Luke 5:1-11

Raphael: Depart from me

Luke 5:1-11 (NRSV)

Once while Jesus was standing beside the lake of Gennesaret, and the crowd was pressing in on him to hear the word of God, ² he saw two boats there at the shore of the lake; the fishermen had gone out of them and were washing their nets. ³ He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon, and asked him to put out a little way from the shore. Then he sat down and taught the crowds from the boat. ⁴ When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, “Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch.” ⁵ Simon answered, “Master, we have worked all night long but have caught nothing. Yet if you say so, I will let down the nets.” ⁶ When they had done this, they caught so many fish that their nets were beginning to break. ⁷ So they signaled their partners in the other boat to come and help them. And they came and filled both boats, so that they began to sink. ⁸ But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man!” ⁹ For he and all who were with him were amazed at the catch of fish that they had taken; ¹⁰ and so also were James and John, sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. Then Jesus said to Simon, “Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching people.” ¹¹ When they had brought their boats to shore, they left everything and followed him.

Luke 5:1-11 (Year C Epiphany 5) relates the miracle of the draught of fish, as Jesus teaches and performs a miracle, leading to Simon recognizing Jesus as Lord and the first four disciples leaving everything to follow him. This material borrows from three passages: Mark 1:16, 1:19, 4:1-2, 1:17, 20, and either became the basis for or derived from a common source of John 21:1-14 and the appearance of the risen Lord. Luke’s genius was to remove both stories from their “original” literary setting and bring them together. Luke chooses this way to narrate the enlistment of the first followers of Jesus. Luke substitutes the simple call we find in Mark of the first four disciples for the story of a miraculous catch of fish that culminates in the recruitment of Peter, leaving Andrew implied in Peter saying “we” were fishing, along with his companions, James and John.

The effect of the placement of the text provides a psychologically plausible background for the call of the disciples by Jesus and their response of following Jesus, making it all less surprising sudden.  According to Luke’s account, Jesus had already embarked upon a profoundly popular ministry in Galilee.  Now, in chapter 5, Luke begins to develop another aspect of Jesus' message -- his desire to put together a team of disciples to work with him. It demonstrates the nature of authentic response to the ministry of Jesus. 

This story shows a methodology in the Synoptic Gospels to which we need to be alert. The historical life of Jesus had ambiguity to it, evidenced in how difficult it was for disciples and the crowds to understand him and how religious leaders would oppose him. However, the gospel writers are writing from the standpoint of their faith in Jesus as Messiah, Lord, and Son of God. Since most people could not read, they anticipated the reading of their gospel narratives to other people of faith. Thus, among episodes involving biographical stories, teachings, healings, and exorcisms, which have ambiguity built into them, they would narrate episodes that made it clear who Jesus was. In this case, this story has features like that of a resurrection appearance to Peter, even as described in the transfiguration story. Luke uses the idealized narrative of the call of the disciples found in Mark and creates his own idealized account of a disclosure of the identity of Jesus to Peter, one that anticipates the appearance of the risen Lord to Peter. It becomes a symbolic actualization of the saying of Jesus regarding making the disciples fishers of people. It expresses the delight in the tradition to elaborate a saying of Jesus with a miracle story.[1] None of the accounts are history, but presentations of an ideal response to the invitation of Jesus. The discrepancies Luke introduces are a small price to pay for the enriched elements of the notion of call and witness that we find here.^[2] One way to read the gospel narratives is that they provide anticipations of the end, resurrection, during the ministry of Jesus. 

Luke 5:1-3 sets the location of the call and miracle. Mark 4:1-2, providing the setting for the chapter of parables, inspires this part of the account in Luke. Jesus is standing by the Lake of Gennesaret. The crowd presses around him as the listen to the word of God (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ). Jesus sees two boats at the edge of the water, where the anglers had gotten out of them and were washing their nets. He gets into a boat that belonged to Simon and asked him to put out a little from the shore. From his watery perch, Jesus can sit and address the crowds, while Simon, laboring over his nets, keeping a sharp eye on his boat, hears every word. At this point, the first interest of Luke is Simon. Luke had already foreshadowed the relationship between Jesus and Simon in 4:38‑39 when Jesus heals Simon's mother‑in‑law. By the time Jesus appears on the shores of the lake of Gennesaret, the fishing grounds of Simon, he is a known figure to Simon with an established record of accomplishment. His family has once before experienced Jesus' healing touch. This time Jesus encounters Simon not as a healer but as a teacher.

Jesus enters the sphere of the life of this man. We see a quick succession from the scene of the action of the Word of Jesus and the sign that accompanies it. If we understand the incident in this way, we can see the parallel with Moses, Isaiah, and Jeremiah.^[3] Peter plays a key role in this gospel, and thus he is the first disciple characterized by Luke. In the apostolic list in 6:14, he is simply Simon. The reader of Luke also scarcely encounters the Peter who struggles and falters, as in Mark, Matthew, and John. Instead, the narrative of Luke presents Peter much more positively. This positive portrayal prepares a reader for the Peter of the Acts narrative, a strong missionary who leads well and rarely stumbles. One can understand Luke’s particular characterization of Peter through that which Luke omits from the narrative of Mark and the additional details Luke adds about Peter’s life. First, Luke does not include the gospel traditions about the rebuke of Peter (Mark 8:32-33/Matthew 16:22-23) after the passion prediction. Second, Luke does not record the specific censure of Peter in the garden of Gethsemane. In Mark and Matthew, we find both recording Jesus’ reprimand of Peter (Mark 14:37/Matthew 26:40), in Luke Jesus addresses an indefinite group of sleeping disciples (Luke 22:45-46). Luke also reports additional information about Peter that bolsters his image. In Luke 22:31-34, even though Peter will deny Jesus three times, Jesus provides a unique assurance to Peter, lest he fall into the hands of the devil. Finally, Luke is the only one of the synoptic writers to grace Peter with an individual experience of the resurrection (Luke 24:34).

