Christ, dying for you."  The preacher will need to look elsewhere for this word of grace.

3.  With whom are you identifying in the text?  It is supremely important that the preacher identify with the Pharisees and scribes, not Jesus, in this text.  It may be tempting for the preacher to assume that since Jesus is scolding the leaders before him that we preachers now have license to scold those before us.  Not so!  It is our job to hear this difficult word and then, alongside our listeners, share in the humbling experience of having our hypocrisy exposed before God.

4.  What, if any, call to obedience is there in this text?  The call to obedience, the word that says, "Follow me," is not present here.  It could perhaps be argued that the call to obedience is implicitly present as Christ exhorts us to be people who not only honor him with our lips, but also have hearts that are near to him.

5.  What Law/Gospel couplet  is suggested by this text?  It is easy to imagine quite a number of couplets that get at the heart of this text:  condemned/forgiven, vain worship/true worship, defiled/cleansed.

6.  Exegetical clues:  I often find that Kittel's exhaustive work, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, is a great source for insights around Greek terms.  So with today's reading.  The article discussing the term for hypocrites (hypocrinomai) (Vol. VIII) is excellent. Kittel writes, "[The scribes and Pharisees] claim to be declaring God's will, but in truth they are only trying to assert the 'traditions of humans'...[There is] a jarring contradiction between what they say and what they do, between the outward appearance and the inward lack of righteousness...  Failure to do God's will is concealed behind the pious appearance of outward conduct...  The proportions of what is commanded are also distorted - the least significant commandment of pious action being put to the forefront and the 'weightier matters of the law' being neglected."  In volume III, Kittel also writes a helpful article on the "heart" (kardia).  He says, "Thus 'kardia' comes to stand for the whole of the inner being of man in contrast to his external side, the 'prosopon' (appearance)...  Thus the heart is supremely the one centre in man to which God turns, in which religious life is rooted, which determines moral conduct."

7.  How does the Crossings Community model work with this text?  At crossings.org, archived by lectionary text, you can find any number of examples on this text.  Here is an approach one might use:  Diagnosis 1:  We hold fast to "things handed down" to us.  D2:  We somehow trust our "handed down" traditions more than God's commandment to love God and neighbor.  D3:  We are lost in sin because we hold on to falsehood and abandon God's commandment. Sin holds us.  Prognosis 4: Christ becomes sin for us, to release us from what holds us.  Christ holds us.  P5:  Released from the power of sin, we begin to trust God's way.  P6:  We now hold fast to Christ's commands, loving God and neighbor.

Blessings on your proclamation!

Offended at the Bread of Life

The end of the bread of life texts, John 6:56-69, is the appointed Gospel lesson for the 13th Sunday after Pentecost.  The penultimate line in the text states what John has hinted at all along - the bread of life and the "words of eternal life" are one and the same.  As God said to the Israelites, "[God] humbled you by letting you hunger, then by feeding you with manna, ...in order to make you understand that one does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord." (Deuteronomy 8:3)

(The following questions are meant to bring to mind some of the issues at stake for Law and Gospel preachers.  A full description of this method can be found in my book, Afflicting the Comfortable, Comforting the Afflicted, available on amazon.com.)

1.  How does the Word function in the text?  The text begins in a very hopeful way.  Jesus gives us himself, promising that "whoever eats me will live because of me," (vs. 57) and "the one who eats this bread will live for ever." (vs. 58)  These are gospel words, meant to assure us that life comes through Jesus.  The second half of the text, however, is less hopeful, as John tells us of the disciples' complaint at these words.  Jesus responds with a word of law: "It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is useless." (vs. 63)  This phrase unmasks all our attempts at self-sufficiency, we who are decidedly fleshly.   We might want to insist that we can have life apart from Christ or his word, but Jesus will have none of it.

2.  How is the word not functioning in the text?  Once again, as we have seen for the entirety of John 6, there is no call to obedience, no word from Christ which says, "Follow me."  Indeed the only command we have in this entire chapter is repeated over and over:  Believe.  This is a call to faith, not a call to follow Jesus.

3.  With whom are you identifying in the text?  We are certainly meant to identify with the disciples.  Their offense in verse 60 is our offense: "This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?"  We, like the disciples, resist the notion that our life is dependent on Christ or the Word.  We want to claim that our life has come from and is sustained by ourselves.

4.  What Law/Gospel couplet is suggested by the text?  Given Jesus' statement regarding the spirit giving life, it might be interesting to the play with flesh/spirit, death/life, or non-faith/faith.  Any of those couplets might lead us to interesting strategies for preaching this text.

