Half the class took a field trip down Blackstone!
My sense of direction sucks.
As does my direction of sense.
On the topic of direction..
I think spiritual direction might sometimes consists of literally losing/finding one's literal direction.
To be literally lost, and then literally found is a-mazing, ex-hilirating and re-demptive ...as lost sheep and sons know from experience and Amazing Graceness.
Lost coins miss out on the feeling of being refound.
I love Paul Hiebert's diagram (below) of our fair city, Fresno, in "Transforming Worldviews."
(full text here)
So downtown streets literally follow and parallel the tracks...which run northeast-southwest.. and are not tied/tethered to a traditional (whose tradition was it, anyway?) north/south, west/east grid.
But the rest of the city follows a traditional north-south, west-east pattern.
There was less attitude and latitude for straying from literal latitude by the time the city expanded beyond downtown.
So, in some circles, we are famous/infamous for two things: introducing the credit card, and being laid out sideways.
Watch it all here:
Post by Dave Wainscott.
Bruggemann offers a taxonomy of the psalms: psalms of orientation, disorientation and reorientation
Sometimes we must lose orientation to find disorientation to find reorientation. In fact, such may be the only way to grow. It's more than a Hegelian synthesis. It's holy liminality and liminal space where holy shift happens. So it could be what happens to a driver's/walker's orientation is a microcosm and metaphor of what happens as we pilgrimage from "glory to glory"...even if transversing through Fowler's stages of faith or Kubler-Ross's stages of grief.
I find spiritual direction by losing my direction.
I find my life by losing it, a Rabbi once prophesied.
Re-pent and be re-oriented for the forgiveness of sins.
Oh, and on the sixth floor of that straightcrooked skyscraper, our church met for a year, Looking down and out the window at Blackstone was radically reorienting. Maybe it did is some spiritual good.
Derrida suggests
DeCerteau ( see Mashup: "Walking in the City"/"Moment of Surrender") has reminded us that the city is a text.
Rob Bell talks about the text as a what, and the context (con-text) as a where.
We wonder "where am I?" when we become lost, and when/where our "insulators" are missing...or crooked. Only then, through lostness and suffering, does creativity emerge:
There’s a phrase we use when we’re describing something we consider new and fresh and unexpected. We say it’s “out of the box.” The problem with the phrase is that when something or someone is judged to be in or out of “the box”, it reveals that “the box” is still our primary point of reference. We’re still operating within the prescribed boundaries and assumptions of how things are supposed to be. “Out of the box” is sometimes merely another way of being “in the box.” And then there are those who come from a totally different place. They ask another kind of question: “There’s a box?” -Rob Bell, Drops Like Stars.
How about a bumper sticker:
- "I lost my insulators. Follow Me!."
- "I lost my box!"
- "Follow me! I'm lost."
grades at FPU
grades at fpu
The answer is a C grade.
From FPU handbook:
A=Superior. The student has demonstrated a quality of work and accomplishment far beyond the formal requirements and shown originality of thought and mastery of material.
B=Above Average.
The student’s achievement exceeds the usual accomplishment, showing a clear
indication of initiative and grasp of subject.
C=Average. The student has met the formal requirements and has demonstrated good comprehension of the subject and reasonable ability to handle ideas.
D=Below Average. The student’s accomplishment leaves much to be desired.Minimum requirements have been met but were inadequate.
=
TEMPLE TANTRUM
INTERCALATION is a "sandwiching" technique. where a story/theme is told/repeated at the beginning and ened of a section, suggesting that if a different story appears in between, it too is related thematically. We looked at this outline of Mark 11:
CURSING OF FIG FREE
CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE
CURSING OF THE FIG TREE
We discussed how the cursing of the fig tree was Jesus' commentary of nationalism/racism/prejudice, because fig trees are often a symbol of national Israel. That the fig tree cursing story is "cut in two" by the inserting/"intercalating" of the temple cleansing, suggested that Jesus action in the temple was also commentary on prejuidice...which become more obvious when we realize the moneychangers and dovesellers are set up in the "court of the Gentiles," which kept the temple from being a "house of prayer FOR ALL NATIONS (GENTILES).
This theme becomes even more clear when we note that Jesus statement was a quote from Isaiah 56:68, and the context there (of course) is against prejudice in the temple.
double paste: Often, two Scriptures/texts are combined into a new one. Ex. : Jesus says “My house shall be a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of thieves.” The first clause (before the comma) is from Isaiah 56:6-8, and the second is from Jeremiah 7:11
hemistiche/ellipsis: when the last section of a well-known phrase is omitted foremphasis: Matthew says "My house shall be a house of prayer......," intentionally
leaving out
the "...for all nations" clause.
”
==
class discussion on Matthew 21 (
INTERCALATION is a "sandwiching" technique. where a story/theme is told/repeated at the beginning and ened of a section, suggesting that if a different story appears in between, it too is related thematically. We looked at this outline of Mark 11:
CURSING OF FIG FREE
CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE
CURSING OF THE FIG TREE
This theme becomes even more clear when we note that Jesus statement was a quote from Isaiah 56:68, and the context there (of course) is against prejudice in the temple.
double paste: Often, two Scriptures/texts are combined into a new one. Ex. : Jesus says “My house shall be a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of thieves.” The first clause (before the comma) is from Isaiah 56:6-8, and the second is from Jeremiah 7:11
hemistiche/ellipsis: when the last section of a well-known phrase is omitted foremphasis: Matthew says "My house shall be a house of prayer......," intentionally
leaving out
the "...for all nations" clause.
”
==
class discussion on Matthew 21 (
Three Acted Parables about Nationalism)
especially focusing on the temple tantrum..
Note, the chapter started with "Palm Sunday":
--
we'll watch (next moodle)the "Lamb of God" video and discuss how it was actually a nationalistic misunderstanding. If Jesus showed up personally in your church Sunday, would you wave the American flag at him, and ask him to run for president? 
a)Van Der Laan:
Jesus on his way to Jerusalem
On the Sunday before Passover, Jesus came out of the wilderness on the eastern side of the Mount of Olives (just as the prophecy said the Messiah would come).
People spread cloaks and branches on the road before him. Then the disciples ?began, joyfully, to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen? (Luke 19:37). The crowd began shouting, ?Hosanna,? a slogan of the ultra-nationalistic Zealots, which meant, ?Please save us! Give us freedom! We?re sick of these Romans!?
The Palm Branches
The people also waved palm branches, a symbol that had once been placed on Jewish coins when the Jewish nation was free. Thus the palm branches were not a symbol of peace and love, as Christians usually assume; they were a symbol of Jewish nationalism, an expression of the people?s desire for political freedom __LINK to full article
b)FPU prof Tim Geddert:
Palm Sunday is a day of pomp and pageantry. Many church sanctuaries are decorated with palm fronds. I’ve even been in a church that literally sent a donkey down the aisle with a Jesus-figure on it. We cheer with the crowds—shout our hosannas—praising God exuberantly as Jesus the king enters the royal city.
But if Matthew, the gospel writer, attended one of our Palm Sunday services, I fear he would respond in dismay, “Don’t you get it?” We call Jesus’ ride into Jerusalem “The Triumphal Entry,” and just like the Jerusalem crowds, we fail to notice that Jesus is holding back tears.
Jesus did not intend for this to be a victory march into Jerusalem, a political rally to muster popular support or a publicity stunt for some worthy project. Jesus was staging a protest—a protest against the empire-building ways of the world.
LINK: full article :Parade Or Protest March
c)From Table Dallas:
Eugene Cho wrote a blog post back in 2009 about the irony of Palm Sunday:
The image of Palm Sunday is one of the greatest ironies. Jesus Christ – the Lord of Lords, King of Kings, the Morning Star, the Savior of all Humanity, and we can list descriptives after descriptives – rides into a procession of “Hosanna, Hosanna…Hosanna in the Highest” - on a donkey – aka - an ass.
He goes on to say it’s like his friend Shane Claiborne once said, “that a modern equivalent of such an incredulous image is of the most powerful person in our modern world, the United States President, riding into a procession…on a unicycle.”