Luke now offers an account of the miracle (4-9a) and the call of Simon and the disciples (9b-11). It has a close parallel to John 21:1-11, where the risen Jesus appears to Peter and the disciples on the Sea of Galilee in connection with a miraculous catch of fish.  Indeed, some scholars suggest that Luke may have been trying to set a pre-resurrection precedent for that post-resurrection fishing trip.  The two stories are versions of the same tradition. Luke takes a teaching story and transforms it into an epiphany experience. The crowd has disappeared. Their swift vanishing act also indicates that Luke may have woven two stories together at this point. Jesus now turns his full attention to Simon, whose nets he has finally washed and readied for the next evening's fishing expedition. In verse 4, When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, in a saying bound to the context, Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch. Jesus' command should have brought raised eyebrows and incredulous looks from Simon and his fellow fishers. Prime fishing hours were long past.  Simon answered, “Master, we have worked all night long (wearisome toil or even travail) but have caught nothing. Yet if you say so, I will let down the nets.” Simon's reply reflects the fence he was still straddling at this point. Having witnessed Jesus perform a healing miracle in his own home and having now heard Jesus preach the Good News, Simon knows there is something special about Jesus. Simon feels compelled to explain to Jesus his fishing experience for the day.  Although he makes sure that Jesus is aware of the fruitlessness of this endeavor, Simon agrees to follow the command of Jesus, his new "Master." In verses 6-7, Luke now emphasizes the enormity of the miracle performed by Jesus. When they had done this, they caught so many fish that their nets were beginning to break. Therefore, they signaled their partners in the other boat, suggesting they had not journeyed far from shore, to come and help them. Moreover, they came and filled both boats, so that they began to sink. The details provided by Luke testify to the miraculous nature of this huge catch of fish. Simon is at last fully convinced of Jesus' divine power and presence. However, in verse 8, when Simon Peter, indicative of his impending new identity as a disciple saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Go away from me, Lord (Κύριε), for I am a sinful (ἁμαρτωλός) man!” Here is an authentic response to Jesus, both in his obedience and in his awareness of his sinfulness in the presence of Jesus. As in the similar incident in John, Peter is ashamed in the presence of Jesus because he had disowned him three times and fled the crucifixion scene.  In the present narrative context, Peter’s response makes little sense. However, after the crucifixion, such guilt becomes understandable. Yet, one need not see his admission of sin as further evidence that Luke took this account from a post‑Resurrection confession by Peter. The terminology Luke employs expresses a general, moral sense of unworthiness and fear‑‑which all who find themselves in the presence of divinity would naturally feel. Note, also, that in Peter's outburst, he no longer addresses Jesus as "master" but instead switches to kyrios or "Lord" ‑‑ a term that in these circumstances conveys far more than a respectful "sir."  Moses, Isaiah, and Jeremiah have this instinct as well, as they try to escape the divine call. Jesus invades the sphere of this man, but Peter wants him to depart from his sphere because he does not feel worthy. The call of Jesus has gone forth to the sinner. In fact, as the call of Levi reminds us, Jesus has come to call sinners rather than the righteous. The sinful man becomes worthy due to the call of Jesus and is therefore able to witness.^[4] For he and all who were with him were amazed (θάμβος) wonder combined with fear, suggesting recognition of the divine) at the catch of fish that they had taken; and so also were James and John, sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. For some scholars, this feels like an awkward reference to the presence of other future disciples. If he has Mark in front of him, he is tipping his hat to the call narrative in that Gospel. Luke immediately refocuses attention on the relationship between Jesus and Simon. Jesus does not in fact depart from the sinner but calls him.  In verse 10, Luke aims the discipleship charge specifically toward Simon. Then Jesus said to Simon, in words like those we find in Mark, Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching (ζωγρῶν, meaning “to capture alive” and “to revive or make alive”) people. Luke avoids the violence suggested by the net in the call narrative of Mark. The first meaning of the term Luke uses fits well with the acts of hunting or fishing, the disciples’ former life, and the second meaning denotes the life on which they are about to embark. Through the plurality of meanings in this verb, one can perceive the depth of Jesus’ teaching and the genius of his apostolic call. The first apostles were to capture human beings while they were biologically alive, but through their capture, the disciples would make them spiritually alive. The miracle is a symbol of what Simon will experience in his fishing for those who will respond by entering the rule of God.  Simon is a leading missionary in Jesus' cause.  Note Luke’s "you shall be taking them alive," = "catching." What anglers do to fish is not good for the fish.  However, Luke has the implication of saving from death and preserved for life. the story concludes in verse 11: When they had brought their boats to shore, they left everything and followed him. This response by the first disciples goes beyond the amazement of the crowds in the response to Jesus. Thus, although Jesus directs to the call to Simon, the undefined “they” respond to the call. The response is immediate and dramatic. The anglers bring their boats ashore abandon them, even with the fish still in them. In Luke's "call" text, the power of this charge, of this invitation to be in service to Christ, is the only detail that is of concern. The particulars of the lives these anglers leave behind are neither Luke's concern nor theirs. Dropping everything, they follow Jesus into a new life of discipleship. Jesus calls them to come to him, to follow him, and to make something specific of them. They will make a transition from what they made of themselves to what Jesus wants to make of them, to make them fish for people is to make them apostles, men of a commission that Jesus gives them, the commission to seek and gather people. These men have a new calling in their seeking and gathering. To fulfill this calling, they must leave their nets and boats to follow Jesus. Jesus calls them to this discipleship. We see here the meaning and purpose of the election of individuals for the proclamation to the many, for the creation of the church with its task in relation to the world. They will share in his prophetic office.^[5]

---

[1] (Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, 1921, 1931, 1958), 217-8, 230; (Jeremias, New Testament Theology: The Proclamation of Jesus, 1971), 87.

[2] (Barth K. , Church Dogmatics, 2004, 1932-67)IV.3 [71.4] 589-91.

[3] (Barth K. , Church Dogmatics, 2004, 1932-67)IV.3 [71.4] 590.

[4] (Barth K. , Church Dogmatics, 2004, 1932-67)IV.3 [71.4] 590.

[5] (Barth K. , Church Dogmatics, 2004, 1932-67)II.2 [35.3] 443-4.

Isaiah 6:1-13

Isaiah 6:1-13 (NRSV)

In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lofty; and the hem of his robe filled the temple. ² Seraphs were in attendance above him; each had six wings: with two they covered their faces, and with two they covered their feet, and with two they flew. ³ And one called to another and said:

“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts;

the whole earth is full of his glory.”

⁴ The pivots on the thresholds shook at the voices of those who called, and the house filled with smoke. ⁵ And I said: “Woe is me! I am lost, for I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips; yet my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!”

⁶ Then one of the seraphs flew to me, holding a live coal that had been taken from the altar with a pair of tongs. ⁷ The seraph touched my mouth with it and said: “Now that this has touched your lips, your guilt has departed and your sin is blotted out.” ⁸ Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” And I said, “Here am I; send me!” ⁹ And he said, “Go and say to this people:

‘Keep listening, but do not comprehend;

keep looking, but do not understand.’

¹⁰ Make the mind of this people dull,

and stop their ears,

and shut their eyes,

so that they may not look with their eyes,

and listen with their ears,

and comprehend with their minds,

and turn and be healed.”

¹¹ Then I said, “How long, O Lord?” And he said:

“Until cities lie waste

without inhabitant,

and houses without people,

and the land is utterly desolate;

¹² until the Lord sends everyone far away,

and vast is the emptiness in the midst of the land.

¹³ Even if a tenth part remain in it,

it will be burned again,

like a terebinth or an oak

whose stump remains standing

when it is felled.”

The holy seed is its stump.

Famously, Isaiah 6:1-13 relates a vision the prophet had in the temple at the time of the death of Uzziah. It relates the call of Isaiah. This passage is a particular example of the multiplicity of biblical ideas of revelation. Here, while worshipping in the temple at Jerusalem, Isaiah becomes part of the counsel of the Lord and receives his commission. [1] The call of Isaiah to become a prophet of God is perhaps the best-known event in Isaiah's life. If the vision recorded in 6:1 marks the start of Isaiah’s ministry, his career began in 738 B.C., the year of King Uzziah’s death, and extended until at least 701 B.C. and possibly later. His words to Ahaz were uttered not long after his ministry in Jerusalem began, and may have propelled him from the ranks of ordinary court prophets to pre—eminent status. It appears that Isaiah was a part of the privileged class within Jerusalem as indicated by his ease of access to the centers of power. His presence in the area of the temple normally restricted to priests might arguably place Isaiah within that class. Might he have been among the 80 priests of valor who confronted King Uzziah on his ill-fated attempt to offer a sacrifice within the temple precinct (II Chronicles 26:16-21)? Certainly uppermost in Isaiah's affections was his love for the city of Jerusalem and his interest in the special relationship between YHWH and the Davidic dynasty.

            Many scholars think the specific setting for chapter 6 to be an annual religious drama conducted in the temple. This drama, known as the Enthronement Celebration (see Psalms 47, 93 and 96-99), depicted the return of the Divine King to the temple as victor over the forces of evil to receive the crown as king, creator and judge of his people.

Isaiah 6: 1-3 describe a vision of the Lord. In the year that King Uzziah died, when the nation is going through a difficult transition from a popular and effective ruler to his unproven and less popular son, Jotham. I hope I am not reading too much into this, but it sounds like Isaiah is worried about the future.  Without Uzziah at the top, what is to happen? He knew that the next king would not be like Uzziah.  After all the good that Uzziah accomplished, the new king could wipe it all away.  Isaiah needed the reminder that it is not good to place too much trust human beings in general and in political leaders in particular.  They often disappoint us.  Those whom we think of as leaders, as celebrities, and lift far above ourselves as idols, often turn out to be too much like us.  They are weak.  They have feet of clay.  Yet, we find it easy for fame, beauty, intellect, wealth, and power to impress us. I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lofty; and the hem of his robe filled the temple. The vision occurs in the temple, likely during an act of worship. Thus, on one Sabbath day, Isaiah entered the temple.  Isaiah was dejected, anxious, yet hopeful that the Lord would give him a sign.  He offered his prayers.  The priests performed their duties.  All went on as before.  However, this time Isaiah saw the Lord. A dejected prophet caught a vision of the real king.  He had been so impressed with the accomplishments of a human king.  He needed a reminder that not all was lost.  The real king was still in charge.  He caught a vision of who the Lord really was. This was no ordinary Sabbath day.  Everything had changed.  Isaiah would not be the same after this.  Throughout much of his ministry, Isaiah tried to persuade the king not to put his trust in foreign alliances.  Rather, in the midst of the complicated politics of that period, he needed to place his trust in the Lord.  The king simply did not listen.  ² Seraphs mixed creatures popular in Egyptian symbolism as guardian deities, were in attendance above him. Each had six wings: with two they covered their faces, and with two they covered their feet (referring to genitalia), and with two they flew. The six-winged seraphim described in this passage are otherwise unknown in the Scriptures, this being the only reference. These attendants to the heavenly throne display the appropriate response to the presence of YHWH.  With two wings, they covered their faces so that the holiness of the Lord would not blind them; with two wings they covered their nakedness; and with two wings they hastened to their appointed tasks.  ³ In addition, one called to another and said: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts, an antiphon sung in Jerusalem temple. In the Hebrew language, one of the ways to express emphasis is through repetition, and thus Isaiah hears the thrice spoken "Holy" as a way of indicating the surpassing holiness of YHWH. As for the Christian reader, wise counsel suggests a need to avoid taking the threefold "Holy" of verse 3 or the "us" of verse 8 in any Trinitarian sense. The former is for emphasis; the latter is YHWH addressing those attending his throne. Yet, the hymn by Reginald Heber (1826) has part of its imagery from this verse. “Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty,” the hymn begins, who is merciful and mighty, “God in three persons blessed Trinity.” As the antiphon concludes, the whole earth is full of the glory of the Lord.”

