May 2014 Echoes

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, April 26, 2014 Read John 21:20-25 Once again we have come to the end of John’s gospel. This time it is the last ending. It’s an ending that tells a peculiar story that is more about the community of John’s gospel than anything else. Once again the beloved disciple plays a crucial role in the story. Peter has just been told that his binding and death lie in the future. Now the attention switches to the beloved disciple. What will his fate be? We learn in the story that a false rumor had been spreading in John’s community. The rumor was that the beloved disciple would not die before the coming of Jesus? Just exactly what the “coming of Jesus” means in this context is a bit ambiguous. In the gospel of John up to this point there has been no talk about a “coming of Jesus” but rather the sending of another advocate, the Holy Spirit. The synoptic gospels do contain the promise that Jesus will come at the close of the age on the clouds of heaven – an event that will be plain for all to see. Likely by the time of the final editing of John’s gospel that claim had spread throughout the communities of followers of Jesus. At any rate, the rumor that the beloved disciple would not die has apparently been smashed. The implication is that he has in fact already died. Clearly the words written are not the words of this eye-witness, beloved disciple, but rather are written about him. And it is at this point that we learn that the one at the core of John’s gospel who prompted the writing and likely editing of this gospel is the beloved disciple we have met in the story and we are told that his testimony is valid – we can trust him. And so the gospel ends once again with the reminder that there is more to say. There are more stories, in fact to many the world cannot contain the books that would be written. Now that we have come to the end of John’s gospel we can revisit a few of the questions we asked at the beginning. Was John aware of Mark, Matthew, or Luke? Likely not, although it is very likely that John shares some earlier traditions that Mark, Matthew, and Luke also used. Was Mark, Matthew, or Luke aware of John’s gospel? Again, likely not, although Luke does seem to share some things in common with John that the others don’t. If there was any awareness it would be Luke’s awareness of John. Who is the author? The answer to that question evades us as we have commented earlier. If Raymond Brown’s hypothesis holds any weight then the author is really a series of people, the first of whom is the beloved disciple. What we can say is that the traditional belief that John, the son of Zebedee was the author is almost certainly not true. Who was the beloved disciple? Again, we cannot determine his identity. As was said above we can likely eliminate some candidates like Lazarus and John, the son of Zebedee, but we cannot find a name. Likely the author of John wanted it that way. In the end we can be very grateful for this gospel. John’s gospel provides us with a new perspective on Jesus and information we cannot find in the synoptic gospels. Our understanding of the story of Jesus is expanded. As we look at the differences between John and the synoptic gospels I don’t think it is a matter of choosing between them but of letting all of them speak together. We can be thankful we have all four.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, April 25, 2014 Read John 21:15-19 The second story that the final editor of John’s gospel has added to the original ending of John’s gospel really is attached to the previous fishing story. In fact, it may well be that these two stories have always been together and that they are in fact one story. As we listen to our story today we need to be reflecting about the denial of Jesus by Peter when Jesus was put in custody at the home of the high priest. In that story three times Peter crumbles under pressure and denies Jesus. So, we have a story where once again Peter is put on the spot. Three times Jesus asks Peter if he loves him. Three times Peter says that he does. Three times Jesus tells Peter to feed the flock. And in the end Peter is told that he will be bound and taken away just like Jesus and that he will die. And the story ends with a call to Peter – “Follow me!” As we listen to this story we can’t help but notice the frustration of Peter as he is put on the spot by Jesus. Was Peter remembering his denial too? We can’t know that for sure, but likely the editor of John’s gospel wants us to be thinking about the denial. Peter is really squirming as the story unfolds. “Please, Jesus, don’t remind me of my failure.” But in the end Peter is rehabilitated and the story can move on. John’s first readers likely heard this story and thought about their own denials and failures. We are invited to do the same. And so the story not only functions to tell a story about Peter and Jesus and about the rehabilitation of Peter, but it also speaks to readers of John’s gospel. We deny and we fail too and Jesus comes to us and asks, “Do you love me?” Jesus does not give up on deniers and failures. He calls them once again to follow. What grace for God’s people.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, April 24, 2014 Read John 21:1-14 Yesterday we talked about the ending of John’s gospel. I’m convinced that at some stage that was the end of the gospel. At some point John intended it to be the end. But why is chapter 21 attached? How did that happen? This is a good place to talk about a theory regarding John’s gospel that makes a lot of sense to me. The person who originated this theory was a Roman Catholic scholar named Raymond Brown. I think he is still the foremost interpreter of John’s gospel – though others have added some wonderful insights. As he pondered the gospel of John with all its peculiarities and “rough edges” and the gospel’s claim to have come for the hand of an eye-witness who is known as the beloved disciple, Brown proposed the hypothesis that there was in fact a follower of Jesus whose identity we cannot determine who was at the core of a community of believers. This eye-witness had experienced being with Jesus and had witnessed his death and resurrection. As he lived within this community he was a voice proclaiming that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. He had done that mostly through sermons and theological arguments. But this original eye-witness had never fully written down what had happened. He was a proclaimer far more than a “historian.” This would explain the long stories and the theological reflection that is so much a part of John’s gospel. It explains why so many stories morph from being the “words of Jesus” to being “words about Jesus.” This original eye-witness was far more intent on interpreting the meaning of Jesus that just telling his story. As time passed eventually this eye-witness died as all of us do. At this point Brown hypothesizes that a follower of this eye-witness takes it upon himself to collect the sermons and theological reflection of the eye-witness to preserve them. Next, Brown hypothesizes another follower who attempts to put narrative and order to these words and an early version of the gospel of John is created. But the community of John is also aware of other stories about Jesus that they have not received through the eye-witness who stands at the core of their community. Some of these stories are like those being told in John’s community and others are slightly different. Finally, Brown proposes that around the year 90 AD a final editor produces the gospel of John as we know it today. There are two important characteristics of this final editor. First he does not want to lose or contradict what he has received from those who came ahead of him in his community. He could have edited out all the “rough edges” but he has chosen to let most of them stand because they came from a past that he valued and even from an eye-witness who still was held in high regard. You don’t just edit out what predecessors have written. Second, this editor is very conscious of the trials and struggles of his own community. For instance he is aware of a painful and threatening split that has happened between Jewish followers of Jesus and non-believing Jews. The non-believing Jews have put Christians out of the synagogue. These and other circumstances in his present community color his writing of the story. To put it more simply, Brown’s hypothesis is that the gospel of John is the product of a series of writers who shaped it over time to what we have today. In that way, John differs from all the other gospels which likely were created by one individual. All of this does not taken anything away from John’s gospel. And the only version of John’s gospel that we have to deal with is the final one. But this theory does help explain some of the difficult part of the gospel as we have it. So when we come to chapter 21 we are likely dealing with a later version of John’s gospel. Someone added chapter 21 to a version of John’s gospel that originally ended with chapter 20. Why would someone want to add to the story? Likely it is because there were three important stories that had come to be well known to the community. If Brown’s hypothesis hold true that a final editor was intent on not editing out the past, then it was natural for him to let the ending at chapter 20 stand and then add to the story. He did much the same thing at chapter 14 which provides an ending to the meal scene only to have more added. He could have edited that ending out too but chose not to. The first story we encounter is a resurrection appearance of Jesus to his disciples in Galilee. We need to remember that Mark and Matthew had spoken of Jesus telling his disciples that they would see him in Galilee. The final editor of John’s gospel likely was well aware of that story too and that it was circulating within the communities of Mark and Matthew. So he chose to add it on to what was already the end of the gospel. As we begin to read the story we need to notice that this is a story that Luke also told his readers (Luke 5:1-11). The disciples have been out in a boat fishing all night and caught nothing. Jesus appears on the scene and tells them to lower their nets once again and this time they catch a great abundance of fish. That’s the core of the story. Luke chooses to use this story much earlier in his gospel as the story through which Jesus called his first disciples and specifically Peter. For his part John tells this story as a resurrection appearance of Jesus in Galilee and as the story continues into the next story in John’s gospel, the point of the story is the rehabilitation Peter who had denied Jesus. The story also has a way of exalting the “beloved disciple” in a way that had been done earlier in John’s gospel. When Peter and the beloved disciple come to the tomb John tells us the beloved disciple believed while Peter did not. And here the beloved disciple recognizes that the figure on shore of the sea is the Lord before Peter does. We are going to talk about the rehabilitation of Peter tomorrow. Of course we want to ask, “When did this story really happen?” The truth is we cannot answer that question and it is really not very important. But, if we must speculate, I would guess that John’s version of the story as a resurrection appearance more likely reflects historical accuracy. So why did Luke use it in such a different way? We need to remember the importance of Jerusalem in Luke’s gospel and the book of Acts. Jerusalem is the center. All of the resurrection appearances in Luke’s gospel happen near Jerusalem. So Luke could not uphold his theological reasons for centering Jesus in Jerusalem and tell this fishing story as it is told by John. But it is such a good story. And it works so well for Luke to tell of the call of Peter. So he moves it forward in the story. And, as we will see tomorrow, this really is a call story – Peter is called again to follow Jesus.