Author: cristovao

January 23, 2018 Hebrew Songs Post a Comment

January Hebrew Song

JANUARY 2018

Hebrew:
עברית:
שיר השירים פרק ה, פסוקים י, י”א:

דוֹדִי צַח וְאָדוֹם דָּגוּל מֵרְבָבָה. רֹאשוֹ כֶּתֶם פָּז קְוֻצּוֹתָיו תַּלְתַּלִּים שְחֹרוֹת כָּעוֹרֵב.
אנגלית:           
 

 

English:

My beloved is clear-skinned and ruddy,

Preeminent among ten thousand.

His head is finest gold,

 His locks are curled

And black as a raven.

 

Transliteration: as it is sung

Dodi, dodi tzach ve-adom dagul me-revava. (x2)

Rosho ketem paz, kvutzotzv taltalim

Shechorot (x3) ka-orev

Dodi (x3) ve-rei … (=my beloved)

Dodi, dodi tzach ve-adom dagul me-revava…..

 

This song is taken almost word by word from Song of Songs.  When we sing it, we add only one word : רֵעִי which is a synonym to the word דוֹדִי= my beloved, my friend, my  closest friend. The girl describes her beloved one a handsome person especially his skin and his hair, and also as an outstanding person that can be seen even among ten thousand people. If the Song of Songs was only a love song it would not be in the  Tanakh (Bible). Rabbi Akiva said, “All the writings are holy, but the Song of Songs is the holy of holies.” Jews have a custom to recite the Song of Songs on Shabbath evenings as Shabbath serves as a renewal of the love relationship between God and the Jewish People.

January 17, 2018 Sunday Commentary Post a Comment

The Third Sunday of the Year

 The Third Sunday of the Year (21 January 2018)

Lectionary readings: Jonah 3:1-5,10; Psalm 24(25):4-6,7b-9; 1 Corinthians 7:29-31; Mark 1:14-20

 

Download

 

Today’s gospel offers a summary of Jesus’ mission according to Mark (1:14-15), highlighting four important aspects: it is good news (euangelion); it is responsive to the possibility of the present time (kairos); it is focused on the reign of God (basileia); and asks people to respond through their actions (“repentance”, metanoia).

 

This summary is followed by two separate call narratives. The first is of Simon (Peter) and Andrew, who in the Marcan tradition are two poor fishermen casting their nets from the shore as they presumably do not own a boat (1:16-18). Next, Jesus calls James and John, who are part of a family business with workers and a boat (1:19-20). The call of Jesus is for those who are poor and wealthy alike, and invites them into the mission of proclaiming good news of God (euangelion tou theou, 1:14): “the theological focus for this Gospel” (Beavis, Kindle locations 1274-1275).

 

In this commentary, I will focus on two aspects of this summary: time (kairos) and good news (euangelion). Time features in three of the four passages we listen to today. In the first reading, Jonah is commanded to proclaim the message of The Eternal (YHWH) to the city of Nineveh (Jonah 3:2): “Forty days more, and Nineveh shall be overthrown! (nehpakhet)” (3:4). There is some ambiguity as to the translation of nehpakhet, which might also be translated as “turns over (i.e., reforms itself)” (J.S.B., 1192). Whilst the number forty indicates a considerable period of time, the turnaround in the behaviour of the citizens of Nineveh “great and small alike” is as immediate as it is universal (3:5).

 

The reading from Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians is framed with a sense of eschatological urgency: “the appointed time [kairos] has grown short…For the present form of this world is passing away” (1 Corinthians 7:29, 31). “Paul’s advice is not to withdraw into the safe and unrestricted realms of the inner life, but to maintain freedom in the midst of involvement” (Conzelmann, 133). Paul is exhorting his readers to be present to the possibilities that the present – the only time we can encounter the Mystery of the Divine – is offering us, as we are.

 

A similar sense of “eschatological urgency” (Beavis, Kindle location 1384) is evident in Jesus’ first words in Mark’s Gospel, “The time [kairos] is fulfilled!” (Mark 1:15), as well as the responses of Simon, Andrew, James and John to Jesus’ call to follow him. Their response is immediate, as they leave their families and their livelihoods to follow Jesus as disciples (Mark 1:18, 20). Although it is more common for a disciple to seek out a rabbi (cf. last Sunday’s gospel, John 1:35-42, also b. Eruv. 30a; b. Ketub. 66b) there is also biblical precedent in Elijah’s seeking out Elisha (1 Kings 19:19-21, JANT, 637) – not the only echoes of the Elijah stories to find their way into the Gospels.

 

Karl Barth (Time Magazine, 1966) noted “Take your Bible and take your newspaper, and read both. But interpret newspapers from your Bible.” Here we find a link to the Psalm, with repeated requests for The Eternal to teach (lammed) its author God’s paths and truth (25:4, 5). The Eternal instructs and leads (25:8, 9). Just like Simon, Andrew, James and John, we are called to follow as disciples (talmidim): people eager to learn the ways of the Divine.

