With God, You Get More Than What You Asked For
Commentary
Jeremiah 31:31-34
The First Lesson is drawn from a book of prophecies of a late 7th to early 6th century BC prophet of Judah, dictated to his aide Baruch, from the reigns of Josiah, Jehoiakim, and Zedekiah through the era of the Babylonian captivity. Some of the prophet’s criticism of the house of David and the temple, giving more attention instead to the Sinai Covenant, may relate to Jeremiah being the descendant of one of David’s high priests, Abiathar, who lost control of the temple and was finally banished.
The assigned verses are part of the so-called hopeful scroll (see 30:1-3). It was probably a promise directed to Israel as a whole. But as prophecies have been loosened in editing from their original historical context, these prophecies have become new for every successive generation. The Lord is prophesied as in the future establishing a new covenant with Israel [the old Hebrew phrase “cut a covenant” is used]. It will replace the one at Sinai that had been broken (vv.31-32). This new covenant will involve putting the law [torah] in the hearts of people and renewing Israel’s status as God’s people (v.33). All will know him and the people’s sin will be forgiven [salach, sent away] (v.34). A hymn follows (vv.35-37).
According to a Gallup poll conducted in May 2018, 49% of Americans say the state of moral values in the U.S. is "poor." Meanwhile, 37% of U.S. adults say moral values are "only fair" and 14% say they are "excellent" or "good." Moralists say we need to preach binding values. And de-constructionists among us say that these developments are good things, that it’s time we got free of establishment figures using so-called moral principles to manipulate and oppress us. Sermons on this lesson can show how God offers the middle ground between these extremes. In faith, the law has been planted in you and me; the law has been put in our hearts. Moral standards are not external to us. In a right relationship with our Lord, keeping the law is who we are. Lots of scientific data support this insight. Neurobiology has found that all healthy human beings (especially in the brain’s left frontal lobe and left temporal lobe) we seem to have a capacity for morality (Andrew Newberg, Why We Believe What We Believe, pp.141-142). And when we engage in matters of faith, we enjoy the secretion of the brain chemical dopamine which also makes us more sociable, more inclined to behave ethically (David Brinn, “Israeli Researchers Discover Gene For Altruism.”) This can be a sermon about how joyful and easy it is for Christians to do God’s thing. The burden of being moral is lighter than we could ever have imagined!
Hebrews 5:5-10
The Second Lesson is found in an anonymous treatise which, given its argument for the superiority of Christ’s sacrifice to those of the levitical priests, was likely written prior to the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 AD. Remarks in 2:3-4 suggest it was written by a member of a generation of Christians after the apostles. The book is not in the format of a traditional Hellenistic epistle. Modern scholars are more inclined to regard it as a sermon, possibly modified after it was delivered to include travel plans, greetings, and a closing (13:20-25). Christians addressed are thought to have been in danger of falling away from their confession (3:1; 4:14; 10:23); they had endured persecution (10:32-36).
The assigned verses are a continuing exposition of Jesus as high priest. The office of high priest is not a self-glorification of Jesus, but he was appointed by God who calls him son, having begotten him. Psalm 2:7 is quoted (v.5). Palm 110:4 is then cited, designating Jesus as high priest after the order of the priest-king Melchizedek of Canaan (described in Genesis 14:17-20) (v.6). Like Melchizedek, Jesus is both a king and high priest. While in the flesh, it is noted, Jesus offered prayers with loud cries to God who could save him. Though he was a son, he learned obedience/submissiveness though suffering (vv.7-8). The prayer Jesus offered in Gethsemane is suggested (Mark 14:32-42). Learning through what one has suffered was an ancient Greek proverb.
Having been made perfect/complete, Jesus became the source of eternal salvation [soteria, also translated safety or soundness] for all who obey/hearken submissively to him (v.9; cf. 2:17-18). Again, his designation by God as high priest after the order of Melchizedek is noted (v.10).
This lesson as well as the gospel afford the opportunity to celebrate how in Jesus, God has walked in our shoes. A 2006 study by Baylor University found that 23% of Americans believe in a distant god who is not involved in our lives. Add to that a 2020 poll by LifeWay research revealing that 52% of American adults believe that Jesus was a great teacher and nothing more. We certainly need sermons on this lesson as antidotes to these trends. The lesson refers to Jesus’ suffering, and if he is God then God must have suffered too. We have a God who has walked in our shoes! Developing this insight, one that shatters our typical image of God as unchanging, can offer great comfort, can help hearers appreciate how relevant faith in God and Jesus’ divinity can be in their lives.