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, April 23, 2014 Read John 20:30-31 Our reading for today brings the gospel of John to an end. Of course, we will notice that there is one more chapter in John’s gospel as we have it today. We will deal with that chapter in the coming days. But, let me repeat, our reading for today brings us to the end of John’s gospel – at least the ending of an earlier version. We cannot read these words in any other way. They are clearly an ending. Endings are important – just like beginnings are important. In this ending John sums up his main point and finally tells his readers the purpose of his writing of this gospel. John tells us that he has been selective in telling the story of Jesus. There are many other stories. Likely John knows some of those other stories. He chose not to tell them. We may recall that Luke said something quite like this at the beginning of his gospel. Luke tells us that he is aware of many who have written an account of the story of Jesus. He has followed those other writings and now Luke has created his own story so that his readers might know the truth. That doesn’t mean that Luke is attempting to correct errors in others. He is not talking about “factual truth” but life creating and life sustaining truth – a foundation upon which we can build our lives. John is about the same thing. And we can know that even though they don’t tell us explicitly Mark and Matthew were about the same thing too. All of them are selectors and editors and craftsmen in their hope of producing a gospel that bears witness to Jesus and creates faith in their readers. John tells his readers that the purpose of his gospel is that they might come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through their believing they might have life in his name. This is John’s personal word to you and to me. Our belief, or lack of it, will be the judgment of whether or not John has been successful in his endeavor. But of course that is also the outcome of anyone who bears witness. John has been a witness and now the verdict rests in our hands. Personally, I am one who believes that John has been successful in the writing of his gospel – I believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and I have come to know the life that God blesses me with in his name. I believe that you join me in receiving John’s testimony and in believing. John’s gospel has done its work!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, April 22, 2014 Read John 20:24-29 Only John tells the story of a second appearance of Jesus to his disciples in a house in Jerusalem. The setting is the same as it was for the first appearance on the evening of the day of resurrection. The doors are still shut – though, significantly, John does not tell us those inside were afraid of the Jews. A week has passed. It has been a week where the followers of Jesus have been telling Thomas, who was absent from the first appearance, that they have seen the Lord. Thomas is not buying their witness. Thomas wants physical proof of the resurrection and appearance of Jesus. Of course this frustrates the others. They can’t provide physical proof. And then, Jesus appears. Jesus offers Thomas what he things he needs – physical proof – but with the appearance of Jesus, Thomas no longer needs this. Once he has seen Jesus Thomas makes the boldest confession found in the Bible – he calls Jesus both Lord and God. In his gospel John has insisted that in Jesus the very presence of God resides. The Word, who was God, became flesh and lived among us! Thomas recognizes that Jesus is God. And then Jesus says some very important words, “Have you believed because you have seen? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe.” These words are directed, of course, to all of the followers of Jesus who would come to believe in him over the long centuries since the time of Jesus’ death/resurrection/ascension. These words are directed at you – and me. And so the story has a very powerful function in the scope of John’s gospel. It bridges the gap between the first followers of Jesus – followers who saw him physically – to followers who can never see him physically, yet who have come to see him and believe in him. The story is meant for the first readers of John’s gospel, the members of John’s community who are struggling to remain faithful. And the message is clear. Even those who cannot physically see Jesus can believe in him and thus see him with eyes of faith. John’s concern is with the continuing of the community of believers in Jesus. How are they to continue? How is the church to survive? Can the church survive? Of course, John has already been dealing with that in his many words about the coming of the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit who Jesus promised to send to his followers. Jesus was concerned about the church of the future throughout John’s gospel. In fact, it may not be saying too much to say that the whole purpose of any of our gospel writers was to seek to maintain and strengthen the church of their time and all time. This story is a very important one for us. The story is meant to assure us that we can be a part of the community of God’s people even though we are not privileged to experience the physical presence of Jesus. Thomas stands in both camps. He is like the disciples in the story who were physically with Jesus. But he is also like all of us when he was absent at the first appearance. We are like Thomas. May we come to confess as he did that Jesus is Lord and God.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, April 21, 2014 Read John 20:19-23 John does not tell us the response of the male disciples to Mary Magdalene’s proclamation. Luke tells us that when the women made their announcement to the male disciples they thought it was an idle tale, but John provides no report of a response. Instead, John moves immediately to the first appearance of Jesus to his disciples. If we briefly examine the other gospel writers we discover that Mark provides no resurrection appearances. Mark simply ends his gospel with the women fleeing in fear and saying nothing to anyone. Only Matthew tells a story of the guards going to tell the chief priests what had happened. Remember, Matthew has told us that the guards witnessed the descent of the angel and the rolling back of the stone. What these guards made of this event is not reported – only that they went to the chief priests to report it. Matthew tells us the chief priests immediately invent a story of the disciples coming and taking the body of Jesus out of the tomb while the guards were asleep. The guards are promised protection should the news reach Pilate’s ears. And so the first deception begins. It is remarkable that people can witness the very same thing and that some come to faith and others persist in unbelief. Matthew tells us the guards do as they were told (Matthew 28:11-15). Matthew will now go on to tell of an appearance of Jesus to his disciples on a mountain in Galilee where Jesus commissions his disciples to be witnesses to the ends of the earth. Jesus does exactly what he said he would do and what the angel had said in Matthew and in Mark – he goes ahead of his disciples to Galilee and there they see him. Following this commissioning Jesus ascends into heaven (Matthew 28:16-20). Luke’s gospel is more like John’s than either Mark or Matthew. Luke begins by telling the story of two disciples on the road to Emmaus who encounter Jesus but do not recognize him. In this way they are a lot like Mary Magdalene in John’s gospel. Along the way Jesus interprets the scripture for them and in the end of the story they recognize Jesus in the breaking of the bread. Mary Magdalene recognized Jesus when her name was spoken. Holy Communion does the same for the Emmaus travelers (Luke 24:13-35). Word and Sacrament create faith! Luke then goes on to tell of an encounter of the risen Jesus with his disciples in the upper room in Jerusalem. This encounter sounds a lot like the encounter John tells his readers (Luke 24:36-49). Finally Luke tells of Jesus leading his disciples one last time to the Mount of Olives and ascending into heaven (Luke 24:50-52). Once again we are struck by the similarities and the differences. For his part John tells a story of Jesus appearing to his disciples in a room with locked doors on the evening of the day of resurrection. It is clear that John and Luke are dealing with the same story of an appearance of Jesus to his disciples in Jerusalem on the evening of the day of resurrection. In John’s story, the disciples have heard Mary Magdalene’s good news but apparently they have not believed it – the doors are still locked for fear of the Jews. We have noticed John’s theme of “fear of the Jews” which may be speaking to people of his own day at this point as well. In the room Jesus reveals himself to the male disciples just as he did to Mary Magdalene. Now they too rejoice! They join Mary Magdalene in adequate and full belief. In a report that sounds something like Matthew commissioning on the mountain in Galilee, John tells of Jesus commissioning his now believing disciples for mission. They are to join Mary Magdalene as evangelists. John also reports a bestowing of the Holy Spirit upon these disciples. Luke will save that story for a later time after telling of Jesus being present with his followers for forty days following his resurrection (Acts 2). The language John uses in the bestowing of the Holy Spirit is reminiscent of the creation story where God breathes the breath of life into Adam (Genesis 2:7). Here Jesus breathes the Spirit into his followers. But a significant happenstance is reported in the story. Thomas is missing. How will the good news and the commissioning continue? We will meet that story tomorrow.