Mt 13-44 txt
Matt 13, 44-46 {SKATTEN OG PERLEN}
Himmelriket kan lignes med en skatt som var gjemt i en åker. En mann fant den, dekket den til igjen, og i sin glede gikk han bort og solgte alt han eide, og kjøpte åkeren. 45 Himmelriket kan også lignes med en kjøpmann som lette etter fine perler. 46 Da han kom over en meget verdifull perle, gikk han bort og solgte alt han eide, og kjøpte den.
Mark 10, 17-31 {JESUS OG DEN RIKE MANNEN}
Da Jesus skulle dra videre, kom en mann løpende, falt på kne for ham og spurte: "Gode mester, hva skal jeg gjøre for å få det evige liv?" 18 Men Jesus sa til ham: "Hvorfor kaller du meg god? Bare én er god - det er Gud. 19 Du kjenner budene: Du skal ikke slå i hjel, du skal ikke bryte ekteskapet, du skal ikke stjele, du skal ikke vitne falskt, du skal ikke bedra noen, du skal hedre din far og din mor." 20 Men han svarte: "Mester, alt dette har jeg holdt fra jeg var ung." 21 Jesus så på ham og fikk ham kjær, og sa: "Én ting mangler deg: Gå bort og selg det du eier, og gi alt til de fattige. Da skal du få en skatt i himmelen. Kom så og følg meg!" 22 Men han ble nedslått over dette svaret og gikk bedrøvet bort, for han var svært rik. 23 Da så Jesus seg rundt i kretsen av disiplene og sa: "Hvor vanskelig det vil være for dem som eier mye, å komme inn i Guds rike." 24 Disiplene ble forferdet over Jesu ord. Men han sa igjen: "Barn, hvor vanskelig det er for dem som stoler på sin rikdom, å komme inn i Guds rike.
[Yngre håndskrifter har en tilføyelse i verset: Barn, hvor vanskelig det er for dem som stoler på sin rikdom, å komme inn i Guds rike.] 25 Det er lettere for en kamel å gå gjennom et nåløye enn for en rik å komme inn i Guds rike." 26 Da ble de enda mer forskrekket og sa til hverandre: "Hvem kan da bli frelst?" 27 Jesus så på dem og sa: "For mennesker er det umulig, men ikke for Gud. Alt er mulig for Gud." 28 Da tok Peter til orde og sa: "Hva så med oss? Vi har forlatt alt og fulgt deg." 29 Jesus svarte: "Sannelig, jeg sier dere: Enhver som har forlatt hus eller brødre eller søstre eller mor eller far eller barn eller åkrer for min skyld og for evangeliets skyld, 30 skal få hundre ganger så mye igjen: her i tiden hus, brødre, søstre, mødre, barn og åkrer - men også forfølgelser - og i den kommende verden evig liv. 31 Men mange som er de første, skal bli de siste, og de siste skal bli de første."
Flp 1, 20-26 Og jeg har det håp og den forventning at jeg ikke i noen ting skal bli stående med skam, men at Kristi storhet, nå som alltid før, skal bli synlig for alle og enhver ved det som skjer med meg, enten jeg skal leve eller dø. 21 For meg er livet Kristus og døden en vinning. 22 Men hvis det å bli i live betyr at jeg kan gjøre et arbeid som bærer frukt, da vet jeg ikke hva jeg skal velge. 23 Jeg kjenner meg trukket til begge sider: Jeg har lyst til å bryte opp herfra og være sammen med Kristus, for det er så mye, mye bedre. 24 Men å bli i live er mer nødvendig for deres skyld. 25 Det er jeg viss på, og derfor vet jeg at jeg skal leve og være hos dere alle og hjelpe dere til fremgang og glede i troen. 26 Da skal dere i Kristus Jesus få rikelig grunn til å prise dere lykkelige for min skyld, når jeg igjen kommer til dere.