Isaiah 6: 4-7 are an act of cleansing and prophetic preparation. ⁴ The pivots on the thresholds, referring to the temple, shook at the voices of those who called, either heavenly or earthly voices, and the house filled with smoke, referring to incense and offerings. ⁵ Moreover, I said: “Woe, referring to guilt, is me! I am lost, expressing his sense of this experience overwhelming him, for I am a man of unclean lips. He feels unfit to be the mouthpiece of the Lord.  The point of the cultic separation of what is holy, of what is dedicated to the Lord or related to the Lord, and especially of the deity and the places and times of the divine presence, is not just to protect the holy against defilement by contact with the profane. Above all, the separation has the design of protecting the world of the profane from the threat of the holy. This explains why Isaiah in this verse responds to a vision of the holy Lord with terror.[2] Not only that, I live among a people of unclean lips. He is also aware of the sinfulness of the people generally. Further, the people have “unclean” lips that could not stand before the eternal King and therefore they have fallen victim to death. The judgment of God upon the people of God confirmed this verdict.[3] We may think the passage is harsh. Yet, we snap at our loved ones. We gossip behind the backs of our friends. If we do not speak ugly thoughts about others, we are thinking them. Carl Jung was trying to help a man with severe depression.  Jung told him to cut back his 14-hour workday to eight.  He was to go directly home to his study and spend his evenings there, quiet and alone.  The man tried it.  He went into his study and did some readings, listened to some music.  After a few weeks, he came back to Jung, complaining that he did not notice any improvement.  When the man told him what he was doing, he said, "But you didn't understand.  I wanted you to be all alone with yourself. Not reading or listening to music."  He got a horrified expression on his face.  "I can't think of any worse company!"  Jung replied, "Yet this is the self you inflict on other people fourteen hours a day."[4] That is why confession of sin daily is a good idea. We are wretched people. This passage can make us wonder if part of discipleship is a real anguish over our sinfulness before the Lord. Too many of us read and hear the Bible without having a basic respect of it. Too many go to church and receive absolution without feeling genuinely refreshed. They receive Holy Communion and remain cold. They seem to lack an appreciation of this moment of grace. More of us may need to pray that the Lord would give us more anguish over our sins. On the other hand, the contrived efforts of preachers and teachers in the church to tell us that we should feel shame and unworthiness are very different from what this passage intends. Such persons may appreciate the fact that the preacher has stepped on their toes a bit or “gone to meddling.” Yet, such feelings are often fleeting and do not yield to real change or transformation. Some Christians become stuck in this “woe is me” place. They forget that the Lord comes to unworthy people with forgiveness and grace. Yet my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!” The acute awareness of YHWH's holiness led Isaiah to recognize the comparative unrighteousness of both him and his people. Yet, in spite of that unrighteousness, YHWH chose to reveal the divine self to Isaiah. ⁶ Then, in an act of ritual cleansing, one of the seraphs flew to me, holding a live coal that it took from the altar with a pair of tongs. ⁷ The seraph touched my mouth with it, purging the whole being of the prophet, and said, “Now that this has touched your lips, your guilt has departed and your sin is blotted out.” This revelation of the Lord to Isaiah displays unimaginable grace. The fact that the Lord would choose any of us to be an ambassador of the Lord is an amazing gift and privilege.

Isaiah knew sin. He knew sin personally, but he also knew his people sinned. How do you live for the Lord in a world that has gone so wrong? Whatever became of sin? Theologian Reinhold Niebuhr said that the Christian doctrine of sin was about the only self-evident doctrine we have as Christians. That is, even if you do not believe in Jesus, if you made anything better than a D in Western Civics, you believe that we sin. Human history is the history of sin.

If Niebuhr is right, whatever happened to sin? We know the great tragedies that human beings inflict upon each other.  Most of us know that those who founded this country, as great as many of them were, had their blind spots and sins.  Think of the way our ancestors treated the Native American.  We think of slavery.  We think of the denial of voting rights to women.  Too often, we seem surprised that those people could do such awful things.  It is as if we are surprised that our ancestors had their dark side.  They reflect who we are as well.  Why can we not just say it? We sin.

Andrew Delbanco, in his book The Death of Satan: How Americans Have Lost the Sense of Evil, notes a rather remarkable difference between the ways Americans dealt with two great disasters: the 1912 sinking of the Titanic and the 1986 explosion of the Challenger. When the Titanic went down, press accounts said there was a lesson for us to learn.  Our technology had its limits. Human pride had its consequences. An often written quote was from Scripture: "Whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." In other words, people did not ascribe the Titanic disaster to class tensions, as in the current movie, but to sin. Delbanco says that when the Challenger exploded, television anchors groped for words. When one newscaster finally found the words to describe what had happened, he reached for the closest language he had to describe something big and bad, rhetoric from the Cold War. "Does this mean the Russians are ahead?" Somewhere, between 1912 and 1986, we lost a language for describing what is wrong with us. It is as if we lost the verbal ability to call something "sin."

Our concern is with individual fulfillment. We have no higher good than self-fulfillment. Such a perspective on the challenge that faces a human life is that it sets aside moral codes as impediments to our self-fulfillment. Yet, the moral struggle, learning the difference between right and wrong, acknowledging that right and wrong exist, is part of what makes us human. We want our children to grow up to be good people, of course, but without the moral categories of right and wrong. We want a generation to be people of character and virtue without the categories of right and wrong. In a sense, we remove the heart from the chest, and yet, still demand that the heart function.[5]

If self-fulfillment is the perceived dilemma of humanity, then are preachers to do with sin? Tom Long tells of a coffee hour conversation with a graduate student. She was serving her first church, preaching her first sermons. "I've got a problem," she declared to this teacher of preaching. "I can preach love, hope, and grace, but I cannot bring myself to preach about sin and judgment. People already get so many bad messages; I don't want my preaching to add another burden." She changed the conversation. The woman had been having a tough time as a full-time seminarian and a single parent. Her teenage son was putting her in misery with his defiance, his bad behavior. He had stolen money from her, crashed the family car in a joy ride. "Last night, I finally broke down," she said. "My son blew into the house and after hurling angry words, slammed the door to his room. I decided that enough was enough, and I confronted him. Even though he is so much bigger than I am, I opened the door, stood there, looked directly at him, and said with all of the firmness I could muster, 'I love you so much I will not allow you to do this to yourself or to us anymore.'" Tom sat there a moment, and then said, "I have just heard a powerful and faithful gospel sermon on sin and judgment."

Are we dishonest about the human condition? The call of Isaiah raises and answers this question. Young Isaiah is in the temple at worship. He has a stunning vision. It was as if the heavens opened and he saw the very throne of the Lord. "Holy, Holy, Holy," sang the cherubim. Moreover, Isaiah cried, "The choir was really on target today!" No. Isaiah declares, "Woe is me, for I am a man of unclean lips." We have had so many TV shows and movies related to angels.  Normally, when the angle shows up, the angel is kind, encouraging, and almost soft.  I do not know if these cherubim and seraphim are synonymous with angels; surely they are kissing cousins at the least.  Now, when the human being meets the angel in these shows, how often does that person cry, "Woe is me, for I am a person of unclean lips"? This experience is similar to that of Peter in Luke 5.  After he witnesses a miracle by Jesus, he bows before Jesus, and says, "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man." They left everything and followed him. Isaiah and Peter both experienced a holy presence that was so awesome that they knew they had no right to be there.   

