INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE

Year C - Proper 10 

AMOS 7:7-17.      Amos, one of the twelve “Minor Prophets,” was no small man, spiritually. His sense of divine justice speaks across the millennia as loudly as ever. With fear or favour for no prince or priest, this farmer from the sticks, spoke for God in symbolic actions as clearly as in dynamic words. In this passage he predicts that God’s displeasure with Israel will result in a national disaster, an event which occurred in 721 BCE with conquest of the Northern Kingdom of Israel by Assyria.

PSALM 82.   Many of the psalms show the influence of the outspoken utterances of the prophets. One hears echoes of Amos in this psalm which may have served as a liturgical hymn in the temple in Jerusalem at the New Year to celebrate the absolute sovereignty of God.

DEUTERONOMY 30:9-14. (Alternate) This excerpt comes from what the editors of Deuteronomy presented the final message of Moses to the Israelites (chs. 29-30). It promised complete prosperity for those who obeyed the covenant law. This assumption has been much abused by those who used it as if it was the last word received directly from God. Such an attitude fails to take into account that the ethic of righteous behaviour by individuals inherent in the Mosaic code is also balanced by a profound sense of social justice.

PSALM 25:1-1   In the original language each stanza of this psalm begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet. The author may have done this to create a form of prayer not only for himself, but for the use of anyone else at a time of great distress. It appealed to God for guidance at a time of moral uncertainty and found it in the covenant law of love and righteous behaviour. This theology reflects the Wisdom literature of the late Persian and Greek period of Jewish history, about four centuries before the birth of Jesus.

COLOSSIANS 1:1-14.    In these opening words of greeting and thanksgiving, Paul applauds the Colossians’ faithfulness to the gospel as his colleague, Epaphras, had instructed them.

          The dominant feature of their faithfulness is love. Paul’s prayer that they continue their spiritual growth in the face of a severe challenge from “the power of darkness” from which they have been rescued. These words point to a time of conflict scholars believe to have been caused by a serious heresy.

LUKE 10:25-37.   One of the most familiar parables answers two universal questions:  who is our neighbour and how we are to relate to others with whom we have little in common, or even a deep sense of mistrust and hostility.

          Jews and Samaritans were as hostile to one another in Jesus’ time as are Israelis and Palestinians today. Yet, like their modern counterparts, they shared the same territory. In those days, however, they also spoke the same language and held many common beliefs in the same God. But the Samaritans had intermarried with foreign tribes imported by the Assyrians after the conquest of which Amos had spoken.

A  MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

AMOS 7:7-17.      It is a pity that the RCL only uses two passages from Amos and these only from the narrative segment of the book (ch.7-9). Amos deserves more than the sharing of his vision of doom with the chief priest of the royal sanctuary at Bethel.

This passage, one of series of five visions (7:1-9:8), tells us something about this earliest of the great prophets (despite his canonical characterization as one of the twelve “Minor Prophets”). Amos is believed to have lived in the period of Assyrian ascendency prior the fall of the Northern Kingdom of Israel to the Assyrians in721 BCE. In his own words, he was not a professional prophet or priest, but a farmer (vs.14). What is more, he was a Judean from Tekoa, a village about 5 mi. south of Bethlehem, in the Southern Kingdom of Judah. Bethel was not very much farther north of Jerusalem, but in the hill country of Ephraim, and thus in the Northern Kingdom known as Israel.

By raising his voice against the moral and social corruption of Israel (i.e. the Northern Kingdom), he encountered the opposition of the royal priesthood of that nation. At this time there were still many authorized royal sanctuaries.

The centralizing of worship at the temple in Jerusalem occurred during the reign of Josiah, king of Judah (ca. 640-605 BCE) at least a century or more later.

Like most rural people, he was something of a jack-of-all-trades, for in addition to having flocks and a fig orchard, he also knew something about building and the tools of that trade. His metaphor of the plumb-line vividly expressed his total condemnation of the moral and spiritual leadership of the nation (vss.7-9). In ancient times, the plumb-line was essential to constructing a small house, a temple or a city wall. Builders depended on this simple tool, a weight suspended from a string, to make walls or columns perfectly vertical. It presented an obvious symbol of righteous behavior.

