Book titles, if they were written today

A great idea…this one in my favorite:
Then: The Gospel of Matthew
Now: 40 Days and a Mule: How One Man Quit His Job and Became the Boss

Thanks to my colleague for forwarding that along.

UPDATE: I am mortified to realize that I did not first read this on Tim Richuitti’s blog where he forwarded a forward and consequently did not cite him here. Let our source critics go to work on that stemmatology.

From Morning Prayer for 23 July 2009.

Dear Colleagues,

I wanted to take a moment to remind you once again to keep
the submissions coming for our 2009 SBL Mid Atlantic
Regional meeting.  If you have not done so already, please
email me your submissions by FRIDAY, DECEMBER 5 at
schipper@temple.edu.  We will be meeting on March 26-27,
2009 in Baltimore.  For further information regarding
submission guidelines, awards, locations, and hotel
reservations, please see the attached “call for papers” pdf.
(I have also copied this the pdf into the body of this email
in case you have trouble with the attachment.)  PLEASE FEEL
FREE TO POST THE CALL FOR PAPERS AND ENCOURAGE YOUR FRIENDS,
COLLEAGUES, OR STUDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CONFERENCE.
Information regarding conference registration will become
available in the coming months.

All the Best,

Jeremy Schipper
Assistant Professor of Hebrew Bible
Department of Religion
Temple University

SBL Mid-Atlantic Regional Coordinator

“This scroll tells us nothing of cleanliness or of uncleanliness, either of prohibition or permission. For what purpose, then, was it written? To teach how great is the reward of those who do deeds of kindness.” R. Ze’ira, Ruth R. II 14.

As cited in “Jewish Exegesis of the Book of Ruth” by DRG Beattie, p. 203.

As pointed out, Aramaic Studies offers a two-for-one!

Bonus Session – Two for the Price of One: SBL24-103, Aramaic Studies
11/24/2008, 4:00 PM to 6:30 PM, Room: Meeting Room 309 – CC
1. Ed Cook, Ralph the Sacred River (1st presenter, time 4:00 pm)
4Q541, Fragment 24 Reconsidered (Again)
2. Chris Brady, Targuman (5th presenter, estimated time 6:00 pm)
The Development of the Character of Ruth in Targum Ruth

Year A
Proper 27
RCL

Amos 5:18-24
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18
Matthew 25:1-13

The Day of the Lord

Thus says the Lord, the God of hosts, the Lord: 
Alas for you who desire the day of the LORD!
    Why do you want the day of the LORD? 
It is darkness, not light.

We are all, I am sure, far more familiar with the last portion of our Old Testament reading from this morning, those words made fresh for the last 40 years by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. “let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an everflowing stream.” But as powerful as those words are, they do not have their full meaning unless the preceding verses are read with them. And they begin with an odd even paradoxical challenge from the prophet, declaring that the day of the Lord is darkness and not light. Surely that cannot be right! That is not how we think of the “day of the Lord” is it? Actually, that is a good question, how do you think of the “day of the Lord”?

I think most Christians probably think it refers to the “Lord’s day,” meaning Sunday, the day of the week on which Jesus arose from the dead. But that is not what it means in the Old Testament. The day of the Lord was the day when God will come and bring his judgment to this world. This is what Amos was declaring and he was challenging those who felt so self-righteous that they were calling for God to hasten his day of judgment, not realizing that they are just as likely to suffer his punishment as any other. The role of a prophet was not, as people so often think, to predict the future. Rather the prophet was and is someone who reminds God’s people of the promises of God and their responsibility in that relationship. In ancient Israel that meant that the prophets reminded Israel of the covenant that God had made with them and that while God had promised to bless them if they were obedient he also promised to punish them if they refused to obey his law and will for them. Most often, but it would be wrong to think that it was exclusively, the royalty, the aristocracy and the priesthood were the subjects of the prophets’ message.

And the message was routinely reduced to “care for the widow, the orphan, and the stranger in your midst.” These were the groups who were the most vulnerable and if society was caring for them, then that would be a pretty good sign that it was following the rest of God’s laws. The problem that Amos is focusing on in this passage is the hypocrisy that we so often have in our own lives: we don’t have our priorities in order.

Even though God’s law calls for Israel to worship him with songs and sacrifices, if they are not being obedient in other matters, the matters of justice and righteousness, none of it…matters.

I hate, I despise your festivals
and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies.
Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings,
I will not accept them; 
and the offerings of well-being of your fatted animals
I will not look upon.

It should be obvious that this is one Old Testament passage that does not require a great deal of exegesis to see its application in our own lives, in our corporate lives as a community of faith and in our individual and private spiritual lives. Our tradition places a great emphasis upon…well, tradition. Tradition and ceremony are central to our worship. But if that worship is not transforming us into servants of God and therefore servants of others, it is useless. It doesn’t matter how much we pray or how often we attend services, if we do not allow God to work in us and make us like Christ, taking up daily our cross and giving up ourselves for others, then it is all hallow and meaningless.

In the Law and the Gospels we are called to come together in worship and to offer up sacrifices to God. But God has also declared that he will despise and reject those very offerings if they are not accompanied with a pure and contrite heart. Consider Cain who brought a sacrifice before God, just as Abel had, and yet God only accepted Abel’s sacrifice. Why? Because it was “by faith [that] Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain’s” (Heb. 11:4). How do we bring our offerings God? Are our prayers, our tithes, our services offered in faithful obedience to God or merely obedience to tradition and habit? Do we return to God what is his while asking him to use us to bring his light and love into this world?

