Bartimaeus

Mark 10:46-52

     Bartimaeus' name means son of Timai or son of the unclean.  Bartimaeus was a blind beggar who called for the attention of Jesus, begging for mercy. 

      Luke and Matthew each tell a similar story, although neither name the blind man.  But the healing in all three stories were of blindness being healed in the vicinity of Jericho.  It is believed, therefore that Luke and Matthew are telling of Bartimaeus' healing.  (Matthew 20:29-34; Luke 18:35-43)


     Matthew relates that there were two men who called out to Jesus asking to receive their sight. Luke and Mark only tell of the one.

     Upon hearing a commotion, Bartimaeus learns that it is Jesus of Nazareth.  All three gospels give Jesus this designation.  Bartimaeus cries out to catch his attention.  This indicates that Bartimaeus knew who Jesus was, and that he had a power to heal.  (Jesus was a common name in those times, so knowing that it was Jesus of Nazareth distinguished him from other men.)
      When Bartimaeus called out to Jesus, the crowd was excited by what was going on and didn’t want the blind man to interrupt what was happening. A blind beggar clearly had little importance to them. He would have been among the helpless and pushed-aside fringes of society. But he would not be silenced.  Likely both desperation and confidence in Jesus himself was involved.  He found the strength to persist.  And Jesus, who did not ignore the helpless or the despised, stopped.
     When asked what he wanted, Bartimaeus asked for his sight. Jesus heals him, saying, “Your faith has saved you.”
     Bartimaeus then followed him. Luke adds that he was glorifying God and all the people who saw it also praised God.
     The voices of the world frequently try to silence the followers of Jesus, to drown them out or simply co-opt them into conforming to worldly ideas. Bartimaeus may remind other followers of Jesus to be focused and to persevere.
     It is noteworthy that Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem. He would not live much longer. But he found time for the needs of an individual.

    An old fable tells of a blind sheep who was approached with the offer of being healed. That sounded good, but before the procedure, he asked what he’d been missing during the time of his blindness. When told of cruelty and war, selfishness and greed and hate, he declined to be healed. He said it would be a punishment to watch the terrible deeds of the world and its people. Soon after receiving his sight, one of the things that Bartimaeus may have had to endure was to watch the crucifixion. Did he wish he was blind once more?

Bartimaeus is noteworthy for his perseverance, faith and thankfulness.  Consider a particular area where perseverance is especially needed now in your life.

Jonah 1:7-16 – Sailors on Jonah’s Ship

      There are two ways in which the book of Jonah has been understood. One way is to understand it as a historical account of a prophet’s experience. This would make it unusual in the sense that there is only one sentence of prophecy in the entire book. Other prophetic books in the bible are primarily the words of the prophet with only minor narrative about the individual’s life.
     If Jonah is not a historical account, it may be that the entire book is a prophetic parable. Story and metaphor was and is a common communication tool, one that Jesus used extensively.
     Either way, the characters of Jonah are vividly presented and reflect personalities and traits that would have been familiar to those who originally received the book.

     The Captain and Mariners on Jonah’s Ship are the focus of this look at lesser known personalities of the Bible.
     These sailors are unnamed. They probably were not Hebrew, or at least most of them probably weren’t. The book mentions that they cried, each to his god. It is true that the Hebrews sometimes failed to hold to the law of “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” They were not always convinced that there weren't other gods to consider, even if they were only supposed to worship the one. Nonetheless the wording of ‘each to his god,’ probably intends the reader to understand that these men come from various cultural backgrounds and thus worshiped a number of gods.
      It is noteworthy, however, that the author represents them as faithful men into their own religious beliefs. They prayed. The captain was disturbed that Jonah was simply taking a nap. He didn’t insist Jonah work alongside the sailors, but he did think Jonah should do his part by praying to his own god instead of snoozing.
      Though there may be no atheists in fox holes, nor on ships in danger, the sailors appear to have a definite religious view of life.  They took gods seriously. The violence of the storm convinces the sailors that someone on board has a god angry at them. So they cast lots to determine who it is.

CASTING LOTS

Today we might cut cards or roll for the highest number on the dice to choose between people. But the idea behind the ancient casting of lots generally was that divine power would guide the choice. Casting lots was done by the Hebrews along with the peoples around them, and was not considered superstitious or connected with witchcraft. Saul cast lots (sacred stones) trying to decide who might be at fault for God’s silence, for he assumed it must be because God was angry at a sin (I Samuel 14:37-43). The disciples of Jesus cast lots in trying to determine which of two men should take the place of Judas (see Acts 1:24-26). They prayed that God would use the casting of lots to show between the two men they had singled out from the rest.

