Ohio Yearly Meeting's Podcast

Conservative Friends Bible Study of The Gospel of John #19

• Henry Jason

Share episode

John 11:38–57 

We study this part of John with clear attention to Greek terms that reshape belief as trust and signs as pointers beyond miracles. Lazarus’s raising, the council’s response, and the approach to Passover reveal how language, liberation, and wholehearted faith meet in practice.

• Belief as trust and confidence, not mere assent
• Christos as title Anointed, not a surname
• Names like Yeshua, Iakobos, Ioudas shifting across testaments
• Lazarus raised, unbind him as liberation motif
• Jesus deeply moved, nuance of Greek verbs
• signs pointing beyond miracles to God’s glory
• Council fear, Caiaphas’s unintended prophecy
• Children of God, adoption and unity
• Passover approaching, Jesus’s withdrawal to Ephraim

A complete list of our podcasts, organized into topics, is available on our website.

To learn more about Ohio Yearly Meeting (Conservative) of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), please visit ohioyearlymeeting.org.

Those interested in exploring the distinctives of Conservative Friends waiting worship should consider checking out our many Zoom Online Worship opportunities during the week here. All are welcome!

We also have several Zoom study groups. Check out the Online Study and Discussion Groups on our website.

Advices read in these podcasts can be found on page 29 in our Book Of Discipline.

We welcome feedback on this and any of our other podcast episodes. Contact us through our website.

SPEAKER_02:

Advice number eight Watch with Christian tenderness over the opening minds of your children help them to understand the teachings of Jesus. Seek to awaken in them the love of Christ, and through example and training and in self-control, to bring them into obedience into the law of God in their own hearts, that they may be joyful and willing in his service. From Ohio Yearly Meetings Book of Discipline.

SPEAKER_04:

This is the Ohio Yearly Meeting Greek Bible Study. This is session number 19, and we are studying the gospel according to John. We left off at chapter 11, verse 37. Are there any questions or comments from last week? Yes, David.

SPEAKER_01:

It's not so much a comment of last week as of cumulative sense that I've gotten of appreciation and the usefulness of these sessions. Yesterday, in our meeting for worship here in Oberlin, there was a query that started out the worship shared by our ministry and nurture, and it was Howard Thurman, a quote I hadn't seen before, but he talked about faiths. And it gave me opportunity to say how in this group and with your leadership, Henry, we have learned the much deeper meaning of the noun and verb pistes and pisteo. And I expanded a bit more as to what trust and confidence would mean, which I think might be somewhat of a relief to those who have grown up in a credile tradition and have been put off by it or rebelling against it or fleeing to friends because we don't have a creed. If I was correct, I said that I thought that Jerome may have done us a disservice by translating Pisteo into credo. I had occasion to look up three simultaneous versions of the Apostles' Creed. And in the Greek it starts out Pisteo, but it's credo in Latin and then uh you know the English that so many have learned, and been made to feel that it's mandatory to affirm these particular articles of faith as forms of words rather than ways of life. It's something that's still quite real with me, and I did feel rightly led and certainly blessed by the expansion of this concept of caseo.

SPEAKER_04:

Okay, let me actually, I hope I can remember all the little things you just brought up. Number one, sometimes the Latin translation that we have of the Greek may not be a correct translation. That occasionally happens. They got it wrong sometimes. The Latin translation of the Bible that we have goes back to Jerome, and there were earlier translations of various parts of the New Testament and the Old Testament with different Latin translations. Sometimes you have to say that Jerome didn't quite get it right, and sometimes the earlier an earlier translation of a bitter piece or something that we still have might have been correct. So I'm just mentioning that, and I'll mention one thing, like even the word Christ. You know the Greek word for anointed is Christos, correct? That means anointed in Greek, anointed with the Holy Spirit. It's not a name. Christos is not a name, it's it's a title. He is the anointed one, and the Hebrew is Messiah. Well, when they translated this text, the New Testament, into Latin, they didn't translate it as anointed. They just put the Greek sounds into Latin and came up with Christus. So that's an interesting thing. I'm just mentioning this happens in various places. There are other topics you brought up. Oh, yes, with pistus and pisto, I believe. Well, the Latin word for I believe is credo, and that means I believe, but it's interesting, and I want to just mention this because the root of that word, the C-R-E-D, is related to another Latin word. I'll give the plural form chordes, which means hearts. The singular is course, course, and that root, the C-O-R-D, is the same root as in C-R-E-D in Credo. It's where you put your heart in Latin. I believe in one God. Actually, the original form is in the plural. Uh, we believe in one God. If we think of trust, we put our trust in one God. We don't put our trust in all these pagan gods, Apollo and Athena and all the other gods, Zeus and Hera, and you name it. We put our confidence in one God only. Now, even with Christos and Christos, let me bring up another thing here. Let me go back to last week's thing here. This is the notes from last week. I have the Hebrew form of Jesus, Yeshua, which in Greek comes out as Yesus. And that was just directly translated into Latin as Yesus, which gives us our English word Jesus. Yeshua, Yeshua in Hebrew is just an a shortened form of the word Yeshua, which is Joshua. The name Jesus is the name Joshua. In other languages, I know in Russian they'll use the same word to refer to Joshua in the Old Testament and Jesus in the New Testament, Jesus is the uh Russian word, and that's how it is in a number of other languages. Now, if you look at the name uh James, the Greek name, Yakobos. When it occurs in the New Testament, we translate it as James, and when it occurs in the Old Testament, it's in English translated as Jacob. It's the same word in the Greek. But for whatever reasons, historically, we are translating it two different ways. When it occurs in the New Testament, we say the name James. When it occurs in the Old Testament, we say the name Jacob. It's the same word, both in Hebrew and in Greek.