The sanctuary of Bethel had been an ancient Canaanite holy place set on a high hill. In Israelite religious traditions it had been associated with the patriarch Jacob. It had been fought over many times during the period of the Judges (12^th to 11^th centuries BCE) and during the reigns of both David and Solomon (10^th century). When the kingdoms were divided by Solomon’s heirs, Jeroboam I (ca. 922-901 BCE) made Bethel the chief sanctuary of the Northern Kingdom (Israel). It became the centre of the cult based on the traditions of the ten northern tribes. After the exile of the northern tribes by the Assyrians in 721 BCE, it became an accursed site of restored Canaanite worship by the addition of a cult object of Asherah to the cultus of Yahweh. A century later, Josiah, king of Judah, razed the sanctuary as part of his centralizing of worship in the temple in Jerusalem, but spared the city of Bethel itself.

Amos delivered his prophetic oracles in the decades immediately preceding the fall of Samaria, Israel’s capital, to the Assyrians. Due to his impressive sense of Yahweh’s justice and righteousness, Amos foresaw the moral decline of the nation and the destruction that awaited Israel (vss.8-9, 17). The king during this period was Jereboam II (788-747 BCE). Assyria had reduced Damascus to poverty and powerlessness, but under a series of weak rulers did not threaten the Palestinian states. This allowed the Northern Kingdom of Israel to prosper and a rich merchant class to develop, but not to the benefit of the common people like Amos. This explains the vehement outrage of the prophet’s message. It also makes him a very contemporary voice for our own time of global capitalism and corruption in government and commerce alike have amok in immoral, money-mad enterprises.

PSALM 82.     This particular psalm contains a whole set of interesting puzzles for the interpreter. The crucial question to be determined is: Who are the gods vss. 1 and 6? Several proposals have been offered. These are (1) heavenly beings or angels meeting in heavenly council over which Yahweh presides as in Job 1:6-12 and 2:1-6 and Daniel 7:9-10; (2) the national gods of the non-Israelites; (3) kings and others vested with political power who have been deified as was common in ancient times; (4) the judges of Israel.  The idea that monarchs or judges were intended is reinforced by the reference to vs.6 in John 10:34 and in the Targums. The latter were rabbinical interpretations of Hebrew scriptures in the Aramaic dialect given in the synagogues from the 1st century BCE until the 6^th century CE. 

The issue emphasized in vss.2-4 is a justiciable occasion: the overwhelming of the poor by being turned over to unscrupulous judges or slave masters. An assembly of gods had many parallels in ancient Near Eastern mythology. The indictment of this judicial council is clear nonetheless. Yahweh requires that justice be done for all without regard to political, economic or social status.

With the evolution of moral monotheism in Hebrew theology, the concept of lesser gods was eventually abandoned, yet not completely. It remained the stock in trade of apocalyptic writings through the late OT and inter-testamental times which greatly influenced Christian apocalyptic and eschatological writings such some of the parables attributed to Jesus and the Book of Revelation.

According to the orally transmitted laws, the Mishnah, collected by Rabbi Judah in the 2^nd century CE, the psalm became a hymn sung in the temple by the Levites on the third day of the week. It may also have been sung at the New Year’s festival to celebrate Yahweh’s moral supremacy. Vs. 8 may be a liturgical addition pointing to either God’s periodic judgments of history or the eschatological judgment at the end of the age when divine sovereignty will be universally acknowledged.

DEUTERONOMY 30:9-14. (Alternate) This excerpt comes from what the editors of Deuteronomy presented as the final message of Moses to the Israelites (chs. 29-30). It has had a remarkably wide influence in subsequent religious and secular history.

The Deuteronomists promised absolute prosperity for those who obeyed the covenant law. This assumption has been much abused by those who used it as if it was the last word received directly from God. Such an attitude fails to take into account that the ethic of righteous behaviour by individuals inherent in the Mosaic code was also balanced by a profound sense of social justice.

Writing no earlier than the 6^th century BCE, it should not surprise us the authors of Deuteronomy show the influence of the great prophets of justice from the 8^th and 7^th century BCE. The whole passage, and especially vs. 14, sound very much like Jeremiah’s oracle of the new covenant (Jer. 31:31-34). It also recalls the Shema and summative commandment in Deut. 6:4-9. For Jews, the essence of obedience to the law was a single-minded love for God and God alone.

As we know, this also became the heart of Jesus’ message. Our Gospel lesson reveals how much he understood wherein right living and communal justice had their roots. The influence of this passage spread even farther through the apostolic mission of Paul evidenced by his quoting from Deut. 30:13-14 in his letter to the Romans as he appealed to his fellow Jews to trust in the righteousness derived by faith in Jesus Christ rather than that of the law (Rom. 10:5-8).