We cannot be honest about our sin because we are dishonest about the human condition.  We know not how to describe ourselves except through therapeutic categories (we are sick rather than sinful).  We have an educational problem, and if we just had enough of it, we eradicate racism, sexism, and other sin one could mention. There is some truth to all of that, but none of it gets to the heart of a specifically Christian view of the human condition.

This Scripture demonstrates that sin is a by-product of God confronting us.  Say it like a professor: sin is a theological rather than an anthropological matter. This is to say that the Christian doctrine of sin deals with our notions of God rather than to our ideas about humanity. Sin is not the result of natural human anxiety or little slip-ups.  We are saying that face-to-face with the awesome righteousness of God, the holiness of Jesus, we fall to our knees. We have our noses rubbed in the great gap between whom we are and who God is. To be brought close to the claim, "Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God Almighty. The whole earth is full of his glory!" is to cry, "Woe is me for I am one of unclean lips and dwell amid a people of unclean lips." Any knowledge of God that is not also knowledge of our impoverishment generates arrogance. Yet, the knowledge of our impoverishment without knowledge of God generates despair. Thus, the Christian who lives in a “woe is me” condition has not heard truly the message of this text. For the Christian, of course, knowledge of Jesus Christ is central because we find there both the glory of the Lord and the impoverishment of humanity.[6]

We know sin as we truly know God. Luther said he would know nothing of his sin had the Holy Spirit not taught him. Sin is a by-product of faithful worship. The theologian Karl Barth could declare that, "Only Christians sin." The sins of non-Christians are peccadilloes, slipups, and small potatoes. Christians sense sin as a huge gap between our loving, forgiving, seeking Savior and us. Christians confess only because of a prior confidence in a forgiving, gracious God. Before that, confession is mere child's play.

The human heart is a great battleground between good and evil, between certain natural human inclinations, and the good that God intends for us. In the words of the eldest brother Dimitri of Fyodor Dostoevsky's great novel, The Brothers Karamazov: "The devil is fighting with God and the battlefield is the human heart."

In a world that has gone has so wrong, we must be willing to face the reality of our condition as human beings.  Yes, there is a great gap between God and us.  God has overcome that gap through grace.  Peter cried, "Depart from me, I am a sinful man!" The good news is, he never does.

In Isaiah 6: 8-13, we have the giving of the divine commission to Isaiah. While he perceives his own weakness before God, he hears a very special voice. ⁸ Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” I find this fascinating.  When Isaiah perceives his own sinfulness, the Lord did not forget about him.  Rather, grace became even more obvious to Isaiah.  The Lord could use a broken person, one who knew his own sinfulness. This revelation also communicates an unavoidable mission. The Lord comes with forgiveness and grace, and therefore a mission. The Lord convicts, but also equips and empowers to live a life for the Lord. The Lord adopts us as children of the Lord. The image is that of the Lord surrounded by the heavenly court with Isaiah allowed to attend. Moreover, I said, “Here am I; send me!” Isaiah displays the kind of faith and trust that we might think of as courage. He is willing to get up and do what needs to be done. Grace frees the prophet to respond to the mission. He hears the question and knows only he can go. He has no authority outside this.  The prophet accepts the commission. Isaiah's call introduces a new element to prophetic ministry, namely the need for the spokesman to experience purification for himself before he can undertake the mission to which he has been called. Thus cleansed (forgiven), Isaiah can do nothing less than show his gratitude by committing himself to the purposes of YHWH. The task is impossible. It will likely not lead to success, as the world understands success. People need to hear that the call of the Lord is toward something that looks like endless failure. ⁹ Further, he said, “Go and say to this people, an implicit sign of divine rejection, for the Lord knew they would reject the message of the prophet. Isaiah united himself to the people by saying that he dwelt among a people of unclean lips. The Lord does not refer to them as the people of the Lord. Rather, they are simply “this people.” Here is the message Isaiah is to deliver. ‘Keep listening, but do not comprehend; keep looking, but do not understand.’ ¹⁰ Make the mind of this people dull, and stop their ears, and shut their eyes, so that they may not look with their eyes, and listen with their ears, and comprehend with their minds, and turn and receive healing.” With their senses dulled, they cannot act responsibly. His call is to a specific political situation. He is not a traditional preacher of repentance. ¹¹ Then I said, “How long, O Lord?” Isaiah begs for this period to end. Thus, he is not just asking for information, as in how many months or years. The Lord said: “Until cities lie waste without inhabitant, and houses without people, and the land is utterly desolate. We are to imagine the devastation wars caused. Isaiah 6:12-13, in a saying that refers to the stump left after the destruction of Judah in 587 BC.[7] If they think they have received enough judgment, they will receive more. Thus, when the prophet asks how long judgment will come, the Lord answers ¹² until the Lord sends everyone far away, and vast is the emptiness in the midst of the land. ¹³ Even if a tenth part remain in it, it will be burned again, like a terebinth or an oak whose stump remains standing when it is felled. “The holy seed is its stump.

In many ways, this passage forms the basic structure for traditional Protestant worship. The call to worship invites us to awaken to the presence of the Lord. Holy, Holy, Holy invites us to offer praise. The entrance into the divine presence gives us an opportunity for awareness of our sin, followed by the assurance of pardon. We then hear the word of God, followed by a hymn of dedication. The benediction invites us to go into the world to serve.

Soren Kierkegaard tells a parable of a community of ducks waddling off to duck church to hear the duck preacher. The duck preacher spoke eloquently of how God had given the ducks wings with which to fly. With these wings there was nowhere the ducks could not go; no God‑given task the ducks could not accomplish. With those wings, they could soar into the presence of God himself. Shouts of "Amen" were quacked throughout the duck congregation. At the conclusion of the service, the ducks left, commenting on what a wonderful message they had heard ‑‑ and waddled back home.

Clearly, Isaiah left this worship service as a man with a mission. This moment may be such a moment for you. It may not, of course, but it might be. With Isaiah, we can also say that the rest of our lives are in the hands of the Lord. We want only what the Lord wants.  No matter where it leads.

John Wesley used a covenant prayer in his service of renewal.  I invite you to share this prayer with me.  May this be a prayer that becomes much more than words upon a page.  Rather, may this prayer express what is in our hearts today. 

I am no longer my own, but thine.  Put me to what thou wilt, rank me with whom thou wilt.  Put me to doing, put me to suffering.  Let me be employed by thee or laid aside for thee, exalted for thee or brought low by thee.  Let me be full, let me be empty.  Let me have all things, let me have nothing.  I freely and heartily yield all things to thy pleasure and disposal.  And now, O glorious and blessed God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, thou art mine, and I am thine.  So be it.  And the covenant which I have made on earth, let it be ratified in heaven.  Amen. 

It seems wise to end this reflection with a popular praise song built off this passage.

"Here I Am, Lord."

I, the Lord of sea and sky,

I have heard My people cry.

All who dwell in dark and sin,

My hand will save.

I who made the stars of night,

I will make their darkness bright.

Who will bear My light to them?

Whom shall I send?

Here I am Lord, Is it I Lord?

I have heard You calling in the night.

I will go Lord, if You lead me.

I will hold Your people in my heart. 

--Lyrics by Dan Schutte.

---

[1] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology, Volume 1, 203.

[2] Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, I, 204ff.

[3] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 30.

[4] Parker Palmer, "Borne Again: The Monastic Way to Church Renewal," Weavings, Se-Oc 1986, 14. 

[5] The image is from C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man.

[6] Knowledge of God without knowledge of our impoverishment generates arrogance. The knowledge of our impoverishment without knowledge of God generates despair. The knowledge of Jesus Christ constitutes the center ground because there we find both God and our impoverishment.  ‑‑ Pascal, Pensees (527).

[7] Many scholars consider verses 12-13 as from one of the editors of the book in 587 BC. The reason for this is that it appears to refer to the exile and destruction of Judah by Babylon in 587 BC.  However, it could also refer to the Assyrian desolation of the northern ten tribes in 721 and would then refer to the deportation initiated by them at that time.  Most scholars prefer, for example, to think of v. 13c as a post-exilic addition, giving hope that the little “stump” around Jerusalem can become a tree, that is, a full nation, once again.  However, if from the lifetime of Isaiah, it would refer to the people of Judah continuing and thriving after the Assyrian invasion of 721 BC.