20:1–21 God addresses the people directly
20:1–2 Introduction. As the people stood in awe before the mountain, they heard the very voice of God introducing himself to them: I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery (2; cf. Dt. 4:12–13; 5:4). There then follows a list of stipulations which were to form the basis of Israel’s covenant relationship with God (3–17). These were later termed ‘the ten words’ (34:28; Dt. 4:13; 10:4), from which we derive the designation Decalogue or Ten Commandments. Their importance was further emphasized when they were eventually inscribed by God on two stone tablets (24:12; 31:18; 34:1, 28; see below).
The stipulations outlined by God were to govern Israel’s relationship with him. These represent the principal requirements which God placed upon the people of Israel for the establishment and maintenance of the covenant relationship between them. The people were to be single-minded in their devotion to the one who had delivered them from Egypt. They were to worship him alone (3). Furthermore, their social behaviour was to follow a pattern which placed a high priority on the rights of the individual as regards life, marriage and possessions. They were to obey these commands out of love for God (6).
Strictly speaking, the Decalogue is not a collection of laws. Various factors set it apart from the other legal collections of the Pentateuch. First it was spoken directly by God to the people; Moses did not act as an intermediary (1, 19; cf. Dt. 4:12–13; 5:4–5, 22–27). Secondly, it alone was inscribed on stone tablets by the ‘finger of God’ (31:18; cf. 24:12, 32:15–16; 34:1, 28). All other regulations and instructions were written down by Moses (24:4; 34:27–28, see note on 34:28). Thirdly, the Ten Commandments are hardly detailed precepts, since no punishments are listed. Although the second and fifth commandments appear to contain penalties, these are really ‘motivation clauses’ designed to promote the observance of the divine instructions. Finally, what human law court could begin to enforce the prohibition against coveting described in the tenth commandment?
The covenant stipulations in ch. 20 are listed in order of descending priority and focus on the Israelites’ relationship to God and other people. Jesus summarized this twofold division as love for God and love for one’s neighbour (Mt. 22:37–39; Mk. 12:29–31). Love for God must come first, but it can never to be divorced from love for one’s neighbour; the former leads automatically to the latter.
20:3 First commandment. Sole allegiance to ‘the Lord’ lies at the very heart of the covenant relationship. It is the foundation upon which everything else rests. The people were in practice to be monotheistic, worshipping only God. As is made clear elsewhere in the Pentateuch, the worship of other deities was punishable by death (Nu. 25:1–18; Dt. 13:1–18).
20:4–6 Second commandment. Unlike contemporary peoples, the Israelites were not to make or worship visual representations of their God. In both Egypt and Canaan, human and animal forms played an important function in depicting the attributes of a deity. Any attempt on the part of the Israelites to represent God using such images would produce a distorted picture of his true nature. The incident of the golden calf (ch. 32) reveals both the necessity of this prohibition in the light of the people’s desire to have some visual image of ‘the Lord’, and the serious consequences of disregarding this commandment.
20:7 Third commandment. Whereas the second commandment prohibits visual representations of God, the third focuses on verbal representations. As a sign of their respect for God, the people were to exercise the greatest caution when talking about him or invoking his name. They were to say nothing which might detract from a true appreciation of his nature and character.
20:8–11 Fourth commandment. The people were to refrain from work on the seventh day, the Sabbath. According to 31:12–18 the Sabbath was the sign of the covenant relationship inaugurated at Sinai; as such it functioned like the earlier covenant sign of circumcision (Gn. 17:9–14). Anyone failing to observe the Sabbath showed their disdain for the special relationship established between God and Israel. As a result of the new covenant inaugurated by Christ the Sabbath (Saturday) was replaced by the Lord’s day (Sunday). The strict observance of the Sabbath, like circumcision, is no longer binding upon Christians.
20:12 Fifth commandment. The concept of honouring is usually associated with God or his representatives, prophets and kings. In all likelihood parents were envisaged as representing God to their children; the family unit being a miniature of the nation. The seriousness of this commandment is reflected in the fact that the death penalty was required for children who wilfully disrespected their parents (Ex. 21:15, 17). If parents, as authority figures within the home, are respected by children, then respect for authority figures within society at large will also follow.
