Jesus: Priest and King

In the Old Testament, the roles of High Priest and King were separate from one another. It seemed to be the division of ‘church and state’, if we were to use language from today. The King led the people in the Name of God. The High Priest led the Worship in the Name of God. Melchizedek brought these two roles together into one person. As we have called him, a Mystery Man in the Bible.

One very significant difference we need to recognize between people of the Biblical times and ourselves is that we have set things up today very differently. The ‘state’ is secular, that is, beyond religions in how it runs things. The ‘church’ maintains its sacred role in our lives, but as something we have deliberately separated from the running of the state, the running of government. In the time of the Old Testament, the King ruled on God’s behalf. The High Priest led worship on God’s behalf. 

So when Jesus is following the pattern of Melchizedek, He is taking on what had been the roles of two different people in the Old Testament. Bringing them together is what Jesus does as our Savior. 

Perhaps the best known Title for Jesus is “Christ”, so well known that it is often mistaken for his family name, Jesus Christ. But it means ‘the Anointed One’. It refers to Jesus’ anointing by the Holy Spirit when this comes down from God in the form of a dove. This moment is recorded in all four gospels. In the Old Testament, both King and High Priest were also anointed to their positions before the Lord, as a way of being set apart for divine service.

It is probably easier for us to relate to Jesus as King, not that we have a king, but because we recognize the position and the role of someone with temporal authority over us. In the United States, our leader is the President. These powers are tempered and balanced by the Congress and by the Court system, but there is one person ‘in charge’. Jesus, being the Son of God, being without sin, is the ideal as our Ruler, operating only from love, not from power, nor from the corruption that comes from it.

The High Priest is out of our direct experience. The role of the priesthood in the Old Testament was marked to a great extent by the performance of the sacrificial system that was the mode of Restoration and Redemption, beginning in the time of Moses. What that means is that the people then had sin in common with us today. We recognize the need to ask for God’s forgiveness for our sins, that we have in common with the people of time of Moses. But in the law of Moses, they required a blood sacrifice, blood for blood, to pay for their sins.

We do not recognize that as an ongoing system, because this system was fulfilled in Christ. Jesus was the final sacrifice. By his death and resurrection on the cross, our sins were paid for and our relationship restored with God. It emerges from and culminates the system that was laid out in law under Moses. Jesus takes things further. He is the Final Sacrifice, but He is also the High Priest who oversees, who runs the sacrificial system. 

So there is a lot of history that finds itself fulfilled in Jesus. It is inclusive of the ‘ruling’ authority of the king and the ‘religious’ authority of the High Priest, but it is not something new. Even these roles been drawn together is seen in the figure of Melchizedek.  

Pastor Peter

Jesus and Melchizedek

While the Gospel of Matthew seems to be written with a Jewish audience in mind, connecting to the Old Testament in a deliberate manner, it is not the only book in the New Testament with such a focus. The other is the book of Hebrews (aptly named). While the gospels focus on the life and ministry of Jesus, Hebrews has a different point of view. It is written in the form of a letter that explicitly lays out the connections of Jesus to what came before, what came in the Old Testament. It might be better described as a theological treatise.  

In the book of Hebrews, Jesus is explicitly “a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.” It is not simply a leap from Genesis to Hebrews, but comes to us by way of Psalm 110, where David speaks of ‘the victory of God’s Priest-King’. David himself was ‘just’ a king. There was another serving as the high priest to God in his kingship. These roles were not blended. In fact, it was when King Saul blended these roles, offering the sacrifices to the Lord that were the purview of the priesthood, that he fell afoul of the Lord. 

But in this Psalm, David is looking forward to someone more powerful than himself, someone who will bring these two most powerful roles in the kingdom together, a priest-king in the order of Melchizedek.

In Melchizedek is something greater, more powerful than in David-who was not only king, but the most powerful king of the People of Israel. Jesus is of the line and family of David, he is of the Royal Line, born in the Royal City of Bethlehem, but there is more to who he is in the understanding of the Old Testament. In addition, Jesus is the High Priest, the only one who is able, once a year, to stand in the presence of God in the Holy of Holies to make atonement for the people. He who has the most power and he who stands closest to God. Such is the Order of Melchizedek, such is our Lord Jesus.  

So, if we were to look to the Mystery Magi, these strange harbingers of God who pop in and out of the life of Jesus as Melchizedek popped in and out of the life of Abraham, could God be providing to us, through Matthew, an even more significant hint at the birth of God’s only Son as to who Jesus is going to be? The Magi have power, consider not only their gifts but their ability to mount an expedition to the east to follow a star. They also have a closeness to God, being able to interpret that the star means something divine. I rather like that idea.

Pastor Peter

The Wise Men: Connections to another Mystery Man?

    In the book of Genesis, God calls Abraham from the East to settle in the land that God promises to Abraham and his descendents. A large section of the middle of Genesis is devoted to Abraham and the foundation of what will become the nation of Israel. But, as with Jesus, there is an episode that brings a mystery man into the life of the Father of God’s people.

His name is Melchizedek. He is named as the king of Salem, and also as a priest of God. Salem is generally considered to be Jerusalem, which David shall conquer as the capital for Israel and the place where the temple of the Lord will be constructed. But prior, it is referred to as a Jebusite fortress-the Jebusites being one of the peoples of Canaan that will be driven out as God brings God’s people into the Promised Land. It was the Jebusites that David drove out.

But in this moment, Melchizedek  just shows up. Abraham has just gone on campaign against certain of the Canaanites to rescue his nephew, Lot. He is successful and, on his return, this mysterious priest-king is there to meet him.. He praises Abraham in the name of God and Abraham, in response, gives him a tithe. The tithe, the granting of one-tenth, is the gift that is offered to God from the fruits of what God has granted. So Abraham is recognizing in Melchizedek the authority of God. 

Melchizedek drops into the life of Abraham for less than 5 verses. This authority of the Lord in the life of God’s Chosen One. 

It feels to me that there is a parallel to be made between Melchizedek and the Magi of Matthew 2. They come, they bless, and they disappear. Led by God and led away just as quickly. For Matthew, the gospel ‘to the Jews’ as some have called it, this is an echo of the Old Testament in a manner that is different from simply quoting something that has been fulfilled in the life and ministry of our Lord. 

Maybe this is also something of a reversal of roles. In Genesis, Abraham (Abram here as the Lord has not yet changed his name), comes from the East and receives the blessing of God in Melchizedek in the Promised Land. Jesus comes from the Promised Land, born in the City of David, and receives the blessing of God from the Magi who come out of the East. 

