The Lectionary and Scripture Interpretation for the Easter Season
The first three Sundays of Easter are focused on resurrection appearances – a reminder that Christ is alive and still with us! The next three Sundays remind us of our ongoing mission in the world.
Today’s reading from the book of Revelation envisions a new city. The Acts reading speaks of a new manner of covenant membership. In the Gospel, Jesus tells of a new way of being with God in the Holy Spirit.
At the Easter Vigil, catechumens are baptized. The Sundays of Easter then provide instruction in the Christian life. Something to ask of each reading, then, is what does it tell us about how to live the Christian life with eyes of newness and wonder?
Acts 15:1-2, 22-29
“When rules about worship or faith place undue burdens upon others, the church is called to step back, question assumptions, and discern the way forward.” (source unknown).
Galatians 2:1-10 and today’s reading recount the same incident. They are both partial accounts but can be used together to understand the whole. This is what the accounts do agree on:
- An important meeting was held concerning the legitimacy of the Gentile mission
- God was at work
- The church made decisions by discerning where God was at work and cooperating with that work
Today’s reading marks the first major crisis in the early church: what is the relationship of Christ-followers to the Jewish heritage? Must Christians be Jews? It’s hard to overstate how important a question this was. Had things come out differently, we might all be observing Jewish purity laws and foregoing pork and worshiping on Saturday. As important as the question was, it is equally important to look at how the nascent community handled discerning the answer. The strategy detailed in today’s passage provides a model of Christian discernment. The reading is about both inclusivity and theological clarity, as well as how we as a community make important decisions.
Let’s reflect for a moment on the impact of this decision. In v1, some folks were saying that circumcision was necessary for salvation. Paul disagreed for many reasons, but I have to wonder how much he consciously considered the issue of gender. We know that, in a number of places, Paul argues for some level of equality for all. Consider Galatians 3:28, for example: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” But we could also consider a number of passages where he seems to teach a male-dominating point of view. It’s worth thinking about the question, though: what if circumcision had been required for salvation, for incorporation into the Christian community? Where would that have left women theologically? You think we have it hard now… I would like to imagine that Paul did indeed consider this question, at least in passing. Perhaps it influenced some of his teaching that salvation is universal and there are no barriers to anyone. (I owe this line of thought to commentary from Dianne Bergant.)
In v1 we pick up with Paul and Barnabas still with the community in Antioch, sharing the fruits of their first missionary journey. But trouble was brewing in the form of some who came to Antioch preaching the necessity of circumcision, of becoming a Jew, in order to be Christian. It’s important to note that Paul likely never intended to start another “religion.” In Romans 11:13-26, he used the metaphor of grafting a branch onto an existing tree. He saw following Christ as a natural extension or fulfillment of Judaism.
You might imagine how disconcerting it would be if someone came into church on Sunday and preached something contrary to established teaching, but something that sounded so very convincing. The church leaders responded to the situation by basically saying, “It’s above our pay grade.”
The Gospels frequently reference “the elders” (Greek presbuteros) as respected Jewish men. Paul’s authentic letters never mention elders, and it is only into the second century that this term began to be one of formal, appointed leadership in the church. Luke’s use of it here is very likely referring not to an ordained position of formal leadership, but, rather, to wise and mature people who are capable of teaching and ministering to the faith community. The NRSV consistently avoids a transliteration of this word, perhaps in order to make this distinction.
So a group was dispatched to travel to Jerusalem and seek resolution to the question. I find it humorous that, in v3, Paul could not resist turning it into a missionary journey! His core calling was to spread the good news and he did so with every opportunity.
V4 is an important part of the model of discernment: the church began by seeing where God was already at work. But even in Jerusalem, some Christians were preaching the necessity of circumscision.
In v7 Peter recalls his experience with Cornelius in Acts 10 where God educated Peter about inclusion of the Gentiles. In v8, Peter refers to God, “who knows the heart,” literally in Greek, “The heart-knowing God.” In the ancient world, the heart was often seen as the center of thought, emotion, and will. This is a compound word which appears only in this verse and in Acts 1:24. It does not appear in other Greek literature of the time and it may have been Luke’s own construction. I like to imagine Luke praying to his “heart-knowing God.”
Peter gives a summary of the heart of the gospel in v11: “We believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” In v12 the community goes back again to how God is already at work. This is a key element of discernment. So many times we think we have to build something new or arrive at some novel conclusion when, in fact, all we really need to do is look around and see what God is already doing. I could use an example here of the shortage of priests and the number of women and married men who have expressed a sense of call to the priesthood. Rather than looking at how God is already at work in calling others, the church chooses to reinforce existing rules of thinking.
In v13 we see that James seems to be the institutional decider in Jerusalem. He references in v14 what Peter has said. The NAB uses Symeon but the reference is to Simon Peter. In vv16-18 he quotes from Amos 9:11-12.
