LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2019, Page 263

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

II. THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS
pearance; the “face” of a house or the “face” of a tree.
Therefore when God hides His face, both Word and
deed, nothing remains but the face of the devil, of
death, and of sin. So he says here, You have hidden
Your face from us, that is, “We see no joy and peace.
We see nothing but death and sin.”30
What might this hiding of God’s face look like in “real life”?
Setting this idea back into the context of Isaiah’s career, as
Oswalt does, can help us answer that question.
This was not something foreign to Isaiah’s experience; it was directly out of his own life. Despite his
most inspired and impassioned preaching, nothing
seemed to move his people. Indeed, as God has said,
their hearts only grew harder. God was hiding his
face (8:17). Would the prophet stop recording what
he was hearing from God? Would he stop imploring
God for his people? No, he would continue faithfully, recording what he heard and calling out to God,
waiting with eager expectation for a day he would
not see in the flesh when God would indeed turn to
his people (63:17), split the heavens (63:19b [Eng.
64:1]), and give them a heart to believe (64:4a [Eng.
5a]). This is a believer’s heart: one that does not
deny the grief and even the anger that stem from
God’s hiddenness, yet all the time waits with glad
expectancy for the sure moment when he will reveal
himself (8:17; 64:3 [Eng. 4]).31
Oswalt points out the dilemma we find ourselves facing:
If joyfully doing righteousness is the key to meeting
God and having him work on our behalf, but we are
fundamentally unable to do righteousness until God
makes it possible, we are in a vicious circle. We cannot do righteousness until God enables us, but God
cannot work in our lives until we do righteousness.32
And we are brought to the following realization:
God is angry and justifiably so, but does he want to remain angry? If so, the people can do nothing about it. They
cannot somehow produce enough righteousness to mollify
God, because they are helpless before their sin, as vv. 5–6
(Eng. 6–7) show so graphically. God will have to satisfy his
righteous anger for himself. No one else can do it.33
30

AE 17:370–371.

31

Oswalt, 40–66, 627.

32

Oswalt, 40–66, 624.

33

Oswalt, 40–66, 624–625.

7. The image that Isaiah uses in verse 6 is both embarrassing and offensive.34 It is not the sort of thing that Christians talk about on Sunday morning — or ever. And
yet, the metaphor is extremely well chosen. In a way,
the image of the menstrual cloth is even more forceful
than that of the corpse. The corpse may illustrate the
loss of life and the rotting of the body that follows, but
the menstrual cloth symbolizes an opportunity for new
life that will never be realized. It is the chance for life
now turned to waste. What other images does the Bible
use for man’s complete inability to rescue himself from
his own sinful condition? See Psalm 38 for another
cluster of images.
8. Oswalt suggests that one of the ways we experience
God hiding His face is when His Word seems to be ineffective. Have you experienced this when trying to share
God’s Word with another person to comfort them, encourage them, admonish them or warn them? How was
your response similar to or different from Isaiah’s?

Isaiah 64:8–9
The dilemma that verse 6 brought us to has no humanly instigated or humanly managed solution. Sinful humanity can
neither pacify God’s anger nor claim a right to His friendly
aid. The prophet and the people for whom he speaks are left
with nowhere to turn, except to God.
“But now.” After all that Isaiah has said since 63:7 — the
recounting of God’s steadfast love, His saving and suffering
and redeeming love, the recounting of Israel’s rebellion and
God’s mighty deliverance of Israel by the hand of Moses,
the questioning of God’s reasons for making this people
whom He rescued to become like a people He had never
ruled, the complaining against God for His not having acted
already, the admission of the sin that is killing Israel from
within and of her apathetic resignation to her doom — after
all that, how can there still be a “but”? Because God is still
Israel’s father.
The dilemma is brought to nothing by God’s fatherhood.
Oswalt writes,

