READING LUKE-ACTS, PART LIII

Above:  Icon of the Ascension, by Andrei Rublev

Image in the Public Domain

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Luke 24:50-53

Acts 1:1-11

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Given that I have written numerous blog posts about the Ascension, and given that they are available at this weblog, I do not seek to replicate them in this post.

As I continue through Luke-Acts, I notice a narrative contradiction.  Luke 24:50-53, read within the narrative context of chapter 24, dates the Ascension to Easter Day.  Yet Acts 1:3 dates the Ascension to forty days after Easter Day.  Interpretations of this discrepancy include:

1. “Forty days” is symbolic,
2. The forty days fill out the calendar, and
3. Acts 1:3 corrects Luke 24 after St. Luke the Evangelist uncovered more information than he had when he wrote the Gospel of Luke.

I am not a fundamentalist.  Biblical inerrancy and infallibility are utter nonsense.  If St. Luke changed his mind, so be it.  If “forty days” is symbolic, so be it.  I do not know which interpretation is corect.

Forty is frequently a symbolic number in the Bible.  One may recall that the reign of King David lasted for about forty years, that the Hebrews wandered in the desert for forty years, that Jesus spent forty days in the desert, and that the mythical Great Flood lasted for forty days and forty nights.  Forty is a sacred number in the Bible.  It, therefore, recurs in the Bible for many more examples than i have cited.  Forty, symbolically, is a round number that designates a fairly long time in terms of human existence or endurance.

So, even if the forty days (Acts 1:3) are symbolic, they still contradict Luke 24, with Jesus’s resurrection and the Ascension occurring on the same day.

Anyway, “ascension” may not be the most accurate word for Jesus’ departure.  “Assumption” may be better.  Christ’s departure resembles the assumptions of Elijah (2 Kings 2:9-11; Sirach 48:9) and Enoch (Genesis 5:23-24; Sirach 49:14b), with apocalyptic imagery added.

The priestly gestures and blessings of Jesus before his departure, followed by worship, close the Gospel of Luke fittingly.  Recall Luke 1:20-23, O reader:  the priest Zechariah could not pronounce a blessing.

The Lukan accounts of the Ascension of Jesus also draw from Sirach 50:1-21, about the high priest Simon II.  The account of Simon II depicts him as the culmination of Israel’s history, at the point of the composition of that book.  Luke-Acts, which postdates Sirach, depicts Jesus as the culmination of Israel’s history.

In Luke 24, the Ascension is the fitting end of the story of Jesus.  In Acts 1, however, the Ascension is the beginning of the story of the mission of the Church.  Placing the two Lukan interpretations side-by-side provides the full picture.

I also detect one of St. Luke’s organizing principles in Luke 24 and Acts 1.  Luke-Acts finishes focusing on one story before focusing on another one, although the stories may overlap.  Consider the focus on St. John the Baptist (Luke 3) before the focus on Jesus (Luke  4-24), O reader.  Then we come to a different focus, starting in Acts 1.

The story of the mission of the Church, empowered by the Holy Spirit, follows.

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

MARCH 2, 2022 COMMON ERA

ASH WEDNESDAY

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

READING LUKE-ACTS, PART XXX

Above:  Woe Unto You, Scribes and Pharisees, by James Tissot

Image in the Public Domain

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Luke 12:1-12

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Leaven usually has a negative connotation in the Bible; leaven frequently symbolizes corruption.  The connotation is negative in Luke 12:1, where leaven represents hypocrisy.

As I feel the need to repeat ad nauseam, due to the pervasive nature of stereotypes, I have no interest in lambasting long-dead Pharisees and feeling morally smug.  Moral hypocrisy is a leaven that corrupts all of us.  Do not beat up on the Pharisees, O reader; look in the mirror instead.  I recall the late Henry Irving Louttit, Jr., when he was the Rector of Christ Episcopal Church, Valdosta, Georgia, describing the Pharisees as the good, churchgoing people of their time.  We conventionally pious people may be more similar to the Pharisees than we like to imagine.

12:2-9 describe fearless confession of faith, different from hypocrisy.  Verses 2 and 1 may seem truer in the age of smartphones and the internet than the recent past, much less antiquity.

