One of the great things about Advent is that regardless of what year of the lectionary cycle we're in, the 4 Sundays all have very *pronounced* themes. The first Sunday of Advent is always about the SECOND ADVENT. This is important. It helps us avoid the trap of sentimentalizing Advent (and Christmas). It is impossible to "look forward" in a real sense to the birth in Bethlehem. It has already happened. But we most definitely can & should look forward to the Second Advent of our Lord. Then the next two Sundays belong to John the Baptist, and finally the last Sunday of Advent belongs to Mary. It's the same every year.
The Gospel reading for this year for Advent 2 comes from Luke 3:1-6:
1 In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar--when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene-- 2 during the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness. 3 He went into all the country around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet: "A voice of one calling in the wilderness, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him. 5 Every valley shall be filled in, every mountain and hill made low. The crooked roads shall become straight, the rough ways smooth. 6 And all people will see God's salvation.'
I'm immediately struck with 2 things: (1)The original audience would've detected a 'shock value' in how Luke grounded what he said by mentioning the movers & shakers of his day. In our day he may have said something like "when Barack Obama was President of the United States, and Patrick Quinn was Governor of Illinois, and Benedict the XVI was Pope, .......something of immense cosmic importance occurred with a homeless guy living in Busse Woods." Get the drift? NOTHING that Obama is doing .....NOTHING that Quinn is doing.......and NOTHING that Benedict XVI is doing can even hold a candle to what is happening with this complete unknown/non-entity. Luke's day & age is not so different from our own. We think & expect that the world's problems can be solved by global decision makers, but God more often chooses to make His presence known through the small & insignificant.
The second thing that jumps out at me is where it says: "the word of God came to John, son of Zechariah in the wilderness."
I'm curious as to why Luke uses the phrase "rema Theou" instead of "logos tou Theou." Both can be easily translated "the word of God," but the latter is the highly recognized introduction to prophecy found in the Greek version of the Old Testament. When **ALL** of the prophets say that the word of the Lord came to them, it's appears as "logos tou Theou." Either Luke did not know his Greek Old Testament well, or this phrase was avoided for some other reason. The Greek 'rema' can mean *more* than just word or utterance, it can also mean 'voice' or the *sound* of speech. I wonder if Luke was attempting to heighten the prophetic nature of John's ministry, in essence by saying: not only does the Word of God come to John, but John being the last of the OT Prophets actually heard the VOICE of God.
I'm not sure I have the answer to that one just now, but it's fun to think about.
Cheers,
TM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I am very sad to be missing the sermon from 11-29-09 :(
Yup....sorry.
That was one of my 3 sundays 'off' that I get per year. I was off in Michigan while Pastor Warmann from nearby Trinity Roselle subbed for me.
I'll be back this week, tho, same time same station.
TM
Tim:
Great thoughts going in!
A quick electronic concordance search shows that REMA KYRIOU/THEOU is used in the LXX for the phrase "Word of the Lord/God," especially in the historical books (Samuel, Kings) when referring to prophets being called or led to speak. Perhaps that is influencing Luke's use of the term.
Art Just's discussion of the Lukan Gospel mentioned that the first several chapters read like the LXX. There is also the parallel between Hannah and Mary, even in the songs of praise attributed to each. It could be that Luke decided to imitate the text of the LXX historical books and lifted the REMA KYRIOU/THEOU phraseology to extend the OT motif to the point of the Baptizer's appearance. Just some musings on that aspect.
My sermon focuses on the sting that the people receive from John's preaching, so that they can be forgiven in their penitence. So they are able to receive the Christ. Likewise, we receive the sting of God's condemnation, so that we can be forgiven and withstand the Day of His Coming. Will give a listen to yours on Monday (DEC 7).
LTZ
Luke:
Cool.
I hadn't thought to look in the historical books, I only [quickly] checked the major prophets in the LXX where it's LOGOS THEOU.
I do recall, not so much from Just's commentary which I no longer have, but from his class .....that the opening of the Lucan narrative is very LXX-ish.
To me this Sunday's pericope is very cosmic, and very fullness-of-time-ish......
Just that phrase, "the word of God came..."
How long had it been since that happened? HUNDREDS of years.
And when it came, who did it come to? Annas? Caiaphas? No, some hayseed out in the wilderness. It's JUST the sort of story you'd expect to hear **IF** you're plugged in to the way God generally seems to work.
My focus is to take these 2 upcoming sundays of Advent & split them like an old made for tv movie, with "to be continued" in between. It's the Messenger & his Message, pt 1 & pt 2.
TM
About 11-29-09 sermon ---- Glad you got some time off :)
About the thread "thoughts going in" . . .
This is absolutely fascinating - I have always loved when one understands the history of what was going on in "Biblical Times" and adding knowledge of translations is wonderful! I'm of the mind that we have mistranslated much of what has been said in the Bible and misunderstood what is important. I'm really happy to have discussion aimed at getting it right :)
SH
Post a Comment