PSALM 107: PART 2

Detailed exegesis. In this case there is reasonable agreement among scholars as to where those natural breaks occur. For example, Allen divides the body of the psalm into two parts, vv. 4-32 and 33-43. In a similar manner, Anderson calls verses 33-43 “the concluding Hymn” in the Psalm. M'Caw and Motyer go a little further by labeling verses 1-3 as an introduction, vv. 4-32 as pictures of redemption, and 33-43 as a summary. RSV differs slightly in choosing to consider v. 32 as part of that final section

Possible sub-sections of these divisions are also seen. Thus, Derek Kidner says that verses 33-38 “are, as we may suppose, not merely about deserts and farmlands, but pointed to other kinds of poverty and riches, not least those of the mind and spirit.” In agreement with this division, Anderson says, “Verses 33-38 describe Yahweh's unlimited control of nature, while verses 39-43 show that this special care extends to the poor and needy.” And deClaisse-Walford breaks out the final verse as a separate section.

The divisions in NEB appear at first to be much more detailed than those above. However, that is only because they treat the four examples within verses 4-32 as four separate sections.

The next step in discerning the overall plan of the chapter is to look for the sort of symmetry one generally finds in biblical passages. Figure 3 below is the result of my personal attempt in that direction.

                                            Figure 3: The Literary Structure of Psalm 107

        A. Introduction (1-3)

                B. Reversals of Perspective (4-32)

                        1. Those in the Desert (4-9)

                                2. Those in Darkness and Gloom (10-16)

                                        3. Those who were sick (17-22)

                                                4. Those at sea (23-32)

                B'. Reversals of Destiny (33-42)

                        1. Judgment (33-34)

                                2. Provision (35-38)

                        1'. Judgment (39-40)

                                2'. Provision (41-42)

        A'. Conclusion (43)

Note the perfect symmetry exhibited by Figure 3, symmetry of a type called a chiasm. In this case, it is a four-part chiasm ABBA with no center section. In those cases the main point of emphasis generally falls naturally on the first and last sections.

Sections A and A': Confirming that these are a matched pair is the telltale fact that the key words in each appear in reverse order. Thus, we read “LORD...mercy” in verse 1, while it becomes “mercies of the LORD” in v. 43. Thus, Alter perceptively notes that “the key concept that began the poem, the faithfulness (or 'loving-kindness,' hesed) of the Lord, rings forth at the end, with the order and syntactic relation of the two component nouns changed, and 'faithfulness' used in the plural (in the Hebrew), perhaps as a concluding indication of all the different mercies of the Lord that the poem has evoked.”

Colin Brown ties these two bookends to the psalm together with the following words: “Psalm 107 celebrates the mighty acts of God experienced by his people, calling on them to praise his redemptive deliverance (vv. 1-2) and concluding with the call, 'Whoever is wise, let him give heed to these things; let men consider the steadfast love of the Lord' (v. 43).”

Brown is probably correct in treating only the first two verses in the psalm as the general introduction. However, v. 3 more specifically acts as an introduction to verses 4-32. We can see this in its mention of “the east, west, north, and sea.” That fourth rather unexpected term matches up perfectly with the fourth part of Section B (vv. 23-32).

Oswalt notes: “Two...qualities are regularly mentioned in the context of [God's] hesed. They are goodness (tob) and faithfulness ('emona). The classic statement of the first is found in Psalm 136:1 (see also Ps 106:1; 107:1; 118:1,29).”

Then there is Kraus who, in Anderson's words, “suggests that verses 2-3 may be a later addition which adapts the Psalm for the use of the restored deportees.” I am not aware of many scholars who would agree with that assessment.

The mention of “sea” in place of the expected “south” in verse 3 has caused undue problems for textual critics. However, the Hebrew manuscripts clearly read “sea.” In addition, (1) it would be much more likely for a scribe to alter the text from “sea” to the more usual “south” than vice versa, (2) the mention of “sea” as the fourth member of the series matches perfectly the subject of the sea in the fourth section B4 in Figure 3 above, and (3) as Anderson points out, there is a partial parallel to such usage in Isaiah 49:12 which reads “from the north and from the sea.”

As De Claisse-Walford puts it, “No Hebrew manuscript...attests the emendation, and LXX, Peshitta, and Vulgate [three early translations] all translate sea here...Further, the four vignettes that follow in vv. 4-32 can be shown to reflect the directions referred to in v. 3.”

There is also some controversy regarding the final verse in the chapter. Kselman labels v. 43 as a possible later addition, “a wisdom addition concluding the psalm.” Arguing against that critical view are the considerations that (1) most scholars see nothing wrong with this verse fitting in with the tone of the rest of the chapter, (2) others have noted wisdom terminology and themes elsewhere in Psalm 107, and (3) the perfect inclusion including reversed elements with the opening verses (see above) demonstrates that they are matched pairs.

Section B: vv. 4-32

Allen defines the four groups giving their testimony as the lost, liberated prisoners who had been wrongdoers, the sick, and seamen.”

And most translators and commentators cite in each of the four cases exact repetition of the following elements: (1) “some..,”, (2) “Then they cried to the LORD in their trouble,” (3) “and he delivered them from their distress,” (4) “Let them thank the LORD for his steadfast love, for his wonderful works to humankind,” and (5) “For...” As Longman says, “This psalm demonstrates the unusual use of two refrains: the one seems to answer the other.”

One minority opinion on this major sub-section is given by Derek Kidner: “In most modern versions each of the nest four stanzas has the same kind of opening [namely, 'some...'] as though we were following the fortunes of different groups. This is inaccurate and obscures the possibility that the four scenes are four ways of looking at the same reality, namely the disastrous situation from which Israel has now been rescued...As that situation is analogous to the plight of all sinners, the psalm can be approached directly, not only through the eyes of Israel.” He makes some good points regarding the lack of exact repetition in the original, but few other scholars would agree with all that he says.

The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery calls these four examples, “a minitheology of such vignettes [as 'the archetypical death and rebirth of the human spirit'].”

Both Wenham and Wurthwein note that the Hebrew text contains special editorial marks on words in verses 21-26 (as well as at v. 40). The problem is that we do not know the exact significance of these indications, but both of these scholars suggest that it may mean that there was some doubt concerning the order of the words in those places.

