Bib 314 fresno spring 13: Week 2: Signs Cont/ Matt 3-4/Baptism and Testation/

Remember the terms quiz has been replaced with the signs quiz:

First ten (see Week 1 post)
1)Three Worlds; see above
2)Bounded set
3)Centered set
4)Fuzzy set
5)Chiasm
6)Inclusio(n)
7)Recurrence
8)Intertextuality/Hyperlinking
9)Venn it
10)Subversion of Empire

11-12 See below

11 Drop Down Box
12 Shift/Hinge
13 Six Degrees of separation
14 Kingdom
15Kenosis/self-emptying
16 Units
17 Generalization/Particularization
18 Remix/Revisitation
19 irony!
20 Sign

Drop Down Box
This "literary technique" of two phrases being so related as to be almost synonymous/interchangeable is called, in computer language,

DROP-DOWN BOX

a "DROP DOWN BOX. We will picture it by this symbol:

In the same way as when you encounter a drop-down menu on a website, and you know you can choose different options, when we talk about "drop-down boxes" in the "text message" of the Bible, will mean a place where you can choose between two options/terms.

Social networking/6 Degrees of Separation: see 1/28
The point here is that everything (in the gospels, and in life) is more interconnected than we realize,
and social networks help us grasp that (Have you ever been surprised at who you are common/mutual faecebook friends with?

Fun diversion: See Jesus' Facebook feed for the last week of his life here

Examples:
>>Jesus' geneology in Matthew.. Jesus is "facebook friends" and even "family" with four Gentile women, etc.
>>I Corinthians chs 12:

¹² Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. ¹³ For we were all baptized by^[c] one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. ¹⁴ Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.
¹⁵ Now if the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. ¹⁶ And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. ¹⁷¹⁸ But in fact God has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. ¹⁹ If they were all one part, where would the body be? ²⁰ As it is, there are many parts, but one body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be?
²¹ The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” ²² On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, ²³ and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, ²⁴ while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, ²⁵ so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. ²⁶ If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.
²⁷ Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it.

Kraybill says,

"The Kingdom of God is a collectivity--a network of persons....more than a series of

individualized email connections linking the King to each subject*...[It] infuses the web of relationships, binding King and citizens togeter" -Kraybill (p, 19 emphases mine)

Kraybill further illustrates the point of community over self by discussing the distinction between an aggregate and a collectivity.[5] He illustrates an aggregate as a group of people who occupy a time and space together but lack any true community (i.e. people at a crosswalk). The key is that they do not influence each other. A collectivity, as Kraybill defines it, has an element of interdependence. These individuals “influence each other, formulate common goals, and together decide how to reach them.”[6] The Kingdom of God functions as a collectivity. The individual lays down his life for the good of the collective. For the church to bear witness to this Kingdom, the body of Christ must exercise this practice. link

What is the central message of the gospel?:

KINGDOM:In light of the video above, and the Bible's use of the term,

not realm, but reign

not place , but person

not race, but grace

not just "then and there," but 'here and now" (Matt. 4:17, 6:10)

We noted that (unlike which side of the road is "right" in England!), the 'direction" in which the Kingdom originates is "both ways": from the future, and from the past.

Many Jews of Jesus' day (and actually, the Greeks) thought of the Kingdom of God as largely a future identity/reality/location.
So when Jesus, in Matthew 4:17 announces that he, as King, is ALREADY bringing in the Kingdom,

this not only subverted expectations, but sounded crazy....and like he was claiming to bring the future into the present.

The Jews talked often about "this age" (earth/now) and "the age to come." (heaven/future).
"Age to come" was used in a way that it was virtually synonymous with "The Kingdom."

Scripture suggests that:

The "age to come" (the Kingdom)
has in large part already come (from the future/heaven)

into "this age"
(in the present/on the earth

by means of the earthy ministry of Jesus: King of the Kingdom.

Thus, Hebrews 6:4-8 offers that disciples ("tamidim") of Jesus have
"already (in this age) tasted the powers of the age to come."

In Jesus, in large part, the age to come has come.
The Future has visited the present,

"The presence of the Kingdom of God was seen as God’s dynamic reign invading the present age without (completely) transforming it into the age to come ” (George Eldon Ladd, p.149,The Presence of the Future.)