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, April 20, 2014 Read John 20:11-18 Today is Easter Sunday, the day all Christians hail as the most precious of all days. It is the day we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus and the hope of new life in him. We have already spent quite a bit of time looking at the story of the resurrection of Jesus in all four gospels. We have also already looked at the encounter between Jesus and Mary Magdalene so not much more needs to be said. Of all the gospel writers perhaps the story of Mary Magdalene is the one that we might identify with the most. Mary Magdalene presents a very human person blown away by the death of one she loved. She comes to the tomb, not expecting to find the risen Jesus. She comes to mourn the dead. We understand that. In her grief she is suddenly grasped by a truth that changed her life forever. She meets the risen Jesus. And she meets him when he calls her name. There is something important and precious about that. Mary does not recognize Jesus at first. But when he calls her name her eyes are opened. Mary become the first evangelist. A story filled with passionate despair evolves into a story of great joy. As we worship together at Easter we are invited to enter into this great joy – and to hear Jesus call us by name too, changing us forever.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, April 19, 2014 Read John 20:1-10 Today is Holy Saturday – the day the church celebrates the Easter Vigil. In all four gospels this day is the Sabbath. It would have begun on the evening we have come to know as Good Friday and continued until the next evening. Then, at sundown, the first day of the week would begin. So the church has gathered at sundown to celebrate the resurrection. We follow in that tradition. As we have noticed throughout our study of John’s gospel, there are many similarities between all four gospel writers. And there are some significant differences. The same is true when it comes to the story of the resurrection. Let me begin by sharing a part of my own personal journey. I was nurtured in a community that valued the Bible. One of the things I remember my confirmation pastor telling us was that we should believe in God, not because of what he said, but because of what the Bible says and that the Bible is 100% true. The Bible is infallible. The Bible is inerrant. I came to the Bible believing that. Then, I encountered the resurrection stories. And it was a near faith shattering experience for me. If there is any story about which the various books of the Bible agree 100% it ought to be the story of the resurrection. If the various writers can’t get that straight, how can a person believe the rest? Of course, what I discovered was that the four gospel writers do not agree. Some speak of one angel, others of two. Some speak of only one person coming to the tomb and others of a group of women. The angels speak one thing in some and something else in others. What is going on here? What happened to infallibility and inerrancy? Was it all a hoax – something like Santa Claus who I had given up long ago? This was a real challenge for me – as I said a near faith shattering event. I was in college at the time and there were plenty of voices that questioned almost everything and there were moments when I wanted to simply walk away from it all. What I have come to realize much later is that God had a hold on me. God would not let me go. So I struggled with the Bible. How was I to understand it? How was I to reconcile the beliefs that I brought with me to the Bible with what I found there? I was and am convinced that we need to be fiercely honest about the Bible. We can’t just force the Bible to say what we want it to say or to be what we want it to be. My journey eventually led me to attend Luther Seminary. I went there unsure if I was really called to be a pastor and I went there with all of my questions about the Bible. I also went there somewhat skeptical of seminary professors. There was all kinds of skepticism about church leaders as there always is. What I found were people who struggled like me and people who found some answers in taking the Bible just as it is and wrestling with it. I still value the Bible intensely. The Bible is the only source and norm that we have to deal with our struggles. I think we need to take the Bible very seriously and to let the Bible speak for itself. I believe God speaks through the Bible, not in some magical way and not without struggle, but in a real way. I believe God encounters us through the Bible. And I also believe that on one level the Bible is just like any other human endeavor. Real people wrote what they wrote and they are responsible for it. They wrote because they were encountered by God too and they wanted to bear witness to their faith. They wanted to be as creative and successful in their witness as they could be. And today that’s what I find simply fascinating about the Bible. Each author has a story to tell and each author’s story is shaped by their own experience and their own struggles and even their own preconceived notions and beliefs. So we journey together to find truth. I will not let go of the Bible. I know that my understandings are not all correct. I know that I may change my mind about some things as I move forward. But in the meantime I share what I can and I treasure the story. Today, I am not in the least troubled by the many discrepancies I find in the Bible and particularly in the resurrection stories. I believe that underneath each of the stories we hear is a deep truth of God who loves humanity, who raised Jesus from the dead, and who reaches out to all of us calling us to faith. As we begin to analyze the resurrection story we discover that all four gospel writers agree that it was on the first day of the week that followers of Jesus came to the tomb. Mark tells us that it was very early on the first day of the week when the sun had risen (Mark 16:2). Matthew tells us it was as the first day of the week was dawning (Matthew 28:1). Luke tells us it was on the first day of the week at early dawn (Luke 24:10). And, John tells us that it was still dark on the first day of the week (John 20:1). All of these are essentially the same. When it comes to who goes to the tomb the variance becomes much greater. Mark tells us that Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome come to the tomb together (Mark 16:1). These are essentially the same three women who stood at a distance and watched the crucifixion and also saw where Jesus was buried (Mark 15:40, 47). Matthew tells us it was Mary Magdalene and the other Mary who come to the tomb (Matthew 28:1). Earlier Matthew had told us that Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee had watched at a distance and that Mary Magdalene and the other Mary had sat opposite the tomb at the time of Jesus’ burial (Matthew 27:56, 61). Luke simply tells us that the women who followed Jesus from Galilee both witnessed the burial and later returned (Luke 23:55, 24:1). Later Luke identifies those who were at the tomb as Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James and more unspecified women (Luke 24:10). In John the only person who comes to the tomb while it was still dark was Mary Magdalene. The only person named in all four gospel stories is Mary Magdalene. Who the others might have been and even if there were more than Mary Magdalene cannot be determined from reading all four gospels – they simply do not agree. After Mary Magdalene has found the tomb to be empty John tells us that she goes to find the male disciples of Jesus and that Peter and the beloved disciple eventually come and witness the empty tomb. Luke reports a similar response to the women by telling his readers that Peter ran to the tomb and saw that the tomb was empty (Luke 24:12). All four gospels agree that a large stone had been placed at the entrance of the tomb. This would have presented a problem for those who came to visit the tomb and anoint the body of Jesus. All four gospel writers solve the problem in a unique and different way. Mark tells us that the women were concerned about who might roll the stone away but their dilemma is solved when they simply find it has already been rolled away (Mark 16:3). Matthew implies that Mary Magdalene and the other Mary are already at the tomb with the stone covering the entrance when an earthquake occurs and an angel comes from heaven and rolls the stone away (Matthew 28:2). Luke agrees with Mark by simply reporting that the stone had already been rolled away when the women arrive (Luke 24:2). And John also agrees with Mark and Luke that Mary Magdalene finds the stone already rolled back when she arrives. So Matthew presents that most variance. Matthew has already introduced the presence or an angel or angels at the tomb and eventually all four gospel writers will speak of an angel or angels. Mark tells of a “young man” dressed in white siting on the right side inside the tomb (Mark 16:5). We can assume that this “young man” was an angel although Mark may be harkening back to the “young man” at Gethsemane who fled away naked during the arrest of Jesus. Now he is fully clothed. Matthew, like Mark, speaks of one angel who has descended from heaven and rolled back the stone and now sits upon it, apparently outside the tomb (Matthew 28:2). Luke speaks of “two men in dazzling clothes who stood beside the women apparently outside the tomb (Luke 24:4). John does not mention the presence of angels until much later in the scene. Mary Magdalene comes to find the tomb empty and, thinking that someone has stolen the body, reports this to the male disciples. Peter and the beloved disciple come to the tomb and also find it empty and even though they go inside the tomb the do not see any angels. After they have left, Mary Magdalene looks into the tomb once again and then she sees two angels sitting inside the tomb where the body of Jesus had lain. Exactly how many angels there were and where they were located differs in these accounts. They simply do not agree. What the angels say to Mary Magdalene and the other women also differs. In Mark the “young man” tells the women not to be alarmed. They are looking for Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified but he has been raised and is not there. The women are invited to see where Jesus had laid and then are told to go and tell the disciples, and Peter, that Jesus is going ahead of them to Galilee, just as he said he would, and that they will see him there (Mark 16:6-7). Matthew inserts a further description of the angel whose appearance was like lightening and whose clothes were white as snow (a remembrance of the Transfiguration of Jesus) and reports that the guard became like dead men. He then tells us that the angel told the women essentially the same message that Mark had reported, however, Matthew omits any reference to Peter (Matthew 28:3-7). Luke tells us the “two men” ask the women why they are looking for the living among the dead. They tell them that Jesus is not here but has risen and then reminds them of what Jesus had told them while they were in Galilee reprising the passion predictions – the Son of Man must be handed over to sinners, be crucified, and on the third day rise. There is no mention of Jesus appearing in Galilee in Luke’s gospel because Jesus will appear in Jerusalem shortly (Luke 24:5-7). John’s report differs the most. As we have noted the presence and speech of the angels comes later in the scene after Peter and the beloved disciple have been at the tomb and left. Only then does Mary Magdalene see the angels. They ask her why she is weeping and receive her reply that someone had taken the body of Jesus away but the angel’s say no more because at this point Jesus appears to Mary. The angels vanish from the story. The most we can say