Section B1: vv. 4-9

It is appropriate that this first of four examples occurs in the east, the first of the four location markers given in v. 3. The other three may similarly line up with the following three examples. “East of the Palestine lies a vast desert that separates it from the eastern side of the Fertile Crescent, Mesopotamia. Few travelers in the ancient Near East dared any attempt to traverse this terrain.” (deClaisse-Walton)

Section B2: vv. 10-16

An anonymous contributor to DBI says of this example that “release from prison is one of the most evocative images of freedom in the Bible – one that focuses on the moment of transition from bondage to freedom.” M'Caw and Motyer describe v. 10 as “bondage of the mind and body” and v. 12 as “bondage of the heart.”

On a note regarding translation, Holladay explains that the word(s) salmawet (or sal mawet), found in verses 10 and 14, may be translated as either “shadow of death,” “dense darkness,” or “deathly shadow.”

Section B3: vv. 17-22

There is a textual point of contention here in that some translations read 'sick” in place of the Hebrew text's 'fools.' Folly is only an incidental topic in Psalms (Ps. 107:17, etc.). The psalm seems to acknowledge the ever-present folly or threat of a slide into folly on his own part or of the people...” (Oswalt)

Regarding v. 18, Mabie states: “Like the realm of Mot, the realm of death in the OT is described with city features, such as gates and bars...implying a specific spatial realm of the dead.”

Section B4: vv. 23-32

“The connection between God's ability to calm a storm in times of distress and the paradigmatic exodus event is made in Ps. 107:23-32, where 'individual salvation and corporate salvation are held together as the wonderful work of the LORD's hesed [loving-kindness].'” (Pao and Schnabel quoting Maye)

“'Wisdom' (hokmah) in this context [i.e. v. 27] probably refers to the navigational skill of the sailors.” (Anderson)

Holladay points out that verses 28-29 appear in a slightly different form in the Thanksgiving Hymns of the Dead Sea community.

Section B': vv. 33-42

“A final section...enlarges on the great reversals of fortune which God delights to bring about in the affairs of men.” (D. Kidner)

Dentan calls this “part of a hymn praising God for his bounty; it was probably not originally composed to go with the preceding verses...”

Anderson notes this section “has no refrain, and its main theme is the providence of God who is the lord of both nature and of men. Some scholars...argue that the hymn is a later addition. This suggestion is possible but not absolutely necessary; the evidence is inconclusive either way.” I would say that the fact this section matches Section B' so perfectly (see Figure 3) is a strong argument for considering it to be an integral part of the original text.

The four sub-sections here are tied together verbally and thematically by the following devices: subsections 1 and 1' both contain the Hebrew root for “waste,” while 2 and 2' share the common theme of fruitfulness.

Section B'1: vv. 33-34 and Section B'2: vv. 35-38

Allen labels these verses “The God of ecology” and says that in this section “all can find common ground in praising God, e.g. for His providential control of nature.”

In reading the descriptions found in verses 33 and 35, I am reminded of the motto of the church I am now attending: “Transforming lifeless spaces into life-giving places through Jesus Christ.”
Section B'1': vv. 39-40

“Kissane, Kraus, et al transpose verses 39-40, but it is possible that verse 39 should be taken as a kind of protasis [i.e., a clause expressing the condition in a conditional sentence] to verse 40. These two verses probably suggest that whenever the righteous are oppressed (verse 39), God will punish the offenders (verse 40). Thus Yahweh shows himself to be in control both of the realm of nature and of human society.” (Anderson)

NIV translates v. 39 so as to show a reversal of Israel's fortune after the blessings of v. 38, thus referring to the devastation by the Assyrians and Babylonians.

Section B'2': vv. 41-42

“An abundance of flocks not only designated prosperity but was indicative of God's goodness, so often expressed in natural and agricultural terms in the OT (Ps 107:41; 144:13).” (Davies)

Allen treats sections B'1'-2' together and titles them “The God of the weak and needy.” He says, “He can lift up the underprivileged to high blessings as well as demote nobles. He compensates for life's inequalities, to the delight of the believer and the chagrin of God's enemies.”

Verse 43

This brings us back to the closing verse which was discussed earlier. Derek Kidner's comment on it is as good place as any to end this post: “The book of Hosea closes on just such a note as this: a sober reminder not to be carried away by the eloquence, in shallow response to what God has done in depth, or in purely imaginative participation in a chapter of history. It is himself that the reader is to recognize in the fourfold picture of plight and salvation, and it is the steadfastness of God that he is now to praise with new insight.”

PSALM 107: PART 1

Main Theme

There is some disagreement among translators and commentators as to how to label this psalm. Thus, I have seen the following titles attached to this chapter in the Psalter: “Variety and Repetition,” “Thanksgiving and Praise,” “The Song of the Redeemed,” “God, a Refuge in All Dangers,” “Thanks to the Saving God,” “The Faithfulness of the Lord,” “Whoever is Wise,” and “God to the Rescue.” My own suggested title would be “The God Who Transforms” or “Reversals,” and I will try to highlight this choice as we go along by underlining some of the key words in the quotations given in the post.

Historical Setting

This is a subject that is a matter of controversy among Bible scholars. Just look at the opinions given below:

Kselman says of Psalm 107:33-38: “God has the power to reverse the normal order (cf. Isa 50.2), and the return from exile is described as a new Exodus (Isa 41.18; 43.19) and resettlement in the land (cf. Josh 24.13).”

Somewhat similarly, the footnote in the Jerusalem Bible feels that verses 4-9 refer to the Exodus while 10-16 deal with the return from Exile. The overall effect is to “elaborate the wisdom theme of the reversal of situations.”

But M'Caw and Motyer discern an entirely different background to the psalm feeling that “it may well be that we find here the pre-exilic community viewing themselves as in principle gathered from the world and all its dangers.”

And for a more general background to the psalm, P.D. Miller says that it “demonstrates the richness of Israel's expression of praise and thanksgiving...The Yahwistic community is in the picture from the beginning, and its history and plight echo throughout the Psalm so that it is always moving on two planes, the individual and the communal, the general and the particular, the existential and the historical.”