Even the ESV avoids the embarrassment by using what is, to some degree, a
euphemism: “polluted garment.” Cf. Lessing, Isaiah 56–66, 359: “The noun ‫בֶּגֶד‬
[beged], ‘garment,’ is in construct with the plural noun ‫[ עִדִּים‬ʿidîm], probably
derived from the root ‫[ עדד‬ʿdd], having to do with a period of time (cf. ‫[ עַד‬ʿad],
‘until’ or ‘perpetuity’). Both BDB (‫[ עִדָּה‬ʿidāh]) and DCH (‫[ עִדָּה‬ʿidāh]) render the
hapax legomenon ‫[ עִדִּים‬ʿidîm] as ‘menstruation.’” Lessing, Isaiah 56–66, 342,
translates the phrase as “garment of menstruation.”

dilemma” by slipping into thinking, “I can understand
why God chose me to be His own; I know that when He
meets me it will be as a friend”? How often do we thank
God for being the One who justifies us but then refuse
to trust Him when He doesn’t act as we expect Him to?

11. Is the knowledge that God acts in unexpected ways
comforting or disturbing? Why? What has been the
most surprising way in which God has ever acted? (cf.
Phil. 2:5–11).
12. Are we confident that God is our Father, too? How do
we know that? (John 20:17 might provide help with this
one.)
13. What have we learned about justification by grace
through faith in this passage? The passage begins by
raising the question of whether or not we can put our
faith in this God — He hasn’t always acted to save His
people the way His people expected Him to. And yet,
Isaiah, like us, cannot go far without admitting that
there is no other God, no one else who acts to save.
The description of a sinful condition that we share
with God’s people of Isaiah’s day leaves no doubt that,
if there is to be a justification, a setting right of things,
it can only be by grace. Finally, we place ourselves
before God our Father and Maker/Remaker in simple,
childlike faith: “Look, God, Your children!”

9

So we are in the hand of God, and even though we
are evil, He thrusts us into the lump, into a Babylonian captivity, until the clay has been worked
through better so that it becomes more pleasing.
Then it will become a new lump. It is as if [Isaiah]
were saying: “The fact that You have trampled the
clay will not harm us who are broken, if only You
remain the Potter and will reshape us.” This is the
task of a potter.38
The ESV’s “Be not so terribly angry” attempts to render the
‫( עַד־מְאֹ֔ד‬ʿad-məōʾd) of the Hebrew text, but Delizsch’s explanation of the phrase gives us a clearer picture of its force:
Let Him then not be angry ‫[ עַד־מְאֹד‬ʿad-məōʾd], “to
the utmost measure” (cf. Ps. cxix. 8), or if we paraphrase it according to the radical meaning of ‫מאד‬
[mʾd], “till the weight becomes intolerable.”39

O son of man, to right my lot
Nought but thy presence can avail;
Yet on the road thy wheels are not,
Nor on the sea thy sail!
My fancied ways why shouldst thou heed?
Thou com’st down thine own secret stair:
Com’st down to answer all my need,
Yea, every bygone prayer!

The theme of waiting in hopeful expectation and with
patient faith comes through clearly in Isaiah’s words, but
this may not have otherwise felt very much like an Advent
Bible study. The opening words of our text were “borrowed”
by Friedrich von Spee for the opening words of his hymn,
“O Savior, Rend the Heavens Wide” (LSB 355, LW 32). Fred
Precht details the connections with our passage and others:

42
Fred L. Precht, Lutheran Worship: Hymnal Companion (St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 1992), 40.

George MacDonald, The Project Gutenberg EBook of Poetical Works of George
MacDonald, Vol. 2 (Posting Date: December 7, 2011 [EBook #9984]).
43

11

Concluding Discussion
Our ways of talking together about justification by grace
through faith may too often risk making it seem about as
significant as getting a rebate check in the mail or paying a
traffic ticket online. We don’t begin to really understand and
care about justification until we begin to feel the crushing
weight of our own sinfulness. Otherwise, as Luther says,
“We are only talking about the letters without the experience.”41 The more truly and fully we know God and the
more truly and fully we know ourselves, the more powerfully do we feel the dilemma that this passage lays before
our hearts. And keep in mind, Isaiah is not talking about
the fate of the nations, not raising the question of whether
or not the heathen can ever be found right with God — no,
he is speaking of God’s chosen, the nation He called into
being and bound to Himself with His covenant of steadfast
love. Justification’s dilemma is felt more powerfully by those
who know that they are God’s people (cf. Romans 7), so it
is “meet, right, and salutary” that we, God’s people today,
should return again and again to these questions.
9. What have we learned about ourselves in this passage?
Most of us here would probably say we have known
for a long time that we are sinful, but, in light of this
passage, we should be asking ourselves why we still feel
sometimes that we know better than God does. What
do our “Oh, if only You would have …” complaints say
about understanding that we are the ones who need
justifying — not God? Do we solve the “justification

Oswalt, 40–66, 629.
AE 17:371.

