{"id":2595,"date":"2025-01-17T09:18:43","date_gmt":"2025-01-17T15:18:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/?p=2595"},"modified":"2025-01-17T09:18:43","modified_gmt":"2025-01-17T15:18:43","slug":"january-17-january-24-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/2025\/01\/17\/january-17-january-24-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"January 17 – January 24, 2025"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Friday, January 17<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Genesis 17: This chapter narrates the circumstances in which Abram and Sarai become Abraham and Sarah (verses 5,15).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This second account of God\u2019s covenant with Abram is the first instance, of three, intimating the source of the name of his son and heir, Isaac. Isaac was named for laughter, because that name, formed from the verbal root shq<\/em>, literally means \u201che will laugh.\u201d When Abram learns that he, at age 100, and his wife, at age 90, will be the parents of this little boy, what else can he do but laugh? (verse 17)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No one felt the irony of their situation better than Sarah herself, however, who will learn of this divine plan in the next chapter, where she will discover the news while eavesdropping, from within the tent, on a conversation between her husband and the Lord whom he hosted outside.  \u201cSarah your wife shall have a son,\u201d she will hear the Latter say. Her response? \u201cSarah laughed within herself,\u201d asserts the Sacred Text, a reaction that she will be a tad too quick to disavow when questioned on the matter. \u201cI did not laugh,\u201d she will insist. \u201cNo,\u201d the Lord will press the point, \u201cbut you did laugh!\u201d (18:9-15).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Later on, right after delivering her son, Sarah will deliver the happy laconism that is the third reference to Isaac\u2019s name: \u201cGod has made me laugh, and all who hear will laugh with me\u201d (21:6).  Hers and Abraham\u2019s laughter was prompted, of course, by the sheer incongruity of the proposition, because \u201cAbraham and Sarah were old, well advanced in age; and Sarah had passed the age of childbearing\u201d (18:11).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the full Christian understanding of the Holy Scriptures, the joy of Abraham and Sarah at the promised birth of Isaac was burdened with prophecy, for his miraculous begetting foretold a later conception more miraculous still. Isaac was, in truth, a type and pledge of \u201cJesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham\u201d (Matthew 1:1). And Mary, mother of this Newer Isaac, having conceived Him in virginity just days before, made perfect her responding song of praise by remembering the mercy that God \u201cspoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever\u201d (Luke 1:55).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Did not Abraham himself anticipate with joy the later coming of that more distant Seed? Surely so, for even our Newer Isaac proclaimed, \u201cYour father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad\u201d (John 8:56).  Like Moses (5:46), Isaiah (12:41), and David (Matthew 22:43), Abraham was gifted to behold, in mystic vision, the final fulfillment of that primeval word, \u201cBut My covenant will I establish with Isaac\u201d (Genesis 17:21).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the second century, St. Irenaeus of Lyons expressed thus the mystery inherent in the figure of Isaac: \u201cAbraham, knowing the Father through the Word, who made heaven and earth, confessed Him as God, and taught by a vision that the Son of God would become a Man among men, by whose arrival his seed would be as the stars of heaven, he longed to see that day, so that he too might embrace Christ, as it were; and beholding Him in the Spirit of prophecy, he rejoiced\u201d (Against the Heresies<\/em> 4.7.1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Saturday, June 18<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Genesis 18: Two scenes fill this chapter. The first is Abraham\u2019s reception of \u201cthe Lord\u201d in the guise of \u201cthree men,\u201d whom the Christian Church has always pictured as three angels. These Three were either the prophetic prefiguration or the appearance of the Persons of the Holy Trinity in human\/angelic form, according to the earliest Christian readings of the text. Because the prophetic promise given about Isaac in this chapter is definitively fulfilled only in the New Testament, it was appropriate that on that occasion God should appear as that Trinity of distinct Persons which the New Testament proclaims Him to be.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