20:13 Sixth commandment. This commandment, by prohibiting murder or man-slaughter, demonstrates the high priority which God places upon human life. No human being has the right to take another’s life because each person is made in God’s image (cf. Gn. 1:27; 9:6). In the Pentateuch, the punishment for taking another’s life is death itself. The commandment, however, does not include judicial executions for capital offences or legitimate deaths resulting from war, and it should also be noted that the OT laws draw a careful distinction between premeditated and accidental deaths (see on 21:1–22:20, the section entitled ‘The sanctity of life’).
20:14 Seventh commandment. In God’s order of priority, the sanctity of human life is followed by the importance of the marriage relationship. Adultery here means sexual relations between a married woman and a man who is not her husband. Those caught in adultery could be executed (Lv. 20:10; Dt. 22:22). Relations between a married man and an unmarried woman do not qualify as adultery. Hence polygamy is not automatically excluded by this commandment, although in practice it was rare in OT times. Similarly, divorce was permitted, but not encouraged. The NT teaching on marriage is, in certain respects, more demanding, reflecting more closely God’s ideal for human marriage as expressed in Gn. 2:24; polygamy, a husband’s adultery and possibly remarriage are all prohibited (cf. Mt. 19:3–12; Mk. 10:2–12; Lk. 16:18). As a whole, the Bible reveals that God desires the establishment of harmonious marital relationships and that neither partner should do anything to undermine this.
20:15 Eighth commandment. The next principle to govern the Israelites’ relationship with God is respect for the property of others. Any individual found guilty of dispossessing another was to be punished in accordance with the value of what they had stolen and the injured party was to be suitably compensated. While other Ancient Near Eastern cultures sometimes invoked the death penalty for theft, the OT consistently rejects such a position, indicating clearly that God values human life and the marital relationship above property.
20:16 Ninth commandment. In the final two commandments we proceed from prohibitions involving actions to prohibitions involving words and thoughts respectively. This concludes the downward progression of priorities which we have observed. The ninth commandment emphasizes the importance of truthfulness. While the prohibition against false testimony was primarily intended for a court of law, it may be extended to include any situation in which untrue words are used to harm another individual.
20:17 Tenth commandment. The final commandment forbids an individual to covet what belongs to another. Unlike all the other commands, it addresses inner feelings and thoughts such as envy or greed. If the Israelites were to enjoy a harmonious covenant relationship with God, every aspect of their lives must conform to his will. Outward adherence is insufficient; their inner selves must be patterned according to the divine principles of morality found in the Ten Commandments. As Jesus reminds us, to interpret the commandments as requiring only outward obedience is to misunderstand their purpose (Mt. 5:17–48).
Ex 20:1-17
The Ten Commandments
20:1–17. apodictic law. A number of collections of legal material have been found from ancient times, including Sumerian, Babylonian, Hittite and Assyrian collections. The most famous is the Code of Hammurabi, dating from several hundred years earlier than Moses. These collections consist primarily of sample rulings in particular types of cases. As case law they present what penalties were assigned to a wide range of offenses, rather than indicating certain behavior to be right or wrong or telling people what they should or should not do. The type of law found in the Ten Commandments that prohibits or requires certain types of behavior is called apodictic law and is rarely found in the legal collections of the ancient Near East.
20:1–17. Decalogue as covenant (not law). The Ten Commandments not only are connected to law but are also a part of the covenant. The literary formulation of the covenant is quite similar to the formulations of international treaties in the ancient Near East. In the stipulations of these treaties, one often finds certain behavior either required or prohibited. In this sense it could be understood that the apodictic form of the Ten Commandments puts them more in the category of covenant than in the category of law.
