New Testament

Bear in mind that Matthew loves OT allusions.
Bear in mind that the magi are Gentile worshippers of Jesus.

He deliberately reports (2:1) that they came from the east.

From the land East of Eden. From Sodom and Gomorrah. From the way into the tabernacle and temple. They came from the east to Jerusalem.

Are we supposed to learn that the birth of this child is access back into the presence of God. Not just for Jewish exiles (1:17), but for Gentiles too?

There’s some good news. Happy Christmas everyone!

OK, it doesn’t fit the tune, but it does fit the sentiment.

Joel Green, NICNT Luke, page 137:

In the light of the cosmic scope of the Isaianic Messianic hope Luke keeps alluding to in chapter 2, and in the light of the references to Gentiles we’ve already had this far in Luke:

This means that the expression ‘those whom he favors’ cannot be limited in application to Israel only. Rather, shalom for Israel is tied up with shalom for the cosmos. Hence, although ‘whom he favors’ is an affirmation of gracious election on God’s part, that graciousness extends to humanity. It should not be read in an exclusive sense – that is, not peace only to a select group whom he favors – but in an inclusive way: In the birth of this child, God’s mercy has fallen on the world.

Thanks to Joel Green, commentary on Luke page 136, for this one

Isaiah 1:3

The ox knows its owner,
and the donkey its master’s crib,
but Israel does not know,
my people do not understand.

I’m looking again at sermon I gave a little while ago on 2 Peter 1:12-21.

What I’m noticing was the careful precision with which Peter describes the inspiration of the OT (prophets) in verse 20.

Picking up, again on this CHN article. The Bible is quite clear that it’s a fair question. Jesus did die for the sins of the whole world. John 3:16 says, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life”.Just a small exegetical observation.

Thanks to Chris Green and Dick Lucas in their BST commentary on 2 Peter for the following paragraph. 2 Peter 2 really is frighteningly contemporary in the scenario it describes.

Having flow charted 2 Peter, the main points stand out quite clearly from the subordinate ones.

Again – just in case this is helpful for anyone, here are two summaries of 2 Peter.

Summary

I’m doing some study of 2 Peter, and have prepared for myself a flow diagram of the English text. For those not familiar with flow diagrams, the idea is that the text is laid out to show the grammatical structure. Main clauses are placed against the left hand margin, and all dependent clauses are indented. Where it makes sense to do so, those dependent clauses are indented so as to place them directly beneath the word they depend on.

Many thanks to Peter Davies, vicar at Audley for his permission to reproduce this morning’s sermon here. Very helpful, I thought, for how clearly he put things. Echoes of Rich Lusk at one point – which certainly is not a criticism!

I have to say that this familiar passage is such a shock to the system.

Re-reading Mark 14 is interesting. In Gethsemane, the disciples were urged to stay awake, watch and pray so that they might not fall into temptation. Jesus himself stayed awake and prayed – presumably including prayer to remain faithful under the forthcoming trial.

A sobering statement on human nature. The disciples could see Jesus, the Son of God incarnate, praying to his father that he might not yield to temptation. Yet they thought (implicitly or explicitly, it doesn’t matter) that they could endure without the Father’s help. Astounding – and sobering.

That also gives a point of contact between chapters 13 and 14. The concluding exhortation in chapter 13 is “stay awake”, the same thing Jesus has to tell the disciples in chapter 14. Could this be one key to working out Mark’s intent in these chapters?