Shape Divider - Style fan_opacity
LENT
Season Intro - Beginning on Ash Wednesday (February 26th in 2020) and ending the Saturday before Palm Sunday (April 4th), Lent is a season of reflection and preparation before the celebrations of Easter. The appointed Old Testament lessons and Psalms lay out the narrative of the creation and fall, outlining humanity's need for a savior as well as God's promise of a coming Messiah through the prophecies. In the Epistle and Gospel lessons, we follow Christ's ministry and journey to the cross, recognizing that he is the fulfillment of God’s promise.
1st Sunday of Lent A Psalm |
1st Sunday of Lent A Epistle |
1st Sunday of Lent A Gospel |
|
2nd Sunday of Lent A Old Testament |
2nd Sunday of Lent A Psalm |
2nd Sunday of Lent A Epistle |
2nd Sunday of Lent A Gospel |
3rd Sunday of Lent A Old Testament |
3rd Sunday of Lent A Psalm |
3rd Sunday of Lent A Epistle |
3rd Sunday of Lent A Gospel |
4th Sunday of Lent A Old Testament |
4th Sunday of Lent A Psalm |
4th Sunday of Lent |
|
First Sunday in Lent
Old Testament Lesson
Gen 2:4-9, 15-17, 25-3:7
Genesis opens with two very different accounts of creation. For the modern reader, this raises questions. We expect a text like Genesis to adhere to our contemporary paradigms for what counts as a historical record. We like names, dates, and places. And we expect that both accounts of creation would line up in their details.
However, in the ancient world stories like this were not primarily viewed as historical documents but accounts about that nation’s or religion’s origins. They explained how the world was structured. What was the relationship between God, man, and creation?
In this way, chapter one of Genesis is telling us one thing about the order and structure of creation and chapter shifts to a micro-focus on God and humanity’s structured relationship. In particular Genesis chapter 1 that God is totally other, he created everything and is not dependent on creation. Not only is God the creator but he structured it as well, ordering light from dark, land from the waters, etc. And finally, from a biblical perspective, man is the concluding mark to creation.
In verse 4 of chapter 2, the author turns from the macro view of creation to a micro view that focuses on the creation of Adam.
2:4
This verse opens with a narrative break from the account given in 1:1-2:3. “This is the account of…” (NET) The Hebrew phrase tOdVlOw;t hR;lEa (}elle toleédot) can be translated as the NET Bible does. Or it can convey the idea of “these are the generations of…” The Greek translation of Genesis 2:4 reads along the lines of “this is the book of the creation (genesis) of …” (Αὕτη ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως…). This is a stylistic device used throughout the book of Genesis to single that we are about to enter a new story or give the genealogy of one of the patriarchs (see: Gen. 5:1, 6:9, 11:27, 25:12, and 37:2). It is used to let the reader know that the story is now going to shift. The author is not going to focus on the creation of the world. Instead, the story is going to shift now and trace the trajectory of mankind and creation.
The subject matter of this “account” is described in a beautiful line of Hebrew poetry. This is even apparent in most English translations:
These are the generations …
of the heavens
and the earth
when they were created,
in the day that the LORD God made
the earth
and the heavens (ESV)
You have a repetition of heaven and earth with the order reversed in the second stanza. This all revolves around two verbs that summarize Genesis chapter 1, “they were created” and “God made.”
2:5
This verse opens with two negative clauses: “no shrub of the field…”, and “no cultivated plants.” These two clauses are followed by two additional clauses that explain them. There were no shrubs because God had not caused it to rain. There were cultivated plants because there was no man to cultivate the soil. The final clause, “there was no man to cultivate the ground” foreshadows the tragedy of this story. Because of Adam and Eve’s disobedience, their relationship to the ground will be broken (3:17-19) and they will be cast out of the garden (Gen 3:23).
2:6
The Hebrew text contains a clever wordplay. The word for “ground; fertile soil” is hDmDda (}adamah). It is from that soil that the man, MDdDa (}adam) will be made.
The fertility of the Eden is seen in 2:6 &7. Water would well up from the earth and water all the surface of the fertile soil, hDmDda (}adamah). It is from this fertile soil that Adam would be made.
2:7
In verse 7 God fashions or forms man (MDdDa, }adam) from the ground (hDmDda, }adamah)
“To form” or “to fashion,” is used in relation to someone who is making or designing something. In Jeremiah 18:2-4 the same verb is used to talk about a potter ‘forming’ a pot.
This was a common concept found in other religious traditions in the ancient Near East. Egyptian engravings depict one of their gods making little human figurines on a potter’s wheel. These figurines were passed to another deity who gave them life. In Babylonian creation stories, mankind was fashioned from clay, and like the biblical account, mankind returned to clay when they died.
The account of human life begins in this verse with God breathing into Adam’s nostrils. Biblically, life begins with the first breath (see Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones Ez. 37:1-10) and ends when that person breathes their last (the expire, Luke 23:46). It is a metonymy. To ‘breathe’ is part of what it means to be alive, a distinct aspect to it.
In both the Old and New Testaments the words (רוּחַ, ruaḥ in Hebrew and πνεῦμα, pneuma in Greek) are used to refer to wind, breath, and spirit (both human and divine).
At first glance, the description of the creation of man here is quite different from that of chapter 1. Man was made “from the ground” rather than “in the image of God” as in chapter 1. The contribution that chapter 2 makes to the creation of mankind is that even though we are made in God’s image we are still one of God’s creations. We are made from the soil.
2:8
The description of the “garden” in chapter two receives a great deal of space in the narrative. “Garden” refers to an enclosed garden, probably often an orchard. The word Eden means a “plain” in Hebrew.
However, when the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek (the LXX) the word used for “garden” is para¿deisoß (paradisos) where we get “paradise” in English. It evokes a location or garden of idyllic delight and rest. This then sets up a trajectory of interpretation regarding the garden of Eden with an image of God’s paradise on Earth. Revelation 2:7 represents the full development of that line of thought that arose from how the Hebrew phrase here was translated into Greek.
It is interesting to note that the “garden” is planted ‘in’ Eden, it is not Eden.
All too often, these two ideas are conflated together. Eden was the region where the garden was located.
2:9
The garden is primarily described in terms of the trees within it. The picture being painted is that this is a fertile, enclosed orchard with a diversity of fruit trees within it. “Pleasing to look at…and good for food” foreshadows the temptation in chapter 3.
The phrase “knowledge of good and evil” has been debated almost since the time Genesis was written. It can refer to wisdom, the ability to discern between good and evil, or moral capacity.
For a thorough discussion of this verse and all the different ways it has been interpreted see: Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 in Word Biblical Commentary (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1987) 1:62–64.
2:15
In 2:8 we were told that God ‘put’ man in the garden and this is repeated here.
“Care and maintain it” literally, “to work/serve it and to preserve/protect it.” Adam’s task was to care for and maintain the garden. This sets up a contrast with the consequences of the fall when Adam is condemned to cultivate the soil which will only yield its produce with great suffering on Adam’s part (3:17-18).
2:16
Verse 16 is incredibly significant within the larger biblical narrative. This is the very first ‘command’ (Heb. hDwDx, tsavah, “to command”) in the Bible. It sets up the entire trajectory of Genesis-Deuteronomy. Man’s responsibility is to respond in a faithful manner to keep God’s commands.
2:17
“In the day that you eat of it you will surely die” sets up the serpent’s temptation of Eve, “You will not surely die.” (3:4) The fact that Adam and Eve do not physically die when they eat from this tree forces the reader to question what exactly did God mean by this warning. On the one hand, “death” implies separation from God. On the other hand, if this is a reference to physical death then “you will surely die” is speaking about human mortality.