 

At mass on Sunday, our priest remarked that there is no ordinary time – the season to which we have just returned – only “extraordinary time.” I could not help but think of the richness of the term kairos, “which has the connotation of “proper” or “opportune” time as well as a time of crisis” (Donahue & Harrington 70-71). We can only live in the present and we are being called to read the “news” (reality) of our world in the light of the Good News of God announced by Jesus, which is rooted in the Scriptures we share with the Jewish people. Now is the time, there is only now, there is only kairos!

 

For Reflection and Discussion: How do I read the “news” of our world? Through what eyes do I consider its veracity? How will I respond to the Good News of God and of God’s Reign that I am called to participate in?

 

Bibliography: Mary Ann Beavis, Mark: Paideia Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group, 2011); Adele Berlin, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Michael A. Fishbane, eds., The Jewish Study Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004); Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, Hermeneia 67 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1975); John R Donahue & Daniel J Harrington, The Gospel of Mark (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2002); Amy-Jill Levine & Marc Zvi Brettler, The Jewish Annotated New Testament (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012).

 

This week’s Sunday Gospel Commentary was prepared by

Mark David Walsh, B.A., B.Theol. Grad. Dip. R.E., M.R.E., Australia,  Bat Kol alum ‘01, ‘02, ’04, ‘13
Email address: markdavidwalsh@gmail.com

[Copyright © 2018]

 

……………………………………………………………

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Gospel commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Sunday Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol.  Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome

……………………………………………………………………

 

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem

1983-2018

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

 

 

Parashah Commentary Post a Comment

Parashat Bo

Shabbat Table Talk

Parashat Bo –Erev Shabbat, January 19, 2018

Week of 14 -20 January

Torah portion: Exodus 10:1-13:16                          Haftarah Jeremiah 46: 13-28

 

Download

 

This week the struggle between Moses and Pharaoh continues.  Do we GO (Bo) or not?  Moses and Aaron return again after 7 plagues have struck the Egyptians and warn Pharaoh to let the Israelites go or suffer the 8th plague of locusts.  “Who are the ones to go” asks Pharaoh? (Ex.10:8)  Moses insists “with our young ones, with our elders we will go, with our sons and with our daughters, with our sheep and with our oxen we will go- for it is YHWH’s pilgrimage-festival for us. (10:9) ALL would go.  As with each of the other plagues, Pharaoh asks forgiveness, but his “plea” continues to quickly become meaningless and with his hardened heart he refuses to let the people go.

 

And so, with the 9th plague darkness covers the land.  The 10th and final plague follows. With this YHWH is seen as the “executioner” in the middle of the night, descending into Egypt to redeem the 1st born of the Israelites by the killing of the 1st born male of all families and beasts including the son of Pharaoh.  Moses in the meantime is instructed to mark this as the 1st month of the year and to prepare to leave Egypt. (Ex. 12:1)  With Chapter 12 the narrative leaves the realm of story telling and enters that of ritual.   The Passover event follows with the elders killing lambs and using the blood to paint the door lintels.  The people are told to stay inside until morning.  Cries and wailing break the silence of the night.  This story and ritual have become part of both Jewish and Christian tradition.

 

In this parashat we also witness dramatic changes between master and slaves.  It takes 8 plagues for Pharaoh to recognize that his authority is meaningless.  The Israelites long for freedom from their lives as slaves. By this point their people had been in Egypt for 430 years.  It is thus hard for them to appreciate their new reality as they leave this land.  They will need to recognize more clearly with their journey to freedom that they are dearly loved by God.  It will take time for the people to truly live into this reality and learn to return this great love.

 

The Haftarah of Jeremiah reminds their ancestor, “Have no fear Jacob, my servant: do not despair.  I will save you.  I am with you says the Eternal One.  That promise and covenant is renewed over and over throughout the history of the “chosen ones.”

 

 For Reflection and Discussion: Today we reach the key moment in Exodus with the Passover event.  It is a reminder that “remembering makes the past present again”.  As 2018 begins, the country of Egypt is an important player on the world stage.  Rights and freedom continue to be openly sought for everywhere we look.  The #MeToo and LGBTQ movements are calling for each person to be treated with dignity and respect – as we all share in the divinity of our Creator.    What can we learn from past struggles between the powerless and those in Power? How do we respond to the “cries” of sisters and brothers to be free of oppression, isolation, and shame?  Will this open us to renewed compassion seeking justice for all?

