Thirtieth Sunday in Ordinary Time

Nineteenth Sunday after Trinity

Job 42:1-6, 10-17: This lection falls into two parts. The first, 42:1-6, is the completion of the poem. The second, 42:10-17, completes the prose part of the book and also the book itself.

42:1-5 give Job's final words to God. Job had approached God with the intention of having God acknowledge Job's integrity. In his final words, Job is able to address God and at the same time hold on to that integrity. God has told Job in the preceding chapters that the work of God in creating and redeeming is far greater than Job's ability to understand what God is doing. But understanding is not the point of these final words. Trusting is, and so is standing humbly before God without having to confess to some unknown sin in order to gain access to God. The Book of Job seems to be telling us that in spite of the chaotic situations that Job has faced, trust of God is still possible, and God's acknowledgment of Job's honor and integrity is also real.

Verse 5 is pivotal to understanding what has happened. Job now has a first-hand experience of God. He "sees" God. We need to remember that "seeing God" is a transcendent act. Moses was not able to see God, though he could talk with God; Moses could only see God's back as he passed by. Isaiah "saw the Lord, high and lifted up," and his whole life was changed. These were among the few who claimed to have a vision of God. The basic premise of the Old Testament is that God sees us all the time, but we see God only on the rarest occasions.

Job is the recipient of one of these occasions. "I had heard of thee by the hearing of the ear. But now my eyes see thee." Marcus Borg (Meeting Jesus Again, p 88) says that this is the point at which Job moves from a second hand hearing of God to a first hand experience of God.

"Second hand religion," says Borg, "is based on hearing what one has heard from others. It consists of thinking that the Christian life is about believing what the Bible says or what the doctrines of the church say. First hand religion, on the other hand, consists of a relationship to that to which the Bible and the teachings of the church point - namely, that reality that we call God or the Spirit of God. . . . The gospel of Jesus - the good news of Jesus' own message - is that there is a way of being that moves beyond both secular and religious conventional wisdom. The path of transformation of which Jesus spoke leads from a life of requirements and measuring up (whether to culture or to God) to a life of relationship with God. It leads from a life of anxiety to a life of peace and trust. It leads from the bondage of self-preoccupation to the freedom of self-forgetfulness. It leads from life centered in culture to life centered in God." It was this transformation, Borg insists, that happened to Job at the end of his story.

The key verse in this section is the last one in the poem, verse 6. Carol A Newsom (NIB4:628) points out this verse is not only terse and ambiguous but that its grammar lends to many interpretations. It can be legitimately translated in any of the following ways:

(1) "Therefore I despise myself and repent upon dust and ashes" (i.e., in humiliation; cf. NRSV; NIV);

(2) "Therefore I retract my words and repent of dust and ashes" (i.e., the symbols of mourning);

(3) "Therefore I reject and forswear dust and ashes" (i.e., the symbols of mourning);

(4) "Therefore I retract my words and have changed my mind concerning dust and ashes" (i.e., the human condition);

(5) "Therefore I retract my words, and I am comforted concerning dust and ashes" (i.e., the human condition).

(6) "Therefore, I recant and relent, being but dust and ashes." (TNK)

That there are many possible interpretations only adds to the mystery and richness of the Book of Job. The author did not say one thing at the end of the poem. He (or she) said many things. This leads us to reflect on the many possible interpretations of the passage, choose one if we can defend it, see many possibilities for meaning if we choose to do so.

The prose ending of the story, (42:10-17), seems to reprise the beginning. The Lord restores the fortunes of Job, indeed, he gave him twice as much as he had before. All his brothers and sisters came to him. They ate a feast with him and brought him comfort and sympathy. They each gave him a piece of money and a gold ring. The Lord blessed Job also, with animals in abundance, and again seven sons and three daughters. Job was blessed personally: he lived not seventy years but twice seventy; he saw not only his grandchildren but his grandchildren's grandchildren.

Does this bring the story to a satisfactory ending? If restoration of wealth is the point of life, this is suitable. If the point of life is a new relationship with God, then each of us has to think through the questions the Book of Job raises for us: is God just, does God have any part in inflicting suffering upon us, how are we to respond to suffering, what is the place of the "chaotic" in life, is there redemption from and resolution to the ambiguities of life? Without providing specific answers for them, the Book of Job bequeaths these and other questions to us.

Psalm 34:1-8, 19-22: This psalm is the thankful cry of a poor man whom God has delivered. "I sought the Lord, and he answered me," says the psalmist (v 4). "This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him and saved him out of all his troubles." "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord delivers him out of all of them. He keeps his bones; not one of them is broken. Evil shall slay the wicked, and those who hate the righteous will be condemned. The Lord redeems the life of his servants; none of the righteous who take refuge in him will be condemned." This author is confident that the Lord will attend all his ways and resolve all the ambiguities and contradictions of life.

He is so confident of this that his poem is surrounded with his blessings and praises to God. "I will bless the Lord at all times. . . . O magnify the Lord with me, let us exalt his name together." "O taste and see that the Lord is good. Happy is the one who takes refuge in him."

Having just come from struggling with the issues raised in the Book of Job, I could not help but wonder whether this psalm is the "anti-Job," containing as it does the kind of theological position against which the Book of Job was written. This author answers all the questions that Job raises and does so without ambiguity. Do I seek the Lord? He will answer me and deliver me from my fears. Am I in trouble? I cry to the Lord, and he will save me out of my troubles. Am I afflicted? God will deliver me out of them all. Are the wicked prevailing in life? God will slay the wicked. Are the poor oppressed and cast down? The Lord redeems the life of his servants.

