2024, December 22 ~ Micah 5:2-5a; Hebrews 10:5-10; Luke 1:39-55
TODAY’S READINGS IN CONTEXT
DECEMBER 22, 2024
Micah 5:2-5a
Reading
2 You, O Bethlehem of Ephrathah, who are one of the little clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to rule in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days.
3 Therefore he shall give them up until the time when she who is in labor has brought forth;
then the rest of his kindred shall return to the people of Israel.
4 And he shall stand and feed his flock in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God. And they shall live secure, for now he shall be great to the ends of the earth;
5 and he shall be the one of peace.
Commentary
Micah was among the earliest of the “Minor Prophets” – the 12 prophets whose works are much shorter than those of the “Major Prophets” (Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel) and are found in a single scroll.
Micah was a prophet (one who spoke for YHWH) to Judea after Northern Israel (Samaria) had been conquered by the Assyrians in 722 BCE (an event to which Micah refers in 1:6). Most scholars therefore date Micah’s prophesies to the period from 720 to 700 BCE, a time when the Assyrians were threatening to conquer Judea. The New Oxford Annotated Bible points out that there are some portions in Chapters 4 and 7 that relate to the Babylonian Exile (586-539) and the Postexilic period, and that Chapters 1-3 of Micah form the oldest core of the book.
Micah is seen as a younger contemporary of Isaiah of Jerusalem (also known as “First Isaiah”) who also spoke of an ideal king coming from the House of David (Is. 7:14).
The New Jerome Biblical Commentary observes that Micah’s preaching was concerned with sin and punishment, not with political or cultic matters, and that he was “preoccupied with social justice and did not fear princes, prophets or priests.” The NJBC states, “Micah is concerned with the people’s rejection of God. Sin is the reason for the coming punishment. The Assyrian king is but the unconscious instrument of God’s wrath.”
This short book is divided into three sections: oracles of judgment and condemnation against Jerusalem and its leaders for their corruption and pretensions (Ch. 1-3); oracles of hope in which Jerusalem would be restored to righteousness (right relationship with YHWH) (Ch. 4-5); and a lawsuit by God, a judgment by God, and a lament that moved to hope (Ch. 6-7).
In today’s reading from Chapter 5, Micah offered a Messianic poem and said that a new David would come from Bethlehem of Ephrathah. (Ephrathah was the name of a clan in Judea, and a region that included Bethlehem.) The Jewish Study Bible notes that the phrase “until she who is to bear has borne” (v.2) (“until the time when she who is in labor has brought forth” in the NRSV) has traditionally been interpreted to focus on comparisons between the birth pangs of a woman and the hardship of Israel prior to the coming of the Messiah.
The new David would feed his flock (v.4) and they would be secure in the peace that the new David would bring (v.5).
Hebrews 10:5-10
Reading
5 When Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body you have prepared for me;
6 in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure.
7 Then I said, ‘See, God, I have come to do your will, O God’ (in the scroll of the book it is written of me).”
8 When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), 9 then he added, “See, I have come to do your will.” He abolishes the first in order to establish the second. 10 And it is by God’s will that we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Commentary
The Letter to the Hebrews was an anonymous sermon addressed to both Jewish and Gentile Jesus Followers which urged them to maintain their Faith in the face of persecution.
Although the Letter to the Hebrews is sometimes attributed to Paul, most scholars agree that it was written some time after Paul’s death in 63 CE, but before 100 CE. The letter introduced a number of important theological themes. The first four chapters explored the word of God spoken through the Son.
The Jewish Annotated New Testament observes that Hebrews has a Platonic philosophical orientation resembling that of Philo of Alexandria and that it contains the New Testament’s most sophisticated Greek.
The NOAB and The JANT agree that the author sought both to ground his arguments in scripture (using the Septuagint) to argue that Jesus is superior to Jewish traditions. The JANT states: “Hebrews offers a distinct and elevated Christology. As the Son of God, Jesus is superior to all other beings, including angels — he is uncreated, immortal, and permanent. He is also superior to all biblical heroes, including Moses and Abraham, as well as institutions like the Levitical priesthood. As both perfect sacrifice and heavenly priest who intercedes for humans, Jesus supersedes the Jewish sacrificial system, rendering it obsolete.”
The JANT continues: “Because Hebrews argues for Jesus’ superiority over all else and the obsolescence of the covenant God made with Moses at Mount Sinai, it expresses what scholars call supersessionist theology. Supersessionism is the idea that Christ’s entry into human history replaces all that has come before, including God’s unique covenant bond with Israel. The same idea is sometimes referred to as rejection/replacement theology.”
In First Century Greek, there were no punctuation or quotation marks, their addition in the NRSV are interpretive acts by the translators.
In the verses before today’s reading, the author of the Letter used language reminiscent of Plato’s Republic in saying the law “has only the shadow of the good things to come and not the form of these realities.” (v.1) He noted that in Judaism there is an annual reminder of one’s sins (on Yom Kippur). For this reason, the sacrifices offered at the Temple were not “perfect” [complete] and he concluded that “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (v.4).
With this as his predicate, the author then asserted that the Christ stated that God did not desire sacrifice and offerings (5a) and that God had “prepared a body” [Jesus of Nazareth] for me [the Christ] (5b).