is that there was an angel or angels who appeared but how many and what they said cannot be determined. The gospel writers simply do not agree. The response of the women to the angels also differs. In Mark, the women are filled with fear and flee from the tomb not saying a word to anyone (Mark 16:8). Matthew tells us that the women run from the tomb in great fear and joy only to run into Jesus who repeats the command to go and tell the male disciples to go to Galilee where they will see Jesus (Matthew 28:8-10). Luke tells us that the women went and told the apostles but they did not believe them thinking the report was an idle tale – though Peter does go to check things out and returns knowing the tomb is indeed empty but he is still filled with amazement and amazement in Luke’s gospel is not a proper response (Luke 24:10-12). Mary Magdalene’s response in John’s gospel is of the highest quality. Once she recognizes that Jesus is present she becomes the first evangelist and goes and tells the disciples that she has seen the Lord! For John, seeing Jesus and believing in him is the whole point of the story. Mary comes to full and adequate belief. Once again the writers simply do not agree regarding the response of the women. The response runs all the way from saying nothing out of fear (Mark) to confessing Jesus as LORD (John). Now that we have heard the varying reports of the four gospel writers we need to focus our attention on John. In some ways John report is the most different. First of all Mary Magdalene is the only woman in John’s gospel and she plays quite a role in the story. She moves from observing the empty tomb and wondering where those who stole the body of Jesus had put him to seeing a pair of angels inside the empty tomb but not being very impressed with them since she repeats her plea to them wondering if perhaps they have taken the body and put it somewhere to bumping into Jesus without realizing that it is Jesus, mistaking him for the gardener, and asking him the same question of whether he might have taken the body and put it somewhere else to the realization that the one who calls her name is Jesus. Mary Magdalene is the main character in the resurrection story – along with Jesus. We will look at Mary’s response a bit more tomorrow. We need to return to John’s report of the reaction of Peter and the beloved disciple to the report of Mary Magdalene that the tomb is empty. John tells us that Peter and the “other disciple” both run to the tomb but the other disciple outruns Peter. At the tomb he waits in deference to Peter, however, who enters the tomb and finds it empty. Inside the tomb Peter discovers a peculiar thing – the wrappings that had been placed around Jesus’ body are laying there but Jesus is gone. Peter comes to no conclusion about all of this. The other disciple, however, sees what Peter saw and believed. How firm and real this belief is, is yet to be determined. John says of both Peter and the beloved disciple that they as yet did not understand the scripture that Jesus must be raised from the dead. They will need the appearance of Jesus for that. So far John has conveyed to his readers the reality of the empty tomb. But that is all that is known for sure. Mary Magdalene persists in her conclusion that someone must have stolen the body of Jesus. She does not profess that Jesus has been raised – it does not enter her mind. And we may well conclude that this thought had not entered Peter’s mind either and perhaps not even the beloved disciple’s mind although John makes that a bit ambiguous by telling his readers that the other disciple believed. The point seems to be that an empty tomb is not enough. More will be needed. And more is provided.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, April 18, 2014 Read John 19:31-42 Today is Good Friday – a day when we gather to contemplate the meaning of the death of Jesus on the cross. We are invited to ponder our response to the crucifixion of Jesus and to linger at the foot of the cross. In John’s gospel we arrive now at the story of the immediate response to the death of Jesus. We discover once again that the story is significantly different from the story we read in the synoptic gospels. Mark and Matthew tell us that at the moment Jesus dies the curtain of the Temple is torn in two from top to bottom. This is the curtain that separated the Holy of Holies from the rest of the structure. No one could enter this place except the high priest and he would enter only once a year on the Day of Atonement – an event that happened in the fall of the year. Luke also tells us about the tearing of the curtain but he places the event just prior to the death of Jesus. The rending of the curtain is crucially important to Mark, Matthew, and Luke. It likely symbolizes for them the “letting loose of God into the world!” Especially for Mark the tearing of the curtain is the counterpart of the rending of the heavens in the baptism of Jesus. Both are meant by Mark to symbolize the coming of God to save his people! It is significant to notice that John does not mention any of this. John has already told his readers that Jesus is the Temple – that came in his moving of the story of the cleansing of the Temple to the beginning of his gospel. Mark, Matthew, and Luke also tell of a Roman centurion who observed Jesus death and makes the first human remark about it. In Mark and Matthew this centurion correctly identifies Jesus as the Son of God – the very first human being to realize and name Jesus as Son of God. Luke changes this slightly and tells us the centurion said that Jesus was innocent. Especially for Mark the words of this centurion are crucial for understanding his gospel – it is only when the Messiah has been crucified and is dead that anyone can truly know who he is! Once again it is significant to notice that John mentions none of this. There are soldiers at the foot of the cross when Jesus dies but they say nothing. It is at this point in Mark’s gospel that Mark identifies some women who are watching from a distance. He tells us that Mary Magdalene is there. He also speaks of a Mary who was the mother of James the Younger and Joses, and a woman named Salome (Mark 15:40). These same women will go to the tomb early on Sunday morning hoping to anoint the body of the dead Jesus with spices. Earlier in the ministry of Jesus, Mark had told of Jesus returning to his hometown of Nazareth where he was eventually rejected. In that passage Mark tells of the family of Jesus who lived at Nazareth and identifies Jesus as the son of Mary and the brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon (Mark 6:3). Is it only coincidence that Mary is identified in both places as the mother of Jesus and the mother of sons named James and Joses? Could it be that the Mary who Mark tells us was observing the crucifixion from a distance was in fact the mother of Jesus? We have heard John identify some women at the foot of the cross. Mary, the mother of Jesus is there. So is Mary Magdalene. Perhaps Mark and John are reflecting a similar tradition that places Mary Magdalene at the cross and also Mary, the mother of Jesus. Mark will make no more use of this reference and one could argue that Mark is not referring to Mary, the mother of Jesus. But it is tempting to make this connection. While Mark and John are significantly different in their approaches they do merge with one another in the telling of the story. Underlying both gospels are the actual events of the powerful action of God in the death of Jesus. Those actual events are at least one step removed from our ability to fully know. Like every event in all of our lives, they have slipped into an unknowable “space in time” where we cannot fully retrieve them. Of course, that does not make them any less true and less powerful. They are no less real. We have noticed that the immediate response to the death of Jesus is quite different in Mark and John. As we listen to John’s story we hear once again a reference to the Day of Preparation. As we have noticed before this puts the crucifixion of Jesus during the day before the Passover was to be observed that evening. That evening would also be the beginning of the Sabbath Day. In this way, John agrees fully with Mark and the others. Jesus died during the day before the Sabbath began. The difference, however, is that Mark and the others view the celebration of Passover to have happened on the previous evening with Jesus dying during the day following Passover. For John the Passover and the Sabbath happened on the same day. John tells his readers that this Sabbath was especially holy because it was a great day of solemnity – it was Passover. And for that reason it was important that the bodies of those who were crucified be removed from the cross. To have them hanging on the cross would have defiled the Passover. Mark will also tell of a Day of Preparation but he adds the caveat that is the Day of Preparation for the Sabbath (Mark 15:42). Mark also tells of the importance of removing the bodies of those who were crucified but this time it is so that the Sabbath not be defiled. In Mark it is Joseph of Arimathea who comes to Pilate to ask permission to remove Jesus’ body from the cross. This same Joseph of Arimathea will show up a bit later in John’s gospel. Mark does not mention the fate of the other two who were crucified with Jesus. Likely we can surmise that they also would have been removed by Joseph of Arimathea, but Mark places the focus on Jesus. John tells his readers that “they” asked Pilate to have the legs of those who were crucified broken. Just who “they” are is ambiguous. Was it the religious leaders? Was it the soldier? Likely John understood it to be the religious leaders. So John tells us that the soldiers go about their duty to break the legs of the crucified. Breaking their legs would have speeded up death since a victim with broken legs could not raise themselves up to breathe. What the soldiers discover is that Jesus has already died. By the way, Mark agrees with this and remarks that Pilate and the soldiers are all surprised to find that Jesus was already dead (Mark 15:44-45). John has far more invested in the fact that Jesus is already dead and that his legs do not need to be broken. First of all John sees this as one more fulfillment of scripture and points his readers to Psalm 69. But even more dramatically is the fact that the bones of the Passover lamb were not to be broken either! Jesus is the Passover Lamb who takes away the sin the world! At this point John adds something that is not mentioned in any of the synoptic gospels. John tells us that one of the soldiers takes his spear and pierces the side of Jesus. On one level the piercing is, of course, to check if Jesus is really dead. I live man would flinch. Jesus is truly dead. But on another level there is something far more dramatic going on. It is clear that John has the book of Zechariah on his mind. Zechariah had spoken of a time when they would look upon the one that they had pierced (Zechariah 12:10). Once again this fulfills the OT. John also tells his readers that when Jesus side is pierced blood and water flow forth. Exactly what this means is at least somewhat ambiguous