20:3. first commandment. When the text says that there should be no other god “before me,” it does not refer to others having a higher position than Yahweh. The introduction in verse 2 has already indicated as a preexisting assumption that Yahweh is their God. The phrase “before me” means “in my presence” and therefore prohibits other gods from being considered to be in the presence of Yahweh. This prohibits several concepts that were a standard part of ancient beliefs. Most religions of that day had a pantheon, a divine assembly that ruled the realm of the gods, the supernatural, and, ultimately, the human world. There would typically be a deity who was designated head of the pantheon, and he, like the other gods, would have at least one consort (female partner). This commandment forbids Israel to think in these terms. Yahweh is not the head of a pantheon, and he does not have a consort—there are no gods in his presence. The only divine assembly that is legitimate for their thinking is made up of angels (as in 1 Kings 22:19–20), not gods. This commandment also then effectively bans much mythology that deals with the interactions of the gods with one another.
20:4. second commandment. The second commandment concerns how Yahweh is to be worshiped, for the idols that it prohibits are idols of him (the previous commandment already dismissed the thought of other gods). The commandment has nothing to do with art, though the graven images of the ancient world were indeed works of art. They were typically carved of wood and overlaid with hammered sheets of silver or gold, then clothed in the finest attire. But the prohibition is more concerned with how they are employed, and here the issue is power. Images of deity in the ancient Near East were where the deity became present in a special way, to the extent that the cult statue became the god (when the god so favored his worshipers), even though it was not the only manifestation of the god. As a result of this linkage, spells, incantations and other magical acts could be performed on the image in order to threaten, bind or compel the deity. In contrast, other rites related to the image were intended to aid the deity or care for the deity. The images then represent a worldview, a concept of deity that was not consistent with how Yahweh had revealed himself. The commandment also prohibits images of anything in heaven, earth or under the earth. In contrast to Egypt, it was not the practice in Syria-Palestine to worship animals or to have gods in the form of animals. Nevertheless, there were animals that were believed to represent the attributes of deity, such as bulls and horses, that would be portrayed in art and sculpture to stand in the place of deity.
20:5–6. punishing third and fourth generations. Punishment to the third or fourth generation is not granted to human judges but to God. It expresses the fact that covenant violation brings guilt on the entire family. The third and fourth generation is then a way to refer to all living members of the family. But there is also a contrast here in the loyalty that extends over thousands of generations as over against the punishment that extends only three or four.
20:6. corporate solidarity. In the ancient Near East a person found his or her identity within a group such as the clan or family. Integration and interdependence were important values, and the group was bound together as a unit. As a result, individual behavior would not be viewed in isolation from the group. When there was sin in a family, all members shared the responsibility. This concept is known as corporate identity.
20:7. third commandment. As the second commandment concerned the issue of exercising power over God, the third turns its attention to exercising God’s power over others. This commandment does not refer to blasphemy or foul language. Rather it is intended to prevent the exploitation of the name of Yahweh for magical purposes or hexing. It also continues the concerns of the second commandment in that someone’s name was believed to be intimately connected to that person’s being and essence. The giving of one’s name was an act of favor, trust and, in human terms, vulnerability. Israel was not to attempt to use Yahweh’s name in magical ways to manipulate him. The commandment was also intended to insure that the use of Yahweh’s name in oaths, vows and treaties was taken seriously.
20:8–11. fourth commandment. Sabbath observation has no known parallel in any of the cultures of the ancient Near East and is distinctive in that it is independent of any of the patterns or rhythms of nature. A similar term was used in Babylonian texts as a full moon day when the king officiated at rites of reconciliation with deity, but it was not a work-free day and has little in common with the Israelite sabbath. The legislation does not require rest as much as it stipulates cessation, interrupting the normal activities of one’s occupation.
20:12. fifth commandment. Honoring and respecting parents consists of respecting their instruction in the covenant. This assumes that a religious heritage is being passed on. The home was seen as an important and necessary link for the covenant instruction of each successive generation. Honor is given to them as representatives of God’s authority for the sake of covenant preservation. If parents are not heeded or their authority is repudiated, the covenant is in jeopardy. In this connection, notice that this commandment comes with covenant promise: living long in the land. In the ancient Near East it is not the religious heritage but the fabric of society that is threatened when there is no respect for parental authority and filial obligations are neglected. Violations would include striking parents, cursing parents, neglecting the care of elderly parents and failing to provide adequate burial.