SPEAKER_00:

Uh Henry, when these says it's the same word in Hebrew and Greek, you mean literally the same spelling in all everything's exactly the same.

SPEAKER_04:

We make a distinction that's not there in the original Hebrew or in the original Greek. Eudios. If it's in the Old Testament, we say it's Judah. If it's in the New Testament, it gets translated Judas. It's exactly the same word. So these things occur throughout. For whatever reason, in English translations, I don't know exactly why, but we make that distinction.

SPEAKER_01:

Henri, uh, you have you solved what has been a mystery to me. There's a line of English kings that are called Jacobite or the Jacobins, but it was King James, and yet apparently it comes from the same root.

SPEAKER_04:

It's the same root. Actually, we get the James from the Latin word Yacobus, but then in a Latin dialect, there was an M instead of a B. And for whatever reason, we follow that particular dialectal Latin form with the M giving us James rather than the B, which is what is in the Greek and in the Hebrew. I'd say probably a lot more about all this, but just letting you know that things change over time, and you never would exactly know what's happening if you didn't do a little research. A couple of other things I should say. Friends were not afraid to use the word creed, early and later friends of the 1600s and 1700s. I've seen it used by friends, early Quakers and later Quakers, to refer to their beliefs. I've seen it in people like Phillips, uh, William Penn, and then in the 18th century, Joseph Phipps. It's basically the equivalent of saying our confession of faith, what our principles are, it doesn't have that same connotation that what friends did protest against in terms of you must believe X, Y, and Z, and the way that it is understood by whoever the authority is. I'm just saying that because I know a lot of liberal friends that we don't have a creed. Well, if you look up what the definition of a creed is, you might see something like a confession of faith. And in Barclay's famous catechism, the other half of that part work is called the Confession of Faith, with some 23 articles of what we believe, what we put our trust in, what we have confidence in. I just want to make a small point there, but you know, you need to understand how words are used and when they were used and how they what they meant. Because friends have, well, conservative friends, traditional early friends, had a confession of faith. There are certain things. We do believe, we do put our trust, our confidence in Christ Jesus, the anointed Messiah, Jesus. Good point, David. I hope I haven't confused people though by saying all this. I think it's kind of good to know some of the stuff. If ever you are asked by others uh as to what we believe, what we put our trust in, you can understand uh again, the Nicene Creed of 325 AD begins in Greek, that we pistoomen, we put our trust, we put our confidence in one God. But how that gets worded, of course, ends up with a trinity there and other kinds of understandings that if you didn't accept it the way it is here, then you were considered to be a heretic. But those were all these political issues with the between the Arians and others of that time. Okay, anything else from last week? I just wanted to also say last week, Pat made a uh good distinction about what Martha was saying when she knows. Uh, and actually, and there's a different, there are two different verbs in Greek, one oida, meaning I know, and that's different from ginosco, which is I know, but I know usually with the sense of I experience. I've got a different knowledge than just knowing, it's much more an experiential kind of deeper kind of understanding. So I just wanted to uh reaffirm that. I don't know if Pat may have anything else to say about that. All right, chapter 11, verse 38. Then Jesus came, again greatly disturbed, to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone was lying against it. Jesus said, Take away the stone. Martha, the sister of the dead man, said to him, Lord, already there is a stench because he has been dead four days. Jesus said to her, Did I not tell you that if you believed you would see the glory of God? So they took away the stone. And Jesus looked upward and said, Father, I thank you for having heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I have said this for the sake of the crowd standing here, so that they may believe that you sent me. When he had said this, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come out. The dead man came out, his hands and feet bound with strips of cloth, and his face wrapped in a cloth. Jesus said to them, Unbind him and let him go. Perhaps some of you have seen pictures of what these graves looked like in the first century. This was like a small cave, and in front of the cave there was a big stone, a round stone. Oh, I should say more like a giant stone made of a large, how can I put it, coin like stone, round and could be rolled to one side or the other, perhaps you know, four, five, six feet high. So one person probably could not do it, they'd have to use levers and whatever to move it to the side. And in verse 39, well, my translation says, Lord, already there is a stench because he has been dead four days. The Greek is probably a little bit stronger. He stinks, it says, He smells four days, very strong. And in verse 40, did I not tell you that if you believed, if you had trust, you would see the glory of God? And of course, this word glory is our famous word, doxa, which has a variety of words, and one of the words is the Shekinah, the manifested presence of God, and that's what he's saying here. In this raising of Lazarus, you will see the manifested presence of God in this action that had happened through Jesus.