 

Bibliography:    Shekel (The Women’s Torah Commentary – Vermont, 2000); Leibowitz (New Studies in Bereshit (Genesis) – Israel ) ;  Fox ( The Five Books of Moses – New York, 1995) ; Plaut (The Haftarah Commentary, New York, 1996)

 

This week’s teaching commentary was prepared by

Mary Louise Chesley-Cora,  M.A.T. Religious Studies

Bat Kol Alumna, 2001

Email:  chezcor@msn.com

Copyright c 2018

 

……………………………………………………………

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Parashah commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol. The commentaries, along with all materials published on the Bat Kol website, are copyrighted by the writers, and are made available for personal and group study, and local church purposes. Permission needed for other purposes. Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

……………………………………………………

 

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem

~~1983-2018~~

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

Website: www.batkol.info    Parashah Admin. gill@batkol.info

 

January 10, 2018 Sunday Commentary Post a Comment

The Second Sunday of the Year

 The Second Sunday of the Year (14 January 2018) 

Lectionary readings: 1Sam 3:3-10. 19; Ps 40; 1Cor 6:13-15. 17-20; Jn 1:35-42 

Theme: Jesus, the Lamb of God

 

Download

 

What strikes me about this gospel narrative is the use of names and titles. It begins with naming John whom we know as the Baptizer. The two with him are ‘disciples’ who are not named. John sees Jesus and points him out with the title “Lamb of God”. The ‘disciples’ (still not named) leave John and follow Jesus. Jesus speaks his first words in this gospel: “What do you seek?” They answer him with another title ‘Rabbi’ meaning ‘Teacher’.

 

We then learn that one of the ‘disciples’ is Andrew. Interestingly enough he is designated as being the brother of ‘Simon Peter’ whom we have not met. Andrew tells Simon (now we are introduced) that they have found the ‘Messiah’ known in Greek as the ‘Christos’, the anointed one.

 

Andrew brings Simon to Jesus and Jesus looks at the man who is Simon the son of John and gives him his title: Cephas, Peter or Rock.

 

‘Titles’ can often take away the humanity of the person and raise them to something that enhances their ego and gives them power especially over other mere mortals. In this passage ‘titles’ designate a calling. John is the one who prepares the way by baptizing with water as he attests to in verses 31-34 where he gives Jesus his true identity: ‘Son of God’.

 

The disciples are followers or learners in the ways of God first with John and then with Jesus whom they recognise as ‘Rabbi’ but after spending time with Jesus attest to the fact that he is the ‘Messiah’ the anointed Saviour of God.

 

Why does John call Jesus the ‘Lamb of God’? The first time he uses the title is in verse 29 and he gives his reason for that: “who takes away the sin of the world”. We are meant to recall the paschal lamb of Exodus 12 and to follow this through to Jesus’ death which John puts at the time of the slaughtering of the paschal lambs. The second time John uses this title is to point out to his disciples who Jesus is, about whom he has already spoken.

 

McKenzie: Dictionary of the Bible (1965) p.491 says that this title refers to Is 53:7 one of the ‘Songs of the Suffering servant of the Lord’ which is also quoted in Acts 8:32 and Jn 19:36: all of which point to Jesus.

 

McKenzie further points out that Joachim Jeremias has suggested that the original Aramaic word talyᾱ’ means both lamb and servant. He says that the original statement was: “Here is the Servant of God”.

 

So ‘titles’ in the kingdom of God are about being a servant, pointing the way to Jesus away from ourselves and showing Jesus to others. As Sirach says in 2:1: “My son (daughter) when you come to serve the Lord, prepare yourself for trials”.  Our answer with Jesus is: “I delight to do your will, O my God; your instruction lies deep within me” (Ps 40:9).

 

For Reflection and Discussion: 1. At the beginning of this New Year what is your answer to Jesus’ question: “What do you seek?” 

 

Bibliography: King, N. The New Testament, (Great Britain: 2004); McKenzie, J.L. Dictionary of the Bible (New York: 1965); The African Bible, (Nairobi: 1999).

 

This week’s Sunday Gospel Commentary was prepared by

Bernadette Chellew, ,Durban, South Africa

 Bat Kol Alum 2008
Email address: btrnchellew@gmail.com

 

[Copyright © 2018]

 

………………………………………………………

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Gospel commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Sunday Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol.  Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

…………………………………………………………………

 

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem

1983-2018

“Christians Studying the Bible  within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

 

Parashah Commentary Post a Comment

Parashah Va'era

 Shabbat Table Talk

Parashah Va’era – Erev Shabbat 12th January 2018

Torah portion:  Ex. 6:2-9:35            Haftarah: Ezek. 28:25-29:21

 

Download

 

Our parashah Va-era takes its name from history of ancestors of Israel to whom G-d “appeared” with the name El-Shaddai and now to Moses He reveals the ineffable name YHWH.  The central thrust is the meaning of the revelation of the new name of G-d “I AM YHWH” (6, 3). YHWH never appears in any physical form here, rather the sign-acts He will establish in the land of Pharaoh in favor of His people trailing under the tyranny of the King of Egypt will lead to the recognition of Him as I AM YHWH. The finality thrust of the narrative block of Sh’mot 6-14, lies in acknowledging YHWH as the G-d.