Here are some articles that may help:

Kingdom of God: by George Ladd

THE KINGDOM'S RETROACTIVE RETROFUTURE

The "Lord's Prayer" does NOT say "daily bread".

Kingdom Now and Not Yet

----------------

MATT 3-4

After tonight's class, tell me what these clips from "The Matrix" have to do with tonight's topics: Jesus' birth, baptism and wonders:

part 1: white rabbit (click to view)
part 2: Neo meets Trinity
part 3: choose your pill:
part 4: waking from the dream:
part 5: immersion into the Matrix
:
---

Joel Hofman has a great point:

All Bible translators have to confront the problem of words that don't convey the same meaning to a modern audience as they did to an ancient one, said linguist Joel M. Hoffman, author of "And God Said - How Translations Conceal the Bible's Original Meaning."

"For example, `John the Baptist' was really like `John the Dunker,'" Hoffman said.

John was doing something new by submerging people in water to cleanse them of their sins, but that is lost on people 2,000 years later, Hoffman said. Today, people hearing John's title might think it refers to a Baptist denomination rather than his then-strange behavior. -link

In Michael Bird's paraphrase, he has switched John to the nickname for John, Jack.
Nice move.

I will be combining the two, and tweaking a bit, and translating as "John the Subversive merger."

I just hope no one mistakes that for "Jack the Ripper"..

or evoke Jack Nicholson's character in "The Shining"..

--

J
Notes from FPU faculty Greg Camp and Laura Roberts:

All four gospels contain a version of Jesus’ baptism. Matthew records the story of Jesus’ baptism in chapter 3, Mark begins his gospel with the story in 1:1-11, Luke has the story in short form in 3:21-22, and John’s version is in 1:19-34. How does this text further answer the question “Who is Jesus?” in Matthew?

Read Matthew 3:1-17Begin with discussion of the worksheet and augment with notes below as needed. Matt transitions to Jesus’ adult ministry by introducing him at his baptism. Mt uses a common ancient literary device called syncresis, which means to make a judgment about something or someone by comparison. It is, in that sense, a simple comparison/contrast. There are 2 comparisons that are being made in chapter 3. One has to do with Jesus and John, the other with Jesus and the Pharisees/ Sadducees. The passage is structured in 3 sections. vv. 1-6 is a description of John and his message. John is presented as a fulfillment of a passage from Isaiah 40, where Israel is being called to return from exile. John is engaged in the same ministry as Isaiah, that of recalling the people. One might conclude that Mt is insinuating that while Israel returned from exile in they never fully returned to God. John’s appearance and location set him the liminal space of the wilderness, apart from Jerusalem society. He stands in the Jordan River, where Israel also would have crossed into the land as they returned. The place of baptism in the Jordan may draw the reader’s attention to the fresh start crossing the Jordan into the land represented for Israel.
vv. 7-10 is a description of the Pharisees, Sadducees and others coming to John for baptism. John confronts them with a message of repentance that specifies the repentance must include acts of righteousness that demonstrate their repentance. The reference “God is able from these stones to raise up children of Abraham” may draw the readers attention to the 12 stones piled at the Jordan when Israel entered the land under Joshua’s leadership. The implication is that even stones can be made into children of Abraham. The difference is their acts have to reflect the righteousness characteristic of true repentance and change.
A brood of vipers refers to a hole in ground where snakes would lay eggs and cover them with dirt for incubation. The newly hatched snakes would remain in the ground undetected by those passing by. A misstep into such a nest could be fatal. The threat is unseen; the passerby thinks the ground is safe, but it is not.The reference to cutting down plants that do not bear fruit is a common analogy used throughout Matthew (for example 7:16-20, 13:24-30). vv 11-12 presents John comparing himself to “the one coming.” The comparison is based on a greater than/ lesser than logic. John is lesser because he baptizes with water; the one coming is greater because he baptizes because he baptizes with the Holy Spirit and with fire. John is lesser because he is not worthy to carry the sandals of the one coming. John announces judgment, the one coming is actually able to bring judgment.
vv 13-17 draws a comparison between Jesus and the Sadducees/ Phar and between J and John. Note the way that the Sadducees and Pharisees are greeted vs. how Jesus is greeted. (see worksheet) The comparison between Jesus and John involves John putting himself as the lesser in Jesus’ presence. Jesus’ enigmatic response allowing John to baptize him is said to “fulfill all righteousness.” How is this to be understood? Does Jesus need to be baptized in the same way others do? John’s is a baptism of repentance; is this what Jesus thinks he needs to do?
Repentance doesn’t only mean turning from inappropriate action, but also involves going in the direction you ought to be going. Jesus aligns himself with God’s purposes. The dynamics between John and Jesus would seem to indicate that part of God’s purpose is for J not to take the greater position but to place himself in the subservient position to John. This is a crucial, initial assertion that we will see reiterated through Mt’s gospel, which links righteousness to a reversal of power relationships, and Jesus being the faithful, humble servant. Immediately following this action, the divine voice announces affirmation of this action and of Jesus’ identity as beloved son. This is what is expected of the son.
---