-Link
-
Article By Dave Wainscott
“Temple Tantrums For All Nations"
Salt Fresno Magazine, Jan 2011:
Some revolutionaries from all nations overlooking the Temple Mount, on our 2004 trip
I
have actually heard people say they fear holding a bake sale anywhere
on church property…they think a divine lightning bolt might drop.
Some
go as far as to question the propriety of youth group fundraisers
(even in the lobby), or flinch at setting up a table anywhere in a
church building (especially the “sanctuary”) where a visiting speaker
or singer sells books or CDs. “I don’t want to get zapped!”
All trace their well-meaning concerns to the “obvious” Scripture:
"Remember when Jesus cast out the moneychangers and dovesellers?"
It
is astounding how rare it is to hear someone comment on the classic
"temple tantrum" Scripture without turning it into a mere moralism:
"Better not sell stuff in church!”
Any serious study of the passage concludes that the most obvious reason Jesus was angry was not commercialism, but:
racism.
I heard that head-scratching.
The tables the Lord was intent on overturning were those of prejudice.
I heard that “Huh?”
A brief study of the passage…in context…will reorient us:
Again,
most contemporary Americans assume that Jesus’ anger was due to his
being upset about the buying and selling. But note that Jesus didn't
say "Quit buying and selling!” His outburst was, "My house shall be a
house of prayer for all nations"
(Mark 11:17, emphasis mine). He was not merely saying what he felt,
but directly quoting Isaiah (56:6-8), whose context is clearly not
about commercialism, but adamantly about letting foreigners and
outcasts have a place in the “house of prayer for all nations”;
for all nations, not just the Jewish nation. Christ was likely upset
not that moneychangers were doing business, but that they were making
it their business to do so disruptfully and disrespectfully in the
"outer court;” in the “Court of the Gentiles” (“Gentiles” means “all
other nations but Jews”). This was 
the
only place where "foreigners" could have a “pew” to attend the
international prayer meeting that was temple worship. Merchants were
making the temple "a den of thieves" not (just) by overcharging for
doves and money, but by (more insidiously) robbing precious people of
“all nations” a place to pray, and the God-given right to "access
access" to God.
Money-changing
and doveselling were not inherently the problem. In fact they were
required; t proper currency and “worship materials” were part of the
procedure and protocol. It’s true that the merchants may have been
overcharging and noisy, but it is where and how they are doing so that
incites Jesus to righteous anger.
The problem is never tables. It’s what must be tabled:
marginalization of people of a different tribe or tongue who are only wanting to worship with the rest of us.
In
the biblical era, it went without saying that when someone quoted a
Scripture, they were assuming and importing the context. So we often
miss that Jesus is quoting a Scripture in his temple encounter, let
alone which Scripture and context. Everyone back then immediately got
the reference: “Oh, I get it, he’s preaching Isaiah, he must really
love foreigners!”:
“Foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord…all who hold fast to my covenant-these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations.” (Isaiah 56:6-8, emphases mine)
Gary Molander, faithful Fresnan and cofounder of Floodgate Productions, has articulated it succinctly:
“The classic interpretation suggests that people were buying and selling stuff in God’s house, and that’s not okay. So for churches that have a coffee bar, Jesus might toss the latte machine out the window.
I wonder if something else is going on here, and I wonder if the Old Testament passage Jesus quotes informs our understanding?…Here’s the point:
Those who are considered marginalized and not worthy of love, but who love God and are pursuing Him, are not out. They’re in..
Those who are considered nationally unclean, but who love God and are pursuing Him, are not out. They’re in.
God’s heart is for Christ’s Church to become a light to the world, not an exclusive club. And when well-meaning people block that invitation, God gets really, really ticked.”
(Gary Molander, http://www.garymo.com/2010/03/who-cant-attend-your-church/)
Still reeling? Hang on, one more test:
How
often have you heard the Scripture about “speak to the mountain and
it will be gone” invoked , with the “obvious” meaning being “the
mountain of your circumstances” or “the mountain of obstacles”? Sounds
good, and that will preach. But again, a quick glance at the
context of that saying of Jesus reveals nary a mention of metaphorical
obstacles. In fact, we find it (Mark 11:21-22) directly after the
“temple tantrum.” And consider where Jesus and the disciples are:
still near the temple, and still stunned by the “object lesson” Jesus
had just given there about prejudice. And know that everyone back
then knew what most today don’t: that one way to talk about the temple
was to call it “the mountain” (Isaiah 2:1, for example: “the mountain
of the Lord’s temple”) .
Which is why most scholars would agree with Joel Green and John Carroll:
“Indeed, read in its immediate context, Jesus’ subsequent instruction to the disciples, ‘Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain..’ can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!... For him, the time of the temple is no more.” (“The Death of Jesus in Early Christianity,” p. 32, emphasis mine).
In
Jesus’ time, the temple system of worship had become far too embedded
with prejudice. So Jesus suggests that his followers actually pray
such a system, such a mountain, be gone.
Soon it literally was.
In our day, the temple is us: the church.
And the church-temple is called to pray a moving, mountain-moving, prayer:
“What keeps us from being a house of prayer for all nations?”
Or as Gary Molander summarizes:
“Who can’t attend your church?” -Dave Wainscott, Salt Fresno Magazine
--
--------------------
the money changers were in the Gentile courts of the temple..Jesus' action opened up the plazaso that Gentiles could pray." -Kraybill, Upside Down Kingdom, p. 151.
-----
--
Note, the chapter started with "Palm Sunday":
--
we'll watch (next moodle)the "Lamb of God" video and discuss how it was actually a nationalistic misunderstanding. If Jesus showed up personally in your church Sunday, would you wave the American flag at him, and ask him to run for president? 
a)Van Der Laan:
Jesus on his way to Jerusalem
On the Sunday before Passover, Jesus came out of the wilderness on the eastern side of the Mount of Olives (just as the prophecy said the Messiah would come).
People spread cloaks and branches on the road before him. Then the disciples ?began, joyfully, to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen? (Luke 19:37). The crowd began shouting, ?Hosanna,? a slogan of the ultra-nationalistic Zealots, which meant, ?Please save us! Give us freedom! We?re sick of these Romans!?
The Palm Branches
The people also waved palm branches, a symbol that had once been placed on Jewish coins when the Jewish nation was free. Thus the palm branches were not a symbol of peace and love, as Christians usually assume; they were a symbol of Jewish nationalism, an expression of the people?s desire for political freedom __LINK to full article
b)FPU prof Tim Geddert:
Palm Sunday is a day of pomp and pageantry. Many church sanctuaries are decorated with palm fronds. I’ve even been in a church that literally sent a donkey down the aisle with a Jesus-figure on it. We cheer with the crowds—shout our hosannas—praising God exuberantly as Jesus the king enters the royal city.
But if Matthew, the gospel writer, attended one of our Palm Sunday services, I fear he would respond in dismay, “Don’t you get it?” We call Jesus’ ride into Jerusalem “The Triumphal Entry,” and just like the Jerusalem crowds, we fail to notice that Jesus is holding back tears.
Jesus did not intend for this to be a victory march into Jerusalem, a political rally to muster popular support or a publicity stunt for some worthy project. Jesus was staging a protest—a protest against the empire-building ways of the world.
LINK: full article :Parade Or Protest March
c)From Table Dallas:
Eugene Cho wrote a blog post back in 2009 about the irony of Palm Sunday:-LinkThe image of Palm Sunday is one of the greatest ironies. Jesus Christ – the Lord of Lords, King of Kings, the Morning Star, the Savior of all Humanity, and we can list descriptives after descriptives – rides into a procession of “Hosanna, Hosanna…Hosanna in the Highest” - on a donkey – aka - an ass.He goes on to say it’s like his friend Shane Claiborne once said, “that a modern equivalent of such an incredulous image is of the most powerful person in our modern world, the United States President, riding into a procession…on a unicycle.”
-
Article By Dave Wainscott
“Temple Tantrums For All Nations"
Salt Fresno Magazine, Jan 2011:
|
| Some revolutionaries from all nations overlooking the Temple Mount, on our 2004 trip |
I have actually heard people say they fear holding a bake sale anywhere on church property…they think a divine lightning bolt might drop.
Some go as far as to question the propriety of youth group fundraisers (even in the lobby), or flinch at setting up a table anywhere in a church building (especially the “sanctuary”) where a visiting speaker or singer sells books or CDs. “I don’t want to get zapped!”
