Study Format:
1. Read passage aloud. What did you notice in the reading? What words or phrase caught your attention?
2. Read passage aloud a second time. What questions would you ask the text?
3. Read passage aloud a third time. What do you hear God calling you to do or be in response to this text?
Interesting Ideas to Consider:
2 Samuel 11:1-5, 14-27
• 2 Samuel 11 marks a dramatic shift in the story of David. Up to this point, David was portrayed as just, righteous, and in favor with God. Here, due to David’s own actions, the story starts to shift, and the fall of David begins. When David uses royal power to get what he wants (Bathsheba), his life and reign spiral out of control and Israel never again will reach the heights it was under David’s rule.
• The first sign of this downfall is that David did not go with his troops into battle, but remained behind in Jerusalem. When the people had begged for a king to “go out before us and fight our battles” (1 Sam 8:20), the prophet Samuel had warned them of the dangers of kings, who “take” from their people for their own interested (1 Sam 8:11-18), now David, instead of leading troops, is “taking” what he sees and desires (2 Samuel 11:4).
• Was Bathsheba guilty for being seen by the king? Some commentators have argued she was, bathing in a place that was so visible from the king’s palace. Others say she was simply a victim; she was, after all, bathing on a roof out of sight. The narrator himself lays the moral responsibility entirely on David, leaving the issue of Bathsheba’s complicity unaddressed.
• Outside of the introduction in v. 3, Bathsheba is never addressed by name, called only “the wife of Uriah” or “the woman.” Even in Matthew’s Gospel, she is addressed as “the wife of Uriah.” The purpose was to place the emphasis of the story on David’s act of adultery, but the effect is to render Bathsheba as essentially a non-person, no more than a part of the plot. She is not mentioned by name again until 2 Samuel 12:24.
• The affair itself is told very abruptly. David “sent,” “took,” and “lay,” Bathsheba “went” and then “returned.” “Sent” and “took” have a sense of aggression, though “went” and “returned” seem to indicate some level of acquiescence. It is important to remember the power dynamic in effect. The king sent for a subject, the subject obeyed. If Bathsheba “came,” it could indicate passivity rather than consent.
• David dealt with the problem of Bathsheba’s pregnancy by placing Uriah in a position in battle where he was sure to be killed. Uriah died a hero’s death, his honor in death preserving David’s honor in life.
1 Kings 1:11-17, 29-31
• The story of Bathsheba picks back up many years later, when King David was old and infirm. He was no longer able to care for himself or his house, and was in the care of others. Time for power to be transferred from David to his successor. Into this power vacuum stepped David’s fourth son, Adonijah. By this point in the story, Adonijah was heir and the oldest surviving son, the earlier three having died or been killed in various court intrigues (the story of David and his family is high drama, like a Game of Thrones style soap opera). Adonijah held a feast to confirm his new status, inviting all the high court officials, but not his brother Solomon who was born in the new capital city and had the support of the court officials against Adonijah.
• Nathan, the court prophet and a supporter of Solomon, came up with a plan. Solomon’s mother, Bathsheba, who had always been a favorite of King David, would go to the king, inform him of Adonijah’s attempted takeover, and “remind” him of his promise that Solomon would be king. “Remind” is in quotation marks, because there is no reference in scripture to David ever making such a promise. Seow indicates that Nathan and Bathsheba were trying to take advantage of David’s senility and trick him into putting Solomon on the throne.
• The trick worked, David spoke decisively, accepting Bathsheba’s memory of the situation and “confirming” the oath he was alleged to have made. Solomon becomes the next king of Israel. And while, certainly, the story behind his ascent is pretty back hall deal-y, Solomon is regarded as a wise and just ruler, a man of faith and wisdom.
Matthew 1:18-25
• Having finished the genealogy, the author now transitions to the main story, the life of Jesus. The writing starts in the middle of the story, when the author brings the reader in, Mary and Joseph are already engaged (a binding engagement in the first century, dissolvable only by death or divorce, so unfaithfulness would be considered adultery) and Mary is already pregnant.
• Strict interpretation of the Law of Moses required capital punishment in instances of adultery; though rabbinic practice had softened that some, the penalty was still severe and humiliating. Joseph is said to be “righteous,” a key word in Matthew’s Gospel meaning “just,” or “one who lives by the law.” Yet Joseph, contrary to the law, out of consideration for Mary, decided not to turn her over to justice, but rather to divorce her quietly.
• The angel’s revelation in v. 20 starts in the typical way, with the phrase “Do not be afraid.”
• The angel told Joseph he was to name the child, naming the child would indicate Joseph had adopted him as his own, thus claiming him in the Davidic line as a “Son of David.” Joseph’s naming of Jesus was how Jesus, without being a genetic descendant of Joseph, ended up in the Davidic line.
• Jesus is an English transliteration of Iesous, a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew Yesua, a shortened form of Yehosua, all of which are versions of the English name Joshua. Joshua/Yeshua/Jesus was in Matthew’s Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (what we call the Old Testament), the successor of Moses. Through his name, we see Jesus cast as the heir and successor to Moses, a theme that will be built upon throughout Matthew’s Gospel. The repeated refrain to Joshua, “I [God] will be with you’ (eg. Joshua 1:9), is also a repeated motif in Matthew’s Gospel.
• The name Jesus/Yeshua was also a common first century name (the historian Josephus knew 20 different people named Jesus). The commonality of the name helps to unite Jesus to humanity, he has a common name and thus is of the world rather than separated from it. The name means “Yahweh helps.” The Messiah is not an individualistic concept, not a “great man,” but the promised deliverer of the people of God. As Moses delivered the people of Israel from physical slavery into freedom, so too is Jesus the one who is to deliver God’s people from spiritual slavery into freedom.
• V. 21 does not specify who “his people” are. The reader might assume at first Israel, but throughout Matthew’s Gospel, the category is expanded to include all people.
• V. 23 is a reference to Isaiah 7:4. In its original context, the quote refers to the idea that there was a woman who was already pregnant in Judah, and by the time her child reached the age of moral discernment, Judah would be delivered from the threat of the Syro-Ephraimitic War. The child was to be given the name “God is with us” (Hebrew Immanuel), to connect it to other times the same promise was made in Isaiah. This child is referenced again in Isaiah 8:8, this time as already present. The word translated as “virgin” in Matthew’s Gospel is alma, and is translated a “young woman” in Isaiah. The word can mean either thing. For Isaiah’s time, it was not a long-range prediction, but a promise of the current salvation of Israel from war. Matthew, however, understands Jesus as a fulfillment of the whole of Scripture, and so understand this promise as both true for Isaiah in the way Isaiah intended it AND as a way of affirming Jesus’ place in the whole of salvation history.
• Did Jesus have siblings? The “until” in v. 25 seems to imply that Mary and Joseph had normal marital relations after the birth of Jesus, and the brothers and sisters mentioned in Matthew 13:55-56 were in fact Jesus’ siblings (or, half-siblings). It is also possible to understand v. 25 as a case for the perpetual virginity of Mary, as the Catholic Church has understood it. Personally (this is Pastor Kjersten’s interpretation), I think Jesus probably did have siblings, but I suppose it doesn’t matter much one way or another.
Works Sourced:
Birch, Bruce C. “The First and Second Books of Samuel.” The New Interpreter’s Bible Volume II. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998.
Boring, M. Eugene. “The Gospel of Matthew.” The New Interpreter’s Bible Volume VIII. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1995.
Seow, Choon-Leong. “The First and Second Books of Kings.” The New Interpreter’s Bible Volume III. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999.
No comments:
Post a Comment