Friday, February 10
Genesis 41: We now come to the third discussion of dreams in the Joseph story. Pharaoh has a dream. Indeed, it becomes something of a nightmare, causing Pharaoh to wake up, which is perhaps why he can recall the dream so vividly (verses 1-4). Going back to sleep, he has another dream (verses 5-7).
It is interesting that Herodotus (2.136) provides us with a story that parallels the present instance. It concerns the dream of an Ethiopian pharaoh named Shabaka, of the 25th Dynasty (725-667). Egyptian literature itself is full of such dreams. In antiquity dreams were regarded as among the ways that gods revealed practical truths to kings and other leaders. We find another instance of it in the case of Solomon (1 Kings 3; 2 Chronicles 1).
Pharaoh’s two dreams have left him very upset, and at last the cup bearer remembers Joseph (verses 8-13). After all, kings could become very upset if no one could be found to interpret their dreams (cf. Daniel 2:1-6). Evidently the cupbearer sensed danger, since Pharaoh’s dream had not yet an interpreter. The fear serves to jog his memory; he recalls how he himself had gotten out of jail two years earlier. At this point he apparently does not even recall Joseph’s name (verse 12).
Joseph is summoned (verses 14-16). We note that this is the third reference to a change in Joseph’s clothing.
Joseph has no doubt that this dream comes from God. God speaks to man in dreams (compare Job 33:15-18; Numbers 12:6). Pharaoh, then, tells his dreams (verses 17-24). We observe that these dreams are not predictions; they are a diagnosis and a warning. Thus, Joseph is able, not only to interpret the dreams, but to instruct Pharaoh what to do about them. His wisdom, in other words, is not just speculative, but practical (verses 25-32).
These dreams have to do with the Nile River, the annual flooding of which is essential to Egyptian agriculture. The Nile’s failure to flood over a seven years period would be catastrophic indeed. In fact, there is a stone inscription found near the first cataract of the Nile, on the island of Siheil, which indicates that a seven years’ drought was not unthinkable.
Joseph does not even pause (verses 33-36). He immediately supplies the practical remedy for the problem, not even waiting for Pharaoh to question him. One has the impression that he has already worked out the details in his mind, while he gave Pharaoh the interpretation. There is no time to be lost (verse 32). The work will require centralized control. This is no work for a committee, and there is no time for a discussion. The only efficient course will require a strong, swift, executive hand (verse 33).
We have already seen Joseph as a take-charge kind of fellow, managing Potiphar’s estate as soon as he arrived, put in direction of the jail as soon as he became a prisoner, and so forth. Pharaoh knows that he has before him the right man for the job (verses 37-43), recognizing that this wisdom comes from the Holy Spirit (verses 38-39).
Joseph again changes clothes (verse 42) and starts a new life (verses 44-46), with new responsibilities (verse 47-49). His plans are successful (verses 53-57).
Joseph becomes the father of two Israelite tribes (verses 50-52). According to Origen and other interpreters, he is now about thirty years old.
Saturday, February 11
Romans 3.19-26: The pistis Iesou Christou (verses 22,26; Galatians 2:16,20) is literally the “faith of Jesus Christ.” It is not simply an objective genitive, “faith in Jesus.” This expression means, rather, “faith in all matters that concern Jesus Christ,” faith in the entire dispensation of grace through Jesus Christ, including the faith that Jesus modeled for us in the course of accomplishing our redemption (cf. Hebrews 12:2). In context it is perhaps better translated as, “the faithfulness of Jesus Christ.”
Just as there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in sin, so there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in Christ. After all, we all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory (verse 23). This divine glory (doxsa) of which we fall short (that is, “miss out on”—hysterountai), is conveyed to us as we grow in grace (2 Corinthians 3:18; 4:6).