 

The parashah contains seven of the ten prodigious sign-acts of liberation narrated in Sh’mot in connection with Israel’s marching into freedom namely, the plagues of Nile turning to blood, Frogs covering the land and even the chamber of Pharaoh, Gnats on humans and animals, plague of flies, killing of the livestock, boils, and the hail. The sign-acts which Moses and Aaron are commanded to perform before Pharaoh, his household, and the land of Egypt will lead ultimately to acknowledge G-d as the ultimate player in the story of the emancipation.

 

The root y.d.‘. (= to know) is a keyword in this parashah and in the Sh’mot in general. G-d, the Israelites, and Pharaoh and Egypt surface as the subject of the verb y.d.‘.

 

It refers to G-d’s taking notice of the children of Israel and their afflictions (2, 25; 3, 7). It is more than an informative knowledge; it is more about personal involvement of the G-d of the covenant with His people whom He calls as the first born (4, 22). In both these instances it is associated to the verb r.’.h. (“to appear” is the meaning of the term r.’.h. in reflexive niphal)).

 

The same association of verbs in 6, 3 at the beginning of our parashah where the rabbinic tradition sees the crucial shift of divine name from Elohim to YHWH while speaking to Moses (Etz Hayim). The paramount importance of the Shem Mephorat (Rabbi A.J. Heschel) lies in recognizing G-d of Mercy as G-d who works liberation. This will be the all-season gospel of the G-d of the Bible that G-d is present in every story of human liberation.

     Israel will recognize the power of the Divine Name, will know YHHW as their G-d when YHWH will put an end to tyranny and bondage of Pharaoh over them (6, 7; 10, 2). The sign-acts for their size and strength are naturally wont to affect the people indiscriminately. However, we hear that YHWH makes a distinction between the Israelites and the Egyptians. This is explicitly clear in the case of the plagues of Flies (8, 20-32), Death of livestock (9, 1-7), Hail, thunder and fire (9, 13-35), Darkness for three days (10, 1-20), and the killing of firstborns (11, 1-10).  Israel celebrated their victory with the same theme of the ‘song of the sea’: “The LORD is my strength and might; He has become my deliverance. This s my God and I will enshrine Him; the God of my father, and I will exalt Him.” (cf.15, 2- Etz Hayim).

 

The distinction is between the oppressor and the oppressed. Using this as a paradigm the prophets of Israel will admonish Israel that they run the same risk if they or their leaders ever simulate Pharaoh. Thus Amos equates the story of Exodus of Israel with that of other people (Amos 9, 7) as a warming that G-d shows no partiality when it comes to the question of oppression.

 

Pharaoh and Egypt seeing the sign-acts will acknowledge YHWH as G-d. Pharaoh and his people consistently refuse to the acknowledge YHWH as G-d. His refusal to know YHWH (“I do not know YHWH,” cf. 5, 2) is meted out with the statement of the purpose of sign-acts, namely to lead Pharaoh into acknowledging G-d YHWH (I AM YHWH). The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart is caused by his own adamancy (8, 15.32; 9, 34) but it is at the same time, overwhelmingly an act of G-d’s own making (cf. 4, 21; 7, 3; 10, 1.20.27; 11, 10; 14, 4.17). The purpose of latter is to allow time to multiply (7, 3) and make a full-blown display (10, 1) of His sign-acts so that both Egyptians and Israelites will know YHWH as the true Lord of history (cf. 10, 2).

 

The haftara taken from Ezekiel correlates the parashah to the Prophet’s condemnation of Tyre and Egypt from another time, during the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem. Both were great powers of the time and known for their affluence and military prowess. However, the affluence led to the primordial sin of presumption and hybris- “I am El”, said the ruler of Tyre (Ezek 28, 3); “Nile is my own; I made it”, said the king of Egypt (Ezek 29, 3.9). YHWH will ruin both Egypt and Tyre until the time they will repent and will be restored.

 

This week’s teaching commentary was prepared by

Fr. James Raphael Anaparambil, Bat Kol Alumnus 2009

Coadjutor Bishop-Designate, Diocese of Alleppey, Kerala, India

Email address: anaparambil@googlemail.com

 [Copyright © 2018]

 

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Parashah commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate  deeper thinking about the meaning of the Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute,  the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol.   The commentaries, along with all materials published on the Bat Kol website, are copyrighted by the writers, and are made available for  personal and group study, and local church purposes. Permission needed for other purposes.  Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

 

~~1983–2018~~

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies , Jerusalem

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

Website: www.batkol.info  Parashat Admin. gill@batkol.info

Parashah Commentary Post a Comment

Parashah Va’era

 Shabbat Table Talk

Parashah Va’era – Erev Shabbat 12th January 2018

Torah portion:  Ex. 6:2-9:35            Haftarah: Ezek. 28:25-29:21

 

Download

 

Our parashah Va-era takes its name from history of ancestors of Israel to whom G-d “appeared” with the name El-Shaddai and now to Moses He reveals the ineffable name YHWH.  The central thrust is the meaning of the revelation of the new name of G-d “I AM YHWH” (6, 3). YHWH never appears in any physical form here, rather the sign-acts He will establish in the land of Pharaoh in favor of His people trailing under the tyranny of the King of Egypt will lead to the recognition of Him as I AM YHWH. The finality thrust of the narrative block of Sh’mot 6-14, lies in acknowledging YHWH as the G-d.

