Knowing Who God Really Is
Commentary
The lessons for this Sunday share common themes regarding knowing God (how he is correctly known) and also that he receives all the credit due him for what he does for us.
Exodus 33:12-23
The First Lesson, reporting the story of Moses’ intercession and preparation for a renewal of the Lord’s covenant with Israel, is taken from a Book so named for the Greek term referring to the liberation of the Israelites from Egyptian bondages. Its Hebrew name (meaning “These are the names”) refers to the first words of the text’s prologue. Like all of the first four books of the Pentateuch, it is the product of three distinct oral traditions. This text likely originated with J (an oral tradition perhaps originating in the Southern Kingdom during the 10th century BC), but is then shaped by another oral tradition identified as P -- the 6th-century BC source rooted in a priestly oral tradition.
The account begins with Moses asking Yahweh who he would send with him to the promised land. Moses expresses satisfaction in having found favor in God’s sight (v. 12). He asks to know the Lord so that he might find favor in his sight (v. 13). Perhaps referring to the Ark of the Covenant, where Hebraic priests taught the Lord resides, Yahweh promises his Presence (v. 14). After consenting to do all Moses has requested (vv. 15-17), Moses asks to see Yahweh’s glory and the Lord again consents -- even promising to proclaim his name and to be gracious on those whom he chooses (vv. 18-19). (The proclamation of a name in the ancient world was tantamount to a disclosure of that person’s identity.) Yahweh next adds that it will not be possible to see his face, for no one can see His face and live (v. 20). (God’s “face” here probably refers to God as he is in himself, his Nature in all its glory.) The lesson concludes with Yahweh claiming that there is a place near to him, and Moses is to stand there on a rock while Yahweh passes by, and then he would cover Moses as he passes by so Moses would only see the Lord’s back and not his face (vv. 21-23). From a Christian standpoint we might regard Christ as the rock, as the covering God uses when he comes to us, allowing us to be in God’s Presence without being destroyed by his majesty (1 Corinthians 10:4). And so the lesson reminds us that God is only correctly known in Christ.
God’s awesomeness and majesty is a fitting theme for 21st-century Americans. Some would contend that we have trivialized God, as we no longer dress up for church (in white circles) and are rather casual in our attitudes toward worship. On the other hand, the idea of a majestic God is in line with a lot of American thinking. A 2006 study by researchers from Baylor University found that the dominant view of God Americans have (31.4%) is that of an authoritarian God who rules over all in justice. The next most popular visions (collectively comprising two in five Americans) may not see God as active in the world like the prevailing model, but that links up with the idea of the first model, that God is so awesome that he cannot be known. And none of these models portray God as loving, but more as the God who encounters Moses in our lesson -- a God who could kill us in his awesomeness.
This brings us to the point to be made in this lesson, read from a Jesus-centered perspective. If we understand that God is only known as he hides himself in Christ, then we are on our way to understanding him as the One who only wants to be known in the loving actions of Jesus. In short, we can only know God as a God of love! This is a message that Americans Christians seem badly to need, as according to the Baylor study only 23% of us believe in a benevolent God. The message of this lesson, reminding us that God is only known in Christ, is one that at least three in four of us badly need to hear.
Another possible angle for the sermon might be to focus on the Lord’s promise to be present to Moses, understanding it as the P tradition did, to refer to God’s Presence in the Ark of the Covenant -- his Presence in worship. Sermons could then be developed reminding worshipers that in the sermon and liturgy God is not distant, but present -- that worship is not just about God but actual fellowship with him.
Psalm 99
The alternative First Lesson is a hymn celebrating God’s kingship, one of the so-called enthronement psalms, found in the collection of Hebrew hymns, most of which were written to accompany worship in the Jerusalem Temple, the book of Psalms (17:1-7, 15). Traditionally this psalm, like the book as a whole, has been attributed to David. This is unlikely, though it is indicative that David was held in great esteem as a great singer.
The psalm begins with an exhortation that the people should tremble before the Lord, as he sits enthroned on the cherubim (v. 1). (This is likely a reference to God’s invisible abode on the cherubim [carvings of winged-like creatures] which was found on the Ark of the Covenant.) God’s awesome greatness is praised (vv. 2-3). The Lord is also said to be a lover of justice (also translated as judgment) (v. 4). It is good to be reminded that the Hebrew term for judgment [mishpat] may connote a sense of comfort to the faithful, not just the threat of punishment -- for judgment in this sense implies that the regime of the wicked who have been oppressing God’s people will be overcome, bringing about liberation and justice.