Although Paul uses the legal language of the Old Testament, it is inaccurate to interpret “freely justified by His grace” only in the sense of an outward, judicial, forensic pronouncement on God’s part. Such a view would render divine grace just as external to man’s heart as was the Law. This theory of a merely external righteousness effectively separates repentance from holiness, as though God would declare a man righteous without actually making him righteous, pronounce him to be just without causing him to be a “saint,” and convert him but without giving him a new heart. God’s righteous act, His deed of justification, does not remain external to the one whom He justifies. It alters him from within.
In fact, a major difference between the Law and the Gospel consists in this very distinction between an external form and an internal transformation. God’s grace justifies by transforming from within; it actually produces something new. By this justifying grace we are made a “new creation” in Christ; we “become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
God has set forth Jesus Christ “as a propitiation by His blood” (verse 25). The Greek word translated here as “propitiation” and used as a description of Christ our Lord is hilasterion, a word found in the New Testament only here and in Hebrews 9:5. It does not mean propitiation in the sense of placating an angry God. Indeed, both the Old and New Testaments carefully avoid speaking about God’s anger in connection with blood sacrifice. The requirement of blood sacrifice, without which there is no atonement for sin, is not related in Holy Scripture to the divine wrath.
Hilastrion designates, rather, the place of divine forgiveness, the locus of the atonement. It is the word used in the Septuagint to refer to the “mercy seat” where God meets man in the sprinkling of sacrificial blood (Leviticus 16:2,11-17).
According to biblical thought, “the life is in the blood.” Therefore, the pouring out of Jesus’ blood in His sacrifice on the Cross is the pouring out of His life in love for the Father and for each of us. By this pouring out of His life, Jesus cleanses away our sins. By His death He defeats sin, and by His resurrection He defeats death.
The righteousness of man, received in faith, comes from the righteousness of God manifested in the expiatory mystery of the Cross. Through the death of Jesus, God both manifests Himself as righteous and makes believers righteous “by the faith of Christ” (verse 26).
Sunday, February 12
Genesis 43: Eventually the family again runs short of food, so Jacob asks his sons to return to Egypt to procure some more. The old man appears to be in a state of denial, giving the order as though there were no complications involved (verses 1-2). It will be up to one of the older sons to remind him that things will not be so easy.
In the previous chapter it was Reuben who served as spokesman for the brothers, both to Joseph and to Jacob. As we saw, he had not been terrible successful, so this time Judah takes over the task (verses 3-5). (The literary dynamics of this narrative, by the way, are destroyed by the modern hypothesis that postulates two “sources” here, ascribing Chapter 42 to one source and Chapter 43 to another. It is utterly pointless and without merit to speculate on hypothetical “sources” that do not exist and perhaps never existed. This sort of historical speculation is not only dubious in its impulse, it also constitutes a distraction from the literary enjoyment of the account.) Judah gives Jacob an ultimatum: Either risk Benjamin or the whole family will starve.
In response, Jacob goes from denial to blame (verse 6). His line of argument is, of course, futile. The point of no-return was long ago reached. Jacob is dealing with a situation that no longer exists. Like many older people whose memories of the past are far more pleasant than the realities of the present, Jacob resists being reminded of the facts. The problem is that he is the one who must make the decision. His sons are powerless to do anything apart from his authority. They too, once again accused, become defensive (verse 7). Joseph had outwitted them; how could they have known? We readers understand, of course, but none of the participants up in Canaan have a clue.
Judah puts his foot down. Enough of this guilt, denial, and blame (verses 8-10). In his executive action, we perceive the attitude and skills of the kings to whom Judah will become the father: David, Solomon, Hezechiah, Josiah, Joseph of Nazareth. Judah obliges Jacob to give in (verses 11-14) and the latter makes very practical suggestions about taking gifts to the Egyptian official and returning the money. He also assumes responsibility for Benjamin. Finally, he prays, not really knowing what he is praying for (though the reader knows), and not knowing that his prayer has already been answered!