Cannot say for sure, but it feels right to me. Tomorrow, we will look at what Melchizedek means to Jesus in the words of the New Testament.

Pastor Peter

The Wise Men: The Mystery Magi of the Bible

  It has become such a part of the lore of Christmas that we do not even consider how odd the story of the Wise Men is in the birth of Jesus. These Magi, Wise Men from the east, unnamed, never to recur in the Biblical record, that just show up. What do we know about them?

We know they were people of means, given the gifts that they brought with them. It was enough to allow Joseph to take his family to Egypt before the Slaughter of the Innocents

.

We know they were people of some kind of importance, given that they were entertained by King Herod when they arrived in Jerusalem.

We know they were astronomers and astrologers (those two were intermingled) of some kind, interpreting the signs of the sky.

We know that, unlike pretty much every creche scene anywhere, they did not arrive with the shepherds at the stable to find Jesus in a manger. Rather, they told Herod they ‘saw the star at its rising’. I have always interpreted this as the angels rising up from where they sang to the shepherds. So there was some time lapse before they arrived. We know that, on questioning them closely, Herod went after every male child two years and under in an attempt to rid himself of this rival to the throne of Israel, which seems to give us a sense of the time gap.

We know that Mary and Joseph were living in Bethlehem. It might have been that they considered Jesus too young to travel with, or it might have been the result of the taxation. Joseph returned to his own city, to Bethlehem. The expectation might have been then that he remain there. 

There is something else we know about the gospel of Matthew. It is the gospel with the most explicit references to the Old Testament. For example, when the Wise Men returned to their land by another road, the Lord warned Joseph and Mary to flee to Egypt ahead of Herod’s retribution. This is to fulfill Hosea 11:1, where God says, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” Unpacking that is going to require its own posting.

More directly, we know that the Wise Men coming to Jerusalem lead Herod to direct his own scribes to dig up the reference to Bethlehem, where the king of the Jews is to be born, as found in Micah 5.

With this backdrop, do we have more that we can say about these mystery men, these mystery magi of Matthew 2? Were they simply a foil to allow Matthew to draw out these references to our Lord Jesus? Or do we find a forerunner to their presence in the Old Testament? Tomorrow, a theory..

Pastor Peter

Isaiah, and, Wait, Christmas in the Old Testament?

          So as we come into the Season of Advent, our focus turns to the prophet Isaiah. What? Wait! Advent, Christmas, birth of Jesus, kind of a New Testament thing, not so much Old, right? Well…

          My personal devotional time has just come through the gospel of Luke, and there was a piece after the Lord’s resurrection that comes to mind. Two men are walking from Jerusalem to Emmaus. They are grieved and probably disappointed because their religious leader, Jesus, has been executed at the hands of the Romans. And despite the rumors, they are convinced he is dead.

          Till, if you know the story-or if you don't-Jesus shows up and walks along with them. Before they know its him, Jesus offers them a masterclass in Biblical interpretation. He opens up the Scriptures (at that moment, the Old Testament) and walks them through it; where they will find Jesus throughout.

          Sidebar: Having that little piece of the bible in mind, or the piece where, after his resurrection, Jesus does a masterclass with the entire cadre of disciples, opening up the Old Testament to them, it has realigned how I have read that much larger section of our Bible. The question I keep asking is ‘Where do I see Jesus here?’ It is illuminating, speculative at times, but illuminating.

          One of the greatest treasure hoards of “Pre-Jesus” biblical writing is to be found in the prophet Isaiah. It is from Isaiah that John the Baptist speaks when he comes to 'prepare the way of the Lord'. Jesus turns to Isaiah in the synagogue one day when he comes to teach and announces how those words are now fulfilled before the eyes of the attendees of the synagogue that Sabbath (and I will leave you to google that passage).

          And if your church does a “Lessons & Carols” service or something akin, lessons of the Bible about Christmas and beloved music between, Isaiah is going to figure rather prominently. We have four Sundays in Advent and Isaiah figures in them all. Two will reflect passages prophesying the birth of Jesus, one will prophesy the plan of God as Jesus has fulfilled it, and one will be our Lessons & Carols service, where we will share Isaiah passages in our readings for the Season.

          Isaiah is the longest prophet, 66 chapters worth. The reading guide is almost as long. A fanciful coincidence is that the Bible is also 66 books long, but I have yet to find a parallel to transcend to something more conspiratorial in my biblical interpretation.

          So we are not going to get to the whole book, we are barely going to scratch the surface, but even so, Isaiah is rich in the prophecies of the coming of Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior, King of Kings and Lord of Lords. 

The British History Podcast, a consideration on 'magic' and 'faith'

          I am listening to “The British History Podcast”, offered by Jamie Jeffers. He is American raised and British born and I have very much enjoyed his take and telling of British history. I am still very early on in the cast, when he was talking about Dark Age Medicine.

          In the midst of this episode, he offered an explanation, or rather a clarification, that got me thinking. In addition to the physical treatments, the various herbs, concoctions, and dung (they really seemed hung up on dung), there was a huge magical component to the practice of medicine. Whether it was chanting or an amulet or where a particular component came from (lichen from a cross for example), there was more than simply the biological and chemical components that are the foundation of modern medicine.

          His clarification came for his Christian listeners. Jamie refers to the portions of the healing that are obviously beyond what modern medicine would practice to be “magic”. At issue is calling something like prayer or a blessing or the use of a cross to be ‘magic’. If I am understanding the situation, those objecting to his language define those practices of Christian origin to be ‘faith-based’, and not ‘magically-based’.

          As a pastor, I do understand that concern. Belief in God Almighty and the power our God provides is in contrast to magical practices that are understood to be of either ‘dark’ forces or some other supernatural origin. I have my own opinions about that. But this is a fair presentation from a faith-based point of view. But Jamie is taking a different point of view in the podcast.

          He is talking about Dark Age Medicine in contradistinction to current medicine. There are the commonalities of herbs with healing properties that are foundational to both ages of medical practice. Today, the herbs have a lot more complex names but their biological and chemical foundations are held in common.

          And I am fine with Jamie referring to the rest as ‘magic’. Maybe talking about the medical practices of the time invoking a ‘transcendent’ component would be more acceptable language. The healing practices of the Dark Ages reaching ‘beyond’ the immediate is a huge, if not the dominant, piece of the practice. That transcendent portion of the healing process is still integral to my belief today, as it is with every faith practice that I am familiar with beyond Christianity. The difference is what ends up in the medical text books.