SPEAKER_07:

I've often read this, Henry, and I think of the resurrection power of Christ. And I often think to myself, if he hadn't said the name Lazarus, how many others would have come forth? You know, it just struck me something I always it makes me consider.

SPEAKER_04:

Yeah. It's in verse 42. I knew that you always hear me, but I've said this for the sake of the crowd standing here, so that they may believe that you sent me. This verb sent here, the form of it. Uh, let me just make sure I got it right here. Is the verb apostello. Apostello. And this is the root that you see in apostle, those who get sent out, but it means sent here, to send out. God has sent out Jesus as the air is past tense. Because this verb and the noun, the noun is apostolos, that doesn't just refer in the New Testament to the 12 apostles, it's used elsewhere as well to refer to anyone sent by God, by Christ. So just be aware that it has a broader meaning and a broader sense than just those 12 special individuals. Any comments, questions here?

SPEAKER_05:

I think that this is a uh a physical representation of what the spiritual event is uh inwardly, in that to the uh the person or in the first birth, there isn't that life. There is actually spiritual death, and to be called forth as Jesus called Lazarus forth, he calls him into life, even though he's been dead. And when it says in 42 that he's giving the reason why he is uh saying these things aloud, he says, because of the people which stand by, I said it, he's making something obvious to them, he's intending to show them something that by himself he would not have needed to do that. But he he he's presenting some information to people, and that's why he's speaking aloud. And in the same way that he's presenting information to people that although they can be dead in sins, that they can be called forth out of death into life. This resurrection of Lazarus is to show people what the inward spiritual event is, making it visible to them.

SPEAKER_04:

That's the manifested manifestation, divine manifestation. Actually, as here, I'm thinking also of the Shema, the basic uh Hebrew prayer that even Jesus uses and says in Mark, hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one, one one God, one Lord. Here he's saying, I knew that you always hear me, but then I have said this for the sake of the crowd standing here. I I kind of see some reference to the kind of understanding that Jesus is trying to get across to those who are seeing this miracle. Go ahead, David.

SPEAKER_01:

You may recall that last week. I was quite impressed by how many words were in that section describing Jesus' very human and deep emotion, and something that we can identify with. And I think your last comment was in anticipation of the docetist heresy that the writer of John wanted to show Jesus as fully human. So today I am looking at verse 38, and I have several translations of this verb embryo my.

SPEAKER_04:

To be deeply moved, it's also as an expression of anger and displeasure. I think deeply moved is probably the best. I don't see groan here. I'm looking to scroll to censure. Now, these uh some of the these other meanings wouldn't fit in here at all. There is an adverb related to this, embry mose, which means furiously. But uh again, I think the best translation is you know being deeply moved.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, it seems to me that Goodspeed in using the phrase that he was repressing a groan, was paying honor to the translation, even if it's not the best one, of um the King James translators. Those are the only ones where I see the word groan.

SPEAKER_04:

I do remember. Hold on, I'm going to another book here. I know there's variations in some of the uh Greek manuscripts with this word, and I don't know if they're really relevant, but there might be. I mean, I forgot, I think I did look this up at one time. Where it occurs in 33, there are variations on that same word, the two verbs there, deeply disturbed. And all right, let's continue then. Okay, the strips of cloth, those are burial clothes, burial cloths or garment. Any other comments, questions before we move on?