“Psalm 107 is typical...in describing the wavering faith of the 'redeemed of Yahweh' (Ps 107:2), some of whom 'became fools through their rebellious ways' (Ps 107:17) and who cried out to Yahweh in their distress and were delivered (Ps 107:19).” (Davies)

L.C. Allen sees the background of this psalm as that of a temple service. “Individuals are to have the opportunity of testifying to God's help in particular difficulties, by oral statement and by sacrifice (v. 22). Then the whole community will cap their thanksgiving with a general outpouring of praise. These two parts of the service are reflected in this psalm.”

In attempting to determine the historical setting of Psalm 107, some additional scholars just zero in on verses 4-32 for clues:

McKnight: “Common human experiences give rise to God's saving acts. Psalm 107 perhaps best puts this all into one grand display.”

DeClaisse-Walford: “The repetition of words in the vignettes provides further evidence that the psalm may have been used in a liturgical setting, in which groups of worshippers recited the words of Psalm 107 antiphonally with presiding priests.”

Dentan says, “This psalm was perhaps sung by groups of pilgrims who came to Jerusalem to celebrate one of the feasts, offering thanks for escape from various dangers.”

“Some scholars (e.g. Kissane) regard this passage [i.e. vv. 23-32] also as a metaphorical account of the return from the Exile (cf. Isa. 54:11). It is not certain, however, that this was the original meaning.” (Anderson)

And concerning just the concluding verses 32-43, M'Caw and Motyer state: “These verses seem broadly based on the history of Israel from Egypt onwards.”

We also see possible echoes of other OT passages in individual verses in this psalm. As just one example, Anderson points out regarding verses 10-16: “The Targum applies these verses to Zedekiah and the nobles of Israel (i.e. Judah) in the Babylonian exile...”

Setting Within the Psalter

This long psalm is notable in several ways. For one thing, it serves to open the last of the five divisions of the Book of Psalms.

Figure 1: Structure of Book V – Psalms 107-150

A. Bridge (Ps. 107)

B. Psalms of David (Ps. 108-110) 

            C. Hallelujah (Ps. 111-117)

A'. Bridge (Ps. 118)

B'. The Torah (Ps. 119)

C'. Song of Ascents (Ps. 120-134)

A''. Bridge (Ps. 135-137)

B''. Psalms of David (Ps. 138-145)

C''. Hallelujah (Ps. 146-150)

This book is arranged somewhat differently than the other four. Three parallel sections begin with bridging psalms (A, A', A'') which contain very similar language. The statement “O give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; for his steadfast love endures for ever!” appears in all three. And Waltke points out that Psalm 107 also relates backwards to the previous psalm with their common theme of gathering the people of Israel from Exile (compare 106:47 and 107:3).

But at the same time, as DeClaisse-Walford points out, the final words in Psalm 107 “set the scene for the rest of the words in Book Five.” And in addition, Holladay notes that the opening of Book 1 (Psalm 1:6) may be compared to the closing of Psalm 107, which opens Book V.

Old Testament Parallels

Various OT influences on the words in Psalm 107 have been proposed by scholars, but it is often hard to make value judgments regarding which writing influenced which due to uncertainties as to the relative dates of composition. Anderson expresses this uncertainly when he says that “verse 40 may be a quotation from Job 12:21a,24b (or vice versa?).”

Schnittjer also points out that Job 12:21-22 appears to be taken from Psalm 107:40 with, however, one important change. In Job, the positive conclusion is left out. He says, “The context of Ps 107 alternates between the blessing and judgment of Yahweh.” This is most clearly seen in verses 33-43.

Schnittjer also notes that “The only places the combination of 'gloom' and 'utter darkness' appear with 'claim' or 'redeem' are Ps 107 (verses 2, 10, 14) and Job 3:5a.”

New Testament Echoes

Working in the opposite direction, some scholars feel that the Gospel accounts may derive some of their ideas from this psalm. For example, Kostenberger sees possible allusions to vv. 23-32 (especially vv. 29-30) in0- John 6:21 as well as to the scattered Gentiles of John 11:52 in Ps. 107:2-3.

But the most extensive list of such parallels comes from Meye, as enumerated and expanded by Colin Brown. Their combined findings are summarized in Figure 2.

                                      Figure 2: Parallels Between Psalm 107 and Mark's Gospel

Subject                                      Psalm 107 (vv.)                 Mark 4-8

God's redemptive deed             1-3,22,32                          5:19-20,27,43; 7:37

summons of the redeemed        2                                       1:37,45; 3:7; 7:24,26

God's steadfast love                  1,15,21,31,43                   4:38; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2

hunger and thirst                      4-9                                     6:30-44; 8:1-10,14-21

darkness and bondage             10,14                                  5:1-20; 6:13; 7:24-30

“the most High”                      1                                         5:7

sickness                                  17-22                                  5:21-6:5,13,53-56; 7:31-37; 8:22-26

peril at sea                              23-32                                  4:35-41; 6:45-52

call to understanding              43                                       8:17-21

More detailed analysis of the text of Psalm 107 will be presented in part 2 of this post.

BIBLICAL CONTACTS BETWEEN THE LIVING AND THE DEAD

 

             Last Desperate Measure (2010) (collage)

To narrow the scope of this posting, it is best to distinguish contact with the dead with two other belief systems: reincarnation and resuscitation.

We see the glimmer of a Jewish belief in a deceased person being reborn into another body in two passages in the Gospel accounts. Just prior to Peter's Great Confession, Jesus had asked his disciples, “Who do people say I am?” And all the answers from the populace they mention indicated that they believed He was the very reincarnation of one of several prominent OT personages (Matthew 16:13–16; Mark 8:27–29; and Luke 9:18–20).

We see the same thing regarding the person of John the Baptist. Based on the prophecy in Malachi 4:5 involving the future return of Elijah, John was an ideal candidate for such a reincarnation. And Jesus' comments in Mark 9:9-13 and Matthew 11:11-16 may have helped to spread such a notion, although they were not meant to be taken literally. The angel's words to Zechariah in Luke 1:17 help to establish that fact.

Then there is the somewhat related concept we see in both the OT and NT of resuscitation back to life of someone who had recently died through the intercession of some sort of holy man such as a prophet, apostle, or Jesus Himself. Interestingly, virtually nothing is told us regarding what subsequently happened to these revived people after this event, but apparently they went on living a normal life in every way until they eventually died a natural death.