These are the issues in life that Job addresses, because Job knows that they are not resolved so easily as is suggested here. Job came to understand that God may mend the broken heart, but God does not prevent the heart from being broken. God may restore the crushed, but the forces that create oppression are not easily dispelled. Job discovered that the naivete of faith contained in this psalm needed to be strengthened and disciplined by God if it is to withstand the onslaughts of evil.

In my estimation, therefore, Psalm 34 and the Book of Job contain alternative understandings of faith. The first faces life with a radiant faith in God that is confident that God will resolve all the ambiguities of life. Job was not that confident. He had begun with a radiant faith like this. But God had treated Job too harshly for this naive faith to support him, and for no know reason God had thrown him on the dump heap of life. Job had to resolve the terrible ambiguities of his treatment by God. In working through these, and yet holding on to his determination that God must answer him, Job has spoken to all those whose experiences of life force them beyond the easy answers to life's ambiguities and contradictions suggested in the 34^th Psalm to the deeper experience of the living Lord that finally came to Job.

Hebrews 7:23-28: The subject of this text is the superiority of the priesthood of Jesus to that of the levitical priests who served in the Temple at Jerusalem. As often happens in the lectionary, the most important parts of a text are omitted. This is so in this instance. Verses 20 through 22 set the context for the verses before us:

20: And it was not without an oath. 21: Those who formerly became priests took their office without an oath, but this one was addressed with an oath,
"The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind,
'Thou art a priest for ever.'"
22: This makes Jesus the surety of a better covenant.

The contrast is between priests who took office without an oath and those who were addressed by an oath. Levitical priests did not take an oath when they took office. But Jesus came into the office because of an oath, not his own but the oath of God. It is the Lord who says to Jesus, according to Psalm 110:4, "You are a priest forever." Because of this oath of God to his Son, says Hebrews, Jesus is the one who guarantees for all of us that a covenant of grace and mercy, which is better than the covenant of law, is extended to us all.

Two further contrasts between Jesus and the presently acting high priests are drawn.

1. The priests are many, for they are subject to death, so that new priests appear generation after generation. But Christ remains, he is dependable, he is the one high priest forever. "Therefore" (v. 25) Christ is able to save for all time (NRSV) or completely (NIV). Salvation through him is assured.

2. Jesus is unlike other high priests who (a) offer sacrifices repeatedly and (b) first for their own sins (5:1-3). In contrast to other high priests, he (a) made one sacrifice once and for all and (b) had no need to offer a sacrifice for himself, because he is without sin (4:15). Floyd Filson (Yesterday p 44) noted that

"the only complete and effective offering which a person can make is the offering of oneself," and this is what Jesus did. The priests offered animal or grain sacrifices. Jesus gave himself. Montefiore caught the sense of this when he wrote in his commentary, "Worshippers offer gifts, priests offer them up, but Jesus offered up himself."

Mark 10:46-52: The streets of Jericho were narrow and twisting, and they were filled with people in the morning of this day. Jesus and his disciples literally had to shoulder their way through the crowds, as did the great multitude of people that were accompanying Jesus as he made his way through Jericho on to Jerusalem.

As they were leaving the city, an incident occurred that caught the attention of Mark the gospel writer. Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the side of the road. He heard the noise of the crowd as it approached him. He even heard the name of Jesus of Nazareth called out. He heard some call him "Teacher," some call him "Christ," some call him "Son of David." That latter title spoke to the blind beggar. The "Son of David" was to be a healer. Solomon, son of David, was a healer. He cast out demons; that's what his "wisdom" consisted of, the ability to cast out demons and to heal. Bartimaeus needed healing. So he cried out, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"

Many of those around him rebuked him. Why should he call on Jesus. He was nothing, a nobody, he didn't even have a name, he was simply "Bar-Timaeus," the son of Timaeus; he was a worthless beggar straddling a street filled with beggars.

But Bartimaeus was not doing to be put off by mere rebukes. He called again: "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me." Through the clamor and clatter of voices around him, Jesus heard his call. He stopped. On his way to Jerusalem, he stopped at the call of a single voice, and the whole parade of people shook to a halt along with him. "Call him," said Jesus. The crowd echoed Jesus' call, "Take heart," said one. "Rise," said another. "He is calling you," said a third.

Bartimaeus sprang up. As he did, he threw off his garment. He did not fold it neatly and lay it aside. In an act of haste and anxiety, he simply threw it away. Did he intend to return and pick it up. We do not know. All we know for certain is that it was all that he owned; that garment represented his total possessions. Bartimaeus cast it aside when Jesus called. The rich man who had approached Jesus just days before could not do this. He had too many possessions to throw them aside and follow Jesus. Not Bartimaeus. All he owned was his need to be healed. He took that to Jesus.

"What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him. "Master," said Bartimaeus, "let me receive my sight." Jesus said to him, "Go your way. Your faith has made you well." Jesus did not make a spittle of clay. He did not lay his hands on the man. Jesus did not have a system for healing; each healing was unique. He simply said, "Go your way." But Bartimaeus did not go his way. He went Jesus' way. He followed Jesus on the way to Jerusalem. Blind Bartimaeus is freed to become a disciple and follow Jesus to the cross on the way that liberates.