            As we have come to understand how sickness and injury are from the 'natural' order of things, our medical and healing practices have followed. There is a scientific methodology to what we do. It does not mean that the this ‘magical’ or ‘transcendent’ component of healing has gone away. I believe it is not simply a piece of the Dark Age history in Britain, but it is universal across human experience. From a 'natural' point of view, the power of a positive mind and a calm spirit are both recognized for their contribution to success in medicine. 

            From a supernatural, a faith-based, perspective, I have seen faith-based practices accomplish some pretty amazing results. 

          Irrespective, if you have an interest in history or things British, give the podcast a listen.

Peter Hofstra

Black Panther: Wakanda Forever Spoilers Ahead

           Let me plunge right in. And I will say again SPOILERS!!!

          When Shuri took the heart shaped herb to become the new Black Panther, I was not surprised. I know that was the big secret of the film, but there was this question that always nagged at me to that moment: Supposing anyone could take the herb-even if only those exposed to vibranium-why wasn’t everyone in Wakanda so equipped?

          It was limited to the royal family, to a certain genetic line. Why? There are people far more imaginative than I who could explain that. But she was the obvious and the only choice (unless there were other branches of the royal family, which has not been indicated in canon).

          To indicate that something did not surprise me points to the possibility that something did surprise me. And something did take me completely by surprise. Killmonger showing up when she journeyed to the realm of the Ancestors. I do not know what I expected. The actor who played her father? Angela Basset? Some kind of CGI/cut up of previously unused material containing Chadwick Boseman? Maybe a final secret bit of filming he did before his death? Anything but him.

          For me, the power of that moment was how Killmonger was the ideal choice. It reinforced the detailed and realistic exploration of grief across that entire movie. This movie is as much a tribute to the memory of Chadwick Boseman as it is a next step in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, whose death touched the lives of so many of us.

          Shuri’s journey of grief into anger and revenge is certainly not a unique comic book theme. It is common enough to be a comic book trope. Consider the origin story of Batman for example. But Bruce Wayne was raised by Alfred. The influence for Shuri coming into the mantle of Black Panther was Killmonger.

          How many villain origins start from something terrible that happened that sent them down the wrong road? Something bad happened to me so I response by doing something bad it return. It is supposed to make the villain somewhere between misunderstood and sympathetic?

          And it came down to the climactic moment. The Black Panther was ready to kill Namor. Her vengeance would have been complete. She would have, in the words of Killmonger, ‘gotten the job done’. But unlike other Marvel movies, the grief was not concentrated in that finale. I am thinking of Iron Man 3, where Tony Stark watched Pepper fall to her apparent death. Grief concentrated into the shock of failure for Iron Man. We followed Shuri through her journey. We cried with her, we were angry with her, we found moments of strange peace and even humor before the grief washed back up.

          What would have been the villain’s end to this movie? The Black Panther executed vengeance on Namor. Then Shuri returned home and continued her work on the herb to allow it to work for all Wakandans (as all are exposed to vibranium). That, with vibranium technology, would have been a world-conquering combination.

          But at the end of a journey of grief, life comes back into focus. The notion of ‘closure’ is incorrect. Rather, the memories remain but the emotions return to a place where they are a part of life, instead of taking life over. That was symbolized in the ritual of burning the mourning garments. And the Easter egg, but I will leave that to be seen.

Peter Hofstra

Book of the Month Club: The Preaching Edition

          The Book of the Month Club, anybody remember those? They probably still exist out there. Books sent at a discount, whatever was currently hot? Could be top 40 (yes, I know that is music, not books), could be genre (sci-fi etc.), with the catalogues sent out? Stop the book shipping by a certain date or the assumption was that you wanted it.

          We of the Christian faith have a book that is a book of books. The Westminster Standards list sixty-six of them. Thankfully, our sister denominations with differing opinions do not count that as a division to be grasped.

          One of the great difficulties in being a pastor has been the inability to overcome the disconnect of Scriptural literacy from many of my parishioners. What? How do we get our parishioners to read their bibles? Many do, don’t get me wrong, but Biblical literacy, or at least familiarity, used to be a cultural presumption. We could make a literary reference to the Bible and assume that it was culturally known.

            But among the ordination requirements I have as a pastor is a Biblical literacy exam. The feeling in my gut is that all church members should be aces on that, not simply those seeking to be ordained (and there is a lot of struggle to pass that one).

          One of the fall backs has been to lean on the Sermon to be teaching as well as preaching. I agree with that in principle, but the weight on the ‘teaching’ in the balance has increased in my considerations as a preacher. There is a presupposition that in the portfolio of skills a minister brings to the church is the moniker of ‘teacher’.

          Let me draw a distinction here. There is the person who has a body of knowledge, of information, that it is to the benefit of the community to be shared and disseminated. Then there is a teacher. It is not the same thing. A subject area specialist is not, by any means, an automatic teacher of said subject area.

          I know this through various personal experiences. One has been the results of the programs in the lives of people in my church experience that I have “taught”. Another has been in reflecting on what I call my “teaching” style compared to actual, trained teachers who’ve been stuck trying to open my mind. Most importantly however is the experience I have gained in being married to a highly skilled professional teacher, whose expertise is not bound to subject matter at to learning expertise. What that means is my wife is in special education, and her responsibility is to bring the students outside the defined parameters of ‘normal’ to the knowledge base and learning capacity as those in the ‘mainstream’. 

            It is also very possible that 'teaching' is not the right word when seeking to build heart knowledge over and against head knowledge. But its the word we have.

          That’s just the background. The foreground of the ‘teaching’ by a preacher is the moment of the sermon. And in the context of a week, it is just a moment. Fifteen to thirty minutes on a Sunday morning out of a time of somewhere around an hour devoted to worship-not learning-to our God. There are different approaches to this.

          Most common in our denomination is the lectionary, a three-year cycle of biblical readings anchored on the synoptic gospels that draw out a huge cross section of Biblical texts. The synoptic gospels are Matthew, Mark, and Luke. They are related in structure and content in a way that is fundamentally different than John. There, teaching, a lesson on gospel structures, bored yet? But it is consistent and it provides a common platform for preaching not just across the PCUSA but among our sister churches and denominations.

          The lectionary is not mandated by the denomination. I have followed it at various times in my preaching career. It might very well be accurate to fault me for not following the discipline tightly enough. But it is a version of ‘book preaching’, which I have also done. Pick a book of the bible, start at chapter one, verse one, and march through to the last chapter, last verse. It certainly exposes the congregation to the long view of a book. But it is realistic to expect someone to put together the structural identity of a book of the bible after this long-term approach? Even if that structural component is built into the sermon? And then comes the problem of the sermon as a teaching moment versus a moment of worship.