==
C

(found this online)

It has been hugely productive, revelational and (even) fun to, as part of a class that several others and I teach, have students plot out (on the whiteboard) their timeline.

As Pastor/Trucker Franks suggests below, sometimes it's "more about the journey than the destination." See also "What if Torah/ מלכות השמים, is more 'journey than 'doctrine'?"
nbsp;

we met Trucker Frank:

and introduced the "Holy Helix"...

We then take time to interweave/intertext our personal timelines with the timeline/trajectory of Jesus' life in Matthew's gospel (the thrust of the class).

Especially helpful is the suggestion by Donald Kraybill ("The Upside Down Kingdom") and Ray Van Der Laan ( video) that throughout his earthly life, Jesus was revisited by remixes of the original three temptations ("testations" ) of the devil"in chapter 4.

Kraybill provocatively proffers the following taxonomy of the temptations; suggesting that any later temptation Jesus faced (or we face) is at heart in one of these three spheres:

1= Bread into stones: Economic

2=Jump from temple and test God:Religious

3=Own all kingdoms: Political;

Henri Nouwen ("in the Name of Jesus" breaks it down this way:

1= Bread into stones: temptation to be relevant

2=Jump from temple and test God: temptation to be spectacular

3=Own all kingdoms: Political; temptation to be rule over

So, it may be useful to plot out various temptations along your life timeline, and ask which of Jesus' temptation are each is tied to.

Nouwen himself, one of the most profound writers on the temptations of Jesus, was both Catholic (gasp!) and struggled with homosexual temptation (!!!)..

And....Uh, on that last temptation, the homosexual one, he was in good company, according to a good Book I read:

"Jesus was tempted in every single way humans are..."(click here for the shocking source...but warning, it's a dangerous book for religious folk!)

SO..if every temptation can be filed under one of the three categories:

Economic Religious Political..

or
Relevant Spectacular Rule over

..under which does sexual temptation occur?

Note Ron Bell's definition of "sexuality," biblically defined:

"For many, sexuality is simply what happens between two people involving physical pleasure. But that's only a small percentage of what sexuality is. Our sexuality is all the ways we strive to reconnect with our world, with each other, and with God." (Rob Bell, "Sex God," p. 42)...

How might virtually all temptations (the three Jesus faced, or others you could name) be fundamentally economic? Kraybill, you'll remember, calls the bread temptation "economic," but how might any/all others temptations trace to this root/'garbage"?
HINT: We noted that he term economics comes from the Ancient Greekοἰκονομία (oikonomia, "management of a household, administration") from οἶκος (oikos, "house") + νόμος (nomos, "custom" or "law"), hence "rules of the house(hold)".^[1

------------------

Note that the baptism of Jesus (chapter 3) and the temptations (chapter 4) should be read together as one literary unit or paragraph ( a "coupling" or "particularization") as two items connected.

Remember how important repeated words are..in this case, "SON":

-The segue is direct..."Then after his baptism, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert for temptation by the devil." (Matt. 4:1)
(see this amazing assortment of Scriptures, maybe he is "God's devil" after all..)

-In light of that, ask In what other ways do the baptism and temptation connect?
How does baptism prepare for temptation?

See the sermon by Nadia Bolz-Weber, "How To Say Defiantly, ‘I am Baptized!’"for a contemporary world application.

NOTE: a drop-down box in the temptation scene:

The devil's text ,

"IF
you are the son of God.."

might better be translated
(according to the Greek word used) as:

"SINCE
you are the son of God.."