2:25
The idea of “naked,” is introduced here and will play a more central role in the fall of man in the next chapter. In chapter 2, “nakedness” implies innocence and a lack of shame. This is emphasized in the next clause “they were not ashamed.” After Adam and Eve eat from the tree their nakedness will take on the connotations of shame, guilt, and vulnerability.
3:1
Serpents got a bad rap in the ancient world. Most of the different cultures depicted evil beings as serpents. A serpent robbed Gilgamesh of his immorality by eating a special plant Gilgamesh had retrieved from the depths of the ocean. For a good article that summarizes how ‘serpents’ are portrayed and used within the Bible see: “Serpent” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, eds. Leland Ryken, James C. Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman III(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1998).
In Genesis 3, a shrewd serpent approached Eve and asked, “Is it really true God said …” He begins his temptation with a question. “Did God really say…”
This is an interesting point in the narrative. In 2:16-17 God gave this command to Adam before Eve was created. So how she learn about this? It highlights a gap in the narrative. While we are not told if she knew this command it requires that we fill in some details in the story. Perhaps Adam relayed this command to her. How accurately did he tell her?
3:4-5
“Surely you will not die” — why? Because, according to the serpent, God knows that you will now possess divine understanding. This alludes back to God’s command to Adam in 2:17. The serpent is using the ambiguity in how that command is phrased in 2:17 as a way to raise questions in Eve’s mind. It raises questions about the benevolence of God. Is God holding something back from you Eve?
3:6
Eve’s temptation culminates in a rapid description of her temptation. She sees that the fruit of this tree was good. This fruit was attractive or desirable. That this fruit not only looked good but it could make one wise. She took some of the fruit. And she ate.
The verb “ate” goes back to God’s command in chapter 2. It signals the climax of Eve’s temptation and the turn toward Adam’s fall. It is also at the heart of God’s questioning of Adam and Eve, “Did you eat from the tree?”
Immediately after Eve violates God’s command she gave some to Adam. The Hebrew places these two verbs adjacent to each other, “she ate and she gave…”
Eve was deceived in her interaction with the serpent. Adam, on the other hand, is portrayed as just eating the fruit. The authors of the New Testament interpret this story in a manner that placed the blame for the fall of mankind on Adam. Eve was deceived but Adam sinned.
3:7
There is an element of humor in this verse. Once they eat the fruit their eyes are opened. This is the first time that they seem to realize that they are naked. “Sheesh Adam, put something on!” They are naked but no longer unashamed. They then make some sort of covering out of fig leaves. Not only is this a rather poor attempt to remedy their nakedness but it betrays just how ignorant and helpless they were at this point in time. They didn’t even know how to clothe themselves and were about to be cast out of God’s garden into a fallen world.
Old Testament Lesson
Gen 2:4-9, 15-17, 25-3:7
Genesis opens with two very different accounts of creation. For the modern reader, this raises questions. We expect a text like Genesis to adhere to our contemporary paradigms for what counts as a historical record. We like names, dates, and places. And we expect that both accounts of creation would line up in their details.
However, in the ancient world stories like this were not primarily viewed as historical documents but accounts about that nation’s or religion’s origins. They explained how the world was structured. What was the relationship between God, man, and creation?
In this way, chapter one of Genesis is telling us one thing about the order and structure of creation and chapter shifts to a micro-focus on God and humanity’s structured relationship. In particular Genesis chapter 1 that God is totally other, he created everything and is not dependent on creation. Not only is God the creator but he structured it as well, ordering light from dark, land from the waters, etc. And finally, from a biblical perspective, man is the concluding mark to creation.
In verse 4 of chapter 2, the author turns from the macro view of creation to a micro view that focuses on the creation of Adam.
2:4
This verse opens with a narrative break from the account given in 1:1-2:3. “This is the account of…” (NET) The Hebrew phrase tOdVlOw;t hR;lEa (}elle toleédot) can be translated as the NET Bible does. Or it can convey the idea of “these are the generations of…” The Greek translation of Genesis 2:4 reads along the lines of “this is the book of the creation (genesis) of …” (Αὕτη ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως…). This is a stylistic device used throughout the book of Genesis to single that we are about to enter a new story or give the genealogy of one of the patriarchs (see: Gen. 5:1, 6:9, 11:27, 25:12, and 37:2). It is used to let the reader know that the story is now going to shift. The author is not going to focus on the creation of the world. Instead, the story is going to shift now and trace the trajectory of mankind and creation.
The subject matter of this “account” is described in a beautiful line of Hebrew poetry. This is even apparent in most English translations:
These are the generations …
of the heavens
and the earth
when they were created,
in the day that the LORD God made
the earth
and the heavens (ESV)
You have a repetition of heaven and earth with the order reversed in the second stanza. This all revolves around two verbs that summarize Genesis chapter 1, “they were created” and “God made.”
2:5
This verse opens with two negative clauses: “no shrub of the field…”, and “no cultivated plants.” These two clauses are followed by two additional clauses that explain them. There were no shrubs because God had not caused it to rain. There were cultivated plants because there was no man to cultivate the soil. The final clause, “there was no man to cultivate the ground” foreshadows the tragedy of this story. Because of Adam and Eve’s disobedience, their relationship to the ground will be broken (3:17-19) and they will be cast out of the garden (Gen 3:23).
2:6
The Hebrew text contains a clever wordplay. The word for “ground; fertile soil” is hDmDda (}adamah). It is from that soil that the man, MDdDa (}adam) will be made.
The fertility of the Eden is seen in 2:6 &7. Water would well up from the earth and water all the surface of the fertile soil, hDmDda (}adamah). It is from this fertile soil that Adam would be made.
2:7
In verse 7 God fashions or forms man (MDdDa, }adam) from the ground (hDmDda, }adamah)
“To form” or “to fashion,” is used in relation to someone who is making or designing something. In Jeremiah 18:2-4 the same verb is used to talk about a potter ‘forming’ a pot.
This was a common concept found in other religious traditions in the ancient Near East. Egyptian engravings depict one of their gods making little human figurines on a potter’s wheel. These figurines were passed to another deity who gave them life. In Babylonian creation stories, mankind was fashioned from clay, and like the biblical account, mankind returned to clay when they died.
The account of human life begins in this verse with God breathing into Adam’s nostrils. Biblically, life begins with the first breath (see Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones Ez. 37:1-10) and ends when that person breathes their last (the expire, Luke 23:46). It is a metonymy. To ‘breathe’ is part of what it means to be alive, a distinct aspect to it.
In both the Old and New Testaments the words (רוּחַ, ruaḥ in Hebrew and πνεῦμα, pneuma in Greek) are used to refer to wind, breath, and spirit (both human and divine).
At first glance, the description of the creation of man here is quite different from that of chapter 1. Man was made “from the ground” rather than “in the image of God” as in chapter 1. The contribution that chapter 2 makes to the creation of mankind is that even though we are made in God’s image we are still one of God’s creations. We are made from the soil.
2:8
The description of the “garden” in chapter two receives a great deal of space in the narrative. “Garden” refers to an enclosed garden, probably often an orchard. The word Eden means a “plain” in Hebrew.
However, when the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek (the LXX) the word used for “garden” is para¿deisoß (paradisos) where we get “paradise” in English. It evokes a location or garden of idyllic delight and rest. This then sets up a trajectory of interpretation regarding the garden of Eden with an image of God’s paradise on Earth. Revelation 2:7 represents the full development of that line of thought that arose from how the Hebrew phrase here was translated into Greek.