I read 12:2-9 and wonder how those verses must have resounded with listeners and readers circa 85 C.E., when the Gospel of Luke was new.  I ponder the context of sporadic, regional persecution, the reality at the time.  This section of the Gospel of Luke resonates differently with me than it does with those who suffer persecution for their faith.  Many people have a persecution complex; I guess it makes them feel especially holy.  Many other people, however, know the experience of persecution.

The top priority of following Jesus, then en route to die, repeats.

The Lucan version of the unpardonable sin occurs in 12:10, divorced from certain critics accusing him of being in league with Satan (Luke 11:14-22; Matthew 12:25-32; Mark 3:23-30).  In the context of the Gospels of Mark and Matthew, the unpardonable sin–blasphemy against the Holy Spirit–is not being able to distinguish between good and evil.  The unpardonable sin, in the context of the Gospel of Luke, is apostasy and moral corruption.  In these contexts, taken together, the unpardonable sin is not being open to God’s truth.  God does not condemn one for committing the unpardonable sin.  No, one condemns oneself by committing it.

This point brings me back to the beginning of this post.  Grace is free, not cheap; it makes demands of its recipients.  For many Christians, that price has included persecution and/or martyrdom.  Hypocrisy and moral corruption may lead to committing the unpardonable sin.  Grace seeks us.  It pursues us.  May we welcome it and accept its demands.

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

JANUARY 6, 2022 COMMON ERA

THE FEAST OF THE EPIPHANY OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

READING LUKE-ACTS, PART XXIX

Above:  Woe Unto You, Scribes and Pharisees, by James Tissot

Image in the Public Domain

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Luke 11:37-54

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jesus had made enemies, who observed him and attempted to entrap him in his words.

Leaving Gentile anti-Semitism and stereotypes of Judaism behind, let us–you, O reader, and I–consider that the meal and the concern for ritual purity existed in a cultural context.  Jesus, as a devout Jew, accepted the validity or ritual purity and impurity.  Christ’s holiness destroyed the causes of ritual impurity, though.

Without sounding like a Pietist (I am not one.), the focus on externals at the expense of spiritual depth is a legitimate criticism of many people, past, present, and future.

One Interpretation of the Lucan version of the rejection of Jesus at Nazareth (4:14-30) is that Jesus likened the villagers of Nazareth to persecutors of old.  That is precisely Jesus’s critique of his hosts in 11:37-54.  It is a critique that applies to many people today.

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

JANUARY 5, 2022 COMMON ERA

THE TWELFTH DAY OF CHRISTMAS

THE FEAST OF ANTONIO LOTTI, ITALIAN ROMAN CATHOLIC MUSICIAN AND COMPOSER

THE FEAST OF FELIX MANZ, FIRST ANABAPTIST MARTYR, 1527

THE FEAST OF SAINT GENOVEVA TORRES MORALES, FOUNDER OF THE CONGREGATION OF THE SACRED HEART OF JESUS AND THE HOLY ANGELS

THE FEAST OF JOHN NEPOMUCENE NEUMANN, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF PHILADELPHIA

THE FEAST OF MARGARET MACKAY, SCOTTISH HYMN WRITER

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

READING LUKE-ACTS, PART XXVIII

Above:  Icon of the Lord’s Prayer

Image in the Public Domain

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Luke 11:1-13

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We read three sections pertaining to prayer in 11:1-13.

The Episcopal catechism defines prayer:

Prayer is responding to God, by thought and by deeds, with and without words.

—The Book of Common Prayer (1979), 856

The Prayer Book catechism defines the principal kinds of prayer, too:

The spiritual kinds of prayer are adoration, praise, thanksgiving, penitence, oblation, intercession, and petition.

–856

Now that we know what “prayer” means, we can intelligently analyze Luke 11:1-13.

The Our Father contains six petitions:

1. That people hold God’s name holy,
2. That the fully-realized Kingdom of God may come,
3. That God will give us our daily subsistence,
4. That God will forgive our sins,
5. That we will forgive all who do wrong to us, and
6. That God may protect us, not test us.

Notice, O reader, that receiving forgiveness depends on forgiving others.  This principle occurs elsewhere in the canonical Gospels.

God does not tempt us, of course.  I recall a cocktail napkin that read:

LEAD ME NOT INTO TEMPTATION.  I CAN FIND MY OWN WAY.