What difference might it make? Is the devil wondering/questioning asking Jesus if he is son of God? Or is he assuming it; he and Jesus both know that he is...and thus "Since you are the Son of God, what kind of ways can I tempt you to use/abuse that Sonship?"
--
Van Der lann, in "Jesus Our Desert – The Three Temptations") proposes that the three "temptations" Jesus met in Matthew 4 were the same three that show up (repackaged, revisited) throughout Jesus' timeline on earth...right up to, and especially including the cross (as in, not avoiding it) .Several examples:

Jesus put God ahead of family ("Who are my brothers and sisters?" "Whoveer loves father and mother more than me cannot be my disciple."-Matthew 12:46-48...in fact, how many ways can you find in that whole chapter where Jesus re-encounters versions of one of the testations?

When people reported Herod wanted to kill him, he was not concerned (Luke 13)

When people wanted to make him king by force, he walked away (John 6:15)

When the crowds were hungry, the disciples wanted Jesus to feed them. He refused (Feeding of the Multitude)

The "get behind me, Satan" comment to Peter when Peter suggested Jesus should bypass the cross (Matthew 18)

"go ahead and use Your power; the cross is going to hurt"

The video offered lots of help on how the Testations of Jesus are related to/equated to/hyperlinked to the Testations of Israel in Exodus, Numbers. Deuteronomy. It is no accident that all three testations of Jesus were found in different form in the OT, as well as the Scriptures Jesus used to counter the testations.

Though it is obvious who "The Son (of God)" is in Matthew (Jesus), unless we know the literary/historical background, we miss that in the Old Testament, that phrase is used for Israel/God's people. (see Exodus 4:22-23 and especially the way Matt 2:15 quotes Hosea 11:1) Thus...remember this chart :

Now we realize that God tested/the devil tempted the first "SON" in a similar way.
Jesus the Son succeeds (in 40 days) in "reversing the curse" that Israel the Son inherited by not passing it (in 40 years).

Jesus is not only (in a sense) the
New Moses,

but (in a sense)

he New Israel

(for help on that important point, see this article,
and this).

VanDer Laan suggested that the heart of Jesus' "success" was consistently and persistently keeping the "Shema," and not caving into a (mis)use of power. This is the "binder" of the testations: Love God and neighbor.Thus

Q).Who is Jesus in Matthew?

A.) The One who, unlike Israel, passed the wilderness testations by loving God with all his heart, soul, mind and strength....and refusing to give into using "right-handed" (a la Capon) power.

VanderLaan prefers to translate "tests" instead of "temptations."
You have seen that I have coined the word "testations" It would seen that in Scripture that God tests, and the devil tempts...and sometimes both are going on simultaneously.

HERE are some helpful questions you might think about if you want to pursue this topic::

1)What were the three temptations of Jesus in Matthew 4:1-11, Compare any ways Mark's account, Mark 1:12-13 and Luke's account, Luke 4:1-13 differ, and suggest any reasons why.

2)How does Nouewen summarize the three temptations(1=to be relevant 2=to be spectacular 3=to rule over). H? How do you (use your own words)?

3)How do the three temptations connect to the historical and literary world of the Hebrew ("Old')Testament?

4)How do the three temptations connect to the contemporary world of Jesus and the disciples?

5)List and discuss several possible ways that versions of the three temptations reoccur and are revisited throughout Jesus' life in Matthew's gospel? (How is Jesus tested/tempted elswhere in Matthew, and how are the temptations versions of a similar one (two, or three) that he faced in the original temptation passage?

6)What are the three core temptations you face, and how have they revisited you throughout your timeline? How would you categorize them using Nouwen's categories? Using the three categories of the "Shema" (heart/mind/might) a la Vander Laan'? Using Kraybill's three categories (1=Economic 2=Religious 3=Political ; see chapters 1-4 of "Upside Down Kingdom")

7)What have you learned about passing these tests/resiisting these temptations?

8)What does all of this (the Matt 4 Scripture, and testing/tempting) have to do with the Kingdom?

