generosity

GENEROSITY
Presented at County Line Brethren Church on July 26, 2009.
Year B, Proper 12
Scripture passages: 2 Kings 4:42-44 & John 6:1-21

Those of us who tend to focus on the New Testament over the Old Testament do ourselves and others a great disservice.

Focusing too much on the New Testament might go something like this. We read the passage in John chapter 6, as if it is the first time this kind of thing ever happened. We may give Jesus more credit than is due him in this story, if that were possible. And so, we may speak of Philip as having no point of reference in the history of this type of thing ever occurring previously. Now, I don't mean to malign Philip. Nor am I saying that he should have remembered that Elisha directed that 100 people be fed from some meager initial contributions – only 900 years earlier. All I'm saying is that if we focus too heavily on the New Testament, we run the risk of missing some very rich stories which enhance the stories of Jesus and the writings of Paul, to name just a couple benefits.

Let's take a look at the context of the story of Elisha and the feeding of the 100. In chapter one of II Kings, Elisha was named as the replacement for Elijah, the consummate prophet of the Old Testament, next to Moses.

Now some of you have not been given the secret tips on how to remember which one came first. Their names sound so similar and it is hard for many people to keep them in their proper place. For Elijah and Elisha, the easy way to remember who came first is that Elijah comes first in the dictionary or the encyclopedia. Now that trick does not work with every sequence in the Bible, but it works here. It also works for Thessalonians, Timothy and Titus, three of the Pauline epistles.

Anyway, Elijah comes before Elisha. Elisha had some big shoes to fill. Elijah seemed to be the prominent, John the Baptist type of prophet. He spoke out against the evils in society, government and the religious establishment. He pronounced an extended drought and lived in seclusion in the wilderness. We get the impression that he was kind of living separate from the people, sometimes in isolation. Elijah was not seen as intimately connected to a community.

On the other hand, the very first miraculous act of Elisha addressed a need in the community. Some men come to Elisha saying that their water is bad. They actually refer to Elisha as “our lord.” Elisha then heals the water (which is perhaps the only time in scripture that an inanimate object is “healed”).

The very next story is when some youths make fun of his bald head. Elisha calls down a curse upon them, bears come out of the woods and maul 42 of them. Let this be a lesson not to make too much fun of other people. The consequences can be dire.

Chapter four begins with the story of the filling of the poverty-stricken widow's oil jars, so much that their financial needs were met thereafter.

Next, Elisha takes up residence with a family in the town of Shunem. The wife of the family was without children. Elisha told her she would have a son in about a year. And so it happened. But sometime later the son became sick and died. Elisha subsequently rose the boy from the dead in a bizarre story.

And finally, immediately prior to our passage today, Elisha transformed an inedible (and perhaps poisonous) stew healthy and good to eat.

You can see that Elisha is living in community with other people. This is somewhat different from Elijah. This difference between Elijah and Elisha can be loosely compared to the differences between John, the Baptizer, and Jesus, the Christ.

So, now knowing that Elisha has been performing miraculous acts within the context of community, our story now does not sound so bizarre.

Let us first make note that Elisha appears to garner the respect of the people, as one having authority. This is brought to bear as we observe a man bringing Elisha his first fruits. Now there is a lot we can say about 'first fruits.' First fruits are the first and the typically the best of the harvest. It is the gift of a gracious steward. It is the gift of one who fully understands that every good and perfect gift comes from above – that it is not our doing. Whatever we “harvest” is a gift from above.

Furthermore, in a day when we are accustomed to giving God our extras, or our leftovers, or our 'already-used-up', this man brought to the “man of God” the first and best of what he had. But as it relates to Elisha, let us notice that Elisha, though not a priest, accepted this gift of first fruits. We may surmise then that Elisha is viewed as someone of spiritual importance by his community.

We should also make note that the man was not required by law to give his gift of first fruits to Elisha. To the contrary, first fruits were to be brought to the priests. This man was bringing the first fruits to Elisha, who was not a priest. We are never given any indication that Elisha was a priest. So whether this was a matter of convenience or passive rebuke, Elisha's acceptance signals that this infraction of the law was ok. Nevertheless, in a sense, Elisha is acting like a priest by accepting the gift.

We are able then to identify a couple more similarities with Jesus. We can hear Jesus' words being foreshadowed here when he says that the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath. We also recall that Jesus acted as a priest. Indeed, Jesus is our high priest.

Elisha, true to his unexpected modus operandi, accepts the gift by directing that it be given to 100 men. We almost get the impression that Elisha does not even touch the gift or partake from it in any form.