PSALM 25:1-10. (Alternate) In its Hebrew original, this psalm has an unusual acrostic structure. Each of its 22 verse begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet. In this excerpt, we have only half of its full text.

Because of this form and the inclusion of several characteristics of wisdom literature, scholars attribute it to a late post-exilic period and not to David as the superscript indicates. One commentator suspected that the author was creating a form of prayer not only for himself, but for the use of anyone else at a time of great distress.

The psalm begins with a statement of trust and petition for divine help as enemies attempt to shame him without justification (vss. 1-3). He then pleads to know the ways of the Lord and to be taught to walk in Yahweh’s way (vss. 4-5). This exhibits a common theme of wisdom poetry. His next plea is for mercy dependent on Yahweh’s steadfast love (vss. 6-8). The excerpt ends in a praiseworthy acknowledgment of Yahweh’s goodness, righteousness, love and faithfulness (vss. 9-10). Many humble but faithful people have found the words of this poem not only comforting but encouraging when life serves up its inevitable trials.

COLOSSIANS 1:1-14.      The debate about the authorship of this letter as one of Paul’s remains inconclusive after 150 years. William Barclay expresses the view which most cogently supports Pauline authorship. But he wonders why this letter containing the highest reach of his thought should have been addressed to so unimportant a town as Colossae then was. In doing so Paul checked a tendency which could have wrecked Asian Christianity, and which might have done irreparable damage to the faith of the whole Church.  (Edinburgh: Church of Scotland, Daily Bible Study: Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.)

Paul did not evangelize the Colossian community or those other towns, Laodicea and Hierapolis, in the Lycus valley east of Ephesus. That had been the work of Epaphras, who had probably become a Christian as a result of meeting Paul in Ephesus. These new Christians may have been mainly Gentiles, but also appear to have been exposed to, if not actual followers of, some Jewish cult with a background similar to the asceticism and mystical piety of the Qumran community or later Gnostics. Writing in the 1950s, Barclay believed these esoteric elements were characteristic of the heresy later given the general title of Gnosticism. This is reinforced by Paul’s reference to the Colossians’ need to “be filled with the knowledge of God’s will and spiritual wisdom and understanding” (vs.9). This might not be Barlcay’s view today in the light of much greater acquaintance with the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1990s.

In these opening words of greeting and thanksgiving Paul applauds the Colossians’ faithfulness to the gospel as Epaphras had instructed them. The dominant feature of their faithfulness is love (vss. 4, 8). Paul’s prayer that they continue “bearing fruit” (vss.6, 10) and “be made strong” in the face of a severe challenge from “the power of darkness” (vs.13) from which they have been rescued points to a time of stress, if not persecution. In the words “love, joy, patience,” we may find allusion to the “fruits of the Spirit” Paul had elucidated in Galatians 5:22-23. Such words also lend emphasis to the Christian ethic of loving one’s enemies which Paul so eloquently expressed in Romans 12. This would further undergird the conviction that this letter is one of several Paul dictated from Rome during his imprisonment in 60-61 CE perhaps a decade or more after the conversion of the Colossians.

Eduard Schweizer’s study of Colossians (The Letter to the Colossians. Augsburg Press, 1982) showed how closely the structure of Colossians resembles Romans. There is a dogmatic section and a section dealing with practical ethical issues in the local community. This introductory segment (1:1-8) and the personal notes at the end (4:7-18) form opening and closing brackets around the main message of the letter.  Schweizer believed that the remaining vss. 9-14 of this passage may come from a baptismal liturgy and are followed by a hymn (vss. 15-20). The emphasis of these verses is spiritual knowledge, but a knowledge entirely different from that of Gnostic thought. Paul was writing of a knowledge of the will of God which had ethical implications rather than mystical secrets. The strength to live this way and “to share the inheritance of the saints in light” (vs. 12) comes from God who has given the believer a new beginning and new meaning to life through the forgiveness of sins. Such a message has deep significance for Christians in any age.

LUKE 10:25-37.     The parable of neighbourliness, the Good Samaritan, came at a teaching moment when Jesus summarized the Torah in two linked quotations from Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18.  We have no way of knowing what motivated the man to ask Jesus the crucial question “wanting to justify himself,” as Luke tells us (vs. 29). One might well suspect, however, that Luke had had some hurtful experience with a crafty lawyer at some time in the past. He used the term “lawyer” six times in his gospel, almost always in a derogatory sense. It occurs twice in Titus, only once in Matthew and nowhere else in the NT. Furthermore, Luke did not use it in passages drawn from Mark or Q, the source some believe he shared with Matthew. Nor did Luke use it where the other gospels speak of scribes. For one steeped in the Jewish law as this man apparently was, no story could have struck a more devastating blow to his pride as a rigidly orthodox Jew. 