The Bible does, however, include stories of God testing people.

Understanding the parable in verses 5-8 requires grasping the cultural context.  Imagine, O reader, a two-level house with a family sleeping on the floor upstairs and with the animals downstairs.  The importune friend in the parable knocks on the door in the middle of the night.  Someone indoors will have to walk in the darkness and disturb the family and the animals just to reach the door.  There was a good reason that good manners dictated not knocking on someone’s door past a certain hour.  The friend in the parable violated social conventions of common courtesy.

This parable is not about nagging God until God consents to one’s request.  God stands in contrast to the nagged neighbor; God promptly grants what people need.  That is the interpretation of John R. Claypool, IV, in Stories Jesus Still Tells:  The Parables (1993), 123.

Robert Farrar Capon offers a different interpretation.  The shamelessness is death itself.  The friend who obtrudes on his neighbor’s privacy at night admits to being a terrible host.

God rises from his death in Jesus not to satisfy our requests, reasonable or unreasonable, unexpressed or overexpressed, but to raise us from our own deaths.  All we need to offer in order to share in the joy of his rising is the shameless, selfless admission that we are dead without him and in him.  The whole parable, therefore, is a conjunction of prayer according to the pGod rises from his death in Jesus not to satisfy our requests, reasonable or unreasonable, unexpressed or overexpressed, but to raise us from our own deaths.  All we need to offer in order to share in the joy of his rising is the shameless, selfless admission that we are dead without him and in him.  The whole parable, therefore, is a conjunction of prayer according to the paradigm of death and resurrection–a footnote to the Lord’s Prayer, if you will, in which Jesus tells us that even the daily bread he taught us to pray for comes only out of death.  And the rest of the passage (Luke 11:9-13) is more of the same.

—Kingdom, Grace, Judgment:  Paradox, Outrage, and Vindication in the Parables of Jesus (2002), 224

Of course, whether, one receives what one requests depends on whether it is consistent with God’s will.

11:9-13 also requires some explanation.  Fish and serpents resemble each other, just as a rolled-up scorpion looks like an egg.  The contrast in 11:9-13 is between human beings and God; we can always trust the faithfulness of God.

Luke 11:13 substitutes “the Holy Spirit” for Matthew 7:11’s “good things.”  God may not grant us all the “good things” we request, but God will grant us the greatest gift.  And people, in order to receive God’s self, i.e., God’s love, must be ready and eager to receive it.  The Lucan substitution is consistent with the theme of the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts.

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

JANUARY 4, 2021 COMMON ERA

THE ELEVENTH DAY OF CHRISTMAS

THE FEAST OF SAINT ANGELA OF FOLIGNO, ITALIAN ROMAN CATHOLIC PENITENT AND HUMANITARIAN

THE FEAST OF SAINT ELIZABETH ANN SETON, FOUNDER OF THE AMERICAN DAUGHTERS OF CHARITY

THE FEAST OF SAINTS GREGORY OF LANGRES, TERTICUS OF LANGRES, GALLUS OF CLERMONT, GREGORY OF TOURS, AVITUS I OF CLERMONT, MAGNERICUS OF TRIER, AND GAUCERICUS, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS

THE FEAST OF JOHANN LUDWIG FREYDT, GERMAN MORAVIAN COMPOSER AND EDUCATOR

THE FEAST OF MARY LUNDIE DUNCAN, SCOTTISH PRESBYTERIAN HYMN WRITER

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

READING LUKE-ACTS, PART XXI

Above:  Jesus and His Apostles

Image in the Public Domain

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Luke 8:16-21; 11:14-36

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In the Gospel of Luke, the Parable of the Lamp functions as an extension of the Parable of the Sower/the Four Soils.  Love and devotion to God accumulate within someone and draw others to God via that person.  The light shines.  Also, nobody has any secrets from God.

Almighty God, to you all hearts are open, all desires known, and from you no secrets are hid:  Cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by your Holy Spirit, that we may perfectly love you, and worthily magnify your holy Name; through Christ our Lord.  Amen.

—The Book of Common Prayer (1979), 355

The lamp in the parable had a spout, a cover, and a rounded body.  This was a small oil lamp.  It belonged on a lampstand, not under a bed or in a jar.  Theologically, a lamp stood for the light of God, shining in the darkness, in this parable.