St. Ambrose of Milan thus commented on this scene in the second half of the fourth century: \u201cPrepared to receive strangers, faithful to God, dedicated to ministering and prompt in His service, Abraham beheld the Trinity in a type. He supplemented hospitality with religious fealty, when beholding the Three he worshipped the One, and preserving the distinction of the Persons, he addressed One Lord, offering to Three the honor of his gift, while acknowledging but a single Power. It was not learning that spoke in him but grace, and although he had not learned, he believed in a way superior to us who have learned. Since no one had distorted the representation of the truth, he sees the Three but worships the Unity. He offers three measures of fine meal while slaying but one victim, considering that a single sacrifice is sufficient but a triple gift; a single victim, but a threefold offering\u201d (Faith in the Resurrection<\/em> 2.96).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second scene in this chapter portrays Abraham\u2019s supplication on behalf of Sodom, the city where Lot resides. Knowing that the Lord is prepared to destroy that city for its wickedness, and fearing for the welfare of his nephew and his family, Abraham bravely endeavors to \u201carrange a deal\u201d with the Lord, in hopes of having the city spared. In one of the most colorful scenes in a very colorful book, Abraham plays the part of the Bedouin trader, a type commonly met in the Middle East, attempting to arrange a lower price by the process of haggling. Particularly good in this art, Abraham works from a \u201cprice\u201d of fifty just men down to a mere ten. He thus serves as the very model of fervent intercessory prayer, unafraid of \u201cpressing a point\u201d with God. Alas, Abraham knows that there are not even ten just men left in Sodom. Before he can suggest a lower figure, however, the Lord abruptly breaks off the negotiations and departs (verse 33). Sodom is doomed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sunday, January 19<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hebrews 6:1-12: This work, apparently a sort of sermon, a \u201cword of encouragedment\u201d (logos parakleseos<\/em>—13:22), was composed for a congregation in fairly dire straits. This work contains several warnings about the dangers of apostasy. To find anything comparable to this in the New Testament, we must go to the letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in the Book of Revelation. Certainly we don\u2019t find this level of warning in any of Paul\u2019s letters to the churches, not even in the epistles to the Galatians and the Corinthians.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The author, however, adopts a tack that may appear surprising: Instead of reviewing the fundamentals of the Christian faith, he determines to take the congregation into deeper waters. He says to them, \u201clet us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity\u201d (ESV). He explains what he means by referring to the earlier catechesis offered to the congregation at the time of their reception into the Christian Church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He does this by way of reminding them of the components of that catechesis: \u201crepentance from dead works and of faith toward God, and of instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.\u201d In the Acts of the Apostles we find all these subjects as matters of instruction when people were brought to the Christian faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our author refers to them here just in passing, as it were, by way of reminding the congregation briefly of things they already know.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He then reminds them of the sacred mysteries by which they were received into the Christian Church. He reminds them of their enlightenment in Baptism—indeed, he actually uses this ancient expression for Baptism: \u201cthose who were once enlightened.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Likewise, he mentions the Holy Communion, which was part of their reception into the Church: \u201chave tasted the heavenly gift.\u201d He speaks of the gift of the Holy Spirit, conferred by the laying on of hands: \u201chave become partakers of the Holy Spirit.\u201d He briefly mentions the understanding of God\u2019s Word imparted to those who join the Church: \u201chave tasted the good word of God.\u201d And finally, refers to all of these experiences as a foretaste of heaven: \u201cthe powers of the world to come.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The author intentionally does not dwell on these things; it is sufficient merely to mention them. Indeed, he mentions them to support a warning against apostasy. He says that those who have experienced such abounding grace must not come short, because it is unlikely they will ever get such a chance again. In fact, he does not even use the word \u201cunlikely.\u201d He says \u201cimpossible.\u201d: it is impossible . . . to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a very strong warning, obviously. Indeed, some readers of Holy Scripture have taken this warning in a very literal sense, interpreting it to mean an actual theological impossibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I do not read the text this way. The interpretive Tradition of the Church understands this \u201cimpossibility\u201d in an exhortative sense, indicating the author\u2019s intention to put the fear of God in his listeners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We recall that Jesus also used rhetorical expressions of this sort, referring to cutting off one\u2019s hand, gouging out one\u2019s eye, and even making oneself a eunuch. Rhetorical expressions of this sort have the merit of gaining the full attention of the listener, which they certainly do.