 

The parashah contains seven of the ten prodigious sign-acts of liberation narrated in Sh’mot in connection with Israel’s marching into freedom namely, the plagues of Nile turning to blood, Frogs covering the land and even the chamber of Pharaoh, Gnats on humans and animals, plague of flies, killing of the livestock, boils, and the hail. The sign-acts which Moses and Aaron are commanded to perform before Pharaoh, his household, and the land of Egypt will lead ultimately to acknowledge G-d as the ultimate player in the story of the emancipation.

 

The root y.d.‘. (= to know) is a keyword in this parashah and in the Sh’mot in general. G-d, the Israelites, and Pharaoh and Egypt surface as the subject of the verb y.d.‘.

 

It refers to G-d’s taking notice of the children of Israel and their afflictions (2, 25; 3, 7). It is more than an informative knowledge; it is more about personal involvement of the G-d of the covenant with His people whom He calls as the first born (4, 22). In both these instances it is associated to the verb r.’.h. (“to appear” is the meaning of the term r.’.h. in reflexive niphal)).

 

The same association of verbs in 6, 3 at the beginning of our parashah where the rabbinic tradition sees the crucial shift of divine name from Elohim to YHWH while speaking to Moses (Etz Hayim). The paramount importance of the Shem Mephorat (Rabbi A.J. Heschel) lies in recognizing G-d of Mercy as G-d who works liberation. This will be the all-season gospel of the G-d of the Bible that G-d is present in every story of human liberation.

     Israel will recognize the power of the Divine Name, will know YHHW as their G-d when YHWH will put an end to tyranny and bondage of Pharaoh over them (6, 7; 10, 2). The sign-acts for their size and strength are naturally wont to affect the people indiscriminately. However, we hear that YHWH makes a distinction between the Israelites and the Egyptians. This is explicitly clear in the case of the plagues of Flies (8, 20-32), Death of livestock (9, 1-7), Hail, thunder and fire (9, 13-35), Darkness for three days (10, 1-20), and the killing of firstborns (11, 1-10).  Israel celebrated their victory with the same theme of the ‘song of the sea’: “The LORD is my strength and might; He has become my deliverance. This s my God and I will enshrine Him; the God of my father, and I will exalt Him.” (cf.15, 2- Etz Hayim).

 

The distinction is between the oppressor and the oppressed. Using this as a paradigm the prophets of Israel will admonish Israel that they run the same risk if they or their leaders ever simulate Pharaoh. Thus Amos equates the story of Exodus of Israel with that of other people (Amos 9, 7) as a warming that G-d shows no partiality when it comes to the question of oppression.

 

Pharaoh and Egypt seeing the sign-acts will acknowledge YHWH as G-d. Pharaoh and his people consistently refuse to the acknowledge YHWH as G-d. His refusal to know YHWH (“I do not know YHWH,” cf. 5, 2) is meted out with the statement of the purpose of sign-acts, namely to lead Pharaoh into acknowledging G-d YHWH (I AM YHWH). The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart is caused by his own adamancy (8, 15.32; 9, 34) but it is at the same time, overwhelmingly an act of G-d’s own making (cf. 4, 21; 7, 3; 10, 1.20.27; 11, 10; 14, 4.17). The purpose of latter is to allow time to multiply (7, 3) and make a full-blown display (10, 1) of His sign-acts so that both Egyptians and Israelites will know YHWH as the true Lord of history (cf. 10, 2).

 

The haftara taken from Ezekiel correlates the parashah to the Prophet’s condemnation of Tyre and Egypt from another time, during the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem. Both were great powers of the time and known for their affluence and military prowess. However, the affluence led to the primordial sin of presumption and hybris- “I am El”, said the ruler of Tyre (Ezek 28, 3); “Nile is my own; I made it”, said the king of Egypt (Ezek 29, 3.9). YHWH will ruin both Egypt and Tyre until the time they will repent and will be restored.

 

This week’s teaching commentary was prepared by

Fr. James Raphael Anaparambil, Bat Kol Alumnus 2009

Coadjutor Bishop-Designate, Diocese of Alleppey, Kerala, India

Email address: anaparambil@googlemail.com

 [Copyright © 2018]

 

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Parashah commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate  deeper thinking about the meaning of the Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute,  the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol.   The commentaries, along with all materials published on the Bat Kol website, are copyrighted by the writers, and are made available for  personal and group study, and local church purposes. Permission needed for other purposes.  Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

 

~~1983–2018~~

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies , Jerusalem

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

Website: www.batkol.info  Parashat Admin. gill@batkol.info

December 30, 2017 Messages Post a Comment

ANNIVERSARY OF BAT KOL’S FOUNDING 8 JANUARY 2018

ANNIVERSARY OF BAT KOL’S FOUNDING

8 JANUARY 2018

1983-2018

 

 

Monday, January 08, 2018, the Church celebrates the Baptism of Jesus. This is the day we celebrate the founding of the Bat Kol Institute, now in existence for 35 years.