It is interesting to note that the “garden” is planted ‘in’ Eden, it is not Eden.
All too often, these two ideas are conflated together. Eden was the region where the garden was located.
2:9
The garden is primarily described in terms of the trees within it. The picture being painted is that this is a fertile, enclosed orchard with a diversity of fruit trees within it. “Pleasing to look at…and good for food” foreshadows the temptation in chapter 3.
The phrase “knowledge of good and evil” has been debated almost since the time Genesis was written. It can refer to wisdom, the ability to discern between good and evil, or moral capacity.
For a thorough discussion of this verse and all the different ways it has been interpreted see: Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 in Word Biblical Commentary (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1987) 1:62–64.
2:15
In 2:8 we were told that God ‘put’ man in the garden and this is repeated here.
“Care and maintain it” literally, “to work/serve it and to preserve/protect it.” Adam’s task was to care for and maintain the garden. This sets up a contrast with the consequences of the fall when Adam is condemned to cultivate the soil which will only yield its produce with great suffering on Adam’s part (3:17-18).
2:16
Verse 16 is incredibly significant within the larger biblical narrative. This is the very first ‘command’ (Heb. hDwDx, tsavah, “to command”) in the Bible. It sets up the entire trajectory of Genesis-Deuteronomy. Man’s responsibility is to respond in a faithful manner to keep God’s commands.
2:17
“In the day that you eat of it you will surely die” sets up the serpent’s temptation of Eve, “You will not surely die.” (3:4) The fact that Adam and Eve do not physically die when they eat from this tree forces the reader to question what exactly did God mean by this warning. On the one hand, “death” implies separation from God. On the other hand, if this is a reference to physical death then “you will surely die” is speaking about human mortality.
2:25
The idea of “naked,” is introduced here and will play a more central role in the fall of man in the next chapter. In chapter 2, “nakedness” implies innocence and a lack of shame. This is emphasized in the next clause “they were not ashamed.” After Adam and Eve eat from the tree their nakedness will take on the connotations of shame, guilt, and vulnerability.
3:1
Serpents got a bad rap in the ancient world. Most of the different cultures depicted evil beings as serpents. A serpent robbed Gilgamesh of his immorality by eating a special plant Gilgamesh had retrieved from the depths of the ocean. For a good article that summarizes how ‘serpents’ are portrayed and used within the Bible see: “Serpent” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, eds. Leland Ryken, James C. Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman III(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1998).
In Genesis 3, a shrewd serpent approached Eve and asked, “Is it really true God said …” He begins his temptation with a question. “Did God really say…”
This is an interesting point in the narrative. In 2:16-17 God gave this command to Adam before Eve was created. So how she learn about this? It highlights a gap in the narrative. While we are not told if she knew this command it requires that we fill in some details in the story. Perhaps Adam relayed this command to her. How accurately did he tell her?
3:4-5
“Surely you will not die” — why? Because, according to the serpent, God knows that you will now possess divine understanding. This alludes back to God’s command to Adam in 2:17. The serpent is using the ambiguity in how that command is phrased in 2:17 as a way to raise questions in Eve’s mind. It raises questions about the benevolence of God. Is God holding something back from you Eve?
3:6
Eve’s temptation culminates in a rapid description of her temptation. She sees that the fruit of this tree was good. This fruit was attractive or desirable. That this fruit not only looked good but it could make one wise. She took some of the fruit. And she ate.
The verb “ate” goes back to God’s command in chapter 2. It signals the climax of Eve’s temptation and the turn toward Adam’s fall. It is also at the heart of God’s questioning of Adam and Eve, “Did you eat from the tree?”
Immediately after Eve violates God’s command she gave some to Adam. The Hebrew places these two verbs adjacent to each other, “she ate and she gave…”
Eve was deceived in her interaction with the serpent. Adam, on the other hand, is portrayed as just eating the fruit. The authors of the New Testament interpret this story in a manner that placed the blame for the fall of mankind on Adam. Eve was deceived but Adam sinned.
3:7
There is an element of humor in this verse. Once they eat the fruit their eyes are opened. This is the first time that they seem to realize that they are naked. “Sheesh Adam, put something on!” They are naked but no longer unashamed. They then make some sort of covering out of fig leaves. Not only is this a rather poor attempt to remedy their nakedness but it betrays just how ignorant and helpless they were at this point in time. They didn’t even know how to clothe themselves and were about to be cast out of God’s garden into a fallen world.
5th Sunday of Lent A
Romans 6:15-23
The image of slavery was often employed by Greco-Roman and Jewish teachers to warn their hearers about the dangers of false teachings, evil passions, or other immoral practices. It was also one of Paul’s favorite metaphors to teach on the Christian life (see Galatians 4:21-5:15). It was an image readily understood by all of Paul’s readers. Slavery was a practice that consumed the Roman Empire. When Paul’s letter to the Romans was written 25-40% of the population were slaves. Slavery was the most fundamental status indicator of a person in the Roman Empire. Whether a person was Jew or Gentile, male or female, was secondary to their status as free or slave. A free man or woman was a person while a slave was property (they were not human).
Paul opens this passage with a rather generic imperative, “do not let sin reign in your bodies.” (6:12) By contrast, the reader is to present the parts (Gk μέλος, melos: limb or part of the body) of their bodies to God as his “instruments” or “tools.” The Greek term for “instrument” is ὅπλα (hopla, where the word for a Greek soldier, a hoplite, is derived) and can refer to instruments, tools or weapons. Because Paul is using the metaphor of slavery in this passage the idea of instrument or tool is prominent.
The idea that “sin will have no mastery over you” may reflect Paul’s rabbinic background. Some Rabbis taught that Israel could not be enslaved by degenerate desires like the Gentiles because God gave them the law (6:14). If that is the case, then Paul was transforming or enlarging God’s gracious covenant with Israel. Israel could be dominated by degenerate desires because of the Law. Now sin has dominion over the church because of God’s grace.
6:15-16 Paul then asked a rhetorical question – and even answered it himself. Should someone sin because they are under grace? “Absolutely NOT!”
I doubt if anyone consciously asks this question, “Should I sin because I am under grace?” Yet we are often guilty of doing exactly this. We excuse our weakness, personal shortcomings, sinful attitudes and actions away. “Oh, that is just how I am ...” Thinking that because we are under grace God fully accepts us and there is no need for us to change. For Paul, such reasoning could not be farther from the truth. We need to bring all of who we are under the Lordship of Christ and present ourselves to him as his slave. There are two paths before us. We can continue to present ourselves to sin which results in death. Or present ourselves as obedient slaves to God that results in righteousness. For Paul, there is no middle ground, we are on one path or the other.
6:17 Paul backs off a little from the strong language he has used so far. He thanks God that the Roman believers have yielded their lives to Christ. Sin was once their master now Christ was.
6:19 Paul returns to his argument at 6:16. The Roman readers are challenged with a choice as to who they would serve. At this point, Paul puts an interesting spin on the metaphor of slavery. Slaves were not given the choice of their master. It was the other way around. Paul portrays a situation in which two masters are trading a slave. However, Paul depicts the slave making the choice as to who they will serve.
If we present the parts of our bodies to impurity as their master the result will be a downward spiral. By contrast, if we present the various areas of our lives to Christ as our master then this will result in our sanctification. The hymn “Take my Life and Let it be” is an excellent adaptation of Paul’s line of reasoning.