These themes link with the psalm’s subsequent testimony to the Lord’s forgiving nature, and the fact that Yahweh is said to seek fairness in Jacob [in Israel] might suggest the validity of understanding his judgments as pertaining to social interactions [justice]. Yahweh Elohim’s holiness and faithfulness to his people are next extolled (vv. 5,9). The holy Lord is said to be a forgiving God, an avenger of wrongdoings (vv. 8-9).
Many of the same themes are in the first alternative of the First Lesson. The holiness of God and his magnificence is a message we need for our time and place, as we tend to trivialize God. But sermons on this text need to make clear that God’s awesome, kingly rule includes compassion and forgiveness (another word that the Baylor University study above indicates America needs). And this includes a passion for justice, so that justice is portrayed to the faithful as the business of our awesome, compassionate God.
1 Thessalonians 1:1-10
The Second Lesson is drawn from one of the authentic letters of Paul, perhaps the earliest piece of New Testament literature, written in the early 50s. It was written to a church comprised mostly of Gentiles threatened by social pressures and some persecution to return to values of the surrounding culture. This lesson is basically Paul’s greeting and thanksgiving. He is joined by Silas and Timothy in offering the Thessalonians grace and peace in the Father and Christ (v. 1). Thanks are given for the Thessalonians and they are mentioned in Paul’s prayers, constantly remembering faith, love, and hope (vv. 2-3). He proceeds to assert that the beloved Thessalonians have been loved by God, that they are elect for the gospel came to them in the power of the Holy Spirit (vv. 4-6). Paul further notes that the Thessalonians turned from idols to serve the true God and wait for the return of his Son (vv. 9-10). This reference to Christ’s imminent return is a theme that appears elsewhere in the epistle (4:13ff).
The emphasis of the lesson, then, is clearly on God’s work among the faithful, that the good we do is not our own but is the result of God and the Spirit working in and through us. This is an important word for sermons in 21st-century America. The results of a Barna Research Group poll in 2001 still seem relevant today; it found that seven in ten Americans believe that we save ourselves by our works, and so it seems that most of us think that the good we do is our own doing. The distant God of the Baylor University poll mentioned above that two in five of us believe in leaves us alone. Another dynamic in our culture against which sermons on this lesson need to contend is the concept of meritocracy, which owes to the Clinton administration. In a recent book, social commentator Thomas Frank (Listen Liberal: Whatever Happened To the Party of the People?, especially pp. 31ff) has made the case that this idea that those who succeed have deserved it by their hard work has come to seem so reasonable that most in the professional class take it for granted. This belief, it seems, has even ensconced liberals who now seem along with pro-business conservatives to regard the poor as failures. We need a voice from the pulpit that makes clear that the good that emerges in life is not the result of our own skills and merits, but undeserved works of the Holy Spirit.
Another angle for sermons on this lesson could be the Pauline belief in Christ’s imminent return. Though according to a 2010 Pew Research poll it is evident that this belief has not fallen on real hard times among most Americans (41% still believe it), among college-educated Americans it seems that most (four in five of that group) do not see Christ on the horizon, a further testimony to a sense of God’s non-involvement in our lives among the elite. Rekindling the belief that things are urgent because Christ is on the horizon might excite in us (like it did for Paul) a sense of God’s presence and action in our lives. We need the urgent, eschatological dimension in our preaching which this lesson offers us.
Matthew 22:15-22
Our gospel from Matthew (22:15-22) was likely based on oral traditions about Jesus. We have already noted the unlikelihood that it was written by Matthew, the disciple of Jesus. In fact, it may well not have been written until the last third of the first century in Antioch, for Bishop Ignatius seems to quote it as early as 110 AD. That it is written in Greek seems to rule out the disciple as the author. Yet there are some Hebraic and Aramaic influences reflected in the Greek text, which could suggest dependence on the original apostles of Jesus, if not Matthew himself. In any case, scholars are fairly certain that the gospel was written to Jewish Christians who were experiencing tensions with the Jewish community (see 24:20).