 

Two aspects of Bat Kol Institute are specifically remembered on the day the Church celebrates the Baptism of Jesus. These are:

 

            Our motto: “We will hear and we will do,” (Deut. 5.27).

            Our name:  “Bat Kol,” a Hebrew phrase for “Daughter of a Voice.”

 

According to the gospel reading of Mark 1, Jesus heard a Voice (a Bat Kol) that said, “You are my Son, the Beloved.”

 

The Bat Kol is a well know phrase in rabbinic literature.  The Bat Kol is represented in Jewish and Christian art as both a dove and the hand of God, a dove that hovers and a hand that leads.

 

Today, let us remember that God speaks to each one of us in our innermost selves and through all the events of our lives. A special task for today might be to focus on hearing and listening to all the sounds around us. 

 

May we close the day with: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior. “

 

A blessed and happy feast to each one.

 

Maureena

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 29, 2017 Sunday Commentary Post a Comment

Baptism of the Lord

Baptism of the Lord (January 7, 2018)

Isa 42:1-4, 6-7,; Ps 29:1-4, 9b-10; Acts 10:34-38; Matt 3:13-17 

Theme: Baptismal gift and responsibility

 

Download

 

In today’s Gospel story on the baptism of Jesus by John in the Jordan River we are told the identity of Jesus by a voice of heaven with these words: This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.

 

The phrase “a voice from heaven” may reflect or be connected with the rabbinic bat kol (literally “daughter of a voice”), that is, an echo of a word uttered in heaven. The rabbis speak of bat kol as a voice delivering a divine message proclaiming God’s will or judgment.

 

The manifestation of Jesus’ identity before his public ministry can also be found in the Gospels of Mark and Luke.  But in Matthew, this is made in the third person (“This is . . .”) as opposed to the second person in Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22 (“You are . . .”).  Does this make Matthew’s version a more definitive manifestation?  All three versions, however, as formulated have references and allusions from Hebrew Scriptures specifically from the books of Psalms, Genesis and Isaiah.

 

“This is my son” echoes  Psalm 2:7,  a psalm used for the coronation of the king of the House of David  that  gives definite royal connotations  and  divine aspect as well since kings were believed to be related to the deity.

 

This also points to Jesus as the Messiah according to Raymond Brown. In Talmudic literature the title Moshiach, or Melech HaMoshiach (the King Messiah), is reserved for the Jewish leader who will redeem Israel in the End of Days and who is a direct descendant of the Davidic dynasty.

 

The designation “my beloved son” recalls another beloved son, Isaac, son of Abraham and Sarah and father of Jacob, who was to be sacrificed as a burnt offering on one of the mountains.  (Gen 22:2).

 

The additional “with whom I am well pleased” echoes Isaiah 42:1 which describes the Servant of the Lord as “my chosen one with whom I am well pleased.”  This is said to point to Jesus as the Isaian Servant who is to bear the infirmities of many and be led to slaughter for the guilt of all (Isaiah 53:4-10). 

 

In summary, Jesus is identified in terms of characters in the Hebrew Scriptures – that of a Davidic king who is an adopted son of God, the longed-for messiah, Isaac and God’s servant – indicating seemingly contradicting royalty, divinity and servanthood attributes.   

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            

Thus, according to a biblical scholar, the text manifesting Jesus’ identity contains “a surplus of meaning,” combining royal and servant motifs along with the language from the tradition of the suffering just person (Wis 2:12-20). It foretells a far from easy ministry for Jesus, with the spectre of sacrifice, suffering and even death.

 

Today, as we read about the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, let us ponder upon our own baptism. The sacrament of baptism is called the sacrament of initiation (to belong to the Church and to mission). When we are baptized, God declares publicly that we are his children. (And I would like to believe also as beloved children with whom God is well pleased.)  We belong to God’s family and we are called to spread God’s love.

 

 But like the life of Jesus, our lives as Christians may be far from simple. I don’t think it is going to be a walk in the park all the time. Just as we are given a great gift, we also gave a great responsibility.  Like Jesus and Isaiah’s suffering servant we also may be asked to make sacrifices and to suffer for our faith.  

 

For Reflection and Discussion:  1) what do you believe to be your greatest gift as a member of the Church? 2) We renew our baptismal promises during Easter usually at the Easter Vigil or the Easter Sunday Mass.  What has been the baptismal vow that you have found hard to keep? Why? How can you help others keep their baptismal promises?

 

Bibliography: Bergant, Dianne. Preaching the New Lectionary, Year B. (Manila, 2008), Brown, Raymond. Christ in the Gospels of the Ordinary Sundays. (Bangalore, 1999), Harrington, Daniel ed. Sacra Pagina: The Gospel of Matthew (Minnesota, 2009).