Psalm 138

Psalm 138

¹ I give you thanks, O Lord,

with my whole heart; before the gods I sing your praise;

 ² I bow down toward your holy temple

and give thanks to your name for your steadfast love and your faithfulness;

for you have exalted your name and your word above everything.

³ On the day I called, you answered me,

you increased my strength of soul.

⁴ All the kings of the earth shall praise you, O Lord,

for they have heard the words of your mouth.

⁵ They shall sing of the ways of the Lord,

for great is the glory of the Lord.

⁶ For though the Lord is high, he regards the lowly;

but the haughty he perceives from far away.

⁷ Though I walk in the midst of trouble,

you preserve me against the wrath of my enemies;

you stretch out your hand, and your right hand delivers me.

⁸ The Lord will fulfill his purpose for me;

your steadfast love, O Lord, endures forever.

Do not forsake the work of your hands.

Psalm 138 is a psalm of thanksgiving and praise, quite likely from the period of King Solomon or shortly after, due to the reference to the Temple.[1] Its superscription is the oft-used Of David. Its exuberance has a wide reach, singing praise before the gods, which may refer to the heavenly court or the gods of the nations, which clearly subordinates to the Lord. He will also sing in praise of the ways of the Lord before the kings of the earth.

In Psalm138: 1-3, the king offers thanks. ¹ I give you thanks, O Lord, with my whole heart (Psalm 9:1, 86:12, and 111:1).  Elsewhere in Scripture, especially passages influenced by Deuteronomistic and/or prophetic theology, there is also an emphasis on honoring (including seeking, loving and obeying) God with the whole heart: Deuteronomy 4:29; 6:5-6; 10:12-13; 30:2, 6, 10; Joshua 22:5; Proverbs 3:5-6; Jeremiah 29:11-14; Joel 2:12; Zephaniah 3:14; Luke 10:27. To what extent is our own love for, obedience to, thanksgiving and praise to God from our whole heart? 

The psalmist interestingly concludes the verse by saying that before the gods (elohim) I sing your praise (Psalm 82:1, 89:7-8, 95:3). God has appeared in worship. If the reference is to gods, it suggests a henotheistic faith, in that while Yahweh is God of Israel exclusively, other nations may have other gods. Such a notion moves against the assumption of many of us that the Old Testament represents a unified picture of a monotheistic faith that denies the existence of the gods. Yet, the historical situations in the Old Testament suggest a complex picture. Exodus 20:3, in commanding the Israelites to have no other gods before Yahweh, suggests other gods exist, but Israel is to have Yahweh. Psalmists could affirm that there is no one like Yahweh among the gods (86:8). The Lord is a great God and King above all gods (95:3). The Lord is to receive praise above all gods (96:4). All gods shall bow before Yahweh, putting their worshippers to shame (97:7). Such a notion reminds us that Israel slowly came to a monotheistic faith only in the time of Hezekiah and Josiah. Joshua 24 suggests that early Israelites worshiped many gods and goddesses, either bringing them with them into the Promised Land or adopted them as such once they arrived. Some Israelites tried to have an eclectic form of religion in which they combined worship of Yahweh with other gods (I Kings 11:33). Prophet after prophet thundered against people with idolatrous beliefs and practices (comparing such unfaithful worship and practices to adultery) because many people were not faithful to the Lord God of Israel alone. Elijah urged the people to decide instead of limping through their lives holding two different opinions. He urges them to follow Yahweh or Baal (I Kings 18:21). II Isaiah was the prophet who most vigorously called Israel to a strict monotheistic, non-idolatrous faith and way of living. There is no other god beside Yahweh, so they are to turn to Yahweh, who is righteous and the Savior. If they turn to Yahweh, they will receive salvation. Yahweh is God, and there is no other (Isaiah 45:21-22). A psalmist ponders why the nations ask where the God of Israel is. God is in the heavens and does whatever what God pleases. In contrast, their idols are the work of human hands, with mouths that do not speak, eyes that do not see, ears that do not hear, noses that do not smell, hands that do not feel, and feet that do not walk. Those who trust in gods like these become like them. The psalmist then urges Israel to trust in the Lord, who is their help and shield (Psalm 115:2-9). Of course, Jesus affirmed the basic creed of Israel, the Shema, which stated that the Lord is one, and beside the Lord is no other (Deuteronomy 6:4 and Mark 12:28-34).  The Bible arose over several periods of Israelite and Jewish biblical and theological history. Paul wrestles with these matters as well. He is clear in his monotheism, affirming that no idol truly exits and there is no God but one. Yet, he also affirms many gods and lords claim the allegiance of their worshippers, while for us, we worship one God revealed in Jesus Christ (I Corinthians 8:4-6). To return to our passage, then, we also need to remember that elohim could also refer to divine beings, the heavenly assembly, divine council, or even angels. The Tanakh translates the word as divine beings. New English Translation has “heavenly assembly”; the LXX Greek has ἀγγέλων (“angels”), and the Latin Vulgate has angelorum (“angels”). In Psalm 8:5 ’elohim is translated variously as “God” (NRSV), “the angels” (KJV) or “the heavenly beings” (NIV and NET). Thus, one could understand elohim as referring the divine council, comprised of Yahweh and other heavenly beings around the throne of Yahweh. Isaiah 6:1-13 suggests the Lord invites the prophet to the divine counsel for him to receive his vision, calling, and mission. Psalmists could suggest encouraging heavenly beings to ascribe glory and strength to Yahweh (29:1). God assumes the throne among the heavenly beings, which we could also understand to be gods (82:1). None of the heavenly beings compares to Yahweh, whom the heavenly beings fear (89:5-8). I repeat the observation that the Israelite and Jewish views of Yahweh, viewed in the context of its biblical and theological history, are more complex than we sometimes realize.

The psalmist continues with the theme of giving thanks. ² I bow down toward your holy temple, in Deuteronomistic theology the name of the Lord resides in the temple, where humans have ritual contact with the Lord, and give thanks to your name for your steadfast love (hesed) and your faithfulness (‘emet). In this reference to the steadfast love and faithfulness of the Lord, we have to do with the identity and consistency of the eternal God in divine love turning toward those whom God has made.[2] He gives thanks in this way, for you have exalted your name and your word above everything. ³ On the day I called, you answered me; you increased my strength of soul. Imagine the relief that, on the very day the king called upon the Lord, the Lord answered. It may not happen often, but when it does, it is wonderful. The poet gets more than he asked for, God granting salvation and new strength. 

Let us pause for a moment and reflect upon the importance of gratitude in our lives. The psalmist is offering gratitude before he has received an answer. The spirit of praise and thanksgiving is one that anticipates victory and divine response. Further, our outer lives need to express our inner world. Without that connection, purity will stagnate, and intention will decay.[3] The only place to live our lives truly is out of gratitude. The longer we live in gratitude, the more we love a life of gratitude. We enjoy our neighbors more. Gratitude arises out of humility. It acknowledges the debt we owe to God and to other people. Gratitude admits that we would have nothing if it were not for what others have already given to us. We need to express this gratitude as often as we can, both to God and to others.[4] Unexpressed gratitude is plain, old-fashioned ingratitude.[5] Genuine happiness will arise out of our cultivation of gratitude. People we intentionally thank will also experience increased happiness. Expressing gratitude is the stone thrown into the flat water. It creates a ripple that affects everything around it.[6]

In Psalm 138: 4-5, the writer turns to the hope that others shall offer praise to the Lord. ⁴ All the kings of the earth shall praise you, O Lord, for they have heard the words of your mouth. ⁵ They shall sing of the ways of the Lord, for great is the glory of the Lord. Human kings praise the Lord because they have seen how the Lord protects those who call upon the Lord. The only way this hope becomes true is the faithful witness of the people of the Lord throughout the earth. The Israelite king plans to publish abroad what the Lord has said. Even Paul had the confidence that faith comes from what one hears (Romans 10:17). However, this could mean in an eschatological sense. However, one could take the meaning here in an eschatological sense. Beyond the end of our human time, human beings shall offer praise.

Then, the poet offers a brief reflection on divine providence. ⁶ For though the Lord is high, he regards the lowly; but the haughty he perceives from far away. The exalted Lord regards the lowly, a reversal reminiscent of the Song of Hannah (I Samuel 2:1-10) and the Magnificat of Mary (Luke 1:46-55). The Lord attends to the needs of the humble and pulls down the proud from miles away.