The brothers return to Egypt (verses 15-17). In their prior trip, Joseph had been rough with them. Now he is kind. What can it mean? So long receptive of bad news and not expecting anything different, the brothers are disposed to put an evil interpretation on the circumstances (verses 18-22). The author of the passage is obviously relishing this description of their mounting anxiety. The brothers have wandered into the “big leagues,” as it were. Faced with the grandeur of the Egyptian court, they fairly come undone. This “man” in Egypt is by far the most powerful person with whom they have ever dealt. They take their case to the head-steward who can speak to them in their own native tongue (verse 23). They never imagine that Joseph has understood everything they said before.
Once again, when the brothers meet Joseph, the prophecy in the ancient dream is fulfilled (verses 24-26). Two dreams, two fulfillments. The reader begins to wonder how long Joseph can sustain this ongoing farce (verses 27-30). He controls himself, however, for he still has one big test in mind, a final test. For a second time, nonetheless, Joseph is overcome with emotion.
During the meal, Joseph goes from this pathos to some more light kidding (verses 31-34), placing his brothers at the table according to their ages, a fact that causes them some more consternation. Could this be an accident? This “man” in Egypt is most uncanny and mysterious. He seems to know everything. He holds them in the palm of his hand, as it were.
Monday, February 13
Romans 5.1-11: Since Paul goes to considerable to pain to speak of the life in Christ in three tenses in this text, perhaps we will be most faithful to his thought if we make those three tenses the outline of what we want to say about it.
First, there is the past tense, which Paul uses to speak of our reconciliation and justification. Paul keeps using the aorist passive participle, dikaiothentes, which means, “having been justified.” It is an act of God in the past that constitutes a new relationship to God. Our justification, our reconciliation is something that has already happened: “having been justified through faith” (verse 1), “having now been justified by His blood” (verse 9).
We observe how calm the Apostle Paul was with respect to his standing before God. He never forgot that God came seeking him, not the other way around. He knew from experience what he writes in this text—namely, “while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (v. 8). Starting on the road to Damascus that day, Paul did not think of himself as a sinner. He thought of other people as sinners, and he was going to put a stop to it. It had not occurred to him that he was the sinner, until the Voice from heaven called him up short. From that point on, Paul knew what he writes in today’s text: “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (v. 6).
Second, there is the future tense, without which we could do none of these things. The future tense concerns what Paul calls “salvation.” Paul clearly thinks of salvation as still something yet to come. In the Epistle to the Romans, the “salvation” effected by God’s power in the Gospel most often refers to a future reality rather than an accomplished fact.
Paul returns to this idea over and over again in the Book of Romans. For instance, in today’s text he says, “Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.”
Paul keeps returning to this theme in Romans. He says in 10:8, “if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” A few verses later he repeats this principle, “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (10:13). And finally, Paul says in 13:11, “now it is high time to awake out of sleep; for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed.” That is to say, our salvation is something in the future, and we are moving toward it.
Third, there is the present tense to speak of our life in Christ right now. This is the dominant verbal tense of this chapter, in which, Paul says, “we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. And not only that, but we also glory in tribulations” (vv. 1-3). All of those verbs are in the present tense: we have peace, we have access, we stand, we rejoice, we glory. This is the present Christian life, in which “the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us” (v. 5). It is a life of peace with God, access to God, standing before God, rejoicing in hope, and glorying in tribulations.
When Paul speaks of the present tense, it is consistently in terms of hope. What does the love of God produce in our lives? What is the supreme gift of the Holy Spirit with which our Father has endowed us? Hope, always hope. Paul writes today, “we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance; and perseverance, character; and character, hope. Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.”
The Christian life flows from the presence of the Holy Spirit in the hearts, mind, souls, and bodies of justified Christians.
This hope in the Christian heart, however, is sustained, not only by God’s love given us in the Holy Spirit, but by the lively recollection of the price that God’s Son paid for our redemption. And this He did when we ourselves were still helpless and ungodly: “For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. . . . while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.”
It always comes back to the Blood. The Blood of Jesus is our only access to God. What is the source of our peace? We have peace with God because of the reconciliation that Jesus effected by His Blood. How do we have access to God? We have access because we have been purchased by His Blood. We rejoice and glory in tribulations, because thereby we receive a double measure of the saving power of His blood. Only in Christ has death ever been an act of redemption, a victory instead of a defeat. This knowledge of what God has already done for us in Christ will sustain our hope for the full salvation that awaits us. Reconciled by His death, we shall be saved by His life.