This lesson concerns Jesus’ response to the question of whether taxes should be paid to Caesar. We find parallel accounts in Mark 12:13-17 and Luke 20:20-36. The Pharisees try to entrap Jesus, and so they send their disciples and some supporters of Herod to raise the hard question, calling Jesus a teacher seeking the way of God (vv. 15-17). The aim of their question seems to have been either to discredit him in the eyes of nationalistic parties if he advocated paying taxes, or to sow seeds for suspicions of his disloyalty to the Roman empire should he not advocate paying them. Aware of the illicit aims of those raising the question, Jesus calls them hypocrites and asks why they put him to the test (v. 18). Next follows the famed reference Jesus makes to the coin with the emperor’s head on it, followed by his claim that we are to give to the emperor what is his and to God the things that are God’s (vv. 19-21).
Some take this lesson as a justification for the American separation of church and state. Perhaps that might be legitimate, but not if the First Amendment is taken as justification for keeping Christians and the Church out of politics. Certainly there are sentiments in America favoring this complete separation of church and state. A 2012 CNN poll found that 38% of Americans feel that we have too much religion in politics. Two in five of us seem to agree with the analysis decades ago of Yale professor Stephen Carter that “God is all right as long as it is just a hobby” (The Culture of Disbelief, p. 23). On the other side there is a 2014 Gallup poll which seems to lament these dynamics, noting that seven in ten Americans think religion is losing influence in American life. Sermons on this lesson can address these trends. Jesus was not apolitical in his thinking, finding a way to explain what following him has to do with politics. He makes it clear that his followers are good citizens, pay taxes. But they do not try to impose God or faith on the empire or the state. Jesus’ politically skillful response to his critics is a model for Christian political intervention. Be smart in your politics. Rely on what best moves people to your viewpoint, because politics is dirty business, balancing the various special interests (including our own) found in a society. The founders of our constitutional system recognized that (James Madison, The Federalist Papers, especially pp. 83-84, 521-522). Christians do bring their God into the political sphere, for government still belongs to him. And as we noted above, God wants justice in the world. Sermons on this text should remind the flock that Christians are not to be about the business of seeing politics Christianized, just about ensuring fairness in accord with the teachings of the Second Table of the Ten Commandments -- values all people share (Romans 1:14-15). This is a sermon for helping the flock recognize that when we follow Jesus’ advice and model we are more likely to seek a politics that cares for the poor (19:21; Luke 18:22). God might tell us to let the emperor’s ways prevail in politics, but we do not really know him without acknowledging him as a God who works for justice.
All these lessons witness to the importance of knowing God correctly -- that in all his awesome omnipotence, God is a God of love who cares for his people in compassion and in seeking justice for all.
Exodus 33:12-23
The First Lesson, reporting the story of Moses’ intercession and preparation for a renewal of the Lord’s covenant with Israel, is taken from a Book so named for the Greek term referring to the liberation of the Israelites from Egyptian bondages. Its Hebrew name (meaning “These are the names”) refers to the first words of the text’s prologue. Like all of the first four books of the Pentateuch, it is the product of three distinct oral traditions. This text likely originated with J (an oral tradition perhaps originating in the Southern Kingdom during the 10th century BC), but is then shaped by another oral tradition identified as P -- the 6th-century BC source rooted in a priestly oral tradition.
The account begins with Moses asking Yahweh who he would send with him to the promised land. Moses expresses satisfaction in having found favor in God’s sight (v. 12). He asks to know the Lord so that he might find favor in his sight (v. 13). Perhaps referring to the Ark of the Covenant, where Hebraic priests taught the Lord resides, Yahweh promises his Presence (v. 14). After consenting to do all Moses has requested (vv. 15-17), Moses asks to see Yahweh’s glory and the Lord again consents -- even promising to proclaim his name and to be gracious on those whom he chooses (vv. 18-19). (The proclamation of a name in the ancient world was tantamount to a disclosure of that person’s identity.) Yahweh next adds that it will not be possible to see his face, for no one can see His face and live (v. 20). (God’s “face” here probably refers to God as he is in himself, his Nature in all its glory.) The lesson concludes with Yahweh claiming that there is a place near to him, and Moses is to stand there on a rock while Yahweh passes by, and then he would cover Moses as he passes by so Moses would only see the Lord’s back and not his face (vv. 21-23). From a Christian standpoint we might regard Christ as the rock, as the covering God uses when he comes to us, allowing us to be in God’s Presence without being destroyed by his majesty (1 Corinthians 10:4). And so the lesson reminds us that God is only correctly known in Christ.