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short, those original listeners to the Epistle to the Hebrews knew themselves to be hearing a final<\/em> warning, before it was too late.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The author presses the point home: \u201cFor the earth which drinks in the rain that often comes upon it, and bears herbs useful for those by whom it is cultivated, receives blessing from God; but if it bears thorns and briers, it is rejected and near to being cursed, whose end is to be burned.\u201d There is only one possible meaning to this warning: the author is reminding his listeners that the fires of hell remain a distinct possibility, if they do not take his admonition seriously.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One suspects that some of them were unhappy with this sort of talk; there have always been Christians who resisted being told of the possibility of eternal damnation. Yet, when there is a clear danger of apostasy, the Christian preacher has the strict moral obligation to mention the matter to those who are in that danger.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So what does our author propose? He proposes what he calls \u201cgoing on to perfection,\u201d \u201cgoing on to maturity.\u201d Rather than return to subjects they already know, he determines to take his listeners into deeper waters, to consider things they have not yet considered, to meditate on a subject of great moment: the more profound significance of the mystery of Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This sermon, or logos parakleseos<\/em>, accordingly, deals with the mysteries of the Incarnation, the Redemption purchased on the Cross, the exaltation of Christ to God\u2019s right hand, and the dynamics of history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the face of a possible defection from the faith, our author resolves to make his listeners familiar with more profound dimensions of the faith. This is the substance of the Epistle to the Hebrews.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Monday, January 20<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matthew 9:18-26: From this point on, Matthew breaks away from the Markan sequence that he has been following. This sequence will be picked up again in Matthew 12.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matthew\u2019s version of this double miracle, the seventh and eighth in the current ten miracles, involves of significant shortening of the 22 verses with which Mark 5 tells the story. The expression \u201cfrom that hour\u201d in Matthew 9:22, which is not found in the parallel accounts in Mark and Luke, serves to tie the story back to the account of the centurion\u2019s servant in 8:13.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matthew is also the only one of the evangelists to mention the flute players already assembling for the funeral of Jairus\u2019s daughter. The raising of the little girl is to be contrasted with the killing of the first-born, which was the tenth of the Mosaic plagues.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hebrews 8.1-13: This passage is noteworthy for containing the New Testament\u2019s longest quotation from the Old Testament, Jeremiah 31:31-34.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When Jesus, in the institution of the Lord\u2019s Supper, used the expression \u201cnew covenant\u201d (1 Corinthians 11:25), he invited Christians to consult Jeremiah\u2019s description of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to this long quotation in Hebrews, the passage from Jeremiah was referenced by St. Paul, who wrote that God \u201cmade us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit\u201d (2 Corinthians 3:6). Paul seems to have had this Jeremian text in mind when he wrote: \u201cYou are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read by all men— clearly an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, of the heart\u201d (2 Corinthians 3:2).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This text, often described as the best lines of Jeremiah, is also one of the most emphatic passages to come from his pen. It is emphatic in the sense of its repeated insistence that God is the one who speaks. Four times this text affirms, \u201csays the Lord.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The significance of this repetition become clear in a consideration of its context: the fall and destruction of Jerusalem. Jeremiah, like the others citizens of the Holy City, saw the obliteration of everything connected with it: the temple, the priesthood, the worship, and so forth. What was left? Nothing but the covenant of the heart. Jeremiah still knew God in the heart.