The lamp is Jesus.  In other words, do not hide Jesus.

Luke 8:19-21, adapted from Mark 3:20-22, tones down the critique of Christ’s biological family.  In Mark 3, they think Jesus is out of his mind.  That, explicit in Mark 3, is absent in Luke 8.The Lucan version omits the relatives’ motive for seeking to speak with Jesus.  Therefore, the Lucan version presents them positively.  Nevertheless, the statement of fictive kinship carries over from the Marcan version.  The theme of hearing and doing, present in the Parables of the Sower/the Four Soils and the Lamp, continues here.  The biological family of Jesus functions as exemplars of hearing and doing in the Lucan version.

The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox insistence on the perpetual virginity of St. Mary of Nazareth puzzles me.  Of course, given that I reject the Virgin Birth, perpetual virginity predictably puzzles me.  In the Greek language, brothers and sisters can also be cousins.  Or they can be brothers and sisters.

The Marcan version of the story fits well with that Gospel’s theme that supposed insiders are really outsiders, and vice versa.  The Lucan version of the story is consistent with that Gospel’s toning down of the Marcan theme, given that the Acts of the Apostles follows the Gospel of Luke.  So, the eleven apostles who survived the Gospel of Luke could not be dolts if their transformation in Acts was to be believable.  Furthermore, the depiction of the biological family of Jesus in Luke 8 flows from previous material, in which St. Mary knew who her (firstborn) son was, Luke 2:39-52 notwithstanding.

The challenge to we of today is to be members of Christ’s spiritual family, that is, to hear the word of God (what God says) and to keep it.

++++++++++++++++++++

“Master,” said John, “we saw a man who was casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him, because he was not following with us.”

But Jesus said, “Forbid him not, for he who is not with you is for you.”

–Luke 9:49-50, Helen Barrett Montgomery, The Centenary Translation of the New Testament (1924)

++++++++++++++++++++

“He who is not for me is against me, and he who is not gathering with me is scattering.”

–Luke 11:23, Helen Barrett Montgomery, The Centenary Translation of the New Testament (1924)

++++++++++++++++++++

Critics of Jesus did not understand that God was acting through Jesus.  The healings Jesus performed indicated the presence of the Kingdom of God, not evil. Judgment would come for those who slandered Jesus.

Likewise, when Jesus had removed evil from someone, that person needed to become filled with the word of God (what God said), or else evil would return in greater quantity than it had been when Christ had expelled it.

Luke 11:27 calls back to 8:19-21.  Regardless of how blessed and pious Christ’s biological family was, those who listened to and heard the word of God were blessed, too.  Loyalty to God, present in Jesus, takes precedence over family ties–no disrespect to relatives intended.  This is good news for the vast majority of us not of the family tree of Jesus.

Cutting through the symbolism and Biblical allusions in Luke 11:29-36, the message of these verses is:

1. Repentance is crucial,
2. The faith of many Gentiles contrasts with the faithlessness of many Jews,
3. God seeks to attract all people, and
4. The Christian life involves the whole body and all human action.

Seeking signs indicates a lack of trust in God.  Receiving a sign and not understanding it indicates obliviousness, at least.  Recall the Johannine version of the Feeding of the Five Thousand (John 6:1-14), O reader.  You and I may agree that it was an astounding sign.  Yet, recall the events of the next day, too.

Then they said to him:

“What sign, then, are you performing, so that we may see it and come to believe in you?  What work are you doing?  Our fathers ate manna in the wilderness, as it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.'”  

–John 6:30-21, Helen Barrett Montgomery, The Centenary Translation of the New Testament (1924)

Those who asked that question had fined at the Feeding of the Five Thousand.

We need not seek signs; they are plentiful.  We need merely to pay proper attention, understand plainly, and behave and think accordingly, whoever we are.

