Isaiah 63:7-9

Often, the Lectionary calendar flows right in to Epiphany after Christmas. This year, we get a couple weeks to reflect on just what do you do now that Jesus is here. If you think it's all about a baby bringing peace, open your Bible to chapter 63 and read about God's white robe stained with blood from his enemies in Edom. This is post Babylonian exile Israel and that pain is fresh in their minds. So the poet reminds us of all the times God has come to the rescue. That's what we get in these meager verses anyway.

But keep reading. They are crying out for Moses. They are trampled. This is no Christmas message of hope here. And we see emerging theology, like referring to God as Father. Chapter 64 continues to search for new metaphors. Good questions for today.

Hebrews 2:10-18

Hebrews finds our believers in dire straits still, "tested". So it's "fitting" that a suffering Jesus is the symbol of God, so our salvation comes through our sufferings. The quoted passages are quoting the Old Testament, establishing Jesus in his rightful place. Psalm 22, traditionally a messianic Psalm, fulfilled by Christ. Isaiah 8:17, links Christ to those disciples. Isaiah was likewise rejected but continued to trust in ultimate victory. Isaiah 8:18, the children, symbolic of the intentions for the future of Israel. Then, the new symbol, the one who lived and died with them, to free them.

Hebrews 2:10-18

For anyone who had to learn all this as if it was history, I'm sorry. For anyone who doesn't yet know this is not history, sorry to be the one to break it to you. The author tells us what he's trying to do, fulfill prophecy. But, sorry, it's not that either. If you try to ask someone who should give you a straight answer about that, it's unlikely you will get one. That link says "he was trying to show … many parallels with the history of the Jewish people." This isn't historical writing though. Making parallels to earlier scripture is a literary technique. Now I've completely ruined Christmas, haven't I?

Just about every line gives you something to track down if you want. You'll be able to find someone who says the reference is meaningful. If you want. Part of doing history is finding that people who most likely would have had something to say about a reference, don't say anything. Josephus was a chronicler of the Jews, and does not mention Herod murdering hundreds of babies, for example. The challenge of being a lay speaker, or any kind of amateur historian, is determining if someone is being honest when they say "most scholars".

Even more challenging is when the Bible tells you there is a prophecy, but there are no other references to it anywhere, Bible or otherwise. So people get paid to argue endlessly about what it is to be a "Nazorean". Is it just from Nazareth, or was he a nazirite like Samson? Or something else? Or, does it matter?