One commonality between all these events is that in each case, the miraculous event happened fairly soon after death occurred. At that point, apparently, reuniting of the spirit and body was still possible. Perhaps this fact is related to the later rabbinic belief described by S.A. White – “References to the rabbis' views of the afterlife are scattered, but may be summarized thus: at death, the soul leaves the body, but may return from time to time until the body disintegrates.” This seems to match more recent accounts of a credible nature in which a person is declared legally dead by a physician but is revived somewhat later and able to recount events from a different physical location or perspective which happened while he or she was “dead.”

Lastly, I have excluded all references in the NT relating to Jesus' post-resurrection appearances since (1) it would be too complicated a study to easily capsulize in a few paragraphs and (2) what the risen Christ was able to do is in no way applicable to what can and did happen regarding mere mortals.

Saul and the Witch of Endor (I Samuel 28)

This is the well-known story of King Saul being so desperate to get some sort of word from God that he resorted to going in disguise to a woman who claimed to be able to contact the dead (illustrated in my collage above). We must point out the strict taboo at the time against consulting mediums or others claiming to be able to consult with the dead. This is clearly seen in Old Testament passages such as Leviticus 19:26,31; 20:6,27; Deuteronomy 18:10-12; and II Kings 23:24.

“It is interesting to note...that the laws against necromancy in Deuteronomy and Leviticus still assume not that it was impossible to summon the dead from Sheol but that it was inappropriate.” (Pitard)

However despite what Pitard's words might suggest, it is important not to take this episode as proof that mediums and fortune tellers can indeed reach the dead. That becomes obvious when one reads this whole story. The witch is clearly shown to be just as amazed when a spirit actually appears as Saul is, perhaps even more so since it seems that had never happened to her in her career as a fraud before.

Kaiser discussed this episode at some length and concludes: “The most prevalent view among orthodox commentators is that there was a genuine appearance of Samuel brought about by God himself. The main piece of evidence favoring this interpretation is I Chronicles 10:13-14...Is Samuel's statement to Saul in I Samuel 28:15 proof that the witch had brought Saul back from the dead? The message delivered by this shade or apparition sounds as if it could well have been from Samuel and from God. Therefore, it is entirely possible that this was a real apparition of Samuel. As to whether Samuel appeared physically, in a body, we conclude that the text does not suggest that he did...But there can be little doubt that there was an appearance of Samuel's spirit or ghost...Our conclusion is that God allowed Samuel's spirit to appear to give Saul one more warning about the evil of his ways.”

Lazarus and the Rich Man (Luke 16:19-31)

If this difficult parable of Christ is taken literally, it appears to teach that there can never be any contact between the living and the dead. However, parables are very rarely designed to be understood in a literal manner.

Snodgrass has perhaps taken the most reasonable approach in discussing what, if anything, this story has to tell us regarding the nature of the afterlife. He says that “the fact that this is a parable with an intent [i.e. regarding money] other than teaching about the future life should warn against taking the picture too literally, and conformity with the rest of Luke's teaching (and the NT) on the future life would seem required for any conclusions. The problem of understanding the biblical material on life after death is much more problematic than most Christians are aware. We know far less, and Scripture is far less clear, than most think...The nature of the story does not allow it to be taken as an actual description of the future life...The parable is not intended to provide a schedule or details about precisely what happens after death.”

The Transfiguration (Mark 9:2-8; Matthew 17:1-8; Luke 9:28-36)

Much could be, as has been, said regarding this watershed moment in the life of Jesus on earth. Here we get a mountaintop view of Jesus calmly conversing with both Moses and Elijah. And it is followed by God speaking from heaven to shine the spotlight squarely on Jesus as the other two personages disappear. It is as hard for us today to know exactly what to make regarding the physical reality of this episode as it was for Peter, who obviously was at a loss for words and could only feebly suggest that perhaps huts should be constructed for the two guests to shield them from the elements.

Rather than attempt to canvass the voluminous literature on this subject, I will limit myself to a few appropriate comments regarding the nature of the appearances by the two OT figures.

After dispensing with theories that this is only a displaced account of Jesus' later resurrection, Lane says, “There is room for discussion concerning the form of the event (i.e. it is possible that the disciples saw a vision of Elijah and Moses and heard the heavenly voice within the scope of that vision) but the transfiguration as an entity must be regarded as an act of revelation for which God was responsible...The transfiguration scene develops as a new 'Sinai' theophany with Jesus as the central figure.”

Hugh Anderson similarly discounts those who dismiss this story as merely a legend and states, “That the story contains symbolic features, as the presence of Moses and Elijah on the stage and numerous other data suggest, is undeniable. Nevertheless it has been maintained that that the story does have a historical basis in an objective manifestation of the divine glory in Jesus, or at least in a visionary experience of the disciples in Jesus' presence.” Anderson then goes on to explain that “the Greek word for 'appeared' (ophthe) [in Mark 4] stands for rather more than a subjective visionary experience and...the fact that Elijah and Moses 'were talking to Jesus' implies their actual presence...”

Notice that both of the above scholars waffle a little bit as to whether Elijah and Moses were present in a bodily form or experienced as a vision given to the three disciples who were also on the mountain. It is impossible at this point in time to be 100% sure concerning either possibility.

The dead walk the streets of Jerusalem (Matthew 27:52-53)

Matthew is the only Evangelist to record this intriguing event. Albright and Mann state: “It is certainly no service to scholarship to find in these verses an imaginative piece of fiction on the part of the evangelist, or simply an attempt to garnish the account of the passion with improbable details. Enough has surely become known in the course of the past fifty years about the language and forms of apocalyptic to evaluate this material seriously. W.G. Essame...is certainly correct in seeing here a dramatization of a saying preserved in the Johannine tradition [referring to John 5:25-29].” Decoding what these scholars have to say, we can see that they are not convinced that this event happened in reality. However, they are willing to take it seriously as an attempt to convey a theological point, namely, “as a triumphant assertion in OT language that the resurrection of Jesus was a divine act.”

But from the more evangelical wing of Christianity, we get a somewhat different perspective. Thus, France says, “This resurrection of dead people has no parallel in the other gospel accounts, and leaves plenty of unanswered questions for the historically minded interpreter...We can only speculate on...why the appearance of 'many' dead worthies to 'many' people left no other trace in historical sources. As with many of Jesus' scientifically unexplainable miracles, Matthew is not interested in satisfying our natural curiosity or answering empirical skepticism. He tells the story for its symbolic significance...he sees Jesus' death, not just his resurrection, as the key to the new life which is now made available to God's people.”