5.  Exegetical insights:  The Greek text enrichs our understanding in this passage by providing us hints to the multiple meanings that John might have had in mind as he wrote.  Several examples:  In verse 60 when the disciples say, "This teaching is difficult," we see that the word for teaching is our old friend, LOGOS.  Recalling John 1 we know that Jesus is called the logos, so clearly John is saying that it is more than the mere teaching that is difficult - Jesus himself, the Word made flesh, is difficult.  Another example: In verse 61, Jesus asks, "Does this offend you?"  The word "offend" is SKANDOLIZOMAI, a well-known word, that means to cause to stumble, particularly in matters of faith.  So Jesus is asking, "Does this teaching cause you to stumble in faith? Do I cause you to stumble in faith?"  Stumbling in faith is more than a mere offense to our sensibilities.  Finally, in verse 66 we read that "many of his disciples turned back and no longer went about with him."  The phrase translated "turned back," means literally that they returned to "the things they had left behind." This suggests that what we have here is a test of loyalty, not merely a reaction to a difficult saying. The twelve, however, stay the course, for they realize that Jesus has "the words of eternal life."

6.  How does the Crossings Community model work with this text?  It would be well worth the time to look at Steven Kuhl's analysis of this text archived under 2012 Year B Gospel, 13th Sunday after Pentecost, at crossings.org/text study.  Kuhl takes up the whole business of our offense at these statements of Jesus and shows how, allowed to fester, it leads to alienation from God.

7.  Insights from the pioneers of the New Homiletic?  Craddock's insight that we must help the listeners experience the text is a particular challenge for the preacher here, because it entails offending our listeners.  If Jesus' words offended his listeners, then we too, as preachers, must do the same.

Blessings on your proclamation!

Murmurings new and old

The third week of the "bread" texts is John 6:35, 41-51.  This is appointed for the 11th week after Pentecost in the year of Mark.  Jesus is now expanding on his claim to be the bread of life.  Now we are promised that this bread not only satisfies all our hunger,  but it also grants eternal life.  Finally, Jesus announces that "the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh."  This text is an excellent chance to preach a Word and Sacrament sermon, since both are alluded to here.

(The following questions are from my basic method on Law and Gospel preaching.  The entire method is laid out in my book, Afflicting the Comfortable, Comforting the Afflicted.  These questions try to get at some of the foundational questions for Law and Gospel preachers.)

1. How does the Word function in the text?  The Word, Jesus, both promises and rebukes in this text.  In this way, the Word is functioning as both law and gospel.  By saying to his listeners, "Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died," Jesus is reminding his listeners that "the food that perishes" (vs.27) will never sustain them.  He is reminding them of their need for Himself, the bread come down from heaven.  By announcing that "I am the living bread that came down from heaven.  Whoever eats of this bread will live forever," Jesus is giving them Himself.  He is proclaiming gospel.  These two functions - to point to the inadequacies of perishable 'bread', and to point to the adequacy of Christ - will be our two main tasks in the sermon.

2.  How is the Word not functioning in the text? The third function of the Word in a text is the call to obedience - a word that says, "Follow me."  There is no such word here.  Jesus is calling us to faith, but beyond that we have no guidance.  There are many other texts we can use that will help us with this, notably the second lesson appointed for the day - Ephesians 4:25-32 - which speaks about building up one another.  One strategy we can employ might be to announce how Christ feeds us - builds us up - and in turn, we are called to build up others.

3.  With whom are you identifying in the text?  It is very important to identify with the Jews in the text - those that are offended by Jesus' word.  This text gives us a good chance to ponder how offensive Jesus' words are to us at times, and to consider how we, as preachers, might risk offending our listeners in order to bring them the bread of life.

4.  What Law/Gospel couplet is suggested by this text?  Some of the same ones we have used earlier in this 'bread' series will do:  hungry/fed, thirsty/satisfied.  We might also think about other couplets such as complaining/ believing, manna/bread of heaven, dying/eternal life.

5.  Exegetical insights:  I find Raymond Brown's classic commentary, The Gospel According to John I-XII, very helpful with this text.  Brown points out that the word translated "complain" in verse 41 is the same word as the Septuagint uses for the murmuring of the Israelites in Exodus 14.  This is a hint that John is drawing on ancient story and memory here in speaking of murmuring, manna, and bread from heaven.  These people, who resist Jesus, are God's people. They are like the Israelites of old, pushing back against God's demands and God's provision.  Any study we do of the stories of the Israelites' murmurings and wanderings in the wilderness will likely bear much fruit in unearthing the meaning of John's artful language in this text.

 6. How does the Crossings Community model work with this text?  Bill White has written an excellent example of the model for this text archived at crossings.org/text study under 2012 Year B Gospel for the 11th Sunday after Pentecost.  I recommend taking a look at it.

Blessings on your proclamation!