We now hear of the occasion of this psalm. Such lavish praise provides the context for the confidence that the purposes of the Lord, for even individual lives cannot be thwarted. Neither heavenly nor earthly powers stand in the way of the loving purpose of the Lord. ⁷ Though I walk in the midst of trouble, you preserve me against the wrath of my enemies; you stretch out your hand, and your right hand delivers me. Here, the hand of the Lord delivers him. The writer asks for protection in battle. His salvation becomes part of the salvation of the world. ⁸ The Lord will fulfill the divine purpose for me. That is, he is confident that the Lord will complete or finish the things for him. The reason will be that your steadfast love (hesed), O Lord, endures forever. He then offers a final appeal. Do not forsake (abandon or cut loose) the work of your hands, referring to himself as the work of the hands of the Lord. Now, the hands of the Lord have fashioned him as well as delivered him. The Lord will bring the redemptive work of God to completion. The psalmist shares the confidence of the prophet that the word of the Lord shall accomplish the purpose the Lord intended and succeed in the matter of which the Lord sent it (Isaiah 55:10-11). This psalmist shares the confidence of Paul, who could remind his readers that the one who began a good work among them will bring that work to completion at the day of Jesus Christ (Philippians 1:6).

---

[1] Dahood strongly objects to a post-exilic date due to the reference to the Temple in verse 2.

[2] (Pannenberg, Systematic Theology 1998, 1991) Volume I, 436.

[3] Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel said it this way: “Unless the outer life expresses the inner world, purity stagnates and intention decays.”

[4] Inspired by —Ellsworth Kalas, “Lessons learned,” Asbury Theological Seminary Alumni Link, Summer 2009, 8.

[5] There is no such thing as gratitude unexpressed.  If it is unexpressed, it is plain, old-fashioned ingratitude.  —Robert Brault.

[6] Lyubomirsky, Sonja. The How of Happiness: A Scientific Approach to Getting the Life You Want. New York: Penguin Press, 2007. 

I Corinthians 15:1-11

I Corinthians 15:1-11

¹ Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters,  of the good news  that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand,  ² through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you—unless you have come to believe in vain.  ³ For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures,  ⁴ and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures,  ⁵ and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.  ⁶ Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters  at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died.   ⁷ Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.  ⁸ Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.  ⁹ For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.  ¹⁰ But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them—though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me.  ¹¹ Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe.

           The theme of I Corinthians 15:1-11 is the resurrection of Jesus.

¹ Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news (εὐαγγέλιον) that I proclaimed (εὐηγγελισάμην) to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, ² through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message (λόγῳ) that I proclaimed (εὐηγγελισάμην) to you—unless you have come to believe in vain. This statement at least hints that to hold firm to the message is a condition for their salvation.  ³ For I handed on to you as of first importance, and therefore of top priority in his preaching and teaching, what I in turn had received. Paul also received the message about the Lord’s Supper (11:23). Thus, we learn that Paul received what he has delivered to them concerning the death and resurrection of Jesus. He would have received this teaching in the first years after the crucifixion and the proclamation of the resurrection. To expand upon the modern historical credibility of the material, the earliest account we have of the appearances is in I Corinthians 15, written around 57 AD in Ephesus. According to Galatians 1:18, Paul was in Jerusalem three years after his conversion. Thus, he was there around 33-35 AD, if we put the death of Jesus in 30 AD. The witnesses of the appearances are quite close to the event of the resurrection. As we have already noted, Paul appeals to an established tradition, rather than his own memory. The assumption that several members of the primitive Christian community genuinely experienced appearances of the resurrected Lord, and therefore not invented in the course of later legendary development, has good historical foundation.[1]

First, Paul received the message that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures.  Christ made expiation for our sins. Human beings could not compensate God for the wrong they had done. One puzzlement the theory of expiation presents is that it suggests that God is hard to please. If human beings could do nothing to make amends does that say “something” about God? Without pursuing this thought too far, the doctrine of the atonement says that God is the one making the sacrifice that human beings did not have the capacity to make. The endless round of sacrifices, both animal and grain, did not place human beings in right relationship with God. Paul is clearly presenting the death of Jesus in this way, freeing us from the responsibility of making something right that we could never make right. In this case, one goes back to Isaiah 53:3ff. Jesus died as one rejected by his people. This passage is the only part of the Jewish tradition to which the early Christians could go to interpret his death in an expiatory way. The circumstances of the death of Jesus provided a reason to go back to this prophetic passage because his people in fact despised and rejected Jesus, but the one whom God also in his resurrection.[2]⁴ As if to emphasize the point, he stresses that he received the teaching that his friends buried him. Eventually, this fact will become an important part of the “proof” that God raised Jesus from the dead. The disciples discovered the emptiness of the tomb. Yet should we consider it significant that Paul does not write directly about the emptiness of the tomb? Paul may have had no interest in such a legend. The Gospel story itself reminds us that historically, the emptiness of the tomb is an ambiguous fact.[3] Yet, the sequence of dead, buried, and raised hints at the emptiness of the tomb. The emphasis upon burial seems to stress that Jesus truly died. Thus, it was not just a literary device.[4] He may have considered the emptiness as self-evident. The “proof” Paul needed was in the appearance of the risen Lord to him, and thus, the emptiness of the tomb was ambiguous. Further, if the tomb is empty, it makes the idea that the appearances are hallucinations less likely. The empty tomb resists any superficial spiritualizing of the Easter message. We can admit that Jesus rose into the kerygma of the church. We can admit that the risen Lord identifies himself with the church so much that it has become the body of Christ. Such notions will push into the background the uniqueness of the event of Christ, transforming it into a generalized spiritual and ethical principle. It connects the earthly corporeality of Jesus with the eschatological reality of a new life. The empty tomb tradition is a separate, independent witness to what happened to Jesus after his death. It becomes an anticipation of the transformation of all creation that Christians anticipate will be the end of creation and thus humanity. 

Christianity is the only religion in the world that places at the very heart of its message the death of its founder. Every other religion has a teacher who lived a human life and died, but followers did not consider that death as something to celebrate. Quite the contrary, followers remember the deaths of the Buddha or Muhammad or Confucius or Zoroaster with solemnity. Followers may consider manner of their deaths as noble. Yet, in the last analysis, they do not view the death of the teacher as especially helpful. Their death is a tragic and irrevocable loss. Not so for the death of Jesus. Paul proclaims that Jesus died for our sins. His words become harsher when he emphasizes the burial of Jesus. Because of his death, we are free. 

Each of us, at some time in life, comes face to face with a massive void, a big empty place. Such experiences are like the emptiness that death will bring. It happens … 

• when you give your heart to someone who doesn’t accept the gift

• when you learn a sport, practice hard and still don’t make the team

• when you study and pursue a profession, only to find you hate your work

• when you create something beautiful, and discover that no one’s interested

• when you try to resist a temptation, but then give in to it again and again

• when you jump to a new job, then lose it in a downsizing

• when you put money into a home, only to see your equity disappear

• when you retire from a long career, and wake up with nothing to do

• when you lose a spouse to cancer, and find yourself all alone in the world.

 

These are huge cold spots. Massive voids. No, you cannot believe you can do anything, and you will do it. Rather, you will have disappointments in your life. It can feel like the emptiness and void of death. We are all going to face some empty places in life, and we need to take them seriously.

            The passion narrative taken seriously is a massive cold spot, emptiness, and silence, from God. The silence of God makes what happens next in the proclamation of Paul a surprise.

Second, Paul received the message that God raised him on the third day in accordance with the scripture. Easter was, and is, a gracious surprise. The scientific details — the biology — of resurrection are a mystery. Christians need to admit the difficulty of continuing to believe the surprise of Easter is a promise for humanity and for creation. The event is entirely God-generated. Jesus did not rise from the dead under his strength or power. Resurrection depended upon the action of God on his behalf. The same is true for all human beings. Note that as Paul continues, his whole focus shifts to the resurrection. Given the similarity of this statement with the “passion predictions” in Mark, and given the fact that Paul says received this tradition, Paul is relating an early statement of beliefs the church had concerning Jesus. This reference to scripture proved the veracity of the message of the resurrection of Jesus. This passage expresses why Paul is so astounded that the issue of resurrection should have even come up. His message of crucifixion and resurrection was of a single piece and primary elements of his preaching. Crucifixion and resurrection form the heart of the message, so much so that one without the other would have brought the salvation Paul is proclaiming. Their preaching would be in vain (verse 12) were it not for the resurrection. Many scholars will agree with Bultmann, who thinks that “resurrection” here simultaneously means “exaltation.” The proper background for the language of resurrection is Jewish apocalyptic. The language is metaphor, in the sense of someone rising from sleep. It hints at new life. It will always be debatable since it points to an event beyond our everyday experience. The resurrection affirms the divine Yes over the life of Jesus, and therefore, re-focuses us upon the event nature of the relationship between God and humanity. 