The ancient road from Jerusalem to Jericho winds along a deep wadi flanked one either side by soaring cliffs. A modern walking trail follows its route, no more than a track on the cliffside. It is vastly easier to go down than to go up. The road descends over 3000 feet in less than ten miles. A modern autobus climbing the new highway on the heights opposite and above the ancient route must go in low gear most of the way. The trek for pedestrians must have been dangerous at any time, but particularly so in inclement weather when flash floods could have threatened to wash away the narrow track or a landslide cast a boulder on the unsuspecting traveler at any moment. In fine weather, the great danger was from robbers for whom there were ample hideouts in secluded natural caves.

The parable itself may have been fictitious, told to illustrate the point it so manifestly makes. Much loved and as important as it is in understanding Jesus’ inclusive attitude and his ethical mandate for all human relationships, it also exhibits some lively rhetoric and considerable unreality.  No knowledgeable priest or Levite, fully aware the dangers, would likely have traveled the road alone. Jesus himself appears to have walked this route in the company of his disciples on his way up from Jericho to Bethany and Jerusalem.

There would have been room on the trail, but scarcely more, for a man to lead a donkey. If the Samaritan was on his way home, he was taking a very indirect route. His journey would more likely have taken him straight north from Jerusalem via Bethel, Shiloh and Sycar. He would have gone this way only if he had business in Jericho or east across the Jordan. Again one wonders if the rescuer, his route and his ministry to the wounded victim were so identified to emphasize Jesus’ point about neighborliness. No Jew would have allowed a Samaritan to assist or comfort him in this way unless he was in extremely helpless circumstances.

According to Jewish tradition, the enmity of Jews and Samaritans dated from the 8^th century BCE. The Assyrian Shalmaneser and his invading army had taken the leading citizens of Israel into exile in 721 BCE never to return. Subsequently the remaining people of the Northern Kingdom had intermarried with immigrants forced to replace the exiles. The Samaritans rejected this view as a vile Jewish canard. They identified Eli, the priest of the sanctuary of Shiloh who mentored Samuel, as the culprit who had establishing a sanctuary at Shiloh to rival the one established by Moses on Mount Gerazim.

W.M. Thomson, a missionary in Palestine, traveled the ancient road to Jericho in 1857 and described the traditional site of the inn where the Samaritan took the victim he had rescued as a caravansary. Today a small Orthodox Christian monastery stands there. It still welcomes pilgrims who dare to follow the ancient route along the footpath this parable fixed forever in human memory. Its unforgetable lesson of the inclusive love of God in Christ remains for every generation to carry to a world desperate for a way out of suicidal conflicts between tribes, nations and cultures.

SOME ADDITIONAL POINTS FOR PREACHING.

AMOS 7:7-17.  The prophesy condemning Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, the royal sanctuary and King Jeroboam should give pause to our contemporary church and national leaders. No human institution is free of the seeds of its own destruction. The powerlessness of church leaders and the decline of all religious institutions is surely ample evidence of this as the second decade 21^st century begins. Presidents and political administrations are similarly powerless in the face of daunting natural and industrial disasters, and rampant economic recession. Is God our refuge? The prophets and psalmists seem to suggest that God is. But as Micah, a younger contemporary of Amos, said, “What does the Lord require of us?” (Micah 6:8)

PSALM 82.  The message of justice conveyed in the psalm may be a little heavy for a summertime sermon, but it does lend substantial credibility to such a prophetic attitude in our contemporary environment. Those who take such a stance cannot expect to be heard with approbation in many congregations. The usual complaint is that preaching and politics should not be mixed. On the other hand, the biblical mandate of social justice for all is clear as this psalm attests, despite the often brutal attempts which have been made to suppress prophetic voices by the rich and powerful.

As this comment is being written, the leaders of the G-8 and G20 and hordes of their supporters are gathering in Huntsville, in Ontario’s holiday hinterland and in downtown Toronto to deal with the economic and geopolitical ailments of the world. Journalists from all over the world are here too to report and comment on whatever they can glean from these solemn deliberations. Also present under the watchful eyes of innumerable police and military detachments are thousands of protesters with countervailing viewpoints and not a few anarchists seeking only to disrupt what all the others are doing. One despairs that anything helpful, let alone social justice, for the world’s suffering millions will come from such expenditures of vast national and international resources. The cost of security alone is said to be $1.1 billion US. Could not that much money have been spent more beneficially in merciful justice?