SPEAKER_05:

In the end of 44, where Jesus says, loose him and let him go, I think is the conclusion of that process of freeing the person from the spiritual death and calling him forth into life. And the final words that he says is loose him and let him go, suggesting that he is now free. So there's a what is the 44?

SPEAKER_04:

Yes, what does the uh King James say there for the last verbs?

SPEAKER_05:

Loose him and let him go.

SPEAKER_04:

Okay, well, the let here is not like an imperative or anything, it's actually a verb in Greek that means to release, unbind him, loosen him. Uh let me go back to it. Unbind him or untie him and release him in the sense of allow him who pagane to go, to walk off.

SPEAKER_05:

Yeah, I think it has um it suggests that understanding that if the sun doth make you free, ye are free indeed. There's the liberation of from captivity is uh being suggested there.

SPEAKER_04:

That's an important point. I don't want to get into this because it's a much more complex subject and the need for sacrifice. I mean, I think some was it someone in this group who once asked a few weeks ago whether Jesus needed to die. I think I said both yes and no. But in terms of understanding that the absolute necessity of going 100% the way, just as it is to be a true Christian, we should be 100% a Christian. We have to go all the way. I'm just commenting on that because I've beginning I've begun to think more and more that is so true that you just can't be, you can't be like 98% pregnant, you know, or with child. You can't really be a true Christian unless you're working on 100%. It may take a while to get there, but it's something that you just can't stop and say, I'm only going to become 75% of a true Christian. But in terms of the sacrifice, uh giving over one's own life because God has in being obedient to God in doing that, Jesus is showing the full extent of what God wants. Uh, that again, there's only one God, and we cannot have any other gods that we are worshiping at the same time. Our God is a jealous God, there's only one God that demands our hundred percent attention. Again, sacrifice is a very complex topic.

SPEAKER_03:

Okay, shall I go on? Another comment. Last week we were talking about Jesus and Mary's conversation about resurrection, and it seems to me that that's continuing here in verses 39 and 40, where Martha says that there's a stench because he's been dead four days, and not realizing that if Jesus, by coming back and and and saying what he has said so far, it has not sunk in, that he could be resurrected.

SPEAKER_04:

I mean, I think of all the miracles of Jesus, perhaps this is the most profound one of all, of course. That seems very clear. As I think I mentioned last week, it's interesting that it's not found in the other three Gospels, but the sources for those gospels were different than this unique gospel of John, which is very different from the other three and written for different purposes, again, teaching purposes as they all were, of course, but the the sources, what's being spoken of, how things are being spoken of are different. And each gospel, of course, has that. Matthew clearly was still written for those who were still very much involved in Hebrew rites and rituals, Jewish priests, whereas Luke, on the other hand, seems to be written much more for a more Gentile group of people, not specifically not only Jews. So you get different flavors there of things being said for different purposes. I mean, again, there are all kinds of these gospels are really very much teaching instruments, as well as memories, reminders of what had happened and why they are called gospels, good news. It's as I've said in the past, it's the the Greek says the good news, the gospel according to Matthew or according to Luke, according to Mark, according to John. It's how they understood it, how they saw it, and that's why they are called according to. It's not the gospel of Mark, but it's how they how they envisioned how they understood it. All right, let's continue now on to the plot to kill Jesus. As we would say, the plot thickens. Verse 45. Many of the Jews, therefore, who had come with Mary and had seen what Jesus did, believed in him. But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what he had done. So the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the council and said, What are we to do? This man is performing many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and destroy both our holy place and our nation. But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, You know nothing at all. You do not understand that it is better for you to have one man die for the people than to have the whole nation destroyed. He did not say this on his own, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the dispersed children of God. So from that day on they plan to put him to death. Again, we have this word believe, put their confidence in, their trust, their complete trust in Jesus, that there's something totally extraordinary about him they're seeing there. The meeting of the council, that's the Sanhedrin, that's the council of the nation. Um in verse 48, the holy place, that would be a reference to the temple. Let me just check one thing here. Tapas just means place, but when it's referred to as the place, it's the holy place, it's the temple. That TLP is like in topography, the lay of the land, topographical map. So that's topas, just means place, but of course, here it's equal to the temple.