in John’s gospel. Likely we should connect this with Zechariah 13:1 where we hear of a “fountain open for the house of David.” And from there we should make the connection to Ezekiel and others who speak of a river of God flowing in the new Jerusalem. Likely John also wants his readers to think of the woman at the well who learns that Jesus is the Living Water which rises up to eternal life. And likely John wants his readers to remember Jesus in the Temple at the Feast of Booths transforming the water ceremony and once again claiming that he is the Living Water. John does not make any of this specific. Perhaps he is depending on his readers to do some work of putting things together. At any rate there is symbolic value in the event of the piercing of Jesus and the flowing forth of blood and water. This event of the piercing of Jesus’ side is important to John’s gospel. It is so important that John tells his readers that he received this information from an eye-witness who saw this and whose witness is true and can be believed. Though John does not specifically mention that this eye-witness is the “beloved disciple” we have met along the way we can surmise that this is the case. This witness is the very one who is at the foundation of John’s gospel! We will encounter the validity of his witness again in chapter 21. All of this makes the event of the piercing of Jesus more important. And eye-witness known to John and his community makes the claim. We need to take it that much more seriously. Before we move forward we should note that Matthew adds a story not found in any of the other gospels. Matthew’s story is of a dramatic event in which the bodies of saints of old that have died are raised and they enter the city appearing to many (Matthew 27:52). What happens to them after that is left hanging. The whole story in Matthew is difficult to deal with. And we have also noticed that Luke tells his readers that those who witnessed the death of Jesus leave beating their breasts in despair wondering what they have done. Only Luke provides this information. As we move forward, like Mark and the others John now moves on to the burial of Jesus. There is much in common between John and the synoptic writers. But there are also significant differences. Mark had introduced his readers to Joseph of Arimathea a little earlier by telling his readers that it is Joseph who wants to be sure that the victims of the crucifixion have died and that their bodies can be removed from the cross. All four gospel writers agree that Joseph of Arimathea is a righteous man. Mark, Matthew, and Luke tell us that he was a member of the council and that he had not agreed with the decision to put Jesus to death. John essentially agrees with this appraisal of Joseph. He tells his readers that Joseph was a follower of Jesus, though a secret one because he was afraid of the Jews. John does not mention that Joseph was a member of the council. We have met this idea of followers of Jesus attempting to remain secret followers for fear of the Jews a number of times in John’s gospel. We have also noticed that at times John seems to be speaking more to the community at the time when this gospel was completed than to the actual time of Jesus. That likely is also the case here to some extent. The final editor of John’s gospel is aware of a deadly and painful split between the followers of Jesus and the Jews of the synagogue. He is also apparently aware of some who want to have it both ways – to be followers of Jesus, but secretly, so they can also be members of the Jewish synagogue. John is critical of them – yet there seems to be at least some place for them. After all John describes this Joseph as one of them. And in John’s story Joseph of Arimathea has a partner – Nicodemus who we have met on two previous occasions. Only John tells us that Nicodemus joined Joseph in burying Jesus – in fact only John mentions a character named Nicodemus. Nicodemus has at least been open to Jesus and wants to defend Jesus before the council. We are left wondering about Nicodemus in each of the two previous encounters we have with him. Here, Nicodemus brings an enormous amount of spices to wrap with the body of Jesus. And together with Joseph he arranges for a proper burial of Jesus. Are we to understand this as the final redemption of Nicodemus? Has Nicodemus finally come to firm and adequate belief in Jesus? We would like to say yes, but John leaves us once again with an ambiguous outcome. Perhaps this has more to do with the time of the final editing of this gospel too. The outcome of “secret disciples” is perhaps still unknown – and Joseph and Nicodemus represent these “secret disciples.”

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, April 17, 2014 Read John 19:23-30 Today is Maundy Thursday. Typically, we find ourselves reading John 13 as we gather for worship on this day and we are reminded of Jesus washing the feet of his disciples and giving them the commandment that they should love one another – that they should do as he has done. We have already looked at the story of the foot washing. In many ways that story is about creating a new community in the aftermath of the death/resurrection/ascension of Jesus. Our story for today also centers on the creating of a new community – the community of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the disciple who Jesus loved. This is a story that only John tells us. It is a story filled with tenderness and passion and reflects John’s great concern for the church. In this way it also reflects Jesus’ great concern for the church after he has returned to his father. That was the major concern of Jesus in the words attached to the meal scene in John’s gospel. As we listen to the story today, we observe that it is closely connected with the story told in the synoptic gospels. All four stories tell of the dividing of Jesus’ clothing by the soldiers. John provides a bit more detail than the others commenting upon the tunic without seam. Some have sought symbolic meaning in this seamless tunic. Perhaps there is something to be found in that but that may also be stretching John’s story a bit. But aside from the story of the dividing of Jesus’ clothing John and the synoptic writers go in very different directions. The synoptic gospels will now tell about the mocking of Jesus as he hangs dying upon the cross. Jesus is surrounded by his enemies – none of his friends are near. As I mentioned, only John tells the story of the encounter at the foot of the cross between Jesus, Mary, and the disciple who Jesus loved. Mark has made it abundantly clear that all of the disciples had abandoned Jesus and fled following his arrest in the garden. The best Mark can do is tell his readers that some women looked on from a distance (Mark 15:40). Matthew follows Mark very closely. Luke provides a little more leeway by telling his readers that once the people around the cross saw that Jesus had died they left beating their breasts in agony and that Jesus’ acquaintances and the women stood at a distance and watched what had happened (Luke 23:49). Luke gives the impression that some of the men may have also been looking on from a distance. John is very different. We remember that John does not tell his readers that the disciples abandoned Jesus and fled when he was arrested. Instead, Jesus had asked that they be released and let go since it was he that they were after. Apparently that is what happened in John’s gospel. Now some very important people show up at the foot of the cross. Their encounter is filled with tenderness and concern. The women who are at the foot of the cross are identified by John as “his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.” Most likely John is referring to four women, though one could decide that there are only three – his mother whose name is Mary, his mother’s sister who was also named Mary who was the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. That would make for the unusual situation that there were two Marys in the same family. It is better if we understand Mary’s sister as unnamed making four women. There is also someone else who is very important to John’s gospel present – the disciple whom Jesus loved. We have met this disciple before in John’s gospel. He is specifically referred to during the meal scene as a disciple who was next to Jesus and who asked Jesus who was to betray him and was told that the one who Jesus gave the bread he had dipped in the dish was the one. The beloved disciple will play a greater role as John’s gospel comes to a close. We wish we could identify this beloved disciple – but John never reveals his identity to us. Perhaps it would be good to review where and when we have encountered this beloved disciple in John’s gospel. If we take the most expansive references, it is likely that the unnamed disciple at the very beginning of John’s gospel is the first reference to this disciple (John 1:35-42). Only Andrew is identified as one of the two who first followed Jesus. The reference to Lazarus as the disciple who Jesus loved adds confusion to the story (John 11). We likely should not include Lazarus in the references to the beloved disciple given the information in the rest of the gospel. The next reference to the disciple who Jesus loved comes at the meal (John 13:23). This time he is referred to specifically as the “beloved disciple.” The next time we meet an unnamed disciple is after the arrest of Jesus when Peter is given passage into the courtyard of the high priest by an unnamed disciple who is known to the high priest (John 18:15). It is mostly this reference that eliminated Lazarus. Our passage for today is the next reference to the beloved disciple – he is with Mary at the cross. At the time when Jesus dies and his body is pierced and blood and water flow forth it is the beloved disciple whose testimony makes certain the fact that this happened. Later in Galilee Jesus will encounter seven disciples, two of whom are not named. It is likely that the beloved disciple was one of those two unnamed disciple since the story ends with a reference to the beloved disciple who people mistakenly thought would not die before Jesus’ coming yet who has apparently died. It is this beloved disciple whose testimony is the foundation of John’s gospel (John 21). I wish we could nail down a name – but that seems impossible. At best we can eliminate some candidates – Lazarus as stated above and likely John the son of Zebedee, even though tradition has identified him as John, can likely be eliminated. In fact, none of the disciples we meet in the synoptic gospels are very good candidates – none would be known to the high priest! So we are stuck without an answer. But that is okay! It may add to the mystery of John’s gospel but we can deal with mystery. The encounter between the beloved disciple and Mary the mother of Jesus is what is really most important in this story. The story reveals the deep concern of Jesus for both his mother and for his followers. And they are given to one another. A new community is born. Like in the foot washing scene, a new community of love is what is at stake in the encounter. Jesus is caring for his own! And the beloved disciple and Mary