Epiphany 2 – January 16, 2011

Isaiah 49:1-7

            This reading is the second of the “servant songs” in Isaiah (see last week’s post for general discussion).  Last week I said that it seems the “servant” in these texts is Israel itself as a people; I still think so, but some parts of this week’s lesson complicate that theory a little.  In particular, verses 1-2 sound like classic calling-of-a-prophet stuff, making it seem as if maybe the “servant” is the prophet.  For example, compare verse 1 to Jeremiah 1:5; also, “he made my mouth like a sharp sword” in verse 2 sounds like preparing a prophet to speak God’s word.  But then, in verse 3, the servant is explicitly identified as Israel: “You are my servant, Israel…”  Then again, though, in verse 5, it sounds like the servant’s job was to “bring Jacob back” to God.  And verse 6 is maybe the most confusing of all: “It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the survivors of Israel; I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth.”  It’s confusing because it makes more sense for a prophet to “raise up the tribes of Israel” than for Israel to raise itself up; at the same time, it makes way more sense for Israel as a whole people to be given “as a light to the nations.” 

Enter the scholars.  I find the note in the HCSB helpful: J.J.M. Roberts says that grammatically, the one raising up the tribes of Jacob and restoring the survivors of Israel isn’t the servant, but rather God.  He says a better translation is, “It is too light a thing, you being my servant, that I should only raise up the tribes of Jacob and restore the survivors of Israel; I will give you as a light to the nations…”  Finally, in verse 7 it says that right now God’s people may be suffering in exile, but the other nations will eventually stand up and take notice because of God’s faithfulness to them.

What’s the upshot?  I think it’s that (1) God is promising rescue and restoration to God’s people; and (2) it’s not only for their own sake (that would be too light and insubstantial) but for the sake of all the peoples of the world.  In other words, it would seem, God is remaking his people into a “servant” people, a people with a mission beyond themselves.

1 Corinthians 1:1-9

            For this week’s Epistle reading, we have the very beginning of 1 Corinthians.  Just a word about the letters to the church in Corinth: we have more correspondence with this congregation than with any other in the NT.  Of course there’s 1 and 2 Corinthians, which are both pretty long as Paul’s letters go.  Then 1 Corinthians 5 mentions an earlier letter, and 2 Corinthians mentions still another “letter of tears.”  Parts of what we call 2 Corinthians may actually be that letter, or part of it, or (parts of) still other letter(s). At any rate, 1 and 2 Corinthians reveal a depth of relationship between Paul and this congregation – and it’s by no means always easy or happy - that we don’t see as much in his other letters.

            Paul’s letter’s typically start with a greeting and then a prayer of thanksgiving for the congregation to whom he’s writing.  (The notable exception being Galatians, in which he’s so mad he skips the prayer.)  That’s what we have in this reading, and I like to think about it this way: as Paul greets and prays for this congregation, we can also hear him greeting and praying for our congregations.  This is all the more true because in v. 2 he explicitly includes all Christians everywhere.

So what do we hear him saying and praying to and for us?  First, in v. 2 he refers to us as “those who are made holy in Christ Jesus, called to be holy ones.”  This is a good reminder because our day-to-day lives may not feel all that holy much of the time.  What I think it means that we are “made holy and called to be holy ones” is that we are tasked with helping to reveal Jesus in and to the world.  In vs. 4-9, Paul gives thanks for the grace of God given to us in Jesus; he says we have been “made rich” in him so that we don’t lack any grace-gift as we’re waiting for the ultimate revealing of Jesus.  God will strengthen us to the end.  A couple of things to highlight here: first, for Paul there is a trajectory to life and history; we are headed somewhere, specifically toward the “revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ.”  Second, Paul lifts up the richness of Christian life – that we are flush with all these grace-gifts (“charisma,” see 12:1-11) to equip us in our job of revealing Jesus in the world. 

With his reference to “speech and knowledge of every kind” (v. 5) Paul gets in a subtle dig at the Corinthians and their obsession with certain grace-gifts, i.e. speaking in tongues.  I think the dig Paul gets in at our expense has to do with “richness” and our obsessive focus on financial wealth or scarcity.

John 1:29-42

            The gospel of John is some wild stuff.  It’s like a parallel-universe gospel.  The story it tells about Jesus is in many ways the same as that told in Matthew, Mark, and Luke: there’s healing on the Sabbath, walking on water, feeding thousands, triumphal entry into Jerusalem.  Many of the characters are the same: John the Baptist, Mary and Martha, Simon Peter.  Then there are some close-but-not-quite-the-same-elements.  For example, Jesus’ mother is here but she’s never named; he cleanses the Temple but it’s at the beginning of the story instead of toward the end; the Samaritan woman at the well kind of reminds us of the Syrophoenician woman in Mark 7 / Canaanite woman in Matthew 15, but it’s also different.  Then there are some events and characters that are just different: Wedding at Cana?  Nicodemus?  Footwashing?  Thomas?  And there’s a ton of teaching material that is unique to John, from being born-from-above to abiding in the True Vine.  When those wacky cats the Jesus Seminar were casting their votes to decide the relative authenticity of Jesus’ words – a process which resulted in a version of the gospels with his words printed in shades ranging from magenta (yep) to black (nope) – if I’m not mistaken the entire gospel of John came out black.  Not that they were biased or anything.  Because it was a totally objective process.

What I’m driving at here is just that John’s gospel is different from the others.  And I will make just a few observations about today’s reading.  First, John the Baptist calls Jesus the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (v. 29) – which is an odd term.  On the one hand, it seems to refer to a ritual described in Leviticus 16 where the priest would ritually place the sins of the community on a live goat and then send it away.  But it was a goat, not a lamb. However, a lamb was used for Passover, and in John’s gospel Jesus is crucified on Passover (instead of the next day, as told by Matthew, Mark, and Luke).  So in that sense John apparently regards Jesus as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.” 

Second, in a case of close-but-not-quite-the-same, John doesn’t explicitly tell about Jesus being baptized or even actually come out and say he was baptized, but John the Baptist comes really close in vs. 32-33 when he relates his experience of seeing the Holy Spirit descend on Jesus and hearing God speak about him.

Third, and connected with #2, words in John’s gospel never mean just one thing, and there’s constantly misunderstanding between Jesus’ hearers who take his words literally and Jesus himself who means something else.  As an example, in v. 32 John the Baptist says the Holy Spirit “remained” on Jesus.  Then in vs. 38-39 those first disciples asking where Jesus is “staying” and then see where he’s “staying.”  Seems innocent enough, but if we turn over to chapter 15 we hear Jesus talking all about how we should “abide” in him and he will “abide” in us.  You guessed it – all these words are the same in Greek, a word meaning remain/ stay/ dwell.  So the idea is, John the Baptist saw the Holy Spirit "remain/dwell" on Jesus - if we know that Jesus "dwells" with the Father and intends for us to "dwell" in him, then the Holy Spirit "dwelling" on Jesus might indicate to us Jesus' "dwelling" with God.  So then, when these disciples ask Jesus where he's "staying/dwelling," and they to go see his house, we understand that they don't get it yet - the house isn't really where he "dwells."  But here at the beginning of John's gospel it's just nicely, subtly confusing.