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

DECEMBER 30, 2021 COMMON ERA

THE SIXTH DAY OF CHRISTMAS

THE FEAST OF ALLEN EASTMAN CROSS, U.S. CONGREGATIONALIST MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER

THE FEAST OF GEORGE WALLACE BRIGGS, ANGLICAN PRIEST AND HYMN WRITER

THE FEAST OF JOHN MAIN, ANGLO-CANADIAN ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST AND MONK

THE FEAST OF JOSIAH BOOTH, ENGLISH ORGANIST, HYMN WRITER, AND HYMN TUNE COMPOSER

THE FEAST OF FRANCES JOSEPH-GAUDET, AFRICAN-AMERICAN EDUCATOR, PRISON REFORMER, AND SOCIAL WORKER

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

READING LUKE-ACTS, PART I

Above:  Icon of St. Luke the Evangelist

Image in the Public Domain

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The whole of Luke’s gospel is about the way in which the living God has planted, in Jesus, the seed of that long-awaited hope in the world.

–N. T. Wright, Lent for Everyone:  Luke, Year C–A Daily Devotional (2009), 2

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Gospel of Luke is the first volume of a larger work.  The Acts of the Apostles is the second volume.  One can read either volume spiritually profitably in isolation from the other one.  However, one derives more benefit from reading Luke-Acts as the two-volume work it is.

Each of the four canonical Gospels bears the name of its traditional author.  The Gospel of Luke is the only case in which I take this traditional authorship seriously as a matter of history.  One may recall that St. Luke was a well-educated Gentile physician and a traveling companion of St. Paul the Apostle.

Luke-Acts dates to circa 85 C.E.,. “give or take five to ten years,” as Raymond E. Brown (1928-1998) wrote in his magisterial An Introduction to the New Testament (1997).  Luke-Acts, having a Gentile author, includes evidence that the audience consisted of Gentiles, too.  The text makes numerous references to the inclusion of Gentiles, for example.  Two of the major themes in Luke-Acts are (a) reversal of fortune, and (b) the conflict between the Roman Empire and the Kingdom of God.  The smoldering ruins of Jerusalem and the Second Temple in 70 C.E. inform the present tense of the story-telling.

Many North American Christians minimize or ignore the imperial politics in the New Testament.  In doing so, they overlook essential historical and cultural contexts.  Luke-Acts, in particular, performs an intriguing political dance with the Roman Empire.  The two-volume work unambiguously proclaims Jesus over the Emperor–a treasonous message, by Roman imperial standards.  Luke-Acts makes clear that the Roman Empire was on the wrong side of God, that its values were opposite those of the Kingdom of God.  Yet the two-volume work goes out of its way to mention honorable imperial officials.

Know six essential facts about me, O reader:

1. This weblog is contains other blog posts covering Luke-Acts, but in the context of lectionaries.  I refer you to those posts.  And I will not attempt to replicate those other posts in the new posts.  Finding those posts is easy; check the category for the book and chapter, such as Luke 1 or Acts 28.
2. I know far more about the four canonical Gospels, especially in relation to each other, than I will mention in the succeeding posts.  I tell you this not to boast, but to try to head off anyone who may chime in with a rejoinder irrelevant to my purpose in any given post.  My strategy will be to remain on topic.
3. My purpose will be to analyze the material in a way that is intellectually honest and applicable in real life.  I respect Biblical scholarship that goes deep into the woods, spending ten pages on three lines.  I consult works of such scholarship.  However, I leave that work to people with Ph.Ds in germane fields and who write commentaries.
4. I am a student of the Bible, not a scholar thereof.
5. I am a left-of-center Episcopalian who places a high value on human reason and intellect.  I value history and science.  I reject both the inerrancy and the infallibility of scripture for these reasons.  Fundamentalists think I am going to Hell for asking too many questions.  I try please God, not fundamentalists. I know too much to affirm certain theological statements.
6. I am a sui generis mix of Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Anglican theological influences.  I consider St. Mary of Nazareth to be the Theotokos (the Bearer of God) and the Mater Dei (the Mother of God).  I also reject the Virgin Birth and the Immaculate Conception with it.

Make of all this whatever you will, O reader.

Shall we begin our journey through Luke-Acts?