All trace their well-meaning concerns to the “obvious” Scripture:
"Remember when Jesus cast out the moneychangers and dovesellers?"
It is astounding how rare it is to hear someone comment on the classic "temple tantrum" Scripture without turning it into a mere moralism:
"Better not sell stuff in church!”
Any serious study of the passage concludes that the most obvious reason Jesus was angry was not commercialism, but:
racism.
I heard that head-scratching.
The tables the Lord was intent on overturning were those of prejudice.
I heard that “Huh?”
A brief study of the passage…in context…will reorient us:
Again, most contemporary Americans assume that Jesus’ anger was due to his being upset about the buying and selling. But note that Jesus didn't say "Quit buying and selling!” His outburst was, "My house shall be a house of prayer for all nations" (Mark 11:17, emphasis mine). He was not merely saying what he felt, but directly quoting Isaiah (56:6-8), whose context is clearly not about commercialism, but adamantly about letting foreigners and outcasts have a place in the “house of prayer for all nations”; for all nations, not just the Jewish nation. Christ was likely upset not that moneychangers were doing business, but that they were making it their business to do so disruptfully and disrespectfully in the "outer court;” in the “Court of the Gentiles” (“Gentiles” means “all other nations but Jews”). This was
the
only place where "foreigners" could have a “pew” to attend the
international prayer meeting that was temple worship. Merchants were
making the temple "a den of thieves" not (just) by overcharging for
doves and money, but by (more insidiously) robbing precious people of
“all nations” a place to pray, and the God-given right to "access
access" to God.
Money-changing and doveselling were not inherently the problem. In fact they were required; t proper currency and “worship materials” were part of the procedure and protocol. It’s true that the merchants may have been overcharging and noisy, but it is where and how they are doing so that incites Jesus to righteous anger.
The problem is never tables. It’s what must be tabled:
marginalization of people of a different tribe or tongue who are only wanting to worship with the rest of us.
In the biblical era, it went without saying that when someone quoted a Scripture, they were assuming and importing the context. So we often miss that Jesus is quoting a Scripture in his temple encounter, let alone which Scripture and context. Everyone back then immediately got the reference: “Oh, I get it, he’s preaching Isaiah, he must really love foreigners!”:
“Foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord…all who hold fast to my covenant-these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations.” (Isaiah 56:6-8, emphases mine)Gary Molander, faithful Fresnan and cofounder of Floodgate Productions, has articulated it succinctly:
“The classic interpretation suggests that people were buying and selling stuff in God’s house, and that’s not okay. So for churches that have a coffee bar, Jesus might toss the latte machine out the window.
I wonder if something else is going on here, and I wonder if the Old Testament passage Jesus quotes informs our understanding?…Here’s the point:
Those who are considered marginalized and not worthy of love, but who love God and are pursuing Him, are not out. They’re in..
Those who are considered nationally unclean, but who love God and are pursuing Him, are not out. They’re in.
God’s heart is for Christ’s Church to become a light to the world, not an exclusive club. And when well-meaning people block that invitation, God gets really, really ticked.”
(Gary Molander, http://www.garymo.com/2010/03/who-cant-attend-your-church/)
Still reeling? Hang on, one more test:
How often have you heard the Scripture about “speak to the mountain and it will be gone” invoked , with the “obvious” meaning being “the mountain of your circumstances” or “the mountain of obstacles”? Sounds good, and that will preach. But again, a quick glance at the context of that saying of Jesus reveals nary a mention of metaphorical obstacles. In fact, we find it (Mark 11:21-22) directly after the “temple tantrum.” And consider where Jesus and the disciples are: still near the temple, and still stunned by the “object lesson” Jesus had just given there about prejudice. And know that everyone back then knew what most today don’t: that one way to talk about the temple was to call it “the mountain” (Isaiah 2:1, for example: “the mountain of the Lord’s temple”) .
Which is why most scholars would agree with Joel Green and John Carroll:
“Indeed, read in its immediate context, Jesus’ subsequent instruction to the disciples, ‘Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain..’ can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!... For him, the time of the temple is no more.” (“The Death of Jesus in Early Christianity,” p. 32, emphasis mine).In Jesus’ time, the temple system of worship had become far too embedded with prejudice. So Jesus suggests that his followers actually pray such a system, such a mountain, be gone.
Soon it literally was.
In our day, the temple is us: the church.
And the church-temple is called to pray a moving, mountain-moving, prayer:
“What keeps us from being a house of prayer for all nations?”
Or as Gary Molander summarizes:
“Who can’t attend your church?” -Dave Wainscott, Salt Fresno Magazine
--
--------------------
the money changers were in the Gentile courts of the temple..Jesus' action opened up the plazaso that Gentiles could pray." -Kraybill, Upside Down Kingdom, p. 151.
-----
--
FOR ALL THE NATIONS: BY RAY VANDER LAAN:
Through the prophet Isaiah, God spoke of the Temple as ?a house of prayer for all the nations? (Isa. 56:7). The Temple represented his presence among his people, and he wanted all believers to have access to him.
Even during the Old Testament era, God spoke specifically about allowing non-Jewish people to his Temple: ?And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord ? these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer? (Isa. 56:7).
Unfortunately, the Temple authorities of Jesus? day forgot God?s desire for all people to worship freely at the Temple. Moneychangers had settled into the Gentile court, along with those who sold sacrificial animals and other religious merchandise. Their activities probably disrupted the Gentiles trying to worship there.
When Jesus entered the Temple area, he cleared the court of these moneychangers and vendors. Today, we often attribute his anger to the fact that they turned the temple area into a business enterprise. But Jesus was probably angry for another reason as well.
As he drove out the vendors, Jesus quoted the passage from Isaiah, ?Is it not written: ?My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations??? The vendors had been inconsiderate of Gentile believers. Their willingness to disrupt Gentile worship and prayers reflected a callous attitude of indifference toward the spiritual needs of Gentiles.
Through his anger and actions, Jesus reminded everyone nearby that God cared for Jew and Gentile alike. He showed his followers that God?s Temple was to be a holy place of prayer and worship for all believers. - Van Der Laan
---
--
Excerpts from a good Andreana Reale article in which she sheds light on Palm Sunday and theTemple Tantrum:
,, Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem actually echoes a custom that would have been familiar to people living in the Greco-Roman world, when the gospels were written.
Simon Maccabeus was a Jewish general who was part of the Maccabean Revolt that occurred two centuries before Christ, which liberated the Jewish people from Greek rule. Maccabeus entered Jerusalem with praise and palm leaves—making a beeline to the Temple to have it ritually cleansed from all the idol worship that was taking place. With the Jewish people now bearing the brunt of yet another foreign ruler (this time the Romans), Jesus’ parade into Jerusalem—complete with praise and palm leaves—was a strong claim that He was the leader who would liberate the people.
Except that in this case, Jesus isn’t riding a military horse, but a humble donkey. How triumphant is Jesus’ “triumphant entry”—on a donkey He doesn’t own, surrounded by peasants from the countryside, approaching a bunch of Jews who want to kill Him?
And so He enters the Temple. In the Greco-Roman world, the classic “triumphant entry” was usually followed by some sort of ritual—making a sacrifice at the Temple, for example, as was the legendary case of Alexander the Great. Jesus’ “ritual” was to attempt to drive out those making a profit in the Temple.
The chaotic commerce taking place—entrepreneurs selling birds and animals as well as wine, oil and salt for use in Temple sacrifices—epitomized much more than general disrespect. It also symbolised a whole system that was founded on oppression and injustice.
In Matthew, Mark and John, for example, Jesus chose specifically to overturn the tables of the pigeon sellers, since these were the staple commodities that marginalised people like women and lepers used to be made ritually clean by the system. Perhaps it was this system that Jesus was referring to when He accused the people of making the Temple “a den of robbers” (Mt 21.13; Mk 11.17; Lk 19.46).
Andreana Reale
--
So Jesus is intertexting and double pasting two Scriptures and making a new one.