Another angle for a sermon is to focus on Jesus’ role as priest, offering a sacrifice that saves us. But if he was not also king, not divine, then God would not be involved in our salvation. In case reference to the son being begotten of the Father seems problematic or undermines the case for Jesus’ divinity, note how several early church fathers described the son’s being begotten of the fathers as akin to the rays which have been eternally begotten of the sun (Athanasius, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol.4, pp.394-395). Just as the sun and its rays have always existed, never one without the other and are of the same substance, so it is with the Father and the son. Yes, Jesus is God, like when we experience the sun’s rays, we say we are “catching some sun.”
John 12:20-33
This gospel is drawn from the last of the four gospels to be written, probably not composed until the last two decades of the first century. The book is very different in style in comparison with the other three (the so-called synoptic) gospels. In fact, it is probably based on these earlier gospels. The book has been identified with John the son of Zebedee, the disciple whom Jesus loved, and this claim was made as long ago as late in the first century by the famed theologian of the early church Irenaeus (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol.1, p.414). It is likely that it was written by a disciple of John. Hints of that possibility are offered by the first post-biblical church historian Eusebius of Caesarea who claimed that the book was written on the basis of external facts made plain in the gospel and so John is a “spiritual gospel” (presumably not based on eyewitness accounts of the author) (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol,1, p.261). Its main agenda was probably to encourage Jewish Christians in conflict with the synagogue to believe that Jesus is the Messiah (20:31).
Some scholars have suggested an alternative account of the origins of John’s Gospel. Appealing to the writings of a late first-early second century Bishop Papias, who may have implied that John’s Gospel was the result of eyewitness origins, such scholars have argued that the book is in fact an authentic historical testimony to Jesus (Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, esp. pp.423ff.; cf. Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol.1, pp.154-155).
This lesson recounts part of the final stages of Jesus’ public ministry between Palm Sunday and the last supper. This is the last of his public dialogues reported in this gospel. John has Jesus offer a prophecy of his suffering and death which is unique to this gospel. Some Greeks who wish to see Jesus approach Philip (who, since he had a Greek name, was probably best able to communicate with them) about the possibility (vv.20-21). With Andrew (also likely of Greek background), Philip approaches Jesus about the possibility of the Greeks seeing him (v.22). Jesus answers with reference to the hour of the Son of Man’s glorification to have come (his full manifestation) (v.23). He proceeds to note the deed for death and sacrifice (to hate one’s life) to gain life, the grain to die if there is a wheat harvest (vv.24-25). Those who would serve Jesus must follow him (v.26).
Our Lord then refers to his troubled soul. But he resolves not to be to be saved from the passion, since he has come for that hour (v.27). While Jesus calls on God the Father to glorify the Father’s name, a voice from heaven speaks of it being glorified (v.28). The crowd confuses this voice with thunder or claim it is the voice of the angels. Jesus says that the voice has come for them (vv.29-30). He notes that his death will judge the world, driving away the prince of this world [Satan]. Jesus says he will be lifted from earth, drawing all people (vv.31-32). John noted that this is a prophecy, signifying the kind of death Jesus would die (v.33).
At least two possible directions for sermons emerge from this text. It would be possible to focus on Jesus’ despair, preaching much like in the Second Lesson on how in Christ God has experienced suffering like us. Another approach might be to focus on the confusion the disciples experienced as a result of the noise they heard. It would be a simple matter to reflect on the confusion Americans have been feeling since 2020 with the pandemic and all the turmoil which followed. The lesson closes with the promise of the great things God in Jesus would do (vv.31-32). His promise clarified the chaos, just like what Jesus’ work on the cross accomplished, drawing us all together orders our chaos in surprising ways. This lesson can inspire sermons which celebrate how when things are most confused, like modern American life has become, God is still in charge, that he has ordered things in ways we could not have imagined.
Sermons on any of these lessons will remind us that God and his ways far overcome our expectations about life. Historically, this fifth Sunday of Lent has been focused on judging our ungodly ways, our messed-up expectations, and ways of doing things which God corrects and overcomes.