20:12–17. commandments and community. Commandments five to nine all deal with issues of covenant in community. They affect the transmission of the covenant in the community and the standing of individuals within the covenant community. Injunctions concern those things that would jeopardize the covenant’s continuity from generation to generation or that would jeopardize the family line or reputation. The covenant must be passed on in the family, and the family must be preserved. In the ancient Near East the concerns were similar, but the focus on preservation of the community was viewed more in social and civil terms. Lists of ethical violations are found in Egypt in the Book of the Dead, where the individual denies that he has committed any of a long list of crimes. In Mesopotamia the incantation series known as Shurpu contains a list of crimes the individual confesses to in order to absolve himself of unknown offenses and thus appease an angry deity. But in neither of these works are these actions prohibited. They also include a wide range of other types of offenses.
20:13. sixth commandment. The word used here is not technically restricted to murder, but it does assume a person as both subject and object. It has been observed that it is used only in the context of homicide (whether accidental or intentional, premeditated or not, judicial, political or otherwise) within the covenant community. Because of the nature of the term used, this verse cannot easily be brought into discussions of pacifism, capital punishments or vegetarianism. Some law collections of the ancient Near East do not treat murder, while in others the punishment only entails monetary compensation. Nevertheless the murderer still ran the risk of being targeted for execution by the victim’s family in a blood feud.
20:14. seventh commandment. The purpose of the legislation was to protect the husband’s name by assuring him that his children would be his own. The law does not insure marital fidelity; its focus is paternity, not sexual ethics. The integrity of the family is protected rather than the integrity of the marriage. If a married man had an affair with an unmarried woman, it was not considered adultery. The offender had to pay damages to the father (22:16–17). This is a natural result of a polygamous society. Promiscuous behavior is not acceptable (Deut 22:21; 23:2), but it is not called adultery if the woman is not married. In the Bible the wife is an extension of the husband, and his name is damaged through adultery. In other cultures the wife was considered property, and this would merely have been a case of damaged goods. Nonetheless, in Egypt (marriage contracts), Mesopotamia (hymns to Ninurta and Shamash) and Canaan (king of Ugarit extradites and executes his wife), adultery was regularly referred to as “the great sin” and was considered extremely detrimental to society in that it was characteristic of anarchy. Hittite laws, Middle Assyrian laws and the Code of Hammurabi all contain legislation against adultery. The protection of the integrity of the family unit was important because the family was the foundation of society. Compromise or collapse of the family meant compromise or collapse of society.
20:15. eighth commandment. Property theft is prevented by the tenth commandment one step before the act. Though the verb used here in the eighth commandment can be used of stealing property, the command is much broader in its focus. Issues such as kidnapping (cf. Deut 24:7) as well as stealing intangibles (dignity, self-respect, freedom, rights) are all important. The word is also used for stealing in the sense of cheating—by cheating someone out of something, you are stealing from him.
20:16. ninth commandment. The terminology indicates the main focus is on formal slander and libel and is concerned primarily with the legal setting. The maintenance of justice was dependent on the reliability of the witness. Nevertheless, character assassination in any of its forms, legal or casual, would constitute false witness and would be a violation of this commandment.
20:17. tenth commandment. In the ancient Near East the concept of coveting occurs in expressions such as “to lift the eyes”—but it is a crime that can be detected and punished only when the desire is translated into action. Ancient Near Eastern literature shows that offenses such as theft and adultery can be described generally in terms of the desire that triggered the chain of events. Whatever action it spawns, this illegitimate desire for something that belongs to someone else is the core of the problem and a threat to the community; any action taken to fulfil such a desire is sin.
20:18. thunder and lightning. Thunder and lightning were considered to regularly accompany the presence of a deity in the ancient Near East, though that is often in a battle setting, not a revelation setting, since the gods of the ancient Near East were not accustomed to revealing themselves.[1]
----
[1]Walton, John H.; Matthews, Victor H.; Chavalas, Mark W., The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press) c2000.