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Genesis 20: We already learned a great deal about Abraham\u2019s powers of persuasion<\/em> when he turned to God in prayer. This was hardly surprising, because the Scriptures call him \u201cthe friend of God\u201d (2 Chronicles 20:7; Isaiah 41:8; Daniel 3:35 [LXX]; Judith 8:22 [Vulgate]; James 2:23), and God, like the rest of us in this respect, delights in doing favors for His friends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As God\u2019s friend, Abraham was blessed with what the Bible calls parresia<\/em>, confidence or even boldness (Ephesians 3:12; Hebrews 4:16), in his approach to the Lord on matters of concern. Like the stalwart widow in the Gospel parable on this subject (Luke 18:1-8), Abraham could be rather persistent, perhaps a tad nagging, when he brought some point of concern to the attention of the Almighty. Accustomed to that mercantile dickering ever common in the Middle East, Abraham knew how to chaffer his way to a bargain, and he incorporated this skill too into his prayer, as it were. We saw this power of his intercessory prayer in Genesis 18:16-33.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus in the present chapter, even after God declared to Abimelech, \u201cIndeed, you are a dead man,\u201d He went on to promise that Abraham \u201cwill pray for you and you shall live\u201d (verses 3,7). And, indeed, \u201cAbraham prayed to God, and God healed Abimelech\u201d (verse17).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tuesday, January 21<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Genesis 21: <\/strong>We come now to the long-awaited birth of Isaac, concerning which the New Testament says, \u201cBy faith Sarah herself also received strength to conceive seed, and she bore a child when she was past the age, because she judged Him faithful who had promised. Therefore, from one man, and him as good as dead, were born as many as the stars in the sky in multitude—innumerable as the sand which is by the seashore\u201d (Hebrews 11:11-12).  While the author of Hebrews praises the faith of Sarah in this respect, the Apostle Paul tends rather to stress the faith of Abraham (Romans 4:19-22).  The circumcision of Isaac (verse 4), commanded in Genesis 17:9-14), would be explicitly mentioned by St. Stephen in Acts 7:8.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Genesis 16 we already learned that all was not well between Sarah and Hagar after Ishmael was born. At that time, however, Hagar enjoyed the advantage that she had borne a son, and Sarah had not. In the present chapter that advantage is a thing of the past, and we are not surprised to see that now Hagar and Ishmael are regarded as the mere slaves that they were. Ishmael is accused of \u201cscoffing\u201d at the younger child Isaac, perhaps a reference to the kinds of teasing that younger children have been known to suffer from older children. Indeed, one may reasonably speculate that Ishmael had heard disparaging remarks about Sarah and Isaac from his own mother and was simply acting them out. At the very least, Sarah does not want her son playing with a mere slave boy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So Hagar must go. Ishmael\u2019s true situation is revealed in the fact that he is not even named; he is simply \u201cthat slave girl\u2019s son\u201d (verse 10). In Sarah\u2019s eyes he has become a non-entity. Abraham is faced with a new problem, therefore. Although Ishmael is not Sarah\u2019s son except in a purely legal sense that no longer bore legal significance, the older boy is still Abraham\u2019s son, and Abraham loves him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whatever Sarah\u2019s reasons for expelling Hagar and Ishmael, God had His own reasons, and He permitted Sarah\u2019s plans to succeed in order for His own reasons to succeed. This is true rather often; God permits evil to prevail for the sake of a greater good that only He can see and plan for. Had Hagar and Ishmael stayed on in Abraham\u2019s household, they would have remained slaves. By their departure Ishmael was able to become the father of a great people on the earth (verse 13), a great people with us to this day, the great people of Arabia, for whom God manifested a special providential interest in this text. We will meet this theme of divine providence abundantly in the Joseph story toward the end of Genesis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The biblical text tends to lose track of Hagar and Ishmael once they arrive in the Negev Desert. The legends of the Arabs tell their own story of how far the mother and child reached in their journey, namely, Mecca. The spring in verses 14-19 the Arabs identify as the spring of Zamzam, found near the Ka\u2018ba at Mecca, which spring allowed human life to flourish in that place. Thus, Ishmael is credited with the founding of Mecca, which is a religious shrine vastly older than Islam. Thus, according to the Bible the Arabs too are a great nation, close relatives of the Jews and regarded as their rather bellicose cousins (Genesis 16:11-12). Indeed, much of the later history of the Fertile Crescent and the Mediterranean Basin was dominated by a