God’s awesomeness and majesty is a fitting theme for 21st-century Americans. Some would contend that we have trivialized God, as we no longer dress up for church (in white circles) and are rather casual in our attitudes toward worship. On the other hand, the idea of a majestic God is in line with a lot of American thinking. A 2006 study by researchers from Baylor University found that the dominant view of God Americans have (31.4%) is that of an authoritarian God who rules over all in justice. The next most popular visions (collectively comprising two in five Americans) may not see God as active in the world like the prevailing model, but that links up with the idea of the first model, that God is so awesome that he cannot be known. And none of these models portray God as loving, but more as the God who encounters Moses in our lesson -- a God who could kill us in his awesomeness.
This brings us to the point to be made in this lesson, read from a Jesus-centered perspective. If we understand that God is only known as he hides himself in Christ, then we are on our way to understanding him as the One who only wants to be known in the loving actions of Jesus. In short, we can only know God as a God of love! This is a message that Americans Christians seem badly to need, as according to the Baylor study only 23% of us believe in a benevolent God. The message of this lesson, reminding us that God is only known in Christ, is one that at least three in four of us badly need to hear.
Another possible angle for the sermon might be to focus on the Lord’s promise to be present to Moses, understanding it as the P tradition did, to refer to God’s Presence in the Ark of the Covenant -- his Presence in worship. Sermons could then be developed reminding worshipers that in the sermon and liturgy God is not distant, but present -- that worship is not just about God but actual fellowship with him.
Psalm 99
The alternative First Lesson is a hymn celebrating God’s kingship, one of the so-called enthronement psalms, found in the collection of Hebrew hymns, most of which were written to accompany worship in the Jerusalem Temple, the book of Psalms (17:1-7, 15). Traditionally this psalm, like the book as a whole, has been attributed to David. This is unlikely, though it is indicative that David was held in great esteem as a great singer.
The psalm begins with an exhortation that the people should tremble before the Lord, as he sits enthroned on the cherubim (v. 1). (This is likely a reference to God’s invisible abode on the cherubim [carvings of winged-like creatures] which was found on the Ark of the Covenant.) God’s awesome greatness is praised (vv. 2-3). The Lord is also said to be a lover of justice (also translated as judgment) (v. 4). It is good to be reminded that the Hebrew term for judgment [mishpat] may connote a sense of comfort to the faithful, not just the threat of punishment -- for judgment in this sense implies that the regime of the wicked who have been oppressing God’s people will be overcome, bringing about liberation and justice.
These themes link with the psalm’s subsequent testimony to the Lord’s forgiving nature, and the fact that Yahweh is said to seek fairness in Jacob [in Israel] might suggest the validity of understanding his judgments as pertaining to social interactions [justice]. Yahweh Elohim’s holiness and faithfulness to his people are next extolled (vv. 5,9). The holy Lord is said to be a forgiving God, an avenger of wrongdoings (vv. 8-9).
Many of the same themes are in the first alternative of the First Lesson. The holiness of God and his magnificence is a message we need for our time and place, as we tend to trivialize God. But sermons on this text need to make clear that God’s awesome, kingly rule includes compassion and forgiveness (another word that the Baylor University study above indicates America needs). And this includes a passion for justice, so that justice is portrayed to the faithful as the business of our awesome, compassionate God.
1 Thessalonians 1:1-10
The Second Lesson is drawn from one of the authentic letters of Paul, perhaps the earliest piece of New Testament literature, written in the early 50s. It was written to a church comprised mostly of Gentiles threatened by social pressures and some persecution to return to values of the surrounding culture. This lesson is basically Paul’s greeting and thanksgiving. He is joined by Silas and Timothy in offering the Thessalonians grace and peace in the Father and Christ (v. 1). Thanks are given for the Thessalonians and they are mentioned in Paul’s prayers, constantly remembering faith, love, and hope (vv. 2-3). He proceeds to assert that the beloved Thessalonians have been loved by God, that they are elect for the gospel came to them in the power of the Holy Spirit (vv. 4-6). Paul further notes that the Thessalonians turned from idols to serve the true God and wait for the return of his Son (vv. 9-10). This reference to Christ’s imminent return is a theme that appears elsewhere in the epistle (4:13ff).