Tuesday, February 14
Matthew 13.1-9: Matthew 13:1-9: As we now come to the third and central of the five great discourses in Matthew, Jesus once again sits down as teacher (Compare 5:1). Taking up a standard mystic number in Holy Scripture, this discourse will be composed of seven parables: the sown seed, the wheat and tares, the mustard seed, the leaven, the hidden treasure, the pearl of great price, and the fishing net. Four of these, as we will have occasion to note, are found only in Matthew. Even in wording this first parable is nearly identical with Mark 4:1-9.
In this chapter, a sharp distinction is made between those that understand the parable—the ‘insiders”–and those that don’t—the “outsiders” (verse 11). Thus, when the chapter opens, Jesus is speaking to large crowds (verse 2), but afterwards He speaks only to an inner circle and privately (verse 36). This move indicates a change in the focus of the Lord’s ministry and preaching. This change is not surprising, in light of the bitter controversies that have been mounting in Matthew’s narrative.
Jesus begins this sermon by sitting down (verse 1)—the posture of the teacher—just as when He began the Sermon on the Mount (5:1; cf. 24:3). A close reading of this text discloses a striking parallel with Revelation 7:9-12, where a great multitude stands before God seated on the throne beside the sea (4:6).
This first parable, in which most of the sown seed is lost, summarizes Jesus’ own experience, as narrated in the previous chapter. So little of the Gospel, it seems, has fallen on fertile ground. As directed to the Church, this parable urges a sense of modesty about “success” in fruitful preaching. A great deal of the sown Word will simply be wasted.
This first parable also provides the foundation for the other six; it is the fountain out of which they flow. Thus, the second parable (wheat and tares in verses 24-30), is concerned with the wasted seed that falls by the wayside and is eaten by birds. The “enemy” that sowed the tares in verse 24 is identical with the “wicked one” in verse 19. Similarly, the third parable (mustard seed in verses 31-32) and the fourth (leaven in verse 33) deal with the seed that is sown on stony ground. Parables five (hidden treasure in verse 44) and six (pearl in verses 45-46) are concerned with the seed sown among thorns, while the seventh parable (dragnet in verses 47-50) parallels the seed sown on fertile ground and bringing forth much fruit.
The seed sown by the wayside (verse 4) is the Word preached to the unworthy heart, an interpretation introduced by the quotation from Isaiah in verse 15: “Lest they should understand with their hearts.” The key is an understanding heart (verse 23). The failure in this case has to do with the first imperative of the Shema: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart.”
The seed fallen on rocky ground (verses 5-6) is the Word preached to a shallow soul, which is unprepared for the trials that the reception of the Word will bring. The failure in this case pertains to the second imperative of the Shema: to love God with the whole soul.
The seed sown among thorns (verse 7) is the Word preached to the worldly, who are concerned with wealth and the strength that comes with wealth. In this case the failure is related to the Shema’s command to love God with all one’s strength.
The seed fallen on good ground (verse 8) is the Word preached to someone with an understanding heart. Such a man is described in Psalm 1: the man who “brings forth his fruit in its season.” This is the man who fulfills all the imperatives of the Shema.
Wednesday, February 15
Matthew 13:10-17: In the Gospel dialogue that immediately follows the parable of the sown seed, only Matthew quotes at length the long text from Isaiah found in verses 14-15. This text well fits the pattern of growing obstinacy on the part of Jesus’ enemies, a theme that has been growing steadily since 11:16. The argument the Lord uses in these verses is obscure, for the plain reason that hardness of heart is an obscure and mysterious subject.
If the workings of divine grace are difficult to comprehend, even more difficult to grasp is man’s willful refusal of that grace. Because a choice is both an effect and a cause, there is a tautology in human choice, and like all tautologies it can only be expressed by what seems a circular argument. That is to say, we choose because we choose. This is what is meant by “free” choice.
