On Line Bible Study - For the Week October 24-30, 2011

Lesson 515

John 3: ¹ Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. ² He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

We are looking at John 3:1-21. You can link to the entire text by clicking the passage above.

We could live in this story! But we are going to consider three things:

1. The interplay of dark and light, night and day.
2. The importance of the Holy Spirit.
3. The difference between being 'well-intentioned' and 'theologically accurate' with regard to Jesus.
   

Darkness and Light ... Nicodemus comes to Jesus in the night, under cover of darkness. Why? We have already read in the prologue to this gospel the following words:

John 1: ⁹ The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. ¹⁰ He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.

Nicodemus knows there is something special about Jesus, but he is still in the dark. The evangelist uses the physical darkness as a way of underscoring Nicodemus' spiritual state of being. The passage under our consideration begins with darkness and concludes with these words:

John 3: ²¹ But those who live by the truth come into the light ...
While 'wowed' by the signs of Jesus, Nicodemus is not yet "on" to the person of Jesus.

The Holy Spirit ... Within the structure of Jewish messianic thought there lies the seeds of this reality - that God is Spirit, and can only be understood, related to, and worshiped "in Spirit". Nicodemus doesn't comprehend this fact. A question that emerges is this: Should he have comprehended this? Could he have comprehended it? He acknowledges Jesus as a 'teacher who has come from God...' Later, Jesus will pose the question to Nicodemus:

John 3: ¹⁰ “You are Israel’s teacher and do you not understand these things?

Isaiah 61:1 reads: The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. Nicodemus should have understood the idea that one must approach the messianic work of the Lord by way of the Spirit.

Good Intentions vs. Right Theology ... Care has to be taken not to come off as theologically arrogant. Care also has to be taken to distinguish between thinking Jesus is a 'good guy' on one hand, and believing he is the Son of God on the other. Jesus makes it clear that he is not as much interested in impressing people with signs as he is concerned with our relationship with God. For Nicodemus to presume Jesus is somehow favored by God by virtue of the signs he performed borders on patronizing Jesus, and Jesus will have none of it.

We in the Northern Hemisphere are entering the darkest season of the year. We can contemplate our need for the Light. (The same reflection can happen in June for those living in Southern climes.) Will the Light of Christ invade our darkness? Does that Light help us discern between platitudes we are tempted to offer over against the praises Christ deserves to receive?

On Line Bible Study - For the Week October 17-23, 2011

Lesson 515

John 2: ¹³ When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. ¹⁴ In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. ¹⁵ So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. ¹⁶ To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” ¹⁷ His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.”

¹⁸ The Jews then responded to him, “What sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?”

¹⁹ Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

²⁰ They replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” ²¹ But the temple he had spoken of was his body. ²² After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.

²³ Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Festival, many people saw the signs he was performing and believed in his name. ²⁴ But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all people. ²⁵ He did not need human testimony about them, for he knew what was in them.

For Mark, Matthew and Luke, this event of 'cleansing the Temple' comes at the end of Jesus' public ministry, just days before his crucifixion. In John it occurs at the beginning of Jesus' ministry. Only John makes mention of a whip, and the above text suggests the whip was used on the beasts. Father Raymond Brown translates this verse such that it suggests the whip was used on the people. Only in John is there the reference to the 'cattle and sheep'.

There are other differences between the Synoptics and John as well. The question of Jesus' authority, for example ... it emerges in Matthew, Mark and Luke a bit later in that narrative relative to the cleansing of the temple than in John. The issue of Jesus raising the temple in three days - that is a line attributed to false witnesses at Jesus' trial in Matthew and Mark (Matthew 26:61 & Mark 14:58 respectively). In John, Jesus actually says the words. How do we account for these differences?

We are told in Verse 22 that what Jesus meant by "...destroy this temple..." was not fully understood until after the resurrection. But there may have been an immediate meaning to his cleansing of the temple that had prophetic overtones which are still applicable today. There was corruption in the 'house of the Lord', proclaimed the prophet Jeremiah.

Recalling that the Temple represented not only the spiritual life of the people, but the civic life as well, we are left wondering what Jesus might do in the midst of those who take advantage of the poor in our own day. How would he react in the midst of systems where corruption and greed were the rule of the day? What is it that needs to be overturned in order for justice to prevail, and for fairness to have its say?

From both a theological and a pragmatic perspective, we are in a similar situation now that people were in two thousand years ago: The powers-that-be need a good scrubbing.

On line Bible Study - For the Week October 10-16, 2011

Lesson 514

John 2: ¹ On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there, ² and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. ³ When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no more wine.”

⁴ “Woman, why do you involve me?” Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come.” ⁵ His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

We must not leave John 2:1-11 without acknowledging the 'mother' question. In his commentary on this gospel, Father Raymond Brown writes: "Perhaps nowhere in John is the difference of theological predisposition between Catholic and Protestant more painfully evident than in the exegesis of 2:4." Father Brown admits much of the Catholic exegesis on this text is not much better than 'pious eisegesis'. ('Eisegesis' is interpreting a text by introducing one's own ideas into the meaning - making a text mean what you want it to mean...) Protestants, on the other hand, tend to simply pass over the text as if it weren't there.

What to do with Mary? Fr. Brown reminds us that from the earliest days of the church Mary was understood to be"both a symbol of the Church and the New Eve." She will make another appearance in the gospel. As Jesus is dying on the cross he acknowledges her presence and addresses her in the same manner there as here - Woman. In that text (John 19:26-27) Mary and the beloved disciple are given to each other as Mother and Son.

