Posts Tagged ‘Bible’

Thirsting for God’s word

July 20, 2013

Pentecost 9

Amos 8:1-12

Marian Free 

Loving God, give us such a thirst for your word that we may read, learn and inwardly digest it and so share it with others. Amen.

I wonder how well you know your Bibles – the word of God. There are some things that you will know well and others that you may not know at all. For example, I am sure that if I asked you how many gospels there were you would all say “four” and that if I asked you to name Jesus’ disciples that you would be able to name at least three. Similarly, I am guessing that you could tell me the first line of the 23rd Psalm and that most of you would know where to look for the story of Daniel in the lion’s den. How would you go though if I asked you to explain why the four gospels differ from each other? How many of Jesus’ parables would you be able to repeat? Do you know in which book of the Bible you would find Satan in the court of heaven? In which book of the New Testament would you find the Golden Rule? And where in the Old Testament would you find the expressions: “How the mighty have fallen” or “keep me as the apple of your eye”[1]?

Many of the churches in this Diocese are participating in an audit that has been developed to measure the health of the church. A key finding of “The Natural Church Life Survey” is that across the Diocese, our knowledge of the bible is very poor. The central document of our faith, the book which records our stories and tells us how God has been a part of human history, is, for many of us, a book which remains largely unknown.

This is a pity for a number of reasons, most of all because the Bible is God’s love letter to humanity. We discover in its pages the story of creation’s propensity to turn away from God and the story of God’s patience which, over and over again, overlooks all our failings and shortcomings and continually restores us. The bible is filled with words of wisdom and comfort to encourage and sustain us – to give us guideposts along the way and to tell us something of the love and presence of God.

Just to give you a few of my favourite examples: Psalm 56:8 tells us that God keeps all our tears in a bottle. Isaiah and Revelation insist that God will wipe away all our tears (Is 25:8, Rev 21:4). In John’s gospel Jesus says: “I have come that you might have life and have it in abundance” (10:10. Elsewhere he says that all the hairs on our head are counted (Luke 12:7). God’s love continues to be poured out on us no matter how little we have done to deserve it.

The list is endless. From the proclamation in Genesis that God created humankind and it was very good, to the promises of heaven in Revelation, the Bible constantly affirms our worth in God’s eyes and God’s love for us – no matter how far we stray or how much we let God down.

On the other hand, the bible is a very human book and its pages expose the very worst of human nature. Between its covers you will find accounts of fratricide, genocide, infanticide, murder, adultery, rape and betrayal. There is no escape in our holy book from the reality of human existence and its potential for and propensity to sin. There is no glossing over or white washing the behaviour of even our most revered biblical heroes – with the exception of Jesus, they are all as flawed as we are.

The reading from Amos today is one of those bleak passages which discourage many from reading the Bible and the Old Testament in particular. This is one of the reasons that it is important to know our Bibles. We have to remember the context in which such accounts were written. In the time of Amos, the people of Israel had abandoned God, they were oppressing the poor and engaging in dubious and dishonest trading practices. Amos is expressing God’s frustration and sorrow at such a situation and God’s distress that the people no longer pay any attention to God’s word. God’s anguish is such that he threatens to withdraw the word from them in order that they should hunger and thirst for it, that they should long to know God again.

So we do an injustice to the text if we don’t take the trouble to understand its historical context, but we also judge it unfairly if we do not read it in the light of the whole book. If we persist to the end of the book of Amos, we see a different story – God does not remain angry, but relents:

9: 13 The time is surely coming, says the LORD,

when the one who ploughs shall overtake the one who reaps,

and the treader of grapes the one who sows the seed;

the mountains shall drip sweet wine,

and all the hills shall flow with it.

14             I will restore the fortunes of my people Israel,

and they shall rebuild the ruined cities and inhabit them;

they shall plant vineyards and drink their wine,

and they shall make gardens and eat their fruit.

15             I will plant them upon their land,

and they shall never again be plucked up

out of the land that I have given them,             says the LORD your God.

The book of Amos was written in and for times very different from our own, but it can still speak to us. We are living in an increasingly multi-cultural and secular society which means that it is our responsibility to keep the word of God alive – to ensure that it is known not only to us but to generations to come. We may not experience a famine of “hearing the words of the Lord”, but the world at large does. It has less and less opportunity to engage with God and with God’s word. For that reason, it is incumbent on us to know and to share what and why we believe, to know our story so well that we can tell it to others, to be so enthusiastic that others will thirst to hear more.

I would like to end today with a challenge for you to begin to read the bible for yourself. Don’t set your target too high, begin with something that is manageable. Decide for example to read the bible for just five minutes a day or to read your way through one book of the bible. Develop your curiosity, ask questions: “What does the bible say about ….” Where can I find the parable of the Good Samaritan? What verse or what Psalm would I suggest to a friend who was going through a difficult time? Where would I find passages that talk about God’s limitless love? Give it a go and see what you can discover.

Let us be those who so know God’s word that we are able to make it known, those who so thirst for the word of God that we are ourselves equipped to slake the thirst of others and so familiar with the word, that it is like our second nature.


[1] The differences in the gospels relate to the writer’s intent, the community for which they were written and to other reasons which I can’t go into here. In the Book of Job, Satan plays an important role in the heavenly court. The Golden Rule is found in Luke and Matthew (6:31, 7:12). ‘How the mighty have fallen” is part of David’s Lament for Saul and David in 2 Samuel 2:19,27 and “keep me as the apple of your eye” comes from Psalm 17:8.