It should be pointed out that this incident is recorded by Matthew in conjunction with the miraculous account (also found in Mark and Luke) of the curtain to the Holy of Holies being ripped from top to bottom, which also has a symbolic meaning behind it in indicating that mankind now has access to God's presence due to Christ's atoning death.

The Man from Macedonia (Acts 16:9)

In this obscure episode, Paul receives a vision in which a person pleads with him to come to Macedonia and preach to them. As to whether this was a genuine message from the dead depends on the identity of the man, and this is an issue which remains debatable. Thus, Stuckenbruck says that “an angelic figure, appearing as a 'man' in Paul's vision, acts as a representative of Macedonia sent by God.”

However, Ramsay and other argued that the figure was actually Luke, who would soon join Paul in his missionary efforts. Neil labels this interpretation as “no more than an attractive speculation.”

Only one commentator of whom I am aware felt that the vision came to Paul from a dead person, and that was William Barclay. John Stott summarizes Barclay's belief that this man was actually Alexander the Great stemming from the fact that: (1) “the district was permeated with memories of Alexander” and (2) “Alexander's aim had been 'to marry the east to the west' and so make one world, while Paul's vision was to make 'one world for Christ'.” I am not aware of any scholars who have sided with Barclay in his belief.

Two future witnesses (Revelation 11:3)

Attempts by well-meaning Bible scholars throughout the ages to dig up the details of future historical events by mining the verses in Revelation have been notable for their failure to predict what will happen. I have seen that again and again just in my own lifetime. There is so much obviously symbolic language in these pages, that such attempts are doomed to failure from the start.

Phillips says, “There has been much speculation about the identity of these two men. One of them is probably Elijah. Fire was characteristic of his ministry, and his miracles were frequently those of judgment. Some think the other witness might be Moses, for he, like Elijah, was a representative man. Between them they stood for the Old Testament ministry, 'the law and the prophets.' Together they stood with the Lord on the Mount of Transfiguration [see above]. But since both these witnesses are to be executed by the beast, the case for Moses is weakened. Moses has already died, and 'it is appointed unto men once to die' (Heb 9:27). Some think the second witness is Enoch. Enoch, like Elijah, was a lonely voice for God in an apostate age, and again like Elijah, he was caught up living into heaven without passing through the article of death.”

But Beale takes a more symbolic view of this passage: “Verses 3-6 explain the primary purpose of the 'measuring' in vv 1-2. That is God's establishment of his presence among his end-time community as his sanctuary is aimed to ensure the effectiveness of their prophetic witness...They are to be prophets like the great prophets of the OT (like Moses and Elijah, vv 4-6)...they represent the whole community of faith, whose primary function is to be a prophetic witness. Just as John the Baptist was not a literal reappearance of Elijah, but came 'in the spirit and power of Elijah' (Luke 1:17), likewise the witnesses are not Moses and Elijah reincarnated. Nevertheless, the two witnesses are patterned after these two OT figures.”

Ford reviews all the attempted identifications of the two witnesses given throughout the ages. These include the following pairs: Enoch and Elijah, Jeremiah and Elijah, James the Bishop of Jerusalem and John the Apostle, Peter and Paul martyred by Nero, the high priest Joshua and Zerubbabel who in Zechariah are symbolized as two olive trees, the two Messiahs mentioned in the Dead Sea writings, the house of Israel (the laity) and the house of Aaron (the priesthood), the messiah of Israel (the Davidic king) and the Messiah of Aaron (priestly Messiah) who represent, respectively, the civil and religious authorities. But she feels that the descriptions of the two best fit Moses and Elijah.

Dispensational speculations regarding the future

I will wisely dispense with any prolonged discussion of noted prophecy “experts” such as John Walvoord who in his The Millennial Kingdom authoritatively lays out all the rules governing the respective lifetimes and types of permissible interactions between the three or four different classes of human beings who will populate the earth during the time of the millennium. These include those who were alive at the start of the millennium but will eventually die, those previously dead who will be given resurrected bodies during this time, saints who were previously raptured alive but will return to earth to live a long life, etc. Some of these beings will be able to intermarry and have children while others will not, etc. etc. Even other scholars who are firmly dispensationalist have a great deal of trouble swallowing all of what Walvoord writes since it is the product of poor exegesis coupled with a healthy dose of imagination. And I must admit that he is one of the more responsible commentators belonging to this camp.

Conclusion

As you can see from the above, if spirits of the departed do indeed communicate with the living, one could certainly not derive that conclusion from the sparsity of clear-cut examples found in the above passage

FAITH IN (OR OF) JESUS CHRIST

 Faith in, or of, Jesus Christ

Let me start out with Showalter's thoughts on this phrase: “Several times Paul refers to faith with a grammatical construction that can be interpreted either as 'faith in Christ' or 'faith of Christ' (Gal. 2.16, 20; 3.22; Rom. 3.22, 26; Phil. 3.9). Scholarly debate centers on whether Jesus is referred to in the first sense as the object of faith or in the second as an example of faith. The NRSV translation includes footnotes that offer the latter reading as an alternative. It has also been suggested that Paul is being intentionally ambiguous with the construction, leaving both possibilities open. In this case it is interesting to note that later documents tend to specify 'faith in Christ,' eliminating the possibility for ambiguity (e.g., 1 Tim. 3.13; Acts 20.21).”

Here are some opinions from Bible scholars concerning those ambiguous cases mentioned above:

Romans 3:22, 26

We may assume that the same meaning is intended in both these occurrences of the phrase in this short section since a rough diagram of repeated key words and concepts in this section shows an approximate parallelism between the first and second part of the passage.

                                                         Figure 1: Romans 3:21-26

        1. righteousness of God

                2. manifested

        1'. righteousness...of God

                        3. faith in/of Jesus Christ

                                4. sinned

                                        5. justified

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

        1''. righteousness of him

                                4'. sins

                2'. showing forth

        1'''. righteousness of him

                                        5'. just, justifying

                        3''. faith in/of Jesus

There is one useful fact pointed out by Vine concerning the phrase in 3'' above: “In Rom. 3:25, the A.V. [Authorized Version, i.e. the King James Version] wrongly links 'faith' with 'in His blood,' as if faith is reposed in the blood (i.e., the Death) of Christ; the en is instrumental; faith rests in the living Person.”