          I have not even attempted to tackle the contrast and the connection between teaching and worship.

          Another way is topical preaching. When this system is abused, topics of preference to the pastor can lead the congregation to a particular point of view about the Bible. But when done with respect to the Bible and its contents, it can be effective. A sermon series on the question of Christian Stewardship is a fairly common topical series in the calendars of church. A sermon series developed on the Sermon on the Mount is another. Or a seasonal approach as a Lenten series on the miracles of Jesus.

          These are all intentional methods of preaching. Without an intentional plan, the danger that is often expressed is that the pastor will fall into a pattern of their preferred Scripture passages, so that a very select list of Biblical passages find expression over the career of a minister, thus the congregation is exposed to that select list, offering a limited window to what the Bible has to offer. Unfortunately, the ‘evidence’ for this danger is anecdotal, based on individual stories, without, in my experience, a pattern being sought as evidence.

          Regardless of that, the question of the sermon and teaching the bible is a difficult one. The ideal would be that a church has a robust service of worship and a robust, well-attended adult educational system in place. I have been learning in the faith for my entire life and I am nowhere near ‘done’. But that is not the reality of church today. There are learners in every congregation, don’t get me wrong.

I will joyfully give a shout out to Nelson Searcy and his integrated structure of church that lays down adult growth and learning from its foundation. That is not here.

So, the Book of the Month approach. Each month, a book of the Bible becomes the focus of preaching. Not the whole book, but selected passages. Against that preaching focus, a devotional reading guide is also provided. In this start up, the idea is to move back and forth between the Old and New Testaments. It is a challenge because of the sheer differences in size between various books. Philippians, for November, is 4 chapters. Isaiah, for December, is 66 chapters long.

Isaiah is certainly not a random choice for December but will provide a preaching focus on the Christmas prophecies contained within its pages. Where is it going? I don’t know. But it’s the Bible. It’s the Handbook of the faith. It is the foundational document of Jesus Christ. It is God’s gift to us. So we shall see.

Pastor Peter

A Pleasant Realization About Inclusivity

           It is a privilege for me to be able to include elements of the worship services that are provided to the denomination by the Presbyterian Outlook in our own worship services. We do not use all the elements, oftentimes rewriting the Call to Worship to reflect the Scripture of the day (which is not the lectionary). But the Confession, Prayers of the People, the call and response to the offering, those we use quite consistently.

          As do we use the response of faith. The majority of the time, these are drawn from the Confessions of the church, which are an excellent reminder of who we are and where we come from. This past Sunday, we used a selection from the Confession of 1967. Something struck me, not the theology, but the language.

          It was not inclusive, as we understand that today. I believe it was inclusive for the time, when the male pronoun and masculine lead were generally accepted as being inclusive, but that understanding has progressed. Being a historic document (and it causes a little pang of something that a document written in my lifetime is ‘historic’), it is understood that the language is also historic (or archaic). But this is often the case with reading the Bible as well, even in the most recent translations.

          I followed the written text for awhile, maybe halfway through. But then I found myself switching into an automatic mode (or subconscious if you like) of updating the language as we shared the text together. ‘Mankind’ became ‘humanity’ and so forth. That is where I was comfortable once again in my language of worship.

          The language of theology and church that I grew up with were male dominant. I came with a certain crankiness to accept inclusive language-deliberately gender neutral-as is practiced these days. It came from the belief and life experience that older practice of inclusivity built into male dominant language. I got it, in my mind, but the heart can be more fickle.

          Until the day I was reading some more conservative reformed theology (that in which I was raised) and the author made the argument that male gender-specific language was, in fact, proof of male exclusivity in the name of our faith to church leadership. Male dominant thinking was given theological weight in the grammatical construct of pronouns…

          That is where the knowledge of the heart synchronized with the head. I could argue from within about inclusiveness being a grammatical construct of inclusive language (I grew up with that). I did not believe there was that sinful streak of hierarchy built into the present-day understanding and expression of the theology on which I was raised.

          So as we spoke these words from the Confession together, the automatic updating began. If I could tolerate watching myself on the live feed, I would be tempted to go back and watch to see what could get picked up on our Youtube channel.

          What does this say about me? That I can, in fact, be taught? That being a life-long learner has deep implications about how the Body of Christ is defined? That sin can nest in the theological creativity of the most devout?

          I found myself reflecting on the need to fix this problem, to update the source material. Yes, to update C67. That was the intent of this morning’s post till I found out it has already been done by people with far more training and experience than myself. Years and years ago. For this I am very grateful.

          Makes me wonder about the rest of our confessional history. As with each generation (or two or three), we revisit the Bible in its original languages to make the best translations we can in the language and grammar of the day, I wonder if there is some work in our confessional history as well.

Pastor Peter

Developing a Four Fold Vision of Christian Life

          So I struggle as a person of faith. There is Jesus and the wonderful things that Jesus has done for the world. The truth of the New Testament is powerful in a world so in need of healing and a moral compass. I was raised in this stuff. That is the truth. But the struggle is the transition to how life then can be lived.

          In other words, here is what Jesus did, what Jesus said, what Jesus brought to us. How do I make it real in my life?

          Then Paul gives us almost a throw away line in his letter to the Philippians: “If then there is any encouragement in Christ, any consolation from love, any sharing in the Spirit, any compassion and sympathy, make my joy complete…”

          There is a reading guide to Philippians in the November 1 posting to the blog that can provide more background in this letter.

          These four things clicked. There is something in Buddhism called the four-fold path, which I am not trying to connect or synchronize to Christianity, but which serves as a useful memory device (I am remembering it from Seminary and comparative religions classes).

          So, lets break out the four statements. "If there" implies to me the possibility that Paul is considering there may NOT be.

          If there is any encouragement in Christ.

          If there is any consolation from love.

          If there is any sharing in the Spirit.

          If there is any compassion and sympathy.

          “If there is”? That implies that Paul is not seeing it, that Paul is hoping for it, that Paul, in the grief and depression of the imprisoned situation that he is in, that he is questioning the basics of his faith.

          If there is encouragement in Christ… That cuts to the quick. Christ shall have dominion, over lands and sea. Christ, whose glory fills the sky. Christ, the true and only light. Jesus, who has promised that all who follow him, that where Jesus is in glory, there shall His servant be. These promises and assumptions are a sample of what we sing in worship to Jesus’ Name. The Name that Paul will assure us is raised, by God, above every Name.