A window into Luke

February 2, 2013

Epiphany 4

Luke 4:21-30

Marian Free

In the name of God, whose son Jesus is revealed to us in the gospels. Amen.

Over the course of this year you will notice that our gospel readings come predominantly from the Gospel of Luke. The reason for this is that we are in the third year of the lectionary cycle. Over three successive years we read, almost in full, Matthew, Mark and Luke. (John does not have a year to itself, but is read during Easter and Lent during those years.)

We do not know anything about the author of the gospel of Luke, but we can deduce some things from the gospel and the way in which it is written. Luke, as Matthew, follows the same order as Mark, however Luke leaves out information and text which he (we presume the author was a “he”) considers unnecessary. For example, he completely omits chapters 6 and 7 of Mark possibly because they contain a number of repetitions. On the other hand, Luke is a storyteller and with just a few details is able to create a comprehensive picture or tell a compelling story. Two of the most well-known and loved stories in the New Testament are told only by Luke – the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal son both of which say a lot very succinctly. So, despite Luke’s preference for brevity, his gospel is significantly longer than that of Mark.

For centuries, it was argued that the author of Luke was a physician. Scholars pointed to Luke’s interest in, and apparent knowledge of things medical. However, it has long since been observed that Luke has no more knowledge or interest in medicine than any other NT writer. It is clear, however, that Luke does have more interest in social justice. (In Acts we find the idea that members of the church should have all things in common and the Song of Mary states that God “has put down the mighty from their thrones and the rich he has sent empty away.”)

We know that Luke was the author of two books – the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles – which, though separated by John in our Bibles, originally belonged together. That they have the same author is demonstrated by the fact that both books are addressed to the same person – Theophilus – and that similar themes play out throughout both books. One clear theme is that of journey and mission. The Gospel, concerned as it is with re-telling the life of Jesus, is focussed on Jerusalem and a large part of the book is taken up with Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem and its consequences. In Acts, the focus begins in Jerusalem, the centre of Judaism and the birth place of the church, and from there the story broadens out to include the Mediterranean and Rome, the centre of the Empire.

Luke’s gospel was probably written some time between the years 80 and 90. it cannot have been written before the sixth decade of the first century otherwise it would not have been able to include the details recorded at the end of Acts, nor can it have been written any later than the late second century which is the date of our earliest copy.

By the time that the gospels were written, the emerging church faced a crisis – the Jews to whom Jesus was sent had failed to respond to his message, whereas the Gentiles – who did not belong to the people of Israel – had come to faith. To some extent, all the gospel writers deal with this conundrum in some way, but the issue expressed most clear in Luke. The third gospel demonstrates both that God remains faithful to his promises – God has not abandoned the Jews – and that the inclusion of the Gentiles was always part of God’s plan. This is one reason that the author of Luke begins the story in the centre of Judaism and concludes the account in the centre of the empire.

Even though Luke is keen to demonstrate the movement of the faith throughout the whole world, he is equally keen to emphasise its Jewish roots. According to Luke, the story of Jesus and of the early church is nothing less than a continuation of Judaism and the fulfilment of the OT expectations. Unlike Mathew, who repeatedly alerts us to the fulfilment of the OT, “this was to fulfil what was written in the scriptures”, Luke makes the same point by repetition and allusion. So for example, the Song of Mary is almost identical to the Song of Hannah and Jesus’ life is portrayed in such a way that those who knew would associate Jesus with Moses. (Moses goes into the wilderness. In the desert Moses experiences a call from God. The people to whom Moses is sent do not understand and so on.) In fact it can be argued that Luke sees the account of John the Baptist as the conclusion of the OT era (the last of the prophets), and Jesus as the beginning of the new, God’s anointed one.

Today’s gospel reading is recorded in Matthew, Mark and Luke. Luke’s record is however, quite different from the other two. If you were able to place the three accounts side by side you would see that Luke provides new material that is not found elsewhere. All three report Jesus’ preaching in the synagogue. Only Luke quotes the passages that Jesus reads: “He has sent me to preach good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives.” Likewise only Luke has Jesus claim that the scripture is fulfilled in him. The former is consistent with Luke’s social justice emphasis and the latter with his fulfilment theme. Luke alone has Jesus insinuate that the crowd (like the Jews in the times of Elijah and Elisha) are unable to recognise one of their own whereas those from outside (Naaman) do. (The reader is not surprised – this is what is happening in their own time – Gentiles believe, those to whom Jesus was sent do not.)

The response of Jesus’ listeners in Mark and Matthew is relatively mild despite being impressed, they took offense at him because they knew him so well). In Luke the reaction to Jesus’ claim and to his insinuation about the lack of faith in his listeners is so powerful and negative that they try to kill him. (Luke, at the beginning of his account of Jesus’ ministry is already making it clear that it is not that God has abandoned God’s people, but that they have failed to recognise God in Jesus.)

Most of us think that we know what the Bible says so sometimes it comes as a shock to learn that passages and stories that we thought belonged to all the gospels belong only to one or that one writer makes what we consider to be radical changes or additions to a familiar story. It is also exciting to compare the three accounts. Our new knowledge encourages us to ask questions, to consider why Luke added so much to his source material, what he was trying to say about Jesus, who were the people who heard or read the Gospel, how did the early church develop and grow and so on? During the year we will discover the answers to some, if not all of these questions.

Scripture is fascinating, confusing, challenging and comforting, but above all, it is one way that God communicates with us and a way that we in turn communicate God to the world. Don’t we owe it to God and to the world to discover and to understand as much as we possibly can?