Take my life, and let it be consecrated, Lord, to Thee ... Take my hands, and let them move at the impulse of Thy love; Take my feet and let them be swift and beautiful for Thee ...
We offer the different parts (members) of our bodies and lives to Christ’s Lordship as the hymn progresses.
6:21-23 “So what is the benefit that you reap?” Paul continues his use of the metaphor of slavery. However, he turns his attention to a different aspect of this metaphor. Instead of asking who is your master he switches to the idea of payment or reward. In Greco- Roman culture slaves often were page a small wage (peculium or stipendium in Latin). This was viewed as a positive thing in the Roman world. A slave might even be able to purchase their freedom if they saved up enough. However, Paul takes this idea and turns it on its head. The “wages” of sin (6:24) is death. In contrast to this tiny ‘wage’ paid to slaves, God gives us the free gift of eternal life. It is not that paying a slave was wrong. But by comparison, God offers us something much greater.
Note: In verse 21 the Greek word for “benefit” is καρπός (karpos). This word normally refers to “fruit.” However, it can also be used to denote wages or a reward. In this context, Paul is using it to represent the “reward” a slave might receive similar to the Latin words mentioned above.
Paul uses the metaphor of slavery to teach us several very important truths in this very dense argument. First, if we present ourselves to sin the result it death (6:16, 21, 23). But as believers, we have been slave traded. We have been freed from sin and enslaved to God (6:18, 20, 22). As a result, we are to present all that we are to our new master, God (6:13, 16, 18, 19, 22).
Romans 6:15-23
The image of slavery was often employed by Greco-Roman and Jewish teachers to warn their hearers about the dangers of false teachings, evil passions, or other immoral practices. It was also one of Paul’s favorite metaphors to teach on the Christian life (see Galatians 4:21-5:15). It was an image readily understood by all of Paul’s readers. Slavery was a practice that consumed the Roman Empire. When Paul’s letter to the Romans was written 25-40% of the population were slaves. Slavery was the most fundamental status indicator of a person in the Roman Empire. Whether a person was Jew or Gentile, male or female, was secondary to their status as free or slave. A free man or woman was a person while a slave was property (they were not human).
Paul opens this passage with a rather generic imperative, “do not let sin reign in your bodies.” (6:12) By contrast, the reader is to present the parts (Gk μέλος, melos: limb or part of the body) of their bodies to God as his “instruments” or “tools.” The Greek term for “instrument” is ὅπλα (hopla, where the word for a Greek soldier, a hoplite, is derived) and can refer to instruments, tools or weapons. Because Paul is using the metaphor of slavery in this passage the idea of instrument or tool is prominent.
The idea that “sin will have no mastery over you” may reflect Paul’s rabbinic background. Some Rabbis taught that Israel could not be enslaved by degenerate desires like the Gentiles because God gave them the law (6:14). If that is the case, then Paul was transforming or enlarging God’s gracious covenant with Israel. Israel could be dominated by degenerate desires because of the Law. Now sin has dominion over the church because of God’s grace.
6:15-16 Paul then asked a rhetorical question – and even answered it himself. Should someone sin because they are under grace? “Absolutely NOT!”
I doubt if anyone consciously asks this question, “Should I sin because I am under grace?” Yet we are often guilty of doing exactly this. We excuse our weakness, personal shortcomings, sinful attitudes and actions away. “Oh, that is just how I am ...” Thinking that because we are under grace God fully accepts us and there is no need for us to change. For Paul, such reasoning could not be farther from the truth. We need to bring all of who we are under the Lordship of Christ and present ourselves to him as his slave. There are two paths before us. We can continue to present ourselves to sin which results in death. Or present ourselves as obedient slaves to God that results in righteousness. For Paul, there is no middle ground, we are on one path or the other.
6:17 Paul backs off a little from the strong language he has used so far. He thanks God that the Roman believers have yielded their lives to Christ. Sin was once their master now Christ was.
6:19 Paul returns to his argument at 6:16. The Roman readers are challenged with a choice as to who they would serve. At this point, Paul puts an interesting spin on the metaphor of slavery. Slaves were not given the choice of their master. It was the other way around. Paul portrays a situation in which two masters are trading a slave. However, Paul depicts the slave making the choice as to who they will serve.
If we present the parts of our bodies to impurity as their master the result will be a downward spiral. By contrast, if we present the various areas of our lives to Christ as our master then this will result in our sanctification. The hymn “Take my Life and Let it be” is an excellent adaptation of Paul’s line of reasoning.
Take my life, and let it be consecrated, Lord, to Thee ... Take my hands, and let them move at the impulse of Thy love; Take my feet and let them be swift and beautiful for Thee ...
We offer the different parts (members) of our bodies and lives to Christ’s Lordship as the hymn progresses.
6:21-23 “So what is the benefit that you reap?” Paul continues his use of the metaphor of slavery. However, he turns his attention to a different aspect of this metaphor. Instead of asking who is your master he switches to the idea of payment or reward. In Greco- Roman culture slaves often were page a small wage (peculium or stipendium in Latin). This was viewed as a positive thing in the Roman world. A slave might even be able to purchase their freedom if they saved up enough. However, Paul takes this idea and turns it on its head. The “wages” of sin (6:24) is death. In contrast to this tiny ‘wage’ paid to slaves, God gives us the free gift of eternal life. It is not that paying a slave was wrong. But by comparison, God offers us something much greater.
Note: In verse 21 the Greek word for “benefit” is καρπός (karpos). This word normally refers to “fruit.” However, it can also be used to denote wages or a reward. In this context, Paul is using it to represent the “reward” a slave might receive similar to the Latin words mentioned above.
Paul uses the metaphor of slavery to teach us several very important truths in this very dense argument. First, if we present ourselves to sin the result it death (6:16, 21, 23). But as believers, we have been slave traded. We have been freed from sin and enslaved to God (6:18, 20, 22). As a result, we are to present all that we are to our new master, God (6:13, 16, 18, 19, 22).
5th Sunday of Lent A
John 11:(1-17)18-44
An interesting aspect of this miracle is that the first 19 verses set up the miracle. Normally in John, Jesus performs a miracle and then John includes an extended discussion on the theological implications that arise from that miracle. In this text, he reverses his normal pattern. This shift in John’s narrative strategy should alert the reader to the fact that they need to give attention to “how” John is relating the story of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus.
11:1-15 Anticipation
This section sets the stage for the miracle and links this chapter with chapter 10. We need to remember that when John wrote his gospel there were no chapter divisions. If we take out these artificial divisions chapters then the unity between chapters 10 and 11 is more evident.
In chapter 10 Jesus gave his sermon on the good shepherd. Immediately after that Jesus is in Jerusalem for the Feast of Dedication. During that feast, Jesus is challenged to reveal if he was the Messiah. Jesus’ reply is evasive and so aggravates his challengers that they were ready to stone him (10:31). The dispute at the end of chapter 10 revolves around several key issues. These are: (1) Jesus being the good shepherd who gives eternal life to his sheep, (2) Jesus’ miracles are done in the Father’s name and bear witness to him, and (3) Jesus claims that “I am the Son of God.” All of these themes are central to the story of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus.
The story of the raising of Lazarus opens with an immediate note of urgency, “now a certain man was ill, Lazarus.” (11:1)
The second verse in chapter 11 does not fit the narrative context well. The way John has constructed the sentence leads the reader to assume that he was referring to an event already mentioned in John’s gospel. Grammatically, John mentions this event as if it had already taken place. However, Mary will not anoint Jesus until chapter 12. Disjunctions like this are common in John and are part of his narrative style. He expected his readers to already be familiar with the story of Mary anointing Jesus. Or we could say that John wrote his gospel with the idea in mind that it should be read several times. This way the reader would know what John was referring to when they encountered one of these narrative disjunctions.