 

This week’s teaching commentary was prepared by

Minerva Generalao, Philippines, Bat Kol Alumna July 2014

Email: mayneer@gmail.com

Copyright 2018

 

……………………………………………………

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Gospel commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Sunday Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol.  Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

…………………………………………………….

 

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem

1983-2018

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

 

Parashah Commentary Post a Comment

Parashat Shemot

 Shabbat Table Talk

Parashat Shemot – Erev Shabbat 5th January 2018

Torah portion: Ex 1:1-6:1  Haftarah: Is 27:6-28:13, 29:22-23

Download

 

“Do what you’re told, and you won’t get in trouble!” As a mom of ten, I have lost track of how many times I said something close to that. Usually exclaimed in exasperation to a child who refused to obey or follow simple directions, and who regularly found themselves in troubling situations, my message was clear. Obedience results in protection and blessing. Disobedience results in trouble and harm. Most of us have probably heard similar refrains directed at us – whether as children from our parents, or as adults from our supervisors. If we are honest, this thinking probably drives much of our thoughts even as we watch the news, interact with neighbors, and counsel friends. Follow simple rules and it will go well with you.

 

What a shock it is then, when we read the opening verses of this week’s Torah portion, Parashat Shemot. “But the Israelites were exceedingly fruitful; they multiplied greatly, increased in numbers and became so numerous that the land was filled with them” (Exodus 1:7). Those unfamiliar with the rest of the narrative perhaps may not find this simple verse shocking. But we are, and this statement jars us. From the opening lines of Scripture, God has been instructing his creation to be fruitful and multiply, to increase in numbers, and to fill the earth. In Genesis, God first makes it possible for vegetation to multiply, and then commands the creatures of the sea, the birds of the air, the wild animals, the livestock, and the animals that move along the ground to be fruitful and multiply. And finally in Genesis 1:28, he blesses his image-bearers and instructs them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.”

 

God’s refrain continues as he instructs Noah (Gen 9:1) and Jacob/Israel (Gen 35:11) to do the same. As God cuts covenant with Abraham, God promises he will make Abraham fruitful and multiply his offspring to be numerous (Gen 17:6). And even as Genesis closes, the dying Jacob tells Joseph of God’s promise to make their family fruitful and increase in numbers (Gen 48:3). The repeated refrain leaves no doubt in a reader’s mind what obedience looks like. They are to be fruitful and multiply. And yet, that obedience is precisely what sets the stage for the Hebrews’ trouble in Egypt. “Then a new king, to whom Joseph meant nothing, came to power in Egypt. ‘Look,’ he said to his people, ‘the Israelites have become far too numerous for us’” (Ex 1:8-9).

 

 The problem is not obedience; the problem is our mindset that obedience leads to ease, comfort and all things going well. The over-simplified formula of obedience leading directly to goodness is not accurate. Sometimes following the ways of the Lord can bring about difficulty and pain in the short-term. Obedience leading to pain is evident throughout Parashat Shemot. Moses obeys God and speaks to Pharaoh, and immediately the situation for the Hebrew slaves worsen (Ex 5:1-9). The Hebrew overseers reject Moses and ask that God’s judgment would fall upon him (Ex 5:20-21). In exasperation, Moses returns to the Lord, protesting the outcome of his obedience saying, “Why, Lord, why have you brought trouble on this people? Is this why you sent me? Ever since I went to Pharaoh to speak in your name, he has brought trouble on this people, and you have not rescued your people at all” (Ex 5:22-23).

 

Moses questions the Lord and his calling when faced with difficulty and pain arising out of his obedience. I think we often tend to do the same. In the end, Moses’ obedience leads to a beautiful story of redemption and hope that continues to be rehearsed and remembered today. But as we read Parashat Shemot this week, let us remember and be encouraged that in the short-term obedience can often lead to greater difficulty, pain and challenges. The parental refrain many of us have heard and said does not necessarily apply; our personal comfort and ease are not central to God’s larger plan. But, we can hope and trust in the Lord who sees our misery, hears our cries, concerns himself with our suffering and comes to our rescue (Ex 3:7-8).

 

For Reflection and Discussion: 1. How has the call to “Do what you’re told, and you won’t get in trouble!” been a guiding principle in your life? Are there times that obedience has actually created potentially more problems and difficulty? How does this principle apply to your life of faith in God? How do you respond when that “formulaic” result does not happen? What might be a better guiding principle? How have you experienced the God who cares (Ex 3:7-8)? 2. The role of disobedience to authorities is also teased about in Parashat Shemot, with the results often surprisingly bringing forth goodness. Shiprah and Puah disobey the Pharoah and refuse to kill newborn boys (Ex 1:17). Moses’ mother disobediently hides her son from the murderous king, hoping to somehow save him (Ex 2:2). Moses’ sister dishonestly “searches for some Hebrew nursemaid” (Ex 2:7-9). Where and when is disobedience proper and good? What are some times in history this has been the case? What about in your life? Or in today’s society?