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

DECEMBER 20, 2021 COMMON ERA

THE TWENTY-THIRD DAY OF ADVENT

THE FEAST OF SAINT DOMINIC OF SILOS, ROMAN CATHOLIC ABBOT

THE FEAST OF BATES GILBERT BURT, EPISCOPAL PRIEST, HYMN WRITER, AND COMPOSER

THE FEAST OF BENJAMIN TUCKER TANNER, AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL BISHOP AND RENEWER OF SOCIETY

THE FEAST OF D. ELTON TRUEBLOOD, U.S. QUAKER THEOLOGIAN

THE FEAST OF JOHANN CHRISTOPH SCHWEDLER, GERMAN LUTHERAN MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER

THE FEAST OF SAINT MICHAL PIASCZYNSKI,POLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST AND MARTYR, 1940

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Above:  Jesus Exorcising

Image in the Public Domain

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

For the Twenty-Fourth Sunday after Trinity, Year 1

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Lectionary from A Book of Worship for Free Churches (The General Council of the Congregational Christian Churches in the United States, 1948)

Collect from The Book of Worship (Evangelical and Reformed Church, 1947)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Stir up, we beseech thee, O Lord, the wills of thy faithful people;

that they, plenteous by bringing forth the fruit of good works,

may of thee be plenteously rewarded;

through Jesus Christ, thy Son, our Lord, who liveth and reigneth

with thee and the Holy Spirit, ever One God, world without end  Amen.

—The Book of Worship (1947), 229-230

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hosea 14

Psalm 119:97-112

Colossians 1:9-14

Luke 11:14-28

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I have no idea what Jesus was actually doing in some accounts of exorcisms.  My scientific, twenty-first-century categories of understanding these accounts include epilepsy, schizophrenia, multiple personalities, and too much stress, all of them conditions the general public understood as demonic possession at the time of Jesus.  I also have no idea how Jesus understood what he was doing in accounts of exorcisms.  After all, I affirm the orthodox idea that the human Jesus knew less than the pre-Incarnate Second Person of the Trinity.  Neither do I reject the possibility of demonic possession, for I know of cases of such possessions.

I affirm that Christ’s critics in LUke 11:14-22, being Hellenists, thought Jesus was exorcising a demon.  I also argue that they made a ludicrous claim, even from within their cultural context:  that Jesus was in league with Satan.

Presenting objectively correct evidence is frequently an unsuccessful method of changing someone’s mind.  That which is objective is true or false; it not subject to agreement or disagreement.  Opinion varies, but it does not change objective reality.  “I disagree: is an invalid reply to proof.  When people link their egos to positions that are objectively false, those people may be reluctant to admit objective reality.

That was happening in Luke 11:14-22.  Jesus contradicted the conventional piety of certain critics.  The way of life was to acknowledge reality, admit error, and follow Christ.  Christ’s critics, who thought they were walking the smooth path of God and obeying divine law, stumbled on Jesus, who rescued people from the domain of darkness.

I do not pretend to know what Jesus was doing or thought he was doing in many accounts of exorcisms.  I affirm, however, that the allegation he was in league with Satan was ridiculous in any context.

I also affirm the imperative of being dead to sin (especially ego) in Christ.

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

MAY 2, 2020 COMMON ERA

THE FEAST OF SAINT ALEXANDER OF ALEXANDRIA, PATRIARCH; AND SAINT ATHANASIUS OF ALEXANDRIA, PATRIARCH AND “FATHER OF ORTHODOXY”

THE FEAST OF CHARLES SILVESTER HORNE, ENGLISH CONGREGATIONALIST MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER

THE FEAST OF CHARLES FRIEDRICH HASSE, GERMAN-BRITISH MORAVIAN COMPOSER AND EDUCATOR

THE FEAST OF JULIA BULKLEY CADY CORY, U.S. PRESBYTERIAN HYMN WRITER

THE FEAST OF SAINT SIGISMUND OF BURGUNDY, KING; SAINT CLOTILDA, FRANKISH QUEEN; AND SAINT CLODOALD, FRANKISH PRINCE AND ABBOT

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Above:  A Dining Room

Image in the Public Domain

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning:

Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them,

that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of life,

which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ,  who lives and reigns

with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.  Amen.

—The Book of Common Prayer (1979), page 236

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 Samuel 2:1-10 or Jeremiah 15:15-21

Psalm 102:1-17

Romans 6:1-11

Luke 11:37-54

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

These five assigned readings merge neatly into a unified message:  Turn to God.  Do not turn away from God.  Otherwise, suffer the consequences.