11:3 John tells us two important points in this verse. First, the two sisters sent word to Jesus that Lazarus was ill. Second, John tells us that Lazarus loved Jesus. This leads the reader to assume that Jesus would go and heal him.
11:4 Jesus’ response to their request presents an interesting turn in this story. Jesus says, “this sickness will not end in death.” Like Jesus’ encounter with Nicodemus, there are two levels of meaning in this story. Jesus’ discussion with Nicodemus revolved around the idea of being born a second time. Was he referring to physical rebirth or spiritual rebirth?
In this story, death is used with two levels of meaning. In one sense, Lazarus’ illness will end in his death. In a second sense, Jesus will show that for those who believe in him death is not the end of life.
11:5-6 In verse 3 we were told that Lazarus loved Jesus. Now John tells us that Jesus loved him and his sisters. “So when Jesus heard that Lazarus was ill ...” he arose and ran quickly to their side...NOT!
Instead, Jesus remained where he was for two more days. This is the second time John has told us that Jesus and this family enjoyed a very close and loving relationship. Yet Jesus appears to disregard their desperation? John is narrating this story in a way that forces the reader to wrestle with these questions.
11:7-10 Finally, Jesus decided to go up to Judea. The disciples are well aware that the closer they got to Jerusalem the more dangerous it was for Jesus. Their warning in verse 8 is designed to highlight this danger for the reader.
Jesus’ reply is in the form of a proverbial saying. If anyone walks in the light they will not stumble because they see where they are going. This creates an intertextual connection to verses 1:4-5 in John’s prologue. Jesus is the light that came into the world and the darkness can not understand or overcome the light.
The hours of the day create a second intertextual connection. This time to John 13:31. At the last supper, Judas goes out to betray Jesus. It is at this point that Jesus declares that “Now the Son of Man is glorified.” When Judas betrays Jesus the hour has finally arrived (see also: John 2:4; 4:21-23; 7:30; 8:20; 13:1; 16:21; 17:1). “Hour” also reminds the reader of Jesus’ teaching in 5:25, “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.”
11:11-16 Sleep was a common metaphor for death in the early church (see the comments on Ephesians 5:14 from Lent A, week 4). The early church most likely picked this metaphor up from Jesus’ teachings because it is such a vivid image. Sleep in a certain sense is like death for a believer. We lay down, close our eyes, and our consciousness shuts down. Then, in the morning our brains reactivate, the neurons flicker to life, we open our eyes, and get up to face a new day. Prior to Jesus, death was like sleep in the sense that one laid down, closed their eyes, and stopped moving. People hoped that they would be raised to new life in the future (see Martha’s response to Jesus in 11:24). Jesus’ resurrection infused new meaning into this metaphor because now we actually know of someone who died, was laid in the grave, and then ‘woke up’ to new life.
Lazarus was sleeping the sleep of death. While there are other stories about people being resuscitated to life, Jesus’ raising of Lazarus is tied directly to who Jesus is and his role as the Good Shepherd. Lazarus will be woken up from death by Jesus. This is one of the central teachings in John’s gospel. Everyone will die (sleep) at some time. But for the believer, the sleep of death will be broken by Jesus’ call to wake up. And like Lazarus, they will respond to the call of the Good Shepherd, get up, and enter the dawn of a new day.
11:16-37 Martha then Mary
Notice how John weaves the Martha and Mary into this story. They are placed side by side. Both are used to communicate very similar concepts. Martha’s role is to engage in dialogue with Jesus. Mary takes the role of a supporting character to highlight Jesus’ actions.
John 11:(1-17)18-44
An interesting aspect of this miracle is that the first 19 verses set up the miracle. Normally in John, Jesus performs a miracle and then John includes an extended discussion on the theological implications that arise from that miracle. In this text, he reverses his normal pattern. This shift in John’s narrative strategy should alert the reader to the fact that they need to give attention to “how” John is relating the story of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus.
11:1-15 Anticipation
This section sets the stage for the miracle and links this chapter with chapter 10. We need to remember that when John wrote his gospel there were no chapter divisions. If we take out these artificial divisions chapters then the unity between chapters 10 and 11 is more evident.
In chapter 10 Jesus gave his sermon on the good shepherd. Immediately after that Jesus is in Jerusalem for the Feast of Dedication. During that feast, Jesus is challenged to reveal if he was the Messiah. Jesus’ reply is evasive and so aggravates his challengers that they were ready to stone him (10:31). The dispute at the end of chapter 10 revolves around several key issues. These are: (1) Jesus being the good shepherd who gives eternal life to his sheep, (2) Jesus’ miracles are done in the Father’s name and bear witness to him, and (3) Jesus claims that “I am the Son of God.” All of these themes are central to the story of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus.
The story of the raising of Lazarus opens with an immediate note of urgency, “now a certain man was ill, Lazarus.” (11:1)
The second verse in chapter 11 does not fit the narrative context well. The way John has constructed the sentence leads the reader to assume that he was referring to an event already mentioned in John’s gospel. Grammatically, John mentions this event as if it had already taken place. However, Mary will not anoint Jesus until chapter 12. Disjunctions like this are common in John and are part of his narrative style. He expected his readers to already be familiar with the story of Mary anointing Jesus. Or we could say that John wrote his gospel with the idea in mind that it should be read several times. This way the reader would know what John was referring to when they encountered one of these narrative disjunctions.
11:3 John tells us two important points in this verse. First, the two sisters sent word to Jesus that Lazarus was ill. Second, John tells us that Lazarus loved Jesus. This leads the reader to assume that Jesus would go and heal him.
11:4 Jesus’ response to their request presents an interesting turn in this story. Jesus says, “this sickness will not end in death.” Like Jesus’ encounter with Nicodemus, there are two levels of meaning in this story. Jesus’ discussion with Nicodemus revolved around the idea of being born a second time. Was he referring to physical rebirth or spiritual rebirth?
In this story, death is used with two levels of meaning. In one sense, Lazarus’ illness will end in his death. In a second sense, Jesus will show that for those who believe in him death is not the end of life.
11:5-6 In verse 3 we were told that Lazarus loved Jesus. Now John tells us that Jesus loved him and his sisters. “So when Jesus heard that Lazarus was ill ...” he arose and ran quickly to their side...NOT!
Instead, Jesus remained where he was for two more days. This is the second time John has told us that Jesus and this family enjoyed a very close and loving relationship. Yet Jesus appears to disregard their desperation? John is narrating this story in a way that forces the reader to wrestle with these questions.
11:7-10 Finally, Jesus decided to go up to Judea. The disciples are well aware that the closer they got to Jerusalem the more dangerous it was for Jesus. Their warning in verse 8 is designed to highlight this danger for the reader.
Jesus’ reply is in the form of a proverbial saying. If anyone walks in the light they will not stumble because they see where they are going. This creates an intertextual connection to verses 1:4-5 in John’s prologue. Jesus is the light that came into the world and the darkness can not understand or overcome the light.
The hours of the day create a second intertextual connection. This time to John 13:31. At the last supper, Judas goes out to betray Jesus. It is at this point that Jesus declares that “Now the Son of Man is glorified.” When Judas betrays Jesus the hour has finally arrived (see also: John 2:4; 4:21-23; 7:30; 8:20; 13:1; 16:21; 17:1). “Hour” also reminds the reader of Jesus’ teaching in 5:25, “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.”