I typically observe two reactions by the giver of the gift, when gifts are received in this manner. Many givers are disappointed or even offended that the recipient does not accept the gift for their own use. Many givers are willing to make a donation to a charitable organization in the name of the intended recipient. But this seems to be impersonal. Maybe Elisha is suggesting a better idea – give it directly (or face to face) to those in need. For it does not take much extrapolation to conclude, given the surrounding context, that the community is living in a time of scarcity. Actually giving it to people, as differentiated from an organization, makes it much more personal.

But when Elisha tells the man to feed 100 people with the first fruits, this creates a dilemma for the man. He would much rather have Elisha distribute it as he sees fit. If Elisha were to distribute the food, it perpetuates the distance between the giver of benevolence and the receiver. You see, it is so easy to write a check of our 'first fruits' and never have to look a hungry person in the eye. {By the way, I am so pleased that you hand out food directly from this church} It is so easy to drop off some clothes at the Salvation Army box and never have to talk directly with the homeless person who will receive it. Please let me clarify. I am NOT speaking against these practices. The organizations that provide these services should be supported. I only point out that in some sense, they perpetuate and exacerbate the distance between those who give and those who receive. It was never intended to be this way. And Elisha forced the man to look these people in the eye.

There was another problem for the man. He was being forced to take a risk. What would happen if he set it in front of the 100 men and there was no miracle? Would the man's reputation be marred? Would he be embarrassed? Would the men be angry? Would they laugh? Even more of a possibility is that he would call them to eat, some would remain hungry and he would be looking at them in the eye and have to tell them there was no more. And here is some rhetoric like what I have heard from time to time: if this is done for the 100 men today, won't they expect it again tomorrow or next week?

Nevertheless, after first objecting, this brave man set the food before the 100 men. He was willing to take the risk. After all, Elisha had said that “this is what the Lord says.” And as a result, this small offering was multiplied, feeding 100 men with some left over.

What we find here is an incredible story of community. Elisha was sufficiently respected in this community such that at least one person brought him their first fruits. We may say that Elisha coerced this man into a more intimate communion with his neighbors. I'll bet he never looked at his neighbors in the same way. I'll bet his neighbors never looked at him in the same way either.

A few points to ponder before we look at our Gospel lesson.
1. We are reminded that everything we have comes from God.
2. We are to be encouraged to give God our first best, not our 'already-worn-out.'
3. Generosity sometimes goes beyond writing checks.
4. Generosity has a special meaning when it is more personal, eye to eye.
5. Generosity costs somebody something.
6. Generosity sometimes bends the law to accomplish its higher purpose.
7. Sometimes generosity implies risk. Indeed, I would submit that there is always risk with generosity, but that may need to be covered later.
8. Generosity is best done in the context of community.
9. Generosity builds community.

In our gospel passage, we find a similar story. I will not look at this in depth. But I would like to draw out some correlations to our Old Testament reading.

1. Jesus lived in the context of community. He spent much of his ministry around the Sea of Galilee. He was well-known there. People would come to him, bringing their sick to be healed. Although he would part from them for periods of prayer, Jesus lived among the people, just like Elisha.
2. Both Andrew and the boy took the risks of generosity. Andrew took the risk by bringing such a small pittance of food, compared to the actual need. And the boy – he also took a risk. He may not get his lunch back. He may not eat. What would he tell his mother? Would he say, like Jack, that he sold the cow for some magic beans? They are remarkably similar stories you know. And as an aside, I know many you mothers are wondering: where was the mother of this boy? I don't have any answer – I just knew that some people ask this of the text privately. So, both Andrew and the boy took some risks.
3. For the boy, generosity was costly. He did end up handing over his lunch before it had been multiplied.
4. I should point out that this was all done under the scrutiny of the crowd. There was no green room or board room to discuss all this in private. Talk about transparency, this was done within the hearing and sight of over 5,000 people.
5. Jesus took a risk also. He may have known that the people would seek to elevate him to an office he did not seek or aspire to. Jesus knew their hearts. He knew this would throw him “off-message.” He did not come to do all the miracles. They were only tools. But Jesus realized that many of the people would only want to experience the excitement of the miracles and were not concerned with the message. Perhaps he knew that they would soon be coming back for bread to eat rather than for the bread of life. You see, Jesus understood that his generosity would be misunderstood and taken advantage of. Nevertheless, Jesus fed the 5,000. And he continued to be generous throughout his ministry. Pay special note here. It is NOT our responsibility to assure that our gifts be utilized in wise ways. Not even Jesus could assure this. And yet, he continued to be generous. Should we not do the likewise?

Some final words of encouragement.

Be generous when it is risky.
Be generous face to face.
Be generous with our best.
Be generous by bending the rules sometimes.
Be generous among the people in this community.
Be generous sometimes even when we highly suspect it will be misused.

Wow, who'd have thought that there was this much in a small obscure story, hidden in II Kings?

Stephen Barber