          Obviously Paul believes in the encouragement of Christ. Philippians 2: 5-11 is arguably the defining description of Jesus as God and Human. He knows it in the words of the gifted Rabbinic teacher that he is, but seems like there is leakage of conviction in his heart. He’s looking for something in this among the Philippians.

          The amazing person that is Jesus, that much I get, good head knowledge, strong foundation to heart knowledge. But Paul gives us more, things that many people of faith will understand implicitly in the encouragement of Christ.

          Is there consolation in love? The biggest shaker to my faith these days is when I look around at what is called “Christianity” out there, and Christ is invoked, but there is a willful disconnect from love. If anything, the name and title of Jesus Christ is wielded in deliberate disregard for love. Oh, there is often some twisted rationalization that uses a crowbar to force “love” into every equation in which Christ is a factor. But that’s the same kind of lie that an abuser uses as their love ‘justification’ where they inflict pain on another ‘for their own good’. Or worse, ‘because the Bible says so’.

          Christ without love makes for the very worst kind of hypocrisy. There is also a disconnect for myself. That ability to love totally and completely.  Not quite there yet. There is a bit in the bible that God is love. That is the supportive piece when people say things like “see Jesus in the face of another”. It is to trigger the love of neighbor that we are called upon to go looking.

          Is there sharing of the Spirit? The reality of the Holy Spirit can be a hard one to wrap my heart around because I have biases against the more expressive forms of the outpouring of the Spirit. I am born and raised in the Frozen Chosen. The more enthusiastic outpourings of religious expression are not in my wheelhouse. So I lose something fundamental about the Spirit.

          The Spirit is the binding that holds the church together. The indwelling of Jesus is something Jesus promised in John 14, it is something we see developing as the early church develops in Acts. If I am to see the face of Jesus in every other person, as the leading edge of love for that person, I need to see the Spirit in the heart of those who are my community of faith. I say my community of faith because not everyone who attends a church is a “faithful” member when faith is defined as relationship to Jesus and not an attendance policy.

          The power of the Presbyterian system is in the committee. It is in the gathering of people in a room to decide and make policy. That rests on the sharing of the Spirit, that the Spirit’s voice speaks through the life and faith experiences of those gathered together. It’s how God’s inspiration works in the writing of the Bible.

          Is there any sympathy and compassion? I think that is what Paul is truly looking for in his trying circumstances. Is anybody there? Does anybody care? It is the most basic function of humanity to care for our fellow humans. To express the law of love of neighbor. The context of sympathy and compassion from with Christianity, as opposed to a world of sin, that is another consideration.

 

Peace, Pastor Peter

American Civics: The Ideal and the Reality Colliding

           Found myself considering Civics in my last post. What would American Civics look like right now? How could we, pun intended, avoid white-washing our history as a nation? Where might we even begin?

          How about an American truism and an American virtue? The truism is that ‘all humans are created equal’ and the virtue is that of personal and collective responsibility?

          The reality is that as we have progressed historically, the pool of ‘all’ who are created equal has expanded. Often the theory has expanded more rapidly than the reality, but it has expanded. Color, race, gender, ethnicity, how many other tangibles and intangibles have affected our definition of ‘all’?

          What is this virtue? A sense of responsibility? A sense that is ACTED upon? That is going to be a little more interesting. Responsibility to whom? To what?

          I believe that the first step is to accept responsibility for our past where we intentionally excluded others from ‘all’ in our consideration of equality. We need to accept responsibility for slavery, accept responsibility for events as what happened at Wounded Knee, for Japanese internment, for abuse aimed at perceived people of Chinese origin for Covid, and accept responsibility for the back drops to the Black Lives Matter and the Me Too movements.

          Yes, All Lives Matter, but we, as a nation, need to take responsibility for the reality that skin color is going to impact whose life matters MORE!

          I wonder if one of the pieces that stands in the way of our collective responsibility is the question of restitution. How much of the physical nation would we be morally responsible to ‘give back’ to someone else? To Mexico? To the First Nations (Canadian influence)? Would taking responsibility mean questioning France’s legitimacy in offering up the Louisiana Purchase? Or Russia offering up Alaska?

          What about matters of reparations? Like for slavery? I wonder how much of this kind of fear and uncertainty adds root to white supremacy movements? Whites were supreme when we did so many horrible and terrible things for White profit and advancement. Is there truly any way that we can accept responsibility and walk that back?

          Or maybe we fear that the truth will be that America is built on a house of cards, morally speaking.

          Or maybe we know that at present, there is only lip-service being paid to the notion that all are created equal and that a huge restructuring of our society, our economy, and our culture will need to happen to live into a reality that all are equal?

          Can’t say for sure. But for our Civics to be anything more than an idealized lie, we need to take seriously that all humans are created equal. And we need to take seriously our individual and national responsibility for when and where that did not happen and still doesn’t happen.

Election Day! Finished at Last.

           I tuned into NPR this morning, as is my initial habit, thinking that we are returning to the news of the world. It is Election Day! Campaign coverage is at an end. Until I remembered that there is something I like even less than campaign coverage. Election coverage.

          I know I should not dislike election coverage. I should love election coverage, champion election coverage, delight in the democratic process unfolding. But I don’t.

          That is because it feels like I am listening to who is going to save America against the excesses of the other side. Joe Biden is too old and senile. Donald Trump is too self-centered and greedy. And that is just the more polite rhetoric,

          Yes, these are midterms. No presidential election. But the rest of it flows from the top. The Sharks and the Jets are fighting over America. Not for America. Maybe if I really felt that the purpose of one party was more than just stopping the other, things would be different.

          As my media revelation has shown, you can probably tell that I am on the “left” of the political spectrum. But when Donald Trump was running for President, I understood the appeal. He was a political ‘outsider’ bringing in a new sensibility. Now, revealing some more of my political standing, President Trump has greatly increased my appreciation of the political ‘insider’, but that’s another story.

          The thing of it is, I want to be excited about our political process. I want the level of public debate in this country to be elevated. I do not want the elementary school recess name calling that I feel we have gotten instead. I think public civics is something that should be taught, not because we need to make America great again, but because it is the duty of every citizen to understand and live and support what makes America so great.

          If you have had the privilege of going to Disney World, to the World Showcase in Epcot, to the American Pavilion, have you listened to the sound track? Specifically “Golden Dream”, that Spotify credits to Randy Bright and Bob Moline. It is quaint, it is idyllic, it is naïve, but that’s what I want.

          I want those people who want me to vote for them up and down the ticket to tell me their dreams and aspirations for fulfilling that ‘golden dream’ in this country. That is going to be a very painful place to get to. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote that ‘all men are created equal’.