Jesus, speaking in Luke 11:37-54, establishes some standards, in a particular context.  The list is hardly comprehensive, but it does not prove useful.  Besides, if he were speaking to a different audience, he would offer a different list of sins.  The list from Luke 11:37-54 is:

1. Placing too much emphasis on the superficial and too little on the consequential,
2. Overlooking justice/righteousness and the love of God,
3. Feeding ego rather than glorifying God,
4. Imposing and maintaining unendurable burdens on people,
5. Being shameless hypocrites, and
6. Teaching the Torah badly, thereby misleading people.

Contrast Jesus’s hosts in Luke 11:37-54 with the notorious sinners with whom our Lord and Savior dined.  The latter groups were not respectable, but they did not understand themselves and acknowledge their need to repent.  They accepted the opportunity to learn from and to follow Jesus.

“Justice” and “righteousness” are the same word in the Bible.  Translators choose either “justice” or “righteousness” on a case-by-case basis.  Standards of justice/righteousness are somewhat relative; they depend on contexts.  How one lives the timeless principles properly depends on who, when, and where one is.  Reread the list from a previous paragraph, O reader.  Ponder the third sin:  feeding ego rather than glorifying God.  Two people may commit that sin yet do so differently.  Likewise, two people may glorify God rather than feed ego, and do so differently.

If Jesus were your dinner guest, O reader, what would he tell you?  And how would you react or respond to him?

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

APRIL 20, 2020 COMMON ERA

THE FEAST OF JOHANNES BUGENHAGEN, GERMAN LUTHERAN THEOLOGIAN, MINISTER, LITURGIST, AND “PASTOR OF THE REFORMATION”

THE FEAST OF SAINTS AMATOR OF AUXERRE AND GERMANUS OF AUXERRE, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS; SAINT MAMERTINUS OF AUXERRE, ROMAN CATHOLIC ABBOT; AND SAINT MARCIAN OF AUXERRE, ROMAN CATHOLIC MONK

THE FEAST OF CHRISTIAN X, KING OF DENMARK AND ICELAND; AND HIS BROTHER, HAAKON VII, KING OF NORWAY

THE FEAST OF MARION MACDONALD KELLARAN, EPISCOPAL SEMINARY PROFESSOR AND LAY LEADER

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Adapted from this post:

https://ordinarytimedevotions.wordpress.com/2020/04/20/devotion-for-proper-16-year-c-humes/

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This is post #2200 of BLOGA THEOLOGICA.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I will strive to follow a blameless course…

Above:  The Grief of Hannah

Image in the Public Domain

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning:

Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them,

that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of life,

which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ,  who lives and reigns

with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.  Amen.

—The Book of Common Prayer (1979), page 236

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 Samuel 1:1-20 or Jeremiah 14:1-22

Psalm 101

Romans 5:12-21

Luke 11:27-36

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Your love and justice will I sing,

to you, Yahweh, will I chant,

I will rhapsodize about your dominion complete.

When will you come to me?

–Psalm 101:1b-2a, Mitchell J. Dahood (1970)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Psalter in The Book of Common Prayer (1979) renders the third line quoted above as,

The germane notes in Dahood’s third (of three) volumes on the Book of Psalms for The Anchor Bible series cite Hebrew words and linguistic nuances to justify his choice of translation.  Part of the pleasure of reading Dahood on the Psalms is studying, after a fashion, under a master of his field–in his case, ancient Semitic languages.  I recommend purchasing his three volumes on the Psalms if one seeks to study the Book of Psalms deeply.

Part of the Hebrew text of Psalm 101 can legitimately read in English as,

I will strive to follow a blameless course,

and as,

I will rhapsodize about your dominion complete.

Think about that, O reader.  One rendering focuses on deeds; the other zeroes in on joyfulness and singing.  No single English-translation can capture the richness of the Hebrew text.

The attitude of the Psalmist, like that of Hannah in 1 Samuel 1:1-20, contrasts with that of the wicked people and generations in the other assigned readings.