37

See Is. 29:16 and 45:9.

38

AE 17:371–372.

40

Oswalt, 40–66, 629.

39

Delitzsch, Isaiah, 472.

41

AE 17:372.

10 | Justifying Christmas — Leader’s Guide

While the students still have their Bibles open to Matthew
1, it will be easy to point out that this is not the beginning
of Matthew’s account of the Gospel and to show them the
way in which Matthew does begin. We may find the first
17 verses of Matthew’s account both tedious and counterintuitive. “What reader can last through 17 verses of such
strange-sounding, tongue-twisting names and even want to
keep reading when he finally gets to Jesus?” we may wonder.
Raymond Brown provided a very valuable introduction to
these verses in his little book A Coming Christ in Advent:

They all were looking for a king
To slay their foes, and lift them high:
Thou cam’st a little baby thing
That made a woman cry.

The final “behold” answers to the “but now” of verse 7 (“But
now, O Lord, you are our Father; … Behold, please look, we
are all your people”). Although the “forever” of “remember
not iniquity forever” leaves us looking to the future and
hoping against hope that something might break this vicious circle of sinful rebellion, for the moment we rest here
with Isaiah and Israel. All that the sinner can do, in the end,
is simply to place himself before God and say, “Look! Your
child,” and wait for Him to act.

36

Read Matt. 1:18-25.

THAT HOLY THING.

to its extremity, which would surely mean the extermination
of his people … [God’s] judgment is not an end in itself;
it is intended to have an ultimately redemptive purpose
in cleansing and restoring the people to purity (cf. 4:2–6;
30:18–22; 54:7–8). Isaiah is here appealing for God to actualize that reality.”40

35

As we turn our attention to the second half of Matthew 1,
we will feel as though we are now moving into territory that
is much more explicitly “Christmassy.” And so we are, but
we need to remember that our theme is “Justifying Christmas,” so we come to this familiar and well-loved passage
asking the same question we asked of Isaiah: What does this
text teach us about justification by grace through faith in
Christ Jesus? This passage may not be familiar to everyone
in the room, so, once again, it will be best for us all to hear
the whole passage from start to finish.

Perhaps, though, in light of our devotion and what we’ve
learned from it, we should always pair this hymn with the
following poem from George MacDonald:43

Justifying Christmas — Leader’s Guide |

Isaiah reinforces God’s unchangeable relationship to His
people as their father with an image he has used twice
before in his book: God as the potter.37 In both earlier uses,
though, it was to point out the absurdity of the pot complaining to the potter about the way he had formed it. Here
the (self-)ruined pot pleads with the potter not to discard
it but to still claim ownership of the pot, to still look on it
as clay that can be used again. Luther explains the image in
connection with its historical setting but with clear applications for later generations of “pots” as well:

Introduction

Closing Thought

A somewhat unique characteristic of this Advent
hymn is its direct reference to numerous bold images, or metaphors, from Holy Scripture. Its theme
reflects the ancient Introit for the Fourth Sunday in
Advent with its dramatic call: “You heavens above,

“Even in times of darkness and the hiding of Your
face, You will act no differently. Your promises are
there, and they stand, and you remain our Father.”36

Session 2: Matt. 1:18–25

[rain] down righteousness; let the clouds shower it
down. Let the earth open wide, let salvation spring
up” (Is. 45:8). Closely associated with this are “Oh,
that you would rend the heavens and come down”
(Is. 64:1) and “A shoot will come up from the stump
of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit”
(Is. 11:1). Not to be overlooked are the references to
Christ as the sun (more direct in the German) —
“His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance”
(Rev. 1:16b) — and as the “bright Morning Star” (Rev.
22:16b), all pointing directly to him as the Redeemer,
whose coming is entreated with deep fervor.42

10.What have we learned about God in this passage? Can
we confess with Isaiah that “no eye has seen a God
besides” our God, the God who makes Himself known
to us in Christ Jesus (cf. 64:4)? How is our knowledge
of God’s ways even better than Isaiah’s knowledge was?
(cf. Luke 10:23–24; John 14:8–11; Heb. 1:1–2).

