INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE

ISAIAH 1:1, 10-20. Isaiah is without doubt the greatest of Israel’s prophets. He survived through one of the stormiest periods of Judean history (circa 745-700 BC). He was so highly regarded nearly two centuries later that the work of another group of anonymous prophesies were added to his and now appear in chapters 40-66.

Although believed to belong to the royal court, he vehemently condemned the injustices of his time. In this passage he thundered against the ruling classes, likening them to the rulers of Sodom and Gomorrah. His message presented God’s claim for social justice rather than elaborate rituals and sacrifices.

PSALM 50:1-8, 22-23. This psalm stands in the tradition of the great prophets like Isaiah. It even repeats some of the same phrases as Isaiah’s condemnation of unworthy rituals, but offers an antidote in sincere prayers of thanksgiving.

GENESIS 15:1-6. (Alternate) Abraham receives from God the promise of an heir and countless descendants. This has become the classic claim of all Jews to their eternal existence as a people.

PSALM 33:12-22. (Alternate) Reiterating the promise of God to Abraham, the closing part of a relatively late psalm celebrates the providence of God for all those who render God due reverence.

HEBREWS 11:1-3, 8-16. This passage celebrates faith and those who have shown themselves to be some of Israel’s greatest faith-heroes. After giving what is for many a somewhat confusing definition of faith, it turns to show how faith had resulted in action by Israel’s great patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

LUKE 12:32-40. The early church believed in the return of Christ at some unknown but imminent time. This passage seems to fit into that tradition. We can find similar elements of it in different contexts both Matthew and Mark (vss. 33-34 = Matthew 6:19-21; vss. 35-40 = Mark 13:33-37). This reveals that a common tradition existed about the meaning of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection. He came to inaugurate God’s reign of love in human affairs and would soon return to accomplish this for all eternity.

*************

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS:

ISAIAH 1:1, 10-20.

In the introduction to his commentary on Isaiah 1-39, in The Interpreter’s Bible (vol 5, 162) the late Professor R. B. Y. Scott described Isaiah as “an aristocrat of the spirit. He moved like a prince among men. He spoke with the dignity and moral authority which he knew befitted an ambassador of the Most High, and it is evident that he was a product of the finest culture of Judah.”

If Scott’s speculations are accurate, he was both in a favored position to observe the society and its cultic practices which he so severely condemned. It is also surprising that he was able to do so for so long against his own class who perpetrated the very evils he condemned. As Scott also wrote: “Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others, he may have been a priest for his vision of God came as he stood where the priests stood between the porch and the altar.” This would account for his long prophetic ministry extending through one of the most turbulent times of the nation’s history from about 742 BCE to 701 BCE when Assyria posed a constant threat, the Northern Kingdom of Israel disappeared altogether and Judah narrowly avoided doing so too.

The body of this reading is especially noteworthy for one of Isaiah’s class since it gives a graphic statement about the futility and the disgrace of worship when the lives of worshipers are absorbed in grave injustice. To say that God is more concerned with human relationships expressed through just economic practices than with formal acts of worship in a stately temple would have been as anathema among the religious establishment then as it is now. Not that Isaiah rejected all formal worship. He only sought to point out that worship must be, as Scott stated, “the expression and symbol of reverence for the moral character of God and the corresponding moral standards which should characterize his people.” Human conduct must be a reflection and imitation of God’s justice, goodness, truth, kindness and mercy. In this Isaiah was not alone, but one with all the great prophetic voices of Israel - Amos, Hosea, Micah and Jeremiah.

It is obvious that Isaiah was speaking to the upper classes of Judah in particular. The common people could not have afforded the exorbitantly costly offerings at the frequent festivals cited in vss.11-14. It was the wealthy too who oppressed the defenseless orphans and widows of vs. 17. The implications of refusal by the elite to follow the path of justice and mercy are set forth in vss.18-20. No unconditional forgiveness is offered as some modern interpretations may suggest. The alternative comes through as clearly as in the Deuteronomic Code of Jeremiah’s time a century later: Repent or be destroyed.

PSALM 50:1-8, 22-23. Just exactly how did the prophetic tradition affect the Psalter? Here is one excellent example. As W. Stewart McCullough states in *The Interpreter’s Bible* (vol. 4, 260): “All the features (of this psalm) stand in the prophetic tradition... (Yet how) the writer handl(ed) the matter of animal sacrifices goes quite beyond the pre-exilic prophets who pronounced the sacrifices of unrighteousness inefficacious, by showing the fundamental unimportance of sacrifice.”