11:11-16 Sleep was a common metaphor for death in the early church (see the comments on Ephesians 5:14 from Lent A, week 4). The early church most likely picked this metaphor up from Jesus’ teachings because it is such a vivid image. Sleep in a certain sense is like death for a believer. We lay down, close our eyes, and our consciousness shuts down. Then, in the morning our brains reactivate, the neurons flicker to life, we open our eyes, and get up to face a new day. Prior to Jesus, death was like sleep in the sense that one laid down, closed their eyes, and stopped moving. People hoped that they would be raised to new life in the future (see Martha’s response to Jesus in 11:24). Jesus’ resurrection infused new meaning into this metaphor because now we actually know of someone who died, was laid in the grave, and then ‘woke up’ to new life.
Lazarus was sleeping the sleep of death. While there are other stories about people being resuscitated to life, Jesus’ raising of Lazarus is tied directly to who Jesus is and his role as the Good Shepherd. Lazarus will be woken up from death by Jesus. This is one of the central teachings in John’s gospel. Everyone will die (sleep) at some time. But for the believer, the sleep of death will be broken by Jesus’ call to wake up. And like Lazarus, they will respond to the call of the Good Shepherd, get up, and enter the dawn of a new day.
11:16-37 Martha then Mary
Notice how John weaves the Martha and Mary into this story. They are placed side by side. Both are used to communicate very similar concepts. Martha’s role is to engage in dialogue with Jesus. Mary takes the role of a supporting character to highlight Jesus’ actions.
Martha |
Mary |
11:20 Martha hears Jesus is coming |
11:28 Teacher is calling for you |
11:20 Meets Jesus on the road |
11:30 meets Jesus at the same place |
11:21 “Lord, if you had been here...” |
11:23 “Lord, if you had been here...” |
11:22 Martha sees Jesus as a righteous man |
11:37-42 Jesus prays as righteous a man |
11:23ff Dialogue on resurrection and life |
11:43-44 Demonstration of resurrection |
In the introduction, I mentioned that this chapter was related to chapter 10. In verse 16-37 Jesus’ teaching on the Good Shepherd is rendered in real life. The Good Shepherd knows his sheep and calls them by name. The sheep know the shepherd’s voice and follow him. Martha heard that Jesus was coming and went to meet (11:20). After her conversation with Jesus, she goes back and tells Mary that Jesus was here and was calling for her. She jumps up and met him on the road (at the very same spot as Martha). Then, at the tomb, Jesus calls out Lazarus’ name. He arose and came out of the tomb. All three of these individuals are examples John uses to teach us about what it means to be one of Jesus’ sheep. There are two other themes that John weaves into this pericope that worth mentioning.
Theme 1: It is all Jesus’ fault.
John laid the blame for Lazarus’ death at Jesus’ feet. In verse 6 we are told that Jesus delayed for two days after learning that Lazarus was ill. In verse 11 John tells us that when Jesus finally decided to go to Bethany he already knew that Lazarus had died. Jesus even says that he was glad that he was not there to heal him (11:15). Martha tells Jesus that if he had been there her brother would have not died (11:21). In verse 32, Mary made the same accusation against Jesus. And finally, John wrote that some of the people mourning with Mary and Martha also ask why Jesus did not save Lazarus (11:37). Six times we are told that Jesus could have saved Lazarus but didn’t.
One of the main points in Rick Warren’s book “The Purpose Driven Life” is that its not about you it’s about God. Even though this small family loved Jesus and Jesus loved them he still allowed Lazarus to die. Why? Verse 15 gives us the answer. Jesus was using this situation to help others believe. Lazarus’ suffering and death were used to help ground the disciples, John’s readers, and our faith in Christ. It is about what God is doing to reach the world which is greater than Mary and Martha’s desperation and loss.
Theme 2: “I am the resurrection and the life”
The stories of Martha and Mary are two parallel stories. Martha’s encounter with Jesus is primarily one of dialogue. Mary’s encounter is filled with actions. Both teach the same point. Jesus is the resurrection and the life and one day will raise us to new life.
After Martha told Jesus that her brother died because he was not there Jesus replied that her brother will ‘rise again.’ (11:23) Martha’s reply in verse 24 reflects good Jewish theology. At the end of time, the dead will be raised, the righteous to everlasting life and the wicked to judgment.
Jesus’ reply takes that theological concept and recasts it. Jesus is “the resurrection.” In other words, the God who will raise the righteous to life at the end of time was standing right there in front of her. He closed his dialogue with her by asking, “Do you believe this?” In Matthew’s gospel, Peter makes the good confession, “You are the Christ” (Matthew 16:16). In John’s gospel Martha makes the good confession. “Yes Lord, I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God who is coming into the world!” (11:27)
When Mary met Jesus she levels the same compliant against him as Martha. But this time Jesus did not respond to her with words but was emotionally moved and asked to see the tomb. Once at the tomb, Jesus cried, “Lazarus, come out!” and Lazarus rose from the dead.
The best commentary on the story of Martha, Mary, and Lazarus is found earlier in John’s gospel:
John 5:25-29
“Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man.
Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.” (ESV)
Theme 1: It is all Jesus’ fault.
John laid the blame for Lazarus’ death at Jesus’ feet. In verse 6 we are told that Jesus delayed for two days after learning that Lazarus was ill. In verse 11 John tells us that when Jesus finally decided to go to Bethany he already knew that Lazarus had died. Jesus even says that he was glad that he was not there to heal him (11:15). Martha tells Jesus that if he had been there her brother would have not died (11:21). In verse 32, Mary made the same accusation against Jesus. And finally, John wrote that some of the people mourning with Mary and Martha also ask why Jesus did not save Lazarus (11:37). Six times we are told that Jesus could have saved Lazarus but didn’t.
One of the main points in Rick Warren’s book “The Purpose Driven Life” is that its not about you it’s about God. Even though this small family loved Jesus and Jesus loved them he still allowed Lazarus to die. Why? Verse 15 gives us the answer. Jesus was using this situation to help others believe. Lazarus’ suffering and death were used to help ground the disciples, John’s readers, and our faith in Christ. It is about what God is doing to reach the world which is greater than Mary and Martha’s desperation and loss.
Theme 2: “I am the resurrection and the life”
The stories of Martha and Mary are two parallel stories. Martha’s encounter with Jesus is primarily one of dialogue. Mary’s encounter is filled with actions. Both teach the same point. Jesus is the resurrection and the life and one day will raise us to new life.
After Martha told Jesus that her brother died because he was not there Jesus replied that her brother will ‘rise again.’ (11:23) Martha’s reply in verse 24 reflects good Jewish theology. At the end of time, the dead will be raised, the righteous to everlasting life and the wicked to judgment.
Jesus’ reply takes that theological concept and recasts it. Jesus is “the resurrection.” In other words, the God who will raise the righteous to life at the end of time was standing right there in front of her. He closed his dialogue with her by asking, “Do you believe this?” In Matthew’s gospel, Peter makes the good confession, “You are the Christ” (Matthew 16:16). In John’s gospel Martha makes the good confession. “Yes Lord, I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God who is coming into the world!” (11:27)
When Mary met Jesus she levels the same compliant against him as Martha. But this time Jesus did not respond to her with words but was emotionally moved and asked to see the tomb. Once at the tomb, Jesus cried, “Lazarus, come out!” and Lazarus rose from the dead.