As to the key phrase, Fitzmyer says, “The sense of the gen[itive] is disputed. Some commentators would understand it as subjective...'through the fidelity of Jesus Christ,' i.e., his obedience to his Father, even to death on the cross...While this interpretation might seem plausible, it runs counter to the main thrust of Paul's theology. Consequently, many commentators continue to understand the gen. as objective, 'through faith in Jesus Christ'...Indeed, as Dunn rightly notes, Paul does not draw attention to Christ's faithfulness elsewhere in the extended exposition of Romans, even where it would have been highly appropriate, especially in chap. 4, where Abraham's pistis ['faith'] is the model for the believer. Paul is not thinking of Christ's fidelity to the Father; nor does he propose it as a pattern for Christian conduct. Rather, Christ himself is the concrete manifestation of God's uprightness, and human beings appropriate to themselves the effects of that manifested uprightness through faith in him.”

But Morris takes a slightly different stance in saying that the meaning could be subjective, referring to the faith Jesus exercised, and the word translated faith could be taken in the sense 'faithfulness'. If this last suggestion were adopted, we could understand it either of 'God's faithfulness in Jesus Christ' or of 'the faithfulness of Jesus Christ'.” He feels that only the latter would make sense in the context. But, in fact, Morris is one of those commentators mentioned above who feels that Paul is being purposely ambiguous here so that the phrase can be taken as either “faith in Jesus Christ” or “faith[fulness] of Jesus Christ.”

Then there is Murray, who feels that there is no need to even debate the subject since the answer is quite obvious: “It is hardly necessary to show that Jesus Christ is the object and not the subject of the faith spoken of. It would be alien to the whole teaching of the apostle to suppose that what he has in mind is a faith that is patterned after the faith which Jesus exercised.”

But Kasemann doesn't feel the subject is quite so cut-and-dried: “This section has rightly been called one of the most obscure and difficult in the whole epistle.”

Davidson and Martin feel that either meaning can be taken for the phrase since: “The divine righteousness may be achieved by the faith of the Savior even up to the cross, which strong faith was an integral element in the atoning value of his supreme sacrifice. Again, and in harmony with the NT images, this faith is projected towards Jesus as object, and so becomes faith in the Redeemer.”

Thus, there is still some room for debate on the meaning of “the faith of/in Jesus Christ” in Romans.

Galatians 2:16, 20

Since this is another case in which there is more than one appearance of the phrase in question found within the same passage, it is instructive to diagram it as well, as presented in Figure 2.

                                                         Figure 2: Galatians 2:15-21

  1. justified

                    2. not by the law

                                      3. but through faith in Christ Jesus

                                                      4. in Christ Jesus believed

  1'. justified

                                        3'. by faith in Christ

                    2'. not by works of the law

  1''. justified

                    2''. no one by works of the law

  1'''. justified

                                                        4'. in Christ

                                         3''. by faith in the Son of God

  1''''. justification

                    2'''. if by law

                                                        4''. Christ

You can see by comparing “Figures 1 and 2 that there is a strong family resemblance between the two, especially when you consider that the governing words in each case (righteousness and justification, respectively) are both derived from the identical Greek root dikaio-.

Galatians 3:22

In the NRSV, this verse reads as follows: “But the scripture has imprisoned all things under the power of sin, so that what was promised through faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.” The attached footnote after “Christ” gives as an alternative reading “through the faith of Jesus Christ.” Briggs says that “faith in Jesus Christ stresses the believer's faith as necessary for obtaining the promise, while the alternative, faith of Jesus Christ, emphasizes Jesus' faith as that which grants the promise.” Thus, according to this understanding, it really doesn't matter which of the two one chooses since the term is ambiguous enough to encompass both meanings at the same time.

But Guthrie makes a definite choice between the above two options in saying that it “is a genitive construction and is to be distinguished from the use of en or eis with a verb of believing. Here it could be understood either of the faith which Jesus Christ possessed, or of the faith directed to Jesus Christ as its object. Clearly the latter is more in harmony with the context.”

However, Martyn opts for the third possibility and translates this part of the verse as: “But in actuality, the scripture imprisoned everything under the power of Sin, in order that the promise might be given via the faith of Jesus Christ to those who believe.”

Philippians 3:9

I will start with Hendricksen's opinion here: “Not righteousness proceeding from law, says Paul, but that (which is) through faith in Christ. Faith is the appropriating agent, the hand extended to receive God's free gift. Since the only righteousness that has any value before God is Christ's righteousness imputed to the sinner as God's free gift is to the undeserving, it stands to reason that the only possible way to obtain this righteousness is to accept it...by simple faith, that is, by appropriating confidence in the Giver; hence also in his word. “God's Anointed is himself the object of this childlike trust (Rom. 1:16,17; 3:21,22; Gal. 2:20; 3:22; cf Hab. 2:4; John 3:16).”

But Melick clearly interprets this verse differently. “”Normally Paul meant 'faithfulness' when the word was a quality of 'God' or 'Christ,' as it is here. It could mean belonging to Christ, produced by Christ, directed to Christ, or simply of Christ. Most likely, it is the faithfulness which is in Christ and should be read 'of Christ.'”

Next, Hughes takes a somewhat broader view of the key phrase by saying, “What he most desired was the righteousness that 'comes through faith in Christ,' or more accurately, 'that comes through the faithfulness of Christ.' The righteousness that he possessed came from Christ's faithful obedience to the Father on the cross as he drank the cup of death to the full for our sins. It is all grace because of Christ's faithful work.”

Finally, Reumann feels that it is ambiguous and that the phrase may indicate either faith in Christ (objective genitive) or “the decisive attitude and stance on Christ's part that brings God's saving righteousness” (subjective genitive).