The viewpoint of the psalmist in vss 16-21 (excluded from this lection) stated that at the time he wrote legalistic tendencies were becoming ascendant as the definition of pious living. Yet he warned those fore whom he wrote against undue obsession with the legalisms to the neglect of the sincere worship and social justice.

A theophany, another facet of prophetic experience, begins in vss.5-6, where the psalmist reaffirmed God’s righteousness and judgment as the basis for God’s covenant with Israel. Vs.8 made a brief introduction to a strong admonition concerning sacrifice and the remainder of that segment (vss.9-15, also excluded) lifted up God’s ownership of all the creatures and/or produce used in sacrificial worship.

The nature of divine judgment comes to the fore more extensively in vss.16-21. Lip service to the Torah is no substitute for true spirituality. In true prophetic manner the closing vss. 22-23 reiterated the earlier statement (vs.14) that God prefers thanksgiving rather than sacrifices and wants worship that issues from thankful people who live faithfully.

GENESIS 15:1-6. (Alternate) Does theophany or any deeply spiritual experience spring from an intense inner struggle? This brief story from the J document (attested by the use of JHWH/YHWH, “the Lord”) would seem to suggest so. The passage describes how Abram (aka Abraham) received from Yahweh the promise of an heir and countless descendants.

The first inkling we get is that Abram’s had a vision in which Yahweh took the initiative in response to Abram’s fear (vs. 1). But Abram still doubted, protesting that he had no son to be his direct heir other than Eliezer of Damascus who had been Abram’s slave (vss. 2-3). Nothing should be made of the locale “Damascus” from which the servant came. The NRSV notes that the Hebrew is uncertain as does Strong’s 1899 *Exhaustive Concordance* of the KJV.

Yahweh dealt directly with Abram’s angst by promising that he would indeed have a rightful heir of his own issue. The promise went much further. Abram’s descendants would be as numerous as the stars. Unquestionably a hyperbole, this still rings through the millennia as the classic claim of all Jews to their eternal existence as the People of Promise.

Vs. 6 stands out in Christian memory because it became Paul’s great instance of faith rather than righteousness as the catalyst for salvation in Galatians 3:6-9. This interpretation must have become part of the Christian tradition for again in Hebrews 11:8-16 cites Abraham as the great exemplar of faith.

PSALM 33:12-22. (Alternate) Reiterating the promise of God to Abraham, the closing part of this relatively late psalm celebrated the providence of God for all those who render God due reverence. This excerpt has a distinct nationalistic tone to it and could be appropriately applied to almost any nation at a time of great distress. Although it set forth conditions for attaining God’s favour, the initiative as to the choice of which nation shall be God’s People is still God’s alone as the sovereign Lord of history.

The striking image of the “eye of God” reflects the lyric poetry of Deutero-Isaiah (cf. Isa. 40:18-28). The image in vss. 13-15 portrays a powerful sovereign looking over his fiefdom calculating by what means he may command the loyalty of his people. Neither political or military power is enough. Only a reverent trust that generates love proves sufficient (vss. 18-19).

A church sanctuary no longer in existence had a circular stained glass window high above the central pulpit picturing a human eye looking down on the congregation. It had a distinctively negative effect on some worshipers who saw it as the “eye of God” witnessing all their thoughts and actions. While vs. 15 does lend some force to that interpretation, it is countered by the trusting attitude with which the psalm ends. By putting trust in God’s steadfast love, expressed so totally in Jesus Christ, we have no reason to fear the judgment of our God.

HEBREWS 11:1-3, 8-16. "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for...." Oh my! What trouble that Greek word hupostasis (here translated “assurance”) has caused through the centuries! Yet this is its only appearance in the NT. Granted that most arguments about it were linguistic and theological, related almost exclusively to the true nature of the Person of Christ in the 4^th and 5^th centuries CE. Here the word is used to define the “essence” of faith. What follows in this excerpt from one of great passages of the NT is a recitation of the achievements of those who acted on faith.

Vs. 2 states that “by faith” they “received approval”-- from God, one presumes, though this is not specifically stated. Vs. 3 goes on to define faith as our attitude, conviction or trust that there is an invisible, spiritual realm or energy which not only influences but actually created and determines what happens in the visible, external environment in which we live from day to day.