According to the author, the Christ then said that “you” (YHWH) took no delight in burnt offerings and sin offerings (v.6), an idea also found in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, Amos and in Psalm 40.
The author continued “quoting” the Christ to say that he (the Christ) had come – as provided in a book maintained by God – to do God’s will (v.7).
The author of the Letter interpreted these “statements” by the Christ to mean that the Crucifixion of Jesus “abolishes the first [covenant]” (v.9) – the Mosaic Law Covenant involving animal and grain sacrifices – “in order to establish the second [covenant]” (v.9b).
The author concluded by saying that it was God’s will that we were sanctified once and for all (v.10) through the offering [the Crucifixion] of the body of Jesus the Christ.
The JANT comments that the argument in Hebrews is “curious” in that the sacrifices prescribed by the Torah never created an expectation in Judaism that sacrifices could cure people of sin. The JANT cites references in Isaiah 1, Jeremiah 7, and Psalms 50 and 51 for the proposition that sacrifices do not substitute for repentance.
The NJBC observes that the author of Hebrews overstates the case: “God’s preferring obedience to sacrifice is interpreted as God’s repudiation of the OT sacrifices and their replacement by the self offering of Jesus.”
Luke 1:39-55
Reading
39 In those days Mary set out and went with haste to a Judean town in the hill country, 40 where she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the child leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit 42 and exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. 43 And why has this happened to me, that the mother of my Lord comes to me? 44 For as soon as I heard the sound of your greeting, the child in my womb leaped for joy. 45 And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her by the Lord.”
46 And Mary said, “My soul magnifies the Lord,
47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
48 for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant. Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed;
49 for the Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name.
50 His mercy is for those who fear him from generation to generation.
51 He has shown strength with his arm; he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts.
52 He has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly;
53 he has filled the hungry with good things and sent the rich away empty.
54 He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy,
55 according to the promise he made to our ancestors, to Abraham and to his descendants forever.”
Commentary
The Gospel According to Luke is generally regarded as having been written around 85 CE. Its author also wrote the Acts of the Apostles. Both books were written in elegant and deliberatively crafted Greek and presented Jesus of Nazareth as the universal savior of humanity. Both emphasized the Holy Spirit as the “driving force” for events.
The Gospel followed the same general chronology of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection as the Gospel of Mark, and more than 50% of Luke’s Gospel was based on Mark. The other portions of Luke include (a) sayings shared with the Gospel According to Matthew but not found in Mark and (b) stories that are unique to Luke such as the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Presentation in the Temple, the Prodigal Son, and the Good Samaritan
Today’s reading is the story of the Visitation and follows the story of the Annunciation. If Mary were of customary marrying age in First Century Israel, she would have been about 14 or 15 years old. Traditionally, the home of Elizabeth and Zachariah in the “hill country of Judea” (v.39) was in Ein Kerem, a town west of Jerusalem.
Mary (whose name means “excellence”) is described as a “relative” of Elizabeth (v.36) but the relation is not specified. The JANT says that this “relation” showed that Mary was of priestly ancestry, because Elizabeth was described by Luke as “a descendant of Aaron” (v.5). This would have meant that John the Baptist was a “descendant of Aaron.” The traditional relationship between Jesus of Nazareth and John the Baptist is that they were cousins, and the presentation of Mary as being of “priestly ancestry” would also mean that Jesus was of traditional Jewish priestly ancestry as well.
The distance to Ein Kerem from Nazareth (where the Annunciation to Mary took place – according to Luke) was about 70 miles (longer if the route avoided Samaria). This trip would have taken three or four days of walking in rugged terrain that had bands of robbers.
As shown by the statement by Elizabeth that the child in her womb “leaped” when she heard Mary’s greeting (v.41), Luke gave Mary a very high status. According to Luke, Elizabeth described Mary as “blessed among women” and “the mother of my Lord” (42-43). The word Luke used for “Lord” is Kyrios – the same word that is used in the LXX to translate YHWH.
Mary’s response (46-55) is called “The Magnificat” from the first word in Jerome’s Vulgate (Latin) translation of the Greek text. Mary’s response used language that was similar in content and tone to Hannah’s song when she learned she was pregnant with Samuel (1 Sam. 2:1-10). The translators’ note advises that some other ancient authorities have Elizabeth saying the Magnificat rather than Mary.
Hannah’s song began: “My heart exults in the LORD; my strength is exalted in my God.” For Hannah, YHWH would raise up the poor from the dust (v.8). Mary affirmed that the Lord has lifted up the lowly (v.52).
The promise to Abraham and his descendants (v.55) is found in Genesis, Micah and elsewhere that the land of Israel was given to Abraham and his descendants forever.
The NJBC notes: “Luke’s intent is missed if one accentuates Mary’s charity and social concern in visiting her aged, pregnant relative Elizabeth. If Luke were intent on presenting Mary as a model of charity, he would not have written v.56 which portrays Mary’s departing from Elizabeth at the time of her greatest need [when Elizabeth was about to give birth]. It also strains credulity to imagine a fourteen-year-old Jewish virgin making a four-day journey by herself. Rather, Luke’s intent in the “Visitation” is literary and theological. He brings together the two mothers-to-be, so that both might praise the God active in their lives and that Elizabeth’s child might be presented as the “precursor” of Mary’s child.”