Mysteriously, then, the refusal to believe is also the punishment for the refusal to believe. These verses are also a sort of explanation of the following section, particularly verses 19 and 23, which contrast the “understanding” and “non-understanding” of God’s Word.
In this respect the disciples of Jesus are distinguished from the others who hear the parables. The “to you” is contrasted with the “to them” (verse 11). The “whoever has” is distinguished from the “whoever has not” (verse 12). There is an antithesis between those that see (verse 16) and those that do not see (verse 13).
Genesis 46: The literary climax of the Joseph cycle has already occurred in the previous chapter. Now the story simply becomes a chronicle for a while. All that remains is for Jacob to die, thus finishing the narrative thread that had been relatively unattended for several chapters. This final part of Genesis chiefly prepares for Exodus.
Once again God reveals Himself to Jacob at Beersheba (verses 1-4), as He has done each time that Jacob moved, at Bethel (Genesis 28) and at Peniel (Genesis 32). God had also revealed Himself at Beersheba to Abraham (Genesis 21) and Isaac (Genesis 26). In that latter passage, as here in Genesis 46, the message had to do with the great number of the promised posterity. Jacob now goes down into Egypt with few people, but they will be greatly multiplied over time. This is the latest in a the series of migrations in Genesis, from Ur to Haran, from Haran to Canaan, from there to Padanaram, back down to Canaan, and now to Egypt (verses 5-7).
There ensues a long list of those who went down into Egypt, their names preserved because these are the families who will form the company of the Exodus. These are, in short, the “first families” of the race. The list commences with the children of Leah (verses 8-15), of which Levi’s sons are of special importance, for theirs will be the genealogy of Israel’s priesthood, including Moses and Aaron (verses 11-12). The sons of Leah’s handmaiden are listed next (verses 16-18), followed by Rachel’s children (verses 19-22) and of her handmaiden (verses 23-26). The number “70” is a round number (cf. Acts 7:9-11).
Joseph is at last reunited to his father (verses 28-30). The children of Israel were never to become sedentary in Egypt (verses 31-34. They would never regard it as home.
Thursday, February 16
Romans 6:15-23: In this section Paul largely repeats what he had insisted on in the earlier part of this chapter (compare verses 1 and 15), namely, that God’s gift of grace is free only in the sense that it cannot be earned. It is not free in the sense of excusing Christians from stern moral and ascetical effort.
Strenuous activity and a robust sense of obligation, that is to say, pertain to the Gospel every bit as much as they did to Law. Man under grace has no fewer responsibilities than man under the Law. (Indeed, the Sermon on the Mount suggests that he has vastly more.) Speaking of “obedience to righteousness,” then, Paul clearly agrees with James’ teaching about the necessity of “works”: “Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?” (verse 16)
The holding of correct doctrine is also of the essence. At the time of baptism a believer submits himself “from the heart” to a “form of doctrine” (typos didaches), a creedal standard, a “rule of faith” (regula fidei), of which “you have taken delivery” (paredothete). Paul refers here to the teaching contained in the Tradition (paradosis) that he himself had received in conjunction with his own baptism (16:17; 1 Corinthians 15:3; 2 Thessalonians 2:15; 2 Timothy 1:13; 4:3; Titus 1:9; 2:1). Once again, we observe that Paul presumes that these Roman Christians, who had not been catechized by him or his close associates, nonetheless received the same foundational doctrine, in an established form (typos), that he himself had received.
In the profession of faith associated with the rite of baptism it has long been customary for believers to repudiate Satan just prior to their confession of the lordship of Jesus. Paul’s wording here appears to reflect this custom. The baptized Christian has exchanged one form of service for another.