Abraham is cited as the exemplar, pursuing God's promise though he would not see it accomplished in his lifetime (vss. 8-16). Yet using him in this instance has its difficulties, even though he is the great hero of faith for three living religious traditions - Jewish, Christian and Moslem. The skeptic might well ask, “What did it get him?” And answer, “A life of wandering in search of a better homeland he never reached!”

Is it enough to say as vs.16 does that people of faith are sojourners through this life? Is this not a pessimistic escapist approach to living faithfully in the world? Does it not deny the view that God intends to redeem the whole of creation rather than to save only those who are faithful and remove them from the wickedness and destruction of the world? Does God really intend simply to transfer those spiritual ones who have faith from this “vale of tears” to a “sweet and blessed country, the home of God’s elect?” Perhaps we need to rethink what Canadian theologian Douglas John Hall calls “our creaturely destiny” in the framework of Christ’s redemptive work in his life, death, resurrection and ascension.

William Barclay’s study of this passage has a fine opening: “To the writer to the Hebrews faith is a hope that is absolutely certain that what it believes is true, and that what it expects will come. It is not hope which looks forward with wistful longing; it is hope which looks forward with utter certainty. It is not hope which takes refuge in a perhaps; it is hope which is founded on a conviction.” (*Daily Bible Study: The Letter to the Hebrews.* Edinburgh: St. Andrew Press, 1955; 144-145.)

More recently, Frances Taylor Gench noted that the word faith is found twenty-four times in Hebrews 11 alone, and more than in any other book in the NT. She contends that what the word means for this unknown author “is closer to the meaning of faithfulness. It speaks of faith as active obedience. It is that characteristic of the Christian life that enables one both to persevere even in the midst of difficult circumstances and to step out into the unknown with the courage to live in a risk and vigourous way. … It enables believers to live by a vision of the realities of God and God’s purposes for the earth, a vision that is not yet present or visible to the eye. It empowers believers to move into the future with trust and confidence, knowing that the future belongs to God.” (*Hebrews and James*. Westminster Bible Companion Series. Westminster John Knox Press, 1996; 63.)

LUKE 12:32-40. So was Jesus talking to his disciples about the here and now or eschatologically? The *eschaton* in late Hebrew and early Christian thought was that moment when the arrival of the new age was imminent at any moment. It was not some far off future event when history would be wound up and everything set right with the world at the coming of Messiah/Christ? Was this interpretation of Jesus’ words by Luke merely ethical counsel for the contemporary world or eschatological and apocalyptic? Scholars have been divided about the exact time references of these three pericopes. If they are all teachings of Jesus himself, they obviously come from different periods of his ministry and were gathered into their present context by Luke himself.

Each of the three pericopes uses a different teaching method. Vss. 32-34 contains an assurance peculiar to Luke, a radical but direct ethical instruction and a proverb: “It is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” What follows is almost a corollary: “(Therefore) sell your possessions, and give alms.” In other words, simplify your life; lighten your burden of material assets so that your spiritual journey will no longer be impaired by their weight. The proverb, "Where your treasure is, there will your hearts be also," could well be from the ancient treasure of Jewish wisdom, exemplifying the prophetic spirit of justice with which that literature was imbued. One questions whether or not this pericope has a parallel in Matthew 6:19-21 as some have argued. Only the proverb seems to be identical; the context expressed a similar though not identical thought.

Vss. 35-38, however, is an allegory which also contains a warning that the Parousia may be delayed. It has certain elements in common with parables in Mark 13:33-37 and Matthew 25:1-13. Neither Jewish rabbis nor Jesus himself used allegories. Those were primarily Hellenistic teaching methods. The early church quickly adopted this teaching method from its Greek converts and from the writings of Philo, the thoroughly Hellenistic Alexandrian Jew. Luke himself may well have been one of those converts to Judaism who had embraced the Christian gospel.

The eschatological aspect to this story reverses the ordinary state of human affairs. The servants await the master to come home from a wedding banquet, possibly through all three night watches. When he does come and they respond to his knock at the door, he will sit them down to a feast and serve them himself. That is a total reversal of the ordinary state of affairs. Obviously, it referred to the messianic banquet at the end of the age, a common feature of Jewish eschatology.