SPEAKER_01:

I have a question. Verse number 48. I'm sorry, at the end of 47, I'm not sure just where it breaks. Anyway, uh, Semayon, S-E-M-E-I-O-N. Some of these render it miracles and some say signs or wonders. And I wonder if there is a difference.

SPEAKER_04:

This word semeon, seman, let's get this straight. Semaeon, the basic meaning of this word is sign, that's all. And I mean it's kind of interesting that John only uses this word, and when he uses it, it refers to miracles. It points to something out of the ordinary, everyday world. That's all. It it doesn't, well, it does mean miracle to us, but uh these are signs of something extraordinary. So something is going on here. Uh uh, and I I mean I it's interesting that he doesn't use the word miracle, but uh he uses this word sign, and it always refers to a miracle. I can't say always, but I believe you know, all relevant places it does. Uh so um why does he do that? Again, he I'm I'm assuming there was a specific purpose to uh in some other gospel, uh maybe it's no, it's in John. Uh uh where Jesus says something to the effect uh uh don't believe in me, but believe in the one who sent me, the father. Uh and I think that's this kind of sign that uh it points to something else. Don't put all your thinking on the miracle, but on something greater, the power of God, the name of God. Uh that's that's where your focus should be. People uh even in other Christian denominations, they they love to have uh to focus on miracles or whatever. You need to get beyond that. They miracles can really be a sign that can lead you to. To something greater, but don't get stuck on at that level of miracle. You've got to go beyond even beyond a miracle to something higher, to something greater about God. Not that God is that Jesus is just a miracle worker. He was, of course. But there's something greater here. So it's, you know, I wouldn't have I would not have translated it as miracle. I would have kept it as sign, you know, in a in if I were translating this. Um and maybe make a footnote or something saying, you know, referring to what I just said. Okay, uh, let me see, where are we here? There was something else I had to say. Oh, yeah, the Greek is very explicit here. In verse 40, my translation says, You know nothing at all. This is uh Caiaphas, the high priest saying to them, you know nothing at all. Uh the Greek says, Who may us ukoidata uden? You don't know nothing, is literally what the Greek says. You don't know nothing. Double negative, really strong in Greek. Um that's the verb that does not refer to having experiential understanding. This is oideta. Uh the other one of the other verbs for knowing in Greek. Um verse 52 is interesting also. Uh verse 51 and 52. Uh, he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation and not for the nation only, not for the Jews only, but to gather into one the dispersed children of God. Any thoughts on what that means? I'm just curious what people think here. Let me say something. This word children, child is this Greek word technon, which comes up many times. It's a neuter noun, grammatically neuter noun in Greek, but that's not important here. And you see the expression in translation, the children of God, and that's what you'll often find. Uh well, the form would be techna tu. The children of the God, the children of God. But this is interesting because another translation that you see also um this also gets translated as the children of God children of God. This one literally means the sons of God. But of course, the masculine can include both. Let me make a small s there. Sons of God.

SPEAKER_06:

That is a higher and I can make a comment.

SPEAKER_04:

There's a higher uh just one one second. There's a this is on a higher level than to call oneself uh a son of God. To say, Berness, that thee is a son of God is higher than just being a techno of God, in my understanding of these two words. But in translation, you often just see what's literally the sons of God also translated as the children of God, which is unfortunate because I don't think they are totally equivalent. I think being a son of God is is uh in in referring to us as children of God is something different than just techna. Um so go ahead, go ahead, Bernice.

SPEAKER_06:

Uh one of the things that crossed my mind is being grafted into the vine or being adopted.

SPEAKER_04:

Right.

SPEAKER_06:

And being adopted is would be just as if you were the um blood of the family.

SPEAKER_04:

Ah, okay.

SPEAKER_06:

Being grafted into it and being grafted into the vine of the faith.

SPEAKER_04:

Yeah, it's like even, I mean, I I can remember hearing many, many years ago, oh several decades ago, that if a if there was any question whether a child belonged to a father and mother, the father would just put the child on his lap and say, This is my son, and there'd be no question about it. That ends the discussion. If there was any you know, suspicion that it wasn't or whatever. Um, and and I I you know I'm not sure whether that would be true of adopted sons or whatever, but uh um anyway, it's it's I just wanted to make a little point here that there are two different ways of saying this, and that some translations don't show the distinction. Okay, uh maybe we can finish this chapter. Let's see if we can do that. 55. Now the Passover of the Jews was near, and many went up from the country to Jerusalem before the Passover to purify themselves. They were looking for Jesus and were asking one another as they stood in the temple, What do you think? Surely he will not come to the festival, will he? Now the chief priests and the Pharisees had given orders that anyone who knew where Jesus was should let them know so that they might arrest him. Easter in a variety of languages we don't they make they don't make a distinction between those two words. They just borrow this Greek word tasca meaning either Passover or Easter. Our English word Easter goes back to an Anglo Saxon pagan goddess, Estra, the god of the East, the god of the dawn. Goddess, I should say. Okay, um he went up from the country to Jerusalem before the Passover to purify themselves. Uh, of course, Jerusalem is higher than some of the countryside around, so you you're going up to Jerusalem. Um and as I've mentioned in the past, uh, in the other three Gospels, uh, you get the impression that Jesus only was out in ministry for for one year, but in John, it's clear that there were at least three years. So uh again, there it wasn't essential in terms of what they wanted to get across to their audiences when they wrote these gospels to be, you know, sort of so literal and so exact in terms of time. There was they're trying to convey a spiritual understanding to to their readers, to those, well, I shouldn't even say readers, to the listeners, because most people, of course, would not own copies of these gospels. Uh, this would only be something that those who are wealthy could own. Yes, David.

SPEAKER_01:

Well, I'm mystified in 56. Why do they think that Jesus would not come to the festival? And in this case, is the they the authorities or the crowd? What is your translation of the beginning of 56? They were looking for Jesus. I guess that would imply the authorities. Are they inferring that he's on the run, in hiding, doesn't want to make himself vulnerable?

SPEAKER_04:

They were seeking him, they were looking for him. That's in 56, and they were saying among themselves in the temple. I'm just trying to find who the who they is here. Um, it's a loose Jews, but which Jews?

SPEAKER_01:

It sounds like it would be the authorities, but I just wonder why they would posit that Jesus probably wouldn't show himself or come to they would they would know they would understand.

SPEAKER_04:

I mean, Jesus obviously understood too. I'm looking for the verse here that says this. In verse 54, Jesus therefore no longer walked about openly among the Jews, but went from there to a town called Ephraim in the region near the wilderness, near the desert. And he remained there with the disciples. The word Jews here probably means both those who are looking to arrest him as well as just other Jews in general. But I'm assuming Ephraim is uh a Jewish town, anyway, at the edge of the uh desert. So he stayed there because Jesus knew that they were looking to arrest him.

SPEAKER_07:

Also, Henry, just a little while before, they asked the same at the Feast of the Tabernacles. They asked again if he was coming, and his brother said not to go, but he did go secretly, and it said the Jews were seeking him there too.

SPEAKER_04:

Yeah, yeah, later. He didn't go right when they yeah, right, that's true. Because most of what Jesus did was up in Galilee, he did go down to Judea, you know, through Samaria and whatnot, but have to say, most of his public ministry was up in the north. More of his opponents were probably down in the south in Jerusalem and thereabouts. Of course, those in Jerusalem would think of the Galileans more as country pumpkins, these rural folk who what do they know? Nazareth was just a tiny village of probably a few houses. Uh, about nine years ago, I went and visited Lithuania for the first time. My grandparents all came from Lithuania, and my cousins took me to where my grandmother grew up, and it was getting dark, it was in the early evening, and there were just maybe four or five houses there, just fields. It was just such a strange feeling. This is the village, and just a few houses, but it was very strange to see it. You have different images in your head about what a place might have looked like a hundred years earlier or something. It was in the middle of nowhere, so that kind of was true of Nazareth. I forget who was saying in the Gospels can anything good come out of Nazareth? One of the uh disciples of Jesus when he was first uh going and choosing his disciples, which again was something that wasn't normal. Usually, disciples, students would go find a teacher they liked and listen to and be taught by him. Here, Jesus went out and probably had discussions and talked to people, and he got the people he wanted, these disciples, these apostles. Okay, anything else? Um all right, fine. We will stop there and we'll start next week on chapter 12, the anointing of Jesus. So, all right, thanks everybody.

SPEAKER_05:

Thank you, Henry. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.

SPEAKER_02:

This podcast has been a production of Ohio Yearly Meeting. It was hosted by Henry Jason and edited by Kim Palmer. The introduction and credits were read by Chip Thomas. The quote in our introduction is from the Queries and Advices section of Ohio Yearly Meetings Book of Discipline. A link to that book can be found in the show notes to this episode. We welcome feedback on this or any of our podcast episodes. We can be contacted through our website, Ohio Yearly Meeting.org.