I will leave it up to the next two scholars to summarize this whole situation with the following words:

“pisteuo (or pistis) eis Christon depicts the committal of one's self to the person of Christ, something more than an intellectual acceptance of the message of the gospel or a recognition of the truth about Christ...But the two aspects are intimately related. Since the person of Christ is the essence of the message that is proclaimed and accepted, to accept the message concerning him is to accept him...entrance into that state is denoted by hoi pisteusantes (Acts 2:44; 4:32; 2 Thess. 1:10; cf. Gal. 2:16).” (M.J. Harris)

“How one understands the Pauline phrase 'faith of Christ' (and equivalent phrases: Rom: 2:22,26; Gal. 2:16,20; Phil. 3:9; Eph. 3:12), it is clear that the NT presents Jesus as more than the object of faith. He is also the very embodiment or personification of faith and faithfulness (Gal. 3:23-25; 1 Tim. 1:14; 2 Tim. 1:13; Rev. 1:5; 14:12; 19:11). As such, Christ constitutes the necessary and sufficient condition of Christian faith (Acts 3:16; Heb. 12:2; 2 Pet. 1:1). It is only because Christ has 'done it all' that the sinner's faith is possible and can be a saving response to God.” (S.S. Taylor)

HABAKKUK 3:16-18

 Those not very familiar with this minor Old Testament prophet who approach this book for the first time might find themselves seeing some notable parallels with another man of God, Job. If so, they are not alone. So comparing the two might be as good a way as any for beginning this post. If not otherwise indicated, all of the comments below from Bible scholars apply to Habakkuk specifically.

Both were notable in their times for their devotion to God.

This fact is rather obvious in the case of Job. As far as the prophet is concerned, God's direct speeches to him are proof enough that he deserved special attention also.

Both lived in difficult times.

In the case of Job, his difficulties were private and involved him and his immediate family. With Habakkuk, it was the whole nation which was in imminent danger.

Southwell explains: “The book...belongs to the literature that saw Babylon's westward encroachment as God's judgment on the evils of Manasseh's reign, despite the Josianic reforms.”

R.L. Smith adds: “The message of Habakkuk was directed to the nation of Judah during the crisis which led to the fall of Jerusalem, the destruction of the temple, and the deportation of many people. The crises was internal as well as external. Internally the nation was torn with strife expressed in the abuse of the righteous by the wicked. The law was ineffective.”

Both had the nerve to question God as to His actions.

We can see numerous examples of this throughout both books.

The bulk of their books is devoted to dialogues.

With Job, it is mainly between him and his friends who feel they are representing God in their speeches. In Habakkuk's case, the dialogue is actually between the prophet and God Himself.

God replied personally to both in rather strange ways.

We see this in the final divine speeches to both men. Job is given an extended biology lesson while Habakkuk is subjected to a historical review from God.

Elizabeth Achtemeier writes: “The hymn of 3:3-15, with its introduction, confirms the message of 2.2-3. The prophet is granted a vision of God's final, future judgment of all, and of the establishment of God's rule over all the earth. The Lord is portrayed as a mighty warrior, marching up from the southern desert, to conquer all his foes and to give salvation to all who trust him. The portrayal presents the most extensive theophany (description of the divine appearance) to be found in the Hebrew Bible...From such a vision of God's future triumph, Habakkuk has found his certainty...The prophet's external circumstances have not changed...But Habakkuk has been given to see the final outcome of human history...The prophet, and all the faithful like him, can therefore rejoice and exult.”

Both men were satisfied with God's words and stopped questioning Him.

In the case of Job, it was the numerous examples in chapters 38-41of God's omnipotence and omniscience which convinced Job of his own ignorance. For Habakkuk, it was the rehearsal in 3:3-15 of God's past demonstrations of his power and care for His people which did the trick.

As several scholars note, v. 16 describing Habakkuk's reaction is expressed in two parallel lines of poetry:

    1. I listened

        2. and trembled

            3. my internal organs

    1'. At the sound

        2'. quivered

            3'. my lips

“By a patient rebuttal that never swerved from his point, the Lord has shut up his servant to a position of passive acknowledgment of the rightness of his ways. Habakkuk earlier had set himself up to 'answer his rebuke' (Hab. 2:1). But now his speech is paralyzed.” (Robertson)

Mobley says, “Awed, and buoyed, by this account of God's power, the poet espouses the kind of faithful waiting evoked by the divine message of 2.4 [i.e., 'the righteous live by faith'].”

“The prophet Habakkuk also recognizes the fragility of life; at the very sight of God's wrath and power, the decay of his trembling body begins within the very marrow of his bones (Hab 3:16).” (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery)

Baker says, “Habakkuk realized the audacity of his questioning this mighty God...who crushed their enemies with his mighty power (3:12-15). When Habakkuk finally understood that it was in front of this God of power and majesty that he stubbornly stood awaiting an answer to his questions (2:1), he was filled with dread and terror (3:16).” Baker compares the prophet with Job in that regard. “Both of them are forced to acknowledge the creating and saving power of God, the giver of life and vitality (Hab. 3:17-19; Job 1:21). This is an encouragement to all people comforted by the apparent absence of moral or theological absolutes. This absence is illusory; the instruction of God has not lost its power and efficacy, nor has God changed his character.”

“Driven to prayer, Habakkuk is allowed to see God's justice in action in the past liberation of Israel from its oppression and his victorious leading of them to the land of promise. (DBI)

Both were content to leave the future up to Him.

Note that in both cases, this transformation happened prior to any real concrete change in their circumstances. In Job's case, his uncertainty did not have to last long, whereas in the prophet's case, he never lived long enough to witness God's eventual regathering of the Israelites back to the promised land after the Exile.

Stephens-Hodge notes the paradox here in that Habakkuk at the same time trembled at the future prospect for Judah but at the same time was content to quietly wait for events to unfold. “His assurance is born of the living faith which these verses so beautifully express...Personal faith is the practical answer to life's discontents.”

“Habakkuk, in other words, had mastered the key verse of his own book – that while the soul of the Chaldeans might be puffed up, still the just shall live by faith (2:4).” (Payne)

DBI: “Habakkuk is convinced; his spiritual quest is concluded. He will trust God come what may.”

“To behold the glory of the Lord and to enter into His purposes is an expanding experience...Habakkuk found it so. The apprehension he had expressed at the onset of the vision (2) proves wholly warranted for when it is over he is left in a state of collapse (16a). (Nute)

Both moved from questioning to faith, praise and joy.