Third, Paul received the message that the risen Lord appeared to certain ones who would become witnesses. I will summarize the work of Reginald H. Fuller.[5] The fact that Paul relates about the event of Christ rests upon witness or testimony is significant. It does not rest upon the type of certainty one can have in math and science. In your life, you have relied upon witnesses. Someone testifies to a wonderful experience (movie, play, restaurant, and so on) and you take his or her word for it. You may be happy you did. They increase their credibility for you. You may be sorry you did, decreasing their credibility. When someone testifies to something unbelievable, such as seeing someone alive after he had surely died, it stretches our ability to believe the witness. Suppose today, someone testified to you she had seen a vision. It does not matter what it was a vision of, but you hear them say it. Testimony, in other words, is notoriously subjective to the offering the testimony and to the one hearing it. A follower of Jesus is willing to believe God acted in an incredible way in Jesus, and will therefore act in an incredible way for us as well. 

I do think that this passage has the effect of offering historical veracity to the resurrection of Jesus. Yet, we need to exercise some caution. To call it proof is to go a bit far. We often think of proof as having the certainty of math and science. If we could do that through the resurrection of Jesus, we would have a historical proof for the existence of God.  I am not willing to go to that place. However, we need to have the courage to look at what Paul offers here as providing a basis for legitimately looking upon the event of Christ as a genuine event in the life of the relationship between God and humanity. It heightens the event nature of that relationship. It emphasizes the revelatory character of that relationship. God discloses something to us that we could not figure out on our own. In his event, God is the one who promises that death and darkness is not the end. Rather, life and light is our end. My focus, naturally, will be the witness Paul provides concerning the resurrection of Jesus.  As we explore Paul’s list of witnesses to the appearances of Jesus. His account here predates the gospel accounts. Just as the Corinthians could not fill in the details of what Paul says here by recalling the gospel narratives, we should not harmonize his list to their stories. Paul may well have provided more details in his teaching and preaching while in Corinth, but to assume his stories would have matched the evangelists’ (which do not even match one another) is an extreme argument from silence. The early church had independent traditions concerning both the appearances and the empty tomb. Yet, the empty tomb receives its significance from the appearances. The experiences of the risen Lord these persons received became an important part of the proof of the message of the resurrection of Jesus.[6] When gnostic elements in Corinth push him, Paul is willing to enumerate witnesses as a proof.[7]  The significance of the list of witnesses is that Paul is going to make vast affirmations in verses 12ff for individuals and for the universe based upon the veracity of what he says here. One needs to have the theological courage to determine precisely as possible what the event of resurrection was for Jesus. Apart from that courage, the theologian runs the risk of becoming little more than offering Gnostic speculation and opinion. [8] The appearances might suggest a distribution between Galilee and Jerusalem, but it would be difficult to know how. Even from the standpoint of modern historical study, the fact that Paul knew the witnesses involved, or most of them, himself being the last in the series, lends credibility to this list. Paul brought this list together to give proof for the fact of the resurrection. Thus, ⁵ he appeared (ὤφθη) to Cephas, then to the twelve. This appearance is the establishment of the church. It confirms the founding significance of the disciples. ⁶ Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. This appearance would appear to be the first fruits of the founding of the church, quite likely the result of the labors of the disciples in Jerusalem. If so, even if it can be nothing more than a supposition, it may have a connection with the event Luke describes on Pentecost in Acts 2.[9] The intent of the enumeration is to give proof by means of witnesses for the facticity of the resurrection of Jesus is particularly strong here. Given the standards of the time, one can hardly call into question the intention Paul has of giving a convincing historical proof.[10] ⁷ Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Although James himself stayed in Jerusalem, he assisted the church in its early missionary outreach into Judea and Samaria. Thus, this appearance would have a connection with that calling and mission. ⁸ Last of all, as to one untimely born (miscarried, aborted), he appeared also to me. The idea is that from the spiritual point of view he was not born at the right time, because he had not been a disciple during the lifetime of the disciples. It could also refer to the idea of unfitness for life, a charge against Paul by his opponents.[11] He would be an unlikely person to choose as an apostle, being an active opponent and persecutor of the church. However, the disciples whom Jesus formed during his life were also unlikely choices. Recognizing this, it would be an interesting study of the unlikely persons and groups of persons with whom God works to be witnesses to the saving works of God. The only criteria seems to be a willingness to listen and respond to the call. One can have little doubt that his appearance has a close connection, not only to his personal conversion, but also to his missionary outreach to the gentile world. It suggests that the appearance to Paul is on a par with or like the appearance to that of the disciples. It suggests the disciples accepted the appearance of the risen Lord to Paul as credible and bound them together in a common mission. All of this gives some credibility to the notion that the appearances were more like the prophetic visions we have in the Old Testament. Isaiah had a vision of the Lord in the Temple. We could compare the visionary experiences of Ezekiel and Zechariah as well. They were disclosures or revelations to these individuals and groups of the risen Lord. We do not have to view such a vision as subjective psychological projection. In this case, the sheer number of the visions occurring over several years suggests something more than simple projection. [12]  The witnesses to the appearances “saw” an end-time reality. If our time and place is the present time, the old age that is passing away, then the appearances are the new age. How can we expect that we can clearly define it in our terms? The appearances occur over a period of three years, which should lend some validity to their historicity.^[13] Paul is insisting that the Jewish apocalyptic hope remains valid for these Gentiles, regardless of heavily influenced they might be by their Greek philosophical tradition. Thus, one might be able to designate the resurrection of Jesus as an historical event. If one can understand the emergence of primitive Christianity only considering the eschatological hope for a resurrection from the dead that occurs in Jesus of Nazareth, then it would be designated a historical event, even if we do not know anything more about it. For some people, he admits, violating the laws of nature is too much to take.[14]

            Scholars who want to explore the historical basis for Christian claims will focus on what Paul says here, in I Corinthians 15:1-11, and rightly so. The appearance stories in Matthew, Luke, and John come 30-40 years later.  The narrations of the appearances of Jesus in the gospel story are vehicles for the theological perspective of each writer.[15]  

            The theological significance of this passage is immense. The letters of Paul formulate basic Christian beliefs along the line of Jewish apocalyptic. An important reason for this is his belief that God raised Jesus from the dead. I do not think most scholars would disagree with this. However, one area that will need some exploration is whether Paul carried out this formulation like his rabbinic heritage, or whether he abandoned it in favor of Hellenism. 

W. D. Davies will make the case that whatever changes he notes in what Paul presents in his letters occur in the context within Judaism. I will focus only on what he says that is pertinent to this passage.[16] For Paul, the resurrection of Jesus is the first fruits of the general resurrection. This image implies that the full harvest will follow. In the resurrection of Jesus, Paul saw the beginning of the end. The powers of the age to come were already at work in his time and place. It was along these lines that Paul participated in the reconstruction of the eschatology of the early church. Now, the background for this reconstruction was Judaism, in that it had already expended much thought upon the problems involved in the notion of resurrection. Such Jewish speculation influenced early church thinking in this regard. For Davies, the most important aspect of this speculation was in Hebrew anthropology and psychology. Judaism conceived of the human being as a totality, a union of flesh and soul. A truly living being was always an embodied spirit, God having created both soul and body. They have a mutual interdependence, incapable of genuine life apart from each other. Death was not natural. It was the consequence of sin. The reunion of soul and body in resurrection was involved in any teaching concerning eternity with God. Life in the age to come must be embodied life. 