1. Human nature is flawed; that is obvious to me.  Human depravity is not even an article of faith for me; I need no faith to accept that for which I have evidence.
2. Sadly, false prophets (frequently supporting a political establishment) remain with us.  One may read of the false prophets in the Book of Jeremiah and think readily of some of some of their contemporary counterparts.
3. The quest for signs indicates faithlessness.  Furthermore, human memories and attention spans can be fleeting.  Consider, O reader, John 6.  One reads of the Feeding of the Five Thousand in the first fifteen verses.  One also reads in verse 30, set on the following day, “Then what sign will you do, that we may see, and believe you?”

May we, by grace, pay attention.  May we mark, learn, and inwardly digest the law of of God.  May we find that law written on our hearts.  Then may we rejoice.  May we rhapsodize consistently and strive to follow a blameless course.  And may we succeed, by grace.

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

APRIL 19, 2020 COMMON ERA

THE SECOND SUNDAY OF EASTER, YEAR A

THE FEAST OF SAINT ALPHEGE, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, AND MARTYR, 1012

THE FEAST OF DAVID BRAINERD, AMERICAN CONGREGATIONALIST THEN PRESBYTERIAN MISSIONARY AND MINISTER

THE FEAST OF SAINT EMMA OF LESUM, BENEFACTOR

THE FEAST OF MARY C. COLLINS, U.S. CONGREGATIONALIST MISSIONARY AND MINISTER

THE FEAST OF OLAVUS PETRI, SWEDISH LUTHERAN THEOLOGIAN, HISTORIAN, LITURGIST, MINISTER, HYMN WRITER, HYMN TRANSLATOR, AND “FATHER OF SWEDISH LITERATURE;” AND HIS BROTHER, LAURENTIUS PETRI, SWEDISH LUTHERAN ARCHBISHOP OF UPPSALA, BIBLE TRANSLATOR, AND “FATHER OF SWEDISH HYMNODY”

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Adapted from this post:

https://ordinarytimedevotions.wordpress.com/2020/04/19/devotion-for-proper-15-year-c-humes/

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Above all, preserve an intense love for each other, since love covers over many a sin.

Above:   The Importunate Neighbor, by William Holman Hunt

Image in the Public Domain

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

For the Sunday after the Ascension, Year 1, according to the U.S. Presbyterian lectionary of 1966-1970

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

O Thou Lord of all times and places, whose thoughts are not our thoughts,

whose ways are not our ways, and who art lifted high above our selfish concerns:

rule our minds, redeem our ways, and by thy mercy draw us to thee;

through Jesus Christ the Lord.  Amen.

—The Book of Common Worship–Provisional Services (1966), 123

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Joel 2:23-27

1 Peter 4:7-11

Luke 11:5-13

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

–1 Peter 4:8, The New Jerusalem Bible (1985)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Divine restoration (extravagant mercy) follows punishment in Joel 2.  Contrary to stereotypes, the depiction of God in the Hebrew Bible is no more all wrathful than the portrayal of God in the New Testament is all merciful.  I wish that more people would read–really read–the Bible, and cease and desist from repeating such inaccurate statements.

God’s intense love for people provides a model for us to emulate.  We, as individuals, as family units, as congregations, as societies, have an obligation to love each other intensely and unconditionally and to build each other up into our best selves in Christ.  This requires sacrifices–often of egos and misguided ambitions.  This requires acknowledging that the common good is so important that we must give up some short-term gains for long-term greater good.  This requires that we sacrifice selfishness.  This requires that we confront each other in love sometimes, as when friends and relatives stage an intervention for an addict.

Living the Golden Rule entails doing the best for others, not necessarily what they want.  It involves doing what they need.  Sometimes intense love is uncomfortable for more than one party involved.  C’est la vie.

May we, following Jesus and deriving power from him, build up each other in Christ, for the common good and the glory of God.

KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR

NOVEMBER 15, 2018 COMMON ERA

THE FEAST OF JOHANN GOTTLOB KLEMM, INSTRUMENT MAKER; DAVID TANNENBERG, SR., GERMAN-AMERICAN MORAVIAN ORGAN BUILDER; JOHANN PHILIP BACHMANN, GERMAN-AMERICAN MORAVIAN INSTRUMENT MAKER; JOSEPH FERDINAND BULITSCHEK, BOHEMIAN-AMERICAN ORGAN BUILDER; AND TOBIAS FRIEDRICH, GERMAN MORAVIAN COMPOSER AND MUSICIAN

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++