An important hermeneutical principle is at work here. Hermeneutics govern how we interpret the Bible. Some use a hermeneutical lens to say that God must act in accord with how we interpret scripture. This approach leaves no room for a God of surprises. The hermeneutical lens used by James is that God’s actions dictate how we understand scripture. In the past, this selection from Amos might have been understood in a certain way. James is saying that God seems to want to include the Gentiles and so that’s what this verse must have been referring to. If this seems like a dangerous road down the path of each person having their own private interpretation of scripture, keep in mind the context of community, prayer, and communal discernment, as well as a group of people deeply rooted in Christ.
The group has discussed and debated and probably argued. Maybe for hours. What we see in v19 is no democratic process, but it is one in which a leader prayerfully listens to all that God is saying and discerns from that.
Leviticus 17-18 gave instructions for non-Jews living among Jews and that is what James draws on for his instructions in v20. These guidelines enabled Jews to remain in table fellowship with their neighbors. The point wasn’t to hang on to a few laws that seemed important. The point was to enable Jewish Christians to live authentically and, at the same time, enable Gentiles to worship and fellowship with those same Jews without bringing offense. It is compromise in its finest sense: each side gives something for the sake of harmony.
Finally we pick up with the lectionary reading in v22. The church at Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas to get the Jerusalem church’s take on a delicate matter. The church in Jerusalem makes a decision and then sends an answer back with Paul and Barnabas, along with representatives from Jerusalem. These men will lend weight and authority to Jerusalem’s decision. Judas we know nothing of, but Silas will go on to join Paul’s next missionary journey.
The rest of the reading is the church’s first encyclical. It is written in the style and manner of official decrees of the time. We might say that, at this point, the human church finally catches up with the divine initiative. V28 references “necessities,” because the Jewish and non-Jewish Christians must fellowship together and must respect one another in the process.
Consider the model of discernment in this chapter. How might you incorporate pieces of it in your own decision-making processes?
Revelation 21:10-14, 22-23
Today’s reading is a continuation of last week’s vision of the new heaven and the new earth and describes what that might look like. This whole chapter is the fulfillment of the entire narrative arc of scripture which began with God creating, followed by humanity’s fall, and now ends with the fullness of God’s redemption. Everything about the city that is described points to divine perfection and completeness. It envisions a time when God’s redemption is brought to completeness and fullness. Nothing else need be done.
Other prophetic visions of restoration from the Old Testament include Isaiah 60:1-22 (prophetic vision of a restored Jerusalem) and Ezekiel 40-48 (detailed architectural vision of the restored temple and city). Isaiah 54:11-17 gives the promise of a city rebuilt with precious stones.
The reading opens in v10 with a reference to the author being “in the spirit.” This is partly to show that this is a vision, not necessarily a literal description. In the vision, he sees Jerusalem coming down out of heaven, from God. In ancient thought, “heaven” was the realm of the divine. “Descent” was a metaphorical way of saying that the divine was entering the human sphere. Jewish thought shared this idea and frequently referenced the “descent” of God or God’s messengers as a powerful image of God interacting with humanity.
Apocalyptic literature relied heavily on the symbolism of numbers and we see this at work in this whole chapter. There are many references to the number 12. This is a number thought to be foundational in the very fabric of creation. For example, there are 12 months in a calendar (lunar or solar) and 12 zodiac signs in an astrological context. Likewise, 4 is another foundational number: four cardinal directions. Both numbers represent completeness and fullness.
In v14, the foundation of the city has 12 stones on which are inscribed the names of the 12 apostles. Peter may have been named The Rock, but the new Jerusalem is built on the fullness of the witness and teaching of all Twelve apostles.
The author recounts many details that are noticed but, in vv22-23, he calls out what seems to be missing: the Temple. By the time of this writing, the Temple would have been gone for decades (it was destroyed in 70AD and this was written around 95AD). The Temple was a core component in the worship practices of ancient Judaism and was seen as the primary meeting place of God and humanity. The absence of the Temple in the new city indicates there is no longer need for such a place: God is now intimately and directly present.
Let your imagination roam over what the new heaven and new earth might be. I mentioned last week that perhaps we create this reality with each moment of our lives. How do you want to envision such newness? What are the core features of it? And then consider how you might actively work to begin bringing it about in the here and now.
John 14:23-29
Chps 13-17 are one long “last supper discourse.” Two key phrases that run throughout these chapters are glory and new commandment. In 13:31-14:31 Jesus will speak at length about returning to the Father. Throughout this passage, notice the themes of coming and going. It begins with Judas leaving and then Jesus will also speak of leaving. But Jesus will speak of his return as well as the coming of the Holy Spirit.