do what Jesus asks. They care for one another. We may have noticed that Mary is somewhat absent from the synoptic gospel stories. She likely was a part of the community from which the gospel of John comes to us. We cannot fully define the relationship between the community that produced John’s gospel and the communities that produced Mark, Matthew, and Luke. It is most likely that the communities of Mark, Matthew, and Luke were more closely connected with one another than any of them were with the community of John. It’s likely that there was little hostility between all these communities and that all eventually merged into the community of the church as we know it from later history. But to think of an early time when there were varieties of communities is fascinating and hopeful. As we return to the story, we notice a couple of other connections. All four gospel writers tell of the wine offered to Jesus. Mark tells us that wine was offered at the beginning of the crucifixion and then later when Jesus cried out near the end. The first offer was likely an anesthetic potion meant to make the crucifixion less painful. The second was really an attempt to keep Jesus alive a while longer to see if Elijah would come since the hearer mistakenly thought Jesus was calling for Elijah when he cried out in despair – “My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me?” In John’s gospel it is Jesus who asks for the wine in order to fulfill the scripture. The reference is to Psalm 69. For those who seek symbolic meaning in John’s gospel the thirsting of Jesus is a great reference to the thirsting of God for his people. That image is a powerful one. The actual death of Jesus is told in significantly different ways in the gospels. In Mark and Matthew, the death of Jesus is one of abandonment. Jesus is abandoned and cries out in despair. The power of the crucified Messiah is most dramatically portrayed in their scene. Luke has softened the scene somewhat with Jesus dying in peace surrendering his spirit to God. In John, the death of Jesus is a powerful expression of victory. In John, Jesus dies with the words “It is finished!” ringing from his lips. Mission accomplished! In John, Jesus remains in control from beginning to end – he lays down his life and he will take it up again. Jesus’ death in John’s gospel is no tragedy – he is not a victim but the victor! This has been John’s theme throughout his gospel. Jesus crucifixion is his glorification! We might wonder why the story is told in these different ways. We may wonder what “really happened.” But that is the wrong question. All of these accounts are true and they speak truth powerfully to those who hear. We need the witness of each to fully comprehend the meaning of the death of Jesus.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, April 16, 2014 Read Zechariah 13:1-6 One of the more peculiar things that John tells his readers is that when the side of Jesus was pierced blood and water flowed forth. We will hear that story soon. Our purpose in listening to Zechariah today is that he also tells of a fountain that will flow forth. Most likely OT passages like this one had some influence upon the gospel writers. We have heard Jesus say earlier that he is the living water. His words are connected to other OT passage as well, but most likely also to this one.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, April 15, 2014 Read Zechariah 12:1-14 The connection to John’s gospel becomes even clearer in today’s reading as we hear about the mourning of one who has been pierced. We will read later in John’s gospel of the piercing of the side of Jesus. We can read those words in light of what we have heard from Zechariah.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, April 13, 2014 Read John 12:12-17 Today is Palm Sunday. We have already looked at and discussed this passage from John 12. We are invited today to review what was said at that time as we celebrate together the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, April 12, 2014 Read Psalm 34 Psalm 34 is even more remote to most of us. At first reading it may seem that this psalm isn’t much like Psalm 22 or Psalm 69. It is a far more upbeat psalm. Yet, as we will discover a little later in John’s gospel this psalm played a part as he references the thought that not one of Jesus’ bones were broken (Psalm 34:20 = John19:36). It is clear that the OT has an influence on how the gospel writers choose to tell the story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, April 11, 2014 Read Psalm 69 Psalm 69 is less familiar to most of us. Yet, as we read it we can see how this psalm would have also been helpful for the earliest followers of Jesus. It speaks of an innocent one who is on the verge of being swallowed up by those who attack him. And, if we listen closer, we hear of the offer of sour wine at the foot of the cross and the offer of vinegar to drink in this psalm – verse 21. The other gospel writers, particularly Luke, made even more use of this psalm. The point is for us to recognize how the earliest followers read psalms like this one through the lens of the death and resurrection of Jesus and then let the psalm color their telling of the story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, April 10, 2014 Read Psalm 22 There are many places that we could turn in the OT to investigate how the first followers of Jesus both read the OT through the lens of the experience of Jesus’ death and resurrection and then shaped their stories on the basis of what they read in the OT. Of all those places it is likely that Psalm 22 was the most valuable to them and shaped their understanding more than any other part of the OT. Christian readers cannot read Psalm 22 without visualizing Jesus on the cross. So many things in Psalm 22 touch the story of Jesus –the mocking and surrounding of this suffering one, the dividing up of the victims clothing among themselves, the agonizing cry of despair (not part of John’s story, however) are the most compelling. In different ways, Psalm 22 proved of great value to both Mark and the traditions that follow him in Matthew and Luke and also to John and those who followed his view. I have speculated, along with most other interpreters of the gospels, that a “Passion Narrative” likely preceded both Mark and John. That two very different gospel stories should have merged into one basic story with the same order lead one to such a conclusion. That suggests, of course, that Psalm 22 was valuable to those earliest Christians who preceded both Mark and John. In the traditions that both received they likely found language linked to Psalm 22. How valuable it must have been to those earliest followers, who were almost exclusively Jewish, to find the story of Jesus in the words of the OT – in a psalm like Psalm 22! We can treasure this psalm too.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, April 9, 2014 Read John 19:17-22 We need to note that John’s story has merged once again with the story told in the synoptic gospels with some variations. The scene now moves to the place of crucifixion. It is only after the sentence of death has been given by Pilate that Mark and Matthew tell of Jesus being mocked by the soldiers and dressed in a purple cloak and crowned with thorns. John had placed this scene within the trial before Pilate. Luke does not mention the purple cloak and has mentioned a mocking of Jesus earlier but it seems far less brutal in Luke’s story. On the way to the cross Mark, Matthew, and Luke tell of a man named Simon of Cyrene who was compelled to carry Jesus’ cross behind him. It is supposed by most readers that Jesus is too weak from the flogging he endured to bear his own cross. None of the gospel writers specifically tell us this. In fact, in John’s gospel Simon is not mentioned and John tells us explicitly that Jesus bears his own cross. Jesus is in control of what is happening to him in John’s gospel – he is not weak in any way. Jesus is not a victim. Jesus is in charge of what is happening. Luke interjects something none of the other gospel writers mention. He tells of women of Jerusalem weeping for Jesus as he journeys the final steps to the cross. Jesus tells them not to weep for him but for themselves. John does not mention these women. All four gospel writers identify the place of crucifixion to be Golgotha which all identify as the “Place of the Skull” and must have been a well-known site just outside the city limits of Jerusalem. The modern Church of the Holy Sepulcher is located over what is the traditional site of the crucifixion. That may well be the case though we cannot be certain. Regardless, it is likely the crucifixion site was on the Northwestern side of the city and in a location where many people would have passed by. John makes the most of this though the others also point to it. All four gospel writers tell of an inscription that is placed on the cross. It was the usual practice to write the crime that had been committed on this sign. In this case the crime identified is that Jesus claimed to be the “King of the Jews.” The sign is another of the ironic characteristics of this scene. Pilate, of course, wrote that Jesus was the “King of the Jews” to mock both Jesus and the Jewish leaders and people. We can imagine his sinister grin as he put this label on this pathetic and helpless one. Pilate knew that Jesus was innocent, that he was not violent, and likely viewed Jesus as a weakling. Just as he may have pointed to Jesus, “the King,” sitting on the judgment seat and said, “see your king,” here too he could point at the cross and at Jesus and say, “this is your king – see what happens to those who attempt to be king in my kingdom!” John makes a great deal out of this sign and the debate between Pilate and the religious authorities about what it said. The religious authorities wanted Pilate to write that Jesus, who they did not think was the king either, had claimed to be king. But Pilate wanted to make it clear that this one really was as much of king as the Jewish people would ever know! But the grand irony in it all is that Jesus is indeed the KING! So Pilates words sound a little like the words of the high priest when he said that it was better for one man to die than for the whole nation to perish. His words were ironically true too. So with the eyes of faith the followers of Jesus are enabled to “see” that Jesus is the king while all other human eyes see only a pathetic man slain in the wake of a political battle between Pilate and the Jews. But John’s readers know that Jesus is no victim! He lays down his life of his own accord – and he will take it up again. Almost in passing, John makes the remark that Jesus was crucified between two others. John makes no further identification of them. Mark, Matthew, and Luke tell their readers that these other two were bandits. Luke makes the most of these others by telling of a dialogue between Jesus and them. The contrast in Luke’s gospel between these two criminals helps Luke to suggest two responses we might make to Jesus. None of this is found in John. We might notice that something else is missing from John’s account. There are no religious leaders who mock Jesus while he