“Joy is a by-product of life with God. Joy is not found by seeking it as an end in itself. It must be given by God (Job 8:21; Ps 4:7; 36:8). Therefore it is received by faith with the gift of salvation (Hab 3:18, etc.).” (DBI)

Robertson calls verses 18-19b, “a resolution of joysome entrustment.”

“Habakkuk has...learned to turn doubt and grief into prayer (1:2-4, 12-17; 3:2-19; compare Ps 73:16-17), maybe in the temple (Hab 2:20). Worship leads him toward joyful faith by God's power and goodness, and 3:16-19 is one of the OT's most exalted expressions of such confidence.” (Southwell)

Nute says, “There is no more moving comment on the prime truth of this prophecy – 'the righteous will life by his faith – than that which is contained in these verses [i.e. Habakkuk 3:17-19]. The affirmation is exquisitely and nobly worded. The faith Habakkuk professes is no blind faith, for it is expressed in clear prospect of a complete catastrophe (17).”

Robertson provides a good conclusion to this post when he asks, “Is it resurrection faith that comes to n in these final words of the prophet? Is he speaking of an expectation of life after the last enemy has done his worst? Certainly his faith is not far from that point. Despite all the anticipated tragedies, he actually can rejoice in his confidence that the vigor of life shall be his...The transition from the complaining prophet to the rejoicing prophet surely must be seen as a work of God's sovereign grace...May the Lord himself continue to provide the grace of life to people of this generation by the faith that justifies.

I JOHN 3:10-18

 When one encounters the writings of the apostle John, it is like entering a different world from the rest of the New Testament. Of course, the Revelation is set apart by its apocalyptic genre, with its many bizarre symbols. But John's Gospel and his three epistles are also like nothing else in the Bible in terms of the words he uses and his unique writing style. Interestingly, John's Greek vocabulary is quite limited in comparison with the other NT authors, which makes it an ideal example to serve as an initial primer for seminary students taking beginning Greek. But that same fact works against exegetes of John's writings, who (along with lay many readers of the English translations) have a great deal of trouble following John's logic as he takes his limited number of words / concepts and repeats them over and over again in various combinations.

For example, one of the usual first steps in attempting to understand any passage of Scripture is to break it up into its individual paragraphs. And in this endeavor we can't just look at the divisions in the earliest Greek manuscripts since, for the most part, they contain no paragraph breaks at all. So the next best thing is to consult the various English translations and scholarly commentators to see if there is a reasonable consensus as to the proper limits to each portion of the Scripture. For the case of I John 3, we encounter the following opinions:

Orr             1-24

Phillips              4-13;                          14-18

TEV                         9-10;     11-12; 13-18

NEB                         9-12; 13-17

Living Bible                  10-11; 12-13; 14-16; 17-20

NRSV                             10-17

JB                                    10-24

Hodges                              10b-15,                  16-18

The Message                         11-13;     14-15; 16-17; 18-20

NIV                                       11-15;                 16-18

Thompson                             11-17

RSV, Akin, Bruce, Marshall 11-18

AB                                         11-24

As you can see above, it would be hard to imagine any other small portion of Scripture in which there was such disagreement. One reason for such confusion is pointed out by R.E. Brown who notes John's

prevalent use of “hinge” verses (most notably at 2:27-29; 3:22-24 and 5:12-13) which serve as transitions from one literary unit to the next and make it nearly impossible to define exact limits to each.

And another literary technique practiced by John, especially well developed in his Gospel, is what is called progressive, or stair-step, parallelism in which the end of one sentence is picked up at the start of the following thought. But then in addition, the idea circles back to the start. This is seen, for example, throughout the prelude to John's Gospel as the two following examples demonstrate:

verses 1-2      In the beginning was the Word

                                                        the Word was with God

                                                        the Word was        God

                     in the beginning                             with God

verses 7-8      he came for testimony

                                to bear witness to the light

                                           he was not the light

                but came to bear witness to the light

Turning next to I John 3, we can see the same phenomenon on a larger scale in our verses of current interest diagrammed in Figure 1. The words and phrases in this arrangement are given in the order found in the Greek text.

                                            Figure 1: Flow of thought in I John 3:10-18

children of God                                                             verse 10

        not do right

                hate

                    brothers

               love                                                                         verse 11

                            murdered                                                 verse 12

                    brother

                            murdered

        deeds

                    brother

                    brother                                                                     verse 13

                hates

                                world

                                        we know                                                                 verse 14

                                                death

                                                life

                love

                     brothers

                hate

                    (brother)

                                                        abides

                                                death

                hating                                                                                             verse 15

                      brother

                                                                murderer

                                        you know

                                                                murderers

                                                no life

                                                        abides

                                        we know                                                  verse 16

                love

                                                life

                        brothers

                                                life

                                world verse 17

                        brother

                love

                                                        abides

                love                                                                                     verse 18

little children

        deeds

One thing we can say with some certainty is that this overall “love” passage encompasses the verses 10-18a. This is clearly seen in the “bookending” device formed by references to the audience as children followed closely by an allusion to their deeds found in both verses 10 and 18a.

As to any possible subdivisions within this general envelope, you can easily see how much that would quite difficult to pin down with any certainty. And the same could well be said for any attempt to look for the peak center of this broadly chiastic (i.e. mirror-image) arrangement. For example, it is tempting to see in the above figure separate center points of emphasis between the two references to “murderer” in v. 12, as well as between the next two “murderer” references found in v. 15. However, there is much too much overlap of themes to be sure of any such value judgment.

The overall effect of John's style in this letter has thus been variously described:

    After reviewing a number of proposed logical schemes attempting to explain the structure of this letter, Marshall concludes that “it seems to be preferable to regard the Epistle as being composed of a series of connected paragraphs whose relation to one another is governed by association of ideas rather than by a logical plan.”

    Grayston: “The repetitions which every reader notices are deliberate. Nothing is acceptable until it has been said, and repeated, and confirmed.”

    And in his understated manner, Bruce says, “Attempts to trace a consecutive argument throughout I John have never succeeded.”

    R.E. Brown states, “The author's logic is so obscure that one could move around units almost at will and still I John would read just as well as it does now.”

    But I think that D.G. Miller does the best job of describing the effect John had in mind in writing this epistle. “Though, in a broad sense, there is order and progression in the letter, yet the various themes are frequently reintroduced, and often blend in to one another, like the leading refrains of a great musical composition.”