The best commentary on the story of Martha, Mary, and Lazarus is found earlier in John’s gospel:
John 5:25-29
“Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man.
Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.” (ESV)
5th Sunday of Lent A
Ezekiel 37:1-14 — Valley of Dry Bones
Israel was without a king, a land, or a temple. They were a ‘dead’ people. In the midst of this time of national despair, Ezekiel prophesied that Israel would return to the promised land and God would resurrect them as a people once again.
The reader must go back to the previous chapter to understand God’s promise to regather his people. The reason why the house of Israel was scattered among the nations was because they profaned the name of the Lord (36:22). God’s judgment upon them was not primarily because of their sin. God acted in this manner to protect “his holy name” and to make his name known among the nations (36:22-23).
In the same breath that God uttered this judgment he also promised that he would regather his people in the future (36:24). When God regathers his people he will cleanse them from their sins. Their cities will be rebuilt. And the countryside will be replanted (36:33-38). Most importantly Israel’s heart will be turned toward God, his Spirit will reside in them, and they “will know that I am the Lord.” (36:38) To offer encouragement to the Babylonian exiles, Ezekiel concluded this oracle with an apocalyptic vision (37:1-14).
Ezekiel 37 is an apocalyptic vision of Israel’s regathering. Israel would have been exposed to Mesopotamian dream-visions and other apocalyptic forms of texts during the Babylonian exile. Ezekiel and other Jewish prophets adapted this genre of literature into their theological repertoire (see Daniel’s visions for other examples). Apocalyptic texts were normally written during periods when the prophet’s audience was experiencing oppressive conditions. The theological emphasis of an apocalyptic vision is not on what God will do in the distant future. Rather, the thrust of an apocalyptic text is to give hope in the midst of suffering. They are characterized by their use of sensational and spectacular imagery.
The apocalyptic vision in Ezekiel 37 has two distinct sections. First, Ezekiel recounted his vision of the valley of dry bones in vv.3-10. Second, he concluded his vision by offering an interpretation in vv.11-14.
First section: 37:1-10
The vision opens with a horrific scene. Ezekiel is brought by the Lord (we are not told how) to a valley filled with dry bones (37:1). Dead bodies were considered sacred in the Ancient Near East. The idea of leaving human bodies to rot in the open for birds to eat was repugnant to every one of the nations and religions during that time. The only time bodies would lie about in such massive numbers would have been after the carnage of a great battle. In a few instances, the bodies of a defeated enemy were not buried as a way to further humiliate that nation. In this way, Ezekiel’s vision ties in with 36:18 where God says, “I poured out my wrath upon them for the blood that they had shed in the land, for the idols with which they had defiled it.” (ESV) It is a vision that conveys the idea that God has decimated Israel and left their bodies to rot in the field.
Ezekiel was asked by God whether these bones would live (v. 3a). Ezekiel acknowledged his lack of omniscience and replied that only the Lord knew (v. 3b). God then instructed Ezekiel to prophesy over the dry bones. God would grow tendons, flesh, and skin over the remains of these corpses and then give breath (ַר֖וּח, ruach) to these bodies. The punchline to this vision is that this “resurrected” people would know that God was the Lord (v. 6).
Ezekiel did as the Lord commanded and proclaimed the Lord’s words over the dead, dry bones. In one of the most dramatic passages in the Bible, the bones came together and grew tendons, flesh, and skin. But they were still dead bodies (vv.7-8). They were not alive because they did not have breath or a spirit (the Hebrew ַר֖וּח, ruach means ‘breath, wind’ or ‘spirit’). The emphasis on spirit/breath in this passage (ַר֖וּח, ruach is used 3 times in verse 9) may be an allusion to Genesis 2:7 where Adam was fully formed by God but was not alive until God breathed (ַר֖וּח, ruach) into him.
Ezekiel was instructed to prophesy for a second time. This time for the breath/wind to come from the four winds and give life to these slain bodies (v.9). The result was a vision of a great army getting up off the ground and standing up.
Ezekiel’s prophecy is an astonishing vision of Israel’s ultimate restoration (vv.4-8). But more importantly, it is a vision of Israel’s spiritual renewal (vv.9-10).
Second section: 37:11-14
Ezekiel’s vision portrays the restoration of a people who had been “dead.” This restoration took place in two stages: (1) physical (or national) restoration and (2) spiritual renewal.
Israel spent close to 70 years as slaves in exile. Many of them had probably lost all hope. So the vision of the valley of dry bones was very appropriate metaphor for Israel’s situation. This vision was meant to convey hope in the most dramatic manner possible. Israel would be restored to their land and spiritually revived. This would not come about through their efforts. Israel was incapable of any action because they were like the
remains of bodies scattered on a battle field. Rather, God would act to free them from captivity, lead them back to the promised land, and revive their trust in him.
Ezekiel 37:1-14 — Valley of Dry Bones
Israel was without a king, a land, or a temple. They were a ‘dead’ people. In the midst of this time of national despair, Ezekiel prophesied that Israel would return to the promised land and God would resurrect them as a people once again.
The reader must go back to the previous chapter to understand God’s promise to regather his people. The reason why the house of Israel was scattered among the nations was because they profaned the name of the Lord (36:22). God’s judgment upon them was not primarily because of their sin. God acted in this manner to protect “his holy name” and to make his name known among the nations (36:22-23).
In the same breath that God uttered this judgment he also promised that he would regather his people in the future (36:24). When God regathers his people he will cleanse them from their sins. Their cities will be rebuilt. And the countryside will be replanted (36:33-38). Most importantly Israel’s heart will be turned toward God, his Spirit will reside in them, and they “will know that I am the Lord.” (36:38) To offer encouragement to the Babylonian exiles, Ezekiel concluded this oracle with an apocalyptic vision (37:1-14).
Ezekiel 37 is an apocalyptic vision of Israel’s regathering. Israel would have been exposed to Mesopotamian dream-visions and other apocalyptic forms of texts during the Babylonian exile. Ezekiel and other Jewish prophets adapted this genre of literature into their theological repertoire (see Daniel’s visions for other examples). Apocalyptic texts were normally written during periods when the prophet’s audience was experiencing oppressive conditions. The theological emphasis of an apocalyptic vision is not on what God will do in the distant future. Rather, the thrust of an apocalyptic text is to give hope in the midst of suffering. They are characterized by their use of sensational and spectacular imagery.
The apocalyptic vision in Ezekiel 37 has two distinct sections. First, Ezekiel recounted his vision of the valley of dry bones in vv.3-10. Second, he concluded his vision by offering an interpretation in vv.11-14.
First section: 37:1-10
The vision opens with a horrific scene. Ezekiel is brought by the Lord (we are not told how) to a valley filled with dry bones (37:1). Dead bodies were considered sacred in the Ancient Near East. The idea of leaving human bodies to rot in the open for birds to eat was repugnant to every one of the nations and religions during that time. The only time bodies would lie about in such massive numbers would have been after the carnage of a great battle. In a few instances, the bodies of a defeated enemy were not buried as a way to further humiliate that nation. In this way, Ezekiel’s vision ties in with 36:18 where God says, “I poured out my wrath upon them for the blood that they had shed in the land, for the idols with which they had defiled it.” (ESV) It is a vision that conveys the idea that God has decimated Israel and left their bodies to rot in the field.
Ezekiel was asked by God whether these bones would live (v. 3a). Ezekiel acknowledged his lack of omniscience and replied that only the Lord knew (v. 3b). God then instructed Ezekiel to prophesy over the dry bones. God would grow tendons, flesh, and skin over the remains of these corpses and then give breath (ַר֖וּח, ruach) to these bodies. The punchline to this vision is that this “resurrected” people would know that God was the Lord (v. 6).