          At the time, that meant ‘white’, that meant ‘landowning’ to a certain minimum. I know that we built this nation of the backs of so many others. But a Great Nation does not build a façade to hide its past. A Great Nation owns its past, outlives its past, and in each generation expands the foundation of freedom and equality and justice and the Dream so that it encompasses more and more and more people.

          I am a Christian living in a sinful world. I know we are not going to get it perfect, not until Jesus comes again. But I want elections to be about how we build the Dream, not how we have to keep others from tearing it down. Then maybe I will appreciate election coverage.

Thanksgiving First-Lest We Lose the Meaning of Christmas

           Somewhere on the celebration of All Saint’s Day (November 1), the seasons wax and wane. Christmas rises and Halloween descends. Tucked in between is Thanksgiving. It is a National holiday parked between the two religious holidays (that some would argue celebrate ‘opposing’ sides).

          I was moved to this when Lynn, my beloved wife, shared a hysterical video clip that showed Thanksgiving as the poor relations among the holidays getting ready to go for the fall (unlike Halloween and Christmas, it does not even have its own sports coat).

          And while Thanksgiving may not carry the pomp and circumstance of the fall and winter holidays, it is critically important to Christmas.  In the words of one of the great mystics of the Christmas canon of the silver screen, “there's a lot of bad 'isms' floatin' around this world, but one of the worst is commercialism. Make a buck, make a buck.”

          As a Christian cleric, it continues to concern me that the star at its rising (the star in the East) is always in danger of paling before the glow of extended shopping hours. And while it is my delight to invite anyone come worship with us at Christmas (in vr or rr-vitual reality or real-reality), there is a bigger promise at stake for this world so much in need.

The promise in Luke goes something like, ‘peace on earth, goodwill to all humanity’ (the translation has some latitude for interpretation). There is an added bit about it being reserved for those whom God favors. In my faith, we are all God’s children, therefore God’s favor rests upon us all. In my experience, ‘making the buck’ can drown out all other voices but its own.

Thus the renewed necessity of front-loading Christmas with Thanksgiving. At the front end, if we infuse Thanksgiving for all that we have, for all that we can offer, for all that we will receive, and all that we will experience, I believe we dance in the winter wonderland more often than dragging through the commercial crawl.

Does music move your soul? For me, the opening of Christmas comes after giving thanks. But for those whom music is a special blessing, how about a soft opening to the Season? Search “Count Your Blessings-White Christmas” on Youtube. It is not a bad anthem for giving thanks.

Rev. Peter Hofstra

Daily Readings for November and December

 Daily Readings: November and December 2022

Looking forward to the next two months, we are swinging into Paul’s letter to the Philippians and to the Prophet Isaiah. In November, we are going to consider gratitude, drawing on Paul’s letter. With Advent, we are moving to the season of preparation for Christmas, so we shall look into Isaiah for the wonderful prophecies looking forward to the birth of our Savior.

For the letter to the Philippians, we begin with the passage in Acts that outlines Paul’s visit to Philippi on his second missionary journey. We will then turn to the letter itself. I am grateful to the Harper Study Bible as the basis for the outline we shall use. Isaiah is a much longer book, some 66 chapters. Again, the outline in the Harper Study Bible shall serve as our basis for readings.

Readings for Philippians

Reading 1: Acts 16: 11-40  Paul’s adventures in Philippi. This gives us a flavor of the City and Paul’s experiences in it.

Reading 2: Philippians 1: 1-11  Paul opens with thanksgiving and the expression of his love for these people.

Reading 3: Philippians 1: 12-30  Paul speaks to his own circumstances, currently under arrest.

Reading 4: Philippians 2: 1-18  Considering who we are in Jesus.

Reading 5: Philippians 2: 19-30  New leadership introduced

Reading 6: Philippians 3: 1-4: 9  Paul reflects on his own experiences to speak of Christ.

Reading 7: Philippians 4: 10-23  Paul acknowledges the gift of the Philippians and closes his letter.

 Readings for Isaiah

Reading 1: Isaiah 1: 1-31  Rebellion and Restoration

Reading 2: Isaiah 2: 1-4:6  Punishment from God will lead to Future Glory

Reading 3: Isaiah 5: 1-20  Judgement against Judah for her Sins

Reading 4: Isaiah 6: 1-13  The call of Isaiah as God’s prophet

to be continued.

Pastor Peter Hofstra

Reading 9: The Second Entreaty by Eliphaz Job 15

 

15Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered:

² ‘Should the wise answer with windy knowledge,
   and fill themselves with the east wind?

Sarcastic reference to Job it seems.

³ Should they argue in unprofitable talk,
   or in words with which they can do no good?

He is dismissing what Job is trying to say in total.

⁴ But you are doing away with the fear of God,
   and hindering meditation before God.

The title of this section in the bible add notes is Job undermining religion.

⁵ For your iniquity teaches your mouth,
   and you choose the tongue of the crafty.

Job is dismissed as telling lies.

⁶ Your own mouth condemns you, and not I;
   your own lips testify against you.

Eliphaz gives no credence to Job’s words, he is not listening.

⁷ ‘Are you the firstborn of the human race?
   Were you brought forth before the hills?

Interesting, not referring to him as Adam, but asking if Job has early creation wisdom

⁸ Have you listened in the council of God?
   And do you limit wisdom to yourself?

We had that council of God in opening of Job.

⁹ What do you know that we do not know?
   What do you understand that is not clear to us?

Is Eliphaz being sarcastic or does he truly wonder if Job knows something different?

¹⁰ The grey-haired and the aged are on our side,
   those older than your father.

In age, there is wisdom.

¹¹ Are the consolations of God too small for you,
   or the word that deals gently with you?

Is God not enough for Job? Again, this is all according to their notions of tragedy being punishment.

¹² Why does your heart carry you away,
   and why do your eyes flash,

He sees arrogance in Job and is trying to call him on it.

¹³ so that you turn your spirit against God,
   and let such words go out of your mouth?

Job is turned away from the way of God.

¹⁴ What are mortals, that they can be clean?
   Or those born of woman, that they can be righteous?

This seems to be a recognition of the sinful condition of everyone before God.

¹⁵ God puts no trust even in his holy ones,
   and the heavens are not clean in his sight;

Something of a reverse compliment on the perfection of God.

¹⁶ how much less one who is abominable and corrupt,
   one who drinks iniquity like water!

If heaven is not good enough, so much less is Job in what he is saying.

¹⁷ ‘I will show you; listen to me;
   what I have seen I will declare—

Now that Job has been ‘put in his place’, Eliphaz will proceed to the ‘truth’ once more.