single idea: How to restrain the ancient and native bellicosity of Arabia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wednesday, January 22<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hebrews 11.17-22: Readers of Genesis 22—from Sirach to Kierkegaard—have pondered long what thoughts may have intruded themselves into the struggling mind of Abraham when the Lord required him to offer his son Isaac in sacrifice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps the most insuperable problem was one of logic: How did Abraham reconcile in his thought the imminent loss of his son with the Lord\u2019s earlier promise that this same son would be the father of many people? Just how could he resolve the contradiction between God\u2019s promise, which he completely believed, and God\u2019s command, which he was completely resolved to obey?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In fact, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in the earliest Christian commentary on this story, explicitly cited God\u2019s earlier promise\u2014\u201cin Isaac your seed shall be called\u201d\u2014in the context of the command that Isaac was to be sacrificed (Hebrews 11:18). How was it possible to reconcile God\u2019s promise with God\u2019s command? Abraham had three days to think about it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The author of Hebrews reflected that Abraham, in order to resolve that contradiction, must have introduced into his reasoning process one further consideration\u2014to wit, God\u2019s power: \u201cHe reasoned that God . . . was able\u201d—logisamenos hoti . . . dynatos ho Theos<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The wording of this argument is quite precise. In speaking of God, the author of Hebrews uses the adjective dynatos<\/em> instead of the verb dynatei<\/em> (\u201cis able\u201d instead of \u201ccould\u201d). In spite of several standard English translations, there is no explicit object (\u201chim\u201d) in this clause. The author thereby indicated he was thinking of more than the saving of Isaac; he had in mind an abiding quality of God—His power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abraham had already experienced God\u2019s power in the conception of Isaac, when he and Sarah, for all practical purposes, were as good as dead: \u201cAnd not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah\u2019s womb\u201d (Romans 4:19).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In other words, Abraham reasoned that God\u2019s power had already overcome the forces of death in the very circumstances of Isaac\u2019s conception. And if God had overcome death once, He was always able. Thus, with regard to Isaac, says Hebrews, Abraham \u201cconsidered that God is able [dynatos<\/em>] to raise from the dead.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When the Sadducees challenged Jesus about the resurrection from the dead, He likewise appealed to the power of God. \u201cAre you not therefore mistaken,\u201d He asked, \u201cbecause you do not know the Scriptures nor the power [dynamis<\/em>] of God?\u201d (Mark 12:24) And it is passing curious that Jesus spoke of both Abraham and Isaac in that context of the resurrection: \u201cI am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.\u201d By way of explaining the reference, Jesus concluded, \u201cHe is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living\u201d (12:26-27).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the author of Hebrews, the mind of ancient Abraham raced ahead in prophecy to the doctrine of the resurrection\u2014it was an experienced inference from what he already knew of God. From the very temptation he endured, Abraham arrived at a new understanding of God\u2014namely, that He is powerful to raise the dead to life. This was a true prophetic revelation granted to the struggling mind of His servant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

St. Augustine was much impressed by this story. \u201cThe pious father,\u201d he wrote, \u201cfaithfully clinging to this promise\u2014because it had to be fulfilled by the one whom God commanded him to kill\u2014did not doubt that this son, whom he had had no hope of being given to him, could be restored to him after his immolation [sibi reddi poterat immolatus<\/em>].\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the author of Hebrews, the restoration of Isaac was enacted \u201cin parable\u201d (en parabole<\/em>—Hebrews 11:19). St. Augustine, translating \u201cparable\u201d as similitudo<\/em>, correctly understood it to refer to the Resurrection of Christ, when God\u2019s Son was restored to Him after His immolation on the Cross. There was a \u201clikeness\u201d—similitude<\/em>—between God and Abraham, revealed in the mystery of the Resurrection (The City of God<\/em> 16.32).