 

This week’s teaching commentary was prepared by

Rev. Kristen B Marble, MDiv, MEd, Bat Kol Alumni 2013

Senior Pastor, West Morris Street Free Methodist Church, Indianapolis IN
Email address: kristen@kristenmarble.com

[Copyright © 2018]

 

    PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Parashah commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol.   The commentaries, along with all materials published on the Bat Kol website, are copyrighted by the writers, and are made available for personal and group study, and local church purposes. Permission needed for other purposes.  Questions, comments and feedback are always  welcome.

 

~~1983–2018~~

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies , Jerusalem

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

Website: www.batkol.info  Parashat Admin. gill@batkol.info

December 27, 2017 Sunday Commentary Post a Comment

Holy Family Sunday

Holy Family (31 December 2017)

Sir 3:3-7, 14-17a; Ps 128:1-5; Col 3:12-21; Matt 2:13-15 19-23

 

Theme: Above all these, put on love.

Download

 

I used to be a cantor in a Catholic church, and when it was time to sing Psalm 128, I would always cringe. After suffering in silence for several years, it turned out in conversation with another female cantor that we both were put off by the words of the Psalm. Our pastor, who was part of the conversation, was shocked that we disliked the Psalm’s comparison of “your wife” to a “fruitful vine,” and the blessing on “the man who fears YHWH.” He thought the Psalm was beautiful and touching with its warm evocation of family life, but who wants to be valued solely for her ability to produce many children to build up a patriarchal household?  The pastor had unquestioningly identified with the contented paterfamilias, while we women had seen that the Psalm was really not about us!

 

For contemporary readers, the passages from Sirach and Colossians may prompt similar reactions. Admittedly, the mention of both mothers and fathers in Sir 3:3, 6, 16, likely influenced by the commandment (Exod 20:12; cf. Lev 20:9), is welcome in a writing so notoriously misogynistic: “So negative are Sirach’s views on women that one scholar has argued that the text reveals an author whose misogyny is pathological even by the male-dominated standards of the author’s own day (Trenchard)” (Eisenbaum, 298). The patriarchal family system presupposed in Colossians 3:12-21 takes for granted a household where wives defer to husbands, children obey their parents, and slaves must obey their masters. Such household codes were well-known in antiquity (e.g., Aristotle, Politics 1,xii-xiii), and presupposed that males and elders were naturally more suited to leadership than women and the young, and that slaves were inferior beings without the capacity to make their own decisions. The deutero-Pauline author of Colossians has a distinctive spin on this ideology that scholars call “love patriarchalism,” in which husbands are instructed to love their wives (3:19), fathers are enjoined not to provoke their children (3:20), and slaves are reminded that their true master is God (3:22-24; cf. Eph 5:21-6:9; 1 Pet 2:11-3:22). Although this ethic moderates the rigid hierarchy of the patriarchal household, it still conceives families in hierarchical terms of status, gender and age, and falls short of the counter-cultural egalitarianism of Gal 3:28.

 

Against this backdrop, the portrayal of Joseph in Matthew is refreshing. Matthew’s infancy narrative focuses on Joseph, not Mary. When he initially finds out that his betrothed is pregnant, presumably by another man, rather than angrily calling for her punishment as an adulteress—an offence worthy of death (Lev 20:10; Deut 22:22; cf. John 8:1-11), “he resolved to divorce her quietly” so as not to shame her (Matt 1:19). He accepts the divine assurance that the pregnancy is “of the Holy Spirit” (1:20), and faithfully protects Mary and a child not his own to the point of fleeing with them to Egypt until the death of Herod (Matt 2:13-15, 19-13). Contrary to the Christian tradition that Joseph was much older than Mary, it is likely that both partners were in their teens, thus making the young man’s loving care of his unconventional family even more praiseworthy.

 

Bibliography: Pamela Eisenbaum, “Sirach,” Women’s Bible Commentary, Revised and Expanded Edition, ed. Carol A. Newsom, Sharon H. Ringe and Jacqueline E. Lapsley (London: SPCK, 2014), 298-304; Pontifical Biblical Commission (PBC), The Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture: The Word that Comes from God and Speaks of God for the Salvation of the World (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2014).

 

For Reflection and Discussion: In the light of today’s commentary, discuss the PBC’s that scripture interpreters need to distinguish between what “should be considered perennially valid and what should be considered relative, linked to a culture, a civilization, or even the mentality of a specific period of time” (PBC, no. 132).

 

This week’s Sunday Gospel Commentary was prepared by

Mary Ann Beavis, Ph.D., Saskatoon, Canada, Bat Kol Alumna 2004, 2006, 2012,

 Email address: mbeavis@stmcollege.ca

[Copyright©2017]

 

………………………………………………………………

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Gospel commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Sunday Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol.  Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

………………………………………………………..

 

 ~~1983–2017~~

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

Website: www.batkol.info;   gill@batkol.info