¹⁸ what sages have told,
   and their ancestors have not hidden,

He turns to the wisdom of the ages of experience in God as his authority.

¹⁹ to whom alone the land was given,
   and no stranger passed among them.

These sages are from land blessed especially by God, adding to their authority.

²⁰ The wicked writhe in pain all their days,
   through all the years that are laid up for the ruthless.

The wicked writhe in pain, Job writhes in pain, therefore Job is wicked.

²¹ Terrifying sounds are in their ears;
   in prosperity the destroyer will come upon them.

Like Job, they are on the receiving end of God’s destructive power.

²² They despair of returning from darkness,
   and they are destined for the sword.

Like Job, they despair from seeing the goodness of God.

²³ They wander abroad for bread, saying, “Where is it?”
   They know that a day of darkness is ready at hand;

They know their punishment is coming.
²⁴ distress and anguish terrify them;
   they prevail against them, like a king prepared for battle.

The wicked see the destruction that Job sees.
²⁵ Because they stretched out their hands against God,
   and bid defiance to the Almighty,

They see it because they turned against God-therefore Job has too.

²⁶ running stubbornly against him
   with a thick-bossed shield;

They are stubborn in their wickedness, as Job is.

²⁷ because they have covered their faces with their fat,
   and gathered fat upon their loins,

They hide in their own arrogance? As Job is.

²⁸ they will live in desolate cities,
   in houses that no one should inhabit,
   houses destined to become heaps of ruins;

They will be alone, as Job is.

²⁹ they will not be rich, and their wealth will not endure,
   nor will they strike root in the earth;

This is what Job has to look forward to, no return of blessing.

³⁰ they will not escape from darkness;
   the flame will dry up their shoots,
   and their blossom will be swept away by the wind.

There is no escape from God.

³¹ Let them not trust in emptiness, deceiving themselves;
   for emptiness will be their recompense.

Let them not trust, Eliphaz also means Job should not trust.

³² It will be paid in full before their time,
   and their branch will not be green.

God’s punishment will be fully worked out, for Job-he continues to sin in Eliphaz’ estimation.

³³ They will shake off their unripe grape, like the vine,
   and cast off their blossoms, like the olive tree.

The wicked will shake off any sense of guilt, as Job is doing.

³⁴ For the company of the godless is barren,
   and fire consumes the tents of bribery.

Because this is what happens to the evil-that which is happening to Job.

³⁵ They conceive mischief and bring forth evil
   and their heart prepares deceit.’

Therefore, this is what Job must be doing.

 

Eliphaz seems a little more tempered in his response to Job, a little less attacking in his tone. Yet he is convinced that Job is lying, or deceived, in all this protest of innocence. Because this is not how God acts. And to question God acting this way is to question the very nature of being in fear of the Lord. Job’s account of what is going on does not track with what faith tells Eliphaz what must be happening.

 

Pastor Peter

Reading 8: Job’s Reply to Zophar Job 12:1-14:22

 

Job’s replies seems to come in two sections. The first is one that replies to the words of his ‘friend’ in their entreaty. The second is Job returning from a response to making his own case before the Lord.

12Then Job answered:
² ‘No doubt you are the people,
   and wisdom will die with you.

Zophar makes a crack about Job essentially missing the secret wisdom of God, this sounds like Job cracking back at him-telling Zophar this ‘wisdom’ is human and therefore mortal.

³ But I have understanding as well as you;
   I am not inferior to you.
   Who does not know such things as these?

In other words, Zophar is treating Job like an uneducated individual, when Job is not.

⁴ I am a laughing-stock to my friends;
   I, who called upon God and he answered me,
   a just and blameless man, I am a laughing-stock.

Job recognizes that his friends do not believe him. He called on God, but they answered instead.

⁵ Those at ease have contempt for misfortune,
   but it is ready for those whose feet are unstable.

Job seems to be saying ‘it is easy for you to talk when you are not suffering’.

⁶ The tents of robbers are at peace,
   and those who provoke God are secure,
   who bring their god in their hands.

His friends seem to be accusing Job of being one of these robbers, these provokers, but in Job’s mind, even they have peace compared to his circumstances.

⁷ ‘But ask the animals, and they will teach you;
   the birds of the air, and they will tell you;
⁸ ask the plants of the earth, and they will teach you;
   and the fish of the sea will declare to you.

Job is appealing to the created life of God to be the witness to his circumstances, where there is not cause and effect, blessing and punishment, in the good and bad that happens?
⁹ Who among all these does not know
   that the hand of the Lord has done this?

It feels to me like there is a ‘circle of life’ thing here, everything gets eaten by something else-faces its own tragic circumstances.

¹⁰ In his hand is the life of every living thing
   and the breath of every human being.

God’s hands are behind all these circumstances, those that happen in nature and what has happened to Job, that this is not the punishment his friends presume, but ‘just’ tragedy.

¹¹ Does not the ear test words
   as the palate tastes food?
¹² Is wisdom with the aged,
   and understanding in length of days?

Job seems to be presenting with these metaphors to defend what he is saying against the accusations of his friends.

¹³ ‘With God are wisdom and strength;
   he has counsel and understanding.
¹⁴ If he tears down, no one can rebuild;
   if he shuts someone in, no one can open up.
¹⁵ If he withholds the waters, they dry up;
   if he sends them out, they overwhelm the land.
¹⁶ With him are strength and wisdom;
   the deceived and the deceiver are his.

Job is acknowledging the power of God, the power God has over all, that there is no reversing what God has done, unless God does it.

¹⁷ He leads counsellors away stripped,
   and makes fools of judges.
¹⁸ He looses the sash of kings,
   and binds a waistcloth on their loins.
¹⁹ He leads priests away stripped,
   and overthrows the mighty.
²⁰ He deprives of speech those who are trusted,
   and takes away the discernment of the elders.
²¹ He pours contempt on princes,
   and looses the belt of the strong.
²² He uncovers the deeps out of darkness,
   and brings deep darkness to light.
²³ He makes nations great, then destroys them;
   he enlarges nations, then leads them away.
²⁴ He strips understanding from the leaders of the earth,
   and makes them wander in a pathless waste.
²⁵ They grope in the dark without light;
   he makes them stagger like a drunkard.

Is Job here taking a swipe back at his friends? Demonstrating the power of God to bring the mighty low and the powerful to an end, so God is working among ‘the wisdom’ of his friends?

13‘Look, my eye has seen all this,
   my ear has heard and understood it.
² What you know, I also know;
   I am not inferior to you.

Again, Job claims the same knowledge and same understanding has his friends, that even in tragic circumstances, he is not lesser.