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why did God test Abraham? In order to reveal an essential aspect of Himself: His power over death. Abraham arrived at this truth through the furnace of his mind, as he struggled to reconcile God\u2019s promise with His command. God\u2019s power over death was not an abstract truth of theology, available to abstract thought; it was learned on the pounding pulse of an ancient Mesopotamian, as he assumed a personal likeness to the very God who put him to the trial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thursday, January 23<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Genesis 23: We come now to the death and burial of Sarah. In a rather gentlemanly fashion, Holy Scripture is generally reluctant to give women\u2019s ages (Luke 2:36-37 being an exception), but here we are told that Sarah was 127 years old when she died (thus making Isaac 37 years old at the time). This is the first death mentioned in the family since Abraham began his travels. Sarah’s death and burial merits more attention, let me suggest, than it generally gains.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The relative neglect of this story is easy to understand. Less dramatic than the sacrifice of Isaac, which comes right before it, the narrative about Sarah is also less romantic than the wooing of Rebecca, which immediately follows it. To the former it is no match as drama, because the quiet death of an old person is less exciting than the threatened death of a young person. And though Abraham’s burial of Sarah is hardly without romance, the tone of this romance is subdued, subtle, more nuanced than the younger love of Isaac and Rebekah. By these criteria, then, Sarah’s interment represents a pause, as it were, a respite or slowing down in the Abraham saga. For these reasons it may not especially stand out in the memory of Bible-readers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let me also suggest two reasons why the story of Sarah’s death burial deserves more explicit attention. First, the story offers an intriguing psychological portrait of Abraham. Second, it sews a significant theological stitch in the Bible’s narrative pattern.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let us begin with the story’s psychological interest in Abraham. A useful way to approach this subject, I think, is by contrasting the figure of Abraham in this account with that in Genesis 18. This comparison is amply warranted, inasmuch as both narratives describe Abraham engaged in a “negotiation.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the earlier story, when Abraham learns of the Lord’s plan to destroy Sodom, he fears for the fate of his nephew Lot, a resident of the city. With an enviable but bewildering optimism he endeavors to change the Lord’s mind, engaging Him in what is arguably the boldest enterprise of “haggling” ever recorded. No attentive reader will forget how Abraham resolutely lowers the original price, as it were, arguing the sum of required just men from fifty down to ten. The bargaining ends only when the Lord Himself, as though desperate of winning the arbitration, suddenly breaks it off!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Genesis 23 all is different. After Abraham has lain prostrate for a while before the dead body of his wife, he rises, sobered by sorrow, and approaches a local Hittite chieftain in order to obtain a piece of land wherein to bury the cherished companion of his long life. He describes himself now as “a foreigner and visitor,” designations rendered doubly significant in the context of death. Abraham is solemn and deferential. There is no haggling now. His whole demeanor is one of gravity and respect. Sarah is gone. What else matters?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, for a small field containing a cave Abraham pays the exorbitant price of four hundred shekels of silver. (In 1 Kings 16:24 Omri pays only six thousand shekels of silver for the entire site of the large city of Samaria.) A gentleman does not haggle over the price of his wife’s tomb. After such a loss, nothing else is worth much. The old man treads slowly out to the cave, bearing Sarah’s body and a lifetime of intimate love.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Second, the story of Sarah’s burial in Genesis 23 advances the theological theme of Israel’s taking possession of the Promised Land. Up to this point in the biblical history, let us recall, Abraham owned no property in Canaan, “not even enough to set his foot on” (Acts 7:5). With the purchase of the burial cave of Machpelah, however, his family actually acquires its first piece of real estate in the Holy Land. This portion of ground becomes the initial installment of Israel’s inheritance, the germinal redemption of God’s earlier pledge, “To your descendants I have given this land” (Genesis 15:18).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this burial ground an inter-generational transmission of ownership is now established, a “tradition,” a “handing on,” of Israel’s historical identity. The aged flesh of Sarah is but the first deposit the Chosen People adds to the soil of Canaan. Abraham will presently join her at Machpelah, and in due course Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah too, will lie down in the tombs beside them. Here the ancestors of the Chosen People will return\u2014”dust to dust”\u2014to the earth from which they were taken.