(This paragraph was composed on Monday, 28.6.2010) In the aftermath of the meetings of the G20, there is a sharply divided edge to the media and public commentary on what was actually accomplished. The well designed spin of political spokespersons claim the unparalleled success of the consensus reached by those attending from around the globe. The final communique had been written long before the delegates arrived to discuss its verbalized issues and approve its final draft. The media focus was on the largely peaceful demonstrations by concerned citizens. This was countered by reports of  violence by a small minority of professional anarchists who used the shelter of these demonstrations to cause considerable violent confrontation with the massive police forces and destruction of private property. The combined police forces have also been strongly criticized for overreaction to what was perceived by many as excessive. Approximatly 900 individuals were arrested, only some 400 of which will be formally charged. Those attending the actual G20 meetings were probably unaware of what was happening outside their well protected cocoon.

DEUTERONOMY 30:9-14.  (Alternative) A narrow approach to prosperity based on the absolutist interpretation of vss. 9-10 of this passage found wide acceptance in the early stages of capitalism some authorities believe was driven by a harsh interpretation of Calvinism. This fostered the rise of great commercial and political empires which advanced science, technology and the global economy to a remarkable extent through the 17^th to 19^th centuries CE. It also resulted in brutally destructive imperial conflicts that lasted throughout the 20^th century. How to adapt economic, political and technological development at a time when globalization is bringing about confrontation between vastly different religious, social and political cultures has become the challenge of the first decades of the 21^st century.

A new published economic history presents a different view of how the inequalities of wealth were created in Great Britain during the Enlightenment Age. (The Enlightened Economy: An Economic History of Britain, 1700-1850.

by Joel Mokyr. Yale University Press, 2010.) The author believes that there was no single cause among the many that other historians have identified. He does allow that effective property rights that encouraged investment did have a major influence. So did the growth of “human capital—the skills and talents—of eighteenth-century Britain, which were created, as much by practical experience and commercial culture as through formal education.”  (From a review in Harper’s Magazine by Edward Glaeser, Glimp Professor of Economics at Harvard University.)  Yet many of those practical men who learned from their experiences and made themselves rich did have some contact with the intellectual men of letters of their time.

COLOSSIANS 1:1-14.   A genuine concern for the Colossians suffering hardship and injustice stands out in Paul’s address to their spiritual needs (vs.10-11). Giving joyful thanks is not the normal human response to such trials. Does that have a special message for any of us at a time when many are indeed buffered if not exactly suffering from the trials of economic recession or natural disaster? Paul did offer hope of “sharing in the heritage of God’s people in the realm of light.” (Vs.12) He was probably speaking of life beyond death and the travails of this life. He also spoke forcefully of standing firm in one’s convictions in this life “with fortitude, patience and joy.” (NEB) A faith that meets today’s problems is something we all both need and may find whatever our tradition.

LUKE 10:25-37.  Biblical Hebrew used two words - chesed and racham which we translate into English variously as mercy, compassion or kindness. The prophets used the latter word more commonly, especially Isaiah, Jeremiah and Hosea. All of whom revealed divine mercy most vividly. The noun meaning womb also had the sense of a womb. He writes in his new work, The Way of Jesus: To Repair and Renew The World  (Abingdon, 2010), that the term reflects “that deep, visceral connection between mother and child, which a father, at least a good father, can also feel.” He adds that the Aramaic form of the word surviving from Jesus’ time “expressed a powerful principle in its translation of Leviticus 22:28 (in the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan), ‘My people, children of Israel, since I am merciful in heaven, so should you be merciful upon earth.’  The expansion in the Targum is unquestionably innovative because the Hebrew text speaks simply of not killing an animal and her young on the same day.”

Corresponding to the Hebrew racham is the Greek word eleos. In Luke 10:37 the KJV translators used “mercy” to convey the same meaning where most modern translators have used “compassion.” The Beatitude in Matthew 5:7 used the verbal form of eleos. It is also noteworthy that in Buddhism the word anukampa is often rendered as “mercy.”

There is a classic Buddhist poem answering the question, “What should the person skilled in profitable practice do when he becomes aware of the peaceful state?” The poem begins, “ One should cultivate an unlimited mind toward all beings, the way a mother protects her only son with her life.” The words are evocative of Michelangelo’s famous statue, La Pieta, of Mary cradling the body of Jesus taken down from the cross.

-30-