Ezekiel did as the Lord commanded and proclaimed the Lord’s words over the dead, dry bones. In one of the most dramatic passages in the Bible, the bones came together and grew tendons, flesh, and skin. But they were still dead bodies (vv.7-8). They were not alive because they did not have breath or a spirit (the Hebrew ַר֖וּח, ruach means ‘breath, wind’ or ‘spirit’). The emphasis on spirit/breath in this passage (ַר֖וּח, ruach is used 3 times in verse 9) may be an allusion to Genesis 2:7 where Adam was fully formed by God but was not alive until God breathed (ַר֖וּח, ruach) into him.
Ezekiel was instructed to prophesy for a second time. This time for the breath/wind to come from the four winds and give life to these slain bodies (v.9). The result was a vision of a great army getting up off the ground and standing up.
Ezekiel’s prophecy is an astonishing vision of Israel’s ultimate restoration (vv.4-8). But more importantly, it is a vision of Israel’s spiritual renewal (vv.9-10).
Second section: 37:11-14
Ezekiel’s vision portrays the restoration of a people who had been “dead.” This restoration took place in two stages: (1) physical (or national) restoration and (2) spiritual renewal.
Israel spent close to 70 years as slaves in exile. Many of them had probably lost all hope. So the vision of the valley of dry bones was very appropriate metaphor for Israel’s situation. This vision was meant to convey hope in the most dramatic manner possible. Israel would be restored to their land and spiritually revived. This would not come about through their efforts. Israel was incapable of any action because they were like the
remains of bodies scattered on a battle field. Rather, God would act to free them from captivity, lead them back to the promised land, and revive their trust in him.
Sunday of Lent A
Psalm 130
Psalm 130 was placed in the Psalms entitled Songs of Ascent. These were sung by pilgrims either trudging up the long roads that led up to Jerusalem or they were sung when entering the temple. In either case, these were songs that were written to prepare a person’s heart for worship in the temple.
In verses 1-2 the psalmist cries out to God from “deep waters” (NET) or “the depths” (ESV). For someone to be ‘down’ is universally a bad thing across all languages. ,מַעֲמַקִּים .In this case, the person is not just ‘down’ but in a deep, dark, place (Heb maʿamaqqiym, this is used in only two other Psalms and always with a connotation of someone in profound distress: Ps 69:2, 14). Ezekiel’s audience (in Ez 37) would have readily identified with this term to describe their situation. This Psalm is applicable for a wide range of situations because the reader is not told what type of distress the petitioner is in.
3-4 Trusting in God’s forgiveness.
Two contrasting ideas are placed side by side. The first concerns God’s righteousness. Were he to keep record of our sins no one could stand before him. The second is that God forgives. The word for ‘forgiveness’ (Heb סְלִיחָה, seliyḥāh) is used only three times in the Hebrew scriptures. In this text, Nehemiah 9:17 and Daniel 9:9. In each instance, ‘forgiveness’ is not something God does but is an attribute of his.
5-6 Waiting for the Lord.
The idea of ‘waiting for the Lord’ is mentioned three times in these two verses. In verse 5, the Hebrew word וָהקָ (qawah) is used twice and is translated as ‘waits’ (ESV, NIV, NASB, and NRSV). In verse 6 this verb is not in the Hebrew text but is implied and most English translations supply a verb related to it. Psalmist’s ‘wait’ is compared to a watchman on a city wall. They ‘wait’ for the morning to be relieved of their duty. The watchman’s wait is also related to knowing that the city has made it safely through another dark and dangerous night. Like the opening line, where the Psalmist cried out form the ‘depths,’ now they wait for the morning’s rays like a watchman in the darkness of night.
7-8 Hope in the Lord.
The Psalm shifts now from a personal petition to a corporate one. All of Israel is exhorted to hope in the Lord. Why? In verse 4 we were told that there is ‘forgiveness’ with God. In this verse, three more reasons are given. First, just as there is forgiveness with God so also is there ‘steadfast love.’ The Hebrew here is חֶסֶד (ḥeseḏ, used close to 250 times in the Hebrew Scriptures) which refers to God’s unfailing love or God’s love based his covenant relationship with Israel. Second, there is ‘plentiful redemption’ with God. God’s steadfast love and abundant redemption are gifts that God has bestowed upon Israel. They are not based on who Israel is because in verse 3 the Psalmist told us that if God considered our sins none of us could stand before him. And finally, the Psalm closes on a positive note of trust in who God is. Israel will be redeemed from all their iniquities.
Psalm 130
Psalm 130 was placed in the Psalms entitled Songs of Ascent. These were sung by pilgrims either trudging up the long roads that led up to Jerusalem or they were sung when entering the temple. In either case, these were songs that were written to prepare a person’s heart for worship in the temple.
In verses 1-2 the psalmist cries out to God from “deep waters” (NET) or “the depths” (ESV). For someone to be ‘down’ is universally a bad thing across all languages. ,מַעֲמַקִּים .In this case, the person is not just ‘down’ but in a deep, dark, place (Heb maʿamaqqiym, this is used in only two other Psalms and always with a connotation of someone in profound distress: Ps 69:2, 14). Ezekiel’s audience (in Ez 37) would have readily identified with this term to describe their situation. This Psalm is applicable for a wide range of situations because the reader is not told what type of distress the petitioner is in.
3-4 Trusting in God’s forgiveness.
Two contrasting ideas are placed side by side. The first concerns God’s righteousness. Were he to keep record of our sins no one could stand before him. The second is that God forgives. The word for ‘forgiveness’ (Heb סְלִיחָה, seliyḥāh) is used only three times in the Hebrew scriptures. In this text, Nehemiah 9:17 and Daniel 9:9. In each instance, ‘forgiveness’ is not something God does but is an attribute of his.
5-6 Waiting for the Lord.
The idea of ‘waiting for the Lord’ is mentioned three times in these two verses. In verse 5, the Hebrew word וָהקָ (qawah) is used twice and is translated as ‘waits’ (ESV, NIV, NASB, and NRSV). In verse 6 this verb is not in the Hebrew text but is implied and most English translations supply a verb related to it. Psalmist’s ‘wait’ is compared to a watchman on a city wall. They ‘wait’ for the morning to be relieved of their duty. The watchman’s wait is also related to knowing that the city has made it safely through another dark and dangerous night. Like the opening line, where the Psalmist cried out form the ‘depths,’ now they wait for the morning’s rays like a watchman in the darkness of night.
7-8 Hope in the Lord.
The Psalm shifts now from a personal petition to a corporate one. All of Israel is exhorted to hope in the Lord. Why? In verse 4 we were told that there is ‘forgiveness’ with God. In this verse, three more reasons are given. First, just as there is forgiveness with God so also is there ‘steadfast love.’ The Hebrew here is חֶסֶד (ḥeseḏ, used close to 250 times in the Hebrew Scriptures) which refers to God’s unfailing love or God’s love based his covenant relationship with Israel. Second, there is ‘plentiful redemption’ with God. God’s steadfast love and abundant redemption are gifts that God has bestowed upon Israel. They are not based on who Israel is because in verse 3 the Psalmist told us that if God considered our sins none of us could stand before him. And finally, the Psalm closes on a positive note of trust in who God is. Israel will be redeemed from all their iniquities.
Shape Divider - Style fan_opacity
|