But he leaves out the most important part "FOR ALL NATIONS"...which means he is hemistiching and making that phrase even more significant by it's absence,
-----
"If anyone says to this mountain, 'Go throw yourself into the sea, and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done.' (Mark 11:23). If you want to be charismatic about it, you can pretend this refers to the mountain of your circumstances--but that is taking the passage out of context. Jesus was not referring to the mountain of circumstances. When he referred to 'this mountain,' I believe (based in part on Zech 4:6-9) that he was looking at the Temple Mount, and indicating that "the mountain on which the temple sits is going to be removed, referring to its destruction by the Romans..
Much of what Jesus said was intended to clue people in to the fact that the religous system of the day would be overthrown, but we miss much if it because we Americanize it, making it say what we want it to say, We turn the parables into fables or moral stories instead of living prophecies that pertain as much to us as to the audience that first heard them."
-Steve Gray, "When The KIngdom Comes," p..31
“Indeed, read in its immediate context, Jesus’ subsequent instruction to the disciples, ‘Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain..’ can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!... For him, the time of the temple is no more.”
"The word about the mountain being cast into the sea.....spoken in Jerusalem, would naturallly refer to the Temple mount. The saying is not simply a miscellaneous comment on how prayer and faith can do such things as curse fig trees. It is a very specific word of judgement: the Temple mountain is, figuratively speaking, to be taken up and cast into the sea."
-N,T. Wright, "Jesus and the Victory of God," p.422
see also:
By intercalating the story of the cursing of the fig tree within that of Jesus' obstruction of the normal activity of the temple, Mark interprets Jesus' action in the temple not merely as its cleansing but its cursing. For him, the time of the temple is no more, for it has lost its fecundity. Indeed , read in its immediate context, Jesus' subsequent instruction to the disciples, "Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain, 'Be taken up and thrown into the sea'" can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!
What is Jesus' concern with the temple? Why does he regard it as extraneous to God's purpose?
Hints may be found in the mixed citation of Mark 11:17, part of which derives from Isaiah 56:7, the other from 11:7. Intended as a house of prayer for all the nations, the temple has been transformed by the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem into a den of brigands. That is, the temple has been perverted in favor of both socioreligious aims (the exclusion of Gentiles as potential recipients of divine reconciliation) and politico-economic purposes (legitimizing and
consolidating the power of the chief priests, whose teaching might be realized even in the plundering of even a poor widow's livelihood-cf 12:41-44)....
...In 12:10-11, Jesus uses temple imagery from Psalm 118 to refer to his own rejection and vindication, and in the process, documents his expectation of a new temple, inclusive of 'others' (12:9, Gentiles?) This is the community of his disciples.
-John T, Carroll and Joel B. Green, "The Death of Jesus in Early Christianity," p. 32-33
FIG TREE: FOLLOW SCRIPTURES WHERE IT IS A SYMBOL OF NATIONIAL ISRAEL/jERUSALEM/GOD'S BOUNDED SET:
Fig Tree:
s to the significance of this passage and what it means, the answer to that is again found in the chronological setting and in understanding how a fig tree is often used symbolically to represent Israel in the Scriptures. First of all, chronologically, Jesus had just arrived at Jerusalem amid great fanfare and great expectations, but then proceeds to cleanse the Temple and curse the barren fig tree. Both had significance as to the spiritual condition of Israel. With His cleansing of the Temple and His criticism of the worship that was going on there (Matthew 21:13; Mark 11:17), Jesus was effectively denouncing Israel’s worship of God. With the cursing of the fig tree, He was symbolically denouncing Israel as a nation and, in a sense, even denouncing unfruitful “Christians” (that is, people who profess to be Christian but have no evidence of a relationship with Christ).
The presence of a fruitful fig tree was considered to be a symbol of blessing and prosperity for the nation of Israel. Likewise, the absence or death of a fig tree would symbolize judgment and rejection. Symbolically, the fig tree represented the spiritual deadness of Israel, who while very religious outwardly with all the sacrifices and ceremonies, were spiritually barren because of their sins. By cleansing the Temple and cursing the fig tree, causing it to whither and die, Jesus was pronouncing His coming judgment of Israel and demonstrating His power to carry it out. It also teaches the principle that religious profession and observance are not enough to guarantee salvation, unless there is the fruit of genuine salvation evidenced in the life of the person. James would later echo this truth when he wrote that “faith without works is deadt also teaches the principle that religious profession and observance are not enough to guarantee salvation, unless there is the fruit of genuine salvation evidenced in the life of the person. James would later echo this truth when he wrote that “faith without works is dead” (James 2:26). The lesson of the fig tree is that we should bear spiritual fruit (Galatians 5:22-23), not just give an appearance of religiosity. God judges fruitlessness, and expects that those who have a relationship with Him will “bear much fruit” ( LINK
--
SOREQ
Through the prophet Isaiah, God spoke of the Temple as ?a house of prayer for all the nations? (Isa. 56:7). The Temple represented his presence among his people, and he wanted all believers to have access to him.Even during the Old Testament era, God spoke specifically about allowing non-Jewish people to his Temple: ?And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord ? these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer? (Isa. 56:7).
Unfortunately, the Temple authorities of Jesus? day forgot God?s desire for all people to worship freely at the Temple. Moneychangers had settled into the Gentile court, along with those who sold sacrificial animals and other religious merchandise. Their activities probably disrupted the Gentiles trying to worship there.
When Jesus entered the Temple area, he cleared the court of these moneychangers and vendors. Today, we often attribute his anger to the fact that they turned the temple area into a business enterprise. But Jesus was probably angry for another reason as well.
As he drove out the vendors, Jesus quoted the passage from Isaiah, ?Is it not written: ?My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations??? The vendors had been inconsiderate of Gentile believers. Their willingness to disrupt Gentile worship and prayers reflected a callous attitude of indifference toward the spiritual needs of Gentiles.
Through his anger and actions, Jesus reminded everyone nearby that God cared for Jew and Gentile alike. He showed his followers that God?s Temple was to be a holy place of prayer and worship for all believers. - Van Der Laan
---
--
Excerpts from a good Andreana Reale article in which she sheds light on Palm Sunday and theTemple Tantrum:
,, Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem actually echoes a custom that would have been familiar to people living in the Greco-Roman world, when the gospels were written.
Simon Maccabeus was a Jewish general who was part of the Maccabean Revolt that occurred two centuries before Christ, which liberated the Jewish people from Greek rule. Maccabeus entered Jerusalem with praise and palm leaves—making a beeline to the Temple to have it ritually cleansed from all the idol worship that was taking place. With the Jewish people now bearing the brunt of yet another foreign ruler (this time the Romans), Jesus’ parade into Jerusalem—complete with praise and palm leaves—was a strong claim that He was the leader who would liberate the people.
Except that in this case, Jesus isn’t riding a military horse, but a humble donkey. How triumphant is Jesus’ “triumphant entry”—on a donkey He doesn’t own, surrounded by peasants from the countryside, approaching a bunch of Jews who want to kill Him?
And so He enters the Temple. In the Greco-Roman world, the classic “triumphant entry” was usually followed by some sort of ritual—making a sacrifice at the Temple, for example, as was the legendary case of Alexander the Great. Jesus’ “ritual” was to attempt to drive out those making a profit in the Temple.
The chaotic commerce taking place—entrepreneurs selling birds and animals as well as wine, oil and salt for use in Temple sacrifices—epitomized much more than general disrespect. It also symbolised a whole system that was founded on oppression and injustice.
In Matthew, Mark and John, for example, Jesus chose specifically to overturn the tables of the pigeon sellers, since these were the staple commodities that marginalised people like women and lepers used to be made ritually clean by the system. Perhaps it was this system that Jesus was referring to when He accused the people of making the Temple “a den of robbers” (Mt 21.13; Mk 11.17; Lk 19.46).
Andreana Reale
--
So Jesus is intertexting and double pasting two Scriptures and making a new one.
-----
Much of what Jesus said was intended to clue people in to the fact that the religous system of the day would be overthrown, but we miss much if it because we Americanize it, making it say what we want it to say, We turn the parables into fables or moral stories instead of living prophecies that pertain as much to us as to the audience that first heard them."
-Steve Gray, "When The KIngdom Comes," p..31
“Indeed, read in its immediate context, Jesus’ subsequent instruction to the disciples, ‘Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain..’ can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!... For him, the time of the temple is no more.”