The lectionary reading begins with v23 but the whole reading is a response to a question in v22 from one of the disciples: “Why do you intend to show yourself to us and not to the world?” Some versions ask why (NAB) but many others phrase it as “how is it that you will reveal yourself to us, and not to the world?'” (NRSV). A “how” question seems to be more appropriate. How are you going to reveal yourself in a way that we disciples will know it but everyone else will not understand? From that springboard, Jesus begins to speak about union with God, love, and the Holy Spirit.
Jesus starts by speaking about love. Love has multiple functions:
- It motivates keeping Jesus’ word/command
- AND it is itself the word/command
Love is relational; it’s about being in relationship with Jesus and with the Father. Love brings God to dwell within us. Don’t be too hasty to read over this without pondering it. Jesus is talking about spiritual union. It’s not just about loving and being loved. This is about being united with the God who created us to desire her.
The word used in v23 for dwelling or home is derived from the Greek verb μένω (menō), meaning “to remain” or “to abide.” The word is used only in this verse and in John 14:2, “in my house are many menōs, dwelling places.” Abide is a key term in this Gospel, but Paul also emphasized the divine indwelling (see 1 Corinthians 3:16 and 1 Corinthians 3:16).
Spend some time meditating on the idea that God dwells in you, that God is united with you.
In v26, Jesus references the Advocate, which he clarifies here as the Holy Spirit. The Greek word is parakletos. Back in v16, Jesus said he would send another parakletos. A parakletos was one called alongside to help, a legal advocate. It comes from the Greek word para, close, and kaleo, to call. The parakletos can make the right legal call because they are close to the situation. The word is used four times in the Gospel of John and also in 1 John 2:1.
The Advocate has three roles here:
- To teach
- To remind
- To provide continuity between Jesus’ earthly life and his heavenly one.
Teaching and reminding are interrelated: to bring to remembrance, not just the events, but also the understanding of them. For example, John 2:22, “After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.” And also John 12:16, “His disciples did not understand these things at first, but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things had been written about him and had been done to him.” The Holy Spirit reminds us of past happenings and then teaches us what they mean. Jesus will come back to this subject in John 16:7-15.
In v27 Jesus speaks of peace. The Hebrew equivalent is shalom. In Hebrew, it meant the idea of wholeness and well-being through restored relationships. Peace was a state in which all the essential parts were joined together in harmony and balance. It doesn’t say or imply anything about the absence of things like hardship or persecution. The customary use of the Greek word peace, in contrast, meant the absence of war and conflict. The early church understood peace as both the present effect and the future goal of the reign of God.
V28 presents a troublesome theological issue: if Jesus and the Father are one, how can the Father then be greater? Arius would use this as the key verse to say that Jesus was just a creature. As in all scripture interpretation, we must view it in the context of the whole of scripture, particularly all the other things Jesus says about himself and the Father in 10:30-13:16.
The Greek word used for greater (megas) meant “large, great, in the widest sense.” It could be used to describe size or physical dimensions. But it could also reference abstract concepts such as power and authority. In the New Testament, “megas” often emphasized the magnitude of God’s works, the authority of Jesus, or the impact of events. In the world of Jesus’ time, greatness was associated with power, wealth, and influence. Jesus would probably have been understood here to be highlighting God’s grandeur.
John’s gospel has many “destabilizing literary techniques,” one of which is “dialectical tensions.” These are similar to paradox and are intended to help the reader move beyond current understandings into a new realm of truth. For example, in John 9:3, Jesus said that sin was not the cause of the man-born-blind’s handicap. But in John 5, Jesus heals a man and then tells him, “See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you,” which seems to imply sin as the root cause of the handicap. John is saying that the relationship between sin and disability can’t be reduced to either “sin causes disability” or “there is no causal relationship between sin and disability.” The truth of the matter is much more nuanced. The author wants us to stumble over these questions and seems to want to plant some doubt in our soul that we can easily gloss over such questions and know beyond a doubt what Jesus is saying. For this insight I am grateful to the work of Sandra Schneiders in Written That You May Believe: Encountering Jesus in the Fourth Gospel.
Going off Schneiders’ work, I would propose Jesus’ statement that “the Father is greater than I” is one such dialectic tension. In other places in the gospel, Jesus is put on level field with the Father. For example John 10:30: “The Father and I are one.” The gospel, I think, is asking us to hold these two apparent opposites in tension and not be too hasty to assume we understand everything about Jesus’ relationship to the one he calls Father. These dialectical tensions truly challenge our modern minds because we ever seek resolution and complete understanding.
Can you recall a time when the Holy Spirit has reminded you of something and helped you understand it in a whole new way?
How is peace evident in your life? Is there a different quality to peace in the midst of a storm vs peace in the calm times?
Scripture texts in this work are taken from the New American Bible, revised edition © 2010, 1991, 1986, 1970 Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington, D.C. and are used by permission of the copyright owner. All Rights Reserved. No part of the New American Bible may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the copyright owner.
© 2023 Kelly Sollinger