9)Discuss how the passages that deal with Jesus not being immune to temptation( Hebrews 2:17-18, Hebrews 4:14-16, and Hebrews 5:7-9) affect your views of "Who is Jesus?" and of Jesus' divinity and humanity.

we met Trucker Frank:

Notes from Camp/Roberts:

There are 3 temptations which parallel the groups with whom Jesus interacts in MatthewFamished - provide food – crowdsUpon temple - protection - leadersseize world - authority - disciplesWhat is it that each group expects, and how does Jesus meet that expectation, both here and later? It is important that these are real temptations. What would be the result of each if Jesus failed? Tie in the expectation from Isaiah 53. What kind of Christ was expected? Will Jesus prove worthy (a true Son)? The temptations represent and initial test, much like an academic pre-test. Jesus will be tested during his ministry on these same issues by the three groups.

Famished - provide food – crowds

Upon temple - protection - leaders

seize world - authority - disciples

The temptation to satisfy physical needs is a very real and necessary temptation. The temptation account does not denigrate this need, but raises the question of what it means to be fully human. Rulers in the ancient world would often provide bread for people to keep them under control, while not treating them as fully human in other ways. Jesus’ response to Satan is that there is more to being human than meeting physical needs. It also includes being able to make choices about life, where one might need to defer gratification or make choices to the detriment of one’s physical well-being (i.e. selling possessions, death on a cross). Jesus does do miracle which do address real physical needs (food, healing). But he also challenges people in the crowds to go beyond equating physical, material well-being with being fully human.
The second temptation to leap from the temple has 2 components, The first is to draw attention to himself in the center of Jewish life, thereby gaining the approval of the temple leaders. The second aspect involves having the authority to call upon angels to protect him. The temptation is to use authority as a means to demonstrate one’s power and privilege. In Jesus’ interactions with the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, temple authorities, he is most frequently questioned about his authority to represent God, and is repeatedly asked to provide a sign demonstrating that authority. Jesus steadfastly refuses to do so. Jesus will not ‘force’ God to provide a sign of Jesus authority beyond the faithfulness Jesus himself demonstrates. The accusations at Jesus’ trial hinge on this question of authority. The third temptation is to receive power without effort. It would entail bowing down to Satan. There is no equal exchange of goods, with Jesus receiving kingdoms in exchange for bowing to Satan. Rather, in the ancient world bowing down indicates a permanent subservient relationship. Satan is offering the kingdoms of the earth if Jesus will submit to Satan’s will and way of doing things. This temptation is linked to the disciples, who frequently are seeking greatness, seats of authority and power, exalted places in Jesus’ kingdom. They are confronted by Jesus about the true cost of gaining those positions. -Camp/Roberts

i

Many changes ocurred as the Jews fret (new temple , synagogues, etc. But key for understanding Matthew are four "parties," groups, sects that emerged. These are discussed in detail in Hauer/Young, Chapter 10, particularly pp. 221-227

Pharisees .lay scholars/ middle class Oral and Written Torah    angels, demons, resurrection........
Sadduccees   priestly/aristocratic         Written Torah only               no angels, demons, resurrection

Essenes: quiet, communal, prob connected to Dead Sea Scrolls
Zealots    advocated armed rebellion against Rome

Read more on each from Ray VannDer Laan:

Essenes Zealots

In this video, a rabbi summarizes the four:

--------------------------------------------------------
Since we have spent so much time discussing the various "parties" of Jesus day, it is helpful to our discussion of culture to hear how one writer views and succinctly characterizes each group's approach to culture (even though the following is overstatement:

"Pharisees separated from culture

Sadducees blended into the culture

Zealots ruled over culture/misused it

Essenes ignored culture....

The Pharisees were sectarian, developing an unending number of laws to separate themselves from the common people.

The Sadducees were syncretists, compromising their beliefs in order to blend into the culture.

The Zealots misused culture as they attempted to usher in God’s kingdom through the use of force.

The Essenes ignored culture altogether, retreating from society where they could seek mystical encounters with God in monkish privacy...

And so we see that sectarians love God but fail to love their neighbors,

And so we see that sectarians
love God but fail to love their neighbors,
while syncretists love their neighbors,
but fail to love God."

---

Here are some Jewish presentations on three of the parties.. we did not show these in class, but it all helps (especially for the final..remember the party you were assigned to last week)

------------------------------------------

HOMEWORK HELP