"The word about the mountain being cast into the sea.....spoken in Jerusalem, would naturallly refer to the Temple mount. The saying is not simply a miscellaneous comment on how prayer and faith can do such things as curse fig trees. It is a very specific word of judgement: the Temple mountain is, figuratively speaking, to be taken up and cast into the sea."
-N,T. Wright, "Jesus and the Victory of God," p.422
see also:
By intercalating the story of the cursing of the fig tree within that of Jesus' obstruction of the normal activity of the temple, Mark interprets Jesus' action in the temple not merely as its cleansing but its cursing. For him, the time of the temple is no more, for it has lost its fecundity. Indeed , read in its immediate context, Jesus' subsequent instruction to the disciples, "Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain, 'Be taken up and thrown into the sea'" can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!
What is Jesus' concern with the temple? Why does he regard it as extraneous to God's purpose?
Hints may be found in the mixed citation of Mark 11:17, part of which derives from Isaiah 56:7, the other from 11:7. Intended as a house of prayer for all the nations, the temple has been transformed by the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem into a den of brigands. That is, the temple has been perverted in favor of both socioreligious aims (the exclusion of Gentiles as potential recipients of divine reconciliation) and politico-economic purposes (legitimizing and
consolidating the power of the chief priests, whose teaching might be realized even in the plundering of even a poor widow's livelihood-cf 12:41-44)....
...In 12:10-11, Jesus uses temple imagery from Psalm 118 to refer to his own rejection and vindication, and in the process, documents his expectation of a new temple, inclusive of 'others' (12:9, Gentiles?) This is the community of his disciples.
-John T, Carroll and Joel B. Green, "The Death of Jesus in Early Christianity," p. 32-33
FIG TREE: FOLLOW SCRIPTURES WHERE IT IS A SYMBOL OF NATIONIAL ISRAEL/jERUSALEM/GOD'S BOUNDED SET:
Fig Tree:
s to the significance of this passage and what it means, the answer to that is again found in the chronological setting and in understanding how a fig tree is often used symbolically to represent Israel in the Scriptures. First of all, chronologically, Jesus had just arrived at Jerusalem amid great fanfare and great expectations, but then proceeds to cleanse the Temple and curse the barren fig tree. Both had significance as to the spiritual condition of Israel. With His cleansing of the Temple and His criticism of the worship that was going on there (Matthew 21:13; Mark 11:17), Jesus was effectively denouncing Israel’s worship of God. With the cursing of the fig tree, He was symbolically denouncing Israel as a nation and, in a sense, even denouncing unfruitful “Christians” (that is, people who profess to be Christian but have no evidence of a relationship with Christ).
The presence of a fruitful fig tree was considered to be a symbol of blessing and prosperity for the nation of Israel. Likewise, the absence or death of a fig tree would symbolize judgment and rejection. Symbolically, the fig tree represented the spiritual deadness of Israel, who while very religious outwardly with all the sacrifices and ceremonies, were spiritually barren because of their sins. By cleansing the Temple and cursing the fig tree, causing it to whither and die, Jesus was pronouncing His coming judgment of Israel and demonstrating His power to carry it out. It also teaches the principle that religious profession and observance are not enough to guarantee salvation, unless there is the fruit of genuine salvation evidenced in the life of the person. James would later echo this truth when he wrote that “faith without works is deadt also teaches the principle that religious profession and observance are not enough to guarantee salvation, unless there is the fruit of genuine salvation evidenced in the life of the person. James would later echo this truth when he wrote that “faith without works is dead” (James 2:26). The lesson of the fig tree is that we should bear spiritual fruit (Galatians 5:22-23), not just give an appearance of religiosity. God judges fruitlessness, and expects that those who have a relationship with Him will “bear much fruit” ( LINK--
Temple Warning Inscription:
The Jewish Temple in Jerusalem was surrounded by a fence (balustrade) with a sign (soreq) that was about 5 ft. [1.5 m.] high. On this fence were mounted inscriptions in Latin and Greek forbidding Gentiles from entering the temple area proper.
One complete inscription was found in Jerusalem and is now on display on the second floor of the “Archaeological Museum” in Istanbul.
The Greek text has been translated: “Foreigners must not enter inside the balustrade or into the forecourt around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his ensuing death.” Compare the accusation against Paul found in Acts 21:28 and Paul’s comments in Ephesians 2:14—“the dividing wall.”
Translation from Elwell, Walter A., and Yarbrough, Robert W., eds. Readings from the First–Century World: Primary Sources for New Testament Study. Encountering Biblical Studies, general editor and New Testament editor Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1998, p. 83. Click Here
Three thought experiments.
- -Think if I offered you a drivers license, claiming i had authority to issue it
- -Think if someone destroyed all bank records and evidence of any debt you have owe
- -Think what would happen if you pointed at something, hoping your dog would look at it.
Now watch this short and important video for explanations:
N.T. Wright, "The Challenge of Jesus":
His attitude to the Temple was not "this institution needs reforming," nor "the wrong people are running this place," nor yet "piety can function elsewhere too." His deepest belief regarding the temple was eschatological: the time had come for God to judge the entire institution. It had come to symbolize the injustice that characterized the society on the inside and on the outside, the rejection of the vocation to be the light of the world, the city set on a hill that would draw to itself all the peoples of the world. (64)
…Jesus acted and spoke as if he was in some sense called to do and be what the Temple was and did. His offer of forgiveness, with no prior condition of Temple-worship or sacrifice, was the equivalent of someone in our world offering as a private individual to issue someone else a passport or a driver’s license. He was undercutting the official system and claiming by implication to be establishing a new one in its place. (65) NT WRIGHT
See for more
The Jewish Temple in Jerusalem was surrounded by a fence (balustrade) with a sign (soreq) that was about 5 ft. [1.5 m.] high. On this fence were mounted inscriptions in Latin and Greek forbidding Gentiles from entering the temple area proper.One complete inscription was found in Jerusalem and is now on display on the second floor of the “Archaeological Museum” in Istanbul.The Greek text has been translated: “Foreigners must not enter inside the balustrade or into the forecourt around the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will have himself to blame for his ensuing death.” Compare the accusation against Paul found in Acts 21:28 and Paul’s comments in Ephesians 2:14—“the dividing wall.”Translation from Elwell, Walter A., and Yarbrough, Robert W., eds. Readings from the First–Century World: Primary Sources for New Testament Study. Encountering Biblical Studies, general editor and New Testament editor Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1998, p. 83. Click Here
- -Think if I offered you a drivers license, claiming i had authority to issue it
- -Think if someone destroyed all bank records and evidence of any debt you have owe
- -Think what would happen if you pointed at something, hoping your dog would look at it.
N.T. Wright, "The Challenge of Jesus":
His attitude to the Temple was not "this institution needs reforming," nor "the wrong people are running this place," nor yet "piety can function elsewhere too." His deepest belief regarding the temple was eschatological: the time had come for God to judge the entire institution. It had come to symbolize the injustice that characterized the society on the inside and on the outside, the rejection of the vocation to be the light of the world, the city set on a hill that would draw to itself all the peoples of the world. (64)
…Jesus acted and spoke as if he was in some sense called to do and be what the Temple was and did. His offer of forgiveness, with no prior condition of Temple-worship or sacrifice, was the equivalent of someone in our world offering as a private individual to issue someone else a passport or a driver’s license. He was undercutting the official system and claiming by implication to be establishing a new one in its place. (65) NT WRIGHT
See for more
--How to study a text via Three Worlds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, become familiar with the "Three Worlds" Concept which comes from your Hauer/Young Tetbook, see especially chapters two and three, and see class notes.
Here below is how one student summarized the worlds (she has more detail here)
Literary World--The literary world of the Bible is simply the text itself, apart from anything outside the text. We mean the world (or, better, worlds) created by the text; the words on the page, by the stories, songs, letters and the myriad other types of literature that make up the Bible. All good literature (and the Bible is, among other things, good literature) creates in readers' minds magnificent, mysterious, and often moving worlds that take on a reality of their own, whether or not they represent anything real outside the pages (Hauer and Young ch 2).