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The grave is the place, after all, where time is fixed, durably fused with space. The complex, shadowing mists of the past are coupled forever to the plain but sturdy permanence of the soil. Everything is settled. In the graveyard, history and geography become one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After Sarah, Abraham would be buried in the same place, along with his son, his grandson, and their wives; all of them rest at Hebron still, awaiting the return of that One who, for a very short while, lay in the grave of the Arimathean.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Friday, January 24<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matthew 10.16-31: Four animals are mentioned in the first verse, all of them for their symbolic value. Although this initial mission is only to \u201cthe lost sheep of the house of Israel,\u201d it is significant that the \u201cnations\u201d are mentioned in 10:18; again, this foreshadows the Great Commission given at the end of Matthew.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These verses make it clear that the proclamation of the gospel by the Church will be met with resistance, just as we saw to be the case in chapters 8 and 9. Like Jesus, the disciples will be \u201chanded over\u201d to \u201ccouncils\u201d (synedria<\/em>). This description, contained here in prophecy, was very much the experience of the Christians whom Matthew knew when he was writing these words. Similar experiences are recorded in the Acts of the Apostles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matthew continues to portray the resistance with which the proclamation of the Gospel will be met. In His exhortation to confidence in the face of such adversity, the Lord takes up an image from the Sermon on the Mount, God\u2019s care of the birds (verses 29-31).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hebrews 9:23-28: According to Leviticus (4.4-14), the altar and the curtain fronting the Holy of Holies were consecrated with the blood of the sin offering. That is to say, the physical place of the worship—the place where God and man were reconciled—needed to be sanctified by this expiatory blood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If this was true of the Tabernacle in the time of Moses, says the author of Hebrews, why should we imagine it not to be true of the true Tabernacle, the eternal model in heaven? Consequently, as the blood of the ancient sin offering purified and consecrated the ancient Tabernacle, so the sacrificial blood of Jesus had to purify and consecrate the heavenly sanctuary, that which was made without hands: \u201cTherefore was it necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The application of this imagery, to elaborate the theology of redemption, is based on the prior understanding of Jesus\u2019 death as a \u201csin offering.\u201d This term, in Hebrew, is \u2019attata\u2019t<\/em>, literally \u201csin.\u201d The LXX translation is literal: hamartia<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Leviticus the verb used to \u201cmake\u201d this sin offering is \u2018asah<\/em> (three times in\u00a0 Leviticus 4:8-9), which is a normal verb connoting the performance of many sacrifices (cf. 5:10; 6:15; 8:34; 9:7,16,22; 14:19; 15:15,30; 16:9,15,24; 19:9; 22:23; 23:12,19). In the Greek text of the Septuagint this \u2018asah<\/em> was translated as poiein<\/em>. This is the same verb used by St. Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:21, where he says that God \u201cmade [Jesus] a sin offering\u201d (hamartian epoiesen<\/em>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This latter text is concerned with man\u2019s reconciliation with God through the sacrifice of Christ: \u201cNow all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ . . . God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them\u201d (5:18-19). This is the context in which Paul wrote, \u201cHe made Him, who knew no sin, a sin offering for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him\u201d (5:21).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That is to say, while St. Paul used the theology of the sin offering to interpret the sacrificial death of Christ, the Epistle to the Hebrews extends that theology to describe the glorification of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Friday, January 17 Genesis 17: This chapter narrates the circumstances in which Abram and Sarai become Abraham and Sarah (verses 5,15). This second account of God\u2019s covenant with Abram is the first instance, of three, intimating the source of the name of his son and heir, Isaac. Isaac was named for laughter, because that name, … Continue reading January 17 – January 24, 2025<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2595"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2596,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595\/revisions\/2596"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2595"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2595"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2595"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}