The First Lesson is drawn from a book of prophecies of a late 7th to early 6th century BC prophet of Judah, dictated to his aide Baruch, from the reigns of Josiah, Jehoiakim, and Zedekiah through the era of the Babylonian captivity. Some of the prophet’s criticism of the house of David and the temple, giving more attention instead to the Sinai Covenant, may relate to Jeremiah being the descendant of one of David’s high priests, Abiathar, who lost control of the temple and was finally banished.
The assigned verses are part of the so-called hopeful scroll (see 30:1-3). It was probably a promise directed to Israel as a whole. But as prophecies have been loosened in editing from their original historical context, these prophecies have become new for every successive generation. The Lord is prophesied as in the future establishing a new covenant with Israel [the old Hebrew phrase “cut a covenant” is used]. It will replace the one at Sinai that had been broken (vv.31-32). This new covenant will involve putting the law [torah] in the hearts of people and renewing Israel’s status as God’s people (v.33). All will know him and the people’s sin will be forgiven [salach, sent away] (v.34). A hymn follows (vv.35-37).
According to a Gallup poll conducted in May 2018, 49% of Americans say the state of moral values in the U.S. is "poor." Meanwhile, 37% of U.S. adults say moral values are "only fair" and 14% say they are "excellent" or "good." Moralists say we need to preach binding values. And de-constructionists among us say that these developments are good things, that it’s time we got free of establishment figures using so-called moral principles to manipulate and oppress us. Sermons on this lesson can show how God offers the middle ground between these extremes. In faith, the law has been planted in you and me; the law has been put in our hearts. Moral standards are not external to us. In a right relationship with our Lord, keeping the law is who we are. Lots of scientific data support this insight. Neurobiology has found that all healthy human beings (especially in the brain’s left frontal lobe and left temporal lobe) we seem to have a capacity for morality (Andrew Newberg, Why We Believe What We Believe, pp.141-142). And when we engage in matters of faith, we enjoy the secretion of the brain chemical dopamine which also makes us more sociable, more inclined to behave ethically (David Brinn, “Israeli Researchers Discover Gene For Altruism.”) This can be a sermon about how joyful and easy it is for Christians to do God’s thing. The burden of being moral is lighter than we could ever have imagined!
Hebrews 5:5-10
The Second Lesson is found in an anonymous treatise which, given its argument for the superiority of Christ’s sacrifice to those of the levitical priests, was likely written prior to the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 AD. Remarks in 2:3-4 suggest it was written by a member of a generation of Christians after the apostles. The book is not in the format of a traditional Hellenistic epistle. Modern scholars are more inclined to regard it as a sermon, possibly modified after it was delivered to include travel plans, greetings, and a closing (13:20-25). Christians addressed are thought to have been in danger of falling away from their confession (3:1; 4:14; 10:23); they had endured persecution (10:32-36).
The assigned verses are a continuing exposition of Jesus as high priest. The office of high priest is not a self-glorification of Jesus, but he was appointed by God who calls him son, having begotten him. Psalm 2:7 is quoted (v.5). Palm 110:4 is then cited, designating Jesus as high priest after the order of the priest-king Melchizedek of Canaan (described in Genesis 14:17-20) (v.6). Like Melchizedek, Jesus is both a king and high priest. While in the flesh, it is noted, Jesus offered prayers with loud cries to God who could save him. Though he was a son, he learned obedience/submissiveness though suffering (vv.7-8). The prayer Jesus offered in Gethsemane is suggested (Mark 14:32-42). Learning through what one has suffered was an ancient Greek proverb.
Having been made perfect/complete, Jesus became the source of eternal salvation [soteria, also translated safety or soundness] for all who obey/hearken submissively to him (v.9; cf. 2:17-18). Again, his designation by God as high priest after the order of Melchizedek is noted (v.10).
This lesson as well as the gospel afford the opportunity to celebrate how in Jesus, God has walked in our shoes. A 2006 study by Baylor University found that 23% of Americans believe in a distant god who is not involved in our lives. Add to that a 2020 poll by LifeWay research revealing that 52% of American adults believe that Jesus was a great teacher and nothing more. We certainly need sermons on this lesson as antidotes to these trends. The lesson refers to Jesus’ suffering, and if he is God then God must have suffered too. We have a God who has walked in our shoes! Developing this insight, one that shatters our typical image of God as unchanging, can offer great comfort, can help hearers appreciate how relevant faith in God and Jesus’ divinity can be in their lives.