The day of the Lord that Amos declared is still coming and God will hold us accountable for our actions and our inaction. Our Gospel reading this morning is from a larger section in Matthew’s Gospel where Jesus tells his disciples what to expect in those last days, as the day of the Lord draws in. This story of the bridesmaids with the oil lamps, that I think sounds really rather odd and bizarre out of its larger context, is a parable of preparation and priorities.

On the one hand it is simply a reminder that we are always to remain vigilant and expectant for the coming of Christ. As Jesus says in the preceding chapter, we may not know the day or the hour, but we do know that he will come and God will mete out his justice. And don’t forget, Amos was already some 700 years before Jesus’ own time, so we cannot simply push Amos and all of this judgment talk aside as just so much “Old Testament nonsense.” Jesus certainly didn’t think so, but he did understand that we are not a patient people. Today our attention span barely lasts for a 15 minute sermon let alone two thousand years of waiting!

We are waiting for his return, but there is so much work to do. In the parable that follows today’s reading Jesus tells the story of the men who are each given a sum of money. One man is given five talents and he invests it, doubling his money. The man given two talents does the same. The man who is given a single talent buries it knowing that his master can be harsh. The ones who invested the money won their master’s praise but the one who did nothing with what he had been given was thrown out into the “outer darkness.”

We have been given great talents, in wealth and ability, in spirit and capacity for love. We have been charged by Jesus himself to go out into the world and share the Gospel message of freedom from sin and death. There is suffering and hardship in our world. There are so many who do not know the love of Christ and the transforming presence of the Spirit in their lives. Have we shared it with them all? Have we met and dealt with every injustice? His return may seem like it is long in coming but we certainly should not be bored, there is so much work still to do.

When the day of the Lord arrives, when Christ shall come again God will establish his order and set the world aright. In the meantime the command goes out to us “let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an everflowing stream.” We are his agents to bring justice and righteousness to this world. Our own sense of justice can so often be flawed and unjust. What we think of as righteousness can often be simply self-serving. And that is why we must be ready, keeping oil in our lamps and our wicks trimmed by continuing to gather in worship, in prayer, and study so that while the bridegroom may be delayed we may grow to understand and live out in this in between time His justice and righteousness.

Take away from me the noise of your songs;
I will not listen to the melody of your harps. 
But let justice roll down like waters,
and righteousness like an everflowing stream.

These are not just the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This is the Word of the Lord.
Amen.

As the church’s doctrines have become more elastic, the church has contracted. It celebrates an “inclusiveness” that includes fewer and fewer members.

He is, of course, not saying anything new or that we have not observed before. I have often marveled at how the so-called “progressives” in our church (I say “so-called” because such a term, like so many in politics, is used not to define oneself, but the other; the opposite of “progressive” is, of course, “regressive”) are so confounded as to why evangelical churches with a fairly straightforward message of repentance, acceptance of forgiveness, and Bible study have been growing so rapidly while our numbers dwindle. The answer is simple. Very few people want a religious community where “anything goes.”

People fundamentally understand that not everything can be equally right. We go to churches, synagogues, and mosques to hear guidance and direction. We know we aren’t perfect and recognize there must be a better way. The last thing we want to hear is “your OK just the way you are, don’t change a thing” because we know that we are not OK. A newer generation won’t get the reference, but we might say “I’m not OK and you’re not OK and that’s OK.” At the core of all the Bible and the Gospel particularly is the assertion that we and this creation were made for something much, much better than what we are now. We need clarity of message so that we can decide whether or not we agree with it. Say what you will about Willow Creek Bible Church, you know what they believe. You may not agree with them, which is fine, but you know what they believe. What does the Episcopal Church believe? Hmm. That’s a tough one….

In many ways I think that the Episcopal Church would be far, far better off if it simply decided to draw a clear line in the sand regarding the role and authority of Scripture. The church would probably lose members and it might gain them, but at least being decisive would allow those seeking a community of faith to know upon what (or whom) the Episcopal Church based their faith.  Be hot or be cold, but no one finds luke wark palatable.

Cook says (playing the devil’s advocate for Domning and Wimmer)

Before the advent of free-will, they would see “sin” as not yet sin but merely all those selfish behaviors and drives that are homologous between animals and humans.

I don’t think I would speak of free-will as having an “adven” per se. It seems to me that having a free-will is part of our nature, having been created “in the image of God.” I understand that much of this discussion involves embracing evolution, with which I have no problem. I believe that one can accept evolution and still retain this vital and fundamental trait of humanity. That being given I would argue that free-will is present and as such so is the potential for sin and evil. Sin and evil did not exist, as such, until it was actualized in the rebellious act of Eve and Adam.

That is just a bit of where my thoughts are going with this. I have to say that I find it tough to read Stephen’s blog online because of the white text on the black background. It really does strain my eyes and require me to take frequent breaks. Am I just a whiner or has anyone else had the same trouble?

Mythtickle by Justin Thompson

Not the best Adam-Eve-Apple-Computer comic I have ever seen, but I do like the groggy, bandaged Adam. Somehow I never quite saw the first-born of all creation potbellied with a comb over. I suppose that is what married life can do to you. *ducks behind the sofa before things start flying*