The emphasis of the lesson, then, is clearly on God’s work among the faithful, that the good we do is not our own but is the result of God and the Spirit working in and through us. This is an important word for sermons in 21st-century America. The results of a Barna Research Group poll in 2001 still seem relevant today; it found that seven in ten Americans believe that we save ourselves by our works, and so it seems that most of us think that the good we do is our own doing. The distant God of the Baylor University poll mentioned above that two in five of us believe in leaves us alone. Another dynamic in our culture against which sermons on this lesson need to contend is the concept of meritocracy, which owes to the Clinton administration. In a recent book, social commentator Thomas Frank (Listen Liberal: Whatever Happened To the Party of the People?, especially pp. 31ff) has made the case that this idea that those who succeed have deserved it by their hard work has come to seem so reasonable that most in the professional class take it for granted. This belief, it seems, has even ensconced liberals who now seem along with pro-business conservatives to regard the poor as failures. We need a voice from the pulpit that makes clear that the good that emerges in life is not the result of our own skills and merits, but undeserved works of the Holy Spirit.
Another angle for sermons on this lesson could be the Pauline belief in Christ’s imminent return. Though according to a 2010 Pew Research poll it is evident that this belief has not fallen on real hard times among most Americans (41% still believe it), among college-educated Americans it seems that most (four in five of that group) do not see Christ on the horizon, a further testimony to a sense of God’s non-involvement in our lives among the elite. Rekindling the belief that things are urgent because Christ is on the horizon might excite in us (like it did for Paul) a sense of God’s presence and action in our lives. We need the urgent, eschatological dimension in our preaching which this lesson offers us.
Matthew 22:15-22
Our gospel from Matthew (22:15-22) was likely based on oral traditions about Jesus. We have already noted the unlikelihood that it was written by Matthew, the disciple of Jesus. In fact, it may well not have been written until the last third of the first century in Antioch, for Bishop Ignatius seems to quote it as early as 110 AD. That it is written in Greek seems to rule out the disciple as the author. Yet there are some Hebraic and Aramaic influences reflected in the Greek text, which could suggest dependence on the original apostles of Jesus, if not Matthew himself. In any case, scholars are fairly certain that the gospel was written to Jewish Christians who were experiencing tensions with the Jewish community (see 24:20).
This lesson concerns Jesus’ response to the question of whether taxes should be paid to Caesar. We find parallel accounts in Mark 12:13-17 and Luke 20:20-36. The Pharisees try to entrap Jesus, and so they send their disciples and some supporters of Herod to raise the hard question, calling Jesus a teacher seeking the way of God (vv. 15-17). The aim of their question seems to have been either to discredit him in the eyes of nationalistic parties if he advocated paying taxes, or to sow seeds for suspicions of his disloyalty to the Roman empire should he not advocate paying them. Aware of the illicit aims of those raising the question, Jesus calls them hypocrites and asks why they put him to the test (v. 18). Next follows the famed reference Jesus makes to the coin with the emperor’s head on it, followed by his claim that we are to give to the emperor what is his and to God the things that are God’s (vv. 19-21).
Some take this lesson as a justification for the American separation of church and state. Perhaps that might be legitimate, but not if the First Amendment is taken as justification for keeping Christians and the Church out of politics. Certainly there are sentiments in America favoring this complete separation of church and state. A 2012 CNN poll found that 38% of Americans feel that we have too much religion in politics. Two in five of us seem to agree with the analysis decades ago of Yale professor Stephen Carter that “God is all right as long as it is just a hobby” (The Culture of Disbelief, p. 23). On the other side there is a 2014 Gallup poll which seems to lament these dynamics, noting that seven in ten Americans think religion is losing influence in American life. Sermons on this lesson can address these trends. Jesus was not apolitical in his thinking, finding a way to explain what following him has to do with politics. He makes it clear that his followers are good citizens, pay taxes. But they do not try to impose God or faith on the empire or the state. Jesus’ politically skillful response to his critics is a model for Christian political intervention. Be smart in your politics. Rely on what best moves people to your viewpoint, because politics is dirty business, balancing the various special interests (including our own) found in a society. The founders of our constitutional system recognized that (James Madison, The Federalist Papers, especially pp. 83-84, 521-522). Christians do bring their God into the political sphere, for government still belongs to him. And as we noted above, God wants justice in the world. Sermons on this text should remind the flock that Christians are not to be about the business of seeing politics Christianized, just about ensuring fairness in accord with the teachings of the Second Table of the Ten Commandments -- values all people share (Romans 1:14-15). This is a sermon for helping the flock recognize that when we follow Jesus’ advice and model we are more likely to seek a politics that cares for the poor (19:21; Luke 18:22). God might tell us to let the emperor’s ways prevail in politics, but we do not really know him without acknowledging him as a God who works for justice.
All these lessons witness to the importance of knowing God correctly -- that in all his awesome omnipotence, God is a God of love who cares for his people in compassion and in seeking justice for all.
