Tell me the old, old story

I was recently at a conference of the Urban Ministry Institute (www.tumi.org) which is engaged in inner city church planting and leadership training.  What is surprising is that they are very strong on what they call “Sacred Roots” or the “Great Tradition.”  By this they mean that essence of the faith that is “shared by all, everywhere” within the church.  This is summarized by the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed.

The other part of this, what makes it well suited to urban ministry is the commitment to the big story of what God is doing in the world.  It can be summarized in a variety of ways (note that the Apostles Creed, particularly on Christ is something of a story, “…born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate…”.

The big story is that God the creator of all things has sought from all time to redeem and rescue a people from all nations by the advent, life, death, resurrection and ascension of the Lord, who with the father has sent the Spirit to guide his people through the scriptures.  This is God’s victory in Christ over the ancient dragon.  One day we will enter fully the City of God, but now we are building the reign of God through our worship, witness and service to Christ.

This is grist for the mill at several levels.  One idea, however, is that this idea shares a few things with the old Schofield Bible narrative – it is a story, not a mere list of doctrinal points, it is clear and compelling, it celebrates Christ as the central actor, it puts the Christian life in a context of something bigger than the individual or a congregation, it gives a summary of the scriptures, and it is accessible to people who do not have academic degrees.

This is also similar to my Reformed and Baptist friends who insist that every sermon ought to be tied to Jesus or to “redemptive history.”

Luke 1,2 Is there a Pattern?

I have been preaching from the birth narratives (Luke 1,2; Matthew 1,2 and John 1 as well) for about 25 years.  There is always something new to see in them.  This year, after becoming more interested in narrative structure, I started to ask if there is some overall structure to Luke 1,2.  So I took a stab at an outline of sections, and then i checked what I did with some more academic works from the Library.

So first, here are the agreed on narrative units to Luke, 1,2.

• Lk 1:1-4 (intro to Luke)
• Lk 1:5-25
• Lk 1:26-38
• Lk 1:39-56
• Lk 1:57-80
• Lk 2:1-20
• Lk 2:21-40
• Lk 2:41-52

Now before you read on, why don’t you take a look at these sections and see how they might be related to each other.  Do you see inclusio, parallelism, chiasm, or chaos?

Now, here is my modified outline, which is very much influenced by J. A. Fitzmyer, Anchor Bible 28, The Gospel According to Luke I – IX.  He sees that the main literary structure is a parallel comparison of John and Jesus, but in every instance Jesus is shown to be superior.

A.  About John – Lk 1:5-25

   B.  About Jesus – Lk 1:26-38

     C.  The Visitation – Lk 1:39-56

A’  Birth of John – Lk 1:57-80

         (a.  v. 57-58 – birth

          b. v. 59-80 – circumcision, name, song

    B’  Lk 2:1-40

          a.  Birth, shepherds, song  2:1-20

          b.  Circumcision, naming, song  2:21-40

           C’   The Temple   2:41-52

the Annunciation sections A, B have numerous parallels, other sections are less exact.  The various “songs” appear in an inexact way.  So we can call this a loose parallel structure.

So how did you do, is your outline better than mine?

II Kings 22,23 – Chiasmus

I told someone this week that I was discovering a “chiasmus” in the story of King Josiah, found in II Kings 22,23.  He asked what that was.

It is a literary form where the elements of a story (A, B, C) are repeated, modified in reverse form (C’, B’, A’).  Chiasmus refers to the shape being an “x” or “chi” in Greek.  Often the main point of the story can be found in the center, where the “x” marks the spot.  The number of elements vary. 

English readers need to look for this as it is not a literary form we are as accustomed to as the ancient Hebrews.   We are used to jokes with three elements (minister, rabbi and priest jokes for example), with “inclusio” returning at the end to the beginning.

In my analysis of II Kings 22, 23, I found such a structure.  Notice below that at the start Josiah is affirmed and at the end.  He has the book read to him and he reads it to others, he was restoring the temple, then he restores the people, etc.  The B’ is a long section detailing the repairs Josiah made as a result of his recommitment to the Covenant. 

This is helpful in finding what the intent of the passage might be.  If you see this structure, it is likely pointing you toward the mid point. In this narrative, that is Hulda’s word form the Lord for Josiah and for Jerusalem.  The passage has good news for Josiah, but bad news for the people.  Overall, what it is saying is that rebellion was so advanced and so deeply set in the people that there was no chance that the judgment of God could be averted.  A very serious point.  However, whatever may be the case for the nation, Josiah was still intent on obedience and he was still rewarded for his repentance and faith.

there is this structure.

A – Josiah Affirmed  22:1,2

    B – Josiah Repairs  22:3-7

            C – The Law Recovered  22:8-10

                    D – Josiah Reads the Law  22:11-13

                          E – Josiah Inquires  22:14

                                    1. Jerusalem  22:15-17

                                    2.  Josiah  22:18-20

                    D’ – Josiah Reads the Law  23:1,2

             C’ – Josiah Recovers the Covenant 23:3

     B’ – Josiah Repairs 23:4-24

                        Jerusalem – 23:4-14

                        Outlying Area – 23:15-20

                        Passover – 23:21-23

                        Idolatry – 23:24

A’ – Josiah Accepted; Jerusalem Rejected  23:25-30

            1. Jerusalem – 23:26-27

            2.  Josiah – 23:25, 28-30