Jesus addresses his mother: Woman ... This is neither a rebuke nor does it suggest lack of respect. Jesus refers to other women he encounters in the same way. Brown suggests the possibility of some "symbolic import" here. He also acknowledges that he is unaware of any other time in either Hebrew or Greek where a son addresses his mother this way. Given the reminiscences of Genesis found in these opening chapters of John's gospel, the idea of the 'New Eve' is certainly not far-fetched.

Mary ... Woman ... Believer ... Mother ... Is it she that, together with the Spirit, bids us Come! (Revelation 22:17.) In the meantime, there is a temple that needs cleansing. That's for the next lesson.

On Line Bible Study - For the Week October 3-9, 2011

Lesson 513

John 2: ¹¹ What Jesus did here in Cana of Galilee was the first of the signs through which he revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him.

Before we look at the first 10 verses in this chapter, we need to be aware of what the 'signs' (semeia in Greek) are all about. Chapters two-twelve of the Gospel are referred to a the 'Book of Signs'. John records seven 'miraculous signs' in these chapters. Father Raymond Brown points out that three of these 'signs' are variations of stories we read in Mark, Matthew and/or Luke. Three others are miracles that are similar to ones found in the Synoptics. This 'first sign' stands alone. Where does it come from?

Some scholars attributed the source for this story as coming from the cult of Dionysus (the god of vintage). Others see meaning in the shortage of wine at the wedding feast - guests typically brought gifts of wine to the wedding. Were Jesus and his disciples too poor to have brought wine? Is their presence at the wedding the reason the party ran out of wine? Is that why Mary is insistent on Jesus taking some action?

At the heart of the matter is this question: What is the purpose of these (or any of the other) signs which Jesus performs? Regardless of their historical setting, the author of the Gospel makes it clear that this - and all the other - signs reveal Jesus' glory and inspire people to come to faith in him. Jesus 'shines' in this story. Let's review the story...

John 2: ¹ On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there, ² and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. ³ When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no more wine.”

⁴ “Woman, why do you involve me?” Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come.” ⁵ His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” ⁶ Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons.

⁷ Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water”; so they filled them to the brim. ⁸ Then he told them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet.”

They did so, ⁹ and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside ¹⁰ and said, “Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.”

THE SETTING - Weddings and banquets are highly charged theological events suggesting such things as God being wedded to God's people, and guests sitting at the divine banquet in the kingdom of God. Jesus is presented here as the source of the Spirit, the one from whom flows the fountains of joy and power and light. Prophets have come; kings have reigned; scholars have taught; priests have presided over the Temple worship; but in Christ what has happened in 'former times' is now superseded. Jesus is "the radiance of God's glory." (See Hebrews 1:1-3.)

Jesus is not only the "wine-maker"; he is the "Light-Bearer", the shining of God's presence in our midst. It may be trite to put it this way, but indeed, Jesus is the 'life of the party' - the one without whom there truly is no party at all.

On Line Bible Study - For the Week September 26-October 2, 2011

Lesson 512

John 1: ⁴³ The next day Jesus decided to leave for Galilee. Finding Philip, he said to him, “Follow me.” ⁴⁴ Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida. ⁴⁵ Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”

⁴⁶ “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” Nathanael asked. “Come and see,” said Philip.

⁴⁷ When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.”

⁴⁸ “How do you know me?” Nathanael asked. Jesus answered, “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.” ⁴⁹ Then Nathanael declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.” 50Jesus said, "You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that." ⁵¹He then added, "Very truly I tell you, you will see 'heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on' the Son of Man."

The challenge: Who is Nathaniel? He is not listed in the "Twelve" in Matthew 10:2-4, Mark 3:13-19 or Luke 6:12-16. Traditions associating him with Simon the Cananean (Mark & Matthew's list), or with Bartholomew (because Bartholomew's name follows Philip's in the list of disciples, and it is Philip who goes and gets Nathanael in the above passage...) are highly speculative.

What is the pejorative remark about Nazareth all about? Perhaps there was some rivalry or jealousy between the communities of Cana (where Nathanael was from?) and Galilee? But this comment would seem to contradict Jesus' assessment of Nathanael as one "in whom there is no deceit" ("guile" in other translations). The Greek word - δόλος - is used in Matthew 26:4 to refer to the "sly" way the chief priests were going to use to arrest Jesus.

Apparently Nathanael heard Jesus' comment because he wonders how it is that Jesus knows him. I saw you while you were still under the fig tree ... Father Raymond Brown points out that Jesus is able to "know" things about people. His vision is sharper, clearer than ordinary human vision. What was Nathanael doing under the tree that enabled Jesus to so quickly assess him, such that Nathanael immediately came to believe Jesus was the Son of God...the king of Israel?

Rabbis would congregate under a fig tree to study or teach. The Talmud speaks of the Law as a "fig tree". Is the tree reminiscent of the tree of knowledge in Paradise?

Regardless of what Nathanael was doing, Jesus' word to him was enough to forever alter his life. Notice how the chapter concludes - with Jesus assuring those around him that there will be more than "words" to his ministry. You will see greater things ...

One last thought ... Perhaps Nathanael represents Israel - or, a contrast to the "Israel" we read about in John's gospel. Unlike his countrymen, Nathanael hears the word of Jesus, and believes. In the next chapter we will move from "hearing" to "seeing".