       The lot fell upon Jonah, who of course already knew what the storm was about. The sailors asked him what they should do to save the ship and Jonah told them they should throw him overboard. (Interesting that he could not bring himself to throw himself into the water, just left it up to other people, though we should give him credit for his honesty about the matter.)
      The next act of the sailors may seem surprising. Instead of breathing a sigh of relief and sending Jonah overboard, they tried once more to save the ship. Clearly these men did not want to sacrifice someone else to save themselves even through it might be argued that the guy had brought it on himself. This seems to indicate that the sailors were decent and kindly men. A purist or legalist might argue that they were irreligious at this point for not acceding to a god’s wishes. In return it could be argued that they knew nothing of Jonah’s god and wanted to be sure there was no other way. In either case, it still speaks to the fact that they weren’t callous to the welfare of a powerless stranger among them. This theme of the foreigner is important in the book of Jonah, as is seen by the later portion of the story, where Jonah is chastised for not caring about the non-Hebrew people of Ninevah.
     When all the efforts of the sailors to save the ship by their own strength had failed, they finally did send Jonah overboard, with the prayer that his god wouldn’t hold it against them. When the storm ceased, they offered sacrifices and prayers and vows to Yahweh. Their part of the story ends here.
   
How could the attitude and actions of these sailors speak to the way the powerless are treated by the strong?


The sailors cast lots to determine divine will – in what ways do people of faith seek that understanding today?

King Melchizedek of Salem

Genesis 14:17-24
     (See also the study about Bera from September 1, 2010)
     Abram was returning from battle. Four kings were making sweeps of the area and among others had just defeated the king of the city-state of Sodom. Sodom was looted and its people captured. Among those people was Lot, the nephew of Abram.
     When Abram got the news, he gathered his allies and the trained men of his camp and went in pursuit. He battled by night and brought back what had been taken.
     A man named Melchizedek stepped up to meet him on his return. One biblical scholar calls Melchizedek a mysterious figure. We know little about him. He appears here and is mentioned in a psalm. Then the author of Hebrews uses him in symbolic ways. But historically, our information is scanty.
     Melchizedek was the king of Salem. Salem is what would later become Jerusalem.
     Melchizedek is also a priest of God. He brings wine and bread to feed Abram and blesses him. Or rather, he notes that God has blessed Abram. Melchizedek lifts a blessing upon God for the victory.
     Now, previous to this, God hasn’t been mentioned in regard to the politics and the war that has taken place. Abram didn’t ask for help from God. Abram didn’t get permission or instructions from God.
     But Melchizedek thanks God anyway, and that brings up a side issue.
     People of faith, especially in the modern era, wrestle with this whole question. We struggle with the place of God even in wars that we believe are necessary and as righteous as anything can be where people get killed.
      We also sometimes struggle with thanking God for things we’ve received—when we know that other good and faithful people may not have been so blessed. We know we aren’t more deserving. We don’t want to be callous to the fact that others could be suffering while we are rejoicing. At the same time, we need to show our gratitude for the author of all good things.
     We don’t know if Melchizedek experienced any of that ambiguity.
     Probably not. He and Abram have had a common enemy. The threat was now averted, at least for a time. This was a moment for rejoicing. It was a time to praise God.
     Abram gives Melchizedek a tenth of what he’s brought back. This was not a political or military division of booty. Melchizedek was a priest and it was thus intended as a religious gift. Giving ten percent as a religious act seems to have been fairly common in ancient times. It wasn’t an idea that was exclusive to the worship of Yahweh.
      But in this case, both Abram and Melchizedek were worshippers of the same God. That may be more significant that it first appears. After all, Melchizedeck was essentially a foreigner to Abram. He is not of the same family. He is not of the line of people that would become the Hebrews. But he worships the same God and Abram’s tithe acknowledges this.
      In fact, the other Old Testament mention of Melchizedek also recognizes him as a legitimate priest of God. Psalm 110 says: The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent. Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.” The book of Hebrews picks up the theme again.
     Although it has been often ignored, there is ample evidence in the scriptures of God’s connection with people outside the “recognized” family.

Lydia – Acts 16:11-15,40

     Lydia was a God-fearer. That is, she was a gentile (non-Jewish) who worshipped God. She met Paul on the river right outside of Philippi and believed his testimony about Jesus. She is described as Lydia from Thyatira, who was a dealer in purple cloth.
      It is possible that this woman’s name was not Lydia. She might have been a woman of Lydia, which was a geographical region, and Thyatira was a city in Lydia. When Paul writes to the Philippians he mentions different women, but never uses the name of Lydia. We can safely believe that if there was a Christian woman in Philippi with that name, Paul would have mentioned her and sent greetings. The story in Acts indicates she had been important to his work in Philippi. Unless she had died or moved away, the absence of Lydia as a name lends support to the supposition that it was the region from which she came. But there aren’t any clues as to which one in Philippians might be “Lydia.”
      Lydia was a business woman. She seems to have been prosperous and the head of her household. Her business was dealing with purple cloth. Purple dye was difficult to attain and consequently expensive. This is why it became known as a royal color, kings being the ones who could afford it. The Israelites, however, included at least one purple thread in their prayer shawls, a reminder of God’s concern for rich and poor alike.
     Thyatira was a city famous for its dyers of cloth. Lydia herself may have been a merchant who had set up business in Philippi. She wasn’t a travelling merchant because she appears to have had a permanent home there. After meeting Paul and believing his witness to Jesus, she and the members of her household were baptized as Christians.
     The head of the household would have had the authority to make a religious decision for everyone. In the Old Testament, Joshua does so when he urges the Israelites to “choose this day whom you will serve, but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”
      If Lydia did make the decision for everyone, they still appear to have become sincere Christians, because Paul had a good relationship with the Philippian church, a foundation of which had to be Lydia’s household. One reasonable explanation for this could be the fact that Lydia subsequently invited Paul to stay in her home during his time in Philippi. This would have been an economic help to Paul, relieving him of the need to earn a living while there. But from the point of view of the household, it gave an opportunity for further instruction in the Christian faith. A further example of Paul’s feelings of closeness with the Philippian church is the fact that they were the only ones he allowed to contribute to his expenses while he was at other churches.
     After Paul and Silas were released from prison in Philippi, it was to Lydia’s house they went first. One can imagine how the fledgling Christians were feeling. They believed in Jesus, but the man who had instructed them in the faith had been imprisoned. What would happen?
     Paul’s immediate return to Lydia’s household is a sign of his concern for them. It also demonstrates his confidence in their regard for him that him. He and Silas met with the believers to give them encouragement before leaving for Thessolonica.
    