In this connection Paul introduces the theme of Christian liberty (verses 18,22; 7:3; 8:2,21; Galatians 2:4; 3:28; 4:22-31; 5:1,13). This liberty is not to be confused with supposed freedom given by the indulgence of the flesh, he says (verse 20). Alas, examples from Christian history prove (and Christian pastors today are well aware) that a misunderstanding of Paul’s teaching about justification through faith has sometimes led, as though by a kind of logic, to very pernicious views about moral freedom. Such a process, however, leads the believer back to the reign of death (verses 21,23).
In context the “holiness” (hagiasmos) of verses 19 and 22 appears to refer to the sanctification and consecration of the Christian’s body, which requires control over the passions of the body (1 Thessalonians 4:3-7; 1 Timothy 2:15). “This assertion may be hazarded, then, that it has been shown that death is the fellowship of the soul in the state of sin with the body, and that life is separation from sin” (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 4.4).
In contrast to the reign of death, the Christian’s goal is eternal life. Men earn death; it is their “wages.” Eternal life, however, cannot be earned. It is the free gift (charisma) of God, given us in Christ Jesus our Lord.
This eternal life also pertains to the Christian’s body, because it begins with the baptism of the body. Accordingly, commenting on these verses, Tertullian wrote: “Thus, throughout this series of meanings (sensuum seriem), withdrawing our members from unrighteousness and sin, and applying them to righteousness and sanctification, and moving them from the wages of death to the free gift of life, [Paul] undoubtedly promises to the flesh the recompense of salvation. Now it would not at all have been consistent that any rule of holiness and righteousness should be explicitly enjoined on the flesh, if the latter were incapable of receiving the reward of that discipline. Nor could baptism be properly ordered for the flesh, if by means of its regeneration a course were not begun unto it
Friday, February 17
Matthew 13.24-30: The six parables that follow the Parable of the Sower should be regarded as commentaries on the latter. The first of these, the Parable of the Wheat and the Weeds, addresses a problem perceived in the seed sown by the wayside (verse 4). That seed, we recall, was snatched away by the Evil One (verse 19). This Evil One reappears in the present parable, where he is identified as the “enemy” and the “Devil” (verses 25,28,39). Those whose hearts are dull (verse 15) are especially under the influence of this “enemy,” even though they live side-by-side with the saints. The difference between the two will be settled at the end of time. (If Matthew intends the Weeds to represent the Jews–a view certainly consonant with this section of his gospel–then his view of salvation history is far less complex than that of Paul–cf. Romans 11:11-36).
The temporary co-existence of the wheat and the weeds will appear later in the co-existence of the good and bad fish (verses 47-50), the wise and foolish maidens (25:1-13), and the sheep and the goats (25:31-46). In all of these parables the separation does not come until the end, the time of the judgment and harvest.
These latter images do convey the sense of delay and the passage of time, exactly as in the Lord’s Final Discourse (24:48; 25:5,19).
Genesis 48: Because of his special role in saving the family, Joseph receives something like the blessing of the firstborn — that is, a double portion; he become the father of two of Israel’s tribes. That meant that his descendents would settle twice the amount of the Promised Land as any of his brothers.
Joseph’s two sons, Ephrem and Manasseh, became as it were the sons of Israel himself (verses 1-7). When Jacob is introduced to the two boys (verses 8-11), his poor eyesight reminds us of aging Isaac, of whose blindness Jacob had taken advantage. The irony is striking. In that earlier case too the larger blessing had been given to the younger son. What Isaac had done by mistake, however, Jacob will do on purpose (verses 12-15).
A Christian reader will take note of Jacob’s crossing of his hands in the act of blessing. It is noteworthy that at least one Christian reader of this text referred to this action as an act of “faith” (Hebrews 11:21, the only example of faith that this epistle ascribes to Jacob). In the blessing itself (verses 15-16), Jacob reaches back two generations in order to reach forward two generations.
Joseph, though he governs Egypt, is unable to govern his old father (verses 17-20). Jacob, let it be said, knew a thing or two about blessings: “I know, my son, I know.” Jacob has been reversing everything since the day he was born, right after tripping up his old brother as the latter emerged from the womb (25:22-23). Right to the end of his life he continues to take the side of the younger man. It is a trait of his personality.