Historical World--The historical world of the Bible isthe world "behind the text" or "outside the text". It is the context in which the Bible came to be written, translated, and interpreted over time, until the present. In studying the historical world of the Bible, we look for evidence outside the text that helps us answer questions such as, who wrote this text, when was it written, to whom was it written, and why was it written. We also probe the text itself for evidence that links it to historical times, places, situations, and persons (Hauer and Young 2)..
Contemporary World--The contemporary world is the "world in front of the text" or the "world of the reader." In one sense, there are as many contemporary worlds of the Bible as there are readers, for each of us brings our own particular concerns and questions to the text. They inevitably shape our reading experience. We are all interested in answering the questions of whether the Bible in general, or particular texts, have any relevance to our personal lives (Hauer and Young ch3).
-Brolin
---------------------
Then, if a specific way to organize your research would help,
here is ONE way you might approach your study:
You might envision studying a passage as a four step process, or a three step process (Observe, Interpret, Apply) with an important interlude (Correlate).
The following outline is from Oletta Wald:
These three steps parallel fairly well with the "three worlds':
OBSERVATION =LITERARY WORLD
INTERPRETATION=HISTORICAL WORLD
APPLICATION=CONTEMPORARY WORLD..
and in the "one way" article below,
CORRELATION=INTERLUDE
---
---
Here, then, below, might be one way to study three worlds. You might follow this process for your next "Three Worlds" assignment, limiting yourself to an hour for each world. You would not necessarily show in the assignment yo all the work from these steps (though you can), these steps are more for your study time, and the final assignment you turn in will show the fruit of this work. It would be helpful to keep this list of 25 steps beside you as you work on your project, it can be guideline or checklist. Or it may be most helpful to you to u turned incopy of these 25 questions, guidelines. and enumerare your final notes just like this:
----------------
:
LITERARY WORLD:
1)Pray for wisdom and insight...it's not considered cheating! (:
2) If a text has not already been assigned, decide on the exact parameters of your text; yourpericope.
3)Make a working decision on genre, and who the text seems to be addressed to. Note if it is addressed to an individual or a group.
4)Re-copy on sheet of paper (or word document) the text (use NRSV, NIV or TNIV translation..Find them all in the drop-down box at Bible Gatway here) without paragraph breaks. Ponder it for several minutes, read it aloud several times, listen to it on audio (BibleGateway.com) and (maybe) even begin memorizing it.. Jot any preliminary thoughts or questions about what it seems to say and mean. Comment on any mood, atmosphere, emotion and tone that you imagine.
5)Rewrite/rearrange the text (or re-organize or reformat it) in a way that makes sense of the flow of thought and grammar. Even if you aren't familiar with grammatical terminology, split apart clauses and pay attention to tense and form. Try some sentence diagramming (examples here, here,here, here)
(See Oletta Wald, "The Joy of Discovery in Bible Study" for ideas), and David Thompson, "Bible Study That Works).
Indent new thoughts, even new phases. Make rhymes, parallelisms, and paragraphs (obvious. Note (maybe color code) repeated words and ideas. New paragraphs or indentations for different speakers. Do you spot inclusio? chiasm?
Maybe use this chart >> as a checklist.
See pp 40-49 of Hauer/Young for lots of help.
Try a computer wordle (here) or word cloud (here) of the passage. Outline the passage. Jot down any new insights about what the text seems to say or mean.
6)Chart or diagram the text in any way that makes sense to you. Make particular use of arrows/circles/underlining to connect themes, logic, words literary devices.
7)Do you see any examples of bounded sets? Centered sets? Fuzzy sets?
8)Comment on the context (the sections just before and after your chosen text. Are there any thematic or literary connections? Repeated themes or words?
Especially if your text is a gospel or from Samuel/Kings/Chronicles, locate any other book where the same story is told (often these are listed under paragraph headings in Bibles; see a Gospel Parallels chart here; you can also check BibleGateway.com). and compare/contrast the accounts. Make tentatative conclusions about your author's viewpoint and TTP (targeted theological purpose), based on what he/she does NOT include.
9)Briefly consider the book the unit is drawn from. Do you know of any themes or issues it is known to address? Read the introduction to the book
here, and check for it in the index of Hauer/Young
10)What would be your working title to your text?
11)Make observations about which book, which Testament the text is from, and anything you know about its author, historical setting, and its place in the broader biblical narrative (See index in Hauer/Young, for example).
12)Are persons/events/places from other biblical books (or testaments) mentioned? If so, you might check these names places in your class notes, Oxford Bible notes, New Bible Dictionary. Erdmans Handbook to the Bible, Erdmans Bible Dictionary, Worldwide Study Bible) or on Ray VanDer Laan's website (type the name or term in the search bar). Is there intertextualty, hyperlinking? Check resources such as BibleGateway.com (tutorial here), concordances, cross-references.
13)Read the section about your text from at least two commentaries (and be sure to quote then in your final project) If your text is from Matthew, use the listed "helpful online resources" tab of the course website. If your text is from a book other than Matthew, you can ask Dave for suggestions. Either way, the Bible Background Commentary(linked there) is recommended. Don't get overwhelmed with detail, or understanding everything written, but do make note of anything that confirms or differs from your findings, and especially any iusight that is intriguing or new.
14)Read the section about your text from "The Bible Background Commentary' (Old Testament
or New Testament)What "historical worlds" insights are found there?
15)Read any article or datafile below from VanDer Laan about your passage:
INTERLUDE:
16)If the text is from Matthew, incorporate any insights from class about the historical world of Jesus day. If the text is not a gospel, how would it relate to Jesus and the gospels, particularly the Sermon on the Mount.
Watch this short video, and ask how your text relates to the "center" of the Bible. Where does the story fit? Do other passages seem to fulfill, supercede, bring further revelation to it?
17)Read the text in two more translations (one being a standard translation such as NRSV, TNIV, ESV, JB, NASV and one being a looser translation or paraphrase (The Message, The Voice, Good News Bible). .Find them all in the drop-down box at Bible Gatway here) Jot down any differences and insights.
18)Summarize your thoughts, findings, feelings and questions
19)Would you modify your working title at this point? Add a subtitle which hints at a sub-theme.
20). What do you know abut the "contemporary" world of the people in the text., or the people addressed in the text. Comment on how your world/our world is different than ours, and note any problems this causes in application. Review
21)Remembering your":personal and social inventory," your results on RRWI/EPIC and the Dan Nainan "What race IS that guy?" video: in what ways does your faith perspective, culture, class, age or gender help or hinder you in understanding/relating to/ appreciating and personalizing the text.
22)On the left hand column of a sheet of paper, summarize your findings, suggestions and hunches about what then text "means" to the original readers/ hearers. Then on the right hand column, make corresponding implications for what the text might mean to us today. How is our situation/nation/church/world the same or different?
23)Especially if your text is teaching or parable, how might it be retold in our day, with contemporary references (culture,k technology, news etc). If the text is parable (or acted parable, like the Fig tree cursing or temple tantrum) how might Jesus (or whoever told the parable) tell the same story to make the same point today? (ex. who are the "Samaritans" of our day?) How might Jesus (or whoever told the parable) tell a different story to make the same point today?
24)Incorporate any insights from areas of skill and knowledge you have (maybe from different classes you have this semester),especially from disciplines that may seem unrelated (science, math, music, computers. mechanics). Think creatively.
25)What is your working summary of the text;s message and meaning,and applications.
What does it have to with a contemporary church's life? My life?
Craft a short devotional thought, or a brief outline of a teaching (sermon or drama) you might offer if asked to bring a devotional or message on this text in a church setting.
First of all, become familiar with the "Three Worlds" Concept which comes from your Hauer/Young Tetbook, see especially chapters two and three, and see class notes.
Here below is how one student summarized the worlds (she has more detail here)
Literary World--The literary world of the Bible is simply the text itself, apart from anything outside the text. We mean the world (or, better, worlds) created by the text; the words on the page, by the stories, songs, letters and the myriad other types of literature that make up the Bible. All good literature (and the Bible is, among other things, good literature) creates in readers' minds magnificent, mysterious, and often moving worlds that take on a reality of their own, whether or not they represent anything real outside the pages (Hauer and Young ch 2).