As Luther expresses it,

Oswalt explains, “Isaiah does not ask that judgment be
dispensed with or suspended, only that it not be carried out

34

Justifying Christmas — Leader’s Guide |

Israel is the distinct creation of God. This was a central point of the historical reminiscence of 63:7–14:
God did not call Israel into existence, give them his
covenant, and lead them into the promised land
because they deserved it for their faithfulness, but
solely as an expression of his own saving character
(“name,” 63:12, 14).35

263

If a Christian today were asked to tell someone who
knows nothing about Christianity the basic story of
Jesus Christ, where would he or she be likely to begin?
I am willing to wager that not one in ten thousand
would begin where the author of the Gospel that the
church puts first begins—where the first line of the
first page of the New Testament begins—with the majestic assurance: This is “the story of the beginning/the
origin/the genesis of Jesus Christ.” Indeed, we might
approximate: “the story of the advent of Jesus Christ.”
For Matthew the origin of Jesus Christ starts with
Abraham begetting Isaac! In other words the story
of the Hebrew patriarchs, of the kings of Judah, and
of other Israelites is the opening stage of the story of
Jesus Christ. That such an Old Testament component
to the Jesus story would not occur to most Christians
today is a sad commentary on how far we have moved
from our ancestors’ understanding of the good news.
Matthew’s list of people who are an integral part of the
origin of Jesus Christ contains some of the most significant names in the biblical account of God’s dealing
with His people Israel, and I for one wish strongly

that at least once a year their names were allowed to
resound in the Christian church on a Sunday when all
the worshiping New Testament people of God were
there to hear.44
Brown’s points are all worth taking to heart. Although this
is not the place to devote to this genealogy the time that it
deserves, let this at least serve as a reminder to us that we
are about to hear the story of Jesus the Christ, who is both
son of Abraham and son of David.45
In keeping with our series theme, we will move ahead to
Matt. 1:18–25. We will focus on three questions:
1. Why does Joseph feel that he should divorce Mary?
2. What is Matthew telling us about Joseph when he refers
to him as “just/righteous”?
3. Why is it important that Joseph be involved in naming
the Child?

Focus Question: Matt. 1:18–20
1. Why does Joseph feel that he should divorce Mary?
Read verse 18 again carefully. How much does Joseph
know at this point? The answer to that question may
seem very obvious after a first reading, but there is a
question about Matthew’s narrative here that has puzzled
readers since ancient times. What did Joseph learn about
his fiancée that made him feel that a quiet but legal end
to their engagement was the best course of action for all
concerned?
The majority of both readers and commentators today
read the text as telling us that Joseph discovered that Mary
was pregnant, that he knew he was not the father and
that he could not — in terms of God’s will and of his own
conscience — take Mary to be his wife. It is not until the
announcement of the angel in Joseph’s dream (v. 20) that
Joseph learns this child is not the product of marital infidelity but of the work of the Holy Spirit.
However, since at least the time of Origen of Alexandria
(† c. A.D. 254), there have been readers who understood
Matthew to be telling us that what Joseph learned about
Mary was that she was pregnant through the working of the
Holy Spirit. Joseph was therefore afraid to take Mary to be
44
Raymond E. Brown, A Coming Christ in Advent (Collegeville, Minnesota:
Liturgical Press, 1988), 18.
45
See pages 73-77 in Jeffrey A. Gibbs, Matthew 1:1–11:1 (St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 2006) for a brief but helpful overview of this section of Matthew.

12 | Justifying Christmas — Leader’s Guide

2019 Convention Workbook