            I want to build upon the suggestion of Pannenberg that the testimonies concerning the appearances and the empty tomb provide reasonable grounds for Christian confidence that God raised Jesus from the dead.[17] This means the appearances did not develop as a legend over the years. This fact separates it from his approach to the legendary stories related to the birth of Jesus.[18] In this view, he has a somewhat surprising ally in Bultmann who also admits that the cross and resurrection as salvation occurrences is different from the myth of the mystery religions and from Gnostic thought.[19] The differences consist in the fact that the subject is a historical person, Jesus, and his death on the cross only a few years earlier is at the center of the salvation occurrence. One does not accept the witness based on authority, of course. The nature of the witness will have to hold up to the testing to which we as modern persons put them.      This passage concludes with the personal testimony of Paul to the work of grace in his life.  ⁹ For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to have God call me as an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. The recipient of grace presupposes that individuals are nothing. This passage brings out the meaning of grace.[20] ¹⁰ Nevertheless, by the grace of God I am what I am, and the grace of God toward me has not been in vain. Without the grace of God, he has no place … no ministry … no job … no nothing. Paul sees himself as unfit and undeserving. The  loving grace of God saved him, lifted him up and set him on a new course, giving a new and quite different meaning to his life. We are where we are and who we are by the grace of God. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them—though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. It seems that the pattern of death and resurrection is true for us as well. If we do not die, then rebirth makes little sense. Yes, Christ has suffered and died for us. For the sake of our spiritual growth, however, our game needs to fall apart. We have lived with a definition of what it means for us to be successful, moral, better than, right, and good. That by which we have gained our identity needs to fail, to the point where we do not feel worthy because we have sinned. At such a point, we realize that live is never about what we do for God. Rather, our lives are about what God has done for us. We stop trying to love God more and we allow God to love us.[21] ¹¹ Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe. 

            Paul is emphasizing that the preaching of the disciples and the early church in Jerusalem are consistent with his preaching. Paul wants to emphasize both the historicity of the resurrection and its centrality in the community’s proclamation. We can say historically that witnesses claim, after the death of Jesus, to have seen him.  Based on such visions, they arrived at the theological conclusion that God raised Jesus from the dead.  They knew they spoke of an event that actually happened.  They became convinced that the resurrection of Jesus had taken place.  Historically, we cannot establish this fact. If the appearances were the sole means by which the certainty that God raised Jesus from the dead came to the disciples, and on which the church came into being, how was it possible for these experiences to have had such an effect?  We simply cannot reserve this question for faith, and deny the question to the historian. 

Yet, I would make the point that Peter, the twelve, the 500, James, and all the apostles, had a decision to make. They had come to a point in their lives when they could respond with faith in what they had seen or turn away from what they had seen. We are at one with the first believers and with Paul himself in our common faith. Granted, our decision relies upon their testimony, but even then, the object of faith remains the risen Lord. When we look upon texts honestly, we can only say that the decision is in part weighing of evidence, but has also become for us the risk of laying our lives alongside that of the crucified and risen Lord. The evidence for the resurrection can only be fragmentary and contradictory. The chronology and topography is vague. We do not have independent sources from which to check the evidence. One should not take narratives of the appearances as history in the purest form. In fact, we treat verses 3-8 in a “strangely abstract way” if we regard it as a citation of witnesses for the purpose of historical proof. The reason we have something related to historical saga is that they describe something beyond the reach of historical study.[22] These verses are not an attempt at an historical proof, for the history of the appearances cannot take place within the confines of modern historical study. This passage is not an attempt at an external objective assurance that the history did take place. The reason is that the witnesses are the tradition that underlies the community, which calls for a decision of faith, not for the acceptance of a well-attested historical report. They are those who have made this decision of faith. The appeal is to faith based in the recollection of the faith that constitutes the community.[23]

This passage is renowned for its ability to arouse passionate debate about Christ’s resurrection and the post-resurrection appearances. This dispute became particularly pronounced in the 20th century after Rudolf Bultmann’s demythologizing enterprise. He, along with others, pondered whether or not Christ’s resurrection and post-resurrection appearances were literal, physical, bodily events. For Bultmann, they were not. For him, “the gospel” was “the Christ of faith” not the “Jesus of history.” It is commonplace for some scholars to claim that Christ’s resurrection and post-resurrection appearances were figurative and spiritual (e.g., Marcus Borg).

While it is possible to view Christ’s resurrection and the post-resurrection appearances exclusively on a metaphorical, spiritual plane — especially in light of Paul’s later remarks (e.g., “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable” [15:50; cf. vv. 51-57]) — such a one-sided conclusion is problematic. For instance, it seems somewhat inconsistent to regard Christ’s death and burial as bodily events, and then suddenly shift and speak of Christ’s resurrection exclusively in spiritual terms. Is such an abrupt change logical in this passage? In addition, although we might struggle to accept a literal, physical resurrection, would Paul have found it dubious given what he reportedly said in Acts 26:8?

Irrespective of one’s position regarding the preceding disagreement, it seems clear that Paul’s understanding of the gospel integrates not only Christ’s death, burial and resurrection, but also Christ’s appearances, especially to him. Consequently, Paul’s profound experience when he received the gospel is not incidental, but critical for the Corinthians. They must remember both the fundamental aspects of the cross — i.e., Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection — and the effects of the gospel.

One approach to the issues raised here is that of keeping the event nature of Christianity before us. The event of Jesus of Nazareth, especially the cross and resurrection, are significant events in the life of God and in the salvation history of humanity. Christianity will lose what is central to it if that event is forgotten. However, it must not become a strangely abstract event of the past. This event of the past needs to have a corresponding event within us, in which, as Paul will say elsewhere, we die with Christ and rise with him. As the life-giving Spirit of God raised Jesus from the dead, the same life-giving Spirit can empower us as well.

---

[1] Pannenberg (Jesus: God and Man, p. 91)

[2] Pannenberg (Systematic Theology, Volume 2, p. 425)

[3] Gordon D. Kaufmann (Systematic Theology: A Historicist Perspective, p. 418)

[4] Pannenberg (Systematic Theology, Volume 2, p. 359)

[5] Reginald Fuller (The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives, 1971, pp. 34-48)

[6] Bultmann, (Theology of the New Testament, Volume 1, p. 82)

[7] Bultmann (Theology of the New Testament, Volume 1, p. 295)

[8] Gordon D. Kaufmann (Systematic Theology: A Historicist Perspective, p. 416-417)

[9] Bultmann (Theology of the New Testament, Volume 1, p. 45)

[10] Pannenberg (Jesus: God and Man, 1964, 89)

[11] (Schneider, TDNT, Volume 2, p. 466-467)

[12] Pannenberg (Jesus: God and Man, p. 92-23)

[13] Reginald H Fuller (The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives, 1971, p. 48-49)

[14] Pannenberg (Jesus: God and Man, p. 98)

[15] In Mark, though there are not appearances in the strict sense of the term, the nature miracles of Jesus seem nothing less than the heavenly Jesus appearing.  The baptism (1:10-11) and the transfiguration (9:2-11) declare Jesus to be the Son.  The feeding of the 5OOO (6:35-43) and the 4OOO (8:1-10) show Jesus in his Eucharistic presence feeding the faithful with bread from heaven.  The calming of the storm (6:47-52) shows Jesus in command of the storms of life that Mark's community was facing.  The exorcisms proclaim Jesus the Son of God through the voice of the demons (1:23-28; 5:1-20).  In Matthew, the risen Lord gives the commission to make disciples of all peoples, thereby making it clear that the mission to Israel is over and that the rest of the world awaits the good news.  The risen Lord will be with them.  In Luke, the interest is verifying the physical nature of the resurrection, a process begun by Mark’s emphasis on the empty tomb.  This is likely the result of the early debate with Gnosticism. None of these stories has any claim to historical accuracy, though they have been great opportunities for meditation in the theology and mission of the church.  The defense of the resurrection appears to be their motivation.  They also become ways in which the gospel writers convey their theology.  That is why we find so much diversity in the accounts of the appearance, while we have so much similarity in the in the narrative of the last week of his life.  The theological richness of these texts makes them wonderful for preaching.  However, the historian can give little credibility to them.

[16] W. D. Davies (Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, p. 285-320)

[17] Pannenberg (Systematic Theology, Volume 2, p. 352-353)

[18] Pannenberg (ibid., p. 318).

[19] Bultmann (Theology of the New Testament, Volume 1, p. 295)

[20] Bultmann (Theology of the New Testament, Volume 1, p. 284)

[21] —Richard Rohr, “The performance principle,” Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditation for June 15, 2016. cac.org. Retrieved July 31, 2018.

[22] Barth (Church Dogmatics, III.2, p. 452 [47.1])

[23] Barth (ibid., IV.1, p. 335 [59.3]),