Historical World--The historical world of the Bible isthe world "behind the text" or "outside the text". It is the context in which the Bible came to be written, translated, and interpreted over time, until the present. In studying the historical world of the Bible, we look for evidence outside the text that helps us answer questions such as, who wrote this text, when was it written, to whom was it written, and why was it written. We also probe the text itself for evidence that links it to historical times, places, situations, and persons (Hauer and Young 2)..
Contemporary World--The contemporary world is the "world in front of the text" or the "world of the reader." In one sense, there are as many contemporary worlds of the Bible as there are readers, for each of us brings our own particular concerns and questions to the text. They inevitably shape our reading experience. We are all interested in answering the questions of whether the Bible in general, or particular texts, have any relevance to our personal lives (Hauer and Young ch3).
-Brolin
---------------------
Then, if a specific way to organize your research would help,
here is ONE way you might approach your study:
You might envision studying a passage as a four step process, or a three step process (Observe, Interpret, Apply) with an important interlude (Correlate).
The following outline is from Oletta Wald:
- OBSERVATION What does the text say?
- INTERPRETATION What did it say and mean to its original readers? What does it mean by what it says?
- Don't forget CORRELATION: How does this fit with the flow/narrative/story of the rest of Bible
- APPLICATION How does this apply today? What does it say and mean to us? How should my life be different tomorrow if I believe this message is relevant?
These three steps parallel fairly well with the "three worlds':
OBSERVATION =LITERARY WORLD
INTERPRETATION=HISTORICAL WORLD
APPLICATION=CONTEMPORARY WORLD..
and in the "one way" article below,
CORRELATION=INTERLUDE
---
---
Here, then, below, might be one way to study three worlds. You might follow this process for your next "Three Worlds" assignment, limiting yourself to an hour for each world. You would not necessarily show in the assignment yo all the work from these steps (though you can), these steps are more for your study time, and the final assignment you turn in will show the fruit of this work. It would be helpful to keep this list of 25 steps beside you as you work on your project, it can be guideline or checklist. Or it may be most helpful to you to u turned incopy of these 25 questions, guidelines. and enumerare your final notes just like this:
----------------
:
1)Pray for wisdom and insight...it's not considered cheating! (:
2) If a text has not already been assigned, decide on the exact parameters of your text; yourpericope.
3)Make a working decision on genre, and who the text seems to be addressed to. Note if it is addressed to an individual or a group.
4)Re-copy on sheet of paper (or word document) the text (use NRSV, NIV or TNIV translation..Find them all in the drop-down box at Bible Gatway here) without paragraph breaks. Ponder it for several minutes, read it aloud several times, listen to it on audio (BibleGateway.com) and (maybe) even begin memorizing it.. Jot any preliminary thoughts or questions about what it seems to say and mean. Comment on any mood, atmosphere, emotion and tone that you imagine.
5)Rewrite/rearrange the text (or re-organize or reformat it) in a way that makes sense of the flow of thought and grammar. Even if you aren't familiar with grammatical terminology, split apart clauses and pay attention to tense and form. Try some sentence diagramming (examples here, here,here, here)
(See Oletta Wald, "The Joy of Discovery in Bible Study" for ideas), and David Thompson, "Bible Study That Works).
Maybe use this chart >> as a checklist.
See pp 40-49 of Hauer/Young for lots of help.
Try a computer wordle (here) or word cloud (here) of the passage. Outline the passage. Jot down any new insights about what the text seems to say or mean.
6)Chart or diagram the text in any way that makes sense to you. Make particular use of arrows/circles/underlining to connect themes, logic, words literary devices.
7)Do you see any examples of bounded sets? Centered sets? Fuzzy sets?
8)Comment on the context (the sections just before and after your chosen text. Are there any thematic or literary connections? Repeated themes or words?
Especially if your text is a gospel or from Samuel/Kings/Chronicles, locate any other book where the same story is told (often these are listed under paragraph headings in Bibles; see a Gospel Parallels chart here; you can also check BibleGateway.com). and compare/contrast the accounts. Make tentatative conclusions about your author's viewpoint and TTP (targeted theological purpose), based on what he/she does NOT include.
9)Briefly consider the book the unit is drawn from. Do you know of any themes or issues it is known to address? Read the introduction to the book
here, and check for it in the index of Hauer/Young
10)What would be your working title to your text?
HISTORICAL WORLD
11)Make observations about which book, which Testament the text is from, and anything you know about its author, historical setting, and its place in the broader biblical narrative (See index in Hauer/Young, for example).
12)Are persons/events/places from other biblical books (or testaments) mentioned? If so, you might check these names places in your class notes, Oxford Bible notes, New Bible Dictionary. Erdmans Handbook to the Bible, Erdmans Bible Dictionary, Worldwide Study Bible) or on Ray VanDer Laan's website (type the name or term in the search bar). Is there intertextualty, hyperlinking? Check resources such as BibleGateway.com (tutorial here), concordances, cross-references.
13)Read the section about your text from at least two commentaries (and be sure to quote then in your final project) If your text is from Matthew, use the listed "helpful online resources" tab of the course website. If your text is from a book other than Matthew, you can ask Dave for suggestions. Either way, the Bible Background Commentary(linked there) is recommended. Don't get overwhelmed with detail, or understanding everything written, but do make note of anything that confirms or differs from your findings, and especially any iusight that is intriguing or new.
14)Read the section about your text from "The Bible Background Commentary' (Old Testament
or New Testament)What "historical worlds" insights are found there?
15)Read any article or datafile below from VanDer Laan about your passage:
INTERLUDE:
16)If the text is from Matthew, incorporate any insights from class about the historical world of Jesus day. If the text is not a gospel, how would it relate to Jesus and the gospels, particularly the Sermon on the Mount.
Watch this short video, and ask how your text relates to the "center" of the Bible. Where does the story fit? Do other passages seem to fulfill, supercede, bring further revelation to it?
17)Read the text in two more translations (one being a standard translation such as NRSV, TNIV, ESV, JB, NASV and one being a looser translation or paraphrase (The Message, The Voice, Good News Bible). .Find them all in the drop-down box at Bible Gatway here) Jot down any differences and insights.
18)Summarize your thoughts, findings, feelings and questions
19)Would you modify your working title at this point? Add a subtitle which hints at a sub-theme.
CONTEMPORARY WORLD:
20). What do you know abut the "contemporary" world of the people in the text., or the people addressed in the text. Comment on how your world/our world is different than ours, and note any problems this causes in application. Review
21)Remembering your":personal and social inventory," your results on RRWI/EPIC and the Dan Nainan "What race IS that guy?" video: in what ways does your faith perspective, culture, class, age or gender help or hinder you in understanding/relating to/ appreciating and personalizing the text.
22)On the left hand column of a sheet of paper, summarize your findings, suggestions and hunches about what then text "means" to the original readers/ hearers. Then on the right hand column, make corresponding implications for what the text might mean to us today. How is our situation/nation/church/world the same or different?
23)Especially if your text is teaching or parable, how might it be retold in our day, with contemporary references (culture,k technology, news etc). If the text is parable (or acted parable, like the Fig tree cursing or temple tantrum) how might Jesus (or whoever told the parable) tell the same story to make the same point today? (ex. who are the "Samaritans" of our day?) How might Jesus (or whoever told the parable) tell a different story to make the same point today?
24)Incorporate any insights from areas of skill and knowledge you have (maybe from different classes you have this semester),especially from disciplines that may seem unrelated (science, math, music, computers. mechanics). Think creatively.
25)What is your working summary of the text;s message and meaning,and applications.
What does it have to with a contemporary church's life? My life?
Craft a short devotional thought, or a brief outline of a teaching (sermon or drama) you might offer if asked to bring a devotional or message on this text in a church setting.
Philemon help?
Here is (from syllabus) the instructions on the Philemon paper. Read carefully, then read below for extra help. Remember, no research is required, but it would help:
Due: one week from last class session, midnight, via email or Google Docs
TASK
The summary paper for Biblical Perspectives is to be a 5-7 page paper that addresses the meaning of the New Testament book of Philemon. Using the skills developed in the course, develop a paper that combines an understanding of the historical, literary and contemporary worlds.