Another angle for a sermon is to focus on Jesus’ role as priest, offering a sacrifice that saves us. But if he was not also king, not divine, then God would not be involved in our salvation. In case reference to the son being begotten of the Father seems problematic or undermines the case for Jesus’ divinity, note how several early church fathers described the son’s being begotten of the fathers as akin to the rays which have been eternally begotten of the sun (Athanasius, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol.4, pp.394-395). Just as the sun and its rays have always existed, never one without the other and are of the same substance, so it is with the Father and the son. Yes, Jesus is God, like when we experience the sun’s rays, we say we are “catching some sun.”
John 12:20-33
This gospel is drawn from the last of the four gospels to be written, probably not composed until the last two decades of the first century. The book is very different in style in comparison with the other three (the so-called synoptic) gospels. In fact, it is probably based on these earlier gospels. The book has been identified with John the son of Zebedee, the disciple whom Jesus loved, and this claim was made as long ago as late in the first century by the famed theologian of the early church Irenaeus (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol.1, p.414). It is likely that it was written by a disciple of John. Hints of that possibility are offered by the first post-biblical church historian Eusebius of Caesarea who claimed that the book was written on the basis of external facts made plain in the gospel and so John is a “spiritual gospel” (presumably not based on eyewitness accounts of the author) (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol,1, p.261). Its main agenda was probably to encourage Jewish Christians in conflict with the synagogue to believe that Jesus is the Messiah (20:31).
Some scholars have suggested an alternative account of the origins of John’s Gospel. Appealing to the writings of a late first-early second century Bishop Papias, who may have implied that John’s Gospel was the result of eyewitness origins, such scholars have argued that the book is in fact an authentic historical testimony to Jesus (Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, esp. pp.423ff.; cf. Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol.1, pp.154-155).
This lesson recounts part of the final stages of Jesus’ public ministry between Palm Sunday and the last supper. This is the last of his public dialogues reported in this gospel. John has Jesus offer a prophecy of his suffering and death which is unique to this gospel. Some Greeks who wish to see Jesus approach Philip (who, since he had a Greek name, was probably best able to communicate with them) about the possibility (vv.20-21). With Andrew (also likely of Greek background), Philip approaches Jesus about the possibility of the Greeks seeing him (v.22). Jesus answers with reference to the hour of the Son of Man’s glorification to have come (his full manifestation) (v.23). He proceeds to note the deed for death and sacrifice (to hate one’s life) to gain life, the grain to die if there is a wheat harvest (vv.24-25). Those who would serve Jesus must follow him (v.26).
Our Lord then refers to his troubled soul. But he resolves not to be to be saved from the passion, since he has come for that hour (v.27). While Jesus calls on God the Father to glorify the Father’s name, a voice from heaven speaks of it being glorified (v.28). The crowd confuses this voice with thunder or claim it is the voice of the angels. Jesus says that the voice has come for them (vv.29-30). He notes that his death will judge the world, driving away the prince of this world [Satan]. Jesus says he will be lifted from earth, drawing all people (vv.31-32). John noted that this is a prophecy, signifying the kind of death Jesus would die (v.33).
At least two possible directions for sermons emerge from this text. It would be possible to focus on Jesus’ despair, preaching much like in the Second Lesson on how in Christ God has experienced suffering like us. Another approach might be to focus on the confusion the disciples experienced as a result of the noise they heard. It would be a simple matter to reflect on the confusion Americans have been feeling since 2020 with the pandemic and all the turmoil which followed. The lesson closes with the promise of the great things God in Jesus would do (vv.31-32). His promise clarified the chaos, just like what Jesus’ work on the cross accomplished, drawing us all together orders our chaos in surprising ways. This lesson can inspire sermons which celebrate how when things are most confused, like modern American life has become, God is still in charge, that he has ordered things in ways we could not have imagined.
Sermons on any of these lessons will remind us that God and his ways far overcome our expectations about life. Historically, this fifth Sunday of Lent has been focused on judging our ungodly ways, our messed-up expectations, and ways of doing things which God corrects and overcomes.