³ But I would speak to the Almighty,
   and I desire to argue my case with God.

As he has said before, Job wants to come to God in his tragic circumstances.

⁴ As for you, you whitewash with lies;
   all of you are worthless physicians.

His friends are not only unhelpful, but worse than useless because they do not listen to him.

⁵ If you would only keep silent,
   that would be your wisdom!

Politely asking them to shut up.

⁶ Hear now my reasoning,
   and listen to the pleadings of my lips.

Job just wants to be heard that they are not listening.

⁷ Will you speak falsely for God,
   and speak deceitfully for him?

Here is his counter accusation, that they speak for God, but it is a lie that they speak.

⁸ Will you show partiality towards him,
   will you plead the case for God?
⁹ Will it be well with you when he searches you out?
   Or can you deceive him, as one person deceives another?

Are they going to be able to deceive God and get away with their falsehoods in God’s name?

¹⁰ He will surely rebuke you
   if in secret you show partiality.
¹¹ Will not his majesty terrify you,
   and the dread of him fall upon you?

God is going to come back on them for their falsehoods.

¹² Your maxims are proverbs of ashes,
   your defenses are defenses of clay.

Their answers are essentially junk.

¹³ ‘Let me have silence, and I will speak,
   and let come on me what may.
¹⁴ I will take my flesh in my teeth,
   and put my life in my hand.

Job just wants them to listen and not judge.

¹⁵ See, he will kill me; I have no hope;
   but I will defend my ways to his face.

Job might die in the process, but he will do so in his innocence.

¹⁶ This will be my salvation,
   that the godless shall not come before him.

Job will be saved, not lumped in with the guilty as his friends presume he must be to receive this tragedy.

¹⁷ Listen carefully to my words,
   and let my declaration be in your ears.
¹⁸ I have indeed prepared my case;
   I know that I shall be vindicated.

Just listen, Job says, he knows he will be found innocent.

¹⁹ Who is there that will contend with me?
   For then I would be silent and die.

Contend with Job on the merits of his case, unlike his friends, who speak falsely in the Lord’s name.

²⁰ Only grant two things to me,
   then I will not hide myself from your face:

The point of view has changed, Job is now calling upon God.

²¹ withdraw your hand far from me,
   and do not let dread of you terrify me.

Again, he asks for God’s hand of tragedy and fear to be withdrawn.

²² Then call, and I will answer;
   or let me speak, and you reply to me.

Job wants to make his case before this silent Lord.

²³ How many are my iniquities and my sins?
   Make me know my transgression and my sin.

Job protests he has not deserved this punishment, but he is not so arrogant as to presume that he might be wrong. If he is, he seeks God to enlighten him on what he did wrong.

²⁴ Why do you hide your face,
   and count me as your enemy?

But Job’s deep sorrow seems to be that God is ignoring him in his pain.

²⁵ Will you frighten a windblown leaf
   and pursue dry chaff?

Job seems to be referring to himself in these metaphors.

²⁶ For you write bitter things against me,
   and make me reap the iniquities of my youth.
²⁷ You put my feet in the stocks,
   and watch all my paths;
   you set a bound to the soles of my feet.
²⁸ One wastes away like a rotten thing,
   like a garment that is moth-eaten.

This is poetic language of Job referring to what God has done to him in these tragic circumstances.

 

14‘A mortal, born of woman, few of days and full of trouble,
²   comes up like a flower and withers,
   flees like a shadow and does not last.

Reflection on the mortality of humans.

³ Do you fix your eyes on such a one?
   Do you bring me into judgement with you?

Why are you targeting me Lord?

⁴ Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?
   No one can.
⁵ Since their days are determined,
   and the number of their months is known to you,
   and you have appointed the bounds that they cannot pass,
⁶ look away from them, and desist,
   that they may enjoy, like laborers, their days.

Job is asking the Lord to let up on the tragedy that God has inflicted upon him. Let him live in peace.

⁷ ‘For there is hope for a tree,
   if it is cut down, that it will sprout again,
   and that its shoots will not cease.

Job is seeking renewal from his tragedy, as a tree that has been cut down.

⁸ Though its root grows old in the earth,
   and its stump dies in the ground,
⁹ yet at the scent of water it will bud
   and put forth branches like a young plant.

Even if it looks as though it dies, it can renew-hope Job seeks.

¹⁰ But mortals die, and are laid low;
   humans expire, and where are they?

He hopes for it, but Job does not see this renewal in humans brought down.

¹¹ As waters fail from a lake,
   and a river wastes away and dries up,
¹² so mortals lie down and do not rise again;
   until the heavens are no more, they will not awake
   or be roused out of their sleep.

This seems to be a ‘pre-Christ’ understanding of life and death in God.

¹³ O that you would hide me in Sheol,
   that you would conceal me until your wrath is past,
   that you would appoint me a set time, and remember me!

But in God, Job seeks to be hidden by God in the place of the dead-Sheol-till this wrath passes by.

¹⁴ If mortals die, will they live again?
   All the days of my service I would wait
   until my release should come.

Release from the tragedy, not unto death.

¹⁵ You would call, and I would answer you;
   you would long for the work of your hands.
¹⁶ For then you would not number my steps,
   you would not keep watch over my sin;
¹⁷ my transgression would be sealed up in a bag,
   and you would cover over my iniquity.

Job is seeking renewal in the Lord, speaking in the language of Jesus covering our iniquities.

¹⁸ ‘But the mountain falls and crumbles away,
   and the rock is removed from its place;
¹⁹ the waters wear away the stones;
   the torrents wash away the soil of the earth;
   so you destroy the hope of mortals.

That is what Job hopes for, but he is only seeing, in his grief, the destruction of the Lord.

²⁰ You prevail for ever against them, and they pass away;
   you change their countenance, and send them away.

God is always overcoming.

²¹ Their children come to honor, and they do not know it;
   they are brought low, and it goes unnoticed.

Someone punished, like himself, could have God bring his children to honor, but Job will not know what is to come.

²² They feel only the pain of their own bodies,
   and mourn only for themselves.’

Job is focused into the mourning of his own tragic circumstances.

 

Job transitions in his entreaty from Zophar to the Lord. He is not above mocking back at his friend, calling him out on presuming that Job does not know how things are ‘supposed’ to work. What seems to pain Job is not that he has these tragic circumstances, but that God is silent among their outpourings on his life. He seeks renewal, he seems something.

If there is a common theme among these entreaties of his friends, it is this presupposition that tragedy must be punishment and Job must have done something to deserve it.

Pastor Peter