PURPOSE
The paper is meant to demonstrate the student’s own analysis and ability to work with a biblical text and as such need not to utilize other resources as in a traditional research paper.
FORM
Thesis: The paper should include a clear thesis statement in the form of “the book of Philemon is about…”
Body: The body of the paper should demonstrate a recognizable structure that articulates why the thesis is viable. The body of the paper may take the form of a verse by verse analysis, follow the categories of historical/literary/contemporary worlds, or use any thematic analysis that is most useful.
Conclusion: The conclusion should restate the thesis and the support in summary fashion. The conclusion is also a place for reflection on the implications of Philemon for your life and work.
Symbol: Throughout this course we have been using one guiding symbol for each night, corresponding to the theme of the evening. Based on your study of the book of Philemon, develop your own symbol that you feel adequately conveys the message of the book and explain it in a paragraph.
GRADING
Grading is based upon how well the thesis is stated and supported, by the clarity of the structure, by the depth of thought and by the quality of mechanics (spelling, grammar).
----------------------------------
Don't forget your symbol...many do.
Here is some help on how to draw a diagram in WORD.
Here's a video on how to do it in Microsoft PAINT.
.
Take a look at the "HOW TO STUDY A TEXT VIA THREE WORLDS" tab on our website, and consider using it as the lens for studying and writing your paper
Come up with a working written definition of what the book seems to be about. Then you might want to branch out and watch some of the videos and commentaries linked below, remembering that they may not all get it "right," and you will see some things that the "experts" don't. The commentaries will be helpful in understanding "historical world" background. Pay careful attention to the instructions on the syllabus. You do not have to cite any sources, but if you do, be sure you attribute them in your paper.
--
>>>N.T. Wright's sermon (video excerpt and complete audio here) will be helpful, as are his comments about the letter here, and his study questions on pages 55-57 here).
Here below is his complete Tyndale commentary on Philemon:
Here's a "word cloud" representation of word frequency in Philemon. What do you notice?:
(all New Testament word clouds here)
What's Philemon about?:
--
Three readings of the letter:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If, for your paper, you want to consider chiasm in Philemon, after searching out any such structures yourselves (which you are getting good at!) consider:
- PHILEMON AS CHIASM WITH VERSE 14 AS CENTER
- THE SAME CHIASM AS ABOVE, WITH MORE DETAIL
- SAME CHIASM , SEEN A BIT DIFFERENTLY
- SAME CHIASM, DIFFERENTLY AGAIN
- -----------------------------------------
- INTERESTING INCLUSIO AND CHIASM OF NAMES IN PHILEMON
- -------------------------------------------------
- CHIASM IN PHILEMON 5
- SAME PHILEMON 5 CHIASM
>>Here is a simple and helpful online commentary on Philemon
>>Here is an excellent one from IVP
>>SEVERAL ADVANCED ONLINE ARTICLES AND COMMENTARIES
Click a page to enlarge and read. Once you have a page open, you can click to magnify it.
-------------------
Kurt Willems, an FPU seminary student, has posted a helpful 5 part series on Philemon (text links below, audio here): James Dennison:
Perhaps we should approach Philemon by first analyzing its structure. You will observe that the first three verses include the names of five persons: Paul, Timothy, Philemon, Apphia, Archippus. You will further observe that the last three verses (vv. 23-25) conclude with the names of five persons: Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, Luke. Now observe also that the pattern of verses 1-3 is five names plus the phrase "the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ." This is precisely mirrored in verses 23-25: five names plus the phrase "the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ." The greeting or salutation of the epistle ends with the Lord Jesus Christ. The closing or conclusion of the epistle ends with the Lord Jesus Christ. A perfectly balanced inclusio structurally envelops the tender plea of the apostle on behalf of Onesimus. Paul, Timothy, Philemon, Apphia, Archippus—members of the church; Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, Luke—members of the church. Within the church, something new is occurring! LINK
Alternative views:
a)He might be a slave, but not a runaway. He simply was asking Paul for help in being an advocate. This view solves several problems with the traditional view, and this article is helpful on Paul's style of persuasion/theme of the letter. by Brian Dodd: click here
b)"This is not about a runaway slave at alll. Paul and Onesimus are literal brothers.":
There are several problems with the interpretation that Onesimus is a runaway fugitive slave. There are other examples of letters written in the period that Paul was writing that implore slaves to return to their masters and that implore masters to receive their slaves back graciously. Paul’s letter to Philemon does not follow the same pattern.
In addition, the epistle itself never says that Onesimus is a runaway or a thief, this is simply a presumption. Finally, the entire argument that Onesimus is a slave is based on verse 15 and 16 where Paul uses the greek word doulos to describe Onesimus. Certainly the word can be interpreted as slave, however, the word is used many other times in scripture and does not always mean that the one called doulos is a literal slave. Sometimes doulos refers to a son or a wife, not a slave. That one word is not a definitive identification of Onesimus.
What if Callahan’s interpretation is correct? Onesimus not just a Christian, he is actually a blood brother to Philemon. This interpretation means that the book of Philemon is about reconciliation in families rather than an admonition for the slave to remain obedient and the master to treat the slave fairly. LINK: Philemon...Slave Master?
..and then we encounter these verses which have caused many varied interpretations. Verses 15-16. Callahan translates them as, “For on this account he has left for the moment, so that you might have him back forever, no longer as though he were a slave, but, more than a slave, as a beloved brother very much so to me, but now much more so to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord.”[1]NOTE also: metaphorical terminology by Paul re: slavery in Galatians 4:7:
First, there is a grammatical question about how to translate this phrase which many have rendered “no longer as a slave.” Callahan dissects the greek and he argues that the phrase is more accurately translated, “no longer as though he were a slave.” Even with Callahan’s translation, the question remains: Why did Paul choose to use the word slave if Onesimus wasn’t a slave?
The word used is doulos and according to Callahan’s research, it “was a term of both honor and opprobrium in the early Christian lexicon.”[2]
It was thought to be an honor to be called a doulos tou theou or a slave of God. In fact, Paul calls himself a slave of Christ in several of his letters including Romans, Philippians, and Titus, as do other authors of the epistles of James and 2 Peter.
It is also true that the term slave signified subjugation, powerlessness, and dishonor, one who does not have liberty or agency on one’s own.
Callahan argues that Paul is using the term doulos to capture both dimensions of the human condition and is perhaps even making a connection with the Christ hymn in Philippians 2 where he quotes an ancient hymn that exalts the Christ who humbles himself to be nothing, powerless, and empty of the divine dimension, like a slave to the human condition.
Callahan argues that Paul is simply calling Onesimus a slave in the same way that he describes himself as a slave. Onesimus is also a doulos tou theou, a slave of God.
If this is the case, then Paul uses language that indicates Onesimus and Philemon are related, in fact that they are brothers in the flesh. Reconciliation and love between brothers was a special concern for several ancient writers and philosophers. One Roman philosopher named Plutarch writes of the importance of repairing a breach between brothers, even if it comes through a mutual friend...
-LINK: Philemon...Brother?
"So you are no longer a slave, but God’s child; and since you are his child, God has made you also an heir"... actually a verse quite similar to Philemon 16 (first clause the same, second clause family language)
"no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother."
c)Allegory:
Philemon, an allegory?
Consider the following passage (Philemon 8-18) with these analogies in mind:
Paul (the advocate) : Jesus
Onesmus (the guilty slave) : us (sinners)
Philemon (the slave owner) : God the Father
Accordingly, though I (Paul) am bold enough in Christ to command you (Philemon) to do what is required, yet for love's sake I prefer to appeal to you—I, Paul, an old man and now a prisoner also for Christ Jesus— I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I became in my imprisonment. (Formerly he was useless to you, but now he is indeed useful to you and to me.) I am sending him back to you, sending my very heart. I would have been glad to keep him with me, in order that he might serve me on your behalf during my imprisonment for the gospel, but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own free will. For this perhaps is why he was parted from you for a while, that you might have him back forever, no longer as a slave but more than a slave, as a beloved brother—especially to me, but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord.
So if you consider me your partner, receive him as you would receive me. If he has wronged you at all, or owes you anything, charge that to my account. I, Paul, write this with my own hand: I will repay it—to say nothing of your owing me even your own self. LINK: Philemon, an allegory?