The third pericope (vss. 39-40) returns to the typical form of a parable. Matthew 24:43-44 has a parallel, so the source may well have been Q as suggested in The Complete Gospels, edited by Robert J. Miller states. (Sonoma, CA: Poleridge Press, 1992. p.284.) Both references counsel being prepared for the unknown moment when the Parousia occurs. An almost identical warning occurs in 1 Thessalonians 5:2, one of Paul’s earliest letters, suggesting that this may indeed be a dominical teaching. On the other hand, an almost identical thought can be found in 2 Peter 3:10 and Revelation 3:3 which came at much later dates, indicating that the idea of an imminent Parousia persisted even to the end of the 1^st century or later.

Preaching on any part of this passage encounters expository difficulties; preaching on all three parts could prove virtually impossible. What is more, the Second Coming seems a rather heavy subject for a summer sermon. Congregants are sure to ask about the Rapture, so popular with some television preachers of recent decades.

SOME ADDITIONAL PREACHNG POINTS.

ISAIAH 1:1, 10-20. In vs.10 the reference to Sodom and Gomorrah has a different connotation to many ears today because of the mistaken association of those vanished cities with homosexuality. What Lot invited the citizens of Sodom to do to his daughters rather than his sons was more than despicable (Gen. 19:4-8). Isaiah referred to these two fated cities simply as figures of moral destruction. They were set in deliberate contrast to the Torah, the authoritative teaching of the Israel’s tradition of which Isaiah was a staunch defender. The subsequent verses declared unequivocally that God required authenticity in Israel’s worship. His point was that such authenticity should have been based on the ethical demands of the ancient covenant verbalized in the Torah.

PSALM 50:1-8, 22-23. We need to ask ourselves continually whether our liturgies are mere words or actual expressions of the heart, mind and soul. That is how the disciples and the apostolic church remembered the prayers of Jesus. His were no anguished words sent heavenwards or recited from ancient texts.

I recall as a child before I was old enough to go to school my mother and my grandmother taking me to their regular meetings of the Ladies Aid (later known as the Women’s Association). They always began their meetings with prayer and it was always the same – the Lord’s Prayer recited by heart. But it still sounds in my memory as a prayer of the heart, not merely mumbled words. Those women most of them came from local farms and very few of them educated beyond elementary school if that. But they knew their Lord. So his prayer came naturally to their lips when my grandmother, their group leader, began their meetings by saying, “Let us pray.”

HEBREWS 11:1-3, 8-16. What is faith? Where do religious experience and spirituality lie? Is it in our human consciousness deep within the maze of the billions of neural connections that make it possible for us to think, be aware of our mental experiences, and express ourselves in meaningful words?

That would appear to be the case as research into the psycho-neurological aspects of religious experience seems to indicate. This is not yet proven to the satisfaction of rational scientific minds. Yet not even the most rational and agnostic among us, let alone the atheists, can argue that humanity in all its variations through many millennia have had experiences of a religious nature which can only be regarded as of a transcendent reality beyond the mundane physical experiences of everyday life.

In a brief daily devotional, Felix Carrion, coordinator of The Stillspeaking Ministry, United Church of Christ, USA, wrote of the interpretation of the parable of the sower and seed in Luke 8:11-15. To him it defined the spiritual experience all of us long for:

“When you are in true possession of your life, this is your life at work (toiling, discerning, understanding, struggling, growing, producing). No one can find your life for you. You alone know it or don't; you alone find it or don't. Others will try for you. But Jesus warns us big against this. Only you can know and speak to the meaning of your life. Nature doesn't play politics. Your true self doesn't play politics. Neither does God.”

LUKE 12:32-40. In her excellent study of Luke’s Gospel, Sharon H. Ringe places the first of these three pericopes in a section with Luke 12:22-30 with the heading, “Confidence and Anxiety.” The passage concerns the reign of God “where abundance flows out of God’s own sufficiency and generosity.” The counsel to dispose of one’s wealth is “the hallmark of a different economy where alms-giving is not just a doling out of extras, but it is a fundamental reallocation of material and social goods according to the canons of justice.”

Ringe includes the remainder of this reading in another section (vss. 35-48) headed “Warnings About the Urgency of the Times.” Like many other interpreters, she believes that this refers to the church’s expectation of the return of the resurrected Jesus. This is not a frequent theme found in Luke but still a call to continue the church’s “attentive waiting for that day, however delayed it may be in coming.” (Luke. Westminster Bible Companion Series. Westminster John Knox Press, 1995; 180)

-30-