is hanging on the cross. There is no crowd to jeer at him. No one suggests to Jesus that if he really is the Messiah he should come down from the cross. The crucifixion scene in John’s gospel is almost serene. We might imagine that there was a good deal of silence – a silence broken only by Jesus who initiates communication first with his mother and the beloved disciple and then with the soldiers when he says that he is thirsty and received a drink of wine to fulfill the scripture. And the final words of Jesus are a shout of victory – mission accomplished! We might be bothered by all these little differences that we encounter as we carefully study the story in each gospel. That would be especially bothersome if we were to think that the inspiration of scripture has to do with “historical accuracy” or that only the Holy Spirit is responsible for what is written. Reading the story carefully ought to lead us to come to the conclusion that we have to give responsibility to each writer too. There have been times in the history of the church when people have argued for “verbal inspiration” which essentially meant that the writers were only vessels who contributed nothing to the process. That simply will not hold up. So understanding how the Bible is the Word of God is more complicated and challenging. But carefully listening to each story is far better than simply trying to smooth things over. Personally, I am not bothered in the least by all these little differences. I find them fascinating and engaging. They make the whole story far more important and valuable to me. We’re going to step away from John’s gospel for a few days to listen to some Psalms and a few chapters from the OT book of Zechariah. The more I have dug into the gospel stories the more convinced I have become that these first writers, in their attempts to understand Jesus, went to the OT to find places that spoke to the situation. They read the OT through the lens of the death and resurrection of Jesus and then they let the OT shape the way in which they told the story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, April 8, 2014 Read John 19:13-16 The seventh and final scene takes place once again outside of Pilate’s headquarters. The scene is filled with irony. Pilate brings Jesus outside. At this point John’s gospel provides two ways of reading. The first way of reading the text would be that Pilate brought Jesus outside and sat Jesus on the judgment seat. That is where the king would sit. Was John subtly telling his readers that Jesus really was the king sitting in judgment? Is the scene ironic? A second way to read the text is to read that Pilate came and sat on the judgment seat to pass judgment on Jesus. Either reading is possible. I think it is likely that John wants his readers to hear the first – Jesus the true King sits on the judgment seat. Jesus is the one in control. If Jesus was the one sitting on the judgment seat then Pilate’s words make more sense. He points at Jesus and says, “Here is you king.” Of course, Pilate’s words are ironic too. Pilate thinks this helpless, beaten, pathetic one is the best king the Jews could muster – and he really is no king. Placing Jesus on the judgment seat was a mockery by Pilate. He was enjoying once again making a mockery of Jesus and of the Jews. At this point in his story John provides his readers with a piece of crucial information. He tells us that it was the Day of Preparation – the day to prepare for the coming Passover that evening. And he also tells us that it was about noon. It was at noon on the Day of Preparation that the priests in the Temple would begin killing the lambs to be used in the Passover Supper that evening. It was at about noon that Jesus, “the Lamb of God” was doomed to death. Mark tells his readers that it was about 9:00 in the morning when Jesus was crucified (Mark 15:25). Then Mark tells his readers that at noon darkness came over the whole land (Mark 15:33). John never mentions the darkness! Finally Mark tells his readers that at about 3:00 in the afternoon Jesus cries out in abandonment and breathes his last (Mark 15:34). John does not specify when any of the other details occurred. His only reference is to noon on the Day of Preparation which would have been a day earlier than the story in Mark. This only adds weight to the claim that John wants his readers to be thinking of the death of Jesus as coinciding with the killing of the Passover lambs! Mark does not seem to have much invested in describing the crucifixion of Jesus as lasting about six hours. It likely may have taken at least that long for a crucified person to die. Some were known to live for a few days as they hung from the cross. Crucifixion was a cruel death – a death through which the Romans wanted to send a message – don’t be or do what this crucified one did. In the political game Pilate gets the last words. The Jewish leaders betray their own religious faith when they cry out – “We have no king but Caesar!” Isn’t God supposed to be the King? And so Jesus in handed over to be crucified. The whole story of the trial of Jesus before Pilate is mostly unique to John. The synoptic writers know of such a trial but the details are far fewer and the trial is less important to them. The main trial in the synoptic gospels is before the Jewish Council. The trial scene before Pilate in John is creatively written. Certainly there is history behind it but John has taken some liberties to proclaim the themes that are important to him.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, April 7, 2014 Read John 19:8-12 The sixth scene takes place once more inside of Pilate’s headquarters. John tells us that upon hearing that Jesus had claimed to be the Son of God, Pilate is “more afraid than ever.” Was Pilate really afraid? I’ve been arguing that Pilate was not one bit interested in truth or justice. That is the picture of Pilate that every other piece of information from the ancient world would have us believe. So, why would John tell us that Pilate was now afraid? Perhaps the best reason is that picturing even Pilate as filled with fear only serves to magnify the dignity of Jesus and to make it clear that Jesus is still in control of his fate. Remember that is one of the things John has made clear to his readers – no one takes Jesus’ life from him, he will lay it down on his own accord. Even the sinister, cruel and evil Pilate is not really in control here. Or, maybe Pilate was really afraid that Jesus might be the real thing. This one statement of John does not fit the picture we have been painting of Pilate nor does it fit the rest of history regarding Pilate. Maybe we will never know exactly what was going on inside of Pilate’s mind. Inside the headquarters there is more talk between Pilate and Jesus – and once again the dialogue serves to lift up some of John’s important themes. Pilate asks the only question worth asking when it comes to Jesus – “Where are you from?” Strikingly, John now tells us Jesus makes no answer. This is the way in which the synoptic writers have portrayed Jesus all along. Is John aware of that tradition too? Where is Jesus from? Readers of John’s gospel know well by now that Jesus is from above. But Jesus has already said as much to Pilate earlier when he said, “My kingdom is not of this world,” and Pilate would not listen. Now Jesus only reminds Pilate who is really in control of things. Jesus remains in control – another of John’s themes. John tells us now that Pilate tried again to set Jesus free. But now it is the Jewish leaders who remind Pilate that if he does not condemn Jesus they will report him to the emperor. They know how to use political power too.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, April 6, 2014 Read John 19:1-7 The fourth scene happens once again inside Pilate’s headquarters. Pilate orders Jesus to be flogged. So much for justice. Pilate could care less. And the soldiers make a mockery both of Jesus and of the Jews. They dress Jesus up in a king’s garment and make mocking gestures of homage to him. Some king! The fifth scene takes place as Pilate goes back outside, bringing the humiliated and beaten Jesus with him. This is what happens to anyone who thinks he can be king. Pilate wants them all to see the brutality of his force. He knows Jesus is not really the king of the Jews but that does not prevent him from treating him with brutality. For a second time Pilate tells the Jews that he can find no case against Jesus. One can only imagine the dread that now enters these Jewish leaders. Is Pilate going to turn Jesus loose? I think we need to think of Pilate once again at his evil and sinister worst. He is not worrying about justice but enjoying humiliating both Jesus and his Jewish accusers. In desperation the Jewish religious leaders cry out for Jesus to be crucified. Of course we are aware that John has let us see that in their cry that Jesus be “lifted up” they may just have ironically been saying far more then they meant to say. And at this point they say something very important about Jesus that has not been a part of the scene to this point. They tell Pilate that their real motive is that Jesus has claimed to be the Son of God.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, April 5, 2014 Read John 18:28-40 John turns now to the only trial of Jesus in his gospel – the trial of Jesus before Pilate. The trial scene runs from John 18:28 through John 19:16 and is one continuous story. The trial before Pilate is a very skillfully and carefully written story. There are seven scenes that portray Pilate moving from inside his palace to the courtyard outside and back again. The whole scene proclaims the greatness of Jesus and the “smallness” of Pilate. Pilate is not in control. Jesus is. John begins by telling us that morning is dawning when Caiaphas delivers Jesus to the headquarters of Pilate. The Jewish leaders have a huge problem. This morning is the morning of the day that they will celebrate Passover in the coming evening. Once again we are confronted with the stark reality that Jesus could not have celebrated the Passover with his disciples at the supper the previous evening in John’s storyline. Jesus will not celebrate Passover. He will be killed first. But, the Jewish religious leaders will celebrate Passover – but only if they can maintain religious purity. To enter Pilate’s headquarters would have meant becoming ritually defiled so they wait outside. That someone of the stature of Pilate would have obliged their desire is highly unusual. We will need to ponder the whole scene regarding Pilate once we have heard the whole story of the event. So the first of seven scenes takes place just outside of Pilate’s headquarters. We need to take a minute to think about just where Pilate’s headquarters was located. There are two possibilities. One would have been at the Antonio Fortress which was just to the north of the Temple. Roman soldiers were stationed there to maintain order. Or, more likely, Pilate was at a palace Herod the Great had built for himself on the lush western side of Jerusalem. Once the Romans had put a governor in charge of Judea and Jerusalem instead of a Jewish ruler like Herod Antipas who ruled in Galilee, that Roman