What affect do you think Lydia had upon her household's sincerity of faith?

Bera - Genesis 14

Bera – King of Sodom


     The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are almost exclusively known by the story of their sin and subsequent destruction. There are additional stories about them.
     Bera is called the king of Sodom. Sodom was a city-state, rather than a traditional kingdom. For twelve years, King Chedorlaomer of Elam had forced Sodom to serve him. Four other kings and city-states, were also under Chedorlaomer’s control. These were King Birsha of Gomorrah, King Shinab of Admah, King Shemeber of Zeboiim, and the king of Bella (that is Zoar). Allies of Chedorlaomer were King Amraphel of Shinar, King Arioch of Ellasar, and King Tidal of Goiim.
     The five subject kings of Chedorlaomer revolted against the four allies. In the midst of this war, two years later, the four kings conquered (“subdued”) several other peoples before a battle was pitched in the Valley of Siddim with the five kings that were rebelling against them. The five were defeated. Three kings escaped to the mountains. But the Valley of Siddim was filled with Bitumen (tar or asphalt) pits. The kings of Gomorrah and Sodom fell into these.

     Note: If anyone has visited the La Brea Tar Pits in the Los Angeles area, they will understand the difficulties of the Tar Pits. Animals of all sorts were trapped in the pits, small creatures to the large mastodons. One human skeleton has also been discovered there. Once in the tar, it would have been extremely hard to extricate oneself without help from someone on solid earth, and the two kings were left behind by their escaping allies.

     Bera of Sodom must have managed to get out of the tar pit because he is mentioned later.

          A Jewish legend is told of Bera that his escape from the pit was miraculous. Though the legend calls Bera a villain, his miraculous escape is attributed to the purpose of converting certain of the heathen to faith in God.

     The five kings took all the goods and provisions from Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 14:12 only mentions Lot as a person taken, but Bera’s later words demonstrate that many, perhaps most, of the people must have been taken captive as well. At least one man escaped the invaders. He brought word to Abram the Hebrew (later known as Abraham). The reason he came to Abram was likely because he knew Abram would have an interest in the fate of his nephew.
     Abram’s allies were Mamre the Amorite, his brother Eshcol and Aner. Abram gathered his allies and all the trained men in his camp. Genesis 14:14 is unclear whether the number of 318 refers to the men in his camp, or the combined numbers of the men in his camp and those of his allies.
     Abram and his fighting force pursued, attacked the invaders by night, and routed them. Then he brought back all the loot that had been taken, his nephew and the people who had been taken captive.
     Bera told Abram to keep all the loot for himself, but asked for the return of his people.
     Traditional interpretation tends to focus on Abraham’s refusal to keep anything for himself. (He had already given 10 percent to Mechezidek and did retain ten percent each for his allies.) This focus elevates Abraham’s pride – i.e. that he refused to recognize Bera’s right to “bestow” a reward on him. Alternately, commentators suggest it was a protest against a concern for wealth. (In the post-exilic times of Israel, the teller of the Genesis story might have been implying that Abraham was “more high-minded than his descendents.”)
      Another scholar, Terence Fretheim, does call Bera’s request generous. He indicates that though commentators tend to view him negatively, the fact that he appears in company with Melchizedek (who was a faithful man) is significant. Concerning Abraham, Fretheim points out that a possibly large portion of the loot actually belonged to Abram/Abraham’s nephew, Lot. The two had already disputed over land and possessions and come to an agreement. If Abram had taken the loot, that would have been tantamount to breaking this agreement. The division of loot in wartime was an ongoing issue during Israel’s history.
      Looking at it from another point of view, Bera was at this point quite helpless. He had neither goods nor army to back him up. He might have wondered whether Abram would keep the people as slaves, or otherwise take advantage of the situation. Despite his powerless condition, he still decided to ask Abram for something.
     Given the reputation of Sodom, it is difficult to know what kind of man Bera was. We also do not know if he was still king by the time the city was destroyed.
      But at this moment, it is notable that when Bera asked for something, he chose people over material goods.