governor had taken over Herod’s palace as his headquarters in Jerusalem. Most of the time the Roman Governor lived at Caesarea on the Mediterranean Sea, but when he was in Jerusalem he stayed at Herod’s Palace. So it’s likely that the scene takes place there. Pilate asks the Jewish religious leaders what the charge against Jesus is. They give no direct answer but simply say that if the man were not a criminal they would not have brought him to Pilate. They expect Pilate to simply take their word for it. Pilate doesn’t bite. He tells them to take the man and judge him according to their law. But the religious leaders persist. They make a claim that they are not permitted to put anyone to death. This claim is highly suspect. They could have had Jesus stoned. Not long into the future Stephen will be stoned and there seems to be no problem with needing Roman permission. It is the type of death that is at question. The Jewish religious leaders do not have the right to crucify. Only the Romans had that power. So, we might wonder why they are intent on having Jesus crucified. Was it really because Jesus had said that was the method by which he would die – he would be “lifted up” which is one of those words with two meanings. John seems to imply that it really was Jesus who was controlling the outcome even here – “this was to fulfill what Jesus had said when he indicated the kind of death he was to die!” The way in which John tells this story indicates that there is more going on than the eye might see. Jesus is in control. He will die in the way in which he desires. The second scene moves inside Pilate’s headquarters. Pilate decides to interrogate Jesus himself. His first question cuts to the heart of the issue – “is Jesus the King of Jews?” We would do well to imagine Pilate asking this question with a smirk on his mouth. Jesus looks like that last thing but a king. It is likely that Pilate decides at this point to enjoy making fun of the Jewish leaders. It is very doubtful that his interrogation is genuine. Before we proceed further we need to note that Mark, Matthew, and Luke also tell of a trial of Jesus before Pilate. As we have noted the four gospel writers have merged in the telling of the story. But the response of Jesus before Pilate is very different in Mark, Matthew, and Luke. When asked by Pilate if he is the king of the Jews, Jesus responds in a very ambiguous way – “You say so.” And then Mark, Matthew and Luke make a point of telling their readers that Jesus refuses to say another word to Pilate. Their whole point is that Jesus is silent before Pilate – and Pilate is left wondering what this means. Mark, Matthew, and Luke are likely thinking of Isaiah’s words of one who like a sheep before the shearer is dumb (Isaiah 53:7). So Jesus says not a word. In John’s story Jesus does plenty of talking. The encounter between Jesus and Pilate is a classic expression of many of the themes in John’s gospel. Jesus is not of this world. Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world either. Yet, he was born for this very moment. Pilate latches on the notion that Jesus has a kingdom and thus must be a king but he completely misunderstands what Jesus is saying. Sometimes the encounter between Jesus and Pilate is viewed as a genuine search for truth. I think viewing this encounter in this way does not bear the weight of all the other information we know about Pilate. He was a brutal, evil man. He was so brutal that eventually the Romans chose to remove him from power. His sinister nature caused too much trouble. So here too I think we should not imagine that Pilate was genuinely searching for truth. If anything he was mocking such a thing as “Truth.” So his response to Jesus, “What is truth?” ought to be heard as a put-down and not a real question. And throughout all of this Pilate ought to be viewed as someone who is only playing with both Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders. The third scene reinforces this notion. Pilate knows that Jesus is innocent. But he does not care about Jesus and he does not care about justice. He thinks up a plot that will incriminate the Jewish accusers. Pilate knows of a real mobster named Barabbas who he has locked away in his jail. Before Pilate is helpless Jesus (his opinion of him) and Barabbas (a real man in Pilate’s opinion). Pilate knows the Jewish leaders will choose to betray Jesus – so he maneuvers them into participating in Barabbas’ crime by choosing Barabbas over Jesus. The actions of Pilate are pure manipulation. And he is having a wonderful time doing it!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, April 4, 2014 Read John 18:25-27 John now returns to the courtyard to tell of the final two denials of Jesus by Peter. John’s skill as a writer shines in his use of these two stories. By intertwining them John skillfully contrasts the faithfulness of Jesus and the faithlessness of Peter. Jesus is not on trial but Peter is! As readers of John’s gospel we already know that Peter will fail. Jesus has said he would. And Peter does. Jesus had also told Peter that his denial would happen before the cock crows. Once the last denial has happened the cock does crow. John does not tell us that Peter left the scene weeping. He simply removes Peter from the scene until the empty tomb scene. John will pick up the three denials much later in his gospel in the resurrection appearance when Jesus will ask Peter three times if his loves him. That will be Peter’s redemption.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, April 3, 2014 Read 18:19-24 John returns to tell of the encounter between Jesus and the high priest. As we noted earlier, it is important that we notice that the only one of significance that is present is Annas. This is no trial of Jesus before the Jewish council. In fact, John uses this story to proclaim that Jesus has spoken openly throughout his ministry and that no one has an excuse for not knowing what Jesus has said or done. At the end of the encounter Jesus is bound by Annas and sent on to Caiaphas who will shortly bring him to Pilate.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, April 2, 2014 Read John 18:15-18 We need to recall that Mark, Matthew, and Luke had all spoken of Peter following at a distance as Jesus is brought to the house of the high priest. All of them speak of Peter entering, by himself, into the courtyard and warming himself by the fire. That is where Mark and Matthew leave it at this time – Luke goes on to tell of the denial by Peter. John’s story is significantly different at this point. John tells us that Peter was not alone in following Jesus to the home of the high priest but “another disciple” who is unidentified also follows. Another disciple, the disciple who Jesus loved, will follow Peter to the empty tomb when Mary Magdalene comes with her “good news” of seeing Jesus. Here, this unidentified disciple facilitates Peter’s entry into the courtyard since he was “known to the high priest.” This is a rather striking piece of information. We could only wish that John would have given the identity of this other disciple. But John chooses to leave us with a mystery. This is not the first time John has done that. He has flirted with an unnamed disciple for some time. We first hear of an unnamed disciple in the first five followers of Jesus back at the time when John the Baptist first identifies Jesus as the “lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” And, we have the “disciple who Jesus loved” present at the supper. Are we to think of the unnamed person in all of these accounts as the same person? Is this the “disciple who Jesus loved?” John does not say. If we decide that the unnamed disciple in each of the instances in John’s gospel and the disciple who Jesus loved are the same person, then it is highly likely that we can eliminate both Lazarus and John, the son of Zebedee, as a candidate for this person. It is hard to imagine either Lazarus or John, the son of Zebedee, as being “known to the high priest.” Yet, it is more likely than not that John has the same person in mind. The mystery of the unnamed disciple, the disciple who Jesus loved, the eye-witness behind the gospel of John continues to grow! Once inside the courtyard, the unnamed disciple disappears and Peter is left alone. He will not be mentioned again in this part of the story. We are left wondering where he is. Did he go inside the high priest’s house? Did he leave? John does not say. At this point John skillfully tells of the first instance of Peter’s denial. He will pick up the remainder of the story of denial shortly.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, April 1, 2014 Read John 18:12-14 As we have noted earlier, all four gospel writers have merges in their telling of the story at this point. Following his arrest, all four gospel writers tell us that Jesus was brought to the home of the high priest. Mark does not identify who the high priest was and proceeds to speak of a gathering of all the chief priests, the elders and the council who put Jesus on trial. Matthew follows Mark quite closely but he does identify the high priest as Caiaphas. Matthew also tells of an immediate trial of Jesus before the council. Luke does not identify who the high priest was but simply that Jesus was brought to his house. For Luke, the trial does not begin until the morning. Mark, Matthew, and Luke all insert a reference to Peter following at a distance. Mark and Matthew speak no more of Peter until after the trial of Jesus is complete and then tell of his denial. Luke proceeds directly from telling of Jesus being brought to the house of the high priest to Peter’s betrayal and then will return to tell of the trial of Jesus before the council the next morning. Only John tells of Jesus being brought to the home of Annas who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas. Annas had been the high priest for a number of years prior to this time, but was deposed in favor of another man who was in turn replaced by Caiaphas. The Roman governor had jurisdiction over who was the high priest and apparently Annas and his family had fallen out of favor for a time and then came back into favor when Caiaphas became high priest – it was a family affair. Actually John says something rather peculiar when he speaks of Caiaphas as “the high priest that year” as if the high priest changed from year to year. That was not the case. The high priest served multiple years at the discretion of the governor. Caiaphas was not only the priest “that year” but for a number of years. This language may hint that the author of John was not as familiar with Jewish practice as we might think. The delivery of Jesus to the home of the high priest does not result in a trial before a Jewish council in John’s gospel. That trial, we remember, has already happened in the aftermath of the raising of Lazarus (John 11:45-53). John reminds his readers of that trial at this point and of Caiaphas’ ironic remark that “it is better for one man to die than for the whole nation to perish.” It is important that we highlight that John does not tell of a trial of Jesus before the religious council. The only ones present are the high priests, Annas and Caiaphas.